Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Max Payne (2008) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Against the gritty, snow covered, and crime ridden streets of New York, one man is waging a battle for redemption and revenge. The man in Detective Max Payne (Mark Wahlberg), and following the murder of his wife and infant son, Payne has seen his life and career spin down an ever deepening black hole to the point where he is relegated to a basement office working on cold cases.
Max has become a creature of the night, and spends his off hours patrolling the grimy sections of the city looking for clues about the death of his wife and taking on all manner of the cities criminal elements to get to the truth which has so long eluded him.
While attempting to gain information from a former snitch, Max is introduced to the Natasha Sax (Olga Kurylenko), and her sister Mona (Mila Kunis). The fact that Mona is suspicious of Max from the start is of little concern to Natasha who follows Max back to his apartment and attempts to seduce him. Max quickly spurns her advances which causes Natasha to leave his apartment angry and unbeknownst to Max, steals his wallet in the process. Shortly after leaving Max’s apartment, Natasha is brutally murdered and when Max’s wallet is found at the scene, he becomes the lead suspect in the murder.
Soon after learning from his former partner that Natasha’s dead may be linked to the death of Max’s wife, Max becomes the subject of a city wide manhunt when his partner turns up dead which is attributed to Max going over the edge.
In a race against time, Max must get to the bottom of the deaths as well as solve his family’s murder and clear his good name. This will not be easy as Max must face the resources of a gigantic corporation as well as a crazed drug lord, and his colleagues on the police force.
Based on the popular video games series from Remedy Entertainment and 3D Realms, Max Payne takes some of the games more prominent characters and themes and creates a new storyline. The bullet time ability that Max had in the game has been omitted and replaced with a few gun battles that are shot at times in slow motion, such as a well staged battle in an office building.
While the storyline and character development may be lacking, the film does a decent job of capturing the look and tone of the games, and Wahlberg is solid as the tormented lead character.
Backed by a solid supporting cast which includes Beau Bridges, Chris O’Donnell, and Ludacris, “Max Payne” is an enjoyable if flawed movie experience that makes up for its shortcomings with solid visuals and some great gun battles that come late in the film.
The picture and sound quality of the movie are very crisp and if you have the chance to enjoy the film in surround sound and HDTV I would highly suggest it.
The bonus features are very good and there is a great graphic book feature that delves more into the character of Max Payne’s wife and the events leading up to her murder.
Max has become a creature of the night, and spends his off hours patrolling the grimy sections of the city looking for clues about the death of his wife and taking on all manner of the cities criminal elements to get to the truth which has so long eluded him.
While attempting to gain information from a former snitch, Max is introduced to the Natasha Sax (Olga Kurylenko), and her sister Mona (Mila Kunis). The fact that Mona is suspicious of Max from the start is of little concern to Natasha who follows Max back to his apartment and attempts to seduce him. Max quickly spurns her advances which causes Natasha to leave his apartment angry and unbeknownst to Max, steals his wallet in the process. Shortly after leaving Max’s apartment, Natasha is brutally murdered and when Max’s wallet is found at the scene, he becomes the lead suspect in the murder.
Soon after learning from his former partner that Natasha’s dead may be linked to the death of Max’s wife, Max becomes the subject of a city wide manhunt when his partner turns up dead which is attributed to Max going over the edge.
In a race against time, Max must get to the bottom of the deaths as well as solve his family’s murder and clear his good name. This will not be easy as Max must face the resources of a gigantic corporation as well as a crazed drug lord, and his colleagues on the police force.
Based on the popular video games series from Remedy Entertainment and 3D Realms, Max Payne takes some of the games more prominent characters and themes and creates a new storyline. The bullet time ability that Max had in the game has been omitted and replaced with a few gun battles that are shot at times in slow motion, such as a well staged battle in an office building.
While the storyline and character development may be lacking, the film does a decent job of capturing the look and tone of the games, and Wahlberg is solid as the tormented lead character.
Backed by a solid supporting cast which includes Beau Bridges, Chris O’Donnell, and Ludacris, “Max Payne” is an enjoyable if flawed movie experience that makes up for its shortcomings with solid visuals and some great gun battles that come late in the film.
The picture and sound quality of the movie are very crisp and if you have the chance to enjoy the film in surround sound and HDTV I would highly suggest it.
The bonus features are very good and there is a great graphic book feature that delves more into the character of Max Payne’s wife and the events leading up to her murder.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Searching (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A phenomenally intriguing social media-focused movie.
There have been many movies that have featured computing and, more specifically, social media at their heart. Some these have used the device of the view “from the screen”: 2016’s entertaining “Nerve” had elements of this, with the majority of the rest of the film being ‘augmented reality’ over the video. But it was 2014’s teen-horror “Unfriended” that set a new bar being seen entirely through a computer screen. No surprise then that the producer of that one – Timur Bekmambetov – is also behind “Searching”. For – although taking a few liberties with news vidoes, that may or may not be showing on Youtube – the whole film is shot through computer screens.
“Oh no!” you sigh “another gimmicky B-movie”. Far from it. Not only is this a really helpful training film for Windows tips and tricks! It’s also a totally absorbing crime mystery anchored by a superb script that keeps the audience guessing to the end.
John Cho – most famous as Sulu in the Star Trek reboots – plays David Kim who is trying to control his 16 year-old daughter Margot (Michelle Ya, in her movie debut). Kim, working in some form of product development, is no technology luddite, and when Margot disappears he uses his nous about social media to try to piece together the fragments of the puzzle to assist police Detective Vick (Debra Messing, “Grace” in “Will and Grace”).
To say any more would ruin what is a masterly roller-coaster ride of twists and turns. The script by first-time director Aneesh Chaganty and Sev Ohanian doesn’t let its audience relax for a moment, spawning more movie cul-de-sacs and red herrings than a classic Agatha Christie.
In the acting stakes John Cho – who really doesn’t get given much to do in the Star Trek background – is here impressively believable as the parent, struggling with both bringing up a teen – enough to stress any mortal out – and an emotional past. Ms La is also equally engaging, given most of her scenes are via close-up web cam.
Criticisms? The film, at 102 minutes, might have usefully trimmed 10 minutes to be an even tighter 90 minute classic. I also thought it pulled its punches in the finale, where a director of the calibre of Hitchcock might have gone for a much darker angle without a qualm.
But I’m nit-picking. This is an excellent thriller that also effectively drills into grief and bereavement (a warning for anyone struggling with this – especially via the “Big C”… you might want to give this one a miss… #Up). It also ironically highlights that whilst broadcasting by people has never been more prevelant, communication between family members is sometimes totally lacking.
Clearly people agree with me that it is excellent: the preview cinema audience I saw this with was buzzing afterwards, and this won the “Audience Award” at Sundance.
“Searching” will be on general release in the UK and US from August 31st 2018. Highly recommended!
“Oh no!” you sigh “another gimmicky B-movie”. Far from it. Not only is this a really helpful training film for Windows tips and tricks! It’s also a totally absorbing crime mystery anchored by a superb script that keeps the audience guessing to the end.
John Cho – most famous as Sulu in the Star Trek reboots – plays David Kim who is trying to control his 16 year-old daughter Margot (Michelle Ya, in her movie debut). Kim, working in some form of product development, is no technology luddite, and when Margot disappears he uses his nous about social media to try to piece together the fragments of the puzzle to assist police Detective Vick (Debra Messing, “Grace” in “Will and Grace”).
To say any more would ruin what is a masterly roller-coaster ride of twists and turns. The script by first-time director Aneesh Chaganty and Sev Ohanian doesn’t let its audience relax for a moment, spawning more movie cul-de-sacs and red herrings than a classic Agatha Christie.
In the acting stakes John Cho – who really doesn’t get given much to do in the Star Trek background – is here impressively believable as the parent, struggling with both bringing up a teen – enough to stress any mortal out – and an emotional past. Ms La is also equally engaging, given most of her scenes are via close-up web cam.
Criticisms? The film, at 102 minutes, might have usefully trimmed 10 minutes to be an even tighter 90 minute classic. I also thought it pulled its punches in the finale, where a director of the calibre of Hitchcock might have gone for a much darker angle without a qualm.
But I’m nit-picking. This is an excellent thriller that also effectively drills into grief and bereavement (a warning for anyone struggling with this – especially via the “Big C”… you might want to give this one a miss… #Up). It also ironically highlights that whilst broadcasting by people has never been more prevelant, communication between family members is sometimes totally lacking.
Clearly people agree with me that it is excellent: the preview cinema audience I saw this with was buzzing afterwards, and this won the “Audience Award” at Sundance.
“Searching” will be on general release in the UK and US from August 31st 2018. Highly recommended!
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated The Batman (2022) in Movies
Mar 6, 2022
Paul Dano and Colin Farrell's Performances (2 more)
The Batmobile car chase with Oz
The different/damaged take on Bruce Wayne
Entirely too long - too much detective work (2 more)
Little to no chemistry between The Bat and The Cat
The raspy adventures of Batsy and Jimbo
When is a Bat Not Quite a Bat?
Matt Reeves’ The Batman isn’t an origin story. Instead Bruce Wayne (Robert Pattinson) treats every villain and every thug as if they were the ones to take his parents away from him. This is a version of Bruce Wayne that hates being Bruce Wayne; Batman is his legacy. The tragedy of losing his parents is his most defining characteristic. Bruce is a social hermit and the world’s biggest introvert in The Batman.
The Riddler (Paul Dano) kills Gotham’s mayor on Halloween night and he continues to target key political figures throughout the film. A cryptic riddle is left for Batman at every crime scene revealing just a big enough clue to keep Batman and Jim Gordon (Jeffrey Wright) entangled in Riddler’s enigmatic bloodbath. As Batman crosses paths with a cat-loving thief named Selina Kyle (Zoe Kravitz) and the magnificently sleazy Iceberg Lounge owner Oswald Cobblepot (Colin Farrell), he soon realizes that the Wayne family may be a bigger piece of the puzzle than he originally imagined.
Paul Dano is essentially the highlight of the film. Matt Reeves stated that his inspiration for his version of the character was The Zodiac Killer and it shows. Riddler’s costume is basically a camouflage gimp outfit with tactical advantages and a fetish for duct tape. Dano’s performance is haunting. His riddles are more akin to Jigsaw’s games from the Saw franchise. The character is at his best when he’s showcased in grainy cell phone videos where his shouting and heavy breathing are even more distorted than if he was standing right in front of you. The intriguing aspect is that Dano seems to be even more mesmerizing as the character once he’s unmasked. He’s able to tap into this lunacy, this dread, and this hypnotic terror that defines the character whether he’s hiding his face or not.
Featured less prominently is Colin Farrell as Oswald Cobblepot, who also delivers a fantastic performance. Farrell is so unrecognizable thanks to the facial prosthetics and fat suit that he’s wearing. Some of the aspects of The Penguin that makes him so dangerous is that he’s incredibly resourceful and he can talk his way into and out of just about anything. Farrell’s best moments as the character come during the Batmobile chase featured in the trailer followed by the conversation Batman and Gordon have with him immediately afterwards. You never knew how much you needed a Spanish lesson from Oz until Matt Reeves came along.
The Batmobile car chase is the best sequence of the film. It’s absolutely explosive and worth seeing in a theater. Michael Giacchino’s score is also bold and thrilling; it helps define the Batman character for a new generation with an undeniably epic theme. Matt Reeves compared Bruce Wayne to Kurt Cobain in this film. Bruce’s relationship with the spotlight and how he’d rather stay away from it is a lot like how Cobain viewed being famous. “Something in the Way” by Nirvana fits the Batman universe so well and it’s surprising nobody has ever thought of utilizing it until now.
This unusual version of Bruce Wayne in The Batman makes it feel unlike any other Batman film. Bruce Wayne is typically a playboy that is consistently showcased at public events that flaunts his fortune and bounces from woman to woman on a nightly basis. In The Batman, we see the smudged black eye makeup as Bruce takes off his cowl. Robert Pattinson didn’t bulk up for the role, so he has this pale and gaunt appearance. He has no interest in the business his father left him in charge of. Vengeance is his only purpose.
The Batman is also the first Batman film to actually feel like a detective story. So much time is devoted to the investigation aspect of the film; maybe too much time. The film is five minutes shy of being three hours long and The Batman feels like a three hour film. Some of these sequences feel like they could have been trimmed (did we really need to see Batman or Bruce Wayne go to the Iceberg Lounge so many times?) or cut entirely, but everything feels like it’s part of the bigger picture of capturing The Riddler. Every little stop along the way leads to the next clue or next big encounter. Unfortunately, it feels like a chore listening to Batman answer riddles for the sixth time in the midst of three hours.
Robert Pattinson is a seriously talented actor outside of the Twilight franchise and Zoe Kravitz chooses interesting projects to be a part of, but their chemistry in The Batman feels forced. Batman tracks down Selina Kyle almost like a stalker as he starts inserting himself into her life after a random encounter at The Iceberg Lounge. Despite being friends in real life, the two actors seem stiff and awkward when they’re around each other. These are two versions of the characters that don’t have the history the comics or the movies laid out for them after decades of publication and on screen appearances. This is supposed to be the first time they’ve met and they go from being bumbling partners to nearly leaving Gotham together after being shot at a few times and finding a dead girl in a trunk; it doesn’t make sense.
Matt Reeves was capable of taking The Batman into a different direction for both the Batman universe and superhero films alike. The action sequences are almost earned here as there’s much more down time while following a lead or doing research. You actually see that Bruce documents his inner monologues and his nightly outings as Batman in handwritten journals. There’s a ton of interesting concepts in The Batman that ultimately don’t pay off.
Paul Dano and Colin Farrell are extraordinary, but The Batman is a three hour slog through Gotham that culminates with an over exaggerated riddle that isn’t worth solving. Having Batman and Jim Gordon both speak in raspy, whispery grunts feels excessive as does Gordon’s insistence on calling Batman, “Chief,” every time that they’re together. The film deserves credit for prominently shining the spotlight on the underbelly of crime in Gotham, but the storytelling in The Batman is a lot like Bugs Bunny meaning to have taken that left turn at Albuquerque; a meandering foray down a dark rabbit hole that isn’t entirely necessary.
The Riddler (Paul Dano) kills Gotham’s mayor on Halloween night and he continues to target key political figures throughout the film. A cryptic riddle is left for Batman at every crime scene revealing just a big enough clue to keep Batman and Jim Gordon (Jeffrey Wright) entangled in Riddler’s enigmatic bloodbath. As Batman crosses paths with a cat-loving thief named Selina Kyle (Zoe Kravitz) and the magnificently sleazy Iceberg Lounge owner Oswald Cobblepot (Colin Farrell), he soon realizes that the Wayne family may be a bigger piece of the puzzle than he originally imagined.
Paul Dano is essentially the highlight of the film. Matt Reeves stated that his inspiration for his version of the character was The Zodiac Killer and it shows. Riddler’s costume is basically a camouflage gimp outfit with tactical advantages and a fetish for duct tape. Dano’s performance is haunting. His riddles are more akin to Jigsaw’s games from the Saw franchise. The character is at his best when he’s showcased in grainy cell phone videos where his shouting and heavy breathing are even more distorted than if he was standing right in front of you. The intriguing aspect is that Dano seems to be even more mesmerizing as the character once he’s unmasked. He’s able to tap into this lunacy, this dread, and this hypnotic terror that defines the character whether he’s hiding his face or not.
Featured less prominently is Colin Farrell as Oswald Cobblepot, who also delivers a fantastic performance. Farrell is so unrecognizable thanks to the facial prosthetics and fat suit that he’s wearing. Some of the aspects of The Penguin that makes him so dangerous is that he’s incredibly resourceful and he can talk his way into and out of just about anything. Farrell’s best moments as the character come during the Batmobile chase featured in the trailer followed by the conversation Batman and Gordon have with him immediately afterwards. You never knew how much you needed a Spanish lesson from Oz until Matt Reeves came along.
The Batmobile car chase is the best sequence of the film. It’s absolutely explosive and worth seeing in a theater. Michael Giacchino’s score is also bold and thrilling; it helps define the Batman character for a new generation with an undeniably epic theme. Matt Reeves compared Bruce Wayne to Kurt Cobain in this film. Bruce’s relationship with the spotlight and how he’d rather stay away from it is a lot like how Cobain viewed being famous. “Something in the Way” by Nirvana fits the Batman universe so well and it’s surprising nobody has ever thought of utilizing it until now.
This unusual version of Bruce Wayne in The Batman makes it feel unlike any other Batman film. Bruce Wayne is typically a playboy that is consistently showcased at public events that flaunts his fortune and bounces from woman to woman on a nightly basis. In The Batman, we see the smudged black eye makeup as Bruce takes off his cowl. Robert Pattinson didn’t bulk up for the role, so he has this pale and gaunt appearance. He has no interest in the business his father left him in charge of. Vengeance is his only purpose.
The Batman is also the first Batman film to actually feel like a detective story. So much time is devoted to the investigation aspect of the film; maybe too much time. The film is five minutes shy of being three hours long and The Batman feels like a three hour film. Some of these sequences feel like they could have been trimmed (did we really need to see Batman or Bruce Wayne go to the Iceberg Lounge so many times?) or cut entirely, but everything feels like it’s part of the bigger picture of capturing The Riddler. Every little stop along the way leads to the next clue or next big encounter. Unfortunately, it feels like a chore listening to Batman answer riddles for the sixth time in the midst of three hours.
Robert Pattinson is a seriously talented actor outside of the Twilight franchise and Zoe Kravitz chooses interesting projects to be a part of, but their chemistry in The Batman feels forced. Batman tracks down Selina Kyle almost like a stalker as he starts inserting himself into her life after a random encounter at The Iceberg Lounge. Despite being friends in real life, the two actors seem stiff and awkward when they’re around each other. These are two versions of the characters that don’t have the history the comics or the movies laid out for them after decades of publication and on screen appearances. This is supposed to be the first time they’ve met and they go from being bumbling partners to nearly leaving Gotham together after being shot at a few times and finding a dead girl in a trunk; it doesn’t make sense.
Matt Reeves was capable of taking The Batman into a different direction for both the Batman universe and superhero films alike. The action sequences are almost earned here as there’s much more down time while following a lead or doing research. You actually see that Bruce documents his inner monologues and his nightly outings as Batman in handwritten journals. There’s a ton of interesting concepts in The Batman that ultimately don’t pay off.
Paul Dano and Colin Farrell are extraordinary, but The Batman is a three hour slog through Gotham that culminates with an over exaggerated riddle that isn’t worth solving. Having Batman and Jim Gordon both speak in raspy, whispery grunts feels excessive as does Gordon’s insistence on calling Batman, “Chief,” every time that they’re together. The film deserves credit for prominently shining the spotlight on the underbelly of crime in Gotham, but the storytelling in The Batman is a lot like Bugs Bunny meaning to have taken that left turn at Albuquerque; a meandering foray down a dark rabbit hole that isn’t entirely necessary.
tapestry100 (306 KP) rated Meddling Kids: A Novel in Books
Jul 26, 2017
Ever wonder what happened to the Scooby Doo gang when they grew up? It wasn't exactly a question I ever thought I needed an answer to until Edgar Cantero decided he needed to give his unique twist on what that adulthood could have looked like. In his beautifully bizarre (bizarrely beautiful?) novel, Cantero introduces us to the Blyton Summer Detective Club, a group of 4 teenagers and their dog who spend their summer vacations solving mysteries in idyllic Blyton Hills. We're familiar with the team: there's Peter, the jock; Nate, the nerdy outsider; Andy, the tomboy; Kerri, the smart one; and Sean, the faithful Weimaraner. After their final case in the summer of 77, involving a masked fortune hunter trying to find the buried treasure of Deboën Mansion, the kids suddenly hang up their spy gear and retire from mystery solving.
Jump ahead thirteen years, and those same crime solving sleuths of young are now disillusioned 20-somethings trying to make their way thru life, not really understanding where their lives went wrong. Peter is dead (even tho Nate still talks to him), Nate is institutionalized (he talks to a dead guy, after all), Andy is a wanderer with a somewhat criminal past, and Kerri is a bartender in a seedy bar, who is also taking care of Tim, Sean's descendant. There was something about that last case, the one they all can't stop thinking about, that wasn't quite right, that is at the root of their problems. When Andy finally decides that enough is enough and they need to go back to Blyton Hills to face these demons and reopen that last case, the group gets together one last time to try to bring sense and closure to that final, haunting case.
Of course, it's not as easy as just a guy in a mask, and as they face down eco-villainous corporations, primordial monsters, ecological disasters, and something that defies description, they begin to come to terms with what has been haunting them over the years. This sounds wildly simplistic as I type it out, and I'm leaving it that way. It's not simplistic in the slightest, but the joy in this book is in the details and following along with the BSDC as they uncover one clue after the next, taking them on a whirlwind ride that makes you unable to put the book down until the very last page.
Much like his previous novel The Supernatural Enhancements (which I am a huge fan of as well), Cantero takes his time with the story, creating a slow build that eventually spirals into this wild adventure, making unexpected twists and turns in the narrative so you never really are sure that you know what's going on. His characters are exactly who they appear to be, rifs of the Scooby gang, but he doesn't make clichés of them. These characters are all their own and as individual as can be. Eagle-eyed readers will also notice fun callbacks to the Scooby cartoons.
So, if you're looking for something with a little mystery, a little horror, with some supernatural hijinx thrown in for fun, you can't go wrong with Meddling Kids. And if you like this, be sure to check out Cantero's The Supernatural Enhancements as well.
Jump ahead thirteen years, and those same crime solving sleuths of young are now disillusioned 20-somethings trying to make their way thru life, not really understanding where their lives went wrong. Peter is dead (even tho Nate still talks to him), Nate is institutionalized (he talks to a dead guy, after all), Andy is a wanderer with a somewhat criminal past, and Kerri is a bartender in a seedy bar, who is also taking care of Tim, Sean's descendant. There was something about that last case, the one they all can't stop thinking about, that wasn't quite right, that is at the root of their problems. When Andy finally decides that enough is enough and they need to go back to Blyton Hills to face these demons and reopen that last case, the group gets together one last time to try to bring sense and closure to that final, haunting case.
Of course, it's not as easy as just a guy in a mask, and as they face down eco-villainous corporations, primordial monsters, ecological disasters, and something that defies description, they begin to come to terms with what has been haunting them over the years. This sounds wildly simplistic as I type it out, and I'm leaving it that way. It's not simplistic in the slightest, but the joy in this book is in the details and following along with the BSDC as they uncover one clue after the next, taking them on a whirlwind ride that makes you unable to put the book down until the very last page.
Much like his previous novel The Supernatural Enhancements (which I am a huge fan of as well), Cantero takes his time with the story, creating a slow build that eventually spirals into this wild adventure, making unexpected twists and turns in the narrative so you never really are sure that you know what's going on. His characters are exactly who they appear to be, rifs of the Scooby gang, but he doesn't make clichés of them. These characters are all their own and as individual as can be. Eagle-eyed readers will also notice fun callbacks to the Scooby cartoons.
So, if you're looking for something with a little mystery, a little horror, with some supernatural hijinx thrown in for fun, you can't go wrong with Meddling Kids. And if you like this, be sure to check out Cantero's The Supernatural Enhancements as well.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated I Let You Go in Books
Feb 1, 2018
One rainy evening, an accident occurs on a quiet neighborhood street. Walking home from school with his mother, young Jacob is hit by a car, and killed. Even worse, the car quickly backs up and drives away, leaving Jacob's mother shattered and Detective Inspector Ray Stevens and his team, particularly eager young DC Kate, to seek out answers.
With her world ruined by the accident, Jenna Gray seeks refuge by the coast. She finds a small cottage, gets a dog, and tries to escape the nightmares of the accident that haunt both her dreams and waking hours. Meanwhile, Ray and Kate are forced to close Jacob's case, no closer to the suspect than when they started. But the two remain undaunted, working on the case in their off hours, and an anniversary plea one year after the accident turns up some potential leads. What exactly happened that rainy night? Will justice ever come for Jacob--and peace for Jenna?
This was an excellent thriller-- a real surprise, honestly. The beginning of the novel started out slow, and was so horrendously sad, what with Jacob's accident and his mother's terrible grief. It was one of several book's I'd read lately involving the death of a child, and I was so saddened that I almost set it aside. I'm glad I didn't though, because while the book is gut-wrenchingly sad, it's excellent, tense, and suspenseful. Divided into several parts, things pick up immensely at the end of the first part, when Mackintosh throws in an excellent plot twist (I shan't say anymore so as not to ruin it).
Mackintosh is excellent at conveying Jenna's anguish and the sadness that the accident causes. We also have a side-plot of Ray and his feelings toward his subordinate, Kate. Ray's home life is unbalanced: he's dealing with issues with his son, Tom, and his wife. These are a bit distracting at times, but serve to humanize him as well. The police subplot (watching them try to piece things together) is interesting, also. In fact, the book alternates in perspectives: we hear from Ray, Jenna, and one more character. In part 2, we go back in time for some of the characters, but remain in the present with Ray and Kate as they (much like us, the readers) try to solve this crime. It's an interesting technique and works surprisingly well. Jenna is a complicated character, but a well-drawn one.
Overall, I quite enjoyed this book. I won't spoil anything, but I will say that there is definitely a trigger for domestic abuse/violence, so please be forewarned for that. There's a character in the novel who reminds me of the husband in that creepy Julia Roberts' film "Sleeping with the Enemy" (I'm totally dating myself here). As such I was up late reading one night, completely creeped out. However, that's the sign of an excellent thriller in my opinion. I raced through the last 2/3 of the book and really wasn't disappointed. There are several more twists, but they actually are pretty believable, not outlandish like in many thrillers. Definitely recommend this one (with the abuse caveat thrown in). A unique psychological thriller that's worth your time, for sure.
I received an ARC of this novel from Netgalley - thank you! The U.S. edition is available everywhere on 5/3/16. You can find a review of this book and many more at my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
With her world ruined by the accident, Jenna Gray seeks refuge by the coast. She finds a small cottage, gets a dog, and tries to escape the nightmares of the accident that haunt both her dreams and waking hours. Meanwhile, Ray and Kate are forced to close Jacob's case, no closer to the suspect than when they started. But the two remain undaunted, working on the case in their off hours, and an anniversary plea one year after the accident turns up some potential leads. What exactly happened that rainy night? Will justice ever come for Jacob--and peace for Jenna?
This was an excellent thriller-- a real surprise, honestly. The beginning of the novel started out slow, and was so horrendously sad, what with Jacob's accident and his mother's terrible grief. It was one of several book's I'd read lately involving the death of a child, and I was so saddened that I almost set it aside. I'm glad I didn't though, because while the book is gut-wrenchingly sad, it's excellent, tense, and suspenseful. Divided into several parts, things pick up immensely at the end of the first part, when Mackintosh throws in an excellent plot twist (I shan't say anymore so as not to ruin it).
Mackintosh is excellent at conveying Jenna's anguish and the sadness that the accident causes. We also have a side-plot of Ray and his feelings toward his subordinate, Kate. Ray's home life is unbalanced: he's dealing with issues with his son, Tom, and his wife. These are a bit distracting at times, but serve to humanize him as well. The police subplot (watching them try to piece things together) is interesting, also. In fact, the book alternates in perspectives: we hear from Ray, Jenna, and one more character. In part 2, we go back in time for some of the characters, but remain in the present with Ray and Kate as they (much like us, the readers) try to solve this crime. It's an interesting technique and works surprisingly well. Jenna is a complicated character, but a well-drawn one.
Overall, I quite enjoyed this book. I won't spoil anything, but I will say that there is definitely a trigger for domestic abuse/violence, so please be forewarned for that. There's a character in the novel who reminds me of the husband in that creepy Julia Roberts' film "Sleeping with the Enemy" (I'm totally dating myself here). As such I was up late reading one night, completely creeped out. However, that's the sign of an excellent thriller in my opinion. I raced through the last 2/3 of the book and really wasn't disappointed. There are several more twists, but they actually are pretty believable, not outlandish like in many thrillers. Definitely recommend this one (with the abuse caveat thrown in). A unique psychological thriller that's worth your time, for sure.
I received an ARC of this novel from Netgalley - thank you! The U.S. edition is available everywhere on 5/3/16. You can find a review of this book and many more at my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Birds of Prey (And the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) (2020) in Movies
Feb 8, 2020
Without a doubt, the best thing about the disastrous Suicide Squad movie of 2016 was Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn. With what little she was given to work with, she went all in and truly made the role her own. A return to the character was inevitable really, and thankfully, that return is not in the form of Suicide Squad 2 but Birds of Prey and the fabulous emancipation of one Harley Quinn.
When we join Harley, she’s just broken up with the Joker. A nice little animated intro, with voiceover from Harley, gives us a quick overview of her life from birth, through childhood and eventually to the point where her and Mr J part ways. She hasn’t made it public knowledge just yet though, for fear of what might happen when word gets out that she no longer has the Joker’s protection. Instead, Harley buys herself a hyena called Bruce, takes part in vicious roller derbys and spends her nights partying at the nightclub of Gotham crime lord Roman Sionis (Ewan McGregor).
Following an explosive public declaration of her relationship status - driving a big truck into Ace Chemicals, the spot where Harley first pledged herself to Mr J - Harley begins to find her life becoming increasingly entwined with that of the other Birds of Prey that will eventually make up the all-women squad. Renee Montoya (Rosie Perez) is a detective, in the process of investigating a series of murders by a crossbow wielding killer named Huntress (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) before the chemical factory explosion. Black Canary (Jurnee Smollett-Bell), a singer at Sionis’ nightclub and packing a voice powerful enough to shatter glass. And finally, young pickpocket Cassandra Cain (Ella Jay Basco). All of these women either have an axe to grind with men that treated them badly, or are currently being hunted by most of Gotham City’s bad guys. Their coming together, and subsequent emancipation, forms the basis of the movie.
That initial process involves a lot of time shifting and flashbacks while we are introduced to the key characters and plot points, before jumping back minutes, hours or even days in order to start filling in the narrative blanks. It’s messy at times and for the most part, it doesn’t really work either. Thankfully though, it’s a tactic that is ditched well before the halfway point.
The ‘Birds’ all have interesting back stories, and great potential in some cases too, but for the most part it’s Harley who is front and centre, stealing the limelight, and it never really feels as though we get to experience the others very much in comparison. Outside of the female leads, I didn’t really think much of Ewan McGregor and didn’t feel him to be a very convincing threat at all.
Birds of Prey is jam packed with creatively chaotic action and fight scenes from Chad Stahelski, who was responsible for the John Wick movies. They are confidently executed, at times cartoon-like, and usually accompanied by a kick-ass soundtrack.
I was initially going to give this a 6/10. But then I looked back at my rating for Suicide Squad and saw that was the rating I gave that. Birds of Prey is good, but not great. However, it is definitely a big improvement on Suicide Squad, so for that I give it a 7.
When we join Harley, she’s just broken up with the Joker. A nice little animated intro, with voiceover from Harley, gives us a quick overview of her life from birth, through childhood and eventually to the point where her and Mr J part ways. She hasn’t made it public knowledge just yet though, for fear of what might happen when word gets out that she no longer has the Joker’s protection. Instead, Harley buys herself a hyena called Bruce, takes part in vicious roller derbys and spends her nights partying at the nightclub of Gotham crime lord Roman Sionis (Ewan McGregor).
Following an explosive public declaration of her relationship status - driving a big truck into Ace Chemicals, the spot where Harley first pledged herself to Mr J - Harley begins to find her life becoming increasingly entwined with that of the other Birds of Prey that will eventually make up the all-women squad. Renee Montoya (Rosie Perez) is a detective, in the process of investigating a series of murders by a crossbow wielding killer named Huntress (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) before the chemical factory explosion. Black Canary (Jurnee Smollett-Bell), a singer at Sionis’ nightclub and packing a voice powerful enough to shatter glass. And finally, young pickpocket Cassandra Cain (Ella Jay Basco). All of these women either have an axe to grind with men that treated them badly, or are currently being hunted by most of Gotham City’s bad guys. Their coming together, and subsequent emancipation, forms the basis of the movie.
That initial process involves a lot of time shifting and flashbacks while we are introduced to the key characters and plot points, before jumping back minutes, hours or even days in order to start filling in the narrative blanks. It’s messy at times and for the most part, it doesn’t really work either. Thankfully though, it’s a tactic that is ditched well before the halfway point.
The ‘Birds’ all have interesting back stories, and great potential in some cases too, but for the most part it’s Harley who is front and centre, stealing the limelight, and it never really feels as though we get to experience the others very much in comparison. Outside of the female leads, I didn’t really think much of Ewan McGregor and didn’t feel him to be a very convincing threat at all.
Birds of Prey is jam packed with creatively chaotic action and fight scenes from Chad Stahelski, who was responsible for the John Wick movies. They are confidently executed, at times cartoon-like, and usually accompanied by a kick-ass soundtrack.
I was initially going to give this a 6/10. But then I looked back at my rating for Suicide Squad and saw that was the rating I gave that. Birds of Prey is good, but not great. However, it is definitely a big improvement on Suicide Squad, so for that I give it a 7.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated I, Robot (2004) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Tales of a dark and foreboding future where technology has run amuck have been cautioning viewers ever since Orwell made the phrase “Big Brother” a household expression. Other films such as ?”, “Westworld”, “Blade Runner” and “The Terminator” often show a dark and dangerous future where dependence upon technology created to serve mankind has lead to its eventual downfall.
In the film “I Robot” Director Alex Proyas who’s past work includes “The Crow” and “Dark City” tells the tale of a near future where robots have become commonplace and are entrusted to do all manner of tasks ranging from package delivery to waiting table and caring for households. The robots are assured to be safe as they are governed by a set of behavioral restrictors that require them to obey all human commands save for those to harm another human, as robots are not allowed to harm or by inaction allow to be harmed any human.
The film stars Will Smith as Del Spooner, a Chicago Homicide detective who does not trust robots and is highly suspicious of them. The fact that in 2035 there has yet to be one documented case worldwide of a robot ever being involved in a crime is of little concern to Del as he sees the potential for danger in technology that is so widely spread.
Del is in many ways a technophobe as aside from his modern car, he has a retro lifestyle including an old fashioned alarm clock, vintage 2004 shoes, and a fondness for music from the 1970’s. An incident in Del’s past has kept him off the force for a while and has only furthered his distaste for robotics and their growing place in society.
No sooner is Del back at work than an apparent suicide at U.S. Robotics by a friend sets the film into motion. What to all seems to be an open and shut case of suicide only causes Del to become more suspicious. Del soon discovers a new model robot locked in the office of the victim, who flees from crime scene and refuses to obey the orders to halt given to him.
The fact that the robot ignores command given by a human thus violating his central laws of programming is put off as a simple malfunction by Billionaire Lawrence Robertson (Bruce Greenwood), who does not want Del’s suspicions to disrupt his business plans on the eve of the largest rollout of new robots in history. It is explained that the new NX-5 model is about to be released to the public and soon there will be one robot for every 5 humans in the world and with so much invested in this, Robertson places a gag order on Del and the entire police force to forget about the renegade robot and not say a word to anyone.
Naturally Del does not follow this command and he suspects that there is a larger and much more serious threat posed to the public even though everyone around his says that he is paranoid and desperate to find or create any evidence to support his theory that robots are not as safe as everyone believes they are.
What follows is an action packed game of cat and mouse as Del and a U.S. Robotics scientist named Susan (Bridget Moynahan), start to uncover a deeper mystery, once in which the very world they have taken for granted is about to change.
The film is a visual marvel that shows you a fairly realistic view of the future as aside from the robots and futuristic highways, the world of 2035 does not look that much different than today.
Proyas knows that Smith is his star and he does a great job allowing him to carry the picture without allowing the visual effects to dominate the film, though they are spectacular. The futuristic highways and a great chase sequence were highlights of the film and had a surprising amount of tension and drama mixed into what was a solid action sequence.
Smith plays Spooner, as a man with demons yet never ceases to become a sensitive character despite his hard edge. He is a man that is determined to follow his instincts and do what is best for the people he is sworn to protect.
The film does only play lip service to the series of novels by Asimov, but it does tell a very good cautionary tale of human’s interaction and dependence upon technology without becoming preachy or losing site of the message that society must ensure to have a balance between humanity and technology in order to thrive.
If I had to find fault, it would be that many of the supporting roles were fairly bland, as Moynahan was not given much to do aside from play a Damsel in distress and the always solid James Cromwell and Bruce Greenwood were not used nearly enough. That being said “I Robot” delivers everything you want in a summer film and more.
In the film “I Robot” Director Alex Proyas who’s past work includes “The Crow” and “Dark City” tells the tale of a near future where robots have become commonplace and are entrusted to do all manner of tasks ranging from package delivery to waiting table and caring for households. The robots are assured to be safe as they are governed by a set of behavioral restrictors that require them to obey all human commands save for those to harm another human, as robots are not allowed to harm or by inaction allow to be harmed any human.
The film stars Will Smith as Del Spooner, a Chicago Homicide detective who does not trust robots and is highly suspicious of them. The fact that in 2035 there has yet to be one documented case worldwide of a robot ever being involved in a crime is of little concern to Del as he sees the potential for danger in technology that is so widely spread.
Del is in many ways a technophobe as aside from his modern car, he has a retro lifestyle including an old fashioned alarm clock, vintage 2004 shoes, and a fondness for music from the 1970’s. An incident in Del’s past has kept him off the force for a while and has only furthered his distaste for robotics and their growing place in society.
No sooner is Del back at work than an apparent suicide at U.S. Robotics by a friend sets the film into motion. What to all seems to be an open and shut case of suicide only causes Del to become more suspicious. Del soon discovers a new model robot locked in the office of the victim, who flees from crime scene and refuses to obey the orders to halt given to him.
The fact that the robot ignores command given by a human thus violating his central laws of programming is put off as a simple malfunction by Billionaire Lawrence Robertson (Bruce Greenwood), who does not want Del’s suspicions to disrupt his business plans on the eve of the largest rollout of new robots in history. It is explained that the new NX-5 model is about to be released to the public and soon there will be one robot for every 5 humans in the world and with so much invested in this, Robertson places a gag order on Del and the entire police force to forget about the renegade robot and not say a word to anyone.
Naturally Del does not follow this command and he suspects that there is a larger and much more serious threat posed to the public even though everyone around his says that he is paranoid and desperate to find or create any evidence to support his theory that robots are not as safe as everyone believes they are.
What follows is an action packed game of cat and mouse as Del and a U.S. Robotics scientist named Susan (Bridget Moynahan), start to uncover a deeper mystery, once in which the very world they have taken for granted is about to change.
The film is a visual marvel that shows you a fairly realistic view of the future as aside from the robots and futuristic highways, the world of 2035 does not look that much different than today.
Proyas knows that Smith is his star and he does a great job allowing him to carry the picture without allowing the visual effects to dominate the film, though they are spectacular. The futuristic highways and a great chase sequence were highlights of the film and had a surprising amount of tension and drama mixed into what was a solid action sequence.
Smith plays Spooner, as a man with demons yet never ceases to become a sensitive character despite his hard edge. He is a man that is determined to follow his instincts and do what is best for the people he is sworn to protect.
The film does only play lip service to the series of novels by Asimov, but it does tell a very good cautionary tale of human’s interaction and dependence upon technology without becoming preachy or losing site of the message that society must ensure to have a balance between humanity and technology in order to thrive.
If I had to find fault, it would be that many of the supporting roles were fairly bland, as Moynahan was not given much to do aside from play a Damsel in distress and the always solid James Cromwell and Bruce Greenwood were not used nearly enough. That being said “I Robot” delivers everything you want in a summer film and more.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Knives Out (2019) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
Murder mystery films tend to be more fun in theory and anticipation than they are to watch. It’s a genre that I very much enjoy and have indulged in over the years. Yet, if I look back in detail at it, I find that it is the books, especially those of Agatha Christie, that I like much more than anything lasting a couple of hours on the screen. There’s something about the mystery being rushed and squeezed into the cinema artform that is usually anti-climactic or even a full on let down.
Perhaps my favourite of the entire genre is a film that refuses to take itself seriously and is at once a pastiche of the multiple cliches that have accumulated over the years. And that film is, of course, the wonderfully camp, funny and charming 1985 romp Clue, starring Tim Curry and a slough of 80s B stars having the time of their lives. It isn’t a “good” film, it is a cult film, it’s joy being in its absolute lack of pretension or moral judgement. Like the board game that inspired it, it isn’t overly complicated or long, but has just enough cleverness, mirth and ambiance about it to always be a winner.
Rian Johnson’s take on the genre, Knives Out, is aware of these elements at all times, being above all things colourful, playful, arch and glib, but never convoluted or cerebral in an alienating way. He is something of a master at subverting a genre and wringing new life into it; take the invention of the teen noir in Brick, or the blend of assassin time travel sci-fi in Looper. He even gave an entire franchise a new breath of life by re-examining the use of humour and self referencing in Star Wars: The Last Jedi.
All of those previous films have as many detractors as mega fans, proving his style is devisive, for its audacity and its irreverence towards any idea of purism within an established model. And Knives Out is no exception to that. However, it may be the film of his that most people can agree on that they enjoyed, for one reason or another. I think it’s as interesting to ask why that is as it is to talk about the film itself… so, I will. At least, I’ll try to do both without losing my train of thought.
Firstly, it looks stunning; the palate of rich colours used in the poster and all marketing just make it look like something you want to immerse yourself in – every jacket, tie, dress, or piece of furniture is designed to precision, and it works like a dream of the genre you may have once had, as if it had been plucked directly from your subconscious. As in all good murder mysteries, the location, props and costumes should hold as much character as the actors, and the stately home of the Thrombey family certainly provides plenty of atmosphere in every texture and material on display.
Of course, the cast of characters is wonderfully put together with some inspired casting of familiar faces and actors you trust, such as Toni Collette and Michael Shannon, together with a few we don’t see enough of these days, such as Jamie Lee Curtis and Don Johnson, who both manage to create something as memorable as anything they did in their golden days. Add to the mix two bone fide action film superstars in Daniel Craig and Chris Evans, who leave the baggage of their most famous characters far behind and manage to convince you they are real actors again, the former with the aide of a jarring but hilarious Southern drawl, that grates at first but is a perfect choice on reflection.
Then there are the two lynchpins of this film’s ultimate success and joy: the exceptional legendary gravitas of 90 year old Christopher Plummer as the patriarch and victim at the centre of the intrigue, and the quite glorious revelation of Ana de Armas, whose charisma, beauty and skill in this delicately balanced role was the most impressive thing for me about the whole production. It may be Craig who is the ever present focus, as the detective tasked with solving the “crime”, but it is de Armas that you will remember most long after the credits roll.
As for the plot, well… I obviously can’t talk about it without ruining the whole thing. But, I can say that it isn’t far into the intricate web of motives, alibis and secrets before you start to sense this is going somewhere different, even unique. The examination of the relationships and personalities, and the extent to which they each demonstrate greed and selfishness is fascinating, superceding the crime that exists on the surface with a swamp of far seedier and unpleasant goings-on. Craig’s suave Benoit Blanc isn’t so much a detective here as a family therapist, or perhaps a supernatural presence in the style of the old classic, An Inspector Calls. Perhaps, it is suggested, no one completely escapes guilt and shame here… or do they? Are we looking for a murderer, or the only morally good person amidst a pack of dogs?
Another key element is how modern and unstuffy it feels, despite the country house and riches this is no play of manners, quite the opposite – no one here is on their best behaviour for the sake of decorum, and being upper class is an idea played with rather than enforced. The tea and cakes of the classic Christie, such as Murder on the Orient Express is replaced by smartphones and similar trappings, that identify it as definitely 2019 and no period piece. The concerns and themes are very much rooted in our present problems, and for that it engages and resonates in ways a costume drama just can’t do.
Upon finishing it for the first time, you may be thinking “sure, OK, I enjoyed that… but I’m not blown away here”. Then, as it sinks in over coming weeks, you find yourself recommending it to people, and thinking about how good it is in ways you didn’t initially think about. And that is surely why it was so embraced by the critics and paying public alike; it is a likeable, fun film, that can also stand some artistic scrutiny. It isn’t the smartest, or prettiest, or most meaningful film ever made, but it is enough of all three to make it an instant mini-classic, in my opinion.
I feel like there is maybe more to say about it, which is always a good sign, but that will do for now. I’d be happy to discuss it with anyone that feels the need. Or hear from anyone that didn’t like it! It would be interesting to hear that side of it, because I haven’t heard many negative comments on it at all. I don’t think I would defend it as a masterpiece to the end of the Earth, ‘cos it ain’t that good. I’m just hard pressed to find a serious fault. And it’s great when one of those sneaks up on you!
Perhaps my favourite of the entire genre is a film that refuses to take itself seriously and is at once a pastiche of the multiple cliches that have accumulated over the years. And that film is, of course, the wonderfully camp, funny and charming 1985 romp Clue, starring Tim Curry and a slough of 80s B stars having the time of their lives. It isn’t a “good” film, it is a cult film, it’s joy being in its absolute lack of pretension or moral judgement. Like the board game that inspired it, it isn’t overly complicated or long, but has just enough cleverness, mirth and ambiance about it to always be a winner.
Rian Johnson’s take on the genre, Knives Out, is aware of these elements at all times, being above all things colourful, playful, arch and glib, but never convoluted or cerebral in an alienating way. He is something of a master at subverting a genre and wringing new life into it; take the invention of the teen noir in Brick, or the blend of assassin time travel sci-fi in Looper. He even gave an entire franchise a new breath of life by re-examining the use of humour and self referencing in Star Wars: The Last Jedi.
All of those previous films have as many detractors as mega fans, proving his style is devisive, for its audacity and its irreverence towards any idea of purism within an established model. And Knives Out is no exception to that. However, it may be the film of his that most people can agree on that they enjoyed, for one reason or another. I think it’s as interesting to ask why that is as it is to talk about the film itself… so, I will. At least, I’ll try to do both without losing my train of thought.
Firstly, it looks stunning; the palate of rich colours used in the poster and all marketing just make it look like something you want to immerse yourself in – every jacket, tie, dress, or piece of furniture is designed to precision, and it works like a dream of the genre you may have once had, as if it had been plucked directly from your subconscious. As in all good murder mysteries, the location, props and costumes should hold as much character as the actors, and the stately home of the Thrombey family certainly provides plenty of atmosphere in every texture and material on display.
Of course, the cast of characters is wonderfully put together with some inspired casting of familiar faces and actors you trust, such as Toni Collette and Michael Shannon, together with a few we don’t see enough of these days, such as Jamie Lee Curtis and Don Johnson, who both manage to create something as memorable as anything they did in their golden days. Add to the mix two bone fide action film superstars in Daniel Craig and Chris Evans, who leave the baggage of their most famous characters far behind and manage to convince you they are real actors again, the former with the aide of a jarring but hilarious Southern drawl, that grates at first but is a perfect choice on reflection.
Then there are the two lynchpins of this film’s ultimate success and joy: the exceptional legendary gravitas of 90 year old Christopher Plummer as the patriarch and victim at the centre of the intrigue, and the quite glorious revelation of Ana de Armas, whose charisma, beauty and skill in this delicately balanced role was the most impressive thing for me about the whole production. It may be Craig who is the ever present focus, as the detective tasked with solving the “crime”, but it is de Armas that you will remember most long after the credits roll.
As for the plot, well… I obviously can’t talk about it without ruining the whole thing. But, I can say that it isn’t far into the intricate web of motives, alibis and secrets before you start to sense this is going somewhere different, even unique. The examination of the relationships and personalities, and the extent to which they each demonstrate greed and selfishness is fascinating, superceding the crime that exists on the surface with a swamp of far seedier and unpleasant goings-on. Craig’s suave Benoit Blanc isn’t so much a detective here as a family therapist, or perhaps a supernatural presence in the style of the old classic, An Inspector Calls. Perhaps, it is suggested, no one completely escapes guilt and shame here… or do they? Are we looking for a murderer, or the only morally good person amidst a pack of dogs?
Another key element is how modern and unstuffy it feels, despite the country house and riches this is no play of manners, quite the opposite – no one here is on their best behaviour for the sake of decorum, and being upper class is an idea played with rather than enforced. The tea and cakes of the classic Christie, such as Murder on the Orient Express is replaced by smartphones and similar trappings, that identify it as definitely 2019 and no period piece. The concerns and themes are very much rooted in our present problems, and for that it engages and resonates in ways a costume drama just can’t do.
Upon finishing it for the first time, you may be thinking “sure, OK, I enjoyed that… but I’m not blown away here”. Then, as it sinks in over coming weeks, you find yourself recommending it to people, and thinking about how good it is in ways you didn’t initially think about. And that is surely why it was so embraced by the critics and paying public alike; it is a likeable, fun film, that can also stand some artistic scrutiny. It isn’t the smartest, or prettiest, or most meaningful film ever made, but it is enough of all three to make it an instant mini-classic, in my opinion.
I feel like there is maybe more to say about it, which is always a good sign, but that will do for now. I’d be happy to discuss it with anyone that feels the need. Or hear from anyone that didn’t like it! It would be interesting to hear that side of it, because I haven’t heard many negative comments on it at all. I don’t think I would defend it as a masterpiece to the end of the Earth, ‘cos it ain’t that good. I’m just hard pressed to find a serious fault. And it’s great when one of those sneaks up on you!
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Sabotage (2014) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Action icon Arnold Schwarzenegger is back in “Sabotage”, with an ensemble film that is part thriller, part action, and part western. Schwarzenegger plays John Breacher, the leader of a top D.E.A. squad who take on the worst of the criminal underworld in the war on drugs.
Breacher has become a celebrity for his exploits as the numerous pictures of him with former Presidents attest to. It is learned that after bringing down a drug Kingpin, Breacher had his wife and son kidnapped in retaliation and he was forced to watch them tortured to death via video for refusing to turn himself over to the kidnappers for retaliation.
The brutal and drawn out nature of the crimes has haunted Breacher and as the film opens he is leading his team on a raid of a mansion filled with cash and bad guys.
His team is very efficient at what they do but have both physical and mental scars from their experiences. The raid goes almost as planned, but Breacher and his team are accused of taking ten million dollars from the crime scene after the raid as it was learned that the F.B.I. were also keeping tabs on the locale.
Six months pass and despite being an outcast, Breacher and his team are returned to active duty after the closure of the investigation against them. With most of his agency convinced someone on the team has taken the money, Breacher and company celebrate their return to active status.
Their celebration is short-lived when members of the team start being killed in brutal fashion. The fact that highly trained operatives are able to be killed in this manner has raised some red flags especially to local detective Brentwood (Olivia Williams), who thinks there may be more to the cases than first thought. The fact that the D.E.A. is not helping with her investigation and the fact that the bodies are starting to pile up lead her and Breacher into an uneasy alliance to find the killer(s).
What follows is a methodical, but at times action packed film that results in an ending that is disappointing compared to what it could have been.
After the final revelation was revealed, it seemed to me that the methods taken did not match up well with the timeline, opportunity, and motivations of the characters involved. The more I thought about the film the more I was convinced that there were easier ways for things to be accomplished or explained and that perhaps there were too many Red Herrings along the way.
The cast is the film is top notch from Terrance Howard, Sam Worthington, Joe Manganiello and Josh Holloway, and this is one of Schwarzenegger’s most mature and diverse roles in memory. I liked the ambiguity of his character as he was not the one man killing machine and unstoppable force of nature that he has portrayed countless times before.
Breacher is a haunted and troubled man who is highly capable at what he does and enjoys doing it even though it has cost him everything he holds dear. The film seemed to be unable to find an identity as it started out as a very gripping drama that had you guessing but took some turns that strained to be credible and became a conglomeration of action clichés and western nostalgia which is a shame as the cast and premise offered so much more as did the first part of the film.
Director David Ayer keeps things moving along and is to be praised for not letting the action overshadow the characters but sadly the final act of the film comes up short and undermines what could have been a classic mix of action and drama.
The film fails as an effective action film or drama which results in an at times enjoyable but largely forgettable effort.
http://sknr.net/2014/03/28/sabotage/
Breacher has become a celebrity for his exploits as the numerous pictures of him with former Presidents attest to. It is learned that after bringing down a drug Kingpin, Breacher had his wife and son kidnapped in retaliation and he was forced to watch them tortured to death via video for refusing to turn himself over to the kidnappers for retaliation.
The brutal and drawn out nature of the crimes has haunted Breacher and as the film opens he is leading his team on a raid of a mansion filled with cash and bad guys.
His team is very efficient at what they do but have both physical and mental scars from their experiences. The raid goes almost as planned, but Breacher and his team are accused of taking ten million dollars from the crime scene after the raid as it was learned that the F.B.I. were also keeping tabs on the locale.
Six months pass and despite being an outcast, Breacher and his team are returned to active duty after the closure of the investigation against them. With most of his agency convinced someone on the team has taken the money, Breacher and company celebrate their return to active status.
Their celebration is short-lived when members of the team start being killed in brutal fashion. The fact that highly trained operatives are able to be killed in this manner has raised some red flags especially to local detective Brentwood (Olivia Williams), who thinks there may be more to the cases than first thought. The fact that the D.E.A. is not helping with her investigation and the fact that the bodies are starting to pile up lead her and Breacher into an uneasy alliance to find the killer(s).
What follows is a methodical, but at times action packed film that results in an ending that is disappointing compared to what it could have been.
After the final revelation was revealed, it seemed to me that the methods taken did not match up well with the timeline, opportunity, and motivations of the characters involved. The more I thought about the film the more I was convinced that there were easier ways for things to be accomplished or explained and that perhaps there were too many Red Herrings along the way.
The cast is the film is top notch from Terrance Howard, Sam Worthington, Joe Manganiello and Josh Holloway, and this is one of Schwarzenegger’s most mature and diverse roles in memory. I liked the ambiguity of his character as he was not the one man killing machine and unstoppable force of nature that he has portrayed countless times before.
Breacher is a haunted and troubled man who is highly capable at what he does and enjoys doing it even though it has cost him everything he holds dear. The film seemed to be unable to find an identity as it started out as a very gripping drama that had you guessing but took some turns that strained to be credible and became a conglomeration of action clichés and western nostalgia which is a shame as the cast and premise offered so much more as did the first part of the film.
Director David Ayer keeps things moving along and is to be praised for not letting the action overshadow the characters but sadly the final act of the film comes up short and undermines what could have been a classic mix of action and drama.
The film fails as an effective action film or drama which results in an at times enjoyable but largely forgettable effort.
http://sknr.net/2014/03/28/sabotage/
BookwormMama14 (18 KP) rated The Bachelor Girl's Guide to Murder (Herringford and Watts, #1) in Books
Jan 2, 2019
In a time when women never wore trousers and most definitely did not solve murders...Herringford & Watts break every rule in the book of propriety and pave their own future. The year is 1910. Toronto has seen it's share of progress and changes over the last few years. Yet, a woman's duty is still to marry, keep house and raise a family. Merinda Herringford and Jemima Watts are best friends, flatmates...and...detectives. These women do not fit the mold for a "Proper Lady". However, they are living out their dreams and following their passion. And to that I say, "Brava!" When the Herringford & Watts Detective Agency opens for business, mischief, madness and mayhem follow wherever these two go. When the mystery of the deaths of two Irish girls is brushed over by the police and press, Herringford & Watts step in to solve the case. The Morality Squad is on the prowl looking for an excuse to cart women away in the name of, "Cleaning up the town". Reasons may include, but are not limited to: a hemline too short, being out without an escort and sticking their nose in the wrong people's business. For this reason, Merinda and Jem masquerade as men with bowler hats on a fairly regular basis. This offers them the freedom of movement that would otherwise be denied them as women. Leading them to new depths and new heights. Joining forces with Constable Jasper Forth and Ray DeLuca, a reporter, will this team see that justice is served? Will their adventures take them too far? And will these bachelor girls be the voice for the women who have none?
I can honestly say that by page 10 of the novella (A Singular & Whimsical Problem), I was addicted to Herringford & Watts! From the cover design of the book to the quirky traits of these two women, I will treasure their story for many years to come. Let's talk about the book itself for a minute. There are several different aspects to the layout that intrigued me. First of all, the silhouettes on the cover (aren't they gorgeous), can be found at the beginning of each chapter as well, with artwork. Giving a deeper impression of the era. There are lovely quotes at the beginning of each chapter as well. Throughout the book you will find footnotes. Not referencing history books, but referencing our characters and addressing the reader personally. This dynamic didn't just draw me into the story, oh no, it gobbled me up and left me wandering the streets of Toronto, trying to walk without using my hips...Through these footnotes we learn a lot about all of our characters, without the need of an extra hundred pages, although I wouldn't have complained about that either.
The story is one of the most beautifully crafted books I have ever read. I am a HUGE fan of Sherlock and Murdoch Mysteries. And to have a story similar to those with women playing the lead...Brilliant! While we see the story through the perspective of different characters, it is mainly through Jem's eyes. Throughout their crime solving adventure, we can see the strength and determination of these women to do the right thing. Jem and Ray both look to the Lord for guidance and are comforted and encouraged by His voice and His peace. While God is a puzzle too big to solve for Merinda at this point. If you enjoy a good mystery with a lot of humour and some faith...THIS is the book for you! There are pins and needles that I am sitting on, waiting for the next book to come out!
I can honestly say that by page 10 of the novella (A Singular & Whimsical Problem), I was addicted to Herringford & Watts! From the cover design of the book to the quirky traits of these two women, I will treasure their story for many years to come. Let's talk about the book itself for a minute. There are several different aspects to the layout that intrigued me. First of all, the silhouettes on the cover (aren't they gorgeous), can be found at the beginning of each chapter as well, with artwork. Giving a deeper impression of the era. There are lovely quotes at the beginning of each chapter as well. Throughout the book you will find footnotes. Not referencing history books, but referencing our characters and addressing the reader personally. This dynamic didn't just draw me into the story, oh no, it gobbled me up and left me wandering the streets of Toronto, trying to walk without using my hips...Through these footnotes we learn a lot about all of our characters, without the need of an extra hundred pages, although I wouldn't have complained about that either.
The story is one of the most beautifully crafted books I have ever read. I am a HUGE fan of Sherlock and Murdoch Mysteries. And to have a story similar to those with women playing the lead...Brilliant! While we see the story through the perspective of different characters, it is mainly through Jem's eyes. Throughout their crime solving adventure, we can see the strength and determination of these women to do the right thing. Jem and Ray both look to the Lord for guidance and are comforted and encouraged by His voice and His peace. While God is a puzzle too big to solve for Merinda at this point. If you enjoy a good mystery with a lot of humour and some faith...THIS is the book for you! There are pins and needles that I am sitting on, waiting for the next book to come out!