Search
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated The Devil's Own (1997) in Movies
Jul 4, 2021
I don't know what's worse: a film that's underwritten and knows it, or a film which sets up such thought-provoking themes only to immediately ditch them by the wayside (which this one is). It's so frustrating how this had most of the elements just on principle alone to be really, really good and it still wasn't. Seemingly intentionally unexciting, so much so that Brad Pitt's middle-schooler-impression-of-Daniel-Day-Lewis-from-đđŻ-đ”đ©đŠ-đđąđźđŠ-đ°đ§-đ”đ©đŠ-đđąđ”đ©đŠđł accent is actually the best part of it. Gets semi-engaging in the last 45 minutes if only because it finally gets some of the right look + feel for what this wants to be, but even then it's got no bite and is disgustingly pro-cop (a cop who shot dead an unarmed victim multiple times then tried to force everyone to cover it up and doesn't regret it can be redeemed without doing anything!). Poises itself to go over issues of oppression, nationalism, trauma, violence, and what happens when they all intersect - but never does. Harrison Ford is so bland here, too. Doesn't even care about its own story, what a fucking shame. This really coulda been something.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Phantom Thread (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
âThereâs an air of quiet death in this houseâ.
The alleged acting swan-song of Daniel Day-Lewis (âLincolnâ) sees him deliver a brilliantly intense portrayal of a maestro in his craft with all the quirks and egotistical faults that come with that position.
Reynolds Woodcock is the craftsman behind a world-renowned 1950âs fashion house, in demand from the elite classes and even royalty. He has a magnetic personality, is overtly self-confident, obsessive, a cruel bully and treats his girlfriends as chattels that he can tire of and dismiss from his life without a backward glance. Trying to keep the business and Reynolds on track, with ruthless efficiency, is his sister Cyril (Leslie Manville, âMaleficentâ).
Looking for his next conquest during a trip to his seaside residence, he reels in blushing young waitress Alma (Vicky Krieps, âThe Colonyâ). But he gets more than he bargains for.
This is a really exquisite and gentle film. Aside from some dubious fungi-related practices, there is no violence, no sex and â aside from about half a dozen well-chosen F-words â limited swearing (of which more below). This is a study of the developing relationship between the two protagonists, with little in the way of plot. Sounds dull? Far from it. This is two hours that flew by.
What it also features is (yet) another example of extremely strong women asserting their power. A scene (well trailed in Manvilleâs award snippets) where Cyril firmly puts Reynolds back in his box is brilliant: a real turning of tables with Woodcock meekly falling into line. And Alma makes for an incredibly rich and complicated character, one of the most interesting female roles Iâve seen this year so far.
Itâs a stellar acting performance from Day-Lewis, and while Oldman fully deserves all of his award kudos for âDarkest Hourâ, Day-Lewis delivers the goods without any of the make-up. It feels like Day-Lewis is a long way down the betting odds this year because âhe always gets oneâ. He certainly gets my vote ahead of all of the other three nominees.
Kreips â not an actress I know â also brilliantly holds her own, and if it wasnât such a strong female field this year she could well have been nominated.
Also worthy of note is the pervasive piano score by (suprisingly) Radioheadâs Jonny Greenwood. Itâs really lovely and counterpoints the rest of the classical score nicely. Its BAFTA and Oscar nominations are both well deserved (though I would expect the Oscar to follow the BAFTA steer with âThe Shape of Waterâ).
All in all, this is a real tour de force by writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson (âInherent Viceâ, âThere Will Be Bloodâ). How much I enjoyed this film was a surprise to me, since I have no interest in the âfashion industryâ (as my family will no doubt be quick to point out!) and I went to see this more out of âdutyâ based on its Oscar buzz than because I really wanted to see it.
The big curiosity is why exactly the BBFC decided that this film was worthy of a 15 certificate rather than a 12A. Their comments on the film say âThere is strong language (âf**kâ), as well as milder terms including âbloodyâ and âhellâ. Other issues include mild sex references and scenes of emotional upset. In one scene, a womanâs nipples are visible through her slip while she is measured for a dress.â For a 12A, the board say âThe use of strong language (for example, âf***â) must be infrequentâ. I didnât count the f-words⊠but as I said I donât think it amounts to more than a half-dozen. Is that âfrequentâ? And â SHOCK, HORROR⊠visible covered nipples you say?! Lock up your teenagers! When you look at the gentleness of this film versus the violence within âBlack Pantherâ, you have to question this disparity.
Reynolds Woodcock is the craftsman behind a world-renowned 1950âs fashion house, in demand from the elite classes and even royalty. He has a magnetic personality, is overtly self-confident, obsessive, a cruel bully and treats his girlfriends as chattels that he can tire of and dismiss from his life without a backward glance. Trying to keep the business and Reynolds on track, with ruthless efficiency, is his sister Cyril (Leslie Manville, âMaleficentâ).
Looking for his next conquest during a trip to his seaside residence, he reels in blushing young waitress Alma (Vicky Krieps, âThe Colonyâ). But he gets more than he bargains for.
This is a really exquisite and gentle film. Aside from some dubious fungi-related practices, there is no violence, no sex and â aside from about half a dozen well-chosen F-words â limited swearing (of which more below). This is a study of the developing relationship between the two protagonists, with little in the way of plot. Sounds dull? Far from it. This is two hours that flew by.
What it also features is (yet) another example of extremely strong women asserting their power. A scene (well trailed in Manvilleâs award snippets) where Cyril firmly puts Reynolds back in his box is brilliant: a real turning of tables with Woodcock meekly falling into line. And Alma makes for an incredibly rich and complicated character, one of the most interesting female roles Iâve seen this year so far.
Itâs a stellar acting performance from Day-Lewis, and while Oldman fully deserves all of his award kudos for âDarkest Hourâ, Day-Lewis delivers the goods without any of the make-up. It feels like Day-Lewis is a long way down the betting odds this year because âhe always gets oneâ. He certainly gets my vote ahead of all of the other three nominees.
Kreips â not an actress I know â also brilliantly holds her own, and if it wasnât such a strong female field this year she could well have been nominated.
Also worthy of note is the pervasive piano score by (suprisingly) Radioheadâs Jonny Greenwood. Itâs really lovely and counterpoints the rest of the classical score nicely. Its BAFTA and Oscar nominations are both well deserved (though I would expect the Oscar to follow the BAFTA steer with âThe Shape of Waterâ).
All in all, this is a real tour de force by writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson (âInherent Viceâ, âThere Will Be Bloodâ). How much I enjoyed this film was a surprise to me, since I have no interest in the âfashion industryâ (as my family will no doubt be quick to point out!) and I went to see this more out of âdutyâ based on its Oscar buzz than because I really wanted to see it.
The big curiosity is why exactly the BBFC decided that this film was worthy of a 15 certificate rather than a 12A. Their comments on the film say âThere is strong language (âf**kâ), as well as milder terms including âbloodyâ and âhellâ. Other issues include mild sex references and scenes of emotional upset. In one scene, a womanâs nipples are visible through her slip while she is measured for a dress.â For a 12A, the board say âThe use of strong language (for example, âf***â) must be infrequentâ. I didnât count the f-words⊠but as I said I donât think it amounts to more than a half-dozen. Is that âfrequentâ? And â SHOCK, HORROR⊠visible covered nipples you say?! Lock up your teenagers! When you look at the gentleness of this film versus the violence within âBlack Pantherâ, you have to question this disparity.
A Fork in the Road: Tales of Food, Pleasure and Discovery on the Road
Lonely Planet, Tamasin Day-Lewis, Giles Coren and James Oseland
Book
Lonely Planet: The world's leading travel guide publisher A Fork in the Road: Tales of Food,...
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Lincoln (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
The history of this country is steeped in mystery and intrigue, but itâs fuzzy on the details. We cling to heroes of the past because we are jaded by the present. Lincoln, a new film from Steven Spielberg, comes to us at a time when there seems to be even more political strife than usual. (Or perhaps thatâs just me getting older and actually paying attention.) Either way, I think this movieâs arrival on the silver screen is very timely, given the recent election.
Daniel Day Lewis, a man revered for his choice of films and roles, as well as his ability to portray characters with so much emotion and conviction, has done it once again. As the title character for this film, Lewis portrays one of the U.S.Aâs greatest leaders and pioneers in a way that few other men could. Surrounded by some of the best actors in Hollywood (including Tommy Lee Jones), this star-studded film has a laundry list of very recognizable faces from all corners of Hollywood. The red carpet was clearly rolled out for this film.
The story starts amid the death and destruction of the American Civil War, an event that is both a fixed point of the story and a constant backdrop. Seeing the fighting and killing made me wonder how gritty this movie would get, but as it turns out, they kept the level of gore pretty low.
The film goes on to set the stage for the final footsteps into the southern theater that was the Civil War. In tandem, it follows the highly controversial 13th amendment, which was barely passed at the time due to racism and the belief that one color of human should be slave to another color. The absurdity of this notion is highlighted, but itâs also familiar in the way it parallels issues we face today: legalizing pot, gay marriage, prostitution, the right to bear arms, etc. Perhaps our grandchildren will watch a film in the future about these struggles, and regard it as we do a film about the Civil War. As I sat and watched this movie, I was nearly in tears at the thought of how African-Americans were once regarded as lesser beings. Will our grandchildren cry at the ridiculousness of our beliefs?
The cinematography was amazingly crisp. Many of the characters are introduced in such a way that they have a grand entrance through the mystique created by camera angles. I have to truly applaud Spielberg for what might be his best film yet. The camera work was immensely effective, relying heavily on the contrast between shadow and light. Coupled with richly detailed sets, it made everything staggeringly realistic, and absolutely convincing.
I will say this for Lincoln: I havenât been so moved and taken aback by a period film in my life. This is a must see for everyone.
The dialog is highly political, and sometimes goes along at quite a clip; be prepared to miss a few things the first time around. However, watching it a second time surely wonât be a sin. The humor alone merits a second viewing. There are many good laughs to be had.
Lincoln is a work of art.
Daniel Day Lewis, a man revered for his choice of films and roles, as well as his ability to portray characters with so much emotion and conviction, has done it once again. As the title character for this film, Lewis portrays one of the U.S.Aâs greatest leaders and pioneers in a way that few other men could. Surrounded by some of the best actors in Hollywood (including Tommy Lee Jones), this star-studded film has a laundry list of very recognizable faces from all corners of Hollywood. The red carpet was clearly rolled out for this film.
The story starts amid the death and destruction of the American Civil War, an event that is both a fixed point of the story and a constant backdrop. Seeing the fighting and killing made me wonder how gritty this movie would get, but as it turns out, they kept the level of gore pretty low.
The film goes on to set the stage for the final footsteps into the southern theater that was the Civil War. In tandem, it follows the highly controversial 13th amendment, which was barely passed at the time due to racism and the belief that one color of human should be slave to another color. The absurdity of this notion is highlighted, but itâs also familiar in the way it parallels issues we face today: legalizing pot, gay marriage, prostitution, the right to bear arms, etc. Perhaps our grandchildren will watch a film in the future about these struggles, and regard it as we do a film about the Civil War. As I sat and watched this movie, I was nearly in tears at the thought of how African-Americans were once regarded as lesser beings. Will our grandchildren cry at the ridiculousness of our beliefs?
The cinematography was amazingly crisp. Many of the characters are introduced in such a way that they have a grand entrance through the mystique created by camera angles. I have to truly applaud Spielberg for what might be his best film yet. The camera work was immensely effective, relying heavily on the contrast between shadow and light. Coupled with richly detailed sets, it made everything staggeringly realistic, and absolutely convincing.
I will say this for Lincoln: I havenât been so moved and taken aback by a period film in my life. This is a must see for everyone.
The dialog is highly political, and sometimes goes along at quite a clip; be prepared to miss a few things the first time around. However, watching it a second time surely wonât be a sin. The humor alone merits a second viewing. There are many good laughs to be had.
Lincoln is a work of art.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
The El Royale Hotel sit directly on the California and Nevada border just outside of Lake Tahoe. In its heyday, the novelty hotel, vibrant and bustling with activity. Even getting visits from famous actors, singers and politicians. But by the 1960s those days had gone and now it is rundown and mostly vacant. Then on one fateful day a group of random strangers meet at the El Royale. There is a minister, Father Daniel Flynn (Jeff Bridges), on his way back from Oakland visiting his brother. Singer Darlene Sweet (Cynthia Erivo) who came to the El Royale because her midday casino singing gig in Reno didnât pay enough for her to stay anywhere else. Then there is Laramie Seymour Sullivan (John Hamm) the vacuum salesman who talks fast and loud. His company does all the hotel bookings so he was stuck with the El Royale, but he is dead set on enjoying the luxurious Honeymoon Suite given the choices. Lastly, there is Emily (Dakota Johnson) she doesnât say much besides she wants a room far away from the other guests. The mismatched group is all greeted by the bellhop/bar tender/service manager Miles (Lewis Pullman). All seems like a chance meeting of a group of travelers. But nothing is what it seems. By the nights end all manner of secrets will come out and all the guestsâ lives will be in jeopardy.
El Royale is a well-crafted and executed mystery/thriller. Writer and Director Drew Goddard (The Martian) does a great job of telling an original story. It keeps you guessing to the end. The cast for the most part is really good. Chris Hemsworth (as Billy Lee) and Cailee Spaeny (as Ruth Summersping) have more underwhelming performances compared to the rest of the cast but still good. Cynthia Erivo, for me, had a great performance. I thought her voice was amazing and how her character was developed throughout the film was interesting and well done. The pace of the movie does start out somewhat slow but rapidly builds and overall is good. The film is set in the 1960s and definitely feels like of that era with the music, news stories, overall appearance of the hotel rooms, etc.
I enjoyed this film. I thought the way the story unfolded was interesting and original. One part that really occurred to be later is that you never really knew who the hero of the film was or would wind up being. When I thought I had it figured out something would happen to change my mind. Or maybe there was not really hero. The slow build up was a little long for me but otherwise it was a great movie theater experience.
El Royale is a well-crafted and executed mystery/thriller. Writer and Director Drew Goddard (The Martian) does a great job of telling an original story. It keeps you guessing to the end. The cast for the most part is really good. Chris Hemsworth (as Billy Lee) and Cailee Spaeny (as Ruth Summersping) have more underwhelming performances compared to the rest of the cast but still good. Cynthia Erivo, for me, had a great performance. I thought her voice was amazing and how her character was developed throughout the film was interesting and well done. The pace of the movie does start out somewhat slow but rapidly builds and overall is good. The film is set in the 1960s and definitely feels like of that era with the music, news stories, overall appearance of the hotel rooms, etc.
I enjoyed this film. I thought the way the story unfolded was interesting and original. One part that really occurred to be later is that you never really knew who the hero of the film was or would wind up being. When I thought I had it figured out something would happen to change my mind. Or maybe there was not really hero. The slow build up was a little long for me but otherwise it was a great movie theater experience.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Live By Night (2017) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
Iâm a sucker for a Prohibition-set yarn. Itâs a fascinating period in history and typically yields excellent filmmaking with gritty, no-nonsense performances, gorgeous production design and hard-boiled action. It was De Palmaâs The Untouchables that hooked me. Some would call it a guilty pleasure; and sure, Morriconeâs score is a little over-the-top, De Niro is more caricature than character actor as Al Capone and Iâm not going to argue that Conneryâs Oscar was a âsympathy voteâ, but itâs got everything I mentioned above in spades and for me itâll always be the high benchmark of the Prohibition era gangster epic. Ben Affleckâs fourth turn as director has done nothing to change my position on that.
Live by Night is an uninspired mess, from voice-over laden start to disastrously predictable end, bringing nothing new or exciting to the table. Beat for beat, its weak script moves from one sigh-inducing clichĂ© to another, reaching clumsily for moments of high emotion that ring hollow and false. If anyone needs any further proof that Matt Damon did all the heavy lifting on the script for Good Will Hunting, they need look no further. It feels wrong to come down so hard on Affleck after his back-to-back successes as a director, but this is more akin to the first work of a blundering novice, and also certainly not what weâve come to expect of a Dennis Lehane adaptation (see Mystic River, Shutter Island and Affleckâs own incredible directorial debut, Gone Baby Gone). His decision to wear so many hats on this project, producing, directing, sole screenwriter and lead actor, has to be the reason for this stumble. The script desperately needed another set of eyes and the part of Joe Coughlin was clearly written for someone younger and more capable of performing with the subtlety needed to play someone who has to traverse the number of moral dilemmas heâs faced with. Hopefully, this inevitable failure will be what convinces Affleck that his place should be behind the camera directing other peopleâs scripts and guiding other peopleâs performances.
Speaking of the performances, there is a massive curve in this collection of acting that swings wildly from the cartoonish to the nuanced. To start with, we have Matthew Maher as a KKK member out for his cut and Robert Glenister as an Irish mob boss, both of whom are supposed to be playing dangerous and threatening but canât do any better than laughable and two-dimensional. Then thereâs Chris Messina and Affleck himself as the hoods on the rise, their chemistry is ill-advised at best as they both seem to think theyâre in a buddy comedy as opposed to a serious piece of gangster melodrama A favorite of mine, Brendan Gleeson, sadly leaves the screen within the first twenty minutes and that left me with only the inimitable Chris Cooper to look forward to. The subplot involving him and Elle Fanning, as his born-again daughter speaking out against Coughlinâs sinful ways is not without problems of its own, but at least they sell it. That should be no surprise on Cooperâs part, but now between this and The Neon Demon last summer; Fanning is firmly on my radar as one to watch. My hope was that we were going to get some tremendous battle of wills between her and Affleckâs character akin to Paul Dano and Daniel Day-Lewisâ conflict in There Will Be Blood, but that was definitely asking too much. Fanningâs role, like Gleesonâs, is unfortunately cut short just as it gets good.
I guess The Untouchables is starting to sound less like a guilty pleasure and more like a masterpiece when compared to this regrettable misfire.
Live by Night is an uninspired mess, from voice-over laden start to disastrously predictable end, bringing nothing new or exciting to the table. Beat for beat, its weak script moves from one sigh-inducing clichĂ© to another, reaching clumsily for moments of high emotion that ring hollow and false. If anyone needs any further proof that Matt Damon did all the heavy lifting on the script for Good Will Hunting, they need look no further. It feels wrong to come down so hard on Affleck after his back-to-back successes as a director, but this is more akin to the first work of a blundering novice, and also certainly not what weâve come to expect of a Dennis Lehane adaptation (see Mystic River, Shutter Island and Affleckâs own incredible directorial debut, Gone Baby Gone). His decision to wear so many hats on this project, producing, directing, sole screenwriter and lead actor, has to be the reason for this stumble. The script desperately needed another set of eyes and the part of Joe Coughlin was clearly written for someone younger and more capable of performing with the subtlety needed to play someone who has to traverse the number of moral dilemmas heâs faced with. Hopefully, this inevitable failure will be what convinces Affleck that his place should be behind the camera directing other peopleâs scripts and guiding other peopleâs performances.
Speaking of the performances, there is a massive curve in this collection of acting that swings wildly from the cartoonish to the nuanced. To start with, we have Matthew Maher as a KKK member out for his cut and Robert Glenister as an Irish mob boss, both of whom are supposed to be playing dangerous and threatening but canât do any better than laughable and two-dimensional. Then thereâs Chris Messina and Affleck himself as the hoods on the rise, their chemistry is ill-advised at best as they both seem to think theyâre in a buddy comedy as opposed to a serious piece of gangster melodrama A favorite of mine, Brendan Gleeson, sadly leaves the screen within the first twenty minutes and that left me with only the inimitable Chris Cooper to look forward to. The subplot involving him and Elle Fanning, as his born-again daughter speaking out against Coughlinâs sinful ways is not without problems of its own, but at least they sell it. That should be no surprise on Cooperâs part, but now between this and The Neon Demon last summer; Fanning is firmly on my radar as one to watch. My hope was that we were going to get some tremendous battle of wills between her and Affleckâs character akin to Paul Dano and Daniel Day-Lewisâ conflict in There Will Be Blood, but that was definitely asking too much. Fanningâs role, like Gleesonâs, is unfortunately cut short just as it gets good.
I guess The Untouchables is starting to sound less like a guilty pleasure and more like a masterpiece when compared to this regrettable misfire.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Youâll never guess who dunnitâŠ
Thereâs a big problem with Kenneth Branaghâs 2017 filming of the Hercule Poirot-based murder mysteryâŠ. and thatâs the 1974 Sidney Lumet classic featuring Albert Finney in the starring role. For that film was so memorable â at least, the âwhoâ of the âwhodunnitâ (no spoilers here) was so memorable â that any remake is likely to be tarnished by that knowledge. If you go into this film blissfully unaware of the plot, you are a lucky man/woman. For this is a classic Agatha Christie yarn.
The irascible, borderline OCD, but undeniably great Belgian detective, Poirot, is dragged around the world by grateful police forces to help solve unsolvable crimes. After solving a case in Jerusalem, Poirot is called back to the UK with his mode of transport being the famous Orient Express. Trapped in the mountains by an avalanche, a murder is committed and with multiple suspects and a plethora of clues it is up to Poirot to solve the case.
Branagh enjoys himself enormously as Poirot, sporting the most distractingly magnificent facial hair since Daniel Day-Lewis in âThe Gangs of New Yorkâ. The moustache must have had its own trailer and make-up team!
Above all, the film is glorious to look at, featuring a rich and exotic colour palette that is reminiscent of the early colour films of the 40âs. Cinematography was by Haris Zambarloukos (âMamma Miaâ and who also collaborated with Branagh on âThor) with lots of innovative âceiling downâ shots and artful point-of-view takes that might be annoying to some but which I consider as deserving of Oscar/BAFTA nominations.
The pictures are accompanied by a lush score by Patrick Doyle (who also scored Branaghâs âThorâ). Hats off also to the special effects crew, who made the alpine bridge scenes look decidedly more alpine than where they were actually filmed (on a specially made bridge in the Surrey Hills!).
All these technical elements combine to make the filmâs early stages look and feel truly epic.
And the cast⊠what a cast! Dame Judi Dench (âVictoria and Abdulâ); Olivia Coleman (âThe Lobsterâ); Johnny Depp (âBlack Massâ); Daisy Ridley (âStar Wars: The Force Awakensâ); PenĂ©lope Cruz (âZoolander 2â); Josh Gad (Olaf!); Derek Jacobi (âI, Claudiusâ); Willem Dafoe (âThe Great Wallâ) and Michelle Pfeiffer (âmother!â). A real case again of an âoh, itâs youâ film again at the cinema â whenâs the last time we saw that?
Itâs also great to see young Lucy Boynton, so magnificent in last yearâs excellent âSing Streetâ, getting an A-list role as the twitchy and disturbed countess.
With all these ingredients in the pot, it should be great, right? Unfortunately, in my view, no, not quite. The filmâs opening momentum is really not maintained by the screenplay by Michael Green (âBlade Runner 2049â; âLoganâ). At heart, itâs a fairly static and âstageyâ piece at best, set as it is on the rather claustrophobic train (just three carriages⊠on the Orient Express⊠really?). But the tale is made even more static by the trainâs derailment in the snow. Branagh and Green try to sex up the action where they can, but there are lengthy passages of fairly repetitive dialogue. One encounter in particular between Branagh and Depp seems to last interminably: you wonder if the problem was that the director wasnât always looking on to yell âCutâ!
All this leads to the ârevelationâ of the murderer as being a bit of an anticlimactic âthank heavens for thatâ rather than the gasping denouement it should have been. (Perhaps this would be different if you didnât know the twist).
However, these reservations aside, itâs an enjoyable night out at the flicks, although a bit of a disappointment from the level of expectation I had for it. I canât be too grumpy about it, given itâs a return to good old-fashioned yarn-spinning at the cinema, with great visuals and an epic cast. And that has to be good news.
For sure, Branagh does make for an amusing and engaging Poirot, even if his dialogue did need some âtuning inâ to. There was a suggestion at the end of the film that we might be seeing his return in âDeath on the Nileâ â the most lush and decorous of Peter Ustinovâs outings â which I would certainly welcome. He will have to find another 10 A-list stars though to decorate the boat, which will be a challenge for casting!
The irascible, borderline OCD, but undeniably great Belgian detective, Poirot, is dragged around the world by grateful police forces to help solve unsolvable crimes. After solving a case in Jerusalem, Poirot is called back to the UK with his mode of transport being the famous Orient Express. Trapped in the mountains by an avalanche, a murder is committed and with multiple suspects and a plethora of clues it is up to Poirot to solve the case.
Branagh enjoys himself enormously as Poirot, sporting the most distractingly magnificent facial hair since Daniel Day-Lewis in âThe Gangs of New Yorkâ. The moustache must have had its own trailer and make-up team!
Above all, the film is glorious to look at, featuring a rich and exotic colour palette that is reminiscent of the early colour films of the 40âs. Cinematography was by Haris Zambarloukos (âMamma Miaâ and who also collaborated with Branagh on âThor) with lots of innovative âceiling downâ shots and artful point-of-view takes that might be annoying to some but which I consider as deserving of Oscar/BAFTA nominations.
The pictures are accompanied by a lush score by Patrick Doyle (who also scored Branaghâs âThorâ). Hats off also to the special effects crew, who made the alpine bridge scenes look decidedly more alpine than where they were actually filmed (on a specially made bridge in the Surrey Hills!).
All these technical elements combine to make the filmâs early stages look and feel truly epic.
And the cast⊠what a cast! Dame Judi Dench (âVictoria and Abdulâ); Olivia Coleman (âThe Lobsterâ); Johnny Depp (âBlack Massâ); Daisy Ridley (âStar Wars: The Force Awakensâ); PenĂ©lope Cruz (âZoolander 2â); Josh Gad (Olaf!); Derek Jacobi (âI, Claudiusâ); Willem Dafoe (âThe Great Wallâ) and Michelle Pfeiffer (âmother!â). A real case again of an âoh, itâs youâ film again at the cinema â whenâs the last time we saw that?
Itâs also great to see young Lucy Boynton, so magnificent in last yearâs excellent âSing Streetâ, getting an A-list role as the twitchy and disturbed countess.
With all these ingredients in the pot, it should be great, right? Unfortunately, in my view, no, not quite. The filmâs opening momentum is really not maintained by the screenplay by Michael Green (âBlade Runner 2049â; âLoganâ). At heart, itâs a fairly static and âstageyâ piece at best, set as it is on the rather claustrophobic train (just three carriages⊠on the Orient Express⊠really?). But the tale is made even more static by the trainâs derailment in the snow. Branagh and Green try to sex up the action where they can, but there are lengthy passages of fairly repetitive dialogue. One encounter in particular between Branagh and Depp seems to last interminably: you wonder if the problem was that the director wasnât always looking on to yell âCutâ!
All this leads to the ârevelationâ of the murderer as being a bit of an anticlimactic âthank heavens for thatâ rather than the gasping denouement it should have been. (Perhaps this would be different if you didnât know the twist).
However, these reservations aside, itâs an enjoyable night out at the flicks, although a bit of a disappointment from the level of expectation I had for it. I canât be too grumpy about it, given itâs a return to good old-fashioned yarn-spinning at the cinema, with great visuals and an epic cast. And that has to be good news.
For sure, Branagh does make for an amusing and engaging Poirot, even if his dialogue did need some âtuning inâ to. There was a suggestion at the end of the film that we might be seeing his return in âDeath on the Nileâ â the most lush and decorous of Peter Ustinovâs outings â which I would certainly welcome. He will have to find another 10 A-list stars though to decorate the boat, which will be a challenge for casting!
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated The Exalted Gate in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>.
I absolutely love the cover of this book. It is gorgeous!! Anyway, this book has ten stories in it, so I will review and rate each one individually.
*
Boots
Judith (of an undisclosed age) is a girl that hates wearing shoes. However, she is in a play where she has to play a Polish tramp. She doesn't want to wear shoes, but the director says even tramps wear shoes. She finds some beat up looking boots in the prop room and puts them on. As soon as they are on her feet, it's like they have a mind of their own. They take Judith where they want to go. What ensues in an adventure that Judith won't soon forget.
I thought the story of Boots was a really cute and interesting read. I definitely think this will appeal to children of all ages. The only slight problem was with punctuation, but that's nothing that major. Judith is an interesting girl. I'd recommend this story.
I'd give Boots a 4.5 out of 5.
*
Five Gifts
Lonia is a thirteen year old girl whose parents are already nagging her to get married. (Yeah, it's a bit much, but it does say in the story that this was way back in the day). She'd rather spend her days in the children's glade talking to her elf friend, Pintak. One day, Pintak is kidnapped by a mean old wizard, and Lonia decides that she must go rescue him. She is given five gifts from different creatures of the forest to help her on her quest.
I was impressed with this story, and I found it quite interesting. There's also a lesson to be learned about experimenting on animals. Lonia was definitely a brave little girl and was willing to risk everything to save her friend. There are a few punctuation mistakes and a mispelt word, but other than that, this story was a good one.
I'd give Five Gifts a 5 out of 5.
*
Sintinko
Sintinko is a story set in Japan back when it was all emperors and generals. The emperor is jealous of Sintinko and wants to have him killed. It's only because of Ilyo, Sintinko's love interest, that the emperor spares his life. However, Sintinko is banished from Japan until he can find a maple tree that can sit in the hand of the emperor. Ilyo and Sintinko know that they will most likely never see each other. Unbeknownst to Sintinko and everyone else, Ilyo disguises herself as a geisha to help Sintinko on his journey. Love and loss are the themes of this story.
This was such a bittersweet love story. I felt sorry for both Sintinko and Ilyo. Sintinko thought he would never see his beloved again and swore off any type of relationship. Ilyo had her beloved right there in front of her, yet she couldn't do anything about it.
The names, being Japanese, were a bit hard to pronounce, but it's easy to get past that since the story is so strong. Speaking of names, this story even lets us know how the Bonsai tree got its name.
There's a few punctuation mistakes, but nothing that takes away from the story.
I think this story would be better suited for ages 11+. Personally, I found the story a bit slow, but not painfully slow.
I'd give Sintinko a 3.5 out of 5.
*
Tivurambhat
Tivurambhat is the story of a ghost by the same name of the title who helps people out in times of need in India. A mean man forces people to work for him by letting them borrow money, putting the interest up, and paying them such low wages they can never afford to pay him pack. One man decides to do something about it and goes to Tivurambhat for help.
I loved the message behind the story. Towards the ending, it even had me smiling. I couldn't pronounce the names since they were all Indian names, so I just shortened them so my American self could pronounce them. I loved the character of Tiv. He kind of reminded me of an American version of Casper for some reason. I really enjoyed the conversation between Pradesh and Tiv the most. This was such a happy story!
Again, there's some punctuation mistakes and a few grammar ones as well, but the story itself was excellent.
I'd give Tivurambhat a 5 out of 5.
*
St. Penalyn's Well
St Penalyn's Well tells the story of Rebecca (of an undisclosed age) who ventures into an overgrown garden with her dog. She stumbles across a well with an inscription. It is while reading this inscription that she becomes trapped in the well. Lucky for her, she meets an elf named Opickle who keeps her company and gives her the inspiration she needs to find her way out.
This was definitely an interesting story. I was hooked all the way through. It's a story about friendship amongst diversity and not giving up. I found Opickle to be just a tad bit of a snob but not enough to put me off the story.
A few punctuation mistakes throughout the story but not enough to be distracting.
St. Penalyn's Well gets a 5 out of 5 from me.
*
Quint and Trout's Mistake
Quint and Trout's Mistake is a story I didn't finish because of the name calling and making fun of someone who is overweight. It starts out innocently enough. A lake is being overrun by a white smelly substance. Two brothers, Quint and Trout, talk their friend Ned into investigating why this is happening. Ned swims down to the bottom of the lake and finds an overweight creature living in a cave who has been kicked out of his house. This is when the name calling starts, and I stopped reading.
I do not like stories aimed at children that condone name calling of any sort whether it be because of weight, disabilities, race, etc. Children do not need to read something like this and feel bad about themselves or view it as an excuse to tease others. I was very disappointed something like this was in a children's book.
Quint and Trout's Mistake gets a 0 out of 5 from me. What a vile story!
*
Densus
Densus is a boy who was born with blue fingernails and blue streaks in his hair. This is because he has a destiny to fulfill. When a crab named Arnold asks him if he'd go tell a giant that he has found a perfect wife for him, Densus agrees because it's his destiny even if there's a possibility the giant could kill him.
This is a story about destinies. It lets us know that we all have destinies if only we weren't too busy trying to find out what they are. This is a fun story which I think children would love! I loved Arnold the crab!! I think a majority of children would love him.
Again, there's a few punctuation and grammar mistakes but nothing major.
I'd give Densus a 5 out of 5.
*
Alice's Granddaughter
Alice's Granddaughter takes place years after Alice in Wonderland. Alice's granddaughter, Alicia, is recruited by a thief named Cheng to go down into a rabbit hole to get him a yellow dragon. Alicia discovers that things in Wonderland haven't changed much.
I thoroughly enjoyed this story! I'm a sucker for everything Alice in Wonderland-esque, and this was no exception! I loved how the author still managed to preserve the original Wonderland in his tale and how he even managed to keep the style of writing similar to that of Lewis Carroll. My favorite character was definitely the talking table. My only gripe is that I wish this story would've been longer!
As like with the previous story, there are some punctuation and grammar mistakes that can be overlooked.
Alice's Granddaughter gets a bit 5 out of 5.
*
The Dragon
The Dragon is a story about death. In this story, we follow a dragon in her very last moments as she dies of what I assume to be old age. We get to see her memories of when she was her prime and when she takes her last breath.
This is a sad story and probably one for the older children unless younger children can handle the topic of death. It's not written in a morbid way though. It's actually written quite beautifully especially when we get to see the memory of the dragon in her prime. I think this story can show that death is not always bad.
There are grammar and punctuation mistakes but nothing that deters from the story.
The Dragon gets a 3.75 out of 5.
*
The Wisdom of a Dog
The Wisdom of a Dog is about a man named Keith and his dog who go on an adventure and wind up in a crystal city. Keith must found out who is destroying the city and save it.
This story was a good read, and I think most children would enjoy it especially as it involves a talking dog. I enjoyed how the author even placed his own dialogue in the story. This is a good versus bad story that shows that bad people never win.
Again, there are grammar and punctuation mistakes, but it doesn't take away from the story.
The Wisdom of a Dog gets a 3.5 out of 5.
*
The Exalted Gate by Daniel Nanavati averages out to a 3.5 out of 5. I'd definitely recommend this book to old and young alike!
(I received a free physical copy of this title from the publisher in exchange for a fair and honest review).
I absolutely love the cover of this book. It is gorgeous!! Anyway, this book has ten stories in it, so I will review and rate each one individually.
*
Boots
Judith (of an undisclosed age) is a girl that hates wearing shoes. However, she is in a play where she has to play a Polish tramp. She doesn't want to wear shoes, but the director says even tramps wear shoes. She finds some beat up looking boots in the prop room and puts them on. As soon as they are on her feet, it's like they have a mind of their own. They take Judith where they want to go. What ensues in an adventure that Judith won't soon forget.
I thought the story of Boots was a really cute and interesting read. I definitely think this will appeal to children of all ages. The only slight problem was with punctuation, but that's nothing that major. Judith is an interesting girl. I'd recommend this story.
I'd give Boots a 4.5 out of 5.
*
Five Gifts
Lonia is a thirteen year old girl whose parents are already nagging her to get married. (Yeah, it's a bit much, but it does say in the story that this was way back in the day). She'd rather spend her days in the children's glade talking to her elf friend, Pintak. One day, Pintak is kidnapped by a mean old wizard, and Lonia decides that she must go rescue him. She is given five gifts from different creatures of the forest to help her on her quest.
I was impressed with this story, and I found it quite interesting. There's also a lesson to be learned about experimenting on animals. Lonia was definitely a brave little girl and was willing to risk everything to save her friend. There are a few punctuation mistakes and a mispelt word, but other than that, this story was a good one.
I'd give Five Gifts a 5 out of 5.
*
Sintinko
Sintinko is a story set in Japan back when it was all emperors and generals. The emperor is jealous of Sintinko and wants to have him killed. It's only because of Ilyo, Sintinko's love interest, that the emperor spares his life. However, Sintinko is banished from Japan until he can find a maple tree that can sit in the hand of the emperor. Ilyo and Sintinko know that they will most likely never see each other. Unbeknownst to Sintinko and everyone else, Ilyo disguises herself as a geisha to help Sintinko on his journey. Love and loss are the themes of this story.
This was such a bittersweet love story. I felt sorry for both Sintinko and Ilyo. Sintinko thought he would never see his beloved again and swore off any type of relationship. Ilyo had her beloved right there in front of her, yet she couldn't do anything about it.
The names, being Japanese, were a bit hard to pronounce, but it's easy to get past that since the story is so strong. Speaking of names, this story even lets us know how the Bonsai tree got its name.
There's a few punctuation mistakes, but nothing that takes away from the story.
I think this story would be better suited for ages 11+. Personally, I found the story a bit slow, but not painfully slow.
I'd give Sintinko a 3.5 out of 5.
*
Tivurambhat
Tivurambhat is the story of a ghost by the same name of the title who helps people out in times of need in India. A mean man forces people to work for him by letting them borrow money, putting the interest up, and paying them such low wages they can never afford to pay him pack. One man decides to do something about it and goes to Tivurambhat for help.
I loved the message behind the story. Towards the ending, it even had me smiling. I couldn't pronounce the names since they were all Indian names, so I just shortened them so my American self could pronounce them. I loved the character of Tiv. He kind of reminded me of an American version of Casper for some reason. I really enjoyed the conversation between Pradesh and Tiv the most. This was such a happy story!
Again, there's some punctuation mistakes and a few grammar ones as well, but the story itself was excellent.
I'd give Tivurambhat a 5 out of 5.
*
St. Penalyn's Well
St Penalyn's Well tells the story of Rebecca (of an undisclosed age) who ventures into an overgrown garden with her dog. She stumbles across a well with an inscription. It is while reading this inscription that she becomes trapped in the well. Lucky for her, she meets an elf named Opickle who keeps her company and gives her the inspiration she needs to find her way out.
This was definitely an interesting story. I was hooked all the way through. It's a story about friendship amongst diversity and not giving up. I found Opickle to be just a tad bit of a snob but not enough to put me off the story.
A few punctuation mistakes throughout the story but not enough to be distracting.
St. Penalyn's Well gets a 5 out of 5 from me.
*
Quint and Trout's Mistake
Quint and Trout's Mistake is a story I didn't finish because of the name calling and making fun of someone who is overweight. It starts out innocently enough. A lake is being overrun by a white smelly substance. Two brothers, Quint and Trout, talk their friend Ned into investigating why this is happening. Ned swims down to the bottom of the lake and finds an overweight creature living in a cave who has been kicked out of his house. This is when the name calling starts, and I stopped reading.
I do not like stories aimed at children that condone name calling of any sort whether it be because of weight, disabilities, race, etc. Children do not need to read something like this and feel bad about themselves or view it as an excuse to tease others. I was very disappointed something like this was in a children's book.
Quint and Trout's Mistake gets a 0 out of 5 from me. What a vile story!
*
Densus
Densus is a boy who was born with blue fingernails and blue streaks in his hair. This is because he has a destiny to fulfill. When a crab named Arnold asks him if he'd go tell a giant that he has found a perfect wife for him, Densus agrees because it's his destiny even if there's a possibility the giant could kill him.
This is a story about destinies. It lets us know that we all have destinies if only we weren't too busy trying to find out what they are. This is a fun story which I think children would love! I loved Arnold the crab!! I think a majority of children would love him.
Again, there's a few punctuation and grammar mistakes but nothing major.
I'd give Densus a 5 out of 5.
*
Alice's Granddaughter
Alice's Granddaughter takes place years after Alice in Wonderland. Alice's granddaughter, Alicia, is recruited by a thief named Cheng to go down into a rabbit hole to get him a yellow dragon. Alicia discovers that things in Wonderland haven't changed much.
I thoroughly enjoyed this story! I'm a sucker for everything Alice in Wonderland-esque, and this was no exception! I loved how the author still managed to preserve the original Wonderland in his tale and how he even managed to keep the style of writing similar to that of Lewis Carroll. My favorite character was definitely the talking table. My only gripe is that I wish this story would've been longer!
As like with the previous story, there are some punctuation and grammar mistakes that can be overlooked.
Alice's Granddaughter gets a bit 5 out of 5.
*
The Dragon
The Dragon is a story about death. In this story, we follow a dragon in her very last moments as she dies of what I assume to be old age. We get to see her memories of when she was her prime and when she takes her last breath.
This is a sad story and probably one for the older children unless younger children can handle the topic of death. It's not written in a morbid way though. It's actually written quite beautifully especially when we get to see the memory of the dragon in her prime. I think this story can show that death is not always bad.
There are grammar and punctuation mistakes but nothing that deters from the story.
The Dragon gets a 3.75 out of 5.
*
The Wisdom of a Dog
The Wisdom of a Dog is about a man named Keith and his dog who go on an adventure and wind up in a crystal city. Keith must found out who is destroying the city and save it.
This story was a good read, and I think most children would enjoy it especially as it involves a talking dog. I enjoyed how the author even placed his own dialogue in the story. This is a good versus bad story that shows that bad people never win.
Again, there are grammar and punctuation mistakes, but it doesn't take away from the story.
The Wisdom of a Dog gets a 3.5 out of 5.
*
The Exalted Gate by Daniel Nanavati averages out to a 3.5 out of 5. I'd definitely recommend this book to old and young alike!
(I received a free physical copy of this title from the publisher in exchange for a fair and honest review).