Search
Everything Sucks - Season 1
7.5
Rate It
TV Season
It's the 1990s in Boring, Ore., and groups of outcasts in Boring High School's AV and drama clubs...
Comedy drama everything sucks Netflix 90s
It's Ok to be Gay: Celebrity Coming out Stories
Diversity Role Models and Alison Stokes
Book
Celebrities share their coming out stories Launched to coincide with National Coming Out Day, It's...
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Ant-Man (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Paul Rudd like you've never seen him before
You can almost hear the groans, yet another superhero film bulldozes its way into cinemas. Sandwiched between the ambitious Avengers: Age of Ultron and the Fantastic Four reboot, Marvel’s Ant-Man is the first of this year’s summer superheroes.
However, numerous setbacks that included a director walking out halfway through filming meant that Ant-Man would be haunted by the action behind-the-scenes, rather than that on it. But what is the finished product like?
Peyton Reed took over from Edgar Wright after some “creative differences” and directs one of the best films to come out of Marvel studios, despite a few issues.
The film follows the story of former criminal Scott Lang, played by Paul Rudd, as he is tasked with becoming the mightily tiny superhero and stop a dangerous form of weaponry falling into the wrong hands – notably those of Darren Cross.
Helping him along the way is scientist Hank Pym, Michael Douglas, and his daughter Hope – played by the wonderful Evangeline Lilly.
Rudd’s casting raised a few eyebrows during the films pre-production but he is as charming as ever and really gets stuck into the role of a superhero. Michael Douglas and Evangeline Lilly are both more than a match for Rudd’s charisma and play their roles well.
What sets Ant-Man apart from the plethora of other big-budget superhero movies is the unique way the titular character utilises the environments around him. Summoning a host of ants to infiltrate buildings adds a new dimension to the genre that is much needed.
The CGI during these sequences is absolutely top-notch. When Rudd shrinks down we are drawn into a whole new world of giant carpet pile and huge ants and it’s hard not to get involved with the insects – you’ll never look at them in the same way again.
Marvel’s usual sense of humour is also in fine form, but again taking a different approach. This is a film well aware of the fact that Ant-Man is a ridiculous character, one of the most bizarre creations to ever come out of the studio.
Thankfully, this doesn’t stop Ant-Man from being ridiculously good fun. The action sequences are thrilling and beautifully choreographed throughout the film and on the whole show that the change in director hasn’t harmed the finished product.
However, like the titular character, the film feels ultimately, very small. After the city-levelling antics of Avengers: Age of Ultron and all the previous Marvel movies, Ant-Man comes across a little lightweight and lacking in substance.
Overall, Paul Rudd’s first foray into the superhero genre is highly commendable. Peyton Reed has managed to overcome near constant bad publicity to create a film that’s funny, thrilling and a little different.
Marvel will continue to churn out these movies until audiences are fed up with the genre, and if the quality remains at this level, it may be a while yet.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/07/19/paul-rudd-like-youve-never-seen-him-ant-man-review/
However, numerous setbacks that included a director walking out halfway through filming meant that Ant-Man would be haunted by the action behind-the-scenes, rather than that on it. But what is the finished product like?
Peyton Reed took over from Edgar Wright after some “creative differences” and directs one of the best films to come out of Marvel studios, despite a few issues.
The film follows the story of former criminal Scott Lang, played by Paul Rudd, as he is tasked with becoming the mightily tiny superhero and stop a dangerous form of weaponry falling into the wrong hands – notably those of Darren Cross.
Helping him along the way is scientist Hank Pym, Michael Douglas, and his daughter Hope – played by the wonderful Evangeline Lilly.
Rudd’s casting raised a few eyebrows during the films pre-production but he is as charming as ever and really gets stuck into the role of a superhero. Michael Douglas and Evangeline Lilly are both more than a match for Rudd’s charisma and play their roles well.
What sets Ant-Man apart from the plethora of other big-budget superhero movies is the unique way the titular character utilises the environments around him. Summoning a host of ants to infiltrate buildings adds a new dimension to the genre that is much needed.
The CGI during these sequences is absolutely top-notch. When Rudd shrinks down we are drawn into a whole new world of giant carpet pile and huge ants and it’s hard not to get involved with the insects – you’ll never look at them in the same way again.
Marvel’s usual sense of humour is also in fine form, but again taking a different approach. This is a film well aware of the fact that Ant-Man is a ridiculous character, one of the most bizarre creations to ever come out of the studio.
Thankfully, this doesn’t stop Ant-Man from being ridiculously good fun. The action sequences are thrilling and beautifully choreographed throughout the film and on the whole show that the change in director hasn’t harmed the finished product.
However, like the titular character, the film feels ultimately, very small. After the city-levelling antics of Avengers: Age of Ultron and all the previous Marvel movies, Ant-Man comes across a little lightweight and lacking in substance.
Overall, Paul Rudd’s first foray into the superhero genre is highly commendable. Peyton Reed has managed to overcome near constant bad publicity to create a film that’s funny, thrilling and a little different.
Marvel will continue to churn out these movies until audiences are fed up with the genre, and if the quality remains at this level, it may be a while yet.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/07/19/paul-rudd-like-youve-never-seen-him-ant-man-review/
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Girl on the Train (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
You won’t uncork a bottle of Malbec again without thinking of this film…
“The Girl on a Train” is the film adaptation of the best-seller by Paula Hawkins, transported from the London suburbs to New York’s Hastings-on-Hudson.
It’s actually rather a sordid story encompassing as it does alcoholism, murder, marital strife, deceit, sexual frustration, an historical tragedy and lashings and lashings of violence. Emily Blunt (“Sicario”, “Edge of Tomorrow”) plays Rachel, a divorcee with an alcohol problem who escapes into an obsessive fantasy each day as she passes her former neighbourhood on her commute into the city. Ex-husband Tom (Justin Theroux, “Zoolander 2”) lives in her old house with his second wife Anna (Rebecca “MI:5” Ferguson) and new baby Evie. But her real fantasy rests with cheerleader-style young neighbour Megan (Haley Bennett) who is actually locked in a frustratingly child-free marriage (frustrating for him at least) with the controlling and unpredictable Scott (Luke Evans, “The Hobbit”). A sixth party in this complex network is Megan’s psychiatrist Dr Kamal Abdic (Édgar Ramírez, “Joy”).
In pure Hitchcockian style Megan witnesses mere glimpses of events from her twice-daily train and from these pieces together stories that suitably feed her psychosis. When ‘shit gets real’ and a key character goes missing, Megan surfaces her suspicions and obsessions to the police investigation (led by Detective Riley, the ever-excellent Allison Janney from “The West Wing”) and promptly makes herself suspect number one.
Readers of the book will already be aware of the twists and turns of the story, so will watch the film from a different perspective than I did. (Despite my best intentions I never managed to read the book first).
First up, you would have to say that Emily Blunt’s performance is outstanding in an extremely challenging acting role. Every nuance of shame, confusion, grief, fear, doubt and anger is beautifully enacted: it would not be a surprise to see her gain her first Oscar nomination for this. All the other lead roles are also delivered with great professionalism, with Haley Bennett (a busy month for her, with “The Magnificent Seven” also out) being impressive and Rebecca Ferguson, one of my favourite current actresses, delivering another measured and delicate performance.
Girl on a Train, The
Rebecca Ferguson as Anna – “there were three of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded”
The supporting roles are also effective, with Darren Goldstein as the somewhat creepy “man in the suit” and “Friends” star Lisa Kudrow popping up in an effective and pivotal role. The Screen Guild Awards have an excellent category for an Ensemble Cast in a Motion Picture, and it feels appropriate to nominate this cast for that award.
So it’s a blockbuster book with a rollercoaster story and a stellar cast, so what could go wrong? Well, something for sure. This is a case in point where I suspect it is easier to slowly peel back Rachel’s lost memory with pages and imagination than it is with dodgy fuzzy images on a big screen. Although the film comes in at only 112 minutes, the pacing in places is too slow (the screenplay by Erin Cressida Wilson takes its time) and director Tate Taylor (“The Help”) is no Hitchcock, or indeed a David Fincher (since the film has strong similarities to last year’s “Gone Girl”: when the action does happen it lacks style, with the violence being on the brutal side and leaving little to the imagination.
It’s by no means a bad film, and worth seeing for the acting performances alone. But it’s not a film I think that will trouble my top 10 for the year.
It’s actually rather a sordid story encompassing as it does alcoholism, murder, marital strife, deceit, sexual frustration, an historical tragedy and lashings and lashings of violence. Emily Blunt (“Sicario”, “Edge of Tomorrow”) plays Rachel, a divorcee with an alcohol problem who escapes into an obsessive fantasy each day as she passes her former neighbourhood on her commute into the city. Ex-husband Tom (Justin Theroux, “Zoolander 2”) lives in her old house with his second wife Anna (Rebecca “MI:5” Ferguson) and new baby Evie. But her real fantasy rests with cheerleader-style young neighbour Megan (Haley Bennett) who is actually locked in a frustratingly child-free marriage (frustrating for him at least) with the controlling and unpredictable Scott (Luke Evans, “The Hobbit”). A sixth party in this complex network is Megan’s psychiatrist Dr Kamal Abdic (Édgar Ramírez, “Joy”).
In pure Hitchcockian style Megan witnesses mere glimpses of events from her twice-daily train and from these pieces together stories that suitably feed her psychosis. When ‘shit gets real’ and a key character goes missing, Megan surfaces her suspicions and obsessions to the police investigation (led by Detective Riley, the ever-excellent Allison Janney from “The West Wing”) and promptly makes herself suspect number one.
Readers of the book will already be aware of the twists and turns of the story, so will watch the film from a different perspective than I did. (Despite my best intentions I never managed to read the book first).
First up, you would have to say that Emily Blunt’s performance is outstanding in an extremely challenging acting role. Every nuance of shame, confusion, grief, fear, doubt and anger is beautifully enacted: it would not be a surprise to see her gain her first Oscar nomination for this. All the other lead roles are also delivered with great professionalism, with Haley Bennett (a busy month for her, with “The Magnificent Seven” also out) being impressive and Rebecca Ferguson, one of my favourite current actresses, delivering another measured and delicate performance.
Girl on a Train, The
Rebecca Ferguson as Anna – “there were three of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded”
The supporting roles are also effective, with Darren Goldstein as the somewhat creepy “man in the suit” and “Friends” star Lisa Kudrow popping up in an effective and pivotal role. The Screen Guild Awards have an excellent category for an Ensemble Cast in a Motion Picture, and it feels appropriate to nominate this cast for that award.
So it’s a blockbuster book with a rollercoaster story and a stellar cast, so what could go wrong? Well, something for sure. This is a case in point where I suspect it is easier to slowly peel back Rachel’s lost memory with pages and imagination than it is with dodgy fuzzy images on a big screen. Although the film comes in at only 112 minutes, the pacing in places is too slow (the screenplay by Erin Cressida Wilson takes its time) and director Tate Taylor (“The Help”) is no Hitchcock, or indeed a David Fincher (since the film has strong similarities to last year’s “Gone Girl”: when the action does happen it lacks style, with the violence being on the brutal side and leaving little to the imagination.
It’s by no means a bad film, and worth seeing for the acting performances alone. But it’s not a film I think that will trouble my top 10 for the year.