Search
Search results
The Race for What's Left: The Global Scramble for the World's Last Reources
Book
From Michael Klare, the renowned expert on natural resource issues, an invaluable account of a new...
Nowhere but Here
4.0
Rate It
Book
A jaded Chicago reporter in her twenties unexpectedly finds love in Napa Valley when she’s...
Let’s Fly
Book
How do you survive when a lucky break turns out to be the worst thing that ever happened to you? ...
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Moonfall (2022) in Movies
Feb 10, 2022
Approximately 30 minutes from the end, due to a sudden and sharp escalation of absurdity, I turned round to my mate and said "what the fuck is happening" - a simple remark that I think sums up Moonfall quite well. It relates directly to the main positive that I found, in that I can't help but admire how hard this film commits to all out sci-fi when it comes to crunch time. It prevents the end result from being a complete bore at the very least.
Roland Emmerich has become a master of underwhelming, disaster flicks at this point, he can make them in his sleep. Instead of doing something new, he's taken his best film, Independence Day, and one of his worst films, 2012, and just smashed them together like a kid playing with their action figures. It results in a predictable outcome - a film that's kind of entertaining, with passable CGI, and a host of characters that we don't care about, with personal issues that we don't care about, and who have more screentime than the mindless destruction of the planet that we all crave. John Bradley, bless him, gives it his all. Easily the highlight of a cast that are woodenly cashing in a paycheck. The dialogue is so awful that I zoned out pretty hard on several occasions.
There was guy in the same screen as us who just very loudly demolished a multi pack of Cadburys Picnics, followed by an entire loaf of Soreen, which was quite astonishing, and made the experience a bit more memorable. Cheers mate.
Roland Emmerich has become a master of underwhelming, disaster flicks at this point, he can make them in his sleep. Instead of doing something new, he's taken his best film, Independence Day, and one of his worst films, 2012, and just smashed them together like a kid playing with their action figures. It results in a predictable outcome - a film that's kind of entertaining, with passable CGI, and a host of characters that we don't care about, with personal issues that we don't care about, and who have more screentime than the mindless destruction of the planet that we all crave. John Bradley, bless him, gives it his all. Easily the highlight of a cast that are woodenly cashing in a paycheck. The dialogue is so awful that I zoned out pretty hard on several occasions.
There was guy in the same screen as us who just very loudly demolished a multi pack of Cadburys Picnics, followed by an entire loaf of Soreen, which was quite astonishing, and made the experience a bit more memorable. Cheers mate.
Christmas Dessert Murder
8.0
Rate It
Book
The perfect stocking stuffer for fans of culinary capers, this holiday omnibus from New York Times...
![Look Both Ways [Audiobook]](/uploads/profile_image/70e/89b3e333-4f7c-4d1e-ba94-d1f1cb69d70e.jpg?m=1678050968)
Look Both Ways [Audiobook]
6.0
Rate It
Book
These headlights are watching you… The media have descended on Garrett Island, a small,...
The Deception (The Secret Tales #2)
9.0
Rate It
Book
A love forged through adversity…. Daughter of an illustrious artist, Lady Charlotte Pheland...
Historical Regency Romance
Joe Julians (221 KP) rated The Disaster Artist (2017) in Movies
Jan 30, 2018
James Franco (1 more)
The tone
Far from a disaster
If you haven't seen The Room, then I urge you to do so at once. It's a bemusing, confusing, unintentionally hilarious 90 odd minutes that fully deserves all the cult screenings and bewildered wonder that it has garnered over the years. It's without question a perfect awful movie. And here with The Disaster Artist, based on the book of the same name, we get to see the story of just went on to get this film made.
To start with, James Franco is perfect as the mysterious and downright bonkers Tommy Wiseau. His voice, his mannerisms, his almost childlike tantrum throwing approach to life, he manages to make an almost unbelievable man fully believable. He's backed up by a cast that commit to the roles, but other than Dave Franco, don't get a huge amount of time in the spotlight. That's not a criticism as such, by design the two central figures in this are Tommy and Greg Sistero- his friend and fellow budding actor.
I suspect if you are a "fan" of The Room, you'll likely get a lot more out of this than if you had little to know knowledge of the film it depicts the making of. It's a blast getting to see certain iconic scenes recreated for this and to hear the origin stories behind key lines- "you're tearing me apart, Lisa" being one such moment that took me by surprise. The original film is a messy nonsensical experience and it's fun to see that almost everyone working on it viewed it as such even when it was being made. Everyone except Tommy that is.
Where things get a little murky for me is with how you are supposed to feel by the time the brilliant end credits roll (there's exact recreations of certain moments played side by side that are great fun.) It seems as though we are meant to be inspired by Tommy and what he has achieved, like in the end this is supposed to be a feel-good movie about never giving up on your dreams. That's all well and good, but Tommy Wiseau doesn't come across particularly well in this. He's a temper tantrum throwing and at times scary man to be around. One scene in particular during the shooting of the 'belly button sex scene' portrays him as a pretty horrible man, one that gets his way by being somewhat of a bully. This isn't addressed again fully and it's hard to feel like cheering him on by the time the big premiere screening rolls round. There's also his about face when it comes to claiming the movie was meant to be a comedy- something nobody believes. On the one hand, it's a smart move to take what he has and run with it, but there's also something sad about him not having something he cared so passionately about be received in the way it was intended. This is something else that is glossed over, but then Wiseau would never speak so candidly to give the writers anything to work with.
Overall this is a great movie and a fascinating watch. Would highly recommend.
To start with, James Franco is perfect as the mysterious and downright bonkers Tommy Wiseau. His voice, his mannerisms, his almost childlike tantrum throwing approach to life, he manages to make an almost unbelievable man fully believable. He's backed up by a cast that commit to the roles, but other than Dave Franco, don't get a huge amount of time in the spotlight. That's not a criticism as such, by design the two central figures in this are Tommy and Greg Sistero- his friend and fellow budding actor.
I suspect if you are a "fan" of The Room, you'll likely get a lot more out of this than if you had little to know knowledge of the film it depicts the making of. It's a blast getting to see certain iconic scenes recreated for this and to hear the origin stories behind key lines- "you're tearing me apart, Lisa" being one such moment that took me by surprise. The original film is a messy nonsensical experience and it's fun to see that almost everyone working on it viewed it as such even when it was being made. Everyone except Tommy that is.
Where things get a little murky for me is with how you are supposed to feel by the time the brilliant end credits roll (there's exact recreations of certain moments played side by side that are great fun.) It seems as though we are meant to be inspired by Tommy and what he has achieved, like in the end this is supposed to be a feel-good movie about never giving up on your dreams. That's all well and good, but Tommy Wiseau doesn't come across particularly well in this. He's a temper tantrum throwing and at times scary man to be around. One scene in particular during the shooting of the 'belly button sex scene' portrays him as a pretty horrible man, one that gets his way by being somewhat of a bully. This isn't addressed again fully and it's hard to feel like cheering him on by the time the big premiere screening rolls round. There's also his about face when it comes to claiming the movie was meant to be a comedy- something nobody believes. On the one hand, it's a smart move to take what he has and run with it, but there's also something sad about him not having something he cared so passionately about be received in the way it was intended. This is something else that is glossed over, but then Wiseau would never speak so candidly to give the writers anything to work with.
Overall this is a great movie and a fascinating watch. Would highly recommend.
Nick Friesen (96 KP) rated Baby Driver (2017) in Movies
Jul 18, 2017
Ansel Elgort's Baby is Compelling and Well Acted (3 more)
The Criminals Each Have Interesting & Distinct Personalities
The Movie Drives to the Infectious Soundtrack
Punchy & Skillfuly Edited Cinematography
So-so Love Interest (1 more)
Ends With a Stereotypical Action Movie Climax
Edgar Wright Goes Fast & Furious (In a Good Way)
Edgar Wright has yet to direct a bad movie. Baby Driver doesn't ruin his streak, but it doesn't quite raise the bar. It does do something new, for Wright at least, in transposing his humor and musicality on top of more mature and serious subject matter. The issue is that the story isn't as original or creative as his previous works. Instead, the creativity and originality exists in the way the movie is executed. Bank heists, a getaway driver, and the shadowy mastermind are all well-worn tropes; but Wright sets it all to an eclectic and rhythmic soundtrack that drives the movie forward. Baby Driver is masterfully edited to sync up with the rhythm of the music, for the first two-thirds at least, until it devolved into a bit of a frantic mess. I almost wonder if that was intentional, however, as it perfectly mirrors Baby's situation. In the first two acts he is calm, in control, and driving to the music on his many iPods. In the third act, his predicament devolves into a disaster beyond his control, and he is knocked out of the rhythm he normally operates in. In the end, none of Baby Driver is bad or poorly done, it just isn't quite as memorable as the Cornetto Trilogy or Scott Pilgrim.
The Failure of the southern column to continue to advance north after the battle of Rosebud set the stage for the annihilation of George Armstrong Custer and his five companies of the 7th Calvary at the Little Big Horn. For nearly 150 years everything possible has been written except the true causes and culprits of the bloody fiasco at the Little Big Horn on June 25, 1876, that shocked the American nation like no other post-Civil War event. Dr. Tucker has relied primarily on source material to expose those individuals American's leading military and civilian officials, who were most responsible for the greatest military disaster. Revealing the Machiavellian currents, dark threads that had artificially manufactured against the Sioux by America's top leaders, including the president, to gain their territory of the Black Hills. He provides with a new understanding of why Custer died on that mountaintop with his most faithful followers. This book brings the reader closer to understanding exactly what occurred on that fateful day that left one man standing and the rest 7th Calvary and Custer dead in the dirt. This book does cover some of the previous books written but you can tell that Dr. Tucker took the time to research further not completely satisfied with the consciences the previous researchers on the Little Big Horn or the life of Custer. I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in post-civil war history, military history or Custer. The overall view was quite refreshing in the fact it covers how much was honestly lost that day not just the dead of those men.