Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Knight and Day (2010) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
You’d be forgiven for thinking that a spy film with the likes of Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz could do no wrong, and indeed that’s the view I had, how wrong I was. Despite a fantastic performance from Diaz, Knight & Day falls well short.
There have been numerous comedy spy capers over the years, some of which have been fantastic, like Johnny English and Get Smart for example and others which have been less than stellar; Mr. & Mrs. Smith comes to mind. Unfortunately Knight & Day fits in between the good and the bad and comes out distinctly average.
Problems blight the film from the off stemming from wobbly CGI to ridiculous stunts and lazy direction choices, it seems like director James Mangold went into this project a little half-heartedly.
Tom Cruise plays spy Roy Miller and the film follows his adventures across the globe protecting the elusive ‘Zephyr’ battery which apparently never runs out of power. Needless to say Cameron Diaz plays the ditzy blonde who later becomes the love interest for the film. Whilst Diaz provides a fun and exciting performance, providing many of the movie’s best comedic moments, Cruise feels seriously miscast in a humorous role and he becomes tiresome to watch.
Alas, the issues don’t stop there. For an action film, it’s distinctly lacking in action and the set pieces that are there are lazily choreographed or rendered in shoddy CGI. Considering its less than modest budget (£120m), Knight & Day should’ve been a joy to watch, instead it’s like looking at a TV programme for 109 minutes.
Meanwhile the villains in the film are simply cardboard cut-outs as the writers haven’t given enough thought to fleshing out their characters. Cruise simply points and shoots and bang, they’re dead.
However, all of these problems could’ve been forgiven if the film had some great storytelling – it doesn’t. What should’ve been the best parts of the film are blacked out. The escapes, the fighting and even some of the ending are lost as Mangold decides to get around inexplicable plot events by drugging the main characters. Again, this is a lazy technique which doesn’t work.
It’s a shame, as there are many reasons why this film should’ve been at least a good summer action flick. In reality, Knight & Day simply becomes passable at best with some inexcusably lazy direction choices, dreadful CGI, bad casting and flimsy characters which all add up to a film which is left hanging on the merits of Cameron Diaz.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/09/13/knight-day-2011/
There have been numerous comedy spy capers over the years, some of which have been fantastic, like Johnny English and Get Smart for example and others which have been less than stellar; Mr. & Mrs. Smith comes to mind. Unfortunately Knight & Day fits in between the good and the bad and comes out distinctly average.
Problems blight the film from the off stemming from wobbly CGI to ridiculous stunts and lazy direction choices, it seems like director James Mangold went into this project a little half-heartedly.
Tom Cruise plays spy Roy Miller and the film follows his adventures across the globe protecting the elusive ‘Zephyr’ battery which apparently never runs out of power. Needless to say Cameron Diaz plays the ditzy blonde who later becomes the love interest for the film. Whilst Diaz provides a fun and exciting performance, providing many of the movie’s best comedic moments, Cruise feels seriously miscast in a humorous role and he becomes tiresome to watch.
Alas, the issues don’t stop there. For an action film, it’s distinctly lacking in action and the set pieces that are there are lazily choreographed or rendered in shoddy CGI. Considering its less than modest budget (£120m), Knight & Day should’ve been a joy to watch, instead it’s like looking at a TV programme for 109 minutes.
Meanwhile the villains in the film are simply cardboard cut-outs as the writers haven’t given enough thought to fleshing out their characters. Cruise simply points and shoots and bang, they’re dead.
However, all of these problems could’ve been forgiven if the film had some great storytelling – it doesn’t. What should’ve been the best parts of the film are blacked out. The escapes, the fighting and even some of the ending are lost as Mangold decides to get around inexplicable plot events by drugging the main characters. Again, this is a lazy technique which doesn’t work.
It’s a shame, as there are many reasons why this film should’ve been at least a good summer action flick. In reality, Knight & Day simply becomes passable at best with some inexcusably lazy direction choices, dreadful CGI, bad casting and flimsy characters which all add up to a film which is left hanging on the merits of Cameron Diaz.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/09/13/knight-day-2011/
WOW, WOW, WOW ???
I can't even begin to explain how much I enjoyed this book ... it was so good, I didn't want it to end and I'm not one who normally reads courtroom books but I was drawn to this because of the serial killer angle .... I know, I know, I'm a little strange in my reading tastes! Don't judge me ?
Now, this is the first book I have read by this author containing Flynn and although it would have probably helped with background information to have read previous ones, I don't feel it is absolutely necessary but I will certainly be seeking them out after reading this.
Anyway, this book is basically about the murder of a starlet and her supposed lover - they were found by the husband who allegedly beat him to death with a baseball bat and stabbed her repeatedly. In comes Flynn as part of the defence team who becomes 'the' defence team following a few revelations whereby the main lawyer (who is employed by the studio) is told to withdraw. Meanwhile, someone is going to great lengths to be on the jury ... welcome to Joshua Kane, a very disturbed individual.
Flynn is a fantastic character; I adore him - so likeable and not 'up himself' like many lawyers seem to be portrayed ... he's "normal" ... well, if you can call a previous con-man with a shady history normal but it does give him a unique view of things which certainly comes in handy in his line of work.
Joshua Kane is far from normal but what a great character he is - such a good baddie!!
The supporting cast were equally as good and all had their part to play in this fantastic book.
The chapters are written alternatively between Flynn and Kane and whilst Flynn's are written in the first person, Kane's are written in the third; this was, I think, a stroke of genius as it gives different perspectives from Flynn who's trying his best for his client to Kane who is cleverly manipulating things from the jury box. The pace of the book is perfect; there's plenty of action, thrills, twists and turns that had me hooked from page one.
This is, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the best books I have ever read and one of the very few that I will read again.
Many thanks to the publisher, Orion Publishing Group, via NetGalley for my copy in return for an honest review - thank you so much, I absolutely loved it and cannot recommend it highly enough.
I can't even begin to explain how much I enjoyed this book ... it was so good, I didn't want it to end and I'm not one who normally reads courtroom books but I was drawn to this because of the serial killer angle .... I know, I know, I'm a little strange in my reading tastes! Don't judge me ?
Now, this is the first book I have read by this author containing Flynn and although it would have probably helped with background information to have read previous ones, I don't feel it is absolutely necessary but I will certainly be seeking them out after reading this.
Anyway, this book is basically about the murder of a starlet and her supposed lover - they were found by the husband who allegedly beat him to death with a baseball bat and stabbed her repeatedly. In comes Flynn as part of the defence team who becomes 'the' defence team following a few revelations whereby the main lawyer (who is employed by the studio) is told to withdraw. Meanwhile, someone is going to great lengths to be on the jury ... welcome to Joshua Kane, a very disturbed individual.
Flynn is a fantastic character; I adore him - so likeable and not 'up himself' like many lawyers seem to be portrayed ... he's "normal" ... well, if you can call a previous con-man with a shady history normal but it does give him a unique view of things which certainly comes in handy in his line of work.
Joshua Kane is far from normal but what a great character he is - such a good baddie!!
The supporting cast were equally as good and all had their part to play in this fantastic book.
The chapters are written alternatively between Flynn and Kane and whilst Flynn's are written in the first person, Kane's are written in the third; this was, I think, a stroke of genius as it gives different perspectives from Flynn who's trying his best for his client to Kane who is cleverly manipulating things from the jury box. The pace of the book is perfect; there's plenty of action, thrills, twists and turns that had me hooked from page one.
This is, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the best books I have ever read and one of the very few that I will read again.
Many thanks to the publisher, Orion Publishing Group, via NetGalley for my copy in return for an honest review - thank you so much, I absolutely loved it and cannot recommend it highly enough.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Heart of the Oak in Books
Dec 30, 2018
Beautifully Written (2 more)
Likable Character
Beautiful illustrations
A Beautiful Story
When I heard about Heart of the Oak by J.L. Novinsky, it was a book that I wanted to read. I also wanted to read it to my 3 year old because it seemed like a really sweet book. My son and I loved Heart of the Oak!
The plot for Heart of the Oak is straightforward and easy for adults and children alike. It's about a tree and his feelings and memories. He remembers when a fat little squirrel, a little boy playing on him as well as other memories. I'd suggest parental guidance for children under 6 though as there's a part in the book where the tree catches fire and is in pain. This could be a little scary for younger children. My 3 year old was a little fearful, but I was able to explain it in terms he'd understand so he wouldn't be scared. However, this book does have a happily ever after ending which is heartwarming, and the oak tree is a very lovable character.
I loved the prose and how well Heart of the Oak flowed. J.L. Novinsky is a talented story teller, and this book definitely proves that. I loved how descriptive everything was in the story. The words she chose seemed to glide off the page and stick sweetly in my mind. The writing definitely drew me in and held my attention until the very end. For example, on the very first page of Heart of the Oak, Novinsky writes "The day is icy and gray. A fine mist shrouds the world around the massive oak tree. Winter's bitter gales rustle the last of the brittle leaves that cling to his spindly branches."
Another thing which makes Heart of the Oak so good are the illustrations. The illustrations are absolutely breathtaking and drawn very well. They are very colorful and vibrant. My son loved the illustrations especially the ones with the dogs and the squirrels. I loved every page.
All in all, Heart of the Oak is a fantastic read. It's a very short story that is beautifully written with fantastic illustrations. Children and adults will definitely fall in love with this heartwarming story about an old oak tree. I would definitely recommend Heart of the Oak by J.L. Novinsky to everyone. It is a lovely story that everyone needs to read at least once in their lives.
--
(A special thank you to the author for providing me with a paperback of Heart of the Oak in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
The plot for Heart of the Oak is straightforward and easy for adults and children alike. It's about a tree and his feelings and memories. He remembers when a fat little squirrel, a little boy playing on him as well as other memories. I'd suggest parental guidance for children under 6 though as there's a part in the book where the tree catches fire and is in pain. This could be a little scary for younger children. My 3 year old was a little fearful, but I was able to explain it in terms he'd understand so he wouldn't be scared. However, this book does have a happily ever after ending which is heartwarming, and the oak tree is a very lovable character.
I loved the prose and how well Heart of the Oak flowed. J.L. Novinsky is a talented story teller, and this book definitely proves that. I loved how descriptive everything was in the story. The words she chose seemed to glide off the page and stick sweetly in my mind. The writing definitely drew me in and held my attention until the very end. For example, on the very first page of Heart of the Oak, Novinsky writes "The day is icy and gray. A fine mist shrouds the world around the massive oak tree. Winter's bitter gales rustle the last of the brittle leaves that cling to his spindly branches."
Another thing which makes Heart of the Oak so good are the illustrations. The illustrations are absolutely breathtaking and drawn very well. They are very colorful and vibrant. My son loved the illustrations especially the ones with the dogs and the squirrels. I loved every page.
All in all, Heart of the Oak is a fantastic read. It's a very short story that is beautifully written with fantastic illustrations. Children and adults will definitely fall in love with this heartwarming story about an old oak tree. I would definitely recommend Heart of the Oak by J.L. Novinsky to everyone. It is a lovely story that everyone needs to read at least once in their lives.
--
(A special thank you to the author for providing me with a paperback of Heart of the Oak in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
Ross (3284 KP) rated The Art of Dying in Books
Aug 15, 2019
Another fantastic historical medical thriller
* I received an advance copy of this book from the publishers and NetGalley in exchange for an honest review *
Ambrose Parry returns with a second book set in Victorian Edinburgh during its medical and scientific revolution. Where the first book centred around Sir James Young Simpson (and others!) search for the perfect anaesthetic, this book focuses more on the man and his reputation. Edinburgh is still a thriving centre of medical science, and reputation is everything. The book starts with Simpson's reputation being besmirched by rivals and former colleagues, looking to suggest negligence. Will Raven and Sarah Fisher team up again to gradually peel away at the facts underlying the case in question and reveal some disturbing trends.
While the plot itself, and its numerous twists and turns, is not exactly ground-breaking, it is excellently told, with clues scattered here, there and everywhere. And to weave this tale around actual historic events and cases really appeals to my mind.
This book, and its predecessor, is one of the most immersive books I have read in a long time. The reader really gets to feel as if they are in Victorian era Edinburgh. Admittedly, I read a fair part of this book while commuting to work in Edinburgh (indeed my children were all born in the Sir James Young Simpson maternity unit of the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary), but I feel the reader with less connection to the city would still get that same feeling.
There is again an underlying message of the treatment of women during those times (and indeed today), both how they are treated in the household and society and also their opportunities for a career and to explore their skills. Sarah Fisher is a strong female character who tolerates her place in society but yearns to break through the glass ceiling, proving her worth to all and sundry as she goes.
In contrast, Will Raven is somewhat spineless in this regard. He sees the issues with society but doesn't do much to act on it. Indeed, he starts the book having run away from Edinburgh and his chances of a relationship with a mere housekeeper, for fear of his heart dooming his medical career. Raven does get some amount of development, both in terms of his medical career, and also in terms of becoming the Victorian equivalent of "woke".
Parry's prose is fantastic and she (they?) truly allow the reader to feel the story unfold around them.
An utterly wonderful book with some interesting history lessons and important messages about the past that should help us build a fairer society today.
Ambrose Parry returns with a second book set in Victorian Edinburgh during its medical and scientific revolution. Where the first book centred around Sir James Young Simpson (and others!) search for the perfect anaesthetic, this book focuses more on the man and his reputation. Edinburgh is still a thriving centre of medical science, and reputation is everything. The book starts with Simpson's reputation being besmirched by rivals and former colleagues, looking to suggest negligence. Will Raven and Sarah Fisher team up again to gradually peel away at the facts underlying the case in question and reveal some disturbing trends.
While the plot itself, and its numerous twists and turns, is not exactly ground-breaking, it is excellently told, with clues scattered here, there and everywhere. And to weave this tale around actual historic events and cases really appeals to my mind.
This book, and its predecessor, is one of the most immersive books I have read in a long time. The reader really gets to feel as if they are in Victorian era Edinburgh. Admittedly, I read a fair part of this book while commuting to work in Edinburgh (indeed my children were all born in the Sir James Young Simpson maternity unit of the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary), but I feel the reader with less connection to the city would still get that same feeling.
There is again an underlying message of the treatment of women during those times (and indeed today), both how they are treated in the household and society and also their opportunities for a career and to explore their skills. Sarah Fisher is a strong female character who tolerates her place in society but yearns to break through the glass ceiling, proving her worth to all and sundry as she goes.
In contrast, Will Raven is somewhat spineless in this regard. He sees the issues with society but doesn't do much to act on it. Indeed, he starts the book having run away from Edinburgh and his chances of a relationship with a mere housekeeper, for fear of his heart dooming his medical career. Raven does get some amount of development, both in terms of his medical career, and also in terms of becoming the Victorian equivalent of "woke".
Parry's prose is fantastic and she (they?) truly allow the reader to feel the story unfold around them.
An utterly wonderful book with some interesting history lessons and important messages about the past that should help us build a fairer society today.
Hara05 (11 KP) rated Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald (2018) in Movies
Jul 1, 2019
The Wizarding World Needs To Be Left Alone
I'm a huge Harry Potter fan. I fell in love as soon as I opened the first book back in 1997 and I've compiled a very extensive, mostly useless knowledge base on the subject.
I put up with the first Fantastic Beasts film for two reasons: I was craving some Potter magic and the 'beasts' were adorable, fascinating and comical. The first film has enough magic, enough fun and enough humour to allow me to enjoy it but Crimes of Grindelwald? Nah. Just Nah.
I can't help but feel completely rinsed by this film. It breaks away from canon, turning a world I've devoted so much time too onto its head. It tells us that everything we have learned, everything we've spent our money and time on, is basically wrong. I haven't been a fan of Rowling dishes out new pieces of information here and there as if she has always known them - just be honest with us and tell us that time has made you think of these things or see things in a different light. She's still an intelligent, creative woman - she doesn't need to keep trying to prove it.
Crimes of Grindelwald just isn't as magical, as innovative or as creative as the Harry Potter series and the viewer can't help but feel that the writers are clutching at straws in order to attempt to build another franchise. They rely too heavily on people's love for the Wizarding World and don't actually offer us much more, or anything of value with this film. It's convoluted, clichéd and at times, predictable. It uses characters so wonderfully fleshed out in the previous film and completely changes who they are in a simple two minute, completely random scene. It feels as if there is no direction to these films, as if Crimes of Grindelwald is a different entity, split from Fantastic Beasts but shoved under that arch in order to make a buck.
I was truly so disappointed with this movie. I felt let down by Rowling and the filmmakers because I've been so loyal to this franchise and I wanted this new installment to be wonderful. I wanted to feel nostalgic and engrossed when I watched this but instead, I was picking out holes in the storyline and pointing out errors. This is not what we expect from what is essentially, a Harry Potter film.
We have three more of these films to get through. I just hope they up their game and are more tolerable than Crimes of Grindelwald.
I put up with the first Fantastic Beasts film for two reasons: I was craving some Potter magic and the 'beasts' were adorable, fascinating and comical. The first film has enough magic, enough fun and enough humour to allow me to enjoy it but Crimes of Grindelwald? Nah. Just Nah.
I can't help but feel completely rinsed by this film. It breaks away from canon, turning a world I've devoted so much time too onto its head. It tells us that everything we have learned, everything we've spent our money and time on, is basically wrong. I haven't been a fan of Rowling dishes out new pieces of information here and there as if she has always known them - just be honest with us and tell us that time has made you think of these things or see things in a different light. She's still an intelligent, creative woman - she doesn't need to keep trying to prove it.
Crimes of Grindelwald just isn't as magical, as innovative or as creative as the Harry Potter series and the viewer can't help but feel that the writers are clutching at straws in order to attempt to build another franchise. They rely too heavily on people's love for the Wizarding World and don't actually offer us much more, or anything of value with this film. It's convoluted, clichéd and at times, predictable. It uses characters so wonderfully fleshed out in the previous film and completely changes who they are in a simple two minute, completely random scene. It feels as if there is no direction to these films, as if Crimes of Grindelwald is a different entity, split from Fantastic Beasts but shoved under that arch in order to make a buck.
I was truly so disappointed with this movie. I felt let down by Rowling and the filmmakers because I've been so loyal to this franchise and I wanted this new installment to be wonderful. I wanted to feel nostalgic and engrossed when I watched this but instead, I was picking out holes in the storyline and pointing out errors. This is not what we expect from what is essentially, a Harry Potter film.
We have three more of these films to get through. I just hope they up their game and are more tolerable than Crimes of Grindelwald.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Fantastic Four (2005) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
About As Memorable As My Last Poop
Based on the long-running comic book, four people are given superpowers when they come in contact with cosmic energy out in space.
Acting: 7
Beginning: 5
Not exactly how you start a movie. Definitely could have scored this lower, but there was at least a glimmer of hope shown in the first ten minutes that told me this movie wouldn’t be a total waste of space. Still, my hopes weren’t high.
Characters: 3
I had some issues here, but I struggled with my scoring. Reason being, I LOVE the comic book characters and appreciate their depth. Yeah, none of that is shown in this movie. The characters aren’t layered, rather they have mere personality types, none of which I was really in love with. They made Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) an over-the-top dick while Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd), the brains of the group, can’t understand the concept of normal social interaction to save his life. I won’t even waste time profiling the other lame-duck characters. You get the point.
Cinematography/Visuals: 2
Conflict: 2
Entertainment Value: 0
At no point during Fantastic Four did I ever say, “Ok, we might have something here.” It was bad on top of bad from beginning to end. Just an unapologetic dumpster fire. Sitting through this movie again is what I envision Hell to be like.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 4
Talk about a slow-moving film. Not only does it take forever for scenes to get to the point, but they divert off into random tangents that ultimately amount to nothing. This is a don’t-pause-when-you-go-to-the-bathroom movie. Drove me crazy.
Plot: 2
There is a scene that happens on a bridge where people need saving. Not only do all four of the superheroes magically end up on the bridge at the same time (they weren’t together previously), but Thing’s wife shows up as well just to walk away in shame because of how gross he’s become. I laughed my ass off! And that should tell you enough about what I think of the plot.
Resolution: 4
I give it a four because it ended. No, the ending wasn’t any better than the rest of the movie, but damnit, it ended and the fact that it finally came to a close put me out of my misery.
Overall: 34
There are bad movies that make me want to stop watching and reviewing movies altogether because of how horrible they are. And then there’s Fantastic Four. This movie is torture to the millionth degree.
Acting: 7
Beginning: 5
Not exactly how you start a movie. Definitely could have scored this lower, but there was at least a glimmer of hope shown in the first ten minutes that told me this movie wouldn’t be a total waste of space. Still, my hopes weren’t high.
Characters: 3
I had some issues here, but I struggled with my scoring. Reason being, I LOVE the comic book characters and appreciate their depth. Yeah, none of that is shown in this movie. The characters aren’t layered, rather they have mere personality types, none of which I was really in love with. They made Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) an over-the-top dick while Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd), the brains of the group, can’t understand the concept of normal social interaction to save his life. I won’t even waste time profiling the other lame-duck characters. You get the point.
Cinematography/Visuals: 2
Conflict: 2
Entertainment Value: 0
At no point during Fantastic Four did I ever say, “Ok, we might have something here.” It was bad on top of bad from beginning to end. Just an unapologetic dumpster fire. Sitting through this movie again is what I envision Hell to be like.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 4
Talk about a slow-moving film. Not only does it take forever for scenes to get to the point, but they divert off into random tangents that ultimately amount to nothing. This is a don’t-pause-when-you-go-to-the-bathroom movie. Drove me crazy.
Plot: 2
There is a scene that happens on a bridge where people need saving. Not only do all four of the superheroes magically end up on the bridge at the same time (they weren’t together previously), but Thing’s wife shows up as well just to walk away in shame because of how gross he’s become. I laughed my ass off! And that should tell you enough about what I think of the plot.
Resolution: 4
I give it a four because it ended. No, the ending wasn’t any better than the rest of the movie, but damnit, it ended and the fact that it finally came to a close put me out of my misery.
Overall: 34
There are bad movies that make me want to stop watching and reviewing movies altogether because of how horrible they are. And then there’s Fantastic Four. This movie is torture to the millionth degree.
Crazy Kings
Games, Entertainment and Stickers
App
The popular CCG meets Tower Defense game that has 1M+ downloads worldwide! Challenge your strategy...
My Christmas Week - Games and Songs All Along
Book and Education
App
Our first Christmas Tale was ranked #1 iPad book app in 2010 and was the Top Selling Christmas...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Corrupted (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
The first thing you notice about The Corrupted is that it's filmed like a TV crime drama. The atmosphere, the style, everything screamed mini-series. It's an interesting story and I enjoyed it, but it gives a very different vibe to a "normal" film. It's difficult to explain. It's something you'd watch while ironing or when you've got a take away coming. It's the perfect accompaniment to doing something else not sitting in silence in the dark, it needs interaction, someone to discuss with while it's on.
Timothy Spall makes a pretty good villain in this, I probably would have also accepted Tim Roth in this role. Spall did seem to be channelling some of his mannerisms.
Sam Claflin as Liam brings the interesting mix of warmth and no-nonsense in his character to life. He turns on a knife edge from family man to criminal, although the latter is more of a protective quality than criminal endeavour.
It's been a long time since I've seen a film where I thought all the acting was excellent, The Corrupted has a fantastic bunch of actors and actresses in it. At the same time as being excited about them all though, I'm sad. This probably would have got more notice as a TV series. I went in with no real knowledge of this, I hadn't even seen it advertised anywhere apart from checking upcoming listings. It was criminally under publicised considering how much marketing King Of Thieves got and didn't deserve.
Noel Clarke as a detective really works for me. He seemed very comfortable in the role and it was nice to see him without a dubious accent... I'm looking at you Fisherman's Friends. I can't say I liked where his story went but the journey there was fantastic. I've been trying to find a listing online of character names, I can only find things listing him as Beckett but I'm sure I heard him call himself "Noel" but at another point his partner calls him "Neil"... of course I can't guarantee my hearing wasn't shot.
Loosely based on real events, The Corrupted offers a surprisingly gritty crime drama. While it does have the odd moments that make you wonder how it made the cut, those are greatly outweighed by the good points. I'll definitely be watching this again at some point, I'm also seeing a potential gift for my dad coming up.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-corrupted-movie-review.html
Timothy Spall makes a pretty good villain in this, I probably would have also accepted Tim Roth in this role. Spall did seem to be channelling some of his mannerisms.
Sam Claflin as Liam brings the interesting mix of warmth and no-nonsense in his character to life. He turns on a knife edge from family man to criminal, although the latter is more of a protective quality than criminal endeavour.
It's been a long time since I've seen a film where I thought all the acting was excellent, The Corrupted has a fantastic bunch of actors and actresses in it. At the same time as being excited about them all though, I'm sad. This probably would have got more notice as a TV series. I went in with no real knowledge of this, I hadn't even seen it advertised anywhere apart from checking upcoming listings. It was criminally under publicised considering how much marketing King Of Thieves got and didn't deserve.
Noel Clarke as a detective really works for me. He seemed very comfortable in the role and it was nice to see him without a dubious accent... I'm looking at you Fisherman's Friends. I can't say I liked where his story went but the journey there was fantastic. I've been trying to find a listing online of character names, I can only find things listing him as Beckett but I'm sure I heard him call himself "Noel" but at another point his partner calls him "Neil"... of course I can't guarantee my hearing wasn't shot.
Loosely based on real events, The Corrupted offers a surprisingly gritty crime drama. While it does have the odd moments that make you wonder how it made the cut, those are greatly outweighed by the good points. I'll definitely be watching this again at some point, I'm also seeing a potential gift for my dad coming up.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-corrupted-movie-review.html
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Oct 8, 2019 (Updated Oct 23, 2019)
Believe the hype
Contains spoilers, click to show
Full disclaimer - I have not been a massive fan of any movies DC related since the Dark Knight trilogy. There have been highlights here and there, but it's a been a rough few years to say the least.
I went to see Joker under a pretty neutral assumption - I had heard the good reviews, the bad reviews, and seen the incredibly well put together trailers - but I was still worried that I wouldn't like it.
What I was presented with was quite possibly the film of the year (I can't realistically see anything beating it at this point)
Make no mistake - Joker is a character driven think piece, light on action, and at times difficult to watch.
Jaoquin Phoenix is absolutely phenomenal as Arthur Fleck, and as we watch his descent into madness (or mental freedom depending on which way you look at it), it's hard not to sympathise with him - I felt myself welling up on more than one occasion.
Frances Conroy deserves a round of applause as well, carving out a fading and sad character failing to realise just how low Arthur is spiralling.
The film itself is bleak, painting a realistic Gotham City, on the brink of anarchy, not too dissimilar to how our world is IRL. All it takes is someone ballsy enough to pull the trigger to set it all off.
The film is draped with tense scene after tense scene as the plot builds up to its climax.
The films depiction of mental health issues rings louder than ever, showing us an all too real world that dismisses and laughs at those who suffer with such issues. It's haunting.
The final act is breathtaking - watching Arthur/Joker on Murray Franklin's talk show - when he's underneath the make up, he's a completely different person, threatening, but with a point that makes sense, and that what makes him so sinister.
The much discussed violence is seldom, but impactful, and most importantly, has a purpose as it builds character growth. Everything just seems so wonderfully crafted - hats off to Todd Phillips.
The score is pretty much flawless, hitting all the right notes, as is the cinematography, showcasing fantastic shots continuously throughout.
Joker feels like a true stand-alone, and is concrete evidence why DC should maybe concentrate on one off efforts rather than building an underwhelming connected universe...
It's a fantastic film through and through, and Phoenix deserves an Oscar, at the very least a nomination.
I went to see Joker under a pretty neutral assumption - I had heard the good reviews, the bad reviews, and seen the incredibly well put together trailers - but I was still worried that I wouldn't like it.
What I was presented with was quite possibly the film of the year (I can't realistically see anything beating it at this point)
Make no mistake - Joker is a character driven think piece, light on action, and at times difficult to watch.
Jaoquin Phoenix is absolutely phenomenal as Arthur Fleck, and as we watch his descent into madness (or mental freedom depending on which way you look at it), it's hard not to sympathise with him - I felt myself welling up on more than one occasion.
Frances Conroy deserves a round of applause as well, carving out a fading and sad character failing to realise just how low Arthur is spiralling.
The film itself is bleak, painting a realistic Gotham City, on the brink of anarchy, not too dissimilar to how our world is IRL. All it takes is someone ballsy enough to pull the trigger to set it all off.
The film is draped with tense scene after tense scene as the plot builds up to its climax.
The films depiction of mental health issues rings louder than ever, showing us an all too real world that dismisses and laughs at those who suffer with such issues. It's haunting.
The final act is breathtaking - watching Arthur/Joker on Murray Franklin's talk show - when he's underneath the make up, he's a completely different person, threatening, but with a point that makes sense, and that what makes him so sinister.
The much discussed violence is seldom, but impactful, and most importantly, has a purpose as it builds character growth. Everything just seems so wonderfully crafted - hats off to Todd Phillips.
The score is pretty much flawless, hitting all the right notes, as is the cinematography, showcasing fantastic shots continuously throughout.
Joker feels like a true stand-alone, and is concrete evidence why DC should maybe concentrate on one off efforts rather than building an underwhelming connected universe...
It's a fantastic film through and through, and Phoenix deserves an Oscar, at the very least a nomination.