Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Batman (2022) in Movies
Mar 12, 2022
Too Long Of a Setup for a Terrific Payoff
The rap on the films of the DCEU - especially the films directed by Zach Snyder - is that they are too dark, dour and a “downer”, with very little joy or sunshine in the images or themes.
The Writer and Director of the new DCEU film, THE BATMAN, Matt Reeves (CLOVERFIELD) has one simple answer for you: “Hold my beer”.
Doubling down on the dark themes, imagery and attitudes of all involved, THE BATMAN is a 3 hour epic that is unrelenting in it’s bleakness with constant rain and dark images with not a peak of sun or color in the entire film. This bleakness and the slowness of the first 5/6 of this film will turn off the average viewer and will thrill only the most diehard of fans.
And that’s too bad for the last 1/2 hour of this film is pretty terrific, paying off the long setup beforehand with a confrontation between Batman (Robert Pattinson) and The Riddler (Paul Dano) that rivals just about any confrontation scene in comic books movie history (this side of Heath Ledger’s Joker).
Let’s start with the overwhelming look and feel of this film. It is a downer. Gotham City is, yet again, a city in decay with the bad guys over-running the good guys. Which begs this question - why would anyone join the Gotham City Police Department? But Director/Writer Reeves is is sure-handed in his approach to this material and he is unwavering in his bleakness. It is a strongly directed film that knows what it wants to be and does not pretend to be anything else - nor does it apologize for being what it is.
In this world is dropped Robert Pattinson (the TWILIGHT films) as the titular Batman and he is a perfect choice for this role in this film. His Batman is morose, dour, thoughtful and razor focused on being “vengeance”. He is not interested in being a good guy or a superhero, rather this version of Batman is focused on being a really good Detective, ferreting out evil-doers and administering punishment when they are caught. This film barely mentions Batman’s alter-ego, Bruce Wayne, and when Pattinson is on the screen in the guise as Bruce Wayne he looks uninterested in being Bruce Wayne, he’d rather be Batman - and this is a compliment for that is how this movie portrays this dual role. Batman is disguising himself as Bruce Wayne (and not vica-versa).
Assisting Batman in his Detective work is Lt. James Gordon (the always terrific Jeffrey Wright), the only honest cop in a corrupt Police Department. These 2 work as a Detective team, and this film often-times feels like a Detective procedural, some liken it to SEVEN with Brad Pitt/Morgan Freeman, I look at it more like the first season of TRUE DETECTIVE(the one with Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson), dark and interesting in their search for the bad guys.
As is typical of these types of films, we have a rogues gallery of villains. Some fair well - an unrecognizable Colin Farrel as Oz (the Penguin) and John Torturro as mob boss Carmine Falcone. While others fair less well - Peter Sarsgaard as corrupt District Attorney Gil Colson and, unfortunately, Zoe Kravitz as Selina Kyle (Catwoman). Both of these roles are not fleshed out well. Kravitz hits the screen looking good in her cat suit and while there is unmistakable sexual chemistry between Catwoman and Batman (not, it should be noted, between Selina Kyle and Bruce Wayne), but this only takes the character so far and Selina really wasn’t the bad-ass conflicted villain/hero that one would expect.
A pleasant surprise was the performance of the always interesting Paul Dano as the Riddler. He underplays this character in much the same way that most have overplayed him. Clearly, this is a smart, if mentally off, person who talks through riddles but has an overall plan to bring down “The Bat’ and the City. Not to spoil this film, but it didn’t really grab my attention until after the masked Riddler was unmasked and that was very late in the game - almost too late.
And that’s the problem with this film. The last 1/2 hour is TERRIFIC, but one has to sit through 2 1/2 hours of dark, dour setup to get there and for most, that journey will not be worth the payoff.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The Writer and Director of the new DCEU film, THE BATMAN, Matt Reeves (CLOVERFIELD) has one simple answer for you: “Hold my beer”.
Doubling down on the dark themes, imagery and attitudes of all involved, THE BATMAN is a 3 hour epic that is unrelenting in it’s bleakness with constant rain and dark images with not a peak of sun or color in the entire film. This bleakness and the slowness of the first 5/6 of this film will turn off the average viewer and will thrill only the most diehard of fans.
And that’s too bad for the last 1/2 hour of this film is pretty terrific, paying off the long setup beforehand with a confrontation between Batman (Robert Pattinson) and The Riddler (Paul Dano) that rivals just about any confrontation scene in comic books movie history (this side of Heath Ledger’s Joker).
Let’s start with the overwhelming look and feel of this film. It is a downer. Gotham City is, yet again, a city in decay with the bad guys over-running the good guys. Which begs this question - why would anyone join the Gotham City Police Department? But Director/Writer Reeves is is sure-handed in his approach to this material and he is unwavering in his bleakness. It is a strongly directed film that knows what it wants to be and does not pretend to be anything else - nor does it apologize for being what it is.
In this world is dropped Robert Pattinson (the TWILIGHT films) as the titular Batman and he is a perfect choice for this role in this film. His Batman is morose, dour, thoughtful and razor focused on being “vengeance”. He is not interested in being a good guy or a superhero, rather this version of Batman is focused on being a really good Detective, ferreting out evil-doers and administering punishment when they are caught. This film barely mentions Batman’s alter-ego, Bruce Wayne, and when Pattinson is on the screen in the guise as Bruce Wayne he looks uninterested in being Bruce Wayne, he’d rather be Batman - and this is a compliment for that is how this movie portrays this dual role. Batman is disguising himself as Bruce Wayne (and not vica-versa).
Assisting Batman in his Detective work is Lt. James Gordon (the always terrific Jeffrey Wright), the only honest cop in a corrupt Police Department. These 2 work as a Detective team, and this film often-times feels like a Detective procedural, some liken it to SEVEN with Brad Pitt/Morgan Freeman, I look at it more like the first season of TRUE DETECTIVE(the one with Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson), dark and interesting in their search for the bad guys.
As is typical of these types of films, we have a rogues gallery of villains. Some fair well - an unrecognizable Colin Farrel as Oz (the Penguin) and John Torturro as mob boss Carmine Falcone. While others fair less well - Peter Sarsgaard as corrupt District Attorney Gil Colson and, unfortunately, Zoe Kravitz as Selina Kyle (Catwoman). Both of these roles are not fleshed out well. Kravitz hits the screen looking good in her cat suit and while there is unmistakable sexual chemistry between Catwoman and Batman (not, it should be noted, between Selina Kyle and Bruce Wayne), but this only takes the character so far and Selina really wasn’t the bad-ass conflicted villain/hero that one would expect.
A pleasant surprise was the performance of the always interesting Paul Dano as the Riddler. He underplays this character in much the same way that most have overplayed him. Clearly, this is a smart, if mentally off, person who talks through riddles but has an overall plan to bring down “The Bat’ and the City. Not to spoil this film, but it didn’t really grab my attention until after the masked Riddler was unmasked and that was very late in the game - almost too late.
And that’s the problem with this film. The last 1/2 hour is TERRIFIC, but one has to sit through 2 1/2 hours of dark, dour setup to get there and for most, that journey will not be worth the payoff.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Blockers (2018) in Movies
Apr 25, 2018
Decent
Blockers met my expectations and I'm not saying that's a good thing. Don't get me wrong, it's a decent film that might make you crack a smile or two while you fold a load of laundry. However, it just misses the mark of being in the upper echelon of comedies. Let's dive into this film about three parents trying to stop their kids from losing their virginity on prom night.
Acting: 8
The film revolved mostly around the parents who tested their range in spite of the film being a comedy. Even with less screen time, however, I thought the kids (probably adults in actuality) outshined their parental figures by far. Gideon Adlon was outstanding in her role as Sam, a girl trying to figure things out in her own life, but still keep up with her friends. Her performance allows you to empathize with her character and root for her story to end well. She gives me a bit of a Maika Monroe vibe and that's a good thing.
Beginning: 4
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Butt chugging. I could just stop there really. The entire scene was shot in such an awkward way, it put you right there in the moment. There were a handful of other scenes that were captured perfectly as well, but I won't ruin the experience. Let's just say the gang goes on an adventure to remember and you're left with a few hilarious sequences as a result.
Conflict: 5
I just couldn't get on board with the mission here. It felt like the parents had worse things to worry about than following their kids on prom night. Even they questioned their own aims at times. If you're not on board, you can't really expect me to be.
There was another part of me that thought, "What's the big deal in the first place? Is all this really worth it?" Of course the parents end up asking themselves the same question, but not until they're way in too deep. There were definitely some ways they could have raised the stakes to give the conflict more meaning.
Genre: 7
Was it laugh out loud funny? At times, absolutely. There were certain moments that I definitely wished there were more of, but all in all, I felt the film tiptoed around being balls-to-the-wall hilarious. Sure the comedy lagged in some places, but when it was funny, it was really funny.
Memorability: 6
Pace: 6
When it wasn't funny, on the other hand, the film just dragged on, leaving for a pretty inconsistent pace. When you waste dialogue on jokes or scenes that aren't funny, the film slows way down as a whole. Definite room for improvement.
Plot: 9
The story takes you on a comedy adventure from one shenanigan to the next. Despite the weak conflict, I thought the story itself was fine. I never felt as if things just happened for the sake of advancing the plot (Pet Peeve #1). The story was far-fetched, but it works within its own realm.
Resolution: 9
Loved the resolution for the parents as they all came to terms with their own realities. There were some moments of mending, laughing, and true feel-good points. I especially enjoyed the resolution for Sam's character. This could have easily been a film about just her and it would have been just as enjoyable if not better.
Overall: 73
Blockers manages to rebound from its very slow start into a decent semblance of a movie. The characters are hilarious and the film can be just as sentimental as it is funny at times. See it...at home.
Acting: 8
The film revolved mostly around the parents who tested their range in spite of the film being a comedy. Even with less screen time, however, I thought the kids (probably adults in actuality) outshined their parental figures by far. Gideon Adlon was outstanding in her role as Sam, a girl trying to figure things out in her own life, but still keep up with her friends. Her performance allows you to empathize with her character and root for her story to end well. She gives me a bit of a Maika Monroe vibe and that's a good thing.
Beginning: 4
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Butt chugging. I could just stop there really. The entire scene was shot in such an awkward way, it put you right there in the moment. There were a handful of other scenes that were captured perfectly as well, but I won't ruin the experience. Let's just say the gang goes on an adventure to remember and you're left with a few hilarious sequences as a result.
Conflict: 5
I just couldn't get on board with the mission here. It felt like the parents had worse things to worry about than following their kids on prom night. Even they questioned their own aims at times. If you're not on board, you can't really expect me to be.
There was another part of me that thought, "What's the big deal in the first place? Is all this really worth it?" Of course the parents end up asking themselves the same question, but not until they're way in too deep. There were definitely some ways they could have raised the stakes to give the conflict more meaning.
Genre: 7
Was it laugh out loud funny? At times, absolutely. There were certain moments that I definitely wished there were more of, but all in all, I felt the film tiptoed around being balls-to-the-wall hilarious. Sure the comedy lagged in some places, but when it was funny, it was really funny.
Memorability: 6
Pace: 6
When it wasn't funny, on the other hand, the film just dragged on, leaving for a pretty inconsistent pace. When you waste dialogue on jokes or scenes that aren't funny, the film slows way down as a whole. Definite room for improvement.
Plot: 9
The story takes you on a comedy adventure from one shenanigan to the next. Despite the weak conflict, I thought the story itself was fine. I never felt as if things just happened for the sake of advancing the plot (Pet Peeve #1). The story was far-fetched, but it works within its own realm.
Resolution: 9
Loved the resolution for the parents as they all came to terms with their own realities. There were some moments of mending, laughing, and true feel-good points. I especially enjoyed the resolution for Sam's character. This could have easily been a film about just her and it would have been just as enjoyable if not better.
Overall: 73
Blockers manages to rebound from its very slow start into a decent semblance of a movie. The characters are hilarious and the film can be just as sentimental as it is funny at times. See it...at home.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
May 27, 2019
"They said the age of heroes would never come again."
As a huge fan of Zack Snyder's first two efforts inside the DCEU and Patty Jenkins wonderful Wonder Woman, my expectations for Justice League were pretty much through the roof. After the mediocre buzz that it got and all the stuff that happened behind the scenes, I was a little skeptical but still very excited, but after getting out of the theater, one word really just describes how I felt; disappointed.
One of the most wonderful things about the huge explosion of comic book movies has brought, to me personally, is being able to see the comics/cartoons that I grew up on, be brought to life on the big screen. The Justice League animated series was my one of my favorite shows as a kid and seeing seeing them come to screen brought joy to my eyes, and was something of a dream come true and that's the one major point I can give to the film as a whole.
My biggest disappointment in the film is actually Warner Brothers. They are a big bunch of idiots, to be honest. If they would've left Snyder to take his time and actually hired someone who Snyder wanted, the film would've been so much better. It's a sad fact when you can obviously tell which scenes were Snyder's and which were Whedon's. I actually loved every part of the film that you could tell was Zack's; it felt passionate and like it was coming from a fan. Whedon gave shitty one-liners and basically made me feel like I was watching a TV-movie.
A major component to why I actually liked the film was the action. It left me satisfied and I was rooting for them to just kickass and look cool doing it, because when you look at the classic "Justice League" stories, that's basically what it was. But even though the action was pretty stellar; I'm so mad at the fact of Steppenwolf looked so fake and like some of the worst CGI I've ever seen; so it mad the fights a little weak when it looks like the team is fighting a green screen. Also, the last 30-ish minutes kinda saved it for me. It was really "epic" and it felt really pure, I guess is the right word.
The cast. Oh my god the cast was so freaking good. Marvel Studios gets it right a lot of the time, but damn DC you won this one. Ezra Miller & Jason Momoa stood out like a sore thumb at how much better they were. They were so charismatic, yet intense, and altogether just right at place in their characters. Ben Affleck I'm so sorry that Whedon choose to mess you up. Affleck was stellar in BvS yet here, he felt dull and not the Batman I know he could be. Gal Gadot & Ray Fisher were both pretty good, but Gadot felt a little like she was but in the backseat, for sure reason. Henry Cavill though, he was kinda good? I couldn't really tell because half the time he looked like CGI, but I'm sure I'll get over it.
Even though there are some major problems I have with the film; Whedon, crappy CGI, and easily way too short for it too work, Zack Snyder's Justice League still works its way into my enjoyment field and I can see myself watching it further down the line. I definitely hope WB can release a longer, and more put together version, because what we got didn't live up to the hype I had for it.
One of the most wonderful things about the huge explosion of comic book movies has brought, to me personally, is being able to see the comics/cartoons that I grew up on, be brought to life on the big screen. The Justice League animated series was my one of my favorite shows as a kid and seeing seeing them come to screen brought joy to my eyes, and was something of a dream come true and that's the one major point I can give to the film as a whole.
My biggest disappointment in the film is actually Warner Brothers. They are a big bunch of idiots, to be honest. If they would've left Snyder to take his time and actually hired someone who Snyder wanted, the film would've been so much better. It's a sad fact when you can obviously tell which scenes were Snyder's and which were Whedon's. I actually loved every part of the film that you could tell was Zack's; it felt passionate and like it was coming from a fan. Whedon gave shitty one-liners and basically made me feel like I was watching a TV-movie.
A major component to why I actually liked the film was the action. It left me satisfied and I was rooting for them to just kickass and look cool doing it, because when you look at the classic "Justice League" stories, that's basically what it was. But even though the action was pretty stellar; I'm so mad at the fact of Steppenwolf looked so fake and like some of the worst CGI I've ever seen; so it mad the fights a little weak when it looks like the team is fighting a green screen. Also, the last 30-ish minutes kinda saved it for me. It was really "epic" and it felt really pure, I guess is the right word.
The cast. Oh my god the cast was so freaking good. Marvel Studios gets it right a lot of the time, but damn DC you won this one. Ezra Miller & Jason Momoa stood out like a sore thumb at how much better they were. They were so charismatic, yet intense, and altogether just right at place in their characters. Ben Affleck I'm so sorry that Whedon choose to mess you up. Affleck was stellar in BvS yet here, he felt dull and not the Batman I know he could be. Gal Gadot & Ray Fisher were both pretty good, but Gadot felt a little like she was but in the backseat, for sure reason. Henry Cavill though, he was kinda good? I couldn't really tell because half the time he looked like CGI, but I'm sure I'll get over it.
Even though there are some major problems I have with the film; Whedon, crappy CGI, and easily way too short for it too work, Zack Snyder's Justice League still works its way into my enjoyment field and I can see myself watching it further down the line. I definitely hope WB can release a longer, and more put together version, because what we got didn't live up to the hype I had for it.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated An Anonymous Girl in Books
Aug 20, 2018
The story line has been done, but this makes it feel original (3 more)
The characters are very fleshed out
The authors have done their research about therapists
The world building is fantastic
Intriguing Plot
I had read The Wife Between Us by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen and loved it. When I heard that the same authors were releasing another book, I became giddy and knew I had to read it. Luckily, An Anonymous Girl was a good read.
The pacing for An Anonymous Girl started off very fast which is what I like. I read a quarter of the book right before bed, and I only stopped because I had to go to sleep. I would have read more had I not been so tired. However, once I found out what the motive was behind Dr. Shield's study, the pacing slowed down, and I found myself not being drawn to the book as much although it still held my attention.
I started off enjoying the plot very much. I loved reading about Jess' participation in this strange study. However, like I felt about the pacing, once I learned the true motive behind the study, the plot wasn't as interesting. I don't want to elaborate on the plot because I don't want to give the motive behind the study away in my review. I will say the plot for An Anonymous Girl was well executed. It is an idea that's been written about so many times, but the way Hedricks and Pekkanen wrote about it was very original. There is one plot twists involving the study, but I felt like their aren't any more major plot twists. I kept waiting for more to happen, but they never came. I was left a little confused about the ending. I'm not sure if it was meant to be a plot twist or not.
The world building was written so amazingly! Everything about An Anonymous Girl felt real. It was obvious that the authors had done their research when it came to therapy and how a therapist would act. I felt as if I were watching everything unfold right in front of me. I was constantly worried for Jess, and I wanted to be her friend and help her with what she was going through.
I felt like the characters were very well written. I felt they were fleshed out enough to be enjoyable. It was hard to not like Jess and want to help her. She was an amazing character. Dr. Shields was also well written. As I've stated about the plot, it is obvious that Hendricks and Pekkanen had done their research on how a therapist might act by analyzing situations. I thoroughly enjoyed the character of Dr. Shields. I thought Thomas was well written. I kept wondering what Thomas' motives were, and I was constantly left guessing if he was bad or good. Luckily the ending of the book makes it clear.
Trigger warnings include possible suicide/murder, alcohol (the characters drink wine throughout the book), prescription drugs (Vicodin is mentioned), one count of sexual abuse, swearing, cheating, blackmail, and manipulation.
All in all, An Anonymous Girl is a good read. The plot takes an idea that's been done numerous times and changes it so it feels different. The characters are fleshed out, and the world building is amazing. I would definitely recommend An Anonymous Girl by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen to those aged 16 and above.
(I received an ecopy of An Anonymous Girl by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen through Netgalley in exchange for an unbiased review. All opinions are my own).
The pacing for An Anonymous Girl started off very fast which is what I like. I read a quarter of the book right before bed, and I only stopped because I had to go to sleep. I would have read more had I not been so tired. However, once I found out what the motive was behind Dr. Shield's study, the pacing slowed down, and I found myself not being drawn to the book as much although it still held my attention.
I started off enjoying the plot very much. I loved reading about Jess' participation in this strange study. However, like I felt about the pacing, once I learned the true motive behind the study, the plot wasn't as interesting. I don't want to elaborate on the plot because I don't want to give the motive behind the study away in my review. I will say the plot for An Anonymous Girl was well executed. It is an idea that's been written about so many times, but the way Hedricks and Pekkanen wrote about it was very original. There is one plot twists involving the study, but I felt like their aren't any more major plot twists. I kept waiting for more to happen, but they never came. I was left a little confused about the ending. I'm not sure if it was meant to be a plot twist or not.
The world building was written so amazingly! Everything about An Anonymous Girl felt real. It was obvious that the authors had done their research when it came to therapy and how a therapist would act. I felt as if I were watching everything unfold right in front of me. I was constantly worried for Jess, and I wanted to be her friend and help her with what she was going through.
I felt like the characters were very well written. I felt they were fleshed out enough to be enjoyable. It was hard to not like Jess and want to help her. She was an amazing character. Dr. Shields was also well written. As I've stated about the plot, it is obvious that Hendricks and Pekkanen had done their research on how a therapist might act by analyzing situations. I thoroughly enjoyed the character of Dr. Shields. I thought Thomas was well written. I kept wondering what Thomas' motives were, and I was constantly left guessing if he was bad or good. Luckily the ending of the book makes it clear.
Trigger warnings include possible suicide/murder, alcohol (the characters drink wine throughout the book), prescription drugs (Vicodin is mentioned), one count of sexual abuse, swearing, cheating, blackmail, and manipulation.
All in all, An Anonymous Girl is a good read. The plot takes an idea that's been done numerous times and changes it so it feels different. The characters are fleshed out, and the world building is amazing. I would definitely recommend An Anonymous Girl by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen to those aged 16 and above.
(I received an ecopy of An Anonymous Girl by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen through Netgalley in exchange for an unbiased review. All opinions are my own).
Cassie Osbourne (6 KP) rated Chains (Seeds of America, #1) in Books
Nov 9, 2018
When Isabel and Ruth's owner dies, they are sold to the loyalist Locktons and shipped to New York. 'Chains' tells the story of the American Revolution through the eyes of a thirteen-year-old slave, struggling to take care of her little sister and discover what real freedom is and how a person can gain it.
I first read this book in 2010 when I was thirteen while I was stuck at a grammar school open evening that my sister was at. I went to the library and started reading 'Chains' instead of having to traipse around hearing about how many geniuses of that school got into Oxford and Cambridge. I was so hooked that I felt that I couldn't leave without it so I stuck it up my jumper and nicked it. I have recently (and legally) got my hands on a copy of 'Ashes', the final book in the trilogy and so am rereading the first two books which I haven't done in years. I am pleased to say that it is still as good as it was when I read it eight years ago.
While I do like well rounded, complex characters and relationships, there is certainly something to be said for simplicity. None of the characters has too much of a character arc in this book except for the protagonist, who is the one telling the story so this may have something to do with her being an unreliable narrator (something that you learn so much about in English A-Level). Did the characters seem a bit stereotypical and cliched at times? Yes, definitely. Did I really care? No, not especially.
The atmosphere was great throughout, especially in the prison scenes and when Isabel has a fever. Everything felt very real and detailed, right down to the last black hair ribbon stashed in a draw. Every chapter, every page, every sentence felt so real and grounded in reality which is difficult to find in a book.
I really enjoyed the writing style, it all suited Isabel's voice down to the ground. Something that I noticed more reading it this time than I did when I was younger were the extracts at the beginnings of the chapters as it is a really nice and easy way to contextualise what is going on in the chapter in comparison to the date in with the chapter is set. It also gives the book a much more political feel which, again, I didn't quite see as much when I was younger.
The plot as a whole is very good and well written but there were definitely some sections that were just not needed or justified at all. However, that is a very minor thing.
The only real downfall of this book was some of the logic. Isabel gets way too lucky too many times, especially since she is a young black girl with a very distinctive scar on her face. A lot of people just seem too nice to her given that she is a slave and the level of racism back then as well. There is one particular instance at the end with some fireworks that I just pure and simply didn't buy.
This book, as well as 'Forge', has been sitting on my shelf for years just waiting to be picked up again and reread. I am so happy that so many years after I read it the first time it is still just as good.
Characters: 8/10
Atmosphere: 9/10
Writing Style: 8/10
Plot: 8/10
Intrigue: 9/10
Logic: 7.5/10
Enjoyment: 10/10
I first read this book in 2010 when I was thirteen while I was stuck at a grammar school open evening that my sister was at. I went to the library and started reading 'Chains' instead of having to traipse around hearing about how many geniuses of that school got into Oxford and Cambridge. I was so hooked that I felt that I couldn't leave without it so I stuck it up my jumper and nicked it. I have recently (and legally) got my hands on a copy of 'Ashes', the final book in the trilogy and so am rereading the first two books which I haven't done in years. I am pleased to say that it is still as good as it was when I read it eight years ago.
While I do like well rounded, complex characters and relationships, there is certainly something to be said for simplicity. None of the characters has too much of a character arc in this book except for the protagonist, who is the one telling the story so this may have something to do with her being an unreliable narrator (something that you learn so much about in English A-Level). Did the characters seem a bit stereotypical and cliched at times? Yes, definitely. Did I really care? No, not especially.
The atmosphere was great throughout, especially in the prison scenes and when Isabel has a fever. Everything felt very real and detailed, right down to the last black hair ribbon stashed in a draw. Every chapter, every page, every sentence felt so real and grounded in reality which is difficult to find in a book.
I really enjoyed the writing style, it all suited Isabel's voice down to the ground. Something that I noticed more reading it this time than I did when I was younger were the extracts at the beginnings of the chapters as it is a really nice and easy way to contextualise what is going on in the chapter in comparison to the date in with the chapter is set. It also gives the book a much more political feel which, again, I didn't quite see as much when I was younger.
The plot as a whole is very good and well written but there were definitely some sections that were just not needed or justified at all. However, that is a very minor thing.
The only real downfall of this book was some of the logic. Isabel gets way too lucky too many times, especially since she is a young black girl with a very distinctive scar on her face. A lot of people just seem too nice to her given that she is a slave and the level of racism back then as well. There is one particular instance at the end with some fireworks that I just pure and simply didn't buy.
This book, as well as 'Forge', has been sitting on my shelf for years just waiting to be picked up again and reread. I am so happy that so many years after I read it the first time it is still just as good.
Characters: 8/10
Atmosphere: 9/10
Writing Style: 8/10
Plot: 8/10
Intrigue: 9/10
Logic: 7.5/10
Enjoyment: 10/10
Darren (1599 KP) rated A Star Is Born (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: A Star is Born starts when rock star Jackson (Cooper) looking for another drink stumbles into a drag bar, he sees working class woman Ally (Gaga) perform on stage, instantly he knows she has talent and learns more about her, bring her on stage for his latest show.
When Ally becomes an overnight success story the two-start performing together which only attractions more record labels who come calling to make Ally the next biggest star in the music world which soon sees her become more famous than Jack whose own problems could bring an end to his fame.
Thoughts on A Star is Born
Characters – Ally is a hotel worker that performers in a local drag bar after being rejected by record labels before. She meets rock star Jack who encourages to perform, first with him and soon the world wants to see her become the biggest star in the music industry. Ally must learn about the world around her, one she has never stepped foot in before or become consumed by it. Jack is the rock star who sees Ally believing she could become a star, he offers her a chance to perform which sets her on her way, Jack however has his own problems with drinks and drugs would could finish his own career just as Ally’s is about to take off. These two characters do take centre stage for the most part, we do see family that support as well as friends who see their friend get to levels of fame they never thought they could.
Performances – Bradley Cooper gives one of his best performances of his career here, not just on front of the camera, but behind it too. He manages to make us feel like his problems are real, which are problem many musicians could be facing. Lady Gaga was always going to be a wonderful choice for the singing side of the film, it was the acting side people wanted to see if she could handle, she does a good job through the film managing to show the bond the two have throughout the film. the supporting cast are good without needing to be challenged to reach the levels of the lead two actors.
Story – The story follows the rise of a musician after being discovered by an alcoholic rock star. We know this is a remake, so we know this had been modernised to tell an old story which deals with the modern problems of fame for musicians. We see how one side is taking every opportunity thrown her way and the other than has been watching his career fade away because of alcoholism and drug abuse. This is a great story of how important taking chances are and how success can ruin lives. The story does however become slightly slow paced because we just jump into a song to cover up anything that needs to be talked about more.
Music/Romance – The music in the film is good with songs that Gaga performs with ease. The romance between the two shows how they can support each other through the lives they didn’t know they would be going through.
Settings – The film uses the settings to show the journey that Ally takes from the small venue to awards ceremony showing here rise to fame.
Scene of the Movie – First song.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The rise feels too fast.
Final Thoughts – This is a great look at how the fame can affect lives in the music industry, we get strong performances from Cooper and Gaga who both shine through the film.
Overall: Great Music based movie.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/01/01/abc-film-challenge-best-of-2018-a-a-star-is-born-2018/
When Ally becomes an overnight success story the two-start performing together which only attractions more record labels who come calling to make Ally the next biggest star in the music world which soon sees her become more famous than Jack whose own problems could bring an end to his fame.
Thoughts on A Star is Born
Characters – Ally is a hotel worker that performers in a local drag bar after being rejected by record labels before. She meets rock star Jack who encourages to perform, first with him and soon the world wants to see her become the biggest star in the music industry. Ally must learn about the world around her, one she has never stepped foot in before or become consumed by it. Jack is the rock star who sees Ally believing she could become a star, he offers her a chance to perform which sets her on her way, Jack however has his own problems with drinks and drugs would could finish his own career just as Ally’s is about to take off. These two characters do take centre stage for the most part, we do see family that support as well as friends who see their friend get to levels of fame they never thought they could.
Performances – Bradley Cooper gives one of his best performances of his career here, not just on front of the camera, but behind it too. He manages to make us feel like his problems are real, which are problem many musicians could be facing. Lady Gaga was always going to be a wonderful choice for the singing side of the film, it was the acting side people wanted to see if she could handle, she does a good job through the film managing to show the bond the two have throughout the film. the supporting cast are good without needing to be challenged to reach the levels of the lead two actors.
Story – The story follows the rise of a musician after being discovered by an alcoholic rock star. We know this is a remake, so we know this had been modernised to tell an old story which deals with the modern problems of fame for musicians. We see how one side is taking every opportunity thrown her way and the other than has been watching his career fade away because of alcoholism and drug abuse. This is a great story of how important taking chances are and how success can ruin lives. The story does however become slightly slow paced because we just jump into a song to cover up anything that needs to be talked about more.
Music/Romance – The music in the film is good with songs that Gaga performs with ease. The romance between the two shows how they can support each other through the lives they didn’t know they would be going through.
Settings – The film uses the settings to show the journey that Ally takes from the small venue to awards ceremony showing here rise to fame.
Scene of the Movie – First song.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The rise feels too fast.
Final Thoughts – This is a great look at how the fame can affect lives in the music industry, we get strong performances from Cooper and Gaga who both shine through the film.
Overall: Great Music based movie.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/01/01/abc-film-challenge-best-of-2018-a-a-star-is-born-2018/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Scream 2 (1997) in Movies
Oct 31, 2019
Characters – Sidney is back studying a college and over the events of the first film, she has moved on with a new boyfriend and new friends, that is until the ‘Stab’ movie is released. Sidney becomes the primary target of the killer and must use the experience with surviving a massacre before to make it out alive. Dewey still suffering the effects of his injuries in the first film, he is no longer a cop and with the events occurring he arrives back in Sidney’s life to try and help before the killer can get near her. Gale wrote the book on the murders, the one that the movie is based on, she is still trying to get a story, but does start to learn the errors in her way when she deals with other reporters. Cotton Weary does have a bigger part this time, as he is trying to piece his life back together after the wrongful accusations. Randy returns to give us the rules needed to make a sequel which an important part of the original. Of our new characters we get the new boyfriend in Derek who seems to be the best part of Sidney’s new life. Cici is the best friend at the college that is the more popular one at the college. This movie does have a larger cast than the first film which doesn’t always give the characters enough screen time.
Performances – Neve Campbell is still good in her role, she does make us believe she is the everyday student that is being tormented by the killer. Courteney Cox and David Arquette continue their good work in the supporting roles, where this film struggles to get the best of the of the supporting cast is by introducing too many characters, with Sarah Michelle Gellar seemingly filling the Drew Barrymore type role, where we expect to see her more in the film.
Story – The story picks up in a universe following the events of the first film where Hollywood makes movies on massacres, with this release we get to see the darker side of Hollywood taking advantage of real-life murders and how the innocent victims and survivor can be painted differently to cinematic purposes, well that seems to be the message I picked up on in this one. when it comes to the slasher side of things we get to watch the victims getting picked off by the killer, this does feel the same as before, while the references through this film focus on the idea of the sequels that Hollywood makes, and how they always story to improve on the last, though we do step away from the horror discussion this time.
Horror/Mystery – The horror side of the film comes from the ideas that people can take advantage of tragic stories for a bigger story, reflecting the events of the film, the mystery can keep us guessing to just who could be behind it this time around with plenty of potential suspects.
Settings – This time the film is set in a college that show us just where Sidney is now in her life which is important as she has moved on, but the event will always be part of her life.
Special Effects – The effects in the film once again show us how blood and gore can be achieved without going over the top.
Scene of the Movie – The showdown.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Too many supporting characters this time around.
Final Thoughts – This is a sequel that is well worth the watch, it shows progression in the horror genre with a sequel that does make sense to how an everyday person would be moving on with their life after the events in the first one, while still having the tragedy on their shoulder.
Overall: Good fun sequel.
Performances – Neve Campbell is still good in her role, she does make us believe she is the everyday student that is being tormented by the killer. Courteney Cox and David Arquette continue their good work in the supporting roles, where this film struggles to get the best of the of the supporting cast is by introducing too many characters, with Sarah Michelle Gellar seemingly filling the Drew Barrymore type role, where we expect to see her more in the film.
Story – The story picks up in a universe following the events of the first film where Hollywood makes movies on massacres, with this release we get to see the darker side of Hollywood taking advantage of real-life murders and how the innocent victims and survivor can be painted differently to cinematic purposes, well that seems to be the message I picked up on in this one. when it comes to the slasher side of things we get to watch the victims getting picked off by the killer, this does feel the same as before, while the references through this film focus on the idea of the sequels that Hollywood makes, and how they always story to improve on the last, though we do step away from the horror discussion this time.
Horror/Mystery – The horror side of the film comes from the ideas that people can take advantage of tragic stories for a bigger story, reflecting the events of the film, the mystery can keep us guessing to just who could be behind it this time around with plenty of potential suspects.
Settings – This time the film is set in a college that show us just where Sidney is now in her life which is important as she has moved on, but the event will always be part of her life.
Special Effects – The effects in the film once again show us how blood and gore can be achieved without going over the top.
Scene of the Movie – The showdown.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Too many supporting characters this time around.
Final Thoughts – This is a sequel that is well worth the watch, it shows progression in the horror genre with a sequel that does make sense to how an everyday person would be moving on with their life after the events in the first one, while still having the tragedy on their shoulder.
Overall: Good fun sequel.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Bloodshot (2020) in Movies
Mar 21, 2020
It's nice to get a different side of the comic book genre for once, I'm still suffering from Marvel/Avengers fatigue so this was a welcome diversion.
After a successful operation, soldier Ray Garrison has come home to take his beautiful wife of a well deserved break. What he doesn't realise is that he's being tracked by a team who are looking for information, and they'll do anything it takes to get it.
Waking up in a high tech lab with no memory Ray discovers that his body has been donated to a company after his death. RSC are pioneers in enhancements to the human body, taking people who might otherwise be given up on and giving them a new lease of life.
When you've had one of those days and you need some gratuitous violence you can't really go wrong with a Vin Diesel films... can you?
I can't say I ever go into films like this expecting a "masterpiece" of cinema, I was just hoping for some solid entertainment and it certainly gives that.
Enhanced humans always offer that level of escapism that allows for a few faux pas to come across as less obvious, but the trailer made me raise an eyebrow. The effects didn't look great in the few snippets we got, luckily, on seeing the final product thought I was pleasantly surprised. The close up action that wouldn't require major stunts were excellent and believable, I didn't feel like there were any holes to pick... until the elevator scene. You'll clearly see the graphic work and it's a real shame it is so bad in comparison to the rest, there's also a terrible chase scene that has no natural movement in it either.
It's not often Vin strays from a certain type of character so we get exactly what you'd expect from his portrayal of Ray Garrison, a driven "bad guy" with a reason to be mad at a lot of stuff. It's not groundbreaking but it's always fun to see.
Eiza Gonzalez as KT gets a good range to work with, she gives us an excellent character with a reasonable amount of depth compared to her counterparts... who I had to call Legs and Eyes in my notes because at no point did I notice if they had names or not.
Our bad guy was obviously Guy Pearce seems about right for him. It wasn't really out of his comfort zone either though and despite him being great as Dr Emil Harting it wasn't really pushing any boundaries.
Visually this film is pretty good, the fight sequence we get glimpses of during the trailer uses colour well and has some amusing little touches in it. A bit of humour and some shots that I'd associate with horror/thriller movies build that excitement and tension well. There's also a well edited montage that's used to great effect to show the audience an event succinctly without it becoming boring, which is always greatly appreciated in films.
There are a few comments I have but they definitely constitute spoilers so I'll keep them to myself, but there's nothing that majorly added or detracted from the film for me beyond what I've mentioned already.
As I said at the beginning, it's nice to have a different comic book entity on our screens and I think the story is a good one, we're thankfully given an interesting set of characters to focus on and that helps the story stay a little lighter. You know how I like an origin tale though and this seems a bit short on that bit of discovery. I've got the graphic novel to read though so I'm interested to see where it deviates. Despite its minor (and slightly major action CGI) issues I really enjoyed Bloodshot, Ray's anger issues really helped get out some frustration.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/bloodshot-movie-review.html
After a successful operation, soldier Ray Garrison has come home to take his beautiful wife of a well deserved break. What he doesn't realise is that he's being tracked by a team who are looking for information, and they'll do anything it takes to get it.
Waking up in a high tech lab with no memory Ray discovers that his body has been donated to a company after his death. RSC are pioneers in enhancements to the human body, taking people who might otherwise be given up on and giving them a new lease of life.
When you've had one of those days and you need some gratuitous violence you can't really go wrong with a Vin Diesel films... can you?
I can't say I ever go into films like this expecting a "masterpiece" of cinema, I was just hoping for some solid entertainment and it certainly gives that.
Enhanced humans always offer that level of escapism that allows for a few faux pas to come across as less obvious, but the trailer made me raise an eyebrow. The effects didn't look great in the few snippets we got, luckily, on seeing the final product thought I was pleasantly surprised. The close up action that wouldn't require major stunts were excellent and believable, I didn't feel like there were any holes to pick... until the elevator scene. You'll clearly see the graphic work and it's a real shame it is so bad in comparison to the rest, there's also a terrible chase scene that has no natural movement in it either.
It's not often Vin strays from a certain type of character so we get exactly what you'd expect from his portrayal of Ray Garrison, a driven "bad guy" with a reason to be mad at a lot of stuff. It's not groundbreaking but it's always fun to see.
Eiza Gonzalez as KT gets a good range to work with, she gives us an excellent character with a reasonable amount of depth compared to her counterparts... who I had to call Legs and Eyes in my notes because at no point did I notice if they had names or not.
Our bad guy was obviously Guy Pearce seems about right for him. It wasn't really out of his comfort zone either though and despite him being great as Dr Emil Harting it wasn't really pushing any boundaries.
Visually this film is pretty good, the fight sequence we get glimpses of during the trailer uses colour well and has some amusing little touches in it. A bit of humour and some shots that I'd associate with horror/thriller movies build that excitement and tension well. There's also a well edited montage that's used to great effect to show the audience an event succinctly without it becoming boring, which is always greatly appreciated in films.
There are a few comments I have but they definitely constitute spoilers so I'll keep them to myself, but there's nothing that majorly added or detracted from the film for me beyond what I've mentioned already.
As I said at the beginning, it's nice to have a different comic book entity on our screens and I think the story is a good one, we're thankfully given an interesting set of characters to focus on and that helps the story stay a little lighter. You know how I like an origin tale though and this seems a bit short on that bit of discovery. I've got the graphic novel to read though so I'm interested to see where it deviates. Despite its minor (and slightly major action CGI) issues I really enjoyed Bloodshot, Ray's anger issues really helped get out some frustration.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/bloodshot-movie-review.html
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Good Time (2017) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
Here is another example of a very watchable low budget film that may have passed by your radar undetected. It came to my attention in two ways. The first because I disliked Uncut Gems so much folk started telling me to watch Good Time to get a better idea of what the Safdie brothers were all about. The second because Robert Pattinson kept popping up and being good in things, when again, there was a time I wouldn’t have thought that possible.
Josh and Benny Safdie have a lot of energy as filmmakers it seems; if the two films I’ve seen so far indicate a motif then it is people forced to act without much thought when the stakes are pretty much life and death. A raw, desperate energy exists in their work that comes straight at you through the screen. In Uncut Gems I found they pushed that feeling too hard, and what we were left with was a massively uncomfortable experience that felt like drinking too much coffee and then being screamed at by someone you hated. Good Time tempers that a little by having a protagonist whose motives you can at least identify with, played by a better, less shouty, more subtle and more likeable actor.
The plot revolves around Pattinson’s Connie frantically trying to find and save his mentally challenged brother, Nick, played by co-director Benny Safdie, after forcing him to participate in a bank robbery that goes wrong. Safdie as an actor is superb and memorable in the role, as is Pattinson. The chemistry between the two is simultaneously edgy, heartbreaking and somehow genuine. You believe they are brothers and invest in it – feeling Nick’s guilt and need to atone driving every bad decision along the grimy path he treads through the seedier parts of the city.
The camerawork and direction make the lights and sounds of the city a character in itself. It may not be true, but I see this film in my head, now as I think of it, as being 90% at night, lit by flashing headlights. Certainly that feel of running head-on into traffic is a big part of it. But there are slower, more sensitive scenes that spring to mind too. Constantly we are being asked if we can forgive Nick, or at least understand why he is making the choices he is making. Essentially he wants the panic to stop, but can’t ever get himself to a place of peace. An idea beautifully illustrated in the scenes involving the female characters of Corey and Crystal (the former played by Jennifer Jason Leigh with typical edge); Nick wants to be loved and respected, but how will that ever be possible?
Contrasting Pattinson’s work here with other recent efforts, including Tenet, The Lighthouse and The Lost City of Z, you can see an impressive range where his true personality disappears into his character. Something not every actor can do by any means, and something Adam Sandler failed to do in Uncut Gems, for example. I continue to be more impressed by him from film to film, to the extent that if I saw him in a cast it would be reason enough to see something. He has that ability to make an average film watchable, often being the best thing about the project. And I have to admit that has surprised me. But I like Kristen Stewart too these days, so it just shows how much the Twilight franchise has to answer for!
I wouldn’t go mad recommending this to everyone, but there is a time and a place for it, and I’m pleased I can appreciate the talent and potential the Safdie Brothers have inherently. There certainly aren’t enough young filmmakers taking risks in this way any more. It wouldn’t surprise me at all to see their formula strike true gold before too long.
Josh and Benny Safdie have a lot of energy as filmmakers it seems; if the two films I’ve seen so far indicate a motif then it is people forced to act without much thought when the stakes are pretty much life and death. A raw, desperate energy exists in their work that comes straight at you through the screen. In Uncut Gems I found they pushed that feeling too hard, and what we were left with was a massively uncomfortable experience that felt like drinking too much coffee and then being screamed at by someone you hated. Good Time tempers that a little by having a protagonist whose motives you can at least identify with, played by a better, less shouty, more subtle and more likeable actor.
The plot revolves around Pattinson’s Connie frantically trying to find and save his mentally challenged brother, Nick, played by co-director Benny Safdie, after forcing him to participate in a bank robbery that goes wrong. Safdie as an actor is superb and memorable in the role, as is Pattinson. The chemistry between the two is simultaneously edgy, heartbreaking and somehow genuine. You believe they are brothers and invest in it – feeling Nick’s guilt and need to atone driving every bad decision along the grimy path he treads through the seedier parts of the city.
The camerawork and direction make the lights and sounds of the city a character in itself. It may not be true, but I see this film in my head, now as I think of it, as being 90% at night, lit by flashing headlights. Certainly that feel of running head-on into traffic is a big part of it. But there are slower, more sensitive scenes that spring to mind too. Constantly we are being asked if we can forgive Nick, or at least understand why he is making the choices he is making. Essentially he wants the panic to stop, but can’t ever get himself to a place of peace. An idea beautifully illustrated in the scenes involving the female characters of Corey and Crystal (the former played by Jennifer Jason Leigh with typical edge); Nick wants to be loved and respected, but how will that ever be possible?
Contrasting Pattinson’s work here with other recent efforts, including Tenet, The Lighthouse and The Lost City of Z, you can see an impressive range where his true personality disappears into his character. Something not every actor can do by any means, and something Adam Sandler failed to do in Uncut Gems, for example. I continue to be more impressed by him from film to film, to the extent that if I saw him in a cast it would be reason enough to see something. He has that ability to make an average film watchable, often being the best thing about the project. And I have to admit that has surprised me. But I like Kristen Stewart too these days, so it just shows how much the Twilight franchise has to answer for!
I wouldn’t go mad recommending this to everyone, but there is a time and a place for it, and I’m pleased I can appreciate the talent and potential the Safdie Brothers have inherently. There certainly aren’t enough young filmmakers taking risks in this way any more. It wouldn’t surprise me at all to see their formula strike true gold before too long.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Bleed For This (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
Bleed for This is the true story of boxer Vinny Pazienza (Miles Teller). Vinny is the type of person that in and out of the ring goes all out to the point he can go no further. This mindset puts him on the verge of being out of boxing after losing three straight fights, which he drastically cuts weight to fight. As he searches for one last chance, he is paired with a new trainer, Kevin Rooney (Aaron Eckhart), who is also seemingly given his last chance to revive his career. Rooney sets out to change the way Vinny trains and convinces him that fighting at a heavier weight will help his body, he previously was taking drastic measures to cut weight for fights. The pair are committed to success even with Vinny’s head strong father’s (Angelo Pazienza played by Ciarán Hinds) disapproving of the change, his mother (Louise Pazienza played by Katey Sagal) not wanting Vinny to get hurt, and his own Manager (Lou Duva played by Ted Levine) saying he should quit boxing all together. After some convincing and a lot of hard work Vinny gets his chance at one last fight. But he is moving up two weight classes and is put into a title fight against a seasoned opponent. Vinny shocks seemingly everyone by overcoming these obstacles and knocking out his favored opponent to become a World Champion.
After the biggest win of his career when everything appears to be going Vinny, his families and Rooney’s way, there is a terrible car accident and Vinny suffers a broken neck. The doctor tells him that he may never walk again, let alone box. With everyone telling him that his boxing career is over, Vinny is single-mindedly determined to do everything he can to get back into the ring. He opts to not have surgery in hopes that his neck can heal on its own and he can return to champion ship form. He has to convince Rooney to train him, find someone willing to fight him, and has to overcome his once over bearing father being unwilling be in his corner for the first time in his life. Even with a mountain of obstacles in his way, he begins his quest to get back into the ring and show everyone that he can do the impossible and regain his past form.
Writer and Director Ben Younger (Prime and Boiler Room) does an excellent job with this inspirational true story. The supporting cast provide solid performances, especial Eckhart and Hinds, but Miles Teller’s performance is what really makes this a fun film to watch. He really seemed to fit into this role really well. His performance was both compelling and fun. There were several times that the film showed actual old footage and footage just made to look old and you really couldn’t tell if it was Teller or the real Vinny Pazienza on the screen. I liked how the boxing sequences were not over dramatized, no mouth pieces flying across the ring, it looked like there was an effort to just keep them as true to the actual fights as possible. I also enjoyed the moments of comedy. For a story full of drama there was a good amount of well-timed comedy, mostly provided by Teller. Visually they did a good job of making the film feel like you were in late 80s and early 90s. There were a couple of slow scenes but overall the film flowed really well.
Overall this was a well done boxing genre movie. Good story, great acting performances and solid directing.
After the biggest win of his career when everything appears to be going Vinny, his families and Rooney’s way, there is a terrible car accident and Vinny suffers a broken neck. The doctor tells him that he may never walk again, let alone box. With everyone telling him that his boxing career is over, Vinny is single-mindedly determined to do everything he can to get back into the ring. He opts to not have surgery in hopes that his neck can heal on its own and he can return to champion ship form. He has to convince Rooney to train him, find someone willing to fight him, and has to overcome his once over bearing father being unwilling be in his corner for the first time in his life. Even with a mountain of obstacles in his way, he begins his quest to get back into the ring and show everyone that he can do the impossible and regain his past form.
Writer and Director Ben Younger (Prime and Boiler Room) does an excellent job with this inspirational true story. The supporting cast provide solid performances, especial Eckhart and Hinds, but Miles Teller’s performance is what really makes this a fun film to watch. He really seemed to fit into this role really well. His performance was both compelling and fun. There were several times that the film showed actual old footage and footage just made to look old and you really couldn’t tell if it was Teller or the real Vinny Pazienza on the screen. I liked how the boxing sequences were not over dramatized, no mouth pieces flying across the ring, it looked like there was an effort to just keep them as true to the actual fights as possible. I also enjoyed the moments of comedy. For a story full of drama there was a good amount of well-timed comedy, mostly provided by Teller. Visually they did a good job of making the film feel like you were in late 80s and early 90s. There were a couple of slow scenes but overall the film flowed really well.
Overall this was a well done boxing genre movie. Good story, great acting performances and solid directing.