Search
Lust for Life: Irvine Welsh and the Trainspotting Phenomenon
Book
In the early 1980s Irvine Welsh's life was going nowhere fast. His teenage dreams of being a...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Darkest Minds (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
A real drawback to this film is that the story line is designed to be several pieces, so you don't get a complete tale, just a cliffhanger of an ending as a lead up to the next one... but are there going to be anymore after the majority of people seem to think it was a flop? I did some vague Googling but it was next to impossible to find anything useful on the subject without wading through all the negative reviews.
I found it really difficult to rate this one. I enjoyed it a lot. I liked the action and the story idea, and the effects were very good... but... much like with the Maze Runner films it will probably stand up better as a collection of films rather than as it is on it's own.
Having only just started the book (I know, finally one I've actually begun and not just got on the shelf!) I'm not sure exactly how dark Ruby's character goes. In a desperate move to help her friends she turns on a bounty hunter who is out to get them. She turns her power loose and tells her to walk into the woods, and keep walking... which now I think about it we've seen in X-Men haven't we? How, or even if, this is represented in the book I do not know, but it's quite a dark moment for this innocent teenager who hasn't really done anything with any malice before now.
The film is somehow a little bit samey while being different all at the same time. I've been wavering between three and four stars on this one, but I think what sealed it's fate is that I would only actually buy this if I was going to be getting all the movies to complete the saga.
I found it really difficult to rate this one. I enjoyed it a lot. I liked the action and the story idea, and the effects were very good... but... much like with the Maze Runner films it will probably stand up better as a collection of films rather than as it is on it's own.
Having only just started the book (I know, finally one I've actually begun and not just got on the shelf!) I'm not sure exactly how dark Ruby's character goes. In a desperate move to help her friends she turns on a bounty hunter who is out to get them. She turns her power loose and tells her to walk into the woods, and keep walking... which now I think about it we've seen in X-Men haven't we? How, or even if, this is represented in the book I do not know, but it's quite a dark moment for this innocent teenager who hasn't really done anything with any malice before now.
The film is somehow a little bit samey while being different all at the same time. I've been wavering between three and four stars on this one, but I think what sealed it's fate is that I would only actually buy this if I was going to be getting all the movies to complete the saga.
Jordan Binkerd (567 KP) rated Men in Black International (2019) in Movies
Sep 14, 2019
Chris Hemsworth (2 more)
Tessa Thompson
Pawny
The two twists are visible a mile away (1 more)
No Will Smith, no Tommy Lee Jones
Not as good as the original, but still excellent
I see a lot of derogatory reviews for this one, and I don't really understand that. Is it as good as the original? No. Neither were the other two sequels. I can only think of two sequels in the history of movies that were as good or better than the original: Terminator 2 - Judgement Day and Star Wars - The Empire Strikes Back. Okay, three, I forgot about The Road Warrior. My point stands. It's an unfair expectation to put on this film, which was perfectly enjoyable and managed to move the MiB franchise outside New York City for a change.
Agent M is our protagonist, a woman who witnessed MiB in action as a girl and escaped being Neuralized. After tracking down MiB, she's sent to London and partnered with Agent H, a legend in the agency who seems to have lost what made him a competent agent. Together, they must ferret out a mole in the Men in Black....
While they're no Smith and Jones, Hemsworth and Thompson have excellent chemistry as evidenced by their repeatedly being paired with each other. Emma Thompson and Liam Neeson are incapable of failing to entertain, especially in material as bonkers as MiB, and Pawny was hilarious. The storyline is a bit cliche, and you see the twists coming miles away, but on the whole I greatly enjoyed the film. It's exactly what I expected it to be, exactly what it wanted to be. The reason for H's change in character is left a little bit ambiguous and unexplained, but should be clear enough on further consideration. I'd be down for a couple more with this cast, honestly....
Agent M is our protagonist, a woman who witnessed MiB in action as a girl and escaped being Neuralized. After tracking down MiB, she's sent to London and partnered with Agent H, a legend in the agency who seems to have lost what made him a competent agent. Together, they must ferret out a mole in the Men in Black....
While they're no Smith and Jones, Hemsworth and Thompson have excellent chemistry as evidenced by their repeatedly being paired with each other. Emma Thompson and Liam Neeson are incapable of failing to entertain, especially in material as bonkers as MiB, and Pawny was hilarious. The storyline is a bit cliche, and you see the twists coming miles away, but on the whole I greatly enjoyed the film. It's exactly what I expected it to be, exactly what it wanted to be. The reason for H's change in character is left a little bit ambiguous and unexplained, but should be clear enough on further consideration. I'd be down for a couple more with this cast, honestly....
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Spider-Man 3 (2007) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
The most anticipated film of the summer, Spider-Man 3 has arrived to the delight of moviegoers the world over. It has been roughly a little more than a year since Spider-Man (Tobey Maguire), defeated Dr. Octopus and saved the city from certain doom.
During this time, Spider-man has become New York City’s celebrated hero, and his day to day alter ego, Peter Parker, delights in his fame, while dating the love of his life, Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst).
As the film opens, Peter has decided to ask Mary Jane to be his wife, and plans to surprise her with a ring during dinner at a fancy restaurant. Mary Jane is starring in a Broadway play, and despite harsh reviews, she is living her dream and madly in love with Peter.
Things take an unexpected twist for Peter when he is attacked one night by his best friend Harry (James Franco), who blames him for the death of his father at the conclusion of the first film. Enhanced by his father’s Goblin serum, Harry is a deadly adversary for Peter who is able to fend off the attack eventually, and put into motion a series of events that will forever change his life.
When a career criminal named Flint Marko (Thomas Hayden Church), is accidentally caught in an experiment while fleeing the authorities, he becomes a living mass of sand, which enables him to start a string of robberies as “The Sandman”, and provides Spider-man with his most unusual opponent yet.
As if this was not enough, Peter must contend with a new hotshot photographer named Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), who is after a staff position at the Daily Bugle. The fact that Peter has more seniority at the paper is of little interest to Eddie, and he will stop at nothing to get the better of Peter.
At this point one would think that Peter has more than enough on his plate, but fate is about to drop an unexpected player into his life, a space based symbiote that bonds
with Peter’s costume and creates a dark black look for Spider-Man as well as an increase in his powers.
Peter becomes obsessed with his new powers, and there is a dramatic change in his persona, which does not sit well with Mary Jane. When new information is given to Peter about the death of his Uncle Ben, Peter is more than willing to use his new found abilities to exact the revenge that he craves.
Peter also has another area of interest as Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard), the daughter of the local Chief of Police has caught his eye, much to the chagrin of both Mary Jane and Gwen’s current boyfriend Eddie Brock.
This tangled web of characters soon forces Peter to take stock of his life and the choices he makes, in order to determine what truly matters to him, the love and respect of his friends, or giving into his darker side and pursing power and unending praise and adulation.
The film starts out well, and the early conflict between Peter and Harry is a brilliantly staged spectacle of sight, sound, and motion. There are also some great moments between the lead characters and Church, Howard and Grace do well with their characters, yet something about Spider-Man 3 did not click for me the way the previous two films in the series have.
Having the luxury of time from the press screener to the opening, I was able to look back at the film the past week and a half to try to determine what did not work for me, and I kept coming back to the same conclusions.
First, the film wants very much to be much darker and edgier than the other films, yet just when you think you are going to see Peter fully cross the line, the film pulls back into campy mode, and we are given scenes of Peter hamming it up as a ladies’ man, and I kid you not, doing an impromptu dance number.
While this works for comedic effect, I am supposed to believe that the darker side of Peter’s soul is being exposed, and I had a hard time thinking that his inner demons include “Saturday Night Fever” style strut down the sidewalk, and a floor show.
The second thing that bothered me was the villains, as aside from Harry as the New Goblin, both the Sandman and Venom were sadly lacking. Neither The Sandman nor Venom had over the top plots to rule the world, kill or enslave the masses, or endanger huge parts of the city as was the case with the original Green Goblin and Dr Octopus.
Rather we have one who is content to steal to fund a noble cause, and wishes only to complete this cause and have Spider-Man out of his way. The second simply wants revenge for being slighted, and does not elude the menace nor danger that the character warrants.
effects wise the film is solid and there are some great moments in the film, but to many times I thought I had seen the same sand effects years early in the “Mummy” series which lead to many cases of “been there, seen that” for me. With a budget that many claim to be the most expensive film ever made when based on current dollar values, I had expected more from the film, especially given the talented and dynamic cast, and the ample backing of the studio.
Director and series Guru Sam Raimi seems to be coasting here as one has to wonder if he used up many of his great ideas in the last two films, and was trying so hard not to repeat himself, that he lost that magic spark that made the last two films such classics.
As it stands, “Spider-Man 3” is a good film, but you can’t help but feel it could have been a better one.
During this time, Spider-man has become New York City’s celebrated hero, and his day to day alter ego, Peter Parker, delights in his fame, while dating the love of his life, Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst).
As the film opens, Peter has decided to ask Mary Jane to be his wife, and plans to surprise her with a ring during dinner at a fancy restaurant. Mary Jane is starring in a Broadway play, and despite harsh reviews, she is living her dream and madly in love with Peter.
Things take an unexpected twist for Peter when he is attacked one night by his best friend Harry (James Franco), who blames him for the death of his father at the conclusion of the first film. Enhanced by his father’s Goblin serum, Harry is a deadly adversary for Peter who is able to fend off the attack eventually, and put into motion a series of events that will forever change his life.
When a career criminal named Flint Marko (Thomas Hayden Church), is accidentally caught in an experiment while fleeing the authorities, he becomes a living mass of sand, which enables him to start a string of robberies as “The Sandman”, and provides Spider-man with his most unusual opponent yet.
As if this was not enough, Peter must contend with a new hotshot photographer named Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), who is after a staff position at the Daily Bugle. The fact that Peter has more seniority at the paper is of little interest to Eddie, and he will stop at nothing to get the better of Peter.
At this point one would think that Peter has more than enough on his plate, but fate is about to drop an unexpected player into his life, a space based symbiote that bonds
with Peter’s costume and creates a dark black look for Spider-Man as well as an increase in his powers.
Peter becomes obsessed with his new powers, and there is a dramatic change in his persona, which does not sit well with Mary Jane. When new information is given to Peter about the death of his Uncle Ben, Peter is more than willing to use his new found abilities to exact the revenge that he craves.
Peter also has another area of interest as Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard), the daughter of the local Chief of Police has caught his eye, much to the chagrin of both Mary Jane and Gwen’s current boyfriend Eddie Brock.
This tangled web of characters soon forces Peter to take stock of his life and the choices he makes, in order to determine what truly matters to him, the love and respect of his friends, or giving into his darker side and pursing power and unending praise and adulation.
The film starts out well, and the early conflict between Peter and Harry is a brilliantly staged spectacle of sight, sound, and motion. There are also some great moments between the lead characters and Church, Howard and Grace do well with their characters, yet something about Spider-Man 3 did not click for me the way the previous two films in the series have.
Having the luxury of time from the press screener to the opening, I was able to look back at the film the past week and a half to try to determine what did not work for me, and I kept coming back to the same conclusions.
First, the film wants very much to be much darker and edgier than the other films, yet just when you think you are going to see Peter fully cross the line, the film pulls back into campy mode, and we are given scenes of Peter hamming it up as a ladies’ man, and I kid you not, doing an impromptu dance number.
While this works for comedic effect, I am supposed to believe that the darker side of Peter’s soul is being exposed, and I had a hard time thinking that his inner demons include “Saturday Night Fever” style strut down the sidewalk, and a floor show.
The second thing that bothered me was the villains, as aside from Harry as the New Goblin, both the Sandman and Venom were sadly lacking. Neither The Sandman nor Venom had over the top plots to rule the world, kill or enslave the masses, or endanger huge parts of the city as was the case with the original Green Goblin and Dr Octopus.
Rather we have one who is content to steal to fund a noble cause, and wishes only to complete this cause and have Spider-Man out of his way. The second simply wants revenge for being slighted, and does not elude the menace nor danger that the character warrants.
effects wise the film is solid and there are some great moments in the film, but to many times I thought I had seen the same sand effects years early in the “Mummy” series which lead to many cases of “been there, seen that” for me. With a budget that many claim to be the most expensive film ever made when based on current dollar values, I had expected more from the film, especially given the talented and dynamic cast, and the ample backing of the studio.
Director and series Guru Sam Raimi seems to be coasting here as one has to wonder if he used up many of his great ideas in the last two films, and was trying so hard not to repeat himself, that he lost that magic spark that made the last two films such classics.
As it stands, “Spider-Man 3” is a good film, but you can’t help but feel it could have been a better one.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Misery in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/misery-by-stephen-king
<b><i>Annie Annie oh Annie please please no please dont Annie I swear to you Ill be good I swear to God Ill be good please give me a chance to be good OH ANNIE PLEASE LET ME BE GOOD -
Just a little pain. Then this nasty business will be behind us for good Paul.</b></i>
Well hot fucking damn. Is this the best book Ive read all year? <b>I think it might be.</b> I am officially a Stephen King fan. A Stephen King convert as my mother is calling me. Misery is a goddamn masterpiece. Its <i>so</i> tense. I dont know how anyone can write so well that Im actually squirming. <b>LEGIT SQUIRMING AS I READ.</b>
Misery is about a bestselling author, Paul Sheldon, who, after celebrating his completion of his next (and best) book, drinks a little too much champagne and gets himself into a nasty car accident in the middle of nowhere. He wakes to find his legs shattered but splintered (splinted???) in a mysterious house. Luckily, or unluckily, hes found himself saved and in the capable hands of his number one fan and ex-nurse, Annie Wilkes.
I put off reading Misery for, oh I dont know, maybe 5 years? I watched the film, of course, because disliking a film can be down to a number of variables, the wrong director, actors you dislike, bad script etc, but not liking a book, <i>a Stephen King book</i>, is down to one and one thing only, the author. And I was <i>so</i> terrified I wouldnt like Stephen King! Honestly, terrified is this right word for it. I didnt want to turn around in a house, no, a society, that claims Stephen King is a modern day Charles Dickens, of sorts, and say nah, not that into him myself. But lo and behold, I ended up liking both the film and the book, thank Christ. The book more so than the film, but isnt that usually the case? Although the actors for both Paul and Annie in the film version were <i>spot on.</i>
I dont think Ive ever been so vocal whilst reading a book. Misery had me yelping and oohing and arring and laughing and yucking all the way through. Kings writing is so vivid you <i>are</i> Paul Sheldon for the duration of the book. Youre Paul, rolling around in his wheelchair, holding your breath and crying and sweating, hoping that car you hear isnt Annies. Hoping shes holding those Godsent Novril tablets every few hours to subdue your pain. Wondering how the hell youre ever going to be able to escape. You completely immerse yourself in the nail biting story, page by page. This is a perfect novel from start to finish, thats all I have left to say.
If youve never read Stephen King before, start with Misery. <b>I double donkey dare you.</b>
<b><i>Annie Annie oh Annie please please no please dont Annie I swear to you Ill be good I swear to God Ill be good please give me a chance to be good OH ANNIE PLEASE LET ME BE GOOD -
Just a little pain. Then this nasty business will be behind us for good Paul.</b></i>
Well hot fucking damn. Is this the best book Ive read all year? <b>I think it might be.</b> I am officially a Stephen King fan. A Stephen King convert as my mother is calling me. Misery is a goddamn masterpiece. Its <i>so</i> tense. I dont know how anyone can write so well that Im actually squirming. <b>LEGIT SQUIRMING AS I READ.</b>
Misery is about a bestselling author, Paul Sheldon, who, after celebrating his completion of his next (and best) book, drinks a little too much champagne and gets himself into a nasty car accident in the middle of nowhere. He wakes to find his legs shattered but splintered (splinted???) in a mysterious house. Luckily, or unluckily, hes found himself saved and in the capable hands of his number one fan and ex-nurse, Annie Wilkes.
I put off reading Misery for, oh I dont know, maybe 5 years? I watched the film, of course, because disliking a film can be down to a number of variables, the wrong director, actors you dislike, bad script etc, but not liking a book, <i>a Stephen King book</i>, is down to one and one thing only, the author. And I was <i>so</i> terrified I wouldnt like Stephen King! Honestly, terrified is this right word for it. I didnt want to turn around in a house, no, a society, that claims Stephen King is a modern day Charles Dickens, of sorts, and say nah, not that into him myself. But lo and behold, I ended up liking both the film and the book, thank Christ. The book more so than the film, but isnt that usually the case? Although the actors for both Paul and Annie in the film version were <i>spot on.</i>
I dont think Ive ever been so vocal whilst reading a book. Misery had me yelping and oohing and arring and laughing and yucking all the way through. Kings writing is so vivid you <i>are</i> Paul Sheldon for the duration of the book. Youre Paul, rolling around in his wheelchair, holding your breath and crying and sweating, hoping that car you hear isnt Annies. Hoping shes holding those Godsent Novril tablets every few hours to subdue your pain. Wondering how the hell youre ever going to be able to escape. You completely immerse yourself in the nail biting story, page by page. This is a perfect novel from start to finish, thats all I have left to say.
If youve never read Stephen King before, start with Misery. <b>I double donkey dare you.</b>
JT (287 KP) rated Session 9 (2001) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Looking back I’ve written a number of horror film reviews which, probably highlights what my favourite genre is? I’ve not been into torture porn or serious amounts of gore. I don’t mind it in small doses, but I prefer films that get under your skin – case in point, Session 9.
In order to satisfy the millennials the majority of horror films today get their thrills from cheap jump scares. But real terror comes from the things that we can relate to. Things that go ‘bump‘ in the night or the sense that we are being watched. This for me, is real terror. Directed by Brad Anderson, Session 9 embodies all of that to perfection.
Despite being made in 2001 and with a low return at the box office, it has been able to creep out audiences years later.
An asbestos cleaning crew are set the task of clearing the abandoned Danvers State Hospital, a job that needs to be done within a week. Company owner Gordon (Peter Mullan) has put a lot of pressure on his team, consisting of Mike (Stephen Gevedon), Phil (David Caruso), Hank (Josh Lucas), and Jeff (Brendan Sexton III), to meet the deadline and collect a bonus. It’s pressure that starts to spill over right from the off.
The hospital is creepy as hell and even in the daylight the crew are plunged into darkness, which doesn’t sit well with Jeff who has a serious case of nyctophobia. They also have to deal with in-fighting amongst the group. On top of the tight deadline Gordon is struggling with the stress of raising a newborn child and arguments with his wife have not helped matters and slowly he becomes dissociated from the group. Meanwhile Mike stumbles across some tapes (nine of them) which are session interviews with a former patient called Mary Hobbes who has multiple personalities, that over the course of each session start to come out.
Phil (David Caruso) & Jeff (Brendan Sexton III) investigate the depths of the hospital
Like Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining – the location starts to take hold of each of the men, sending them spiraling into a world of personal madness. A number of subplots become interconnected the longer the film goes on and the pacing, while slow for some horror fans, is brilliantly orchestrated for those with patience. Despite being made in 2001 and with a low return at the box office, it has been able to creep out audiences years later.
What makes the film even more terrifying is the setting. The film was shot in the actual Danvers State Hospital so it needed little doing to it in terms of effects. The hospital was said to be the birth place of the prefrontal lobotomy (something which is referenced in the film), and part of me thinks that the fear on the actors faces as they walk the halls was in fact genuine terror. If that is the case then it only adds to the horror.
Session 9 will stay with you long after the credits. It doesn’t rely on heavy gore or CGI and builds tension with what you think you can see and at times – what you can’t.
In order to satisfy the millennials the majority of horror films today get their thrills from cheap jump scares. But real terror comes from the things that we can relate to. Things that go ‘bump‘ in the night or the sense that we are being watched. This for me, is real terror. Directed by Brad Anderson, Session 9 embodies all of that to perfection.
Despite being made in 2001 and with a low return at the box office, it has been able to creep out audiences years later.
An asbestos cleaning crew are set the task of clearing the abandoned Danvers State Hospital, a job that needs to be done within a week. Company owner Gordon (Peter Mullan) has put a lot of pressure on his team, consisting of Mike (Stephen Gevedon), Phil (David Caruso), Hank (Josh Lucas), and Jeff (Brendan Sexton III), to meet the deadline and collect a bonus. It’s pressure that starts to spill over right from the off.
The hospital is creepy as hell and even in the daylight the crew are plunged into darkness, which doesn’t sit well with Jeff who has a serious case of nyctophobia. They also have to deal with in-fighting amongst the group. On top of the tight deadline Gordon is struggling with the stress of raising a newborn child and arguments with his wife have not helped matters and slowly he becomes dissociated from the group. Meanwhile Mike stumbles across some tapes (nine of them) which are session interviews with a former patient called Mary Hobbes who has multiple personalities, that over the course of each session start to come out.
Phil (David Caruso) & Jeff (Brendan Sexton III) investigate the depths of the hospital
Like Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining – the location starts to take hold of each of the men, sending them spiraling into a world of personal madness. A number of subplots become interconnected the longer the film goes on and the pacing, while slow for some horror fans, is brilliantly orchestrated for those with patience. Despite being made in 2001 and with a low return at the box office, it has been able to creep out audiences years later.
What makes the film even more terrifying is the setting. The film was shot in the actual Danvers State Hospital so it needed little doing to it in terms of effects. The hospital was said to be the birth place of the prefrontal lobotomy (something which is referenced in the film), and part of me thinks that the fear on the actors faces as they walk the halls was in fact genuine terror. If that is the case then it only adds to the horror.
Session 9 will stay with you long after the credits. It doesn’t rely on heavy gore or CGI and builds tension with what you think you can see and at times – what you can’t.
156Reviews (7 KP) rated I Lost My Body (2019) in Movies
May 1, 2020
It wasn't surprising that I Lost My Body, a story about a severed hand that is trying to find its way back to its owner, didn't win “Best Animated feature” at this years Oscars. Originality seems to be quite low on the Academy's criteria. But it was more telling that it lost to Toy Story 4, a fourth instalment of a franchise that began in 1995. Sadly for director Jeremy Clapin, the decision was the right one.
'I Lost My Body' follows Naoufel (Hakim Faris), a young Parisian child with overflowing potential, whose objective in life is to grow up to be “An Astronaut and a Concert Pianist”. Naoufel's life changes direction dramatically when his parents are killed in a car accident and he is placed into foster care. As he grows up, his goals change from playing in concert halls to delivering pizzas in time so his boss won't dock his pay. It's during this endeavour that he “meets” Gabrielle (Victoire Du Bois), who is introduced as just a voice on her buildings intercom but instantly captivates Naoufel and sets him on a mission to meet her in person. After lightly stalking her, he takes a job in her uncle's carpentry business begins courting her with some success. Most of this happens before the half way mark.
All of this is enough for any film, for an animation it's a lot to do, for a viewer it's a lot to take in, but there is even more going on, there is a hand on the loose.
Surprisingly, this is where the film falls short, where it tells the story about the hand. After escaping a medical freezer the hand sets out on a journey to find its body, bit by bit covering the ground that the Naoufel timeline has already gone through and, if anything, distracting from the interesting aspects of the plot. Whether it's through writing (Clapin also wrote the screenplay alongside Guillaume Laurant) or the animation, these scenes lack any stakes. The hand falls off buildings, survives being crushed in a garbage truck, is attacked by rats, and so on, but still remains whole. As gruesome as it sounds, if the hand lost a piece here, a fingertip there, it would truly make it seem like a journey with consequence. Instead the hand seems invincible, it doesn't overcome any of its trials because it was always going to survive, and sadly, makes this side of plot the more redundant the more it progresses.
Given the amount of time it takes to make an animation, it's a shame to leave any of it on the cutting room floor, but by the end of this film you'll be wishing there was a bit more down there, mostly containing images of a severed hand. I believe there is half a great film here, the reviews it's received from around the world show us that. Unfortunately I also believe there is a very average half a film here, that doesn't do enough to justify its existence, and definitely isn't better than Toy Story 4.
'I Lost My Body' follows Naoufel (Hakim Faris), a young Parisian child with overflowing potential, whose objective in life is to grow up to be “An Astronaut and a Concert Pianist”. Naoufel's life changes direction dramatically when his parents are killed in a car accident and he is placed into foster care. As he grows up, his goals change from playing in concert halls to delivering pizzas in time so his boss won't dock his pay. It's during this endeavour that he “meets” Gabrielle (Victoire Du Bois), who is introduced as just a voice on her buildings intercom but instantly captivates Naoufel and sets him on a mission to meet her in person. After lightly stalking her, he takes a job in her uncle's carpentry business begins courting her with some success. Most of this happens before the half way mark.
All of this is enough for any film, for an animation it's a lot to do, for a viewer it's a lot to take in, but there is even more going on, there is a hand on the loose.
Surprisingly, this is where the film falls short, where it tells the story about the hand. After escaping a medical freezer the hand sets out on a journey to find its body, bit by bit covering the ground that the Naoufel timeline has already gone through and, if anything, distracting from the interesting aspects of the plot. Whether it's through writing (Clapin also wrote the screenplay alongside Guillaume Laurant) or the animation, these scenes lack any stakes. The hand falls off buildings, survives being crushed in a garbage truck, is attacked by rats, and so on, but still remains whole. As gruesome as it sounds, if the hand lost a piece here, a fingertip there, it would truly make it seem like a journey with consequence. Instead the hand seems invincible, it doesn't overcome any of its trials because it was always going to survive, and sadly, makes this side of plot the more redundant the more it progresses.
Given the amount of time it takes to make an animation, it's a shame to leave any of it on the cutting room floor, but by the end of this film you'll be wishing there was a bit more down there, mostly containing images of a severed hand. I believe there is half a great film here, the reviews it's received from around the world show us that. Unfortunately I also believe there is a very average half a film here, that doesn't do enough to justify its existence, and definitely isn't better than Toy Story 4.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Harriet (2019) in Movies
Feb 29, 2020
Cynthia Erivo - mesmerising (2 more)
Great ensemble cast.
Truly uplifting story
A Crime has been committed
I'm not talking here about the criminal act of Edward Brodess (Mike Marunde) at the start of the film, tearing up perfectly legal documents that prove that slave 'Minty' (Cynthia Erivo) should be released from servitude. No. I'm talking about the 2020 Academy Awards selection.
This was just about the one and only mainstream film that I didn't get to see before this year's awards, and on catching up with it now I feel positively cross with the Academy. Were they looking for an excuse NOT to pour praise on a black-heavy film? Surely not! And yet here we have a standout performance from Cynthia Erivo, that should have been (imho) a more prominent challenger to Renée Zellweger; together with a superb supporting actor performance by Leslie Odom Jr. as her underground railway "Fat Controller" in Philadelphia.
And don't get me started on how or why Erivo didn't get the Oscar for best song with "Stand Up"! (And as both Erivo and Elton John are British, I'm not being partisan here). But did you HEAR and compare those two songs on the night?
The story is based (many would say 'very loosely based') on the amazing life story of Harriet Tubman, who in the run-up to the American Civil War made it her mission to free slaves. Illegally trapped herself on the Brodess farm in Maryland, 'Minty' plans to flee north leaving behind her husband John Tubman (Zackary Momoh), her father (an excellent Clarke Peters), her mother (Vanessa Bell Calloway) and four of her six siblings. It's a perilous pursuit, since being caught by the posse and their hunting dogs will mean severe beatings if not worse.
Fortunately, Minty has an ally.... God. For since a skull fracture, handed out by Gideon Brodess (Joe Alwyn, on great form), at the age of 13, Minty has had seizures where God has shown her flashes of future events.
"Be Free or Die" are the options. Which way will the dice fall for Minty, now reborn as Harriet, as she embarks on ever more perilous missions?
I just loved this movie. I thought Cynthia Erivo was mesmerising as the woman of great substance (you might say, 'True Brit'). There's not been a single Erivo film yet shown that I haven't been impressed with, with "Bad Times at the El Royale" being a particular favourite.
And what a fabulous ensemble cast! Aside from the folks mentioned above, other key performances come from Vondie Curtis-Hall as the Reverend Green (no, not "in the conservatory, with the lead piping") who delivers some fabulous gospel singing, Janelle Monáe (of "Hidden Figures" fame) as the kindly (but fictional) Marie Buchanon who is a friend in need, and Henry Hunter Hall who we first meet as the tricksy bounty hunter Walter.
Also praiseworthy is the score by Terence Blanchard, which seems to completely fit the mood of the movie, and the slightly blue-washed landscape cinematography of John Toll.
Kasi Lemmons - a lady whose previous work I'm not familiar with - directs with style, and (although I appreciate that the Best Director Oscar category only has five names in it) she must have been disappointed not to have been nominated for this. Lemmons also contributed to the story/script from Gregory Allen Howard ("Remember the Titans").
Why the hate on IMDB for this? The user reviews seem to be full of hateful 1* reviews, complaining of perverting the historical record. I can only conclude that this cohort is composed of a) black people genuinely upset about the portrayal of Tubman (which I can respect) and b) racists who are deadly opposed to the message the film portrays and looking for an excuse to bring it down.
Ignore them! If you change the name of the lead character to a fictional one and ignore the "based on a true story" angle, this is a genuinely uplifting and inspiring film. I was sat on a crowded plane, but I genuinely teared up at the finale (and particularly the very final shot) of this movie. It really spoke to me.
Recommended..... dig it out on a streaming service near you and make your own mind up.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/29/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-harriet-2019/. Thanks).
This was just about the one and only mainstream film that I didn't get to see before this year's awards, and on catching up with it now I feel positively cross with the Academy. Were they looking for an excuse NOT to pour praise on a black-heavy film? Surely not! And yet here we have a standout performance from Cynthia Erivo, that should have been (imho) a more prominent challenger to Renée Zellweger; together with a superb supporting actor performance by Leslie Odom Jr. as her underground railway "Fat Controller" in Philadelphia.
And don't get me started on how or why Erivo didn't get the Oscar for best song with "Stand Up"! (And as both Erivo and Elton John are British, I'm not being partisan here). But did you HEAR and compare those two songs on the night?
The story is based (many would say 'very loosely based') on the amazing life story of Harriet Tubman, who in the run-up to the American Civil War made it her mission to free slaves. Illegally trapped herself on the Brodess farm in Maryland, 'Minty' plans to flee north leaving behind her husband John Tubman (Zackary Momoh), her father (an excellent Clarke Peters), her mother (Vanessa Bell Calloway) and four of her six siblings. It's a perilous pursuit, since being caught by the posse and their hunting dogs will mean severe beatings if not worse.
Fortunately, Minty has an ally.... God. For since a skull fracture, handed out by Gideon Brodess (Joe Alwyn, on great form), at the age of 13, Minty has had seizures where God has shown her flashes of future events.
"Be Free or Die" are the options. Which way will the dice fall for Minty, now reborn as Harriet, as she embarks on ever more perilous missions?
I just loved this movie. I thought Cynthia Erivo was mesmerising as the woman of great substance (you might say, 'True Brit'). There's not been a single Erivo film yet shown that I haven't been impressed with, with "Bad Times at the El Royale" being a particular favourite.
And what a fabulous ensemble cast! Aside from the folks mentioned above, other key performances come from Vondie Curtis-Hall as the Reverend Green (no, not "in the conservatory, with the lead piping") who delivers some fabulous gospel singing, Janelle Monáe (of "Hidden Figures" fame) as the kindly (but fictional) Marie Buchanon who is a friend in need, and Henry Hunter Hall who we first meet as the tricksy bounty hunter Walter.
Also praiseworthy is the score by Terence Blanchard, which seems to completely fit the mood of the movie, and the slightly blue-washed landscape cinematography of John Toll.
Kasi Lemmons - a lady whose previous work I'm not familiar with - directs with style, and (although I appreciate that the Best Director Oscar category only has five names in it) she must have been disappointed not to have been nominated for this. Lemmons also contributed to the story/script from Gregory Allen Howard ("Remember the Titans").
Why the hate on IMDB for this? The user reviews seem to be full of hateful 1* reviews, complaining of perverting the historical record. I can only conclude that this cohort is composed of a) black people genuinely upset about the portrayal of Tubman (which I can respect) and b) racists who are deadly opposed to the message the film portrays and looking for an excuse to bring it down.
Ignore them! If you change the name of the lead character to a fictional one and ignore the "based on a true story" angle, this is a genuinely uplifting and inspiring film. I was sat on a crowded plane, but I genuinely teared up at the finale (and particularly the very final shot) of this movie. It really spoke to me.
Recommended..... dig it out on a streaming service near you and make your own mind up.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/29/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-harriet-2019/. Thanks).
Erika (17789 KP) rated The Dead Don't Die (2019) in Movies
Jun 15, 2019
Hilariously Self-Aware
Zombie-comedies are the only kind of zombie movies I enjoy, and this was no exception.
Bill Murray (who was previously in Zombieland), and Adam Driver are the main characters, as cops in a small town (maybe in NY?), and their chemistry is deadpan and hilarious. Driver mentions multiple times throughout the film that 'This is going to end badly', finally Murray's character asks him why he keeps saying that. Driver's character responds that he read the entire script. Murray proceeds to call Jim Jarmusch an a-hole, since he didn't get the whole script. I about died of laughter over that.
Tilda Swinton's character is completely whack-a-doo, and cuts off zombies' heads with ease with a samurai sword. Because, as everyone knows, kill the head.
The entire movie is absurdist, and the humor might not be for everyone. It's gotten really bad reviews from a lot of critics, so I may be in the minority. Chloë Sevigny's character was the only one that completely annoyed me.
It's ultimately an homage to zombie films and, of course, an allegory of modern times, with people being absorbed in their mobile phones, unaware of the real world around them.
Bill Murray (who was previously in Zombieland), and Adam Driver are the main characters, as cops in a small town (maybe in NY?), and their chemistry is deadpan and hilarious. Driver mentions multiple times throughout the film that 'This is going to end badly', finally Murray's character asks him why he keeps saying that. Driver's character responds that he read the entire script. Murray proceeds to call Jim Jarmusch an a-hole, since he didn't get the whole script. I about died of laughter over that.
Tilda Swinton's character is completely whack-a-doo, and cuts off zombies' heads with ease with a samurai sword. Because, as everyone knows, kill the head.
The entire movie is absurdist, and the humor might not be for everyone. It's gotten really bad reviews from a lot of critics, so I may be in the minority. Chloë Sevigny's character was the only one that completely annoyed me.
It's ultimately an homage to zombie films and, of course, an allegory of modern times, with people being absorbed in their mobile phones, unaware of the real world around them.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Annihilation (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2018
Heavy sci-fi greatness!
Let me start by saying I love movies love 2001: A Space Odyssey, Memento, Under the Skin, even The Holy Mountain or The Fountain. In other words, movies that are nonlinear, vague, ambiguous or maybe lack a large amount of point.
That being said, based on reviews and some I had read I had kind of expected this to be a crossbreed of The Mist and Aliens and it was kind of that, but so much more.
I love "heavy" sci-fi like Solaris, 2001, Interstellar, movies that make you think and just aren't about explosions and CGI. This movie does have exceptional visuals and the music score is amazing, but the story and ideas here are very compelling and not something you see in most movies made nowadays.
I am not putting down those who disliked the film, I love a great movie debate and respect others' opinions. I just thought this movie is exceptionally unique and striking both visually and emotionally.
I was really invested in the story and couldn't wait to see how it turned out.
If you love movies that are out there, give this one a shot.
That being said, based on reviews and some I had read I had kind of expected this to be a crossbreed of The Mist and Aliens and it was kind of that, but so much more.
I love "heavy" sci-fi like Solaris, 2001, Interstellar, movies that make you think and just aren't about explosions and CGI. This movie does have exceptional visuals and the music score is amazing, but the story and ideas here are very compelling and not something you see in most movies made nowadays.
I am not putting down those who disliked the film, I love a great movie debate and respect others' opinions. I just thought this movie is exceptionally unique and striking both visually and emotionally.
I was really invested in the story and couldn't wait to see how it turned out.
If you love movies that are out there, give this one a shot.
