Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Bombshell (2019) in Movies
Jan 31, 2020
Well acted - and important - film
The new Jay Roach film, BOMBSHELL - the Fox News sex scandal film - focuses on the struggles of 3 female protagonists - Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman), Megyn Kelly (Charlize Theron) and Kayla Pospisil (Margot Robbie) - as they attempt to climb (or stay at the top of) the Corporate Ladder while battling sexism and a toxic work culture at Fox News. It is a powerful story that is a necessary tale in the "#MeToo" era that demands viewers to stand up and take notice.
And with powerhouse actresses leading this film - standing up and taking notice is an easy thing to do.
Based on factual events, BOMBSHELL portrays the sexism that female on air personalities encounter at FoxNews - a place filled with "good ol' boys" who patronize and sexualize the females in the office to the detriment of the females and the benefit and gratification of the males. Surprisingly, they are joined in this by some other females in the office who figure "better them than me". At the top of the office - and the toxic work culture - is Roger Ailes (an almost unrecognizable John Lithgow) who is hailed by Fox as the man who can create the news - and profits.
Kidman, Theron and Robbie are well cast in their roles, showing nuance, concern and strength as these negative conditions rear their ugly heads over and over again. All 3 produce powerhouse performances - certainly up there amongst the best of their careers - and Theron and Robbie are well deserved Oscar nominees for their performances. Kidman was NOT nominated for her performance, but she is just as deserving as the other two.
But, for me, the real surprise - and the best performance - of this film belongs to Lithgow's portrayal of Ailes. His characterization shows a real wolf, taking advantage of his status and position, to prey upon those in his office. It is a sly, evil performance of a sly, evil man. What impressed me the most is that this performance - and this character - could have easily gone "over the top" into "pure villain" territory and Lithgow resists this temptation - to the betterment of this film, but to the detriment of his Oscar chances.
As written by Charles Randolph (THE BIG SHORT) this film has a pacing/theming issue for the first 1/2 hour of this film. Is it a serious film? Is it sarcastic look at toxic masculinity work culture? Is it an indictment on our current society as a whole? Randolph's script uses some of the same tactics as THE BIG SHORT, having performers breaking the 4th wall and commenting and narrating the events while looking directly at the camera. While this tactic worked very well in THE BIG SHORT (if you haven't seen this film, I highly recommend you do), it works less well here and Director Jay Roach (TRUMBO) wisely drops that "gimmick" after the first 1/2 hour.
This film is filled with wonderful character actors making extended (and powerful) cameos. The likes of Kate McKinnon, Allyson Janney, Holland Taylor, Connie Britton, Stephen Root, Malcolm McDowell, Robin Weigert, Mark Duplass, Richard Kind, Mark Moses and Tricia Helfer all contribute greatly to the film while shining in the little screen time they have.
A necessary - and powerful - film filled with tremendous performances that shine a light on a problem that is pervasive today. Which makes this film a must watch - as difficult as it is to watch at times.
Letter Grade: A- (the first 1/2 hour brings it down a point)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
And with powerhouse actresses leading this film - standing up and taking notice is an easy thing to do.
Based on factual events, BOMBSHELL portrays the sexism that female on air personalities encounter at FoxNews - a place filled with "good ol' boys" who patronize and sexualize the females in the office to the detriment of the females and the benefit and gratification of the males. Surprisingly, they are joined in this by some other females in the office who figure "better them than me". At the top of the office - and the toxic work culture - is Roger Ailes (an almost unrecognizable John Lithgow) who is hailed by Fox as the man who can create the news - and profits.
Kidman, Theron and Robbie are well cast in their roles, showing nuance, concern and strength as these negative conditions rear their ugly heads over and over again. All 3 produce powerhouse performances - certainly up there amongst the best of their careers - and Theron and Robbie are well deserved Oscar nominees for their performances. Kidman was NOT nominated for her performance, but she is just as deserving as the other two.
But, for me, the real surprise - and the best performance - of this film belongs to Lithgow's portrayal of Ailes. His characterization shows a real wolf, taking advantage of his status and position, to prey upon those in his office. It is a sly, evil performance of a sly, evil man. What impressed me the most is that this performance - and this character - could have easily gone "over the top" into "pure villain" territory and Lithgow resists this temptation - to the betterment of this film, but to the detriment of his Oscar chances.
As written by Charles Randolph (THE BIG SHORT) this film has a pacing/theming issue for the first 1/2 hour of this film. Is it a serious film? Is it sarcastic look at toxic masculinity work culture? Is it an indictment on our current society as a whole? Randolph's script uses some of the same tactics as THE BIG SHORT, having performers breaking the 4th wall and commenting and narrating the events while looking directly at the camera. While this tactic worked very well in THE BIG SHORT (if you haven't seen this film, I highly recommend you do), it works less well here and Director Jay Roach (TRUMBO) wisely drops that "gimmick" after the first 1/2 hour.
This film is filled with wonderful character actors making extended (and powerful) cameos. The likes of Kate McKinnon, Allyson Janney, Holland Taylor, Connie Britton, Stephen Root, Malcolm McDowell, Robin Weigert, Mark Duplass, Richard Kind, Mark Moses and Tricia Helfer all contribute greatly to the film while shining in the little screen time they have.
A necessary - and powerful - film filled with tremendous performances that shine a light on a problem that is pervasive today. Which makes this film a must watch - as difficult as it is to watch at times.
Letter Grade: A- (the first 1/2 hour brings it down a point)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Catwoman: Soulstealer - DC Icons Book 3 in Books
Oct 25, 2018
So I needed a "book about a heist" for the PopSugar 2018 Reading Challenge, and naturally, Catwoman fits the bill. It wouldn't be a Catwoman novel/cartoon/graphic novel without a heist! Several, in fact, in this instance. And she teams up with Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn to pull them off, even though she doesn't seem to actually need the girls in this book. I love that Maas chose to include them, because Ivy/Harley/Catwoman is one of my all-time favorite team-ups. The book also delves into the relationship between Ivy and Harley, and Harley's dysfunctional dependence on the Joker (who's in Arkham for this book). I loved seeing that.
Interestingly, Batman doesn't show, other than a few phone calls with Luke Fox, Lucius Fox's son. Luke takes the traditional role of Batman-as-Catwoman's-love-interest, but as Batwing, a sort-of Robin. (Maybe I read too many comics? Nah.) The switch was surprising; it's always Catwoman and Batman, Selina and Bruce. Except when it's Talia and Bruce, I suppose.
I do wonder if they're going to do an ensemble cast novel after these first four books. (Wonder Woman: Warbringer, Batman: Nightwalker, and Superman: Dawnbreaker being the other three.) Superman doesn't come out until January, but the first three have been very disconnected from one another. Wonder Woman wasn't even mentioned in Batman or Catwoman. It seems odd to have them as a series, but never mention one another in each book? That, or the Superman book is going to tie the other three together, which seems like a disservice to Superman.
Anyway. I really liked Luke Fox as Batwing - the book touched, just a little bit, on racial issues, and how even as an obscenely rich black man he's not entirely exempt from those. In one scene he worries about the color of his skin being seen through damage to his batsuit, and cops realizing he's black. It's a sober reminder that even in a city beset by evil clowns, it's still set in the United States and we still have those racist systems in place.
The banter between Luke and Selina, and Selina and Harley and Ivy, is fantastic. I haven't actually read any of Sarah J. Maas' books - I know, I know - but if they're like Catwoman, I should probably give in and do so. So far, Wonder Woman is still my favorite of the DC Icons series (which is no surprise, as I love Leigh Bardugo) but Catwoman is really good.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Interestingly, Batman doesn't show, other than a few phone calls with Luke Fox, Lucius Fox's son. Luke takes the traditional role of Batman-as-Catwoman's-love-interest, but as Batwing, a sort-of Robin. (Maybe I read too many comics? Nah.) The switch was surprising; it's always Catwoman and Batman, Selina and Bruce. Except when it's Talia and Bruce, I suppose.
I do wonder if they're going to do an ensemble cast novel after these first four books. (Wonder Woman: Warbringer, Batman: Nightwalker, and Superman: Dawnbreaker being the other three.) Superman doesn't come out until January, but the first three have been very disconnected from one another. Wonder Woman wasn't even mentioned in Batman or Catwoman. It seems odd to have them as a series, but never mention one another in each book? That, or the Superman book is going to tie the other three together, which seems like a disservice to Superman.
Anyway. I really liked Luke Fox as Batwing - the book touched, just a little bit, on racial issues, and how even as an obscenely rich black man he's not entirely exempt from those. In one scene he worries about the color of his skin being seen through damage to his batsuit, and cops realizing he's black. It's a sober reminder that even in a city beset by evil clowns, it's still set in the United States and we still have those racist systems in place.
The banter between Luke and Selina, and Selina and Harley and Ivy, is fantastic. I haven't actually read any of Sarah J. Maas' books - I know, I know - but if they're like Catwoman, I should probably give in and do so. So far, Wonder Woman is still my favorite of the DC Icons series (which is no surprise, as I love Leigh Bardugo) but Catwoman is really good.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Road Not Taken
Games
App
"It looks like a cute fairy tale, but this is a turn-based game that's thorny with challenge and...
Countdown 1945
Book
From Chris Wallace, the veteran journalist and anchor of Fox News Sunday, comes an electrifying...
Lee KM Pallatina (951 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jan 3, 2020
Disney+ (Ha, get it)
Although this contains spoilers, its doesn't differ much from the original plot (like at all).
In a tradition that we have now become accustomed to when it comes to disney, this live action adaptation seemingly fails to hit home like the original animated classic.
Parts of the songs were missing, beyonce as nala felt empty in some parts.
This movie sticks to the original story & some great voice overs in most cases.
Although it's something I'd happily watch again, I'd rather wait 20 mins for my vhs tape to rewind and sit through the trailers (and that's after I've gone through the trouble of setting up my vcr) and watch the animated version.
I know that a live action adaptation is suppose to go for the realistic look, but would it really be that bad to have made the characters look exactly like their animated counterparts?? Make the bird blue, give scar a black mane etc.
Absolutely loved the timon and pumba scenes. (Definitely wanna see a live action lion king 3: Hakuna Mutata and maybe Robin hood (fox version lol) )
Overall a 7/10 (ish)
In a tradition that we have now become accustomed to when it comes to disney, this live action adaptation seemingly fails to hit home like the original animated classic.
Parts of the songs were missing, beyonce as nala felt empty in some parts.
This movie sticks to the original story & some great voice overs in most cases.
Although it's something I'd happily watch again, I'd rather wait 20 mins for my vhs tape to rewind and sit through the trailers (and that's after I've gone through the trouble of setting up my vcr) and watch the animated version.
I know that a live action adaptation is suppose to go for the realistic look, but would it really be that bad to have made the characters look exactly like their animated counterparts?? Make the bird blue, give scar a black mane etc.
Absolutely loved the timon and pumba scenes. (Definitely wanna see a live action lion king 3: Hakuna Mutata and maybe Robin hood (fox version lol) )
Overall a 7/10 (ish)
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Wolverine (2013) in Movies
Jul 30, 2019
An ok film that could have been so much more.
Here we have the 6th entry into the X-Men franchise, and the second solo outing for Wolverine.
I, like many comic fans, was thrilled when it was announced that this film would be diving into Logan's time in Japan. It's arguably one of the strongest solo Wolverine storylines from the comic!
The finished film however misses the mark. Not completely - remnants of the comic are left intact, buts it's clear that the studio meddled once again. When The Wolverine is concentrating on the dialogue heavy scenes, it's good. When it throws Logan against ninjas, it's (mostly) good.
However, FOX obviously didn't have enough faith in this as a whole, and opted to push James Mangold in the direction of dodgy CGI orgies.
The climatic battle against a massive CGI robot ninja (referred to as Silver Samurai - the bloody cheek), is so out of place, that it nearly ruins the whole film.
I feel that James Mangold is not to blame. He clearly has respect for the source material, and isn't about big CGI blowouts - he would go on to direct the stellar Logan a few years later.
A wasted opportunity then, and a storyline I really hope Marvel Studios revisits again in the future
I, like many comic fans, was thrilled when it was announced that this film would be diving into Logan's time in Japan. It's arguably one of the strongest solo Wolverine storylines from the comic!
The finished film however misses the mark. Not completely - remnants of the comic are left intact, buts it's clear that the studio meddled once again. When The Wolverine is concentrating on the dialogue heavy scenes, it's good. When it throws Logan against ninjas, it's (mostly) good.
However, FOX obviously didn't have enough faith in this as a whole, and opted to push James Mangold in the direction of dodgy CGI orgies.
The climatic battle against a massive CGI robot ninja (referred to as Silver Samurai - the bloody cheek), is so out of place, that it nearly ruins the whole film.
I feel that James Mangold is not to blame. He clearly has respect for the source material, and isn't about big CGI blowouts - he would go on to direct the stellar Logan a few years later.
A wasted opportunity then, and a storyline I really hope Marvel Studios revisits again in the future
Animal Memory for Children
Education and Games
App
The best matching & learning animals memory game for kids! All chapters for free now. "Animal...
The Life and Death of Lord Erroll: The Truth Behind the Happy Valley Murder
Book
The true story of the life and mysterious murder of the most talked-about and glamorous member of...
Drawing Blood: Forty Five Years of Scarfe
6.0
Rate It
Book
This is a truly exceptional collection of drawings from one of our most revered cultural...
Wire Style: 45 New Jewelry Designs: No. 2
Book
With a variety of metals including silver, copper, brass, steel, and colored wire, Wire Style 2...