Search
Beatriz (17 KP) rated 1408 (2007) in Movies
Feb 22, 2019
1408
1408 is a 2007 American psychological horror film based on Stephen King's 1999 short story of the same name.
It tells the story about a man that specialises in going to places with paranormal events and longs to find something that actually scares him. So he goes to the room 1408 in the Dolphin Hotel.
Its a genious psycological horror .
Here are some facts i found about the film ...
-The bottle that Gerald Olin offers Mike Enslin is named "Les Cinquant Sept Décès". In French, it means literally
"The fifty seven deaths". And just after that we learn that in the room 1408 there were 56 deaths. So we could have guessed that Mike's fate was "written".
-When the clock starts counting down from 60:00, the movie ends exactly one hour later.
-There are many references to the number "13" throughout the movie. The room is numbered "1408", add each number together equals 13. The room is on the 14th floor,
and the Hotel skips the 13th floor, so the room is technically on the 13th floor. The room's key lock also has "6214" etched into it, which adds up to 13.
And the first death was in the year 1912, which adds to 13.
- It has two alternative endings
It tells the story about a man that specialises in going to places with paranormal events and longs to find something that actually scares him. So he goes to the room 1408 in the Dolphin Hotel.
Its a genious psycological horror .
Here are some facts i found about the film ...
-The bottle that Gerald Olin offers Mike Enslin is named "Les Cinquant Sept Décès". In French, it means literally
"The fifty seven deaths". And just after that we learn that in the room 1408 there were 56 deaths. So we could have guessed that Mike's fate was "written".
-When the clock starts counting down from 60:00, the movie ends exactly one hour later.
-There are many references to the number "13" throughout the movie. The room is numbered "1408", add each number together equals 13. The room is on the 14th floor,
and the Hotel skips the 13th floor, so the room is technically on the 13th floor. The room's key lock also has "6214" etched into it, which adds up to 13.
And the first death was in the year 1912, which adds to 13.
- It has two alternative endings
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Snowpiercer in TV
Jul 14, 2020
In an attempt to stop global warming the world was frozen. Now the only remaining people live aboard the Snowpiercer, a train 1001 carriages long that continually circles the world.
Snowpiercer is based on a french comic series. There are three comics set before the series which is set 7 years after the extinction event (When the world froze) then another comic, then a movie (15 years after the EE) then two more comics, this means that if, like me, you have seen the film first you will know that there are some limits to what can happen in the series.
Like the film the series is foremost a commentary on class with the train having three official classes, 1st, 2nd and 3rd, the unofficial 'Night Car' and the tailys, a large group of stowaways who live in the tail of the train.
Snowpiercer also focus on the impact of living in a very closed and contained environment and the effect that even the slightest change could make.
Be warned there are a few violent scenes, a bit of nudity, and sex references so if you don't like that sort of thing you may want to avoid this
Snowpiercer is based on a french comic series. There are three comics set before the series which is set 7 years after the extinction event (When the world froze) then another comic, then a movie (15 years after the EE) then two more comics, this means that if, like me, you have seen the film first you will know that there are some limits to what can happen in the series.
Like the film the series is foremost a commentary on class with the train having three official classes, 1st, 2nd and 3rd, the unofficial 'Night Car' and the tailys, a large group of stowaways who live in the tail of the train.
Snowpiercer also focus on the impact of living in a very closed and contained environment and the effect that even the slightest change could make.
Be warned there are a few violent scenes, a bit of nudity, and sex references so if you don't like that sort of thing you may want to avoid this
Olivier Assayas recommended Fanny and Alexander (1982) in Movies (curated)
Olivier Assayas recommended Topsy-Turvy (1999) in Movies (curated)
Awix (3310 KP) rated Populaire (2012) in Movies
Nov 30, 2019 (Updated Nov 30, 2019)
Charming, feather-light French rom-com. The plot is typical of the genre: two beautiful young people meet near the start and are instantly attracted to one another, and the script has to contrive reasons to keep them apart for the best part of two hours. The incidental material this time around concerns typing very quickly, and the way the film drolly converts sports movie cliches into a word-processing context generates a lot of gentle humour.
Mainly succeeds due to a hugely charming performance by Deborah Francois, though; also through simply being very well put-together in nearly every department. It's not trying too hard to be clever, or deep, or deliver a big message - in fact, some might find the gender politics a bit problematic, but if you complain about that I really think we're in butterfly-on-a-wheel territory. Nice to look at, light and fun.
Mainly succeeds due to a hugely charming performance by Deborah Francois, though; also through simply being very well put-together in nearly every department. It's not trying too hard to be clever, or deep, or deliver a big message - in fact, some might find the gender politics a bit problematic, but if you complain about that I really think we're in butterfly-on-a-wheel territory. Nice to look at, light and fun.
Awix (3310 KP) rated The Hand of Night (1968) in Movies
May 29, 2020 (Updated May 30, 2020)
So-so British horror movie, one of a number of genre films made in north Africa in the mid to late sixties. A troubled man (William Sylvester, presumably fairly fresh from 2001: A Space Odyssey) visiting Morocco finds himself torn between a vivacious young French girl and a sultry woman who may or may not be (hint: she is) an ancient vampire.
Admirably serious tone and the central metaphor is coherent, but the problem with a lot of these foreign-shot films is that all the money seems to have gone on plane tickets, and the photography is often primitive and flat (a bit like a travelogue from the Moroccan Tourist Board). The pace is also not all it could be. Some decent bits here and there but the drabness of the film and its lack of incident counts against it. A case of potential not being realised.
Admirably serious tone and the central metaphor is coherent, but the problem with a lot of these foreign-shot films is that all the money seems to have gone on plane tickets, and the photography is often primitive and flat (a bit like a travelogue from the Moroccan Tourist Board). The pace is also not all it could be. Some decent bits here and there but the drabness of the film and its lack of incident counts against it. A case of potential not being realised.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Da Vinci Code (2006) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
No film since “The Last Temptation of Christ” has invoked as much controversy as The Da Vinci Code based on the book of the same name by Dan Brown. Prior to the film even being screened for the press, cries ran out to ban the film and its message that some find blasphemous. Fortunately calmer heads have prevailed and the film by Director Ron Howard has arrived in a wash of media frenzy not seen since Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ.
If you are seeing a pattern forming, you would be correct as it seems that few topics can raise ire and wrath more than the topic of religion, especially if the film proposes a viewpoint that differs from the traditional beliefs that are given by the church, bible, and history.
In the film, a monk appears to murder an elderly man who with his last ounces of strength, manages to leave a cryptic riddle on his body. The bizarre nature of the crime prompts French police inspector Fache (Jean Reno) to travel to the Louvre to investigate the crime. A clue at the crime scene causes the police to summer Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) from a lecture hall where he is signing his latest book on symbols. Since the deceased was supposed to meet Langdon earlier in the day Langdon has fallen under suspicion for the crime.
As he attempts to decipher the message at the crime scene, Langdon encounters a police cryptologists named Sophie (Audrey Tautou), who informs Robert that he is in danger and soon the duo are fleeing from the police after deciphering some hidden clues at the crime scene.
Before either Robert or Audrey knows what is happening, they are being accused of multiple murders and on the run. As the clues begin to mount, the mystery takes an even stranger turn by the discovery of an artifact that when unlocked, should contain a map.
Seeking refuge and help, the duo arrive at the estate of Sir Leigh Teabing (Sir Ian Mc Kellen), who proceeds to tell Robert and Sophie that the clues they have uncovered are part of a cover-up that segments of the church will stop at nothing to keep secret. The nature of this secret is such that should it become public knowledge, then they very foundations of history, faith, and the church could be shaken to their core.
As the mystery becomes clearer, the group are attacked by a Monk named Silas (Paul Bettany), who has been doing the violent work of someone know as The Teacher in an effort to discover the location of artifacts and those attempting to uncover the mystery.
What follows is a frantic race that travels from Paris to London in an effort to get to the bottom of the mystery and unravel the true nature of the mystery and the secret that people are willing to kill for in order to protect.
While some may find the mystery, the players, and their motivations confusing, the film does grab hold and moves along at a solid pace. Ron Howard once again shows his skill by directing a film that is different from his other works, yet rich in its visuals and complexity. The scenic locales of the film enhance the mystery (For those who have not read the book), as they attempt to decipher the clues along with the characters.
The work from the cast was solid as Hanks gives a very good if restrained performance in his portrayal. Mc Kellen is a very nice blend of elegance and old world charm that lifts up every scene in which he is in.
While there are those who will lambaste the film for the message it provides, I chose to look at it as a film that does what movies should, entertain and make you think. The film is not saying its assertions are hard and cold facts, what it is doing is providing a vehicle for debate.
In college I was told that through debate comes knowledge and growth for a society. This was common in ancient Greek and Roman society where issues of the day would be debated in open forums. It seems that we as a society have become too insistent to take things at face value and have forgotten that the very nature of the human experience is to question, grow, and seek our own answers. As such the film is a great example of how Hollywood at times gets it right and provides solid entertainment that will stimulate as well as entertain.
If you are seeing a pattern forming, you would be correct as it seems that few topics can raise ire and wrath more than the topic of religion, especially if the film proposes a viewpoint that differs from the traditional beliefs that are given by the church, bible, and history.
In the film, a monk appears to murder an elderly man who with his last ounces of strength, manages to leave a cryptic riddle on his body. The bizarre nature of the crime prompts French police inspector Fache (Jean Reno) to travel to the Louvre to investigate the crime. A clue at the crime scene causes the police to summer Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) from a lecture hall where he is signing his latest book on symbols. Since the deceased was supposed to meet Langdon earlier in the day Langdon has fallen under suspicion for the crime.
As he attempts to decipher the message at the crime scene, Langdon encounters a police cryptologists named Sophie (Audrey Tautou), who informs Robert that he is in danger and soon the duo are fleeing from the police after deciphering some hidden clues at the crime scene.
Before either Robert or Audrey knows what is happening, they are being accused of multiple murders and on the run. As the clues begin to mount, the mystery takes an even stranger turn by the discovery of an artifact that when unlocked, should contain a map.
Seeking refuge and help, the duo arrive at the estate of Sir Leigh Teabing (Sir Ian Mc Kellen), who proceeds to tell Robert and Sophie that the clues they have uncovered are part of a cover-up that segments of the church will stop at nothing to keep secret. The nature of this secret is such that should it become public knowledge, then they very foundations of history, faith, and the church could be shaken to their core.
As the mystery becomes clearer, the group are attacked by a Monk named Silas (Paul Bettany), who has been doing the violent work of someone know as The Teacher in an effort to discover the location of artifacts and those attempting to uncover the mystery.
What follows is a frantic race that travels from Paris to London in an effort to get to the bottom of the mystery and unravel the true nature of the mystery and the secret that people are willing to kill for in order to protect.
While some may find the mystery, the players, and their motivations confusing, the film does grab hold and moves along at a solid pace. Ron Howard once again shows his skill by directing a film that is different from his other works, yet rich in its visuals and complexity. The scenic locales of the film enhance the mystery (For those who have not read the book), as they attempt to decipher the clues along with the characters.
The work from the cast was solid as Hanks gives a very good if restrained performance in his portrayal. Mc Kellen is a very nice blend of elegance and old world charm that lifts up every scene in which he is in.
While there are those who will lambaste the film for the message it provides, I chose to look at it as a film that does what movies should, entertain and make you think. The film is not saying its assertions are hard and cold facts, what it is doing is providing a vehicle for debate.
In college I was told that through debate comes knowledge and growth for a society. This was common in ancient Greek and Roman society where issues of the day would be debated in open forums. It seems that we as a society have become too insistent to take things at face value and have forgotten that the very nature of the human experience is to question, grow, and seek our own answers. As such the film is a great example of how Hollywood at times gets it right and provides solid entertainment that will stimulate as well as entertain.
Ashley Valencia (5 KP) rated Beauty and the Beast (2017) in Movies
Apr 13, 2019
I Wanted to Like It
The animated Beauty and the Beast is one of my favorite movies to this day so i really wanted to like this film and tried to go in with no expectations.
I knew we were in trouble when Emma Watson started her first song of the film HEAVILY autotuned. The practice used to be that if an actor couldnt sing, they would lip sync and have someone else do the singing voice. This was also common practice for the animated films, one actor for singing and another for spoken lines. I wish they would've gone this route. The autotuning is just so heavy I found it cringey.
The film is gorgeous, a lot of pleasing visuals and effects but the Beast just looks, strange. Not really animalistic. Honestly more like if his face was carved out of a tree.
Despite the singing issue I do think the cast was well chosen. They all do a good job with what they have. Especially the actor playing Gaston. It seemed clear that they weren't 100% sure what to do with the character. At a few points it seemed like they were going to try to make him sympathetic but then they'd fall back on him just being awful. Still the actor did an amazing job and really sold it.
For the most part the plot sticks close to the original film though there are a few new elements, some background on Belle's mom, and new songs.
A few weeks before the film's release the director announced that there was definitely a gay character in the film. There are a few implications that there might be but that's it. I think honestly it would've come across better, he would've been given more credit, if he'd just let it be instead of making a big announcement and patting himself on the back. It would've seemed like a subtle nod to the lgbtq community instead of the false disappointing promise it turned out to be. He wanted the credit without actually putting in the work and it shows.
Overall I just didn't care for it. It's fine. Nothing spectacular. The animated film was definitely better. So I'd say stick with the classic however it is worth watching just to see the different interpretation of the story.
If you want a live action version I would recommend La Belle et la Bete, the 2014 French-Germanic version instead. It's a more interesting and visually stunning version of the story.
I knew we were in trouble when Emma Watson started her first song of the film HEAVILY autotuned. The practice used to be that if an actor couldnt sing, they would lip sync and have someone else do the singing voice. This was also common practice for the animated films, one actor for singing and another for spoken lines. I wish they would've gone this route. The autotuning is just so heavy I found it cringey.
The film is gorgeous, a lot of pleasing visuals and effects but the Beast just looks, strange. Not really animalistic. Honestly more like if his face was carved out of a tree.
Despite the singing issue I do think the cast was well chosen. They all do a good job with what they have. Especially the actor playing Gaston. It seemed clear that they weren't 100% sure what to do with the character. At a few points it seemed like they were going to try to make him sympathetic but then they'd fall back on him just being awful. Still the actor did an amazing job and really sold it.
For the most part the plot sticks close to the original film though there are a few new elements, some background on Belle's mom, and new songs.
A few weeks before the film's release the director announced that there was definitely a gay character in the film. There are a few implications that there might be but that's it. I think honestly it would've come across better, he would've been given more credit, if he'd just let it be instead of making a big announcement and patting himself on the back. It would've seemed like a subtle nod to the lgbtq community instead of the false disappointing promise it turned out to be. He wanted the credit without actually putting in the work and it shows.
Overall I just didn't care for it. It's fine. Nothing spectacular. The animated film was definitely better. So I'd say stick with the classic however it is worth watching just to see the different interpretation of the story.
If you want a live action version I would recommend La Belle et la Bete, the 2014 French-Germanic version instead. It's a more interesting and visually stunning version of the story.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Julie & Julia (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
Julie & Julia’ is an intertwined tale based on the two true stories of cooking legend Julia Child (Meryl Streep) and that of author Julie Powell (Amy Adams). It is a story of non-traditional mentoring and the value of hard work and dedication, covering the process Child went through creating the 1961 classic Mastering the Art of French Cooking alongside the tale of Powell who was made famous when she blogged her way through Child’s book.
The films leads do nothing but deliver. Amy Adams, sporting a spunky new haircut, creates a character that is both soul searching and fun to watch. Meryl Streep amazingly transforms into Child, having perfected the subtleties of her personality so well that I found myself remising back to my single digit years.
The costumes are delightful and manage to seamlessly separate the two women’s tales while uniting them into a bigger story. The use of color and pacing make this a film that displays not only a change in time and lifestyle, but also the uniting human values that are entirely timeless.
A story of relationships and personal growth, combined with moments of laughter and hardship, I found myself in the mood I enjoyed through ‘Chocolat’ and ‘The Pursuit of Happyness’.
The film could have used more food imagery and I felt like the character of Eric Powell (Chris Messina) could have been better developed. But the delightful relationship between Julia and her husband Paul Child, played by the ever-enchanting Stanley Tucci, made this film a wildly entertaining journey.
On top of being a well-told tale, ‘Julie & Julia’ has that je ne sais quoi which make it a truly exceptional piece of film, and I know this because even my action loving husband enjoyed it. Well worth the price of admission ‘Julie & Julia’ is a time traveling felicity that is sure to win your heart, as it has mine.
The films leads do nothing but deliver. Amy Adams, sporting a spunky new haircut, creates a character that is both soul searching and fun to watch. Meryl Streep amazingly transforms into Child, having perfected the subtleties of her personality so well that I found myself remising back to my single digit years.
The costumes are delightful and manage to seamlessly separate the two women’s tales while uniting them into a bigger story. The use of color and pacing make this a film that displays not only a change in time and lifestyle, but also the uniting human values that are entirely timeless.
A story of relationships and personal growth, combined with moments of laughter and hardship, I found myself in the mood I enjoyed through ‘Chocolat’ and ‘The Pursuit of Happyness’.
The film could have used more food imagery and I felt like the character of Eric Powell (Chris Messina) could have been better developed. But the delightful relationship between Julia and her husband Paul Child, played by the ever-enchanting Stanley Tucci, made this film a wildly entertaining journey.
On top of being a well-told tale, ‘Julie & Julia’ has that je ne sais quoi which make it a truly exceptional piece of film, and I know this because even my action loving husband enjoyed it. Well worth the price of admission ‘Julie & Julia’ is a time traveling felicity that is sure to win your heart, as it has mine.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Non-Stop (2014) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Bill Marks (Liam Neeson) is a man with demons. After his daughter fell seriously ill, the former New York police officer began a long descent into alcoholism and emotional distress. His fall was so great; Bill ended up losing his job and fortunately was able to find work as an Air Marshall providing in flight security for commercial routes.
In the new film Non-Stop, Bill is about to take a trans-Atlantic flight to London, and despite his dislike of flying and desire not to have a three day layover in London, reports for duty.
To say Bill is on edge would be an understatement as not only does he top off his coffee with a shot of spirits, he disables the airline smoke alarms so he can sneak a smoke to help calm himself and gather his thoughts.
Despite his issues, Bill is committed to his job and reports for duty and finds himself seated next to a charismatic lady named Jen (Julianne Moore), after she swaps seats with a passenger. Jen is a frequent traveler and noting that Bill seems on edge during takeoff, does her best to help calm him which Bill says will happen once they are airborne as he dislikes take offs.
True to his word, Bill is alert and ready to do his job once the plane is leveled off and en route to London. When a mysterious text arrives telling Bill that unless he deposits 150 million into an account, a passenger will be killed every twenty minutes, Bill swings into action and is determined to get to the bottom of the threat.
The flight crew is eager to put it off as a hoax as they state that a person cannot kill people on a crowded flight without being seen and it is likely just an elaborate hoax. Not convinced, Bill begins to investigate and asks for the passenger manifest to be rechecked and wants the account number he was given traced.
With the first deadline approaching Bill believes he has eliminated the threat when he uncovers a traitor in the midst in the guise of a fellow Air Marshall.
However text messages continue to arrive with instructions and Bill learns from his superiors that the account number given is in Bill’s name. Convinced that there is a viable threat Bill must fight to save the day when the crew, his bosses, and passengers believe he is deranged and actually hijacking the plane himself via an elaborate ruse.
While the film at times stretches credibility, it is for the most part a very tight and suspenseful and enjoyable film. My only issues were the final act at times seemed a bit to Hollywood and conventional for me but thanks to Neeson the film works.
The premise was engaging as was the cast and I was kept guessing as to the true nature of the threat as the film was good at casting suspicions then redirecting them throughout.
Like with the “Taken” films, Neeson is able to take a film that could be a mess in the hands of another actor but through his charisma and strong presence is able to give a character that although flawed is one that an audience can support.
French director Jaume Collet-Serra knows suspense from his part work with films such as “Orphan” and “Mindscape” and he wisely lets the film be a character driven story with action rather than an action film that happens to have characters.
As I said earlier, the final act was what kept the film from being a classic for me, but as it is, there is still plenty of good stuff to make this a film worth catching.
http://sknr.net/2014/02/28/non-stop/
In the new film Non-Stop, Bill is about to take a trans-Atlantic flight to London, and despite his dislike of flying and desire not to have a three day layover in London, reports for duty.
To say Bill is on edge would be an understatement as not only does he top off his coffee with a shot of spirits, he disables the airline smoke alarms so he can sneak a smoke to help calm himself and gather his thoughts.
Despite his issues, Bill is committed to his job and reports for duty and finds himself seated next to a charismatic lady named Jen (Julianne Moore), after she swaps seats with a passenger. Jen is a frequent traveler and noting that Bill seems on edge during takeoff, does her best to help calm him which Bill says will happen once they are airborne as he dislikes take offs.
True to his word, Bill is alert and ready to do his job once the plane is leveled off and en route to London. When a mysterious text arrives telling Bill that unless he deposits 150 million into an account, a passenger will be killed every twenty minutes, Bill swings into action and is determined to get to the bottom of the threat.
The flight crew is eager to put it off as a hoax as they state that a person cannot kill people on a crowded flight without being seen and it is likely just an elaborate hoax. Not convinced, Bill begins to investigate and asks for the passenger manifest to be rechecked and wants the account number he was given traced.
With the first deadline approaching Bill believes he has eliminated the threat when he uncovers a traitor in the midst in the guise of a fellow Air Marshall.
However text messages continue to arrive with instructions and Bill learns from his superiors that the account number given is in Bill’s name. Convinced that there is a viable threat Bill must fight to save the day when the crew, his bosses, and passengers believe he is deranged and actually hijacking the plane himself via an elaborate ruse.
While the film at times stretches credibility, it is for the most part a very tight and suspenseful and enjoyable film. My only issues were the final act at times seemed a bit to Hollywood and conventional for me but thanks to Neeson the film works.
The premise was engaging as was the cast and I was kept guessing as to the true nature of the threat as the film was good at casting suspicions then redirecting them throughout.
Like with the “Taken” films, Neeson is able to take a film that could be a mess in the hands of another actor but through his charisma and strong presence is able to give a character that although flawed is one that an audience can support.
French director Jaume Collet-Serra knows suspense from his part work with films such as “Orphan” and “Mindscape” and he wisely lets the film be a character driven story with action rather than an action film that happens to have characters.
As I said earlier, the final act was what kept the film from being a classic for me, but as it is, there is still plenty of good stuff to make this a film worth catching.
http://sknr.net/2014/02/28/non-stop/
Dutch (59 KP) Feb 22, 2019