Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Churchill (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“We will bore them on the beaches”.
“Churchill” tells the story of the great leader’s extreme opposition to “Operation Overlord”, the Eisenhower-led invasion of Normandy in 1944 that ultimately led – more by luck that judgement perhaps – to the fall of the Third Reich in the following year.
I’m not a historian but am married to one, so know the importance of “sources” in the pursuit of “truth”: one man’s terrorist is after all another man’s freedom fighter from a different perspective. Some sources on the internet (here for example) certainly suggest the The British (led by Churchill as Prime Minister) might have sensibly promoted the acceleration of the Italian campaign to reach Berlin rather than the far riskier Channel crossing.
This film however paints Churchill as a man demonised by his decision to send young men to their deaths in the fateful Gallipoli beach landings of World War One, with this – rather than a sensible strategic one – being the primary reason for opposing the Normandy landings. To further paint him as a bumbling old fool that is “worked around” by his peers strikes you as borderline libellous.
So the film’s script, by novice Alex von Tunzelmann, immediately set the wrong tone with me, and the undeniably strong performances of Brian Cox (“The Bourne Identity”) as Churchill and the wonderful Miranda Richardson (“Harry Potter” and the soon to be released “Stronger”) as Clemmie can’t fill the gap.
Besides anything else, diretor Jonathan Teplitzky (“The Railway Man”) delivers a piece so dull and lifeless, and with so much brooding, that its not remotely enjoyable. You think the introduction of a bullied secretary – Ms Garrett (Ella Purnell) – with a strong personal connection to ‘Overlord’ will add dramatic colour? But this angle too seems to go nowhere in particular.
There are many tales of the Normandy landings that are fascinating, over and above the dramatic sweep of “The Longest Day” (which is surely well overdue for a remake?) and Spielberg’s fictionalisation of the Niland brothers in “Saving Private Ryan”. How about the 2 out of 29 American amphibious tanks that reached Omaha beach after ignoring British advice to not launch so far from shore in rough seas?
So, as a film, it might be “worthy”. But I didn’t remotely believe the depiction of Churchill and it astonished me that such a rivetingly exciting period of British history could deliver a film that bored me. So, sorry, can’t recommend this one. Perhaps Joe Wright will have a better go with Gary Oldman as Churchill in “Darkest Hour”…
I’m not a historian but am married to one, so know the importance of “sources” in the pursuit of “truth”: one man’s terrorist is after all another man’s freedom fighter from a different perspective. Some sources on the internet (here for example) certainly suggest the The British (led by Churchill as Prime Minister) might have sensibly promoted the acceleration of the Italian campaign to reach Berlin rather than the far riskier Channel crossing.
This film however paints Churchill as a man demonised by his decision to send young men to their deaths in the fateful Gallipoli beach landings of World War One, with this – rather than a sensible strategic one – being the primary reason for opposing the Normandy landings. To further paint him as a bumbling old fool that is “worked around” by his peers strikes you as borderline libellous.
So the film’s script, by novice Alex von Tunzelmann, immediately set the wrong tone with me, and the undeniably strong performances of Brian Cox (“The Bourne Identity”) as Churchill and the wonderful Miranda Richardson (“Harry Potter” and the soon to be released “Stronger”) as Clemmie can’t fill the gap.
Besides anything else, diretor Jonathan Teplitzky (“The Railway Man”) delivers a piece so dull and lifeless, and with so much brooding, that its not remotely enjoyable. You think the introduction of a bullied secretary – Ms Garrett (Ella Purnell) – with a strong personal connection to ‘Overlord’ will add dramatic colour? But this angle too seems to go nowhere in particular.
There are many tales of the Normandy landings that are fascinating, over and above the dramatic sweep of “The Longest Day” (which is surely well overdue for a remake?) and Spielberg’s fictionalisation of the Niland brothers in “Saving Private Ryan”. How about the 2 out of 29 American amphibious tanks that reached Omaha beach after ignoring British advice to not launch so far from shore in rough seas?
So, as a film, it might be “worthy”. But I didn’t remotely believe the depiction of Churchill and it astonished me that such a rivetingly exciting period of British history could deliver a film that bored me. So, sorry, can’t recommend this one. Perhaps Joe Wright will have a better go with Gary Oldman as Churchill in “Darkest Hour”…
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Dracula Untold (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The latest Dracula movie attempts to honor an ancient story while adding some new spice and bringing the usual graphics flair we’ve come to expect from Hollywood, but falls short.
Dracula Untold, as the name implies, is an origin story for the pop culture father-of-all-vampires. Luke Evans bears the mantle of Prince Vlad Tepes of the Dracula Clan. (Not Count, but Prince.) What about the King, you ask? Well, they didn’t cover this, but there is no King.
Luke Evans is one of my favorite actors in Hollywood right now, and he does this role justice. The rest of the cast contributed solid performances as well, as best they could with sub par script, and poor direction. Charles Dance was a particular pleasure to witness.
This film is Gary Shore’s directorial debut, and it’s easy to see the marks of a neophyte director. Had it been in the hands of someone more experienced, it would have been a juggernaut of a Fall film. Even so, he did pretty well enough, all things considered. According to his work history, Shore was an electrician until 1998, then disappeared until 2014. This is his second film so far this year.
Dracula Untold opens with the story of Vlad the Impaler, as told by his son. Vlad was shipped off to the Turks to become a trained and conditioned weapon. He earned his title by impaling an entire village for the Turkish army. Vlad was a deadly force on the battlefield, but they eventually allowed him to go home, where he could start a family and rule Transylvania. It is painfully obvious that the usual blood-thirsty character was meant to become a hero for this new tale.
The Turks return to take more boys, like they did him, but he refuses. This draws the Turks’ ire, and they demand retribution for the insult and insubordination. Desperate, he seeks out a monster in the mountains who was the REAL first vampire — a man who made a deal with a demon.
Vlad is granted temporary powers, paying a heavy price in the process. After this, the story really ramps up.
This film left me feeling as if something was missing. I attribute this to missing explanations, plot holes (like the lack of King), and several other missteps. Normally, I can look past plot holes. A strong enough movie will keep me from noticing them until I’m rethinking it later. In this case, they were too distracting. The music was unimpressive and not at all memorable. The one liners were forced and distracting, instead of powerful and emotional.
This movie is worth seeing if you’re a fan of vampires in general or Dracula in particular. That said, I wouldn’t advise high expectations. Great aspects were abundant, but there were just as many failings. If you feel compelled to see it, wait until you can see it at home, and save the money.
Dracula Untold, as the name implies, is an origin story for the pop culture father-of-all-vampires. Luke Evans bears the mantle of Prince Vlad Tepes of the Dracula Clan. (Not Count, but Prince.) What about the King, you ask? Well, they didn’t cover this, but there is no King.
Luke Evans is one of my favorite actors in Hollywood right now, and he does this role justice. The rest of the cast contributed solid performances as well, as best they could with sub par script, and poor direction. Charles Dance was a particular pleasure to witness.
This film is Gary Shore’s directorial debut, and it’s easy to see the marks of a neophyte director. Had it been in the hands of someone more experienced, it would have been a juggernaut of a Fall film. Even so, he did pretty well enough, all things considered. According to his work history, Shore was an electrician until 1998, then disappeared until 2014. This is his second film so far this year.
Dracula Untold opens with the story of Vlad the Impaler, as told by his son. Vlad was shipped off to the Turks to become a trained and conditioned weapon. He earned his title by impaling an entire village for the Turkish army. Vlad was a deadly force on the battlefield, but they eventually allowed him to go home, where he could start a family and rule Transylvania. It is painfully obvious that the usual blood-thirsty character was meant to become a hero for this new tale.
The Turks return to take more boys, like they did him, but he refuses. This draws the Turks’ ire, and they demand retribution for the insult and insubordination. Desperate, he seeks out a monster in the mountains who was the REAL first vampire — a man who made a deal with a demon.
Vlad is granted temporary powers, paying a heavy price in the process. After this, the story really ramps up.
This film left me feeling as if something was missing. I attribute this to missing explanations, plot holes (like the lack of King), and several other missteps. Normally, I can look past plot holes. A strong enough movie will keep me from noticing them until I’m rethinking it later. In this case, they were too distracting. The music was unimpressive and not at all memorable. The one liners were forced and distracting, instead of powerful and emotional.
This movie is worth seeing if you’re a fan of vampires in general or Dracula in particular. That said, I wouldn’t advise high expectations. Great aspects were abundant, but there were just as many failings. If you feel compelled to see it, wait until you can see it at home, and save the money.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Laundromat (2019) in Movies
Aug 1, 2021
Fun and Interesting
Do remember the Oscar nominated film THE BIG SHORT from 2015, where Director Adam McKay would make sense out of a dry subject (the financial crisis of 2008) by breaking the 4th wall and speaking directly to the audience, while also wrapping in a very strong emotional drama?
Well…Director Steven Soderbergh (ERIN BROCKOVICH) has taken that recipe and attached it to another dry subject (this time money laundering through off-shore “Shell Companies”) and has turned in a very good and interesting (though not quite as intense) film that got lost in the shuffle in 2019.
Starring Meryl Streep as a widow who is trying to get her Insurance Company to pay off after the death of her husband, THE LAUNDROMAT follows the trail through shell company after shell company as the money is Laundered by 2 unscrupulous Bankers (Gary Oldman and Antonio Banderas) in a series of vignettes.
While THE LAUNDROMAT doesn’t pack the punch of THE BIG SHORT (where the real life consequences of what happened impacted many, many people throughout the world), THE LAUNDROMAT falls just short in that only Meryl Streep’s character really suffers the consequences (though many unscrupulous players do get theirs in the end).
Soderbergh is a Director who’s work I have really, really liked throughout his career as he has a tendency to focus on the people, rather than spectacle, when telling a story, and it works well in this film. He gets the audience to care about the victims of the scheming money men and root like crazy for the “bad guys” to get theirs.
As for the acting, Meryl Streep (of course) is marvelous as Ellen Martin, the widow who’s tragic experience (the death of her husband - played by the great James Cromwell) sets off the course of events in this film.
Oldman and Banderas are equally as good as the narrators and antagonists of this piece. They play their roles with a slight wink in their eyes and a “devil-may-care” attitude which makes them charming, but does take a notch (or so) off of the drama of the piece.
Soderbergh, as he is want to do, fills this film with many memorable actors/characters in what amounts to extended cameos - Jeffrey Wright, Robert Patrick, David Schwimmer, Will Forte, Chris Parnell, Larry Wilmore and even Sharon Stone stop by for a moment to bring other characters into play and they all work well.
To be fair, some of the vignettes work better than the others, but all-in-all Soderbergh has crafted an interesting, fun and IMPORTANT film that will teach it’s audience about the inner workings of a system that most of us have heard about but never really looked into.
Check out THE LAUNDROMAT the next time you are scrolling through Netflix looking for something good to watch.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Well…Director Steven Soderbergh (ERIN BROCKOVICH) has taken that recipe and attached it to another dry subject (this time money laundering through off-shore “Shell Companies”) and has turned in a very good and interesting (though not quite as intense) film that got lost in the shuffle in 2019.
Starring Meryl Streep as a widow who is trying to get her Insurance Company to pay off after the death of her husband, THE LAUNDROMAT follows the trail through shell company after shell company as the money is Laundered by 2 unscrupulous Bankers (Gary Oldman and Antonio Banderas) in a series of vignettes.
While THE LAUNDROMAT doesn’t pack the punch of THE BIG SHORT (where the real life consequences of what happened impacted many, many people throughout the world), THE LAUNDROMAT falls just short in that only Meryl Streep’s character really suffers the consequences (though many unscrupulous players do get theirs in the end).
Soderbergh is a Director who’s work I have really, really liked throughout his career as he has a tendency to focus on the people, rather than spectacle, when telling a story, and it works well in this film. He gets the audience to care about the victims of the scheming money men and root like crazy for the “bad guys” to get theirs.
As for the acting, Meryl Streep (of course) is marvelous as Ellen Martin, the widow who’s tragic experience (the death of her husband - played by the great James Cromwell) sets off the course of events in this film.
Oldman and Banderas are equally as good as the narrators and antagonists of this piece. They play their roles with a slight wink in their eyes and a “devil-may-care” attitude which makes them charming, but does take a notch (or so) off of the drama of the piece.
Soderbergh, as he is want to do, fills this film with many memorable actors/characters in what amounts to extended cameos - Jeffrey Wright, Robert Patrick, David Schwimmer, Will Forte, Chris Parnell, Larry Wilmore and even Sharon Stone stop by for a moment to bring other characters into play and they all work well.
To be fair, some of the vignettes work better than the others, but all-in-all Soderbergh has crafted an interesting, fun and IMPORTANT film that will teach it’s audience about the inner workings of a system that most of us have heard about but never really looked into.
Check out THE LAUNDROMAT the next time you are scrolling through Netflix looking for something good to watch.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)