Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Licorice Pizza (2021) in Movies
Dec 20, 2021
Set in the San Fernando Valley of 1973; Writer/Director Paul Thomas Anderson has created a loving and nostalgia-filled look at that era with his new film “Licorice Pizza”. The film focuses on a teenaged Gary (Cooper Hoffman) who becomes intrigued by an older photographer assistant named Alana (Alana Haim); during his school photo sessions.
Despite their age difference; the two become friends and Gary attempts to impress her with his hustle as he works in the fringes of Hollywood and has become a regular on the audition circuit and various events thanks to his agent.
When he is able to get Alana to act as his chaperone on a promotional trip to New York; reality sets in when Alana catches the eye of an older actor and starts dating him; Gary moves his hustle into high gear and begins a successful Waterbed business and even convinces his agent to represent Alana.
What follows is a long-winding story as the two move into Hollywood circles and face various challenges associated with their times, confused feelings, and goals.
While the film has some great moments and really great performance; especially that of Haim and Bradley Cooper; the two hours and forty-five minute run time seemed overly long and self-indulgent and could easily have lost forty-five minutes or so and not lost much as the film is loaded with scenes that are overly long or do not advance the story or characters in any meaningful way.
In many ways, the film plays out like a teenaged boy’s fantasy as there is the alluring older woman and his repeated ways to impress her; some of which stretch credibility.
What makes the film work so well is the nostalgic and loving look at the era and the winning performances from the cast. Much like he did with “Boogie Nights”; Anderson is not afraid to take broken or dysfunctional characters and make them sympathetic and relatable.
Expect the movie to do well with the Award voters and it will be interesting to see what the cast will do next.
Despite their age difference; the two become friends and Gary attempts to impress her with his hustle as he works in the fringes of Hollywood and has become a regular on the audition circuit and various events thanks to his agent.
When he is able to get Alana to act as his chaperone on a promotional trip to New York; reality sets in when Alana catches the eye of an older actor and starts dating him; Gary moves his hustle into high gear and begins a successful Waterbed business and even convinces his agent to represent Alana.
What follows is a long-winding story as the two move into Hollywood circles and face various challenges associated with their times, confused feelings, and goals.
While the film has some great moments and really great performance; especially that of Haim and Bradley Cooper; the two hours and forty-five minute run time seemed overly long and self-indulgent and could easily have lost forty-five minutes or so and not lost much as the film is loaded with scenes that are overly long or do not advance the story or characters in any meaningful way.
In many ways, the film plays out like a teenaged boy’s fantasy as there is the alluring older woman and his repeated ways to impress her; some of which stretch credibility.
What makes the film work so well is the nostalgic and loving look at the era and the winning performances from the cast. Much like he did with “Boogie Nights”; Anderson is not afraid to take broken or dysfunctional characters and make them sympathetic and relatable.
Expect the movie to do well with the Award voters and it will be interesting to see what the cast will do next.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Tiptoes (2003) in Movies
May 13, 2021
It's a bit difficult to know where to start with a movie like Tiptoes, where an arguably unpromising idea is coupled to at least one deeply suspect creative decision. Basically, this is a look at what it means to be a short person, or the parents of one, in the modern world, realised through a peculiar rom-com plot about twin brothers (one of whom is a short person) getting involved with the same girl. If you think this sounds odd, there is a ten-year age-gap between the twin brothers, and the short one is played by Gary Oldman through the wonders of him kneeling down on his shoes. (Oldman has said playing a short person was 'a stretch', which is an interesting choice of words.) Meanwhile, a subplot concerns a French Marxist biker short person played by Peter Dinklage.
It may all be very well-intentioned and motivated by genuine sympathy for the short person community, but the sight of Oldman kneeling down behind various low objects or embedded in a sofa with fake short legs attached to it disastrously sabotages the film. That said, even if they'd opted for more height-appropriate casting, I suspect the contrived melodrama of the movie would still be difficult to take seriously. A deeply bizarre film, and perhaps deservedly obscure.
It may all be very well-intentioned and motivated by genuine sympathy for the short person community, but the sight of Oldman kneeling down behind various low objects or embedded in a sofa with fake short legs attached to it disastrously sabotages the film. That said, even if they'd opted for more height-appropriate casting, I suspect the contrived melodrama of the movie would still be difficult to take seriously. A deeply bizarre film, and perhaps deservedly obscure.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Ocean’s 8 (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Can 8 women do the work of 11, 12 or even 13 men?
The female empowerment #SheToo implications of the title are clearly writ large for this movie! The answer of course…. is a major spoiler, so we won’t go there.
Debbie Ocean (Sandra Bullock, “Gravity“), the previously unreferenced sister of arch-scoundrel Danny Ocean (George Clooney) from the reboot trilogy, is released from prison after a 5 year stretch. This has given her plenty of time to plan her next job – a jewellry heist from the New York Met – in intricate detail. She recruits biker-chick Lou (Cate Blanchett , “Carol“) as her partner and they then proceed to recruit a team of expert crimimals: well… some are not criminals, but soon will be! Will they succeed, or will Debbie have an even longer time to plan her next heist?
Stiff as planks…. Sandra Bullock and Cate Blanchett.
The movie unfortunately is rather like watching paint dry. It’s very glossy and expensive paint, I grant you, but compared to certainly Ocean’s 11 and even Ocean’s 13 it’s not in the premier league. There’s virtually nothing about the plot that leaves you surprised. Even the twists are merely “oh”s rather than “OH!’s”.
Stylistically the film attempts to model the Soderbergh split-screen visuals of his films, doing it quite well, and is accompanied by a similar jazz-style soundtrack which works effectively. Arguably, the well-chosen music by Daniel Pemberton (“King Arthur: Legend of the Sword“) is the best thing in the film.
When they said they were stealing from the Met…. perhaps I misunderstood?
Otherwise though, that’s where most of the similarities end, with there being limited character development to make you really care all that much whether the team win or lose. The script, by director Gary Ross (“The Hunger Games”) and Olivia Milch had a few clever lines that made me smile: but it’s not laugh-out-loud territory. So the story had better be good. Unfortunately, here Gary Ross’s story has so many implausible coincidences and incredulous leaps of intuition – “yeah, I’m from the hood innit but I have a grasp of magnetic resonance couplings learnt the hard way, from the street up!” – that belief is less suspended and more hung, drawn and quartered. This is not saying that the Ocean’s trilogy was without a few similar issues – reaching its nadir with Julia Roberts pretending to be Julia Roberts in “Ocean’s 12” – but this film is more consistently bonkers.
Hang on… I only count seven here?
I have to admit that the build up to the heist through the first half of the film left me sufficiently entertained, but that momentum suddenly fizzles out and the final reel becomes quite tedious. I also expected something to happen at the end, cameo-wise, that never did!
Acting wise, the best turn comes from Anne Hathaway (“Colossal“, “Les Miserables”) as a vainglorious actress but Helena Bonham Carter (“Suffragette“, “Harry Potter”) is also good value as the quirky fashion expert, coming across like some sort of ditzy Fatima Blush.
Good value – Anne Hathaway and Helena Bonham Carter.
I also liked Rihanna’s ‘Nine Ball’ character. Less successful for me was Bullock, who I felt came across as very wooden, and Blanchett, slightly less so. There are also some ‘B-list’ celebrities attending the Met-gala that are fun to watch out for, as well as two members of the earlier films’ cast.
After Diamonds but with nowhere to store an Umbrella: Rihanna knocks them dead on the red carpet.
So, it’s a disappointing effort from Gary Ross. All glitz and glamour but with little substance.
Debbie Ocean (Sandra Bullock, “Gravity“), the previously unreferenced sister of arch-scoundrel Danny Ocean (George Clooney) from the reboot trilogy, is released from prison after a 5 year stretch. This has given her plenty of time to plan her next job – a jewellry heist from the New York Met – in intricate detail. She recruits biker-chick Lou (Cate Blanchett , “Carol“) as her partner and they then proceed to recruit a team of expert crimimals: well… some are not criminals, but soon will be! Will they succeed, or will Debbie have an even longer time to plan her next heist?
Stiff as planks…. Sandra Bullock and Cate Blanchett.
The movie unfortunately is rather like watching paint dry. It’s very glossy and expensive paint, I grant you, but compared to certainly Ocean’s 11 and even Ocean’s 13 it’s not in the premier league. There’s virtually nothing about the plot that leaves you surprised. Even the twists are merely “oh”s rather than “OH!’s”.
Stylistically the film attempts to model the Soderbergh split-screen visuals of his films, doing it quite well, and is accompanied by a similar jazz-style soundtrack which works effectively. Arguably, the well-chosen music by Daniel Pemberton (“King Arthur: Legend of the Sword“) is the best thing in the film.
When they said they were stealing from the Met…. perhaps I misunderstood?
Otherwise though, that’s where most of the similarities end, with there being limited character development to make you really care all that much whether the team win or lose. The script, by director Gary Ross (“The Hunger Games”) and Olivia Milch had a few clever lines that made me smile: but it’s not laugh-out-loud territory. So the story had better be good. Unfortunately, here Gary Ross’s story has so many implausible coincidences and incredulous leaps of intuition – “yeah, I’m from the hood innit but I have a grasp of magnetic resonance couplings learnt the hard way, from the street up!” – that belief is less suspended and more hung, drawn and quartered. This is not saying that the Ocean’s trilogy was without a few similar issues – reaching its nadir with Julia Roberts pretending to be Julia Roberts in “Ocean’s 12” – but this film is more consistently bonkers.
Hang on… I only count seven here?
I have to admit that the build up to the heist through the first half of the film left me sufficiently entertained, but that momentum suddenly fizzles out and the final reel becomes quite tedious. I also expected something to happen at the end, cameo-wise, that never did!
Acting wise, the best turn comes from Anne Hathaway (“Colossal“, “Les Miserables”) as a vainglorious actress but Helena Bonham Carter (“Suffragette“, “Harry Potter”) is also good value as the quirky fashion expert, coming across like some sort of ditzy Fatima Blush.
Good value – Anne Hathaway and Helena Bonham Carter.
I also liked Rihanna’s ‘Nine Ball’ character. Less successful for me was Bullock, who I felt came across as very wooden, and Blanchett, slightly less so. There are also some ‘B-list’ celebrities attending the Met-gala that are fun to watch out for, as well as two members of the earlier films’ cast.
After Diamonds but with nowhere to store an Umbrella: Rihanna knocks them dead on the red carpet.
So, it’s a disappointing effort from Gary Ross. All glitz and glamour but with little substance.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Santa Clarita Diet - Season 3 in TV
Apr 7, 2019
I remember watching season 1 of Santa Clarita Diet and wondering after just a few episodes if it would ever make it to another season. Don't get me wrong, I loved the humour and the craziness of the show, but wasn’t sure how they would ever manage to stretch the idea out any further than that. Well, we're now onto season 3 of what has proven to be one of the funniest and most consistently well written shows around right now, with no signs of it slowing down anytime soon.
Season 2 ended on a bit of a cliffhanger with Sheila (Drew Barrymore) and Joel (Timothy Olyphant) getting caught with a re-animated corpse head out in the desert by their cop neighbour Anne (Natalie Morales). At the same time, daughter Abby (Liv Hewson) and their other neighbour’s son Eric (Skyler Gisondo) blowing up a fracking site. It’s the kind of wild predicament which, despite sounding crazy on paper, has become perfectly normal for this show.
Season 3 picks things up with Anne convinced that Sheila has been sent by god to help rid the world of evildoers, and as a church goer herself, she believes she must dedicate herself to helping Sheila. Meanwhile, the kids find themselves having to dodge an FBI agent who has been assigned to the fracking site case. And as for the re-animated head of Gary? Well, after positioning him back in their basement, the Hammonds decide to equip him with a headset and an Alexa so that he can work as an employee for their brand new realty company. Once again, something which sounds crazy on paper, but totally works on the show. And is also very funny as he turns out to be the perfect employee.
Season 3 also begins heavily expanding the world of the show, and the zombie mythology briefly introduced in previous seasons. A group called the Knights of Serbia are out to rid the world of the undead, and there is a mysterious stranger accompanied by a couple of thugs who also seem to have sinister motives for capturing zombies. As if all of that wasn’t enough, Sheila begins putting pressure on Joel to join her in becoming undead!
The pace of the show is what I love about the show. There’s always a family drama, or bigger issue to try and resolve meaning you never get time to be bored. The way that Sheila and Joel tackle everything like it’s something as mundane as changing a blown light bulb is one of the best things about the show and I particularly love Joel and his calmly frustrated comebacks and subtle one liners. Little things - like Joel discovering that there are separate kitchen drawers, with separate utensils for normal cooking and for more gross purposes - are just perfect.
Although this season isn’t quite as funny as last, there are some very funny new characters this time, most notably, Ron, who appeared last season but is newly undead in season 3. The whole season just breezes by, and once again ends on an exciting cliffhanger. Bring on season 4!
Season 2 ended on a bit of a cliffhanger with Sheila (Drew Barrymore) and Joel (Timothy Olyphant) getting caught with a re-animated corpse head out in the desert by their cop neighbour Anne (Natalie Morales). At the same time, daughter Abby (Liv Hewson) and their other neighbour’s son Eric (Skyler Gisondo) blowing up a fracking site. It’s the kind of wild predicament which, despite sounding crazy on paper, has become perfectly normal for this show.
Season 3 picks things up with Anne convinced that Sheila has been sent by god to help rid the world of evildoers, and as a church goer herself, she believes she must dedicate herself to helping Sheila. Meanwhile, the kids find themselves having to dodge an FBI agent who has been assigned to the fracking site case. And as for the re-animated head of Gary? Well, after positioning him back in their basement, the Hammonds decide to equip him with a headset and an Alexa so that he can work as an employee for their brand new realty company. Once again, something which sounds crazy on paper, but totally works on the show. And is also very funny as he turns out to be the perfect employee.
Season 3 also begins heavily expanding the world of the show, and the zombie mythology briefly introduced in previous seasons. A group called the Knights of Serbia are out to rid the world of the undead, and there is a mysterious stranger accompanied by a couple of thugs who also seem to have sinister motives for capturing zombies. As if all of that wasn’t enough, Sheila begins putting pressure on Joel to join her in becoming undead!
The pace of the show is what I love about the show. There’s always a family drama, or bigger issue to try and resolve meaning you never get time to be bored. The way that Sheila and Joel tackle everything like it’s something as mundane as changing a blown light bulb is one of the best things about the show and I particularly love Joel and his calmly frustrated comebacks and subtle one liners. Little things - like Joel discovering that there are separate kitchen drawers, with separate utensils for normal cooking and for more gross purposes - are just perfect.
Although this season isn’t quite as funny as last, there are some very funny new characters this time, most notably, Ron, who appeared last season but is newly undead in season 3. The whole season just breezes by, and once again ends on an exciting cliffhanger. Bring on season 4!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Dark Knight Rises (2012) in Movies
Jun 27, 2018
A "good enough" ending to the trilogy
Going into the filming of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES, Director Christopher Nolan had a problem on his hands. The previous film in this trilogy - 2008's THE DARK KNIGHT - had turned into a cultural phenomenon based, in part, on the late Heath Ledger's bravura performance as The Joker. So how does he top it?
The quick answer is - you don't, so don't even try.
THE DARK KNIGHT RISES is a satisfactory conclusion to the Dark Knight trilogy that started with 2005's BATMAN BEGINS and, again stars Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman, the "Dark Knight".
What Director Nolan wisely does is continue his dark tone with this film, but does not even mention The Joker (or Ledger) in this film. Let the memories of the past films be just that - memories - and let this film stand on it's own.
And it does, for the most part.
Taking place 8 years after the events of THE DARK KNIGHT, this film has Batman coming out of self-imposed "retirement" to, yet again, save Gotham City from the clutches of a bad guy - this time, the masked Bane. In the course of this film Batman is torn down, to be risen and reborn again as the shining light of good over evil, shedding the "Dark Knight" moniker once and for all.
Nolan - and his brother, and frequent collaborator, Jonathan - wrote the screenplay and it is...serviceable. Nothing really remarkable about the story and plot. It gives each one of our returning characters - Lucious Fox (Morgan Freeman), Alfred Pennyworth (Michael Caine) and - especially - Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) room to shine along with other, new characters like Selina Kyle/Catwoman (a really good Anne Hathaway), Officer Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) Miranda Tate (Marion Cotillard) and, of course, Bane (Tom Hardy).
As you might be able to see, ALL of these actors are members of Nolan's "troupe" of actors - they either have been in other Nolan films (or, in the case of Hathaway, WILL be in another Nolan film) and each of them appear on the screen with gusto and a quiet confidence in their characters and a trust in a filmmaker that comes from frequent collaborations.
In the lead, Bale, of course, gives his usual, strong performance, though I did detect a hint of weariness in the performance. Now...some will say that is because the character is becoming weary, but I think it is more to the case that Bale was growing weary of playing this character.
But that is a quibble for all of the characters/actors do a terrific/professional job pushing the plot forward, which (let's admit) is just an excuse to go from one gigantic battle/chase scene to another and...Nolan certainly knows how to do these.
From the opening to close, every one of these gigantic "set pieces" held my attention and I found myself - even though I have seen this film before - sitting on the edge of my seat as the good guys - led by Batman - raced time to thwart the machinations of the bad guys in the end.
I'm glad these action sequences held my attention, for there are, inexplicably, looooong sections of this film where there is no action, but "character development" and "growth from strong internal retrospection." This sort of thing might have looked good on the page, but it is rather dull and boring when put on the screen. This film is almost 3 hours long, and - if Mr. Nolan would like to contact me - I can suggest a few spots where we can trim about 20-30 minutes out of this film, starting with the long stretch where Bruce Wayne is imprisoned.
But...these stretches are tolerable when you know it will lead you to some really fine action sequences featuring character/actors that you care about and are actually rooting for them to succeed. As I stated before, this is an "agreeable" conclusion to the trilogy. One who's journey I was glad to be one, but - to be honest - one that I was glad was over as well.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
The quick answer is - you don't, so don't even try.
THE DARK KNIGHT RISES is a satisfactory conclusion to the Dark Knight trilogy that started with 2005's BATMAN BEGINS and, again stars Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman, the "Dark Knight".
What Director Nolan wisely does is continue his dark tone with this film, but does not even mention The Joker (or Ledger) in this film. Let the memories of the past films be just that - memories - and let this film stand on it's own.
And it does, for the most part.
Taking place 8 years after the events of THE DARK KNIGHT, this film has Batman coming out of self-imposed "retirement" to, yet again, save Gotham City from the clutches of a bad guy - this time, the masked Bane. In the course of this film Batman is torn down, to be risen and reborn again as the shining light of good over evil, shedding the "Dark Knight" moniker once and for all.
Nolan - and his brother, and frequent collaborator, Jonathan - wrote the screenplay and it is...serviceable. Nothing really remarkable about the story and plot. It gives each one of our returning characters - Lucious Fox (Morgan Freeman), Alfred Pennyworth (Michael Caine) and - especially - Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) room to shine along with other, new characters like Selina Kyle/Catwoman (a really good Anne Hathaway), Officer Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) Miranda Tate (Marion Cotillard) and, of course, Bane (Tom Hardy).
As you might be able to see, ALL of these actors are members of Nolan's "troupe" of actors - they either have been in other Nolan films (or, in the case of Hathaway, WILL be in another Nolan film) and each of them appear on the screen with gusto and a quiet confidence in their characters and a trust in a filmmaker that comes from frequent collaborations.
In the lead, Bale, of course, gives his usual, strong performance, though I did detect a hint of weariness in the performance. Now...some will say that is because the character is becoming weary, but I think it is more to the case that Bale was growing weary of playing this character.
But that is a quibble for all of the characters/actors do a terrific/professional job pushing the plot forward, which (let's admit) is just an excuse to go from one gigantic battle/chase scene to another and...Nolan certainly knows how to do these.
From the opening to close, every one of these gigantic "set pieces" held my attention and I found myself - even though I have seen this film before - sitting on the edge of my seat as the good guys - led by Batman - raced time to thwart the machinations of the bad guys in the end.
I'm glad these action sequences held my attention, for there are, inexplicably, looooong sections of this film where there is no action, but "character development" and "growth from strong internal retrospection." This sort of thing might have looked good on the page, but it is rather dull and boring when put on the screen. This film is almost 3 hours long, and - if Mr. Nolan would like to contact me - I can suggest a few spots where we can trim about 20-30 minutes out of this film, starting with the long stretch where Bruce Wayne is imprisoned.
But...these stretches are tolerable when you know it will lead you to some really fine action sequences featuring character/actors that you care about and are actually rooting for them to succeed. As I stated before, this is an "agreeable" conclusion to the trilogy. One who's journey I was glad to be one, but - to be honest - one that I was glad was over as well.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)