Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Beauty and the Beast (2017) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
Whenever I was asked who my favorite Disney prince was, I’d answer, without hesitation, “The Beast.”
Friends would look at me askance and ask, “The Beast? Really?”
And I’d simply reply, “Have you not seen his library?”
I also claim Belle as my favorite Disney princess. As a bookworm, Beauty and the Beast gave me a princess I could relate to. Sure, I had just graduated from high school the year before the animated film – not really the demographic Disney was catering to. But when I first watched Belle’s introductory scene, as she made her way through the village with her nose buried in a book while the townfolk sang of her “odd” behavior, I felt l the corners of my lips rise on their own, in a smile of recognition.
Sure, it also may have been because of the clever lyrics of the late Howard Ashman and the wondrous melodies of Alan Menken in that first song alone, but Belle quickly me over not only with her joy for stories and spirit of adventure, but also with her brave spirit.
Beauty and the Beast is a fairy tale told many times over and Disney’s live-action version follows the animated classic closely with some variation and additional scenes and few more songs. Like the animated film, it’s sweepingly romantic and just as enchanting. What the audience may struggle with is that Emma Watson’s Belle is not as…well, animated as the animated Belle. She brings a solemnity to the role, and as singing talent goes, while she is no Paige O’Hara, she can sing.
Luke Evans makes a menacingly handsome Gaston and his big number, with his sidekick LeFou (Josh Gad) is an entertaining high point that cements Gaston’s position as my favorite villain. Dan Stevens brought a bit more humanity to Beast, and with a heartbreaking song of his own, his despair is more keenly felt in this movie. But I have to admit, I prefer Josh Groban’s version of Beast’s solo, which you do get to hear if you sit through the credits.
Lumière the candelabra and Cogsworth the clock were brought to life with great voice work Ewan McGregor and Ian McKellen, respectively. Emma Thompson voiced Mrs. Potts perfectly. I don’t know if it was her voice, the theme song or the ballroom dance scene that provoked an overwhelming sense of nostalgia, but the captivating combination literally brought tears to my eyes. Kevin Kline, who played Belle’s father, Maurice, Stanley Tucci, and Broadway great Audra McDonald round out a solid supporting cast.
As a huge fan of the 1991 Beauty and the Beast, I didn’t believe a live-action version could improve on the beloved, timeless classic. But just like with the animated film, it was truly the songs that made the movie, and the music does it again for the live-action film, making it a memorable, magical treat for young and old alike.
Friends would look at me askance and ask, “The Beast? Really?”
And I’d simply reply, “Have you not seen his library?”
I also claim Belle as my favorite Disney princess. As a bookworm, Beauty and the Beast gave me a princess I could relate to. Sure, I had just graduated from high school the year before the animated film – not really the demographic Disney was catering to. But when I first watched Belle’s introductory scene, as she made her way through the village with her nose buried in a book while the townfolk sang of her “odd” behavior, I felt l the corners of my lips rise on their own, in a smile of recognition.
Sure, it also may have been because of the clever lyrics of the late Howard Ashman and the wondrous melodies of Alan Menken in that first song alone, but Belle quickly me over not only with her joy for stories and spirit of adventure, but also with her brave spirit.
Beauty and the Beast is a fairy tale told many times over and Disney’s live-action version follows the animated classic closely with some variation and additional scenes and few more songs. Like the animated film, it’s sweepingly romantic and just as enchanting. What the audience may struggle with is that Emma Watson’s Belle is not as…well, animated as the animated Belle. She brings a solemnity to the role, and as singing talent goes, while she is no Paige O’Hara, she can sing.
Luke Evans makes a menacingly handsome Gaston and his big number, with his sidekick LeFou (Josh Gad) is an entertaining high point that cements Gaston’s position as my favorite villain. Dan Stevens brought a bit more humanity to Beast, and with a heartbreaking song of his own, his despair is more keenly felt in this movie. But I have to admit, I prefer Josh Groban’s version of Beast’s solo, which you do get to hear if you sit through the credits.
Lumière the candelabra and Cogsworth the clock were brought to life with great voice work Ewan McGregor and Ian McKellen, respectively. Emma Thompson voiced Mrs. Potts perfectly. I don’t know if it was her voice, the theme song or the ballroom dance scene that provoked an overwhelming sense of nostalgia, but the captivating combination literally brought tears to my eyes. Kevin Kline, who played Belle’s father, Maurice, Stanley Tucci, and Broadway great Audra McDonald round out a solid supporting cast.
As a huge fan of the 1991 Beauty and the Beast, I didn’t believe a live-action version could improve on the beloved, timeless classic. But just like with the animated film, it was truly the songs that made the movie, and the music does it again for the live-action film, making it a memorable, magical treat for young and old alike.
Pandemic: The Board Game
Games
App
As skilled members of a disease-fighting team, you must keep four deadly diseases at bay while...
T.I.M.E Stories
8.0
Rate It
Tabletop Game
The T.I.M.E Agency protects humanity by preventing temporal faults and paradoxes from threatening...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Black Phone (2022) in Movies
Jul 19, 2022
Tense and Suspenseful
Part STRANGER THINGS and Part IT, the new Blumhouse film, THE BLACK PHONE, is a surprisingly effective horror/thriller that is reminiscent of the better Stephen King stories - and that just might be because the short story for which this film is based on is written by Joe Hill - Stephen King’s son.
Wisely set in a time before cell phones (like both Stranger Things and It), THE BLACK PHONE tells the tale of a small town in Colorado that suddenly falls victim to “THE GRABBER” - an individual who grabs young teenage boys and kills them.
Smartly Directed by Scott Derrickson (the first DOCTOR STRANGE film), THE BLACK PHONE is effective for it focuses on the isolation of being in captivity, the anxiety of not knowing when someone is going to come through the door of the cell and the relationships of the young teens caught in “The Grabber’s” web. Credit for this, of course, goes to Derrickson who dropped out of Directing DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS (over “creative differences”) and chose this passion project as his salve - and the passion shows. It must also be pointed out that Derrickson, wisely, opts to up the tension of this film, rather than the gore, so this movie becomes a suspense flick and not torture-porn.
Derrickson also draws very good performances from the young actors playing the main roles of this film - Mason Thames (Finney), Madeleine McGraw (Gwen), Tristan Pravong (Bruce), Jacob Moran (Billy) and Miguel Cazarez Mora (Robin). All are believable in their well written roles bringing more than just one-dimension to their characters.
These kids are more than ably joined by adult actors like James Ransone (IT: CHAPTER TWO), Jeremy Davies (TV’s LOST) and E. Roger Mitchell (OUTER BANKS). All of these folks bring gravitas and reality to a story that does drift into the un-reality at times.
And then there is the performance of the always good Ethan Hawke as the villain of this piece - THE GRABBER. It is a masterful performance by Hawke who brings humanity to this monster. Almost every actor that plays a villain say that they try to see the film from the villain’s point of view and Hawke brings that to this character in spades and (almost) makes one want to root for him. It is one of the better villains realized on film in the last few years.
One quibble with The Black Phone, is that it does have a tendency to sag a bit (especially in the middle). It is in the middle of the film that one can tell that this movie was based on a SHORT story and so, by necessity, there is some padding.
But that is picking a nit in what is a smart and tense film, one that will have you on the edge of your seat until the end.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Wisely set in a time before cell phones (like both Stranger Things and It), THE BLACK PHONE tells the tale of a small town in Colorado that suddenly falls victim to “THE GRABBER” - an individual who grabs young teenage boys and kills them.
Smartly Directed by Scott Derrickson (the first DOCTOR STRANGE film), THE BLACK PHONE is effective for it focuses on the isolation of being in captivity, the anxiety of not knowing when someone is going to come through the door of the cell and the relationships of the young teens caught in “The Grabber’s” web. Credit for this, of course, goes to Derrickson who dropped out of Directing DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS (over “creative differences”) and chose this passion project as his salve - and the passion shows. It must also be pointed out that Derrickson, wisely, opts to up the tension of this film, rather than the gore, so this movie becomes a suspense flick and not torture-porn.
Derrickson also draws very good performances from the young actors playing the main roles of this film - Mason Thames (Finney), Madeleine McGraw (Gwen), Tristan Pravong (Bruce), Jacob Moran (Billy) and Miguel Cazarez Mora (Robin). All are believable in their well written roles bringing more than just one-dimension to their characters.
These kids are more than ably joined by adult actors like James Ransone (IT: CHAPTER TWO), Jeremy Davies (TV’s LOST) and E. Roger Mitchell (OUTER BANKS). All of these folks bring gravitas and reality to a story that does drift into the un-reality at times.
And then there is the performance of the always good Ethan Hawke as the villain of this piece - THE GRABBER. It is a masterful performance by Hawke who brings humanity to this monster. Almost every actor that plays a villain say that they try to see the film from the villain’s point of view and Hawke brings that to this character in spades and (almost) makes one want to root for him. It is one of the better villains realized on film in the last few years.
One quibble with The Black Phone, is that it does have a tendency to sag a bit (especially in the middle). It is in the middle of the film that one can tell that this movie was based on a SHORT story and so, by necessity, there is some padding.
But that is picking a nit in what is a smart and tense film, one that will have you on the edge of your seat until the end.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Roma (2018) in Movies
Mar 2, 2020 (Updated Mar 3, 2020)
I watched Roma exactly a week ago today. And although I knew 20 minutes in that I loved it, and at the end that I really loved it, I have taken that time to let it settle within me in before coming to write about it. Some films are so good that you have to do that: let it sink into you fully, before doing anything so trivial as judging and comparing them. Roma is incomparable! I have never seen anything like it, or felt as deeply moved by a film in a long time.
Not that it didn’t get attention at the time of its release, it did, receiving 10 Oscar nominations and winning 3, for best foreign language film, director and cinematography, but it certainly wasn’t seen by as many people as it should have been, despite its presence on Netflix from the start. Having digested it now, and spending some time reading about how and why it was made, I feel a slight mission to recommend it to as many people as I can.
Based on Alfonso Cuarón’s own childhood in Mexico City, and his memories of his family and especially their housemaid, Liboria (Libo) Rodriguez, to whom the film is dedicated, it is a masterpiece labour of love that few directors ever achieve or even attempt to make. After a strong career of exceptional films, including Y Tu Mamá También, Children of Men and Gravity, it was the box office and critical success of the latter that gave Cuarón carte blanche to go and make whatever project he chose. Where many might have been tempted by the big money of superhero or fantasy movies (for which he had some experience with Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) he went back to his roots and shot a very personal non-English film, in black and white, where no music exists except that which occurs naturally, and on the surface not much happens.
At least it feels like not much is happening, such is the naturalistic, almost improvised (although it wasn’t) style and pace; shot with a lens capturing detail and nuance with some of the most beautiful photography I have ever had the privilege to see. Truly, an awful lot is happening, but you have to feel and experience it, not simply be told it by the narrative. It takes a while for our Hollywood conditioned brains to accept this at first, and many might come to it and give up half an hour in because of that challenge. I can promise, however, there is not a single thing boring about this film, unless humanity is boring.
Oscar nominated lead Yalitza Aparicio as the shy, loving maid, Cleo, was not an actor before this film. She auditioned and was hand picked by Cuarón from hundreds of young women, without knowing who he was or what the film was about. Apparently, the film was shot in sequence so as not to confuse her emotionally on her extraordinary journey. She is so unassuming and natural that part of you falls in love with her immediately. In time, we almost come to forget we are watching an act at all, and almost become her, such is the empathy she evokes.
Which isn’t an easy ride, as we watch her be gently and then cruelly ignored, mistreated and used; climaxing in one of the most astonishingly painful and jaw-dropping scenes imaginable, and then a scene of such powerful redemption and humanity it instantly breaks the heart and lifts the soul. All the while she never asks for attention or love, but is just herself: a young woman living a difficult but beautiful life in a country and time full of turmoil, prejudice and social change.
The recreation of Mexico in 1970 is so breathtaking, it is hard to imagine at times we are not watching a documentary from that era. But, it is the detail the lens chooses to capture that reminds you this is a visual poem and a love-letter to a time, a place and a family far away in history and the memory of one man (represented by ten year old Carlos Peralta as Paco). At times it evokes the work of the very greatest film artists of all time: Bergman, Fellini, Hitchcock etc. Not one image is wasted or insignificant, from the reflection of the sky in water, to the dog-shit constantly lining the driveway. Everything is chosen and meaningful in the full context of the work.
There is no awkward exposition, no dramatic moments milked for all they are worth, no sequences of heightened excitement that manipulate us; simply truthful moments that hang in the air for what they are, leaving us to decide how we relate to them without ever preaching or teaching us how. In that way, it is a work of such maturity that I doubt many living directors could emulate it at all. The closest comparison I can think of is the personal passion Spielberg put into Shindler’s List, but really it is a moot comparison, and in fact owes much more to films like Haneke’s The White Ribbon.
Can it be faulted? Well, yes, certainly. But, honestly, I don’t see the point in trying. It is as close to perfection a small story of this kind can be. Importantly, I think it is an open film, that allows us to take from it whatever we like, relating to our own experiences and cares. For me, it said that any pain and hardship can be overcome, as long as there is love and beauty walking by its side. A message of no small importance. If you haven’t seen it, I urge you to do so. If you have, then please keep spreading the word. I believe it to be a genuine classic that will endure the criticism of many decades to come. Without a doubt in my mind something very special indeed.
Not that it didn’t get attention at the time of its release, it did, receiving 10 Oscar nominations and winning 3, for best foreign language film, director and cinematography, but it certainly wasn’t seen by as many people as it should have been, despite its presence on Netflix from the start. Having digested it now, and spending some time reading about how and why it was made, I feel a slight mission to recommend it to as many people as I can.
Based on Alfonso Cuarón’s own childhood in Mexico City, and his memories of his family and especially their housemaid, Liboria (Libo) Rodriguez, to whom the film is dedicated, it is a masterpiece labour of love that few directors ever achieve or even attempt to make. After a strong career of exceptional films, including Y Tu Mamá También, Children of Men and Gravity, it was the box office and critical success of the latter that gave Cuarón carte blanche to go and make whatever project he chose. Where many might have been tempted by the big money of superhero or fantasy movies (for which he had some experience with Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) he went back to his roots and shot a very personal non-English film, in black and white, where no music exists except that which occurs naturally, and on the surface not much happens.
At least it feels like not much is happening, such is the naturalistic, almost improvised (although it wasn’t) style and pace; shot with a lens capturing detail and nuance with some of the most beautiful photography I have ever had the privilege to see. Truly, an awful lot is happening, but you have to feel and experience it, not simply be told it by the narrative. It takes a while for our Hollywood conditioned brains to accept this at first, and many might come to it and give up half an hour in because of that challenge. I can promise, however, there is not a single thing boring about this film, unless humanity is boring.
Oscar nominated lead Yalitza Aparicio as the shy, loving maid, Cleo, was not an actor before this film. She auditioned and was hand picked by Cuarón from hundreds of young women, without knowing who he was or what the film was about. Apparently, the film was shot in sequence so as not to confuse her emotionally on her extraordinary journey. She is so unassuming and natural that part of you falls in love with her immediately. In time, we almost come to forget we are watching an act at all, and almost become her, such is the empathy she evokes.
Which isn’t an easy ride, as we watch her be gently and then cruelly ignored, mistreated and used; climaxing in one of the most astonishingly painful and jaw-dropping scenes imaginable, and then a scene of such powerful redemption and humanity it instantly breaks the heart and lifts the soul. All the while she never asks for attention or love, but is just herself: a young woman living a difficult but beautiful life in a country and time full of turmoil, prejudice and social change.
The recreation of Mexico in 1970 is so breathtaking, it is hard to imagine at times we are not watching a documentary from that era. But, it is the detail the lens chooses to capture that reminds you this is a visual poem and a love-letter to a time, a place and a family far away in history and the memory of one man (represented by ten year old Carlos Peralta as Paco). At times it evokes the work of the very greatest film artists of all time: Bergman, Fellini, Hitchcock etc. Not one image is wasted or insignificant, from the reflection of the sky in water, to the dog-shit constantly lining the driveway. Everything is chosen and meaningful in the full context of the work.
There is no awkward exposition, no dramatic moments milked for all they are worth, no sequences of heightened excitement that manipulate us; simply truthful moments that hang in the air for what they are, leaving us to decide how we relate to them without ever preaching or teaching us how. In that way, it is a work of such maturity that I doubt many living directors could emulate it at all. The closest comparison I can think of is the personal passion Spielberg put into Shindler’s List, but really it is a moot comparison, and in fact owes much more to films like Haneke’s The White Ribbon.
Can it be faulted? Well, yes, certainly. But, honestly, I don’t see the point in trying. It is as close to perfection a small story of this kind can be. Importantly, I think it is an open film, that allows us to take from it whatever we like, relating to our own experiences and cares. For me, it said that any pain and hardship can be overcome, as long as there is love and beauty walking by its side. A message of no small importance. If you haven’t seen it, I urge you to do so. If you have, then please keep spreading the word. I believe it to be a genuine classic that will endure the criticism of many decades to come. Without a doubt in my mind something very special indeed.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Ant-Man (2015) in Movies
May 10, 2019
"I Know a Guy"
I've been a comic book junkie all my life. I have, however, never been really interested in Ant-Man. It's not an easy super hero to fall for. It is therefore to me all the more astonishing they managed to pull it off so well in this troubled production.
There are only a handful of ways to treat an origin story an Ant-Man breaks no molds there. It hits every single beat you'd expect it to, builds up the story like you'd expect it to and concludes it like you'd expect it to. So it is left to the moments in between and the schwung with which it delivers them to make the film. And it works like a charm.
Every time I felt myself getting a bit annoyed with yet another piece of expository dialogue or predictable plot development, it sideswiped me with a fantastic action sequence, hilarious fight scene or the utterly brilliant Michael Peña. There is so much clever entertainment chucked into the film that it was very easy for me to just say 'Fuck it' and enjoy the ride.
What I loved about it was the toned down treatment of the bizarreness of the super powers. It would have been very easy to go completely overboard with this, but Reed actually manages to bring a level headedness to the fantastical which I appreciated and which actually strengthened what they were basically trying to instill in Rudd's character, some semblance of identifiable humanity. As much as I love Wright, I'm perhaps one of the few people who don't think he would have been able to restrain himself and gone the route of Scott Pilgrim which is not something that would have worked I feel.
Rudd is excellent and plays it straight, casting off a vibe of 'What the hell am I doing?' very successfully. He is likable and his transformation into this unlikely hero worked mainly because of the way he played it. The rest of the cast is great (CGI-Michael Douglas will haunt me forever) and Michael Peña truly is stellar. Give him his own film. Please.
The main attraction in this type of film is usually the action. And while the action in this is fantastic, there is surprisingly little of it, making the final confrontation actually something to look forward to And boy does it deliver. It uses the potential of the, let's be honest, silliness of the powers to its fullest, making it what it should be. A thrilling ride.
Ant-Man surprised me. Wright's involvement is palpable, which is good. But its main attraction lies in the simple fact that it is effortlessly entertaining. Fun, funny and exciting. Exactly what it should be.
There are only a handful of ways to treat an origin story an Ant-Man breaks no molds there. It hits every single beat you'd expect it to, builds up the story like you'd expect it to and concludes it like you'd expect it to. So it is left to the moments in between and the schwung with which it delivers them to make the film. And it works like a charm.
Every time I felt myself getting a bit annoyed with yet another piece of expository dialogue or predictable plot development, it sideswiped me with a fantastic action sequence, hilarious fight scene or the utterly brilliant Michael Peña. There is so much clever entertainment chucked into the film that it was very easy for me to just say 'Fuck it' and enjoy the ride.
What I loved about it was the toned down treatment of the bizarreness of the super powers. It would have been very easy to go completely overboard with this, but Reed actually manages to bring a level headedness to the fantastical which I appreciated and which actually strengthened what they were basically trying to instill in Rudd's character, some semblance of identifiable humanity. As much as I love Wright, I'm perhaps one of the few people who don't think he would have been able to restrain himself and gone the route of Scott Pilgrim which is not something that would have worked I feel.
Rudd is excellent and plays it straight, casting off a vibe of 'What the hell am I doing?' very successfully. He is likable and his transformation into this unlikely hero worked mainly because of the way he played it. The rest of the cast is great (CGI-Michael Douglas will haunt me forever) and Michael Peña truly is stellar. Give him his own film. Please.
The main attraction in this type of film is usually the action. And while the action in this is fantastic, there is surprisingly little of it, making the final confrontation actually something to look forward to And boy does it deliver. It uses the potential of the, let's be honest, silliness of the powers to its fullest, making it what it should be. A thrilling ride.
Ant-Man surprised me. Wright's involvement is palpable, which is good. But its main attraction lies in the simple fact that it is effortlessly entertaining. Fun, funny and exciting. Exactly what it should be.
Kyera (8 KP) rated Morning Star in Books
Feb 1, 2018
As with the two previous books in the series, Morning Star is brutally violent and honest in its portrayal of the darkness of humanity. It's a strange series that I don't quite know how I feel. While overall the plot and storytelling are good and I enjoy reading the series, for the most part, I am also frequently horrified by events and actions. As a result, I would recommend again that younger teen readers do not pick this up. Wait until you are older to read the series.
Sevro is such a strange character, but I love him. Some of the things he said, although unintentionally funny, had me laughing aloud (and probably sounding like a crazy person because I was by myself). Sadly, the course of the war and things that he has experienced seem to change him - as the war alters all of the characters. In the third book, he is just as funny and strangely likable as he was in the previous two books despite the horrors that he has endured.
I love the honest wonder of Ragnar, despite his fierce size and fighting skills he was not born to the same world as Darrow. He is genuinely pleased or fascinated by things most would take for granted in that world. Despite the fact that Ragnar is a terrifying killing machine - you can't help but like him.
Although there is a lot of death and destruction in these books, it is not until halfway through the third book that the pain of a character affected me. I got a little teary-eyed because it was one of the characters that I had grown to care about. I don't feel a very strong connection to them in general, which I feel is probably the main weakness of this series for me.
The second book fell prey to the typical slow nature of a middle book in a trilogy. In general, I feel that these books take some time to get into but become very engaging eventually. The third book was a little slower to start than even the others, although there were some enjoyable moments early on it wasn't until a little over halfway through the book that I really thought 'wow this is where things start happening.'
Once I was in the second half of the book, I felt like this was my favorite of the books in the series. I think Pierce Brown does his best work when he's talking about a battle. So the fighting you see in this part of the book really shines.
While it is very authentic to a war scenario, I don't personally like that so many characters die. I know people would complain if no one died because then the stakes wouldn't be as high for the characters but it makes me so sad when a character I like doesn't make it.
Despite the slow start of the third book, by the end, I had completely forgotten about it and felt that this was my favorite book in the series. The action, the schemes, everything just pulled me in and I was riveted, guessing, gasping and cheering until the very last page.
Sevro is such a strange character, but I love him. Some of the things he said, although unintentionally funny, had me laughing aloud (and probably sounding like a crazy person because I was by myself). Sadly, the course of the war and things that he has experienced seem to change him - as the war alters all of the characters. In the third book, he is just as funny and strangely likable as he was in the previous two books despite the horrors that he has endured.
I love the honest wonder of Ragnar, despite his fierce size and fighting skills he was not born to the same world as Darrow. He is genuinely pleased or fascinated by things most would take for granted in that world. Despite the fact that Ragnar is a terrifying killing machine - you can't help but like him.
Although there is a lot of death and destruction in these books, it is not until halfway through the third book that the pain of a character affected me. I got a little teary-eyed because it was one of the characters that I had grown to care about. I don't feel a very strong connection to them in general, which I feel is probably the main weakness of this series for me.
The second book fell prey to the typical slow nature of a middle book in a trilogy. In general, I feel that these books take some time to get into but become very engaging eventually. The third book was a little slower to start than even the others, although there were some enjoyable moments early on it wasn't until a little over halfway through the book that I really thought 'wow this is where things start happening.'
Once I was in the second half of the book, I felt like this was my favorite of the books in the series. I think Pierce Brown does his best work when he's talking about a battle. So the fighting you see in this part of the book really shines.
While it is very authentic to a war scenario, I don't personally like that so many characters die. I know people would complain if no one died because then the stakes wouldn't be as high for the characters but it makes me so sad when a character I like doesn't make it.
Despite the slow start of the third book, by the end, I had completely forgotten about it and felt that this was my favorite book in the series. The action, the schemes, everything just pulled me in and I was riveted, guessing, gasping and cheering until the very last page.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Operation Finale (2018) in Movies
Sep 11, 2018
Very Good Film with 2 Very Good Performances
The kids are back in school, the leaves are beginning to turn and Halloween is just around the corner (if you believe the displays in the stores), which means it's a "dead period" at the Cineplex for decent films. So, the BankofMarquis headed to the "Art House" to check out a well made, well directed and well acted post WWII drama - OPERATION FINALE.
Set in the early 1960's, OPERATION FINALE tells the tale of Israeli Secret Service Agent's attempt to capture Adolph Eichman in Argentina and bring him back to Israel to face a very public, world-wide trial for his role as the "Architect of the Final Solution".
In other hands, this film could have very easily devolved into a Jason Bourne-type action flick with kick-ass Mossad agents fighting Nazi-loving Argentinian police (with assists from once and future Nazi's). But, in the hands of Writer Matthew Orton (in his major Screenplay debut) and Director Chris Weitz (ABOUT A BOY) this film becomes something much more, much deeper and much more interesting than that, it becomes a character study between Eichman and Mossad Agent Peter Malkin.
The first 1/2 hour of the film starts out "action-y" enough, with the discovery of Eichman and the Mossad's planning of the caper that will bring him to justice. We get the "gathering of the team" - and there's a couple of interesting characters in this group - specifically the characters played by Nick Kroll and Melanie Laurent - but the film really takes off and finds it's footing when the team - and the film - is forced to slow down (waiting for their escape plane to show up) and coax a confession (of sorts) out of Eichman.
So the middle part of this film is really a "two-hander" interrogation between Malkin (Oscar Isaac) and Eichman (Sir Ben Kingsley) - and both really bring it. Isaac (EX MACHINA, STAR WARS) shows a sadness and vulnerability as the agent who's life was deeply affected by the death of his sister (and other family members) at the hands of the SS. He is out to nail Eichman for his crime, but discovers a humanity (both in himself and in Eichman) along the way.
But the picture really belongs to the performance of Sir Ben as Eichman. This is a larger than life actor portraying a larger than life character and more than holds the audience's attention whenever he is on the scene - and when it comes down to an interrogation of Eichman by Malkin, the positions are quickly switched and it is Eichman who is the interrogator and Malkin is in the hot seat. It's not quite an "Oscar-worthy" performance, falling just short of that, but darn good nonetheless.
The final 1/2 hour of the film falls prey to the "Argo" ending - making a more exciting escape than it was in real life - but that is just a quibble for a really good, really intelligent and really ADULT film. One that is well worth checking out at an Art House near you.
Letter Grade A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Set in the early 1960's, OPERATION FINALE tells the tale of Israeli Secret Service Agent's attempt to capture Adolph Eichman in Argentina and bring him back to Israel to face a very public, world-wide trial for his role as the "Architect of the Final Solution".
In other hands, this film could have very easily devolved into a Jason Bourne-type action flick with kick-ass Mossad agents fighting Nazi-loving Argentinian police (with assists from once and future Nazi's). But, in the hands of Writer Matthew Orton (in his major Screenplay debut) and Director Chris Weitz (ABOUT A BOY) this film becomes something much more, much deeper and much more interesting than that, it becomes a character study between Eichman and Mossad Agent Peter Malkin.
The first 1/2 hour of the film starts out "action-y" enough, with the discovery of Eichman and the Mossad's planning of the caper that will bring him to justice. We get the "gathering of the team" - and there's a couple of interesting characters in this group - specifically the characters played by Nick Kroll and Melanie Laurent - but the film really takes off and finds it's footing when the team - and the film - is forced to slow down (waiting for their escape plane to show up) and coax a confession (of sorts) out of Eichman.
So the middle part of this film is really a "two-hander" interrogation between Malkin (Oscar Isaac) and Eichman (Sir Ben Kingsley) - and both really bring it. Isaac (EX MACHINA, STAR WARS) shows a sadness and vulnerability as the agent who's life was deeply affected by the death of his sister (and other family members) at the hands of the SS. He is out to nail Eichman for his crime, but discovers a humanity (both in himself and in Eichman) along the way.
But the picture really belongs to the performance of Sir Ben as Eichman. This is a larger than life actor portraying a larger than life character and more than holds the audience's attention whenever he is on the scene - and when it comes down to an interrogation of Eichman by Malkin, the positions are quickly switched and it is Eichman who is the interrogator and Malkin is in the hot seat. It's not quite an "Oscar-worthy" performance, falling just short of that, but darn good nonetheless.
The final 1/2 hour of the film falls prey to the "Argo" ending - making a more exciting escape than it was in real life - but that is just a quibble for a really good, really intelligent and really ADULT film. One that is well worth checking out at an Art House near you.
Letter Grade A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Jessica - Where the Book Ends (15 KP) rated Love, Hate, and Other Filters in Books
Jan 30, 2019
Love Hate & Other Filters is a book that I was really looking forward to read, it got great hype and the fact that Ahmed is a debut author was just the icing on the cake for me. I loved the premise of the story and learning more about Indian culture through the characters in this book. Ahmed definitely delivered in that area. Her writing was descriptive and her exploration of feelings was on point. It was a quick moving story that left me turning the pages well into the night. I fell in love with Maya and Phil. I especially loved Violet, she has some real MC potential but Ahmed did a great job of not letting her take over the story. I’d love to see a companion book with Violet as the MC, I digress.
The story of Maya and Phil was a cute love story centered in the midst of something so much greater. Their story is derailed by a terrorist attack that hits close to home for Maya and as a result everything she wanted for herself, for her life is flipped upside down. See, the supposed terrorist shares her last name, and as a result Maya and her family have to deal with the insecurities and the intolerance of the people in their community. Islamophobia is a growing problem in our world, and this book is just the tip of the iceberg. The story was haunting and emotional. I personally can’t believe that people treat other people the way they do in this book. It makes me weep for humanity.
I had two problems with this book, which is why I only gave it a 4 star rating… I know Maya is 17 and she would have been just a baby when September 11th happened; however, I would have thought that Islamophobia would have been part of her life from the word go. I’m not saying that it should be that way or that I wish that on anyone because I would never do that. But, I think it’s something that has been so prevalent in our society since September 11th that I find it hard to swallow that she doesn’t mention encountering Islamophobia prior to the terrorist attack when she’s 17. Not only that but her parents don’t mention it either, which I find hard to believe.
The other problem I have with this book is the ending… To be honest it felt rushed to me. I would have loved to see the way it played out in more detail. I would also have preferred the epilogue to flash a little farther into the future. But, that’s just my opinion.
Overall, Ahmed has a great ability to manipulate the written word and weave together a story that will embed itself in your heart. I highly recommend this book, it’s a quick read that is both eye opening and a reminder of what people in this country and world are dealing with. I will gladly pick up any book that Ahmed writes in the future, and I encourage you to pick up this one.
The story of Maya and Phil was a cute love story centered in the midst of something so much greater. Their story is derailed by a terrorist attack that hits close to home for Maya and as a result everything she wanted for herself, for her life is flipped upside down. See, the supposed terrorist shares her last name, and as a result Maya and her family have to deal with the insecurities and the intolerance of the people in their community. Islamophobia is a growing problem in our world, and this book is just the tip of the iceberg. The story was haunting and emotional. I personally can’t believe that people treat other people the way they do in this book. It makes me weep for humanity.
I had two problems with this book, which is why I only gave it a 4 star rating… I know Maya is 17 and she would have been just a baby when September 11th happened; however, I would have thought that Islamophobia would have been part of her life from the word go. I’m not saying that it should be that way or that I wish that on anyone because I would never do that. But, I think it’s something that has been so prevalent in our society since September 11th that I find it hard to swallow that she doesn’t mention encountering Islamophobia prior to the terrorist attack when she’s 17. Not only that but her parents don’t mention it either, which I find hard to believe.
The other problem I have with this book is the ending… To be honest it felt rushed to me. I would have loved to see the way it played out in more detail. I would also have preferred the epilogue to flash a little farther into the future. But, that’s just my opinion.
Overall, Ahmed has a great ability to manipulate the written word and weave together a story that will embed itself in your heart. I highly recommend this book, it’s a quick read that is both eye opening and a reminder of what people in this country and world are dealing with. I will gladly pick up any book that Ahmed writes in the future, and I encourage you to pick up this one.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Harriet (2019) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
Harriet Tubman was among one of the most significant abolitionists in United States history. This film tells the story of her life where she was born in Maryland as a plantation slave. Named Araminta at “Minty” Ross, she transforms throughout her journey, becoming Harriet Tubman as well as transforming into Moses, the appropriate name for the person who leads.
The story begins after church services where Minty’s husband John Tubman who was a free slave asks the plantation owner to allow Minty to be freed so their children would be born free instead of slaves. The slave owner, Henry Broadess (Mike Marunde played with a gleeful abundance of entitlement) denies the request. This is the spark where Araminta decides to run away to live as a free person.
Minty was known for her “spells” since the accident, where she was hit in the forehead by a thrown weight. The film interprets seizures as her conversation with God. The film uses these spells as her talks with and messages received from God. That is how Harriett’s visions are explained. That she has an ability to know where to go and what to from what she sees when she has an episode.
Harriet had saved herself from slavery. She made it to the State of Pennsylvania where she would be free. After a year or so, Harriet decided that she would not be able to rest comfortably as a “free slave” without her husband and her family. That is when she decided that she would go get her loved ones.
As we know from history, she saved her family and many others through the Underground Railroad. All her rescues were successful, totaling 70 that she brought to freedom. The Civil War began a few years later. We are shown Harriet, working with the Union Army to save the lives of about 700 slaves.
The film celebrates Harriet Tubman and provides a beautiful biographical film of this amazing woman. Cynthia Erivo should get a nomination or two come award season. Pssst, she already has a Tony from her performance of The Color Purple on Broadway and a Grammy. She is already halfway to an EGOT. The cast of the film is fantastic. Leslie Odom Jr. as William Still, the man who kept the records of each emancipated slave and provided new identities to help them. Then there is Janelle Monae, as Mary Buchanon, born a free woman. She was among the group that helped Harriet make a new life in Philadelphia.
The film tells a brave tale, but it glosses over the dark history of slavery. Yes, it is one of the dark chapters in humanity. The atrocities committed in the name of self-preservation are despicable. The creators of the movie could have provided a more realistic representation of a picture of slavery.
This film is very good. Ms. Erivo performs effortlessly as Harriet. The supporting cast are very good. Harriet Tubman was a hell of a woman back in the day. I liked the movie. I also would have liked to have slavery shown in stark reality, not coated in idealism.
The story begins after church services where Minty’s husband John Tubman who was a free slave asks the plantation owner to allow Minty to be freed so their children would be born free instead of slaves. The slave owner, Henry Broadess (Mike Marunde played with a gleeful abundance of entitlement) denies the request. This is the spark where Araminta decides to run away to live as a free person.
Minty was known for her “spells” since the accident, where she was hit in the forehead by a thrown weight. The film interprets seizures as her conversation with God. The film uses these spells as her talks with and messages received from God. That is how Harriett’s visions are explained. That she has an ability to know where to go and what to from what she sees when she has an episode.
Harriet had saved herself from slavery. She made it to the State of Pennsylvania where she would be free. After a year or so, Harriet decided that she would not be able to rest comfortably as a “free slave” without her husband and her family. That is when she decided that she would go get her loved ones.
As we know from history, she saved her family and many others through the Underground Railroad. All her rescues were successful, totaling 70 that she brought to freedom. The Civil War began a few years later. We are shown Harriet, working with the Union Army to save the lives of about 700 slaves.
The film celebrates Harriet Tubman and provides a beautiful biographical film of this amazing woman. Cynthia Erivo should get a nomination or two come award season. Pssst, she already has a Tony from her performance of The Color Purple on Broadway and a Grammy. She is already halfway to an EGOT. The cast of the film is fantastic. Leslie Odom Jr. as William Still, the man who kept the records of each emancipated slave and provided new identities to help them. Then there is Janelle Monae, as Mary Buchanon, born a free woman. She was among the group that helped Harriet make a new life in Philadelphia.
The film tells a brave tale, but it glosses over the dark history of slavery. Yes, it is one of the dark chapters in humanity. The atrocities committed in the name of self-preservation are despicable. The creators of the movie could have provided a more realistic representation of a picture of slavery.
This film is very good. Ms. Erivo performs effortlessly as Harriet. The supporting cast are very good. Harriet Tubman was a hell of a woman back in the day. I liked the movie. I also would have liked to have slavery shown in stark reality, not coated in idealism.