Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Jackie (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Spoiler! Her husband gets shot.
“Jackie” tells the story of the spiralling grief, loss and anger of Jackie Kennedy driven by the assassination of JFK in Dallas in November 1963. Hopping backwards and forwards in flashback, the film centres on the first interview given by Jackie (Natalie Portman, “Black Swan”) to a ‘Time’ journalist (Billy Crudup, “Watchmen”, “Spotlight”).
Through this interview we flashback to see Jackie as the young First Lady engaged in recording a TV special for a tour of the White House: nervous, unsure of herself and with a ‘baby girl’ voice. This contrasts with her demeanour in the interview which – although subject to emotional outburst and grief – is assured, confident and above all extremely assertive. We live the film through Jackie’s eyes as she experiences the arrival in Dallas, the traumatic events of November 22nd in Dealey Plaza, the return home to Washington and the complicated arrangement of the President’s funeral.
This is an acting tour de force for Natalie Portman, who is astonishingly emotional as the grief-stricken ex-first lady. She nails this role utterly and completely. Having already won the Golden Globe for an actress in a dramatic role, you would be a foolish man to bet against her not taking the Oscar. (I know I said just the other week that I though Emma Stone should get it for “La La Land” – as another Golden Globe winner, for the Comedy/Musical category – and a large part of my heart would still really like to see Stone win it…. But excellent as that performance was, this is a far more challenging role.)
In a key supporting role is Peter Sarsgaard (“The Magnificent Seven”) as Bobby Kennedy (although his lookalike is not one of the best: that accolade I would give to Gaspard Koenig, in an un-speaking role, as the young Ted Kennedy).
Also providing interesting support as Jackie’s priest is John Hurt (“Alien”, “Dr Who”) and, as Jackie’s close friend, the artist Bill Walton, is Richard E Grant (“Withnail and I”, who as he grows older is looking more and more like Geoffrey Rush – I was sure it was him!).
Director Pablo Larraín (whose previous work I am not familiar with) automatically assumes that EVERYONE has the background history to understand the narrative without further explanation: perhaps as this happened 54 years ago, this is a bit of a presumption for younger viewers? Naturally for people of my advanced years, these events are as burned into our collective psyches as the images in the Zapruder film.
While the film focuses predominantly, and brilliantly, on Jackie’s mental state, the film does gently question (via an outburst from Bobby) as to what JFK actually achieved in his all too short presidency – ‘Will he be remembered for resolving the Cuban missile crisis: something he originally created?’ rants Bobby. In reality, JFK is remembered in history for this assassination and the lost potential for what he might have done. I would have liked the script to have delved a little bit further into that collective soul-searching.
This is a very sombre movie in tone, from the bleak opening, with a soundtrack of sonorous strings, to the bleak weather-swept scenes at Arlington cemetery. The cinematography (by Stéphane Fontaine, “Rust and Bone”) cleverly contrasts between the vibrant hues of Jackie’s “Camelot” to the washed-out blueish tones of the post-assassination events. If you don’t feel depressed going into this film, you probably will be coming out! But the journey is a satisfying one nonetheless, and the script by Noah Oppenheim – in a SIGNIFICANT departure from his previous teen-flick screenplays for “Allegiant” and “The Maze Runner” – is both tight and thought-provoking.
Overall, a recommended watch which comes with a prediction: “And the Oscar goes to… Natalie Portman”.
Finally, note that for those of a squeamish disposition, there is a very graphic depiction of the assassination from Jackie’s point-of-view…. but this is not until nearly the end of the film, so you are reasonably safe until then!
Also as a final general whinge, could directors PLEASE place an embargo on the logos of more than two production companies coming up at the start of a film? This has about six of them and is farcical, aping the (very amusing) parody in “Family Guy” (as shown here).
Through this interview we flashback to see Jackie as the young First Lady engaged in recording a TV special for a tour of the White House: nervous, unsure of herself and with a ‘baby girl’ voice. This contrasts with her demeanour in the interview which – although subject to emotional outburst and grief – is assured, confident and above all extremely assertive. We live the film through Jackie’s eyes as she experiences the arrival in Dallas, the traumatic events of November 22nd in Dealey Plaza, the return home to Washington and the complicated arrangement of the President’s funeral.
This is an acting tour de force for Natalie Portman, who is astonishingly emotional as the grief-stricken ex-first lady. She nails this role utterly and completely. Having already won the Golden Globe for an actress in a dramatic role, you would be a foolish man to bet against her not taking the Oscar. (I know I said just the other week that I though Emma Stone should get it for “La La Land” – as another Golden Globe winner, for the Comedy/Musical category – and a large part of my heart would still really like to see Stone win it…. But excellent as that performance was, this is a far more challenging role.)
In a key supporting role is Peter Sarsgaard (“The Magnificent Seven”) as Bobby Kennedy (although his lookalike is not one of the best: that accolade I would give to Gaspard Koenig, in an un-speaking role, as the young Ted Kennedy).
Also providing interesting support as Jackie’s priest is John Hurt (“Alien”, “Dr Who”) and, as Jackie’s close friend, the artist Bill Walton, is Richard E Grant (“Withnail and I”, who as he grows older is looking more and more like Geoffrey Rush – I was sure it was him!).
Director Pablo Larraín (whose previous work I am not familiar with) automatically assumes that EVERYONE has the background history to understand the narrative without further explanation: perhaps as this happened 54 years ago, this is a bit of a presumption for younger viewers? Naturally for people of my advanced years, these events are as burned into our collective psyches as the images in the Zapruder film.
While the film focuses predominantly, and brilliantly, on Jackie’s mental state, the film does gently question (via an outburst from Bobby) as to what JFK actually achieved in his all too short presidency – ‘Will he be remembered for resolving the Cuban missile crisis: something he originally created?’ rants Bobby. In reality, JFK is remembered in history for this assassination and the lost potential for what he might have done. I would have liked the script to have delved a little bit further into that collective soul-searching.
This is a very sombre movie in tone, from the bleak opening, with a soundtrack of sonorous strings, to the bleak weather-swept scenes at Arlington cemetery. The cinematography (by Stéphane Fontaine, “Rust and Bone”) cleverly contrasts between the vibrant hues of Jackie’s “Camelot” to the washed-out blueish tones of the post-assassination events. If you don’t feel depressed going into this film, you probably will be coming out! But the journey is a satisfying one nonetheless, and the script by Noah Oppenheim – in a SIGNIFICANT departure from his previous teen-flick screenplays for “Allegiant” and “The Maze Runner” – is both tight and thought-provoking.
Overall, a recommended watch which comes with a prediction: “And the Oscar goes to… Natalie Portman”.
Finally, note that for those of a squeamish disposition, there is a very graphic depiction of the assassination from Jackie’s point-of-view…. but this is not until nearly the end of the film, so you are reasonably safe until then!
Also as a final general whinge, could directors PLEASE place an embargo on the logos of more than two production companies coming up at the start of a film? This has about six of them and is farcical, aping the (very amusing) parody in “Family Guy” (as shown here).
Alison Pink (7 KP) rated Sisterhood Everlasting (Sisterhood, #5) in Books
Jan 15, 2018
I won this book from First Reads, failing to realize that it was another book in the series of The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants. I have not read any of the books in this series nor have a I seen the movies so I was worried that I would be totally lost. I was undeterred however & plunged in with fingers crossed.
I have to say it didn't really matter that I knew nothing about the series prior to this book. It was able to stand on its own. There was back story, but not knowing it didn't seem to effect my enjoyment of this book. It was a bit difficult to get into at first, but once I was in, I was in & invested in Lena, Carmen, TIbby, & Bee.
The book seems to be a final installment in the series. It opens with the 4 friends hardly speaking to each other as life has gotten in the way. 3 of them recieve letters from Tibby who is currently living in Australia. They contain requests to meet her in Greece & also the plane tickets to allow them to do so. The 3 head off, meet up in JFK airport, & fly off to Greece to get there. They mysetery begins when they arrive & Tibby is not there waiting for them as she said she would be.
This is a sad read, but it is also very real. The characters jump off the page & the writing plunges you deep into their lives. I love that in a book.
I have to say it didn't really matter that I knew nothing about the series prior to this book. It was able to stand on its own. There was back story, but not knowing it didn't seem to effect my enjoyment of this book. It was a bit difficult to get into at first, but once I was in, I was in & invested in Lena, Carmen, TIbby, & Bee.
The book seems to be a final installment in the series. It opens with the 4 friends hardly speaking to each other as life has gotten in the way. 3 of them recieve letters from Tibby who is currently living in Australia. They contain requests to meet her in Greece & also the plane tickets to allow them to do so. The 3 head off, meet up in JFK airport, & fly off to Greece to get there. They mysetery begins when they arrive & Tibby is not there waiting for them as she said she would be.
This is a sad read, but it is also very real. The characters jump off the page & the writing plunges you deep into their lives. I love that in a book.
Alison Pink (7 KP) rated Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot in Books
Jan 15, 2018
I will be the first to admit that I am not a big fan of Bill O'Reilly's views on many things, but there is no arguing that he can write an excellent book. This is the second of his "Killing" series that I've read, the first being Killing Jesus. They were both wonderful & so easy to lose yourself in.
This particular book made me forget that I was reading about actual events. I was so immersed in the story. JFK & Jackie are fascinating people & their life together makes them all the more intriguing. This book isn't just about the assassination, but the years, months, & days leading up to that fateful day in November. Both for the Kennedy family & the Oswalds. I found myself at times, thinking, "No don't do that." Or, "Yes, listen to your gut & your advisors & cancel that trip." Almost hoping that somehow it would turn out differently, but knowing full well how it was going to end.
Despite knowing the end before even cracking the book open, I was hooked from the very first word. It is rare to read a non-fiction book that reads like a spy novel & political thriller. That's what makes the reader forget that the events really happened. It doesn't falter into all the conspiracy theories or speculation on the events leading up to it. It is remarkably well researched & based on the countless records, videos, transcripts, & documents from the era. This is a must read for anyone, even if you aren't fascinated with the Kennedys as I was.
This particular book made me forget that I was reading about actual events. I was so immersed in the story. JFK & Jackie are fascinating people & their life together makes them all the more intriguing. This book isn't just about the assassination, but the years, months, & days leading up to that fateful day in November. Both for the Kennedy family & the Oswalds. I found myself at times, thinking, "No don't do that." Or, "Yes, listen to your gut & your advisors & cancel that trip." Almost hoping that somehow it would turn out differently, but knowing full well how it was going to end.
Despite knowing the end before even cracking the book open, I was hooked from the very first word. It is rare to read a non-fiction book that reads like a spy novel & political thriller. That's what makes the reader forget that the events really happened. It doesn't falter into all the conspiracy theories or speculation on the events leading up to it. It is remarkably well researched & based on the countless records, videos, transcripts, & documents from the era. This is a must read for anyone, even if you aren't fascinated with the Kennedys as I was.
I don't know why, but for some reason I've never really taken to Stephen King's novels all that much.
I don't know whether that's because he's best known as a horror writer (with that being my least favourite genre), or whether because as a UK native I don't have quite the same cultural touchstones as King himself (or other American readers/writers), but there you have it.
(And, as an aside, I find that date format of 11.22.63 to be very disconcerting - I'm more used to dd/mm/yy i.e. 22/11/63 instead of 11.22.63)
Anyway, with all that said, I decided to give this a chance after it was recommended to me by a friend as 'a bit like Quantum Leap. I would have thought it was right up your street' (and I'm paraphrasing there somewhat).
I can see where he was coming from - this is a time travel novel, after all, here dealing with the JFK assassination - with the hero of the piece out to stop that assassination after finding a 'wormhole' back in time to the late 1950s.
Now that I've read it, I can say that it is definitely immersive with some solid world building, but boy does the middle section draaagggg: I was tempted, at one point, to just skip forward a good chunk (I didn't) to see if anything of note would happen ...
In short? Enjoyable enough, yes, but not enough to make me want to change my outlook on other King novels.
I don't know whether that's because he's best known as a horror writer (with that being my least favourite genre), or whether because as a UK native I don't have quite the same cultural touchstones as King himself (or other American readers/writers), but there you have it.
(And, as an aside, I find that date format of 11.22.63 to be very disconcerting - I'm more used to dd/mm/yy i.e. 22/11/63 instead of 11.22.63)
Anyway, with all that said, I decided to give this a chance after it was recommended to me by a friend as 'a bit like Quantum Leap. I would have thought it was right up your street' (and I'm paraphrasing there somewhat).
I can see where he was coming from - this is a time travel novel, after all, here dealing with the JFK assassination - with the hero of the piece out to stop that assassination after finding a 'wormhole' back in time to the late 1950s.
Now that I've read it, I can say that it is definitely immersive with some solid world building, but boy does the middle section draaagggg: I was tempted, at one point, to just skip forward a good chunk (I didn't) to see if anything of note would happen ...
In short? Enjoyable enough, yes, but not enough to make me want to change my outlook on other King novels.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated The Flight Attendant in Books
Jun 21, 2019
Cassie Bowden is a flight attendant who works international flights out of JFK airport in New York City. On a flight to Dubai, Cassie meets, Alex Sokolov, a finance guy who is in town on business. They decide to have dinner after they are both settled in the city and that leads to much more. Cassie ends up spending the night with Alex, there's only one problem. She wakes up in the morning and he does not. Laying in a pool of his blood, Cassie doesn't know whether she is responsible or not. She is known for her drunken escapades, but has never encountered anything like this. Instead of telling anyone, she returns to the U.S. She will grapple back and forth with herself, her friends, family, attorney, and FBI about what really happened that night in Dubai and who is Alex Sokolov.
I have loved Chris Bohjalian's books from the first one I read, Midwives.
There was a time in my life when I wanted to be a flight attendant. I'm not sure what happened that I didn't go through with it. I would have loved to travel the world seeing different places no matter how briefly. Although I here the flight attendant life isn't as glamorous as it may seem.
This book really grabbed me from the start. Cassie liked to get drunk and make bad decisions. This time she thought she found a nice guy, but who would want him dead. The FBI thinks she may have been in on it, but she's nothing but a flight attendant, not a spy. Will she continue her wild behavior, or will this incident be a wake up call for her?
Travel with Cassie all over the world as she tries to figure out her life and where it all went wrong. Will she make it out of this situation or will she spend the rest of her life somewhere she doesn't belong?
I have loved Chris Bohjalian's books from the first one I read, Midwives.
There was a time in my life when I wanted to be a flight attendant. I'm not sure what happened that I didn't go through with it. I would have loved to travel the world seeing different places no matter how briefly. Although I here the flight attendant life isn't as glamorous as it may seem.
This book really grabbed me from the start. Cassie liked to get drunk and make bad decisions. This time she thought she found a nice guy, but who would want him dead. The FBI thinks she may have been in on it, but she's nothing but a flight attendant, not a spy. Will she continue her wild behavior, or will this incident be a wake up call for her?
Travel with Cassie all over the world as she tries to figure out her life and where it all went wrong. Will she make it out of this situation or will she spend the rest of her life somewhere she doesn't belong?
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated The Flight Attendant in Books
Jul 22, 2019
Cassie Bowden is a flight attendant who works international flights out of JFK airport in New York City. On a flight to Dubai, Cassie meets, Alex Sokolov, a finance guy who is in town on business. They decide to have dinner after they are both settled in the city and that leads to much more. Cassie ends up spending the night with Alex, there's only one problem. She wakes up in the morning and he does not. Laying in a pool of his blood, Cassie doesn't know whether she is responsible or not. She is known for her drunken escapades, but has never encountered anything like this. Instead of telling anyone, she returns to the U.S. She will grapple back and forth with herself, her friends, family, attorney, and FBI about what really happened that night in Dubai and who is Alex Sokolov.
I have loved Chris Bohjalian's books from the first one I read, Midwives.
There was a time in my life when I wanted to be a flight attendant. I'm not sure what happened that I didn't go through with it. I would have loved to travel the world seeing different places no matter how briefly. Although I here the flight attendant life isn't as glamorous as it may seem.
This book really grabbed me from the start. Cassie liked to get drunk and make bad decisions. This time she thought she found a nice guy, but who would want him dead. The FBI thinks she may have been in on it, but she's nothing but a flight attendant, not a spy. Will she continue her wild behavior, or will this incident be a wake up call for her?
Travel with Cassie all over the world as she tries to figure out her life and where it all went wrong. Will she make it out of this situation or will she spend the rest of her life somewhere she doesn't belong?
I have loved Chris Bohjalian's books from the first one I read, Midwives.
There was a time in my life when I wanted to be a flight attendant. I'm not sure what happened that I didn't go through with it. I would have loved to travel the world seeing different places no matter how briefly. Although I here the flight attendant life isn't as glamorous as it may seem.
This book really grabbed me from the start. Cassie liked to get drunk and make bad decisions. This time she thought she found a nice guy, but who would want him dead. The FBI thinks she may have been in on it, but she's nothing but a flight attendant, not a spy. Will she continue her wild behavior, or will this incident be a wake up call for her?
Travel with Cassie all over the world as she tries to figure out her life and where it all went wrong. Will she make it out of this situation or will she spend the rest of her life somewhere she doesn't belong?
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated 11.22.63 in Books
Nov 30, 2020
When this book first came in, back in 2011, I blew it off, despite a marked interest in all things JFK/Lee Harvey Oswald conspiracy related. However, when I saw who had written it, that interest was dashed bits. Jumping ahead to yesterday, when I completed the book, I find myself having to rough myself up mentally for not reading this sooner!
The novel is unlike anything I've read by King. The prose was just right, not too much. Even the use of profanity was toned down = not sure if this was because of the era it was set (unlikely, I apt to believe, as life was not "The Donna Reed Show", contrary to what we would like to believe) or attributable to the fact that Mr. King has, in fact, grown up as a writer. In any case, I liked a whole heckuva lot!
The book had so many good plot elements: time-travel, romance, epic dilemmas, and characters that you genuinely cared about! All of the aforementioned elements added up to a novel worthy of praise and adulatation - many times over!
The story within was so engaging that I finished it within a week after starting it - something I haven't been able to do with a Stephen King novel in a loooong time! Throughout the tale, I found myself smiling, laughing, gripped with tension and suspense, and the hardest emotion to pull: tears of sadness and delight!
Look, I will not mislead or try to "lure" you into reading this. What I do is tell it like this: there more books on the NY Times bestseller list that are just filler for writers' contractual obligations, lacking the real substance or feeling needed for a proper tale.! '11/21/63' has plenty of feeling and substance, enough to offer to some of the other bestsellers on the list now, and then.
And conclusion, I will leave like this: Seriously? You do a lot worse that giving this book the shot it deserves.
The novel is unlike anything I've read by King. The prose was just right, not too much. Even the use of profanity was toned down = not sure if this was because of the era it was set (unlikely, I apt to believe, as life was not "The Donna Reed Show", contrary to what we would like to believe) or attributable to the fact that Mr. King has, in fact, grown up as a writer. In any case, I liked a whole heckuva lot!
The book had so many good plot elements: time-travel, romance, epic dilemmas, and characters that you genuinely cared about! All of the aforementioned elements added up to a novel worthy of praise and adulatation - many times over!
The story within was so engaging that I finished it within a week after starting it - something I haven't been able to do with a Stephen King novel in a loooong time! Throughout the tale, I found myself smiling, laughing, gripped with tension and suspense, and the hardest emotion to pull: tears of sadness and delight!
Look, I will not mislead or try to "lure" you into reading this. What I do is tell it like this: there more books on the NY Times bestseller list that are just filler for writers' contractual obligations, lacking the real substance or feeling needed for a proper tale.! '11/21/63' has plenty of feeling and substance, enough to offer to some of the other bestsellers on the list now, and then.
And conclusion, I will leave like this: Seriously? You do a lot worse that giving this book the shot it deserves.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Patriots Day (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
There are events in history that are burned into our memories. The attack on Pearl Harbor, JFK assassination, Challenger explosion, Oklahoma City bombing, and 9/11 stand out as moments when their respective generations ask “where were you when?” The same can be said with the Boston Marathon bombing of 2013. In Patriot’s Day we bear witness to the various people involved with the events that unfolded during that week. We are reminded of the tension and fear that the nation experienced as law enforcement tried to find those responsible. The film reopens a wound that has just begun to heal so that we are reminded of the vulnerability that everyone, from every walk of life has to terrorism and acts of violence.
Patriot’s Day stars Mark Wahlberg as a police officer and native Bostonian who is placed on duty for the Boston Marathon. The film is not about him or his personal experience. Rather, the film is more about the myriad of individuals who witness or fall victim to the attack that day. Unlike similar films that deal with the topic of terrorism, the film does not focus on the effect the events have on one or two people. The film is complex and demonstrates the circumstances of the attack, the investigation, the apprehension, and the personal experiences through a variety of voices and faces. The film makes the experience personal and does not depend on sensationalism to sell the story.
The film will captivate those that see it in being able to learn more about the individuals involved or who fell victim. It is also remarkable in its ability to weave the storytelling so that each player has a strong development before their portion of the tale is fully realized. It allows for an appreciation of the individuals involved and demonstrates that they are more than just names in a report. Patriot’s Day is a film that will open wounds for those who witnessed and experienced the events first-hand, but allows for those who have little to no memory of that week to delve deeper into the way that the events played out and truly understand the manner in which the city of Boston went from hurting, to healing, to being strong.
Patriot’s Day stars Mark Wahlberg as a police officer and native Bostonian who is placed on duty for the Boston Marathon. The film is not about him or his personal experience. Rather, the film is more about the myriad of individuals who witness or fall victim to the attack that day. Unlike similar films that deal with the topic of terrorism, the film does not focus on the effect the events have on one or two people. The film is complex and demonstrates the circumstances of the attack, the investigation, the apprehension, and the personal experiences through a variety of voices and faces. The film makes the experience personal and does not depend on sensationalism to sell the story.
The film will captivate those that see it in being able to learn more about the individuals involved or who fell victim. It is also remarkable in its ability to weave the storytelling so that each player has a strong development before their portion of the tale is fully realized. It allows for an appreciation of the individuals involved and demonstrates that they are more than just names in a report. Patriot’s Day is a film that will open wounds for those who witnessed and experienced the events first-hand, but allows for those who have little to no memory of that week to delve deeper into the way that the events played out and truly understand the manner in which the city of Boston went from hurting, to healing, to being strong.
Johnny Messias (25 KP) rated The Irishman (2019) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Al Pacino as Hoffa (6 more)
Joe Pesci is wonderful
De Niro anchors the film
Scorsese on top form
Thelma Schoonmaker’s editing
Steve Zaillian’s script
De Niro and Pacino together
Marty’s marvellous Oldfellas
The Irishman – BFI London Film Festival Review Oct 13th 2019.
An extended cinematic love letter to some of the finest actors of the last 40 years, and to a bygone era of US history, The Irishman is reassuringly brilliant. Like the best Scorsese joints, its business is power brokers, mobsters and underground schemers, but often as a comedy of manners. De Niro anchors the story, yes as mob enforcer but also as a kind of killer Forrest Gump; “connected” to some key milestones in 1960s America; Bay of Pigs, Jimmy Hoffa’s teamsters, RFK, then later the shadow of Nixon. Famously, we see De Niro’s titular character Frank in his 20s, 30s, 40s, right up until the old age home. Scorsese uses computerised de-aging technology to achieve the effect make-up artists might have parlayed. It works well—mostly. What grips you and takes you in is the bravura acting. Al Pacino gives a wonderful performance as Jimmy Hoffa. He goes full “Pacino” with speeches and grandstanding but it is the lilt of this voice (all sing song) in quiet moments that makes this the best we’ve seen from Al in many a year. Joe Pesci as well. He’s kind of the centre of this world, as the mobster who links up De Niro to Pacino’s Hoffa. Pesci speaks quietly and carefully; you sense how much power he has without any of the violence that was trademark in his famous Casino and Goodfellas roles. Over nearly 3.5 hours (never seems long) what you get is a beautifully written, shot, edited and performed drama about loyalty, friendship and a creeping sense of regret. All with the backdrop of this fascinating period: JFK, Union movements, Cuba, Fidel Castro. It lingers long in the memory and it’s one to cherish, since we surely won’t see its like again.
An extended cinematic love letter to some of the finest actors of the last 40 years, and to a bygone era of US history, The Irishman is reassuringly brilliant. Like the best Scorsese joints, its business is power brokers, mobsters and underground schemers, but often as a comedy of manners. De Niro anchors the story, yes as mob enforcer but also as a kind of killer Forrest Gump; “connected” to some key milestones in 1960s America; Bay of Pigs, Jimmy Hoffa’s teamsters, RFK, then later the shadow of Nixon. Famously, we see De Niro’s titular character Frank in his 20s, 30s, 40s, right up until the old age home. Scorsese uses computerised de-aging technology to achieve the effect make-up artists might have parlayed. It works well—mostly. What grips you and takes you in is the bravura acting. Al Pacino gives a wonderful performance as Jimmy Hoffa. He goes full “Pacino” with speeches and grandstanding but it is the lilt of this voice (all sing song) in quiet moments that makes this the best we’ve seen from Al in many a year. Joe Pesci as well. He’s kind of the centre of this world, as the mobster who links up De Niro to Pacino’s Hoffa. Pesci speaks quietly and carefully; you sense how much power he has without any of the violence that was trademark in his famous Casino and Goodfellas roles. Over nearly 3.5 hours (never seems long) what you get is a beautifully written, shot, edited and performed drama about loyalty, friendship and a creeping sense of regret. All with the backdrop of this fascinating period: JFK, Union movements, Cuba, Fidel Castro. It lingers long in the memory and it’s one to cherish, since we surely won’t see its like again.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Selma (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Set in 1965, the film follows the voting rights marches from Selma to Montgomery. During the time Black citizens had the legal right to vote, but there were countless strategies put into place to stop them from actually being able to use those voting rights.
The film does a good job of providing back story of what was happening that brought on the marches. It portrays the horrific brutality of a time when blatant hatred ripped through the soul of the nation.
During the Selma march, peaceful protestors dressed in their Sunday’s best were beaten (even killed) by local police. However, even the most hard to watch moments of violence were toned down in comparison to actual footage from the Selma march.
The visceral moments of raw emotion and terrible violence will give the audience chills
Martin Luther King, Jr. (David Oyelowo) would of course be a hard pair of shoes to fill as an actor. But somehow Oyelowo pulls it off with a passion that shows in his eyes. Even the ways in which Oyelowo delivers his speeches were powerful and moving, much in the way of the real MLK, Jr.
An intriguing part of the film is the attention given to MLK, Jr.’s wife, Coretta Scott King (Carmen Ejogo). She is a less talked about figure in history, but perhaps this will now change. She is shown to be a very strong and intelligent woman, who serves as the backbone to the King family. Her role as wife, mother, and political supporter are highlighted.
The cast selection is top notch, making the film very realistic.
Tom Wilkinson, who plays Lyndon B. Johnson, practically resurrects the late President. His physical appearance and vocals make the actor almost indistinguishable from the real LBJ. .
However, there is some controversy over the historical accuracy of certain aspects of the film. This especially is true in regards to the portrayal of LBJ.
He is portrayed as under pressure to pass legislation in favor of Black voters, but he himself comes off as a racist whose heart is not in the cause. This portrayal paints a picture of a dishonest man, wielding political power to save face. It is contradicting to the more well-known image of the LBJ who actually cared very much about civil rights and poverty.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is thought to be his most important piece of legislative work. It was certainly not just a mere political reaction to protestors, though they surely had a strong impact on making it happen.
No one can deny the power of MLK, Jr.’s work. It is a profound historical example of the possibility for political transformation through the will of the people.
Another point of question is whether or not it was JFK or LBJ who originally ordered the FBI surveillance of MLK, Jr. and those associated with him.
A slightly troubling aspect of the film is that it lacks showing any tinge of gender inequality, which was a pervasive part of that era. Also, it was hinted at that MLK, Jr. had infidelity issues. Personally, I had some question as to whether or not this was true, or if it was even a useful piece of information to include. Perhaps it was included to show a more human side to MLK, Jr.
All of these questions aside, “Selma” is an amazing and moving piece of work.
A finely crafted cinematic reflection of a deep and painful scar on American history, I give “Selma” 4.5 out of 5 stars.
The film does a good job of providing back story of what was happening that brought on the marches. It portrays the horrific brutality of a time when blatant hatred ripped through the soul of the nation.
During the Selma march, peaceful protestors dressed in their Sunday’s best were beaten (even killed) by local police. However, even the most hard to watch moments of violence were toned down in comparison to actual footage from the Selma march.
The visceral moments of raw emotion and terrible violence will give the audience chills
Martin Luther King, Jr. (David Oyelowo) would of course be a hard pair of shoes to fill as an actor. But somehow Oyelowo pulls it off with a passion that shows in his eyes. Even the ways in which Oyelowo delivers his speeches were powerful and moving, much in the way of the real MLK, Jr.
An intriguing part of the film is the attention given to MLK, Jr.’s wife, Coretta Scott King (Carmen Ejogo). She is a less talked about figure in history, but perhaps this will now change. She is shown to be a very strong and intelligent woman, who serves as the backbone to the King family. Her role as wife, mother, and political supporter are highlighted.
The cast selection is top notch, making the film very realistic.
Tom Wilkinson, who plays Lyndon B. Johnson, practically resurrects the late President. His physical appearance and vocals make the actor almost indistinguishable from the real LBJ. .
However, there is some controversy over the historical accuracy of certain aspects of the film. This especially is true in regards to the portrayal of LBJ.
He is portrayed as under pressure to pass legislation in favor of Black voters, but he himself comes off as a racist whose heart is not in the cause. This portrayal paints a picture of a dishonest man, wielding political power to save face. It is contradicting to the more well-known image of the LBJ who actually cared very much about civil rights and poverty.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is thought to be his most important piece of legislative work. It was certainly not just a mere political reaction to protestors, though they surely had a strong impact on making it happen.
No one can deny the power of MLK, Jr.’s work. It is a profound historical example of the possibility for political transformation through the will of the people.
Another point of question is whether or not it was JFK or LBJ who originally ordered the FBI surveillance of MLK, Jr. and those associated with him.
A slightly troubling aspect of the film is that it lacks showing any tinge of gender inequality, which was a pervasive part of that era. Also, it was hinted at that MLK, Jr. had infidelity issues. Personally, I had some question as to whether or not this was true, or if it was even a useful piece of information to include. Perhaps it was included to show a more human side to MLK, Jr.
All of these questions aside, “Selma” is an amazing and moving piece of work.
A finely crafted cinematic reflection of a deep and painful scar on American history, I give “Selma” 4.5 out of 5 stars.