Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Bourne Legacy (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
With the franchise torch passing from Matt Damon to Jeremy Renner, “The Bourne Legacy” shows that there is still plenty of life in the franchise.
The events of the film take place during and after the events in The Bourne Ultimatum”and portrays the effects and consequences of the actions taken by Jason Bourne in the first three movies. Now that Bourne has made Treadstone/Blackbriar public and began to seek some measure of justice for lives that were destroyed by the program, the government attempts to cover-up their operations and discredit Bourne and his associate CIA deputy director Pamela Landy who is facing a myriad of charges.
Enter Stacy Keach and Ed Norton who ooze a chilling creepiness as shadowy government figures who will stop at nothing to cover up the growing scandal, including wholesale murder.
Bourne and his program were, in the words of one character, “the tip of the iceberg” and as such, just another program the government ran, which had the same goals of Operation Treadstone but used different methods to create and train their agents, becomes the focus of the film.
Alex Cross (Renner), finds himself the lone survivor of a purge that has eliminated all the living members of his program, this includes the very scientists who helped created the enhanced agents. As a creation who needs special medications to function, Cross races to Washington in an attempt to reach Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz), who has been a medical contact for Cross for years. Shearing herself is a survivor of numerous dangers and attempted assassinations, thanks to the timely arrival of Cross.
In an attempt to escape the government manhunt lead by Agent Eric Byer (Edward Norton), As these events are unfolding, the actions of Jason Bourne and Pam Landy in the final moments of ‘The Bourne Ultimatum’ are beginning to unravel which forces Cross and Marta to flee to Manila to get Cross a shot at being able to function at his elite level with the need for medications.
With locales that include the wilderness of Alaska, the alleys of Chicago, America’s east coast, and the streets of Manila, “The Bourne Legacy” breathes new life into the franchise. While the first hour of the film moved at a slow pace and lacked much action, the last thirty minutes kicked into high gear and included a fantastic chase and action sequence through Manila.
Renner does not try to be Bourne, and instead plays Cross as a kind but efficient warrior. We are given some insight into his backstory and motivations for entering the program, and Renner goes all out for a demanding and physical role while earning the audience’s sympathy for the plight of Cross.
Director Tony Gilroy (Who also had a hand in the script), knows the franchise well as he had a hand in writing the previous three films and directed one. It is clear that he is steering the franchise to a very likely fifth film, perhaps one where Renner and Damon will cross paths which would be to the fans’ delight. Should that not happen, the series is in great hands with Renner.
The events of the film take place during and after the events in The Bourne Ultimatum”and portrays the effects and consequences of the actions taken by Jason Bourne in the first three movies. Now that Bourne has made Treadstone/Blackbriar public and began to seek some measure of justice for lives that were destroyed by the program, the government attempts to cover-up their operations and discredit Bourne and his associate CIA deputy director Pamela Landy who is facing a myriad of charges.
Enter Stacy Keach and Ed Norton who ooze a chilling creepiness as shadowy government figures who will stop at nothing to cover up the growing scandal, including wholesale murder.
Bourne and his program were, in the words of one character, “the tip of the iceberg” and as such, just another program the government ran, which had the same goals of Operation Treadstone but used different methods to create and train their agents, becomes the focus of the film.
Alex Cross (Renner), finds himself the lone survivor of a purge that has eliminated all the living members of his program, this includes the very scientists who helped created the enhanced agents. As a creation who needs special medications to function, Cross races to Washington in an attempt to reach Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz), who has been a medical contact for Cross for years. Shearing herself is a survivor of numerous dangers and attempted assassinations, thanks to the timely arrival of Cross.
In an attempt to escape the government manhunt lead by Agent Eric Byer (Edward Norton), As these events are unfolding, the actions of Jason Bourne and Pam Landy in the final moments of ‘The Bourne Ultimatum’ are beginning to unravel which forces Cross and Marta to flee to Manila to get Cross a shot at being able to function at his elite level with the need for medications.
With locales that include the wilderness of Alaska, the alleys of Chicago, America’s east coast, and the streets of Manila, “The Bourne Legacy” breathes new life into the franchise. While the first hour of the film moved at a slow pace and lacked much action, the last thirty minutes kicked into high gear and included a fantastic chase and action sequence through Manila.
Renner does not try to be Bourne, and instead plays Cross as a kind but efficient warrior. We are given some insight into his backstory and motivations for entering the program, and Renner goes all out for a demanding and physical role while earning the audience’s sympathy for the plight of Cross.
Director Tony Gilroy (Who also had a hand in the script), knows the franchise well as he had a hand in writing the previous three films and directed one. It is clear that he is steering the franchise to a very likely fifth film, perhaps one where Renner and Damon will cross paths which would be to the fans’ delight. Should that not happen, the series is in great hands with Renner.
156Reviews (7 KP) rated I Lost My Body (2019) in Movies
May 1, 2020
It wasn't surprising that I Lost My Body, a story about a severed hand that is trying to find its way back to its owner, didn't win “Best Animated feature” at this years Oscars. Originality seems to be quite low on the Academy's criteria. But it was more telling that it lost to Toy Story 4, a fourth instalment of a franchise that began in 1995. Sadly for director Jeremy Clapin, the decision was the right one.
'I Lost My Body' follows Naoufel (Hakim Faris), a young Parisian child with overflowing potential, whose objective in life is to grow up to be “An Astronaut and a Concert Pianist”. Naoufel's life changes direction dramatically when his parents are killed in a car accident and he is placed into foster care. As he grows up, his goals change from playing in concert halls to delivering pizzas in time so his boss won't dock his pay. It's during this endeavour that he “meets” Gabrielle (Victoire Du Bois), who is introduced as just a voice on her buildings intercom but instantly captivates Naoufel and sets him on a mission to meet her in person. After lightly stalking her, he takes a job in her uncle's carpentry business begins courting her with some success. Most of this happens before the half way mark.
All of this is enough for any film, for an animation it's a lot to do, for a viewer it's a lot to take in, but there is even more going on, there is a hand on the loose.
Surprisingly, this is where the film falls short, where it tells the story about the hand. After escaping a medical freezer the hand sets out on a journey to find its body, bit by bit covering the ground that the Naoufel timeline has already gone through and, if anything, distracting from the interesting aspects of the plot. Whether it's through writing (Clapin also wrote the screenplay alongside Guillaume Laurant) or the animation, these scenes lack any stakes. The hand falls off buildings, survives being crushed in a garbage truck, is attacked by rats, and so on, but still remains whole. As gruesome as it sounds, if the hand lost a piece here, a fingertip there, it would truly make it seem like a journey with consequence. Instead the hand seems invincible, it doesn't overcome any of its trials because it was always going to survive, and sadly, makes this side of plot the more redundant the more it progresses.
Given the amount of time it takes to make an animation, it's a shame to leave any of it on the cutting room floor, but by the end of this film you'll be wishing there was a bit more down there, mostly containing images of a severed hand. I believe there is half a great film here, the reviews it's received from around the world show us that. Unfortunately I also believe there is a very average half a film here, that doesn't do enough to justify its existence, and definitely isn't better than Toy Story 4.
'I Lost My Body' follows Naoufel (Hakim Faris), a young Parisian child with overflowing potential, whose objective in life is to grow up to be “An Astronaut and a Concert Pianist”. Naoufel's life changes direction dramatically when his parents are killed in a car accident and he is placed into foster care. As he grows up, his goals change from playing in concert halls to delivering pizzas in time so his boss won't dock his pay. It's during this endeavour that he “meets” Gabrielle (Victoire Du Bois), who is introduced as just a voice on her buildings intercom but instantly captivates Naoufel and sets him on a mission to meet her in person. After lightly stalking her, he takes a job in her uncle's carpentry business begins courting her with some success. Most of this happens before the half way mark.
All of this is enough for any film, for an animation it's a lot to do, for a viewer it's a lot to take in, but there is even more going on, there is a hand on the loose.
Surprisingly, this is where the film falls short, where it tells the story about the hand. After escaping a medical freezer the hand sets out on a journey to find its body, bit by bit covering the ground that the Naoufel timeline has already gone through and, if anything, distracting from the interesting aspects of the plot. Whether it's through writing (Clapin also wrote the screenplay alongside Guillaume Laurant) or the animation, these scenes lack any stakes. The hand falls off buildings, survives being crushed in a garbage truck, is attacked by rats, and so on, but still remains whole. As gruesome as it sounds, if the hand lost a piece here, a fingertip there, it would truly make it seem like a journey with consequence. Instead the hand seems invincible, it doesn't overcome any of its trials because it was always going to survive, and sadly, makes this side of plot the more redundant the more it progresses.
Given the amount of time it takes to make an animation, it's a shame to leave any of it on the cutting room floor, but by the end of this film you'll be wishing there was a bit more down there, mostly containing images of a severed hand. I believe there is half a great film here, the reviews it's received from around the world show us that. Unfortunately I also believe there is a very average half a film here, that doesn't do enough to justify its existence, and definitely isn't better than Toy Story 4.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020) in Movies
Oct 19, 2020 (Updated Oct 19, 2020)
Fascinating
The Trial of the Chicago 7 is Aaron Sorkin’s second foray into directing, a dramatisation of the true story of 7 people on trial following the events at the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, Illinois.
The film centres around what is effectively a sham of a trial, and aside from a few flashbacks and prep scenes, it is virtually set entirely in the courtroom for the 2+ hour duration. There aren’t many films that can pull this off and aside from a slight lull in the middle, The Trial of the Chicago 7 manages this impressively well and this is mainly down to Aaron Sorkin himself and his rather stellar cast. It also helps that the story itself is a fascinating one. I knew nothing about the trial, the people or even the protests in Chicago, so watching this was a rather disturbing eye opener. It’s a truly compelling and interesting story which has a great deal of relevance to today’s politics – Netflix Ken what they were doing releasing this close to election time!
I’m a long time fan of Sorkin’s writing and alongside his directing, it definitely does not disappoint here. His usual sharp and quick witted dialogue is ever present and is delivered flawless by the marvellous cast. Sorkin even manages to throw in a few laughs which considering the rather serious aspects of the story is no mean feat, and these are often delivered from the ‘bromance’ between Sacha Baron Cohen’s Abbie Hoffman and Jeremy Strong’s Jerry Rubin. However every single member of this ensemble cast shines individually. From Mark Rylance’s exasperated lawyer William Kunstler to Frank Langella’s rather evil and incompetent judge, from Joseph Gordon Levitt’s prosecutor with a conscience to Eddie Redmayne’s intellectual Hayden. Even Michael Keaton who has a blink and you’ll miss it role as a former Attorney General is brilliant. I couldn’t pinpoint a single person in this case who excels above another as they are all fantastic.
I don’t believe this film is perfect. There is a slight lull in the middle due to the mostly courtroom setting, even with the cracking dialogue, and whilst I did enjoy Sorkin’s directing style, I did wonder if this film looked a little too slick and polished overall. The story is dark, gritty and rather disturbing when you think of the political and racial undertones and motivations, and the film itself doesn’t always reflect this – the ending especially is very moving, but feels a little too happy and Hollywood. I’d also question why not all of the major characters were included in the intertitles detailing what happened to the individuals after the events of this film. Considering it was such a balanced cast, it seemed odd not to include all the main characters especially for those who don’t know the real life history.
Overall this is a fantastic dialogue and performance driven film. Sorkin is without a doubt a master of the legal and political drama, and if you’re a fan of his earlier work then this is definitely one worth watching. Whilst “enjoyable” may not be the most appropriate word considering the subject matter, this is a hugely interesting and entertaining watch.
The film centres around what is effectively a sham of a trial, and aside from a few flashbacks and prep scenes, it is virtually set entirely in the courtroom for the 2+ hour duration. There aren’t many films that can pull this off and aside from a slight lull in the middle, The Trial of the Chicago 7 manages this impressively well and this is mainly down to Aaron Sorkin himself and his rather stellar cast. It also helps that the story itself is a fascinating one. I knew nothing about the trial, the people or even the protests in Chicago, so watching this was a rather disturbing eye opener. It’s a truly compelling and interesting story which has a great deal of relevance to today’s politics – Netflix Ken what they were doing releasing this close to election time!
I’m a long time fan of Sorkin’s writing and alongside his directing, it definitely does not disappoint here. His usual sharp and quick witted dialogue is ever present and is delivered flawless by the marvellous cast. Sorkin even manages to throw in a few laughs which considering the rather serious aspects of the story is no mean feat, and these are often delivered from the ‘bromance’ between Sacha Baron Cohen’s Abbie Hoffman and Jeremy Strong’s Jerry Rubin. However every single member of this ensemble cast shines individually. From Mark Rylance’s exasperated lawyer William Kunstler to Frank Langella’s rather evil and incompetent judge, from Joseph Gordon Levitt’s prosecutor with a conscience to Eddie Redmayne’s intellectual Hayden. Even Michael Keaton who has a blink and you’ll miss it role as a former Attorney General is brilliant. I couldn’t pinpoint a single person in this case who excels above another as they are all fantastic.
I don’t believe this film is perfect. There is a slight lull in the middle due to the mostly courtroom setting, even with the cracking dialogue, and whilst I did enjoy Sorkin’s directing style, I did wonder if this film looked a little too slick and polished overall. The story is dark, gritty and rather disturbing when you think of the political and racial undertones and motivations, and the film itself doesn’t always reflect this – the ending especially is very moving, but feels a little too happy and Hollywood. I’d also question why not all of the major characters were included in the intertitles detailing what happened to the individuals after the events of this film. Considering it was such a balanced cast, it seemed odd not to include all the main characters especially for those who don’t know the real life history.
Overall this is a fantastic dialogue and performance driven film. Sorkin is without a doubt a master of the legal and political drama, and if you’re a fan of his earlier work then this is definitely one worth watching. Whilst “enjoyable” may not be the most appropriate word considering the subject matter, this is a hugely interesting and entertaining watch.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Nov 27, 2017
Decent cast performances (1 more)
Good fun
Varying quality of SFX (1 more)
Painfully safe
Justice At Last For DC Fans?
Last weekend, a movie dropped that most comic book fans have been hotly anticipating for the last few decades. The follow up to the disappointment that was Dawn of Justice, Justice League had a lot to live up to. I’m not going to try and convince you that it is a perfect movie, but I enjoyed it. If I was judging the movie on it’s own I would probably be much harsher with my rating etc, but in the context of other DCEU movies, it’s a breath of fresh air.
The first half of the movie is extremely choppy and unfocused and feels more like a grab bag of scenes cut together to resemble a story rather than any sort of coherent story. Then the last half of the movie plays it incredibly safe and plays out exactly how you would predict. There are no surprises or twists and then the credits roll and half heartedly set up a potential sequel, although with the huge amount of money Warner Bros lost on this movie if the rumoured budget amount of 300 million is to be believed, we may not be getting another entry any time soon. Which is sort of a shame because there are aspects of this movie that I really like, such as Batfleck and Jeremy Irons as Alfred.
There isn’t really much to talk about here, which is disappointing. Although Batman V Superman left a great deal to be desired as a decent comic book movie, it at least gave all of us something to talk about. The cast is alright, Affleck was just as great as Batman as he’s been up until now, Cavill puts in a decent Superman performance if you can get by that dodgy CGI upper lip, Gal Gadot is great as Wonder Woman, Ray Fisher does fine as Cyborg, Jason Momoa’s Aquaman is pretty one dimensional, but I think that’s more to do with the script than with the actor. Ezra Miller is annoying but clearly supposed to be the comic relief in the film. JK Simmons is wasted as Jim Gordon, but it’s nice to see Amy Adams in a reduced role here. I don’t hate Amy Adams, but I am not a fan of her portrayal as Lois Lane and surprisingly, she actually serves a purpose in this film, as opposed to pondering about with a camera looking surprised. The SFX varies greatly, with some really impressive visual effects and some that look like absolute garbage.
Slight spoilers going forwards I guess, but it’s not exactly a shocking revelation that they resurrect Superman from the dead in this movie, which as a long time comic book fan, I feel like could have been handled better.
Overall, it’s not the worst movie in the world; it’s not even the worst movie in this universe, but really it should be great. This movie should be so much better than, ‘okay,’ it’s the Justice League for Christssake. This film isn’t even as good as Thor Ragnarok, the third sequel in one of the least popular Avenger’s solo film. Justice League should have blown Thor out of the water, both commercially and critically! However, as a standalone film, without any context around it, it is a fun film and I did enjoy my time with it.
The first half of the movie is extremely choppy and unfocused and feels more like a grab bag of scenes cut together to resemble a story rather than any sort of coherent story. Then the last half of the movie plays it incredibly safe and plays out exactly how you would predict. There are no surprises or twists and then the credits roll and half heartedly set up a potential sequel, although with the huge amount of money Warner Bros lost on this movie if the rumoured budget amount of 300 million is to be believed, we may not be getting another entry any time soon. Which is sort of a shame because there are aspects of this movie that I really like, such as Batfleck and Jeremy Irons as Alfred.
There isn’t really much to talk about here, which is disappointing. Although Batman V Superman left a great deal to be desired as a decent comic book movie, it at least gave all of us something to talk about. The cast is alright, Affleck was just as great as Batman as he’s been up until now, Cavill puts in a decent Superman performance if you can get by that dodgy CGI upper lip, Gal Gadot is great as Wonder Woman, Ray Fisher does fine as Cyborg, Jason Momoa’s Aquaman is pretty one dimensional, but I think that’s more to do with the script than with the actor. Ezra Miller is annoying but clearly supposed to be the comic relief in the film. JK Simmons is wasted as Jim Gordon, but it’s nice to see Amy Adams in a reduced role here. I don’t hate Amy Adams, but I am not a fan of her portrayal as Lois Lane and surprisingly, she actually serves a purpose in this film, as opposed to pondering about with a camera looking surprised. The SFX varies greatly, with some really impressive visual effects and some that look like absolute garbage.
Slight spoilers going forwards I guess, but it’s not exactly a shocking revelation that they resurrect Superman from the dead in this movie, which as a long time comic book fan, I feel like could have been handled better.
Overall, it’s not the worst movie in the world; it’s not even the worst movie in this universe, but really it should be great. This movie should be so much better than, ‘okay,’ it’s the Justice League for Christssake. This film isn’t even as good as Thor Ragnarok, the third sequel in one of the least popular Avenger’s solo film. Justice League should have blown Thor out of the water, both commercially and critically! However, as a standalone film, without any context around it, it is a fun film and I did enjoy my time with it.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
May 12, 2018
Awesome
When an artificial intelligence outthinks its creator and forms itself into dozens of destructive robots, Earth's mightiest heroes come together once again to put a stop to the threat.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
As most MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) films tend to do, Avengers: Age of Ultron gets off to a really quick start wasting no time with action. Everyone gets a piece in the first ten minutes and they're working even better together than they did in the first film. While Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) and Thor (Chris Hemsworth) flex their muscle and rip tanks in half, Hawkeye Jeremy Renner) pierces through dudes like the modern-day Legolas.
Characters: 10
A part of what works so well for these characters is how grossly different their backstories and personalities are. Hawkeye is a family man that uses humor to mask his annoyance in certain situations. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is constantly pushing the boundary envelope and acts superior to the ideas and thoughts of the rest of the group. Normally you hate a guy like this but he wears the hat so well. Throw in Vision, a benevolent AI with a sense of purpose, and the rest of the crew and you have a pretty solid character-base.
AI of the hour Ultron (James Spader) is a villain with a surprising amount of depth. He fights for his own cause which, in his mind, is the only necessary option for balance and preservation. His smooth, even-keeled voice can be chilling at times making for some pretty solid scenes.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
There is enough action in the film for two films. The plot steamrolls into new scenes of combat, one after the next. Dull moments are nonexistent. There is something about having all of these characters on the screen at the same time that keeps the film exciting and fresh. Teamups are especially cool, watching pairs like Captain America (Chris Evans) and Thor perform unique combo moves. You want eye candy? The film delivers.
Genre: 8
Not the best superhero film I've seen, although I believe that says more about the emergence of the genre than the film itself. This century has ushered in some phenomenal superhero movies that do the genre proud, including ones that set themselves apart by having enriched characters and deeper meaning. Age of Ultron is solid, but falls just slightly out of the Cream of the Crop territory.
Memorability: 9
The action sequences alone played throughout my mind well after having watched the film. Among other things, Age of Ultron gives you a falling city along with a classic matchup between Hulk and Stark in the Hulkbuster suit. Perhaps the most memorable part came at the very end when Ultron and Vision are having a conversation about the fate of humanity. Part foreshadowing, part introspection, it was a very fitting way to bring the curtain down on the action.
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Resolution: 8
Overall: 94
No, it's not the best MCU film made to date, but it's still a high-quality film with a solid story and memorable sequences that keep you glued to your seat. Thankful for the rewatch as I enjoyed it even more the second time around.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
As most MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) films tend to do, Avengers: Age of Ultron gets off to a really quick start wasting no time with action. Everyone gets a piece in the first ten minutes and they're working even better together than they did in the first film. While Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) and Thor (Chris Hemsworth) flex their muscle and rip tanks in half, Hawkeye Jeremy Renner) pierces through dudes like the modern-day Legolas.
Characters: 10
A part of what works so well for these characters is how grossly different their backstories and personalities are. Hawkeye is a family man that uses humor to mask his annoyance in certain situations. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is constantly pushing the boundary envelope and acts superior to the ideas and thoughts of the rest of the group. Normally you hate a guy like this but he wears the hat so well. Throw in Vision, a benevolent AI with a sense of purpose, and the rest of the crew and you have a pretty solid character-base.
AI of the hour Ultron (James Spader) is a villain with a surprising amount of depth. He fights for his own cause which, in his mind, is the only necessary option for balance and preservation. His smooth, even-keeled voice can be chilling at times making for some pretty solid scenes.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
There is enough action in the film for two films. The plot steamrolls into new scenes of combat, one after the next. Dull moments are nonexistent. There is something about having all of these characters on the screen at the same time that keeps the film exciting and fresh. Teamups are especially cool, watching pairs like Captain America (Chris Evans) and Thor perform unique combo moves. You want eye candy? The film delivers.
Genre: 8
Not the best superhero film I've seen, although I believe that says more about the emergence of the genre than the film itself. This century has ushered in some phenomenal superhero movies that do the genre proud, including ones that set themselves apart by having enriched characters and deeper meaning. Age of Ultron is solid, but falls just slightly out of the Cream of the Crop territory.
Memorability: 9
The action sequences alone played throughout my mind well after having watched the film. Among other things, Age of Ultron gives you a falling city along with a classic matchup between Hulk and Stark in the Hulkbuster suit. Perhaps the most memorable part came at the very end when Ultron and Vision are having a conversation about the fate of humanity. Part foreshadowing, part introspection, it was a very fitting way to bring the curtain down on the action.
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Resolution: 8
Overall: 94
No, it's not the best MCU film made to date, but it's still a high-quality film with a solid story and memorable sequences that keep you glued to your seat. Thankful for the rewatch as I enjoyed it even more the second time around.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
This one belongs to James Spader
I doubt that Joss Whedon and the team down at Marvel knew just how successful 2012’s Avengers Assemble would go on to be. After just a few months of release it became the third highest-grossing film of all time, by no means an easy feat to achieve.
Therefore, Whedon and co had their work cut out trying to build on the solid foundations they had laid when it came to producing a sequel. However, three years and $250m later Avengers: Age of Ultron hits our screens. But is it the follow-up everyone was asking for?
Age of Ultron follows the dynamic team of superheroes as they continue to save the world following the near cataclysmic events of the 2009 predecessor and of course every Marvel film released since. Here however, they are tasked with taking down a robot hell bent on destroying the world – a tough day at the office to say the least.
All the fan favourites return as well as some new faces in a film that is technically spectacular but a little overambitious at times. There are 11, count them 11, major characters vying for screen time in Age of Ultron and while Whedon manages to give each of them their own story arc, at times it feels a little rushed.
Joining the cast is James Spader as the voice of Ultron, a robot accidentally created by Tony Stark, and he is by far the most intriguing character in an already impressive line-up. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be on fine form as the wise-cracking Iron Man/Stark with Chris Hemsworth providing the eye-candy as Thor.
It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner’s Black Widow and Hawkeye get some much-needed fleshing out after their fairly limited roles in previous Marvel films, and Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk is a joy to watch.
Kick-Ass’ Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Godzilla’s Elizabeth Olsen also join the cast as Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, two characters fans of the X-Men universe will recognise. However, due to legal requirements their origins are changed and the fact that they are mutants is never revealed, unfortunately limiting their appeal.
When it comes to special effects, Whedon has made sure every sequence is brimming with the highest quality CGI, and despite a couple of lapses early on in the film, the majority of the picture is flawless with some stunning global locations beautifully juxtaposed with the characters doing their thing.
What stands out in Age of Ultron however is the plot. Avengers Assemble was a fine film right up until the generic city-levelling, headache inducing climax that looked like it could have come straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
Thankfully, whilst the action is dialled up a few notches here, the plot is much more detailed and the final scenes are utterly breath-taking.
Overall, Avengers: Age of Ultron had a massive amount to live up to and in some respects it falls a little short, its overambitious nature is its downfall with too many characters needing screen time. However, as a good-time blockbuster it’s hard to find one better and James Spader is genuinely mesmerising as Ultron.
Is it the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Well, it’s definitely an improvement on its predecessor – but for me, Guardians of the Galaxy just takes that title by a whisker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/26/this-one-belongs-to-james-spader-avengers-age-of-ultron-review/
Therefore, Whedon and co had their work cut out trying to build on the solid foundations they had laid when it came to producing a sequel. However, three years and $250m later Avengers: Age of Ultron hits our screens. But is it the follow-up everyone was asking for?
Age of Ultron follows the dynamic team of superheroes as they continue to save the world following the near cataclysmic events of the 2009 predecessor and of course every Marvel film released since. Here however, they are tasked with taking down a robot hell bent on destroying the world – a tough day at the office to say the least.
All the fan favourites return as well as some new faces in a film that is technically spectacular but a little overambitious at times. There are 11, count them 11, major characters vying for screen time in Age of Ultron and while Whedon manages to give each of them their own story arc, at times it feels a little rushed.
Joining the cast is James Spader as the voice of Ultron, a robot accidentally created by Tony Stark, and he is by far the most intriguing character in an already impressive line-up. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be on fine form as the wise-cracking Iron Man/Stark with Chris Hemsworth providing the eye-candy as Thor.
It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner’s Black Widow and Hawkeye get some much-needed fleshing out after their fairly limited roles in previous Marvel films, and Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk is a joy to watch.
Kick-Ass’ Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Godzilla’s Elizabeth Olsen also join the cast as Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, two characters fans of the X-Men universe will recognise. However, due to legal requirements their origins are changed and the fact that they are mutants is never revealed, unfortunately limiting their appeal.
When it comes to special effects, Whedon has made sure every sequence is brimming with the highest quality CGI, and despite a couple of lapses early on in the film, the majority of the picture is flawless with some stunning global locations beautifully juxtaposed with the characters doing their thing.
What stands out in Age of Ultron however is the plot. Avengers Assemble was a fine film right up until the generic city-levelling, headache inducing climax that looked like it could have come straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
Thankfully, whilst the action is dialled up a few notches here, the plot is much more detailed and the final scenes are utterly breath-taking.
Overall, Avengers: Age of Ultron had a massive amount to live up to and in some respects it falls a little short, its overambitious nature is its downfall with too many characters needing screen time. However, as a good-time blockbuster it’s hard to find one better and James Spader is genuinely mesmerising as Ultron.
Is it the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Well, it’s definitely an improvement on its predecessor – but for me, Guardians of the Galaxy just takes that title by a whisker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/26/this-one-belongs-to-james-spader-avengers-age-of-ultron-review/
Christina Haynes (148 KP) rated The Fandom in Books
Mar 26, 2018
The Fandom
The Fandom
By Anna Day
Review: Christina Haynes
Ever loved a story so much that you wanted to jump inside the book and be apart of it. Imagine going to 'comic con' dressed up as your favourite character. Then actually becoming them in their world. Violet her two best friends; Alice and Katie. And her little brother Nate. Arrive at 'comic con' dressed up as their favourite characters from a book/film called 'The Gallows Dance'
Whilst meeting their favourite actors who play the lead characters in the movie, something happened and they get transported into the real Gallows Dance. Only they don't know this until the main character Rose gets killed and Violet who's dressed up as Rose has to take over her role.
So a little information about the Gallows Dance. The Gallows Dance is a book within this book, written by an author called Sally King. The characters in the book are called 'The Imps or the Gems'
The Imps are lower class citizens they live on the streets or in small houses, sealed in the old cities whilst the Gems have the countryside. The Imps don't have much, they are rife with disease and crime, they all look different and not 'what the gems like'
The Gems, however, are PERFECT. They are genetically enhanced to have the perfect body, the perfect mind and life. They live in these perfect houses and have taken over the stately homes and castles all for themselves. They have servants and go to balls almost every day, they stick to only Gems and marry only Gems.
The Gallows Dance is set in a dystopian London but in a very backwards way, for example, the Gallows is where they hang the Imps like they hung people back in the Elizabethan era in Tyburn, where they would hang 'Witches' The clothing is similar to this (well this is how I imaged it anyway) of course things are more like now, with the landmarks, but its all very backwards.
In the 'Gallows Dance' Rose is a rebel Imp who wants to with the rebels help, stop all Gems from being 'THE RULERS' and treating Imps like they are the lowest of all humans and that the Gems are the best. She heads into the Gem's world and tries to find out secrets to destroy the Gem government. She does this by working for the Gems as a servant in the Pastures, to gain the secrets about a powerful Gem, Jeremy Harper. She does this by befriending his son Willow Harper. However, Willow falls for Rose and in return, she falls for him. As the story goes on they both run away to which Rose is caught and hanged at the 'Gallows Dance' but not before Willow confesses his love for her. Which puts an end to the 'Gallows Dance' once and for all and everyone will live as one again, no more Imps and Gems. They will simply just be Humans.
But all this won't happen if Violet doesn't complete the story how Rose would of. If Violet does not get Willow to fall for her and follow her to the Gallows. Then they will all be stuck in the book forever and never be able to go home.
So time is ticking for Violet and her friends, they have exactly one week before Rose who's now Violet is due to hang. So Violet had better start learning her lines.
3 ½ – NOT A BAD BOOK / BUT I REALLY LIKED IT
By Anna Day
Review: Christina Haynes
Ever loved a story so much that you wanted to jump inside the book and be apart of it. Imagine going to 'comic con' dressed up as your favourite character. Then actually becoming them in their world. Violet her two best friends; Alice and Katie. And her little brother Nate. Arrive at 'comic con' dressed up as their favourite characters from a book/film called 'The Gallows Dance'
Whilst meeting their favourite actors who play the lead characters in the movie, something happened and they get transported into the real Gallows Dance. Only they don't know this until the main character Rose gets killed and Violet who's dressed up as Rose has to take over her role.
So a little information about the Gallows Dance. The Gallows Dance is a book within this book, written by an author called Sally King. The characters in the book are called 'The Imps or the Gems'
The Imps are lower class citizens they live on the streets or in small houses, sealed in the old cities whilst the Gems have the countryside. The Imps don't have much, they are rife with disease and crime, they all look different and not 'what the gems like'
The Gems, however, are PERFECT. They are genetically enhanced to have the perfect body, the perfect mind and life. They live in these perfect houses and have taken over the stately homes and castles all for themselves. They have servants and go to balls almost every day, they stick to only Gems and marry only Gems.
The Gallows Dance is set in a dystopian London but in a very backwards way, for example, the Gallows is where they hang the Imps like they hung people back in the Elizabethan era in Tyburn, where they would hang 'Witches' The clothing is similar to this (well this is how I imaged it anyway) of course things are more like now, with the landmarks, but its all very backwards.
In the 'Gallows Dance' Rose is a rebel Imp who wants to with the rebels help, stop all Gems from being 'THE RULERS' and treating Imps like they are the lowest of all humans and that the Gems are the best. She heads into the Gem's world and tries to find out secrets to destroy the Gem government. She does this by working for the Gems as a servant in the Pastures, to gain the secrets about a powerful Gem, Jeremy Harper. She does this by befriending his son Willow Harper. However, Willow falls for Rose and in return, she falls for him. As the story goes on they both run away to which Rose is caught and hanged at the 'Gallows Dance' but not before Willow confesses his love for her. Which puts an end to the 'Gallows Dance' once and for all and everyone will live as one again, no more Imps and Gems. They will simply just be Humans.
But all this won't happen if Violet doesn't complete the story how Rose would of. If Violet does not get Willow to fall for her and follow her to the Gallows. Then they will all be stuck in the book forever and never be able to go home.
So time is ticking for Violet and her friends, they have exactly one week before Rose who's now Violet is due to hang. So Violet had better start learning her lines.
3 ½ – NOT A BAD BOOK / BUT I REALLY LIKED IT
Goldenarrow74 (10 KP) rated My Scientology Movie (2015) in Movies
Jun 3, 2018
Frustrating but still unashamedly Louis
Now this is a good one:
• Scientology fascinates/horrifies me in equal measure
• I love Louis Theroux’s work over the years, from pornstars to neo-nazis
So, if you add together one of the most unassuming yet tenacious investigative journalists and one of the most misunderstood religions and there’s bound to be sparks flying, right?
Well almost. I recall some comments about a Louis documentary where he kinda lost his usual cool and got wound up/ deterred by his would-be interviewees. Perhaps this could be the one.
Even if this is not the film in question, it’s certainly a little more subdued than his usual material. Because the church told him to sod off.
I guess his view that he wants to offer an unbiased and impartial view on their religion is not one shared by David Whatshisface. This is a shame as I’d loved to have seen LT probe the chief scientist with his softly, softly good cop/nicer cop style of interviewing.
It could well have been a titanic battle of intellect and wills. Almost on a parallel with Westley & Vizzini in the Princess Bride. But now we’ll never know.
Seriously, it’s sort of hobbled the film from the start if we don’t get to speak to anyone from the church, as all we are going to here from therefore are people who don’t know about what really happens or do know but have now come out from the protective umbrella of Scientology and are (quite reasonably) regarded as “embittered”.
Even Louis is being asked a lot to conjure something truly worthwhile with his only evidence coming from potentially biased sources.
It’s only at the hour mark that we even hear of the charitable causes the church supports, from drug abuse to disaster relief. And not long before that we even see a very limited glimpse of the drills, or ‘tech’ that forms part of the Scientologist’s belief system.
What makes me laugh, disappointedly, is that Louis is complaining that the lawyers are accusing him of dwelling on those embittered “squirrels”.... when that’s exactly what he has been doing, out of necessity as he has no other material.
I’m happy to give the benefit of the doubt to LT whenever possible but I think he dropped a bollock there.
I also wonder if the reason we are only given such a brief example of the dianetics system is that the Church’s powerful tentacles reach all the way to the Beeb? I’ve always though that Jeremy Paxman had a steely determination that came from more than just political vigour...
Or maybe it’s because Louis didn’t think it was important enough? Hardly. Maybe because Marty Rathbun got upset and stopped doing it (incidentally he is a crap teacher! Getting visibly disappointed when the student doesn’t immediately see/feel/get what you intend is not the way to help relax and convince someone).
It was slightly disappointing to not see Isaac Hayes who left South Park in a strop because they were planning an episode on Scientology - when he had no problem participating in storylines concerning paedophilia, terrorism, Satan & Saddam Hussein having sex etc..
I jest, of course. And that’s obviously a mistake as it’s abundantly clear that Scientologists have no sense of humour whatsoever. I’m going to be constantly scanning my rear view mirror for a large, clumsily driven Toyota 4x4 now. That won’t stand out at all in the small towns of rural Buckinghamshire will it?
• Scientology fascinates/horrifies me in equal measure
• I love Louis Theroux’s work over the years, from pornstars to neo-nazis
So, if you add together one of the most unassuming yet tenacious investigative journalists and one of the most misunderstood religions and there’s bound to be sparks flying, right?
Well almost. I recall some comments about a Louis documentary where he kinda lost his usual cool and got wound up/ deterred by his would-be interviewees. Perhaps this could be the one.
Even if this is not the film in question, it’s certainly a little more subdued than his usual material. Because the church told him to sod off.
I guess his view that he wants to offer an unbiased and impartial view on their religion is not one shared by David Whatshisface. This is a shame as I’d loved to have seen LT probe the chief scientist with his softly, softly good cop/nicer cop style of interviewing.
It could well have been a titanic battle of intellect and wills. Almost on a parallel with Westley & Vizzini in the Princess Bride. But now we’ll never know.
Seriously, it’s sort of hobbled the film from the start if we don’t get to speak to anyone from the church, as all we are going to here from therefore are people who don’t know about what really happens or do know but have now come out from the protective umbrella of Scientology and are (quite reasonably) regarded as “embittered”.
Even Louis is being asked a lot to conjure something truly worthwhile with his only evidence coming from potentially biased sources.
It’s only at the hour mark that we even hear of the charitable causes the church supports, from drug abuse to disaster relief. And not long before that we even see a very limited glimpse of the drills, or ‘tech’ that forms part of the Scientologist’s belief system.
What makes me laugh, disappointedly, is that Louis is complaining that the lawyers are accusing him of dwelling on those embittered “squirrels”.... when that’s exactly what he has been doing, out of necessity as he has no other material.
I’m happy to give the benefit of the doubt to LT whenever possible but I think he dropped a bollock there.
I also wonder if the reason we are only given such a brief example of the dianetics system is that the Church’s powerful tentacles reach all the way to the Beeb? I’ve always though that Jeremy Paxman had a steely determination that came from more than just political vigour...
Or maybe it’s because Louis didn’t think it was important enough? Hardly. Maybe because Marty Rathbun got upset and stopped doing it (incidentally he is a crap teacher! Getting visibly disappointed when the student doesn’t immediately see/feel/get what you intend is not the way to help relax and convince someone).
It was slightly disappointing to not see Isaac Hayes who left South Park in a strop because they were planning an episode on Scientology - when he had no problem participating in storylines concerning paedophilia, terrorism, Satan & Saddam Hussein having sex etc..
I jest, of course. And that’s obviously a mistake as it’s abundantly clear that Scientologists have no sense of humour whatsoever. I’m going to be constantly scanning my rear view mirror for a large, clumsily driven Toyota 4x4 now. That won’t stand out at all in the small towns of rural Buckinghamshire will it?
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Assassin's Creed (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Making movies based on video games has had a dubious history when it comes to cinematic success. While “Resident Evil” and “Warcraft” found decent success, films such as “DOOM”, “Super Mario Bros”, “Wing Commander”, and others crashed and burned hard at the box office. The reason for this was explained to me once by Director Uwe Boll who has crafted numerous titles based on video games and has suffered harsh feedback from fans and critics as a result.
Boll explained to me that many times you are only getting the name from a game and some of the characters but there is often a long list of things you cannot do from the game developers which often includes visuals, stories, and content that was used in the games as well as areas that might be used for potential sequels down the road.
So with such restrictive rules, one would ask yourself why anyone would want to take the risk. The answer like all things in Hollywood is money as game based movies already have a built in audience, and all one needs to do is successfully tap into that audience successfully and you can have a successful film and perhaps a series.
With this in mind, developer Ubisoft is looking to bring many of their games to the screen and unlike most game companies, they are taking a very hands-on approach to the process as they were active though all parts of the process from casting to the choice of Director and writers.
Their first effort is “Assassin’s Creed”, which is based on their very popular and successful series of games which combine historical settings with plenty of action and intriguing plots.
The film stars Michael Fassbender as Cal Lynch, who is about to be executed for murdering a criminal. Cal awakens to find that he has been given a new lease on life thanks to Sofia (Marion Cotillard) and her father Rikkin (Jeremy Irons), who run an institute dedicated to the elimination of violence.
Of course there is more to the story than Cal is told and he is strapped into a machine that allows him to experience the memories of one of his ancestors in Spain who was a skilled assassin. Cal ventures back in time again and again, as he attempts to locate a mysterious object that was last known to be in the possession of his ancestor, unaware that there is a much larger game underway with the fate of humanity in the balance.
The film makes a good effort as there are some nice visuals and action sequences, but unfortunately they are too few and far between and the film suffers from a stale narrative and dull characters which is surprising considering the talent that is attached to it.
This is not to say that it is a bad film, but rather it is not very memorable and is something that once seen is likely easy to forget and does not inspire enthusiasm for more which puts a crimp in the plans for the sequels. Time will tell how the film does, but it looks sadly like yet another effort that comes up lacking.
http://sknr.net/2016/12/20/assassins-creed/
Boll explained to me that many times you are only getting the name from a game and some of the characters but there is often a long list of things you cannot do from the game developers which often includes visuals, stories, and content that was used in the games as well as areas that might be used for potential sequels down the road.
So with such restrictive rules, one would ask yourself why anyone would want to take the risk. The answer like all things in Hollywood is money as game based movies already have a built in audience, and all one needs to do is successfully tap into that audience successfully and you can have a successful film and perhaps a series.
With this in mind, developer Ubisoft is looking to bring many of their games to the screen and unlike most game companies, they are taking a very hands-on approach to the process as they were active though all parts of the process from casting to the choice of Director and writers.
Their first effort is “Assassin’s Creed”, which is based on their very popular and successful series of games which combine historical settings with plenty of action and intriguing plots.
The film stars Michael Fassbender as Cal Lynch, who is about to be executed for murdering a criminal. Cal awakens to find that he has been given a new lease on life thanks to Sofia (Marion Cotillard) and her father Rikkin (Jeremy Irons), who run an institute dedicated to the elimination of violence.
Of course there is more to the story than Cal is told and he is strapped into a machine that allows him to experience the memories of one of his ancestors in Spain who was a skilled assassin. Cal ventures back in time again and again, as he attempts to locate a mysterious object that was last known to be in the possession of his ancestor, unaware that there is a much larger game underway with the fate of humanity in the balance.
The film makes a good effort as there are some nice visuals and action sequences, but unfortunately they are too few and far between and the film suffers from a stale narrative and dull characters which is surprising considering the talent that is attached to it.
This is not to say that it is a bad film, but rather it is not very memorable and is something that once seen is likely easy to forget and does not inspire enthusiasm for more which puts a crimp in the plans for the sequels. Time will tell how the film does, but it looks sadly like yet another effort that comes up lacking.
http://sknr.net/2016/12/20/assassins-creed/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Judge (2014) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Family dramas are nothing new for most people but for hotshot defense lawyer Hank Palmer (Robert Downey Jr.), things are about to get supremely intense following the passing of his mother. Forced to go back to the small Indiana town that he grew up in, Hank has very much become the victim of his success in Chicago. While he has material goods and a wonderful daughter, his marriage is falling apart and he returns home out of a sense of duty, eager to get away from their at his earliest opportunity. His brothers Glen and Dale (Vincent D’Ofrio and Jeremy Strong), are happy to see him but unfortunately the visit brings up old wounds between Hank and his father Judge Palmer (Robert Duvall).
The duo have a very bitter history between them and at their mothers wake things can best be described as icily civil between them. Hank looks forward to catching the early flight out in the morning eager to put the town behind him forever when early the next morning their lives take a change when the judges prize Cadillac is discovered to have damage consistent from a collision.
These feisty and defiant judge claims he hit nothing and he maintains this stance even when the police show up and he is suspected of vehicular homicide. Further compounding the case is that the victim was known to the judge and had been recently released after being sentenced for murder. The fact that the two individuals had a prior and bitter history with one another makes the judge a prime candidate for vehicular homicide.
Despite his best wishes and in defiance of his father, Hank decides to represent his father and pending trial as he clearly sees that his father’s representative (Dax Sheppard), is no match for the hotshot prosecutor (Billy Bob Thornton), that is been brought in to prosecute the judge. In what can best be described as a hate/hate relationship Hank is supremely conflicted but wants to do right by his father.
Further complicating matters is the emergence of his old high school girlfriend Samantha (Vera Farmiga), who causes Hank to revisit childhood memories both painful and pleasant. Along the way new discoveries are made that causes Hank to reevaluate his father as well as his life and family and take stock of his priorities.
The film has some funny and tender moments in between the courtroom proceedings which at times our little incredulous yet always captivating.
The cast is first-rate specifically Downey Jr. and Duvall who do Oscar quality work in their roles. While some may be quick to dismiss the film is courtroom procedural, I found “The Judge” to be a very interesting and engaging human drama about very real characters and their all too relatable clauses human beings. These are not Teflon superheroes but rather real flesh and blood people confronted with problems and emotions that people in the audience should be able to rate late to even if they had not experienced them first-hand.
The supporting cast was fantastic and the pacing of the film helped to move things along despite the nearly two-hour runtime. The film is rated R due to some very intense moments and conversations between the characters but stands out as one of the more memorable and enjoyable films of 2014 .
http://sknr.net/2014/10/10/judge/
The duo have a very bitter history between them and at their mothers wake things can best be described as icily civil between them. Hank looks forward to catching the early flight out in the morning eager to put the town behind him forever when early the next morning their lives take a change when the judges prize Cadillac is discovered to have damage consistent from a collision.
These feisty and defiant judge claims he hit nothing and he maintains this stance even when the police show up and he is suspected of vehicular homicide. Further compounding the case is that the victim was known to the judge and had been recently released after being sentenced for murder. The fact that the two individuals had a prior and bitter history with one another makes the judge a prime candidate for vehicular homicide.
Despite his best wishes and in defiance of his father, Hank decides to represent his father and pending trial as he clearly sees that his father’s representative (Dax Sheppard), is no match for the hotshot prosecutor (Billy Bob Thornton), that is been brought in to prosecute the judge. In what can best be described as a hate/hate relationship Hank is supremely conflicted but wants to do right by his father.
Further complicating matters is the emergence of his old high school girlfriend Samantha (Vera Farmiga), who causes Hank to revisit childhood memories both painful and pleasant. Along the way new discoveries are made that causes Hank to reevaluate his father as well as his life and family and take stock of his priorities.
The film has some funny and tender moments in between the courtroom proceedings which at times our little incredulous yet always captivating.
The cast is first-rate specifically Downey Jr. and Duvall who do Oscar quality work in their roles. While some may be quick to dismiss the film is courtroom procedural, I found “The Judge” to be a very interesting and engaging human drama about very real characters and their all too relatable clauses human beings. These are not Teflon superheroes but rather real flesh and blood people confronted with problems and emotions that people in the audience should be able to rate late to even if they had not experienced them first-hand.
The supporting cast was fantastic and the pacing of the film helped to move things along despite the nearly two-hour runtime. The film is rated R due to some very intense moments and conversations between the characters but stands out as one of the more memorable and enjoyable films of 2014 .
http://sknr.net/2014/10/10/judge/