Search
Just Outside of Hope
Book
Just Outside of Hope, the sequel to Road Without End, moves through the early years of the 1980s. It...
LGBTQ+ Fiction
Irvin S. Cobb: The Rise and Fall of an American Humorist
Book
"Humor is merely tragedy standing on its head with its pants torn." - Irvin S. Cobb Born and raised...
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Little Things (2021) in Movies
Jan 26, 2021
Academy Award Winners Denzel Washington, Jared Leto, and Remi Malik star in the new thriller “The Little Things” and combine to make very gripping and memorable performances.
The script was reportedly written over thirty years ago by John Lee Hancock who has gone on to write, direct, and produce multiple films of note in the decades since he first created the screenplay.
The film is set in 1990 and involves a cop named Joe Deacon (Denzel Washington), who travels from his small California town to Los Angeles to get information on a suspect.
Joe has a history in L.A as he used to be a homicide detective for the department which combined with his meltdown while obsessing over a murder case has caused him more than a bit of notoriety.
Jim Baxter (Remi Malik) is the hotshot new Detective who has been leading the investigation into a string of unsolved murders. Joe accompanies Jim to a new crime scene and notes some similarities with his unsolved case. Joe takes some personal days and begins to do some legwork on the case and reports his findings to Jim which causes Joe to remember aspects of what drove him to his marital, health, and career issues as he is unable and unwilling to let the case drop.
When a prime suspect no longer fits into the picture; suspicions fall on a crime enthusiast named Albert (Jared Leto) who seems to check all the boxes but is also taking delight in winding up Joe which causes Jim to question if he is a viable suspect or just an oddball who gets off on crimes and winding up the cops but does not actually commit any offenses.
As the delicate dance unfolds between the characters the fact that this is an era before Cell Phones, DNA tests, GPS, and elaborate computer networks helps underscore the plight of the officers. If the film was set in a modern setting much of the suspense and uncertainty of the story and characters would be moot thanks to technology.
As the game of cat and mouse unfolds between the characters Jim learns how a person can become obsessed with a case and Joe attempts to mentor him from the success and failures of his life which includes some gray areas.
Aside from the strong performances and engaging story what makes “The Little Things” work is that it is a film that does not take the Hollywood fallbacks of extended gunfights, car chases, and over the top action scenes. What it does show is real and flawed characters that are doing what they think are right and does not attempt to wrap things up nice and tidy.
The film uses the element of doubt to not only drive the story but the actions of the characters which underscores that an element of uncertainty exists in some investigations and in with the resources available to police at the time; things are not always certain.
The film will appear in cinemas and HBO Max and is a compelling and well-crafted thriller that is not to be missed.
4.5 stars out of 5
The script was reportedly written over thirty years ago by John Lee Hancock who has gone on to write, direct, and produce multiple films of note in the decades since he first created the screenplay.
The film is set in 1990 and involves a cop named Joe Deacon (Denzel Washington), who travels from his small California town to Los Angeles to get information on a suspect.
Joe has a history in L.A as he used to be a homicide detective for the department which combined with his meltdown while obsessing over a murder case has caused him more than a bit of notoriety.
Jim Baxter (Remi Malik) is the hotshot new Detective who has been leading the investigation into a string of unsolved murders. Joe accompanies Jim to a new crime scene and notes some similarities with his unsolved case. Joe takes some personal days and begins to do some legwork on the case and reports his findings to Jim which causes Joe to remember aspects of what drove him to his marital, health, and career issues as he is unable and unwilling to let the case drop.
When a prime suspect no longer fits into the picture; suspicions fall on a crime enthusiast named Albert (Jared Leto) who seems to check all the boxes but is also taking delight in winding up Joe which causes Jim to question if he is a viable suspect or just an oddball who gets off on crimes and winding up the cops but does not actually commit any offenses.
As the delicate dance unfolds between the characters the fact that this is an era before Cell Phones, DNA tests, GPS, and elaborate computer networks helps underscore the plight of the officers. If the film was set in a modern setting much of the suspense and uncertainty of the story and characters would be moot thanks to technology.
As the game of cat and mouse unfolds between the characters Jim learns how a person can become obsessed with a case and Joe attempts to mentor him from the success and failures of his life which includes some gray areas.
Aside from the strong performances and engaging story what makes “The Little Things” work is that it is a film that does not take the Hollywood fallbacks of extended gunfights, car chases, and over the top action scenes. What it does show is real and flawed characters that are doing what they think are right and does not attempt to wrap things up nice and tidy.
The film uses the element of doubt to not only drive the story but the actions of the characters which underscores that an element of uncertainty exists in some investigations and in with the resources available to police at the time; things are not always certain.
The film will appear in cinemas and HBO Max and is a compelling and well-crafted thriller that is not to be missed.
4.5 stars out of 5
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Eyes of Tammy Faye (2021) in Movies
Feb 13, 2022
Good Performances, Thin Script
Jessica Chastain is, in my opinion - and with all apologies to Glenn Close - the best actress working today that has yet to win an Academy Award. Having been nominated twice previously (Supporting Actress for THE HELP in 2012 and Actress for ZERO DARKY THIRTY in 2013 - a performance I thought she was a shoo-in Oscar winner for, she would lose to Jennifer Lawrence for SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK), Chastain has earned her 3rd Oscar nomination for portraying Tammy Faye Bakker in THE EYES OF TAMMY FAYE. It would be absurdly bizarre if THIS was the role she would win for.
Telling the story of Tammy Faye Bakker, the heavily made-up spouse/partner to disgraced Televangelist Jim Bakker, THE EYES OF TAMMY FAYE has, at it’s core, some TERRIFIC performances by Chastain, Andrew Garfield (Jim Bakker), Cherry Jones (Tammy Faye’s mother) and Vincent D’Onofrio (Jerry Falwell), it’s a shame that these performances couldn’t be performed with a better written and directed film.
Directed by Michael Showalter and Written by Fenton Bailey, Randy Barbato and Abe Sylvie (which might explain part of the issue), THE EYES OF TAMMY FAYE just doesn’t go deep enough into the characters portrayed, but - instead - opts for the superficial, opting to paint each character in one dimension. There is the “not attached to the real world/idealistic” Tammy Faye. The “he seems nice on the surface, but there is something else going on underneath” Jim Bakker. The “evil/power hungry” Jerry Falwell and the “never approving” Mother.
All of these, on the surface, are the makings of a good film, unfortunately Showalter and the 3 writers never mine the depths of these characters showing other sides and/or connecting the characters to each other.
Which is a shame for the performances of all the main characters are terrific and would have been much more so had they had better material to work with. Chastain, rightfully, has been Oscar nominated for her turn. She won’t win, but she is deserving of the nomination and would have been a quite serious contender had she had better material.
Which, ultimately, makes this film fall flat. The ingredients were there, they just weren’t put together well enough to make a satisfying experience.
Letter Grade: B- (for the performances)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Telling the story of Tammy Faye Bakker, the heavily made-up spouse/partner to disgraced Televangelist Jim Bakker, THE EYES OF TAMMY FAYE has, at it’s core, some TERRIFIC performances by Chastain, Andrew Garfield (Jim Bakker), Cherry Jones (Tammy Faye’s mother) and Vincent D’Onofrio (Jerry Falwell), it’s a shame that these performances couldn’t be performed with a better written and directed film.
Directed by Michael Showalter and Written by Fenton Bailey, Randy Barbato and Abe Sylvie (which might explain part of the issue), THE EYES OF TAMMY FAYE just doesn’t go deep enough into the characters portrayed, but - instead - opts for the superficial, opting to paint each character in one dimension. There is the “not attached to the real world/idealistic” Tammy Faye. The “he seems nice on the surface, but there is something else going on underneath” Jim Bakker. The “evil/power hungry” Jerry Falwell and the “never approving” Mother.
All of these, on the surface, are the makings of a good film, unfortunately Showalter and the 3 writers never mine the depths of these characters showing other sides and/or connecting the characters to each other.
Which is a shame for the performances of all the main characters are terrific and would have been much more so had they had better material to work with. Chastain, rightfully, has been Oscar nominated for her turn. She won’t win, but she is deserving of the nomination and would have been a quite serious contender had she had better material.
Which, ultimately, makes this film fall flat. The ingredients were there, they just weren’t put together well enough to make a satisfying experience.
Letter Grade: B- (for the performances)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Singles (1992)
7.4
Rate It
Movie Watch
Set amidst the burgeoning Seattle alternative music scene of the early Nineties, Singles follows a...
March: Book Three
John Lewis, Andrew Aydin and Nate Powell
10.0
Rate It
Book
Welcome to the stunning conclusion of the award-winning and best-selling MARCH trilogy. Congressman...
Politics social issues
Ollie SB (2279 KP) rated A Bat out of Hell: The Musical in Dominion Theatre (London, United Kingdom) in Shows
Aug 14, 2020
The Music (1 more)
The Cast
A Story Out of Hell, Music Out of Heaven
I watched this a few years ago at the Dominion Theatre in London, and will hopefully be seeing it again in January (fingers crossed). I am by no means a massive theatre fan, but I was drawn to this show because of my love for Meat Loaf (the artist not the food). My mum got me and my sister hooked on his music from a young age and it was my sister that convinced me to see this show - I'm glad that she did...
Written by Jim Steinman, who also wrote the original album 'Bat Out of Hell' (one of the greatest albums ever btw) this show tells the story of... well it's kinda confusing... basically, two 18 year olds that fall in love, even though the parents forbid it... but the characters are all stuck at age 18 and never age... and it's set in some post-apocalyptic, dystopian future... yeah like I said, confusing. But as I said, I didn't really see this show for the story, it was the music that carried me through this show.
The story is... okay, but the music is brilliant. It offers a slightly different take on classics such as 'Bat Out of Hell', 'Paradise by the Dashboard Lights' and 'Heaven Can Wait' amongst others. The songs really help you to understand the story a bit better, and are performed brilliantly by the cast.
Overall I would say this show is probably perfect for fans of Meat Loaf, but perhaps lacking in story for avid theatre goers. For someone like me who isn't that invested in theatre culture, but appreciates the music, this show was perfect.
Written by Jim Steinman, who also wrote the original album 'Bat Out of Hell' (one of the greatest albums ever btw) this show tells the story of... well it's kinda confusing... basically, two 18 year olds that fall in love, even though the parents forbid it... but the characters are all stuck at age 18 and never age... and it's set in some post-apocalyptic, dystopian future... yeah like I said, confusing. But as I said, I didn't really see this show for the story, it was the music that carried me through this show.
The story is... okay, but the music is brilliant. It offers a slightly different take on classics such as 'Bat Out of Hell', 'Paradise by the Dashboard Lights' and 'Heaven Can Wait' amongst others. The songs really help you to understand the story a bit better, and are performed brilliantly by the cast.
Overall I would say this show is probably perfect for fans of Meat Loaf, but perhaps lacking in story for avid theatre goers. For someone like me who isn't that invested in theatre culture, but appreciates the music, this show was perfect.
Wintres Woma by James Elkington
Album
RIYL Steve Gunn, Michael Chapman, Kevin Ayers, Bert Jansch, Ryley Walker, Jim O'Rourke, Scott...
Darren (1599 KP) rated Fun With Dick and Jane (2005) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: Fun with Dick and Jane starts as we meet Dick (Carrey) who is about to get a promotion to vice president of the company he has worked for, for year. The problem comes that this promotion is designed to put the blame on the company’s problems on him instead of the men who really are involved, Jack (Baldwin) and Frank (Jenkins).
Dick loses his job and his wife Jane (Leoni) has quit her job, the two struggle to find new jobs and before long they are facing being evicted, which turns them to a life of crime to save their home.
Thoughts on Fun with Dick and Jane
Characters – Dick has been working for a company for his whole working career, he has been waiting for a chance to get to the next step which he gets only to see himself become the fall guy, making him unemployable in the field. He can’t get a job anywhere and out of pure desperation he turns to a life a crime to support his family. Jane is the wife of Dick who quits her job with his new promotion and can’t get a new job, she believes in Dick and ends up teaming up with Dick to commit crime. Jack and Frank are the CEOs that have taken advantage of Dick to get away clean after their illegal trading.
Performances – Jim Carrey gets to play into the full energy comedy that he is known for here, this isn’t the best he has given, but his fans will enjoy what he does, Tea Leoni does struggle with comedy and it is clear to see because she just doesn’t work with Carrey’s comedy. Alec Baldwin and Richard Jenkins get to enjoy their roles in the film playing into what they could be for these real people.
Story – The story follows a couple that are forced into a life of crime after losing everything when a business they are employed with gets closed down with the CEOs leaving the employees broke. This is a remake which has been bought into the modern era of greedy businessman who have taken advantage of their employees only to be left nothing. The story does seem to be going in fast forward with the crime montage flashing over what is happening. This does have a good outcome for everyone involved, but just doesn’t engage for the audience.
Comedy/Crime – The comedy in the film mostly revolves around Jim Carrey bringing in his routine which is enjoyed by people who are fans of his work, the crime side of the film shows just how CEOs can try and get away with things and how one couple looks to crime to survive.
Settings – The film doesn’t give us any settings which feel overly iconic which the film could have had to make us become more invested in what is happening.
Scene of the Movie – The first robbery.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Crime montage.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the book crime comedy that skips over too much of the interesting material only to leave us feeling like we blinked and missed too much.
Overall: Basic crime comedy.
Dick loses his job and his wife Jane (Leoni) has quit her job, the two struggle to find new jobs and before long they are facing being evicted, which turns them to a life of crime to save their home.
Thoughts on Fun with Dick and Jane
Characters – Dick has been working for a company for his whole working career, he has been waiting for a chance to get to the next step which he gets only to see himself become the fall guy, making him unemployable in the field. He can’t get a job anywhere and out of pure desperation he turns to a life a crime to support his family. Jane is the wife of Dick who quits her job with his new promotion and can’t get a new job, she believes in Dick and ends up teaming up with Dick to commit crime. Jack and Frank are the CEOs that have taken advantage of Dick to get away clean after their illegal trading.
Performances – Jim Carrey gets to play into the full energy comedy that he is known for here, this isn’t the best he has given, but his fans will enjoy what he does, Tea Leoni does struggle with comedy and it is clear to see because she just doesn’t work with Carrey’s comedy. Alec Baldwin and Richard Jenkins get to enjoy their roles in the film playing into what they could be for these real people.
Story – The story follows a couple that are forced into a life of crime after losing everything when a business they are employed with gets closed down with the CEOs leaving the employees broke. This is a remake which has been bought into the modern era of greedy businessman who have taken advantage of their employees only to be left nothing. The story does seem to be going in fast forward with the crime montage flashing over what is happening. This does have a good outcome for everyone involved, but just doesn’t engage for the audience.
Comedy/Crime – The comedy in the film mostly revolves around Jim Carrey bringing in his routine which is enjoyed by people who are fans of his work, the crime side of the film shows just how CEOs can try and get away with things and how one couple looks to crime to survive.
Settings – The film doesn’t give us any settings which feel overly iconic which the film could have had to make us become more invested in what is happening.
Scene of the Movie – The first robbery.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Crime montage.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the book crime comedy that skips over too much of the interesting material only to leave us feeling like we blinked and missed too much.
Overall: Basic crime comedy.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Passengers (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Titanic in the Sky
Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence are two of the world’s most bankable stars. What with Pratt helping to resurrect prehistoric franchises like Jurassic Park and Lawrence turning The Hunger Games series into one of the biggest ever, it seems they are the people Hollywood wants to work with, right here, right now.
It was inevitable they’d team up together at some point, though director Mortem Tyldum’s (The Imitation Game) sci-fi flick Passengers perhaps isn’t what their fan-bases had in mind. But do the pair sizzle together as much as they do apart?
On a routine journey through space to a new home, two passengers, sleeping in suspended animation, are awakened 90 years too early when their ship malfunctions. As Jim (Pratt) and Aurora (Lawrence) face living the rest of their lives on board, with every luxury they could ever ask for, they begin to fall for each other, unable to deny their intense attraction until they discover the ship is in grave danger. With the lives of 5,000 sleeping passengers at stake, only Jim and Aurora can save them all.
Adding to the ever expanding sci-fi universe, Passengers is a slickly directed and engrossing film with a coat of varnish like no other movie this year. It certainly looks the part, though it’s probably best not to scratch beneath the surface of this Titanic in the sky, as much like the Starship Avalon on which our unlucky duo are stranded on, there’s not much going on underneath.
Pratt and Lawrence thankfully have an intense chemistry together, and that’s a good thing considering they are, by and large, the only two characters throughout. Propping up a 2 hour film is no easy feat and its testament to their talents that they are able to do so. Sure, their dialogue is a little cheesy, but they’re likeable enough to warrant a pardon this time around.
Elsewhere, Michael Sheen comes close to stealing the show as an enthusiastic android bartender, providing yet another great droid to add to the genre’s roster. Alan Tudyk from last week’s Rogue One also showed how deep these mechanical characters can be.
The special effects are on the whole very good, though there are a few instances of CGI that don’t quite hit the spot. The Avalon itself however is fantastically realised and scenes like the much-marketed swimming pool gravity loss are stunning to watch, all the while helped by Pratt and Lawrence’s brilliant acting skills.
There is one big problem however. The story. There are numerous elements to the plot that aren’t mentioned in the trailer, so I won’t spoil them for you here, but Passengers has seriously miscalculated a couple of elements to Pratt and Lawrence’s relationship – with a sudden third act tonal shift leaving a sour taste in the mouth.
Luckily, these flaws don’t detract from what is a thrilling rollercoaster from start to finish. Whilst it may not be as deep and meaningful as Ridley Scott’s The Martian, Passengers has an immersive quality – it’s like being on-board the Avalon, and with Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence keeping us company, who can blame us for going along for the ride.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/12/22/titanic-in-the-sky-passengers-review/
It was inevitable they’d team up together at some point, though director Mortem Tyldum’s (The Imitation Game) sci-fi flick Passengers perhaps isn’t what their fan-bases had in mind. But do the pair sizzle together as much as they do apart?
On a routine journey through space to a new home, two passengers, sleeping in suspended animation, are awakened 90 years too early when their ship malfunctions. As Jim (Pratt) and Aurora (Lawrence) face living the rest of their lives on board, with every luxury they could ever ask for, they begin to fall for each other, unable to deny their intense attraction until they discover the ship is in grave danger. With the lives of 5,000 sleeping passengers at stake, only Jim and Aurora can save them all.
Adding to the ever expanding sci-fi universe, Passengers is a slickly directed and engrossing film with a coat of varnish like no other movie this year. It certainly looks the part, though it’s probably best not to scratch beneath the surface of this Titanic in the sky, as much like the Starship Avalon on which our unlucky duo are stranded on, there’s not much going on underneath.
Pratt and Lawrence thankfully have an intense chemistry together, and that’s a good thing considering they are, by and large, the only two characters throughout. Propping up a 2 hour film is no easy feat and its testament to their talents that they are able to do so. Sure, their dialogue is a little cheesy, but they’re likeable enough to warrant a pardon this time around.
Elsewhere, Michael Sheen comes close to stealing the show as an enthusiastic android bartender, providing yet another great droid to add to the genre’s roster. Alan Tudyk from last week’s Rogue One also showed how deep these mechanical characters can be.
The special effects are on the whole very good, though there are a few instances of CGI that don’t quite hit the spot. The Avalon itself however is fantastically realised and scenes like the much-marketed swimming pool gravity loss are stunning to watch, all the while helped by Pratt and Lawrence’s brilliant acting skills.
There is one big problem however. The story. There are numerous elements to the plot that aren’t mentioned in the trailer, so I won’t spoil them for you here, but Passengers has seriously miscalculated a couple of elements to Pratt and Lawrence’s relationship – with a sudden third act tonal shift leaving a sour taste in the mouth.
Luckily, these flaws don’t detract from what is a thrilling rollercoaster from start to finish. Whilst it may not be as deep and meaningful as Ridley Scott’s The Martian, Passengers has an immersive quality – it’s like being on-board the Avalon, and with Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence keeping us company, who can blame us for going along for the ride.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/12/22/titanic-in-the-sky-passengers-review/