Search
Search results
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated A Poison Tree in Books
Nov 8, 2019
David Braddock has a happy home life and a successful business he enjoys running. When he runs into occasional acquaintance Jim Fosse in a bar, things begin to change. Jim makes him a surprising offer: kill my wife and I'll kill yours. David has no reason to kill his wife and is appalled at the offer. But then his life begins to slowly fall apart both at home and at work. Perhaps Jim Fosse's suggestion wasn't as outlandish as it first appeared?
As his life spirals out of any of his control, David struggles to come to terms with the reality of his situation. But what is real and what is just a figment of his imagination, grown from a malicious poisonous seed?
This is a fantastic read, if at times pretty bleak. It shows how what appears on the surface to be a stable lifestyle is only held up by the slimmest of supports and these can easily be removed. Throughout all of the main plot following David's fall, some of it from external factors, some of it very much of his own making, there are several twists which take the story in a new directions, some of which are like emotional hammer blows, others are reveals that are obvious in hindsight.
Despite the dark tone of the story Dolan's light touch keeps things moving along preventing the flow from getting anywhere near being described as 'harrowing'. Characters and dialogue are very well handled and there is a natural pace that draws the reader on, even if they are unsure if they want to find out what happens next.
An interesting read and a recommended one for anyone who appreciates realistic characters and plotting.
As his life spirals out of any of his control, David struggles to come to terms with the reality of his situation. But what is real and what is just a figment of his imagination, grown from a malicious poisonous seed?
This is a fantastic read, if at times pretty bleak. It shows how what appears on the surface to be a stable lifestyle is only held up by the slimmest of supports and these can easily be removed. Throughout all of the main plot following David's fall, some of it from external factors, some of it very much of his own making, there are several twists which take the story in a new directions, some of which are like emotional hammer blows, others are reveals that are obvious in hindsight.
Despite the dark tone of the story Dolan's light touch keeps things moving along preventing the flow from getting anywhere near being described as 'harrowing'. Characters and dialogue are very well handled and there is a natural pace that draws the reader on, even if they are unsure if they want to find out what happens next.
An interesting read and a recommended one for anyone who appreciates realistic characters and plotting.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Passengers (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
Jim Preston (Chris Pratt) is a man looking for a fresh start on a new world. Along with 5000 other passengers; Jim is sleeping away the 120 year journey in stasis aboard a luxury ship. In the new film “Passengers”, Jim finds his entire world turned upside down when he is awakened 90 years before the completion of his trip. Alone with no way to return to stasis; Jim struggles to keep his wits as despite having food and recreation readily available, his only companions are server robots and an Android bartender named Arthur (Michael Sheen).
Unable to wake any of the crew to assist him with the situation or access the bridge of the ship, Jim uses his engineering skills to study the operations of the ship as well as gain access to areas normally reserved for VIP passengers.
As time goes by Jim becomes more and more despondent because he cannot even contact anyone on earth as the computer informs him that it will take 36 years for reply to any of his messages to reach the ship and he grows weary of the thought of spending the rest of his life alone.
During one of his frequent visits to his former stasis chamber, Jim discovers an attractive passenger named Aurora (Jennifer Lawrence), and using the ships database, proceeds to learn all about her and begins to fall in love with her as she sleeps blissfully unaware of his presence.
Fate eventually gets in the way and Aurora awakens and joins Jim is the only people awake on the massive ship. Having come from a privileged background as a successful author, Aurora is really upset over spending the rest of her life on the ship as her plan was to spend a year on the colony world before returning to Earth and resuming her writing career 241 years after she left with the adventure she is undertaken being the basis for some of her new work.
The two eventually have feelings for one another, but Jim is harboring a dark secret that threatens to unravel the happy life they have been able to build for one another. As if that was not enough, the ship is experiencing random and increasing malfunctions which threaten not only their survival, but the long-term survival of the fellow crew and passengers and the long journey that they have ahead of them.
What follows is a time predictable but albeit entertaining mix of romance and action. There are some very good visuals in the film and while the story moves along at a very predictable pace, the two leads make the material work. The film does have numerous plot holes in it which I cannot go into without spoiling it but suffice it to say the premise of q couple stranded is not new.
Yes we have seen this all before but the cast and the interesting locale and visuals make the film add up to more than the sum of its parts. I only wish there’d been a little more time shoring up the plot holes and perhaps adding a little bit of mystery and intrigue to the plot as it truly would’ve made this more compelling.
Unable to wake any of the crew to assist him with the situation or access the bridge of the ship, Jim uses his engineering skills to study the operations of the ship as well as gain access to areas normally reserved for VIP passengers.
As time goes by Jim becomes more and more despondent because he cannot even contact anyone on earth as the computer informs him that it will take 36 years for reply to any of his messages to reach the ship and he grows weary of the thought of spending the rest of his life alone.
During one of his frequent visits to his former stasis chamber, Jim discovers an attractive passenger named Aurora (Jennifer Lawrence), and using the ships database, proceeds to learn all about her and begins to fall in love with her as she sleeps blissfully unaware of his presence.
Fate eventually gets in the way and Aurora awakens and joins Jim is the only people awake on the massive ship. Having come from a privileged background as a successful author, Aurora is really upset over spending the rest of her life on the ship as her plan was to spend a year on the colony world before returning to Earth and resuming her writing career 241 years after she left with the adventure she is undertaken being the basis for some of her new work.
The two eventually have feelings for one another, but Jim is harboring a dark secret that threatens to unravel the happy life they have been able to build for one another. As if that was not enough, the ship is experiencing random and increasing malfunctions which threaten not only their survival, but the long-term survival of the fellow crew and passengers and the long journey that they have ahead of them.
What follows is a time predictable but albeit entertaining mix of romance and action. There are some very good visuals in the film and while the story moves along at a very predictable pace, the two leads make the material work. The film does have numerous plot holes in it which I cannot go into without spoiling it but suffice it to say the premise of q couple stranded is not new.
Yes we have seen this all before but the cast and the interesting locale and visuals make the film add up to more than the sum of its parts. I only wish there’d been a little more time shoring up the plot holes and perhaps adding a little bit of mystery and intrigue to the plot as it truly would’ve made this more compelling.
I was pleasantly surprised by "After We Fall." I requested it on a whim from Netgalley and it had the dubious distinction of being the novel that followed the latest Michael Connelly Bosch book (and in my eyes, Connelly and Bosch can do no wrong).
The novel is told from the viewpoint from four characters - Tom, a police officer; Celia, a flight attendant and Tom's wife; Jim, a father and former police officer; and Freya, a young student. Their lives entertwine over the course of the book, all centered around a plane that goes down one snowy night. Their stories are superbly told and each character extremely well-drawn-- albeit not always likeable. There are several mysteries that build within the book-- why did the plane go down, of course--along with a murder that's central to the story.
You would think with so few characters that the plot would seem trite and the outcome apparent, but Kavanaugh does a great job of creating suspense and keeping you on your toes. Just when you think you've figured something out, there's another small surprise. I found myself completely immersed in the character's lives (I was immediately drawn to Tom, liked Jim and Freya, and had issues with Celia, but that's all just from my own perspective).
Definitely a worthwhile read.
(Note, I received a copy of this book from Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.)
The novel is told from the viewpoint from four characters - Tom, a police officer; Celia, a flight attendant and Tom's wife; Jim, a father and former police officer; and Freya, a young student. Their lives entertwine over the course of the book, all centered around a plane that goes down one snowy night. Their stories are superbly told and each character extremely well-drawn-- albeit not always likeable. There are several mysteries that build within the book-- why did the plane go down, of course--along with a murder that's central to the story.
You would think with so few characters that the plot would seem trite and the outcome apparent, but Kavanaugh does a great job of creating suspense and keeping you on your toes. Just when you think you've figured something out, there's another small surprise. I found myself completely immersed in the character's lives (I was immediately drawn to Tom, liked Jim and Freya, and had issues with Celia, but that's all just from my own perspective).
Definitely a worthwhile read.
(Note, I received a copy of this book from Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.)
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)
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.
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/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Passengers (2016) in Movies
Dec 6, 2017
Not as Bad as the Critics Said
Passengers works for me largely in part due to the great chemistry between Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence. Their relationship is believable, real. Exactly what I would expect from two people stuck in a space paradise together. I try to avoid words like "sizzle" and "spice" when describing onscreen pairings, but it's 7:30pm on a Tuesday night and I have folded clothes to put away. So....Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence absolutely sizzle onscreen together! Free from the inhibitions of watching eyes the duo adds real spice to the film's flavor. Yep, that just happened. No regrets. Yolo.
I was surprised by how solid the film was from beginning to end. The mark of a great movie for me is consistency throughout, the same measure I use to judge a good key lime pie. Passengers kept me engaged for its entirety without managing to overstay its welcome. It's funny in parts while being touching in others. Overall the pace works.
The special effects were also impressive. The inside of the ship where most of the story takes place is a carnival of sights. Its futuristic yet a familiar touch of home at the same time. The recesses of space were captured in brilliant fashion. As main character Jim Preston (Pratt) goes exploring the expanse, you start to realize just how small and lonely he must feel in comparison.
When Preston awakens on a craft headed for another planet, he realizes the ship pulled him from hibernation too soon. It isn't long before he is joined by Aurora Lane (Lawrence) who has to help him figure out why the ship woke them up early before things go terribly wrong.
The only thing holding this film back from being great as opposed to "just ok" is implausibility. There are quite a few things that happen, both from a scientific standpoint and plot advancement standpoint, that may leave you scratching your head a bit. This film falls victim at times of trying to take shortcuts. However, if you can suspend your disbelief for just long enough and turn a blind eye, you won't be disappointed.
Some films are reviewed badly because they're...well...bad. Other films fall victim to what I call Pile-On: A few critics from the "In Crowd" don't like it so everyone else is supposed to hate it as well (see The Hitman's Bodyguard). I think Passengers suffer from the latter. See it. It won't change your life, but a great way to spend two hours nonetheless. I give it a 73.
I was surprised by how solid the film was from beginning to end. The mark of a great movie for me is consistency throughout, the same measure I use to judge a good key lime pie. Passengers kept me engaged for its entirety without managing to overstay its welcome. It's funny in parts while being touching in others. Overall the pace works.
The special effects were also impressive. The inside of the ship where most of the story takes place is a carnival of sights. Its futuristic yet a familiar touch of home at the same time. The recesses of space were captured in brilliant fashion. As main character Jim Preston (Pratt) goes exploring the expanse, you start to realize just how small and lonely he must feel in comparison.
When Preston awakens on a craft headed for another planet, he realizes the ship pulled him from hibernation too soon. It isn't long before he is joined by Aurora Lane (Lawrence) who has to help him figure out why the ship woke them up early before things go terribly wrong.
The only thing holding this film back from being great as opposed to "just ok" is implausibility. There are quite a few things that happen, both from a scientific standpoint and plot advancement standpoint, that may leave you scratching your head a bit. This film falls victim at times of trying to take shortcuts. However, if you can suspend your disbelief for just long enough and turn a blind eye, you won't be disappointed.
Some films are reviewed badly because they're...well...bad. Other films fall victim to what I call Pile-On: A few critics from the "In Crowd" don't like it so everyone else is supposed to hate it as well (see The Hitman's Bodyguard). I think Passengers suffer from the latter. See it. It won't change your life, but a great way to spend two hours nonetheless. I give it a 73.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Christopher Robin (2018) in Movies
Apr 1, 2019
Endearing and Pleasant
Never was a big “Winnie the Pooh” guy growing up, but I was always familiar with the characters. Christopher Robin made me fall in love with these characters all the same. Now an adult, Christopher returns to the Hundred Acre Woods to reunite with old friends he left behind.
Acting: 10
Jim Cummings is stellar as both Pooh and Tigger. Although I don’t have a huge point of reference, I can say that it felt like he poured his heart into these characters, making them extremely lovable. His tone and inflection just have a way of making me smile. I also loved Brad Garrett voicing Eeyore. That choice is almost a given as his voice is perfect, but I loved how he took the role and made it his own. Amazing job by the cast all around.
Beginning: 9
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Reminiscent of what they did with the Snuggle bear, the characters are not quite animated, but an odd form of CGI. They don’t feel like fake creatures, rather they are a uniquely pleasant creation. Seeing them interact with Christopher Robin and the settings around them was a treat. I loved the way the Hundred Acre Woods are captured and the well-crafted closeups of the characters that evoke emotion. Especially powerful was the montage of Christopher Robin growing into a man at the beginning of the movie. It shows you just how far removed he is from his childhood.
Conflict: 7
Genre: 9
I appreciate it when a kids film can take their material and use it to appeal to adults. Christopher Robin straddles the line between adults and children extremely well and makes it an enjoyable experience for all. I smiled. I laughed. And maybe, just maybe, I got a little teary.
Memorability: 9
The movie hits you with a strong message about the necessity of growing up and the importance of holding on to yourself as you age. Watching it inspired me to remember how it felt to be fancy free without a care in the world and how good that felt. The movie does a great job of sprinkling the message in with the fun of the story.
One of my favorite scenes in the movie is when Pooh and Christopher reunite for the first time. They are sitting on park benches facing away from each other. It’s an endearing moment that helps to get the adventure rolling.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
If this ending doesn’t move you, you are not human. Kidding, but it’s the perfect sappy ending for a sappy movie. The kind of ending that makes you want to start the movie over from the beginning and watch it all over again.
Overall: 94
First Po, then Paddington, now Pooh. I don’t know what it is about these bears that put a smile on my face, but whatever it is, it works! Christopher Robin was definitely one of my favorite movies of 2018.
Acting: 10
Jim Cummings is stellar as both Pooh and Tigger. Although I don’t have a huge point of reference, I can say that it felt like he poured his heart into these characters, making them extremely lovable. His tone and inflection just have a way of making me smile. I also loved Brad Garrett voicing Eeyore. That choice is almost a given as his voice is perfect, but I loved how he took the role and made it his own. Amazing job by the cast all around.
Beginning: 9
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Reminiscent of what they did with the Snuggle bear, the characters are not quite animated, but an odd form of CGI. They don’t feel like fake creatures, rather they are a uniquely pleasant creation. Seeing them interact with Christopher Robin and the settings around them was a treat. I loved the way the Hundred Acre Woods are captured and the well-crafted closeups of the characters that evoke emotion. Especially powerful was the montage of Christopher Robin growing into a man at the beginning of the movie. It shows you just how far removed he is from his childhood.
Conflict: 7
Genre: 9
I appreciate it when a kids film can take their material and use it to appeal to adults. Christopher Robin straddles the line between adults and children extremely well and makes it an enjoyable experience for all. I smiled. I laughed. And maybe, just maybe, I got a little teary.
Memorability: 9
The movie hits you with a strong message about the necessity of growing up and the importance of holding on to yourself as you age. Watching it inspired me to remember how it felt to be fancy free without a care in the world and how good that felt. The movie does a great job of sprinkling the message in with the fun of the story.
One of my favorite scenes in the movie is when Pooh and Christopher reunite for the first time. They are sitting on park benches facing away from each other. It’s an endearing moment that helps to get the adventure rolling.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
If this ending doesn’t move you, you are not human. Kidding, but it’s the perfect sappy ending for a sappy movie. The kind of ending that makes you want to start the movie over from the beginning and watch it all over again.
Overall: 94
First Po, then Paddington, now Pooh. I don’t know what it is about these bears that put a smile on my face, but whatever it is, it works! Christopher Robin was definitely one of my favorite movies of 2018.