Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated Robert The Bruce (2019) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Story: Robert the Bruce starts after William Wallace is defeated, Robert the Bruce (Macfadyen) and John Comyn (Harris) are fighting for control of Scotland, with John coming up the winner, Robert isn’t willing to take this defeat laying down, with his loyal soldiers James Douglas (Murtagh) planning to take Scotland back.
With Robert injured, Morag (Hutchison) and her family discover him, nursing him back to health despite being in a heavily Comyn control area, with Brandubh (McGowan) hunting down anyone who supporting Robert the Bruce, he must regain his strength to take his rightful place on the throne of Scotland.
Thoughts on Robert the Bruce
Characters – Robert the Bruce is the man that was crowned king of Scotland after the English were defeated, he wasn’t everybody’s first choice, which sees him needing to fight for his place on the throne, which sees him being left for dead, while his opposition takes control of the land, eliminating anybody who supports him. John Comyn is the other man that believes he could be king of Scotland, he has taken control in the battle against Robert, which sees him continuing to use the connections with English, much to anger of the Scots. Morag is the single mother that saw her husband killed fighting for Robert, she must raise her children believing John is the rightful ruler, either if her stories tell of Robert’s bravery. Brandubh is related to Morag, he is willing to kill anybody that doesn’t fight for his own country, which sees him trying to hunt down Robert the Bruce.
Performances – Angus Macfadyen reprises his former role of Robert the Bruce, one he played in Braveheart, he brings us a wise leader performance through the film. Jared Harris might have a supporting role, but after this year, you want to pause and watch any scene this man is in. Anna Hutchison does bring us a stronger performance than you would expect from her, with her getting to show that she can handle a serious role. Zach McGowan does a lot of the heavy lifting in this film, he is the one that gets to handle the most action through the film, with him being the villain for large parts of the film which otherwise would involve less action.
Story – The story here follows Robert the Bruce who became of the King of Scotland in the aftermath of the William Wallace battles against the English. Now this is set up to be some what of a sequel to Braveheart, which it is only in continuing a story, not in film story. we do play into the idea of how Scotland was left in the unknown after the battle, with two people fighting for the leadership, with the people left divided and calm required to make the land complete once again. The pacing of the story does come off slow in places which doesn’t help because, it is mostly a mother trying to prove to her children who should be king, and who they should tell people they respect more to remain safe. If you know your history the end of the film isn’t going to be a mystery to you and it does feel like there could have been a bigger impact with certain things that happen in this story.
History – This is a history lesson to the people that wanted to know more historic accuracy behind Scotland’s independence from England, unlike what Braveheart did.
Settings – The film does make us feel like we are in part of Scotland, we get to see how the condition made the events of the film difficult for the men fighting for the rightful cause.
Scene of the Movie – The crown.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is about 30 minutes too long for everything that is told in this story.
Final Thoughts – This is an interesting look at the history of Robert the Bruce and his rise to become king of Scotland, seeing how he overcame odds to take his place on the throne. Everything is acted well, never looking out of place.
Overall: History lesson.
With Robert injured, Morag (Hutchison) and her family discover him, nursing him back to health despite being in a heavily Comyn control area, with Brandubh (McGowan) hunting down anyone who supporting Robert the Bruce, he must regain his strength to take his rightful place on the throne of Scotland.
Thoughts on Robert the Bruce
Characters – Robert the Bruce is the man that was crowned king of Scotland after the English were defeated, he wasn’t everybody’s first choice, which sees him needing to fight for his place on the throne, which sees him being left for dead, while his opposition takes control of the land, eliminating anybody who supports him. John Comyn is the other man that believes he could be king of Scotland, he has taken control in the battle against Robert, which sees him continuing to use the connections with English, much to anger of the Scots. Morag is the single mother that saw her husband killed fighting for Robert, she must raise her children believing John is the rightful ruler, either if her stories tell of Robert’s bravery. Brandubh is related to Morag, he is willing to kill anybody that doesn’t fight for his own country, which sees him trying to hunt down Robert the Bruce.
Performances – Angus Macfadyen reprises his former role of Robert the Bruce, one he played in Braveheart, he brings us a wise leader performance through the film. Jared Harris might have a supporting role, but after this year, you want to pause and watch any scene this man is in. Anna Hutchison does bring us a stronger performance than you would expect from her, with her getting to show that she can handle a serious role. Zach McGowan does a lot of the heavy lifting in this film, he is the one that gets to handle the most action through the film, with him being the villain for large parts of the film which otherwise would involve less action.
Story – The story here follows Robert the Bruce who became of the King of Scotland in the aftermath of the William Wallace battles against the English. Now this is set up to be some what of a sequel to Braveheart, which it is only in continuing a story, not in film story. we do play into the idea of how Scotland was left in the unknown after the battle, with two people fighting for the leadership, with the people left divided and calm required to make the land complete once again. The pacing of the story does come off slow in places which doesn’t help because, it is mostly a mother trying to prove to her children who should be king, and who they should tell people they respect more to remain safe. If you know your history the end of the film isn’t going to be a mystery to you and it does feel like there could have been a bigger impact with certain things that happen in this story.
History – This is a history lesson to the people that wanted to know more historic accuracy behind Scotland’s independence from England, unlike what Braveheart did.
Settings – The film does make us feel like we are in part of Scotland, we get to see how the condition made the events of the film difficult for the men fighting for the rightful cause.
Scene of the Movie – The crown.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is about 30 minutes too long for everything that is told in this story.
Final Thoughts – This is an interesting look at the history of Robert the Bruce and his rise to become king of Scotland, seeing how he overcame odds to take his place on the throne. Everything is acted well, never looking out of place.
Overall: History lesson.
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated Unusual Suspects: Stories of Mystery & Fantasy in Books
Mar 1, 2018
Another uneven anthology. I still have it in my hands, so I'll try to hit each story briefly.
"Lucky" by Charlaine Harris - Sookie is much easier to take in short form. I can't help it, the woman grates on me (in the TV show even worse than in the books). The other characters keep me reading.
"Bogieman" by Carole Nelson Douglas - Delilah Street does more than grate on my nerves in long form. She's more palatable in short form, too, but there are reminders of why I don't intend to read more in that series.
"Looks are Deceiving" by Michael A. Stackpole - If I've read any of Stackpole's work before, it's been in anthologies, and I don't remember it. I did wonder if this short story is set in a universe he uses in longer works, though. It wasn't bad at all.
"The House of Seven Spirits" by Sharon Shinn - I loved this story! And how often do you say that about a haunted house tale? I must track down and read some of Shinn's novels. Any suggestions?
"Glamour" by Mike Doogan - The Peasantry Anti-Defamation League might be after Doogan if he isn't careful (at least, representatives of the male peasantry). The story was cute, and it did make me laugh.
"Spellbound" by Donna Andrews - This is another author whose books are going on my (groaning) to-read shelf. The story hit a few clichés, but was fun enough to get away with them.
"The Duh Vice" by Michael Armstrong - Ugh. A little too preachy, and way too much anti-fat prejudice.
"Weight of the World" by John Straley - Where does Santa Claus go in the off-season? That's the biggest question answered in this piece. The "mystery" was "solved" nearly as soon as it was discovered.
"Illumination" by Laura Anne Gilman - Bonnie's back story! I think a bit of this story is used in the first chapter of Gilman's first PUPI novel, but I'll know more when I get my hands on it. It's a must-read for fans of the Cosa Nostradamus universe, though.
"The House" by Laurie R. King - could we maybe call a hiatus on the abused-kid stories? Maybe I'm hypersensitive, but I'm tired of them.
"Appetite for Murder" by Simon R. Green - another dark Nightside story. I don't think I'll ever need to read more in that universe.
"A Woman's Work" by Dana Stabenow - I'm an unabashed Stabenow fangirl. Despite that, I wasn't sure how she'd do in a fantasy setting. She proved herself, certainly. I can only hope that we'll see longer fantasy works from her in print at some juncture.
"Lucky" by Charlaine Harris - Sookie is much easier to take in short form. I can't help it, the woman grates on me (in the TV show even worse than in the books). The other characters keep me reading.
"Bogieman" by Carole Nelson Douglas - Delilah Street does more than grate on my nerves in long form. She's more palatable in short form, too, but there are reminders of why I don't intend to read more in that series.
"Looks are Deceiving" by Michael A. Stackpole - If I've read any of Stackpole's work before, it's been in anthologies, and I don't remember it. I did wonder if this short story is set in a universe he uses in longer works, though. It wasn't bad at all.
"The House of Seven Spirits" by Sharon Shinn - I loved this story! And how often do you say that about a haunted house tale? I must track down and read some of Shinn's novels. Any suggestions?
"Glamour" by Mike Doogan - The Peasantry Anti-Defamation League might be after Doogan if he isn't careful (at least, representatives of the male peasantry). The story was cute, and it did make me laugh.
"Spellbound" by Donna Andrews - This is another author whose books are going on my (groaning) to-read shelf. The story hit a few clichés, but was fun enough to get away with them.
"The Duh Vice" by Michael Armstrong - Ugh. A little too preachy, and way too much anti-fat prejudice.
"Weight of the World" by John Straley - Where does Santa Claus go in the off-season? That's the biggest question answered in this piece. The "mystery" was "solved" nearly as soon as it was discovered.
"Illumination" by Laura Anne Gilman - Bonnie's back story! I think a bit of this story is used in the first chapter of Gilman's first PUPI novel, but I'll know more when I get my hands on it. It's a must-read for fans of the Cosa Nostradamus universe, though.
"The House" by Laurie R. King - could we maybe call a hiatus on the abused-kid stories? Maybe I'm hypersensitive, but I'm tired of them.
"Appetite for Murder" by Simon R. Green - another dark Nightside story. I don't think I'll ever need to read more in that universe.
"A Woman's Work" by Dana Stabenow - I'm an unabashed Stabenow fangirl. Despite that, I wasn't sure how she'd do in a fantasy setting. She proved herself, certainly. I can only hope that we'll see longer fantasy works from her in print at some juncture.
MaryAnn (14 KP) rated CSB Worldview Study Bible in Books
Nov 4, 2019
The CSB Worldview Study Bible features extensive worldview study notes and articles by notable Christian scholars to help Christians better understand the grand narrative and flow of Scripture within the biblical framework from which we are called to view reality and make sense of life and the world. Guided by general editors David S. Dockery and Trevin K. Wax, this Bible is an invaluable resource and study tool that will help you to discuss, defend, and clearly share with others the truth, hope, and practical compatibility of Christianity in everyday life.
Features include:
Extensive worldview study notes
Over 130 articles by notable Christian scholars
Center-column references
Smyth-sewn binding
Presentation page
Two ribbon markers
Two-piece gift box, and more
General Editors: David S. Dockery and Trevin Wax
Associate Editors: Constantine R. Campbell, E. Ray Clendenen, Eric J. Tully
Contributors include: David S. Dockery, Trevin K. Wax, Ray Van Neste, John Stonestreet, Ted Cabal, Darrell L. Bock, Mary J. Sharp, Carl R. Trueman, Bruce Riley Ashford, R. Albert Mohler Jr., William A. Dembski, Preben Vang, David K. Naugle, Jennifer A. Marshall, Aida Besancon Spencer, Paul Copan, Robert Smith Jr., Douglas Groothuis, Russell D. Moore, Mark A. Noll, Timothy George, Carla D. Sanderson, Kevin Smith, Gregory B. Forster, Choon Sam Fong, and more.
The CSB Worldview Study Bible features the highly readable, highly reliable text of the Christian Standard Bible (CSB). The CSB stays as literal as possible to the Bibles original meaning without sacrificing clarity, making it easier to engage with Scriptures life-transforming message and to share it with others.
This is a wonderful Bible that not only gives us God's word but teaches through credible editors about the Christians view of the world. There are articles that show us the Biblical view of that issue; such a: the Biblical view of music, Personal Finances. Ther is an article on how Christians should relate to the government along with various other interesting articles.
This is a great study Bible for new believers, for discipling, for those interested in how God's word relates to issues around us today. How we as Christians should respond to a world that is turning against Christians.
This is a beautiful Bible, that is easy to read and has full-color maps. This will be a great addition to anyone's library.
CSB Worldview Study Bible
I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review and the opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commissions 16 CFR, Part 255 : Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.
Features include:
Extensive worldview study notes
Over 130 articles by notable Christian scholars
Center-column references
Smyth-sewn binding
Presentation page
Two ribbon markers
Two-piece gift box, and more
General Editors: David S. Dockery and Trevin Wax
Associate Editors: Constantine R. Campbell, E. Ray Clendenen, Eric J. Tully
Contributors include: David S. Dockery, Trevin K. Wax, Ray Van Neste, John Stonestreet, Ted Cabal, Darrell L. Bock, Mary J. Sharp, Carl R. Trueman, Bruce Riley Ashford, R. Albert Mohler Jr., William A. Dembski, Preben Vang, David K. Naugle, Jennifer A. Marshall, Aida Besancon Spencer, Paul Copan, Robert Smith Jr., Douglas Groothuis, Russell D. Moore, Mark A. Noll, Timothy George, Carla D. Sanderson, Kevin Smith, Gregory B. Forster, Choon Sam Fong, and more.
The CSB Worldview Study Bible features the highly readable, highly reliable text of the Christian Standard Bible (CSB). The CSB stays as literal as possible to the Bibles original meaning without sacrificing clarity, making it easier to engage with Scriptures life-transforming message and to share it with others.
This is a wonderful Bible that not only gives us God's word but teaches through credible editors about the Christians view of the world. There are articles that show us the Biblical view of that issue; such a: the Biblical view of music, Personal Finances. Ther is an article on how Christians should relate to the government along with various other interesting articles.
This is a great study Bible for new believers, for discipling, for those interested in how God's word relates to issues around us today. How we as Christians should respond to a world that is turning against Christians.
This is a beautiful Bible, that is easy to read and has full-color maps. This will be a great addition to anyone's library.
CSB Worldview Study Bible
I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review and the opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commissions 16 CFR, Part 255 : Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Finding your feet (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Foot tapping and Tear Jerking.
There are some films whose trailers really don’t properly represent their contents. The trailer for the new ‘grey-pound’ film “Finding Your Feet” promised a light hearted and witty foray into an elderly dance-club. And, yes, you get some laughs. But it’s very much a bitter sweet comedy, and the bitterness is ladled on by the bucketload leading to more tears than smiles through the majority of the running time.
Sandra (Imelda Staunton, “Pride“) – now Lady Sandra, after her husband’s latest knighthood – is in a predictable, sex-free but reasonably happy marriage to legal beagle Mike (John Sessions, “Denial“, “Florence Foster Jenkins“) when her world is shaken to its core on discovering that Mike has been having a five-year affair with her best friend Pamela (Josie Lawrence). Moving in with her Bohemian sister Bif (Celia Imrie, “Bridget Jones Baby“), she struggles to integrate into her decidedly lower class lifestyle and find common ground with Bif’s dance club friends Charlie (Timothy Spall, “Denial“, “Mr Turner”), Ted (David Hayman) and Jackie (Joanna Lumley, “The Wolf of Wall Street“).
Can Sandra turn her downward spiral around and find love and happiness again? Well, the posters scream “The Feel Good Film of the Year” so you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to know the answer to that! But it’s a bumpy journey for sure.
Getting all the acting honours is Timothy Spall, who is far too good to be buried away in this small British rom com. To watch him do “ordinary bloke doing ordinary things” is an absolute delight. He adds class and distinction to every scene he’s in, especially for those concerned with his truly tragic and upsetting back-story. Running a close second is Celia Imrie who has a wicked smile off to perfection and adds a lot of emotional depth to her performance: and she needs the range, since she too is on a pretty emotional journey through the second half of the film.
John Sessions and Josie Lawrence – old compatriots of course from the original version of TV’s “Whose Line Is It Anyway” – also deliver marvellous cameo performances, as does Phoebe Nicholls (“The Elephant Man”, “Downton Abbey”) as the tennis playing friend Janet.
Less convincing for me was Imelda Staunton, particularly in the first half of the film: for me she never quite pulls off the icy cold emotional wreck of Sandra, but is much better once the thaw has set in.
The film is written by Meg Leonard (in a debut script) and Nick Moorcroft (who did the “St Trinians” scripts). And there are some funny lines in there, although it has to be said that there are not enough of them. The majority of the best ones in fact are in the trailer, never bettered by Joanna Lumley’s zinger…. “My last marriage ended for religious reasons…. he thought he was God and I didn’t”! There’s not much more room for comic lines, since the rest of the script is stuffed with the dramatic outcomes from various flavours of old-age malady. Fortunately I was one of the younger members of the generally grey-haired audience, but for those further up the scale it must have been like staring into the void!
The film will win no awards for choreography, since the dance scenes are gloriously inept and out of sync. But this all rather adds to the charm of the piece.
Directed by Richard Loncraine, director of the equally forgettable Brit-flick “Wimbledon” and the rather more memorable “Brimstone and Treacle”, this is as Douglas Adams would have said “Mostly Harmless”: a film that most over-50’s will find a pleasant way to spend two hours. But go in expecting a drama with comic moments, rather than the hilarious comedy predicted by the trailer, and you will be better prepared.
(I should comment that the rating below is my view: my illustrious wife declared it a triumphant chick-flick and gave it FFFFf).
Sandra (Imelda Staunton, “Pride“) – now Lady Sandra, after her husband’s latest knighthood – is in a predictable, sex-free but reasonably happy marriage to legal beagle Mike (John Sessions, “Denial“, “Florence Foster Jenkins“) when her world is shaken to its core on discovering that Mike has been having a five-year affair with her best friend Pamela (Josie Lawrence). Moving in with her Bohemian sister Bif (Celia Imrie, “Bridget Jones Baby“), she struggles to integrate into her decidedly lower class lifestyle and find common ground with Bif’s dance club friends Charlie (Timothy Spall, “Denial“, “Mr Turner”), Ted (David Hayman) and Jackie (Joanna Lumley, “The Wolf of Wall Street“).
Can Sandra turn her downward spiral around and find love and happiness again? Well, the posters scream “The Feel Good Film of the Year” so you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to know the answer to that! But it’s a bumpy journey for sure.
Getting all the acting honours is Timothy Spall, who is far too good to be buried away in this small British rom com. To watch him do “ordinary bloke doing ordinary things” is an absolute delight. He adds class and distinction to every scene he’s in, especially for those concerned with his truly tragic and upsetting back-story. Running a close second is Celia Imrie who has a wicked smile off to perfection and adds a lot of emotional depth to her performance: and she needs the range, since she too is on a pretty emotional journey through the second half of the film.
John Sessions and Josie Lawrence – old compatriots of course from the original version of TV’s “Whose Line Is It Anyway” – also deliver marvellous cameo performances, as does Phoebe Nicholls (“The Elephant Man”, “Downton Abbey”) as the tennis playing friend Janet.
Less convincing for me was Imelda Staunton, particularly in the first half of the film: for me she never quite pulls off the icy cold emotional wreck of Sandra, but is much better once the thaw has set in.
The film is written by Meg Leonard (in a debut script) and Nick Moorcroft (who did the “St Trinians” scripts). And there are some funny lines in there, although it has to be said that there are not enough of them. The majority of the best ones in fact are in the trailer, never bettered by Joanna Lumley’s zinger…. “My last marriage ended for religious reasons…. he thought he was God and I didn’t”! There’s not much more room for comic lines, since the rest of the script is stuffed with the dramatic outcomes from various flavours of old-age malady. Fortunately I was one of the younger members of the generally grey-haired audience, but for those further up the scale it must have been like staring into the void!
The film will win no awards for choreography, since the dance scenes are gloriously inept and out of sync. But this all rather adds to the charm of the piece.
Directed by Richard Loncraine, director of the equally forgettable Brit-flick “Wimbledon” and the rather more memorable “Brimstone and Treacle”, this is as Douglas Adams would have said “Mostly Harmless”: a film that most over-50’s will find a pleasant way to spend two hours. But go in expecting a drama with comic moments, rather than the hilarious comedy predicted by the trailer, and you will be better prepared.
(I should comment that the rating below is my view: my illustrious wife declared it a triumphant chick-flick and gave it FFFFf).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Ant-Man and the Wasp (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Large and Small on screen, but just ends up middling.
So, for the first time we divided last night at the cinema. I went off to watch “Ant-Man and the Wasp” and my wife – not a Marvel fan – went to see “Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again” (for the THIRD time!). Incidentally, Mamma Mia 2 seems to be the movie phenomenon of the summer, taking over from “The Greatest Showman” as the movie phenomenon of the winter. It’s been out three weeks now and the shows are still selling out, with people (mostly groups of women) being turned away at the ticket desk. I can see this one running in theatres until October, when they bring out a sing-a-long edition and it carries on running ‘til Christmas. Extraordinary.
But, let’s turn from big things to small things. In a prologue we see a young Dr Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) and wife Janet (Michelle Pfeiffer) torn apart as Janet miniturises herself into the “quantum realm” to save the world from nuclear disaster. But in the present day Hank thinks there might be a way to find and retrieve Janet with the help of their superhero daughter Hope (“The Wasp”, played by Evangeline Lilly). (“What the f*** have you been thinking about instead for the last 30 years while I’ve been sat here avoiding neutrons”, would be the imagined response from Janet, but we don’t go there!).
But Scott Lang (aka “Ant Man”, Paul Rudd), having also been to the quantum realm, holds a key part of the puzzle. To add to their problems, a strange ghost-like girl called Ava has her own reasons for retrieving the lost soul, but in ways that will tear Janet limb from limb. Can Hank, Hope and Scott succeed, while dodging both The Ghost, the FBI and other criminal forces intent on seizing Pym’s technology?
I must admit that I’d somewhat forgotten how “Ant Man” ended three years ago, which together with the one film missing from my Marvel-watching canon being “Captain America: Civil War” left me somewhat confused by why we start the film with our hero Lang under two-year’s house arrest. But much fun is had with Lang’s curfew and the frustration of FBI agent Jimmy Woo (Randall Park) in trying to catch him breaking the rules.
For we are again at the comedic end of the Marvel universe. However the comedy is extremely uneven this time and doesn’t sit particularly well with the dramatic and emotional elements of the film. It’s certainly nowhere near the consistently funny content of the surprisingly good “Thor: Ragnarok”. Some of Rudd’s lines just smell of “trying too hard”.
Adding comedic value is Michael Peña returning here as Scott’s partner Luis. His motor-mouth routine after taking a truth drug (“not a truth drug”!) was hilarious, with the rest of the cast miming his words in flashback.
It has to be said though that there are some truly great sight-gags, to rival the Thomas the Tank Engine scenes in the first film. The expanding salt-cellar; the expanding / contracting car and building moments; and the “skateboard” scenes. But all – and I mean ALL – of these scenes were universally spoiled by the trailer, such that the reaction to them was “oh, that’s that bit then”. NEVER has there been a better case for a teaser trailer that basically said “Ant Man’s back; here’s ONE wow-factor visual”. It’s just criminal. Interestingly, re the trailer, there was also at least one scene (the “you go high, I’ll go low” one, which I thought was very funny) that didn’t make the cut I saw.
Acting wise you can’t fault the cast with Lilly just great as “The Wasp”. If I was her, I would have said “OK… I’ll do the film, but I get to keep the suit!”. That would be her age monitoring device for years to come…. “Does the zip still do up at the back? Do my impossibly pert breasts still align with these impossibly well-moulded contours?”. It’s also great to see Michael Douglas and Laurence Fishburne going head-to-head in the acting stakes. Walton Goggins again crops up as a believable bad-guy, a performance I really enjoyed, but the star turn for me in the whole film was a career-making performance by Hannah John-Kamen as Ava/The Ghost: she’s previously only had small supporting roles in “Tomb Raider” and “Ready Player One”. Looking like a Star Wars sand-person in her outfit she removes her mask to reveal a stunningly piercing gaze and great screen presence. One to watch for the future.
Directed by original “Ant Man” director Peyton Reed, it’s a perfectly entertaining watch for a summer night, but it is uneven in tone, perhaps the result of the team of five credited with the writing. Ask me in two months’ time to tell you anything about it and I will probably struggle. It’s a “meh” sort of film for me.
But, let’s turn from big things to small things. In a prologue we see a young Dr Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) and wife Janet (Michelle Pfeiffer) torn apart as Janet miniturises herself into the “quantum realm” to save the world from nuclear disaster. But in the present day Hank thinks there might be a way to find and retrieve Janet with the help of their superhero daughter Hope (“The Wasp”, played by Evangeline Lilly). (“What the f*** have you been thinking about instead for the last 30 years while I’ve been sat here avoiding neutrons”, would be the imagined response from Janet, but we don’t go there!).
But Scott Lang (aka “Ant Man”, Paul Rudd), having also been to the quantum realm, holds a key part of the puzzle. To add to their problems, a strange ghost-like girl called Ava has her own reasons for retrieving the lost soul, but in ways that will tear Janet limb from limb. Can Hank, Hope and Scott succeed, while dodging both The Ghost, the FBI and other criminal forces intent on seizing Pym’s technology?
I must admit that I’d somewhat forgotten how “Ant Man” ended three years ago, which together with the one film missing from my Marvel-watching canon being “Captain America: Civil War” left me somewhat confused by why we start the film with our hero Lang under two-year’s house arrest. But much fun is had with Lang’s curfew and the frustration of FBI agent Jimmy Woo (Randall Park) in trying to catch him breaking the rules.
For we are again at the comedic end of the Marvel universe. However the comedy is extremely uneven this time and doesn’t sit particularly well with the dramatic and emotional elements of the film. It’s certainly nowhere near the consistently funny content of the surprisingly good “Thor: Ragnarok”. Some of Rudd’s lines just smell of “trying too hard”.
Adding comedic value is Michael Peña returning here as Scott’s partner Luis. His motor-mouth routine after taking a truth drug (“not a truth drug”!) was hilarious, with the rest of the cast miming his words in flashback.
It has to be said though that there are some truly great sight-gags, to rival the Thomas the Tank Engine scenes in the first film. The expanding salt-cellar; the expanding / contracting car and building moments; and the “skateboard” scenes. But all – and I mean ALL – of these scenes were universally spoiled by the trailer, such that the reaction to them was “oh, that’s that bit then”. NEVER has there been a better case for a teaser trailer that basically said “Ant Man’s back; here’s ONE wow-factor visual”. It’s just criminal. Interestingly, re the trailer, there was also at least one scene (the “you go high, I’ll go low” one, which I thought was very funny) that didn’t make the cut I saw.
Acting wise you can’t fault the cast with Lilly just great as “The Wasp”. If I was her, I would have said “OK… I’ll do the film, but I get to keep the suit!”. That would be her age monitoring device for years to come…. “Does the zip still do up at the back? Do my impossibly pert breasts still align with these impossibly well-moulded contours?”. It’s also great to see Michael Douglas and Laurence Fishburne going head-to-head in the acting stakes. Walton Goggins again crops up as a believable bad-guy, a performance I really enjoyed, but the star turn for me in the whole film was a career-making performance by Hannah John-Kamen as Ava/The Ghost: she’s previously only had small supporting roles in “Tomb Raider” and “Ready Player One”. Looking like a Star Wars sand-person in her outfit she removes her mask to reveal a stunningly piercing gaze and great screen presence. One to watch for the future.
Directed by original “Ant Man” director Peyton Reed, it’s a perfectly entertaining watch for a summer night, but it is uneven in tone, perhaps the result of the team of five credited with the writing. Ask me in two months’ time to tell you anything about it and I will probably struggle. It’s a “meh” sort of film for me.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Outlaw King (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
After more than eight years of war with King Edward I of England (Stephen Dillane) the Scottish Nobles swear allegiance to the crown, ending the brutal. This includes Robert Bruce (Chris Pine) who is one of two men in line to be King of Scots. But by pledging his loyalty to they agree to be under the supervision of the Earl of Pembroke, Aymer de Valence (Sam Spruell). Robert’s father, Robert Bruce Senior (James Cosmo), had pushed for the peace with England but when he dies and the younger Robert is in charge a new fight for independence seems eminent. When the last remaining outlaw, William Wallace, is killed by the English Robert knows the time to fight is now. He decides to meet with his rival for the crown, John Comyn (Callan Mulvey), to have a united Scotland fighting for freedom. When Comyn denies Robert’s request and tells him he will use the information to be named King by Edward I, Robert kills him. This proves costly as it divides the Scottish Lords. Robert is determined and will take a small group loyal to him and fight one of the largest and most feared armies in the world.
This film is based on historical events and follows Robert the Bruce in his guerilla warfare battle for independence against the English. The film definitely seemed to take some poetic license with the story, but overall it feels realistic. Set in the medieval Scotland this is both a gritty and beautifully shot film. The wide shots show the beautiful country and coasts of Scotland. Then the day to day life and the battle scenes are dirty and grimy. The film is a brutal as advertised not only in the battle scenes but also throughout the film. Director David Mackenzie (Hell or High Water, Starred Up) crafts a well thought out story that moves briskly along. I had a couple of issues with the CGI not being super realistic. One brutal scene where someone drawn and quartered, I’ll let you research that, and the body looks like a blob rather than a torso. There were also some awkward cut scenes that didn’t make sense to me. Really not making sense. The opening sequence of the film is done in one shot and might be one of the most impressively shot sequences I have seen in a movie in a long time. The performances are also really good. Billy Howie, Prince of Wales, is a good antagonist and Aaron Taylor-Johnson, James Douglas, is a marvelous madman protector of the Robert the Bruce.
I enjoyed this movie in the theater and think a Netflix view is going to be perfect. It is brutal so the faint of heart should be prepared to look away multiple times. It may get compared to another famous Scottish film from not too long ago and I think this is a nice update. But this is not that film, both in good and bad ways. I enjoyed my watching experience and will definitely catch it streaming on its release date.
This film is based on historical events and follows Robert the Bruce in his guerilla warfare battle for independence against the English. The film definitely seemed to take some poetic license with the story, but overall it feels realistic. Set in the medieval Scotland this is both a gritty and beautifully shot film. The wide shots show the beautiful country and coasts of Scotland. Then the day to day life and the battle scenes are dirty and grimy. The film is a brutal as advertised not only in the battle scenes but also throughout the film. Director David Mackenzie (Hell or High Water, Starred Up) crafts a well thought out story that moves briskly along. I had a couple of issues with the CGI not being super realistic. One brutal scene where someone drawn and quartered, I’ll let you research that, and the body looks like a blob rather than a torso. There were also some awkward cut scenes that didn’t make sense to me. Really not making sense. The opening sequence of the film is done in one shot and might be one of the most impressively shot sequences I have seen in a movie in a long time. The performances are also really good. Billy Howie, Prince of Wales, is a good antagonist and Aaron Taylor-Johnson, James Douglas, is a marvelous madman protector of the Robert the Bruce.
I enjoyed this movie in the theater and think a Netflix view is going to be perfect. It is brutal so the faint of heart should be prepared to look away multiple times. It may get compared to another famous Scottish film from not too long ago and I think this is a nice update. But this is not that film, both in good and bad ways. I enjoyed my watching experience and will definitely catch it streaming on its release date.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Ant-Man and the Wasp (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Following the unexpected and shocking moments from “Avengers: Infinity War”, fans eagerly awaited the next Marvel Studios film for any type of clues as to what will happen next when the next Avengers film arrives next summer. “Ant-Man and the Wasp”, is set before the events of “Avengers: Infinity War”, and finds Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) under home confinement thanks to a plea deal he took for siding with Captain America in “Captain America: Civil War”.
The years of being at home have driven Scott to find creative ways to entertain himself when his friend Luis (Michael Pena) and his daughter Cassie are not around. Scott is nearing the end of his isolation but knows F.B.I. Agent Woo (Randall Park), is waiting for him to slip up and with a possible twenty year prison term in the balance, he is not eager to make any mistakes.
Scott is also on the outs with Hope (Evangeline Lilly) and her father Hank (Michael Douglas) as it is revealed he took the Ant-Man suit and took part in the Civil War without their permission.
Fate intervenes when a strange dream causes Scott to contact Hope who in turn takes a reluctant Scott along with her to get to the bottom of the dream. Scott is naturally reluctant as he is days away from freedom and being discovered out and about and consorting with his wanted former associates would not be good for his eventual freedom.
A shady tech dealer named Sonny Burch (Walton Goggins) and a dangerous new adversary named “Ghost” (Hannah John-Kamen) also complicate matters and force Scott, Hope, and Hank to contend with issues all around them as the race against time on an urgent mission while trying to stay away from Woo and his team.
The film is a bit slow getting started but it does have some great character moments as well as humor around the build-up to the action sequences. The action when it comes mixes some great visual FX with some humor as Hope and Scott jump between everyday items at various sizes to face the threats presented to them. The cast works very well with one another and there are some great moments that will likely become favorites for fans of the characters and Marvel.
The Ghost is a rather interesting choice as an adversary as we do not have an individual bent on conquest, revenge, mass destruction, or accumulating power and wealth. While it may seem odd to have a more down to earth and relatable villain in a Marvel film, it does continue a recent trend of showing of adversaries who are complex, harder to define, and sympathetic much like The Winter Soldier.
There are two scenes in the credits which are very important to the continuity of the Marvel Universe and with “Captain Marvel” due in March 2019, it will likely get fans whipped into overdrive thinking about the possibilities they present.
“Ant-Man and the Wasp” is not as epic in scale as some of the past Marvel films, but thanks to a likeable cast and some timely humor, it should keep fans happy until the next chapter in the series.
http://sknr.net/2018/06/27/ant-man-and-the-wasp/
The years of being at home have driven Scott to find creative ways to entertain himself when his friend Luis (Michael Pena) and his daughter Cassie are not around. Scott is nearing the end of his isolation but knows F.B.I. Agent Woo (Randall Park), is waiting for him to slip up and with a possible twenty year prison term in the balance, he is not eager to make any mistakes.
Scott is also on the outs with Hope (Evangeline Lilly) and her father Hank (Michael Douglas) as it is revealed he took the Ant-Man suit and took part in the Civil War without their permission.
Fate intervenes when a strange dream causes Scott to contact Hope who in turn takes a reluctant Scott along with her to get to the bottom of the dream. Scott is naturally reluctant as he is days away from freedom and being discovered out and about and consorting with his wanted former associates would not be good for his eventual freedom.
A shady tech dealer named Sonny Burch (Walton Goggins) and a dangerous new adversary named “Ghost” (Hannah John-Kamen) also complicate matters and force Scott, Hope, and Hank to contend with issues all around them as the race against time on an urgent mission while trying to stay away from Woo and his team.
The film is a bit slow getting started but it does have some great character moments as well as humor around the build-up to the action sequences. The action when it comes mixes some great visual FX with some humor as Hope and Scott jump between everyday items at various sizes to face the threats presented to them. The cast works very well with one another and there are some great moments that will likely become favorites for fans of the characters and Marvel.
The Ghost is a rather interesting choice as an adversary as we do not have an individual bent on conquest, revenge, mass destruction, or accumulating power and wealth. While it may seem odd to have a more down to earth and relatable villain in a Marvel film, it does continue a recent trend of showing of adversaries who are complex, harder to define, and sympathetic much like The Winter Soldier.
There are two scenes in the credits which are very important to the continuity of the Marvel Universe and with “Captain Marvel” due in March 2019, it will likely get fans whipped into overdrive thinking about the possibilities they present.
“Ant-Man and the Wasp” is not as epic in scale as some of the past Marvel films, but thanks to a likeable cast and some timely humor, it should keep fans happy until the next chapter in the series.
http://sknr.net/2018/06/27/ant-man-and-the-wasp/
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in Books
Nov 14, 2019
What can be said about Douglas Adams' freewheeling science fiction comedy that hasn't been said before? Probably nothing but that doesn't mean it doesn't deserve a review.
I first came to the Hitchhiker's Guide series through this book. It was about 1981 I suppose and it was recommended by a school friend. I hadn't been aware of the radio series (although as luck would have it it was repeated on BBC Radio 4 within a few weeks) and it was a little while before the television adaptation appeared (which for all its faults - mainly a lack of budget - stayed true to the spirit of the books and the radio series rather more successfully than the film).
From the point I opened this and started reading I couldn't get enough Hitchhiker's Guide. Adams' style is so much like a swan on a lake - it all seems effortless on the surface but underneath there's a lot going on. As Adams' friend John Lloyd has commented, he had the ability to write backwards, so he would start with several pages of (what to other people would be) excellent material and after a couple of days' furious writing it would be down to 2 pages, but each sentence a carefully crafted gem. The result is like the difference between beer and vodka. You will enjoy drinking the beer but the distilled and concentrated vodka will knock you out.
There is real genius in the wit, ideas seemingly being pulled from nowhere and taking on a whole new aspect (towels for example). Delightful non-sequitors (especially from aliens who turn out to be pretty ordinary - or frequently less than ordinary), brilliant and inventive word play and sheer imagination and brio run through every page, all joined together by delightful asides from 'the book'.
The story itself is based on the radio series of the same name which was pretty much made up as it went along, Adams following whatever idea seemed to give him the best scope for a quick gag at the time. But somehow this all works and the story is remarkably coherent (although the book does veer away from the thread of the radio series at the very end). It has been said before that it resembles Gulliver's Travels as each new world reveals new wonders (or new banalities shining a light on our own humdrum existences here on Earth).
Oh the story? The book essentially follows one Arthur Dent, a completely unremarkable and normal human being apart from two things. Firstly his house is about to be demolished to make way for a bypass, a fact he was previously unaware of. Secondly his friend Ford Prefect (the book explains the name) is not from Guildford after all but from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. When aliens show up to demolish the whole Earth to make way for an interstellar bypass, Ford saves Arthur from certain death and reveals he is a reporter for a book called The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy and he got stuck on Earth for rather a long time.
Arthur proceeds to have a rather horrible time being shot at, thrown out of spaceships, patronised and generally baffled by everything that is going on around him. But The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy is always on hand to try to explain things.
Incredibly amusing, brilliantly written and ultimately quoteable this not just a good book, it is something that really everyone should read.
I first came to the Hitchhiker's Guide series through this book. It was about 1981 I suppose and it was recommended by a school friend. I hadn't been aware of the radio series (although as luck would have it it was repeated on BBC Radio 4 within a few weeks) and it was a little while before the television adaptation appeared (which for all its faults - mainly a lack of budget - stayed true to the spirit of the books and the radio series rather more successfully than the film).
From the point I opened this and started reading I couldn't get enough Hitchhiker's Guide. Adams' style is so much like a swan on a lake - it all seems effortless on the surface but underneath there's a lot going on. As Adams' friend John Lloyd has commented, he had the ability to write backwards, so he would start with several pages of (what to other people would be) excellent material and after a couple of days' furious writing it would be down to 2 pages, but each sentence a carefully crafted gem. The result is like the difference between beer and vodka. You will enjoy drinking the beer but the distilled and concentrated vodka will knock you out.
There is real genius in the wit, ideas seemingly being pulled from nowhere and taking on a whole new aspect (towels for example). Delightful non-sequitors (especially from aliens who turn out to be pretty ordinary - or frequently less than ordinary), brilliant and inventive word play and sheer imagination and brio run through every page, all joined together by delightful asides from 'the book'.
The story itself is based on the radio series of the same name which was pretty much made up as it went along, Adams following whatever idea seemed to give him the best scope for a quick gag at the time. But somehow this all works and the story is remarkably coherent (although the book does veer away from the thread of the radio series at the very end). It has been said before that it resembles Gulliver's Travels as each new world reveals new wonders (or new banalities shining a light on our own humdrum existences here on Earth).
Oh the story? The book essentially follows one Arthur Dent, a completely unremarkable and normal human being apart from two things. Firstly his house is about to be demolished to make way for a bypass, a fact he was previously unaware of. Secondly his friend Ford Prefect (the book explains the name) is not from Guildford after all but from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. When aliens show up to demolish the whole Earth to make way for an interstellar bypass, Ford saves Arthur from certain death and reveals he is a reporter for a book called The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy and he got stuck on Earth for rather a long time.
Arthur proceeds to have a rather horrible time being shot at, thrown out of spaceships, patronised and generally baffled by everything that is going on around him. But The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy is always on hand to try to explain things.
Incredibly amusing, brilliantly written and ultimately quoteable this not just a good book, it is something that really everyone should read.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Bird Box (2018) in Movies
Feb 1, 2019
Almost a good movie
One of my favorite films of 2018 is A QUIET PLACE where aliens with extreme hearing can get you if you make a noise. It is a quite interesting and well made film (with a bravura performance by Emily Blunt), so when I heard there was a variant of this theme (this time you can't use your eyes), I decided to check it out and to see if Sandra Bullock could pull off the same sort of bravura performance as Blunt.
And, that's too bad, for by comparison the Netflix flick BIRD BOX is no A QUIET PLACE, but if I don't try to compare it to A QUIET PLACE, BIRD BOX is a very entertaining film, indeed.
The story follows Bullock as Malorie a pregnant single woman who holds no "maternal instinct" towards her unborn child. Malorie is devoid of emotion and compassion and is dreading the day that her child will be born. Enter into this an "end of world event" where unseen aliens show up and, if you look at them, you go insane and try to commit suicide. Amidst this chaos, Malorie and a ragtag assortment of survivors find shelter in the house of Douglas (John Malkovich). Can this disparate group of strangers find a way to survive in this insane new world?
Well...the fun in this kind of movie is in the characters trapped together and the "10 Little Indians" style of demise as the house guests are picked off one by one by the aliens (or each other). It is the drama of these trapped individuals, and the surprise and the ingenuity of how they are killed off that makes or breaks these types of films.
And in this way, this film succeeds very well for besides Bullock and Malkovich, the housemates are filled with (for the most part) a strong grouping of actors led, most notably, by Trevante Rhodes (MOONLIGHT) and Jacki Weaver (ANIMAL KINGDOM). They are strong presences in this household and are interesting to watch. Good ol' B.D. Wong (JURASSIC PARK among many, many credits) brings his usual, solid game and Lil Rey Howery (GET OUT) brings much needed energy and humor to the proceedings. Add to this the usual, creepy Tom Hollander (IN THE LOOP) as a mysterious houseguest who is...creepy...and there is enough going on to keep my interest.
Add to this the always intriguing work of Malkovich as the paranoid, "me first" homeowner and Bullock underplaying her emotions as a counterbalance to Malkovich overplaying his emotions and the scenes in the house were interesting and (at times) gripping.
The problem I have with this film is that it inter cuts these scenes with scenes of Bullock (and a few other survivors from the house) "5 years later" - so, you already know who makes it and who doesn't - which takes away the tension of the house scenes. It also has an ending that, quite frankly, I saw coming a mile off and so it was not a satisfying conclusion to the proceedings for the ending was uneventful and unsurprising. A poor way to end this sort of film.
Don't get me wrong, the scenes in the house of the initial group of survivors is well worth viewing this film, I just wish Director Susanne Bier (THE NIGHT MANAGER) didn't dilute these scenes by bringing us forward in time too soon. I wonder how much better this film could have been had we just watched the events of the film (including all of the "5 years later scenes") in chronological order, I gotta think it would have been a better film.
This is, by every definition of the term, a "B" film, perfect for a snow, rain or cold-bound afternoon at home.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And, that's too bad, for by comparison the Netflix flick BIRD BOX is no A QUIET PLACE, but if I don't try to compare it to A QUIET PLACE, BIRD BOX is a very entertaining film, indeed.
The story follows Bullock as Malorie a pregnant single woman who holds no "maternal instinct" towards her unborn child. Malorie is devoid of emotion and compassion and is dreading the day that her child will be born. Enter into this an "end of world event" where unseen aliens show up and, if you look at them, you go insane and try to commit suicide. Amidst this chaos, Malorie and a ragtag assortment of survivors find shelter in the house of Douglas (John Malkovich). Can this disparate group of strangers find a way to survive in this insane new world?
Well...the fun in this kind of movie is in the characters trapped together and the "10 Little Indians" style of demise as the house guests are picked off one by one by the aliens (or each other). It is the drama of these trapped individuals, and the surprise and the ingenuity of how they are killed off that makes or breaks these types of films.
And in this way, this film succeeds very well for besides Bullock and Malkovich, the housemates are filled with (for the most part) a strong grouping of actors led, most notably, by Trevante Rhodes (MOONLIGHT) and Jacki Weaver (ANIMAL KINGDOM). They are strong presences in this household and are interesting to watch. Good ol' B.D. Wong (JURASSIC PARK among many, many credits) brings his usual, solid game and Lil Rey Howery (GET OUT) brings much needed energy and humor to the proceedings. Add to this the usual, creepy Tom Hollander (IN THE LOOP) as a mysterious houseguest who is...creepy...and there is enough going on to keep my interest.
Add to this the always intriguing work of Malkovich as the paranoid, "me first" homeowner and Bullock underplaying her emotions as a counterbalance to Malkovich overplaying his emotions and the scenes in the house were interesting and (at times) gripping.
The problem I have with this film is that it inter cuts these scenes with scenes of Bullock (and a few other survivors from the house) "5 years later" - so, you already know who makes it and who doesn't - which takes away the tension of the house scenes. It also has an ending that, quite frankly, I saw coming a mile off and so it was not a satisfying conclusion to the proceedings for the ending was uneventful and unsurprising. A poor way to end this sort of film.
Don't get me wrong, the scenes in the house of the initial group of survivors is well worth viewing this film, I just wish Director Susanne Bier (THE NIGHT MANAGER) didn't dilute these scenes by bringing us forward in time too soon. I wonder how much better this film could have been had we just watched the events of the film (including all of the "5 years later scenes") in chronological order, I gotta think it would have been a better film.
This is, by every definition of the term, a "B" film, perfect for a snow, rain or cold-bound afternoon at home.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)