Search
Search results
Blazing Minds (92 KP) rated Bombshell (2019) in Movies
Nov 1, 2021 (Updated Nov 3, 2021)
Now I have to say that I wasn't 100% sure of the story behind Bombshell that stars Charlize Theron, Nicole Kidman, Margot Robbie and an unrecognisable John Lithgow, what I did vaguely know is that the movie is based on the rather powerful and controversial media empire Fox News and of the story of the woman that brought down the man that created the well-known empire.
It's certainly a refreshing change from all the action and adventure films that I've been seeing lately and ys it is a slowish paced film, but Bombshell kept me interested in the storyline, as they fight to take on the power of Fox News and Roger Ailes (John Lithgow), this is a film that is pretty powerful to watch and is intriguing and interesting as Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman) takes on the media mogul in a fight for justice.
It's certainly a refreshing change from all the action and adventure films that I've been seeing lately and ys it is a slowish paced film, but Bombshell kept me interested in the storyline, as they fight to take on the power of Fox News and Roger Ailes (John Lithgow), this is a film that is pretty powerful to watch and is intriguing and interesting as Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman) takes on the media mogul in a fight for justice.
Kevin Phillipson (9958 KP) rated Bombshell (2019) in Movies
Sep 22, 2020
Charlize Theron (3 more)
Nicole Kidman
John Lithgow
Margot Robbie
Watched on Amazon prime I used to have fox news at one time on my sky box and knew of some of the people who read the news never knowing what was going on behind the scenes. On with the review not usually my cup of tea but it was rather good movie the stand out acting goes to Charlize Theron who plays Megyan Kelly at one point I thought it was Megyan Kelly and not Charlize Theron the rest of the cast is excellent do I would highly recommend the movie
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Jonah Hex (2010) in Movies
Feb 28, 2021
A recent re-watch of Jonah Hex went something like this:
- a lot of stuff happened before that title card that it's already incoherent
- wait, Michael Fassbender is in this?
- I can't see what's happening
- ah sweet, it's the dude from Mastodon.
- wait, Will Arnett is in this?
- Megan Fox really drew the short straw on a lot of her movie projects
- is that Michael Shannon!?
- ah sweet, it's the dude from John Wick.
- wait, Jeffrey Dean Morgan is in this!?
- once again, couldn't see what the fuck was happening because of the piss poor lighting, but Jonah Hex is nearly dead again, apparently.
- Ah cool, here's a mid-runtime action heavy sequence, still can't tell what's happening.
- wait....nope, it's over.
Christ, this movie is a blurry mess that's impressively hard to follow considering its short runtime. I love the Jonah Hex comics, I tend to enjoy Josh Brolin and John Malkovich, how is this such a trainwreck?
That Mastodon soundtrack is badass though.
- a lot of stuff happened before that title card that it's already incoherent
- wait, Michael Fassbender is in this?
- I can't see what's happening
- ah sweet, it's the dude from Mastodon.
- wait, Will Arnett is in this?
- Megan Fox really drew the short straw on a lot of her movie projects
- is that Michael Shannon!?
- ah sweet, it's the dude from John Wick.
- wait, Jeffrey Dean Morgan is in this!?
- once again, couldn't see what the fuck was happening because of the piss poor lighting, but Jonah Hex is nearly dead again, apparently.
- Ah cool, here's a mid-runtime action heavy sequence, still can't tell what's happening.
- wait....nope, it's over.
Christ, this movie is a blurry mess that's impressively hard to follow considering its short runtime. I love the Jonah Hex comics, I tend to enjoy Josh Brolin and John Malkovich, how is this such a trainwreck?
That Mastodon soundtrack is badass though.
Jeremy King (346 KP) rated The Lone Ranger (2013) in Movies
Oct 7, 2019
Ok i am going to say i really enjoyed this western. I thought it had the right amout of action in this western.
A great story from the point of view Tonto (Johnny Depp) on how him and John Reid, the Lone Ranger (Armie Hammer) met.
Now the down fault of this movie is that it was under the Disney Flag. If they held off till they had another studio (FOX) and put it out under that studio flag it would have done better. Just seem to violent for a disney movie and alot of adult hummor. Now if they ever plan to remake it again under Disney i would tie in Thunder Mountain and less blood.
A great story from the point of view Tonto (Johnny Depp) on how him and John Reid, the Lone Ranger (Armie Hammer) met.
Now the down fault of this movie is that it was under the Disney Flag. If they held off till they had another studio (FOX) and put it out under that studio flag it would have done better. Just seem to violent for a disney movie and alot of adult hummor. Now if they ever plan to remake it again under Disney i would tie in Thunder Mountain and less blood.
Debbiereadsbook (1087 KP) rated Honey From the Lion (Love Across Time #2) in Books
May 7, 2019
beautifully written love story
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is the second book in the Love Across Time series, but you don't need to have read book one, Heroes For Ghosts, for this one to make sense. They are only related in that they both are time travel stories.
Laurie books himself a week on a dude ranch and on the first night there is caught in a snow storm along with a meteor shower. Waking up freezing, he manages to find himself in John's cabin, in 1891. John just wants to be left alone, to get on with his solitary life after the horrors of the war. Finding a freezing young man on his doorstep kind of throws him for a loop but the pair grow close. When Laurie gets caught in a storm again, and comes back to his time, he knows where he wants to be: with John. But how to get there?
I liked this, I liked this A LOT. Just one teeny weeny thing stopped it getting 5 stars, but I will come back to that.
Laurie is burnt out from work, and decides a dude ranch week is just the thing. First night there, he hears the legend of Old Joe and his little fox he found. Waking up in 1891, finding John and subsequently meeting the people in this legend, don't bother Laurie so much, as when he returns to his time. He KNOWS he needs to be with John, and when the lady on the ranch explains the legend PROPERLY, and what The Iron Mountain, the snow storms AND the meteor showers are said to do, Laurie knows, he KNOWS where he needs to be, and how to get there.
I loved that Laurie was almost totally UNphased by everything! He's like: Okay then! I went to sleep in 2018 and I woke up in 1891! Let's get on and live here! There wasn't really any panicking on his part, except when they went to town and Laurie was attacked, and I liked that he was all calm about everything.
I must admit, I thought he might have put the clues together about the legend before he did, but Laurie was enjoying his time with John. Teaching John all the pleasures he has missed up to now, even if it might get them killed. Coming back to his time, though, he sees it then.
It's not overly explicit, but it carries passion and love a plenty. Full of words and phrases of the time though. It takes time for Laurie and John to properly come together, and I liked being made to wait for it. It isn't a quick thing, them falling in love, it creeps up on them both and I loved that it did.
The only niggle I have is this: only Laurie has a say. I desperately wanted to hear from John, I really did. There were some important points that I needed to hear what he was thinking about, feeling, experiencing with Laurie, and he doesn't tell me. And if John had had a say, this would have been a 5 star read, I'm sure.
It's a beautifully written love story, this, don't mistake what I'm saying! It's just, I needed John, and I don't get him.
But even though only Laurie has a say, his voice is strong and clear and he grabbed me and did not let go. One sitting, 300 pages, two and a half hours, not a muscle moved off the sofa! Job done.
4 meteor stars, shooting across the sky.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
This is the second book in the Love Across Time series, but you don't need to have read book one, Heroes For Ghosts, for this one to make sense. They are only related in that they both are time travel stories.
Laurie books himself a week on a dude ranch and on the first night there is caught in a snow storm along with a meteor shower. Waking up freezing, he manages to find himself in John's cabin, in 1891. John just wants to be left alone, to get on with his solitary life after the horrors of the war. Finding a freezing young man on his doorstep kind of throws him for a loop but the pair grow close. When Laurie gets caught in a storm again, and comes back to his time, he knows where he wants to be: with John. But how to get there?
I liked this, I liked this A LOT. Just one teeny weeny thing stopped it getting 5 stars, but I will come back to that.
Laurie is burnt out from work, and decides a dude ranch week is just the thing. First night there, he hears the legend of Old Joe and his little fox he found. Waking up in 1891, finding John and subsequently meeting the people in this legend, don't bother Laurie so much, as when he returns to his time. He KNOWS he needs to be with John, and when the lady on the ranch explains the legend PROPERLY, and what The Iron Mountain, the snow storms AND the meteor showers are said to do, Laurie knows, he KNOWS where he needs to be, and how to get there.
I loved that Laurie was almost totally UNphased by everything! He's like: Okay then! I went to sleep in 2018 and I woke up in 1891! Let's get on and live here! There wasn't really any panicking on his part, except when they went to town and Laurie was attacked, and I liked that he was all calm about everything.
I must admit, I thought he might have put the clues together about the legend before he did, but Laurie was enjoying his time with John. Teaching John all the pleasures he has missed up to now, even if it might get them killed. Coming back to his time, though, he sees it then.
It's not overly explicit, but it carries passion and love a plenty. Full of words and phrases of the time though. It takes time for Laurie and John to properly come together, and I liked being made to wait for it. It isn't a quick thing, them falling in love, it creeps up on them both and I loved that it did.
The only niggle I have is this: only Laurie has a say. I desperately wanted to hear from John, I really did. There were some important points that I needed to hear what he was thinking about, feeling, experiencing with Laurie, and he doesn't tell me. And if John had had a say, this would have been a 5 star read, I'm sure.
It's a beautifully written love story, this, don't mistake what I'm saying! It's just, I needed John, and I don't get him.
But even though only Laurie has a say, his voice is strong and clear and he grabbed me and did not let go. One sitting, 300 pages, two and a half hours, not a muscle moved off the sofa! Job done.
4 meteor stars, shooting across the sky.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Leslye Headland recommended Bombshell (2019) in Movies (curated)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Bombshell (2019) in Movies
Jan 26, 2020
Power-house female lead roles, times 3. (1 more)
John Lithgow (who should have got a supporting actor nom)
Sleazy old Fox.
This is a curious one. I wonder whether the audience reaction to this one will polarize along gender lines as it did for my wife and I? For I thought this one was "good, but nothing special"... but the illustrious Mrs Movie Man thought it was excellent and would be "memorable".
The movie is based on the true story of the first "Me Too" case against a prominent man in power. Before Harvey Weinstein (allegedly!) there was Roger Ailes (John Lithgow), CEO of the Fox Network. Under the shadowy gaze of the Murdoch brothers (Ben Lawson and Josh Lawson), Ailes rules Fox with a rod of iron. Unfortunately, it's Ailes' - ahem - 'rod of iron' that is part of the problem.
Three women are at the centre of the drama. Megyn Kelly (Charlize Theron) is a leading anchorwoman, fighting her own battles in a man's world. She is currently in trouble with 50% of the US population for taking a firm stand on-screen against Trump's treatment of women; Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman) is a broadcaster approaching her 50's and being shunted progressively towards the door, via afternoon shows, in favour of 'younger models'; Kayla Pospisil (Margot Robbie) is a keen new-starter, ambitious and keen as mustard to impress her bosses, including Ailes.
The three women seldom interact (a scene in a lift is a study in awkwardness) but are all on different stages of the same journey.
I clearly saw a review which referenced the movie as being "Adam McKay-like" since I went in assuming that McKay ("Vice", "The Big Short") was the director of this one. For that reason, I was puzzled. Yes, there were occasions where the actors broke the 4th wall; and there were little visual tricks (a burned in Fox logo for example) that entertained. But it wasn't the close-to-the-edge roller-coaster of innovation that I have come to expect from a McKay film.
When the titles rolled, it was an "Aha" moment! Actually, the director is the Austin Powers director Jay Roach. Not that he hasn't done drama as well: he did the Bryan Cranston vehicle "Trumbo" a few years back. And another MacKay link is the writer: the screenplay is by Charles Randolph, the writer of "The Big Short".
The leading ladies in this really are leading, with Charlize Theron picking up a well-deserved Best Actress Oscar nomination and Margot Robbie getting the Best Supporting nom. Theron is brilliant in everything she does, and here she is chameleon-like in disappearing into her character. I wasn't as sure about Robbie early in the film, but an excruciating "twirl" for Ailes is brilliantly done and an emotional scene during a date is Oscar-reel worthy.
Great supporting turns come from "The West Wing's" Allison Janney and from Kate McKinnon. McKinnon was the most annoying thing in "Yesterday", as the brash US agent, but here she is effective as the lesbian friend of Kayla.
Holding up the male end (as it were) is a fantastic performance from John Lithgow (surprisingly overlooked during the awards season) and Malcolm McDowell delivering an uncanny Rupert Murdoch.
Overall, the "Me Too" movement has created an earthquake in popular culture. Many more movies featuring strong female leads have appeared in the last few years, and that's great. This is a reminder of the time before that, when men openly used their power to force unwanted sex on employees. And its horrifying and disconcerting to watch.
And it was a good movie. But it just wasn't a "wow" movie for me. A female audience will by definition have more experience of this than a male one. Perhaps there is a sense of 'collective guilt' that we blokes need to work through. And perhaps that's a subconscious reason why I didn't 100% engage with the film. (Though I'd like to make it perfectly clear that I don't have any skeletons in that particular closet!)
(For the graphical review, please check out the review on One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/01/24/one-manns-movies-film-review-bombshell-2020/).
The movie is based on the true story of the first "Me Too" case against a prominent man in power. Before Harvey Weinstein (allegedly!) there was Roger Ailes (John Lithgow), CEO of the Fox Network. Under the shadowy gaze of the Murdoch brothers (Ben Lawson and Josh Lawson), Ailes rules Fox with a rod of iron. Unfortunately, it's Ailes' - ahem - 'rod of iron' that is part of the problem.
Three women are at the centre of the drama. Megyn Kelly (Charlize Theron) is a leading anchorwoman, fighting her own battles in a man's world. She is currently in trouble with 50% of the US population for taking a firm stand on-screen against Trump's treatment of women; Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman) is a broadcaster approaching her 50's and being shunted progressively towards the door, via afternoon shows, in favour of 'younger models'; Kayla Pospisil (Margot Robbie) is a keen new-starter, ambitious and keen as mustard to impress her bosses, including Ailes.
The three women seldom interact (a scene in a lift is a study in awkwardness) but are all on different stages of the same journey.
I clearly saw a review which referenced the movie as being "Adam McKay-like" since I went in assuming that McKay ("Vice", "The Big Short") was the director of this one. For that reason, I was puzzled. Yes, there were occasions where the actors broke the 4th wall; and there were little visual tricks (a burned in Fox logo for example) that entertained. But it wasn't the close-to-the-edge roller-coaster of innovation that I have come to expect from a McKay film.
When the titles rolled, it was an "Aha" moment! Actually, the director is the Austin Powers director Jay Roach. Not that he hasn't done drama as well: he did the Bryan Cranston vehicle "Trumbo" a few years back. And another MacKay link is the writer: the screenplay is by Charles Randolph, the writer of "The Big Short".
The leading ladies in this really are leading, with Charlize Theron picking up a well-deserved Best Actress Oscar nomination and Margot Robbie getting the Best Supporting nom. Theron is brilliant in everything she does, and here she is chameleon-like in disappearing into her character. I wasn't as sure about Robbie early in the film, but an excruciating "twirl" for Ailes is brilliantly done and an emotional scene during a date is Oscar-reel worthy.
Great supporting turns come from "The West Wing's" Allison Janney and from Kate McKinnon. McKinnon was the most annoying thing in "Yesterday", as the brash US agent, but here she is effective as the lesbian friend of Kayla.
Holding up the male end (as it were) is a fantastic performance from John Lithgow (surprisingly overlooked during the awards season) and Malcolm McDowell delivering an uncanny Rupert Murdoch.
Overall, the "Me Too" movement has created an earthquake in popular culture. Many more movies featuring strong female leads have appeared in the last few years, and that's great. This is a reminder of the time before that, when men openly used their power to force unwanted sex on employees. And its horrifying and disconcerting to watch.
And it was a good movie. But it just wasn't a "wow" movie for me. A female audience will by definition have more experience of this than a male one. Perhaps there is a sense of 'collective guilt' that we blokes need to work through. And perhaps that's a subconscious reason why I didn't 100% engage with the film. (Though I'd like to make it perfectly clear that I don't have any skeletons in that particular closet!)
(For the graphical review, please check out the review on One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/01/24/one-manns-movies-film-review-bombshell-2020/).
Lee KM Pallatina (951 KP) rated Die Hard (1988) in Movies
Jan 16, 2021 (Updated Jan 17, 2021)
The casting (3 more)
Plot
SFX
Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman in general
Welcome to the party pal!
In 1988 Hollywood Gambled on a lesser known tv star for it's high budget action thriller.
Laughed at when hearing their choice of actor, it was the 80's and when you heard action movie you'd immediately think "Schwarzenegger or stallone, maybe even Kurt Russel" Hollywood wanted obe of the bigger stars and reached out to them, but they all turned it down so average Joe became their Vacationing NYPD hero, so they stuck with the man known as Bruce Willis!
Whilst Visiting his estranged wife at the (fictional) Nakatomi plaza (Fox plaza) the building and it's workforce are quickly taken hostage.
Enter John McClain (willis) a rough looking, smooth talking (the guy literally has a smooth/relaxed voice) witty, sarcastic NYPD cop who just can't seem to catch a break.
Armed with everything I wrote above, aswell as bare feet, air-vents, and a fire hose, McClain pursues the terrorists in an action packed attempt at proving his wife wrong and maybe saving a few people in the process.
Die Hard is a classic 80's action epic that spawned many terrible sequels (excluding 'with a vengeance') that we still paid to watch aswell as countless knockoffs.
Did you know?
. The team behind die hard was laughed at because of their lead choice (you should do I just told you)
. The movie was almost shut down because they used a real life helicopter around the building whilst local residents tried to sleep causing an outrage and filed complaints.
. miniature explosions were set of atop the building for affect.
. Alan Rickman was lied to about when he'd be dropped from the "building" the capture a natural look of fear (about a 30ft drop).
. It was Alan Rickmans first movie ( what a way to hit the ground and keep running)
. A replica model of the building was built to film the remaining explosions on the building.
. The original Vest (tank top) is on display in the Smithsonian.
.the movie was filmed during official construction of the fox plaza aka nakatomi plaza.
Laughed at when hearing their choice of actor, it was the 80's and when you heard action movie you'd immediately think "Schwarzenegger or stallone, maybe even Kurt Russel" Hollywood wanted obe of the bigger stars and reached out to them, but they all turned it down so average Joe became their Vacationing NYPD hero, so they stuck with the man known as Bruce Willis!
Whilst Visiting his estranged wife at the (fictional) Nakatomi plaza (Fox plaza) the building and it's workforce are quickly taken hostage.
Enter John McClain (willis) a rough looking, smooth talking (the guy literally has a smooth/relaxed voice) witty, sarcastic NYPD cop who just can't seem to catch a break.
Armed with everything I wrote above, aswell as bare feet, air-vents, and a fire hose, McClain pursues the terrorists in an action packed attempt at proving his wife wrong and maybe saving a few people in the process.
Die Hard is a classic 80's action epic that spawned many terrible sequels (excluding 'with a vengeance') that we still paid to watch aswell as countless knockoffs.
Did you know?
. The team behind die hard was laughed at because of their lead choice (you should do I just told you)
. The movie was almost shut down because they used a real life helicopter around the building whilst local residents tried to sleep causing an outrage and filed complaints.
. miniature explosions were set of atop the building for affect.
. Alan Rickman was lied to about when he'd be dropped from the "building" the capture a natural look of fear (about a 30ft drop).
. It was Alan Rickmans first movie ( what a way to hit the ground and keep running)
. A replica model of the building was built to film the remaining explosions on the building.
. The original Vest (tank top) is on display in the Smithsonian.
.the movie was filmed during official construction of the fox plaza aka nakatomi plaza.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated The Big Trail (1930) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
“The Indians are my friends…” Breck Coleman – John Wayne
Not exactly a statement that would exemplify the Career of a man rightly or wrongly associated as being the Cowboy of the Cowboy and Indian movies. But there is no doubt that John Wayne was certainly one of the biggest western stars of cinema.
And The Big Trail is where it really begins for Wayne, but this 1930’s classic was a box office failure, coming not only at the dawn of sound film, but at the time of The Great Depression. It would be another decade by the time “The Duke” wold be born and John Wayne would take his crown as the western superstar which we all know today.
But The Big Trail, originally entitled The Oregon Trail, is not really a John Wayne vehicle. He was a relative unknown actor alongside stage talent, many of whom were drafted into Hollywood at this time simply because they could give a decent vocal performance, as many a silent star was falling, failing to adapt the talkies.
But again, sound is not the selling point of this movie. This was one of a handful of films which pioneered the 70mm film format, in this case, Fox Grandeur, or Grandeur 70. A none anamorphic widescreen format, which whilst not the first attempt, nor the first 70mm film format, it was the nearest to which would succeed later.
2oth Century Fox would change cinema in 1953 with the release of the first CinemaScope film, The Robe, a year after the debut of Cinerama, but Grandeur more closest resembles Todd AO, a format which is still technically used today though in a somewhat different way. The secret to CinemaScope’s later success was in many ways the reason for the failure of Grandeur and that was the fact that CinemaScope was an anamorphic process, screening the image from a regular 35mm film and expanding with the lens, therefore making it a lot cheaper to adapt existing projectors and auditoriums.
Grandeur on the other hand was a larger film format and required a complete upgrade to theatres and therefore, especially at the dawn of the depression era, was financially untenable. Only two theatres in the U.S. would ever show this film in its widescreen glory, with rest showing the alternate 35mm Academy version.
And this film, had SIX versions shot simultaneously, in four different languages, 35mm and 70mm, each requiring different takes with different cameras or casts. This was an incredible feet but one which would soon be reduced with the use of audio dubbing, subtitles and ability to pan and scan.
The problem with this film is simple. It has a loose plot but no real twists and turns. This is almost a documentary following the wagon train trail across the west as group of pioneers make their way to the better life and building the United States, or at least personifying the romantic version of it.
But the film’s pacing and visual style works best through the widescreen lens, a beautiful journey with the untamed west as backdrop, but this is not the the version that most people have seen. The majority only saw the 35mm version which is 20 minutes shorter, edited more quickly and simply doesn’t have the visual flare of the Grandeur version. And without this vast visual canvas, the thousands of extras and props are almost cut from the film, a film with now feels a bit pointless and bit wayward.
Starring an unknown, though despite his hammy acting, Wayne manages to hold his own, the pacing is rushed and the fact that this is an epic journey which we are embarking on with them is somewhat lost.
The widescreen version’s main failing is the sound, which is inferior and poorly mixed in comparison to the 35mm cut, which is crisper and louder, but sound was never going to this movie’s strength and it was still rudimentary at this point. But on a visual level, considering the age of the print, the cinematography is up there as being some of the best, with scale and dare I say, “grandeur” about it.
This is an interesting film to watch now, though unless you are a strong western fan, I would say that it will not thrill, though as a peace of cinematic history, it is littered with footnotes and it very watchable.
And The Big Trail is where it really begins for Wayne, but this 1930’s classic was a box office failure, coming not only at the dawn of sound film, but at the time of The Great Depression. It would be another decade by the time “The Duke” wold be born and John Wayne would take his crown as the western superstar which we all know today.
But The Big Trail, originally entitled The Oregon Trail, is not really a John Wayne vehicle. He was a relative unknown actor alongside stage talent, many of whom were drafted into Hollywood at this time simply because they could give a decent vocal performance, as many a silent star was falling, failing to adapt the talkies.
But again, sound is not the selling point of this movie. This was one of a handful of films which pioneered the 70mm film format, in this case, Fox Grandeur, or Grandeur 70. A none anamorphic widescreen format, which whilst not the first attempt, nor the first 70mm film format, it was the nearest to which would succeed later.
2oth Century Fox would change cinema in 1953 with the release of the first CinemaScope film, The Robe, a year after the debut of Cinerama, but Grandeur more closest resembles Todd AO, a format which is still technically used today though in a somewhat different way. The secret to CinemaScope’s later success was in many ways the reason for the failure of Grandeur and that was the fact that CinemaScope was an anamorphic process, screening the image from a regular 35mm film and expanding with the lens, therefore making it a lot cheaper to adapt existing projectors and auditoriums.
Grandeur on the other hand was a larger film format and required a complete upgrade to theatres and therefore, especially at the dawn of the depression era, was financially untenable. Only two theatres in the U.S. would ever show this film in its widescreen glory, with rest showing the alternate 35mm Academy version.
And this film, had SIX versions shot simultaneously, in four different languages, 35mm and 70mm, each requiring different takes with different cameras or casts. This was an incredible feet but one which would soon be reduced with the use of audio dubbing, subtitles and ability to pan and scan.
The problem with this film is simple. It has a loose plot but no real twists and turns. This is almost a documentary following the wagon train trail across the west as group of pioneers make their way to the better life and building the United States, or at least personifying the romantic version of it.
But the film’s pacing and visual style works best through the widescreen lens, a beautiful journey with the untamed west as backdrop, but this is not the the version that most people have seen. The majority only saw the 35mm version which is 20 minutes shorter, edited more quickly and simply doesn’t have the visual flare of the Grandeur version. And without this vast visual canvas, the thousands of extras and props are almost cut from the film, a film with now feels a bit pointless and bit wayward.
Starring an unknown, though despite his hammy acting, Wayne manages to hold his own, the pacing is rushed and the fact that this is an epic journey which we are embarking on with them is somewhat lost.
The widescreen version’s main failing is the sound, which is inferior and poorly mixed in comparison to the 35mm cut, which is crisper and louder, but sound was never going to this movie’s strength and it was still rudimentary at this point. But on a visual level, considering the age of the print, the cinematography is up there as being some of the best, with scale and dare I say, “grandeur” about it.
This is an interesting film to watch now, though unless you are a strong western fan, I would say that it will not thrill, though as a peace of cinematic history, it is littered with footnotes and it very watchable.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Transformers (2007) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Based on the popular line of toys and animated television series from the 80’s. Steven Spielberg and Michael Bay have teamed up to create a mega million FX extravaganza that will delight fans both old and new.
The story involves a group of sentient machines who have battled for centuries in an effort to locate and possess an all powerful object. The kind Autobots led by Optimus Prime, wish to locate and destroy the artifact to keep it from the evil Decepticons who would use the artificat for their own evil purposes, and the deaths of billions.
The film opens with a spectacular battle at a U.S. military installation in the middle east, where one of the Decepticons is attempting to access sensative information from the computer network. Overwhelmed by the attack and subsequent assault on Air Force One, the U.S. government has called in the best and brightest in effort to get to the bottom of the mysterious attacks and the mysterious assailants.
Meanwhile, mild mannered high school student Sam Witicky (Shia LaBeouf), is trying to raise money for a car, and uses his class presentation to hawk his Ebay auctions, unaware that the fate of the universe will soon rest in his hands. After purchasing a used Camaro and giving a ride to the hottest girl in school Mikaela (Megan Fox), Sam thinks his luck is about to change. Little does Sam know that his car is actually one of the advanced scouts for the Autobots, who are attempting to locate one of the items in Sam’s online auction, as it actually contains clues as to the location of the lost artifact.
In short order, the two sides are facing off in several shape changing battles with Sam, Mikaela, and the rest of humanity caught in the balance. Bay and Spielberg have done a great job of combining jaw-dropping FX and action with the humor, charm, and fun that made the original series such a huge success. The audience at my press screening reacted very positively to the film, and there were numerous cheers and rounds of enthusiastic applause throughout the film.
If I had to find fault with the film, it would be that at roughly the 3/4 point, a plot line involving John Turturro as an agent in a secret organization seems forced and unnecessary, as it greatly detracts from the pacing and action of the film. Until this point, the film was very engrossing and moved along at a brisk clip. When the film gets back to the action, it delivers with a solid finale, that while using some of the action film staples, still manages to keep it exciting.
LaBeof works well with Fox and there are numerous supporting roles and cameos that make “Transformers” a pleasant, if silly treat.
The story involves a group of sentient machines who have battled for centuries in an effort to locate and possess an all powerful object. The kind Autobots led by Optimus Prime, wish to locate and destroy the artifact to keep it from the evil Decepticons who would use the artificat for their own evil purposes, and the deaths of billions.
The film opens with a spectacular battle at a U.S. military installation in the middle east, where one of the Decepticons is attempting to access sensative information from the computer network. Overwhelmed by the attack and subsequent assault on Air Force One, the U.S. government has called in the best and brightest in effort to get to the bottom of the mysterious attacks and the mysterious assailants.
Meanwhile, mild mannered high school student Sam Witicky (Shia LaBeouf), is trying to raise money for a car, and uses his class presentation to hawk his Ebay auctions, unaware that the fate of the universe will soon rest in his hands. After purchasing a used Camaro and giving a ride to the hottest girl in school Mikaela (Megan Fox), Sam thinks his luck is about to change. Little does Sam know that his car is actually one of the advanced scouts for the Autobots, who are attempting to locate one of the items in Sam’s online auction, as it actually contains clues as to the location of the lost artifact.
In short order, the two sides are facing off in several shape changing battles with Sam, Mikaela, and the rest of humanity caught in the balance. Bay and Spielberg have done a great job of combining jaw-dropping FX and action with the humor, charm, and fun that made the original series such a huge success. The audience at my press screening reacted very positively to the film, and there were numerous cheers and rounds of enthusiastic applause throughout the film.
If I had to find fault with the film, it would be that at roughly the 3/4 point, a plot line involving John Turturro as an agent in a secret organization seems forced and unnecessary, as it greatly detracts from the pacing and action of the film. Until this point, the film was very engrossing and moved along at a brisk clip. When the film gets back to the action, it delivers with a solid finale, that while using some of the action film staples, still manages to keep it exciting.
LaBeof works well with Fox and there are numerous supporting roles and cameos that make “Transformers” a pleasant, if silly treat.