Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Monsters University (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Monsters University brings Billy Crystal, John Goodman, and the whole gang back in what I can only describe as a huge win.
Twelve years after Disney and Pixar brought us the wildly successful Monsters Inc., Pixar finally follows up with this year’s must-see family movie, which comes to us in the form of a prequel.
Monsters University opens by showing us a very young Mike Wazowski, who gets lost on a school trip to a very familiar scare floor at Monsters Inc. After surviving a trip to the human realm, he receives a hat from one of the professional scarers, emblazoned with MU. From that point on, a wide-eyed Wazowski dedicates his life to getting into Monsters University.
Fast forward many years and Mike is at his first day of college. MU becomes the backdrop for the education, friendships, scare games, and destiny-setting events that lead into the original movie we already know and love.
I was a bit skeptical going in I was a fan of the original, but prequels are damned hard to pull off, and kid/family movies aren’t typically my preference. Fortunately, after the first 15 minutes, the humor started picking up. The writers, designers, and artists did a masterful job of combining kid-humor antics with adult humor. Like many Pixar films, it contains one-liners and inside jokes that require life experience to really appreciate. (There was nothing dirty, just more adult-themed quips.)
I was impressed by the pacing, the detail, and the seamless flow of the animation, not to mention the excellent voice talent. Crystal, Goodman, Nathan Fillion, Steve Buscemi, Helen Mirren, and all the other actors did top-notch work.
I do have two complaints. There was not one mention of Mike Wazowski’s parents. We don’t know who they were or what they did, nor did we even get a visual of what they looked like. In a world occupied by such a wide variety of monsters, my curiosity was piqued. Even more maddening was the repeated mention of James P (Sulley) Sullivan’s father, who was apparently a very famous scarer. Sully is repeatedly reminded of living up to the family name, yet we never see so much as a picture showcasing his family. Perhaps this was addressed in a scene that didn’t make it from storyboards to the final cut.
Those minor issues aside, Monsters University is done very well, and it is extremely entertaining. From the many laugh-out-loud moments to the solemn, tear-jerking scenes, this movie is a real win.
Twelve years after Disney and Pixar brought us the wildly successful Monsters Inc., Pixar finally follows up with this year’s must-see family movie, which comes to us in the form of a prequel.
Monsters University opens by showing us a very young Mike Wazowski, who gets lost on a school trip to a very familiar scare floor at Monsters Inc. After surviving a trip to the human realm, he receives a hat from one of the professional scarers, emblazoned with MU. From that point on, a wide-eyed Wazowski dedicates his life to getting into Monsters University.
Fast forward many years and Mike is at his first day of college. MU becomes the backdrop for the education, friendships, scare games, and destiny-setting events that lead into the original movie we already know and love.
I was a bit skeptical going in I was a fan of the original, but prequels are damned hard to pull off, and kid/family movies aren’t typically my preference. Fortunately, after the first 15 minutes, the humor started picking up. The writers, designers, and artists did a masterful job of combining kid-humor antics with adult humor. Like many Pixar films, it contains one-liners and inside jokes that require life experience to really appreciate. (There was nothing dirty, just more adult-themed quips.)
I was impressed by the pacing, the detail, and the seamless flow of the animation, not to mention the excellent voice talent. Crystal, Goodman, Nathan Fillion, Steve Buscemi, Helen Mirren, and all the other actors did top-notch work.
I do have two complaints. There was not one mention of Mike Wazowski’s parents. We don’t know who they were or what they did, nor did we even get a visual of what they looked like. In a world occupied by such a wide variety of monsters, my curiosity was piqued. Even more maddening was the repeated mention of James P (Sulley) Sullivan’s father, who was apparently a very famous scarer. Sully is repeatedly reminded of living up to the family name, yet we never see so much as a picture showcasing his family. Perhaps this was addressed in a scene that didn’t make it from storyboards to the final cut.
Those minor issues aside, Monsters University is done very well, and it is extremely entertaining. From the many laugh-out-loud moments to the solemn, tear-jerking scenes, this movie is a real win.
Darren (1599 KP) rated 10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019 (Updated Jun 20, 2019)
Contains spoilers, click to show
Story: 10 Cloverfield Lane starts as we see Michelle (Winstead) walking away from her married life with Ben only to find herself in a car accident. Upon waking up she finds her chained up in a bed as she desperately looks for a way out. Michelle’s capturer is Howard (Goodman) who claims to have saved her from an attack on America. Michelle isn’t the only other person in the bunker with Emmett (Gallagher Jr) also there.
Howard has been preparing this bunker for years and has everything needed to survive in luxury with electricity and plumbing. The three have to learn to live with each other as the paranoia about what has really happened keeps rising.
10 Cloverfield Lane is a very clever thriller that creates the paranoia of what could be going happening through nearly the whole film. We are sat wondering what is happening outside the bunker and what will happen inside the bunker. The downside from where I am sat was knowing it was a sequel, if this was just about the bunker and the final twist was that it was in the Cloverfield universe we would have found ourselves fully on Michelle’s side but as we know it is all real we kind of side with the paranoia filled Howard. This is good and tense throughout but the title alone takes away something truly special about the film.
Actor Review
John Goodman: Howard is the man who has built the bunker, he has let both Michelle and Emmett stay in his bunker as he believes America would come under attack from something. He is ex-navy and very paranoid, we are left wondering whether h is crazy or not though. John is great in this role where we see him using the talent he has.howard
Mary Elizabeth Winstead: Michelle is a young woman who is wondering about her life before finding herself being in a car crash. She wakes up in the bunker where she has to learn to live with Howard and Emmett. She is never comfortable there always trying to find a way out. Mary is great in this strong female role.michelle
John Gallagher Jr: Emmett was hired to help build the bunker and found himself inside when the attacks happened. He tries to be nice to Michele which only pushes Howard into his paranoia. John is good in this role if only the supporting of the three.
Support Cast: 10 Cloverfield Lane doesn’t have many other characters with most just being in one scene.
Director Review: Dan Trachtenberg – Dan gives us a thriller that really does keep up guessing what is real.
Horror: 10 Cloverfield Lane gives us the idea where we just don’t know what is going on showing the paranoia driving the horror.
Mystery: 10 Cloverfield Lane keeps us guessing from start to finish.
Sci-Fi: 10 Cloverfield Lane enters into a world which could have a post-apocalyptic world but never really understand.
Thriller: 10 Cloverfield Lane keeps us on edge for the whole film where we are left to wonder where the film will go.
Settings: 10 Cloverfield Lane has nearly the whole film inside the bunker where we see the tension rise.
Special Effects: 10 Cloverfield Lane has good effects when needed without being in the film being all about special effects.
Suggestion: 10 Cloverfield Lane is one for fans of the original to enjoy but just remember this is only in the same universe rather than a sequel. (Watch)
Best Part: Performances.
Worst Part: Title is misleading.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: We could have.
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $15 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 43 Minutes
Tagline: Something is coming
Trivia: Howard states that he worked on satellites for the military. Michelle sees an envelope in the bunker from a company called Bold Futura. Bold Futura is the company responsible for the satellite that is seen crashing into the ocean in the ending of Cloverfield (2008) which is what is believed to be responsible for disturbing the creature.
Overall: Great concept we don’t see in sequels with this only being in the same universe only.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/03/31/10-cloverfield-lane-2016/
Howard has been preparing this bunker for years and has everything needed to survive in luxury with electricity and plumbing. The three have to learn to live with each other as the paranoia about what has really happened keeps rising.
10 Cloverfield Lane is a very clever thriller that creates the paranoia of what could be going happening through nearly the whole film. We are sat wondering what is happening outside the bunker and what will happen inside the bunker. The downside from where I am sat was knowing it was a sequel, if this was just about the bunker and the final twist was that it was in the Cloverfield universe we would have found ourselves fully on Michelle’s side but as we know it is all real we kind of side with the paranoia filled Howard. This is good and tense throughout but the title alone takes away something truly special about the film.
Actor Review
John Goodman: Howard is the man who has built the bunker, he has let both Michelle and Emmett stay in his bunker as he believes America would come under attack from something. He is ex-navy and very paranoid, we are left wondering whether h is crazy or not though. John is great in this role where we see him using the talent he has.howard
Mary Elizabeth Winstead: Michelle is a young woman who is wondering about her life before finding herself being in a car crash. She wakes up in the bunker where she has to learn to live with Howard and Emmett. She is never comfortable there always trying to find a way out. Mary is great in this strong female role.michelle
John Gallagher Jr: Emmett was hired to help build the bunker and found himself inside when the attacks happened. He tries to be nice to Michele which only pushes Howard into his paranoia. John is good in this role if only the supporting of the three.
Support Cast: 10 Cloverfield Lane doesn’t have many other characters with most just being in one scene.
Director Review: Dan Trachtenberg – Dan gives us a thriller that really does keep up guessing what is real.
Horror: 10 Cloverfield Lane gives us the idea where we just don’t know what is going on showing the paranoia driving the horror.
Mystery: 10 Cloverfield Lane keeps us guessing from start to finish.
Sci-Fi: 10 Cloverfield Lane enters into a world which could have a post-apocalyptic world but never really understand.
Thriller: 10 Cloverfield Lane keeps us on edge for the whole film where we are left to wonder where the film will go.
Settings: 10 Cloverfield Lane has nearly the whole film inside the bunker where we see the tension rise.
Special Effects: 10 Cloverfield Lane has good effects when needed without being in the film being all about special effects.
Suggestion: 10 Cloverfield Lane is one for fans of the original to enjoy but just remember this is only in the same universe rather than a sequel. (Watch)
Best Part: Performances.
Worst Part: Title is misleading.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: We could have.
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $15 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 43 Minutes
Tagline: Something is coming
Trivia: Howard states that he worked on satellites for the military. Michelle sees an envelope in the bunker from a company called Bold Futura. Bold Futura is the company responsible for the satellite that is seen crashing into the ocean in the ending of Cloverfield (2008) which is what is believed to be responsible for disturbing the creature.
Overall: Great concept we don’t see in sequels with this only being in the same universe only.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/03/31/10-cloverfield-lane-2016/
An Introduction to the Early Development of Mathematics
Book
An easy-to-read presentation of the early history of mathematics Engaging and accessible, An...
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Kong: Skull Island (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Beauty and the Beast
The fact that Legendary Pictures are busying themselves with an epic Godzilla vs King Kong showdown is one of the worst kept secrets in Hollywood. Naturally, this presented a problem for Peter Jackson’s Kong who simply doesn’t measure up against the giant lizard in 2013’s Godzilla.
And in Hollywood, size really does matter; therefore the monstrous ape has been given a monumental upgrade featuring an all-star cast and some serious talent behind the camera. But is Kong: Skull Island as bananas as its trailers would suggest? Or are we looking at something a little more mainstream?
At the climax of the Vietnam War, a team of explorers and mercenaries head to an unchartered island in the South Pacific in an effort to document its inhabitants. Little do they know they are crossing into the domain of vicious man-eating monsters and the legendary Kong.
With a cast that includes Tom Hiddleston, Brie Larson, John Goodman, Samuel L Jackson and John C Reilly, you’d be forgiven for thinking everything is hunky dory over on Skull Island, but this spectacular film isn’t without its flaws. A lack of character development and a severe tonal imbalance mean it’s a beautiful near miss that thankfully manages to pull itself up from a crash landing.
Jordan Vogt-Roberts in his first big budget feature directs a film that is absolutely staggering to watch, with stunning cinematography and exceptionally well-choreographed battles between the gigantic ape and his many adversaries. Giving indie directors the chance to work with big studios to produce blockbusters is something that seems incredibly popular at the moment.
After all, Gareth Edwards took up the challenge of rebooting Godzilla in 2013 with stunning results and Colin Trevorrow was entrusted by Steven Spielberg to rekindle the public’s love affair with Jurassic Park back in 2015 and that worked a treat too.
Here, Vogt-Roberts utilises both of those franchises to great effect, even managing to shoehorn a tasteful reference to Samuel L Jackson’s Jurassic Park character, Ray Arnold. Elsewhere, though, the film falls a little flat. The constant switch in tone from comedy to action leaves a sour taste in the mouth, though John C Reilly’s stranded pilot is a pleasure to watch and lightens up proceedings.
Tom Hiddleston does well in the leading role, though as an SAS operative, he feels a little miscast and Samuel L Jackson’s Preston Packard is immensely dislikeable and his gripe with Kong is forced. It creates a subplot that doesn’t really need to be there.
The special effects, however, are top notch, helped by the splendid cinematography. The gorgeous sunsets and sweeping tropical landscapes have a whiff of Apocalypse Now and the misty terrain brings back memories of Jurassic Park’s first sequel, The Lost World.
Overall, Kong: Skull Island is a stunning film filled to the brim with colour, charming effects and great performances. However, it is a little light on character development and that tone issue is frustrating at times, but as a precursor to a mighty monster battle, it does a fine job in continuing the franchise and setting its future.
Leaving the cinema, though, I was left with a concern for when the two behemoths, Godzilla and Kong, finally meet. Each film has given their respective creature a ‘personality’, and if one of them must inevitably die, who on earth do you choose to perish?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/03/10/beauty-and-the-beast-kong-skull-island-review/
And in Hollywood, size really does matter; therefore the monstrous ape has been given a monumental upgrade featuring an all-star cast and some serious talent behind the camera. But is Kong: Skull Island as bananas as its trailers would suggest? Or are we looking at something a little more mainstream?
At the climax of the Vietnam War, a team of explorers and mercenaries head to an unchartered island in the South Pacific in an effort to document its inhabitants. Little do they know they are crossing into the domain of vicious man-eating monsters and the legendary Kong.
With a cast that includes Tom Hiddleston, Brie Larson, John Goodman, Samuel L Jackson and John C Reilly, you’d be forgiven for thinking everything is hunky dory over on Skull Island, but this spectacular film isn’t without its flaws. A lack of character development and a severe tonal imbalance mean it’s a beautiful near miss that thankfully manages to pull itself up from a crash landing.
Jordan Vogt-Roberts in his first big budget feature directs a film that is absolutely staggering to watch, with stunning cinematography and exceptionally well-choreographed battles between the gigantic ape and his many adversaries. Giving indie directors the chance to work with big studios to produce blockbusters is something that seems incredibly popular at the moment.
After all, Gareth Edwards took up the challenge of rebooting Godzilla in 2013 with stunning results and Colin Trevorrow was entrusted by Steven Spielberg to rekindle the public’s love affair with Jurassic Park back in 2015 and that worked a treat too.
Here, Vogt-Roberts utilises both of those franchises to great effect, even managing to shoehorn a tasteful reference to Samuel L Jackson’s Jurassic Park character, Ray Arnold. Elsewhere, though, the film falls a little flat. The constant switch in tone from comedy to action leaves a sour taste in the mouth, though John C Reilly’s stranded pilot is a pleasure to watch and lightens up proceedings.
Tom Hiddleston does well in the leading role, though as an SAS operative, he feels a little miscast and Samuel L Jackson’s Preston Packard is immensely dislikeable and his gripe with Kong is forced. It creates a subplot that doesn’t really need to be there.
The special effects, however, are top notch, helped by the splendid cinematography. The gorgeous sunsets and sweeping tropical landscapes have a whiff of Apocalypse Now and the misty terrain brings back memories of Jurassic Park’s first sequel, The Lost World.
Overall, Kong: Skull Island is a stunning film filled to the brim with colour, charming effects and great performances. However, it is a little light on character development and that tone issue is frustrating at times, but as a precursor to a mighty monster battle, it does a fine job in continuing the franchise and setting its future.
Leaving the cinema, though, I was left with a concern for when the two behemoths, Godzilla and Kong, finally meet. Each film has given their respective creature a ‘personality’, and if one of them must inevitably die, who on earth do you choose to perish?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/03/10/beauty-and-the-beast-kong-skull-island-review/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Cloverfield Paradox (2018) in Movies
Feb 22, 2018
A fun "who-will-survive" flick
During the Super Bowl, a "surprise" trailer dropped for a new entry in the Cloverfield family of films. The good news is that the film was dropping on Netflix the next day, so fanboys immediately jumped on-line and then started hating on it (again, on-line) because it wasn't exactly what they thought it would be.
Which is too bad, for THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX is a very fun, very well made, very well acted "10 Little Indians" style Sci-Fi film (you know, the type of film where a finite group of folks are marooned someplace - like and island or an isolated, creepy mansion and are picked off one by one). This time, they are on a space station, and when an experiment goes awry, bad things start to happen.
I stated that this film is another entry in the "Cloverfield family of films", so let me explain that. The overseer of these films is none other than JJ Abrams and he has stated that there will be a series of films - very different in style, type and substance - that will (somehow) be related in the Cloverfield Universe. And, so far, he has fulfilled his promise (at least to me) - for those that just want "more of the same", he has alienated.
The first film, CLOVERFIELD, is a "found footage" film about a giant monster (think Godzilla) rampaging through modern day New York City. Of the 3 films,thus far, in the Cloverfield family, this one (for me) was the least effective (especially because I am not a big fan of "found footage" films). The 2nd film was 2016's 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE and was a very effective psychological horror/drama starring John Goodman as a fellow who has rescued/captured (kidnapped?) Mary Elizabeth Winstead and has locked her in his survival bunker in order to - he says - save her from the monster above. The film effectively goes back and forth with wondering what is scarier - the monster above or the monster (Goodman) below. If you haven't seen 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE, I highly recommend it.
The third installment, then, is THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX, a prequel of sorts about a group of scientists aboard a space station conducting a desperate, highly dangerous power experiments to solve the world's energy crisis. When something goes wrong, bad things happen. And since this is in the Cloverfield family, you gotta know it has some connection with how the Cloverfield monster got on Earth.
But this film doesn't really concern itself with the Cloverfield monster - which is what I think is angering the "fanboys" - this film is about the survival of the charismatic, international scientists that are stranded on this space station after the accident. Almost every one of the actors in this film are "oh...that guy" type actors - all very good. From German actor Daniel Bruhl (RUSH) to Chinese actress Ziyi Zhang (CROUCHING TIGER...) to Englishman David Oyelowo (SELMA) to good ol' John Ortiz (a million different things) - the cast is strong, fun to watch and easy to root for. They all are in service to the plot devices (and predicaments they are in) and they serve the plot (and the film) well.
Special notice should be made for Chris O'Dowd (BRIDESMAIDS) who brings some much needed levity via his deadpan humor approach to everything as the ship's handyman and, especially, Gugu Mbatha-Raw (BELLE) as the heroine of the adventure from through who's eyes we encounter the events of the film.
I have stated before that I am a sucker for these types of "10 Little Indians who-will-survive" films and this one is no exception. Go in with no preconceived notions, roll with what the film throws at you and you'll have a good time time, too.
THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX is now streaming on Netflix.
Letter Grade: B (it is the very definition of a "B" movie).
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Which is too bad, for THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX is a very fun, very well made, very well acted "10 Little Indians" style Sci-Fi film (you know, the type of film where a finite group of folks are marooned someplace - like and island or an isolated, creepy mansion and are picked off one by one). This time, they are on a space station, and when an experiment goes awry, bad things start to happen.
I stated that this film is another entry in the "Cloverfield family of films", so let me explain that. The overseer of these films is none other than JJ Abrams and he has stated that there will be a series of films - very different in style, type and substance - that will (somehow) be related in the Cloverfield Universe. And, so far, he has fulfilled his promise (at least to me) - for those that just want "more of the same", he has alienated.
The first film, CLOVERFIELD, is a "found footage" film about a giant monster (think Godzilla) rampaging through modern day New York City. Of the 3 films,thus far, in the Cloverfield family, this one (for me) was the least effective (especially because I am not a big fan of "found footage" films). The 2nd film was 2016's 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE and was a very effective psychological horror/drama starring John Goodman as a fellow who has rescued/captured (kidnapped?) Mary Elizabeth Winstead and has locked her in his survival bunker in order to - he says - save her from the monster above. The film effectively goes back and forth with wondering what is scarier - the monster above or the monster (Goodman) below. If you haven't seen 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE, I highly recommend it.
The third installment, then, is THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX, a prequel of sorts about a group of scientists aboard a space station conducting a desperate, highly dangerous power experiments to solve the world's energy crisis. When something goes wrong, bad things happen. And since this is in the Cloverfield family, you gotta know it has some connection with how the Cloverfield monster got on Earth.
But this film doesn't really concern itself with the Cloverfield monster - which is what I think is angering the "fanboys" - this film is about the survival of the charismatic, international scientists that are stranded on this space station after the accident. Almost every one of the actors in this film are "oh...that guy" type actors - all very good. From German actor Daniel Bruhl (RUSH) to Chinese actress Ziyi Zhang (CROUCHING TIGER...) to Englishman David Oyelowo (SELMA) to good ol' John Ortiz (a million different things) - the cast is strong, fun to watch and easy to root for. They all are in service to the plot devices (and predicaments they are in) and they serve the plot (and the film) well.
Special notice should be made for Chris O'Dowd (BRIDESMAIDS) who brings some much needed levity via his deadpan humor approach to everything as the ship's handyman and, especially, Gugu Mbatha-Raw (BELLE) as the heroine of the adventure from through who's eyes we encounter the events of the film.
I have stated before that I am a sucker for these types of "10 Little Indians who-will-survive" films and this one is no exception. Go in with no preconceived notions, roll with what the film throws at you and you'll have a good time time, too.
THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX is now streaming on Netflix.
Letter Grade: B (it is the very definition of a "B" movie).
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Atomic Blonde (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
The beginning of the end of the Cold War,1989. East and West Germany still separated by more than just a wall. An MI6 agent sent to retrieve a knock list two weeks prior has been killed and the list is missing. It contains information on every agent for each agency who have representation in Berlin. MI6 sends in Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron), specialist in intelligence collection and hand to hand combat. She would have to work with the section chief David Percival (James McAvoy) to retrieve the list before it falls into the hands of the competition.
Lorraine’s fight scenes, carefully choreographed to deliver efficiency in movement where not one strike is wasted. The action sequences truly drives the pace of the storyline. one would think that this is just the average action film but it’s not. This film’s storyline has very good pacing although there are points of slight foreshadowing, but it keeps one guessing about peoples loyalties even after it is established…or is it?
Charlize plays Lorraine with the coolness on par with 007, but with a realistic enemy. McAvoy’s Percival is the agent that has spent so much time in Berlin where he has become entrenched in the role of a black-market trader so familiar with the east/west that he believes he knows how to run the game. He toggles back and forth from East to West like an eel slithering through the hands of fishermen.
We also see a few familiar faces playing key appointments in the spy game. Toby Jones as Eric Gray, Lorraine’s boss and John Goodman as Emmet Kurzfeld, the CIA attaché to this mission with MI6. Sofia Boutella, who we have seen in Kingsman and The Mummy plays Delphine Lasalle, the fledgling agent from France documenting Lorraine’s every move.
The film is set to the steady rhythm of 80’s electronic New Wave. The soundtrack in this movie does not function solely as accompaniment. Each scene is accentuated by songs carefully curated to enhance each moment as a supporting character.
Based on Antony Johnston’s 2012 Graphic Novel “The Coldest City” Director David Leitch (John Wick & Deadpool 2 ) gives us an ass kicking female protagonist that is clever, darkly witty and can take on pretty much anything that comes her way. The stunts are filmed with an experienced fluidity and the movements are crisp, definitely a benefit from Leitch’s stunt expertise.
So far, the summer blockbuster season can be named the point where female action heroes can hold the attention of the viewer, no longer seen as the frail victim or second fiddle to the man. She can take care of business and put the hurt on anyone that comes at her as well as share with the audience that she has emotional depth.
My attention was captured from the first shot to the ending credits.
Lorraine’s fight scenes, carefully choreographed to deliver efficiency in movement where not one strike is wasted. The action sequences truly drives the pace of the storyline. one would think that this is just the average action film but it’s not. This film’s storyline has very good pacing although there are points of slight foreshadowing, but it keeps one guessing about peoples loyalties even after it is established…or is it?
Charlize plays Lorraine with the coolness on par with 007, but with a realistic enemy. McAvoy’s Percival is the agent that has spent so much time in Berlin where he has become entrenched in the role of a black-market trader so familiar with the east/west that he believes he knows how to run the game. He toggles back and forth from East to West like an eel slithering through the hands of fishermen.
We also see a few familiar faces playing key appointments in the spy game. Toby Jones as Eric Gray, Lorraine’s boss and John Goodman as Emmet Kurzfeld, the CIA attaché to this mission with MI6. Sofia Boutella, who we have seen in Kingsman and The Mummy plays Delphine Lasalle, the fledgling agent from France documenting Lorraine’s every move.
The film is set to the steady rhythm of 80’s electronic New Wave. The soundtrack in this movie does not function solely as accompaniment. Each scene is accentuated by songs carefully curated to enhance each moment as a supporting character.
Based on Antony Johnston’s 2012 Graphic Novel “The Coldest City” Director David Leitch (John Wick & Deadpool 2 ) gives us an ass kicking female protagonist that is clever, darkly witty and can take on pretty much anything that comes her way. The stunts are filmed with an experienced fluidity and the movements are crisp, definitely a benefit from Leitch’s stunt expertise.
So far, the summer blockbuster season can be named the point where female action heroes can hold the attention of the viewer, no longer seen as the frail victim or second fiddle to the man. She can take care of business and put the hurt on anyone that comes at her as well as share with the audience that she has emotional depth.
My attention was captured from the first shot to the ending credits.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Argo (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
As a small child, I can remember the Iranian hostage crisis as it dominated the news media for over a year. While I did not understand the political atmosphere behind it, I did understand that a group of our embassy staff were being held prisoner in a foreign land for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Director and star Ben Affleck has brought a new side to the story to light in the form of his new film “Argo”, which is based upon true events which have recently become declassified. The story centers around six workers of the embassy in Tehran, who fled the chaos when a disgruntled mob stormed the embassy walls. At that time it was unheard of for an embassy to be occupied as they host country and internal security were thought to of been more than adequate protection.
However for a country in a state of revolution, much less one that was extremely upset with America’s refusal to return the deposed Shah to face trial, security from the local populace was not available when the unthinkable happened.
After being turned away by the British and New Zealand embassies, the six escapees find refuge in the residence of the Canadian ambassador Ken Taylor (Victor Garber), who refuses to turn them away despite the volatile political situation harboring them would create should they ever be discovered.
On the other side of the world, C.I.A. Director Jack O’Donnell (Bryan Cranston), and his staff are desperately looking for a way to retrieve not only the Americans held hostage but also the six individuals currently being sheltered by the Canadian ambassador.
With few viable options available, save for the longshot of trying to get the refugees to bike through 300 miles of winter and soldier laden roads to the Turkish border, Tony Mendez (Affleck), is brought in to find other options.
One evening, Tony gets the idea to go to Iran posing as a Canadian filmmaker on a location scouting trip for an upcoming film. His plan is to pass the refugees off as part of his crew thanks to newly issued passports from the Canadian government.
In order to add validity to his plan, Tony recruits award-winning makeup artist John Chambers (John Goodman), and producer Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin), to help establish the necessary cover for the operation.
Soon Tony, John, and Lester have obtained a script for science fiction film named “Argo”, and the use the Hollywood trades and publicity machine to establish their back story of their production company and film project.
With time running down, Tony must venture alone to Tehran to meet with and prepare the refugees for extraction as well as firming up their cover with the local Iranian authorities.
What follows is a tense political thriller that is extremely well performed and captivating throughout. What really impressed me about the film was that Affleck expertly paced it and refrain from using such overused stereotypes such as car chases, fight sequences, and love scenes to tell the story.
The cast is exceptionally good all around and the film does a good job capturing the look and the atmosphere of the situation without ever becoming preachy and taking extreme political stances. Instead the focus is on real people caught in an extraordinary situation from which they were unprepared, and the extraordinary measures taken by good people in the United States and Canada who stepped up and did the right thing regardless of the cost to them personally or politically.
“Argo”, was an extremely pleasant surprise in one of the most enjoyable films I have seen this year. While I understand it would not be for everyone, I would not be surprised to see the film get a few Oscar nods come awards season as they would be in my opinion well deserved.
Director and star Ben Affleck has brought a new side to the story to light in the form of his new film “Argo”, which is based upon true events which have recently become declassified. The story centers around six workers of the embassy in Tehran, who fled the chaos when a disgruntled mob stormed the embassy walls. At that time it was unheard of for an embassy to be occupied as they host country and internal security were thought to of been more than adequate protection.
However for a country in a state of revolution, much less one that was extremely upset with America’s refusal to return the deposed Shah to face trial, security from the local populace was not available when the unthinkable happened.
After being turned away by the British and New Zealand embassies, the six escapees find refuge in the residence of the Canadian ambassador Ken Taylor (Victor Garber), who refuses to turn them away despite the volatile political situation harboring them would create should they ever be discovered.
On the other side of the world, C.I.A. Director Jack O’Donnell (Bryan Cranston), and his staff are desperately looking for a way to retrieve not only the Americans held hostage but also the six individuals currently being sheltered by the Canadian ambassador.
With few viable options available, save for the longshot of trying to get the refugees to bike through 300 miles of winter and soldier laden roads to the Turkish border, Tony Mendez (Affleck), is brought in to find other options.
One evening, Tony gets the idea to go to Iran posing as a Canadian filmmaker on a location scouting trip for an upcoming film. His plan is to pass the refugees off as part of his crew thanks to newly issued passports from the Canadian government.
In order to add validity to his plan, Tony recruits award-winning makeup artist John Chambers (John Goodman), and producer Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin), to help establish the necessary cover for the operation.
Soon Tony, John, and Lester have obtained a script for science fiction film named “Argo”, and the use the Hollywood trades and publicity machine to establish their back story of their production company and film project.
With time running down, Tony must venture alone to Tehran to meet with and prepare the refugees for extraction as well as firming up their cover with the local Iranian authorities.
What follows is a tense political thriller that is extremely well performed and captivating throughout. What really impressed me about the film was that Affleck expertly paced it and refrain from using such overused stereotypes such as car chases, fight sequences, and love scenes to tell the story.
The cast is exceptionally good all around and the film does a good job capturing the look and the atmosphere of the situation without ever becoming preachy and taking extreme political stances. Instead the focus is on real people caught in an extraordinary situation from which they were unprepared, and the extraordinary measures taken by good people in the United States and Canada who stepped up and did the right thing regardless of the cost to them personally or politically.
“Argo”, was an extremely pleasant surprise in one of the most enjoyable films I have seen this year. While I understand it would not be for everyone, I would not be surprised to see the film get a few Oscar nods come awards season as they would be in my opinion well deserved.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Onward (2020) in Movies
Mar 25, 2020
Fun...but..."lesser" PIxar
I am a big fan of the PIXAR films. I am a big fan of Chris Pratt and Tom Holland. I am a big fan of Fantasy films (wizards, elves, dwarves and so on...) So when I heard there was going to be a Pixar flick featuring the voice talents of Pratt and Holland about characters in a Fantasy world, I was excited to check it out.
I should have lowered my expectations.
Don't get me wrong, ONWARD is a good film. It is whimsical, fantastic and fun. It just could have been better.
Set in a time where Elves, Faeries, Unicorns and Wizards exist, but they exist as "regular" people, going to jobs, going to school, living their lives...ONWARD tells the tale of 2 brothers (Pratt and Holland) who go on a magical quest to bring back their dead father - at least for one night.
It's a fun romp, but it's not a REALLY fun romp. And that's the issue with this film. It is all lower case - where the film could have been UPPER CASE (if you know what I mean). Holland and Pratt are good together, they are not GREAT together (like Tom Hanks and Tim Allen in TOY STORY or Billy Crystal and John Goodman in MONSTER'S INC.). Julia Louis-Dreyfuss is off-beat as their mother, but she isn't over-the-top WACKY as the mother. Octavio Spencer is "octane" as a former mythical creature that aids the boys - but she's not HIGH-OCTANE.
You get the drift.
I lay the fault of this on Director Dam Scanlon who's other Pixar Directorial effort, MONSTER'S UNIVERSITY suffered from a similar malaise. It was fun...not AWESOME FUN. The pacing of the film doesn't really help as there is no strong push to the goal in this film. I caught myself stirring in my seat as the film progressed...never a good sign.
Don't get me wrong, it is still a good film - the kids will like it. I just have come to expect more from PIXAR. I put Pixar films on 2 levels - GREAT Pixar films (the TOY STORY films, UP, WALL-E) and LESSER Pixar films (MONSTER'S UNIVERSITY, CARS 2, BRAVE).
I would put ONWARD in the LESSER category.
Letter Grade: B (even a "lesser" Pixar film is still above average)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
I should have lowered my expectations.
Don't get me wrong, ONWARD is a good film. It is whimsical, fantastic and fun. It just could have been better.
Set in a time where Elves, Faeries, Unicorns and Wizards exist, but they exist as "regular" people, going to jobs, going to school, living their lives...ONWARD tells the tale of 2 brothers (Pratt and Holland) who go on a magical quest to bring back their dead father - at least for one night.
It's a fun romp, but it's not a REALLY fun romp. And that's the issue with this film. It is all lower case - where the film could have been UPPER CASE (if you know what I mean). Holland and Pratt are good together, they are not GREAT together (like Tom Hanks and Tim Allen in TOY STORY or Billy Crystal and John Goodman in MONSTER'S INC.). Julia Louis-Dreyfuss is off-beat as their mother, but she isn't over-the-top WACKY as the mother. Octavio Spencer is "octane" as a former mythical creature that aids the boys - but she's not HIGH-OCTANE.
You get the drift.
I lay the fault of this on Director Dam Scanlon who's other Pixar Directorial effort, MONSTER'S UNIVERSITY suffered from a similar malaise. It was fun...not AWESOME FUN. The pacing of the film doesn't really help as there is no strong push to the goal in this film. I caught myself stirring in my seat as the film progressed...never a good sign.
Don't get me wrong, it is still a good film - the kids will like it. I just have come to expect more from PIXAR. I put Pixar films on 2 levels - GREAT Pixar films (the TOY STORY films, UP, WALL-E) and LESSER Pixar films (MONSTER'S UNIVERSITY, CARS 2, BRAVE).
I would put ONWARD in the LESSER category.
Letter Grade: B (even a "lesser" Pixar film is still above average)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Argo: How the CIA and Hollywood Pulled Off the Most Audacious Rescue in History
Matt Baglio and Antonio Mendez
Book
Argo by Antonio Mendez and Matt Baglio - the declassified CIA story behind the Oscar-winning film...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Nobody (2021) in Movies
Apr 27, 2021
A Fun Romp
Any fan of one of the greatest TV series of all-time, BREAKING BAD, or it’s spin-off, BETTER CALL SAUL, know the acting chops that Bob Odenkirk brings to the role of slimey, billboard lawyer Saul Goodman. His fast-talking, fast-thinking con-man is a character for the ages.
So, naturally, one would think “action star”.
But, darn it, if it doesn’t work.
Playing a retired undercover agent with a “certain set of skills”, NOBODY follows “Hutch” Mansell as he gets pulled back into using those skills when he helps a young woman who is being harassed on a bus, only to find out the thugs he went against are connected to the Russian Mob.
You can pretty much fill in the blanks from there. This film does not really tread any new ground…but…gosh…it was a fun watch.
Playing a more comedic hero than Liam Neeson in the TAKEN movies or Keanu Reeves’ JOHN WICK, Odenkirk, nonetheless, pulls off the “action hero” qualities just fine and is a winning enough presence on the screen that he holds your attention.
Christopher Lloyd (yes, Doc Brown from BACK TO THE FUTURE) is along for the ride as Odenkirk’s father, who gets pulled into the action when the Russian Mobsters decide to go after Hutch’s family and he looks like he is having a ball with this role.
The rest of the cast is pretty by-the-book (though a special shoutout needs to go to 1980’s heavy, Michael Ironside, who has a short role in this film - I would have loved to have seen more of him). The head Russian mobster is a bit over-the-top for my tastes, but the action sequences more than make up for all of this.
Credit for that must be given to Director Ilya Naishuller (HARDCORE HENRY) for he gives this film a unique look in the fight scenes while constantly having his tongue placed firmly in his cheek. I’ve seen ALOT of action films, so when a film brings something unique and fun to the screen, I sit up and notice.
And, notice I did. For NOBODY is a fun, popcorn flick. One that will be entertaining for the 92 minutes you watch.
Just don’t expect to see it during Awards season next year.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
So, naturally, one would think “action star”.
But, darn it, if it doesn’t work.
Playing a retired undercover agent with a “certain set of skills”, NOBODY follows “Hutch” Mansell as he gets pulled back into using those skills when he helps a young woman who is being harassed on a bus, only to find out the thugs he went against are connected to the Russian Mob.
You can pretty much fill in the blanks from there. This film does not really tread any new ground…but…gosh…it was a fun watch.
Playing a more comedic hero than Liam Neeson in the TAKEN movies or Keanu Reeves’ JOHN WICK, Odenkirk, nonetheless, pulls off the “action hero” qualities just fine and is a winning enough presence on the screen that he holds your attention.
Christopher Lloyd (yes, Doc Brown from BACK TO THE FUTURE) is along for the ride as Odenkirk’s father, who gets pulled into the action when the Russian Mobsters decide to go after Hutch’s family and he looks like he is having a ball with this role.
The rest of the cast is pretty by-the-book (though a special shoutout needs to go to 1980’s heavy, Michael Ironside, who has a short role in this film - I would have loved to have seen more of him). The head Russian mobster is a bit over-the-top for my tastes, but the action sequences more than make up for all of this.
Credit for that must be given to Director Ilya Naishuller (HARDCORE HENRY) for he gives this film a unique look in the fight scenes while constantly having his tongue placed firmly in his cheek. I’ve seen ALOT of action films, so when a film brings something unique and fun to the screen, I sit up and notice.
And, notice I did. For NOBODY is a fun, popcorn flick. One that will be entertaining for the 92 minutes you watch.
Just don’t expect to see it during Awards season next year.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)