Search
Search results
Allison Anders recommended Young Mr. Lincoln (1939) in Movies (curated)
Kevin Smith recommended A Man for All Seasons (1966) in Movies (curated)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Hotel Artemis (2018) in Movies
Feb 10, 2019
Not as interesting as it wanted to be
On my airplane ride from Mpls to San Diego I was able to catch up with gritty, action-noir thriller BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE and was really surprised by how much I enjoyed it. So, I was excited to see that another gritty,, action-noir film, HOTEL ARTEMIS was showing on the flight back.
Well...HOTEL ARTEMIS is no EL ROYALE and maybe that's not fair to Artemis, for I was constantly comparing the two films, so let me see if I can separate the 2 and hold HOTEL ARTEMIS up to it's own scrutiny.
Telling the tale of a JOHN WICK-type world where - instead of a safehouse Hotel for crooks, the HOTEL ARTEMIS is a safehouse HOSPITAL for crooks where the rules are that the crooks cannot hurt each other on the premises. When a riot breaks out in downtown Los Angeles, the rules go out the window and mayhem - and violence - ensue.
Well...this film is no JOHN WICK either. Oh shoot, I've done it again. I've compared this film to another film.
And that's the problem with HOTEL ARTEMIS, it treads ground that has been trod better - and with more style - before. So this film, no matter how well intention-ed, falls short in originality, style and substance. I was still entertained, but not as entertained as I was by JOHN WICK or EL ROYALE.
Jodie Foster (in her first acting role since 2013's ELYSIUM) stars as the person who runs the Artemis. She has a mysterious background (of course) and runs the Artemis with an emotional-less efficiency. Her performance is quirky and interesting and almost holds the film together - almost. She is joined by Sterling K. Brown, Charlie Day, Brian Tyree Henry and Sofia Boutella as patients in the Hotel - none of which were interesting or unusual. They all were playing variants of the characters they usually play, almost as if Director/Writer Drew Pearce said "Get my a Charlie Day-type and a Sterling K. Brown-type", and the Casting Director thought they "scored" by getting the original person - each of whom looks like they are coasting through this film at about 70% output.
Only Dave Bautista shines as the "Health Care Professional" who works with Foster. He brings an interesting charisma to his character and was almost the high point in the film.
Almost. All of the performances pale in comparison to the Mob Boss who shows up about 2/3 of the way through the film. This character is talked about in reverential and scary terms throughout the film. The build-up was huge for this character and I was prepared for the inevitable let down when the mob boss finally shows up, but when the elevator door opens up and I saw that is was Jeff Goldblum in "full Goldblum" mode, I was thrilled and he did not disappoint. He commanded the screen at a time that the film was getting tiresome and he wound up the characters, the energy of the film and the action to help it ride to its inevitable, bloody conclusion.
Ultimately, Pearce delivered a solid B- film, one that has moments of quirk and interest, but set against a backdrop - and supporting actors - that are subdued and not memorable. This is a cardinal sin for this kind of film, instead of subduing those parts, Pearce needed to enhance those and he just plainly did not.
If you want to see a good, stylized, gritty action film, with interesting locales and supporting players, check out JOHN WICK or BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE. If you've seen these, HOTEL ARTEMIS is fine, but the other two do it better.
Letter Grade: B-
6 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Well...HOTEL ARTEMIS is no EL ROYALE and maybe that's not fair to Artemis, for I was constantly comparing the two films, so let me see if I can separate the 2 and hold HOTEL ARTEMIS up to it's own scrutiny.
Telling the tale of a JOHN WICK-type world where - instead of a safehouse Hotel for crooks, the HOTEL ARTEMIS is a safehouse HOSPITAL for crooks where the rules are that the crooks cannot hurt each other on the premises. When a riot breaks out in downtown Los Angeles, the rules go out the window and mayhem - and violence - ensue.
Well...this film is no JOHN WICK either. Oh shoot, I've done it again. I've compared this film to another film.
And that's the problem with HOTEL ARTEMIS, it treads ground that has been trod better - and with more style - before. So this film, no matter how well intention-ed, falls short in originality, style and substance. I was still entertained, but not as entertained as I was by JOHN WICK or EL ROYALE.
Jodie Foster (in her first acting role since 2013's ELYSIUM) stars as the person who runs the Artemis. She has a mysterious background (of course) and runs the Artemis with an emotional-less efficiency. Her performance is quirky and interesting and almost holds the film together - almost. She is joined by Sterling K. Brown, Charlie Day, Brian Tyree Henry and Sofia Boutella as patients in the Hotel - none of which were interesting or unusual. They all were playing variants of the characters they usually play, almost as if Director/Writer Drew Pearce said "Get my a Charlie Day-type and a Sterling K. Brown-type", and the Casting Director thought they "scored" by getting the original person - each of whom looks like they are coasting through this film at about 70% output.
Only Dave Bautista shines as the "Health Care Professional" who works with Foster. He brings an interesting charisma to his character and was almost the high point in the film.
Almost. All of the performances pale in comparison to the Mob Boss who shows up about 2/3 of the way through the film. This character is talked about in reverential and scary terms throughout the film. The build-up was huge for this character and I was prepared for the inevitable let down when the mob boss finally shows up, but when the elevator door opens up and I saw that is was Jeff Goldblum in "full Goldblum" mode, I was thrilled and he did not disappoint. He commanded the screen at a time that the film was getting tiresome and he wound up the characters, the energy of the film and the action to help it ride to its inevitable, bloody conclusion.
Ultimately, Pearce delivered a solid B- film, one that has moments of quirk and interest, but set against a backdrop - and supporting actors - that are subdued and not memorable. This is a cardinal sin for this kind of film, instead of subduing those parts, Pearce needed to enhance those and he just plainly did not.
If you want to see a good, stylized, gritty action film, with interesting locales and supporting players, check out JOHN WICK or BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE. If you've seen these, HOTEL ARTEMIS is fine, but the other two do it better.
Letter Grade: B-
6 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Awix (3310 KP) rated War of the Worlds: Global Dispatches in Books
Feb 3, 2020
Diverse collection of short stories all revisiting the Martian invasion of 1898 (as originally detailed by H.G. Wells). Most (but not all) of the stories are narrated by notables from the period, most (but not all) of these are famous writers: Henry James, Samuel Clemens, Rudyard Kipling, and so on. The collection kind of overlooks the implication that the Martians only actually invade southern England in Wells' novel, but then most adaptations do the same thing, and the stories here aren't even consistent with each other (the fate of Paris varies significantly in the Jules Verne and Pablo Picasso entries).
A bit of a mixed bag, to be honest: some of the stories just restage elements of Wells with a different backdrop, others treat the Martians as a backdrop for more introspective tales, still others indulge in literary pastiche. Unlikely juxtapositions and in-jokes abound - Rudyard Kipling meets Gandhi, Tolstoy meets Stalin, Samuel Clemens (d. 1910) makes reference to John Christopher (b. 1922). The best stories are mostly the ones which recognise the political/satirical subtext powering the Wells novel and attempt to do something similar - so Barbara Hambly's story concerns British imperialism in India, and the effect of the Martians on the situation there, while another looks at the consequences for pre-revolutionary Russia. That said, Connie Willis' Hugo-winning contribution sends the whole conceit of the novel up with a predictable mixture of tongue-in-cheek drollery and sheer absurd silliness, as the unlikely effect of a Martian encounter on the poetry of Emily Dickinson is revealed (especially considering Dickinson died twelve years before the coming of the Martians). The good stories are very good indeed, the less good ones merely a bit tedious. A worthy and worthwhile tribute to the original novel.
A bit of a mixed bag, to be honest: some of the stories just restage elements of Wells with a different backdrop, others treat the Martians as a backdrop for more introspective tales, still others indulge in literary pastiche. Unlikely juxtapositions and in-jokes abound - Rudyard Kipling meets Gandhi, Tolstoy meets Stalin, Samuel Clemens (d. 1910) makes reference to John Christopher (b. 1922). The best stories are mostly the ones which recognise the political/satirical subtext powering the Wells novel and attempt to do something similar - so Barbara Hambly's story concerns British imperialism in India, and the effect of the Martians on the situation there, while another looks at the consequences for pre-revolutionary Russia. That said, Connie Willis' Hugo-winning contribution sends the whole conceit of the novel up with a predictable mixture of tongue-in-cheek drollery and sheer absurd silliness, as the unlikely effect of a Martian encounter on the poetry of Emily Dickinson is revealed (especially considering Dickinson died twelve years before the coming of the Martians). The good stories are very good indeed, the less good ones merely a bit tedious. A worthy and worthwhile tribute to the original novel.
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Will Shaksper's Secret in Books
Feb 4, 2020
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
As there is nothing to prove otherwise I have to label Will Shaksper’s Secret by John Hole as a work of fiction through the way it is written would almost suggest otherwise. Without a works-cited or a bibliography or anything saying it is even loosely based in fact I can not give this book any other category.
In 1584 John Heminges is dismissed from his job largely due to sleeping with his boss’s wife. During his interactions with her, she robs him, leaving him penniless and alone. It is because of this that he ends up on the outside of a playhouse and saves Henry Condell thus connecting him to the theater. Within the preforming group he meats Christopher Marlowe and Will Shaksper.
As it happens Christopher Marlowe gets into quite a bit of trouble for preaching atheism in a time when the church is struggling to begin with. This results in the threat of execution hanging over him. To protect him from this fate, other performers create a plan to make it appear that Christopher Marlowe is dead, allowing him to disappear. After he has been gone for some time Will Shaksper stars producing some wonder plays of amazing quality but they always come following a visit from a messenger.
The concept of Will Shakespear not actually being the famous playwright that everyone knows him to be is interesting. Also, the circumstances that allowed to trade of writing from Christopher Marlowe to Will Shaksper was strange in a way that makes one question if things could actually have worked out that way. Sadly to say thought the title and description on the back promise an interesting read yet the book fails to deliver. The book itself ended up being very dry and the “blustering, boiserous journey” ended up dragging and slow.
Adults who enjoy Shakspere both in language and historically would be the type of person ideally interested in this book. They dry style and language used best suits this book for those who are true fand of literary classics. Others may attempt to read it but might find the language a bit difficult. I rate this book 1 out of 4. The back of this book promises a much more interesting story than what it actually is. Besides being dry the plot is largely lost among the language. I understand what was being attempted and give the author credit for it, but I believe it largely missed the mark.
https://nightreaderreviews.blogspot.com
https://facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
https://smashbomb.com/nightreader
In 1584 John Heminges is dismissed from his job largely due to sleeping with his boss’s wife. During his interactions with her, she robs him, leaving him penniless and alone. It is because of this that he ends up on the outside of a playhouse and saves Henry Condell thus connecting him to the theater. Within the preforming group he meats Christopher Marlowe and Will Shaksper.
As it happens Christopher Marlowe gets into quite a bit of trouble for preaching atheism in a time when the church is struggling to begin with. This results in the threat of execution hanging over him. To protect him from this fate, other performers create a plan to make it appear that Christopher Marlowe is dead, allowing him to disappear. After he has been gone for some time Will Shaksper stars producing some wonder plays of amazing quality but they always come following a visit from a messenger.
The concept of Will Shakespear not actually being the famous playwright that everyone knows him to be is interesting. Also, the circumstances that allowed to trade of writing from Christopher Marlowe to Will Shaksper was strange in a way that makes one question if things could actually have worked out that way. Sadly to say thought the title and description on the back promise an interesting read yet the book fails to deliver. The book itself ended up being very dry and the “blustering, boiserous journey” ended up dragging and slow.
Adults who enjoy Shakspere both in language and historically would be the type of person ideally interested in this book. They dry style and language used best suits this book for those who are true fand of literary classics. Others may attempt to read it but might find the language a bit difficult. I rate this book 1 out of 4. The back of this book promises a much more interesting story than what it actually is. Besides being dry the plot is largely lost among the language. I understand what was being attempted and give the author credit for it, but I believe it largely missed the mark.
https://nightreaderreviews.blogspot.com
https://facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
https://smashbomb.com/nightreader
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Hardcore Henry (2016) in Movies
Oct 24, 2017 (Updated Oct 24, 2017)
An Original Thrill
The trailers for this movie had me intrigued from the get go, then the reviews were released and they just made me want to see this movie even more, so going in my hype level was pretty high and Hardcore Henry still managed to exceed my expectations. I mean, its not going to win any Oscars, but if you are looking for a non stop over the top action thrill ride, then wade right in. There is no holds barred here, this is proper action done in a unique way. The method of shooting isn’t perfect, it uses a great deal of shaky cam, so much so that it ends up obscuring some of the fast paced fight scenes and stunt choreography, which is a shame as the stunts are really spectacular and they only ramp up as the movie progresses. I loved Sharlto Copley in District 9, but he hasn’t wowed me since then, until I saw his performance in this movie. This performance really shows how diverse he is and there is a certain musical number involving him that is definitely one of the highlights of the movie, but I won’t spoil it here. In fact I can’t really say anything about his character without spoiling him other than his name is Jimmy and he is awesome.
The villain in this movie is ripped straight out of a cheesy video game, but he is kind of so bad that he’s good. He looks like the Targaryan brother from Game Of Thrones, he sounds like someone doing a bad John Malkovich impression and he has telekinesis powers to boot. His powers are never explained, but he is basically a jedi without a lightsabre from an 80’s electronic music video. Actually, comparing this movie to a video game is probably the most accurate way to describe it. Think a modern sci fi game that plays like classic Doom and you aren’t far off, which in my opinion is one of the most epic concepts ever conceived. However the concept is only the starting blocks of a project like this one, the execution has to be great as well to stop the movie from only ever being remembered as a throwaway neat idea. Thankfully the execution is effective here both figuratively and literally. This is one of they movies where you feel like a kid again while you watch it and it is glorious to experience from start to finish. The special effects are actually pretty good for what is presumably a pretty low budget film, over the top and fantastically ridiculous, but they add to the madness of the piece and they are a feast for the eyes. The soundtrack is pretty spot on too, it perfectly melds with the insane, fast paced, badass tone that the filmmakers were aiming for and helps to keep that high octane feel going for the duration of the flick.
Hardcore Henry is not a perfect movie by any stretch, but for what it is it delivers in a big way. It is highly entertaining and whether you enjoy this style of movie or not, it is hard to take your eyes off of the screen for the hour and a half that it is on for, this movie is going to grip you and take you for a high stakes mental ride whether you like it or not. If you are into over the top action and ridiculous stunts and set pieces, then I could not recommend this movie more.
The villain in this movie is ripped straight out of a cheesy video game, but he is kind of so bad that he’s good. He looks like the Targaryan brother from Game Of Thrones, he sounds like someone doing a bad John Malkovich impression and he has telekinesis powers to boot. His powers are never explained, but he is basically a jedi without a lightsabre from an 80’s electronic music video. Actually, comparing this movie to a video game is probably the most accurate way to describe it. Think a modern sci fi game that plays like classic Doom and you aren’t far off, which in my opinion is one of the most epic concepts ever conceived. However the concept is only the starting blocks of a project like this one, the execution has to be great as well to stop the movie from only ever being remembered as a throwaway neat idea. Thankfully the execution is effective here both figuratively and literally. This is one of they movies where you feel like a kid again while you watch it and it is glorious to experience from start to finish. The special effects are actually pretty good for what is presumably a pretty low budget film, over the top and fantastically ridiculous, but they add to the madness of the piece and they are a feast for the eyes. The soundtrack is pretty spot on too, it perfectly melds with the insane, fast paced, badass tone that the filmmakers were aiming for and helps to keep that high octane feel going for the duration of the flick.
Hardcore Henry is not a perfect movie by any stretch, but for what it is it delivers in a big way. It is highly entertaining and whether you enjoy this style of movie or not, it is hard to take your eyes off of the screen for the hour and a half that it is on for, this movie is going to grip you and take you for a high stakes mental ride whether you like it or not. If you are into over the top action and ridiculous stunts and set pieces, then I could not recommend this movie more.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Boneseeker in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Okay, I have a question: who else, while reading this book (if you did), kept imagining Sherlock Holmes as Benedict Cumberbatch? And I don't even have cable to watch it, nor do I have time to watch Masterpiece Mystery....
<img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_kJ9pDaSzoQ/U2VHyusffEI/AAAAAAAADKw/2xCShmhbaAg/s1600/turnups.gif"; height="153" width="320">
Although imagining THE Sherlock Holmes having a kid is probably impossible. Yet in Boneseeker, it's the next generation of Holmes and Watson, only it's not the legendary duo (wait, they're legendary, right?). Instead of being set in London, the story is mainly set in Philadelphia and New York. Arabella, Sherlock's daughter, and Henry, John Watson's son, are on an expedition to find out if a giant hand found are from a Neanderthal or from Nephilim.
Boneseeker is actually quite scary. Sausage murder? Oh dear. But essentially the book is focused on 4 missing scientists who were on the hunt to prove what the hand really is in said expedition above. I think they were also looking for more giant bones hey, can't give anything away, eh? before they actually vanished into nowhere.
The notes at the end were really helpful. I was planning on doing some of my own research when I had the time, whether at school or at the library, but then I finished reading Boneseeker and saw "AUTHOR'S NOTES." Thus resulting in me going "Fantastic! Less research and Bing crap for me!" Search engines usually just give a) a bunch of crap, b) something entirely different from what you're searching for, or c) "I'm sorry, but that search term doesn't exist. Try again." That's like "Oh, GAME OVER." *plays funky music* I think my mom once said Google told her "Hahaha, you're so funny. What kind of search term is that?" Seems legit mom. I think that's just Option A or B for you.
<img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MPfbXCfaO6U/U2VIn0kF3WI/AAAAAAAADK4/nihGmv8QglM/s1600/seemslegit.gif"; height="180" width="320">
What's disappointing? Sherlock doesn't make much an appearance, to the dismay of Sherlock fans, unless you're just a fan of John Watson. He makes quite the appearance for the majority of the book. Oh, and it's a stand alone. *sigh* I was so hoping for a sequel. On the bright side, no waiting! Isn't that great, with so many series of books popping up by the day?
<img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_4sSv6F_1eg/U2VJFOLi7qI/AAAAAAAADLE/I9G2jTU62xc/s1600/too-many-people.gif"; height="156" width="320">
Despite the fact Sherlock doesn't make a huge appearance, mystery fans will find this an enjoyable reads. Oh, and maybe for those who enjoy reading about blood and gore...
EDIT: I stand corrected. This is NOT a stand alone (according to author)
------------------
Advance review copy provided by publisher
Original Rating: 4.5
Original Review posted on <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/06/arc-review-boneseeker-by-brynn-chapman.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>
<img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_kJ9pDaSzoQ/U2VHyusffEI/AAAAAAAADKw/2xCShmhbaAg/s1600/turnups.gif"; height="153" width="320">
Although imagining THE Sherlock Holmes having a kid is probably impossible. Yet in Boneseeker, it's the next generation of Holmes and Watson, only it's not the legendary duo (wait, they're legendary, right?). Instead of being set in London, the story is mainly set in Philadelphia and New York. Arabella, Sherlock's daughter, and Henry, John Watson's son, are on an expedition to find out if a giant hand found are from a Neanderthal or from Nephilim.
Boneseeker is actually quite scary. Sausage murder? Oh dear. But essentially the book is focused on 4 missing scientists who were on the hunt to prove what the hand really is in said expedition above. I think they were also looking for more giant bones hey, can't give anything away, eh? before they actually vanished into nowhere.
The notes at the end were really helpful. I was planning on doing some of my own research when I had the time, whether at school or at the library, but then I finished reading Boneseeker and saw "AUTHOR'S NOTES." Thus resulting in me going "Fantastic! Less research and Bing crap for me!" Search engines usually just give a) a bunch of crap, b) something entirely different from what you're searching for, or c) "I'm sorry, but that search term doesn't exist. Try again." That's like "Oh, GAME OVER." *plays funky music* I think my mom once said Google told her "Hahaha, you're so funny. What kind of search term is that?" Seems legit mom. I think that's just Option A or B for you.
<img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MPfbXCfaO6U/U2VIn0kF3WI/AAAAAAAADK4/nihGmv8QglM/s1600/seemslegit.gif"; height="180" width="320">
What's disappointing? Sherlock doesn't make much an appearance, to the dismay of Sherlock fans, unless you're just a fan of John Watson. He makes quite the appearance for the majority of the book. Oh, and it's a stand alone. *sigh* I was so hoping for a sequel. On the bright side, no waiting! Isn't that great, with so many series of books popping up by the day?
<img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_4sSv6F_1eg/U2VJFOLi7qI/AAAAAAAADLE/I9G2jTU62xc/s1600/too-many-people.gif"; height="156" width="320">
Despite the fact Sherlock doesn't make a huge appearance, mystery fans will find this an enjoyable reads. Oh, and maybe for those who enjoy reading about blood and gore...
EDIT: I stand corrected. This is NOT a stand alone (according to author)
------------------
Advance review copy provided by publisher
Original Rating: 4.5
Original Review posted on <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/06/arc-review-boneseeker-by-brynn-chapman.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>
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)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Body Snatcher (1945) in Movies
Oct 17, 2020
Boris Karloff (1 more)
Bela Lugosi
Invasion
The Body Snatcher- is not related to "The Body Snatchers". Yes it is confused. Cause i thought this was the oringal version of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", just called "The Body Snatcher". Nope it turns out its two different things. Both based off of books. This film is based off of "The Body Snatcher" by Robert Louis Stevenson. While "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" is based off of Jack Finney's 1954 science fiction novel "The Body Snatchers". So yea not confusing at all.
The plot: Dr. Toddy MacFarlane (Henry Daniell) needs cadavers for his medical experiments, ultimately intended to treat a young disabled girl. However, they are not easy to come by, so he enlists the help of taxi driver John Gray (Boris Karloff) and his assistant, Joseph (Bela Lugosi), to unearth bodies from the cemetery. When Donald (Russell Wade), Dr. MacFarlane's assistant, recognizes one of the corpses Gray delivers, the true source of the bodies is called into question.
It is based on the short story "The Body Snatcher" by Robert Louis Stevenson. The film's producer Val Lewton helped adapt the story for the screen, writing under the pen name of "Carlos Keith". The film was marketed with the tagline "The screen's last word in shock sensation!" The frequent mentions of Burke, Hare, and Dr. Knox, all refer to the West Port murders in 1828.
The Body Snatcher was one of three films that Boris Karloff did with RKO Radio Pictures from 1945 to 1946, which were produced by Val Lewton. The other two films were Isle of the Dead (1945) and Bedlam (1946).
Bela Lugosi, who became famous with another Universal classic, Dracula (1931), also signed a deal with RKO. Lewton and MacDonald eventually wrote a small role for him; it became the last film Lugosi and Karloff made together.
Robert Wise – later best-known for his work in The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951), West Side Story (1961), The Sound of Music (1965), and The Sand Pebbles (1966) – was assigned to direct the film. Longtime film editor at RKO, he had replaced the original director on The Curse of the Cat People (1944) when it fell behind schedule and Lewton, who produced it, decided to promote him to his superiors.
Its a excellent film.
The plot: Dr. Toddy MacFarlane (Henry Daniell) needs cadavers for his medical experiments, ultimately intended to treat a young disabled girl. However, they are not easy to come by, so he enlists the help of taxi driver John Gray (Boris Karloff) and his assistant, Joseph (Bela Lugosi), to unearth bodies from the cemetery. When Donald (Russell Wade), Dr. MacFarlane's assistant, recognizes one of the corpses Gray delivers, the true source of the bodies is called into question.
It is based on the short story "The Body Snatcher" by Robert Louis Stevenson. The film's producer Val Lewton helped adapt the story for the screen, writing under the pen name of "Carlos Keith". The film was marketed with the tagline "The screen's last word in shock sensation!" The frequent mentions of Burke, Hare, and Dr. Knox, all refer to the West Port murders in 1828.
The Body Snatcher was one of three films that Boris Karloff did with RKO Radio Pictures from 1945 to 1946, which were produced by Val Lewton. The other two films were Isle of the Dead (1945) and Bedlam (1946).
Bela Lugosi, who became famous with another Universal classic, Dracula (1931), also signed a deal with RKO. Lewton and MacDonald eventually wrote a small role for him; it became the last film Lugosi and Karloff made together.
Robert Wise – later best-known for his work in The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951), West Side Story (1961), The Sound of Music (1965), and The Sand Pebbles (1966) – was assigned to direct the film. Longtime film editor at RKO, he had replaced the original director on The Curse of the Cat People (1944) when it fell behind schedule and Lewton, who produced it, decided to promote him to his superiors.
Its a excellent film.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Forsaken (2016) in Movies
Sep 16, 2019
Characters – John Henry Clayton left his town for war, he never returned until his mother died, he has become distant from his father not believing in God, the town does fear his actions in the past, which has made him the threat to the gang controlling the town and when things become personal, he becomes the man people need to fear. Reverend Samuel Clayton is respected in the town which he has made a place believing in God, he doesn’t like his son returning, but learns that he hasn’t for a good reason. James McCurdy is the man running the town, he lets his men kill to get the property he wants. Dave Turner is one of the men that works for James, one that does play by honour over many of the shot first men in the gang.
Performances – Kiefer Sutherland in the leading role is fine, though his mumbling doesn’t help us care enough his character, opposite his father Donald who isn’t the most entertaining either. Michael Wincott was the most interesting character because he seems to get some development and want to see more from him. Brian Cox feels completely wasted in his role that gives him nothing.
Story – The story follows a man returning home with a reputation while he needs to learn how to make a stand to protect his town which has become a problem overrun by a gang of outlaws. This does follow the generic idea of a returning man helping clean up his town without offer anything new, it keeps us seeing how the action are building up to the problems that will be facing before the final showdown. The pacing does become slow which does make things unfold at a snail’s pace which just doesn’t keep our attention for long enough.
Action/Western – The action does feel flat, we just don’t get enough of it to make us believe it is action heavy movie, though the mood makes us feel like the western we are entering.
Settings – The film does make us feel like we are the small town which has a community feeling about it.
Scene of the Movie – Dave doesn’t like his men not following orders.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The mumbling from Kiefer.
Final Thoughts – This is a slow paced action western movie that just never gets going and ends up feeling the pace taking age to get through.
Overall: Slow and bland.
Performances – Kiefer Sutherland in the leading role is fine, though his mumbling doesn’t help us care enough his character, opposite his father Donald who isn’t the most entertaining either. Michael Wincott was the most interesting character because he seems to get some development and want to see more from him. Brian Cox feels completely wasted in his role that gives him nothing.
Story – The story follows a man returning home with a reputation while he needs to learn how to make a stand to protect his town which has become a problem overrun by a gang of outlaws. This does follow the generic idea of a returning man helping clean up his town without offer anything new, it keeps us seeing how the action are building up to the problems that will be facing before the final showdown. The pacing does become slow which does make things unfold at a snail’s pace which just doesn’t keep our attention for long enough.
Action/Western – The action does feel flat, we just don’t get enough of it to make us believe it is action heavy movie, though the mood makes us feel like the western we are entering.
Settings – The film does make us feel like we are the small town which has a community feeling about it.
Scene of the Movie – Dave doesn’t like his men not following orders.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The mumbling from Kiefer.
Final Thoughts – This is a slow paced action western movie that just never gets going and ends up feeling the pace taking age to get through.
Overall: Slow and bland.