Search
Search results
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Uncle Buck (1989) in Movies
Mar 18, 2018
Hilarious
My Movies 365 journey has taken me deep into 80's territory, with Uncle Buck being my next up to review. Released in 1989, it just squeezes into the decade but is perfect for it. The 80's trend is becoming clearer with every film I watch: It was all about having fun. No strong depth. No taking itself too seriously. If you were going to see a film in the 80's, you were there for the sole purpose of having a good time. Did I have a good time watching Uncle Buck? Absolutely!
The film is simple in its design, yet still manages to have a ton of classic scenes. How many takes do you think it took to film the memorable Q&A scene with John Candy and McCauley Caulkin? I crack up just thinking about it so I can only imagine how hard it was for them. And Uncle Buck's car? Oh my God, the car! Hooptiest of hoopties. I don't know what's funnier, hearing its shotgun exhaust for the first time or watching everyone scatter for their lives.
Uncle Buck is called in to help babysit after his brother and sister-in-law have to go out of town to deal with an emergency. Other than the fact that there's no real substance to the movie, I don't really have anything bad to say about it. John Candy is perfect in his role as Buck. He's lived a life full of mistakes, but he's a great guy at heart. How can you not love a guy that will make you table-sized pancakes and punch out a clown for your birthday? My Favorite Line: "Take this quarter, go downtown, and have a rat gnaw that thing off your face!"
Recommended by an Uncle Kory, I'm so glad Uncle Buck made it's way onto my movie list. I'm giving it an 85.
The film is simple in its design, yet still manages to have a ton of classic scenes. How many takes do you think it took to film the memorable Q&A scene with John Candy and McCauley Caulkin? I crack up just thinking about it so I can only imagine how hard it was for them. And Uncle Buck's car? Oh my God, the car! Hooptiest of hoopties. I don't know what's funnier, hearing its shotgun exhaust for the first time or watching everyone scatter for their lives.
Uncle Buck is called in to help babysit after his brother and sister-in-law have to go out of town to deal with an emergency. Other than the fact that there's no real substance to the movie, I don't really have anything bad to say about it. John Candy is perfect in his role as Buck. He's lived a life full of mistakes, but he's a great guy at heart. How can you not love a guy that will make you table-sized pancakes and punch out a clown for your birthday? My Favorite Line: "Take this quarter, go downtown, and have a rat gnaw that thing off your face!"
Recommended by an Uncle Kory, I'm so glad Uncle Buck made it's way onto my movie list. I'm giving it an 85.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Lone Ranger (2013) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
With much of the pre-release coverage of the film centered on the reportedly $250 million plus shooting budget, audiences can finally see the fruits of this labor as Disney brings “The Lone Ranger” to the big screen. The movie stars Johnny Depp as Tonto and tells a slightly updated tale of the masked ranger, yet stays refreshingly grounded in the traditions and history of the source material.
Armie Hammer stars as John Reid, a district attorney who returns to Texas to provide justice to a lawless land that is in the process of great expansion thanks to the pending completion of the Transcontinental Railroad. In the 1860s, the country is in a great state of change as the completion of the railroad will allow people to travel coast-to-coast across, something that was once an extremely long and dangerous journey to undertake.
The local railroad administrator plans to do a public hanging of notorious outlaw murder Butch Cavendish (William Fichtner), as an example of how law and order has come to the wild frontier, a show to encourage Western expansion and install a sense of security in the local populace. The local Comanche tribes are told that as long as they continue to honor the established treaties they will be able to coexist in peace with the Western settlers.
Following a daring escape from the train that is carrying him to justice, Cavendish departs into the desert with his gang of outlaws. Not willing to let him escape justice once again, Reid’s brother Dan deputizes John, and leads the posse to bring Cavendish to justice. Now as anybody who’s followed any of the previous incarnations of the story knows, the posse is ambushed and all the Rangers are brutally murdered by Cavendish and is outlaws. Enter Tonto, who discovers John barely alive, and overseas his restoration to health. It is Tonto who convinces Reid to wear a mask as he is convinced that Cavendish had help and that it would be best for John and his brother’s family if the world believed John died with the other rangers to save them from any possible retribution
In a refreshing change of pace, Reid is not a swaggering fountain of machismo. He is a man who puts his faith in the law rather than in a six shooter and is actually hesitant to fire a weapon and use lethal forms of violence to dispense justice. This brings him at odds from time to time with Tonto who tries to walk the thin line between his people and his beliefs and the ever-changing modern world around him.
When the military began systematically retaliating against Tonto’s people for perceived raids against the townspeople, Reid and Tonto not only must deal with Cavendish and his gang of outlaws but must get to the bottom of a larger mystery that threatens to not only eradicate the Comanche people but to threaten the good citizens of the area. With his trusty and at times comical white horse, Silver, Reid and Tonto must learn to coexist with each other in a desperate race against time.
The film was an extremely enjoyable and fresh take on the characters that I really enjoyed. By giving the characters slightly more updated and relatable personas and traits yet retaining their core identities in history, Depp and Hammer made this a Western that was fun and cool and yet stayed true to the origins of the characters while making them more appealing to a modern audience. What really impressed me was Depp how he took what is often jokingly seen as a stereo typical Western sidekick and made him a very compelling yet diverse character. Yes, there is a lot of humor in the film but it is entertainingly at the expense of Reid, most often with Tonto getting some of the best lines in the film. I really appreciated the fact how it told a story without being overly politically correct or preaching, letting the characters and the action convey the message.
The action in the film is solid and the harrowing finale had people in the test screening cheering the action. Producer Jerry Bruckheimer and Director Gore Verbinski are to be commended for bringing a lively story that introduces the iconic characters to a new generation of fans. I hope that the film is able to draw fans and gives Disney’s a good return on its large investment as I would love to see Depp and Hammer back for future adventures. “The Lone Ranger” was the most pleasant surprise of the summer to date and the only summer film so far that I would pay to see again.
http://sknr.net/2013/07/03/the-lone-ranger/
Armie Hammer stars as John Reid, a district attorney who returns to Texas to provide justice to a lawless land that is in the process of great expansion thanks to the pending completion of the Transcontinental Railroad. In the 1860s, the country is in a great state of change as the completion of the railroad will allow people to travel coast-to-coast across, something that was once an extremely long and dangerous journey to undertake.
The local railroad administrator plans to do a public hanging of notorious outlaw murder Butch Cavendish (William Fichtner), as an example of how law and order has come to the wild frontier, a show to encourage Western expansion and install a sense of security in the local populace. The local Comanche tribes are told that as long as they continue to honor the established treaties they will be able to coexist in peace with the Western settlers.
Following a daring escape from the train that is carrying him to justice, Cavendish departs into the desert with his gang of outlaws. Not willing to let him escape justice once again, Reid’s brother Dan deputizes John, and leads the posse to bring Cavendish to justice. Now as anybody who’s followed any of the previous incarnations of the story knows, the posse is ambushed and all the Rangers are brutally murdered by Cavendish and is outlaws. Enter Tonto, who discovers John barely alive, and overseas his restoration to health. It is Tonto who convinces Reid to wear a mask as he is convinced that Cavendish had help and that it would be best for John and his brother’s family if the world believed John died with the other rangers to save them from any possible retribution
In a refreshing change of pace, Reid is not a swaggering fountain of machismo. He is a man who puts his faith in the law rather than in a six shooter and is actually hesitant to fire a weapon and use lethal forms of violence to dispense justice. This brings him at odds from time to time with Tonto who tries to walk the thin line between his people and his beliefs and the ever-changing modern world around him.
When the military began systematically retaliating against Tonto’s people for perceived raids against the townspeople, Reid and Tonto not only must deal with Cavendish and his gang of outlaws but must get to the bottom of a larger mystery that threatens to not only eradicate the Comanche people but to threaten the good citizens of the area. With his trusty and at times comical white horse, Silver, Reid and Tonto must learn to coexist with each other in a desperate race against time.
The film was an extremely enjoyable and fresh take on the characters that I really enjoyed. By giving the characters slightly more updated and relatable personas and traits yet retaining their core identities in history, Depp and Hammer made this a Western that was fun and cool and yet stayed true to the origins of the characters while making them more appealing to a modern audience. What really impressed me was Depp how he took what is often jokingly seen as a stereo typical Western sidekick and made him a very compelling yet diverse character. Yes, there is a lot of humor in the film but it is entertainingly at the expense of Reid, most often with Tonto getting some of the best lines in the film. I really appreciated the fact how it told a story without being overly politically correct or preaching, letting the characters and the action convey the message.
The action in the film is solid and the harrowing finale had people in the test screening cheering the action. Producer Jerry Bruckheimer and Director Gore Verbinski are to be commended for bringing a lively story that introduces the iconic characters to a new generation of fans. I hope that the film is able to draw fans and gives Disney’s a good return on its large investment as I would love to see Depp and Hammer back for future adventures. “The Lone Ranger” was the most pleasant surprise of the summer to date and the only summer film so far that I would pay to see again.
http://sknr.net/2013/07/03/the-lone-ranger/
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated Gray Mountain in Books
May 10, 2018
Samantha Kofer is a real estate attorney working for a huge law firm in New York City. When all of the banks go belly up so does Samantha's job. She was given the option to being furloughed for one year and during that year, she is encouraged to volunteer during this year off at a non-profit that the firm has chosen.
Trying to find the right place to volunteer has been difficult since there are so many out of work lawyers who are all going through the same thing. She found "The Mountain Legal Aid Clinic[who]ran its low-budget operations from an abandoned hardware store on Main Street in Brady, Virginia, population twenty-two hundred and declining with each census Brady, was in southwest, Virginia, Appalachia, coal country."
In Brady, Samantha works with Mattie and Annette and meets many of their clients who are poor people in need of everything from simple divorces and wills to black lung disease claims Mattie's nephew, Donovan, is also in Brady and his firm fights coal companies tooth and nail for the people of coal country who have been destroyed by their illegal practices. There are a lot of things that happen that help to shape Samantha into a more respectable lawyer, but they don't come without great loss.
John Grisham likes to get the heart of the matter, he likes to grip at your heartstrings so that you can feel the characters that he is portraying. For a big New York City attorney, though, Samantha is not really a character I got to enjoy as much as I thought I would. She seemed a bit of a wimp in some instances. Whining about never setting foot in a courtroom or drafting a will. I wanted to jump in the book and smack her one good time. Whether or not you have done these things, you are a lawyer, and is this not in your job description? This is one of the worse John Grisham books I have read. It didn't have the same go getter attitude that the other books have.
Overall, the book kept me interested and wanting to know what was going to happen next. There were parts that had me on the edge of my seat. I'm wondering if there is going to be more from Samantha Kofer, because the story seemed unfinished.
First title in Take Control of Your TBR 2015!
Trying to find the right place to volunteer has been difficult since there are so many out of work lawyers who are all going through the same thing. She found "The Mountain Legal Aid Clinic[who]ran its low-budget operations from an abandoned hardware store on Main Street in Brady, Virginia, population twenty-two hundred and declining with each census Brady, was in southwest, Virginia, Appalachia, coal country."
In Brady, Samantha works with Mattie and Annette and meets many of their clients who are poor people in need of everything from simple divorces and wills to black lung disease claims Mattie's nephew, Donovan, is also in Brady and his firm fights coal companies tooth and nail for the people of coal country who have been destroyed by their illegal practices. There are a lot of things that happen that help to shape Samantha into a more respectable lawyer, but they don't come without great loss.
John Grisham likes to get the heart of the matter, he likes to grip at your heartstrings so that you can feel the characters that he is portraying. For a big New York City attorney, though, Samantha is not really a character I got to enjoy as much as I thought I would. She seemed a bit of a wimp in some instances. Whining about never setting foot in a courtroom or drafting a will. I wanted to jump in the book and smack her one good time. Whether or not you have done these things, you are a lawyer, and is this not in your job description? This is one of the worse John Grisham books I have read. It didn't have the same go getter attitude that the other books have.
Overall, the book kept me interested and wanting to know what was going to happen next. There were parts that had me on the edge of my seat. I'm wondering if there is going to be more from Samantha Kofer, because the story seemed unfinished.
First title in Take Control of Your TBR 2015!
ClareR (5589 KP) rated A Thousand Moons in Books
Apr 10, 2020
A Thousand Moons is set after the American Civil War in 1870’s Tennessee. This book follows on from Days Without End, and whilst I haven’t read it (yet! It’s on my bookshelf!), it didn’t affect my enjoyment at all.
Winona is a Lakota orphan who has been adopted by former soldiers Thomas McNulty and John Cole. She lives on their farm with them and Lige Magan, and two ex-slaves, Rosalee and Tennyson. Racism is still rife: Native Americans are seen as little more than animals, and black people are still hanged in the streets without trial for minor infractions.
Despite this, Winona has an admirer who wants to marry her: a white man. He’s persistent, and she doesn’t seem sure as to whether she really wants to marry him. And then something terrible happens. Winona is brought home: she is battered, raped and she doesn’t remember what happened or who did it.
This is such an emotional book. Winona’s reaction after her attack, coupled with the fact that she will never have any protection under the law, is heartbreaking.
Things that happen to other characters just seems to show starkly the injustices in the USA at this time. But it is all told in the most beautiful way. The writing really is exquisite: the descriptions of Winona’s inner thoughts, the descriptions of the landscape, and the way that life is shown, all really drew me in to this story. I loved reading it every day on The Pigeonhole. I will certainly be getting the first book in this series down off the shelf to read.
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for serialising this book, and to Sebastian Barry for joining in.
Winona is a Lakota orphan who has been adopted by former soldiers Thomas McNulty and John Cole. She lives on their farm with them and Lige Magan, and two ex-slaves, Rosalee and Tennyson. Racism is still rife: Native Americans are seen as little more than animals, and black people are still hanged in the streets without trial for minor infractions.
Despite this, Winona has an admirer who wants to marry her: a white man. He’s persistent, and she doesn’t seem sure as to whether she really wants to marry him. And then something terrible happens. Winona is brought home: she is battered, raped and she doesn’t remember what happened or who did it.
This is such an emotional book. Winona’s reaction after her attack, coupled with the fact that she will never have any protection under the law, is heartbreaking.
Things that happen to other characters just seems to show starkly the injustices in the USA at this time. But it is all told in the most beautiful way. The writing really is exquisite: the descriptions of Winona’s inner thoughts, the descriptions of the landscape, and the way that life is shown, all really drew me in to this story. I loved reading it every day on The Pigeonhole. I will certainly be getting the first book in this series down off the shelf to read.
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for serialising this book, and to Sebastian Barry for joining in.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Saw V (2008) in Movies
Apr 20, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
Ok so another review for another Saw film (with 4 more to go), it would be easy to just write 'more of the same' but that's the good thing about the Saw movies, they give the viewers what they want, more games and more gore. but they also expand on the law and the characters.
The previous two films have focused on Amanda (The Pig) and an John (Jigsaw), Saw V concentrates on Mark Hoffman, the first copy cat killer and (I think) the first pig.
As with the previous few films, Saw V tells Marks tale in the present and via flashbacks and manages to weave Mark into the events we have seen in the other films. All the whilst we have another 'Game' being played out. However this time around the game is almost irrelevant where as the games in the other films normally end up being part of the ongoing story in Saw V it's just something else that is happening. The police don't even seem to know or find out about it being more interested in if there is a traitor and who it is.
Saw V does go back to it's roots whilst pushing the franchise forward, there are flashbacks to the previous films, showing how Mark was involved, all though they did seem to almost totally ignore Amanda. There is a small nod to the film 'Seven' which was an inspiration for the first film when Johns wife receives her inheritance.
The Biggest problem with Saw V is that the time line is getting too complicated to follow and seems to interfere with the events in Saw IV but that doesn't cause to many problems.
We never did get to find out what was in the box though, maybe in Saw VI.
The previous two films have focused on Amanda (The Pig) and an John (Jigsaw), Saw V concentrates on Mark Hoffman, the first copy cat killer and (I think) the first pig.
As with the previous few films, Saw V tells Marks tale in the present and via flashbacks and manages to weave Mark into the events we have seen in the other films. All the whilst we have another 'Game' being played out. However this time around the game is almost irrelevant where as the games in the other films normally end up being part of the ongoing story in Saw V it's just something else that is happening. The police don't even seem to know or find out about it being more interested in if there is a traitor and who it is.
Saw V does go back to it's roots whilst pushing the franchise forward, there are flashbacks to the previous films, showing how Mark was involved, all though they did seem to almost totally ignore Amanda. There is a small nod to the film 'Seven' which was an inspiration for the first film when Johns wife receives her inheritance.
The Biggest problem with Saw V is that the time line is getting too complicated to follow and seems to interfere with the events in Saw IV but that doesn't cause to many problems.
We never did get to find out what was in the box though, maybe in Saw VI.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Saints for All Occasions in Books
Mar 6, 2019
Beautiful story of parenthood, immigration, siblings, religion, and so much more
Nora and Theresa Flynn are only twenty-one and seventeen when they leave their native Ireland and immigrate to the U.S. For her entire life, Nora has been the quintessential older sister, raising Theresa and their younger brother after the death of their mother. Now she's headed to Boston to be married to their former Irish neighbor, Charlie, whom Nora doesn't really even love. Theresa, meanwhile, is outgoing, beautiful, and intelligent. She loves the dances and social atmosphere in Boston, but that all changes when she winds up pregnant. Both Nora and Theresa are forced to make some drastic life decisions that will affect them for the rest of their lives. Fifty years later, in 2009, Nora and Charlie have four children: John, Bridget, Brian, and Patrick. But Theresa and Nora are no longer speaking, and Theresa lives as a cloistered nun in an abbey in Vermont. What happened between the two sisters? And how will a sudden tragedy affect their current, separate lives?
This was an amazing book - just beautiful, heartbreaking, and lovely. Sullivan captured the essence of each of her characters so perfectly. I could picture every one, and each was so realistic, with their own background, mannerisms, and details.
The novel switches between the past, starting with Nora and Theresa's journey to Boston, and 2009, with a shocking event that rocks the entire family. We hear from each character--Nora, Theresa, John, Bridget, Brian, and Patrick. As I said, they are each an individual and embellished with Sullivan's wonderful writing and details. For instance, I loved the tidbit that Nora and her daughter-in-law communicated for years mainly through Nora's daughter's dog at family gatherings. It said so much with just one story. (And I've so been there.)
I became attached to each character in their own way thanks to the strong writing and characterization. I don't always enjoy books with shifts between time periods, but all flowed seamlessly here. There's an underlying thread that ties everything together, just adding to the brilliance of the novel. While it's really a story of a family, there's still a bit of suspense, as you try to fit some pieces together. Everything works so well.
Overall, I just loved this beautiful story of parenthood, immigration, siblings, religion, and so much more. It's achingly well-written, and while it ended just right, I was still sad to see the characters go. I'll certainly be recommending it to everyone I know
This was an amazing book - just beautiful, heartbreaking, and lovely. Sullivan captured the essence of each of her characters so perfectly. I could picture every one, and each was so realistic, with their own background, mannerisms, and details.
The novel switches between the past, starting with Nora and Theresa's journey to Boston, and 2009, with a shocking event that rocks the entire family. We hear from each character--Nora, Theresa, John, Bridget, Brian, and Patrick. As I said, they are each an individual and embellished with Sullivan's wonderful writing and details. For instance, I loved the tidbit that Nora and her daughter-in-law communicated for years mainly through Nora's daughter's dog at family gatherings. It said so much with just one story. (And I've so been there.)
I became attached to each character in their own way thanks to the strong writing and characterization. I don't always enjoy books with shifts between time periods, but all flowed seamlessly here. There's an underlying thread that ties everything together, just adding to the brilliance of the novel. While it's really a story of a family, there's still a bit of suspense, as you try to fit some pieces together. Everything works so well.
Overall, I just loved this beautiful story of parenthood, immigration, siblings, religion, and so much more. It's achingly well-written, and while it ended just right, I was still sad to see the characters go. I'll certainly be recommending it to everyone I know
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Saints for All Occasions in Books
Jan 30, 2018
Well-written (1 more)
Striking characters
Gorgeous family saga
Nora and Theresa Flynn are only twenty-one and seventeen when they leave their native Ireland and immigrate to the U.S. For her entire life, Nora has been the quintessential older sister, raising Theresa and their younger brother after the death of their mother. Now she's headed to Boston to be married to their former Irish neighbor, Charlie, whom Nora doesn't really even love. Theresa, meanwhile, is outgoing, beautiful, and intelligent. She loves the dances and social atmosphere in Boston, but that all changes when she winds up pregnant. Both Nora and Theresa are forced to make some drastic life decisions that will affect them for the rest of their lives. Fifty years later, in 2009, Nora and Charlie have four children: John, Bridget, Brian, and Patrick. But Theresa and Nora are no longer speaking, and Theresa lives as a cloistered nun in an abbey in Vermont. What happened between the two sisters? And how will a sudden tragedy affect their current, separate lives?
This was an amazing book - just beautiful, heartbreaking, and lovely. Sullivan captured the essence of each of her characters so perfectly. I could picture every one, and each was so realistic, with their own background, mannerisms, and details.
The novel switches between the past, starting with Nora and Theresa's journey to Boston, and 2009, with a shocking event that rocks the entire family. We hear from each character--Nora, Theresa, John, Bridget, Brian, and Patrick. As I said, they are each an individual and embellished with Sullivan's wonderful writing and details. For instance, I loved the tidbit that Nora and her daughter-in-law communicated for years mainly through Nora's daughter's dog at family gatherings. It said so much with just one story. (And I've so been there.)
I became attached to each character in their own way thanks to the strong writing and characterization. I don't always enjoy books with shifts between time periods, but all flowed seamlessly here. There's an underlying thread that ties everything together, just adding to the brilliance of the novel. While it's really a story of a family, there's still a bit of suspense, as you try to fit some pieces together. Everything works so well.
Overall, I just loved this beautiful story of parenthood, immigration, siblings, religion, and so much more. It's achingly well-written, and while it ended just right, I was still sad to see the characters go. I'll certainly be recommending it to everyone I know.
This was an amazing book - just beautiful, heartbreaking, and lovely. Sullivan captured the essence of each of her characters so perfectly. I could picture every one, and each was so realistic, with their own background, mannerisms, and details.
The novel switches between the past, starting with Nora and Theresa's journey to Boston, and 2009, with a shocking event that rocks the entire family. We hear from each character--Nora, Theresa, John, Bridget, Brian, and Patrick. As I said, they are each an individual and embellished with Sullivan's wonderful writing and details. For instance, I loved the tidbit that Nora and her daughter-in-law communicated for years mainly through Nora's daughter's dog at family gatherings. It said so much with just one story. (And I've so been there.)
I became attached to each character in their own way thanks to the strong writing and characterization. I don't always enjoy books with shifts between time periods, but all flowed seamlessly here. There's an underlying thread that ties everything together, just adding to the brilliance of the novel. While it's really a story of a family, there's still a bit of suspense, as you try to fit some pieces together. Everything works so well.
Overall, I just loved this beautiful story of parenthood, immigration, siblings, religion, and so much more. It's achingly well-written, and while it ended just right, I was still sad to see the characters go. I'll certainly be recommending it to everyone I know.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Blood Father (2016) in Movies
Sep 2, 2019
Story: Blood Father starts as John Link (Gibson) who has recovered from his own substance abuse problems to be a tattooist while being parole. He has been searching for his daughter for years but when Lydia (Moriarty) calls him in need of help he races to her aid.
Link finds out that Lydia is in over her head which leads him into going on the run breaking his parole to protect her and locate the people who are trying to kill his daughter, using old connections along the way.
Thoughts on Blood Father
Characters – John Link is a former alcoholic convict, he has cleaned himself up but when his daughter finds herself in trouble he must go back into the routes that left him in prison, he must go after the men trying to kill his daughter, while stopping himself going off the bandwagon. Lydia is the teenager daughter runaway, she finds herself in too deep with the drug cartels but now she needs to trust her father to keep her safe. Jonah is the boyfriend of Lydia that she believes she killed cause the effects of the film. Preacher is one of the people Link turns to for help while Kirby is his support while trying to stay off the drinks.
Performances – Mel Gibson might have had troubled times recently but he shows us here the talent he holds to lead a movie in the action genre. Erin Moriarty is good in this film too because she shows us a street wise character beyond her years. Diego Luna is solid as the villain but we just don’t get enough from his character. This is a problem through the film, we don’t give the support characters enough time.
Story – The story is good, as it follows a distant father daughter relationship needing to rebuild after she finds herself in trouble with the law. This works for the story because we know how the aging hero is the new thing now, as an actor that can easily be the new one that saves his child and this gives us everything we want, we have moments of comedy as the two come from difference backgrounds but overall this is everything you would expect it to be
Action/Crime – The action is fire fights between Link and anyone that gets in his way, this does work well as the crime side of the story takes us into.
Settings – The settings show us the underworld that works for the hiding from potential trouble using no iconic landmarks which makes this fully believable.
Scene of the Movie – Showdown
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t learn enough about the villains.
Final Thoughts – This is a good action film that is enjoyable, short sweet and gives you everything you want.
Overall: Action film 101.
Link finds out that Lydia is in over her head which leads him into going on the run breaking his parole to protect her and locate the people who are trying to kill his daughter, using old connections along the way.
Thoughts on Blood Father
Characters – John Link is a former alcoholic convict, he has cleaned himself up but when his daughter finds herself in trouble he must go back into the routes that left him in prison, he must go after the men trying to kill his daughter, while stopping himself going off the bandwagon. Lydia is the teenager daughter runaway, she finds herself in too deep with the drug cartels but now she needs to trust her father to keep her safe. Jonah is the boyfriend of Lydia that she believes she killed cause the effects of the film. Preacher is one of the people Link turns to for help while Kirby is his support while trying to stay off the drinks.
Performances – Mel Gibson might have had troubled times recently but he shows us here the talent he holds to lead a movie in the action genre. Erin Moriarty is good in this film too because she shows us a street wise character beyond her years. Diego Luna is solid as the villain but we just don’t get enough from his character. This is a problem through the film, we don’t give the support characters enough time.
Story – The story is good, as it follows a distant father daughter relationship needing to rebuild after she finds herself in trouble with the law. This works for the story because we know how the aging hero is the new thing now, as an actor that can easily be the new one that saves his child and this gives us everything we want, we have moments of comedy as the two come from difference backgrounds but overall this is everything you would expect it to be
Action/Crime – The action is fire fights between Link and anyone that gets in his way, this does work well as the crime side of the story takes us into.
Settings – The settings show us the underworld that works for the hiding from potential trouble using no iconic landmarks which makes this fully believable.
Scene of the Movie – Showdown
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t learn enough about the villains.
Final Thoughts – This is a good action film that is enjoyable, short sweet and gives you everything you want.
Overall: Action film 101.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
The Arthurian legend: but with Cockneys.
So, bit difficult to describe this one… so I asked my bloke Alfie from Londinium to explain what’s it all about…
“‘Ere, OK bruv. So this is dun by that geezer Guy Ritchie – yer know, the one that dun that Sherlock Holmes with the Iron Man geezer Robert Junior Downey, that one. His new film is a rip-roarin’ acshun movie what retells da Arfurian legend in a novel new way.
That Hulk bloke Eric Bana is Arfur’s farfer an’ ‘e’s ‘avin’ a few problems wiv ‘is bruvver Vortigern (Jude Law, who’s a bi’ ov a cockney ‘imself, but ‘ere speaks like a posh bloke. Know what I mean?) So ‘e (Vortigern dat is) gets some magical ‘elp from some slippery watery bints in a puddle and so ‘is dad puts ‘is God Forbid in a boat an’ sends ‘im down da river ter The Smoke ter live wiv some prozzies.
But ‘e grows up big an’ strong an’ ‘andy wiv a sword. His friends tell ‘im ter get aaaht ov town as da King’s blokes are lookin’ fer da young geezer who would be king. An’ e says like “Scapa Flow sowf ov da river at dis time ov night. Are yew mad?”. So e gets caught like an’ gets tested by some famous football bloke ter pull a big sword aaaht ov just a random bi’ ov stone (nod, nod, wink wink, nice twist – ssshhh!).
The Vortigern bloke is very cross an’ tries to kill ‘im but ‘e gets rescued by some bird who can make birds, lol, an’ other fings do what she wants. So can Arfur beat ‘is uncle? Gawdon Bennet, I’m not gon’a tell yew da whole darn fing! Yer’ll ‘ave ter go an’ watch i’ ter find out.”
Thanks Alfie. Couldn’t have said it better myself!
The quirky style of Guy Ritchie isn’t one that you would think would translate well to the Arthurian setting, and as the film starts you tend to think you were right! But if you give it a chance it wears you down into acceptance and then – ultimately – a lot of enjoyment.
Jude Law is deliciously evil mixed with a heavy dose of mad, and delivers the goods.
Charlie Hunnam who plays Arthur (no, I hadn’t heard of him either but he was in the “Lost City of Z”) does a decent job as the medieval hunk, although he seems at time to have taken voice coaching in ‘Olde-English’ from Russell Crowe, since the lad’s Geordie accent seems to wander from Cockney through central southern England to Liverpudlian at one point (definitely channelling a young John Lennon)! Relative newcomer, the Spanish actress Astrid Bergès-Frisbey is effectively weird as the mage.
Particularly noteworthy (no pun intended) is the superb action soundtrack by Daniel Pemberton (“Steve Jobs“, “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.“) which propels the action really well and contains some standout moments.
Also a standout in the technical categories is the editing by James Herbert, who did both of Downey Junior’s “Sherlock Holmes” films (in a similar style) and also “Edge of Tomorrow“. The style is typified with Arthur’s growth to manhood in the streets of London which is stylishly done.
I saw the film in 3D – not a particularly favourite format – but quite well done, although falls into the “trying too hard” category at times with lots of drifting embers… you know the sort.
It’s not bloody Shakespeare. It’s not even the bloody Arthurian legend as you know it. But it is bloody good fun if you let it in.
“‘Ere, OK bruv. So this is dun by that geezer Guy Ritchie – yer know, the one that dun that Sherlock Holmes with the Iron Man geezer Robert Junior Downey, that one. His new film is a rip-roarin’ acshun movie what retells da Arfurian legend in a novel new way.
That Hulk bloke Eric Bana is Arfur’s farfer an’ ‘e’s ‘avin’ a few problems wiv ‘is bruvver Vortigern (Jude Law, who’s a bi’ ov a cockney ‘imself, but ‘ere speaks like a posh bloke. Know what I mean?) So ‘e (Vortigern dat is) gets some magical ‘elp from some slippery watery bints in a puddle and so ‘is dad puts ‘is God Forbid in a boat an’ sends ‘im down da river ter The Smoke ter live wiv some prozzies.
But ‘e grows up big an’ strong an’ ‘andy wiv a sword. His friends tell ‘im ter get aaaht ov town as da King’s blokes are lookin’ fer da young geezer who would be king. An’ e says like “Scapa Flow sowf ov da river at dis time ov night. Are yew mad?”. So e gets caught like an’ gets tested by some famous football bloke ter pull a big sword aaaht ov just a random bi’ ov stone (nod, nod, wink wink, nice twist – ssshhh!).
The Vortigern bloke is very cross an’ tries to kill ‘im but ‘e gets rescued by some bird who can make birds, lol, an’ other fings do what she wants. So can Arfur beat ‘is uncle? Gawdon Bennet, I’m not gon’a tell yew da whole darn fing! Yer’ll ‘ave ter go an’ watch i’ ter find out.”
Thanks Alfie. Couldn’t have said it better myself!
The quirky style of Guy Ritchie isn’t one that you would think would translate well to the Arthurian setting, and as the film starts you tend to think you were right! But if you give it a chance it wears you down into acceptance and then – ultimately – a lot of enjoyment.
Jude Law is deliciously evil mixed with a heavy dose of mad, and delivers the goods.
Charlie Hunnam who plays Arthur (no, I hadn’t heard of him either but he was in the “Lost City of Z”) does a decent job as the medieval hunk, although he seems at time to have taken voice coaching in ‘Olde-English’ from Russell Crowe, since the lad’s Geordie accent seems to wander from Cockney through central southern England to Liverpudlian at one point (definitely channelling a young John Lennon)! Relative newcomer, the Spanish actress Astrid Bergès-Frisbey is effectively weird as the mage.
Particularly noteworthy (no pun intended) is the superb action soundtrack by Daniel Pemberton (“Steve Jobs“, “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.“) which propels the action really well and contains some standout moments.
Also a standout in the technical categories is the editing by James Herbert, who did both of Downey Junior’s “Sherlock Holmes” films (in a similar style) and also “Edge of Tomorrow“. The style is typified with Arthur’s growth to manhood in the streets of London which is stylishly done.
I saw the film in 3D – not a particularly favourite format – but quite well done, although falls into the “trying too hard” category at times with lots of drifting embers… you know the sort.
It’s not bloody Shakespeare. It’s not even the bloody Arthurian legend as you know it. But it is bloody good fun if you let it in.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated All the Money in the World (2017) in Movies
Feb 14, 2018
Bland with the exception of Christopher Plummer
By now, almost everyone knows about the last minute switch of Christopher Plummer in place of current-pariah Kevin Spacey as pivotal Billionaire J. Paul Getty in Ridley Scott's ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD, so when I checked out Plummer's Oscar nominated turn, I couldn't but help see if I could tell when Scott put in a new scene and where he just "augmented" his scenes with Plummer. And then, a funny thing happened...
I stopped looking at this for I was captivated by Plummer's performance.
A 3 time Oscar nominee (he is the oldest person to win an Academy Award - at the age of 82 - for his Supporting Role in BEGINNERS in 2010), the 88 year old Plummer shows that he can still command a movie for anytime he is on screen this film crackles and becomes interesting.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the rest of the film.
Telling the story of the kidnapping of Getty's grandson, and the "richest man in the world's" refusal to pay the ransom, ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD stars Charlie Plummer (no relation) as John Paul Getty III (the kidnapped grandson), Mark Wahlberg as "fixer" Fletcher Chase, who was told by Getty to get his grandson back for "the lowest possible cost", Romain Duris as one of the kidnappers and the great Michelle Williams as the mother of the kidnapped boy - and the daughter-in-law of Getty, Gail Harris. Each one of these performances are good, but not great. Doing what needs to be done in what they are given to do but nothing more.
I think the problem with this film is one of focus. It spends about 50% of the time with William's character - and this is fine, but then it jumps to the kidnapped son, to "the fixer", to "the kidnapper", to the grandson and back to the mother, so no real through-line, continuity or strong character development can occur, with the exception of Christopher Plummer's J. Paul Getty. To be fair to Williams, C. Plummer has the showier role and she is just asked to be the center of this tale, the world in which all else revolves and that, ultimately, makes her character somewhat bland.
I place the blame for this on Screenwriter David Scarpa (based on the book by John Pearson) and Director Scott. I think their reach exceeded their grasp on this one. If they could have focused more on one of the characters - instead of spreading things out - perhaps this film would have become more interesting and less bland. It stays on one note - despite jumping to different people in vastly different situations - throughout it's 2 hour and 15 minute time frame.
All in all, a missed opportunity. It is a decent film that had the potential to be VERY good. The only one who was VERY good was Christopher Plummer - and certainly his performance is worth the price of admission.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
I stopped looking at this for I was captivated by Plummer's performance.
A 3 time Oscar nominee (he is the oldest person to win an Academy Award - at the age of 82 - for his Supporting Role in BEGINNERS in 2010), the 88 year old Plummer shows that he can still command a movie for anytime he is on screen this film crackles and becomes interesting.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the rest of the film.
Telling the story of the kidnapping of Getty's grandson, and the "richest man in the world's" refusal to pay the ransom, ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD stars Charlie Plummer (no relation) as John Paul Getty III (the kidnapped grandson), Mark Wahlberg as "fixer" Fletcher Chase, who was told by Getty to get his grandson back for "the lowest possible cost", Romain Duris as one of the kidnappers and the great Michelle Williams as the mother of the kidnapped boy - and the daughter-in-law of Getty, Gail Harris. Each one of these performances are good, but not great. Doing what needs to be done in what they are given to do but nothing more.
I think the problem with this film is one of focus. It spends about 50% of the time with William's character - and this is fine, but then it jumps to the kidnapped son, to "the fixer", to "the kidnapper", to the grandson and back to the mother, so no real through-line, continuity or strong character development can occur, with the exception of Christopher Plummer's J. Paul Getty. To be fair to Williams, C. Plummer has the showier role and she is just asked to be the center of this tale, the world in which all else revolves and that, ultimately, makes her character somewhat bland.
I place the blame for this on Screenwriter David Scarpa (based on the book by John Pearson) and Director Scott. I think their reach exceeded their grasp on this one. If they could have focused more on one of the characters - instead of spreading things out - perhaps this film would have become more interesting and less bland. It stays on one note - despite jumping to different people in vastly different situations - throughout it's 2 hour and 15 minute time frame.
All in all, a missed opportunity. It is a decent film that had the potential to be VERY good. The only one who was VERY good was Christopher Plummer - and certainly his performance is worth the price of admission.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)