Search
Search results
The Notorious Mrs. Clem: Murder and Money in the Gilded Age
Book
In September 1868, the remains of Jacob and Nancy Jane Young were found lying near the banks of...
Darren (1599 KP) rated 40 Days and 40 Nights (2002) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 40 Days and 40 Nights starts as we meet Matt (Hartnett) who has been struggling with his break up from Nicole (Shaw), this has led Matt to a string of one night stands that lead to him having visions of a black hole. Matt’s brother John (Tree) is in training to become a priest where Matt learns about lent and vows to give up all sexual activity for 40 days and 40 nights.
When his roommate Ryan (Costanzo) decides to spread the news about the vow a betting pool opens up and to make Matt’s life more difficult when he finally meets the perfect woman Erica (Sossamon). Matt has to learn to balance his vow while starting a new relationship where sex is out of the question.
40 Days and 40 Nights is a film I did enjoy watching even if I can see big flaws in the story, this mostly comes from the idea that it is written that every guy is obsessed with sex and couldn’t possible go 40 days without having it. The problems comes where everyone is against Matt rather than having even just one person supporting him through his self-improvement idea. I do however feel the story works for what it is trying to be even if it comes off unbelievable throughout.
Actor Review
Josh Hartnett: Matt Sullivan is a struggling man who can’t get over his ex-girlfriend Nicole. Running through a string of one night stands he wakes from these with a vision of the world coming to an end. Coming up with the idea to give up sexual activity for lent his life becomes a game for people around the world who has bet on when it will end and the perfect woman come into his life his whole life becomes difficult. Josh shows with this performance he can handle comedy.
Shannyn Sossamon: Erica has been struggling to find the right guy and her job doesn’t help. She meets Matt and see him as a different guy to the normal ones she meets but doesn’t fully understand the vow. Shannyn is good in this role being a strong leading lady.
Paulo Costanzo: Ryan is Matt’s roommate who is always looking to go out and meet girls for sex. He keeps watch over Matt after telling everyone about the vow. Paulo is solid as this supporting friend even if this generic.
Adam Tree: John Sullivan is the priest in training brother of Matt’s who doesn’t believe he can achieve his vow because he knows how difficult it is to go through. Adam is solid but in the end is just another supporting character.
Support Cast: 40 Days and 40 Nights has a supporting cast which includes plenty of different characters that are trying to make Matt break his vow with not a single person actually supporting him.
Director Review: Michael Lehmann – Michael gives us a fun comedy even if it is very one sided with the reactions and mind set people are meant to be in.
Comedy: 40 Days and 40 Nights has moments of comedy which mostly surround people trying to make Matt break the vow.
Romance: 40 Days and 40 Nights does try to tackle relationships by trying to make it more about how sex isn’t the most important part of the relationship.
Settings: 40 Days and 40 Nights keeps the settings around San Francisco which is always a great visual location for a film.
Suggestion: 40 Days and 40 Nights is one to try it does have good moments of good comedy but it also has a story which seems to be very much sex is all people think about. (Try It)
Best Part: Hartnett works for comedy.
Worst Part: Not everyone is sex obsessed.
Romantic Moment: No contact date.
Believability: The way things go I would say no.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $17 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 36 Minutes
Tagline: It’s Easy to Say But Harder To Do!
Overall: Simple comedy that does work well for what it is trying to achieve.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/07/25/40-days-and-40-nights-2002/
When his roommate Ryan (Costanzo) decides to spread the news about the vow a betting pool opens up and to make Matt’s life more difficult when he finally meets the perfect woman Erica (Sossamon). Matt has to learn to balance his vow while starting a new relationship where sex is out of the question.
40 Days and 40 Nights is a film I did enjoy watching even if I can see big flaws in the story, this mostly comes from the idea that it is written that every guy is obsessed with sex and couldn’t possible go 40 days without having it. The problems comes where everyone is against Matt rather than having even just one person supporting him through his self-improvement idea. I do however feel the story works for what it is trying to be even if it comes off unbelievable throughout.
Actor Review
Josh Hartnett: Matt Sullivan is a struggling man who can’t get over his ex-girlfriend Nicole. Running through a string of one night stands he wakes from these with a vision of the world coming to an end. Coming up with the idea to give up sexual activity for lent his life becomes a game for people around the world who has bet on when it will end and the perfect woman come into his life his whole life becomes difficult. Josh shows with this performance he can handle comedy.
Shannyn Sossamon: Erica has been struggling to find the right guy and her job doesn’t help. She meets Matt and see him as a different guy to the normal ones she meets but doesn’t fully understand the vow. Shannyn is good in this role being a strong leading lady.
Paulo Costanzo: Ryan is Matt’s roommate who is always looking to go out and meet girls for sex. He keeps watch over Matt after telling everyone about the vow. Paulo is solid as this supporting friend even if this generic.
Adam Tree: John Sullivan is the priest in training brother of Matt’s who doesn’t believe he can achieve his vow because he knows how difficult it is to go through. Adam is solid but in the end is just another supporting character.
Support Cast: 40 Days and 40 Nights has a supporting cast which includes plenty of different characters that are trying to make Matt break his vow with not a single person actually supporting him.
Director Review: Michael Lehmann – Michael gives us a fun comedy even if it is very one sided with the reactions and mind set people are meant to be in.
Comedy: 40 Days and 40 Nights has moments of comedy which mostly surround people trying to make Matt break the vow.
Romance: 40 Days and 40 Nights does try to tackle relationships by trying to make it more about how sex isn’t the most important part of the relationship.
Settings: 40 Days and 40 Nights keeps the settings around San Francisco which is always a great visual location for a film.
Suggestion: 40 Days and 40 Nights is one to try it does have good moments of good comedy but it also has a story which seems to be very much sex is all people think about. (Try It)
Best Part: Hartnett works for comedy.
Worst Part: Not everyone is sex obsessed.
Romantic Moment: No contact date.
Believability: The way things go I would say no.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $17 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 36 Minutes
Tagline: It’s Easy to Say But Harder To Do!
Overall: Simple comedy that does work well for what it is trying to achieve.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/07/25/40-days-and-40-nights-2002/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated 2012 (2009) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Roland Emmerich does big budget disaster flicks as well as Dairylea does cheese. However, some of his most recent attempts to dominate the box office have been panned by viewers and critics alike, who say that he has become too reliant on special effects.
Unfortunately, those critics better look away now, as his new film is the biggest yet.
2012 takes place, well, in 2012 for the most part and features an array of big Hollywood names attracted none the less by the huge box office forecasts for the film. The premise is simple; here comes the end of the world and god should we run!
With a reported budget of over $200m which is more than Michael Bay spent on his worldwide smash Transformers: Revenge of the fallen, Emmerich was certainly able to splash out on some eye popping CGI.
2012 reads like The Day After Tomorrow on a steroid, which is no bad thing, but that film had some hideously underdeveloped characters and lacked the depth needed to allow viewers to share compassion for the people who had been affected by the global crisis.
Thankfully it seems that Emmerich has learnt his lesson here and has provided us with a back-story and it comes in many different forms. Thandie Newton and Danny Glover play president’s daughter and president respectively, a great deal of emotion has gone into writing these two characters and their on-screen scenes together, albeit a small amount, are wonderful.
John Cusack and Amanda Peet play divorced parents Jackson and Kate, only united by the love they share for their two young children and predictably later on in the film, a few deeper emotions. Unfortunately these two share no chemistry together and their on-screen scenes are flawed as a result.
2012 doesn’t have a huge deal of character development but it does improve on what was seen in The Day After Tomorrow and more recently, 10,000BC, with a deeper understanding of the characters. It ultimately succeeds in making the viewers share compassion for even the heartless characters in the film.
Moving on to the saving grace of all disaster films; the special effects, fans of major cities being destroyed are going to be pleased here with some eye-watering action pieces really showing why perhaps Emmerich overshadows even Michael Bay and has become the king of destroying anything that can be destroyed. There are a few questionable scenes, which look rather less than realistic, but this is a small point that doesn’t need to be taken into account.
Whilst all this may seem excellent, it all feels familiar, it’s all been seen and done before, so in reality 2012 adds nothing new to the genre which is unfortunate because it really is an excellent film.
Overall, 2012 is a mouth-watering treat in cinema engineering, apart from some lapses in scientific accuracy and some shaky special effects; it surpasses The Day After Tomorrow and similar disaster films by sheer depth. On the downside it adds nothing new to the formula, but if you want sheer popcorn fodder then please, look no further.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/18/2012-2009/
Unfortunately, those critics better look away now, as his new film is the biggest yet.
2012 takes place, well, in 2012 for the most part and features an array of big Hollywood names attracted none the less by the huge box office forecasts for the film. The premise is simple; here comes the end of the world and god should we run!
With a reported budget of over $200m which is more than Michael Bay spent on his worldwide smash Transformers: Revenge of the fallen, Emmerich was certainly able to splash out on some eye popping CGI.
2012 reads like The Day After Tomorrow on a steroid, which is no bad thing, but that film had some hideously underdeveloped characters and lacked the depth needed to allow viewers to share compassion for the people who had been affected by the global crisis.
Thankfully it seems that Emmerich has learnt his lesson here and has provided us with a back-story and it comes in many different forms. Thandie Newton and Danny Glover play president’s daughter and president respectively, a great deal of emotion has gone into writing these two characters and their on-screen scenes together, albeit a small amount, are wonderful.
John Cusack and Amanda Peet play divorced parents Jackson and Kate, only united by the love they share for their two young children and predictably later on in the film, a few deeper emotions. Unfortunately these two share no chemistry together and their on-screen scenes are flawed as a result.
2012 doesn’t have a huge deal of character development but it does improve on what was seen in The Day After Tomorrow and more recently, 10,000BC, with a deeper understanding of the characters. It ultimately succeeds in making the viewers share compassion for even the heartless characters in the film.
Moving on to the saving grace of all disaster films; the special effects, fans of major cities being destroyed are going to be pleased here with some eye-watering action pieces really showing why perhaps Emmerich overshadows even Michael Bay and has become the king of destroying anything that can be destroyed. There are a few questionable scenes, which look rather less than realistic, but this is a small point that doesn’t need to be taken into account.
Whilst all this may seem excellent, it all feels familiar, it’s all been seen and done before, so in reality 2012 adds nothing new to the genre which is unfortunate because it really is an excellent film.
Overall, 2012 is a mouth-watering treat in cinema engineering, apart from some lapses in scientific accuracy and some shaky special effects; it surpasses The Day After Tomorrow and similar disaster films by sheer depth. On the downside it adds nothing new to the formula, but if you want sheer popcorn fodder then please, look no further.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/18/2012-2009/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Amsterdam (2022) in Movies
Nov 21, 2022
Weak First Half Gives Way To Strong Second Half
There are certain Directors working today that gain such a reputation that most Major Movie Stars clamor to be in their films - no matter how big (or small) their part is. Quentin Tarantino, Wes Anderson and Christopher Nolan all come to mind. And, for some reason, David O. Russell is in that camp as well.
The latest film from this cinematic auteur, AMSTERDAM, is jam-packed with stars from Christian Bale to John David Washington to Margot Robbie, Robert DeNiro, Zoe Saldana, Rami Malek, Andrea Riseborough, Chris Rock, Michael Shannon, Michael Myers, Timothy Olyphant, Any-Taylor Joy and even Taylor Swift show up to play part in this drama/thriller/comedy that takes a real life event and gives it the David O. Russell touch.
And…what is the David O. Russell touch? It is - for better or for worse - a skewed perspective of the goings-on in the film, commenting on the action while driving a narrative forward. On the one hand, he is liked by many actors for he let’s them improvise and work through their performances. However, on the other hand, if he is not getting what he wants, he is also known as a antagonistic Director as he has had on-set feuds with George Clooney, Lilly Tomlin and Amy Adams. But…on the other hand…he has been nominated for Best Director 3x and quite a few of his actors (Bale, Adams, Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, etc.) have been nominated for an Oscar.
For AMSTERDAM the film’s tone and intention meander for the 1st half of the movie - as do the performances - before settling into a crackerjack thriller/murder-mystery/espionage film.
And that’s too bad for many will be turned off by the 1st half - the meandering is detrimental to the audience’s enjoyment - it feels like a series of “acting scenes” and not a coherent grouping of scenarios leading to a plot. This will turn many off - and will have them turning off the film - before it settles down and becomes good.
As is often the case with Russell’s films, the performances are good (Washington), better (Robbie) and best (Bale, channelling his inner Peter Faulk) while the other actors support the 3 leads in surprising ways. If nothing else, see this movie to watch all of these wonderful performers plying their craft. Of course, you’ll be saying to yourself “that’s wonderfully acted” for you won’t be immersed into the people, emotions or the plot at the beginning.
And that is Russell’s issue. If he could have settled on the tone and focus of the 2nd half of the film in the first half, he’d have himself another Oscar contending film. But, as it were, it’s an interesting curiosity - one that will have you entertained for a few hours, but will leave you scratching your head longing for “what could have been”.
Letter Grade: B (“C” for the first half, “A” for the 2nd half)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The latest film from this cinematic auteur, AMSTERDAM, is jam-packed with stars from Christian Bale to John David Washington to Margot Robbie, Robert DeNiro, Zoe Saldana, Rami Malek, Andrea Riseborough, Chris Rock, Michael Shannon, Michael Myers, Timothy Olyphant, Any-Taylor Joy and even Taylor Swift show up to play part in this drama/thriller/comedy that takes a real life event and gives it the David O. Russell touch.
And…what is the David O. Russell touch? It is - for better or for worse - a skewed perspective of the goings-on in the film, commenting on the action while driving a narrative forward. On the one hand, he is liked by many actors for he let’s them improvise and work through their performances. However, on the other hand, if he is not getting what he wants, he is also known as a antagonistic Director as he has had on-set feuds with George Clooney, Lilly Tomlin and Amy Adams. But…on the other hand…he has been nominated for Best Director 3x and quite a few of his actors (Bale, Adams, Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, etc.) have been nominated for an Oscar.
For AMSTERDAM the film’s tone and intention meander for the 1st half of the movie - as do the performances - before settling into a crackerjack thriller/murder-mystery/espionage film.
And that’s too bad for many will be turned off by the 1st half - the meandering is detrimental to the audience’s enjoyment - it feels like a series of “acting scenes” and not a coherent grouping of scenarios leading to a plot. This will turn many off - and will have them turning off the film - before it settles down and becomes good.
As is often the case with Russell’s films, the performances are good (Washington), better (Robbie) and best (Bale, channelling his inner Peter Faulk) while the other actors support the 3 leads in surprising ways. If nothing else, see this movie to watch all of these wonderful performers plying their craft. Of course, you’ll be saying to yourself “that’s wonderfully acted” for you won’t be immersed into the people, emotions or the plot at the beginning.
And that is Russell’s issue. If he could have settled on the tone and focus of the 2nd half of the film in the first half, he’d have himself another Oscar contending film. But, as it were, it’s an interesting curiosity - one that will have you entertained for a few hours, but will leave you scratching your head longing for “what could have been”.
Letter Grade: B (“C” for the first half, “A” for the 2nd half)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bookapotamus (289 KP) rated The History of Jane Doe in Books
May 29, 2018
I was really intrigued by the description of this book and happy when I won the chance to read and review it. The History of Jane Doe is an ode to first loves, and a journey through mental illness. It's fun, it's sad, it's heartbreaking while also being heartwarming.
Ray is a high-schooler history-buff in love with Jane. She enters his life and him and his best friend Simon are forever changed. But she hides some deep dark secrets that torment her and Ray has a hard time seeing into her head, as is usually the case when loving someone who is depressed, and he struggles to find his way through her dark past so that they can have a future. This is a history of her life, written by Ray, flipping between the past and present of one devastating day when everything changes.
Michael Belanger writes that he's experienced some painful episodes in his life, and it's evident in how eloquently he decribes feelings of sadness and darkness. I can imagine this book will make quite a few people very sad, as most everyone knows someone who suffers from depression, or anxiety, or other forms of mental illness. But I also think it will probably help just as many. I applaud him for his candor and insights into a rarely talked-about issue.
If you love 13 Reasons Why, or anything by John Green, you will love this story. The witty banter between Ray and Jane, Simon and Mary is refreshing and fun, and it's an interesting look into mental illness, how things in life can trigger it, and change a person, and and exploration of how it affects all those around you, and how even though you may think you are ending your suffering, you are ultimately just passing it on to those who loved you.
What I took away most from this is that even if you feel like you are drowning in darkness and can't see past the shadows, you never know what a light you'll be to someone else.
Ray is a high-schooler history-buff in love with Jane. She enters his life and him and his best friend Simon are forever changed. But she hides some deep dark secrets that torment her and Ray has a hard time seeing into her head, as is usually the case when loving someone who is depressed, and he struggles to find his way through her dark past so that they can have a future. This is a history of her life, written by Ray, flipping between the past and present of one devastating day when everything changes.
Michael Belanger writes that he's experienced some painful episodes in his life, and it's evident in how eloquently he decribes feelings of sadness and darkness. I can imagine this book will make quite a few people very sad, as most everyone knows someone who suffers from depression, or anxiety, or other forms of mental illness. But I also think it will probably help just as many. I applaud him for his candor and insights into a rarely talked-about issue.
If you love 13 Reasons Why, or anything by John Green, you will love this story. The witty banter between Ray and Jane, Simon and Mary is refreshing and fun, and it's an interesting look into mental illness, how things in life can trigger it, and change a person, and and exploration of how it affects all those around you, and how even though you may think you are ending your suffering, you are ultimately just passing it on to those who loved you.
What I took away most from this is that even if you feel like you are drowning in darkness and can't see past the shadows, you never know what a light you'll be to someone else.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Tag (2018) in Movies
Jul 28, 2018
Pretty Funny
A group of friends' have relied on a monthly game of Tag to stay in contact with each other. The friends must come together to take down Jerry (Jeremy Renner), the only one in their circle who has never been tagged. Sound stupid? Sure. However it's a lot less cornier and a lot funnier than you might imagine.
Acting: 10
This star-studded cast really came to play, pun-intended. I can only imagine how challenging it would be to take a role like this so seriously while trying to have fun at the same time, but each of the actors/actresses managed their roles perfectly and brought their own style to the game. Isla Fisher was my personal favorite playing the role of Anna Malloy who desperately wants to be initiated into the Tag group but has to settle for (aggressively) helping her husband win. Her intensity cracks me up in every scene she plays in.
Beginning: 8
Characters: 10
I loved that these characters weren't flat, but fleshed out, which made for even better comedy in the longrun. Aside from Anna, you've got Susan Crosby (Leslie Bibb), a perfectionist who wants to keep the Tag game away from her perfect wedding. Jerry's character is a flat-out masterpiece, a bit of Pink Panther meets Sherlock Holmes. Every character brings their own uniqueness to the game.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Speaking of Sherlock Holmes, I loved the Holmes-esque cinematics used when capturing Jerry's aversion tactics. Straight out of an action film, watching him duck and dive without breaking a sweat while all the other players destroy themselves is hilarious. The slo-mo captures are perfect, something akin to a Michael Bay or John Woo film.
Conflict: 5
Genre: 7
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Plot: 8
Resolution: 8
Somewhat cheesy, it still manages to get the job done. Considering how preposterous the rest of the film is, the ending works just fine.
Overall: 84
The comedy is up and down, but overall, Tag is solidly funny. With a unique concept and a great cast, this is a film that will definitely keep you entertained.
Acting: 10
This star-studded cast really came to play, pun-intended. I can only imagine how challenging it would be to take a role like this so seriously while trying to have fun at the same time, but each of the actors/actresses managed their roles perfectly and brought their own style to the game. Isla Fisher was my personal favorite playing the role of Anna Malloy who desperately wants to be initiated into the Tag group but has to settle for (aggressively) helping her husband win. Her intensity cracks me up in every scene she plays in.
Beginning: 8
Characters: 10
I loved that these characters weren't flat, but fleshed out, which made for even better comedy in the longrun. Aside from Anna, you've got Susan Crosby (Leslie Bibb), a perfectionist who wants to keep the Tag game away from her perfect wedding. Jerry's character is a flat-out masterpiece, a bit of Pink Panther meets Sherlock Holmes. Every character brings their own uniqueness to the game.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Speaking of Sherlock Holmes, I loved the Holmes-esque cinematics used when capturing Jerry's aversion tactics. Straight out of an action film, watching him duck and dive without breaking a sweat while all the other players destroy themselves is hilarious. The slo-mo captures are perfect, something akin to a Michael Bay or John Woo film.
Conflict: 5
Genre: 7
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Plot: 8
Resolution: 8
Somewhat cheesy, it still manages to get the job done. Considering how preposterous the rest of the film is, the ending works just fine.
Overall: 84
The comedy is up and down, but overall, Tag is solidly funny. With a unique concept and a great cast, this is a film that will definitely keep you entertained.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Adjustment Bureau (2011) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story David Norris (Matt Damon) is running for congress when a story gets released cause his ratings to slide. It is now upon Harry (Anthony Mackie) to fix this to make sure David wins and follows his destine path. David goes on to win and thanks to a chance meeting with Elise (Emily Blunt) gives one of the best speeches people have heard boosting his chances of running for senate.
The next morning Harry misses the chance he has to stop David getting on a bus to work, on this bus he meet Elise again cause his destiny to be changed. After getting her phone number he arrives at work only to discover that Charlie (Michael Kelly) his campaign manager and his office had been frozen by Richardson (John Slattery) and his team for adjustments. After seeing behind the curtain Richardson burns the number putting David back on his path, warning David not to find Elise and not tell anyone about the people making peoples lives happen.
David is left trying to keep his destine line while always trying to find Elise can he beat the adjustment team watch and you will see.
Verdict The headline review was ‘Bourne meets Inception’ and in a way it is having a way of controlling someones life by make chances things happen. the action chases are well constructed without even having to use guns. David love for Elise is strong with all the obstacles and sacrifices he makes for the idea of a better futures. This is a strong action thriller that everyone should enjoy but you would have to watch from start to finish and will struggle if picked up half way through.
Best quote Elise ‘ I’m not some hopeless romantic, I would never allow myself to be that way, but once I’ve fell, even for a moment, what I felt with you’
Favourite character Harry David personal watcher who explains the rules and breaks some too
Stand out performance Matt Damon he gives his normal strong performance as an important figure who takes risks
Best moment The door chase
Worst Moment Maybe being picky but maybe more explanation of the year gaps
https://moviesreview101.com/2011/07/09/the-adjustment-bureau-2011/
The next morning Harry misses the chance he has to stop David getting on a bus to work, on this bus he meet Elise again cause his destiny to be changed. After getting her phone number he arrives at work only to discover that Charlie (Michael Kelly) his campaign manager and his office had been frozen by Richardson (John Slattery) and his team for adjustments. After seeing behind the curtain Richardson burns the number putting David back on his path, warning David not to find Elise and not tell anyone about the people making peoples lives happen.
David is left trying to keep his destine line while always trying to find Elise can he beat the adjustment team watch and you will see.
Verdict The headline review was ‘Bourne meets Inception’ and in a way it is having a way of controlling someones life by make chances things happen. the action chases are well constructed without even having to use guns. David love for Elise is strong with all the obstacles and sacrifices he makes for the idea of a better futures. This is a strong action thriller that everyone should enjoy but you would have to watch from start to finish and will struggle if picked up half way through.
Best quote Elise ‘ I’m not some hopeless romantic, I would never allow myself to be that way, but once I’ve fell, even for a moment, what I felt with you’
Favourite character Harry David personal watcher who explains the rules and breaks some too
Stand out performance Matt Damon he gives his normal strong performance as an important figure who takes risks
Best moment The door chase
Worst Moment Maybe being picky but maybe more explanation of the year gaps
https://moviesreview101.com/2011/07/09/the-adjustment-bureau-2011/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Bad Teacher (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Recently jilted by the sugar daddy of her dreams apathetic schoolteacher Elizabeth Halsey (Cameron Diaz) must return to her day job. Just as Elizabeth has settled in to her listless career reality, a single and wealthy substitute teacher (Scott Delacorte played by Justin Timberlake) appears. Elizabeth must now prove that she is the best teacher in the school to win Delecorte’s attention and wallet. However her nemesis the overachieving and oddly bubbly educator, Amy Squirrel (Lucy Punch) also has eyes for the new faculty member.
Rounding out the eccentric cast of characters is the shy teacher Lynn Davies (Phyllis Smith), the lazy yet funny gym teacher Russell Gettis (Jason Segel), and the dolphin obsessed principal Wally Snur (John Michael Higgins). Further supporting the leads are a number of up and coming child-actors such as Kaitlyn Dever who plays know-it-all student Shasha Abernathy to crush obsessed sad sack Garrett Tiara (Matthew J. Evans).
Despite the strong cast, “Bad Teacher” will likely become associated with Cameron Diaz who uses her intense and direct comedic strength to shine in the nefarious role. Portrayed by Diaz, the character of Elizabeth comes across as wickedly manipulative yet manages to remain likeable.
But, “Bad Teacher” will not have you gasping for air between fits of laughter. The film has slow moments and a number of letdowns. Among the worst is the lackluster comical styling of Justin Timberlake as Scott Delacorte. While the role is critical to the film’s plot, the character is underdeveloped. Moreover Justin Timberlake does nothing for the part which is an unwelcome shock to audiences who associate his name with some of the funniest moments in recent “Saturday Night Live” history as well as his impressive performance in “The Social Network”.
Brimming with vulgar language and shockingly bold comedic scene choices “Bad Teacher” will surely offend bashful audiences. Still, the film is funnier than “There’s Something About Mary” and the recently disappointing “The Hangover: Part II”.
It is not a slam-dunk but “Bad Teacher” will give audiences some unexpected summer laughs, if they are prepared for the onslaught of vulgarity that this film hinges upon.
Rounding out the eccentric cast of characters is the shy teacher Lynn Davies (Phyllis Smith), the lazy yet funny gym teacher Russell Gettis (Jason Segel), and the dolphin obsessed principal Wally Snur (John Michael Higgins). Further supporting the leads are a number of up and coming child-actors such as Kaitlyn Dever who plays know-it-all student Shasha Abernathy to crush obsessed sad sack Garrett Tiara (Matthew J. Evans).
Despite the strong cast, “Bad Teacher” will likely become associated with Cameron Diaz who uses her intense and direct comedic strength to shine in the nefarious role. Portrayed by Diaz, the character of Elizabeth comes across as wickedly manipulative yet manages to remain likeable.
But, “Bad Teacher” will not have you gasping for air between fits of laughter. The film has slow moments and a number of letdowns. Among the worst is the lackluster comical styling of Justin Timberlake as Scott Delacorte. While the role is critical to the film’s plot, the character is underdeveloped. Moreover Justin Timberlake does nothing for the part which is an unwelcome shock to audiences who associate his name with some of the funniest moments in recent “Saturday Night Live” history as well as his impressive performance in “The Social Network”.
Brimming with vulgar language and shockingly bold comedic scene choices “Bad Teacher” will surely offend bashful audiences. Still, the film is funnier than “There’s Something About Mary” and the recently disappointing “The Hangover: Part II”.
It is not a slam-dunk but “Bad Teacher” will give audiences some unexpected summer laughs, if they are prepared for the onslaught of vulgarity that this film hinges upon.
The Spider Network: The Wild Story of a Maths Genius, a Gang of Backstabbing Bankers, and One of the Greatest Scams in Financial History
Book
Listed as an FT book of the month. "Anyone with an interest in financial services and in what has...
Matt Geiger (15 KP) rated Cars 2 (2011) in Movies
Jun 27, 2020 (Updated Jun 27, 2020)
Perhaps the first indication that Pixar could still lose sight of its capabilities, it should be common knowledge that CARS 2 is the worst Pixar film. While the first Cars movie was not Pixar's finest outing itself, the eccentricities of its premise and the likeable residents of Radiator Springs were enough to draw attention away from any holes the story had, numerous as they were. What we get here is an utterly incoherent and inconceivable sequel that makes just about every mistake a sequel can make. While the central espionage-based plot initially appears as a thoughtful homage to 007, and ultimately proves that Larry the Cable Guy has plenty of star power as Tow Mater, it devolves into an overstuffed, mediocre snoozefest that just keeps driving in a circle, content with giving the viewer vertigo. In fact, it is so flawed, audiences finally have to consider the implications imposed by the concept of living cars operating freely in their own world. It's not just that it's bad, but creating an entirely different story of this nature requires shoving all of the original characters to the side, including Lightning McQueen. You would think that a character who grew on audiences and learned some valuable lessons in such a short amount of time would've played a more notable role in the outcome of the film, but here he is reduced to a yammering motor of a damsel in distress, and hilarious stock characters like Luigi, Guido, and Fillmore are given literally nothing to work with. Not even the new characters make an impression, wasting the talent of Michael Caine and John Turturro among others. Honestly, there really isn't much about this movie to justify its existence. Whereas better Pixar sequels ring in on the success of their predecessor for the sake of inviting us to invest in the world they are trying to build, CARS 2 is a blown gasket that ultimately crashes the once profitable cash grab vehicle that the nostalgic first film helped to create. With this film, Pixar achieved the impossible: they made a bad movie.