Search
Search results
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Serial Mom (1994) in Movies
Jul 4, 2021
"đđ° đșđ°đ¶ đ”đ©đȘđŻđŹ đ đŻđŠđŠđ„ đą đđąđžđșđŠđł?"
"đ đ°đ¶ đŻđŠđŠđ„ đąđŻ đąđšđŠđŻđ”!"
đđ°đźđźđȘđŠ đđŠđąđłđŠđŽđ”: đđąđłđ” đđ. Does anyone do the satirization of stuck-up suburban values as originally and/or as brutally entertaining as John Waters? Most other directors would have turned this into a threadbare lecture that refused to have any sort of fun. But here we have this beautiful concoction of B-movie theatrics, gore, pitch-perfect performances, jovial filth, rock-solid lampooning, and A1 comedy - so lovingly inspired by low-budget camp and slashers of the 60s-80s that it honestly could pass off as one in many respects. Kathleen Turner is a live wire - in one of the most religiously entertaining female performances of all time, it has a blast radius that would make a military warhead quake. This is the type of role that just demands your attention, perpetually switching between these polar opposite demeanors at the drop of a hat with expert-level talent and all game for the ensuing absurdity. Which on its own would have been enough to carry 93 minutes of fun but then the film is also super clever and uproarious without rest. Had an ear-to-ear smile on my face for most of the runtime and laughed so often that my mouth began to give out mid-laugh due to the muscles simply being too worn out from overwork. Quotable as fuck and every scene is memorable, a total killer.
"đ đ°đ¶ đŻđŠđŠđ„ đąđŻ đąđšđŠđŻđ”!"
đđ°đźđźđȘđŠ đđŠđąđłđŠđŽđ”: đđąđłđ” đđ. Does anyone do the satirization of stuck-up suburban values as originally and/or as brutally entertaining as John Waters? Most other directors would have turned this into a threadbare lecture that refused to have any sort of fun. But here we have this beautiful concoction of B-movie theatrics, gore, pitch-perfect performances, jovial filth, rock-solid lampooning, and A1 comedy - so lovingly inspired by low-budget camp and slashers of the 60s-80s that it honestly could pass off as one in many respects. Kathleen Turner is a live wire - in one of the most religiously entertaining female performances of all time, it has a blast radius that would make a military warhead quake. This is the type of role that just demands your attention, perpetually switching between these polar opposite demeanors at the drop of a hat with expert-level talent and all game for the ensuing absurdity. Which on its own would have been enough to carry 93 minutes of fun but then the film is also super clever and uproarious without rest. Had an ear-to-ear smile on my face for most of the runtime and laughed so often that my mouth began to give out mid-laugh due to the muscles simply being too worn out from overwork. Quotable as fuck and every scene is memorable, a total killer.
Otway93 (567 KP) rated When the Wind Blows (1986) in Movies
Dec 28, 2019 (Updated Dec 28, 2019)
Plot (3 more)
Animation
Soundtrack
Voice acting
A terrifying yet emotional masterpiece.
Contains spoilers, click to show
After many years of wanting to see this film, and building up my expectations, today I finally saw it, and was far from disappointed.
This Raymond Briggs' feature length animation tells the tale of an elderly couple (voiced by Sir John Mills and Dane Peggy Ashcroft) in the country trying to survive in the aftermath of a nuclear strike, with only the real life UK nuclear survival pamphlet "Protect and Survive" to help them.
This film is not for the faint of heart, and realistically should probably not have a PG rating, as the couples experiences with radiation sickness are rather graphic and are more than likely to upset younger audiences (it upset me, and I'm 26!).
The animation is beautiful, as it is with every Raymond Briggs' film, but with a difference as it does often mix stop-motion and classic animation to make something quite haunting and very special, with other "special sequences" reminiscent of Pink Floyd's The Wall.
And last but not least: the soundtrack. With a title track performed by David Bowie, you already know it's going to be good. But the score (written by Roger Waters of Pink Floyd) is also incredible, yet again very reminiscent of Pink Floyd's "Goodbye Blue Sky"...again from "The Wall". With additional music by Squeeze, Paul Hardcastle and Hugh Cornwell, this makes it a pleasure to listen to.
Overall, an aural, visual and emotional rollercoaster, but not for the faint hearted.
Remember those last few words, not for the faint hearted!
This Raymond Briggs' feature length animation tells the tale of an elderly couple (voiced by Sir John Mills and Dane Peggy Ashcroft) in the country trying to survive in the aftermath of a nuclear strike, with only the real life UK nuclear survival pamphlet "Protect and Survive" to help them.
This film is not for the faint of heart, and realistically should probably not have a PG rating, as the couples experiences with radiation sickness are rather graphic and are more than likely to upset younger audiences (it upset me, and I'm 26!).
The animation is beautiful, as it is with every Raymond Briggs' film, but with a difference as it does often mix stop-motion and classic animation to make something quite haunting and very special, with other "special sequences" reminiscent of Pink Floyd's The Wall.
And last but not least: the soundtrack. With a title track performed by David Bowie, you already know it's going to be good. But the score (written by Roger Waters of Pink Floyd) is also incredible, yet again very reminiscent of Pink Floyd's "Goodbye Blue Sky"...again from "The Wall". With additional music by Squeeze, Paul Hardcastle and Hugh Cornwell, this makes it a pleasure to listen to.
Overall, an aural, visual and emotional rollercoaster, but not for the faint hearted.
Remember those last few words, not for the faint hearted!
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Seed of Chucky (2004) in Movies
Nov 26, 2019 (Updated Jan 7, 2020)
What even is this film!?
Seed of Chucky is the fifth in the Child's Play series, and definitely is the peak of absurdity in this particular franchise.
After writing the first four, Don Mancini steps behind the camera for the first time to direct this entry, and it's crystal clear he wanted to take it into comedic territory, and honestly, it works for the most part.
A lot of Seed is so ridiculous, you can't help but laugh.
Chucky plans to transfer his soul into Redman of all people, Britney Spears gets blown up, there's a live ventriloquist competition that looks more jumping than a metal concert, there's a member of S Club 7 in it, Jennifer Tilly, John Waters, Redman, and Jason Flemyng (because why the hell not) all play themselves - I could go on.
Jennifer Tilly especially deserves credit, as her willingness to poke fun at herself is a big part of what makes this film fun.
Billy Boyd voices Glen/Glenda, the spawn of Chucky, and that's also just ridiculous as it sounds.
Seed has some genuinely nice gore effects going on but as a horror film, it's rubbish. Nothing scary happens at all. But as an all out, stupid comedy with horror leanings, it hard not to like.
I love the more unsettling Chucky of the first two movies, and would take him over the quippy Chucky of the later movies - a huge reason why I didn't care much for Bride of Chucky - but when it's this over the top, I can get on board without too much fuss.
After writing the first four, Don Mancini steps behind the camera for the first time to direct this entry, and it's crystal clear he wanted to take it into comedic territory, and honestly, it works for the most part.
A lot of Seed is so ridiculous, you can't help but laugh.
Chucky plans to transfer his soul into Redman of all people, Britney Spears gets blown up, there's a live ventriloquist competition that looks more jumping than a metal concert, there's a member of S Club 7 in it, Jennifer Tilly, John Waters, Redman, and Jason Flemyng (because why the hell not) all play themselves - I could go on.
Jennifer Tilly especially deserves credit, as her willingness to poke fun at herself is a big part of what makes this film fun.
Billy Boyd voices Glen/Glenda, the spawn of Chucky, and that's also just ridiculous as it sounds.
Seed has some genuinely nice gore effects going on but as a horror film, it's rubbish. Nothing scary happens at all. But as an all out, stupid comedy with horror leanings, it hard not to like.
I love the more unsettling Chucky of the first two movies, and would take him over the quippy Chucky of the later movies - a huge reason why I didn't care much for Bride of Chucky - but when it's this over the top, I can get on board without too much fuss.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Bad Boys for Life (2020) in Movies
Jan 28, 2020
It's says a lot about this third entry into the Bad Boys franchise, when there's been a 17 year gap between movies, and it still manages to be this good!
The Bad Boys films are known for being over the top, sweary, violent, funny, and action packed, and thankfully, this tried and tested formula sticks again.
It's silliness is hugely toned down from the overly gratuitous Bad Boys II, (it's still pretty silly mind), and we're presented with a host of characters that actually ground the franchise a little, and it's all the better for it.
Will Smith and Martin Lawrence are once again hugely likable as detectives Mike Lowrey and Marcus Burnett, the chemistry between the two is still hilariously beautiful and bro-tastic after all these years.
BBFL also introduces a group of new characters, a law enforcement response team known as AMMO, who are also all pretty likable. I feel that the writers are perhaps testing the waters for a potential spin off.
The movies bad guys are drug-queen Isabel Aretas and her son Armando (Kate del Castillo and Jacob Scipio respectively) who both do a pretty good job at playing imposing and dangerous villains.
We also get some back story regarding Mike Lowrey that has never been touched on before - a possible avenue for a prequel maybe?
The action set pieces are exciting and well choreographed (best motorbike chase since John Wick 3) and directors Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah - taking over from Michael Bay - do a solid job of delivering a well shot action packed adventure, with just enough nods to the original duology's style.
The only criticisms I have really stem from pacing. The movie feels very staggered for much of the first half and takes a while to really kick into gear, but once it does, it's hugely entertaining.
Also, the comedy is laid on pretty thick and fast from the get go, and there were quite a few moments that didn't land, (predictably, there was plenty of too-old-for-this-shit jokes) but by the same merit, there were plenty that did.
Bad Boys For Life is overall a fun time that is pretty hard to not enjoy, and it actually might just be the best of the series, if not, then it's certainly on par with the first.
The narrative makes a good effort to set up potential directions for the franchise going forward (I counted at least three obvious set ups) but based on the strength of this entry, it something that I would actually like to see, and considering I went to the cinema content in the apparent knowledge that this would be the last one, that can only be a good thing.
The Bad Boys films are known for being over the top, sweary, violent, funny, and action packed, and thankfully, this tried and tested formula sticks again.
It's silliness is hugely toned down from the overly gratuitous Bad Boys II, (it's still pretty silly mind), and we're presented with a host of characters that actually ground the franchise a little, and it's all the better for it.
Will Smith and Martin Lawrence are once again hugely likable as detectives Mike Lowrey and Marcus Burnett, the chemistry between the two is still hilariously beautiful and bro-tastic after all these years.
BBFL also introduces a group of new characters, a law enforcement response team known as AMMO, who are also all pretty likable. I feel that the writers are perhaps testing the waters for a potential spin off.
The movies bad guys are drug-queen Isabel Aretas and her son Armando (Kate del Castillo and Jacob Scipio respectively) who both do a pretty good job at playing imposing and dangerous villains.
We also get some back story regarding Mike Lowrey that has never been touched on before - a possible avenue for a prequel maybe?
The action set pieces are exciting and well choreographed (best motorbike chase since John Wick 3) and directors Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah - taking over from Michael Bay - do a solid job of delivering a well shot action packed adventure, with just enough nods to the original duology's style.
The only criticisms I have really stem from pacing. The movie feels very staggered for much of the first half and takes a while to really kick into gear, but once it does, it's hugely entertaining.
Also, the comedy is laid on pretty thick and fast from the get go, and there were quite a few moments that didn't land, (predictably, there was plenty of too-old-for-this-shit jokes) but by the same merit, there were plenty that did.
Bad Boys For Life is overall a fun time that is pretty hard to not enjoy, and it actually might just be the best of the series, if not, then it's certainly on par with the first.
The narrative makes a good effort to set up potential directions for the franchise going forward (I counted at least three obvious set ups) but based on the strength of this entry, it something that I would actually like to see, and considering I went to the cinema content in the apparent knowledge that this would be the last one, that can only be a good thing.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated These Broken Stars (Starbound, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Original Review posted on <a title="These Broken Stars by Amie Kaufman and Megan Spooner" href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2013/12/arc-review-these-broken-stars-by-amie-kaufman.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Original Rating: 4.5 out of 5 owls
Note: Formatting may be lost due to copy and paste.
<i><b>Disclaimer:</b> Review copy provided by Disney Hyperion via Netgalley for review (thanks!)</i>
These Broken Stars follows two very different people, Lilac and Tarver, from a futuristic galaxy as they try to survive in the wilderness of an unknown planet after a ship crash in space.
I really love the way how These Broken Stars is set up and formatted. I didn't exactly understand it at first, but the beginning of each chapter is in the present (in terms of the book's timeline â not 2013), giving a very brief synopsis in a sort-of interview/interrogation style with Tarver. Then the chapter gives an elaboration, telling the story behind the interview/interrogation in Lilac's and Tarver's point of views. It sort of reminds me of If I Stay with its many flashbacks, but not as depressing (thankfully).
The romance between Lilac and Tarver is probably a little fast, but I can't really tell. In other words, compared to a lot of books I've come across that have romance, These Broken Stars is one of the ones not written in such a way that the reader may cringe. *phew*
What I didn't like though, is Tarver's personality. Usually I love it when a main character is sassy and has an attitude. Tarver's though... it just didn't bounce out really well. I mean, yes, he's sarcastic, and yes he has an attitude, but I just didn't really like it. It didn't really seem to go in with Lilac's personality.
I'm not being sexist. Otherwise, I would never have said that I liked Augustus Waters' personality from The Fault in Our Stars. In fact, I probably would have said that I hated Gus's personality.
(Oh no. With that being said, I'm bound to be the target of tomatoes for a while. *gives a very innocent look and ducks*)
It's not because it's John Green either. I can't always say an author is my favorite when it's my first time reading their work(s).
Of course, everyone's opinions, likes and dislikes of a character's attitude in a book is completely different from someone else.
For a debut novel, Kaufman writes an astronomically intriguing story. The situations Lilac and Tarver are put in aren't too exaggerated or unrealistic, and in a way, the story keeps the reader guessing until the author smoothly reveals what's really going on. I had to wonder a few times why a few horror elements were doing there, lurking about.
For anyone who likes science fiction/fantasy with a hint of romance, you might want to try out These Broken Stars. Maybe someone else will have a much better time with Tarver's personality. No guarantees, though. And no rollbacks in the process.
Original Rating: 4.5 out of 5 owls
Note: Formatting may be lost due to copy and paste.
<i><b>Disclaimer:</b> Review copy provided by Disney Hyperion via Netgalley for review (thanks!)</i>
These Broken Stars follows two very different people, Lilac and Tarver, from a futuristic galaxy as they try to survive in the wilderness of an unknown planet after a ship crash in space.
I really love the way how These Broken Stars is set up and formatted. I didn't exactly understand it at first, but the beginning of each chapter is in the present (in terms of the book's timeline â not 2013), giving a very brief synopsis in a sort-of interview/interrogation style with Tarver. Then the chapter gives an elaboration, telling the story behind the interview/interrogation in Lilac's and Tarver's point of views. It sort of reminds me of If I Stay with its many flashbacks, but not as depressing (thankfully).
The romance between Lilac and Tarver is probably a little fast, but I can't really tell. In other words, compared to a lot of books I've come across that have romance, These Broken Stars is one of the ones not written in such a way that the reader may cringe. *phew*
What I didn't like though, is Tarver's personality. Usually I love it when a main character is sassy and has an attitude. Tarver's though... it just didn't bounce out really well. I mean, yes, he's sarcastic, and yes he has an attitude, but I just didn't really like it. It didn't really seem to go in with Lilac's personality.
I'm not being sexist. Otherwise, I would never have said that I liked Augustus Waters' personality from The Fault in Our Stars. In fact, I probably would have said that I hated Gus's personality.
(Oh no. With that being said, I'm bound to be the target of tomatoes for a while. *gives a very innocent look and ducks*)
It's not because it's John Green either. I can't always say an author is my favorite when it's my first time reading their work(s).
Of course, everyone's opinions, likes and dislikes of a character's attitude in a book is completely different from someone else.
For a debut novel, Kaufman writes an astronomically intriguing story. The situations Lilac and Tarver are put in aren't too exaggerated or unrealistic, and in a way, the story keeps the reader guessing until the author smoothly reveals what's really going on. I had to wonder a few times why a few horror elements were doing there, lurking about.
For anyone who likes science fiction/fantasy with a hint of romance, you might want to try out These Broken Stars. Maybe someone else will have a much better time with Tarver's personality. No guarantees, though. And no rollbacks in the process.
Peter Strickland recommended One Day (2018) in Movies (curated)
5 Minute Movie Guy (379 KP) rated The Fault In Our Stars (2014) in Movies
Jun 26, 2019 (Updated Jun 26, 2019)
Undoubtedly one of the great love stories of our time. (3 more)
Shailene Woodley and Ansel Elgort are a perfect match.
John Green's novel is brilliantly adapted to the silver screen.
This is a movie that will stay with you long after it's over.
On the surface, it's easy to dismiss The Fault in Our Stars as being a sappy teenage love affair, but I can fortunately say that this is one of the great love stories of our time.
Based on John Greenâs popular young adult novel, The Fault in Our Stars is a film that is profoundly beautiful, eloquent and heartfelt. It tells of an extraordinary love between two unforgettable characters who are brought together by similarly ill-fated circumstances. Hazel Grace Lancaster and Augustus Waters are both victims of cancer. Although they do their best to hide it, these two young adults are each afraid of their ominous and unstable futures. Theyâre just trying to live purposeful lives and experience life like normal teenagers, but the looming threat of an untimely death impedes that desire. However, for a film filled with so much uncertainty, I can fortunately say that there is little doubt that The Fault in Our Stars is one of the great love stories of our time.
On the surface, itâs easy to dismiss The Fault in Our Stars as being a sappy teenage love affair. Iâll confess that I went into the theater expecting to be fully surrounded by crying teenage girls, while I would be quietly laughing to myself at their heartache. What I surely didnât anticipate, however, was to be so deeply drawn into the film. Even more surprising is the fact that The Fault in Our Stars has actually turned out to be my favorite movie of the year so far. This is a film that is sincerely heartfelt and unflinchingly genuine. It brings truth to the romantic fantasies we have, and teaches us that we canât let the fear of possible heartache hold us back from the endless potential of love.
Make no mistake about it, The Fault in Our Stars is a tear-jerker. Itâs difficult to watch these lovable characters endure such unjustifiable hardship. Hazel and Augustus are each forced to face a formidable fate that they shouldnât have to. I really felt a strong attachment to both of them, and found them to be remarkably identifiable. This connection makes it all the more unsettling when their situations turn dire. The reason that The Fault in Our Stars manages to be so effective is because of its authenticity and accessibility. The characters are not only admirable, but relatable. Theyâre not simply reduced to being unfortunate young cancer patients that weâre meant to feel sorry for. While of course we can sympathize with their condition, it is their compassion and the content of their characters that make them so compelling.
While the film features its fair share of tragedy, I should make it clear that itâs not heart-wrenchingly malicious in the way it deals with its ensuing sadness. This is not a film that is deliberately trying to make anyone feel bad. It is merely being honest in its depiction of the unfairness that often exists in life. While you very well might cry when watching the film, itâs not entirely depressing and hopeless. In fact, I would argue that The Fault in Our Stars is more pleasant than painful. The sadness it makes you feel ends up all being worthwhile because of the joyous, unforgettable memories the movie creates along the way. This is a film that will stay with you long after seeing it. To answer the question youâre all wondering: no, the movie didnât make me cry. Though my lack of tears is not a particularly good indicator of the emotional quality of the film. I donât really allow myself to cry during movies, but I certainly came close, and it undeniably left me deeply touched and forever grateful that I watched it.
Being that this is a romance, I must warn you that this isnât a movie for everyone. Truth be told, Iâm a sucker for a good romance, but Iâm aware not everyone has the patience for these kind of movies. The Fault in Our Stars is a slow-burning journey that takes its time to relish in the moments. It does this skillfully, maintaining a steady, balanced pace while building up to a powerful climax. Some may find the film to be a little too cutesy, but I think anyone who approaches it with an open-mind will find that itâs legitimately a really great film. My only real criticism of the movie involves the awkward return of a particular character towards the end of the movie. It makes for a rather unwelcome and perplexing intrusion, although it does at least help to set up the filmâs wonderful ending.
John Greenâs story is refreshing, witty, and modern. It is not only insightful in its depiction of love and life, but also offers an amazing attention to detail. It nails the feelings of love, and perfectly captures the life of being a teenager. The characters created by Green truly come to life in this film. Divergent star Shailene Woodley shines as Hazel, a young woman suffering from terminal thyroid cancer. Additionally, Ansel Elgort is incredibly charming as Augustus, a high school basketball star whose career ended short when cancer turned him into an amputee. The two of them are a perfect complementary match. Laura Dern also puts in a commendable performance as Hazelâs mom, a selfless, loving parent and companion. The filmâs soundtrack is sensational. Itâs appropriately fitting and delightful, featuring great work by artists such as Ed Sheeran, Birdy, and Ray LaMontagne. Every aspect of the movie comes together to produce a thoroughly poignant and relevant package.
The Fault in Our Stars is a film that speaks to our generation. It stares boldly into our fears of the eminent death that haunts us all, and makes no attempt to glamorize it. Even though itâs about a pair of teenagers, itâs not afraid to deal with mature content. Itâs actually all the more engrossing and troubling because these two characters are young. Theyâre already facing a pivotal time in their lives and are learning to experience the world on their own accord, and yet their journeys are plagued by the callous complications of cancer. Their age gives the film a stronger emotional impact, emphasizing the preciousness of life and the importance of living it to the fullest. The Fault in Our Stars is a smart and stimulating movie, and just like its star characters, it is wholly worthy of remembrance.
(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 7.12.14.)
On the surface, itâs easy to dismiss The Fault in Our Stars as being a sappy teenage love affair. Iâll confess that I went into the theater expecting to be fully surrounded by crying teenage girls, while I would be quietly laughing to myself at their heartache. What I surely didnât anticipate, however, was to be so deeply drawn into the film. Even more surprising is the fact that The Fault in Our Stars has actually turned out to be my favorite movie of the year so far. This is a film that is sincerely heartfelt and unflinchingly genuine. It brings truth to the romantic fantasies we have, and teaches us that we canât let the fear of possible heartache hold us back from the endless potential of love.
Make no mistake about it, The Fault in Our Stars is a tear-jerker. Itâs difficult to watch these lovable characters endure such unjustifiable hardship. Hazel and Augustus are each forced to face a formidable fate that they shouldnât have to. I really felt a strong attachment to both of them, and found them to be remarkably identifiable. This connection makes it all the more unsettling when their situations turn dire. The reason that The Fault in Our Stars manages to be so effective is because of its authenticity and accessibility. The characters are not only admirable, but relatable. Theyâre not simply reduced to being unfortunate young cancer patients that weâre meant to feel sorry for. While of course we can sympathize with their condition, it is their compassion and the content of their characters that make them so compelling.
While the film features its fair share of tragedy, I should make it clear that itâs not heart-wrenchingly malicious in the way it deals with its ensuing sadness. This is not a film that is deliberately trying to make anyone feel bad. It is merely being honest in its depiction of the unfairness that often exists in life. While you very well might cry when watching the film, itâs not entirely depressing and hopeless. In fact, I would argue that The Fault in Our Stars is more pleasant than painful. The sadness it makes you feel ends up all being worthwhile because of the joyous, unforgettable memories the movie creates along the way. This is a film that will stay with you long after seeing it. To answer the question youâre all wondering: no, the movie didnât make me cry. Though my lack of tears is not a particularly good indicator of the emotional quality of the film. I donât really allow myself to cry during movies, but I certainly came close, and it undeniably left me deeply touched and forever grateful that I watched it.
Being that this is a romance, I must warn you that this isnât a movie for everyone. Truth be told, Iâm a sucker for a good romance, but Iâm aware not everyone has the patience for these kind of movies. The Fault in Our Stars is a slow-burning journey that takes its time to relish in the moments. It does this skillfully, maintaining a steady, balanced pace while building up to a powerful climax. Some may find the film to be a little too cutesy, but I think anyone who approaches it with an open-mind will find that itâs legitimately a really great film. My only real criticism of the movie involves the awkward return of a particular character towards the end of the movie. It makes for a rather unwelcome and perplexing intrusion, although it does at least help to set up the filmâs wonderful ending.
John Greenâs story is refreshing, witty, and modern. It is not only insightful in its depiction of love and life, but also offers an amazing attention to detail. It nails the feelings of love, and perfectly captures the life of being a teenager. The characters created by Green truly come to life in this film. Divergent star Shailene Woodley shines as Hazel, a young woman suffering from terminal thyroid cancer. Additionally, Ansel Elgort is incredibly charming as Augustus, a high school basketball star whose career ended short when cancer turned him into an amputee. The two of them are a perfect complementary match. Laura Dern also puts in a commendable performance as Hazelâs mom, a selfless, loving parent and companion. The filmâs soundtrack is sensational. Itâs appropriately fitting and delightful, featuring great work by artists such as Ed Sheeran, Birdy, and Ray LaMontagne. Every aspect of the movie comes together to produce a thoroughly poignant and relevant package.
The Fault in Our Stars is a film that speaks to our generation. It stares boldly into our fears of the eminent death that haunts us all, and makes no attempt to glamorize it. Even though itâs about a pair of teenagers, itâs not afraid to deal with mature content. Itâs actually all the more engrossing and troubling because these two characters are young. Theyâre already facing a pivotal time in their lives and are learning to experience the world on their own accord, and yet their journeys are plagued by the callous complications of cancer. Their age gives the film a stronger emotional impact, emphasizing the preciousness of life and the importance of living it to the fullest. The Fault in Our Stars is a smart and stimulating movie, and just like its star characters, it is wholly worthy of remembrance.
(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 7.12.14.)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Their Finest (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Keep Calm and Carry on Writing.
In a well-mined category, âTheir Finestâ is a World War 2 comedy/drama telling a tale I havenât seen told before: the story behind the British Ministry of Information and their drive to produce propaganda films that support morale and promote positive messages in a time of national crisis. For it is 1940 and London is under nightly attack by the Luftwaffe during the time known as âThe Blitzâ. Unfortunately the Ministry is run by a bunch of toffs, and their output is laughably misaligned with the working class population, and especially the female population: with their husbands fighting overseas, these two groups are fast becoming one and the same. For women are finding and enjoying new empowerment and freedom in being socially unshackled from the kitchen sink.
The brave crew of the Nancy Starling. Bill Nighy as Uncle Frank, with twins Lily and Francesca Knight as the Starling sisters.
Enter Catrin Cole (Gemma Arterton, âThe Girl with all the Giftsâ) who is one such woman arriving to a dangerous London from South Wales to live with struggling disabled artist Ellis (Jack Huston, grandson of John Huston). Catrin, stretching the truth a little, brings a stirring âtrueâ tale of derring-do about the Dunkirk evacuation to the Ministryâs attention. She is then employed to âwrite the slopâ (the womanâs dialogue) in the writing team headed by spiky Tom Buckley (Sam Claflin, âMe Before Youâ).
One of the stars of the film within the film is âUncle Frankâ played by the aging but charismatic actor Ambrose Hilliard (Bill Nighy, âDadâs Armyâ, âLove Actuallyâ). Catrin proves her worth by pouring oil on troubled waters as the army insist on the introduction of an American airman (Jake Lacy, âCarolâ) to the stressful mix. An attraction builds between Catrin and Tom, but how will the love triangle resolve itself? (For a significant clue see the âSpoiler Sectionâ below the trailer, but be warned that this is a major spoiler!).
As you might expect if youâve seen the trailer the film is, in the main, warm and funny with Gemma Arterton just gorgeously huggable as the determined young lady trying to make it in a misogynistic 40âs world of work. Arterton is just the perfect âgirl next doorâ: (sigh⊠if I was only 20 years younger and unattached!) But mixed in with the humour and the romantic storyline is a harsh sprinkling of the trials of war and not a little heartbreak occurs. This is at least a 5 tissue movie.
Claflin, who is having a strong year with appearances in a wide range of films, is also eminently watchable. One of his best scenes is a speech with Arterton about âwhy people love the moviesâ, a theory that the film merrily and memorably drives a stake through the heart of!
Elsewhere Lacy is hilarious as the hapless airman with zero acting ability; Helen McCrory (âHarry Potterâ) as Sophie Smith vamps it up wonderfully as the potential Polish love interest for Hilliard; Richard E Grant (âLoganâ) and Jeremy Irons (âThe Lion Kingâ, âDie Hard: with a Vengeanceâ) pop up in useful cameos and Eddie Marsan (âSherlock Holmesâ) is also touching as Hilliardâs long-suffering agent.
But it is Bill Nighyâs Hilliard who carries most of the wit and humour of the film with his pompous thespian persona, basking in the dwindling glory of a much loved series of âInspector Lynleyâ films. With his pomposity progressively warming under the thawing effect of Sophie and Catrin, you have to love him! Bill Nighy is, well, Bill Nighy. Hugh Grant gets it (unfairly) in the neck for âbeing Hugh Grantâ in every film, but this pales in comparison with Nighyâs performances! But who cares: his kooky delivery is just delightful and he is a national treasure!
Slightly less convincing for me was Rachael Stirlingâs role as a butch ministry busybody with more than a hint of the lesbian about her. Stirlingâs performance in the role is fine, but would this really have been so blatant in 1940âs Britain? This didnât really ring true for me.
While the film gamely tries to pull off London in the Blitz the filmâs limited budget (around ÂŁ25m) makes everything feel a little underpowered and âemptyâ: a few hundred more extras in the Underground/Blitz scenes for example would have helped no end. However, the special effects crew do their best and the cinematography by Sebastian Blenkov (âThe Riot Clubâ) suitably conveys the mood: a scene where Catrin gets caught in a bomb blast outside a clothes shop is particularly moving.
As with all comedy dramas, sometimes the bedfellows lie uncomfortably with each other, and a couple of plot twists: one highly predictable; one shockingly unpredictable make this a non-linear watch. This rollercoaster of a script by Gaby Chiappe, in an excellent feature film debut (she actually also has a cameo in the propaganda âcarrot filmâ!), undeniably adds interest and makes the film more memorable. However (I know from personal experience) that the twist did not please everyone in the audience!
Despite its occasionally uneven tone, this is a really enjoyable watch (particularly for more mature audiences) and Danish director Lone Scherfig finally has a vehicle that matches the quality of her much praised Carey Mulligan vehicle âAn Educationâ.
The brave crew of the Nancy Starling. Bill Nighy as Uncle Frank, with twins Lily and Francesca Knight as the Starling sisters.
Enter Catrin Cole (Gemma Arterton, âThe Girl with all the Giftsâ) who is one such woman arriving to a dangerous London from South Wales to live with struggling disabled artist Ellis (Jack Huston, grandson of John Huston). Catrin, stretching the truth a little, brings a stirring âtrueâ tale of derring-do about the Dunkirk evacuation to the Ministryâs attention. She is then employed to âwrite the slopâ (the womanâs dialogue) in the writing team headed by spiky Tom Buckley (Sam Claflin, âMe Before Youâ).
One of the stars of the film within the film is âUncle Frankâ played by the aging but charismatic actor Ambrose Hilliard (Bill Nighy, âDadâs Armyâ, âLove Actuallyâ). Catrin proves her worth by pouring oil on troubled waters as the army insist on the introduction of an American airman (Jake Lacy, âCarolâ) to the stressful mix. An attraction builds between Catrin and Tom, but how will the love triangle resolve itself? (For a significant clue see the âSpoiler Sectionâ below the trailer, but be warned that this is a major spoiler!).
As you might expect if youâve seen the trailer the film is, in the main, warm and funny with Gemma Arterton just gorgeously huggable as the determined young lady trying to make it in a misogynistic 40âs world of work. Arterton is just the perfect âgirl next doorâ: (sigh⊠if I was only 20 years younger and unattached!) But mixed in with the humour and the romantic storyline is a harsh sprinkling of the trials of war and not a little heartbreak occurs. This is at least a 5 tissue movie.
Claflin, who is having a strong year with appearances in a wide range of films, is also eminently watchable. One of his best scenes is a speech with Arterton about âwhy people love the moviesâ, a theory that the film merrily and memorably drives a stake through the heart of!
Elsewhere Lacy is hilarious as the hapless airman with zero acting ability; Helen McCrory (âHarry Potterâ) as Sophie Smith vamps it up wonderfully as the potential Polish love interest for Hilliard; Richard E Grant (âLoganâ) and Jeremy Irons (âThe Lion Kingâ, âDie Hard: with a Vengeanceâ) pop up in useful cameos and Eddie Marsan (âSherlock Holmesâ) is also touching as Hilliardâs long-suffering agent.
But it is Bill Nighyâs Hilliard who carries most of the wit and humour of the film with his pompous thespian persona, basking in the dwindling glory of a much loved series of âInspector Lynleyâ films. With his pomposity progressively warming under the thawing effect of Sophie and Catrin, you have to love him! Bill Nighy is, well, Bill Nighy. Hugh Grant gets it (unfairly) in the neck for âbeing Hugh Grantâ in every film, but this pales in comparison with Nighyâs performances! But who cares: his kooky delivery is just delightful and he is a national treasure!
Slightly less convincing for me was Rachael Stirlingâs role as a butch ministry busybody with more than a hint of the lesbian about her. Stirlingâs performance in the role is fine, but would this really have been so blatant in 1940âs Britain? This didnât really ring true for me.
While the film gamely tries to pull off London in the Blitz the filmâs limited budget (around ÂŁ25m) makes everything feel a little underpowered and âemptyâ: a few hundred more extras in the Underground/Blitz scenes for example would have helped no end. However, the special effects crew do their best and the cinematography by Sebastian Blenkov (âThe Riot Clubâ) suitably conveys the mood: a scene where Catrin gets caught in a bomb blast outside a clothes shop is particularly moving.
As with all comedy dramas, sometimes the bedfellows lie uncomfortably with each other, and a couple of plot twists: one highly predictable; one shockingly unpredictable make this a non-linear watch. This rollercoaster of a script by Gaby Chiappe, in an excellent feature film debut (she actually also has a cameo in the propaganda âcarrot filmâ!), undeniably adds interest and makes the film more memorable. However (I know from personal experience) that the twist did not please everyone in the audience!
Despite its occasionally uneven tone, this is a really enjoyable watch (particularly for more mature audiences) and Danish director Lone Scherfig finally has a vehicle that matches the quality of her much praised Carey Mulligan vehicle âAn Educationâ.