Search
Search results
156Reviews (7 KP) rated Emma (2020) in Movies
May 1, 2020
Have you ever been at a dinner party that has gone on little too long? You were greeted warmly, settled quickly and comfortably, it's been fun, the company has been in fine form, spinning anecdotes that have entertained. But towards the end, you've all run out of things to say, no one quite knows if it's time to leave or not and it's all got a bit awkward.
I could end my review there, I think you get the point I'm trying to make, but almost the entire cast of this film deserve more, each of them pulling up what would be quite a laborious and dull film into something better, something unworthy of such a cold explanation.
The film starts with Emma (Ana Taylor-Joy) having recently played matchmaker and having had everything very much her way, as the title screen puts it, “Having lived twenty-one years in the world with very little to vex her”, she sees the people around her as entertainment, in the way a child plays with their dolls, marrying them off and assuming that they will live happily ever after. Taylor-Joy is does magnificently in this role, portraying Emma with child-like innocence, while still showing us a character that is all scheming and intelligence, but without any malice, it's a fine line to walk and she does it excellently.
With this in mind she picks up a new friend in Harriet Smith, a young and naive woman played by Mia Goth, a very different role than we've seen her in before, Mia attacks this with a level of enthusiasm and energy that only a few could get away with. Emma intends to marry her friend to Mr Elton (Josh O'Connor), the leader of the local church, whose awkward nature and odd gestures are one of many comedic points of the film, but not all goes to plan.
Director Autumn de Wilde does a wonderful job immersing you into a world of bright pastel colours, handsome characters and sweet lavish deserts, showing you not a period accurate representation, but a view into the way Emma sees the world. This is what the film does best, immersing you into 1800's social networking. Status and decorum is what matters, so that when the minor insults and social faux pas' start coming we understand the gravity of each action, however slight they are.
The film has great talent throughout, their roles could easily come across cliché or bit-part, but are elevated by the skill and subtlety of the people playing them. Johnny Flynn is Mr Knightly, the misunderstood good-guy, but makes it sincere and caring, though we are left to guess why he seems to live with Emma. Bill Nighy is the cranky old father with barely anything to do, but manages to steal entire scenes with just a withering look, and Miranda Hart playing, well, Miranda Hart.
Unfortunately, this all gets dragged down by its excessive length and lack of surprise. At just over two hours run-time even the sharp wit of the earlier scenes start to seem like a distant memory, and as the ending you saw coming from around the hour mark unfolds, you'll start to wonder why it took such a long journey to get there.
I could end my review there, I think you get the point I'm trying to make, but almost the entire cast of this film deserve more, each of them pulling up what would be quite a laborious and dull film into something better, something unworthy of such a cold explanation.
The film starts with Emma (Ana Taylor-Joy) having recently played matchmaker and having had everything very much her way, as the title screen puts it, “Having lived twenty-one years in the world with very little to vex her”, she sees the people around her as entertainment, in the way a child plays with their dolls, marrying them off and assuming that they will live happily ever after. Taylor-Joy is does magnificently in this role, portraying Emma with child-like innocence, while still showing us a character that is all scheming and intelligence, but without any malice, it's a fine line to walk and she does it excellently.
With this in mind she picks up a new friend in Harriet Smith, a young and naive woman played by Mia Goth, a very different role than we've seen her in before, Mia attacks this with a level of enthusiasm and energy that only a few could get away with. Emma intends to marry her friend to Mr Elton (Josh O'Connor), the leader of the local church, whose awkward nature and odd gestures are one of many comedic points of the film, but not all goes to plan.
Director Autumn de Wilde does a wonderful job immersing you into a world of bright pastel colours, handsome characters and sweet lavish deserts, showing you not a period accurate representation, but a view into the way Emma sees the world. This is what the film does best, immersing you into 1800's social networking. Status and decorum is what matters, so that when the minor insults and social faux pas' start coming we understand the gravity of each action, however slight they are.
The film has great talent throughout, their roles could easily come across cliché or bit-part, but are elevated by the skill and subtlety of the people playing them. Johnny Flynn is Mr Knightly, the misunderstood good-guy, but makes it sincere and caring, though we are left to guess why he seems to live with Emma. Bill Nighy is the cranky old father with barely anything to do, but manages to steal entire scenes with just a withering look, and Miranda Hart playing, well, Miranda Hart.
Unfortunately, this all gets dragged down by its excessive length and lack of surprise. At just over two hours run-time even the sharp wit of the earlier scenes start to seem like a distant memory, and as the ending you saw coming from around the hour mark unfolds, you'll start to wonder why it took such a long journey to get there.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Fantastic Four (2005) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
About As Memorable As My Last Poop
Based on the long-running comic book, four people are given superpowers when they come in contact with cosmic energy out in space.
Acting: 7
Beginning: 5
Not exactly how you start a movie. Definitely could have scored this lower, but there was at least a glimmer of hope shown in the first ten minutes that told me this movie wouldn’t be a total waste of space. Still, my hopes weren’t high.
Characters: 3
I had some issues here, but I struggled with my scoring. Reason being, I LOVE the comic book characters and appreciate their depth. Yeah, none of that is shown in this movie. The characters aren’t layered, rather they have mere personality types, none of which I was really in love with. They made Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) an over-the-top dick while Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd), the brains of the group, can’t understand the concept of normal social interaction to save his life. I won’t even waste time profiling the other lame-duck characters. You get the point.
Cinematography/Visuals: 2
Conflict: 2
Entertainment Value: 0
At no point during Fantastic Four did I ever say, “Ok, we might have something here.” It was bad on top of bad from beginning to end. Just an unapologetic dumpster fire. Sitting through this movie again is what I envision Hell to be like.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 4
Talk about a slow-moving film. Not only does it take forever for scenes to get to the point, but they divert off into random tangents that ultimately amount to nothing. This is a don’t-pause-when-you-go-to-the-bathroom movie. Drove me crazy.
Plot: 2
There is a scene that happens on a bridge where people need saving. Not only do all four of the superheroes magically end up on the bridge at the same time (they weren’t together previously), but Thing’s wife shows up as well just to walk away in shame because of how gross he’s become. I laughed my ass off! And that should tell you enough about what I think of the plot.
Resolution: 4
I give it a four because it ended. No, the ending wasn’t any better than the rest of the movie, but damnit, it ended and the fact that it finally came to a close put me out of my misery.
Overall: 34
There are bad movies that make me want to stop watching and reviewing movies altogether because of how horrible they are. And then there’s Fantastic Four. This movie is torture to the millionth degree.
Acting: 7
Beginning: 5
Not exactly how you start a movie. Definitely could have scored this lower, but there was at least a glimmer of hope shown in the first ten minutes that told me this movie wouldn’t be a total waste of space. Still, my hopes weren’t high.
Characters: 3
I had some issues here, but I struggled with my scoring. Reason being, I LOVE the comic book characters and appreciate their depth. Yeah, none of that is shown in this movie. The characters aren’t layered, rather they have mere personality types, none of which I was really in love with. They made Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) an over-the-top dick while Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd), the brains of the group, can’t understand the concept of normal social interaction to save his life. I won’t even waste time profiling the other lame-duck characters. You get the point.
Cinematography/Visuals: 2
Conflict: 2
Entertainment Value: 0
At no point during Fantastic Four did I ever say, “Ok, we might have something here.” It was bad on top of bad from beginning to end. Just an unapologetic dumpster fire. Sitting through this movie again is what I envision Hell to be like.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 4
Talk about a slow-moving film. Not only does it take forever for scenes to get to the point, but they divert off into random tangents that ultimately amount to nothing. This is a don’t-pause-when-you-go-to-the-bathroom movie. Drove me crazy.
Plot: 2
There is a scene that happens on a bridge where people need saving. Not only do all four of the superheroes magically end up on the bridge at the same time (they weren’t together previously), but Thing’s wife shows up as well just to walk away in shame because of how gross he’s become. I laughed my ass off! And that should tell you enough about what I think of the plot.
Resolution: 4
I give it a four because it ended. No, the ending wasn’t any better than the rest of the movie, but damnit, it ended and the fact that it finally came to a close put me out of my misery.
Overall: 34
There are bad movies that make me want to stop watching and reviewing movies altogether because of how horrible they are. And then there’s Fantastic Four. This movie is torture to the millionth degree.
Mark Jaye (65 KP) rated The Conjuring (2013) in Movies
May 13, 2019
The Conjuring Review
Contains spoilers, click to show
Originally wrote in 2013:
As an avid fan of horror I look for a few little things which if aren't apparent within the first minute decide on whether I'm going to bother with the rest of the film. Usually the company releasing the movie is a good starting point, reputable/recognised director or producer, recognisable actor/s, good production values - that sort of thing. I've seen some hum-dingers over the years - those films where Johnny Nobody has gathered several of his buddies together with a cheap camcorder or two and filmed some alleged zombie epic in the woods at the back of their school.
**The Conjuring is not one of those**
I like to think I have a strong disposition when it comes to scares - usually it takes a lot to make me squint. Examples that come to mind are 'Sinister', 'The Grudge', the end of 'The Ring' (you know, the scary dark haired girl climbing out of the TV!). The Conjuring is one of those - I watched this in the middle of the morning and found it pretty scary in places.
James Wan certainly knows how to make a movie of this type and is great at evoking atmosphere and notching up the scares as the film develops. In a nutshell, this is the alleged real life story of the Perron family who in 1971 moved into a new farmhouse. It isn't long before the usual shenanigans begin - pictures pulled off walls, doors knocking in the dead of night, the children befriending mysterious 'imaginary' kids (who we all know watching are going to show up at some point). The film sticks to the tried and tested story - gradual possession of one of the adults (Lily Taylor), gradually increasing appearances by ghostly figures, calling in the ghostbusters, gathering the proof, then the exorcism. It may be join the dots territory but it works.
Patrick Wilson shines and seems to be making his mark in films of this nature (Insidious and Insidious Chapter 2) - he portrays real life paranormal investigator Ed Warren who with his wife Lorraine (played just as well by Vera Farmiga) become immersed in the life of the Perron's making themselves targets of the supernatural force at work in the process.
The demonic spirit at work is that of a witch who was married to the guy who built the house back in the 1800's who cursed the land before committing suicide after murdering their child whilst a few days old. There is one particularly pant browning scene where the witch makes her first appearance atop a bedroom wardrobe....and I'll leave it there!
Quality. Best horror I've seen since Sinister.
As an avid fan of horror I look for a few little things which if aren't apparent within the first minute decide on whether I'm going to bother with the rest of the film. Usually the company releasing the movie is a good starting point, reputable/recognised director or producer, recognisable actor/s, good production values - that sort of thing. I've seen some hum-dingers over the years - those films where Johnny Nobody has gathered several of his buddies together with a cheap camcorder or two and filmed some alleged zombie epic in the woods at the back of their school.
**The Conjuring is not one of those**
I like to think I have a strong disposition when it comes to scares - usually it takes a lot to make me squint. Examples that come to mind are 'Sinister', 'The Grudge', the end of 'The Ring' (you know, the scary dark haired girl climbing out of the TV!). The Conjuring is one of those - I watched this in the middle of the morning and found it pretty scary in places.
James Wan certainly knows how to make a movie of this type and is great at evoking atmosphere and notching up the scares as the film develops. In a nutshell, this is the alleged real life story of the Perron family who in 1971 moved into a new farmhouse. It isn't long before the usual shenanigans begin - pictures pulled off walls, doors knocking in the dead of night, the children befriending mysterious 'imaginary' kids (who we all know watching are going to show up at some point). The film sticks to the tried and tested story - gradual possession of one of the adults (Lily Taylor), gradually increasing appearances by ghostly figures, calling in the ghostbusters, gathering the proof, then the exorcism. It may be join the dots territory but it works.
Patrick Wilson shines and seems to be making his mark in films of this nature (Insidious and Insidious Chapter 2) - he portrays real life paranormal investigator Ed Warren who with his wife Lorraine (played just as well by Vera Farmiga) become immersed in the life of the Perron's making themselves targets of the supernatural force at work in the process.
The demonic spirit at work is that of a witch who was married to the guy who built the house back in the 1800's who cursed the land before committing suicide after murdering their child whilst a few days old. There is one particularly pant browning scene where the witch makes her first appearance atop a bedroom wardrobe....and I'll leave it there!
Quality. Best horror I've seen since Sinister.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald (2018) in Movies
Nov 22, 2018
Dull, boring & confused
I'll start by saying I've never been enamoured with the idea of the Fantastic Beasts films. For me, the wizarding world should have been left alone. The first film was enjoyable to a point (mainly because of Eddie Redmayne and the niffler), but this second film is inexcusable. And the fact that they're making another 3 more... totally unnecessary.
This film doesn't get off to a good start with the opening sequence, and rarely gets any better throughout the entire 2+ hour runtime. Some of the camera angles and shots used are terrible, jumping around all over the place even when it's just dialogue and the action scenes are virtually unwatchable. Whilst the effects are good, the plot is convoluted, confusing and just plain old boring. The majority of the film is just dialogue, and not well scripted dialogue at that and it gets very dull very quickly.
The characters that were likeable in the first film were either poorly used or turned into something completely different to what was likeable about them in the first place. There are far too many characters in this and even with the far too long run time, there isn't much time for character development. Johnny Depp is horrendous as Grindelwald. Not only because the character himself is the least menacing villain you've ever seen, but he's just not a very good actor anymore. I actually think his original incarnation as Colin Farrell in the first film would've been much better. I also couldn't figure out what crimes he had committed until the final act. The only person to come out of this film fairly intact was Jude Law, who played a likeable Dumbledore even if he wasn't on screen nearly enough. And really, it was only the creatures that made this worth watching and there just wasn't enough of them. Definitely not enough Niffler antics!
My main issue with this film is that it's messing with canon, bringing in characters we don't want to see and telling a story we don't need to hear. We didn't need to see Hogwarts, Dumbledore, McGonagall, Nagini and a few others I won't name. It's turning the wizarding world into a convoluted mess. They could have made a fairly decent standalone first Fantastic Beasts film that didn't link in with Grindelwald or the history at all, but instead they've made this nonsense.
And if I didn't think it could get any worse, the reveal of Credence's real identity right at the end nearly had me shouting at the screen it was that bad and ridiculous.
I probably could have walked out of this film after half an hour and not been bothered. Terrible.
This film doesn't get off to a good start with the opening sequence, and rarely gets any better throughout the entire 2+ hour runtime. Some of the camera angles and shots used are terrible, jumping around all over the place even when it's just dialogue and the action scenes are virtually unwatchable. Whilst the effects are good, the plot is convoluted, confusing and just plain old boring. The majority of the film is just dialogue, and not well scripted dialogue at that and it gets very dull very quickly.
The characters that were likeable in the first film were either poorly used or turned into something completely different to what was likeable about them in the first place. There are far too many characters in this and even with the far too long run time, there isn't much time for character development. Johnny Depp is horrendous as Grindelwald. Not only because the character himself is the least menacing villain you've ever seen, but he's just not a very good actor anymore. I actually think his original incarnation as Colin Farrell in the first film would've been much better. I also couldn't figure out what crimes he had committed until the final act. The only person to come out of this film fairly intact was Jude Law, who played a likeable Dumbledore even if he wasn't on screen nearly enough. And really, it was only the creatures that made this worth watching and there just wasn't enough of them. Definitely not enough Niffler antics!
My main issue with this film is that it's messing with canon, bringing in characters we don't want to see and telling a story we don't need to hear. We didn't need to see Hogwarts, Dumbledore, McGonagall, Nagini and a few others I won't name. It's turning the wizarding world into a convoluted mess. They could have made a fairly decent standalone first Fantastic Beasts film that didn't link in with Grindelwald or the history at all, but instead they've made this nonsense.
And if I didn't think it could get any worse, the reveal of Credence's real identity right at the end nearly had me shouting at the screen it was that bad and ridiculous.
I probably could have walked out of this film after half an hour and not been bothered. Terrible.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Alice Through the Looking Glass (2016) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Alice Through the Looking Glass starts as Alice (Wasikowska) returns from one of her voyages around the world only to find her dreams of seeing the world have been taken from her. Escaping the real world Wonderland calls Alice back with Queen Mirana (Hathaway) and the rest of the characters need Alice to bring the Hatter (Depp) back to his senses after he falls through memories of his loss.
Alice must travel back through time to save the Hatter’ family and bring him back to his colourful ways. Alice finds herself having to go to Time (Cohen) himself to find a way to save the Hatter where she finds herself coming across an old foe Iracebeth (Carter) who wants to use time to control the kingdoms regaining her crown.
Alice Through the Looking Glass does what Oz the Great and Powerful and Wicked have done to The Wizard of Oz by making us want to sympathise with the villainous characters by showing us how they got driven into evil ways because of the bad decisions by the good one. The travel through time works because it does explain certain moments from the story like why Hatter and co have been waiting so long for the tea party. In the end this just tries slightly too much to not bring any new villainous threat to the world to show Alice the important lesson in the real life she is living.
Actor Review
Johnny Depp: Hatter Tarrant Hightopp has gone into a deep depression when he learns to remember the fate of his family, Alice is trying to go through his past to stop this event so we get to meet Hatter as he was younger and struggling to decide whether to follow in his father’s footsteps. Johnny continues his streak of quirky roles but does get over shadowed by Mia.
Mia Wasikowska: Alice is now an adventurer who travels the world only to return home and find her future gone and being forced to give up her dreams. When she returns to Wonderland she must battle the forces of time to save her old friend Hatter and learn to accept her own changes in her life. Mia is good in this role but it is strange seeing an older version of Alice.
Helena Bonham Carter: Iracebeth is the evil queen who lost her crown in the first film, she wants to use time to change the past keeping her power over the kingdoms, but this time we learn about what drove her to be the way she is. Helena continues her blatant rip off performance from Queenie in Blackadder.
Anne Hathaway: Mirana is the good queen of the kingdom who asks Alice to help the Hatter only for us to learn about her younger ways. Anne is very basic in this supporting performance where she doesn’t get much to work with.
Support Cast: Alice Through the Looking Glass has a big supporting cast with Sacha Baron Cohen shining as Time itself chasing Alice down through time.
Director Review: James Bobin – James gives us a solid sequel but seems to mix Oz the Great and Powerful with time travel.
Adventure: Alice Through the Looking Glass does put Alice on an adventure she could only dream of through time itself.
Family: Alice Through the Looking Glass does feel slightly too dark for the youngest members of family to enjoy.
Fantasy: Alice Through the Looking Glass builds on the fantasy world created on the first outing looking deeper into the backstory of the characters involved.
Settings: Alice Through the Looking Glass brings us back to the Wonderland location with the inclusion of the time warehouse location.
Special Effects: Alice Through the Looking Glass is a film you can almost feel the green screen behind the actors.
Suggestion: Alice Through the Looking Glass is only one to try really I don’t think it is one that is that special. (Try It)
Best Part: Time is a good character.
Worst Part: Just feels like a copy of Oz the Great and the Powerful with time travel.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $170 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 53 Minutes
Tagline: This spring, it’s time for a little madness.
Overall: Simple sequel that offers nothing new to the overall Wonderland world.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/06/23/alice-through-the-looking-glass-2016/
Alice must travel back through time to save the Hatter’ family and bring him back to his colourful ways. Alice finds herself having to go to Time (Cohen) himself to find a way to save the Hatter where she finds herself coming across an old foe Iracebeth (Carter) who wants to use time to control the kingdoms regaining her crown.
Alice Through the Looking Glass does what Oz the Great and Powerful and Wicked have done to The Wizard of Oz by making us want to sympathise with the villainous characters by showing us how they got driven into evil ways because of the bad decisions by the good one. The travel through time works because it does explain certain moments from the story like why Hatter and co have been waiting so long for the tea party. In the end this just tries slightly too much to not bring any new villainous threat to the world to show Alice the important lesson in the real life she is living.
Actor Review
Johnny Depp: Hatter Tarrant Hightopp has gone into a deep depression when he learns to remember the fate of his family, Alice is trying to go through his past to stop this event so we get to meet Hatter as he was younger and struggling to decide whether to follow in his father’s footsteps. Johnny continues his streak of quirky roles but does get over shadowed by Mia.
Mia Wasikowska: Alice is now an adventurer who travels the world only to return home and find her future gone and being forced to give up her dreams. When she returns to Wonderland she must battle the forces of time to save her old friend Hatter and learn to accept her own changes in her life. Mia is good in this role but it is strange seeing an older version of Alice.
Helena Bonham Carter: Iracebeth is the evil queen who lost her crown in the first film, she wants to use time to change the past keeping her power over the kingdoms, but this time we learn about what drove her to be the way she is. Helena continues her blatant rip off performance from Queenie in Blackadder.
Anne Hathaway: Mirana is the good queen of the kingdom who asks Alice to help the Hatter only for us to learn about her younger ways. Anne is very basic in this supporting performance where she doesn’t get much to work with.
Support Cast: Alice Through the Looking Glass has a big supporting cast with Sacha Baron Cohen shining as Time itself chasing Alice down through time.
Director Review: James Bobin – James gives us a solid sequel but seems to mix Oz the Great and Powerful with time travel.
Adventure: Alice Through the Looking Glass does put Alice on an adventure she could only dream of through time itself.
Family: Alice Through the Looking Glass does feel slightly too dark for the youngest members of family to enjoy.
Fantasy: Alice Through the Looking Glass builds on the fantasy world created on the first outing looking deeper into the backstory of the characters involved.
Settings: Alice Through the Looking Glass brings us back to the Wonderland location with the inclusion of the time warehouse location.
Special Effects: Alice Through the Looking Glass is a film you can almost feel the green screen behind the actors.
Suggestion: Alice Through the Looking Glass is only one to try really I don’t think it is one that is that special. (Try It)
Best Part: Time is a good character.
Worst Part: Just feels like a copy of Oz the Great and the Powerful with time travel.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $170 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 53 Minutes
Tagline: This spring, it’s time for a little madness.
Overall: Simple sequel that offers nothing new to the overall Wonderland world.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/06/23/alice-through-the-looking-glass-2016/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Fantastic Four (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
An absolute snooze
Here comes yet another superhero film. Ending Marvel’s year that has included the charming Big Hero 6, the overstuffed Avengers: Age of Ultron and the surprisingly excellent Ant-Man, the Fox produced Fantastic Four reboot has a tough job trying to get audiences to forget the horror that came before it.
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Outfit (2022) in Movies
Jul 1, 2022
Smart, Intelligent and Understated
So much of the success or failure of a film at the Cineplex Box Office depends on the marketing of the film and the timing of it’s release. In the case of the wonderful crime drama THE OUTFIT (who’s release was buried in late January/early February 2022), the marketing did it no favors.
And that’s too bad, for this Mark Rylance film - which could easily be a stage play - is an intriguing SMART cat and mouse drama between some mob types and their tailor.
Yes, their tailor.
Rylance stars as Leonard, a tailor (he prefers to be called a “cutter”), who has a shop in Chicago in the 1950’s, THE OUTFIT tells the tale of said cutter who’s business is booming thanks to patronage of local gangsters (the titular OUTFIT) who not only frequent his shop for suits, but also to use it as a place to make “drops”. The intrigue of this film comes when “things get real” for THE OUTFIT and they use Leonard’s shop as a hideout. Leonard must outsmart the outfit - and their foes - if he hopes to survive the night.
It’s a smart premise made all the more interesting by the understated performance by Rylance who, once again, shows that his genial demeanor is disguising a very intelligent and fast-working brain. It is another in a long string of strong performances by Rylance (who won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his work in 2015’s BRIDGE OF SPIES).
Rylance is joined on screen by some very good performances by Zoey Deutch (ZOMBIELAND DOUBLETAP), Johnny Flynn (EMMA), Stage Actor Simon Russell Beale (THE DEATH OF STALIN) and, most surprisingly, Dylan O’Brien (THE MAZE RUNNER). They bring a Broadway stage performance sense of style to this work - and it is absolutely the right approach to this material, for the entire film takes place inside Leonard’s tailor shop.
Credit for this must go to Director Graham Moore (THE IMITATION GAME) who wrote this film with Johnathan McClain. He has a firm grip on what he is attempting to do - and he does it well. He sets up the premise and the players well and then pays off the circumstances - sometimes surprisingly - in satisfying ways. It is a strong showing by Moore and I’ll be looking to see what he does next.
Intelligent, understated, stage-like, smart…no wonder the suits at Universal had no idea how to market it.
So, I’ll market/champion this film that perfectly casts Rylance. He is in almost every scene and it is his intense and interesting performance that will pull you into his shop - and into the world of the OUTFIT.
Check it out - you’ll be glad you did.
THE OUTFIT is streaming for free for those of you subscribed to PEACOCK and can be rented (or bought) on most of the major outlets for those types of things.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And that’s too bad, for this Mark Rylance film - which could easily be a stage play - is an intriguing SMART cat and mouse drama between some mob types and their tailor.
Yes, their tailor.
Rylance stars as Leonard, a tailor (he prefers to be called a “cutter”), who has a shop in Chicago in the 1950’s, THE OUTFIT tells the tale of said cutter who’s business is booming thanks to patronage of local gangsters (the titular OUTFIT) who not only frequent his shop for suits, but also to use it as a place to make “drops”. The intrigue of this film comes when “things get real” for THE OUTFIT and they use Leonard’s shop as a hideout. Leonard must outsmart the outfit - and their foes - if he hopes to survive the night.
It’s a smart premise made all the more interesting by the understated performance by Rylance who, once again, shows that his genial demeanor is disguising a very intelligent and fast-working brain. It is another in a long string of strong performances by Rylance (who won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his work in 2015’s BRIDGE OF SPIES).
Rylance is joined on screen by some very good performances by Zoey Deutch (ZOMBIELAND DOUBLETAP), Johnny Flynn (EMMA), Stage Actor Simon Russell Beale (THE DEATH OF STALIN) and, most surprisingly, Dylan O’Brien (THE MAZE RUNNER). They bring a Broadway stage performance sense of style to this work - and it is absolutely the right approach to this material, for the entire film takes place inside Leonard’s tailor shop.
Credit for this must go to Director Graham Moore (THE IMITATION GAME) who wrote this film with Johnathan McClain. He has a firm grip on what he is attempting to do - and he does it well. He sets up the premise and the players well and then pays off the circumstances - sometimes surprisingly - in satisfying ways. It is a strong showing by Moore and I’ll be looking to see what he does next.
Intelligent, understated, stage-like, smart…no wonder the suits at Universal had no idea how to market it.
So, I’ll market/champion this film that perfectly casts Rylance. He is in almost every scene and it is his intense and interesting performance that will pull you into his shop - and into the world of the OUTFIT.
Check it out - you’ll be glad you did.
THE OUTFIT is streaming for free for those of you subscribed to PEACOCK and can be rented (or bought) on most of the major outlets for those types of things.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Here we go again
I can’t be the only one surprised that the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise has managed to withstand five films. Created on a whim by Disney in 2003, the first film propelled Johnny Depp into the lives of movie fans like never before.
However, come 2017 and Depp’s star is sinking faster than the Black Pearl. After three pretty dreadful sequels, the cast reunites for Salazar’s Revenge. But does a change in directors herald a new and exciting path for the plucky pirates?
Thrust into an all-new adventure, a down-on-his-luck Captain Jack Sparrow (Depp) feels the winds of ill-fortune blowing strongly when ghost sailors led by his nemesis, evil Captain Salazar (Javier Bardem), escape from the Devil’s Triangle. Jack’s only hope lies in seeking out the legendary Trident of Poseidon, but to find it, he must forge an uneasy alliance with a brilliant and beautiful astronomer (Kaya Scodelario and a headstrong young man in the British navy (Brenton Thwaites).
Newcomer directors Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg craft a film that is magnificent to look at and stunning to listen to, but features all of the same problems as its predecessors. The time really is up on this franchise.
Of the cast, only Javier Bardem’s snarling Salazar makes any sort of lasting impact. In fact, he’s probably the best antagonist the series has ever had and makes for a menacing presence throughout. Depp looks like he’s on autopilot, almost as bored of Jack Sparrow’s drunken antics as we are, and the normally excellent Kaya Scodelario (Skins, Maze Runner) plays a particularly bland female lead during the films running time.
Speaking of which, at 142 minutes, this is one migraine inducing slog. All four previous films have suffered from being overstuffed, and with the extra abundance of characters this time around, it’s even more painful. There simply is no need to create a film that’s nearly two and a half hours long, especially considering the plot is as paint-by-numbers as you can get.
Nevertheless, to look at, Salazar’s Revenge really is breath-taking. The action is filmed confidently and the sets are fantastically detailed using some exceptional practical effects. There are ghost sharks, glistening islands and the motion capture used on Javier Bardem and his crew is seamless. Only the CGI-heavy finale lets the film down. The music is also sublime. Geoff Zanelli’s thunderous melody features the trademark theme-tune mixed with some really lovely orchestral music.
Overall, Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge kicks off a summer season filled to the brim with sequels and after the previous film’s poor reception, expectation was almost as low as it is for Transformers: the Last Knight.
What we’ve ended up with is a bit of a double-edged sword then. It’s certainly better than the previous three sequels and almost up to the standard of the 2003 original; the problem is, that film wasn’t particularly good in the first place.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/26/here-we-go-again-pirates-of-the-caribbean-salazars-revenge-review/
However, come 2017 and Depp’s star is sinking faster than the Black Pearl. After three pretty dreadful sequels, the cast reunites for Salazar’s Revenge. But does a change in directors herald a new and exciting path for the plucky pirates?
Thrust into an all-new adventure, a down-on-his-luck Captain Jack Sparrow (Depp) feels the winds of ill-fortune blowing strongly when ghost sailors led by his nemesis, evil Captain Salazar (Javier Bardem), escape from the Devil’s Triangle. Jack’s only hope lies in seeking out the legendary Trident of Poseidon, but to find it, he must forge an uneasy alliance with a brilliant and beautiful astronomer (Kaya Scodelario and a headstrong young man in the British navy (Brenton Thwaites).
Newcomer directors Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg craft a film that is magnificent to look at and stunning to listen to, but features all of the same problems as its predecessors. The time really is up on this franchise.
Of the cast, only Javier Bardem’s snarling Salazar makes any sort of lasting impact. In fact, he’s probably the best antagonist the series has ever had and makes for a menacing presence throughout. Depp looks like he’s on autopilot, almost as bored of Jack Sparrow’s drunken antics as we are, and the normally excellent Kaya Scodelario (Skins, Maze Runner) plays a particularly bland female lead during the films running time.
Speaking of which, at 142 minutes, this is one migraine inducing slog. All four previous films have suffered from being overstuffed, and with the extra abundance of characters this time around, it’s even more painful. There simply is no need to create a film that’s nearly two and a half hours long, especially considering the plot is as paint-by-numbers as you can get.
Nevertheless, to look at, Salazar’s Revenge really is breath-taking. The action is filmed confidently and the sets are fantastically detailed using some exceptional practical effects. There are ghost sharks, glistening islands and the motion capture used on Javier Bardem and his crew is seamless. Only the CGI-heavy finale lets the film down. The music is also sublime. Geoff Zanelli’s thunderous melody features the trademark theme-tune mixed with some really lovely orchestral music.
Overall, Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge kicks off a summer season filled to the brim with sequels and after the previous film’s poor reception, expectation was almost as low as it is for Transformers: the Last Knight.
What we’ve ended up with is a bit of a double-edged sword then. It’s certainly better than the previous three sequels and almost up to the standard of the 2003 original; the problem is, that film wasn’t particularly good in the first place.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/26/here-we-go-again-pirates-of-the-caribbean-salazars-revenge-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Entourage (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
When we last saw the crew from the smash HBO series Entourage, they were jetting their way to Europe to celebrate the pending marriage of movie star Vincent Chase (Adrian Grenier). Taking up soon after the events of the series finale, “Entourage” opens with a spectacular deck party hosted by Vinnie after his marriage lasted all of 9 days. He has his friends Turtle (Jerry Ferrara), Eric (Kevin Connolly), and his half-brother Johnny (Kevin Dillon), join him at his party set aboard a lavish yacht.
At the same time, former Agent to the Stars and now studio head, Ari Gold (Jeremy Piven) has called Vincent to offer him the lead for what he plans to be his first blockbuster under his watch. Vincent accepts the role but on the condition that he makes his directorial debut on the picture.
Despite his reservations, Ari uses his influence to get Vincent the job and attempts very hard to keep his end of deal he made with his wife that they could take the job and move back to Hollywood as long as Ari can keep his anger in check and make sure he has fun moments with his family often.
When the film runs over budget and Eric is forced to ask Ari for more money, Ari must travel to Texas to meet with the main financer of the film, Larsen McCredle (Billy Bob Thornton), Larsen is not willing to part with more money and he assigns his son Travis (Haley Joel Osment), to travel back to L.A. with Ari and oversee the completion of the film.
Naturally things do not go as planned and Ari’s slow burning fuse is ramping to overdrive with hysterical results and despite their best intentions, Vincent’s friends cannot seem to get out of their own way as they have numerous funny and embarrassing subplots around them and their romantic interests.
If you are a fan of the series you know what to expect, plenty of male bonding, women, jokes, and Ari pouring gasoline on every fire he attempts to put out.
The film is well-paced and very funny and it was great to see the gang back in action, especially when they had a script that enhances the show and does not treat it as a movie of the week reunion.
The supporting cast is solid and it is great fun seeing all the celebrity cameos and characters from the series that appear in the film.
The big draw is Piven, as he commands every scene that he is in. Running from full on rage to subtle submission in a blink of an eye, he reminds us of why he won three Emmy Awards for his portrayal of the character, and I will honestly say I think he should be given Oscar consideration for his performance in the film.
In the end if you are a fan of the series you will likely enjoy the film very much and if not, then what are you waiting for? See the show and you will fast become a fan.
http://sknr.net/2015/06/03/entourage/
At the same time, former Agent to the Stars and now studio head, Ari Gold (Jeremy Piven) has called Vincent to offer him the lead for what he plans to be his first blockbuster under his watch. Vincent accepts the role but on the condition that he makes his directorial debut on the picture.
Despite his reservations, Ari uses his influence to get Vincent the job and attempts very hard to keep his end of deal he made with his wife that they could take the job and move back to Hollywood as long as Ari can keep his anger in check and make sure he has fun moments with his family often.
When the film runs over budget and Eric is forced to ask Ari for more money, Ari must travel to Texas to meet with the main financer of the film, Larsen McCredle (Billy Bob Thornton), Larsen is not willing to part with more money and he assigns his son Travis (Haley Joel Osment), to travel back to L.A. with Ari and oversee the completion of the film.
Naturally things do not go as planned and Ari’s slow burning fuse is ramping to overdrive with hysterical results and despite their best intentions, Vincent’s friends cannot seem to get out of their own way as they have numerous funny and embarrassing subplots around them and their romantic interests.
If you are a fan of the series you know what to expect, plenty of male bonding, women, jokes, and Ari pouring gasoline on every fire he attempts to put out.
The film is well-paced and very funny and it was great to see the gang back in action, especially when they had a script that enhances the show and does not treat it as a movie of the week reunion.
The supporting cast is solid and it is great fun seeing all the celebrity cameos and characters from the series that appear in the film.
The big draw is Piven, as he commands every scene that he is in. Running from full on rage to subtle submission in a blink of an eye, he reminds us of why he won three Emmy Awards for his portrayal of the character, and I will honestly say I think he should be given Oscar consideration for his performance in the film.
In the end if you are a fan of the series you will likely enjoy the film very much and if not, then what are you waiting for? See the show and you will fast become a fan.
http://sknr.net/2015/06/03/entourage/