Search
Search results
David McK (3180 KP) rated Thor (2011) in Movies
Sep 12, 2021
One of the earliest movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), - I think it's the 4th - way back in Phase 1, with what was seemingly an odd choice of director in our very own (I'm from Northern Ireland, as he is) Kenneth Branagh.
However, you can soon see why he was chosen, with this film - in particular - having a very Shakespearian feel to it, what with the whole plot of two brothers to the throne (as an aside, also the first film to leave Earth for large portions) and the whole familial drama going on ...
I also remember, prior to this, that my whole recollection of the character came from the old 70s/80s 'The Incredible Hulk' tv show and mini movies, where Thor was more-or-less somewhat similar to Jekyll and Hyde, in that he shared a body with the lead character ('who-so-ever be so worthy') of the crippled doctor Donald Blake - a name dropped in this movie as an Easter egg, as Jane Foster's ex boyfriend, and - temporarily - borrowed by this version of Thor.
Unlike many of the later MCU movies, this has a surprisingly small finale, and the scene with Thor breaking into the SHIELD camp in his attempt to recover Mjolnir is still the best bit of the whole thing.
However, you can soon see why he was chosen, with this film - in particular - having a very Shakespearian feel to it, what with the whole plot of two brothers to the throne (as an aside, also the first film to leave Earth for large portions) and the whole familial drama going on ...
I also remember, prior to this, that my whole recollection of the character came from the old 70s/80s 'The Incredible Hulk' tv show and mini movies, where Thor was more-or-less somewhat similar to Jekyll and Hyde, in that he shared a body with the lead character ('who-so-ever be so worthy') of the crippled doctor Donald Blake - a name dropped in this movie as an Easter egg, as Jane Foster's ex boyfriend, and - temporarily - borrowed by this version of Thor.
Unlike many of the later MCU movies, this has a surprisingly small finale, and the scene with Thor breaking into the SHIELD camp in his attempt to recover Mjolnir is still the best bit of the whole thing.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
It is 1934, and our moustachioed detective has just solved a theft in Jerusalem. He looks forward to resting in Istanbul, but his break is interrupted with the news that he must return to London for a case. It seems like Poirot's luck is in, having just met his friend who is director of the Orient Express.
Once on board Poirot catches the attention of the businessman, Samuel Ratchett. Ratchett has received threatening letters, and wishes to hire the detective as his bodyguard during their journey, but the offer is politely declined.
That night an avalanche derails he train and the passengers are stranded. In the morning Ratchett is found dead, stabbed a dozen times. Poirot and Bouc, the train director, investigate the passengers as repairs begin. Poirot discovers a partially destroyed note connecting Ratchett to the kidnapping of Daisy Armstrong, a child who was abducted from her bedroom and held for ransom. After the ransom was paid, Daisy was found murdered. Ratchett is identified as John Cassetti, Daisy’s kidnapper and murderer.
First off, let me address the elephant in the room... that'll be Kenneth Branagh as Poirot. David Suchet will always be my Poirot, he's perfect. Branagh, for me, has an overacting issue. And that moustache, it's just ridiculous. That's not even taking into account the scene where Poirot is laying in bed and he doesn't have his night-time moustache cosy on. Crazy.
Agatha Christie's tale has definitely been given the Hollywood treatment. It's gone from the quite dark Suchet version, to something quite farcical in comparison. I can understand remaking some things, but when you have such a definitive portrayal of a character why would you recast them?
Having just rewatched the 2010 version I will say that the story line in the movie is probably easier to understand. It's also more suitable for a younger audience.
As a passing comment to everyone who was surprised to hear they were going to do Death On The Nile next... no shit, Poirot! It was dropped in at the end of the film.
Once on board Poirot catches the attention of the businessman, Samuel Ratchett. Ratchett has received threatening letters, and wishes to hire the detective as his bodyguard during their journey, but the offer is politely declined.
That night an avalanche derails he train and the passengers are stranded. In the morning Ratchett is found dead, stabbed a dozen times. Poirot and Bouc, the train director, investigate the passengers as repairs begin. Poirot discovers a partially destroyed note connecting Ratchett to the kidnapping of Daisy Armstrong, a child who was abducted from her bedroom and held for ransom. After the ransom was paid, Daisy was found murdered. Ratchett is identified as John Cassetti, Daisy’s kidnapper and murderer.
First off, let me address the elephant in the room... that'll be Kenneth Branagh as Poirot. David Suchet will always be my Poirot, he's perfect. Branagh, for me, has an overacting issue. And that moustache, it's just ridiculous. That's not even taking into account the scene where Poirot is laying in bed and he doesn't have his night-time moustache cosy on. Crazy.
Agatha Christie's tale has definitely been given the Hollywood treatment. It's gone from the quite dark Suchet version, to something quite farcical in comparison. I can understand remaking some things, but when you have such a definitive portrayal of a character why would you recast them?
Having just rewatched the 2010 version I will say that the story line in the movie is probably easier to understand. It's also more suitable for a younger audience.
As a passing comment to everyone who was surprised to hear they were going to do Death On The Nile next... no shit, Poirot! It was dropped in at the end of the film.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
You’ll never guess who dunnit…
There’s a big problem with Kenneth Branagh’s 2017 filming of the Hercule Poirot-based murder mystery…. and that’s the 1974 Sidney Lumet classic featuring Albert Finney in the starring role. For that film was so memorable – at least, the “who” of the “whodunnit” (no spoilers here) was so memorable – that any remake is likely to be tarnished by that knowledge. If you go into this film blissfully unaware of the plot, you are a lucky man/woman. For this is a classic Agatha Christie yarn.
The irascible, borderline OCD, but undeniably great Belgian detective, Poirot, is dragged around the world by grateful police forces to help solve unsolvable crimes. After solving a case in Jerusalem, Poirot is called back to the UK with his mode of transport being the famous Orient Express. Trapped in the mountains by an avalanche, a murder is committed and with multiple suspects and a plethora of clues it is up to Poirot to solve the case.
Branagh enjoys himself enormously as Poirot, sporting the most distractingly magnificent facial hair since Daniel Day-Lewis in “The Gangs of New York”. The moustache must have had its own trailer and make-up team!
Above all, the film is glorious to look at, featuring a rich and exotic colour palette that is reminiscent of the early colour films of the 40’s. Cinematography was by Haris Zambarloukos (“Mamma Mia” and who also collaborated with Branagh on “Thor) with lots of innovative “ceiling down” shots and artful point-of-view takes that might be annoying to some but which I consider as deserving of Oscar/BAFTA nominations.
The pictures are accompanied by a lush score by Patrick Doyle (who also scored Branagh’s “Thor”). Hats off also to the special effects crew, who made the alpine bridge scenes look decidedly more alpine than where they were actually filmed (on a specially made bridge in the Surrey Hills!).
All these technical elements combine to make the film’s early stages look and feel truly epic.
And the cast… what a cast! Dame Judi Dench (“Victoria and Abdul“); Olivia Coleman (“The Lobster“); Johnny Depp (“Black Mass“); Daisy Ridley (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“); Penélope Cruz (“Zoolander 2“); Josh Gad (Olaf!); Derek Jacobi (“I, Claudius”); Willem Dafoe (“The Great Wall“) and Michelle Pfeiffer (“mother!“). A real case again of an “oh, it’s you” film again at the cinema – when’s the last time we saw that?
It’s also great to see young Lucy Boynton, so magnificent in last year’s excellent “Sing Street“, getting an A-list role as the twitchy and disturbed countess.
With all these ingredients in the pot, it should be great, right? Unfortunately, in my view, no, not quite. The film’s opening momentum is really not maintained by the screenplay by Michael Green (“Blade Runner 2049“; “Logan“). At heart, it’s a fairly static and “stagey” piece at best, set as it is on the rather claustrophobic train (just three carriages… on the Orient Express… really?). But the tale is made even more static by the train’s derailment in the snow. Branagh and Green try to sex up the action where they can, but there are lengthy passages of fairly repetitive dialogue. One encounter in particular between Branagh and Depp seems to last interminably: you wonder if the problem was that the director wasn’t always looking on to yell “Cut”!
All this leads to the “revelation” of the murderer as being a bit of an anticlimactic “thank heavens for that” rather than the gasping denouement it should have been. (Perhaps this would be different if you didn’t know the twist).
However, these reservations aside, it’s an enjoyable night out at the flicks, although a bit of a disappointment from the level of expectation I had for it. I can’t be too grumpy about it, given it’s a return to good old-fashioned yarn-spinning at the cinema, with great visuals and an epic cast. And that has to be good news.
For sure, Branagh does make for an amusing and engaging Poirot, even if his dialogue did need some ‘tuning in’ to. There was a suggestion at the end of the film that we might be seeing his return in “Death on the Nile” – the most lush and decorous of Peter Ustinov’s outings – which I would certainly welcome. He will have to find another 10 A-list stars though to decorate the boat, which will be a challenge for casting!
The irascible, borderline OCD, but undeniably great Belgian detective, Poirot, is dragged around the world by grateful police forces to help solve unsolvable crimes. After solving a case in Jerusalem, Poirot is called back to the UK with his mode of transport being the famous Orient Express. Trapped in the mountains by an avalanche, a murder is committed and with multiple suspects and a plethora of clues it is up to Poirot to solve the case.
Branagh enjoys himself enormously as Poirot, sporting the most distractingly magnificent facial hair since Daniel Day-Lewis in “The Gangs of New York”. The moustache must have had its own trailer and make-up team!
Above all, the film is glorious to look at, featuring a rich and exotic colour palette that is reminiscent of the early colour films of the 40’s. Cinematography was by Haris Zambarloukos (“Mamma Mia” and who also collaborated with Branagh on “Thor) with lots of innovative “ceiling down” shots and artful point-of-view takes that might be annoying to some but which I consider as deserving of Oscar/BAFTA nominations.
The pictures are accompanied by a lush score by Patrick Doyle (who also scored Branagh’s “Thor”). Hats off also to the special effects crew, who made the alpine bridge scenes look decidedly more alpine than where they were actually filmed (on a specially made bridge in the Surrey Hills!).
All these technical elements combine to make the film’s early stages look and feel truly epic.
And the cast… what a cast! Dame Judi Dench (“Victoria and Abdul“); Olivia Coleman (“The Lobster“); Johnny Depp (“Black Mass“); Daisy Ridley (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“); Penélope Cruz (“Zoolander 2“); Josh Gad (Olaf!); Derek Jacobi (“I, Claudius”); Willem Dafoe (“The Great Wall“) and Michelle Pfeiffer (“mother!“). A real case again of an “oh, it’s you” film again at the cinema – when’s the last time we saw that?
It’s also great to see young Lucy Boynton, so magnificent in last year’s excellent “Sing Street“, getting an A-list role as the twitchy and disturbed countess.
With all these ingredients in the pot, it should be great, right? Unfortunately, in my view, no, not quite. The film’s opening momentum is really not maintained by the screenplay by Michael Green (“Blade Runner 2049“; “Logan“). At heart, it’s a fairly static and “stagey” piece at best, set as it is on the rather claustrophobic train (just three carriages… on the Orient Express… really?). But the tale is made even more static by the train’s derailment in the snow. Branagh and Green try to sex up the action where they can, but there are lengthy passages of fairly repetitive dialogue. One encounter in particular between Branagh and Depp seems to last interminably: you wonder if the problem was that the director wasn’t always looking on to yell “Cut”!
All this leads to the “revelation” of the murderer as being a bit of an anticlimactic “thank heavens for that” rather than the gasping denouement it should have been. (Perhaps this would be different if you didn’t know the twist).
However, these reservations aside, it’s an enjoyable night out at the flicks, although a bit of a disappointment from the level of expectation I had for it. I can’t be too grumpy about it, given it’s a return to good old-fashioned yarn-spinning at the cinema, with great visuals and an epic cast. And that has to be good news.
For sure, Branagh does make for an amusing and engaging Poirot, even if his dialogue did need some ‘tuning in’ to. There was a suggestion at the end of the film that we might be seeing his return in “Death on the Nile” – the most lush and decorous of Peter Ustinov’s outings – which I would certainly welcome. He will have to find another 10 A-list stars though to decorate the boat, which will be a challenge for casting!
Mark Halpern (153 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Jan 26, 2018
Exceptional remake
Based on the famous book written by Agatha Christie Novel Murder On The Orient Express. The story of thirteen different strangers and one famous Detective are on one of the most luxurious trains in the eastern hemisphere. One man gets murdered and it is up to famous detective Hercule Poirot to solve the case. The train passengers contain a mixture of classes from a Princess, to countess, a Doctor, a Dancer, The valet, The professor, the gold digger a antiquities dealer and a nurse, a governess, a Count, the Italian fan and the Conductor. They are the suspects in this cold blooded murder. During the murder the an avalanche knocks the train off the tracks and during this is when the body is discovered. It is this stoppage of time that allows our Hero to question the suspects and try to make sense of all the evidence what ever there maybe.
I can't divulge more because there are so many different plot points that it would ruin the chance for you to see the movie and enjoy it.
The Book can never be beat, The first movie was ok but, the remake was fantastic. Stars Melanie Griffith, Judi Dench, William Dafoe, Daisy Ridley, Johnny Deep, Josh Gad, Penople Cruz and Kenneth Branagh. This is an excellent cast for this movie and it is amazing. I do suggest you read the book first but, that is just a suggestion
I can't divulge more because there are so many different plot points that it would ruin the chance for you to see the movie and enjoy it.
The Book can never be beat, The first movie was ok but, the remake was fantastic. Stars Melanie Griffith, Judi Dench, William Dafoe, Daisy Ridley, Johnny Deep, Josh Gad, Penople Cruz and Kenneth Branagh. This is an excellent cast for this movie and it is amazing. I do suggest you read the book first but, that is just a suggestion
David McK (3180 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express in Books
Dec 27, 2021
As a general rule, I'm not really big into murder mystery whodunnits, generally finding them boring, (sometimes) obvious and just, well, generally a little bit stale.
That may be why I'd never read perhaps Agatha Christie's most famous murder story before, or even had any interest in which any of the (numerous) films, TV series or plays based around the same.
Which is a long way of saying that I came into this 'cold', as it were, knowing little beyond the fact that it was a Hercule Poirot mystery (thanks to the 2017 Kenneth Branagh movie, which I hadn't seen), and that the murder was on a train (d'uh!) just as it ran into snow whilst on a journey.
Now that I've read it, I have to say: I found little to cause me to revise my opinion of murder mysteries in general.
That's not to say that it is bad, per se, just that it never really hooked me all that much: indeed, at times it felt more like a chore to read than something enjoyable. Indeed, I'm sorry to say, the reveal of just who carried out the crime also completely failed to elicit any form of surprise or emotion at all from me: not that I saw it coming but just that, well, it almost felt like a relief when it did.
All I can say is: sorry, any Poirot fans!
That may be why I'd never read perhaps Agatha Christie's most famous murder story before, or even had any interest in which any of the (numerous) films, TV series or plays based around the same.
Which is a long way of saying that I came into this 'cold', as it were, knowing little beyond the fact that it was a Hercule Poirot mystery (thanks to the 2017 Kenneth Branagh movie, which I hadn't seen), and that the murder was on a train (d'uh!) just as it ran into snow whilst on a journey.
Now that I've read it, I have to say: I found little to cause me to revise my opinion of murder mysteries in general.
That's not to say that it is bad, per se, just that it never really hooked me all that much: indeed, at times it felt more like a chore to read than something enjoyable. Indeed, I'm sorry to say, the reveal of just who carried out the crime also completely failed to elicit any form of surprise or emotion at all from me: not that I saw it coming but just that, well, it almost felt like a relief when it did.
All I can say is: sorry, any Poirot fans!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
A war vehicle running low on fuel.
The words “Christopher Nolan” and “disappointment” are not words I would naturally associate… but for me, they apply where “Dunkirk” is concerned.
It promised so much from the trailer: a historical event of epic proportions; Kenneth Branagh; Tom Hardy; Mark Rylance; Hans Zimmer on the keys; the director of such classics as “The Dark Knight”; “Inception” and “Interstellar” : what could go wrong?
But it just doesn’t work and I’ve spent the last 24 hours trying to unpick why.
A key problem for me was the depiction of the beach itself. The film eschews CGI effects – a move that I would normally approve of – in favour of the use of “practical effects” and the involvement of “thousands of extras” (as the rather glutinously positive Wiki entry declares). Unfortunately for the movie, there were some 400,000 troops marooned in this last patch of civilisation ahead of the Nazi hoard, and all of the shots refuse to acknowledge this scale of potential human tragedy. Yes, there are individual scenes of horror, such as the soldier walking into the sea against the impassive stares of the young heroes. But nothing of scale. At times I thought I’d seen more people on the beach on a winter’s day in Bournemouth! In the absence of a co-production with China, and the provision of the volume of extras as in “The Great Wall“, CGI becomes a necessary evil to make the whole exercise believable.
What it was really like…. one of the famous paintings by Charles Cundall (Crown copyright).
My disquiet at this deepened when we got to the sharp end of the rescue by the “small boats”. In my mind (and I’m NOT quite old enough to remember this!) I imagine a sea full of them. A sight to truly merit Branagh’s awed gaze. But no. They might have been “original” vessels…. but there was only about half a dozen of them. A mental vision dashed.
Did I feel a spot of rain? Looking to unfriendly skies on the River Mole.
The film attempts to tell the story from three perspectives: from the land; from the sea and from the air. The sea though gets the lion’s share of the film, and there is much drowning that occurs that (I am aware) was distressing for some in the audience.
Styles going in One Direction…. down.
Nolan also pushes his quirky “timeline” manipulation too far for an audience that largely expects a linear telling of a classic tale. It’s day; it’s night; the minesweeper’s sailing; then sunk; then sailing again; a Spitfire crashes, then crashes again from a different perspective. I know many in the audience just didn’t ‘get’ that: leaving them presumably very confused!
That being said, the film is not a write off, and has its moments of brilliance. Kenneth Branagh (“Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit“, “Valkyrie”) – although having a range of Nolan’s clipped and cheesy lines to say – is impressive as the commanding officer. Mark Rylance (“Bridge of Spies“, “The BFG“) also shines as the captain of the “Moonstone”: one of the small boats out of Weymouth (although here there is a grievous lack of backstory for the civilian efforts). And Tom Hardy (“The Revenant“, “Legend“), although having limited opportunity to act with anything other than his eyes, is impressive as RAF pilot Farrier. His final scene of stoic heroism is memorable.
Fionn Whitehead is also impressive in his movie debut, and even Harry Styles (“This is Us“) equips himself well.
A surfeit of horror leads to a lack of compassion. Harry Styles, Aneurin Barnard and Fionn Whitehead look on as the death toll mounts.
The cinematography by Hoyte Van Hoytema (“Interstellar“) is stunning with some memorable shots: a burning plane on a beach being a highspot for me.
And Hans Zimmer’s score is Oscar-worthy, generating enormous tension with a reverberating score, albeit sometimes let down by unsuitable cutaways (for example, to scenes of boat loading). Elsewhere in the sound department though I had major issues, with a decent percentage of the dialogue being completely inaudible in the sound mix.
Kenneth Branagh, impressive as Commander Bolton RN.
I really wanted this to be a “Battle of Britain”. Or a “Bridge Too Far”. Or even a “Saving Private Ryan”. Unfortunately, for me it was none of these, and this goes down as one of my movie disappointments of the year so far.
It promised so much from the trailer: a historical event of epic proportions; Kenneth Branagh; Tom Hardy; Mark Rylance; Hans Zimmer on the keys; the director of such classics as “The Dark Knight”; “Inception” and “Interstellar” : what could go wrong?
But it just doesn’t work and I’ve spent the last 24 hours trying to unpick why.
A key problem for me was the depiction of the beach itself. The film eschews CGI effects – a move that I would normally approve of – in favour of the use of “practical effects” and the involvement of “thousands of extras” (as the rather glutinously positive Wiki entry declares). Unfortunately for the movie, there were some 400,000 troops marooned in this last patch of civilisation ahead of the Nazi hoard, and all of the shots refuse to acknowledge this scale of potential human tragedy. Yes, there are individual scenes of horror, such as the soldier walking into the sea against the impassive stares of the young heroes. But nothing of scale. At times I thought I’d seen more people on the beach on a winter’s day in Bournemouth! In the absence of a co-production with China, and the provision of the volume of extras as in “The Great Wall“, CGI becomes a necessary evil to make the whole exercise believable.
What it was really like…. one of the famous paintings by Charles Cundall (Crown copyright).
My disquiet at this deepened when we got to the sharp end of the rescue by the “small boats”. In my mind (and I’m NOT quite old enough to remember this!) I imagine a sea full of them. A sight to truly merit Branagh’s awed gaze. But no. They might have been “original” vessels…. but there was only about half a dozen of them. A mental vision dashed.
Did I feel a spot of rain? Looking to unfriendly skies on the River Mole.
The film attempts to tell the story from three perspectives: from the land; from the sea and from the air. The sea though gets the lion’s share of the film, and there is much drowning that occurs that (I am aware) was distressing for some in the audience.
Styles going in One Direction…. down.
Nolan also pushes his quirky “timeline” manipulation too far for an audience that largely expects a linear telling of a classic tale. It’s day; it’s night; the minesweeper’s sailing; then sunk; then sailing again; a Spitfire crashes, then crashes again from a different perspective. I know many in the audience just didn’t ‘get’ that: leaving them presumably very confused!
That being said, the film is not a write off, and has its moments of brilliance. Kenneth Branagh (“Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit“, “Valkyrie”) – although having a range of Nolan’s clipped and cheesy lines to say – is impressive as the commanding officer. Mark Rylance (“Bridge of Spies“, “The BFG“) also shines as the captain of the “Moonstone”: one of the small boats out of Weymouth (although here there is a grievous lack of backstory for the civilian efforts). And Tom Hardy (“The Revenant“, “Legend“), although having limited opportunity to act with anything other than his eyes, is impressive as RAF pilot Farrier. His final scene of stoic heroism is memorable.
Fionn Whitehead is also impressive in his movie debut, and even Harry Styles (“This is Us“) equips himself well.
A surfeit of horror leads to a lack of compassion. Harry Styles, Aneurin Barnard and Fionn Whitehead look on as the death toll mounts.
The cinematography by Hoyte Van Hoytema (“Interstellar“) is stunning with some memorable shots: a burning plane on a beach being a highspot for me.
And Hans Zimmer’s score is Oscar-worthy, generating enormous tension with a reverberating score, albeit sometimes let down by unsuitable cutaways (for example, to scenes of boat loading). Elsewhere in the sound department though I had major issues, with a decent percentage of the dialogue being completely inaudible in the sound mix.
Kenneth Branagh, impressive as Commander Bolton RN.
I really wanted this to be a “Battle of Britain”. Or a “Bridge Too Far”. Or even a “Saving Private Ryan”. Unfortunately, for me it was none of these, and this goes down as one of my movie disappointments of the year so far.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Thor (2011) in Movies
May 9, 2019
Two worlds, One hero
Thor is presented with a difficult challenge - believably incorporating a god into the Marvel Cinematic Universe that has already been established. This task falls to director Kenneth Branagh, who devotes sufficient time to both Asgard, Thor's (Chris Hemsworth) home realm, and Earth, where he is exiled to. Asgard is depicted through a heavy use of special effects which creates a sense of wonder, but the story is steeped in relatable familial issues. When Thor disobeys his father, Odin (Anthony Hopkins), he is cast to Earth as a mortal. His hammer, Mjolnir, is the source of his powers, and it is also sent to Earth to await someone worthy enough to wield such power.
Most superhero movies spend a large amount of time introducing their hero to their superpower, and then invest yet more time discovering the full potential of this power. In the case of Thor, this is reversed. He begins the film a powerful god and is then stripped of such a gift, forced to learn to live without such capabilities. It is here that the film really shines, as Thor attempts to adapt to life on Earth. He is not accustomed to human ways, and this fish out of water scenario is wisely played for laughs.
Of course, this being a superhero movie means a love interest is required to be drafted in. Enter Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), an astrophysicist who discovers Thor. She is accompanied by her mentor, Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård), and her assistant, Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings). They all become entangled with S.H.I.E.L.D, who have previously been glimpsed in Iron Man (2008), The Incredible Hulk (2008), and Iron Man 2 (2010). Throughout this series of films it has been evident that there is something larger at play, and with Thor this bigger picture begins to come into sharper focus.
Thor's brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is presented as the villain, but he mostly stays in the shadows and pulls the strings of others to do his fighting. This results in less CGI-laden battles but a stronger character-based story. Thor strikes a pleasing balance between plot and spectacle, effectively setting up a likeable hero and an interesting big bad. However, with most of the Earth-based action set in a small town in New Mexico, the threat never feels particularly palpable.
I was skeptical but intrigued by Thor, and Branagh does do a marvellous job of incorporating myth and legend into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I would have liked to see Kat Dennings given a meatier role to play, but that minor quibble aside Thor is a highly enjoyable superhero movie. Chris Hemsworth is great as Thor, delivering in both the heroics and comedy and Loki played by Tom Hiddelston is a fantastic villian. Sadly, the film doesn't quite rise to the bar set by Iron Man, but it does come impressively close.
Most superhero movies spend a large amount of time introducing their hero to their superpower, and then invest yet more time discovering the full potential of this power. In the case of Thor, this is reversed. He begins the film a powerful god and is then stripped of such a gift, forced to learn to live without such capabilities. It is here that the film really shines, as Thor attempts to adapt to life on Earth. He is not accustomed to human ways, and this fish out of water scenario is wisely played for laughs.
Of course, this being a superhero movie means a love interest is required to be drafted in. Enter Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), an astrophysicist who discovers Thor. She is accompanied by her mentor, Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård), and her assistant, Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings). They all become entangled with S.H.I.E.L.D, who have previously been glimpsed in Iron Man (2008), The Incredible Hulk (2008), and Iron Man 2 (2010). Throughout this series of films it has been evident that there is something larger at play, and with Thor this bigger picture begins to come into sharper focus.
Thor's brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is presented as the villain, but he mostly stays in the shadows and pulls the strings of others to do his fighting. This results in less CGI-laden battles but a stronger character-based story. Thor strikes a pleasing balance between plot and spectacle, effectively setting up a likeable hero and an interesting big bad. However, with most of the Earth-based action set in a small town in New Mexico, the threat never feels particularly palpable.
I was skeptical but intrigued by Thor, and Branagh does do a marvellous job of incorporating myth and legend into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I would have liked to see Kat Dennings given a meatier role to play, but that minor quibble aside Thor is a highly enjoyable superhero movie. Chris Hemsworth is great as Thor, delivering in both the heroics and comedy and Loki played by Tom Hiddelston is a fantastic villian. Sadly, the film doesn't quite rise to the bar set by Iron Man, but it does come impressively close.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Belfast (2021) in Movies
Jan 14, 2022
In short, Belfast is a very human and truly wonderful piece of cinema.
It's visual style is both stunning and simple, and is brimming with plenty of striking imagery.
It's themes are rich. The setting explores the civil unrest between Protestants and Catholics in 1960s Belfast. This turbulent moment in time is a constant presence for sure, but the main bulk of the narrative deals with a working class family who are struggling with debt, and are looking to potentially relocate to England in light of the city wide violence. The very heart of the story though is found in Buddy, the young son of the family who is dealing with growing up and not wanting to leave. Buddy's actor, Jude Hill, is excellent. He embodies innocent childhood and the adventure that comes with it. He's an 11 year old actor, holding his own against screen veterans such as Ciarán Hinds and Judi Dench (both fantastic as always).
Other than Buddy, most of the heavy lifting is undertaken by the mother, played by Caitriona Balfe, who really deserves an Academy Nomination for her role here. Jamie Dornan also stars, who proved to be a pleasant surprise for me, only knowing him from the obvious, and is a welcome addition to an all round stellar cast. Throughout this, the narrative touches upon loss and loneliness, and the moments of life that manage to be bittersweet.
Belfast is a sometimes heartwarming, powerful, occasionally funny, and often melancholy tale told with a lot of love and care. Kenneth Branagh has delivered a slice of cinematic gold.
It's visual style is both stunning and simple, and is brimming with plenty of striking imagery.
It's themes are rich. The setting explores the civil unrest between Protestants and Catholics in 1960s Belfast. This turbulent moment in time is a constant presence for sure, but the main bulk of the narrative deals with a working class family who are struggling with debt, and are looking to potentially relocate to England in light of the city wide violence. The very heart of the story though is found in Buddy, the young son of the family who is dealing with growing up and not wanting to leave. Buddy's actor, Jude Hill, is excellent. He embodies innocent childhood and the adventure that comes with it. He's an 11 year old actor, holding his own against screen veterans such as Ciarán Hinds and Judi Dench (both fantastic as always).
Other than Buddy, most of the heavy lifting is undertaken by the mother, played by Caitriona Balfe, who really deserves an Academy Nomination for her role here. Jamie Dornan also stars, who proved to be a pleasant surprise for me, only knowing him from the obvious, and is a welcome addition to an all round stellar cast. Throughout this, the narrative touches upon loss and loneliness, and the moments of life that manage to be bittersweet.
Belfast is a sometimes heartwarming, powerful, occasionally funny, and often melancholy tale told with a lot of love and care. Kenneth Branagh has delivered a slice of cinematic gold.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Death on the Nile (2022) in Movies
Feb 10, 2022
Most of the female cast. (2 more)
Poirot's backstory.
Kenneth Branagh's mustache.
Slow-moving with little payoff. (2 more)
Nothing substantial happens for the first hour.
Not entertaining. Perfect example of first world problems.
A Drowzy Whodunit Loaded with Mediocrity
Death on the Nile is the sequel to 2017’s Murder on the Orient Express with director and lead actor Kenneth Branagh returning. The mystery thriller is based on the 1937 novel of the same name by Agatha Christie. Death on the Nile has been adapted before as a 1978 film and as a 2004 episode of the Poirot television series starring David Suchet.
The 2022 film has been completed since December of 2019. The film was moved around several times due to COVID and was pushed back even further after Armie Hammer’s abuse allegations.
Mostly occurring shortly after the events of Murder on the Orient Express, Death on the Nile offers a bit of a look into the past of Hercule Poirot (Branagh). Taking place on the Yser Bridge in Belgium In 1914, a young Poirot advises his Belgian captain to attack the Germans spontaneously without warning. The attack is a success, but Poirot’s captain triggers an explosive after their victory. The explosion leaves Poirot’s face heavily scarred and offers an explanation as to why he always has a mustache.
Poirot reunites with his friend Bouc (Tom Bateman, who also returns from Murder on the Orient Express) in Egypt. Bouc is traveling with his mother Euphemia (Annette Bening) and their friends as they celebrate the marriage of Linnet Ridgeway (Gal Gadot) and Simon Doyle (Armie Hammer). To make matters more complicated, Simon was originally romantically involved with Jaqueline (Emma Mackey) who was also a former friend of Linnet. She now scornfully follows Simon and Linnet around Egypt.
The party travels on the S. S. Karnak, a steamship, along the river Nile. A murder eventually takes place on the steamship, which ignites a desire within Poirot to discover who the killer is before more suffer the same fate.
CGI and visual effects are used to make Kenneth Branagh look younger in the opening sequence of the film. The issue is he looks almost as bad as Henry Cavill did as Superman during the reshoots for Justice League. Branagh’s upper lip is almost nonexistent during this sequence and his philtrum seems to barely move when he speaks. It’s a visual nightmare and a terrible way to jump start a murder mystery.
Poirot travels to a Jazz nightclub where he’s first introduced to Simon, Jacqueline, and Linnet. Poirot spends much of the film embracing his OCD habits and people watching. This first nightclub sequence is about ten minutes long and you’re basically forced to watch people do nothing but dance for that entire time. Armie Hammer’s overly sexual dancing combined with his heavy breathing and constant sweating with both Gal Gadot and Emma Mackey is nauseating even without taking his sexual allegations into consideration.
Nothing really happens in the film for the first hour. Death on the Nile takes its time getting to the murder as little things begin to disappear (like a tube of paint) and Simon and Linnet are nearly crushed to death by a falling rock as they’re practically mid-coitus while sightseeing some pyramids. Emma Mackey gives a particularly strong performance. She is blinded by one-sided love in the film and her performance is a combination of passion, borderline insanity, and a broken heart.
Annette Bening is so cynical that it’s humorous and Jennifer Saunders adds just enough sarcastic bite to remind us ever so slightly of Absolutely Fabulous. Letitia Wright portrays business manager Rosalie Otterbourne. Her performance is intriguing because she’s always fighting for what she feels like she’s rightfully owed; whether it’s the right amount of money for her services or her happiness away from the limelight.
Like Murder on the Orient Express and other Agatha Christie adaptations, the enticing aspect of Death on the Nile is not only its massive and recognizable cast but also the fact that the story is written in a way that everyone is a suspect. The film’s nonchalant way of meandering towards that first murder is frustrating. A deliberate pace is one thing, but Death on the Nile is boring for the most part. Poirot is asked to take a case involving Jacqueline and the safety of Simon and Linnet, but is then mocked for being heartless and not being able to solve the case sooner. The people on board are likely meant to be scared, but come off as rich people not getting what they want the instant they want it.
Death on the Nile crawls towards a resolution you don’t feel invested in. Poirot’s backstory is interesting and there are some solid performances especially from the female cast, but the film otherwise feels like an unwanted game of Guess Who after you unwillingly chug two bottles of NyQuil and are asked to predict who the killer is after two long hours of tediousness.
The 2022 film has been completed since December of 2019. The film was moved around several times due to COVID and was pushed back even further after Armie Hammer’s abuse allegations.
Mostly occurring shortly after the events of Murder on the Orient Express, Death on the Nile offers a bit of a look into the past of Hercule Poirot (Branagh). Taking place on the Yser Bridge in Belgium In 1914, a young Poirot advises his Belgian captain to attack the Germans spontaneously without warning. The attack is a success, but Poirot’s captain triggers an explosive after their victory. The explosion leaves Poirot’s face heavily scarred and offers an explanation as to why he always has a mustache.
Poirot reunites with his friend Bouc (Tom Bateman, who also returns from Murder on the Orient Express) in Egypt. Bouc is traveling with his mother Euphemia (Annette Bening) and their friends as they celebrate the marriage of Linnet Ridgeway (Gal Gadot) and Simon Doyle (Armie Hammer). To make matters more complicated, Simon was originally romantically involved with Jaqueline (Emma Mackey) who was also a former friend of Linnet. She now scornfully follows Simon and Linnet around Egypt.
The party travels on the S. S. Karnak, a steamship, along the river Nile. A murder eventually takes place on the steamship, which ignites a desire within Poirot to discover who the killer is before more suffer the same fate.
CGI and visual effects are used to make Kenneth Branagh look younger in the opening sequence of the film. The issue is he looks almost as bad as Henry Cavill did as Superman during the reshoots for Justice League. Branagh’s upper lip is almost nonexistent during this sequence and his philtrum seems to barely move when he speaks. It’s a visual nightmare and a terrible way to jump start a murder mystery.
Poirot travels to a Jazz nightclub where he’s first introduced to Simon, Jacqueline, and Linnet. Poirot spends much of the film embracing his OCD habits and people watching. This first nightclub sequence is about ten minutes long and you’re basically forced to watch people do nothing but dance for that entire time. Armie Hammer’s overly sexual dancing combined with his heavy breathing and constant sweating with both Gal Gadot and Emma Mackey is nauseating even without taking his sexual allegations into consideration.
Nothing really happens in the film for the first hour. Death on the Nile takes its time getting to the murder as little things begin to disappear (like a tube of paint) and Simon and Linnet are nearly crushed to death by a falling rock as they’re practically mid-coitus while sightseeing some pyramids. Emma Mackey gives a particularly strong performance. She is blinded by one-sided love in the film and her performance is a combination of passion, borderline insanity, and a broken heart.
Annette Bening is so cynical that it’s humorous and Jennifer Saunders adds just enough sarcastic bite to remind us ever so slightly of Absolutely Fabulous. Letitia Wright portrays business manager Rosalie Otterbourne. Her performance is intriguing because she’s always fighting for what she feels like she’s rightfully owed; whether it’s the right amount of money for her services or her happiness away from the limelight.
Like Murder on the Orient Express and other Agatha Christie adaptations, the enticing aspect of Death on the Nile is not only its massive and recognizable cast but also the fact that the story is written in a way that everyone is a suspect. The film’s nonchalant way of meandering towards that first murder is frustrating. A deliberate pace is one thing, but Death on the Nile is boring for the most part. Poirot is asked to take a case involving Jacqueline and the safety of Simon and Linnet, but is then mocked for being heartless and not being able to solve the case sooner. The people on board are likely meant to be scared, but come off as rich people not getting what they want the instant they want it.
Death on the Nile crawls towards a resolution you don’t feel invested in. Poirot’s backstory is interesting and there are some solid performances especially from the female cast, but the film otherwise feels like an unwanted game of Guess Who after you unwillingly chug two bottles of NyQuil and are asked to predict who the killer is after two long hours of tediousness.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Belfast (2021) in Movies
Nov 21, 2021
Underwhelming
The trouble with hearing that a film is a “shoo-in” Oscar film is that I go in with expectations and, sometimes, there is no way the film can live up to the expectations that I have for it.
Such is the case with the new film Written and Directed by Kenneth Branagh, his personal remembrance BELFAST.
Professionally made, with a strong cast and some decent dialogue, BELFAST tells the tale of a young boy growing up in Ireland when “the troubles” (the Irish Civil War between Protestants and Catholics of the late 1960’s) erupts and the family must turn against friends and neighbors and make the difficult decision as to what side of the conflict they should be one - and whether they should stay in Ireland or move to England.
We see this world through the eyes of 9 year old Buddy (Jude Hill). Consequently, we only gets bit and pieces of the story as he starts to understand what is going on. And that is part of the problem with this film. We receive the information in bits and pieces on the level of a child. And the premise just doesn’t work, for his parents and grandparents constantly attempt to shield the child from the goings-on in the world (and thus shield the audience).
Branagh’s script is underwritten and slight - but he turns it over to some tremendous performers who elevate it to something better than it is.
Veteran actors Dame Judi Dench and Ciaran Hinds are fine comic relief in this film as the Grandparents who are wise and seeing that the world that they once knew is changing. These two aging thespians bring a spark to this film, for it is pretty limp otherwise.
The conflict between Pa (Jamie Doran - 50 SHADES OF GREY) and Ma (Citrione Balfe - OUTLANDER) over the families’ reaction to the events outside of their home never really crescendoes with any power. Again, I blame the writing. The conflict between these two is just not interesting enough. So, if I don’t blame the writing, I’ll blame the Directing - which is also by Branagh.
Balfe is being touted as a Best Actress Oscar contender, and I can see how she might get one, as she does have “the Oscar Speech”, but there is not much more to recommend here.
This film is professionally done and acted well enough - there just needed to be more “there” there.
Letter Grade B-
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such is the case with the new film Written and Directed by Kenneth Branagh, his personal remembrance BELFAST.
Professionally made, with a strong cast and some decent dialogue, BELFAST tells the tale of a young boy growing up in Ireland when “the troubles” (the Irish Civil War between Protestants and Catholics of the late 1960’s) erupts and the family must turn against friends and neighbors and make the difficult decision as to what side of the conflict they should be one - and whether they should stay in Ireland or move to England.
We see this world through the eyes of 9 year old Buddy (Jude Hill). Consequently, we only gets bit and pieces of the story as he starts to understand what is going on. And that is part of the problem with this film. We receive the information in bits and pieces on the level of a child. And the premise just doesn’t work, for his parents and grandparents constantly attempt to shield the child from the goings-on in the world (and thus shield the audience).
Branagh’s script is underwritten and slight - but he turns it over to some tremendous performers who elevate it to something better than it is.
Veteran actors Dame Judi Dench and Ciaran Hinds are fine comic relief in this film as the Grandparents who are wise and seeing that the world that they once knew is changing. These two aging thespians bring a spark to this film, for it is pretty limp otherwise.
The conflict between Pa (Jamie Doran - 50 SHADES OF GREY) and Ma (Citrione Balfe - OUTLANDER) over the families’ reaction to the events outside of their home never really crescendoes with any power. Again, I blame the writing. The conflict between these two is just not interesting enough. So, if I don’t blame the writing, I’ll blame the Directing - which is also by Branagh.
Balfe is being touted as a Best Actress Oscar contender, and I can see how she might get one, as she does have “the Oscar Speech”, but there is not much more to recommend here.
This film is professionally done and acted well enough - there just needed to be more “there” there.
Letter Grade B-
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)