Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Red Sparrow (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
In Red Sparrow, Jennifer Lawrence (of Hunger Games fame) portrays Russian ballet dancer Dominika who is grievously injured at the peak of her career. Without the ability to continue dancing, she is at risk of losing not only her home, but the medical care that her sickly mother so desperately needs. In a final act of desperation, she reaches out to her uncle (masterfully portrayed by Matthias Schoenaerts), who is not only family, but also the deputy director of Russia’s intelligence agency, the SVR. He offers the means to not only keep them housed, but also to ensure that her mother continues to get the very best treatment and care from her private nurses. With no other option but to agree, she reluctantly takes an assignment to “entertain” a powerful Russian figure with the intent to swap out his cell phone, with another provided by her uncle. In an emotionally intense scene she witnesses a heinous act of murder and is forced to make a decision, join those who carried out the murder and become a Red Sparrow or die.
Dominika is then sent to the training school where all Red Sparrows learn their craft. They are taught manipulation by any means necessary, identifying what their target desires and utilizing this desire to get what they want. It’s brutal training that few succeed at, where each pupil uses their body and their minds to get information from their subjects. Dominika’s personal strength of both will and body are tested, until a call comes in from the SVR that they are in need of her newly acquired talents. She is given an opportunity to prove her worth to the state by traveling to Budapest, to get close to a C.I.A. agent, and convince him to give up the name of a mole who has been providing secrets to the Americans. This is where the dangerous game of cat and mouse starts between her and her C.I.A. target Nate Nash (Joel Edgerton).
Jennifer Lawrence in her portrayal of a strong, yet desperate Russian woman is both believable and saddening. She mastered her Russian accent and it comes across naturally. The audience sees the constant struggle between what she must do to protect her mother and the lengths that she must go to, to acquire the information the SVR needs to rout out the mole. Her character goes through numerous physical, emotional and psychological tortures as she grows closer to her end game. For a Red Sparrow failure is not an option, as failure means death.
As a spy movie, it regularly keeps you guessing up until the very end. You keep asking yourself whether Nate will be able to turn Dominika against her country and become an operative for the C.I.A., or is she simply playing the part as the sparrow and using his trust against him? As an audience member you never truly know who to trust or which side Dominika is on, and that’s what keeps the movie so intriguing throughout.
“Red Sparrow” is one of those rare films that keeps you on the edge of your seat through the entire film. As soon as you think you know where it’s going you are suddenly turned in another direction. You think you know the answers, only to be wrong the next minute…or are you? Red Sparrow is by far one of the best spy movies that I have seen in a long time. Even though there isn’t a lot of action it provides the intrigue of an intense chess game, planning multiple moves ahead to arrive at checkmate in the very end, and to that end it succeeds brilliantly.
Dominika is then sent to the training school where all Red Sparrows learn their craft. They are taught manipulation by any means necessary, identifying what their target desires and utilizing this desire to get what they want. It’s brutal training that few succeed at, where each pupil uses their body and their minds to get information from their subjects. Dominika’s personal strength of both will and body are tested, until a call comes in from the SVR that they are in need of her newly acquired talents. She is given an opportunity to prove her worth to the state by traveling to Budapest, to get close to a C.I.A. agent, and convince him to give up the name of a mole who has been providing secrets to the Americans. This is where the dangerous game of cat and mouse starts between her and her C.I.A. target Nate Nash (Joel Edgerton).
Jennifer Lawrence in her portrayal of a strong, yet desperate Russian woman is both believable and saddening. She mastered her Russian accent and it comes across naturally. The audience sees the constant struggle between what she must do to protect her mother and the lengths that she must go to, to acquire the information the SVR needs to rout out the mole. Her character goes through numerous physical, emotional and psychological tortures as she grows closer to her end game. For a Red Sparrow failure is not an option, as failure means death.
As a spy movie, it regularly keeps you guessing up until the very end. You keep asking yourself whether Nate will be able to turn Dominika against her country and become an operative for the C.I.A., or is she simply playing the part as the sparrow and using his trust against him? As an audience member you never truly know who to trust or which side Dominika is on, and that’s what keeps the movie so intriguing throughout.
“Red Sparrow” is one of those rare films that keeps you on the edge of your seat through the entire film. As soon as you think you know where it’s going you are suddenly turned in another direction. You think you know the answers, only to be wrong the next minute…or are you? Red Sparrow is by far one of the best spy movies that I have seen in a long time. Even though there isn’t a lot of action it provides the intrigue of an intense chess game, planning multiple moves ahead to arrive at checkmate in the very end, and to that end it succeeds brilliantly.
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated The Wolf Man (1941) in Movies
May 25, 2017
A classic Universal Monster Movie (2 more)
Lon Chaney Jr
Claude Rains
Even a Man who is pure of heart....
Even a man who is pure of heart, and says his prayers by night, may become a wolf when the wolfsbane blooms, and the Autumn moon is bright.
Heard that before in other werewolf movies, well this was it's origin. Created purely for the film, this poem even had some people believing it was an original folklore saying. If you have watched a handful of werewolf movies, then you will have noticed a lot of similarities;
- Silver bullets
- Wolfsbane
- Full Moon
- Not being able to retreat their acts from their loved ones
- Pentagrams
- Gypsies
- Gypsy Curses
- A Bite or scratch from the werewolf turns you
Some of these were originally created by the writers working on this film, and have become stereotypes that inspire many other werewolf films, TV Shows, Books, and Games etc.
The portrayal of Lawrence Talbot, by Lon Chaney Jr. is one that makes the classic Universal Monsters so special. Just like Frankenstein's Monster, the audiences of the 40's would have been frightened and horrified by these creatures, enough so that they wouldn't realise that they are in actual fact, suppose to sympathize with them, because when you watch the creatures being chased and hunted,the angry mobs fail to understand that these creatures never wanted this. Frankenstein's Monster never asked to be created, or to have the brain of a criminal mistakenly placed into his head instead of that of a civilized man. Larry Talbot never asked for the Wolf Man's curse, which he encountered whilst trying to save the life of a young female friend of his love interest.
With a great story and, at the time, revolutionary stop motion effects for the wolf man transformation, but of course the most important aspect, the beautifully crafted practical effects, the makeup that brings the creature to life, is incredible. My favourite of the classic Universal Monster Movies and one of my favourite movies of all time.
Heard that before in other werewolf movies, well this was it's origin. Created purely for the film, this poem even had some people believing it was an original folklore saying. If you have watched a handful of werewolf movies, then you will have noticed a lot of similarities;
- Silver bullets
- Wolfsbane
- Full Moon
- Not being able to retreat their acts from their loved ones
- Pentagrams
- Gypsies
- Gypsy Curses
- A Bite or scratch from the werewolf turns you
Some of these were originally created by the writers working on this film, and have become stereotypes that inspire many other werewolf films, TV Shows, Books, and Games etc.
The portrayal of Lawrence Talbot, by Lon Chaney Jr. is one that makes the classic Universal Monsters so special. Just like Frankenstein's Monster, the audiences of the 40's would have been frightened and horrified by these creatures, enough so that they wouldn't realise that they are in actual fact, suppose to sympathize with them, because when you watch the creatures being chased and hunted,the angry mobs fail to understand that these creatures never wanted this. Frankenstein's Monster never asked to be created, or to have the brain of a criminal mistakenly placed into his head instead of that of a civilized man. Larry Talbot never asked for the Wolf Man's curse, which he encountered whilst trying to save the life of a young female friend of his love interest.
With a great story and, at the time, revolutionary stop motion effects for the wolf man transformation, but of course the most important aspect, the beautifully crafted practical effects, the makeup that brings the creature to life, is incredible. My favourite of the classic Universal Monster Movies and one of my favourite movies of all time.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Silver Linings Playbook (2012) in Movies
Feb 17, 2019
Classic
A man trying to piece his life together after being released from a mental institution befriends a woman just as whacky and out of control as he is.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 5
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 8
Genre: 8
Silver Linings Playbook is a unique story about finding The One while finding your way. It’s a wild ride of storytelling where you hope it plays out in a certain fashion, but you’re never really sure. It’s hilarious, thought-provoking, and touching all at once. A definite classic.
Memorability: 10
One of my favorite scenes in this whole movie occurs when Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence) confronts Pat (Bradley Cooper) after he missed their scheduled dance practice. It’s a brilliant scene where Tiffany and Pat Sr. (Robert De Niro) go back and forth about why missing practice was the worst thing Pat Jr. could have done. There are quite a few moments like these where the dialogue is just right and the scene unfolds perfectly. These moments not only captivate your attention but have you anticipating the next great moment.
Pace: 10
And it’s because of those moments that the overall pace is managed so well. Outside of a slow beginning, the story moves at an extremely consistent pace. Sometimes funny, sometimes touching, and sometimes both, it forces you through the story while you ride an emotional high.
Plot: 10
The originality of the story gives me nothing to compare it to and that’s a great thing. It’s a film that succeeds by staying in its own lane and not trying to be anything else. It also succeeds with consistency: There are no holes or weaknesses that make the overall story come up short.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 91
Memorable scenes abound in Silver Linings Playbook. Anytime Chris Tucker shows up randomly, you know it’s going to be a good time. It’s not just a good movie, but a movie with staying power. The more I watch it, the more I end up loving it.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 5
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 8
Genre: 8
Silver Linings Playbook is a unique story about finding The One while finding your way. It’s a wild ride of storytelling where you hope it plays out in a certain fashion, but you’re never really sure. It’s hilarious, thought-provoking, and touching all at once. A definite classic.
Memorability: 10
One of my favorite scenes in this whole movie occurs when Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence) confronts Pat (Bradley Cooper) after he missed their scheduled dance practice. It’s a brilliant scene where Tiffany and Pat Sr. (Robert De Niro) go back and forth about why missing practice was the worst thing Pat Jr. could have done. There are quite a few moments like these where the dialogue is just right and the scene unfolds perfectly. These moments not only captivate your attention but have you anticipating the next great moment.
Pace: 10
And it’s because of those moments that the overall pace is managed so well. Outside of a slow beginning, the story moves at an extremely consistent pace. Sometimes funny, sometimes touching, and sometimes both, it forces you through the story while you ride an emotional high.
Plot: 10
The originality of the story gives me nothing to compare it to and that’s a great thing. It’s a film that succeeds by staying in its own lane and not trying to be anything else. It also succeeds with consistency: There are no holes or weaknesses that make the overall story come up short.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 91
Memorable scenes abound in Silver Linings Playbook. Anytime Chris Tucker shows up randomly, you know it’s going to be a good time. It’s not just a good movie, but a movie with staying power. The more I watch it, the more I end up loving it.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated X-Men: First Class (2011) in Movies
Jul 28, 2019
Back on form
Fox made a smart move with First Class. After just four movies, the X-Men movie franchise had already started to feel a bit stale. The solution? Take the story way back for a 60s adventure.
The casting here is pretty strong. James McAvoy is great in the role of a younger and cockier Charles Xavier, and Michael Fassbender seems like perfect casting as Erik Lensher (even if his Irish accent slips into his dialogue now and again!)
The relationship between the two friends, sadly destined to become enemies, is the beating heart of First Class. A lot of the action we've become accustomed too throughout these films is sidelined to explore their friendship, and their conflicting ideologies. As the plot comes to a head, and these two really pull in opposite directions, the emotional impact is well earned and hard hitting.
Elsewhere, we have Nicholas Holt as Beast and Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique. They also fit the billing pretty well, and are a welcome addition to the cast.
As an X-Men comic fan, it's a lovely touch to see less known characters get screen time such as Azazel, Havoc, and finally - Banshee!
We also get an adaption of Emma Frost, although she is criminally underused, merely present as a glorified henchwoman.
Kevin Bacon is the big bad this time round, playing Sebastian Shaw, a relatively minor X-Men villain, who plays his part well in First Class - he never feels like a huge threat, but that works as it doesn't steal the limelight from Erik's descent into Magneto.
The final action scene is enjoyable comic book fun - the small X-Men team clad in yellow and blue outfits (a nod to the original comic costumes), and the setting is full of colour. Its pretty damn glorious.
First Class is a stand out entry into the X-Men franchise, and certainly worth your time, even if you've never seen another X-Men film!
The casting here is pretty strong. James McAvoy is great in the role of a younger and cockier Charles Xavier, and Michael Fassbender seems like perfect casting as Erik Lensher (even if his Irish accent slips into his dialogue now and again!)
The relationship between the two friends, sadly destined to become enemies, is the beating heart of First Class. A lot of the action we've become accustomed too throughout these films is sidelined to explore their friendship, and their conflicting ideologies. As the plot comes to a head, and these two really pull in opposite directions, the emotional impact is well earned and hard hitting.
Elsewhere, we have Nicholas Holt as Beast and Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique. They also fit the billing pretty well, and are a welcome addition to the cast.
As an X-Men comic fan, it's a lovely touch to see less known characters get screen time such as Azazel, Havoc, and finally - Banshee!
We also get an adaption of Emma Frost, although she is criminally underused, merely present as a glorified henchwoman.
Kevin Bacon is the big bad this time round, playing Sebastian Shaw, a relatively minor X-Men villain, who plays his part well in First Class - he never feels like a huge threat, but that works as it doesn't steal the limelight from Erik's descent into Magneto.
The final action scene is enjoyable comic book fun - the small X-Men team clad in yellow and blue outfits (a nod to the original comic costumes), and the setting is full of colour. Its pretty damn glorious.
First Class is a stand out entry into the X-Men franchise, and certainly worth your time, even if you've never seen another X-Men film!
JT (287 KP) rated American Hustle (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
There’s a lot of love for American Hustle and with a cast such as this it is easy to see why. It’s a film that oozes glitz and glamour and has a slick sense of stability with shades Scorsese as an attempt at a crime caper.
Bale is top draw, an opening shot that requires no dialogue sees Bale’s stomach bloating Irving Rosenfeld carefully craft a balding comb over. Then in walks his partner throughout this initial sting, Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper) with a beautiful perm – and this is just the male cast.
The film is loosely based on a true story. Bale’s con man falls for Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams) and the pair look to collude together before being nabbed by the FBI and forced to help bring down a circle of corrupt politicians as a way to avoid prosecution. This is no heist from the Soderbergh play book, but a slow churning plan that involves fake sheikhs and mafia bosses and is the brainchild of agent DiMaso who targets Mayor Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner) as one of the many poor unfortunates looking to make change in a growing 70s society.
Supporting cast are exceptional, none more so than Jennifer Lawrence, as Rosenfeld’s long suffering wife who during proceedings threatens to blow the whole plan wide open. That’s not to say that Amy Adams isn’t well worth her role, but the wardrobe department must have been short on ideas for her if all that was around were dresses with plunging necklines.
Overall it plays out well but does suffer confusion as you wonder who is playing who during the whole affair. All the way through I felt that something wasn’t quite right with it. For me it didn’t have the lasting impact that The Fighter had or even Silver Linings Playbook, but as a film that wants to capture everything the 70s were about it does a stupendous job.
Bale is top draw, an opening shot that requires no dialogue sees Bale’s stomach bloating Irving Rosenfeld carefully craft a balding comb over. Then in walks his partner throughout this initial sting, Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper) with a beautiful perm – and this is just the male cast.
The film is loosely based on a true story. Bale’s con man falls for Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams) and the pair look to collude together before being nabbed by the FBI and forced to help bring down a circle of corrupt politicians as a way to avoid prosecution. This is no heist from the Soderbergh play book, but a slow churning plan that involves fake sheikhs and mafia bosses and is the brainchild of agent DiMaso who targets Mayor Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner) as one of the many poor unfortunates looking to make change in a growing 70s society.
Supporting cast are exceptional, none more so than Jennifer Lawrence, as Rosenfeld’s long suffering wife who during proceedings threatens to blow the whole plan wide open. That’s not to say that Amy Adams isn’t well worth her role, but the wardrobe department must have been short on ideas for her if all that was around were dresses with plunging necklines.
Overall it plays out well but does suffer confusion as you wonder who is playing who during the whole affair. All the way through I felt that something wasn’t quite right with it. For me it didn’t have the lasting impact that The Fighter had or even Silver Linings Playbook, but as a film that wants to capture everything the 70s were about it does a stupendous job.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Roe v. Wade (2021) in Movies
Mar 24, 2021
Tough subject matter taken head on (1 more)
'Old-pros' Voight, Davi and Guttenberg turn up
The script is clunky and unconvincing (1 more)
Some of the supporting acting roles are ropey
A controversial look at the Supreme Court legalisation of abortion in 1973
Roe v Wade was a controversial vote by the US Supreme Court in 1973 over whether abortion should be legalized across the US, following its earlier legalization in New York state.
Following an early personal tragedy, Dr. Bernard Nathanson (Nick Loeb) is a leading abortion advocate, making a tidy living by performing abortions in New York. Together with writer and journalist Larry Lader (Jamie Kennedy) the pair lobby for the "Right to Choose": to legalize abortion across the country. They 'recruit' Norma McCorvey (Summer Joy Campbell), under the pseudonym of Jane Roe, to headline their case.
Against them are the 'Pro-Life' lobby headed by Dr. Mildred Jefferson (Stacey Nash) with Henry Wade (James DuMont), the district attorney for Dallas County, being the opposing plaintiff.
Positives:
- It's a brave team that put a movie together about such an emotionally charged subject, and Nick Loeb and crew should be congratulated for being brave enough to do so.
- As in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", this was subject matter from the era from the US 1960/1970's that I was completely unaware of, so I didn't know where the movie might go (no spoilers here).
- The movie plays its cards pretty close to its chest for most of the running time as regards whose 'side' it is on: pro-Life or pro-Choice. You see each team working their own corner, and the facts for and against are provided to the viewer (which Nick Loeb asserts have been thoroughly fact checked).
- The film comes to life most in some of the legal debates between Professor Robert Byrn (Joey Lawrence) and his students. These were the scenes which I enjoyed most, and Lawrence delivers one of the better acting performances in the movie.
- There's fun in seeing a lot of 'old pros' appearing in cameos as the supreme court judges: Jon Voight ("Mission Impossible"); Bond villain Robert Davi ("Licence to Kill"); Corbin Bernsen ("LA Law") and Steve Guttenberg ("3 Men and a Baby").
Negatives:
- There's no polite way to say this, but as a relatively low-budget movie, some of the supporting performances are on the decidedly ropy side.
- I wanted to see more of the legal debate between the members of the Supreme court.... but I suspect the shooting time available with these 'big name' actors was limited. That's a shame.
- This is not a "Trial of the Chicago 7", and the script is NOT by Aaron Sorkin. It generally lacks polish. And there is way too much "Oh, hello <<Insert full title and name of character here>>" which is distractingly unnatural (just use sub-titles!).
- Those familiar with my blog will know of my UTTER HATRED of voiceovers in movies! This is deployed throughout (by Nick Loeb) and irritated me enormously. More "Show".... less "Tell"!
- The movie doesn't know when to quit. There is a natural and dramatic "end point" to the story. But the movie tacks on multiple 'epilogue' scenes. Some of these are interesting and informative, showing broadcasts of the 'real-life' participants. Others are superfluous, and lessen the overall impact of the message. IMHO, it would have been better to end at the natural end-point of the story, then 'do a "Sully"' by dropping the real life photos and interviews as insets into the end-titles.
I'll sometimes put 'warnings' for sensitive viewers into my reviews. As the subject matter is abortion, then this may naturally self-deselect certain viewers. But to be clear, the movie does 'go there' in two short, almost subliminal, scenes that will almost certainly upset any parents that have been through any form of pre-natal loss. Watcher beware.
(For my full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/03/24/roe-v-wade-theres-a-fortune-in-abortion/. Thanks.)
Following an early personal tragedy, Dr. Bernard Nathanson (Nick Loeb) is a leading abortion advocate, making a tidy living by performing abortions in New York. Together with writer and journalist Larry Lader (Jamie Kennedy) the pair lobby for the "Right to Choose": to legalize abortion across the country. They 'recruit' Norma McCorvey (Summer Joy Campbell), under the pseudonym of Jane Roe, to headline their case.
Against them are the 'Pro-Life' lobby headed by Dr. Mildred Jefferson (Stacey Nash) with Henry Wade (James DuMont), the district attorney for Dallas County, being the opposing plaintiff.
Positives:
- It's a brave team that put a movie together about such an emotionally charged subject, and Nick Loeb and crew should be congratulated for being brave enough to do so.
- As in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", this was subject matter from the era from the US 1960/1970's that I was completely unaware of, so I didn't know where the movie might go (no spoilers here).
- The movie plays its cards pretty close to its chest for most of the running time as regards whose 'side' it is on: pro-Life or pro-Choice. You see each team working their own corner, and the facts for and against are provided to the viewer (which Nick Loeb asserts have been thoroughly fact checked).
- The film comes to life most in some of the legal debates between Professor Robert Byrn (Joey Lawrence) and his students. These were the scenes which I enjoyed most, and Lawrence delivers one of the better acting performances in the movie.
- There's fun in seeing a lot of 'old pros' appearing in cameos as the supreme court judges: Jon Voight ("Mission Impossible"); Bond villain Robert Davi ("Licence to Kill"); Corbin Bernsen ("LA Law") and Steve Guttenberg ("3 Men and a Baby").
Negatives:
- There's no polite way to say this, but as a relatively low-budget movie, some of the supporting performances are on the decidedly ropy side.
- I wanted to see more of the legal debate between the members of the Supreme court.... but I suspect the shooting time available with these 'big name' actors was limited. That's a shame.
- This is not a "Trial of the Chicago 7", and the script is NOT by Aaron Sorkin. It generally lacks polish. And there is way too much "Oh, hello <<Insert full title and name of character here>>" which is distractingly unnatural (just use sub-titles!).
- Those familiar with my blog will know of my UTTER HATRED of voiceovers in movies! This is deployed throughout (by Nick Loeb) and irritated me enormously. More "Show".... less "Tell"!
- The movie doesn't know when to quit. There is a natural and dramatic "end point" to the story. But the movie tacks on multiple 'epilogue' scenes. Some of these are interesting and informative, showing broadcasts of the 'real-life' participants. Others are superfluous, and lessen the overall impact of the message. IMHO, it would have been better to end at the natural end-point of the story, then 'do a "Sully"' by dropping the real life photos and interviews as insets into the end-titles.
I'll sometimes put 'warnings' for sensitive viewers into my reviews. As the subject matter is abortion, then this may naturally self-deselect certain viewers. But to be clear, the movie does 'go there' in two short, almost subliminal, scenes that will almost certainly upset any parents that have been through any form of pre-natal loss. Watcher beware.
(For my full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/03/24/roe-v-wade-theres-a-fortune-in-abortion/. Thanks.)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Finding your feet (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Foot tapping and Tear Jerking.
There are some films whose trailers really don’t properly represent their contents. The trailer for the new ‘grey-pound’ film “Finding Your Feet” promised a light hearted and witty foray into an elderly dance-club. And, yes, you get some laughs. But it’s very much a bitter sweet comedy, and the bitterness is ladled on by the bucketload leading to more tears than smiles through the majority of the running time.
Sandra (Imelda Staunton, “Pride“) – now Lady Sandra, after her husband’s latest knighthood – is in a predictable, sex-free but reasonably happy marriage to legal beagle Mike (John Sessions, “Denial“, “Florence Foster Jenkins“) when her world is shaken to its core on discovering that Mike has been having a five-year affair with her best friend Pamela (Josie Lawrence). Moving in with her Bohemian sister Bif (Celia Imrie, “Bridget Jones Baby“), she struggles to integrate into her decidedly lower class lifestyle and find common ground with Bif’s dance club friends Charlie (Timothy Spall, “Denial“, “Mr Turner”), Ted (David Hayman) and Jackie (Joanna Lumley, “The Wolf of Wall Street“).
Can Sandra turn her downward spiral around and find love and happiness again? Well, the posters scream “The Feel Good Film of the Year” so you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to know the answer to that! But it’s a bumpy journey for sure.
Getting all the acting honours is Timothy Spall, who is far too good to be buried away in this small British rom com. To watch him do “ordinary bloke doing ordinary things” is an absolute delight. He adds class and distinction to every scene he’s in, especially for those concerned with his truly tragic and upsetting back-story. Running a close second is Celia Imrie who has a wicked smile off to perfection and adds a lot of emotional depth to her performance: and she needs the range, since she too is on a pretty emotional journey through the second half of the film.
John Sessions and Josie Lawrence – old compatriots of course from the original version of TV’s “Whose Line Is It Anyway” – also deliver marvellous cameo performances, as does Phoebe Nicholls (“The Elephant Man”, “Downton Abbey”) as the tennis playing friend Janet.
Less convincing for me was Imelda Staunton, particularly in the first half of the film: for me she never quite pulls off the icy cold emotional wreck of Sandra, but is much better once the thaw has set in.
The film is written by Meg Leonard (in a debut script) and Nick Moorcroft (who did the “St Trinians” scripts). And there are some funny lines in there, although it has to be said that there are not enough of them. The majority of the best ones in fact are in the trailer, never bettered by Joanna Lumley’s zinger…. “My last marriage ended for religious reasons…. he thought he was God and I didn’t”! There’s not much more room for comic lines, since the rest of the script is stuffed with the dramatic outcomes from various flavours of old-age malady. Fortunately I was one of the younger members of the generally grey-haired audience, but for those further up the scale it must have been like staring into the void!
The film will win no awards for choreography, since the dance scenes are gloriously inept and out of sync. But this all rather adds to the charm of the piece.
Directed by Richard Loncraine, director of the equally forgettable Brit-flick “Wimbledon” and the rather more memorable “Brimstone and Treacle”, this is as Douglas Adams would have said “Mostly Harmless”: a film that most over-50’s will find a pleasant way to spend two hours. But go in expecting a drama with comic moments, rather than the hilarious comedy predicted by the trailer, and you will be better prepared.
(I should comment that the rating below is my view: my illustrious wife declared it a triumphant chick-flick and gave it FFFFf).
Sandra (Imelda Staunton, “Pride“) – now Lady Sandra, after her husband’s latest knighthood – is in a predictable, sex-free but reasonably happy marriage to legal beagle Mike (John Sessions, “Denial“, “Florence Foster Jenkins“) when her world is shaken to its core on discovering that Mike has been having a five-year affair with her best friend Pamela (Josie Lawrence). Moving in with her Bohemian sister Bif (Celia Imrie, “Bridget Jones Baby“), she struggles to integrate into her decidedly lower class lifestyle and find common ground with Bif’s dance club friends Charlie (Timothy Spall, “Denial“, “Mr Turner”), Ted (David Hayman) and Jackie (Joanna Lumley, “The Wolf of Wall Street“).
Can Sandra turn her downward spiral around and find love and happiness again? Well, the posters scream “The Feel Good Film of the Year” so you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to know the answer to that! But it’s a bumpy journey for sure.
Getting all the acting honours is Timothy Spall, who is far too good to be buried away in this small British rom com. To watch him do “ordinary bloke doing ordinary things” is an absolute delight. He adds class and distinction to every scene he’s in, especially for those concerned with his truly tragic and upsetting back-story. Running a close second is Celia Imrie who has a wicked smile off to perfection and adds a lot of emotional depth to her performance: and she needs the range, since she too is on a pretty emotional journey through the second half of the film.
John Sessions and Josie Lawrence – old compatriots of course from the original version of TV’s “Whose Line Is It Anyway” – also deliver marvellous cameo performances, as does Phoebe Nicholls (“The Elephant Man”, “Downton Abbey”) as the tennis playing friend Janet.
Less convincing for me was Imelda Staunton, particularly in the first half of the film: for me she never quite pulls off the icy cold emotional wreck of Sandra, but is much better once the thaw has set in.
The film is written by Meg Leonard (in a debut script) and Nick Moorcroft (who did the “St Trinians” scripts). And there are some funny lines in there, although it has to be said that there are not enough of them. The majority of the best ones in fact are in the trailer, never bettered by Joanna Lumley’s zinger…. “My last marriage ended for religious reasons…. he thought he was God and I didn’t”! There’s not much more room for comic lines, since the rest of the script is stuffed with the dramatic outcomes from various flavours of old-age malady. Fortunately I was one of the younger members of the generally grey-haired audience, but for those further up the scale it must have been like staring into the void!
The film will win no awards for choreography, since the dance scenes are gloriously inept and out of sync. But this all rather adds to the charm of the piece.
Directed by Richard Loncraine, director of the equally forgettable Brit-flick “Wimbledon” and the rather more memorable “Brimstone and Treacle”, this is as Douglas Adams would have said “Mostly Harmless”: a film that most over-50’s will find a pleasant way to spend two hours. But go in expecting a drama with comic moments, rather than the hilarious comedy predicted by the trailer, and you will be better prepared.
(I should comment that the rating below is my view: my illustrious wife declared it a triumphant chick-flick and gave it FFFFf).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Mother! (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Welcome to the Crystal Maze.
Darren Aronosfsky’s mother! is like no other film you’ll see this year: guaranteed. As a film lover, an Aronosfsky film is a bit like root canal at the dentist: you know you really need to go ahead and do it, but you know you’re not going to be very comfortable in the process.
Jennifer Lawrence (“Passengers“, “Joy“) plays “mother!” doing up a dilapidated old house in the middle of nowhere with her much older husband “Him” (Javier Bardem, “Skyfall”). he (sorry…. He) is a world-famous poet struggling to overcome a massive writing block. The situation is making things tense between the couple, and things get worse when He inexplicably invites a homeless couple “man” (Ed Harris, “Westworld”, “The Truman Show”) and “woman” (Michelle Pfeiffer, “Stardust”) to stay at the house. As things go progressively downhill, is mother losing her mind or is all the crazy stuff going on actually happening?
Jennifer Lawrence can do no wrong at the moment, and her complexion in the film is flawless: it needs to be, since she has the camera constantly about 3 inches from her face for large chunks of the movie: I sat in the very back row, and I still wasn’t far enough away! Her portrayal of a house-proud woman getting progressively more and more irritated by her guests’ inconsiderate acts – a glass? without a table mat??! – is a joy to watch. As her DIY ‘paradise’ is progressively sullied my ‘man’ and ‘woman’, so her distress grows exponentially.
Some of the supporting acting is also superb, with Ed Harris and particularly Michelle Pfeiffer enjoying themselves immensely. Also worthy of note are the brothers played by real-life brothers Brian Gleeson and Domhnall Gleeson: the latter must never sleep since he must be *constantly* on set at the moment. One of these guys in particular is very abel! (sic).
Whereas the trailer depicts this as a kind of normal haunted house spookfest, it is actually nothing of the sort: much of the action (although far-fetched) has a reasonably rational explanation (a continuation of my theme of the “physics of horror” from my last two reviews). The film is largely seen through mother!’s eyes, and the skillful cinematographer Matthew Libatique – an Aronosfsky-regular – oppressively and relentlessly delivers a uniquely tense cinematic experience. For me, for the first two thirds of the film at least, it succeeds brilliantly.
Aronosfsky is no shirker of film controversy: having Natalie Portman perform oral sex on Natalie Portman in “Black Swan” was enough to teach you that. But in the final reels of this film, Aronosfsky doesn’t just wind the dial past 10 to the Spinal Tap 11…. he keeps going right on up to 20. There are a few scenes in movies over the years that I wish I could go back and “unsee”, and this film has one of those: a truly upsetting slice of horror, playing to your worst nightmares of loss and despair. While the religious allegory in these scenes is splatted on as heavily as the splodges of mother!’s decorative plaster, they are nonetheless extremely disturbing and bound to massively divide the cinema audience. I think it’s fair to say that this DVD is not going to have “The Perfect Gift for Mother’s Day” as its marketing strapline.
Which all leaves me… where exactly? For the first time in a long time I actually have no idea! This is a film that I was willing to give an “FF” to while I was watching it, but as time has passed and I have thought more on the environmental and religious allegories, and the portrayal of the cult worship prevalent in popular X-factor celebrity, I am warming to it despite my best instincts not to. I’m not religious, but I would love to compare notes on this one with someone with strongly Christian views.
So, I’m actually going to break all the rules (a snake told me to) and not provide any rating below at this time. I might revisit it again at Christmas* to see if I can resolve it in my mind as either a movie masterpiece or over-indulgent codswallop.
* I have, and have decided to give it 4 Fads… its a film I’ve thought about a lot over the last few months.
Jennifer Lawrence (“Passengers“, “Joy“) plays “mother!” doing up a dilapidated old house in the middle of nowhere with her much older husband “Him” (Javier Bardem, “Skyfall”). he (sorry…. He) is a world-famous poet struggling to overcome a massive writing block. The situation is making things tense between the couple, and things get worse when He inexplicably invites a homeless couple “man” (Ed Harris, “Westworld”, “The Truman Show”) and “woman” (Michelle Pfeiffer, “Stardust”) to stay at the house. As things go progressively downhill, is mother losing her mind or is all the crazy stuff going on actually happening?
Jennifer Lawrence can do no wrong at the moment, and her complexion in the film is flawless: it needs to be, since she has the camera constantly about 3 inches from her face for large chunks of the movie: I sat in the very back row, and I still wasn’t far enough away! Her portrayal of a house-proud woman getting progressively more and more irritated by her guests’ inconsiderate acts – a glass? without a table mat??! – is a joy to watch. As her DIY ‘paradise’ is progressively sullied my ‘man’ and ‘woman’, so her distress grows exponentially.
Some of the supporting acting is also superb, with Ed Harris and particularly Michelle Pfeiffer enjoying themselves immensely. Also worthy of note are the brothers played by real-life brothers Brian Gleeson and Domhnall Gleeson: the latter must never sleep since he must be *constantly* on set at the moment. One of these guys in particular is very abel! (sic).
Whereas the trailer depicts this as a kind of normal haunted house spookfest, it is actually nothing of the sort: much of the action (although far-fetched) has a reasonably rational explanation (a continuation of my theme of the “physics of horror” from my last two reviews). The film is largely seen through mother!’s eyes, and the skillful cinematographer Matthew Libatique – an Aronosfsky-regular – oppressively and relentlessly delivers a uniquely tense cinematic experience. For me, for the first two thirds of the film at least, it succeeds brilliantly.
Aronosfsky is no shirker of film controversy: having Natalie Portman perform oral sex on Natalie Portman in “Black Swan” was enough to teach you that. But in the final reels of this film, Aronosfsky doesn’t just wind the dial past 10 to the Spinal Tap 11…. he keeps going right on up to 20. There are a few scenes in movies over the years that I wish I could go back and “unsee”, and this film has one of those: a truly upsetting slice of horror, playing to your worst nightmares of loss and despair. While the religious allegory in these scenes is splatted on as heavily as the splodges of mother!’s decorative plaster, they are nonetheless extremely disturbing and bound to massively divide the cinema audience. I think it’s fair to say that this DVD is not going to have “The Perfect Gift for Mother’s Day” as its marketing strapline.
Which all leaves me… where exactly? For the first time in a long time I actually have no idea! This is a film that I was willing to give an “FF” to while I was watching it, but as time has passed and I have thought more on the environmental and religious allegories, and the portrayal of the cult worship prevalent in popular X-factor celebrity, I am warming to it despite my best instincts not to. I’m not religious, but I would love to compare notes on this one with someone with strongly Christian views.
So, I’m actually going to break all the rules (a snake told me to) and not provide any rating below at this time. I might revisit it again at Christmas* to see if I can resolve it in my mind as either a movie masterpiece or over-indulgent codswallop.
* I have, and have decided to give it 4 Fads… its a film I’ve thought about a lot over the last few months.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated King of Thorns in Books
Nov 18, 2019
It won't be a surprise that in this book we find Jorg installed as king in his own right. It is also his wedding day. Rather inconventiently his castle is also about to be attacked by a huge army and he just doesn't have the troops to stop them.
The main story thread takes place over the day of the wedding and the battle to save his castle and kingdom. Any worries that Jorg has become soft in the years since the first book are swifly put aside as it's clear that with a proper army he can simply cause mayhem on a larger scale.
Like the first book there is also a 'flashback' story, again taking place four years previously, a year after he declared himself king. In this his journey takes him to other parts of the broken empire, showing more variety than the first book. There is also more use of arcane powers - for good and evil - and other adversaries join the story.
I thought the first book was excellent, if a little light on plot. This follow up is another notch up on the scale. The battle scenes are tenser, the plans even more desperate. The plot is now in full swing and moves nicely between the two story threads, events from four years previously having direct impact on the present.
We also find out more about The Builders and the world that Jorg inhabits, all of it totally fascinating, and once again Jorg is not above using the 'ancient' technology to further his ends.
The characterisation is better in this book, simply because more time is taken to flesh them out, but not at the expense of the speed of the story. Lawrence really is a natural story teller.
The plot twists and turns, and the reader is left guessing at each turn of the battle at what Jorg is going to do next and how he is going to win through the insurmountable odds stacked against him.
This really is an amazing book. I cannot recommend it highly enough.
The main story thread takes place over the day of the wedding and the battle to save his castle and kingdom. Any worries that Jorg has become soft in the years since the first book are swifly put aside as it's clear that with a proper army he can simply cause mayhem on a larger scale.
Like the first book there is also a 'flashback' story, again taking place four years previously, a year after he declared himself king. In this his journey takes him to other parts of the broken empire, showing more variety than the first book. There is also more use of arcane powers - for good and evil - and other adversaries join the story.
I thought the first book was excellent, if a little light on plot. This follow up is another notch up on the scale. The battle scenes are tenser, the plans even more desperate. The plot is now in full swing and moves nicely between the two story threads, events from four years previously having direct impact on the present.
We also find out more about The Builders and the world that Jorg inhabits, all of it totally fascinating, and once again Jorg is not above using the 'ancient' technology to further his ends.
The characterisation is better in this book, simply because more time is taken to flesh them out, but not at the expense of the speed of the story. Lawrence really is a natural story teller.
The plot twists and turns, and the reader is left guessing at each turn of the battle at what Jorg is going to do next and how he is going to win through the insurmountable odds stacked against him.
This really is an amazing book. I cannot recommend it highly enough.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated San Andreas (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The new Warner Brothers movie San Andreas stars Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson as Chief Ray Gaines, Carla Gugino as Emma Gaines, Alexandra Daddario as their daughter Blake Gaines, Paul Giamatti as scientist Lawrence, Ioan Gruffudd as Daniel (Emma’s new love interest, as she & Chief Gaines are about to finalize their divorce), and Archie Panjabi as Serena, a reporter.
The movie opens with a gut-wrenching helicopter rescue lead by Chief Gaines where he rescues a girl from a car that has careened off the edge of a cliff and is hanging precariously over a river. He manages to sweep her out of the car just barely before the car crashes the rest of the way down the cliff which would have surely killed her.
In my opinion, the movie never stops delivering gut wrenching, edge of your set moments. I was holding my breath and on edge thru the entirety of the film.
This is definitely a movie that you absolutely do NOT want to wait and see at home, it NEEDS ‘the big screen’. I think it probably is also better in 3D as well, I think the 3D adds to the special effects and helps pull you into the movie.
I was able to connect to the characters and while some of the situations were really really far fetched (Gaines rescuing Emma off the top of a collapsing building in a rescue helicopter as it literally crumbled away beneath her), the dedication that his character showed in trying to get her to safety, really made the story work for me.
There were moments of cute comedy in the film, mostly in the interactions between Blake Gaines and the brothers Ben and Ollie (Hugo Johnstone-Burt and Art Parkinson) that helped break up some of the tension imposed by the continuous onslaught of the disasters caused by the biggest earthquakes ever recorded.
If you like action / disaster movies, and a decent story, you will like this film.
Rated PG-13, I wouldn’t bring young children, but I would bring older kids, aged 13 and up, as the rating suggests.
I would give this movie 4 out of 5 stars for a good story and edge of your seat action throughout.
The movie opens with a gut-wrenching helicopter rescue lead by Chief Gaines where he rescues a girl from a car that has careened off the edge of a cliff and is hanging precariously over a river. He manages to sweep her out of the car just barely before the car crashes the rest of the way down the cliff which would have surely killed her.
In my opinion, the movie never stops delivering gut wrenching, edge of your set moments. I was holding my breath and on edge thru the entirety of the film.
This is definitely a movie that you absolutely do NOT want to wait and see at home, it NEEDS ‘the big screen’. I think it probably is also better in 3D as well, I think the 3D adds to the special effects and helps pull you into the movie.
I was able to connect to the characters and while some of the situations were really really far fetched (Gaines rescuing Emma off the top of a collapsing building in a rescue helicopter as it literally crumbled away beneath her), the dedication that his character showed in trying to get her to safety, really made the story work for me.
There were moments of cute comedy in the film, mostly in the interactions between Blake Gaines and the brothers Ben and Ollie (Hugo Johnstone-Burt and Art Parkinson) that helped break up some of the tension imposed by the continuous onslaught of the disasters caused by the biggest earthquakes ever recorded.
If you like action / disaster movies, and a decent story, you will like this film.
Rated PG-13, I wouldn’t bring young children, but I would bring older kids, aged 13 and up, as the rating suggests.
I would give this movie 4 out of 5 stars for a good story and edge of your seat action throughout.