Search
Search results
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated A Game of Thrones in Books
Nov 13, 2019
I've been reviewing books online for nearly a year now... and in that time I have finished every book I have started and more-or-less enjoyed every book and given positive reviews.
But this book has put an end to that. As a fan of writers such as Joe Abercrombie who cite this series and George R R Martin as a big influence, I thought I should give this a read. After all, with so many plaudits and a hit television show it couldn't be that bad, could it.
Unfortunately it could. I liked the prologue - that was interesting to read and had some good writing and interesting characters in it. The one star is purely for this part of the book. Treat it as a short story and ignore the rest of the weighty tome and you won't go far wrong.
From this point forward nothing works. I can see that Martin was trying to inject a bit of reality and grit into fantasy, though it could be argues it had not exactly been all sunlight, dancing elves and heroes with rippling muscles for several decades so I don't see it as the massive change in direction it has been touted as in some quarters.
What we have is a succession of dreary, uninteresting characters taking part in a series of dull and stilted conversations attempting to create some sort of dramatic tension simply by existing. And then quite often there will be sex, not for any reason other than it seems this is what Martin thinks makes characters interesting. And the sex scenes are really, really awful. They read as if an over-excited 15 year old boy has written them.
The structure - where each chapter is told from the point of view of a different character - probably sounded really good on paper. But the end result is almost impossible to read as there is no continuity between sections that are dealing with the same characters, So for the first half of every chapter the reader is trying to get to grips with the new main character while also working out which kingdom they are in and how they related to the many, many other characters. It's just plain too confusing and exhausting as an actual narrative device.
And the characters themselves... I was expecting Martin to try everything possible to avoid any of the usual tropes, but no. Accepted there are no magicians, elves or pure-hearted swashbuckling heroes. But what is left is just the usual supporting cast - the bastard half brother with a grudge, the scheming dwarf, the wronged heir to the throne... there is absolutely nothing new or inventive in any of the characters.
What this book reminded me of most was the Harry Potter series. Completely derivative, averagely written and heavily marketed fantasy stories eagerly consumed by people who don't actually read fantasy. To those who do read fantasy this is such a poor relation to the other fine works that have been published in the last 30 years it's not even worth considering.
If you have never read this, don't bother. Instead do yourself a favour and pick up something that actually has something to say and contains some truly interesting characters and worlds. Joe Abercrombie or Mark Lawrence, for example.
But this book has put an end to that. As a fan of writers such as Joe Abercrombie who cite this series and George R R Martin as a big influence, I thought I should give this a read. After all, with so many plaudits and a hit television show it couldn't be that bad, could it.
Unfortunately it could. I liked the prologue - that was interesting to read and had some good writing and interesting characters in it. The one star is purely for this part of the book. Treat it as a short story and ignore the rest of the weighty tome and you won't go far wrong.
From this point forward nothing works. I can see that Martin was trying to inject a bit of reality and grit into fantasy, though it could be argues it had not exactly been all sunlight, dancing elves and heroes with rippling muscles for several decades so I don't see it as the massive change in direction it has been touted as in some quarters.
What we have is a succession of dreary, uninteresting characters taking part in a series of dull and stilted conversations attempting to create some sort of dramatic tension simply by existing. And then quite often there will be sex, not for any reason other than it seems this is what Martin thinks makes characters interesting. And the sex scenes are really, really awful. They read as if an over-excited 15 year old boy has written them.
The structure - where each chapter is told from the point of view of a different character - probably sounded really good on paper. But the end result is almost impossible to read as there is no continuity between sections that are dealing with the same characters, So for the first half of every chapter the reader is trying to get to grips with the new main character while also working out which kingdom they are in and how they related to the many, many other characters. It's just plain too confusing and exhausting as an actual narrative device.
And the characters themselves... I was expecting Martin to try everything possible to avoid any of the usual tropes, but no. Accepted there are no magicians, elves or pure-hearted swashbuckling heroes. But what is left is just the usual supporting cast - the bastard half brother with a grudge, the scheming dwarf, the wronged heir to the throne... there is absolutely nothing new or inventive in any of the characters.
What this book reminded me of most was the Harry Potter series. Completely derivative, averagely written and heavily marketed fantasy stories eagerly consumed by people who don't actually read fantasy. To those who do read fantasy this is such a poor relation to the other fine works that have been published in the last 30 years it's not even worth considering.
If you have never read this, don't bother. Instead do yourself a favour and pick up something that actually has something to say and contains some truly interesting characters and worlds. Joe Abercrombie or Mark Lawrence, for example.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Bad Boys for Life (2020) in Movies
Jan 20, 2020
The first Bad Boys movie came out in 1995, with the second arriving in 2003. So, 17 years on and these Miami bad boys are sure to be showing signs of age, following a career of fast cars and extreme action. Thankfully, Bad Boys for Life acknowledges that fact, even if we do get to hear the phrase "we're getting too old for this shit", or variations of, on many occasions throughout. Marcus Burnett (Martin Lawrence) is becoming a grandfather, keen to move on from being a bad boy in order to try and become a "good man" instead. Meanwhile, Mike Lowrey (Will Smith) isn't quite there just yet, continuing to try and live his shallow bad boy life at full throttle, dying his greying goatee beard in denial. When Mike becomes the target for a badass Mexican drug-lord (Kate del Castillo) and her ruthless son, his past comes back to haunt him and both boys have no choice but to get back together in order to take down the bad guys one last time.
OK, full disclaimer - I haven't seen Bad Boys and I haven't seen Bad Boys II. I probably wouldn't have been concerned about seeing this third installment either if I'm honest, but I found myself with a couple of hours to kill in London over the weekend, with Bad Boys for Life being literally the only movie that I hadn't seen which was showing at a convenient time. General opinion online so far seems to be that this is a fairly decent entry into the franchise though, and not necessarily something where you needed to have seen the previous movies in order to enjoy, so I decided to give it a shot. Consequently, there may be things about this movie that fans of the series will be happy to see or that they will be disappointed to see, but which I can't really comment on. I was heading into this like it was a standalone movie.
So, with Burnett trying to adjust to a life of relaxation at home, getting under his wife's feet in the process, it's up to Lowrey to tackle the assassin threat. However, due to him being one of their targets, he's forced to join the AMMO squad as a consultant. AMMO are Miami PD's elite team, utilising technology to track and monitor high-profile criminals, and the majority of the team are all considerably younger than Lowrey too. To them, Lowrey is just the old man that would rather shoot first and ask questions later, and it's not long before a frustrated Lowrey is disobeying orders, taking charge and introducing the team to some of his Bad Boy ways.
As far as buddy cop action movies go, Bad Boys for Life was an absolute blast. I've seen reviewers negatively describe the impact that Michael Bay had on the last Bad Boys movie with his over the top action mayhem style of film making. However, this time around, new co-directors Bilall Fallah and Adil El Arbi are in charge (although Bay does have a small cameo in the movie!) and while the action is still frenetic at times, it's also a lot more coherent too. The pacing in Bad Boys for Life felt spot on and with a good mix of humour, some decent villains and some fast paced inventive action that you can actually follow, it all makes for an enjoyable ride.
OK, full disclaimer - I haven't seen Bad Boys and I haven't seen Bad Boys II. I probably wouldn't have been concerned about seeing this third installment either if I'm honest, but I found myself with a couple of hours to kill in London over the weekend, with Bad Boys for Life being literally the only movie that I hadn't seen which was showing at a convenient time. General opinion online so far seems to be that this is a fairly decent entry into the franchise though, and not necessarily something where you needed to have seen the previous movies in order to enjoy, so I decided to give it a shot. Consequently, there may be things about this movie that fans of the series will be happy to see or that they will be disappointed to see, but which I can't really comment on. I was heading into this like it was a standalone movie.
So, with Burnett trying to adjust to a life of relaxation at home, getting under his wife's feet in the process, it's up to Lowrey to tackle the assassin threat. However, due to him being one of their targets, he's forced to join the AMMO squad as a consultant. AMMO are Miami PD's elite team, utilising technology to track and monitor high-profile criminals, and the majority of the team are all considerably younger than Lowrey too. To them, Lowrey is just the old man that would rather shoot first and ask questions later, and it's not long before a frustrated Lowrey is disobeying orders, taking charge and introducing the team to some of his Bad Boy ways.
As far as buddy cop action movies go, Bad Boys for Life was an absolute blast. I've seen reviewers negatively describe the impact that Michael Bay had on the last Bad Boys movie with his over the top action mayhem style of film making. However, this time around, new co-directors Bilall Fallah and Adil El Arbi are in charge (although Bay does have a small cameo in the movie!) and while the action is still frenetic at times, it's also a lot more coherent too. The pacing in Bad Boys for Life felt spot on and with a good mix of humour, some decent villains and some fast paced inventive action that you can actually follow, it all makes for an enjoyable ride.
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated A Walk Among the Tombstones (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
A Walk Among the Tombstones stars Liam Neeson as former cop, and former alcoholic, Matthew Scudder in this adaptation of the tenth novel in Lawrence Block’s long-running series. Set in 1999, amid the Y2K scare, Scudder operates just outside of the law as an unlicensed private investigator. Approached by a fellow AA member, he is tasked with finding the men responsible for kidnapping and murdering the wife of a local drug trafficker. Along the way, he receives help from homeless teen T.J. (played, with admirable restraint in a role easy to overdo, by newcomer Brian ‘Astro’ Bradley) and discovers that the two men he is investigating have killed before, and will do so again.
This is exactly the type of movie that I find myself drawn to, a brooding, hard-edged film-noir, but what stops me from enjoying it more and rating it higher is that right from the opening frames, Tombstones, unlike last year’s Prisoners, which defied all my expectations, doesn’t strive to do anything more than to satisfy the requirements of its genre and lean heavily on the performance of its lead.
That being said, it is another fantastic performance from Neeson and, still sporting that questionable American accent, he brings real weight to the character of Scudder. Don’t expect to see a tour-de-force the likes of Denzel Washington battling alcoholism in Flight, but it is refreshing to see these types of characters humanized and played straight in roles that have previously been over-the-top and laughably romanticized.
Another highlight is the relationship between Scudder and T.J, something that from the outset seems a cliché and had the potential to detract from the plot, it is however surprisingly well-constructed. One scene in particular between them is a stand-out as we see Scudder’s reaction to finding out that T.J. has been carrying a presumably stolen firearm. I will refrain from ruining the punchline, but it is a rare piece of frank dialogue and is deservedly shocking in its delivery.
Where A Walk Among the Tombstones unfortunately falls short is in its lack of subtlety, through a heavy-handed score and, more importantly, a bloated running time. More times than I would have liked, I found myself asking, “Is this scene necessary, or relevant?” Less would have been so much more, especially in the case of the two antagonists, who are set up as being formidable psychopaths for our anti-hero, they are instantly deflated through a single moment that depicts the normality of what we assume is their morning routine. Though it’s not unheard of that the most violent of criminals lead ordinary lives, the tongue-in-cheek nature of the scene does nothing to intensify the fear and dread we are supposed to feel toward these men.
Fans of Liam Neeson should be pleased, but what we’re given here is a solid first act and dialogue that ranges from good to great, but ultimately a predictable, over-long, paint-by-numbers effort. Sure, it hits all the right notes atmospherically, but I can’t expect that it will be more or less memorable than any of the other recent thriller entries in Neeson’s oeuvre (anyone remember 2011’s Unknown?). Between this and knowing that a third Taken is on the way, I now find myself longing for another great dramatic turn from him along the lines of Five Minutes of Heaven, or Kinsey.
This is exactly the type of movie that I find myself drawn to, a brooding, hard-edged film-noir, but what stops me from enjoying it more and rating it higher is that right from the opening frames, Tombstones, unlike last year’s Prisoners, which defied all my expectations, doesn’t strive to do anything more than to satisfy the requirements of its genre and lean heavily on the performance of its lead.
That being said, it is another fantastic performance from Neeson and, still sporting that questionable American accent, he brings real weight to the character of Scudder. Don’t expect to see a tour-de-force the likes of Denzel Washington battling alcoholism in Flight, but it is refreshing to see these types of characters humanized and played straight in roles that have previously been over-the-top and laughably romanticized.
Another highlight is the relationship between Scudder and T.J, something that from the outset seems a cliché and had the potential to detract from the plot, it is however surprisingly well-constructed. One scene in particular between them is a stand-out as we see Scudder’s reaction to finding out that T.J. has been carrying a presumably stolen firearm. I will refrain from ruining the punchline, but it is a rare piece of frank dialogue and is deservedly shocking in its delivery.
Where A Walk Among the Tombstones unfortunately falls short is in its lack of subtlety, through a heavy-handed score and, more importantly, a bloated running time. More times than I would have liked, I found myself asking, “Is this scene necessary, or relevant?” Less would have been so much more, especially in the case of the two antagonists, who are set up as being formidable psychopaths for our anti-hero, they are instantly deflated through a single moment that depicts the normality of what we assume is their morning routine. Though it’s not unheard of that the most violent of criminals lead ordinary lives, the tongue-in-cheek nature of the scene does nothing to intensify the fear and dread we are supposed to feel toward these men.
Fans of Liam Neeson should be pleased, but what we’re given here is a solid first act and dialogue that ranges from good to great, but ultimately a predictable, over-long, paint-by-numbers effort. Sure, it hits all the right notes atmospherically, but I can’t expect that it will be more or less memorable than any of the other recent thriller entries in Neeson’s oeuvre (anyone remember 2011’s Unknown?). Between this and knowing that a third Taken is on the way, I now find myself longing for another great dramatic turn from him along the lines of Five Minutes of Heaven, or Kinsey.
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated Safe (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
I’ve returned with another movie review for y’all and it should certainly come as no surprise Whatsoever that my review covers the latest edition to Jason Statham’s growing resume of action Movies. After 3 delays for its U.S. release, “SAFE” has finally arrived.
“Safe” is first and foremost an action film as one would expect from Statham
But somehow he always seems to up his game with even better actions scenes which are brilliantly Choreographed.
Some of which will have you laughing at the ineptness of his enemies
Or to the point where you’ll cringe at the very thought of the pain the characters might be going through. But as always, it’s worth it. This time, they’ve even thrown in more of a storyline and a plot twist or two that would peak Tarentino’s interest.
From writer/director by Boaz Yakin and executive producer Kevin Spacey and producer Lawrence Bender (Of Pulp Fiction and Inglorious Bastards fame), Jason Statham stars as Luke Wright. A garbage man turned second-rate cage fighter and former NYPD officer. Upon leaving the NYPD after testifying against corrupt NYPD detectives, Luke drifts from garbage man to Mixed Martial Arts fighter.
In order to support his pregnant wife. Upon winning a fight that he was supposed to lose the bad guys decides to make an example of him by brutally murdering his wife and unborn child. If this was not bad enough, the bad guys then tell Luke that they will murder anyone he comes into contact with as is illustrated when they later kill a homeless man Luke gave his shoes to.
Meanwhile, Mei (Catherine Chan) a young math prodigy, is forced to be a ‘counter’ for a Chinese triad (in essence instead of using computers, the triad forces her to memorize everything from money for drug transactions to police payoffs etc.), in order to keep the triad from killing her mother.
Upon learning of the death of her mother, Mei escapes but with the knowledge of the entire organization retained in her memory the triad hunts her down through the streets of New York City while also trying to avoid the same thugs who terrorize Luke as they have discovered who she is and want to use everything she knows to bring down their competitors.
Luke, mourning the loss of his wife and unborn child nearly commits suicide by jumping in front of a subway when he witness Mei being chased through the subway by the same goons who killed his wife.
After realizing that he is the only one who can protect Mei, Luke begins a brutal rampage through New York City battling all who stand in the way and pose a threat to Mei.
To sum up the movie briefly it is Grand Theft Auto meets “The Transporter” in New York City
minus the sex, drugs, and the modified Audi with the V-12 rocket engine.
There are plenty of shootouts, fight scenes, car chases, in even some intrigue to keep you thinking. A most excellent movie if you’re looking to take a break from the sunny weather and take refuge in a cool air-conditioned movie theater as the film is more than worth spending your hard earned cash on.
“Safe” is first and foremost an action film as one would expect from Statham
But somehow he always seems to up his game with even better actions scenes which are brilliantly Choreographed.
Some of which will have you laughing at the ineptness of his enemies
Or to the point where you’ll cringe at the very thought of the pain the characters might be going through. But as always, it’s worth it. This time, they’ve even thrown in more of a storyline and a plot twist or two that would peak Tarentino’s interest.
From writer/director by Boaz Yakin and executive producer Kevin Spacey and producer Lawrence Bender (Of Pulp Fiction and Inglorious Bastards fame), Jason Statham stars as Luke Wright. A garbage man turned second-rate cage fighter and former NYPD officer. Upon leaving the NYPD after testifying against corrupt NYPD detectives, Luke drifts from garbage man to Mixed Martial Arts fighter.
In order to support his pregnant wife. Upon winning a fight that he was supposed to lose the bad guys decides to make an example of him by brutally murdering his wife and unborn child. If this was not bad enough, the bad guys then tell Luke that they will murder anyone he comes into contact with as is illustrated when they later kill a homeless man Luke gave his shoes to.
Meanwhile, Mei (Catherine Chan) a young math prodigy, is forced to be a ‘counter’ for a Chinese triad (in essence instead of using computers, the triad forces her to memorize everything from money for drug transactions to police payoffs etc.), in order to keep the triad from killing her mother.
Upon learning of the death of her mother, Mei escapes but with the knowledge of the entire organization retained in her memory the triad hunts her down through the streets of New York City while also trying to avoid the same thugs who terrorize Luke as they have discovered who she is and want to use everything she knows to bring down their competitors.
Luke, mourning the loss of his wife and unborn child nearly commits suicide by jumping in front of a subway when he witness Mei being chased through the subway by the same goons who killed his wife.
After realizing that he is the only one who can protect Mei, Luke begins a brutal rampage through New York City battling all who stand in the way and pose a threat to Mei.
To sum up the movie briefly it is Grand Theft Auto meets “The Transporter” in New York City
minus the sex, drugs, and the modified Audi with the V-12 rocket engine.
There are plenty of shootouts, fight scenes, car chases, in even some intrigue to keep you thinking. A most excellent movie if you’re looking to take a break from the sunny weather and take refuge in a cool air-conditioned movie theater as the film is more than worth spending your hard earned cash on.
ACCUPLACER Test Prep!
Education and Reference
App
ACCUPLACER TestBank is on Sale! (Lifetime access - No subscription) "Here's How You Can Beat The...
Case Files Anatomy 3rd Edition, Lange CF
Medical and Education
App
Learn anatomy in the context of real-life patients and prepare for the boards. Experience with...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Hamilton (2020) in Movies
Jul 5, 2020
Captures the power of being in "the room where it happens"
I'll just cut to the chase, the filmed version of the mega-hit stage musical HAMILTON (now streaming on Disney+) is terrific. If you are one of the few that have not seen this, check it out - you'll be glad you did.
I could go on and on about the Pulitzer-Prize winning show, the script, the music, the performances and/or the cross-cultural casting - all of which works to perfection, but what separates this film from the other hit Broadway shows that are converted to film is how well that the filmmakers were able to translate the power of being inside the theater during a live performance of this show.
Credit, of course, needs to go to the visionaries responsible for this show, creator/writer/star Lin-Manuel Miranda and Director Thomas Kail. They realized pretty early on (when the show was becoming the phenomenon that it has become) that they wanted to preserve this event for future generations, so started making plans to film the show - in High Def - with an audience and without an audience (for close-ups). In June 2016, about a month before the original cast started leaving the show (and right after the show won 11 Tony Awards), they spent $10 million to capture the show - with live audiences on Sunday and Tuesday and then spent the rest of Sunday night and all day Monday doing close-ups and crane shots to augment the action.
The results are outstanding. The wide-shots show the breadth of the production - showing the strong, Tony Award winning choreography by Andy Blankenbuehler, the unique, minimal and highly versatile set, the Tony Award winning costumes by Paul Tazewell and the Lighting Design that earned Howell Blinkley a Tony. All of these are showcased in this film - special note should be made about the Lighting that needed to be tweaked on the spot for the filming.
As for the close-ups, they showcase the wry smile and comedic delight that Tony winner Daveed Diggs shows in his roles as Lafayette/Jefferson, the power and sorrow of Tony Award winner Renee Elise Goldsberry - her spotlight number SATISFIED is as "perfect" a musical number as you will ever see. The powerful acting of Leslie Odom, Jr. as Aaron Burr (who won the Tony as Best Actor over Lin-Manuel's performance as Hamilton) as well as terrific supporting turns by the likes of Anthony Ramos (Lawrence/Phillip), Chris Jackson (showing real leadership as George Washington) and Okieriete Onaodwoan as Hercules Mulligan (one of my absolute favorite characters in this show)./James Madison.
Special note should be made to Jonathan Groff's portrayal of King George III - it is, basically, a cameo role, but he is filmed with such tight close-ups (showing spittle rolling down has chin as he sings) that marvelously juxtaposes King George's real emotions with that of the words he is speaking.
But, of course, the real star is Lin-Manuel Miranda - the genius creative force behind Hamilton. Interestingly enough, I thought his performance was the weakest of the lead cast (don't get me wrong, he was still excellent - just not "as excellent" as some of the others). His true vision, of course, was to tell the story of "the people of that era" as told by "the people of our era".
That is the true genius of Hamilton.
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars out of 10 (can I turn this up to 11)?
I could go on and on about the Pulitzer-Prize winning show, the script, the music, the performances and/or the cross-cultural casting - all of which works to perfection, but what separates this film from the other hit Broadway shows that are converted to film is how well that the filmmakers were able to translate the power of being inside the theater during a live performance of this show.
Credit, of course, needs to go to the visionaries responsible for this show, creator/writer/star Lin-Manuel Miranda and Director Thomas Kail. They realized pretty early on (when the show was becoming the phenomenon that it has become) that they wanted to preserve this event for future generations, so started making plans to film the show - in High Def - with an audience and without an audience (for close-ups). In June 2016, about a month before the original cast started leaving the show (and right after the show won 11 Tony Awards), they spent $10 million to capture the show - with live audiences on Sunday and Tuesday and then spent the rest of Sunday night and all day Monday doing close-ups and crane shots to augment the action.
The results are outstanding. The wide-shots show the breadth of the production - showing the strong, Tony Award winning choreography by Andy Blankenbuehler, the unique, minimal and highly versatile set, the Tony Award winning costumes by Paul Tazewell and the Lighting Design that earned Howell Blinkley a Tony. All of these are showcased in this film - special note should be made about the Lighting that needed to be tweaked on the spot for the filming.
As for the close-ups, they showcase the wry smile and comedic delight that Tony winner Daveed Diggs shows in his roles as Lafayette/Jefferson, the power and sorrow of Tony Award winner Renee Elise Goldsberry - her spotlight number SATISFIED is as "perfect" a musical number as you will ever see. The powerful acting of Leslie Odom, Jr. as Aaron Burr (who won the Tony as Best Actor over Lin-Manuel's performance as Hamilton) as well as terrific supporting turns by the likes of Anthony Ramos (Lawrence/Phillip), Chris Jackson (showing real leadership as George Washington) and Okieriete Onaodwoan as Hercules Mulligan (one of my absolute favorite characters in this show)./James Madison.
Special note should be made to Jonathan Groff's portrayal of King George III - it is, basically, a cameo role, but he is filmed with such tight close-ups (showing spittle rolling down has chin as he sings) that marvelously juxtaposes King George's real emotions with that of the words he is speaking.
But, of course, the real star is Lin-Manuel Miranda - the genius creative force behind Hamilton. Interestingly enough, I thought his performance was the weakest of the lead cast (don't get me wrong, he was still excellent - just not "as excellent" as some of the others). His true vision, of course, was to tell the story of "the people of that era" as told by "the people of our era".
That is the true genius of Hamilton.
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars out of 10 (can I turn this up to 11)?
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Gatecrash (2021) in Movies
Feb 19, 2021
Enjoyably strange
Gatecrash is a 2021 psychological thriller from Lawrence Gough, based on a play by Terry Hughes. It opens with a rather beautiful and picturesque shot of the English countryside at dusk, when a speeding car disturbs the peace and alongside a prominent score, promises us a rather tense and thrilling start to the film.
And in this aspect it doesn’t disappoint. Gatecrash disposes with any preamble and pitches us straight into the action. A couple return to a rather maze-like and futuristically styled home in the middle of an argument, but what at first seems like a domestic argument is in fact much more serious: the husband, Steve (Ben Cura), has just committed a hit and run. He’s drunk, abusive and wants his wife, Nicole (Olivia Bonamy), to take the blame. And it wasn’t just an innocent accident as Steve not only knocked someone over, he drove over them again in his rush to flee.
The first 15 minutes follows this argument and then as it ends as Nicole and Steve separate inside the house; him to clean up any evidence from the accident and her to discretely take a pregnancy test. This soon begins to drag, and fortunately we’re saved by a sinister phone call from the landline, that appears to be coming from Steve’s mobile, that he hasn’t seen since the hit and run. This soon escalates into something verging on horror territory as we follow Nicole around their now claustrophobic house.
It’s this middle act that I enjoyed the most as Gatecrash turns into a tense and almost terrifying thriller, as Nicole and Steve have to face off against a mysterious and menacing police officer (Samuel West) who arrives on their doorstep. West is possibly my favourite part of this film, his character is completely over the top and ridiculous yet still portrays this strange, ominous air. It’s strange to find a character who is immensely fun to watch yet still manages to terrify you. He’s further helped by his character’s unexplained and questionable motives that give this thriller an intriguing air of mystery.
Following on from the aftermath of the hit and run, the film jumps to a later time after Nicole has had her baby and again the couple are visited by another mysterious stranger, this one called Sid (Anton Lesser). At first Sid seems like a kind, lovely old man but his unusual air and conversation soon unveil yet more hidden and sinister motives that culminate in a tense finale.
It’s this final act that I was least keen on. At first the dialogue between Sid, Nicole and Steve is gripping but it seems to drag on and keep going round in circles before it finally gets to some dramatic piece of action. This dragging dialogue is definitely Gatecrash’s biggest flaw, and this is in no doubt down to it’s theatre origins. On the stage I can see dialogue like this working well, but as a film it needs a lot more oomph to keep our attention. The cast do well to keep us entertained though, Olivia Bonamy puts in a very understated performance as Nicole and Ben Cura was delightful to watch as Steve purely because the character is a rather despicable excuse for a man. And fortunately Gough’s cinematography works well with the few action scenes to try and make up for the slumps in the dialogue heavy earlier scenes.
Overall Gatecrash is a fairly enjoyable thriller and is worth watching purely for its general air of mystery and the tense and exciting second act.
And in this aspect it doesn’t disappoint. Gatecrash disposes with any preamble and pitches us straight into the action. A couple return to a rather maze-like and futuristically styled home in the middle of an argument, but what at first seems like a domestic argument is in fact much more serious: the husband, Steve (Ben Cura), has just committed a hit and run. He’s drunk, abusive and wants his wife, Nicole (Olivia Bonamy), to take the blame. And it wasn’t just an innocent accident as Steve not only knocked someone over, he drove over them again in his rush to flee.
The first 15 minutes follows this argument and then as it ends as Nicole and Steve separate inside the house; him to clean up any evidence from the accident and her to discretely take a pregnancy test. This soon begins to drag, and fortunately we’re saved by a sinister phone call from the landline, that appears to be coming from Steve’s mobile, that he hasn’t seen since the hit and run. This soon escalates into something verging on horror territory as we follow Nicole around their now claustrophobic house.
It’s this middle act that I enjoyed the most as Gatecrash turns into a tense and almost terrifying thriller, as Nicole and Steve have to face off against a mysterious and menacing police officer (Samuel West) who arrives on their doorstep. West is possibly my favourite part of this film, his character is completely over the top and ridiculous yet still portrays this strange, ominous air. It’s strange to find a character who is immensely fun to watch yet still manages to terrify you. He’s further helped by his character’s unexplained and questionable motives that give this thriller an intriguing air of mystery.
Following on from the aftermath of the hit and run, the film jumps to a later time after Nicole has had her baby and again the couple are visited by another mysterious stranger, this one called Sid (Anton Lesser). At first Sid seems like a kind, lovely old man but his unusual air and conversation soon unveil yet more hidden and sinister motives that culminate in a tense finale.
It’s this final act that I was least keen on. At first the dialogue between Sid, Nicole and Steve is gripping but it seems to drag on and keep going round in circles before it finally gets to some dramatic piece of action. This dragging dialogue is definitely Gatecrash’s biggest flaw, and this is in no doubt down to it’s theatre origins. On the stage I can see dialogue like this working well, but as a film it needs a lot more oomph to keep our attention. The cast do well to keep us entertained though, Olivia Bonamy puts in a very understated performance as Nicole and Ben Cura was delightful to watch as Steve purely because the character is a rather despicable excuse for a man. And fortunately Gough’s cinematography works well with the few action scenes to try and make up for the slumps in the dialogue heavy earlier scenes.
Overall Gatecrash is a fairly enjoyable thriller and is worth watching purely for its general air of mystery and the tense and exciting second act.
Jeff Nichols recommended The Hustler (1961) in Movies (curated)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Ava (2020) in Movies
Oct 8, 2020
Great mother/daughter scene in the middle of a generic assassin flick
To give you everything you need to know about the Jessica Chastain assassin flick AVA is to read the IMDB description of the film:
"Ava is a deadly assassin who works for a black ops organization, traveling the globe specializing in high profile hits. When a job goes dangerously wrong she is forced to fight for her own survival."
Pretty generic, right? There are only about a dozen films that I can think of off the top of my head that would fit this description. So...what separates this one to make it worth watching?
Not much.
Chastain stars as Ava, a deadly assassin who...oh, you get it. When the "job goes dangerously wrong", she heads back to Boston and into the arms of her loving family - who want nothing to do with her.
Chastain is good, but nothing special as Ava...she seems to be able to pull off the physicality of this role quite well (like Jennifer Lawrence in RED SPARROW or Charlize Theron in ATOMIC BLONDE). The head of the shadowy organization that Ava works, played by Collin Farrell, is generically shadowy and Farrell plays it professionally with a touch of "over the top" acting (but not too much). The great John Malkovich is a spark of energy in this film as Ava's mentor. Mr. Malkovich, as is his want to do, eats the scenery in every scene that he is in. Under normal circumstances, this would annoying, but in this film, it is welcome. Ioan Gruffudd and Joan Chen show up (briefly) as adversaries of Ava and all of these components makes the "assassin side" of this film work well enough.
The "family side' of this film just doesn't work - except for one scene.
Common is just plain bad in the underwritten role of Ava's former lover who is now married to her sister. Jess Wexler is forgettable as Ava's sister (I even had to look her up on IMDB to remind me of who played this role) and Geena Davis - as Ava's estranged mother - looks like she is just there because she owed someone a favor.
Except for one scene.
And that's the interesting thing about this film. Right in the middle of this very generic, very ordinary film is a "come to Jesus" meeting between Ava (Chastain) and her mother (Davis). This scene was "Oscar worthy" with 2 very good actresses going back and forth with each other (with Davis dominating the scene). I gotta think that this scene was the only one Davis read when she agreed to do this film and was pouting during her other, generic scenes.
Director Tate Taylor (who took over when the original Director was bounced when past sexual indiscretions were unearthed) and writer Matthew Newton bring nothing new to the genre. It is all very...generic. The action scenes are professionally done, but generic. The situations are contrived and...generic. The acting is...scenery chewing generic. The ending is predictably generic.
All-in-all an "entertaining enough" generic action flick - except for that one scene (and maybe Malkovich's performance), they make it worthwhile.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10 - it really is a "5", but will add a point for Malkovich and another point for the mother daughter scene). - and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
"Ava is a deadly assassin who works for a black ops organization, traveling the globe specializing in high profile hits. When a job goes dangerously wrong she is forced to fight for her own survival."
Pretty generic, right? There are only about a dozen films that I can think of off the top of my head that would fit this description. So...what separates this one to make it worth watching?
Not much.
Chastain stars as Ava, a deadly assassin who...oh, you get it. When the "job goes dangerously wrong", she heads back to Boston and into the arms of her loving family - who want nothing to do with her.
Chastain is good, but nothing special as Ava...she seems to be able to pull off the physicality of this role quite well (like Jennifer Lawrence in RED SPARROW or Charlize Theron in ATOMIC BLONDE). The head of the shadowy organization that Ava works, played by Collin Farrell, is generically shadowy and Farrell plays it professionally with a touch of "over the top" acting (but not too much). The great John Malkovich is a spark of energy in this film as Ava's mentor. Mr. Malkovich, as is his want to do, eats the scenery in every scene that he is in. Under normal circumstances, this would annoying, but in this film, it is welcome. Ioan Gruffudd and Joan Chen show up (briefly) as adversaries of Ava and all of these components makes the "assassin side" of this film work well enough.
The "family side' of this film just doesn't work - except for one scene.
Common is just plain bad in the underwritten role of Ava's former lover who is now married to her sister. Jess Wexler is forgettable as Ava's sister (I even had to look her up on IMDB to remind me of who played this role) and Geena Davis - as Ava's estranged mother - looks like she is just there because she owed someone a favor.
Except for one scene.
And that's the interesting thing about this film. Right in the middle of this very generic, very ordinary film is a "come to Jesus" meeting between Ava (Chastain) and her mother (Davis). This scene was "Oscar worthy" with 2 very good actresses going back and forth with each other (with Davis dominating the scene). I gotta think that this scene was the only one Davis read when she agreed to do this film and was pouting during her other, generic scenes.
Director Tate Taylor (who took over when the original Director was bounced when past sexual indiscretions were unearthed) and writer Matthew Newton bring nothing new to the genre. It is all very...generic. The action scenes are professionally done, but generic. The situations are contrived and...generic. The acting is...scenery chewing generic. The ending is predictably generic.
All-in-all an "entertaining enough" generic action flick - except for that one scene (and maybe Malkovich's performance), they make it worthwhile.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10 - it really is a "5", but will add a point for Malkovich and another point for the mother daughter scene). - and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)