Search
Search results
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated A Good Neighborhood in Books
Mar 26, 2020
Oak Knoll is a close-knit multiracial neighborhood in North Carolina where everyone looks out for one another. Valerie Alston-Holt, a professor and single mother, has raised her biracial son, Xavier, there since he was small. Their calm life changes, however, when the Whitman family moves in next door. First they raze the current house and build a "Mcmansion," whose very existence threatens the health of Valerie's beloved historic oak tree. Brad Whitman is a local celebrity, known for his charisma and commercials for his company, Whitman HVAC. His wife, Julia, has long escaped her trailer park days and is now raising her daughters Julia and Lily in a privilege she once dreamed of. But soon the Alston-Holts and Whitmans find them themselves fighting over the oak tree's well-being and then, the budding romance between Julia and Xavier.
"An upscale new house in a simple old neighborhood. A girl on a chaise beside a swimming pool, who wants to be left alone. We begin our story here, in the minutes before the small event that will change everything."
This book took my heart and spit it right out again. Oh my goodness. It's a different, beautiful, and absolutely heartbreaking read. We're told from the very beginning--by our omniscient third person narrator--that something bad is going to happen. And yet, I lived in denial that this was true. I devoured this book in two halves. It's utterly engrossing, and the characters just pop off the pages. The teens, especially. Oh Juniper and Xavier. I will not easily forget either of you.
A Good Neighborhood tackles a host of timely topics, and it handles all of them deftly. Race, religion, sexism, feminism--none of these are exempt in the pages of this novel. We see whiteness as a symbolism for purity, and we watch as Juniper struggles with the set of values being pushed upon her by her mother and stepfather, including a "purity vow" to remain both a virgin and loyal to her future husband. And then there's Xavier, a talented musician, who has been raised by his strong mother after his father's death. She wants so much for her son to do anything, but yet lives in fear because he is biracial. Juniper, Xavier, and Valerie were such powerful characters.
I do not want to give much of the plot away, but I can tell you that this book is heartbreaking and beautiful. It will get you to think about racism and sexism. The strong themes of good versus evil are presented in such a unique and compelling manner. Adding the third-person piece just gives an extra piece to the story. This book is incredibly well-written and will stay with you for quite some time. 4.5 stars.
"An upscale new house in a simple old neighborhood. A girl on a chaise beside a swimming pool, who wants to be left alone. We begin our story here, in the minutes before the small event that will change everything."
This book took my heart and spit it right out again. Oh my goodness. It's a different, beautiful, and absolutely heartbreaking read. We're told from the very beginning--by our omniscient third person narrator--that something bad is going to happen. And yet, I lived in denial that this was true. I devoured this book in two halves. It's utterly engrossing, and the characters just pop off the pages. The teens, especially. Oh Juniper and Xavier. I will not easily forget either of you.
A Good Neighborhood tackles a host of timely topics, and it handles all of them deftly. Race, religion, sexism, feminism--none of these are exempt in the pages of this novel. We see whiteness as a symbolism for purity, and we watch as Juniper struggles with the set of values being pushed upon her by her mother and stepfather, including a "purity vow" to remain both a virgin and loyal to her future husband. And then there's Xavier, a talented musician, who has been raised by his strong mother after his father's death. She wants so much for her son to do anything, but yet lives in fear because he is biracial. Juniper, Xavier, and Valerie were such powerful characters.
I do not want to give much of the plot away, but I can tell you that this book is heartbreaking and beautiful. It will get you to think about racism and sexism. The strong themes of good versus evil are presented in such a unique and compelling manner. Adding the third-person piece just gives an extra piece to the story. This book is incredibly well-written and will stay with you for quite some time. 4.5 stars.
Joan of Arc: The Image of Female Heroism
Book
The fame of Joan of Arc began in her lifetime and, though it has dipped a little now and then, she...
I'll Be Gone in the Dark: One Woman's Obsessive Search for the Golden State Killer
9.0
Rate It
Book
Introduction by Gillian Flynn Afterword by Patton Oswalt "This is a one sit-down read. That's how...
Felipe (17 KP) rated Chaplin (1992) in Movies
Dec 7, 2020
A modern tragedy meant to be one of the greats
Contains spoilers, click to show
Richard Attenborough delivers another masterpiece of cinematic biography and is a worthy successor to Ghandi. The structure of the film is told as a flashback while Charlie Chaplin is writing his autobiography with a fictional editor that does not exist. We see for the first time the flaws of who Chaplin is as a person and we see him confront his past in a way that is painful not unlike how it is painful when we relive moments in our lives we would rather choose to forget. However, the success of the film is how it strips the illusion of who Chaplin was and presents to us a person who is tragically flawed but who is unbale to appreciate his own genius. An example is when Chaplin's version of the invention of the Tramp is seen for what he imagined it to be an idealized moment in which the character is calling to him except for what it really was, We see the reality of the movies during this time; a hectic spur of the moment improvised invention drawn from real life. Yet we see Chaplin as the midwife to this new artform the movies and we see him develop it for what it is, the highest expression of art that stirs our imagination and makes us believe anything is possible. We even cry during Chaplin's moments of personal tragedy; the insanity and loss of his mother; repeated failed marriages; the death of his best friend, Douglas Fairbanks and finally his tragic and painful exile from America the only place he knew as home all taking place in the backdrop of the invention and evolution of cinema. However, I feel that in the end Chaplin is the one that comes out triumphant. In the last moments of the movie we see how Chaplin despairs that he feels that he has been forgotten and made irrelevant by the changing times; he feels that the weight of not only his age but the weight of the world on his shoulders and yet we see that everything he believes himself to be is completely wrong when Hollywood bestows on him the greatest honor which is not only the special Oscar but also a standing ovation. His final triumph is to be made a knight by Queen Elizabeth II, we are truly made to see that although flawed he is triumphant in the end.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Almost Christmas (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
It’s that time of year again, well maybe a little bit sooner than I would prefer because we haven’t hit thanksgiving yet. Holiday Season is here! So the attempts from the studios to get a piece of the holiday season box office. This new comedy from writer David E. Talbert (Baggage Claim) and producer Will Packer (Ride Along, Think Like a Man series, This Christmas), Almost Christmas, tells the story of a beloved patriarch, Walter, played by Danny Glover, a retired mechanic who owned a chain of auto shops and is now getting ready to spend the holiday with his four adult children and their families.
This year is the family’s first Christmas since the death of Walter’s wife, Grace, and the film flashes back to show us a beautiful 45 year relationship, that even when their home overflowed with children, they kept their love and affection.
Grace showed her dedication to Walter and the rest of her family with delicious recipes, especially her sweet potato pie.
Walter asks his family for one gift this holiday season to spend five days under the same roof without killing one another.
But later in the film you find out that the real drama is the rivalry between Rachel and Cheryl and the undergoing feud over each other’s life choices. Rachel (Gabrielle Union) a divorced mom, who after different career attempts, finally decided to become a law student; but unfortunately this last one made her financially unstable. Rachel’s overachieving big sister, Cheryl (Kimberly Elise) is always hiding her own insecurities and trying to control her obnoxious husband J.B. Smoove, and older retired athlete, who played basketball in Croatia in the 80’s, and considers himself a celebrity and an American hero.
Their brothers Christian (Romany Malco) is occupied with his congressional run, and Evan (Jessie Usher), the surprise baby of the family, is attempting to conquer a college football injury and secretly abusing of pain killers.
Finally we have aunt May (Mo’nique), who deserves a special mention for being extremely hilarious having a still-functioning career as a backup singer and in the past performed with Mick Jagger and Chaka Khan and now enjoys imparting all of her wisdom to her nieces, nephews and Walter.
The movie’s sibling dynamics feels authentic, with a relatable blend of rivalry, nostalgia, and dependence; Glover’s quest to perfect his wife’s signature dish will pull at anyone’s heartstrings.
It is surprisingly funny and hits it mark more than it misses. But it is not a secret that the major strength of this movie is its cast led by Danny Glover, and how we start to get too old for some shit, and an amazing team of charming actors and actresses that can transport you in the time with the right music and some dancing in the kitchen.
This year is the family’s first Christmas since the death of Walter’s wife, Grace, and the film flashes back to show us a beautiful 45 year relationship, that even when their home overflowed with children, they kept their love and affection.
Grace showed her dedication to Walter and the rest of her family with delicious recipes, especially her sweet potato pie.
Walter asks his family for one gift this holiday season to spend five days under the same roof without killing one another.
But later in the film you find out that the real drama is the rivalry between Rachel and Cheryl and the undergoing feud over each other’s life choices. Rachel (Gabrielle Union) a divorced mom, who after different career attempts, finally decided to become a law student; but unfortunately this last one made her financially unstable. Rachel’s overachieving big sister, Cheryl (Kimberly Elise) is always hiding her own insecurities and trying to control her obnoxious husband J.B. Smoove, and older retired athlete, who played basketball in Croatia in the 80’s, and considers himself a celebrity and an American hero.
Their brothers Christian (Romany Malco) is occupied with his congressional run, and Evan (Jessie Usher), the surprise baby of the family, is attempting to conquer a college football injury and secretly abusing of pain killers.
Finally we have aunt May (Mo’nique), who deserves a special mention for being extremely hilarious having a still-functioning career as a backup singer and in the past performed with Mick Jagger and Chaka Khan and now enjoys imparting all of her wisdom to her nieces, nephews and Walter.
The movie’s sibling dynamics feels authentic, with a relatable blend of rivalry, nostalgia, and dependence; Glover’s quest to perfect his wife’s signature dish will pull at anyone’s heartstrings.
It is surprisingly funny and hits it mark more than it misses. But it is not a secret that the major strength of this movie is its cast led by Danny Glover, and how we start to get too old for some shit, and an amazing team of charming actors and actresses that can transport you in the time with the right music and some dancing in the kitchen.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Nightworld (2017) in Movies
Sep 16, 2019
Characters – Brett Anderson is a grief stricken for police officer, he retired from the force after his wife’s death, he takes a job as a security guard in an apartment in Bulgaria which leads him to get caught up in a mystery about the apartment which brings him past back to haunt him. Jacob is a former guard that lost his eye sight, he knows the mystery about the apartment and helps guide Brett through the strange events. Martin is the apartment manager and needs to find a new guard to watch over any problems in the apartment when he is away. Zara is the waitress at the local café that offer a romantic angle for Brett, while filling in the blanks about the history of the apartment.
Performances – Jason London is solid enough in the leading role, most of what he does is ask questions which is how the audience must learn what is going on. Robert Englund as the elderly figure that is trying to help works well because he is the biggest draw for the film. Gianna Capaldi and Lorina Kamburova are both fine they never get out of first gear for their performances though.
Story – The story here follows a man that needs to rebuild his life, get given a job as a security guard for an apartment building that has secrets he can’t even imagine. The pace of the story is slow, because we have a lot of building up with little to no hints to what the big conclusion will be, the final third of the film lets everything go, making the early parts of the story more interesting, the time loss angle does feel tagged in for no reason and by the end you still won’t completely understand what just happened. The reveals in the film are big, though they could be considered overkill for what could have be a much more subtle story.
Horror – The horror comes from the nightmares Brett suffers before the big reveal in the final act which shows us just what has been going on.
Settings – The whole film is set in one building, it shows how the layers can hold secrets and the mystery about the building is key t the story being told.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are used well when needed, we don’t go over the top with them and the best one are used for the final act.
Scene of the Movie – Behind the door.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Starts too slow for the ending.
Final Thoughts – This is a slow burning horror thriller, it does reward us with a manic ending which is worth the wait for, only it does take too long to get there with little hints to help us understand the ending.
Overall: Slow though rewarding.
Performances – Jason London is solid enough in the leading role, most of what he does is ask questions which is how the audience must learn what is going on. Robert Englund as the elderly figure that is trying to help works well because he is the biggest draw for the film. Gianna Capaldi and Lorina Kamburova are both fine they never get out of first gear for their performances though.
Story – The story here follows a man that needs to rebuild his life, get given a job as a security guard for an apartment building that has secrets he can’t even imagine. The pace of the story is slow, because we have a lot of building up with little to no hints to what the big conclusion will be, the final third of the film lets everything go, making the early parts of the story more interesting, the time loss angle does feel tagged in for no reason and by the end you still won’t completely understand what just happened. The reveals in the film are big, though they could be considered overkill for what could have be a much more subtle story.
Horror – The horror comes from the nightmares Brett suffers before the big reveal in the final act which shows us just what has been going on.
Settings – The whole film is set in one building, it shows how the layers can hold secrets and the mystery about the building is key t the story being told.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are used well when needed, we don’t go over the top with them and the best one are used for the final act.
Scene of the Movie – Behind the door.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Starts too slow for the ending.
Final Thoughts – This is a slow burning horror thriller, it does reward us with a manic ending which is worth the wait for, only it does take too long to get there with little hints to help us understand the ending.
Overall: Slow though rewarding.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Spree (2020) in Movies
Aug 16, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
When he was younger, Kurt Kunkle was a streamer but life got in the way and he had to get a job as a 'Spree' driver (an Uber driver). Now he has an Idea of haw to get his viewers back, by streaming him self as he goes on a killing Spree of his Spree customers.
Spree is a warning about the impact streaming and Vlogging can have, both on the streamers and the viewers. Both Kurt and Jessie are shown as being addicted to getting views, although for different reasons; Kurt feels that, if he isn't getting views and streaming everything then he is nothing, he even looks down on others because they are not streaming. Jessie, on the other hand streams to get her act and message across and (to begin with) see's herself as a different, more superior kind of Vlogger to Kurt.
The viewer are shown as being detached from the reality of Kurt's actions (At least until the very final scene). To begin with they think it's all fake, where as Kurt is shown as thinking some other blogs are real, and no-one is really interested until the killings get more extreme, then the viewers don't seem to care whether it's real or not and even involve themselves by egging Kurt on and joining in with polls.
The Spree customers are shown almost as stereotypes, most are self centred and obsessed with their own streams, or they are racist or sexist.
The story is good and not overly reliant on gore, a lot of the actual kills are made off screen with just blood that needs to be washed off the car. One death you don't even see.
Spree is shot mainly as Kurt's stream and often goes split screen as he crosses over with other streams an, at times this can be a bit distracting as, as well as the video footage you also see the comments which are, most of the time, flowing too fast to read, only slowing down when necessary or flashing up on the main screen if they are important enough.
This is the only problem i had with Spree though. As a light weight slasher it lacks some of the tension (at least at the beginning) you might expect but still has some decent kills and manages to make some social statements although the biggest one is probably after everything has happen and we are shown how the video lives on on the web even when it has supposedly been taken down, which is odd because this also has the feel of a set up for a possible sequel.
Spree is a warning about the impact streaming and Vlogging can have, both on the streamers and the viewers. Both Kurt and Jessie are shown as being addicted to getting views, although for different reasons; Kurt feels that, if he isn't getting views and streaming everything then he is nothing, he even looks down on others because they are not streaming. Jessie, on the other hand streams to get her act and message across and (to begin with) see's herself as a different, more superior kind of Vlogger to Kurt.
The viewer are shown as being detached from the reality of Kurt's actions (At least until the very final scene). To begin with they think it's all fake, where as Kurt is shown as thinking some other blogs are real, and no-one is really interested until the killings get more extreme, then the viewers don't seem to care whether it's real or not and even involve themselves by egging Kurt on and joining in with polls.
The Spree customers are shown almost as stereotypes, most are self centred and obsessed with their own streams, or they are racist or sexist.
The story is good and not overly reliant on gore, a lot of the actual kills are made off screen with just blood that needs to be washed off the car. One death you don't even see.
Spree is shot mainly as Kurt's stream and often goes split screen as he crosses over with other streams an, at times this can be a bit distracting as, as well as the video footage you also see the comments which are, most of the time, flowing too fast to read, only slowing down when necessary or flashing up on the main screen if they are important enough.
This is the only problem i had with Spree though. As a light weight slasher it lacks some of the tension (at least at the beginning) you might expect but still has some decent kills and manages to make some social statements although the biggest one is probably after everything has happen and we are shown how the video lives on on the web even when it has supposedly been taken down, which is odd because this also has the feel of a set up for a possible sequel.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Don't Breathe (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Here comes Little Kevin, all grown up and blinded.
“Don’t Breathe” had a concept that appealed to me. Three Detroit teens are systematically robbing houses of goods to pawn with the aim of getting Rocky (Jane “Evil Dead” Levy) out of the clutches of her deadbeat family to start a new life in California with her younger sister. Dylan Minnette plays the cautious and intellectual Alex, hiding his crush on Rocky particularly badly. Daniel Zovatto plays the fruit-loopy stoner ‘Money’ – the loose cannon of the trio and Rocky’s boyfriend.
After a successful run, they unwisely pick on the home of a blind war veteran (“Avatar”‘s Stephen Lang). He is not just ‘Home Alone’ but ‘Neighbourhood Alone’ (reflecting, probably accurately, the demise of previously affluent suburbs in some industrially declining US cities). Blind or not, the vet (and friend) are a force to be reckoned with: with startling speed the tables are turned and the kids are fighting for their lives. And there are more surprises in store within the spooky old house.
As an audience member, there are certainly points at which the title becomes uncomfortably literal! On the tensionometer, there is a similarity here with last year’s “No Escape”. A scene where blindness is turned into a positive asset is particularly effective.
As is common with this genre, the film suffers from a plot-line that at times makes no sense and involves indestructible participants (with an incident involving garden shears being particularly incomprehensible).
A particularly unpleasant sexual-threat scene towards the end of the film is also nonsensical involving a level of -ahem – ‘preparation’ that the preceding plot simply doesn’t merit.
Inevitably though, the film lives or dies on whether you feel empathy for the disreputable kids in peril. The start of the film tries to balance the empathy scales by giving Rocky her backstory, throwing in the ‘little sister’ card. It also demonstrates that “The Blind Man” is a ‘bit of a bastard’ – or perhaps that should be a ‘bit of a baste-ard’ (LOL, in-joke)). Unfortunately however I hold the peculiarly unfashionable idea that if things are “mine” they are “mine” – not anyone elses: so, on balance, I wasn’t rooting for them and would be happy to let the thieving little sh*ts all get beaten to death!
Jane Levy (channelling a young Emma Stone) acquits herself admirably as the heroine in peril. Also of particular note is the highly effective atonal score by Roque Baños that ramps up the tension extremely effectively. Directed by “Evil Dead” director, Uruguayan Fede Alverez, the film does have a certain style and is an enjoyable roller-coaster ride, provided you park your brain at the (well locked) door.
After a successful run, they unwisely pick on the home of a blind war veteran (“Avatar”‘s Stephen Lang). He is not just ‘Home Alone’ but ‘Neighbourhood Alone’ (reflecting, probably accurately, the demise of previously affluent suburbs in some industrially declining US cities). Blind or not, the vet (and friend) are a force to be reckoned with: with startling speed the tables are turned and the kids are fighting for their lives. And there are more surprises in store within the spooky old house.
As an audience member, there are certainly points at which the title becomes uncomfortably literal! On the tensionometer, there is a similarity here with last year’s “No Escape”. A scene where blindness is turned into a positive asset is particularly effective.
As is common with this genre, the film suffers from a plot-line that at times makes no sense and involves indestructible participants (with an incident involving garden shears being particularly incomprehensible).
A particularly unpleasant sexual-threat scene towards the end of the film is also nonsensical involving a level of -ahem – ‘preparation’ that the preceding plot simply doesn’t merit.
Inevitably though, the film lives or dies on whether you feel empathy for the disreputable kids in peril. The start of the film tries to balance the empathy scales by giving Rocky her backstory, throwing in the ‘little sister’ card. It also demonstrates that “The Blind Man” is a ‘bit of a bastard’ – or perhaps that should be a ‘bit of a baste-ard’ (LOL, in-joke)). Unfortunately however I hold the peculiarly unfashionable idea that if things are “mine” they are “mine” – not anyone elses: so, on balance, I wasn’t rooting for them and would be happy to let the thieving little sh*ts all get beaten to death!
Jane Levy (channelling a young Emma Stone) acquits herself admirably as the heroine in peril. Also of particular note is the highly effective atonal score by Roque Baños that ramps up the tension extremely effectively. Directed by “Evil Dead” director, Uruguayan Fede Alverez, the film does have a certain style and is an enjoyable roller-coaster ride, provided you park your brain at the (well locked) door.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Death on the Nile (2022) in Movies
Feb 7, 2022
Originally set to release in December of 2019; the long-delayed cinematic retelling of Agatha Christie’s “Death on the Nile” has finally arrived in cinemas. The last cinematic version of the classic book arrived in 1978 and this time; Director and star Kenneth Branagh beings his version of Master Detective Hercule Poirot to Egypt after a chance encounter with his friend Bouc (Tom Bateman) while on vacation; Poirot attends the wedding of wealthy socialite Linette Ridgeway (Gal Gadot) and notices that she has married a man named Simon Doyle (Armie Hammer).
The wedding is a bit of a shock to many as just six weeks prior Doyle was engaged to Jacqueline de Bellefort (Emma Mackey), and Poirot observed the two of them in a London club and how Ridgeway was introduced to Simon by her friend Jacqueline.
The wedding reception is disrupted by the arrival of Jacqueline and Linette and Simon confides in Poirot that she has been following them around the world and asks the Detective to encourage her to leave them alone so they can get on with their life.
Jacqueline is highly disturbed and pleads her love for Simon and shows a gun which leads Poirot to encourage the newlyweds to abandon their overseas plans and go home. Simon and Linette press on and decide to take their wedding party on a cruise of the Nile in an attempt to get away from Jacqueline.
The plan seems to be working well until Jacqueline shows up as a ticketed passenger at a stop along the way. When a near-fatal accident occurs followed by a murder; Poirot must investigate the guests to find the killer. Naturally, there is plenty of motivation to go around, and as the deaths mount; Poirot must use his genius to find the killer.
The movie takes its time getting started but the CGI-enhanced scenery and the strong cast are very compelling and set the pieces in place very well. While I was able to solve the mystery about halfway into the film, some of the details around it were cleverly concealed and there were plenty of twists that had me consider other possible suspects.
Some may find the film a bit slow but that is the nature of a good mystery as time is given to developing the characters and their motives which adds to the suspense of the film.
In the end, the film is an engaging mystery that recalls the classic movie mysteries of old and it will be very interesting to see if audiences will embrace the film in the same way as they did with “Murder on the Orient Express” and audiences will get more Poirot adventures from Branagh in the near future.
4 stars out of 5.
The wedding is a bit of a shock to many as just six weeks prior Doyle was engaged to Jacqueline de Bellefort (Emma Mackey), and Poirot observed the two of them in a London club and how Ridgeway was introduced to Simon by her friend Jacqueline.
The wedding reception is disrupted by the arrival of Jacqueline and Linette and Simon confides in Poirot that she has been following them around the world and asks the Detective to encourage her to leave them alone so they can get on with their life.
Jacqueline is highly disturbed and pleads her love for Simon and shows a gun which leads Poirot to encourage the newlyweds to abandon their overseas plans and go home. Simon and Linette press on and decide to take their wedding party on a cruise of the Nile in an attempt to get away from Jacqueline.
The plan seems to be working well until Jacqueline shows up as a ticketed passenger at a stop along the way. When a near-fatal accident occurs followed by a murder; Poirot must investigate the guests to find the killer. Naturally, there is plenty of motivation to go around, and as the deaths mount; Poirot must use his genius to find the killer.
The movie takes its time getting started but the CGI-enhanced scenery and the strong cast are very compelling and set the pieces in place very well. While I was able to solve the mystery about halfway into the film, some of the details around it were cleverly concealed and there were plenty of twists that had me consider other possible suspects.
Some may find the film a bit slow but that is the nature of a good mystery as time is given to developing the characters and their motives which adds to the suspense of the film.
In the end, the film is an engaging mystery that recalls the classic movie mysteries of old and it will be very interesting to see if audiences will embrace the film in the same way as they did with “Murder on the Orient Express” and audiences will get more Poirot adventures from Branagh in the near future.
4 stars out of 5.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Spider-Man 3 (2007) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
The most anticipated film of the summer, Spider-Man 3 has arrived to the delight of moviegoers the world over. It has been roughly a little more than a year since Spider-Man (Tobey Maguire), defeated Dr. Octopus and saved the city from certain doom.
During this time, Spider-man has become New York City’s celebrated hero, and his day to day alter ego, Peter Parker, delights in his fame, while dating the love of his life, Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst).
As the film opens, Peter has decided to ask Mary Jane to be his wife, and plans to surprise her with a ring during dinner at a fancy restaurant. Mary Jane is starring in a Broadway play, and despite harsh reviews, she is living her dream and madly in love with Peter.
Things take an unexpected twist for Peter when he is attacked one night by his best friend Harry (James Franco), who blames him for the death of his father at the conclusion of the first film. Enhanced by his father’s Goblin serum, Harry is a deadly adversary for Peter who is able to fend off the attack eventually, and put into motion a series of events that will forever change his life.
When a career criminal named Flint Marko (Thomas Hayden Church), is accidentally caught in an experiment while fleeing the authorities, he becomes a living mass of sand, which enables him to start a string of robberies as “The Sandman”, and provides Spider-man with his most unusual opponent yet.
As if this was not enough, Peter must contend with a new hotshot photographer named Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), who is after a staff position at the Daily Bugle. The fact that Peter has more seniority at the paper is of little interest to Eddie, and he will stop at nothing to get the better of Peter.
At this point one would think that Peter has more than enough on his plate, but fate is about to drop an unexpected player into his life, a space based symbiote that bonds
with Peter’s costume and creates a dark black look for Spider-Man as well as an increase in his powers.
Peter becomes obsessed with his new powers, and there is a dramatic change in his persona, which does not sit well with Mary Jane. When new information is given to Peter about the death of his Uncle Ben, Peter is more than willing to use his new found abilities to exact the revenge that he craves.
Peter also has another area of interest as Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard), the daughter of the local Chief of Police has caught his eye, much to the chagrin of both Mary Jane and Gwen’s current boyfriend Eddie Brock.
This tangled web of characters soon forces Peter to take stock of his life and the choices he makes, in order to determine what truly matters to him, the love and respect of his friends, or giving into his darker side and pursing power and unending praise and adulation.
The film starts out well, and the early conflict between Peter and Harry is a brilliantly staged spectacle of sight, sound, and motion. There are also some great moments between the lead characters and Church, Howard and Grace do well with their characters, yet something about Spider-Man 3 did not click for me the way the previous two films in the series have.
Having the luxury of time from the press screener to the opening, I was able to look back at the film the past week and a half to try to determine what did not work for me, and I kept coming back to the same conclusions.
First, the film wants very much to be much darker and edgier than the other films, yet just when you think you are going to see Peter fully cross the line, the film pulls back into campy mode, and we are given scenes of Peter hamming it up as a ladies’ man, and I kid you not, doing an impromptu dance number.
While this works for comedic effect, I am supposed to believe that the darker side of Peter’s soul is being exposed, and I had a hard time thinking that his inner demons include “Saturday Night Fever” style strut down the sidewalk, and a floor show.
The second thing that bothered me was the villains, as aside from Harry as the New Goblin, both the Sandman and Venom were sadly lacking. Neither The Sandman nor Venom had over the top plots to rule the world, kill or enslave the masses, or endanger huge parts of the city as was the case with the original Green Goblin and Dr Octopus.
Rather we have one who is content to steal to fund a noble cause, and wishes only to complete this cause and have Spider-Man out of his way. The second simply wants revenge for being slighted, and does not elude the menace nor danger that the character warrants.
effects wise the film is solid and there are some great moments in the film, but to many times I thought I had seen the same sand effects years early in the “Mummy” series which lead to many cases of “been there, seen that” for me. With a budget that many claim to be the most expensive film ever made when based on current dollar values, I had expected more from the film, especially given the talented and dynamic cast, and the ample backing of the studio.
Director and series Guru Sam Raimi seems to be coasting here as one has to wonder if he used up many of his great ideas in the last two films, and was trying so hard not to repeat himself, that he lost that magic spark that made the last two films such classics.
As it stands, “Spider-Man 3” is a good film, but you can’t help but feel it could have been a better one.
During this time, Spider-man has become New York City’s celebrated hero, and his day to day alter ego, Peter Parker, delights in his fame, while dating the love of his life, Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst).
As the film opens, Peter has decided to ask Mary Jane to be his wife, and plans to surprise her with a ring during dinner at a fancy restaurant. Mary Jane is starring in a Broadway play, and despite harsh reviews, she is living her dream and madly in love with Peter.
Things take an unexpected twist for Peter when he is attacked one night by his best friend Harry (James Franco), who blames him for the death of his father at the conclusion of the first film. Enhanced by his father’s Goblin serum, Harry is a deadly adversary for Peter who is able to fend off the attack eventually, and put into motion a series of events that will forever change his life.
When a career criminal named Flint Marko (Thomas Hayden Church), is accidentally caught in an experiment while fleeing the authorities, he becomes a living mass of sand, which enables him to start a string of robberies as “The Sandman”, and provides Spider-man with his most unusual opponent yet.
As if this was not enough, Peter must contend with a new hotshot photographer named Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), who is after a staff position at the Daily Bugle. The fact that Peter has more seniority at the paper is of little interest to Eddie, and he will stop at nothing to get the better of Peter.
At this point one would think that Peter has more than enough on his plate, but fate is about to drop an unexpected player into his life, a space based symbiote that bonds
with Peter’s costume and creates a dark black look for Spider-Man as well as an increase in his powers.
Peter becomes obsessed with his new powers, and there is a dramatic change in his persona, which does not sit well with Mary Jane. When new information is given to Peter about the death of his Uncle Ben, Peter is more than willing to use his new found abilities to exact the revenge that he craves.
Peter also has another area of interest as Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard), the daughter of the local Chief of Police has caught his eye, much to the chagrin of both Mary Jane and Gwen’s current boyfriend Eddie Brock.
This tangled web of characters soon forces Peter to take stock of his life and the choices he makes, in order to determine what truly matters to him, the love and respect of his friends, or giving into his darker side and pursing power and unending praise and adulation.
The film starts out well, and the early conflict between Peter and Harry is a brilliantly staged spectacle of sight, sound, and motion. There are also some great moments between the lead characters and Church, Howard and Grace do well with their characters, yet something about Spider-Man 3 did not click for me the way the previous two films in the series have.
Having the luxury of time from the press screener to the opening, I was able to look back at the film the past week and a half to try to determine what did not work for me, and I kept coming back to the same conclusions.
First, the film wants very much to be much darker and edgier than the other films, yet just when you think you are going to see Peter fully cross the line, the film pulls back into campy mode, and we are given scenes of Peter hamming it up as a ladies’ man, and I kid you not, doing an impromptu dance number.
While this works for comedic effect, I am supposed to believe that the darker side of Peter’s soul is being exposed, and I had a hard time thinking that his inner demons include “Saturday Night Fever” style strut down the sidewalk, and a floor show.
The second thing that bothered me was the villains, as aside from Harry as the New Goblin, both the Sandman and Venom were sadly lacking. Neither The Sandman nor Venom had over the top plots to rule the world, kill or enslave the masses, or endanger huge parts of the city as was the case with the original Green Goblin and Dr Octopus.
Rather we have one who is content to steal to fund a noble cause, and wishes only to complete this cause and have Spider-Man out of his way. The second simply wants revenge for being slighted, and does not elude the menace nor danger that the character warrants.
effects wise the film is solid and there are some great moments in the film, but to many times I thought I had seen the same sand effects years early in the “Mummy” series which lead to many cases of “been there, seen that” for me. With a budget that many claim to be the most expensive film ever made when based on current dollar values, I had expected more from the film, especially given the talented and dynamic cast, and the ample backing of the studio.
Director and series Guru Sam Raimi seems to be coasting here as one has to wonder if he used up many of his great ideas in the last two films, and was trying so hard not to repeat himself, that he lost that magic spark that made the last two films such classics.
As it stands, “Spider-Man 3” is a good film, but you can’t help but feel it could have been a better one.