Search
Search results
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Lone Survivor (2014) in Movies
Jan 26, 2021 (Updated Feb 2, 2021)
Mark Walhbeg (1 more)
Ben Foster
Never Out of the Fight
Lone Survivor- is a intense action thriller thats based on a true story. Its slow at first, but around halfway in, it gets good.
The plot:In 2005 Afghanistan, Navy SEALs Marcus Luttrell (Mark Wahlberg), Michael Murphy (Taylor Kitsch), Danny Dietz (Emile Hirsch) and Matthew "Axe" Axelson (Ben Foster) deploy on a mission of surveillance and to take out Taliban leader Ahmad Shah. Though spotted by goatherds, Luttrell and his team decide not to kill them. But one of the Afghans alerts a group of Taliban fighters to the invaders, and a terrible battle ensues, in which the SEALs find themselves hopelessly outnumbered and outgunned.
Its a must see film.
The plot:In 2005 Afghanistan, Navy SEALs Marcus Luttrell (Mark Wahlberg), Michael Murphy (Taylor Kitsch), Danny Dietz (Emile Hirsch) and Matthew "Axe" Axelson (Ben Foster) deploy on a mission of surveillance and to take out Taliban leader Ahmad Shah. Though spotted by goatherds, Luttrell and his team decide not to kill them. But one of the Afghans alerts a group of Taliban fighters to the invaders, and a terrible battle ensues, in which the SEALs find themselves hopelessly outnumbered and outgunned.
Its a must see film.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Ready or Not (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Bloody Good Fun
Ready Or Not is a 2019 black comedy/horror movie directed by Matt Bettinelli-Olphin and Tyler Gillett from a screenplay by Gus Busick and R. Christopher Murphy. Producers on the film included Tripp Vinson, James Vanderbilt, Willem Sherak, and Bradley J. Fischer. It was produced by Fox Searchlight Pictures, Mythology Entertainment, Vinson Films and distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures. The film stars Samara Weaving, Adam Brody, Mark O'Brien, Henry Czerny and Andie MacDowell.
Grace couldn't be happier after she marries the man of her dreams at his family's luxurious estate. There's just one catch -- at midnight on the wedding night, the wealthy Le Domas family hosts a generations long tradition of playing a game with each new addition to the family. Tony, her new father-in-law explains that Grace must participate in a session where she must draw a card from a mysterious wooden box and play the game to be a full-fledged member of the family. She must now hide from midnight until dawn while her new in-laws hunt her down with guns, crossbows, and other weapons s she desperately tries to survive the night,
This movie was great. I liked it quite a bit. It was a fresh take on one of my favorite genres. The movie was also pretty funny and had a good way of mixing the horror with comedy. The acting was also really good with Samara Weaving doing a great job and a solid performance from Adam Brody too. The script and plot could have been a little more solid but it's a enjoyable ride. There were some inconsistencies with the plot and some humor that fell flat but overall a good mashup of genres and fresh take on some stereotypes and cliches. I give this movie a 8/10. Not necessarily a horror movie but more aligned with survival horror, I recommend it for people who like movies like that.
Grace couldn't be happier after she marries the man of her dreams at his family's luxurious estate. There's just one catch -- at midnight on the wedding night, the wealthy Le Domas family hosts a generations long tradition of playing a game with each new addition to the family. Tony, her new father-in-law explains that Grace must participate in a session where she must draw a card from a mysterious wooden box and play the game to be a full-fledged member of the family. She must now hide from midnight until dawn while her new in-laws hunt her down with guns, crossbows, and other weapons s she desperately tries to survive the night,
This movie was great. I liked it quite a bit. It was a fresh take on one of my favorite genres. The movie was also pretty funny and had a good way of mixing the horror with comedy. The acting was also really good with Samara Weaving doing a great job and a solid performance from Adam Brody too. The script and plot could have been a little more solid but it's a enjoyable ride. There were some inconsistencies with the plot and some humor that fell flat but overall a good mashup of genres and fresh take on some stereotypes and cliches. I give this movie a 8/10. Not necessarily a horror movie but more aligned with survival horror, I recommend it for people who like movies like that.
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Have you ever wondered how your body works? Author Mark Murphy has his theory. The human body is full of little creatures known as min, and it is no different for 34 year old Will. Min live in every part of the body doing different jobs to make each part of the body work they way it should. However, these min are much like the humans they inhabit: they have their own jobs, their own lives, their own feelings and their own opinions.
Penelope Potts is a bored 15 year old min living in the left ear department with nothing much to do. Yet one day life becomes much more exciting when she and her best friend Henry are selected to take part in the trials to try and win themselves a position in Central Head.
Whilst this is taking place, however, the evil leader of the min, Sananab (incidentally bananas spelt backwards) has come up with a malicious plan that may change the life of the min forever. When Sananab discovers that Penelope is doing very well in the trials he becomes very interested in her. But when Penelope discovers his evil plan her life is immediately in danger.
Murphy’s ideas are very imaginative but are also similar to the <i>Numbskulls</i> in the <i>Beano</i> – perhaps this even had some influence on his novel? It is fun to envisage tiny beings living in human bodies making sure every organ works properly. The min themselves are an interesting bunch. Apart from Penelope, none appear to be that intelligent leading to humorous scenes, which could have the reader laughing out loud.
<i>Minology</i> despite the <i>“ology”</i> is not a heavy read and can be taken at the reader’s own pace. Whether they want something to read leisurely or something to read quickly this book will be more than adequate. And, if you like the min so much and want to read even more about their funny lives, there is a second book!
Have you ever wondered how your body works? Author Mark Murphy has his theory. The human body is full of little creatures known as min, and it is no different for 34 year old Will. Min live in every part of the body doing different jobs to make each part of the body work they way it should. However, these min are much like the humans they inhabit: they have their own jobs, their own lives, their own feelings and their own opinions.
Penelope Potts is a bored 15 year old min living in the left ear department with nothing much to do. Yet one day life becomes much more exciting when she and her best friend Henry are selected to take part in the trials to try and win themselves a position in Central Head.
Whilst this is taking place, however, the evil leader of the min, Sananab (incidentally bananas spelt backwards) has come up with a malicious plan that may change the life of the min forever. When Sananab discovers that Penelope is doing very well in the trials he becomes very interested in her. But when Penelope discovers his evil plan her life is immediately in danger.
Murphy’s ideas are very imaginative but are also similar to the <i>Numbskulls</i> in the <i>Beano</i> – perhaps this even had some influence on his novel? It is fun to envisage tiny beings living in human bodies making sure every organ works properly. The min themselves are an interesting bunch. Apart from Penelope, none appear to be that intelligent leading to humorous scenes, which could have the reader laughing out loud.
<i>Minology</i> despite the <i>“ology”</i> is not a heavy read and can be taken at the reader’s own pace. Whether they want something to read leisurely or something to read quickly this book will be more than adequate. And, if you like the min so much and want to read even more about their funny lives, there is a second book!
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Minology II The Disquisitive Saga Of Filbert Monkston in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
What if scientists have been wrong about the way the human body works? What if there are thousands of tiny creatures controlling each and every organ, making sure everything in the body is in working order? This is the idea that Mark Murphy has based his books upon. These creatures are called min and not only do they help the body to function; they have their own lives to deal with as well.
<i>Minology II: The Disquisitive Saga of Filbert Monkston</i> is the second of the <i>Minology stories</i>. Filbert is a seventeen-year-old min who has grown up in the Gutlands as part of the Kushnick tribe. However he is beginning to question their religion. Why do they have these beliefs? Why do they sacrifice food? An argument with his father sparks off a series of events that cause trouble for many min.
After storming off, Filbert and his friend Gordon come into contact with a strange group of travellers. Not realizing how dangerous they are, Filbert and Gordon get drawn into a trap. Baron Floppy, Filbert’s father, on the other hand, regrets the outburst at his son and is extremely worried when he never returns home. Along with a search party he goes out to find his son. As the story leads up to reuniting the father and son an old mystery is uncovered and finally solved after many years of it being left unanswered.
As with the first <i>Minology</i> book, this is a lighthearted read containing a lot of humour. Many of the min are not the most intelligent of creatures resulting in rather a lot of misunderstandings which can be particularly amusing. The storyline itself can be quite gripping as the mystery unravels.
Although <i>Minology II</i> does not exactly follow on from the previous novel, it would be handy to read the books in order as the first story provides more information about who the min are and a little about the body they are inhabiting.
Overall, <i>Minology II</i> is a good short read, however could have done with another proof read before publication. It is a shame that the writer cannot tell the difference between the words ‘were’ and ‘where’!
What if scientists have been wrong about the way the human body works? What if there are thousands of tiny creatures controlling each and every organ, making sure everything in the body is in working order? This is the idea that Mark Murphy has based his books upon. These creatures are called min and not only do they help the body to function; they have their own lives to deal with as well.
<i>Minology II: The Disquisitive Saga of Filbert Monkston</i> is the second of the <i>Minology stories</i>. Filbert is a seventeen-year-old min who has grown up in the Gutlands as part of the Kushnick tribe. However he is beginning to question their religion. Why do they have these beliefs? Why do they sacrifice food? An argument with his father sparks off a series of events that cause trouble for many min.
After storming off, Filbert and his friend Gordon come into contact with a strange group of travellers. Not realizing how dangerous they are, Filbert and Gordon get drawn into a trap. Baron Floppy, Filbert’s father, on the other hand, regrets the outburst at his son and is extremely worried when he never returns home. Along with a search party he goes out to find his son. As the story leads up to reuniting the father and son an old mystery is uncovered and finally solved after many years of it being left unanswered.
As with the first <i>Minology</i> book, this is a lighthearted read containing a lot of humour. Many of the min are not the most intelligent of creatures resulting in rather a lot of misunderstandings which can be particularly amusing. The storyline itself can be quite gripping as the mystery unravels.
Although <i>Minology II</i> does not exactly follow on from the previous novel, it would be handy to read the books in order as the first story provides more information about who the min are and a little about the body they are inhabiting.
Overall, <i>Minology II</i> is a good short read, however could have done with another proof read before publication. It is a shame that the writer cannot tell the difference between the words ‘were’ and ‘where’!
Darren (1599 KP) rated 28 Days Later (2002) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Verdict: Modern Zombie Gem
Story: 28 Days Later starts by showing a group of activists breaking into a laboratory where chimps are forced to watch some of the most gruesome sites in human history. This was designed to create pure rage and when the chimps are released an epidemic starts. 28 Days Later (title drop) we meet Jim (Murphy) who wakes up in a hospital, alone he searches looking for help but the hospital, streets and everywhere is empty. Wonder around the empty London Jim finds a church filled with infected that chase him before getting save by Mark (Huntley) and Selena (Harris) who also fill in the blanks of what happened.
Jim finds out the harsh reality of the world now but meeting Frank (Gleeson) and his daughter Hannah (Burns) gives them a chance to go to a radio signal left by the military. The group soon find the military holding up in a mansion lead by Major Henry West (Eccleston) but not everything is as it seems.
28 Days Later brings the modern infected zombie film to life in one of the best story ideas we have seen. It is good to see a story that the infection can only be spread rather than you turn when you die which is big change to all we have seen. The journey itself is been there seen that but what we get is a revenge film with infected around once we meet the military. This shows us that the enemy could come from all direction and our characters are never going to be safe in the world now. This is easily one of the best zombie based films in recent years. (9/10)
REPORT THIS AD
Actor Review
Cillian Murphy: Jim waking up alone in a hospital he wonders the empty city before being found by other survivors, with a group he heads to the military safe zone where he ends up having to fight to save the rest of his group from not only infected but the soldiers. Cillian gives a great performance and this put him on the map for bigger roles. (9/10)
jim
Naomie Harris: Selena the nonsense survivor who takes no prisoners which we see from the moment her fellow survivor gets infected. Naomie gives a good performance showing that she was always going to be in bigger films. (8/10)
Brendan Gleeson: Frank caring father who has waited for support before taking his daughter to a radio signal he has been hearing. This character may only be a supporting character but his final moments are one of the most memorable turns in this genre history. Brendan does a good job in what is just a supporting performance. (8/10)
Christopher Eccleston: Major Henry West who is running the military unit that has been calling for the survivors but his motives are not what they seem. Christopher gives a good performance in the role. (7/10)
Support Cast: 28 Days Later doesn’t have the biggest supporting cast we have a couple of other survivors as well as the soldiers in the military unit. They all help as they show us what the characters are capable off.
Director Review: Danny Boyle – Danny does a great job directing this zombie classic that is easily one of the best in the genre. (9/10)
Horror: 28 Days Later uses plenty of horror elements with survival horror shinning through. (10/10)
Music: 28 Days Later uses brilliant scores to build the tension up through the scenes. (9/10)
Settings: 28 Days Later uses the settings really well to show how empty busy places could be when the world comes to an end. (9/10)
Special Effects: 28 Days Later uses great special effects with the infected creation. (9/10)
Suggestion: 28 Days Later is one to watch for every horror fan out there. (Horror Fans Watch)
Best Part: Suspense building.
Worst Part: Nothing
Action Scene Of The Film: Jim breaks into the mansion
REPORT THIS AD
Kill Of The Film: Frank
Scariest Scene: Jim’s returns home
Believability: No (0/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: Has one sequel with talks of another always around.
Post Credits Scene: There is the alternative ending
Oscar Chances: No
Box Office: $82 Million
Budget: $8 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 53 Minutes
Tagline: His fear began when he woke up alone. His terror began when he realised he wasn’t.
Trivia: The scene where Jim and Selena celebrate with Frank and Hannah was shot on September 11, 2001. Danny Boyle said it felt extremely strange to shoot a celebratory scene on that particular day.
Overall: Brilliant Infected Film
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/03/14/28-days-later-2002/
Story: 28 Days Later starts by showing a group of activists breaking into a laboratory where chimps are forced to watch some of the most gruesome sites in human history. This was designed to create pure rage and when the chimps are released an epidemic starts. 28 Days Later (title drop) we meet Jim (Murphy) who wakes up in a hospital, alone he searches looking for help but the hospital, streets and everywhere is empty. Wonder around the empty London Jim finds a church filled with infected that chase him before getting save by Mark (Huntley) and Selena (Harris) who also fill in the blanks of what happened.
Jim finds out the harsh reality of the world now but meeting Frank (Gleeson) and his daughter Hannah (Burns) gives them a chance to go to a radio signal left by the military. The group soon find the military holding up in a mansion lead by Major Henry West (Eccleston) but not everything is as it seems.
28 Days Later brings the modern infected zombie film to life in one of the best story ideas we have seen. It is good to see a story that the infection can only be spread rather than you turn when you die which is big change to all we have seen. The journey itself is been there seen that but what we get is a revenge film with infected around once we meet the military. This shows us that the enemy could come from all direction and our characters are never going to be safe in the world now. This is easily one of the best zombie based films in recent years. (9/10)
REPORT THIS AD
Actor Review
Cillian Murphy: Jim waking up alone in a hospital he wonders the empty city before being found by other survivors, with a group he heads to the military safe zone where he ends up having to fight to save the rest of his group from not only infected but the soldiers. Cillian gives a great performance and this put him on the map for bigger roles. (9/10)
jim
Naomie Harris: Selena the nonsense survivor who takes no prisoners which we see from the moment her fellow survivor gets infected. Naomie gives a good performance showing that she was always going to be in bigger films. (8/10)
Brendan Gleeson: Frank caring father who has waited for support before taking his daughter to a radio signal he has been hearing. This character may only be a supporting character but his final moments are one of the most memorable turns in this genre history. Brendan does a good job in what is just a supporting performance. (8/10)
Christopher Eccleston: Major Henry West who is running the military unit that has been calling for the survivors but his motives are not what they seem. Christopher gives a good performance in the role. (7/10)
Support Cast: 28 Days Later doesn’t have the biggest supporting cast we have a couple of other survivors as well as the soldiers in the military unit. They all help as they show us what the characters are capable off.
Director Review: Danny Boyle – Danny does a great job directing this zombie classic that is easily one of the best in the genre. (9/10)
Horror: 28 Days Later uses plenty of horror elements with survival horror shinning through. (10/10)
Music: 28 Days Later uses brilliant scores to build the tension up through the scenes. (9/10)
Settings: 28 Days Later uses the settings really well to show how empty busy places could be when the world comes to an end. (9/10)
Special Effects: 28 Days Later uses great special effects with the infected creation. (9/10)
Suggestion: 28 Days Later is one to watch for every horror fan out there. (Horror Fans Watch)
Best Part: Suspense building.
Worst Part: Nothing
Action Scene Of The Film: Jim breaks into the mansion
REPORT THIS AD
Kill Of The Film: Frank
Scariest Scene: Jim’s returns home
Believability: No (0/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: Has one sequel with talks of another always around.
Post Credits Scene: There is the alternative ending
Oscar Chances: No
Box Office: $82 Million
Budget: $8 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 53 Minutes
Tagline: His fear began when he woke up alone. His terror began when he realised he wasn’t.
Trivia: The scene where Jim and Selena celebrate with Frank and Hannah was shot on September 11, 2001. Danny Boyle said it felt extremely strange to shoot a celebratory scene on that particular day.
Overall: Brilliant Infected Film
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/03/14/28-days-later-2002/
Lee (2222 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Jul 26, 2017
Breathtaking and Intense
It's 1940 and the Nazis are overpowering the British army, forcing them to retreat to Dunkirk in an effort to return home to England. The English channel is all that stands in the way of the 400,000 soldiers that are stranded on the beach. The story begins with Tommy (Fionn Whitehead), making his way through the town as propaganda is being dropped from the sky, informing them that the enemy are closing in. After a brief dash to avoid the bullets that begin raining down on him and some fellow soldiers, he barely manages to make it to the beach where the immense desperation of the situation becomes apparent. Thousands of men lined up, waiting for something to free them while bodies wash up on the beach. The cinematic scale is, as you'd expect from Christopher Nolan, impressive. And it doesn't let up from then on.
We follow three different stories, covering land, sea and air and spanning differing time-frames. Intersecting and even overtaking each other at crucial moments, which sounds confusing but actually works very well. After being introduced to the perspective on land, which then continues to play out over a week, we're introduced to Mr Dawson (Mark Rylance) as he prepares to set off from England by yacht along with his son and another local boy, loaded with lifejackets and keen to do their bit to help bring our boys home. This storyline is set to play out over the period of one day. Finally, we're introduced to RAF pilot Farrier (Tom Hardy), whose story will play out over an hour. He's up in the sky, over the channel. As we alternate between each story, momentum is never lost and the tension continues to grow as time, and available options, begin to dwindle. On land, bombs, bullets and torpedoes repeatedly prevent a successful escape, sinking boats and ships. Up in the air, a damaged fuel gauge means that Farrier has to constantly guesstimate how much fuel and time he's got left before dropping out of the sky, while single-handedly taking out enemy planes in the process. Down on the water, Dawson and his small crew have their own drama after rescuing a stranded soldier (Cillian Murphy). Clearly a broken man who takes a turn for the worse upon realising that they're not headed for home and are in fact on their way back to the hell that he's just left behind.
Despite featuring a number of famous faces, probably the most surprising cast member of all is Harry Styles. Every time he features in a scene, and he does feature quite a bit, it kind of threw me off balance and I was just expecting him to cock the whole thing up. Luckily he doesn't. This is a truly breathtaking movie, with no over the top CGI or gore and with everyone at the top of their game. Perfectly ramped up tension, accompanied by an intense musical score from the fantastic Hans Zimmer. The dogfights, featuring real spitfires filmed over the English Channel, are also incredible with the roar of their engines and bullets flying. The movie does an amazing job of fully immersing you in this pivotal moment of history. It's truly edge of seat stuff throughout. Incredible.
We follow three different stories, covering land, sea and air and spanning differing time-frames. Intersecting and even overtaking each other at crucial moments, which sounds confusing but actually works very well. After being introduced to the perspective on land, which then continues to play out over a week, we're introduced to Mr Dawson (Mark Rylance) as he prepares to set off from England by yacht along with his son and another local boy, loaded with lifejackets and keen to do their bit to help bring our boys home. This storyline is set to play out over the period of one day. Finally, we're introduced to RAF pilot Farrier (Tom Hardy), whose story will play out over an hour. He's up in the sky, over the channel. As we alternate between each story, momentum is never lost and the tension continues to grow as time, and available options, begin to dwindle. On land, bombs, bullets and torpedoes repeatedly prevent a successful escape, sinking boats and ships. Up in the air, a damaged fuel gauge means that Farrier has to constantly guesstimate how much fuel and time he's got left before dropping out of the sky, while single-handedly taking out enemy planes in the process. Down on the water, Dawson and his small crew have their own drama after rescuing a stranded soldier (Cillian Murphy). Clearly a broken man who takes a turn for the worse upon realising that they're not headed for home and are in fact on their way back to the hell that he's just left behind.
Despite featuring a number of famous faces, probably the most surprising cast member of all is Harry Styles. Every time he features in a scene, and he does feature quite a bit, it kind of threw me off balance and I was just expecting him to cock the whole thing up. Luckily he doesn't. This is a truly breathtaking movie, with no over the top CGI or gore and with everyone at the top of their game. Perfectly ramped up tension, accompanied by an intense musical score from the fantastic Hans Zimmer. The dogfights, featuring real spitfires filmed over the English Channel, are also incredible with the roar of their engines and bullets flying. The movie does an amazing job of fully immersing you in this pivotal moment of history. It's truly edge of seat stuff throughout. Incredible.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Stuber (2019) in Movies
Jul 18, 2019
Lack of chemistry between the leads
"Chemistry" is a tricky thing in a film and one that "either you got it or you don't" - it's an elusive element that can sink or raise a film. Case in point 2 films I have seen this week.
I rewatched the 1998 Crime/Romance flick OUT OF SIGHT - starring George Clooney and Jennifer Lopez. I remembered this Steven Soderbergh directed film as "terrific" and was excited to show it to my bride. What I realized when watching it is that this is a middle-of-the-road film that is elevated by the tremendous (sexual) chemistry between Lopez and Clooney. It oozes off the screen and is palatable to the viewer.
On the other end of the scale is the recent Action/Comedy STUBER with comedian Kuamil Nanjiani (THE BIG SICK) and former pro wrestler Dave Bautista (Drax in the GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY films). This is a middle-of-the-road film that is hurt (tremendously) by the LACK of chemistry between the two leads.
Nanjiani stars as Stu, a sad-sack Uber driver who does not stand up for himself while Bautista is a "nothing gets in my way" take charge cop who (because of recent eye surgery) cannot drive and hires an Uber driver, Stu (who gets called STUBER, hence the name of the film), to chase down clues to a criminal he's been on the hunt for - shenanigans ensue.
Individually, some of the scenes/scenarios of this film are fine/funny and Nanjiani is terrific as Stu and adds some clever comedic elements to a script that is "good enough" by Tripper Clancy.
And then there's Bautista.
He seems lost in this film, underplaying the things that make him good, his over-exuberance and over physicality (if that is a term) of someone of his size. Is this Bautista's fault or did Director Michael Dowse (GOON) purposely tone him down? It doesn't really matter for it doesn't really work.
And this is the beginning of the problem with the chemistry between the two leads - Nanjiani manic energy is not matched by Bautista - he seems to be an "energy sucker" and takes quite a bit of life out of this film. But...Director Dowse is also a problem, for he brings this lack of energy to quite a few of the big action scenes, underplaying, not overplaying what should have been over played.
There are some good things in this - besides the script and Nanjiani, Natalie Morales and Betty Gilpin are good and we do have a "Mira Sorvino sighting", which is welcome...but that's about it. Oh...except for an extended cameo by Karen Gillan (Nebula in the GUARDIANS films) she brings some energy. I would have loved to see her paired with Nanjiani in this.
If you're looking for a good "buddy cop" film with good chemistry between the leads, might I suggest THE OTHER GUYS (Will Ferrell/Mark Wahlberg), RUNNING SCARED (Billy Crystal/Gregory Hines) or the greatest example of strong chemistry - 48 HOURS (Nick Nolte/Eddie Murphy). Stuber would be the example of just the opposite.
6 stars out of 10 (for Nanjiani, Gillan and Sorvino - and a script and circumstances that could have worked had the chemistry between the leads been better)
Letter Grade: B- and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I rewatched the 1998 Crime/Romance flick OUT OF SIGHT - starring George Clooney and Jennifer Lopez. I remembered this Steven Soderbergh directed film as "terrific" and was excited to show it to my bride. What I realized when watching it is that this is a middle-of-the-road film that is elevated by the tremendous (sexual) chemistry between Lopez and Clooney. It oozes off the screen and is palatable to the viewer.
On the other end of the scale is the recent Action/Comedy STUBER with comedian Kuamil Nanjiani (THE BIG SICK) and former pro wrestler Dave Bautista (Drax in the GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY films). This is a middle-of-the-road film that is hurt (tremendously) by the LACK of chemistry between the two leads.
Nanjiani stars as Stu, a sad-sack Uber driver who does not stand up for himself while Bautista is a "nothing gets in my way" take charge cop who (because of recent eye surgery) cannot drive and hires an Uber driver, Stu (who gets called STUBER, hence the name of the film), to chase down clues to a criminal he's been on the hunt for - shenanigans ensue.
Individually, some of the scenes/scenarios of this film are fine/funny and Nanjiani is terrific as Stu and adds some clever comedic elements to a script that is "good enough" by Tripper Clancy.
And then there's Bautista.
He seems lost in this film, underplaying the things that make him good, his over-exuberance and over physicality (if that is a term) of someone of his size. Is this Bautista's fault or did Director Michael Dowse (GOON) purposely tone him down? It doesn't really matter for it doesn't really work.
And this is the beginning of the problem with the chemistry between the two leads - Nanjiani manic energy is not matched by Bautista - he seems to be an "energy sucker" and takes quite a bit of life out of this film. But...Director Dowse is also a problem, for he brings this lack of energy to quite a few of the big action scenes, underplaying, not overplaying what should have been over played.
There are some good things in this - besides the script and Nanjiani, Natalie Morales and Betty Gilpin are good and we do have a "Mira Sorvino sighting", which is welcome...but that's about it. Oh...except for an extended cameo by Karen Gillan (Nebula in the GUARDIANS films) she brings some energy. I would have loved to see her paired with Nanjiani in this.
If you're looking for a good "buddy cop" film with good chemistry between the leads, might I suggest THE OTHER GUYS (Will Ferrell/Mark Wahlberg), RUNNING SCARED (Billy Crystal/Gregory Hines) or the greatest example of strong chemistry - 48 HOURS (Nick Nolte/Eddie Murphy). Stuber would be the example of just the opposite.
6 stars out of 10 (for Nanjiani, Gillan and Sorvino - and a script and circumstances that could have worked had the chemistry between the leads been better)
Letter Grade: B- and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Justin Patchett (42 KP) rated Inception (2010) in Movies
Mar 13, 2019
Masterful visuals, including many practical effects wonders (1 more)
Extraordinary score by Hans Zimmer
Relationships bud in the film, but feel forced (1 more)
A few plot-holes, albeit none thoroughly distracting
Contains spoilers, click to show
With two of the most scathing reviews I’ve written under my belt, I figured it was time to write about my favorite movie of all time, Christopher Nolan’s “Inception.”
“Inception” revolves around Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio), a spy who uses military-grade technology and shared dreams to extract information from his marks. He and his team are unwittingly tested by their latest target, Mr. Saito (Ken Watanabe) for recruitment into a different kind of job: Inception, a type of job using the same skills and technology to implant an idea. In particular, Saito calls on Cobb to plant an idea on his business competitor, Robert Fischer (Cillian Murphy). In spite of his reluctancy about this type of job, Saito’s offer to clear Cobb of a murder charge sways Cobb in favor of taking the job.
Cobb gathers new help, including Ariadne (Ellen Page), an architect he finds capable of creating complex labyrinths. With the help of a deep sedative, the team is able to make Fischer have dreams within dreams within dreams, a method that makes the mark more receptive to the implanted idea. It comes with a cost, though: The dreams become more unstable as they continue going deeper into the dream world, and the sedative itself creates the risk of actual death within the dream.
First of all, let’s talk cast. Already, we’ve got four top-grade talents named, but we also have Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Arthur, Cobb’s point man, Tom Hardy as Eames, a forger, and additional roles filled by Marion Cotillard and Michael Caine. Nolan did not lack for talent in this one, and by gosh it shows.
Visually, “Inception” excels most with making the impossible as real as cinema can make it. Throughout the film, characters are able to manipulate the rules of the dream world, making for moments where fruit explodes, cities bend, and stairwells become endless. Beyond portraying the impossible, though, the film has to show the real world, too. In those scenes, an aesthetic that can’t exactly be placed takes over. The technology has a slightly retro-futuristic feel to it, while the fashion and settings rely on classic tastes. Even Hans Zimmer’s score, which samples from the work of vocalist Edith Piaf, contributes to the chronological ambiguity of the movie. By not being able to place the film’s setting in any particular year or even decade, it seems prepackaged to become a classic film.
Speaking of Zimmer, he’s is at his best with this score. The complexity of the film reflects in a layered score, and listening to it on its own is its own sort of treat. It’s one of those symphonic recordings that the listener will pick out something they never noticed before every time.
But even above the stellar cast and visuals that have inspired reality-bending sequences in films since, this film’s biggest success is its use of approachable themes and concepts to tell a story within a story. Nearly a decade after its initial release, fans have widely circulated the idea that “Inception” is a film about storytelling. Concepts as basic as nesting stories within stories play out many ways across the plot. It also plays with common experiences in dreams, turning experiences like the feeling of falling into tools for Cobb’s team to exploit. Essentially, if you can dream, you already have a primer in this film’s core principles.
It’s not without flaws, as no film is. Certain moments fail to hold up upon closer inspection. For instance, the relationship between Ariadne and Arthur comes across forced. Those moments aside, from its foreshadowing opening to its meaningfully open-ended ending, “Inception” is an absolute marvel.
“Inception” revolves around Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio), a spy who uses military-grade technology and shared dreams to extract information from his marks. He and his team are unwittingly tested by their latest target, Mr. Saito (Ken Watanabe) for recruitment into a different kind of job: Inception, a type of job using the same skills and technology to implant an idea. In particular, Saito calls on Cobb to plant an idea on his business competitor, Robert Fischer (Cillian Murphy). In spite of his reluctancy about this type of job, Saito’s offer to clear Cobb of a murder charge sways Cobb in favor of taking the job.
Cobb gathers new help, including Ariadne (Ellen Page), an architect he finds capable of creating complex labyrinths. With the help of a deep sedative, the team is able to make Fischer have dreams within dreams within dreams, a method that makes the mark more receptive to the implanted idea. It comes with a cost, though: The dreams become more unstable as they continue going deeper into the dream world, and the sedative itself creates the risk of actual death within the dream.
First of all, let’s talk cast. Already, we’ve got four top-grade talents named, but we also have Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Arthur, Cobb’s point man, Tom Hardy as Eames, a forger, and additional roles filled by Marion Cotillard and Michael Caine. Nolan did not lack for talent in this one, and by gosh it shows.
Visually, “Inception” excels most with making the impossible as real as cinema can make it. Throughout the film, characters are able to manipulate the rules of the dream world, making for moments where fruit explodes, cities bend, and stairwells become endless. Beyond portraying the impossible, though, the film has to show the real world, too. In those scenes, an aesthetic that can’t exactly be placed takes over. The technology has a slightly retro-futuristic feel to it, while the fashion and settings rely on classic tastes. Even Hans Zimmer’s score, which samples from the work of vocalist Edith Piaf, contributes to the chronological ambiguity of the movie. By not being able to place the film’s setting in any particular year or even decade, it seems prepackaged to become a classic film.
Speaking of Zimmer, he’s is at his best with this score. The complexity of the film reflects in a layered score, and listening to it on its own is its own sort of treat. It’s one of those symphonic recordings that the listener will pick out something they never noticed before every time.
But even above the stellar cast and visuals that have inspired reality-bending sequences in films since, this film’s biggest success is its use of approachable themes and concepts to tell a story within a story. Nearly a decade after its initial release, fans have widely circulated the idea that “Inception” is a film about storytelling. Concepts as basic as nesting stories within stories play out many ways across the plot. It also plays with common experiences in dreams, turning experiences like the feeling of falling into tools for Cobb’s team to exploit. Essentially, if you can dream, you already have a primer in this film’s core principles.
It’s not without flaws, as no film is. Certain moments fail to hold up upon closer inspection. For instance, the relationship between Ariadne and Arthur comes across forced. Those moments aside, from its foreshadowing opening to its meaningfully open-ended ending, “Inception” is an absolute marvel.