Search
Search results
David McK (3422 KP) rated The Incredible Hulk (2008) in Movies
Jan 30, 2021 (Updated Sep 18, 2022)
Don't make me hungry. You wouldn't like me when I'm... hungry.
One of the earliest of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) movies (2nd? 3rd? Google says 2nd), it's easy to forget that this is actually considered part of the MCU, what with the lead actor (Ed Norton) being replaced in the dual role of Bruce Banner/The Hulk in later MCU entries by Mark Ruffalo, the complete disappearance of Liv Tyler's love interest Betty Ross from any subsequent film - at least, so far - and little to no mention made of the Harlem final showdown outside the confines of the more niche TV shows (such as Daredevil) when they were still being shown on Netflix. Indeed, about the only through line onto the larger MCU is General Ross, who does appear in later MCU films...
Anyway, all that said, this is solidly mid-tier stuff: better than the Ang Lee version from circa 2003, sure, but not up there with the likes of The Winter Soldier or Avengers Assemble.
Anyway, all that said, this is solidly mid-tier stuff: better than the Ang Lee version from circa 2003, sure, but not up there with the likes of The Winter Soldier or Avengers Assemble.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Father Stu (2022) in Movies
Sep 25, 2022
One Note Performance In The Lead Sinks Film
When one creates a film that is based on the real life exploits of a person, the Writer/Director of the film will be sorely tempted to include that character in every scene. Which is fine if that character is written in an interesting enough way to keep our attention. When it is NOT written well, then the film is poorer because of it.
Such is the case with Writer/Director Rosalind Ross’ (BARBARIAN) FATHER STU starring Mark Wahlberg in the titular role. Ms. Ross focuses on really one-trait of this character, never really diving deeper into the soul of the scoundrel who would turn his life around to serve others and, unfortunately, that is how Wahlberg plays this character as well - with the one note of “con-man and schemer” trying to have his charm and charisma carry the day. While this one note is not deep or particularly interesting, Wahlberg commits to this choice and plays Stu in that manner throughout the first part of the film.
And…that would be fine if the Stuart Long character has some sort of change of heart in the middle of the film when he decides to head to the Seminary, but Wahlberg plays this character (and Ross’ Directs this film) with the same one note. Consequently, those around him - and the audience - question his sincerity. I just plain didn’t buy or believe the character in the 2nd half of the movie and that sinks the ending of this film.
Fortunately, this film is populated with some wonderful, nuanced, performances from the Supporting Characters. Jacki Weaver (ANIMAL KINGDOM) is, once again, playing an abandoned wife constantly scrambling and scraping to get by. She has played this sort of roles many, many times before and she is always VERY good. This film is no exception. Malcolm McDowell does more than should be expected with the small part of the Head of the Seminary that Stuart attends. It would be very easy for McDowell to “mail it in”, but he doesn’t. He invests in his character - and his scenes with Wahlberg are much more interesting because of that. Teresa Ruiz (NARCOS) is sincere and believable as Stu’s one-time girlfriend while Cody Fern (AMERICAN HORROR STORY) brings plenty of layers as the character that could be/should be the one-note villain of this piece but is something a bit more.
And then there is Mel Gibson as Stu’s estranged father. He brings his star power - and considerable acting chops - to this pivotal role in the film and it is HIS change that I believed and drove the end of the film. I, actually, wanted to see more of his character.
Ultimately, this movie falls short because of the lack of depth of the performance by Wahlberg - and that’s too bad for the rest of the film is quite good.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such is the case with Writer/Director Rosalind Ross’ (BARBARIAN) FATHER STU starring Mark Wahlberg in the titular role. Ms. Ross focuses on really one-trait of this character, never really diving deeper into the soul of the scoundrel who would turn his life around to serve others and, unfortunately, that is how Wahlberg plays this character as well - with the one note of “con-man and schemer” trying to have his charm and charisma carry the day. While this one note is not deep or particularly interesting, Wahlberg commits to this choice and plays Stu in that manner throughout the first part of the film.
And…that would be fine if the Stuart Long character has some sort of change of heart in the middle of the film when he decides to head to the Seminary, but Wahlberg plays this character (and Ross’ Directs this film) with the same one note. Consequently, those around him - and the audience - question his sincerity. I just plain didn’t buy or believe the character in the 2nd half of the movie and that sinks the ending of this film.
Fortunately, this film is populated with some wonderful, nuanced, performances from the Supporting Characters. Jacki Weaver (ANIMAL KINGDOM) is, once again, playing an abandoned wife constantly scrambling and scraping to get by. She has played this sort of roles many, many times before and she is always VERY good. This film is no exception. Malcolm McDowell does more than should be expected with the small part of the Head of the Seminary that Stuart attends. It would be very easy for McDowell to “mail it in”, but he doesn’t. He invests in his character - and his scenes with Wahlberg are much more interesting because of that. Teresa Ruiz (NARCOS) is sincere and believable as Stu’s one-time girlfriend while Cody Fern (AMERICAN HORROR STORY) brings plenty of layers as the character that could be/should be the one-note villain of this piece but is something a bit more.
And then there is Mel Gibson as Stu’s estranged father. He brings his star power - and considerable acting chops - to this pivotal role in the film and it is HIS change that I believed and drove the end of the film. I, actually, wanted to see more of his character.
Ultimately, this movie falls short because of the lack of depth of the performance by Wahlberg - and that’s too bad for the rest of the film is quite good.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Kingsman: The Golden Circle (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Vaughn and Golding cross the pond to deliver more of the same.
You would probably need to be living under a rock not to know that “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” is the follow-up film to Matthew Vaughn and Jane Goldman’s highly successful 2015 offering “Kingsman: The Secret Service”: a raucous, violent and rude entry into the spy-caper genre. And the sequel is more of the same: why mess with a crowd-pleasing formula?
The fledgling agent Eggsy (Taron Egerton (“Eddie the Eagle“), curiously called “Eggy” at various points in the film for reasons I didn’t understand) is now the new “Galahad” following the demise in the first film of the original, played by Colin Firth (“Magic in the Moonlight“, “Bridget Jones’ Baby“). But just as he’s getting into his stride the whole Kingsman organisation, now headed by Michael Gambon (“Harry Potter”) as Arthur , is ripped apart by an evil drugs cartel called “The Golden Circle” headed by smiling but deadly Poppy (Juliane Moore, “Still Alice”).
Eggsy and Lancelot (Mark Strong, “Miss Sloane“) in desperation turn to Statesman – the US equivalent organisation – and together with some surprising allies set out to defeat the evil plot to poison all casual drug users.
Subtle this film certainly is not, featuring brash and absurdly unrealistic action scenes that are 90% CGI but – for me at least – enormous fun to watch. As with the first film (and I’m thinking of the grotesquely violent church scene here) the action moves however from ‘edgy’ to “over-the-top/offensive” at times. The ‘burger scene’ and (particularly) the ‘Glastonbury incident’ are the standout moments for all the wrong reasons. I have a theory about how these *might* have come about…
One Mann’s Movies Showcase Theatre
The scene: Matthew Vaughn and Jane Golding are working “The Golden Circle” script at Goldman’s English home.
Vaughn: “OK, so Eggsy is in the tent with Clara and needs to plant the tracking device on her.”
Goldman’s husband Jonathan Ross sticks his head round the door.
Ross: “Hey Guys, I’ve an idea about that. I was on the phone to Wussell Bwand and we came up with a GWEAT idea.”
Vaughn: (rolling his eyes, mutters to himself): “Oh God, not again…”
Ross: “We thought that Eggsy could use his finger to stick the tracker right up her – ahem – ‘lady canal’ and… and… here’s the really great bit… the camera’s gonna be his finger. A camera up the muff! It’ll be weally weally funny!”
Vaughn: “But Jonathan…”.
Goldman nudges him hard.
Goldman (whispering): “Just let it go Matthew… you know what he’s like if he doesn’t get at least a couple of his ideas into the film”.
You can only hope a stunt vagina was used for this scene, else Poppy Delavigne (older sister of Cara) is going to find it very hard to find credible future work. One can only guess what tasteful interlude is being planned for Kingsman 3 – – a prostate-based tracker perhaps?
The film works best when the core team of Taron Egerton, Mark Strong and Colin Firth (yes, Colin Firth!) are together. Jeff Bridges (“Hell or High Water“), Channing Tatum (“Foxcatcher“) and Halle Berry (“Monster’s Ball”) all turn up as key members of ‘Statesman’ – adding star power but not a lot else – together with Pedro Pascal (“The Great Wall“) as ‘Whiskey’…. who I expected to be someone equally famous behind the moustache but wasn’t!
There’s also a very entertaining cameo from a star (no spoilers from me) whose foul-mouthed tirades I found very funny, and who also has the funniest line in the film (playing off one of the most controversial elements of the first film). It’s fair to say though that others I’ve spoken to didn’t think this appearance fitted the film at all.
Julianne Moore makes for an entertaining – if less than credible – villain, as does Bruce Greenwood (“Star Trek: Into Darkness”) as a barely disguised Trump. None of the motivations of the bad ‘uns however support any scrutiny whatsoever: this is very much a “park your brain at the door” film.
I really shouldn’t enjoy this crass, brash, brainless movie fast-food… and I know many have hated it! But my guilty secret is that I really did like it – one of the best nights of unadulterated escapist fun I’ve had since “Baby Driver”. Classy it’s certainly NOT, but I enjoyed this just as much as the original.
The fledgling agent Eggsy (Taron Egerton (“Eddie the Eagle“), curiously called “Eggy” at various points in the film for reasons I didn’t understand) is now the new “Galahad” following the demise in the first film of the original, played by Colin Firth (“Magic in the Moonlight“, “Bridget Jones’ Baby“). But just as he’s getting into his stride the whole Kingsman organisation, now headed by Michael Gambon (“Harry Potter”) as Arthur , is ripped apart by an evil drugs cartel called “The Golden Circle” headed by smiling but deadly Poppy (Juliane Moore, “Still Alice”).
Eggsy and Lancelot (Mark Strong, “Miss Sloane“) in desperation turn to Statesman – the US equivalent organisation – and together with some surprising allies set out to defeat the evil plot to poison all casual drug users.
Subtle this film certainly is not, featuring brash and absurdly unrealistic action scenes that are 90% CGI but – for me at least – enormous fun to watch. As with the first film (and I’m thinking of the grotesquely violent church scene here) the action moves however from ‘edgy’ to “over-the-top/offensive” at times. The ‘burger scene’ and (particularly) the ‘Glastonbury incident’ are the standout moments for all the wrong reasons. I have a theory about how these *might* have come about…
One Mann’s Movies Showcase Theatre
The scene: Matthew Vaughn and Jane Golding are working “The Golden Circle” script at Goldman’s English home.
Vaughn: “OK, so Eggsy is in the tent with Clara and needs to plant the tracking device on her.”
Goldman’s husband Jonathan Ross sticks his head round the door.
Ross: “Hey Guys, I’ve an idea about that. I was on the phone to Wussell Bwand and we came up with a GWEAT idea.”
Vaughn: (rolling his eyes, mutters to himself): “Oh God, not again…”
Ross: “We thought that Eggsy could use his finger to stick the tracker right up her – ahem – ‘lady canal’ and… and… here’s the really great bit… the camera’s gonna be his finger. A camera up the muff! It’ll be weally weally funny!”
Vaughn: “But Jonathan…”.
Goldman nudges him hard.
Goldman (whispering): “Just let it go Matthew… you know what he’s like if he doesn’t get at least a couple of his ideas into the film”.
You can only hope a stunt vagina was used for this scene, else Poppy Delavigne (older sister of Cara) is going to find it very hard to find credible future work. One can only guess what tasteful interlude is being planned for Kingsman 3 – – a prostate-based tracker perhaps?
The film works best when the core team of Taron Egerton, Mark Strong and Colin Firth (yes, Colin Firth!) are together. Jeff Bridges (“Hell or High Water“), Channing Tatum (“Foxcatcher“) and Halle Berry (“Monster’s Ball”) all turn up as key members of ‘Statesman’ – adding star power but not a lot else – together with Pedro Pascal (“The Great Wall“) as ‘Whiskey’…. who I expected to be someone equally famous behind the moustache but wasn’t!
There’s also a very entertaining cameo from a star (no spoilers from me) whose foul-mouthed tirades I found very funny, and who also has the funniest line in the film (playing off one of the most controversial elements of the first film). It’s fair to say though that others I’ve spoken to didn’t think this appearance fitted the film at all.
Julianne Moore makes for an entertaining – if less than credible – villain, as does Bruce Greenwood (“Star Trek: Into Darkness”) as a barely disguised Trump. None of the motivations of the bad ‘uns however support any scrutiny whatsoever: this is very much a “park your brain at the door” film.
I really shouldn’t enjoy this crass, brash, brainless movie fast-food… and I know many have hated it! But my guilty secret is that I really did like it – one of the best nights of unadulterated escapist fun I’ve had since “Baby Driver”. Classy it’s certainly NOT, but I enjoyed this just as much as the original.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Ocean’s 8 (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
For the last five plus years all Debbie Ocean (Sandra Bullock) has had to think about was how to steal a $150 million dollar necklace of the neck of a mark during the Met Gala. Why she had all that time to think about was because she was incarcerated. The plan is flawless on paper but it would have to be to pull off this caper at one of the most high profile events of the year. Meticulously thought out and every eventuality covered. Now all she needs is a crew to make it happen. She gets her right hand girl Lou (Cate Blanchett) and they set out to plan the heist. The start with getting down on her luck designer Rose Weil (Helena Bonham Carter), who must persuade the mark, socialite actress Daphne Kluger (Anne Hathaway), to wear her dress and the diamonds to the even. Then let add a fence, Tammy (Sarah Paulson), a pick-pocket, Constance (Awkwafina), diamond expert, Amita (Mindy Kaling), and a hacker, Nine Ball (Rihanna), everyone they need to make this plan happen. The plan is made, the crew is assembled and the Met Ball is days away and all they have to do is rob a highly protected necklace in a museum filled with people and more cameras than you can count.
David Ross (Pleasantville, Seabiscuit) wrote and directed the most recent film in the Ocean’s storyline. It definitely is in the same mold of the male dominated Ocean’s trilogy of films. There are even cameos from the old crew and the direct link of the main character being the sister of the protagonist of those films really ties them together. There are several nods to the original films and even the music and cinematography match up pretty well. At times I would say that it tries too hard to be like those films.
The cast does a great job. The character development is really good and if successful could definitely lead to follow up films. Awkwafina, who I had not heard of before going into this film, was a real bright spot and stood out in the scenes she was in. James Corden, as insurance investigator John Frazier, was also fun. The flow and pace of the film really went along well. There were definitely fun moments, also some moments that were a little cheesy, which are to be expected. Also to be expected in heist movie are some twist and turns, which this film delivers on. It keeps you guessing until the end.
Overall this was a fun movie going experience but maybe on I would be more likely to rent than see on the big screen.
David Ross (Pleasantville, Seabiscuit) wrote and directed the most recent film in the Ocean’s storyline. It definitely is in the same mold of the male dominated Ocean’s trilogy of films. There are even cameos from the old crew and the direct link of the main character being the sister of the protagonist of those films really ties them together. There are several nods to the original films and even the music and cinematography match up pretty well. At times I would say that it tries too hard to be like those films.
The cast does a great job. The character development is really good and if successful could definitely lead to follow up films. Awkwafina, who I had not heard of before going into this film, was a real bright spot and stood out in the scenes she was in. James Corden, as insurance investigator John Frazier, was also fun. The flow and pace of the film really went along well. There were definitely fun moments, also some moments that were a little cheesy, which are to be expected. Also to be expected in heist movie are some twist and turns, which this film delivers on. It keeps you guessing until the end.
Overall this was a fun movie going experience but maybe on I would be more likely to rent than see on the big screen.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Incredible Hulk (2008) in Movies
Feb 11, 2020 (Updated Apr 7, 2020)
The second entry into the ever expanding MCU has it's flaws, but it's still an entertaining enough monster movie featuring one of Marvel Comics most beloved characters.
Edward Norton is a fantastic actor, and his involvement here as Bruce Banner is an inspired choice. It's a shame that behind the scenes politics resulted in him leaving the franchise so soon, even though I love Mark Ruffalo!
He plays Banner as a fairly broody individual, but with an awkward edge, a man who's constantly in fear if what he can turn into.
Liv Tyler plays Betty Ross, and she's pretty much just Liv Tyler throughout. She's actually pretty charming as the character and it would be nice to see her turn up in future MCU films (hey, if they can get Natalie Portman involved again then surely it's a possibility!)
Tim Roth and William Hurt play the antagonists to Banner, and are both enjoyable in the more villainous roles, even if Roth is more or less relegated to spouting out cheesy one liners. Hurt has of course reprised his role in later films and is a welcome main stay in the franchise.
We also have Tim Blake Nelson and Ty Burrell, set up as future characters (The Leader and Doc Samson respectively), but neither of these have yet to come to fruition, so as it stands, both feel like wasted opportunities.
The narrative is pretty straightforward as Banner is pursued across the planet, but it gets the job done, ending in a big showdown between Hulk and Abomination in the middle of Harlem.
One of my main criticisms stems from this scene actually, with the film climaxing in a big CGI fight, between the hero, and an evil version of the hero, exactly like in Iron Man, and unfortunately, in a fair few MCU films further down the line (Iron Man 2, Black Panther, Ant Man). The CGI, whilst still good enough, doesn't hold up anywhere near as well as Iron Man however (which came out in the same year), and the green/grey colour scheme of both characters, and the night-time setting, gives the whole scene a dull edge, even if Hulk does tear a car in half and use both halves as boxing gloves...
The Incredible Hulk is a mostly decent film, but it shows signs of a franchise still finding its feet, and these signs grow in obviousness the older it gets, which is a big contrast when compared to the confident nature of Iron Man.
It also feels a bit stuck in the "look at this cool shot" superhero formula that became rampant during the 2000s.
It's still a fun film however, and deserves it's place in a Marvel movie marathon.
Edward Norton is a fantastic actor, and his involvement here as Bruce Banner is an inspired choice. It's a shame that behind the scenes politics resulted in him leaving the franchise so soon, even though I love Mark Ruffalo!
He plays Banner as a fairly broody individual, but with an awkward edge, a man who's constantly in fear if what he can turn into.
Liv Tyler plays Betty Ross, and she's pretty much just Liv Tyler throughout. She's actually pretty charming as the character and it would be nice to see her turn up in future MCU films (hey, if they can get Natalie Portman involved again then surely it's a possibility!)
Tim Roth and William Hurt play the antagonists to Banner, and are both enjoyable in the more villainous roles, even if Roth is more or less relegated to spouting out cheesy one liners. Hurt has of course reprised his role in later films and is a welcome main stay in the franchise.
We also have Tim Blake Nelson and Ty Burrell, set up as future characters (The Leader and Doc Samson respectively), but neither of these have yet to come to fruition, so as it stands, both feel like wasted opportunities.
The narrative is pretty straightforward as Banner is pursued across the planet, but it gets the job done, ending in a big showdown between Hulk and Abomination in the middle of Harlem.
One of my main criticisms stems from this scene actually, with the film climaxing in a big CGI fight, between the hero, and an evil version of the hero, exactly like in Iron Man, and unfortunately, in a fair few MCU films further down the line (Iron Man 2, Black Panther, Ant Man). The CGI, whilst still good enough, doesn't hold up anywhere near as well as Iron Man however (which came out in the same year), and the green/grey colour scheme of both characters, and the night-time setting, gives the whole scene a dull edge, even if Hulk does tear a car in half and use both halves as boxing gloves...
The Incredible Hulk is a mostly decent film, but it shows signs of a franchise still finding its feet, and these signs grow in obviousness the older it gets, which is a big contrast when compared to the confident nature of Iron Man.
It also feels a bit stuck in the "look at this cool shot" superhero formula that became rampant during the 2000s.
It's still a fun film however, and deserves it's place in a Marvel movie marathon.