Search
Nick Beaty (70 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Nov 25, 2019 (Updated Nov 26, 2019)
And the Oscar goes to...
First things first, you can not start a review of Joker without mentioning the lead performance from Joaquin Phoenix as Arthur Fleck. I would say he is probably an evens favourite to take home the best actor Oscar at next years ceremony.
As for the movie itself, Tod Phillips take on Joker almost feels like a tribute to early Martin Scorsese movies, with the most obvious being Taxi Driver & The King of Comedy, both starring Robert De Niro who also appears here. This is certainly not a bad thing as they are brilliant pieces of cinema, that will stand the test of time. As will Joker in my opinion for it's excellent cinematography & gritty authenticity, I think people will still be talking about this movie for many years to come.
There are a few very slight flaws that I could point out. The first being that because it is so Scorsese like, for me it loses the feeling of being set in Gotham city and just feels very much like we are in New York city. Secondly the Wayne's and Alfred are very much portrayed as the bad guys in this movie, in my opinion I felt myself siding with Arthur/Joker a little too much maybe, which makes you lose all sympathy for the reason Batman became the Dark Knight in the first place. Last but not least the very controversial choice of adding a Gary Glitter song at a pivotal point of the movie, is a strange choice to say the least.
Overall Joker is an exceptional character study of a very disturbed individual with many mental health issues, add to that a superb performance by Joaquin Phoenix and I think you have a movie that will only get better with time and become a genre classic. With the huge box office success, I just hope DC keep this grim, very true to life approach for their future Batman projects.
As for the movie itself, Tod Phillips take on Joker almost feels like a tribute to early Martin Scorsese movies, with the most obvious being Taxi Driver & The King of Comedy, both starring Robert De Niro who also appears here. This is certainly not a bad thing as they are brilliant pieces of cinema, that will stand the test of time. As will Joker in my opinion for it's excellent cinematography & gritty authenticity, I think people will still be talking about this movie for many years to come.
There are a few very slight flaws that I could point out. The first being that because it is so Scorsese like, for me it loses the feeling of being set in Gotham city and just feels very much like we are in New York city. Secondly the Wayne's and Alfred are very much portrayed as the bad guys in this movie, in my opinion I felt myself siding with Arthur/Joker a little too much maybe, which makes you lose all sympathy for the reason Batman became the Dark Knight in the first place. Last but not least the very controversial choice of adding a Gary Glitter song at a pivotal point of the movie, is a strange choice to say the least.
Overall Joker is an exceptional character study of a very disturbed individual with many mental health issues, add to that a superb performance by Joaquin Phoenix and I think you have a movie that will only get better with time and become a genre classic. With the huge box office success, I just hope DC keep this grim, very true to life approach for their future Batman projects.
Allison Anders recommended The Red Shoes (1948) in Movies (curated)
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Shark Tale (2004) in Movies
Jul 7, 2021
Ghastly. I mean holy shit these fish are fucking UGLY. I was expecting some sort of ironic enjoyment or overlooked nuance a la something like 𝘍𝘰𝘰𝘥𝘧𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵!, but instead I just got an in-your-face assault of nauseating animation and the worst sound design DreamWorks has ever shat out - Angelina Jolie is barely even audible in this. I'm a firm believer that the most aesthetically horrible time period was the 2000s - specifically the mid-2000s - and this tried so hard to be 'in the now' when it was released that it feels like looking back at some sort of garish cave drawing that serves as a reminder for how much society has progressed since then. For instance, you know how you can go back to Finding Nemo and not be repelled because it doesn't open with a fucking "MTV Cribs" parody? I've never been a huge fan of Will Smith's shtick but here it grates worse than it ever has before or since - and with such an irredeemable, downright annoying character like this fugly little idiot to boot. In fact the only intrigue in any of these voice performances are from Jack Black and - er - *checks notes* Martin Scorsese. I can't honestly say it was laugh-free but I can still say it sucks hard.
Nick Beaty (70 KP) rated The Irishman (2019) in Movies
Jan 26, 2020 (Updated Jan 26, 2020)
De Niro is the best he has been in a long time...
First off any movie that has Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, Joe Pesci and Martin Scorsese connected to it has me from the get go.
De Niro is the best he has been in a long time as mob hitman Frank Sheeran, Joe Pesci is excellent in a much more reserved role as Russell Bufalino and Al Pacino is superb as the loud and brash Jimmy Hoffa. All the buzz is around the three lead actors, as all have been nominated for Oscars. Although for me Stephen Graham more than holds his own alongside these legends, as the cocky and destructive 'Tony Pro'. Some of the best scenes are with him and Pacino not seeing eye to eye on various occasions.
Personally I felt it wasn't as Scorsese as I expected, it didn't have the same narrative or feel as say Goodfellas or Casino, I'm not saying that is a bad thing as it's still a very good movie, it's just not on their level in my opinion.
There has been a lot of talk about the 3 hour 29 minutes running time. I personally don't understand all the fuss, as there have been many classic, award winning movies even longer than this. Gone with the Wind took home the Oscar in 1940 and ran a whopping 3h 58m. Ben Hur won best picture in 1960 at 3h 32m and more recently Titanic in 1998 was slightly less at 3h 14m.
I also feel the need to mention a couple of scenes that felt very reminiscent of one of my favourite movies Pulp Fiction. The opening sequence when the words 'I heard you paint houses' flash on the screen felt very Tarantino and the whole car scene with Jesse Plemons & Louis Cancelmi talking about the fish, was very Jule's & Vincent like. I'm not sure if that is just me or whether other people agree.
Overall I get that it is a long movie and people have very busy lives but if you get the chance you really should watch it, just to see these big screen legends at work and doing what they do best.
De Niro is the best he has been in a long time as mob hitman Frank Sheeran, Joe Pesci is excellent in a much more reserved role as Russell Bufalino and Al Pacino is superb as the loud and brash Jimmy Hoffa. All the buzz is around the three lead actors, as all have been nominated for Oscars. Although for me Stephen Graham more than holds his own alongside these legends, as the cocky and destructive 'Tony Pro'. Some of the best scenes are with him and Pacino not seeing eye to eye on various occasions.
Personally I felt it wasn't as Scorsese as I expected, it didn't have the same narrative or feel as say Goodfellas or Casino, I'm not saying that is a bad thing as it's still a very good movie, it's just not on their level in my opinion.
There has been a lot of talk about the 3 hour 29 minutes running time. I personally don't understand all the fuss, as there have been many classic, award winning movies even longer than this. Gone with the Wind took home the Oscar in 1940 and ran a whopping 3h 58m. Ben Hur won best picture in 1960 at 3h 32m and more recently Titanic in 1998 was slightly less at 3h 14m.
I also feel the need to mention a couple of scenes that felt very reminiscent of one of my favourite movies Pulp Fiction. The opening sequence when the words 'I heard you paint houses' flash on the screen felt very Tarantino and the whole car scene with Jesse Plemons & Louis Cancelmi talking about the fish, was very Jule's & Vincent like. I'm not sure if that is just me or whether other people agree.
Overall I get that it is a long movie and people have very busy lives but if you get the chance you really should watch it, just to see these big screen legends at work and doing what they do best.
8 1/2
Book
Federico Fellini's masterpiece 8 1/2 (Otto e mezzo) shocked audiences around the world when it was...
Silence: Picador Classic
Shusaku Endo and Martin Scorsese
Book
With an introduction by Martin Scorsese, director of the film starring Andrew Garfield and Adam...
Awake in the Dark: The Best of Roger Ebert
Roger Ebert and David Bordwell
Book
Roger Ebert has been writing film reviews for the "Chicago Sun-Times" for over forty years. In fact,...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Irishman (2019) in Movies
Nov 30, 2019
Delivers What Is Expected
Like eating comfort food on a cold, wintery day, sitting down to catch the latest Scorsese/DeNiro mob movie filled me with a warmth that was satisfying for it's familiarity. It is a film landscape mined by professionals who know this genre of movie well.
There is a terrific film in this 3 1/2 hour epic - if only "Marty" would have trimmed the fat to find it.
Telling the real-life story (with some conjecture and fabrications), THE IRISHMAN tells the tale of...well...Irishman Frank Sheeran (Robert DeNiro) a working stiff who rises in the ranks of mobster Russell Buffalino (Joe Pesci) to be one of his chief enforcers and the personal bodyguard to Jimmy Hoffa (Al Paciino).
In the lead, DeNiro commands the screen like the DeNiro of old. His Frank Sheeran is menacing, razor-focused on his objectives. You never question Frank's loyalties and his ability to keep silent. DeNiro shows this by be being silent for a good part of this film, even though he is on screen for most of it. He is a commanding force that requires that we pay attention to him.
It was good to see Pesci back onscreen as Russell Buffalino. His mob boss is pragmatic, making decisions sternly and expecting his people to follow them, no questions asked. His presence on the screen is almost as commanding as DeNiro's and I wouldn't be surprised to see DeNiro (Best Actor) and Pesci (Best Supporting Actor) be in the mix come Oscar time.
In lesser, (almost cameo), roles - but faring very well - is a "who's who" of character actors, Harvey Keitel (who I would have LOVED to have seen much, much more in this film), Ray Romano, Bobby Canavale, Jesse Pleimens and Anna Paquin, I'm sure all jumped at the chance to appear - however briefly - in a Scorsese mob epic.
Faring less well in this film is Al Pacio as Jimmy Hoffa. He is back to his "yelling Al Pacino" ways of films like SCENT OF A WOMAN. His Hoffa is pretty one note and, consequently, his scenes with DeNiro are ineffective mostly because Pacino is chewing up the scenery (and yelling) while DeNiro is sitting silent and staring and listening to Pacino. This was a major disappointment for me, but (fortunately), Hoffa is in only about 1/3 of this long film, so while it hampered my enjoyment of the film, it didn't ruin it.
Credit (and blame) for all of this goes to master Director Martin Scorsese who has mined these waters more successfully in CASINO, THE DEPARTED and GOODFELLAS (his best film, IMO). This film is a loving pastiche to these types of films and a bygone era - and he chose to make it for NETFLIX for he wanted to make a sprawling epic and take his time in telling the story he wanted to tell. This is evidenced in the 3 1/2 hour length of this film, which if filled with long tracking shots set to a backdrop of Italian crooners singing old standards. It's a throwback to a different time and place, one that these players know well.
Scorsese has stated the he only decided to make this film because the "de-aging" software the he used to make DeNiro and Pesci look 30 years younger was "good enough" to use. And I would agree with that statement. The de-aging of these 2 (and others) is "good enough", in some scenes I forgot I was watching a de-aged DeNiro and Pesci, while in some other scenes, I could spot the trick. Again, it was "good enough" and not distracting (unless you were looking to make it distracting, then you probably found what you were looking for).
But for me - a fan of these types of films, I was not disappointed. It was about what I expected it to be. If you were looking for something different and new, look elsewhere, you will be disappointed.
Letter Grade: B+
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
There is a terrific film in this 3 1/2 hour epic - if only "Marty" would have trimmed the fat to find it.
Telling the real-life story (with some conjecture and fabrications), THE IRISHMAN tells the tale of...well...Irishman Frank Sheeran (Robert DeNiro) a working stiff who rises in the ranks of mobster Russell Buffalino (Joe Pesci) to be one of his chief enforcers and the personal bodyguard to Jimmy Hoffa (Al Paciino).
In the lead, DeNiro commands the screen like the DeNiro of old. His Frank Sheeran is menacing, razor-focused on his objectives. You never question Frank's loyalties and his ability to keep silent. DeNiro shows this by be being silent for a good part of this film, even though he is on screen for most of it. He is a commanding force that requires that we pay attention to him.
It was good to see Pesci back onscreen as Russell Buffalino. His mob boss is pragmatic, making decisions sternly and expecting his people to follow them, no questions asked. His presence on the screen is almost as commanding as DeNiro's and I wouldn't be surprised to see DeNiro (Best Actor) and Pesci (Best Supporting Actor) be in the mix come Oscar time.
In lesser, (almost cameo), roles - but faring very well - is a "who's who" of character actors, Harvey Keitel (who I would have LOVED to have seen much, much more in this film), Ray Romano, Bobby Canavale, Jesse Pleimens and Anna Paquin, I'm sure all jumped at the chance to appear - however briefly - in a Scorsese mob epic.
Faring less well in this film is Al Pacio as Jimmy Hoffa. He is back to his "yelling Al Pacino" ways of films like SCENT OF A WOMAN. His Hoffa is pretty one note and, consequently, his scenes with DeNiro are ineffective mostly because Pacino is chewing up the scenery (and yelling) while DeNiro is sitting silent and staring and listening to Pacino. This was a major disappointment for me, but (fortunately), Hoffa is in only about 1/3 of this long film, so while it hampered my enjoyment of the film, it didn't ruin it.
Credit (and blame) for all of this goes to master Director Martin Scorsese who has mined these waters more successfully in CASINO, THE DEPARTED and GOODFELLAS (his best film, IMO). This film is a loving pastiche to these types of films and a bygone era - and he chose to make it for NETFLIX for he wanted to make a sprawling epic and take his time in telling the story he wanted to tell. This is evidenced in the 3 1/2 hour length of this film, which if filled with long tracking shots set to a backdrop of Italian crooners singing old standards. It's a throwback to a different time and place, one that these players know well.
Scorsese has stated the he only decided to make this film because the "de-aging" software the he used to make DeNiro and Pesci look 30 years younger was "good enough" to use. And I would agree with that statement. The de-aging of these 2 (and others) is "good enough", in some scenes I forgot I was watching a de-aged DeNiro and Pesci, while in some other scenes, I could spot the trick. Again, it was "good enough" and not distracting (unless you were looking to make it distracting, then you probably found what you were looking for).
But for me - a fan of these types of films, I was not disappointed. It was about what I expected it to be. If you were looking for something different and new, look elsewhere, you will be disappointed.
Letter Grade: B+
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Saul Bass: Anatomy of Film Design
Book
Iconic graphic designer and Academy Award--winning filmmaker Saul Bass (1920--1996) defined an...
Hidden in Plain Sight: An Archaeology of Magic and the Cinema
Book
What does it mean to deWhat does it mean to describe cinematic effects as "movie magic," to compare...