Search
Search results
Awix (3310 KP) created a video about Master of the Flying Guillotine (1976) in Movies
Mar 29, 2020
Darren (64 KP) created a video about in The Films Of Jackie Chan
Nov 5, 2019
Larry Kramer recommended A Handful of Dust in Books (curated)
Andy K (10821 KP) created a video about Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) in Movies
Dec 24, 2018 (Updated Dec 24, 2018)
Russ Troutt (291 KP) rated Spielberg (2017) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Watched another amazing documentary from HBO tonight simply titled Spielberg, but there is nothing simple about the man behind the name. Growing up with Steven Spielberg movies has been a true blessing. The Duel between story and shot crafted in a way that ultimately results in everyone's Jaws dropping. It was nice seeing the cameras turned and getting what will surely be my Closest Encounter with him. He is a true Raider of cinema who has created a Temple of film and I've loved every second of his Crusade. His Empire of movies is so out of this world he could be classified an Extra-Terrestrial. A master of being able to Hook the audience with beautiful Color and Jurassic shots; I could go on forever making a List of praises. I'm sure you were able Catch my many inteded puns, but the One thing I wanted to make clear in my Bridge of words in this Post is my love for Spielberg and this great documentary. I know I left out some great titles in my play on words, but one I definitely did not forget and had to find a way to use is Saving Private Ryan. There, I used it :p
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Karate Kid (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
It may not be “use the force”, but the phrase “wax on, wax off” has stood the test of time in popular culture and cinematic fame. Would the newest Karate Kid film do the same? Could I stomach another ghastly remake in a year that seems endlessly full of them? Well, I am happy to report that I didn’t have to.
Jaden Smith crafts an engaging portrayal of the lead character, Dre Parker, a kid trying to fit in and make friends as an African-American in China. Equally impressive was Jackie Chan as maintenance man by day, Kung Fu master by night, Mr. Han. Chan’s performance was surprisingly dramatic and, for once, did not entirely center on his undeniable martial arts appeal. Don’t get me wrong, the martial arts are in there but for Chan this film displays his tenure as a veteran of the big screen.
It seems there is only one thing that could have been better: Tarji P. Hensen who played Dre’s dopey mom, Sherry Parker. No parent could seem this self-absorbed and unaware of a situation yet maintain wholesome parental figure status, and the acting was poor to boot. Overshadowing Hensen’s lame interjections was Dre’s adorable love interest, Meiying (played by Wenwen Han). The performance of Meiying managed to captured not only Dre’s heart but also that of the entire audience while staying on the film’s well-plotted course.
“The Karate Kid” is emotionally charged and action packed, there is really no denying it. And so what if the whole thing also looks a lot like a tourist film for China, the great landscapes and classic shots only add to the imagery.
Film buffs and fans of the original Karate Kid series will enjoy the mix of subtly-placed and more blatant references to the original films. Better yet it quickly becomes clear that Jackie Chan is not trying to top the legendary performance of Pat Morita but manages to prove that the story we all got so wrapped up in 1984 is still relevant in today’s modern world.
Jaden Smith crafts an engaging portrayal of the lead character, Dre Parker, a kid trying to fit in and make friends as an African-American in China. Equally impressive was Jackie Chan as maintenance man by day, Kung Fu master by night, Mr. Han. Chan’s performance was surprisingly dramatic and, for once, did not entirely center on his undeniable martial arts appeal. Don’t get me wrong, the martial arts are in there but for Chan this film displays his tenure as a veteran of the big screen.
It seems there is only one thing that could have been better: Tarji P. Hensen who played Dre’s dopey mom, Sherry Parker. No parent could seem this self-absorbed and unaware of a situation yet maintain wholesome parental figure status, and the acting was poor to boot. Overshadowing Hensen’s lame interjections was Dre’s adorable love interest, Meiying (played by Wenwen Han). The performance of Meiying managed to captured not only Dre’s heart but also that of the entire audience while staying on the film’s well-plotted course.
“The Karate Kid” is emotionally charged and action packed, there is really no denying it. And so what if the whole thing also looks a lot like a tourist film for China, the great landscapes and classic shots only add to the imagery.
Film buffs and fans of the original Karate Kid series will enjoy the mix of subtly-placed and more blatant references to the original films. Better yet it quickly becomes clear that Jackie Chan is not trying to top the legendary performance of Pat Morita but manages to prove that the story we all got so wrapped up in 1984 is still relevant in today’s modern world.
Sass Perilla (36 KP) rated The Master and Margarita in Books
Aug 9, 2019
Worth a read? Yes. Worth a reread? Maybe not.
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Master and Magarita: Mikhail Bulgakov
Firstly, I didn’t intend to write an essay on this novel. However, once started I found I had a lot to say, and the more I thought about the plot and characters, the more ideas and parallels were sparked, so I am hopeful that the verbosity of this review can be forgiven.
At the risk of sounding both ignorant and uncultured, I found this novel (at least at first) bloody hard slog; not least because the Russian characters have three names, plus a nickname, plus a pun on their name (none of which work particularly well in translation and all of which sound rather similar to the English untrained ear). As an example- Ivan Nikolaevich Ponyrev (who seems to be referred to by any and all of these names) is also known as “Homeless” and “the poet” is a key character in the opening section of the novel. To further demonstrate: there are 17 different names that start with A that are used to refer to 15 different characters with Andreyevich used as the middle name of a bereaved uncle, who makes a journey from Kiev after his nephew is beheaded in a freak tram accident- and Andrey the buffet manager at a Moscow theatre. Clear as mud right? And that is before starting on similarly named characters with the initials M, P, L and S! At my last count there were 45 distinct characters, and I am fairly sure there will be some that I have missed. Hence, I did a lot of re-reading to work out exactly who was doing what to whom.
Additionally, I would suggest you need to be wary of the different translations. The distinct changes in meaning are subtle but important. To triangulate I had three versions at my disposal: Hugh Aplin’s translation (available for free on Kindle), the audiobook version translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (which I listened to simultaneously when reading the book to come to my own interpretation, and the subtitles for the Russian TV miniseries from 2005 when I gave up trying to work out who was who from name alone!
So those were my “technical” issues (if you like) with engaging with this novel, and this lack of clarity and understanding (and my own lack of contextual knowledge of Stalinist Russia) meant I missed many of the (what I am sure are hysterically funny to those in the know) satirical jokes in the opening section. That said, the random action and quick changes of focus, undercurrent of chaos in Moscow despite entrenched hierarchal structures and clear threat that (any) one could go missing at any time, for an unclear reason gave a clear insight into the mind and fears of a 1930s Russian citizen. No wonder it was available only in censored form for so long.
Despite these hardships, there were some genuinely laugh out loud moments in the first Moscow based part of the novel. The citizens have not lost their individuality, as they scrabble and fight for bank notes in the theatre, which are later revealed to be worthless. Nor have they lost their sense of pride and vanity, which we see in the female theatre goers, so desperate to attain the fashionable French couture (which later literally disappears from their bodies leaving semi-naked citizenesses desperately trying to cover themselves in a scene reminiscent of “Allo Allo” meets “Benny Hill”). When Professor Woland says his show will “expose” what the locals have failed to realise is that it is their (moral) shortcomings that are about to be revealed. The message is clearly, that no government can successfully legislate against human nature.
Oooh- and another fun fact, apparently Woland (later revealed- or perhaps is implied- to be Satan) was the inspiration to the Rolling Stones 1968 hit “Sympathy for the Devil”, well at least that is what my Google-Fu tells me.
Obviously, there were substantial hurdles to leap, however, I found by the second half of the novel, when we finally meet the eponymous characters, I had got in to the swing of things and begun to embrace the farcical surrealism of the novel.
The second “book” marks a change in tone, although it continues to cut away to scenes of Jesus’ sentencing by Pilate and execution (here known in the Aramaic form Yeshua). Ironically it is these scenes that are the most “real” and substantially human, as Pilate’s decision weighs head achingly heavily on him throughout. The Master and Margarita seem to be the only two characters fully invested in the authenticity of literature, and serve as a counterpoint to the heavily censored “monstrous” writing of Ivan and the rest of the writers’ union Massolit, more interested in fine dining and what their positions can do for them then the production of quality writing.
And it is Margarita’s journey of discovery and liberation from the stodgy, miserable societal expectations of that leads her back to her Master. Bulgakov mixes classical myth, Russian folklore and Bible stories to give us an impression of the timelessness of the central romance. As the worlds of communist Moscow and the inner worlds of the Master and Margarita collide, we are informed of the former’s desire to excuse all magic (and mischief) as the product of mass hypnosis, when the latter (and the reader) are fully aware of the spiritual significance and dimension of the events.
Clever, astute and in places laugh out loud funny, this novel none-the-less requires a level of dedication from the non-Russian speaking reader. Worth a read? Yes. Worth a re-read? Maybe not.
Firstly, I didn’t intend to write an essay on this novel. However, once started I found I had a lot to say, and the more I thought about the plot and characters, the more ideas and parallels were sparked, so I am hopeful that the verbosity of this review can be forgiven.
At the risk of sounding both ignorant and uncultured, I found this novel (at least at first) bloody hard slog; not least because the Russian characters have three names, plus a nickname, plus a pun on their name (none of which work particularly well in translation and all of which sound rather similar to the English untrained ear). As an example- Ivan Nikolaevich Ponyrev (who seems to be referred to by any and all of these names) is also known as “Homeless” and “the poet” is a key character in the opening section of the novel. To further demonstrate: there are 17 different names that start with A that are used to refer to 15 different characters with Andreyevich used as the middle name of a bereaved uncle, who makes a journey from Kiev after his nephew is beheaded in a freak tram accident- and Andrey the buffet manager at a Moscow theatre. Clear as mud right? And that is before starting on similarly named characters with the initials M, P, L and S! At my last count there were 45 distinct characters, and I am fairly sure there will be some that I have missed. Hence, I did a lot of re-reading to work out exactly who was doing what to whom.
Additionally, I would suggest you need to be wary of the different translations. The distinct changes in meaning are subtle but important. To triangulate I had three versions at my disposal: Hugh Aplin’s translation (available for free on Kindle), the audiobook version translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (which I listened to simultaneously when reading the book to come to my own interpretation, and the subtitles for the Russian TV miniseries from 2005 when I gave up trying to work out who was who from name alone!
So those were my “technical” issues (if you like) with engaging with this novel, and this lack of clarity and understanding (and my own lack of contextual knowledge of Stalinist Russia) meant I missed many of the (what I am sure are hysterically funny to those in the know) satirical jokes in the opening section. That said, the random action and quick changes of focus, undercurrent of chaos in Moscow despite entrenched hierarchal structures and clear threat that (any) one could go missing at any time, for an unclear reason gave a clear insight into the mind and fears of a 1930s Russian citizen. No wonder it was available only in censored form for so long.
Despite these hardships, there were some genuinely laugh out loud moments in the first Moscow based part of the novel. The citizens have not lost their individuality, as they scrabble and fight for bank notes in the theatre, which are later revealed to be worthless. Nor have they lost their sense of pride and vanity, which we see in the female theatre goers, so desperate to attain the fashionable French couture (which later literally disappears from their bodies leaving semi-naked citizenesses desperately trying to cover themselves in a scene reminiscent of “Allo Allo” meets “Benny Hill”). When Professor Woland says his show will “expose” what the locals have failed to realise is that it is their (moral) shortcomings that are about to be revealed. The message is clearly, that no government can successfully legislate against human nature.
Oooh- and another fun fact, apparently Woland (later revealed- or perhaps is implied- to be Satan) was the inspiration to the Rolling Stones 1968 hit “Sympathy for the Devil”, well at least that is what my Google-Fu tells me.
Obviously, there were substantial hurdles to leap, however, I found by the second half of the novel, when we finally meet the eponymous characters, I had got in to the swing of things and begun to embrace the farcical surrealism of the novel.
The second “book” marks a change in tone, although it continues to cut away to scenes of Jesus’ sentencing by Pilate and execution (here known in the Aramaic form Yeshua). Ironically it is these scenes that are the most “real” and substantially human, as Pilate’s decision weighs head achingly heavily on him throughout. The Master and Margarita seem to be the only two characters fully invested in the authenticity of literature, and serve as a counterpoint to the heavily censored “monstrous” writing of Ivan and the rest of the writers’ union Massolit, more interested in fine dining and what their positions can do for them then the production of quality writing.
And it is Margarita’s journey of discovery and liberation from the stodgy, miserable societal expectations of that leads her back to her Master. Bulgakov mixes classical myth, Russian folklore and Bible stories to give us an impression of the timelessness of the central romance. As the worlds of communist Moscow and the inner worlds of the Master and Margarita collide, we are informed of the former’s desire to excuse all magic (and mischief) as the product of mass hypnosis, when the latter (and the reader) are fully aware of the spiritual significance and dimension of the events.
Clever, astute and in places laugh out loud funny, this novel none-the-less requires a level of dedication from the non-Russian speaking reader. Worth a read? Yes. Worth a re-read? Maybe not.
LilyLovesIndie (123 KP) rated The Two Towers (The Lord of the Rings, #2) in Books
Nov 5, 2018
See the latest and more detailed review over on Ramble Media http://www.ramblemedia.com/?p=19824
I'll keep this brief, as with the other review, because quite frankly, I'm a busy bee and there are hundreds of more detailed and in depth reviews out there for you all to peruse at will!
So, the company is sundered, we finally get our first tantalising glimpse of Mordor and come across some wonderful creations, both good and evil, of what must have been a very active imagination. Yet for some reason, this book is a lot harder to read than its prequel.
If I'm totally honest, I'm being over generous with my fourth star. At times, this book really dragged, it felt like a chore to read, was hard to keep events straight and in chronological order, and quite honestly could have been a whole lot shorter. Regardless of that, there are some redeeming features that have me literally dying to get started on the final instalment.
If nothing else, Tolkien is a master of cliff hangers! He has written a fantastic collection of books that always, without fail, leave you hanging on to the last word of the book, trying to glean as much information as you can from it, to make the short wait to finding the next part more bearable. I honestly cannot imagine how this must have been for those reading when the book was first released, I'm struggling to wait a few hours to find out what happened to Frodo, back then they probably waited a few months at least!
The mystery over what the other half of the company are up to whilst you're reading about the others is a great motivator to carry on. I have to say, I find Frodo and Sam very dull at times, it required Gollum to perk up their half of the book, but I find Aragorn and his side of the company much more compelling to read. Maybe it's simply because I'm a closet hobbit and I don't enjoy reading about them because of that, or maybe it's because an Elf, a Wizard and a descendent of a mighty lineage are just much more interesting and impressive. I don't know, but Frodo is boring me.
And on that note, I suppose I should really call it a day before I go and rant for thousands of words about what I don't like about Frodo. It's a good book, slow at times and hard going, rather like their journey, but it redeemed itself towards the end (even if Shelbob will be giving me nightmares for the foreseeable future).
I'll keep this brief, as with the other review, because quite frankly, I'm a busy bee and there are hundreds of more detailed and in depth reviews out there for you all to peruse at will!
So, the company is sundered, we finally get our first tantalising glimpse of Mordor and come across some wonderful creations, both good and evil, of what must have been a very active imagination. Yet for some reason, this book is a lot harder to read than its prequel.
If I'm totally honest, I'm being over generous with my fourth star. At times, this book really dragged, it felt like a chore to read, was hard to keep events straight and in chronological order, and quite honestly could have been a whole lot shorter. Regardless of that, there are some redeeming features that have me literally dying to get started on the final instalment.
If nothing else, Tolkien is a master of cliff hangers! He has written a fantastic collection of books that always, without fail, leave you hanging on to the last word of the book, trying to glean as much information as you can from it, to make the short wait to finding the next part more bearable. I honestly cannot imagine how this must have been for those reading when the book was first released, I'm struggling to wait a few hours to find out what happened to Frodo, back then they probably waited a few months at least!
The mystery over what the other half of the company are up to whilst you're reading about the others is a great motivator to carry on. I have to say, I find Frodo and Sam very dull at times, it required Gollum to perk up their half of the book, but I find Aragorn and his side of the company much more compelling to read. Maybe it's simply because I'm a closet hobbit and I don't enjoy reading about them because of that, or maybe it's because an Elf, a Wizard and a descendent of a mighty lineage are just much more interesting and impressive. I don't know, but Frodo is boring me.
And on that note, I suppose I should really call it a day before I go and rant for thousands of words about what I don't like about Frodo. It's a good book, slow at times and hard going, rather like their journey, but it redeemed itself towards the end (even if Shelbob will be giving me nightmares for the foreseeable future).
LilyLovesIndie (123 KP) rated The Truth Seekers in Books
Nov 5, 2018
A period romance of the highest order, this story is totally un-put-downable from the moment you first step foot into the twisted psyche of the enigmatic and, quite frankly, dark Mr Hawes. There are so many twists and turns and little surprises throughout this book that it truly is a wonderful read. But before I start to waffle too much in general terms, IÕll get stuck in in letting you know my thoughts.
To start, I think the characters are more than worthy of a mention. Lawrence is a master of character development, and I say this after having only read one of her books, but that is honestly how strongly I feel about it. Never, in all my many books, have I come across a character as understated yet complex as Miranda. At first sight, she appears to be a simple and quite ordinary society beauty, but how very wrong that assumption would be. As the story progresses, we see her develop into a fiesty, and then broken young woman, before she regains her spark. The journey she travels is so tangible you can almost feel the emotions pouring through the pages. And that brings me onto the strange Mr Hawes. HeÕs a character and a half. Awkward, rude and at times quite objectionable, yet I still felt endeared to his situation. I find him harder to describe, as he really is so different and out of the box that itÕs refreshing against the standard ÔconformityÕ to society norms you usually find in period novels.
Something else I think really needs mentioning is the fact that this book is hugely believable. I am a huge reader of historical books, I am a great history addict and I have to say, this book ticks every single box. ItÕs full of the little quirks you would expect to see in that time Ð the language, the traditions, the vacation spots. ItÕs all just sublimely weaved together to create a total immersion into this time. It is truly like reading a modern day Jane Austen, and I mean that as the highest compliment and the greatest praise for Lawrence. It is clear that there is a huge bank of knowledge behind this writing, and that makes it so much easier and enjoyable to read. Honestly, I canÕt praise it highly enough!
At the risk of repeating myself, I am going to touch briefly on the plot for my final batch of comments because I am left slightly astounded and speechless with this book. The plot is amazing. Put very simply I know, but it is just exquisite in itÕs development, itÕs execution and itÕs whole story is just perfect. I donÕt say that very often about books, but this is so worthy of the mention. IÕm just, well, struggling to put in to words exactly how much I loved the way the story developed. The twists and turns, sudden changes, and eventually the happiness weÕve been searching for from the start, it was all woven together with immense skill and understanding for the genre and that made it such an easy book to get lost in (in the best possible way).
In conclusion, just in case you didnÕt grasp it earlier in the review Ð I freaking loved this book! It was fantastic from start to finish. A great pace, wonderful characters and a delightful storyline that kept me hooked from page one. The only thing I didnÕt like is the fact it had to end! I cannot recommend this highly enough and I will be looking forward to devouring more of Elizabeth LawrenceÕs offerings as soon as I possibly can.
ARC received with thanks and first reviewed as part of a blog tour on Lily Loves Indie - http://lilylovesindie.co.uk/?p=267
To start, I think the characters are more than worthy of a mention. Lawrence is a master of character development, and I say this after having only read one of her books, but that is honestly how strongly I feel about it. Never, in all my many books, have I come across a character as understated yet complex as Miranda. At first sight, she appears to be a simple and quite ordinary society beauty, but how very wrong that assumption would be. As the story progresses, we see her develop into a fiesty, and then broken young woman, before she regains her spark. The journey she travels is so tangible you can almost feel the emotions pouring through the pages. And that brings me onto the strange Mr Hawes. HeÕs a character and a half. Awkward, rude and at times quite objectionable, yet I still felt endeared to his situation. I find him harder to describe, as he really is so different and out of the box that itÕs refreshing against the standard ÔconformityÕ to society norms you usually find in period novels.
Something else I think really needs mentioning is the fact that this book is hugely believable. I am a huge reader of historical books, I am a great history addict and I have to say, this book ticks every single box. ItÕs full of the little quirks you would expect to see in that time Ð the language, the traditions, the vacation spots. ItÕs all just sublimely weaved together to create a total immersion into this time. It is truly like reading a modern day Jane Austen, and I mean that as the highest compliment and the greatest praise for Lawrence. It is clear that there is a huge bank of knowledge behind this writing, and that makes it so much easier and enjoyable to read. Honestly, I canÕt praise it highly enough!
At the risk of repeating myself, I am going to touch briefly on the plot for my final batch of comments because I am left slightly astounded and speechless with this book. The plot is amazing. Put very simply I know, but it is just exquisite in itÕs development, itÕs execution and itÕs whole story is just perfect. I donÕt say that very often about books, but this is so worthy of the mention. IÕm just, well, struggling to put in to words exactly how much I loved the way the story developed. The twists and turns, sudden changes, and eventually the happiness weÕve been searching for from the start, it was all woven together with immense skill and understanding for the genre and that made it such an easy book to get lost in (in the best possible way).
In conclusion, just in case you didnÕt grasp it earlier in the review Ð I freaking loved this book! It was fantastic from start to finish. A great pace, wonderful characters and a delightful storyline that kept me hooked from page one. The only thing I didnÕt like is the fact it had to end! I cannot recommend this highly enough and I will be looking forward to devouring more of Elizabeth LawrenceÕs offerings as soon as I possibly can.
ARC received with thanks and first reviewed as part of a blog tour on Lily Loves Indie - http://lilylovesindie.co.uk/?p=267
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Ready Player One (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Virtually brilliant with Easter Eggs a plenty.
Of all the Spielberg films of recent years – and possibly with the exception of “The BFG” – this was the film whose trailer disconcerted me the most. It really looked dire: CGI over heart; gimmicks over substance. I was right about ‘The BFG”, one of my least favourite Spielberg flicks. I was definitely wrong about “Ready Player One”: it’s a blast.
The film is fun in continually throwing surprises at you, including those actors not included in the trailer and only on small print on the poster. So I won’t spoil that here for you (you can of course look them up on imdb if you want to: but I suggest you try to see this one ‘cold’).
It’s 2044, and the majority of the population have taken the next logical step of video gaming and virtual reality and retreated into their own headsets, living out their lives primarily as avatars within the fanciful landscapes of “The Oasis”. You can “be” anyone and (subject to gaining the necessary credits) “do” anything there.
When the housing market is stacked against you. Columbus Ohio circa 2044.
The Oasis was the brainchild of a (Steve Wozniak-like) genius called James Halliday (played in enormous style by “Actor R”) and supported by his (Steve Jobs-like) business partner Ogden Morrow (“Actor P”). The two had a big falling out leaving Halliday in total control of the Oasis. But he died, and his dying “game” was to devise a devious competition that left a trail of three virtual keys in the Oasis leading to an ‘easter egg’: which if found would provide the finder with total ownership of the Oasis and the trillions of dollars that it is worth.
But the game is not only played by amateur “gunters” (egg-hunters) like our hero Wade Watts (Tye Sheridan, “X-Men: Apocalypse“) and his in-Oasis flirting partner Samantha (Olivia Cooke, “Me and Earl and the Dying Girl”); there are big corporate game-hunters involved like IoI (that’s eye-oh-eye, not one-oh-one as I assumed from the trailer) who fill warehouses with combinations of nerd-consultants and professional game players to try to find the keys before anyone else. Which hardly seems fair does it? Ruthless boss Sorrento (Ben Mendelsohn, “Rogue One“) and his tough-as-nails hench-woman F’Nale Zandor (Hannah John-Kamen, “Tomb Raider“) really couldn’t give a toss!
In the future, everyone is reaching out for something.
What follows is two-hours of high-octane game-play and eye-popping 3D (it is good in 3D by the way) that melds a baseline of “Avatar” with soupçons of “Tron”, “Minority Report” and Dan Brown novels. But its a blend that works.
I was afraid as I said that CGI would squash flat any hope of character development and story, and – yes – to be sure this is ‘suppressed’ a bit. You never get to really know many of the ‘pack’ members to any great level other than Wade and Samantha. And exactly what drives the corporate protagonists, other than “corporate greed”, is not particularly clear. What gives the film heart though are the performances of “Actor P” and (particularly) “Actor R”, who again steals every scene he is in. For their limited screen time together, the pair bounce off each other in a delightful way.
I have to make a confession at this point that I spent the whole film thinking “Miles Teller is way too old for the part of Wade”! Tye Sheridan (who I think *does* bear a likeness!) is actually much more age appropriate, and is fine in the role. But the star performance for me, out of the youngsters at least, was Oldham’s-own Olivia Cooke, who has a genuinely magnetic screen presence. She is most definitely a name to watch for the future.
Ready Player One
Young star of the show for me – Olivia Cooke as Samantha.
Lena Waithe (“Master of None”) plays Wade’s inventor friend Helen.
The story, although simple and quite one-dimensional, in the main intrigues: there is nothing like a Mario-style chase for keys to entertain when it is done well (I am so old and crusty that in my day it was “Manic Miner” on a ZX-Spectrum!).
He’s iron and he’s just gigantic! Reb’s creation becomes a force to be reckoned with when needed.
And there’s not just one “Easter Egg” in this film: the film is rammed to the rafters with throwbacks to classic pop-culture icons of past decades, and particularly the 80’s…. the film could have been subtitled “I ❤ 80’s”. Some of these are subliminal (Mayor Goldie Wilson anyone?), and others are more prominent but very clever: “The Zemekis cube” and “The Holy Hand Grenade” being prime examples. This is a film that deserves buying on Blu-ray and then slo-mo-ing through! The nostalgia extends to the music by Alan Silvestri, with occasional motifs from his most famous soundtrack!
For me though, the highspot of the film is a journey into a recreation of a classic ’80’s film which – while a scary sequence, earning for sure its 12A UK rating – is done with verve and chutzpah.
Wade’s avatar, Parzival.
Although a little overlong (2 hours 20 mins) and getting rather over-blown and LOTR-esque in the finale, the ending is very satisfying – roll on Tuesdays and Thursdays!
Spielberg’s recent films have been largely solid and well-constructed watches (“The Post” and “Bridge of Spies” for example) but they have been more niche than mainstream box office draws. I firmly predict that “Ready Player One” will change that: here Spielberg has a sure-fire hit on his hands and word of mouth (rather than the ho-hum trailer) should assure that.
The film is fun in continually throwing surprises at you, including those actors not included in the trailer and only on small print on the poster. So I won’t spoil that here for you (you can of course look them up on imdb if you want to: but I suggest you try to see this one ‘cold’).
It’s 2044, and the majority of the population have taken the next logical step of video gaming and virtual reality and retreated into their own headsets, living out their lives primarily as avatars within the fanciful landscapes of “The Oasis”. You can “be” anyone and (subject to gaining the necessary credits) “do” anything there.
When the housing market is stacked against you. Columbus Ohio circa 2044.
The Oasis was the brainchild of a (Steve Wozniak-like) genius called James Halliday (played in enormous style by “Actor R”) and supported by his (Steve Jobs-like) business partner Ogden Morrow (“Actor P”). The two had a big falling out leaving Halliday in total control of the Oasis. But he died, and his dying “game” was to devise a devious competition that left a trail of three virtual keys in the Oasis leading to an ‘easter egg’: which if found would provide the finder with total ownership of the Oasis and the trillions of dollars that it is worth.
But the game is not only played by amateur “gunters” (egg-hunters) like our hero Wade Watts (Tye Sheridan, “X-Men: Apocalypse“) and his in-Oasis flirting partner Samantha (Olivia Cooke, “Me and Earl and the Dying Girl”); there are big corporate game-hunters involved like IoI (that’s eye-oh-eye, not one-oh-one as I assumed from the trailer) who fill warehouses with combinations of nerd-consultants and professional game players to try to find the keys before anyone else. Which hardly seems fair does it? Ruthless boss Sorrento (Ben Mendelsohn, “Rogue One“) and his tough-as-nails hench-woman F’Nale Zandor (Hannah John-Kamen, “Tomb Raider“) really couldn’t give a toss!
In the future, everyone is reaching out for something.
What follows is two-hours of high-octane game-play and eye-popping 3D (it is good in 3D by the way) that melds a baseline of “Avatar” with soupçons of “Tron”, “Minority Report” and Dan Brown novels. But its a blend that works.
I was afraid as I said that CGI would squash flat any hope of character development and story, and – yes – to be sure this is ‘suppressed’ a bit. You never get to really know many of the ‘pack’ members to any great level other than Wade and Samantha. And exactly what drives the corporate protagonists, other than “corporate greed”, is not particularly clear. What gives the film heart though are the performances of “Actor P” and (particularly) “Actor R”, who again steals every scene he is in. For their limited screen time together, the pair bounce off each other in a delightful way.
I have to make a confession at this point that I spent the whole film thinking “Miles Teller is way too old for the part of Wade”! Tye Sheridan (who I think *does* bear a likeness!) is actually much more age appropriate, and is fine in the role. But the star performance for me, out of the youngsters at least, was Oldham’s-own Olivia Cooke, who has a genuinely magnetic screen presence. She is most definitely a name to watch for the future.
Ready Player One
Young star of the show for me – Olivia Cooke as Samantha.
Lena Waithe (“Master of None”) plays Wade’s inventor friend Helen.
The story, although simple and quite one-dimensional, in the main intrigues: there is nothing like a Mario-style chase for keys to entertain when it is done well (I am so old and crusty that in my day it was “Manic Miner” on a ZX-Spectrum!).
He’s iron and he’s just gigantic! Reb’s creation becomes a force to be reckoned with when needed.
And there’s not just one “Easter Egg” in this film: the film is rammed to the rafters with throwbacks to classic pop-culture icons of past decades, and particularly the 80’s…. the film could have been subtitled “I ❤ 80’s”. Some of these are subliminal (Mayor Goldie Wilson anyone?), and others are more prominent but very clever: “The Zemekis cube” and “The Holy Hand Grenade” being prime examples. This is a film that deserves buying on Blu-ray and then slo-mo-ing through! The nostalgia extends to the music by Alan Silvestri, with occasional motifs from his most famous soundtrack!
For me though, the highspot of the film is a journey into a recreation of a classic ’80’s film which – while a scary sequence, earning for sure its 12A UK rating – is done with verve and chutzpah.
Wade’s avatar, Parzival.
Although a little overlong (2 hours 20 mins) and getting rather over-blown and LOTR-esque in the finale, the ending is very satisfying – roll on Tuesdays and Thursdays!
Spielberg’s recent films have been largely solid and well-constructed watches (“The Post” and “Bridge of Spies” for example) but they have been more niche than mainstream box office draws. I firmly predict that “Ready Player One” will change that: here Spielberg has a sure-fire hit on his hands and word of mouth (rather than the ho-hum trailer) should assure that.