Mathematics for the Life Sciences: Calculus, Modeling, Probability, and Dynamical Systems
Book
Mathematics for the Life Sciences provides present and future biologists with the mathematical...
Mathematical Modelling for Next-Generation Cryptography: Crest Crypto-Math Project
Tsuyoshi Takagi, Masato Wakayama, Keisuke Tanaka and Noboru Kunihiro
Book
This book presents the mathematical background underlying security modeling in the context of...
Introduction to Process Control: Analysis, Mathematical Modeling, Control and Optimization: 2017
Book
This textbook is intended for an introductory graduate level on process control, taught in most...
Mathematical and Computational Approaches in Advancing Modern Science and Engineering: 2016
Jacques Belair, Herb Kunze, Ian A. Frigaard and Roman N. Makarov
Book
Focusing on five main groups of interdisciplinary problems, this book covers a wide range of topics...
Mathematical Modeling and Computational Intelligence in Engineering Applications: 2016
Antonio Jose Da Silva Neto, Orestes Llanes Santiago and Geraldo Nunes Silva
Book
This book brings together a rich selection of studies in mathematical modeling and computational...
Stochastic Modeling and Mathematical Statistics: A Text for Statisticians and Quantitative Scientists
Book
Provides a Solid Foundation for Statistical Modeling and Inference and Demonstrates Its Breadth of...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated 47 Meters Down (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
With sharks circling and air running low, will the girls survive their ordeal?
Last year, one of the surprise movies of the year for me was “The Shallows“, which I really enjoyed. A tense, well made yarn held together by a solid performance by Blake Lively and with a genuine escalation of tension (albeit let down by a poor ending).
“47 Metres Down” differs from that film in three major respects: B-movie acting, from Mandy Moore and Claire Holt (with Holt being significantly better than Moore); a screenplay by Johannes Roberts and Ernest Riera that is both ponderous and unbelievable; and dialogue that is at times truly execrable.
The film really takes its time to get to the ‘sharp end’ (as it were). Once there, the actions of the girls are so clinically stupid that they are deserving of Darwin Award nominations. Fortunately, the IQs of the sharks (well realised as CGI by Outpost VFX) are only marginally greater: the sharks will appear and then go away for ten minutes at a time, just so that the implausible plot can progress unmolested.
These films always need an escalator for the tension: in “The Shallows” it was the rising tide; in this film it is the air supply. This element works well and adds an additional element of claustrophobia to the film that is already at 11 on the scale (you surely don’t need me to tell you that claustrophobics need to avoid this film!).
Much of the dialogue is expository regarding what is going on in the darkness and is so repetitive (“We ARE going to get out of here Kate!”) that it would make a good drinking game. The worst dialogue award though goes to Matthew Modine (“Memphis Belle”) who’s repeated medical descriptions of “the bends” becomes mildly comical – I literally got a fit of the giggles at one point.
I’m not going to completely savage the film though, since there IS a nice twist to the ending, albeit one that’s heavily signposted. And instead of reaching constantly for the classic “Ben’s head in the boat” jump scare, the film occasionally teases the audience with set-ups that ultimately just feature murky water and nothing more.
My recommendation: if you’ve not yet seen “The Shallows”, check that out on DVD and give this one a miss.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Oppenheimer (2023) in Movies
Jul 27, 2023
Based on the life of the “Father of the Atomic Bomb”, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Nolan’s latest epic is a rarity in today’s Motion Picture landscape - a prestige picture, bankrolled lavishly, filmed gorgeously and populated with a veritable who’s who of “A” list actors that tells a complex story of a complicated man who ends up remorseful of what he has unleashed in this world.
And it works very, very well.
Nolan regular, Cillian Murphy, is equal parts quirky, driven, determined and haunted in his multi-layered performance as the titular character - who is in almost every scene of this 3 hour film. He is fascinating to watch and his “more internal than external” performance draws the audience in throughout the events depicted in this film. It is the Best Performance of the career of one of the most interesting actors of this generation and one should not be surprised if his name is called during awards season next year.
Murphy is capably supported by a long list of strong performers giving strong performances in roles that are much smaller than ones they normally receive. Matt Damon, Florence Pugh, Josh Hartnett(!), Casey Affleck, Rami Malek, Matthew Modine, Kenneth Branagh (of course, it’s a Nolan film), Jason Clarke and Alden Ehrenreich bring their “A” game to roles that could have been thrown away.
Also, good ol’ Tom Conti (one of the most interesting actors from the late ‘70’s and early ‘80’s) shows up in this film as Albert Einstein and reminds us all why he is such a good performer…and…wait until you see who shows up for one scene in this film as President Harry S. Truman!
Oh…and don’t forget Emily Blunt (as Oppenheimer’s wife) and (surprisingly) Robert Downey, Jr. (as a politician using Oppenheimer for his own purposes). Both of them put in Award-winning-level uspporting performances, elevating two “A” list actors to the “A+ list”.
But this film is more than just it’s performers. Nolan demands - and receives - top notch work from the Cinematographer, the Sound Designer, the Editor, the Costume Designer and the Composer (Ludwig Goranssson, NOT Nolan regular Hans Zimmer). They (along with Nolan) craft a beautifully made and put together film that will dazzle the senses. If you get a chance, see this film in a movie theater and, if you can, see it in either iMAX or 70mm, you will be glad you did.
What holds this film back - just a little bit - is the story that is being told. Nolan (as he is want to do) plays with time and pretty frenetically cuts back and forth between about 4 different timelines to tell this story. It’s effective most of the time, but at other times, it becomes distracting and….with a 3 hour run time…does drag a bit at times.
But these are quibbles to a film that is “as good as it gets” by the BEST DIRECTOR plying his trade today. It is another triumph for Nolan and he will be making many, many acceptance speeches in just a few short months.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)