Search
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Upside (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Not the 5* French classic, but a fun and moving movie nonetheless.
So, the movie-going audience for this film will divide into two categories:
Category A: those that have seen the original 2011 French classic “The Intouchables” that this is based on, and;
Category B: those that haven’t.
2011 is just before I started “One Mann’s Movies”, but “The Intouchables” would have got 5* from me, no problem.
This movie joins a list of standout European movies – for example, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”; “Let The Right One In”; “Sleepless Night”; etc. – that have had Hollywood “makeovers” that don’t match up to the originals. And this is no exception. However, it’s still been well made and deserves respect as a standalone piece of movie-making.
The Plot
Based on a true story, Phillip Lacasse (Bryan Cranston) is left both paraplegic and widowed by a string of bad luck. Not that money can buy you everything, but his care arrangements are substantially helped by him being a multi-millionaire (“Not rich enough to buy The Yankees; Rich enough to buy The Mets”). This is from success in investments and writing about such investments.
Depressed, cranky and with a “DNR” that his diligent PA Yvonne (Nicole Kidman) seems unable to comply with, Phillip lashes out at anyone and everyone and so dispatches his carers with monotonous regularity. Dell Scott (Kevin Hart) is on parole, with the requirement to seek work. Due to a mix-up, he finds himself in the employ of Phillip: with the suspicion that he’s been hired because he is the very worst candidate imaginable, and thus the most likely to let Phillip shuffle off this mortal coil. But the two men’s antipathy to each other slowly thaws as they teach each other new tricks.
Pin left in the grenade
Those who have seen “The Intouchables” will fondly remember the first 5 minutes of that film: a flash-forward to a manic police car-chase featuring our protagonists (there played by François Cluzet and Omar Sy). It drops like a comedy hand-grenade to open the film. Unfortunately, you can’t help but feel a bit let down by the same re-creation in “The Upside”. It has all the same content but none of the heart.
After that rocky start, the film continues to rather stutter along. Part of the reason for this I think is Kevin Hart. It’s not that he’s particularly bad in the role: it’s just that he IS Kevin Hart, and I was constantly thinking “there’s that comedian playing that role”.
However, once the story gets into its swing, giving Cranston more of a chance to shine (which he does), then the film started to motor and my reservations about Hart started to wane. Some of these story set pieces – such as the one about the art work – are punch-the-air funny in their own right. Cranston’s timing in delivering his punchlines is immaculate.
This IS what actors do
There seems to have been some furore about the casting of Bryan Cranston as the role of the disabled millionaire instead of a disabled actor. Lord save us! He’s an actor! That’s what actors do for a living: pretend to be people they’re not! It’s also worth pointing out that François Cluzet was an able-bodied actor as well.
As already mentioned, Bryan Cranston excels in the role. Phillip goes through such a wide range of emotions from despair to pure joy and back again that you can’t help but be impressed by the performance.
On the female side of the cast, it’s really nice to see Nicole Kidman in such a quiet and understated role and it’s nicely done; Aja Naomi King does a nice job as Dell’s protective ex-girlfriend Latrice; and there’s a nice female cameo as well, which I won’t spoil since I wasn’t expecting to see her in the film.
Final Thoughts
As a standalone film it has some laugh-out-loud moments, some feelgood highs and some moments of real pathos. The audience I saw this with was small, but there was still a buzz in the room and sporadic applause as the end titles came up: God only knows that’s unusual for a film!
The director is “Limitless” and “Divergent” director Neil Burger, and it’s a perfectly fun and innocent night out at the flicks that I commend to the house in this month of celluloid awards heavyweights.
Category A: those that have seen the original 2011 French classic “The Intouchables” that this is based on, and;
Category B: those that haven’t.
2011 is just before I started “One Mann’s Movies”, but “The Intouchables” would have got 5* from me, no problem.
This movie joins a list of standout European movies – for example, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”; “Let The Right One In”; “Sleepless Night”; etc. – that have had Hollywood “makeovers” that don’t match up to the originals. And this is no exception. However, it’s still been well made and deserves respect as a standalone piece of movie-making.
The Plot
Based on a true story, Phillip Lacasse (Bryan Cranston) is left both paraplegic and widowed by a string of bad luck. Not that money can buy you everything, but his care arrangements are substantially helped by him being a multi-millionaire (“Not rich enough to buy The Yankees; Rich enough to buy The Mets”). This is from success in investments and writing about such investments.
Depressed, cranky and with a “DNR” that his diligent PA Yvonne (Nicole Kidman) seems unable to comply with, Phillip lashes out at anyone and everyone and so dispatches his carers with monotonous regularity. Dell Scott (Kevin Hart) is on parole, with the requirement to seek work. Due to a mix-up, he finds himself in the employ of Phillip: with the suspicion that he’s been hired because he is the very worst candidate imaginable, and thus the most likely to let Phillip shuffle off this mortal coil. But the two men’s antipathy to each other slowly thaws as they teach each other new tricks.
Pin left in the grenade
Those who have seen “The Intouchables” will fondly remember the first 5 minutes of that film: a flash-forward to a manic police car-chase featuring our protagonists (there played by François Cluzet and Omar Sy). It drops like a comedy hand-grenade to open the film. Unfortunately, you can’t help but feel a bit let down by the same re-creation in “The Upside”. It has all the same content but none of the heart.
After that rocky start, the film continues to rather stutter along. Part of the reason for this I think is Kevin Hart. It’s not that he’s particularly bad in the role: it’s just that he IS Kevin Hart, and I was constantly thinking “there’s that comedian playing that role”.
However, once the story gets into its swing, giving Cranston more of a chance to shine (which he does), then the film started to motor and my reservations about Hart started to wane. Some of these story set pieces – such as the one about the art work – are punch-the-air funny in their own right. Cranston’s timing in delivering his punchlines is immaculate.
This IS what actors do
There seems to have been some furore about the casting of Bryan Cranston as the role of the disabled millionaire instead of a disabled actor. Lord save us! He’s an actor! That’s what actors do for a living: pretend to be people they’re not! It’s also worth pointing out that François Cluzet was an able-bodied actor as well.
As already mentioned, Bryan Cranston excels in the role. Phillip goes through such a wide range of emotions from despair to pure joy and back again that you can’t help but be impressed by the performance.
On the female side of the cast, it’s really nice to see Nicole Kidman in such a quiet and understated role and it’s nicely done; Aja Naomi King does a nice job as Dell’s protective ex-girlfriend Latrice; and there’s a nice female cameo as well, which I won’t spoil since I wasn’t expecting to see her in the film.
Final Thoughts
As a standalone film it has some laugh-out-loud moments, some feelgood highs and some moments of real pathos. The audience I saw this with was small, but there was still a buzz in the room and sporadic applause as the end titles came up: God only knows that’s unusual for a film!
The director is “Limitless” and “Divergent” director Neil Burger, and it’s a perfectly fun and innocent night out at the flicks that I commend to the house in this month of celluloid awards heavyweights.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Lion (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Lost in Train-station.
As January progresses, the quality Oscar films just keep on coming! India’s vibrant and teeming tapestry of life is a natural gift for film-makers, without a word needing to be spoken, and director Garth Davis – in an impressive feature film debut – utilizes that backdrop to the max.
In a true life story, five-year-old Saroo (Sunny Pawar, in an astonishingly adept child performance) is accidentally separated from his family in the Madhya Pradesh region of Western India and goes on a journey by train of hundreds of miles to Calcutta: a city full of people who don’t even speak his language.
Lost, alone and facing the perils of a street child in a dangerous city, Saroo is eventually adopted by a kindly Australian couple (played by Nicole Kidman (“Before I Go To Sleep“) and David Wenham (Faramir in “The Lord of the Rings”)).
Growing up in a comfortable, loving, but not – ultimately – idyllic home environment, Saroo (now Dev Patel, “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel”) grows up and in his late teens goes to Melbourne University to study Hotel Management (Dev Patel? Hotel Management? What were the odds?!). While there, memories of the past resurface and an obsessive need to trace his Indian origins takes hold, disrupting both his career plans and his relationship with the love of his life Lucy (Rooney Mara, “Carol“). But with a remembered home-town name that doesn’t exist, only hazy memories of the train station he departed from, and thousands and thousands of train stations across India, how could he ever succeed?
India is enormously photogenic and cinematographer Greig Fraser (“Rogue One“, “Foxcatcher“) takes the maximum advantage of that with some memorable and dramatic landscapes: work that has been Oscar nominated. Also Oscar nominated and contributing strongly to the look and feel of the film is a well-judged and effectively used piano score by Volker Bertelmann and Dustin O’Halloran.
In the acting stakes, Dev Patel gives his best ever performance and his Oscar nomination – curiously for Best Supporting actor since, I presume, Sunny Pawar has the most screen time – is very well deserved. A moving performance, particularly at the tearful end of the movie, for which a box of tissues is recommended.
Nicole Kidman, not an actress I have ever hugely warmed to, is excellent here as the fragile adoptive mother, despite having to sport a crazy red curly wig. Another Oscar nomination.
Also worthy of note is young Abhishek Bharate as Saroo’s brother Guddu: the touching chemistry between the thieving young rascals at the start of the movie grounds the whole family relationship that’s sets up the emotional heart of the subsequent quest.
Luke Davies’ adapted screenplay is also Oscar nominated, although perhaps not as deserving to win as some of the other nominees. I would (naively perhaps) assume that adapting a screenplay from a true-life story must be an easier task, since the facts have to speak for themselves. But besides that, while the first half of the film, with the scenes in India, is exceptionally good, the Australian section became a more patchy with the motivations of Saroo’s actions and the impact they have on his adoptive family not feeling completely fleshed out.
While I’m sure being a street urchin in Calcutta in the mid-80’s was a horribly difficult and perilous existence, the screenplay paints the sense that that almost EVERY male in the city is either a pedophile or hopelessly corrupt: something that if I was a Calcutta resident I would likely take offence to.
However, this is a hugely involving and enjoyable movie, and a “Best Film” rounds off the impressive haul of six Oscar nominations. You might be cynical and view the subject matter as being comfortable Oscar-bait… but you can hardly argue about the absolute quality of the film-making on show here.
By the way, if you are curious as to where the title of the film comes from, you need to wait until the end titles: a masterly touch that I really liked!
The end titles also lay out the fact that the perils of street kids in India is still real and present, and the film is supporting charitable work to help. If you were moved by the film (as I was) you can make a donation at http://lionmovie.com (as I did)!
Highly recommended.
In a true life story, five-year-old Saroo (Sunny Pawar, in an astonishingly adept child performance) is accidentally separated from his family in the Madhya Pradesh region of Western India and goes on a journey by train of hundreds of miles to Calcutta: a city full of people who don’t even speak his language.
Lost, alone and facing the perils of a street child in a dangerous city, Saroo is eventually adopted by a kindly Australian couple (played by Nicole Kidman (“Before I Go To Sleep“) and David Wenham (Faramir in “The Lord of the Rings”)).
Growing up in a comfortable, loving, but not – ultimately – idyllic home environment, Saroo (now Dev Patel, “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel”) grows up and in his late teens goes to Melbourne University to study Hotel Management (Dev Patel? Hotel Management? What were the odds?!). While there, memories of the past resurface and an obsessive need to trace his Indian origins takes hold, disrupting both his career plans and his relationship with the love of his life Lucy (Rooney Mara, “Carol“). But with a remembered home-town name that doesn’t exist, only hazy memories of the train station he departed from, and thousands and thousands of train stations across India, how could he ever succeed?
India is enormously photogenic and cinematographer Greig Fraser (“Rogue One“, “Foxcatcher“) takes the maximum advantage of that with some memorable and dramatic landscapes: work that has been Oscar nominated. Also Oscar nominated and contributing strongly to the look and feel of the film is a well-judged and effectively used piano score by Volker Bertelmann and Dustin O’Halloran.
In the acting stakes, Dev Patel gives his best ever performance and his Oscar nomination – curiously for Best Supporting actor since, I presume, Sunny Pawar has the most screen time – is very well deserved. A moving performance, particularly at the tearful end of the movie, for which a box of tissues is recommended.
Nicole Kidman, not an actress I have ever hugely warmed to, is excellent here as the fragile adoptive mother, despite having to sport a crazy red curly wig. Another Oscar nomination.
Also worthy of note is young Abhishek Bharate as Saroo’s brother Guddu: the touching chemistry between the thieving young rascals at the start of the movie grounds the whole family relationship that’s sets up the emotional heart of the subsequent quest.
Luke Davies’ adapted screenplay is also Oscar nominated, although perhaps not as deserving to win as some of the other nominees. I would (naively perhaps) assume that adapting a screenplay from a true-life story must be an easier task, since the facts have to speak for themselves. But besides that, while the first half of the film, with the scenes in India, is exceptionally good, the Australian section became a more patchy with the motivations of Saroo’s actions and the impact they have on his adoptive family not feeling completely fleshed out.
While I’m sure being a street urchin in Calcutta in the mid-80’s was a horribly difficult and perilous existence, the screenplay paints the sense that that almost EVERY male in the city is either a pedophile or hopelessly corrupt: something that if I was a Calcutta resident I would likely take offence to.
However, this is a hugely involving and enjoyable movie, and a “Best Film” rounds off the impressive haul of six Oscar nominations. You might be cynical and view the subject matter as being comfortable Oscar-bait… but you can hardly argue about the absolute quality of the film-making on show here.
By the way, if you are curious as to where the title of the film comes from, you need to wait until the end titles: a masterly touch that I really liked!
The end titles also lay out the fact that the perils of street kids in India is still real and present, and the film is supporting charitable work to help. If you were moved by the film (as I was) you can make a donation at http://lionmovie.com (as I did)!
Highly recommended.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Upside (2019) in Movies
May 8, 2019 (Updated May 8, 2019)
On The Up and Up
This movie had a bit of a strange release, at least in my area. It was one of those movies that only had two showings a day on it's opening weekend and they were both at really obscure times like 10:30am and 2:40pm, - times that would suggest that this movie was being put out to die. This was disappointing as, after seeing the trailers, I was looking forward to seeing it and never got the chance while it was in cinemas. Anyway, I finally got around to seeing it upon it's home release and I really enjoyed it.
Although I did like the look of this project from the trailer and I am a big fan of Bryan Cranston, I was wary of Kevin Hart starring opposite him in this role. It looked like a role that would require a more serious actor than Kevin Hart and I was concerned that Hart had been miscast and only chosen because of the recognition of his name rather than whether or not he was the right actor for the part.
Surprisingly and thankfully, I was proven entirely wrong. Hart shows here that he is in fact very capable in a more serious role such as this and doesn't just have to resort to screaming in every film he is in. I hope that he takes on more serious stuff following this as I much prefer it to any of his 'comedic,' roles. The rest of the cast are also great, Cranston gives a sublime performance as he always does and Nicole Kidman works well as Cranston's character's secretary/ potential love interest.
This film is a remake of a French film called The Intouchables and there are other elements of it that bear similarities to other movies that we have seen before, but it is a well told story that has various worthwhile messages littered throughout it. The script is witty and snappy enough that the film never feels slow or boring.
Overall, I really enjoyed my time with this one. It isn't the most original thing I have ever seen, but it was entertaining and it had heart. The script was well written and the direction was solid. The performances from the entire cast also help elevate the already funny script even further.
Although I did like the look of this project from the trailer and I am a big fan of Bryan Cranston, I was wary of Kevin Hart starring opposite him in this role. It looked like a role that would require a more serious actor than Kevin Hart and I was concerned that Hart had been miscast and only chosen because of the recognition of his name rather than whether or not he was the right actor for the part.
Surprisingly and thankfully, I was proven entirely wrong. Hart shows here that he is in fact very capable in a more serious role such as this and doesn't just have to resort to screaming in every film he is in. I hope that he takes on more serious stuff following this as I much prefer it to any of his 'comedic,' roles. The rest of the cast are also great, Cranston gives a sublime performance as he always does and Nicole Kidman works well as Cranston's character's secretary/ potential love interest.
This film is a remake of a French film called The Intouchables and there are other elements of it that bear similarities to other movies that we have seen before, but it is a well told story that has various worthwhile messages littered throughout it. The script is witty and snappy enough that the film never feels slow or boring.
Overall, I really enjoyed my time with this one. It isn't the most original thing I have ever seen, but it was entertaining and it had heart. The script was well written and the direction was solid. The performances from the entire cast also help elevate the already funny script even further.
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated The Rules of Magic in Books
Feb 19, 2018
So I actually didn't know that Practical Magic the movie was based on a book. But when I saw The Rules of Magic billed as the prequel to a movie I had loved, I knew I had to read it. And I'm so glad I did. The Rules of Magic is, well, magical. Magical and nostalgic and spell-binding. Most book worlds feel different than their respective movie-worlds, but this felt like a logical prequel. (It may be because I haven't seen the movie in some time - I intend to remedy that soon, and I might just have to read the book as well.)
Practical Magic, the well known movie with Sandra Bullock and Nicole Kidman, centers around the two girls and their elderly aunts. The Rules of Magic is the aunts' story. And what a story. It begins in New York, as the older of the two aunts is turning 17. On an Owens' girl's seventeenth birthday, they receive an invitation to spend the summer at the Owens home in Massachusetts. Frances, the older of the two girls, receives the invitation, and her two siblings won't let her go alone, so all three of them (yes, three, the movie doesn't mention their brother that I recall, though I suppose Bullock and Kidman's characters had to come from somewhere!) pack up and head to Massachusetts, where they meet their Aunt Isabelle. Over the course of the summer, they learn their family history, and get verification that they are indeed witches. (They'd had certain powers throughout childhood, though their mother tried to deny it.)
It was Vincent's storyline that intrigued me, since I knew where Frances and Jet ended up. There was an unexpected curveball that I won't spoil here, but I enjoyed it. It was Jet and Frances' storylines that had me crying at the end of the book, though. Not the very last chapter - it ended on a hopeful note - but the few chapters preceding it had me in tears. (It was midnight, and everyone else was asleep, so I had myself a good cry over my book, and then had to try to sleep on a wet pillow.)
If you enjoyed Practical Magic the movie, you should read this book. It's a perfect prequel.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Practical Magic, the well known movie with Sandra Bullock and Nicole Kidman, centers around the two girls and their elderly aunts. The Rules of Magic is the aunts' story. And what a story. It begins in New York, as the older of the two aunts is turning 17. On an Owens' girl's seventeenth birthday, they receive an invitation to spend the summer at the Owens home in Massachusetts. Frances, the older of the two girls, receives the invitation, and her two siblings won't let her go alone, so all three of them (yes, three, the movie doesn't mention their brother that I recall, though I suppose Bullock and Kidman's characters had to come from somewhere!) pack up and head to Massachusetts, where they meet their Aunt Isabelle. Over the course of the summer, they learn their family history, and get verification that they are indeed witches. (They'd had certain powers throughout childhood, though their mother tried to deny it.)
It was Vincent's storyline that intrigued me, since I knew where Frances and Jet ended up. There was an unexpected curveball that I won't spoil here, but I enjoyed it. It was Jet and Frances' storylines that had me crying at the end of the book, though. Not the very last chapter - it ended on a hopeful note - but the few chapters preceding it had me in tears. (It was midnight, and everyone else was asleep, so I had myself a good cry over my book, and then had to try to sleep on a wet pillow.)
If you enjoyed Practical Magic the movie, you should read this book. It's a perfect prequel.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Ben Is Back (2018) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
We seem to be knee deep in movies like this at the moment, Ben Is Back being the second from Lucas Hedges. This one is penned and directed by his father, Peter Hedges, though it doesn't appear that he was a shoo-in for the role.
After seeing Boy Erased I wasn't overly sure about Hedges as an actor, if I'm honest this has done little to sway that opinion in me. I don't feel like we get a massive range from him, possibly because these movies all feel like they've been made to win things over everything else? I'm not sure.
Hedges performance is brought up a level by the incredible performance from Julia Roberts, that woman truly is a treasure. The desperate nature of her character is so evident in every scene, wanting to do anything she can for her son and trying to fix everything. I don't think there was a single point where she faltered, and the part she played in the ending was immensely emotional.
There's also a solid support cast in Courtney B. Vance and Kathryn Newton. They drew in the much-needed family element which could have been lost to all the scenes with Ben and Holly out on their own.
You have to compare this to Beautiful Boy, it's difficult not to. They could be the same film, Ben Is Back just edges ahead for me though. I wasn't overly keen on the main actors in either film and both were carried by their parental leads. Both cover the drugs topic well from their own angles but here I felt we got a much better look at the family impact.
This rounded out a very emotional double bill at the cinema and what I actually came out thinking wasn't about this film in particular but that this year has given us some fantastic mum performances. Julia Roberts, Penelope Cruz and Nicole Kidman have managed to use their films to prove that they're giants in the acting world.
What you should do
I'd add Ben Is Back to my list of films to watch at least once.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
All I would really like is an attic that was as easy to get into as theirs.
After seeing Boy Erased I wasn't overly sure about Hedges as an actor, if I'm honest this has done little to sway that opinion in me. I don't feel like we get a massive range from him, possibly because these movies all feel like they've been made to win things over everything else? I'm not sure.
Hedges performance is brought up a level by the incredible performance from Julia Roberts, that woman truly is a treasure. The desperate nature of her character is so evident in every scene, wanting to do anything she can for her son and trying to fix everything. I don't think there was a single point where she faltered, and the part she played in the ending was immensely emotional.
There's also a solid support cast in Courtney B. Vance and Kathryn Newton. They drew in the much-needed family element which could have been lost to all the scenes with Ben and Holly out on their own.
You have to compare this to Beautiful Boy, it's difficult not to. They could be the same film, Ben Is Back just edges ahead for me though. I wasn't overly keen on the main actors in either film and both were carried by their parental leads. Both cover the drugs topic well from their own angles but here I felt we got a much better look at the family impact.
This rounded out a very emotional double bill at the cinema and what I actually came out thinking wasn't about this film in particular but that this year has given us some fantastic mum performances. Julia Roberts, Penelope Cruz and Nicole Kidman have managed to use their films to prove that they're giants in the acting world.
What you should do
I'd add Ben Is Back to my list of films to watch at least once.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
All I would really like is an attic that was as easy to get into as theirs.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Bombshell (2019) in Movies
Dec 19, 2019
It was an event that sent shockwaves throughout the News industry as allegations of harassment brought down Roger Ailes and fueled the growing “Me Too” movement.
In the new film “Bombshell” we learn how Roger Ailes (John Lithgow), had so much power and influence that he helped elect several politicians and rose to the head of Fox News. He ran Media Empire to great success and made those around him celebrities.
The film follows Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman) who opts to fight her ouster from the company claiming that her career was marked by frequent harassment often by Aisles himself.
At the same time; Megyn Kelly (Charlize Theron), is dealing with backlash from Candidate Donald Trump and is being forced to endure what she sees as verbal attacks for the good of their audience and ratings.
As this story unfolds, the audience is introduced to Kayla Pospisil (Margot Robbie), a young journalist eager to make her way up the corporate ladder. She is introduced to Aisles who asks her to “model” for him claiming that since they work in a visual medium; he cannot just let anyone on the air and needs to ensure “loyalty” amongst his staff.
Carlson eventually files a lawsuit but due to the power that Aisles and the Network holds; nobody is willing to come forward to back her and she is faced with taking on the media giant alone. The movie then centers on the key players and their day to day lives which enables them to find the strength to come forward and do what they believe is right.
The film is powerful and all of the leads do amazing work. Lithgow is especially good in his role as he is as captivating as his is loathsome in the part.
The film is sure to spark some discussion as despite the events portrayed in the film it appears that many of those who acted improperly managed to financially win from their downfall but it at least set a precedent for those looking to come forward knowing they are not alone.
My only issue was that knowing how the story came out and that fact that it was very recent undermined any real drama but the performances and engaging and topical subject matter held my attention throughout.
4 stars out of 5
In the new film “Bombshell” we learn how Roger Ailes (John Lithgow), had so much power and influence that he helped elect several politicians and rose to the head of Fox News. He ran Media Empire to great success and made those around him celebrities.
The film follows Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman) who opts to fight her ouster from the company claiming that her career was marked by frequent harassment often by Aisles himself.
At the same time; Megyn Kelly (Charlize Theron), is dealing with backlash from Candidate Donald Trump and is being forced to endure what she sees as verbal attacks for the good of their audience and ratings.
As this story unfolds, the audience is introduced to Kayla Pospisil (Margot Robbie), a young journalist eager to make her way up the corporate ladder. She is introduced to Aisles who asks her to “model” for him claiming that since they work in a visual medium; he cannot just let anyone on the air and needs to ensure “loyalty” amongst his staff.
Carlson eventually files a lawsuit but due to the power that Aisles and the Network holds; nobody is willing to come forward to back her and she is faced with taking on the media giant alone. The movie then centers on the key players and their day to day lives which enables them to find the strength to come forward and do what they believe is right.
The film is powerful and all of the leads do amazing work. Lithgow is especially good in his role as he is as captivating as his is loathsome in the part.
The film is sure to spark some discussion as despite the events portrayed in the film it appears that many of those who acted improperly managed to financially win from their downfall but it at least set a precedent for those looking to come forward knowing they are not alone.
My only issue was that knowing how the story came out and that fact that it was very recent undermined any real drama but the performances and engaging and topical subject matter held my attention throughout.
4 stars out of 5
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Paddington (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The timeless storybook written by Michael Bond about a loveable, well-mannered immigrant Bear who tries to adapt to the human world.
The movie opens up with an English Explorer, Montgomery Clyde (Tim Downie), who ventures to the darkest Peru and encounters Paddington’s Aunt Lucy(voiced by Imelda Stauton) and Uncle Pastuzo(voiced by Michael Gambon). Instead of shooting them to take back to the Geographers’ Guild to be stuffed, he teaches them to speak English and introduces them to marmalade. He ends his adventure by telling the two bears he would always give them a home in London. Fast forward 40 years, Lucy and Pastuzo are now raising their very energetic nephew (voiced by Ben Wishaw) and teach him everything they know about London and how to make marmalade. Sadly, tragedy strikes after a devastating earthquake destroys their home. This forces Aunt Lucy to allow the young bear to stowaway on a ship bound for London to find Montgomery Clyde, the explorer, while she takes residence at a facility for retired bears.
The little bear is discovered by the Brown family while wandering Paddington Station. After reading the tag that says, “Please look after this bear,” the Browns take him home and give him the name Paddington. They also agreed to help him find the explorer that once befriended his aunt and uncle. Confused by his new unfamiliar surroundings, Paddington becomes an accident prone guest who inadvertently creates chaos and devastation where ever he goes.
Writer/Director Paul King has made an ingeniously witty, funny film that will appeal to moviegoers of all ages. A sweet and playful take on the beloved 1950s children’s book. For the most part, it does follow the storyline of the book. With the exception of the character Millicent, played by Nicole Kidman, who is a museum taxidermist. She wants nothing more than to make Paddington the newest member of the museum’s collection of stuffed exotic animals.
You can’t help but fall in love with Paddington, and it’s just as easy to love the Brown family. This is a delightfully charming film with the perfect amount of quirkiness. A story of a lost child trying to find friends and a place to belong. A wonderful movie that will melt your heart!
The movie opens up with an English Explorer, Montgomery Clyde (Tim Downie), who ventures to the darkest Peru and encounters Paddington’s Aunt Lucy(voiced by Imelda Stauton) and Uncle Pastuzo(voiced by Michael Gambon). Instead of shooting them to take back to the Geographers’ Guild to be stuffed, he teaches them to speak English and introduces them to marmalade. He ends his adventure by telling the two bears he would always give them a home in London. Fast forward 40 years, Lucy and Pastuzo are now raising their very energetic nephew (voiced by Ben Wishaw) and teach him everything they know about London and how to make marmalade. Sadly, tragedy strikes after a devastating earthquake destroys their home. This forces Aunt Lucy to allow the young bear to stowaway on a ship bound for London to find Montgomery Clyde, the explorer, while she takes residence at a facility for retired bears.
The little bear is discovered by the Brown family while wandering Paddington Station. After reading the tag that says, “Please look after this bear,” the Browns take him home and give him the name Paddington. They also agreed to help him find the explorer that once befriended his aunt and uncle. Confused by his new unfamiliar surroundings, Paddington becomes an accident prone guest who inadvertently creates chaos and devastation where ever he goes.
Writer/Director Paul King has made an ingeniously witty, funny film that will appeal to moviegoers of all ages. A sweet and playful take on the beloved 1950s children’s book. For the most part, it does follow the storyline of the book. With the exception of the character Millicent, played by Nicole Kidman, who is a museum taxidermist. She wants nothing more than to make Paddington the newest member of the museum’s collection of stuffed exotic animals.
You can’t help but fall in love with Paddington, and it’s just as easy to love the Brown family. This is a delightfully charming film with the perfect amount of quirkiness. A story of a lost child trying to find friends and a place to belong. A wonderful movie that will melt your heart!
Big Little Lies
8.6
Rate It
Book
Don't want Big Little Lies to end? Then why not order Liane Moriarty's new hit, Truly Madly...
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated Unbound (Colours of Love, #1) in Books
Apr 9, 2019
Grace Lawson is about to start the greatest internship. She gets to spend three months in London, interning at Huntington Ventures. Jonathan Huntington, the company's CEO is a gorgeous guy who is almost always wearing black. Catching the red-eye to London from Chicago, and having to rush off the plane to make it to her new job on time, Grace runs(literally)into Jonathan Huntington at the airport. Making the mistake of thinking he was there to pick her up, she gets a ride with him in his limo(along with some colleagues he was actually waiting for) to the office. Feeling embarrassed the whole time.
Once at Huntington Ventures, Jonathan extends her internship from working in the investment department to working side by side with him. Grace or no one else in the company was expecting this turn of events. Jonathan has never had an intern working with him before. Will Grace be able to work this closely with Jonathan without falling in love with him? Everyone has warned her about this man, including Jonathan himself. This is going to be an interesting and exciting three months.
Unbound is the first in the Colors of Love series by Kathryn Taylor. I'm not sure how many books total are in the series. Book two Uncovered, is set to be released in the United States on August 17, 2015.
This book starts off a lot like 50 Shades of Grey. The virgin meets this wealthy, handsome man and is enticed by his power and the fact that he is unattainable. Jonathan's sexual desires aren't sadistic the way Christian Grey's are, I would say he's just a bit kinky. Then there's a little "Eyes Wide Shut"(Tom Cruise/Nicole Kidman sex club movie) thrown in. I enjoyed this book. The erotic scenes are believable. I think a few words may have been lost in translation, though, as I believe this book was first written in German. For instance, the word clit is never used, but "sensitive place" is used quite a bit and, in my opinion, in those instances, clit would have been an appropriate word to use.
I'm not a big fan of Jonathan Harrington, he seems to be abrasive to everyone. Grace seems a little naive for a woman embarking on her own to London for three months. Maybe these two are meant to be or maybe we have another erotic romance series on our hands that we will grow to love to hate like 50 Shades and the Crossfire series. Either way, come on August for Colors of Love #2 - Uncovered.
Once at Huntington Ventures, Jonathan extends her internship from working in the investment department to working side by side with him. Grace or no one else in the company was expecting this turn of events. Jonathan has never had an intern working with him before. Will Grace be able to work this closely with Jonathan without falling in love with him? Everyone has warned her about this man, including Jonathan himself. This is going to be an interesting and exciting three months.
Unbound is the first in the Colors of Love series by Kathryn Taylor. I'm not sure how many books total are in the series. Book two Uncovered, is set to be released in the United States on August 17, 2015.
This book starts off a lot like 50 Shades of Grey. The virgin meets this wealthy, handsome man and is enticed by his power and the fact that he is unattainable. Jonathan's sexual desires aren't sadistic the way Christian Grey's are, I would say he's just a bit kinky. Then there's a little "Eyes Wide Shut"(Tom Cruise/Nicole Kidman sex club movie) thrown in. I enjoyed this book. The erotic scenes are believable. I think a few words may have been lost in translation, though, as I believe this book was first written in German. For instance, the word clit is never used, but "sensitive place" is used quite a bit and, in my opinion, in those instances, clit would have been an appropriate word to use.
I'm not a big fan of Jonathan Harrington, he seems to be abrasive to everyone. Grace seems a little naive for a woman embarking on her own to London for three months. Maybe these two are meant to be or maybe we have another erotic romance series on our hands that we will grow to love to hate like 50 Shades and the Crossfire series. Either way, come on August for Colors of Love #2 - Uncovered.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Jan 8, 2019 (Updated Jan 8, 2019)
Wishy Washy
I was excited to see this movie after hearing the glowing reviews and praise it was getting. I am also a fan of Jason Momoa and James Wan, so I was really hoping for this to be at least as good as Wonder Woman. Also, being a long time fan of DC Comics, I really want to see them find their footing cinematically and I thought that this could finally be the start of that. Unfortunately I left the cinema feeling pretty underwhelmed.
The movie opens by telling the story of how Aquaman's parents came to meet and fall in love, even though they are from vastly different worlds. This whole sequence is brilliant and I was totally on-board for what was to come afterwards. Sadly, this opening sequence is by far the best part of the entire movie. From this point on it descends into a mediocre action adventure flick with story elements very reminiscent of Thor and Black Panther, (two movies that are vastly superior to this one.)
From a direction standpoint, it is clear that James Wan knows how to visually capture a scene in the most beautiful and intriguing way possible, which is especially evident during the trench sequence. His direction during all of the action sequences is great, with Nicole Kidman's trident work in the opening scene and the rooftop sequence with Black Manta, Mera and Aquaman being the highlights. I don't think that my issue with this movie is due to the direction lacking in any aspect. The only questionable choice in my opinion, was the choice to shoot the big Black Manta scene in broad daylight. It just looked slightly naff and would have came across much better if shot in darker conditions at night.
Nor do I think that it is the fault of any of the cast members. I think that Momoa does a great job in the title role and he looks incredible in the full on Aquaman suit, (which I don't think many other actors could legitimately pull off.) I think that Patrick Wilson did a decent job as the evil slightly cheesy power hungry half brother of Aquaman. I also enjoyed Willem Dafoe, Dolph Lundgren and Nicole Kidman in each of their scenes.
I think that the major culprit in this movie feeling a bit forced at times, is the lazy script that the actors had to work with. Almost every scene plays out in the exact same way; with the characters that we are following turning up to a new location, meeting up with a character, (usually Willem Dafoe,) listening to them spout a bunch of expositional dialogue and then mid sentence bad guys will attack and an explosion will go off cutting the conversation short. Then we will get a well shot action sequence with super dynamic cinematography, then the characters will figure out where they need to go next, they will go to the next location and the process will be rinsed and repeated for the duration of the movie.
Overall, Aquaman is not a bad superhero movie, there is a lot of fun to be had here with the badass action sequences. Unfortunately the lazy script holds the movie back from being as good as the glowing reviews told me it would be and out of the DC solo movies, - this, Man of Steel and Wonder Woman, - this is probably the worst of the three.
PS. Although I don't think that the movie in general was up to the highest level of quality, the CGI is objectively breath-taking in every scene and I totally agree with James Wan that it is nothing short of an atrocity that the SFX team on this movie have been snubbed for this year's Oscars ceremony.
The movie opens by telling the story of how Aquaman's parents came to meet and fall in love, even though they are from vastly different worlds. This whole sequence is brilliant and I was totally on-board for what was to come afterwards. Sadly, this opening sequence is by far the best part of the entire movie. From this point on it descends into a mediocre action adventure flick with story elements very reminiscent of Thor and Black Panther, (two movies that are vastly superior to this one.)
From a direction standpoint, it is clear that James Wan knows how to visually capture a scene in the most beautiful and intriguing way possible, which is especially evident during the trench sequence. His direction during all of the action sequences is great, with Nicole Kidman's trident work in the opening scene and the rooftop sequence with Black Manta, Mera and Aquaman being the highlights. I don't think that my issue with this movie is due to the direction lacking in any aspect. The only questionable choice in my opinion, was the choice to shoot the big Black Manta scene in broad daylight. It just looked slightly naff and would have came across much better if shot in darker conditions at night.
Nor do I think that it is the fault of any of the cast members. I think that Momoa does a great job in the title role and he looks incredible in the full on Aquaman suit, (which I don't think many other actors could legitimately pull off.) I think that Patrick Wilson did a decent job as the evil slightly cheesy power hungry half brother of Aquaman. I also enjoyed Willem Dafoe, Dolph Lundgren and Nicole Kidman in each of their scenes.
I think that the major culprit in this movie feeling a bit forced at times, is the lazy script that the actors had to work with. Almost every scene plays out in the exact same way; with the characters that we are following turning up to a new location, meeting up with a character, (usually Willem Dafoe,) listening to them spout a bunch of expositional dialogue and then mid sentence bad guys will attack and an explosion will go off cutting the conversation short. Then we will get a well shot action sequence with super dynamic cinematography, then the characters will figure out where they need to go next, they will go to the next location and the process will be rinsed and repeated for the duration of the movie.
Overall, Aquaman is not a bad superhero movie, there is a lot of fun to be had here with the badass action sequences. Unfortunately the lazy script holds the movie back from being as good as the glowing reviews told me it would be and out of the DC solo movies, - this, Man of Steel and Wonder Woman, - this is probably the worst of the three.
PS. Although I don't think that the movie in general was up to the highest level of quality, the CGI is objectively breath-taking in every scene and I totally agree with James Wan that it is nothing short of an atrocity that the SFX team on this movie have been snubbed for this year's Oscars ceremony.