Search
Search results
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Northman (2022) in Movies
May 11, 2022
Robert Eggers continues his winning streak with The Northman, surely one of the most visually stunning and compelling movies in recent years. A Viking revenge story presented in his signature style is just cinematic crack waiting to happen as far as I'm concerned.
The first third is a fast moving setup that effectively establishes the characters and shows off quite an epic production. After that, The Northman becomes a tight and slow burning thriller as Amleth (Alexander Skarsgård) exacts a psychologically torturous revenge on the people who killer his father. It's a perfect marriage of powerful character drama, weird imagery, Viking culture and beliefs, bizarre gore, and fantasy set pieces, and it's slower pace ensures that it's utterly captivating.
The whole film looks incredible from start to finish and is complimented by a wonderful music score.
It's all cemented by a stacked cast. Skarsgård is a capable lead for sure, and is just a big walking muscle in this, the manly bastard. Anya Taylor-Joy is great as always, and the supporting cast boasts the likes of Nicole Kidman, Willem Dafoe, Ethan Hawke, and Claes Bang who are all stellar.
I can't heap enough praise on The Northman, another homerun from Eggers. I'd happily call it a masterpiece.
The first third is a fast moving setup that effectively establishes the characters and shows off quite an epic production. After that, The Northman becomes a tight and slow burning thriller as Amleth (Alexander Skarsgård) exacts a psychologically torturous revenge on the people who killer his father. It's a perfect marriage of powerful character drama, weird imagery, Viking culture and beliefs, bizarre gore, and fantasy set pieces, and it's slower pace ensures that it's utterly captivating.
The whole film looks incredible from start to finish and is complimented by a wonderful music score.
It's all cemented by a stacked cast. Skarsgård is a capable lead for sure, and is just a big walking muscle in this, the manly bastard. Anya Taylor-Joy is great as always, and the supporting cast boasts the likes of Nicole Kidman, Willem Dafoe, Ethan Hawke, and Claes Bang who are all stellar.
I can't heap enough praise on The Northman, another homerun from Eggers. I'd happily call it a masterpiece.
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.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Bombshell (2019) in Movies
Jan 31, 2020
Well acted - and important - film
The new Jay Roach film, BOMBSHELL - the Fox News sex scandal film - focuses on the struggles of 3 female protagonists - Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman), Megyn Kelly (Charlize Theron) and Kayla Pospisil (Margot Robbie) - as they attempt to climb (or stay at the top of) the Corporate Ladder while battling sexism and a toxic work culture at Fox News. It is a powerful story that is a necessary tale in the "#MeToo" era that demands viewers to stand up and take notice.
And with powerhouse actresses leading this film - standing up and taking notice is an easy thing to do.
Based on factual events, BOMBSHELL portrays the sexism that female on air personalities encounter at FoxNews - a place filled with "good ol' boys" who patronize and sexualize the females in the office to the detriment of the females and the benefit and gratification of the males. Surprisingly, they are joined in this by some other females in the office who figure "better them than me". At the top of the office - and the toxic work culture - is Roger Ailes (an almost unrecognizable John Lithgow) who is hailed by Fox as the man who can create the news - and profits.
Kidman, Theron and Robbie are well cast in their roles, showing nuance, concern and strength as these negative conditions rear their ugly heads over and over again. All 3 produce powerhouse performances - certainly up there amongst the best of their careers - and Theron and Robbie are well deserved Oscar nominees for their performances. Kidman was NOT nominated for her performance, but she is just as deserving as the other two.
But, for me, the real surprise - and the best performance - of this film belongs to Lithgow's portrayal of Ailes. His characterization shows a real wolf, taking advantage of his status and position, to prey upon those in his office. It is a sly, evil performance of a sly, evil man. What impressed me the most is that this performance - and this character - could have easily gone "over the top" into "pure villain" territory and Lithgow resists this temptation - to the betterment of this film, but to the detriment of his Oscar chances.
As written by Charles Randolph (THE BIG SHORT) this film has a pacing/theming issue for the first 1/2 hour of this film. Is it a serious film? Is it sarcastic look at toxic masculinity work culture? Is it an indictment on our current society as a whole? Randolph's script uses some of the same tactics as THE BIG SHORT, having performers breaking the 4th wall and commenting and narrating the events while looking directly at the camera. While this tactic worked very well in THE BIG SHORT (if you haven't seen this film, I highly recommend you do), it works less well here and Director Jay Roach (TRUMBO) wisely drops that "gimmick" after the first 1/2 hour.
This film is filled with wonderful character actors making extended (and powerful) cameos. The likes of Kate McKinnon, Allyson Janney, Holland Taylor, Connie Britton, Stephen Root, Malcolm McDowell, Robin Weigert, Mark Duplass, Richard Kind, Mark Moses and Tricia Helfer all contribute greatly to the film while shining in the little screen time they have.
A necessary - and powerful - film filled with tremendous performances that shine a light on a problem that is pervasive today. Which makes this film a must watch - as difficult as it is to watch at times.
Letter Grade: A- (the first 1/2 hour brings it down a point)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
And with powerhouse actresses leading this film - standing up and taking notice is an easy thing to do.
Based on factual events, BOMBSHELL portrays the sexism that female on air personalities encounter at FoxNews - a place filled with "good ol' boys" who patronize and sexualize the females in the office to the detriment of the females and the benefit and gratification of the males. Surprisingly, they are joined in this by some other females in the office who figure "better them than me". At the top of the office - and the toxic work culture - is Roger Ailes (an almost unrecognizable John Lithgow) who is hailed by Fox as the man who can create the news - and profits.
Kidman, Theron and Robbie are well cast in their roles, showing nuance, concern and strength as these negative conditions rear their ugly heads over and over again. All 3 produce powerhouse performances - certainly up there amongst the best of their careers - and Theron and Robbie are well deserved Oscar nominees for their performances. Kidman was NOT nominated for her performance, but she is just as deserving as the other two.
But, for me, the real surprise - and the best performance - of this film belongs to Lithgow's portrayal of Ailes. His characterization shows a real wolf, taking advantage of his status and position, to prey upon those in his office. It is a sly, evil performance of a sly, evil man. What impressed me the most is that this performance - and this character - could have easily gone "over the top" into "pure villain" territory and Lithgow resists this temptation - to the betterment of this film, but to the detriment of his Oscar chances.
As written by Charles Randolph (THE BIG SHORT) this film has a pacing/theming issue for the first 1/2 hour of this film. Is it a serious film? Is it sarcastic look at toxic masculinity work culture? Is it an indictment on our current society as a whole? Randolph's script uses some of the same tactics as THE BIG SHORT, having performers breaking the 4th wall and commenting and narrating the events while looking directly at the camera. While this tactic worked very well in THE BIG SHORT (if you haven't seen this film, I highly recommend you do), it works less well here and Director Jay Roach (TRUMBO) wisely drops that "gimmick" after the first 1/2 hour.
This film is filled with wonderful character actors making extended (and powerful) cameos. The likes of Kate McKinnon, Allyson Janney, Holland Taylor, Connie Britton, Stephen Root, Malcolm McDowell, Robin Weigert, Mark Duplass, Richard Kind, Mark Moses and Tricia Helfer all contribute greatly to the film while shining in the little screen time they have.
A necessary - and powerful - film filled with tremendous performances that shine a light on a problem that is pervasive today. Which makes this film a must watch - as difficult as it is to watch at times.
Letter Grade: A- (the first 1/2 hour brings it down a point)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Finding Steve McQueen (2019) in Movies
Nov 9, 2020
This heist comedy (we'll come to that later) sounds pretty good from the synopsis, I can't really elaborate much on it like I normally would because, for once, it's spot on!
I had a big issue almost straight off the bat... "In 1972"... that's how the synopsis starts. I had reread it just before starting the film and as it begins it actually flashes up "1980", very quickly it's explained (and it makes sense) but I didn't enjoy starting the film with that confusion. Now, if I was seeing this in the cinema it wouldn't have been an issue because you don't tend to sit there in the trailers reading the synopsis before it starts, but with it hitting digital you will be instantly seeing it before you press play... I know it's a really minor thing to be bugged by... but it did bug me.
The reason for the jump in years is that we're seeing Harry Barber telling his girlfriend, Molly, the story of his past and the heist. Flashbacks are a time-honoured tradition in films, but they're difficult to get right. The story jumps several times, but there's very little differentiation between time unless the diner is involved on one side of the jump. At one point it jumps because he talks at the camera and we hop back to Molly talking, it stuck out... it either never happened again or it blended in so well that I didn't notice it. It wouldn't be the first film to add something random like that and abandon the style choice. Some else will have to let me know if it happened more than I think it did.
These two things, combined with some free moving camerawork (that you know I hate) meant that I found the beginning of Finding Steve McQueen, especially when the heist that is pushed in the marketing doesn't appear for quite a while.
IMDb lists crime thriller as a guide... thriller is definitely the wrong word. Heist comedy (as per the PR I saw) is definitely more accurate, though I didn't find it particularly funny. It did bring a mild laugh out of me, but not enough to stamp it with the comedy tag. Even "heist" feels like it doesn't fit well, it may be about one but what's presented is much heavier on other parts of the story. It's more like a biopic with romance than crime. In the end that's a little bit disappointing when you're looking forward to crime.
William Fichtner was an instant standout for me, I thought he handled the role of Enzo Rotella particularly well, and there was a great dynamic with Louis Lombardi as Pauly. Rachael Taylor as Molly Murphy was great too, when she wasn't freaking me out with how much she looked like Nicole Kidman. Somehow I've never noticed that before so I'll have to put it down to a cunning makeup artist.
From there though I was underwhelmed. I'm not familiar with Travis Fimmel, and sadly, from this performance I've not been convinced to check out anything in his back catalogue. Apart from two well-played emotional scenes I didn't enjoy the character of Harry Barber at all.
Had this been advertised as a biography instead of a crime/heist then I probably would have had a more favourable opinion, but we're presented with a slow and light film. I'm not expecting all crime films to be gritty and dark, but I do expect them to focus more on the actual crime and investigation. That's also where I found the flashback idea falling apart because we're shown things for context that Harry wouldn't have known and been able to tell Molly.
What I did love about this film was the setting and the look of everything. It had a wonderful freshness about it and that coupled with the costumes felt natural and like it captured the era perfectly.
I by no means hated this film, but I was extremely disappointed. The way the story was balanced means that the heist gets lost in everything else that's happening and although it's hailed as an amazing feat in American history it doesn't feel all that impressive in this portrayal. The only real criminal thing about this film was the underuse of Forest Whitaker.
As a biography I could have seen clear to give this a 3, maybe a 3.5, but as a crime I can't give it more than a 2. It feels entirely misrepresented, had it not been for the few excellent performances, and the hope of exciting crime drama, I think I would have turned it off.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/finding-steve-mcqueen-movie-review.html
I had a big issue almost straight off the bat... "In 1972"... that's how the synopsis starts. I had reread it just before starting the film and as it begins it actually flashes up "1980", very quickly it's explained (and it makes sense) but I didn't enjoy starting the film with that confusion. Now, if I was seeing this in the cinema it wouldn't have been an issue because you don't tend to sit there in the trailers reading the synopsis before it starts, but with it hitting digital you will be instantly seeing it before you press play... I know it's a really minor thing to be bugged by... but it did bug me.
The reason for the jump in years is that we're seeing Harry Barber telling his girlfriend, Molly, the story of his past and the heist. Flashbacks are a time-honoured tradition in films, but they're difficult to get right. The story jumps several times, but there's very little differentiation between time unless the diner is involved on one side of the jump. At one point it jumps because he talks at the camera and we hop back to Molly talking, it stuck out... it either never happened again or it blended in so well that I didn't notice it. It wouldn't be the first film to add something random like that and abandon the style choice. Some else will have to let me know if it happened more than I think it did.
These two things, combined with some free moving camerawork (that you know I hate) meant that I found the beginning of Finding Steve McQueen, especially when the heist that is pushed in the marketing doesn't appear for quite a while.
IMDb lists crime thriller as a guide... thriller is definitely the wrong word. Heist comedy (as per the PR I saw) is definitely more accurate, though I didn't find it particularly funny. It did bring a mild laugh out of me, but not enough to stamp it with the comedy tag. Even "heist" feels like it doesn't fit well, it may be about one but what's presented is much heavier on other parts of the story. It's more like a biopic with romance than crime. In the end that's a little bit disappointing when you're looking forward to crime.
William Fichtner was an instant standout for me, I thought he handled the role of Enzo Rotella particularly well, and there was a great dynamic with Louis Lombardi as Pauly. Rachael Taylor as Molly Murphy was great too, when she wasn't freaking me out with how much she looked like Nicole Kidman. Somehow I've never noticed that before so I'll have to put it down to a cunning makeup artist.
From there though I was underwhelmed. I'm not familiar with Travis Fimmel, and sadly, from this performance I've not been convinced to check out anything in his back catalogue. Apart from two well-played emotional scenes I didn't enjoy the character of Harry Barber at all.
Had this been advertised as a biography instead of a crime/heist then I probably would have had a more favourable opinion, but we're presented with a slow and light film. I'm not expecting all crime films to be gritty and dark, but I do expect them to focus more on the actual crime and investigation. That's also where I found the flashback idea falling apart because we're shown things for context that Harry wouldn't have known and been able to tell Molly.
What I did love about this film was the setting and the look of everything. It had a wonderful freshness about it and that coupled with the costumes felt natural and like it captured the era perfectly.
I by no means hated this film, but I was extremely disappointed. The way the story was balanced means that the heist gets lost in everything else that's happening and although it's hailed as an amazing feat in American history it doesn't feel all that impressive in this portrayal. The only real criminal thing about this film was the underuse of Forest Whitaker.
As a biography I could have seen clear to give this a 3, maybe a 3.5, but as a crime I can't give it more than a 2. It feels entirely misrepresented, had it not been for the few excellent performances, and the hope of exciting crime drama, I think I would have turned it off.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/finding-steve-mcqueen-movie-review.html