Search
Moonlight (Knights of Black Swan #4)
10.0
Rate It
Book
The story continues to touch on the lives of former B Team members and their families while new...
Paranormal Romance Series
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Black Panther (2018) in Movies
May 19, 2019 (Updated Jun 8, 2019)
A by the numbers origin story, with some great performances that elevate
Black Panther was introduced into the MCU during Civil War, with little time for much backstory. And Ryan Cooglers efforts to illustrate said back story works for the most part.
This film is filled to the brim with vibrant colours, and an extremely likable cast.
Chadwick Boseman, Letitia Wright, Danai Gurira (literally throwing wigs at one point), Daniel Kaluuya, and Lulita Nyong'o are all great, and really paint a picture of the tribal togetherness that is Wakanda.
The two villains are where the cast really shines however, and of course, mainly Michael B. Jordan.
Here we have a layered Marvel villain, someone who you can truly sympathise with, whose backstory is fleshed out enough to almost side with him. Almost.
Jordan does a great job of bringing Killmonger to life.
Similar props to Andy Serkis. After a tiny roll in Age of Ultron, he gets a chance here to play Klaue like and absolute psychopath, and it's clear just how much fun he has in to roll.
A few negatives.... The way that Klaue's story arc is concluded is hugely unsatisfying.
The CGI is dodgy in parts, especially during then climatic battle.
The last battle itself is fun for the most part, but the fight between Black Panther and Killmonger falls into the age old MCU trope of 'the-hero-fighting-an-evil-version-of-themselves-in-a-similar-oufit' (see Iron Man, Iron Man 2, Ant-Man for reference)
Martin Freeman's character seems and largely unnecessary addition here, but it's always fun to see characters from other MCU movies.
All in all, Black Panther can be bland in places, but it's done the important part of finally establishing Wakanda in the MCU, and I for one am looking forward to what other stories will occur there (fingers crossed for a Sub-Mariner story line in a sequel!)
This film is filled to the brim with vibrant colours, and an extremely likable cast.
Chadwick Boseman, Letitia Wright, Danai Gurira (literally throwing wigs at one point), Daniel Kaluuya, and Lulita Nyong'o are all great, and really paint a picture of the tribal togetherness that is Wakanda.
The two villains are where the cast really shines however, and of course, mainly Michael B. Jordan.
Here we have a layered Marvel villain, someone who you can truly sympathise with, whose backstory is fleshed out enough to almost side with him. Almost.
Jordan does a great job of bringing Killmonger to life.
Similar props to Andy Serkis. After a tiny roll in Age of Ultron, he gets a chance here to play Klaue like and absolute psychopath, and it's clear just how much fun he has in to roll.
A few negatives.... The way that Klaue's story arc is concluded is hugely unsatisfying.
The CGI is dodgy in parts, especially during then climatic battle.
The last battle itself is fun for the most part, but the fight between Black Panther and Killmonger falls into the age old MCU trope of 'the-hero-fighting-an-evil-version-of-themselves-in-a-similar-oufit' (see Iron Man, Iron Man 2, Ant-Man for reference)
Martin Freeman's character seems and largely unnecessary addition here, but it's always fun to see characters from other MCU movies.
All in all, Black Panther can be bland in places, but it's done the important part of finally establishing Wakanda in the MCU, and I for one am looking forward to what other stories will occur there (fingers crossed for a Sub-Mariner story line in a sequel!)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Words (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
On paper, The Words is a film that is better suited as a literary novella. In print, we, as readers, are often granted insight to our characters thoughts and motivation that is frequently lost on film or delivered in a lackluster voiceover that most critics deem as lazy film making. Furthermore, the story within a story, within a story approach in film often leaves the audience with uninteresting shells of characters and can make a story forgettable at best.
Given these reasons, it is easy to see why many would choose to undertake a less ambitious story for their directorial debut. That group does not include co-writer-directors Brian Klugman and Lee Sternthal. This duo is actually successful at tackling this dangerous story-within-a-story film device by keeping it simple. Focusing on the main characters of each story and their motivation, while tying each together with some common themes like love, what it means to write something great, and how far the need for success will drive the characters.
The movie begins with highly successful author Clay Hammond (Dennis Quaid) conducting a reading of his latest novel The Words. Among his audience is literary grad student and adoring fan, Daniella (Olivia Wilde), who has aspirations of picking the brain of the man that authored her favorite stories and perhaps getting involved romantically. As Hammond begins to read his story we are introduced to the tale of starving writer Rory Jensen (Bradley Cooper) and his wife Dora (Zoe Saldana). The two are a young couple in love, trying to get on their feet while Rory struggles with multiple rejections of his novels, until he is finally forced to come to grips with his own limitations as an artist and a writer.
As he settles into life and a job as a mail clerk at a publishing firm, he finds a lost manuscript in a vintage leather briefcase that Dora had purchased for him during their honeymoon in Paris. That story turns out to be something that moves him to tears. It is the final thing in his realization that he will never be the great writer that he thought he was, the great writer that wrote this anonymous story. In an effort to feel and try to understand what it is like to create something great, Rory decides to retype the novel word for word on his laptop if only to admire the beautiful story that he had instantly fallen in love with. When Dora mistakenly reads the novel, she encourages him to submit it to a publisher. Before he can tell her the truth, his world is transformed into the life he had always imagined he would have for himself and Dora as the novel gains him both great literary and commercial success. And finally, now that his star has risen he can get his own novel published.
Enter Jeremy Irons as the old man who reveals himself to Rory as the true author of his story. The old man feels compelled to explain to Rory the tragic origin of the story that has become the young author’s success. Irons steals every second he is on screen as his delivery of the old man oozes with the intellectual style that has been his trademark over the years. Like Rory, we are helpless to do nothing but listen and get lost in the words of his story as if he was sitting next to us and telling the story in real life.
The old man reveals that the novel is the result of great love and pain that his younger self (Ben Barnes) and the love of his life Celia (Nora Arnezeder) endured. While I am not familiar with Barnes’ and Arnezeder’s work, their performance as the younger couple in Irons’ story had a genuine connection. And while this love story does not seem to be anything new when it comes to film, it served its purpose by strengthening the other stories, showing how a great story can be mused from someplace unexpected, even if only once.
With Rory now confronted with his deceitful success, he struggles to decide how to make things right and live with himself as a fraud. It’s at this point the film subtly suggest that Hammond’s story of Rory may actually be a disguised autobiography.
As Rory, Bradley Cooper gives perhaps his best performance to date. I feel that despite his poor and deceitful decision, at no point does he lose the audience. With the help of a strong and emotionally charged performance by Zoe Saldana, we experience Cooper’s honest plight and can understand the events that unfold around him. He is effective as a man who genuinely believes he does not deserve the success that he stole. Without a doubt, this will be a surprising role for those fans who only know Cooper from the humorous characters he plays in The Hangover and most recently Hit and Run. I hope this is the beginning of growth in his craft beyond the charming, confident character we have seen in Limitless and perhaps into a deeper emotional actor.
The weakest part of this film is the story of Clay Hammond and Daniella. Dennis Quaid is quite unlikable as Hammond. He is monotone in his readings and the prose of his story is mediocre at best. While the film drops hints that Hammond’s story of Rory is autobiographical it makes sense that Quaid’s character is played this way. He succeeds in helping create the notion that Hammond is unworthy of the success his character has enjoyed. But something about his performance is so unlikable that even when his character has a redeeming moment, it is lost on an audience that may not care enough about him for it to work.
To add to this dislike of Quaid, Olivia Wilde seems out of place as the character Daniella. It is not that her performance is bad, it is just that every time they showed her as the starry-eyed fan who is love struck for Hammond, she just seemed out of place. Additionally there did not seem to be any connection between Daniella and Hammond in the way the other characters’ connections helped strengthen their performances.
In the end, I enjoyed this movie more than I expected. Visually the Montreal backdrop does an excellent job as both New York and Paris. And the continual piano score helps blend the stories. The simple focus on the main characters helped maintain the three different stories and keep the overall pacing of the movie in order. In addition, the solid to exceptional performances also helped to keep the film focused and avoided the empty shell of characters that most movies of this nature create. That being said, this movie is not for everyone, but those looking for a change of pace from the summer blockbusters season should consider this film.
Given these reasons, it is easy to see why many would choose to undertake a less ambitious story for their directorial debut. That group does not include co-writer-directors Brian Klugman and Lee Sternthal. This duo is actually successful at tackling this dangerous story-within-a-story film device by keeping it simple. Focusing on the main characters of each story and their motivation, while tying each together with some common themes like love, what it means to write something great, and how far the need for success will drive the characters.
The movie begins with highly successful author Clay Hammond (Dennis Quaid) conducting a reading of his latest novel The Words. Among his audience is literary grad student and adoring fan, Daniella (Olivia Wilde), who has aspirations of picking the brain of the man that authored her favorite stories and perhaps getting involved romantically. As Hammond begins to read his story we are introduced to the tale of starving writer Rory Jensen (Bradley Cooper) and his wife Dora (Zoe Saldana). The two are a young couple in love, trying to get on their feet while Rory struggles with multiple rejections of his novels, until he is finally forced to come to grips with his own limitations as an artist and a writer.
As he settles into life and a job as a mail clerk at a publishing firm, he finds a lost manuscript in a vintage leather briefcase that Dora had purchased for him during their honeymoon in Paris. That story turns out to be something that moves him to tears. It is the final thing in his realization that he will never be the great writer that he thought he was, the great writer that wrote this anonymous story. In an effort to feel and try to understand what it is like to create something great, Rory decides to retype the novel word for word on his laptop if only to admire the beautiful story that he had instantly fallen in love with. When Dora mistakenly reads the novel, she encourages him to submit it to a publisher. Before he can tell her the truth, his world is transformed into the life he had always imagined he would have for himself and Dora as the novel gains him both great literary and commercial success. And finally, now that his star has risen he can get his own novel published.
Enter Jeremy Irons as the old man who reveals himself to Rory as the true author of his story. The old man feels compelled to explain to Rory the tragic origin of the story that has become the young author’s success. Irons steals every second he is on screen as his delivery of the old man oozes with the intellectual style that has been his trademark over the years. Like Rory, we are helpless to do nothing but listen and get lost in the words of his story as if he was sitting next to us and telling the story in real life.
The old man reveals that the novel is the result of great love and pain that his younger self (Ben Barnes) and the love of his life Celia (Nora Arnezeder) endured. While I am not familiar with Barnes’ and Arnezeder’s work, their performance as the younger couple in Irons’ story had a genuine connection. And while this love story does not seem to be anything new when it comes to film, it served its purpose by strengthening the other stories, showing how a great story can be mused from someplace unexpected, even if only once.
With Rory now confronted with his deceitful success, he struggles to decide how to make things right and live with himself as a fraud. It’s at this point the film subtly suggest that Hammond’s story of Rory may actually be a disguised autobiography.
As Rory, Bradley Cooper gives perhaps his best performance to date. I feel that despite his poor and deceitful decision, at no point does he lose the audience. With the help of a strong and emotionally charged performance by Zoe Saldana, we experience Cooper’s honest plight and can understand the events that unfold around him. He is effective as a man who genuinely believes he does not deserve the success that he stole. Without a doubt, this will be a surprising role for those fans who only know Cooper from the humorous characters he plays in The Hangover and most recently Hit and Run. I hope this is the beginning of growth in his craft beyond the charming, confident character we have seen in Limitless and perhaps into a deeper emotional actor.
The weakest part of this film is the story of Clay Hammond and Daniella. Dennis Quaid is quite unlikable as Hammond. He is monotone in his readings and the prose of his story is mediocre at best. While the film drops hints that Hammond’s story of Rory is autobiographical it makes sense that Quaid’s character is played this way. He succeeds in helping create the notion that Hammond is unworthy of the success his character has enjoyed. But something about his performance is so unlikable that even when his character has a redeeming moment, it is lost on an audience that may not care enough about him for it to work.
To add to this dislike of Quaid, Olivia Wilde seems out of place as the character Daniella. It is not that her performance is bad, it is just that every time they showed her as the starry-eyed fan who is love struck for Hammond, she just seemed out of place. Additionally there did not seem to be any connection between Daniella and Hammond in the way the other characters’ connections helped strengthen their performances.
In the end, I enjoyed this movie more than I expected. Visually the Montreal backdrop does an excellent job as both New York and Paris. And the continual piano score helps blend the stories. The simple focus on the main characters helped maintain the three different stories and keep the overall pacing of the movie in order. In addition, the solid to exceptional performances also helped to keep the film focused and avoided the empty shell of characters that most movies of this nature create. That being said, this movie is not for everyone, but those looking for a change of pace from the summer blockbusters season should consider this film.
PHOTOESSAY Online Art Magazine
Book and Magazines & Newspapers
App
Photoessay Georgian Online Magazine - The language is an acoustically and optically perceivable...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Early Man (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
From the creators of Chicken Run and Wallace and Gromit comes the “true”
story of the origin of the world’s most popular sport-football (or soccer
as we call it in the U.S.). A charming film that takes us back to the dawn
of man, The Stone Age, where a motley band of cavemen and women live an
archaic lifestyle foraging and hunting for their food.
Their way of life
is shattered as the Bronze age approaches, and mining for metal becoming
superior, along with the love of football (soccer) playing second. The
leader of the Bronze Age conquerors Lord Nooth strips the cavemen from
their land to mine for more metal and for smelting. Eager to keep their
way of life and get their home back, the Cavemen challenge Lord Nooth to a
game of football.
Who doesn’t love a good underdog story? As you can guess, it’s hysterical
slapstick humor and sheer silliness of epic proportion. In true Wallace
and Gromit fashion, Aardman animation create a movie with an underlying
sweetness that makes the audience fall in love with such delightful
characters.
Featuring an all-star British voice cast featuring Tom
Hiddleston, Maisie Williams, Tom Redmayne, and Timothy Spall, Early Man may
not be your typical run of the mill bright, boisterous, tug at the
heartstrings type of movie, but it definitely provides enough physical
comedy to keep the audience laughing and a great message about teamwork and
learning to coexist.
story of the origin of the world’s most popular sport-football (or soccer
as we call it in the U.S.). A charming film that takes us back to the dawn
of man, The Stone Age, where a motley band of cavemen and women live an
archaic lifestyle foraging and hunting for their food.
Their way of life
is shattered as the Bronze age approaches, and mining for metal becoming
superior, along with the love of football (soccer) playing second. The
leader of the Bronze Age conquerors Lord Nooth strips the cavemen from
their land to mine for more metal and for smelting. Eager to keep their
way of life and get their home back, the Cavemen challenge Lord Nooth to a
game of football.
Who doesn’t love a good underdog story? As you can guess, it’s hysterical
slapstick humor and sheer silliness of epic proportion. In true Wallace
and Gromit fashion, Aardman animation create a movie with an underlying
sweetness that makes the audience fall in love with such delightful
characters.
Featuring an all-star British voice cast featuring Tom
Hiddleston, Maisie Williams, Tom Redmayne, and Timothy Spall, Early Man may
not be your typical run of the mill bright, boisterous, tug at the
heartstrings type of movie, but it definitely provides enough physical
comedy to keep the audience laughing and a great message about teamwork and
learning to coexist.
Chocolate Unwrapped: Taste and Enjoy the World's Finest Chocolate
Book
* The story of chocolate: its place in history, from the Mayans to 21st-century artisan producers;...
Break Beats in the Bronx: Rediscovering Hip-Hop's Early Years
Book
The origin story of hip-hop—one that involves Kool Herc DJing a house party on Sedgwick Avenue in...
Music music history
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Bloodshot (2020) in Movies
Jul 27, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Man, I expected this to be absolute gutter trash based on some of the reviews I've seen here and there, but honestly, found this to be a pretty passable dumb comic book origin story.
The cast are mostly good (minus a couple of generic jumped-up-alpha-male-arseholes). Vin Diesel just being Vin Diesel (which I used to hate but these days kind of love-hate), Guy Pearce playing a typically shady villain, Eiza González representing the badass female quota nicely, and Lamorne Morris playing the sometimes amusing comic relief. They all gel well for the most part.
It also doesn't take itself to seriously - I was ready to hate Bloodshot within the first ten minutes due to some really on the nose dumbfuckery to do with Toby Kebbell's character, but later on, the movie references said scene and pokes fun at it, thankfully.
There's one particular great action set piece during the first third of the film (the one that made up a fair amount of the trailer) which earns Bloodshot more points than it otherwise would have, and the semi-Groundhog Day plot keeps the movie interesting for the most part.
However, and it's a big however, although Bloodshot is fairly good for a fair portion of the runtime, it absolutely shits the bed in the final third.
Opting for a big CGI blowout (of course), the big final sequence just looks horrible.
The character models used in the fight sequences reminded me of Neo from The Matrix Reloaded, and that looked bad 17 years ago!
It's a loud, ugly mess that unfortunately de-rails any good that came before.
It also doesn't make a lick of sense, but WHO CARES, EXPLOSIONS AND CGI VIN DIESEL, WOOOOAHHH. It sucks.
I get the feeling that the ending (after the shitty fight scene) was supposed to be deep and left open to interpretation, but it just felt thrown on and confusing, and I also, I didn't really care by this point.
Ultimately, I would like to see Bloodshot get a sequel. This first outing is truly an origin film, and it would be interesting to see how further entries could flesh out the story, and borrow more from the comics.
I just hope this crappy Coronavirus pandemic is taken into account by the suits when looking at the poor box office.
The cast are mostly good (minus a couple of generic jumped-up-alpha-male-arseholes). Vin Diesel just being Vin Diesel (which I used to hate but these days kind of love-hate), Guy Pearce playing a typically shady villain, Eiza González representing the badass female quota nicely, and Lamorne Morris playing the sometimes amusing comic relief. They all gel well for the most part.
It also doesn't take itself to seriously - I was ready to hate Bloodshot within the first ten minutes due to some really on the nose dumbfuckery to do with Toby Kebbell's character, but later on, the movie references said scene and pokes fun at it, thankfully.
There's one particular great action set piece during the first third of the film (the one that made up a fair amount of the trailer) which earns Bloodshot more points than it otherwise would have, and the semi-Groundhog Day plot keeps the movie interesting for the most part.
However, and it's a big however, although Bloodshot is fairly good for a fair portion of the runtime, it absolutely shits the bed in the final third.
Opting for a big CGI blowout (of course), the big final sequence just looks horrible.
The character models used in the fight sequences reminded me of Neo from The Matrix Reloaded, and that looked bad 17 years ago!
It's a loud, ugly mess that unfortunately de-rails any good that came before.
It also doesn't make a lick of sense, but WHO CARES, EXPLOSIONS AND CGI VIN DIESEL, WOOOOAHHH. It sucks.
I get the feeling that the ending (after the shitty fight scene) was supposed to be deep and left open to interpretation, but it just felt thrown on and confusing, and I also, I didn't really care by this point.
Ultimately, I would like to see Bloodshot get a sequel. This first outing is truly an origin film, and it would be interesting to see how further entries could flesh out the story, and borrow more from the comics.
I just hope this crappy Coronavirus pandemic is taken into account by the suits when looking at the poor box office.
Justin Taylor (59 KP) rated Power Rangers (2017) in Movies
Oct 29, 2018
Everything is better than the show because they got a better budget and better actors. (1 more)
References to the shows universe and legacy are littered throughout this movie see if u can spot them all
Basically the very first episode of power rangers but updated and expanded upon which isn't necessarily a bad thing but letting u know that it's not a new team just a reimagining (1 more)
Only the last half is power Rangers stuff which is understandable because it's an origin story so be warned in case ur expecting ranger stuff throughout
How a power rangers movie should be!
Contains spoilers, click to show
Overall this movie was mixed for me I didn't hate it but I didn't like it either...best way I can describe it is if DC got ahold of it.
The movies fine but don't expect too much from it also be aware this is a reimagining of the mighty Morphin Power rangers first episode so it's not a new team or a sequel to a season just it's own thing.
The cast owns it in this movie especially the blue ranger billy. Also the suits look awesome and the megazord is pretty awesome too.
The movies fine but don't expect too much from it also be aware this is a reimagining of the mighty Morphin Power rangers first episode so it's not a new team or a sequel to a season just it's own thing.
The cast owns it in this movie especially the blue ranger billy. Also the suits look awesome and the megazord is pretty awesome too.
Rommel's Spy: Operation Condor and the Desert War
Book
In 1942, John Eppler was one of two German spies inserted behind British lines in Egypt after an...