Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Dirty Grandpa (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Dirty De Niro
It’s hard to imagine an acting career that has continuously impressed as much as that of Robert De Niro. The two-time Academy Award-winner has also racked up an incredible five further nominations at the Oscars, cementing him as a Hollywood great.
However, over the last few years, this acting veteran has spiralled into rather dangerous territory. Taking on thankless role after thankless role with terrible romantic comedies, his filmography makes for grim reading these days.
His latest movie sees him star alongside the hunky Zac Efron in Dirty Grandpa, a gross-out comedy following the pair on a road trip from Atlanta to Florida, but does it do enough to restore some sheen to De Niro’s CV?
De Niro stars as Richard ‘Dick’ Kelly, an army veteran mourning the loss of his late wife. To ease his grief, he and his uptight lawyer grandson Jason (Efron) take a trip together as a way of catching up. Though for Dick, there’s more than scenery on his mind.
I’ll get this off my chest before we go any further. The script is absolutely atrocious and one of the worst I have ever come across in the genre, and Dan Mazer’s inconsistent direction only highlights these major flaws.
Both Efron and De Niro look uncomfortable with the overly offensive dialogue that targets homosexuals and ethnic minorities just to try and raise a laugh. This is comedy at its laziest and Dirty Grandpa is more than happy to admit that to you – it’s definitely not ashamed of what it is.
Nevertheless, it’s such a shame to see a former Oscar winner taking on the role of a borderline perverted grandparent. The constant leering at college girls and the cringe-worthy talk of sex just don’t sit well with those who know of De Niro’s once unrivalled talent and this is why he feels sorely miscast.
Efron too starts off incredibly poorly. As the uptight lawyer, he spouts legalese that you know he doesn’t truly understand, though once he starts to unwind we see him at his best. The actor knows that he works well in films where he can use his cracking smile and body to full effect and it’s certainly out in force here.
Elsewhere, a supporting cast that includes Parks and Recreation’s Aubrey Plaza fares much better with Plaza being the film’s standout character. Her sex-obsessed Lenore is actually very funny indeed and provides Dirty Grandpa with what it sorely needs – genuine comedy.
Unfortunately, despite a few laughs, the film tries too hard with the tired old clichés. From fart jokes to racism and sexism, it’s all there – all the while unaware it’s adding another nail in the coffin of Robert De Niro’s acting career.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/05/dire-de-niro-dirty-grandpa-review/
However, over the last few years, this acting veteran has spiralled into rather dangerous territory. Taking on thankless role after thankless role with terrible romantic comedies, his filmography makes for grim reading these days.
His latest movie sees him star alongside the hunky Zac Efron in Dirty Grandpa, a gross-out comedy following the pair on a road trip from Atlanta to Florida, but does it do enough to restore some sheen to De Niro’s CV?
De Niro stars as Richard ‘Dick’ Kelly, an army veteran mourning the loss of his late wife. To ease his grief, he and his uptight lawyer grandson Jason (Efron) take a trip together as a way of catching up. Though for Dick, there’s more than scenery on his mind.
I’ll get this off my chest before we go any further. The script is absolutely atrocious and one of the worst I have ever come across in the genre, and Dan Mazer’s inconsistent direction only highlights these major flaws.
Both Efron and De Niro look uncomfortable with the overly offensive dialogue that targets homosexuals and ethnic minorities just to try and raise a laugh. This is comedy at its laziest and Dirty Grandpa is more than happy to admit that to you – it’s definitely not ashamed of what it is.
Nevertheless, it’s such a shame to see a former Oscar winner taking on the role of a borderline perverted grandparent. The constant leering at college girls and the cringe-worthy talk of sex just don’t sit well with those who know of De Niro’s once unrivalled talent and this is why he feels sorely miscast.
Efron too starts off incredibly poorly. As the uptight lawyer, he spouts legalese that you know he doesn’t truly understand, though once he starts to unwind we see him at his best. The actor knows that he works well in films where he can use his cracking smile and body to full effect and it’s certainly out in force here.
Elsewhere, a supporting cast that includes Parks and Recreation’s Aubrey Plaza fares much better with Plaza being the film’s standout character. Her sex-obsessed Lenore is actually very funny indeed and provides Dirty Grandpa with what it sorely needs – genuine comedy.
Unfortunately, despite a few laughs, the film tries too hard with the tired old clichés. From fart jokes to racism and sexism, it’s all there – all the while unaware it’s adding another nail in the coffin of Robert De Niro’s acting career.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/05/dire-de-niro-dirty-grandpa-review/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Two Popes (2019) in Movies
Jan 29, 2020
Well Acted
In 2012, the conservative Pope Benedict - citing failing health - made the rare move of stepping down from the Papacy. He was, ultimately, replaced by the more Liberal Pope Francis. THE TWO POPES is a fictional account of a conversation that these two men had prior to Benedict's stepping down.
If you are looking for a hard-hitting expose of the issues the Catholic Church was facing at the time with the conservative Benedict facing off against the Liberal Francis, then you will be disappointed. But...if you are looking for an interesting, gentle acting exercise where 2 strong actors take Center Stage to move from enemies to frenemies to friends, then you will enjoy THE TWO POPES.
The review of this film begins and ends with the performances of the 2 leads - Jonathan Pryce as Pope Francis (Cardinal Bergoglio in the film) and Anthony Hopkins as Pope Benedict - and they are terrific. Pryce was nominated in the Best Actor Oscar category while Hopkins sits in the Best Supporting Actor category (deservedly so - Pryce has much more screen time and focus).
As Francis, Pryce is conflicted by both what is currently happening with the Church and his own demons. His Cardinal Bergoglio is alternately strong and weak - and Pryce plays this well. It is just about the best performance I have ever seen from Pryce on film. Unfortunately for him, he pales in comparison with the withering, wilted and strong portrayal of Pope Benedict that is put on by Hopkins. This is Sir Anthony's best work in years and shows that this ol' trouper "still has it." As I stated earlier, they are both nominated (deservedly) for Oscars, for it is an actor's movie, but only Hopkins would be a deserving winner (though neither of them will win).
THE TWO POPES is Directed by Brazilian Fernando Meirelles based on a screen play by Anthony McCarten (DARKEST HOUR). McCarten's script is stronger than Meirelles Direction. I felt like I was watching a filmed stage play with both Popes sitting and talking for long stretches of time. Do not be surprised to see a stage version of this film on Broadway sometime soon. It played more like an extended episode of Masterpiece Theater than a Theatrical Film.
At just over 2 hours, this film is just a bit too long, but (of course) both Popes have their "Oscar moment" in the tail end of the movie so that helps it to cross the finish line strong.
If you are looking for strong acting, look no further than THE TWO POPES, you will not be disappointed.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
If you are looking for a hard-hitting expose of the issues the Catholic Church was facing at the time with the conservative Benedict facing off against the Liberal Francis, then you will be disappointed. But...if you are looking for an interesting, gentle acting exercise where 2 strong actors take Center Stage to move from enemies to frenemies to friends, then you will enjoy THE TWO POPES.
The review of this film begins and ends with the performances of the 2 leads - Jonathan Pryce as Pope Francis (Cardinal Bergoglio in the film) and Anthony Hopkins as Pope Benedict - and they are terrific. Pryce was nominated in the Best Actor Oscar category while Hopkins sits in the Best Supporting Actor category (deservedly so - Pryce has much more screen time and focus).
As Francis, Pryce is conflicted by both what is currently happening with the Church and his own demons. His Cardinal Bergoglio is alternately strong and weak - and Pryce plays this well. It is just about the best performance I have ever seen from Pryce on film. Unfortunately for him, he pales in comparison with the withering, wilted and strong portrayal of Pope Benedict that is put on by Hopkins. This is Sir Anthony's best work in years and shows that this ol' trouper "still has it." As I stated earlier, they are both nominated (deservedly) for Oscars, for it is an actor's movie, but only Hopkins would be a deserving winner (though neither of them will win).
THE TWO POPES is Directed by Brazilian Fernando Meirelles based on a screen play by Anthony McCarten (DARKEST HOUR). McCarten's script is stronger than Meirelles Direction. I felt like I was watching a filmed stage play with both Popes sitting and talking for long stretches of time. Do not be surprised to see a stage version of this film on Broadway sometime soon. It played more like an extended episode of Masterpiece Theater than a Theatrical Film.
At just over 2 hours, this film is just a bit too long, but (of course) both Popes have their "Oscar moment" in the tail end of the movie so that helps it to cross the finish line strong.
If you are looking for strong acting, look no further than THE TWO POPES, you will not be disappointed.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Hillbilly Elegy (2020) in Movies
Apr 22, 2021
General Shoutiness and a glowering Glenn Close
I missed Ron Howard's "Hillbilly Elegy" when it came out at the end of last year, but principally wanted to catch up on it to see Glenn Close's Oscar nominated performance before Sunday's Oscars.
Positives:
- When this film started, I suspected that the Glenn Close nomination might be another 'Judi Dench in Shakespeare in Love' - - where her acceptance speech is longer than the time spent on screen! But no. Because of the flashback format deployed in the film, she actually gets a good amount of air time. And it's a really solid and impressive performance.
- The supporting cast is also good. Amy Adams is given a lot to do with a challenging role, and (just about) pulls it off. And young Owen Asztalos as the younger J. D. particularly impressed me.
Negatives:
- Although it's based on J. D. Vance's true life story, I really struggled to get very invested in the story. The choppy nature of the narrative - hopping repeatedly between 'the present' and multiple flashback timelines - really doesn't help with this.
- The whole J. D. / Usha romance element almost felt like it belonged in a different film. In fact, I found it frustrating that I found the elements with J. D.'s struggles at college, with the emerging love and guidance of Usha, as a more compelling narrative than the druggie mother lead story. Perhaps the movie was just trying to be too ambitious?
- Apart from one 'personal decision' scene in a motel bedroom, there's not much of an "up-side" to the story for the viewer to take away. It's not a movie that I found a positive experience.
Viewer Advisory;
If you've had any history of life in a dysfunctional family, there is a lot of shouting, slapping and general tension in this movie which you might find disturbing.
Summary Thoughts:
So, I came to this to see the performance of Glenn Close, and it's very good. I would personally be surprised if she takes the Oscar for this. However, having been nominated eight times before and never won, the 'sympathy vote' may play here.
But one of my bellweathers for a movie is to think whether I'll remember it in six months time. I'm afraid this one is unlikely to pass the test. If you say "Hillbilly Elegy" to me in October, I'll probably recall a whole lot of shouty people and Glenn Close glowering at me from the screen. That's not a wholly great recommendation for a movie. Sorry Mr Howard, but this one's a 'miss' for me.
(For the full graphical review, please see the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/21/hillbilly-elegy-review/ ).
Positives:
- When this film started, I suspected that the Glenn Close nomination might be another 'Judi Dench in Shakespeare in Love' - - where her acceptance speech is longer than the time spent on screen! But no. Because of the flashback format deployed in the film, she actually gets a good amount of air time. And it's a really solid and impressive performance.
- The supporting cast is also good. Amy Adams is given a lot to do with a challenging role, and (just about) pulls it off. And young Owen Asztalos as the younger J. D. particularly impressed me.
Negatives:
- Although it's based on J. D. Vance's true life story, I really struggled to get very invested in the story. The choppy nature of the narrative - hopping repeatedly between 'the present' and multiple flashback timelines - really doesn't help with this.
- The whole J. D. / Usha romance element almost felt like it belonged in a different film. In fact, I found it frustrating that I found the elements with J. D.'s struggles at college, with the emerging love and guidance of Usha, as a more compelling narrative than the druggie mother lead story. Perhaps the movie was just trying to be too ambitious?
- Apart from one 'personal decision' scene in a motel bedroom, there's not much of an "up-side" to the story for the viewer to take away. It's not a movie that I found a positive experience.
Viewer Advisory;
If you've had any history of life in a dysfunctional family, there is a lot of shouting, slapping and general tension in this movie which you might find disturbing.
Summary Thoughts:
So, I came to this to see the performance of Glenn Close, and it's very good. I would personally be surprised if she takes the Oscar for this. However, having been nominated eight times before and never won, the 'sympathy vote' may play here.
But one of my bellweathers for a movie is to think whether I'll remember it in six months time. I'm afraid this one is unlikely to pass the test. If you say "Hillbilly Elegy" to me in October, I'll probably recall a whole lot of shouty people and Glenn Close glowering at me from the screen. That's not a wholly great recommendation for a movie. Sorry Mr Howard, but this one's a 'miss' for me.
(For the full graphical review, please see the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/21/hillbilly-elegy-review/ ).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Night House (2020) in Movies
Aug 23, 2021
Rebecca Hall - outstanding (1 more)
Nicely vague script: leaves a lot to interpret
This one really creeped me out
Positives:
- Of the different movie genres, comedy and horror are probably the ones that polarise opinion the most. One person's meat is another's fowl. But I have to say that this movie officially creeped me out. I was extremely tense for just about the whole 107 minute running time. Much of this is down to Rebecca Hall, who is just SUPERB in this. She brilliantly portrays a woman on the edge, her impassive character breaking every so often into an "everything's fine" sarcastic smile. I know that the Academy tend not to nominate actors for Oscars for 'frivolous' films, but this genuinely, to me, felt like an Oscar-nomination-worthy performance.
- I've talked before in my blog about the overuse of 'jump scares' in horror films and the law of diminishing returns. This film doles them out very sparingly indeed. There are two notable ones (one spoiled by the trailer!) but - man - the first of these had me levitating off the seat!
- The script is very vague indeed about where you end up in this movie. (I've tried to do a synopsis of what I *think* happened in a "Sp0iler section" in my blog). The script deliciously muddies the waters between dreams and reality; sanity and madness; sobriety and drunkenness; with the real-life Madelyn (Stacy Martin) bringing you up short at times with an "oh - so that bit must by reality then"!
Negatives:
- The ending. I'm not sure how I wanted it to end. But it felt wholly anti-climactic.
Summary Thoughts on "The Night House": London-born Rebecca Hall seems to have a "leisurely" output as an actress, but she really deserves more prominence in the industry. (If you've not seen it yet, watch her outstanding performance in "Christine" as another proof point). Here she magnificently holds the movie together.
Effective horror films for me are those on the tense psychological side rather than the mindless slasher variety. This point was well made by Tom Shone in his review in "The Sunday Times", describing it as a "middle-aged kind of horror movie!". "The Night House" delivered those mental chills for me in spades. There is actually very little gore in this one. But it certainly had me thinking about it when I woke up in the middle of the night last night. Was that a noise downstairs??
If you like your scary films, then this one is highly recommended.
(For my full graphical review, please check out onemannsmovies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).
- Of the different movie genres, comedy and horror are probably the ones that polarise opinion the most. One person's meat is another's fowl. But I have to say that this movie officially creeped me out. I was extremely tense for just about the whole 107 minute running time. Much of this is down to Rebecca Hall, who is just SUPERB in this. She brilliantly portrays a woman on the edge, her impassive character breaking every so often into an "everything's fine" sarcastic smile. I know that the Academy tend not to nominate actors for Oscars for 'frivolous' films, but this genuinely, to me, felt like an Oscar-nomination-worthy performance.
- I've talked before in my blog about the overuse of 'jump scares' in horror films and the law of diminishing returns. This film doles them out very sparingly indeed. There are two notable ones (one spoiled by the trailer!) but - man - the first of these had me levitating off the seat!
- The script is very vague indeed about where you end up in this movie. (I've tried to do a synopsis of what I *think* happened in a "Sp0iler section" in my blog). The script deliciously muddies the waters between dreams and reality; sanity and madness; sobriety and drunkenness; with the real-life Madelyn (Stacy Martin) bringing you up short at times with an "oh - so that bit must by reality then"!
Negatives:
- The ending. I'm not sure how I wanted it to end. But it felt wholly anti-climactic.
Summary Thoughts on "The Night House": London-born Rebecca Hall seems to have a "leisurely" output as an actress, but she really deserves more prominence in the industry. (If you've not seen it yet, watch her outstanding performance in "Christine" as another proof point). Here she magnificently holds the movie together.
Effective horror films for me are those on the tense psychological side rather than the mindless slasher variety. This point was well made by Tom Shone in his review in "The Sunday Times", describing it as a "middle-aged kind of horror movie!". "The Night House" delivered those mental chills for me in spades. There is actually very little gore in this one. But it certainly had me thinking about it when I woke up in the middle of the night last night. Was that a noise downstairs??
If you like your scary films, then this one is highly recommended.
(For my full graphical review, please check out onemannsmovies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Wife (2017) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021 (Updated Sep 28, 2021)
Glenn Close … #robbed.
I missed “The Wife” when it came out in September, but finally caught it a few weeks ago. (Been a busy time at work so have a bit of a backlog of reviews!).
The Plot.
Joan Castleman (Glenn Close) is the doting wife of internationally renowned writer Joe Castleman (Jonathan Pryce). As we start the film, Joe has just received a call from Stockholm. No, it’s not an “amusing story about a goat” (for any MM2 fans out there). It’s notification that he is to receive the Nobel prize for literature. As Joan listens to the news on the extension, there is something in her eyes that betrays mixed emotions.
They travel to Sweden (on Concorde, obviously) with their son Max (Max Irons) – a writer at the start of his career. Max and Joe have a strained relationship.
Also in Stockholm is Nathanial Bone (Christian Slater) – the bane of Joe’s life, since he seems insistent on writing the biography of the great man. As Nathanial picks through the history of the couple, things start to unravel in unexpected ways.
What a performance!
The heart of this film, and the main reason for watching what is really a bit of a pot-boiler, is the performance by Glenn Close. It’s a remarkable demonstration of the acting craft and 110% Oscar worthy.
Don’t get me wrong…. as I watched the Oscars live in the wee-hours of Monday morning I let out a WHOOP of joy when our own national treasure Olivia Colman picked up the award. But I have to say that I think Glenn Close was rather robbed. Close can act brilliantly without saying a single word. In fact most of her best scenes are reaction shots to what she is listening to.
In comparison I found Jonathan Pryce to be a soupçon over-the-top as the feted writer, and I didn’t find the portrayal of Bone by Slater to be terribly convincing. So it’s a very mixed acting bag in my view.
Utterly gorgeous in a way that only Swedish women can be is Karin Franz Körlof as the personal photographer Linnea. She can also act!
A perfectly pleasant movie
Directed by Swedish director Björn Runge and with a screenplay by Jane Anderson, it’s a perfectly pleasant way to spend a couple of hours. The story is intriguing enough to keep your interest, although it plays its hand so early that the simmering suspense element ebbs out of the film. A final “Sixth Sense” style of reveal might have been much more effective.
But this is above all a film to relish the performance of Close: the facial acting during the speech at the awards ceremony is something that should be studied at acting schools for years to come.
The Plot.
Joan Castleman (Glenn Close) is the doting wife of internationally renowned writer Joe Castleman (Jonathan Pryce). As we start the film, Joe has just received a call from Stockholm. No, it’s not an “amusing story about a goat” (for any MM2 fans out there). It’s notification that he is to receive the Nobel prize for literature. As Joan listens to the news on the extension, there is something in her eyes that betrays mixed emotions.
They travel to Sweden (on Concorde, obviously) with their son Max (Max Irons) – a writer at the start of his career. Max and Joe have a strained relationship.
Also in Stockholm is Nathanial Bone (Christian Slater) – the bane of Joe’s life, since he seems insistent on writing the biography of the great man. As Nathanial picks through the history of the couple, things start to unravel in unexpected ways.
What a performance!
The heart of this film, and the main reason for watching what is really a bit of a pot-boiler, is the performance by Glenn Close. It’s a remarkable demonstration of the acting craft and 110% Oscar worthy.
Don’t get me wrong…. as I watched the Oscars live in the wee-hours of Monday morning I let out a WHOOP of joy when our own national treasure Olivia Colman picked up the award. But I have to say that I think Glenn Close was rather robbed. Close can act brilliantly without saying a single word. In fact most of her best scenes are reaction shots to what she is listening to.
In comparison I found Jonathan Pryce to be a soupçon over-the-top as the feted writer, and I didn’t find the portrayal of Bone by Slater to be terribly convincing. So it’s a very mixed acting bag in my view.
Utterly gorgeous in a way that only Swedish women can be is Karin Franz Körlof as the personal photographer Linnea. She can also act!
A perfectly pleasant movie
Directed by Swedish director Björn Runge and with a screenplay by Jane Anderson, it’s a perfectly pleasant way to spend a couple of hours. The story is intriguing enough to keep your interest, although it plays its hand so early that the simmering suspense element ebbs out of the film. A final “Sixth Sense” style of reveal might have been much more effective.
But this is above all a film to relish the performance of Close: the facial acting during the speech at the awards ceremony is something that should be studied at acting schools for years to come.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Final Destination 5 (2011) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 11, 2019)
Did we really need another Final Destination film? After the last, merely average movie, the answer on everyone’s lips was a firm and resounding no. However, a surprising return to form for the franchise has ensured that even this old goat has life in it yet.
Gone are the cheap, cheesy shocks that littered Final Destination 3 and 4. In their place are the genuine thrills and spills from the first two films. The movie returns the guessing game element to its audience and for that I am thoroughly grateful.
Newcomer Steven Quale helms this instalment which combines excellent 3D with fantastic special effects and a dazzling set of opening credits which showcase the deaths from the films that preceded it. I wasn’t expecting much from this film, I have to admit, but the credits really are a highlight as you try and remember which film each death is from.
As with any film in the Final Destination franchise, an epic opening disaster is the norm. Whilst the motorway pileup from Final Destination 2 has been the best up until now, the bridge collapse in this film is utterly mesmerising and edge of your seat thrilling. From the flawless special effects to the scale of the production, it surpasses anything seen before in the series.
The deaths have also returned to form too. Instead of out and out cheese, they’re shocking to the point of jaw-dropping. It’ll have you checking every loose nut and bolt from now on and probably have you resisting that fashionable laser eye surgery too. Thankfully though, away from the deaths, it errs on the side of humorous without delving into slapstick.
Nicholas D’Agosto leads a small cast as they try and find a way to cheat death after surviving that epic bridge disaster. An interesting storyline this time around has the cast told that they are able to cheat death by killing someone else, therefore having their life swapped with yours. The acting from all corners leaves a lot to be desired and the dialogue and performances are unashamedly wooden but this is a small point in a film that really does shock and surprise.
However, perhaps the best part of the film and the reason why it’s so enjoyable is the final twist, a twist that will leave you shouting at the screen in dismay. It’s practically impossible to see it coming until the last 5 minutes and in these last minutes you realise just how clever director Steven Quale has been in creating this film.
It may not be the most original movie to ever grace the big screen and the cast aren’t going to trouble the Oscars but Final Destination 5 returns a lifeless franchise to what it once was, bloody good fun and as such it is by far, the best in the series.
So, the question now is; do we need Final Destination 6?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/09/21/review-final-destination-5-2011/
Gone are the cheap, cheesy shocks that littered Final Destination 3 and 4. In their place are the genuine thrills and spills from the first two films. The movie returns the guessing game element to its audience and for that I am thoroughly grateful.
Newcomer Steven Quale helms this instalment which combines excellent 3D with fantastic special effects and a dazzling set of opening credits which showcase the deaths from the films that preceded it. I wasn’t expecting much from this film, I have to admit, but the credits really are a highlight as you try and remember which film each death is from.
As with any film in the Final Destination franchise, an epic opening disaster is the norm. Whilst the motorway pileup from Final Destination 2 has been the best up until now, the bridge collapse in this film is utterly mesmerising and edge of your seat thrilling. From the flawless special effects to the scale of the production, it surpasses anything seen before in the series.
The deaths have also returned to form too. Instead of out and out cheese, they’re shocking to the point of jaw-dropping. It’ll have you checking every loose nut and bolt from now on and probably have you resisting that fashionable laser eye surgery too. Thankfully though, away from the deaths, it errs on the side of humorous without delving into slapstick.
Nicholas D’Agosto leads a small cast as they try and find a way to cheat death after surviving that epic bridge disaster. An interesting storyline this time around has the cast told that they are able to cheat death by killing someone else, therefore having their life swapped with yours. The acting from all corners leaves a lot to be desired and the dialogue and performances are unashamedly wooden but this is a small point in a film that really does shock and surprise.
However, perhaps the best part of the film and the reason why it’s so enjoyable is the final twist, a twist that will leave you shouting at the screen in dismay. It’s practically impossible to see it coming until the last 5 minutes and in these last minutes you realise just how clever director Steven Quale has been in creating this film.
It may not be the most original movie to ever grace the big screen and the cast aren’t going to trouble the Oscars but Final Destination 5 returns a lifeless franchise to what it once was, bloody good fun and as such it is by far, the best in the series.
So, the question now is; do we need Final Destination 6?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/09/21/review-final-destination-5-2011/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Roman J. Israel, Esq. (2018) in Movies
Feb 23, 2018
Come for Denzel, stay for...well...there isn't much else to stay for
Denzel Washington is one of the finest actors of his generation. A charismatic screen presence, he commands the viewer's attention whether he is performing a comedy, drama or action film. He has won 2 Oscars as a performer and has been nominated for his acting 6 other times - including (rightfully so) for his performance as the titular character in ROMAN J ISRAEL, ESQ.
And thank goodness he is in this film for I found precious little else to recommend in this movie.
ROMAN J. ISRAEL, ESQ. tells the story of...ahem...Roman J. Israel, Esq, a "savant" legal attorney (some would call him autistic) who has spent the past many, many years as the behind the scenes lawyer in a rundown 2 person law firm that specializes in defending "the little guy". When his partner unexpectedly dies, Roman is thrust into the world of big time, big business and big MONEY law and when Roman is sucked into this world he suffers a crisis of conscience and must decide between the luxuries that this new, rich life affords and the idealism that has driven him for all these many years.
In lesser hands, this character could have been maudlin or cloying - but in Washington's seasoned hands, this character jumps off the page as a quirky and different sort of person - a genius to be sure - but a troubled genius. One that is more comfortable alone, in his library with his books and legal briefs than with people. Washington threads the needle very well in his portrayal making Roman J. Israel seem like a real person and not just a character.
Also strong is Colin Farrell as the head of the Big Business Law Firm that Roman ends up working for. Farrell has grown as an actor in my eyes - and his portrayal of George Pierce shows a another real person behind the suit and not just a 2 dimensional caricature. Also along for the ride is Carmen Ejogo in an underwritten part as a young idealistic lawyer - and potential love interest for Roman - who reminds Roman of his younger self.
But, despite these performances, the film falls flat because - besides Roman's crisis of conscience - nothing else really happens.
The blame for this has to lie at the hands of screenwriter and director Dan Gilroy (the wonderful, underrated - and underseen - NIGHTCRAWLER). He is fascinated by the intricacies of Roman's world but fails to flesh it out. It's almost as if he was so interested in creating the trees, he never created a forest interesting enough for these trees to live in - or for us to visit.
So come for Denzel, but be warned, if you stay there's not much else to stay for.
Letter Grade B- (because of Denzel's performance)
6 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And thank goodness he is in this film for I found precious little else to recommend in this movie.
ROMAN J. ISRAEL, ESQ. tells the story of...ahem...Roman J. Israel, Esq, a "savant" legal attorney (some would call him autistic) who has spent the past many, many years as the behind the scenes lawyer in a rundown 2 person law firm that specializes in defending "the little guy". When his partner unexpectedly dies, Roman is thrust into the world of big time, big business and big MONEY law and when Roman is sucked into this world he suffers a crisis of conscience and must decide between the luxuries that this new, rich life affords and the idealism that has driven him for all these many years.
In lesser hands, this character could have been maudlin or cloying - but in Washington's seasoned hands, this character jumps off the page as a quirky and different sort of person - a genius to be sure - but a troubled genius. One that is more comfortable alone, in his library with his books and legal briefs than with people. Washington threads the needle very well in his portrayal making Roman J. Israel seem like a real person and not just a character.
Also strong is Colin Farrell as the head of the Big Business Law Firm that Roman ends up working for. Farrell has grown as an actor in my eyes - and his portrayal of George Pierce shows a another real person behind the suit and not just a 2 dimensional caricature. Also along for the ride is Carmen Ejogo in an underwritten part as a young idealistic lawyer - and potential love interest for Roman - who reminds Roman of his younger self.
But, despite these performances, the film falls flat because - besides Roman's crisis of conscience - nothing else really happens.
The blame for this has to lie at the hands of screenwriter and director Dan Gilroy (the wonderful, underrated - and underseen - NIGHTCRAWLER). He is fascinated by the intricacies of Roman's world but fails to flesh it out. It's almost as if he was so interested in creating the trees, he never created a forest interesting enough for these trees to live in - or for us to visit.
So come for Denzel, but be warned, if you stay there's not much else to stay for.
Letter Grade B- (because of Denzel's performance)
6 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Darren (1599 KP) rated 12 Angry Men (1957) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
Story: 12 Angry Men starts with our jury being taken to the jury room to make their verdict. Early conversations discuss the idea that the case being cut and dry, but when the first vote goes up only eleven men pick guilty while one man stands up and votes not guilty. He wants to discuss the case before making it quick decision on whether to send the accused the death row.
As the 12 men discuss the case the solo juror that stood up against the guilty verdict slowly starts to talk the rest of the jury into looking at the facts of the case and slowly starts to turn the jury.
12 Angry Men is one of the simplest stories you will ever see, it also takes a fresh turn on a trial film. On paper this could sound very boring, and it would be hard to talk anyone out of that, but once you watch this you will not be able t look away. When you look at what this film achieves you will bee impressed too a new level and even with this film being nearly 60 years old it hasn’t dated a single bit. (10/10)
Actor Review
Full Cast: 12 Angry Men only uses the 12 actors and I don’t think it would be fair to judge each individual performance because this could easily be the best ensemble cast of all time, each character has their different background and opinion on what is the outcome of the case. Every single cast member does a brilliant job showing just how intense being stuck on a jury can be.cast
Director Review: Sidney Lumet – Sidney gives us one of the greatest films ever put onto film, end of discussion. (10/10)
Crime: 12 Angry Men shows the 12 juror discussing a criminal case while making final verdict, this is a great insight into how they would have got to the final out come. (10/10)
Drama: 12 Angry Men gets top marks for this brilliant piece of work. (10/10)
Settings: 12 Angry Men uses just the jury room for the whole setting giving us an insight to just the conversation between the jurors. (10/10)
Suggestion: 12 Angry Men is a must watch for all the film fans out there I do still think casual film fans might find it not their cup of tea. (Watch)
Best Part: The performances are all brilliant.
Worst Part: No, isn’t one.
Believability: While I have been on a jury and understand how the discussion take place this cold very well be how intense it gets in there. (10/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: Nominated for 3 Oscars
Budget: $350,000
Runtime: 2 Hours 1 Minute
Tagline: They have twelve scraps of paper… Twelve chances to kill!
Overall: One of the greatest films you will ever see.
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/08/25/12-angry-men-1957/
As the 12 men discuss the case the solo juror that stood up against the guilty verdict slowly starts to talk the rest of the jury into looking at the facts of the case and slowly starts to turn the jury.
12 Angry Men is one of the simplest stories you will ever see, it also takes a fresh turn on a trial film. On paper this could sound very boring, and it would be hard to talk anyone out of that, but once you watch this you will not be able t look away. When you look at what this film achieves you will bee impressed too a new level and even with this film being nearly 60 years old it hasn’t dated a single bit. (10/10)
Actor Review
Full Cast: 12 Angry Men only uses the 12 actors and I don’t think it would be fair to judge each individual performance because this could easily be the best ensemble cast of all time, each character has their different background and opinion on what is the outcome of the case. Every single cast member does a brilliant job showing just how intense being stuck on a jury can be.cast
Director Review: Sidney Lumet – Sidney gives us one of the greatest films ever put onto film, end of discussion. (10/10)
Crime: 12 Angry Men shows the 12 juror discussing a criminal case while making final verdict, this is a great insight into how they would have got to the final out come. (10/10)
Drama: 12 Angry Men gets top marks for this brilliant piece of work. (10/10)
Settings: 12 Angry Men uses just the jury room for the whole setting giving us an insight to just the conversation between the jurors. (10/10)
Suggestion: 12 Angry Men is a must watch for all the film fans out there I do still think casual film fans might find it not their cup of tea. (Watch)
Best Part: The performances are all brilliant.
Worst Part: No, isn’t one.
Believability: While I have been on a jury and understand how the discussion take place this cold very well be how intense it gets in there. (10/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: Nominated for 3 Oscars
Budget: $350,000
Runtime: 2 Hours 1 Minute
Tagline: They have twelve scraps of paper… Twelve chances to kill!
Overall: One of the greatest films you will ever see.
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/08/25/12-angry-men-1957/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated State of Play (2009) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In the corridors of the nation’s capital, Washington D.C. alliances and wheeling and dealing are the name of the game. With billions if not trillions of dollars hinging on new laws and policy, corporations clearly have an interest in which way the political winds are leaning and how it will affect their all important bottom line.
In the political thriller “State of Play”, Director Kevin MacDonald has combined a stellar cast with a strong script from Tony Gilroy, Billy Ray, and Matthew Michael Carnahan to craft one of the best dramas since Gilroy’s “Michael Clayton”.
When the lead researcher of Congressman Stephen Collins (Ben Affleck), dies in an accident, it is a devastating blow to the young Congressman as he prepares for a series of hearings intended to cull the growth of a private security firm.
What is at first listed as an accident raises suspicion in veteran news reporter Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe), who has had a long friendship, with Collins. Despite tension in recent years, Collins turns to Cal when it is revealed that he had an affair with his researcher. As Cal looks into the story he is under pressure from his editor (Helen Mirren), to deliver a story to keep the papers new owners happy. If this was not bad enough, Cal is also dogged by an online reporter for the paper named Della (Rachael McAdams), who is looking to make a name for herself at the paper.
Cal soon learns that the assistant was killed in what was made to look like an accident, and that a shooting incident that occurred prior to the death may be related to the murder.
Cal teams up with Della and soon learns that some very big players may be involved and that they will stop at nothing to protect their secret.
In a race against time, Cal and Della must get to the bottom of the mystery and stay alive. Unsure who to trust and which way their leads will follow, Cal and Della look for the answers that unaware that the quest they have undertaken will affect the halls of power as well as the very nation itself.
“State of Play” is a very tight thriller that is filled with twists and turns. The characters are interesting and well developed and the performances are first rate. Crowe is powerful as the determined Cal and works well with Affleck and Adams. Robin Wright Penn and Helen Mirren also give very strong performances.
The story of the film seems ripped from the headlines and has an eerie sense of reality to it, and works much better than “The International” attempted to do with its conspiracy premise.
While I have avoided as many spoilers as I could, suffice it to say that the film does have a deep plot that twists and turns to a rewarding conclusion and will keep your attention. I would hope that the fine work in this film is not forgotten when the Oscars come up next.
In the political thriller “State of Play”, Director Kevin MacDonald has combined a stellar cast with a strong script from Tony Gilroy, Billy Ray, and Matthew Michael Carnahan to craft one of the best dramas since Gilroy’s “Michael Clayton”.
When the lead researcher of Congressman Stephen Collins (Ben Affleck), dies in an accident, it is a devastating blow to the young Congressman as he prepares for a series of hearings intended to cull the growth of a private security firm.
What is at first listed as an accident raises suspicion in veteran news reporter Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe), who has had a long friendship, with Collins. Despite tension in recent years, Collins turns to Cal when it is revealed that he had an affair with his researcher. As Cal looks into the story he is under pressure from his editor (Helen Mirren), to deliver a story to keep the papers new owners happy. If this was not bad enough, Cal is also dogged by an online reporter for the paper named Della (Rachael McAdams), who is looking to make a name for herself at the paper.
Cal soon learns that the assistant was killed in what was made to look like an accident, and that a shooting incident that occurred prior to the death may be related to the murder.
Cal teams up with Della and soon learns that some very big players may be involved and that they will stop at nothing to protect their secret.
In a race against time, Cal and Della must get to the bottom of the mystery and stay alive. Unsure who to trust and which way their leads will follow, Cal and Della look for the answers that unaware that the quest they have undertaken will affect the halls of power as well as the very nation itself.
“State of Play” is a very tight thriller that is filled with twists and turns. The characters are interesting and well developed and the performances are first rate. Crowe is powerful as the determined Cal and works well with Affleck and Adams. Robin Wright Penn and Helen Mirren also give very strong performances.
The story of the film seems ripped from the headlines and has an eerie sense of reality to it, and works much better than “The International” attempted to do with its conspiracy premise.
While I have avoided as many spoilers as I could, suffice it to say that the film does have a deep plot that twists and turns to a rewarding conclusion and will keep your attention. I would hope that the fine work in this film is not forgotten when the Oscars come up next.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Sound of Metal (2019) in Movies
Apr 13, 2021
Acting by Riz Ahmed, Paul Raci AND Olivia Cooke (2 more)
Wonderful story: show not tell!
Sound design is simply epic
When I was young, I remember being scared to death by an old black and white movie about a woman who went blind.... I remember she was travelling on a bus and the movie simulated the view through her eyes as her vision dimmed and then went black. (I've googled this without joy, so can't place the movie!) I found the concept of suddenly losing one of your key senses to be utterly terrifying. So, I was fully engaged with Ruben's issues in this movie.
I thought the movie was going to be downbeat and depressing. But, both with it's positive portrayal of the deaf community and with the extraordinary ending, I found it to be a wonderfully heart-warming tale.
Positives:
- There is just SOOO much depth to this story: a character torn from his familiar world and struggling to adapt to the changes. It's fundamentally a movie about acceptance of self. The last two minutes of the screen time are momentous: one of the best endings of a movie I can remember in recent memory. A truly religious experience.
- "Sound of Metal" won the BAFTA at the weekend for Sound, and deservedly so. It's another leading character in the film, with the editing deftly weaving between the soundscape that most of us live in and Ruben's perception. Apparently, the sound team used a hyper-sensitive microphone in Ahmed's mouth to pick up the inner noises of his body.
- Both Riz Ahmed and Paul Raci are nominated for Oscars. Simply stunning performances from both of them.
- Although not nominated, I'd lob Olivia Cooke's name into that frame too. It's almost IMPOSSIBLE to see the same actress who played "Pixie" in the body of Lou. It's a transformation akin to Charlize Theron's in "Monster". (In fact, it took me until the Paris scenes to actually recognize her!)
- Director Darius Marder - IN HIS DIRECTORIAL FEATURE DEBUT! - delivers a fabulous example of "show not tell". All of the detail is present in the film to tell the story if you look for it. You don't need dialogue to give Lou's backstory: just a casual shot of her lower arm is enough.
Negatives:
- It's a VERY minor quibble but, with a 2 hour running length, the Paris scenes dragged just a little for me. I might have chosen to do a few nips and tucks there in the 'party' scenes. But I wouldn't have wanted to lose much.
"Sound of Metal" has - I'm sure - a guaranteed slot in my Films of the Year list. Simply stunning and highly recommended, this is currently showing in the UK on Amazon Prime.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/13/sound-of-metal-dont-ignore-that-ear-bud-volume-warning-on-your-phone-kids/ )
I thought the movie was going to be downbeat and depressing. But, both with it's positive portrayal of the deaf community and with the extraordinary ending, I found it to be a wonderfully heart-warming tale.
Positives:
- There is just SOOO much depth to this story: a character torn from his familiar world and struggling to adapt to the changes. It's fundamentally a movie about acceptance of self. The last two minutes of the screen time are momentous: one of the best endings of a movie I can remember in recent memory. A truly religious experience.
- "Sound of Metal" won the BAFTA at the weekend for Sound, and deservedly so. It's another leading character in the film, with the editing deftly weaving between the soundscape that most of us live in and Ruben's perception. Apparently, the sound team used a hyper-sensitive microphone in Ahmed's mouth to pick up the inner noises of his body.
- Both Riz Ahmed and Paul Raci are nominated for Oscars. Simply stunning performances from both of them.
- Although not nominated, I'd lob Olivia Cooke's name into that frame too. It's almost IMPOSSIBLE to see the same actress who played "Pixie" in the body of Lou. It's a transformation akin to Charlize Theron's in "Monster". (In fact, it took me until the Paris scenes to actually recognize her!)
- Director Darius Marder - IN HIS DIRECTORIAL FEATURE DEBUT! - delivers a fabulous example of "show not tell". All of the detail is present in the film to tell the story if you look for it. You don't need dialogue to give Lou's backstory: just a casual shot of her lower arm is enough.
Negatives:
- It's a VERY minor quibble but, with a 2 hour running length, the Paris scenes dragged just a little for me. I might have chosen to do a few nips and tucks there in the 'party' scenes. But I wouldn't have wanted to lose much.
"Sound of Metal" has - I'm sure - a guaranteed slot in my Films of the Year list. Simply stunning and highly recommended, this is currently showing in the UK on Amazon Prime.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/13/sound-of-metal-dont-ignore-that-ear-bud-volume-warning-on-your-phone-kids/ )
