Search
Search results
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
Drunk Johnny Part 4
This one is good, just not as good as the trilogy, it does return Jack Sparrow and his adventures to get more drunk, im kidding. But actually its true. So is Will Turner in it, nope, is Elizabeth Swan in it, nope, is Davy Jones in it, nope. So who's in this Barbossa of course he is. I like Barbossa he's a good anti-hero. So who's the villian this time, Blackbread played by the excellent Ian McShane, so how is he in this film, well he's good. Just I miss Bill Nighy as Davy Jones he was excellent in the role and as the charcter he had a arc that was in two films. Blackbread is okay as a villian just not the same.
The Plot: The checkered past of Capt. Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) catches up to him when he encounters Angelica (Penélope Cruz), a beautiful pirate that Jack once loved then left. Angelica forces him to accompany her to the Queen Anne's Revenge, the ship of the notorious Blackbeard (Ian McShane). Accompanied by a zombie crew, the trio sets sail to find the legendary Fountain of Youth. However, Jack's rival, Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush), also seeks the fountain, as does a ship from Spain.
Ahh so this time its Jack Sparrow's adventure to the fountian of youth. A plus is that Keith Richards is back playing Jack Sparrow's father, wait did we need that? Probley not, but we got it anyways.
So you watch this film, yes if you like the other ones, you'll like this one. Just dont watch the 5th one.
The Plot: The checkered past of Capt. Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) catches up to him when he encounters Angelica (Penélope Cruz), a beautiful pirate that Jack once loved then left. Angelica forces him to accompany her to the Queen Anne's Revenge, the ship of the notorious Blackbeard (Ian McShane). Accompanied by a zombie crew, the trio sets sail to find the legendary Fountain of Youth. However, Jack's rival, Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush), also seeks the fountain, as does a ship from Spain.
Ahh so this time its Jack Sparrow's adventure to the fountian of youth. A plus is that Keith Richards is back playing Jack Sparrow's father, wait did we need that? Probley not, but we got it anyways.
So you watch this film, yes if you like the other ones, you'll like this one. Just dont watch the 5th one.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Everybody Knows (Todos Lo Saben) (2018) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
I can guarantee that Everybody Knows was woefully under scheduled in cinemas across the country. I luckily got to see this while I was travelling for work, there's the occasional handy perk!
A certain amount of people find foreign language films a little daunting (I may have said this when I watched the Kobiety Mafii series, if I did, apologies). Everybody Knows certainly has its issues, mainly there are a lot of characters and when you couple this with the subtitles you miss a certain amount of introductions because they're so quick.
Initially the film doesn't really flow well and I was concerned that this might be consistent through the rest, however once we get into it thankfully that changes.
Spanish farmland always seems to offer the opportunity for fantastic scenic shots and they definitely took advantage of this in the early sequences. The drone shots at the wedding were particularly stunning to see from that vantage point.
Laura is an interesting character, she's got complicated relationships all over the place, her husband, Paco and then tensions rise within the family as we progress. Penélope Cruz is incredible in this role, she adapts to every situation as it arises and brings Laura to life with an emotional performance throughout. There's a stark change in her from before to after the wedding, everything adapts to support this, acting, wardrobe, make-up. In a movie full of good things this is probably the best.
Paco, played by Javier Bardem, is a great match for Laura. He's strong, loyal and he has a very clear sense of right and wrong. The connection between the two characters is incredible, which I'm sure is due in part to the fact that they're married in real life. Paco's journey is fraught, there's confusion and frustration through a lot of it. I can' say I was overly happy with how his story ended, but then I guess not everything ends the way you want it to.
I liked the idea behind the main story, it wasn't over complicated which allowed us to connect with the characters more. I was surprised when I came out that the film had been quite so long, at no point did it feel its length, it was incredibly well paced.
Suspicions were formed fairly early on (by me) about the twist. The film presents you with a few options, I'm glad that I didn't guess correctly.
Collectively this film is wonderful, Cruz had me crying like a baby, there were surprising moments of suspense and it had a laid back Spanish attitude to it, nothing was rushed but it still manages to keep you jogging along at a quick pace.
Apart from that initial issue with the flow there is little to quibble about. It's a very enjoyable (I'm not sure that enjoyable is the right word) film. I'm not sure that I could watch it again and get the same fire out of it that I did the first time now that I know what happens.
What you should do
You should absolutely try this one, good story and good acting come together for a tear-filled journey. Cruz will make you feel so many things.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A vineyard, summer sun, wine made by my own fair hands... *sigh*
A certain amount of people find foreign language films a little daunting (I may have said this when I watched the Kobiety Mafii series, if I did, apologies). Everybody Knows certainly has its issues, mainly there are a lot of characters and when you couple this with the subtitles you miss a certain amount of introductions because they're so quick.
Initially the film doesn't really flow well and I was concerned that this might be consistent through the rest, however once we get into it thankfully that changes.
Spanish farmland always seems to offer the opportunity for fantastic scenic shots and they definitely took advantage of this in the early sequences. The drone shots at the wedding were particularly stunning to see from that vantage point.
Laura is an interesting character, she's got complicated relationships all over the place, her husband, Paco and then tensions rise within the family as we progress. Penélope Cruz is incredible in this role, she adapts to every situation as it arises and brings Laura to life with an emotional performance throughout. There's a stark change in her from before to after the wedding, everything adapts to support this, acting, wardrobe, make-up. In a movie full of good things this is probably the best.
Paco, played by Javier Bardem, is a great match for Laura. He's strong, loyal and he has a very clear sense of right and wrong. The connection between the two characters is incredible, which I'm sure is due in part to the fact that they're married in real life. Paco's journey is fraught, there's confusion and frustration through a lot of it. I can' say I was overly happy with how his story ended, but then I guess not everything ends the way you want it to.
I liked the idea behind the main story, it wasn't over complicated which allowed us to connect with the characters more. I was surprised when I came out that the film had been quite so long, at no point did it feel its length, it was incredibly well paced.
Suspicions were formed fairly early on (by me) about the twist. The film presents you with a few options, I'm glad that I didn't guess correctly.
Collectively this film is wonderful, Cruz had me crying like a baby, there were surprising moments of suspense and it had a laid back Spanish attitude to it, nothing was rushed but it still manages to keep you jogging along at a quick pace.
Apart from that initial issue with the flow there is little to quibble about. It's a very enjoyable (I'm not sure that enjoyable is the right word) film. I'm not sure that I could watch it again and get the same fire out of it that I did the first time now that I know what happens.
What you should do
You should absolutely try this one, good story and good acting come together for a tear-filled journey. Cruz will make you feel so many things.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A vineyard, summer sun, wine made by my own fair hands... *sigh*
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011) in Movies
Feb 25, 2019
Return to form
Based, believe it or not, loosely, on the Tim Powers novel, On Stranger Tides, Pirates 4 seemed about as appealing as hole in the head after the diabolical sequels to the excellent first outing. Then it was to be in 3D, scrap several key characters and shed the direction of Gore Verbinski, in favour of Chicago's, Rob Marshall. A recipe for disaster? It seemed that way.
Though saying that, Gore had certainly sealed his fate with me, turning what was a well conceived, action adventure romp with some very memorable characters into an unnecessary epic saga which seriously missed the point and derailed itself. One dubious decision taken in the production of Dead Man's Chest, was to keep Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightly's characters, let alone giving them so much prominence.
Knightly was fine, for the first film,. in fact, she was spot on, but she couldn't carry the role any further and began to look ridiculous as the series progressed. This should have been the adventures of Jack Sparrow, so excellently portrayed by Johnny Depp, and Geoffrey Rush's, Barbossa was the perfect pirate. So I was more than pleased to see the continuing adventures of these two characters, with Depp, returning to form after I felt that he had lost it in the sequels.
Penélope Cruz was another pleasant surprise, as never being a fan of her's, I was dubious but this was casting done properly. She was more than convincing as a pirate and put Knightly's efforts to shame. But what of Ian McShane's Blackbeard? Well, another great showing from him, but the inexplicable magic displayed as he waves in his 3D sword around and points it at the camera to remind us that 3D is here, not so much.
But the 3D was pretty naff. You could watch most of the film without the glasses, with the effect being limited to several sequences. It looked good, it was inoffensive and unobtrusive but what was the point again? I don't think that this film will do 3D any real harm but that's because nobody really noticed it in the first place.
The sense of adventure from the The Curse Of The Black Pearl was evident here and long over due. I find it puzzling as to why so many reviews have been so harsh, branding it boring, overly complicated and not pulled together properly, but I would disagree. Granted, it is a bit scrappy, it's not going to be used as case study in tight scripting, or deep character development and it is somewhat derivative, but it was fun, flashy and flamboyant.
Isn't this what these films are all about? Depp created a classic character with Sparrow back in 2003, and tough I felt that he was a one trick pony, Sparrow that is, not Depp, this was a partial return to form, under new direction from Marshall. But I am left feeling that no matter how much I enjoyed this for what it was, the first Pirates Of The Caribbean was a film which successfully transferred a theme park ride into a career defining blockbuster, but I feel that it should have remained one film, a single triumph and not a franchise that has been saved in my eyes, by the fourth installment.
Though saying that, Gore had certainly sealed his fate with me, turning what was a well conceived, action adventure romp with some very memorable characters into an unnecessary epic saga which seriously missed the point and derailed itself. One dubious decision taken in the production of Dead Man's Chest, was to keep Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightly's characters, let alone giving them so much prominence.
Knightly was fine, for the first film,. in fact, she was spot on, but she couldn't carry the role any further and began to look ridiculous as the series progressed. This should have been the adventures of Jack Sparrow, so excellently portrayed by Johnny Depp, and Geoffrey Rush's, Barbossa was the perfect pirate. So I was more than pleased to see the continuing adventures of these two characters, with Depp, returning to form after I felt that he had lost it in the sequels.
Penélope Cruz was another pleasant surprise, as never being a fan of her's, I was dubious but this was casting done properly. She was more than convincing as a pirate and put Knightly's efforts to shame. But what of Ian McShane's Blackbeard? Well, another great showing from him, but the inexplicable magic displayed as he waves in his 3D sword around and points it at the camera to remind us that 3D is here, not so much.
But the 3D was pretty naff. You could watch most of the film without the glasses, with the effect being limited to several sequences. It looked good, it was inoffensive and unobtrusive but what was the point again? I don't think that this film will do 3D any real harm but that's because nobody really noticed it in the first place.
The sense of adventure from the The Curse Of The Black Pearl was evident here and long over due. I find it puzzling as to why so many reviews have been so harsh, branding it boring, overly complicated and not pulled together properly, but I would disagree. Granted, it is a bit scrappy, it's not going to be used as case study in tight scripting, or deep character development and it is somewhat derivative, but it was fun, flashy and flamboyant.
Isn't this what these films are all about? Depp created a classic character with Sparrow back in 2003, and tough I felt that he was a one trick pony, Sparrow that is, not Depp, this was a partial return to form, under new direction from Marshall. But I am left feeling that no matter how much I enjoyed this for what it was, the first Pirates Of The Caribbean was a film which successfully transferred a theme park ride into a career defining blockbuster, but I feel that it should have remained one film, a single triumph and not a franchise that has been saved in my eyes, by the fourth installment.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
You’ll never guess who dunnit…
There’s a big problem with Kenneth Branagh’s 2017 filming of the Hercule Poirot-based murder mystery…. and that’s the 1974 Sidney Lumet classic featuring Albert Finney in the starring role. For that film was so memorable – at least, the “who” of the “whodunnit” (no spoilers here) was so memorable – that any remake is likely to be tarnished by that knowledge. If you go into this film blissfully unaware of the plot, you are a lucky man/woman. For this is a classic Agatha Christie yarn.
The irascible, borderline OCD, but undeniably great Belgian detective, Poirot, is dragged around the world by grateful police forces to help solve unsolvable crimes. After solving a case in Jerusalem, Poirot is called back to the UK with his mode of transport being the famous Orient Express. Trapped in the mountains by an avalanche, a murder is committed and with multiple suspects and a plethora of clues it is up to Poirot to solve the case.
Branagh enjoys himself enormously as Poirot, sporting the most distractingly magnificent facial hair since Daniel Day-Lewis in “The Gangs of New York”. The moustache must have had its own trailer and make-up team!
Above all, the film is glorious to look at, featuring a rich and exotic colour palette that is reminiscent of the early colour films of the 40’s. Cinematography was by Haris Zambarloukos (“Mamma Mia” and who also collaborated with Branagh on “Thor) with lots of innovative “ceiling down” shots and artful point-of-view takes that might be annoying to some but which I consider as deserving of Oscar/BAFTA nominations.
The pictures are accompanied by a lush score by Patrick Doyle (who also scored Branagh’s “Thor”). Hats off also to the special effects crew, who made the alpine bridge scenes look decidedly more alpine than where they were actually filmed (on a specially made bridge in the Surrey Hills!).
All these technical elements combine to make the film’s early stages look and feel truly epic.
And the cast… what a cast! Dame Judi Dench (“Victoria and Abdul“); Olivia Coleman (“The Lobster“); Johnny Depp (“Black Mass“); Daisy Ridley (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“); Penélope Cruz (“Zoolander 2“); Josh Gad (Olaf!); Derek Jacobi (“I, Claudius”); Willem Dafoe (“The Great Wall“) and Michelle Pfeiffer (“mother!“). A real case again of an “oh, it’s you” film again at the cinema – when’s the last time we saw that?
It’s also great to see young Lucy Boynton, so magnificent in last year’s excellent “Sing Street“, getting an A-list role as the twitchy and disturbed countess.
With all these ingredients in the pot, it should be great, right? Unfortunately, in my view, no, not quite. The film’s opening momentum is really not maintained by the screenplay by Michael Green (“Blade Runner 2049“; “Logan“). At heart, it’s a fairly static and “stagey” piece at best, set as it is on the rather claustrophobic train (just three carriages… on the Orient Express… really?). But the tale is made even more static by the train’s derailment in the snow. Branagh and Green try to sex up the action where they can, but there are lengthy passages of fairly repetitive dialogue. One encounter in particular between Branagh and Depp seems to last interminably: you wonder if the problem was that the director wasn’t always looking on to yell “Cut”!
All this leads to the “revelation” of the murderer as being a bit of an anticlimactic “thank heavens for that” rather than the gasping denouement it should have been. (Perhaps this would be different if you didn’t know the twist).
However, these reservations aside, it’s an enjoyable night out at the flicks, although a bit of a disappointment from the level of expectation I had for it. I can’t be too grumpy about it, given it’s a return to good old-fashioned yarn-spinning at the cinema, with great visuals and an epic cast. And that has to be good news.
For sure, Branagh does make for an amusing and engaging Poirot, even if his dialogue did need some ‘tuning in’ to. There was a suggestion at the end of the film that we might be seeing his return in “Death on the Nile” – the most lush and decorous of Peter Ustinov’s outings – which I would certainly welcome. He will have to find another 10 A-list stars though to decorate the boat, which will be a challenge for casting!
The irascible, borderline OCD, but undeniably great Belgian detective, Poirot, is dragged around the world by grateful police forces to help solve unsolvable crimes. After solving a case in Jerusalem, Poirot is called back to the UK with his mode of transport being the famous Orient Express. Trapped in the mountains by an avalanche, a murder is committed and with multiple suspects and a plethora of clues it is up to Poirot to solve the case.
Branagh enjoys himself enormously as Poirot, sporting the most distractingly magnificent facial hair since Daniel Day-Lewis in “The Gangs of New York”. The moustache must have had its own trailer and make-up team!
Above all, the film is glorious to look at, featuring a rich and exotic colour palette that is reminiscent of the early colour films of the 40’s. Cinematography was by Haris Zambarloukos (“Mamma Mia” and who also collaborated with Branagh on “Thor) with lots of innovative “ceiling down” shots and artful point-of-view takes that might be annoying to some but which I consider as deserving of Oscar/BAFTA nominations.
The pictures are accompanied by a lush score by Patrick Doyle (who also scored Branagh’s “Thor”). Hats off also to the special effects crew, who made the alpine bridge scenes look decidedly more alpine than where they were actually filmed (on a specially made bridge in the Surrey Hills!).
All these technical elements combine to make the film’s early stages look and feel truly epic.
And the cast… what a cast! Dame Judi Dench (“Victoria and Abdul“); Olivia Coleman (“The Lobster“); Johnny Depp (“Black Mass“); Daisy Ridley (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“); Penélope Cruz (“Zoolander 2“); Josh Gad (Olaf!); Derek Jacobi (“I, Claudius”); Willem Dafoe (“The Great Wall“) and Michelle Pfeiffer (“mother!“). A real case again of an “oh, it’s you” film again at the cinema – when’s the last time we saw that?
It’s also great to see young Lucy Boynton, so magnificent in last year’s excellent “Sing Street“, getting an A-list role as the twitchy and disturbed countess.
With all these ingredients in the pot, it should be great, right? Unfortunately, in my view, no, not quite. The film’s opening momentum is really not maintained by the screenplay by Michael Green (“Blade Runner 2049“; “Logan“). At heart, it’s a fairly static and “stagey” piece at best, set as it is on the rather claustrophobic train (just three carriages… on the Orient Express… really?). But the tale is made even more static by the train’s derailment in the snow. Branagh and Green try to sex up the action where they can, but there are lengthy passages of fairly repetitive dialogue. One encounter in particular between Branagh and Depp seems to last interminably: you wonder if the problem was that the director wasn’t always looking on to yell “Cut”!
All this leads to the “revelation” of the murderer as being a bit of an anticlimactic “thank heavens for that” rather than the gasping denouement it should have been. (Perhaps this would be different if you didn’t know the twist).
However, these reservations aside, it’s an enjoyable night out at the flicks, although a bit of a disappointment from the level of expectation I had for it. I can’t be too grumpy about it, given it’s a return to good old-fashioned yarn-spinning at the cinema, with great visuals and an epic cast. And that has to be good news.
For sure, Branagh does make for an amusing and engaging Poirot, even if his dialogue did need some ‘tuning in’ to. There was a suggestion at the end of the film that we might be seeing his return in “Death on the Nile” – the most lush and decorous of Peter Ustinov’s outings – which I would certainly welcome. He will have to find another 10 A-list stars though to decorate the boat, which will be a challenge for casting!