Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated Night Crossing (1982) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Story: Night Crossing starts as we go to East Germany in 1979, The Strelzyk family, Peter (Hurt), Doris (Alexander), Frank (D.McKeon) and Fitscher (K.McKeon) who are getting tired of not being able to go to the west side of Germany, one they see as fairer. The friendship between this family and the Wetzel’s Gunter (Bridges) and Petra (O’Connor) keeps them strong, while they see the friends trying to escape getting killed.
When Peter comes up with up the idea to build a balloon with Gunter to escape, it will mean working in secret because getting caught will only see him killed. When Gunter leaves for family reasons, Peter must keep the idea within the family for the hope for their future.
Characters – Peter is a father that has been living with his family in Eastern Germany, he is getting tired of the lack of change or unity with the Western side and decides he wants to risk his family’s life to escape, he plans to build a balloon which would fly over the borders in place. Doris is the wife of Peter, she is reluctant to help at first, but soon sees this being the only option. Gunter is the friend that wants to help build the balloon, only for his wife to push him into staying behind because of the young age of their children. Petra is Gunter’s wife that doesn’t want to risk their infant children with an escape plan so dangerous.
Performances – John Hurt in the leading role is the strongest member of the cast, he shows that even a common man can have the hope required for his character. Jane Alexander and Glynnis O’Connor are both fitting the wife type of role which doesn’t get much else to do. Beau Bridges completes the cast with a performance that shows just how young men would have been affected in this world.
Story – The story follows two families that work together to find a way to escape East Germany and get into West Germany in the late 70s, they must risk everything for this, which is failing would see them face certain death. this is a story of inspiration that showed us just how much people were willing to risk escaping a land they couldn’t live their natural life without being dictated too, it shows the patience to make it happen and how family can inspire you to risk everything.
Family/History – This might be classed as a family film that is because of the families involved in trying to make this high risk situation happen, the history of their escape is one that could inspire many who were trapped in the land.
Settings – The film is set in the harsh living conditions the families would have been living in and how secretive their plan would have been to make happen.
Scene of the Movie – Are we in the West?
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It could have been a lot darker.
Final Thoughts – This is an inspiration story of two family’s determination to make it out of a life which didn’t offer them a true future.
Overall: True story that shows bravery and inspiration.
When Peter comes up with up the idea to build a balloon with Gunter to escape, it will mean working in secret because getting caught will only see him killed. When Gunter leaves for family reasons, Peter must keep the idea within the family for the hope for their future.
Characters – Peter is a father that has been living with his family in Eastern Germany, he is getting tired of the lack of change or unity with the Western side and decides he wants to risk his family’s life to escape, he plans to build a balloon which would fly over the borders in place. Doris is the wife of Peter, she is reluctant to help at first, but soon sees this being the only option. Gunter is the friend that wants to help build the balloon, only for his wife to push him into staying behind because of the young age of their children. Petra is Gunter’s wife that doesn’t want to risk their infant children with an escape plan so dangerous.
Performances – John Hurt in the leading role is the strongest member of the cast, he shows that even a common man can have the hope required for his character. Jane Alexander and Glynnis O’Connor are both fitting the wife type of role which doesn’t get much else to do. Beau Bridges completes the cast with a performance that shows just how young men would have been affected in this world.
Story – The story follows two families that work together to find a way to escape East Germany and get into West Germany in the late 70s, they must risk everything for this, which is failing would see them face certain death. this is a story of inspiration that showed us just how much people were willing to risk escaping a land they couldn’t live their natural life without being dictated too, it shows the patience to make it happen and how family can inspire you to risk everything.
Family/History – This might be classed as a family film that is because of the families involved in trying to make this high risk situation happen, the history of their escape is one that could inspire many who were trapped in the land.
Settings – The film is set in the harsh living conditions the families would have been living in and how secretive their plan would have been to make happen.
Scene of the Movie – Are we in the West?
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It could have been a lot darker.
Final Thoughts – This is an inspiration story of two family’s determination to make it out of a life which didn’t offer them a true future.
Overall: True story that shows bravery and inspiration.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated Dares, Lies & Gemini's in Books
Jun 1, 2018
This book was incredible
Tristana and Peter live as roommates in a boarding house in Virginia. When they first meet, there is an instant connection between the two. Tristana, though, is too involved in her work and Peter is still working out issues of his own after the death of his brother.
Seraphina is a club girl who likes going out and finding the bad boys. Men that are willing to cheat to have a piece of her. Nathan stand on the sideline and watches her, trying to figure out why she is doing this to herself. But he is always there to step in in case there is a problem.
Will these couples ever get their lives together in order to be much happier as partners instead of singles? Will Tristana be able to break out of her shell around Peter? Will Nathan ever reveal himself to Seraphina and tell her his true feelings?
Thank you to Kat Alexander for the opportunity to read and review this book. She is now on my list of authors whose books I'm going to get without reading the description.
I was hooked on this story from the start. The characters are intriguing and I could totally identify with Seraphina. I was very anxious to find out what was going to happen with these characters. Then about half way through the book BOOM!!! The atomic bomb was dropped on the whole story. Usually when reading book, you know a twist is going to come or you can guess what is going to happen next. I didn't see this coming at all!! From that point on, nothing in life mattered except finding out what was going to happen next.
I can't say much more without giving away spoilers, but if you like a romantic novel with a huge twist, pick up this book today.
Seraphina is a club girl who likes going out and finding the bad boys. Men that are willing to cheat to have a piece of her. Nathan stand on the sideline and watches her, trying to figure out why she is doing this to herself. But he is always there to step in in case there is a problem.
Will these couples ever get their lives together in order to be much happier as partners instead of singles? Will Tristana be able to break out of her shell around Peter? Will Nathan ever reveal himself to Seraphina and tell her his true feelings?
Thank you to Kat Alexander for the opportunity to read and review this book. She is now on my list of authors whose books I'm going to get without reading the description.
I was hooked on this story from the start. The characters are intriguing and I could totally identify with Seraphina. I was very anxious to find out what was going to happen with these characters. Then about half way through the book BOOM!!! The atomic bomb was dropped on the whole story. Usually when reading book, you know a twist is going to come or you can guess what is going to happen next. I didn't see this coming at all!! From that point on, nothing in life mattered except finding out what was going to happen next.
I can't say much more without giving away spoilers, but if you like a romantic novel with a huge twist, pick up this book today.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Horror Express (1972) in Movies
Nov 23, 2020
Christopher Lee (1 more)
Peter Cushing
The Terror Express
Horror Express- is a great movie. The horror, the terror, the gory, the acting, all great.
The plot: Alexander Saxton (Christopher Lee), a brilliant British anthropologist researching in the Russian Far East, boards the Trans-Siberian Express with his latest discovery, a frozen specimen he hopes to prove is the missing link. But en route to Europe, passengers begin to turn up dead, and terror engulfs the train as Saxton and his partner, Dr. Wells (Peter Cushing), struggle to contain a mysterious -- and increasingly murderous -- force with the power to control minds.
According to Martin, the film was made because a producer obtained a train set from Nicholas and Alexandra (1971). "He came up with the idea of writing a script just so he would be able to use this prop," said Martin. "Now at that time, Phil was in the habit of buying up loads of short stories to adapt into screenplays, and the story for Horror Express was originally based on a tale written by a little-known American scriptwriter and playwright."
Securing Lee and Cushing was a coup for Gordon, since it lent an atmosphere reminiscent of Hammer Films, many of which starred both of the actors. When Cushing arrived in Madrid to begin work on the picture, however, he was still distraught over the recent death of his wife, and announced to Gordon that he could not do the film. With Gordon desperate over the idea of losing one of his important stars, Lee stepped in and put Cushing at ease simply by talking to his old friend about some of their previous work together. Cushing changed his mind and stayed on.
Its a great movie.
The plot: Alexander Saxton (Christopher Lee), a brilliant British anthropologist researching in the Russian Far East, boards the Trans-Siberian Express with his latest discovery, a frozen specimen he hopes to prove is the missing link. But en route to Europe, passengers begin to turn up dead, and terror engulfs the train as Saxton and his partner, Dr. Wells (Peter Cushing), struggle to contain a mysterious -- and increasingly murderous -- force with the power to control minds.
According to Martin, the film was made because a producer obtained a train set from Nicholas and Alexandra (1971). "He came up with the idea of writing a script just so he would be able to use this prop," said Martin. "Now at that time, Phil was in the habit of buying up loads of short stories to adapt into screenplays, and the story for Horror Express was originally based on a tale written by a little-known American scriptwriter and playwright."
Securing Lee and Cushing was a coup for Gordon, since it lent an atmosphere reminiscent of Hammer Films, many of which starred both of the actors. When Cushing arrived in Madrid to begin work on the picture, however, he was still distraught over the recent death of his wife, and announced to Gordon that he could not do the film. With Gordon desperate over the idea of losing one of his important stars, Lee stepped in and put Cushing at ease simply by talking to his old friend about some of their previous work together. Cushing changed his mind and stayed on.
Its a great movie.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Legend of Tarzan (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
CPR Needed
As tends to be the case with Hollywood, studios pay very close attention to their rivals release schedules, eyeing up potential competition to pit their films against, maxing box-office returns in the process.
And when Disney announced they were rebooting The Jungle Book in March this year, Warner Bros quickly responded with another jungle-themed film; The Legend of Tarzan. But does this interpretation on the classic character swing or fall?
It’s been nearly a decade since Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgård), aka John Clayton III, left Africa to live in Victorian England with his wife Jane (Margot Robbie). Danger lurks on the horizon as Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz), a treacherous envoy for King Leopold, devises a scheme that lures the couple and friend George Williams (Samuel L Jackson) to the Congo. Rom plans to capture Tarzan and deliver him to an old enemy in exchange for diamonds. When Jane becomes a pawn in his devious plot, Tarzan must return to the jungle to save the woman he loves.
Directed by David Yates (Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows), Legend of Tarzan features committed performances from its lead cast, immersive scenery and impressive special effects, but all of the glitz can’t save a film that plods along at a dreadful pace. Not since Peter Jackson’s King Kong has there been a movie that wastes so much of its opening act.
Alexander Skarsgård is likeable and commanding as the titular character, but lacks enough acting prowess to tackle the deeper, more emotional side that writers Adam Cozad and Craig Brewer have brought to the table here. Therefore, the scenes featuring a solo Tarzan suffer somewhat and Samuel L Jackson feels wasted in a poorly written and half-hearted role.
It is in Margot Robbie and Christoph Waltz that we find the film’s saving graces. Their characters leap off the screen with Waltz in particular being a highlight throughout. It’s unfortunate that one of our greatest living actors is lambasted with poor dialogue however, though the script just about keeps him afloat.
David Yates brings a similar filming style here to that of his foray into Harry Potter. The action is confidently filmed, but he avoids the use of shaky-cam that many directors seem to find appealing nowadays. The CGI is on the whole very good, especially in the finale which is breath-taking to watch.
It’s just a shame the rest of the film is such a drag. The first hour is incredibly poorly paced with very brief, albeit well-filmed, action sequences not doing enough to brighten Legend of Tarzan up. Elsewhere, the use of flashbacks is at first a decent way of giving the audience some exposition, but after the tenth one, they’re a nuisance.
Overall, The Legend of Tarzan does a lot more with its iconic character than other films have done, but that doesn’t excuse its poor pacing. Thankfully, the exciting finale lifts the final act above the standard of the first hour, and commanding performances from all the cast sustain interest just about enough to see it through to the end.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/07/07/cpr-needed-the-legend-of-tarzan-review/
And when Disney announced they were rebooting The Jungle Book in March this year, Warner Bros quickly responded with another jungle-themed film; The Legend of Tarzan. But does this interpretation on the classic character swing or fall?
It’s been nearly a decade since Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgård), aka John Clayton III, left Africa to live in Victorian England with his wife Jane (Margot Robbie). Danger lurks on the horizon as Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz), a treacherous envoy for King Leopold, devises a scheme that lures the couple and friend George Williams (Samuel L Jackson) to the Congo. Rom plans to capture Tarzan and deliver him to an old enemy in exchange for diamonds. When Jane becomes a pawn in his devious plot, Tarzan must return to the jungle to save the woman he loves.
Directed by David Yates (Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows), Legend of Tarzan features committed performances from its lead cast, immersive scenery and impressive special effects, but all of the glitz can’t save a film that plods along at a dreadful pace. Not since Peter Jackson’s King Kong has there been a movie that wastes so much of its opening act.
Alexander Skarsgård is likeable and commanding as the titular character, but lacks enough acting prowess to tackle the deeper, more emotional side that writers Adam Cozad and Craig Brewer have brought to the table here. Therefore, the scenes featuring a solo Tarzan suffer somewhat and Samuel L Jackson feels wasted in a poorly written and half-hearted role.
It is in Margot Robbie and Christoph Waltz that we find the film’s saving graces. Their characters leap off the screen with Waltz in particular being a highlight throughout. It’s unfortunate that one of our greatest living actors is lambasted with poor dialogue however, though the script just about keeps him afloat.
David Yates brings a similar filming style here to that of his foray into Harry Potter. The action is confidently filmed, but he avoids the use of shaky-cam that many directors seem to find appealing nowadays. The CGI is on the whole very good, especially in the finale which is breath-taking to watch.
It’s just a shame the rest of the film is such a drag. The first hour is incredibly poorly paced with very brief, albeit well-filmed, action sequences not doing enough to brighten Legend of Tarzan up. Elsewhere, the use of flashbacks is at first a decent way of giving the audience some exposition, but after the tenth one, they’re a nuisance.
Overall, The Legend of Tarzan does a lot more with its iconic character than other films have done, but that doesn’t excuse its poor pacing. Thankfully, the exciting finale lifts the final act above the standard of the first hour, and commanding performances from all the cast sustain interest just about enough to see it through to the end.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/07/07/cpr-needed-the-legend-of-tarzan-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Last Stand (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
It’s 2013 and Arnold Schwarzenegger is back in his first leading role in 10 years in
“The Last Stand”
Directed by legendary South Korean director Kim Ji-w oon, The Last Stand stars
Schwarzenegger as Ray Owens, a former LAPD narcotics officer who has left the
violence and bloodshed of the big city to become the sheriff of a sleepy border town
in Arizona called Sommerton Junction where the biggest crime is the town’s mayor
parking in the firezone on main street.
Meanwhile in Las Vegas, Gabriel Cortez, the most vicious and ruthless drug lord
since Pablo Escobar, stages a spectacular escape from FBI custody and takes off
in a stolen/modified Chevrolet Corvette C6ZR1.
With a FBI agent held hostage and a group of mercenaries, Cortez races towards
the Mexican border at over 200 mph and Sommerton Junction. Counted out by the FBI
and the military as just another ‘small town sheriff’ with a group of inexperienced
deputies, Sherriff Owens reluctantly accepts the truth that the only thing standing
between Cortez and his escape and the safety of the people of Sommerton Junction is
Ray.
Co-starring Forrest Whitaker, Johnny Knoxville, Jaimie Alexander, Luis Guzman,
Peter Stormare, and Genesis Rodriguez, “The Last Stand” is a great action film
with an ensemble cast that follows the formula of the ‘action film’ but follows it
well. A basic/solid plot with plenty of spectacular stunts and explosions. After the
first 5 minutes, you don’t have a chance to leave the theater. The story unfolds
quickly, and you really don’t have the chance to look away. With plenty of comic
relief (most of it courtesy of Johnny Knoxville and Luis Guzman) and no romantic
scenes (except for one or two couples lip locking) I though the movie was a great
film. After 10 years, it was honestly a relief to see Schwarzenegger back in movies
as the lead and as part of an ensemble cast.
If there is one thing you can count on,
it is because Arnold always delivers when it comes to action movies no matter the scale,
and after so much time in politics it doesn’t look like he’s skipped a beat
and it’s a great escape from the winter chaos outside.
Welcome back Mr. Schwarzenegger!
“The Last Stand”
Directed by legendary South Korean director Kim Ji-w oon, The Last Stand stars
Schwarzenegger as Ray Owens, a former LAPD narcotics officer who has left the
violence and bloodshed of the big city to become the sheriff of a sleepy border town
in Arizona called Sommerton Junction where the biggest crime is the town’s mayor
parking in the firezone on main street.
Meanwhile in Las Vegas, Gabriel Cortez, the most vicious and ruthless drug lord
since Pablo Escobar, stages a spectacular escape from FBI custody and takes off
in a stolen/modified Chevrolet Corvette C6ZR1.
With a FBI agent held hostage and a group of mercenaries, Cortez races towards
the Mexican border at over 200 mph and Sommerton Junction. Counted out by the FBI
and the military as just another ‘small town sheriff’ with a group of inexperienced
deputies, Sherriff Owens reluctantly accepts the truth that the only thing standing
between Cortez and his escape and the safety of the people of Sommerton Junction is
Ray.
Co-starring Forrest Whitaker, Johnny Knoxville, Jaimie Alexander, Luis Guzman,
Peter Stormare, and Genesis Rodriguez, “The Last Stand” is a great action film
with an ensemble cast that follows the formula of the ‘action film’ but follows it
well. A basic/solid plot with plenty of spectacular stunts and explosions. After the
first 5 minutes, you don’t have a chance to leave the theater. The story unfolds
quickly, and you really don’t have the chance to look away. With plenty of comic
relief (most of it courtesy of Johnny Knoxville and Luis Guzman) and no romantic
scenes (except for one or two couples lip locking) I though the movie was a great
film. After 10 years, it was honestly a relief to see Schwarzenegger back in movies
as the lead and as part of an ensemble cast.
If there is one thing you can count on,
it is because Arnold always delivers when it comes to action movies no matter the scale,
and after so much time in politics it doesn’t look like he’s skipped a beat
and it’s a great escape from the winter chaos outside.
Welcome back Mr. Schwarzenegger!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Cider House Rules (1999) in Movies
Apr 26, 2020
Great acting, great writing, great directing
When we do our "Secret Cinema" adventures at our house (one person picks the film and the rest of the family doesn't know what it is until it starts running), we try to give clues. This film was nominated for 7 Oscars for the 1999 season, winning 2 - including a 2nd BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR OSCAR for a veteran actor. It is based on a wonderful novel and features 3 young actors well before they became stars.
Sound interesting? Then check out THE CIDER HOUSE RULES.
Based on the novel by John Irving, THE CIDER HOUSE RULES follows the life of Homer Wells (a pre-SPIDERMAN Tobey Maguire), a young orphan who is raised/mentored by the head of his Orphanage, Dr. Wilbur Larch (Michael Caine). When Homer decides to leave the orphanage and experience the world, he learns quite a bit about life including THE CIDER HOUSE RULES.
This is one of those "coming of age/follow a person through their life"-type films that relies heavily on style, substance and the performance of the actors on the screen. And under the Direction of Swedish Director Lasse Hallstrom and with words of the Screenplay by the author of the novel, John Irving, and with terrific actors like Maguire and Caine (amongst others) speaking those lines - a spell is cast and a heartwarming, life-affirming experience unfolds.
Caine won his 2nd Oscar for his role as Dr. Larch. This is a complex character who has his own, very certain, views on the world and is uncompromising in his care for others. It is a wonderful performance - even taking into account the peculiar Maine/United States accent Caine puts on. His character's empathy, strength and vulnerability are at play throughout this performance and he is a very deserving recipient of the Oscar.
A very young Charlize Theron and a (then) unknown Paul Rudd are engaging, charming and extremely photogenic as a young couple that Homer leaves the orphanage to see the world with. Rudd is the embodiment of the "nice guy" in this film - you can see the seeds of a career of playing "the nice guy" in this performance. Theron radiates beauty, power and a self-reliance that shows the strong actress she will become. While Homer's relationship with Dr. Larch is the heart and conflict of this film, the trio of McGuire/Theron/Rudd are the soul. The film also features a bevy of strong character actors in smaller roles that prop this film up. Jane Alexander, Kathy Baker, J.K. Simmons, Kate Nelligan and Delroy Lindo all shine in smaller roles - as do some of the child actors that portray other orphans like Keiran Caulkin and (especially) Per Erik Sullivan as the physically compromised Fuzzy.
But...none of this works if Maguire doesn't hold this film together (for we see this world/film through his eyes and he is in every scene) and he brings it. He has a quiet charm and innocence that helps bring us into his world in a welcoming way. Certainly, the awkwardness that Homer shows around Theron will be in evidence when he plays Peter Parker years later, but it is the inner strength that Maguire shows that really makes this character shine.
John Irving wrote the screen play based on his novel - and the results are satisfying, both to those who've never read the book (or have encountered an Irving novel/book before) or veteran readers/lovers of Irving's work (like myself).
All of this is wrapped in a package by Director Lasse Hallstrom (MY LIFE AS A DOG) in a charming, loving way that show the people, events and times through a lens that amplifies the proceedings in a way that is welcoming and engaging.
It is always a bit of a concern of mine to revisit a film that I remember fondly, but in this case, I am glad I jumped at the chance to revisit this charming film.
And you'll be glad you did, too.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Sound interesting? Then check out THE CIDER HOUSE RULES.
Based on the novel by John Irving, THE CIDER HOUSE RULES follows the life of Homer Wells (a pre-SPIDERMAN Tobey Maguire), a young orphan who is raised/mentored by the head of his Orphanage, Dr. Wilbur Larch (Michael Caine). When Homer decides to leave the orphanage and experience the world, he learns quite a bit about life including THE CIDER HOUSE RULES.
This is one of those "coming of age/follow a person through their life"-type films that relies heavily on style, substance and the performance of the actors on the screen. And under the Direction of Swedish Director Lasse Hallstrom and with words of the Screenplay by the author of the novel, John Irving, and with terrific actors like Maguire and Caine (amongst others) speaking those lines - a spell is cast and a heartwarming, life-affirming experience unfolds.
Caine won his 2nd Oscar for his role as Dr. Larch. This is a complex character who has his own, very certain, views on the world and is uncompromising in his care for others. It is a wonderful performance - even taking into account the peculiar Maine/United States accent Caine puts on. His character's empathy, strength and vulnerability are at play throughout this performance and he is a very deserving recipient of the Oscar.
A very young Charlize Theron and a (then) unknown Paul Rudd are engaging, charming and extremely photogenic as a young couple that Homer leaves the orphanage to see the world with. Rudd is the embodiment of the "nice guy" in this film - you can see the seeds of a career of playing "the nice guy" in this performance. Theron radiates beauty, power and a self-reliance that shows the strong actress she will become. While Homer's relationship with Dr. Larch is the heart and conflict of this film, the trio of McGuire/Theron/Rudd are the soul. The film also features a bevy of strong character actors in smaller roles that prop this film up. Jane Alexander, Kathy Baker, J.K. Simmons, Kate Nelligan and Delroy Lindo all shine in smaller roles - as do some of the child actors that portray other orphans like Keiran Caulkin and (especially) Per Erik Sullivan as the physically compromised Fuzzy.
But...none of this works if Maguire doesn't hold this film together (for we see this world/film through his eyes and he is in every scene) and he brings it. He has a quiet charm and innocence that helps bring us into his world in a welcoming way. Certainly, the awkwardness that Homer shows around Theron will be in evidence when he plays Peter Parker years later, but it is the inner strength that Maguire shows that really makes this character shine.
John Irving wrote the screen play based on his novel - and the results are satisfying, both to those who've never read the book (or have encountered an Irving novel/book before) or veteran readers/lovers of Irving's work (like myself).
All of this is wrapped in a package by Director Lasse Hallstrom (MY LIFE AS A DOG) in a charming, loving way that show the people, events and times through a lens that amplifies the proceedings in a way that is welcoming and engaging.
It is always a bit of a concern of mine to revisit a film that I remember fondly, but in this case, I am glad I jumped at the chance to revisit this charming film.
And you'll be glad you did, too.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Big Little Lies - Season 1 in TV
Feb 8, 2019 (Updated Feb 8, 2019)
Rich White People Problems: The Show
As more news of Season 2 of this show seeps out, I decided to eventually get around to catching the first season of this highly praised and seemingly universally lauded show. I went in expecting greatness from this thing after reading all of the glowing critic's reviews. I am also a huge fan of many of the cast members involved in this project, so knowing nothing about the plot or subject matter the show is based on, I went in blind; excited to see what this series had in store.
The series opens with some ominous editing and vague hints that a major crime has been committed, which we eventually realise to be a murder. Then we are taken backwards tin time and are introduced to Reese Witherspoon's character Madeline, whom initially comes off as entitled and annoying, but you assume that this is going to have a purpose in her character's arc and she will grow on you. You are wrong to assume that as she is extremely irritating throughout the entire duration of the series, constantly interrupting other characters lines and sticking her oar in during group situations, just for the sake of clinging on to the spotlight and keeping herself at the centre of attention.
Thankfully, Nicole Kidman's character Celeste is less annoying and instead just a bit strange. We see pretty early on that she is a victim of domestic abuse at the hands of her much younger husband played by Alexander Skarsgard. At first this is pretty harrowing and sad to see, but for some reason, - and I don't want to kink shame anyone, - but it seems like she kind of likes it. The third main character we are introduced to is Jane, played by Shailene Woodley who immediately seems like damaged goods.
The "conflict," is then set up. After the first day at school we see a highly unrealistic scene play out as the most insensitive teacher in the world with zero foresight gathers all of the children in her class along with their parents outside the school gates. A girl has marks on her neck from being choked by one of the other kids. The teacher then asks the girl to point out the kid that did this to her (in front of the entire class and their parents!) and she points to Jane's son Ziggy. The boy denies any wrongdoing, but the girl who has been hurt's mother, (played by Laura Dern, whom I normally really like,) is a horrible, bitter bitch who responds to the situation by berating the accused boy in front of everyone, degrading his mother in the process for defending her child and not "making," him apologise.
*Insert Peter Griffin "Oh my God, who the hell cares?" meme here.*
Yeah, this is the kind of schoolyard bullshit that this show expects us to treat as a life or death issue. The whole thing is full of non-issues and petty whines centred around 'he said/she said,' nonsense. Then we are supposed to relate to these immature, venomous parents who don't do anything to help the situation whatsoever. Meanwhile the show treats domestic abuse, - something that is a very real and threatening issue, - as just a weird kink in this oddball couple's relationship.
It is clear that all of these parents clearly care far more about self-image than they do about their own children, which makes all of them extremely gross and off putting as characters. They constantly make up excuses as if to try and justify themselves and claim that the bitchy, conniving choices that they make towards each other is for the sake of their kids, when it is clearly just to one up each other in pathetic, petty social warfare and childish beefs.
Website theodysseyonline.com has an article called, '13 Reasons Why Big Little Lies Is So Powerful.' I truly fail to see what is apparently so powerful and ground-breaking about this series. I'm not even sure what it is trying to say; that domestic abuse and rape are bad things done by evil people? Wow, what a brave and unique stance to take! I also resent the idea that everyone that says anything remotely negative about this show is a women-hating misogynist. I consider myself a left-leaning liberal and a feminist, I am a strong supporter of equal rights amongst all genders and races and I do regular work for a women's mental health charity, but I can still spot an overrated, hollow waste of 7 hours when I see one.
Overall, even though this season only last 7 episodes, it is not worth your time. After watching the first 2 episodes I thought about giving up on it, but then I thought about all of the glowing reviews and thought, 'no, surely this must get better.' Let me save you seven hours of your time; it doesn't. This is a melodramatic glorified soap opera that doesn't handle any of the issues that it tries to tackle well and it is filled, - to the point it is bursting at the seams, - with small scope issues and minor annoyances treated as life threatening scenarios, all the while brushing off the genuinely scary and potentially life threatening scenario of domestic abuse.
The series opens with some ominous editing and vague hints that a major crime has been committed, which we eventually realise to be a murder. Then we are taken backwards tin time and are introduced to Reese Witherspoon's character Madeline, whom initially comes off as entitled and annoying, but you assume that this is going to have a purpose in her character's arc and she will grow on you. You are wrong to assume that as she is extremely irritating throughout the entire duration of the series, constantly interrupting other characters lines and sticking her oar in during group situations, just for the sake of clinging on to the spotlight and keeping herself at the centre of attention.
Thankfully, Nicole Kidman's character Celeste is less annoying and instead just a bit strange. We see pretty early on that she is a victim of domestic abuse at the hands of her much younger husband played by Alexander Skarsgard. At first this is pretty harrowing and sad to see, but for some reason, - and I don't want to kink shame anyone, - but it seems like she kind of likes it. The third main character we are introduced to is Jane, played by Shailene Woodley who immediately seems like damaged goods.
The "conflict," is then set up. After the first day at school we see a highly unrealistic scene play out as the most insensitive teacher in the world with zero foresight gathers all of the children in her class along with their parents outside the school gates. A girl has marks on her neck from being choked by one of the other kids. The teacher then asks the girl to point out the kid that did this to her (in front of the entire class and their parents!) and she points to Jane's son Ziggy. The boy denies any wrongdoing, but the girl who has been hurt's mother, (played by Laura Dern, whom I normally really like,) is a horrible, bitter bitch who responds to the situation by berating the accused boy in front of everyone, degrading his mother in the process for defending her child and not "making," him apologise.
*Insert Peter Griffin "Oh my God, who the hell cares?" meme here.*
Yeah, this is the kind of schoolyard bullshit that this show expects us to treat as a life or death issue. The whole thing is full of non-issues and petty whines centred around 'he said/she said,' nonsense. Then we are supposed to relate to these immature, venomous parents who don't do anything to help the situation whatsoever. Meanwhile the show treats domestic abuse, - something that is a very real and threatening issue, - as just a weird kink in this oddball couple's relationship.
It is clear that all of these parents clearly care far more about self-image than they do about their own children, which makes all of them extremely gross and off putting as characters. They constantly make up excuses as if to try and justify themselves and claim that the bitchy, conniving choices that they make towards each other is for the sake of their kids, when it is clearly just to one up each other in pathetic, petty social warfare and childish beefs.
Website theodysseyonline.com has an article called, '13 Reasons Why Big Little Lies Is So Powerful.' I truly fail to see what is apparently so powerful and ground-breaking about this series. I'm not even sure what it is trying to say; that domestic abuse and rape are bad things done by evil people? Wow, what a brave and unique stance to take! I also resent the idea that everyone that says anything remotely negative about this show is a women-hating misogynist. I consider myself a left-leaning liberal and a feminist, I am a strong supporter of equal rights amongst all genders and races and I do regular work for a women's mental health charity, but I can still spot an overrated, hollow waste of 7 hours when I see one.
Overall, even though this season only last 7 episodes, it is not worth your time. After watching the first 2 episodes I thought about giving up on it, but then I thought about all of the glowing reviews and thought, 'no, surely this must get better.' Let me save you seven hours of your time; it doesn't. This is a melodramatic glorified soap opera that doesn't handle any of the issues that it tries to tackle well and it is filled, - to the point it is bursting at the seams, - with small scope issues and minor annoyances treated as life threatening scenarios, all the while brushing off the genuinely scary and potentially life threatening scenario of domestic abuse.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Battleship (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Basing a movie off of a videogame is often a risky proposition. For every “Resident Evil”, there at least a dozen others that are out and out disasters, “Mario Brothers”, “Wing Commander”, and “Double Dragon” are a few examples of how not to do it.
While Hollywood shows no signs of stopping videogame adaptations anytime soon, game development companies are becoming more savvy with allowing their products to become movies and are requiring uality scripts, cast, and directors before they enter into any film deal. Undaunted, Hollywood turned its eyes on children’s toys for inspiration. With the successful Transformers series, Hasbro has been targeted for their very popular line of board games as source material for future movies.
First out of the box is “Battleship”, director Peter Berg’s big-budget adaptation of the timeless naval strategy game that has been enjoyed for decades by players young and old. Since this is the era of video games, the simplistic style of the board game needed to be tweaked in order to make it appealing for the summer movie masses.
Gone is the classic strategy of the game and in its place, a loud and brash cast of 20-somethings, over-the-top special effects, and a plot riddled with more holes than the classic grids in the game that spawned the film.
Taylor Kitsch follows up his role in John Carter by playing Alex Hopper, a ne’er-do-well who despite the mentoring of his successful naval officer brother (Alexander Skarsgard), never seems to run out of ways to get himself in trouble. His latest efforts to impress a girl he met in a bar, land him in hot water with the authorities and his brother lays down the law and insists that Alex join the Navy and make something of his life.
The film jumps into the future where Alex is now dating the very attractive girl from the bar, Samantha (Brooklyn Decker), and trying to get enough courage together to ask her father for permission to marry his daughter. The fact that her father is Admiral Shane (Liam Neeson), only complicates the matter.
Despite holding the rank of an officer, Alex is still extremely headstrong and prone to getting himself in trouble. What what was supposed to be a friendly soccer match during allied naval exercises escalates, and Alex finds himself facing an ignominious exit from the Navy. He’s given a temporary reprieve as the ships in his fleet are suddenly faced with the threat of extraterrestrial origins.
Approximately around the same time Alex entered the Navy, scientists developed a way to amplify radio signals and directed them toward planets they believed could possibly support life. The signals were answered in the form of a hostile force that arrives on Earth only to cut a swath of destruction across the world as well as the naval fleet it encounters. Cut off from the rest of the fleet and reinforcements by an energy field, Alex is forced into command and must confront the deadly enemy at all cost to save the world.
What follows is a series of elaborate special effects that, while visually appealing, fail to pack much punch as the plot and characters are so underwhelming.
I understand that for films this type, especially given the source material, one must give a certain amount of leeway and accept, even grudgingly, the inconsistencies and impracticalities. That being said, not only are the characters about as thin and one-dimensional as they possibly could be, they are for the most part utterly devoid of any interesting qualities nor are they given much in the way of back story that makes us care for their outcomes. R&B star Rihanna spends a good chunk of her time looking tough and menacing, but isn’t given much more to do than occasionally fire a gun.
Kitsch is so utterly bland and unsympathetic that there’s just really no redeeming value to his character. Battleship is supposed to be a story of redemption but instead it’s a story of inconsistencies. Many times throughout the film common sense much less standard military procedures seems to go out the window.
For example, standard rules of engagement tactics were not used early in the film, but yet were readily deployed during the so-called big finale to the film with success. One has to wonder how more seasoned officers with far more resources at their disposal failed to utilize such tactics or have success with the methods that they employed. Yet ironically, this young lieutenant on his first command is able to out-maneuver these aliens when he decides to take to the offensive and lull the enemy into a fairly passive mode where they don’t do much more than watch.
The aliens, while interesting, are given precious little to do other than occasionally destroy or blow something up. We have no idea why they are on earth and to be honest, why they arrived in such small force. If the idea was to conquer Earth, it was poorly planned. Yet if proper procedures were followed, their incursion could have been dealt with very early and easily with the resources at hand. But that would’ve made for a short movie.
What I found puzzling was how surprisingly light on action the movie was. Yes there were firefights but they were spread sparingly throughout the film. You do not have one grand epic battle against overwhelming odds, you do not have legions of enemy troops for the Navy to wade through. It was pretty much a here-it-is-take-it-or-leave it, ho-hum finale.
The film does have some good points with Hawaii as its main backdrop. I did like the fact that there were a lot of active and retired soldiers and sailors used in the filming of the picture. It is clear that the filmmakers wanted to honor the soldiers who have so gallantly served our nation. I just wish they could’ve given them a much better showcase, because truthfully you’ll find far more thrills and enjoyment busting out the actual Battleship game than sitting through the film.
There is a scene post-credits that does hint at possible future installments, but I kept asking myself one question, “Why?” Rumor has it that several years goes Steven Segal attempted to revive his big-screen career by pitching an Under Siege 3 to Universal. Segal supposedly pitched the idea that his character would be on a naval ship that encountered extraterrestrial menace. The studio passed on this idea and, if there’s any truth to the rumor, they should have passed on this idea when it came time to make Battleship.
While Hollywood shows no signs of stopping videogame adaptations anytime soon, game development companies are becoming more savvy with allowing their products to become movies and are requiring uality scripts, cast, and directors before they enter into any film deal. Undaunted, Hollywood turned its eyes on children’s toys for inspiration. With the successful Transformers series, Hasbro has been targeted for their very popular line of board games as source material for future movies.
First out of the box is “Battleship”, director Peter Berg’s big-budget adaptation of the timeless naval strategy game that has been enjoyed for decades by players young and old. Since this is the era of video games, the simplistic style of the board game needed to be tweaked in order to make it appealing for the summer movie masses.
Gone is the classic strategy of the game and in its place, a loud and brash cast of 20-somethings, over-the-top special effects, and a plot riddled with more holes than the classic grids in the game that spawned the film.
Taylor Kitsch follows up his role in John Carter by playing Alex Hopper, a ne’er-do-well who despite the mentoring of his successful naval officer brother (Alexander Skarsgard), never seems to run out of ways to get himself in trouble. His latest efforts to impress a girl he met in a bar, land him in hot water with the authorities and his brother lays down the law and insists that Alex join the Navy and make something of his life.
The film jumps into the future where Alex is now dating the very attractive girl from the bar, Samantha (Brooklyn Decker), and trying to get enough courage together to ask her father for permission to marry his daughter. The fact that her father is Admiral Shane (Liam Neeson), only complicates the matter.
Despite holding the rank of an officer, Alex is still extremely headstrong and prone to getting himself in trouble. What what was supposed to be a friendly soccer match during allied naval exercises escalates, and Alex finds himself facing an ignominious exit from the Navy. He’s given a temporary reprieve as the ships in his fleet are suddenly faced with the threat of extraterrestrial origins.
Approximately around the same time Alex entered the Navy, scientists developed a way to amplify radio signals and directed them toward planets they believed could possibly support life. The signals were answered in the form of a hostile force that arrives on Earth only to cut a swath of destruction across the world as well as the naval fleet it encounters. Cut off from the rest of the fleet and reinforcements by an energy field, Alex is forced into command and must confront the deadly enemy at all cost to save the world.
What follows is a series of elaborate special effects that, while visually appealing, fail to pack much punch as the plot and characters are so underwhelming.
I understand that for films this type, especially given the source material, one must give a certain amount of leeway and accept, even grudgingly, the inconsistencies and impracticalities. That being said, not only are the characters about as thin and one-dimensional as they possibly could be, they are for the most part utterly devoid of any interesting qualities nor are they given much in the way of back story that makes us care for their outcomes. R&B star Rihanna spends a good chunk of her time looking tough and menacing, but isn’t given much more to do than occasionally fire a gun.
Kitsch is so utterly bland and unsympathetic that there’s just really no redeeming value to his character. Battleship is supposed to be a story of redemption but instead it’s a story of inconsistencies. Many times throughout the film common sense much less standard military procedures seems to go out the window.
For example, standard rules of engagement tactics were not used early in the film, but yet were readily deployed during the so-called big finale to the film with success. One has to wonder how more seasoned officers with far more resources at their disposal failed to utilize such tactics or have success with the methods that they employed. Yet ironically, this young lieutenant on his first command is able to out-maneuver these aliens when he decides to take to the offensive and lull the enemy into a fairly passive mode where they don’t do much more than watch.
The aliens, while interesting, are given precious little to do other than occasionally destroy or blow something up. We have no idea why they are on earth and to be honest, why they arrived in such small force. If the idea was to conquer Earth, it was poorly planned. Yet if proper procedures were followed, their incursion could have been dealt with very early and easily with the resources at hand. But that would’ve made for a short movie.
What I found puzzling was how surprisingly light on action the movie was. Yes there were firefights but they were spread sparingly throughout the film. You do not have one grand epic battle against overwhelming odds, you do not have legions of enemy troops for the Navy to wade through. It was pretty much a here-it-is-take-it-or-leave it, ho-hum finale.
The film does have some good points with Hawaii as its main backdrop. I did like the fact that there were a lot of active and retired soldiers and sailors used in the filming of the picture. It is clear that the filmmakers wanted to honor the soldiers who have so gallantly served our nation. I just wish they could’ve given them a much better showcase, because truthfully you’ll find far more thrills and enjoyment busting out the actual Battleship game than sitting through the film.
There is a scene post-credits that does hint at possible future installments, but I kept asking myself one question, “Why?” Rumor has it that several years goes Steven Segal attempted to revive his big-screen career by pitching an Under Siege 3 to Universal. Segal supposedly pitched the idea that his character would be on a naval ship that encountered extraterrestrial menace. The studio passed on this idea and, if there’s any truth to the rumor, they should have passed on this idea when it came time to make Battleship.