Search
Search results
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Godzilla vs. Kong (2021) in Movies
Apr 1, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
Let me start by saying that Godzilla Vs Kong is offensively entertaining when the two big bois are smacking the shit out of each other and generally wrecking entire cities, but whereas the first Godzilla had too little lizard action, and King of the Monsters arguably overcompensated, this time around, it's gone back to too little! The big smackdowns were fun, but they seemed done and dusted pretty quickly. It felt like they were lacking meat.
Especially when *SPOILERS* (worst kept secret in recent cinema memory) MechaGodzilla joins the fun near the end. He looks awesome, but again, it's over with pretty quick, and I wanted more dammit! Outside of the fighting, all of the scenes set in the Hollow Earth were pretty decent and interesting in their lore building.
Then there's of course the usual cast of forgettable human characters. Kaylee Hottle and Rebecca Hall are both great and hugely likable, but everyone else is just kind of there, and the plot criminally wastes Demián Bichir. I found there was once again way too much human drama, and none of it seemed at all important, and there was nowhere near enough development on offer to care one bit about them.
So what do we have then? Godzilla Vs Kong is definitely a shallow monster movie, but it's a hell of a lot of fun when it wants to be, with a fantastic music score (the reworked Godzilla theme slaps) and some truly stunning digital effects. The neon aesthetic in the Hong Kong scenes looks great, and the titular monsters look as good as ever. Better than KOTM, not as good as Skull Island, but still worth checking out for anyone who likes this particular sub genre.
On a final note - can't wait to see this properly when cinemas re-open!
Especially when *SPOILERS* (worst kept secret in recent cinema memory) MechaGodzilla joins the fun near the end. He looks awesome, but again, it's over with pretty quick, and I wanted more dammit! Outside of the fighting, all of the scenes set in the Hollow Earth were pretty decent and interesting in their lore building.
Then there's of course the usual cast of forgettable human characters. Kaylee Hottle and Rebecca Hall are both great and hugely likable, but everyone else is just kind of there, and the plot criminally wastes Demián Bichir. I found there was once again way too much human drama, and none of it seemed at all important, and there was nowhere near enough development on offer to care one bit about them.
So what do we have then? Godzilla Vs Kong is definitely a shallow monster movie, but it's a hell of a lot of fun when it wants to be, with a fantastic music score (the reworked Godzilla theme slaps) and some truly stunning digital effects. The neon aesthetic in the Hong Kong scenes looks great, and the titular monsters look as good as ever. Better than KOTM, not as good as Skull Island, but still worth checking out for anyone who likes this particular sub genre.
On a final note - can't wait to see this properly when cinemas re-open!
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Gift (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The new film ‘The Gift’ will be the first movie released by the new company STX Entertainment.
It stars Jason Bateman as Simon, Joel Edgerton as Gordo, and Rebecca Hall as Robyn, Simons’ wife.
The story begins with Simon and Robyn just moving back to Los Angeles. He works in cyber security, and she is an interior designer trying to start her own business.
While out shopping for new home decor, Robyn is approached by a man she’s never seen, who says he is an old acquaintance of Simons.
Through a series of instances where Gordo delivers unasked for, and at least in Simons case, unwanted, gifts the story unravels into a twisty path of creepy stalking behavior with an undercurrent of as yet unrevealed plots for revenge.
While Robyn thinks that Gordo is just lonely and trying to make a friendly good impression, Simon insists that Gordo is ‘weird’ and that he has an ulterior motive due to his attraction to Robyn.
While not quite a ‘Fatal Attraction’ story as much as a ‘Revenge’ plot, this movie does keep you interested, invested and involved. It isn’t quite a ‘digging your nails into your palms’ kind of scary but more of a ‘what the HECK is he doing’, and ‘oh my gosh he can’t possibly be doing THAT’ story.
At least twice, the audience jumped and some of us yelped at at least one point.
The movie keeps you not quite sure who to feel most sorry for and not quite knowing who, if anyone, you are ‘rooting for’
The end is a twisted mess (in a good way) that had my jaw dropping and saying to myself ‘oh no no no no no no NO that’s not happening, it can’t be that way…..’, even though I had seen it coming.
I liked the movie and think people looking for a psychological thriller will really enjoy it.
I would give this movie 4 out of 5 stars.
It stars Jason Bateman as Simon, Joel Edgerton as Gordo, and Rebecca Hall as Robyn, Simons’ wife.
The story begins with Simon and Robyn just moving back to Los Angeles. He works in cyber security, and she is an interior designer trying to start her own business.
While out shopping for new home decor, Robyn is approached by a man she’s never seen, who says he is an old acquaintance of Simons.
Through a series of instances where Gordo delivers unasked for, and at least in Simons case, unwanted, gifts the story unravels into a twisty path of creepy stalking behavior with an undercurrent of as yet unrevealed plots for revenge.
While Robyn thinks that Gordo is just lonely and trying to make a friendly good impression, Simon insists that Gordo is ‘weird’ and that he has an ulterior motive due to his attraction to Robyn.
While not quite a ‘Fatal Attraction’ story as much as a ‘Revenge’ plot, this movie does keep you interested, invested and involved. It isn’t quite a ‘digging your nails into your palms’ kind of scary but more of a ‘what the HECK is he doing’, and ‘oh my gosh he can’t possibly be doing THAT’ story.
At least twice, the audience jumped and some of us yelped at at least one point.
The movie keeps you not quite sure who to feel most sorry for and not quite knowing who, if anyone, you are ‘rooting for’
The end is a twisted mess (in a good way) that had my jaw dropping and saying to myself ‘oh no no no no no no NO that’s not happening, it can’t be that way…..’, even though I had seen it coming.
I liked the movie and think people looking for a psychological thriller will really enjoy it.
I would give this movie 4 out of 5 stars.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Holmes and Watson (2018) in Movies
Apr 27, 2020
They can't all be winners
Well...they can't all be winners.
I know that Will Ferrell is an "acquired taste" - either you like the "all in" comedy of this man, or you don't. I happen to like Ferrell, his comedy has aged on me like a fine wine. I find that some of his most recent films like THE OTHER GUYS and THE HOUSE are very funny (maybe not as funny as ANCHORMAN...but what is). I think this comedian still has his fastball.
But, sometimes, wine doesn't age well, it turns into vinegar. And for Ferrell, this vinegar is the comedic dud that is HOLMES & WATSON.
Partnering with familiar on-screen partner John C. Reilly (who paired with Ferrell in films like STEP BROTHERS and TALLEDEGA NIGHTS) this film is a parody of the multitude of Sherlock Holmes films - this time showing that not only is Holmes and idiot but so is Watson. But, somehow, they manage to solve the crime and save the day anyway.
Ferrell is (typically) over-the-top and obtuse as Holmes. Usually, this combination works for him (see ANCHORMAN) but it just falls flat here. Same thing for John C. Reilly's Watson - he is just as over-the-top and obtuse and (I think) that's the beginning of the problem here. The two just bounce off each other without the joke landing on either of them - nor does it land of the audience.
Ralph Fiennes (Moriarty), Rebecca Hall (potential girlfriend), Rob Brydon (Inspector Lestrade) and Kelly Macdonald (Mrs. Hudson) all fair poorly with poor material to work with.
Writer/Director Etan (that's Etan, not Ethan) Cohen (IDIOCRACY) does nothing to help things here with either his writing or his direction. My only thought here is that he thought that Ferrell and Reilly could improvise themselves into a good film.
It didn't happen.
Letter Grade: C (because I guffawed out loud - despite myself - a couple of times)
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I know that Will Ferrell is an "acquired taste" - either you like the "all in" comedy of this man, or you don't. I happen to like Ferrell, his comedy has aged on me like a fine wine. I find that some of his most recent films like THE OTHER GUYS and THE HOUSE are very funny (maybe not as funny as ANCHORMAN...but what is). I think this comedian still has his fastball.
But, sometimes, wine doesn't age well, it turns into vinegar. And for Ferrell, this vinegar is the comedic dud that is HOLMES & WATSON.
Partnering with familiar on-screen partner John C. Reilly (who paired with Ferrell in films like STEP BROTHERS and TALLEDEGA NIGHTS) this film is a parody of the multitude of Sherlock Holmes films - this time showing that not only is Holmes and idiot but so is Watson. But, somehow, they manage to solve the crime and save the day anyway.
Ferrell is (typically) over-the-top and obtuse as Holmes. Usually, this combination works for him (see ANCHORMAN) but it just falls flat here. Same thing for John C. Reilly's Watson - he is just as over-the-top and obtuse and (I think) that's the beginning of the problem here. The two just bounce off each other without the joke landing on either of them - nor does it land of the audience.
Ralph Fiennes (Moriarty), Rebecca Hall (potential girlfriend), Rob Brydon (Inspector Lestrade) and Kelly Macdonald (Mrs. Hudson) all fair poorly with poor material to work with.
Writer/Director Etan (that's Etan, not Ethan) Cohen (IDIOCRACY) does nothing to help things here with either his writing or his direction. My only thought here is that he thought that Ferrell and Reilly could improvise themselves into a good film.
It didn't happen.
Letter Grade: C (because I guffawed out loud - despite myself - a couple of times)
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Iron Man 3 (2013) in Movies
May 10, 2019 (Updated May 10, 2019)
"i am iron man 2.0"
Marking the commencement of the second phase of Marvel Cinematic Universe after the first one culminated with The Avengers, Iron Man 3 presents a definite improvement over its insufferably insipid predecessor but it still falls short of the magical experience that was the first Iron Man film. However, it does carry a new energy & has a refreshing vibe to it, thanks to the new director at helm.
Iron Man 3 continues the story of Tony Stark who's recovering from post-traumatic stress caused by the events of The Avengers. Unable to sleep & genuinely afraid of losing what he loves, Stark's life is turned upside down after he issues a threat to a radical terrorist who retaliates by destroying his personal world, leaving him far more vulnerable than ever before & forcing him to rebuild from the scratch.
Co-written & directed by Shane Black, Iron Man 3 really benefits from a fresh perspective & is an enjoyable ride for the most part but is also marred by its attempt to try out way too many things at once, out of which only a few work out in a convincing manner. Technical aspects are finely executed for its Cinematography favours a slightly darker tone, Editing steadily paces its narrative while Brian Tyler's score adds more vibrancy to its plot.
Coming to the performances, Guy Pearce, Ben Kingsley & Rebecca Hall join the reprising cast & ably fill up their given roles while Robert Downey Jr. once again manages to impress the most. The best thing about this sequel is the position it puts Tony Stark in & Downey Jr. does a terrific job in bringing that vulnerability on the screen. Also, while I was a bit furious at what they did with Iron Man's arch-nemesis, I did later warm up to what their intent was here.
On an overall scale, Iron Man 3 is a solid follow up to Iron Man & you don't even have to go through the crap that was Iron Man 2 to get to this one. The film's intent to cover the darker issues at hand while keeping itself light-hearted & plenty of fun is a combination that doesn't gel so well, is at friction on many occasions & is bound to divide its viewers, but its improvement over everything that was so wrong with its predecessor nevertheless makes it a welcome chapter, if not a worthy one.
Iron Man 3 continues the story of Tony Stark who's recovering from post-traumatic stress caused by the events of The Avengers. Unable to sleep & genuinely afraid of losing what he loves, Stark's life is turned upside down after he issues a threat to a radical terrorist who retaliates by destroying his personal world, leaving him far more vulnerable than ever before & forcing him to rebuild from the scratch.
Co-written & directed by Shane Black, Iron Man 3 really benefits from a fresh perspective & is an enjoyable ride for the most part but is also marred by its attempt to try out way too many things at once, out of which only a few work out in a convincing manner. Technical aspects are finely executed for its Cinematography favours a slightly darker tone, Editing steadily paces its narrative while Brian Tyler's score adds more vibrancy to its plot.
Coming to the performances, Guy Pearce, Ben Kingsley & Rebecca Hall join the reprising cast & ably fill up their given roles while Robert Downey Jr. once again manages to impress the most. The best thing about this sequel is the position it puts Tony Stark in & Downey Jr. does a terrific job in bringing that vulnerability on the screen. Also, while I was a bit furious at what they did with Iron Man's arch-nemesis, I did later warm up to what their intent was here.
On an overall scale, Iron Man 3 is a solid follow up to Iron Man & you don't even have to go through the crap that was Iron Man 2 to get to this one. The film's intent to cover the darker issues at hand while keeping itself light-hearted & plenty of fun is a combination that doesn't gel so well, is at friction on many occasions & is bound to divide its viewers, but its improvement over everything that was so wrong with its predecessor nevertheless makes it a welcome chapter, if not a worthy one.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Prestige (2006) in Movies
Mar 22, 2018
Underrated and underseen gem
Along with INSOMNIA, the 2006 film that Nolan directed, THE PRESTIGE is probably one of his least known and least viewed films and that is too bad for it is a wonderful motion picture that proves he is a strong director with a strong vision.
Dubbed "The Warring Magicians" film, THE PRESTIGE stars Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman as two 19th Century Magicians who are...well...at war with each other. Of course, they started out as partners, but soon became enemies, each trying to out do each other and to discover the other magician's secrets.
Cleverly written by Nolan and his frequent collaborator, his brother Jonathan Nolan - and based on the novel by Christopher Priest, THE PRESTIGE will keep you guessing throughout, trying to figure out "how they did it" and are constantly being surprised by double turns, back stabbing and second guessing.
Bale, by this time in his career, has established himself as a powerful actor - and he shines here. Joining Bale is Nolan regular Michael Caine as the mentor of the two magicians, a young-ish Scarlett Johannsen as a a woman who falls in love with both of them (of course) and Rebecca Hall and Piper Perabo as Bale's and Jackman's wives, respectively. But...the surprise to me in this film when I first saw it - and again when I recently re-viewed it - is the performance of Hugh Jackman. This film shows that Jackman is more than just Wolverine - that dude can act. As a magician, he is showing glimpses of being "THE GREATEST SHOWMAN" (but that is another movie for another day) and more than holds his own against a fierce Bale. Finally...special notice needs to be made to the actor who portrays inventor Nikola Tesla - perfectly cast in this role is Ziggy Stardust himself, David Bowie. It's a shame that Bowie did not act in more films for he captures the screen in the brief appearances he makes in this film.
As for Nolan - he is now coming into his own as a Director. The action is fast paced, the twists and turns are "honestly" played, the composition of the pictures on the screen are interesting and beautiful to look at and I walked away satisfied.
If you haven't seen THE PRESTIGE (or if you haven't seen it in awhile) - check this one out. You'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A (and...that's a surprise to me, I figured it would be a B+/A- film)
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Dubbed "The Warring Magicians" film, THE PRESTIGE stars Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman as two 19th Century Magicians who are...well...at war with each other. Of course, they started out as partners, but soon became enemies, each trying to out do each other and to discover the other magician's secrets.
Cleverly written by Nolan and his frequent collaborator, his brother Jonathan Nolan - and based on the novel by Christopher Priest, THE PRESTIGE will keep you guessing throughout, trying to figure out "how they did it" and are constantly being surprised by double turns, back stabbing and second guessing.
Bale, by this time in his career, has established himself as a powerful actor - and he shines here. Joining Bale is Nolan regular Michael Caine as the mentor of the two magicians, a young-ish Scarlett Johannsen as a a woman who falls in love with both of them (of course) and Rebecca Hall and Piper Perabo as Bale's and Jackman's wives, respectively. But...the surprise to me in this film when I first saw it - and again when I recently re-viewed it - is the performance of Hugh Jackman. This film shows that Jackman is more than just Wolverine - that dude can act. As a magician, he is showing glimpses of being "THE GREATEST SHOWMAN" (but that is another movie for another day) and more than holds his own against a fierce Bale. Finally...special notice needs to be made to the actor who portrays inventor Nikola Tesla - perfectly cast in this role is Ziggy Stardust himself, David Bowie. It's a shame that Bowie did not act in more films for he captures the screen in the brief appearances he makes in this film.
As for Nolan - he is now coming into his own as a Director. The action is fast paced, the twists and turns are "honestly" played, the composition of the pictures on the screen are interesting and beautiful to look at and I walked away satisfied.
If you haven't seen THE PRESTIGE (or if you haven't seen it in awhile) - check this one out. You'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A (and...that's a surprise to me, I figured it would be a B+/A- film)
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Prestige (2006) in Movies
Jan 9, 2021
Criminally underrated
Film #10 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: The Prestige
The Prestige is one of 3 Christopher Nolan films on this bucket list (the others being Memento and The Dark Knight), and probably the one that has least recognition out of the the three. In fact I’d say it’s criminally underrated. It focuses on two rival magicians in Victorian London, Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale), as a tragic accident gives rise to a bitter escalating feud. Supporting are Michael Caine as stage magic designer and engineer Cutter, Scarlett Johansson as magician’s assistant Olivia, Rebecca Hall as Borden’s wife Sarah and a brief appearance from Andy Serkis and the great David Bowie as Nikola Tesla and his assistant.
From the very start, The Prestige asks us the age old magician’s phrase “Are you watching closely?” and is very much a hint at events to come, warning us that we should be paying attention. And with this being a Christopher Nolan film, this shouldn’t be a surprise. The Prestige starts at the end, with an intriguing image of dozens of discarded top hats explaining magic tricks and the meaning behind the film’s title, and is followed by the death of one of the main characters and subsequent incarceration of another. It continues in typical Nolan style, jumping between the prison, Angier’s journey to visit Nikola Tesla and telling the story of both magicians and their feud from the very beginning. A tad confusing at times, but it wouldn’t be a Nolan film with a some time travelling story telling.
Magic isn’t probably something that appeals as much now as it did back when this film is set. Victorian London is a perfect setting at a time when magic was very much a fascination and a popular form of entertainment, and the costumes and set design for this period are very well done and in keeping with the dark and dreary setting. Yet strangely despite this, The Prestige never feels like a run of the mill period drama. The cast too are perfect for their roles and also help to make magic a lot more appealing. Christian Bale’s cockney Borden is exactly what you’d expect from him yet couldn’t imagine anyone else playing the role, especially with such an awkward verging on unlikeable character, and it’s refreshing to see Hugh Jackman play a part where he isn’t a completely nice or likeable person. And of course it wouldn’t be a Christopher Nolan film without Michael Caine, who brings some much needed humour and exposition. The only drag is unfortunately Scarlett Johansson, whose dodgy English accent pulls us away from anything she puts into her performance.
The Prestige is a slow burn murder mystery, that almost feels like a gothic horror at times with some sci-fi aspects thrown in. The plot has a vast amount of twists and turns and you really do have to be watching closely to understand it all and the ending itself and the final twist is probably the most polarising of them all. For me, the first time I watched this I never saw this twist coming. It truly shocked me, despite the many nods the film gives to the twist throughout. Watching this back now years later, I have to admit that the twist is actually a little predictable when you really think about it. But the feeling of astonishment I had watching this for the first time was second to none. What is most strange though, is that the most confusing thing in this entire film isn’t the twists and turns, it’s the fact that both Angier and Norden can dress up in ridiculously fake disguises to fool each other and ruin the tricks. This does spoil things a little.
I’ve always loved magic and grew up watching many magic shows on TV when I was younger. For me Nolan has brought back that love and appeal of magic, with a hugely entertaining and captivating story. It may not be perfect and the ending may lose some of it’s shine after the first watch, but it’s still another brilliant film from Christopher Nolan.
The Prestige is one of 3 Christopher Nolan films on this bucket list (the others being Memento and The Dark Knight), and probably the one that has least recognition out of the the three. In fact I’d say it’s criminally underrated. It focuses on two rival magicians in Victorian London, Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale), as a tragic accident gives rise to a bitter escalating feud. Supporting are Michael Caine as stage magic designer and engineer Cutter, Scarlett Johansson as magician’s assistant Olivia, Rebecca Hall as Borden’s wife Sarah and a brief appearance from Andy Serkis and the great David Bowie as Nikola Tesla and his assistant.
From the very start, The Prestige asks us the age old magician’s phrase “Are you watching closely?” and is very much a hint at events to come, warning us that we should be paying attention. And with this being a Christopher Nolan film, this shouldn’t be a surprise. The Prestige starts at the end, with an intriguing image of dozens of discarded top hats explaining magic tricks and the meaning behind the film’s title, and is followed by the death of one of the main characters and subsequent incarceration of another. It continues in typical Nolan style, jumping between the prison, Angier’s journey to visit Nikola Tesla and telling the story of both magicians and their feud from the very beginning. A tad confusing at times, but it wouldn’t be a Nolan film with a some time travelling story telling.
Magic isn’t probably something that appeals as much now as it did back when this film is set. Victorian London is a perfect setting at a time when magic was very much a fascination and a popular form of entertainment, and the costumes and set design for this period are very well done and in keeping with the dark and dreary setting. Yet strangely despite this, The Prestige never feels like a run of the mill period drama. The cast too are perfect for their roles and also help to make magic a lot more appealing. Christian Bale’s cockney Borden is exactly what you’d expect from him yet couldn’t imagine anyone else playing the role, especially with such an awkward verging on unlikeable character, and it’s refreshing to see Hugh Jackman play a part where he isn’t a completely nice or likeable person. And of course it wouldn’t be a Christopher Nolan film without Michael Caine, who brings some much needed humour and exposition. The only drag is unfortunately Scarlett Johansson, whose dodgy English accent pulls us away from anything she puts into her performance.
The Prestige is a slow burn murder mystery, that almost feels like a gothic horror at times with some sci-fi aspects thrown in. The plot has a vast amount of twists and turns and you really do have to be watching closely to understand it all and the ending itself and the final twist is probably the most polarising of them all. For me, the first time I watched this I never saw this twist coming. It truly shocked me, despite the many nods the film gives to the twist throughout. Watching this back now years later, I have to admit that the twist is actually a little predictable when you really think about it. But the feeling of astonishment I had watching this for the first time was second to none. What is most strange though, is that the most confusing thing in this entire film isn’t the twists and turns, it’s the fact that both Angier and Norden can dress up in ridiculously fake disguises to fool each other and ruin the tricks. This does spoil things a little.
I’ve always loved magic and grew up watching many magic shows on TV when I was younger. For me Nolan has brought back that love and appeal of magic, with a hugely entertaining and captivating story. It may not be perfect and the ending may lose some of it’s shine after the first watch, but it’s still another brilliant film from Christopher Nolan.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Transcendence (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
First time director and Academy award-winning cinematographer Wally Pfister (Inception, The Dark
Knight Trilogy) takes on an ambitious film both visually and thematically for his first attempt at the
director chair. And while he hits all the visual cues you would expect from someone who has worked
so closely with Christopher Nolan on several films, he does less so when it comes telling us a story
that works in the world that he is presenting to us on screen. And thus this film falls flat, muddled and
fragmented in its story.
Visually the film provides you with framing and movement that that is easy to follow and pleasing to
look at. Along with the score, the look of the film constantly feels like it is taking you somewhere grand
or eye-opening. However it never quite gets there as the passage of time is not clear which creates a
fragmented sense of reality.
Furthermore, because of the structure of the film, the viewer is expecting a form of payoff or definitive
stance from the message of the story. But instead the story falls flat upon itself by not clearly defining
the characters motivations on screen. That is not to say that the film is acted poorly, it is just that
there really isn’t any reason to believe the motivations of the characters because they were never
shown to us. We are supposed to believe that the love between Johnny Depp as Dr. Will Caster, the
leading artificial intelligence researcher and his wife Evelyn (Rebecca Hall) is the reason why the plot is
developing. But we are never truly shown the reason why their love is so strong. Furthermore, when Dr.
Caster is shot to stop him from furthering his research, his own wife Evelyn barley even sheds a tear.
Why then would I believe her ridiculous motivations to follow a self-aware artificial intelligence that she
believes is her husband, down the rabbit hole for years without constant reassurance that it is in fact her
Husband, which we never really get any explanation of? Nor do we get any reassurance that she loves
him, other than an occasional had touching a computer screen. I get that people greave in different
ways, but not all ways work on advancing a story on film.
Perhaps the biggest disjointed story development is when the Caster’s close friend and colleague Max
(Paul Bettany) is kidnapped by extremists for two years and no one is looking for him. Furthermore,
when he reappears after being told that two years has passed, he is now trying to stop the evolution of
AI that he helped create without more than a mere sentence. The film keeps reminding us that people
fear what they don’t understand, which is right. I fear I don’t understand the motivation behind the
characters without being shown or explained what happened to them or why they are doing something.
As if this was not enough, at no real point did any of ancillary characters matter. Cillian Murphy
represents the government at large as the lone FBI agent in the film. But his purpose is meaningless as
he does nothing to stop anything suspicious until the final act. What is worse, is that he was brought in
to stop the extremist (that are mostly forgotten after the first act) but then sides with them to attempt
to stop the AI. The same AI he let grow out of control in the first place.
I am not even going to go into the “pod-people” plot as it seemed as a way to try to advance the story
to an ending. As if these good scientists, who are just trying to help the world, have crossed the line or
something. This, which Evelyn still doesn’t see a problem with and continues to allow for years until
Morgan Freeman shows up and tells her to get out of her situation and away from the AI. At which
point, she mulls it over for perhaps a day and decides she is done. Ugh. You have come this far with no
reason, why stop? Just keep going?
I, like most movie goers, am willing to suspend my disbelief as long as the reasons for what I am
watching on screen make sense in the world shown to me. A few scenes here or there that provided
explanation or reason why is should care about these characters would have been appreciated and
helped this movie be less disjointed and muddled. Because of this, I really cannot recommend this film
to anyone except those who want to think abstractly about AI. But be warned, thematically, there is no
clear stance on weather that is good or bad either.
Knight Trilogy) takes on an ambitious film both visually and thematically for his first attempt at the
director chair. And while he hits all the visual cues you would expect from someone who has worked
so closely with Christopher Nolan on several films, he does less so when it comes telling us a story
that works in the world that he is presenting to us on screen. And thus this film falls flat, muddled and
fragmented in its story.
Visually the film provides you with framing and movement that that is easy to follow and pleasing to
look at. Along with the score, the look of the film constantly feels like it is taking you somewhere grand
or eye-opening. However it never quite gets there as the passage of time is not clear which creates a
fragmented sense of reality.
Furthermore, because of the structure of the film, the viewer is expecting a form of payoff or definitive
stance from the message of the story. But instead the story falls flat upon itself by not clearly defining
the characters motivations on screen. That is not to say that the film is acted poorly, it is just that
there really isn’t any reason to believe the motivations of the characters because they were never
shown to us. We are supposed to believe that the love between Johnny Depp as Dr. Will Caster, the
leading artificial intelligence researcher and his wife Evelyn (Rebecca Hall) is the reason why the plot is
developing. But we are never truly shown the reason why their love is so strong. Furthermore, when Dr.
Caster is shot to stop him from furthering his research, his own wife Evelyn barley even sheds a tear.
Why then would I believe her ridiculous motivations to follow a self-aware artificial intelligence that she
believes is her husband, down the rabbit hole for years without constant reassurance that it is in fact her
Husband, which we never really get any explanation of? Nor do we get any reassurance that she loves
him, other than an occasional had touching a computer screen. I get that people greave in different
ways, but not all ways work on advancing a story on film.
Perhaps the biggest disjointed story development is when the Caster’s close friend and colleague Max
(Paul Bettany) is kidnapped by extremists for two years and no one is looking for him. Furthermore,
when he reappears after being told that two years has passed, he is now trying to stop the evolution of
AI that he helped create without more than a mere sentence. The film keeps reminding us that people
fear what they don’t understand, which is right. I fear I don’t understand the motivation behind the
characters without being shown or explained what happened to them or why they are doing something.
As if this was not enough, at no real point did any of ancillary characters matter. Cillian Murphy
represents the government at large as the lone FBI agent in the film. But his purpose is meaningless as
he does nothing to stop anything suspicious until the final act. What is worse, is that he was brought in
to stop the extremist (that are mostly forgotten after the first act) but then sides with them to attempt
to stop the AI. The same AI he let grow out of control in the first place.
I am not even going to go into the “pod-people” plot as it seemed as a way to try to advance the story
to an ending. As if these good scientists, who are just trying to help the world, have crossed the line or
something. This, which Evelyn still doesn’t see a problem with and continues to allow for years until
Morgan Freeman shows up and tells her to get out of her situation and away from the AI. At which
point, she mulls it over for perhaps a day and decides she is done. Ugh. You have come this far with no
reason, why stop? Just keep going?
I, like most movie goers, am willing to suspend my disbelief as long as the reasons for what I am
watching on screen make sense in the world shown to me. A few scenes here or there that provided
explanation or reason why is should care about these characters would have been appreciated and
helped this movie be less disjointed and muddled. Because of this, I really cannot recommend this film
to anyone except those who want to think abstractly about AI. But be warned, thematically, there is no
clear stance on weather that is good or bad either.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Tales from the Loop in TV
Jan 22, 2021
Such is the competition for our attention on the major streaming services, and such is the daunting depth of choice, that sometimes something of real quality can slip through the net for a while. I like to think that eventually, everything gets the audience it deserves, because eventually enough people that appreciated it will find it and pass it on. But it is apparent that good things can go under the radar very easily for one reason or another.
Everything about the production and presentation of Amazon’s Tales From the Loop suggests they thought it might be a bigger hit, or at least they had enough faith in it to let it be different from the mass appeal conventions that apply to sci-fi shows. They have proved this many times in recent years, with shows like The Man In the High Castle and The Expanse favouring patient and mature story-telling over interminable flashbangs and whizzpops usually found in the more action based sci-fi on Netflix and others (The Handmaid’s Tale being another notable exception).
Having raised myself auto-didactically on the oldest traditions of science fiction writing in novel and short story form since my teenage years, I can say with some amateur authority that the point of using sci-fi ideas was always about the people and the parallels to social reality and politics that could be highlighted by putting them in a “what-if” situation. The lazer guns and spaceships and evil aliens were much more a product of Hollywood, and still are. Great science fiction writing can and usually does revolve around a very simple change to the world we know, an inversion or a convention or a technology that turns how we live on its head. At its best it is philosophical and moral poetry.
Tales From the Loop, inspired by the beguiling paintings of Swedish Artist Simon Stålenhag aspires to return to these principles, eschewing breakneck pace and unnecessary exposition at every turn – it is entirely content to confuse and sometimes even bore you with its patient, melancholy approach, testing almost if you are worthy to reach the prize of deeper meaning buried away in the final few episodes.
The idea of Stålenhag’s work is to juxtapose a familiar and mundane landscape with a detail of technology that does not exist in our reality. Often it is something broken, run-down or neglected, leaving a strange sadness and beauty behind that has you wondering who once made this and what was it for, and why is it no longer loved? The untold stories objects and hidden lives, secrets and desires that have been lost, is what this sensitive and delicate show is about. It is about the interconnection of lives caught in time, and the sci-fi / tech conceit is only the hanger that coat is put on. Which… I love.
The surface idea is that we are looking at the inhabitants of a small American town that once relied on farming and community, but now has been changed by the presence of an underground facility that deals with experimental physics and finding ways to make impossible things possible. They call it The Loop. It is never fully explained where it came from, or why, or what it is truly capable of – the mystery is always allowed to remain mostly a mystery – which, again, I love!
Many people in the town work at The Loop and rely on it for their livelihoods and collective economy, including Jonathon Pryce and Rebecca Hall, who are ostensibly the show’s main characters. But most folk have no idea what is really going on. Each episode focuses on one or two members of the community that interweave with one another; several important people begin as background dressing and become more prevalent as the full story of their lives and connections unfolds. But no one character is in every episode… which, you know, I love.
Their lives, that seem simple at first glance, are revealed to be complex tapestries of emotion and personal history, revolving around how The Loop has affected them and the things they love. The progression and unfolding of the detail is so deliberate and usually under-explained that very often you don’t realise the effect the full image will have. And when it does catch up with you it becomes a very moving and meaningful experience. Characters that you don’t understand or even like at first come into sharper focus as we reach the climax of the season and grow to learn why they are the way they are. The story arcs of Pryce and Hall in particular are very satisfying, tragic yet utterly beautiful to comprehend.
A lot of the criticism you will see about the show will concentrate on how slow it all is. I am totally convinced this is a deliberate artistic choice to weed out the thrill junkies. They are very welcome to go elsewhere, and it sounds as if many of them did, basing their reviews on one or two half watched episodes they couldn’t be bothered to engage with or wonder at. Which is why I think in time the respect for this as a work of art will come back around.
There is nothing to fault in the production at all. From the opening credits to the end of each episode, what you get is a very highly polished and considered look and feel, designed to evoke certain feelings over others – a wistfulness, an ennui, a bittersweet smile of knowing, perhaps. It invites you to watch patiently and relate, not to watch eagerly and expect… which, you know, I love.
The photography is crisp and well framed always; the music is subtle but effective; the dialogue is often sparing and well chosen (no detail is merely thrown away); and the direction is of a remarkably uniform vision, considering each episode is a different guest professional, including such prestigious names as Jodie Foster, Mark Romanek and Andrew Stanton.
I absolutely urge anyone that isn’t put off by a little sentiment to give this one a try. Sadness and regret in life is not something to shun and be afraid of, they are parts of human experience, and I love art that explores them as concepts. Put that art in a science fiction context and I am bound to love it even more. Like the final moments of Blade Runner, we know that one day all these moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. We have to take time to see the beauty while we can, even if that beauty is painful.
It may not be for you – I don’t think it is better or worse than other things, just more… me. There is every chance that if it isn’t you… you will hate it. If you do begin, however, please see it to the finish before casting judgement – the final episode directed by Jodie Foster is truly wonderful: a pay-off of such emotion after your investment of seven previous stories, tying it all together perfectly. Rarely have I felt so stupid for not understanding the point of something sooner, or been more pleased that I hadn’t. The final moment of the season is literally unforgettable, and gets richer in my imagination by the day.
Will there be a second season? There certainly could be. Was it enough of a success to justify the investment? Hmm, not sure. Either way, it either sits as a perfect self contained collection of fine, old-fashioned sci-fi stories, or I’d be happy to see it expand, as long as the temptation isn’t to listen to the negative reviews and pander to the fast-food mentality that has already rejected it without fully understanding it. Because nothing needs to change here. A thing of beauty, recommended to those who like beautiful and delicate things.
Everything about the production and presentation of Amazon’s Tales From the Loop suggests they thought it might be a bigger hit, or at least they had enough faith in it to let it be different from the mass appeal conventions that apply to sci-fi shows. They have proved this many times in recent years, with shows like The Man In the High Castle and The Expanse favouring patient and mature story-telling over interminable flashbangs and whizzpops usually found in the more action based sci-fi on Netflix and others (The Handmaid’s Tale being another notable exception).
Having raised myself auto-didactically on the oldest traditions of science fiction writing in novel and short story form since my teenage years, I can say with some amateur authority that the point of using sci-fi ideas was always about the people and the parallels to social reality and politics that could be highlighted by putting them in a “what-if” situation. The lazer guns and spaceships and evil aliens were much more a product of Hollywood, and still are. Great science fiction writing can and usually does revolve around a very simple change to the world we know, an inversion or a convention or a technology that turns how we live on its head. At its best it is philosophical and moral poetry.
Tales From the Loop, inspired by the beguiling paintings of Swedish Artist Simon Stålenhag aspires to return to these principles, eschewing breakneck pace and unnecessary exposition at every turn – it is entirely content to confuse and sometimes even bore you with its patient, melancholy approach, testing almost if you are worthy to reach the prize of deeper meaning buried away in the final few episodes.
The idea of Stålenhag’s work is to juxtapose a familiar and mundane landscape with a detail of technology that does not exist in our reality. Often it is something broken, run-down or neglected, leaving a strange sadness and beauty behind that has you wondering who once made this and what was it for, and why is it no longer loved? The untold stories objects and hidden lives, secrets and desires that have been lost, is what this sensitive and delicate show is about. It is about the interconnection of lives caught in time, and the sci-fi / tech conceit is only the hanger that coat is put on. Which… I love.
The surface idea is that we are looking at the inhabitants of a small American town that once relied on farming and community, but now has been changed by the presence of an underground facility that deals with experimental physics and finding ways to make impossible things possible. They call it The Loop. It is never fully explained where it came from, or why, or what it is truly capable of – the mystery is always allowed to remain mostly a mystery – which, again, I love!
Many people in the town work at The Loop and rely on it for their livelihoods and collective economy, including Jonathon Pryce and Rebecca Hall, who are ostensibly the show’s main characters. But most folk have no idea what is really going on. Each episode focuses on one or two members of the community that interweave with one another; several important people begin as background dressing and become more prevalent as the full story of their lives and connections unfolds. But no one character is in every episode… which, you know, I love.
Their lives, that seem simple at first glance, are revealed to be complex tapestries of emotion and personal history, revolving around how The Loop has affected them and the things they love. The progression and unfolding of the detail is so deliberate and usually under-explained that very often you don’t realise the effect the full image will have. And when it does catch up with you it becomes a very moving and meaningful experience. Characters that you don’t understand or even like at first come into sharper focus as we reach the climax of the season and grow to learn why they are the way they are. The story arcs of Pryce and Hall in particular are very satisfying, tragic yet utterly beautiful to comprehend.
A lot of the criticism you will see about the show will concentrate on how slow it all is. I am totally convinced this is a deliberate artistic choice to weed out the thrill junkies. They are very welcome to go elsewhere, and it sounds as if many of them did, basing their reviews on one or two half watched episodes they couldn’t be bothered to engage with or wonder at. Which is why I think in time the respect for this as a work of art will come back around.
There is nothing to fault in the production at all. From the opening credits to the end of each episode, what you get is a very highly polished and considered look and feel, designed to evoke certain feelings over others – a wistfulness, an ennui, a bittersweet smile of knowing, perhaps. It invites you to watch patiently and relate, not to watch eagerly and expect… which, you know, I love.
The photography is crisp and well framed always; the music is subtle but effective; the dialogue is often sparing and well chosen (no detail is merely thrown away); and the direction is of a remarkably uniform vision, considering each episode is a different guest professional, including such prestigious names as Jodie Foster, Mark Romanek and Andrew Stanton.
I absolutely urge anyone that isn’t put off by a little sentiment to give this one a try. Sadness and regret in life is not something to shun and be afraid of, they are parts of human experience, and I love art that explores them as concepts. Put that art in a science fiction context and I am bound to love it even more. Like the final moments of Blade Runner, we know that one day all these moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. We have to take time to see the beauty while we can, even if that beauty is painful.
It may not be for you – I don’t think it is better or worse than other things, just more… me. There is every chance that if it isn’t you… you will hate it. If you do begin, however, please see it to the finish before casting judgement – the final episode directed by Jodie Foster is truly wonderful: a pay-off of such emotion after your investment of seven previous stories, tying it all together perfectly. Rarely have I felt so stupid for not understanding the point of something sooner, or been more pleased that I hadn’t. The final moment of the season is literally unforgettable, and gets richer in my imagination by the day.
Will there be a second season? There certainly could be. Was it enough of a success to justify the investment? Hmm, not sure. Either way, it either sits as a perfect self contained collection of fine, old-fashioned sci-fi stories, or I’d be happy to see it expand, as long as the temptation isn’t to listen to the negative reviews and pander to the fast-food mentality that has already rejected it without fully understanding it. Because nothing needs to change here. A thing of beauty, recommended to those who like beautiful and delicate things.