Search
Search results
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Wheels (2014) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Mar 12, 2020)
According to the film’s IMDb page, this low budget indie production, filmed in Los Angeles is the greatest film of all time! A month ago it sat at 9.3, which is better than The Godfather and The Shawshank Redemption! As I am writing and compiling a book about the best 200 films of the 21st century, up to the end of 2019, I was obliged to check this out. With almost 18,000 votes to its name, there must be something in it being rated that highly, right?
Well, obviously not. Someone smart behind the film, listed variously as a 2014 or 2017 production, depending on where you look, had clearly gone out of their way to manipulate its online presence in the hope of gaining viewers. Look, it worked – I watched it, and now I’m writing about it. Pretty shameful really, as you find that almost no website has a bad review or rating for it out there; it has pretty much been scrubbed clean. How they did it, I do not know, but it is indefensible to be honest. The real shame being that it isn’t a bad film for the budget at all, and may have got more views and respect the old fashioned way.
The story revolves around a recently paralysed man becoming suicidal and finding another guy in a wheelchair to ask if he will blow his brains out with a gun. From there the two go on a rampage of drug addiction, self harm and anti-social misbehaviour. For every cliche in there, there is another moment which is quite well done, and although you can see the cracks here and there it is mostly a watchable and enjoyable film, with some laughs and some genuine emotion. Acting wise, the two leads (writer and co-director Donavon Warren and Patrick Hume) have their moments too; perhaps lacking anything hugely inciteful, but certainly competent enough to compare favourably to some higher profile movies.
Ultimately, it is merely fine. Not something you would recommend or especially remember, but not a complete waste of 2 hours either. It is clearly going for the idea that disabled people are helpless victims on its head, and does largely succeed in not condescending or amping up the pity. That doesn’t stop either of them being unlikable people, however – perhaps that is the point.
More interesting than the film by far is how these guys manipulated the publicity system to get it seen. So many films worth seeing drift into obscurity for lack of money, take the films of Shane Caruth, Primer and Upstream Color. Both incredible, original and intelligent movies that no one saw, and only word of mouth many years later puts them on anyone’s radar. Then there are the endless festival films that do the rounds and can’t pick up distribution, no matter how good. Perhaps a film like Wheels needs to employ these kind of tactics to survive. It is really a question of ethics. I have to say, as an honest reviewer, it does bother me that fake ratings and reviews can exist and slip under the wire. But maybe that is just me…?
Well, obviously not. Someone smart behind the film, listed variously as a 2014 or 2017 production, depending on where you look, had clearly gone out of their way to manipulate its online presence in the hope of gaining viewers. Look, it worked – I watched it, and now I’m writing about it. Pretty shameful really, as you find that almost no website has a bad review or rating for it out there; it has pretty much been scrubbed clean. How they did it, I do not know, but it is indefensible to be honest. The real shame being that it isn’t a bad film for the budget at all, and may have got more views and respect the old fashioned way.
The story revolves around a recently paralysed man becoming suicidal and finding another guy in a wheelchair to ask if he will blow his brains out with a gun. From there the two go on a rampage of drug addiction, self harm and anti-social misbehaviour. For every cliche in there, there is another moment which is quite well done, and although you can see the cracks here and there it is mostly a watchable and enjoyable film, with some laughs and some genuine emotion. Acting wise, the two leads (writer and co-director Donavon Warren and Patrick Hume) have their moments too; perhaps lacking anything hugely inciteful, but certainly competent enough to compare favourably to some higher profile movies.
Ultimately, it is merely fine. Not something you would recommend or especially remember, but not a complete waste of 2 hours either. It is clearly going for the idea that disabled people are helpless victims on its head, and does largely succeed in not condescending or amping up the pity. That doesn’t stop either of them being unlikable people, however – perhaps that is the point.
More interesting than the film by far is how these guys manipulated the publicity system to get it seen. So many films worth seeing drift into obscurity for lack of money, take the films of Shane Caruth, Primer and Upstream Color. Both incredible, original and intelligent movies that no one saw, and only word of mouth many years later puts them on anyone’s radar. Then there are the endless festival films that do the rounds and can’t pick up distribution, no matter how good. Perhaps a film like Wheels needs to employ these kind of tactics to survive. It is really a question of ethics. I have to say, as an honest reviewer, it does bother me that fake ratings and reviews can exist and slip under the wire. But maybe that is just me…?
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Flight (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
I’m not good with dramas. I like to watch movies to escape reality and dramas are all about reminding you of the turmoil and awkwardness and unpredictability that is reality. But, only if they’re good. Dramas require an emotional response from the viewer, which can only be achieved through great performances, enhanced by story, music and editing. (don’t quote me I could be missing one). If one or more elements are missing, at best it’s an unexpected comedy, at worst you’ve just wasted time and money that you’ll never get back.
Flight in my opinion delivered. We start off with gratuitous nudity (for me it didn’t add to the story but guys will like it) from flight attendant Katerina Marquez (Nadine Valazquez) and a man, Captain Whip Whitacker (Denzel Washington) who’s about to hit his rock bottom. After a night of drinking and snorting some cocaine, together they take to the skies only for it to go horribly wrong, the plane begins an uncontrolled nose dive. Lot’s of close up shots put you right into the aircraft and you almost feel as if you’re on the flight as it’s going down (seriously my heart involuntarily started pounding faster).
Afterwards, the movie really hits its’ stride and gets into the gritty reality of what life can become. Denzel does an excellent job of bringing you in to the internal struggles with his demons; he’s so good in his denial. John Goodman plays a drug dealer Harling Mays, almost as a comic relief which actually works. Don Cheadle plays Hugh Lang, a criminal attorney sent to help Cpt Whitacker as questions arise about what really caused the plane to crash. He plays a great attorney, not smarmy, not slick, but intelligent and sharp, and in his own way, caring.
Nicole Maggen (Kelly Reilly), a drug addict who we witness goes through a relapse that puts her into the path of Cpt Whitacker. Co-pilot Ken Evans (Brian Geraghty) was a convincingly green pilot whom I would not want flying any plane I’m in. And flight attendant Margaret Tomason (Tamara Tunie), a good friend of Whitackers for several years and Pilots union rep Charlie Anderson (Bruce Greenwood) a long time military buddy who comes back into his life because of the crash. I liked both their performances, they really did great in their supporting rolls; you couldn’t have one without the other.
There is a question of devine intervention and redemption, but I think the movie steers clear of being overly religious. (I could have done without Ken Evans wife, overkill in my opinion and not necessary to the story). Anything more I say will spill the beans on the ending, so I’ll leave you with this; it really is unpredictable, you never quite know what Cpt Whitacker’s going to do until he does it. There are beautiful moments and bittersweet moments that create a powerful, emotional ride that I would recommend to someone who likes a good drama. And, even to people like me, who generally try to avoid them.
Flight in my opinion delivered. We start off with gratuitous nudity (for me it didn’t add to the story but guys will like it) from flight attendant Katerina Marquez (Nadine Valazquez) and a man, Captain Whip Whitacker (Denzel Washington) who’s about to hit his rock bottom. After a night of drinking and snorting some cocaine, together they take to the skies only for it to go horribly wrong, the plane begins an uncontrolled nose dive. Lot’s of close up shots put you right into the aircraft and you almost feel as if you’re on the flight as it’s going down (seriously my heart involuntarily started pounding faster).
Afterwards, the movie really hits its’ stride and gets into the gritty reality of what life can become. Denzel does an excellent job of bringing you in to the internal struggles with his demons; he’s so good in his denial. John Goodman plays a drug dealer Harling Mays, almost as a comic relief which actually works. Don Cheadle plays Hugh Lang, a criminal attorney sent to help Cpt Whitacker as questions arise about what really caused the plane to crash. He plays a great attorney, not smarmy, not slick, but intelligent and sharp, and in his own way, caring.
Nicole Maggen (Kelly Reilly), a drug addict who we witness goes through a relapse that puts her into the path of Cpt Whitacker. Co-pilot Ken Evans (Brian Geraghty) was a convincingly green pilot whom I would not want flying any plane I’m in. And flight attendant Margaret Tomason (Tamara Tunie), a good friend of Whitackers for several years and Pilots union rep Charlie Anderson (Bruce Greenwood) a long time military buddy who comes back into his life because of the crash. I liked both their performances, they really did great in their supporting rolls; you couldn’t have one without the other.
There is a question of devine intervention and redemption, but I think the movie steers clear of being overly religious. (I could have done without Ken Evans wife, overkill in my opinion and not necessary to the story). Anything more I say will spill the beans on the ending, so I’ll leave you with this; it really is unpredictable, you never quite know what Cpt Whitacker’s going to do until he does it. There are beautiful moments and bittersweet moments that create a powerful, emotional ride that I would recommend to someone who likes a good drama. And, even to people like me, who generally try to avoid them.
We Happy Few
7.3
Rate It
Video Game Watch
IMPORTANT: As the game is in Early Access phase, please read carefully the Early Access disclaimer...
action
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Line of Duty (2019) in Movies
Jul 12, 2020
I know a throwaway action film when I see it and they're usually either brilliant films to relax to or a great opportunity to catch up on your social media feeds.
Frank Penny is bumbling through his life as a cop, a loner, disgraced, but he still knows what's right. When an operation to rescue a kidnap victim goes awry he leaps into the pursuit against orders, cornering the suspect it looks like it's a job well done, until he has to draw his gun. With the suspect down there might not be any way to get the girl back safely.
You'd be forgiven for thinking this was a different film from the outset. It starts with heavy inspirational music over Frank working out, is it a sports movie about redemption? A stylised title comes up, is it a romcom? None of the above, it is of course a crime thriller. After the opening that does thankfully become evident.
When we meet characters that would normally be a time for a slightly slower pace, but Line Of Duty seems to keep everything quick from the very beginning and it doesn't slow as we get further in. The constant action sweeps you along with everything and you really don't notice how long you've been watching for.
Aaron Eckhart in the lead role... makes me pause. It works in a John McClane-esque race against time kind of way but the dynamic with Courtney Eaton is strange. The recklessness that he takes by bringing her along with him (if you ignore the madness of doing it in the first place) makes you think it's going to be a flirty kind of relationship, but he's over twice her age and with his backstory you'd expect a protective father figure... but remember there's all that action and peril so that really doesn't work either.
Eaton gives a fairly solid performance as the intrepid reporter, there's not anything mindblowing mixed in the role but it's nice to have the action broken up with the ongoing commentary and slight touch of humour.
As you'd expect with a fast pace those cameras go running a lot, ugh to jiggly camerawork, but thankfully because it's incorporated with the action you don't notice so much. Along with that you get to see some of Ava's phone camera footage, I think the film could have stood to have more of it, it would have been a relevant change in style and added a little more to spice up the expected elements. I was a little surprised to see some random video game shots creep in, those clips work just fine in things like Guns Akimbo, but in the context of Line Of Duty it didn't make a lot of sense when there was a sensible alternative available.
Line Of Duty is the Ronseal of films, you know what to expect and in that regard it doesn't disappoint. It's got lots of your typical action cliches and if you like the race against time type of storyline then I really don't think you'll have any issue watching it.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/07/line-of-duty-movie-review.html
Frank Penny is bumbling through his life as a cop, a loner, disgraced, but he still knows what's right. When an operation to rescue a kidnap victim goes awry he leaps into the pursuit against orders, cornering the suspect it looks like it's a job well done, until he has to draw his gun. With the suspect down there might not be any way to get the girl back safely.
You'd be forgiven for thinking this was a different film from the outset. It starts with heavy inspirational music over Frank working out, is it a sports movie about redemption? A stylised title comes up, is it a romcom? None of the above, it is of course a crime thriller. After the opening that does thankfully become evident.
When we meet characters that would normally be a time for a slightly slower pace, but Line Of Duty seems to keep everything quick from the very beginning and it doesn't slow as we get further in. The constant action sweeps you along with everything and you really don't notice how long you've been watching for.
Aaron Eckhart in the lead role... makes me pause. It works in a John McClane-esque race against time kind of way but the dynamic with Courtney Eaton is strange. The recklessness that he takes by bringing her along with him (if you ignore the madness of doing it in the first place) makes you think it's going to be a flirty kind of relationship, but he's over twice her age and with his backstory you'd expect a protective father figure... but remember there's all that action and peril so that really doesn't work either.
Eaton gives a fairly solid performance as the intrepid reporter, there's not anything mindblowing mixed in the role but it's nice to have the action broken up with the ongoing commentary and slight touch of humour.
As you'd expect with a fast pace those cameras go running a lot, ugh to jiggly camerawork, but thankfully because it's incorporated with the action you don't notice so much. Along with that you get to see some of Ava's phone camera footage, I think the film could have stood to have more of it, it would have been a relevant change in style and added a little more to spice up the expected elements. I was a little surprised to see some random video game shots creep in, those clips work just fine in things like Guns Akimbo, but in the context of Line Of Duty it didn't make a lot of sense when there was a sensible alternative available.
Line Of Duty is the Ronseal of films, you know what to expect and in that regard it doesn't disappoint. It's got lots of your typical action cliches and if you like the race against time type of storyline then I really don't think you'll have any issue watching it.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/07/line-of-duty-movie-review.html
Bank Millennium
Finance and Productivity
App
Aplikacja mobilna Banku Millennium łatwo dopasowuje się do indywidualnych potrzeb użytkowników....
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated You Were Never Really Here (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Joachim Phoenix delivers a standout performance in a violent tale of crusading.
Joachim Phoenix (“Her”) is a very intense actor, and fits perfectly here into the role of Joe. For he is a hired thug, available to do over anyone you think deserves dispatching or giving a good telling off. His weapon of choice for this task is a ball-point hammer, bought each time from a local hardware shop. He is a ghost, who drifts in and out of his jobs, face concealed by a hoodie and emanating an air of menace that automatically deflects enquiring eyes.
When hired by a Senator (Alex Manette) to rescue his wayward daughter Nina (Ekaterina Samsonov) from the clutches of a paedophile gang, Joe delivers on the job with gusto, and – you sense – a degree of satisfaction. But then things go from bad to violent worse and Joe is drawn into a deadly high stakes game. As things get more and more personal, Joe embarks on a personal crusade for justice and retribution.
The real joy of this film is that Joe is such a nuanced character. Yes, he’s a brutal thug, but is still living with and loving his aged and demented mother (Judith Roberts), even though she drives him to distraction. He’s also clearly damaged himself, with a high degree of OCD behavior exhibited. Via clever flashbacks, we get hints to the route that led the boy to become this damaged man. As a sociopath, when things go wrong he could just say “F*** it” and walk away. But he doesn’t. Is this altruism? A sense of professional pride? Or is it the sight of a path to redemption? Although you could strongly argue that revenge kicks in to reinforce his decision, Lynne Ramsay‘s screenplay leaves things deliciously vague. Ramsey also directs expertly: she previously did 2011’s “We Need To Talk About Kevin”.
“I don’t like gory films” you might say “so this doesn’t sound like one for me”. Me neither, but actually, the trailer makes the film seem worse than it is. The violence is more alluded to than shown. Most of the “hammer action” is done either in long shot or seen on CCTV cameras, and you don’t get to see much of the outcome. There is only one really gory bit that I remember (shut your eyes where Phoenix answers the knock at the hotel door if you are squeamish!).
This doesn’t mean that it’s a comfortable watch though. It’s an insanely tense film since you’re not sure the direction it will go in next (think “Get Out”), and it has more than its fair share of “WTF” moments, especially in a dramatic closing scene. There are some memorable cinematic moments as well: a young girl in a nightie in the paedophile den blankly observing Joe’s handiwork being one that stays with you.
It’s a standout film, winning Best Actor (for Phoenix) and best screenplay (for Ramsey) at Cannes. It will be in a strong position to make my films of the year list. Highly recommended.
When hired by a Senator (Alex Manette) to rescue his wayward daughter Nina (Ekaterina Samsonov) from the clutches of a paedophile gang, Joe delivers on the job with gusto, and – you sense – a degree of satisfaction. But then things go from bad to violent worse and Joe is drawn into a deadly high stakes game. As things get more and more personal, Joe embarks on a personal crusade for justice and retribution.
The real joy of this film is that Joe is such a nuanced character. Yes, he’s a brutal thug, but is still living with and loving his aged and demented mother (Judith Roberts), even though she drives him to distraction. He’s also clearly damaged himself, with a high degree of OCD behavior exhibited. Via clever flashbacks, we get hints to the route that led the boy to become this damaged man. As a sociopath, when things go wrong he could just say “F*** it” and walk away. But he doesn’t. Is this altruism? A sense of professional pride? Or is it the sight of a path to redemption? Although you could strongly argue that revenge kicks in to reinforce his decision, Lynne Ramsay‘s screenplay leaves things deliciously vague. Ramsey also directs expertly: she previously did 2011’s “We Need To Talk About Kevin”.
“I don’t like gory films” you might say “so this doesn’t sound like one for me”. Me neither, but actually, the trailer makes the film seem worse than it is. The violence is more alluded to than shown. Most of the “hammer action” is done either in long shot or seen on CCTV cameras, and you don’t get to see much of the outcome. There is only one really gory bit that I remember (shut your eyes where Phoenix answers the knock at the hotel door if you are squeamish!).
This doesn’t mean that it’s a comfortable watch though. It’s an insanely tense film since you’re not sure the direction it will go in next (think “Get Out”), and it has more than its fair share of “WTF” moments, especially in a dramatic closing scene. There are some memorable cinematic moments as well: a young girl in a nightie in the paedophile den blankly observing Joe’s handiwork being one that stays with you.
It’s a standout film, winning Best Actor (for Phoenix) and best screenplay (for Ramsey) at Cannes. It will be in a strong position to make my films of the year list. Highly recommended.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Eternal Rider (Lords of Deliverance, #1, Demonica, #6) in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I loved that this book took a concept that I am very familiar with, the Four Horsemen from Revelation, and turned it on its head. For all of the repetitiveness of fantasy fiction using the same species over and over again - from mermaids to vampires - the horsemen are definitely new vehicles for enticing literature.
The background of the story is that all of the horsemen once lead human lives, but were cursed to become the horsemen after reacting very badly to the news that Lilith is their mother. Another interesting quirk on the common tale is that one of them is actually female, Limos. The four are destined to either fulfill the Biblical prophecy or the demonic equivalent - which none of them want to do. In addition, each of them have a unique method by which they fall into the demonic prophecy's designated role and must fight to keep said method from playing out.
Ares, whom the story says the Greek god of war is named for, is destined to become War should the being bearing his seal, or agimortus, dies. Thanks to Cara, a human, inadvertently crossing paths with a hellhound, she becomes the bearer of the agimortus. Luckily, she has a few tricks of her own to aid her in her new role. I liked Cara and the way she seemed to blossom despite her captivity and impending death, as well as how easily she could stand up to Ares. I would have liked a little more character development, as it did not feel like her character arc was complete.
Ares is also an interesting character. Even though he is drawn to wars and violence, with his very presence inciting violence and rage among humans, Cara is immune to this ability. Because of how her presence weakens him, Ares shows a vulnerability characteristic of the humanity he left behind thousands of years ago. Around Cara, he is simply a normal guy falling in love, and the way he attempts to "macho-up" to deal with it is positively adorable.
The violence in the book is both believable and quite gritty. Of course, the horsemen's supernatural abilities of strength and healing allow it to be especially intense and dramatic. The sexual scenes in the book are also quite graphic and detailed, without feeling cheesy or awkward.
The laws built into Ione's world of horsemen, angels, and demons is complex without being confusing. The reader is introduced to its structure piece by piece throughout the novel without being bombarded by the details, and all of the pieces fit together nicely. In addition, Ione even includes a glossary at the beginning of the book to help the reader become more accustomed to the world.
The other siblings are all unique and show lots of promise for future books in the series. Thanatos, destined to become Death, has a seductive air of mystery that had me wondering several times throughout the book if something would occur between him and Cara. The sister, Limos, destined to be Famine, also shows many interesting characteristics, such as a certain hidden madness that she struggles to keep leashed, and the chemistry she shares with Arik is palpable. Even though Reseph becomes Pestilence early in the book, I have a feeling he may prove to be the most interesting of the siblings under a theme of redemption. I only have to wait till December for Immortal Rider (Lords of Deliverance), which centers on Limos, to find out what happens next!
The background of the story is that all of the horsemen once lead human lives, but were cursed to become the horsemen after reacting very badly to the news that Lilith is their mother. Another interesting quirk on the common tale is that one of them is actually female, Limos. The four are destined to either fulfill the Biblical prophecy or the demonic equivalent - which none of them want to do. In addition, each of them have a unique method by which they fall into the demonic prophecy's designated role and must fight to keep said method from playing out.
Ares, whom the story says the Greek god of war is named for, is destined to become War should the being bearing his seal, or agimortus, dies. Thanks to Cara, a human, inadvertently crossing paths with a hellhound, she becomes the bearer of the agimortus. Luckily, she has a few tricks of her own to aid her in her new role. I liked Cara and the way she seemed to blossom despite her captivity and impending death, as well as how easily she could stand up to Ares. I would have liked a little more character development, as it did not feel like her character arc was complete.
Ares is also an interesting character. Even though he is drawn to wars and violence, with his very presence inciting violence and rage among humans, Cara is immune to this ability. Because of how her presence weakens him, Ares shows a vulnerability characteristic of the humanity he left behind thousands of years ago. Around Cara, he is simply a normal guy falling in love, and the way he attempts to "macho-up" to deal with it is positively adorable.
The violence in the book is both believable and quite gritty. Of course, the horsemen's supernatural abilities of strength and healing allow it to be especially intense and dramatic. The sexual scenes in the book are also quite graphic and detailed, without feeling cheesy or awkward.
The laws built into Ione's world of horsemen, angels, and demons is complex without being confusing. The reader is introduced to its structure piece by piece throughout the novel without being bombarded by the details, and all of the pieces fit together nicely. In addition, Ione even includes a glossary at the beginning of the book to help the reader become more accustomed to the world.
The other siblings are all unique and show lots of promise for future books in the series. Thanatos, destined to become Death, has a seductive air of mystery that had me wondering several times throughout the book if something would occur between him and Cara. The sister, Limos, destined to be Famine, also shows many interesting characteristics, such as a certain hidden madness that she struggles to keep leashed, and the chemistry she shares with Arik is palpable. Even though Reseph becomes Pestilence early in the book, I have a feeling he may prove to be the most interesting of the siblings under a theme of redemption. I only have to wait till December for Immortal Rider (Lords of Deliverance), which centers on Limos, to find out what happens next!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Dumbo (2019) in Movies
Apr 5, 2019
In a word...bland
There are many words that you can use to describe films by Tim Burton: Gothic, Bizarre, Dark, Interesting, SteamPunk, Unique, Visual.
With the live action DUMBO, you can add another word to describe a Tim Burton film: Bland.
Based on the 1941 animated classic character of Walt Disney, DUMBO tells the tale of an animal, shamed for having a deformity...over-large ears...but when the young elephant discovers that these ears can save the circus he is in - and will help reunite him with his mother - a journey to redemption begins.
Sounds like a pretty good premise for a film, right? Unfortunately, this isn't really the theme of this film. Unlike other Disney "live action" versions of classic animated films (BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, the upcoming ALADDIN and THE LION KING), DUMBO is a live action remake only in the fact that Director Burton uses the baby elephant, separated from his mother, with over large ears who can fly. This film shows no signs of the earlier, beloved, children's film. It eliminates the songs (except as background music) and it tacks on a family drama of a returning army veteran (who's wife died while he was away) and his 2 children and a rival circus trying to steal the famed flying elephant.
Is it a children's movie? Is it a Tim Burton eerie, scary, visual delight? Well...yes...and no...on both parts and that's the problem of this film. Burton straddles a line between the two, never committing to a fun, stylistic children's film (like PADDINGTON 2) or an eerie, bizarre Tim Burton film (many, many to name but the closest I can come is BIG FISH). He restrains himself to the bland middle and it shows.
He has assembled a strong ensemble of actors to populate this world - Colin Farrell, Danny DeVito, Eva Green, Michael Keaton and Alan Arkin are all in this film - and are all bland. While, at times, this film felt every minute of it's 1 hour and 52 minute run time, I was longing for more from each of these characters, fleshing out what was the BEGINNING of interesting characters, but never getting past that. Each one of these characters are bland, bland, bland and you can see each actor trying harder and harder to push some sort of character to the screen, but never succeeding.
The only interesting characters, ironically enough, is that of Dumbo and his mother, Mrs. Jumbo. These are 2 CGI, non-speaking characters but they say more in facial expressions and movements than all of the human characters combined.
And that's the other problem with this film. Much like another Disney Live Action film, TOMORROWLAND, a large part of this film is given to showing the world that is lavishly made by the Director, Production Designer, Art Director and Cinematographer - and it is impressive indeed - but the action and characters inhabiting this world are...well...bland and that makes for a lackluster film.
One thing to note - this film is not scary, nor is it overly sad (things that I heard that this film was), so I'd be interested to hear if you have younger children (ages 7-10, say) and they saw the film - did they enjoy it? I think they just might.
I didn't, I thought this film was bland.
Letter Grade: B- (for the interesting visuals put up on the screen)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
With the live action DUMBO, you can add another word to describe a Tim Burton film: Bland.
Based on the 1941 animated classic character of Walt Disney, DUMBO tells the tale of an animal, shamed for having a deformity...over-large ears...but when the young elephant discovers that these ears can save the circus he is in - and will help reunite him with his mother - a journey to redemption begins.
Sounds like a pretty good premise for a film, right? Unfortunately, this isn't really the theme of this film. Unlike other Disney "live action" versions of classic animated films (BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, the upcoming ALADDIN and THE LION KING), DUMBO is a live action remake only in the fact that Director Burton uses the baby elephant, separated from his mother, with over large ears who can fly. This film shows no signs of the earlier, beloved, children's film. It eliminates the songs (except as background music) and it tacks on a family drama of a returning army veteran (who's wife died while he was away) and his 2 children and a rival circus trying to steal the famed flying elephant.
Is it a children's movie? Is it a Tim Burton eerie, scary, visual delight? Well...yes...and no...on both parts and that's the problem of this film. Burton straddles a line between the two, never committing to a fun, stylistic children's film (like PADDINGTON 2) or an eerie, bizarre Tim Burton film (many, many to name but the closest I can come is BIG FISH). He restrains himself to the bland middle and it shows.
He has assembled a strong ensemble of actors to populate this world - Colin Farrell, Danny DeVito, Eva Green, Michael Keaton and Alan Arkin are all in this film - and are all bland. While, at times, this film felt every minute of it's 1 hour and 52 minute run time, I was longing for more from each of these characters, fleshing out what was the BEGINNING of interesting characters, but never getting past that. Each one of these characters are bland, bland, bland and you can see each actor trying harder and harder to push some sort of character to the screen, but never succeeding.
The only interesting characters, ironically enough, is that of Dumbo and his mother, Mrs. Jumbo. These are 2 CGI, non-speaking characters but they say more in facial expressions and movements than all of the human characters combined.
And that's the other problem with this film. Much like another Disney Live Action film, TOMORROWLAND, a large part of this film is given to showing the world that is lavishly made by the Director, Production Designer, Art Director and Cinematographer - and it is impressive indeed - but the action and characters inhabiting this world are...well...bland and that makes for a lackluster film.
One thing to note - this film is not scary, nor is it overly sad (things that I heard that this film was), so I'd be interested to hear if you have younger children (ages 7-10, say) and they saw the film - did they enjoy it? I think they just might.
I didn't, I thought this film was bland.
Letter Grade: B- (for the interesting visuals put up on the screen)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Dana (24 KP) rated Fairest - Levana's Story in Books
Mar 23, 2018
As always, there are going to be spoilers in this review, so be warned.
As much as I love the Lunar Chronicles series, I did not enjoy reading this book. Yes, we got backstory into Levana's life and (finally) are told what she actually looks like, but she is not a likable character in the slightest. I was expecting some sort of redeemable quality for the character and got nothing. It is hard for me to believe that any villain has absolutely zero things that can be said are good, but Levana is one of them.
She is painted as this self involved, self-loathing, overly power hungry character who has no feelings except what she thinks is love. This, again, is hard to imagine. I mean, I understand (but do not condone) her lack of feelings toward her parents. They were not there for her at all as a child and basically let Channary get away with physically maiming her little sister. But still, she didn't feel anything toward them when they were brutally murdered and actually fantasized about doing it herself? Like, what the hell?
And then there comes her very abusive relationship with her "husband." First off, disguising yourself as his wife, that's weird, but then doing it after that wife dies, only weeks after she died, that's messed up. Then taking away his agency, his ability to say no, by manipulating him mentally, come on! Really? And getting jealous that he actually loves his daughter and wanting her to suffer for it. This girl has issues!
And to top it all off, trying to get Selene murdered by "accident" only to take her throne and have the gall to stand up at the podium at both Selene's and Channary's funeral smug as hell because she gets to be queen now? I can't believe that someone would be that heartless.
Channary, for all of her messed up qualities, is even given some amount of redemption in her love for Selene. It was only really revealed eight years after she was murdered, but still, it is something that shows she is at least part human in her emotions. Even though she is a pretty bad character, I kind of like Channary?!? Out of the two sisters, she is the most "real" in her ability to act like a person.
I also like getting the backstory of Winter so I can know what to expect and understand why she acts as she does before I start reading her book. It is interesting to know that she, Selene, and Jacin were really close as children and that Selene's death hit her so hard. I also like that we got to meet her mother, Solstice, because she was a freaking angel and should not have died. Ugh. But then, Selene wouldn't have had any friends growing up because Levana would have shut that down so fast.
Overall, I was disappointed with this book. Especially since all of the other ones have been so great. It is hard to see characters who are just so bad with no redeeming qualities. It makes me think less of the story, in a way, because it is not making that character as deep as they can be. I am going to read the rest of the series, because I love the other characters, but this one was kind of a let down.
As much as I love the Lunar Chronicles series, I did not enjoy reading this book. Yes, we got backstory into Levana's life and (finally) are told what she actually looks like, but she is not a likable character in the slightest. I was expecting some sort of redeemable quality for the character and got nothing. It is hard for me to believe that any villain has absolutely zero things that can be said are good, but Levana is one of them.
She is painted as this self involved, self-loathing, overly power hungry character who has no feelings except what she thinks is love. This, again, is hard to imagine. I mean, I understand (but do not condone) her lack of feelings toward her parents. They were not there for her at all as a child and basically let Channary get away with physically maiming her little sister. But still, she didn't feel anything toward them when they were brutally murdered and actually fantasized about doing it herself? Like, what the hell?
And then there comes her very abusive relationship with her "husband." First off, disguising yourself as his wife, that's weird, but then doing it after that wife dies, only weeks after she died, that's messed up. Then taking away his agency, his ability to say no, by manipulating him mentally, come on! Really? And getting jealous that he actually loves his daughter and wanting her to suffer for it. This girl has issues!
And to top it all off, trying to get Selene murdered by "accident" only to take her throne and have the gall to stand up at the podium at both Selene's and Channary's funeral smug as hell because she gets to be queen now? I can't believe that someone would be that heartless.
Channary, for all of her messed up qualities, is even given some amount of redemption in her love for Selene. It was only really revealed eight years after she was murdered, but still, it is something that shows she is at least part human in her emotions. Even though she is a pretty bad character, I kind of like Channary?!? Out of the two sisters, she is the most "real" in her ability to act like a person.
I also like getting the backstory of Winter so I can know what to expect and understand why she acts as she does before I start reading her book. It is interesting to know that she, Selene, and Jacin were really close as children and that Selene's death hit her so hard. I also like that we got to meet her mother, Solstice, because she was a freaking angel and should not have died. Ugh. But then, Selene wouldn't have had any friends growing up because Levana would have shut that down so fast.
Overall, I was disappointed with this book. Especially since all of the other ones have been so great. It is hard to see characters who are just so bad with no redeeming qualities. It makes me think less of the story, in a way, because it is not making that character as deep as they can be. I am going to read the rest of the series, because I love the other characters, but this one was kind of a let down.