Search
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Thor: The Dark World (2013) in Movies
Oct 1, 2020
The second Thor movie is a visual representation of the word "meh". It has all the right ingredients, but somehow manages to fall flat.
The general plot is an issue. It's not a terrible narrative, but it's the kind of bloated fantasy stuff you would find in an early 2000s superhero movie, not a franchise that is eight films in and includes The Avengers.
The only purpose it serves in the grand scheme of things is the introduction of another Infinity Stone. Other than that it's just stuffed with exposition and kind of bland.
Another issue is, you guess it, the villain. Malekith isn't necessarily a bad choice for the movies antagonist, but his execution feels inconsequential and boring. Christopher Eccleston does the best with what he has but the stakes never feel high with this guy, although I do enjoy his comic- accurate appearance from the halfway mark.
Visually, The Dark World looks great. The CGI is pretty decent, the locations such as Asgard are just as well realised as the first film. Returning cast members include Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård, Rene Russo, Kat Dennings, Idris Elba and Natalie Portman, as well as the always awesome Chris Hemsworth. Nothing wrong here, although I do feel that Lady Sif and The Warriors Three are wasted this time around.
The final set piece is pretty damn entertaining to be fair, and borders on suitable comic-book absurdity at points. The attack on Asgard by the Dark Elves is also pretty thrilling, but everything else is a little so so.
I still like Thor: The Dark World for what it's worth, it's just a little by the numbers and uninspired, and is probably my least favourite of the MCU movies to date.
The general plot is an issue. It's not a terrible narrative, but it's the kind of bloated fantasy stuff you would find in an early 2000s superhero movie, not a franchise that is eight films in and includes The Avengers.
The only purpose it serves in the grand scheme of things is the introduction of another Infinity Stone. Other than that it's just stuffed with exposition and kind of bland.
Another issue is, you guess it, the villain. Malekith isn't necessarily a bad choice for the movies antagonist, but his execution feels inconsequential and boring. Christopher Eccleston does the best with what he has but the stakes never feel high with this guy, although I do enjoy his comic- accurate appearance from the halfway mark.
Visually, The Dark World looks great. The CGI is pretty decent, the locations such as Asgard are just as well realised as the first film. Returning cast members include Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård, Rene Russo, Kat Dennings, Idris Elba and Natalie Portman, as well as the always awesome Chris Hemsworth. Nothing wrong here, although I do feel that Lady Sif and The Warriors Three are wasted this time around.
The final set piece is pretty damn entertaining to be fair, and borders on suitable comic-book absurdity at points. The attack on Asgard by the Dark Elves is also pretty thrilling, but everything else is a little so so.
I still like Thor: The Dark World for what it's worth, it's just a little by the numbers and uninspired, and is probably my least favourite of the MCU movies to date.
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Velvet Buzzsaw (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Ever since Netflix have proven themselves as a fantastic streaming platform, everyone gets hyped about their ‘Originals’. Velvet Buzzsaw was no exception, and when the first trailer dropped I was so excited to watch it. Everything about it seemed great; it was written and directed by Dan Gilroy (the guy who gave us the fantastic Nightcrawler), and the cast was incredible. Who could say no to Jake Gyllenhaal, Rene Russo AND Toni Collette? Not me. Unfortunately, this wonderful mix didn’t live up to my expectations at all and left me feeling very disappointed.
The main issue I had with Velvet Buzzsaw is that the pacing is horrendously slow. The first 45 minutes felt like nothing but exposition, when it was a relatively simple concept for the audience to grasp. The film follows a bunch of art critics, artists and patrons of the arts as they uncover a series of paintings from an unknown artist. However, they’re not your normal paintings because a supernatural force lurks within them waiting to enact revenge. That’s it, that’s the synopsis. So why waste so much screen time dragging things out? The trailer made this look like a fast paced, intense thriller, but the reality is nothing like that.
It’s a shame the pacing and screenplay is so weak, because Velvet Buzzsaw does have a few redeeming features. The quality of acting is very good, and visually it’s beautiful to look at, particularly the locations and the paintings that appear throughout. I especially enjoyed the characters Rhodora Haze (Rene Russo) and Gretchen (Toni Collette), as they embody the typically powerful, ruthless and bitchy personas one would expect from this industry. They satirise art lovers perfectly, which is partially why I haven’t rated this film lower. In all honesty, these actors deserved better than the script they were dealt, and it’s a shame such talent was wasted here. I’m having trouble understanding how you can take such an interesting concept and brilliant actors, and make it so boring.
Even the inevitable death scenes are pretty dull, and play like a straight to TV horror film that doesn’t quite hit the mark. Velvet Buzzsaw fails to execute any sort of suspense, or even terror, so when people eventually die you’re just sat there like “Huh, is that it?”. After such a slow first act, you expect some kind of payoff, but it never arrives. Again, the trailer had some pretty scary moments that made me expect a few jump scares or intense moments. I’m confused about why this was even marketed as a horror-thriller, when it lacks so many of the aspects that make both those genres great. I didn’t feel scared at all, and even when the characters we were supposed to hate met their demise, there was no morbid satisfaction in it. To be completely honest, I was apathetic towards the whole thing. I just wanted it to end.
If you are a fan of slow-burning films that take a while to get going, then you might enjoy Velvet Buzzsaw more than I did. I don’t necessarily have a problem with these types of films, but you still need to keep the audience gripped somehow. You need to give people a reason to keep watching.
Gilroy’s attempt to show the horrors of the art world falls flat, and certainly doesn’t live up to the expectations based on the success of Nightcrawler. Part of me even wondered how this was the same man, it felt so vastly different to his other work. Netflix Originals rarely let me down, but this time, they really did.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/review-velvet-buzzsaw-2019/
The main issue I had with Velvet Buzzsaw is that the pacing is horrendously slow. The first 45 minutes felt like nothing but exposition, when it was a relatively simple concept for the audience to grasp. The film follows a bunch of art critics, artists and patrons of the arts as they uncover a series of paintings from an unknown artist. However, they’re not your normal paintings because a supernatural force lurks within them waiting to enact revenge. That’s it, that’s the synopsis. So why waste so much screen time dragging things out? The trailer made this look like a fast paced, intense thriller, but the reality is nothing like that.
It’s a shame the pacing and screenplay is so weak, because Velvet Buzzsaw does have a few redeeming features. The quality of acting is very good, and visually it’s beautiful to look at, particularly the locations and the paintings that appear throughout. I especially enjoyed the characters Rhodora Haze (Rene Russo) and Gretchen (Toni Collette), as they embody the typically powerful, ruthless and bitchy personas one would expect from this industry. They satirise art lovers perfectly, which is partially why I haven’t rated this film lower. In all honesty, these actors deserved better than the script they were dealt, and it’s a shame such talent was wasted here. I’m having trouble understanding how you can take such an interesting concept and brilliant actors, and make it so boring.
Even the inevitable death scenes are pretty dull, and play like a straight to TV horror film that doesn’t quite hit the mark. Velvet Buzzsaw fails to execute any sort of suspense, or even terror, so when people eventually die you’re just sat there like “Huh, is that it?”. After such a slow first act, you expect some kind of payoff, but it never arrives. Again, the trailer had some pretty scary moments that made me expect a few jump scares or intense moments. I’m confused about why this was even marketed as a horror-thriller, when it lacks so many of the aspects that make both those genres great. I didn’t feel scared at all, and even when the characters we were supposed to hate met their demise, there was no morbid satisfaction in it. To be completely honest, I was apathetic towards the whole thing. I just wanted it to end.
If you are a fan of slow-burning films that take a while to get going, then you might enjoy Velvet Buzzsaw more than I did. I don’t necessarily have a problem with these types of films, but you still need to keep the audience gripped somehow. You need to give people a reason to keep watching.
Gilroy’s attempt to show the horrors of the art world falls flat, and certainly doesn’t live up to the expectations based on the success of Nightcrawler. Part of me even wondered how this was the same man, it felt so vastly different to his other work. Netflix Originals rarely let me down, but this time, they really did.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/review-velvet-buzzsaw-2019/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Intern (2015) in Movies
Jun 6, 2018
In a word...charming
Like most of you, I did not make it to the movie theaters in September, 2015 to catch the Nancy Meyers "fish-out-of-water" comedy THE INTERN about a 70-ish man (Robert DeNiro) who goes to work at an Internet Start-up company headed by a a driven Millennial (Anne Hathaway). It seemed that this film was just going to be another Robert DeNiro phone-it-in "paycheck" comedy and not worth our time.
Boy, was I wrong.
In a word, I would call this film...charming. Hathaway is charming, the other workers and Interns at the start-up are charming and DeNiro (believe it or not) is the most charming of all.
Starring as Ben - a widower who is just withering away with inactivity and boredom who decides to go back to work - DeNiro shows he "still has it". His Ben is a strong character, as nuanced as one can be in this type of film and...yes...EXTREMELY charming. DeNiro most definitely is NOT phoning this one in - he gives it a very good effort (maybe not A+, but...) and it shows. He is on screen for almost every scene and holds our attention throughout.
Proving to be a worthy partner in this film is Anne Hathaway's driven Internet sensation, Jules. She spars with DeNiro throughout and the two make a fun pairing.
Also joining in on the fun is Rene Russo as a masseuse (and love interest for DeNiro and Andrew Rannels as Jules' ass't. But it is the trio of Adam Devine, Zack Pearlman and Jason Orley that almost steals this film as 3 knuckleheads that work with - and are mentored by - DeNiro's Yoda-like Intern. I almost would have preferred to see a film about these 4.
Nothing in this film is revolutionary or new and Director/Writer Meyers keeps it that way. It's like pulling on an old, comfortable sweater or a really well worn-in pair of shoes. It won't win any awards, but it is fun..and, yes...charming just the same.
THE INTERN is now streaming on NETFLIX and AMAZON PRIME, if you are looking for a...I'll say it one more time...charming...way to spend an evening - look no further than here.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Boy, was I wrong.
In a word, I would call this film...charming. Hathaway is charming, the other workers and Interns at the start-up are charming and DeNiro (believe it or not) is the most charming of all.
Starring as Ben - a widower who is just withering away with inactivity and boredom who decides to go back to work - DeNiro shows he "still has it". His Ben is a strong character, as nuanced as one can be in this type of film and...yes...EXTREMELY charming. DeNiro most definitely is NOT phoning this one in - he gives it a very good effort (maybe not A+, but...) and it shows. He is on screen for almost every scene and holds our attention throughout.
Proving to be a worthy partner in this film is Anne Hathaway's driven Internet sensation, Jules. She spars with DeNiro throughout and the two make a fun pairing.
Also joining in on the fun is Rene Russo as a masseuse (and love interest for DeNiro and Andrew Rannels as Jules' ass't. But it is the trio of Adam Devine, Zack Pearlman and Jason Orley that almost steals this film as 3 knuckleheads that work with - and are mentored by - DeNiro's Yoda-like Intern. I almost would have preferred to see a film about these 4.
Nothing in this film is revolutionary or new and Director/Writer Meyers keeps it that way. It's like pulling on an old, comfortable sweater or a really well worn-in pair of shoes. It won't win any awards, but it is fun..and, yes...charming just the same.
THE INTERN is now streaming on NETFLIX and AMAZON PRIME, if you are looking for a...I'll say it one more time...charming...way to spend an evening - look no further than here.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Lethal Weapon 3 (1992) in Movies
Jul 10, 2020 (Updated Jul 10, 2020)
The Perfect Trio : Mel, Danny and Joe
Lethal Weapon 3- i love the chemistry between Mel, Danny and Joe. Its the perfect trio, their bounce off of each other. The comedy is excellent. The one liners are good. The action is good, the plot is good.
The plot: Veteran police detective Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover) is only days away from retiring when he and his tough partner, Martin Riggs (Mel Gibson), are roped into an important internal affairs case. Working with the beautiful, no-nonsense Sergeant Lorna Cole (Rene Russo) and aided by the shifty informant Leo Getz (Joe Pesci), Murtaugh and Riggs begin to close in on a black-market weapons operation involving corrupt cop and arms dealer Jack Travis (Stuart Wilson).
Director Richard Donner is an animal-rights and pro-choice activist, and placed many posters and stickers for these causes in the film. Of note are the T-shirt worn by one of Murtaugh's daughters (the actress's idea), an 18-wheeler with an anti-fur slogan on the side, and a sticker on a locker in the police station.
Director Richard Donner demanded some big changes on the script which included changing the original character of Lorna (who had a different name in earlier drafts) into a woman and turning her into Riggs's girlfriend. He also re-worked the script to be less story-oriented and not focus on the main villains but instead on the relationship between Riggs and Murtaugh. He also toned down action scenes from the script and brought back Leo Getz into the story. All of his scenes were written in afterwards. In the original script Leo had left L.A. for New York. Boam had some disagreements with changes that Donner made but he was not against them. Boam was fired after he wrote his first two drafts of the script. One of the reasons for this was because Donner wasn't interested in the script and he disagreed with some parts of Boam's original draft.
Carrie Fisher was an uncredited script doctor on the film.
Several versions of a Lethal Weapon video game were released in conjunction with this sequel's release, appearing on the NES, SNES, Game Boy, Amiga, Atari ST, and Commodore 64 platforms. Also released was a Lethal Weapon 3 pinball game.
Its a funny entertaining movie, on to the last one in the franchise. I've loved the franchise so far and hopefully the 4th one is good.
The plot: Veteran police detective Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover) is only days away from retiring when he and his tough partner, Martin Riggs (Mel Gibson), are roped into an important internal affairs case. Working with the beautiful, no-nonsense Sergeant Lorna Cole (Rene Russo) and aided by the shifty informant Leo Getz (Joe Pesci), Murtaugh and Riggs begin to close in on a black-market weapons operation involving corrupt cop and arms dealer Jack Travis (Stuart Wilson).
Director Richard Donner is an animal-rights and pro-choice activist, and placed many posters and stickers for these causes in the film. Of note are the T-shirt worn by one of Murtaugh's daughters (the actress's idea), an 18-wheeler with an anti-fur slogan on the side, and a sticker on a locker in the police station.
Director Richard Donner demanded some big changes on the script which included changing the original character of Lorna (who had a different name in earlier drafts) into a woman and turning her into Riggs's girlfriend. He also re-worked the script to be less story-oriented and not focus on the main villains but instead on the relationship between Riggs and Murtaugh. He also toned down action scenes from the script and brought back Leo Getz into the story. All of his scenes were written in afterwards. In the original script Leo had left L.A. for New York. Boam had some disagreements with changes that Donner made but he was not against them. Boam was fired after he wrote his first two drafts of the script. One of the reasons for this was because Donner wasn't interested in the script and he disagreed with some parts of Boam's original draft.
Carrie Fisher was an uncredited script doctor on the film.
Several versions of a Lethal Weapon video game were released in conjunction with this sequel's release, appearing on the NES, SNES, Game Boy, Amiga, Atari ST, and Commodore 64 platforms. Also released was a Lethal Weapon 3 pinball game.
Its a funny entertaining movie, on to the last one in the franchise. I've loved the franchise so far and hopefully the 4th one is good.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Thor (2011) in Movies
Jul 21, 2020
The first Thor film gets a bad wrap, and I think it's due to a combination of people forgetting just how good it is, and it perhaps being tarnished by it's underwhelming sequel, when in reality, Thor marks Marvel Studios first steps into more cosmic territory, a realm that was once deemed a little too silly for the general public, and pulls it off in style.
Firstly, translating the many characters of the Thor comic series is no easy feat. They all talk in a Shakespearean dialect, and have ridiculous costumes. The script though is fantastic. The Asgardian characters are still very bombastic, but when mixed with humans from Earth, it's becomes naturally comical. It doesn't feel corny, and somehow, it works very well.
As for the costumes, everyone just looks badass truth be told so hats off to the costume department.
Chris Hemsworth is the embodiment of Thor, and it's truly difficult to see anyone else in the role. He's charming, funny, and has just the right amount of god-like angst, and it's easy to see why he's become a firm favourite as the MCU has continued to expand.
The same goes for Tom Hiddleston as Loki. His portrayal of the God of Mischief is equal parts sinister, slimy, and sympathetic. He's the villain that you can't help but love and it's a testament to his performance that Loki has remained a mainstay in the MCU, a franchise that is often guilty of the one-and-done method when it comes to villains.
The cast is rounded out by a stellar lineup, including Natalie Portman, Anthony Hopkins, Rene Russo, Jaime Alexander, Stellan Skaragård, Idris Elba and even includes a bigger role for the always excellent Clark Gregg. This film also serves as the introduction of Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye, another MCU staple. It's a strong cast list without a doubt.
The action set pieces are all pretty fun, and the effects still just about hold up. I'd argue that Thor looks better than the first two Iron Man films in that respect. Asgard looks great as well.
Another thing I absolutely LOVE about Thor is the music score by Patrick Doyle. In terms of original orchestral music, it's probably by favourite within the MCU (possibly on par with Infinity War and Endgame) but it's fantastic, and gives me goosebumps every damn time I watch this movie
Thor is action packed, with a fantastic script and score, and a great cast with well fleshed out characters. Bringing Kenneth Branagh on board as director was a great choice, and overall, the film deserves way more love than it gets.
Ignoring the first Avengers movie, Thor is the crown jewel of phase one!
Firstly, translating the many characters of the Thor comic series is no easy feat. They all talk in a Shakespearean dialect, and have ridiculous costumes. The script though is fantastic. The Asgardian characters are still very bombastic, but when mixed with humans from Earth, it's becomes naturally comical. It doesn't feel corny, and somehow, it works very well.
As for the costumes, everyone just looks badass truth be told so hats off to the costume department.
Chris Hemsworth is the embodiment of Thor, and it's truly difficult to see anyone else in the role. He's charming, funny, and has just the right amount of god-like angst, and it's easy to see why he's become a firm favourite as the MCU has continued to expand.
The same goes for Tom Hiddleston as Loki. His portrayal of the God of Mischief is equal parts sinister, slimy, and sympathetic. He's the villain that you can't help but love and it's a testament to his performance that Loki has remained a mainstay in the MCU, a franchise that is often guilty of the one-and-done method when it comes to villains.
The cast is rounded out by a stellar lineup, including Natalie Portman, Anthony Hopkins, Rene Russo, Jaime Alexander, Stellan Skaragård, Idris Elba and even includes a bigger role for the always excellent Clark Gregg. This film also serves as the introduction of Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye, another MCU staple. It's a strong cast list without a doubt.
The action set pieces are all pretty fun, and the effects still just about hold up. I'd argue that Thor looks better than the first two Iron Man films in that respect. Asgard looks great as well.
Another thing I absolutely LOVE about Thor is the music score by Patrick Doyle. In terms of original orchestral music, it's probably by favourite within the MCU (possibly on par with Infinity War and Endgame) but it's fantastic, and gives me goosebumps every damn time I watch this movie
Thor is action packed, with a fantastic script and score, and a great cast with well fleshed out characters. Bringing Kenneth Branagh on board as director was a great choice, and overall, the film deserves way more love than it gets.
Ignoring the first Avengers movie, Thor is the crown jewel of phase one!
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Nightcrawler (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The concept of the American dream is generally thought of as ascending to great heights of success. For some, that means creating something out of nothing. They can do this either through lots of hard work, or by having a stroke of good luck.
“Nightcrawler” centers around Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal), a young man who is attempting to do just that – create something out of nothing and ascend to great heights of success.
Truly a schmuck by every definition of the word, Louis is a contemptible character. He lies, steals, and bends every rule in pursuit of the almighty dollar. This makes for a character that people will love to hate.
Louis discovers a grand opportunity to make money by essentially playing paparazzi to the world of crime. A skill in high demand in a news industry which sensationalizes violence and crime in order to gain ratings.
The film portrays the workings of the news media as somewhat twisted. The industry plays off of the naivety of the American public.
This theme builds throughout the movie, becoming more and more apparent. It hints at an uncertainty of the ethics of crime news coverage. This message is perhaps intended to extend beyond the silver screen and into the real world.
A thriller with depth, “Nightcrawler” is one hell of a debut for director Dan Gilroy. In addition to the unique and complex plot line, the cast is expertly selected.
Each character achieves a raw realness that turns the audience into witnesses rather than movie goers.
Gyllenhaal, who lost 20 pounds for the role, has mastered the art of portraying madness. His eyes communicate a certain detached sadness, yet at the same time he appears egotistical. His expression exudes an inner dialogue which is fleeting and somewhat absent from reality. He is the main character in the movie, as well as in his own mind.
The evolution which his character, Louis, exhibits is electrifying. He is a man in constant motion – doing whatever it takes to succeed, and sinking deeper into the dark side of a news media that lives off of ratings.
The film starts to resemble a gory train wreck which one cannot resist but to stare at as it follows Louis. In order to get the perfect shot, he pushes the line of morality further and further. His morally questionable character begins to blur into the realm of psychotic.
Human lives begin to be something of a commodity when on the other side of a lens. Nina (Rene Russo), a news director desperate to stay in demand is determined to stay focused on theme of urban crime creeping into suburban neighborhoods. She knows this is what grabs attention, and despite reality, she intends to deliver a particular story to viewers.
Russo’s tired eyes add to the realness of the dramatic story. She is just one of the characters which may confuse the audience in regards to who is “good” and who is “bad.” The interplay between characters who cannot be defined as good or bad creates a massively entertaining drama.
The deeper message of the film is left up for interpretation. Perhaps many people are just “not so good,” then there’s Louis who most people won’t be able to help but loath.
A true statement piece, “Nightcrawler” delivers a nauseating cinematic rush.
I give “Nightcrawler” 5 out of 5 stars.
“Nightcrawler” centers around Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal), a young man who is attempting to do just that – create something out of nothing and ascend to great heights of success.
Truly a schmuck by every definition of the word, Louis is a contemptible character. He lies, steals, and bends every rule in pursuit of the almighty dollar. This makes for a character that people will love to hate.
Louis discovers a grand opportunity to make money by essentially playing paparazzi to the world of crime. A skill in high demand in a news industry which sensationalizes violence and crime in order to gain ratings.
The film portrays the workings of the news media as somewhat twisted. The industry plays off of the naivety of the American public.
This theme builds throughout the movie, becoming more and more apparent. It hints at an uncertainty of the ethics of crime news coverage. This message is perhaps intended to extend beyond the silver screen and into the real world.
A thriller with depth, “Nightcrawler” is one hell of a debut for director Dan Gilroy. In addition to the unique and complex plot line, the cast is expertly selected.
Each character achieves a raw realness that turns the audience into witnesses rather than movie goers.
Gyllenhaal, who lost 20 pounds for the role, has mastered the art of portraying madness. His eyes communicate a certain detached sadness, yet at the same time he appears egotistical. His expression exudes an inner dialogue which is fleeting and somewhat absent from reality. He is the main character in the movie, as well as in his own mind.
The evolution which his character, Louis, exhibits is electrifying. He is a man in constant motion – doing whatever it takes to succeed, and sinking deeper into the dark side of a news media that lives off of ratings.
The film starts to resemble a gory train wreck which one cannot resist but to stare at as it follows Louis. In order to get the perfect shot, he pushes the line of morality further and further. His morally questionable character begins to blur into the realm of psychotic.
Human lives begin to be something of a commodity when on the other side of a lens. Nina (Rene Russo), a news director desperate to stay in demand is determined to stay focused on theme of urban crime creeping into suburban neighborhoods. She knows this is what grabs attention, and despite reality, she intends to deliver a particular story to viewers.
Russo’s tired eyes add to the realness of the dramatic story. She is just one of the characters which may confuse the audience in regards to who is “good” and who is “bad.” The interplay between characters who cannot be defined as good or bad creates a massively entertaining drama.
The deeper message of the film is left up for interpretation. Perhaps many people are just “not so good,” then there’s Louis who most people won’t be able to help but loath.
A true statement piece, “Nightcrawler” delivers a nauseating cinematic rush.
I give “Nightcrawler” 5 out of 5 stars.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Two for the Money (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
The fall often brings the changing of the leaves and cooler weather, but for many men, fall is the start of Football season. For many, this time honored tradition that has given rise to terms such as “Football Widow”, “tailgating”, and “Super Bowl Party”, is a welcome diversion from the week, and something that is looked forward to all week.
There are also those who look forward to the games for other reasons, such as gambling. In a multi-billion dollar industry, gamblers spend hours looking over the injury reports, betting lines, and handicapping reports in an effort to gain any edge they can find.
In the new film Two for the Money, viewers are shown the highs, lows, and manipulations that can come from high stakes gambling. Brandon Lang (Matthew Mc Conaughey), a star Quarterback whose dreams of playing as a professional end due to a knee injury.
Reduced, to recording messages for a 900 service to make a living, Brandon is given the chance to record his projections for the coming weekend’s games. In no time, Brandon is racking up a very impressive win/loss record which draws the attention of Walter Abrams, (Al Pacino), who whisks Brandon to New York and wants to make him the cornerstone of his advising service.
In no time, Brandon is given a new look, a new stage name, and is center stage making the predictions. The wins start to pile up as does the money which causes bitterness amongst certain staff members who resent the lavish amounts of attention that Brandon is getting from Walter.
Brandon becomes caught up in the life of money, a fast car, and lavish living, and soon finds himself losing touch with his true self. It is at this point that things start to change in Brandon’s fortunes and he must find a way to get himself back on track, before his life spins horribly out of control.
The catchy premise of the film and strong cast starts out strong but looses its way as the film unfolds. Pacino is as effective as always, but his portrayal of Walter as a man obsessed with winning at all costs and his family is often sharply contrasted. In one scene we see him in a menacing light when things are going very well for him, yet when you think he should be going over the top in a time of crisis, he is restrained and unconcerned.
While the above is a good portrayal of the duality of the character, it does not make for high drama as he never does explode. The shoe never does drop, he shows menace, you wait for the moment, where he will turn on those around him, yet it never fully arises.
Rene Russo does a good job as the loyal wife who has mixed feelings about her life. She loves Walter and their daughter but hates gambling, and urges Brandon to walk away from it all. She is good in her scenes but she is not given enough to allow her to shine.
Mc Conaughey is good in his part as his character seems to be an interesting contrast in duality. He has no problem in asking people to bet thousands of dollars on his picks, yet his is unwilling to gamble. He likes the money and fame that comes with his position yet frets over not getting calls from his mother. The part starts strong but the character ultimately comes off bland and unsympathetic.
While not a bad film, Two for the Money ultimately is hindered by the pacing of the film which tends to drag, uneven characters, and a lack of tension. This becomes very clear and towards the last half of the film as much of the interest in the characters and their situations are lost.
There are also those who look forward to the games for other reasons, such as gambling. In a multi-billion dollar industry, gamblers spend hours looking over the injury reports, betting lines, and handicapping reports in an effort to gain any edge they can find.
In the new film Two for the Money, viewers are shown the highs, lows, and manipulations that can come from high stakes gambling. Brandon Lang (Matthew Mc Conaughey), a star Quarterback whose dreams of playing as a professional end due to a knee injury.
Reduced, to recording messages for a 900 service to make a living, Brandon is given the chance to record his projections for the coming weekend’s games. In no time, Brandon is racking up a very impressive win/loss record which draws the attention of Walter Abrams, (Al Pacino), who whisks Brandon to New York and wants to make him the cornerstone of his advising service.
In no time, Brandon is given a new look, a new stage name, and is center stage making the predictions. The wins start to pile up as does the money which causes bitterness amongst certain staff members who resent the lavish amounts of attention that Brandon is getting from Walter.
Brandon becomes caught up in the life of money, a fast car, and lavish living, and soon finds himself losing touch with his true self. It is at this point that things start to change in Brandon’s fortunes and he must find a way to get himself back on track, before his life spins horribly out of control.
The catchy premise of the film and strong cast starts out strong but looses its way as the film unfolds. Pacino is as effective as always, but his portrayal of Walter as a man obsessed with winning at all costs and his family is often sharply contrasted. In one scene we see him in a menacing light when things are going very well for him, yet when you think he should be going over the top in a time of crisis, he is restrained and unconcerned.
While the above is a good portrayal of the duality of the character, it does not make for high drama as he never does explode. The shoe never does drop, he shows menace, you wait for the moment, where he will turn on those around him, yet it never fully arises.
Rene Russo does a good job as the loyal wife who has mixed feelings about her life. She loves Walter and their daughter but hates gambling, and urges Brandon to walk away from it all. She is good in her scenes but she is not given enough to allow her to shine.
Mc Conaughey is good in his part as his character seems to be an interesting contrast in duality. He has no problem in asking people to bet thousands of dollars on his picks, yet his is unwilling to gamble. He likes the money and fame that comes with his position yet frets over not getting calls from his mother. The part starts strong but the character ultimately comes off bland and unsympathetic.
While not a bad film, Two for the Money ultimately is hindered by the pacing of the film which tends to drag, uneven characters, and a lack of tension. This becomes very clear and towards the last half of the film as much of the interest in the characters and their situations are lost.