Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Morgan (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Producer Ridley Scott has teamed with his son Luke for the new
Horror/Suspense film “Morgan” which blends Horror and Suspense in what may
well be a new franchise for FOX.
The film follows an isolated research facility surrounded by trees where
an experiment named Morgan (Anya Taylor-Joy), has had an “incident” which
has caused the parent company to dispatch a troubleshooter named Lee
Weathers (Kate Mara) to evaluate the program.
The cold and no-nonsense Weathers meets some hesitation from the research
team as they see her as a company tool intent on closing their program and
years of research and being unable to see the potential and progress of
their work.
As Weathers and the audience gets to know Morgan, they learn that she is a
genetic creation who became aware and functional at a very early age and
her recent act of violence has her confined to a cage where she listens to
music, plays Chess, and spends her time dreaming of her former visits
outside.
As Morgan is evaluated it appears that there is far more to her than first
appears. The creation is capable of great empathy, wisdom, and
appreciation for beauty, but also has a very dark side, which can appear
out of nowhere.
As the complex study and interactions with Morgan unfold, Lee and the
scientists are faced with a series of difficult decisions that sets things
on a course from which they may not return.
The film takes a while to get up to speed and does not have anything that
viewers have not seen before. I was able to figure out the twists to the
film early on and an incident that is referred to in the film would have
made a far more interesting film than what we were given. Perhaps it is
being saved for a possible prequel because as it currently stands,
“Morgan”, is an interesting if formulaic film that borrows from several
other films.
The funny thing about it is that like “Prometheus” the more I
thought about it, the more questions I had and perhaps like his father,
Scott is using the film to setup a much larger universe and future films.
I only wish there was a bit more to this as the premise though interesting
does not have enough for the versatile and talented cast to do and they
deserved much better.
http://sknr.net/2016/08/29/morgan/
Horror/Suspense film “Morgan” which blends Horror and Suspense in what may
well be a new franchise for FOX.
The film follows an isolated research facility surrounded by trees where
an experiment named Morgan (Anya Taylor-Joy), has had an “incident” which
has caused the parent company to dispatch a troubleshooter named Lee
Weathers (Kate Mara) to evaluate the program.
The cold and no-nonsense Weathers meets some hesitation from the research
team as they see her as a company tool intent on closing their program and
years of research and being unable to see the potential and progress of
their work.
As Weathers and the audience gets to know Morgan, they learn that she is a
genetic creation who became aware and functional at a very early age and
her recent act of violence has her confined to a cage where she listens to
music, plays Chess, and spends her time dreaming of her former visits
outside.
As Morgan is evaluated it appears that there is far more to her than first
appears. The creation is capable of great empathy, wisdom, and
appreciation for beauty, but also has a very dark side, which can appear
out of nowhere.
As the complex study and interactions with Morgan unfold, Lee and the
scientists are faced with a series of difficult decisions that sets things
on a course from which they may not return.
The film takes a while to get up to speed and does not have anything that
viewers have not seen before. I was able to figure out the twists to the
film early on and an incident that is referred to in the film would have
made a far more interesting film than what we were given. Perhaps it is
being saved for a possible prequel because as it currently stands,
“Morgan”, is an interesting if formulaic film that borrows from several
other films.
The funny thing about it is that like “Prometheus” the more I
thought about it, the more questions I had and perhaps like his father,
Scott is using the film to setup a much larger universe and future films.
I only wish there was a bit more to this as the premise though interesting
does not have enough for the versatile and talented cast to do and they
deserved much better.
http://sknr.net/2016/08/29/morgan/
Ross (3282 KP) rated Alien: Covenant (2017) in Movies
Dec 18, 2017
Didn't feel like an Alien film (no suspense) (1 more)
Doesn't repair the bad feelings left by Prometheus
Where Prometheus came kind of close to explaining the origins of the aliens from the original films, it just fell short (see all the well documented plot holes and inconsistencies). Here, Ridley Scott had a chance to remedy that, but instead seems to have decided to keep digging and has promised we'll eventually get there and all will be revealed.
We are led to believe android David has been beavering away, having killed a planet full of Engineers, developing the greatest living being - the xenomorph. So we are led to believe that after killing all the life on the planet he has somehow been implanting these alien embryos into a living host. Erm ... How?
Also, if the classic xenomorph has only now started to develop after being incubated in a human host, how come they were clearly depicted in ancient cave drawings in Alien vs Predator?
Also also, if the facehugger is apparently a more efficient delivery method than air-borne (I don't think it is) how come it takes so much longer in the original films - John Hurt lying with a facehugger on for hours before hatching, where here the whole gestation seems to be minutes, or an hour as the pace of the film requires. The evolution seems to have slowed down between here and Alien. Also the chestburster becomes an instant killing machine rather than being a weak little snake needing to hide out and eat.
The trademark Alien suspense was completely lacking. Nowhere was there the edge of the seat, dark corridors, pipes coming alive or anything. It was more of an action film with little horror aspect in it.
Overall, this film felt like even more of an insult to the original films than Prometheus did. It could well be that this becomes a small part of a masterpiece but it seems very unlikely and feels like a very long way round and poorly delivered.
We are led to believe android David has been beavering away, having killed a planet full of Engineers, developing the greatest living being - the xenomorph. So we are led to believe that after killing all the life on the planet he has somehow been implanting these alien embryos into a living host. Erm ... How?
Also, if the classic xenomorph has only now started to develop after being incubated in a human host, how come they were clearly depicted in ancient cave drawings in Alien vs Predator?
Also also, if the facehugger is apparently a more efficient delivery method than air-borne (I don't think it is) how come it takes so much longer in the original films - John Hurt lying with a facehugger on for hours before hatching, where here the whole gestation seems to be minutes, or an hour as the pace of the film requires. The evolution seems to have slowed down between here and Alien. Also the chestburster becomes an instant killing machine rather than being a weak little snake needing to hide out and eat.
The trademark Alien suspense was completely lacking. Nowhere was there the edge of the seat, dark corridors, pipes coming alive or anything. It was more of an action film with little horror aspect in it.
Overall, this film felt like even more of an insult to the original films than Prometheus did. It could well be that this becomes a small part of a masterpiece but it seems very unlikely and feels like a very long way round and poorly delivered.
Kelly Knows (95 KP) rated White Squall (1996) in Movies
Jul 3, 2019
Skipper Kills All The Waves
The fantastic telling of the true story of the ill-fated Albatross. Sometimes you watch a movie at a young age, and the power of it sticks with you well into adulthood. White Squall is such a movie for me, and I imagine, many others. A sailor once, and a sailor someday to be, my father and I first watched this movie together when I was a youngster. Those silvered memories can be tarnished if a movie doesn't age well. Not the case with White Squall. Jeff Bridges is a powerhouse as the indomitable Skipper. You will instantly become caught up in the story of these young men learning what it means to indeed be called a man, especially on the sea. Some of the tropes are clunky, but merely a product of the time. You still buy in to the plot with little to no eye rolling. The archetypes of the characters run from Oscar level to 2D flat, but with a main cast of over a dozen, that is to be expected. Again, Jeff Bridges is amazing and more than carries the slack, performance wise. Parents be warned, this is based on a tragedy at sea. Do the math on that one, and adjust accordingly for the kids. The plot is fairly tame for the first half of the movie. The reason this movie gets high marks from me is the incredible direction from Ridley Scott, and the powerhouse sea visuals. The effects department really went to town on this one. You can feel the fury of the ocean, for she is a fickle mistress. They even used a full-scale mock-up of the ship in a horizon tank. Google that. It's awesome. With an amazing story, cast, score, all the above, this movie will always be the perfect with side of popcorn and a comfy recliner.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated The Pirates! An Adventure With Scientists (2012) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
Ardman Animation returned to the big screen in 2012 with this adaptation of the Children novel series, The Pirates!.
After building model sets in order to plan out a CGI animation similar to their 2011 Arthur Christmas, they quickly decided to return to their roots and this 3-D adventure was filmed as a stop-motion movie and is much the better for it.
The story itself, whilst following real life characters such as Queen Victoria and Charles Darwin, is pure, adulterated fiction, not quite from the school of Ridley Scott in which he claims to be making historical epics whilst taking liberties, I grant you, but still, I’m still having to explain to my 5 year old daughter that Queen Victoria was a super villain as portrayed here! We follow a crew of Pirates, lead by The Pirate Captain (Hugh Grant) as he attempts to win the converted pirate of the year but to no avail.
After an encounter with Charles Darwin (David Tennent), he learns that the ships “parrot”, Polly, is in fact a thought to be extinct Dodo and the pair along with his crew, return to England in order to win Scientist Of The Year as well. But Queen Victoria wants the bird, in order to eat it with other world leaders who gather to taste rarest cuisine.
My main issue with this film is that Victoria is presented a villain and this is now how my 5 year old daughter, who loves this film by the way, now looks upon as a baddie! But other than that this is a witty film built on wit. Every frame contains a joke of some kind, whether it be in the background, audible or part of the action.
Ardman’s style is unmistakable and quintessentially British and I suspect that whilst some international audiences will find this quaint, it will probably be lost on many.
But this is an underrated adventure, with lovable characters, villains and all told at a good pace.
Not something to be used for your history homework but still and enjoyable romp none the less.
After building model sets in order to plan out a CGI animation similar to their 2011 Arthur Christmas, they quickly decided to return to their roots and this 3-D adventure was filmed as a stop-motion movie and is much the better for it.
The story itself, whilst following real life characters such as Queen Victoria and Charles Darwin, is pure, adulterated fiction, not quite from the school of Ridley Scott in which he claims to be making historical epics whilst taking liberties, I grant you, but still, I’m still having to explain to my 5 year old daughter that Queen Victoria was a super villain as portrayed here! We follow a crew of Pirates, lead by The Pirate Captain (Hugh Grant) as he attempts to win the converted pirate of the year but to no avail.
After an encounter with Charles Darwin (David Tennent), he learns that the ships “parrot”, Polly, is in fact a thought to be extinct Dodo and the pair along with his crew, return to England in order to win Scientist Of The Year as well. But Queen Victoria wants the bird, in order to eat it with other world leaders who gather to taste rarest cuisine.
My main issue with this film is that Victoria is presented a villain and this is now how my 5 year old daughter, who loves this film by the way, now looks upon as a baddie! But other than that this is a witty film built on wit. Every frame contains a joke of some kind, whether it be in the background, audible or part of the action.
Ardman’s style is unmistakable and quintessentially British and I suspect that whilst some international audiences will find this quaint, it will probably be lost on many.
But this is an underrated adventure, with lovable characters, villains and all told at a good pace.
Not something to be used for your history homework but still and enjoyable romp none the less.
Lee Richmond (19 KP) rated Blade Runner 2049 (2017) in Movies
Mar 2, 2019
The key to the future is finally unearthed.
I must admit, my hopes where not high. Since 2012 I have witnessed Ridley Scott wiping his arse on his past glory with the ever worsening Alien Prequels. I hated Prometheus and the less said about Alien Covenant the better. Not only that but did Blade Runner really need a sequel? I was of the strong belief that it did not. The original was a beautifully told, self contained flick with a strong start, middle and end. Throw in to the mix the fact that generally a movie sequel that appears a few decades after the original is rarely as good as what came before. I'm talking about you Indiana Jones, Dumb and Dumber and so on..
Taking that all into account I sat down to watch Blade Runner 2049 with the most open mind I could muster and as the end credits rolled the only thought in my sci-fi frazzled head was "holy shit what a movie"..
I loved it. Not just liked it. Not just found it to be ok (which was about all I had hoped for). I fucking loved it. My wife found it slow and eventually wandered off for a bath but I loved it. I loved the visuals that burst forth from the screen and penetrated my brain through my eyeballs. The story was equally as compelling as the original. Ryan Gosling was great. Harrison Ford was great. The nods to the original all great and never sickly nostalgic.
I can honestly say that I have never been so happy to be wrong. Although there is a 30+ year gap between both films I didn't feel that the special effects (although stunning here) did anything to spoil those of the original. Hopefully this movie has taught me to be more open minded but somehow I imagine I will always be this cynical old bastard that those who know me have come to love or loathe.
If you haven't seen this film yet, or if like me you're expecting the worst, my advice would be "stop being an arse and enjoy the spectacle and dare I say masterpiece? That Blade Runner 2049 truly is".
Taking that all into account I sat down to watch Blade Runner 2049 with the most open mind I could muster and as the end credits rolled the only thought in my sci-fi frazzled head was "holy shit what a movie"..
I loved it. Not just liked it. Not just found it to be ok (which was about all I had hoped for). I fucking loved it. My wife found it slow and eventually wandered off for a bath but I loved it. I loved the visuals that burst forth from the screen and penetrated my brain through my eyeballs. The story was equally as compelling as the original. Ryan Gosling was great. Harrison Ford was great. The nods to the original all great and never sickly nostalgic.
I can honestly say that I have never been so happy to be wrong. Although there is a 30+ year gap between both films I didn't feel that the special effects (although stunning here) did anything to spoil those of the original. Hopefully this movie has taught me to be more open minded but somehow I imagine I will always be this cynical old bastard that those who know me have come to love or loathe.
If you haven't seen this film yet, or if like me you're expecting the worst, my advice would be "stop being an arse and enjoy the spectacle and dare I say masterpiece? That Blade Runner 2049 truly is".
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Alien: Covenant (2017) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Ridley Scott has followed “Prometheus” with the film that eschews the is it or isn’t it a prequel question by firmly establishing its ties to his landmark film “Alien”. The title of the film “Alien Covenant” leaves little doubt as to what franchise this film is connected to and does a very solid job of connecting elements of the franchise without being as nebulous, divisive, and confusing as its predecessor.
The film follows a colony ship named Covenant which is on an extended mission of colonization approximately 7 years away from their destination. A crew of 15 watches over approximately 2000 colonist and frozen embryos as they attempt to build a new life on a distant world. When an unexpected event jeopardizes the ship the crew was revived and forced into action to deal with the unexpected consequences that have arisen. The ship synthetic lifeform named Walter (Michael Fassbender), and crew quickly assess the damage and plot a course to repair the ship and continue on their journey.
During the course of the repairs a garbled transmission is discovered by the ship’s pilot Tennessee “Danny McBride”. What appears to be a human transmission only a relatively short distance away from the ship is too enticing to pass up for Captain Oram (Billy Crudup), even though ship’s officer Daniels (Katherine Waterston), believes that it is simply too good to be true and questions how a planet that seems to meet all of their needs alluded their initial scans. Undaunted, the ship set up to explore the mysterious planet and find a beautiful world that seems to be an ideal fit for colonization. Things take an unexpected change when a dangerous situation arises and before long the crew finds themselves facing an unexpected series of dangers of horrors and unable to evacuate thanks to a violent storm in the area.
They are eventually taken in by the android David (Michael Fassbender), who relays that he has been stranded on planet 10 years following the events of the Prometheus mission. David bonds with his “brother” Walter will the crew try to make sense of the situation as they believe there is much more to the story than they have been told.
When much larger dangers arise the crew must rally to survive against a nightmare situation that has the potential to threaten not only their ship and crew but perhaps all of humanity.
This time out director Ridley Scott has not shied away from giving fans deadly creatures and action that many felt was sadly missing from “Prometheus”. While the film certainly isn’t in the same caliber as “Alien” and “Aliens”, I did find it more enjoyable than the two subsequent films that followed and significantly more enjoyable than “Prometheus”. Yes there are still some nebulous elements to the story that will hopefully be addressed in the subsequent films and one could argue that a good portion of this film was basically a set up for the next film that his planned follow-up. However very strong performances by Fassbender, McBride, and Waterston, as well as the incredible visual effects and highly detailed sets really make this a fun and exciting adventure. While most of the cast does exist is little more than fodder for the various dangers in the film there is effort given to at least give them a little bit of back story and relate ability so you have some sympathy towards their outcome. The mixing of new and familiar creatures bodes very well for the future the franchise and the film was gripping from start to finish and certainly provided plenty of entertainment.
I really love the look of the ship and was intrigued by the potential that the film established as toward the direction of the series. While it does tread on some of the thematic elements of the previous films such as the whole nature of creation and existence, it is not as heavy handed and cerebral and finds a much better balance between horror, action, science fiction, and metaphysical questions.
From a fans perspective this is much more of the film that I was expecting when “Prometheus” was first announced and hopefully this is a very good omen for the direction that future films will follow since the intention has been established of linking the new films to the events of the original movie. If you are fan of the series you will definitely want to check this out as it has been my favorite film of the summer to date and I look forward to seeing it again soon.
http://sknr.net/2017/05/16/alien-covenant/
The film follows a colony ship named Covenant which is on an extended mission of colonization approximately 7 years away from their destination. A crew of 15 watches over approximately 2000 colonist and frozen embryos as they attempt to build a new life on a distant world. When an unexpected event jeopardizes the ship the crew was revived and forced into action to deal with the unexpected consequences that have arisen. The ship synthetic lifeform named Walter (Michael Fassbender), and crew quickly assess the damage and plot a course to repair the ship and continue on their journey.
During the course of the repairs a garbled transmission is discovered by the ship’s pilot Tennessee “Danny McBride”. What appears to be a human transmission only a relatively short distance away from the ship is too enticing to pass up for Captain Oram (Billy Crudup), even though ship’s officer Daniels (Katherine Waterston), believes that it is simply too good to be true and questions how a planet that seems to meet all of their needs alluded their initial scans. Undaunted, the ship set up to explore the mysterious planet and find a beautiful world that seems to be an ideal fit for colonization. Things take an unexpected change when a dangerous situation arises and before long the crew finds themselves facing an unexpected series of dangers of horrors and unable to evacuate thanks to a violent storm in the area.
They are eventually taken in by the android David (Michael Fassbender), who relays that he has been stranded on planet 10 years following the events of the Prometheus mission. David bonds with his “brother” Walter will the crew try to make sense of the situation as they believe there is much more to the story than they have been told.
When much larger dangers arise the crew must rally to survive against a nightmare situation that has the potential to threaten not only their ship and crew but perhaps all of humanity.
This time out director Ridley Scott has not shied away from giving fans deadly creatures and action that many felt was sadly missing from “Prometheus”. While the film certainly isn’t in the same caliber as “Alien” and “Aliens”, I did find it more enjoyable than the two subsequent films that followed and significantly more enjoyable than “Prometheus”. Yes there are still some nebulous elements to the story that will hopefully be addressed in the subsequent films and one could argue that a good portion of this film was basically a set up for the next film that his planned follow-up. However very strong performances by Fassbender, McBride, and Waterston, as well as the incredible visual effects and highly detailed sets really make this a fun and exciting adventure. While most of the cast does exist is little more than fodder for the various dangers in the film there is effort given to at least give them a little bit of back story and relate ability so you have some sympathy towards their outcome. The mixing of new and familiar creatures bodes very well for the future the franchise and the film was gripping from start to finish and certainly provided plenty of entertainment.
I really love the look of the ship and was intrigued by the potential that the film established as toward the direction of the series. While it does tread on some of the thematic elements of the previous films such as the whole nature of creation and existence, it is not as heavy handed and cerebral and finds a much better balance between horror, action, science fiction, and metaphysical questions.
From a fans perspective this is much more of the film that I was expecting when “Prometheus” was first announced and hopefully this is a very good omen for the direction that future films will follow since the intention has been established of linking the new films to the events of the original movie. If you are fan of the series you will definitely want to check this out as it has been my favorite film of the summer to date and I look forward to seeing it again soon.
http://sknr.net/2017/05/16/alien-covenant/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated All the Money in the World (2017) in Movies
Feb 14, 2018
Bland with the exception of Christopher Plummer
By now, almost everyone knows about the last minute switch of Christopher Plummer in place of current-pariah Kevin Spacey as pivotal Billionaire J. Paul Getty in Ridley Scott's ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD, so when I checked out Plummer's Oscar nominated turn, I couldn't but help see if I could tell when Scott put in a new scene and where he just "augmented" his scenes with Plummer. And then, a funny thing happened...
I stopped looking at this for I was captivated by Plummer's performance.
A 3 time Oscar nominee (he is the oldest person to win an Academy Award - at the age of 82 - for his Supporting Role in BEGINNERS in 2010), the 88 year old Plummer shows that he can still command a movie for anytime he is on screen this film crackles and becomes interesting.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the rest of the film.
Telling the story of the kidnapping of Getty's grandson, and the "richest man in the world's" refusal to pay the ransom, ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD stars Charlie Plummer (no relation) as John Paul Getty III (the kidnapped grandson), Mark Wahlberg as "fixer" Fletcher Chase, who was told by Getty to get his grandson back for "the lowest possible cost", Romain Duris as one of the kidnappers and the great Michelle Williams as the mother of the kidnapped boy - and the daughter-in-law of Getty, Gail Harris. Each one of these performances are good, but not great. Doing what needs to be done in what they are given to do but nothing more.
I think the problem with this film is one of focus. It spends about 50% of the time with William's character - and this is fine, but then it jumps to the kidnapped son, to "the fixer", to "the kidnapper", to the grandson and back to the mother, so no real through-line, continuity or strong character development can occur, with the exception of Christopher Plummer's J. Paul Getty. To be fair to Williams, C. Plummer has the showier role and she is just asked to be the center of this tale, the world in which all else revolves and that, ultimately, makes her character somewhat bland.
I place the blame for this on Screenwriter David Scarpa (based on the book by John Pearson) and Director Scott. I think their reach exceeded their grasp on this one. If they could have focused more on one of the characters - instead of spreading things out - perhaps this film would have become more interesting and less bland. It stays on one note - despite jumping to different people in vastly different situations - throughout it's 2 hour and 15 minute time frame.
All in all, a missed opportunity. It is a decent film that had the potential to be VERY good. The only one who was VERY good was Christopher Plummer - and certainly his performance is worth the price of admission.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
I stopped looking at this for I was captivated by Plummer's performance.
A 3 time Oscar nominee (he is the oldest person to win an Academy Award - at the age of 82 - for his Supporting Role in BEGINNERS in 2010), the 88 year old Plummer shows that he can still command a movie for anytime he is on screen this film crackles and becomes interesting.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the rest of the film.
Telling the story of the kidnapping of Getty's grandson, and the "richest man in the world's" refusal to pay the ransom, ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD stars Charlie Plummer (no relation) as John Paul Getty III (the kidnapped grandson), Mark Wahlberg as "fixer" Fletcher Chase, who was told by Getty to get his grandson back for "the lowest possible cost", Romain Duris as one of the kidnappers and the great Michelle Williams as the mother of the kidnapped boy - and the daughter-in-law of Getty, Gail Harris. Each one of these performances are good, but not great. Doing what needs to be done in what they are given to do but nothing more.
I think the problem with this film is one of focus. It spends about 50% of the time with William's character - and this is fine, but then it jumps to the kidnapped son, to "the fixer", to "the kidnapper", to the grandson and back to the mother, so no real through-line, continuity or strong character development can occur, with the exception of Christopher Plummer's J. Paul Getty. To be fair to Williams, C. Plummer has the showier role and she is just asked to be the center of this tale, the world in which all else revolves and that, ultimately, makes her character somewhat bland.
I place the blame for this on Screenwriter David Scarpa (based on the book by John Pearson) and Director Scott. I think their reach exceeded their grasp on this one. If they could have focused more on one of the characters - instead of spreading things out - perhaps this film would have become more interesting and less bland. It stays on one note - despite jumping to different people in vastly different situations - throughout it's 2 hour and 15 minute time frame.
All in all, a missed opportunity. It is a decent film that had the potential to be VERY good. The only one who was VERY good was Christopher Plummer - and certainly his performance is worth the price of admission.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
Holly Johnson recommended Blade Runner Soundtrack by Vangelis in Music (curated)
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated House of Gucci (2021) in Movies
Dec 7, 2021
If there was ever the perfect example of an incredible cast stuck inside a lackluster finished product, then House of Gucci is surely it.
The pacing is the main culprit. The first 45 minutes or so feel relatively breezy. The narrative unfolding is a fun and interesting one. The characters are all introduced well enough. But something happens around the midpoint that makes HoG feel like a slog, and it never quite recovers. For a story that has a very specific final destination, it manages to feel direction-less for quite a bit of the runtime. By the time the credits rolled, I felt like I'd run a marathon through thick mud.
The saving grace then, is the aforementioned cast. Lady Gaga turns in a magnificent performance, further cementing that she belongs in cinema. I've said before, and I'll say it again, I fucking love Adam Driver in pretty much everything he touches, and here is no different. The two leads together go a long way to ensure that HoG remains watchable. Al Pacino and Jeremy Irons could play these kind of roles in their sleep by now but their presence here is a welcome one. There's a specific scene somewhere within the first hour (I think) where it's just the two of them talking to eachother about their respective offspring, and it's like screen crack for me. Two masters at work. Then there's Jared Leto, who's portrayal of Paolo Gucci could definitely be deemed as excessive, full on Mario-esque accent and all, but he actually provides a huge dash of charisma in the duller moments so I can't complain too much.
All of the characters in this story are bad people to varying levels of degree, but they also command a certain level of sympathy, and to HoG's credit, this aspect is executed well, and 100% sold by it's great talent.
House of Gucci is nice to look at, boasts a top drawer ensemble cast, and has some genuine moments of excellence, but it's also overblown and overstuffed with hot air. I saw another review on here saying that it felt like it was made with the sole and transparent purpose of winning Oscars, and I can completely agree with that statement. Ridley Scott has made some of my absolute favourite films over the years, and while it does have its merits and is fun in parts, this one sadly feels a little self indulgent to really hit the mark.
The pacing is the main culprit. The first 45 minutes or so feel relatively breezy. The narrative unfolding is a fun and interesting one. The characters are all introduced well enough. But something happens around the midpoint that makes HoG feel like a slog, and it never quite recovers. For a story that has a very specific final destination, it manages to feel direction-less for quite a bit of the runtime. By the time the credits rolled, I felt like I'd run a marathon through thick mud.
The saving grace then, is the aforementioned cast. Lady Gaga turns in a magnificent performance, further cementing that she belongs in cinema. I've said before, and I'll say it again, I fucking love Adam Driver in pretty much everything he touches, and here is no different. The two leads together go a long way to ensure that HoG remains watchable. Al Pacino and Jeremy Irons could play these kind of roles in their sleep by now but their presence here is a welcome one. There's a specific scene somewhere within the first hour (I think) where it's just the two of them talking to eachother about their respective offspring, and it's like screen crack for me. Two masters at work. Then there's Jared Leto, who's portrayal of Paolo Gucci could definitely be deemed as excessive, full on Mario-esque accent and all, but he actually provides a huge dash of charisma in the duller moments so I can't complain too much.
All of the characters in this story are bad people to varying levels of degree, but they also command a certain level of sympathy, and to HoG's credit, this aspect is executed well, and 100% sold by it's great talent.
House of Gucci is nice to look at, boasts a top drawer ensemble cast, and has some genuine moments of excellence, but it's also overblown and overstuffed with hot air. I saw another review on here saying that it felt like it was made with the sole and transparent purpose of winning Oscars, and I can completely agree with that statement. Ridley Scott has made some of my absolute favourite films over the years, and while it does have its merits and is fun in parts, this one sadly feels a little self indulgent to really hit the mark.
theVman (16 KP) rated Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) in Movies
Jun 1, 2018 (Updated Jun 1, 2018)
Supporting Actors (1 more)
Director manged to pull together a watchable film
The two leads actors (1 more)
Clunky Script
A Good Lead Casting is Far Far Away
Its not The Last Jedi bad, but it nowhere close to being The Force Awakens good. Its main problem being that its leading actors struggle to bring a shred of charisma to the screen. Luckily the supporting cast did their job brilliantly and its the support that the film so desperately needed. Much like Rouge One did, Solo director Ron Howard delivers a very different looking Star Wars story and that is made very clear from the first shot. Visually, Solo invokes it inner Ridley Scott, and uses a very mixed bag in the use of it colour and lighting palettes that in any other movie might feel as if its been jigsawed together by three different directors. Somehow Solo has made this work to its advantage and by offering us answers to the key questions we might have about Hans Solo past “How did he meet Chewy?” and “How did he get the Millennium Falcon?” we can get through a very clunky and disjointed script with the end result being something watchable – just.
I cant shake the fact that i thought Alden Ehrenreich, facially, looks alot more like a young Jack Back than Harrison Ford. In fairness every now and again Alden captures a small something that made Star Wars fans fall in love with Hans Solo in the first place, but he mainly offers an uneven performance that made me forget that i was supposed to be watching a younger version of the charming rouge. Emilia Clarkes portrayal as the love interest, was as emotional barren as the plot offered through out the entire first act of the film, and combined, almost destroys the audiences ability to invest in the rest of the film at all.
However, the second act brings the arrival of Donald Glover pretty much nailing his role as a younger Lando Carlrissian, unfortunately the script makes this Lando feel like a bit of a character of obligation as oppose to a character of substance and necessity. The action scenes pick up, the usual special effects and musical score make things a little more “Star Wars-y” and the film becomes way more enjoyable. Knowing that these are its strengths, the film over indulges in them way to much, leading to lengthy action scenes over staying their welcome and forgetting to develop the subplots.
After an action heavy middle, the script tries do too much in the final act to reclaim its grasp on a story leading to a very laborious and tedious climax.
I cant shake the fact that i thought Alden Ehrenreich, facially, looks alot more like a young Jack Back than Harrison Ford. In fairness every now and again Alden captures a small something that made Star Wars fans fall in love with Hans Solo in the first place, but he mainly offers an uneven performance that made me forget that i was supposed to be watching a younger version of the charming rouge. Emilia Clarkes portrayal as the love interest, was as emotional barren as the plot offered through out the entire first act of the film, and combined, almost destroys the audiences ability to invest in the rest of the film at all.
However, the second act brings the arrival of Donald Glover pretty much nailing his role as a younger Lando Carlrissian, unfortunately the script makes this Lando feel like a bit of a character of obligation as oppose to a character of substance and necessity. The action scenes pick up, the usual special effects and musical score make things a little more “Star Wars-y” and the film becomes way more enjoyable. Knowing that these are its strengths, the film over indulges in them way to much, leading to lengthy action scenes over staying their welcome and forgetting to develop the subplots.
After an action heavy middle, the script tries do too much in the final act to reclaim its grasp on a story leading to a very laborious and tedious climax.