Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Sting (1973) in Movies
Mar 29, 2020
On my list of All Time Favorite Films
I'll come right out and say it - the 1973 Academy Award winning film for Best Picture, THE STING, is one of the greatest films of all time. It's well written, well acted, well directed with a memorable musical score and characters, situations, costumes and set design that become richer over time and through repeated viewings.
Set in Chicago in the gangster-ridden, depression era mid-1930's, THE STING tells the tale of two con man who join forces for the ultimate con of a vile N.Y. Gangster who is responsible for killing a friend of theirs.
From everything I have read about it, the script by David S. Ward (who won an Oscar for his work) arrived pretty much finished. He shaped the story of the con men - and the myriad pieces of misdirection - fully before shopping it around to the studios. Universal jumped all over it and tabbed veteran Director George Roy Hill (BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID) to helm the picture. Hill - being no dummy - saw this as a vehicle to re-team Newman and Redford (stars of Butch Cassidy) and the rest...as they say...is history.
Newman and Redford are perfectly cast as veteran grifter Henry Gondorff (Newman) and up and coming grifter Johnny Hooker (Redford). They have an ease of playing off of each other - each one complimenting the other one - both giving in their scenes with the other one which makes the scenes more rich and alive. They are joined by a veritable "who's who" of late '60's/early '70's character actors - Harold Gould, Eileen Brennan, Charles Durning, Ray Walston and Dana Elcar - all of them bring their "A" game and they are fun to watch. Special notice should be made to Robert Earl Jones (father of James Earl Jones) as Luther, the character who's fate propels the plot forward.
But...none of this would work if you didn't have a "bad guy" that was interesting to watch - and to root against - and bad guys don't get much better...and badder...than Robert Shaw's Doyle Lonnegan. Shaw plays Lonnegan as a physically tough boss who doesn't suffer failure, but is smart enough to avoid obvious traps. He is a worthy adversary of Gondorff and Hooker's and it is fun to watch Newman, Redford and Shaw play off each other. One other note - it was with this performance that Universal recommended Shaw to young Director Stephen Spielberg for his "shark flick" JAWS.
Edith Head won her 8th (and last) Oscar for the magnificent period costumes in this film and Marvin Hamlisch won for the Music - a surprising hit on the pop charts of re-channeled Scott Joplin tunes. The set design won an Oscar - as did the Director, George Roy Hill. All in all, the film won 7 out of the 11 Oscars it was nominated for (Redford was nominated for Best Actor, but did not win).
THE STING is a well crafted film. One that tells a timeless story and that stands the test of time as a testament of how great of an achievement in film this is. It is one of my All Time favorites.
Letter Grade: the rare A+
5 stars (out of 5) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Set in Chicago in the gangster-ridden, depression era mid-1930's, THE STING tells the tale of two con man who join forces for the ultimate con of a vile N.Y. Gangster who is responsible for killing a friend of theirs.
From everything I have read about it, the script by David S. Ward (who won an Oscar for his work) arrived pretty much finished. He shaped the story of the con men - and the myriad pieces of misdirection - fully before shopping it around to the studios. Universal jumped all over it and tabbed veteran Director George Roy Hill (BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID) to helm the picture. Hill - being no dummy - saw this as a vehicle to re-team Newman and Redford (stars of Butch Cassidy) and the rest...as they say...is history.
Newman and Redford are perfectly cast as veteran grifter Henry Gondorff (Newman) and up and coming grifter Johnny Hooker (Redford). They have an ease of playing off of each other - each one complimenting the other one - both giving in their scenes with the other one which makes the scenes more rich and alive. They are joined by a veritable "who's who" of late '60's/early '70's character actors - Harold Gould, Eileen Brennan, Charles Durning, Ray Walston and Dana Elcar - all of them bring their "A" game and they are fun to watch. Special notice should be made to Robert Earl Jones (father of James Earl Jones) as Luther, the character who's fate propels the plot forward.
But...none of this would work if you didn't have a "bad guy" that was interesting to watch - and to root against - and bad guys don't get much better...and badder...than Robert Shaw's Doyle Lonnegan. Shaw plays Lonnegan as a physically tough boss who doesn't suffer failure, but is smart enough to avoid obvious traps. He is a worthy adversary of Gondorff and Hooker's and it is fun to watch Newman, Redford and Shaw play off each other. One other note - it was with this performance that Universal recommended Shaw to young Director Stephen Spielberg for his "shark flick" JAWS.
Edith Head won her 8th (and last) Oscar for the magnificent period costumes in this film and Marvin Hamlisch won for the Music - a surprising hit on the pop charts of re-channeled Scott Joplin tunes. The set design won an Oscar - as did the Director, George Roy Hill. All in all, the film won 7 out of the 11 Oscars it was nominated for (Redford was nominated for Best Actor, but did not win).
THE STING is a well crafted film. One that tells a timeless story and that stands the test of time as a testament of how great of an achievement in film this is. It is one of my All Time favorites.
Letter Grade: the rare A+
5 stars (out of 5) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Meg (2018) in Movies
Dec 4, 2018
Not "So Awful It's Good", just Awful
One of the surprise hits of the summer of 2018 was the "so bad it's good" mega-shark movie THE MEG, starring the impediment of modern-day machismo, Jason Statham. So, when I saw that it was streaming on DirecTV, I thought I'd melt into the couch with a blanket and a beverage of my choice and relish in the over-the-top awfulness that is THE MEG.
Well...I am here to report that THE MEG is awful, just not over-the-top "so bad it's good" awful. It's just awful - and that is an awful disappointment.
I can see the pitch now - THE MEG is "Jaws, but bigger, it's Mega-Jaws! What were the best parts of Jaws? Well, we're gonna do that again, just more!" But what these filmmakers failed to realize is that the best part of Jaws isn't the shark attacking, it's the interaction of the 3 men who go off in search of the shark.
And...the folks that are "fish-fodder" for this big shark just aren't interesting enough. The filmmakers give Jason Statham a PTSD backstory that is forgotten about 2 minutes into the film. His nemesis/former crewmate (a forgettable Robert Taylor) hates Statham's character for about 5 minutes...the stalwart captain is...well stalwart and he is played by "I always melt into the background" Cliff Curtis. Rubie Rose is on-board as the "young genius" who's good looks and youth makes everyone underestimate her - even after she proves over and over again that she is young and a GENIUS. And then, there's good ol' Rain Wilson (Dwight from THE OFFICE) who's the megalomaniacal mega-billionaire who wants to capture (not kill) The Meg for profit.
The problem with all these characters (and others like Masi Oka's homesick scientist) is that they are one-note but not SO one note that they are over-the-top caricatures. They're just boring and forgettable.
As for the shark killings (the real reason that The Meg is intriguing), they are just as boring and forgettable as the characters. Most of them are homages to kills ni the Jaws series of films, so there is some fun in that, but none of them are truly unique and original or over-the-top enough.
The blame, I think, probably goes to "the suits" at Warner Brothers or perhaps Gravity Pictures. There are 3 writers on this, so clearly the script kept getting sent back to the drawing board - and 19(!) producers attached. I heard that Eli Roth was attached at one point and he wanted to make it EXTREMELY graphic and bloody - but "the suits" wanted something they could market to a broader audience, so let him go and hired the always mediocre Jon Turtletaub (LAST VEGAS, THE SORCERER'S APPRENTICE) to Direct and mediocrity reigns all over.
If you want a "so bad it's good" mega-shark film and check out DEEP BLUE SEA (the Samuel L. Jackson speech in this film is worth the price of admission). And when you see THE MEG on whatever streaming platform you prefer and are prepared to watch it "for a laugh", save yourself the bother (and the boredom) and stream something else.
Letter Grade: C (it is competently made)
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Well...I am here to report that THE MEG is awful, just not over-the-top "so bad it's good" awful. It's just awful - and that is an awful disappointment.
I can see the pitch now - THE MEG is "Jaws, but bigger, it's Mega-Jaws! What were the best parts of Jaws? Well, we're gonna do that again, just more!" But what these filmmakers failed to realize is that the best part of Jaws isn't the shark attacking, it's the interaction of the 3 men who go off in search of the shark.
And...the folks that are "fish-fodder" for this big shark just aren't interesting enough. The filmmakers give Jason Statham a PTSD backstory that is forgotten about 2 minutes into the film. His nemesis/former crewmate (a forgettable Robert Taylor) hates Statham's character for about 5 minutes...the stalwart captain is...well stalwart and he is played by "I always melt into the background" Cliff Curtis. Rubie Rose is on-board as the "young genius" who's good looks and youth makes everyone underestimate her - even after she proves over and over again that she is young and a GENIUS. And then, there's good ol' Rain Wilson (Dwight from THE OFFICE) who's the megalomaniacal mega-billionaire who wants to capture (not kill) The Meg for profit.
The problem with all these characters (and others like Masi Oka's homesick scientist) is that they are one-note but not SO one note that they are over-the-top caricatures. They're just boring and forgettable.
As for the shark killings (the real reason that The Meg is intriguing), they are just as boring and forgettable as the characters. Most of them are homages to kills ni the Jaws series of films, so there is some fun in that, but none of them are truly unique and original or over-the-top enough.
The blame, I think, probably goes to "the suits" at Warner Brothers or perhaps Gravity Pictures. There are 3 writers on this, so clearly the script kept getting sent back to the drawing board - and 19(!) producers attached. I heard that Eli Roth was attached at one point and he wanted to make it EXTREMELY graphic and bloody - but "the suits" wanted something they could market to a broader audience, so let him go and hired the always mediocre Jon Turtletaub (LAST VEGAS, THE SORCERER'S APPRENTICE) to Direct and mediocrity reigns all over.
If you want a "so bad it's good" mega-shark film and check out DEEP BLUE SEA (the Samuel L. Jackson speech in this film is worth the price of admission). And when you see THE MEG on whatever streaming platform you prefer and are prepared to watch it "for a laugh", save yourself the bother (and the boredom) and stream something else.
Letter Grade: C (it is competently made)
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Cursed (2005) in Movies
Sep 18, 2020
the cgi (2 more)
production problems
PG-13 not R
Hollywood's Own Werewolves
Cursed- could of been better. It had a good young cast of people. Just the movie itself was so-so. The cgi/visual effects were bad, like really bad. So bad it made the movie bad.
The only thing making this film good is its young cast and the horror.
The plot: In Los Angeles, siblings Ellie (Christina Ricci) and Jimmy (Jesse Eisenberg) come across an accident on Mulholland Drive. As they try to help the woman caught in the wreckage, a ferocious creature attacks them, devouring the woman and scratching the terrified siblings. They slowly discover that the creature was a werewolf and that they have fallen victim to a deadly curse. Now that they have been sliced by the werewolf's claws, they will be transformed into werewolves themselves.
Originally planned for 2003, the film is a notable example of development hell, taking over two more years to be made than originally planned, during which producers Bob and Harvey Weinstein kept asking for reshoots and changes to the plot, re-edited the movie to give a PG-13 rating rather than the original intended R-rating, and fired legendary makeup artist Rick Baker to replace the werewolves he had created with computer-generated ones.
The film was a box-office failure and was panned by critics; Craven himself was very displeased with the final result.
The set used for the high school is Torrance High School, the same used for Sunnydale High on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and West Beverly High on Beverly Hills, 90210 and its spin-off 90210.
However, the film soon suffered numerous production and script issues and was postponed for over a year. While production was stalled, several cast members had to be replaced due to scheduling conflicts with other films. When the movie was rewritten and reshot, many cast members had been cut entirely, including Skeet Ulrich, Mandy Moore, Omar Epps, Illeana Douglas, Heather Langenkamp, Scott Foley, Robert Forster, and Corey Feldman.
Only about 90% of the original version was filmed, leaving the original ending unfilmed. Although, while filming the original version, producer Bob Weinstein told Wes Craven he was happy with the film, he later changed his opinion and ordered for the movie to be reshot with a new plot. After massive reshoots which included filming a new ending, Weinstein told Craven he didn't like the new ending, leading to another ending where Jake attacks Ellie and Jimmy in their home, despite some incoherence with the rest of the film.
In the fall of 2004, Dimension cut the film to a PG-13 rating instead of the planned R rating. Speaking to the New York Post, Wes Craven commented, "The contract called for us to make an R-rated film. We did. It was a very difficult process. Then it was basically taken away from us and cut to PG-13 and ruined. It was two years of very difficult work and almost 100 days of shooting of various versions. Then at the very end, it was chopped up and the studio thought they could make more with a PG-13 movie, and trashed it ... I thought it was completely disrespectful, and it hurt them too, and it was like they shot themselves in the foot with a shotgun.
Its a decent movie.
The only thing making this film good is its young cast and the horror.
The plot: In Los Angeles, siblings Ellie (Christina Ricci) and Jimmy (Jesse Eisenberg) come across an accident on Mulholland Drive. As they try to help the woman caught in the wreckage, a ferocious creature attacks them, devouring the woman and scratching the terrified siblings. They slowly discover that the creature was a werewolf and that they have fallen victim to a deadly curse. Now that they have been sliced by the werewolf's claws, they will be transformed into werewolves themselves.
Originally planned for 2003, the film is a notable example of development hell, taking over two more years to be made than originally planned, during which producers Bob and Harvey Weinstein kept asking for reshoots and changes to the plot, re-edited the movie to give a PG-13 rating rather than the original intended R-rating, and fired legendary makeup artist Rick Baker to replace the werewolves he had created with computer-generated ones.
The film was a box-office failure and was panned by critics; Craven himself was very displeased with the final result.
The set used for the high school is Torrance High School, the same used for Sunnydale High on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and West Beverly High on Beverly Hills, 90210 and its spin-off 90210.
However, the film soon suffered numerous production and script issues and was postponed for over a year. While production was stalled, several cast members had to be replaced due to scheduling conflicts with other films. When the movie was rewritten and reshot, many cast members had been cut entirely, including Skeet Ulrich, Mandy Moore, Omar Epps, Illeana Douglas, Heather Langenkamp, Scott Foley, Robert Forster, and Corey Feldman.
Only about 90% of the original version was filmed, leaving the original ending unfilmed. Although, while filming the original version, producer Bob Weinstein told Wes Craven he was happy with the film, he later changed his opinion and ordered for the movie to be reshot with a new plot. After massive reshoots which included filming a new ending, Weinstein told Craven he didn't like the new ending, leading to another ending where Jake attacks Ellie and Jimmy in their home, despite some incoherence with the rest of the film.
In the fall of 2004, Dimension cut the film to a PG-13 rating instead of the planned R rating. Speaking to the New York Post, Wes Craven commented, "The contract called for us to make an R-rated film. We did. It was a very difficult process. Then it was basically taken away from us and cut to PG-13 and ruined. It was two years of very difficult work and almost 100 days of shooting of various versions. Then at the very end, it was chopped up and the studio thought they could make more with a PG-13 movie, and trashed it ... I thought it was completely disrespectful, and it hurt them too, and it was like they shot themselves in the foot with a shotgun.
Its a decent movie.
Hadley (567 KP) rated Ghostly Tales: Spine-Chilling Stories of the Victorian Age in Books
Jan 20, 2021
Ghost stories (1 more)
Well-written
This collection of tales will transport you to a time when staircases creaked in old manor houses, and a candle could be blown out by a gust of wind, or by a passing ghost. Penned by some of the greatest Victorian novelists and masters of the ghost story genre, these stories come alive alongside exquisitely eerie art in this special illustrated edition.
Since this is a short story collection, I will list the stories with a short synopsis and what I liked and disliked about them.
"Oh, Whistle, and I'll Come to You, My Lad" by M.R. James
A professor decides to go on vacation to work on his golf game while doing a little side work in the town's archaeology, but when he digs up an old whistle and blows into it, he instantly regrets what the whistle brings.
Liked: the buildup to the climax was done masterfully, and the superstition that was used as the premise of the story
Disliked: that the ending is never explained
"The Old Nurse's Story" by Elizabeth Gaskell
When a governess and her ward are taken to a haunted house, they found out that everyone has to pay for their misdeeds.
Liked: the perfect example of what Victorian ghost stories were
Disliked: Nothing; I really enjoyed this one
"The Signalman" by Charles Dickens
A railroad signalman tells a co-worker that he is seeing a ghost that warns him of future accidents, but his co-worker can't tell if he's telling the truth or losing his mind.
Liked: an excellent ghost story; I wish it were an entire novel
Disliked: nothing
"The Body-Snatcher" by Robert Louis Stevenson
When a medical student realizes that the 'donated' bodies are murder victims, he's not so sure he can live with the consequences.
Liked: the ending wasn't predictable
Disliked: at the start, there's a little confusion among who is who
" The Captain of the Pole-Star" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
A group of whalers are stuck in the middle of the ocean because of ice burgs, but the ice is the least of their problems when they begin to hear and see supernatural things out on the ice.
Liked: the plot of the story was really good
Disliked: the run-on sentences, some of the accents were hard to decipher, and the ending wasn't explained
"The Phantom Coach" by Amelia B. Edwards
A young man loses his way while on a hunt, but soon finds help with an old man that is convinced the supernatural is real, and when he senses the young man does not, he puts him up against forces from the other side.
Liked: the story never lulled, and the descriptions of the undead were amazing
Disliked: nothing, I thought the story was really good
"The Screaming Skull" by F. Marion Crawford
When the friend of a family finds a skull in the latter's home, he begins to question whether or not the husband murdered his wife.
Liked: I love that this story is actually based off an urban legend
Disliked: the way the author kept breaking away from the story to talk to the audience; it caused the flow of the story to stop
Overall, the Victorian-era authors knew how to write a ghost story. I absolutely loved this collection of short stories. I highly recommend this book to people who love a good 'ol fashioned ghost story (not the gory ones we have today).
Since this is a short story collection, I will list the stories with a short synopsis and what I liked and disliked about them.
"Oh, Whistle, and I'll Come to You, My Lad" by M.R. James
A professor decides to go on vacation to work on his golf game while doing a little side work in the town's archaeology, but when he digs up an old whistle and blows into it, he instantly regrets what the whistle brings.
Liked: the buildup to the climax was done masterfully, and the superstition that was used as the premise of the story
Disliked: that the ending is never explained
"The Old Nurse's Story" by Elizabeth Gaskell
When a governess and her ward are taken to a haunted house, they found out that everyone has to pay for their misdeeds.
Liked: the perfect example of what Victorian ghost stories were
Disliked: Nothing; I really enjoyed this one
"The Signalman" by Charles Dickens
A railroad signalman tells a co-worker that he is seeing a ghost that warns him of future accidents, but his co-worker can't tell if he's telling the truth or losing his mind.
Liked: an excellent ghost story; I wish it were an entire novel
Disliked: nothing
"The Body-Snatcher" by Robert Louis Stevenson
When a medical student realizes that the 'donated' bodies are murder victims, he's not so sure he can live with the consequences.
Liked: the ending wasn't predictable
Disliked: at the start, there's a little confusion among who is who
" The Captain of the Pole-Star" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
A group of whalers are stuck in the middle of the ocean because of ice burgs, but the ice is the least of their problems when they begin to hear and see supernatural things out on the ice.
Liked: the plot of the story was really good
Disliked: the run-on sentences, some of the accents were hard to decipher, and the ending wasn't explained
"The Phantom Coach" by Amelia B. Edwards
A young man loses his way while on a hunt, but soon finds help with an old man that is convinced the supernatural is real, and when he senses the young man does not, he puts him up against forces from the other side.
Liked: the story never lulled, and the descriptions of the undead were amazing
Disliked: nothing, I thought the story was really good
"The Screaming Skull" by F. Marion Crawford
When the friend of a family finds a skull in the latter's home, he begins to question whether or not the husband murdered his wife.
Liked: I love that this story is actually based off an urban legend
Disliked: the way the author kept breaking away from the story to talk to the audience; it caused the flow of the story to stop
Overall, the Victorian-era authors knew how to write a ghost story. I absolutely loved this collection of short stories. I highly recommend this book to people who love a good 'ol fashioned ghost story (not the gory ones we have today).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
The Arthurian legend: but with Cockneys.
So, bit difficult to describe this one… so I asked my bloke Alfie from Londinium to explain what’s it all about…
“‘Ere, OK bruv. So this is dun by that geezer Guy Ritchie – yer know, the one that dun that Sherlock Holmes with the Iron Man geezer Robert Junior Downey, that one. His new film is a rip-roarin’ acshun movie what retells da Arfurian legend in a novel new way.
That Hulk bloke Eric Bana is Arfur’s farfer an’ ‘e’s ‘avin’ a few problems wiv ‘is bruvver Vortigern (Jude Law, who’s a bi’ ov a cockney ‘imself, but ‘ere speaks like a posh bloke. Know what I mean?) So ‘e (Vortigern dat is) gets some magical ‘elp from some slippery watery bints in a puddle and so ‘is dad puts ‘is God Forbid in a boat an’ sends ‘im down da river ter The Smoke ter live wiv some prozzies.
But ‘e grows up big an’ strong an’ ‘andy wiv a sword. His friends tell ‘im ter get aaaht ov town as da King’s blokes are lookin’ fer da young geezer who would be king. An’ e says like “Scapa Flow sowf ov da river at dis time ov night. Are yew mad?”. So e gets caught like an’ gets tested by some famous football bloke ter pull a big sword aaaht ov just a random bi’ ov stone (nod, nod, wink wink, nice twist – ssshhh!).
The Vortigern bloke is very cross an’ tries to kill ‘im but ‘e gets rescued by some bird who can make birds, lol, an’ other fings do what she wants. So can Arfur beat ‘is uncle? Gawdon Bennet, I’m not gon’a tell yew da whole darn fing! Yer’ll ‘ave ter go an’ watch i’ ter find out.”
Thanks Alfie. Couldn’t have said it better myself!
The quirky style of Guy Ritchie isn’t one that you would think would translate well to the Arthurian setting, and as the film starts you tend to think you were right! But if you give it a chance it wears you down into acceptance and then – ultimately – a lot of enjoyment.
Jude Law is deliciously evil mixed with a heavy dose of mad, and delivers the goods.
Charlie Hunnam who plays Arthur (no, I hadn’t heard of him either but he was in the “Lost City of Z”) does a decent job as the medieval hunk, although he seems at time to have taken voice coaching in ‘Olde-English’ from Russell Crowe, since the lad’s Geordie accent seems to wander from Cockney through central southern England to Liverpudlian at one point (definitely channelling a young John Lennon)! Relative newcomer, the Spanish actress Astrid Bergès-Frisbey is effectively weird as the mage.
Particularly noteworthy (no pun intended) is the superb action soundtrack by Daniel Pemberton (“Steve Jobs“, “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.“) which propels the action really well and contains some standout moments.
Also a standout in the technical categories is the editing by James Herbert, who did both of Downey Junior’s “Sherlock Holmes” films (in a similar style) and also “Edge of Tomorrow“. The style is typified with Arthur’s growth to manhood in the streets of London which is stylishly done.
I saw the film in 3D – not a particularly favourite format – but quite well done, although falls into the “trying too hard” category at times with lots of drifting embers… you know the sort.
It’s not bloody Shakespeare. It’s not even the bloody Arthurian legend as you know it. But it is bloody good fun if you let it in.
“‘Ere, OK bruv. So this is dun by that geezer Guy Ritchie – yer know, the one that dun that Sherlock Holmes with the Iron Man geezer Robert Junior Downey, that one. His new film is a rip-roarin’ acshun movie what retells da Arfurian legend in a novel new way.
That Hulk bloke Eric Bana is Arfur’s farfer an’ ‘e’s ‘avin’ a few problems wiv ‘is bruvver Vortigern (Jude Law, who’s a bi’ ov a cockney ‘imself, but ‘ere speaks like a posh bloke. Know what I mean?) So ‘e (Vortigern dat is) gets some magical ‘elp from some slippery watery bints in a puddle and so ‘is dad puts ‘is God Forbid in a boat an’ sends ‘im down da river ter The Smoke ter live wiv some prozzies.
But ‘e grows up big an’ strong an’ ‘andy wiv a sword. His friends tell ‘im ter get aaaht ov town as da King’s blokes are lookin’ fer da young geezer who would be king. An’ e says like “Scapa Flow sowf ov da river at dis time ov night. Are yew mad?”. So e gets caught like an’ gets tested by some famous football bloke ter pull a big sword aaaht ov just a random bi’ ov stone (nod, nod, wink wink, nice twist – ssshhh!).
The Vortigern bloke is very cross an’ tries to kill ‘im but ‘e gets rescued by some bird who can make birds, lol, an’ other fings do what she wants. So can Arfur beat ‘is uncle? Gawdon Bennet, I’m not gon’a tell yew da whole darn fing! Yer’ll ‘ave ter go an’ watch i’ ter find out.”
Thanks Alfie. Couldn’t have said it better myself!
The quirky style of Guy Ritchie isn’t one that you would think would translate well to the Arthurian setting, and as the film starts you tend to think you were right! But if you give it a chance it wears you down into acceptance and then – ultimately – a lot of enjoyment.
Jude Law is deliciously evil mixed with a heavy dose of mad, and delivers the goods.
Charlie Hunnam who plays Arthur (no, I hadn’t heard of him either but he was in the “Lost City of Z”) does a decent job as the medieval hunk, although he seems at time to have taken voice coaching in ‘Olde-English’ from Russell Crowe, since the lad’s Geordie accent seems to wander from Cockney through central southern England to Liverpudlian at one point (definitely channelling a young John Lennon)! Relative newcomer, the Spanish actress Astrid Bergès-Frisbey is effectively weird as the mage.
Particularly noteworthy (no pun intended) is the superb action soundtrack by Daniel Pemberton (“Steve Jobs“, “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.“) which propels the action really well and contains some standout moments.
Also a standout in the technical categories is the editing by James Herbert, who did both of Downey Junior’s “Sherlock Holmes” films (in a similar style) and also “Edge of Tomorrow“. The style is typified with Arthur’s growth to manhood in the streets of London which is stylishly done.
I saw the film in 3D – not a particularly favourite format – but quite well done, although falls into the “trying too hard” category at times with lots of drifting embers… you know the sort.
It’s not bloody Shakespeare. It’s not even the bloody Arthurian legend as you know it. But it is bloody good fun if you let it in.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Professor (McMurtrie and Drake Legal Thrillers #1) in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
<i>The Professor</i>, a legal thriller by American author Robert Bailey, is a well-written novel about an investigation into a fatal car crash. A collision between a speeding truck and a family car resulted in the death of all four people in the vehicles. The mother of one of the deceased is determined to find out the truth about what happened and so enlists the help of an old friend, Thomas McMurtrie, the Professor.
Although everything revolves around the upcoming trial, the story is really focused on two people in particular. One is the aforementioned Professor and the other is an ex-student of his, Rick Drake. Tom used to be a lawyer but after persuasion from Coach Paul Bryant he took up a position at the University of Alabama teaching law. Now at 68 years old he is forced into retirement. Rick Drake, on the other hand, is a young and struggling lawyer, who after punching Tom due to his hot headedness is finding it difficult to pick up work. Putting aside their differences, the two of the come together to try and win this court case. The opposition, however, seem determined to make that impossible by using any means possible.
The prologue initially misled me. It explains how Tom became a professor in 1969 by detailing his meeting with Coach Paul Bryant who is more often referred to as the Man. This title, as well as the capitalization, led me to believe that he would be a sinister, untrustworthy character in this story. That turned out not to be the case – nor was he even in it, having long passed away. He was known as the Man in the same way that Tom is known as the Professor, due to respect and admiration.
There were times when I did not like what was happening in the novel, particularly the murders of Rick’s key witnesses, but once the trial actually began it got really exciting with the pace picking up as I hoped that everything would resolve itself.
For those who love crime novels this is a definite read. I cannot be entirely sure but the caption on the back cover “The First McMurtrie & Drake Investigation” implies that this could become a series rather than a standalone story; in which case it would be interesting to discover what the pair do next.
<i>The Professor</i>, a legal thriller by American author Robert Bailey, is a well-written novel about an investigation into a fatal car crash. A collision between a speeding truck and a family car resulted in the death of all four people in the vehicles. The mother of one of the deceased is determined to find out the truth about what happened and so enlists the help of an old friend, Thomas McMurtrie, the Professor.
Although everything revolves around the upcoming trial, the story is really focused on two people in particular. One is the aforementioned Professor and the other is an ex-student of his, Rick Drake. Tom used to be a lawyer but after persuasion from Coach Paul Bryant he took up a position at the University of Alabama teaching law. Now at 68 years old he is forced into retirement. Rick Drake, on the other hand, is a young and struggling lawyer, who after punching Tom due to his hot headedness is finding it difficult to pick up work. Putting aside their differences, the two of the come together to try and win this court case. The opposition, however, seem determined to make that impossible by using any means possible.
The prologue initially misled me. It explains how Tom became a professor in 1969 by detailing his meeting with Coach Paul Bryant who is more often referred to as the Man. This title, as well as the capitalization, led me to believe that he would be a sinister, untrustworthy character in this story. That turned out not to be the case – nor was he even in it, having long passed away. He was known as the Man in the same way that Tom is known as the Professor, due to respect and admiration.
There were times when I did not like what was happening in the novel, particularly the murders of Rick’s key witnesses, but once the trial actually began it got really exciting with the pace picking up as I hoped that everything would resolve itself.
For those who love crime novels this is a definite read. I cannot be entirely sure but the caption on the back cover “The First McMurtrie & Drake Investigation” implies that this could become a series rather than a standalone story; in which case it would be interesting to discover what the pair do next.
JT (287 KP) rated Killer Elite (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Just another mindless Statham master-class of ass kicking? Think again people, this one is a whole different ball game, and one that sets this easily one of the Stath’s best to date. Paired alongside Robert De Niro would be an honour in itself for any actor and the rapport between the two was like they had been lifelong friends.
Despite De Niro’s relatively smallish part he still gets his moment in the limelight, and makes the most of the opportunity, with a few witty pieces of dialogue thrown in, we all know he can handle an automatic weapon.
It’s more than just an action film though, it’s part drama part spy thriller
This is all about Danny (Jason Statham) and his group of deadly assassins, Davies, played by Prison Break’s Dominic Purcell and Meier (Aden Young) who set out to take down three former SAS soldiers who are alleged to have killed a dying Sheik’s three sons. All this in return for the release of Hunter, simply put “You do this job, or Hunter’s a dead man.”
Set in the 80s it gives the film a real retro feel to it, and the action is balls and all, there is no CGI here. From an opening sequence centred on a assassination attempt to close hand to hand combat, director McKendry goes a little Bourne-esque with his sharp direction and tight camera shots.
Clive Owen sporting the film’s dodgiest tash is ultra slick and uber cool as the dogsbody of a secret society called The Feather Men which is actually a book by Ranulph Fiennes to which the film is based. Why The Feather Men? Because they have the lightest touch, apt really when Owen goes about his business heavy handed.
It’s more than just an action film though, its part drama part spy thriller. The script is extremely well written with intricate characters that you can care about, rather than go to watch kick the shit out of each other.
The film does jump from a variety of locations, from the Middle East to London to Paris to the outback bush of Australia, it can be hard to follow and keep up with just where they are. But a close eye will leave no confusion whatsoever.
It’s a great debut feature from McKendry and will do his stock no harm at all, and for Statham fans this one has got a bit more meat on it to chew through.
Despite De Niro’s relatively smallish part he still gets his moment in the limelight, and makes the most of the opportunity, with a few witty pieces of dialogue thrown in, we all know he can handle an automatic weapon.
It’s more than just an action film though, it’s part drama part spy thriller
This is all about Danny (Jason Statham) and his group of deadly assassins, Davies, played by Prison Break’s Dominic Purcell and Meier (Aden Young) who set out to take down three former SAS soldiers who are alleged to have killed a dying Sheik’s three sons. All this in return for the release of Hunter, simply put “You do this job, or Hunter’s a dead man.”
Set in the 80s it gives the film a real retro feel to it, and the action is balls and all, there is no CGI here. From an opening sequence centred on a assassination attempt to close hand to hand combat, director McKendry goes a little Bourne-esque with his sharp direction and tight camera shots.
Clive Owen sporting the film’s dodgiest tash is ultra slick and uber cool as the dogsbody of a secret society called The Feather Men which is actually a book by Ranulph Fiennes to which the film is based. Why The Feather Men? Because they have the lightest touch, apt really when Owen goes about his business heavy handed.
It’s more than just an action film though, its part drama part spy thriller. The script is extremely well written with intricate characters that you can care about, rather than go to watch kick the shit out of each other.
The film does jump from a variety of locations, from the Middle East to London to Paris to the outback bush of Australia, it can be hard to follow and keep up with just where they are. But a close eye will leave no confusion whatsoever.
It’s a great debut feature from McKendry and will do his stock no harm at all, and for Statham fans this one has got a bit more meat on it to chew through.
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated Water for Elephants (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
The future is bright with promise for Jacob, a Cornell veterinary sciences student, ready to graduate and follow in his father’s footsteps. But after a series of unfortunate events, Jacob finds himself a college dropout, homeless and penniless. He sets out to find work and stows away on a passing train which turns out to be the Benzini Brothers Circus train.
Jacob appeals to the vanity of the heartless circus owner and ringmaster, August, convincing him to keep him on as the circus veterinary doctor. One of his first patients is the horse of the circus’ star attraction, Marlena, who also happens to be August’s wife. When Marlena’s horse is replaced by an elephant, Jacob is made responsible for the elephant’s care and training. This gives Marlena and Jacob a common ally in Rosie, the elephant, and a common enemy in an increasingly violent August. Cue the furtive glances, the stilted conversations and awkward moments that signal the start of the mutual attraction between Marlena and Jacob.
While Jacob, Marlena and August form the romantic triangle that drives the story, it’s Rosie and the circus backdrop that provide the more entertaining aspects of the movie. Director Francis Lawrence (Constantine and I Am Legend) pays decent attention to period detail, highlighting the desperation and brutality of The Great Depression while romanticizing the ephemeral circus life and the subversive lifestyles enjoyed in defiance of The Prohibition. Sadly they were just quick peeks into a curious world.
Based on a best-selling novel of the same name by Sara Gruen, Water for Elephants is a sweet tale told in retrospect by a 90-something-year old Jacob, played by a wistful Hal Holbrook. Robert Pattinson plays young Jacob capably, and I have no doubt his fans will swoon at the many close ups of his brooding stare, pained grimaces and the occasional delighted smile. While this character gives him a few more lines than his more well-known role as Edward, the tortured vampire of the Twilight saga, it was difficult to watch him and not see the similarities in how he portrays Jacob and Edward. Reese Witherspoon’s Marlena was in turns adequately fragile and sufficiently steely. With negligible chemistry, Pattinson and Witherspoon’s performances paled in comparison to that of Christoph Waltz whose sadistic August was played with cunning zeal.
A carefully told story, Water for Elephants is however too carefully told, in a predictable, pedantic pace. However, fans of Pattinson will not be disappointed.
Jacob appeals to the vanity of the heartless circus owner and ringmaster, August, convincing him to keep him on as the circus veterinary doctor. One of his first patients is the horse of the circus’ star attraction, Marlena, who also happens to be August’s wife. When Marlena’s horse is replaced by an elephant, Jacob is made responsible for the elephant’s care and training. This gives Marlena and Jacob a common ally in Rosie, the elephant, and a common enemy in an increasingly violent August. Cue the furtive glances, the stilted conversations and awkward moments that signal the start of the mutual attraction between Marlena and Jacob.
While Jacob, Marlena and August form the romantic triangle that drives the story, it’s Rosie and the circus backdrop that provide the more entertaining aspects of the movie. Director Francis Lawrence (Constantine and I Am Legend) pays decent attention to period detail, highlighting the desperation and brutality of The Great Depression while romanticizing the ephemeral circus life and the subversive lifestyles enjoyed in defiance of The Prohibition. Sadly they were just quick peeks into a curious world.
Based on a best-selling novel of the same name by Sara Gruen, Water for Elephants is a sweet tale told in retrospect by a 90-something-year old Jacob, played by a wistful Hal Holbrook. Robert Pattinson plays young Jacob capably, and I have no doubt his fans will swoon at the many close ups of his brooding stare, pained grimaces and the occasional delighted smile. While this character gives him a few more lines than his more well-known role as Edward, the tortured vampire of the Twilight saga, it was difficult to watch him and not see the similarities in how he portrays Jacob and Edward. Reese Witherspoon’s Marlena was in turns adequately fragile and sufficiently steely. With negligible chemistry, Pattinson and Witherspoon’s performances paled in comparison to that of Christoph Waltz whose sadistic August was played with cunning zeal.
A carefully told story, Water for Elephants is however too carefully told, in a predictable, pedantic pace. However, fans of Pattinson will not be disappointed.
ClareR (5577 KP) rated The Ninth Child in Books
May 1, 2020
Victorian Scotland, where reality meets myth.
The Ninth Child is a mesmerising mix of reality and fairytale. Neither of them are the pretty version, either. The story itself is set in Glasgow and the Trossachs between 1856 and 1859, where Isabel Aird is the wife of a young doctor. She has miscarried all seven of the babies she has carried so far, and is struggling to find meaning in her life. Her husband is very protective of her, but she can’t seem to forgive him for his apparent ability to shake off the loss of their babies.
We also get little glimpses in to the private lives of Queen Victoria and Albert, and the reason for this becomes clear as the story progresses. The link between the two families seems to be a strange character called Robert Kirke. Strange things seem to have been happening since the digging and tunnelling began. Isabel meets this strange man not long after she moves near to the site of the Loch Katrine Waterworks. This is no place for a lady brought up in all the comforts of a well-to-do Glaswegian home. But Isabel finds solace in the wildness, and the descriptions of the lochs and landscapes makes it easy to understand why.
This was such a surprising book, it wasn’t at all what I was expecting. I WAS expecting a good story - I loved The Sealwoman’s Gift. The mix of real, hard life and the fairy elements were really well done, and I loved that these weren’t the pretty, twee, friendly fairies that we seem to hear of so much of these days. I like my fairies to be tricksters, untrustworthy, always looking for an angle that they can work, a little grotesque.
I really enjoyed this book, and seemed to read it far too quickly. I’m a lover of history, myths and the unexplained, and this certainly delivered in these areas. The writing is gorgeous - the descriptions are such that you feel you’re there. We were supposed to be going on holiday this year to the Highlands, and this has made me hope even more that we’ll still be able to go. It’s one thing reading a description, it’s quite another to be there, experiencing the landscape for yourself.
This is a wonderful book, and one to tell my friends about!
Many thanks to NetGalley and Two Roads for my copy of this book to read and review.
We also get little glimpses in to the private lives of Queen Victoria and Albert, and the reason for this becomes clear as the story progresses. The link between the two families seems to be a strange character called Robert Kirke. Strange things seem to have been happening since the digging and tunnelling began. Isabel meets this strange man not long after she moves near to the site of the Loch Katrine Waterworks. This is no place for a lady brought up in all the comforts of a well-to-do Glaswegian home. But Isabel finds solace in the wildness, and the descriptions of the lochs and landscapes makes it easy to understand why.
This was such a surprising book, it wasn’t at all what I was expecting. I WAS expecting a good story - I loved The Sealwoman’s Gift. The mix of real, hard life and the fairy elements were really well done, and I loved that these weren’t the pretty, twee, friendly fairies that we seem to hear of so much of these days. I like my fairies to be tricksters, untrustworthy, always looking for an angle that they can work, a little grotesque.
I really enjoyed this book, and seemed to read it far too quickly. I’m a lover of history, myths and the unexplained, and this certainly delivered in these areas. The writing is gorgeous - the descriptions are such that you feel you’re there. We were supposed to be going on holiday this year to the Highlands, and this has made me hope even more that we’ll still be able to go. It’s one thing reading a description, it’s quite another to be there, experiencing the landscape for yourself.
This is a wonderful book, and one to tell my friends about!
Many thanks to NetGalley and Two Roads for my copy of this book to read and review.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Driven (2001) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: Driven starts as we get to see how a racing season is going, Beau Brandenburg (Schweiger) the reigning champion starts shinning until rookie driver Jimmy Bly (Pardue) starts becoming competition for the title. When Jimmy starts to fade, team manager Carl Henry (Reynolds) brings back former champion Joe Tanto (Stallone) to help keep the head on straight of the rookie driver.
With Joe back to be used as an experienced blocker to help Jimmy, it is Jimmy that will need to make the difficult decisions and with his brother and manager Demille Bly (Leonard) who is trying to control the young drivers ever movement. Can he get the title won on his rookie season or will the pressure get to him?
Thoughts on Driven
Characters – Joe Tanto was the once great driver, former champion and past his prime, still considered one for the experience factor. He needs to help guide the rookie who is destining to become champion, while facing his own personal regrets. Carl Henry is the owner of the team, he knows Jimmy will become champion and will do anything to make sure his team brings the title back. Jimmy Bly is the rookie making big waves in the sport, controlled by his brother to avoid the pressure that comes with being at the top. He makes the rookie mistakes and need guidance to become champion. Beau Brandenburg is the champion, the best in the game right now even if he can come of arrogant at times. Sophia is the girlfriend of Beau, she has been for years now and after a disagreement she befriends Jimmy adding extra tension between the two potential champions. Demille Bly is the brother and manager of Jimmy, he is trying to control every decision of his career, he is the closest to being the villain in the film.
Performances – Sylvester Stallone is solid enough for this film he fills in the mentor role well enough. Burt Reynolds as the team manager works for the film, we needed an older figure in this role. Kip Pardue does suit the rookie driver well even certain parts of the script are poor. Til Schweiger, Estella Warren and Robert Sean Leonard are good in the supporting roles which give them a chance to have fun with their roles.
Story – The story follows a rookie facing a champion for an unlike season in race car driving, we see the good and bad moments for the whole field, the pressures thrown on the young driver, with a friendly rivalry being created between the two. We have the older mentor role needed to keep the head on the straight for the younger driver. While being a Formula One fan I can enjoy a good rivalry film which this does give us even if the races have been intensified for the cinematic audience. We get lesson to be learnt by the drivers, team and managers which this season will give us.
Action/Sports – The action in this film comes from the races, while the special effects used have dated horrendously the flat out racing is a join to watch. The sport side of the film gives us a look into the racing industry and just how dangerous it can be when racing for victory.
Settings – The film takes us around the world to different race tracks used in the sport in real life.
Scene of the Movie – The accident.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The special effects.
Final Thoughts – This is a film the fans of racing will enjoy, it has good sequence even if the special effects are weak, it does feel like we are watch Cars the live action movie.
Overall: Racing fun film.
With Joe back to be used as an experienced blocker to help Jimmy, it is Jimmy that will need to make the difficult decisions and with his brother and manager Demille Bly (Leonard) who is trying to control the young drivers ever movement. Can he get the title won on his rookie season or will the pressure get to him?
Thoughts on Driven
Characters – Joe Tanto was the once great driver, former champion and past his prime, still considered one for the experience factor. He needs to help guide the rookie who is destining to become champion, while facing his own personal regrets. Carl Henry is the owner of the team, he knows Jimmy will become champion and will do anything to make sure his team brings the title back. Jimmy Bly is the rookie making big waves in the sport, controlled by his brother to avoid the pressure that comes with being at the top. He makes the rookie mistakes and need guidance to become champion. Beau Brandenburg is the champion, the best in the game right now even if he can come of arrogant at times. Sophia is the girlfriend of Beau, she has been for years now and after a disagreement she befriends Jimmy adding extra tension between the two potential champions. Demille Bly is the brother and manager of Jimmy, he is trying to control every decision of his career, he is the closest to being the villain in the film.
Performances – Sylvester Stallone is solid enough for this film he fills in the mentor role well enough. Burt Reynolds as the team manager works for the film, we needed an older figure in this role. Kip Pardue does suit the rookie driver well even certain parts of the script are poor. Til Schweiger, Estella Warren and Robert Sean Leonard are good in the supporting roles which give them a chance to have fun with their roles.
Story – The story follows a rookie facing a champion for an unlike season in race car driving, we see the good and bad moments for the whole field, the pressures thrown on the young driver, with a friendly rivalry being created between the two. We have the older mentor role needed to keep the head on the straight for the younger driver. While being a Formula One fan I can enjoy a good rivalry film which this does give us even if the races have been intensified for the cinematic audience. We get lesson to be learnt by the drivers, team and managers which this season will give us.
Action/Sports – The action in this film comes from the races, while the special effects used have dated horrendously the flat out racing is a join to watch. The sport side of the film gives us a look into the racing industry and just how dangerous it can be when racing for victory.
Settings – The film takes us around the world to different race tracks used in the sport in real life.
Scene of the Movie – The accident.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The special effects.
Final Thoughts – This is a film the fans of racing will enjoy, it has good sequence even if the special effects are weak, it does feel like we are watch Cars the live action movie.
Overall: Racing fun film.