Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Casablanca (1942) in Movies
May 6, 2019
A Classic in Every Sense of the Word
"Of all the gin joints, in all the towns, in all the world, she walks into mine."
"We'll always have Paris."
"Here's looking at you, kid."
"Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship."
And many, many, many other iconic lines were featured in the brilliant 1942 all-time Classic CASABLANCA. Listed as "Warner Brothers Project #410", this film was supposed to be "just another film", but it turned out to be something more.
Starring Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman and Claude Rains, CASABLANCA tells the story of refugees trying to flee Nazi controlled France (via Casablanca) in WWII. Amongst the denizens of Casablanca, there is Rick Blain, proprieter of Rick's Cafe American - a place where one can buy documents needed to escape, as well as escape - through a bottle.
Humphrey Bogart is perfectly cast as the jaded, "I stick my neck out for no one", Rick. He is cynical, corrupt, selfish...but he also has a heart of gold underneath it all. Bogie plays all of these layers - richly - at once, and was rewarded with an Academy Award nomination. He would lose to Paul Lukas for WATCH ON THE RHINE - a film I haven't seen, so can't judge as to the merits of his win. But...based on Bogart's performance...I'd say he was robbed.
Rick's "partner in crime' is Capt. Louis Renault of the Casablanca police. He is cheerfully and unapologetic-ally played by Claude Rains, who also was nominated (but didn't win) for his performance. These two play off each other brilliantly and the chemistry between these two is evident and I would have LOVED to see another film featuring these two fine performers. I'd say the chemistry between these two actors is a high point in this film, if it weren't for...
Ingrid Bergman as Ilse Lund - a past romance of Rick's. When Ilse and her husband, Viktor Laszlo enters Rick's seeking transit papers to flee the Nazi's, the instant spark and chemistry between Bogart and Bergman is palatable. You can feel the heat between the two of them through the screen and the longing and regret for "what could have been" is heartbreaking. If you were to show an example of "screen chemistry" the scenes between Bogart in Bergman in this film would be "Exhibit A".
Credit for all of this - and for keeping the plot machinations moving forward - is Warner Brothers "contract director" Michael Curtiz - one of the greatest Directors of "old Hollywood." His credits include the Errol Flynn ROBIN HOOD, James Cagney's Oscar turn as George M. Cohan in YANKEE DOODLE DANDY, CASABLANCA, the Bing Crosby/Danny Kaye WHITE CHRISTMAS and John Wayne in THE COMMANCHERO'S - all big budget, big expectations films that delivered the goods. Curtiz won the Oscar for his work in this film.
Assisting him are the two men who wrote so many memorable lines...twin brothers Julius and Phillip Epstein. They (deservedly) won an Oscar for their screenplay - the only set of Twins to win the Oscar.
The supporting cast - including Paul Henreid, Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre - are exceptional as well, as are great scene after great scene - including the "Marseilles" scene and, of course, the fog covered airport scene at the end.
If you haven't seen this film in awhile, do yourself a favor and check it out. If you have NEVER seen it, I envy you the experience of seeing this wonderful black and white film for the first time. It is consistently listed as one of the top 5 films of all time - and earns that ranking. It truly is one of the greatest films - with some of the greatest performances - of all time.
Certainly, if you wanted just one example of Studio "Old Hollywood" movie making, this would be the one movie to watch.
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
"We'll always have Paris."
"Here's looking at you, kid."
"Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship."
And many, many, many other iconic lines were featured in the brilliant 1942 all-time Classic CASABLANCA. Listed as "Warner Brothers Project #410", this film was supposed to be "just another film", but it turned out to be something more.
Starring Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman and Claude Rains, CASABLANCA tells the story of refugees trying to flee Nazi controlled France (via Casablanca) in WWII. Amongst the denizens of Casablanca, there is Rick Blain, proprieter of Rick's Cafe American - a place where one can buy documents needed to escape, as well as escape - through a bottle.
Humphrey Bogart is perfectly cast as the jaded, "I stick my neck out for no one", Rick. He is cynical, corrupt, selfish...but he also has a heart of gold underneath it all. Bogie plays all of these layers - richly - at once, and was rewarded with an Academy Award nomination. He would lose to Paul Lukas for WATCH ON THE RHINE - a film I haven't seen, so can't judge as to the merits of his win. But...based on Bogart's performance...I'd say he was robbed.
Rick's "partner in crime' is Capt. Louis Renault of the Casablanca police. He is cheerfully and unapologetic-ally played by Claude Rains, who also was nominated (but didn't win) for his performance. These two play off each other brilliantly and the chemistry between these two is evident and I would have LOVED to see another film featuring these two fine performers. I'd say the chemistry between these two actors is a high point in this film, if it weren't for...
Ingrid Bergman as Ilse Lund - a past romance of Rick's. When Ilse and her husband, Viktor Laszlo enters Rick's seeking transit papers to flee the Nazi's, the instant spark and chemistry between Bogart and Bergman is palatable. You can feel the heat between the two of them through the screen and the longing and regret for "what could have been" is heartbreaking. If you were to show an example of "screen chemistry" the scenes between Bogart in Bergman in this film would be "Exhibit A".
Credit for all of this - and for keeping the plot machinations moving forward - is Warner Brothers "contract director" Michael Curtiz - one of the greatest Directors of "old Hollywood." His credits include the Errol Flynn ROBIN HOOD, James Cagney's Oscar turn as George M. Cohan in YANKEE DOODLE DANDY, CASABLANCA, the Bing Crosby/Danny Kaye WHITE CHRISTMAS and John Wayne in THE COMMANCHERO'S - all big budget, big expectations films that delivered the goods. Curtiz won the Oscar for his work in this film.
Assisting him are the two men who wrote so many memorable lines...twin brothers Julius and Phillip Epstein. They (deservedly) won an Oscar for their screenplay - the only set of Twins to win the Oscar.
The supporting cast - including Paul Henreid, Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre - are exceptional as well, as are great scene after great scene - including the "Marseilles" scene and, of course, the fog covered airport scene at the end.
If you haven't seen this film in awhile, do yourself a favor and check it out. If you have NEVER seen it, I envy you the experience of seeing this wonderful black and white film for the first time. It is consistently listed as one of the top 5 films of all time - and earns that ranking. It truly is one of the greatest films - with some of the greatest performances - of all time.
Certainly, if you wanted just one example of Studio "Old Hollywood" movie making, this would be the one movie to watch.
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Lies We Tell Ourselves in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review</i>
<i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> by Robin Talley is a realistic tale about the beginning of the integration of coloured people into white schools in late 1950s America. In Virginia it is 1959 and ten Negros are beginning their first day at Jefferson Highschool. The experience is narrated from one of the ten, Sarah’s, perspective. In other parts of the novel the voice changes to that of Linda, a particularly nasty white girl, who is one of countless students opposed to integration.
Although many young people will have been taught about the black civil right movement it is still shocking to read about the horrible things they had to endure. By writing in the first person, Talley encourages the reader to try to understand how they would feel in a similar situation. Sarah and her friends instantly become the victims of verbal and physical abuse that members of authority turn a blind eye to.
To Sarah, Linda is a nasty spoilt bully who, although does not join in with the taunting and abuse, is as bad as the rest of them. Through reading Linda’s account it becomes clear that her behaviour has a lot to do with her home life, in particularly with her father’s attitude towards her. After being forced to partner Sarah for a French project Linda begins to question why there is so much emphasis on skin colour, however not wanting to be shunned by her own friends she keeps these thoughts to herself.
Sarah is also struggling to come to terms with her sexual preference for girls. It has been drilled into her that these thoughts are a sin. She hides her true feelings from everyone and constantly berates herself mentally for being “unnatural”. But it turns out she may not be the only one with these thoughts.
The lies referred to in the title are not the blatant or harmful lies but rather the lies the characters believe or even want to believe. Each chapter begins with a lie that reflects what is occurring in the novel at that time; for example “There’s no need to be afraid” and “I don’t care what they think of me.” This is an interesting way of telling the story as it emphasizes Sarah’s determination to keep going despite what she is subjected to. It also reveals the mental struggles she faces. On the other hand the lies disclose Linda’s conflicting feelings towards the South’s current situation and segregation laws.
Although not a religious novel, each part begins with the title of a Christian hymn. It was the norm for everyone to go to church and, despite the separate churches, was something black and white people did. Sarah and Linda have faith in God yet they both use the bible’s teachings for opposing arguments. The religious aspect also highlights Sarah’s self-hatred and belief that she has fallen into sin.
Unfortunately in today’s world there are still issues with racism and homophobia however after reading <i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> it is evident that these situations have vastly improved, at least in the Western world, since the 1950s. Without children such as Sarah going through these horrible experiences nothing would have changed. There would still be separate schools, slavery and inaccurate opinions about race inequality. America has a lot to thank these brave students who were the first to create mixed race schools.
Overall this is a brilliant book. Well written and realistic, it really draws the reader in to the characters’ stories. Although <i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> is a work of fiction, it is historically accurate and can teach a lot about America’s history to young adults today.
<i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> by Robin Talley is a realistic tale about the beginning of the integration of coloured people into white schools in late 1950s America. In Virginia it is 1959 and ten Negros are beginning their first day at Jefferson Highschool. The experience is narrated from one of the ten, Sarah’s, perspective. In other parts of the novel the voice changes to that of Linda, a particularly nasty white girl, who is one of countless students opposed to integration.
Although many young people will have been taught about the black civil right movement it is still shocking to read about the horrible things they had to endure. By writing in the first person, Talley encourages the reader to try to understand how they would feel in a similar situation. Sarah and her friends instantly become the victims of verbal and physical abuse that members of authority turn a blind eye to.
To Sarah, Linda is a nasty spoilt bully who, although does not join in with the taunting and abuse, is as bad as the rest of them. Through reading Linda’s account it becomes clear that her behaviour has a lot to do with her home life, in particularly with her father’s attitude towards her. After being forced to partner Sarah for a French project Linda begins to question why there is so much emphasis on skin colour, however not wanting to be shunned by her own friends she keeps these thoughts to herself.
Sarah is also struggling to come to terms with her sexual preference for girls. It has been drilled into her that these thoughts are a sin. She hides her true feelings from everyone and constantly berates herself mentally for being “unnatural”. But it turns out she may not be the only one with these thoughts.
The lies referred to in the title are not the blatant or harmful lies but rather the lies the characters believe or even want to believe. Each chapter begins with a lie that reflects what is occurring in the novel at that time; for example “There’s no need to be afraid” and “I don’t care what they think of me.” This is an interesting way of telling the story as it emphasizes Sarah’s determination to keep going despite what she is subjected to. It also reveals the mental struggles she faces. On the other hand the lies disclose Linda’s conflicting feelings towards the South’s current situation and segregation laws.
Although not a religious novel, each part begins with the title of a Christian hymn. It was the norm for everyone to go to church and, despite the separate churches, was something black and white people did. Sarah and Linda have faith in God yet they both use the bible’s teachings for opposing arguments. The religious aspect also highlights Sarah’s self-hatred and belief that she has fallen into sin.
Unfortunately in today’s world there are still issues with racism and homophobia however after reading <i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> it is evident that these situations have vastly improved, at least in the Western world, since the 1950s. Without children such as Sarah going through these horrible experiences nothing would have changed. There would still be separate schools, slavery and inaccurate opinions about race inequality. America has a lot to thank these brave students who were the first to create mixed race schools.
Overall this is a brilliant book. Well written and realistic, it really draws the reader in to the characters’ stories. Although <i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> is a work of fiction, it is historically accurate and can teach a lot about America’s history to young adults today.
Midge (525 KP) rated Mr Penumbra's 24-hour Bookstore in Books
Dec 24, 2018
A wonderful novel, and a must-read for bibliophiles and techies (2 more)
Hilarious and very genuine lead character
Cleverly written
Imaginative And Optimistic!
I love this book. It's a refreshing, pleasant, imaginative and optimistic book about friendship and the lure of the mysterious, and among other things, it's about a bookstore! It's a definite must-read for all bibliophiles.
Mr Penumbra's 24-Hour Bookstore begins with Clay Jannon, an out-of-work web designer who has found employment at a 24-hour bookstore located in San Francisco. Although the store has very few customers, he meets a variety of strange people that frequent the shop, but who rarely buy anything. However, they borrow mysteriously coded volumes, known as the "Waybacklist," most of which are hand-made, from a secret corner of the store. His curiosity sets him on a strange journey to try to find out more about the "Waybacklist," of ancient, esoteric books.
When they make an exchange from the "Waybacklist," Clay must record transaction details into an old logbook, including personal information about each customer, such as their appearance and state of mind. When the shop is empty, Clay busies himself by creating a computerised model of the bookstore in 3D. By identifying each of his customers by a different colour in the model, he is able to see a pattern developing and becomes convinced that the customers and Penumbra himself are members of a secret cult.
With two computer geek friends, one an old school friend, Neel, and the other a potential customer he met in the bookstore, Kat, who becomes his girlfriend, Clay sets out on a quest to learn the carefully kept secrets of the bookstore. When they bring their findings to Mr Penumbra, they discover the bookstore's secrets extend further than they ever imagined.
Clay, the main character, is exactly the kind of lead you want in this type of novel. He is constantly clueless though he tries hard, he is absolutely hilarious and very genuine. There are many different secondary characters regularly being introduced, but the book is so cleverly written that they never seem unnecessary. There is a lot of different levels of interaction between them, that I really liked.
There is an amazing use of different technologies in this book, however despite all the Google, Amazon, Kindle and the computer references, the true emphasis of the novel is on the people, and that is why I found the book so charming and bewitching. The younger characters are keen and enthusiastic, and you can identify with their search for connection and knowledge. The mix of foisty old books and cutting-edge technology is captivating.
If you prefer villains in your novels then this book is not for you. There is no evil in this book, and everyone that the narrator meets becomes a friend. I couldn't really guess how this book would end but I loved the way the story was concluded. The following quote is actually the last paragraph in the book, but it describes the mystery and the wonder of the whole book, to perfection.
"A man walking fast down a dark lonely street. Quick steps and hard breathing, all wonder and need. A bell above a door and the tinkle it makes. A clerk and a ladder and warm golden light, and then: the right book exactly, at exactly the right time."
Enthralling and fun to read, this novel, with its unique twists and turns of plot, left me feeling very satisfied.
Mr Penumbra's 24-Hour Bookstore has inspired me to read other novels by Robin Sloan.
Mr Penumbra's 24-Hour Bookstore begins with Clay Jannon, an out-of-work web designer who has found employment at a 24-hour bookstore located in San Francisco. Although the store has very few customers, he meets a variety of strange people that frequent the shop, but who rarely buy anything. However, they borrow mysteriously coded volumes, known as the "Waybacklist," most of which are hand-made, from a secret corner of the store. His curiosity sets him on a strange journey to try to find out more about the "Waybacklist," of ancient, esoteric books.
When they make an exchange from the "Waybacklist," Clay must record transaction details into an old logbook, including personal information about each customer, such as their appearance and state of mind. When the shop is empty, Clay busies himself by creating a computerised model of the bookstore in 3D. By identifying each of his customers by a different colour in the model, he is able to see a pattern developing and becomes convinced that the customers and Penumbra himself are members of a secret cult.
With two computer geek friends, one an old school friend, Neel, and the other a potential customer he met in the bookstore, Kat, who becomes his girlfriend, Clay sets out on a quest to learn the carefully kept secrets of the bookstore. When they bring their findings to Mr Penumbra, they discover the bookstore's secrets extend further than they ever imagined.
Clay, the main character, is exactly the kind of lead you want in this type of novel. He is constantly clueless though he tries hard, he is absolutely hilarious and very genuine. There are many different secondary characters regularly being introduced, but the book is so cleverly written that they never seem unnecessary. There is a lot of different levels of interaction between them, that I really liked.
There is an amazing use of different technologies in this book, however despite all the Google, Amazon, Kindle and the computer references, the true emphasis of the novel is on the people, and that is why I found the book so charming and bewitching. The younger characters are keen and enthusiastic, and you can identify with their search for connection and knowledge. The mix of foisty old books and cutting-edge technology is captivating.
If you prefer villains in your novels then this book is not for you. There is no evil in this book, and everyone that the narrator meets becomes a friend. I couldn't really guess how this book would end but I loved the way the story was concluded. The following quote is actually the last paragraph in the book, but it describes the mystery and the wonder of the whole book, to perfection.
"A man walking fast down a dark lonely street. Quick steps and hard breathing, all wonder and need. A bell above a door and the tinkle it makes. A clerk and a ladder and warm golden light, and then: the right book exactly, at exactly the right time."
Enthralling and fun to read, this novel, with its unique twists and turns of plot, left me feeling very satisfied.
Mr Penumbra's 24-Hour Bookstore has inspired me to read other novels by Robin Sloan.
James P. Sumner (65 KP) rated Official Secrets (2019) in Movies
Oct 16, 2019
Should this tense, dramatic thriller remain a Secret?
I was lucky enough to be invited to an advanced screening of this film, ahead of it's general release.
"Official Secrets (2019)" is a tense and clever thriller based on real events that occurred during the beginning of the Iraq War in 2003. Keira Knightley plays Katherine Gun, a British spy-turned-whistleblower who worked for GCHQ at the time. She leaked confidential information to the press, exposing illegal activities at the highest levels of government intended to falsely justify the invasion of Iraq. Backed by a high-calibre support cast, which includes Matt Smith and Ralph Fiennes, this film serves to show you the true story of what happened during this shadowy and questionable chapter in our history.
The film uses actual news footage from the time to great effect, making you feel as if you're watching a biographical documentary on the History Channel. Knightley is captivating as the Robin Hood-esque lead, delivering a truly believable and heartfelt performance throughout. It wasn't until the credits began to roll and they showed you footage of the real Katherine Gun from news reels at the time that you realise just how good Knightley's performance really was. From the way she dressed to the tone in which she spoke and the small mannerisms of her personality, it was a very, very good portrayal.
As with most films like this, I imagine certain events and aspects of the story were dramatised or exaggerated for the purposes of cinema, but at no point did it ever feel like it. Any changes to real events were subtle enough that you couldn't spot them without detailed knowledge of what really happened at the time - something, it turns out, very few people actually had.
Matt Smith is both charming and uncompromising as the stubborn reporter who champions Gun's crusade for the truth, giving her support and a platform to get her message out to the world. Similarly, Ralph Fiennes looks right at home as the lawyer who defends her in the public eye.
I admit that certain aspects and legalities within the plot felt, at times, a little far-fetched, but honestly, the film did such a good job of telling this story, I'm inclined to think that's still how things actually happened.
Spoilers aren't as much of an issue for films like this, as you already know the outcome. But this film isn't about the destination, it's about the journey. It shines a spotlight on the down-and-dirty world of global politics, as well as how difficult it can sometimes be to choose to do the right thing.
The film moves along at a slow yet perfect pace. It doesn't look or feel like a Hollywood movie, which I think is a very good thing. Instead, it feels like a BBC drama, similar to Line of Duty or Luther or Spooks, and that's exactly the kind of approach this film needed to work.
I went into this admittedly understanding very little of what went on back in 2003. I was much younger and wasn't interested in geopolitics, or even the news in general. But seeing this film piqued my interest, and after a few hours of Googling the events depicted in the film, I'm even more in awe of just how well made this was. Kudos to everyone involved.
My only criticism, if I had to give one, would be the number of times people had to say "Official Secrets Act"... I get that's what the film is about, but it seemed like every character had a quota for the number of times they had to mention it! But that's just nit-picking for nit-picking's sake. This truly is a cracking film. One of the gems of the year that's not to be missed!
"Official Secrets (2019)" is a tense and clever thriller based on real events that occurred during the beginning of the Iraq War in 2003. Keira Knightley plays Katherine Gun, a British spy-turned-whistleblower who worked for GCHQ at the time. She leaked confidential information to the press, exposing illegal activities at the highest levels of government intended to falsely justify the invasion of Iraq. Backed by a high-calibre support cast, which includes Matt Smith and Ralph Fiennes, this film serves to show you the true story of what happened during this shadowy and questionable chapter in our history.
The film uses actual news footage from the time to great effect, making you feel as if you're watching a biographical documentary on the History Channel. Knightley is captivating as the Robin Hood-esque lead, delivering a truly believable and heartfelt performance throughout. It wasn't until the credits began to roll and they showed you footage of the real Katherine Gun from news reels at the time that you realise just how good Knightley's performance really was. From the way she dressed to the tone in which she spoke and the small mannerisms of her personality, it was a very, very good portrayal.
As with most films like this, I imagine certain events and aspects of the story were dramatised or exaggerated for the purposes of cinema, but at no point did it ever feel like it. Any changes to real events were subtle enough that you couldn't spot them without detailed knowledge of what really happened at the time - something, it turns out, very few people actually had.
Matt Smith is both charming and uncompromising as the stubborn reporter who champions Gun's crusade for the truth, giving her support and a platform to get her message out to the world. Similarly, Ralph Fiennes looks right at home as the lawyer who defends her in the public eye.
I admit that certain aspects and legalities within the plot felt, at times, a little far-fetched, but honestly, the film did such a good job of telling this story, I'm inclined to think that's still how things actually happened.
Spoilers aren't as much of an issue for films like this, as you already know the outcome. But this film isn't about the destination, it's about the journey. It shines a spotlight on the down-and-dirty world of global politics, as well as how difficult it can sometimes be to choose to do the right thing.
The film moves along at a slow yet perfect pace. It doesn't look or feel like a Hollywood movie, which I think is a very good thing. Instead, it feels like a BBC drama, similar to Line of Duty or Luther or Spooks, and that's exactly the kind of approach this film needed to work.
I went into this admittedly understanding very little of what went on back in 2003. I was much younger and wasn't interested in geopolitics, or even the news in general. But seeing this film piqued my interest, and after a few hours of Googling the events depicted in the film, I'm even more in awe of just how well made this was. Kudos to everyone involved.
My only criticism, if I had to give one, would be the number of times people had to say "Official Secrets Act"... I get that's what the film is about, but it seemed like every character had a quota for the number of times they had to mention it! But that's just nit-picking for nit-picking's sake. This truly is a cracking film. One of the gems of the year that's not to be missed!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Bombshell (2019) in Movies
Jan 31, 2020
Well acted - and important - film
The new Jay Roach film, BOMBSHELL - the Fox News sex scandal film - focuses on the struggles of 3 female protagonists - Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman), Megyn Kelly (Charlize Theron) and Kayla Pospisil (Margot Robbie) - as they attempt to climb (or stay at the top of) the Corporate Ladder while battling sexism and a toxic work culture at Fox News. It is a powerful story that is a necessary tale in the "#MeToo" era that demands viewers to stand up and take notice.
And with powerhouse actresses leading this film - standing up and taking notice is an easy thing to do.
Based on factual events, BOMBSHELL portrays the sexism that female on air personalities encounter at FoxNews - a place filled with "good ol' boys" who patronize and sexualize the females in the office to the detriment of the females and the benefit and gratification of the males. Surprisingly, they are joined in this by some other females in the office who figure "better them than me". At the top of the office - and the toxic work culture - is Roger Ailes (an almost unrecognizable John Lithgow) who is hailed by Fox as the man who can create the news - and profits.
Kidman, Theron and Robbie are well cast in their roles, showing nuance, concern and strength as these negative conditions rear their ugly heads over and over again. All 3 produce powerhouse performances - certainly up there amongst the best of their careers - and Theron and Robbie are well deserved Oscar nominees for their performances. Kidman was NOT nominated for her performance, but she is just as deserving as the other two.
But, for me, the real surprise - and the best performance - of this film belongs to Lithgow's portrayal of Ailes. His characterization shows a real wolf, taking advantage of his status and position, to prey upon those in his office. It is a sly, evil performance of a sly, evil man. What impressed me the most is that this performance - and this character - could have easily gone "over the top" into "pure villain" territory and Lithgow resists this temptation - to the betterment of this film, but to the detriment of his Oscar chances.
As written by Charles Randolph (THE BIG SHORT) this film has a pacing/theming issue for the first 1/2 hour of this film. Is it a serious film? Is it sarcastic look at toxic masculinity work culture? Is it an indictment on our current society as a whole? Randolph's script uses some of the same tactics as THE BIG SHORT, having performers breaking the 4th wall and commenting and narrating the events while looking directly at the camera. While this tactic worked very well in THE BIG SHORT (if you haven't seen this film, I highly recommend you do), it works less well here and Director Jay Roach (TRUMBO) wisely drops that "gimmick" after the first 1/2 hour.
This film is filled with wonderful character actors making extended (and powerful) cameos. The likes of Kate McKinnon, Allyson Janney, Holland Taylor, Connie Britton, Stephen Root, Malcolm McDowell, Robin Weigert, Mark Duplass, Richard Kind, Mark Moses and Tricia Helfer all contribute greatly to the film while shining in the little screen time they have.
A necessary - and powerful - film filled with tremendous performances that shine a light on a problem that is pervasive today. Which makes this film a must watch - as difficult as it is to watch at times.
Letter Grade: A- (the first 1/2 hour brings it down a point)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
And with powerhouse actresses leading this film - standing up and taking notice is an easy thing to do.
Based on factual events, BOMBSHELL portrays the sexism that female on air personalities encounter at FoxNews - a place filled with "good ol' boys" who patronize and sexualize the females in the office to the detriment of the females and the benefit and gratification of the males. Surprisingly, they are joined in this by some other females in the office who figure "better them than me". At the top of the office - and the toxic work culture - is Roger Ailes (an almost unrecognizable John Lithgow) who is hailed by Fox as the man who can create the news - and profits.
Kidman, Theron and Robbie are well cast in their roles, showing nuance, concern and strength as these negative conditions rear their ugly heads over and over again. All 3 produce powerhouse performances - certainly up there amongst the best of their careers - and Theron and Robbie are well deserved Oscar nominees for their performances. Kidman was NOT nominated for her performance, but she is just as deserving as the other two.
But, for me, the real surprise - and the best performance - of this film belongs to Lithgow's portrayal of Ailes. His characterization shows a real wolf, taking advantage of his status and position, to prey upon those in his office. It is a sly, evil performance of a sly, evil man. What impressed me the most is that this performance - and this character - could have easily gone "over the top" into "pure villain" territory and Lithgow resists this temptation - to the betterment of this film, but to the detriment of his Oscar chances.
As written by Charles Randolph (THE BIG SHORT) this film has a pacing/theming issue for the first 1/2 hour of this film. Is it a serious film? Is it sarcastic look at toxic masculinity work culture? Is it an indictment on our current society as a whole? Randolph's script uses some of the same tactics as THE BIG SHORT, having performers breaking the 4th wall and commenting and narrating the events while looking directly at the camera. While this tactic worked very well in THE BIG SHORT (if you haven't seen this film, I highly recommend you do), it works less well here and Director Jay Roach (TRUMBO) wisely drops that "gimmick" after the first 1/2 hour.
This film is filled with wonderful character actors making extended (and powerful) cameos. The likes of Kate McKinnon, Allyson Janney, Holland Taylor, Connie Britton, Stephen Root, Malcolm McDowell, Robin Weigert, Mark Duplass, Richard Kind, Mark Moses and Tricia Helfer all contribute greatly to the film while shining in the little screen time they have.
A necessary - and powerful - film filled with tremendous performances that shine a light on a problem that is pervasive today. Which makes this film a must watch - as difficult as it is to watch at times.
Letter Grade: A- (the first 1/2 hour brings it down a point)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
FarFaria Stories To Read Along
Education and Book
App
- “Brain Expander” –Parenting Magazine - “Netflix for Children's Books!” –USA Today -...
Camping With Grandpa
Education and Games
App
Hey, campers! Who wants to roast a marshmallow and eat a s’more? Grab a stick and join Grandpa on...
Disposable Futures: The Seduction of Violence in the Age of Spectacle
Brad Evans and Henry A. Giroux
Book
"This is a must-read book for anyone ready to transcend fear and imagine a new reality."--Tikkun...
Tongits Wars
Games
App
The most exciting rummy game ever! Manipulate your luck by doing strategic and decisive actions and...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Wonder Woman 1984 (2020) in Movies
Jan 10, 2021
Misses more than it hits
The first Gal Gadot-led WONDER WOMAN film (2017) is generally regarded by most (myself included) as the finest film in the DCEU and Gal Gadot’s portrayal of Diana Prince/Wonder Woman is the highlight of any DCEU film that she appears in, so it was with much (delayed) anticipation that a viewing of WONDER WOMAN 1984 (finally) took place.
It’s too bad that the filmmakers couldn’t take the time in the delay of this movie’s release to craft a better film.
WONDER WOMAN 1984 takes the titular character and places this ageless Supehero in the titular timeframe. What Director Patty Jenkins (who so wonderfully brought us the first Wonder Woman film) and the her co-script writer Geoff Johns and all of the others who crafted this film failed to do was to capitalize on their hero and this timeline.
After an opening scene that flashbacks to Diana Prince’s youth on her isolated island of Themyscira (a scene who’s sole purpose, it seems, is to shoehorn favorites Robin Wright and Connie Nielsen from the first film into this one). We then go to a fight in a 1980’s mall (in a clear homage to such fights as the ones in COMMANDO and TRUE LIES - action sequences, that I might add, that were done better by Arnold Schwarzenegger and James Cameron). So back-to-back, this film starts off on unsure footing.
Enter Pedro Pascal’s main villain Maxwell Lord with the ability of a truly wonderful, memorable, villain to elevate the proceedings.
He does not.
Plain and simple, Pascal’s Maxwell Lord just doesn’t work as as a villain. He would have been a nice “secondary villain”.
Which is how I would recommend that Jenkins and Johns approach this character and film, for the secondary villain, Barbara Minerva/Cheetah worked better for me.
As portrayed by Kristen Wiig, we first encounter Minerva as a mousey, insecure co-worker of Diana Prince but slowly - over the course of the film - Minerva becomes stronger and more self-assured and when her transformation into Cheetah is complete, she is a viable opponent for Wonder Woman. And with Gadot’s strong (expected) portrayal of Diana/Wonder Woman the scenes of these 2 playing off each other - both physically and verbally - elevates this film above mediocrity.
As does the chemistry between Gadot and Chris Pine as Steve Trevor (from the first film). This relationship was one of the best parts of the first film, so the filmmakers had to figure out how to bring him back - and how they decided to do it was “fine” (with one issue I have that I can’t reveal but I also think a simple “tweak” in the storyline would have fixed). Because these 2 have such tremendous character - and because Pascal’s villain character is weak - this movie spends way too much time on Diana and Steve and this film loses it’s focus multiple times.
But…a few good action scenes would have saved things - but there aren’t really any. Certainly none that are as visually interesting, and emotionally satisfying, as the “no man’s land” scene in the first film.
This movie is “fine” and with the performances of Gadot, Pine and Wiig, they elevate the needle a little above “fine”. So I will give this movie about a point more than I (probably) should - which puts this film as one of the better films of the DCEU - which says more about the state of the DCEU than it does about this movie.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
It’s too bad that the filmmakers couldn’t take the time in the delay of this movie’s release to craft a better film.
WONDER WOMAN 1984 takes the titular character and places this ageless Supehero in the titular timeframe. What Director Patty Jenkins (who so wonderfully brought us the first Wonder Woman film) and the her co-script writer Geoff Johns and all of the others who crafted this film failed to do was to capitalize on their hero and this timeline.
After an opening scene that flashbacks to Diana Prince’s youth on her isolated island of Themyscira (a scene who’s sole purpose, it seems, is to shoehorn favorites Robin Wright and Connie Nielsen from the first film into this one). We then go to a fight in a 1980’s mall (in a clear homage to such fights as the ones in COMMANDO and TRUE LIES - action sequences, that I might add, that were done better by Arnold Schwarzenegger and James Cameron). So back-to-back, this film starts off on unsure footing.
Enter Pedro Pascal’s main villain Maxwell Lord with the ability of a truly wonderful, memorable, villain to elevate the proceedings.
He does not.
Plain and simple, Pascal’s Maxwell Lord just doesn’t work as as a villain. He would have been a nice “secondary villain”.
Which is how I would recommend that Jenkins and Johns approach this character and film, for the secondary villain, Barbara Minerva/Cheetah worked better for me.
As portrayed by Kristen Wiig, we first encounter Minerva as a mousey, insecure co-worker of Diana Prince but slowly - over the course of the film - Minerva becomes stronger and more self-assured and when her transformation into Cheetah is complete, she is a viable opponent for Wonder Woman. And with Gadot’s strong (expected) portrayal of Diana/Wonder Woman the scenes of these 2 playing off each other - both physically and verbally - elevates this film above mediocrity.
As does the chemistry between Gadot and Chris Pine as Steve Trevor (from the first film). This relationship was one of the best parts of the first film, so the filmmakers had to figure out how to bring him back - and how they decided to do it was “fine” (with one issue I have that I can’t reveal but I also think a simple “tweak” in the storyline would have fixed). Because these 2 have such tremendous character - and because Pascal’s villain character is weak - this movie spends way too much time on Diana and Steve and this film loses it’s focus multiple times.
But…a few good action scenes would have saved things - but there aren’t really any. Certainly none that are as visually interesting, and emotionally satisfying, as the “no man’s land” scene in the first film.
This movie is “fine” and with the performances of Gadot, Pine and Wiig, they elevate the needle a little above “fine”. So I will give this movie about a point more than I (probably) should - which puts this film as one of the better films of the DCEU - which says more about the state of the DCEU than it does about this movie.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)