Search
Search results
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Ninja Girl in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Author in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
So I have Cookie OGormans debut novel, <i>Adorkable </i>sitting in my Kindle app, and I cant wait to read it because it sounds freakishly adorable, and I am all about adorable books (I like to mention <i><a href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-imperfect-chemistry-by-mary-frame"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">Imperfect Chemistry</a></i> for the New Adult readers).
<i>Ninja Girl</i> is OGormans second novel, and it does seem like a second book in a stand-alone series since from what I know, the love interest of this book, Ash, makes an appearance in <i>Adorkable </i>and the couple in that book make an appearance here. (Did I make sense or was that too weird?)
What drew me to <i>Ninja Girl</i> in the first place is the Korean MC, Snow, who looks up to Bruce Lee as her role model and makes her decisions based on what she thinks Bruce Lee would approve. Shes phenomenal at martial arts, which makes her stick out from her group of friends because shes considered a tomboy. To prove that she is indeed a girl, Snow decides to kiss an entirely random guy, someone she would never typically go for, who turns out to be the son of a running candidate for the Senate that recently got pulled out of his life in a public school to a private school.
<i>Ninja Girl</i> reverses the whole damsel in distress and boy saves girl trope - instead, Snow is the one who saves Ash. Snow is recruited as Ashs bodyguard when his father starts getting more threats as they get closer to elections. Its just so refreshing to see a familiar trope being reversed and breaking out of the norm (and of course, OGorman isnt the only one who does this, but Im extremely glad theres another female character to root for).
It is a very nitpicky thing, but I am a little bothered by the title since ninja originates from Japan. However, I feel the title fits remarkably well with Snow as a character - she is extraordinarily fast in her movements when we see her in action as a bodyguard.
I loved the writing style in <i>Ninja Girl</i> - OGorman is hilarious with her writing style, and there are a lot of moments where I just really enjoyed having Snow as the main character and getting to know Ash as a character. As mentioned, I currently have OGormans debut novel on my kindle and getting the chance to see her writing style in her sophomore novel makes me extremely excited to read her debut when I get the chance. There are some fantastic lines in <i>Ninja Girl</i> that I love, and I honestly want to make a different post featuring all of my favorite quotes from the book.
Overall, though, if you want a cute story with a kickass main character who is a POC and hilarious lines, <i>Ninja Girl</i> might be the book for you.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/ninja-girl-by-cookie-ogorman-blog-tour/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
So I have Cookie OGormans debut novel, <i>Adorkable </i>sitting in my Kindle app, and I cant wait to read it because it sounds freakishly adorable, and I am all about adorable books (I like to mention <i><a href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-imperfect-chemistry-by-mary-frame"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">Imperfect Chemistry</a></i> for the New Adult readers).
<i>Ninja Girl</i> is OGormans second novel, and it does seem like a second book in a stand-alone series since from what I know, the love interest of this book, Ash, makes an appearance in <i>Adorkable </i>and the couple in that book make an appearance here. (Did I make sense or was that too weird?)
What drew me to <i>Ninja Girl</i> in the first place is the Korean MC, Snow, who looks up to Bruce Lee as her role model and makes her decisions based on what she thinks Bruce Lee would approve. Shes phenomenal at martial arts, which makes her stick out from her group of friends because shes considered a tomboy. To prove that she is indeed a girl, Snow decides to kiss an entirely random guy, someone she would never typically go for, who turns out to be the son of a running candidate for the Senate that recently got pulled out of his life in a public school to a private school.
<i>Ninja Girl</i> reverses the whole damsel in distress and boy saves girl trope - instead, Snow is the one who saves Ash. Snow is recruited as Ashs bodyguard when his father starts getting more threats as they get closer to elections. Its just so refreshing to see a familiar trope being reversed and breaking out of the norm (and of course, OGorman isnt the only one who does this, but Im extremely glad theres another female character to root for).
It is a very nitpicky thing, but I am a little bothered by the title since ninja originates from Japan. However, I feel the title fits remarkably well with Snow as a character - she is extraordinarily fast in her movements when we see her in action as a bodyguard.
I loved the writing style in <i>Ninja Girl</i> - OGorman is hilarious with her writing style, and there are a lot of moments where I just really enjoyed having Snow as the main character and getting to know Ash as a character. As mentioned, I currently have OGormans debut novel on my kindle and getting the chance to see her writing style in her sophomore novel makes me extremely excited to read her debut when I get the chance. There are some fantastic lines in <i>Ninja Girl</i> that I love, and I honestly want to make a different post featuring all of my favorite quotes from the book.
Overall, though, if you want a cute story with a kickass main character who is a POC and hilarious lines, <i>Ninja Girl</i> might be the book for you.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/ninja-girl-by-cookie-ogorman-blog-tour/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
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)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Lady Vanishes (1938) in Movies
Aug 5, 2019
A Film That Never Quite Steadies Itself
When a woman disappears after a train ride, iris Henderson (Margaret Lockwood), who was on the same train, is trying to prove that the woman was even there to begin with and get to the bottom of what’s going on. I always root for the classics (50’s or earlier) because of my immense respect for film and also wanting to recommend some hidden gems. Unfortunately this one fell a bit short for me and here’s why…
Acting: 10
I thought the performances were quite on par for the course. Lockwood delivers her lines with a sincerity and truth that almost manages to keep me engaged. I wish her character was more interesting, but that’s not her fault. She had a job and she did that job in stellar fashion along with some of the other main actors/actresses that came along for this ride.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 2
These characters were about as interesting as canned chicken noodle soup, not the kind you get from PF Chang’s. No, these are Great Value characters all day and they bored me to tears. I wanted someone, ANYONE, to make me care and I just couldn’t bring myself to latch on to any of them. You know what I always say and it bears repeating: When you have weak characters, you’re not even giving your story a fighting chance. Good characters are like the tires on a fine car. The car means nothing if it doesn’t have a means in which to be transported.
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
Conflict: 6
I never really felt like much was happening. There are flashes, sure, but I just couldn’t get a grasp on the stakes for some reason. I waited, believe me I did, but I left the viewing wanting much more than what I got.
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 10
I know this is going to seem ass-backwards from everything I’ve written up to this point, but I scored this category so high because of the attempt at an original story. No, it wasn’t perfect. Yes, the execution could have been much better. However, I do feel like this is a film that needs to be respected within its time.
Pace: 5
Things never really steadied for me as I found myself continuously looking at the clock. While it picks up slightly towards its conclusion, it never really gains the steam that I was looking for. For me, there was just too much of too much, meaning it kept veering off into different directions before properly getting to the end of one road.
Plot: 5
Resolution: 10
As I mentioned, things definitely pick up steam at the end until you get to a thrilling conclusion. When it was all said and done, I found myself asking, “Why the hell couldn’t the rest of the movie be like this?” It was almost like there was a different director for the last fifteen minutes of the movie. Definitely ties a nice bow on things.
Overall: 68
As of this review, The Lady Vanishes has a 98% on Rotten Tomatoes with an 88% Audience Score. I plan to watch this movie again because it missed me the first time. Maybe the second time around I’ll pick up on the magic I seem to be missing.
Acting: 10
I thought the performances were quite on par for the course. Lockwood delivers her lines with a sincerity and truth that almost manages to keep me engaged. I wish her character was more interesting, but that’s not her fault. She had a job and she did that job in stellar fashion along with some of the other main actors/actresses that came along for this ride.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 2
These characters were about as interesting as canned chicken noodle soup, not the kind you get from PF Chang’s. No, these are Great Value characters all day and they bored me to tears. I wanted someone, ANYONE, to make me care and I just couldn’t bring myself to latch on to any of them. You know what I always say and it bears repeating: When you have weak characters, you’re not even giving your story a fighting chance. Good characters are like the tires on a fine car. The car means nothing if it doesn’t have a means in which to be transported.
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
Conflict: 6
I never really felt like much was happening. There are flashes, sure, but I just couldn’t get a grasp on the stakes for some reason. I waited, believe me I did, but I left the viewing wanting much more than what I got.
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 10
I know this is going to seem ass-backwards from everything I’ve written up to this point, but I scored this category so high because of the attempt at an original story. No, it wasn’t perfect. Yes, the execution could have been much better. However, I do feel like this is a film that needs to be respected within its time.
Pace: 5
Things never really steadied for me as I found myself continuously looking at the clock. While it picks up slightly towards its conclusion, it never really gains the steam that I was looking for. For me, there was just too much of too much, meaning it kept veering off into different directions before properly getting to the end of one road.
Plot: 5
Resolution: 10
As I mentioned, things definitely pick up steam at the end until you get to a thrilling conclusion. When it was all said and done, I found myself asking, “Why the hell couldn’t the rest of the movie be like this?” It was almost like there was a different director for the last fifteen minutes of the movie. Definitely ties a nice bow on things.
Overall: 68
As of this review, The Lady Vanishes has a 98% on Rotten Tomatoes with an 88% Audience Score. I plan to watch this movie again because it missed me the first time. Maybe the second time around I’ll pick up on the magic I seem to be missing.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Knowing my love of reading, a friend of mine suggested I read The Maze Runner by James Dashner a few years ago. I had just finished reading Hunger Games so, honestly, I was burned out on post-apocalyptic survival stories so I set it aside. However, being familiar with the title, my interest was piqued when the movie was announced and I found myself drawn into the story more than I expected when I screened The Maze Runner movie in 2014. It didn’t have the desperate drama of The Hunger Games, but the mystery of the maze was intriguing enough.
If you haven’t seen the first movie in this series, you’ll want to watch that first as Scorch Trials picks up pretty much where the last movie ended. There are no recaps or flashbacks which fans may appreciate as the full 2 hours and 12 minute running time is dedicated to advancing the story, but it’s definitely not a movie that stands well on its own.
Having escaped from the Glade, Thomas and his somber band of Gladers are transported to a fortified military installation where for a brief moment they believe they’re safe from Ava Paige and WCKD, the mysterious organization that placed them in the Glade for reasons still unknown.
Suspicious and untrusting (by nature, or conditioning?), Thomas, played with grim determination by Dylan O’Brien, uncovers the outpost’s connection to WCKD and the gang is on the run again but this time, instead of a maze, they find themselves in a desolate landscape known as the Scorch.
If the first movie was “The Great Escape”, this movie is “The Amazing Race”. Hoping to find “The Right Hand”, a vigilante group of resistance fighters that have allegedly rescued other Gladers, Thomas and gang set out across a barren wasteland. The movie follows their desperate flight to avoid both WCKD operatives and “cranks”, zombies who were victims of a virus that has wiped out most of humanity.
I watched most of The Scorch Trials, much like I watch The Walking Dead, with my eyes clenched shut but still listening earnestly, but I’m a bit of a wimp that way. There’s definitely more action in this installment and those who enjoyed the first movie, will appreciate this one more even though the last 20 minutes or so of the movie was set up for the third Maze Runner: The Death Cure due in 2017.
The core band of Gladers, played by O’Brien, Kaya Scodelario (Teresa), Thomas Brodie-Sangster (Newt), Ki Hong Lee (Minho), Dexter Darden (Frypan) and Alexander Flores (Winston) are easy to root for, while Game of Thrones’ Aiden Gillen (Janson) and Patricia Clarkson, who reprises her role as Ava Paige, are very easy to dislike. The Scorch Trials introduces new characters, like Aris another maze escapee played by Jacob Lofland, and Brenda and Jorge, survivors turned mercenaries played by Rosa Salazar and Giancarlo Esposito who add a new dimension to the story. Will they help lead the Gladers to The Right Hand or turn them over to WCKD for the right price?
In addition to nearly maiming my husband by squeezing his hand too tight, I also left the movie a little winded from holding my breath in suspense, and watching these kids do a hell of a lot of running. A worthy sequel, The Scorch Trials definitely leaves you ready for the story to continue.
If you haven’t seen the first movie in this series, you’ll want to watch that first as Scorch Trials picks up pretty much where the last movie ended. There are no recaps or flashbacks which fans may appreciate as the full 2 hours and 12 minute running time is dedicated to advancing the story, but it’s definitely not a movie that stands well on its own.
Having escaped from the Glade, Thomas and his somber band of Gladers are transported to a fortified military installation where for a brief moment they believe they’re safe from Ava Paige and WCKD, the mysterious organization that placed them in the Glade for reasons still unknown.
Suspicious and untrusting (by nature, or conditioning?), Thomas, played with grim determination by Dylan O’Brien, uncovers the outpost’s connection to WCKD and the gang is on the run again but this time, instead of a maze, they find themselves in a desolate landscape known as the Scorch.
If the first movie was “The Great Escape”, this movie is “The Amazing Race”. Hoping to find “The Right Hand”, a vigilante group of resistance fighters that have allegedly rescued other Gladers, Thomas and gang set out across a barren wasteland. The movie follows their desperate flight to avoid both WCKD operatives and “cranks”, zombies who were victims of a virus that has wiped out most of humanity.
I watched most of The Scorch Trials, much like I watch The Walking Dead, with my eyes clenched shut but still listening earnestly, but I’m a bit of a wimp that way. There’s definitely more action in this installment and those who enjoyed the first movie, will appreciate this one more even though the last 20 minutes or so of the movie was set up for the third Maze Runner: The Death Cure due in 2017.
The core band of Gladers, played by O’Brien, Kaya Scodelario (Teresa), Thomas Brodie-Sangster (Newt), Ki Hong Lee (Minho), Dexter Darden (Frypan) and Alexander Flores (Winston) are easy to root for, while Game of Thrones’ Aiden Gillen (Janson) and Patricia Clarkson, who reprises her role as Ava Paige, are very easy to dislike. The Scorch Trials introduces new characters, like Aris another maze escapee played by Jacob Lofland, and Brenda and Jorge, survivors turned mercenaries played by Rosa Salazar and Giancarlo Esposito who add a new dimension to the story. Will they help lead the Gladers to The Right Hand or turn them over to WCKD for the right price?
In addition to nearly maiming my husband by squeezing his hand too tight, I also left the movie a little winded from holding my breath in suspense, and watching these kids do a hell of a lot of running. A worthy sequel, The Scorch Trials definitely leaves you ready for the story to continue.
MP3 Quran- Abdurrehman Al Sudais
Education and Utilities
App
Quran Audio-Al Sudais is the ultimate Quran application for iPhone/Ipad users with Quran recitations...
French-English Translation Dictionary and Verbs
Reference and Education
App
Top-selling dictionary app since 2008 • Every translation you need plus verb conjugations in all...
Guitar Jam Tracks : Reggae
Music and Entertainment
App
MAKES LEARNING GUITAR FUN Practice jamming, learning scales and soloing to a Reggae jam track in...
Haiti Glass
Book
Winner of the 2015 PEN Oakland Josephine Miles Literary Award In her debut collection of verse and...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Marnie (1964) in Movies
Nov 6, 2020
Mediocre Hitchcock - but still pretty good
Heading into 1964, Alfred Hitchcock was on quite a roll. He had just rolled out - in order, VERTIGO (1958), NORTH BY NORTHWEST (1959), PSYCHO (1960) and THE BIRDS (1963) and his anthology series ALFRED HITCHCOCK PRESENTS had made him into a household name throughout the world. So it was with great anticipation/expectation that the world awaited his next major motion picture.
And while this film, MARNIE was not the critical or commercial success of his previous outings, it still has enough good in it that makes it a worthwhile film to watch.
Starring Tippi Hedren (THE BIRDS) and Sean Connery (fresh off his James Bond success in DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE), MARNIE is, basically, a "two-hander" (a film that is primarily focused on conversation between 2 people) about an habitual thief, Marnie, with deep psychological troubles who is loved (and handled) by a man who is seeking to get to the root of what makes her tick.
And..in someone else's hands..this film could have been overly melodramatic, but in Hitchcock's adroit hands, it is a deep and disturbing psychological thriller that succeeds more often than it doesn't.
Starting with what works, Hitchcock's Direction (obviously) is at the fore. He knows how to play out a moment - especially a scene where Marnie steals from a safe. Hitchcock locks the camera in place and plays the scene with no music and just letting the events play out. It is a typical suspenseful Hitchcock scene and very well done.
The other thing that works is the performance of Connery. His charm and screen charisma shines brightly. making a problematic character like the one Connery portrays seemingly benign. Also...Tippi Hedren's performance at the end of this movie almost rescues her character...almost.
What doesn't work? Well...let's start with the title character, Marnie, as played by Hedren. She just doesn't have the charisma and charm of Connery and never really brings her character to life. She overacts at times when she has one of her "episodes" (I would think that both Hitchcock and Hedren share the blame for this) it is almost laughable in it's over-acting and she just seems in over her head with this role. It is said that Hitchcock had the film and role of Marnie written specifically as a comeback vehicle for Grace Kelly. It is too bad that this didn't come to pass, as I would have LOVED to see what an actress of her caliber would have done with this role.
The other thing that doesn't really work for me is the 2 characters at the forefront of this film. Both Hedren's Marnie and Connery's Mark Rutland are not likeable (though, as I said earlier, Connery's charm and charisma rescue's the Rutland character), but neither of these characters are ones that us, the audience, particularly care for - and that is a problem with a film that is pretty much focused on these characters.
Not one of Hitchcock's best...but still good...and the ending almost makes up for the weaknesses of the earlier parts of the movie.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - even mediocre Hitchcock is till pretty good.
And...you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And while this film, MARNIE was not the critical or commercial success of his previous outings, it still has enough good in it that makes it a worthwhile film to watch.
Starring Tippi Hedren (THE BIRDS) and Sean Connery (fresh off his James Bond success in DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE), MARNIE is, basically, a "two-hander" (a film that is primarily focused on conversation between 2 people) about an habitual thief, Marnie, with deep psychological troubles who is loved (and handled) by a man who is seeking to get to the root of what makes her tick.
And..in someone else's hands..this film could have been overly melodramatic, but in Hitchcock's adroit hands, it is a deep and disturbing psychological thriller that succeeds more often than it doesn't.
Starting with what works, Hitchcock's Direction (obviously) is at the fore. He knows how to play out a moment - especially a scene where Marnie steals from a safe. Hitchcock locks the camera in place and plays the scene with no music and just letting the events play out. It is a typical suspenseful Hitchcock scene and very well done.
The other thing that works is the performance of Connery. His charm and screen charisma shines brightly. making a problematic character like the one Connery portrays seemingly benign. Also...Tippi Hedren's performance at the end of this movie almost rescues her character...almost.
What doesn't work? Well...let's start with the title character, Marnie, as played by Hedren. She just doesn't have the charisma and charm of Connery and never really brings her character to life. She overacts at times when she has one of her "episodes" (I would think that both Hitchcock and Hedren share the blame for this) it is almost laughable in it's over-acting and she just seems in over her head with this role. It is said that Hitchcock had the film and role of Marnie written specifically as a comeback vehicle for Grace Kelly. It is too bad that this didn't come to pass, as I would have LOVED to see what an actress of her caliber would have done with this role.
The other thing that doesn't really work for me is the 2 characters at the forefront of this film. Both Hedren's Marnie and Connery's Mark Rutland are not likeable (though, as I said earlier, Connery's charm and charisma rescue's the Rutland character), but neither of these characters are ones that us, the audience, particularly care for - and that is a problem with a film that is pretty much focused on these characters.
Not one of Hitchcock's best...but still good...and the ending almost makes up for the weaknesses of the earlier parts of the movie.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - even mediocre Hitchcock is till pretty good.
And...you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Ma Rainey's Black Bottom (2020) in Movies
Feb 12, 2021
Give Chadwick the Oscar
Pulitzer Prize winning Playwright August Wilson wrote 10 plays that he labeled his “Century Cycle” - one placed in each decade of the 20th century that depicts the Negro experience in America. Denzel Washington has pledged to produce a film for each one of these plays.
The first film, FENCES (2016), earned Viola Davis an Oscar and was nominated for Best Film. The 2nd film, MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM looks to be just as awarded.
Set in a recording studio in Chicago in the 1920’s (the only play of Wilson’s Century Cycle NOT set in Pittsburgh), MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM tells the story of a recording session for Ma Rainey and her band.
Nominated for the Tony for Best Play of 1984, MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM is the perfect stage play, for it takes place in one room - the recording studio. The problem with turning this into a film is that Director George C. Wolf felt compelled to “open things up” and added scenes, mostly at the beginning of the film, that takes you out of the studio. He also included Ma Rainey in some of these scenes, thus taking away the power of her entrance about 1/3 of the way into the story. These added scenes add nothing to the story and waters down some of the strength that being confined in one place brings.
But, oh, with performances and dialogue like this, those things are quickly forgotten.
Davis, of course, is stellar as Ma Rainey grabbing the spotlight and commanding the room with her presence. Ma Rainey (and Davis) are not to be trifled with and this is a powerhouse performance, so much so that I can forgive the film for having Davis’ voice dubbed for much of her singing performance.
But…Davis performance pales in comparison to the elite level work of Chadwick Boseman in the central role of trumpet player Levee who has some demons to unpack, demons that drive both his artistic and emotional self. This is a difficult character to root for, but Boseman’s charm shines through and mixed with his rage and sadness, makes for a potent combination and an interesting character to watch. Adding to the poignancy of the performance is the knowledge that this as Boseman’s last role before succumbing to cancer.
Colman Domingo (my favorite actor in FEAR THE WALKING DEAD) brings a strong grounding to the preceedings in the role of Cutler while veteran character actor Glynn Turman (who I remember from the 1970’s mini-series CENTENNIAL) is at a career best as another musician, Toledo. Most of the film (and play) consist of Cutler, Toledo and Levee talking, arguing, bantering and pontificating and these 3 are more than up to this challenge.
All of this, of course, would not be possible without the power of the original stage play script by August Wilson. This work was ably adapted to the screen by Ruben Santiago-Hudson (a shoo-in for an Oscar nomination).
A very strong, very interesting tale with some very moving performances makes MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM a worthy Oscar-type film that should be checked out by all.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
The first film, FENCES (2016), earned Viola Davis an Oscar and was nominated for Best Film. The 2nd film, MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM looks to be just as awarded.
Set in a recording studio in Chicago in the 1920’s (the only play of Wilson’s Century Cycle NOT set in Pittsburgh), MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM tells the story of a recording session for Ma Rainey and her band.
Nominated for the Tony for Best Play of 1984, MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM is the perfect stage play, for it takes place in one room - the recording studio. The problem with turning this into a film is that Director George C. Wolf felt compelled to “open things up” and added scenes, mostly at the beginning of the film, that takes you out of the studio. He also included Ma Rainey in some of these scenes, thus taking away the power of her entrance about 1/3 of the way into the story. These added scenes add nothing to the story and waters down some of the strength that being confined in one place brings.
But, oh, with performances and dialogue like this, those things are quickly forgotten.
Davis, of course, is stellar as Ma Rainey grabbing the spotlight and commanding the room with her presence. Ma Rainey (and Davis) are not to be trifled with and this is a powerhouse performance, so much so that I can forgive the film for having Davis’ voice dubbed for much of her singing performance.
But…Davis performance pales in comparison to the elite level work of Chadwick Boseman in the central role of trumpet player Levee who has some demons to unpack, demons that drive both his artistic and emotional self. This is a difficult character to root for, but Boseman’s charm shines through and mixed with his rage and sadness, makes for a potent combination and an interesting character to watch. Adding to the poignancy of the performance is the knowledge that this as Boseman’s last role before succumbing to cancer.
Colman Domingo (my favorite actor in FEAR THE WALKING DEAD) brings a strong grounding to the preceedings in the role of Cutler while veteran character actor Glynn Turman (who I remember from the 1970’s mini-series CENTENNIAL) is at a career best as another musician, Toledo. Most of the film (and play) consist of Cutler, Toledo and Levee talking, arguing, bantering and pontificating and these 3 are more than up to this challenge.
All of this, of course, would not be possible without the power of the original stage play script by August Wilson. This work was ably adapted to the screen by Ruben Santiago-Hudson (a shoo-in for an Oscar nomination).
A very strong, very interesting tale with some very moving performances makes MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM a worthy Oscar-type film that should be checked out by all.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)