Search
Search results
John Garrett (27 KP) rated La La Land (2016) in Movies
Jul 11, 2017
Cinematography (1 more)
The leads
The ending (1 more)
Pacing
A musical love letter for hollywood
this charming movie is an unashamedly nostalgic love letter to years of cinema gone. The musical numbers to the impromptu dance routines make this a throughly enjoyable film for lovers of film old and new.
the 2 leads in this film Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling are superb. They both manage beautiful nuanced performances. They have fantastic chemistry as shown in previous films (crazy stupid love & gangster squad) but it really comes alive in this film.
the direction and cinematography of this movie is sometimes visually breathtaking. Damen Chiselle has proven what a versatile director he is with this movie and is willing to take a real risk.
where this movie does fall flat unfortunately is the pacing. At times the movie feels like it drags and could do with slimming out. At just over 2 hours this film is fairly long for a musical of modern standards. Also I felt the ending to be rather disjointed and jarring.
That being said I still found this movie to be absolutely charming and has a brilliant musical score you will be humming and whistling for days to come.
the 2 leads in this film Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling are superb. They both manage beautiful nuanced performances. They have fantastic chemistry as shown in previous films (crazy stupid love & gangster squad) but it really comes alive in this film.
the direction and cinematography of this movie is sometimes visually breathtaking. Damen Chiselle has proven what a versatile director he is with this movie and is willing to take a real risk.
where this movie does fall flat unfortunately is the pacing. At times the movie feels like it drags and could do with slimming out. At just over 2 hours this film is fairly long for a musical of modern standards. Also I felt the ending to be rather disjointed and jarring.
That being said I still found this movie to be absolutely charming and has a brilliant musical score you will be humming and whistling for days to come.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Song to Song (2017) in Movies
Sep 20, 2020
Yeah I'm basic, sue me. Part sad travelogue, part Malick faux-poetic tirade, part genuinely exceptional romance - but all in all one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen, left me breathless; the type of grandiose feast for the senses that honestly belongs in a museum. Not even just in the experience > film sense either tbh because what this is really good at capturing is people who are caught in fleeting lives - where they routinely visit some of the happiest places in the world but no one is actually happy - and how their love comes and goes, and sometimes just doesn't work out. Nothing notably momentous or bad always happens, sometimes it just... doesn't quite click. And that's okay. Sumptuous, erotic, funny, romantic, heartbreaking, and for once a romance that doesn't shame these people for simply testing out the waters. I also really want some of whatever Fassbender is on here because that shit looks like it *works*. Say what you will about the guy but no one's making movies like this. By *far* the best artsy love story with music as a backdrop starring Ryan Gosling.
Kevin Wilson (179 KP) rated La La Land (2016) in Movies
Nov 24, 2018
Great catchy soundtrack (2 more)
Great cast
Good story
A great musical where the music shines
This was a great movie and went well beyond my expectations. I have watched this many times now and still love it.
Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling are both fantastic and work well together. The songs are so good and catchy and convinced me to go get the soundtrack and am listening to it as i write this. It also convinced me to look into jazz which i never thought to listen to before. This movie feels like a love letter to that genre of music. This movie is all about the music and i loved every second of every song.
It is a romance story you have seen before but they sfill find a way to make if feel fresh and different with an ending not really expected. I think throughtout this movie i felt every emotion there is.
The movie was shot beautifully and in a way you could be convinced this was filmed either now or many years ago. There is an old fashioned feeling about this movie which i loved.
It may not be for everyone but i can recommend it for a musical fan. I never expected to enjoy it as much as i did.
Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling are both fantastic and work well together. The songs are so good and catchy and convinced me to go get the soundtrack and am listening to it as i write this. It also convinced me to look into jazz which i never thought to listen to before. This movie feels like a love letter to that genre of music. This movie is all about the music and i loved every second of every song.
It is a romance story you have seen before but they sfill find a way to make if feel fresh and different with an ending not really expected. I think throughtout this movie i felt every emotion there is.
The movie was shot beautifully and in a way you could be convinced this was filmed either now or many years ago. There is an old fashioned feeling about this movie which i loved.
It may not be for everyone but i can recommend it for a musical fan. I never expected to enjoy it as much as i did.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated First Man (2018) in Movies
Aug 16, 2019
Dull
I'm so glad I didn't watch this film at the cinema. I don't think I could've gotten through it without falling asleep, it's that dull and drawn out.
Visually this film looks brilliant, the space scenes especially look great. It also has a very good cast, although unsurprisingly most appear to have been sidelined in favour of Ryan Gosling who is pretty average at best. This film may have been slightly more enjoyable had they gotten someone a little more charismatic in the lead role. I'm just very thankful for Corey Stoll as Aldrin for putting a little life into this! The main problem though is that it is far too long, drawn out and melodramatic, and spends too much time on the earth scenes and build up. They could have easily cut a lot of this out, speed up the pace and knock half an hour off the runtime without any noticeable issues. It isn't really helped though by the fact that we all know how this story turns out (spoiler - he walks on the moon at the end), so there's little suspense or tension and makes for rather a dull film.
I think I found the informative videos made for tourists to watch at Kennedy Space Center more entertaining than this film.
Visually this film looks brilliant, the space scenes especially look great. It also has a very good cast, although unsurprisingly most appear to have been sidelined in favour of Ryan Gosling who is pretty average at best. This film may have been slightly more enjoyable had they gotten someone a little more charismatic in the lead role. I'm just very thankful for Corey Stoll as Aldrin for putting a little life into this! The main problem though is that it is far too long, drawn out and melodramatic, and spends too much time on the earth scenes and build up. They could have easily cut a lot of this out, speed up the pace and knock half an hour off the runtime without any noticeable issues. It isn't really helped though by the fact that we all know how this story turns out (spoiler - he walks on the moon at the end), so there's little suspense or tension and makes for rather a dull film.
I think I found the informative videos made for tourists to watch at Kennedy Space Center more entertaining than this film.
Gareth von Kallenbach (962 KP) rated The Nice Guys (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
This is how it’s supposed to be done. Though it’s not the most original flick to grace the silver screen, Shane Black’s follow-up to his instant cult classic Kiss Kiss Bang Bang has everything you could want in an action/comedy romp. A solid dynamic between its two charming yet flawed leads, a strong plot that has enough twists and turns to keep you thrilled but not lost, and plenty of quotably razor-sharp dialogue. Imagine the Lethal Weapon type meets a less obtuse Inherent Vice. Besides the return of Jason Bourne in July, it will undoubtedly be the most entertaining thing you’ll see in another summer season of mediocrity. Is anybody really that interested in a ninth X-Men film?
Russell Crowe is the muscle-for-hire opposite Ryan Gosling as the P.I. referred to by his daughter as “the worst detective in the world”. They are thrust together by circumstance and, after a couple of amusing altercations, come to find out they are both involved in a larger case of conspiracy and cover-up as they race to find the girl at the center of it all. Crowe and Gosling make a winning team with chemistry in spades and, though the dialogue they’re given may not feel as fresh as what Val Kilmer and Robert Downey Jr. had to work with in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang; they still pull it off marvelously. Between Gosling’s unfortunate directorial debut, Lost River, and Crowe’s string of misfires since 2010’s Robin Hood, these were the type of roles their fading stars were in dire need of and they both certainly look at home in a 70’s-era Hollywood detective story. For Gosling especially, this is probably the most likable he’s ever been. Well done also to the casting department for finding Angourie Rice. As Gosling’s daughter, she’s does an admirably fine job of playing a girl who can stand up to an incredibly hostile world and give some back. Here’s hoping she’s got a decent agent that will keep her in rich, multi-dimensional characters.
Shane Black, already having proved that he knows his way around a screenplay or two, is firmly coming into his own as a director (though the Christmas thing has got to stop), and I’ll be eagerly anticipating his next foray behind the camera. It’s also another excellent job from Warner’s marketing team, with a trailer that gave just enough of the one-liners and snippets of action without spoiling too many of the fun and twisty plot points. The action beats and moments of violence themselves, due to a tightly-structured script, feel earned and well-placed. Not once did I get that overwhelming feeling of action fatigue I’ve been experiencing so much in film lately (I’m looking at you, Marvel). The Nice Guys is all-around great filmmaking and one I can’t wait to revisit. I wouldn’t doubt it’ll be a day-one buy for me when it hits the home video market.
Russell Crowe is the muscle-for-hire opposite Ryan Gosling as the P.I. referred to by his daughter as “the worst detective in the world”. They are thrust together by circumstance and, after a couple of amusing altercations, come to find out they are both involved in a larger case of conspiracy and cover-up as they race to find the girl at the center of it all. Crowe and Gosling make a winning team with chemistry in spades and, though the dialogue they’re given may not feel as fresh as what Val Kilmer and Robert Downey Jr. had to work with in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang; they still pull it off marvelously. Between Gosling’s unfortunate directorial debut, Lost River, and Crowe’s string of misfires since 2010’s Robin Hood, these were the type of roles their fading stars were in dire need of and they both certainly look at home in a 70’s-era Hollywood detective story. For Gosling especially, this is probably the most likable he’s ever been. Well done also to the casting department for finding Angourie Rice. As Gosling’s daughter, she’s does an admirably fine job of playing a girl who can stand up to an incredibly hostile world and give some back. Here’s hoping she’s got a decent agent that will keep her in rich, multi-dimensional characters.
Shane Black, already having proved that he knows his way around a screenplay or two, is firmly coming into his own as a director (though the Christmas thing has got to stop), and I’ll be eagerly anticipating his next foray behind the camera. It’s also another excellent job from Warner’s marketing team, with a trailer that gave just enough of the one-liners and snippets of action without spoiling too many of the fun and twisty plot points. The action beats and moments of violence themselves, due to a tightly-structured script, feel earned and well-placed. Not once did I get that overwhelming feeling of action fatigue I’ve been experiencing so much in film lately (I’m looking at you, Marvel). The Nice Guys is all-around great filmmaking and one I can’t wait to revisit. I wouldn’t doubt it’ll be a day-one buy for me when it hits the home video market.
Nicholas Sparks recommended Dirty Dancing (1987) in Movies (curated)
JT (287 KP) rated Only God Forgives (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Now here is a film that completely split critics. It’s not going to be everyone’s cup of tea and it’s clear to see why. Anyone expecting a well constructed follow up to Winding Refn’s hit Drive are going to be sorely disappointed, as Only God Forgives serves up a mix of beautiful neon visuals, character dreamscapes and minimal dialogue.
Julian (Ryan Gosling) runs a Thai boxing club deep in the heart of Bangkok using it as front for a drug smuggling ring with his brother. Events take a horrific turn when his brother rapes and murders an underage prostitute. Enter retired cop Chang (Vithaya Pansringarm), more well known as the ‘Angel of Vengeance’ who has a unique and almost godlike way of handing out retribution to those who cross his path.
When he allows Julian’s brother to be murdered by the father of the girl he killed, Julian’s mother Crystal and family matriarch heads out to demand that Julian take revenge for his brothers death.
Only God Forgives is a film doused in deep colours that awash the actors on screen and cast them in a variety of different lights. It feels a bit art house and at times arrogant. This must have been the easiest pay cheque that Gosling has ever picked up. He barely speaks and stamps any authority on screen by long drawn out stares of which he is the master.
Scott Thomas is not the mother figure that you would expect to have. Goading Julian into submission in a vile and disgusting manner she belittles him, prompting the question that he is half the man his brother is. She is one of the few standouts. All blonde hair and jewellery along with a arsenal of foul language. However, it will be Chang that leaves the afterthought, as he glides about unleashing his sword on those who stand in his way.
Only God Forgives is violent, and it is certainly not for the faint-hearted, the spilling of blood (particularly one hard to watch scene) is in keeping with the tonal colour of the setting. It doesn’t have Drive’s slickness but does come with an equally pulsating sound track.
There is no arguing that from a cinematography point of view this film his head and shoulders above others. But there is the odd occasion when you really have to question the director and what it was that he set out to achieve?
Julian (Ryan Gosling) runs a Thai boxing club deep in the heart of Bangkok using it as front for a drug smuggling ring with his brother. Events take a horrific turn when his brother rapes and murders an underage prostitute. Enter retired cop Chang (Vithaya Pansringarm), more well known as the ‘Angel of Vengeance’ who has a unique and almost godlike way of handing out retribution to those who cross his path.
When he allows Julian’s brother to be murdered by the father of the girl he killed, Julian’s mother Crystal and family matriarch heads out to demand that Julian take revenge for his brothers death.
Only God Forgives is a film doused in deep colours that awash the actors on screen and cast them in a variety of different lights. It feels a bit art house and at times arrogant. This must have been the easiest pay cheque that Gosling has ever picked up. He barely speaks and stamps any authority on screen by long drawn out stares of which he is the master.
Scott Thomas is not the mother figure that you would expect to have. Goading Julian into submission in a vile and disgusting manner she belittles him, prompting the question that he is half the man his brother is. She is one of the few standouts. All blonde hair and jewellery along with a arsenal of foul language. However, it will be Chang that leaves the afterthought, as he glides about unleashing his sword on those who stand in his way.
Only God Forgives is violent, and it is certainly not for the faint-hearted, the spilling of blood (particularly one hard to watch scene) is in keeping with the tonal colour of the setting. It doesn’t have Drive’s slickness but does come with an equally pulsating sound track.
There is no arguing that from a cinematography point of view this film his head and shoulders above others. But there is the odd occasion when you really have to question the director and what it was that he set out to achieve?
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Blade Runner 2049 (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A Visual Treat
It was always going to be a tricky proposition to craft a sequel to Ridley Scott’s divisive 1982 film, Blade Runner. By divisive, I mean that while it has gained a cult following in the decades since its initial release, the film’s initial box-office run resulted in a gross that many would label ‘disappointing.’
Stuck in development hell for well over 20 years, Blade Runner 2049 as it’s now known entered the hands of sci-fi aficionado Denis Villeneuve since 2015. But has a wait of over three decades been kind to the finished film?
Officer K (Ryan Gosling), a new blade runner tasked with tracking down old replicants for the Los Angeles Police Department, unearths a long-buried secret that has the potential to plunge what’s left of society into chaos. His discovery leads him on a quest to find Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), a former blade runner who’s been missing for 30 years.
Visually, Blade Runner 2049 is an absolute masterpiece but from the director of the equally stunning Arrival, this was to be expected. Tasked with taking the first film and crafting a worthy sequel was never going to be an easy ride for Villeneuve and he almost makes it out the other side unscathed, almost.
Our cast is one of the film’s strongest suits with Gosling in particular being as magnetic a presence as ever. It’s also nice to see the wonderful Dave Bautista sink his teeth into something a little grittier than his well-worn Drax persona. Unfortunately, despite being an ever-present feature in the trailers, Harrison Ford is disappointingly underused, though he does appear in 2049’s best sequences.
The cinematography is absolutely beautiful, there really is no other word for it. Bizarrely grounded in reality, the year 2049 is a place that doesn’t feel too far away from the world as we know it. Villeneuve’s metropolis’ live and breathe right before our very eyes with a desolate Las Vegas in particular being a highlight, bathed in an eerie orange glow.
The CGI too is staggering and some of the best seen in the genre. Holograms litter the cityscapes and detail pours out of every frame – Blade Runner 2049 has been meticulously crafted to an incredibly high standard by someone who clearly cares about the legacy this film will leave.
Elsewhere, the score by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch is exquisite. Blending nostalgic tones with a modern edge, the music is one of the film’s high points and couples with each frame almost perfectly.
So, to look at and to listen to, it’s spectacular. But how does the rest of this sequel fare? Well, not too bad at all really. The story feels linked to the first film in a way that doesn’t tread on its toes. Many long-awaited sequels feel it necessary to shred what came before and try far too hard to craft their own paths. Thankfully, 2049 honours its predecessor in more ways than just sickly nostalgia.
Unfortunately, it’s far too long. At 163 minutes, this is a real slog by anyone’s standards and while it’s true the pacing is spot on, there’s no getting away from the fact that this is a long film and feels it. It would’ve been pretty easy to shave a couple of minutes from the run-time here and there, though it’s not too much of an issue.
My only other bugbear is a pretty big one. Ridley Scott’s ’82 masterpiece was a film that had a soul, despite its plot focusing on those to the contrary. Here, the sheen, the glitz and the polish are all super impressive but much like the replicants our blade runner must hunt, it all feels a touch soulless.
Ultimately, Blade Runner 2049 is a fine sequel to a film that’s been crying out for one since 1982. Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford make a fine pairing despite the latter’s limited screen time but what this film is lacking is heart, and that’s something that can’t be made with stunning cinematography.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/06/blade-runner-2049-review/
Stuck in development hell for well over 20 years, Blade Runner 2049 as it’s now known entered the hands of sci-fi aficionado Denis Villeneuve since 2015. But has a wait of over three decades been kind to the finished film?
Officer K (Ryan Gosling), a new blade runner tasked with tracking down old replicants for the Los Angeles Police Department, unearths a long-buried secret that has the potential to plunge what’s left of society into chaos. His discovery leads him on a quest to find Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), a former blade runner who’s been missing for 30 years.
Visually, Blade Runner 2049 is an absolute masterpiece but from the director of the equally stunning Arrival, this was to be expected. Tasked with taking the first film and crafting a worthy sequel was never going to be an easy ride for Villeneuve and he almost makes it out the other side unscathed, almost.
Our cast is one of the film’s strongest suits with Gosling in particular being as magnetic a presence as ever. It’s also nice to see the wonderful Dave Bautista sink his teeth into something a little grittier than his well-worn Drax persona. Unfortunately, despite being an ever-present feature in the trailers, Harrison Ford is disappointingly underused, though he does appear in 2049’s best sequences.
The cinematography is absolutely beautiful, there really is no other word for it. Bizarrely grounded in reality, the year 2049 is a place that doesn’t feel too far away from the world as we know it. Villeneuve’s metropolis’ live and breathe right before our very eyes with a desolate Las Vegas in particular being a highlight, bathed in an eerie orange glow.
The CGI too is staggering and some of the best seen in the genre. Holograms litter the cityscapes and detail pours out of every frame – Blade Runner 2049 has been meticulously crafted to an incredibly high standard by someone who clearly cares about the legacy this film will leave.
Elsewhere, the score by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch is exquisite. Blending nostalgic tones with a modern edge, the music is one of the film’s high points and couples with each frame almost perfectly.
So, to look at and to listen to, it’s spectacular. But how does the rest of this sequel fare? Well, not too bad at all really. The story feels linked to the first film in a way that doesn’t tread on its toes. Many long-awaited sequels feel it necessary to shred what came before and try far too hard to craft their own paths. Thankfully, 2049 honours its predecessor in more ways than just sickly nostalgia.
Unfortunately, it’s far too long. At 163 minutes, this is a real slog by anyone’s standards and while it’s true the pacing is spot on, there’s no getting away from the fact that this is a long film and feels it. It would’ve been pretty easy to shave a couple of minutes from the run-time here and there, though it’s not too much of an issue.
My only other bugbear is a pretty big one. Ridley Scott’s ’82 masterpiece was a film that had a soul, despite its plot focusing on those to the contrary. Here, the sheen, the glitz and the polish are all super impressive but much like the replicants our blade runner must hunt, it all feels a touch soulless.
Ultimately, Blade Runner 2049 is a fine sequel to a film that’s been crying out for one since 1982. Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford make a fine pairing despite the latter’s limited screen time but what this film is lacking is heart, and that’s something that can’t be made with stunning cinematography.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/06/blade-runner-2049-review/
MelanieTheresa (997 KP) rated First Man (2018) in Movies
Oct 3, 2018
POV launch sequences (1 more)
Claire Foy
A bit slow (2 more)
A little long
Terrible sound mixing
I love a good space movie.
Everyone knows the story of the first moon landing - who, what, where, when, how - but this movie goes a bit deeper than the history books you've read. I'm not spoiling the ending by telling you they land on the moon; you already know this. What you may not know is what led up to that historical moment: the tests, the failures, the losses, the toll taken on the astronauts and their families during NASA's race to the moon. This movie does well in that respect. Claire Foy does an amazing job of making you feel with her and for her. The POV in the launch sequences is terrific. You almost feel like you're in the cockpit with Armstrong as he's launching into space. Really well done.
Now, the bad.
- It was slow, and probably too long.
- Ryan Gosling has exactly one facial expression throughout the entire movie. He goes through the proper emotions, but his face does not. Even when he's crying over the death of his daughter, the only thing that changes about his face is the added tears.
- The sound mixing was terrible. The effects were turned up far too high and the voices far too low, to the point where I sometimes couldn't hear what was being said, and as a result I definitely missed some partial conversations. This is one of my biggest movie pet peeves.
Overall, I enjoyed the movie, but it's not one I'd need to watch again down the road.
Now, the bad.
- It was slow, and probably too long.
- Ryan Gosling has exactly one facial expression throughout the entire movie. He goes through the proper emotions, but his face does not. Even when he's crying over the death of his daughter, the only thing that changes about his face is the added tears.
- The sound mixing was terrible. The effects were turned up far too high and the voices far too low, to the point where I sometimes couldn't hear what was being said, and as a result I definitely missed some partial conversations. This is one of my biggest movie pet peeves.
Overall, I enjoyed the movie, but it's not one I'd need to watch again down the road.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated First Man (2018) in Movies
Oct 13, 2018
GREAT, Visceral Space Scenes - Boring, Soap-Opera-ish Earth Scenes
Get to the largest screen you can find with the best sound system and check out FIRST MAN. The visceral spectacle of space travel is expertly captured and needs to be seen on the BIG screen while your chair vibrates from the sound. You, the audience, fwill eel like you are in the spaceship with Neil Armstrong on his way to the moon.
Too bad the Earth-bound moments of this film don't go to the same heights.
Directed by Damien Chazelle in his follow-up to his Oscar winning Directorial stint with LA LA LAND, FIRST MAN tells the story of Neil Armstrong in the 1960s, going from test pilot to the First Man who stepped foot on the moon.
As I stated earlier, the times that we are in the space capsule, or flight plane or test simulator with Armstrong are a visceral experience not to be missed. Chazelle puts his camera close in, often times seeing what Armstrong is seeing - most of that time with loud, shimming and shaking noises and shimming and shaking cameras that left me wonder how these Pioneers of Space Flight ever made it to the Moon and back safely. These scenes - and especially the last 1/2 hour of the film when Armstrong & Co. go to the moon - are worth the price of admission alone. Add on top of that a driving, visceral (there's that word again) score by Chazelle's musical collaborator Justin Hurwitz (Oscar winner for the music for LA LA LAND) and your heart will be thumping loudly in your chest during these exhilarating scenes.
And that is good, for Chazelle and screenwriter Josh Singer (SPOTLIGHT) try to squeeze in a Soap-Opera-esque plot and motivation for Armstrong throughout this film that just didn't work for me. They tried too hard to give Armstrong some "personal" motivations for being stoic, pragmatic and driven to his vision.
As for the acting, Ryan Gosling is...well...stoic, pragmatic and driven to his vision as Armstrong. Do you see that look on Gosling/Armstrong's face in the picture that is accompanying this review? You get that 90% of the time with him. Most of the other actors - Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, Pablo Schreiber, Ethan Embry, Lukas Haas - all give the same stoic, pragmatic performance, so there is no real personality here. Even the great Ciaran Hinds - who normally can chew scenery with the best of them - was toned way down to stoic, pragmatic proportions.
This made the performance of Corey Stoll as Buzz Aldrin all the more jarring for he bursts into this film at about the halfway point, cracking jokes and having a personality. Unfortunately, this was annoying at this point, rather than refreshing and I ended up thinking what a jerk Aldrin is.
Add to that Claire Foy (THE CROWN) as Armstrong's wife who has a constant pained expression on her face. She will get an Oscar nomination, for she had the big "Oscars" speech as the worried wife and mother - a speech where Gosling/Armstrong looked at her pragmatically and with solid stoicism.
Fortunately, what saves this movie is that these Earth-bound scenes of fairly boring people in cliched situations are quickly wiped away with awe-inspiring action pieces - they really are worth the price of admission - even the higher price you will need to pay to see it in IMAX with a kick-butt sound system.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars - have I mentioned how great the space scenes in this film are?
And you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Too bad the Earth-bound moments of this film don't go to the same heights.
Directed by Damien Chazelle in his follow-up to his Oscar winning Directorial stint with LA LA LAND, FIRST MAN tells the story of Neil Armstrong in the 1960s, going from test pilot to the First Man who stepped foot on the moon.
As I stated earlier, the times that we are in the space capsule, or flight plane or test simulator with Armstrong are a visceral experience not to be missed. Chazelle puts his camera close in, often times seeing what Armstrong is seeing - most of that time with loud, shimming and shaking noises and shimming and shaking cameras that left me wonder how these Pioneers of Space Flight ever made it to the Moon and back safely. These scenes - and especially the last 1/2 hour of the film when Armstrong & Co. go to the moon - are worth the price of admission alone. Add on top of that a driving, visceral (there's that word again) score by Chazelle's musical collaborator Justin Hurwitz (Oscar winner for the music for LA LA LAND) and your heart will be thumping loudly in your chest during these exhilarating scenes.
And that is good, for Chazelle and screenwriter Josh Singer (SPOTLIGHT) try to squeeze in a Soap-Opera-esque plot and motivation for Armstrong throughout this film that just didn't work for me. They tried too hard to give Armstrong some "personal" motivations for being stoic, pragmatic and driven to his vision.
As for the acting, Ryan Gosling is...well...stoic, pragmatic and driven to his vision as Armstrong. Do you see that look on Gosling/Armstrong's face in the picture that is accompanying this review? You get that 90% of the time with him. Most of the other actors - Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, Pablo Schreiber, Ethan Embry, Lukas Haas - all give the same stoic, pragmatic performance, so there is no real personality here. Even the great Ciaran Hinds - who normally can chew scenery with the best of them - was toned way down to stoic, pragmatic proportions.
This made the performance of Corey Stoll as Buzz Aldrin all the more jarring for he bursts into this film at about the halfway point, cracking jokes and having a personality. Unfortunately, this was annoying at this point, rather than refreshing and I ended up thinking what a jerk Aldrin is.
Add to that Claire Foy (THE CROWN) as Armstrong's wife who has a constant pained expression on her face. She will get an Oscar nomination, for she had the big "Oscars" speech as the worried wife and mother - a speech where Gosling/Armstrong looked at her pragmatically and with solid stoicism.
Fortunately, what saves this movie is that these Earth-bound scenes of fairly boring people in cliched situations are quickly wiped away with awe-inspiring action pieces - they really are worth the price of admission - even the higher price you will need to pay to see it in IMAX with a kick-butt sound system.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars - have I mentioned how great the space scenes in this film are?
And you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)