Search
Search results
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Iron Man 2 (2010) in Movies
May 9, 2019
"if you could make god bleed people would cease to believe in him"
What made Iron Man so great was its original story, exciting action, and stellar performances. But beneath all the spectacle was a heart, characters we cared about and a coherent story in which we watched a narsasistic asshole become a good guy. All of that has vanished in the rushed, noisy, but enjoyable sequel.
Tony Stark is now living the life of a rockstar, a superhero that everyone knows the identity of, enjoying a celebrity lifestyle. Meanwhile, a villain connected to Tony's past recreates his technology and seeks revenge. Tony also deals with the mystery of his dead parents, his relationship with Pepper, wards off government attempts to control his technology, rebuffs his corporate rival, and has to rework his technology that is slowly killing him. Oh, and The Avengers show up.
If that sounds like an overcrowded movie to you, that's because it is. Iron Man 2 acts as an Iron Man sequel and an Avengers prequel. The clashing of these two stories is due to an unfocused narrative trying to cram in ten different storylines. Half the stories don't conclude in a satisfying way, and we're left with a pretty looking movie.
Luckily the performances are still great, Robert Downey Jr. is again a delight to watch, Sam Rockwell is fun as his counterpart rival, and Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard as best friend Rhodes, a worthy replacement. Scarlett Johansson joins the cast as an Avengers refenerence, with very little to do other than look good and kick ass.
Jon Favreau seems much less interested in the project this time around, as he falls under the weight of the studio pushing for a sequel in two years as opposed to three. The script has a couple of witty highlights, mostly with Same Rockwell as Tony's business rival.
The action is thrilling and everything you'd want when it comes, but it doesn't show up often. The visual effects are improved, and the sound design is top notch. The score is mediocre, with a few notable exceptions.
There is too much going on for one movie, but by the end of the movie you're left wanting more. Not enough time was devoted to the different characters and plot lines, which results in a highly uneven movie with short bursts of excitement and a solid cast. Worth one watch.
Tony Stark is now living the life of a rockstar, a superhero that everyone knows the identity of, enjoying a celebrity lifestyle. Meanwhile, a villain connected to Tony's past recreates his technology and seeks revenge. Tony also deals with the mystery of his dead parents, his relationship with Pepper, wards off government attempts to control his technology, rebuffs his corporate rival, and has to rework his technology that is slowly killing him. Oh, and The Avengers show up.
If that sounds like an overcrowded movie to you, that's because it is. Iron Man 2 acts as an Iron Man sequel and an Avengers prequel. The clashing of these two stories is due to an unfocused narrative trying to cram in ten different storylines. Half the stories don't conclude in a satisfying way, and we're left with a pretty looking movie.
Luckily the performances are still great, Robert Downey Jr. is again a delight to watch, Sam Rockwell is fun as his counterpart rival, and Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard as best friend Rhodes, a worthy replacement. Scarlett Johansson joins the cast as an Avengers refenerence, with very little to do other than look good and kick ass.
Jon Favreau seems much less interested in the project this time around, as he falls under the weight of the studio pushing for a sequel in two years as opposed to three. The script has a couple of witty highlights, mostly with Same Rockwell as Tony's business rival.
The action is thrilling and everything you'd want when it comes, but it doesn't show up often. The visual effects are improved, and the sound design is top notch. The score is mediocre, with a few notable exceptions.
There is too much going on for one movie, but by the end of the movie you're left wanting more. Not enough time was devoted to the different characters and plot lines, which results in a highly uneven movie with short bursts of excitement and a solid cast. Worth one watch.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Avengers: Endgame (2019) in Movies
May 11, 2019
"Part of the journey is the end"
A satisfying conclusion to the Infinity Saga, the best way to describe Avengers: Endgame is Fan Wish Fulfillment: The Movie. Seriously, this film lives and breathes fan service from top to bottom, yet it WORKS. Rather than coming off as obnoxiously pandering, the film’s use of fan service is more secondary to everything else, often being used in ways that are creative and even add to the comedy. And speaking of comedy, Avengers: Endgame is unquestionably one of the funniest films in the MCU, yet the comedy never detracts from the heart or the emotional weight of the film itself.
It’s legitimately shocking how much the Russo Bros have improved as filmmakers. Not only do they perfectly nail tonal consistency here, but most, if not all, of the drama scenes are well handled, the direction of actors is great, and even in terms of just visual composition (especially cinematography) and editing, they show major improvement here compared to their previous MCU works. There’s also some neat production design and Alan Silvestri provides a fantastic score.
Co-writers Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely’s screenplay is easily one of the strongest aspects of Avengers: Endgame. While some characters won’t get as much focus as others, the characters who are primarily focused on (Nebula, Tony, Steve and Hawkeye) each have legitimately really great, character arcs, and the way it ties them into the film’s theme of loss only makes them even better.
But despite the shockingly strong writing and direction, Avengers: Endgame mostly works so well due to its mostly committed ensemble. The acting is mostly pretty solid-strong across the board, with the standouts being Robert Downey Jr, Karen Gillan and Chris Evans who are excellent. That said, Chris Hemsworth, Brie Larson (in very minimal screen time), Jeremy Renner, Scarlett Johansson, Mark Ruffalo,Paul Rudd, Bradley Cooper, Josh Brolin and Don Cheadle all have their moments as well.
If Avengers: Endgame really is a farewell to many characters people have grown to love, then it is almost certainly a rewarding and satisfying one, and the third act features one of the best battle sequences in any comic book film. It might not be absolutely perfect, but it’s well performed, strongly written & directed, thoroughly entertaining and incredibly satisfying, and you’ll laugh, cheer and most definitely even cry. Without a doubt one of the absolute best MCU installments to date.
It’s legitimately shocking how much the Russo Bros have improved as filmmakers. Not only do they perfectly nail tonal consistency here, but most, if not all, of the drama scenes are well handled, the direction of actors is great, and even in terms of just visual composition (especially cinematography) and editing, they show major improvement here compared to their previous MCU works. There’s also some neat production design and Alan Silvestri provides a fantastic score.
Co-writers Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely’s screenplay is easily one of the strongest aspects of Avengers: Endgame. While some characters won’t get as much focus as others, the characters who are primarily focused on (Nebula, Tony, Steve and Hawkeye) each have legitimately really great, character arcs, and the way it ties them into the film’s theme of loss only makes them even better.
But despite the shockingly strong writing and direction, Avengers: Endgame mostly works so well due to its mostly committed ensemble. The acting is mostly pretty solid-strong across the board, with the standouts being Robert Downey Jr, Karen Gillan and Chris Evans who are excellent. That said, Chris Hemsworth, Brie Larson (in very minimal screen time), Jeremy Renner, Scarlett Johansson, Mark Ruffalo,Paul Rudd, Bradley Cooper, Josh Brolin and Don Cheadle all have their moments as well.
If Avengers: Endgame really is a farewell to many characters people have grown to love, then it is almost certainly a rewarding and satisfying one, and the third act features one of the best battle sequences in any comic book film. It might not be absolutely perfect, but it’s well performed, strongly written & directed, thoroughly entertaining and incredibly satisfying, and you’ll laugh, cheer and most definitely even cry. Without a doubt one of the absolute best MCU installments to date.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Marriage Story (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
One Mann’s Movies Review of “Marriage Story” – a “Kramer vs Kramer lite” in my book, albeit with some great acting performances.
K vs K Lite.
For me, mention the phrase “divorce movie” and there’s only one film that comes to mind – the Oscar-laden classic from 1979 starring an immaculate Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep. THAT toy plane; THOSE stiches! (Gulp). This is the yardstick by which I judge such movies… and to be honest, “Marriage Story” didn’t measure up.
The story.
We start the movie seeing the apparently idyllic married life of theatre impresario Charlie (Adam Driver) and his lead actress and muse Nicole (Scarlett Johansson), together bringing up their young child. But spin forwards and the pair are in the middle of an ‘amicable’ separation, with Nicole returning to her home roots in California and Charlie having an expensive commute to and from New York where he’s struggling to premiere his show on Broadway.
But despite an agreement to keep lawyers out of the equation, Nicole is persuaded to lawyer up with Nora Fanshaw (Laura Dern) tightening up the legal screws until Charlie’s life risks being torn apart. It’s time for him to fight back.
Well regarded by the Academy.
As for “Kramer vs Kramer”, this is a movie that has been garlanded with multiple Oscar nominations. Both Driver and Johansson are nominated in the lead acting roles and Laura Dern seems to be favourite for the Best Supporting Actress gong (after winning the Golden Globe and the BAFTA). Three more Oscar nominations come for the score (by Randy Newman); the original screenplay (by director Noah Baumbach); and a Best Film nomination.
Both leads deliver really emotional performances, with Johansson in particular being very believable in the role. But who knew she was so short?! She always strikes me as a statuesque beauty, but she’s only 5′ 3” and it’s particularly noticeable in a scene filmed at Warner Brothers Studios.
It’s also fabulous to see both the great Alan Alda (here showing signs of his Parkinson’s) and Ray Liotta on screen again, as both low-rent and top-dollar lawyers respectively.
But WHY exactly are they divorcing?
I found the whole set up of the movie as frustrating. There seemed no clear understanding of why the separation is happening. True there is an affair involved (and Mrs Movie Man and I have always lived our nearly 40 years of marriage with the understanding that a “one strike” rule applies). But notwithstanding that, it seems to be more of a ‘drifting apart’ that’s gone on. I just wanted to give them a good shaking and get them to work it out!
This is all obviously unfair – because (and I also know this from experience) that in many marriages ‘shit happens’: some people do just want to do different things; feel suffocated; etc. And – thinking about it – I’m not sure there was any real reason given for Meryl Streep‘s departure in K vs K: which was part of the reason for Dustin Hoffman‘s character’s frustration.
Who do you sympathise with?
This is a movie where the audience is bound to take a side. But for me, there was only one side to take and that was Charlie’s. The actions of Nicole seem reprehensible and unforgivable, and when there are lines to be crossed she seems to have little hesitation in crossing them.
Many people seem to rave about this movie, but…
…I found the pace to be inconsistent. At one point, the story just stops for a soulful rendition by Charlie of a song in a bar, and I frankly just got bored with it. And while there’s a steady build up of the legal case involved, suddenly we seem to skip to a resolution without any real rationale for it. Or did I fall asleep??
A further irritation for me was Julie Hagerty as Nicole’s mum Sandra. She does the kooky mum turn that she did perfectly well in last year’s funny “Instant Family“, but its a role that really didn’t seem to fit in this movie. There’s an element of slapstick comedy in these scenes that just didn’t suit the general tone of the movie.
Overall, I just don’t share the love for this movie. Given the choice, I’d much rather watch Kramer vs Kramer again.
And what was that punchline?
By the way, Alan Alda is a fantastic comedian, and really knows how to deliver a joke. In this movie he’s regaling Charlie with a long-winded story (on the clock) when Charlie interrupts him. How did it end…. Alda revealed the full joke after a press screening at the New York Film Festival… and it’s a corker!
This woman’s at her hairdresser’s, and she says, “I’m going to Rome on holiday.”
He says, “Oh really, what airline are you taking?”
She says, “Alitalia.”
He says, “Alitalia, are you crazy? That’s terrible, don’t take that.”
He says, “Where are you gonna stay?”
She says, “I’m gonna stay at The Hassler.”
“The Hassler! What, are you kidding? They’re renovating the Hassler. You’ll hear hammering all night long. You won’t sleep! What are you gonna see?”
She says, “I think I’m going to try to go to the Vatican.” “The Vatican? You’ll be standing in line all day long—”
(Charlie interrupts at this point, but the joke goes on)
So she goes to Rome. She comes back, and the hairdresser says, “How was it?”
She says, “It was a great trip, it was wonderful.”
“How was the Vatican?”
“Wonderful! We happened to meet the Pope.”
“You met the Pope?”
“Yeah, and he spoke to me.”
“What did he say to you?”
“He said, ‘Where’d you get that f***ing haircut?’”
LOL!
For me, mention the phrase “divorce movie” and there’s only one film that comes to mind – the Oscar-laden classic from 1979 starring an immaculate Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep. THAT toy plane; THOSE stiches! (Gulp). This is the yardstick by which I judge such movies… and to be honest, “Marriage Story” didn’t measure up.
The story.
We start the movie seeing the apparently idyllic married life of theatre impresario Charlie (Adam Driver) and his lead actress and muse Nicole (Scarlett Johansson), together bringing up their young child. But spin forwards and the pair are in the middle of an ‘amicable’ separation, with Nicole returning to her home roots in California and Charlie having an expensive commute to and from New York where he’s struggling to premiere his show on Broadway.
But despite an agreement to keep lawyers out of the equation, Nicole is persuaded to lawyer up with Nora Fanshaw (Laura Dern) tightening up the legal screws until Charlie’s life risks being torn apart. It’s time for him to fight back.
Well regarded by the Academy.
As for “Kramer vs Kramer”, this is a movie that has been garlanded with multiple Oscar nominations. Both Driver and Johansson are nominated in the lead acting roles and Laura Dern seems to be favourite for the Best Supporting Actress gong (after winning the Golden Globe and the BAFTA). Three more Oscar nominations come for the score (by Randy Newman); the original screenplay (by director Noah Baumbach); and a Best Film nomination.
Both leads deliver really emotional performances, with Johansson in particular being very believable in the role. But who knew she was so short?! She always strikes me as a statuesque beauty, but she’s only 5′ 3” and it’s particularly noticeable in a scene filmed at Warner Brothers Studios.
It’s also fabulous to see both the great Alan Alda (here showing signs of his Parkinson’s) and Ray Liotta on screen again, as both low-rent and top-dollar lawyers respectively.
But WHY exactly are they divorcing?
I found the whole set up of the movie as frustrating. There seemed no clear understanding of why the separation is happening. True there is an affair involved (and Mrs Movie Man and I have always lived our nearly 40 years of marriage with the understanding that a “one strike” rule applies). But notwithstanding that, it seems to be more of a ‘drifting apart’ that’s gone on. I just wanted to give them a good shaking and get them to work it out!
This is all obviously unfair – because (and I also know this from experience) that in many marriages ‘shit happens’: some people do just want to do different things; feel suffocated; etc. And – thinking about it – I’m not sure there was any real reason given for Meryl Streep‘s departure in K vs K: which was part of the reason for Dustin Hoffman‘s character’s frustration.
Who do you sympathise with?
This is a movie where the audience is bound to take a side. But for me, there was only one side to take and that was Charlie’s. The actions of Nicole seem reprehensible and unforgivable, and when there are lines to be crossed she seems to have little hesitation in crossing them.
Many people seem to rave about this movie, but…
…I found the pace to be inconsistent. At one point, the story just stops for a soulful rendition by Charlie of a song in a bar, and I frankly just got bored with it. And while there’s a steady build up of the legal case involved, suddenly we seem to skip to a resolution without any real rationale for it. Or did I fall asleep??
A further irritation for me was Julie Hagerty as Nicole’s mum Sandra. She does the kooky mum turn that she did perfectly well in last year’s funny “Instant Family“, but its a role that really didn’t seem to fit in this movie. There’s an element of slapstick comedy in these scenes that just didn’t suit the general tone of the movie.
Overall, I just don’t share the love for this movie. Given the choice, I’d much rather watch Kramer vs Kramer again.
And what was that punchline?
By the way, Alan Alda is a fantastic comedian, and really knows how to deliver a joke. In this movie he’s regaling Charlie with a long-winded story (on the clock) when Charlie interrupts him. How did it end…. Alda revealed the full joke after a press screening at the New York Film Festival… and it’s a corker!
This woman’s at her hairdresser’s, and she says, “I’m going to Rome on holiday.”
He says, “Oh really, what airline are you taking?”
She says, “Alitalia.”
He says, “Alitalia, are you crazy? That’s terrible, don’t take that.”
He says, “Where are you gonna stay?”
She says, “I’m gonna stay at The Hassler.”
“The Hassler! What, are you kidding? They’re renovating the Hassler. You’ll hear hammering all night long. You won’t sleep! What are you gonna see?”
She says, “I think I’m going to try to go to the Vatican.” “The Vatican? You’ll be standing in line all day long—”
(Charlie interrupts at this point, but the joke goes on)
So she goes to Rome. She comes back, and the hairdresser says, “How was it?”
She says, “It was a great trip, it was wonderful.”
“How was the Vatican?”
“Wonderful! We happened to meet the Pope.”
“You met the Pope?”
“Yeah, and he spoke to me.”
“What did he say to you?”
“He said, ‘Where’d you get that f***ing haircut?’”
LOL!
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Jungle Book (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A New Classic
There’s an old saying; “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, and that was the kind of reaction many people had towards Disney’s live-action remake of The Jungle Book.
Helmed by Iron Man director, Jon Favreau, it certainly garnered a mixed response come its first trailer release late last year. But what is the finished product like? And are we looking at a new classic?
Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle Book is one of the most recognisable tales ever, despite its wafer thin plot, and the 1967 Disney animation is faithful to the first, and unfortunately also the latter.
We join this film in the midst of the action, as our young hero Mowgli (played by an unbelievably good Neel Sethi) learns how to run with his family – an adoptive pack of wolves. As the story progresses, Mowgli meets a whole host of friendly, and not so friendly, jungle animals as he strives to find just who he is.
This is a much darker interpretation of the classic story than we have been used to. There are scenes here that are genuinely terrifying, helped in part by the breath-taking CGI used to render the animals, with one infamous tiger in particular being the stuff of nightmares.
Speaking of which, an all-star cast that includes Ben Kingsley, Bill Murray, Scarlett Johansson, Idris Elba, Christopher Walken and Lupita Nyong’o lend their voices to fan favourites like Bagheera, Baloo, Kaa, Shere Khan, King Louie and Raksha. The vocal performances from each are sublime with Murray being a particular highlight with his comedic persona fitting perfectly with Baloo.
The jungle is brought to the screen in such detail that each frame is brimming with creatures, plants and life. In 3D, it is one of the most magnificent settings ever put to film as vibrant colours make the eyes dance with excitement. It lives and breathes right before your very eyes.
Then there’s the soundtrack. It’s true that the majority of the animation’s songs failed to make the cut, but looking back, it was only Bare Necessities that made any sort of impact and thankfully this survives, receiving a thundering orchestral backing track in the process. Christopher Walken’s gangster-like singing gives I Wanna Be Like You a whole new edge.
Nevertheless, it does, at times feel like Jon Favreau is going through the motions with the rest of the story – setting Mowgli up for one big set piece after another, though a few nice additions keep the plot flowing right up until the harrowing and beautifully filmed finale.
Overall, Disney has another classic on their hands. The Jungle Book is one of the most spectacular and breath-taking films ever put to the big screen. From a magnificent score to exceptional voice acting, it’s practically perfect in every way.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/04/16/a-new-classic-the-jungle-book-review/
Helmed by Iron Man director, Jon Favreau, it certainly garnered a mixed response come its first trailer release late last year. But what is the finished product like? And are we looking at a new classic?
Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle Book is one of the most recognisable tales ever, despite its wafer thin plot, and the 1967 Disney animation is faithful to the first, and unfortunately also the latter.
We join this film in the midst of the action, as our young hero Mowgli (played by an unbelievably good Neel Sethi) learns how to run with his family – an adoptive pack of wolves. As the story progresses, Mowgli meets a whole host of friendly, and not so friendly, jungle animals as he strives to find just who he is.
This is a much darker interpretation of the classic story than we have been used to. There are scenes here that are genuinely terrifying, helped in part by the breath-taking CGI used to render the animals, with one infamous tiger in particular being the stuff of nightmares.
Speaking of which, an all-star cast that includes Ben Kingsley, Bill Murray, Scarlett Johansson, Idris Elba, Christopher Walken and Lupita Nyong’o lend their voices to fan favourites like Bagheera, Baloo, Kaa, Shere Khan, King Louie and Raksha. The vocal performances from each are sublime with Murray being a particular highlight with his comedic persona fitting perfectly with Baloo.
The jungle is brought to the screen in such detail that each frame is brimming with creatures, plants and life. In 3D, it is one of the most magnificent settings ever put to film as vibrant colours make the eyes dance with excitement. It lives and breathes right before your very eyes.
Then there’s the soundtrack. It’s true that the majority of the animation’s songs failed to make the cut, but looking back, it was only Bare Necessities that made any sort of impact and thankfully this survives, receiving a thundering orchestral backing track in the process. Christopher Walken’s gangster-like singing gives I Wanna Be Like You a whole new edge.
Nevertheless, it does, at times feel like Jon Favreau is going through the motions with the rest of the story – setting Mowgli up for one big set piece after another, though a few nice additions keep the plot flowing right up until the harrowing and beautifully filmed finale.
Overall, Disney has another classic on their hands. The Jungle Book is one of the most spectacular and breath-taking films ever put to the big screen. From a magnificent score to exceptional voice acting, it’s practically perfect in every way.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/04/16/a-new-classic-the-jungle-book-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
For Captain Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), the two years following his exploits in “The Avengers” has not been easy. He is still coming to grips with being a man out of time, as the world around him is a much more dangerous and complicated place than the one he grew up in.
He runs missions for S.H.I.E.L.D. under the command of Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), and is often accompanies by a team of agents as well as his fellow Avenger Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson).
A recent mission has lead the Captain to question some of the tactics used by S.H.I.E.L.D. and Fury decides it is time to be more open with Rogers about the pending plans of the agency which involve launching three Super Carriers that will eliminate threats before they happen.
Naturally this sort of “Gunboat Diplomacy” does not sit well with the highly ethical Rogers but Fury tells him he needs to get out of the past and become aware of just how different and dangerous the world they live in has become.
Fury believes that the Captain does have some valid concerns and uncovers that things may not be as they appear. When a vicious and well coordinated attack happen, Captain America is called into action and soon finds himself facing a deadly assassin known as The Winter Soldier.
The heat soon rises making Rogers soon question whom he can trust as a deadly conspiracy that holds the fate of the world in the balance erupts, and only Rogers and his team can save the day.
The film is an intense thrill ride that mixes the best elements of the Marvel films with solid action and a dramatic thriller. There are strong performances all around and the addition of Anthony Mackie and Robert Redford to the already strong ensemble was a masterful plan.
Directors Anthony and Joe Russo (Who are said to already be signed for the next Captain America film), clearly have a grasp on the material and they deftly combine action with a human story full of ethical dilemmas and personal motivations to deliver a film that is so much more than the usual FX laden films that are common with comic book related films.
Marvel Studios has once again upped the ante and have continued their amazing run of film success and keep getting better and better. There are several hints dropped about other characters and events in the upcoming Marvel cinematic universe as well as plenty of treats for fans. You will want to stay for the two additional scenes that take place during the credits as they give fans a hint of what is to come next year with “The Avengers: Age of Ultron”.
Until then, “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” is a spectacular summer event film, as an it is a non-stop thrill ride and a textbook example of how to bring the best elements of a comic book to life.
http://sknr.net/2014/04/04/captain-america-the-winter-soldier/
He runs missions for S.H.I.E.L.D. under the command of Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), and is often accompanies by a team of agents as well as his fellow Avenger Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson).
A recent mission has lead the Captain to question some of the tactics used by S.H.I.E.L.D. and Fury decides it is time to be more open with Rogers about the pending plans of the agency which involve launching three Super Carriers that will eliminate threats before they happen.
Naturally this sort of “Gunboat Diplomacy” does not sit well with the highly ethical Rogers but Fury tells him he needs to get out of the past and become aware of just how different and dangerous the world they live in has become.
Fury believes that the Captain does have some valid concerns and uncovers that things may not be as they appear. When a vicious and well coordinated attack happen, Captain America is called into action and soon finds himself facing a deadly assassin known as The Winter Soldier.
The heat soon rises making Rogers soon question whom he can trust as a deadly conspiracy that holds the fate of the world in the balance erupts, and only Rogers and his team can save the day.
The film is an intense thrill ride that mixes the best elements of the Marvel films with solid action and a dramatic thriller. There are strong performances all around and the addition of Anthony Mackie and Robert Redford to the already strong ensemble was a masterful plan.
Directors Anthony and Joe Russo (Who are said to already be signed for the next Captain America film), clearly have a grasp on the material and they deftly combine action with a human story full of ethical dilemmas and personal motivations to deliver a film that is so much more than the usual FX laden films that are common with comic book related films.
Marvel Studios has once again upped the ante and have continued their amazing run of film success and keep getting better and better. There are several hints dropped about other characters and events in the upcoming Marvel cinematic universe as well as plenty of treats for fans. You will want to stay for the two additional scenes that take place during the credits as they give fans a hint of what is to come next year with “The Avengers: Age of Ultron”.
Until then, “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” is a spectacular summer event film, as an it is a non-stop thrill ride and a textbook example of how to bring the best elements of a comic book to life.
http://sknr.net/2014/04/04/captain-america-the-winter-soldier/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Sing (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Fun for all the family
Talking animated animals are big business over in Hollywood. After all, Disney’s Zootopia was one of only a handful of films to gross over $1billion last year. Its competitor, The Secret Life of Pets performed well but wasn’t critically successful.
Here, the company behind that second film, Illumination Entertainment, try to get the genre right with Sing. But are we looking at the next superstar of the animated genre?
Koala Buster Moon (Matthew McConaughey) presides over a once-grand theatre that has recently fallen on hard times. An eternal optimist, he loves his work enormously and will do anything to preserve it. Facing the crumbling of his life’s ambition, he takes one final chance to restore his fading jewel to its former glory by producing a singing competition, with eternal glory facing the winner.
There’s an impressive roster of talent on offer in Sing, something that parents will no doubt enjoy slightly more than the offspring they no doubt have to bring with them. With Matthew McConaughey taking the lead role, Taron Egerton, Reese Witherspoon, Scarlett Johansson and Seth McFarlane to name a few all lend their voices. There’s even a role for Brit-favourite Jennifer Saunders as a grumpy old sheep, it’s not ground-breaking, but it’s immensely likeable stuff.
Illumination Entertainment has brought us the brilliant Despicable Me franchise as well as its ridiculously successful spin-off Minions, but they’ve been criticised heavily for relying too much on the funny yellow critters to cash their paycheques. Thankfully, bar the now infamous company logo, the tic-tac shaped creatures are nowhere to be found and Sing is a vastly entertaining movie, in spite of their absence.
Whilst it’s true that the animation lacks the depth or fluidity of offerings from Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks, there is a certain charm to its simplistic colour palate that children will find endearing. The plot is woefully unoriginal but director Garth Jennings, in his first animated feature, utilises that well, cleverly referencing the many talent shows that feature on our television screens – including those we are sick of.
There are some moral lessons in here too. Tori Kelly’s stage-shy elephant Meena has a great story arc that sees her face her fears and embrace her talents, whilst Taron Egerton’s gorilla Johnny stands up to his criminal father and learns that a life of crime doesn’t always pay.
In fact, only Seth MacFarlane’s obnoxious mouse Mike fails to make an impact on the plot, with his berating of an asthmatic sheep in the cleverly produced opening sequence coming across a little crude in comparison to the rest of the script.
Overall, Sing is a great film to hold the kid’s attention as we approach the half-term holidays. It would be easy to criticise it for lacking an original story, but there’s more to offer here than a half-baked plot. It’s beautifully voiced and reasonably well animated. Illumination Entertainment may not have topped Zootopia, but this is their best offering outside of Despicable Me by a country mile.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/01/28/fun-for-all-the-family-sing-review/
Here, the company behind that second film, Illumination Entertainment, try to get the genre right with Sing. But are we looking at the next superstar of the animated genre?
Koala Buster Moon (Matthew McConaughey) presides over a once-grand theatre that has recently fallen on hard times. An eternal optimist, he loves his work enormously and will do anything to preserve it. Facing the crumbling of his life’s ambition, he takes one final chance to restore his fading jewel to its former glory by producing a singing competition, with eternal glory facing the winner.
There’s an impressive roster of talent on offer in Sing, something that parents will no doubt enjoy slightly more than the offspring they no doubt have to bring with them. With Matthew McConaughey taking the lead role, Taron Egerton, Reese Witherspoon, Scarlett Johansson and Seth McFarlane to name a few all lend their voices. There’s even a role for Brit-favourite Jennifer Saunders as a grumpy old sheep, it’s not ground-breaking, but it’s immensely likeable stuff.
Illumination Entertainment has brought us the brilliant Despicable Me franchise as well as its ridiculously successful spin-off Minions, but they’ve been criticised heavily for relying too much on the funny yellow critters to cash their paycheques. Thankfully, bar the now infamous company logo, the tic-tac shaped creatures are nowhere to be found and Sing is a vastly entertaining movie, in spite of their absence.
Whilst it’s true that the animation lacks the depth or fluidity of offerings from Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks, there is a certain charm to its simplistic colour palate that children will find endearing. The plot is woefully unoriginal but director Garth Jennings, in his first animated feature, utilises that well, cleverly referencing the many talent shows that feature on our television screens – including those we are sick of.
There are some moral lessons in here too. Tori Kelly’s stage-shy elephant Meena has a great story arc that sees her face her fears and embrace her talents, whilst Taron Egerton’s gorilla Johnny stands up to his criminal father and learns that a life of crime doesn’t always pay.
In fact, only Seth MacFarlane’s obnoxious mouse Mike fails to make an impact on the plot, with his berating of an asthmatic sheep in the cleverly produced opening sequence coming across a little crude in comparison to the rest of the script.
Overall, Sing is a great film to hold the kid’s attention as we approach the half-term holidays. It would be easy to criticise it for lacking an original story, but there’s more to offer here than a half-baked plot. It’s beautifully voiced and reasonably well animated. Illumination Entertainment may not have topped Zootopia, but this is their best offering outside of Despicable Me by a country mile.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/01/28/fun-for-all-the-family-sing-review/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Marriage Story (2019) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
Divorce has been depicted many times onscreen, as it’s one of those difficult realities about adult relationships. There’s still a lot of stigma around the breakdown of a marriage, but Marriage Story deals with the topic in a very raw and unique way.
The film follows Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) and Charlie (Adam Driver) as they’re going through the turbulent divorce period. The couple share a young son Henry, who naturally causes complications for the two when it comes to custodial agreements.
Marriage Story opens with two gorgeous monologues about what the two characters love about each other, both of which are enough to make you cry a mere few minutes into the film. This contrasts very well with the present day, where they’re both struggling to make their marriage work.
It would have been very easy for Noah Baumbach to encourage the audience to pick sides, leaving them to subconsciously ‘root’ for either party to do well in the scenario. But remarkably that’s not the case, as it’s a very unbiased film that lays everything out on the table for us to see. Each messy, complicated detail is shown to us, and we end up sympathising with both.
One thing I really enjoyed about Marriage Story is the way Baumbach criticises some of the ridiculousness associated with divorce, especially when it comes to legal battles. Nicole reluctantly turns to ruthless lawyer Nora Fanshaw (Laura Dern), who is honest about the lies that have to be told in order to get through this.
Dern’s performance is hilarious but also highlights some of the inequalities and utterly baffling scenarios that happen when picking up a legal case. I wasn’t aware of any of them so it was quite a shock.
Watching the film is excruciating in places, but that’s a compliment on how raw and honest it is. It seems wrong for Charlie and Nicole to have to say and do certain things, all dictated by their respective lawyers. A clean break just isn’t possible when a child is involved.
It becomes even more complicated for the couple when Nicole decides to move back to Los Angeles, 2,789 miles away from New York City where she and Charlie used to reside. This creates a very literal distance between them, and causes problems with the battle for custody and Henry’s wellbeing.
Whilst there are many scenes which will reduce you to tears, Marriage Story has some comedic elements to lighten the mood, especially when it comes to Nicole’s family and how they react to the news of the divorce.
The two central performances in Marriage Story really are exceptional, and you become invested in the lives of people you don’t even know. One dramatic scene between Charlie and Nicole in particular had me openly sobbing, as it was full of contempt instead of love. Many of us can react to that exchange in a failing relationship, and it hurts.
If you want a very honest look at what it’s like to go through a divorce, then Marriage Story is just that. This isn’t the kind of film that sugarcoats anything and instead takes its audience on an emotional rollercoaster from start to finish.
The film follows Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) and Charlie (Adam Driver) as they’re going through the turbulent divorce period. The couple share a young son Henry, who naturally causes complications for the two when it comes to custodial agreements.
Marriage Story opens with two gorgeous monologues about what the two characters love about each other, both of which are enough to make you cry a mere few minutes into the film. This contrasts very well with the present day, where they’re both struggling to make their marriage work.
It would have been very easy for Noah Baumbach to encourage the audience to pick sides, leaving them to subconsciously ‘root’ for either party to do well in the scenario. But remarkably that’s not the case, as it’s a very unbiased film that lays everything out on the table for us to see. Each messy, complicated detail is shown to us, and we end up sympathising with both.
One thing I really enjoyed about Marriage Story is the way Baumbach criticises some of the ridiculousness associated with divorce, especially when it comes to legal battles. Nicole reluctantly turns to ruthless lawyer Nora Fanshaw (Laura Dern), who is honest about the lies that have to be told in order to get through this.
Dern’s performance is hilarious but also highlights some of the inequalities and utterly baffling scenarios that happen when picking up a legal case. I wasn’t aware of any of them so it was quite a shock.
Watching the film is excruciating in places, but that’s a compliment on how raw and honest it is. It seems wrong for Charlie and Nicole to have to say and do certain things, all dictated by their respective lawyers. A clean break just isn’t possible when a child is involved.
It becomes even more complicated for the couple when Nicole decides to move back to Los Angeles, 2,789 miles away from New York City where she and Charlie used to reside. This creates a very literal distance between them, and causes problems with the battle for custody and Henry’s wellbeing.
Whilst there are many scenes which will reduce you to tears, Marriage Story has some comedic elements to lighten the mood, especially when it comes to Nicole’s family and how they react to the news of the divorce.
The two central performances in Marriage Story really are exceptional, and you become invested in the lives of people you don’t even know. One dramatic scene between Charlie and Nicole in particular had me openly sobbing, as it was full of contempt instead of love. Many of us can react to that exchange in a failing relationship, and it hurts.
If you want a very honest look at what it’s like to go through a divorce, then Marriage Story is just that. This isn’t the kind of film that sugarcoats anything and instead takes its audience on an emotional rollercoaster from start to finish.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Jojo Rabbit (2019) in Movies
Jan 11, 2020
If you asked me why I skipped seeing this one twice before it's UK release I wouldn't be able to give you a proper answer. I guess I just didn't fancy it, and the second time Odeon outdid Cineworld with a really early Parasite screening so that felt like the sensible choice instead.
Jojo wants to be a good German, but as he's about to go off to a Nazi Youth Camp he worries about how he'll do. Luckily he has a friend to help him through it, Adolf Hitler. The Fuhrer is always with him in spirit.
Recovering at home after an accident Jojo discovers that he's not alone in the house. He discovers Elsa hiding in a wall space upstairs, hidden by his mother. Jojo is torn, he should report her to the authorities but that could be bad news for him and his mother.
I was genuinely surprised about who was turning up to see this. There were a lot of family groups and groups of teenagers. It shouldn't really shock me, everyone has their own interests in a wide variety of things, but I wasn't expecting to see such young people coming to see it.
By far my favourite thing about this film was Sam Rockwell as Captain Klenzendorf, a little bitter with his situation and begrudgingly training the kids for the battles ahead, he's making the best of a bad situation. He's funny, and more importantly, glorious in battle. From the ridiculous to a surprisingly moving scene at the end, he was the performance of the whole film for me.
Child actors have their ups and downs, some have the knack right out of the gate but I didn't really get that from Roman Griffin Davis or Archie Yates. Both got some good moments out of the script but their delivery and the consistency of the characters didn't carry through it as a whole.
Thomasin McKenzie however brought a little something extra to her role of Elsa. I didn't mind her slightly more serious parts in this but it was difficult to get much more out of it when so much revolved around her and Jojo in scenes together. I don't like "awkward" and some of the scenes are *shudder*.
I can't really talk about the film without talking about Taika Waititi as Hitler. I found him quite amusing to begin with but when the character started to change as Jojo did I felt it was a little over the top.
Dramatic moments pop up when you really aren't expecting them, two in particular stuck with me afterwards. One, as I mentioned, with Sam Rockwell and the other with Scarlett Johansson. Rockwell's was a complete surprise, but ScarJo's, though unexpected, was overplayed a lot in the build up.
Jojo Rabbit is a very odd film, I didn't know what to expect at all really and the final result left me no wiser. Entertaining yes, but not something I would have to see again.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/jojo-rabbit-movie-review.html
Jojo wants to be a good German, but as he's about to go off to a Nazi Youth Camp he worries about how he'll do. Luckily he has a friend to help him through it, Adolf Hitler. The Fuhrer is always with him in spirit.
Recovering at home after an accident Jojo discovers that he's not alone in the house. He discovers Elsa hiding in a wall space upstairs, hidden by his mother. Jojo is torn, he should report her to the authorities but that could be bad news for him and his mother.
I was genuinely surprised about who was turning up to see this. There were a lot of family groups and groups of teenagers. It shouldn't really shock me, everyone has their own interests in a wide variety of things, but I wasn't expecting to see such young people coming to see it.
By far my favourite thing about this film was Sam Rockwell as Captain Klenzendorf, a little bitter with his situation and begrudgingly training the kids for the battles ahead, he's making the best of a bad situation. He's funny, and more importantly, glorious in battle. From the ridiculous to a surprisingly moving scene at the end, he was the performance of the whole film for me.
Child actors have their ups and downs, some have the knack right out of the gate but I didn't really get that from Roman Griffin Davis or Archie Yates. Both got some good moments out of the script but their delivery and the consistency of the characters didn't carry through it as a whole.
Thomasin McKenzie however brought a little something extra to her role of Elsa. I didn't mind her slightly more serious parts in this but it was difficult to get much more out of it when so much revolved around her and Jojo in scenes together. I don't like "awkward" and some of the scenes are *shudder*.
I can't really talk about the film without talking about Taika Waititi as Hitler. I found him quite amusing to begin with but when the character started to change as Jojo did I felt it was a little over the top.
Dramatic moments pop up when you really aren't expecting them, two in particular stuck with me afterwards. One, as I mentioned, with Sam Rockwell and the other with Scarlett Johansson. Rockwell's was a complete surprise, but ScarJo's, though unexpected, was overplayed a lot in the build up.
Jojo Rabbit is a very odd film, I didn't know what to expect at all really and the final result left me no wiser. Entertaining yes, but not something I would have to see again.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/jojo-rabbit-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Asteroid City (2023) in Movies
Jun 30, 2023
Too "Wes Anderson" For It's Own Good
If you watched the Oscar Nominated Wes Anderson film THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL back in 2014 and thought to yourself - “I want more of this type of thing - only turned up to 11”, then does the BankofMarquis have a film for you.
ASTEROID CITY is the most Wes Anderson film that Wes Anderson has ever filmed.
It is up to you to decide whether that’s a good or bad thing.
A movie within a play within a narration (yes, it’s that “meta”), ASTEROID CITY tells the tale of a group of folks congregating in a timeframe that seems to scream “1950’s America” in a very small, isolated Southwestern American town that seems to scream “Los Alamos, New Mexico” and the life, loves, adventures - and wry comments of the events therein - that these folks encounter/endure all wrapped up in the pastel colored, dry-pan delivered style that has become the signature of a Wes Anderson film.
Populated - as is always the case these days with a Wes Anderson film - by a veritable who’s who of actors who seem to be in on the joke - or at least want to appear that they are part of the “cool kids club”. Names like Anderson regulars Jason Schwartzman, Liev Schrieber, Willem Dafoe and Ed Norton mix in with Anderson newcomers like Tom Hanks, Steve Carrell and Scarlett Johansson succeed more than they fail, but the film falls down from the heights of THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL by becoming “too cute” for it’s own good.
Central to the story is the relationship between Schwartzman’s War Photographer and Johansson’s movie star but this relationship fails to draw the audience in because of the presentational, deadpan style of Anderson’s delivery of the material. Same goes for Hanks’ portrayal of Schwartzman’s father, Carrell’s portrayal of the Motel Manager and Schrieber’s portrayal of another parent at the hotel.
Jeffrey Wright and Tilda Swinton are the most successful of the players as their characters are aloof and mysterious - and the style that Anderson throws at this film leans towards these types of characters…but it leaves the audience at arms’ length.
Special notice should be made of Margot Robbie’s one scene as her character is spoken of, but not seen…until she is.. and her scene is the most interesting in the film.
And…the BankofMarquis hasn’t even mentioned Edward Norton’s playwright (who writes the play that this movie is based on) and Adrian Brody as the Director of the play. The are brought on screen from time to time to archly comment and/or explain the goings-on.
This being an Anderson film, the visuals are stunning and original (but, ironically, familiar to Wes Anderson regulars) and this is the main reason to see this film, it is visually rich and interesting…and different…of a film to look at.
But…Wes Anderson needed to lean away (not into) being…Wes Anderson.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
ASTEROID CITY is the most Wes Anderson film that Wes Anderson has ever filmed.
It is up to you to decide whether that’s a good or bad thing.
A movie within a play within a narration (yes, it’s that “meta”), ASTEROID CITY tells the tale of a group of folks congregating in a timeframe that seems to scream “1950’s America” in a very small, isolated Southwestern American town that seems to scream “Los Alamos, New Mexico” and the life, loves, adventures - and wry comments of the events therein - that these folks encounter/endure all wrapped up in the pastel colored, dry-pan delivered style that has become the signature of a Wes Anderson film.
Populated - as is always the case these days with a Wes Anderson film - by a veritable who’s who of actors who seem to be in on the joke - or at least want to appear that they are part of the “cool kids club”. Names like Anderson regulars Jason Schwartzman, Liev Schrieber, Willem Dafoe and Ed Norton mix in with Anderson newcomers like Tom Hanks, Steve Carrell and Scarlett Johansson succeed more than they fail, but the film falls down from the heights of THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL by becoming “too cute” for it’s own good.
Central to the story is the relationship between Schwartzman’s War Photographer and Johansson’s movie star but this relationship fails to draw the audience in because of the presentational, deadpan style of Anderson’s delivery of the material. Same goes for Hanks’ portrayal of Schwartzman’s father, Carrell’s portrayal of the Motel Manager and Schrieber’s portrayal of another parent at the hotel.
Jeffrey Wright and Tilda Swinton are the most successful of the players as their characters are aloof and mysterious - and the style that Anderson throws at this film leans towards these types of characters…but it leaves the audience at arms’ length.
Special notice should be made of Margot Robbie’s one scene as her character is spoken of, but not seen…until she is.. and her scene is the most interesting in the film.
And…the BankofMarquis hasn’t even mentioned Edward Norton’s playwright (who writes the play that this movie is based on) and Adrian Brody as the Director of the play. The are brought on screen from time to time to archly comment and/or explain the goings-on.
This being an Anderson film, the visuals are stunning and original (but, ironically, familiar to Wes Anderson regulars) and this is the main reason to see this film, it is visually rich and interesting…and different…of a film to look at.
But…Wes Anderson needed to lean away (not into) being…Wes Anderson.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Lost In Translation (2003) in Movies
May 13, 2018
Solid Film
When a famous actor hops over to Tokyo to shoot a commercial, he meets a young woman that fills an empty void in his life.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
My son hates dramas and rightfully so as he's a thirteen-year-old boy. He wants to see things blowing up and people getting thrown through walls. Yet somehow, the first ten minutes of Lost In Translation sucked him in as much as it did me prompting him to watch the whole thing. From the time he touches down in Tokyo, Bob Harris (Bill Murray) sucks you in and holds on to your attention for dear life. You're anxious to see what this man is going to do next.
Characters: 10
Staying on Bob for a moment, his character made the film. His dry sense of humor and pure disinterest in everything going on around him is so sincere and captured just perfectly. He's torn between his sense of duty with work and family, so much so that he's almost forgotten how to enjoy life. When Charlotte (Scarlett Johansson) comes along, everything changes for him. Charlotte is innocent and sweet and is somehow drawn to Bob like a moth to a flame. Like most "opposites attract" relationships, the two fit extremely well together and add a sense of appeal to the film. Watching them both interact with the Japanese people and try to bridge cultural and language gaps was easy comedy that works everytime.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 7
Genre: 10
Memorability: 9
There are a number of memorable scenes that stick out in my head with a couple of favorites I keep replaying. The first is where he's trying to shoot his commercial. The director is trying to relay something to Bob in Japanese which a translator is telling Bob in English. The scene is only five minutes long and had me cracking up from start to finish. In my other favorite scene, Bob has a run-in in his hotel room with a Japanese prostitute. Again, the language disparity makes the entire interaction one hilarious situation.
Outside of memorable scenes, Lost In Translation gives you a pause for introspection and contemplative thought. Oftentimes we wander aimlessly through the relationships in our lives...but what do they really mean? What are relationships without happiness or closeness? What is the real meaning of a connection?
Pace: 9
Plot: 10
Had this film's story taken place in North America somewhere, it wouldn't have been nearly as impactful. With the setting in Japan, it throws a monkey-wrench into a plot that could have been extremely simple and makes it way more intriguing. Are Bob and Charlotte truly falling for each other or are they just connecting because they are lonely and so far from home? Definite food for thought.
Resolution: 8
Ah, the famous ending of Lost In Translation. What did she say? What does it all mean? How does the story end anyway? The ending, while it does leave you hanging, is an intriguing one for sure. I understand the ambiguity and I don't love it, but I'm ok with it.
Overall: 92
Bill Murray is like the Marvel Cinematic Universe...on steroids. They have been putting out hits for a decade now. Murray has been starring in classics for decades. This film is another notch on his belt. Loved it!
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
My son hates dramas and rightfully so as he's a thirteen-year-old boy. He wants to see things blowing up and people getting thrown through walls. Yet somehow, the first ten minutes of Lost In Translation sucked him in as much as it did me prompting him to watch the whole thing. From the time he touches down in Tokyo, Bob Harris (Bill Murray) sucks you in and holds on to your attention for dear life. You're anxious to see what this man is going to do next.
Characters: 10
Staying on Bob for a moment, his character made the film. His dry sense of humor and pure disinterest in everything going on around him is so sincere and captured just perfectly. He's torn between his sense of duty with work and family, so much so that he's almost forgotten how to enjoy life. When Charlotte (Scarlett Johansson) comes along, everything changes for him. Charlotte is innocent and sweet and is somehow drawn to Bob like a moth to a flame. Like most "opposites attract" relationships, the two fit extremely well together and add a sense of appeal to the film. Watching them both interact with the Japanese people and try to bridge cultural and language gaps was easy comedy that works everytime.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 7
Genre: 10
Memorability: 9
There are a number of memorable scenes that stick out in my head with a couple of favorites I keep replaying. The first is where he's trying to shoot his commercial. The director is trying to relay something to Bob in Japanese which a translator is telling Bob in English. The scene is only five minutes long and had me cracking up from start to finish. In my other favorite scene, Bob has a run-in in his hotel room with a Japanese prostitute. Again, the language disparity makes the entire interaction one hilarious situation.
Outside of memorable scenes, Lost In Translation gives you a pause for introspection and contemplative thought. Oftentimes we wander aimlessly through the relationships in our lives...but what do they really mean? What are relationships without happiness or closeness? What is the real meaning of a connection?
Pace: 9
Plot: 10
Had this film's story taken place in North America somewhere, it wouldn't have been nearly as impactful. With the setting in Japan, it throws a monkey-wrench into a plot that could have been extremely simple and makes it way more intriguing. Are Bob and Charlotte truly falling for each other or are they just connecting because they are lonely and so far from home? Definite food for thought.
Resolution: 8
Ah, the famous ending of Lost In Translation. What did she say? What does it all mean? How does the story end anyway? The ending, while it does leave you hanging, is an intriguing one for sure. I understand the ambiguity and I don't love it, but I'm ok with it.
Overall: 92
Bill Murray is like the Marvel Cinematic Universe...on steroids. They have been putting out hits for a decade now. Murray has been starring in classics for decades. This film is another notch on his belt. Loved it!