Search
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) created a post
Jun 21, 2020
Death in High Circles
Book
There is mischief afoot in the village of Fallow Fold. Persons unknown have been on a spree of...
Michael Korda recommended Rififi (1955) in Movies (curated)
White Houses
Book
"Amy Bloom brings an untold slice of history so dazzlingly and devastatingly to life, it took my...
The Great British Farmhouse Cookbook (Yeo Valley)
Book
Not just a name on a yoghurt pot, Yeo Valley is a real organic farm in the picturesque West Country....
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Belfast (2021) in Movies
Jan 14, 2022
In short, Belfast is a very human and truly wonderful piece of cinema.
It's visual style is both stunning and simple, and is brimming with plenty of striking imagery.
It's themes are rich. The setting explores the civil unrest between Protestants and Catholics in 1960s Belfast. This turbulent moment in time is a constant presence for sure, but the main bulk of the narrative deals with a working class family who are struggling with debt, and are looking to potentially relocate to England in light of the city wide violence. The very heart of the story though is found in Buddy, the young son of the family who is dealing with growing up and not wanting to leave. Buddy's actor, Jude Hill, is excellent. He embodies innocent childhood and the adventure that comes with it. He's an 11 year old actor, holding his own against screen veterans such as Ciarán Hinds and Judi Dench (both fantastic as always).
Other than Buddy, most of the heavy lifting is undertaken by the mother, played by Caitriona Balfe, who really deserves an Academy Nomination for her role here. Jamie Dornan also stars, who proved to be a pleasant surprise for me, only knowing him from the obvious, and is a welcome addition to an all round stellar cast. Throughout this, the narrative touches upon loss and loneliness, and the moments of life that manage to be bittersweet.
Belfast is a sometimes heartwarming, powerful, occasionally funny, and often melancholy tale told with a lot of love and care. Kenneth Branagh has delivered a slice of cinematic gold.
It's visual style is both stunning and simple, and is brimming with plenty of striking imagery.
It's themes are rich. The setting explores the civil unrest between Protestants and Catholics in 1960s Belfast. This turbulent moment in time is a constant presence for sure, but the main bulk of the narrative deals with a working class family who are struggling with debt, and are looking to potentially relocate to England in light of the city wide violence. The very heart of the story though is found in Buddy, the young son of the family who is dealing with growing up and not wanting to leave. Buddy's actor, Jude Hill, is excellent. He embodies innocent childhood and the adventure that comes with it. He's an 11 year old actor, holding his own against screen veterans such as Ciarán Hinds and Judi Dench (both fantastic as always).
Other than Buddy, most of the heavy lifting is undertaken by the mother, played by Caitriona Balfe, who really deserves an Academy Nomination for her role here. Jamie Dornan also stars, who proved to be a pleasant surprise for me, only knowing him from the obvious, and is a welcome addition to an all round stellar cast. Throughout this, the narrative touches upon loss and loneliness, and the moments of life that manage to be bittersweet.
Belfast is a sometimes heartwarming, powerful, occasionally funny, and often melancholy tale told with a lot of love and care. Kenneth Branagh has delivered a slice of cinematic gold.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Aug 26, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is the 9th film by Quinton Tarantino. Set in 1969 the film follows Rick Dolton, an actor whose career is on it's way down and his stunt double and friend Cliff Booth. Although this is a Tarantino movie it is not an action movie but more of a ‘slice of life’ movie with some action scenes.
Like all Tarantino movies, when there is no action, and there is very little action, the film crawls at a slow pace with lots of set up, dialog and driving meaning that nothing much happens for the first hour and a half. This time is used to set up the characters and the three intertwining time lines; The main one with Rick and Cliff, one that follows Sharon Tate and one that follows the Manson family.
As with most Tarantino film’s the narrative isn't linear with a lot of Rick’s back story being told by flashbacks and clips from films and T.V. shows, both real and fictional.
I have said that this is not an action film but it does have a few violent scenes, including people getting burnt with a flame thrower. The film culminates with the Manson family's murder of Karen Tate and Roman Polanski, however, as with Inglorious Bas****ds the film goes off on a different tangent from what really happened.
There are a few ‘meta' moments in ‘Once upon a time in Hollywood’ including a moment where Rick is reading a book that is echoing his life and other moments where Rick and Cliff interact with other real actors, most of whom don't play themselves (partly because some of the real actors are dead) creating and oddly unreal atmosphere.
Like all Tarantino movies, when there is no action, and there is very little action, the film crawls at a slow pace with lots of set up, dialog and driving meaning that nothing much happens for the first hour and a half. This time is used to set up the characters and the three intertwining time lines; The main one with Rick and Cliff, one that follows Sharon Tate and one that follows the Manson family.
As with most Tarantino film’s the narrative isn't linear with a lot of Rick’s back story being told by flashbacks and clips from films and T.V. shows, both real and fictional.
I have said that this is not an action film but it does have a few violent scenes, including people getting burnt with a flame thrower. The film culminates with the Manson family's murder of Karen Tate and Roman Polanski, however, as with Inglorious Bas****ds the film goes off on a different tangent from what really happened.
There are a few ‘meta' moments in ‘Once upon a time in Hollywood’ including a moment where Rick is reading a book that is echoing his life and other moments where Rick and Cliff interact with other real actors, most of whom don't play themselves (partly because some of the real actors are dead) creating and oddly unreal atmosphere.
A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing
Book
Barbara Unkovi? is a keen and perceptive observer of the human condition, as her previous...
Amy Norman (1042 KP) rated Dead to Me in TV
May 17, 2020
I 'accidentally' watched Season 1 in a day, and have just done the same with Season 2 😬
I put Season 1 on as a whim, and it was not what I expected at all, I was pleasantly surprised.
It has the witty gritty humour of older programs like 'Dexter', it touches on some emotional subjects but I wouldn't say it will bring you to tears.
It is more slice of life, as it touches on those subjects with a dark humour you will find yourself relating to.
It was refreshing to see a strong female lead cast, where it just felt like the norm, sometimes programs can push that agenda a bit too hard.
The balance of the two female leads is perfect in their oddly formed symbiotic relationship, and felt a bit closer to reality than other false female friendships you see on TV.
The way the story unfolds is brilliant, and well paced. You will feel those 'oh no' moments, and wonder what will happen next with a sense of dread.
Prepare for almost each episode to be a cliff hanger, or WTF just happened, which will draw you into the next episode.
'Dead to Me' is certainly not what you think it is going to be, and is definitely worth a watch.
P.S. it also makes great use of swearing 😅
I put Season 1 on as a whim, and it was not what I expected at all, I was pleasantly surprised.
It has the witty gritty humour of older programs like 'Dexter', it touches on some emotional subjects but I wouldn't say it will bring you to tears.
It is more slice of life, as it touches on those subjects with a dark humour you will find yourself relating to.
It was refreshing to see a strong female lead cast, where it just felt like the norm, sometimes programs can push that agenda a bit too hard.
The balance of the two female leads is perfect in their oddly formed symbiotic relationship, and felt a bit closer to reality than other false female friendships you see on TV.
The way the story unfolds is brilliant, and well paced. You will feel those 'oh no' moments, and wonder what will happen next with a sense of dread.
Prepare for almost each episode to be a cliff hanger, or WTF just happened, which will draw you into the next episode.
'Dead to Me' is certainly not what you think it is going to be, and is definitely worth a watch.
P.S. it also makes great use of swearing 😅
Justin Patchett (42 KP) rated Roma (2018) in Movies
Mar 3, 2019
Caught in a bad Roma
Contains spoilers, click to show
It’s been a long while since I watched a film deserving of a truly, harshly negative review. I have gotten so close so many times, and I’ll be damned if Netflix hadn’t gotten close to earning that with the fridge-logic that ruined Bird Box. Even Bird Box, though, feels enjoyable in retrospect compared to another Netflix exclusive: Alfonso Cuarón’s Roma.
Since I’m in a clear minority on this film, I feel obligated to preemptively address some common criticisms. If Roma had been produced in English, presented in color and with any score, it couldn’t fix the fact that I simply dislike Roma’s genre. Sure, I’ve liked slice-of-life drama films, and modern period pieces do fine by me. Pretentious Oscar-farming arthouse flicks like this, though, never win my praise.
Roma follows Cleo, a housemaid in Mexico City. Cleo has gotten pregnant and the presumed father, Fermín, leaves her to buy cigarettes before the baby’s even born. Her employer, Sofía, is dealing with a cheating spouse. What follows is two hours of both of these women marginally helping each other with their respective situations. As slice-of-life films do.
Since it's a slice-of-life film, much of the story just basically happens. You'll remember a scene here or there that happened, even if it was ultimately insignificant. In one scene for instance, Cleo goes to confront the baby daddy, who’s at a huge martial arts class. She spectates and proves to be the only one able to perform a certain yoga pose. Which is important because it helped add another few minutes to the film.
Cleo goes into labor not long after this confrontation, but her daughter ends up being stillborn. This all happens in the midst of the Corpus Christi Massacre. What the heck was the Corpus Christi Massacre, you may ask? According to this film, it was a brutal inconvenience on Cleo’s way to the hospital after her water breaks. This actual historical event simply happens and is never addressed for one second more. You know, just like in Titanic where the shipwreck just makes things inconvenient for Rose and Jack.
The last major scene in the film comes when Sofía invites Cleo to come with her family on a trip to the beach, not as staff but to help Cleo cope with the tragedy of losing her child. While they’re there, Sofía leaves the children in Cleo’s care for two freaking minutes, and two of the kids nearly drown. Cleo, though, can’t swim, and so she stands out in the water as the kids rescue each other. And that's about as close as Roma gets to a cohesive plot. Cleo only came with them to help her grieving, which meant she could be there to be powerless while her employer’s kids save each other’s lives. Bad things happen to us, the film teaches, so that good things can coincidentally happen in our proximity.
In fact, coincidence seems to be the running theme, here. Remember the Corpus Christi Massacre? No? What if I call it “the scene where Cleo goes into labor”? Maybe that helps? Fermín briefly held Cleo at gunpoint in the middle of it. Again, mere coincidence. Just like it’s a mere coincidence that she goes into labor the same day as a massacre that killed 120 people. As coincidences do.
Roma isn’t an aggressively bad film. There are a rare few moments within Roma’s 2-hour runtime where you think, “I can see that clip showing up during a Facebook video binge,” but again: These are moments more rare than our current president ordering a rare steak. That rarity has everything to do with the fact that the movie has so few moments, at all. The rest is shots that linger too long from angles that repeat themselves all too often. It’s like Cuarón asked someone, “What does a movie like Juno need to be better?” They responded, “Nothing.” So Cuarón packed Roma with nothing.
Which brings up one of my biggest criticisms of Roma: The cinematography is bland. Cuarón shot practically the entire film on one camera, set a specific distance from the subject, and kept takes running as longer than they should have, padding out a short-film’s worth of content to feature length. It’s bland cinematography that somehow earned an Oscar for Best Cinematography.
Gravity showed us what Cuarón was capable of. Beyond bringing a seemingly authentic view of space to the big screen, Gravity offered variety. Yes, the huge collision scene in Gravity takes on the feel of a one-take scene, but even then, the camera moves with the action. And if your attention moves away from the foreground the shot, you’re able to see other important things going on. With Roma, though, your foreground is your film. Period. And to be sure, you'll be kept at arm's length from that foreground at all times, both metaphorically and cinematically.
There's a number of reasons why Roma wasn't the Best Picture, this year. Gravity proved that Roma is not Cuarón’s best film. Bo Burnham–yes, that Bo Burnham–wrote and directed a better slice-of-life film with Eighth Grade. And Roma might not even be the past year’s best black-and-white film; I dare suggest that Cold War may have been better.
To give it the credit it’s due, Roma’s cast rightly earned nominations for their performances. Yalitza Aparicio and Marina de Tavira earned Best Actress nominations for their roles, and for their part, their performances were authentic as can be. It's the least the Academy could do for having them endure Cuarón's lengthy takes.
But now that I've given it credit, I demand my time back for the scene of Fermín going Star Wars Kid meets Full Monty.
Since I’m in a clear minority on this film, I feel obligated to preemptively address some common criticisms. If Roma had been produced in English, presented in color and with any score, it couldn’t fix the fact that I simply dislike Roma’s genre. Sure, I’ve liked slice-of-life drama films, and modern period pieces do fine by me. Pretentious Oscar-farming arthouse flicks like this, though, never win my praise.
Roma follows Cleo, a housemaid in Mexico City. Cleo has gotten pregnant and the presumed father, Fermín, leaves her to buy cigarettes before the baby’s even born. Her employer, Sofía, is dealing with a cheating spouse. What follows is two hours of both of these women marginally helping each other with their respective situations. As slice-of-life films do.
Since it's a slice-of-life film, much of the story just basically happens. You'll remember a scene here or there that happened, even if it was ultimately insignificant. In one scene for instance, Cleo goes to confront the baby daddy, who’s at a huge martial arts class. She spectates and proves to be the only one able to perform a certain yoga pose. Which is important because it helped add another few minutes to the film.
Cleo goes into labor not long after this confrontation, but her daughter ends up being stillborn. This all happens in the midst of the Corpus Christi Massacre. What the heck was the Corpus Christi Massacre, you may ask? According to this film, it was a brutal inconvenience on Cleo’s way to the hospital after her water breaks. This actual historical event simply happens and is never addressed for one second more. You know, just like in Titanic where the shipwreck just makes things inconvenient for Rose and Jack.
The last major scene in the film comes when Sofía invites Cleo to come with her family on a trip to the beach, not as staff but to help Cleo cope with the tragedy of losing her child. While they’re there, Sofía leaves the children in Cleo’s care for two freaking minutes, and two of the kids nearly drown. Cleo, though, can’t swim, and so she stands out in the water as the kids rescue each other. And that's about as close as Roma gets to a cohesive plot. Cleo only came with them to help her grieving, which meant she could be there to be powerless while her employer’s kids save each other’s lives. Bad things happen to us, the film teaches, so that good things can coincidentally happen in our proximity.
In fact, coincidence seems to be the running theme, here. Remember the Corpus Christi Massacre? No? What if I call it “the scene where Cleo goes into labor”? Maybe that helps? Fermín briefly held Cleo at gunpoint in the middle of it. Again, mere coincidence. Just like it’s a mere coincidence that she goes into labor the same day as a massacre that killed 120 people. As coincidences do.
Roma isn’t an aggressively bad film. There are a rare few moments within Roma’s 2-hour runtime where you think, “I can see that clip showing up during a Facebook video binge,” but again: These are moments more rare than our current president ordering a rare steak. That rarity has everything to do with the fact that the movie has so few moments, at all. The rest is shots that linger too long from angles that repeat themselves all too often. It’s like Cuarón asked someone, “What does a movie like Juno need to be better?” They responded, “Nothing.” So Cuarón packed Roma with nothing.
Which brings up one of my biggest criticisms of Roma: The cinematography is bland. Cuarón shot practically the entire film on one camera, set a specific distance from the subject, and kept takes running as longer than they should have, padding out a short-film’s worth of content to feature length. It’s bland cinematography that somehow earned an Oscar for Best Cinematography.
Gravity showed us what Cuarón was capable of. Beyond bringing a seemingly authentic view of space to the big screen, Gravity offered variety. Yes, the huge collision scene in Gravity takes on the feel of a one-take scene, but even then, the camera moves with the action. And if your attention moves away from the foreground the shot, you’re able to see other important things going on. With Roma, though, your foreground is your film. Period. And to be sure, you'll be kept at arm's length from that foreground at all times, both metaphorically and cinematically.
There's a number of reasons why Roma wasn't the Best Picture, this year. Gravity proved that Roma is not Cuarón’s best film. Bo Burnham–yes, that Bo Burnham–wrote and directed a better slice-of-life film with Eighth Grade. And Roma might not even be the past year’s best black-and-white film; I dare suggest that Cold War may have been better.
To give it the credit it’s due, Roma’s cast rightly earned nominations for their performances. Yalitza Aparicio and Marina de Tavira earned Best Actress nominations for their roles, and for their part, their performances were authentic as can be. It's the least the Academy could do for having them endure Cuarón's lengthy takes.
But now that I've given it credit, I demand my time back for the scene of Fermín going Star Wars Kid meets Full Monty.