Search
Search results
Flowerpower (154 KP) rated Toy Story (1995) in Movies
Apr 24, 2017
Classic Pixar. (4 more)
Superb entertainment for all the family.
Irresistible characters.
Great fun, lots of humour and a must watch, even now, over 22 years after first release.
Tom Hanks as Woody.
The film sports a provocative and appealing story that's every bit the equal of this technical achievement.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Fighting with My Family (2019) in Movies
Feb 28, 2019
Heavily fictionalised women's-entertainment-wrestling biopic is kept very watchable by solid if familiar structure and a clutch of strong performances. Not really the pure comedy that the trailer suggests it may be; the more serious strands of the plot are surprisingly effective - not really the Dwayne Johnson movie that the publicity material also implies, as a high percentage of his on-screen contribution is in the trailer.
Works pretty well as a sports movie, hitting all the right beats; tries to fudge the fact that entertainment-wrestling isn't strictly speaking sport (i.e., the results of the matches are scripted), not especially successfully. Fun to watch anyway; Florence Pugh carries the movie effortlessly and doesn't even need to go into high gear to do so.
Works pretty well as a sports movie, hitting all the right beats; tries to fudge the fact that entertainment-wrestling isn't strictly speaking sport (i.e., the results of the matches are scripted), not especially successfully. Fun to watch anyway; Florence Pugh carries the movie effortlessly and doesn't even need to go into high gear to do so.
Lee KM Pallatina (951 KP) rated Impact Wrestling in TV
Apr 5, 2020
Hard to Kill
2002 - the beginning
Founded by Jeff and Jerry Jarrett in 2002, the company was known as TNA it was officially changed to IMPACT (the company's weekly named staple show) in 2018.
Beginning as NWA/TNA Total Nonstop Action being associated with the National Wrestling Alliance (NWA), though not as a merged promotion.
In 2004 the company dropped the NWA co. Branding & ran soley as TNA (Total Nonstop Action Wrestling, but continued to use the NWA World Heavyweight and Tag Team championships in agreement with the NWA.
2007 - Becoming their own
both parties parted ways and the company created the TNA World Heavyweight and TNA World Tag Team championships. The promotion was purchased by Anthem at the beginning of 2017 and, in March of that year, was fully rebranded under its current name after its main television series.
Falling on hard times -
From its inception, the promotion had been considered the second-largest in the United States behind WWE.
Impact was viewed by some to have fallen behind longtime rival Ring of Honor in 2017, with the loss of their U.S. television contract with Spike in 2014, as well as monetary and personnel issues, being noted as factors to their decline.
2017 - Anthem sports & entertainment purchase TNA!
January 4th 2017, Anthem sports announced they had bought Majority interest in TNA & had formed Anthem wrestling exhibitions LLC. Having already owned Fight Network, a 24/7 multiplatform service dedicated to complete coverage of combat sports, TNA was a perfect fit that was sure to attain more attention.
Soon after, the TNA name was dropped & the promotion would simply be known as IMPACT WRESTLING!
2018 - Rebirth
Impact has since made a fantastic recovery & although has not quite reached the height of it's earlier Glory days, it has sustained an international television distribution with Anthems majority purchase of AXS TV, which subsequently began carrying Impact programming.
Though, with the formation of All Elite Wrestling (AEW) that year, and that promotion's high-profile U.S television deal with TNT (which is seen in more households than AXS), Impact is still viewed as a smaller promotion by comparison.
Founded by Jeff and Jerry Jarrett in 2002, the company was known as TNA it was officially changed to IMPACT (the company's weekly named staple show) in 2018.
Beginning as NWA/TNA Total Nonstop Action being associated with the National Wrestling Alliance (NWA), though not as a merged promotion.
In 2004 the company dropped the NWA co. Branding & ran soley as TNA (Total Nonstop Action Wrestling, but continued to use the NWA World Heavyweight and Tag Team championships in agreement with the NWA.
2007 - Becoming their own
both parties parted ways and the company created the TNA World Heavyweight and TNA World Tag Team championships. The promotion was purchased by Anthem at the beginning of 2017 and, in March of that year, was fully rebranded under its current name after its main television series.
Falling on hard times -
From its inception, the promotion had been considered the second-largest in the United States behind WWE.
Impact was viewed by some to have fallen behind longtime rival Ring of Honor in 2017, with the loss of their U.S. television contract with Spike in 2014, as well as monetary and personnel issues, being noted as factors to their decline.
2017 - Anthem sports & entertainment purchase TNA!
January 4th 2017, Anthem sports announced they had bought Majority interest in TNA & had formed Anthem wrestling exhibitions LLC. Having already owned Fight Network, a 24/7 multiplatform service dedicated to complete coverage of combat sports, TNA was a perfect fit that was sure to attain more attention.
Soon after, the TNA name was dropped & the promotion would simply be known as IMPACT WRESTLING!
2018 - Rebirth
Impact has since made a fantastic recovery & although has not quite reached the height of it's earlier Glory days, it has sustained an international television distribution with Anthems majority purchase of AXS TV, which subsequently began carrying Impact programming.
Though, with the formation of All Elite Wrestling (AEW) that year, and that promotion's high-profile U.S television deal with TNT (which is seen in more households than AXS), Impact is still viewed as a smaller promotion by comparison.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Oct 21, 2019
Fun and Exhilarating
War is coming between Earth and the underwater world of Atlantis. Arthur Curry (Jason Momoa), half-human half Atlantean, seeks to end the war before it spirals out of control. Despite its shortcomings, I’ll get this out of the way now: Aquaman absolutely rocks.
Acting: 7
Beginning: 10
Characters: 8
Arthur’s character grew on me as the movie progressed. He’s a tough guy, no doubt, but I also appreciated his honesty in expressing fear at the same time. He wasn’t reckless, rather he was someone that fully understood the stakes. Despite this clearly being an action blockbuster, I appreciate the efforts in trying to make the characters fun and exhilarating.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 8
This movie won’t make you think. In fact, there are a number of times where it feels designed to do just the opposite. It’s memorability comes in the fact that I can honestly say I’ve never really seen anything like it. The scenes, sequences, and setpieces try really hard and it’s very endearing. The visuals are beautiful particularly during the underwater battle sequences. Just damn beautiful to watch. It’s Finding Nemo on steroids.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Didn’t linger, ended at exactly the right time with something feasible and simple. A great finish for an overall great experience.
Overall: 92
If you’re a fan of sports, you might relate to this analogy: Ever watch a playoff series and the underdog wins the first game? You say to yourself, “Meh, it’s one game. They’ll lose the next four.” Then they win the next game and another game. Your eyes start to get big as you realize, “They might actually do this!” DC, I’m looking at you. I’m rooting so hard that you guys keep the train rolling. Aquaman is a hit.
Acting: 7
Beginning: 10
Characters: 8
Arthur’s character grew on me as the movie progressed. He’s a tough guy, no doubt, but I also appreciated his honesty in expressing fear at the same time. He wasn’t reckless, rather he was someone that fully understood the stakes. Despite this clearly being an action blockbuster, I appreciate the efforts in trying to make the characters fun and exhilarating.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 8
This movie won’t make you think. In fact, there are a number of times where it feels designed to do just the opposite. It’s memorability comes in the fact that I can honestly say I’ve never really seen anything like it. The scenes, sequences, and setpieces try really hard and it’s very endearing. The visuals are beautiful particularly during the underwater battle sequences. Just damn beautiful to watch. It’s Finding Nemo on steroids.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Didn’t linger, ended at exactly the right time with something feasible and simple. A great finish for an overall great experience.
Overall: 92
If you’re a fan of sports, you might relate to this analogy: Ever watch a playoff series and the underdog wins the first game? You say to yourself, “Meh, it’s one game. They’ll lose the next four.” Then they win the next game and another game. Your eyes start to get big as you realize, “They might actually do this!” DC, I’m looking at you. I’m rooting so hard that you guys keep the train rolling. Aquaman is a hit.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Network (1976) in Movies
Feb 9, 2018
All time classic
"I'M MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!"
One of the most famous lines in film history is as impactful today as it was when it was first uttered by fictitious news anchor Howard Beale in Paddy Chayefsky's (seemingly) parody of where TV and TV news is heading, 1976's NETWORK.
The astonishing thing about this terrific motion picture is how prescient it is. News is now entertainment. Appeal to the disaffected masses. Drive our message to the viewers. Be provocative. The 6:00 news had "less than 1 minute of hard news, the rest was sex, scandal, brutal crime sports, children with incurable diseases and lost puppies."
Sound familiar? This isn't from today, it came from this movie that was made 42 years ago as a cautionary tale of what might happen.
Besides the social ramifications, how does this film hold up? Quite well, indeed. A rare 10 star BankofMarquis film. Starting with the great Paddy Chayefsky's Oscar winning Screenplay. This was the capper on a brilliant career from Chayefsky - who also won Oscar's for his screenplay for 1972's THE HOSPITAL (I'll have to check that one out) and 1956's MARTY.
What does a terrific screenplay do? It attracts top-level talent clamoring to be in this - and they all deliver. Start with Faye Dunaway who won the Lead Actress Oscar for her role as Entertainment Head Diane Christensen - a driven, work hard, play hard individual who has the idea to make news "entertainment". Lost in the fog of time (and MOMMIE DEAREST) is the fact that in the mid-1970's, Dunaway was, perhaps, the greatest leading actress of the day and her skills are in sharp display in this film.
Joining Dunaway in terrific supporting turns are Robert Duvall, following his turns as Tom Hagen in GODFATHER I and II, as network head, Frank Hackett, Ned Beatty as Ned Jennings, President of the company that owns the network - he has a speech towards the tail end of this film that is as good - both in performance and in the way that it is shot - as anything put upon the screen - it was masterful. Speaking of masterful, Beatrice Straight won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress in one of the shortest performances to ever win. She is in this film for about 6 minutes in total - but she won her Oscar for a 5 minute scene that is, most definately Oscar-worthy.
And then there are the leading men. William Holden gives one of the last great performances of his extraordinary career as the "voice of reason in this film". He is our everyman caught up in the bizarre, absurd circumstances that evolve around him. It is his effort to try to make sense of this insanity that jumps off the screen. Holden was, deservedly, nominated for a Best Actor in a Leading Role Oscar, but lost (rightfully so) to Peter Finch's turn as crazed newsman turned prophet, Howard Beale. His maniacal (but not over the top) turn is one for the ages. If you do nothing else, see this film for his performance (but there is so, so much more to love here). Unfortunately, Finch passed away from a heart attack in between his Oscar nomination and win, and was the first posthumous winner in an acting role (sadly, Heath Ledger would join this "club" years later).
Finally, enough cannot be said about Sidney Lumet's direction. A movie like this would not succeed without a sure, steady and seasoned hand at the helm - and this is how I would describe Lumet's direction. He lets the camera roll and lets the actors and the screenplay take center stage, not drawing attention away, but adding to the themes of the film throughout - especially in Beatty's speech at the end.
NETWORK was nominated for (but did not win) the Oscar for Best Film of 1976. Did it lose out to other nominees ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN or TAXI DRIVER? Nope, it lost to ROCKY.
Let that sink in.
If you get a chance to watch (or rewatch) this film, I highly recommend you do so. For me, it was GREAT to watch this on the big screen with an audience, one of the reasons I love - and will continue to attend - the SECRET CINEMA series of films.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
One of the most famous lines in film history is as impactful today as it was when it was first uttered by fictitious news anchor Howard Beale in Paddy Chayefsky's (seemingly) parody of where TV and TV news is heading, 1976's NETWORK.
The astonishing thing about this terrific motion picture is how prescient it is. News is now entertainment. Appeal to the disaffected masses. Drive our message to the viewers. Be provocative. The 6:00 news had "less than 1 minute of hard news, the rest was sex, scandal, brutal crime sports, children with incurable diseases and lost puppies."
Sound familiar? This isn't from today, it came from this movie that was made 42 years ago as a cautionary tale of what might happen.
Besides the social ramifications, how does this film hold up? Quite well, indeed. A rare 10 star BankofMarquis film. Starting with the great Paddy Chayefsky's Oscar winning Screenplay. This was the capper on a brilliant career from Chayefsky - who also won Oscar's for his screenplay for 1972's THE HOSPITAL (I'll have to check that one out) and 1956's MARTY.
What does a terrific screenplay do? It attracts top-level talent clamoring to be in this - and they all deliver. Start with Faye Dunaway who won the Lead Actress Oscar for her role as Entertainment Head Diane Christensen - a driven, work hard, play hard individual who has the idea to make news "entertainment". Lost in the fog of time (and MOMMIE DEAREST) is the fact that in the mid-1970's, Dunaway was, perhaps, the greatest leading actress of the day and her skills are in sharp display in this film.
Joining Dunaway in terrific supporting turns are Robert Duvall, following his turns as Tom Hagen in GODFATHER I and II, as network head, Frank Hackett, Ned Beatty as Ned Jennings, President of the company that owns the network - he has a speech towards the tail end of this film that is as good - both in performance and in the way that it is shot - as anything put upon the screen - it was masterful. Speaking of masterful, Beatrice Straight won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress in one of the shortest performances to ever win. She is in this film for about 6 minutes in total - but she won her Oscar for a 5 minute scene that is, most definately Oscar-worthy.
And then there are the leading men. William Holden gives one of the last great performances of his extraordinary career as the "voice of reason in this film". He is our everyman caught up in the bizarre, absurd circumstances that evolve around him. It is his effort to try to make sense of this insanity that jumps off the screen. Holden was, deservedly, nominated for a Best Actor in a Leading Role Oscar, but lost (rightfully so) to Peter Finch's turn as crazed newsman turned prophet, Howard Beale. His maniacal (but not over the top) turn is one for the ages. If you do nothing else, see this film for his performance (but there is so, so much more to love here). Unfortunately, Finch passed away from a heart attack in between his Oscar nomination and win, and was the first posthumous winner in an acting role (sadly, Heath Ledger would join this "club" years later).
Finally, enough cannot be said about Sidney Lumet's direction. A movie like this would not succeed without a sure, steady and seasoned hand at the helm - and this is how I would describe Lumet's direction. He lets the camera roll and lets the actors and the screenplay take center stage, not drawing attention away, but adding to the themes of the film throughout - especially in Beatty's speech at the end.
NETWORK was nominated for (but did not win) the Oscar for Best Film of 1976. Did it lose out to other nominees ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN or TAXI DRIVER? Nope, it lost to ROCKY.
Let that sink in.
If you get a chance to watch (or rewatch) this film, I highly recommend you do so. For me, it was GREAT to watch this on the big screen with an audience, one of the reasons I love - and will continue to attend - the SECRET CINEMA series of films.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated 2 Fast 2 Furious (2003) in Movies
Mar 11, 2020
Faster Than the Newer Films...But Also Much Worse
Brian O’Connor (Paul Walker) tries to redeem himself from the first film by taking out a gang of car enthusiasts.
Acting: 4
Beginning: 6
Characters: 0
These characters are about as interesting as an empty takeout box. Not only is there no kind of depth whatsoever, I never really liked the characters to begin with. I can usually deal with characters not growing if they’re at least interesting, but 2 Fast 2 Furious gives us neither. The cars have more characters than the characters themselves. Might has well let them do the talking instead.
Cinematography/Visuals: 4
Speaking from the future, the car chases/race don’t nearly have the same impact as the latter films. In comparison, they are boring and stale and aren’t enough to carry the movie. Overall it’s shot in gimmicky fashion with lots of slowmo and near-misses. It is painful to watch at times.
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 5
Sometimes a movie can be so bad that it keeps your interest solely for the fact that you want to see what crappity crap crap is going to happen next. I fell asleep on more than one occasion which is a horrible thing to say about a movie that revolves around car chases. There was little in the way of redemption here.
Memorability: 5
One line made me give this score above a zero, a line I will always remember for the rest of my days. At one point, Walker almost put me in a casket by saying, “I said forget about it, cuh.” This line has since become the source of a number of memes and Youtube clips and I can still burst into laughter if I were to watch it right now. Regarding everything else about the movie? Forget about it, cuh.
Pace: 9
If I’m holding it to the standard of the latter movies, I do have to acknowledge that the movie gets through its plot at a fairly quick pace. It is easily one of the shortest in the franchise as almost all of the others top two hours. Yes, it still put me to sleep, but only because the content sucked.
Plot: 4
Sports a story that my six-year-old nephew could have come up with. Barely believable, it has holes inside of holes. I almost wish they had just said, “Screw it. Just look at the cool cars.”
Resolution: 5
Overall: 49
Dumpster fire. Burning poop. A fly walking on a windowsill with only one wing. These are all things that are more interesting than 2 Fast 2 Furious. Talk about a nightmare.
Acting: 4
Beginning: 6
Characters: 0
These characters are about as interesting as an empty takeout box. Not only is there no kind of depth whatsoever, I never really liked the characters to begin with. I can usually deal with characters not growing if they’re at least interesting, but 2 Fast 2 Furious gives us neither. The cars have more characters than the characters themselves. Might has well let them do the talking instead.
Cinematography/Visuals: 4
Speaking from the future, the car chases/race don’t nearly have the same impact as the latter films. In comparison, they are boring and stale and aren’t enough to carry the movie. Overall it’s shot in gimmicky fashion with lots of slowmo and near-misses. It is painful to watch at times.
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 5
Sometimes a movie can be so bad that it keeps your interest solely for the fact that you want to see what crappity crap crap is going to happen next. I fell asleep on more than one occasion which is a horrible thing to say about a movie that revolves around car chases. There was little in the way of redemption here.
Memorability: 5
One line made me give this score above a zero, a line I will always remember for the rest of my days. At one point, Walker almost put me in a casket by saying, “I said forget about it, cuh.” This line has since become the source of a number of memes and Youtube clips and I can still burst into laughter if I were to watch it right now. Regarding everything else about the movie? Forget about it, cuh.
Pace: 9
If I’m holding it to the standard of the latter movies, I do have to acknowledge that the movie gets through its plot at a fairly quick pace. It is easily one of the shortest in the franchise as almost all of the others top two hours. Yes, it still put me to sleep, but only because the content sucked.
Plot: 4
Sports a story that my six-year-old nephew could have come up with. Barely believable, it has holes inside of holes. I almost wish they had just said, “Screw it. Just look at the cool cars.”
Resolution: 5
Overall: 49
Dumpster fire. Burning poop. A fly walking on a windowsill with only one wing. These are all things that are more interesting than 2 Fast 2 Furious. Talk about a nightmare.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Drive Angry (2011) in Movies
Mar 13, 2020
What Happens When a Movie Meets Zero Effort
Ok, let’s not waste time with this: Drive Angry is easily one of the worst movies I’ve ever watched in my life. To be more specific, third worst behind the awful 1994 version of Fantastic Four (look that doozy up when you have a chance) and Battlefield Earth where we got to see John Travolta sporting dreads. Yes, folks, Drive Angry is bad in every single way imaginable. It is a movie you will long to forget. As far as the plot is concerned, there is a lot I tried to blot out about this movie but I’m pretty sure it’s about a man who has returned from Hell in a car he stole from the set of Fast and the Furious to prevent the sacrifice of his granddaughter by an evil cult. You say what now?
Acting: 5
I feel like these actors knew after the first week of filming that this was going to be a shit-show so they all mailed it in. Nicholas Cage, star of said shit-show, delivers his lines with the excitement of someone getting a flu shot. I won’t linger on this point, but let’s just say I’ve seen the cast of a Hallmark movie do better than these lame-duck performances.
Beginning: 1
Much like the middle and the end, the beginning is an awful disaster. It sports one of the worst setups I think I have ever seen for a movie. After ten minutes, I knew I was in for a world of pain.
Characters: 2
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Honestly, the visuals could be a lot worse. There were some decent moments particularly when things slowed down that were bordering on looking pretty cool. While a lot of action sequences were pretty cheesy it was nice to see they at least put in a smidgeon of effort with the special effects.
Conflict: 5
Entertainment Value: 2
Memorability: 0
After the movie was over, I instantly started thinking, “Is there a time machine that I can use to get part of my life back?” There is absolutely no value in this movie, nothing to remember with the exception of the absolutely horrid filmmaking. I am still appalled this project made it through completion.
Pace: 0
Plot: 0
Story? We don’t need no stinking story! Oh, how I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during this pitch meeting. It seriously made my head hurt. They try and give you a story then throw it all out the window with repeated implausible occurrences that beat you into submission.
Resolution: 1
Overall: 24
In light of the Black Mamba Kobe Bryant’s passing, the number 24 should represent greatness. Not with my scoring of Drive Angry. Unless, of course, I’m referring to the greatness of sucking. If that’s the case, then yes, this movie is indeed great. Great and terrible.
Acting: 5
I feel like these actors knew after the first week of filming that this was going to be a shit-show so they all mailed it in. Nicholas Cage, star of said shit-show, delivers his lines with the excitement of someone getting a flu shot. I won’t linger on this point, but let’s just say I’ve seen the cast of a Hallmark movie do better than these lame-duck performances.
Beginning: 1
Much like the middle and the end, the beginning is an awful disaster. It sports one of the worst setups I think I have ever seen for a movie. After ten minutes, I knew I was in for a world of pain.
Characters: 2
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Honestly, the visuals could be a lot worse. There were some decent moments particularly when things slowed down that were bordering on looking pretty cool. While a lot of action sequences were pretty cheesy it was nice to see they at least put in a smidgeon of effort with the special effects.
Conflict: 5
Entertainment Value: 2
Memorability: 0
After the movie was over, I instantly started thinking, “Is there a time machine that I can use to get part of my life back?” There is absolutely no value in this movie, nothing to remember with the exception of the absolutely horrid filmmaking. I am still appalled this project made it through completion.
Pace: 0
Plot: 0
Story? We don’t need no stinking story! Oh, how I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during this pitch meeting. It seriously made my head hurt. They try and give you a story then throw it all out the window with repeated implausible occurrences that beat you into submission.
Resolution: 1
Overall: 24
In light of the Black Mamba Kobe Bryant’s passing, the number 24 should represent greatness. Not with my scoring of Drive Angry. Unless, of course, I’m referring to the greatness of sucking. If that’s the case, then yes, this movie is indeed great. Great and terrible.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Express (2008) in Movies
Aug 13, 2020
I Tried
I was rooting something fierce for The Express. Sure the trailer looked cheesy, but I wanted to give it a chance. And give it a chance I did. I gave it every chance in the book and it got more painful with every second. It follows the true story of Ernie Davis and his journey to make it to the NFL .
Acting: 7
There are some solid performances for the most part but it’s unfortunately sprinkled in with what I call Hallmark Acting. It’s painfully obvious that not everyone is on the same wavelength here. Fortunately, Rob Brown is strong as Ernie Davis which makes things a bit more bearable throughout the movie.
Beginning: 3
Very slow start, mainly because I didn’t really understand what they were trying to establish with the story. Ernie is narrating, but there are a jumble of images to start and you have to make a push to piece things together. It’s also a very cliche start to a story.
Characters: 10
I did really enjoy Ernie’s character which made the movie better for me since he was the focal point. I also really appreciate his grandparents in the story, particularly his grandfather played by Charles S. Dutton. They are full of love as they make a push to steer Ernie in the right direction. Shout out to Dennis Quaid as well playing the role of the gruff coach Ben Schwartzwalder. He had a few scenes that were definitely made brighter because of him.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 3
Even without knowing the story (as I didn’t) you can kind of guess and see where things are going. I didn’t feel like they did a solid enough job of showing the obstacles Ernie had to overcome. According to this, he was a beast early on and basically never looked back from there. That’s all good and fine but it takes away from the conflict needed to drive the story.
Entertainment Value: 6
Memorability: 5
Out of all the sports movies I’ve watched, this one doesn’t even hold a candle. I get sleepy just thinking about it at times. The story is ultimately memorable, but there are no real moments or scenes that stand out above the rest.
Pace: 6
Plot: 4
Resolution: 8
Given the rest of the movie, the ending actually wasn’t all that bad. Without giving anything away it was quality closure for the story. It made me wonder why they couldn’t pull this off in the rest of the movie.
Overall: 57
The Express was doing ok for a bit and then it just got really weird. There is a scene where Ernie is out on the field and there are these strange heat shimmers. This, like a number of other things, just had no place in the movie. Given a do over of some sort, this wouldn’t be a bad story to see unfold on the screen.
Acting: 7
There are some solid performances for the most part but it’s unfortunately sprinkled in with what I call Hallmark Acting. It’s painfully obvious that not everyone is on the same wavelength here. Fortunately, Rob Brown is strong as Ernie Davis which makes things a bit more bearable throughout the movie.
Beginning: 3
Very slow start, mainly because I didn’t really understand what they were trying to establish with the story. Ernie is narrating, but there are a jumble of images to start and you have to make a push to piece things together. It’s also a very cliche start to a story.
Characters: 10
I did really enjoy Ernie’s character which made the movie better for me since he was the focal point. I also really appreciate his grandparents in the story, particularly his grandfather played by Charles S. Dutton. They are full of love as they make a push to steer Ernie in the right direction. Shout out to Dennis Quaid as well playing the role of the gruff coach Ben Schwartzwalder. He had a few scenes that were definitely made brighter because of him.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 3
Even without knowing the story (as I didn’t) you can kind of guess and see where things are going. I didn’t feel like they did a solid enough job of showing the obstacles Ernie had to overcome. According to this, he was a beast early on and basically never looked back from there. That’s all good and fine but it takes away from the conflict needed to drive the story.
Entertainment Value: 6
Memorability: 5
Out of all the sports movies I’ve watched, this one doesn’t even hold a candle. I get sleepy just thinking about it at times. The story is ultimately memorable, but there are no real moments or scenes that stand out above the rest.
Pace: 6
Plot: 4
Resolution: 8
Given the rest of the movie, the ending actually wasn’t all that bad. Without giving anything away it was quality closure for the story. It made me wonder why they couldn’t pull this off in the rest of the movie.
Overall: 57
The Express was doing ok for a bit and then it just got really weird. There is a scene where Ernie is out on the field and there are these strange heat shimmers. This, like a number of other things, just had no place in the movie. Given a do over of some sort, this wouldn’t be a bad story to see unfold on the screen.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Cinderella Man (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In the late 1920’s Jim Braddock was a boxer with a future. After many wins, he was poised to take his place as one of the greatest boxers of his time. Things took a bad turn for Jim in 1929 when he first lost a 15 round decision to Tommy Loughran, and then lost everything in the Stock Market Crash.
In the new film Cinderella Man Academy Award winner Russell Crowe stars as Jim Braddock in one of the most satisfying films in recent memory. Down and almost out, Braddock struggles to provide for his wife Mae (Renee Zellweger), and his three children. A series of hand injuries has forced Jim to resort to fighting in pick up fights, as he is unable to find work as a laborer.
Things go from bad to worse for Jim when he breaks a bone in his hand and is unable to provide entertainment for those in a local boxing match which results in the suspension of his boxing license. With his electricity turned off in the dead of winter, and his children coughing from the effects of the cold, Jim is forced to hide his injury and seek work as a day laborer to get by.
As Jim and Mae debate sending the kids to her sister in order to better provide for them, a ray of hope arises when Jim’s old manger Joe Gould (Paul Giamatti), says he has arranged a fight with a $250 payday.
Since Jim’s hand has healed, he takes the fight seeing it as a chance to get caught up on his bills. Fate steps in when in a shocking turnaround; Jim wins the fight via knock out, and captures the imagination of the local sports community. Before long, Jim is racking up win after win and improving his lot in life as he prepares for an unexpected title shot against the devastating and unbeaten Max Baer (Craig Bierko).
The fact that Baer has killed two men in the ring is a cause of great stress for Jim and Mae as she worries for the safety of her husband while Jim sees the fight as his chance to provide some financial security for his family.
Anyone who has seen the trailer can be sure that the big fight will take place, and that the underdog will find himself in a battle against overwhelming odds, but what makes Cinderella Man such a captivating film is the captivating human drama that propels the film. There have been many boxing films ranging from “Rocky” to “Raging Bull”, that have depicted the graphic action of the ring, but few have reached the depths of human drama that this film does. Jim is not looking for glory, he is simply looking to provide for his family the best way that he is able be it in the ring or hauling cargo at the docks.
Crowe is riveting as he is able to convey his characters plight to the audience without making it seem forced or heavy handed. Where Crowe truly shines is his ability to mix the emotional sequences of the film with the athletic and action filled ring sequences and not lose any of his character. Far too often actors fail to convince in one aspect when they try to mix drama and action, but Crowe easily transitions between the demands of the role proving again that he is the most gifted actor in Hollywood. The steady direction of Ron Howard keeps the film moving at a crisp pace, without allowing the story to become mired in sentiment.
The only real issue I had with the film is that the talented Zellweger is not given enough to do, as beyond doting for and worry about her family, she is not given much to do aside from stand by while the action occurs around her.
That being said Cinderella Man, is a triumph of film making, and should be a forced to contend with come Oscar season.
In the new film Cinderella Man Academy Award winner Russell Crowe stars as Jim Braddock in one of the most satisfying films in recent memory. Down and almost out, Braddock struggles to provide for his wife Mae (Renee Zellweger), and his three children. A series of hand injuries has forced Jim to resort to fighting in pick up fights, as he is unable to find work as a laborer.
Things go from bad to worse for Jim when he breaks a bone in his hand and is unable to provide entertainment for those in a local boxing match which results in the suspension of his boxing license. With his electricity turned off in the dead of winter, and his children coughing from the effects of the cold, Jim is forced to hide his injury and seek work as a day laborer to get by.
As Jim and Mae debate sending the kids to her sister in order to better provide for them, a ray of hope arises when Jim’s old manger Joe Gould (Paul Giamatti), says he has arranged a fight with a $250 payday.
Since Jim’s hand has healed, he takes the fight seeing it as a chance to get caught up on his bills. Fate steps in when in a shocking turnaround; Jim wins the fight via knock out, and captures the imagination of the local sports community. Before long, Jim is racking up win after win and improving his lot in life as he prepares for an unexpected title shot against the devastating and unbeaten Max Baer (Craig Bierko).
The fact that Baer has killed two men in the ring is a cause of great stress for Jim and Mae as she worries for the safety of her husband while Jim sees the fight as his chance to provide some financial security for his family.
Anyone who has seen the trailer can be sure that the big fight will take place, and that the underdog will find himself in a battle against overwhelming odds, but what makes Cinderella Man such a captivating film is the captivating human drama that propels the film. There have been many boxing films ranging from “Rocky” to “Raging Bull”, that have depicted the graphic action of the ring, but few have reached the depths of human drama that this film does. Jim is not looking for glory, he is simply looking to provide for his family the best way that he is able be it in the ring or hauling cargo at the docks.
Crowe is riveting as he is able to convey his characters plight to the audience without making it seem forced or heavy handed. Where Crowe truly shines is his ability to mix the emotional sequences of the film with the athletic and action filled ring sequences and not lose any of his character. Far too often actors fail to convince in one aspect when they try to mix drama and action, but Crowe easily transitions between the demands of the role proving again that he is the most gifted actor in Hollywood. The steady direction of Ron Howard keeps the film moving at a crisp pace, without allowing the story to become mired in sentiment.
The only real issue I had with the film is that the talented Zellweger is not given enough to do, as beyond doting for and worry about her family, she is not given much to do aside from stand by while the action occurs around her.
That being said Cinderella Man, is a triumph of film making, and should be a forced to contend with come Oscar season.