Search
Search results
Awix (3310 KP) rated Red Sparrow (2018) in Movies
Mar 7, 2018 (Updated Mar 7, 2018)
Stodgy and slightly bloated twisty-turny espionage thriller is made distinctive, if that's the right word, by extra added leery prurience. Beautiful Russian ballerina (played by American) is blackmailed by her uncle (Belgian) into going to elite hooker-spy school, run by terrifying matron (English). Soon she is packed off on mission to subvert rugged American CIA agent (Australian).
Now there's a discussion to be had about just how appropriate it is to be making blockbuster entertainment about Russian espionage, infiltration, and assassination these days - some would say that a taste barrier has been well and truly breached, and the depiction of the Russian state is cartoon-horrible. But surely we can agree that, at the moment if at no other time, there is something unconscionable about a movie the sine qua non of which is the depiction of an attractive young actress in various provocative situations and states of nudity. Some nastily graphic violence, too, much of it misogynistic and openly sexual. J-Law's performance is not up to the usual standard and mainly consists of doing a Rooshan oksent from behind an unflattering fringe. Competently made, but too long and too much. The kind of film you emerge from wanting to be hosed down with sheep dip. Yuck.
Now there's a discussion to be had about just how appropriate it is to be making blockbuster entertainment about Russian espionage, infiltration, and assassination these days - some would say that a taste barrier has been well and truly breached, and the depiction of the Russian state is cartoon-horrible. But surely we can agree that, at the moment if at no other time, there is something unconscionable about a movie the sine qua non of which is the depiction of an attractive young actress in various provocative situations and states of nudity. Some nastily graphic violence, too, much of it misogynistic and openly sexual. J-Law's performance is not up to the usual standard and mainly consists of doing a Rooshan oksent from behind an unflattering fringe. Competently made, but too long and too much. The kind of film you emerge from wanting to be hosed down with sheep dip. Yuck.
ClareR (5589 KP) rated The Resident in Books
Jul 26, 2020 (Updated Jul 26, 2020)
How can a thriller be both horrific and hilarious at the same time? The humour in The Resident keeps poking its head up in the most unlikely and inappropriate circumstances, and I loved it.
Thomas Brogan is a serial killer on the run, who finds an abandoned end of terrace house to hide in. He discovers that this house and the other three in the row have a shared loft space. So Brogan starts to spy on his neighbours. He has a penchant for playing games with his victims, and this is an ideal set up for him - and the secrets that he discovers are more than enough to keep him entertained.
This is such a fast paced, entertaining read, and I can well imagine it as a film. There are some very interesting twists and turns, and some real heart-in-mouth moments. It was another great reading experience with The Pigeonhole, the comments and opinions from the other readers making it all the more entertaining, and the author dropping in to answer questions. This is what makes The Pigeonhole so great!
If you like your thrillers a bit gory and a bit inappropriately funny, you’ll love this book - I did!
Thomas Brogan is a serial killer on the run, who finds an abandoned end of terrace house to hide in. He discovers that this house and the other three in the row have a shared loft space. So Brogan starts to spy on his neighbours. He has a penchant for playing games with his victims, and this is an ideal set up for him - and the secrets that he discovers are more than enough to keep him entertained.
This is such a fast paced, entertaining read, and I can well imagine it as a film. There are some very interesting twists and turns, and some real heart-in-mouth moments. It was another great reading experience with The Pigeonhole, the comments and opinions from the other readers making it all the more entertaining, and the author dropping in to answer questions. This is what makes The Pigeonhole so great!
If you like your thrillers a bit gory and a bit inappropriately funny, you’ll love this book - I did!
Awix (3310 KP) rated La Flor (2018) in Movies
Nov 2, 2019
How can one rating do justice to film-making on this scale? The simple numbers involved are staggering: the film lasts thirteen and a half hours, took nine years to make, is composed of six different episodes comprising many more sub-narratives. It's usually shown over three or four days, for obvious reasons. Even the closing credits last for over forty minutes (yes, I stayed: my thought process was basically 'Well, I've come this far..).
There's at least one horror movie in the mix, along with a musical melodrama, a sprawling existential spy thriller, and a metafictional self-parody. Characters include archaeologists, witches, Casanova and Margaret Thatcher. Just about the only thing holding it together is the presence of the same four actresses, who play significant roles in almost every episode. It begins very generic, but becomes increasingly strange and avant garde as it progresses. One would say it has become completely unravelled by the end, but it's not as if it was ever very ravelled. Parts of it are indisputably brilliant and highly accomplished, others are kind of indifferent; some of it is actively irritating. In the end it is a gargantuan, self-indulgent oddity. Some of it is definitely worth watching, but the whole thirteen hours...? I'm not sure. Maybe wait until it comes on TV.
There's at least one horror movie in the mix, along with a musical melodrama, a sprawling existential spy thriller, and a metafictional self-parody. Characters include archaeologists, witches, Casanova and Margaret Thatcher. Just about the only thing holding it together is the presence of the same four actresses, who play significant roles in almost every episode. It begins very generic, but becomes increasingly strange and avant garde as it progresses. One would say it has become completely unravelled by the end, but it's not as if it was ever very ravelled. Parts of it are indisputably brilliant and highly accomplished, others are kind of indifferent; some of it is actively irritating. In the end it is a gargantuan, self-indulgent oddity. Some of it is definitely worth watching, but the whole thirteen hours...? I'm not sure. Maybe wait until it comes on TV.
Alison Pink (7 KP) rated Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot in Books
Jan 15, 2018
I will be the first to admit that I am not a big fan of Bill O'Reilly's views on many things, but there is no arguing that he can write an excellent book. This is the second of his "Killing" series that I've read, the first being Killing Jesus. They were both wonderful & so easy to lose yourself in.
This particular book made me forget that I was reading about actual events. I was so immersed in the story. JFK & Jackie are fascinating people & their life together makes them all the more intriguing. This book isn't just about the assassination, but the years, months, & days leading up to that fateful day in November. Both for the Kennedy family & the Oswalds. I found myself at times, thinking, "No don't do that." Or, "Yes, listen to your gut & your advisors & cancel that trip." Almost hoping that somehow it would turn out differently, but knowing full well how it was going to end.
Despite knowing the end before even cracking the book open, I was hooked from the very first word. It is rare to read a non-fiction book that reads like a spy novel & political thriller. That's what makes the reader forget that the events really happened. It doesn't falter into all the conspiracy theories or speculation on the events leading up to it. It is remarkably well researched & based on the countless records, videos, transcripts, & documents from the era. This is a must read for anyone, even if you aren't fascinated with the Kennedys as I was.
This particular book made me forget that I was reading about actual events. I was so immersed in the story. JFK & Jackie are fascinating people & their life together makes them all the more intriguing. This book isn't just about the assassination, but the years, months, & days leading up to that fateful day in November. Both for the Kennedy family & the Oswalds. I found myself at times, thinking, "No don't do that." Or, "Yes, listen to your gut & your advisors & cancel that trip." Almost hoping that somehow it would turn out differently, but knowing full well how it was going to end.
Despite knowing the end before even cracking the book open, I was hooked from the very first word. It is rare to read a non-fiction book that reads like a spy novel & political thriller. That's what makes the reader forget that the events really happened. It doesn't falter into all the conspiracy theories or speculation on the events leading up to it. It is remarkably well researched & based on the countless records, videos, transcripts, & documents from the era. This is a must read for anyone, even if you aren't fascinated with the Kennedys as I was.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Six Minutes to Midnight (2021) in Movies
Apr 4, 2021 (Updated Apr 4, 2021)
Historical story (Potential for a great film) (1 more)
Judi Dench
B-grade spy caper antics (1 more)
Some ridiculous plot-points
A "39 Steps-esque" thriller that doesn't match its potential
In "Six Minutes to Midnight", it's the summer of 1939 (so we are in a parallel time-flow here with the events of "The Dig"). A private girl's school - the Augusta Victoria College in Bexhill-on-Sea - is run with loving care by the spinster Miss Rocholl (Judi Dench). But the 'finishing school' is unusual, in that all its teenage students are German. Indeed, they are the offspring of prominent Nazis.
When half-German English teacher Thomas Miller (Eddie Izzard) applies for a suddenly vacant position, he is taken on to share the teaching duties with Rocholl and Ilse (Carla Juri). But in snooping into the activities going on there, he finds mystery and danger.
Positives:
This is a fascinating premise for a movie that will appeal to an older generation, along the lines of "They don't make them like this anymore". It has elements of the 'good guy on the run' that struck parallels with "The 39 Steps" for me.
It's great that the school is all based on historical fact. Miss Rochol did indeed run the school, as a part of a plan to infiltrate British high-society with pro-Nazi sympathies ahead of an invasion. In real-life, one of the pupils was the god-daughter of Heinrich Himmler and one - Bettina von Ribbentrop - was the daughter of the German foreign minister.
After a comic "Family Guy"-style set of production logos to kick off with (for a full one and a half minutes!!), the pre-title sequence is a superb scene-setter. What exactly is going on here? A frantic scrabbling in a bookcase. A pier-end disappearance. The school badge (a genuine reproduction!) with its Union flag and Nazi Swastika insignia. The girls performing a ballet-like ritual on the beach with batons. (This looks to be a cracker, I thought).
Judi Dench. Superb as always.
Chris Seager does the cinematography, and impressively so. Most of Seager's CV has been TV work, so it must be delightful to be given the breadth of a cinema screen to capture landscapes like this.
I like the clever title: "Six Minutes to Midnight". I assumed it was intended solely to reflect the imminence of war. But it actually has another meaning entirely.
Negatives:
For me, was a highly frustrating film. All of the great credibility and atmosphere it builds up in the first 30 minutes, it then squanders by diving off into sub-Hitchcock spy capers.
Izzard becomes a 'man on the run', and doesn't seem credible at that. (I appreciate the irony of this statement given that this is the man who ran 32 marathons in 31 days for charity!) But Izzard is built for distance and not for speed, and some of the police chase scenes in the movie strain credibility to breaking point. Another actor might have been able to pull this off better.
There's a lack of continuity in the film: was it perhaps cut down from a much longer running time? At one point, Miller is a wanted murderer with his face plastered on the front pages. The next, kindly bus driver Charlie (Jim Broadbent) is unaccountably aiding him and Rochol seems to have assumed his innocence in later scenes.
Various spy caper clichés are mined to extreme - including those old classics 'swerve to avoid bullets'; 'gun shot but different gun'; and 'shot guy seems to live forever'. And there are double-agent 'twists' occurring that are utterly predictable.
A very specific continuity irritation for me was in an 'aircraft landing' scene. Markers are separated by nine paces (I went back and counted them!) yet a view from a plane shows them a 'runway-width' apart. This might have escaped scrutiny were it shown just once. But no... we have ground shot; air shot; ground shot; air shot..... repeatedly!
Summary thoughts: This was one of the cinema trailers that most appealed to me over a year ago, in those heady days in the sunlit-uplands of life before Covid-19. It's a movie that showed a great deal of promise, since the history is fascinating. And there is probably a really great TV serial in here: showing the 'alternate history' consequences of these high-society German girls penetrating British society and steering the war in a different direction (screenplay idea (C) RJ Mann!) But the potential is squandered with a non-credible spy caper bolted onto the side.
So with "Six Minutes to Midnight", Downton-director Andy Goddard has made a perfectly watchable 'rainy Sunday afternoon' film, that I enjoyed in part for its 'old-school' quirkiness. But it's frustrating that all the promise couldn't be transitioned into a more satisfying movie.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/04/six-minutes-to-midnight-a-39-steps-esque-thriller-but-not-quite-pulling-it-off/. Thanks).
When half-German English teacher Thomas Miller (Eddie Izzard) applies for a suddenly vacant position, he is taken on to share the teaching duties with Rocholl and Ilse (Carla Juri). But in snooping into the activities going on there, he finds mystery and danger.
Positives:
This is a fascinating premise for a movie that will appeal to an older generation, along the lines of "They don't make them like this anymore". It has elements of the 'good guy on the run' that struck parallels with "The 39 Steps" for me.
It's great that the school is all based on historical fact. Miss Rochol did indeed run the school, as a part of a plan to infiltrate British high-society with pro-Nazi sympathies ahead of an invasion. In real-life, one of the pupils was the god-daughter of Heinrich Himmler and one - Bettina von Ribbentrop - was the daughter of the German foreign minister.
After a comic "Family Guy"-style set of production logos to kick off with (for a full one and a half minutes!!), the pre-title sequence is a superb scene-setter. What exactly is going on here? A frantic scrabbling in a bookcase. A pier-end disappearance. The school badge (a genuine reproduction!) with its Union flag and Nazi Swastika insignia. The girls performing a ballet-like ritual on the beach with batons. (This looks to be a cracker, I thought).
Judi Dench. Superb as always.
Chris Seager does the cinematography, and impressively so. Most of Seager's CV has been TV work, so it must be delightful to be given the breadth of a cinema screen to capture landscapes like this.
I like the clever title: "Six Minutes to Midnight". I assumed it was intended solely to reflect the imminence of war. But it actually has another meaning entirely.
Negatives:
For me, was a highly frustrating film. All of the great credibility and atmosphere it builds up in the first 30 minutes, it then squanders by diving off into sub-Hitchcock spy capers.
Izzard becomes a 'man on the run', and doesn't seem credible at that. (I appreciate the irony of this statement given that this is the man who ran 32 marathons in 31 days for charity!) But Izzard is built for distance and not for speed, and some of the police chase scenes in the movie strain credibility to breaking point. Another actor might have been able to pull this off better.
There's a lack of continuity in the film: was it perhaps cut down from a much longer running time? At one point, Miller is a wanted murderer with his face plastered on the front pages. The next, kindly bus driver Charlie (Jim Broadbent) is unaccountably aiding him and Rochol seems to have assumed his innocence in later scenes.
Various spy caper clichés are mined to extreme - including those old classics 'swerve to avoid bullets'; 'gun shot but different gun'; and 'shot guy seems to live forever'. And there are double-agent 'twists' occurring that are utterly predictable.
A very specific continuity irritation for me was in an 'aircraft landing' scene. Markers are separated by nine paces (I went back and counted them!) yet a view from a plane shows them a 'runway-width' apart. This might have escaped scrutiny were it shown just once. But no... we have ground shot; air shot; ground shot; air shot..... repeatedly!
Summary thoughts: This was one of the cinema trailers that most appealed to me over a year ago, in those heady days in the sunlit-uplands of life before Covid-19. It's a movie that showed a great deal of promise, since the history is fascinating. And there is probably a really great TV serial in here: showing the 'alternate history' consequences of these high-society German girls penetrating British society and steering the war in a different direction (screenplay idea (C) RJ Mann!) But the potential is squandered with a non-credible spy caper bolted onto the side.
So with "Six Minutes to Midnight", Downton-director Andy Goddard has made a perfectly watchable 'rainy Sunday afternoon' film, that I enjoyed in part for its 'old-school' quirkiness. But it's frustrating that all the promise couldn't be transitioned into a more satisfying movie.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/04/six-minutes-to-midnight-a-39-steps-esque-thriller-but-not-quite-pulling-it-off/. Thanks).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated A Simple Favor (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A Dangerous Liaison.
Wow, this one starts spectacularly well! Who’s not to love some “Thomas Crown” style titles over a French language version of “Music to watch girls by”? Brilliant!
We are then introduced to the hyper-annoying single mum Stephanie Smothers (Anna Kendrick): someone so perky and goodie-two-shoes as a school helper that every other parent loathes her. What she does seem to have a talent for is filming cheesy “mom’s hints and tips” videos in her kitchen that she posts to her video blog.
Enter the polar opposite of Stephanie: the stylish, sophisticated, amoral and highly intimidating she-wolf called Emily (Blake Lively). On the excuse of play-dates between their sons, she seduces Stephanie with her swanky 5* lifestyle that she lives with her husband Sean (Henry Golding), a struggling writer. Given the oddness of the couple, there are more than a few hints – in line with the title of my review – that this is some kind of subtle grooming. But to what end?
How can someone so beautiful be so camera-shy? Anna Kendrick going for a cheeky snap of Blake Lively (and failing). (Source: GEM Entertainment).
When Emily suddenly goes missing without explanation, Sergeant Malloy (Andrew Moodie) has no shortage of suspects to investigate as Stephanie finds that she actually knew very little about the ghost-like Emily.
There is a surfeit of glossy style in Paul Feig‘s film. I’ve already enthused about the opening titles. But the stylish french-language music – coordinated by Theodore Shapiro – continues throughout, reaching a peak with Serge Gainsbourg’s sublime “Laisse Tomber Les Filles” over the equally entertaining end-titles.
Sharing confessions. A “BF” moment (and no… not “Best Friends”!). (Source: GEM Entertainment
But as a comedy thriller ther….
“HANG ON A MINUTE DR BOB! WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY? COMEDY THRILLER? I watched the trailer for this one, and it’s “Gone Girl” remade isn’t it? It wasn’t comedy! Even IMDB describe it as “Crime, Drama, Mystery”!”
Yes, quite, and therein lies the problem with this film. I found the trailers (the full trailer as well as the teaser trailer attached below) to be highly misleading about the “feel” of the film. The comedy is distributed throughout with some great comic put-downs (“Prudes are people too” coos Emily to Stephanie) and generally laugh-out-loud dialogue. So yes, it IS a “Gone Girl” or “The Girl on the Train” wannabe… but it’s with added ‘laffs’. Now this revelation might make the film appeal to you much more than the trailer did. But in my book, ‘thriller’ and ‘comedy’ are not genres to comfortably share a bed and for me the film became increasingly inconsistent. This inconsistency built to a finale where all semblance of plot and reality seemed to go right out of the window… it could have been an improv episode or “Who’s Line Is It Anyway?”.
The writer is Jessica Sharzer (who did the screenplay for “Nerve” which I very much liked). But I suspect the issue lies more with Paul Feig‘s background in comedies (“Bridesmaids”, “The Heat”, “Spy”) and he couldn’t resist spicing up the thriller with some out-of-place comedy. Which was a shame, since I really liked the overall thriller plot, and the dynamic built up between Kendrick and Lively.
Coming clean…ing. Anna Kendrick as an undercover mopper. (Source: GEM Entertainment).
Blake Lively (Mrs Deadpool of course) is actually staggeringly good as the unfathomable and slightly deranged Emily, and even Kendrick – who seems to have had a run of very so-so movies recently – is entertainingly quirky in this one.
I also enjoyed the performance of Rupert Friend (probably best known as Peter Quinn in “Homeland”) playing a vain and ego-centric fashion designer Dennis Nylon. Great fun.
Never trust a redhead. Emily being a-muse-ing. (Source: GEM Entertainment).
Was I entertained? Yes I was, so I am tempted to recommend you seeing this rather than not. But I was also irritated in equal measure…. I really felt from the opening scenes that this one had legs to make my Top 10 for the year. But no.
Please comment and let me know which side of the fence you sit on!
We are then introduced to the hyper-annoying single mum Stephanie Smothers (Anna Kendrick): someone so perky and goodie-two-shoes as a school helper that every other parent loathes her. What she does seem to have a talent for is filming cheesy “mom’s hints and tips” videos in her kitchen that she posts to her video blog.
Enter the polar opposite of Stephanie: the stylish, sophisticated, amoral and highly intimidating she-wolf called Emily (Blake Lively). On the excuse of play-dates between their sons, she seduces Stephanie with her swanky 5* lifestyle that she lives with her husband Sean (Henry Golding), a struggling writer. Given the oddness of the couple, there are more than a few hints – in line with the title of my review – that this is some kind of subtle grooming. But to what end?
How can someone so beautiful be so camera-shy? Anna Kendrick going for a cheeky snap of Blake Lively (and failing). (Source: GEM Entertainment).
When Emily suddenly goes missing without explanation, Sergeant Malloy (Andrew Moodie) has no shortage of suspects to investigate as Stephanie finds that she actually knew very little about the ghost-like Emily.
There is a surfeit of glossy style in Paul Feig‘s film. I’ve already enthused about the opening titles. But the stylish french-language music – coordinated by Theodore Shapiro – continues throughout, reaching a peak with Serge Gainsbourg’s sublime “Laisse Tomber Les Filles” over the equally entertaining end-titles.
Sharing confessions. A “BF” moment (and no… not “Best Friends”!). (Source: GEM Entertainment
But as a comedy thriller ther….
“HANG ON A MINUTE DR BOB! WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY? COMEDY THRILLER? I watched the trailer for this one, and it’s “Gone Girl” remade isn’t it? It wasn’t comedy! Even IMDB describe it as “Crime, Drama, Mystery”!”
Yes, quite, and therein lies the problem with this film. I found the trailers (the full trailer as well as the teaser trailer attached below) to be highly misleading about the “feel” of the film. The comedy is distributed throughout with some great comic put-downs (“Prudes are people too” coos Emily to Stephanie) and generally laugh-out-loud dialogue. So yes, it IS a “Gone Girl” or “The Girl on the Train” wannabe… but it’s with added ‘laffs’. Now this revelation might make the film appeal to you much more than the trailer did. But in my book, ‘thriller’ and ‘comedy’ are not genres to comfortably share a bed and for me the film became increasingly inconsistent. This inconsistency built to a finale where all semblance of plot and reality seemed to go right out of the window… it could have been an improv episode or “Who’s Line Is It Anyway?”.
The writer is Jessica Sharzer (who did the screenplay for “Nerve” which I very much liked). But I suspect the issue lies more with Paul Feig‘s background in comedies (“Bridesmaids”, “The Heat”, “Spy”) and he couldn’t resist spicing up the thriller with some out-of-place comedy. Which was a shame, since I really liked the overall thriller plot, and the dynamic built up between Kendrick and Lively.
Coming clean…ing. Anna Kendrick as an undercover mopper. (Source: GEM Entertainment).
Blake Lively (Mrs Deadpool of course) is actually staggeringly good as the unfathomable and slightly deranged Emily, and even Kendrick – who seems to have had a run of very so-so movies recently – is entertainingly quirky in this one.
I also enjoyed the performance of Rupert Friend (probably best known as Peter Quinn in “Homeland”) playing a vain and ego-centric fashion designer Dennis Nylon. Great fun.
Never trust a redhead. Emily being a-muse-ing. (Source: GEM Entertainment).
Was I entertained? Yes I was, so I am tempted to recommend you seeing this rather than not. But I was also irritated in equal measure…. I really felt from the opening scenes that this one had legs to make my Top 10 for the year. But no.
Please comment and let me know which side of the fence you sit on!
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Captive State (2019) in Movies
Jul 6, 2020
Not Captivating Enough - 6/10
Captive State is a 2019 sci-fi/thriller movie directed by Rupert Wyatt and co-written by Rupert Wyatt and Erica Beeney. It was produced by Amblin Partners and Participant Media with producers Rupert Wyatt and David Crockett. The film stars John Goodman, Ashton Sanders, Jonathan Majors, and Vera Farmiga.
In 2019, Chicago is placed under Martial Law as extraterrestrials invade Earth. Attempting to flee the city, the Drummond family, breaks through a barricade to a tunnel exit. Before they can back up and reverse, the aliens attack, vaporizing both parents, with the children having survived in the backseat. Nine years later, 2028, the world has surrendered to the conquering alien forces, who have now become the governing authority. They are called "The Legislators" because all rules of governance and subsequent laws come from them. Walled off from the rest of the city and deep beneath the ground, they've had conscripted humans build them suitable habitats called "Closed Zones" where only high government officials are granted access. Gabriel Drummond (Ashton Sanders), the younger son of the Drummond family is confronted by Chicago Police Commander William Mulligan (John Goodman) who believes he is a part of the resistance. Gabriel's brother Rafe Drummond (Jonathan Majors) was part of the resistance but died on a mission and murals are painted of him in Pilsen, the poor part of town, where Gabriel lives. Mulligan however is not convinced the resistance group, called Phoenix has been neutralized as believed and continues to work towards bringing them down.
This movie was not at all what I expected. I thought it was going to be better than what it was and that's because I didn't even have high expectations going into it. So from the previews/trailers it looked like it was going to be a bigger scale resistance. When I hear resistance fighting, I guess I picture more like fighting like Fallen Skies or like the resistance fighters in Star Wars. This was more of a political/spy thriller going back and forth between the point of view from members of the resistance and those tasked with bringing them down. It had sprinkling of sci-fi and aliens but was too grounded in reality to make it entertaining. It seemed very "done before" and lacked originality. John Goodman did a good job and so did Ashton Sanders but I feel this movie suffered from a bad plot to begin with. Or maybe it sounds good on paper but the delivery failed. Visually it was appealing, the aliens and ships and things looked wonderful but after watching seemed like it wasn't enough to leave the audience satisfied. I give it a 6/10.
In 2019, Chicago is placed under Martial Law as extraterrestrials invade Earth. Attempting to flee the city, the Drummond family, breaks through a barricade to a tunnel exit. Before they can back up and reverse, the aliens attack, vaporizing both parents, with the children having survived in the backseat. Nine years later, 2028, the world has surrendered to the conquering alien forces, who have now become the governing authority. They are called "The Legislators" because all rules of governance and subsequent laws come from them. Walled off from the rest of the city and deep beneath the ground, they've had conscripted humans build them suitable habitats called "Closed Zones" where only high government officials are granted access. Gabriel Drummond (Ashton Sanders), the younger son of the Drummond family is confronted by Chicago Police Commander William Mulligan (John Goodman) who believes he is a part of the resistance. Gabriel's brother Rafe Drummond (Jonathan Majors) was part of the resistance but died on a mission and murals are painted of him in Pilsen, the poor part of town, where Gabriel lives. Mulligan however is not convinced the resistance group, called Phoenix has been neutralized as believed and continues to work towards bringing them down.
This movie was not at all what I expected. I thought it was going to be better than what it was and that's because I didn't even have high expectations going into it. So from the previews/trailers it looked like it was going to be a bigger scale resistance. When I hear resistance fighting, I guess I picture more like fighting like Fallen Skies or like the resistance fighters in Star Wars. This was more of a political/spy thriller going back and forth between the point of view from members of the resistance and those tasked with bringing them down. It had sprinkling of sci-fi and aliens but was too grounded in reality to make it entertaining. It seemed very "done before" and lacked originality. John Goodman did a good job and so did Ashton Sanders but I feel this movie suffered from a bad plot to begin with. Or maybe it sounds good on paper but the delivery failed. Visually it was appealing, the aliens and ships and things looked wonderful but after watching seemed like it wasn't enough to leave the audience satisfied. I give it a 6/10.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Atomic Blonde (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Say hello to Mrs. John Wick
David Leitch is one of the most exciting film-makers of the current crop of directors working today. His brilliant John Wick reignited Keanu Reeves’ career in spectacular fashion and he’s worked behind-the-scenes on films like Captain America: Civil War and Jurassic World.
Just this year he signed on to direct Deadpool 2 after Tim Miller’s sudden departure. In the meantime, he’s treating us to another adults-only thriller, Atomic Blonde. But is this Charlize Theron-led vehicle as good as his previous work?
Sensual and savage, Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) is the most elite spy in MI6, an agent willing to use all her skills to stay alive during impossible missions. With the Berlin Wall ready to crumble, she travels into the middle of the city to retrieve a dossier and take down an espionage ring. Once there, she teams up with an embedded station chief (James McAvoy) to navigate her way through the deadliest game of spies.
Charlize Theron is fast-becoming one of Hollywood’s most bankable stars after decent turns in Fast & Furious 8 and Mad Max: Fury Road. In Atomic Blonde this is no exception. She commands the screen in each and every frame, oozing class and showing the world she is a first-class action superstar.
The rest of the cast are also exquisite. James McAvoy can do no wrong this year after his out-of-this-world performance in Split, and his David Percival here is fleshed out, well-written and beautifully acted. Elsewhere, John Goodman and Toby Jones add even more prowess to proceedings.
Add to this some stunning cinematography and you’ve got a recipe for success. Atomic Blonde relishes the era in which it is presented with a magnificent soundtrack and beautiful direction. Leitch makes the film feel very much alive, with brutally realistic action shot without needless shaky cam or over-the-top scoring.
Unfortunately, the story is less successful. If Theron is the living, beating heart of Atomic Blonde, the script nearly strangles her. It is nearly impossible to truly understand what is happening on screen as the plot throws more twists and turns at the audience than Spaghetti Junction. Ordinarily, this would be great, but here it’s distracting and nonsensical.
Nevertheless, this is a vastly entertaining film, very much in the same vein of John Wick. In fact, it’d be fantastic if we could see these two characters brought together in a crossover of epic proportions.
Overall, David Leitch hasn’t quite recaptured the success of his first feature film but has managed to craft a highly stylised and quick-moving thriller that feels very real and utilises its exceptional cast incredibly well, with Charlize Theron being an absolute delight. It’s just unfortunate the plot is a bit of a damp squib.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/08/10/atomic-blonde-review-say-hello-to-mrs-john-wick/
Just this year he signed on to direct Deadpool 2 after Tim Miller’s sudden departure. In the meantime, he’s treating us to another adults-only thriller, Atomic Blonde. But is this Charlize Theron-led vehicle as good as his previous work?
Sensual and savage, Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) is the most elite spy in MI6, an agent willing to use all her skills to stay alive during impossible missions. With the Berlin Wall ready to crumble, she travels into the middle of the city to retrieve a dossier and take down an espionage ring. Once there, she teams up with an embedded station chief (James McAvoy) to navigate her way through the deadliest game of spies.
Charlize Theron is fast-becoming one of Hollywood’s most bankable stars after decent turns in Fast & Furious 8 and Mad Max: Fury Road. In Atomic Blonde this is no exception. She commands the screen in each and every frame, oozing class and showing the world she is a first-class action superstar.
The rest of the cast are also exquisite. James McAvoy can do no wrong this year after his out-of-this-world performance in Split, and his David Percival here is fleshed out, well-written and beautifully acted. Elsewhere, John Goodman and Toby Jones add even more prowess to proceedings.
Add to this some stunning cinematography and you’ve got a recipe for success. Atomic Blonde relishes the era in which it is presented with a magnificent soundtrack and beautiful direction. Leitch makes the film feel very much alive, with brutally realistic action shot without needless shaky cam or over-the-top scoring.
Unfortunately, the story is less successful. If Theron is the living, beating heart of Atomic Blonde, the script nearly strangles her. It is nearly impossible to truly understand what is happening on screen as the plot throws more twists and turns at the audience than Spaghetti Junction. Ordinarily, this would be great, but here it’s distracting and nonsensical.
Nevertheless, this is a vastly entertaining film, very much in the same vein of John Wick. In fact, it’d be fantastic if we could see these two characters brought together in a crossover of epic proportions.
Overall, David Leitch hasn’t quite recaptured the success of his first feature film but has managed to craft a highly stylised and quick-moving thriller that feels very real and utilises its exceptional cast incredibly well, with Charlize Theron being an absolute delight. It’s just unfortunate the plot is a bit of a damp squib.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/08/10/atomic-blonde-review-say-hello-to-mrs-john-wick/
ClareR (5589 KP) rated The Warehouse in Books
Sep 25, 2019
A brilliant, if disturbing, dystopian thriller!
What will the future hold for us, with climate change becoming ever more a part of our lives, capitalism taking over every part of society and big business pushing out the small, local businesses? Well, The Warehouse looks at all of these things in a near-future dystopian thriller.
The Cloud rules pretty much everything. We learn of its genesis from one of the narrators: Gibson. He is the founder of The Cloud, and built the business up from nothing. He is nearing the end of his life, and he has decided to blog during his remaining weeks as he visits all of The Cloud installations in the US.
Paxton used to have his own small business, but after The Cloud takes his product and sells it at a much cheaper price, his company folds. He finds himself without a job, home and money. So he decides to go and work for Cloud. Those who work there, live on site in small apartments. The children of workers are educated at Cloud schools, workers are entertained on site, and there are restaurants, shops and cinemas - all within the Cloud ‘town’. There is no reason to ever leave these huge towns (it reminded me of the Victorian models of towns built around coal mines or factories- the owners would provide accommodation near to work, so that there would be no excuse not to go to work. If you lost your job, you lost your home.).
Zinnia also gets a job at Cloud at the same time as Paxton, but she has an ulterior motive for being there. She’s an undercover spy for a competitor, and she has been given a job to do by someone that she’s never met.
Capitalism does not do well out of this book. It’s like the author has taken the idea of capitalism to its furthest point to show us what will happen if we and our governments continue to give big business the freedoms and money that we do. Every aspect of the workers lives is monitored through a wristband that they must wear at all times. In my e was no way that these people could ever imagine that they were free. They weren’t. Accidents at work were brushed under the carpet, as were assaults (sexual and physical), and drug dealing. Everything was done to the advantage of The Cloud.
I really enjoyed this, and it not only entertained, it gave me food for thought. What would our world be like bereft of humanity and morality? Well actually, I think it would be pretty much like living in The Cloud facility! And the thing is, it’s all perfectly plausible! This is a great read.
Many thanks to NetGalley and Bantam Press for my copy of this book to read and review.
The Cloud rules pretty much everything. We learn of its genesis from one of the narrators: Gibson. He is the founder of The Cloud, and built the business up from nothing. He is nearing the end of his life, and he has decided to blog during his remaining weeks as he visits all of The Cloud installations in the US.
Paxton used to have his own small business, but after The Cloud takes his product and sells it at a much cheaper price, his company folds. He finds himself without a job, home and money. So he decides to go and work for Cloud. Those who work there, live on site in small apartments. The children of workers are educated at Cloud schools, workers are entertained on site, and there are restaurants, shops and cinemas - all within the Cloud ‘town’. There is no reason to ever leave these huge towns (it reminded me of the Victorian models of towns built around coal mines or factories- the owners would provide accommodation near to work, so that there would be no excuse not to go to work. If you lost your job, you lost your home.).
Zinnia also gets a job at Cloud at the same time as Paxton, but she has an ulterior motive for being there. She’s an undercover spy for a competitor, and she has been given a job to do by someone that she’s never met.
Capitalism does not do well out of this book. It’s like the author has taken the idea of capitalism to its furthest point to show us what will happen if we and our governments continue to give big business the freedoms and money that we do. Every aspect of the workers lives is monitored through a wristband that they must wear at all times. In my e was no way that these people could ever imagine that they were free. They weren’t. Accidents at work were brushed under the carpet, as were assaults (sexual and physical), and drug dealing. Everything was done to the advantage of The Cloud.
I really enjoyed this, and it not only entertained, it gave me food for thought. What would our world be like bereft of humanity and morality? Well actually, I think it would be pretty much like living in The Cloud facility! And the thing is, it’s all perfectly plausible! This is a great read.
Many thanks to NetGalley and Bantam Press for my copy of this book to read and review.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Quantum of Solace (2008) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
With the success of “Casino Royale” featuring new Bond Daniel Craig, the world has waiting eagerly for the follow up, “Quantum of Solace” which continues the historic spy franchise.
Picking up exactly where the last film ended, Bond is walking a fine line between revenge and doing his duty after being betrayed by Vesper at the end of the last film. While interrogating a suspect with M (Judy Densch), it is learned that there is an organization that is very dangerous and influential that even has influence in the C.I.A. and MI6.
Before they can learn any further information, a shocking betrayal happens and Bond is in hot pursuit of the suspect across the rooftops of Italy and soon locked in a deadly confrontation with the traitor.
The recent events have M concerned and Bond is dispatched to Haiti to follow on a lead which thanks to a case of mistaken identity leads Bond to a woman named Camille (Olga Kurylenko). Olga is involved in a deadly game with a corrupt businessman named Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), and a Bolivian General named Medrano (Joaquin Cosio).
Unsure of their involvement, Bond follows Greene, and learns that he heads an environmental group and has designs on a track of desert in Bolivia. Unsure if Greene’s interest in the area is related to diamonds, oil, or something else, M tasks Bond with finding out what is going on, as her superiors are betting that it is related to oil, and with the C.I. A. involved, it is reasoned that the England cannot be left out of an already dwindling oil supply.
It is at this point that the film lost much of its steam for me as the final revelation seemed to be much ado about nothing as this sort of thing happens, and has happened the world over for years and is hardly worthy of involving the MI6, much less the worlds must dangerous spy.
What follows is a series of betrayals and a few action scenes leading up to a fiery climax which almost redeems the film.
Let me say at the outset that I am a Bond fan and a traditionalist. I understand change happens over time and I am not one who thinks that the role began and ended with Sean Connery. I enjoyed Roger Moore though found him a bit camp. Timothy Dalton did not work for me, and George Lazenby was only Bond for one film so it is hard to judge him fairly. That being said, I found Pierce Brosnan to have been the best Bond since Connery as his interpretation of the character is dead on.
Sir Ian Fleming created the character and has said that he was influenced by people he knew. Bond is a well educated and cultured individual who was educated at the top schools, was an officer in the Royal Navy, and is a suave and charming individual as well as a cold and deadly killer when needed. He is scarred by events in his past, as such he relies on alcohol, duty, and woman to get by, but never once allows himself to get to close to anyone.
When they rebooted the franchise with Craig, much of the 40 years of Bond as well as the essence of the character have been lost. Craig’s Bond is not a cultured blue blood, he is a common thug. In my review of “Casino Royale” I mentioned that the new Bond passed up spending a night with a woman in order to pursue a lead, and how Connery would have found time to do both with style.
Craig’s Bond is very light on womanizing and the film has zero sexual tension and only a very brief romance seen that seems tacked on. The underlying themes of Bond has been guns, gadgets, girls, and action, and this film has chosen to pretty much eschew almost all of this as there are zero gadgets in the film and to be honest, I found the plot to be uninspired.
I think that in many ways the people behind the film have tried to get as far away from the past Bond films as possible especially the maniacal villains who were bent on destroying the world.
As an action film, the movie does have its moments and if it was not a Bond film would be a passable action thriller. As a Bond film, it promises the world and will likely disappoint much long term Bond fans and appeal mainly to those who do not have a longstanding history with the character from book to film. I have to wonder if Sir Ian Fleming is spinning in his grave over what they have done to his gentleman spy in the name of progress.
Picking up exactly where the last film ended, Bond is walking a fine line between revenge and doing his duty after being betrayed by Vesper at the end of the last film. While interrogating a suspect with M (Judy Densch), it is learned that there is an organization that is very dangerous and influential that even has influence in the C.I.A. and MI6.
Before they can learn any further information, a shocking betrayal happens and Bond is in hot pursuit of the suspect across the rooftops of Italy and soon locked in a deadly confrontation with the traitor.
The recent events have M concerned and Bond is dispatched to Haiti to follow on a lead which thanks to a case of mistaken identity leads Bond to a woman named Camille (Olga Kurylenko). Olga is involved in a deadly game with a corrupt businessman named Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), and a Bolivian General named Medrano (Joaquin Cosio).
Unsure of their involvement, Bond follows Greene, and learns that he heads an environmental group and has designs on a track of desert in Bolivia. Unsure if Greene’s interest in the area is related to diamonds, oil, or something else, M tasks Bond with finding out what is going on, as her superiors are betting that it is related to oil, and with the C.I. A. involved, it is reasoned that the England cannot be left out of an already dwindling oil supply.
It is at this point that the film lost much of its steam for me as the final revelation seemed to be much ado about nothing as this sort of thing happens, and has happened the world over for years and is hardly worthy of involving the MI6, much less the worlds must dangerous spy.
What follows is a series of betrayals and a few action scenes leading up to a fiery climax which almost redeems the film.
Let me say at the outset that I am a Bond fan and a traditionalist. I understand change happens over time and I am not one who thinks that the role began and ended with Sean Connery. I enjoyed Roger Moore though found him a bit camp. Timothy Dalton did not work for me, and George Lazenby was only Bond for one film so it is hard to judge him fairly. That being said, I found Pierce Brosnan to have been the best Bond since Connery as his interpretation of the character is dead on.
Sir Ian Fleming created the character and has said that he was influenced by people he knew. Bond is a well educated and cultured individual who was educated at the top schools, was an officer in the Royal Navy, and is a suave and charming individual as well as a cold and deadly killer when needed. He is scarred by events in his past, as such he relies on alcohol, duty, and woman to get by, but never once allows himself to get to close to anyone.
When they rebooted the franchise with Craig, much of the 40 years of Bond as well as the essence of the character have been lost. Craig’s Bond is not a cultured blue blood, he is a common thug. In my review of “Casino Royale” I mentioned that the new Bond passed up spending a night with a woman in order to pursue a lead, and how Connery would have found time to do both with style.
Craig’s Bond is very light on womanizing and the film has zero sexual tension and only a very brief romance seen that seems tacked on. The underlying themes of Bond has been guns, gadgets, girls, and action, and this film has chosen to pretty much eschew almost all of this as there are zero gadgets in the film and to be honest, I found the plot to be uninspired.
I think that in many ways the people behind the film have tried to get as far away from the past Bond films as possible especially the maniacal villains who were bent on destroying the world.
As an action film, the movie does have its moments and if it was not a Bond film would be a passable action thriller. As a Bond film, it promises the world and will likely disappoint much long term Bond fans and appeal mainly to those who do not have a longstanding history with the character from book to film. I have to wonder if Sir Ian Fleming is spinning in his grave over what they have done to his gentleman spy in the name of progress.