Search
Search results
156Reviews (7 KP) rated Dark Waters (2019) in Movies
May 1, 2020
Films are important.
Films are important to us all for many different reasons, they show what we are, what we can be, what we aspire to be, of who we are. Sometimes that comes in the form of escapism, of dreaming that we can be better, Mark Ruffalo is no stranger to the genre I'm referring to, sometimes shows us our darkest fears and that we can overcome them, and sometimes, it shows us just how low, we as people can get, and never offer any kind of redemption. Dark Waters manages to be all of these things. A small intro before the film began had me franticly signing up to numerous petitions the second the film ended, joining a cause I didn't even know existed before I sat down to watch. This is why film is important, and why you should watch Dark Waters as soon as you can. So why the 3 out of 5 rating? Surely a film that EVERYONE should watch should get top marks, right? Unfortunately not.
The film begins with Rob Bilott (Mark Ruffalo), a corporate defence attorney, whose office is visited by a farmer from his home town, trying to raise a legal case against DuPont, a multi-billion dollar business, the towns biggest employer, and a chemical company at the heart of potentially poisoning the towns water supply. As Billot investigates the scale of the issue, and its inevitable cover up, it all becomes alarmingly clear. Thousands of people are being poisoned, they're health will likely deteriorate and life threatening illnesses are now a high probability. To take a line from the recent movie Bombshell “somebody has to stand up, somebody has to get mad.”
That anger that should be felt, but for all the terrifying facts about the poisoning these people received on a daily basis, it never comes, the rage should be palpable. Instead it opts for giving us all the information, teaching about regulation and government intervention, or lack thereof, and the only temper in the film shows comes as a heated exchange in a board room that blows over as soon as it comes, and protesters outside courtrooms for fleeting moments throughout the movie. It should be seething instead of showing, giving us the knowledge we need through gritted teeth, not clinical, scientific and impersonal.
Dark Waters is off the mark with its tone, Mark Ruffalo's high-priced lawyer is too uncertain, a little too every-man, never really portrayed a hot-shot or an underdog, and the supporting cast fall into “Good Guy” or “Bad Guy” far too easily with no exploration into any depth of character. One scene has a DuPont representative, shown in great detail, every undisputable, despicable thing that his company has done to these people, and listens attentively, never upset or defiant but instead seeming slightly bored, before getting up and leaving. Every scene feels like it should be emotionally hard-hitting but never raises above a tap on the shoulder.
As the lesson goes on, the complete lack of morals DuPont has, becomes shockingly clear as they drag the case on for as long as they can, making sure Billot's firm spend more money and time than they are willing to pay. Bilot's home life becomes strained, which distracts from the main thread more than adds to it plot, he becomes distant from his wife, a woefully underused Anne Hathaway, and his health deteriorates under the weight of fighting, and in the end, the conclusion is murkier than the water supply. But he still fights, and in real life, Rob Billot is still fighting to this day to help the West Virginia community, and to change the way the corporations are regulated worldwide.
This film is important, and everyone should see it because it's message, just don't see it for its entertainment value, because that's few and far between.
Films are important to us all for many different reasons, they show what we are, what we can be, what we aspire to be, of who we are. Sometimes that comes in the form of escapism, of dreaming that we can be better, Mark Ruffalo is no stranger to the genre I'm referring to, sometimes shows us our darkest fears and that we can overcome them, and sometimes, it shows us just how low, we as people can get, and never offer any kind of redemption. Dark Waters manages to be all of these things. A small intro before the film began had me franticly signing up to numerous petitions the second the film ended, joining a cause I didn't even know existed before I sat down to watch. This is why film is important, and why you should watch Dark Waters as soon as you can. So why the 3 out of 5 rating? Surely a film that EVERYONE should watch should get top marks, right? Unfortunately not.
The film begins with Rob Bilott (Mark Ruffalo), a corporate defence attorney, whose office is visited by a farmer from his home town, trying to raise a legal case against DuPont, a multi-billion dollar business, the towns biggest employer, and a chemical company at the heart of potentially poisoning the towns water supply. As Billot investigates the scale of the issue, and its inevitable cover up, it all becomes alarmingly clear. Thousands of people are being poisoned, they're health will likely deteriorate and life threatening illnesses are now a high probability. To take a line from the recent movie Bombshell “somebody has to stand up, somebody has to get mad.”
That anger that should be felt, but for all the terrifying facts about the poisoning these people received on a daily basis, it never comes, the rage should be palpable. Instead it opts for giving us all the information, teaching about regulation and government intervention, or lack thereof, and the only temper in the film shows comes as a heated exchange in a board room that blows over as soon as it comes, and protesters outside courtrooms for fleeting moments throughout the movie. It should be seething instead of showing, giving us the knowledge we need through gritted teeth, not clinical, scientific and impersonal.
Dark Waters is off the mark with its tone, Mark Ruffalo's high-priced lawyer is too uncertain, a little too every-man, never really portrayed a hot-shot or an underdog, and the supporting cast fall into “Good Guy” or “Bad Guy” far too easily with no exploration into any depth of character. One scene has a DuPont representative, shown in great detail, every undisputable, despicable thing that his company has done to these people, and listens attentively, never upset or defiant but instead seeming slightly bored, before getting up and leaving. Every scene feels like it should be emotionally hard-hitting but never raises above a tap on the shoulder.
As the lesson goes on, the complete lack of morals DuPont has, becomes shockingly clear as they drag the case on for as long as they can, making sure Billot's firm spend more money and time than they are willing to pay. Bilot's home life becomes strained, which distracts from the main thread more than adds to it plot, he becomes distant from his wife, a woefully underused Anne Hathaway, and his health deteriorates under the weight of fighting, and in the end, the conclusion is murkier than the water supply. But he still fights, and in real life, Rob Billot is still fighting to this day to help the West Virginia community, and to change the way the corporations are regulated worldwide.
This film is important, and everyone should see it because it's message, just don't see it for its entertainment value, because that's few and far between.
Invoice Now with Debitoor
Business
App
Simple, fast, and intuitive invoicing right on your mobile. Designed for sole traders and small...
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated The Boys - Season 2 in TV
Jan 22, 2021
As I have already stated in my review of season one of The Boys, it is a show that I have found compelling to watch without actually liking or thinking it is necessarily very good. The premise was intriguing, and threw up some pretty interesting dramatic conflicts in the first season. But it was obvious from very early on that this show wanted to make the most of its 18 certificate and use gore, violence and shock tactics to really make fans of those things gasp.
In season two they have taken that key point of difference and turned the volume up to ten! All I remember from it, some three months now since I finished it, is blood, exploding and crushed heads, severed limbs, gross out deaths and lots more blood. Which, you know, turns some people on, but after the first ten times I got pretty sick of it – almost literally – and was just riding it out to the finish mostly.
Performance wise, there isn’t really a stand out, and the writing doesn’t really offer the opportunity (yet) for true emotional depth. Antony Starr, as the deplorably egotistical maniac “hero” Homelander, is the one you love to hate though! Rarely have I found myself wanting a character to get his dues so much! He is utterly loathsome and repulsive, so much credit for that creation. Depending on where they take things in season 3 and beyond, he could emerge as one of the iconic characters of this era of streaming TV.
In terms of story progression, a decent job has been made by introducing Aya Cash as Stormfront, a depraved love interest for Homelander with a big secret and a great plot device. Most of the events have revolved around her introduction, development, backstory reveal and consequences of that on the show’s main man. Meanwhile the storyline around Karl Urban as Billy Butcher becomes more and more forgettable and sometimes irrelevant.
That is the problem with this show really; it has set itself up as being Superheros that are actually assholes vs renegade anti-heros that want to stop them… but, it knows that as soon as that conflict is resolved and satisfied the show is over. So, they drag the story along with very minimal contact as yet between the two. Plenty of inner turmoil within the two groups, but no action as such against one another.
And that is why the build up to this season’s climax felt mostly anti-climactic. Although it did land a half decent cliff-hanger right at the end. I don’t know… I just feel as if it’s a show to let wash over you without that much value in analysing it. And that wash always makes me feel slightly grubbier than I was before. If redemption, conflict and resolution are on the cards they need to get a dose of it into season three, or I will probably lose interest fast.
Amazon Prime has a lot of shows a lot better than this one, but probably none that appeal as much to boys and men under 30. It has its place on the vast entertainment schedule, but personally I am craving more meaning and less of the puerile dependence on gore. However, if that is what its audience talk about, then its gonna increase not decrease. They have set their own bloody bar now and my fear is this is what the future of the show holds: more and more original ways to gross us out. I’d like to be proved wrong, but I don’t feel in a huge rush about it either way.
In season two they have taken that key point of difference and turned the volume up to ten! All I remember from it, some three months now since I finished it, is blood, exploding and crushed heads, severed limbs, gross out deaths and lots more blood. Which, you know, turns some people on, but after the first ten times I got pretty sick of it – almost literally – and was just riding it out to the finish mostly.
Performance wise, there isn’t really a stand out, and the writing doesn’t really offer the opportunity (yet) for true emotional depth. Antony Starr, as the deplorably egotistical maniac “hero” Homelander, is the one you love to hate though! Rarely have I found myself wanting a character to get his dues so much! He is utterly loathsome and repulsive, so much credit for that creation. Depending on where they take things in season 3 and beyond, he could emerge as one of the iconic characters of this era of streaming TV.
In terms of story progression, a decent job has been made by introducing Aya Cash as Stormfront, a depraved love interest for Homelander with a big secret and a great plot device. Most of the events have revolved around her introduction, development, backstory reveal and consequences of that on the show’s main man. Meanwhile the storyline around Karl Urban as Billy Butcher becomes more and more forgettable and sometimes irrelevant.
That is the problem with this show really; it has set itself up as being Superheros that are actually assholes vs renegade anti-heros that want to stop them… but, it knows that as soon as that conflict is resolved and satisfied the show is over. So, they drag the story along with very minimal contact as yet between the two. Plenty of inner turmoil within the two groups, but no action as such against one another.
And that is why the build up to this season’s climax felt mostly anti-climactic. Although it did land a half decent cliff-hanger right at the end. I don’t know… I just feel as if it’s a show to let wash over you without that much value in analysing it. And that wash always makes me feel slightly grubbier than I was before. If redemption, conflict and resolution are on the cards they need to get a dose of it into season three, or I will probably lose interest fast.
Amazon Prime has a lot of shows a lot better than this one, but probably none that appeal as much to boys and men under 30. It has its place on the vast entertainment schedule, but personally I am craving more meaning and less of the puerile dependence on gore. However, if that is what its audience talk about, then its gonna increase not decrease. They have set their own bloody bar now and my fear is this is what the future of the show holds: more and more original ways to gross us out. I’d like to be proved wrong, but I don’t feel in a huge rush about it either way.
Think Ladder
Health & Fitness and Medical
App
Thinkladder is a Cognitive Behavioural Therapy and meditation hybrid app. The app allows users to...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated No Time to Die (2021) in Movies
Oct 16, 2021
Works well enough - despite a weak villain
The Daniel Craig James Bond films are a different breed of Bond films. Instead of each one being a “one-off, fun romp” filled with Gadgets, Villains, Beautiful Ladies and Wild Stunts, the 5 films of the “Daniel Craig era” of Bond films was something else…gritty, serious and serialized, each film standing on it’s own but also building on the previous one to tell one long story.
It will be up to the individual to decide whether this type of storytelling works for Bond.
For me, it does.
Picking up where SPECTRE left off, NO TIME TO DIE follows Bond and his lady love from that film, Madeliene (Lea Seydoux) as they are followed and threatened by agents from SPECTRE. After an action-packed opening, Bond heads into retirement only to be drawn back in.
Director Cary Fukunaga (BEASTS OF NO NATION) crafts a satisfying, if somewhat too long and dragged out, finale for Craig as Bond battles villains joined by old friends (and fiends) along the way (as a bit of a final Curtain Call for them all), meets some new allies (and adversaries) all while dealing with his own feelings.
And it is this part of the film that “Bond purists” will be the most annoyed about. JAMES BOND HAS FEELINGS! He isn’t just a “Super-Spy” with a quip and a gadget, Fukunaga and perennial Bond writers Neal Purvis & Robert Wade (along with Fukunaga and Phoebe Waller-Bridge) craft a Bond that has cracks in his veneer that show doubts and fears underneath.
This rounding out of the character works for me in this film, especially if you put this film in the context of all 5 Craig Bond films. It is a natural growth for the character and one that Craig handles well.
As for the performances, regular Bond players Ralph Fiennes (M), Naomi Harris (Moneypenny), Ben Whishaw (Q), Rory Kinnear (Tanner) and Jeffrey Wright (CIA Agent Felix Leiter) all have a moment (or 2) to shine and they show up on the screen like old friends showing up at a going away party. Christoph Walz also reprises his role of Blofeld from SPECTRE (it’s not a spoiler, it’s in the trailers) and it was good to see Blofeld and Bond play chess one last time and Seydoux’s performance as Bond’s “lady love” is “good enough”.
But it is the newcomers to this story that stand out to me - with one strong exception. Lashana Lynch (as a fellow 00 agent) and Billy Magnussen both shine in this film as do Ana de Armas as another femme that Bond encounters - this is the 3rd strong performance I’ve seen from the former model (following strong turns in BLADE RUNNER 2049 and opposite Craig in KNIVES OUT) and am eagerly awaiting what she will do next.
Only Rami Malek as villain Safin fails to be interesting and that’s where this film falls down. Safin’s encounters with Bond bring the energy and excitement down, thanks to Malek’s “underplaying” of a role that should have been overplayed. His performance just doesn’t work.
But, this is a Bond film, so the acting and plot always take a backseat to the action - and the action in this film is better than average, but not A-M-A-Z-I-N-G as one expects from Bond films. Couple that with Malek’s underwhelming performance and this Bond film will leave audiences with an unfulfilled feeling.
Unless, you are invested in the journey that Craig has taken Bond on - and the culmination of that journey to conclude this film. If you are invested in that, this film work. If you are not, it will not.
It worked for me.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
It will be up to the individual to decide whether this type of storytelling works for Bond.
For me, it does.
Picking up where SPECTRE left off, NO TIME TO DIE follows Bond and his lady love from that film, Madeliene (Lea Seydoux) as they are followed and threatened by agents from SPECTRE. After an action-packed opening, Bond heads into retirement only to be drawn back in.
Director Cary Fukunaga (BEASTS OF NO NATION) crafts a satisfying, if somewhat too long and dragged out, finale for Craig as Bond battles villains joined by old friends (and fiends) along the way (as a bit of a final Curtain Call for them all), meets some new allies (and adversaries) all while dealing with his own feelings.
And it is this part of the film that “Bond purists” will be the most annoyed about. JAMES BOND HAS FEELINGS! He isn’t just a “Super-Spy” with a quip and a gadget, Fukunaga and perennial Bond writers Neal Purvis & Robert Wade (along with Fukunaga and Phoebe Waller-Bridge) craft a Bond that has cracks in his veneer that show doubts and fears underneath.
This rounding out of the character works for me in this film, especially if you put this film in the context of all 5 Craig Bond films. It is a natural growth for the character and one that Craig handles well.
As for the performances, regular Bond players Ralph Fiennes (M), Naomi Harris (Moneypenny), Ben Whishaw (Q), Rory Kinnear (Tanner) and Jeffrey Wright (CIA Agent Felix Leiter) all have a moment (or 2) to shine and they show up on the screen like old friends showing up at a going away party. Christoph Walz also reprises his role of Blofeld from SPECTRE (it’s not a spoiler, it’s in the trailers) and it was good to see Blofeld and Bond play chess one last time and Seydoux’s performance as Bond’s “lady love” is “good enough”.
But it is the newcomers to this story that stand out to me - with one strong exception. Lashana Lynch (as a fellow 00 agent) and Billy Magnussen both shine in this film as do Ana de Armas as another femme that Bond encounters - this is the 3rd strong performance I’ve seen from the former model (following strong turns in BLADE RUNNER 2049 and opposite Craig in KNIVES OUT) and am eagerly awaiting what she will do next.
Only Rami Malek as villain Safin fails to be interesting and that’s where this film falls down. Safin’s encounters with Bond bring the energy and excitement down, thanks to Malek’s “underplaying” of a role that should have been overplayed. His performance just doesn’t work.
But, this is a Bond film, so the acting and plot always take a backseat to the action - and the action in this film is better than average, but not A-M-A-Z-I-N-G as one expects from Bond films. Couple that with Malek’s underwhelming performance and this Bond film will leave audiences with an unfulfilled feeling.
Unless, you are invested in the journey that Craig has taken Bond on - and the culmination of that journey to conclude this film. If you are invested in that, this film work. If you are not, it will not.
It worked for me.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Tessa Duvall is an independent artist, who depends on no one but herself. It doesn't matter that she's barely scraping by: she has her pride. When Tessa reluctantly agrees to accompany her best friend, Holly, to a party at the ritzy hotel where Holly works, she isn't expecting much. Tessa isn't one for the lavish affairs that take place at the Grange--a hotel owned by the two incredibly wealthy Monahan brothers. That night, however, Tessa meets Ross Monahan, a renowned playboy. The two have a one-night-stand and Tessa doesn't think much of it: until she realizes she's pregnant. Meanwhile, Holly, spends her entire life throwing herself at Ross' brother, Max, but Max doesn't give her the time of day.
So, while this is a romance, and we're sort of all supposed to know how it ends up, we--as readers--are also supposed to enjoy getting there. It's like the cheesy Christmas movies I've been enjoying during the holiday season. Sure, you know immediately how they will end, but you should like watching the lovelorn workaholic and the handsome Christmas tree farmer fall in love nonetheless. Alas, it just didn't happen for me in this one. The plot was enjoyable at first, but then it just seemed like the same things kept happening over and over. And over. Pregnancies! Weeping! Running away! Angst! Some of the plot twists were just so strange and seemed inserted to keep the book going, but it didn't need to keep going, because it was *lasting forever.*
The majority of the characters annoyed me for most of the novel. Tessa, our supposedly independent heroine, spends a decent chunk of the novel running from her issues. And while I suppose that meant she wasn't running into Ross' arms, it was irritating nonetheless. Ross seemed to just be a cad, and I honestly didn't blame Tessa for avoiding him. The supporting cast was more enjoyable, but after a while, the book seemed bogged down by their own endless problems and "will they or won't they" issues of their own, along with a lot of plot devoted to Ross' exploits. After a while, I really didn't care who ended up with whom, I just wanted it all to be over. I smiled a few times and laughed a bit (Holly is a trip) but overall, this one just irritated me.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review.
So, while this is a romance, and we're sort of all supposed to know how it ends up, we--as readers--are also supposed to enjoy getting there. It's like the cheesy Christmas movies I've been enjoying during the holiday season. Sure, you know immediately how they will end, but you should like watching the lovelorn workaholic and the handsome Christmas tree farmer fall in love nonetheless. Alas, it just didn't happen for me in this one. The plot was enjoyable at first, but then it just seemed like the same things kept happening over and over. And over. Pregnancies! Weeping! Running away! Angst! Some of the plot twists were just so strange and seemed inserted to keep the book going, but it didn't need to keep going, because it was *lasting forever.*
The majority of the characters annoyed me for most of the novel. Tessa, our supposedly independent heroine, spends a decent chunk of the novel running from her issues. And while I suppose that meant she wasn't running into Ross' arms, it was irritating nonetheless. Ross seemed to just be a cad, and I honestly didn't blame Tessa for avoiding him. The supporting cast was more enjoyable, but after a while, the book seemed bogged down by their own endless problems and "will they or won't they" issues of their own, along with a lot of plot devoted to Ross' exploits. After a while, I really didn't care who ended up with whom, I just wanted it all to be over. I smiled a few times and laughed a bit (Holly is a trip) but overall, this one just irritated me.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review.
Debbiereadsbook (1440 KP) rated Dead In The Pond (Grasmere Trilogy #2) in Books
Oct 18, 2018
i love Bishan!
This is book two in the Grasmere Cottage Mystery Trilogy, and you MUST read book one, Dead In The Garden, before you read this one. They are NOT stand alones and they follow on.
Bishan, now out of jail, and Valor still have no idea who is killing, and why Bish and Valor have been singled out. Then another body is discovered, and Valor's worst nightmare comes true. Bish tries, he really does, but he just wants things to go back to the way they were, before.
Bishan has his say here, and just Bishan. He is Autistic, and his minds does go off at tangents all over the place, and he does take some following.
But I'm so bloody glad he gets his voice here!!
The guys are trying to piece together who might be doing this, and getting nowhere. Neither are the police. Things seem to calm down, then Bish and Valor are in a car accident that appears to be anything but. Didn't expect that particular person to stoop quite so low, but when HE turns up dead, and Valor is faced with having to deal with the family who disowned him so long ago. Bish struggles with that, but knows it's gotta be done.
Bish's mind wanders all over the place, but always seems to come back to the point at hand, he just goes the long way round. You have to concentrate, pat attention and keep up! For ME?? That's a really good thing! Being a speed reader at the best of times, if I've gotta slow down, it's the sign of a great book.
There is almost two plot lines going on here: the murders, and whatever is happening with Valor's family and just WHY they are so desperate to bring him back to London, away from Bish. But Valor won't go, not without Bishan. He LOVES Bishan, I loved the scene where they decide to definitely NOT get married! The love these two have for each other comes across every time Valor reaches for Bish and is rewarded with their joined hands, every time Bish makes tea for Valor, in every single thing they do for each other.
I fell in love with Bishan here, and his mum!
I'm still none the wiser as to whodunnit or why, but it's great that I'm being kept on my toes!
OH!!! Massive cliffhanger here! There was one for book one, but here's is far bigger!
Since Bishan has such an interesting voice
5 full stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Bishan, now out of jail, and Valor still have no idea who is killing, and why Bish and Valor have been singled out. Then another body is discovered, and Valor's worst nightmare comes true. Bish tries, he really does, but he just wants things to go back to the way they were, before.
Bishan has his say here, and just Bishan. He is Autistic, and his minds does go off at tangents all over the place, and he does take some following.
But I'm so bloody glad he gets his voice here!!
The guys are trying to piece together who might be doing this, and getting nowhere. Neither are the police. Things seem to calm down, then Bish and Valor are in a car accident that appears to be anything but. Didn't expect that particular person to stoop quite so low, but when HE turns up dead, and Valor is faced with having to deal with the family who disowned him so long ago. Bish struggles with that, but knows it's gotta be done.
Bish's mind wanders all over the place, but always seems to come back to the point at hand, he just goes the long way round. You have to concentrate, pat attention and keep up! For ME?? That's a really good thing! Being a speed reader at the best of times, if I've gotta slow down, it's the sign of a great book.
There is almost two plot lines going on here: the murders, and whatever is happening with Valor's family and just WHY they are so desperate to bring him back to London, away from Bish. But Valor won't go, not without Bishan. He LOVES Bishan, I loved the scene where they decide to definitely NOT get married! The love these two have for each other comes across every time Valor reaches for Bish and is rewarded with their joined hands, every time Bish makes tea for Valor, in every single thing they do for each other.
I fell in love with Bishan here, and his mum!
I'm still none the wiser as to whodunnit or why, but it's great that I'm being kept on my toes!
OH!!! Massive cliffhanger here! There was one for book one, but here's is far bigger!
Since Bishan has such an interesting voice
5 full stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Jason X (2001) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Just when you thought it was safe to return to the local theater, along comes “Jason X”, the tenth installment of the popular Friday the 13th series. Having grown tired of the summer camp settings of the majority of the series the creators set recent installments in New York City as well as played with the formula by having Jason possess people as was shown in the last two films of the series.
This is a new era and this time Jason is back to his old tricks in an entirely new setting. After being cryogenically frozen in 2010, Jason and a female scientist are discovered by a student survey team and revived in the year 2455 where Earth has become uninhabitable. Warnings about Jason and his ability to regenerate from any injury are unheeded as the lure of big money is motivating the group’s leader Professor Lowe (Johnathan Potts) rather than the safety of the students and crew of the ship. Before long, Jason is up to his old tricks increasing his body count as he unleashes new and gruesome ways to dispatch the crew.
Being a horror film, the plot is secondary to the action and director James Isaac does not let the film get overly serious and even pokes fun at itself and the series. There are a number of lines and situations where the audience could ask if the characters could be any dumber, however in an interesting twist, these sort of situations as well as others are setup and carried off with intentional comedic results that had the audience laughing and thus providing a nice break from the scares and gore.
The cast is made up of largely unknowns and they are about as forgettable as the movie as they exist to be little more than fodder for Jason. I found it interesting to note that by the year 2455, students are still as ditzy as they are portrayed in 2002, and have libidos that make the 1984 LA Lakers look like a Vestal Virgin convention. That being said, “Jason X” is a standard horror film that has a few twists for the audience. Although you will have seen all of this before, the space setting and the humor helps make the film stand out from some of the stale installments of the series, but the lack of a story and character development keeps this film from being a true Horror classis. My advice, if you are a fan of the series gather your friends and wait for the video.
This is a new era and this time Jason is back to his old tricks in an entirely new setting. After being cryogenically frozen in 2010, Jason and a female scientist are discovered by a student survey team and revived in the year 2455 where Earth has become uninhabitable. Warnings about Jason and his ability to regenerate from any injury are unheeded as the lure of big money is motivating the group’s leader Professor Lowe (Johnathan Potts) rather than the safety of the students and crew of the ship. Before long, Jason is up to his old tricks increasing his body count as he unleashes new and gruesome ways to dispatch the crew.
Being a horror film, the plot is secondary to the action and director James Isaac does not let the film get overly serious and even pokes fun at itself and the series. There are a number of lines and situations where the audience could ask if the characters could be any dumber, however in an interesting twist, these sort of situations as well as others are setup and carried off with intentional comedic results that had the audience laughing and thus providing a nice break from the scares and gore.
The cast is made up of largely unknowns and they are about as forgettable as the movie as they exist to be little more than fodder for Jason. I found it interesting to note that by the year 2455, students are still as ditzy as they are portrayed in 2002, and have libidos that make the 1984 LA Lakers look like a Vestal Virgin convention. That being said, “Jason X” is a standard horror film that has a few twists for the audience. Although you will have seen all of this before, the space setting and the humor helps make the film stand out from some of the stale installments of the series, but the lack of a story and character development keeps this film from being a true Horror classis. My advice, if you are a fan of the series gather your friends and wait for the video.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Funny People (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
We all have our favorite Adam Sandler movies. There are the fans of The Wedding Singer and 50 First Dates and there’s the loyal camp who can quote Happy Gilmore or Big Daddy verbatim. You hear the name Adam Sandler’s and you think goofy, lovable guy. Dependably funny and quotable, from the mid-90’s on, he was the go-to comedian when we looked for an easy laugh. Of late, with the growing list of popular movies under his belt, when you think goofy, lovable funny guy, another name comes up: Seth Rogan. In “Funny People” you get them both.
Sandler plays George Simmons, a popular comedian who’s diagnosed with a fatal disease. Playing a comedian is hardly a stretch for Sandler, but for one whose dramatic turns can be counted on one hand, he plays the stricken man who’s suddenly face to face with his immortality quite convincingly. Rogan is Ira Wright, a desperate young comic who’s still vying for stage time at the local comedy club. George, perhaps recognizing a bit of himself or seeing a glimmer of comedic genius in Ira after catching his act, hires Ira to write for him.
Ira goes from writer and personal assistant/confidante to opening act as he helps George deal with his illness. He encourages the veteran comedian to reconnect with his compatriots in the business, opening the film to a parade of old faces from the stand-up circuit. George’s reflections on his life eventually lead him back to a lost love, Laura, played by Leslie Mann. Amidst the funny, laugh-out-loud scenes, are some believably tender moments, not just between Mann and Sandler but also, oddly enough, Sandler and Rogan.
Directing the comedic duo is writer/director Judd Apatow, who gave Rogan that growing list of successful movies after first casting him in The 40-Year-Old Virgin. Sandler could certainly use some of Apatow’s Midas-like touch after his recent string of marginal films. With a strong supporting cast of Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman who play Ira’s roommates Leo and Mark and Eric Bana, Laura’s husband, the movie is in turns hilarious and puzzling. The strong storyline of a veteran comedian taking a novice comic under his wings gets lost when George pursues a second chance with an unhappily married Laura. What could’ve been a touching passing of the torch tale is confused by an annoying love triangle. When the movie returns its focus to George and Ira, it’s saved, just barely, by the fact that we’re still watching two of comedy’s goofy, lovable funny guys.
Sandler plays George Simmons, a popular comedian who’s diagnosed with a fatal disease. Playing a comedian is hardly a stretch for Sandler, but for one whose dramatic turns can be counted on one hand, he plays the stricken man who’s suddenly face to face with his immortality quite convincingly. Rogan is Ira Wright, a desperate young comic who’s still vying for stage time at the local comedy club. George, perhaps recognizing a bit of himself or seeing a glimmer of comedic genius in Ira after catching his act, hires Ira to write for him.
Ira goes from writer and personal assistant/confidante to opening act as he helps George deal with his illness. He encourages the veteran comedian to reconnect with his compatriots in the business, opening the film to a parade of old faces from the stand-up circuit. George’s reflections on his life eventually lead him back to a lost love, Laura, played by Leslie Mann. Amidst the funny, laugh-out-loud scenes, are some believably tender moments, not just between Mann and Sandler but also, oddly enough, Sandler and Rogan.
Directing the comedic duo is writer/director Judd Apatow, who gave Rogan that growing list of successful movies after first casting him in The 40-Year-Old Virgin. Sandler could certainly use some of Apatow’s Midas-like touch after his recent string of marginal films. With a strong supporting cast of Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman who play Ira’s roommates Leo and Mark and Eric Bana, Laura’s husband, the movie is in turns hilarious and puzzling. The strong storyline of a veteran comedian taking a novice comic under his wings gets lost when George pursues a second chance with an unhappily married Laura. What could’ve been a touching passing of the torch tale is confused by an annoying love triangle. When the movie returns its focus to George and Ira, it’s saved, just barely, by the fact that we’re still watching two of comedy’s goofy, lovable funny guys.
JT (287 KP) rated The Lincoln Lawyer (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
When Edward Norton [SPOILER ALERT] raised a smirk at the end of Primal Fear to reveal himself as a sick and twisted killer it capped a sublime performance from an actor that would go on to do bigger and better things.
Primal Fear was a courtroom thriller that held you all the way to the bitter end, and as that solemn expression washed over poor Richard Gere‘s face at the end you could only stand up and applaud.
The Lincoln Lawyer travels down a similar premise, but despite all the twists and turns in a plot based on the novel by Michael Connelly it fails to keep the tension high enough to satisfy us to a pay off that is only blip on the thriller spectrum, I personally wanted something bigger.
Maybe you’re seduced by his Texan drawl or his searing good looks, either way its a solid performance from someone whose comfortable in this type of atmosphere
McConaughey plays Mick Haller a defence attourney working out the back of his sleak looking black Lincoln, and whose job it is to pretty much keep the scum of the earth on the streets, something which has obviously damaged his marraige with Maggie McPherson (Tomei). His reputation though is flipped over mid way through and we suddenly get an insight into a man that is as much a doting father as he is a great defence attorney.
Well alright, alright, alright!
When he’s asked to defend rich boy Louis Roulet (Phillippe) for beating a prostitute to within an inch of her life he suddenly gets a conscience when he realizes that the clean cut image might be a façade to something much more sinister. The film itself is not bad at all, and in parts it’s actually very good with McConaughey calling on his supporting cast for help which includes John Leguizamo and William H. Macy.
McConaughey’s court presence is smooth and charismatic, which would probably make him quite a good litigator in the real world. Maybe you’re seduced by his Texan drawl or his searing good looks, either way its a solid performance from someone who’s comfortable in this type of atmosphere.
Phillippe is certainly no Norton, and you know right off the bat that he’s as guilty as hell but its a good turn from him nonetheless. As thrillers go its up there and is thoroughly enjoyable, most notably for McConaughey’s performance which is a role that has been a long time coming for him, and one that he nails right to the court room wall.
Primal Fear was a courtroom thriller that held you all the way to the bitter end, and as that solemn expression washed over poor Richard Gere‘s face at the end you could only stand up and applaud.
The Lincoln Lawyer travels down a similar premise, but despite all the twists and turns in a plot based on the novel by Michael Connelly it fails to keep the tension high enough to satisfy us to a pay off that is only blip on the thriller spectrum, I personally wanted something bigger.
Maybe you’re seduced by his Texan drawl or his searing good looks, either way its a solid performance from someone whose comfortable in this type of atmosphere
McConaughey plays Mick Haller a defence attourney working out the back of his sleak looking black Lincoln, and whose job it is to pretty much keep the scum of the earth on the streets, something which has obviously damaged his marraige with Maggie McPherson (Tomei). His reputation though is flipped over mid way through and we suddenly get an insight into a man that is as much a doting father as he is a great defence attorney.
Well alright, alright, alright!
When he’s asked to defend rich boy Louis Roulet (Phillippe) for beating a prostitute to within an inch of her life he suddenly gets a conscience when he realizes that the clean cut image might be a façade to something much more sinister. The film itself is not bad at all, and in parts it’s actually very good with McConaughey calling on his supporting cast for help which includes John Leguizamo and William H. Macy.
McConaughey’s court presence is smooth and charismatic, which would probably make him quite a good litigator in the real world. Maybe you’re seduced by his Texan drawl or his searing good looks, either way its a solid performance from someone who’s comfortable in this type of atmosphere.
Phillippe is certainly no Norton, and you know right off the bat that he’s as guilty as hell but its a good turn from him nonetheless. As thrillers go its up there and is thoroughly enjoyable, most notably for McConaughey’s performance which is a role that has been a long time coming for him, and one that he nails right to the court room wall.