Search
Tobin Bell recommended Jeremiah Johnson (1972) in Movies (curated)
GustavoCampello (6 KP) rated Hive (2021) in Movies
Feb 10, 2022
Sundance Film Award winning film, it took me a while to write because even now things are still hammering in my head. It is a simple film, but extremely strong. A portrait of a society so different from ours, with a Muslim and sexist majority. The delivery to the role of all the actresses is impressive as it is so realistic. The scenes that caught my attention the most are the moments of calm and happiness of women in the midst of such a chaotic and sad life. The ghosts of conflict and the scars they cause are present in every second of the film and it manages to convey, as far as possible, the horror that is war. A film about empowerment that anyone who cares about feminism has to watch. Now I'm in the mood to try ajvar, I have a friend from Macedonia who confirmed that it's delicious, looking for it in a market.
Mysterious Traveller by Weather Report
Album
A quarter-century on, Weather Report's music has dated in a way that Miles Davis' best fusion...
Case of the Lost Child (The Trey Parker Story #2)
Book
The Trey Parker Story II: Case of the Lost Child, the second novel in this paranormal thriller...
Paranormal Thriller
Bill O'Reilly's Legends and Lies: The Real West
Bill O'Reilly and David Fisher
5.0
Rate It
Book
The must-have companion to Bill O'Reilly's historic series Legends and Lies: The Real West, a...
Wild West History
Erika (17788 KP) rated Lorena in TV
Feb 16, 2019
Warning: I am a true crime fiend and thought that this was so well done. I've also included something explicit at the end because it was really relevant.
Even if you don't know her by name, Lorena Bobbitt is the wife that cut off her abusive husband's man part. Even I remember it, and I was a kid at the time. The media painted her as a crazy, jealous woman.
Originally, that's what I thought too, until I watched a 20/20 special, in response to this special being shown at Sundance. They interviewed the husband, and I'm not even going to dignify this dude by using his name. I absolutely have nothing nice to say about this skeezball, so I won't say anything at all.
This special showed the testimony of Lorena, and various witnesses that testified to the violence/abuse that she received at the hands of her husband. The dude said all along that she was lying, and that she was just crazy. She did end up being not guilty for reason of insanity.
While I might have originally thought she was making it up (I'm a cynic), actually hearing the testimonies, and not just interpretations of it, made me believe her. I have to admit, I cried during some of it.
This is definitely a mature documentary, it shows pictures of the severed dude part, and there was also a barrage of photos of abused women.
The documentary also tackles the fact that women and men reacted very differently to this case.
(Explicit):
One of the quotes from a prostitute interviewed sums it up (how I remember it): Thousands of girls in Africa get their clits cut off, but one guy gets his penis cut off and the media loses its mind.
Now that's the truth.
Even if you don't know her by name, Lorena Bobbitt is the wife that cut off her abusive husband's man part. Even I remember it, and I was a kid at the time. The media painted her as a crazy, jealous woman.
Originally, that's what I thought too, until I watched a 20/20 special, in response to this special being shown at Sundance. They interviewed the husband, and I'm not even going to dignify this dude by using his name. I absolutely have nothing nice to say about this skeezball, so I won't say anything at all.
This special showed the testimony of Lorena, and various witnesses that testified to the violence/abuse that she received at the hands of her husband. The dude said all along that she was lying, and that she was just crazy. She did end up being not guilty for reason of insanity.
While I might have originally thought she was making it up (I'm a cynic), actually hearing the testimonies, and not just interpretations of it, made me believe her. I have to admit, I cried during some of it.
This is definitely a mature documentary, it shows pictures of the severed dude part, and there was also a barrage of photos of abused women.
The documentary also tackles the fact that women and men reacted very differently to this case.
(Explicit):
One of the quotes from a prostitute interviewed sums it up (how I remember it): Thousands of girls in Africa get their clits cut off, but one guy gets his penis cut off and the media loses its mind.
Now that's the truth.
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated Splice (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
I consider myself a pretty well educated horror-movie buff. As a child, my brother lovingly showed me movies like Critters” and Ghoulies, along with the Halloween and Friday the 13th series. Freddy Krueger scared me no more than Ronald McDonald did (and no, I don’t have a fear of clowns). I have pretty much grown immune to horror films and their ilk, so it takes a lot to get a rise out of me. Sadly, like many many others, Splice failed miserably in doing so.
Meet Clive (Adrian Brody) and Elsa (Sarah Polley), two very cliché, defiant scientists who lead their industry by creating a prototype of the first ever genetically engineered creature. These two creatures, dubbed “Fred” and “Ginger”, claim a genetic code that they hope to someday use for veterinary and medicinal advances. In light of their success, Elsa conveys her desire to start working with human genes, a desire her supervisors immediately shoot down. Ever rebellious, Elsa and Clive begin splicing human genomes on their own, hoping to create a creature that will be unequaled in its genetic capabilities and advances. Yet their result turns out to be something far more humanoid than previously hoped. Soon they find themselves with a creature, lovingly named “Dren”, that’s startlingly human and yet embodies the abilities of amphibian and bird, a creature that’s capable of employing human emotion and intelligence while reveling in its animalistic tendencies. Even with Elsa's nurturing, their experiment takes a turn for the worse.
At first I had high hopes for this film. It was an independent film that premiered at Sundance (it's also being shown currently at the Seattle Independent Film Festival), had Adrian Brody as its lead, and one of my favorite directors, Guillermo Del Toro as one of its executive producers. All in all, I thought this might prove to be one of those rare horror-movie exceptions. But I was wrong.
Remember that time when you first watched Saw in the movie theater, and how comical that scene was where Cary Elwes' character is sawing off his leg to break free to save his family, only to have the game end less than an hour or so later? It was supposed to be one of those "dramatic" moments but everyone ends up laughing instead. Yeah, that's kind of what happens in Splice. Numerous times throughout the movie, the audience ended up laughing at the more dramatic moments. Sadly, the plot in and of itself was decent.
Perhaps if there had been a bigger budget or if more attention had been paid to the acting and the movie's resolution it might have turned out in much better form. It's my understanding that the original Sundance film had been edited and altered, thus resulting in what we see. Whether this was for better or worse, I've no clue. Given the ridiculous ending and the generic horror-movie allure, it flopped terribly and the ending just seemed thrown together more than anything else. Plus, if the plot didn't get under your skin, Dren's chirps and warbles would.
The opening credits were amazing (I have to give credit where credit is due) and the beginning scenes weren't terribly bad. Overall, the movie is more comical than terrifying and the plot weaker than watered-down instant coffee. There are far too many holes in the storyline and Adrian Brody's character wasn't strong enough to carry a cast as obscure as this. I would wait to see what the DVD would hold for this one. Maybe the extras will help fill in the gaps or the unedited film will present itself in a different light?
Meet Clive (Adrian Brody) and Elsa (Sarah Polley), two very cliché, defiant scientists who lead their industry by creating a prototype of the first ever genetically engineered creature. These two creatures, dubbed “Fred” and “Ginger”, claim a genetic code that they hope to someday use for veterinary and medicinal advances. In light of their success, Elsa conveys her desire to start working with human genes, a desire her supervisors immediately shoot down. Ever rebellious, Elsa and Clive begin splicing human genomes on their own, hoping to create a creature that will be unequaled in its genetic capabilities and advances. Yet their result turns out to be something far more humanoid than previously hoped. Soon they find themselves with a creature, lovingly named “Dren”, that’s startlingly human and yet embodies the abilities of amphibian and bird, a creature that’s capable of employing human emotion and intelligence while reveling in its animalistic tendencies. Even with Elsa's nurturing, their experiment takes a turn for the worse.
At first I had high hopes for this film. It was an independent film that premiered at Sundance (it's also being shown currently at the Seattle Independent Film Festival), had Adrian Brody as its lead, and one of my favorite directors, Guillermo Del Toro as one of its executive producers. All in all, I thought this might prove to be one of those rare horror-movie exceptions. But I was wrong.
Remember that time when you first watched Saw in the movie theater, and how comical that scene was where Cary Elwes' character is sawing off his leg to break free to save his family, only to have the game end less than an hour or so later? It was supposed to be one of those "dramatic" moments but everyone ends up laughing instead. Yeah, that's kind of what happens in Splice. Numerous times throughout the movie, the audience ended up laughing at the more dramatic moments. Sadly, the plot in and of itself was decent.
Perhaps if there had been a bigger budget or if more attention had been paid to the acting and the movie's resolution it might have turned out in much better form. It's my understanding that the original Sundance film had been edited and altered, thus resulting in what we see. Whether this was for better or worse, I've no clue. Given the ridiculous ending and the generic horror-movie allure, it flopped terribly and the ending just seemed thrown together more than anything else. Plus, if the plot didn't get under your skin, Dren's chirps and warbles would.
The opening credits were amazing (I have to give credit where credit is due) and the beginning scenes weren't terribly bad. Overall, the movie is more comical than terrifying and the plot weaker than watered-down instant coffee. There are far too many holes in the storyline and Adrian Brody's character wasn't strong enough to carry a cast as obscure as this. I would wait to see what the DVD would hold for this one. Maybe the extras will help fill in the gaps or the unedited film will present itself in a different light?
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Searching (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A phenomenally intriguing social media-focused movie.
There have been many movies that have featured computing and, more specifically, social media at their heart. Some these have used the device of the view “from the screen”: 2016’s entertaining “Nerve” had elements of this, with the majority of the rest of the film being ‘augmented reality’ over the video. But it was 2014’s teen-horror “Unfriended” that set a new bar being seen entirely through a computer screen. No surprise then that the producer of that one – Timur Bekmambetov – is also behind “Searching”. For – although taking a few liberties with news vidoes, that may or may not be showing on Youtube – the whole film is shot through computer screens.
“Oh no!” you sigh “another gimmicky B-movie”. Far from it. Not only is this a really helpful training film for Windows tips and tricks! It’s also a totally absorbing crime mystery anchored by a superb script that keeps the audience guessing to the end.
John Cho – most famous as Sulu in the Star Trek reboots – plays David Kim who is trying to control his 16 year-old daughter Margot (Michelle Ya, in her movie debut). Kim, working in some form of product development, is no technology luddite, and when Margot disappears he uses his nous about social media to try to piece together the fragments of the puzzle to assist police Detective Vick (Debra Messing, “Grace” in “Will and Grace”).
To say any more would ruin what is a masterly roller-coaster ride of twists and turns. The script by first-time director Aneesh Chaganty and Sev Ohanian doesn’t let its audience relax for a moment, spawning more movie cul-de-sacs and red herrings than a classic Agatha Christie.
In the acting stakes John Cho – who really doesn’t get given much to do in the Star Trek background – is here impressively believable as the parent, struggling with both bringing up a teen – enough to stress any mortal out – and an emotional past. Ms La is also equally engaging, given most of her scenes are via close-up web cam.
Criticisms? The film, at 102 minutes, might have usefully trimmed 10 minutes to be an even tighter 90 minute classic. I also thought it pulled its punches in the finale, where a director of the calibre of Hitchcock might have gone for a much darker angle without a qualm.
But I’m nit-picking. This is an excellent thriller that also effectively drills into grief and bereavement (a warning for anyone struggling with this – especially via the “Big C”… you might want to give this one a miss… #Up). It also ironically highlights that whilst broadcasting by people has never been more prevelant, communication between family members is sometimes totally lacking.
Clearly people agree with me that it is excellent: the preview cinema audience I saw this with was buzzing afterwards, and this won the “Audience Award” at Sundance.
“Searching” will be on general release in the UK and US from August 31st 2018. Highly recommended!
“Oh no!” you sigh “another gimmicky B-movie”. Far from it. Not only is this a really helpful training film for Windows tips and tricks! It’s also a totally absorbing crime mystery anchored by a superb script that keeps the audience guessing to the end.
John Cho – most famous as Sulu in the Star Trek reboots – plays David Kim who is trying to control his 16 year-old daughter Margot (Michelle Ya, in her movie debut). Kim, working in some form of product development, is no technology luddite, and when Margot disappears he uses his nous about social media to try to piece together the fragments of the puzzle to assist police Detective Vick (Debra Messing, “Grace” in “Will and Grace”).
To say any more would ruin what is a masterly roller-coaster ride of twists and turns. The script by first-time director Aneesh Chaganty and Sev Ohanian doesn’t let its audience relax for a moment, spawning more movie cul-de-sacs and red herrings than a classic Agatha Christie.
In the acting stakes John Cho – who really doesn’t get given much to do in the Star Trek background – is here impressively believable as the parent, struggling with both bringing up a teen – enough to stress any mortal out – and an emotional past. Ms La is also equally engaging, given most of her scenes are via close-up web cam.
Criticisms? The film, at 102 minutes, might have usefully trimmed 10 minutes to be an even tighter 90 minute classic. I also thought it pulled its punches in the finale, where a director of the calibre of Hitchcock might have gone for a much darker angle without a qualm.
But I’m nit-picking. This is an excellent thriller that also effectively drills into grief and bereavement (a warning for anyone struggling with this – especially via the “Big C”… you might want to give this one a miss… #Up). It also ironically highlights that whilst broadcasting by people has never been more prevelant, communication between family members is sometimes totally lacking.
Clearly people agree with me that it is excellent: the preview cinema audience I saw this with was buzzing afterwards, and this won the “Audience Award” at Sundance.
“Searching” will be on general release in the UK and US from August 31st 2018. Highly recommended!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated CODA (2021) in Movies
Feb 25, 2022
Fairly Standard Fare
I am a film completionist, meaning I must see a film through to the end no matter what. At times, I take a break and come back to it (figuring I might not have been in the right mood for the film) but in other times, I fight through whatever emotion I am feeling (most of the time boredom) to keep focused on what the filmmakers are attempting to do in their film - and, at times, I am rewarded for this perseverance.
Such is the case with the Oscar Nominated film CODA. Written and Directed by Sian Heder (who was Oscar Nominated for her Screenplay), CODA tells the tale of Ruby who is a CODA (Child of Deaf Adults), who runs afoul of her family (especially her parents) and their expectations of her.
For the first half of this film it is pretty standard fare - one that has been shown on many, many movie screens throughout the years. Even though this one had the added “plot twist” of Ruby being able to hear while her Parents and Brothers are all deaf, the first half of this film never rose above the ordinary.
But, something happened in the 2nd half of the film, I fell in love with this family and their foibles and was rooting for them all to resolve their issues and for Ruby to get what she wanted.
Credit for this must go to Writer/Director Heder, who is not deaf, who came up with the idea/concept for the film and then felt a strong obligation to “get it right” for the deaf community. And get it right she does.
Her first good move was to cast Oscar Winner Marlee Matlin, a well known deaf performer and advocate for the Deaf Community. She brought instant credibility and star power to this film and she also insisted that the other 2 deaf characters in this film be performed by deaf performers.
Troy Kotsur is Oscar Nominated as Best Supporting Actor for his turn as Ruby’s father and he, for the first 1/2 of this film, acts in black and white - either funny (the comic relief) or angry (the drama) and I was unimpressed by him, but - just like the film - his performance gains some nuance in the 2nd half and he does have the “Oscar Moment” in this part of the movie that makes him a deserving nominee.
Emilia Jones is “just fine” in the lead role of Ruby and Daniel Durant (the other deaf actor in this film who plays her brother) and Lonnie Farmer (who plays her teacher) are also “fine”. Thank goodness we had the star wattage of Matlin to elevate the first half of the film before things got interesting - and nuanced - in the 2nd half.
Kudos to CODA for shining a light on a group that does not normally get the light shone upon it and kudos to the Academy for nominating this Sundance darling in the Best Picture category.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such is the case with the Oscar Nominated film CODA. Written and Directed by Sian Heder (who was Oscar Nominated for her Screenplay), CODA tells the tale of Ruby who is a CODA (Child of Deaf Adults), who runs afoul of her family (especially her parents) and their expectations of her.
For the first half of this film it is pretty standard fare - one that has been shown on many, many movie screens throughout the years. Even though this one had the added “plot twist” of Ruby being able to hear while her Parents and Brothers are all deaf, the first half of this film never rose above the ordinary.
But, something happened in the 2nd half of the film, I fell in love with this family and their foibles and was rooting for them all to resolve their issues and for Ruby to get what she wanted.
Credit for this must go to Writer/Director Heder, who is not deaf, who came up with the idea/concept for the film and then felt a strong obligation to “get it right” for the deaf community. And get it right she does.
Her first good move was to cast Oscar Winner Marlee Matlin, a well known deaf performer and advocate for the Deaf Community. She brought instant credibility and star power to this film and she also insisted that the other 2 deaf characters in this film be performed by deaf performers.
Troy Kotsur is Oscar Nominated as Best Supporting Actor for his turn as Ruby’s father and he, for the first 1/2 of this film, acts in black and white - either funny (the comic relief) or angry (the drama) and I was unimpressed by him, but - just like the film - his performance gains some nuance in the 2nd half and he does have the “Oscar Moment” in this part of the movie that makes him a deserving nominee.
Emilia Jones is “just fine” in the lead role of Ruby and Daniel Durant (the other deaf actor in this film who plays her brother) and Lonnie Farmer (who plays her teacher) are also “fine”. Thank goodness we had the star wattage of Matlin to elevate the first half of the film before things got interesting - and nuanced - in the 2nd half.
Kudos to CODA for shining a light on a group that does not normally get the light shone upon it and kudos to the Academy for nominating this Sundance darling in the Best Picture category.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated Equity (2016) in Movies
Jul 15, 2019
Today’s movie for your consideration is from the same selection of films you’d find ‘The Boiler Room’ with only this one is far more ‘reality based’. A financial thriller depicting the cutthroat and take-no-prisoners world of investment banking and Wall Street. ‘Equity’ is directed by Meera Menon and written by Sarah Megan Thomas, Alysia Renier, and Amy Fox. The film centers on investment banker, Naomi Bishop who is attempting to put together one of the biggest deals in her life and Wall Street history after her first ‘failure’, while combating rivals in and outside her own company, across gender lines, and a federal investigation focusing on someone she knows intimately … Or so she thinks.
‘Equity’ appeared in competition at the 2016 Sundance Film Festival and stars Anna Gunn, Sarah Megan Thomas, Alysia Renier, James Purefoy, Sophie Von Haselburg, Margret Colin, Lee Tergesen, and Craig Bierko.
Investment banker Naomi Bishop (Anna Gunn) was one of the most successful investment bankers on Wall Street. She was unstoppable. Until she lost her first deal. Well into her career, she is striving to keep her reputation intact as a ‘rain maker’. The one in her company that secures the deal every time and brings record profits for her company in the process. In jeopardy of missing out on a promotion, she pours all her effort into her latest deal and in the process passes over her assistant Erin Manning (Sarah Megan Thomas) for a promotion. An eager young woman with a new husband and a baby on the way, Erin also strives to break through the ‘gender lines’ that still exist and make her on mark on Wall Street. At the same time Samantha (Alysia Reiner), an investigator who has recently made the jump from investigating federal drug cases to white collar crime, is looking into the activities of investment banker Micheal Connor (James Purefoy). Who may or may not be with the same firm as Naomi Bishop and also Naomi’s significant other . Bishop soon discovers the tangled web centering on this latest deal and soon realizes that not only might she have been betrayed, but it might have been from more than one of the people she ‘almost trusts’.
I found this film to be very much an example of the chaos in the world of finance as well as the personal lives that people in this field may or may not have and the dangers posed when you become friends or close to others in said field. A great deal, no pun intended, hinges on this world. The ‘average person’s’ future can be decided here and they have absolutely no control over it and all the while you have these folks bickering amongst themselves and scrambling for every dollar. Sometimes breaking the law in the process and sometimes with no regard as to whether it affects those closest to them. It is indeed chaos in a purer form with no ‘happy ending’ and no ‘bad ending’. It’s a multi-billion dollar game of musical chairs with chairs and people being removed.
The film is ‘realistic’. As far as what we, outside that world, see it as. It’s all a numbers game with the potential for great profit or great lose to them. Your friends and those you trust will turn on you like that. They care about the money and the next big deal. People just fall by the waist side. It’s a rather refreshing take on ‘greed and ambition’. I give this film 4 out of 5 stars.
‘Equity’ appeared in competition at the 2016 Sundance Film Festival and stars Anna Gunn, Sarah Megan Thomas, Alysia Renier, James Purefoy, Sophie Von Haselburg, Margret Colin, Lee Tergesen, and Craig Bierko.
Investment banker Naomi Bishop (Anna Gunn) was one of the most successful investment bankers on Wall Street. She was unstoppable. Until she lost her first deal. Well into her career, she is striving to keep her reputation intact as a ‘rain maker’. The one in her company that secures the deal every time and brings record profits for her company in the process. In jeopardy of missing out on a promotion, she pours all her effort into her latest deal and in the process passes over her assistant Erin Manning (Sarah Megan Thomas) for a promotion. An eager young woman with a new husband and a baby on the way, Erin also strives to break through the ‘gender lines’ that still exist and make her on mark on Wall Street. At the same time Samantha (Alysia Reiner), an investigator who has recently made the jump from investigating federal drug cases to white collar crime, is looking into the activities of investment banker Micheal Connor (James Purefoy). Who may or may not be with the same firm as Naomi Bishop and also Naomi’s significant other . Bishop soon discovers the tangled web centering on this latest deal and soon realizes that not only might she have been betrayed, but it might have been from more than one of the people she ‘almost trusts’.
I found this film to be very much an example of the chaos in the world of finance as well as the personal lives that people in this field may or may not have and the dangers posed when you become friends or close to others in said field. A great deal, no pun intended, hinges on this world. The ‘average person’s’ future can be decided here and they have absolutely no control over it and all the while you have these folks bickering amongst themselves and scrambling for every dollar. Sometimes breaking the law in the process and sometimes with no regard as to whether it affects those closest to them. It is indeed chaos in a purer form with no ‘happy ending’ and no ‘bad ending’. It’s a multi-billion dollar game of musical chairs with chairs and people being removed.
The film is ‘realistic’. As far as what we, outside that world, see it as. It’s all a numbers game with the potential for great profit or great lose to them. Your friends and those you trust will turn on you like that. They care about the money and the next big deal. People just fall by the waist side. It’s a rather refreshing take on ‘greed and ambition’. I give this film 4 out of 5 stars.