Search
GoldieBlox and the Movie Machine
Education and Entertainment
App
***Heads up! You may experience instability when upgrading from earlier versions of this App. Please...
Ross (3284 KP) rated Rogue: Untouched in Books
May 11, 2021
Great X-person origin story+
Anyone who has seen the first X-men film will be aware of Rogue's backstory to an extent - an unfortunate teenage snog leaving a boy in a coma and resulting in her spending all her time isolated from touching others and spending her allowance on gloves.
In that film, Rogue is played by the wonderful Anna Paquin, who also starred as Sookie Stackhouse in True Blood. It both helped and confused me that in this book Rogue is waiting tables in a smalltown diner, blurring the lines between Rogue and Sookie for me. I kept expecting a vampire to walk through the diner doors. Instead, we are treated to the superb cajun Gambit, my favourite character from the early 90s cartoon series. He helps Rogue (Anna Marie) to discover that she has some mutant powers and how they could be used.
At the same time, Rogue meets two mysterious ladies who are seeking new students for their academy and encourage her to take a chance and give up her waiting career.
Rogue then finds herself embroiled in Gambit's past exploits with a mutant slave trader and has to quickly learn to use her powers (and those of the mutants around her) to escape their capture.
The book flows well, with plenty of character development for Rogue and a satisfying cast of familiar and new (to me at least!) mutants along the way - including one late reveal that I'm sure all readers will see coming a mile off.
While the book never dragged and the pace was great, I did struggle to get through this book as quickly as I had hoped. This is more down to things going on outwith my reading schedule (stupidly listening to 500 albums, marking professional exams and the kids' school holidays). However, while I can't quite put my finger on anything specific, the book didn't quite drag me back in for a sneaky 10 minutes during the day.
I did enjoy this book, as with some of the other Marvel novels issued recently, and would recommend it to anyone looking for something a bit super-hero-y but in a novel.
I received a free advance copy of this book from the publishers and netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
In that film, Rogue is played by the wonderful Anna Paquin, who also starred as Sookie Stackhouse in True Blood. It both helped and confused me that in this book Rogue is waiting tables in a smalltown diner, blurring the lines between Rogue and Sookie for me. I kept expecting a vampire to walk through the diner doors. Instead, we are treated to the superb cajun Gambit, my favourite character from the early 90s cartoon series. He helps Rogue (Anna Marie) to discover that she has some mutant powers and how they could be used.
At the same time, Rogue meets two mysterious ladies who are seeking new students for their academy and encourage her to take a chance and give up her waiting career.
Rogue then finds herself embroiled in Gambit's past exploits with a mutant slave trader and has to quickly learn to use her powers (and those of the mutants around her) to escape their capture.
The book flows well, with plenty of character development for Rogue and a satisfying cast of familiar and new (to me at least!) mutants along the way - including one late reveal that I'm sure all readers will see coming a mile off.
While the book never dragged and the pace was great, I did struggle to get through this book as quickly as I had hoped. This is more down to things going on outwith my reading schedule (stupidly listening to 500 albums, marking professional exams and the kids' school holidays). However, while I can't quite put my finger on anything specific, the book didn't quite drag me back in for a sneaky 10 minutes during the day.
I did enjoy this book, as with some of the other Marvel novels issued recently, and would recommend it to anyone looking for something a bit super-hero-y but in a novel.
I received a free advance copy of this book from the publishers and netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
My Town : Cinema
Education and Entertainment
App
It’s My Town Movie Night! Enter the theater and buy a ticket for the movie you’d like to see....
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Black Adam (2022) in Movies
Oct 25, 2022
About As Middle-Of-The-Road As You Can Get
The DC Extended Universe (DCEU) has been criticized by many (including the BankofMarquis) for being too dark, dour and somber. The powers-that-be at DC clearly have heard that criticism and with their latest installment - BLACK ADAM - they ditched that grim tone.
If only they would have spent time on character and plot development instead of blowing things up and dispatching nameless/faceless henchmen.
Based on a DC Comics character the BankofMarquis knew nothing about - and featuring SOME characters from DC that the BankofMarquis had heard of (o’k, one character, Hawkman), BLACK ADAM stars Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson as the titular anti-hero who comes out of hibernation after about 5,000 years to exact vengeance on those who wronged him.
It’s a tricky line to walk when you are working with an anti-hero bent on death and destruction, but it can be done if you bring some humanity and humility to the character and have this anti-hero character go on some sort of journey of discovery along the way.
While this film succeeds for the most part in bringing a lighter tone and some fun to the proceedings, it seems that Director Jaume Collet-Serra (Orphan) and the trio of writers that penned this weak script opted to play it safe and didn’t go too dark (at the beginning) or too “Super-Heroey” (if that is a word) at the end, so what you get is a safe, middle-of-the-road entertainment that is “good enough” and (this is damning with faint praise), one of the better offerings in the DCEU.
Let’s start with the Johnson in the titular role. The film (and film-makers) play down Johnson’s inherent charm throughout the film - to the detriment of all. Johnson plays Black Adam with a focus of purpose and a lack of awareness and humor. While this could have been played with great effect neither Johnson nor Director Collet-Serra leans into this enough to make it a strong part of the offering. True, Johnson’s inherent charisma and screen presence shines through no matter how much it is attempted to be tamped down, but the character just comes off as plain vanilla.
Of course, Johnson’s physical form has never looked better and he excels in the action sequences - which are plentiful and full of explosions and destruction (destruction that is never commented on). These scenes overwhelm the story and the plot - and is one of the reasons that this film doesn’t rise above decent. It has lots of blowing things up and SuperHeroes going “smashy-smashy” with no real emotional resonance or consequence to them.
As for the other actors in this film, Aldis Hodge (ONE NIGHT IN MIAMI) is strong as the only DC Character previous known to the BankofMarquis - Hawkman. He is a welcome addition to this universe and it would be great if he showed up in more DCEU films - including adding him to any Justice League films.
Sarah Shahi (PERSON OF INTEREST on TV) is always a welcome sight in a film - and she more than capably fills in as the representative of the filmgoing audience as the human who is wrapped up the proceedings of these SuperHeroes while Mohammed Amer (the TV series RAMY) provides strong comic relief as Shahi’s brother.
Unfortunately, the film felt the need to put in 2 teenage Superheroes (I guess to appeal to their target audience) in the guise of Atom Smasher, Noah Centineo (THE PERFECT DATE) and Cyclone, Quintessa Swindell (the TV Series IN TREATMENT). These are both decent enough - and good looking enough - performers to put on screen, and they both would look good in a CW TV Series like THE FLASH, but their characters are pointless in this film. They are add-ons that don’t really add anything to the events.
And then there is good ol’ former James Bond Pierce Brosnan as Dr. Fate, a character the BankofMarquis knew nothing about before this film, but now am clamoring for a standalone movie for Brosnan and this character. He was the best thing in this move and this veteran actor understood the assignment, bringing humor and gravitas when needed while doling out sage advice - Obi-Wan style - to both Hawkman and Black Adam throughout the film.
All-in-all, a decent time at the theater (the DCEU has certainly done worse), but, in the end, BLACK ADAM is as disposable as Cotton Candy, fun while it lasts, but not anything that will stay with you for any length of time.
Letter Grade: B (the most solid “B” that a film can have).
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
If only they would have spent time on character and plot development instead of blowing things up and dispatching nameless/faceless henchmen.
Based on a DC Comics character the BankofMarquis knew nothing about - and featuring SOME characters from DC that the BankofMarquis had heard of (o’k, one character, Hawkman), BLACK ADAM stars Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson as the titular anti-hero who comes out of hibernation after about 5,000 years to exact vengeance on those who wronged him.
It’s a tricky line to walk when you are working with an anti-hero bent on death and destruction, but it can be done if you bring some humanity and humility to the character and have this anti-hero character go on some sort of journey of discovery along the way.
While this film succeeds for the most part in bringing a lighter tone and some fun to the proceedings, it seems that Director Jaume Collet-Serra (Orphan) and the trio of writers that penned this weak script opted to play it safe and didn’t go too dark (at the beginning) or too “Super-Heroey” (if that is a word) at the end, so what you get is a safe, middle-of-the-road entertainment that is “good enough” and (this is damning with faint praise), one of the better offerings in the DCEU.
Let’s start with the Johnson in the titular role. The film (and film-makers) play down Johnson’s inherent charm throughout the film - to the detriment of all. Johnson plays Black Adam with a focus of purpose and a lack of awareness and humor. While this could have been played with great effect neither Johnson nor Director Collet-Serra leans into this enough to make it a strong part of the offering. True, Johnson’s inherent charisma and screen presence shines through no matter how much it is attempted to be tamped down, but the character just comes off as plain vanilla.
Of course, Johnson’s physical form has never looked better and he excels in the action sequences - which are plentiful and full of explosions and destruction (destruction that is never commented on). These scenes overwhelm the story and the plot - and is one of the reasons that this film doesn’t rise above decent. It has lots of blowing things up and SuperHeroes going “smashy-smashy” with no real emotional resonance or consequence to them.
As for the other actors in this film, Aldis Hodge (ONE NIGHT IN MIAMI) is strong as the only DC Character previous known to the BankofMarquis - Hawkman. He is a welcome addition to this universe and it would be great if he showed up in more DCEU films - including adding him to any Justice League films.
Sarah Shahi (PERSON OF INTEREST on TV) is always a welcome sight in a film - and she more than capably fills in as the representative of the filmgoing audience as the human who is wrapped up the proceedings of these SuperHeroes while Mohammed Amer (the TV series RAMY) provides strong comic relief as Shahi’s brother.
Unfortunately, the film felt the need to put in 2 teenage Superheroes (I guess to appeal to their target audience) in the guise of Atom Smasher, Noah Centineo (THE PERFECT DATE) and Cyclone, Quintessa Swindell (the TV Series IN TREATMENT). These are both decent enough - and good looking enough - performers to put on screen, and they both would look good in a CW TV Series like THE FLASH, but their characters are pointless in this film. They are add-ons that don’t really add anything to the events.
And then there is good ol’ former James Bond Pierce Brosnan as Dr. Fate, a character the BankofMarquis knew nothing about before this film, but now am clamoring for a standalone movie for Brosnan and this character. He was the best thing in this move and this veteran actor understood the assignment, bringing humor and gravitas when needed while doling out sage advice - Obi-Wan style - to both Hawkman and Black Adam throughout the film.
All-in-all, a decent time at the theater (the DCEU has certainly done worse), but, in the end, BLACK ADAM is as disposable as Cotton Candy, fun while it lasts, but not anything that will stay with you for any length of time.
Letter Grade: B (the most solid “B” that a film can have).
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Precious Blood (The Blessed, #1) in Books
Jun 7, 2018 (Updated May 18, 2019)
Precious Blood was a book I'd been dying to read since it first became available to buy. Everything about it sounded super interesting. Whilst a lot of other reviewers didn't really care for the book, I absolutely loved it! This book had so many feels for me, and it's definitely one of my favorites so far this year.
Agnes, Cecilia, and Lucy are all admitted to the emergency room on the same night. Agnes has slit her wrists, Cecilia had drowned (and has been resuscitated), and Lucy has overdosed on some pills. On that fateful night, they are all given bracelets by the mysterious Sebastian. They seek him out and find him at a church. Sebastian tells the girls they are saints, but Sebastian has escaped from a mental institution and is listed as being very dangerous. Is Sebastian telling the truth or are the girls' lives in danger?
The world building, like the cover, was creepy and beautiful all at the same time. For the most part, it was easy to picture everything that was happening to Sebastian, the girls, and everyone else in my head. I love how Hurley makes it seem like something such as what happened in Precious Blood could actually happen at any time. The one thing that sort of bothered me was the insta-love between Sebastian and the girls. Perhaps it was more of hero worship, but it still happened quite quickly.
The pacing is what lets Precious Blood down a bit, but not by much. The pacing is not slow at all, yet it's the opposite. There are a few times where the pacing just totally takes off which left me feeling very confused and wondering what had just happened. In fact, I counted this happening as three times during the story. Maybe I just wasn't paying enough attention, but the story did seem to be missing some leeway those few times. Other then those times, the pacing really worked and definitely held my attention especially during the first two-thirds of the story.
I loved the plot! It was super interesting reading about these three girls' lives. They each brought their own baggage to the table. I was constantly wondering if Sebastian was delusional when he told the girls that they were reincarnated as martyred saints and were in danger or if he was actually being serious. I really enjoyed the way the story played out.
I thought the characters were very well written. I loved the innocence that Agnes seemed to have. The only thing I didn't like about Agnes was how she treated her mother. She was very rude to her. I don't know if there's more of a back story between Agnes and her mother, but if there was, it wasn't mentioned much in the book. My favorite character was Cecelia. She came across as being very hardcore and like she didn't care about many things, but she was actually quite a loving and caring person. Even when she had no money, she'd still buy some food and a drink for the homeless guy who lived on the top of her building. Cecelia had a very big heart. Lucy started off being selfish, but even she has a change of heart. Sebastian was very charismatic. I like how dedicated he was to his cause and how he was willing to risk everything for it.
Trigger warnings include profanity, death, and some graphic violence.
Overall, Precious Blood is a very creepy but beautifully written book. Yes, there were some pacing problems but nothing too serious. I would definitely recommend Precious Blood by Tonya Hurley to those aged 17+. The plot is interesting and the characters are likable. I loved this book so much that I bought the next in the series after finishing this one.
Agnes, Cecilia, and Lucy are all admitted to the emergency room on the same night. Agnes has slit her wrists, Cecilia had drowned (and has been resuscitated), and Lucy has overdosed on some pills. On that fateful night, they are all given bracelets by the mysterious Sebastian. They seek him out and find him at a church. Sebastian tells the girls they are saints, but Sebastian has escaped from a mental institution and is listed as being very dangerous. Is Sebastian telling the truth or are the girls' lives in danger?
The world building, like the cover, was creepy and beautiful all at the same time. For the most part, it was easy to picture everything that was happening to Sebastian, the girls, and everyone else in my head. I love how Hurley makes it seem like something such as what happened in Precious Blood could actually happen at any time. The one thing that sort of bothered me was the insta-love between Sebastian and the girls. Perhaps it was more of hero worship, but it still happened quite quickly.
The pacing is what lets Precious Blood down a bit, but not by much. The pacing is not slow at all, yet it's the opposite. There are a few times where the pacing just totally takes off which left me feeling very confused and wondering what had just happened. In fact, I counted this happening as three times during the story. Maybe I just wasn't paying enough attention, but the story did seem to be missing some leeway those few times. Other then those times, the pacing really worked and definitely held my attention especially during the first two-thirds of the story.
I loved the plot! It was super interesting reading about these three girls' lives. They each brought their own baggage to the table. I was constantly wondering if Sebastian was delusional when he told the girls that they were reincarnated as martyred saints and were in danger or if he was actually being serious. I really enjoyed the way the story played out.
I thought the characters were very well written. I loved the innocence that Agnes seemed to have. The only thing I didn't like about Agnes was how she treated her mother. She was very rude to her. I don't know if there's more of a back story between Agnes and her mother, but if there was, it wasn't mentioned much in the book. My favorite character was Cecelia. She came across as being very hardcore and like she didn't care about many things, but she was actually quite a loving and caring person. Even when she had no money, she'd still buy some food and a drink for the homeless guy who lived on the top of her building. Cecelia had a very big heart. Lucy started off being selfish, but even she has a change of heart. Sebastian was very charismatic. I like how dedicated he was to his cause and how he was willing to risk everything for it.
Trigger warnings include profanity, death, and some graphic violence.
Overall, Precious Blood is a very creepy but beautifully written book. Yes, there were some pacing problems but nothing too serious. I would definitely recommend Precious Blood by Tonya Hurley to those aged 17+. The plot is interesting and the characters are likable. I loved this book so much that I bought the next in the series after finishing this one.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Tomb Raider (2018) in Movies
Mar 17, 2018
Not a bad start to this series
I have a confession to make, I have not seen the Angelina Jolie Lara Croft films, nor am I all that familiar with the video games that have spawned these movies, so it is with a fresh perspective that I judge how good (or bad) this film is.
And you know what? It's pretty good.
Starring Alicia Vikander, TOMB RAIDER is the origin story of how Lara Croft becomes a...ahem...Tomb Raider. This is the first starring role in a big "tent pole" film for her and she holds the center of the story quite well. Best known as the Oscar winner for Best Supporting Actress in THE DANISH GIRL (which I feel was a consolation prize for her from the Academy as a way of apologizing for not even nominating her for her Oscar-worthy performance in EX MACHINA), TOMB RAIDER transforms Ms. Vikander into a viable action star. Her Lara Croft is not a "super-hero" who is impervious to pain, rather, she is a real person (a tough one, I'll admit) but when she gets hurt, she feels it.
Doing everything but twirling his mustache is Walton Goggins as Mathias Vogel a rival Tomb Raider looking to raid the same tomb.
Why are they looking for this tomb? Does it matter? Nope. The fun is in the journey - and what fun there is. Norwegian Director Roar Uthaug (THE WAVE) keeps the action moving swiftly, jumping from one clue to another and one stunt to another, rarely slowing down for the audience to think - and that's a good thing, because as I'm thinking about this film a day later, I'm beginning to punch some pretty big holes in the plot. But...that doesn't matter because watching Croft/Vikander get herself out of trouble is entertaining.
Also shining in this film is Daniel Wu as Lu Ren, who's father, Lu Ren, disappeared chasing the same tomb as Croft's father (Dominic West). Ren and Crofft team up to race Vogel to the tomb.
Along for the ride in smaller-ish roles - in what appears to be the first film of a series - are such stalwarts as Nick Frost (uncredited), Jaime Winstone, Derek Jacobi and Kristen ScottThomas. All of whom must have been promised larger roles in later films in this series.
A solid start to the series. I, for one, will look forward to the next tomb that Lara Croft raids.
Letter Grade B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And you know what? It's pretty good.
Starring Alicia Vikander, TOMB RAIDER is the origin story of how Lara Croft becomes a...ahem...Tomb Raider. This is the first starring role in a big "tent pole" film for her and she holds the center of the story quite well. Best known as the Oscar winner for Best Supporting Actress in THE DANISH GIRL (which I feel was a consolation prize for her from the Academy as a way of apologizing for not even nominating her for her Oscar-worthy performance in EX MACHINA), TOMB RAIDER transforms Ms. Vikander into a viable action star. Her Lara Croft is not a "super-hero" who is impervious to pain, rather, she is a real person (a tough one, I'll admit) but when she gets hurt, she feels it.
Doing everything but twirling his mustache is Walton Goggins as Mathias Vogel a rival Tomb Raider looking to raid the same tomb.
Why are they looking for this tomb? Does it matter? Nope. The fun is in the journey - and what fun there is. Norwegian Director Roar Uthaug (THE WAVE) keeps the action moving swiftly, jumping from one clue to another and one stunt to another, rarely slowing down for the audience to think - and that's a good thing, because as I'm thinking about this film a day later, I'm beginning to punch some pretty big holes in the plot. But...that doesn't matter because watching Croft/Vikander get herself out of trouble is entertaining.
Also shining in this film is Daniel Wu as Lu Ren, who's father, Lu Ren, disappeared chasing the same tomb as Croft's father (Dominic West). Ren and Crofft team up to race Vogel to the tomb.
Along for the ride in smaller-ish roles - in what appears to be the first film of a series - are such stalwarts as Nick Frost (uncredited), Jaime Winstone, Derek Jacobi and Kristen ScottThomas. All of whom must have been promised larger roles in later films in this series.
A solid start to the series. I, for one, will look forward to the next tomb that Lara Croft raids.
Letter Grade B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated The Fourth Monkey (4MK Thriller, #1) in Books
Mar 15, 2018
<img src="https://bookbumzuky.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/4mk-giveaway-v2.png"; width="430" height="430" alt="win the book!"/>
<a href="https://bookbum.co.uk/2017/06/27/4mk/">WIN A HARDBACK COPY OF THE BOOK HERE!</a> (UK only)
------
I had so many opinions running through my head when I was reading this. At first I was excited and intrigued to find out more, then I was slightly reluctant to read it towards the middle (though I think factors outside of the book were influencing my opinion at that point) and then by the end I was super eager to finish it (in a good way) and see where it went.
This is a fast paced thriller thats going to keep you rooted to your seat. I, unfortunately, had so much to do while reading this book (work and personal life) that I wasnt able to sit and read huge chunks of it and I think thats why I got a little slow to reading it towards the middle. If youre going to read this book, my advice is to free up some of your time so you can bulk read it, otherwise some of the more shocking revelations and continuous fast paced action wont have its desired effect.
The first thing I loved about this novel is the fact that our protagonist is an older man, not some sprightly new thing coming straight out of police school. It was nice to have that less popular character as our hero. The second thing I loved was the Diary entries. I (mainly) love books that jump back and forth between past and present so when these skin crawlingly creepy diary entries started, I was pumped! They never let me down, through the entire thing they were disturbing and really added something to the novel.
My only complaint? Well, this was a buddy read with my pal Annie @ The Misstery, and we knew who 4MK was the moment we met them. Kind of a bummer but at the same time it was quite fun to see if we were actually going to be right or not (we were). It was still good fun to find out how everything came together in the end.
Overall, I really enjoyed this novel and Im already excited to see another book in the series will be out next year. The ending lines of the novel are chilling and I cant wait for them to be followed up!
<i>Thanks to HQ for sending me a copy of the book in exchange for an honest review!</i>
<a href="https://bookbum.co.uk/2017/06/27/4mk/">WIN A HARDBACK COPY OF THE BOOK HERE!</a> (UK only)
------
I had so many opinions running through my head when I was reading this. At first I was excited and intrigued to find out more, then I was slightly reluctant to read it towards the middle (though I think factors outside of the book were influencing my opinion at that point) and then by the end I was super eager to finish it (in a good way) and see where it went.
This is a fast paced thriller thats going to keep you rooted to your seat. I, unfortunately, had so much to do while reading this book (work and personal life) that I wasnt able to sit and read huge chunks of it and I think thats why I got a little slow to reading it towards the middle. If youre going to read this book, my advice is to free up some of your time so you can bulk read it, otherwise some of the more shocking revelations and continuous fast paced action wont have its desired effect.
The first thing I loved about this novel is the fact that our protagonist is an older man, not some sprightly new thing coming straight out of police school. It was nice to have that less popular character as our hero. The second thing I loved was the Diary entries. I (mainly) love books that jump back and forth between past and present so when these skin crawlingly creepy diary entries started, I was pumped! They never let me down, through the entire thing they were disturbing and really added something to the novel.
My only complaint? Well, this was a buddy read with my pal Annie @ The Misstery, and we knew who 4MK was the moment we met them. Kind of a bummer but at the same time it was quite fun to see if we were actually going to be right or not (we were). It was still good fun to find out how everything came together in the end.
Overall, I really enjoyed this novel and Im already excited to see another book in the series will be out next year. The ending lines of the novel are chilling and I cant wait for them to be followed up!
<i>Thanks to HQ for sending me a copy of the book in exchange for an honest review!</i>
Slugterra: Slug it Out!
Games
App
Slug it out! and become the best slugslinger of all time! Play as hero Eli Shane in this fast-paced...
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Batman Begins (2005) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
Batman has always seemed to make great viewing and with the darker takes on him of the past to decades, great movies. This was a real treat though. It’s almost a rational take on an irrational super hero. Christopher Nolan has managed to give Batman a human face and the world he inhabits a sense of scale and realism. But that’s not to say that it is lacking in the sense of the theatrical.
Back in 2005, the hype for this film was building, with a new take on the old comic hero taking shape. Though I must admit that the design of the new Batmobile didn’t look cool to me, but I loved the concept of rooting him in a real world. The other questionable point was that lack of the big hitters in terms of the villains. The Joker, Penguin, Riddler and Catwomen were dumped in favour of The Scarecrow and Ra’s al Ghul, with only one that I, as the un-indoctrinated in comic book lore, that I had heard of being The Scarecrow.
But this was not to be a typical Batman film in any sense of the word. In June 2005, Batman was reborn and not only had the career of an independently styled filmmaker, Christopher Nolan blown into the big leagues but Blockbusters had just been redefined, an event not dis-similar in effect t those of Jaws and Star Wars in the 1970’s.
Batman, a Warner Bros. cash cow for decades, was about to cross all the main lines within the industry and a blockbuster with art house sensibilities and real intelligence was about to born. It’s not the first, but it opened the door for Nolan and his like to change the way we think about movies of this kind. It doesn’t seem to be that long ago that Marvel was dominating cinemas was some first-rate adaptations such as X-Men, Spider-man and the underrated Hulk, which in many ways may be classed as a prototype for this, with art house direction from Ang Lee.
The plot of Batman Begins isn’t really that important though that’s not to sell it short. It’s a highly developed and conceived story, packed from the opening frame to the 140th minute, but it’s simply the perfect blend of the evolution of Bruce Wayne into Batman, and the usual diabolical plans of the super-villain, only it doesn’t feel like that when you’re watching it. It feels like a well judged story about a traumatised young man, struggling to come terms with his parents murder, and his place in the world.
Luckily for him, his family are billionaires and his butler is Alfred, or more importantly, Michael Caine! There are of course a whole host of contrivances to explain how Batman’s image was forged, how the Batcave was created and where the Batmobile came from, but no-one’s suggesting that this a documentary. This is a more grounded and psychological approach to the story of a nutcase who dressed up like a bat and fights crime without a single superpower to his aid.
But it’s how Nolan brings all this together that works so well. He addresses things so subtly that you can end up missing them if you blink, or at least fail to see them coming. Wayne is turned into a flamboyant excentric to maintain a distance from his friends, if he even has any. The Batcave never ends up looking how we’d expect either, but it is full of bats if that helps and he does park his car there.
It is not until The Dark Knight that we see a Batcave of sorts and that isn’t even in the grounds of Wayne Manor. So, the direction, conception and writing are great, what about the casting? Christian Bale is Wayne/Batman for me, though the animatistic tone to his voice maybe a little overdone, but I do get it. Katie Holmes is the weakest link and am glad that she was recast for the sequel. The rest of the players are first-rate and this may well be on of the best casts ever assembled for a single film in my opinion.
Gary Oldman, so understated as Lt. Gordon, Caine as Alfred is perfect; Liam Neeson is on top form, which he isn’t always, let’s face it and Morgan Freeman, like Oldman and Caine can seemingly do no wrong. Then there’s Hans Zimmer‘s collaboration with James Newton Howard for the score which is one of Zimmer’s best. Howard is an able composer and he clearly provided many of the excellent emotional riffs, but it was Zimmer who brought this together with his dominant, strident style, colossal beats and pacing.
The look and sound of this film sets it apart from so many of its brethren. Batman Begins is a truly original, relentless and groundbreaking movie that is the best of the comic book movies by a mile, but not necessarily the best comic book adaptation. Spider-man or Watchmen for example, may qualify for the fact that they more literally reflect their respective sources but Nolan’s masterpiece is a blueprint as to how film should tackle such adaptations.
And yes, that’s right; Batman Begins is a masterpiece if ever there was one, though a slightly lesser one in comparison to its own sequel, The Dark Knight which may have completely rewritten the handbook.
Back in 2005, the hype for this film was building, with a new take on the old comic hero taking shape. Though I must admit that the design of the new Batmobile didn’t look cool to me, but I loved the concept of rooting him in a real world. The other questionable point was that lack of the big hitters in terms of the villains. The Joker, Penguin, Riddler and Catwomen were dumped in favour of The Scarecrow and Ra’s al Ghul, with only one that I, as the un-indoctrinated in comic book lore, that I had heard of being The Scarecrow.
But this was not to be a typical Batman film in any sense of the word. In June 2005, Batman was reborn and not only had the career of an independently styled filmmaker, Christopher Nolan blown into the big leagues but Blockbusters had just been redefined, an event not dis-similar in effect t those of Jaws and Star Wars in the 1970’s.
Batman, a Warner Bros. cash cow for decades, was about to cross all the main lines within the industry and a blockbuster with art house sensibilities and real intelligence was about to born. It’s not the first, but it opened the door for Nolan and his like to change the way we think about movies of this kind. It doesn’t seem to be that long ago that Marvel was dominating cinemas was some first-rate adaptations such as X-Men, Spider-man and the underrated Hulk, which in many ways may be classed as a prototype for this, with art house direction from Ang Lee.
The plot of Batman Begins isn’t really that important though that’s not to sell it short. It’s a highly developed and conceived story, packed from the opening frame to the 140th minute, but it’s simply the perfect blend of the evolution of Bruce Wayne into Batman, and the usual diabolical plans of the super-villain, only it doesn’t feel like that when you’re watching it. It feels like a well judged story about a traumatised young man, struggling to come terms with his parents murder, and his place in the world.
Luckily for him, his family are billionaires and his butler is Alfred, or more importantly, Michael Caine! There are of course a whole host of contrivances to explain how Batman’s image was forged, how the Batcave was created and where the Batmobile came from, but no-one’s suggesting that this a documentary. This is a more grounded and psychological approach to the story of a nutcase who dressed up like a bat and fights crime without a single superpower to his aid.
But it’s how Nolan brings all this together that works so well. He addresses things so subtly that you can end up missing them if you blink, or at least fail to see them coming. Wayne is turned into a flamboyant excentric to maintain a distance from his friends, if he even has any. The Batcave never ends up looking how we’d expect either, but it is full of bats if that helps and he does park his car there.
It is not until The Dark Knight that we see a Batcave of sorts and that isn’t even in the grounds of Wayne Manor. So, the direction, conception and writing are great, what about the casting? Christian Bale is Wayne/Batman for me, though the animatistic tone to his voice maybe a little overdone, but I do get it. Katie Holmes is the weakest link and am glad that she was recast for the sequel. The rest of the players are first-rate and this may well be on of the best casts ever assembled for a single film in my opinion.
Gary Oldman, so understated as Lt. Gordon, Caine as Alfred is perfect; Liam Neeson is on top form, which he isn’t always, let’s face it and Morgan Freeman, like Oldman and Caine can seemingly do no wrong. Then there’s Hans Zimmer‘s collaboration with James Newton Howard for the score which is one of Zimmer’s best. Howard is an able composer and he clearly provided many of the excellent emotional riffs, but it was Zimmer who brought this together with his dominant, strident style, colossal beats and pacing.
The look and sound of this film sets it apart from so many of its brethren. Batman Begins is a truly original, relentless and groundbreaking movie that is the best of the comic book movies by a mile, but not necessarily the best comic book adaptation. Spider-man or Watchmen for example, may qualify for the fact that they more literally reflect their respective sources but Nolan’s masterpiece is a blueprint as to how film should tackle such adaptations.
And yes, that’s right; Batman Begins is a masterpiece if ever there was one, though a slightly lesser one in comparison to its own sequel, The Dark Knight which may have completely rewritten the handbook.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Schrodinger's Film
There is a thought experiment that is used to help make sense of the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Say you have a cat, a box and a fragile vial of poison. You put the cat and the poison in the box knowing that the vial may break, you lunatic.
At this point, so goes the thought experiment, until we can perceive whether or not the cat is dead, the cat is dead AND alive simultaneously, and it is only when you look into the box that you know whether you have a friend for life or a Korean meal.
I bring this up because I often insist that I prefer a bad movie with great moments than a movie that’s adequate across the board, but Guy Ritchie’s most recent film certainly puts that to the test. It’s almost my favourite film of the year but is full of nigh-unforgiveable blunders that I don’t think I can watch it again. But I don’t regret seeing it. King Arthur is both good and not good and the cat is still in the box.
Well, I might as well start with what’s good about the film. For one, the character of Arthur himself has a pretty interesting arc. Normally interpretations of the Arthur myth focus on the King bit, so despite it being yet another origin story, it at least is for a character who rarely gets one, and it’s an interesting spin on the reluctant hero arc.
In addition, the world itself feels like it desperately needs a hero. You get the sense that this world is falling apart, which is much better than some other chosen one narratives like Harry Potter, where even when Voldemort took over the wizarding world he didn’t seem to do anything. Also, this is a fantasy film that isn’t just Lord of the Rings again, but a more Celtic mystic mythology that is ripe for exploration.
Then there’s Jude Law, who is so moustache-twirlingly evil that he’s hilarious. He’s clearly having the time of his life playing this cartoon super villain and making him campy enough to be fun while still threatening and compelling when he needs to be.
Shame about the rest of the cast, who all have the same personality, that of “Ah’m just one o’ tha lads, apples and pears, apples and pears.” It’s like a Chelsea game but set in the Dark Ages. So it’s identical to a Chelsea game. The only exception is Astrid Frizbee’s mage, whose intense magic power is so devastating that she manages to put a sleep spell on the audience every time she opens her noise-hole and lets out a monotone bored drone.
There’s also the action, and Hollywood, we need to talk. I thought that shaky cam was just a phase, but I’ve seen you doing it again, and you need to stop. I’ve played VR games where you do nothing but ride particularly unstable cows and came out the other end less motion sick than your sword fighting scenes. Come on, you’re better than this, and we just what’s best for you, so just buy a steady-cam already.
Maybe it’s Guy Ritchie himself, though. Nothing in the film seems to last longer than three minutes aside Arthur’s whining. Sometimes it works, like the very snappy but informative way we see Arthur grow from stupid baby to stupid adult, and sometimes it’s stupid, like when an entire other movie’s worth of content gets squashed into an uninspired montage.
But that’s the great dilemma; the montages are good and bad, like the movie itself. You will only enjoy the movie if you enjoy the movie but if you don’t then you won’t. I write this piece a defeated critic, ladies and gentlemen. Is it worth seeing? I don’t really know. A bigger fan of Guy Ritchie or quantum mechanics than I will probably get something out of it and there are worse movies out there, but it also can’t help but disappoint somehow. The cat isn’t dead, but it has a bit of a cold.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/25/schrodingers-film-king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-review/
At this point, so goes the thought experiment, until we can perceive whether or not the cat is dead, the cat is dead AND alive simultaneously, and it is only when you look into the box that you know whether you have a friend for life or a Korean meal.
I bring this up because I often insist that I prefer a bad movie with great moments than a movie that’s adequate across the board, but Guy Ritchie’s most recent film certainly puts that to the test. It’s almost my favourite film of the year but is full of nigh-unforgiveable blunders that I don’t think I can watch it again. But I don’t regret seeing it. King Arthur is both good and not good and the cat is still in the box.
Well, I might as well start with what’s good about the film. For one, the character of Arthur himself has a pretty interesting arc. Normally interpretations of the Arthur myth focus on the King bit, so despite it being yet another origin story, it at least is for a character who rarely gets one, and it’s an interesting spin on the reluctant hero arc.
In addition, the world itself feels like it desperately needs a hero. You get the sense that this world is falling apart, which is much better than some other chosen one narratives like Harry Potter, where even when Voldemort took over the wizarding world he didn’t seem to do anything. Also, this is a fantasy film that isn’t just Lord of the Rings again, but a more Celtic mystic mythology that is ripe for exploration.
Then there’s Jude Law, who is so moustache-twirlingly evil that he’s hilarious. He’s clearly having the time of his life playing this cartoon super villain and making him campy enough to be fun while still threatening and compelling when he needs to be.
Shame about the rest of the cast, who all have the same personality, that of “Ah’m just one o’ tha lads, apples and pears, apples and pears.” It’s like a Chelsea game but set in the Dark Ages. So it’s identical to a Chelsea game. The only exception is Astrid Frizbee’s mage, whose intense magic power is so devastating that she manages to put a sleep spell on the audience every time she opens her noise-hole and lets out a monotone bored drone.
There’s also the action, and Hollywood, we need to talk. I thought that shaky cam was just a phase, but I’ve seen you doing it again, and you need to stop. I’ve played VR games where you do nothing but ride particularly unstable cows and came out the other end less motion sick than your sword fighting scenes. Come on, you’re better than this, and we just what’s best for you, so just buy a steady-cam already.
Maybe it’s Guy Ritchie himself, though. Nothing in the film seems to last longer than three minutes aside Arthur’s whining. Sometimes it works, like the very snappy but informative way we see Arthur grow from stupid baby to stupid adult, and sometimes it’s stupid, like when an entire other movie’s worth of content gets squashed into an uninspired montage.
But that’s the great dilemma; the montages are good and bad, like the movie itself. You will only enjoy the movie if you enjoy the movie but if you don’t then you won’t. I write this piece a defeated critic, ladies and gentlemen. Is it worth seeing? I don’t really know. A bigger fan of Guy Ritchie or quantum mechanics than I will probably get something out of it and there are worse movies out there, but it also can’t help but disappoint somehow. The cat isn’t dead, but it has a bit of a cold.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/25/schrodingers-film-king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-review/