Search
Search results
Caitlin Ann Cherniak (85 KP) rated Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire in Books
Oct 22, 2018
Why do I have a feeling that the guy who wrote this just went on a rant and decided to put that whole rant into one giant ass book?
Don't get me wrong. This book has a couple of points, especially when he discusses religion and the Salem witch trails. However, when he starts getting into the more modern points of fantasy, either I didn't see it at all, or he was basically really poking fun at what the whole point of fantasy really is.
The title of the book is Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire. If he's going to use the word "Haywire" in a title, he better show pretty clear examples of why America is being flushed down the toilet. Poking fun at people cosplaying, playing video games, and being able to have fun at Disneyland or Disney World is not a point to say why America seems to be failing as a society. In fact, I can make a counterargument by saying that flights of fantasy in those contexts are actually forming the culture, not destroying it. Because of the evolution of entertainment (such as film, video games, etc.), it's easier to envision fantasy stories come to life. Before that, we had books, and no one was poking fun at books throughout this entire giant essay. Not only is that missing the forest for the trees, but it makes the argument of people being shown too much fantasy through visual mass media is a very shallow take on the topic of fantasy.
Also, the premise of the book talks about how people are arguing that Trump is ruining America because of his bullshit (and they're not wrong). I expected the book to discuss politics more in depth as a way to add onto the fantasyland argument. The book doesn't even do that, not even at the end when it "comes full circle" back to the Trump argument. If anything, the book kinda let it slide that it was for Trump and his radical ideas rather than finding flaws in them as people would expect. Look, if the book ended up explaining why Trump was trying to escape the Fantasyland argument, I'm all for reading that to make my own points. However, by just simply saying that Trump is being more realistic without any real reason, that also makes this essay a shallow writing. People want to read on why Trump has realistic views or not. If the point of this essay is talking about how fantastic ideas are plaguing a great nation, why not add that into the mix?
This essay was a real hit and miss for me. For something that's as thick as War and Peace, I expected this essay to have as juicy material as War and Peace, but it doesn't. It's just a 500 year rant on how "stupid" society can be, and that lost me as I finished the book.
Don't get me wrong. This book has a couple of points, especially when he discusses religion and the Salem witch trails. However, when he starts getting into the more modern points of fantasy, either I didn't see it at all, or he was basically really poking fun at what the whole point of fantasy really is.
The title of the book is Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire. If he's going to use the word "Haywire" in a title, he better show pretty clear examples of why America is being flushed down the toilet. Poking fun at people cosplaying, playing video games, and being able to have fun at Disneyland or Disney World is not a point to say why America seems to be failing as a society. In fact, I can make a counterargument by saying that flights of fantasy in those contexts are actually forming the culture, not destroying it. Because of the evolution of entertainment (such as film, video games, etc.), it's easier to envision fantasy stories come to life. Before that, we had books, and no one was poking fun at books throughout this entire giant essay. Not only is that missing the forest for the trees, but it makes the argument of people being shown too much fantasy through visual mass media is a very shallow take on the topic of fantasy.
Also, the premise of the book talks about how people are arguing that Trump is ruining America because of his bullshit (and they're not wrong). I expected the book to discuss politics more in depth as a way to add onto the fantasyland argument. The book doesn't even do that, not even at the end when it "comes full circle" back to the Trump argument. If anything, the book kinda let it slide that it was for Trump and his radical ideas rather than finding flaws in them as people would expect. Look, if the book ended up explaining why Trump was trying to escape the Fantasyland argument, I'm all for reading that to make my own points. However, by just simply saying that Trump is being more realistic without any real reason, that also makes this essay a shallow writing. People want to read on why Trump has realistic views or not. If the point of this essay is talking about how fantastic ideas are plaguing a great nation, why not add that into the mix?
This essay was a real hit and miss for me. For something that's as thick as War and Peace, I expected this essay to have as juicy material as War and Peace, but it doesn't. It's just a 500 year rant on how "stupid" society can be, and that lost me as I finished the book.
Debbiereadsbook (1449 KP) rated Memory Lane (Pine Cove #5) in Books
Mar 13, 2021
I loved that everyone plays a part here!
I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book 5 in the Pine Cove series, and while not necessary to have read the other 4, I would personally recommedn that you do. It will give you a better feel for Pine Cove, and more importantly, for the people who live in it, and just why what happens here is NOT the norm for this town.
Jay is Robin's brother. Angel is his best friend from childhood and Jay has loved Angel since that day on the bridge, 16 years ago. Now having Angel so close, Jay is struggling to keep his feelings hidden. Then when Angel has an accident at work, and loses some memory, Jay steps up to look after Angel and puts himself in a world more hurt. Angel, on the other hand, remembers Jay. Jay is the first thing he says when he wakes up, and he remembers all the places that he and Jay went to as kids. ALL his memories revolve around Jay. Everything he feels, revolves around Jay. Is he attracted to Jay?
I enjoyed this, I really did but it doesn't pack the punch that the first three books carry.
Oh don't get me wrong, it's a wonderfully written, well told book, but it doesn't sucker punch you quite so much and I kinda missed that.
The love Jay has for Angel is palable, right from the start, and that carries right through the book, even if it thought it might cost him their friendship. Angel's feeling for Jay are a little less. . . . romantic but nonetheless intense. It just takes Angel time to filter all the noise in his head from his ex, to see what he really feels for Jay; how MUCH he feels for Jay.
I loved the fact that it's on the bridge, when Jay fell in love with Angel, that Angel lets his feelings really come out!
I could see what had happened to cause the accident coming at me, just as soon as the instigator makes themselves known causing trouble. I didn't think they quite go as far as they do though!
I loved that everyone plays a part here. Robin and Dair; Scout and Emery, Swift and Micha, and Ben and Elias: they all take part to some degree or other. Kamran too, and something happens here that makes me wonder what is going on with him!
And halle-flipping-lujah! Ava and Peyton finally FINALLY admit, out loud, in front of everyone, what they mean to each other and I still want them to have a story!
So from this book, I want two more: Kamran's story and Ava/Peyton's! Greedy? Moi?? I don't know what you mean!
A great read, though, all in all!
4 solid stars
**same worded review will appear elewhere**
This is book 5 in the Pine Cove series, and while not necessary to have read the other 4, I would personally recommedn that you do. It will give you a better feel for Pine Cove, and more importantly, for the people who live in it, and just why what happens here is NOT the norm for this town.
Jay is Robin's brother. Angel is his best friend from childhood and Jay has loved Angel since that day on the bridge, 16 years ago. Now having Angel so close, Jay is struggling to keep his feelings hidden. Then when Angel has an accident at work, and loses some memory, Jay steps up to look after Angel and puts himself in a world more hurt. Angel, on the other hand, remembers Jay. Jay is the first thing he says when he wakes up, and he remembers all the places that he and Jay went to as kids. ALL his memories revolve around Jay. Everything he feels, revolves around Jay. Is he attracted to Jay?
I enjoyed this, I really did but it doesn't pack the punch that the first three books carry.
Oh don't get me wrong, it's a wonderfully written, well told book, but it doesn't sucker punch you quite so much and I kinda missed that.
The love Jay has for Angel is palable, right from the start, and that carries right through the book, even if it thought it might cost him their friendship. Angel's feeling for Jay are a little less. . . . romantic but nonetheless intense. It just takes Angel time to filter all the noise in his head from his ex, to see what he really feels for Jay; how MUCH he feels for Jay.
I loved the fact that it's on the bridge, when Jay fell in love with Angel, that Angel lets his feelings really come out!
I could see what had happened to cause the accident coming at me, just as soon as the instigator makes themselves known causing trouble. I didn't think they quite go as far as they do though!
I loved that everyone plays a part here. Robin and Dair; Scout and Emery, Swift and Micha, and Ben and Elias: they all take part to some degree or other. Kamran too, and something happens here that makes me wonder what is going on with him!
And halle-flipping-lujah! Ava and Peyton finally FINALLY admit, out loud, in front of everyone, what they mean to each other and I still want them to have a story!
So from this book, I want two more: Kamran's story and Ava/Peyton's! Greedy? Moi?? I don't know what you mean!
A great read, though, all in all!
4 solid stars
**same worded review will appear elewhere**
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated The Other Woman in Books
Jun 5, 2019
When Sophie discovers her husband is having an affair, she sets out to tackle the problem head on and confront his mistress face-to-face, in her own home, so his mistress can see her happy idyllic home life with their teenage children for herself, and perhaps back off. But they get into a tussle and the mistress accidentally gets killed, from then on one disaster after another happens to poor Sophie who is just trying to get rid of the body, but with such a busy household she ends up hiding the dead mistress in the freezer until she has more time to dispose of it. This idea had me thinking of that Fawlty Towers episode where a man dies in his hotel room and Basil ends up hiding him in the laundry basket, instead of doing the sensible, normal thing and owning up.
Although I did read this very fast and strangely have to admit I also thoroughly enjoyed this story, I did have a chuckle at quite a few of the things that happened. The nosy neighbour seemed to be constantly following Sophie around as if she had nothing better to do. The housekeeper who spotted everything going on! The twist at the end (featuring the truth about the mistress and what was really going on with the husband), was totally unexpected, and possibly pulled out of a hat to surprise us. Then the final wrap up session kind of happened far too easily for my liking. It was also a tad unbelievable, too. But hey, the way I looked at it was the husband needed to repent and unleash some of this guilt, and maybe even needed to prove his love for Sophie. Whilst Sophie (it turns out) was most certainly not a woman to be messed with, even though I doubted she realised it at the time until these disasters kept happening to her.
Overall, I did enjoy how fast I read this book, and how it kept me on tenterhooks whipping through the pages eager to get to the end to find out how they were going to round this off without getting caught. Seriously, Sophie was just trying to dispose of a body, and yet everything that could go wrong for her, did go wrong and I was constantly wondering just how was she going to get out of this mess! I also loved the ‘mysterious’ ending, which kind of made everything Sophie tried to avoid, come true and all her past efforts just a waste of time… comeuppance? Karma can be a bitch, even if the whole thing was just one big mistake. Worth a read if you don’t take it too seriously.
Although I did read this very fast and strangely have to admit I also thoroughly enjoyed this story, I did have a chuckle at quite a few of the things that happened. The nosy neighbour seemed to be constantly following Sophie around as if she had nothing better to do. The housekeeper who spotted everything going on! The twist at the end (featuring the truth about the mistress and what was really going on with the husband), was totally unexpected, and possibly pulled out of a hat to surprise us. Then the final wrap up session kind of happened far too easily for my liking. It was also a tad unbelievable, too. But hey, the way I looked at it was the husband needed to repent and unleash some of this guilt, and maybe even needed to prove his love for Sophie. Whilst Sophie (it turns out) was most certainly not a woman to be messed with, even though I doubted she realised it at the time until these disasters kept happening to her.
Overall, I did enjoy how fast I read this book, and how it kept me on tenterhooks whipping through the pages eager to get to the end to find out how they were going to round this off without getting caught. Seriously, Sophie was just trying to dispose of a body, and yet everything that could go wrong for her, did go wrong and I was constantly wondering just how was she going to get out of this mess! I also loved the ‘mysterious’ ending, which kind of made everything Sophie tried to avoid, come true and all her past efforts just a waste of time… comeuppance? Karma can be a bitch, even if the whole thing was just one big mistake. Worth a read if you don’t take it too seriously.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Nomadland (2020) in Movies
Mar 2, 2021
Pseudo-Documentary
Frances McDormand is an interesting character actress to watch, one that uses her character actress looks to disguise the fact that she is, in fact, a strong leading actress that draws our attention to her in whatever project she is in. This facet of her on-screen personae is going full throttle in her new film NOMADLAND.
And, thank goodness it is, for without McDormand on the screen, this “slice-of-life” pseudo-documentary disguised as a feature film would be almost unwatchable as McDormand’s character floats through “slice of life” after “slice of life” in what is referred to as the “Nomad Lifestyle”.
Earnestly Directed by Chloe Zao, NOMADLAND tells the tale of Fern (McDormand) who loses her life, her job and her husband during the recession of the late 2000’s and starts to float through life - and experiences - as a “Nomad”, a person with no permanent address who goes from place to place, catching on to the random odd job and living her life in her van.
Zao and McDormand spent years filming in actual Nomad communities with the others in this film often times not realizing that McDormand was an actress playing a part. For McDormand, it had to be the ultimate acting challenge - living in the real world as a character - and she brings a watchable, lost Fern to the screen and she genuinely and earnestly interacts with the real-life characters she encounters. She is very watchable and is a pleasant character to spend the time with.
Most of these real life people she encounters open up about their lifestyle and the movie took on the feel of documentary with Fern as the interviewer/narrator of the story. This made for an intriguing glimpse into a heretofore unknown world (at least to me), but not a compelling film does it make.
Zao does try to drive a narrative as the only other notable actor in this film - David Straitharn - shows up as a fellow Nomad that develops a crush on Fern and is interested in leaving the Nomad life and invites Fern to join him.
This is the only real conflict in this story as we spend an hour-forty-five watching Fern flit from place to place and person to person not really trying to find herself, but letting the wind blow her to wherever the trail takes her next.
An intriguing (enough) slice of life, with a watchable central performance by McDormand, but not substantial enough to engage me as a feature film.
Letter Grade: B (I applaud the attempt)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
And, thank goodness it is, for without McDormand on the screen, this “slice-of-life” pseudo-documentary disguised as a feature film would be almost unwatchable as McDormand’s character floats through “slice of life” after “slice of life” in what is referred to as the “Nomad Lifestyle”.
Earnestly Directed by Chloe Zao, NOMADLAND tells the tale of Fern (McDormand) who loses her life, her job and her husband during the recession of the late 2000’s and starts to float through life - and experiences - as a “Nomad”, a person with no permanent address who goes from place to place, catching on to the random odd job and living her life in her van.
Zao and McDormand spent years filming in actual Nomad communities with the others in this film often times not realizing that McDormand was an actress playing a part. For McDormand, it had to be the ultimate acting challenge - living in the real world as a character - and she brings a watchable, lost Fern to the screen and she genuinely and earnestly interacts with the real-life characters she encounters. She is very watchable and is a pleasant character to spend the time with.
Most of these real life people she encounters open up about their lifestyle and the movie took on the feel of documentary with Fern as the interviewer/narrator of the story. This made for an intriguing glimpse into a heretofore unknown world (at least to me), but not a compelling film does it make.
Zao does try to drive a narrative as the only other notable actor in this film - David Straitharn - shows up as a fellow Nomad that develops a crush on Fern and is interested in leaving the Nomad life and invites Fern to join him.
This is the only real conflict in this story as we spend an hour-forty-five watching Fern flit from place to place and person to person not really trying to find herself, but letting the wind blow her to wherever the trail takes her next.
An intriguing (enough) slice of life, with a watchable central performance by McDormand, but not substantial enough to engage me as a feature film.
Letter Grade: B (I applaud the attempt)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Word Swag - Cool fonts & typography generator
Photo & Video and Utilities
6.0
Rate It
App
You've found the authentic Word Swag™ app! Word Swag magically turns your words into beautiful...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Zombie Tidal Wave (2019) in Movies
Jun 3, 2020
A zombie film made for the SyFy Channel starring Ian Ziering you say? Sign me up.
While out fishing a group of friends catch something sinister. They haul a putrid looking dead body out of the water and very quickly realise that it isn't quite as dead as they'd have hoped. That body is the first in an army of the undead that takes over the town as an unexpected tidal wave gives them a helping hand.
Is this film bad? Yes. Is it an entertaining watch? Also yes, but on that SyFy Original movie level of yes.
Bless Ian Ziering and his movie decision. In Zombie Tidal Wave (I really love saying the whole title) he plays Hunter, a fisherman who's about to leave town for a fresh start. Hunter is everything you hope he will be. I also noticed on IMDb that Ziering has a story credit... well colour me surprised... it's a super-duper amazing tale about zombies by the sea.
I'm not going to insult you by saying that this would win any awards, we all know it wouldn't even without watching it. It wouldn't even win a Razzie, that's how good it is! Everything about this is in fact distinctly average, apart from the following...
That story... it's got a great idea with twists and turns that "make sense". It could almost have been a serious zombie film if someone at some point hadn't gone "You know what? We need more." "More what?" "Everything."
Those special effects... are terrible. I have never seen such badly CGId water, and that's something you should take seriously coming from someone who has seen as many made for TV movies as I have.
The consistency... there are facts about locations and objects that the film just throws out the window, there are some continuity errors as well... but while that sounds like a bad thing it's really an essential part of the enjoyment/
This couldn't be a typical review so to complete it I just want to share with you some of my notes/interactions with the film, I'll include some cryptic highlights to look out for too.
- The zombie that must have unnaturally long legs or be standing on a zombie pyramid.
- Synchronised swimming zombies.
- I snort laughed so hard at a big reveal point that I nearly choked on my breakfast.
- A stunning Bond girl moment that might have been the best shot of the film.
- The different densities of glass.
- The Sharknado reference.
- ... and the result of that reference.
- Douchebag and his girlfriend.
- Family banter with a zombie.
- "Reinforcements".
- Zombie's styling flip flops.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/zombie-tidal-wave-movie-review.html
While out fishing a group of friends catch something sinister. They haul a putrid looking dead body out of the water and very quickly realise that it isn't quite as dead as they'd have hoped. That body is the first in an army of the undead that takes over the town as an unexpected tidal wave gives them a helping hand.
Is this film bad? Yes. Is it an entertaining watch? Also yes, but on that SyFy Original movie level of yes.
Bless Ian Ziering and his movie decision. In Zombie Tidal Wave (I really love saying the whole title) he plays Hunter, a fisherman who's about to leave town for a fresh start. Hunter is everything you hope he will be. I also noticed on IMDb that Ziering has a story credit... well colour me surprised... it's a super-duper amazing tale about zombies by the sea.
I'm not going to insult you by saying that this would win any awards, we all know it wouldn't even without watching it. It wouldn't even win a Razzie, that's how good it is! Everything about this is in fact distinctly average, apart from the following...
That story... it's got a great idea with twists and turns that "make sense". It could almost have been a serious zombie film if someone at some point hadn't gone "You know what? We need more." "More what?" "Everything."
Those special effects... are terrible. I have never seen such badly CGId water, and that's something you should take seriously coming from someone who has seen as many made for TV movies as I have.
The consistency... there are facts about locations and objects that the film just throws out the window, there are some continuity errors as well... but while that sounds like a bad thing it's really an essential part of the enjoyment/
This couldn't be a typical review so to complete it I just want to share with you some of my notes/interactions with the film, I'll include some cryptic highlights to look out for too.
- The zombie that must have unnaturally long legs or be standing on a zombie pyramid.
- Synchronised swimming zombies.
- I snort laughed so hard at a big reveal point that I nearly choked on my breakfast.
- A stunning Bond girl moment that might have been the best shot of the film.
- The different densities of glass.
- The Sharknado reference.
- ... and the result of that reference.
- Douchebag and his girlfriend.
- Family banter with a zombie.
- "Reinforcements".
- Zombie's styling flip flops.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/zombie-tidal-wave-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Finch (2021) in Movies
Nov 18, 2021
Very Effective
There are times when there is a “Perfect Storm” of film material, performance, mood, style and execution of said material and the headspace that I am in when I sit down to view the movie that elevates a film viewing experience above the norm.
Such was my experience when I sat down and watched the Tom Hanks Post-Apocalyptic film FINCH on AppleTV+. On paper, it looks like a run-of-the-mill “last few survivors on Earth struggle to remain alive” film, but - in my experience - it was much better than that.
Starring Tom Hanks as loner scientist Finch, who is scraping by in the remains of St. Louis with a dog and 2 robot helpers - robots of his own creation. When conditions in St. Louis worsen, Finch must pack up (with his 3 companions in tow) and head to a place where he thinks that life might be better - San Francisco.
Pretty standard “road movie” stuff, right? But in the hands of an Actor like Hanks, Emmy Winning GAME OF THRONES Director Miguel Sapochnik, a script by Craig Luck and Ivor Powell that digs into the humanity of Finch (and the situation) and some top-notch Computer animation of the Robots (especially “Jeff” voiced by Caleb Landry Jones), this film elevates itself above the norm.
There are not too many actors who could hold the attention of an audience for 2 hours speaking with 2 robots and a dog, but Hanks manages to do this - and do this very well. He brings his basic decency to the fore and makes us root for him from the start.
The surprise for me was the voice work of Caleb Landry Jones (GET OUT) who matches Hanks beat for beat and brings the same level of decency to his character. It is a testament to Jones’ work in a Motion Capture suit - and the “mo-cap” (Supervised by Scott Stokdyk) that makes the audience see and feel emotions on the face of the robot that just aren’t there. It’s that good.
Director Sapochnik really moves the film at the correct pace as he stops for the humanity, but doesn’t dwell on it too long - and, thus, avoids making the film too sentimental and mawkish. It is a delicate balancing act that this film walks very well.
Probably the biggest movie-going surprise of the year for me. A film that, at this point, will end up in my Top 10 of 2021.
Yes, I am as surprised as you are by this.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such was my experience when I sat down and watched the Tom Hanks Post-Apocalyptic film FINCH on AppleTV+. On paper, it looks like a run-of-the-mill “last few survivors on Earth struggle to remain alive” film, but - in my experience - it was much better than that.
Starring Tom Hanks as loner scientist Finch, who is scraping by in the remains of St. Louis with a dog and 2 robot helpers - robots of his own creation. When conditions in St. Louis worsen, Finch must pack up (with his 3 companions in tow) and head to a place where he thinks that life might be better - San Francisco.
Pretty standard “road movie” stuff, right? But in the hands of an Actor like Hanks, Emmy Winning GAME OF THRONES Director Miguel Sapochnik, a script by Craig Luck and Ivor Powell that digs into the humanity of Finch (and the situation) and some top-notch Computer animation of the Robots (especially “Jeff” voiced by Caleb Landry Jones), this film elevates itself above the norm.
There are not too many actors who could hold the attention of an audience for 2 hours speaking with 2 robots and a dog, but Hanks manages to do this - and do this very well. He brings his basic decency to the fore and makes us root for him from the start.
The surprise for me was the voice work of Caleb Landry Jones (GET OUT) who matches Hanks beat for beat and brings the same level of decency to his character. It is a testament to Jones’ work in a Motion Capture suit - and the “mo-cap” (Supervised by Scott Stokdyk) that makes the audience see and feel emotions on the face of the robot that just aren’t there. It’s that good.
Director Sapochnik really moves the film at the correct pace as he stops for the humanity, but doesn’t dwell on it too long - and, thus, avoids making the film too sentimental and mawkish. It is a delicate balancing act that this film walks very well.
Probably the biggest movie-going surprise of the year for me. A film that, at this point, will end up in my Top 10 of 2021.
Yes, I am as surprised as you are by this.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Life Itself (2018) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
This film is hard to watch, not because it's not good but because there's a lot of chaos to the story at the beginning. We're then treated to a portion that's entirely in Spanish which kicks off an emotional rollercoaster that brings us into the end.
One of the things we see near the beginning of this story almost instantly made me dislike the film, the story line exposes the fact that what we're hearing might not be what actually happened. It plays on the point that one person's view of something isn't the same as another person's. This will sound silly when I say it but I was annoyed that it had pointed out that the film might be lying to me. The reason it's particularly silly is that this same scenario happens a lot in all sorts of films. I know films lie to me but I don't want to know it.
I'm sitting here tapping my pen as I try and write this review, the film left me perplexed in so many ways. I went into the film prepared for what I thought I was going to see and yet it opened with Samuel L. Jackson. You read that right, I haven't lost the plot, Samuel L. "MFing" Jackson. Admittedly he was there doing what I love best about him but he only added to my confusion. The sort of film this is, opening with him, even with the context it makes no sense.
We're treated to lots of great actors in this one but I have to say that I was most happy to see Annette Bening pop up. (The American President used to be one of my go to films. I've also just noticed Captain Marvel in her filmography... *wheezes into a paper bag*) Her part may have been fleeting but in the chaotic part of the film she was the only grounded point. From my high to my low point... Oscar Isaac. It actually upsets me to put him in this position as I've enjoyed him in most of his recent films but I wasn't feeling the love for his character Will. In nearly every scene I could see a style I associate with Jake Johnson and honestly I'd much rather have seen him trying that role.
If you can make it to the mid-way point of the movie then you do get a much more palatable film, and a predictable one. There is a point where you absolutely know what is going to happen at the end of the film and from thereon in you look for the connections before they happen. Despite that point it's a satisfactory ending to a rather mixed bag.
We were also treated to a Q&A after the film featuring Dan Fogelman (writer and director) and actress Olivia Cooke. Sadly it was a bit of an anti-climax, I often find that these featurettes can offer some fascinating insights into the goings on but this seemed more like an after thought for this preview.
What you should do
As if to add insult to injury you don't need to leave the house to see this film as it is made by Sky (although I'm also seeing Amazon Studios coming up in places, but I'm sure the film actually said Sky) and premieres on Sky Cinema at the same time as being released at cinemas. If you can see it on there then go for it, I'm not sure it's cinema worthy.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A life picking olives in the Spanish countryside?
One of the things we see near the beginning of this story almost instantly made me dislike the film, the story line exposes the fact that what we're hearing might not be what actually happened. It plays on the point that one person's view of something isn't the same as another person's. This will sound silly when I say it but I was annoyed that it had pointed out that the film might be lying to me. The reason it's particularly silly is that this same scenario happens a lot in all sorts of films. I know films lie to me but I don't want to know it.
I'm sitting here tapping my pen as I try and write this review, the film left me perplexed in so many ways. I went into the film prepared for what I thought I was going to see and yet it opened with Samuel L. Jackson. You read that right, I haven't lost the plot, Samuel L. "MFing" Jackson. Admittedly he was there doing what I love best about him but he only added to my confusion. The sort of film this is, opening with him, even with the context it makes no sense.
We're treated to lots of great actors in this one but I have to say that I was most happy to see Annette Bening pop up. (The American President used to be one of my go to films. I've also just noticed Captain Marvel in her filmography... *wheezes into a paper bag*) Her part may have been fleeting but in the chaotic part of the film she was the only grounded point. From my high to my low point... Oscar Isaac. It actually upsets me to put him in this position as I've enjoyed him in most of his recent films but I wasn't feeling the love for his character Will. In nearly every scene I could see a style I associate with Jake Johnson and honestly I'd much rather have seen him trying that role.
If you can make it to the mid-way point of the movie then you do get a much more palatable film, and a predictable one. There is a point where you absolutely know what is going to happen at the end of the film and from thereon in you look for the connections before they happen. Despite that point it's a satisfactory ending to a rather mixed bag.
We were also treated to a Q&A after the film featuring Dan Fogelman (writer and director) and actress Olivia Cooke. Sadly it was a bit of an anti-climax, I often find that these featurettes can offer some fascinating insights into the goings on but this seemed more like an after thought for this preview.
What you should do
As if to add insult to injury you don't need to leave the house to see this film as it is made by Sky (although I'm also seeing Amazon Studios coming up in places, but I'm sure the film actually said Sky) and premieres on Sky Cinema at the same time as being released at cinemas. If you can see it on there then go for it, I'm not sure it's cinema worthy.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A life picking olives in the Spanish countryside?
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Martyrs (2008) in Movies
Dec 28, 2019
Entertaining In a Crazy Way
Sometimes it helps to watch a movie with another person to get an extra perspective on what makes a movie special. I’ll admit, I would have reamed Martyrs on my own merit, but I definitely looked at it differently once I got an alternate opinion from my wife who watched is as well. The movie follows the story of two friends Anna (Morjana Aloui) and Lucie (Mylene Jampanoi). Lucie finds herself looking out for Anna when Anna can’t stop seeing an apparition that makes her do terrible things. Anna’s got a secret that no one believes, including Lucie who has her doubts.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
In the beginning we see Anna running away from what can only be seen as an abusive situation. She’s cut up and bleeding. It doesn’t take long to be drawn into her story and want to know more about what happened.
Characters: 6
I appreciated the depth of Anna’s character. She has issues, layers of them. You feel bad for her and terrified of her at the same time. The other characters, however, left a bit to be desired. We don’t really get a deep dive into Lucie’s situation, only that she has this need to take care of Anna. Outside of these two, the rest of the characters definitely fall a bit flat.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 6
There are some truly tense moments in Martyrs, but a good portion of the movie feels more like torture porn. The action comes in brief pockets and isn’t always effective when it does happen. There were some solid sequences that were truly terrifying, but overall things could have been better.
Entertainment Value: 7
This movie succeeds with intrigue and originality. If charisma alone was enough to pass a movie, my overall score would be a lot higher. I enjoyed the mystery of it all which held my attention throughout the film. Will Lucie get to the bottom of what’s going on with Anna? Is Anna telling the truth? You really don’t know what to expect.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 9
Plot: 5
I think Martyrs eventually becomes a victim of it’s own trope as it focuses too much on leaving you in the dark and not necessarily pushing a legit story. I definitely feel there are certain elements that could have made the story a lot better, but I’m hesitant to dive in too much for fear of ruining the story. The plot progression is mediocre at best and leaves too much to interpretation.
Resolution: 8
For what it’s worth, Martyrs has absolutely one of the craziest endings I have ever seen. If you would have told me at the start of the movie that the road would have led there, I wouldn’t believe you. The shock factor is definitely there.
Overall: 74
Had the story been stronger and a bit more character development considered, Martyrs might have had more success with me. As it stands, I consider it an interesting enough film to watch at least once. it will keep you guessing right up until the end.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
In the beginning we see Anna running away from what can only be seen as an abusive situation. She’s cut up and bleeding. It doesn’t take long to be drawn into her story and want to know more about what happened.
Characters: 6
I appreciated the depth of Anna’s character. She has issues, layers of them. You feel bad for her and terrified of her at the same time. The other characters, however, left a bit to be desired. We don’t really get a deep dive into Lucie’s situation, only that she has this need to take care of Anna. Outside of these two, the rest of the characters definitely fall a bit flat.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 6
There are some truly tense moments in Martyrs, but a good portion of the movie feels more like torture porn. The action comes in brief pockets and isn’t always effective when it does happen. There were some solid sequences that were truly terrifying, but overall things could have been better.
Entertainment Value: 7
This movie succeeds with intrigue and originality. If charisma alone was enough to pass a movie, my overall score would be a lot higher. I enjoyed the mystery of it all which held my attention throughout the film. Will Lucie get to the bottom of what’s going on with Anna? Is Anna telling the truth? You really don’t know what to expect.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 9
Plot: 5
I think Martyrs eventually becomes a victim of it’s own trope as it focuses too much on leaving you in the dark and not necessarily pushing a legit story. I definitely feel there are certain elements that could have made the story a lot better, but I’m hesitant to dive in too much for fear of ruining the story. The plot progression is mediocre at best and leaves too much to interpretation.
Resolution: 8
For what it’s worth, Martyrs has absolutely one of the craziest endings I have ever seen. If you would have told me at the start of the movie that the road would have led there, I wouldn’t believe you. The shock factor is definitely there.
Overall: 74
Had the story been stronger and a bit more character development considered, Martyrs might have had more success with me. As it stands, I consider it an interesting enough film to watch at least once. it will keep you guessing right up until the end.
