Search
Search results
Rat (1 KP) rated Peaky Blinders - Season 1 in TV
Mar 28, 2018
Forget everything you think you know about period drama
It would be easy to dismiss Peaky Blinders as just a British drama. It would be easy to dismiss it as just a period piece. It would be easy to claim that it was just a British Boardwalk Empire. You'd be so wrong to do so.
Every part of Peaky Blinders is perfection. From the superb acting of its regular cast (Cillian Murphy on a tv show? Sign me up!) to a roster of featured guests (Sam Neill? Tom Hardy? Adrien Brody? Who did the casting director sell their soul to, anyway?) to the use of colour and an outlaw music soundtrack that shouldn't work, but does (Nick Cave? PJ Harvey? Tom Waits? David Bowie? On a period drama? What is this? Freaking genius, that's what.)
Shortly after the end of the first World War, a family of Irish gypsy (their word, not mine) - blooded Birmingham bookmakers tries to recover from the horrors of that war and build up their business. Second oldest, Tommy Shelby (played expertly by Cillian Murphy who manages to play a gangster who is both ruthless and fragile with the ability to break your heart with a single look), came back from the war broken by his experiences, but determined to rise far beyond the limitations of his Small Heath upbringing. Not only does he have the expected clashes with those who want to keep him from growing his business (both criminal rivals and the police) but he has a family to run (with all the interpersonal conflicts that entails). All of this is set against a backdrop of political turmoil from the IRA and the rise of communist sympathy in the UK.
You shouldn't like Tommy Shelby, but he is written and acted so well that you won't be able to not like him. The same can be said for older brother, Arthur, younger siblings John, Ada, and Finn. If you don't love Aunt Polly, then you must have a problem with strong female characters.
Steven Knight has taken a world told to him through family legend and turned it into a world that you will be eager to inhabit an hour (or, if you're like everyone I know, a season) at a time. He writes a period drama that doesn't feel dated. The characters and their struggles are as relevant today as they were nearly a hundred years ago.
Take a chance on the show with the weird name and discover why there are very few casual Peaky Blinders fans. There's a reason why the late, great David Bowie was a huge fan and made sure that they would have a song from his last album before he died. There's a reason the show's dated fashion and hairstyles are making a comeback, why Peaky Blinders pubs and pub nights are popping up all over. It's that good. Check it out for yourself.
Every part of Peaky Blinders is perfection. From the superb acting of its regular cast (Cillian Murphy on a tv show? Sign me up!) to a roster of featured guests (Sam Neill? Tom Hardy? Adrien Brody? Who did the casting director sell their soul to, anyway?) to the use of colour and an outlaw music soundtrack that shouldn't work, but does (Nick Cave? PJ Harvey? Tom Waits? David Bowie? On a period drama? What is this? Freaking genius, that's what.)
Shortly after the end of the first World War, a family of Irish gypsy (their word, not mine) - blooded Birmingham bookmakers tries to recover from the horrors of that war and build up their business. Second oldest, Tommy Shelby (played expertly by Cillian Murphy who manages to play a gangster who is both ruthless and fragile with the ability to break your heart with a single look), came back from the war broken by his experiences, but determined to rise far beyond the limitations of his Small Heath upbringing. Not only does he have the expected clashes with those who want to keep him from growing his business (both criminal rivals and the police) but he has a family to run (with all the interpersonal conflicts that entails). All of this is set against a backdrop of political turmoil from the IRA and the rise of communist sympathy in the UK.
You shouldn't like Tommy Shelby, but he is written and acted so well that you won't be able to not like him. The same can be said for older brother, Arthur, younger siblings John, Ada, and Finn. If you don't love Aunt Polly, then you must have a problem with strong female characters.
Steven Knight has taken a world told to him through family legend and turned it into a world that you will be eager to inhabit an hour (or, if you're like everyone I know, a season) at a time. He writes a period drama that doesn't feel dated. The characters and their struggles are as relevant today as they were nearly a hundred years ago.
Take a chance on the show with the weird name and discover why there are very few casual Peaky Blinders fans. There's a reason why the late, great David Bowie was a huge fan and made sure that they would have a song from his last album before he died. There's a reason the show's dated fashion and hairstyles are making a comeback, why Peaky Blinders pubs and pub nights are popping up all over. It's that good. Check it out for yourself.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Can You Ever Forgive Me? (2018) in Movies
Nov 11, 2018
Strong performances eleveates this "Art House" film.
With not a whole lot of interest filling out the screens at the multi-plexes at this time, I thought I'd head to the "Art House" to check out Melissa McCarthy in CAN YOU EVER FORGIVE ME? This film is garnering strong Oscar buzz for McCarthy's performance and I figured I'd see for myself.
And...darn it all...after a slow start, it does turn into an Oscar worthy performance, after all.
Telling the true tale of writer Lee Israel (based on her memoir), CYEFM tells the story of Israel's descent into criminal behavior to make ends meet by forging literary documents from the past and selling them as the real deal.
Starring as Israel, McCarthy drops all the artifice and bluster that she usually brings to her comedic characters to bring us a "non-people" person (Israel's own words) who is down on her luck. I was a bit skeptical of this performance in the first half of the film for I thought she had fallen victim to the "comedian trying their hands at a serious role" syndrome, being WAY too serious and glum, without a hint of humor. But, in the 2nd half of the film, McCarthy really finds this character and we begin to see a fully formed 3 dimensional person emerging on the screen - warts and all. And, when Israel/McCarthy gives the speech that will be shown at her Oscar nomination, she shows that she is fully deserving of any accolades that might come her way. It is a strong, humanistic portrayal of a person trying to figure it out - and learning that the shortcut probably isn't the best way to go.
Aiding her in her journey - and in this film - is Richard E. Grant as Jack Hock, another lost soul trying to make it in this world while having a good time doing it. Grant has the "showier" of the 2 roles and he revels in his moments. I would be fine with Grant being nominated as well - it is that strong of a performance and balances McCarthy's character wonderfully.
I did have a problem with the first 1/2 of this film, mainly for I disliked the 2 main characters being portrayed, they are certainly NOT 2 people to root for and I felt the film was only showing 1 dimensional stereotypes, but once McCarthy and Grant devise the forgery scheme, the film - and the performances - get very interesting, and multi-layered, indeed.
Keep in mind that this is an "Art House" film, by that I mean "talky". There isn't a whole lot of action and a TON of atmosphere and dialogue, not the type of film for everyone, but for those of you who like this sort of thing, you'll be rewarded by strong performances that lifts this film to a higher level.
Letter Grade: B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And...darn it all...after a slow start, it does turn into an Oscar worthy performance, after all.
Telling the true tale of writer Lee Israel (based on her memoir), CYEFM tells the story of Israel's descent into criminal behavior to make ends meet by forging literary documents from the past and selling them as the real deal.
Starring as Israel, McCarthy drops all the artifice and bluster that she usually brings to her comedic characters to bring us a "non-people" person (Israel's own words) who is down on her luck. I was a bit skeptical of this performance in the first half of the film for I thought she had fallen victim to the "comedian trying their hands at a serious role" syndrome, being WAY too serious and glum, without a hint of humor. But, in the 2nd half of the film, McCarthy really finds this character and we begin to see a fully formed 3 dimensional person emerging on the screen - warts and all. And, when Israel/McCarthy gives the speech that will be shown at her Oscar nomination, she shows that she is fully deserving of any accolades that might come her way. It is a strong, humanistic portrayal of a person trying to figure it out - and learning that the shortcut probably isn't the best way to go.
Aiding her in her journey - and in this film - is Richard E. Grant as Jack Hock, another lost soul trying to make it in this world while having a good time doing it. Grant has the "showier" of the 2 roles and he revels in his moments. I would be fine with Grant being nominated as well - it is that strong of a performance and balances McCarthy's character wonderfully.
I did have a problem with the first 1/2 of this film, mainly for I disliked the 2 main characters being portrayed, they are certainly NOT 2 people to root for and I felt the film was only showing 1 dimensional stereotypes, but once McCarthy and Grant devise the forgery scheme, the film - and the performances - get very interesting, and multi-layered, indeed.
Keep in mind that this is an "Art House" film, by that I mean "talky". There isn't a whole lot of action and a TON of atmosphere and dialogue, not the type of film for everyone, but for those of you who like this sort of thing, you'll be rewarded by strong performances that lifts this film to a higher level.
Letter Grade: B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Darren (1599 KP) rated Jarhead 3: The Siege (2016) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Story: Jarhead 3: The Siege starts as new recruit Evan Albright (Weber) who has just gotten a role working in the US Embassy in the Middle East, welcomed by Hansen (Ainsley) and under the orders from Gunny Raines (Adkins) with the job to protect the Ambassador Cahill (Hogan). With Evan going through the lesson of how to operate in the embassy we are ready to begin.
Evan notices somebody outside the normal outside the embassy, which soon sees him learning the lessons of the protocol. The marines find the embassy under siege and must use all their training to keep the Ambassador alive against countless enemies.
Thoughts on Jarhead 3: The Siege
Characters – Evan is the newest marine bought into the embassy, he does fill in the gaps for the protocol that must be followed by the team, learn to work with the rest of the unit and is the first to suspect something is going on around the embassy and ends up being the one leading the fight back. Gunny Raines is the leader of the marines, you play by his rules or face the consequences. Major Lincoln is the one leading the rescue attempt, bringing the back-up required to hopefully help the stranded marines, spends most of the film in a helicopter racing to the scene. Olivia Winston is the computer operative at the embassy, she like Evan has bigger dreams when it comes to rising up through the military rankings.
Performances – Charlie Weber does take the leading role here where we follow his character entering the world, he works as a soldier never setting the world alight, which can be same for the whole cast sees Scott Adkins, Sasha Jackson and Dennis Haysbert.
Story – The story here follows a newly recruit marine in an US embassy that must deal with a siege from the locals on the building meaning he will join the marines to show off their skills to defend the embassy. This is one of the simplest stories you will ever see, we follow Evan as he and we learn the lay of the land, the siege is everything you would expect too, following the usual ideas of needing to have safety and out live the numbers that are trying to kill you. It does feel like the story is safe rather than challenging.
Action/War – The action plays into the war side of the film, we get plenty of military manoeuvres to see bullets flying around.
Settings – The settings in the film show us the embassy and how the marines operate within it, we see how this makes the positions difficult to defend.
Scene of the Movie – The escape.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is too by the books.
Final Thoughts – This is an easy to follow military action film, it doesn’t do anything wrong, only it just seems to be by the book and overly safe.
Overall: Safe Military Film.
Evan notices somebody outside the normal outside the embassy, which soon sees him learning the lessons of the protocol. The marines find the embassy under siege and must use all their training to keep the Ambassador alive against countless enemies.
Thoughts on Jarhead 3: The Siege
Characters – Evan is the newest marine bought into the embassy, he does fill in the gaps for the protocol that must be followed by the team, learn to work with the rest of the unit and is the first to suspect something is going on around the embassy and ends up being the one leading the fight back. Gunny Raines is the leader of the marines, you play by his rules or face the consequences. Major Lincoln is the one leading the rescue attempt, bringing the back-up required to hopefully help the stranded marines, spends most of the film in a helicopter racing to the scene. Olivia Winston is the computer operative at the embassy, she like Evan has bigger dreams when it comes to rising up through the military rankings.
Performances – Charlie Weber does take the leading role here where we follow his character entering the world, he works as a soldier never setting the world alight, which can be same for the whole cast sees Scott Adkins, Sasha Jackson and Dennis Haysbert.
Story – The story here follows a newly recruit marine in an US embassy that must deal with a siege from the locals on the building meaning he will join the marines to show off their skills to defend the embassy. This is one of the simplest stories you will ever see, we follow Evan as he and we learn the lay of the land, the siege is everything you would expect too, following the usual ideas of needing to have safety and out live the numbers that are trying to kill you. It does feel like the story is safe rather than challenging.
Action/War – The action plays into the war side of the film, we get plenty of military manoeuvres to see bullets flying around.
Settings – The settings in the film show us the embassy and how the marines operate within it, we see how this makes the positions difficult to defend.
Scene of the Movie – The escape.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is too by the books.
Final Thoughts – This is an easy to follow military action film, it doesn’t do anything wrong, only it just seems to be by the book and overly safe.
Overall: Safe Military Film.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Alone For Christmas (2013) in Movies
Dec 15, 2019
UK DVD release title, Bone Alone.
Shopping in Tesco each week involves a traditional visit to the DVD aisle to look for bargains and new releases. At this time of year that also means some quality seasonal content that you've never heard of before... and so I give you, Bone Alone!
When Bone gets in trouble for the antics of his little brother Columbus he's banished to a dogsitter as the family go off for the holidays.
Bone, with the help of the other dogs, makes an escape after he realises his home is in danger. A group of burglars have their sights set on their valuables, but this is Bone's house and he has to defend it.
Its original title was Alone For Christmas, let's face it though, that's just not as good as Bone Alone. Is it a rip off of Home Alone featuring dogs or is it porn... who knows?!
The first thing you will notice about Bone Alone is the absolutely ridiculous effects used to animate the dog's mouths, it's truly awful, but thankfully it's easily forgotten once you get into it because... dare I say it? This film is pretty entertaining.
Add some dogs to a film and you've got me keen, get those dogs to execute a Home Alone plan on some unscrupulous baddies? Sold! Bone does not let his lack of opposable thumbs stop him making his house a fortress that even Kevin would be proud of. Honestly, I don't know how he thought of some of them, I'll be adding them to my own battle plan options shortly.
We've obviously got quality acting from the canine contingent, especially from our lead actors, Hooligan and Torpedo playing Bone and Columbus. Plus there are lots of little cameos from other floofy talents.
The human cast is classic TV movie, acting that's just cheesy enough that the film appears to not take itself too seriously. It's headed up by one of TV's favourite dads, David DeLuise, and as always he's the right sort of amusing to make the role work. The villains have your favourite traits but out of the three of them my favourite was definitely Phil played by John Kenward, he's the adorable buffoon that you really kind of feel for in the whole thing.
Generally the cast isn't made up of people you'd recognise, but then you spot Kevin Sorbo... I don't know what he's channelling when it comes to this role but it's not entirely good. There's a whole section of his story that I zoned out of, that was probably the only part of this masterpiece that I didn't get along with.
Bone Alone is a really fun film because it's equal parts ridiculous and amusing. I can't say there's much in it that's going to make cinematic history but I liked it and that's really all that matters.
Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/12/bone-alone-movie-review.html
When Bone gets in trouble for the antics of his little brother Columbus he's banished to a dogsitter as the family go off for the holidays.
Bone, with the help of the other dogs, makes an escape after he realises his home is in danger. A group of burglars have their sights set on their valuables, but this is Bone's house and he has to defend it.
Its original title was Alone For Christmas, let's face it though, that's just not as good as Bone Alone. Is it a rip off of Home Alone featuring dogs or is it porn... who knows?!
The first thing you will notice about Bone Alone is the absolutely ridiculous effects used to animate the dog's mouths, it's truly awful, but thankfully it's easily forgotten once you get into it because... dare I say it? This film is pretty entertaining.
Add some dogs to a film and you've got me keen, get those dogs to execute a Home Alone plan on some unscrupulous baddies? Sold! Bone does not let his lack of opposable thumbs stop him making his house a fortress that even Kevin would be proud of. Honestly, I don't know how he thought of some of them, I'll be adding them to my own battle plan options shortly.
We've obviously got quality acting from the canine contingent, especially from our lead actors, Hooligan and Torpedo playing Bone and Columbus. Plus there are lots of little cameos from other floofy talents.
The human cast is classic TV movie, acting that's just cheesy enough that the film appears to not take itself too seriously. It's headed up by one of TV's favourite dads, David DeLuise, and as always he's the right sort of amusing to make the role work. The villains have your favourite traits but out of the three of them my favourite was definitely Phil played by John Kenward, he's the adorable buffoon that you really kind of feel for in the whole thing.
Generally the cast isn't made up of people you'd recognise, but then you spot Kevin Sorbo... I don't know what he's channelling when it comes to this role but it's not entirely good. There's a whole section of his story that I zoned out of, that was probably the only part of this masterpiece that I didn't get along with.
Bone Alone is a really fun film because it's equal parts ridiculous and amusing. I can't say there's much in it that's going to make cinematic history but I liked it and that's really all that matters.
Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/12/bone-alone-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Richard Jewell (2019) in Movies
Feb 2, 2020
Mellow paced - nothing special
89 year old Director/Actor Clint Eastwood has mellowed with age. He seems at peace with himself and prefers to work at a pace that he sets. His latest Directing effort - RICHARD JEWELL - has that sort of mellowness. It takes it time to tell it's story with no real urgency to it.
It could have used some life to be injected in it.
Based on the true events of the pipe bombing in Centennial Park in Atlanta during the 1996 Summer Olympics, RICHARD JEWELL tells the story of...well...Richard Jewell - the Security Guard who was hailed as a hero for warning people about the bomb, saving many lives, while also being listed as the #1 suspect in the bombing.
Director Eastwood and Writer Billy Ray do not spend much time making the audience guess at to whether or not they think that Jewell committed the crime (he did not - the real bomber was caught in 2006), rather they spend their time showing a person who's being railroaded by the FBI and who's life is caught up in the scramble by the press to "get the story." Again...this would be more interesting if Director Eastwood would show some sort of urgency to the proceedings, but this film is paced on an even keel from start to finish, and I never got caught up, emotionally, in the events that were transpiring in front of me.
Paul Walter Hauser (Shawn Eckhardt in I, TONYA) does a "fine enough" job as the titular character - but it isn't anything special and since the viewer is spending almost every scene with him "fine enough" isn't good enough. Adding to my disappointment are the portrayals by John Hamm (as an FBI Agent) and Olivia Wilde (as a Newspaper Reporter). Both of these performances border on caricature (especially Wilde's performance). I'm disappointed in Eastwood for letting this happen.
Injecting "some" life into this film is Kathy Bates - who was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her portrayal of Richard Jewell's mother - and she delivers better than the others...but not "Oscar Worthy". She does nail her "Oscar moment", but I don't think the script gives her much else to do.
The brightest spot in this film - by far - is the portrayal of Richard Jewell's lawyer, Watson Bryant, by Sam Rockwell and the performance of Nina Ariande as Bryant's Secretary/Girlfriend. If anyone should have been nominated for an Oscar for their performance in this film, it is Rockwell - his is the best one in the film and Ariande plays off him wonderfully well. I sat up a little taller in my seat whenever these two had a scene together.
But that's about it. It's a pretty "meh" movie - professionally made and paced deliberately and mellowly - like Clint Eastwood. But not like an Oscar contending film.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
It could have used some life to be injected in it.
Based on the true events of the pipe bombing in Centennial Park in Atlanta during the 1996 Summer Olympics, RICHARD JEWELL tells the story of...well...Richard Jewell - the Security Guard who was hailed as a hero for warning people about the bomb, saving many lives, while also being listed as the #1 suspect in the bombing.
Director Eastwood and Writer Billy Ray do not spend much time making the audience guess at to whether or not they think that Jewell committed the crime (he did not - the real bomber was caught in 2006), rather they spend their time showing a person who's being railroaded by the FBI and who's life is caught up in the scramble by the press to "get the story." Again...this would be more interesting if Director Eastwood would show some sort of urgency to the proceedings, but this film is paced on an even keel from start to finish, and I never got caught up, emotionally, in the events that were transpiring in front of me.
Paul Walter Hauser (Shawn Eckhardt in I, TONYA) does a "fine enough" job as the titular character - but it isn't anything special and since the viewer is spending almost every scene with him "fine enough" isn't good enough. Adding to my disappointment are the portrayals by John Hamm (as an FBI Agent) and Olivia Wilde (as a Newspaper Reporter). Both of these performances border on caricature (especially Wilde's performance). I'm disappointed in Eastwood for letting this happen.
Injecting "some" life into this film is Kathy Bates - who was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her portrayal of Richard Jewell's mother - and she delivers better than the others...but not "Oscar Worthy". She does nail her "Oscar moment", but I don't think the script gives her much else to do.
The brightest spot in this film - by far - is the portrayal of Richard Jewell's lawyer, Watson Bryant, by Sam Rockwell and the performance of Nina Ariande as Bryant's Secretary/Girlfriend. If anyone should have been nominated for an Oscar for their performance in this film, it is Rockwell - his is the best one in the film and Ariande plays off him wonderfully well. I sat up a little taller in my seat whenever these two had a scene together.
But that's about it. It's a pretty "meh" movie - professionally made and paced deliberately and mellowly - like Clint Eastwood. But not like an Oscar contending film.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
JT (287 KP) rated World War Z (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Zombies, they’ve been around for a while now in all shapes and sizes, yet like the walking undead the genre shows no signs of dying out. Director Marc Forster teams up with Brad Pitt for a zombie horror (if you can really call it that) which travels the world in search of a vaccine that will stop the world’s population being wiped out.
It doesn’t take long for the first action set piece to explode into life, as Pitt and his family face a race against time to get out of New York city and off the streets as the zombie pandemic takes a grip. It’s certainly enough to hold your attention as we watch the transformation. People scampering this way and that as hordes of zombies swarm the streets like rats coming up from the sewer.
Gerry secures safety on board one of the few remaining battleships and is told that he must join the fight to find a cure, or head back to hell with his family in tow. He then jets off on a whistle stop tour taking him to South Korea, Israeli and of all places Wales (that got a chuckle from the audience) where each destination kicks off another exciting and thoroughly enjoyable zombie set piece.
However one thing is missing from this film, something vital that sets it apart from others, gore. Given the PG-13 rating certain scenes cut away from anything resembling graphic violence, which was a massive shame. The lack of flesh eating action which fans are used to seeing is a real disappointment. It is an element that could have taken this film from good to great and I felt like I had been cheated out of my ticket price.
Forster’s CG zombie hordes are impressive, particularly rampaging through the Israeli back streets and the film certainly delivers on some slick tension with one or two jump out of your seat moments. But for me it’s not enough to carry the entire film through, and when things quieten down you’re not left with much else to fill the time before the next shit hitting fan moment.
The occasional plot hole threatens to rear its ugly head, and given the size of the budget the ending is a real let down, but it clearly hints at a potential sequel. If they choose to go down that route then blood must be spilled and lots of it. The acting in World War Z is hardly filled with standouts, and with the exception of Pitt, most only pop up from time to time. Like Matthew Fox’s paratrooper which pretty much feels like a cameo and James Badge Dale’s Captain Speke, around for minutes before taking one to the head.
Visually it’s great there is no question about that, the zombies are terrifying but it needed just a little bit more to push it into the front as one of the better zombie flicks.
It doesn’t take long for the first action set piece to explode into life, as Pitt and his family face a race against time to get out of New York city and off the streets as the zombie pandemic takes a grip. It’s certainly enough to hold your attention as we watch the transformation. People scampering this way and that as hordes of zombies swarm the streets like rats coming up from the sewer.
Gerry secures safety on board one of the few remaining battleships and is told that he must join the fight to find a cure, or head back to hell with his family in tow. He then jets off on a whistle stop tour taking him to South Korea, Israeli and of all places Wales (that got a chuckle from the audience) where each destination kicks off another exciting and thoroughly enjoyable zombie set piece.
However one thing is missing from this film, something vital that sets it apart from others, gore. Given the PG-13 rating certain scenes cut away from anything resembling graphic violence, which was a massive shame. The lack of flesh eating action which fans are used to seeing is a real disappointment. It is an element that could have taken this film from good to great and I felt like I had been cheated out of my ticket price.
Forster’s CG zombie hordes are impressive, particularly rampaging through the Israeli back streets and the film certainly delivers on some slick tension with one or two jump out of your seat moments. But for me it’s not enough to carry the entire film through, and when things quieten down you’re not left with much else to fill the time before the next shit hitting fan moment.
The occasional plot hole threatens to rear its ugly head, and given the size of the budget the ending is a real let down, but it clearly hints at a potential sequel. If they choose to go down that route then blood must be spilled and lots of it. The acting in World War Z is hardly filled with standouts, and with the exception of Pitt, most only pop up from time to time. Like Matthew Fox’s paratrooper which pretty much feels like a cameo and James Badge Dale’s Captain Speke, around for minutes before taking one to the head.
Visually it’s great there is no question about that, the zombies are terrifying but it needed just a little bit more to push it into the front as one of the better zombie flicks.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Killing Death (2008) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Story: The Killing Death starts when two detectives Frank (Dangerfield) who is about to retire and Jimmy (Trubiak) who is on his first case, must figure out the connection between a string of murders, with the suspect Chicago Phil (Reimer) committing a string of murders around town, each suspect is introduced to give him a fresh kill.
The closer the detectives get to solving the case, the increased number of bodies that keep turning up, can they solve the case before it is too late.
Thoughts on The Killing Death
Characters – Frank is an aging detective that has always finished his cases, he is about to retire and now he wants to finish this last case before he goes, Jimmy is the rookie working his first case, he is learning from Frank too, proving he needs to solve the case to make it. Chicago Phil is a pizza delivery guy that has a habit of killing his clients, he is trying to make a perfect pizza along the way.
Performances – This is a hard film to criticise because of the fact it is micro budget, the problem with the acting comes from the fact that nothing feels natural in how things are delivered.
Story – The story here follows two detectives trying to solve the case of a serial killer in their town. The outside of this story seems simple and one that could be enjoyed, only for it to come up very short in delivery, the killer and weapon of choice does seem to become random, even though we have a couple of scenes where it is clear choice, the detectives seem to just be making up their own story to make the case easy to close and apart from investigating the case, they never seen to search for answers. For a micro-budget story this does do what it needs to by laying out the format, only it just doesn’t come close to becoming easy to enjoy.
Comedy/Horror – The comedy in this film does come from how awkward the two detectives are when it comes to communication, it is very hard to see these jokes coming off. The horror is only around the kills, which are meant to show a serial killer at work.
Settings – The film uses the different houses that could have a pizza delivery as the main locations, which work for the film.
Special Effects – The effects for a micro budget are the strongest part of the film, they show how certain things can work in films.
Scene of the Movie – Take it easy.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Most of the comedy.
Final Thoughts – This is a micro budget film that does try to give us something original even though it does miss for the most part on comedy, it is a film that looks like the people behind it enjoyed making.
Overall: Sometimes you just need to enjoy what you do.
The closer the detectives get to solving the case, the increased number of bodies that keep turning up, can they solve the case before it is too late.
Thoughts on The Killing Death
Characters – Frank is an aging detective that has always finished his cases, he is about to retire and now he wants to finish this last case before he goes, Jimmy is the rookie working his first case, he is learning from Frank too, proving he needs to solve the case to make it. Chicago Phil is a pizza delivery guy that has a habit of killing his clients, he is trying to make a perfect pizza along the way.
Performances – This is a hard film to criticise because of the fact it is micro budget, the problem with the acting comes from the fact that nothing feels natural in how things are delivered.
Story – The story here follows two detectives trying to solve the case of a serial killer in their town. The outside of this story seems simple and one that could be enjoyed, only for it to come up very short in delivery, the killer and weapon of choice does seem to become random, even though we have a couple of scenes where it is clear choice, the detectives seem to just be making up their own story to make the case easy to close and apart from investigating the case, they never seen to search for answers. For a micro-budget story this does do what it needs to by laying out the format, only it just doesn’t come close to becoming easy to enjoy.
Comedy/Horror – The comedy in this film does come from how awkward the two detectives are when it comes to communication, it is very hard to see these jokes coming off. The horror is only around the kills, which are meant to show a serial killer at work.
Settings – The film uses the different houses that could have a pizza delivery as the main locations, which work for the film.
Special Effects – The effects for a micro budget are the strongest part of the film, they show how certain things can work in films.
Scene of the Movie – Take it easy.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Most of the comedy.
Final Thoughts – This is a micro budget film that does try to give us something original even though it does miss for the most part on comedy, it is a film that looks like the people behind it enjoyed making.
Overall: Sometimes you just need to enjoy what you do.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) in Movies
Mar 30, 2021
The Last 45 minutes (out of 4 hours) is decent
When Zach Snyder was filming JUSTICE LEAGUE in 2016, a tragedy occurred in his family and he was forced to drop out and the job of Directing that film went to Joss Whedon (THE AVENGERS). This version of the film was met by many (including me) with a collective “meh”, it was an unintelligible mess of a movie that paid lip service to fan boys (maybe) and gave very little to anyone not well versed in all things DC Comics. Many, many fans assumed that there was much left on the cutting room floor (or not filmed at all) that would correct the many mistakes of this film.
After a large outcry to “Restore The Snyder Cut”, Warner Brothers and HBO Max gave the fans what they wanted - a 4 hour redone version of this film that was intended to clear up the many, many confusing moments of the first film.
And that is EXACTLY what has happened. Zach Snyder has created a film that is very long on explanation and exposition - exactly what the fanboys wanted. What it didn’t do was to clear up the mess that is the plot, pacing and characters of this film.
ZACH SNYDER’S JUSTICE LEAGUE unites many of the great SuperHeroes of DC Comics - Superman (Henry Cavill), Batman (Ben Affleck), Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Aquaman (Jason Momoa), The Flash (Ezra Miller) and Cyborg (Ray Fisher) - to fight an intergalactic villain.
So..how many of those heroes are you anxious to see on screen together and really dive deep into their backstories and motivations? If you said The Flash and Cyborg - then this is the film for you for Snyder really delves deeply into these 2 characters.
Unfortunately, what this has done is to push the heroes that the “average Joe” knows and loves - Batman, WonderWoman and Aquaman - to the background and, most damning of all, relinquished Superman to an extended cameo. He also throws almost every DC Character that has appeared in a previous film in - most really quickly. So, thanks for stopping by the party Lois Lane (Amy Adams), Commissioner Gordon (J.K. Simmons), Vulko (Willem Dafoe), Lex Luther (Jesse Eisenberg), Alfred (Jeremy Irons), Martha Kent (Diane Lane), Queen Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen) and Mira (Amber Heard). If I blinked I would have missed you.
To be fair, the last 45 minutes of this film are really interesting (including an Epilogue that sets up a sequel that we’ll never see), but in order to get there, you need to slog through 3 hours and 15 minutes of this disjointed film.
Worth the effort for the “Fanboys” and “Hardcores”, not worth the effort for the “Average Joe”.
Letter Grade: B (I really, really liked the Epilogue)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
After a large outcry to “Restore The Snyder Cut”, Warner Brothers and HBO Max gave the fans what they wanted - a 4 hour redone version of this film that was intended to clear up the many, many confusing moments of the first film.
And that is EXACTLY what has happened. Zach Snyder has created a film that is very long on explanation and exposition - exactly what the fanboys wanted. What it didn’t do was to clear up the mess that is the plot, pacing and characters of this film.
ZACH SNYDER’S JUSTICE LEAGUE unites many of the great SuperHeroes of DC Comics - Superman (Henry Cavill), Batman (Ben Affleck), Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Aquaman (Jason Momoa), The Flash (Ezra Miller) and Cyborg (Ray Fisher) - to fight an intergalactic villain.
So..how many of those heroes are you anxious to see on screen together and really dive deep into their backstories and motivations? If you said The Flash and Cyborg - then this is the film for you for Snyder really delves deeply into these 2 characters.
Unfortunately, what this has done is to push the heroes that the “average Joe” knows and loves - Batman, WonderWoman and Aquaman - to the background and, most damning of all, relinquished Superman to an extended cameo. He also throws almost every DC Character that has appeared in a previous film in - most really quickly. So, thanks for stopping by the party Lois Lane (Amy Adams), Commissioner Gordon (J.K. Simmons), Vulko (Willem Dafoe), Lex Luther (Jesse Eisenberg), Alfred (Jeremy Irons), Martha Kent (Diane Lane), Queen Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen) and Mira (Amber Heard). If I blinked I would have missed you.
To be fair, the last 45 minutes of this film are really interesting (including an Epilogue that sets up a sequel that we’ll never see), but in order to get there, you need to slog through 3 hours and 15 minutes of this disjointed film.
Worth the effort for the “Fanboys” and “Hardcores”, not worth the effort for the “Average Joe”.
Letter Grade: B (I really, really liked the Epilogue)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Woman in the Window (2021) in Movies
May 24, 2021
It is NOT Rear Window
A piece of advice for you when you start to watch the “Alfred Hitchcock-esque” thriller, THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW. If you are at all a Hitchcock fan, you will be spending the first part of this film comparing it to the 1954 classic REAR WINDOW and this would be a disservice to this film.
For…THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is no Rear Window, nor is it intended to be. It has many, many elements that are the same as Rear Window (most notably, the setup: a housebound person thinks they have witnessed a murder in a neighboring apartment), and THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is just like Rear Window…until it isn’t.
And that’s when I started to like this film, when I stopped comparing it (in my head) to Rear Window.
Based on the Best Seller by A.J. Finn (adapted for the screen by Tracy Letts who also appears in the film), THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW tells the tale of Anna Fox, an agoraphobic who watches life go on outside her window. When she thinks she has witnessed a murder, she (and the audience) must decide is it real? Did she truly witness a murder? If so, who dunnit? If not, is she just hallucinating things? Is Anna crazy?
The answers to these questions were satisfying enough to me that I ended up enjoying the film experience that I had - but I have to be honest and tell you that, for awhile, my enjoyment of this film was hanging by a thread.
Amy Adams (ENCHANTED) is terrific - if unspectacular - in the title role. Her Anna Fox is murkey (that is meant as a compliment) and struggles through most of the film trying to determine what is real and what is an illusion. Adams does a “journeyman’s” job with this role. She acts her way through it in such a workmanlike fashion that I almost forgot that it is Adams on the screen.
Wyatt Russell (Kurt’s son who is also the new Captain America in THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER) fares the best of the Supporting players for he has the most to do. Unfortunately, Director Joe Wright (ATONEMENT) and Screenwriter Letts wastes such strong actors as Gary Oldman (DARKEST HOUR), Julianne Moore (STILL ALICE), Anthony Mackie (The Falcon in the Marvel Movies), Jennifer Jason Leigh (HATEFUL 8), Brian Tyree Henry (GET OUT) and Letts himself in terribly underwritten roles that serve (mostly) as red herrings - and each of their characters are interchangeable and forgettable.
And that, ultimately, is where this film comes apart. While I cared about Anna and the solution to the mystery - I didn’t care very much about the other characters involved.
Which is why, I think, I’ll pull my DVD of Rear Window out and watch that film for the umpteenth time.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
For…THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is no Rear Window, nor is it intended to be. It has many, many elements that are the same as Rear Window (most notably, the setup: a housebound person thinks they have witnessed a murder in a neighboring apartment), and THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is just like Rear Window…until it isn’t.
And that’s when I started to like this film, when I stopped comparing it (in my head) to Rear Window.
Based on the Best Seller by A.J. Finn (adapted for the screen by Tracy Letts who also appears in the film), THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW tells the tale of Anna Fox, an agoraphobic who watches life go on outside her window. When she thinks she has witnessed a murder, she (and the audience) must decide is it real? Did she truly witness a murder? If so, who dunnit? If not, is she just hallucinating things? Is Anna crazy?
The answers to these questions were satisfying enough to me that I ended up enjoying the film experience that I had - but I have to be honest and tell you that, for awhile, my enjoyment of this film was hanging by a thread.
Amy Adams (ENCHANTED) is terrific - if unspectacular - in the title role. Her Anna Fox is murkey (that is meant as a compliment) and struggles through most of the film trying to determine what is real and what is an illusion. Adams does a “journeyman’s” job with this role. She acts her way through it in such a workmanlike fashion that I almost forgot that it is Adams on the screen.
Wyatt Russell (Kurt’s son who is also the new Captain America in THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER) fares the best of the Supporting players for he has the most to do. Unfortunately, Director Joe Wright (ATONEMENT) and Screenwriter Letts wastes such strong actors as Gary Oldman (DARKEST HOUR), Julianne Moore (STILL ALICE), Anthony Mackie (The Falcon in the Marvel Movies), Jennifer Jason Leigh (HATEFUL 8), Brian Tyree Henry (GET OUT) and Letts himself in terribly underwritten roles that serve (mostly) as red herrings - and each of their characters are interchangeable and forgettable.
And that, ultimately, is where this film comes apart. While I cared about Anna and the solution to the mystery - I didn’t care very much about the other characters involved.
Which is why, I think, I’ll pull my DVD of Rear Window out and watch that film for the umpteenth time.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)