Search
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The People Under the Stairs (1991) in Movies
Jan 2, 2021
Often overlooked by Wes Craven's wider known films, The People Under the Stairs is a gem of an early nineties horror in its own right for a few reasons.
First and foremost, it has a great cast. Brandon Quintin Adams heads up the cast. He's a cute kid who is easy to root for. The supporting cast is strong too, including Ving Rhames, A.J. Langer, and Sean Whalen. But the stars of the show are it's horrendous villains. Twin Peaks alumni Wendy Robie and Everett McGill play the antagonists (simply credited as "woman" and "man") and they just relish in how absolutely vile they are, and are the main source of entertainment throughout the runtime. The Hall of Fame of horror villainy isn't easy to get into, being crammed with popular icons and all, but these two deserve a spot for sure.
Other than these positives, it's also boasts some decent practical gore, a few creepy visuals, some moments of well earned tension, and is socially relevant to this day, touching upon subjects such as class difference, unaffordable healthcare, and racism. It's screenplay is an intelligent one in this respect, as well as having a fun side to it.
My only real issue with The People Under the Stairs is it's pacing. It does take a little too long to get going. When everything starts to get chaotic, it really becomes a good time, but it does get a bit repetitive, no matter how entertaining it is to see Everett McGill running around in a gimp suit.
These are minor gripes though, it's definitely worth a watch. It's another solid piece of work from Wes Craven, and deserves it's cult status wholeheartedly.
First and foremost, it has a great cast. Brandon Quintin Adams heads up the cast. He's a cute kid who is easy to root for. The supporting cast is strong too, including Ving Rhames, A.J. Langer, and Sean Whalen. But the stars of the show are it's horrendous villains. Twin Peaks alumni Wendy Robie and Everett McGill play the antagonists (simply credited as "woman" and "man") and they just relish in how absolutely vile they are, and are the main source of entertainment throughout the runtime. The Hall of Fame of horror villainy isn't easy to get into, being crammed with popular icons and all, but these two deserve a spot for sure.
Other than these positives, it's also boasts some decent practical gore, a few creepy visuals, some moments of well earned tension, and is socially relevant to this day, touching upon subjects such as class difference, unaffordable healthcare, and racism. It's screenplay is an intelligent one in this respect, as well as having a fun side to it.
My only real issue with The People Under the Stairs is it's pacing. It does take a little too long to get going. When everything starts to get chaotic, it really becomes a good time, but it does get a bit repetitive, no matter how entertaining it is to see Everett McGill running around in a gimp suit.
These are minor gripes though, it's definitely worth a watch. It's another solid piece of work from Wes Craven, and deserves it's cult status wholeheartedly.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Emperor (2013) in Movies
Sep 9, 2019
A tough challenge
The end of Asian campaign of World War II is complicated. The Japanese surrender following the US dropping the pair of atomic bombs; killing hundreds of thousands, wounding many more and leaving cities in ruins. Tensions are still running at a fever pitch and many people are demanding answers and swift justice for those responsible.
"Supreme Commander" General Douglas MacArthur is put in charge of rebuilding Japan and enlists General Bonner Fellers the nearly impossible task of investigating the involvement of Japan's emperor Hirohito and whether or not he should be tried convicted and hung as a result of his orders. Did he order the attack on Pearl Harbor? What did he know and when did he know it? Was he the one who gave the orders or were his generals in charge of the overall operations? In addition, Fellers is given only 10 days to find his ruling before MacArthur has to report back to his commanders in the US.
Sellers starts with trying to figure out the people involved, find them, interview them and find those who don't want to be found. His interviews ask more questions than answer them and he feels like he is going nowhere fast.
Intertwined are his recollections of a romance he had years earlier with a Japanese exchange student who left the US and returned to her home in Japan. His emotions are getting the better of him while he thinks about his former love and attempts to locate her or learn her fate while he does his job.
Matthew Fox is the best part of this film. As a military man, he respects the chain of command and works within in, but also is able to show his emotions when he is with the woman he loves. I loved the flashback scenes as they were able to show the man as well as just the uniform and Fox did this very well.
Tommy Lee Jones played the character he plays in most of his movies. Barking orders to his underlings and enjoying very much being in charge.
I don't know very much about Japanese culture and this film helped me understand what values they hold sacred. These values highly motivate their actions which can be very noble and traditional or unrelenting and barbaric depending on the situation.
You feel real turmoil as the investigation concludes and the results which are found (or not found) and how the situation is resolved. The characters are flawed which makes them more real. This makes the story more emotional and believable.
The Japanese countryside is beautiful in the time of peace contrasted with the desolate scarred Earth shown after the bombs fell.
Compelling historical dramas always intrigue me and this one did the same.
"Supreme Commander" General Douglas MacArthur is put in charge of rebuilding Japan and enlists General Bonner Fellers the nearly impossible task of investigating the involvement of Japan's emperor Hirohito and whether or not he should be tried convicted and hung as a result of his orders. Did he order the attack on Pearl Harbor? What did he know and when did he know it? Was he the one who gave the orders or were his generals in charge of the overall operations? In addition, Fellers is given only 10 days to find his ruling before MacArthur has to report back to his commanders in the US.
Sellers starts with trying to figure out the people involved, find them, interview them and find those who don't want to be found. His interviews ask more questions than answer them and he feels like he is going nowhere fast.
Intertwined are his recollections of a romance he had years earlier with a Japanese exchange student who left the US and returned to her home in Japan. His emotions are getting the better of him while he thinks about his former love and attempts to locate her or learn her fate while he does his job.
Matthew Fox is the best part of this film. As a military man, he respects the chain of command and works within in, but also is able to show his emotions when he is with the woman he loves. I loved the flashback scenes as they were able to show the man as well as just the uniform and Fox did this very well.
Tommy Lee Jones played the character he plays in most of his movies. Barking orders to his underlings and enjoying very much being in charge.
I don't know very much about Japanese culture and this film helped me understand what values they hold sacred. These values highly motivate their actions which can be very noble and traditional or unrelenting and barbaric depending on the situation.
You feel real turmoil as the investigation concludes and the results which are found (or not found) and how the situation is resolved. The characters are flawed which makes them more real. This makes the story more emotional and believable.
The Japanese countryside is beautiful in the time of peace contrasted with the desolate scarred Earth shown after the bombs fell.
Compelling historical dramas always intrigue me and this one did the same.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated King Kong (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Following up the box office and Oscar success of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy is an undertaking that is sure to have its dangers. Expectations of the fans notwithstanding, the ability to recapture the magic of the trilogy could be akin to capturing lightning in a bottle. When it was announced that Peter Jackson would follow his Oscar success by doing yet another adaptation of King Kong, there were plenty of questions amidst the excitement.
When an earlier remake was a critical and commercial bomb, “Would Jackson be able to do justice to one of the all time classics?” was one of the biggest questions. When it was announced that comedian Jack Black would be in the film, people began to wonder what Jackson had brewing. Black, as well as Academy Award winner Adrian Brody were seen as offbeat choices. As the release date for the film neared, so did speculation over the look of the film, the running time, and its decision to follow the screenplay of the original rather than adapt to a modern setting.
The film follows a filmmaker named Carl Denham (Jack Black), who in an act of desperation flees New York for a mysterious and uncharted island in an attempt to finish his latest movie before the studio can shut him down. Amidst the backdrop of the Great Depression, it is clear that Denham knows that failure now could be the end of his livelihood and his long term future. As he embarks on his fly by night production, Denham encounters Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts), a recently unemployed Vaudeville performer who is enticed into the film in the hopes of meeting its writer Jack Driscoll (Adrian Brody). It seems that Ann has long coveted a part in Driscoll’s plays and hopes that by meeting him, she will obtain her long sought after audition.
With the cops and studio hot on their heels, the cast and crew board a tramp steamer named “The Venture” as they set off for the mysterious island that is known only to Denham via a mysterious map he obtained through methods unknown.
As the voyage unwinds, not only does Denham get the chance to film segments of the film, but Ann and a stranded Jack find themselves becoming an item. Jack is inspired by Ann, and he works like a man inspired turning out page after page of material for various projects which he hopes Ann will star.
Eventually the ship finds its way to the mysterious Skull Island surrounded in fog, and the crew venture ashore to take in the bizarre and exotic land that has previously been unexplored. Upon finding a fortified wall and settlement the crew has a run in with some dangerous natives which in turn leads to Ann being kidnapped and offered up sacrificial style to a gigantic creature the Islanders refer to as Kong. Undaunted, Jack and the crew set off to rescue Ann while Denham shoots footage along the way, as the island offers visuals the likes of which have never been seen by mankind.
Along the way, the crew encounters deadly creatures and obstacles at every turn, as does Ann who plays a dangerous game of cat and mouse with Kong as she comes to grips with her situation. Kong is taken with the lovely Ann and protects her against numerous dangers including a pack of Tyrannosauruses in one of the film’s best action sequences.
Of course few will be surprised at the final act of the film so I will leave it to say that the fish out of water nature of the previous versions remains intact as Kong finds himself dealing with an urban jungle which leads to a spectacular finale atop the Empire State Building.
In many ways Jackson’s film is three separate films. The first hour of the film is an interesting and, at times witty, character piece where the lead characters assemble. The look of the city is amazing, making it very clear that enormous amounts of effort went into crafting the look of Depression Era New York, and to remind the audience that Prohibition was also in effect. The interplay between the characters is decent.Black does standout work as the slick Denham, as does Watts as the wholesome and lovable Ann.
The second hour of the film is the special effects showcase where the mysteries of Skull Island and Kong are shown complete with all manner of CGI creatures and action sequences. While most of them are well staged, I could not help but note that on more than one occasion the CGI backdrops did not match up well with their live action counterparts. There is one scene of a stampede where it looked like the actors had been drawn in and that they were running in place as they clearly did not mesh with the spectacle behind them.
Throughout the film this occurrence happened more and more which really had me wondering if the effects house was overtaxed. A film with a budget reportedly over 100 million should not have these technical issues. Thankfully Kong himself is a wonder, with everything from his expressive eyes and facial features, captured in a remarkable way. It is just a shame that the other effects did not get the same treatment as the films namesake, as he truly is a site to behold. Andy Serkis who did the character mannerisms for the animators program did a phenomenal job. The movements of Kong progress with a strength and agility that bellies a simian rather than a skilled performer.
I do not want it to sound as if I did not enjoy the film, as much of the film worked very well, technical issues aside. What my biggest issue with the film was that at over 3 Hours, it was far too long for the material to support. We get numerous scenes of Ann and Kong flirting, bonding, fighting, running, and more. What is cute the first couple of times becomes dull the more it is repeated. It is obvious that they have a bond; we do not need to see it over and over ad nauseum to get the message. Also, the character development and interplay between the characters that was so effective in the first part of the film all but vanishes amidst the effects.
The finale of the film is a rousing success as the daring visuals and camera angles are very inventive and thrilling. This segment with its fury of motion and sound will have viewers on the edge of their seat as it certainly delivers the goods. The biggest issue again is having to sit through three hours to get to it. Anyone who has seen either version of Kong knows exactly where the film is heading, and after two hours of screen time I found myself wishing they would just hurry up and get to it.
Jackson has crafted a very entertaining and lavish film that packs its share of thrills. What the film needed is someone to reign in Jackson and his boundless enthusiasm for the project to remind him that sometimes less is more. Jackson has said that he had over 4 hours worth of material filmed but trimmed it down to its current running time. When the film is almost twice the running time of the original, I found myself thinking that minus 45 minutes the same story could have been told.
Despite the flaws and the hype, King Kong is a solid film that for me was more satisfying in many ways than any of the “Rings” films. While not quite a masterpiece, this Kong is worthy of the name and pedigree of the timeless original that inspired it.
When an earlier remake was a critical and commercial bomb, “Would Jackson be able to do justice to one of the all time classics?” was one of the biggest questions. When it was announced that comedian Jack Black would be in the film, people began to wonder what Jackson had brewing. Black, as well as Academy Award winner Adrian Brody were seen as offbeat choices. As the release date for the film neared, so did speculation over the look of the film, the running time, and its decision to follow the screenplay of the original rather than adapt to a modern setting.
The film follows a filmmaker named Carl Denham (Jack Black), who in an act of desperation flees New York for a mysterious and uncharted island in an attempt to finish his latest movie before the studio can shut him down. Amidst the backdrop of the Great Depression, it is clear that Denham knows that failure now could be the end of his livelihood and his long term future. As he embarks on his fly by night production, Denham encounters Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts), a recently unemployed Vaudeville performer who is enticed into the film in the hopes of meeting its writer Jack Driscoll (Adrian Brody). It seems that Ann has long coveted a part in Driscoll’s plays and hopes that by meeting him, she will obtain her long sought after audition.
With the cops and studio hot on their heels, the cast and crew board a tramp steamer named “The Venture” as they set off for the mysterious island that is known only to Denham via a mysterious map he obtained through methods unknown.
As the voyage unwinds, not only does Denham get the chance to film segments of the film, but Ann and a stranded Jack find themselves becoming an item. Jack is inspired by Ann, and he works like a man inspired turning out page after page of material for various projects which he hopes Ann will star.
Eventually the ship finds its way to the mysterious Skull Island surrounded in fog, and the crew venture ashore to take in the bizarre and exotic land that has previously been unexplored. Upon finding a fortified wall and settlement the crew has a run in with some dangerous natives which in turn leads to Ann being kidnapped and offered up sacrificial style to a gigantic creature the Islanders refer to as Kong. Undaunted, Jack and the crew set off to rescue Ann while Denham shoots footage along the way, as the island offers visuals the likes of which have never been seen by mankind.
Along the way, the crew encounters deadly creatures and obstacles at every turn, as does Ann who plays a dangerous game of cat and mouse with Kong as she comes to grips with her situation. Kong is taken with the lovely Ann and protects her against numerous dangers including a pack of Tyrannosauruses in one of the film’s best action sequences.
Of course few will be surprised at the final act of the film so I will leave it to say that the fish out of water nature of the previous versions remains intact as Kong finds himself dealing with an urban jungle which leads to a spectacular finale atop the Empire State Building.
In many ways Jackson’s film is three separate films. The first hour of the film is an interesting and, at times witty, character piece where the lead characters assemble. The look of the city is amazing, making it very clear that enormous amounts of effort went into crafting the look of Depression Era New York, and to remind the audience that Prohibition was also in effect. The interplay between the characters is decent.Black does standout work as the slick Denham, as does Watts as the wholesome and lovable Ann.
The second hour of the film is the special effects showcase where the mysteries of Skull Island and Kong are shown complete with all manner of CGI creatures and action sequences. While most of them are well staged, I could not help but note that on more than one occasion the CGI backdrops did not match up well with their live action counterparts. There is one scene of a stampede where it looked like the actors had been drawn in and that they were running in place as they clearly did not mesh with the spectacle behind them.
Throughout the film this occurrence happened more and more which really had me wondering if the effects house was overtaxed. A film with a budget reportedly over 100 million should not have these technical issues. Thankfully Kong himself is a wonder, with everything from his expressive eyes and facial features, captured in a remarkable way. It is just a shame that the other effects did not get the same treatment as the films namesake, as he truly is a site to behold. Andy Serkis who did the character mannerisms for the animators program did a phenomenal job. The movements of Kong progress with a strength and agility that bellies a simian rather than a skilled performer.
I do not want it to sound as if I did not enjoy the film, as much of the film worked very well, technical issues aside. What my biggest issue with the film was that at over 3 Hours, it was far too long for the material to support. We get numerous scenes of Ann and Kong flirting, bonding, fighting, running, and more. What is cute the first couple of times becomes dull the more it is repeated. It is obvious that they have a bond; we do not need to see it over and over ad nauseum to get the message. Also, the character development and interplay between the characters that was so effective in the first part of the film all but vanishes amidst the effects.
The finale of the film is a rousing success as the daring visuals and camera angles are very inventive and thrilling. This segment with its fury of motion and sound will have viewers on the edge of their seat as it certainly delivers the goods. The biggest issue again is having to sit through three hours to get to it. Anyone who has seen either version of Kong knows exactly where the film is heading, and after two hours of screen time I found myself wishing they would just hurry up and get to it.
Jackson has crafted a very entertaining and lavish film that packs its share of thrills. What the film needed is someone to reign in Jackson and his boundless enthusiasm for the project to remind him that sometimes less is more. Jackson has said that he had over 4 hours worth of material filmed but trimmed it down to its current running time. When the film is almost twice the running time of the original, I found myself thinking that minus 45 minutes the same story could have been told.
Despite the flaws and the hype, King Kong is a solid film that for me was more satisfying in many ways than any of the “Rings” films. While not quite a masterpiece, this Kong is worthy of the name and pedigree of the timeless original that inspired it.
Lee KM Pallatina (951 KP) rated Die Hard (1988) in Movies
Jan 16, 2021 (Updated Jan 17, 2021)
The casting (3 more)
Plot
SFX
Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman in general
Welcome to the party pal!
In 1988 Hollywood Gambled on a lesser known tv star for it's high budget action thriller.
Laughed at when hearing their choice of actor, it was the 80's and when you heard action movie you'd immediately think "Schwarzenegger or stallone, maybe even Kurt Russel" Hollywood wanted obe of the bigger stars and reached out to them, but they all turned it down so average Joe became their Vacationing NYPD hero, so they stuck with the man known as Bruce Willis!
Whilst Visiting his estranged wife at the (fictional) Nakatomi plaza (Fox plaza) the building and it's workforce are quickly taken hostage.
Enter John McClain (willis) a rough looking, smooth talking (the guy literally has a smooth/relaxed voice) witty, sarcastic NYPD cop who just can't seem to catch a break.
Armed with everything I wrote above, aswell as bare feet, air-vents, and a fire hose, McClain pursues the terrorists in an action packed attempt at proving his wife wrong and maybe saving a few people in the process.
Die Hard is a classic 80's action epic that spawned many terrible sequels (excluding 'with a vengeance') that we still paid to watch aswell as countless knockoffs.
Did you know?
. The team behind die hard was laughed at because of their lead choice (you should do I just told you)
. The movie was almost shut down because they used a real life helicopter around the building whilst local residents tried to sleep causing an outrage and filed complaints.
. miniature explosions were set of atop the building for affect.
. Alan Rickman was lied to about when he'd be dropped from the "building" the capture a natural look of fear (about a 30ft drop).
. It was Alan Rickmans first movie ( what a way to hit the ground and keep running)
. A replica model of the building was built to film the remaining explosions on the building.
. The original Vest (tank top) is on display in the Smithsonian.
.the movie was filmed during official construction of the fox plaza aka nakatomi plaza.
Laughed at when hearing their choice of actor, it was the 80's and when you heard action movie you'd immediately think "Schwarzenegger or stallone, maybe even Kurt Russel" Hollywood wanted obe of the bigger stars and reached out to them, but they all turned it down so average Joe became their Vacationing NYPD hero, so they stuck with the man known as Bruce Willis!
Whilst Visiting his estranged wife at the (fictional) Nakatomi plaza (Fox plaza) the building and it's workforce are quickly taken hostage.
Enter John McClain (willis) a rough looking, smooth talking (the guy literally has a smooth/relaxed voice) witty, sarcastic NYPD cop who just can't seem to catch a break.
Armed with everything I wrote above, aswell as bare feet, air-vents, and a fire hose, McClain pursues the terrorists in an action packed attempt at proving his wife wrong and maybe saving a few people in the process.
Die Hard is a classic 80's action epic that spawned many terrible sequels (excluding 'with a vengeance') that we still paid to watch aswell as countless knockoffs.
Did you know?
. The team behind die hard was laughed at because of their lead choice (you should do I just told you)
. The movie was almost shut down because they used a real life helicopter around the building whilst local residents tried to sleep causing an outrage and filed complaints.
. miniature explosions were set of atop the building for affect.
. Alan Rickman was lied to about when he'd be dropped from the "building" the capture a natural look of fear (about a 30ft drop).
. It was Alan Rickmans first movie ( what a way to hit the ground and keep running)
. A replica model of the building was built to film the remaining explosions on the building.
. The original Vest (tank top) is on display in the Smithsonian.
.the movie was filmed during official construction of the fox plaza aka nakatomi plaza.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Mauritanian (2021) in Movies
Apr 14, 2021
Great acting from all four leads, especially Tahar Rahim (2 more)
Great use of screen ratios for flashbacks
Very thought provoking
War crimes don't just happen on the battlefield
It’s 2001. Bush and Rumsfeld seek vengeance on the perpetrators of 9/11. Quite right too. But rounding up hundreds of suspects and incarcerating them for years, without charge, in Guantánamo Bay in Cuba was an appalling act for a supposedly first-world country.
“The Mauritanian” then is the true story of one such unfortunate – Mohamedou Ould Slahi, played by Tahar Rahim. We first join Slahi at a family wedding in Nouakchott (good “Pointless” answer for the capital of Mauritania people!). ‘Invited for questioning’ by the American authorities, we next see Slahi in the Cuban stronghold.
Pro-bono lawyer Nancy Hollander (Jodie Foster) becomes a pariah by picking up his defence. Supporting her is assistant Teri Duncan (Shailene Woodley). Hollander is very formal and professionally aloof, not assuming his guilt or innocence. After meeting the man, and assuming his innocence, Duncan though is more emotionally involved. The man opposing them at trial is US Army prosecutor Stuart Couch (Benedict Cumberbatch). Couch, having lost one of his best friends aboard the South Tower plane, has an axe to grind.
As the pair battle unseen forces for access to documentation, they uncover more and more of the truth about life in Guantánamo Bay.
Positives:
- I've not read the book so I found the story gripping. As the related legal information is divulged, the movie drip-feeds flashbacks of Slahia's story, which is clever.
- Acting wise, "The Mauritanian" has top notch stuff. Tahir Rahim is excellent as Slahia. He portrays charismatic and confident businessman, brought down to earth with a bump. Not recognizing him with an Oscar nomination feels like a minor crime. He will have to make do with the BAFTA nomination. Also brilliant is Jodie Foster. As the illustrious Mrs Movie Man pointed out, it's so nice to see an actress acting her age with confidence. The ever-watchable Shailene Woodley is also great, especially in a dramatic 'dismissal' scene. She adds some much needed warmth to the legal team. The southern drawl from Cumberbatch is a bit of a surprise and takes some getting used to. But it's still a strong performance from him.
- After ranting on last time at Zack Snyder's use of 4:3 screen ratios in "Justice League", here is an intelligent use of the technique. The film is in 16:9 ratio, but then pivots to 4:3 for all of the Guantanamo flashback scenes, reflecting the claustrophobia of Slahia's position.
- Real-life footage over the closing titles is absolutely fascinating.
Negatives:
- I personally didn't find this a particular negative, but I went into the film knowing it to be a "legal drama". So there would be lots of scenes, as in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", with courtroom debate and gavel-banging, right? Actually, there is almost none of that. Most of the legal action is in terms of the preparation of the case and the paperwork involved. (If this makes the movie sound excruciatingly dull... think again!)
- The Guantanamo story ends quite abruptly (with the above-mentioned jolt), and left me wanting to see more of the intervening time. It's not often that I complain about a film running too short, but here is one where just a little of "the Snyder treatment" might have been welcomed!
Additional Note for the squeamish: For those worried about seeing distressing scenes of torture (e.g. Fingernail extraction, etc), these are - although disturbing - more of the "psychological torment" type. So those of a squeamish disposition can still watch this one.
Summary Thoughts:
The fact that "The Mauritanian" is a true story hammers home just what the US has been up to over the last 20 years. War crimes are not only committed on the battlefield.
Director Kevin Macdonald is no stranger to documentaries ("Touching the Void", "Whitney"). He's also proved adept at bringing gripping true stories to the screen (having previously given us "The Last King of Scotland"). Here, the emotional journeys of the key characters are well observed making the movie 'highly recommended'.
For the full One Mann's Movies review see here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/09/the-mauritanian-america-are-you-squirming-with-embarrassment/
“The Mauritanian” then is the true story of one such unfortunate – Mohamedou Ould Slahi, played by Tahar Rahim. We first join Slahi at a family wedding in Nouakchott (good “Pointless” answer for the capital of Mauritania people!). ‘Invited for questioning’ by the American authorities, we next see Slahi in the Cuban stronghold.
Pro-bono lawyer Nancy Hollander (Jodie Foster) becomes a pariah by picking up his defence. Supporting her is assistant Teri Duncan (Shailene Woodley). Hollander is very formal and professionally aloof, not assuming his guilt or innocence. After meeting the man, and assuming his innocence, Duncan though is more emotionally involved. The man opposing them at trial is US Army prosecutor Stuart Couch (Benedict Cumberbatch). Couch, having lost one of his best friends aboard the South Tower plane, has an axe to grind.
As the pair battle unseen forces for access to documentation, they uncover more and more of the truth about life in Guantánamo Bay.
Positives:
- I've not read the book so I found the story gripping. As the related legal information is divulged, the movie drip-feeds flashbacks of Slahia's story, which is clever.
- Acting wise, "The Mauritanian" has top notch stuff. Tahir Rahim is excellent as Slahia. He portrays charismatic and confident businessman, brought down to earth with a bump. Not recognizing him with an Oscar nomination feels like a minor crime. He will have to make do with the BAFTA nomination. Also brilliant is Jodie Foster. As the illustrious Mrs Movie Man pointed out, it's so nice to see an actress acting her age with confidence. The ever-watchable Shailene Woodley is also great, especially in a dramatic 'dismissal' scene. She adds some much needed warmth to the legal team. The southern drawl from Cumberbatch is a bit of a surprise and takes some getting used to. But it's still a strong performance from him.
- After ranting on last time at Zack Snyder's use of 4:3 screen ratios in "Justice League", here is an intelligent use of the technique. The film is in 16:9 ratio, but then pivots to 4:3 for all of the Guantanamo flashback scenes, reflecting the claustrophobia of Slahia's position.
- Real-life footage over the closing titles is absolutely fascinating.
Negatives:
- I personally didn't find this a particular negative, but I went into the film knowing it to be a "legal drama". So there would be lots of scenes, as in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", with courtroom debate and gavel-banging, right? Actually, there is almost none of that. Most of the legal action is in terms of the preparation of the case and the paperwork involved. (If this makes the movie sound excruciatingly dull... think again!)
- The Guantanamo story ends quite abruptly (with the above-mentioned jolt), and left me wanting to see more of the intervening time. It's not often that I complain about a film running too short, but here is one where just a little of "the Snyder treatment" might have been welcomed!
Additional Note for the squeamish: For those worried about seeing distressing scenes of torture (e.g. Fingernail extraction, etc), these are - although disturbing - more of the "psychological torment" type. So those of a squeamish disposition can still watch this one.
Summary Thoughts:
The fact that "The Mauritanian" is a true story hammers home just what the US has been up to over the last 20 years. War crimes are not only committed on the battlefield.
Director Kevin Macdonald is no stranger to documentaries ("Touching the Void", "Whitney"). He's also proved adept at bringing gripping true stories to the screen (having previously given us "The Last King of Scotland"). Here, the emotional journeys of the key characters are well observed making the movie 'highly recommended'.
For the full One Mann's Movies review see here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/09/the-mauritanian-america-are-you-squirming-with-embarrassment/
Debbiereadsbook (1202 KP) rated In Safe Keeping (Heroes and Babies #2) in Books
Sep 3, 2019
excellent follow up!
Independent reviewer for Divine Magazine, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book two in the Heroes and Babies series, but you do NOT need to have read book one, In Safe Hands, before you read this one. There is (or I didn’t pick it up) no relation between the two books, save the Hero and the Baby! But I recommend you do read it, because its bloody brilliant!
Lucas couldn’t save his son, who died in a fire 3 years ago, but saving Owen and baby Mia goes a little way to help. But Owen in clearly running, from what Lucas doesn’t know. His protective instincts are out the roof for Owen and Mia, and Lucas will do anything to keep them safe.
Book one got me out of a bit of a book funk and blew me away, and book two did too!
Lucas’ pain isn’t immediate obvious, and it takes time for the full picture to become clear. I mean, two thirds of the book before you get it ALL laid out for you! And not everything is how you think it’s gonna be! Love being kept on my toes.
The attraction Lucas has for Owen is also slow to become clear, sort of sneaking up on him. While Lucas was married to a woman, he doesn’t question his attraction to Owen, and just runs with it.
Owen’s pain is equally slow in coming out, and it’s not easy reading, not at all. Owen’s attraction to Lucas is powerful, but Owen questions whether that is just the situation, rather than anything real. When they finally get to the “good stuff” though, Owen knows who he wants, he just hopes Lucas feels the same.
Because of the creeping up on Lucas thing, it is not especially explicit, but then again, it doesn’t need to be. It is hot though, it just takes a long time, right till nearly the end of the book!
Again, we get to hear from the bad guy, although said bad guy isn’t quite as bad as one would think, just a man in a really bad place. It is quite graphic, the level of violence that occurs but I think the IS needed, for Owen’s fright to be fully explained, for you to understand what it is he is running from.
Both have guys a say, and you know that makes me happy! I wasn’t sure if Owen would, at first, but he does. Both voices are different, and well written.
I am, currently, listening to book one, and I was hearing Michael Pauley narrate this, so I would hope he does narrate this as well as he does book one!
5 stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
This is book two in the Heroes and Babies series, but you do NOT need to have read book one, In Safe Hands, before you read this one. There is (or I didn’t pick it up) no relation between the two books, save the Hero and the Baby! But I recommend you do read it, because its bloody brilliant!
Lucas couldn’t save his son, who died in a fire 3 years ago, but saving Owen and baby Mia goes a little way to help. But Owen in clearly running, from what Lucas doesn’t know. His protective instincts are out the roof for Owen and Mia, and Lucas will do anything to keep them safe.
Book one got me out of a bit of a book funk and blew me away, and book two did too!
Lucas’ pain isn’t immediate obvious, and it takes time for the full picture to become clear. I mean, two thirds of the book before you get it ALL laid out for you! And not everything is how you think it’s gonna be! Love being kept on my toes.
The attraction Lucas has for Owen is also slow to become clear, sort of sneaking up on him. While Lucas was married to a woman, he doesn’t question his attraction to Owen, and just runs with it.
Owen’s pain is equally slow in coming out, and it’s not easy reading, not at all. Owen’s attraction to Lucas is powerful, but Owen questions whether that is just the situation, rather than anything real. When they finally get to the “good stuff” though, Owen knows who he wants, he just hopes Lucas feels the same.
Because of the creeping up on Lucas thing, it is not especially explicit, but then again, it doesn’t need to be. It is hot though, it just takes a long time, right till nearly the end of the book!
Again, we get to hear from the bad guy, although said bad guy isn’t quite as bad as one would think, just a man in a really bad place. It is quite graphic, the level of violence that occurs but I think the IS needed, for Owen’s fright to be fully explained, for you to understand what it is he is running from.
Both have guys a say, and you know that makes me happy! I wasn’t sure if Owen would, at first, but he does. Both voices are different, and well written.
I am, currently, listening to book one, and I was hearing Michael Pauley narrate this, so I would hope he does narrate this as well as he does book one!
5 stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Rugged and Relentless (Husbands for Hire, #1) in Books
Feb 11, 2019
This book had quite an intriguing premise -- four women decide to place an ad for husbands in order to revive a dead mining town and turn it into a sawmill town. Their good intentions did not account for the reality of the kind of men who would be showing up for such a curious promise, and the likelihood of their being able to maintain control of a town full of men. I also found it a bit ironic that the book is marketed as a Christian fiction book, though the four women have made themselves heads over the men and are anything but submissive -- even Cora, the one woman actually engaged. Still, the scenario presents some humorous situations as the women interact with the various men of many colorful backgrounds.
The major issue of control is a point of contention for the women throughout the book, as it is obvious that food and lodging won't be enough to corral the men into subservience, even food as delicious as Evie's. Jake is one of the men that steps in to act as bodyguard to the women and leader over the men, since he conveniently has a background in running a sawmill. Jake's presence in Hope Falls is an accident, though, as he had no previous interest in obtaining a wife and was more interested in pursuing revenge for the murder of his brother. He adopts the name Jacob Creed to hide his identity, and uses the husband ad as a cover for his true intentions, but his attraction to Evie is obvious to all but Evie herself.
Evie's self-esteem issues regularly get in the way of her being able to build a relationship with any of the men, especially the one man who gets under her skin, Jacob. She covers her low self-esteem with a bossy pride that annoyed me throughout the book, as her main obstacle seemed to be herself. But Jacob's approach to her low self-image will have any woman with "heft" cheering, especially when he almost force-fed her cookies.
This book was a fun and humorous read, with an original concept that I found refreshing.
The major issue of control is a point of contention for the women throughout the book, as it is obvious that food and lodging won't be enough to corral the men into subservience, even food as delicious as Evie's. Jake is one of the men that steps in to act as bodyguard to the women and leader over the men, since he conveniently has a background in running a sawmill. Jake's presence in Hope Falls is an accident, though, as he had no previous interest in obtaining a wife and was more interested in pursuing revenge for the murder of his brother. He adopts the name Jacob Creed to hide his identity, and uses the husband ad as a cover for his true intentions, but his attraction to Evie is obvious to all but Evie herself.
Evie's self-esteem issues regularly get in the way of her being able to build a relationship with any of the men, especially the one man who gets under her skin, Jacob. She covers her low self-esteem with a bossy pride that annoyed me throughout the book, as her main obstacle seemed to be herself. But Jacob's approach to her low self-image will have any woman with "heft" cheering, especially when he almost force-fed her cookies.
This book was a fun and humorous read, with an original concept that I found refreshing.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Friday Night Lights (2004) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
For many small towns in America, the rituals surrounding football season have become so ingrained into the fabric of local society that all aspects of life revolve around the game each Friday.
One prime example of this is in the town of Odessa Texas, where every fall young men embrace the rituals of football as their ticket to bigger and better things in life, and where local merchants close their shops less than miss a single moment of the biggest show in town, the Perriman Panthers.
In the new film &”Friday Night Lights”, audiences get a firsthand look at the trials and tribulations that the team endured during its 1988 season that had previously been covered in the book of the same name by H.G. Bissinger which centered much like the film on the racial and economic overtones of the community.
The film stars Billy Bob Thornton as Coach Gary Gaines a man who despite a string of winning seasons and State Championships to his credit is under pressure to deliver not only a championship team, but an undefeated season as well. The players feel the pressure to, as every person they encounter on the eve of their season is quick to remind them to win it all and go undefeated.
While the first game starts as an enjoyable romp for Perriman and fans it soon becomes tragic when all everything running back Boobie Miles (Derick Luke), injures his knee and as a result the team is routed in it’s next start causing the world to fall in around the coach as disgruntled local fans go so far as to clutter his home with for sale signs following a single loss.
Undaunted the team picks itself up and finds a way to get back to its winning ways and make a run for the state tournament. Along the way the players will be saddled with the standard issues including but not limited to injuries, self-doubt, an abusive father, a sick parent, and local pressure from rabid fans that will not accept anything short of an undefeated season.
While the game scenes of the fill are well done, as Director Peter Berg mixes footage of the 2003 Perriman team with recreated scenes to create a dynamic and engrossing recreation of the game that is perhaps one of the best ever captured on film. Sadly, the game sequences are the only good part of the film as when the story deviates from the actual games, it becomes bogged down in boring sentiment and sports film stereotypes that are so over used, the film has little tension or surprises as I was easily able to see what was coming.
As if this was not bad enough, Thornton is mostly wasted as aside from a few good one-liners, he is reduced to the stern coach with the heart of gold. We know his character loves his family and his team but we do not know what drives and motivates the man. Worse yet, the team is made up of generally bland and unremarkable individuals who do not gain much sympathy from the audience as they are so bland I found myself caring little as to their outcomes.
The more I watched the film, the more I kept being reminded of “Varsity Blues” which compared to “Lights”, is a much better film in almost every aspect. My advice, save this one for a rental.
One prime example of this is in the town of Odessa Texas, where every fall young men embrace the rituals of football as their ticket to bigger and better things in life, and where local merchants close their shops less than miss a single moment of the biggest show in town, the Perriman Panthers.
In the new film &”Friday Night Lights”, audiences get a firsthand look at the trials and tribulations that the team endured during its 1988 season that had previously been covered in the book of the same name by H.G. Bissinger which centered much like the film on the racial and economic overtones of the community.
The film stars Billy Bob Thornton as Coach Gary Gaines a man who despite a string of winning seasons and State Championships to his credit is under pressure to deliver not only a championship team, but an undefeated season as well. The players feel the pressure to, as every person they encounter on the eve of their season is quick to remind them to win it all and go undefeated.
While the first game starts as an enjoyable romp for Perriman and fans it soon becomes tragic when all everything running back Boobie Miles (Derick Luke), injures his knee and as a result the team is routed in it’s next start causing the world to fall in around the coach as disgruntled local fans go so far as to clutter his home with for sale signs following a single loss.
Undaunted the team picks itself up and finds a way to get back to its winning ways and make a run for the state tournament. Along the way the players will be saddled with the standard issues including but not limited to injuries, self-doubt, an abusive father, a sick parent, and local pressure from rabid fans that will not accept anything short of an undefeated season.
While the game scenes of the fill are well done, as Director Peter Berg mixes footage of the 2003 Perriman team with recreated scenes to create a dynamic and engrossing recreation of the game that is perhaps one of the best ever captured on film. Sadly, the game sequences are the only good part of the film as when the story deviates from the actual games, it becomes bogged down in boring sentiment and sports film stereotypes that are so over used, the film has little tension or surprises as I was easily able to see what was coming.
As if this was not bad enough, Thornton is mostly wasted as aside from a few good one-liners, he is reduced to the stern coach with the heart of gold. We know his character loves his family and his team but we do not know what drives and motivates the man. Worse yet, the team is made up of generally bland and unremarkable individuals who do not gain much sympathy from the audience as they are so bland I found myself caring little as to their outcomes.
The more I watched the film, the more I kept being reminded of “Varsity Blues” which compared to “Lights”, is a much better film in almost every aspect. My advice, save this one for a rental.
Navitel Navigator Russia
Navigation and Travel
App
Navitel Navigator is a navigation system which provides precise car navigation, geosocial services...
Navitel Navigator Ukraine
Navigation and Travel
App
Navitel Navigator is a navigation system which provides precise car navigation, geosocial services...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) Jan 2, 2021