Search
Search results
TacoDave (3883 KP) rated The Good Liar (2019) in Movies
Nov 12, 2019
Acting (2 more)
Actors
Story
Unexpected violence (2 more)
Unexpected adult themes
One random scene of nudity for no reason
A Good-ish Thriller
I had the pleasure of attending the premiere of "The Good Liar" on November 6 in New York City. (I won a sweepstakes to attend.) I was already interested in seeing the movie, but getting to watch it in a theater full of the people who made the movie was thrilling.
"The Good Liar" is the story of two people in their 70's who meet on a dating app. The man, played by Sir Ian McKellen, is clearly a con man. We get to see him interact with the woman - a fantastic Dame Helen Mirren - with a certain old man, kind hound-dog attitude, then immediately leave the room and work on a scam to steal thousands of pounds from unlucky rubes.
It seems, at face value, that he is indeed a good liar. But things are not always clear cut in a game of shells, and although we don't know what Helen Mirren's character is doing, it starts to become clear that she hasn't been completely honest about herself...
I won't spoil anything else in the plot: this is the kind of movie that unravels slowly as it builds with twists and turns. You should go into it with no more knowledge than what I've posted above.
If that was it - if the whole movie was a fun cat-and-mouse game between two phenomenal actors - I would have given it a higher score. But the movie also has a dark underbelly that surprised me and turned me off a bit. There is one gratuitous shot of nudity at the beginning of the film that makes little narrative sense and feels shoehorned in. There are a few moments of unexpected, brutal violence. And the reveal at the end relates to adult themes that left me feeling unsettled when the movie ended.
In short, I liked the movie quite a lot, but I wouldn't recommend it to my mom.
"The Good Liar" is the story of two people in their 70's who meet on a dating app. The man, played by Sir Ian McKellen, is clearly a con man. We get to see him interact with the woman - a fantastic Dame Helen Mirren - with a certain old man, kind hound-dog attitude, then immediately leave the room and work on a scam to steal thousands of pounds from unlucky rubes.
It seems, at face value, that he is indeed a good liar. But things are not always clear cut in a game of shells, and although we don't know what Helen Mirren's character is doing, it starts to become clear that she hasn't been completely honest about herself...
I won't spoil anything else in the plot: this is the kind of movie that unravels slowly as it builds with twists and turns. You should go into it with no more knowledge than what I've posted above.
If that was it - if the whole movie was a fun cat-and-mouse game between two phenomenal actors - I would have given it a higher score. But the movie also has a dark underbelly that surprised me and turned me off a bit. There is one gratuitous shot of nudity at the beginning of the film that makes little narrative sense and feels shoehorned in. There are a few moments of unexpected, brutal violence. And the reveal at the end relates to adult themes that left me feeling unsettled when the movie ended.
In short, I liked the movie quite a lot, but I wouldn't recommend it to my mom.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Conjuring 2 (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Horror and Suspense movies always intrigued me, especially the ones based on true events or are historically based. The fact that it happened to someone actually made me more invested in the story and prompted me to think of the ways that I would deal with that situation should it arise. After watching The Conjuring 2, I hope that day never happens.
Conjuring 2 finds us catching up with Ed and Lorraine Warren as they travel to Enfield, England to help a family suffering from a paranormal encounter. After gaining a measure of fame for their experience, the Hodgson family is sought out by the Catholic Church and the Warrens in order to determine if the incidents are real or fabricated. They discover that this case pushes them to the limits of their faith and results in them becoming the targets of this demonic possession.
The film itself is a stronger story, filled with more suspense and depth than the first film and goes far beyond Annabelle, which, at times had me not connect at all with the family and I found myself cheering for the doll. The chemistry between Patrick Wilson (The Conjuring, Insidious series) and Vera Farmiga (The Departed, The Conjuring) and Frances O’Connor drive the story and ensure that audiences become invested within the storyline and circumstances and not just for the “frights.”
Sequels can often be plagued with problems, tropes, and going overboard with certain themes and ideas in order to retain its core audience. This is not the case with The Conjuring 2. The story and approach are fresh. Aspects of the film are not predictable. There are no massive holes within the plot. Time was invested within the writing and filming to ensure a solid story, suspense, and impact on viewers beyond their exit from the theater. The Conjuring series looks as though it is just getting started. Personally, I look forward to the remaining stories of the Warren family even if it means sleeping with the lights on after viewing.
Conjuring 2 finds us catching up with Ed and Lorraine Warren as they travel to Enfield, England to help a family suffering from a paranormal encounter. After gaining a measure of fame for their experience, the Hodgson family is sought out by the Catholic Church and the Warrens in order to determine if the incidents are real or fabricated. They discover that this case pushes them to the limits of their faith and results in them becoming the targets of this demonic possession.
The film itself is a stronger story, filled with more suspense and depth than the first film and goes far beyond Annabelle, which, at times had me not connect at all with the family and I found myself cheering for the doll. The chemistry between Patrick Wilson (The Conjuring, Insidious series) and Vera Farmiga (The Departed, The Conjuring) and Frances O’Connor drive the story and ensure that audiences become invested within the storyline and circumstances and not just for the “frights.”
Sequels can often be plagued with problems, tropes, and going overboard with certain themes and ideas in order to retain its core audience. This is not the case with The Conjuring 2. The story and approach are fresh. Aspects of the film are not predictable. There are no massive holes within the plot. Time was invested within the writing and filming to ensure a solid story, suspense, and impact on viewers beyond their exit from the theater. The Conjuring series looks as though it is just getting started. Personally, I look forward to the remaining stories of the Warren family even if it means sleeping with the lights on after viewing.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Captain America: The First Avenger is a return to form for the Marvel comic-book film universe, and a solid final lead-up to the multi-hero film The Avengers, coming next year.
Chris Evans does a fantastic job of introducing us to the wiry little guy with guts who eventually becomes Captain America. Such unashamed, honest virtue is different from the typical superhero movie we’ve come to see over the last few years, and for good reason: internal conflicts often make for dramatic films. However, I don’t think such unwavering idealism would have worked with any other comic-book character than Captain America. Stanley Tucci and Tommy Lee Jones add heart to the movie, but the soul of this movie really is the Captain. Hugo Weaving as The Red Skull plays a satisfying villain here, but his motives aren’t clarified enough to warrant his fervor for evil. Hayley Atwell, playing love interest and British agent Peggy Carter does a more convincing job in her role than Hugo Weaving does in his.
The plot of the film was pretty standard fare. Hero battles villain. The ending was more climactic and earnest than I had expected walking into the theater, and it gracefully sets up the Avengers movie. Like many of the other Marvel movies of recent note, there is a decent amount of self-deprecating comic book humor that helps break up the slower parts between action scenes.
The effects of the film were solid. They were pulpy enough to feel like a Marvel universe, rather than our own, but they still carried the action to an exciting level. The art department and cinematographer did a good job recreating the 40’s asthetic throughout the film, though there was enough exotic comic book elements to bring you back into a world where superheroes really do exist.
Despite its own flaws, this is one of the better Marvel films to come out since Iron Man, and count me in to watch The Avengers next year.
Chris Evans does a fantastic job of introducing us to the wiry little guy with guts who eventually becomes Captain America. Such unashamed, honest virtue is different from the typical superhero movie we’ve come to see over the last few years, and for good reason: internal conflicts often make for dramatic films. However, I don’t think such unwavering idealism would have worked with any other comic-book character than Captain America. Stanley Tucci and Tommy Lee Jones add heart to the movie, but the soul of this movie really is the Captain. Hugo Weaving as The Red Skull plays a satisfying villain here, but his motives aren’t clarified enough to warrant his fervor for evil. Hayley Atwell, playing love interest and British agent Peggy Carter does a more convincing job in her role than Hugo Weaving does in his.
The plot of the film was pretty standard fare. Hero battles villain. The ending was more climactic and earnest than I had expected walking into the theater, and it gracefully sets up the Avengers movie. Like many of the other Marvel movies of recent note, there is a decent amount of self-deprecating comic book humor that helps break up the slower parts between action scenes.
The effects of the film were solid. They were pulpy enough to feel like a Marvel universe, rather than our own, but they still carried the action to an exciting level. The art department and cinematographer did a good job recreating the 40’s asthetic throughout the film, though there was enough exotic comic book elements to bring you back into a world where superheroes really do exist.
Despite its own flaws, this is one of the better Marvel films to come out since Iron Man, and count me in to watch The Avengers next year.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Beastly (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
The beauty and the beast story has officially entered the world of modern fashion in the new film Beastly. In this adaptation we meet Kyle (Alex Pettyfer) a rich kid who believes that a handsome exterior is all that counts in this world. That is until he slights emo student witch Kendra (Mary-Kate Olsen). Kyle soon finds himself with a beastly appearance, cursed until he can overcome his new fractured form and make someone fall in love with him. Adding to the cast is Kyle’s love interest and all around nice girl, Lindy (Vanessa Hudgens). Also notable is Kyle’s mentor/tutor Will played by Neil Patrick Harris.
Sticking closely to the predictable and extremely overdone plot, Beastly offers audiences very little they have not seen before. Kyle is overdramatic. Lindy is suspiciously like the character Vanessa Hudgens played in “High School Musical”. And we learn that Neil Patrick Harris, while always funny, does not play a convincing blind man.
The film does have good scenery and a soundtrack that is high school appropriate. Moreover, the wardrobe is strikingly impressive. But trite dialogue and poorly paced emotional cues give the film a juvenile comedic result. Beastly is amusing and a little funny, however it completely misses the emotional connection expected from a teen adaptation of a famous romantic tale.
Further distracting from the film’s romantic plot are the numerous hollow side stories and plethora of unnecessary character details. From the sudden trip to Kyle’s family cabin to the violent fight between Lindy’s father and a drug dealer, the movie includes numerous scenes that should have been cut.
But still, even with all the downsides, I had no interest in leaving the theater, because Beastly was a high budget train wreck. Not unlike a B-movie in quality and dialogue yet with an impressive budget, an Olsen sister, and some serious face tattoos, “Beastly” is simply cheesy.
Sticking closely to the predictable and extremely overdone plot, Beastly offers audiences very little they have not seen before. Kyle is overdramatic. Lindy is suspiciously like the character Vanessa Hudgens played in “High School Musical”. And we learn that Neil Patrick Harris, while always funny, does not play a convincing blind man.
The film does have good scenery and a soundtrack that is high school appropriate. Moreover, the wardrobe is strikingly impressive. But trite dialogue and poorly paced emotional cues give the film a juvenile comedic result. Beastly is amusing and a little funny, however it completely misses the emotional connection expected from a teen adaptation of a famous romantic tale.
Further distracting from the film’s romantic plot are the numerous hollow side stories and plethora of unnecessary character details. From the sudden trip to Kyle’s family cabin to the violent fight between Lindy’s father and a drug dealer, the movie includes numerous scenes that should have been cut.
But still, even with all the downsides, I had no interest in leaving the theater, because Beastly was a high budget train wreck. Not unlike a B-movie in quality and dialogue yet with an impressive budget, an Olsen sister, and some serious face tattoos, “Beastly” is simply cheesy.
CC
Confederate Combat Commander: The Remarkable Life of Brigadier General Alfred Jefferson Vaughan, Jr.
Book
Known as one of the most aggressive Confederate officers in the Western Theater, Brigadier General...
Music Direction for the Stage: A View from the Podium
Book
Theater music directors must draw on a remarkably broad range of musical skills. Not only do they...
Judy Greer recommended Singles (1992) in Movies (curated)
Derek Cianfrance recommended The Gospel According to St. Matthew (1964) in Movies (curated)
Erika (17789 KP) rated Cruella (2021) in Movies
Jun 1, 2021 (Updated Jun 1, 2021)
Cruella is the newest live-action adaptation of a cartoon character that Disney decided to give us. I only went to see the movie because there was nothing else out in the theater this weekend.
At an overly-long, bloated run time of 2 hours and 12 minutes, we get the entire life story of Cruella, prior to 101 Dalmatians, whose real name is Estella. Of course, it starts with the stereotypical birth scene, continuing through childhood to adulthood. She becomes orphaned, and meets her two future henchmen, played by Paul Walter Hauser and Joel Fry. They were pretty bumbling, and I found myself both amused and annoyed by them.
Estella dreams of a career in fashion, and by a series of events, ends up at the fashion house of the Baroness. There’s a connection from the Baroness to the events that caused Estella to be orphaned, and when that connection is made by Estella, she goes full on Cruella. I think Disney was attempting to show that Estella/Cruella has some sort of hereditary personality disorder, and I don’t know how I felt about that being used as a plot device. Cruella’s vendetta and revenge are sort of fun to watch, but there’s just too much. Every time you thought the movie was ending, something else happened.
Emma Stone does make Cruella interesting, which is a positive. Emma Thompson as the Baroness was so over the top, but at least Thompson seemed to enjoy playing someone that deranged.
For me, the only positives of this film were the costumes and music. The 60s/70s soundtrack was sick (in a good way), and the fashion was over the top and outrageous. The run time was so long, and Disney should have just slapped it on Disney+, for free, as a miniseries. The movie was not worth the price of a ticket, and definitely not worth that crazy premium pricing on VOD. If you’re interested, wait a couple of months and watch it for free when it joins the Disney+ library.
At an overly-long, bloated run time of 2 hours and 12 minutes, we get the entire life story of Cruella, prior to 101 Dalmatians, whose real name is Estella. Of course, it starts with the stereotypical birth scene, continuing through childhood to adulthood. She becomes orphaned, and meets her two future henchmen, played by Paul Walter Hauser and Joel Fry. They were pretty bumbling, and I found myself both amused and annoyed by them.
Estella dreams of a career in fashion, and by a series of events, ends up at the fashion house of the Baroness. There’s a connection from the Baroness to the events that caused Estella to be orphaned, and when that connection is made by Estella, she goes full on Cruella. I think Disney was attempting to show that Estella/Cruella has some sort of hereditary personality disorder, and I don’t know how I felt about that being used as a plot device. Cruella’s vendetta and revenge are sort of fun to watch, but there’s just too much. Every time you thought the movie was ending, something else happened.
Emma Stone does make Cruella interesting, which is a positive. Emma Thompson as the Baroness was so over the top, but at least Thompson seemed to enjoy playing someone that deranged.
For me, the only positives of this film were the costumes and music. The 60s/70s soundtrack was sick (in a good way), and the fashion was over the top and outrageous. The run time was so long, and Disney should have just slapped it on Disney+, for free, as a miniseries. The movie was not worth the price of a ticket, and definitely not worth that crazy premium pricing on VOD. If you’re interested, wait a couple of months and watch it for free when it joins the Disney+ library.
