Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Wind River (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
Between Sicario and Hell or High Water (both of which landed on my year-end best lists for 2015 and 2016 respectively), Taylor Sheridan has already proven to be an incredible talent at crafting slow-burning thrillers that also serve as in-depth character studies. His new film, third as a screenwriter and second as a director, may move at quite a faster pace than his previous two screenplays, but it is no less accomplished, either in plot or in character development. Though some may leave the theater feeling that they haven’t seen anything new, and they’d be right to as there isn’t anything particularly flashy or unique in the direction or cinematography, Wind River however finds its strength in its simplicity. It’s a simple story concerning the death of a young girl on a Wyoming reservation, of the tracker (Jeremy Renner) for whom the circumstance strikes too close to home, and of the presumably untested FBI agent (Elizabeth Olsen) forced to face the darker side of her chosen profession.
For Jeremy Renner, Wind River marks a career best. He displays restraint in a role that others would have played far too arrogantly and when he lets us in to share in his character’s painful past, the melodrama inherent in the dialogue is delivered with dignity and humility. Complimenting his performance beautifully is Gil Birmingham as Martin, the father of the murdered girl. Much like his work opposite Jeff Bridges in Hell or High Water, his scenes with Renner are the highlight of the film. Every line he delivers reverberates with truth and with the weight of losing of two children, one whose life is thrown away to drug use and one to an untimely, mysterious death. Veteran actor and longtime favorite of mine, Graham Greene is also on hand to give a competent turn as the local sheriff who in equal measures doles out tension-relieving humor as well as reminding us of the gravity of a bleak situation.
In amongst a predominately-male cast, Elizabeth Olsen shines. This film was an undoubtedly a tough task, as her character is given no soft options, and her performance gave me cause to reflect on a young Jodie Foster in The Silence of the Lambs. I don’t just draw this comparison because of the fact they both play young agents thrust into a situation beyond their level of experience, but because of the scenes in these films where they are called upon to confidently take command of a room full of men and to show great physicality in moments of unexpected violence. It’s another top mark in her filmography comparable to her breakout in Martha Marcy May Marlene and hopefully, in-between bouts of this bloated Marvel Cinematic Universe nonsense, we’ll continue to see her in roles of some substance.
For Jeremy Renner, Wind River marks a career best. He displays restraint in a role that others would have played far too arrogantly and when he lets us in to share in his character’s painful past, the melodrama inherent in the dialogue is delivered with dignity and humility. Complimenting his performance beautifully is Gil Birmingham as Martin, the father of the murdered girl. Much like his work opposite Jeff Bridges in Hell or High Water, his scenes with Renner are the highlight of the film. Every line he delivers reverberates with truth and with the weight of losing of two children, one whose life is thrown away to drug use and one to an untimely, mysterious death. Veteran actor and longtime favorite of mine, Graham Greene is also on hand to give a competent turn as the local sheriff who in equal measures doles out tension-relieving humor as well as reminding us of the gravity of a bleak situation.
In amongst a predominately-male cast, Elizabeth Olsen shines. This film was an undoubtedly a tough task, as her character is given no soft options, and her performance gave me cause to reflect on a young Jodie Foster in The Silence of the Lambs. I don’t just draw this comparison because of the fact they both play young agents thrust into a situation beyond their level of experience, but because of the scenes in these films where they are called upon to confidently take command of a room full of men and to show great physicality in moments of unexpected violence. It’s another top mark in her filmography comparable to her breakout in Martha Marcy May Marlene and hopefully, in-between bouts of this bloated Marvel Cinematic Universe nonsense, we’ll continue to see her in roles of some substance.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Wonder Woman (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
The extent of my knowledge of Wonder Woman comes from vague memories of the TV show with Lynda Carter in the 70s and the Super Friends cartoon in the early 80s. So I knew she was an Amazon princess from Paradise Island who flew an invisible plane. I may have been Wonder Woman for Halloween back when you stuck your arms through a plastic sheet with Wonder Woman’s torso painted on it, that tied at the neck like a cheap, hospital gown, with a mask with eyes cutout and a mouth you really couldn’t breathe through. So really, I knew OF her, but I never really actually knew much about Wonder Woman.
Fast forward some 40 years later and I’m in a theater learning Diana is the fiercely spirited daughter of Queen Hippolyta who sculpted her from clay and was brought to life by Zeus. Wait. What? Tell me more! She’s raised on the secluded island of Themyscira where, thanks to her aunt Antiope’s training, Diana develops extraordinary skill in combat.
Those skills come in handy when Steve Trevor somehow crashes through the protective barrier surrounding Themyscira, while trying to escape from the Germans. Suddenly made aware of an outside world, Diana decides to leave Themyscira with Trevor for war-torn Europe believing she must help stop the great war.
Gal Gadot portrays Wonder Woman as a strong-willed, worldly but still naïve force to reckon with. Chris Pine plays a wiley American spy who isn’t immune to Diana’s beauty but remains respectful of the innocence he can see behind her conviction. Together they team up with a motley crew of unlikely heroes to bring down a horrific German, whom Diana believes is Ares, the God of War, reborn.
I wasn’t sure what kept me more riveted, the storyline, the chemistry between Gadot and Pine,or Wonder Woman’s physical beauty and prowess. I can tell you that I never heard a screener audience cheer for Batman or Superman like they did for Wonder Woman, just at the sight of the determined superhero slowly walking towards battle, prompted in part by the pounding opening wails of Wonder Woman’s theme music.
Wonder Woman is an origin story well-told, something I really can’t say for the previous Justice League movies. Where Man of Steel, Batman v Superman and Suicide Squad have left me “meh” for future DC movies, Wonder Woman left me hopeful for Justice League and future DC Extended Universe movies. I hope the directors of DCEU movies take some lessons from Wonder Woman’s director, Patty Jenkins. Simply put, we want to root for a multi-dimensional superhero with a story we can easily follow and get behind. In other words, be like Wonder Woman.
Fast forward some 40 years later and I’m in a theater learning Diana is the fiercely spirited daughter of Queen Hippolyta who sculpted her from clay and was brought to life by Zeus. Wait. What? Tell me more! She’s raised on the secluded island of Themyscira where, thanks to her aunt Antiope’s training, Diana develops extraordinary skill in combat.
Those skills come in handy when Steve Trevor somehow crashes through the protective barrier surrounding Themyscira, while trying to escape from the Germans. Suddenly made aware of an outside world, Diana decides to leave Themyscira with Trevor for war-torn Europe believing she must help stop the great war.
Gal Gadot portrays Wonder Woman as a strong-willed, worldly but still naïve force to reckon with. Chris Pine plays a wiley American spy who isn’t immune to Diana’s beauty but remains respectful of the innocence he can see behind her conviction. Together they team up with a motley crew of unlikely heroes to bring down a horrific German, whom Diana believes is Ares, the God of War, reborn.
I wasn’t sure what kept me more riveted, the storyline, the chemistry between Gadot and Pine,or Wonder Woman’s physical beauty and prowess. I can tell you that I never heard a screener audience cheer for Batman or Superman like they did for Wonder Woman, just at the sight of the determined superhero slowly walking towards battle, prompted in part by the pounding opening wails of Wonder Woman’s theme music.
Wonder Woman is an origin story well-told, something I really can’t say for the previous Justice League movies. Where Man of Steel, Batman v Superman and Suicide Squad have left me “meh” for future DC movies, Wonder Woman left me hopeful for Justice League and future DC Extended Universe movies. I hope the directors of DCEU movies take some lessons from Wonder Woman’s director, Patty Jenkins. Simply put, we want to root for a multi-dimensional superhero with a story we can easily follow and get behind. In other words, be like Wonder Woman.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Goldfinch (2019) in Movies
Sep 13, 2019
The life of Theodore Decker (Ansel Elgort and Oakes Fegley) is for every changed when his mother is killed in an explosion at an art museum. In the same tragic moments when his mother is killed he also makes a decision that will help shape the rest of his life, he takes a rare and valuable painting in the chaos of surrounding. This painting, The Goldfinch, wasn’t something he planned on taking, but having it will be the only thing that brings him comfort in the days ahead. After the tragedy he is temporarily placed with a family he really enjoys. He has a best friend, Andy Barbour (Ryan Foust), and a mother figure in Mrs. Barbour (Nicole Kidman). Theodore also makes a connection to a girl Pippa (Aimee Laurence and later by Ashleigh Cummings) and her caretaker Hobie (Jeffrey Wright). Pippa and her uncle Welty (Robert Joy) were standing right next to Theodore when the explosion that killed his mother happened. Welty also passes away during the explosion but not before he would influence Theodore to take the painting. Thus changing the trajectory of the rest of his life.
This film is based on the Pulitzer Prize winning book by Donna Tartt of the same name. I have not read the book so I cannot make a comparison between the two. The director, John Crowley (Brooklyn and Closed Circuit) makes a visually beautiful film. You can tell that care was taken to make the film have a certain feel and texture. The cast is very good, including those mentioned above and Finn Wolfhard, Sarah Paulson, Aneurin Barnard and more. I particularly thought the casting of Oakes Fegley as the Young Theodore and Ansel Elgort as the adult Theodore was particularly good. The story skipped in sequence and you could see the similarity in the two actors as on character. The overall story is original and fascinating. But the film jumped around and made it feel choppy. Also the run time of two hours and twenty nine minutes somehow felt longer than that. The story moved at a snail’s pace and really seemed like it had no direction. Then in the final 10 minutes it wrapped up in a flash.
I thought overall the performances were good and the story was interesting but how it was presented really lacked. It was slow and developed in a non-compelling way. I could definitely see potential but it fell a little short for me. It did make me want to read the book and see how the author meant for the story to be told. I would recommend seeing this in a theater for the cinematography because it was beautifully shot.
This film is based on the Pulitzer Prize winning book by Donna Tartt of the same name. I have not read the book so I cannot make a comparison between the two. The director, John Crowley (Brooklyn and Closed Circuit) makes a visually beautiful film. You can tell that care was taken to make the film have a certain feel and texture. The cast is very good, including those mentioned above and Finn Wolfhard, Sarah Paulson, Aneurin Barnard and more. I particularly thought the casting of Oakes Fegley as the Young Theodore and Ansel Elgort as the adult Theodore was particularly good. The story skipped in sequence and you could see the similarity in the two actors as on character. The overall story is original and fascinating. But the film jumped around and made it feel choppy. Also the run time of two hours and twenty nine minutes somehow felt longer than that. The story moved at a snail’s pace and really seemed like it had no direction. Then in the final 10 minutes it wrapped up in a flash.
I thought overall the performances were good and the story was interesting but how it was presented really lacked. It was slow and developed in a non-compelling way. I could definitely see potential but it fell a little short for me. It did make me want to read the book and see how the author meant for the story to be told. I would recommend seeing this in a theater for the cinematography because it was beautifully shot.
World Conqueror 1945
Games and Entertainment
App
World Conqueror 1945 is a new style strategy game on the background of WWⅡ(Super Risk). In the...
Rowmote: Remote Control for Mac
Utilities and Productivity
App
Rowmote lets you seamlessly control audio, video, and presentation applications on your Mac from...
LiveTunes: LIVE Music Player
Music and Entertainment
App
What if you could make any regular song sound like a live concert with the touch of a button? ...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Last House on the Left (1972) in Movies
Sep 3, 2020
To Avoid Fainting Keep Repeating...Its Only A Movie
The Last House on the Left- was wes's directoral debut and what a start. Its a disturbing, psychological, graphic, exploitation horror film.
The plot: Teenagers Mari (Sandra Cassel) and Phyllis (Lucy Grantham) head to the city for a concert, then afterward go looking for drugs. Instead, they find a gang of escaped convicts who subject them to a night of torture and rape. The gang then kills the girls in the woods, not realizing they're near Mari's house. When they pose as salesmen and are taken in by Mari's mother (Cynthia Carr) and father (Gaylord St. James), it doesn't take the parents long to figure out their identities and plot revenge.
Wes Craven, who had no money at the time, was put on the job of synchronizing dailies for Cunningham's re-shoot. He soon began editing the film with Cunningham. He soon began editing the film with Cunningham and they became good friends. Hallmark bought the film for $10,000, and it was considered a "hit"; this prompted Hallmark to persuade them to make another film with a bigger budget, and gave them $90,000 to shoot a horror film.
This script, written under the title Night of Vengeance, has never been released; only a brief glimpse is visible in the featurette Celluloid Crime of the Century (a 2003 documentary on the making of the film).
The majority of the cast of The Last House on the Left were inexperienced or first-time actors, with the exception of Richard Towers, Eleanor Shaw, and Sandra Peabody who were all soap opera regulars and had prior film roles.
The film underwent multiple title changes, with its investors initially titling it Sex Crime of the Century. However, after test screenings were completed, it was decided to change the title to Krug and Company; however, this title was found to have little draw during test screenings. A marketing specialist who was an acquaintance of Cunningham's proposed the title The Last House on the Left. Craven initially thought the title was "terrible."
Due to its graphic content, the film sparked protests from the public throughout the fall of 1972 who called for its removal from local theaters.
Promotional material capitalized on the film's graphic content and divisive reception, featuring the tagline: "To avoid fainting, keep repeating 'It's only a movie' ..." advertising campaign. Under the Last House... title, the film proved to be a hit.
Though the film passed with an R-rating by the Motion Picture Association of America, director Craven claimed that on several occasions, horrified audience members would demand that theater projectionists destroy the footage, sometimes stealing the film themselves.
It is a distubing film but it is a excellet film by a horror icon.
The plot: Teenagers Mari (Sandra Cassel) and Phyllis (Lucy Grantham) head to the city for a concert, then afterward go looking for drugs. Instead, they find a gang of escaped convicts who subject them to a night of torture and rape. The gang then kills the girls in the woods, not realizing they're near Mari's house. When they pose as salesmen and are taken in by Mari's mother (Cynthia Carr) and father (Gaylord St. James), it doesn't take the parents long to figure out their identities and plot revenge.
Wes Craven, who had no money at the time, was put on the job of synchronizing dailies for Cunningham's re-shoot. He soon began editing the film with Cunningham. He soon began editing the film with Cunningham and they became good friends. Hallmark bought the film for $10,000, and it was considered a "hit"; this prompted Hallmark to persuade them to make another film with a bigger budget, and gave them $90,000 to shoot a horror film.
This script, written under the title Night of Vengeance, has never been released; only a brief glimpse is visible in the featurette Celluloid Crime of the Century (a 2003 documentary on the making of the film).
The majority of the cast of The Last House on the Left were inexperienced or first-time actors, with the exception of Richard Towers, Eleanor Shaw, and Sandra Peabody who were all soap opera regulars and had prior film roles.
The film underwent multiple title changes, with its investors initially titling it Sex Crime of the Century. However, after test screenings were completed, it was decided to change the title to Krug and Company; however, this title was found to have little draw during test screenings. A marketing specialist who was an acquaintance of Cunningham's proposed the title The Last House on the Left. Craven initially thought the title was "terrible."
Due to its graphic content, the film sparked protests from the public throughout the fall of 1972 who called for its removal from local theaters.
Promotional material capitalized on the film's graphic content and divisive reception, featuring the tagline: "To avoid fainting, keep repeating 'It's only a movie' ..." advertising campaign. Under the Last House... title, the film proved to be a hit.
Though the film passed with an R-rating by the Motion Picture Association of America, director Craven claimed that on several occasions, horrified audience members would demand that theater projectionists destroy the footage, sometimes stealing the film themselves.
It is a distubing film but it is a excellet film by a horror icon.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015) in Movies
Jun 3, 2020
BB-8 (2 more)
Old Cast
Better Than The Prequels
A New Hope Shortly Lived
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Force Awakens- is a excellent, phenomenal movie, no doubt about that. Its the return of old charcters coming back and a whole new cast of new charcters. My favorite is BB-8, he reminds me of R2-D2. The problem if you really think about it is.. Its a copy & paste of A New Hope. Lets look deeper into that.
Case 1- Introducing A Core Trio, you have Rey, Finn and Poe. In ANH, you have Luke, Leia and Han.
Case 2- Rey's beginning. Some one who is lonely, raised in the desert and finds a droid that has important infomation and that sets off the beginning of the adventure. Sounds like Luke to me, cause it is.
Case 3- The Droid Holds The Secret Clue To Everything Important. In this case, BB-8 is holding important infomation on the whereabouts on to find Luke.
Hmm R2-D2, secret message from Leia to Obi-Wan Kenobi, Luke, the farmboy whose future as a Jedi would save the Rebellion and the galaxy, is led to his Jedi. Intresting right.
Case 4- Jakku And Tatooine. Jakku is basically Tattooine. Its where the main charcter is from, where the story begins, where the main charcter finds the droid and where the adventure begins.
Case 5- Starkiller Base And The Death Star. Basically Starkiller Base is the Death Star. The First Order's Starkiller Base is just a complete rip off of Darth Vader's Death Star. While the Starkiller Base can inflict much more damage than the Death Star, it's basically the same weapon. A has basically the same weak point.
So basically what Im saying is that The Force Awakens is a copy & paste of A New Hope.
The plot: Set 30 years after Return of the Jedi, The Force Awakens follows Rey, Finn, Poe Dameron, and Han Solo's search for Luke Skywalker and their fight in the Resistance, led by General Leia Organa and veterans of the Rebel Alliance, against Kylo Ren and the First Order, a successor to the Galactic Empire.
I remember seeing this film opening day at 9:15am on Friday. With a packed theater, every seat was full and that was a excellent experience. Seeing it with a crowd full of star wars fans was epic and would do it again.
Its fun, entertaining and overall a excellent, phenomenal movie. Bringing us a new star wars movie after the awful prequels. The Force Awakens brought us fans a new hope after the disappointed and awful prequels. A new hope that didnt last long, but i will get to those soon. But for now this review.
Case 1- Introducing A Core Trio, you have Rey, Finn and Poe. In ANH, you have Luke, Leia and Han.
Case 2- Rey's beginning. Some one who is lonely, raised in the desert and finds a droid that has important infomation and that sets off the beginning of the adventure. Sounds like Luke to me, cause it is.
Case 3- The Droid Holds The Secret Clue To Everything Important. In this case, BB-8 is holding important infomation on the whereabouts on to find Luke.
Hmm R2-D2, secret message from Leia to Obi-Wan Kenobi, Luke, the farmboy whose future as a Jedi would save the Rebellion and the galaxy, is led to his Jedi. Intresting right.
Case 4- Jakku And Tatooine. Jakku is basically Tattooine. Its where the main charcter is from, where the story begins, where the main charcter finds the droid and where the adventure begins.
Case 5- Starkiller Base And The Death Star. Basically Starkiller Base is the Death Star. The First Order's Starkiller Base is just a complete rip off of Darth Vader's Death Star. While the Starkiller Base can inflict much more damage than the Death Star, it's basically the same weapon. A has basically the same weak point.
So basically what Im saying is that The Force Awakens is a copy & paste of A New Hope.
The plot: Set 30 years after Return of the Jedi, The Force Awakens follows Rey, Finn, Poe Dameron, and Han Solo's search for Luke Skywalker and their fight in the Resistance, led by General Leia Organa and veterans of the Rebel Alliance, against Kylo Ren and the First Order, a successor to the Galactic Empire.
I remember seeing this film opening day at 9:15am on Friday. With a packed theater, every seat was full and that was a excellent experience. Seeing it with a crowd full of star wars fans was epic and would do it again.
Its fun, entertaining and overall a excellent, phenomenal movie. Bringing us a new star wars movie after the awful prequels. The Force Awakens brought us fans a new hope after the disappointed and awful prequels. A new hope that didnt last long, but i will get to those soon. But for now this review.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Matrix Resurrections (2021) in Movies
Dec 31, 2021
Unnecessary
And now from the unnecessary sequels department…
And, that, pretty much sums up THE MATRIX RESURRECTIONS - a title that is a confession of a studio and creator that is looking to milk a few more bucks out of a dormant franchise.
Written and Directed by Lana Wachowski (one of the creators/directors of the original Matrix trilogy), MATRIX RESURRECTIONS drops us back into the Matrix that is the same, yet different, and - intriguingly enough - brings us back to Neo and Trinity, 2 characters that died in the 3rd film.
Of course, this being Science Fiction/Fantasy, no one needs to stay dead, if another story can be built around them.
Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss are back as Neo & Trinity (this film would not have happened if they didn’t say yes to this) - and they are the best thing in this film. Their chemistry is strong and any film that can bring back Carrie-Anne Moss as a lead in a film, is okay by me.
The best newcomer in this film is Jonathan Groff as “Agent Smith” (Hugo Weaving was set to reprise his role, but had to drop out due to Theater Commitments). Groff channels his inner “King George” (the character that he was Tony Nominated for in the Stage Musical Hamilton) and it works well in this film.
As for the other “character/actors” - like the characters that Jada Pinkett-Smith (the only other returning actor from the original trilogy), Yahya Abdbul-Mateen II (playing a version of Morpheus), Thelma Hopkins, Jessica Henwick and…yes that IS Cristina Ricci - they are all pretty generic and serve as plot machinations to get us from one action set piece to another.
And, of course, there is Neil Patrick Harris as “THE ANALYST”, it’s an interesting, pivotal, role in this film and would have been better served being played by someone less “well known”. All I kept thinking as I watched this performance was - “it’s evil Neil Patrick Harris”!
As for the special effects/set pieces, they are “fine” but nothing “special”. The first Matrix film was a brilliant, groundbreaking and mind-bending piece of filmmaking that introduced cinema (for good or ill) to “bullet time” - a Special F/X that has been en vogue ever since. But this film is just a mismash of CGI that is neither brilliant nor groundbreaking and the dense mythology plot of this film is not “mind-bending”, it is more like “headache-inducing”.
Do yourself a favor and skip the Resurrection of The Matrix and, instead, check out the brilliant 1999 original - it holds up well (and is the subject of my January podcast).
Letter Grade: B- (thanks to Reeves, Moss and Groff)
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And, that, pretty much sums up THE MATRIX RESURRECTIONS - a title that is a confession of a studio and creator that is looking to milk a few more bucks out of a dormant franchise.
Written and Directed by Lana Wachowski (one of the creators/directors of the original Matrix trilogy), MATRIX RESURRECTIONS drops us back into the Matrix that is the same, yet different, and - intriguingly enough - brings us back to Neo and Trinity, 2 characters that died in the 3rd film.
Of course, this being Science Fiction/Fantasy, no one needs to stay dead, if another story can be built around them.
Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss are back as Neo & Trinity (this film would not have happened if they didn’t say yes to this) - and they are the best thing in this film. Their chemistry is strong and any film that can bring back Carrie-Anne Moss as a lead in a film, is okay by me.
The best newcomer in this film is Jonathan Groff as “Agent Smith” (Hugo Weaving was set to reprise his role, but had to drop out due to Theater Commitments). Groff channels his inner “King George” (the character that he was Tony Nominated for in the Stage Musical Hamilton) and it works well in this film.
As for the other “character/actors” - like the characters that Jada Pinkett-Smith (the only other returning actor from the original trilogy), Yahya Abdbul-Mateen II (playing a version of Morpheus), Thelma Hopkins, Jessica Henwick and…yes that IS Cristina Ricci - they are all pretty generic and serve as plot machinations to get us from one action set piece to another.
And, of course, there is Neil Patrick Harris as “THE ANALYST”, it’s an interesting, pivotal, role in this film and would have been better served being played by someone less “well known”. All I kept thinking as I watched this performance was - “it’s evil Neil Patrick Harris”!
As for the special effects/set pieces, they are “fine” but nothing “special”. The first Matrix film was a brilliant, groundbreaking and mind-bending piece of filmmaking that introduced cinema (for good or ill) to “bullet time” - a Special F/X that has been en vogue ever since. But this film is just a mismash of CGI that is neither brilliant nor groundbreaking and the dense mythology plot of this film is not “mind-bending”, it is more like “headache-inducing”.
Do yourself a favor and skip the Resurrection of The Matrix and, instead, check out the brilliant 1999 original - it holds up well (and is the subject of my January podcast).
Letter Grade: B- (thanks to Reeves, Moss and Groff)
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Cold War (2018) in Movies
Feb 15, 2019
A meditation on love
There are some movies that I can bang the review out the moment I leave the theater (for example, ANY movie starring Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson). There are other films that I need to sit with for a few days and sort out my feelings and thoughts about them. Such is the case with the Polish film COLD WAR.
I am an "Oscar completist" and, thus, needed to see this film, not because I am a big fan of foreign films or because I am culturally literate, but because the Director of this film, Pawel Pawlikowski, was nominated for an Oscar for Best Director.
And I'm glad I saw this film, for COLD WAR is a rich, thoughtful, meditation on love and sacrifice that is full of mood and emotion. This film was conceived, written and directed by Pawlikowski and it shows on the screen. There is much heart on display here. It is said that Pawlikowski patterned the two lead characters after the tumultuous relationship of his parents (he even gave them his parents name), so I gotta think there is some knowledge and depth to these characters and their situations that resonate.
I walked into this film not knowing much about the plot or characters and this actually worked in the favor of the film, so I won't say much about it now except to say that this film follows the characters Zula (Joanna Kulig) and Wiktor (Tomasz Kot) as they experience life and love in Poland in the years just following WWII, the "Cold War" years.
As far as the acting goes, both Kulig and Kot are strong and they share a rich chemistry with each other. The film crackled when these two personalities were on the screen together and didn't crackle when they weren't together, so that must say something for their performances. Anyone else on the screen is "fine" (read: forgettable) in service of the plot and the two leads.
But, make no mistake, this film is a Director's film and Pawlikowski deserves the Academy Award nomination he received. The scenes are lush, and very "European" (lots of shots of still objects with a single viola playing in the background). The film was shot in black and white and this really helps the "behind the Iron Curtain" feel of things.
This film was also nominated for Best Foreign Language Film, and I think it has a good shot for that award (Pawlikowski is, I feel, a long shot for his award). Which makes this film worth seeing, just know you are getting a Polish language film, centered on two characters, with lots of long, lingering "beauty" shots setting up environment and feel. Don't expect fast pacing and action.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I am an "Oscar completist" and, thus, needed to see this film, not because I am a big fan of foreign films or because I am culturally literate, but because the Director of this film, Pawel Pawlikowski, was nominated for an Oscar for Best Director.
And I'm glad I saw this film, for COLD WAR is a rich, thoughtful, meditation on love and sacrifice that is full of mood and emotion. This film was conceived, written and directed by Pawlikowski and it shows on the screen. There is much heart on display here. It is said that Pawlikowski patterned the two lead characters after the tumultuous relationship of his parents (he even gave them his parents name), so I gotta think there is some knowledge and depth to these characters and their situations that resonate.
I walked into this film not knowing much about the plot or characters and this actually worked in the favor of the film, so I won't say much about it now except to say that this film follows the characters Zula (Joanna Kulig) and Wiktor (Tomasz Kot) as they experience life and love in Poland in the years just following WWII, the "Cold War" years.
As far as the acting goes, both Kulig and Kot are strong and they share a rich chemistry with each other. The film crackled when these two personalities were on the screen together and didn't crackle when they weren't together, so that must say something for their performances. Anyone else on the screen is "fine" (read: forgettable) in service of the plot and the two leads.
But, make no mistake, this film is a Director's film and Pawlikowski deserves the Academy Award nomination he received. The scenes are lush, and very "European" (lots of shots of still objects with a single viola playing in the background). The film was shot in black and white and this really helps the "behind the Iron Curtain" feel of things.
This film was also nominated for Best Foreign Language Film, and I think it has a good shot for that award (Pawlikowski is, I feel, a long shot for his award). Which makes this film worth seeing, just know you are getting a Polish language film, centered on two characters, with lots of long, lingering "beauty" shots setting up environment and feel. Don't expect fast pacing and action.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)