Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Girl in the Spider's Web (2018) in Movies
Oct 2, 2019
Characters – Lisbeth Salander is the famous hacker that will stand up against any man that is causing a woman abuse, she will leave her brand on them. She is called for difficult hacking jobs, which sees her take something from the Americans, this makes her a wanted suspect in Sweden and her on the run looking for answers to clear her name. Mikael Blomkvist is still the only person that Lisbeth will trust, he tries to operate from a distant and investigates the trust behind what is happening. Ed Needham is the American that has his system hacked, a government man, he heads to Sweden to get it back and finds nothing but barriers from the Swedish government. Camilla Salander is the long lost sister of Lisbeth, she thought to be dead, but now she is involved in a criminal gang known as The Spiders, targeting Lisbeth for what she wants.
Performances – Claire Foy does feel mis-cast in this role, she doesn’t seem to have a tough enough look to make this character effect as the two previous stars. Sverrir Gudnason had large shoes to fill and he doesn’t do a strong enough job in the Mikael role, while Sylvia Hoeks does what she can with her role without being anything overly special, while LaKeith Stanfield doesn’t seem to feel like the character he is meant to be playing.
Story – The story here is the fourth story in the Dragon Tattoo world, the second in English and is the first not written by the original author. We follow Lisbeth who once again finds herself needing to take on secret organisation that what something that could put the world in danger and this time it becomes more personal, with her sister being the enemy. This story does feel like it has borrowed from many other films and while it still puts Lisbeth is an anti-hero role, we only seem to find ourselves in one direction where Lisbeth is always one step ahead of everything happening, despite the fact we get to see just how twisted the Spiders are, it paints one image of them only to leave us facing a different softer enemy.
Action/Crime – The action was pretty much all given away in the trailer, we have the motorbike chase across the ice, the car chases and shoot outs, each feels very similar and doesn’t have the suspense required in a thriller.
Settings – The film does try to bring everything back to Lisbeth’s backstory with the settings showing the off the grid life she current lives compared to the one she could have lived, the snowy roads add a little to the chases, but not that much overall.
Scene of the Movie – Ice lake escape.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The Spider’s not hinting at wanting to do to what they did to the guy without a nose, to the new Lisbeth group.
Final Thoughts – This does feel like a cash grab on a franchise that has never taken off on the American side of things, we get everything scaled back leaving us feeling disappointed by the end of the film.
Overall: No thrills to be seen here.
Performances – Claire Foy does feel mis-cast in this role, she doesn’t seem to have a tough enough look to make this character effect as the two previous stars. Sverrir Gudnason had large shoes to fill and he doesn’t do a strong enough job in the Mikael role, while Sylvia Hoeks does what she can with her role without being anything overly special, while LaKeith Stanfield doesn’t seem to feel like the character he is meant to be playing.
Story – The story here is the fourth story in the Dragon Tattoo world, the second in English and is the first not written by the original author. We follow Lisbeth who once again finds herself needing to take on secret organisation that what something that could put the world in danger and this time it becomes more personal, with her sister being the enemy. This story does feel like it has borrowed from many other films and while it still puts Lisbeth is an anti-hero role, we only seem to find ourselves in one direction where Lisbeth is always one step ahead of everything happening, despite the fact we get to see just how twisted the Spiders are, it paints one image of them only to leave us facing a different softer enemy.
Action/Crime – The action was pretty much all given away in the trailer, we have the motorbike chase across the ice, the car chases and shoot outs, each feels very similar and doesn’t have the suspense required in a thriller.
Settings – The film does try to bring everything back to Lisbeth’s backstory with the settings showing the off the grid life she current lives compared to the one she could have lived, the snowy roads add a little to the chases, but not that much overall.
Scene of the Movie – Ice lake escape.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The Spider’s not hinting at wanting to do to what they did to the guy without a nose, to the new Lisbeth group.
Final Thoughts – This does feel like a cash grab on a franchise that has never taken off on the American side of things, we get everything scaled back leaving us feeling disappointed by the end of the film.
Overall: No thrills to be seen here.
Darren (1599 KP) rated American Pie 2 (2001) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: With the boys back together after their first year at college, they spend the summer in a Lake house partying every night. Showing the next step each character has or in some cases has not taken. The story reflects real life, which I think adds something to make this the best in the series. (9/10)
Cast: Jason Biggs as Jim –The loveable loser is back getting himself into trouble again. Starting when his parents walk in on him again, there is also an unfortunate event with some glue. Hasn’t really grown up as much as he would have liked to and is still waiting for a chance with Nadia (Elizabeth). (9/10)
Thomas Ian Nicholas as Kevin – Again comes up with the plan that involves everyone going to the lake for the summer. Only problem is he is still waiting for Vicki (Reid) and hasn’t taken the next step, which he thought he would have done. Sort of the more serious character of the group makes him less interesting on the comedy side of the story. (8/10)
Seann William Scott as Stifler – Loud, Rude, Outrageous but we love him, Hasn’t grown up at all Still putting everyone down with one liners and has a new grudge with Finch after the Prom the year before. Stifler has become one of the funniest characters ever created. Star Performance (9/10)
Eddie Kaye Thomas as Finch – More cultured more grown up and wiser still waiting for his goddess Stifler’s Mum. Doing Tantra all the way through adds some very comical moments for him. (8/10)
Chris Klein as Oz – With his girlfriend Heather (Suvari) going away to Europe for the summer Oz joins the guys. The most grown up of the guys now. (8/10)
Eugene Levy as Jim’s Dad –Only because of his speeches are the funniest thing in the whole film because they are always in the most awkward moments. Favourite Character (9/10)
Comedy: Another great instalment of comedy though I think the story is better than the original I feel the overall comedy isn’t as funny but still very funny as the scenarios created are way funnier. (9/10)
Music: Even better soundtrack than the original (10/10)
Suggestion: Out of all the American Pie films this is the one I would suggest to anyone to watch as I feel it is the best. (10/10)
Best Part: The lesbian radio scene
Favourite Quote: Jim’s Dad ‘I think I bring a new meaning to the word cool’
Similar Too: Old School, Road Trip
Overall: With the better story moments and some very funny moments, this is another must watch comedy that will leave you in stitches once it’s all over. With the best moments of life after college before you start going into the big world.
https://moviesreview101.com/2012/04/04/american-pie-2-2001/
Cast: Jason Biggs as Jim –The loveable loser is back getting himself into trouble again. Starting when his parents walk in on him again, there is also an unfortunate event with some glue. Hasn’t really grown up as much as he would have liked to and is still waiting for a chance with Nadia (Elizabeth). (9/10)
Thomas Ian Nicholas as Kevin – Again comes up with the plan that involves everyone going to the lake for the summer. Only problem is he is still waiting for Vicki (Reid) and hasn’t taken the next step, which he thought he would have done. Sort of the more serious character of the group makes him less interesting on the comedy side of the story. (8/10)
Seann William Scott as Stifler – Loud, Rude, Outrageous but we love him, Hasn’t grown up at all Still putting everyone down with one liners and has a new grudge with Finch after the Prom the year before. Stifler has become one of the funniest characters ever created. Star Performance (9/10)
Eddie Kaye Thomas as Finch – More cultured more grown up and wiser still waiting for his goddess Stifler’s Mum. Doing Tantra all the way through adds some very comical moments for him. (8/10)
Chris Klein as Oz – With his girlfriend Heather (Suvari) going away to Europe for the summer Oz joins the guys. The most grown up of the guys now. (8/10)
Eugene Levy as Jim’s Dad –Only because of his speeches are the funniest thing in the whole film because they are always in the most awkward moments. Favourite Character (9/10)
Comedy: Another great instalment of comedy though I think the story is better than the original I feel the overall comedy isn’t as funny but still very funny as the scenarios created are way funnier. (9/10)
Music: Even better soundtrack than the original (10/10)
Suggestion: Out of all the American Pie films this is the one I would suggest to anyone to watch as I feel it is the best. (10/10)
Best Part: The lesbian radio scene
Favourite Quote: Jim’s Dad ‘I think I bring a new meaning to the word cool’
Similar Too: Old School, Road Trip
Overall: With the better story moments and some very funny moments, this is another must watch comedy that will leave you in stitches once it’s all over. With the best moments of life after college before you start going into the big world.
https://moviesreview101.com/2012/04/04/american-pie-2-2001/
The Missing Matisse: A Memoir
1.0
Rate It
Book
Nazi planes were bombing Paris the day a lifelong, more personal war began for Pierre. It was the...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Harder They Fall (2021) in Movies
Nov 13, 2021
Terrific Ending
I am a “bitter-ender”, I will stay until the end of a Sporting Event or a Movie in the hopes that something interesting will happen.
And, in the case of the Netflix Original Film THE HARDER THEY FALL, I was rewarded for my patience.
Based on real-life African-American characters - and with an All-Black Cast - THE HARDER THEY FALL tells the tale of 2 rival gangs in the “Old West” (circa 1880 or so) as they rob, cheat, outsmart and kill each other.
This 2 1/2 hour epic has 2 distinct parts. The first 2 hours is all set up. A film that looks like a pale imitation of a Quentin Tarantino film by Writer/Director Jaymes Samuel (best known as collaborating with Baz Luhrman and Jay Z on the soundtrack for THE GREAT GATSBY). He is clearly influenced by Tarantno and tries to mimic Tarantino’s style - and, like most imitators - falls short mainly because he focused on the style and not the substance of what Tarantino does.
He populates this film with some of the finest Black Actors working today - Idris Elba, DelRoy Lindo, Jonathan Majors, Lakeith Stanfield and Zazie Bettz are all underutilized during the first 2 hours of this film and I had myself wondering why they agreed to do this film.
And then came the last 1/2 hour.
The final portion of THE HARDER THEY FALL is about as good a piece of film-making that you will see, with the showdown between the 2 rival gangs really paying off and Majors, Lindo and Elba (especially) finally get their chance to shine - and answers the question as to why these fine performers were in this film. It’s as if Samuels had a great ending in mind and patched together a film (and plot) that would get the characters to that point.
And then there is the case of Regina King - who was acting in a different kind of film all along. She reigns in this film like a true MOVIE STAR, commanding the screen - and your attention - whenever she shows up. She has a wonderful monologue in the underwhelming first 2 hours of this film - that is worthy of Tarantino - and shows why King is undeniably a MOVIE STAR. This monologue alone almost makes the first 2 hours bearable.
You will have a conundrum when contemplating seeing THE HARDER THEY FALL. Will you be willing to sit through 2 hours of a B- film (a “C” film, if it wasn’t for King) to, finally, be rewarded with an A+ ending?
The choice is yours.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And, in the case of the Netflix Original Film THE HARDER THEY FALL, I was rewarded for my patience.
Based on real-life African-American characters - and with an All-Black Cast - THE HARDER THEY FALL tells the tale of 2 rival gangs in the “Old West” (circa 1880 or so) as they rob, cheat, outsmart and kill each other.
This 2 1/2 hour epic has 2 distinct parts. The first 2 hours is all set up. A film that looks like a pale imitation of a Quentin Tarantino film by Writer/Director Jaymes Samuel (best known as collaborating with Baz Luhrman and Jay Z on the soundtrack for THE GREAT GATSBY). He is clearly influenced by Tarantno and tries to mimic Tarantino’s style - and, like most imitators - falls short mainly because he focused on the style and not the substance of what Tarantino does.
He populates this film with some of the finest Black Actors working today - Idris Elba, DelRoy Lindo, Jonathan Majors, Lakeith Stanfield and Zazie Bettz are all underutilized during the first 2 hours of this film and I had myself wondering why they agreed to do this film.
And then came the last 1/2 hour.
The final portion of THE HARDER THEY FALL is about as good a piece of film-making that you will see, with the showdown between the 2 rival gangs really paying off and Majors, Lindo and Elba (especially) finally get their chance to shine - and answers the question as to why these fine performers were in this film. It’s as if Samuels had a great ending in mind and patched together a film (and plot) that would get the characters to that point.
And then there is the case of Regina King - who was acting in a different kind of film all along. She reigns in this film like a true MOVIE STAR, commanding the screen - and your attention - whenever she shows up. She has a wonderful monologue in the underwhelming first 2 hours of this film - that is worthy of Tarantino - and shows why King is undeniably a MOVIE STAR. This monologue alone almost makes the first 2 hours bearable.
You will have a conundrum when contemplating seeing THE HARDER THEY FALL. Will you be willing to sit through 2 hours of a B- film (a “C” film, if it wasn’t for King) to, finally, be rewarded with an A+ ending?
The choice is yours.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Popular Science
News and Magazines & Newspapers
App
Popular Science is the magazine for anyone curious about what’s new and next. With a readership...
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Kitchen (2019) in Movies
Sep 24, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
When their mobster husbands are all sent to prison, three women decide that the only way they can survive is to take over their criminal enterprise’s, the quest is can their friendship last.
The Kitchen is based on comics released by DC Vertigo and is set in ‘Hell’s Kitchen’, New York during the 1970’s and focus’ on the lives of the wives of an Irish/American mob and their struggle to maintain a basic life style once their husbands have been arrested. Each of the women have a different type of relationship with their husbands; Kathy is in a seemingly normal, loving relationship, Claire is in an abusive relationship and Ruby is in a mixed marriage which is looked down on by alto for the other characters. One of the threads of the film is how each woman reacts to their husbands being away and what will happen when they return.
First off, this is not a comedy, I have seen some reviews where people seem to have been expecting a few laughs, mainly because of the casting of Melissa McCarthy and Tiffany Haddish. The Kitchen has violence, abuse, attempted rape, bad language, lots of guns, prostitutes and shootings but no humour. I think there was only one time anyone laughed (in the cinema audience) and that was when the characters were being shown how to dispose of a dead body.
I have to say that this is a good, well written female lead film, the premise is not forced and there is a reason the characters are female and in a situation that women would not normally be in, especially for the time it is set. Even though the characters are slightly stereotyped (The beaten woman trying to get stronger, the loving wife trying to keep things together) they are not turned into a joke or overly exaggerated and is a big step up from the Ghostbuster’s remake which also had McCarthy as part of an all-female team. Like Ghostbusters there is also a male character who helps the team, Gabriel, but the Kitchen avoids turning him into a joke unlike Chris Hemsworth in ghostbusters.
It could be said that the way the male characters are portrayed is bad, most of them are either thugs, stupid or crazy but this not due to any kind of feminism agenda but is a slightly stereotyped view of how a segment of people were seen, most of the people they deal with are the Irish/American mobsters. This is also shown by the Italians; they are not portrayed in the same way.
I do get the feeling that The Kitchen will be remembered more for scenes and its characters than for the overall movie as there are some bits that seem to drag but, overall it is a film worth watching.
The Kitchen is based on comics released by DC Vertigo and is set in ‘Hell’s Kitchen’, New York during the 1970’s and focus’ on the lives of the wives of an Irish/American mob and their struggle to maintain a basic life style once their husbands have been arrested. Each of the women have a different type of relationship with their husbands; Kathy is in a seemingly normal, loving relationship, Claire is in an abusive relationship and Ruby is in a mixed marriage which is looked down on by alto for the other characters. One of the threads of the film is how each woman reacts to their husbands being away and what will happen when they return.
First off, this is not a comedy, I have seen some reviews where people seem to have been expecting a few laughs, mainly because of the casting of Melissa McCarthy and Tiffany Haddish. The Kitchen has violence, abuse, attempted rape, bad language, lots of guns, prostitutes and shootings but no humour. I think there was only one time anyone laughed (in the cinema audience) and that was when the characters were being shown how to dispose of a dead body.
I have to say that this is a good, well written female lead film, the premise is not forced and there is a reason the characters are female and in a situation that women would not normally be in, especially for the time it is set. Even though the characters are slightly stereotyped (The beaten woman trying to get stronger, the loving wife trying to keep things together) they are not turned into a joke or overly exaggerated and is a big step up from the Ghostbuster’s remake which also had McCarthy as part of an all-female team. Like Ghostbusters there is also a male character who helps the team, Gabriel, but the Kitchen avoids turning him into a joke unlike Chris Hemsworth in ghostbusters.
It could be said that the way the male characters are portrayed is bad, most of them are either thugs, stupid or crazy but this not due to any kind of feminism agenda but is a slightly stereotyped view of how a segment of people were seen, most of the people they deal with are the Irish/American mobsters. This is also shown by the Italians; they are not portrayed in the same way.
I do get the feeling that The Kitchen will be remembered more for scenes and its characters than for the overall movie as there are some bits that seem to drag but, overall it is a film worth watching.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Captor (2019) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
Story: The Captor starts when American Kaj Hansson (Hawke) walks into a bank taking hostages in bank clerks Bianca Lind (Rapace) and Klara Mardh (Santos), he wants Gunnar Sorensson (Strong) released from prison along with his outlandish demands that Chief Mattsson (Heyerdahl) must try to put together.
As the hostage situation continue we start to see the truth unravel and see how Bianca starts to respect Kaj even feeling like she is part of the heist herself, can they make it out of the heist as the origin of the term ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ is born here.
Thoughts on The Captor
Characters – Kaj Hansson is the American that has walked into the bank, he doesn’t really have a plan, he knows what he wants though, he wants to be fair to his hostages, never actually wanting to hurt anybody, just to make sure the police see him as a threat. He starts to make friends with the hostages too. Bianca Lind is the bank clerk that has her own family and finds herself being held hostage, she becomes the stronger of the two women, she starts to become attracted to Kaj believing he isn’t a bad guy, this is her story. Gunnar Sorensson is the man that Kaj wants released from prison, he is one of the most famous bank robbers in the country and he sees the mistakes that Kaj is making, while having a deal with the Chief. Chief Mattsson is the man trying to end the situation, he is trying to stay one step ahead of Kaj to get everyone out alive.
Performances – Ethan Hawke is a delight to watch in this film, he plays the over the top which sums up what the character needs to be through this film. Noomi Rapace plays her role well giving us a character which is both interested and scared through the film. Mark Strong is the supporting acting for a generation, he brings his complex character to life with ease once again. Christopher Heyerdahl is strong through the film showing a determined, though calm man through the film.
Story – The story here follows a bank heist which led to the first case of Stockholm Syndrome, where the hostage falls in love with the hostage taker, we see how this hostage situation unfolds with the outlandish demands as the woman starts to fall for him. When it comes to bank heist movies, we have seen plenty, they usually revolve around the criminals and the police trying to stay ahead of each other, with this one we do have that, but we have the added dynamic of seeing how the hostages and takers start to bond when they see that everything can be kept under control, remember this is set in 1973 so the technology isn’t going to be a game changer in how everything is solved. Seeing both sides get to the talking can go through moments of slow story telling, but it isn’t long until Kaj goes a little bit crazy demanding our attention once again. With a subplot involving Gunnar’s position in the situation, we get to see how Kaj really doesn’t know what he is doing making it easier to help the hostages take sympathy with him. It was nice to have just normal police that aren’t looking to solve a personal problem with this case, which is so often the case in these stories.
Comedy/Crime – The comedy in the film comes from everything Kaj seems to do, from his outfit with wig, cowboy hat and American swagger, to how he overreacts to everything that is going on, the crime is loosely based on a real incident, with the names changed, it is a hostage situation, but you never feel like there is a threat.
Settings – Most of the film is set within the walls of the bank, it is a simple and well craft set that shows us just how the people have been thrown together in this situation.
Scene of the Movie – Kaj shares a pear.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t feel like there is a threat in the film.
Final Thoughts – This is a different way to tell a heist movie, it does show us how hostages can fall in love with their captors and overtime even support them, we get the routine hostage talks and end up right where we need to for the story to flow with ease.
Overall: Nice spin on the heist genre.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/06/17/the-captor-2019/
As the hostage situation continue we start to see the truth unravel and see how Bianca starts to respect Kaj even feeling like she is part of the heist herself, can they make it out of the heist as the origin of the term ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ is born here.
Thoughts on The Captor
Characters – Kaj Hansson is the American that has walked into the bank, he doesn’t really have a plan, he knows what he wants though, he wants to be fair to his hostages, never actually wanting to hurt anybody, just to make sure the police see him as a threat. He starts to make friends with the hostages too. Bianca Lind is the bank clerk that has her own family and finds herself being held hostage, she becomes the stronger of the two women, she starts to become attracted to Kaj believing he isn’t a bad guy, this is her story. Gunnar Sorensson is the man that Kaj wants released from prison, he is one of the most famous bank robbers in the country and he sees the mistakes that Kaj is making, while having a deal with the Chief. Chief Mattsson is the man trying to end the situation, he is trying to stay one step ahead of Kaj to get everyone out alive.
Performances – Ethan Hawke is a delight to watch in this film, he plays the over the top which sums up what the character needs to be through this film. Noomi Rapace plays her role well giving us a character which is both interested and scared through the film. Mark Strong is the supporting acting for a generation, he brings his complex character to life with ease once again. Christopher Heyerdahl is strong through the film showing a determined, though calm man through the film.
Story – The story here follows a bank heist which led to the first case of Stockholm Syndrome, where the hostage falls in love with the hostage taker, we see how this hostage situation unfolds with the outlandish demands as the woman starts to fall for him. When it comes to bank heist movies, we have seen plenty, they usually revolve around the criminals and the police trying to stay ahead of each other, with this one we do have that, but we have the added dynamic of seeing how the hostages and takers start to bond when they see that everything can be kept under control, remember this is set in 1973 so the technology isn’t going to be a game changer in how everything is solved. Seeing both sides get to the talking can go through moments of slow story telling, but it isn’t long until Kaj goes a little bit crazy demanding our attention once again. With a subplot involving Gunnar’s position in the situation, we get to see how Kaj really doesn’t know what he is doing making it easier to help the hostages take sympathy with him. It was nice to have just normal police that aren’t looking to solve a personal problem with this case, which is so often the case in these stories.
Comedy/Crime – The comedy in the film comes from everything Kaj seems to do, from his outfit with wig, cowboy hat and American swagger, to how he overreacts to everything that is going on, the crime is loosely based on a real incident, with the names changed, it is a hostage situation, but you never feel like there is a threat.
Settings – Most of the film is set within the walls of the bank, it is a simple and well craft set that shows us just how the people have been thrown together in this situation.
Scene of the Movie – Kaj shares a pear.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t feel like there is a threat in the film.
Final Thoughts – This is a different way to tell a heist movie, it does show us how hostages can fall in love with their captors and overtime even support them, we get the routine hostage talks and end up right where we need to for the story to flow with ease.
Overall: Nice spin on the heist genre.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/06/17/the-captor-2019/
Madame Tussaud: A Novel of the French Revolution
Book
The world knows Madame Tussaud as a wax artist extraordinaire . . . but who was this woman who...
Darren (1599 KP) rated Anti-Social (2015) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Story: Anti-Social starts as we meet street artist Dee (Sulkin), his model girlfriend Kirsten (Markle) and his armed robber brother Marcus (Myers) who has been making the headlines for all the wrong reasons now. Dee is about to be given motivation from Philip (Berkel) who sees his potential as an artist, while Marcus is getting deeper into the world of crime.
Dee is given the chance to escape the rough streets of crime, only to find himself being caught in the middle of the drug war his brother has started in the streets of London.
Thoughts on Anti-Social
Characters – Dee is a street artist in London, think of him like the Banksy of the local era. His art work has grabbed the attention of many with his big opportunity coming his way, when his brother gets into trouble, he is forced to balance his own future for his brother’s. Marcus is part of an armed robbery gang that are terrorising London, he has rivals from both sides of the law which has put him in the middle of a drug war, he never asks his brother to help him. Kirsten is the model girlfriend of Dee’s, she is an American that isn’t used to the world Dee is from, she doesn’t do much else other than support Dee. Philip is the man from the art world that could easily make Dee’s life better and is willing to make this happen.
Performances – Gregg Sulkin in the leading role is solid enough, we see his difficult life decision being made well enough, though he does lack that true charisma for a leading role. Meghan Markle is the biggest draw for this film now because of her royal status, only she is completely wasted here, given next to nothing to do. Josh Myers gives us a character which only leaves us hating his character, this is something you will see from nearly all of the criminal side of this film.
Story – The story here follows two brothers whose lives are going in very different directions only for the one that is about to escape, needing to return to criminal world where he must make up for his brother’s error. The way this story is told feels very messy, the idea that the street artist getting a bring break is simple and effective along with the idea that he could be made to make a decision about his future. It is the time spent with the criminal brother, we gain no sympathy for him or his crew, we learn nothing about why they are committing these crimes doesn’t help. The number of gangs also isn’t shown in anyway to make us truly understand the world we are living in and while the final act does have tension, it seems to come from the wrong reasoning.
Crime – The crime world we enter in this film is gangs and robbers, we focus on one young man about to leave this world, who gets dragged back into it after his brother’s action, it shows how in London people are willing to just commit crimes for the fun of it.
Settings – The film is set in London and shows us just where the criminals will act to try and make a living from hurting other people.
Scene of the Movie – The airport.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – No sympathy for the criminals.
Final Thoughts – This is a messy crime movie which only ends up making you not care about the characters like it should.
Overall: Messy and drags along.
Dee is given the chance to escape the rough streets of crime, only to find himself being caught in the middle of the drug war his brother has started in the streets of London.
Thoughts on Anti-Social
Characters – Dee is a street artist in London, think of him like the Banksy of the local era. His art work has grabbed the attention of many with his big opportunity coming his way, when his brother gets into trouble, he is forced to balance his own future for his brother’s. Marcus is part of an armed robbery gang that are terrorising London, he has rivals from both sides of the law which has put him in the middle of a drug war, he never asks his brother to help him. Kirsten is the model girlfriend of Dee’s, she is an American that isn’t used to the world Dee is from, she doesn’t do much else other than support Dee. Philip is the man from the art world that could easily make Dee’s life better and is willing to make this happen.
Performances – Gregg Sulkin in the leading role is solid enough, we see his difficult life decision being made well enough, though he does lack that true charisma for a leading role. Meghan Markle is the biggest draw for this film now because of her royal status, only she is completely wasted here, given next to nothing to do. Josh Myers gives us a character which only leaves us hating his character, this is something you will see from nearly all of the criminal side of this film.
Story – The story here follows two brothers whose lives are going in very different directions only for the one that is about to escape, needing to return to criminal world where he must make up for his brother’s error. The way this story is told feels very messy, the idea that the street artist getting a bring break is simple and effective along with the idea that he could be made to make a decision about his future. It is the time spent with the criminal brother, we gain no sympathy for him or his crew, we learn nothing about why they are committing these crimes doesn’t help. The number of gangs also isn’t shown in anyway to make us truly understand the world we are living in and while the final act does have tension, it seems to come from the wrong reasoning.
Crime – The crime world we enter in this film is gangs and robbers, we focus on one young man about to leave this world, who gets dragged back into it after his brother’s action, it shows how in London people are willing to just commit crimes for the fun of it.
Settings – The film is set in London and shows us just where the criminals will act to try and make a living from hurting other people.
Scene of the Movie – The airport.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – No sympathy for the criminals.
Final Thoughts – This is a messy crime movie which only ends up making you not care about the characters like it should.
Overall: Messy and drags along.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The 15:17 To Paris (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
Based on book, The 15:17 to Paris: The True Story of a Terrorist, a Train, and Three American Soldiers by Jeffrey E. Stern, Spencer Stone, Anthony Sadler and Alek Skarlatos, the film, The 15:17 to Paris tells the story of three America friends who stop a terrorist attempt on a train to Paris.
The men are heroes and it is inspiring to see how ordinary people can step up and put their lives at risk to save lives.
As such, this film would have been better told as a short documentary. Mostly because I found myself wondering what these men were thinking in those moments. How were they feeling when they saw people running and heard a gunshot. What made them take action? Was there doubt? And how did their friendship/bond contribute to being able to support each other in that moment and after?
Unfortunately, we do not get the answers to these questions. Instead Director Clint Eastwood decided to make a film that was trying to imitate real life as much as possible. So much so, the three actual heroes Stone, Sadler and Skarlatos play themselves. If Eastwood’s goal was to show how mundane life is in every day moments and a terrorist attack can happen at any moment in any mundane situation and end just as quickly, he succeeded. These three friends have cringe worthy dialogue that goes nowhere throughout the story. It makes these real life friends feel like they do not have any chemistry as it is clear they all feel out of their element in front of the camera. Not exactly the level of amateurism you would expect from a full feature film.
The semi bright spot is when we are shown how these three men became friends as boys and how they grew up. We get an understanding of how they like to play “war” in their back yard and how they would get in trouble but still have each other’s back when it counted. However, like the rest of this film, I wish this was told as a documentary or dramatic documentary. I wanted to hear from them firsthand what they thought about their friendship and how it evolved.
Stone, Sadler and Skarlatos are Heroes. They deserve better than this film. These three men deserve an opportunity to have their story told so people everywhere can care and understand. One of them had a call to duty because of his grandfather who served in WWII. What did that truly mean to him? We don’t know. One felt like he was being pushed to greatness by the universe. What did that mean to him now that it’s happened? We don’t know because we don’t hear from him first hand. The other was always just looking to have a good time. How does he feel about what happened and his friends? We don’t know. Because we are never given anything buy hollow dialogue, some loose information to surmise these things and bad screen chemistry from three real life friends.
I left the movie in awe of what the trio did in a moment where most people would run or think only of themselves. But I cannot in good faith recommend anyone spend money at a theater for a film that feels like it was produced by an amateur and should have been premiered on YouTube.
The men are heroes and it is inspiring to see how ordinary people can step up and put their lives at risk to save lives.
As such, this film would have been better told as a short documentary. Mostly because I found myself wondering what these men were thinking in those moments. How were they feeling when they saw people running and heard a gunshot. What made them take action? Was there doubt? And how did their friendship/bond contribute to being able to support each other in that moment and after?
Unfortunately, we do not get the answers to these questions. Instead Director Clint Eastwood decided to make a film that was trying to imitate real life as much as possible. So much so, the three actual heroes Stone, Sadler and Skarlatos play themselves. If Eastwood’s goal was to show how mundane life is in every day moments and a terrorist attack can happen at any moment in any mundane situation and end just as quickly, he succeeded. These three friends have cringe worthy dialogue that goes nowhere throughout the story. It makes these real life friends feel like they do not have any chemistry as it is clear they all feel out of their element in front of the camera. Not exactly the level of amateurism you would expect from a full feature film.
The semi bright spot is when we are shown how these three men became friends as boys and how they grew up. We get an understanding of how they like to play “war” in their back yard and how they would get in trouble but still have each other’s back when it counted. However, like the rest of this film, I wish this was told as a documentary or dramatic documentary. I wanted to hear from them firsthand what they thought about their friendship and how it evolved.
Stone, Sadler and Skarlatos are Heroes. They deserve better than this film. These three men deserve an opportunity to have their story told so people everywhere can care and understand. One of them had a call to duty because of his grandfather who served in WWII. What did that truly mean to him? We don’t know. One felt like he was being pushed to greatness by the universe. What did that mean to him now that it’s happened? We don’t know because we don’t hear from him first hand. The other was always just looking to have a good time. How does he feel about what happened and his friends? We don’t know. Because we are never given anything buy hollow dialogue, some loose information to surmise these things and bad screen chemistry from three real life friends.
I left the movie in awe of what the trio did in a moment where most people would run or think only of themselves. But I cannot in good faith recommend anyone spend money at a theater for a film that feels like it was produced by an amateur and should have been premiered on YouTube.