Search
Beckett (2021)
6.3
Rate It
Movie
Following a tragic car accident in Greece, Beckett, an American tourist, finds himself at the center...
Old (2021)
6.1
Rate It
Movie
High-concept horror-fantasy from M Night Shyamalan. A group of tourists at a luxury resort find...
Phantom Thread (2017)
7.5
Rate It
Movie Watch
In 1950s London, a renowned fashion designer named Reynolds Woodcock becomes enamored with a young,...
Period drama Haute couture
Awix (3310 KP) rated Phantom Thread (2017) in Movies
Feb 9, 2018 (Updated Feb 9, 2018)
Not a Fun Guy to Be With
Yet another reissue of the controversial 1999 movie, but this time George Lucas has taken out all the stuff with taxation and Jar Jar Binks in favour of fashion design... ha ha, I jest.
Daniel Day-Lewis plays an obsessional creative genius who throws himself completely into his work and is very demanding of everyone around him, and is occasionally prone to hallucinating dead family members (so perhaps this role was less of a stretch for him than many).
Initially this comes across as a slightly so-what romantic drama about the relationship between a powerful, privileged man and a much younger woman, with him as a manipulative user and her, essentially, as a victim, but it eventually turns into a dark and even slightly twisted tale of what it sometimes takes to make a relationship work.
Day-Lewis is good, obviously, but so is Vicky Krieps as the woman in his life; presumably it's only her obscurity that's kept her from getting awards nods as she is really as good as he is.
Probably not for everyone, but Paul Anderson's most satisfying and accessible film for some years.
Daniel Day-Lewis plays an obsessional creative genius who throws himself completely into his work and is very demanding of everyone around him, and is occasionally prone to hallucinating dead family members (so perhaps this role was less of a stretch for him than many).
Initially this comes across as a slightly so-what romantic drama about the relationship between a powerful, privileged man and a much younger woman, with him as a manipulative user and her, essentially, as a victim, but it eventually turns into a dark and even slightly twisted tale of what it sometimes takes to make a relationship work.
Day-Lewis is good, obviously, but so is Vicky Krieps as the woman in his life; presumably it's only her obscurity that's kept her from getting awards nods as she is really as good as he is.
Probably not for everyone, but Paul Anderson's most satisfying and accessible film for some years.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Girl in the Spider's Web (2018) in Movies
Nov 16, 2018
Foy is good - the rest is bland and boring
I, like many of you,was surprised to learn that there was a new "Girl with the Dragon Tatoo" film coming out. I thought, "do we need another one"? I got my answer.
We don't.
THE GIRL IN THE SPIDER'S WEB continues the story of crusading, crime-fighting, techno-punk computer hacker Lisbeth Salander as she continues on her journey to right the wrongs committed to women from no-good men. She is joined in her quest, once again, by journalist Mikael Bloomkvist.
Claire Foy (The Crown) takes over the title role and she is the ONLY thing in this film worth watching. Her Lisbeth is interesting, intense and doggedly-determined. Foy is a charismatic actress and this charisma comes off on the screen. Unfortunately, the other characters/actors that Foy is asked to play with (and off of) are bland, boring and very, very forgettable. Staring with Sverrir Gudnason as Bloomkvist. This character is supposed to by Lisbeth's partner and former lover, but there was no spark of recognition or connection between the two of them and this fellow could have been ANYBODY. Sylvia Hoeks, Adreja Pejic and even Vicky Krieps (so interesting in THE PHANTOM THREAD) were all disposable and interchangeable. Only Stephen Merchant (in a serious role) and Lakeith Stanfield showed any spark of interest.
The plot of this film didn't help matters either. Where the first GIRL IN THE DRAGON TATOO is a very intimate, very personal story, SPIDER'S WEB is bigger and broader (almost entering into James Bond territory) making the stakes superficial and phony (even though the plot involved her sister and her father, which SHOULD make it VERY personal). Director Fede Alvarez (working from his own screenplay) also brings nothing to the table, visually, making this a very slow, very tedious slog, indeed.
But then, Foy/Salander shows up on the screen and interest increases - at least until she leaves the screen again.
Avoid this Spider's Web and go find the original Dragon Tatoo films.
Letter Grade B- (for Foy's performance)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
We don't.
THE GIRL IN THE SPIDER'S WEB continues the story of crusading, crime-fighting, techno-punk computer hacker Lisbeth Salander as she continues on her journey to right the wrongs committed to women from no-good men. She is joined in her quest, once again, by journalist Mikael Bloomkvist.
Claire Foy (The Crown) takes over the title role and she is the ONLY thing in this film worth watching. Her Lisbeth is interesting, intense and doggedly-determined. Foy is a charismatic actress and this charisma comes off on the screen. Unfortunately, the other characters/actors that Foy is asked to play with (and off of) are bland, boring and very, very forgettable. Staring with Sverrir Gudnason as Bloomkvist. This character is supposed to by Lisbeth's partner and former lover, but there was no spark of recognition or connection between the two of them and this fellow could have been ANYBODY. Sylvia Hoeks, Adreja Pejic and even Vicky Krieps (so interesting in THE PHANTOM THREAD) were all disposable and interchangeable. Only Stephen Merchant (in a serious role) and Lakeith Stanfield showed any spark of interest.
The plot of this film didn't help matters either. Where the first GIRL IN THE DRAGON TATOO is a very intimate, very personal story, SPIDER'S WEB is bigger and broader (almost entering into James Bond territory) making the stakes superficial and phony (even though the plot involved her sister and her father, which SHOULD make it VERY personal). Director Fede Alvarez (working from his own screenplay) also brings nothing to the table, visually, making this a very slow, very tedious slog, indeed.
But then, Foy/Salander shows up on the screen and interest increases - at least until she leaves the screen again.
Avoid this Spider's Web and go find the original Dragon Tatoo films.
Letter Grade B- (for Foy's performance)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Phantom Thread (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“There’s an air of quiet death in this house”.
The alleged acting swan-song of Daniel Day-Lewis (“Lincoln“) sees him deliver a brilliantly intense portrayal of a maestro in his craft with all the quirks and egotistical faults that come with that position.
Reynolds Woodcock is the craftsman behind a world-renowned 1950’s fashion house, in demand from the elite classes and even royalty. He has a magnetic personality, is overtly self-confident, obsessive, a cruel bully and treats his girlfriends as chattels that he can tire of and dismiss from his life without a backward glance. Trying to keep the business and Reynolds on track, with ruthless efficiency, is his sister Cyril (Leslie Manville, “Maleficent“).
Looking for his next conquest during a trip to his seaside residence, he reels in blushing young waitress Alma (Vicky Krieps, “The Colony”). But he gets more than he bargains for.
This is a really exquisite and gentle film. Aside from some dubious fungi-related practices, there is no violence, no sex and – aside from about half a dozen well-chosen F-words – limited swearing (of which more below). This is a study of the developing relationship between the two protagonists, with little in the way of plot. Sounds dull? Far from it. This is two hours that flew by.
What it also features is (yet) another example of extremely strong women asserting their power. A scene (well trailed in Manville’s award snippets) where Cyril firmly puts Reynolds back in his box is brilliant: a real turning of tables with Woodcock meekly falling into line. And Alma makes for an incredibly rich and complicated character, one of the most interesting female roles I’ve seen this year so far.
It’s a stellar acting performance from Day-Lewis, and while Oldman fully deserves all of his award kudos for “Darkest Hour”, Day-Lewis delivers the goods without any of the make-up. It feels like Day-Lewis is a long way down the betting odds this year because “he always gets one”. He certainly gets my vote ahead of all of the other three nominees.
Kreips – not an actress I know – also brilliantly holds her own, and if it wasn’t such a strong female field this year she could well have been nominated.
Also worthy of note is the pervasive piano score by (suprisingly) Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood. It’s really lovely and counterpoints the rest of the classical score nicely. Its BAFTA and Oscar nominations are both well deserved (though I would expect the Oscar to follow the BAFTA steer with “The Shape of Water“).
All in all, this is a real tour de force by writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson (“Inherent Vice”, “There Will Be Blood”). How much I enjoyed this film was a surprise to me, since I have no interest in the “fashion industry” (as my family will no doubt be quick to point out!) and I went to see this more out of ‘duty’ based on its Oscar buzz than because I really wanted to see it.
The big curiosity is why exactly the BBFC decided that this film was worthy of a 15 certificate rather than a 12A. Their comments on the film say “There is strong language (‘f**k’), as well as milder terms including ‘bloody’ and ‘hell’. Other issues include mild sex references and scenes of emotional upset. In one scene, a woman’s nipples are visible through her slip while she is measured for a dress.” For a 12A, the board say “The use of strong language (for example, ‘f***’) must be infrequent”. I didn’t count the f-words… but as I said I don’t think it amounts to more than a half-dozen. Is that “frequent”? And – SHOCK, HORROR… visible covered nipples you say?! Lock up your teenagers! When you look at the gentleness of this film versus the violence within “Black Panther”, you have to question this disparity.
Reynolds Woodcock is the craftsman behind a world-renowned 1950’s fashion house, in demand from the elite classes and even royalty. He has a magnetic personality, is overtly self-confident, obsessive, a cruel bully and treats his girlfriends as chattels that he can tire of and dismiss from his life without a backward glance. Trying to keep the business and Reynolds on track, with ruthless efficiency, is his sister Cyril (Leslie Manville, “Maleficent“).
Looking for his next conquest during a trip to his seaside residence, he reels in blushing young waitress Alma (Vicky Krieps, “The Colony”). But he gets more than he bargains for.
This is a really exquisite and gentle film. Aside from some dubious fungi-related practices, there is no violence, no sex and – aside from about half a dozen well-chosen F-words – limited swearing (of which more below). This is a study of the developing relationship between the two protagonists, with little in the way of plot. Sounds dull? Far from it. This is two hours that flew by.
What it also features is (yet) another example of extremely strong women asserting their power. A scene (well trailed in Manville’s award snippets) where Cyril firmly puts Reynolds back in his box is brilliant: a real turning of tables with Woodcock meekly falling into line. And Alma makes for an incredibly rich and complicated character, one of the most interesting female roles I’ve seen this year so far.
It’s a stellar acting performance from Day-Lewis, and while Oldman fully deserves all of his award kudos for “Darkest Hour”, Day-Lewis delivers the goods without any of the make-up. It feels like Day-Lewis is a long way down the betting odds this year because “he always gets one”. He certainly gets my vote ahead of all of the other three nominees.
Kreips – not an actress I know – also brilliantly holds her own, and if it wasn’t such a strong female field this year she could well have been nominated.
Also worthy of note is the pervasive piano score by (suprisingly) Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood. It’s really lovely and counterpoints the rest of the classical score nicely. Its BAFTA and Oscar nominations are both well deserved (though I would expect the Oscar to follow the BAFTA steer with “The Shape of Water“).
All in all, this is a real tour de force by writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson (“Inherent Vice”, “There Will Be Blood”). How much I enjoyed this film was a surprise to me, since I have no interest in the “fashion industry” (as my family will no doubt be quick to point out!) and I went to see this more out of ‘duty’ based on its Oscar buzz than because I really wanted to see it.
The big curiosity is why exactly the BBFC decided that this film was worthy of a 15 certificate rather than a 12A. Their comments on the film say “There is strong language (‘f**k’), as well as milder terms including ‘bloody’ and ‘hell’. Other issues include mild sex references and scenes of emotional upset. In one scene, a woman’s nipples are visible through her slip while she is measured for a dress.” For a 12A, the board say “The use of strong language (for example, ‘f***’) must be infrequent”. I didn’t count the f-words… but as I said I don’t think it amounts to more than a half-dozen. Is that “frequent”? And – SHOCK, HORROR… visible covered nipples you say?! Lock up your teenagers! When you look at the gentleness of this film versus the violence within “Black Panther”, you have to question this disparity.