Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Arrival (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Wow – what a surprise.
Sometimes I can get very irritated by a trailer for giving too much away (case in point, “Room” – which I recut – and more recently “Passengers”). Sometimes I can get very excited by a really good teaser trailer (case in point, “10 Cloverfield Lane”). But most of the time a “ho hum” trailer typically drives the expectation of a “ho hum” film: “Jack Reacher: Never Look Back” being a good recent example. Then there is “Arrival”…
Because the trailer for “Arrival” belies absolutely nothing about the depth and complexity of the film. At face value, it looks like a dubious “Close Encounters” wannabe, with a threat of movement towards the likes of “Independence Day” and “The 5th Wave”. Actually what you get is a film that approaches the grandeur of “Close Encounters” but interlaces it with the intellectual depth of “Inception”, the mystery of “Intersteller” and a heavy emotional jolt or two of “Up”.
Amy Adams (“Batman vs Superman”) plays Dr Louise Banks, a language teacher at a US university facing a bunch of particularly disengaged students one morning. For good reason since world news is afoot. Twelve alien craft have positioned themselves strategically around the world, hanging a few feet from the ground in just the sort of way that bricks don’t. Banks is approached by Colonel Weber (Forest Whitaker) and offered the job of trying to communicate with the aliens: where did they come from? why are they here? Banks faces the biggest challenge of her academic career in trying to devise a strategy for communication without any foundation of knowledge on what level communication even works at for them. Assisted by Ian Donelly (Jeremy Renner, “Mission Impossible IV/V”, “Avengers”), a theoretical physicist, the pair try to crack the code against a deadline set by the inexorable rise of international tensions – driven by China’s General Chang (Tzi Ma, “Veep”; “24”).
Steven Spielberg made a rare error of judgement by adding scenes in his “Special Edition” of “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” showing everyman power guy Roy Neary (Richard Dreyfuss) entering the alien spacecraft. Some things are best left to the imagination. Here, a reprise of that mistake seems inevitable, but – perversely – seems to be pulled off with mastery and aplomb. The aliens are well rendered, and the small scale nature of the set (I’m sure I’ve been in similar dingy waiting rooms in UK railway stations!) is cleverly handled by the environmental conditions.
But where the screenplay really kills it is in the emergence of the real power unleashed by the translation work. To say any more would deliver spoilers, which I won’t do. But this is a masterly piece of science-fiction writing. The screenplay was by Eric Heisserer – someone with a limited scriptwriting CV of horror film reboots/sequels such as “Final Destination 5”, “The Thing” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street” – so the portents were not good, which just adds to the surprise. If I were to be critical, some of the dialogue at times is a little TOO clever for its own good and smacks of Aaron Sorkin over-exposition: the comment about “They have a word for it in Hungary” for example went right over my head.
Denis Villeneuve (“Sicario”) deftly directs, leaving the pace of the story glacially slow in places to let the audience deduce what is going on at their own speed. This will NOT be to the liking of movie fans who like their films in a wham-bam of CGI, but was very much to my liking. The film in fact has very little exposition, giving you lots to think about after the credits roll: there were elements of the story (such as her book) that still generated debate with my better half on the drive home.
Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner are first rate and an effectively moody score by Jóhann Jóhannsson (“Sicario”; “The Theory of Everything”) round off the other high-point credits for me.
An extraordinary film, this is a must see for sci-fi fans but also for lovers of good cinema and well-crafted stories.
Because the trailer for “Arrival” belies absolutely nothing about the depth and complexity of the film. At face value, it looks like a dubious “Close Encounters” wannabe, with a threat of movement towards the likes of “Independence Day” and “The 5th Wave”. Actually what you get is a film that approaches the grandeur of “Close Encounters” but interlaces it with the intellectual depth of “Inception”, the mystery of “Intersteller” and a heavy emotional jolt or two of “Up”.
Amy Adams (“Batman vs Superman”) plays Dr Louise Banks, a language teacher at a US university facing a bunch of particularly disengaged students one morning. For good reason since world news is afoot. Twelve alien craft have positioned themselves strategically around the world, hanging a few feet from the ground in just the sort of way that bricks don’t. Banks is approached by Colonel Weber (Forest Whitaker) and offered the job of trying to communicate with the aliens: where did they come from? why are they here? Banks faces the biggest challenge of her academic career in trying to devise a strategy for communication without any foundation of knowledge on what level communication even works at for them. Assisted by Ian Donelly (Jeremy Renner, “Mission Impossible IV/V”, “Avengers”), a theoretical physicist, the pair try to crack the code against a deadline set by the inexorable rise of international tensions – driven by China’s General Chang (Tzi Ma, “Veep”; “24”).
Steven Spielberg made a rare error of judgement by adding scenes in his “Special Edition” of “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” showing everyman power guy Roy Neary (Richard Dreyfuss) entering the alien spacecraft. Some things are best left to the imagination. Here, a reprise of that mistake seems inevitable, but – perversely – seems to be pulled off with mastery and aplomb. The aliens are well rendered, and the small scale nature of the set (I’m sure I’ve been in similar dingy waiting rooms in UK railway stations!) is cleverly handled by the environmental conditions.
But where the screenplay really kills it is in the emergence of the real power unleashed by the translation work. To say any more would deliver spoilers, which I won’t do. But this is a masterly piece of science-fiction writing. The screenplay was by Eric Heisserer – someone with a limited scriptwriting CV of horror film reboots/sequels such as “Final Destination 5”, “The Thing” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street” – so the portents were not good, which just adds to the surprise. If I were to be critical, some of the dialogue at times is a little TOO clever for its own good and smacks of Aaron Sorkin over-exposition: the comment about “They have a word for it in Hungary” for example went right over my head.
Denis Villeneuve (“Sicario”) deftly directs, leaving the pace of the story glacially slow in places to let the audience deduce what is going on at their own speed. This will NOT be to the liking of movie fans who like their films in a wham-bam of CGI, but was very much to my liking. The film in fact has very little exposition, giving you lots to think about after the credits roll: there were elements of the story (such as her book) that still generated debate with my better half on the drive home.
Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner are first rate and an effectively moody score by Jóhann Jóhannsson (“Sicario”; “The Theory of Everything”) round off the other high-point credits for me.
An extraordinary film, this is a must see for sci-fi fans but also for lovers of good cinema and well-crafted stories.
Paul Kellett (118 KP) created a post in Solo Gamers
May 9, 2019
I adore this book. It's not only a good science fiction story, but also fantastically character-driven, which is rare in genre fiction. That's great for me. When I read a book, I care more about psychological development than what a shiny setting and fun toys it has.
It's not a happy, frolic-through-the-daisies type of story. We're talking not only about war, but child abuse, human trafficking and rape. It can be quite disturbing, if that type of thing isn't your cup of tea. But if that doesn't particularly bug you, it's a fantastic book.
One thing that really bugs me, though, is how so many people insist there's slash. As a person who's not into that kind of thing, that originally turned me off of reading it, because I had a bad feeling the main character, Jos, was going to find healing comfort from his trauma in the loving arms of another guy, and it would go downhill from there.
Luckily, I decided to read it anyway. And I don't see very much slash there. Sure, one character definitely has a thing for Jos, and the villain's a real creep, and then there's a character who's gay by Word Of God, but that's it for this book. The rest of it's pretty much characters insinuating, which is designed to anger other characters. That's it.
Jos, himself, is on the asexual side. He treats attraction as a completely alien concept. Niko is a surrogate father to him. I see him as feeling responsible for protecting Evan. Evan, who frustrates him a great deal. And one time, Jos seriously needed a hug, and fell asleep while being hugged. Woke up, and went right back to the asexual, PTSD, Hates-Being-Touched Jos we know and love.
None of that makes him gay. And three characters who are bi or gay does in no way a majority make. Sure, the shipping potential is there for fans if they want to use it, but certain type of fans are always finding stuff where there's canonically nothing.
In short, one of the best books I've read, and I absolutely loved the main character. He is not gay, and neither are the majority of characters.
It's not a happy, frolic-through-the-daisies type of story. We're talking not only about war, but child abuse, human trafficking and rape. It can be quite disturbing, if that type of thing isn't your cup of tea. But if that doesn't particularly bug you, it's a fantastic book.
One thing that really bugs me, though, is how so many people insist there's slash. As a person who's not into that kind of thing, that originally turned me off of reading it, because I had a bad feeling the main character, Jos, was going to find healing comfort from his trauma in the loving arms of another guy, and it would go downhill from there.
Luckily, I decided to read it anyway. And I don't see very much slash there. Sure, one character definitely has a thing for Jos, and the villain's a real creep, and then there's a character who's gay by Word Of God, but that's it for this book. The rest of it's pretty much characters insinuating, which is designed to anger other characters. That's it.
Jos, himself, is on the asexual side. He treats attraction as a completely alien concept. Niko is a surrogate father to him. I see him as feeling responsible for protecting Evan. Evan, who frustrates him a great deal. And one time, Jos seriously needed a hug, and fell asleep while being hugged. Woke up, and went right back to the asexual, PTSD, Hates-Being-Touched Jos we know and love.
None of that makes him gay. And three characters who are bi or gay does in no way a majority make. Sure, the shipping potential is there for fans if they want to use it, but certain type of fans are always finding stuff where there's canonically nothing.
In short, one of the best books I've read, and I absolutely loved the main character. He is not gay, and neither are the majority of characters.
Anna Marie Green (7 KP) rated Mass Effect: Andromeda in Video Games
Jul 3, 2018
Incredible Scenery (2 more)
Excellent Gameplay
Good Story Concept
Horrible Dialogue Interactions (4 more)
Rushed Production Led to Disastrous Bugs
The Faces
Online Mode
Romance Options Feel Hollow
The Tragedy of Mass Effect
The game I love to hate.
ME:A is worth at least a single playthrough, at least to understand where the complainsts were coming from. This game enrages us so much for a variety of reasons:
1. It Isn't Really Mass Effect
For a the bells and whistles of the Mass Effect title, Andromeda feels more like an Alternative Universe Fanfiction. There are hints of the original hidden in the world– messages from Liara T'Soni, a mention of Shephard, and the logs with the Reapers– but the story is so jarringly different at times that they could have replaced any of the alien species with new ones and been none the wiser. Ryder's relationship with SAM is at complete odds with the entirery of the Mass Effect story. This was probably BioWare's narrative goal, but it was so poorly executed that it just read as lazinezs.
2. The Dialogue
I'm not entirely sure who was in charge of the game's dialogue, but I am certain they helped ghostwrite 50 Shades of Grey.
"He's dead. Ha. Probably because I shot him in the face."
"You, and your god damned father. Sorry. My face is tired."
It's just... Horrible. Like a really crummy porno imitation of a good film. The voice actors have awkward pauses and scenes where they just look at you for a few moments.
3. The Ruined Potential
The worst thing about this game is the fact that underneath all the mistakes, the palimpsest of poorly written dialogue, and the rushed money-grubbing of a rabid EA, Mass Effect Andromeda was actually... Fun? The story was genuinely interesting. The characters had good stories. The worlds were beautiful and creative.
The Angara were interesting and creative. The revelation towards the end? I wouldn't say I was completely surprised, but it did leave me wanting to know about the galaxy beyond the Heleus Cluster.
It's just a shame they ruined their own creation before it was even completed.
Andromeda was flawed and greedy, but at the same time, it was a testament to game design and world development.
ME:A is worth at least a single playthrough, at least to understand where the complainsts were coming from. This game enrages us so much for a variety of reasons:
1. It Isn't Really Mass Effect
For a the bells and whistles of the Mass Effect title, Andromeda feels more like an Alternative Universe Fanfiction. There are hints of the original hidden in the world– messages from Liara T'Soni, a mention of Shephard, and the logs with the Reapers– but the story is so jarringly different at times that they could have replaced any of the alien species with new ones and been none the wiser. Ryder's relationship with SAM is at complete odds with the entirery of the Mass Effect story. This was probably BioWare's narrative goal, but it was so poorly executed that it just read as lazinezs.
2. The Dialogue
I'm not entirely sure who was in charge of the game's dialogue, but I am certain they helped ghostwrite 50 Shades of Grey.
"He's dead. Ha. Probably because I shot him in the face."
"You, and your god damned father. Sorry. My face is tired."
It's just... Horrible. Like a really crummy porno imitation of a good film. The voice actors have awkward pauses and scenes where they just look at you for a few moments.
3. The Ruined Potential
The worst thing about this game is the fact that underneath all the mistakes, the palimpsest of poorly written dialogue, and the rushed money-grubbing of a rabid EA, Mass Effect Andromeda was actually... Fun? The story was genuinely interesting. The characters had good stories. The worlds were beautiful and creative.
The Angara were interesting and creative. The revelation towards the end? I wouldn't say I was completely surprised, but it did leave me wanting to know about the galaxy beyond the Heleus Cluster.
It's just a shame they ruined their own creation before it was even completed.
Andromeda was flawed and greedy, but at the same time, it was a testament to game design and world development.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The 5th wave (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Films about invaders from space have been a staple of film and television since the golden age of cinema. Playing on many Cold War fears in the aftermath of W.W.II, aliens bent on destruction has been an enduring staple of cinematic culture.
In the new film “The 5th Wave” which is based on the book of the same name, Chloe Grace Moretz plays Cassie, a teen who has her entire life turned upside down by the arrival of a mysterious craft. A few days after the arrival of “the Others” as they are known, a pulse wipes out all electronics on the planet. This is soon followed by tsunamis and earthquakes as well as disease and death.
Cassie along with her father and brother find shelter but their community is soon disrupted by the arrival of the military who say that the invaders are now amongst them and posing as humans.
The military under the leadership of Colonel Vosch (Liev Schreiber) has a plan to train the children to spot and defeat the alien invaders thus setting in motion the main conflict of the film. The secondary story consists of Cassie attempting to reunite with her family and her relationship with a mysterious stranger named Evan (Alex Roe).
The film is clearly aimed at a young adult market and as such I was able to spot the big twist in the film a long ways off as the clues were blatantly obvious to me. That being said, the film is better than you might expect and being the first chapter in a trilogy of books does set up the possibilities of sequels.
The dialogue and acting is pretty groan inducing at times, but again, remember the target audience, the film should entertain and it is nice to see Moretz deliver a solid performance in what in many ways could have been a limited role.
While it is not going to make you forget “The Hunger Games” anytime soon, the film is still a decent escape for those willing to overlook the flaws.
http://sknr.net/2016/01/22/the-5th-wave/
In the new film “The 5th Wave” which is based on the book of the same name, Chloe Grace Moretz plays Cassie, a teen who has her entire life turned upside down by the arrival of a mysterious craft. A few days after the arrival of “the Others” as they are known, a pulse wipes out all electronics on the planet. This is soon followed by tsunamis and earthquakes as well as disease and death.
Cassie along with her father and brother find shelter but their community is soon disrupted by the arrival of the military who say that the invaders are now amongst them and posing as humans.
The military under the leadership of Colonel Vosch (Liev Schreiber) has a plan to train the children to spot and defeat the alien invaders thus setting in motion the main conflict of the film. The secondary story consists of Cassie attempting to reunite with her family and her relationship with a mysterious stranger named Evan (Alex Roe).
The film is clearly aimed at a young adult market and as such I was able to spot the big twist in the film a long ways off as the clues were blatantly obvious to me. That being said, the film is better than you might expect and being the first chapter in a trilogy of books does set up the possibilities of sequels.
The dialogue and acting is pretty groan inducing at times, but again, remember the target audience, the film should entertain and it is nice to see Moretz deliver a solid performance in what in many ways could have been a limited role.
While it is not going to make you forget “The Hunger Games” anytime soon, the film is still a decent escape for those willing to overlook the flaws.
http://sknr.net/2016/01/22/the-5th-wave/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Exodus: Gods and Kings is a new movie directed by Ridley Scott.
With other great films under his belt such as Alien, Gladiator, GI Jane, and many many more, I had high hopes for this film.
The cast includes Christian Bale as Moses, Ben Kingsley as Nun, Joel Edgerton as Ramses, John Turturro as Seti, Sigourney Weaver as Tuya, and Aaron Paul as Joshua.
At 2 hours and 22 minutes long, I actually FELT the movie dragging in places, and yet I was less than thrilled with the ending.
The 3D didn’t add anything to the movie. During scenes where the 3D should have been a major asset to the film, enhancing the viewing experience, and drawing the audience into the story, it really didn’t add anything to the story, nor did it seem to add any “wow factor”.
Being completely non-religious myself, I cannot speak to many of the other seemingly negative comments regarding the films lack of “following the true story”, but I can say that the story presented was rather…. Lackluster.
In previews it seemed as if the whole movie would be set on a grand grand scale, and that it was worth paying to see on the big screen.
In actuality, while the movie does seem to be set on a grand scale, it just didn’t grab me in enough, didn’t capture my feelings and make me root for one side or the other, didn’t make me CARE enough about the characters or the story to want to bother to see it again, on the big screen or even on the tv.
I wouldn’t go so far as to call it “horrible”‘ or even “bad”, but I couldn’t tell someone “this is a movie you simply MUST SEE on the big screen”, either.
If I’d have paid to see it, I’d have been annoyed.
The best summation that I might be able to give this movie is…. “Meh”.
I’d give this movie a reluctant 2 out of 5 stars, and only as many as 2 to give Ridley Scott the benefit of the doubt.
With other great films under his belt such as Alien, Gladiator, GI Jane, and many many more, I had high hopes for this film.
The cast includes Christian Bale as Moses, Ben Kingsley as Nun, Joel Edgerton as Ramses, John Turturro as Seti, Sigourney Weaver as Tuya, and Aaron Paul as Joshua.
At 2 hours and 22 minutes long, I actually FELT the movie dragging in places, and yet I was less than thrilled with the ending.
The 3D didn’t add anything to the movie. During scenes where the 3D should have been a major asset to the film, enhancing the viewing experience, and drawing the audience into the story, it really didn’t add anything to the story, nor did it seem to add any “wow factor”.
Being completely non-religious myself, I cannot speak to many of the other seemingly negative comments regarding the films lack of “following the true story”, but I can say that the story presented was rather…. Lackluster.
In previews it seemed as if the whole movie would be set on a grand grand scale, and that it was worth paying to see on the big screen.
In actuality, while the movie does seem to be set on a grand scale, it just didn’t grab me in enough, didn’t capture my feelings and make me root for one side or the other, didn’t make me CARE enough about the characters or the story to want to bother to see it again, on the big screen or even on the tv.
I wouldn’t go so far as to call it “horrible”‘ or even “bad”, but I couldn’t tell someone “this is a movie you simply MUST SEE on the big screen”, either.
If I’d have paid to see it, I’d have been annoyed.
The best summation that I might be able to give this movie is…. “Meh”.
I’d give this movie a reluctant 2 out of 5 stars, and only as many as 2 to give Ridley Scott the benefit of the doubt.
TJ
The Journals of Captain James Cook on His Voyages of Discovery: Volume I: The Voyage of the Endeavour 1768 - 1771
Book
Captain James Cook's first two voyages of exploration, in 1768-71 and 1772-75, had drawn the modern...
TJ
The Journals of Captain James Cook on His Voyages of Discovery: Volume III Part : The Voyage of the Resolution and Discovery, 1776-1780
Book
Captain James Cook's first two voyages of exploration, in 1768-71 and 1772-75, had drawn the modern...
Egypt Legend - Temple of Anubis
Games and Entertainment
App
'Egypt Legend - Temple of Anubis' is a marble shoot out, match 3 game with the Egyptian theme. It is...
Red Dwarf - Season 1
8.2
Rate It
TV Season Watch
It was a script rejected by everyone at the BBC for three years. It starred a poet, an...