Search
Search results
Erika (17789 KP) rated Captain Blood (1935) in Movies
May 20, 2018
Captain Blood is absolutely, one of my favorite films. I actually own it in HD and it's always on my tablet to watch while I'm traveling.
Captain Blood is based upon the book by Rafael Sabatini. Sabatini has written some great books that have also been made into movies, such as Scaramouche and The Sea Hawk. Errol Flynn plays the main character, Peter Blood, who was a doctor during the English Revolution. Blood is arrested and sent to the colony of Jamaica because he was perceived as a traitor. Blood escapes with other slaves (not a spoiler, seriously, this film was made in 1935), and becomes a pirate. Pirate adventures occur, and once Blood's name is finally cleared, it is a happily ever after. The last scene is probably my favorite in the entire movie.
Captain Blood is based upon the book by Rafael Sabatini. Sabatini has written some great books that have also been made into movies, such as Scaramouche and The Sea Hawk. Errol Flynn plays the main character, Peter Blood, who was a doctor during the English Revolution. Blood is arrested and sent to the colony of Jamaica because he was perceived as a traitor. Blood escapes with other slaves (not a spoiler, seriously, this film was made in 1935), and becomes a pirate. Pirate adventures occur, and once Blood's name is finally cleared, it is a happily ever after. The last scene is probably my favorite in the entire movie.
Jeremiah Zagar recommended Hopscotch (1980) in Movies (curated)
Awix (3310 KP) rated Riders of Justice (2020) in Movies
Jul 24, 2021
Danish revenge thriller. A veteran soldier teams up with a gang of geeks to find the man responsible for his wife's death. Looks like yet another attempt at something like a Liam Neeson movie, but this is much defter and funnier, and more emotionally articulate.
Great performance from Mikkelson, playing the straight man as he is surrounded by comic performances from his various sidekicks - but this is a serious film about grief and how the world works and how people attempt to make sense of this. The director manages to slide the film from farce to thriller to drama without any of the changes in tone jarring in the slightest, even if the plot is a bit reliant on the occasional contrivance. Lots of fun but also undeniably moving.
Great performance from Mikkelson, playing the straight man as he is surrounded by comic performances from his various sidekicks - but this is a serious film about grief and how the world works and how people attempt to make sense of this. The director manages to slide the film from farce to thriller to drama without any of the changes in tone jarring in the slightest, even if the plot is a bit reliant on the occasional contrivance. Lots of fun but also undeniably moving.
John Gielgud: Matinee Idol to Movie Star
Book
New in paperback, John Gielgud: Matinee Idol to Movie Star is the most authoritative and...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Dead Ringers (1988) in Movies
Sep 15, 2020 (Updated Sep 15, 2020)
Whats The Difference Between Us
Dead Ringers- is a decent movie, its the last movie david cronenberg did in the 80's. So his 80's streak ending on a low ball/a dispointment. I really liked Jeremy Irons he was really good. And the psychological espect was good as well. Other than that it was a okay movie.
The Plot: Elliot (Jeremy Irons), a successful gynecologist, works at the same practice as his identical twin, Beverly (also Irons). Elliot is attracted to many of his patients and has affairs with them. When he inevitably loses interest, he will give the woman over to Beverly, the meeker of the two, without the woman knowing the difference. Beverly falls hard for one of the patients, Claire (Geneviève Bujold), but when she inadvertently deceives him, he slips into a state of madness.
In his DVD commentary, Irons claims that Robert De Niro declined playing the Mantles due to his unease with the subject matter and portraying gynecologists, while William Hurt decided to reject the parts because "it is hard enough to play one role".
Irons was given two different dressing rooms with two sets of costumes for playing his two characters. However, given the fact that he said "the whole point of the story is you should sometimes be confused as to which is which", he chose to use only one of the rooms and combine different costume items intended for different characters. Irons also developed an "internal way" to portray each character, employing the Alexander technique for "different energy points", giving each character his own appearance.
Like i said before the psychological espect is good in this. Jeremy Irons was excellent. I wouldnt really recordmend this film, rather davids other 80's films instead.
The Plot: Elliot (Jeremy Irons), a successful gynecologist, works at the same practice as his identical twin, Beverly (also Irons). Elliot is attracted to many of his patients and has affairs with them. When he inevitably loses interest, he will give the woman over to Beverly, the meeker of the two, without the woman knowing the difference. Beverly falls hard for one of the patients, Claire (Geneviève Bujold), but when she inadvertently deceives him, he slips into a state of madness.
In his DVD commentary, Irons claims that Robert De Niro declined playing the Mantles due to his unease with the subject matter and portraying gynecologists, while William Hurt decided to reject the parts because "it is hard enough to play one role".
Irons was given two different dressing rooms with two sets of costumes for playing his two characters. However, given the fact that he said "the whole point of the story is you should sometimes be confused as to which is which", he chose to use only one of the rooms and combine different costume items intended for different characters. Irons also developed an "internal way" to portray each character, employing the Alexander technique for "different energy points", giving each character his own appearance.
Like i said before the psychological espect is good in this. Jeremy Irons was excellent. I wouldnt really recordmend this film, rather davids other 80's films instead.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Expendables (2010) in Movies
Nov 22, 2019
Mumble Mumble Mumbe Part 1
Lets get all of the 80's action stars and throw them into a movie. Will Bruce and Arnold be in it, nope well for only 1min and 30secs. Yes you heard that correctly two of the biggest action stars only get 1min and 30sec screen time cameo with Sly. Making jokes and one-liners. So whats the plot then.
The Plot: A group of mercenaries is double-crossed during a mission and are approached by Church to overthrow the ruthless dictator of a South American country. It isn't long before the men realise things aren't quite as they appear, finding themselves caught in a dangerous web of betrayal. Although their mission is compromised and an innocent is in danger, soldier of fortune Barney and his comrades decide to get the job done.
Also the charcter names are really weird but intresting and predictable. Like Lee Christmas, Gunner Jensen, Yin Yang, Hale Caesar, Toll Road, Toll and Mr. Church.
All of 80's stars are here like Dolph Lundren who, ohh the russian guy from rocky 4 and Randy Couture who, oh a retired MMA fighting.
Its a funny, action movie and will have a good time watching.
The Plot: A group of mercenaries is double-crossed during a mission and are approached by Church to overthrow the ruthless dictator of a South American country. It isn't long before the men realise things aren't quite as they appear, finding themselves caught in a dangerous web of betrayal. Although their mission is compromised and an innocent is in danger, soldier of fortune Barney and his comrades decide to get the job done.
Also the charcter names are really weird but intresting and predictable. Like Lee Christmas, Gunner Jensen, Yin Yang, Hale Caesar, Toll Road, Toll and Mr. Church.
All of 80's stars are here like Dolph Lundren who, ohh the russian guy from rocky 4 and Randy Couture who, oh a retired MMA fighting.
Its a funny, action movie and will have a good time watching.
Annie Baker recommended A Room With a View (1985) in Movies (curated)
Annie Baker recommended Documenteur (1981) in Movies (curated)
David McK (3687 KP) rated Batman: The Long Halloween in Books
Jan 30, 2019
Of all the Superhero's around, I personally think that Batman has the best Rogue's gallery of villains: Superman, for instance, has Lex Luthor And (to a lesser extent) General Zod, while Spiderman has, what, Green Goblin? Dr Octopus? Venom?
Batman, on the other hand (and purely off the top of my head): The Joker. The Penguin. Poison Ivy. The Riddler. Catwoman (on/off as a villain). Scarecrow. Bane. And Two-Face.
Admittedly, some of those characters are now more famous than they used to be before due to the various Batman films, with the last four (And the first) mentioned in my list all appearing in the more-recent Christopher Nolan 'Dark Knight' series of Batman films. Of that trilogy, the second movie concerned itself principally with two main villains: The Joker, and Harvey Dent (aka Two-Face) and, in particular, the circumstances that led District Attorney Dent to become Two-Face.
Those circumstances are also the subject of this graphic novel, which also has a foreword/introduction by the director and writer of 'The Dark Knight', Christopher Nolan and David Goyer, in which they acknowledge the huge debt their movie owes to this novel.
This is also commonly cited as one of the better Batman stories, and is set during the early days of Batman's crusade against criminality in Gotham - there's no Robin here, nor Oracle (well, there is, but only as a baby), for instance.
As such, it makes a good intro (IMO) into the Batman mythos, not far behind the futuristic The Dark Knight Returns or the early-set Year One.
Batman, on the other hand (and purely off the top of my head): The Joker. The Penguin. Poison Ivy. The Riddler. Catwoman (on/off as a villain). Scarecrow. Bane. And Two-Face.
Admittedly, some of those characters are now more famous than they used to be before due to the various Batman films, with the last four (And the first) mentioned in my list all appearing in the more-recent Christopher Nolan 'Dark Knight' series of Batman films. Of that trilogy, the second movie concerned itself principally with two main villains: The Joker, and Harvey Dent (aka Two-Face) and, in particular, the circumstances that led District Attorney Dent to become Two-Face.
Those circumstances are also the subject of this graphic novel, which also has a foreword/introduction by the director and writer of 'The Dark Knight', Christopher Nolan and David Goyer, in which they acknowledge the huge debt their movie owes to this novel.
This is also commonly cited as one of the better Batman stories, and is set during the early days of Batman's crusade against criminality in Gotham - there's no Robin here, nor Oracle (well, there is, but only as a baby), for instance.
As such, it makes a good intro (IMO) into the Batman mythos, not far behind the futuristic The Dark Knight Returns or the early-set Year One.
MelanieTheresa (997 KP) rated Yesterday (2019) in Movies
Sep 23, 2019 (Updated Sep 23, 2019)
Better than I thought it would be.
Contains spoilers, click to show
Failing musician gets hit by a car during a mysterious worldwide 12-second blackout, and wakes up to a world in which The Beatles never existed (also never existed: Coca-Cola, cigarettes (?), and Harry Potter). Musician claims the songs as his own and becomes an overnight sensation.
(There are also the rom-com elements: failing musician is oblivious to the feelings of his friend-slash-manager until he's uber-famous and it's almost too late, friend-slash-manager starts seeing someone else, etc.)
Evidently, there are two other people in the world who also remember The Beatles, and though the movie attempts to make you think there may be something sinister happening there (*gasp* are they going to expose him??), there isn't. These two people aren't even mad that the musician is claiming he wrote the songs; they're just happy to hear the songs again.
There's a pretty great sequence in which our main character looks up John Lennon (played by Robert Carlyle) and goes to visit him, because hey, if The Beatles never existed, then it follows that John must still be alive, right? I didn't even think of that until he showed up on screen, but it seemed like a quietly brilliant piece of the movie.
So what caused the mysterious 12-second blackout and the disappearance of The Beatles (and Coca-Cola, cigarettes, Harry Potter)? I HAVE NO IDEA BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T TELL US. Anybody who knows me will tell you I always need to know the "why" of things, so this mostly happily-ever-after ending left me super frustrated.
(There are also the rom-com elements: failing musician is oblivious to the feelings of his friend-slash-manager until he's uber-famous and it's almost too late, friend-slash-manager starts seeing someone else, etc.)
Evidently, there are two other people in the world who also remember The Beatles, and though the movie attempts to make you think there may be something sinister happening there (*gasp* are they going to expose him??), there isn't. These two people aren't even mad that the musician is claiming he wrote the songs; they're just happy to hear the songs again.
There's a pretty great sequence in which our main character looks up John Lennon (played by Robert Carlyle) and goes to visit him, because hey, if The Beatles never existed, then it follows that John must still be alive, right? I didn't even think of that until he showed up on screen, but it seemed like a quietly brilliant piece of the movie.
So what caused the mysterious 12-second blackout and the disappearance of The Beatles (and Coca-Cola, cigarettes, Harry Potter)? I HAVE NO IDEA BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T TELL US. Anybody who knows me will tell you I always need to know the "why" of things, so this mostly happily-ever-after ending left me super frustrated.
Beetle Rider (341 KP) May 21, 2018
Erika (17789 KP) May 22, 2018