Search
Search results

Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated Aladdin (1992) in Movies
May 4, 2020
I think this is one of the strongest Disney movies. I think the plot is great and the characters are great. Abu is obviously my favorite. It's hard to watch this film, though, because of Robin Williams, but it also makes me appreciate his work so much more. I think he is the best genie and the animations they did along with him pushes him that much further.
The soundtrack to this film is phenomenal and it makes me want to see the Broadway production just to hear the arrangements live. This definitely isn't my favorite Disney movie, but it's a good one,
The soundtrack to this film is phenomenal and it makes me want to see the Broadway production just to hear the arrangements live. This definitely isn't my favorite Disney movie, but it's a good one,

Bob Mann (459 KP) rated A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood (2019) in Movies
Dec 13, 2019
"Anything mentionable is manageable"
Tom Hanks' new movie is a film I personally struggled to fully engage with. But some I suspect will truly LOVE it's gentle and feel-good nature.
Who WAS Fred Rogers? Based on a true story this movie very quickly makes you realise that Fred Rogers, who died in 2003, was an American legend. This is supported by the GLOWING reviews here on IMDB by US viewers. Rogers was a children's TV presenter that used puppets and song to help children work through their fears and psychological issues. I suspect, like me, most Brits would say "WHO?" (Just as if a 60's born Brit like me saying "Let's look through the arched window" will similarly get a "WHAT?" from nearly all Americans!)
Here the story revolves not around Fred (Tom Hanks) helping a child with issues, but with Fred's fixation with 'Esquire' journo Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys), who is fighting his own demons of anger, resentment and pain. For Lloyd is struggling not only with his feelings about fatherhood, with the normal strains that is placing on the relationship with wife and mother Andrea (Susan Kelechi Watson), but also with the reemergence on the scene of his estranged and hard-drinking father Jerry (Chris Cooper).
The movie starts (and continues) with model sets reminiscent of the brilliantly barmy "Welcome to Marwen" and (the rather more subtle) "Game Night". Fun is had with matchbox-car freeways and planes flying off and clunking down on model runways.
We join Mr Rogers on set filming his series: and the movie sloooooows to match Rogers' leisurely pace. This was a movie I went into completely blind (which is unusual for me): I knew precisely zip about it. No knowledge of Rogers. No knowledge of the story. No sight of the trailer. Nothing. So these opening scenes were a real "WTF" moment as my brain struggled to work out what the story was all about.
There was undeniably something creepy about seeing the saintly Fred Rogers engaging with sick and vulnerable children. And I realised just what damage the likes of the convicted-paedophiles Jimmy Saville, Stuart Hall and Rolf Harris have done to my suspicions against all such entertainers. I feared - without any background knowledge on Rogers - that the story would take a darker turn. But no! That's not the story....
For as mentioned earlier, this is the story of Lloyd. And it's a relatively simple and linear story of familial stress that we've seen in movies throughout the decades. Whether you will buy into this story-within-the-story, or not, will flavour your overall enjoyment of the film.
Many who are into analysis and 'talking treatments' will - I think - appreciate the script. But I personally didn't really warm to any of the players - other than Rogers - so this was a negative for me. And I found the pace so slow that I ended up a bit fidgety and bored moving into the second reel of the film. Two women got up and walked out at that point - - it was clearly not for them (this was a Cineworld "Unlimited" pre-release screening).
The third reel rather pulled it together again, and established an "It's a Wonderful Life" style of feelgood that I warmed to much more.
This is a movie I predict the Academy will love. And everyone loves Hanks already. Read the tea-leaves. It's a brilliant performance from Hanks in its stillness and quietness.
No more so than in one particular scene....
This is the follow up movie from Marielle Heller to the impressive "Can You Ever Forgive Me?". And this particular scene - let's call it the "Anti-When-Harry-Met-Sally" moment - is a massively brave and striking piece of cinema.
It's truly extraordinary and worth the price of a ticket alone.
In summary, I enjoyed this movie, primarily for watching the master Hanks at work. The pacing for me was somewhat off though. But I can't be overly critical of such a warm-hearted movie. I predict you will see this and go home with a big dose of the warm-fuzzies.
See here for the full graphical review - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/12/12/one-manns-movies-film-review-a-beautiful-day-in-the-neighborhood-2019/
Who WAS Fred Rogers? Based on a true story this movie very quickly makes you realise that Fred Rogers, who died in 2003, was an American legend. This is supported by the GLOWING reviews here on IMDB by US viewers. Rogers was a children's TV presenter that used puppets and song to help children work through their fears and psychological issues. I suspect, like me, most Brits would say "WHO?" (Just as if a 60's born Brit like me saying "Let's look through the arched window" will similarly get a "WHAT?" from nearly all Americans!)
Here the story revolves not around Fred (Tom Hanks) helping a child with issues, but with Fred's fixation with 'Esquire' journo Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys), who is fighting his own demons of anger, resentment and pain. For Lloyd is struggling not only with his feelings about fatherhood, with the normal strains that is placing on the relationship with wife and mother Andrea (Susan Kelechi Watson), but also with the reemergence on the scene of his estranged and hard-drinking father Jerry (Chris Cooper).
The movie starts (and continues) with model sets reminiscent of the brilliantly barmy "Welcome to Marwen" and (the rather more subtle) "Game Night". Fun is had with matchbox-car freeways and planes flying off and clunking down on model runways.
We join Mr Rogers on set filming his series: and the movie sloooooows to match Rogers' leisurely pace. This was a movie I went into completely blind (which is unusual for me): I knew precisely zip about it. No knowledge of Rogers. No knowledge of the story. No sight of the trailer. Nothing. So these opening scenes were a real "WTF" moment as my brain struggled to work out what the story was all about.
There was undeniably something creepy about seeing the saintly Fred Rogers engaging with sick and vulnerable children. And I realised just what damage the likes of the convicted-paedophiles Jimmy Saville, Stuart Hall and Rolf Harris have done to my suspicions against all such entertainers. I feared - without any background knowledge on Rogers - that the story would take a darker turn. But no! That's not the story....
For as mentioned earlier, this is the story of Lloyd. And it's a relatively simple and linear story of familial stress that we've seen in movies throughout the decades. Whether you will buy into this story-within-the-story, or not, will flavour your overall enjoyment of the film.
Many who are into analysis and 'talking treatments' will - I think - appreciate the script. But I personally didn't really warm to any of the players - other than Rogers - so this was a negative for me. And I found the pace so slow that I ended up a bit fidgety and bored moving into the second reel of the film. Two women got up and walked out at that point - - it was clearly not for them (this was a Cineworld "Unlimited" pre-release screening).
The third reel rather pulled it together again, and established an "It's a Wonderful Life" style of feelgood that I warmed to much more.
This is a movie I predict the Academy will love. And everyone loves Hanks already. Read the tea-leaves. It's a brilliant performance from Hanks in its stillness and quietness.
No more so than in one particular scene....
This is the follow up movie from Marielle Heller to the impressive "Can You Ever Forgive Me?". And this particular scene - let's call it the "Anti-When-Harry-Met-Sally" moment - is a massively brave and striking piece of cinema.
It's truly extraordinary and worth the price of a ticket alone.
In summary, I enjoyed this movie, primarily for watching the master Hanks at work. The pacing for me was somewhat off though. But I can't be overly critical of such a warm-hearted movie. I predict you will see this and go home with a big dose of the warm-fuzzies.
See here for the full graphical review - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/12/12/one-manns-movies-film-review-a-beautiful-day-in-the-neighborhood-2019/

Julian Schnabel recommended Andrei Rublev (1966) in Movies (curated)

Lee (2222 KP) rated Stan & Ollie (2018) in Movies
Dec 19, 2018 (Updated Dec 19, 2018)
A wonderful movie
I have been really looking forward to seeing this movie. I, along with countless millions around the world, have fond memories of watching regular re-runs of Laurel & Hardy movies on TV, and they hold a very special place in so many people's hearts. Timeless legends that deserve to be remembered for generations to come. That being said, the preview screening I attended last night was probably only a quarter full, so I fear that this story detailing the latter part of their career isn't really going to appeal to mainstream audiences. I kind of hope it reignites interest in their work though as this truly is a wonderful film.
The movie begins in 1937, where Stan and Ollie are currently riding high as the most successful comedy performers in Hollywood. They're at Hal Roach studios, making their way to the set of Way Out West in order to shoot another scene. They're just chatting away together as we follow them - about their wives, about money. Stan's contract with Hal Roach is due to end shortly, while Ollie's isn't, and Stan is conscious of the fact that they don't actually own the rights to their own movies, so don't make as much money as performers such as Charlie Chaplin. He argues a bit with Hal Roach about it, before he and Ollie perform a song and dance number for the movie (the original clip of this scene is shown at the end of this movie, highlighting just how perfectly they nailed the recreation of it here). That short conversation, and the differing viewpoints regarding money and their film rights, lays the foundations for the rest of the movie, and we then jump forward 16 years.
The boys arrive in Newcastle, England in 1953. They're here to perform a tour of the UK, recreating classic scenes from their movies in an attempt to generate enough interest in them to get a movie made. A retelling of Robin Hood, which is being written by Stan. Age is clearly catching up with them though, particularly with Ollie, while Stan remains the driving force of the pair, constantly performing classic gags and coming up with new ideas. Unfortunately for them, they barely manage to fill half the seats of the theatres they perform in, with concern growing as to whether or not their eventual London dates will even go ahead. Their wives are due to join them on tour in a couple of weeks time, and they're also concerned as to what they'll make of it all when they arrive, especially as the boys are currently only staying in small, simple guest houses. Promoter Bernard Delfont (one of the movies funniest supporting roles) is keen to get them out and about promoting themselves, attending events and meeting dignitaries. His interests initially seem focused elsewhere in the theatre business, particularly with upcoming British comedy performer Norman Wisdom, so it's hard work generating interest in Laurel & Hardy once more. Luckily though, the effort pays off, and they eventually upgrade their London show to a bigger theatre, selling it out.
John C Reilly and Steve Coogan are just perfect as Stan and Ollie. I struggled a little at times with Steve Coogan, as I've been a big fan of his varied comedy work for nearly 30 years now, so found it a bit distracting. But he definitely pulls this off, and it's incredible to see so many mannerisms and iconic scenes from their movies so perfectly reproduced by both leads. The other outstanding and hilarious double act in this movie are the wives, who arrive in London to support their husbands and mix things up a little. They are clearly very caring and protective of their husbands though, supporting them through ill health, and an unfortunate falling out between Stan and Ollie related to events that occurred 16 years ago. A pivotal moment in their careers which was alluded to in the opening scenes of the movie, and further elaborated on in a number of flashbacks later on. It's a bit of an emotional roller-coaster, but overall this is a wonderfully heartwarming and moving love story about two of Hollywoods greatest. And it succeeded in making me want to watch every single one of their movies again.
The movie begins in 1937, where Stan and Ollie are currently riding high as the most successful comedy performers in Hollywood. They're at Hal Roach studios, making their way to the set of Way Out West in order to shoot another scene. They're just chatting away together as we follow them - about their wives, about money. Stan's contract with Hal Roach is due to end shortly, while Ollie's isn't, and Stan is conscious of the fact that they don't actually own the rights to their own movies, so don't make as much money as performers such as Charlie Chaplin. He argues a bit with Hal Roach about it, before he and Ollie perform a song and dance number for the movie (the original clip of this scene is shown at the end of this movie, highlighting just how perfectly they nailed the recreation of it here). That short conversation, and the differing viewpoints regarding money and their film rights, lays the foundations for the rest of the movie, and we then jump forward 16 years.
The boys arrive in Newcastle, England in 1953. They're here to perform a tour of the UK, recreating classic scenes from their movies in an attempt to generate enough interest in them to get a movie made. A retelling of Robin Hood, which is being written by Stan. Age is clearly catching up with them though, particularly with Ollie, while Stan remains the driving force of the pair, constantly performing classic gags and coming up with new ideas. Unfortunately for them, they barely manage to fill half the seats of the theatres they perform in, with concern growing as to whether or not their eventual London dates will even go ahead. Their wives are due to join them on tour in a couple of weeks time, and they're also concerned as to what they'll make of it all when they arrive, especially as the boys are currently only staying in small, simple guest houses. Promoter Bernard Delfont (one of the movies funniest supporting roles) is keen to get them out and about promoting themselves, attending events and meeting dignitaries. His interests initially seem focused elsewhere in the theatre business, particularly with upcoming British comedy performer Norman Wisdom, so it's hard work generating interest in Laurel & Hardy once more. Luckily though, the effort pays off, and they eventually upgrade their London show to a bigger theatre, selling it out.
John C Reilly and Steve Coogan are just perfect as Stan and Ollie. I struggled a little at times with Steve Coogan, as I've been a big fan of his varied comedy work for nearly 30 years now, so found it a bit distracting. But he definitely pulls this off, and it's incredible to see so many mannerisms and iconic scenes from their movies so perfectly reproduced by both leads. The other outstanding and hilarious double act in this movie are the wives, who arrive in London to support their husbands and mix things up a little. They are clearly very caring and protective of their husbands though, supporting them through ill health, and an unfortunate falling out between Stan and Ollie related to events that occurred 16 years ago. A pivotal moment in their careers which was alluded to in the opening scenes of the movie, and further elaborated on in a number of flashbacks later on. It's a bit of an emotional roller-coaster, but overall this is a wonderfully heartwarming and moving love story about two of Hollywoods greatest. And it succeeded in making me want to watch every single one of their movies again.

Anand Wilder recommended Bugsy Malone Soundtrack by Paul Williams in Music (curated)

Adam Carolla recommended Wedding Crashers (2005) in Movies (curated)

Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2369 KP) rated Deadly Director’s Cut in Books
Oct 3, 2022 (Updated Oct 3, 2022)
The Director Is Cut Out of the Picture
Hollywood has come to Haggerman’s Catskills Resort as famed director Elias Theropodous has decided to use it for some of the outdoor scenes for his new movie. Elizabeth Grady, the resort’s manager, is thrilled with the money, but not the disruptions to life at the resort, especially with Elias’s demands. However, when he dies after a night of eating and drinking at the resort, Elizabeth quickly realizes she has to find the killer in order to save the resort’s reputation. Can she do it?
Hollywood coming to town is a familiar trope, especially in cozies, but authors continue to use it because it works. That’s certainly the case here. The plot kept me engaged, sometimes reading a little later than I had planned, and I loved how the climax played out, although there is a minor continuity error with the climax. It doesn’t impact who the killer is. I also appreciated how the sub-plots some of the regulars had tie in with this main story yet also felt like natural continuations of their arcs from the first book. Naturally, the new characters are strong as well. I enjoyed the setting; I was ready to book a vacation at the resort myself. I also appreciated the way the 1950’s setting came to life, with little bits of everyday life infusing every page. If you are looking for a fun historical cozy, look no further than this book.
Hollywood coming to town is a familiar trope, especially in cozies, but authors continue to use it because it works. That’s certainly the case here. The plot kept me engaged, sometimes reading a little later than I had planned, and I loved how the climax played out, although there is a minor continuity error with the climax. It doesn’t impact who the killer is. I also appreciated how the sub-plots some of the regulars had tie in with this main story yet also felt like natural continuations of their arcs from the first book. Naturally, the new characters are strong as well. I enjoyed the setting; I was ready to book a vacation at the resort myself. I also appreciated the way the 1950’s setting came to life, with little bits of everyday life infusing every page. If you are looking for a fun historical cozy, look no further than this book.

Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Shaun the Sheep Movie (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Shaun the Sheep is a spin-off from the popular British stop-motion animation show Wallace and Gromit. This one of a kind, smart, and loveable sheep burst on to the small screen nearly twenty years ago in the short “A Close Shave.” Winning the hearts of millions, it’s no surprise a movie was in the works.
This film starts off with a silent monologue of how Shaun, the rest of flock of sheep, and Bitzer, the loyal and always “by the book” sheepdog, came to live with the Farmer. Fast forward a few years, sick and tired of the redundant life of waking up early, being herded throughout the farm, shaved, and fed the same food every day, Shaun brilliantly devises a plan to give him and the flock the day off. Unfortunately, the plan of tricking the Farmer to fall asleep in an RV trailer goes awry when the trailer wriggles loose from its tire wedges sending the Farmer off on an out of control trip and ending up in the Big City with amnesia. Stuck on the Farm with no one to tend to their needs, the Sheep and Bitzer panic and set off to the Big City to bring the Farmer back home. And, so begins the adventure into unchartered territory.
It’s remarkable that a movie with no dialogue manages to convey so many messages and emotions-from anger, comic relief, sadness to gratitude and joy. My hats go off to writer-director duo, Mark Burton and Richard Starzak, and the rest of the animation team for paying such wonderful attention to detail with the characters, the vibrant scenery, and also being on point with the comedic timing.
Every generation will love this movie and it definitely proves that silence is golden.
This film starts off with a silent monologue of how Shaun, the rest of flock of sheep, and Bitzer, the loyal and always “by the book” sheepdog, came to live with the Farmer. Fast forward a few years, sick and tired of the redundant life of waking up early, being herded throughout the farm, shaved, and fed the same food every day, Shaun brilliantly devises a plan to give him and the flock the day off. Unfortunately, the plan of tricking the Farmer to fall asleep in an RV trailer goes awry when the trailer wriggles loose from its tire wedges sending the Farmer off on an out of control trip and ending up in the Big City with amnesia. Stuck on the Farm with no one to tend to their needs, the Sheep and Bitzer panic and set off to the Big City to bring the Farmer back home. And, so begins the adventure into unchartered territory.
It’s remarkable that a movie with no dialogue manages to convey so many messages and emotions-from anger, comic relief, sadness to gratitude and joy. My hats go off to writer-director duo, Mark Burton and Richard Starzak, and the rest of the animation team for paying such wonderful attention to detail with the characters, the vibrant scenery, and also being on point with the comedic timing.
Every generation will love this movie and it definitely proves that silence is golden.

Final Cut
Book
Perfect for fans of Elle Cosimano and Nita Prose, when Hollywood costumer Joey Jessop stumbles...

Awix (3310 KP) rated Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) in Movies
Jun 6, 2018 (Updated Jun 7, 2018)
Star Trek: the Motion Picture - more gruelling to make, or to watch? We may never know the answer. Actually, viewed these days, it's not quite that bad - Enterprise crew reconvene after big cloud is sighted on a course for Earth. Many conversations ensue, intercut with stately special effects sequences which feel like they go on forever. Mainly because they do.
To be honest, if you stop thinking about TMP as a movie and view it instead as the most lavish TV pilot in history, many of its problems are a bit more understandable. It explains why the crew take ages getting back together, and why they don't really seem like their old selves until near the end. It explains why much time is devoted to introducing new characters (even if they don't, in the end, make it out of the movie alive - although Will and Ilia were sort of reincarnated as Will and Deanna some years later). It doesn't really explain why the plot is so derivative of TV Trek, but you can't have everything I suppose.
It is true you can get a very good sense of the history of Star Trek without ever watching this movie, and also that the first three minutes may actually be the most engaging bit of it. But if you're watching it at all, you'll most likely have enough affection for the original characters to overlook the numerous flaws in the film.
To be honest, if you stop thinking about TMP as a movie and view it instead as the most lavish TV pilot in history, many of its problems are a bit more understandable. It explains why the crew take ages getting back together, and why they don't really seem like their old selves until near the end. It explains why much time is devoted to introducing new characters (even if they don't, in the end, make it out of the movie alive - although Will and Ilia were sort of reincarnated as Will and Deanna some years later). It doesn't really explain why the plot is so derivative of TV Trek, but you can't have everything I suppose.
It is true you can get a very good sense of the history of Star Trek without ever watching this movie, and also that the first three minutes may actually be the most engaging bit of it. But if you're watching it at all, you'll most likely have enough affection for the original characters to overlook the numerous flaws in the film.