Search
Search results
John Taylor recommended The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (1943) in Movies (curated)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Casper (1995) in Movies
Oct 27, 2020
Bill Pullman (1 more)
Christina Ricci
Friendly Ghost
Casper- is a hallloween classic. Its funny, spooky, entertaining and above all a great movie.
The plot: Casper (voiced by Malachi Pearson) is a kind young ghost who peacefully haunts a mansion in Maine. When specialist James Harvey (Bill Pullman) arrives to communicate with Casper and his fellow spirits, he brings along his teenage daughter, Kat (Christina Ricci). Casper quickly falls in love with Kat, but their budding relationship is complicated not only by his transparent state, but also by his troublemaking apparition uncles and their mischievous antics.
The film makes extensive use of computer-generated imagery to create the ghosts, and it is the first feature film to have a fully CGI character in the lead role. It goes for a much darker interpretation of the Friendly Ghost in comparison to the comics, cartoons, and films of the previous years, especially with its theme of death, most notably providing the character a tragic backstory that addresses his death.
In the mirror scene, Dr. Harvey was also supposed to transform into Spielberg. According to director Silberling, the cameo was filmed, but was cut for pacing reasons. Spielberg was relieved, feeling that he is not much of an actor himself and was quite nervous in front of the camera.
It was just strange to see all of those cameos, i felt like thier were just a wink to the audience of whom ever was watching. Like ohh their Dan Aykroyd and ohh their is Mel Gibson and ohh look Cilent Eastwood. The problem is this is films audience is for children, so children wouldnt even know who those people are.
Other than that its a great film.
The plot: Casper (voiced by Malachi Pearson) is a kind young ghost who peacefully haunts a mansion in Maine. When specialist James Harvey (Bill Pullman) arrives to communicate with Casper and his fellow spirits, he brings along his teenage daughter, Kat (Christina Ricci). Casper quickly falls in love with Kat, but their budding relationship is complicated not only by his transparent state, but also by his troublemaking apparition uncles and their mischievous antics.
The film makes extensive use of computer-generated imagery to create the ghosts, and it is the first feature film to have a fully CGI character in the lead role. It goes for a much darker interpretation of the Friendly Ghost in comparison to the comics, cartoons, and films of the previous years, especially with its theme of death, most notably providing the character a tragic backstory that addresses his death.
In the mirror scene, Dr. Harvey was also supposed to transform into Spielberg. According to director Silberling, the cameo was filmed, but was cut for pacing reasons. Spielberg was relieved, feeling that he is not much of an actor himself and was quite nervous in front of the camera.
It was just strange to see all of those cameos, i felt like thier were just a wink to the audience of whom ever was watching. Like ohh their Dan Aykroyd and ohh their is Mel Gibson and ohh look Cilent Eastwood. The problem is this is films audience is for children, so children wouldnt even know who those people are.
Other than that its a great film.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Band a Part (1964) in Movies
Jan 28, 2021
Of all the directors I have flirted with in my opening months with the BFI player, Godard is the one I am finding most accessible and least intimidating. He is the guy whose movies I am most tempted by when I don’t want to think or analyse too much, but simply sit back and enjoy for being cool. I also wanted to see why Quentin Tarantino named his production company after this movie. And now I have seen it his whole oeuvre makes total sense, at last! The exact feel of this Nouvelle Vague cornerstone is exactly what you find in 80% of what Tarantino is trying to do. The plot is incidental, of course. What is happening is only there to pin the characters and quirky dialogue on. Being cool is all. And this mid 60s confection is so cool, so French and so much style over content in the best possible way.
On the surface it is about two dodgy guys who take a shine to a girl and rope her into a heist. But the most memorable moments are the trivialities of them dancing the Maddison in a cafe because they are bored; reading the news aloud from newspapers whilst sat in the woods; driving erratically in a speedy little jalopy with a broken roof; and just making faces at one another as they flirt and express the bittersweet tediousness of being alive. It epitomises the time and place almost more than A Bout de Souffle, and in my opinion is the more mature, more knowing film. Ultimately it means very little, but is impossible not to like. It also sparked a greater interest in Anna Karina as a film icon, being the 2nd film on this list in which she impressed me.
On the surface it is about two dodgy guys who take a shine to a girl and rope her into a heist. But the most memorable moments are the trivialities of them dancing the Maddison in a cafe because they are bored; reading the news aloud from newspapers whilst sat in the woods; driving erratically in a speedy little jalopy with a broken roof; and just making faces at one another as they flirt and express the bittersweet tediousness of being alive. It epitomises the time and place almost more than A Bout de Souffle, and in my opinion is the more mature, more knowing film. Ultimately it means very little, but is impossible not to like. It also sparked a greater interest in Anna Karina as a film icon, being the 2nd film on this list in which she impressed me.
Andy K (10826 KP) rated The Creature Walks Among Us (1956) in Movies
Sep 22, 2019
The final installment of the Creature trilogy finds another expedition headed out to detain and capture the newly freed creature with a yacht full of doctors and a doctor's wife. After a long journey, the creature in finally located and captured.
The beast is badly burned in a freak fire accident, but afterwards begins to transform. He sheds his webbed appendages and facial gills and starts to look more human and less like a fish. He also can no longer breathe underwater and appears to be becoming more aware of the world around him.
Meanwhile, the doctor's wife is having a rough time of her situation having to deal with not only her abusive husband, but the unwanted advances of other men. Events come to a boiling point among the love triangle and the beast appears to have gotten the blame for something he didn't do.
Aware of the situation he lashes out again for his very survival.
I liked this film better than "Revenge of the Creature", but both films are far inferior to the original classic. Having the creature change so he could walk on land was not a good idea since his ability to swim around and sneak up on the tourists was one of his most endearing qualities!
His transformed look was also a step down from his original appearance. His more human look reminded me of the way Louis Gossett Jr. looked in the movie "Enemy Mine". They may have been trying for something different, especially since this was the 3rd Creature film in 3 years, but it was largely not successful.
Not sure why they chose to have another love scandal either. Why not just focus on the creature and doing something there rather than something you've seen 1000 times before?
The beast is badly burned in a freak fire accident, but afterwards begins to transform. He sheds his webbed appendages and facial gills and starts to look more human and less like a fish. He also can no longer breathe underwater and appears to be becoming more aware of the world around him.
Meanwhile, the doctor's wife is having a rough time of her situation having to deal with not only her abusive husband, but the unwanted advances of other men. Events come to a boiling point among the love triangle and the beast appears to have gotten the blame for something he didn't do.
Aware of the situation he lashes out again for his very survival.
I liked this film better than "Revenge of the Creature", but both films are far inferior to the original classic. Having the creature change so he could walk on land was not a good idea since his ability to swim around and sneak up on the tourists was one of his most endearing qualities!
His transformed look was also a step down from his original appearance. His more human look reminded me of the way Louis Gossett Jr. looked in the movie "Enemy Mine". They may have been trying for something different, especially since this was the 3rd Creature film in 3 years, but it was largely not successful.
Not sure why they chose to have another love scandal either. Why not just focus on the creature and doing something there rather than something you've seen 1000 times before?
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Molly's Game (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Wordy but entertaining.
You can never accuse Aaron Sorkin of skimping on his words. Sorkin is of course the award-winning writer of “The West Wing” but on the big screen he has also written many classics: “A Few Good Men”; “The Social Network” and “Steve Jobs” for example. Here he also makes his directorial debut in a movie about the true-life turbulent career of Olympic wannabe skier Molly Bloom.
Bloom is played by Jessica Chastain, from films such as “Zero Dark Thirty” and “Miss Sloane” (one of my films of the year last year). Chastain’s roles as an actress are often quite cold and calculating, as suits her demeanour. As such her characters are not often easy to warm to in movies (and as such, my wife is not a fan).
Taking the piste. Molly in her younger ski-centric role.
Here as Molly Bloom she is as equally driven as in “Miss Sloane“, but the drive is learned from her father (Kevin Costner), bullying her to be the best she can be at skiing in a highly competitive family. Forced out of the skiing business (for reasons I won’t spoil), she takes a “gap year” from law school that turns into a “gap life” after she falls into the slightly shady business of running poker nights for LA’s rich elite. It’s here that Chastain’s Bloom is able to show a gentler and more compassionate side, trying to talk some of her clients (who invariably fall in love with her) off the ledge of their gambling addiction.
Chris O’Dowd as one of the punter’s in deep.
Sorkin’s script (based on Molly’s own autobiography, I should add) does a really nice job of cutting backwards and forwards through Molly’s timeline to drill into motivations and her mental state, and in doing so he pulls out an award-winning (or at least Golden-Globe award-nominating) performance from Chastain in the process. Also very effective though is Kevin Costner (“Hidden Figures“, “Man of Steel“), who is quietly building an impressive portfolio of supporting actor roles. Here he rather dials in his “tough and aloof guy” performance until the park bench scene (below) where he surprises in a good way.
Benches with wolves. Kevin Costner impressive as Molly’s hard-line father.
It’s also a blessed relief to find a decent vehicle to showcase the undoubted talents of Britain’s Idris Elba – an actor who has been woefully served by rubbish such as “Bastille Day“, rather lame sequels like “Star Trek: Beyond” or minor roles such as in “Thor: Ragnarok“. Here he can really get his teeth into the role of Molly’s lawyer, with a multi-layered character that reveals a little – but not too much of – his back-story to leave you with intriguing questions.
An indecisive Charlie Jaffey (Idris Elba) can make his mind up about Molly (Jessica Chastain).
So it’s a good film, but an intelligent watch that mandates your attention. The script is sufficiently dense and wordy that it requires significant concentration: this is not a “park your brain at the door” type of ‘Michael Bay film’. (As such, while it remains a recommended watch, I’m not sure it would be one that would necessarily make my DVD list for repeat watchings).
Michael Cera (centre) as the mysterious but powerful “Player X”; a Hollywood actor, but who is he supposed to be? (Answers on a postcard!).
But again, I must comment on what an amazing year this is turning out to be for women in film. Less #Me-too and more #She-do! Once again, here is a movie where a confident woman is firmly in the driving seat, and while powerful men try to bring her down, it is not them that succeeds. (The studio bill for talent in the past year must be a LOT less than it was the year before! #don’tshootme #topicalhumour #CarrieGracey). #TimesUp.
Bloom is played by Jessica Chastain, from films such as “Zero Dark Thirty” and “Miss Sloane” (one of my films of the year last year). Chastain’s roles as an actress are often quite cold and calculating, as suits her demeanour. As such her characters are not often easy to warm to in movies (and as such, my wife is not a fan).
Taking the piste. Molly in her younger ski-centric role.
Here as Molly Bloom she is as equally driven as in “Miss Sloane“, but the drive is learned from her father (Kevin Costner), bullying her to be the best she can be at skiing in a highly competitive family. Forced out of the skiing business (for reasons I won’t spoil), she takes a “gap year” from law school that turns into a “gap life” after she falls into the slightly shady business of running poker nights for LA’s rich elite. It’s here that Chastain’s Bloom is able to show a gentler and more compassionate side, trying to talk some of her clients (who invariably fall in love with her) off the ledge of their gambling addiction.
Chris O’Dowd as one of the punter’s in deep.
Sorkin’s script (based on Molly’s own autobiography, I should add) does a really nice job of cutting backwards and forwards through Molly’s timeline to drill into motivations and her mental state, and in doing so he pulls out an award-winning (or at least Golden-Globe award-nominating) performance from Chastain in the process. Also very effective though is Kevin Costner (“Hidden Figures“, “Man of Steel“), who is quietly building an impressive portfolio of supporting actor roles. Here he rather dials in his “tough and aloof guy” performance until the park bench scene (below) where he surprises in a good way.
Benches with wolves. Kevin Costner impressive as Molly’s hard-line father.
It’s also a blessed relief to find a decent vehicle to showcase the undoubted talents of Britain’s Idris Elba – an actor who has been woefully served by rubbish such as “Bastille Day“, rather lame sequels like “Star Trek: Beyond” or minor roles such as in “Thor: Ragnarok“. Here he can really get his teeth into the role of Molly’s lawyer, with a multi-layered character that reveals a little – but not too much of – his back-story to leave you with intriguing questions.
An indecisive Charlie Jaffey (Idris Elba) can make his mind up about Molly (Jessica Chastain).
So it’s a good film, but an intelligent watch that mandates your attention. The script is sufficiently dense and wordy that it requires significant concentration: this is not a “park your brain at the door” type of ‘Michael Bay film’. (As such, while it remains a recommended watch, I’m not sure it would be one that would necessarily make my DVD list for repeat watchings).
Michael Cera (centre) as the mysterious but powerful “Player X”; a Hollywood actor, but who is he supposed to be? (Answers on a postcard!).
But again, I must comment on what an amazing year this is turning out to be for women in film. Less #Me-too and more #She-do! Once again, here is a movie where a confident woman is firmly in the driving seat, and while powerful men try to bring her down, it is not them that succeeds. (The studio bill for talent in the past year must be a LOT less than it was the year before! #don’tshootme #topicalhumour #CarrieGracey). #TimesUp.
Erika (17789 KP) rated Vice (2018) in Movies
Jan 8, 2019
Was I supposed to be shocked and appalled?
I saw this movie nearly two weeks ago, and I'm still not sure how I feel about it. There was something very Shakespearean about it in general, and when there were soliloquies being recited.
I mean, was I supposed to be shocked about what went on with Cheney? Did people love this film because they felt like it revealed a ton that apparently isn't general knowledge? I don't really understand the hype, nor the 'unbelievably' in the whole story, but I also worked in politics for a bit and studied history, so nothing surprised me.
If you don't know much about politics, I guess it would be mind-blowing. To me, this was completely over-hyped, and the only reason it's getting so much press is because Christian Bale got fat again.
I mean, was I supposed to be shocked about what went on with Cheney? Did people love this film because they felt like it revealed a ton that apparently isn't general knowledge? I don't really understand the hype, nor the 'unbelievably' in the whole story, but I also worked in politics for a bit and studied history, so nothing surprised me.
If you don't know much about politics, I guess it would be mind-blowing. To me, this was completely over-hyped, and the only reason it's getting so much press is because Christian Bale got fat again.
Science Fiction and Politics, Courtney Brown, Emory University
Podcast
Science Fiction and Politics Class, Courtney Brown, Emory University. It has long been known that...
Carlos Reygadas recommended Robocop (1987) in Movies (curated)
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated What We Do In The Shadows (2014) in Movies
Sep 27, 2020
What We Do in the Shadows is just great.
Pretty much every line of dialogue is hilarious, and very subtle most of the time.
There's a lot of funny dry humour here, excentuated wholeheartedly by the New Zealand accent.
Taika Waititi and Jemaine Clement are fantastic both behind and in front of camera, and the rest of the cast, in particular Cori Gonzalez-Macuer and Jonny Brugh are brilliant as well. Special kudos to Stu Rutherford for giving us a character that even vampires don't want to die.
The horror element is pretty good also. It plays on many vampire tropes well still managing to be suitably bloody when it needs to be.
What We Do in the Shadows is just an all round wonderful movie, something I find myself thinking for most things that Taika Waititi touches.
Pretty much every line of dialogue is hilarious, and very subtle most of the time.
There's a lot of funny dry humour here, excentuated wholeheartedly by the New Zealand accent.
Taika Waititi and Jemaine Clement are fantastic both behind and in front of camera, and the rest of the cast, in particular Cori Gonzalez-Macuer and Jonny Brugh are brilliant as well. Special kudos to Stu Rutherford for giving us a character that even vampires don't want to die.
The horror element is pretty good also. It plays on many vampire tropes well still managing to be suitably bloody when it needs to be.
What We Do in the Shadows is just an all round wonderful movie, something I find myself thinking for most things that Taika Waititi touches.
How to Eat Fried Worms
5.5
Rate It
Book
Because of a bet, Billy is in the uncomfortable position of having to eat fifteen worms in...