Search
Search results
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Halloween II (1981) in Movies
Mar 5, 2021
There's a fair amount to love about Halloween II, a sequel set on the same night as the original, immediately following that films ending.
For instance, I can admire the style that director Rick Rosenthal was going for, attempting to make his sequel feel as much like the first film as possible, the idea being that you could watch both back to back.
There a few creepy shots here and there. One that really sticks is the shot of Michael in the darkness just before the poor nurse get killed with a syringe. Another is Michael on the CCTV when he first enters the hospital. Another is when Laurie see Michael across the parking lot underneath a red light. and then there's Michael with blood running out of the eye holes in his mask, followed by him walking out of that one room completely ablaze. It's all to do with Michael then! Once again, this movie showcases how his straightforward design is striking and rightly iconic.
It's nice to see Jamie Lee Curtis back as Laurie, and Donald Pleasance back as Loomis. All in all, it does truly feel like a sequel, but there's something missing.
The original is one of my favourite horrors ever made, and Halloween II, despite its positives, just fails to capture the same essence. This is partly to do with the script. It feels like a lot of the actors were just told to ad lib all their lines or something. The tension building scenes go on for a little too long also, ironically voiding a few scenes of said tension. It's feels like the first film in everything but execution pretty much.
It's a heavily flawed sequel, but it's still a decent watch, and is certainly one of the better sequels in this long running series. It deserves credit for the bit near the beginning where Loomis shouts "you don't know what death is!" before the synth heavy version of the theme tune kicks in, that was badass.
For instance, I can admire the style that director Rick Rosenthal was going for, attempting to make his sequel feel as much like the first film as possible, the idea being that you could watch both back to back.
There a few creepy shots here and there. One that really sticks is the shot of Michael in the darkness just before the poor nurse get killed with a syringe. Another is Michael on the CCTV when he first enters the hospital. Another is when Laurie see Michael across the parking lot underneath a red light. and then there's Michael with blood running out of the eye holes in his mask, followed by him walking out of that one room completely ablaze. It's all to do with Michael then! Once again, this movie showcases how his straightforward design is striking and rightly iconic.
It's nice to see Jamie Lee Curtis back as Laurie, and Donald Pleasance back as Loomis. All in all, it does truly feel like a sequel, but there's something missing.
The original is one of my favourite horrors ever made, and Halloween II, despite its positives, just fails to capture the same essence. This is partly to do with the script. It feels like a lot of the actors were just told to ad lib all their lines or something. The tension building scenes go on for a little too long also, ironically voiding a few scenes of said tension. It's feels like the first film in everything but execution pretty much.
It's a heavily flawed sequel, but it's still a decent watch, and is certainly one of the better sequels in this long running series. It deserves credit for the bit near the beginning where Loomis shouts "you don't know what death is!" before the synth heavy version of the theme tune kicks in, that was badass.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Cube Zero (2004) in Movies
Jan 19, 2021
Somewhere between the competent tightness of Cube and the rancid excrement of Cube 2: Hypercube, lies the average but relatively entertaining Cube Zero. Cube.
I was honestly expecting some flaming garbage at this point, but this prequel to the series improves on Cube 2 in every way. Its characters are either more compelling or more schlocky, the design of the rooms and traps are much better and less bland, the godawful CGI has been switched out for a mostly practical effort, and it's gory again! Like the first one, the gore is fairly seldom, but it's pretty grim when it hits. The opening kill (again, like the first movie) is a doozy.
It doesn't just ape the first film however, as Cube Zero actually attempts to do something different with the narrative. Whilst a chunk of the plot follows a group of people once again stuck in the trap filled maze, trying to figure out how to leave, the other half takes place outside of the Cube, more specifically, in a place where engineers work, and monitor the test subjects progress. It holds back on telling us too much, which is a wise move, and changes up what has already become a stale formula. However, this is also a big negative as it's just a bit boring.... When the film kept cutting back to the people inside the Cube, I found myself engaged way more, before swiftly being back to watching some dude playing chess... It just drags.
The last third is a bit more interesting, and kind of links back to the first film (I think? The last scene was really confusing) and overall, doesn't over complicate things to the point of extreme boredom like the second film.
Overall, Cube Zero is a perfectly watchable bit of fluff. Its never going to set anyone's world on fire but it's serviceable in what it does, and is entertaining enough to warrant one last dip into this series before an inevitable remake surfaces at somepoint.
I was honestly expecting some flaming garbage at this point, but this prequel to the series improves on Cube 2 in every way. Its characters are either more compelling or more schlocky, the design of the rooms and traps are much better and less bland, the godawful CGI has been switched out for a mostly practical effort, and it's gory again! Like the first one, the gore is fairly seldom, but it's pretty grim when it hits. The opening kill (again, like the first movie) is a doozy.
It doesn't just ape the first film however, as Cube Zero actually attempts to do something different with the narrative. Whilst a chunk of the plot follows a group of people once again stuck in the trap filled maze, trying to figure out how to leave, the other half takes place outside of the Cube, more specifically, in a place where engineers work, and monitor the test subjects progress. It holds back on telling us too much, which is a wise move, and changes up what has already become a stale formula. However, this is also a big negative as it's just a bit boring.... When the film kept cutting back to the people inside the Cube, I found myself engaged way more, before swiftly being back to watching some dude playing chess... It just drags.
The last third is a bit more interesting, and kind of links back to the first film (I think? The last scene was really confusing) and overall, doesn't over complicate things to the point of extreme boredom like the second film.
Overall, Cube Zero is a perfectly watchable bit of fluff. Its never going to set anyone's world on fire but it's serviceable in what it does, and is entertaining enough to warrant one last dip into this series before an inevitable remake surfaces at somepoint.
Richard Hell recommended Pickup on South Street (1953) in Movies (curated)
Kung Fu Panda 2 Storybook
Book and Education
App
★ #1 in Books (iPhone) - May 2011 ★ #2 in Books (iPad) - May 2011 ★ Featured in What's Hot...
Bookapotamus (289 KP) rated Painless in Books
Jul 2, 2018
Very Cool Book!
Excuse me for a second, while I go barf. OMG this book. Holy heck the gruesome descriptions of blood and gore and guts was SO RAD. I found myself cringing and fidgeting and yes, even feeling a bit nauseous in some spots - but totally in a GOOD WAY! Painless was exactly what I wanted in a super-unique, creepy, shocking horror-thriller.
Greg Owens is in pain. A LOT of pain. He fell off a ladder on a construction job, injuring his back, and his entire life has gone to shit. He lost his wife, his kid, he can't work, he's addicted to pills. He's desperate, and can't find anything that will help him get relief, so he can return to construction, or any job he doesn't need "Pills to pay the Bills" in order to to work. His addiction is keeping him from his little girl and he's resorted to getting pills illegally from dealers, just to make it though the day.
Dr. Dante Menta is running an exclusive clinical trial. He's been working on a pain relief technique for years, and promises a complete cure of all physical pain. Sign me up, right? We meet all the patients involved in the trial who have arrived before Greg. There are even animal patients. Some of them are seeking relief from back pain, or car accident injuries, others from auto-immune things like Lupus - and even chronic migraine headaches.
The patients are taken in one by one to get the procedure and at first, it's exactly as promised and the results are impressive! But soon, shit starts hitting the fan. Patients are starting to act really strange, obsessive, destructive. Things start to go horribly, horribly wrong. And it's incredible awesome to watch!
I thought this story was really different and the premise was immediately intriguing - it was a quick read, but written really well, and explores a dark side of both how people deal with pain management and also Dr. Mentas obsession with his life's work to find a cure. I would love to see this translated to a horror movie, and I'd be first in line to buy a ticket!
Greg Owens is in pain. A LOT of pain. He fell off a ladder on a construction job, injuring his back, and his entire life has gone to shit. He lost his wife, his kid, he can't work, he's addicted to pills. He's desperate, and can't find anything that will help him get relief, so he can return to construction, or any job he doesn't need "Pills to pay the Bills" in order to to work. His addiction is keeping him from his little girl and he's resorted to getting pills illegally from dealers, just to make it though the day.
Dr. Dante Menta is running an exclusive clinical trial. He's been working on a pain relief technique for years, and promises a complete cure of all physical pain. Sign me up, right? We meet all the patients involved in the trial who have arrived before Greg. There are even animal patients. Some of them are seeking relief from back pain, or car accident injuries, others from auto-immune things like Lupus - and even chronic migraine headaches.
The patients are taken in one by one to get the procedure and at first, it's exactly as promised and the results are impressive! But soon, shit starts hitting the fan. Patients are starting to act really strange, obsessive, destructive. Things start to go horribly, horribly wrong. And it's incredible awesome to watch!
I thought this story was really different and the premise was immediately intriguing - it was a quick read, but written really well, and explores a dark side of both how people deal with pain management and also Dr. Mentas obsession with his life's work to find a cure. I would love to see this translated to a horror movie, and I'd be first in line to buy a ticket!
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Perfect Mother in Books
May 10, 2018
Compelling and suspenseful novel that grabs you from the start
The May Mothers--a group of parents who all gave birth in May--meet regularly to discuss their parenting woes, joys, and everything in between. On the 4th of July, the group decides to go out in the evening--their first time out since their children were born. They meet at a bar, and most of the group is looking forward to an evening of drinking and dancing. But Winnie, a single mother, is reluctant to leave her son, Midas, with a babysitter for the first time. And, that evening, all goes wrong: while Winnie is out, Midas is taken from his own home while the babysitter sleeps: stolen from his crib without anyone leaving a trace. Suddenly Winnie's life is splashed across the media, who are also saying the police have done everything wrong with the investigation from the start. Three of the other mothers only want to help Winnie get Midas back--but will it come at the cost of their own privacy as well?
This is a compelling and suspenseful novel that grabs you from the beginning, when we are told that it is a year later and a woman from the Mother's group is in prison due to Midas' disappearance. From there, the story rewinds, as told from the point-of-view of several women in the group, including Francie, Colette, Nell, and Winnie. It slowly unfolds with snippets from each and turns out to be incredibly suspenseful. The characters are all entwined a bit, and there are some excellent twists and turns as plot pieces unfold.
Even better, the novel offers some excellent commentary on how women are treated wrapped up in the mystery plot. Woven into the plot twists, we see some of the harsh realities of motherhood (in the U.S., especially) related to working mothers, breastfeeding, sleeplessness, and the overall pressure placed on new moms. As Winnie is increasingly tried in the media, Molloy does a good job of weaving in TV news and commentary on how mothers are expected to behave. It's well-done and I enjoyed the dual aspect of a well-done thriller but also the social commentary aspect, too.
Overall, I really enjoyed this one. It was very exciting and very surprising. At times, there often seemed to be a frustrating character involved with something to hide and making bad decisions (secretly copying files, hacking into things, etc.), but I suppose that comes with the territory. And yes, I am a little tired of the multiple POV/surprise twist format, but it worked so well here that I'll forgive. In the end, this is a really enjoyable novel with a vast cast of characters, some excellent twists, and amazing insight into motherhood. I'm really excited that this will be turned into a movie with Kerry Washington.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
This is a compelling and suspenseful novel that grabs you from the beginning, when we are told that it is a year later and a woman from the Mother's group is in prison due to Midas' disappearance. From there, the story rewinds, as told from the point-of-view of several women in the group, including Francie, Colette, Nell, and Winnie. It slowly unfolds with snippets from each and turns out to be incredibly suspenseful. The characters are all entwined a bit, and there are some excellent twists and turns as plot pieces unfold.
Even better, the novel offers some excellent commentary on how women are treated wrapped up in the mystery plot. Woven into the plot twists, we see some of the harsh realities of motherhood (in the U.S., especially) related to working mothers, breastfeeding, sleeplessness, and the overall pressure placed on new moms. As Winnie is increasingly tried in the media, Molloy does a good job of weaving in TV news and commentary on how mothers are expected to behave. It's well-done and I enjoyed the dual aspect of a well-done thriller but also the social commentary aspect, too.
Overall, I really enjoyed this one. It was very exciting and very surprising. At times, there often seemed to be a frustrating character involved with something to hide and making bad decisions (secretly copying files, hacking into things, etc.), but I suppose that comes with the territory. And yes, I am a little tired of the multiple POV/surprise twist format, but it worked so well here that I'll forgive. In the end, this is a really enjoyable novel with a vast cast of characters, some excellent twists, and amazing insight into motherhood. I'm really excited that this will be turned into a movie with Kerry Washington.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Night School (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Teddy Walker (Kevin Hart) appears to be living a great life. He is successful BBQ grill salesman, he has a Porsche, a nice apartment and a loving and successful girlfriend, Lisa (Megalyn Echikunwoke). Appearances can be deceiving however. The between the Porsche and rent payments he is barely getting by pay check to pay check. Plus he refuses to let his girlfriend pay for any of their dates. Teddy thinks he is turning a corner when his boss tells him that the BBQ grill store will be turned over to him once he retires. Finally he feels like he will have some stability and decides to propose Lisa. During the proposal, at the store that will one day will be his, there is an explosion and the entire store is destroyed. Now Teddy finds himself is out of a job and with no diploma there is little hope of him getting one. Teddy’s friend Marvin (Ben Schwartz) tells him that he can get him a job as a financial assistant but only if he can get his GED. So he heads back to his old high school to take a GED prep course at night school. Thinking he can use his salesman skill to talk his way into cruising to getting his diploma. Unfortunately for him two things stand in his way. One is the principle is his high school nemesis, Stewart (Taran Killam). The second, the night school teacher, Carrie (Tiffany Haddish), will only help those who put in the work and his smooth talk won’t work on this teacher. Now for the first time in his life, Teddy can’t talk his way out of a tough situation and must put in the work to stay with Lisa.
This film surprised me in that not only does it bring the laughs but also has a really positive message. It has a recurring theme of second chances throughout the film. It also tackles learning disabilities in a really interesting and thoughtful way. I thought that yes at times it was cheesy but really stuck to the message of it’s never too late to realize your potential.
This Malcolm D Lee (Girls Trip, The Best Man) directed film definitely has it funny moments. Kevin Hart and Tiffany Haddish really know how to play off each other, even though I think the back and forth gets a little old by the end. To me the supporting cast (Al Madrigal, Rob Riggle, Romany Malco, Mary Lynn Rajskub, Anne Winters, to name a few) really do a good job and all have really funny moments. The best parts of the movie are when the Hart, Haddish and company are in school playing off each other. The film does repeat some jokes a little too much for me but overall laughed and like the positive message. I liked the originality of the story, even if its themes felt familiar. This may not win any awards but it was an enjoyable and entertaining comedy.
This film surprised me in that not only does it bring the laughs but also has a really positive message. It has a recurring theme of second chances throughout the film. It also tackles learning disabilities in a really interesting and thoughtful way. I thought that yes at times it was cheesy but really stuck to the message of it’s never too late to realize your potential.
This Malcolm D Lee (Girls Trip, The Best Man) directed film definitely has it funny moments. Kevin Hart and Tiffany Haddish really know how to play off each other, even though I think the back and forth gets a little old by the end. To me the supporting cast (Al Madrigal, Rob Riggle, Romany Malco, Mary Lynn Rajskub, Anne Winters, to name a few) really do a good job and all have really funny moments. The best parts of the movie are when the Hart, Haddish and company are in school playing off each other. The film does repeat some jokes a little too much for me but overall laughed and like the positive message. I liked the originality of the story, even if its themes felt familiar. This may not win any awards but it was an enjoyable and entertaining comedy.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Payback (1999) in Movies
Jul 15, 2020
Get Ready To Root For The Bad Guy
Payback- is a intresting revenge action thriller. Maybe its me, but i fell like this movie is boring. Its good, but some what boring, like nothing going on. Also its kinda of confusing, again it might just be me, but i fell like its confusing as well. Like i said before its good, but in the end its both boring and confusing.
The plot: Porter (Mel Gibson) is a thief betrayed by both his wife, Lynn (Deborah Kara Unger), and his partner, Val (Gregg Henry), when he is shot in the back after a heist. Slowly, Porter recovers from his wounds and begins a search for Val, intent on recovering his share of the money they stole together. With the aid of prostitute Rosie (Maria Bello), Porter captures Val but still cannot find his cash. For this, Porter will have to challenge an imposing crime syndicate called the Outfit.
Although credited as director, Brian Helgeland's cut of the film was not the theatrical version released to audiences. After the end of principal photography, Helgeland's version was deemed too dark for the mainstream public. Following a script rewrite by Terry Hayes, director Helgeland was replaced by the production designer John Myhre, who reshot 30% of the film. The intent was to make the Porter character accessible. The film's tagline became: "Get Ready to Root for the Bad Guy." A potentially controversial scene between Porter and Lynn which arguably involves spousal abuse was excised and more plot elements were added to the third act. After 10 days of reshoots, a new opening scene and voiceover track also were added, and Kris Kristofferson walked on as a new villain.
The Director's Cut version features a female Bronson, that is never seen only heard over the phone voiced by Sally Kellerman, does not include the voice-over by Porter and several Bronson-related scenes. During their scuffle (which is longer than in the theatrical version and was the main source of controversy), Porter earlier tells Lynn that his picture with Rosie was taken before they met, thereby rendering her jealousy unjustified. This version has an entirely different, ambiguous ending where Porter is seriously wounded in a train station shootout and driven off by Rosie.
A June 4, 2012, look at "movies improved by directors' cuts" by The A.V. Club described Payback: Straight Up as "a marked improvement on the unrulier original.
Mel Gibson stated in a short interview released as a DVD extra that it "would've been ideal to shoot in black and white." He noted that "people want a color image" and that the actual film used a bleach bypass process to tint the film. In addition to this, the production design used muted shades of red, brown, and grey for costumes, sets, and cars for further effect.
Like i said its a good revenge action thriller but to me its both boring and confusing. Maybe i have to watch the directors cut.
The plot: Porter (Mel Gibson) is a thief betrayed by both his wife, Lynn (Deborah Kara Unger), and his partner, Val (Gregg Henry), when he is shot in the back after a heist. Slowly, Porter recovers from his wounds and begins a search for Val, intent on recovering his share of the money they stole together. With the aid of prostitute Rosie (Maria Bello), Porter captures Val but still cannot find his cash. For this, Porter will have to challenge an imposing crime syndicate called the Outfit.
Although credited as director, Brian Helgeland's cut of the film was not the theatrical version released to audiences. After the end of principal photography, Helgeland's version was deemed too dark for the mainstream public. Following a script rewrite by Terry Hayes, director Helgeland was replaced by the production designer John Myhre, who reshot 30% of the film. The intent was to make the Porter character accessible. The film's tagline became: "Get Ready to Root for the Bad Guy." A potentially controversial scene between Porter and Lynn which arguably involves spousal abuse was excised and more plot elements were added to the third act. After 10 days of reshoots, a new opening scene and voiceover track also were added, and Kris Kristofferson walked on as a new villain.
The Director's Cut version features a female Bronson, that is never seen only heard over the phone voiced by Sally Kellerman, does not include the voice-over by Porter and several Bronson-related scenes. During their scuffle (which is longer than in the theatrical version and was the main source of controversy), Porter earlier tells Lynn that his picture with Rosie was taken before they met, thereby rendering her jealousy unjustified. This version has an entirely different, ambiguous ending where Porter is seriously wounded in a train station shootout and driven off by Rosie.
A June 4, 2012, look at "movies improved by directors' cuts" by The A.V. Club described Payback: Straight Up as "a marked improvement on the unrulier original.
Mel Gibson stated in a short interview released as a DVD extra that it "would've been ideal to shoot in black and white." He noted that "people want a color image" and that the actual film used a bleach bypass process to tint the film. In addition to this, the production design used muted shades of red, brown, and grey for costumes, sets, and cars for further effect.
Like i said its a good revenge action thriller but to me its both boring and confusing. Maybe i have to watch the directors cut.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated La La Land (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“It’s very nostalgic – will people like it?”
A little film. Not sure whether you might have heard of it yet? Damien Chazelle has followed up his astonishingly proficient “Whiplash” – my top film of 2015 – with a sure-fire theatre-filler in “La La Land”. The old-fashioned musical extravaganza is back, and back with style!
“La La Land” tells the bittersweet love story of Sebastian (Ryan Gosling) and Mia (Emma Stone) who first meet in an LA traffic jam but then get thrown together by chance (LA is such a small place after all!). Over the course of the next four seasons romance blossoms. Mia is a struggling actress bouncing from audition to audition in a hopeless attempt to break through in LA’s tough movie business. She makes ends meet as a Barista on the Warner Brother’s lot. Meanwhile Sebastian is on a mission of his own: a talented musician, he is trying to restore jazz to the main stage (something the film’s soundtrack will undoubtedly help do!) by opening his own classic jazz bar. As both strive for success on their own terms can love survive to deliver us the classic ‘Hollywood ending’?
The film is technically astonishing, with clever continuous shots of the “Birdman” variety and masterly cinematography (by Linus Sandgren of “Joy” and “American Hustle”). The lighting team in particular is superb: a case in point is Mia’s ‘in-Seine’ (sic) song, with breathtaking fades of the background to darkness, a camera whizz-around the actress for effect and then a brilliant fade back to reality. Loved it. Overall, there are enough similar moments in the film to make cinema-lovers like me gasp with delight.
There’s a curious timelessness about the piece which is surely deliberate. While there are obvious and non-apologetic throwbacks to the classic musicals of the 50’s like “West Side Story” and “Singin’ in the Rain” and references to both “Casablanca” and “Rebel without a Cause”, there is also a 60’s vibe to the ‘girls getting ready’ sequence; an 80’s A-ha cover thrown in at a pool party; and a Californian Prius obsession that is surely more ‘noughties’ than current. Most curiously, while everyone has smartphones noone seems to text anyone to announce changes to plans: the film is almost distancing itself from much of modern life.
In the acting stakes Emma Stone again shines like a beacon. She is just magnetic on the screen: the biggest plot hole in the film (tiny spoiler) is why on earth she wasn’t given the part for her first audition! I was disappointed she didn’t win the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for “Birdman” in the “87th Awards” (she lost out to Patricia Arquette for “Boyhood”): but she just keeps getting better and Better and BETTER.
Ryan Gosling’s confident and cocky turn also radiates charisma: in particular, it is astonishing that Gosling could play “only a few chords” on the piano before training for the film. A confidence boost for struggling piano learners everywhere.
It is actually difficult to imagine two better actors for the roles. (Emma Watson allegedly turned it down for “Beauty and the Beast”: something she might be kicking herself for!) Are they both the best singers and dancers when compared to Gene Kelly, Fred Astaire, Debbie Reynolds (R.I.P.) or Cyd Charisse? No, undoubtedly not, but they have an undeniable charm all of their own. (Perhaps we will see the ilk of the great hoofers and crooners rise again with a resurgence in the classic musical. Can Hollywood take a hint?)
The big question: now that both Stone and Gosling have won Golden Globes for acting in the “Comedy or Musical” category, can they convert that to Oscar glory where there is a single category in play? I’d like to think so.
It’s also great to see proper movie-making taking place in the Hollywood studios again: during my recent visits to LA there seemed to be little other than TV work going on in the main studio complexes there (although its worth pointing out that for this film not all of the filming was actually done on the Warner Brothers lot). (As an aside, the Warner Brothers tour – which you need to book well in advance – is a GREAT day out for movie lovers, with a Sunday visit giving you the best access to live sets. #insideknowledgetrivia: that small grassy triangle with the gravestones on it is where they filmed many of the “Friends” outdoor scenes such as the baseball match!).
Musicals are clearly measured by the quality of the music, and Justin Hurwitz (“Whiplash”) has produced a gem with – notwithstanding the jazz numbers and a catchy little pop number from John Legend – merely a handful of simple but unforgettable melodies that recur in different variations throughout the film. The soundtrack is already in my Amazon library and uplifting my mood on what is a damp and dreary Monday here in the UK.
Damien Chazelle has delivered a triumph in both direction and original script. There is really very little I can fault the film on. In what was the somewhat patchy Coen brothers offering from last year – “Hail Caesar” – there was a standout moment of a throwback song and dance number with Channing Tatum that I raved about (you can catch it here). If I was being picky, then this tantalising snippet would be a better representation of the style and vim of the original genre – – with the exception of the opening number, few of the song and dance numbers in “La La Land” quite get to that “Broadway Melody” level of scale and energy. This, together with a few concerns about the pacing in some places, led me to rate this as a 4.5 on first viewing.
However on now seeing it twice within 36 hours, it’s got me well and truly under its spell! I normally emotionally resist films that arrive with excessive hype… but, in this case… I give in.
“La La Land” tells the bittersweet love story of Sebastian (Ryan Gosling) and Mia (Emma Stone) who first meet in an LA traffic jam but then get thrown together by chance (LA is such a small place after all!). Over the course of the next four seasons romance blossoms. Mia is a struggling actress bouncing from audition to audition in a hopeless attempt to break through in LA’s tough movie business. She makes ends meet as a Barista on the Warner Brother’s lot. Meanwhile Sebastian is on a mission of his own: a talented musician, he is trying to restore jazz to the main stage (something the film’s soundtrack will undoubtedly help do!) by opening his own classic jazz bar. As both strive for success on their own terms can love survive to deliver us the classic ‘Hollywood ending’?
The film is technically astonishing, with clever continuous shots of the “Birdman” variety and masterly cinematography (by Linus Sandgren of “Joy” and “American Hustle”). The lighting team in particular is superb: a case in point is Mia’s ‘in-Seine’ (sic) song, with breathtaking fades of the background to darkness, a camera whizz-around the actress for effect and then a brilliant fade back to reality. Loved it. Overall, there are enough similar moments in the film to make cinema-lovers like me gasp with delight.
There’s a curious timelessness about the piece which is surely deliberate. While there are obvious and non-apologetic throwbacks to the classic musicals of the 50’s like “West Side Story” and “Singin’ in the Rain” and references to both “Casablanca” and “Rebel without a Cause”, there is also a 60’s vibe to the ‘girls getting ready’ sequence; an 80’s A-ha cover thrown in at a pool party; and a Californian Prius obsession that is surely more ‘noughties’ than current. Most curiously, while everyone has smartphones noone seems to text anyone to announce changes to plans: the film is almost distancing itself from much of modern life.
In the acting stakes Emma Stone again shines like a beacon. She is just magnetic on the screen: the biggest plot hole in the film (tiny spoiler) is why on earth she wasn’t given the part for her first audition! I was disappointed she didn’t win the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for “Birdman” in the “87th Awards” (she lost out to Patricia Arquette for “Boyhood”): but she just keeps getting better and Better and BETTER.
Ryan Gosling’s confident and cocky turn also radiates charisma: in particular, it is astonishing that Gosling could play “only a few chords” on the piano before training for the film. A confidence boost for struggling piano learners everywhere.
It is actually difficult to imagine two better actors for the roles. (Emma Watson allegedly turned it down for “Beauty and the Beast”: something she might be kicking herself for!) Are they both the best singers and dancers when compared to Gene Kelly, Fred Astaire, Debbie Reynolds (R.I.P.) or Cyd Charisse? No, undoubtedly not, but they have an undeniable charm all of their own. (Perhaps we will see the ilk of the great hoofers and crooners rise again with a resurgence in the classic musical. Can Hollywood take a hint?)
The big question: now that both Stone and Gosling have won Golden Globes for acting in the “Comedy or Musical” category, can they convert that to Oscar glory where there is a single category in play? I’d like to think so.
It’s also great to see proper movie-making taking place in the Hollywood studios again: during my recent visits to LA there seemed to be little other than TV work going on in the main studio complexes there (although its worth pointing out that for this film not all of the filming was actually done on the Warner Brothers lot). (As an aside, the Warner Brothers tour – which you need to book well in advance – is a GREAT day out for movie lovers, with a Sunday visit giving you the best access to live sets. #insideknowledgetrivia: that small grassy triangle with the gravestones on it is where they filmed many of the “Friends” outdoor scenes such as the baseball match!).
Musicals are clearly measured by the quality of the music, and Justin Hurwitz (“Whiplash”) has produced a gem with – notwithstanding the jazz numbers and a catchy little pop number from John Legend – merely a handful of simple but unforgettable melodies that recur in different variations throughout the film. The soundtrack is already in my Amazon library and uplifting my mood on what is a damp and dreary Monday here in the UK.
Damien Chazelle has delivered a triumph in both direction and original script. There is really very little I can fault the film on. In what was the somewhat patchy Coen brothers offering from last year – “Hail Caesar” – there was a standout moment of a throwback song and dance number with Channing Tatum that I raved about (you can catch it here). If I was being picky, then this tantalising snippet would be a better representation of the style and vim of the original genre – – with the exception of the opening number, few of the song and dance numbers in “La La Land” quite get to that “Broadway Melody” level of scale and energy. This, together with a few concerns about the pacing in some places, led me to rate this as a 4.5 on first viewing.
However on now seeing it twice within 36 hours, it’s got me well and truly under its spell! I normally emotionally resist films that arrive with excessive hype… but, in this case… I give in.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated End of Watch (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Director/Writer David Ayer (Street Kings, Training day) once again takes us into the world of the Los Angeles police department in the new movie End of Watch. Only this time rather than go in the corrupt police officer direction he has gone before, Ayer instead takes audiences on a honest and somewhat realistic emotionally charged ride along with two young and confident LAPD patrolmen.
While the story in this film is as simple as two cops over reaching their pay grades causing them to get on a drug cartels hit list. The film is more like an unrated extended episode of the TV series Cops, focusing on the everyday encounters of our heroes as they patrol south central LA. These encounters range from calls for lost children, domestic disturbance, and noise violations, albeit a bit exaggerated in these and several other incidents. Still the various types of encounters cause the film to feel like a true ride along into the lives of these LAPD cops. Additionally the use of the handheld “found footage” film style works surprisingly well at giving the movie that TV episodic style that makes the overall experience feel realistic. That being said, there are a few scenes where it is not clear who is holding the camera or where the shot is coming from, however these scenes are barely noticeable because of the excellent performances by our protagonists that keeps our interest on what they are saying and doing on screen rather than who is holding the camera.
Officer Bryan Taylor (Jake Gyllenhaal, Source Code) is our main protagonist of this movie. The ex-marine turned cop has to take an art elective in his pre-law studies and decides to take a documentary film class and take us on the inside of the LAPD. Gyllenhaal ‘s performance embodies Taylor as the good natured ambitious officer wanting more in his life of relationships and career. It would be easy for this character to be the traditional good cop in movies like this however given the found footage film style we instead find that Taylor, while good, can also be a complete “jerk” cop who is quick to anger and use brutish force when he deems necessary. This only helps solidify the rawness and reality of this film which pays a nod to the difficult nature of this job for real life police officers. Gyllenhaal gives yet another outstanding performance in his career causing us to grow attached to his character and respect him.
In addition Michel Pena (Crash) delivers a fantastic performance as Taylor’s partner and best friend Officer Mike Zavala. Pena embodies the other side to Gyllenhaal’s “jerk” cop by with his own good natured, simple man who is quick to become a bull when pushed. No more is this better shown in a scene where Zavala and a gang member get into a war of words and caused Zavala to drop his gun and badge and fight man to man to settle their dispute in the “street” way. Thus earning respect from that particular gang member.
Together Gyllenhaal and Pena share the screen wonderfully. Their relationship seems effortless and natural as if they were actually partners and best friends. You can tell they are having fun on set working together and it shows in their performance together as they really get a sense that they are more than partners and friends but are in fact, brothers. Their relationship and characters are only developed further as we watch Taylor pursue a deeper intellectual relationship with scientist Janet (Anna Kendrick, Up In The Air) and Zavala through the birth of his first born from wife Gabby (Natalie Martinez, Death Race). Kendrick and Martinez give believable performances as love interests to our heroes that show us a more human and softer side of these testosterone filled officers who will do whatever it takes to uphold the law. Throw in a strong supporting cast of other police officers led by Frank Grillo (Warrior) who plays the LAPD’s sergeant and you have a performance where we not only care about our heroes but we see the brotherhood of the police force in general.
One thing that I was not expecting from the film is the amount of moments where the audience literally laughed out loud. That is not to say that this is a comedy, in fact it is far from it. But the quick witted jokes and verbal jabs by our onscreen partners help alleviate some of the heavy emotional scenes of the movie. I felt that these characters used that good natured humor to keep themselves from going off of the deep end in handling all of the gruesome encounters they witness. These well placed laughs helped the audience deal with these gruesome scenes as well and helped strengthen our bond with these brothers.
All in all, this movie is a buddy cop film on steroids. While there is not much of a traditional story arch, this helps develop the realistic feel more like an unrated extended episode of Cops. That being said Gyllenhaal and Pena deliver a fantastic performance together. They have a real connection that makes you believe they have been partners for years and consider each other brothers. Add in a solid ensemble cast and the overall experience is worth the price of admission. However those who grow motion sick from found footage films may want to stay clear as there is a definite lack of steady cam
While the story in this film is as simple as two cops over reaching their pay grades causing them to get on a drug cartels hit list. The film is more like an unrated extended episode of the TV series Cops, focusing on the everyday encounters of our heroes as they patrol south central LA. These encounters range from calls for lost children, domestic disturbance, and noise violations, albeit a bit exaggerated in these and several other incidents. Still the various types of encounters cause the film to feel like a true ride along into the lives of these LAPD cops. Additionally the use of the handheld “found footage” film style works surprisingly well at giving the movie that TV episodic style that makes the overall experience feel realistic. That being said, there are a few scenes where it is not clear who is holding the camera or where the shot is coming from, however these scenes are barely noticeable because of the excellent performances by our protagonists that keeps our interest on what they are saying and doing on screen rather than who is holding the camera.
Officer Bryan Taylor (Jake Gyllenhaal, Source Code) is our main protagonist of this movie. The ex-marine turned cop has to take an art elective in his pre-law studies and decides to take a documentary film class and take us on the inside of the LAPD. Gyllenhaal ‘s performance embodies Taylor as the good natured ambitious officer wanting more in his life of relationships and career. It would be easy for this character to be the traditional good cop in movies like this however given the found footage film style we instead find that Taylor, while good, can also be a complete “jerk” cop who is quick to anger and use brutish force when he deems necessary. This only helps solidify the rawness and reality of this film which pays a nod to the difficult nature of this job for real life police officers. Gyllenhaal gives yet another outstanding performance in his career causing us to grow attached to his character and respect him.
In addition Michel Pena (Crash) delivers a fantastic performance as Taylor’s partner and best friend Officer Mike Zavala. Pena embodies the other side to Gyllenhaal’s “jerk” cop by with his own good natured, simple man who is quick to become a bull when pushed. No more is this better shown in a scene where Zavala and a gang member get into a war of words and caused Zavala to drop his gun and badge and fight man to man to settle their dispute in the “street” way. Thus earning respect from that particular gang member.
Together Gyllenhaal and Pena share the screen wonderfully. Their relationship seems effortless and natural as if they were actually partners and best friends. You can tell they are having fun on set working together and it shows in their performance together as they really get a sense that they are more than partners and friends but are in fact, brothers. Their relationship and characters are only developed further as we watch Taylor pursue a deeper intellectual relationship with scientist Janet (Anna Kendrick, Up In The Air) and Zavala through the birth of his first born from wife Gabby (Natalie Martinez, Death Race). Kendrick and Martinez give believable performances as love interests to our heroes that show us a more human and softer side of these testosterone filled officers who will do whatever it takes to uphold the law. Throw in a strong supporting cast of other police officers led by Frank Grillo (Warrior) who plays the LAPD’s sergeant and you have a performance where we not only care about our heroes but we see the brotherhood of the police force in general.
One thing that I was not expecting from the film is the amount of moments where the audience literally laughed out loud. That is not to say that this is a comedy, in fact it is far from it. But the quick witted jokes and verbal jabs by our onscreen partners help alleviate some of the heavy emotional scenes of the movie. I felt that these characters used that good natured humor to keep themselves from going off of the deep end in handling all of the gruesome encounters they witness. These well placed laughs helped the audience deal with these gruesome scenes as well and helped strengthen our bond with these brothers.
All in all, this movie is a buddy cop film on steroids. While there is not much of a traditional story arch, this helps develop the realistic feel more like an unrated extended episode of Cops. That being said Gyllenhaal and Pena deliver a fantastic performance together. They have a real connection that makes you believe they have been partners for years and consider each other brothers. Add in a solid ensemble cast and the overall experience is worth the price of admission. However those who grow motion sick from found footage films may want to stay clear as there is a definite lack of steady cam