Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Valentine's Day (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Ashton Kutcher has put down his pranks and camera to return to the big screen leading in this star packed Los Angeles romantic comedy. This feature ties together stories of love, truth, and romance, all taking place within the span of a single Valentine’s Day. The film considers relationships from multiple angles and does a fantastic job intertwining individual stories into a single plotline. Yet before preparing for another “Love Actually” let it be know that the tone of “Valentine’s Day” is entirely its own.
As previously mentioned the cast is comprised of film and television stars including but not limited to Julia Roberts, Anne Hathaway, Hector Elizondo, Queen Latifah and not one but two Jessicas (Biel and Alba). As if that were not enough to drawn in big numbers at the box office, “Valentine’s Day” also stars Jennifer Garner, Jamie Foxx, as well as the Mc-actors from Grey’s Anatomy (Patrick Dempsey and Eric Dane). Still not convinced? Then add in Shirley MacLaine, George Lopez and both Taylors (Swift and Lautner) and you’ve got yourself a guaranteed hit, but does the film actually utilize this outstandingly one of a kind cast? Actually it does.
The film is unexpectedly scattered with all the ups and downs of Valentine’s Day from pink and red color schemes to an anti-Valentine’s piñata beat down. All of the scenes are either engaging and honest or delightful and light covering romantic scenarios that truly run the gauntlet. Seriously where else are you going to see Julia Roberts in fatigues and Anne Hathaway as an adult phone entertainer?
I honestly wish there was more to gripe about considering that this film is just a fun romantic comedy, but “Valentine’s Day” is fresh and enjoyable for every minute of the film. Much funnier than I ‘d expected and not insultingly mushy, Valentine’s Day is a perfect date movie which will be a surprise hit even for those romance cynics.
As previously mentioned the cast is comprised of film and television stars including but not limited to Julia Roberts, Anne Hathaway, Hector Elizondo, Queen Latifah and not one but two Jessicas (Biel and Alba). As if that were not enough to drawn in big numbers at the box office, “Valentine’s Day” also stars Jennifer Garner, Jamie Foxx, as well as the Mc-actors from Grey’s Anatomy (Patrick Dempsey and Eric Dane). Still not convinced? Then add in Shirley MacLaine, George Lopez and both Taylors (Swift and Lautner) and you’ve got yourself a guaranteed hit, but does the film actually utilize this outstandingly one of a kind cast? Actually it does.
The film is unexpectedly scattered with all the ups and downs of Valentine’s Day from pink and red color schemes to an anti-Valentine’s piñata beat down. All of the scenes are either engaging and honest or delightful and light covering romantic scenarios that truly run the gauntlet. Seriously where else are you going to see Julia Roberts in fatigues and Anne Hathaway as an adult phone entertainer?
I honestly wish there was more to gripe about considering that this film is just a fun romantic comedy, but “Valentine’s Day” is fresh and enjoyable for every minute of the film. Much funnier than I ‘d expected and not insultingly mushy, Valentine’s Day is a perfect date movie which will be a surprise hit even for those romance cynics.
Directors Tell the Story: Master the Craft of Television and Film Directing
Bethany Rooney and Mary Lou Belli
Book
Move over, movies: the freshest storytelling today is on television, where the multi-episodic format...
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated The Boyfriend Swap in Books
Apr 9, 2019
Robyn and Sydney are similar in many ways. They are both successful in their careers. Robyn is a music teacher and Sydney is a lawyer. They both have boyfriends that are very attractive. They also both don't want to take the boyfriends home with them for the holidays. For Robyn, her family is tired of seeing her with artsy men who have no future. For Sydney, she is tired of her father monopolizing the holiday with shop talk. The holidays are supposed to be fun, not judgmental and hostile. So, even though they've just met, Sydney comes up with brilliant idea, swap boyfriends for the holiday. It's just a few days, what's the harm? When Robyn finds out Sydney is dating her childhood crush, will she be able to hold it together? And how will her family handle this? Is this swap really such a good idea?
Thank you to Meredith Schorr, NetGalley, and Henery Press for the opportunity to read and review this book.
First of all, I'm not sure this is something I would have ever been able to do. To trade boyfriends at all, but with someone I don't even know. I'm not sure it would work out for me. It's been a while since I've read a book quite like this. It was cute and quirky and I can easily see this being made into a movie.
Robyn's Story
For Robyn, whenever she brings home a guy who is good to her, she has fun with, and is artsy like her parents, they let her know that he is not the right guy for her. She needs a guy with a steady job someone with a 401K and a savings account. Robyn and her boyfriend Perry have been together for almost a year, and they have a lot of fun together. But is he really, "The One"?
Bringing home Will is going to shock the hell out of her family. He was her childhood crush and now he's pretending to be her boyfriend. Will she be able to keep up the farce over the few days they spend with her family or will the secret be revealed before it's even started?
Sydney's Story
Sydney has to bring home a date for Christmas. If not her parents will try to set her up with some hideous guy she would never be interested in, but would be good for business. And she doesn't want to bring home Will. Will is a lawyer just like Sydney, and like Sydney's father. If she brings him home, all her father will do the entire time is try to recruit him to their law firm, and Sydney doesn't want to subject him to that. She also likes keeping her personal life to herself.
When Sydney brings Perry to the family dinner, she is surprised at how well her family likes him. This was not how she had planned this to go. And then when Perry deviates from her script, it makes things even worse. Will they be able to make it through the holiday without killing each other.
This book was a funny, romantic read that had me routing for one character to the end. This is the first book I have read by Meredith Schorr, but it won't be my last. I look forward to reading more of her books.
Thank you to Meredith Schorr, NetGalley, and Henery Press for the opportunity to read and review this book.
First of all, I'm not sure this is something I would have ever been able to do. To trade boyfriends at all, but with someone I don't even know. I'm not sure it would work out for me. It's been a while since I've read a book quite like this. It was cute and quirky and I can easily see this being made into a movie.
Robyn's Story
For Robyn, whenever she brings home a guy who is good to her, she has fun with, and is artsy like her parents, they let her know that he is not the right guy for her. She needs a guy with a steady job someone with a 401K and a savings account. Robyn and her boyfriend Perry have been together for almost a year, and they have a lot of fun together. But is he really, "The One"?
Bringing home Will is going to shock the hell out of her family. He was her childhood crush and now he's pretending to be her boyfriend. Will she be able to keep up the farce over the few days they spend with her family or will the secret be revealed before it's even started?
Sydney's Story
Sydney has to bring home a date for Christmas. If not her parents will try to set her up with some hideous guy she would never be interested in, but would be good for business. And she doesn't want to bring home Will. Will is a lawyer just like Sydney, and like Sydney's father. If she brings him home, all her father will do the entire time is try to recruit him to their law firm, and Sydney doesn't want to subject him to that. She also likes keeping her personal life to herself.
When Sydney brings Perry to the family dinner, she is surprised at how well her family likes him. This was not how she had planned this to go. And then when Perry deviates from her script, it makes things even worse. Will they be able to make it through the holiday without killing each other.
This book was a funny, romantic read that had me routing for one character to the end. This is the first book I have read by Meredith Schorr, but it won't be my last. I look forward to reading more of her books.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
This one belongs to James Spader
I doubt that Joss Whedon and the team down at Marvel knew just how successful 2012’s Avengers Assemble would go on to be. After just a few months of release it became the third highest-grossing film of all time, by no means an easy feat to achieve.
Therefore, Whedon and co had their work cut out trying to build on the solid foundations they had laid when it came to producing a sequel. However, three years and $250m later Avengers: Age of Ultron hits our screens. But is it the follow-up everyone was asking for?
Age of Ultron follows the dynamic team of superheroes as they continue to save the world following the near cataclysmic events of the 2009 predecessor and of course every Marvel film released since. Here however, they are tasked with taking down a robot hell bent on destroying the world – a tough day at the office to say the least.
All the fan favourites return as well as some new faces in a film that is technically spectacular but a little overambitious at times. There are 11, count them 11, major characters vying for screen time in Age of Ultron and while Whedon manages to give each of them their own story arc, at times it feels a little rushed.
Joining the cast is James Spader as the voice of Ultron, a robot accidentally created by Tony Stark, and he is by far the most intriguing character in an already impressive line-up. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be on fine form as the wise-cracking Iron Man/Stark with Chris Hemsworth providing the eye-candy as Thor.
It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner’s Black Widow and Hawkeye get some much-needed fleshing out after their fairly limited roles in previous Marvel films, and Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk is a joy to watch.
Kick-Ass’ Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Godzilla’s Elizabeth Olsen also join the cast as Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, two characters fans of the X-Men universe will recognise. However, due to legal requirements their origins are changed and the fact that they are mutants is never revealed, unfortunately limiting their appeal.
When it comes to special effects, Whedon has made sure every sequence is brimming with the highest quality CGI, and despite a couple of lapses early on in the film, the majority of the picture is flawless with some stunning global locations beautifully juxtaposed with the characters doing their thing.
What stands out in Age of Ultron however is the plot. Avengers Assemble was a fine film right up until the generic city-levelling, headache inducing climax that looked like it could have come straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
Thankfully, whilst the action is dialled up a few notches here, the plot is much more detailed and the final scenes are utterly breath-taking.
Overall, Avengers: Age of Ultron had a massive amount to live up to and in some respects it falls a little short, its overambitious nature is its downfall with too many characters needing screen time. However, as a good-time blockbuster it’s hard to find one better and James Spader is genuinely mesmerising as Ultron.
Is it the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Well, it’s definitely an improvement on its predecessor – but for me, Guardians of the Galaxy just takes that title by a whisker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/26/this-one-belongs-to-james-spader-avengers-age-of-ultron-review/
Therefore, Whedon and co had their work cut out trying to build on the solid foundations they had laid when it came to producing a sequel. However, three years and $250m later Avengers: Age of Ultron hits our screens. But is it the follow-up everyone was asking for?
Age of Ultron follows the dynamic team of superheroes as they continue to save the world following the near cataclysmic events of the 2009 predecessor and of course every Marvel film released since. Here however, they are tasked with taking down a robot hell bent on destroying the world – a tough day at the office to say the least.
All the fan favourites return as well as some new faces in a film that is technically spectacular but a little overambitious at times. There are 11, count them 11, major characters vying for screen time in Age of Ultron and while Whedon manages to give each of them their own story arc, at times it feels a little rushed.
Joining the cast is James Spader as the voice of Ultron, a robot accidentally created by Tony Stark, and he is by far the most intriguing character in an already impressive line-up. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be on fine form as the wise-cracking Iron Man/Stark with Chris Hemsworth providing the eye-candy as Thor.
It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner’s Black Widow and Hawkeye get some much-needed fleshing out after their fairly limited roles in previous Marvel films, and Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk is a joy to watch.
Kick-Ass’ Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Godzilla’s Elizabeth Olsen also join the cast as Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, two characters fans of the X-Men universe will recognise. However, due to legal requirements their origins are changed and the fact that they are mutants is never revealed, unfortunately limiting their appeal.
When it comes to special effects, Whedon has made sure every sequence is brimming with the highest quality CGI, and despite a couple of lapses early on in the film, the majority of the picture is flawless with some stunning global locations beautifully juxtaposed with the characters doing their thing.
What stands out in Age of Ultron however is the plot. Avengers Assemble was a fine film right up until the generic city-levelling, headache inducing climax that looked like it could have come straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
Thankfully, whilst the action is dialled up a few notches here, the plot is much more detailed and the final scenes are utterly breath-taking.
Overall, Avengers: Age of Ultron had a massive amount to live up to and in some respects it falls a little short, its overambitious nature is its downfall with too many characters needing screen time. However, as a good-time blockbuster it’s hard to find one better and James Spader is genuinely mesmerising as Ultron.
Is it the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Well, it’s definitely an improvement on its predecessor – but for me, Guardians of the Galaxy just takes that title by a whisker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/26/this-one-belongs-to-james-spader-avengers-age-of-ultron-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Why Him? (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
When an “out of touch” Midwesterner owner of a paper factory (Bryan Cranston) decides to take his family to California to spend Christmas with his college student daughter (Zoey Deutch) and meet her new tech-millionaire, but socially inept boyfriend (James Franco), a typical father vs boyfriend faceoff ensues. For many, Why Him? will be enough to satisfy the comedy itch. Those expecting to find the next gut busting comedy will be disappointed, while those thinking it will be a dull comedy will be pleasantly surprised. This film is somewhere in the middle. A constant stream of chuckles with a few bigger laughs here or there. But ultimately forgettable at the lack of main characters to root for.
The highlights of this film include Cranston who reminds us that he has comedic timing from his years in Malcom in the Middle. His chemistry and timing is played well across Megan Mullally who perfectly delivers a few genuine laughs as a Midwestern suburban wife trying to maintain the niceties. Their son (Griffin Gluck) also adds to the humorous family affair as a teenage brother trying to be taken seriously as an adult but still being treated as a child. Lastly, the always funny Keegan-Michael Key hilariously plays Gustav, the “estate manager” to the tech-millionaire boyfriend and spices up the film every time he seems to appear.
James Franco on the other hand quickly wears out is welcome as the socially inept tech-millionaire boyfriend. At times he is funny, however after the dropping the “f-bomb” so many times you begin to sees him as a basic, depthless “caricature” only going for the low hanging fruit of crude jokes. Still, his crude, repeated, jokes are no longer funny after the first few times we see them. The film tries to give Franco some “mysterious depth” through an eluded troubled childhood and his genuine honesty. Only the film never gives you any payoff, as Franco’s character never actually evolves past his caricature shortcomings. It is a shame, because we actually like the girlfriend character (Zoey Deutch) and want to understand what she sees in Franco’s character, however since he never really evolves, there really is no reason to like or root for them to be together.
I also want to point out that this film acknowledges its biggest flaw. At one point in the film a character points out that there is a war going on between father and boyfriend, only the boyfriend isn’t actually fighting. That’s true, and thus there is no real conflict and no real reason to root for any of the characters. Franco’s boyfriend character never evolves past his caricature. While Cranston’s father character only evolves because the movie devolves into “paint by numbers” territory in the last 10 minutes. Since there is no one to root, we do not really care the outcome as we got our chuckles throughout the film but will forget about it shortly after walking out the theater.
Why Him? Has a solid cast, a few unexpected cameos and delivers constant chuckles throughout, however without giving us a likeable boyfriend or any characters to root for, the lack of memorable gut busting laughs has this film as nothing more than a typical forgettable comedy.
The highlights of this film include Cranston who reminds us that he has comedic timing from his years in Malcom in the Middle. His chemistry and timing is played well across Megan Mullally who perfectly delivers a few genuine laughs as a Midwestern suburban wife trying to maintain the niceties. Their son (Griffin Gluck) also adds to the humorous family affair as a teenage brother trying to be taken seriously as an adult but still being treated as a child. Lastly, the always funny Keegan-Michael Key hilariously plays Gustav, the “estate manager” to the tech-millionaire boyfriend and spices up the film every time he seems to appear.
James Franco on the other hand quickly wears out is welcome as the socially inept tech-millionaire boyfriend. At times he is funny, however after the dropping the “f-bomb” so many times you begin to sees him as a basic, depthless “caricature” only going for the low hanging fruit of crude jokes. Still, his crude, repeated, jokes are no longer funny after the first few times we see them. The film tries to give Franco some “mysterious depth” through an eluded troubled childhood and his genuine honesty. Only the film never gives you any payoff, as Franco’s character never actually evolves past his caricature shortcomings. It is a shame, because we actually like the girlfriend character (Zoey Deutch) and want to understand what she sees in Franco’s character, however since he never really evolves, there really is no reason to like or root for them to be together.
I also want to point out that this film acknowledges its biggest flaw. At one point in the film a character points out that there is a war going on between father and boyfriend, only the boyfriend isn’t actually fighting. That’s true, and thus there is no real conflict and no real reason to root for any of the characters. Franco’s boyfriend character never evolves past his caricature. While Cranston’s father character only evolves because the movie devolves into “paint by numbers” territory in the last 10 minutes. Since there is no one to root, we do not really care the outcome as we got our chuckles throughout the film but will forget about it shortly after walking out the theater.
Why Him? Has a solid cast, a few unexpected cameos and delivers constant chuckles throughout, however without giving us a likeable boyfriend or any characters to root for, the lack of memorable gut busting laughs has this film as nothing more than a typical forgettable comedy.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The End Of The Tour (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The End of the Tour tells the story of the five-day interview between Rolling Stone reporter and novelist David Lipsky (Jesse Eisenberg) and acclaimed novelist David Foster Wallace (Jason Segel), which took place right after the 1996 publication of Wallace’s groundbreaking epic novel, Infinite Jest. The film is based on Lipsky’s critically acclaimed memoir about this unforgettable encounter, written following Wallace’s 2008 suicide.
So there is the summary. And it tells you what this movie is about. However what that summary does not tell you is the depth of emotion to which both Jason Segel and Jesse Eisenberg deliver in their performances.
Jesse Eisenberg gives a performance that we come to expect from the Oscar nominated actor. Not only can you feel, but you can also and understand his curiosity and jealousy towards Segel’s success. A less successful writer, he wants the notoriety that Segel has. So much so, that he is constantly trying to find the holes in Segel’s persona under the guise of an interview and yet is forced to ponder the things that Segel is saying to him.
Jason Segel’s portrayal of David Foster Wallace is not understated by the word phenomenal. I was skeptical that Segel would not be able to deliver a dramatic performance of this caliber, but I am glad to say I was wrong. He steals every scene he is in and his performance is so deep and thoughtful that Jason Segel himself disappears and we are instead left with a performance of what I will always believe David Foster Wallace was like in real life. This performance is one of the best I have seen this year and I believe he will receive an Oscar nomination for this role. I was fascinated with Segel’s performance that I actually downloaded David Foster Wallace’s book Infinite Jest on my drive home.
Performances aside, this movie is not for everyone. If you are looking for an inactive cinematic experience then this film is not for you. This film makes you think. It is like being a part of a deep conversation with friends trying to make sense of the world. It brings perspective to the society we live in and the loneliness we find ourselves trying to avoid while clinging to meaningless things that bring us simple pleasure. A simple way of living where we go from A to B to C to find meaning, only to obtain those things and then not knowing what we do next. But for those who are looking to escape the mundane summer blockbusters and want to see stellar performances, be sure to check this one out.
So there is the summary. And it tells you what this movie is about. However what that summary does not tell you is the depth of emotion to which both Jason Segel and Jesse Eisenberg deliver in their performances.
Jesse Eisenberg gives a performance that we come to expect from the Oscar nominated actor. Not only can you feel, but you can also and understand his curiosity and jealousy towards Segel’s success. A less successful writer, he wants the notoriety that Segel has. So much so, that he is constantly trying to find the holes in Segel’s persona under the guise of an interview and yet is forced to ponder the things that Segel is saying to him.
Jason Segel’s portrayal of David Foster Wallace is not understated by the word phenomenal. I was skeptical that Segel would not be able to deliver a dramatic performance of this caliber, but I am glad to say I was wrong. He steals every scene he is in and his performance is so deep and thoughtful that Jason Segel himself disappears and we are instead left with a performance of what I will always believe David Foster Wallace was like in real life. This performance is one of the best I have seen this year and I believe he will receive an Oscar nomination for this role. I was fascinated with Segel’s performance that I actually downloaded David Foster Wallace’s book Infinite Jest on my drive home.
Performances aside, this movie is not for everyone. If you are looking for an inactive cinematic experience then this film is not for you. This film makes you think. It is like being a part of a deep conversation with friends trying to make sense of the world. It brings perspective to the society we live in and the loneliness we find ourselves trying to avoid while clinging to meaningless things that bring us simple pleasure. A simple way of living where we go from A to B to C to find meaning, only to obtain those things and then not knowing what we do next. But for those who are looking to escape the mundane summer blockbusters and want to see stellar performances, be sure to check this one out.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) in Movies
Jun 6, 2021
I've been told that 'The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift' is the worst of the franchise and, so far, I'd have to agree. For what it is it's not terrible but it's not great either.
In my review for the the first 'The Fast and the Furious' I mentioned that parts of it felt like one of those movies set in a high school, well, 'Tokyo Drift' takes that and runs (Rides?) with it. The opening scenes are exactly that, a high school movie, we have the jocks being, well, jocks, as portraited in most 80's & 90's movies, bulling and making life miserable for those that aren't there own. But don't worry the film soon shifts from an American high school to a Japanese one and, lets face it we knew it would have to happen, the clues in the title after all. To be fair, from this point on most of the action is on the roads and not the school but as a lot of the plot revolves around Sean and Neela, a girl he met in his new school the high school film feel remains.
One good thing that 'Tokyo Drift' manages is to continue the idea of 'Family' that is present in the previous films with Sean finding his new family in Tokyo and his relationship with his, first his mother and then his farther and also with Neela having to choose which side side (or which family) she belongs to as well as the surprise cameo at the end (it's an old film but I didn't know about it so I'm probably not the only one).
One thing missing from 'Tokyo Drift' was the crime aspect (except, of course the street racing), the first movie had touched on it with the truck robbery's and the second was almost all about finding and moving the drug money. The Yakuza are mentioned and there are underground clubs but the yakuza are there more as another symbol of family and the clubs just are, there is no one investigating them and they are more just an excuse to have lots of scantily clad women wondering around.
If you just want a film that you can turn your brain off to then 'The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift' is ok, it has action in the form of car chases, plenty of 'eye candy' and a bit of a story. Just don't expect anything to taxing.
In my review for the the first 'The Fast and the Furious' I mentioned that parts of it felt like one of those movies set in a high school, well, 'Tokyo Drift' takes that and runs (Rides?) with it. The opening scenes are exactly that, a high school movie, we have the jocks being, well, jocks, as portraited in most 80's & 90's movies, bulling and making life miserable for those that aren't there own. But don't worry the film soon shifts from an American high school to a Japanese one and, lets face it we knew it would have to happen, the clues in the title after all. To be fair, from this point on most of the action is on the roads and not the school but as a lot of the plot revolves around Sean and Neela, a girl he met in his new school the high school film feel remains.
One good thing that 'Tokyo Drift' manages is to continue the idea of 'Family' that is present in the previous films with Sean finding his new family in Tokyo and his relationship with his, first his mother and then his farther and also with Neela having to choose which side side (or which family) she belongs to as well as the surprise cameo at the end (it's an old film but I didn't know about it so I'm probably not the only one).
One thing missing from 'Tokyo Drift' was the crime aspect (except, of course the street racing), the first movie had touched on it with the truck robbery's and the second was almost all about finding and moving the drug money. The Yakuza are mentioned and there are underground clubs but the yakuza are there more as another symbol of family and the clubs just are, there is no one investigating them and they are more just an excuse to have lots of scantily clad women wondering around.
If you just want a film that you can turn your brain off to then 'The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift' is ok, it has action in the form of car chases, plenty of 'eye candy' and a bit of a story. Just don't expect anything to taxing.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Scooby Doo: Return to Zombie Island (2019) in Movies
Sep 16, 2019
Characters – Scooby-Doo and Shaggy have both become tired of solving mysteries, they want the team to stop and get their way, they win the holiday for the gang which sees them going to an old location needing to decide whether to let the group solve the mystery on the island. Fred has sold the Mystery Machine, he is having daytime dreams of it returning to him, where he judges most other vehicles for not being on the same level as his beloved. Daphne is here, though we don’t see anything we haven’t seen before from her, while Velma has a blog showing us just how the character has evolved for the time, which does show the frustration here character has when she can’t solve the mysteries anymore. Most of the new characters are left to feel just here with only Alan the hotel manager and Seaver being properly introduced.
Story – The story here follows the mystery inc gang who get invited back to an old location to solve the mystery from their past, only to find themselves needing to fight cat people once again. The story tries to be self-aware of many of the previous films, which has worked before, but for some reason doesn’t quite click this time. The fact we have seen the evolution of Velma and not the rest of the characters disappoints, which also seems to play along the idea of being a film within a film, that just again puts too much wink, wink, nudge, nudge to the audience. If you are a Scooby Doo fan, this story is everything you need, even if it does have a couple of flaws along the way.
Adventure/Comedy – The adventure does see the gang return to one of their most famous locations, which is different to much of what we have seen before, while the comedy does land in a couple of places very well.
Settings – The film does take the gang back to Moonscar island to face a new host of enemies in one of the most famous locations.
Animation – This does have the typical animation you are used to seeing for the Scooby Doo movies, it never lets down and works for the slapstick side of things.
Scene of the Movie – The big jump.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Daphne is almost just painted background character.
Final Thoughts – This isn’t the best Scooby Doo animated movie, it disappoints in a lot of places with how it handles certain decisions in the story and too many wink wink nudge nudge moments.
Overall: Basic Scooby Doo.
Story – The story here follows the mystery inc gang who get invited back to an old location to solve the mystery from their past, only to find themselves needing to fight cat people once again. The story tries to be self-aware of many of the previous films, which has worked before, but for some reason doesn’t quite click this time. The fact we have seen the evolution of Velma and not the rest of the characters disappoints, which also seems to play along the idea of being a film within a film, that just again puts too much wink, wink, nudge, nudge to the audience. If you are a Scooby Doo fan, this story is everything you need, even if it does have a couple of flaws along the way.
Adventure/Comedy – The adventure does see the gang return to one of their most famous locations, which is different to much of what we have seen before, while the comedy does land in a couple of places very well.
Settings – The film does take the gang back to Moonscar island to face a new host of enemies in one of the most famous locations.
Animation – This does have the typical animation you are used to seeing for the Scooby Doo movies, it never lets down and works for the slapstick side of things.
Scene of the Movie – The big jump.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Daphne is almost just painted background character.
Final Thoughts – This isn’t the best Scooby Doo animated movie, it disappoints in a lot of places with how it handles certain decisions in the story and too many wink wink nudge nudge moments.
Overall: Basic Scooby Doo.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Their Finest (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Keep Calm and Carry on Writing.
In a well-mined category, “Their Finest” is a World War 2 comedy/drama telling a tale I haven’t seen told before: the story behind the British Ministry of Information and their drive to produce propaganda films that support morale and promote positive messages in a time of national crisis. For it is 1940 and London is under nightly attack by the Luftwaffe during the time known as “The Blitz”. Unfortunately the Ministry is run by a bunch of toffs, and their output is laughably misaligned with the working class population, and especially the female population: with their husbands fighting overseas, these two groups are fast becoming one and the same. For women are finding and enjoying new empowerment and freedom in being socially unshackled from the kitchen sink.
The brave crew of the Nancy Starling. Bill Nighy as Uncle Frank, with twins Lily and Francesca Knight as the Starling sisters.
Enter Catrin Cole (Gemma Arterton, “The Girl with all the Gifts“) who is one such woman arriving to a dangerous London from South Wales to live with struggling disabled artist Ellis (Jack Huston, grandson of John Huston). Catrin, stretching the truth a little, brings a stirring ‘true’ tale of derring-do about the Dunkirk evacuation to the Ministry’s attention. She is then employed to “write the slop” (the woman’s dialogue) in the writing team headed by spiky Tom Buckley (Sam Claflin, “Me Before You“).
One of the stars of the film within the film is ‘Uncle Frank’ played by the aging but charismatic actor Ambrose Hilliard (Bill Nighy, “Dad’s Army“, “Love Actually”). Catrin proves her worth by pouring oil on troubled waters as the army insist on the introduction of an American airman (Jake Lacy, “Carol“) to the stressful mix. An attraction builds between Catrin and Tom, but how will the love triangle resolve itself? (For a significant clue see the “Spoiler Section” below the trailer, but be warned that this is a major spoiler!).
As you might expect if you’ve seen the trailer the film is, in the main, warm and funny with Gemma Arterton just gorgeously huggable as the determined young lady trying to make it in a misogynistic 40’s world of work. Arterton is just the perfect “girl next door”: (sigh… if I was only 20 years younger and unattached!) But mixed in with the humour and the romantic storyline is a harsh sprinkling of the trials of war and not a little heartbreak occurs. This is at least a 5 tissue movie.
Claflin, who is having a strong year with appearances in a wide range of films, is also eminently watchable. One of his best scenes is a speech with Arterton about “why people love the movies”, a theory that the film merrily and memorably drives a stake through the heart of!
Elsewhere Lacy is hilarious as the hapless airman with zero acting ability; Helen McCrory (“Harry Potter”) as Sophie Smith vamps it up wonderfully as the potential Polish love interest for Hilliard; Richard E Grant (“Logan“) and Jeremy Irons (“The Lion King”, “Die Hard: with a Vengeance”) pop up in useful cameos and Eddie Marsan (“Sherlock Holmes”) is also touching as Hilliard’s long-suffering agent.
But it is Bill Nighy’s Hilliard who carries most of the wit and humour of the film with his pompous thespian persona, basking in the dwindling glory of a much loved series of “Inspector Lynley” films. With his pomposity progressively warming under the thawing effect of Sophie and Catrin, you have to love him! Bill Nighy is, well, Bill Nighy. Hugh Grant gets it (unfairly) in the neck for “being Hugh Grant” in every film, but this pales in comparison with Nighy’s performances! But who cares: his kooky delivery is just delightful and he is a national treasure!
Slightly less convincing for me was Rachael Stirling’s role as a butch ministry busybody with more than a hint of the lesbian about her. Stirling’s performance in the role is fine, but would this really have been so blatant in 1940’s Britain? This didn’t really ring true for me.
While the film gamely tries to pull off London in the Blitz the film’s limited budget (around £25m) makes everything feel a little underpowered and ’empty’: a few hundred more extras in the Underground/Blitz scenes for example would have helped no end. However, the special effects crew do their best and the cinematography by Sebastian Blenkov (“The Riot Club”) suitably conveys the mood: a scene where Catrin gets caught in a bomb blast outside a clothes shop is particularly moving.
As with all comedy dramas, sometimes the bedfellows lie uncomfortably with each other, and a couple of plot twists: one highly predictable; one shockingly unpredictable make this a non-linear watch. This rollercoaster of a script by Gaby Chiappe, in an excellent feature film debut (she actually also has a cameo in the propaganda “carrot film”!), undeniably adds interest and makes the film more memorable. However (I know from personal experience) that the twist did not please everyone in the audience!
Despite its occasionally uneven tone, this is a really enjoyable watch (particularly for more mature audiences) and Danish director Lone Scherfig finally has a vehicle that matches the quality of her much praised Carey Mulligan vehicle “An Education”.
The brave crew of the Nancy Starling. Bill Nighy as Uncle Frank, with twins Lily and Francesca Knight as the Starling sisters.
Enter Catrin Cole (Gemma Arterton, “The Girl with all the Gifts“) who is one such woman arriving to a dangerous London from South Wales to live with struggling disabled artist Ellis (Jack Huston, grandson of John Huston). Catrin, stretching the truth a little, brings a stirring ‘true’ tale of derring-do about the Dunkirk evacuation to the Ministry’s attention. She is then employed to “write the slop” (the woman’s dialogue) in the writing team headed by spiky Tom Buckley (Sam Claflin, “Me Before You“).
One of the stars of the film within the film is ‘Uncle Frank’ played by the aging but charismatic actor Ambrose Hilliard (Bill Nighy, “Dad’s Army“, “Love Actually”). Catrin proves her worth by pouring oil on troubled waters as the army insist on the introduction of an American airman (Jake Lacy, “Carol“) to the stressful mix. An attraction builds between Catrin and Tom, but how will the love triangle resolve itself? (For a significant clue see the “Spoiler Section” below the trailer, but be warned that this is a major spoiler!).
As you might expect if you’ve seen the trailer the film is, in the main, warm and funny with Gemma Arterton just gorgeously huggable as the determined young lady trying to make it in a misogynistic 40’s world of work. Arterton is just the perfect “girl next door”: (sigh… if I was only 20 years younger and unattached!) But mixed in with the humour and the romantic storyline is a harsh sprinkling of the trials of war and not a little heartbreak occurs. This is at least a 5 tissue movie.
Claflin, who is having a strong year with appearances in a wide range of films, is also eminently watchable. One of his best scenes is a speech with Arterton about “why people love the movies”, a theory that the film merrily and memorably drives a stake through the heart of!
Elsewhere Lacy is hilarious as the hapless airman with zero acting ability; Helen McCrory (“Harry Potter”) as Sophie Smith vamps it up wonderfully as the potential Polish love interest for Hilliard; Richard E Grant (“Logan“) and Jeremy Irons (“The Lion King”, “Die Hard: with a Vengeance”) pop up in useful cameos and Eddie Marsan (“Sherlock Holmes”) is also touching as Hilliard’s long-suffering agent.
But it is Bill Nighy’s Hilliard who carries most of the wit and humour of the film with his pompous thespian persona, basking in the dwindling glory of a much loved series of “Inspector Lynley” films. With his pomposity progressively warming under the thawing effect of Sophie and Catrin, you have to love him! Bill Nighy is, well, Bill Nighy. Hugh Grant gets it (unfairly) in the neck for “being Hugh Grant” in every film, but this pales in comparison with Nighy’s performances! But who cares: his kooky delivery is just delightful and he is a national treasure!
Slightly less convincing for me was Rachael Stirling’s role as a butch ministry busybody with more than a hint of the lesbian about her. Stirling’s performance in the role is fine, but would this really have been so blatant in 1940’s Britain? This didn’t really ring true for me.
While the film gamely tries to pull off London in the Blitz the film’s limited budget (around £25m) makes everything feel a little underpowered and ’empty’: a few hundred more extras in the Underground/Blitz scenes for example would have helped no end. However, the special effects crew do their best and the cinematography by Sebastian Blenkov (“The Riot Club”) suitably conveys the mood: a scene where Catrin gets caught in a bomb blast outside a clothes shop is particularly moving.
As with all comedy dramas, sometimes the bedfellows lie uncomfortably with each other, and a couple of plot twists: one highly predictable; one shockingly unpredictable make this a non-linear watch. This rollercoaster of a script by Gaby Chiappe, in an excellent feature film debut (she actually also has a cameo in the propaganda “carrot film”!), undeniably adds interest and makes the film more memorable. However (I know from personal experience) that the twist did not please everyone in the audience!
Despite its occasionally uneven tone, this is a really enjoyable watch (particularly for more mature audiences) and Danish director Lone Scherfig finally has a vehicle that matches the quality of her much praised Carey Mulligan vehicle “An Education”.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Alaska (1996) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Alaska starts as we meet the Barnes family, father Jake (Benedict) a small plane pilot and his kids Jessie (Birch) and Sean (Kartheiser), the family has started a new life in Alaska after their death of Jake’s wife and mother of Jessie and Sean. While Jessie has embraced this new life enjoying the beautiful sites, Sean is struggling with new life. We also get to meet to poachers Perry (Heston) and Koontz (Fraser) who have been hunting polar bears.
When their father goes missing, Jessie and Sean aim to go in search of him through the Alaskan wilderness discovering a captured baby polar bear cub that they release who joins them on their adventure, which only attracts the poachers attention as they find themselves chased through the wilderness by the poachers too in a race against time to find their father.
Thoughts on Alaska
Characters/Performance – Jessie is the sister of the siblings, she has embraced the change to Alaska learning to be part of the team with her father, while they both want to search for their father, she is the most prepared of the two. Sean hates his new life in Alaska and wants to move back to Chicago but you can clearly see he is grieving his mother with his behaviour, but with his father missing he will do everything he can to find him, learning to love the beautiful landscape they are part of now. Jake is the father of the family that has given up his 747-pilot job to start a new life in the small town in Alaska, he does spend most of the film trapped in his plane but his character gives Jessie and Sean the reason for going on their adventure. Perry and Koontz are two poachers hunting polar bears, they cross paths with the kids as they menacingly try to recapture the polar bear cub that they had released.
Performance wise, Thora Birch and Vincent Kartheiser are both great in the lead roles as the children in search of their father. Dirk doesn’t have much to do but does what he needs to well. Charlton Heston as the menacing poacher does seem to enjoy the role he plays in the movie.
Story – The story of two young teenagers going into the wilderness to find their missing father is a nice tried and tested formula, this style of film seemed to be the rave for family films around the time too, so to stand out you had to do something different. We get the moments of peril which are good and well-paced but we also get the moments of discovery which are just as important. Obviously, there are negatives here which include the idea the adults are clueless when searching for people in crashes and poachers being just evil people. I would also like to point out, that it is very unlikely a polar bear mother is just going to accept another cub, well that is what David Attenborough has taught me.
Adventure/Family – The adventure the kids get to go on is one I remember watching as a kid going, I wanna do that and I still would like to. The family side of this film is about the unity between a broken family doing everything to stay together and of course having a cute little polar bear helping them out.
Settings – Alaska as a setting, beautiful, stunning, peril filled and perfect for the story being told.
Effects – We only have a few effects in use here, most feels practical with the stunt work and working with a potential deadly animal in a polar bear.
Final Thoughts – This is easily one of the better kids work with animal films of the 90s, one that gives you hope in humanity and a wonderful setting.
Overall: Family night sorted.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/01/31/alaska-1996/
When their father goes missing, Jessie and Sean aim to go in search of him through the Alaskan wilderness discovering a captured baby polar bear cub that they release who joins them on their adventure, which only attracts the poachers attention as they find themselves chased through the wilderness by the poachers too in a race against time to find their father.
Thoughts on Alaska
Characters/Performance – Jessie is the sister of the siblings, she has embraced the change to Alaska learning to be part of the team with her father, while they both want to search for their father, she is the most prepared of the two. Sean hates his new life in Alaska and wants to move back to Chicago but you can clearly see he is grieving his mother with his behaviour, but with his father missing he will do everything he can to find him, learning to love the beautiful landscape they are part of now. Jake is the father of the family that has given up his 747-pilot job to start a new life in the small town in Alaska, he does spend most of the film trapped in his plane but his character gives Jessie and Sean the reason for going on their adventure. Perry and Koontz are two poachers hunting polar bears, they cross paths with the kids as they menacingly try to recapture the polar bear cub that they had released.
Performance wise, Thora Birch and Vincent Kartheiser are both great in the lead roles as the children in search of their father. Dirk doesn’t have much to do but does what he needs to well. Charlton Heston as the menacing poacher does seem to enjoy the role he plays in the movie.
Story – The story of two young teenagers going into the wilderness to find their missing father is a nice tried and tested formula, this style of film seemed to be the rave for family films around the time too, so to stand out you had to do something different. We get the moments of peril which are good and well-paced but we also get the moments of discovery which are just as important. Obviously, there are negatives here which include the idea the adults are clueless when searching for people in crashes and poachers being just evil people. I would also like to point out, that it is very unlikely a polar bear mother is just going to accept another cub, well that is what David Attenborough has taught me.
Adventure/Family – The adventure the kids get to go on is one I remember watching as a kid going, I wanna do that and I still would like to. The family side of this film is about the unity between a broken family doing everything to stay together and of course having a cute little polar bear helping them out.
Settings – Alaska as a setting, beautiful, stunning, peril filled and perfect for the story being told.
Effects – We only have a few effects in use here, most feels practical with the stunt work and working with a potential deadly animal in a polar bear.
Final Thoughts – This is easily one of the better kids work with animal films of the 90s, one that gives you hope in humanity and a wonderful setting.
Overall: Family night sorted.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/01/31/alaska-1996/