Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated A Simple Favor (2018) in Movies
Apr 8, 2020
Well Worth Watching
I'll start this review by stating for the record - I LIKE BLAKE LIVELY. I think the former Gossip Girl star is extremely watchable and interesting - and in the right role, can take over a film.
And...in A SIMPLE FAVOR...she is in the right role.
Also starring Anne Kendrick (INTO THE WOODS), A SIMPLE FAVOR tells the tale of a suburban mother (Kendrick) who forms a friendship with a lively (no pun intended) working mom (Lively) - from "The City" no less - who asks her friend for "A Simple Favor" - watch her child while she tends to some urgent business. When the working Mom goes missing, the suburban Mom starts snooping into what happened.
Directed by Paul Feig (BRIDESMAIDS), A SIMPLE FAVOR finds itself in a bit of a "no man's land" of style and genre. Is it a made for TV Movie like BIG LITTLE LIES (no...it's ambition and production style is more ambitious than that). Is it a "Major Motion Picture" a la GONE GIRL (no...it's not that ambitious). Is it a satire on the suburban Mom (partially), a whodunnit (partially), a mystery (partially) a black comedy (partially).
And that's what is in this film's favor - and it's biggest issue. It's hard to define and pin down and the feel of the film floats all over the place, as do the performances of the leading ladies.
Anna Kendrick is perfectly well suited to play the frumpy suburban Mom, Stephanie, who's underlying unhappiness is masked by the perma-grin and energy of that Mom who volunteers for EVERYTHING at school. She is more than balanced by Lively's scene-stealing performance as Emily the working Mom from NYC that doesn't take crap - or orders - from anybody. Their scenes together are uneven and unbalanced - and that is perfect for what Stephanie is going through. She encounters a force of nature in Emily and is just trying to hang on for dear life.
And there, again, is where the issues of this film (and it's strengths) show up. Sometimes - it seems - that Stephanie is getting a foothold, only to slip and fall. But then she gets her foothold stronger and a whole new character emerges, only to have it slip again...and then she is SNARKY...and slips back to mousey...and then she is CLEVER...and slips back to mousey...and the she...
You get the idea. It keeps the audience guessing and off-guard, but the change in tone hurts the overall flow of the film.
It, ultimately, becomes a fairly clever whoddunit that had me guessing (for the most part) until the end, so I have to admit - I ended up enjoying it - mostly because of Lively's energy.
Letter Grade: B+ (well worth your time to check out)
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
And...in A SIMPLE FAVOR...she is in the right role.
Also starring Anne Kendrick (INTO THE WOODS), A SIMPLE FAVOR tells the tale of a suburban mother (Kendrick) who forms a friendship with a lively (no pun intended) working mom (Lively) - from "The City" no less - who asks her friend for "A Simple Favor" - watch her child while she tends to some urgent business. When the working Mom goes missing, the suburban Mom starts snooping into what happened.
Directed by Paul Feig (BRIDESMAIDS), A SIMPLE FAVOR finds itself in a bit of a "no man's land" of style and genre. Is it a made for TV Movie like BIG LITTLE LIES (no...it's ambition and production style is more ambitious than that). Is it a "Major Motion Picture" a la GONE GIRL (no...it's not that ambitious). Is it a satire on the suburban Mom (partially), a whodunnit (partially), a mystery (partially) a black comedy (partially).
And that's what is in this film's favor - and it's biggest issue. It's hard to define and pin down and the feel of the film floats all over the place, as do the performances of the leading ladies.
Anna Kendrick is perfectly well suited to play the frumpy suburban Mom, Stephanie, who's underlying unhappiness is masked by the perma-grin and energy of that Mom who volunteers for EVERYTHING at school. She is more than balanced by Lively's scene-stealing performance as Emily the working Mom from NYC that doesn't take crap - or orders - from anybody. Their scenes together are uneven and unbalanced - and that is perfect for what Stephanie is going through. She encounters a force of nature in Emily and is just trying to hang on for dear life.
And there, again, is where the issues of this film (and it's strengths) show up. Sometimes - it seems - that Stephanie is getting a foothold, only to slip and fall. But then she gets her foothold stronger and a whole new character emerges, only to have it slip again...and then she is SNARKY...and slips back to mousey...and then she is CLEVER...and slips back to mousey...and the she...
You get the idea. It keeps the audience guessing and off-guard, but the change in tone hurts the overall flow of the film.
It, ultimately, becomes a fairly clever whoddunit that had me guessing (for the most part) until the end, so I have to admit - I ended up enjoying it - mostly because of Lively's energy.
Letter Grade: B+ (well worth your time to check out)
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Downsizing (2017) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
Sweeping up a few older films that I wanted to see but missed at the cinema in the last few years. My current IMDb watch list sits at 488, and, unlike this movie, never seems to shrink! There is a lot to keep up with. Bad reviews have kept me away from Alexander Payne’s Downsizing until now. I have to say, without the burden of expectation, it is a lot better than I thought it would be.
In particular, Sideways and The Descendents from the same Director are two of my absolute favourite light comedy satires of the last 20 years, so I am always interested to see what he is up to. He often has an eye for subtlety and relationships that can break the heart with truth. There is some of that on display here too, it has to be said, however, you do wonder if the sci-fi / CGI element of Downsizing got a little bit in the way?
It isn’t quite the film it could have been, and at times does feel messy and rushed. It also doesn’t follow through entirely with its premise, and perhaps that is what disappointed a lot of the audience. The idea of the small leaving the world of the large behind in search of an environmental solution to the world’s problems is compelling as a joke and allegorical devise… But it just isn’t explored to its full potential, and the visual effects that allow us to see this are years behind what they should have been.
Saying that, the personal journey’s of the main characters are relevent, funny, relatable and often unexpected. Matt Damon is totally fine and well cast; Christoph Waltz adds a counter-point humour and point of view that balances the political ethics of the subject very well; and both Kristen Wiig and Udi Keir offer support of deft pathos in minor roles.
The film truly belongs to Hong Chau, however. Without her multi-layered and show-stealing turn as a Vietnamese refugee, who “downsized” to escape tyranny, losing a limb in the process, the film would be much less than it ends up being. For its many faults, her performance lifts it to something worth watching, as long as you can forgive the argument that her character is a too broadly drawn race stereo-type. Honestly, I can’t see the problem, because I think what she does with it makes the movie – but I am aware of the problems with it…
As a political message and environmental allegory, the film as a whole raises some interesting debate, sometimes because of its (ahem) shortcomings. It is neither intelligent enough, nor funny enough to be a “good” film. But it is an entertaining film. If only to see the sequence of legal and medical procedure that leads to the new world of being small!
What would we be prepared to do to find an answer to a dying world, economic failure and personal unhappiness? Would we risk everything to find ourselves and a solution? Or would we carry on regardless? Feeling lost in a world of fear and looming disaster is a subject worth exploring, and I feel Downsizing asks enough questions well enough to be at least seen and argued with. If that is the only purpose it serves then… OK by me.
The bottom line is, I didn’t hate it. To see it at a rating of 5.7 on IMDb is strange and actually very interesting. It is not a bad film. It just doesn’t completely succeed. I think that score says much more about how vitriolic and opinionated people are becoming about environmental issues. Which is good. A missed opportunity perhaps, and therefore it earns a place in the bin marked “admirable failures”. See it for yourself if you haven’t – it has cult status written all over it, in very small writing.
In particular, Sideways and The Descendents from the same Director are two of my absolute favourite light comedy satires of the last 20 years, so I am always interested to see what he is up to. He often has an eye for subtlety and relationships that can break the heart with truth. There is some of that on display here too, it has to be said, however, you do wonder if the sci-fi / CGI element of Downsizing got a little bit in the way?
It isn’t quite the film it could have been, and at times does feel messy and rushed. It also doesn’t follow through entirely with its premise, and perhaps that is what disappointed a lot of the audience. The idea of the small leaving the world of the large behind in search of an environmental solution to the world’s problems is compelling as a joke and allegorical devise… But it just isn’t explored to its full potential, and the visual effects that allow us to see this are years behind what they should have been.
Saying that, the personal journey’s of the main characters are relevent, funny, relatable and often unexpected. Matt Damon is totally fine and well cast; Christoph Waltz adds a counter-point humour and point of view that balances the political ethics of the subject very well; and both Kristen Wiig and Udi Keir offer support of deft pathos in minor roles.
The film truly belongs to Hong Chau, however. Without her multi-layered and show-stealing turn as a Vietnamese refugee, who “downsized” to escape tyranny, losing a limb in the process, the film would be much less than it ends up being. For its many faults, her performance lifts it to something worth watching, as long as you can forgive the argument that her character is a too broadly drawn race stereo-type. Honestly, I can’t see the problem, because I think what she does with it makes the movie – but I am aware of the problems with it…
As a political message and environmental allegory, the film as a whole raises some interesting debate, sometimes because of its (ahem) shortcomings. It is neither intelligent enough, nor funny enough to be a “good” film. But it is an entertaining film. If only to see the sequence of legal and medical procedure that leads to the new world of being small!
What would we be prepared to do to find an answer to a dying world, economic failure and personal unhappiness? Would we risk everything to find ourselves and a solution? Or would we carry on regardless? Feeling lost in a world of fear and looming disaster is a subject worth exploring, and I feel Downsizing asks enough questions well enough to be at least seen and argued with. If that is the only purpose it serves then… OK by me.
The bottom line is, I didn’t hate it. To see it at a rating of 5.7 on IMDb is strange and actually very interesting. It is not a bad film. It just doesn’t completely succeed. I think that score says much more about how vitriolic and opinionated people are becoming about environmental issues. Which is good. A missed opportunity perhaps, and therefore it earns a place in the bin marked “admirable failures”. See it for yourself if you haven’t – it has cult status written all over it, in very small writing.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Max Winslow and the House of Secrets (2019) in Movies
Oct 13, 2020
Max Winslow and the House of Secrets is a family film, very much in the vein of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Maxine Winslow (Sydne Mikelle), or Max for short, is our Charlie Bucket, coming from a single-parent family and living with a mother who is struggling with debt. Tech-savvy Max is also a skilled hacker, demonstrating this by taking control of her neighbours video doorbell and making it ring so that he comes running outside. Kind of like a modern-day Knock-Down Ginger.
Max heads into school, where we’re introduced to some more teens who are set to join her later on, including a social-media obsessed girl, a boy addicted to gaming and a boy who enjoys trolling people online. As they settle down at their desks, the face of eccentric billionaire Atticus Virtue (Chad Michael Murray) takes over all of the TV screens throughout the school. He tells them that five students are to be selected to spend the night in his high tech mansion, and undertake a series of games, with the winner becoming the new owner of the mansion. When the confirmation text messages start coming through to the student phones later that day, we already know most of those that receive the big green tick on their screens, so they head off to the mansion, ready to spend the night.
Atticus himself isn’t at the mansion to greet the group. Instead, an AI named Haven (voiced by Marina Sirtis) opens the door for them, orders a takeaway delivery and gives them their instructions for the night. Basically, whoever solves the most puzzles and earns the highest score wins the mansion!
The puzzles start off ridiculously hard, with a locked door requiring a six-digit code to open, and only three attempts allowed. Max spots three jars of candy in the room and automatically decides that the total pieces of candy in each jar can be combined into a six-digit number, obviously. And you’re not supposed to think about how she managed to get them in the right order, or why the plate of cookies on the table wasn’t included in the code…
From there, the points come a lot easier for the team, such as simply putting on a pair of sunglasses(!), before turning slightly sinister as the group separates and everyone heads off on their own. Haven begins to go a little bit rogue, although with her monotone delivery of thinly veiled threats, she never really comes across as scary as I think she is meant to be. The games become a way of showing each individual the error of their ways - narcissistic Sophia is trapped in a bathroom talking to her mirror reflection, which has now turned into a nastier version of herself, while others are trapped in VR scenarios designed to show them where they’ve gone wrong in life.
It’s at this point that the movie struggles. The VR recreations are mostly dull, while other scenes utilise some pretty dodgy VFX and there’s never any real feeling of peril or threat. The young cast, for the most part, give some pretty good performances. However, with a mediocre script, none of them is really given very much to work with. Consequently, some of them, particularly the character of Max, feel a little wasted, not fleshed out enough.
While entertaining at times, Max Winslow and the House of Secrets is too scary for young children and not dramatic or scary enough for adults to really enjoy. Hopefully, though, the teen audience that this is squarely aimed at will pick up on the strong moral messages at the heart of the movie and will manage to gain some enjoyment from it.
Max heads into school, where we’re introduced to some more teens who are set to join her later on, including a social-media obsessed girl, a boy addicted to gaming and a boy who enjoys trolling people online. As they settle down at their desks, the face of eccentric billionaire Atticus Virtue (Chad Michael Murray) takes over all of the TV screens throughout the school. He tells them that five students are to be selected to spend the night in his high tech mansion, and undertake a series of games, with the winner becoming the new owner of the mansion. When the confirmation text messages start coming through to the student phones later that day, we already know most of those that receive the big green tick on their screens, so they head off to the mansion, ready to spend the night.
Atticus himself isn’t at the mansion to greet the group. Instead, an AI named Haven (voiced by Marina Sirtis) opens the door for them, orders a takeaway delivery and gives them their instructions for the night. Basically, whoever solves the most puzzles and earns the highest score wins the mansion!
The puzzles start off ridiculously hard, with a locked door requiring a six-digit code to open, and only three attempts allowed. Max spots three jars of candy in the room and automatically decides that the total pieces of candy in each jar can be combined into a six-digit number, obviously. And you’re not supposed to think about how she managed to get them in the right order, or why the plate of cookies on the table wasn’t included in the code…
From there, the points come a lot easier for the team, such as simply putting on a pair of sunglasses(!), before turning slightly sinister as the group separates and everyone heads off on their own. Haven begins to go a little bit rogue, although with her monotone delivery of thinly veiled threats, she never really comes across as scary as I think she is meant to be. The games become a way of showing each individual the error of their ways - narcissistic Sophia is trapped in a bathroom talking to her mirror reflection, which has now turned into a nastier version of herself, while others are trapped in VR scenarios designed to show them where they’ve gone wrong in life.
It’s at this point that the movie struggles. The VR recreations are mostly dull, while other scenes utilise some pretty dodgy VFX and there’s never any real feeling of peril or threat. The young cast, for the most part, give some pretty good performances. However, with a mediocre script, none of them is really given very much to work with. Consequently, some of them, particularly the character of Max, feel a little wasted, not fleshed out enough.
While entertaining at times, Max Winslow and the House of Secrets is too scary for young children and not dramatic or scary enough for adults to really enjoy. Hopefully, though, the teen audience that this is squarely aimed at will pick up on the strong moral messages at the heart of the movie and will manage to gain some enjoyment from it.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Vacation (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Family holidays will never be the same
It was 1983 when Chevy Chase and Beverly D’Angelo made the infamous decision to take their family across the US to “America’s Favourite Family Fun Park” in National Lampoon’s Vacation.
Being the best in the long-running series, it seemed natural for it to receive a fully-fledged sequel of some kind, but it has taken up until now to get the balance right, but does Vacation evoke memories of that brilliant road-trip comedy?
Ed Helms takes on the role of an adult Rusty Griswold as he, like his father makes the epic trip to Walley World theme park alongside his long-suffering wife Debbie (Christina Applegate) and his two sons James and Kevin, played by Skyler Gisondo and Steele Stebbins respectively.
Everybody’s favourite thunder-god, Chris Hemsworth makes a rather revealing cameo as Rusty’s brother-in-law and ladies’ man, Stone Crandall, and helps lift Vacation out of what could have been a half-way lull.
Naturally, there are many tasteful references to its predecessor but this isn’t just a lesson in comedy history. Writers Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley inject some much-needed modern humour into the film – this is most definitely a movie from the 21st Century.
Ed Helms and Christina Applegate have real chemistry as the married couple but it is in their children that most of the laughs are. James and Kevin are the stereotypical, bickering siblings but like everything in Vacation they are turned up to eleven.
From raw sewage infested hot springs to a would-be maniac truck driver, the gags on the whole hit the spot every single time – by no means an easy feat when writing a comedy over 90 minutes in length. There are a couple of ill-placed laughs like a Four Corners police brawl that threaten to stop the film in its tracks, but thankfully these are few and far between.
Short but sweet cameos for Chevy Chase and Beverly D’Angelo towards the climax anchor Vacation to what came before it and it’s nice that the writers didn’t forget to honour those roots in more ways than sickly nostalgia.
The direction is also positively inspired. Acting like a tourist brochure for the USA, Vacation makes you feel like you’re part of the vast locations. From desolate highways to bustling cities, it’s all here and beautifully shot.
Unfortunately the plot seems to run a little out of steam towards the end. After all, there’s only so much déjà vu a story can take and it seems that the writers put all their best work in the first two thirds of the movie, as is the case with many films in the genre.
Nevertheless, Vacation is a confident film that knows exactly what it’s trying to be. Acting as a standalone comedy for newcomers and a decent sequel for fans of the original, it has something for everyone.
The acting is sublime and the casting choices are spot on, only a lacklustre final third pull it back from the edge of glory.
I probably won’t be planning that road trip any time soon.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/23/family-holidays-will-never-be-the-same-vacation-review/
Being the best in the long-running series, it seemed natural for it to receive a fully-fledged sequel of some kind, but it has taken up until now to get the balance right, but does Vacation evoke memories of that brilliant road-trip comedy?
Ed Helms takes on the role of an adult Rusty Griswold as he, like his father makes the epic trip to Walley World theme park alongside his long-suffering wife Debbie (Christina Applegate) and his two sons James and Kevin, played by Skyler Gisondo and Steele Stebbins respectively.
Everybody’s favourite thunder-god, Chris Hemsworth makes a rather revealing cameo as Rusty’s brother-in-law and ladies’ man, Stone Crandall, and helps lift Vacation out of what could have been a half-way lull.
Naturally, there are many tasteful references to its predecessor but this isn’t just a lesson in comedy history. Writers Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley inject some much-needed modern humour into the film – this is most definitely a movie from the 21st Century.
Ed Helms and Christina Applegate have real chemistry as the married couple but it is in their children that most of the laughs are. James and Kevin are the stereotypical, bickering siblings but like everything in Vacation they are turned up to eleven.
From raw sewage infested hot springs to a would-be maniac truck driver, the gags on the whole hit the spot every single time – by no means an easy feat when writing a comedy over 90 minutes in length. There are a couple of ill-placed laughs like a Four Corners police brawl that threaten to stop the film in its tracks, but thankfully these are few and far between.
Short but sweet cameos for Chevy Chase and Beverly D’Angelo towards the climax anchor Vacation to what came before it and it’s nice that the writers didn’t forget to honour those roots in more ways than sickly nostalgia.
The direction is also positively inspired. Acting like a tourist brochure for the USA, Vacation makes you feel like you’re part of the vast locations. From desolate highways to bustling cities, it’s all here and beautifully shot.
Unfortunately the plot seems to run a little out of steam towards the end. After all, there’s only so much déjà vu a story can take and it seems that the writers put all their best work in the first two thirds of the movie, as is the case with many films in the genre.
Nevertheless, Vacation is a confident film that knows exactly what it’s trying to be. Acting as a standalone comedy for newcomers and a decent sequel for fans of the original, it has something for everyone.
The acting is sublime and the casting choices are spot on, only a lacklustre final third pull it back from the edge of glory.
I probably won’t be planning that road trip any time soon.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/23/family-holidays-will-never-be-the-same-vacation-review/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Bachelor Party (1984) in Movies
Jul 19, 2019
Verdict: Wild Party
Story: Bachelor Party starts when Rick (Hanks) announces to his friends, Jay (Zmed), Rudy (Diamond), Gary (Grossman), Ryko (Dudikoff) that he is going to marry his girlfriend Debbie (Kitaen), which means one thing for the guys, a bachelor party. Rick is trusted by Debbie, but her father Ed (Grizzard) doesn’t like him and wants his selection Cole (Prescott) to marry his daughter.
With the bachelor party underway, the boys think they are going to have a couple of strippers, few drinks and a good time, only for Cole to bring problems to the party in his attempts to break up the couple, meanwhile Debbie is having her own quieter party with her friends, which is also in Cole’s plans.
Thoughts on Bachelor Party
Characters – Rick is considered a bit of a slacker, he drives a school bus and hasn’t ever put his life into any order, he does however decide to marry his girlfriend against her father’s wishes, he is used to getting abused by people who look down on him, though he is the friend that will always be there for a friend in need. Debbie is the future bride, she comes from a rich family which she is tired of the lifestyle that looks down on people and sees the pure nature in Rick. Jay is the best friend that is always trying to get Rick in trouble, he loves to party too. Ed is the father of Debbie, he always looks down on Rick never seeing him as good enough for his daughter and wants to end the relationship before it gets started.
Performances – Tom Hanks is the clear standout in this film, you get to see how he has a different level of acting abilities than most people in the film being able to do the sleazy moments, while bring a human friendship figure to life. The rest of the cast do work for their roles, the party animals work well, the upper-class characters and the one trying to steal the girl work too.
Story – The story here follows a slacker that is going to marry the love of his life, but before he must have a bachelor party which soon gets out of control. This film doesn’t have the deepest story, it dives into the idea parents don’t always approve of the potential loved ones, your friends will want you have one last mad night before you get married and needing to avoid the person trying to take apart you life. This is everything that we know from the wild party film, it plays out like a checklist without being anything new, but easy to enjoy.
Comedy – The comedy in this film enters us into the wild party, we get to see how things go wrong, they will get us laughing at times even if certain jokes might not have aged well.
Settings – The film is set in a hotel room for the party, we get to see how the guests get themselves into trouble through the night, looking for extra people to join the party.
Scene of the Movie – 3D experience.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The donkey.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun 80s party movie, which bought us an early role from Tom Hanks, it is everything you expect and can be a good time for all.
Overall: Simple, fun and entertaining.
Rating
Story: Bachelor Party starts when Rick (Hanks) announces to his friends, Jay (Zmed), Rudy (Diamond), Gary (Grossman), Ryko (Dudikoff) that he is going to marry his girlfriend Debbie (Kitaen), which means one thing for the guys, a bachelor party. Rick is trusted by Debbie, but her father Ed (Grizzard) doesn’t like him and wants his selection Cole (Prescott) to marry his daughter.
With the bachelor party underway, the boys think they are going to have a couple of strippers, few drinks and a good time, only for Cole to bring problems to the party in his attempts to break up the couple, meanwhile Debbie is having her own quieter party with her friends, which is also in Cole’s plans.
Thoughts on Bachelor Party
Characters – Rick is considered a bit of a slacker, he drives a school bus and hasn’t ever put his life into any order, he does however decide to marry his girlfriend against her father’s wishes, he is used to getting abused by people who look down on him, though he is the friend that will always be there for a friend in need. Debbie is the future bride, she comes from a rich family which she is tired of the lifestyle that looks down on people and sees the pure nature in Rick. Jay is the best friend that is always trying to get Rick in trouble, he loves to party too. Ed is the father of Debbie, he always looks down on Rick never seeing him as good enough for his daughter and wants to end the relationship before it gets started.
Performances – Tom Hanks is the clear standout in this film, you get to see how he has a different level of acting abilities than most people in the film being able to do the sleazy moments, while bring a human friendship figure to life. The rest of the cast do work for their roles, the party animals work well, the upper-class characters and the one trying to steal the girl work too.
Story – The story here follows a slacker that is going to marry the love of his life, but before he must have a bachelor party which soon gets out of control. This film doesn’t have the deepest story, it dives into the idea parents don’t always approve of the potential loved ones, your friends will want you have one last mad night before you get married and needing to avoid the person trying to take apart you life. This is everything that we know from the wild party film, it plays out like a checklist without being anything new, but easy to enjoy.
Comedy – The comedy in this film enters us into the wild party, we get to see how things go wrong, they will get us laughing at times even if certain jokes might not have aged well.
Settings – The film is set in a hotel room for the party, we get to see how the guests get themselves into trouble through the night, looking for extra people to join the party.
Scene of the Movie – 3D experience.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The donkey.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun 80s party movie, which bought us an early role from Tom Hanks, it is everything you expect and can be a good time for all.
Overall: Simple, fun and entertaining.
Rating
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Mission impossible dead reckoning part one (2023) in Movies
Jul 14, 2023
What A Summer Blockbuster Movie Should Be
Boy, that Tom Cruise sure knows how to make a crowd-pleasing, summer blockbuster movie.
Fresh off his cinema-saving success with TOP GUN: MAVERICK, Cruise (and Director Christopher McQuarrie) comes back with another giant summer tentpole film - MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: DEAD RECKONING, PART ONE - and they hit it out of the park again.
The 7th film in the Mission Impossible franchise (which debuted, incredibly, 27 years ago), DEAD RECKONING, PART ONE reunites Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) with his band of hero/outlaws to stop yet another world-wide crisis. It’s familiar ground but it is the journey not the destination that makes these types of films work and the journey (which, to be honest, is just an excuse to jump from action set piece to action set piece) is a fun one filled with comfortable characters/actors both old and new.
Besides Cruise (who’s got the Ethan Hunt character down), DR1 is filled with Hunt’s “regular” crew, Luther (Vingh Rhames - the only other actor besides Cruise to be in every MI film), Benji (SImon Pegg - around since MI 3) and Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson - on board since film 5). These are all familiar, comfortable characters and when the band gets back together about 1/2 way through the film, it felt liking sinking into your couch after a long, hard (but good) day of work to watch your favorite comfort show.
McQuarrie, wisely, populates the rest of the film with new, but comfortably familiar, faces such as Haley Atwell (Agent Carter in the MCU), Shea Wigham (ironically, he played Atwell’s boss in the Agent Carter TV Series), Pom Klementieff as Paris (the name of the character Leonard Nimoy played in the TV Series). Klementieff is also a veteran of the MCU having played Mantis in the Guardians of the Galaxy films, Esai Morales (one of the bosses in NYPD BLUE) and Cary Elwes (the Princess Bride). All bring their “A” game to the adventure and all of them acquit themselves just fine.
Oh…and Henry Czerny reprises his role as Kittridge from the first Mission Impossible film - and it was good to see him, too as was Vanessa Kirby’s re-appearance as Hunt’s “frenemie”, The White Widow (in a role that is a bit more expanded).
But, of course, all of these actors/performances takes a back seat to the action sequences and McQuarrie and Cruise are at the top of their game here. The big action set pieces are a marvel to watch - very enjoyable, exciting, nerve-wracking and easy to follow with some sense of humor rolled in. Unlike another big action flick (that leaned more towards the over-the-top comic-book type action), this Mission Impossible film relies on tension to make these action scenes pop off the screen - and McQuarrie succeeds.
Since this film is labeled as “Part One” you would expect to this film to end on a cliff-hanger and McQuarrie/Cruise were smart about that, too. It is more of “the mission isn’t finished” than a cliff-hanger, which helps this film hold together on it’s own and not just “Part One of a two-parter”.
Very smart, indeed.
A fun romp at the cinema - head out to the biggest screen possible to immerse yourself into this mission, you’ll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
A fun, escapist, action film that is satisfying (and not dumb), MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: DEAD
Fresh off his cinema-saving success with TOP GUN: MAVERICK, Cruise (and Director Christopher McQuarrie) comes back with another giant summer tentpole film - MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: DEAD RECKONING, PART ONE - and they hit it out of the park again.
The 7th film in the Mission Impossible franchise (which debuted, incredibly, 27 years ago), DEAD RECKONING, PART ONE reunites Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) with his band of hero/outlaws to stop yet another world-wide crisis. It’s familiar ground but it is the journey not the destination that makes these types of films work and the journey (which, to be honest, is just an excuse to jump from action set piece to action set piece) is a fun one filled with comfortable characters/actors both old and new.
Besides Cruise (who’s got the Ethan Hunt character down), DR1 is filled with Hunt’s “regular” crew, Luther (Vingh Rhames - the only other actor besides Cruise to be in every MI film), Benji (SImon Pegg - around since MI 3) and Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson - on board since film 5). These are all familiar, comfortable characters and when the band gets back together about 1/2 way through the film, it felt liking sinking into your couch after a long, hard (but good) day of work to watch your favorite comfort show.
McQuarrie, wisely, populates the rest of the film with new, but comfortably familiar, faces such as Haley Atwell (Agent Carter in the MCU), Shea Wigham (ironically, he played Atwell’s boss in the Agent Carter TV Series), Pom Klementieff as Paris (the name of the character Leonard Nimoy played in the TV Series). Klementieff is also a veteran of the MCU having played Mantis in the Guardians of the Galaxy films, Esai Morales (one of the bosses in NYPD BLUE) and Cary Elwes (the Princess Bride). All bring their “A” game to the adventure and all of them acquit themselves just fine.
Oh…and Henry Czerny reprises his role as Kittridge from the first Mission Impossible film - and it was good to see him, too as was Vanessa Kirby’s re-appearance as Hunt’s “frenemie”, The White Widow (in a role that is a bit more expanded).
But, of course, all of these actors/performances takes a back seat to the action sequences and McQuarrie and Cruise are at the top of their game here. The big action set pieces are a marvel to watch - very enjoyable, exciting, nerve-wracking and easy to follow with some sense of humor rolled in. Unlike another big action flick (that leaned more towards the over-the-top comic-book type action), this Mission Impossible film relies on tension to make these action scenes pop off the screen - and McQuarrie succeeds.
Since this film is labeled as “Part One” you would expect to this film to end on a cliff-hanger and McQuarrie/Cruise were smart about that, too. It is more of “the mission isn’t finished” than a cliff-hanger, which helps this film hold together on it’s own and not just “Part One of a two-parter”.
Very smart, indeed.
A fun romp at the cinema - head out to the biggest screen possible to immerse yourself into this mission, you’ll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
A fun, escapist, action film that is satisfying (and not dumb), MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: DEAD
Darren (1599 KP) rated St. Agatha (2018) in Movies
Oct 2, 2019
Characters – Mary is a pregnant young lady with a tragic past which saw her running from her abusive father, she seeks refuge to have her child, which sees her in a convent, only for this to be a worse hell than her previous life, she is stuck with the abusive religious nuns that want her baby, even renaming her Agatha. Mother Superior runs the convent, she has strict rules and expects the women to follow these rules or face punishment, she does however want the children to be born, which means the punishments won’t put the babies at risks, she has women under her control, but when it comes to Mary she must go to new extremes to keep her position of power in place. Catherine is one of the few women that offers Mary any help within the walls, she is also pregnant further along than Mary, meaning the two teaming up would mean more risk for her. We do have other girls that are under different levels of control, while we also have other nuns who are trying to prove their level of strictness to the Mother Superior.
Performances – Sabrina Kern in the leading role is great to watch, she brings the broken figure and shows us just how determined she is to make the most out of her life with her child. Carolyn Hennessy does bring us the strict figure required for her role which will show how capable to she to take control of the scenes through the film. the rest of the cast do a solid job throughout, they each get their moment to shine in the film’s story too.
Story – The story follows a young woman who seeks refuge in a convent to help her have her child only to find the convent is being controlled by nuns that don’t always follow the bible when it comes to helping the young women that come to them for help. With this story we do get to give until the personal life of Mary that does have a tragic past and does show how far she has had to go to fix the problems in her life. The main focus is on the convent which does keep us guessing to what the Mother Superior will do next because they want the babies and can’t risk damaging them, but do need to punish the women. We do get elements of the theme around the idea of cults which does play an important factor in just where the film ends up going. We also have women at different stages of pregnancy which shows us and Mary just what will happen to her if she stays.
Horror – The horror in the film follows the events in the convent, we get a mix of hauntings and torture, which are only making Mary look like she is losing her mind.
Settings – The film is set in the convent, we get to see how the locked doors keep people in and just how they are going to be forcing the woman to follow the rules.
Special Effects – The effects in this film are used to show the injuries which aren’t as graphic as they could have been, though they imply horrific injuries given.
Scene of the Movie – The baby is coming.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It could have gone a lot darker that is does go.
Final Thoughts – This is a solid enough horror that uses the themes of religious cults to make the horror seem more realistic and shocking.
Overall: Religious Cult 101
Performances – Sabrina Kern in the leading role is great to watch, she brings the broken figure and shows us just how determined she is to make the most out of her life with her child. Carolyn Hennessy does bring us the strict figure required for her role which will show how capable to she to take control of the scenes through the film. the rest of the cast do a solid job throughout, they each get their moment to shine in the film’s story too.
Story – The story follows a young woman who seeks refuge in a convent to help her have her child only to find the convent is being controlled by nuns that don’t always follow the bible when it comes to helping the young women that come to them for help. With this story we do get to give until the personal life of Mary that does have a tragic past and does show how far she has had to go to fix the problems in her life. The main focus is on the convent which does keep us guessing to what the Mother Superior will do next because they want the babies and can’t risk damaging them, but do need to punish the women. We do get elements of the theme around the idea of cults which does play an important factor in just where the film ends up going. We also have women at different stages of pregnancy which shows us and Mary just what will happen to her if she stays.
Horror – The horror in the film follows the events in the convent, we get a mix of hauntings and torture, which are only making Mary look like she is losing her mind.
Settings – The film is set in the convent, we get to see how the locked doors keep people in and just how they are going to be forcing the woman to follow the rules.
Special Effects – The effects in this film are used to show the injuries which aren’t as graphic as they could have been, though they imply horrific injuries given.
Scene of the Movie – The baby is coming.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It could have gone a lot darker that is does go.
Final Thoughts – This is a solid enough horror that uses the themes of religious cults to make the horror seem more realistic and shocking.
Overall: Religious Cult 101
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
Please stop now
Contains spoilers, click to show
Where to begin...
Fallen Kingdom is full to the brim with stupid.
It sort of imitates The Lost World - first half set on an island, second half set within human population - but it just falls on its face, especially in that second half.
We have a typical evil guy, with a ludicrous plan to use dinosaurs in modern war scenarios (again - for some absurd reason), we have a new "crazy" hybrid lab created dinosaur on the rampage (again!), And to top it all off, the writers decided to throw in a side plot about a little girl who actually a clone? What? Why?
There's also a bit with a velociraptor diving through a window, away from an explosion, like a dinosaur John McClane - we are so far away from the first movie now, is there any point in carrying on?
The first half of the film fairs slightly better, (the opening scene is a highlight for me) and the CGI is pretty solid throughout, but as soon as they leave the island, it's nosedives in spectacular fashion.
Bruce Dallas-Howard and Chris Pratt - again, both fine actors, bit here they are just there, not really adding or taking away from the whole experience.
And just like Jurassic World, it's full of silly plot points that I try not to think too hard about, bit in the end can't help myself such as:
Why is Claire not incarcerated for the events of the first film - she's definitely responsible for a lot of civilians being mailed by rampant dinosaurs.
How does the old guy have absolutely no idea that there is a massive lab/dinosaur prison below his house.
How did they get the T-Rex onto the boat into containment in the few minutes between the main characters jumping into the ocean to getting to the boat themselves?
Why does the Indoraptor happily eat everyone in sight, but then sneak up on the little girl... It's a kind of cool shit but still.
When the film reaches it's conclusion with dinosaurs roaming our everyday lives, you realise that most of the trailer is in the last minute of the film, and this was maybe all filler to reach the inevitable sequel, but to be honest, my interest is low at this point.
On a final note, I love Jeff Goldblum but what was the point of his appearance here? He literally says the name of the film out loud, and that's it. Jesus.
Fallen Kingdom is full to the brim with stupid.
It sort of imitates The Lost World - first half set on an island, second half set within human population - but it just falls on its face, especially in that second half.
We have a typical evil guy, with a ludicrous plan to use dinosaurs in modern war scenarios (again - for some absurd reason), we have a new "crazy" hybrid lab created dinosaur on the rampage (again!), And to top it all off, the writers decided to throw in a side plot about a little girl who actually a clone? What? Why?
There's also a bit with a velociraptor diving through a window, away from an explosion, like a dinosaur John McClane - we are so far away from the first movie now, is there any point in carrying on?
The first half of the film fairs slightly better, (the opening scene is a highlight for me) and the CGI is pretty solid throughout, but as soon as they leave the island, it's nosedives in spectacular fashion.
Bruce Dallas-Howard and Chris Pratt - again, both fine actors, bit here they are just there, not really adding or taking away from the whole experience.
And just like Jurassic World, it's full of silly plot points that I try not to think too hard about, bit in the end can't help myself such as:
Why is Claire not incarcerated for the events of the first film - she's definitely responsible for a lot of civilians being mailed by rampant dinosaurs.
How does the old guy have absolutely no idea that there is a massive lab/dinosaur prison below his house.
How did they get the T-Rex onto the boat into containment in the few minutes between the main characters jumping into the ocean to getting to the boat themselves?
Why does the Indoraptor happily eat everyone in sight, but then sneak up on the little girl... It's a kind of cool shit but still.
When the film reaches it's conclusion with dinosaurs roaming our everyday lives, you realise that most of the trailer is in the last minute of the film, and this was maybe all filler to reach the inevitable sequel, but to be honest, my interest is low at this point.
On a final note, I love Jeff Goldblum but what was the point of his appearance here? He literally says the name of the film out loud, and that's it. Jesus.
Cocktails - Virtual Drink Mixer and Recipes
Food & Drink and Lifestyle
App
Another cocktail or recipe app? Virtual reality! Incredibly simple and unique! Mix Cocktails,...
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated Frozen 2: Dangerous Secrets: The Story of Iduna and Agnarr in Books
Dec 29, 2020
Dangerous Secrets is the greatly anticipated prequel to Frozen II which, for the first time in forever, shines the spotlight onto King Agnarr and Queen Iduna of Arendelle.
The 2019 film undoubtedly revealed some of these secrets, such as Iduna being Northuldra and saving Agnarr as a child as well as the two of them venturing to Ahtohallan to find the answers behind Elsa’s powers. Unfortunately, thanks to the film, we also know that they never completed their journey.
Cue Mari Mancusi who expertly bring the monarchs back to life through her writing and forms these little-known characters into best friends, young lovers and torn parents, always just trying to do the next right thing.
The back stories of Agnarr and Iduna are nothing short of brilliant: the reader meets both characters in the Enchanted Forest on the fateful day of the dam celebration and we experience the wonder of both worlds colliding, along with the following danger and confusion from a first-person perspective.
I thoroughly appreciated how Mari Mancusi didn’t have to explain what had happened between the Arendellian forces and the Northuldra: Mancusi knows that the reader already knows the true turn of events from the movie. All throughout Dangerous Secrets this “inside knowledge” is used beautifully: allowing us to experience events as our protagonists do, but without diluting the tension and excitement with explanations.
The reader grows up alongside the future King and Queen, seeing their friendship blossom and experiencing their respective heartbreaks and secrets. The Northuldra are widely believed to be enemies of Arendelle due to the King’s death and the rumours surrounding it. Iduna’s hardship of hiding her true identity is matched only by her grief of losing the only family she has ever known. Similarly, Agnarr has lost a father, his best friend General Matthias and now has to learn how to be a King. Even when they find solace in their friendship and the later romance that this grows into, Iduna is not royalty: their love is doomed from the start…isn’t it?
Regular readers of my reviews will know I loved Jen Calonita’s “Let it Go” but felt that towards the end the writing emulated the movie verbatim in places. I found Kamilla Benko’s “Forest of Shadows” interesting and unique but ultimately it tried too hard to insert different elements into the Frozen universe that we know and love.
In my opinion, Dangerous Secrets contains none of these criticisms.
Elements of the movie are included, of course they are! Agnarr and Iduna’s reading tree is taken straight out of Elsa’s/Ahtohallan’s ice memories; Oaken’s trading post and sauna is briefly mentioned as a rest stop during one of the couple’s adventures and the wonder of chocolate is something Elsa and Anna definitely inherited from their parents!
The difference with this novel is that any references to the movie are easter eggs: elements that we love to spot; they are not brash and in-your-face; they are subtle and add to the story rather than creating it entirely. For example, I loved the inclusion of Grand-Pabbie and the trolls. I also suspect we may have met Kristoff’s mother – perhaps opening the door to another book from Mari Mancusi?
Of course, Dangerous Secrets can only end with the fateful voyage made by the royal couple and, true to form, this made me cry my little heart out. I know from the author’s note that Mari Mancusi is a mother herself but I feel that I would have known this anyway through the sheer heartbreak she portrays through Iduna, and later Agnarr. From their first discovery of Elsa’s powers; to Anna’s accident; to acknowledging that they were endangering Elsa by asking her to “conceal, don’t feel” right up until the couple’s realisation that they will never see their daughters again: the writing is powerful, hard-hitting and, with Ahtohallan’s last gift, stunningly beautiful.
This is a five-star glimpse into the King and Queen of Arendelle and a must-read for any fan of Frozen.
Will Mancusi reveal the secret of the ice-gatherer woman’s identity next?
Only Ahtohallan knows.
The 2019 film undoubtedly revealed some of these secrets, such as Iduna being Northuldra and saving Agnarr as a child as well as the two of them venturing to Ahtohallan to find the answers behind Elsa’s powers. Unfortunately, thanks to the film, we also know that they never completed their journey.
Cue Mari Mancusi who expertly bring the monarchs back to life through her writing and forms these little-known characters into best friends, young lovers and torn parents, always just trying to do the next right thing.
The back stories of Agnarr and Iduna are nothing short of brilliant: the reader meets both characters in the Enchanted Forest on the fateful day of the dam celebration and we experience the wonder of both worlds colliding, along with the following danger and confusion from a first-person perspective.
I thoroughly appreciated how Mari Mancusi didn’t have to explain what had happened between the Arendellian forces and the Northuldra: Mancusi knows that the reader already knows the true turn of events from the movie. All throughout Dangerous Secrets this “inside knowledge” is used beautifully: allowing us to experience events as our protagonists do, but without diluting the tension and excitement with explanations.
The reader grows up alongside the future King and Queen, seeing their friendship blossom and experiencing their respective heartbreaks and secrets. The Northuldra are widely believed to be enemies of Arendelle due to the King’s death and the rumours surrounding it. Iduna’s hardship of hiding her true identity is matched only by her grief of losing the only family she has ever known. Similarly, Agnarr has lost a father, his best friend General Matthias and now has to learn how to be a King. Even when they find solace in their friendship and the later romance that this grows into, Iduna is not royalty: their love is doomed from the start…isn’t it?
Regular readers of my reviews will know I loved Jen Calonita’s “Let it Go” but felt that towards the end the writing emulated the movie verbatim in places. I found Kamilla Benko’s “Forest of Shadows” interesting and unique but ultimately it tried too hard to insert different elements into the Frozen universe that we know and love.
In my opinion, Dangerous Secrets contains none of these criticisms.
Elements of the movie are included, of course they are! Agnarr and Iduna’s reading tree is taken straight out of Elsa’s/Ahtohallan’s ice memories; Oaken’s trading post and sauna is briefly mentioned as a rest stop during one of the couple’s adventures and the wonder of chocolate is something Elsa and Anna definitely inherited from their parents!
The difference with this novel is that any references to the movie are easter eggs: elements that we love to spot; they are not brash and in-your-face; they are subtle and add to the story rather than creating it entirely. For example, I loved the inclusion of Grand-Pabbie and the trolls. I also suspect we may have met Kristoff’s mother – perhaps opening the door to another book from Mari Mancusi?
Of course, Dangerous Secrets can only end with the fateful voyage made by the royal couple and, true to form, this made me cry my little heart out. I know from the author’s note that Mari Mancusi is a mother herself but I feel that I would have known this anyway through the sheer heartbreak she portrays through Iduna, and later Agnarr. From their first discovery of Elsa’s powers; to Anna’s accident; to acknowledging that they were endangering Elsa by asking her to “conceal, don’t feel” right up until the couple’s realisation that they will never see their daughters again: the writing is powerful, hard-hitting and, with Ahtohallan’s last gift, stunningly beautiful.
This is a five-star glimpse into the King and Queen of Arendelle and a must-read for any fan of Frozen.
Will Mancusi reveal the secret of the ice-gatherer woman’s identity next?
Only Ahtohallan knows.