Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Battle of the Sexes (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tennis and sex, but without the grunting.
Here’s a good test of someone’s age…. ask the question “Billie-Jean?”. Millennials will probably come back with “Huh?”; those in their 30’s or 40’s might come back with “Michael Jackson!”; those older than that will probably reply “King!”.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Equalizer 2 (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
Ex-government assassin Robert McCall (Denzel Washington) takes it upon himself to right the wrongs of those who have been exploited. He spends his days driving a Lyft around making chance encounters with people. When one of those people is in need he will go to any length to dispense justice. His brand of justice is brutal and swift but he always give the oppressors the chance to redeem themselves. He does this for people passing though his life but when his best friend, and one of the only former colleges to know his alive, Susan Plummer (Melissa Leo) is killed while on an investigation he sets out to dispatch vengeance rather than justice. He will stop at nothing to find out why his friend was murdered and eliminate those responsible. Robert must first reveal that he is still alive to his former partner Dave York (Pedro Pascal) so he can have access to the investigation. Once he has access the pair will try and find the killers and exact revenge. That is before the killers find them.
This film is the follow up to 2014’s The Equalizer. It returns both Washington and Leo as well as Director Antoine Fuqua (Shooter, South Paw) and Writer Richard Wenk (Jack Reacher: Never Go Back, 16 Blocks) and Bill Pullman, as Brian Plummer. The action scenes in the beginning of the film are really well done. Maybe a spoiler here so caution, the climatic fight scene at the end is less well done and because it is set in a hurricane a lot of it is blurry and hard to follow. It puts you in the setting of the weather but because the action is hand to hand you can really miss a lot of what is going on. It didn’t really work for me personally. The story started out really how I expected and followed the first films story of McCall helping out those who had no other options. This part felt very much like the first film but not redundant. However, it really slowed down when it got into the main story of the film. This part really seemed overly predictable and unoriginal. You, or rather I, could see how the entire movie was laid out and the inevitable conclusion with very few plot twist. This made pace of the film is tough for me. Really action packed at the beginning and then really slow drawn out drama in the middle.
On its own this film is an okay movie. One of many action/crime/mystery films that are made each year. It didn’t really do a good job of distinguishing itself from the rest of the genre. But fans of this type of movie can enjoy how it is heartfelt and warm at times and bloody and action packed at others. The end I discussed above I was not a fan of. Also there is the issue of when you compare it to the original film it really is lacking some key things that the made the first film a success. The villain in this film really leaves something to be desired while the first film had a pretty good antagonist. The pace of the first film was much better and the story flowed more naturally. Sometimes it is really hard to recreate something and I think this film falls way short.
This film is the follow up to 2014’s The Equalizer. It returns both Washington and Leo as well as Director Antoine Fuqua (Shooter, South Paw) and Writer Richard Wenk (Jack Reacher: Never Go Back, 16 Blocks) and Bill Pullman, as Brian Plummer. The action scenes in the beginning of the film are really well done. Maybe a spoiler here so caution, the climatic fight scene at the end is less well done and because it is set in a hurricane a lot of it is blurry and hard to follow. It puts you in the setting of the weather but because the action is hand to hand you can really miss a lot of what is going on. It didn’t really work for me personally. The story started out really how I expected and followed the first films story of McCall helping out those who had no other options. This part felt very much like the first film but not redundant. However, it really slowed down when it got into the main story of the film. This part really seemed overly predictable and unoriginal. You, or rather I, could see how the entire movie was laid out and the inevitable conclusion with very few plot twist. This made pace of the film is tough for me. Really action packed at the beginning and then really slow drawn out drama in the middle.
On its own this film is an okay movie. One of many action/crime/mystery films that are made each year. It didn’t really do a good job of distinguishing itself from the rest of the genre. But fans of this type of movie can enjoy how it is heartfelt and warm at times and bloody and action packed at others. The end I discussed above I was not a fan of. Also there is the issue of when you compare it to the original film it really is lacking some key things that the made the first film a success. The villain in this film really leaves something to be desired while the first film had a pretty good antagonist. The pace of the first film was much better and the story flowed more naturally. Sometimes it is really hard to recreate something and I think this film falls way short.
FilmIntuition (33 KP) rated Gate 76 in Books
Jun 1, 2018
Oozing With Tension
In the right place at the right time, boxer turned private eye Freddy Ferguson catches sight of some very wrong people in an airport security line just before a flight explodes at the San Francisco International Airport.
And even though he's been contracted to go through passenger lists as part of the B team hired by the airline, Freddy can't help but follow up on what he'd witnessed on that deadly night when an enigmatic blonde woman escaped certain death by checking in only to change her appearance in an airport bathroom rather than get on that flight. Is she a part of a bigger conspiracy or merely the last living witness of a horrific crime?
Stylistically reminiscent of Raymond Chandler and Elmore Leonard with its no-nonsense first person point-of-view, indie author Andrew Diamond's Noir flavored page turner is terse, strong, and oozing with tension.
But while Freddy's redemptive plight is fascinating indeed, the otherwise terrific Gate 76 makes a few missteps in its final third as – instead of zeroing in on its increasingly complicated Grisham level mystery – one of its female leads begins to preach at Freddy, and therefore the reader. And even though I appreciate the book's bold characterization and vivid description, moments like this are not only the opposite of subtle but they also pull focus away from the main storyline.
Juggling a large number of characters to the point that in the end, Freddy has to phone a few to literally tell them and the reader what is going on, Gate 76 might've worked even better if it had cut down on some of the middle-men to avoid the repetition of needing to explain something we've already figured out alongside our lead.
From its dynamic opening that plays just like an action movie, Gate 76 is a largely effective and entertaining thriller. With his keen sense of humor, eye for details, and ability to weave together an intricate number of subplots with style, this was a great introduction for me to Andrew Diamond and makes me eager to pick up some of his other reads.
Note: I received an ARC of this title via Bookish First in exchange for my honest opinion.
And even though he's been contracted to go through passenger lists as part of the B team hired by the airline, Freddy can't help but follow up on what he'd witnessed on that deadly night when an enigmatic blonde woman escaped certain death by checking in only to change her appearance in an airport bathroom rather than get on that flight. Is she a part of a bigger conspiracy or merely the last living witness of a horrific crime?
Stylistically reminiscent of Raymond Chandler and Elmore Leonard with its no-nonsense first person point-of-view, indie author Andrew Diamond's Noir flavored page turner is terse, strong, and oozing with tension.
But while Freddy's redemptive plight is fascinating indeed, the otherwise terrific Gate 76 makes a few missteps in its final third as – instead of zeroing in on its increasingly complicated Grisham level mystery – one of its female leads begins to preach at Freddy, and therefore the reader. And even though I appreciate the book's bold characterization and vivid description, moments like this are not only the opposite of subtle but they also pull focus away from the main storyline.
Juggling a large number of characters to the point that in the end, Freddy has to phone a few to literally tell them and the reader what is going on, Gate 76 might've worked even better if it had cut down on some of the middle-men to avoid the repetition of needing to explain something we've already figured out alongside our lead.
From its dynamic opening that plays just like an action movie, Gate 76 is a largely effective and entertaining thriller. With his keen sense of humor, eye for details, and ability to weave together an intricate number of subplots with style, this was a great introduction for me to Andrew Diamond and makes me eager to pick up some of his other reads.
Note: I received an ARC of this title via Bookish First in exchange for my honest opinion.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Fast & Furious 6 (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Paul Walker and Vin Diesel are back in “Fast & Furious 6” the latest chapter in the hugely popular “Fast & Furious” series. This time out the renegade crew is enticed from their comfortable and no-extradition lifestyles with the promise of full pardons by Agent Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson). Hobbs is willing to meet the team’s high demands due to the international threat posed by a team of drivers who are headed by a former military specialist named Owen Shaw (Luke Evans).
A rough first encounter and pursuit through London not only proves just how dangerous and skilled Shaw and his crew are, but brings Dominic (Vin Diesel), face to face with Letty (Michelle Rodriquez), who was thought to have been killed years ago. Battling conflicting emotions with finding Letty not only alive but also on the team he’s trying to bring down, Dominic must get the crew into shape to discover where Shaw will strike next. Thankfully Brian( Paul Walker) is able to use his skills from his law enforcement days in order to get a much needed lead despite the peril it costs him to do so. In a race against time, the crew must risk it all to thwart Shaw who is the most skilled and dangerous foe they have encountered to date. What follows is an action-packed, adrenaline-fueled all out romp that is a solid action film.
The movie requires you to take great leaps of logic and faith even for a film of this type and while it does not work as well as the previous two entries, Director Justin Lin knows his audience and delivers what they want. There is plenty of racing and action and the film does use plenty of actual stunts rather than CGI and the Fast & Furious crew throw themselves into the highly physical roles. The cast works well with one another and seem to be having a good time being back with one another, which is a good thing as the jaw-dropping after credits scene promises that the series still has enough gas in the tank to thrill audiences.
A rough first encounter and pursuit through London not only proves just how dangerous and skilled Shaw and his crew are, but brings Dominic (Vin Diesel), face to face with Letty (Michelle Rodriquez), who was thought to have been killed years ago. Battling conflicting emotions with finding Letty not only alive but also on the team he’s trying to bring down, Dominic must get the crew into shape to discover where Shaw will strike next. Thankfully Brian( Paul Walker) is able to use his skills from his law enforcement days in order to get a much needed lead despite the peril it costs him to do so. In a race against time, the crew must risk it all to thwart Shaw who is the most skilled and dangerous foe they have encountered to date. What follows is an action-packed, adrenaline-fueled all out romp that is a solid action film.
The movie requires you to take great leaps of logic and faith even for a film of this type and while it does not work as well as the previous two entries, Director Justin Lin knows his audience and delivers what they want. There is plenty of racing and action and the film does use plenty of actual stunts rather than CGI and the Fast & Furious crew throw themselves into the highly physical roles. The cast works well with one another and seem to be having a good time being back with one another, which is a good thing as the jaw-dropping after credits scene promises that the series still has enough gas in the tank to thrill audiences.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Lincoln Lawyer (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Mick Haller (Matthew McConaughey) is a criminal defense attorney who works out of his Lincoln Town Car in Los Angeles, hence the title of the movie and book “The Lincoln Lawyer” by Michael Connelly. Mickey defends all kinds of criminals and all he expects from his clients is that they pay him. While he may be a rather shifty lawyer, he is a loving father to his daughter Hayley (Mackenzie Aladjem) and he obviously still cares for her mother Maggie McPherson (Marisa Tomei).
Now although he has many clients, none are really big money clients. That changes one day when Louis Roulet (Ryan Phillippe), a rich Beverly Hills playboy, is arrested for assault & attempted rape and he wants Mick to defend him. At first Mick believes that he will be able to easily get his client acquitted, but as he and his investigator Frank Levin (William H. Macy) dig deeper, they discovery disturbing information about the case and it’s possible link to another.
In his quest to win the all mighty “Not Guilty” verdict, Mick has many obstacles (both professional and personal) placed before him that he must successfully navigate around, and treachery hiding in the shadows that he must bring into the light or else he may lose more than just a case.
While the entire cast was incredible, Matthew McConaughey and Ryan Phillippe gave equally amazing performances (this is especially true for any scene that they were both in). The characters were well-developed, believable and for the most part likable, heck I even liked the biker Eddie (Trace Adkins). The storyline was intriguing with a twist or two that I did not see coming and it also had some very nice humor sprinkled in. I did find that in a few scenes the dialogue seemed to be a bit unnatural for what was going on but it didn’t really detract from the overall scenes in question. Personally I hope this film does well enough that they make a sequel (I believe the book’s sequel is The Reversal) because I would like to see more of these characters in action.
Now although he has many clients, none are really big money clients. That changes one day when Louis Roulet (Ryan Phillippe), a rich Beverly Hills playboy, is arrested for assault & attempted rape and he wants Mick to defend him. At first Mick believes that he will be able to easily get his client acquitted, but as he and his investigator Frank Levin (William H. Macy) dig deeper, they discovery disturbing information about the case and it’s possible link to another.
In his quest to win the all mighty “Not Guilty” verdict, Mick has many obstacles (both professional and personal) placed before him that he must successfully navigate around, and treachery hiding in the shadows that he must bring into the light or else he may lose more than just a case.
While the entire cast was incredible, Matthew McConaughey and Ryan Phillippe gave equally amazing performances (this is especially true for any scene that they were both in). The characters were well-developed, believable and for the most part likable, heck I even liked the biker Eddie (Trace Adkins). The storyline was intriguing with a twist or two that I did not see coming and it also had some very nice humor sprinkled in. I did find that in a few scenes the dialogue seemed to be a bit unnatural for what was going on but it didn’t really detract from the overall scenes in question. Personally I hope this film does well enough that they make a sequel (I believe the book’s sequel is The Reversal) because I would like to see more of these characters in action.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
It is 1934, and our moustachioed detective has just solved a theft in Jerusalem. He looks forward to resting in Istanbul, but his break is interrupted with the news that he must return to London for a case. It seems like Poirot's luck is in, having just met his friend who is director of the Orient Express.
Once on board Poirot catches the attention of the businessman, Samuel Ratchett. Ratchett has received threatening letters, and wishes to hire the detective as his bodyguard during their journey, but the offer is politely declined.
That night an avalanche derails he train and the passengers are stranded. In the morning Ratchett is found dead, stabbed a dozen times. Poirot and Bouc, the train director, investigate the passengers as repairs begin. Poirot discovers a partially destroyed note connecting Ratchett to the kidnapping of Daisy Armstrong, a child who was abducted from her bedroom and held for ransom. After the ransom was paid, Daisy was found murdered. Ratchett is identified as John Cassetti, Daisy’s kidnapper and murderer.
First off, let me address the elephant in the room... that'll be Kenneth Branagh as Poirot. David Suchet will always be my Poirot, he's perfect. Branagh, for me, has an overacting issue. And that moustache, it's just ridiculous. That's not even taking into account the scene where Poirot is laying in bed and he doesn't have his night-time moustache cosy on. Crazy.
Agatha Christie's tale has definitely been given the Hollywood treatment. It's gone from the quite dark Suchet version, to something quite farcical in comparison. I can understand remaking some things, but when you have such a definitive portrayal of a character why would you recast them?
Having just rewatched the 2010 version I will say that the story line in the movie is probably easier to understand. It's also more suitable for a younger audience.
As a passing comment to everyone who was surprised to hear they were going to do Death On The Nile next... no shit, Poirot! It was dropped in at the end of the film.
Once on board Poirot catches the attention of the businessman, Samuel Ratchett. Ratchett has received threatening letters, and wishes to hire the detective as his bodyguard during their journey, but the offer is politely declined.
That night an avalanche derails he train and the passengers are stranded. In the morning Ratchett is found dead, stabbed a dozen times. Poirot and Bouc, the train director, investigate the passengers as repairs begin. Poirot discovers a partially destroyed note connecting Ratchett to the kidnapping of Daisy Armstrong, a child who was abducted from her bedroom and held for ransom. After the ransom was paid, Daisy was found murdered. Ratchett is identified as John Cassetti, Daisy’s kidnapper and murderer.
First off, let me address the elephant in the room... that'll be Kenneth Branagh as Poirot. David Suchet will always be my Poirot, he's perfect. Branagh, for me, has an overacting issue. And that moustache, it's just ridiculous. That's not even taking into account the scene where Poirot is laying in bed and he doesn't have his night-time moustache cosy on. Crazy.
Agatha Christie's tale has definitely been given the Hollywood treatment. It's gone from the quite dark Suchet version, to something quite farcical in comparison. I can understand remaking some things, but when you have such a definitive portrayal of a character why would you recast them?
Having just rewatched the 2010 version I will say that the story line in the movie is probably easier to understand. It's also more suitable for a younger audience.
As a passing comment to everyone who was surprised to hear they were going to do Death On The Nile next... no shit, Poirot! It was dropped in at the end of the film.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Electrical Life of Louis Wain (2021) in Movies
Jan 17, 2022
1/2 of a GREAT Movie
It is a fun surprise to be perusing all the streaming services available and tripping across a very entertaining film that, heretofore, was unknown.
Such was the case with THE ELECTRICAL LIFE OF LOUIS WAIN - a biography (of sorts) of the eponymous English painter, known for his fanciful portraits of cats.
Starring Benedict Cumberbatch (in the title role) and Written and Directed by Will Sharpe (BLACK POND) based on a story by Simon Stephenson (who also co-wrote the screenplay with Sharpe), THE ELECTICAL LIFE OF LOUIS WAIN is 1/2 of a very good (maybe even GREAT) film that falls apart in the 2nd half.
The first half of this film finds the eccentric Wain finding love and discovering his artistic talent. It is this 1/2 of the film that draws you in - and must have been what drew the talents of Sharpe, Claire Foy (Queen Elizabeth in the first few seasons of THE CROWN) and Cumberbatch to this film. Cumberbatch, of course, is superb as Wain (especially in this first half) and his chemistry with Foy (who plays his love interest/wife) is tremendous and IS the reason to see this film.
However, the film shifts focus, by necessity, in the 2nd half to the rising stardom of Wain and his descent into madness. Toby Jones (as his benefactor) and the always under-rated Andrea Riseborough (OBLIVION) take center stage with Cumberbatch in this part of the film and the love, fun, whimsey and depth of the first 1/2 of the film disappears. Riseborough, particularly, suffers from a poorly written role where her character - Wain’s disapproving sister - is (in essence) the “bad guy”, so Sharpe and Stephenson replace love, warmth and support with disapproval, anger and madness. While this is true to the life that Wain lived, it didn’t make for a particularly interesting 2nd half of a film.
Come for Benedict’s and Foy’s chemistry and performances, stay for the rest because…well…it’s still pretty good.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Such was the case with THE ELECTRICAL LIFE OF LOUIS WAIN - a biography (of sorts) of the eponymous English painter, known for his fanciful portraits of cats.
Starring Benedict Cumberbatch (in the title role) and Written and Directed by Will Sharpe (BLACK POND) based on a story by Simon Stephenson (who also co-wrote the screenplay with Sharpe), THE ELECTICAL LIFE OF LOUIS WAIN is 1/2 of a very good (maybe even GREAT) film that falls apart in the 2nd half.
The first half of this film finds the eccentric Wain finding love and discovering his artistic talent. It is this 1/2 of the film that draws you in - and must have been what drew the talents of Sharpe, Claire Foy (Queen Elizabeth in the first few seasons of THE CROWN) and Cumberbatch to this film. Cumberbatch, of course, is superb as Wain (especially in this first half) and his chemistry with Foy (who plays his love interest/wife) is tremendous and IS the reason to see this film.
However, the film shifts focus, by necessity, in the 2nd half to the rising stardom of Wain and his descent into madness. Toby Jones (as his benefactor) and the always under-rated Andrea Riseborough (OBLIVION) take center stage with Cumberbatch in this part of the film and the love, fun, whimsey and depth of the first 1/2 of the film disappears. Riseborough, particularly, suffers from a poorly written role where her character - Wain’s disapproving sister - is (in essence) the “bad guy”, so Sharpe and Stephenson replace love, warmth and support with disapproval, anger and madness. While this is true to the life that Wain lived, it didn’t make for a particularly interesting 2nd half of a film.
Come for Benedict’s and Foy’s chemistry and performances, stay for the rest because…well…it’s still pretty good.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Lee (2222 KP) rated They Shall Not Grow Old (2018) in Movies
Nov 12, 2018
Absolutely outstanding and timely reminder of our past
I managed to miss the cinema screenings of this recently, so was very happy to discover that it was going to be shown on the BBC as part of their centenary remembrance schedule and I'd be able to enjoy it at home.
A collection of old archive footage from World War I shows young boys enlisting in the army and going through their training. It's narrated by actual WWI veterans, describing how they lied about their age in order to sign up and recounting their fears and excitement while preparing for battle. Even at this point in the movie, it's an effective and interesting use of the tired looking silent black and white clips we're all used to seeing.
And then we suddenly see where all the time and effort has been spent on this movie, as one of those tired looking clips suddenly transforms into vivid colour. And it's not just the colour that's been applied either. Where these original film clips would vary in frame rate, resulting in that familiar jittery sped up effect, that's all been corrected here, with computers used to apply missing frames and provide a smoother realistic experience. Sound has been added too, not just the explosions and sounds of war, but voices of the soldiers. The team were able to lip read the restored footage and then record actors voices onto it. Apparently, the cinema release even has a touch of 3D applied to it!
The result though is simply incredible. We're taken into the trenches and into the war itself. Not only does it make the horrors of war all the more real and horrific, but it also makes the fun and the laughter that the soldiers still managed to share all the more poignant too. It's absolutely outstanding, and something that everyone should see.
A collection of old archive footage from World War I shows young boys enlisting in the army and going through their training. It's narrated by actual WWI veterans, describing how they lied about their age in order to sign up and recounting their fears and excitement while preparing for battle. Even at this point in the movie, it's an effective and interesting use of the tired looking silent black and white clips we're all used to seeing.
And then we suddenly see where all the time and effort has been spent on this movie, as one of those tired looking clips suddenly transforms into vivid colour. And it's not just the colour that's been applied either. Where these original film clips would vary in frame rate, resulting in that familiar jittery sped up effect, that's all been corrected here, with computers used to apply missing frames and provide a smoother realistic experience. Sound has been added too, not just the explosions and sounds of war, but voices of the soldiers. The team were able to lip read the restored footage and then record actors voices onto it. Apparently, the cinema release even has a touch of 3D applied to it!
The result though is simply incredible. We're taken into the trenches and into the war itself. Not only does it make the horrors of war all the more real and horrific, but it also makes the fun and the laughter that the soldiers still managed to share all the more poignant too. It's absolutely outstanding, and something that everyone should see.
Neil Goddard (3 KP) rated Hellboy (2019) in Movies
Feb 27, 2020
It all looked soooo promising
Contains spoilers, click to show
Let me say this upfront; David Harbour looks f---ing boss as Hellboy. The makeup is far superior to that of Ron Perlman, not that there was anything wrong with Ron Perlman’s, but with this new incarnation it’s all in the eyes. Deep red, sunken, pained. Sadly, that is all I can say about this movie that is one hundred percent genuinely positive. There are positives however, but they come with a big ‘however’.
I was initially a little concerned that we were getting a re-boot and not a direct sequel to Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008), especially as it still seemed so recent and was so well made. I know it was over a decade ago but quality is timeless, yeah? Then David Harbour was cast and Neil Marshall announced as director. Great, thought I, an actor I like and a director who’s put out some solid genre material. I saw the first picture of Harbour as Hellboy and I was genuinely excited. I saw the trailer and again, excited. Then I watched the film.
Eurgh, where to start?
Firstly, Ian McShane’s initial voice over is clunky and ill fitting, then they throw in some b@llocks about King Arthur and Excalibur. I had my first wobble here, as some of the effects seemed less than special.
Cue opening titles.
The film starts with a Mexican wrestling match that is purely exposition to let us know Hellboy is a hard drinking and hard fighting anti-hero working for an organisation that deals with the paranormal. The make up for his vampiric opponent is also great (can’t fault the makeup department), but the scene seemed superfluous. We get the nubbin of the story forming now; some horrible witchy wench from way back when was cut into bits and flung around jolly old England to prevent her from spreading a right ‘orrible plague. Turns out a potty-mouthed Liverpudlian pig-monster is collecting said bits in the hope of putting her back together in exchange for his normal appearance. Scouse pig-monster is quite entertaining.
Hellboy goes to England at the request of an upper-class paranormal society to help them kill giants; this goes t1ts up. Again, this seems like unnecessary exposition to introduce Alice, a medium who he rescued as a baby, who now rescues him in a transit van. We also get introduced to M11’s Agent Daimio. There something wrong with him, he keeps injecting himself with a serum to stop something happening. I knew at this point we’d get to see what it was eventually, probably at a juncture where something is needed to rescue someone important. However, at this point I had a feeling it would be bad, I just didn’t know how bad.
There some more fighting, some good effects, some mediocre effects and some terrible effects. There’s some good one-liners, there’s some dull and/or terrible dialogue and then we get the film’s conclusion.
There’s something I’ve been putting off mentioning as I didn’t want the entire review to be about it, and it could have been; the witchy wench at the heart of all this paranormal consternation, Nimue, is played by Milla Jovovich and she is terrible. From when she first opens her mouth to her predictable demise, she is terrible. Terrible. TERRIBLE.
I love some of the Resident Evil films but all she’s required to do is some slow-motion scissor kicks and shoot zombies and zombie-dogs in the face. She is tolerated, rather than enjoyed. Here she is emoting, or at least I think that’s what she was going for, and as a depiction of an evil entity bent of the destruction of all mankind, she is, for want of a better word, cack.
David Harbour and the Hellboy franchise deserve better than this. To be blunt, the franchise has better than this and Mike Mignola should be a bit more f---ing precious with his creation.
Hellboy (2004) was genuinely exciting; it was an origin story that bought that story full circle for its thrilling and apocalyptical conclusion. It has a wonderful nemesis, great support and breath-taking visuals. The re-tread of the origin story in Hellboy (2019) is, again, one more unnecessary diversion from a sketchy plot, which, for all its meagre bones takes a f-ck load of time to tell.
Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008) was equally impressive. It also introduced a fully formed community of creatures and customs hiding alongside mankind. It did so with nonchalant aplomb. Nothing seemed irrelevant or forced. For two films with almost identical running times, Hellboy (2019) tells less of a story with way more waffle.
So, I did mention there were some positives. David Harbour is great. He’s dour, sarcastic, defiant and funny, he just has no engaging story in which to be all those things. Ian McShane is good as the father figure but he is overshadowed by memories of the late, unbelievably great John Hurt. The story of a witch trying to destroy mankind is solid fantasy movie gold and the unleashing of her plague late in the final act is suitably hellish; bizarre demons emerging from city streets and tearing humans limb from limb, it’s bloody wonderful and wonderfully bloody. They all could have come straight out of a Clive Barker fever dream. However, it’s too little too late, by this point in the story we’ve had too many cutaways, too much shoddy CGI, and Agent Daimio stinking up many a scene with his ‘will he won’t he’ turn into something rubbish… he does.
The worst part of all this is I don’t know if they can come back from this. The film may have sunk the franchise at least for the next few years.
I do however, look forward to a re-boot in a decade or so, if we haven’t all been assimilated by aliens, overrun by AI robots or decimated by a supernatural plague bought on by some witchy wench with an axe to grind.
THREE WORD SUMMATION: Big Red Turd.
I was initially a little concerned that we were getting a re-boot and not a direct sequel to Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008), especially as it still seemed so recent and was so well made. I know it was over a decade ago but quality is timeless, yeah? Then David Harbour was cast and Neil Marshall announced as director. Great, thought I, an actor I like and a director who’s put out some solid genre material. I saw the first picture of Harbour as Hellboy and I was genuinely excited. I saw the trailer and again, excited. Then I watched the film.
Eurgh, where to start?
Firstly, Ian McShane’s initial voice over is clunky and ill fitting, then they throw in some b@llocks about King Arthur and Excalibur. I had my first wobble here, as some of the effects seemed less than special.
Cue opening titles.
The film starts with a Mexican wrestling match that is purely exposition to let us know Hellboy is a hard drinking and hard fighting anti-hero working for an organisation that deals with the paranormal. The make up for his vampiric opponent is also great (can’t fault the makeup department), but the scene seemed superfluous. We get the nubbin of the story forming now; some horrible witchy wench from way back when was cut into bits and flung around jolly old England to prevent her from spreading a right ‘orrible plague. Turns out a potty-mouthed Liverpudlian pig-monster is collecting said bits in the hope of putting her back together in exchange for his normal appearance. Scouse pig-monster is quite entertaining.
Hellboy goes to England at the request of an upper-class paranormal society to help them kill giants; this goes t1ts up. Again, this seems like unnecessary exposition to introduce Alice, a medium who he rescued as a baby, who now rescues him in a transit van. We also get introduced to M11’s Agent Daimio. There something wrong with him, he keeps injecting himself with a serum to stop something happening. I knew at this point we’d get to see what it was eventually, probably at a juncture where something is needed to rescue someone important. However, at this point I had a feeling it would be bad, I just didn’t know how bad.
There some more fighting, some good effects, some mediocre effects and some terrible effects. There’s some good one-liners, there’s some dull and/or terrible dialogue and then we get the film’s conclusion.
There’s something I’ve been putting off mentioning as I didn’t want the entire review to be about it, and it could have been; the witchy wench at the heart of all this paranormal consternation, Nimue, is played by Milla Jovovich and she is terrible. From when she first opens her mouth to her predictable demise, she is terrible. Terrible. TERRIBLE.
I love some of the Resident Evil films but all she’s required to do is some slow-motion scissor kicks and shoot zombies and zombie-dogs in the face. She is tolerated, rather than enjoyed. Here she is emoting, or at least I think that’s what she was going for, and as a depiction of an evil entity bent of the destruction of all mankind, she is, for want of a better word, cack.
David Harbour and the Hellboy franchise deserve better than this. To be blunt, the franchise has better than this and Mike Mignola should be a bit more f---ing precious with his creation.
Hellboy (2004) was genuinely exciting; it was an origin story that bought that story full circle for its thrilling and apocalyptical conclusion. It has a wonderful nemesis, great support and breath-taking visuals. The re-tread of the origin story in Hellboy (2019) is, again, one more unnecessary diversion from a sketchy plot, which, for all its meagre bones takes a f-ck load of time to tell.
Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008) was equally impressive. It also introduced a fully formed community of creatures and customs hiding alongside mankind. It did so with nonchalant aplomb. Nothing seemed irrelevant or forced. For two films with almost identical running times, Hellboy (2019) tells less of a story with way more waffle.
So, I did mention there were some positives. David Harbour is great. He’s dour, sarcastic, defiant and funny, he just has no engaging story in which to be all those things. Ian McShane is good as the father figure but he is overshadowed by memories of the late, unbelievably great John Hurt. The story of a witch trying to destroy mankind is solid fantasy movie gold and the unleashing of her plague late in the final act is suitably hellish; bizarre demons emerging from city streets and tearing humans limb from limb, it’s bloody wonderful and wonderfully bloody. They all could have come straight out of a Clive Barker fever dream. However, it’s too little too late, by this point in the story we’ve had too many cutaways, too much shoddy CGI, and Agent Daimio stinking up many a scene with his ‘will he won’t he’ turn into something rubbish… he does.
The worst part of all this is I don’t know if they can come back from this. The film may have sunk the franchise at least for the next few years.
I do however, look forward to a re-boot in a decade or so, if we haven’t all been assimilated by aliens, overrun by AI robots or decimated by a supernatural plague bought on by some witchy wench with an axe to grind.
THREE WORD SUMMATION: Big Red Turd.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Captain Marvel (2019) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Marvel just about manages to pull it off
With a touching tribute to the amazing Stan Lee, it’s clear from the outset that Captain Marvel isn’t going to be your ordinary MCU instalment, or so Marvel Studios would have us believe. The 21stfilm, yes, I can’t quite believe it either, in the long-standing Marvel Cinematic Universe, Captain Marvel is the first superhero film from the studio to focus primarily on a single female lead.
Astounding really that a franchise started by all intents and purposes way back in 2008 with Iron Man and has grossed billion after billion at the box-office hasn’t felt the need to offer a big tentpole movie to a female hero. But history aside, Captain Marvel has finally landed. Are we looking at one of Marvel’s greats?
Captain Marvel (Brie Larson) is an extra-terrestrial Kree warrior who finds herself caught in the middle of an intergalactic battle between her people and the Skrulls. Living on Earth in 1995, she keeps having recurring memories of another life as U.S. Air Force pilot Carol Danvers. With help from Nick Fury (Samuel L Jackson), Captain Marvel tries to uncover the secrets of her past while harnessing her special superpowers to end the war with the evil Skrulls.
Directed by Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck in their first big-budget blockbuster, Captain Marvel shows, if you’ll pardon the pun, flecks of brilliance while battling a fairly average origins story for what could be described as Marvel’s most powerful hero.
Where it does shine throughout is in its casting. We’ll get to the titular hero shortly but Samuel L Jackson’s performance across the film is exceptional. Beautifully de-aged without the off-putting uncanny valley treatment we occasionally get with these types of visual effects, he’s a highlight of the film and the chemistry he shares with Larson is believable and enjoyable to watch.
Clearly not afraid of being typecast is Ben Mendelsohn who has played some tremendous villains over the course of his career. From Rogue One to Ready Player One, the Australian actor clearly feels right at home as Skrull leader, Talos.
Though hidden behind layers of prosthetics for the majority of the movie, he comes across much better than poor Oscar Issac did in X-Men: Apocalypse. Unfortunately, the film does lack a menacing villain throughout however, but this isn’t down to Mendelsohn’s performance which is spot on.
While the action is filmed with aplomb and there are some cracking set pieces, they feel a little ordinary and lacking in originality
Brie Larson is good, but her story arc is hampered by a bout of amnesia, used to progress the story. It’s a poor scripting decision by the film’s five writers but a necessary one to deal with all the Marvel lore and baggage that comes with creating the 21staddition to a very interlinked series. It’s a shame that this is the case as Larson shares wonderful chemistry with all her co-stars and is let down by her at-times clunky dialogue.
When it comes to the visual effects, we’ve got a story of two halves. This is a $152million movie and with that comes a set of expectations that just aren’t fulfilled consistently enough. Some of the CGI used is incredibly poor and the Kree’s home planet of Hala feels hollow – worlds away from Sakaar and Nova Prime from other Marvel outings. It could almost be compared to that of the Star Wars sequels, though perhaps that’s being a little too harsh.
The cinematography too is bland. Ben Davis is one of the finest cinematographers working in the industry and has put his name to films like Doctor Strange, Guardians of the Galaxy, Kick-Ass and Avengers: Age of Ultron to name but a few. But here, he seems to lack that flair he’s so often known for and while the action is filmed with aplomb and there are some cracking set pieces, they feel a little ordinary and lacking in originality.
Thankfully Captain Marvel retains that classic Marvel sense of humour that we all know and love and there are some genuinely touching moments as the titular hero begins to remember who she is. It also feels very much of the era it’s set in and that’s great. 90s music and a real 90s feel emanate from the screen and it’s here that the film scores highly.
Overall, Captain Marvel is a competent but not outstanding origins story that lacks consistent visual effects, a truly compelling script and engaging cinematography. While it is difficult to warm to Brie Larson’s Carol Danvers at times, it is testament to her acting ability that she remains likeable throughout – it’s just a shame that Marvel hasn’t quite managed to pull it off completely this time around.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/03/08/captain-marvel-review-marvel-just-about-manages-to-pull-it-off/
Astounding really that a franchise started by all intents and purposes way back in 2008 with Iron Man and has grossed billion after billion at the box-office hasn’t felt the need to offer a big tentpole movie to a female hero. But history aside, Captain Marvel has finally landed. Are we looking at one of Marvel’s greats?
Captain Marvel (Brie Larson) is an extra-terrestrial Kree warrior who finds herself caught in the middle of an intergalactic battle between her people and the Skrulls. Living on Earth in 1995, she keeps having recurring memories of another life as U.S. Air Force pilot Carol Danvers. With help from Nick Fury (Samuel L Jackson), Captain Marvel tries to uncover the secrets of her past while harnessing her special superpowers to end the war with the evil Skrulls.
Directed by Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck in their first big-budget blockbuster, Captain Marvel shows, if you’ll pardon the pun, flecks of brilliance while battling a fairly average origins story for what could be described as Marvel’s most powerful hero.
Where it does shine throughout is in its casting. We’ll get to the titular hero shortly but Samuel L Jackson’s performance across the film is exceptional. Beautifully de-aged without the off-putting uncanny valley treatment we occasionally get with these types of visual effects, he’s a highlight of the film and the chemistry he shares with Larson is believable and enjoyable to watch.
Clearly not afraid of being typecast is Ben Mendelsohn who has played some tremendous villains over the course of his career. From Rogue One to Ready Player One, the Australian actor clearly feels right at home as Skrull leader, Talos.
Though hidden behind layers of prosthetics for the majority of the movie, he comes across much better than poor Oscar Issac did in X-Men: Apocalypse. Unfortunately, the film does lack a menacing villain throughout however, but this isn’t down to Mendelsohn’s performance which is spot on.
While the action is filmed with aplomb and there are some cracking set pieces, they feel a little ordinary and lacking in originality
Brie Larson is good, but her story arc is hampered by a bout of amnesia, used to progress the story. It’s a poor scripting decision by the film’s five writers but a necessary one to deal with all the Marvel lore and baggage that comes with creating the 21staddition to a very interlinked series. It’s a shame that this is the case as Larson shares wonderful chemistry with all her co-stars and is let down by her at-times clunky dialogue.
When it comes to the visual effects, we’ve got a story of two halves. This is a $152million movie and with that comes a set of expectations that just aren’t fulfilled consistently enough. Some of the CGI used is incredibly poor and the Kree’s home planet of Hala feels hollow – worlds away from Sakaar and Nova Prime from other Marvel outings. It could almost be compared to that of the Star Wars sequels, though perhaps that’s being a little too harsh.
The cinematography too is bland. Ben Davis is one of the finest cinematographers working in the industry and has put his name to films like Doctor Strange, Guardians of the Galaxy, Kick-Ass and Avengers: Age of Ultron to name but a few. But here, he seems to lack that flair he’s so often known for and while the action is filmed with aplomb and there are some cracking set pieces, they feel a little ordinary and lacking in originality.
Thankfully Captain Marvel retains that classic Marvel sense of humour that we all know and love and there are some genuinely touching moments as the titular hero begins to remember who she is. It also feels very much of the era it’s set in and that’s great. 90s music and a real 90s feel emanate from the screen and it’s here that the film scores highly.
Overall, Captain Marvel is a competent but not outstanding origins story that lacks consistent visual effects, a truly compelling script and engaging cinematography. While it is difficult to warm to Brie Larson’s Carol Danvers at times, it is testament to her acting ability that she remains likeable throughout – it’s just a shame that Marvel hasn’t quite managed to pull it off completely this time around.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/03/08/captain-marvel-review-marvel-just-about-manages-to-pull-it-off/