Search
Search results
Om Namah Shivaya Japa
Lifestyle and Health & Fitness
App
Om Namah Shivaya is an ancient mantra used to awaken higher states of consciousness. In this app,...
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated The Hunger Games (2012) in Movies
Sep 20, 2020 (Updated Nov 26, 2020)
One of the most clueless things I've ever seen, as painstakingly unintelligent as it is one-dimensional and blunt. My problem isn't so much that every YA movie from then until at least 2018 cribbed from it (and for the most part, did it better lol) mercilessly until they left nothing left to this one but its picked-clean carcass - but moreso with the fact that it does only a couple steps above the bare minimum. How awesome would this have been as a Battle Royale-style, anti-fascist bloodbath where a bunch of kids are picked at random and exposed to both the elements and a shit-ton of weapons in a đđłđ¶đźđąđŻ đđ©đ°đž-esque battlefield commentated by a flamboyant Stanley Tucci and Toby Jones? But no, fuck that right? Instead we get a garbage-looking, shakycam exercise in going through the motions with bad characters and toothless action (wasps? most of the characters dying offscreen? are you kidding me?). Plus we're treated to another awful forced romance, dull-arrowed swipes at classism which amount to nothing more than overtly-obvious visual signifiers with nothing to actually chew on (I assume out of cowardice - which makes it worse), and one of the most infamous cases of vaguely misogynistic attempts at a 'strong female lead' by making her mean and stripped of any actual personality. Somehow it doesn't really drag, but it's pretty viciously unexciting. There's some real bite to the scenes where Katniss's every expression let alone word is picked apart by a capricious crowd and disingenuous MC, and Haymitch painfully watching the rich children play with the toy sword - though not only does it refuse to dive into the treasure trove of possible commentary it sets up, but I actually have to apologize to the (worlds better) đđȘđ·đŠđłđšđŠđŻđ” for goofing on its idiotic politics because this is somehow even dumber. "We want to make sure there's never another uprising again, show we're a gracious + caring government, and entertain the public all at once. How do we do that? Well we'll just start abducting and killing children at random on national television of course!" Lmfao. Doesn't lean into anything that could have made this enjoyable, and there's a lot - so they had to have *tried* to make it this flat. Also one of those movies that only knows how to express its limited emotion through unbearable "everything sucks" world-building. Great... that would be another thing entirely if it even earned the right to do that, which naturally this doesn't. Cheesy and unintentionally funny.
Darren (1599 KP) rated On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
Characters â James Bond is back, he is still a womaniser only now he doesnât have the same spark of charisma that he had been showing in previous films, he still must go head to head with Blofeld, but he just doesnât feel right this time around. Tracey is the Bond girl this time around, she isnât as easy as the previous one showing a higher intelligence to stay ahead of Bond and not following the traditions that her father wants. Blofeld returns and for some reason doesnât recognise Bond even after meeting him in the last film, so that is strange. He has a masterplan to take over the world or at least put money in his pocket, well bank account. Draco is the connection to locate Blofeld with him being Tracyâs father it also helps with the locating as part of a deal.
Performances â George Lazenby doesnât have the same level of charisma or charm that Sean Connery brings, this only disappoints and takes us away from the film in places. Diana Rigg does bring class the to Bond girl role, showing more commitment to this role that Lazenby. Telly Savalas struggles to step into Donald Pleasenceâs shoes in the Blofeld role almost being a parody of the character.
Story â The story here takes James on his latest mission which is to capture Blofeld after his escape last time out, this takes him in a new direction away from the tropical islands and into the snow-covered mountain ranges as Blofeld is working on his next plan to become rich. The story is a way too long compared to previous films and does drag at times, the fact Blofeld doesnât remember James is a big issue for me because them coming face to face was a big moment in You Only Live Twice. The highlight of the story comes from the fact we get a surprise ending which does show us that we are ready to continue the battle.
Action/Adventure â The action is a complete mixed bag because certain fights are good, but then the horrible green screen moments just donât work. The adventure takes James to a new location which is all we want at times.
Settings â We are set in the Swiss Alps on top of one of the mountains which shows us a base that isnât easy to escape from and away from the bikinis we have been seeing too often.
Scene of the Movie â Ski escape.
That Moment That Annoyed Me â Blofeld not remember Bond.
Final Thoughts â This is the weakest in the series to date, we just donât get drawn in like before and the attempted new technology use only hinders the film.
Overall: Weakest Bond film to date.
Performances â George Lazenby doesnât have the same level of charisma or charm that Sean Connery brings, this only disappoints and takes us away from the film in places. Diana Rigg does bring class the to Bond girl role, showing more commitment to this role that Lazenby. Telly Savalas struggles to step into Donald Pleasenceâs shoes in the Blofeld role almost being a parody of the character.
Story â The story here takes James on his latest mission which is to capture Blofeld after his escape last time out, this takes him in a new direction away from the tropical islands and into the snow-covered mountain ranges as Blofeld is working on his next plan to become rich. The story is a way too long compared to previous films and does drag at times, the fact Blofeld doesnât remember James is a big issue for me because them coming face to face was a big moment in You Only Live Twice. The highlight of the story comes from the fact we get a surprise ending which does show us that we are ready to continue the battle.
Action/Adventure â The action is a complete mixed bag because certain fights are good, but then the horrible green screen moments just donât work. The adventure takes James to a new location which is all we want at times.
Settings â We are set in the Swiss Alps on top of one of the mountains which shows us a base that isnât easy to escape from and away from the bikinis we have been seeing too often.
Scene of the Movie â Ski escape.
That Moment That Annoyed Me â Blofeld not remember Bond.
Final Thoughts â This is the weakest in the series to date, we just donât get drawn in like before and the attempted new technology use only hinders the film.
Overall: Weakest Bond film to date.
Go Film Magazine - Art House Cinema & Award Winning Movies On The Go
Entertainment and Magazines & Newspapers
7.0
Rate It
App
Go Film Magazine Brings You The Best Short Films From Around The World Straight To Your iPad and...
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Captain America: Civil War (2016) in Movies
Dec 24, 2020
To it's credit, Civil War was incredible at it's time of release, but a recent re watch left me feeling a little emptier than I remember, and I think it's down to further films in the MCU. The main issue is that whilst it's a third Captain America movie, it is also Avengers 2.5, and as such, loses something from both sides of the coin. The complicated relationship between Bucky and Cap was one of the driving forces that made The Winter Soldier one of the best MCU films to date, but here, that side is distracted from by the big headline brawl. The Civil War side of things is set up pretty well, but the pay off doesn't quite pack the punch it needs to due to the overall focus on the aformentioned Bucky/Cap story.
When it first released, it benefited from boasting the first MCU appearances of Black Panther and Spider-Man. Since then we've seen plenty of both, in arguably better movies. At the time of release, the airport fight scene had me beaming with nerdy joy, but since then, we've been spoiled by Infinity War and Endgame, and the titular Civil War is really a low stakes fight full of pulled punches, wrapped up in a fan pleasing package. Basically, hindsight shows that Civil War is a victim of Marvel Studios bigger event movies that have followed since.
Another point worth mentioning is the villains' evil plan. The big bad this time is classic Captain America antagonist Baron Zeno, and his plan is, well, it's really convoluted. I know it's a comic book film, and I should suspend my disbelief to a certain degree, but I can't rag on Lex Luthors' stupid plan in Batman v Superman and then give this a free pass. It gets the ball rolling, and puts all the players into the right places for the film to proceed, but it's dumb as fuck.
It's miles away from being a bad comic book film though. The cast are all once again superb. Some of the emotional beats are fantastic, especially the final showdown between Iron Man and Cap. The way Tony is portrayed as a man with nothing left to lose at the films climax is heart breaking. It's extremely visually pleasing, the CGI is top drawer and the action is stupidly entertaining.
Civil War ultimately is full of thrilling moments that are designed to have comic book fans jumping for joy, but underneath all it's pizzazz, my recent re watch has shown me that it's a film trying to do too much. Luckily the Russo's managed to refine their formula for Infinity War, and as such, Civil War is a flawed yet important stepping stone to the Infinity Saga climax. Still 100% worth watching.
When it first released, it benefited from boasting the first MCU appearances of Black Panther and Spider-Man. Since then we've seen plenty of both, in arguably better movies. At the time of release, the airport fight scene had me beaming with nerdy joy, but since then, we've been spoiled by Infinity War and Endgame, and the titular Civil War is really a low stakes fight full of pulled punches, wrapped up in a fan pleasing package. Basically, hindsight shows that Civil War is a victim of Marvel Studios bigger event movies that have followed since.
Another point worth mentioning is the villains' evil plan. The big bad this time is classic Captain America antagonist Baron Zeno, and his plan is, well, it's really convoluted. I know it's a comic book film, and I should suspend my disbelief to a certain degree, but I can't rag on Lex Luthors' stupid plan in Batman v Superman and then give this a free pass. It gets the ball rolling, and puts all the players into the right places for the film to proceed, but it's dumb as fuck.
It's miles away from being a bad comic book film though. The cast are all once again superb. Some of the emotional beats are fantastic, especially the final showdown between Iron Man and Cap. The way Tony is portrayed as a man with nothing left to lose at the films climax is heart breaking. It's extremely visually pleasing, the CGI is top drawer and the action is stupidly entertaining.
Civil War ultimately is full of thrilling moments that are designed to have comic book fans jumping for joy, but underneath all it's pizzazz, my recent re watch has shown me that it's a film trying to do too much. Luckily the Russo's managed to refine their formula for Infinity War, and as such, Civil War is a flawed yet important stepping stone to the Infinity Saga climax. Still 100% worth watching.
Darren (1599 KP) rated I Like Me (2018) in Movies
Sep 13, 2019
Characters â Maggie is a free spirit that has spent most of her life being carefree, she returns home for her fatherâs funeral where she invites herself to stay with her half-sister, Maggie will drink too much and cause constant stress in her sisterâs life, while not even getting a conversation out of her son. She writes a self-help book that makes her a big star, which offers her a chance to help people, but she struggles to deal with her own problems in life. Hannah is the younger half-sister of Maggie, she is married and looking for a promotion at work, she has her life pretty much together, until Maggie arrives in her life and things start to go wrong. Luke is Hannahâs husband that is still feeling young heart being a fan of disco bowling. Michael is the son of Maggieâs, the person she most wants back in her life, but he keeps his distance from her.
Performances â Sue Schaffel and Anna Fagan take the leading roles, they show us great chemistry through the film as they both have to show the ups and downs of their lives. Chris Kozlowski will get most of the laughs in the film.
Story â The story here follows a free spirit that returns to her home town, where she tries to put her life back together with her self-help book making her an internet sensation, but can she fix her own life before it is too late. This is a story that does focus on the idea that people will need help in everybody life, people might turn to books, but in reality it will always be yourself that helps the most. We do see how people can go off the rails and will try to find their own directions, while we will also people that seem to be grounded, but lack direction. We do get the important messages here and by the end of the film you will understand the meaning behind everything in the story.
Comedy â The comedy in the film comes from Maggieâs action and a lot comes from Luke just trying to be a good husband without ever siding with anybody.
Settings â The film keeps the settings simple enough being everyday home locations, until we go to the disco bowling which adds the colour and fun to the life of the characters.
Scene of the Movie â Disco bowling.
That Moment That Annoyed Me â There could have been more on Maggieâs childhood, like was she raised with Hannah, who was her mother.
Final Thoughts â This is a fun comedy that does have a life message involved, it will get the laughs and has strong performances throughout.
Overall: Fun comedy.
Performances â Sue Schaffel and Anna Fagan take the leading roles, they show us great chemistry through the film as they both have to show the ups and downs of their lives. Chris Kozlowski will get most of the laughs in the film.
Story â The story here follows a free spirit that returns to her home town, where she tries to put her life back together with her self-help book making her an internet sensation, but can she fix her own life before it is too late. This is a story that does focus on the idea that people will need help in everybody life, people might turn to books, but in reality it will always be yourself that helps the most. We do see how people can go off the rails and will try to find their own directions, while we will also people that seem to be grounded, but lack direction. We do get the important messages here and by the end of the film you will understand the meaning behind everything in the story.
Comedy â The comedy in the film comes from Maggieâs action and a lot comes from Luke just trying to be a good husband without ever siding with anybody.
Settings â The film keeps the settings simple enough being everyday home locations, until we go to the disco bowling which adds the colour and fun to the life of the characters.
Scene of the Movie â Disco bowling.
That Moment That Annoyed Me â There could have been more on Maggieâs childhood, like was she raised with Hannah, who was her mother.
Final Thoughts â This is a fun comedy that does have a life message involved, it will get the laughs and has strong performances throughout.
Overall: Fun comedy.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Ready or Not (2019) in Movies
Sep 2, 2019
Iâve always loved playing games, board games, role playing games, computer gamesâŠwhatever. I remember as a kid most of the games we played were played outside, whether it was a game of capture the flag, tag, or the always entertaining game of Hide and Seek. All the games I have ever played have been played in fun, with no real stakes involved outside of maybe some pride or some friendly competition. What if there was more at stake than simply having to sit out the game for the rest of the time? What if hiding and surviving until dawn was the only way you were going to live to see the next day? I donât know about you, but Iâd make sure it was the best game of Hide and Seek Iâd ever played, or it would end up being my last. Ready or Not, a dark comedy from Fox Searchlight (now Walt Disney Studios) and directed by Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett, explores what happens when a ruthless business man sells his soul to the devil for the sake of a board game empire.
Early on we are introduced to Grace. She spent her childhood bouncing from foster home to foster home, wanting a family but just never quite getting one. When she finally finds the man of her dreams Alex (Mark OâBrien) who also is one of the heirs to a giant gaming empire, she believes that all her longing for a family, even one as messed up as his, is finally paying off. Not long after the wedding it is revealed that part of the tradition to joining the family is to play a game. Alex reassures her that the game could be something as simple as checkers or possibly as complex as chess. He doesnât know as itâs up to a special box, imbued with mystical powers that selects the game that she will be forced to play.
Upon placing the card in the box, and withdrawing it, three little words are inscribed upon itâŠHide and Seek. Thinking this is simply a game, and with no further instructions, the family puts on the Hide and Seek record and begin counting to 100. Once the count is up, weapons are handed out to the âseekersâ and the game begins.
Not long after finding her hiding spot, Grace quickly becomes bored of playing and comes out admitting defeat. It is only after a series of unfortunate events resulting in the deaths of some of the key players does Grace finally understand that this family plays for keeps. With the help of an unlikely ally from Alexâs brother Daniel (Adam Brody), she not only is given an opportunity to survive the night, but also learns of the pact with the devil that was made which allowed the family to acquire its great fortune. Unless they can satisfy the curse, the entire family will not live to see the sunrise.
Ready or Not takes an outstanding cast and provides them with an equally fantastic setting. Andie MacDowell portrays the creepy mother-in-law Becky, along with her equally creepy and even more unhinged husband Tony (Henry Czerny). Each character plays out their roles in the most over-the-top performances imaginable, an they pull them off more believably then I think they even had intended. Whether its Kristian Bunn as the bumbling Fitch, who is forced to YouTube how to use a crossbow and googles whether pacts with the devil are real or BSâŠor Elyse Levesque as the stoic Charity, who has absolutely no problem killing someone, if it means she gets to maintain her lavish lifestyle. The cast is truly what pulls the movie off, with their ability to take the absurdity and make it almost feel normal.
Ready or Not does have the occasional jump scare and is literally coated in blood throughout, but itâs the dark comedy that really sets this movie apart from many that have come before it. I donât know if itâs wrong to laugh at things that should be completely taboo as much as I did. Ready or Not tries to make you think itâs serious, even when you know it is intentionally not. While some of the dialog might fall a bit flat, youâd be hard pressed to notice between your bursts of laughter. You know a movie does something right, when you find yourself quoting it not only immediately after it finishes, but into the next day (and at this rate probably beyond).
Ready or Not is a fun film, thatâs the best way to describe it. Itâs gruesome and of course violent, but it doesnât take itself seriously and asks the same of the audience. There have been other movies who have taken this genre too seriously in the past, and lead to mixed results. Ready or Not wants you to laugh at its absurdity and take glee in the events that take place. Based on the individual characters, itâs amazing that the family has survived as long as it hasâŠmust be because that card doesnât come up very often. If you are looking for a fun film, one that you want to laugh at (and with) you could certainly do worse than Ready or Not. It is one of the best dark comedies to come out in years, and it makes me long for the days when movies were still unique and werenât simply attempting to reboot everything.
Early on we are introduced to Grace. She spent her childhood bouncing from foster home to foster home, wanting a family but just never quite getting one. When she finally finds the man of her dreams Alex (Mark OâBrien) who also is one of the heirs to a giant gaming empire, she believes that all her longing for a family, even one as messed up as his, is finally paying off. Not long after the wedding it is revealed that part of the tradition to joining the family is to play a game. Alex reassures her that the game could be something as simple as checkers or possibly as complex as chess. He doesnât know as itâs up to a special box, imbued with mystical powers that selects the game that she will be forced to play.
Upon placing the card in the box, and withdrawing it, three little words are inscribed upon itâŠHide and Seek. Thinking this is simply a game, and with no further instructions, the family puts on the Hide and Seek record and begin counting to 100. Once the count is up, weapons are handed out to the âseekersâ and the game begins.
Not long after finding her hiding spot, Grace quickly becomes bored of playing and comes out admitting defeat. It is only after a series of unfortunate events resulting in the deaths of some of the key players does Grace finally understand that this family plays for keeps. With the help of an unlikely ally from Alexâs brother Daniel (Adam Brody), she not only is given an opportunity to survive the night, but also learns of the pact with the devil that was made which allowed the family to acquire its great fortune. Unless they can satisfy the curse, the entire family will not live to see the sunrise.
Ready or Not takes an outstanding cast and provides them with an equally fantastic setting. Andie MacDowell portrays the creepy mother-in-law Becky, along with her equally creepy and even more unhinged husband Tony (Henry Czerny). Each character plays out their roles in the most over-the-top performances imaginable, an they pull them off more believably then I think they even had intended. Whether its Kristian Bunn as the bumbling Fitch, who is forced to YouTube how to use a crossbow and googles whether pacts with the devil are real or BSâŠor Elyse Levesque as the stoic Charity, who has absolutely no problem killing someone, if it means she gets to maintain her lavish lifestyle. The cast is truly what pulls the movie off, with their ability to take the absurdity and make it almost feel normal.
Ready or Not does have the occasional jump scare and is literally coated in blood throughout, but itâs the dark comedy that really sets this movie apart from many that have come before it. I donât know if itâs wrong to laugh at things that should be completely taboo as much as I did. Ready or Not tries to make you think itâs serious, even when you know it is intentionally not. While some of the dialog might fall a bit flat, youâd be hard pressed to notice between your bursts of laughter. You know a movie does something right, when you find yourself quoting it not only immediately after it finishes, but into the next day (and at this rate probably beyond).
Ready or Not is a fun film, thatâs the best way to describe it. Itâs gruesome and of course violent, but it doesnât take itself seriously and asks the same of the audience. There have been other movies who have taken this genre too seriously in the past, and lead to mixed results. Ready or Not wants you to laugh at its absurdity and take glee in the events that take place. Based on the individual characters, itâs amazing that the family has survived as long as it hasâŠmust be because that card doesnât come up very often. If you are looking for a fun film, one that you want to laugh at (and with) you could certainly do worse than Ready or Not. It is one of the best dark comedies to come out in years, and it makes me long for the days when movies were still unique and werenât simply attempting to reboot everything.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Words (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
On paper, The Words is a film that is better suited as a literary novella. In print, we, as readers, are often granted insight to our characters thoughts and motivation that is frequently lost on film or delivered in a lackluster voiceover that most critics deem as lazy film making. Furthermore, the story within a story, within a story approach in film often leaves the audience with uninteresting shells of characters and can make a story forgettable at best.
Given these reasons, it is easy to see why many would choose to undertake a less ambitious story for their directorial debut. That group does not include co-writer-directors Brian Klugman and Lee Sternthal. This duo is actually successful at tackling this dangerous story-within-a-story film device by keeping it simple. Focusing on the main characters of each story and their motivation, while tying each together with some common themes like love, what it means to write something great, and how far the need for success will drive the characters.
The movie begins with highly successful author Clay Hammond (Dennis Quaid) conducting a reading of his latest novel The Words. Among his audience is literary grad student and adoring fan, Daniella (Olivia Wilde), who has aspirations of picking the brain of the man that authored her favorite stories and perhaps getting involved romantically. As Hammond begins to read his story we are introduced to the tale of starving writer Rory Jensen (Bradley Cooper) and his wife Dora (Zoe Saldana). The two are a young couple in love, trying to get on their feet while Rory struggles with multiple rejections of his novels, until he is finally forced to come to grips with his own limitations as an artist and a writer.
As he settles into life and a job as a mail clerk at a publishing firm, he finds a lost manuscript in a vintage leather briefcase that Dora had purchased for him during their honeymoon in Paris. That story turns out to be something that moves him to tears. It is the final thing in his realization that he will never be the great writer that he thought he was, the great writer that wrote this anonymous story. In an effort to feel and try to understand what it is like to create something great, Rory decides to retype the novel word for word on his laptop if only to admire the beautiful story that he had instantly fallen in love with. When Dora mistakenly reads the novel, she encourages him to submit it to a publisher. Before he can tell her the truth, his world is transformed into the life he had always imagined he would have for himself and Dora as the novel gains him both great literary and commercial success. And finally, now that his star has risen he can get his own novel published.
Enter Jeremy Irons as the old man who reveals himself to Rory as the true author of his story. The old man feels compelled to explain to Rory the tragic origin of the story that has become the young authorâs success. Irons steals every second he is on screen as his delivery of the old man oozes with the intellectual style that has been his trademark over the years. Like Rory, we are helpless to do nothing but listen and get lost in the words of his story as if he was sitting next to us and telling the story in real life.
The old man reveals that the novel is the result of great love and pain that his younger self (Ben Barnes) and the love of his life Celia (Nora Arnezeder) endured. While I am not familiar with Barnesâ and Arnezederâs work, their performance as the younger couple in Ironsâ story had a genuine connection. And while this love story does not seem to be anything new when it comes to film, it served its purpose by strengthening the other stories, showing how a great story can be mused from someplace unexpected, even if only once.
With Rory now confronted with his deceitful success, he struggles to decide how to make things right and live with himself as a fraud. Itâs at this point the film subtly suggest that Hammondâs story of Rory may actually be a disguised autobiography.
As Rory, Bradley Cooper gives perhaps his best performance to date. I feel that despite his poor and deceitful decision, at no point does he lose the audience. With the help of a strong and emotionally charged performance by Zoe Saldana, we experience Cooperâs honest plight and can understand the events that unfold around him. He is effective as a man who genuinely believes he does not deserve the success that he stole. Without a doubt, this will be a surprising role for those fans who only know Cooper from the humorous characters he plays in The Hangover and most recently Hit and Run. I hope this is the beginning of growth in his craft beyond the charming, confident character we have seen in Limitless and perhaps into a deeper emotional actor.
The weakest part of this film is the story of Clay Hammond and Daniella. Dennis Quaid is quite unlikable as Hammond. He is monotone in his readings and the prose of his story is mediocre at best. While the film drops hints that Hammondâs story of Rory is autobiographical it makes sense that Quaidâs character is played this way. He succeeds in helping create the notion that Hammond is unworthy of the success his character has enjoyed. But something about his performance is so unlikable that even when his character has a redeeming moment, it is lost on an audience that may not care enough about him for it to work.
To add to this dislike of Quaid, Olivia Wilde seems out of place as the character Daniella. It is not that her performance is bad, it is just that every time they showed her as the starry-eyed fan who is love struck for Hammond, she just seemed out of place. Additionally there did not seem to be any connection between Daniella and Hammond in the way the other charactersâ connections helped strengthen their performances.
In the end, I enjoyed this movie more than I expected. Visually the Montreal backdrop does an excellent job as both New York and Paris. And the continual piano score helps blend the stories. The simple focus on the main characters helped maintain the three different stories and keep the overall pacing of the movie in order. In addition, the solid to exceptional performances also helped to keep the film focused and avoided the empty shell of characters that most movies of this nature create. That being said, this movie is not for everyone, but those looking for a change of pace from the summer blockbusters season should consider this film.
Given these reasons, it is easy to see why many would choose to undertake a less ambitious story for their directorial debut. That group does not include co-writer-directors Brian Klugman and Lee Sternthal. This duo is actually successful at tackling this dangerous story-within-a-story film device by keeping it simple. Focusing on the main characters of each story and their motivation, while tying each together with some common themes like love, what it means to write something great, and how far the need for success will drive the characters.
The movie begins with highly successful author Clay Hammond (Dennis Quaid) conducting a reading of his latest novel The Words. Among his audience is literary grad student and adoring fan, Daniella (Olivia Wilde), who has aspirations of picking the brain of the man that authored her favorite stories and perhaps getting involved romantically. As Hammond begins to read his story we are introduced to the tale of starving writer Rory Jensen (Bradley Cooper) and his wife Dora (Zoe Saldana). The two are a young couple in love, trying to get on their feet while Rory struggles with multiple rejections of his novels, until he is finally forced to come to grips with his own limitations as an artist and a writer.
As he settles into life and a job as a mail clerk at a publishing firm, he finds a lost manuscript in a vintage leather briefcase that Dora had purchased for him during their honeymoon in Paris. That story turns out to be something that moves him to tears. It is the final thing in his realization that he will never be the great writer that he thought he was, the great writer that wrote this anonymous story. In an effort to feel and try to understand what it is like to create something great, Rory decides to retype the novel word for word on his laptop if only to admire the beautiful story that he had instantly fallen in love with. When Dora mistakenly reads the novel, she encourages him to submit it to a publisher. Before he can tell her the truth, his world is transformed into the life he had always imagined he would have for himself and Dora as the novel gains him both great literary and commercial success. And finally, now that his star has risen he can get his own novel published.
Enter Jeremy Irons as the old man who reveals himself to Rory as the true author of his story. The old man feels compelled to explain to Rory the tragic origin of the story that has become the young authorâs success. Irons steals every second he is on screen as his delivery of the old man oozes with the intellectual style that has been his trademark over the years. Like Rory, we are helpless to do nothing but listen and get lost in the words of his story as if he was sitting next to us and telling the story in real life.
The old man reveals that the novel is the result of great love and pain that his younger self (Ben Barnes) and the love of his life Celia (Nora Arnezeder) endured. While I am not familiar with Barnesâ and Arnezederâs work, their performance as the younger couple in Ironsâ story had a genuine connection. And while this love story does not seem to be anything new when it comes to film, it served its purpose by strengthening the other stories, showing how a great story can be mused from someplace unexpected, even if only once.
With Rory now confronted with his deceitful success, he struggles to decide how to make things right and live with himself as a fraud. Itâs at this point the film subtly suggest that Hammondâs story of Rory may actually be a disguised autobiography.
As Rory, Bradley Cooper gives perhaps his best performance to date. I feel that despite his poor and deceitful decision, at no point does he lose the audience. With the help of a strong and emotionally charged performance by Zoe Saldana, we experience Cooperâs honest plight and can understand the events that unfold around him. He is effective as a man who genuinely believes he does not deserve the success that he stole. Without a doubt, this will be a surprising role for those fans who only know Cooper from the humorous characters he plays in The Hangover and most recently Hit and Run. I hope this is the beginning of growth in his craft beyond the charming, confident character we have seen in Limitless and perhaps into a deeper emotional actor.
The weakest part of this film is the story of Clay Hammond and Daniella. Dennis Quaid is quite unlikable as Hammond. He is monotone in his readings and the prose of his story is mediocre at best. While the film drops hints that Hammondâs story of Rory is autobiographical it makes sense that Quaidâs character is played this way. He succeeds in helping create the notion that Hammond is unworthy of the success his character has enjoyed. But something about his performance is so unlikable that even when his character has a redeeming moment, it is lost on an audience that may not care enough about him for it to work.
To add to this dislike of Quaid, Olivia Wilde seems out of place as the character Daniella. It is not that her performance is bad, it is just that every time they showed her as the starry-eyed fan who is love struck for Hammond, she just seemed out of place. Additionally there did not seem to be any connection between Daniella and Hammond in the way the other charactersâ connections helped strengthen their performances.
In the end, I enjoyed this movie more than I expected. Visually the Montreal backdrop does an excellent job as both New York and Paris. And the continual piano score helps blend the stories. The simple focus on the main characters helped maintain the three different stories and keep the overall pacing of the movie in order. In addition, the solid to exceptional performances also helped to keep the film focused and avoided the empty shell of characters that most movies of this nature create. That being said, this movie is not for everyone, but those looking for a change of pace from the summer blockbusters season should consider this film.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Swallow (2019) in Movies
Apr 25, 2020
Are you a faker or a maker
Swallow is a film about striving for perfection, the effects of childhood trauma/abusive relationships and the struggle of tying to achieve inner peace/happiness. While its no means a pleasant watch Swallow is both breathtakingly stunning and beautifully depressing at the same time. That and also the shocking realisation that its also completley groundeded in reality too as it deals with such unusual yet very real circumstances make it truly unique and a heartbreaking story. We begin with seeing Hunter tidying her stunningly beautiful home seeming like shes living the life most of us could only dream about, but much like this years invisible man we soon see the reality is shes trapped and a victim of a somwhat abusive relationship buy a man clearly influenced to much by his money and parents. See he's very well off but with this comes a down side. Hes arrogant, patronising, selfish and neglectful treating his beautiful wife as a mere accessory to make him look better to his friends, parents and buisness partners. To him shes just another flashy possession that should be seen and not heard, an accomplishment and when the aren't in public he ignores her, constantly puts her down, underminds her, patronizes her, takes away all her decision making and cares more about how he looks. In public he makes here feel small/useless, degrades her and embarsess her to make himself feel better as he strives for his own perfect life. Thus Hunter develops this addiction and fascination of swallowing items. Interestingly the swallowing starts off kid of fun and visually the items seduce hunter in an almost erotic and playful manner but as the film progresses it becomes a more agressive tendency where the objects change to become more visually aggressive/harmful and even call out and taunt hunter literally begging for her to take them into her mouth. At first the motive behind the swallowing seems innocent enough and a somewhat harmless way of dealing with the neglect from her husband as she still seems extreamly happy and grateful for the life she lives. But its this naivety and innocence that makes swallowing so easy for hunter as shes almost lured in and welcomed by the warm, blissfull, elegance the objects bring. Its like she feels relaxed, clam and embraced by the almost erotic, hypnotic, sensual and orgasmic sensations swallowing brings her. This is all represented by lovely (yet cold) whites and light blue colours littering the early scenes frequently, then theres a transition into warm colours as she starts to feel more satisfied (feeling like she has found happines momentarily and in her own way of achieving something/challenging herself so she feels she has value and worth). As things progress however harsher items are digested and the colours instantly turn to harsh reds symbolizing temptation, punishment, danger and lust making our perception of why she does this shift to thinking its being done as a punishment or for attention and to feel sexualy violated. For a while it seems that this is all the film has to offer but as the story unfolds constant plot twists creep up to delight and shock with the film even switching genres at times to dabble in more horror esq moments that wouldnt go a miss in a film like suspiria. I really dont want to spoil to much but past trauma plays a big part here and how the films character progression portrays what it feels like to be in this kind of harsh mental state is distressing and frequently upsetting as we learn to understand the condition and see how quick people are to dismiss it as a selfish act. See everyone has addictions and hidden secrets some far worse than others and we see how these addictions/traits hinder other characters on thier path to perfection too and also how much harder it is to reach happiness knowing you have flaws. With all its twists and turns swallow had me absolutely fixated on the screen constantly and every character became a puzzle i had to try and unlock if i wanted to figure out thier true nature and motives. I too had become addicted and Swallow is now one of my favorite movies of this year whithout question. From its stunning cinematography, its real/raw stressful and disturbing themes to its sheer beauty and innocence swallow when it endend left me trully feeling like id witnessed something rewarding and satisfying that served a true purpose with what it had to say. Yet I found my mind was still buzzing for the need to delve deeper into it looking for more to ingest and already craving to re watch it. Most people wont like this movie but only because they might be missing the point. Its about the strength and power of secrets, overcomming trauma, selfworth and the progression to finding true happiness in yourself and its absolutely Fantastic.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Pan (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
I had mixed emotions when I first saw the trailer for Pan. The story of Peter Pan was one of my all time favorites growing up. Then Steven Spielberg had to go and get Robin Williams and Dustin Hoffman together to bring us Hook, and it solidified the stories of Pan as the best thing since sliced bread for me. So here we have Joe Wright bringing the word put on paper by Jason Fuchs to real life. The story of how Peter came to Neverland; and just how did Captain James T. Hook become so fearful of crocodiles. I was worried, and so I shut it all out. I did not watch any more trailers, clips, or synopsis on the film. But, my curiosity got the best of me, and when we offered the press screening, I jumped at the opportunity to see it. And boy, I am glad I did.
Pan, in case you havenât figured it out, tells the story of 12-year old orphan Peter (Levi Miller), who is abducted from his orphanage, along with many other little boy orphans, by pirates from Neverland. When they bring Peter to Neverland, he is forced to work in the mines, serving the evil pirate overlord, Black Beard (Hugh Jackman, no seriously. It totally doesnât even look like him.). Itâs not long before some very unusual things start happening to him, and he, along with James T. Hook (Garrett Hedlund), escape the mines to find the natives and Princess Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara), who helps Peter discover his destiny.
Loaded with stunning visuals and a great soundtrack (including some very recognizable songs in the form of pirate chants), Pan nails it in all the right ways. The visionaries who brought this world to life are amazing, and the creativity in every scene is astounding. It was especially charming that the people behind the film kept in mind that it is a family film. While there is some violence, it is an action movie after all, they applied some very interesting effects and theories to use in place of the gore and blood. I also enjoyed, as weird as this sounds, the brightness of the whole movie. They didnât try to make the film a dark tale of gritty origins. The feel of the story has the same notes of brightness that I remember from the Disney film as a kid, to even Hook in my later years.
And the likenesses do not stop there. It was very fun, and a bit nostalgic, to catch the references and clues of whatâs to come. You see things that influence the characters to become who we know and love. And true to the rumors/stories I heard of the background of the beloved Peter Pan tale, Captain Hook and Peter began their time together as friends. The film sets out to do what it was meant to do⊠tell the story of how Peter and Captain Hook became who they were. But, not all is revealed in this film. When the film is over, and youâll wish it werenât, our beloved hero and villain have a long way to go still. So look forward to more films to come.
The only gripe I had with this movie was the acting. And just one part in general. I felt most of the cast was excellent. Jackman portrayed a great, and zany by the standards of the Paniverse (hoping to coin a new term here people, #paniverse), pirate⊠czar?! I know I used overlord, but itâs hard to say what he is other than he is the captain of captains. Mara played Tiger Lily oh so very well, and Miller held his own right up there with the bigger names. But it was Hedlund I had issue with. His portrayal of James Hook was more reminiscent of Jack Nicholson with elongated words, and an almost creepy like vibe. Itâs just not how I imagined him to act, and maybe that is just throwing my perception off. Though, my feeling and view of the portrayal was echoed by my guest at the screening, so there may be something to it. Luckily, my negative view of the acting was not enough to pull me out of the experience, and I was still able to enjoy the movie.
Bottom line. Go see this movie. Take your kids, your partners, your parents, your grandparents, your cousinâs, auntâs son/daughter⊠oh wait. Thatâs you. The point is. Itâs definitely worth seeing. The 3D effects were nothing ground breaking, but it would still be worth it to see it in 3D. And this will definitely be in my collection on day 1 of home release.
Pan, in case you havenât figured it out, tells the story of 12-year old orphan Peter (Levi Miller), who is abducted from his orphanage, along with many other little boy orphans, by pirates from Neverland. When they bring Peter to Neverland, he is forced to work in the mines, serving the evil pirate overlord, Black Beard (Hugh Jackman, no seriously. It totally doesnât even look like him.). Itâs not long before some very unusual things start happening to him, and he, along with James T. Hook (Garrett Hedlund), escape the mines to find the natives and Princess Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara), who helps Peter discover his destiny.
Loaded with stunning visuals and a great soundtrack (including some very recognizable songs in the form of pirate chants), Pan nails it in all the right ways. The visionaries who brought this world to life are amazing, and the creativity in every scene is astounding. It was especially charming that the people behind the film kept in mind that it is a family film. While there is some violence, it is an action movie after all, they applied some very interesting effects and theories to use in place of the gore and blood. I also enjoyed, as weird as this sounds, the brightness of the whole movie. They didnât try to make the film a dark tale of gritty origins. The feel of the story has the same notes of brightness that I remember from the Disney film as a kid, to even Hook in my later years.
And the likenesses do not stop there. It was very fun, and a bit nostalgic, to catch the references and clues of whatâs to come. You see things that influence the characters to become who we know and love. And true to the rumors/stories I heard of the background of the beloved Peter Pan tale, Captain Hook and Peter began their time together as friends. The film sets out to do what it was meant to do⊠tell the story of how Peter and Captain Hook became who they were. But, not all is revealed in this film. When the film is over, and youâll wish it werenât, our beloved hero and villain have a long way to go still. So look forward to more films to come.
The only gripe I had with this movie was the acting. And just one part in general. I felt most of the cast was excellent. Jackman portrayed a great, and zany by the standards of the Paniverse (hoping to coin a new term here people, #paniverse), pirate⊠czar?! I know I used overlord, but itâs hard to say what he is other than he is the captain of captains. Mara played Tiger Lily oh so very well, and Miller held his own right up there with the bigger names. But it was Hedlund I had issue with. His portrayal of James Hook was more reminiscent of Jack Nicholson with elongated words, and an almost creepy like vibe. Itâs just not how I imagined him to act, and maybe that is just throwing my perception off. Though, my feeling and view of the portrayal was echoed by my guest at the screening, so there may be something to it. Luckily, my negative view of the acting was not enough to pull me out of the experience, and I was still able to enjoy the movie.
Bottom line. Go see this movie. Take your kids, your partners, your parents, your grandparents, your cousinâs, auntâs son/daughter⊠oh wait. Thatâs you. The point is. Itâs definitely worth seeing. The 3D effects were nothing ground breaking, but it would still be worth it to see it in 3D. And this will definitely be in my collection on day 1 of home release.