Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated If Beale Street Could Talk (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Love and Rage against the machine.
The baby asked,
‘Is there not one righteous among them?”
― James Baldwin, If Beale Street Could Talk
Beale Street refers to the jumpin’ heart of Memphis where Louis Armstrong was born. As explained in text from Baldwin’s source book (requiring a speed read!) it’s used as a metaphor for the birthplace of every black person in America. (“Every black person in America was born on Beale Street“). But the story is set in Harlem, New York, and with this intellectual stretch, before I even get past the title, I am immediately reaching for the “P-word”, of which more later.
The Plot
Tish (KiKi Layne) is 19 and in love with her lifelong friend ‘Fonny’ (Stephan James). So much in love in fact (and so careless) that Tish is now pregnant with his child. Tish must break this news to both families herself, since Fonny is inside awaiting trial for a vicious rape that he claims he didn’t commit. Tish and their joint families are trying to help, but can Fonny be released in time to see the birth of his child? Or are the institutions so set against him that release is impossible and death row might await?
Interwoven with Love and Anger
At its heart, this film portrays a truly beautiful love story. Tish and Fonny (both adorably played by the young leads) are friends becoming more than friends. We see their emerging love through flashback scenes. Some of these, particularly one on a metro train, are exquisitely done; long gazes into eyes, starting as one thing and ending as another.
In another scene, Fonny takes Tish’s virginity, and it’s done with style, taste and finesse. For younger teens this should be compulsory viewing as an antidote to all the horrible porn they are seeing on the internet: THIS is what sex, based on a foundation of true love, is all about. (The film is UK15 rated for “infrequent very strong language, strong sex” – I actually agree with the rating for the language (and actually I think an act of marital violence should also have also been referenced)…. but not for the sex, which should be 12A).
It’s a love story then? Well, yes, but offset against that, it’s a very angry film, seething with rage about how the police force and the justice system is set ‘against the black man’. Director Barry Jenkins (of – eventual – Oscar winner “Moonlight” fame) has a message to impart and he is intent on imparting it.
A great ensemble performance
The film didn’t get a SAG nomination for the ensemble cast, but it almost feels that they missed out here. As well as the two young leads being spectacular, the whole of the rest of the cast really gel well together, particularly the respective parents: Colman Domingo (“Selma“) as Tish’s father Joseph; Regina King as Tish’s mother Sharon; Michael Beach (“Patriots Day“) as Fonny’s father Frank and Aunjanue Ellis as his bible-bashing mother. A dramatic scene where they all collectively hear the news about the pregnancy is both comical and shocking in equal measure.
Poor sound mixing
If this film gets an Oscar nomination for sound, I’ll frankly be cross! There is significant use of sonorous, bass-heavy music and effects (including a lovely cello theme by Nicholas Britell) – all very effective; there is a lot of earnest and quietly spoken dialogue between the characters – also moody and effective. Unfortunately the two are mixed together in some scenes and frankly I couldn’t make out what was being said. Most frustrating.
In addition, there is voiceover narration from Tish (if you follow my blog regularly you KNOW what I think about that!). Actually, this isn’t as overly intrusive as in films like “The Hate U Give“, but it sounds like it was recorded in a dustbin! It’s a bit like that effect you get with headphones where the plug isn’t quite in the socket, and everything sounds way off and tinny. When combined with Layne’s accent the effect, again, made the dialogue difficult to comprehend.
The c-word and the n-word
There’s a degree of bad language in the film, albeit mild in comparison to “The Favourite“! Tish’s sister (Teyonah Parris) uses the c-word in one very funny dissing of Fonny’s ‘up-themselves’ sisters (Ebony Obsidian and Dominique Thorne). But the n-word is used repeatedly during the film, and that I can never get used to. I ‘get it’ (in the sense that I understand the perception) that this is a word that ‘only black people can use between themselves’. But this just feels elitist and wrong to me. At a time when Viggo Mortensen gets crucified for using it once (while being descriptive and in-context) during a press junket for “Green Book“, I just feel that if a word is taboo it should be taboo, period.
The p-word
My p-word here is “pretentious”. Barry Jenkins clearly feels he has something to prove after the success of “Moonlight“, and there are certainly moments of directorial brilliance in the film. As previously mentioned, the sex scene is one of the best I’ve seen in a long while. Also beautifully done are a birthing scene and two confrontational scenes in Puerto Rico. But there are also moments that seem to be staged, artificial and too ‘arty’ for their own good. Any hidden meaning behind them completely passed me by. (Examples are Sharon’s wig scene and a pan around Fonny’s wood sculpture). It all seems to be “trying too hard”.
Hate for the police is also writ large on the film, with every discriminatory police officer in the whole of the US embodied in the wicked sneering face of the police office Bell (Ed Skrein).
A platform that should be used for more than ranting
This is a film written and directed by an American black man (Jenkins) and largely fully cast with American black people. And I’m a white Englishman commenting on it. I’m clearly unqualified to pass judgement on how black America really feels about things! But comment I will from this fug of ignorance.
It feels to me that the “Black Lives Movement” has given, at long last, black film-makers like Jenkins a platform in cinema to present from. This is a great thing. But I’m sensing that at the moment the tone of the output from that platform (such as this film) seems to me heavily tinged with anger: a scream of frustration about the system and racial injustice over the years. It’s the film-makers right to make films about subjects dear to them. And I’m sure this summer we’ll sadly again see atrocities as previously seen in the likes of Ferguson and Dallas, fuelling the fire of hate. But I would personally really like to see someone like Jenkins use his undoubted talents to make a more uplifting film: a film reflecting the more positive strives that are happening in society, allowing for people of all races and all sexual orientations to make their way in business (not drug-running or crime!) and/or life in general. Those good news stories – the positive side of race relations – are out there and my view is that someone like Barry Jenkins should be telling them.
Final thoughts
I wasn’t as much of a fan of “Moonlight” as the Academy, and this film also left me conflicted. The film is well-made and the cast is very engaging. It also has a love story at its heart that is moody but well-done. Overall though the movie felt over-engineered and a little pretentious, and that knocked it down a few pegs for me.
‘Is there not one righteous among them?”
― James Baldwin, If Beale Street Could Talk
Beale Street refers to the jumpin’ heart of Memphis where Louis Armstrong was born. As explained in text from Baldwin’s source book (requiring a speed read!) it’s used as a metaphor for the birthplace of every black person in America. (“Every black person in America was born on Beale Street“). But the story is set in Harlem, New York, and with this intellectual stretch, before I even get past the title, I am immediately reaching for the “P-word”, of which more later.
The Plot
Tish (KiKi Layne) is 19 and in love with her lifelong friend ‘Fonny’ (Stephan James). So much in love in fact (and so careless) that Tish is now pregnant with his child. Tish must break this news to both families herself, since Fonny is inside awaiting trial for a vicious rape that he claims he didn’t commit. Tish and their joint families are trying to help, but can Fonny be released in time to see the birth of his child? Or are the institutions so set against him that release is impossible and death row might await?
Interwoven with Love and Anger
At its heart, this film portrays a truly beautiful love story. Tish and Fonny (both adorably played by the young leads) are friends becoming more than friends. We see their emerging love through flashback scenes. Some of these, particularly one on a metro train, are exquisitely done; long gazes into eyes, starting as one thing and ending as another.
In another scene, Fonny takes Tish’s virginity, and it’s done with style, taste and finesse. For younger teens this should be compulsory viewing as an antidote to all the horrible porn they are seeing on the internet: THIS is what sex, based on a foundation of true love, is all about. (The film is UK15 rated for “infrequent very strong language, strong sex” – I actually agree with the rating for the language (and actually I think an act of marital violence should also have also been referenced)…. but not for the sex, which should be 12A).
It’s a love story then? Well, yes, but offset against that, it’s a very angry film, seething with rage about how the police force and the justice system is set ‘against the black man’. Director Barry Jenkins (of – eventual – Oscar winner “Moonlight” fame) has a message to impart and he is intent on imparting it.
A great ensemble performance
The film didn’t get a SAG nomination for the ensemble cast, but it almost feels that they missed out here. As well as the two young leads being spectacular, the whole of the rest of the cast really gel well together, particularly the respective parents: Colman Domingo (“Selma“) as Tish’s father Joseph; Regina King as Tish’s mother Sharon; Michael Beach (“Patriots Day“) as Fonny’s father Frank and Aunjanue Ellis as his bible-bashing mother. A dramatic scene where they all collectively hear the news about the pregnancy is both comical and shocking in equal measure.
Poor sound mixing
If this film gets an Oscar nomination for sound, I’ll frankly be cross! There is significant use of sonorous, bass-heavy music and effects (including a lovely cello theme by Nicholas Britell) – all very effective; there is a lot of earnest and quietly spoken dialogue between the characters – also moody and effective. Unfortunately the two are mixed together in some scenes and frankly I couldn’t make out what was being said. Most frustrating.
In addition, there is voiceover narration from Tish (if you follow my blog regularly you KNOW what I think about that!). Actually, this isn’t as overly intrusive as in films like “The Hate U Give“, but it sounds like it was recorded in a dustbin! It’s a bit like that effect you get with headphones where the plug isn’t quite in the socket, and everything sounds way off and tinny. When combined with Layne’s accent the effect, again, made the dialogue difficult to comprehend.
The c-word and the n-word
There’s a degree of bad language in the film, albeit mild in comparison to “The Favourite“! Tish’s sister (Teyonah Parris) uses the c-word in one very funny dissing of Fonny’s ‘up-themselves’ sisters (Ebony Obsidian and Dominique Thorne). But the n-word is used repeatedly during the film, and that I can never get used to. I ‘get it’ (in the sense that I understand the perception) that this is a word that ‘only black people can use between themselves’. But this just feels elitist and wrong to me. At a time when Viggo Mortensen gets crucified for using it once (while being descriptive and in-context) during a press junket for “Green Book“, I just feel that if a word is taboo it should be taboo, period.
The p-word
My p-word here is “pretentious”. Barry Jenkins clearly feels he has something to prove after the success of “Moonlight“, and there are certainly moments of directorial brilliance in the film. As previously mentioned, the sex scene is one of the best I’ve seen in a long while. Also beautifully done are a birthing scene and two confrontational scenes in Puerto Rico. But there are also moments that seem to be staged, artificial and too ‘arty’ for their own good. Any hidden meaning behind them completely passed me by. (Examples are Sharon’s wig scene and a pan around Fonny’s wood sculpture). It all seems to be “trying too hard”.
Hate for the police is also writ large on the film, with every discriminatory police officer in the whole of the US embodied in the wicked sneering face of the police office Bell (Ed Skrein).
A platform that should be used for more than ranting
This is a film written and directed by an American black man (Jenkins) and largely fully cast with American black people. And I’m a white Englishman commenting on it. I’m clearly unqualified to pass judgement on how black America really feels about things! But comment I will from this fug of ignorance.
It feels to me that the “Black Lives Movement” has given, at long last, black film-makers like Jenkins a platform in cinema to present from. This is a great thing. But I’m sensing that at the moment the tone of the output from that platform (such as this film) seems to me heavily tinged with anger: a scream of frustration about the system and racial injustice over the years. It’s the film-makers right to make films about subjects dear to them. And I’m sure this summer we’ll sadly again see atrocities as previously seen in the likes of Ferguson and Dallas, fuelling the fire of hate. But I would personally really like to see someone like Jenkins use his undoubted talents to make a more uplifting film: a film reflecting the more positive strives that are happening in society, allowing for people of all races and all sexual orientations to make their way in business (not drug-running or crime!) and/or life in general. Those good news stories – the positive side of race relations – are out there and my view is that someone like Barry Jenkins should be telling them.
Final thoughts
I wasn’t as much of a fan of “Moonlight” as the Academy, and this film also left me conflicted. The film is well-made and the cast is very engaging. It also has a love story at its heart that is moody but well-done. Overall though the movie felt over-engineered and a little pretentious, and that knocked it down a few pegs for me.
Micky Barnard (542 KP) rated Geekerella (Once Upon a Con #1) in Books
Dec 6, 2018
Sweet but forgettable
This book was cuteness-incarnate with a slice of grit, a retake on Cinderella with a geeky fandom context that worked in a way that was fun and easy to connect. I found myself sucked into this story of Elle and Darien. Darien is something of a beta-male character and I’m always here for that.
As you might imagine, Elle lives with her stepmother and step sisters, things are pretty grim and abusive at home and that made for difficult reading at certain moments. Darien is playing the lead role in a film depicting a fandom Elle has been immersed in since childhood thanks to her late dad’s love of it.
The serendipitous connection through text between these two was a lovely, sweet slow build but the masking of their identities was bound to lead to complications. The events in the storyline were occasionally fresh outside of the fairytale but mostly predictable too, especially when it came to the meeting of these two. There were some very clever aspects like the pumpkin, the cosplaying elements were enjoyable and the side characters were superb. Sage was a highlight from a side character perspective. The character diversity was oozing from the pages in an unforced and natural way. I appreciated how this was conceptualised. .
This was enjoyable, easy YA reading with a delightful geek-fandom. I think this book would appeal to many.
I voluntarily read an early copy of this book.
As you might imagine, Elle lives with her stepmother and step sisters, things are pretty grim and abusive at home and that made for difficult reading at certain moments. Darien is playing the lead role in a film depicting a fandom Elle has been immersed in since childhood thanks to her late dad’s love of it.
The serendipitous connection through text between these two was a lovely, sweet slow build but the masking of their identities was bound to lead to complications. The events in the storyline were occasionally fresh outside of the fairytale but mostly predictable too, especially when it came to the meeting of these two. There were some very clever aspects like the pumpkin, the cosplaying elements were enjoyable and the side characters were superb. Sage was a highlight from a side character perspective. The character diversity was oozing from the pages in an unforced and natural way. I appreciated how this was conceptualised. .
This was enjoyable, easy YA reading with a delightful geek-fandom. I think this book would appeal to many.
I voluntarily read an early copy of this book.
Independent Chinese Documentary: Alternative Visions, Alternative Publics
Book
This book analyses how independent documentaries are forging a new public sphere in today's China....
Darren (1599 KP) rated Iron Man (2008) in Movies
Oct 24, 2019
Characters – Tony Stark is a billionaire playboy engineer who has been developing the latest weapons to defend the home land, he looks down on most the people he meets including the soldiers showing around the warzone. He gets captured and designs a weapon that sees him escape, he makes himself Iron Man which will keep him alive, which sees him looking at life through different eyes, where he doesn’t want to supply weapons in conflict. Rhodey is the military best friend of Tony’s he uses the weapons created to help his men, he can get tired of Tony’s partying lifestyle. Obadiah Stane ran Stark enterprise after Tony’s parents death, he has mentored Tony in business, but is left with a difficult decision after Tony’s decision to stop making weapons. Pepper Potts is Tony’s assistant, she handles the affairs while he gets on with his business.
Performances – Robert Downey Jr is fantastic in the leading role, we can believe his confidence and cocky nature that he is showing through the film. Terrence Howard is playing a more grounded character, he would go onto be replaced in this role, he just doesn’t have the complete opposite against that Robert brings. Jeff Bridges is strong as the villainous businessman who is controlled by greed. Gwyneth Paltrow does a solid job as Pepper, where she is going to become a character we get to know through the franchise.
Story – The story shows us how Tony Stark went from businessman to Iron Man after learning the cost of his weapons which are being used on both sides of the war and must stop the man running his family’s company into the ground with these action. For origin stories we get to see the change in Tony’s mentality over the course of the story which is what will make somebody a hero. We don’t get the completely over the top destruction, with most of the fight scenes blending into the story where we see Tony learning how to control his suit. We get the first steps into the Marvel Cinematic Universe which brings the franchise to life with this just needing to give the hero an early villain that will make him a new hero in the world.
Action/Sci-Fi – The action in this film comes war sequences and how Tony learns about his suits capabilities, the first mission shows what we are going to see in the future. The sci-fi elements in this film comes from how the suit is created to keep Tony alive and the new levels of technology involved.
Settings – The film takes us to a couple of locations, Miami where Tony lives shows his playboy lifestyle, the Afghan locations show how the war is being fought with the two different sides and the same weapons.
Special Effects – The effects used in this film show us the scale of what Tony will have do to survive, we have the idea of his heart that never looks out of place.
Scene of the Movie – Iron Man’s first mission.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Rhodey isn’t the most interesting character in this film.
Final Thoughts – This is a wonderful beginning to the franchise which would go onto change how cinema is experienced, it has the origin of an unknown character to the casual fans of comic book movies, which works for laughs and action, without being a comedy.
Overall: Fun, entertaining and enjoyable.
Performances – Robert Downey Jr is fantastic in the leading role, we can believe his confidence and cocky nature that he is showing through the film. Terrence Howard is playing a more grounded character, he would go onto be replaced in this role, he just doesn’t have the complete opposite against that Robert brings. Jeff Bridges is strong as the villainous businessman who is controlled by greed. Gwyneth Paltrow does a solid job as Pepper, where she is going to become a character we get to know through the franchise.
Story – The story shows us how Tony Stark went from businessman to Iron Man after learning the cost of his weapons which are being used on both sides of the war and must stop the man running his family’s company into the ground with these action. For origin stories we get to see the change in Tony’s mentality over the course of the story which is what will make somebody a hero. We don’t get the completely over the top destruction, with most of the fight scenes blending into the story where we see Tony learning how to control his suit. We get the first steps into the Marvel Cinematic Universe which brings the franchise to life with this just needing to give the hero an early villain that will make him a new hero in the world.
Action/Sci-Fi – The action in this film comes war sequences and how Tony learns about his suits capabilities, the first mission shows what we are going to see in the future. The sci-fi elements in this film comes from how the suit is created to keep Tony alive and the new levels of technology involved.
Settings – The film takes us to a couple of locations, Miami where Tony lives shows his playboy lifestyle, the Afghan locations show how the war is being fought with the two different sides and the same weapons.
Special Effects – The effects used in this film show us the scale of what Tony will have do to survive, we have the idea of his heart that never looks out of place.
Scene of the Movie – Iron Man’s first mission.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Rhodey isn’t the most interesting character in this film.
Final Thoughts – This is a wonderful beginning to the franchise which would go onto change how cinema is experienced, it has the origin of an unknown character to the casual fans of comic book movies, which works for laughs and action, without being a comedy.
Overall: Fun, entertaining and enjoyable.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Until Death (2007) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: Until Death starts as we see how Anthony Stowe (Van Damme) operates under his own addictions of heroin, sex alcohol which has put his career on the edge, his marriage in the drain and his enemy Gabriel Callaghan (Rea) is getting away with the crimes he wants.
When Gabriel catches up with Anthony, he puts a bullet in his skull leaving him for dead, only to leave him in a coma in which he shouldn’t recover from. 6 months later he awakens from his coma and is left to the care of his estranged wife Valerie (Giles), as he recovers it turns out he has changed becoming a better person and even more determined to track down Gabriel.
Thoughts on Until Death
Characters – Anthony Stowes is a dirty cop, hooked on heroin with enemies in the force and on the streets, the methods have made his hard to work with and his long running pursuit of Callaghan puts him in the firing line. After he gets shot and left for dead, he must recover, a process which see him changing to become a better man. Valerie is the wife that is about to divorce Anthony after years of problems between the two, after his injury she takes him in even though she has moved on with her life. Gabriel Callaghan is the ruthless mobster trying to get ahead in the city, he disposes of anyone that gets in his way and won’t let Stowe stop his plan.
Performances – We watch Van Damme movies to watch him kick ass, not because of his acting standards, he is good through the film as does give us a chance to work on his serious reactions, he doesn’t get to show the fighting enough though. Selina Giles does struggle with her role though, you never believe her acting in this role. Stephen Rea does seem to enjoy this villainous role where he can become darker as the film unfolds.
Story – The story follows a dirty cop that goes head to head with a crime boss only for his crashing life to be turned around by a near death experience. The pacing of the story is slow for my liking, we spend too much time with the bad version of Stowe and not enough on the reborn versions road to redemption, which is by the book. Granted we don’t need the deepest story here because we know what we are getting going into the film.
Action/Crime – The action is held back for the final act of the movie, which is fine, but when you have Van Damme in the leading role, you would expect more. The crime side of the film does play into the bigger picture of what is going on which give the characters the biggest part of the development they get.
Settings – The film uses New Orleans as the setting which is always a city used for dirty cop locations, it works well without being over used for the films backdrop.
Scene of the Movie – Final act is the saving grace of the film.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The damn camera turns.
Final Thoughts – This is a typical Van Damme action movie, it tries to give us a serious side without being able to capture this and we are saved by a final act action sequence which is entertaining to watch.
Overall: Van Damme 101
When Gabriel catches up with Anthony, he puts a bullet in his skull leaving him for dead, only to leave him in a coma in which he shouldn’t recover from. 6 months later he awakens from his coma and is left to the care of his estranged wife Valerie (Giles), as he recovers it turns out he has changed becoming a better person and even more determined to track down Gabriel.
Thoughts on Until Death
Characters – Anthony Stowes is a dirty cop, hooked on heroin with enemies in the force and on the streets, the methods have made his hard to work with and his long running pursuit of Callaghan puts him in the firing line. After he gets shot and left for dead, he must recover, a process which see him changing to become a better man. Valerie is the wife that is about to divorce Anthony after years of problems between the two, after his injury she takes him in even though she has moved on with her life. Gabriel Callaghan is the ruthless mobster trying to get ahead in the city, he disposes of anyone that gets in his way and won’t let Stowe stop his plan.
Performances – We watch Van Damme movies to watch him kick ass, not because of his acting standards, he is good through the film as does give us a chance to work on his serious reactions, he doesn’t get to show the fighting enough though. Selina Giles does struggle with her role though, you never believe her acting in this role. Stephen Rea does seem to enjoy this villainous role where he can become darker as the film unfolds.
Story – The story follows a dirty cop that goes head to head with a crime boss only for his crashing life to be turned around by a near death experience. The pacing of the story is slow for my liking, we spend too much time with the bad version of Stowe and not enough on the reborn versions road to redemption, which is by the book. Granted we don’t need the deepest story here because we know what we are getting going into the film.
Action/Crime – The action is held back for the final act of the movie, which is fine, but when you have Van Damme in the leading role, you would expect more. The crime side of the film does play into the bigger picture of what is going on which give the characters the biggest part of the development they get.
Settings – The film uses New Orleans as the setting which is always a city used for dirty cop locations, it works well without being over used for the films backdrop.
Scene of the Movie – Final act is the saving grace of the film.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The damn camera turns.
Final Thoughts – This is a typical Van Damme action movie, it tries to give us a serious side without being able to capture this and we are saved by a final act action sequence which is entertaining to watch.
Overall: Van Damme 101
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2 (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Fans all around the world have been waiting for the fifth and final installment of the film adaption of Stephanie Meyer’s best selling book series, “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn part 2” and without skipping a beat, part two begins right where its predecessor left off.
Bella opens her eyes with heightened vampire senses and embraces her new life as a wife, a mother and more importantly as a vampire. With her uncontrollable thirst she and Edward go for a run in the woods so that she can learn to hunt. She suddenly becomes enamored with her sudden speed and amazing strength. There certainly is no need for Edward to show her the tools of the trade as with Bella’s new found strength she is able to do that on her own.
Another perk to being vampire newlyweds who for that matter don’t have to rest or eat certainly leaves room for only one other thing to do and they sure love doing it! This finally provides the audience with a much steamier scene then in the last installment and in my opinion exactly how the writer intended it to be.
When Renesmee is born she is half vampire and half human and therefore poses no risk to anybody. Unfortunately for the Cullen family, she is mistaken to be one of the “immortal children”. In the past the “immortal children” were done away with by the Volturi as they posed a huge risk because being children they had no self control and posed a risk of showing humans that there were in fact monsters that had been living among them. This leads to a massive showdown with the leader of the Volturi, Aro and his cohorts against the Cullens and other clans who have come to their aid along with Jacob and his wolf pack. Will Bella and Edward get the “happily ever after” they so desire?
This is probably the hardest review that I have had to write and I say that because I am as a lot of you already know one of the biggest Twilight fans out there. This installment, film wise, is my favorite one because of all of the action and suspense. Parts of the film will surprise you and parts will tug on your heart strings but all in all, it is the best film of all of them by far.
You would at least need to know the back story before getting in to it or you will be completely lost! The cinematography and colors against the Northwest backdrops are beautiful. Bill Condon did a great job! I am not a fan by any means of computer generated humans, especially babies so I could have done without that but honestly how else could they have portrayed little Renesmee as she grew at such a fast rate?
This film is worth seeing and the guys will get at least some really cool fighting scenes and pretty ladies to look at while taking there girlfriends to see this film. All joking aside it is a fantastic story and should be not be missed. There is a reason why they bring in the big bucks and its not just because of teen girls going to see Jacob taking his shirt off.
Bella opens her eyes with heightened vampire senses and embraces her new life as a wife, a mother and more importantly as a vampire. With her uncontrollable thirst she and Edward go for a run in the woods so that she can learn to hunt. She suddenly becomes enamored with her sudden speed and amazing strength. There certainly is no need for Edward to show her the tools of the trade as with Bella’s new found strength she is able to do that on her own.
Another perk to being vampire newlyweds who for that matter don’t have to rest or eat certainly leaves room for only one other thing to do and they sure love doing it! This finally provides the audience with a much steamier scene then in the last installment and in my opinion exactly how the writer intended it to be.
When Renesmee is born she is half vampire and half human and therefore poses no risk to anybody. Unfortunately for the Cullen family, she is mistaken to be one of the “immortal children”. In the past the “immortal children” were done away with by the Volturi as they posed a huge risk because being children they had no self control and posed a risk of showing humans that there were in fact monsters that had been living among them. This leads to a massive showdown with the leader of the Volturi, Aro and his cohorts against the Cullens and other clans who have come to their aid along with Jacob and his wolf pack. Will Bella and Edward get the “happily ever after” they so desire?
This is probably the hardest review that I have had to write and I say that because I am as a lot of you already know one of the biggest Twilight fans out there. This installment, film wise, is my favorite one because of all of the action and suspense. Parts of the film will surprise you and parts will tug on your heart strings but all in all, it is the best film of all of them by far.
You would at least need to know the back story before getting in to it or you will be completely lost! The cinematography and colors against the Northwest backdrops are beautiful. Bill Condon did a great job! I am not a fan by any means of computer generated humans, especially babies so I could have done without that but honestly how else could they have portrayed little Renesmee as she grew at such a fast rate?
This film is worth seeing and the guys will get at least some really cool fighting scenes and pretty ladies to look at while taking there girlfriends to see this film. All joking aside it is a fantastic story and should be not be missed. There is a reason why they bring in the big bucks and its not just because of teen girls going to see Jacob taking his shirt off.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Jigsaw (2017) in Movies
May 1, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
10 Years after the events in saw 7 (the Final chapter/Saw 3D) a new 'game' has started and a new group of police officers have to try to find out what is happening and who is responsible.
Jigsaw runs to almost the same formula as the previous films , there is a game in progress and the police have to stop it but as well as the game there is still enough of a story to make the film interesting. The biggest difference is that there isn't really the back story in the same way the other films had mainly because, with the exception of John Kramer (the original Jigsaw), we have all new characters. Instead Jigsaw focuses on finding out who the new Jigsaw is or even if it is a new Jigsaw or if John has some how come back from the dead. This is where the film is cleaver, it gives us a number of possible suspects and even makes it seem it may be John.
Jigsaw doesn't seem to be as gory as the previous films, yes you still have people in a game and yes at least some of them loose but there are no intestines littering the ground or close ups on people getting cut in half. Don't get me wrong there is still gore, closeups of the dead bodies and people loosing limbs but it doesn't quite have the same feel to it.
The story aspect to the film is good , as I said, it does leave you guessing to who the killer is although, if you pay attention there are clues. The film also plays with time a bit and, as in the other films, this is used to throw the viewer off track.
Jigsaw is a good entry in to the Saw franchise, as it has a ten year gap from Saw 7 it doesn't get bogged down with the original charters and doesn't get (too) bogged down with the past timeline which was getting a bit muddled (in my opinion) but it does manage to pull from what has gone before and use it further the story.
And that's it, the end of the Saw franchise. OK not quite, at the time of writing 'Spiral, Chapters from the book of Saw' is due out at the cinema (Corona willing) in a couple of weeks and it looks to bigger and better however I probably won't get to see it for a while so, for now, it's time to move onto something new.
Jigsaw runs to almost the same formula as the previous films , there is a game in progress and the police have to stop it but as well as the game there is still enough of a story to make the film interesting. The biggest difference is that there isn't really the back story in the same way the other films had mainly because, with the exception of John Kramer (the original Jigsaw), we have all new characters. Instead Jigsaw focuses on finding out who the new Jigsaw is or even if it is a new Jigsaw or if John has some how come back from the dead. This is where the film is cleaver, it gives us a number of possible suspects and even makes it seem it may be John.
Jigsaw doesn't seem to be as gory as the previous films, yes you still have people in a game and yes at least some of them loose but there are no intestines littering the ground or close ups on people getting cut in half. Don't get me wrong there is still gore, closeups of the dead bodies and people loosing limbs but it doesn't quite have the same feel to it.
The story aspect to the film is good , as I said, it does leave you guessing to who the killer is although, if you pay attention there are clues. The film also plays with time a bit and, as in the other films, this is used to throw the viewer off track.
Jigsaw is a good entry in to the Saw franchise, as it has a ten year gap from Saw 7 it doesn't get bogged down with the original charters and doesn't get (too) bogged down with the past timeline which was getting a bit muddled (in my opinion) but it does manage to pull from what has gone before and use it further the story.
And that's it, the end of the Saw franchise. OK not quite, at the time of writing 'Spiral, Chapters from the book of Saw' is due out at the cinema (Corona willing) in a couple of weeks and it looks to bigger and better however I probably won't get to see it for a while so, for now, it's time to move onto something new.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Girl on the Train (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
You won’t uncork a bottle of Malbec again without thinking of this film…
“The Girl on a Train” is the film adaptation of the best-seller by Paula Hawkins, transported from the London suburbs to New York’s Hastings-on-Hudson.
It’s actually rather a sordid story encompassing as it does alcoholism, murder, marital strife, deceit, sexual frustration, an historical tragedy and lashings and lashings of violence. Emily Blunt (“Sicario”, “Edge of Tomorrow”) plays Rachel, a divorcee with an alcohol problem who escapes into an obsessive fantasy each day as she passes her former neighbourhood on her commute into the city. Ex-husband Tom (Justin Theroux, “Zoolander 2”) lives in her old house with his second wife Anna (Rebecca “MI:5” Ferguson) and new baby Evie. But her real fantasy rests with cheerleader-style young neighbour Megan (Haley Bennett) who is actually locked in a frustratingly child-free marriage (frustrating for him at least) with the controlling and unpredictable Scott (Luke Evans, “The Hobbit”). A sixth party in this complex network is Megan’s psychiatrist Dr Kamal Abdic (Édgar Ramírez, “Joy”).
In pure Hitchcockian style Megan witnesses mere glimpses of events from her twice-daily train and from these pieces together stories that suitably feed her psychosis. When ‘shit gets real’ and a key character goes missing, Megan surfaces her suspicions and obsessions to the police investigation (led by Detective Riley, the ever-excellent Allison Janney from “The West Wing”) and promptly makes herself suspect number one.
Readers of the book will already be aware of the twists and turns of the story, so will watch the film from a different perspective than I did. (Despite my best intentions I never managed to read the book first).
First up, you would have to say that Emily Blunt’s performance is outstanding in an extremely challenging acting role. Every nuance of shame, confusion, grief, fear, doubt and anger is beautifully enacted: it would not be a surprise to see her gain her first Oscar nomination for this. All the other lead roles are also delivered with great professionalism, with Haley Bennett (a busy month for her, with “The Magnificent Seven” also out) being impressive and Rebecca Ferguson, one of my favourite current actresses, delivering another measured and delicate performance.
Girl on a Train, The
Rebecca Ferguson as Anna – “there were three of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded”
The supporting roles are also effective, with Darren Goldstein as the somewhat creepy “man in the suit” and “Friends” star Lisa Kudrow popping up in an effective and pivotal role. The Screen Guild Awards have an excellent category for an Ensemble Cast in a Motion Picture, and it feels appropriate to nominate this cast for that award.
So it’s a blockbuster book with a rollercoaster story and a stellar cast, so what could go wrong? Well, something for sure. This is a case in point where I suspect it is easier to slowly peel back Rachel’s lost memory with pages and imagination than it is with dodgy fuzzy images on a big screen. Although the film comes in at only 112 minutes, the pacing in places is too slow (the screenplay by Erin Cressida Wilson takes its time) and director Tate Taylor (“The Help”) is no Hitchcock, or indeed a David Fincher (since the film has strong similarities to last year’s “Gone Girl”: when the action does happen it lacks style, with the violence being on the brutal side and leaving little to the imagination.
It’s by no means a bad film, and worth seeing for the acting performances alone. But it’s not a film I think that will trouble my top 10 for the year.
It’s actually rather a sordid story encompassing as it does alcoholism, murder, marital strife, deceit, sexual frustration, an historical tragedy and lashings and lashings of violence. Emily Blunt (“Sicario”, “Edge of Tomorrow”) plays Rachel, a divorcee with an alcohol problem who escapes into an obsessive fantasy each day as she passes her former neighbourhood on her commute into the city. Ex-husband Tom (Justin Theroux, “Zoolander 2”) lives in her old house with his second wife Anna (Rebecca “MI:5” Ferguson) and new baby Evie. But her real fantasy rests with cheerleader-style young neighbour Megan (Haley Bennett) who is actually locked in a frustratingly child-free marriage (frustrating for him at least) with the controlling and unpredictable Scott (Luke Evans, “The Hobbit”). A sixth party in this complex network is Megan’s psychiatrist Dr Kamal Abdic (Édgar Ramírez, “Joy”).
In pure Hitchcockian style Megan witnesses mere glimpses of events from her twice-daily train and from these pieces together stories that suitably feed her psychosis. When ‘shit gets real’ and a key character goes missing, Megan surfaces her suspicions and obsessions to the police investigation (led by Detective Riley, the ever-excellent Allison Janney from “The West Wing”) and promptly makes herself suspect number one.
Readers of the book will already be aware of the twists and turns of the story, so will watch the film from a different perspective than I did. (Despite my best intentions I never managed to read the book first).
First up, you would have to say that Emily Blunt’s performance is outstanding in an extremely challenging acting role. Every nuance of shame, confusion, grief, fear, doubt and anger is beautifully enacted: it would not be a surprise to see her gain her first Oscar nomination for this. All the other lead roles are also delivered with great professionalism, with Haley Bennett (a busy month for her, with “The Magnificent Seven” also out) being impressive and Rebecca Ferguson, one of my favourite current actresses, delivering another measured and delicate performance.
Girl on a Train, The
Rebecca Ferguson as Anna – “there were three of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded”
The supporting roles are also effective, with Darren Goldstein as the somewhat creepy “man in the suit” and “Friends” star Lisa Kudrow popping up in an effective and pivotal role. The Screen Guild Awards have an excellent category for an Ensemble Cast in a Motion Picture, and it feels appropriate to nominate this cast for that award.
So it’s a blockbuster book with a rollercoaster story and a stellar cast, so what could go wrong? Well, something for sure. This is a case in point where I suspect it is easier to slowly peel back Rachel’s lost memory with pages and imagination than it is with dodgy fuzzy images on a big screen. Although the film comes in at only 112 minutes, the pacing in places is too slow (the screenplay by Erin Cressida Wilson takes its time) and director Tate Taylor (“The Help”) is no Hitchcock, or indeed a David Fincher (since the film has strong similarities to last year’s “Gone Girl”: when the action does happen it lacks style, with the violence being on the brutal side and leaving little to the imagination.
It’s by no means a bad film, and worth seeing for the acting performances alone. But it’s not a film I think that will trouble my top 10 for the year.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Velvet Buzzsaw (2019) in Movies
Feb 2, 2019 (Updated Feb 3, 2019)
A little confused
A little confused is definitely how I feel about this film. In parts it’s a darkly satirical take on the art world with some horror thrown in, but the rest is just plain old dull with a handful of characters you care little about. Jake Gyllenhaal is great as usual, but I feel the rest of the cast were a let down. Zawe Ashton especially seemed to put in a very deadpan and robot like performance - must have been how her character was intended but it just didn’t work. It also doesn’t help that despite Jake Gyllenhaal, there’s no real main character in this and this is where it falls done, bouncing between a lot of mostly conceited unliveable characters.
This film spends far too much time talking and poking fun at the art world, instead of focusing more on the horror aspect. The story of art killing people is an intriguing one that sounds like it’s been taken straight out of a Stephen King book, it’s just a shame the film didn’t capitalise on this until well over an hour in. Especially as a lot of the horror parts were well done and quite disturbing, although some of the special effects were a bit OTT.
I just find this entire film a little bit meh. It wasn’t terrible, but it’s not particularly memorable either. And whilst I’m sure there’s a message about the fake and judgemental art world, it doesn’t really make for a great film.
This film spends far too much time talking and poking fun at the art world, instead of focusing more on the horror aspect. The story of art killing people is an intriguing one that sounds like it’s been taken straight out of a Stephen King book, it’s just a shame the film didn’t capitalise on this until well over an hour in. Especially as a lot of the horror parts were well done and quite disturbing, although some of the special effects were a bit OTT.
I just find this entire film a little bit meh. It wasn’t terrible, but it’s not particularly memorable either. And whilst I’m sure there’s a message about the fake and judgemental art world, it doesn’t really make for a great film.
Hollywood Catwalk: Exploring Costume and Transformation in American Film
Book
The High School outsider takes off her glasses, puts on a dress, and becomes the Prom Queen; the...