Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Nov 10, 2019
Joachim Phoenix - Oscar winning performance? (1 more)
Look and feel of the film - technically brilliant
A loser's tale.
“Joker” has managed to stir up a whirlwind of controversy, centring partly around the level of violence included but also on the use of “that song” on the soundtrack. But putting aside that flurry of commentary, what of the film itself?
Man, this is a dark film! It’s as much of an anti-superhero film as this year’s “Brightburn“. The Batman legacy has addressed the mental state of the protagonists before (both that of the hero and the villains). Here we have a real study of how a mentally unstable no-hoper can be pushed over the edge by bigotry, carelessness and government cut-backs.
Indeed, there is something alarmingly prescient about the movie’s plot line, watching this as we (in the UK) are in the month of possible (or as Boris Johnson would say, definite) Brexit madness! “Is it me, or is it getting crazier out there?” Arthur Fleck muses to his social worker (Sharon Washington). And a rant by Arthur late on goes “Everybody just yells and screams at each other. Nobody’s civil anymore. Nobody thinks what it’s like to be the other guy. You think men like Thomas Wayne ever think what it’s like to be someone like me? To be somebody but themselves? They don’t. They think that we’ll just sit there and take it, like good little boys! That we won’t werewolf and go wild!” Chilling words as we possibly face a very bumpy October and November in the UK.
After reviewing “Judy” I wouldn’t be the least surprised if I’d just seen the Best Actress award bagged (by Renée Zellweger). Now, with “Joker”, surely Joachim Phoenix might bag his first (and well overdue in my book) Oscar. Although nominated before (for “Gladiator”, “Walk the Line” and “The Master”) he’s never won. Here Phoenix’s physical transformation into Arthur Fleck is SIMPLY EXTRAORDINARY. And the way he captures the (medically) induced fits of helpless laughter, ending in a sort of choking fit, is brilliant and replicated to a ‘T’ on multiple occasions.
I loved “You Were Never Really Here“, primarily due to Phoenix’s pitch-perfect performance. And “Joker” reminded me very much of Lynne Ramsey‘s film: a disturbed loner, looking after his elderly mother; with violence meted out to wrong-doers. Joe is almost the yin to Arthur Fleck’s yang: Joe is an invisible man who is very much present; Arthur is a very visible man who thinks he is invisible. There’s even comment by Fleck towards the end of the film that sometimes he thinks he’s ‘not really there at all’! (A deliberate ‘in’ joke in reference to that film?)
After some pretty piss-poor “pension grabs” in recent years, culminating in the appalling career- nadir of “Dirty Grandpa” in 2016, Robert De Niro comes good with a fine performance as the idolised but thoughtless and cruel talk-show host Murray Franklin. It’s very much a supporting role, but delivered with great aplomb.
Also great again is “Deadpool 2“‘s Zazie Beetz (a great trivia answer for an actor with three ‘z’s’ in the name). This angle of the story is deviously clever, and Zazie handles the various twists and turns brilliantly.
Movie violence needs to be taken in context to both the film’s story and to the movie’s certificate. For those expecting a light and fluffy “Avengers” style of movie, they might be shocked by what they see. True that the film definitely pushes the boundaries of what I think is acceptable in a UK15-certificate film. … I suspect there were HEATED discussions at the BBFC after this screening! The violence though seems comparable to some other 15’s I’ve seen: a DIY-store drill scene in “The Equalizer” comes to mind.
A particularly brutal scene is reminiscent of a climactic scene in “Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood“, such that Quentin Tarantino might have just cause to appeal his ‘UK18’ certificate.
You might argue about the level of violence that SHOULD be shown in a 15 certificate film. But I think the violence portrayed – given this is in the known context an origin story for a psychopathic killer – is appropriate. I personally found the Heath Ledger‘s Joker’s “pencil trick” scene in “The Dark Knight” more disturbing, given it was a 12 certificate.
I have less sympathy for the inclusion of “Rock and Roll Part 2” on the soundtrack. The fact that a convicted paedophile (I refuse to say his name) is profiting from the ticket sales is galling. This is almost deliberately courting controversy. There has been some view that this is a “traditional” chant song at US football matches (as “The Hey Song”). But most (all?) teams have now recognized the connection and stopped its use. At least here the director and producers should have more of a ‘world view’ on this.
Where “Hangover” director Todd Phillips does recover some of this respect is in the quality of the script (co-written with Scott Silver) and the direction. It’s misdirection without mis-direction! Some of the twists in the plot (no spoilers here!) I did not see coming, and certain aspects of the story (again no spoilers!) are left brilliantly (and chillingly) vague.
Sure, it borrows heavily in story-line and mood from Martin Scorsese‘s “Taxi Driver”. And I was also reminded of 1993’s Joel Schumacher flick “Falling Down” where Michael Douglas is an ordinary man pushed to the edge and beyond by a series of life’s trials. But if you want to criticise a film for “not being 100% original” then let’s start at the top of the 2019 IMDB listings and keep going! I’ve also seen comment from some that criticises the somewhat clunky overlay of the Batman back-story into the script. I also understand that view but I didn’t personally share it.
Elsewhere I would not be surprised if the movie gets garlanded with technical Oscar nominations aplenty come January. The cinematography, by Phillips-regular Lawrence Sher, is exquisite in setting the grimy 70’s tone. (I loved the retro Warner Brothers logo too). And both video and sound editing is top-notch. Not forgetting a sonorous cello-heavy soundtrack that perfectly suits the mood. Want to put a bet on which film might top the “number of Oscar nominations” list? This might not be a bad choice.
Dark and brooding, with a slow-burn start, this is a proper drama that might make action superhero fans fidgety. But I simply loved it, and would love to carve out the time to give it a re-watch. The Phoenix performance is extraordinary. Will this make my Top 10 of the year? Fingers to head, and pull the trigger…. it’s a no-brainer.
Man, this is a dark film! It’s as much of an anti-superhero film as this year’s “Brightburn“. The Batman legacy has addressed the mental state of the protagonists before (both that of the hero and the villains). Here we have a real study of how a mentally unstable no-hoper can be pushed over the edge by bigotry, carelessness and government cut-backs.
Indeed, there is something alarmingly prescient about the movie’s plot line, watching this as we (in the UK) are in the month of possible (or as Boris Johnson would say, definite) Brexit madness! “Is it me, or is it getting crazier out there?” Arthur Fleck muses to his social worker (Sharon Washington). And a rant by Arthur late on goes “Everybody just yells and screams at each other. Nobody’s civil anymore. Nobody thinks what it’s like to be the other guy. You think men like Thomas Wayne ever think what it’s like to be someone like me? To be somebody but themselves? They don’t. They think that we’ll just sit there and take it, like good little boys! That we won’t werewolf and go wild!” Chilling words as we possibly face a very bumpy October and November in the UK.
After reviewing “Judy” I wouldn’t be the least surprised if I’d just seen the Best Actress award bagged (by Renée Zellweger). Now, with “Joker”, surely Joachim Phoenix might bag his first (and well overdue in my book) Oscar. Although nominated before (for “Gladiator”, “Walk the Line” and “The Master”) he’s never won. Here Phoenix’s physical transformation into Arthur Fleck is SIMPLY EXTRAORDINARY. And the way he captures the (medically) induced fits of helpless laughter, ending in a sort of choking fit, is brilliant and replicated to a ‘T’ on multiple occasions.
I loved “You Were Never Really Here“, primarily due to Phoenix’s pitch-perfect performance. And “Joker” reminded me very much of Lynne Ramsey‘s film: a disturbed loner, looking after his elderly mother; with violence meted out to wrong-doers. Joe is almost the yin to Arthur Fleck’s yang: Joe is an invisible man who is very much present; Arthur is a very visible man who thinks he is invisible. There’s even comment by Fleck towards the end of the film that sometimes he thinks he’s ‘not really there at all’! (A deliberate ‘in’ joke in reference to that film?)
After some pretty piss-poor “pension grabs” in recent years, culminating in the appalling career- nadir of “Dirty Grandpa” in 2016, Robert De Niro comes good with a fine performance as the idolised but thoughtless and cruel talk-show host Murray Franklin. It’s very much a supporting role, but delivered with great aplomb.
Also great again is “Deadpool 2“‘s Zazie Beetz (a great trivia answer for an actor with three ‘z’s’ in the name). This angle of the story is deviously clever, and Zazie handles the various twists and turns brilliantly.
Movie violence needs to be taken in context to both the film’s story and to the movie’s certificate. For those expecting a light and fluffy “Avengers” style of movie, they might be shocked by what they see. True that the film definitely pushes the boundaries of what I think is acceptable in a UK15-certificate film. … I suspect there were HEATED discussions at the BBFC after this screening! The violence though seems comparable to some other 15’s I’ve seen: a DIY-store drill scene in “The Equalizer” comes to mind.
A particularly brutal scene is reminiscent of a climactic scene in “Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood“, such that Quentin Tarantino might have just cause to appeal his ‘UK18’ certificate.
You might argue about the level of violence that SHOULD be shown in a 15 certificate film. But I think the violence portrayed – given this is in the known context an origin story for a psychopathic killer – is appropriate. I personally found the Heath Ledger‘s Joker’s “pencil trick” scene in “The Dark Knight” more disturbing, given it was a 12 certificate.
I have less sympathy for the inclusion of “Rock and Roll Part 2” on the soundtrack. The fact that a convicted paedophile (I refuse to say his name) is profiting from the ticket sales is galling. This is almost deliberately courting controversy. There has been some view that this is a “traditional” chant song at US football matches (as “The Hey Song”). But most (all?) teams have now recognized the connection and stopped its use. At least here the director and producers should have more of a ‘world view’ on this.
Where “Hangover” director Todd Phillips does recover some of this respect is in the quality of the script (co-written with Scott Silver) and the direction. It’s misdirection without mis-direction! Some of the twists in the plot (no spoilers here!) I did not see coming, and certain aspects of the story (again no spoilers!) are left brilliantly (and chillingly) vague.
Sure, it borrows heavily in story-line and mood from Martin Scorsese‘s “Taxi Driver”. And I was also reminded of 1993’s Joel Schumacher flick “Falling Down” where Michael Douglas is an ordinary man pushed to the edge and beyond by a series of life’s trials. But if you want to criticise a film for “not being 100% original” then let’s start at the top of the 2019 IMDB listings and keep going! I’ve also seen comment from some that criticises the somewhat clunky overlay of the Batman back-story into the script. I also understand that view but I didn’t personally share it.
Elsewhere I would not be surprised if the movie gets garlanded with technical Oscar nominations aplenty come January. The cinematography, by Phillips-regular Lawrence Sher, is exquisite in setting the grimy 70’s tone. (I loved the retro Warner Brothers logo too). And both video and sound editing is top-notch. Not forgetting a sonorous cello-heavy soundtrack that perfectly suits the mood. Want to put a bet on which film might top the “number of Oscar nominations” list? This might not be a bad choice.
Dark and brooding, with a slow-burn start, this is a proper drama that might make action superhero fans fidgety. But I simply loved it, and would love to carve out the time to give it a re-watch. The Phoenix performance is extraordinary. Will this make my Top 10 of the year? Fingers to head, and pull the trigger…. it’s a no-brainer.
Hollywood in the 30s
Daniel Kothenschulte and Robert Nippoldt
Book
Tinseltown's golden era, illustrated: From Chaplin's last silent films to the colorful Wizard of Oz ...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Tom Cruise returns as Jack Reacher in the second cinematic installment of the popular character in the book series by Lee Child. In “Jack Reacher: Never Go Back”. After helping the military with an operation, Reacher returns to his drifter ways but is enticed to travel to Washington D.C. to visit Major Turner (Colbie Smulders), after establishing a friendship with her via phone during the recent operation.
Reacher has left the military behind and why he agreed to do the task for the Military is unclear aside from the actions of those involved upset his moral compass and made him become involved.
Upon reaching D.C. Reacher is informed that Turner has been arrested and charged with espionage and that she has requested that he not be allowed to see or contact her.
This does not sit right with Reacher and the fact that Turner occupies the same office that he was commanded has made this more than a personal score for him. Reacher also notices that he is being followed by some military contractors and soon suspects that he and Turner are in serious danger.
Reacher uses his resources and abilities to break Turner from confinement to save her life and sets off to clear her name and stay ahead of the forces that seem to know their every move.
If this was not enough trouble for Reacher, he is also implicated in a crime he did not commit and learns that there is a young girl named Samantha (Danika Yarosh), who has been targeted to get to Reacher even though he has no idea who she is and how she is involved.
What follows is an exciting mix of action and suspense as Reacher and Turner battle enemies and try to solve the clues behind their situation before it is too late.
The sequel has a premise that grabs you early on and an energy that keeps you compelled to the action. Cruise seems to be very comfortable with the part in his second outing as Reacher and it shows as he commands the screen with a mix of physicality and restraint that underscores the complex nature of the character. Smulders also does well with the physical nature of her part and works very well with Cruise as she is far from a damsel in distress.
The film at times takes some leaps of faith but the intensity and suspense of the film as well as the solid action scenes and pacing make the film a very pleasant surprise and one worth watching.
http://sknr.net/2016/10/21/jack-reacher-never-go-back/
Reacher has left the military behind and why he agreed to do the task for the Military is unclear aside from the actions of those involved upset his moral compass and made him become involved.
Upon reaching D.C. Reacher is informed that Turner has been arrested and charged with espionage and that she has requested that he not be allowed to see or contact her.
This does not sit right with Reacher and the fact that Turner occupies the same office that he was commanded has made this more than a personal score for him. Reacher also notices that he is being followed by some military contractors and soon suspects that he and Turner are in serious danger.
Reacher uses his resources and abilities to break Turner from confinement to save her life and sets off to clear her name and stay ahead of the forces that seem to know their every move.
If this was not enough trouble for Reacher, he is also implicated in a crime he did not commit and learns that there is a young girl named Samantha (Danika Yarosh), who has been targeted to get to Reacher even though he has no idea who she is and how she is involved.
What follows is an exciting mix of action and suspense as Reacher and Turner battle enemies and try to solve the clues behind their situation before it is too late.
The sequel has a premise that grabs you early on and an energy that keeps you compelled to the action. Cruise seems to be very comfortable with the part in his second outing as Reacher and it shows as he commands the screen with a mix of physicality and restraint that underscores the complex nature of the character. Smulders also does well with the physical nature of her part and works very well with Cruise as she is far from a damsel in distress.
The film at times takes some leaps of faith but the intensity and suspense of the film as well as the solid action scenes and pacing make the film a very pleasant surprise and one worth watching.
http://sknr.net/2016/10/21/jack-reacher-never-go-back/
David McK (3695 KP) rated Aliens: The Female War in Books
Jan 30, 2019
The third book in Dark Horse's spin-off series of novels and comics to include Billie and Wilks, this also throws Ripley into the mix, and finishes the story first began in [b:Aliens: Earth Hive|343281|Aliens Earth Hive|Steve Perry|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1366133734s/343281.jpg|333628] and continued in [b:Aliens: Nightmare Asylum|20873|Aliens Nightmare Asylum|Steve Perry|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388857061s/20873.jpg|22061]. Wheres the 1979 film 'Alien' had a single Alien stalking the crew of the Nostromo after they picked up the transmission, with the 1986 film 'Aliens' then introducing the concept of the Alien Queen, this extrapolates even further than that with the introduction of an Alien Queen Mother providing the deus ex machina for the plot.
Talking of the plot: this is maybe a bit slower than those previous two novels, with more emphasis on character development (I know, I know: is such a thing even possible in these types of books?).
As before, not going to set the literary world alight nor win any awards, but an enjoyable enough quick diversion for a day or two.
Talking of the plot: this is maybe a bit slower than those previous two novels, with more emphasis on character development (I know, I know: is such a thing even possible in these types of books?).
As before, not going to set the literary world alight nor win any awards, but an enjoyable enough quick diversion for a day or two.
Colour Bar (Film Tie In): The Triumph of Seretse Khama and His Nation
Book
The true story of a love which defied family, Apartheid, and empire - the inspiration for the major...
Ben-Hur: The Original Blockbuster
Book
Ben-Hur was the first literary blockbuster to generate multiple and hugely profitable adaptations,...
The Use and Abuse of Cinema: German Legacies from the Weimar Era to the Present
Book
Eric Rentschler's new book, The Use and Abuse of Cinema, takes readers on a series of enthralling...
Akira Kurosawa
Book
'Most directors have one film for which they are known or possibly two', Francis Ford Coppola has...
Donnie Darko (2001)
8.1
Rate It
Movie Watch
Donnie Darko is a psychological science fiction and drama written and directed by Richard Kelly. ...
Science Fiction Drama Horror Themes
I am Not Your Negro
10.0
Rate It
Book
The New York Times bestseller based on the Oscar nominated documentary film In June 1979, the writer...