Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated Regarding Henry (1991) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: Regarding Henry starts as we meet hotshot lawyer Henry Turner (Ford) he closes cases with ease and has the full trust of the partners in the firm, his strict behaviour does return home too with the way he controls his daughter Rachel (Allen), with his wife Sarah (Bening) dealing with reminding him of names at parties.
Henry’s life is turned upside down when he is shot in a head, leaving him with no memory, speech or mobility. Bradley (Nunn) his physical Therapist comes into this life to help teach him again as Sarah must adapt without the income that Henry once bought in. with Henry’s recovery going well, can a return home make him better, both in health and in his own personal standards of treating people.
Thoughts on Regarding Henry
Characters – Henry is a lawyer, he closes cases with ease, but doesn’t seem to be close to his family or friends, busy working for the most part of his life. When he gets shot in the head, he must learn to recover and learn everything again, this shows Henry a new way to look at life which will make him a better person. Sarah is the wife of Henry, she supports him through the tough time knowing he will remember his life in time. Bradley is the physical therapist that helps Henry break the first hurdles in his recovery.
Performances – Harrison Ford gives a performance we wouldn’t know him for, he does well for the most part, but there are moments he doesn’t hit the performance like he should. Annette Bening is good in her role through the film with Bill Nunn adding the extra moments needed in this film.
Story – The story here plays out like a fantasy film in places, we have one man that has a lift changing injury that makes him see life in a different point of view. We see his recovery process which shows us how the people in his life can change their opinions on one person after an injury impairs their abilities. This does tell the recovery process and clearly shows the changes Henry goes though which are good to see through the film.
Romance – The romance of the film is standard it shows the life both Henry and Sarah have had before and after the injury.
Settings – The film is set mostly in New York city, which is great as I always say, which helps show how the busy life of Henry affected his life.
Scene of the Movie – The rehab.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Moments Ford doesn’t hit the injury the way you believe.
Final Thoughts – This is a good drama that shows how injuries can affect lives, not just the person that is injured but the people close to them too.
Overall: Good Film which shows Ford in different light.
Henry’s life is turned upside down when he is shot in a head, leaving him with no memory, speech or mobility. Bradley (Nunn) his physical Therapist comes into this life to help teach him again as Sarah must adapt without the income that Henry once bought in. with Henry’s recovery going well, can a return home make him better, both in health and in his own personal standards of treating people.
Thoughts on Regarding Henry
Characters – Henry is a lawyer, he closes cases with ease, but doesn’t seem to be close to his family or friends, busy working for the most part of his life. When he gets shot in the head, he must learn to recover and learn everything again, this shows Henry a new way to look at life which will make him a better person. Sarah is the wife of Henry, she supports him through the tough time knowing he will remember his life in time. Bradley is the physical therapist that helps Henry break the first hurdles in his recovery.
Performances – Harrison Ford gives a performance we wouldn’t know him for, he does well for the most part, but there are moments he doesn’t hit the performance like he should. Annette Bening is good in her role through the film with Bill Nunn adding the extra moments needed in this film.
Story – The story here plays out like a fantasy film in places, we have one man that has a lift changing injury that makes him see life in a different point of view. We see his recovery process which shows us how the people in his life can change their opinions on one person after an injury impairs their abilities. This does tell the recovery process and clearly shows the changes Henry goes though which are good to see through the film.
Romance – The romance of the film is standard it shows the life both Henry and Sarah have had before and after the injury.
Settings – The film is set mostly in New York city, which is great as I always say, which helps show how the busy life of Henry affected his life.
Scene of the Movie – The rehab.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Moments Ford doesn’t hit the injury the way you believe.
Final Thoughts – This is a good drama that shows how injuries can affect lives, not just the person that is injured but the people close to them too.
Overall: Good Film which shows Ford in different light.
50 Beaches to Blow Your Mind
Lonely Planet and Ben Handicott
Book
From the people who have been delivering trustworthy guidebooks to every destination in the world...
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Return of The King
The Lion King is a 2019 computer-animated musical movie directed and produced by Jon Favreau. It was written by Jeff Nathanson, and produced by Fairview Entertainment and Walt Disney Pictures and distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures. The film stars Donald Glover, Seth Rogen, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Beyonce and James Earl Jones.
King Mufasa (James Earl Jones) and Queen Sarabi rule over the animal kingdom with their pride of lions from Pride Rock, in the African Pride Lands. Things change with the birth of their son, Simba, the new Prince. Mufasa's younger brother, and former heir to the throne, Scar, covets the throne and plots to eliminate Mufasa and Simba, so he may become king. The battle for Pride Rock is filled with betrayal, tragedy and drama and circumstances are forever changed after the events of the stampede.
This movie was really good, but of course it was. The original Lion King was one of Disney's best animated films to date. There was a lot of build up to the release of this movie, with fans every anticipating when they could finally see this story on the big screen again. Jon Favreau did not disappoint, but there was a lot of negativity and bad review scores when it first released. I think the big problem was that in all the previews/trailers leading up to the movie coming out showed how realistic the animals looked and how they were able to recreate iconic scenes in stunning state of the art CGI, but they never showed the animals talking or singing. This for me made it difficult to get fully immersed in the film when the very realistic animals began talking and singing, but eventually it went away or I got used to it a couple minutes into the movie. Also they changed very little in this remake and it was almost literally a shot for shot or scene for scene recreation of the original Lion King, which I think bothered the critics. I personally liked little changes they made that I felt made the movie just a little bit better, like the dialogue between Mufasa's and Scar implying Mufasa's gave him the scar, Zimbabwe catching up with Nala for the journey back to Pride Rock, and Nala leading the female lions in the fight against the hyenas. I also thought it was cool how they made it more clear that one of the hyenas was the leader and it was the female and the scene where Scar makes the deal with them. Overall though I feel like they could have shown more emotion in the animals if they had chosen a style that was so detailed to look so realistic. I give this movie a 7/10. It is worth watching for nostalgia and to see it in theaters is a treat, especially when getting children or younger family members to see it for the first time, but the original is still the better film.
King Mufasa (James Earl Jones) and Queen Sarabi rule over the animal kingdom with their pride of lions from Pride Rock, in the African Pride Lands. Things change with the birth of their son, Simba, the new Prince. Mufasa's younger brother, and former heir to the throne, Scar, covets the throne and plots to eliminate Mufasa and Simba, so he may become king. The battle for Pride Rock is filled with betrayal, tragedy and drama and circumstances are forever changed after the events of the stampede.
This movie was really good, but of course it was. The original Lion King was one of Disney's best animated films to date. There was a lot of build up to the release of this movie, with fans every anticipating when they could finally see this story on the big screen again. Jon Favreau did not disappoint, but there was a lot of negativity and bad review scores when it first released. I think the big problem was that in all the previews/trailers leading up to the movie coming out showed how realistic the animals looked and how they were able to recreate iconic scenes in stunning state of the art CGI, but they never showed the animals talking or singing. This for me made it difficult to get fully immersed in the film when the very realistic animals began talking and singing, but eventually it went away or I got used to it a couple minutes into the movie. Also they changed very little in this remake and it was almost literally a shot for shot or scene for scene recreation of the original Lion King, which I think bothered the critics. I personally liked little changes they made that I felt made the movie just a little bit better, like the dialogue between Mufasa's and Scar implying Mufasa's gave him the scar, Zimbabwe catching up with Nala for the journey back to Pride Rock, and Nala leading the female lions in the fight against the hyenas. I also thought it was cool how they made it more clear that one of the hyenas was the leader and it was the female and the scene where Scar makes the deal with them. Overall though I feel like they could have shown more emotion in the animals if they had chosen a style that was so detailed to look so realistic. I give this movie a 7/10. It is worth watching for nostalgia and to see it in theaters is a treat, especially when getting children or younger family members to see it for the first time, but the original is still the better film.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Lethal Weapon 2 (1989) in Movies
Jul 9, 2020
Protect Joe Pesci
Lethal Weapon 2- adds more action, drama, suspense, thrills, comedy, lots of comedy and more chemistry.
The production:
Shane Black and Warren Murphy's original Play Dirty script:
Their original title for the script was Play Dirty. Although many people thought that their script was brilliant, it was rejected by Silver, studio and director Richard Donner for being too dark and bloody, and because in the ending of the script Riggs dies, while they wanted to keep him alive in case of further sequels. They also wanted the second film to focus more on comedy, while Black's draft focused more on courage and heroics, like Riggs willing to die to protect Murtaugh and his family, due to his love for them
When his script was rejected, Black felt that he had failed the producers. He initially offered to give his payment back, but his agent talked him out of it. Black also refused to re-write the script and quit from the project after working for six months on it. Black later said how the problem with the second film was that they did too much comedy, and how he dislikes the third and fourth films because of the way Riggs' character was changed.
Director Richard Donner said in the film's Blu-ray commentary that the film was shot in such a way that it could be edited with two different endings, one in which Riggs dies and one in which he lives. Audiences in test screenings responded well to Riggs' survival, and this was kept, though the last shot in the film with the camera moving away from Murtaugh holding Riggs was shot for the ending in which he dies.
Jeffrey Boam's final script:
Originally, the character of Rika was intended to survive, with the last scene in the film being Riggs and Rika eating Thanksgiving dinner with the Murtaughs, but the director decided to kill the character to increase Riggs' motivation to destroy the South African drug smugglers. The film was the debut of Leo Getz (Joe Pesci), a crooked but whistle-blowing CPA who is placed in protective custody by Riggs and Murtaugh, and makes the detectives' more difficult due to his neurotic behavior. The Getz character remained a regular throughout the remainder of the film series.
The plot: South African smugglers find themselves being hounded and harassed by Riggs and Murtaugh, two mismatched Los Angeles police officers. However, the South Africans are protected by diplomatic immunity, and so the two are assigned to witness-protection duty in an attempt by their captain to keep his job. It is only when this witness reveals to them that he has already dealt with the smugglers that the trouble really starts.
I love the chemistry between Mel and Danny and now adding Joe Pesci to the mix its perfect. The perfrct trio.
Lethal Weapon 2- is a good sequel to the first one, and adds more. Highly recordmend watching it.
The production:
Shane Black and Warren Murphy's original Play Dirty script:
Their original title for the script was Play Dirty. Although many people thought that their script was brilliant, it was rejected by Silver, studio and director Richard Donner for being too dark and bloody, and because in the ending of the script Riggs dies, while they wanted to keep him alive in case of further sequels. They also wanted the second film to focus more on comedy, while Black's draft focused more on courage and heroics, like Riggs willing to die to protect Murtaugh and his family, due to his love for them
When his script was rejected, Black felt that he had failed the producers. He initially offered to give his payment back, but his agent talked him out of it. Black also refused to re-write the script and quit from the project after working for six months on it. Black later said how the problem with the second film was that they did too much comedy, and how he dislikes the third and fourth films because of the way Riggs' character was changed.
Director Richard Donner said in the film's Blu-ray commentary that the film was shot in such a way that it could be edited with two different endings, one in which Riggs dies and one in which he lives. Audiences in test screenings responded well to Riggs' survival, and this was kept, though the last shot in the film with the camera moving away from Murtaugh holding Riggs was shot for the ending in which he dies.
Jeffrey Boam's final script:
Originally, the character of Rika was intended to survive, with the last scene in the film being Riggs and Rika eating Thanksgiving dinner with the Murtaughs, but the director decided to kill the character to increase Riggs' motivation to destroy the South African drug smugglers. The film was the debut of Leo Getz (Joe Pesci), a crooked but whistle-blowing CPA who is placed in protective custody by Riggs and Murtaugh, and makes the detectives' more difficult due to his neurotic behavior. The Getz character remained a regular throughout the remainder of the film series.
The plot: South African smugglers find themselves being hounded and harassed by Riggs and Murtaugh, two mismatched Los Angeles police officers. However, the South Africans are protected by diplomatic immunity, and so the two are assigned to witness-protection duty in an attempt by their captain to keep his job. It is only when this witness reveals to them that he has already dealt with the smugglers that the trouble really starts.
I love the chemistry between Mel and Danny and now adding Joe Pesci to the mix its perfect. The perfrct trio.
Lethal Weapon 2- is a good sequel to the first one, and adds more. Highly recordmend watching it.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Good Will Hunting (1997) in Movies
Jul 9, 2021
Well Deserved Oscars for Williams, Damon and Affleck
One of the benefits of “Secret Movie Night” is that it forces me to watch (or rewatch) a film that I would not seek out on my own. Such is the case with this month’s selection - GOOD WILL HUNTING - the film that made Matt Damon and Ben Affleck stars and earned the late, great Robin Williams his only Academy Award.
Leaning hard on the mantra “write what you know”, GOOD WILL HUNTING tells the tale of a generationally talented math prodigy, who grew up in South Boston and fights his demons to find his place in this world.
Famously, the screenplay of this film earned Damon and Affleck Oscars for Best Original Screenplay and it is well deserved. They paint a picture of life of these “Southies” that appears to me real and genuine. The “family” feel of the friendship of the main characters rings true and Damon and Affleck have real chemistry with each other - like old friends playing off each other.
However, the relationship between Affleck and Damon’s character in this film is only the 3rd best relationship in this film. The best, of course, is the relationship between Will Hunting (Damon) and the shrink that is assigned to him, played by Robin Williams. It is a haunting, raw, emotional and REAL performance by Williams - one very deserving of the Oscar - and I was more than a little sad to watch this performance knowing that this uniquely talented performer is no longer with us.
The surprise to me in this rewatch of the film is the performance of Minnie Driver as a young lady that becomes emotionally attached to Will. Driver’s performance as Harvard student Skylar is also real and the struggles of her character to get a connection with Will was heartbreaking to watch.
Good Will Hunting also features strong supporting work by Stellan Skarsgard as the MIT Math Professor who discovers - and then becomes jealous of - Will’s talents and Ben Affleck’s younger brother, a then unknown Casey Affleck, who steals almost every scene he is in.
All of this would not have worked without the magnificent, Oscar nominated, Direction of Gus Van Sant (DRUGSTORE COWBOY). He was the perfect choice to direct this intimate, personal drama and he has a way of drawing out the emotions and rawness of the characters on the screen without being cloying or overdramatic. He was a strong contender for Best Director that year (as was Good Will Hunting for Best Picture) but it ran into a roadblock that was James Cameron and TITANIC.
If you have never seen this film - or if you haven’t seen this in quite some time - check out GOOD WILL HUNTING, it is well worth your time.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Leaning hard on the mantra “write what you know”, GOOD WILL HUNTING tells the tale of a generationally talented math prodigy, who grew up in South Boston and fights his demons to find his place in this world.
Famously, the screenplay of this film earned Damon and Affleck Oscars for Best Original Screenplay and it is well deserved. They paint a picture of life of these “Southies” that appears to me real and genuine. The “family” feel of the friendship of the main characters rings true and Damon and Affleck have real chemistry with each other - like old friends playing off each other.
However, the relationship between Affleck and Damon’s character in this film is only the 3rd best relationship in this film. The best, of course, is the relationship between Will Hunting (Damon) and the shrink that is assigned to him, played by Robin Williams. It is a haunting, raw, emotional and REAL performance by Williams - one very deserving of the Oscar - and I was more than a little sad to watch this performance knowing that this uniquely talented performer is no longer with us.
The surprise to me in this rewatch of the film is the performance of Minnie Driver as a young lady that becomes emotionally attached to Will. Driver’s performance as Harvard student Skylar is also real and the struggles of her character to get a connection with Will was heartbreaking to watch.
Good Will Hunting also features strong supporting work by Stellan Skarsgard as the MIT Math Professor who discovers - and then becomes jealous of - Will’s talents and Ben Affleck’s younger brother, a then unknown Casey Affleck, who steals almost every scene he is in.
All of this would not have worked without the magnificent, Oscar nominated, Direction of Gus Van Sant (DRUGSTORE COWBOY). He was the perfect choice to direct this intimate, personal drama and he has a way of drawing out the emotions and rawness of the characters on the screen without being cloying or overdramatic. He was a strong contender for Best Director that year (as was Good Will Hunting for Best Picture) but it ran into a roadblock that was James Cameron and TITANIC.
If you have never seen this film - or if you haven’t seen this in quite some time - check out GOOD WILL HUNTING, it is well worth your time.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Filmbox Live
Entertainment and Lifestyle
App
Enjoy hundreds of movies and entertainment channels in Filmbox Live with a single subscription!...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Call Me by Your Name (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Of lazy Italian summer nights.
It took me two sittings on different transatlantic flights to get through Luca Guadagnino’s much vaunted coming of age film. And I accept that this piecemeal approach might not have enhanced my opinion of the movie. Because I’m going to upset some of you who claimed it to be your “film of the year” last year. While I enjoyed it, it certainly didn’t grab me like that.
What I will admit is that the film is gloriously sun-drenched and atmospheric, set as it is in the countryside around Crema in northern Italy. Shut your eyes and you can almost smell the olive trees and the bolognese simmering on the stove.
You have to hand it to them: the film just reeks of Italian class.
The story, set in 1983, concerns the 17 year-old musical prodigy Elio (Timothée Chalamet, “Lady Bird“, “Interstellar“) who, with his good looks, has the opportunity to seduce his fair share of Italian babes, specifically the gorgeous Marzia (Esther Garrel) who has the hots for him. Although not one to look a gift vagina in the mouth, Elio is sexually conflicted and finds himself increasingly drawn, romantically, to the dashing and cock-sure 24-year old American visitor Oliver (Armie Hammer, “Free Fire“, “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.“): a feeling that is, initially, reluctantly returned.
Love unrequited. Lady in red Marzia (Esther Garrel) – will she be eventually told to get on her bike?
The Oscar-winning screenplay by James Ivory (he of Merchant and Ivory production fame) is rich and deep with lines that roll off the actors’ tongues like syrup. The action also includes the most inappropriate use of foodstuffs since “American Pie” (and presumably that went in the bin afterwards!).
Family times around the dinner table can get exceptionally loud.
The drama is slow and drawn-out, so action-film fans will be asleep within the first 30 minutes. That wasn’t a problem for me…. it is a film in which you can really soak up the atmosphere. And it exquisitely explores the genuine pain of first love.
The pain of first love.
But what I’m afraid I really couldn’t relate to was Elio’s action about half-way through the film. In the main, he acts as a typically introspective and sensitive teenager, slightly awkward and bashful in approaching sexual matters. But then in a pivotal scene he makes a daring move which – to me – seemed completely out of character. This rather threw me, and I never really got my equilibrium back with the movie after that.
Elio and Oliver…. with Elio about to do something out of character.
It’s no doubt a finely crafted film. The sex scenes are beautifully shot and could never be accused of veering towards the pornographic. But I’m honestly not sure it’s a film that gripped me enough to seek it out to watch again in the future. (Sorry CMBYN lovers!)
What I will admit is that the film is gloriously sun-drenched and atmospheric, set as it is in the countryside around Crema in northern Italy. Shut your eyes and you can almost smell the olive trees and the bolognese simmering on the stove.
You have to hand it to them: the film just reeks of Italian class.
The story, set in 1983, concerns the 17 year-old musical prodigy Elio (Timothée Chalamet, “Lady Bird“, “Interstellar“) who, with his good looks, has the opportunity to seduce his fair share of Italian babes, specifically the gorgeous Marzia (Esther Garrel) who has the hots for him. Although not one to look a gift vagina in the mouth, Elio is sexually conflicted and finds himself increasingly drawn, romantically, to the dashing and cock-sure 24-year old American visitor Oliver (Armie Hammer, “Free Fire“, “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.“): a feeling that is, initially, reluctantly returned.
Love unrequited. Lady in red Marzia (Esther Garrel) – will she be eventually told to get on her bike?
The Oscar-winning screenplay by James Ivory (he of Merchant and Ivory production fame) is rich and deep with lines that roll off the actors’ tongues like syrup. The action also includes the most inappropriate use of foodstuffs since “American Pie” (and presumably that went in the bin afterwards!).
Family times around the dinner table can get exceptionally loud.
The drama is slow and drawn-out, so action-film fans will be asleep within the first 30 minutes. That wasn’t a problem for me…. it is a film in which you can really soak up the atmosphere. And it exquisitely explores the genuine pain of first love.
The pain of first love.
But what I’m afraid I really couldn’t relate to was Elio’s action about half-way through the film. In the main, he acts as a typically introspective and sensitive teenager, slightly awkward and bashful in approaching sexual matters. But then in a pivotal scene he makes a daring move which – to me – seemed completely out of character. This rather threw me, and I never really got my equilibrium back with the movie after that.
Elio and Oliver…. with Elio about to do something out of character.
It’s no doubt a finely crafted film. The sex scenes are beautifully shot and could never be accused of veering towards the pornographic. But I’m honestly not sure it’s a film that gripped me enough to seek it out to watch again in the future. (Sorry CMBYN lovers!)
Darren (1599 KP) rated Amadeus (1984) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Amadeus starts as an elderly Antonio Salieri (Abraham) admitting that he killed Mozart, leading to him getting taken to the insane asylum. Salieri recounts his story of his small town beginnings dreaming of being a composer and after a moment of fate he ends up in a position where he can learn music leading to him job as head conductor to the king of Austria. Mozart (Hulce) is the world renowned composer that has taken the notice of all around him with Salieri dreaming of one day being as good as Mozart.
We see how Mozart constantly ends up out shinning Salieri with his music leading to the rivalry between the two, with Salieri serious look on life and Mozart’s flamboyant style of just getting through each moment. Salieri moves into the position of being the connection to the Emperor to get his unique work out there but he is really just building him up for failure trying to break him down with criticize of his work.
REPORT THIS AD
Amadeus gives us a brilliant look at one of the greatest musical minds in the history of man. We know the basic idea of what happened to him but now we get to see it through the eyes of one of his closest friends even if he is filled with envy for him. What starts as envy is filled with respect and seeing how a talented person can get used by all the people close to him which will drive him into his bad ways. Overall this really is a brilliant drama that is told in a way we can just enjoy.
Actor Review
F Murray Abraham: Antonio Salieri admits that he killed Mozart, but now he is confessing to how he believes he was responsible for the death from inside an insane asylum. We watch how he got his dreams of working with music and constantly found himself lacking the complete flair and natural ability of Mozart leading to jealous and planning to bring him down slowly. F Murray gives us a brilliant and well deserved Oscar winning performance in this role.seleir
Tom Hulce: Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is the flamboyant and brilliant composer who lives life on the edge spending every penny he ever received for his work, he pushes the boundaries to what is accepted even if his work is loved. He gains inspiration from his personal stories which will gain him enemies from his own confident in the government. Tom gives a performance that could easily have won him an Oscar too.morzart
Elizabeth Berridge: Constanze Mozart is the wife of Wolfgang, she supports him in all the work he does but just wants him to actually get paid for the work so they can look after the family, even after she lives him she feels guilty. Elizabeth does a good job in this role.
Roy Dotrice: Leopold Mozart is the overbearing father who pushed Amadeus into this career path making him the puppet when he was younger as he was leading him to become the biggest name in music of his time. After his death we learn about the control he had over Amadeus. Roy is good in this supporting role.
Support Cast: Amadeus has a well performed supporting cast that each hold their own in the characters they are playing.
Director Review: Milos Forman – Milos gives us one of the best biographical films of all time.
Biographical: Amadeus shows the troubles of the great man and how it was his eventual downfall.
Music: Amadeus uses all the music of the great man and how it would have look on stage for the fans witnessing it all.
Settings: Amadeus recreates all the settings that would have been used during the time the film is set.
Suggestion: Amadeus is one that could have been watched by anyone to learn about a part of history. (Watch)
Best Part: The performances are brilliant.
Worst Part: If you are not a fan of classical music you will struggle.
Believability: Yes
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: Won 8 Oscars including Best Picture, Best Actor, Director and Writing also nominated for a further 3.
Box Office: $51 Million
Budget: $18 Million
Runtime: 2 Hours 40 Minutes
Tagline: Everything you’ve heard is true.
Trivia: When the movie won Best Picture at The 57th Annual Academy Awards (1985), Sir Laurence Olivier was presenting the award. He went up to the podium, opened the envelope and said “Amadeus.” The problem was he forgot to read the nominees first.
Overall: Brilliant drama about one of the greatest musicians of all time
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/01/06/amadeus-1984/
We see how Mozart constantly ends up out shinning Salieri with his music leading to the rivalry between the two, with Salieri serious look on life and Mozart’s flamboyant style of just getting through each moment. Salieri moves into the position of being the connection to the Emperor to get his unique work out there but he is really just building him up for failure trying to break him down with criticize of his work.
REPORT THIS AD
Amadeus gives us a brilliant look at one of the greatest musical minds in the history of man. We know the basic idea of what happened to him but now we get to see it through the eyes of one of his closest friends even if he is filled with envy for him. What starts as envy is filled with respect and seeing how a talented person can get used by all the people close to him which will drive him into his bad ways. Overall this really is a brilliant drama that is told in a way we can just enjoy.
Actor Review
F Murray Abraham: Antonio Salieri admits that he killed Mozart, but now he is confessing to how he believes he was responsible for the death from inside an insane asylum. We watch how he got his dreams of working with music and constantly found himself lacking the complete flair and natural ability of Mozart leading to jealous and planning to bring him down slowly. F Murray gives us a brilliant and well deserved Oscar winning performance in this role.seleir
Tom Hulce: Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is the flamboyant and brilliant composer who lives life on the edge spending every penny he ever received for his work, he pushes the boundaries to what is accepted even if his work is loved. He gains inspiration from his personal stories which will gain him enemies from his own confident in the government. Tom gives a performance that could easily have won him an Oscar too.morzart
Elizabeth Berridge: Constanze Mozart is the wife of Wolfgang, she supports him in all the work he does but just wants him to actually get paid for the work so they can look after the family, even after she lives him she feels guilty. Elizabeth does a good job in this role.
Roy Dotrice: Leopold Mozart is the overbearing father who pushed Amadeus into this career path making him the puppet when he was younger as he was leading him to become the biggest name in music of his time. After his death we learn about the control he had over Amadeus. Roy is good in this supporting role.
Support Cast: Amadeus has a well performed supporting cast that each hold their own in the characters they are playing.
Director Review: Milos Forman – Milos gives us one of the best biographical films of all time.
Biographical: Amadeus shows the troubles of the great man and how it was his eventual downfall.
Music: Amadeus uses all the music of the great man and how it would have look on stage for the fans witnessing it all.
Settings: Amadeus recreates all the settings that would have been used during the time the film is set.
Suggestion: Amadeus is one that could have been watched by anyone to learn about a part of history. (Watch)
Best Part: The performances are brilliant.
Worst Part: If you are not a fan of classical music you will struggle.
Believability: Yes
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: Won 8 Oscars including Best Picture, Best Actor, Director and Writing also nominated for a further 3.
Box Office: $51 Million
Budget: $18 Million
Runtime: 2 Hours 40 Minutes
Tagline: Everything you’ve heard is true.
Trivia: When the movie won Best Picture at The 57th Annual Academy Awards (1985), Sir Laurence Olivier was presenting the award. He went up to the podium, opened the envelope and said “Amadeus.” The problem was he forgot to read the nominees first.
Overall: Brilliant drama about one of the greatest musicians of all time
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/01/06/amadeus-1984/
Hazel (1853 KP) rated My Side of the Diamond in Books
Sep 16, 2017
Impassive
This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
My Side of the Diamond is the latest novel by British author Sally Gardner. Employing the use of science fiction, Gardner explores the concept of love in a unique tale of a covered up alien invasion. The main characters are unfortunately caught up in the drama; however, no one will ever believe their story.
Jazmin Little’s best friend, Becky, has disappeared. Some say she was murdered, others claim she committed suicide, but what everyone agrees on is that she jumped from the top of the Shard in London, but never landed. Jazmin knows what happened but the authorities have torn her witness statement to shreds. Now everyone believes that she is the cause of Becky’s disappearance.
The reader plays an active role as the mysterious Mr. Jones who is interviewing a handful of characters involved with the mystery surrounding Becky’s fate. Jazmin and the others tell the reader, as Mr. Jones, the truth about the lead-up to the moment their lives changed forever. Jazmin explains the events that preceded Becky becoming infatuated with the enigmatic Icarus. From their first meeting, bizarre and frightening things began to occur. From Becky’s sudden recovery from anorexia as though she had just had an epiphany, to being chased by an impossible monster, the friends and their relatives are suddenly in serious danger.
Icarus claims to be an alien who has come to Earth to learn about love. Becky instantly believed him, however, Jazmin and the others remained sceptical. As they open up to Mr. Jones, they wish they could go back in time and change the way things panned out. In hindsight, they know who was good and who was bad, but at the time, it was impossible to know whom to trust.
Although the main story focuses on the relationship between Becky and Icarus and their resulting disappearance, Gardner also explores themes of social classes and friendship. Jazmin and Becky were polar opposite: Becky came from a family made of money, whereas Jazmin was lucky to have a can of baked beans for dinner. Despite this, they were best friends who did not let their backgrounds interfere with their relationship. The significance of their social class comes to light as Jazmin explains what happened at the trial after Becky’s disappearance. Being from such a low caste, it was easy for everyone to pin the blame on Jazmin.
The concept behind My Side of the Diamond is interesting, as is the method of narrating the story, however, it lacks any emotional connection. Mr. Jones, although having no dialogue of his own, comes across as an impassive character, and that is how I felt whilst reading the book. None of the characters were particularly relatable and it was difficult to care about what happened to them. Their circumstances were creepy, but also far-fetched and hard to comprehend.
Although Sally Gardner’s ideas are good, My Side of the Diamond is a disappointment, especially coming from a prize-winning author
My Side of the Diamond is the latest novel by British author Sally Gardner. Employing the use of science fiction, Gardner explores the concept of love in a unique tale of a covered up alien invasion. The main characters are unfortunately caught up in the drama; however, no one will ever believe their story.
Jazmin Little’s best friend, Becky, has disappeared. Some say she was murdered, others claim she committed suicide, but what everyone agrees on is that she jumped from the top of the Shard in London, but never landed. Jazmin knows what happened but the authorities have torn her witness statement to shreds. Now everyone believes that she is the cause of Becky’s disappearance.
The reader plays an active role as the mysterious Mr. Jones who is interviewing a handful of characters involved with the mystery surrounding Becky’s fate. Jazmin and the others tell the reader, as Mr. Jones, the truth about the lead-up to the moment their lives changed forever. Jazmin explains the events that preceded Becky becoming infatuated with the enigmatic Icarus. From their first meeting, bizarre and frightening things began to occur. From Becky’s sudden recovery from anorexia as though she had just had an epiphany, to being chased by an impossible monster, the friends and their relatives are suddenly in serious danger.
Icarus claims to be an alien who has come to Earth to learn about love. Becky instantly believed him, however, Jazmin and the others remained sceptical. As they open up to Mr. Jones, they wish they could go back in time and change the way things panned out. In hindsight, they know who was good and who was bad, but at the time, it was impossible to know whom to trust.
Although the main story focuses on the relationship between Becky and Icarus and their resulting disappearance, Gardner also explores themes of social classes and friendship. Jazmin and Becky were polar opposite: Becky came from a family made of money, whereas Jazmin was lucky to have a can of baked beans for dinner. Despite this, they were best friends who did not let their backgrounds interfere with their relationship. The significance of their social class comes to light as Jazmin explains what happened at the trial after Becky’s disappearance. Being from such a low caste, it was easy for everyone to pin the blame on Jazmin.
The concept behind My Side of the Diamond is interesting, as is the method of narrating the story, however, it lacks any emotional connection. Mr. Jones, although having no dialogue of his own, comes across as an impassive character, and that is how I felt whilst reading the book. None of the characters were particularly relatable and it was difficult to care about what happened to them. Their circumstances were creepy, but also far-fetched and hard to comprehend.
Although Sally Gardner’s ideas are good, My Side of the Diamond is a disappointment, especially coming from a prize-winning author
Lee (2222 KP) rated Santa Clarita Diet - Season 3 in TV
Apr 7, 2019
I remember watching season 1 of Santa Clarita Diet and wondering after just a few episodes if it would ever make it to another season. Don't get me wrong, I loved the humour and the craziness of the show, but wasn’t sure how they would ever manage to stretch the idea out any further than that. Well, we're now onto season 3 of what has proven to be one of the funniest and most consistently well written shows around right now, with no signs of it slowing down anytime soon.
Season 2 ended on a bit of a cliffhanger with Sheila (Drew Barrymore) and Joel (Timothy Olyphant) getting caught with a re-animated corpse head out in the desert by their cop neighbour Anne (Natalie Morales). At the same time, daughter Abby (Liv Hewson) and their other neighbour’s son Eric (Skyler Gisondo) blowing up a fracking site. It’s the kind of wild predicament which, despite sounding crazy on paper, has become perfectly normal for this show.
Season 3 picks things up with Anne convinced that Sheila has been sent by god to help rid the world of evildoers, and as a church goer herself, she believes she must dedicate herself to helping Sheila. Meanwhile, the kids find themselves having to dodge an FBI agent who has been assigned to the fracking site case. And as for the re-animated head of Gary? Well, after positioning him back in their basement, the Hammonds decide to equip him with a headset and an Alexa so that he can work as an employee for their brand new realty company. Once again, something which sounds crazy on paper, but totally works on the show. And is also very funny as he turns out to be the perfect employee.
Season 3 also begins heavily expanding the world of the show, and the zombie mythology briefly introduced in previous seasons. A group called the Knights of Serbia are out to rid the world of the undead, and there is a mysterious stranger accompanied by a couple of thugs who also seem to have sinister motives for capturing zombies. As if all of that wasn’t enough, Sheila begins putting pressure on Joel to join her in becoming undead!
The pace of the show is what I love about the show. There’s always a family drama, or bigger issue to try and resolve meaning you never get time to be bored. The way that Sheila and Joel tackle everything like it’s something as mundane as changing a blown light bulb is one of the best things about the show and I particularly love Joel and his calmly frustrated comebacks and subtle one liners. Little things - like Joel discovering that there are separate kitchen drawers, with separate utensils for normal cooking and for more gross purposes - are just perfect.
Although this season isn’t quite as funny as last, there are some very funny new characters this time, most notably, Ron, who appeared last season but is newly undead in season 3. The whole season just breezes by, and once again ends on an exciting cliffhanger. Bring on season 4!
Season 2 ended on a bit of a cliffhanger with Sheila (Drew Barrymore) and Joel (Timothy Olyphant) getting caught with a re-animated corpse head out in the desert by their cop neighbour Anne (Natalie Morales). At the same time, daughter Abby (Liv Hewson) and their other neighbour’s son Eric (Skyler Gisondo) blowing up a fracking site. It’s the kind of wild predicament which, despite sounding crazy on paper, has become perfectly normal for this show.
Season 3 picks things up with Anne convinced that Sheila has been sent by god to help rid the world of evildoers, and as a church goer herself, she believes she must dedicate herself to helping Sheila. Meanwhile, the kids find themselves having to dodge an FBI agent who has been assigned to the fracking site case. And as for the re-animated head of Gary? Well, after positioning him back in their basement, the Hammonds decide to equip him with a headset and an Alexa so that he can work as an employee for their brand new realty company. Once again, something which sounds crazy on paper, but totally works on the show. And is also very funny as he turns out to be the perfect employee.
Season 3 also begins heavily expanding the world of the show, and the zombie mythology briefly introduced in previous seasons. A group called the Knights of Serbia are out to rid the world of the undead, and there is a mysterious stranger accompanied by a couple of thugs who also seem to have sinister motives for capturing zombies. As if all of that wasn’t enough, Sheila begins putting pressure on Joel to join her in becoming undead!
The pace of the show is what I love about the show. There’s always a family drama, or bigger issue to try and resolve meaning you never get time to be bored. The way that Sheila and Joel tackle everything like it’s something as mundane as changing a blown light bulb is one of the best things about the show and I particularly love Joel and his calmly frustrated comebacks and subtle one liners. Little things - like Joel discovering that there are separate kitchen drawers, with separate utensils for normal cooking and for more gross purposes - are just perfect.
Although this season isn’t quite as funny as last, there are some very funny new characters this time, most notably, Ron, who appeared last season but is newly undead in season 3. The whole season just breezes by, and once again ends on an exciting cliffhanger. Bring on season 4!