Search
Search results
Peril in Paris
9.0
Rate It
Book
Lady Georgiana Rannoch and her dashing husband, Darcy, are awaiting a bundle of joy, but an...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood (2019) in Movies
Dec 13, 2019
"Anything mentionable is manageable"
Tom Hanks' new movie is a film I personally struggled to fully engage with. But some I suspect will truly LOVE it's gentle and feel-good nature.
Who WAS Fred Rogers? Based on a true story this movie very quickly makes you realise that Fred Rogers, who died in 2003, was an American legend. This is supported by the GLOWING reviews here on IMDB by US viewers. Rogers was a children's TV presenter that used puppets and song to help children work through their fears and psychological issues. I suspect, like me, most Brits would say "WHO?" (Just as if a 60's born Brit like me saying "Let's look through the arched window" will similarly get a "WHAT?" from nearly all Americans!)
Here the story revolves not around Fred (Tom Hanks) helping a child with issues, but with Fred's fixation with 'Esquire' journo Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys), who is fighting his own demons of anger, resentment and pain. For Lloyd is struggling not only with his feelings about fatherhood, with the normal strains that is placing on the relationship with wife and mother Andrea (Susan Kelechi Watson), but also with the reemergence on the scene of his estranged and hard-drinking father Jerry (Chris Cooper).
The movie starts (and continues) with model sets reminiscent of the brilliantly barmy "Welcome to Marwen" and (the rather more subtle) "Game Night". Fun is had with matchbox-car freeways and planes flying off and clunking down on model runways.
We join Mr Rogers on set filming his series: and the movie sloooooows to match Rogers' leisurely pace. This was a movie I went into completely blind (which is unusual for me): I knew precisely zip about it. No knowledge of Rogers. No knowledge of the story. No sight of the trailer. Nothing. So these opening scenes were a real "WTF" moment as my brain struggled to work out what the story was all about.
There was undeniably something creepy about seeing the saintly Fred Rogers engaging with sick and vulnerable children. And I realised just what damage the likes of the convicted-paedophiles Jimmy Saville, Stuart Hall and Rolf Harris have done to my suspicions against all such entertainers. I feared - without any background knowledge on Rogers - that the story would take a darker turn. But no! That's not the story....
For as mentioned earlier, this is the story of Lloyd. And it's a relatively simple and linear story of familial stress that we've seen in movies throughout the decades. Whether you will buy into this story-within-the-story, or not, will flavour your overall enjoyment of the film.
Many who are into analysis and 'talking treatments' will - I think - appreciate the script. But I personally didn't really warm to any of the players - other than Rogers - so this was a negative for me. And I found the pace so slow that I ended up a bit fidgety and bored moving into the second reel of the film. Two women got up and walked out at that point - - it was clearly not for them (this was a Cineworld "Unlimited" pre-release screening).
The third reel rather pulled it together again, and established an "It's a Wonderful Life" style of feelgood that I warmed to much more.
This is a movie I predict the Academy will love. And everyone loves Hanks already. Read the tea-leaves. It's a brilliant performance from Hanks in its stillness and quietness.
No more so than in one particular scene....
This is the follow up movie from Marielle Heller to the impressive "Can You Ever Forgive Me?". And this particular scene - let's call it the "Anti-When-Harry-Met-Sally" moment - is a massively brave and striking piece of cinema.
It's truly extraordinary and worth the price of a ticket alone.
In summary, I enjoyed this movie, primarily for watching the master Hanks at work. The pacing for me was somewhat off though. But I can't be overly critical of such a warm-hearted movie. I predict you will see this and go home with a big dose of the warm-fuzzies.
See here for the full graphical review - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/12/12/one-manns-movies-film-review-a-beautiful-day-in-the-neighborhood-2019/
Who WAS Fred Rogers? Based on a true story this movie very quickly makes you realise that Fred Rogers, who died in 2003, was an American legend. This is supported by the GLOWING reviews here on IMDB by US viewers. Rogers was a children's TV presenter that used puppets and song to help children work through their fears and psychological issues. I suspect, like me, most Brits would say "WHO?" (Just as if a 60's born Brit like me saying "Let's look through the arched window" will similarly get a "WHAT?" from nearly all Americans!)
Here the story revolves not around Fred (Tom Hanks) helping a child with issues, but with Fred's fixation with 'Esquire' journo Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys), who is fighting his own demons of anger, resentment and pain. For Lloyd is struggling not only with his feelings about fatherhood, with the normal strains that is placing on the relationship with wife and mother Andrea (Susan Kelechi Watson), but also with the reemergence on the scene of his estranged and hard-drinking father Jerry (Chris Cooper).
The movie starts (and continues) with model sets reminiscent of the brilliantly barmy "Welcome to Marwen" and (the rather more subtle) "Game Night". Fun is had with matchbox-car freeways and planes flying off and clunking down on model runways.
We join Mr Rogers on set filming his series: and the movie sloooooows to match Rogers' leisurely pace. This was a movie I went into completely blind (which is unusual for me): I knew precisely zip about it. No knowledge of Rogers. No knowledge of the story. No sight of the trailer. Nothing. So these opening scenes were a real "WTF" moment as my brain struggled to work out what the story was all about.
There was undeniably something creepy about seeing the saintly Fred Rogers engaging with sick and vulnerable children. And I realised just what damage the likes of the convicted-paedophiles Jimmy Saville, Stuart Hall and Rolf Harris have done to my suspicions against all such entertainers. I feared - without any background knowledge on Rogers - that the story would take a darker turn. But no! That's not the story....
For as mentioned earlier, this is the story of Lloyd. And it's a relatively simple and linear story of familial stress that we've seen in movies throughout the decades. Whether you will buy into this story-within-the-story, or not, will flavour your overall enjoyment of the film.
Many who are into analysis and 'talking treatments' will - I think - appreciate the script. But I personally didn't really warm to any of the players - other than Rogers - so this was a negative for me. And I found the pace so slow that I ended up a bit fidgety and bored moving into the second reel of the film. Two women got up and walked out at that point - - it was clearly not for them (this was a Cineworld "Unlimited" pre-release screening).
The third reel rather pulled it together again, and established an "It's a Wonderful Life" style of feelgood that I warmed to much more.
This is a movie I predict the Academy will love. And everyone loves Hanks already. Read the tea-leaves. It's a brilliant performance from Hanks in its stillness and quietness.
No more so than in one particular scene....
This is the follow up movie from Marielle Heller to the impressive "Can You Ever Forgive Me?". And this particular scene - let's call it the "Anti-When-Harry-Met-Sally" moment - is a massively brave and striking piece of cinema.
It's truly extraordinary and worth the price of a ticket alone.
In summary, I enjoyed this movie, primarily for watching the master Hanks at work. The pacing for me was somewhat off though. But I can't be overly critical of such a warm-hearted movie. I predict you will see this and go home with a big dose of the warm-fuzzies.
See here for the full graphical review - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/12/12/one-manns-movies-film-review-a-beautiful-day-in-the-neighborhood-2019/
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Okja (2017) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Mar 3, 2020)
Okja (pronounced ok-cha, as far as I can discern from hearing it said) was a film I had on my radar from its release, but it took the impetus of Parasite and director Bong Joon Ho winning the Oscar to kick me into settling down to watch it. It is the kind of film I would have seen as a matter of course when I worked at the beloved Cameo Cinema, Edinburgh, back in the day… but the kind of film it takes me a while to get around to these days.
What I had heard was that it was quirky, had a very black humour and involved a giant pig. Other than that I was going in blind. Which is always preferable, with almost any film! Hype and too much information can ruin your experience of a thing, simply by putting preconceptions and ideas in your head that may influence your thinking and true reaction to something. I was very grateful then to avoid too much information regarding this unique movie.
The cast is full of people I like, outside of the Korean cast that were strangers to me, in all honesty. Jake Gyllenhaal and Paul Dano, especially, are two actors that have been high on my list of consistent performers you can trust for some years; both making interesting and compelling career choices in terms of subject matter and working with strong directors. Tilda Swinton too is usually good value for a promising watch, almost guaranteeing something slightly leftfield and worth thinking about.
Dano gets away with being the one likeable, if morally ambiguous, character out of the three; with Swinton and Gyllenhaal giving bizarre, heightened comic performances that it is hard to reference to anything else! As the main story of eco-consciousness and a girl’s love for her giant pig progresses in charming fashion, it is these starkly bonkers performances that stick out like very sore thumbs – sometimes raising awkward chuckles, but mostly making you go “what the hell is going on!?”
Well, what is going on is an exploration of corporate evil, the lies, deviousness and manipulation used to make a profit that ignores life and nature as anything worth preserving, or even loving. It wants us to look at meat eating for what it is, and imagines how we might think more about it as a species if we truly accept that animals have rights, personalities, even souls. Of course many people watching wouldn’t need to be converted to this way of thinking at all, so I am very curious (as a non vegetarian / vegan) what reaction a person whose consciousness of these things has been awake for years might have…?
It is possible to watch this without involving yourself too much in that whole debate, however. At its heart, it is a film about innocent love, and a rescue movie that sets unlikely heroes against a gargantuan nemesis against all odds. Naturally, it is a very smart script, that doesn’t ignore the notion of making fun of itself and keeping it mostly fun. In many ways, it seems like a family friendly film, apart from the underlying seriousness of the subject of cruelty, torture and, essentially, murder for the private gain of unscrupulous suits who would watch the world burn in the name of profit.
At the time of watching it, I caught myself in the right mood and really enjoyed it for what it was. Seo-Hyun Ahn as Mija is utterly lovely, and you do find yourself falling for Okja (rendered with marvelous CGI work) and sympathising with the warmth of their relationship as friends. The moments of the film that show nature and the calm of a non-modern world are the most compelling. The parts of the film with cities and noise and guns are more jarring – which, perhaps, is the point and fully intentional. Clearly, this is a director with serious vision and talent that was almost, if not quite, getting it right. As we now know, with Parasite he nailed it…
This is a film I’d be a little cautious of recommending to some people. It is just too odd in parts. It is a good film, not a great one. And perhaps more likely to impress in the hands of viewers that are already converted to the cause and way of thinking it champions.
What I had heard was that it was quirky, had a very black humour and involved a giant pig. Other than that I was going in blind. Which is always preferable, with almost any film! Hype and too much information can ruin your experience of a thing, simply by putting preconceptions and ideas in your head that may influence your thinking and true reaction to something. I was very grateful then to avoid too much information regarding this unique movie.
The cast is full of people I like, outside of the Korean cast that were strangers to me, in all honesty. Jake Gyllenhaal and Paul Dano, especially, are two actors that have been high on my list of consistent performers you can trust for some years; both making interesting and compelling career choices in terms of subject matter and working with strong directors. Tilda Swinton too is usually good value for a promising watch, almost guaranteeing something slightly leftfield and worth thinking about.
Dano gets away with being the one likeable, if morally ambiguous, character out of the three; with Swinton and Gyllenhaal giving bizarre, heightened comic performances that it is hard to reference to anything else! As the main story of eco-consciousness and a girl’s love for her giant pig progresses in charming fashion, it is these starkly bonkers performances that stick out like very sore thumbs – sometimes raising awkward chuckles, but mostly making you go “what the hell is going on!?”
Well, what is going on is an exploration of corporate evil, the lies, deviousness and manipulation used to make a profit that ignores life and nature as anything worth preserving, or even loving. It wants us to look at meat eating for what it is, and imagines how we might think more about it as a species if we truly accept that animals have rights, personalities, even souls. Of course many people watching wouldn’t need to be converted to this way of thinking at all, so I am very curious (as a non vegetarian / vegan) what reaction a person whose consciousness of these things has been awake for years might have…?
It is possible to watch this without involving yourself too much in that whole debate, however. At its heart, it is a film about innocent love, and a rescue movie that sets unlikely heroes against a gargantuan nemesis against all odds. Naturally, it is a very smart script, that doesn’t ignore the notion of making fun of itself and keeping it mostly fun. In many ways, it seems like a family friendly film, apart from the underlying seriousness of the subject of cruelty, torture and, essentially, murder for the private gain of unscrupulous suits who would watch the world burn in the name of profit.
At the time of watching it, I caught myself in the right mood and really enjoyed it for what it was. Seo-Hyun Ahn as Mija is utterly lovely, and you do find yourself falling for Okja (rendered with marvelous CGI work) and sympathising with the warmth of their relationship as friends. The moments of the film that show nature and the calm of a non-modern world are the most compelling. The parts of the film with cities and noise and guns are more jarring – which, perhaps, is the point and fully intentional. Clearly, this is a director with serious vision and talent that was almost, if not quite, getting it right. As we now know, with Parasite he nailed it…
This is a film I’d be a little cautious of recommending to some people. It is just too odd in parts. It is a good film, not a great one. And perhaps more likely to impress in the hands of viewers that are already converted to the cause and way of thinking it champions.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Arrival (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Wow – what a surprise.
Sometimes I can get very irritated by a trailer for giving too much away (case in point, “Room” – which I recut – and more recently “Passengers”). Sometimes I can get very excited by a really good teaser trailer (case in point, “10 Cloverfield Lane”). But most of the time a “ho hum” trailer typically drives the expectation of a “ho hum” film: “Jack Reacher: Never Look Back” being a good recent example. Then there is “Arrival”…
Because the trailer for “Arrival” belies absolutely nothing about the depth and complexity of the film. At face value, it looks like a dubious “Close Encounters” wannabe, with a threat of movement towards the likes of “Independence Day” and “The 5th Wave”. Actually what you get is a film that approaches the grandeur of “Close Encounters” but interlaces it with the intellectual depth of “Inception”, the mystery of “Intersteller” and a heavy emotional jolt or two of “Up”.
Amy Adams (“Batman vs Superman”) plays Dr Louise Banks, a language teacher at a US university facing a bunch of particularly disengaged students one morning. For good reason since world news is afoot. Twelve alien craft have positioned themselves strategically around the world, hanging a few feet from the ground in just the sort of way that bricks don’t. Banks is approached by Colonel Weber (Forest Whitaker) and offered the job of trying to communicate with the aliens: where did they come from? why are they here? Banks faces the biggest challenge of her academic career in trying to devise a strategy for communication without any foundation of knowledge on what level communication even works at for them. Assisted by Ian Donelly (Jeremy Renner, “Mission Impossible IV/V”, “Avengers”), a theoretical physicist, the pair try to crack the code against a deadline set by the inexorable rise of international tensions – driven by China’s General Chang (Tzi Ma, “Veep”; “24”).
Steven Spielberg made a rare error of judgement by adding scenes in his “Special Edition” of “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” showing everyman power guy Roy Neary (Richard Dreyfuss) entering the alien spacecraft. Some things are best left to the imagination. Here, a reprise of that mistake seems inevitable, but – perversely – seems to be pulled off with mastery and aplomb. The aliens are well rendered, and the small scale nature of the set (I’m sure I’ve been in similar dingy waiting rooms in UK railway stations!) is cleverly handled by the environmental conditions.
But where the screenplay really kills it is in the emergence of the real power unleashed by the translation work. To say any more would deliver spoilers, which I won’t do. But this is a masterly piece of science-fiction writing. The screenplay was by Eric Heisserer – someone with a limited scriptwriting CV of horror film reboots/sequels such as “Final Destination 5”, “The Thing” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street” – so the portents were not good, which just adds to the surprise. If I were to be critical, some of the dialogue at times is a little TOO clever for its own good and smacks of Aaron Sorkin over-exposition: the comment about “They have a word for it in Hungary” for example went right over my head.
Denis Villeneuve (“Sicario”) deftly directs, leaving the pace of the story glacially slow in places to let the audience deduce what is going on at their own speed. This will NOT be to the liking of movie fans who like their films in a wham-bam of CGI, but was very much to my liking. The film in fact has very little exposition, giving you lots to think about after the credits roll: there were elements of the story (such as her book) that still generated debate with my better half on the drive home.
Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner are first rate and an effectively moody score by Jóhann Jóhannsson (“Sicario”; “The Theory of Everything”) round off the other high-point credits for me.
An extraordinary film, this is a must see for sci-fi fans but also for lovers of good cinema and well-crafted stories.
Because the trailer for “Arrival” belies absolutely nothing about the depth and complexity of the film. At face value, it looks like a dubious “Close Encounters” wannabe, with a threat of movement towards the likes of “Independence Day” and “The 5th Wave”. Actually what you get is a film that approaches the grandeur of “Close Encounters” but interlaces it with the intellectual depth of “Inception”, the mystery of “Intersteller” and a heavy emotional jolt or two of “Up”.
Amy Adams (“Batman vs Superman”) plays Dr Louise Banks, a language teacher at a US university facing a bunch of particularly disengaged students one morning. For good reason since world news is afoot. Twelve alien craft have positioned themselves strategically around the world, hanging a few feet from the ground in just the sort of way that bricks don’t. Banks is approached by Colonel Weber (Forest Whitaker) and offered the job of trying to communicate with the aliens: where did they come from? why are they here? Banks faces the biggest challenge of her academic career in trying to devise a strategy for communication without any foundation of knowledge on what level communication even works at for them. Assisted by Ian Donelly (Jeremy Renner, “Mission Impossible IV/V”, “Avengers”), a theoretical physicist, the pair try to crack the code against a deadline set by the inexorable rise of international tensions – driven by China’s General Chang (Tzi Ma, “Veep”; “24”).
Steven Spielberg made a rare error of judgement by adding scenes in his “Special Edition” of “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” showing everyman power guy Roy Neary (Richard Dreyfuss) entering the alien spacecraft. Some things are best left to the imagination. Here, a reprise of that mistake seems inevitable, but – perversely – seems to be pulled off with mastery and aplomb. The aliens are well rendered, and the small scale nature of the set (I’m sure I’ve been in similar dingy waiting rooms in UK railway stations!) is cleverly handled by the environmental conditions.
But where the screenplay really kills it is in the emergence of the real power unleashed by the translation work. To say any more would deliver spoilers, which I won’t do. But this is a masterly piece of science-fiction writing. The screenplay was by Eric Heisserer – someone with a limited scriptwriting CV of horror film reboots/sequels such as “Final Destination 5”, “The Thing” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street” – so the portents were not good, which just adds to the surprise. If I were to be critical, some of the dialogue at times is a little TOO clever for its own good and smacks of Aaron Sorkin over-exposition: the comment about “They have a word for it in Hungary” for example went right over my head.
Denis Villeneuve (“Sicario”) deftly directs, leaving the pace of the story glacially slow in places to let the audience deduce what is going on at their own speed. This will NOT be to the liking of movie fans who like their films in a wham-bam of CGI, but was very much to my liking. The film in fact has very little exposition, giving you lots to think about after the credits roll: there were elements of the story (such as her book) that still generated debate with my better half on the drive home.
Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner are first rate and an effectively moody score by Jóhann Jóhannsson (“Sicario”; “The Theory of Everything”) round off the other high-point credits for me.
An extraordinary film, this is a must see for sci-fi fans but also for lovers of good cinema and well-crafted stories.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga (2020) in Movies
Jun 27, 2020
Rachel McAdams and Dan Stevens steal most of the scenes (1 more)
A real feelgood movie that spoofs the unspoofable pretty well
My lovely farce
Will Ferrell's output over the last few years has been decidedly patchy. I have to go back to "Get Hard" to find one of his movies that really got to my funny bone. But this latest Netflix offering hits the spot for me.
We start with the song recently voted the number one Eurovision song of all time by UK viewers: "Waterloo" by Abba. Young Lars Erickssong (LOL) (Alfie Melia) is transfixed watching the 1974 Eurovision winner with his recently bereaved father and local Lothario Erick (Pierce Brosnan). (Mental note to women: never marry Brosnan on screen... he gets through wives faster than you can murder "S.O.S."). Also present are his friends and young Sigrit ("probably not by sister") Ericksdottir (Sophia-Grace Donnelly). Lars vows to one day stand on that stage and make his father and his remote Icelandic fishing village proud.
Now all grown up, Lars (now Will Ferrell) and Sigrit (now Rachel McAdams) are still pursuing their dream of representing Iceland in the upcoming Eurovision Song Contest. They are, of course, dreadful - - so they should fit right in! But their way is blocked by the immensely talented Katiana (Demi Lovato) and all seems hopeless. Will Sigrit's faith in the power of the Elves see them through?
There's an obvious problem here. The Eurovision Song Contest is in itself so bat-s**t bonkers that it is almost impossible to spoof. (If anyone is not on this wavelength, checkout the genuine Russian entry in this year's (cancelled) contest on Youtube). But the team here (writers Will Ferrell and Andrew Steele and director David "The Judge" Dobkin) do a really great job. I'd love to know what a US audience - who I guess will mostly be unfamiliar with Eurovision - make of this. Since Australia are now honorary Europeans in the contest.... wouldn't it be great if there was a Mexican mariachi band attending and a country and western act from the States? (Brits would love the US to be involved.... as spoofed in the film, there's only one country European's hate more than the UK.... be nice to have someone else to join us in the "nul points" club!)
Wherever you may be on the "Ferrell-funny-or-not-ometer", there's one thing I hope we can all agree on here, and that is that Rachel McAdams continues to shine as a comic lead. She was fantastic in "Game Night" - one of my favourite comedies of recent years - and here she is both gorgeous and hilarious. She knocks it out of the park playing the elf-loving Icelandic pixie with the golden voice. (McAdams "sings" but is significantly "helped" in the mix by Swedish pop star Molly Sandén (aka My Marianne)).
Here she even gets to almost reprise her wonderful "YEESSSSS! Oh no, he died!" line from "Game Night".
Almost matching her in the scene-stealing stakes though is Downton's Dan Stevens as Lemtov: a Russian 'Tom Jones'-like contestant singing "Lion of Love" ("Let's get together; I'm a lion lover; And I hunt for love!"). He's DEFINITELY not gay ("There are no gays in Russia") but are his multi-millions enough to turn Sigrit's head?
For those who love their annual Eurovision parties, there are also an impressive array of nice cameos that will delight.
But where the film-makers really score (no pun intended) is making the music so fitting. Some of the tracks make you think "Yeah, if this was the real content, this might have got my vote". Director Dobkin is quoted as saying "It's okay if it's funny, but it has to be really good music. It has to still be great and just kitschy enough to be Eurovision, because that's part of what's fun about Eurovision" (Source: Vulture). Very true. This success is down to the involvement of pop writer/producer Savan Kotecha on the project: the man behind hits by Katy Petty, Ariana Grande and Ellie Goulding.
A comedy needs to make me laugh, and this one really did - numerous times. It's not just the dialogue. Some of the cut-away scenes are priceless and perfectly executed: jumping whales; a collapsing glacier; a small slamming door!
Sure, it borrows from a number of other sources in its plot: most notably THAT episode of "Father Ted" and the rap-battle scenes from "Pitch Perfect". And sure, some of the outRAGEOUS Icelandic accents sometimes swerve into an alarming mix of Indian, Welsh and Caribbean dialects! But above all, this is movie with real heart. The plot is pretty well signposted, but the finale still packs a (surprisingly) hefty emotional punch, and it leaves you with a really nice afterglow.
As we struggle out of Covid lockdown, it may not be a vaccine, but it is a pretty good medicine for the side-effects. Did I love this? Jaja Ding Dong!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/06/27/one-manns-movies-film-review-eurovision-song-contest-the-story-of-fire-saga-2020/ ).
We start with the song recently voted the number one Eurovision song of all time by UK viewers: "Waterloo" by Abba. Young Lars Erickssong (LOL) (Alfie Melia) is transfixed watching the 1974 Eurovision winner with his recently bereaved father and local Lothario Erick (Pierce Brosnan). (Mental note to women: never marry Brosnan on screen... he gets through wives faster than you can murder "S.O.S."). Also present are his friends and young Sigrit ("probably not by sister") Ericksdottir (Sophia-Grace Donnelly). Lars vows to one day stand on that stage and make his father and his remote Icelandic fishing village proud.
Now all grown up, Lars (now Will Ferrell) and Sigrit (now Rachel McAdams) are still pursuing their dream of representing Iceland in the upcoming Eurovision Song Contest. They are, of course, dreadful - - so they should fit right in! But their way is blocked by the immensely talented Katiana (Demi Lovato) and all seems hopeless. Will Sigrit's faith in the power of the Elves see them through?
There's an obvious problem here. The Eurovision Song Contest is in itself so bat-s**t bonkers that it is almost impossible to spoof. (If anyone is not on this wavelength, checkout the genuine Russian entry in this year's (cancelled) contest on Youtube). But the team here (writers Will Ferrell and Andrew Steele and director David "The Judge" Dobkin) do a really great job. I'd love to know what a US audience - who I guess will mostly be unfamiliar with Eurovision - make of this. Since Australia are now honorary Europeans in the contest.... wouldn't it be great if there was a Mexican mariachi band attending and a country and western act from the States? (Brits would love the US to be involved.... as spoofed in the film, there's only one country European's hate more than the UK.... be nice to have someone else to join us in the "nul points" club!)
Wherever you may be on the "Ferrell-funny-or-not-ometer", there's one thing I hope we can all agree on here, and that is that Rachel McAdams continues to shine as a comic lead. She was fantastic in "Game Night" - one of my favourite comedies of recent years - and here she is both gorgeous and hilarious. She knocks it out of the park playing the elf-loving Icelandic pixie with the golden voice. (McAdams "sings" but is significantly "helped" in the mix by Swedish pop star Molly Sandén (aka My Marianne)).
Here she even gets to almost reprise her wonderful "YEESSSSS! Oh no, he died!" line from "Game Night".
Almost matching her in the scene-stealing stakes though is Downton's Dan Stevens as Lemtov: a Russian 'Tom Jones'-like contestant singing "Lion of Love" ("Let's get together; I'm a lion lover; And I hunt for love!"). He's DEFINITELY not gay ("There are no gays in Russia") but are his multi-millions enough to turn Sigrit's head?
For those who love their annual Eurovision parties, there are also an impressive array of nice cameos that will delight.
But where the film-makers really score (no pun intended) is making the music so fitting. Some of the tracks make you think "Yeah, if this was the real content, this might have got my vote". Director Dobkin is quoted as saying "It's okay if it's funny, but it has to be really good music. It has to still be great and just kitschy enough to be Eurovision, because that's part of what's fun about Eurovision" (Source: Vulture). Very true. This success is down to the involvement of pop writer/producer Savan Kotecha on the project: the man behind hits by Katy Petty, Ariana Grande and Ellie Goulding.
A comedy needs to make me laugh, and this one really did - numerous times. It's not just the dialogue. Some of the cut-away scenes are priceless and perfectly executed: jumping whales; a collapsing glacier; a small slamming door!
Sure, it borrows from a number of other sources in its plot: most notably THAT episode of "Father Ted" and the rap-battle scenes from "Pitch Perfect". And sure, some of the outRAGEOUS Icelandic accents sometimes swerve into an alarming mix of Indian, Welsh and Caribbean dialects! But above all, this is movie with real heart. The plot is pretty well signposted, but the finale still packs a (surprisingly) hefty emotional punch, and it leaves you with a really nice afterglow.
As we struggle out of Covid lockdown, it may not be a vaccine, but it is a pretty good medicine for the side-effects. Did I love this? Jaja Ding Dong!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/06/27/one-manns-movies-film-review-eurovision-song-contest-the-story-of-fire-saga-2020/ ).
Kaysee Hood (83 KP) rated Eleanor & Park in Books
Oct 3, 2017
A love story that is not a love story, but is a love story with lessons sometimes everything falls into place as you want it and yet can somehow.
The most confusing sentence I will ever form about book. I loved Fangirl, so it was no trouble picking this up the next time I went to Barnes & Noble. Everyone told me how much they loved this book while I was reading Fangirl and though it has sat in the stack of books for months waiting for me to pick it up yesterday felt like the day to start.
I could not put it down.
Eleanor is not perfect. She is not skinny as a twig, instead the beautiful thickness of the oak itself. She has hair the brightest red you could ever think of that curls at every chance on top of each other and freckles to match on the pale skin. If that was not enough she dresses in such a manner that demands to make her be noticed if you somehow looked over her curly mop. In short, Eleanor is not your typical girl in books. I've realized I've said this before. I really truly mean it as I do each time. Eleanor is not the heroine who discovers powers. Eleanor does not magically win anyone over because she suddenly alters changeable things about herself. No, she remains true to herself through the story. She is hardly ever able to accept the good since she has only known awful.
Awful tends to weed back into her life, no matter how much Park could pluck it away for a short time.
Park is one of those people who is there, yet is not there. He is not popular, but he is not unpopular. He skims by with little to no effort. If it was not for his father being a Vet, if it was not for his family always living in town since before it was a town, then Park may not have had it so easy. He would have gotten more crap about being 5'4" and slender. He would have gotten beat up for being half Korean. Not a lot happened to Park. Girls were few. Millstones were slim. Everything was this nice norm where he had little worries. His biggest worry was learning stick. Until he sees Eleanor because then it becomes an uphill battle worrying if he will keep is so-so status or not all with Eleanor suddenly being dropped his lap. He’s never felt much of anything. Never felt good enough. Never felt bliss. Never felt it all made sense. She changed that, even if she frustrated him to no end with how she talked and acted. It all changed. Though even he remained the same.
The most confusing sentence I will ever form about book. I loved Fangirl, so it was no trouble picking this up the next time I went to Barnes & Noble. Everyone told me how much they loved this book while I was reading Fangirl and though it has sat in the stack of books for months waiting for me to pick it up yesterday felt like the day to start.
I could not put it down.
Eleanor is not perfect. She is not skinny as a twig, instead the beautiful thickness of the oak itself. She has hair the brightest red you could ever think of that curls at every chance on top of each other and freckles to match on the pale skin. If that was not enough she dresses in such a manner that demands to make her be noticed if you somehow looked over her curly mop. In short, Eleanor is not your typical girl in books. I've realized I've said this before. I really truly mean it as I do each time. Eleanor is not the heroine who discovers powers. Eleanor does not magically win anyone over because she suddenly alters changeable things about herself. No, she remains true to herself through the story. She is hardly ever able to accept the good since she has only known awful.
Awful tends to weed back into her life, no matter how much Park could pluck it away for a short time.
Park is one of those people who is there, yet is not there. He is not popular, but he is not unpopular. He skims by with little to no effort. If it was not for his father being a Vet, if it was not for his family always living in town since before it was a town, then Park may not have had it so easy. He would have gotten more crap about being 5'4" and slender. He would have gotten beat up for being half Korean. Not a lot happened to Park. Girls were few. Millstones were slim. Everything was this nice norm where he had little worries. His biggest worry was learning stick. Until he sees Eleanor because then it becomes an uphill battle worrying if he will keep is so-so status or not all with Eleanor suddenly being dropped his lap. He’s never felt much of anything. Never felt good enough. Never felt bliss. Never felt it all made sense. She changed that, even if she frustrated him to no end with how she talked and acted. It all changed. Though even he remained the same.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated The Secrets We Keep in Books
May 10, 2018
Kit Stitski is dead. He fell into the quarry during a party and drowned and ever since June no one has been able to come forward to say what really happened to him. Now that school has started, his mother is making a plea with the students to come forward with what they know. Was it just a tragic accident or did someone do something to Kit? Clementine was there, she spoke with Kit and sent him off to the bushes when he said he had to go to the bathroom. Ellie was there too, she is keeping Clementine's secret, but does she have a secret of her own? Jake was there, in fact, Kit followed him to the party. And Mac was there with Ellie, did he do something to Kit?
As a new school year starts, everyone is reflecting on the tragic night at the end of the previous school year. They've had the whole summer to think about it and now that school is back in session, Ms. Stitski wants answers and closure about what happened with her son. When she shows up for the first day of school, Jake, Clementine, Ellie, and Mac are all on edge because they feel they are responsible for Kit's death. They can't imagine that this was just an accident, something must of happened to him when he was out of their sight. But is that possible?
I really enjoyed this YA novel by Deb Loughead. I was a quick read that kept me engrossed the entire time. The author never really mentions where the story is set, and it could be any town in any country. Kids will be kids and will do what they want despite the rules set by their parents. None of the kids should have been at the quarry that night. It's a dangerous place and even more so when it is dark. Kit was mentally challenged, but loved by all in the school. The students recall happy moments with Kit that help his family to heal after this difficult situation. This is a story you could see in today's news stories. A tragic accident that took the life of an innocent person.
I think people of all ages will enjoy this book. I think it is especially important for youth to read. It has a message of honesty in the book. About being able to talk to your parents about the things that are going on in your world. The book has a strong family focus and includes diverse family structures that are seen today. I recommend this book for anyone who is looking for a good novel to read.
Thank you to NetGalley and Dundurn for the opportunity to review this book.
As a new school year starts, everyone is reflecting on the tragic night at the end of the previous school year. They've had the whole summer to think about it and now that school is back in session, Ms. Stitski wants answers and closure about what happened with her son. When she shows up for the first day of school, Jake, Clementine, Ellie, and Mac are all on edge because they feel they are responsible for Kit's death. They can't imagine that this was just an accident, something must of happened to him when he was out of their sight. But is that possible?
I really enjoyed this YA novel by Deb Loughead. I was a quick read that kept me engrossed the entire time. The author never really mentions where the story is set, and it could be any town in any country. Kids will be kids and will do what they want despite the rules set by their parents. None of the kids should have been at the quarry that night. It's a dangerous place and even more so when it is dark. Kit was mentally challenged, but loved by all in the school. The students recall happy moments with Kit that help his family to heal after this difficult situation. This is a story you could see in today's news stories. A tragic accident that took the life of an innocent person.
I think people of all ages will enjoy this book. I think it is especially important for youth to read. It has a message of honesty in the book. About being able to talk to your parents about the things that are going on in your world. The book has a strong family focus and includes diverse family structures that are seen today. I recommend this book for anyone who is looking for a good novel to read.
Thank you to NetGalley and Dundurn for the opportunity to review this book.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated The Color Project in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Author in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
<b>Five Reasons Why You Should Drop Everything on July 18 and Read <i>The Color Project</i></b>
Lately I've been in a reviewing funk/slump, so I am back again with another list of reasons why you should totally drop everything, and I mean <i>everything</i> (except for homework and other real-life priorities despite the fact you'd rather read all day) on July 18 (WHEN THE BOOK COMES OUT!) and read Sierra Abrams's debut novel.
<b>The Use of Apps</b> - I think this is a <i>really</i> minor detail, but I almost never see books that actually uses smartphone apps, and Abrams incorporates the use of at least one app I think almost everyone uses on a daily basis if not more.
<b>Gorgeous Writing</b> - I currently don't have the copy with me by side as I'm writing this review, but Abrams has some <i>amazing</i> descriptors in her novel (most of which having to do with stars and constellations, which I adore). Have I mentioned the chapters are based on songs?!
<b>Family and Friendship</b> - Aside from the obvious romance, family and friendship plays an important role in <i>The Color Project</i>, and I <i>loved</i> how Abrams incorporated those two elements together seamlessly with romance.
<b>So Much Emotional Feels</b> - If anyone knows me well enough, I am <i>not</i> an emotional person when it comes to the books I read and the movies/TV shows I see. <i>The Color Project</i> brings out my emotional side, and I had so many tears as I got closer to the end of the novel. (Granted, I might have been watching far too many <i>Boys Over Flowers</i> episodes and reading about three other contemporary novels at the same time, but <i>I never cryyy</i>.)
<b>Cute Characters</b> - I am <i>alll</i> for adorable characters. <i>Imperfect Chemistry</i> is valid proof of that, along with many others I've been reading lately (from <i>I Believe in a Thing Called Love</i> to <i>When Dimple Met Rishi</i>). Bee and Levi are so adorable, I just want to pick them up from <i>The Color Project</i> and adopt them.
It was an absolute delight to read Bee's and Levi's story in <i>The Color Project,</i> and is perfect for those looking for a contemporary novel that has gorgeous writing and bring so much emotion.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-color-project-by-sierra-abrams/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<b>Five Reasons Why You Should Drop Everything on July 18 and Read <i>The Color Project</i></b>
Lately I've been in a reviewing funk/slump, so I am back again with another list of reasons why you should totally drop everything, and I mean <i>everything</i> (except for homework and other real-life priorities despite the fact you'd rather read all day) on July 18 (WHEN THE BOOK COMES OUT!) and read Sierra Abrams's debut novel.
<b>The Use of Apps</b> - I think this is a <i>really</i> minor detail, but I almost never see books that actually uses smartphone apps, and Abrams incorporates the use of at least one app I think almost everyone uses on a daily basis if not more.
<b>Gorgeous Writing</b> - I currently don't have the copy with me by side as I'm writing this review, but Abrams has some <i>amazing</i> descriptors in her novel (most of which having to do with stars and constellations, which I adore). Have I mentioned the chapters are based on songs?!
<b>Family and Friendship</b> - Aside from the obvious romance, family and friendship plays an important role in <i>The Color Project</i>, and I <i>loved</i> how Abrams incorporated those two elements together seamlessly with romance.
<b>So Much Emotional Feels</b> - If anyone knows me well enough, I am <i>not</i> an emotional person when it comes to the books I read and the movies/TV shows I see. <i>The Color Project</i> brings out my emotional side, and I had so many tears as I got closer to the end of the novel. (Granted, I might have been watching far too many <i>Boys Over Flowers</i> episodes and reading about three other contemporary novels at the same time, but <i>I never cryyy</i>.)
<b>Cute Characters</b> - I am <i>alll</i> for adorable characters. <i>Imperfect Chemistry</i> is valid proof of that, along with many others I've been reading lately (from <i>I Believe in a Thing Called Love</i> to <i>When Dimple Met Rishi</i>). Bee and Levi are so adorable, I just want to pick them up from <i>The Color Project</i> and adopt them.
It was an absolute delight to read Bee's and Levi's story in <i>The Color Project,</i> and is perfect for those looking for a contemporary novel that has gorgeous writing and bring so much emotion.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-color-project-by-sierra-abrams/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
BookInspector (124 KP) rated We Were the Salt of the Sea in Books
Sep 24, 2020
Ode to the sea, that would describe this book the best, I think. This novel could make even the coldest heart to fall in love with this powerful God’s creation. 🙂
Catherine was looking for her biological mother, and one day she found her, but she was dead. There were so many unanswered questions left, and Catherine was trying to find out, who her mother really was. The characters chosen for this novel were incredibly complex. Their thoughts and feelings filled this book with different states of mind and different perspectives. All the characters had their own unique personality, and sometimes, they were really mysterious to me. I needed quite a bit of time to analyze them. I didn’t have a particularly favourite character in this book, I think they all had their pros and cons, making them all very believable and realistic.
The narrative of this novel was very smartly written, drop feeding the reader with the investigation’s findings, and opening the characters bit by bit. It was quite a slow burner for me, and I really missed some good twists and turns, but I think this novel concentrates more on the character’s feelings and their search of true selves, rather than trying to solve the crime. I really liked the setting and atmosphere of this novel, and the whole plot was soaked with sea love. The author has a passion for sailing, and you can truly feel her love for the sea when she explains the bond, which sea brings out in sailors. Authors expertise shines not only through the sea love but also through knowledge of boats and fishermen’s routines.
The writing style of this novel was very beautiful and incredibly poetic. The chapters had pretty decent length and didn’t leave me bored. The language of this book has quite a lot of sailing terms and is filled with French charm, so I had to look up some of the terms, which sounded alien to me. 🙂 I did like the ending of this book, I think it rounded the story quite well, however, this book makes your brain work, and even though there is a clue of who Catherine’s father is, I still couldn’t figure it out. (I am too lazy 😀 ) So, if you read this book, please let me know in the comment section down below 😉
So, to conclude, if you like sea, boats and a little bit of crime, filled with charming prose and unique characters, then this book is definitely for you. Summer season is just around the corner, so don’t forget a copy of this book, while enjoying that drink on the beach 😉
Catherine was looking for her biological mother, and one day she found her, but she was dead. There were so many unanswered questions left, and Catherine was trying to find out, who her mother really was. The characters chosen for this novel were incredibly complex. Their thoughts and feelings filled this book with different states of mind and different perspectives. All the characters had their own unique personality, and sometimes, they were really mysterious to me. I needed quite a bit of time to analyze them. I didn’t have a particularly favourite character in this book, I think they all had their pros and cons, making them all very believable and realistic.
The narrative of this novel was very smartly written, drop feeding the reader with the investigation’s findings, and opening the characters bit by bit. It was quite a slow burner for me, and I really missed some good twists and turns, but I think this novel concentrates more on the character’s feelings and their search of true selves, rather than trying to solve the crime. I really liked the setting and atmosphere of this novel, and the whole plot was soaked with sea love. The author has a passion for sailing, and you can truly feel her love for the sea when she explains the bond, which sea brings out in sailors. Authors expertise shines not only through the sea love but also through knowledge of boats and fishermen’s routines.
The writing style of this novel was very beautiful and incredibly poetic. The chapters had pretty decent length and didn’t leave me bored. The language of this book has quite a lot of sailing terms and is filled with French charm, so I had to look up some of the terms, which sounded alien to me. 🙂 I did like the ending of this book, I think it rounded the story quite well, however, this book makes your brain work, and even though there is a clue of who Catherine’s father is, I still couldn’t figure it out. (I am too lazy 😀 ) So, if you read this book, please let me know in the comment section down below 😉
So, to conclude, if you like sea, boats and a little bit of crime, filled with charming prose and unique characters, then this book is definitely for you. Summer season is just around the corner, so don’t forget a copy of this book, while enjoying that drink on the beach 😉
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Logan (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“When the man comes around”
At last – a superhero movie with real heart… (and not just the chunks over the knuckle blades!). Logan is a bit of a revelation. I was reluctant to go and see it, since a) I’m a lukewarm X-Men fan at best and b) I hadn’t seen either of the previous two Wolverine spin-off films. (Seeing the other Wolverine films, by the way, is not a pre-requisite for enjoying this one). After a long day at work, my choice was “Logan” or “Kong: Skull Island”. I voted for this one, and I’m so glad I did.
It’s now 2029. Hugh Jackman plays Wolverine, but this is not a Wolverine we have seen before. This is an aged and deteriorating superhero: his self-healing powers are waning; a limp is developing; and his fighting prowess (although still legendary) doesn’t show the stamina it once did. This is a Wolverine that is also an unlikely carer, looking after a mentally degenerating Professor Xavier (Patrick Stewart), now 90 years old and finding it increasingly difficult to keep his devastating mental superpowers under control. This is a Wolverine trying desperately to avoid the limelight, working diligently as a limo-driver in an effort to save money for the dream of buying a ‘Sunseeker’ and sailing off with Xavier into the sunset, gaining true anonymity among the boating fraternity.
Life doesn’t play ball though. A brutal encounter with a gang on the highway outside El Paso advertises Wolverine’s presence and brings him into contact with a strange eleven-year-old girl (Dafne Keen) with impressive powers of her own. The girl is being pursued by a “reiver” (Boyd Holbrook, “Run all Night”) supported by a small private army. Against his will, Wolverine is forced into a memorable road trip with the old man and the young girl that leaves a trail of bloodied bodies behind them.
For, be warned, this is an *extremely* violent film, with much dismemberment and ‘blade work’ that must have kept the prosthetics department busy for months. It’s also quite emotionally brutal, particularly within a central segment set in a “Field of Dreams” style idyll (featuring Eriq La Salle from E.R.) that you know in your gut is not going to end with “Goodnight John Boy” pleasantries.
The well-choreographed and frenetic action within the road-trip segment reminded me at times of the harsh cinematography and dynamics of “Mad Max: Fury Road” – a great compliment.
But the film also takes time to pause, in uncharacteristic Marvel-ways, for character development and genuinely intelligent dialogue. These interludes allow the acting to shine, and it is first-rate. We all know (from “Les Miserables” for instance) that Hugh Jackman can act, but this is arguably his best-ever performance: a meaty role (he actually has two in the film) that affords him tremendous range and emotion. At one point towards the end of the film I thought “this has genuine Oscar show-reel potential”. He will surely never get nominated – a Marvel film? Get Away! But wouldn’t it make a refreshing change if he was? Recognizing good acting, regardless of the context.
Patrick Stewart is a great Shakespearean actor, and here he also gets given full rein to impress as he hasn’t had chance to in most of his movie roles to date.
Claiming the prize so far this year for the most unusual casting decision is Stephen Merchant as the albino helper Caliban, unrecognizable to me at first until he had some lengthy dialogue to flex his Bristol accent on! A non-comic and dramatic role, Merchant does really well with it.
Finally, I can’t leave the acting without doffing my cap to young Dafne Keen whose mesmerising feral stare would probably put the fear of God into every parent of a pre-teen girl! Even though she has only a handful of lines, this is an impressive feature film debut. I predict we will see much more of this young lady.
Less convincing to me was Richard E Grant as the evil mastermind behind the scheme, who never quite seemed nasty enough to me to be believable: in one scene he could be calling back a dog that’s run off down the beach rather than desperately trying to gain control of an out of control situation!
Directed by James Mangold (“Walk the Line”, “Knight and Day”), who co-wrote the piece with Scott Frank (“Minority Report”) and Michael Green (“Green Lantern”… yes, really!), this was a gritty and well constructed movie. If you can stomach the gore and the body count (I would see it as very lucky to have got away with its UK ’15’ certificate) this is a rollercoaster of a movie that is recommended.
By the way, to save you from sitting through the end titles (although you do get a Johnny Cash classic to enjoy) there is no “monkey” at the end of this Marvel film. (I’m no stranger to still be sitting there as the lights come up… but many of the crowd that were left looked vaguely embarrassed!)
In terms of my rating, I’m not a fanboy for Marvel or DC properties, but here I award a rating I have only previously bestowed on two superhero films before: the quirky “Ant Man” and the anarchic “Deadpool“….
It’s now 2029. Hugh Jackman plays Wolverine, but this is not a Wolverine we have seen before. This is an aged and deteriorating superhero: his self-healing powers are waning; a limp is developing; and his fighting prowess (although still legendary) doesn’t show the stamina it once did. This is a Wolverine that is also an unlikely carer, looking after a mentally degenerating Professor Xavier (Patrick Stewart), now 90 years old and finding it increasingly difficult to keep his devastating mental superpowers under control. This is a Wolverine trying desperately to avoid the limelight, working diligently as a limo-driver in an effort to save money for the dream of buying a ‘Sunseeker’ and sailing off with Xavier into the sunset, gaining true anonymity among the boating fraternity.
Life doesn’t play ball though. A brutal encounter with a gang on the highway outside El Paso advertises Wolverine’s presence and brings him into contact with a strange eleven-year-old girl (Dafne Keen) with impressive powers of her own. The girl is being pursued by a “reiver” (Boyd Holbrook, “Run all Night”) supported by a small private army. Against his will, Wolverine is forced into a memorable road trip with the old man and the young girl that leaves a trail of bloodied bodies behind them.
For, be warned, this is an *extremely* violent film, with much dismemberment and ‘blade work’ that must have kept the prosthetics department busy for months. It’s also quite emotionally brutal, particularly within a central segment set in a “Field of Dreams” style idyll (featuring Eriq La Salle from E.R.) that you know in your gut is not going to end with “Goodnight John Boy” pleasantries.
The well-choreographed and frenetic action within the road-trip segment reminded me at times of the harsh cinematography and dynamics of “Mad Max: Fury Road” – a great compliment.
But the film also takes time to pause, in uncharacteristic Marvel-ways, for character development and genuinely intelligent dialogue. These interludes allow the acting to shine, and it is first-rate. We all know (from “Les Miserables” for instance) that Hugh Jackman can act, but this is arguably his best-ever performance: a meaty role (he actually has two in the film) that affords him tremendous range and emotion. At one point towards the end of the film I thought “this has genuine Oscar show-reel potential”. He will surely never get nominated – a Marvel film? Get Away! But wouldn’t it make a refreshing change if he was? Recognizing good acting, regardless of the context.
Patrick Stewart is a great Shakespearean actor, and here he also gets given full rein to impress as he hasn’t had chance to in most of his movie roles to date.
Claiming the prize so far this year for the most unusual casting decision is Stephen Merchant as the albino helper Caliban, unrecognizable to me at first until he had some lengthy dialogue to flex his Bristol accent on! A non-comic and dramatic role, Merchant does really well with it.
Finally, I can’t leave the acting without doffing my cap to young Dafne Keen whose mesmerising feral stare would probably put the fear of God into every parent of a pre-teen girl! Even though she has only a handful of lines, this is an impressive feature film debut. I predict we will see much more of this young lady.
Less convincing to me was Richard E Grant as the evil mastermind behind the scheme, who never quite seemed nasty enough to me to be believable: in one scene he could be calling back a dog that’s run off down the beach rather than desperately trying to gain control of an out of control situation!
Directed by James Mangold (“Walk the Line”, “Knight and Day”), who co-wrote the piece with Scott Frank (“Minority Report”) and Michael Green (“Green Lantern”… yes, really!), this was a gritty and well constructed movie. If you can stomach the gore and the body count (I would see it as very lucky to have got away with its UK ’15’ certificate) this is a rollercoaster of a movie that is recommended.
By the way, to save you from sitting through the end titles (although you do get a Johnny Cash classic to enjoy) there is no “monkey” at the end of this Marvel film. (I’m no stranger to still be sitting there as the lights come up… but many of the crowd that were left looked vaguely embarrassed!)
In terms of my rating, I’m not a fanboy for Marvel or DC properties, but here I award a rating I have only previously bestowed on two superhero films before: the quirky “Ant Man” and the anarchic “Deadpool“….