Search
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022) in Movies
Apr 22, 2022
Meta-Fun
It is a tricky thing on film, to parody your film image without making it an homage (or a complete trashing) of yourself. And, in THE UNBEARABLE WEIGHT OF MASSIVE TALENT, Nicholas Cage (playing Nick Cage) has found the line perfectly.
Conceived, written and Directed by Tom Cormican (THAT AWKWARD MOMENT), UWOMT (as I will call it here on out) is a meta-film that has Nicholas Cage playing a highly stylized and fictionalized version of himself. In this film, Nick Cage is desperate for work and going broke, when a rich fan offers him $1 million to appear at a birthday party. What happens next is bizarre, gonzo and out-of-control - and a lot of fun.
Let’s start with the man himself, Nicholas Cage, once he was convinced to do this film (and it took some convincing, for he turned this film down at least 3 times), he dives in with both feet and with full gusto filling Nick Cage with the wild actions and antics that are the basis of many, many Nicholas Cage memes. It is a knowing characterization by Cage, but one that knows when to pull back (not a trait often associated with him) and he does it all without winking at the camera.
Credit for this must go to Writer/Director Cormican (and his co-writer Kevin Etten),who had a clear vision of what they wanted to accomplish here, what tone they wanted to set, and how “meta” they wanted this film to be. And they accomplish this goal well, making an interesting and intriguing comedy/action flick that will satisfy many…but, especially, fans of Nicholas Cage.
Along for the fun ride are Neil Patrick Harris, Tiffany Hadish, Ike Barinholtz and Sharon Horgan who all deliver the right vibe for this film (as well as a couple of cameos that would be a spoiler to mention). They all look like that they are having a fun time.
But…the glue that holds all of this craziness together is the performance of Pedro Pascual (NARCOS, THE MANDILORIAN) who plays the millionaire Superfan who hires Cage and, eventually, befriends him. This is a masterful, comedic performance and it is Pascual’s sincerity (without going into buffoonery or overplaying) that grounds this film just enough that you actually care about the relationship between Pascual’s character, Javy, and Cage.
A ton of fun, not only for the performances and wild events, but for the many, many references to fun Cage films/roles of the past - items that will now motivate many (including myself) to check out.
Letter Grade: A
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Conceived, written and Directed by Tom Cormican (THAT AWKWARD MOMENT), UWOMT (as I will call it here on out) is a meta-film that has Nicholas Cage playing a highly stylized and fictionalized version of himself. In this film, Nick Cage is desperate for work and going broke, when a rich fan offers him $1 million to appear at a birthday party. What happens next is bizarre, gonzo and out-of-control - and a lot of fun.
Let’s start with the man himself, Nicholas Cage, once he was convinced to do this film (and it took some convincing, for he turned this film down at least 3 times), he dives in with both feet and with full gusto filling Nick Cage with the wild actions and antics that are the basis of many, many Nicholas Cage memes. It is a knowing characterization by Cage, but one that knows when to pull back (not a trait often associated with him) and he does it all without winking at the camera.
Credit for this must go to Writer/Director Cormican (and his co-writer Kevin Etten),who had a clear vision of what they wanted to accomplish here, what tone they wanted to set, and how “meta” they wanted this film to be. And they accomplish this goal well, making an interesting and intriguing comedy/action flick that will satisfy many…but, especially, fans of Nicholas Cage.
Along for the fun ride are Neil Patrick Harris, Tiffany Hadish, Ike Barinholtz and Sharon Horgan who all deliver the right vibe for this film (as well as a couple of cameos that would be a spoiler to mention). They all look like that they are having a fun time.
But…the glue that holds all of this craziness together is the performance of Pedro Pascual (NARCOS, THE MANDILORIAN) who plays the millionaire Superfan who hires Cage and, eventually, befriends him. This is a masterful, comedic performance and it is Pascual’s sincerity (without going into buffoonery or overplaying) that grounds this film just enough that you actually care about the relationship between Pascual’s character, Javy, and Cage.
A ton of fun, not only for the performances and wild events, but for the many, many references to fun Cage films/roles of the past - items that will now motivate many (including myself) to check out.
Letter Grade: A
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Darren (1599 KP) rated American Pie 2 (2001) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: With the boys back together after their first year at college, they spend the summer in a Lake house partying every night. Showing the next step each character has or in some cases has not taken. The story reflects real life, which I think adds something to make this the best in the series. (9/10)
Cast: Jason Biggs as Jim –The loveable loser is back getting himself into trouble again. Starting when his parents walk in on him again, there is also an unfortunate event with some glue. Hasn’t really grown up as much as he would have liked to and is still waiting for a chance with Nadia (Elizabeth). (9/10)
Thomas Ian Nicholas as Kevin – Again comes up with the plan that involves everyone going to the lake for the summer. Only problem is he is still waiting for Vicki (Reid) and hasn’t taken the next step, which he thought he would have done. Sort of the more serious character of the group makes him less interesting on the comedy side of the story. (8/10)
Seann William Scott as Stifler – Loud, Rude, Outrageous but we love him, Hasn’t grown up at all Still putting everyone down with one liners and has a new grudge with Finch after the Prom the year before. Stifler has become one of the funniest characters ever created. Star Performance (9/10)
Eddie Kaye Thomas as Finch – More cultured more grown up and wiser still waiting for his goddess Stifler’s Mum. Doing Tantra all the way through adds some very comical moments for him. (8/10)
Chris Klein as Oz – With his girlfriend Heather (Suvari) going away to Europe for the summer Oz joins the guys. The most grown up of the guys now. (8/10)
Eugene Levy as Jim’s Dad –Only because of his speeches are the funniest thing in the whole film because they are always in the most awkward moments. Favourite Character (9/10)
Comedy: Another great instalment of comedy though I think the story is better than the original I feel the overall comedy isn’t as funny but still very funny as the scenarios created are way funnier. (9/10)
Music: Even better soundtrack than the original (10/10)
Suggestion: Out of all the American Pie films this is the one I would suggest to anyone to watch as I feel it is the best. (10/10)
Best Part: The lesbian radio scene
Favourite Quote: Jim’s Dad ‘I think I bring a new meaning to the word cool’
Similar Too: Old School, Road Trip
Overall: With the better story moments and some very funny moments, this is another must watch comedy that will leave you in stitches once it’s all over. With the best moments of life after college before you start going into the big world.
https://moviesreview101.com/2012/04/04/american-pie-2-2001/
Cast: Jason Biggs as Jim –The loveable loser is back getting himself into trouble again. Starting when his parents walk in on him again, there is also an unfortunate event with some glue. Hasn’t really grown up as much as he would have liked to and is still waiting for a chance with Nadia (Elizabeth). (9/10)
Thomas Ian Nicholas as Kevin – Again comes up with the plan that involves everyone going to the lake for the summer. Only problem is he is still waiting for Vicki (Reid) and hasn’t taken the next step, which he thought he would have done. Sort of the more serious character of the group makes him less interesting on the comedy side of the story. (8/10)
Seann William Scott as Stifler – Loud, Rude, Outrageous but we love him, Hasn’t grown up at all Still putting everyone down with one liners and has a new grudge with Finch after the Prom the year before. Stifler has become one of the funniest characters ever created. Star Performance (9/10)
Eddie Kaye Thomas as Finch – More cultured more grown up and wiser still waiting for his goddess Stifler’s Mum. Doing Tantra all the way through adds some very comical moments for him. (8/10)
Chris Klein as Oz – With his girlfriend Heather (Suvari) going away to Europe for the summer Oz joins the guys. The most grown up of the guys now. (8/10)
Eugene Levy as Jim’s Dad –Only because of his speeches are the funniest thing in the whole film because they are always in the most awkward moments. Favourite Character (9/10)
Comedy: Another great instalment of comedy though I think the story is better than the original I feel the overall comedy isn’t as funny but still very funny as the scenarios created are way funnier. (9/10)
Music: Even better soundtrack than the original (10/10)
Suggestion: Out of all the American Pie films this is the one I would suggest to anyone to watch as I feel it is the best. (10/10)
Best Part: The lesbian radio scene
Favourite Quote: Jim’s Dad ‘I think I bring a new meaning to the word cool’
Similar Too: Old School, Road Trip
Overall: With the better story moments and some very funny moments, this is another must watch comedy that will leave you in stitches once it’s all over. With the best moments of life after college before you start going into the big world.
https://moviesreview101.com/2012/04/04/american-pie-2-2001/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Invisible Man (2020) in Movies
Mar 6, 2020
Pleasantly Surprised with a Great Lead Performance by Moss
I really had no desire to check out the Blumhouse re-imaging of the classic Universal horror classic THE INVISIBLE MAN, but I was hearing positive comments on it - especially about the lead performance - so I figured I'd better check it out.
And I'm glad I did. For this INVISIBLE MAN is taught and tense with (of course) a strong leading performance. And...it has something else...
Intelligence.
Originally, THE INVISIBLE MAN was supposed to be part of the ongoing Universal Studios "Dark Universe" series of films - Universal's answer to the Marvel Cinematic Universe or the DCEU - but when the first film in this series THE MUMMY tanked at the box office, Universal made a "first look deal" with Blumhouse Studios (makers of such low budget horror films as PARANORMAL ACTIVITY and THE PURGE) to make stand alone films with the classic Universal Studios characters.
First up...THE INVISIBLE MAN...replacing Johnny Depp in the titular role and changing the focus of the film from THE INVISIBLE MAN to a woman (Elizabeth Moss) being harassed (or is she?) by THE INVISIBLE MAN.
And...an inspired choice it is. I was surpirsed by the restraint and intelligence that Blumhouse - and Director Leigh Whanell (UPGRADE) - show with this material. Whanell ratchets up the tension and let's the audience sit in the uncertainty that the main character has.
And...when that main character is performed as well as Elisabeth Moss (THE HANDMAID'S TALE), then it is 2 hours well worth your time. Moss' performance is the glue that holds this film together. If she isn't as good as she is in her role, then this film doesn't work. She is...and it does. Some say that she should earn an Oscar nomination for this work. I wouldn't quite go there (if any actress in a Horror film deserves an Oscar nomination, it would have been Lupita Nyong'o in US last year) but it is a very, very good performance.
As is the performances of Harriet Dyer (as Moss' sister) and Aldis Hodge (as a friend of Moss' character). These two brought watch-ability, and believe-ability, to their characters and situations. And this is good for, if I'm to be honest, this film does fall down in the believe-ability factor. I have a tendency to turn that part of my brain off in these types of films, but there are HUGE plot holes and gaps in logic that I just couldn't ignore, which brought this film down a peg or so.
As does the performance of Oliver Jackson-Cohen in the title role. I just didn't like what he was doing in this role, but fortunately, we don't see much of him (rim-shot).
Overall, a pleasant enough surprise with an intelligence I wasn't expecting and a lead performance that is worth the price of admission.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
And I'm glad I did. For this INVISIBLE MAN is taught and tense with (of course) a strong leading performance. And...it has something else...
Intelligence.
Originally, THE INVISIBLE MAN was supposed to be part of the ongoing Universal Studios "Dark Universe" series of films - Universal's answer to the Marvel Cinematic Universe or the DCEU - but when the first film in this series THE MUMMY tanked at the box office, Universal made a "first look deal" with Blumhouse Studios (makers of such low budget horror films as PARANORMAL ACTIVITY and THE PURGE) to make stand alone films with the classic Universal Studios characters.
First up...THE INVISIBLE MAN...replacing Johnny Depp in the titular role and changing the focus of the film from THE INVISIBLE MAN to a woman (Elizabeth Moss) being harassed (or is she?) by THE INVISIBLE MAN.
And...an inspired choice it is. I was surpirsed by the restraint and intelligence that Blumhouse - and Director Leigh Whanell (UPGRADE) - show with this material. Whanell ratchets up the tension and let's the audience sit in the uncertainty that the main character has.
And...when that main character is performed as well as Elisabeth Moss (THE HANDMAID'S TALE), then it is 2 hours well worth your time. Moss' performance is the glue that holds this film together. If she isn't as good as she is in her role, then this film doesn't work. She is...and it does. Some say that she should earn an Oscar nomination for this work. I wouldn't quite go there (if any actress in a Horror film deserves an Oscar nomination, it would have been Lupita Nyong'o in US last year) but it is a very, very good performance.
As is the performances of Harriet Dyer (as Moss' sister) and Aldis Hodge (as a friend of Moss' character). These two brought watch-ability, and believe-ability, to their characters and situations. And this is good for, if I'm to be honest, this film does fall down in the believe-ability factor. I have a tendency to turn that part of my brain off in these types of films, but there are HUGE plot holes and gaps in logic that I just couldn't ignore, which brought this film down a peg or so.
As does the performance of Oliver Jackson-Cohen in the title role. I just didn't like what he was doing in this role, but fortunately, we don't see much of him (rim-shot).
Overall, a pleasant enough surprise with an intelligence I wasn't expecting and a lead performance that is worth the price of admission.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
The Great Prank War
Games and Entertainment
App
Help Mordecai, Rigby, Muscle Man and Skips take the park back from Gene and his goons with a...
Becs (244 KP) rated Seven at Sea in Books
Jul 29, 2019
Captivating memoir on taking risks
TRIGGER WARNINGS: mild swearing and peril
**Possible spoilers ahead**
Working a temp job night shift in a cubicle in Manhattan to help provide for his wife and their five children, the youngest with Down Syndrome, Erik Orton knew something had to change. Watching the sailboats on the Hudson River during his breaks, he dared to dream, and craved a life that was full of more than just surviving day to day. Despite having no sailing experience, his wife Emily’s phobia of deep water, and already being financially stretched, the family of seven turned their excuses into reasons and their fears into motivation as they set off on a voyage that ultimately took them 5,000 miles from New York to the Caribbean and back. Their journey that included plenty of learning and adventure, showed them the value of doing things their own way, and most importantly gave them time together as a family before their oldest daughter left for college.
And while this memoir is incredibly inspiring, and the Ortons did certainly gain a lot from sailing with their family for a year, the takeaway of Seven at Sea is not that all of us should quit our jobs and buy sailboats. The book serves as an encouraging reminder that our lives can be what we make them regardless of what society dictates. Many of us, especially parents, tend to fell stuck in our circumstances. The Ortons show us that on a large or small scale, we can imagine more boldly than we usually allow for and dare to dream of a life that doesn’t look anything like the one we have now – and still manage to be great parents, spouses, and members of society.
I am generally not taken with memoirs as they never capture my attention, but this was so good! I was captivated and enthralled from the get go. The narration was told in both Erik and Emily’s point of view. That added a fun and interesting appeal to this novel.
One thing I loved while reading was how the highs and the lows of taking such a risk like this were included. Erik and Emily keep it authentic, unique, and honest. It was really well-written and has as much adventure as an action novel! The one thing worth noting that I had a problem with, was that it was a slow read. It took a bit more time and motivation to read, but this adventure story made up for it. Emily’s insight helped round out Erik’s insight. She was the glue that held everything together, while Erik was the lumber. This memoir tells a story of risks and going the road less traveled by. Seven at Sea teaches the reader that the journey is the destination and that relationships are the most important things we have, that we should always strive to strengthen and refine them.
Most people can’t take the risk of just up and leaving their current situation like Erik and Emily did with their five children. Seven at Sea reminds us that our lives are what we make of them and that we should all have the courage to seek our dream lives whatever they may be.
**Possible spoilers ahead**
Working a temp job night shift in a cubicle in Manhattan to help provide for his wife and their five children, the youngest with Down Syndrome, Erik Orton knew something had to change. Watching the sailboats on the Hudson River during his breaks, he dared to dream, and craved a life that was full of more than just surviving day to day. Despite having no sailing experience, his wife Emily’s phobia of deep water, and already being financially stretched, the family of seven turned their excuses into reasons and their fears into motivation as they set off on a voyage that ultimately took them 5,000 miles from New York to the Caribbean and back. Their journey that included plenty of learning and adventure, showed them the value of doing things their own way, and most importantly gave them time together as a family before their oldest daughter left for college.
And while this memoir is incredibly inspiring, and the Ortons did certainly gain a lot from sailing with their family for a year, the takeaway of Seven at Sea is not that all of us should quit our jobs and buy sailboats. The book serves as an encouraging reminder that our lives can be what we make them regardless of what society dictates. Many of us, especially parents, tend to fell stuck in our circumstances. The Ortons show us that on a large or small scale, we can imagine more boldly than we usually allow for and dare to dream of a life that doesn’t look anything like the one we have now – and still manage to be great parents, spouses, and members of society.
I am generally not taken with memoirs as they never capture my attention, but this was so good! I was captivated and enthralled from the get go. The narration was told in both Erik and Emily’s point of view. That added a fun and interesting appeal to this novel.
One thing I loved while reading was how the highs and the lows of taking such a risk like this were included. Erik and Emily keep it authentic, unique, and honest. It was really well-written and has as much adventure as an action novel! The one thing worth noting that I had a problem with, was that it was a slow read. It took a bit more time and motivation to read, but this adventure story made up for it. Emily’s insight helped round out Erik’s insight. She was the glue that held everything together, while Erik was the lumber. This memoir tells a story of risks and going the road less traveled by. Seven at Sea teaches the reader that the journey is the destination and that relationships are the most important things we have, that we should always strive to strengthen and refine them.
Most people can’t take the risk of just up and leaving their current situation like Erik and Emily did with their five children. Seven at Sea reminds us that our lives are what we make of them and that we should all have the courage to seek our dream lives whatever they may be.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Gods Of Egypt (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Gods of Egypt is a visually stunning fantasy film that teeters on the edge of being campy.
The trailers for this film set high expectations, promising a story of the mythical, god-like beings that come from Egyptian lore. But they also raised questions: would the story keep in tune with common mythos, or branch out into a whole new realm?
With Game of Thrones star Nikolaj Coster-Waldau taking the lead, along with 300’s Gerard Butler, the film starts off in a beautiful, ancient Egypt, ruled over by Osiris and his Queen. Horus, Osiris’s son (Coster- Waldau), is ready to assume the crown, but Set (Butler), brother to Osiris, has other plans. He feels scorned for having to live in the desert, and decides it is his time to rule all of Egypt. He murders Osiris, but leaves Horus alive, taking his eyes instead of his life.
Enter a thief, who wants to rescue his beloved from the clutches of Set’s architect (Rufus Sewell). The love of his life somehow talks him into rallying a dejected Horus to fight Set.
All the gods of Egypt are represented in some form or fashion, even if in minor capacity.
The gods have the ability to morph into larger, more powerful beings. They are nigh invincible, but still age, and die. They pray to Ra, god of the sun and grandfather to Horus.
This two-hour movie is filled to the brim with star-power, and superb acting. The special effects are a sight to behold, and they instill a sense of wonderment. The adventure is grand indeed, and will certainly leave you entertained.
That said, the script is sub-par. There are moments where emotional lines could be delivered, but aren’t. This is not from lack of trying on the part of the actors; the writers simply failed to find the proper words. In these moments, there was laughter from the audience at my viewing — during scenes clearly not meant for humor. This is the precarious knife-edge the movie walks between greatness and campy.
I’ve read several articles about how moviegoers are upset at the very Caucasian-looking cast. I shared this sentiment, to a certain degree. It seemed odd that a movie about a specific time and place in history made little effort to be ethnically accurate.
In the end, I let it go. The movie’s lore turned out to be so far from a real-world tie in that it no longer mattered. It was clear this was some sort of alternate universe; one of the major plot holes is a lack of connection to planet Earth.
If you can divorce yourself from some of these elements, you can really enjoy the film for what it is.
My screener companion said he didn’t care for the graphics, because they were obviously fake. I experienced this movie using animated films as my frame of reference, and that made it easier to watch. It is also clearly a High Fantasy film.
In summary: great acting is the glue that holds this film together. Without that talent, it wouldn’t stand up. It is, however, worth seeing if you love fantasy films. You will be entertained, for sure.
3.5 out 5 stars
The trailers for this film set high expectations, promising a story of the mythical, god-like beings that come from Egyptian lore. But they also raised questions: would the story keep in tune with common mythos, or branch out into a whole new realm?
With Game of Thrones star Nikolaj Coster-Waldau taking the lead, along with 300’s Gerard Butler, the film starts off in a beautiful, ancient Egypt, ruled over by Osiris and his Queen. Horus, Osiris’s son (Coster- Waldau), is ready to assume the crown, but Set (Butler), brother to Osiris, has other plans. He feels scorned for having to live in the desert, and decides it is his time to rule all of Egypt. He murders Osiris, but leaves Horus alive, taking his eyes instead of his life.
Enter a thief, who wants to rescue his beloved from the clutches of Set’s architect (Rufus Sewell). The love of his life somehow talks him into rallying a dejected Horus to fight Set.
All the gods of Egypt are represented in some form or fashion, even if in minor capacity.
The gods have the ability to morph into larger, more powerful beings. They are nigh invincible, but still age, and die. They pray to Ra, god of the sun and grandfather to Horus.
This two-hour movie is filled to the brim with star-power, and superb acting. The special effects are a sight to behold, and they instill a sense of wonderment. The adventure is grand indeed, and will certainly leave you entertained.
That said, the script is sub-par. There are moments where emotional lines could be delivered, but aren’t. This is not from lack of trying on the part of the actors; the writers simply failed to find the proper words. In these moments, there was laughter from the audience at my viewing — during scenes clearly not meant for humor. This is the precarious knife-edge the movie walks between greatness and campy.
I’ve read several articles about how moviegoers are upset at the very Caucasian-looking cast. I shared this sentiment, to a certain degree. It seemed odd that a movie about a specific time and place in history made little effort to be ethnically accurate.
In the end, I let it go. The movie’s lore turned out to be so far from a real-world tie in that it no longer mattered. It was clear this was some sort of alternate universe; one of the major plot holes is a lack of connection to planet Earth.
If you can divorce yourself from some of these elements, you can really enjoy the film for what it is.
My screener companion said he didn’t care for the graphics, because they were obviously fake. I experienced this movie using animated films as my frame of reference, and that made it easier to watch. It is also clearly a High Fantasy film.
In summary: great acting is the glue that holds this film together. Without that talent, it wouldn’t stand up. It is, however, worth seeing if you love fantasy films. You will be entertained, for sure.
3.5 out 5 stars
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated All About Steve (2009) in Movies
Jun 15, 2020
A Movie About a Crossword Puzzle Designer? Ummm...
With a mindblowing 6% Rating on Rotten Tomatoes (mindblowing because it’s too high), All About Steve is the story of a crossword puzzle designer who travels across the country with the hopes of convincing a CNN newsreporter that they belong together. I can feel your excitement. It’s palpable.
Acting: 3
Have you ever seen a mouse try and get off of a glue trap? That’s the equivalent of the acting work in this movie. Let’s start with the woman of the hour, Sandra Bullock playing the leading role of Mary Horowitz. I couldn’t help but think as she runs through her lines, “Do you even want to be on set right now?” She reads the lines of her character like a robocaller at times. I can actually say that for quite a few of the actors that bought into this dud.
Beginning: 6
I’ve seen worse starts to movies, I’ll be honest. The career fair scene is actually pretty hilarious which is probably about the only nice thing I have to say about this movie. If the entire movie had been like this, the overall score would have been double. Unfortunately the movie still would have been shit.
Characters: 5
I’ve always said, if you hate the main character of a movie, there’s a good chance you’re going to hate the movie. That theory definitely holds true here as Mary pains me with every single scene I watch her in. And the way they paint Bradley Cooper’s character Steve out to be such a jerk is just wrong. I mean this a reverse Pepe Le Peu situation we got going on here but he is the one we’re supposed to be mad at? Nightmare.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 1
Yeah, there’s nothing I care about that’s happening throughout the duration of this movie. I could care less about Mary’s quest to win Steve because it’s just wrong. She’s a psycopath! When I say, “Nothing to see here!” I mean it.
Entertainment Value: 2
Ok, so here’s why I gave it a 2 despite how dreadful the entire movie was: I kept waiting to see how much worse things would get. The further I went down the rabbit hole, things just got more and more painful. Ever watch elementary school kids play basketball? Pretty much the same kind of train wreck here.
Memorability: 0
Pace: 0
Considering this is one of the worst movies imaginable, it’s no secret that “snail’s pace” doesn’t do it justice. Getting through All About Steve almost requires much drinking. Sure, you can survive it sober. Not advisable.
Plot: 1
It’s a story that makes no sense revolving around characters that don’t have a single solid motivation to their name. Even when you think for a moment that things might redeem themselves, the movie manages to set itself on fire again. Lost count of the number of times I asked myself, “Where the hell is this going?”
Resolution: 3
Overall: 26
Maybe it was because I was tired. Maybe it’s because I think Sandra Bullock is beautiful and who the hell would be stupid enough to run from that? Maybe it was because I had just watched A Quiet Place right before and was blown away by how incredible it was. Or maybe…All About Steve is just a terrible terrible movie. Yeah, I think I’ll go with the latter.
Acting: 3
Have you ever seen a mouse try and get off of a glue trap? That’s the equivalent of the acting work in this movie. Let’s start with the woman of the hour, Sandra Bullock playing the leading role of Mary Horowitz. I couldn’t help but think as she runs through her lines, “Do you even want to be on set right now?” She reads the lines of her character like a robocaller at times. I can actually say that for quite a few of the actors that bought into this dud.
Beginning: 6
I’ve seen worse starts to movies, I’ll be honest. The career fair scene is actually pretty hilarious which is probably about the only nice thing I have to say about this movie. If the entire movie had been like this, the overall score would have been double. Unfortunately the movie still would have been shit.
Characters: 5
I’ve always said, if you hate the main character of a movie, there’s a good chance you’re going to hate the movie. That theory definitely holds true here as Mary pains me with every single scene I watch her in. And the way they paint Bradley Cooper’s character Steve out to be such a jerk is just wrong. I mean this a reverse Pepe Le Peu situation we got going on here but he is the one we’re supposed to be mad at? Nightmare.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 1
Yeah, there’s nothing I care about that’s happening throughout the duration of this movie. I could care less about Mary’s quest to win Steve because it’s just wrong. She’s a psycopath! When I say, “Nothing to see here!” I mean it.
Entertainment Value: 2
Ok, so here’s why I gave it a 2 despite how dreadful the entire movie was: I kept waiting to see how much worse things would get. The further I went down the rabbit hole, things just got more and more painful. Ever watch elementary school kids play basketball? Pretty much the same kind of train wreck here.
Memorability: 0
Pace: 0
Considering this is one of the worst movies imaginable, it’s no secret that “snail’s pace” doesn’t do it justice. Getting through All About Steve almost requires much drinking. Sure, you can survive it sober. Not advisable.
Plot: 1
It’s a story that makes no sense revolving around characters that don’t have a single solid motivation to their name. Even when you think for a moment that things might redeem themselves, the movie manages to set itself on fire again. Lost count of the number of times I asked myself, “Where the hell is this going?”
Resolution: 3
Overall: 26
Maybe it was because I was tired. Maybe it’s because I think Sandra Bullock is beautiful and who the hell would be stupid enough to run from that? Maybe it was because I had just watched A Quiet Place right before and was blown away by how incredible it was. Or maybe…All About Steve is just a terrible terrible movie. Yeah, I think I’ll go with the latter.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Powerless (The Hero Agenda, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<strong>Guys, I've found the Fight Book of the Year.</strong> At this rate I'm actually wondering if there's such a thing as a Blogger's Choice Awards so I can actually <i>nominate</i> this.
(If there is one, point me there NOW. I'll love you forever. :p)
In a world with heroes and villains, Kenna Swift works as an intern in a lab. While working in the lab one night, Kenna gets attacked by villains and is even saved by one of them. Being saved by a villain causes her to think about what a hero or a villain really is, and she ends up teaming up with them after finding out that maybe heroes aren't exactly heroes.
<b>I actually like Kenna as a character. Considering her circumstances, she's actually pretty brilliant and resourceful</b> when all else fails, kick butt by kneeing someone in the balls. She even had an experiment before everything went Inferno to try and become a hero as well instead of being powerless. <b>Her brilliance and intelligence sometimes fall short in the midst of chaos, but I pretty much approve her as a character.</b>
Except... I'm still irritated. <strong><i>Powerless</i> just has sooo many arguments and fights. The characters fight with each other constantly verbally and physically. The fighting takes up over half of the book</strong> when Kenna, Rebel, and Jeremy team up with villains. Kenna is basically a bystander, Rebel is ironically the glue, and Jeremy is going neck to neck with Draven. Nitro and Dante already have some tension between them. <strong>There's boy drama and fighting thrown together, and it is SO. DARN. IRRITATING.</strong>
Have I mentioned <strong>it sounds completely immature?</strong> By some point in the book, I've deemed <i>Powerless</i> <b>a book unworthy of memorability in my brain simply because of the number of fights that belong in a playground with unruly little kids tugging each other consistently.</b> The amount was also great enough I mentally started to threaten poor A.G. Howard's <i>Unhinged</i>.
But of course, <i><a title="Splintered by A.G. Howard" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-splintered-by-ag-howard/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">Splintered</a></i> has a love triangle to which I feel completely indifferent to regardless of the fact I like the world and read the second book to determine which, if any, corner actually deserves my complete and utmost devotion.
(It also inspired a few discussion posts for the future. *tucks posts in an invisible drawer*)
Anyways, back to the fights. The majority of book are the characters not getting along for most of the book it's akin to the <a title="Lark by Erica Cope" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-lark-by-erica-cope/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">romance overshadowing the plot</a> and I found it highly annoying. Meanwhile, <strong>I'm left with questions about the entire world after reading the book and none of them actually got answered.</strong><strong>
</strong>
How does this whole power thing work? Are powers inherited, or are they random? Is being a villain or hero random, or are they inherited (that seems to be yes)? Why was the hero/villain world created? HOW was it created? Was it an experiment gone awry? Is it similar to Captain America?
I got vague answers or no answers. Childs and Deebs may answer those questions in the sequels, or perhaps it's the overall plot of the series, but, I don't really see how it will all fit with what they've laid out in <i>Powerless</i>. <b>It's plot-driven and doesn't take too much time to develop the world or the characters, but makes you question what is considered good and evil.</b>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-powerless-by-tera-lynn-childs-and-tracey-deebs/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
(If there is one, point me there NOW. I'll love you forever. :p)
In a world with heroes and villains, Kenna Swift works as an intern in a lab. While working in the lab one night, Kenna gets attacked by villains and is even saved by one of them. Being saved by a villain causes her to think about what a hero or a villain really is, and she ends up teaming up with them after finding out that maybe heroes aren't exactly heroes.
<b>I actually like Kenna as a character. Considering her circumstances, she's actually pretty brilliant and resourceful</b> when all else fails, kick butt by kneeing someone in the balls. She even had an experiment before everything went Inferno to try and become a hero as well instead of being powerless. <b>Her brilliance and intelligence sometimes fall short in the midst of chaos, but I pretty much approve her as a character.</b>
Except... I'm still irritated. <strong><i>Powerless</i> just has sooo many arguments and fights. The characters fight with each other constantly verbally and physically. The fighting takes up over half of the book</strong> when Kenna, Rebel, and Jeremy team up with villains. Kenna is basically a bystander, Rebel is ironically the glue, and Jeremy is going neck to neck with Draven. Nitro and Dante already have some tension between them. <strong>There's boy drama and fighting thrown together, and it is SO. DARN. IRRITATING.</strong>
Have I mentioned <strong>it sounds completely immature?</strong> By some point in the book, I've deemed <i>Powerless</i> <b>a book unworthy of memorability in my brain simply because of the number of fights that belong in a playground with unruly little kids tugging each other consistently.</b> The amount was also great enough I mentally started to threaten poor A.G. Howard's <i>Unhinged</i>.
But of course, <i><a title="Splintered by A.G. Howard" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-splintered-by-ag-howard/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">Splintered</a></i> has a love triangle to which I feel completely indifferent to regardless of the fact I like the world and read the second book to determine which, if any, corner actually deserves my complete and utmost devotion.
(It also inspired a few discussion posts for the future. *tucks posts in an invisible drawer*)
Anyways, back to the fights. The majority of book are the characters not getting along for most of the book it's akin to the <a title="Lark by Erica Cope" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-lark-by-erica-cope/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">romance overshadowing the plot</a> and I found it highly annoying. Meanwhile, <strong>I'm left with questions about the entire world after reading the book and none of them actually got answered.</strong><strong>
</strong>
How does this whole power thing work? Are powers inherited, or are they random? Is being a villain or hero random, or are they inherited (that seems to be yes)? Why was the hero/villain world created? HOW was it created? Was it an experiment gone awry? Is it similar to Captain America?
I got vague answers or no answers. Childs and Deebs may answer those questions in the sequels, or perhaps it's the overall plot of the series, but, I don't really see how it will all fit with what they've laid out in <i>Powerless</i>. <b>It's plot-driven and doesn't take too much time to develop the world or the characters, but makes you question what is considered good and evil.</b>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-powerless-by-tera-lynn-childs-and-tracey-deebs/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Live By Night (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“Sleep by day…”.
Ben Affleck’s new movie could best be described as “sprawling”. In both directing and writing the screenplay (based on a novel by Dennis Lehane), Affleck has aimed for a “Godfather” style gangster epic and missed: not missed by a country mile, but missed nonetheless.
Morally bankrupted by his experiences in the trenches, Joe Coughlin (Affleck) returns to Boston to pick and choose which social rules he wants to follow. Not sociopathic per se, as he has a strong personal code of conduct, but Coughlin turns to robbery walking a delicate path between the warring mob factions of the Irish community, led by Albert White (the excellent Robert Glenister from TV’s “Hustle”), and the Italian community, led by Maso Pescatore (Remo Girone). Trying to keep him out of jail is his father (“Harry Potter”’s Brendan Gleeson) who – usefully – is the Deputy Police Chief. Life gets complicated when he falls in love with White’s moll, Emma Gould (Sienna Miller). The scene is set for a drama stretching from Boston to the hot and steamy Everglades over a period of the next twenty years.
Although a watchable popcorn film, the choppy episodic nature of the movie is hugely frustrating, with no compelling story arc to glue all of the disparate parts together. The (often very violent) action scenes are very well done and exciting but as a viewer you don’t feel invested in a ‘journey’ from the beginning of the film to the (unsatisfactory) ending. In my experience it’s never a good sign when the writer considers it necessary to add a voiceover to the soundtrack, and here Affleck mutters truisms about his thoughts and motives that irritate more than illuminate.
The sheer volume of players in the piece (there are about three film’s worth in here) and the resulting minimal screen time given to each allows no time for character development. Unfortunately the result is that you really care very little about whether people live or die and big plot developments land as rather an “oh” than an “OH!”.
Affleck puts in a great turn as the autistic central character whose condition results in a cold, calculating demeanor and a complete lack of emotion reflecting on his face. Oh, hang on… no, wait a minute… sorry… I’ve got the wrong film…. I’m thinking about “The Accountant”. I don’t know whether he filmed these films in parallel. I generally enjoy Ben Affleck’s work (he was excellent in “The Town”) but for 95% of this film his part could have been completed by a burly extra with an Affleck mask on. In terms of acting range, his facial muscles barely get to a “2” on the scale. Given the double problem that he is barely credible as the “young man” returning mentally wounded from the trenches, then in my opinion he would have been better to have focused on the writing and directing and found a lead of the likes of an Andrew Garfield to fill Coughlin’s shoes.
That’s not to say there is not some good acting present in the rest of the cast’s all too brief supporting roles. Elle Fanning (“Trumbo”, “Maleficent”) in particular shines as the Southern belle Loretta Figgis: a religious zealot driving her police chief father (Chris Cooper, “The Bourne Identity”) to distraction. Cooper also delivers a star turn as the moral but pragmatic law-man.
Sienna Miller (“Foxcatcher”) delivers a passable Cork accent and does her best to develop some believable chemistry with the rock-like Affleck. Zoe Saldana (“Star Trek”) is equally effective as a Cuban humanitarian.
In summary, it’s sprawlingly watchable… but overall a disappointment, with Affleck over-reaching. One day we surely will get a gangster film the likes of another “Godfather”, “Goodfellas” or “Untouchables”. Although this has its moments, unfortunately it’s more towards the “Public Enemies” end of the genre spectrum.
Morally bankrupted by his experiences in the trenches, Joe Coughlin (Affleck) returns to Boston to pick and choose which social rules he wants to follow. Not sociopathic per se, as he has a strong personal code of conduct, but Coughlin turns to robbery walking a delicate path between the warring mob factions of the Irish community, led by Albert White (the excellent Robert Glenister from TV’s “Hustle”), and the Italian community, led by Maso Pescatore (Remo Girone). Trying to keep him out of jail is his father (“Harry Potter”’s Brendan Gleeson) who – usefully – is the Deputy Police Chief. Life gets complicated when he falls in love with White’s moll, Emma Gould (Sienna Miller). The scene is set for a drama stretching from Boston to the hot and steamy Everglades over a period of the next twenty years.
Although a watchable popcorn film, the choppy episodic nature of the movie is hugely frustrating, with no compelling story arc to glue all of the disparate parts together. The (often very violent) action scenes are very well done and exciting but as a viewer you don’t feel invested in a ‘journey’ from the beginning of the film to the (unsatisfactory) ending. In my experience it’s never a good sign when the writer considers it necessary to add a voiceover to the soundtrack, and here Affleck mutters truisms about his thoughts and motives that irritate more than illuminate.
The sheer volume of players in the piece (there are about three film’s worth in here) and the resulting minimal screen time given to each allows no time for character development. Unfortunately the result is that you really care very little about whether people live or die and big plot developments land as rather an “oh” than an “OH!”.
Affleck puts in a great turn as the autistic central character whose condition results in a cold, calculating demeanor and a complete lack of emotion reflecting on his face. Oh, hang on… no, wait a minute… sorry… I’ve got the wrong film…. I’m thinking about “The Accountant”. I don’t know whether he filmed these films in parallel. I generally enjoy Ben Affleck’s work (he was excellent in “The Town”) but for 95% of this film his part could have been completed by a burly extra with an Affleck mask on. In terms of acting range, his facial muscles barely get to a “2” on the scale. Given the double problem that he is barely credible as the “young man” returning mentally wounded from the trenches, then in my opinion he would have been better to have focused on the writing and directing and found a lead of the likes of an Andrew Garfield to fill Coughlin’s shoes.
That’s not to say there is not some good acting present in the rest of the cast’s all too brief supporting roles. Elle Fanning (“Trumbo”, “Maleficent”) in particular shines as the Southern belle Loretta Figgis: a religious zealot driving her police chief father (Chris Cooper, “The Bourne Identity”) to distraction. Cooper also delivers a star turn as the moral but pragmatic law-man.
Sienna Miller (“Foxcatcher”) delivers a passable Cork accent and does her best to develop some believable chemistry with the rock-like Affleck. Zoe Saldana (“Star Trek”) is equally effective as a Cuban humanitarian.
In summary, it’s sprawlingly watchable… but overall a disappointment, with Affleck over-reaching. One day we surely will get a gangster film the likes of another “Godfather”, “Goodfellas” or “Untouchables”. Although this has its moments, unfortunately it’s more towards the “Public Enemies” end of the genre spectrum.