Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Seventh Son (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
After a two-year delay, Seventh Son has finally reached the big screen, and it will leave you conflicted.
Seventh Son is brought to us by director Sergey Bodrov. Originally set for a February 2013 release, the film had complicated distribution arrangements between Legendary and Warner Brothers, which kept causing delays.
Jeff Bridges plays one of the title characters: Master John Gregory. He is the last of an order of peacekeeper knights, which once used to be a thousand strong. All of these knights are seventh sons of seventh sons, and are self-tasked with keeping the evil creatures of the world at bay.
The movie starts off with a young Gregory completing a prison cell for an unknown woman. Years later, the prisoner, a draconic beast, breaks out and attacks a nearby town, specifically targeting the aged Knight and his apprentice (Kit Harington — Jon Snow from Game of Thrones). This recently released evil is Mother Malkin (Julianne Moore), the queen of witches.
During the battle, Harington’s brief existence in this film is brought to an end, causing Gregory to seek out another apprentice. This search leads him to young Thomas Ward (Ben Barnes). After Ward goes through some sad goodbyes with his family, he and Gregory set out to take down the Witch Queen before the blood moon sets.
His training would normally take 10 years, but they only have a week.
Put simply, this movie was very fragmented. It isn’t a good movie, but it isn’t a bad one either. It has reasonable special effects and decent fight scenes.
There is plenty of star power: Jeff Bridges, Julianne Moore, Kit Harington, Djimon Hounsou (one of my favorites), and Jason Scott Lee.
Jeff Bridges missed the mark on his character. It’s one thing to be disgruntled and war-torn with a curious sense of humor, but it’s something quite different to be outright silly.
There were no explanations. How did the order come about? Why seventh sons of seventh sons? How did Gregory KNOW there was a seventh son at that house? How did the war start? Why is Gregory the last? Why wasn’t there more about Gregory’s relationship with Malkin? Why did the skeleton in the armor attack Tom? Why do the swords hum? Where did the stone come from? Why was it powerful? Why anything, really? The story has no depth, failing to explain the “why” of any of its lore. There were only statements of fact, which confuses viewers and prevents them from becoming emotionally anchored to the story.
I simply didn’t care about the characters. The film was disorganized and rushed. Perhaps it would have been better served as two films, or a longer film, or even a mini series.
Seventh Son had the potential to be so much more. A combination of poor writing and bad direction made the movie lackluster to me and all three of my companions.
The actors delivered many campy one-liners, and the chuckles they drew from the crowd were quite unintentional.
If you are a fan of high fantasy, it’s probably worth seeing, but wait for it to arrive on Netflix and use it as background entertainment
Seventh Son is brought to us by director Sergey Bodrov. Originally set for a February 2013 release, the film had complicated distribution arrangements between Legendary and Warner Brothers, which kept causing delays.
Jeff Bridges plays one of the title characters: Master John Gregory. He is the last of an order of peacekeeper knights, which once used to be a thousand strong. All of these knights are seventh sons of seventh sons, and are self-tasked with keeping the evil creatures of the world at bay.
The movie starts off with a young Gregory completing a prison cell for an unknown woman. Years later, the prisoner, a draconic beast, breaks out and attacks a nearby town, specifically targeting the aged Knight and his apprentice (Kit Harington — Jon Snow from Game of Thrones). This recently released evil is Mother Malkin (Julianne Moore), the queen of witches.
During the battle, Harington’s brief existence in this film is brought to an end, causing Gregory to seek out another apprentice. This search leads him to young Thomas Ward (Ben Barnes). After Ward goes through some sad goodbyes with his family, he and Gregory set out to take down the Witch Queen before the blood moon sets.
His training would normally take 10 years, but they only have a week.
Put simply, this movie was very fragmented. It isn’t a good movie, but it isn’t a bad one either. It has reasonable special effects and decent fight scenes.
There is plenty of star power: Jeff Bridges, Julianne Moore, Kit Harington, Djimon Hounsou (one of my favorites), and Jason Scott Lee.
Jeff Bridges missed the mark on his character. It’s one thing to be disgruntled and war-torn with a curious sense of humor, but it’s something quite different to be outright silly.
There were no explanations. How did the order come about? Why seventh sons of seventh sons? How did Gregory KNOW there was a seventh son at that house? How did the war start? Why is Gregory the last? Why wasn’t there more about Gregory’s relationship with Malkin? Why did the skeleton in the armor attack Tom? Why do the swords hum? Where did the stone come from? Why was it powerful? Why anything, really? The story has no depth, failing to explain the “why” of any of its lore. There were only statements of fact, which confuses viewers and prevents them from becoming emotionally anchored to the story.
I simply didn’t care about the characters. The film was disorganized and rushed. Perhaps it would have been better served as two films, or a longer film, or even a mini series.
Seventh Son had the potential to be so much more. A combination of poor writing and bad direction made the movie lackluster to me and all three of my companions.
The actors delivered many campy one-liners, and the chuckles they drew from the crowd were quite unintentional.
If you are a fan of high fantasy, it’s probably worth seeing, but wait for it to arrive on Netflix and use it as background entertainment
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Your Highness (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
For all you minotaur lovers out there, the movie Your Highness is the film for you. Not that the movie is about them but it has the most unique minotaur I have ever seen in a movie. Your Highness takes place long ago in a land far away in a kingdom that has two princes. The oldest and heir-to-the-throne is Prince Fabious (the fabulous James Franco). He is a prince’s prince, a knight’s knight, he enjoys protecting the innocent, he slays evil cyclops and other evil things that should be slayed.
The youngest is Prince Thadeous (film co-writer Danny McBride), he is a slacker’s slacker, a player’s player, he enjoys booze and other mind-altering stuff, he lays with easy maidens and…well, you get the point. Even though the two brothers are so very different they still love each other, even if Thadeous won’t admit it. So when Prince Fabious was to be married to the beautiful yet naive Belladonna (the enchanting Zooey Deschanel) he wanted none other than his younger brother to be his best man.
But fate had other plans and what should have been the happiest of wedding days was ruined when the evil wizard Leezar (Justin Theroux) kidnaps Belladonna so he can produce an evil dragon offspring that he would use to rule the world. The two brothers vow to save her and kill Leezar. Ok, technically Thadeous is told by their father the King (Charles Dance) that either he goes with his older brother or he will be kicked out of the kingdom and it is Fabious who does the vowing. So they ride out with their most trusted knights and along the way they meet the Great Wize (not a typo) Wizard (voiced by Mario Torres. Jr.), the highly skilled fighter Isabel (played by a pretty intimidating Natalie Portman), the Minotaur (Brian Steele, a surprisingly fitting name), forest people (I loved the forest people!). Epic adventure and treachery ensue – dun dun dunn! Will they save Belladonna and the world? Will Thadeous become a respectable prince? Will the minotaur live happily ever after?
The movie is funny but the humor is on par with middle-school-aged male humor so approximately 80% of all adult males will probably find the movie funny and a lot of wives will be wondering why they married them. It also had some decent fight scenes sprinkled throughout the movie. I’ll be honest, there were a couple of scenes in the film that I wish I could un-see… the kind of stuff that never happened in any dice role-playing game that I have ever played.
Now I am sure we have all seen movies where one person’s performance was so well done that it made the other people’s performances seem lacking (whether they truly were or not). To me this movie fell victim to that problem. After all with people like Charles Dance, Natalie Portman, James Franco, Zooey Deschanel and Damian Lewis, who plays Boremont, one of the trusted Knights, it was bound to happen. Overall, a very entertaining and funny movie.
The youngest is Prince Thadeous (film co-writer Danny McBride), he is a slacker’s slacker, a player’s player, he enjoys booze and other mind-altering stuff, he lays with easy maidens and…well, you get the point. Even though the two brothers are so very different they still love each other, even if Thadeous won’t admit it. So when Prince Fabious was to be married to the beautiful yet naive Belladonna (the enchanting Zooey Deschanel) he wanted none other than his younger brother to be his best man.
But fate had other plans and what should have been the happiest of wedding days was ruined when the evil wizard Leezar (Justin Theroux) kidnaps Belladonna so he can produce an evil dragon offspring that he would use to rule the world. The two brothers vow to save her and kill Leezar. Ok, technically Thadeous is told by their father the King (Charles Dance) that either he goes with his older brother or he will be kicked out of the kingdom and it is Fabious who does the vowing. So they ride out with their most trusted knights and along the way they meet the Great Wize (not a typo) Wizard (voiced by Mario Torres. Jr.), the highly skilled fighter Isabel (played by a pretty intimidating Natalie Portman), the Minotaur (Brian Steele, a surprisingly fitting name), forest people (I loved the forest people!). Epic adventure and treachery ensue – dun dun dunn! Will they save Belladonna and the world? Will Thadeous become a respectable prince? Will the minotaur live happily ever after?
The movie is funny but the humor is on par with middle-school-aged male humor so approximately 80% of all adult males will probably find the movie funny and a lot of wives will be wondering why they married them. It also had some decent fight scenes sprinkled throughout the movie. I’ll be honest, there were a couple of scenes in the film that I wish I could un-see… the kind of stuff that never happened in any dice role-playing game that I have ever played.
Now I am sure we have all seen movies where one person’s performance was so well done that it made the other people’s performances seem lacking (whether they truly were or not). To me this movie fell victim to that problem. After all with people like Charles Dance, Natalie Portman, James Franco, Zooey Deschanel and Damian Lewis, who plays Boremont, one of the trusted Knights, it was bound to happen. Overall, a very entertaining and funny movie.
The Ludicrous Laws of Old London
Book
London abounds with all manner of ludicrous laws, and not all of these curious statutes have been...
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
The Transformers of the superhero genre
It feels like eons ago that Batman v Superman was announced as a genuine movie. Way back in 2007 there was a poster that seemed to signify DC Comic’s plans in I am Legend, but fans just thought of it as a pipedream.
Now, in 2016, the moment has finally arrived. The marketing campaign has been relentless, the trailers have been criticised for showing far too much (which they have), and Ben Affleck’s casting as Batman was met with disdain rather than joy. So what is the finished product like?
Superman has now become a controversial figure after his climactic battle with General Zod, with Batman in particular being cautious of his true plans for Earth. After a new threat is created, Doomsday, they must put aside their differences to save the planet.
Following on directly from the events of Man of Steel, director Zak Snyder brings together DC Comics’ biggest superheroes in a film as loud as anything Michael Bay served up in the Transformers series.
Henry Cavill returns as the god from above with Ben Affleck taking over duties from Christian Bale as the Dark Knight. Both of them give great performances with Cavill in particular impressing. Affleck proves his doubters wrong and is more than a match for Bale, though his one facial expression wears thin over the course of the film.
Elsewhere, Jesse Eisenberg takes on the role of Lex Luthor in a portrayal reminiscent of Johnny Depp’s Willy Wonka – eerily creepy and well-acted but just trying that little bit too hard. Amy Adams makes a welcome return as Lois Lane and gets much more screen time here than she did in Man of Steel.
However, the most praise has to go to Gal Gadot. Her exceptional characterisation of Wonder Woman is one of the movie’s highlights and it’s such a shame she takes a backseat to the two titular characters. It’s clear the filmmakers thought highly of her too, as she gets her own thundering theme tune whenever she appears.
Unfortunately, the plot is just too nondescript and completely incomprehensible at times, with Lex Luthor’s motives remaining unclear throughout the 150 minute running time. This proves increasingly hard to swallow as the film progresses and makes his villain feel less menacing than he should be.
Nevertheless, Batman v Superman is visually spectacular. Snyder bombards the audience with breath-taking set pieces, dispersing them well enough to ensure the plot only drags in a few areas, namely at the beginning – though the film’s flabby length is a sticking point; it simply doesn’t need to be nearly three hours long.
It may all sound pretty negative, but the exciting and beautifully filmed final act almost makes up for these shortcomings. We also get to see an emotional side to the genre, something that has been sorely lacking more recently with the constant quipping of the Marvel Universe.
Overall, Batman v Superman was never going to live up to the hype and in some ways it does fall short. The battle between Bat of Gotham and Son of Krypton is disappointingly brief and the story lacks any real weight, until the final 30 minutes. But it’s filmed in such a unique fashion and with such confidence; it’s quite possible you may not see anything like it in the genre again.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/27/the-transformers-of-the-superhero-genre-batman-v-superman-review/
Now, in 2016, the moment has finally arrived. The marketing campaign has been relentless, the trailers have been criticised for showing far too much (which they have), and Ben Affleck’s casting as Batman was met with disdain rather than joy. So what is the finished product like?
Superman has now become a controversial figure after his climactic battle with General Zod, with Batman in particular being cautious of his true plans for Earth. After a new threat is created, Doomsday, they must put aside their differences to save the planet.
Following on directly from the events of Man of Steel, director Zak Snyder brings together DC Comics’ biggest superheroes in a film as loud as anything Michael Bay served up in the Transformers series.
Henry Cavill returns as the god from above with Ben Affleck taking over duties from Christian Bale as the Dark Knight. Both of them give great performances with Cavill in particular impressing. Affleck proves his doubters wrong and is more than a match for Bale, though his one facial expression wears thin over the course of the film.
Elsewhere, Jesse Eisenberg takes on the role of Lex Luthor in a portrayal reminiscent of Johnny Depp’s Willy Wonka – eerily creepy and well-acted but just trying that little bit too hard. Amy Adams makes a welcome return as Lois Lane and gets much more screen time here than she did in Man of Steel.
However, the most praise has to go to Gal Gadot. Her exceptional characterisation of Wonder Woman is one of the movie’s highlights and it’s such a shame she takes a backseat to the two titular characters. It’s clear the filmmakers thought highly of her too, as she gets her own thundering theme tune whenever she appears.
Unfortunately, the plot is just too nondescript and completely incomprehensible at times, with Lex Luthor’s motives remaining unclear throughout the 150 minute running time. This proves increasingly hard to swallow as the film progresses and makes his villain feel less menacing than he should be.
Nevertheless, Batman v Superman is visually spectacular. Snyder bombards the audience with breath-taking set pieces, dispersing them well enough to ensure the plot only drags in a few areas, namely at the beginning – though the film’s flabby length is a sticking point; it simply doesn’t need to be nearly three hours long.
It may all sound pretty negative, but the exciting and beautifully filmed final act almost makes up for these shortcomings. We also get to see an emotional side to the genre, something that has been sorely lacking more recently with the constant quipping of the Marvel Universe.
Overall, Batman v Superman was never going to live up to the hype and in some ways it does fall short. The battle between Bat of Gotham and Son of Krypton is disappointingly brief and the story lacks any real weight, until the final 30 minutes. But it’s filmed in such a unique fashion and with such confidence; it’s quite possible you may not see anything like it in the genre again.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/27/the-transformers-of-the-superhero-genre-batman-v-superman-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A Triumph
Brutal. Spectacular. Emotional. These are just some of the adjectives you could use to describe Christopher Nolan’s latest film, Dunkirk. The director of Inception, The Dark Knight, Memento and Interstellar is one of the greatest film-makers working today and he raises the bar once again with this bleak tale from World War II.
With war, you have to respect the past whilst allowing modern-day film-goers to truly understand the brutality that ordinary people like you and I went through on a daily basis.
In May 1940, Germany had advanced into France, trapping Allied troops on the beaches of Dunkirk. Under air and ground cover from British and French forces, troops were slowly and methodically evacuated from the beach using not only military ships but civilian boats too. At the end of this incredible story of courage, 330,000 French, British, Belgian and Dutch soldiers were safely evacuated.
I found a quote the other day that said “Christopher Nolan is like Michael Bay for people who have ever read a book” and in Dunkirk that seems more apt than ever. Of course there are explosions, many of them, but they are interweaved with some incredible storytelling.
Split into three separate timelines, Dunkirk follows fisherman Mark Rylance as he sails to the beaches as part of the civilian rescue effort. On land we shadow a group of young soldiers desperately trying to get back home. Finally, the film flies alongside Tom Hardy’s brave Spitfire pilot as he tries his best to keep the beaches safe.
Each of the stories has something to offer but Mark Rylance’s performance is definitely the best, making his timeline the most interesting and often the most emotional. Addressing the elephant in the room, Harry Styles, is probably best at this part of the review – he’s excellent and in a much larger part than I had imagined.
In fact, all the performances are excellent, helped in part by Christopher Nolan’s incredible use of close-ups. This is a living, breathing war and as the audience, you feel as claustrophobic as the 400,000 men did waiting on that beach in 1940.
Moreover, the sound is just astonishing. I have never known a film use sound to such an extent to convey sheer terror. The score by Hans Zimmer, coupled with the deafening aircraft flying overhead and the rapid gunfire is incredibly harrowing and makes Dunkirk very hard to watch at times – despite its 12A certification.
Dunkirk is also a masterclass in practical effects. Nearly everything you see on screen was shot without the use of CGI and my goodness you can tell. We’re so used to seeing blockbusters filled to the brim with computer generated imagery that it’s easy to forget just how good practical effects can be.
Overall, Christopher Nolan has created a tasteful homage to a day that has been etched into the minds of generations of people. It would’ve been easy to create a film that focused on the action rather than the human details of this incredible story, but Nolan has managed to craft an absolute triumph. It’s one of the best films of the year and an absolute must-watch.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/07/23/dunkirk-review-a-triumph/
With war, you have to respect the past whilst allowing modern-day film-goers to truly understand the brutality that ordinary people like you and I went through on a daily basis.
In May 1940, Germany had advanced into France, trapping Allied troops on the beaches of Dunkirk. Under air and ground cover from British and French forces, troops were slowly and methodically evacuated from the beach using not only military ships but civilian boats too. At the end of this incredible story of courage, 330,000 French, British, Belgian and Dutch soldiers were safely evacuated.
I found a quote the other day that said “Christopher Nolan is like Michael Bay for people who have ever read a book” and in Dunkirk that seems more apt than ever. Of course there are explosions, many of them, but they are interweaved with some incredible storytelling.
Split into three separate timelines, Dunkirk follows fisherman Mark Rylance as he sails to the beaches as part of the civilian rescue effort. On land we shadow a group of young soldiers desperately trying to get back home. Finally, the film flies alongside Tom Hardy’s brave Spitfire pilot as he tries his best to keep the beaches safe.
Each of the stories has something to offer but Mark Rylance’s performance is definitely the best, making his timeline the most interesting and often the most emotional. Addressing the elephant in the room, Harry Styles, is probably best at this part of the review – he’s excellent and in a much larger part than I had imagined.
In fact, all the performances are excellent, helped in part by Christopher Nolan’s incredible use of close-ups. This is a living, breathing war and as the audience, you feel as claustrophobic as the 400,000 men did waiting on that beach in 1940.
Moreover, the sound is just astonishing. I have never known a film use sound to such an extent to convey sheer terror. The score by Hans Zimmer, coupled with the deafening aircraft flying overhead and the rapid gunfire is incredibly harrowing and makes Dunkirk very hard to watch at times – despite its 12A certification.
Dunkirk is also a masterclass in practical effects. Nearly everything you see on screen was shot without the use of CGI and my goodness you can tell. We’re so used to seeing blockbusters filled to the brim with computer generated imagery that it’s easy to forget just how good practical effects can be.
Overall, Christopher Nolan has created a tasteful homage to a day that has been etched into the minds of generations of people. It would’ve been easy to create a film that focused on the action rather than the human details of this incredible story, but Nolan has managed to craft an absolute triumph. It’s one of the best films of the year and an absolute must-watch.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/07/23/dunkirk-review-a-triumph/
Carma (21 KP) rated Moonlight Over Manhattan in Books
Jun 17, 2019
Do one thing every day that scares you. I think that is the best advice we could give ourselves on a daily basis. How many times have we just went status quo and always wondered what if. Harriet Knight is status quo. She is an average girl, with an average life, with average problems. But the month between Thanksgiving and Christmas she decides to challenge herself daily. No more status quo, start living outside the box. The plan is going worse than expected though and then she finds herself on the internet dating site date from hell. The best way she can think of to end said date is to jump out of the bathroom window. That is how we meet Harriet.
Harriet is a dog walker/pet sitter along with her twin sister Fliss. The started their own company and it has really taken off. Her sister has recently moved out of their apartment to live in the Hamptons with Seth (read Holiday in the Hamptons, you won’t regret it). Harriet finds herself alone for the first time in a very long time. After jumping out the bathroom window she heads to the ER to get her ankle checked and in walks Dr. Ethan Black.
Ethan Black is all ER all the time. He puts his very heart and soul in to his daily life and enjoys going to work everyday. Maybe the reason his marriage failed is because he puts 100% into his job. 100% means 0% left over for anything else. He is quite happy in his every day routine until his sister calls with an emergency. He'll do anything for his sister, well maybe anything.
Harriet agrees to change locations for one of her customers because an emergency takes them out of town. Her regular client "Madi" is staying with her “uncle”, a busy doctor, and needs to get her daily walk there instead of home. Harriet and Ethan meet again and realize they need each other to navigate this new normal. Can Ethan still put his heart and soul into work, but make a relationship work. Can Harriet realize she is great the way she is and "challenge Harriet" is a perfect way to get the happy ever after she craves.
I loved Harriet, more than any single main female character I can think of for a while. She is an every woman, self-conscience, has a stutter, awkward, shy. Being a dog walker/pet sitter myself I feel like Harriet (minus the stutter but just as awkward). I also loved revisiting the O’Neil family in Vermont. The way the author paints the scenery each and every time, makes me want to jump in the car and head to Vermont immediately. One of the other things I enjoy about Sarah Morgan novels is the English phrases that inevitably make their way into the writing. There are usually 3 or 4 common English phrases that don’t quite translate to US actions. I enjoy finding them though, and if not immediately known how they translate, finding the answer. None are every so strange though that it affects the flow of the story.
Even though I received this book in exchange for an honest review, it is another great novel from Sarah Morgan, as if I expected anything less. I am adding this to my From Manhattan with Love shelf immediately, hope you do the same right now.
Harriet is a dog walker/pet sitter along with her twin sister Fliss. The started their own company and it has really taken off. Her sister has recently moved out of their apartment to live in the Hamptons with Seth (read Holiday in the Hamptons, you won’t regret it). Harriet finds herself alone for the first time in a very long time. After jumping out the bathroom window she heads to the ER to get her ankle checked and in walks Dr. Ethan Black.
Ethan Black is all ER all the time. He puts his very heart and soul in to his daily life and enjoys going to work everyday. Maybe the reason his marriage failed is because he puts 100% into his job. 100% means 0% left over for anything else. He is quite happy in his every day routine until his sister calls with an emergency. He'll do anything for his sister, well maybe anything.
Harriet agrees to change locations for one of her customers because an emergency takes them out of town. Her regular client "Madi" is staying with her “uncle”, a busy doctor, and needs to get her daily walk there instead of home. Harriet and Ethan meet again and realize they need each other to navigate this new normal. Can Ethan still put his heart and soul into work, but make a relationship work. Can Harriet realize she is great the way she is and "challenge Harriet" is a perfect way to get the happy ever after she craves.
I loved Harriet, more than any single main female character I can think of for a while. She is an every woman, self-conscience, has a stutter, awkward, shy. Being a dog walker/pet sitter myself I feel like Harriet (minus the stutter but just as awkward). I also loved revisiting the O’Neil family in Vermont. The way the author paints the scenery each and every time, makes me want to jump in the car and head to Vermont immediately. One of the other things I enjoy about Sarah Morgan novels is the English phrases that inevitably make their way into the writing. There are usually 3 or 4 common English phrases that don’t quite translate to US actions. I enjoy finding them though, and if not immediately known how they translate, finding the answer. None are every so strange though that it affects the flow of the story.
Even though I received this book in exchange for an honest review, it is another great novel from Sarah Morgan, as if I expected anything less. I am adding this to my From Manhattan with Love shelf immediately, hope you do the same right now.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Moon (2009) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
Sam Bell is at the end of his rope. He's an astronaut that took a job on the moon whose contract lasted three long years. The job requires him to send storage containers of Helium-3 back to Earth, which would essentially help with the planet's power situation. Other than his computer assistant, GERTY, Sam is alone. He's started talking to himself and basically feels like he's losing his mind since he's been on the moon for so long in this lonely state. The only thing that's really keeping him straight is the fact that he's supposed to go home in two weeks. Sam just wants to get home and see his wife and daughter, who's already growing up without him in her life. As Sam ventures outside for some everyday maintenance, he discovers something disturbing. An accident occurred while somebody was behind the wheel of one of the lunar vehicles and the unconscious man Sam pulls out of the vehicle looks exactly like him. Sam is then given the unfortunate task of trying to figure out if he's lost his marbles or if some conspiracy scheme has been transpiring right under his nose this entire time.
Moon has been one of my most anticipated films of the year ever since I saw the trailer a few months ago. Everything about the trailer pulled me in. Sam Rockwell looked to put in an incredible performance, the score sounded incredibly solid and fit the film like a glove, and it just looked like a really amazing sci-fi film. Have you ever walked away from a film completely satisfied? That feeling you have when you see a film that just sticks with you as its most memorable moments play through your head and you smile a little as you walk to your car? That's the feeling that pulsed through me after seeing Moon. A feeling that I've only felt a handful of times (The Dark Knight, Benjamin Button, Up, and Moon come to mind).
Sam Rockwell is really in top form here. I've always wanted to like him, but had always seen him in films where it felt like he was holding back and not showing his full potential. Moon definitely corrected that as Rockwell is really able to portray his acting range and how wonderful he really is. When I saw 1408, the first thing that crossed my mind after it ended was that John Cusack really carried that film. It was just him alone in a hotel room the majority of the film and he was able to make that worth watching. What John Cusack is to 1408, Sam Rockwell is to Moon as it's just Sam reacting to himself during the film's duration.
It's not often that I get to say a film met my expectations or satisfied me in every way, but Moon did just that. This is Sam Rockwell at his best. The film pulls you in as soon as the opening scene hits with Sam running on a treadmill and that familiar music from the trailer kicks in. My craving for an incredible and original sci-fi film for quite some time was met with this and it delivered in every aspect. It's definitely in the running for my favorite film of 2009.
Moon has been one of my most anticipated films of the year ever since I saw the trailer a few months ago. Everything about the trailer pulled me in. Sam Rockwell looked to put in an incredible performance, the score sounded incredibly solid and fit the film like a glove, and it just looked like a really amazing sci-fi film. Have you ever walked away from a film completely satisfied? That feeling you have when you see a film that just sticks with you as its most memorable moments play through your head and you smile a little as you walk to your car? That's the feeling that pulsed through me after seeing Moon. A feeling that I've only felt a handful of times (The Dark Knight, Benjamin Button, Up, and Moon come to mind).
Sam Rockwell is really in top form here. I've always wanted to like him, but had always seen him in films where it felt like he was holding back and not showing his full potential. Moon definitely corrected that as Rockwell is really able to portray his acting range and how wonderful he really is. When I saw 1408, the first thing that crossed my mind after it ended was that John Cusack really carried that film. It was just him alone in a hotel room the majority of the film and he was able to make that worth watching. What John Cusack is to 1408, Sam Rockwell is to Moon as it's just Sam reacting to himself during the film's duration.
It's not often that I get to say a film met my expectations or satisfied me in every way, but Moon did just that. This is Sam Rockwell at his best. The film pulls you in as soon as the opening scene hits with Sam running on a treadmill and that familiar music from the trailer kicks in. My craving for an incredible and original sci-fi film for quite some time was met with this and it delivered in every aspect. It's definitely in the running for my favorite film of 2009.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Knight of Cups (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
I’ll just come out and say it … This movie for all it’s grandeur with its ensemble cast and it’s amazing photographic work and direction is something that should be shown at film festivals and in art house movie theaters and NOT your mainstream chain theaters. Someplace where you can order a meal and perhaps a glass of wine or a local ale. Why? If the movie has Christian Bale in its cast you know there’s going to be drama involved regardless of whether or not the movie itself is dramatic. THIS particular film is a drama that could be compared to something written by Shakespeare.
‘Knight Of Cups’ is a romantic drama written and directed by Terrence Malick and stars an ensemble cast including Christian Bale, Cate Blanchett, Antonio Banderas, Natalie Portman, Brian Dennehy, Armin Muller-Stahl, Isabel Lucas, Freida Pinto, Wes Bentley, Imogen Poots, Teresa Palmer, and Peter Matthiessen.
“Once there was a young prince whose father, the king of the East, sent him down into Egypt to find a pearl. But when the prince arrived, the people poured him a cup. Drinking it, he forgot he was the son of a king, forgot about the pearl and fell into a deep sleep.”
Rick (Bale) is a successful writer born into a powerful family in L.A. The son of Joseph (Dennehy) and brother to Barry (Bently). After the lose of a second brother as well as his mother, Rick becomes disillusioned and loses himself in the excesses found in the ‘City Of Angles’ and nearby Las Vegas. Along this aimless journey he encounters 6 different women Nancy (Blanchett) a doctor, Elizabeth (Portman) a married woman, Helen (Pinto), Isabel (Lucas), Karen (Palmer), and Della (Poots) looking to form some sort of bond or connection. Perhaps even to discover love only to encounter more lose. He wanders from cities, to beaches, then from mountains to deserts. Searching for something meaningful, some purpose all the while trying to hold what remains of his family and his own sanity together and along the way encounters a cast of colorful characters who have their own ideas about life and their own views on how he should live his.
This film was pretty much Malick’s attempt at making an art film with a large budget and a star studded cast. That’s just the thing. He succeeded and it was just too much. From a technical standpoint, it was wonderfully directed with its landscapes and ‘not-the-norm’ angles and close-ups but it simultaneously took away from the people and the story. It was almost as though they were trying to combine a film on the Discovery Channel with a drama. The film was two minutes shy of 2 hours long. Had the director been able to shave 20 minutes from it, then I could see it given a limited run in major theaters. I have to give kudos to the actors and actresses who were on top of their game which made the film worth sitting through once. The film is rated R for scenes of violence, nudity, and language. If you’re enduring one of those days where you just need to disappear and NOT communicate with anyone for a while, go see this movie. It’s runtime and complexity will help take your mind off your troubles. I’d highly recommend though that you save the film for viewing at home. I’ll give this film 3 out of 5 stars.
‘Knight Of Cups’ is a romantic drama written and directed by Terrence Malick and stars an ensemble cast including Christian Bale, Cate Blanchett, Antonio Banderas, Natalie Portman, Brian Dennehy, Armin Muller-Stahl, Isabel Lucas, Freida Pinto, Wes Bentley, Imogen Poots, Teresa Palmer, and Peter Matthiessen.
“Once there was a young prince whose father, the king of the East, sent him down into Egypt to find a pearl. But when the prince arrived, the people poured him a cup. Drinking it, he forgot he was the son of a king, forgot about the pearl and fell into a deep sleep.”
Rick (Bale) is a successful writer born into a powerful family in L.A. The son of Joseph (Dennehy) and brother to Barry (Bently). After the lose of a second brother as well as his mother, Rick becomes disillusioned and loses himself in the excesses found in the ‘City Of Angles’ and nearby Las Vegas. Along this aimless journey he encounters 6 different women Nancy (Blanchett) a doctor, Elizabeth (Portman) a married woman, Helen (Pinto), Isabel (Lucas), Karen (Palmer), and Della (Poots) looking to form some sort of bond or connection. Perhaps even to discover love only to encounter more lose. He wanders from cities, to beaches, then from mountains to deserts. Searching for something meaningful, some purpose all the while trying to hold what remains of his family and his own sanity together and along the way encounters a cast of colorful characters who have their own ideas about life and their own views on how he should live his.
This film was pretty much Malick’s attempt at making an art film with a large budget and a star studded cast. That’s just the thing. He succeeded and it was just too much. From a technical standpoint, it was wonderfully directed with its landscapes and ‘not-the-norm’ angles and close-ups but it simultaneously took away from the people and the story. It was almost as though they were trying to combine a film on the Discovery Channel with a drama. The film was two minutes shy of 2 hours long. Had the director been able to shave 20 minutes from it, then I could see it given a limited run in major theaters. I have to give kudos to the actors and actresses who were on top of their game which made the film worth sitting through once. The film is rated R for scenes of violence, nudity, and language. If you’re enduring one of those days where you just need to disappear and NOT communicate with anyone for a while, go see this movie. It’s runtime and complexity will help take your mind off your troubles. I’d highly recommend though that you save the film for viewing at home. I’ll give this film 3 out of 5 stars.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Interstellar (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
For my money, Christopher Nolan is the best director and storyteller in the film industry today. Over the years he has grown with each film he has created. In his early work, like Following, Memento, and Insomniac, he experimented with different notions of how we as an audience perceived a story unfold on film. In each of those films he learned techniques that he carried with him as he moved onto bigger commercial success’ like The Dark Knight Trilogy and The Prestige. All of those techniques, culminated in my humble opinion, his masterpiece with 2010s Inception. Now he is back, with a space exploration film for this generation that rivals Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space odyssey with an added dash of 1997s Contact.
Everything you expect from a Nolan film his here. Stunning visuals that not only leave us breathless at the vastness and beauty of space and other worlds, but also character driven framing that is subtle enough for us to be able to understand and focus on this character driven story. We are driven forward by one man’s mission to save the earth, but on a more humanizing level, his family. It is this constant thread, especially the bond of Love between a father and daughter, which holds this majestic film together from start to finish. Those who miss this focus or nitpick at the science of it all may be disappointed and feel the film is too big to be concluded with such a simple notion. However those who are willing to concede that impressive visuals do not need to be concluded on an ostentatious scale for there to be a grandiose impact, will find satisfaction at a film that makes us contemplate our place in time and space.
If these stunning visuals are the face of this film, then the score is undoubtedly the emotion. Nolan once again teams up with Academy Award winning composer Hans Zimmer, to produce a stunningly moving and heartfelt score that not only propels forward in our exploration of the unknown, but at times is our only friend in letting us know it is ok to breath.
Perhaps it is just the gravity of the work that Nolan has done in the last few years, but the actors in this film know the stakes and each came to play. The cast each elevate their performances not only for themselves but for each other. Led by Academy Award Winner winners Mathew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway, as well as Academy Award Nominee Jessica Chastain, the entire cast of Interstellar deliver excellent performances that cause us not only relate, but to feel the world at large and the relationships with each other. I was especially impressed with the young Mackenzie Foy, whose relationship with McConaughey is crucial to the story being able to hold together for the entire film.
In closing, Interstellar is a beautiful film to behold with a story that revolves around exploration, survival, and love told in an epic way both visually and audibly. For some there may be a few make or break moments, but if you just focus on the story and world being told to you, it will all make sense. The film’s running time is 2 hours and 49 minutes which may seem like much to some, however because Interstellar is an experience, not just a film, the length is hardly noticeable as a bad thing. After walking away, you will want to see this experience in the theaters again, especially in IMAX for the best possible visuals and audio.
Everything you expect from a Nolan film his here. Stunning visuals that not only leave us breathless at the vastness and beauty of space and other worlds, but also character driven framing that is subtle enough for us to be able to understand and focus on this character driven story. We are driven forward by one man’s mission to save the earth, but on a more humanizing level, his family. It is this constant thread, especially the bond of Love between a father and daughter, which holds this majestic film together from start to finish. Those who miss this focus or nitpick at the science of it all may be disappointed and feel the film is too big to be concluded with such a simple notion. However those who are willing to concede that impressive visuals do not need to be concluded on an ostentatious scale for there to be a grandiose impact, will find satisfaction at a film that makes us contemplate our place in time and space.
If these stunning visuals are the face of this film, then the score is undoubtedly the emotion. Nolan once again teams up with Academy Award winning composer Hans Zimmer, to produce a stunningly moving and heartfelt score that not only propels forward in our exploration of the unknown, but at times is our only friend in letting us know it is ok to breath.
Perhaps it is just the gravity of the work that Nolan has done in the last few years, but the actors in this film know the stakes and each came to play. The cast each elevate their performances not only for themselves but for each other. Led by Academy Award Winner winners Mathew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway, as well as Academy Award Nominee Jessica Chastain, the entire cast of Interstellar deliver excellent performances that cause us not only relate, but to feel the world at large and the relationships with each other. I was especially impressed with the young Mackenzie Foy, whose relationship with McConaughey is crucial to the story being able to hold together for the entire film.
In closing, Interstellar is a beautiful film to behold with a story that revolves around exploration, survival, and love told in an epic way both visually and audibly. For some there may be a few make or break moments, but if you just focus on the story and world being told to you, it will all make sense. The film’s running time is 2 hours and 49 minutes which may seem like much to some, however because Interstellar is an experience, not just a film, the length is hardly noticeable as a bad thing. After walking away, you will want to see this experience in the theaters again, especially in IMAX for the best possible visuals and audio.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Near Perfect Film/Comic Book Movie With A Piece Missing
Contains spoilers, click to show
This film did a great job in making the Joker or rather Arthur a sympathetic character. Joaquin Phoenix did a phenomenal job in this movie. His laugh made me really feel for this character, it sounded sad but also painful, like it physically hurt him. I really felt for Arthur and it actually made me feel bad for him equally when he was getting beat up and assaulted but also just berated and treated bad by others. People were talking about the violence in the movie and how it was graphic and disturbing but what bothered me more were the parts where Arthur was having violence done on him, it made me sad for him. I thought a lot of the movie was well done. The double twist in him finding his mother's letter to Thomas Wayne saying he (Arthur) is his son only to find out that he was adopted was a great reveal. Still makes me wonder what the truth really is, because later he does find a photograph with Thomas Wayne's initials on the back. Either he really is his son and Wayne had it covered up, which he totally has the means to do, or maybe she was delusional about it. I also thought it was cool how they showed Arthur also had delusions of grandeur in the begging when he is watching the Murray show and he imagines himself as a guest there. Like I said this movie was really well done in a lot of ways but there were somethings that bothered me. One right off the back is that Bruce Wayne is just a kid in this movie and if Arthur is supposed to be the Joker he would be way older than he should be when Wayne becomes Batman. To mere there wasn't a lot that Arthur really did as Joker. Nothing grandiose or epic like what I've become accustomed to with the Joker in other incarnations. There was no plans or power moves like in The Dark Knight or parade and taking over the city like in 1989's Batman. They really could have called the movie something else since he really only becomes the Joker at the end of the movie for not really that long even. I know it's supposed to be an origin story of how he becomes the Joker but it wasn't even going off of any of the comics and just loosely based on the version of Joker from The Killing Joke and then given the "Hollywood" treatment. I think I just expected more Joker from a movie called Joker. I thought the ending was perfect if it would have ended with him on top of the car when they helped him escape. I honestly don't know why they should that little part with him in Arkham, I don't think it added anything and kind of took away from it. The only thing I can think of is they didn't want to end it that dark. I have to say that if your judging this film from not being a big fan of Joker, the comics or the films and only on as a stand alone film it's probably like a 9/10. But for me since at it's core it is a comic book movie I give it an 8/10.