Search
Search results
Midnight Captive (Bonded By Blood Vampire Chronicles #2)
8.0
Rate It
Book
CAILIN MAC DOUGAL has lived a dangerous life being the adopted daughter of vampire Broderick...
Historical Paranormal Romance
The Killer’s Wife
Book
A serial killer, a woman on the run, and an obsessive parole officer tangle in a psychological net...
Psychological Thriller Suspense
Rockin’ Around the Chickadee
9.0
Rate It
Book
Bells are ringing and alarms are sounding in Donna Andrews' latest cheery addition in the New York...
Crime and Parchment
9.0
Rate It
Book
Rare books librarian Juniper Blume knows this much...an ancient Celtic manuscript shouldn't be in a...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Lestranger than fiction.
I must be one of the last people to watch this in the cinema, thanks to an irritating bout of sickness and – well – frankly total bloody apathy! For me this is the franchise that nobody asked for and nobody wanted. (Well, “nobody” is probably overstating the case, since there is probably a bunch of Potterheads out there who are shouting at me right now). But judging from the opinion of my daughter-in-law, who could win “Mastermind” with her knowledge of the original Potter series as her specialist subject, I am certainly not alone in my lack of enthusiasm.
The Plot
I’d really love to tell you about the plot. I really would! But I would struggle to pull all the multitude of strands together from J.K. Rowling’s story and coherently explain them to anyone. If Rowling had put ten thousand monkeys (not a million – it’s no bloody Shakespeare) into a room with typewriters and locked the door I wouldn’t be surprised.
Let me try at a high level….. The arch-criminal wizard Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) is being tortured in ‘Trump Tower’, but manages to escape and flees to Paris in pursuit of a mysterious circus performer called Credence (Ezra Miller) and his bewitched companion Nagini (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) played fetchingly by Claudia Kim. Someone needs to stop him, and all eyes are on Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law). But he is unable to do so, since he and Grindelwald are “closer than brothers” (nudge, nudge, wink, wink). So a reluctant and UK-grounded Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) is smuggled into the danger zone… which suits him just fine since his love Tina (Katherine Waterston) is working for the ministry there, and the couple are currently estranged due to a (topical) bout of ‘Fake News’.
Throw in a potential love triangle between Newt, his brother Theseus (Callum Turner) and old Hogwart’s schoolmate Leta Lestrange (Zoë Kravitz) and about a half dozen other sub-plots and you have… well… a complete bugger’s muggle – – sorry – – muddle.
A plot that’s all at sea
Above all, I really can’t explain the crux of the plot. A venerable diarrhoea of exposition in a crypt, during an inexplicably quiet fifteen minutes (given ‘im-who-can-be-named is next door with about a thousand other people!) left me completely bewildered. A bizarre event at sea (no spoilers) would seem to make absolutely NO SENSE when considered with another reveal at the end of the film. I thought I must have clearly missed something… or I’d just not been intelligent enough to process the information…. or…. it was actually completely bonkers! Actually, I think it’s the latter: in desperation I went on a fan site that tried to explain the plot. While it was explained there, the explanation aligned with what I thought had happened: but it made no mention of the ridiculousness of the random coincidence involved!
The turns
The film’s a mess. Which is a shame since everyone involved tries really hard. Depp oozes evil very effectively (he proves that nicely on arriving in Paris, and doubles-down about 5 minutes later: #veryverydark). Redmayne replays his Newt-act effectively but once again (and I see I made the same comments in my “Fantastic Beasts” review) his character mumbles again so much that many of his lines are unintelligible.
I also complained last time that the excellent actress Katherine Waterston was criminally underused as the tentative love interest Tina. this trend unfortunately continues unabated in this film…. you’ll struggle afterwards to write down what she actually did in this film.
Jacob (Dan Fogler) and Queenie (Alison Sudol, looking for all the world in some scenes like Rachel Weisz) reprise their roles in a sub-plot that goes nowhere in particular.
Of the newcomers, Jude Law as Dumbledore is a class-act but has very little screen time: hopefully he will get more to do next time around. Zoë Kravitz impresses as Leta.
Wizards of the screen
As you would expect from a David Yates / David Heyman Potter collaboration, the product design, costume design and special effects are all excellent. Some scenes are truly impressive – an ‘explosion’ in a Parisian garret is particularly spectacular.
But special effects alone do not a great film make. Many reviews I’ve seen complain that this was a ‘filler’ film… a set-up film for the rest of the series. And I can understand that view. If you analyse the film overall, virtually NOTHING of importance actually happens: it’s like the “Order of the Phoenix” of the prequels.
Final Thoughts
I dragged myself along to see this one because “I thought I should”. The third in the series will really need to sparkle to make me want to see it. If J.K. Rowling were to take me advice (she won’t – she NEVER returns my calls!) then she would sculpt the story-arc but leave the screenwriting to someone better. The blame for this one, I’m afraid, lies at Rowling’s door alone.
The Plot
I’d really love to tell you about the plot. I really would! But I would struggle to pull all the multitude of strands together from J.K. Rowling’s story and coherently explain them to anyone. If Rowling had put ten thousand monkeys (not a million – it’s no bloody Shakespeare) into a room with typewriters and locked the door I wouldn’t be surprised.
Let me try at a high level….. The arch-criminal wizard Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) is being tortured in ‘Trump Tower’, but manages to escape and flees to Paris in pursuit of a mysterious circus performer called Credence (Ezra Miller) and his bewitched companion Nagini (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) played fetchingly by Claudia Kim. Someone needs to stop him, and all eyes are on Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law). But he is unable to do so, since he and Grindelwald are “closer than brothers” (nudge, nudge, wink, wink). So a reluctant and UK-grounded Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) is smuggled into the danger zone… which suits him just fine since his love Tina (Katherine Waterston) is working for the ministry there, and the couple are currently estranged due to a (topical) bout of ‘Fake News’.
Throw in a potential love triangle between Newt, his brother Theseus (Callum Turner) and old Hogwart’s schoolmate Leta Lestrange (Zoë Kravitz) and about a half dozen other sub-plots and you have… well… a complete bugger’s muggle – – sorry – – muddle.
A plot that’s all at sea
Above all, I really can’t explain the crux of the plot. A venerable diarrhoea of exposition in a crypt, during an inexplicably quiet fifteen minutes (given ‘im-who-can-be-named is next door with about a thousand other people!) left me completely bewildered. A bizarre event at sea (no spoilers) would seem to make absolutely NO SENSE when considered with another reveal at the end of the film. I thought I must have clearly missed something… or I’d just not been intelligent enough to process the information…. or…. it was actually completely bonkers! Actually, I think it’s the latter: in desperation I went on a fan site that tried to explain the plot. While it was explained there, the explanation aligned with what I thought had happened: but it made no mention of the ridiculousness of the random coincidence involved!
The turns
The film’s a mess. Which is a shame since everyone involved tries really hard. Depp oozes evil very effectively (he proves that nicely on arriving in Paris, and doubles-down about 5 minutes later: #veryverydark). Redmayne replays his Newt-act effectively but once again (and I see I made the same comments in my “Fantastic Beasts” review) his character mumbles again so much that many of his lines are unintelligible.
I also complained last time that the excellent actress Katherine Waterston was criminally underused as the tentative love interest Tina. this trend unfortunately continues unabated in this film…. you’ll struggle afterwards to write down what she actually did in this film.
Jacob (Dan Fogler) and Queenie (Alison Sudol, looking for all the world in some scenes like Rachel Weisz) reprise their roles in a sub-plot that goes nowhere in particular.
Of the newcomers, Jude Law as Dumbledore is a class-act but has very little screen time: hopefully he will get more to do next time around. Zoë Kravitz impresses as Leta.
Wizards of the screen
As you would expect from a David Yates / David Heyman Potter collaboration, the product design, costume design and special effects are all excellent. Some scenes are truly impressive – an ‘explosion’ in a Parisian garret is particularly spectacular.
But special effects alone do not a great film make. Many reviews I’ve seen complain that this was a ‘filler’ film… a set-up film for the rest of the series. And I can understand that view. If you analyse the film overall, virtually NOTHING of importance actually happens: it’s like the “Order of the Phoenix” of the prequels.
Final Thoughts
I dragged myself along to see this one because “I thought I should”. The third in the series will really need to sparkle to make me want to see it. If J.K. Rowling were to take me advice (she won’t – she NEVER returns my calls!) then she would sculpt the story-arc but leave the screenwriting to someone better. The blame for this one, I’m afraid, lies at Rowling’s door alone.
Jamie (131 KP) rated Here and Gone in Books
Jul 26, 2017
Engrossing story line (2 more)
Well-developed characters
Good female relationships
Several plot holes (1 more)
Mildly frustrating main character
A parent's worst nightmare
This book may be one of the most compelling reads that I’ve had in a while. Here and Gone is the story of a woman trying to escape an abusive marriage that finds herself in handcuffs and her children taken away by suspicious cops. It’s every parent’s worst nightmare. The opening chapters reminded me of some terrifying cases that I’ve read about innocent people being pulled over by corrupt or phony police officers.
The narrative swaps between characters throughout the story, sometimes swinging into the main two character’s pasts to flesh out their personalities. I really liked Danny, though I’ll admit that he seemed like a bit of an Asian stereotype to me, and being Asian American myself I wasn’t sure how I felt about it. His role in the story was cool but also seemed a little out of place. Audra I wish I could say that I liked her more, but her attitude in some of the flashback chapters really bothered me. My heart did break for her character, however, stuck in an abusive marriage with an enabler, with several chapters detailing her struggle with drug addiction.
I love the serious amount of woman power in this book that highlights the importance of female relationships. There are just certain things that many women know and understand about each other. This book was a heartfelt reminder about how vital it is for women to lift each other up, rather than tearing each other down. It was almost always female characters that would see what was happening to Audra and helped when she needed it the most. This was a major highlight for me in the story.
On the other hand though, I had to cut the rating down a little bit due to some pretty glaring plot holes that kept making me stop and ask my husband about law or the standard policies that are followed in any investigation. There were little things I noticed that just didn’t seem right and it would pull me out of my immersion in the novel.
Maybe it’s just me, but I would imagine that if a suspect in a missing person’s case were to implicate someone, even if it was a member of law enforcement, of abducting the kids and threatening her into taking the blame, wouldn’t the FBI be at least mildly suspicious? Question the officers involved, perhaps monitor their activity, separate them from the case, or put them on administrative leave? It would only make sense to me that the officers in question are too close to the case and should be taken off of it, but that wasn’t what happened. One cop had full access to the suspect, to police resources, and was still involved in the investigation. The other cop, well, nobody seemed to care about her one bit, or really noticed her absence. In fact, the FBI in general seemed pretty impotent in this book and that just didn’t seem normal to me.
All that aside, I really enjoyed this book. I was completely absorbed in the story from the first page and I couldn’t put it down, devouring it quickly over a period of about two days. I’ll definitely be checking out some more of the author’s work in the future.
The narrative swaps between characters throughout the story, sometimes swinging into the main two character’s pasts to flesh out their personalities. I really liked Danny, though I’ll admit that he seemed like a bit of an Asian stereotype to me, and being Asian American myself I wasn’t sure how I felt about it. His role in the story was cool but also seemed a little out of place. Audra I wish I could say that I liked her more, but her attitude in some of the flashback chapters really bothered me. My heart did break for her character, however, stuck in an abusive marriage with an enabler, with several chapters detailing her struggle with drug addiction.
I love the serious amount of woman power in this book that highlights the importance of female relationships. There are just certain things that many women know and understand about each other. This book was a heartfelt reminder about how vital it is for women to lift each other up, rather than tearing each other down. It was almost always female characters that would see what was happening to Audra and helped when she needed it the most. This was a major highlight for me in the story.
On the other hand though, I had to cut the rating down a little bit due to some pretty glaring plot holes that kept making me stop and ask my husband about law or the standard policies that are followed in any investigation. There were little things I noticed that just didn’t seem right and it would pull me out of my immersion in the novel.
Maybe it’s just me, but I would imagine that if a suspect in a missing person’s case were to implicate someone, even if it was a member of law enforcement, of abducting the kids and threatening her into taking the blame, wouldn’t the FBI be at least mildly suspicious? Question the officers involved, perhaps monitor their activity, separate them from the case, or put them on administrative leave? It would only make sense to me that the officers in question are too close to the case and should be taken off of it, but that wasn’t what happened. One cop had full access to the suspect, to police resources, and was still involved in the investigation. The other cop, well, nobody seemed to care about her one bit, or really noticed her absence. In fact, the FBI in general seemed pretty impotent in this book and that just didn’t seem normal to me.
All that aside, I really enjoyed this book. I was completely absorbed in the story from the first page and I couldn’t put it down, devouring it quickly over a period of about two days. I’ll definitely be checking out some more of the author’s work in the future.
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Gotham - Season 1 in TV
Jun 20, 2018
Cast (5 more)
Character development
Characters
Setting
Great Drama
Gripping storyline
Some of the more extreme comic book costumes (2 more)
Some of the characters
Certain plot elements that take away the drama (mostly if you've read or seen what happens next)
Imagine a Gotham without Batman....
Contains spoilers, click to show
When I first watched it when it first aired, I was sceptical and yet excited and then I felt let down. Gotham at first was a great cop show but what annoyed me was the fact that all these things that we knew to happen when Batman was around, were happening when Bruce Wayne was still a child and my brain couldn't wrap around the idea let alone get behind it, but at the same time I didn't know what I was expecting. Still I watched the first two seasons because I wanted to see some of my favourite villains and characters brought to life and I love Ben McKenzie as James Gordon!
However upon recently returning to watching Gotham I have come to see it in a new light and adore the show to pieces as I should have from the start. Gotham isn't about Batman, it's not about Bruce Wayne (not fully anyways). I see now that Gotham is a concept of a question:
"What if these villains we're here before Batman? Leaving only the police to deal with the extremity of Gotham most famous rogues!"
What makes this show so good is that we see a young, reckless and a little out of character Jim Gordon, who is even willing to bend the law to the point of breaking to get Justice. The drama is intense and you never can tell when Jim goes off on one, if he'll restrain himself to the law and doing things by the book. In a way there's a lot of Batman within Jim Gordon himself which makes the show even better.
Some of the characters annoy me at times. I liked Fish Mooney at first because she was dangerous and twisted, but when you bring a character back so many times you just lose interest and they're no longer a threat to the drama of their character development because you leave yourself with the only two viable questions: "will she ever stay dead?" And "when will she die for good?" I just don't seem to be concerned for her anymore like I did in the first season when she was double crossing Falcone. When everything was fresh and you didn't know if a stray bullet might hit her finally or if an Assassin was in her midst at all times waiting to strike. The drama for me didn't vanish but certainly lessened in later seasons.
The character development of characters like Bruce Wayne, Jim Gordon, Edward Nigma and Oswald Cobblepot are brilliantly written. With Bruce becoming a stronger minded young man in season two and Oswald's rise to power. I particularly loved Nigmas transformation into a killer because of the way it was set out, with the first murder being slightly on purpose, the second a complete accident, the third being to protect himself against discovery and the rest being a complete turn around into someone who discovers he enjoys the task of killing someone. The writers are excellent when it comes to development of characters and plot.
Can't wait for the new season and I hope they go out with a bang!
However upon recently returning to watching Gotham I have come to see it in a new light and adore the show to pieces as I should have from the start. Gotham isn't about Batman, it's not about Bruce Wayne (not fully anyways). I see now that Gotham is a concept of a question:
"What if these villains we're here before Batman? Leaving only the police to deal with the extremity of Gotham most famous rogues!"
What makes this show so good is that we see a young, reckless and a little out of character Jim Gordon, who is even willing to bend the law to the point of breaking to get Justice. The drama is intense and you never can tell when Jim goes off on one, if he'll restrain himself to the law and doing things by the book. In a way there's a lot of Batman within Jim Gordon himself which makes the show even better.
Some of the characters annoy me at times. I liked Fish Mooney at first because she was dangerous and twisted, but when you bring a character back so many times you just lose interest and they're no longer a threat to the drama of their character development because you leave yourself with the only two viable questions: "will she ever stay dead?" And "when will she die for good?" I just don't seem to be concerned for her anymore like I did in the first season when she was double crossing Falcone. When everything was fresh and you didn't know if a stray bullet might hit her finally or if an Assassin was in her midst at all times waiting to strike. The drama for me didn't vanish but certainly lessened in later seasons.
The character development of characters like Bruce Wayne, Jim Gordon, Edward Nigma and Oswald Cobblepot are brilliantly written. With Bruce becoming a stronger minded young man in season two and Oswald's rise to power. I particularly loved Nigmas transformation into a killer because of the way it was set out, with the first murder being slightly on purpose, the second a complete accident, the third being to protect himself against discovery and the rest being a complete turn around into someone who discovers he enjoys the task of killing someone. The writers are excellent when it comes to development of characters and plot.
Can't wait for the new season and I hope they go out with a bang!
Grace and Tippi are conjoined twins, after being homeschooled for 16 years they are forced to attend Hornbeacon High.
The city can longer fund the girls homeschooling, nor can the family afford it, together they must venture the real world of stares, nasty comments, cruelty and obstacles they have to overcome.
Will they make friends? love! could it even be a possibility?
The girls realise they have to make a heart wrenching decision not only for the family but for themselves.
Easy money
<I> If I owned a pistol i could rob a bank.
I could stick a gun in a teller's face
and demand a stack of cash
then motor off in a stolen Maserati.
I could sell drugs to kids on the street corners
or pimp out girls to the highest bidder.
I could break and law I wanted.
If they imprisoned me,
they'd have to lock up Tippi too,
which is false arrest,
Illegal,
and would never stand up in a
court of law.
If I didn't have this damn conscience,
we'd be rich.</I>
I loved this verse (above) It made me laugh at the thought, she has a point, how would that work?
My thoughts,
I loved this book, i have never read anything like this before and it was thought-provoking. I had never thought of things such as when one of them is ill, the other stays in bed until recuperation, or what if one of them falls in love? If one drinks alcohol, will the other get drunk? There were times during this book where i would stop reading and do a thinking pose like J.D from Scrubs and ponder.
This book has made me want to learn more about conjoined twins and the effects on their lives, if anyone know any other books like this let me know, even if its non fiction.
Characters:
The parents - I felt no connection to the parents whatsoever, it felt like they had given up, What with the father being made redundant, depressed, and an alcoholic. The mum was overworked in a bank. However saying that it does show you the effects and costs,strain that it can have on families.
Yasmeen - has her own problems and with that she has become hardened to bullies, the twins need a friend like this
Grace was they shyer of the two whereas Tippi was most outspoken and bitchy.
Jon - I felt no connection with him at all, I just felt he was in the story as Sarah Crossan wanted to touch on the subject of love.
Dragon I felt sorry for as she was having to fend for herself in the sense that her parents couldn't afford ballet lessons so she had to find alternative ways to carry on with her dance,
This is the first book that I have ever read in verse and it was so different, easy to read and quick. the book is 430 pages and read this in less than a day.
Its told in Grace's POV, however it would have been nice to hear from Tippi too.
Sarah Crossan touches very slightly on other subjects but doesn't delve deep into them.
She also shows you that these 2 girls have such a bond that if the possibility of separation was an option they would refuse, despite the health scares, remarks and challenges they will come across.
Overall I rate this book 4 out of 5 stars
The city can longer fund the girls homeschooling, nor can the family afford it, together they must venture the real world of stares, nasty comments, cruelty and obstacles they have to overcome.
Will they make friends? love! could it even be a possibility?
The girls realise they have to make a heart wrenching decision not only for the family but for themselves.
Easy money
<I> If I owned a pistol i could rob a bank.
I could stick a gun in a teller's face
and demand a stack of cash
then motor off in a stolen Maserati.
I could sell drugs to kids on the street corners
or pimp out girls to the highest bidder.
I could break and law I wanted.
If they imprisoned me,
they'd have to lock up Tippi too,
which is false arrest,
Illegal,
and would never stand up in a
court of law.
If I didn't have this damn conscience,
we'd be rich.</I>
I loved this verse (above) It made me laugh at the thought, she has a point, how would that work?
My thoughts,
I loved this book, i have never read anything like this before and it was thought-provoking. I had never thought of things such as when one of them is ill, the other stays in bed until recuperation, or what if one of them falls in love? If one drinks alcohol, will the other get drunk? There were times during this book where i would stop reading and do a thinking pose like J.D from Scrubs and ponder.
This book has made me want to learn more about conjoined twins and the effects on their lives, if anyone know any other books like this let me know, even if its non fiction.
Characters:
The parents - I felt no connection to the parents whatsoever, it felt like they had given up, What with the father being made redundant, depressed, and an alcoholic. The mum was overworked in a bank. However saying that it does show you the effects and costs,strain that it can have on families.
Yasmeen - has her own problems and with that she has become hardened to bullies, the twins need a friend like this
Grace was they shyer of the two whereas Tippi was most outspoken and bitchy.
Jon - I felt no connection with him at all, I just felt he was in the story as Sarah Crossan wanted to touch on the subject of love.
Dragon I felt sorry for as she was having to fend for herself in the sense that her parents couldn't afford ballet lessons so she had to find alternative ways to carry on with her dance,
This is the first book that I have ever read in verse and it was so different, easy to read and quick. the book is 430 pages and read this in less than a day.
Its told in Grace's POV, however it would have been nice to hear from Tippi too.
Sarah Crossan touches very slightly on other subjects but doesn't delve deep into them.
She also shows you that these 2 girls have such a bond that if the possibility of separation was an option they would refuse, despite the health scares, remarks and challenges they will come across.
Overall I rate this book 4 out of 5 stars
Darren (1599 KP) rated All the Money in the World (2017) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: All the Money in the World starts when John Paul Getty III (Charlie Plummer) get kidnapped in Rome, the ransom is $17 Million, the only person that can help her mother Gail Harris (Williams) get the money is the estranged billionaire grandfather J Paul Getty (Christopher Plummer) who isn’t willing to pay a single dollar to get his favourite grandson back.
Fletcher Chase (Wahlberg) is recruited to negotiate a deal with the kidnappers, but Getty isn’t willing to spare a dollar to get him back as the situation starts to get out of hand as time starts to run out on getting John Paul Getty III back alive.
REPORT THIS AD
Thoughts on All the Money in the World
Characters – Gail Harris is the mother of John Paul Getty III, she has given up her fortune she could have had from her divorce to keep her son, she must go back to her old father in law to get the money, even after she doesn’t get the money she leads the campaign to save her son. J Paul Getty is the richest man in the world, he has made the money by taking whatever he wants and will never give up money for anything that doesn’t increase his value. Businessman at heart he will only do a deal for his own good. Fletcher Chase is the deal maker, he has been able to negotiate deals for Getty for years and now he is assigned to help retrieve the grandson.
Performances – Michelle Williams is the true star of this movie, she shines in every scene she is in, showing the strength on front of the cameras and the weakness behind them. Christopher Plummer is great in his role which was one that we get to see him take very late in the process. Mark Wahlberg is surprisingly good in his role, taking a supporting position he handles everything without becoming over the top like you would imagine him doing.
Story – The story here follows the kidnapping of the grandchild of the richest man in the world and follows whether he is willing to spend his fortune to get him back alive. We have the concerned mother that will do anything to get him back, even go against the father-in-law. While the story does come off slow at times as we do go through the same process too often, but it does show how greed can drive people to make terrible decisions.
Biopic/Crime/Mystery – This is meant to be about a real person, not sure how real the story is truly about, this could be considered one of the biggest kidnapping cases of all time if is real though.
Settings – The film does use the backdrops wonderfully through the film to make us feel like we are part of the scenes we are watching through, the beauty stands out here.
Scene of the Movie – Williams performance is something to sit and enjoy.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It does feel long.
Final Thoughts – This is a good crime thriller, it shows us just how far people will go for money and how far people will go to keep it.
Overall: Long strong movie.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/04/23/all-the-money-in-the-world-2017/
Fletcher Chase (Wahlberg) is recruited to negotiate a deal with the kidnappers, but Getty isn’t willing to spare a dollar to get him back as the situation starts to get out of hand as time starts to run out on getting John Paul Getty III back alive.
REPORT THIS AD
Thoughts on All the Money in the World
Characters – Gail Harris is the mother of John Paul Getty III, she has given up her fortune she could have had from her divorce to keep her son, she must go back to her old father in law to get the money, even after she doesn’t get the money she leads the campaign to save her son. J Paul Getty is the richest man in the world, he has made the money by taking whatever he wants and will never give up money for anything that doesn’t increase his value. Businessman at heart he will only do a deal for his own good. Fletcher Chase is the deal maker, he has been able to negotiate deals for Getty for years and now he is assigned to help retrieve the grandson.
Performances – Michelle Williams is the true star of this movie, she shines in every scene she is in, showing the strength on front of the cameras and the weakness behind them. Christopher Plummer is great in his role which was one that we get to see him take very late in the process. Mark Wahlberg is surprisingly good in his role, taking a supporting position he handles everything without becoming over the top like you would imagine him doing.
Story – The story here follows the kidnapping of the grandchild of the richest man in the world and follows whether he is willing to spend his fortune to get him back alive. We have the concerned mother that will do anything to get him back, even go against the father-in-law. While the story does come off slow at times as we do go through the same process too often, but it does show how greed can drive people to make terrible decisions.
Biopic/Crime/Mystery – This is meant to be about a real person, not sure how real the story is truly about, this could be considered one of the biggest kidnapping cases of all time if is real though.
Settings – The film does use the backdrops wonderfully through the film to make us feel like we are part of the scenes we are watching through, the beauty stands out here.
Scene of the Movie – Williams performance is something to sit and enjoy.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It does feel long.
Final Thoughts – This is a good crime thriller, it shows us just how far people will go for money and how far people will go to keep it.
Overall: Long strong movie.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/04/23/all-the-money-in-the-world-2017/
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Rhythm Section (2019) in Movies
Mar 5, 2020
The Rhythm Section popped up almost out of nowhere when it hit screens. Seeing the cast line-up I was very interested in seeing what it had to offer.
Stephanie has been a broken woman ever since her family died in a plane crash. The situation would be tough for anyone to deal with but it's made worse by the fact she was supposed to be on the plane too. Life in tatters, addicted to drugs and turning tricks for money she's all but given up on life. That's when Proctor appears.
Proctor is an investigative journalist who is tracking down the people responsible for the tragedy. He takes her in and she paws over his evidence. With a new found rage she goes off on her own, but actions have consequences and it's a steep learning curve.
There is something in The Rhythm Section, the story has a definite spark, but this final product didn't hit the right note for me. It's a classic story of revenge but the film doesn't seem to make much out of it. Littering it with flashbacks to fill in story and attempt to get us in Stephanie's head just adds to the jumpiness throughout. That jumpiness wasn't just reserved for the story, I noted that the camera movements early on were bizarre, I imagine in an effort to emulate her physical and mental state, but it was particularly jarring to watch.
The Rhythm Section seems to have no real way to follow the passage of time, which I feel was a mistake as it would have helped to make things more believable. Somehow B (Law) managed to get Stephanie off drugs, markedly improve her fitness levels and train her to be an (admittedly mediocre) assassin. With some concept of time elapsing I might have been on board with that transformation.
All that training seems to be for nought as she mainly survives off dumb luck during her travels. Her natural luck would also explain how she managed to capture the only bit of information she needed at the beginning of the film to find Proctor's well trained and secret source.
Law and Lively had some good moments in her training montage. There was some humour and friendship, of a sort, but the combative nature of both characters outside of that felt strained and neither appeared comfortable in the role. Sterling K. Brown playing Mark Serra seemed to be the most at home in the role, there was a spark there that gave him a confidence in what he was doing.
With a script written by the author of the source material I'm at a bit of a loss, this scenario should mean that it's a proper representation of the book but I'm left with little desire to experience any of the other three stories in this series having seen Rhythm Section.
As I said, there feels like there's something in this idea that would have made a great film, but it feels rushed and a little confused. The film ends in a way that could see a sequel, and that is possible given the other books in the series, but I can't see it progressing beyond one film off the back of this.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-rhythm-section-movie-review.html
Stephanie has been a broken woman ever since her family died in a plane crash. The situation would be tough for anyone to deal with but it's made worse by the fact she was supposed to be on the plane too. Life in tatters, addicted to drugs and turning tricks for money she's all but given up on life. That's when Proctor appears.
Proctor is an investigative journalist who is tracking down the people responsible for the tragedy. He takes her in and she paws over his evidence. With a new found rage she goes off on her own, but actions have consequences and it's a steep learning curve.
There is something in The Rhythm Section, the story has a definite spark, but this final product didn't hit the right note for me. It's a classic story of revenge but the film doesn't seem to make much out of it. Littering it with flashbacks to fill in story and attempt to get us in Stephanie's head just adds to the jumpiness throughout. That jumpiness wasn't just reserved for the story, I noted that the camera movements early on were bizarre, I imagine in an effort to emulate her physical and mental state, but it was particularly jarring to watch.
The Rhythm Section seems to have no real way to follow the passage of time, which I feel was a mistake as it would have helped to make things more believable. Somehow B (Law) managed to get Stephanie off drugs, markedly improve her fitness levels and train her to be an (admittedly mediocre) assassin. With some concept of time elapsing I might have been on board with that transformation.
All that training seems to be for nought as she mainly survives off dumb luck during her travels. Her natural luck would also explain how she managed to capture the only bit of information she needed at the beginning of the film to find Proctor's well trained and secret source.
Law and Lively had some good moments in her training montage. There was some humour and friendship, of a sort, but the combative nature of both characters outside of that felt strained and neither appeared comfortable in the role. Sterling K. Brown playing Mark Serra seemed to be the most at home in the role, there was a spark there that gave him a confidence in what he was doing.
With a script written by the author of the source material I'm at a bit of a loss, this scenario should mean that it's a proper representation of the book but I'm left with little desire to experience any of the other three stories in this series having seen Rhythm Section.
As I said, there feels like there's something in this idea that would have made a great film, but it feels rushed and a little confused. The film ends in a way that could see a sequel, and that is possible given the other books in the series, but I can't see it progressing beyond one film off the back of this.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-rhythm-section-movie-review.html