Search
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Suicide Squad (2021) in Movies
Aug 10, 2021
Anarchic and very funny script, with some great visual gags (1 more)
Elba, Davis and Robbie all great. As is new name Daniela Melchior.
What a difference a "The" makes! The original "Suicide Squad" from 2016 was a botched and lacklustre affair, getting just 5/10 from me. James Gunn's semi-reboot is hyper-violent, overlong, totally ludicrous but a whole bunch of fun.
Positives:
- "From the horribly beautiful mind of James Gunn" gushes the trailer. But in this case, they ain't kidding. The film is (at times) hugely inventive in its visual gags as well as its dialogue. On the DC/Marvel superhero spectrum, this is right up at the "Ragnarok" end in terms of comedy value. It made me guffaw a good dozen times.
- To match that, the action scenes are suitably ludicrous and over-the-top. They feature the most "out there" big-boss since Mr Stay Puft terrorised New York in the original "Ghostbusters"!
- All the cast seem to be having a blast, which carries you, as the audience, along with the fun. Both Viola Davis and Idris Elba add real gravitas at the middle of it all, but Robbie's reprise of Harley Quinn tends to get all the best lines and the most memorable sequences. Her petal-strewn decimation of a platoon of security guards is something to behold.
- But of the lesser-known names, it's Daniela Melchior who really stood out for me as Cleo Cazo - Ratcatcher 2. This appears to be the first non-Portuguese feature she's done, and a great future beckons I think. Such extraordinary screen presence! Loved her character too: a "millennial" who sleeps in and questions what an OHP is!
- Great music choices, as you would expect from the "Guardians of the Galaxy" guy.
Negatives:
- Like Polka-Dot's mum, the comedy style is all over the place! (You have to have watched the movie to understand that gag!). I guess that's true of any comedy, but a number of the jokes feel contrived and didn't fully land.
- There is just so much gratuitous violence in this one that I am frankly amazed that the BBFC awarded it only a UK "15" certificate (this is my second query in a row to the BBFC - they need to employ me!). I reckon this will prove to have the highest body count of any movie in 2021. It's all done in a comic-book style, but when "Army of the Dead" (review still to follow) gets an "18", I'm not quite sure why this is much different.
Summary Thoughts on "The Suicide Squad": I'd mentally set myself up to really hate this one. But the opposite turned out to be true. As a comedy it made me laugh like a drain at times, and although some of the violence went somewhat over the top for me, I thought it to be a fine summer popcorn blockbuster (but very much for adults).
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).
Positives:
- "From the horribly beautiful mind of James Gunn" gushes the trailer. But in this case, they ain't kidding. The film is (at times) hugely inventive in its visual gags as well as its dialogue. On the DC/Marvel superhero spectrum, this is right up at the "Ragnarok" end in terms of comedy value. It made me guffaw a good dozen times.
- To match that, the action scenes are suitably ludicrous and over-the-top. They feature the most "out there" big-boss since Mr Stay Puft terrorised New York in the original "Ghostbusters"!
- All the cast seem to be having a blast, which carries you, as the audience, along with the fun. Both Viola Davis and Idris Elba add real gravitas at the middle of it all, but Robbie's reprise of Harley Quinn tends to get all the best lines and the most memorable sequences. Her petal-strewn decimation of a platoon of security guards is something to behold.
- But of the lesser-known names, it's Daniela Melchior who really stood out for me as Cleo Cazo - Ratcatcher 2. This appears to be the first non-Portuguese feature she's done, and a great future beckons I think. Such extraordinary screen presence! Loved her character too: a "millennial" who sleeps in and questions what an OHP is!
- Great music choices, as you would expect from the "Guardians of the Galaxy" guy.
Negatives:
- Like Polka-Dot's mum, the comedy style is all over the place! (You have to have watched the movie to understand that gag!). I guess that's true of any comedy, but a number of the jokes feel contrived and didn't fully land.
- There is just so much gratuitous violence in this one that I am frankly amazed that the BBFC awarded it only a UK "15" certificate (this is my second query in a row to the BBFC - they need to employ me!). I reckon this will prove to have the highest body count of any movie in 2021. It's all done in a comic-book style, but when "Army of the Dead" (review still to follow) gets an "18", I'm not quite sure why this is much different.
Summary Thoughts on "The Suicide Squad": I'd mentally set myself up to really hate this one. But the opposite turned out to be true. As a comedy it made me laugh like a drain at times, and although some of the violence went somewhat over the top for me, I thought it to be a fine summer popcorn blockbuster (but very much for adults).
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Ink Exchange (Wicked Lovely, #2) in Books
Feb 11, 2019
The second book in the Wicked Lovely series is decidely darker than the first book, especially as it focuses on the Dark Court. A major plot point is Leslie's struggles to deal with how her brother and father have fallen off the "deep end" and the rape that her brother allowed to happen to her. She believes a tattoo will allow her to reclaim her body as her own and stop being afraid, but the tattoo she chooses has unimaginable consequences as she becomes entangled into the drama of the faery courts that her best friend Aislinn belongs to.
I like the change in main characters, as we get to see this world through other characters' eyes as well as learn about different aspects that Keenan or Aislinn may not be familiar with. I had a difficult time finding a character to really love, as all three of the main characters, Leslie, Irial, and Niall, all seemed to have major faults that I had a hard time getting around. The theme for this book seemed to be the darker side of humanity and how deeply entrenched people can get into the "gray" area of life, while still believing that they are not doing anything wrong. Irial wants to only use Leslie, just as he has for every other mortal, but then he falls for her. Leslie wants to be her own person and hates her brother for his druggie lifestyle, but then becomes an addict just like Ren. Niall has shunned the Dark Court for all it stands for, even denying his own nature, but then wants Leslie so bad that he unknowingly uses what he is and what the Dark Court is about to try and lure her to him. In a word, they all behave like hypocrites, but Marr is such a good writer, that I find myself feeling sorry for all of them at some point. While in many fantasy genre works, the female lead often has to choose between two guys, Marr takes a completely unpredictable approach, and I think that I like this ending the best of all possibilities. Plus, since this is only the second book in a series, there is potential for Leslie to change her mind in the long run as she becomes more comfortable in her own skin.
The way that Marr approaches the horrific trauma that Leslie endured prior to this book's beginning is handled very delicately, as it should be. It is never really described in detail what exactly happens to her, and it is mostly left up to the reader's imagination, which I think is a smart move in that girls who have been in a situation similar to Leslie's can relate to her and feel like they have a voice in her words and thoughts. This alone is what makes this book both poignant and powerful. The fact that both males vying for her affection try to rescue her from this trauma in his own way is what redeems both of them for me.
Politics run heavy in this series, and while I am not really a fan of politics in real life, fantasy books often make it much more interesting, Marr's writing being no exception. The dynamics between the faery courts are quite intriguing and I think they seem to balance one another out well, even though at first glance it might seem like some should be kept over others. I find myself constantly wondering about the High Court and its Queen, Sorcha, which I can look forward to in the third installment in the series, Fragile Eternity (Wicked Lovely).
I like the change in main characters, as we get to see this world through other characters' eyes as well as learn about different aspects that Keenan or Aislinn may not be familiar with. I had a difficult time finding a character to really love, as all three of the main characters, Leslie, Irial, and Niall, all seemed to have major faults that I had a hard time getting around. The theme for this book seemed to be the darker side of humanity and how deeply entrenched people can get into the "gray" area of life, while still believing that they are not doing anything wrong. Irial wants to only use Leslie, just as he has for every other mortal, but then he falls for her. Leslie wants to be her own person and hates her brother for his druggie lifestyle, but then becomes an addict just like Ren. Niall has shunned the Dark Court for all it stands for, even denying his own nature, but then wants Leslie so bad that he unknowingly uses what he is and what the Dark Court is about to try and lure her to him. In a word, they all behave like hypocrites, but Marr is such a good writer, that I find myself feeling sorry for all of them at some point. While in many fantasy genre works, the female lead often has to choose between two guys, Marr takes a completely unpredictable approach, and I think that I like this ending the best of all possibilities. Plus, since this is only the second book in a series, there is potential for Leslie to change her mind in the long run as she becomes more comfortable in her own skin.
The way that Marr approaches the horrific trauma that Leslie endured prior to this book's beginning is handled very delicately, as it should be. It is never really described in detail what exactly happens to her, and it is mostly left up to the reader's imagination, which I think is a smart move in that girls who have been in a situation similar to Leslie's can relate to her and feel like they have a voice in her words and thoughts. This alone is what makes this book both poignant and powerful. The fact that both males vying for her affection try to rescue her from this trauma in his own way is what redeems both of them for me.
Politics run heavy in this series, and while I am not really a fan of politics in real life, fantasy books often make it much more interesting, Marr's writing being no exception. The dynamics between the faery courts are quite intriguing and I think they seem to balance one another out well, even though at first glance it might seem like some should be kept over others. I find myself constantly wondering about the High Court and its Queen, Sorcha, which I can look forward to in the third installment in the series, Fragile Eternity (Wicked Lovely).
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Oct 10, 2019
Joaquin's Performance Elevates This Film
Give Joaquin Phoenix the Oscar right now. His bravura performance as the titular character in JOKER is one for the ages. He is on the screen in every scene of this film and captivates and repulses you at the same time. This performance raises this film to another level.
The question is - what level was this film at, and where does this performance raise it to?
Set in Gotham City right around the time of the murder of Bruce Wayne's parents, JOKER tells the origin story of...well...a character that calls himself JOKER. This sad sack, with the name of Arthur Fleck, is a part-time clown (standing outside of store closings with a spinning sign or going to Children's Hospital). We watch his origins as he rises (or perhaps...falls?) to the anarchic symbol that is JOKER. And that's the interesting thing about this film. You are watching the fall of a man and the rise of a symbol - does Fleck find comfort or madness in this journey - or, perhaps, maybe he finds comfort in madness?
Embodying this broken spirit that keeps getting up despite whatever beatings (sometimes physical, sometimes mental, always with the potential to finally break him) is the unique talent that is Joaquin Phoenix. You can tell from his portrayal of Arthur that there is something just "off" with him and you continually wait for the breaking point that will drive him down the road of JOKER. But it is not only his acting that is on display here, it the manipulation and movements of his body that is amazing and outstanding. Much like a professional dancer, Phoenix/Fleck waltzes through this film like there is a musical score that only he can hear - and that is both fascinating and disturbing at the same time. There is a fine line that needs to be trod here, for if you don't, this character and performance can easily be one of total madness (a.k.a. Jack Nicholson as Jack Torrance in the SHINING) but Phoenix balances sanity/insanity very well and you are waiting for the final blow that will send him, inevitably, over the edge. It's like watching a ticking time bomb that you cannot see the clock counting down to zero - but count down to zero you are sure it will do.
Exchanging blows with Phoenix for about 1/3 of this film is Robert DeNiro as talk show host Murray Franklin (think a meaner version of Johnny Carson). DeNiro is VERY good in this role and it is good to see that he still can "bring it" as a serious actor when he wants to. Unfortunately, DeNiro's character isn't really in the first 2/3 of this film and that's too bad. Phoenix' Arthur Fleck is a force to be reckoned with and he really could have used another character just as strong to play against.
Unfortunately, Writer/Director Todd Phillips (THE HANGOVER films) doesn't really give Phoenix anyone strong to play against for the first 2/3 of this film though Frances Conroy (overbearing mother), Zazie Beetz (potential love interest) and Brett Cullen (billionaire Thomas Wayne, father of Bruce) come and go in all too brief appearances that never really are on screen long enough to stand their ground (though Conroy comes close). This makes the first part of this film very on-sided, dreary, depressing and dark. I get that Director/Writer Phillips was going for the "Decaying of Gotham" theme as seen through the eyes of Fleck, but it became a slog after awhile. I wanted to yell at the screen at about the 1 hour mark "All right, I get it!"
Now...to give Phillips credit, he creates an interesting version of this world that we all know well (through the Dark Knight and various other DC Universe films), so I give him points for originality. And...he really NAILS the ending (the last 1/3 of the film - the part WITH DeNiro). I thought it was effective and potent and left it's mark.
Which brings me back to my opening thought. Phoenix raises this film up with his performance - the question is "from where to where". I'd have to say (because of the slowness of the first 2/3 of this film) that Phoenix fearless performance raises this dark and dreary film from a "C" to a "B". So with that in mind, I give JOKER...
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The question is - what level was this film at, and where does this performance raise it to?
Set in Gotham City right around the time of the murder of Bruce Wayne's parents, JOKER tells the origin story of...well...a character that calls himself JOKER. This sad sack, with the name of Arthur Fleck, is a part-time clown (standing outside of store closings with a spinning sign or going to Children's Hospital). We watch his origins as he rises (or perhaps...falls?) to the anarchic symbol that is JOKER. And that's the interesting thing about this film. You are watching the fall of a man and the rise of a symbol - does Fleck find comfort or madness in this journey - or, perhaps, maybe he finds comfort in madness?
Embodying this broken spirit that keeps getting up despite whatever beatings (sometimes physical, sometimes mental, always with the potential to finally break him) is the unique talent that is Joaquin Phoenix. You can tell from his portrayal of Arthur that there is something just "off" with him and you continually wait for the breaking point that will drive him down the road of JOKER. But it is not only his acting that is on display here, it the manipulation and movements of his body that is amazing and outstanding. Much like a professional dancer, Phoenix/Fleck waltzes through this film like there is a musical score that only he can hear - and that is both fascinating and disturbing at the same time. There is a fine line that needs to be trod here, for if you don't, this character and performance can easily be one of total madness (a.k.a. Jack Nicholson as Jack Torrance in the SHINING) but Phoenix balances sanity/insanity very well and you are waiting for the final blow that will send him, inevitably, over the edge. It's like watching a ticking time bomb that you cannot see the clock counting down to zero - but count down to zero you are sure it will do.
Exchanging blows with Phoenix for about 1/3 of this film is Robert DeNiro as talk show host Murray Franklin (think a meaner version of Johnny Carson). DeNiro is VERY good in this role and it is good to see that he still can "bring it" as a serious actor when he wants to. Unfortunately, DeNiro's character isn't really in the first 2/3 of this film and that's too bad. Phoenix' Arthur Fleck is a force to be reckoned with and he really could have used another character just as strong to play against.
Unfortunately, Writer/Director Todd Phillips (THE HANGOVER films) doesn't really give Phoenix anyone strong to play against for the first 2/3 of this film though Frances Conroy (overbearing mother), Zazie Beetz (potential love interest) and Brett Cullen (billionaire Thomas Wayne, father of Bruce) come and go in all too brief appearances that never really are on screen long enough to stand their ground (though Conroy comes close). This makes the first part of this film very on-sided, dreary, depressing and dark. I get that Director/Writer Phillips was going for the "Decaying of Gotham" theme as seen through the eyes of Fleck, but it became a slog after awhile. I wanted to yell at the screen at about the 1 hour mark "All right, I get it!"
Now...to give Phillips credit, he creates an interesting version of this world that we all know well (through the Dark Knight and various other DC Universe films), so I give him points for originality. And...he really NAILS the ending (the last 1/3 of the film - the part WITH DeNiro). I thought it was effective and potent and left it's mark.
Which brings me back to my opening thought. Phoenix raises this film up with his performance - the question is "from where to where". I'd have to say (because of the slowness of the first 2/3 of this film) that Phoenix fearless performance raises this dark and dreary film from a "C" to a "B". So with that in mind, I give JOKER...
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
It’s about 6 weeks since I finished season 3 of this incredible show from Netflix. I have been putting off writing about it, because I wanted to let it settle. And also because I have a hell of a lot to say about it. I am gonna try and be comprehensive, without giving too much away in terms of spoilers. I am going to assume you have seen some of it, or have heard the hype, at least. If you haven’t got around to it yet, then all I can say is: what are you doing with your entertainment life? Get on it, now! It is as ubiquitous as Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, or The Wire, and sits comfortably in that group for consistent quality and lasting impressions.
Season one first aired in July 2017. I heard good things very quickly, albeit with some hesitation. It was dark, sometimes literally, utilising a trademark washed-out effect visually, that instantly gave it a bleak feel, which was not to everyone’s taste, but I loved. General consensus had it that the writing was great; the situation and concept drew you in from minute one. In fact, I believe the first episode is one of the best pilots seen in the last decade, bar none. It made no bones about what we were to expect from the start: intelligent dialogue, a lot of tension and a hefty chunk of jaw-dropping brutality.
Jason Bateman has enjoyed a remarkable career in the last ten years, putting behind him a patchy child-star and B actor tag, to emerge as the go to guy for deadpan comedy pathos, rivalled only, perhaps by Paul Rudd. Ozark is Bateman’s show in many regards, fulfilling his ambition to produce and direct as well as act, and he is a superb central pivot to the show, as hard nosed accountant turned drug cartel puppet, Marty Byrde. He excels in all three roles on every level, and if you are a fan of his lighter work, chances are you will fall head over heels for his dubious charm in Ozark.
But, whilst he is the lynchpin of the show, and a compelling character in every subtley drawn way, there is so much more to the show than him. Laura Linney, as his initially timid wife, Wendy, is never less than interesting. Perfectly cast, utilising her skill for portraying strong yet flawed women at every turn; she grows into a character so full of contradictions and conflicts, that you change your mind whether you like her or not almost episode to episode. Time will tell, but she may yet emerge in season 4 as the most fully realised character in the show, depending on how her arc ends. The potential is huge, and despite a CV of solid roles over the years, this could be the defining work of her career. It’s already close.
Then there are the kids in this very modern nuclear family, Charlotte and Jonah, played by Sofia Hublitz and Skylar Gaetner. These characters could have been set decoration in lesser hands, but in this show they are given the chance to grow and become pivotal to the ongoing story in remarkable ways. There is nothing stereotypical about either of them, and the two young actors more than rise to the challenge of matching the more experienced pros. Many a show has been ruined by miscast youths that can’t match the more sophisticated adult content, but I remain impressed by these two, both as characters and actors. Again, they have the scope to go into very fascinating places within the story when season four emerges.
The true strength of the show, however, may lie in its consistently solid output of great supporting characters. Julia Gartner, as older than her years redneck with ambitions to rise above it, Ruth, has garnered all the plaudits, quite rightly. You grow to like her in usual ways. At first mistrusting her and then ended up 100% on her side. At times, she is the only one making sense and making the right decisions. The continual ways she is forced to grow up fast and bounce back from traumatic situations is so beautifully handled, that when she does show her vulnerable side it is at once shocking and heart- rending.
A lot of characters come and go; some forever, much quicker than you anticipated… for the sake of non spoilers, I won’t go into a who’s who here, but many meet a very sticky end, and it isn’t always who you think it will be. Especially by season 3, which largely drops the dark filter on the camera lens, but cranks up the body count exponentially, you start to feel that no one is safe, and anyone can go at any minute. Except, when they do, and why they do, is so well interwoven into the plot that you forget to look for the sucker punch and are still left with your jaw hitting the floor.
There were moments on season three where I was actually talking to the screen, begging certain characters not to do what they were doing; a sure sign of complete emotional investment. A big part of that was the addition of Tom Pelphrey as Wendy’s brother, who from the start puts a genius new spin on the family dynamic, becoming intertwined in interesting and ultimately devastating ways. His character takes a while to warm up, but by mid-season he is guaranteed to be your favourite person in it. And in episode 9, he delivers a monologue and a performance that I would quite honestly say is one of the absolute best things I’ve ever seen in a TV show.
I was moderately outraged then, to see he wasn’t rewarded with at least a nomination for the 2020 Emmy Awards. An oversight rather than a snub, for sure, but when Bateman, Linney and Garner all got nominated and he didn’t it felt like a real injustice, and a lot of online vitriol reflected that. Such a shame, especially if it turns out to be the best work he ever does – and I can’t imagine anything better, but who knows where he will go from here.
By the end of season 3 I felt exhausted. Each episode is slightly over an hour long, but can feel like you just watched a self contained movie. The quality certainly feels that way. I was both elated and shocked by the way it was left on a cliff edge, and relieved that I could take a break from it now. Although, waiting potentially up to two years to see how the story ends now seems like a long wait.
And it will be the end, one way or another, as the production announced season four will be the last, however stretching from 10 to 14 episodes, divided into 2 halves of 7; a trick Breaking Bad also did in its fifth and final season. I love that idea. Knowing the finish line is coming, rather than having it stretch out for years until the ideas and the momentum have long run out. Dexter springs to mind: a show that should have ended two seasons earlier, for sure.
I can really only see two ways it can go from here: either everyone dies, and that seems quite likely right now, or they win big. There simply is no inbetween I can imagine that would be satisfying. And I’m on the fence which I will prefer… The only certainty is that I will be very excited indeed when it comes around. And shows that make you feel that way are rare. In the meantime, I’m gonna watch a lot of comedies. I need a laugh after this…
Season one first aired in July 2017. I heard good things very quickly, albeit with some hesitation. It was dark, sometimes literally, utilising a trademark washed-out effect visually, that instantly gave it a bleak feel, which was not to everyone’s taste, but I loved. General consensus had it that the writing was great; the situation and concept drew you in from minute one. In fact, I believe the first episode is one of the best pilots seen in the last decade, bar none. It made no bones about what we were to expect from the start: intelligent dialogue, a lot of tension and a hefty chunk of jaw-dropping brutality.
Jason Bateman has enjoyed a remarkable career in the last ten years, putting behind him a patchy child-star and B actor tag, to emerge as the go to guy for deadpan comedy pathos, rivalled only, perhaps by Paul Rudd. Ozark is Bateman’s show in many regards, fulfilling his ambition to produce and direct as well as act, and he is a superb central pivot to the show, as hard nosed accountant turned drug cartel puppet, Marty Byrde. He excels in all three roles on every level, and if you are a fan of his lighter work, chances are you will fall head over heels for his dubious charm in Ozark.
But, whilst he is the lynchpin of the show, and a compelling character in every subtley drawn way, there is so much more to the show than him. Laura Linney, as his initially timid wife, Wendy, is never less than interesting. Perfectly cast, utilising her skill for portraying strong yet flawed women at every turn; she grows into a character so full of contradictions and conflicts, that you change your mind whether you like her or not almost episode to episode. Time will tell, but she may yet emerge in season 4 as the most fully realised character in the show, depending on how her arc ends. The potential is huge, and despite a CV of solid roles over the years, this could be the defining work of her career. It’s already close.
Then there are the kids in this very modern nuclear family, Charlotte and Jonah, played by Sofia Hublitz and Skylar Gaetner. These characters could have been set decoration in lesser hands, but in this show they are given the chance to grow and become pivotal to the ongoing story in remarkable ways. There is nothing stereotypical about either of them, and the two young actors more than rise to the challenge of matching the more experienced pros. Many a show has been ruined by miscast youths that can’t match the more sophisticated adult content, but I remain impressed by these two, both as characters and actors. Again, they have the scope to go into very fascinating places within the story when season four emerges.
The true strength of the show, however, may lie in its consistently solid output of great supporting characters. Julia Gartner, as older than her years redneck with ambitions to rise above it, Ruth, has garnered all the plaudits, quite rightly. You grow to like her in usual ways. At first mistrusting her and then ended up 100% on her side. At times, she is the only one making sense and making the right decisions. The continual ways she is forced to grow up fast and bounce back from traumatic situations is so beautifully handled, that when she does show her vulnerable side it is at once shocking and heart- rending.
A lot of characters come and go; some forever, much quicker than you anticipated… for the sake of non spoilers, I won’t go into a who’s who here, but many meet a very sticky end, and it isn’t always who you think it will be. Especially by season 3, which largely drops the dark filter on the camera lens, but cranks up the body count exponentially, you start to feel that no one is safe, and anyone can go at any minute. Except, when they do, and why they do, is so well interwoven into the plot that you forget to look for the sucker punch and are still left with your jaw hitting the floor.
There were moments on season three where I was actually talking to the screen, begging certain characters not to do what they were doing; a sure sign of complete emotional investment. A big part of that was the addition of Tom Pelphrey as Wendy’s brother, who from the start puts a genius new spin on the family dynamic, becoming intertwined in interesting and ultimately devastating ways. His character takes a while to warm up, but by mid-season he is guaranteed to be your favourite person in it. And in episode 9, he delivers a monologue and a performance that I would quite honestly say is one of the absolute best things I’ve ever seen in a TV show.
I was moderately outraged then, to see he wasn’t rewarded with at least a nomination for the 2020 Emmy Awards. An oversight rather than a snub, for sure, but when Bateman, Linney and Garner all got nominated and he didn’t it felt like a real injustice, and a lot of online vitriol reflected that. Such a shame, especially if it turns out to be the best work he ever does – and I can’t imagine anything better, but who knows where he will go from here.
By the end of season 3 I felt exhausted. Each episode is slightly over an hour long, but can feel like you just watched a self contained movie. The quality certainly feels that way. I was both elated and shocked by the way it was left on a cliff edge, and relieved that I could take a break from it now. Although, waiting potentially up to two years to see how the story ends now seems like a long wait.
And it will be the end, one way or another, as the production announced season four will be the last, however stretching from 10 to 14 episodes, divided into 2 halves of 7; a trick Breaking Bad also did in its fifth and final season. I love that idea. Knowing the finish line is coming, rather than having it stretch out for years until the ideas and the momentum have long run out. Dexter springs to mind: a show that should have ended two seasons earlier, for sure.
I can really only see two ways it can go from here: either everyone dies, and that seems quite likely right now, or they win big. There simply is no inbetween I can imagine that would be satisfying. And I’m on the fence which I will prefer… The only certainty is that I will be very excited indeed when it comes around. And shows that make you feel that way are rare. In the meantime, I’m gonna watch a lot of comedies. I need a laugh after this…
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated McLintock! (1963) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Solid Visuals but Nothing Else
A cattle baron’s wife returns after a two-year separation wanting a divorce.
Acting: 10
It’s a tough task to ask someone not to like John Wayne and the things he brings to the big screen. He has a distinct way of capturing your attention and holding it with his no-nonsense demeanor and sheer bad-assery. I enjoyed the other performances as well, but, for me, it always goes back to Wayne and your sheer desire as a viewer to see what he’s going to do or say next.
Beginning: 2
Not a strong start in the least. Even past the first ten minutes, I spent a considerable amount of time trying to figure out just what the hell the plot was. A beginning that is mired in confusion is not a very good beginning at all.
Characters: 7
I’ll admit, George Washington McLintock is probably someone I would like to have a glass of whiskey with. He’s charming and doesn’t take any guff from anyone. Other fun characters included the Native American guy (whose name slips me right now) and Drago. If it weren’t for McLintock’s wife who was just a horrible character to deal with the entire movie, this category would have scored higher.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Conflict: 6
It’s hard to really appreciate conflict when you don’t know fully what the story is about. Throughout the movie, I was never really grabbed as there wasn’t enough action to keep me fully entertained. It’s like watching two dudes square up a bar, but all they do is push each other the whole time. I wanted more and damned if McLintock! wanted to give it to me.
Genre: 6
Memorability: 6
One of the reasons I will review a movie well after having seen it is to gauge how memorable it is. How many scenes stick out in my head days, weeks, sometimes months later? The answer as it relates to McLintock!: Not a whole damn lot. I remember one scene where they were fighting in a mud slide. I also remember a spanking. Outside of that…nothing. Mind you, I just watched this movie two months ago.
Pace: 7
Once the movie picks up, it holds on pretty consistently. Outside of a couple small lulls, it managed to hold my attention and keep me entertained enough to want to see what would happen next. I love movies and pacing is extremely important to me. It’s too bad the pacing here wasn’t enough to alter the overall strength of the movie.
Plot: 7
Yes, I finally figured out what the story was about. Once I had a better sense, it made the overall movie a bit more enjoyable. Pretty straightforward, we are looking at something that was good, not great.
Resolution: 2
Overall: 62
So why did I dislike this movie so much? Outside of a terrible beginning and ending, I think a lot of it has to do with Mrs. McLintock’s character. She was just a ghastly person, plain and simple, with not a redeeming characteristic in her body. And I don’t think she was even meant to be a villain, yet that’s how she came across. Probably won’t be watching McLintock! again anytime soon.
Acting: 10
It’s a tough task to ask someone not to like John Wayne and the things he brings to the big screen. He has a distinct way of capturing your attention and holding it with his no-nonsense demeanor and sheer bad-assery. I enjoyed the other performances as well, but, for me, it always goes back to Wayne and your sheer desire as a viewer to see what he’s going to do or say next.
Beginning: 2
Not a strong start in the least. Even past the first ten minutes, I spent a considerable amount of time trying to figure out just what the hell the plot was. A beginning that is mired in confusion is not a very good beginning at all.
Characters: 7
I’ll admit, George Washington McLintock is probably someone I would like to have a glass of whiskey with. He’s charming and doesn’t take any guff from anyone. Other fun characters included the Native American guy (whose name slips me right now) and Drago. If it weren’t for McLintock’s wife who was just a horrible character to deal with the entire movie, this category would have scored higher.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Conflict: 6
It’s hard to really appreciate conflict when you don’t know fully what the story is about. Throughout the movie, I was never really grabbed as there wasn’t enough action to keep me fully entertained. It’s like watching two dudes square up a bar, but all they do is push each other the whole time. I wanted more and damned if McLintock! wanted to give it to me.
Genre: 6
Memorability: 6
One of the reasons I will review a movie well after having seen it is to gauge how memorable it is. How many scenes stick out in my head days, weeks, sometimes months later? The answer as it relates to McLintock!: Not a whole damn lot. I remember one scene where they were fighting in a mud slide. I also remember a spanking. Outside of that…nothing. Mind you, I just watched this movie two months ago.
Pace: 7
Once the movie picks up, it holds on pretty consistently. Outside of a couple small lulls, it managed to hold my attention and keep me entertained enough to want to see what would happen next. I love movies and pacing is extremely important to me. It’s too bad the pacing here wasn’t enough to alter the overall strength of the movie.
Plot: 7
Yes, I finally figured out what the story was about. Once I had a better sense, it made the overall movie a bit more enjoyable. Pretty straightforward, we are looking at something that was good, not great.
Resolution: 2
Overall: 62
So why did I dislike this movie so much? Outside of a terrible beginning and ending, I think a lot of it has to do with Mrs. McLintock’s character. She was just a ghastly person, plain and simple, with not a redeeming characteristic in her body. And I don’t think she was even meant to be a villain, yet that’s how she came across. Probably won’t be watching McLintock! again anytime soon.
MichaelS (0 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Feb 20, 2018
"Meanwhile, at the Hall Of Justice..."
This movie is the culmination of a childhood full of Saturday mornings in front of the tv in pajamas with a bowl of cereal. "Superfriends" was superheroes at it's most basic. The bad guys wanted to take over or destroy the world and the good guys have to stop them. That was the depth of the plots for both those classic cartoons, and this movie. It's pure cartoon fun brought to life, and I loved every minute of it.
The plot only serves as a reason for these heroes to come together. So you can say that story is not a top priority. Character is the name of the game here, and on that level, the movie is gold. Each character is fully realized, with their own individual situation they need to grow from. Every hero is given his or her moment to shine as an individual. When they stand as a team, it's some of the best superhero action we've ever gotten.
The performances of the League members is spot on across the board. Every character is presented exactly the way they should be. Ben Affleck continues to prove all the doubters wrong, by giving us the best live action version of Batman we've ever seen. Right from the start you see how he demands fear from evildoers, but filled with hope for the good things in the world. Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman. If there was any doubt left after her solo movie, it should be thoroughly erased now. She's strong in body, mind, and spirit. Jason Mamoa forever erases the idea of Aquaman being the wimpiest superhero. His "surfer dude" take on the character brings all the recklessness and abandon you'd expect from a beach bum. He's almost like a Spartan soldier that lives for the excitement of battle. Ezra Miller brings a youthful excitement of someone who is simply jazzed by what he, and others, can do with their abilities. He's almost the comic relief until you realize that the excited reactions he gives to everything is exactly what we would to if we were dropped in that situation.
SPOILER TERRITORY....skip to "END SPOILERS" if you don't want anything ruined
Although it should really come as no surprise to anyone, Superman does indeed return from the dead in this movie. Not only is that he's resurrected very cool, but the aftermath gives us the best fight scene of the film. Superman vs The Justice League. 'nuff said? I've always loved Henry Cavill as Superman, but now he owns the role. He has grown from a man filled with self doubt, trying to find his place in the world, to a man who now fully realizes who he is, and what purpose he serves to mankind. Lots of great Superman stuff in this movie, and that is the thing I'm most thankful for.
END SPOILERS
This is the most fun I've had with a superhero movie in a long time. It may not have the deepest plot, but that is fine with me, because this is truly a comic book come to life. It's full of the action and joyful spirit that the boy in me tuned into every weekend. Now, if the post credit scene in the movie delivers, it REALLY will be everything that the classic Challenges Of The Superfriends, and reduce me to that boy in pajamas again, cereal in hand, and a smile on my face.
The plot only serves as a reason for these heroes to come together. So you can say that story is not a top priority. Character is the name of the game here, and on that level, the movie is gold. Each character is fully realized, with their own individual situation they need to grow from. Every hero is given his or her moment to shine as an individual. When they stand as a team, it's some of the best superhero action we've ever gotten.
The performances of the League members is spot on across the board. Every character is presented exactly the way they should be. Ben Affleck continues to prove all the doubters wrong, by giving us the best live action version of Batman we've ever seen. Right from the start you see how he demands fear from evildoers, but filled with hope for the good things in the world. Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman. If there was any doubt left after her solo movie, it should be thoroughly erased now. She's strong in body, mind, and spirit. Jason Mamoa forever erases the idea of Aquaman being the wimpiest superhero. His "surfer dude" take on the character brings all the recklessness and abandon you'd expect from a beach bum. He's almost like a Spartan soldier that lives for the excitement of battle. Ezra Miller brings a youthful excitement of someone who is simply jazzed by what he, and others, can do with their abilities. He's almost the comic relief until you realize that the excited reactions he gives to everything is exactly what we would to if we were dropped in that situation.
SPOILER TERRITORY....skip to "END SPOILERS" if you don't want anything ruined
Although it should really come as no surprise to anyone, Superman does indeed return from the dead in this movie. Not only is that he's resurrected very cool, but the aftermath gives us the best fight scene of the film. Superman vs The Justice League. 'nuff said? I've always loved Henry Cavill as Superman, but now he owns the role. He has grown from a man filled with self doubt, trying to find his place in the world, to a man who now fully realizes who he is, and what purpose he serves to mankind. Lots of great Superman stuff in this movie, and that is the thing I'm most thankful for.
END SPOILERS
This is the most fun I've had with a superhero movie in a long time. It may not have the deepest plot, but that is fine with me, because this is truly a comic book come to life. It's full of the action and joyful spirit that the boy in me tuned into every weekend. Now, if the post credit scene in the movie delivers, it REALLY will be everything that the classic Challenges Of The Superfriends, and reduce me to that boy in pajamas again, cereal in hand, and a smile on my face.
Best Weight Loss Hypnosis Therapy by Seth Deborah Roth, Lose Fat, Think Thin & Better Health, through Hypnotherapy and Meditation.
Medical and Lifestyle
6.0
Rate It
App
One app, 15 Weight Loss Sessions! Featured on the Discovery Channel, Created By A Fellow with the...
Hadley (567 KP) rated Ghostly Tales: Spine-Chilling Stories of the Victorian Age in Books
Jan 20, 2021
Ghost stories (1 more)
Well-written
This collection of tales will transport you to a time when staircases creaked in old manor houses, and a candle could be blown out by a gust of wind, or by a passing ghost. Penned by some of the greatest Victorian novelists and masters of the ghost story genre, these stories come alive alongside exquisitely eerie art in this special illustrated edition.
Since this is a short story collection, I will list the stories with a short synopsis and what I liked and disliked about them.
"Oh, Whistle, and I'll Come to You, My Lad" by M.R. James
A professor decides to go on vacation to work on his golf game while doing a little side work in the town's archaeology, but when he digs up an old whistle and blows into it, he instantly regrets what the whistle brings.
Liked: the buildup to the climax was done masterfully, and the superstition that was used as the premise of the story
Disliked: that the ending is never explained
"The Old Nurse's Story" by Elizabeth Gaskell
When a governess and her ward are taken to a haunted house, they found out that everyone has to pay for their misdeeds.
Liked: the perfect example of what Victorian ghost stories were
Disliked: Nothing; I really enjoyed this one
"The Signalman" by Charles Dickens
A railroad signalman tells a co-worker that he is seeing a ghost that warns him of future accidents, but his co-worker can't tell if he's telling the truth or losing his mind.
Liked: an excellent ghost story; I wish it were an entire novel
Disliked: nothing
"The Body-Snatcher" by Robert Louis Stevenson
When a medical student realizes that the 'donated' bodies are murder victims, he's not so sure he can live with the consequences.
Liked: the ending wasn't predictable
Disliked: at the start, there's a little confusion among who is who
" The Captain of the Pole-Star" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
A group of whalers are stuck in the middle of the ocean because of ice burgs, but the ice is the least of their problems when they begin to hear and see supernatural things out on the ice.
Liked: the plot of the story was really good
Disliked: the run-on sentences, some of the accents were hard to decipher, and the ending wasn't explained
"The Phantom Coach" by Amelia B. Edwards
A young man loses his way while on a hunt, but soon finds help with an old man that is convinced the supernatural is real, and when he senses the young man does not, he puts him up against forces from the other side.
Liked: the story never lulled, and the descriptions of the undead were amazing
Disliked: nothing, I thought the story was really good
"The Screaming Skull" by F. Marion Crawford
When the friend of a family finds a skull in the latter's home, he begins to question whether or not the husband murdered his wife.
Liked: I love that this story is actually based off an urban legend
Disliked: the way the author kept breaking away from the story to talk to the audience; it caused the flow of the story to stop
Overall, the Victorian-era authors knew how to write a ghost story. I absolutely loved this collection of short stories. I highly recommend this book to people who love a good 'ol fashioned ghost story (not the gory ones we have today).
Since this is a short story collection, I will list the stories with a short synopsis and what I liked and disliked about them.
"Oh, Whistle, and I'll Come to You, My Lad" by M.R. James
A professor decides to go on vacation to work on his golf game while doing a little side work in the town's archaeology, but when he digs up an old whistle and blows into it, he instantly regrets what the whistle brings.
Liked: the buildup to the climax was done masterfully, and the superstition that was used as the premise of the story
Disliked: that the ending is never explained
"The Old Nurse's Story" by Elizabeth Gaskell
When a governess and her ward are taken to a haunted house, they found out that everyone has to pay for their misdeeds.
Liked: the perfect example of what Victorian ghost stories were
Disliked: Nothing; I really enjoyed this one
"The Signalman" by Charles Dickens
A railroad signalman tells a co-worker that he is seeing a ghost that warns him of future accidents, but his co-worker can't tell if he's telling the truth or losing his mind.
Liked: an excellent ghost story; I wish it were an entire novel
Disliked: nothing
"The Body-Snatcher" by Robert Louis Stevenson
When a medical student realizes that the 'donated' bodies are murder victims, he's not so sure he can live with the consequences.
Liked: the ending wasn't predictable
Disliked: at the start, there's a little confusion among who is who
" The Captain of the Pole-Star" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
A group of whalers are stuck in the middle of the ocean because of ice burgs, but the ice is the least of their problems when they begin to hear and see supernatural things out on the ice.
Liked: the plot of the story was really good
Disliked: the run-on sentences, some of the accents were hard to decipher, and the ending wasn't explained
"The Phantom Coach" by Amelia B. Edwards
A young man loses his way while on a hunt, but soon finds help with an old man that is convinced the supernatural is real, and when he senses the young man does not, he puts him up against forces from the other side.
Liked: the story never lulled, and the descriptions of the undead were amazing
Disliked: nothing, I thought the story was really good
"The Screaming Skull" by F. Marion Crawford
When the friend of a family finds a skull in the latter's home, he begins to question whether or not the husband murdered his wife.
Liked: I love that this story is actually based off an urban legend
Disliked: the way the author kept breaking away from the story to talk to the audience; it caused the flow of the story to stop
Overall, the Victorian-era authors knew how to write a ghost story. I absolutely loved this collection of short stories. I highly recommend this book to people who love a good 'ol fashioned ghost story (not the gory ones we have today).
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Pudge & Prejudice in Books
Jan 31, 2021
I'm not big on romance novels, but when I saw the cover and synopsis of Pudge & Prejudice by A.K. Pittman, I knew that this was one book I had to read. It just seemed so relatable. I'm so happy that I did get a chance to read this book because I have become totally smitten with it!
I thought the plot for Pudge & Prejudice was very well written. It's 1984, and fifteen year old Elyse (nicknamed "Pudge" by her older sister) and her family have just moved to Texas. It's a bit of a culture shock at first, but Elyse learns the ropes quickly. While her beautiful, older sister Jayne has no trouble fitting in at high school, Elyse's body issues complicate things especially when it comes to guys like Billy Fritz. Will Elyse ever be able to get over her looks or will the way she thinks of herself be her downfall?
The plot for Pudge & Prejudice is such a cute one, and it's one I can semi-relate too. (I never had a crush on any of the football players at my school, but I was a chubby teen like Elyse.) Pittman does an excellent job of making the small Texas town that Elyse lives in come to life. I could picture every sight, taste, and smell throughout the book. I just had to open my book, and I was instantly transported. The pacing for Pudge & Prejudice was spot on. I found myself not wanting to put this book down. It held my interest from the very first page. I loved the 1980's references, and I was glad that they weren't overdone like some other books. One thing that I did enjoy about Pudge & Prejudice is that the romance isn't all in your face. It's hard for me to describe, but although there was some romance, it wasn't what the whole book was about. I didn't spot any plot twists, but Pudge & Prejudice is such a fantastic book that it didn't need any plot twists. There was a minor cliffhanger at the end of the book which mentions the summer after Elyse's sophomore year. I'm hoping this will turn into a series because I would love to see what happened to Elyse and her sister Jayne that summer. (I was so sad when the book ended.) I will say that I did find some of the book a bit unrealistic as to who crushes on Elyse. I have never known something like that to happen. Maybe it happens to a small minority, but I never knew it to happen at any school I had ever known. However, this was such a sweet and fun read that I didn't mind. I liked seeing how the story would progress.
Kudos to A.K. Pittman for writing such fantastic well fleshed out characters! I think I knew someone like each character mentioned when I was in school. I could picture each character in Pudge & Prejudice as if they were someone I knew in real life. Elyse was the most relatable character for me. I was her in high school (minus the crush on a football player). I sympathized with her more than any other character I've ever came across in a book. Pittman's portrayal of an overweight teen struggling with self esteem issues was perfect. I loved how sweet Jayne, Elyse's older sister, was. I loved the relationship between between Jayne and Elyse. The way they looked out for each other was really sweet. Charlie was also a really nice guy, and it was interesting to read about his and Jayne's relationship especially when the problem of sports came up. Billy was an interesting character. He's the only one that I couldn't imagine knowing in real life. Perhaps they are unicorns at exist somewhere, but I had never known anyone like Billy when I was a teen (and even now). However, Billy was a complex and great character. I did enjoy reading about him. Lottie was well fleshed out, but she seemed a bit too snobby for my liking. She was way too blunt and what she said about her boyfriend really irked me. She treated her boyfriend horribly. If I was Elyse, I wouldn't have been friends with her for very long, but I understand how hard it was for Elyse to make friends. Unfortunately, I did know people like Lottie in my school. Lydia (Elyse's younger sister) was fun to read about as was Gage although I never really trusted Gage for some reason.
Trigger warnings for Pudge & Prejudice include minor kissing, a mention of sex, a mention of punching someone, cheating, and body issues.
All in all, Pudge & Prejudice is such a cute and fun read. It's got such a relatable plot and a cast full of characters that everyone can relate to. This is one book that I could definitely picture as a successful Netflix series. (I know I'd binge watch for sure!) I would definitely recommend Pudge & Prejudice by A.K. Pittman to everyone aged 13+ that are after a sweet and fun read. This is one book that will leave you smiling long after you've read it.
--
(A special thank you to Lone Star Literary Life for providing me with a paperback copy of Pudge & Prejudice by A.K. Pittman in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
I thought the plot for Pudge & Prejudice was very well written. It's 1984, and fifteen year old Elyse (nicknamed "Pudge" by her older sister) and her family have just moved to Texas. It's a bit of a culture shock at first, but Elyse learns the ropes quickly. While her beautiful, older sister Jayne has no trouble fitting in at high school, Elyse's body issues complicate things especially when it comes to guys like Billy Fritz. Will Elyse ever be able to get over her looks or will the way she thinks of herself be her downfall?
The plot for Pudge & Prejudice is such a cute one, and it's one I can semi-relate too. (I never had a crush on any of the football players at my school, but I was a chubby teen like Elyse.) Pittman does an excellent job of making the small Texas town that Elyse lives in come to life. I could picture every sight, taste, and smell throughout the book. I just had to open my book, and I was instantly transported. The pacing for Pudge & Prejudice was spot on. I found myself not wanting to put this book down. It held my interest from the very first page. I loved the 1980's references, and I was glad that they weren't overdone like some other books. One thing that I did enjoy about Pudge & Prejudice is that the romance isn't all in your face. It's hard for me to describe, but although there was some romance, it wasn't what the whole book was about. I didn't spot any plot twists, but Pudge & Prejudice is such a fantastic book that it didn't need any plot twists. There was a minor cliffhanger at the end of the book which mentions the summer after Elyse's sophomore year. I'm hoping this will turn into a series because I would love to see what happened to Elyse and her sister Jayne that summer. (I was so sad when the book ended.) I will say that I did find some of the book a bit unrealistic as to who crushes on Elyse. I have never known something like that to happen. Maybe it happens to a small minority, but I never knew it to happen at any school I had ever known. However, this was such a sweet and fun read that I didn't mind. I liked seeing how the story would progress.
Kudos to A.K. Pittman for writing such fantastic well fleshed out characters! I think I knew someone like each character mentioned when I was in school. I could picture each character in Pudge & Prejudice as if they were someone I knew in real life. Elyse was the most relatable character for me. I was her in high school (minus the crush on a football player). I sympathized with her more than any other character I've ever came across in a book. Pittman's portrayal of an overweight teen struggling with self esteem issues was perfect. I loved how sweet Jayne, Elyse's older sister, was. I loved the relationship between between Jayne and Elyse. The way they looked out for each other was really sweet. Charlie was also a really nice guy, and it was interesting to read about his and Jayne's relationship especially when the problem of sports came up. Billy was an interesting character. He's the only one that I couldn't imagine knowing in real life. Perhaps they are unicorns at exist somewhere, but I had never known anyone like Billy when I was a teen (and even now). However, Billy was a complex and great character. I did enjoy reading about him. Lottie was well fleshed out, but she seemed a bit too snobby for my liking. She was way too blunt and what she said about her boyfriend really irked me. She treated her boyfriend horribly. If I was Elyse, I wouldn't have been friends with her for very long, but I understand how hard it was for Elyse to make friends. Unfortunately, I did know people like Lottie in my school. Lydia (Elyse's younger sister) was fun to read about as was Gage although I never really trusted Gage for some reason.
Trigger warnings for Pudge & Prejudice include minor kissing, a mention of sex, a mention of punching someone, cheating, and body issues.
All in all, Pudge & Prejudice is such a cute and fun read. It's got such a relatable plot and a cast full of characters that everyone can relate to. This is one book that I could definitely picture as a successful Netflix series. (I know I'd binge watch for sure!) I would definitely recommend Pudge & Prejudice by A.K. Pittman to everyone aged 13+ that are after a sweet and fun read. This is one book that will leave you smiling long after you've read it.
--
(A special thank you to Lone Star Literary Life for providing me with a paperback copy of Pudge & Prejudice by A.K. Pittman in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Jinx: The Life and Deaths of Robert Durst in TV
Jun 27, 2018 (Updated Jun 27, 2018)
Mindblowing
Contains spoilers, click to show
I have been on a bit of a documentary kick lately and my most recent watch was the Jinx. I never watched this show back when it aired in 2015, or followed the story at the time, so I went into this show knowing very little about the tale it was telling. I'd say if you are in the same boat, then that is probably the best way to go into this doc. There are only six parts to the doc, so it can be binged over a few nights or in one day. Don't look up anything about it before watching and just go in blind, by the end your mind will be blown.
Please don't read on until you have seen the show in it's entirety as there are massive SPOILERS ahead. It feels weird to say that about a documentary, something that actually happened, but I promise you will not want this final revelation spoiled for you in any way.
Ok, so during the last interview, Andrew Jarecki confronts Robert Durst with two letters with the same address handwritten on each, one written by Durst years previous and the other was written by the killer and sent into a police station to notify them of the location of a body. Beverly Hills is spelt wrong in each, it is spelt BEVERLEY on each and the handwriting is exceptionally similar, especially the letter N. Durst initially appears pretty unphased by the accusation and brushes it off, until Jarecki asks him to look at a sheet that has the two versions of the address blown up and placed side by side and he asks him to tell him what one he wrote and what one he didn't and Durst is unable to tell the difference. He then begins burping uncontrollably as if trying to supress vomiting. The interview ends and Jarecki thanks Durst for his time. Durst then goes to the bathroom, unaware that he is still wearing a live microphone and says:
"There it is, you're caught.
You're right of course, but you can't imagine...
Arrest him.
I don't know what's in the house.
Oh, I want this.
What a disaster.
He was right, I was wrong.
And the burping?
I'm having difficulty understanding the question.
What the hell did I do?
Killed them all, of course."
Holy shit, these filmmakers just stumbled into getting an accidental confession from a guy who has dodged the law since 1982. Not only that, but what was recorded actually sounds like two different people having a conversation, almost like Gollum and Sméagol from Lord Of The Rings. The recording is creepy, but extremely important and provides an absolutely captivating ending to this already brilliant story. I think that what we hear in the bathroom is two sides of Durst arguing about what has just transpired. The way that each line is like a comment and then a response and the way that his tone of voice changes from line to line. I will type up my interpretation of the conversation below showing what side of Durst said what.
Good Bob: There it is, you're caught.
Bad Bob: You're right of course, but you can't imagine...
Good Bob: Arrest him.
Bad Bob: I don't know what's in the house.
Good Bob: Oh, I want this.
Bad Bob: What a disaster.
Good Bob:He was right, I was wrong.
Bad Bob: And the burping?
Good Bob: I'm having difficulty understanding the question.
What the hell did I do?
Bad Bob: Killed them all, of course.
This is obviously pure conjecture, but it's how I see the conversation going in Durst's head. Whether this is proof of disassociation or multiple personality disorder, I don't know as I'm not a psychiatrist, all that I know is that it is absolutely fascinating to hear this play out in a real world situation and makes for an absolutely brilliant piece of TV.
Please don't read on until you have seen the show in it's entirety as there are massive SPOILERS ahead. It feels weird to say that about a documentary, something that actually happened, but I promise you will not want this final revelation spoiled for you in any way.
Ok, so during the last interview, Andrew Jarecki confronts Robert Durst with two letters with the same address handwritten on each, one written by Durst years previous and the other was written by the killer and sent into a police station to notify them of the location of a body. Beverly Hills is spelt wrong in each, it is spelt BEVERLEY on each and the handwriting is exceptionally similar, especially the letter N. Durst initially appears pretty unphased by the accusation and brushes it off, until Jarecki asks him to look at a sheet that has the two versions of the address blown up and placed side by side and he asks him to tell him what one he wrote and what one he didn't and Durst is unable to tell the difference. He then begins burping uncontrollably as if trying to supress vomiting. The interview ends and Jarecki thanks Durst for his time. Durst then goes to the bathroom, unaware that he is still wearing a live microphone and says:
"There it is, you're caught.
You're right of course, but you can't imagine...
Arrest him.
I don't know what's in the house.
Oh, I want this.
What a disaster.
He was right, I was wrong.
And the burping?
I'm having difficulty understanding the question.
What the hell did I do?
Killed them all, of course."
Holy shit, these filmmakers just stumbled into getting an accidental confession from a guy who has dodged the law since 1982. Not only that, but what was recorded actually sounds like two different people having a conversation, almost like Gollum and Sméagol from Lord Of The Rings. The recording is creepy, but extremely important and provides an absolutely captivating ending to this already brilliant story. I think that what we hear in the bathroom is two sides of Durst arguing about what has just transpired. The way that each line is like a comment and then a response and the way that his tone of voice changes from line to line. I will type up my interpretation of the conversation below showing what side of Durst said what.
Good Bob: There it is, you're caught.
Bad Bob: You're right of course, but you can't imagine...
Good Bob: Arrest him.
Bad Bob: I don't know what's in the house.
Good Bob: Oh, I want this.
Bad Bob: What a disaster.
Good Bob:He was right, I was wrong.
Bad Bob: And the burping?
Good Bob: I'm having difficulty understanding the question.
What the hell did I do?
Bad Bob: Killed them all, of course.
This is obviously pure conjecture, but it's how I see the conversation going in Durst's head. Whether this is proof of disassociation or multiple personality disorder, I don't know as I'm not a psychiatrist, all that I know is that it is absolutely fascinating to hear this play out in a real world situation and makes for an absolutely brilliant piece of TV.