Search
Search results
Justin Patchett (42 KP) rated Roma (2018) in Movies
Mar 3, 2019
Caught in a bad Roma
Contains spoilers, click to show
It’s been a long while since I watched a film deserving of a truly, harshly negative review. I have gotten so close so many times, and I’ll be damned if Netflix hadn’t gotten close to earning that with the fridge-logic that ruined Bird Box. Even Bird Box, though, feels enjoyable in retrospect compared to another Netflix exclusive: Alfonso Cuarón’s Roma.
Since I’m in a clear minority on this film, I feel obligated to preemptively address some common criticisms. If Roma had been produced in English, presented in color and with any score, it couldn’t fix the fact that I simply dislike Roma’s genre. Sure, I’ve liked slice-of-life drama films, and modern period pieces do fine by me. Pretentious Oscar-farming arthouse flicks like this, though, never win my praise.
Roma follows Cleo, a housemaid in Mexico City. Cleo has gotten pregnant and the presumed father, Fermín, leaves her to buy cigarettes before the baby’s even born. Her employer, Sofía, is dealing with a cheating spouse. What follows is two hours of both of these women marginally helping each other with their respective situations. As slice-of-life films do.
Since it's a slice-of-life film, much of the story just basically happens. You'll remember a scene here or there that happened, even if it was ultimately insignificant. In one scene for instance, Cleo goes to confront the baby daddy, who’s at a huge martial arts class. She spectates and proves to be the only one able to perform a certain yoga pose. Which is important because it helped add another few minutes to the film.
Cleo goes into labor not long after this confrontation, but her daughter ends up being stillborn. This all happens in the midst of the Corpus Christi Massacre. What the heck was the Corpus Christi Massacre, you may ask? According to this film, it was a brutal inconvenience on Cleo’s way to the hospital after her water breaks. This actual historical event simply happens and is never addressed for one second more. You know, just like in Titanic where the shipwreck just makes things inconvenient for Rose and Jack.
The last major scene in the film comes when Sofía invites Cleo to come with her family on a trip to the beach, not as staff but to help Cleo cope with the tragedy of losing her child. While they’re there, Sofía leaves the children in Cleo’s care for two freaking minutes, and two of the kids nearly drown. Cleo, though, can’t swim, and so she stands out in the water as the kids rescue each other. And that's about as close as Roma gets to a cohesive plot. Cleo only came with them to help her grieving, which meant she could be there to be powerless while her employer’s kids save each other’s lives. Bad things happen to us, the film teaches, so that good things can coincidentally happen in our proximity.
In fact, coincidence seems to be the running theme, here. Remember the Corpus Christi Massacre? No? What if I call it “the scene where Cleo goes into labor”? Maybe that helps? Fermín briefly held Cleo at gunpoint in the middle of it. Again, mere coincidence. Just like it’s a mere coincidence that she goes into labor the same day as a massacre that killed 120 people. As coincidences do.
Roma isn’t an aggressively bad film. There are a rare few moments within Roma’s 2-hour runtime where you think, “I can see that clip showing up during a Facebook video binge,” but again: These are moments more rare than our current president ordering a rare steak. That rarity has everything to do with the fact that the movie has so few moments, at all. The rest is shots that linger too long from angles that repeat themselves all too often. It’s like Cuarón asked someone, “What does a movie like Juno need to be better?” They responded, “Nothing.” So Cuarón packed Roma with nothing.
Which brings up one of my biggest criticisms of Roma: The cinematography is bland. Cuarón shot practically the entire film on one camera, set a specific distance from the subject, and kept takes running as longer than they should have, padding out a short-film’s worth of content to feature length. It’s bland cinematography that somehow earned an Oscar for Best Cinematography.
Gravity showed us what Cuarón was capable of. Beyond bringing a seemingly authentic view of space to the big screen, Gravity offered variety. Yes, the huge collision scene in Gravity takes on the feel of a one-take scene, but even then, the camera moves with the action. And if your attention moves away from the foreground the shot, you’re able to see other important things going on. With Roma, though, your foreground is your film. Period. And to be sure, you'll be kept at arm's length from that foreground at all times, both metaphorically and cinematically.
There's a number of reasons why Roma wasn't the Best Picture, this year. Gravity proved that Roma is not Cuarón’s best film. Bo Burnham–yes, that Bo Burnham–wrote and directed a better slice-of-life film with Eighth Grade. And Roma might not even be the past year’s best black-and-white film; I dare suggest that Cold War may have been better.
To give it the credit it’s due, Roma’s cast rightly earned nominations for their performances. Yalitza Aparicio and Marina de Tavira earned Best Actress nominations for their roles, and for their part, their performances were authentic as can be. It's the least the Academy could do for having them endure Cuarón's lengthy takes.
But now that I've given it credit, I demand my time back for the scene of Fermín going Star Wars Kid meets Full Monty.
Since I’m in a clear minority on this film, I feel obligated to preemptively address some common criticisms. If Roma had been produced in English, presented in color and with any score, it couldn’t fix the fact that I simply dislike Roma’s genre. Sure, I’ve liked slice-of-life drama films, and modern period pieces do fine by me. Pretentious Oscar-farming arthouse flicks like this, though, never win my praise.
Roma follows Cleo, a housemaid in Mexico City. Cleo has gotten pregnant and the presumed father, Fermín, leaves her to buy cigarettes before the baby’s even born. Her employer, Sofía, is dealing with a cheating spouse. What follows is two hours of both of these women marginally helping each other with their respective situations. As slice-of-life films do.
Since it's a slice-of-life film, much of the story just basically happens. You'll remember a scene here or there that happened, even if it was ultimately insignificant. In one scene for instance, Cleo goes to confront the baby daddy, who’s at a huge martial arts class. She spectates and proves to be the only one able to perform a certain yoga pose. Which is important because it helped add another few minutes to the film.
Cleo goes into labor not long after this confrontation, but her daughter ends up being stillborn. This all happens in the midst of the Corpus Christi Massacre. What the heck was the Corpus Christi Massacre, you may ask? According to this film, it was a brutal inconvenience on Cleo’s way to the hospital after her water breaks. This actual historical event simply happens and is never addressed for one second more. You know, just like in Titanic where the shipwreck just makes things inconvenient for Rose and Jack.
The last major scene in the film comes when Sofía invites Cleo to come with her family on a trip to the beach, not as staff but to help Cleo cope with the tragedy of losing her child. While they’re there, Sofía leaves the children in Cleo’s care for two freaking minutes, and two of the kids nearly drown. Cleo, though, can’t swim, and so she stands out in the water as the kids rescue each other. And that's about as close as Roma gets to a cohesive plot. Cleo only came with them to help her grieving, which meant she could be there to be powerless while her employer’s kids save each other’s lives. Bad things happen to us, the film teaches, so that good things can coincidentally happen in our proximity.
In fact, coincidence seems to be the running theme, here. Remember the Corpus Christi Massacre? No? What if I call it “the scene where Cleo goes into labor”? Maybe that helps? Fermín briefly held Cleo at gunpoint in the middle of it. Again, mere coincidence. Just like it’s a mere coincidence that she goes into labor the same day as a massacre that killed 120 people. As coincidences do.
Roma isn’t an aggressively bad film. There are a rare few moments within Roma’s 2-hour runtime where you think, “I can see that clip showing up during a Facebook video binge,” but again: These are moments more rare than our current president ordering a rare steak. That rarity has everything to do with the fact that the movie has so few moments, at all. The rest is shots that linger too long from angles that repeat themselves all too often. It’s like Cuarón asked someone, “What does a movie like Juno need to be better?” They responded, “Nothing.” So Cuarón packed Roma with nothing.
Which brings up one of my biggest criticisms of Roma: The cinematography is bland. Cuarón shot practically the entire film on one camera, set a specific distance from the subject, and kept takes running as longer than they should have, padding out a short-film’s worth of content to feature length. It’s bland cinematography that somehow earned an Oscar for Best Cinematography.
Gravity showed us what Cuarón was capable of. Beyond bringing a seemingly authentic view of space to the big screen, Gravity offered variety. Yes, the huge collision scene in Gravity takes on the feel of a one-take scene, but even then, the camera moves with the action. And if your attention moves away from the foreground the shot, you’re able to see other important things going on. With Roma, though, your foreground is your film. Period. And to be sure, you'll be kept at arm's length from that foreground at all times, both metaphorically and cinematically.
There's a number of reasons why Roma wasn't the Best Picture, this year. Gravity proved that Roma is not Cuarón’s best film. Bo Burnham–yes, that Bo Burnham–wrote and directed a better slice-of-life film with Eighth Grade. And Roma might not even be the past year’s best black-and-white film; I dare suggest that Cold War may have been better.
To give it the credit it’s due, Roma’s cast rightly earned nominations for their performances. Yalitza Aparicio and Marina de Tavira earned Best Actress nominations for their roles, and for their part, their performances were authentic as can be. It's the least the Academy could do for having them endure Cuarón's lengthy takes.
But now that I've given it credit, I demand my time back for the scene of Fermín going Star Wars Kid meets Full Monty.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Mindhunter - Season 1 in TV
Oct 24, 2017 (Updated Oct 24, 2017)
Fantastic Performances (3 more)
Brilliant Script
Good Direction
Great Soundtrack
A Method In The Madness?
Mindhunter is a Netflix series set in the late 70's, that follows two FBI detectives as they embark to learn more about serial killers and why they do the things that they do. One of the detectives, Bill Tench, actually coins the phrase, 'serial killer,' at one point and the team do seem to be making progressive steps into understanding a disturbed psyche, even if some of the methods they use along the way are fairly questionable.
The series is produced by David Fincher, who also directs 4 episodes of this first season. If you are a fan of Fincher's other work, then this will be right up your street. It shares a lot of similarities with Se7en, The Social Network, Gone Girl, Panic Room and definitely Zodiac. The two main series stars, Jonathan Groff and Holt McCallany are brilliant in their roles. You may recognise McCallany from Fight Club and Groff from Glee, but this show couldn't be a further departure from Glee if it tried, which makes Groff's already electric performance, even better.
McCallany plays Bill Tench, an older FBI agent who has a good few years of experience under his belt. Groff plays Holden Ford, a young maverick, who barges his way towards progress, regardless of who gets caught up in the collateral damage. The two work fantastically together and the chemistry between the two actors is one of the best things about this show. The supporting cast are also solid, with Hannah Gross standing out as Holden's girlfriend, as well as Anna Torv, who plays a doctor of psychology helping the two detectives analyse the data that they collect from interviews held with various serial killers. The serial killers featured throughout the show are also memorable, especially Jerry Brudos and Ed Kemper. Cameron Britton, who plays Kemper, gives a subtly terrifying performance and is exponentially engaging for every minute that he is onscreen.
The performances are helped with a brilliant script. The dialogue is snappy and effective, causing as many existential questions as it does unorthodox observations. Fincher's direction, is of course, fantastic and the other directors who work on this show also do a good job. The soundtrack to the show is sometimes antithetic to what is going on in the storyline, but it is always effective and never distracting. The shot composition and cinematography was also on point in each episode, with some really effective imagery being implemented throughout.
Overall, this is a brilliantly made, psychological drama. The writing is of a very high standard and the performances are excellent all around. If you are a fan of serial killer stories or anything David Fincher has worked on before, this will be for you. The characters are all interesting and deep and although they may do some questionable things, I can't wait to see where this endeavour takes them next.
The series is produced by David Fincher, who also directs 4 episodes of this first season. If you are a fan of Fincher's other work, then this will be right up your street. It shares a lot of similarities with Se7en, The Social Network, Gone Girl, Panic Room and definitely Zodiac. The two main series stars, Jonathan Groff and Holt McCallany are brilliant in their roles. You may recognise McCallany from Fight Club and Groff from Glee, but this show couldn't be a further departure from Glee if it tried, which makes Groff's already electric performance, even better.
McCallany plays Bill Tench, an older FBI agent who has a good few years of experience under his belt. Groff plays Holden Ford, a young maverick, who barges his way towards progress, regardless of who gets caught up in the collateral damage. The two work fantastically together and the chemistry between the two actors is one of the best things about this show. The supporting cast are also solid, with Hannah Gross standing out as Holden's girlfriend, as well as Anna Torv, who plays a doctor of psychology helping the two detectives analyse the data that they collect from interviews held with various serial killers. The serial killers featured throughout the show are also memorable, especially Jerry Brudos and Ed Kemper. Cameron Britton, who plays Kemper, gives a subtly terrifying performance and is exponentially engaging for every minute that he is onscreen.
The performances are helped with a brilliant script. The dialogue is snappy and effective, causing as many existential questions as it does unorthodox observations. Fincher's direction, is of course, fantastic and the other directors who work on this show also do a good job. The soundtrack to the show is sometimes antithetic to what is going on in the storyline, but it is always effective and never distracting. The shot composition and cinematography was also on point in each episode, with some really effective imagery being implemented throughout.
Overall, this is a brilliantly made, psychological drama. The writing is of a very high standard and the performances are excellent all around. If you are a fan of serial killer stories or anything David Fincher has worked on before, this will be for you. The characters are all interesting and deep and although they may do some questionable things, I can't wait to see where this endeavour takes them next.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Wheelman (2017) in Movies
Oct 24, 2017 (Updated Oct 24, 2017)
Grillo is great (1 more)
Decent script
One Hell Of A Night
Wheelman is a Netflix movie that unfortunately debuted on the same date as the hotly anticipated Stephen King adaption, 1922. Though Wheelman deserves more than to be overlooked and although I didn't expect much going into it, I came away afterwards pleasantly surprised.
This movie reminds me of a bunch of others. There is some aspects of Phonebooth used here, it was also reminiscent of a Tom Hardy film called Locke that came out a couple of years ago. It is also similar to what Drive was marketed as in the trailers before it's release, (even though Drive ended up being a psychological nior drama.) The movie took a while to convince me; for the first 15 minutes nothing happened that really excited me, but once I got a bit deeper into and more invested in the story that was unfolding, I ended up being sucked into the wild ride that the protagonist was going through. I think that the film's success on that front, relies a great deal on the performance of Frank Grillo, so it's just as well he brought his A-game here. For 99% of the movie, Grillo is onscreen, so there is no hiding from the camera in terms of his performance and he nails every second of it. He really manages to make an insanely dangerous situation feel grounded and relatable. The other actors are mostly featured via their voices on the phone, which again makes their performances difficult to deliver, but they all manage it convincingly. I always knew who each person was in relation to each other and what each character's motives were, which isn't always clear in a movie where most characters are only heard on the phone.
The script is decent, but I feel that a lot of the dialogue was ad-libbed, which again adds a natural, more realistic feel to the events that are unfolding. This was a good move by the director and the direction overall is great. There are some fairly odd creative choices made, but all of them are effective and feel worthwhile. The cinematography and sound mixing are implemented effectively and add to the overall urgent tone that the movie is pursuing.
Overall, this is definitely worth a watch. To me, it is like a callback to a 70's action chase thriller, with a modern twist. There is also an element of film noir present and the intense tone will keep you engaged until the end credits. You do need to stick with the film past the fifteen minute mark though. Although the whole thing is only 82 minutes long in it's entirety, it takes while to really suck you in, but once it does, it is a really fun ride worth taking.
This movie reminds me of a bunch of others. There is some aspects of Phonebooth used here, it was also reminiscent of a Tom Hardy film called Locke that came out a couple of years ago. It is also similar to what Drive was marketed as in the trailers before it's release, (even though Drive ended up being a psychological nior drama.) The movie took a while to convince me; for the first 15 minutes nothing happened that really excited me, but once I got a bit deeper into and more invested in the story that was unfolding, I ended up being sucked into the wild ride that the protagonist was going through. I think that the film's success on that front, relies a great deal on the performance of Frank Grillo, so it's just as well he brought his A-game here. For 99% of the movie, Grillo is onscreen, so there is no hiding from the camera in terms of his performance and he nails every second of it. He really manages to make an insanely dangerous situation feel grounded and relatable. The other actors are mostly featured via their voices on the phone, which again makes their performances difficult to deliver, but they all manage it convincingly. I always knew who each person was in relation to each other and what each character's motives were, which isn't always clear in a movie where most characters are only heard on the phone.
The script is decent, but I feel that a lot of the dialogue was ad-libbed, which again adds a natural, more realistic feel to the events that are unfolding. This was a good move by the director and the direction overall is great. There are some fairly odd creative choices made, but all of them are effective and feel worthwhile. The cinematography and sound mixing are implemented effectively and add to the overall urgent tone that the movie is pursuing.
Overall, this is definitely worth a watch. To me, it is like a callback to a 70's action chase thriller, with a modern twist. There is also an element of film noir present and the intense tone will keep you engaged until the end credits. You do need to stick with the film past the fifteen minute mark though. Although the whole thing is only 82 minutes long in it's entirety, it takes while to really suck you in, but once it does, it is a really fun ride worth taking.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Knock Knock (2015) in Movies
Nov 2, 2017
The acting is just terrible (1 more)
The whole premise is just ridiculous
What the hell was Keanu thinking?
I came across this on Netflix last night and remembered seeing the trailer for it in the cinema at some point in the past. I vaguely remembered wanting to see it if I ever got the chance. What I definitely didn't remember is that the reason I probably never saw it was down to the sheer number of awful reviews it managed to receive. So, here's another one to add to them.
Keanu Reeves is an architect, living in an amazing house with a beautiful wife and two perfect kids. The movie opens by slowly panning through the house, showing us that on literally every single piece of available wall space there's a photo of the happy family. They just look so perfect and content together. Keanu wakes up in bed with his wife and the kids burst in to bring Keanu a father's day chocolate cake. They have some fun and he chases them away, pretending to be monster. Wow, they really are determined to drum home the fact that Keanu has this perfect family life, something he'd be pretty stupid to mess up! Already though, the acting is just awful - the whole setup feels forced, none of it feels natural at all. A crucial plot point that we do discover here though - Keanus character has not had much action in the sack recently...
His wife and kids head off to the beach for the weekend leaving Keanu to try and get on top of his workload, designing some buildings, listening to loud music and 3D printing his work. That is, until he's interrupted late at night by a couple of young girls knocking at his front door. It's raining hard and they claim that their taxi dropped them off for a party, but they think that they're in completely the wrong area. Keanu lets them in to check the party location on his iPad (their phones are soaking wet) while he calls them an Uber. They begin flirting with him, but he resists. He ends up putting their clothes in the tumble dryer, the flirting continues, he continues to resist. Until eventually.... well, lets just say that he more than makes up for the action in the sack he's been missing out on recently.
All I'll say is that things get more intense and more ridiculous after that as the girls stick around and make his life a living hell, despite his attempts to try and get rid of them. It's all really over the top and just plain stupid, but I just had to watch it right to the end to see what happens. One thing it definitely proved though - Keanu Reeves really should stick to just being John Wick. Or Ted "Theodore" Logan.
Keanu Reeves is an architect, living in an amazing house with a beautiful wife and two perfect kids. The movie opens by slowly panning through the house, showing us that on literally every single piece of available wall space there's a photo of the happy family. They just look so perfect and content together. Keanu wakes up in bed with his wife and the kids burst in to bring Keanu a father's day chocolate cake. They have some fun and he chases them away, pretending to be monster. Wow, they really are determined to drum home the fact that Keanu has this perfect family life, something he'd be pretty stupid to mess up! Already though, the acting is just awful - the whole setup feels forced, none of it feels natural at all. A crucial plot point that we do discover here though - Keanus character has not had much action in the sack recently...
His wife and kids head off to the beach for the weekend leaving Keanu to try and get on top of his workload, designing some buildings, listening to loud music and 3D printing his work. That is, until he's interrupted late at night by a couple of young girls knocking at his front door. It's raining hard and they claim that their taxi dropped them off for a party, but they think that they're in completely the wrong area. Keanu lets them in to check the party location on his iPad (their phones are soaking wet) while he calls them an Uber. They begin flirting with him, but he resists. He ends up putting their clothes in the tumble dryer, the flirting continues, he continues to resist. Until eventually.... well, lets just say that he more than makes up for the action in the sack he's been missing out on recently.
All I'll say is that things get more intense and more ridiculous after that as the girls stick around and make his life a living hell, despite his attempts to try and get rid of them. It's all really over the top and just plain stupid, but I just had to watch it right to the end to see what happens. One thing it definitely proved though - Keanu Reeves really should stick to just being John Wick. Or Ted "Theodore" Logan.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Ritual (2017) in Movies
May 12, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
If you’re browsing Netflix for a horror movie, The Ritual is definitely one worth checking out. Set in a foreboding, heavily wooded landscape of the Swedish mountains, this horror film reminds viewers that maybe, just maybe you should think twice about taking that shortcut – because you know, clearly that horror movie trope hasn’t been done enough.
Nevermind that, though. Starting off with a group of friends discussing their next vacation, we soon learn which character is the biggest coward of the troupe – Luke, The Ritual‘s first bloodletting comes fairly early on. Unintentionally, Luke and Robert (Rafe Spall and Paul Reid, respectively) stumble upon a robbery whilst they are inside a liquor store. Luke, in a cowardly manner, retreats and in his endeavor to do so, hits a few bottles and makes a noise, alerting the robbers to Robert’s presence and thus resulting directly in Robert’s murder. The guilt eats at him later on, but during the entire fiasco, Luke makes no attempt to come to Robert’s aid; he only watches as his friend is brutally slaughtered. (Okay, that one might be a bit of a hyperbole compared to later scenes, but I digress.)
As a direct result of this incident, the remaining quartet, which consists of Hutch (Robert James-Collier), Phil (Arsher Ali), and Dom (Sam Troughton) in addition to Luke, decide to go hiking in memory of Robert – a trip they’d originally ridiculed him about in the earlier bar scene. And thus, we have the set up of The Ritual.
Plotwise, I felt The Ritual was fairly solid as far as cult movies go – if a bit overplayed. Group of guys goes on a trip. Someone gets injured. They try to take a shortcut back. Things go badly. Of course, there’s a bit more of an occult flavor to it, one that’s a bit more haunting in quality which is nice, but overall it’s nothing new. The difference here is it is something that is done well as opposed to half-assed.
When we get to characters though, the only one that’s even remotely likable in my opinion is Phil. The others are all self-centered assholes or, in Luke’s case, cowards. Dom’s got the luck of a bag of rocks tossed into a lake and told to float, and Hutch… we’ll leave it at that. Luke’s character, on the other hand, experiences major growth. Earlier in the film, we watch him suffer from the inability to act; by the end of the film he is forced into action: either he redeems himself, or he dies.
Another aspect of this film that I love is its absolutely breathtaking shots. I hate using adverbs that I’ve already used earlier in a review, but haunting is such an apt description of the shots taken of the Swedish forests and mountains that we see in The Ritual. Those scenes, coupled with the disturbing echoes of Luke’s guilt really have a way of balancing out the movie.
Nevermind that, though. Starting off with a group of friends discussing their next vacation, we soon learn which character is the biggest coward of the troupe – Luke, The Ritual‘s first bloodletting comes fairly early on. Unintentionally, Luke and Robert (Rafe Spall and Paul Reid, respectively) stumble upon a robbery whilst they are inside a liquor store. Luke, in a cowardly manner, retreats and in his endeavor to do so, hits a few bottles and makes a noise, alerting the robbers to Robert’s presence and thus resulting directly in Robert’s murder. The guilt eats at him later on, but during the entire fiasco, Luke makes no attempt to come to Robert’s aid; he only watches as his friend is brutally slaughtered. (Okay, that one might be a bit of a hyperbole compared to later scenes, but I digress.)
As a direct result of this incident, the remaining quartet, which consists of Hutch (Robert James-Collier), Phil (Arsher Ali), and Dom (Sam Troughton) in addition to Luke, decide to go hiking in memory of Robert – a trip they’d originally ridiculed him about in the earlier bar scene. And thus, we have the set up of The Ritual.
Plotwise, I felt The Ritual was fairly solid as far as cult movies go – if a bit overplayed. Group of guys goes on a trip. Someone gets injured. They try to take a shortcut back. Things go badly. Of course, there’s a bit more of an occult flavor to it, one that’s a bit more haunting in quality which is nice, but overall it’s nothing new. The difference here is it is something that is done well as opposed to half-assed.
When we get to characters though, the only one that’s even remotely likable in my opinion is Phil. The others are all self-centered assholes or, in Luke’s case, cowards. Dom’s got the luck of a bag of rocks tossed into a lake and told to float, and Hutch… we’ll leave it at that. Luke’s character, on the other hand, experiences major growth. Earlier in the film, we watch him suffer from the inability to act; by the end of the film he is forced into action: either he redeems himself, or he dies.
Another aspect of this film that I love is its absolutely breathtaking shots. I hate using adverbs that I’ve already used earlier in a review, but haunting is such an apt description of the shots taken of the Swedish forests and mountains that we see in The Ritual. Those scenes, coupled with the disturbing echoes of Luke’s guilt really have a way of balancing out the movie.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Umbrella Academy in TV
Mar 7, 2019 (Updated Mar 7, 2019)
Characters (1 more)
SFX
One For A Rainy Day
A few years ago when I heard the guy from My Chemical Romance had wrote a graphic novel, it peaked my interest, but after reading up on some reviews of the book, it just sounded like a rip-off of other properties like Watchmen and X-Men and to be honest I wasn't a huge fan of the obscure character designs and bizarre artwork. I never got around to reading it after this as I was kind of put off by the accusations of unoriginality and the weird art.
Then late last year, I read that there was a Netflix adaption of the show being released and my curiosity was once again peaked. After reading some of the early glowing reviews from critics, I knew that I had found my next binge.
This show is fantastic, which for the most part is owed to it's well written and well acted characters. The members of the Umbrella Academy and their various odd relationships with one another, as well as the outsiders that have interaction with them throughout the show, make the character dynamics of this show as a whole pretty unique and exciting. The cast are all brilliant, with Robert Sheehan's Klaus being the clear stand-out. He gets all of the best lines and nails the American accent that he speaks with in the show.
It is cool to get an insight into the world that the show-runners have crafted, which is as odd as it is charming. It is similar to our own world, with a few pretty drastic changes that change the dynamic of the universe in a oddly interesting way. There were points while watching the show that I was reminded of other superhero stories like Watchmen and X-Men, but instead of Umbrella Academy blatantly ripping off these other stories, it instead takes some of the best parts from its respective influences and adapts them to suit the narrative that is unfolding. It comes off as more of a wink and a nod than just a lazy copy/paste job.
I also feel like the amazing CGI work on Pogo the chimp, - who is highly intelligent and serves as the family's butler, - deserves a shout-out. It is quite possibly the best CGI that I have ever seen in a TV show and is almost on the same level as the CGI on Caesar in the Planet Of The Apes movies.
Overall, The Umbrella Academy is a stellar example of what happens when a show embraces it's influences and presents them in a coherent way in collaboration with the original story that the show itself is telling. It is not the greatest superhero story ever filmed, but it is an extremely entertaining and satisfying ride that the show takes you on over its 10 episodes and it is well worth your time.
Then late last year, I read that there was a Netflix adaption of the show being released and my curiosity was once again peaked. After reading some of the early glowing reviews from critics, I knew that I had found my next binge.
This show is fantastic, which for the most part is owed to it's well written and well acted characters. The members of the Umbrella Academy and their various odd relationships with one another, as well as the outsiders that have interaction with them throughout the show, make the character dynamics of this show as a whole pretty unique and exciting. The cast are all brilliant, with Robert Sheehan's Klaus being the clear stand-out. He gets all of the best lines and nails the American accent that he speaks with in the show.
It is cool to get an insight into the world that the show-runners have crafted, which is as odd as it is charming. It is similar to our own world, with a few pretty drastic changes that change the dynamic of the universe in a oddly interesting way. There were points while watching the show that I was reminded of other superhero stories like Watchmen and X-Men, but instead of Umbrella Academy blatantly ripping off these other stories, it instead takes some of the best parts from its respective influences and adapts them to suit the narrative that is unfolding. It comes off as more of a wink and a nod than just a lazy copy/paste job.
I also feel like the amazing CGI work on Pogo the chimp, - who is highly intelligent and serves as the family's butler, - deserves a shout-out. It is quite possibly the best CGI that I have ever seen in a TV show and is almost on the same level as the CGI on Caesar in the Planet Of The Apes movies.
Overall, The Umbrella Academy is a stellar example of what happens when a show embraces it's influences and presents them in a coherent way in collaboration with the original story that the show itself is telling. It is not the greatest superhero story ever filmed, but it is an extremely entertaining and satisfying ride that the show takes you on over its 10 episodes and it is well worth your time.
BookblogbyCari (345 KP) rated Mindhunter: Inside the FBI Elite Serial Crime Unit (Now A Netflix Series) in Books
Mar 10, 2019
Douglas is a show-off
This is hands-down the most action-packed biography I have ever read! And it’s almost the most egotistical and narcissistic sounding biography I have ever read.
In his opening scene in the prologue, Douglas finds himself waking up from a coma in hospital expecting to be tortured by sick criminals, having (almost) single-handily run the FBI’s psychological profiling unit, handling hundreds of cases for several years.
I haven’t had the opportunity to watch the Netflix series based on this book, but I am quite a fan of the Criminal Minds series, so I had an idea of what to expect. However, you need to get 6 chapters in before Douglas starts talking about his work as an FBI profiler. He starts off talking about growing up, his love life, and getting into his career.
Douglas may call himself a profiler, but in my opinion, he is first and foremost a story-teller, with a talent for a drama-filled yarn. And rather than being put off by his constant bragging, I found myself hanging on his every word.
This light and long prelude to the criminal profiling section of the book made the crime details feel all the more gruesome. Some of the predictions made by Douglas about the murderers are barely believable. I mean, how can a crime scene really tell you the age of a murderer or what kind of car he drives?
Unfortunately, Douglas doesn’t offer much explanation into these kinds of things, and the leader is left assuming it’s all down to statistics. And if there’s anywhere the book is let down it would be here, because this would be why readers would pick the book up.
I once read a similar book called The Profiler, by Pat Brown. Brown, however, was a mere spectator to criminal goings on and had no influence whatever on getting criminals brought to justice. Douglas, however, would meet with local police and provide strategies on getting the bad guy, and getting him to confess.
To me, the most crucial chapter was Battle of the Shrinks. It looks at how criminals are dealt with once apprehended. Here Douglas meets with a psychiatrist whose job it was to assess whether criminals can have their sentences shortened and be let off early. This psychiatrist didn’t bother reading police reports to see from an outsider exactly what the criminal had done because he didn’t want to be made biased it and wanted to meet the criminal exactly as they presented himself to him. Douglas was appalled by this attitude and tried to get this over to the psychiatrist, but sadly, to no avail.
In short, this is a very entertaining book, and while it can teach you lot, reading it will never make you as good a profiler as John Douglas himself.
In his opening scene in the prologue, Douglas finds himself waking up from a coma in hospital expecting to be tortured by sick criminals, having (almost) single-handily run the FBI’s psychological profiling unit, handling hundreds of cases for several years.
I haven’t had the opportunity to watch the Netflix series based on this book, but I am quite a fan of the Criminal Minds series, so I had an idea of what to expect. However, you need to get 6 chapters in before Douglas starts talking about his work as an FBI profiler. He starts off talking about growing up, his love life, and getting into his career.
Douglas may call himself a profiler, but in my opinion, he is first and foremost a story-teller, with a talent for a drama-filled yarn. And rather than being put off by his constant bragging, I found myself hanging on his every word.
This light and long prelude to the criminal profiling section of the book made the crime details feel all the more gruesome. Some of the predictions made by Douglas about the murderers are barely believable. I mean, how can a crime scene really tell you the age of a murderer or what kind of car he drives?
Unfortunately, Douglas doesn’t offer much explanation into these kinds of things, and the leader is left assuming it’s all down to statistics. And if there’s anywhere the book is let down it would be here, because this would be why readers would pick the book up.
I once read a similar book called The Profiler, by Pat Brown. Brown, however, was a mere spectator to criminal goings on and had no influence whatever on getting criminals brought to justice. Douglas, however, would meet with local police and provide strategies on getting the bad guy, and getting him to confess.
To me, the most crucial chapter was Battle of the Shrinks. It looks at how criminals are dealt with once apprehended. Here Douglas meets with a psychiatrist whose job it was to assess whether criminals can have their sentences shortened and be let off early. This psychiatrist didn’t bother reading police reports to see from an outsider exactly what the criminal had done because he didn’t want to be made biased it and wanted to meet the criminal exactly as they presented himself to him. Douglas was appalled by this attitude and tried to get this over to the psychiatrist, but sadly, to no avail.
In short, this is a very entertaining book, and while it can teach you lot, reading it will never make you as good a profiler as John Douglas himself.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Klaus (2019) in Movies
Dec 15, 2019
New Christmas films always make me a little sceptical, a lot don't seem to take things very seriously and that means something naff that isn't always good. Seeing the trailer for Klaus made me hopeful though, I love an origin story.
Jesper has had a privileged life up until this point, when daddy is in charge of the business you can skate by with the minimum of effort. Things are about to change though, his father has had enough of his loafing around.
One year. 6,000 letters. This is what Jesper must achieve or he'll be cast out of the life of comfort he knows. That sounds doable, right? It does until you find out he's being sent to the farthest reaches where many postmen have gone before and soon fled. The town aren't the communicative type unless it involves and insult and a projectile weapon. Jesper is set on giving up until he spots a house out on the very edge of the map, this home belongs to a reclusive woodsman named Klaus.
At first glance the animation on Klaus looked too simplistic, in a world where computer animation and effects exist you sometimes forget that something doesn't have to be overcomplicated to be good. By the end I was amazed at how much this "simple" looking film managed to get across. The contrast between the bright happy world and the dark glum one in Smeerensburg is wonderful to behold, the colours (or lack thereof) get across the despair, and mixed with the characters it shows you exactly what sort of situation Jesper is dealing with.
What I particularly like about the amination is how well each scene is crafted outside of the characters. It's so atmospheric, the fog over the town, the mist in the forest, the way the light works with the weather, it's magical.
Smeerensburg's townsfolk match their surroundings perfectly and I'd really like to congratulate the person who came up with that crazed little stabby girl, she might be my favourite character of all. Seeing how the changes unfold throughout the film was lovely, each one brought with it a thrill that warmed this cold heart on a winter's day.
"A true act of goodwill always sparks another."
The story itself is a staple of Christmas films, love and friendship conquering selfishness, but it's a very charming way to look at it. I liked that the obligatory love interest storyline was actually not the main point, the friendship made for a much better focus. Klaus weaves a wonderful tale of how simple deeds can change the world... yes, I'm being overly dramatic!
I wasn't prepared for how much this was going to get to me, I've watched it twice this weekend and I'll be watching it again before Christmas is here. Thank you, Netflix. I'm adding this to my regular Christmas watching rotation.
Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/12/klaus-movie-review.html
Jesper has had a privileged life up until this point, when daddy is in charge of the business you can skate by with the minimum of effort. Things are about to change though, his father has had enough of his loafing around.
One year. 6,000 letters. This is what Jesper must achieve or he'll be cast out of the life of comfort he knows. That sounds doable, right? It does until you find out he's being sent to the farthest reaches where many postmen have gone before and soon fled. The town aren't the communicative type unless it involves and insult and a projectile weapon. Jesper is set on giving up until he spots a house out on the very edge of the map, this home belongs to a reclusive woodsman named Klaus.
At first glance the animation on Klaus looked too simplistic, in a world where computer animation and effects exist you sometimes forget that something doesn't have to be overcomplicated to be good. By the end I was amazed at how much this "simple" looking film managed to get across. The contrast between the bright happy world and the dark glum one in Smeerensburg is wonderful to behold, the colours (or lack thereof) get across the despair, and mixed with the characters it shows you exactly what sort of situation Jesper is dealing with.
What I particularly like about the amination is how well each scene is crafted outside of the characters. It's so atmospheric, the fog over the town, the mist in the forest, the way the light works with the weather, it's magical.
Smeerensburg's townsfolk match their surroundings perfectly and I'd really like to congratulate the person who came up with that crazed little stabby girl, she might be my favourite character of all. Seeing how the changes unfold throughout the film was lovely, each one brought with it a thrill that warmed this cold heart on a winter's day.
"A true act of goodwill always sparks another."
The story itself is a staple of Christmas films, love and friendship conquering selfishness, but it's a very charming way to look at it. I liked that the obligatory love interest storyline was actually not the main point, the friendship made for a much better focus. Klaus weaves a wonderful tale of how simple deeds can change the world... yes, I'm being overly dramatic!
I wasn't prepared for how much this was going to get to me, I've watched it twice this weekend and I'll be watching it again before Christmas is here. Thank you, Netflix. I'm adding this to my regular Christmas watching rotation.
Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/12/klaus-movie-review.html
Lee (2222 KP) rated Missing Link (2019) in Movies
Jan 21, 2020
Despite being a huge fan of Coraline and Kubo and the Two Strings, I'd managed to miss out on Missing Link, the latest movie from stop-motion masters Laika, last year when it was originally shown in cinemas. Having recently won the Golden Globe for Best Animated Feature Film, and on the receiving end of a number of other nominations, including an Oscar nom for Best Animated Feature, I was very happy to discover (by chance!) that it had now made its way onto Netflix.
Missing Link is set in Victorian England and tells the story of Sir Lionel Frost (voiced by Hugh Jackman), an adventurer with a passion for exploration and the discovery of mythical creatures. When we first meet Sir Lionel, he is on a small boat with his assistant, hoping to obtain photographic evidence of the existence of the elusive Loch Ness monster. Such evidence would hopefully grant him membership to the exclusive "Society of Great Men", which is run by Lord Piggot-Dunceby (Stephen Fry). Unfortunately, despite Nessie making an appearance to Frost, things don't quite go according to plan and he returns home without any evidence. And in need of a new assistant!
Another shot at entry into the society comes in the form of a letter, which is addressed to Frost on his return home to London. The letter describes the legendary Sasquatch and tells of sightings in the Pacific Northwest so Frost immediately makes a deal with Piggot-Dunceby that will see him accepted should he return with proof that the Sasquatch is real. But Piggot-Dunceby has no such plans to admit Frost and enlists the services of an assassin (Timothy Olyphant) to follow and eliminate him before he gets chance to make it back to England.
When Frost eventually arrives in the forest, he not only discovers the Sasquatch, but also that the Sasquatch can talk and was in fact the one who sent the letter! Sir Lionel names him "Mr. Link" and learns that he just wanted his help in finding his relatives, the Yetis who live in the Himalayas. They join forces and set off, back across America, across the Ocean and across Europe, all the while trying to avoid and outwit the deadly assassin.
Missing Link is more vibrant, more detailed and exhibits a much smoother animation style than any of the previous movies from Laika. It is an outstanding achievement from everyone involved and I am always in awe whenever I see the behind the scenes making of videos from Laika. However, despite looking amazing and featuring some very funny moments from a talented and on-form voice cast, I found Missing Link to the be the weakest in terms of story when compared to Coraline and Kubo. It's certainly not a bad movie, it just didn't grab me at any point, and I didn't feel it was particularly memorable when I'd finished it either.
Missing Link is set in Victorian England and tells the story of Sir Lionel Frost (voiced by Hugh Jackman), an adventurer with a passion for exploration and the discovery of mythical creatures. When we first meet Sir Lionel, he is on a small boat with his assistant, hoping to obtain photographic evidence of the existence of the elusive Loch Ness monster. Such evidence would hopefully grant him membership to the exclusive "Society of Great Men", which is run by Lord Piggot-Dunceby (Stephen Fry). Unfortunately, despite Nessie making an appearance to Frost, things don't quite go according to plan and he returns home without any evidence. And in need of a new assistant!
Another shot at entry into the society comes in the form of a letter, which is addressed to Frost on his return home to London. The letter describes the legendary Sasquatch and tells of sightings in the Pacific Northwest so Frost immediately makes a deal with Piggot-Dunceby that will see him accepted should he return with proof that the Sasquatch is real. But Piggot-Dunceby has no such plans to admit Frost and enlists the services of an assassin (Timothy Olyphant) to follow and eliminate him before he gets chance to make it back to England.
When Frost eventually arrives in the forest, he not only discovers the Sasquatch, but also that the Sasquatch can talk and was in fact the one who sent the letter! Sir Lionel names him "Mr. Link" and learns that he just wanted his help in finding his relatives, the Yetis who live in the Himalayas. They join forces and set off, back across America, across the Ocean and across Europe, all the while trying to avoid and outwit the deadly assassin.
Missing Link is more vibrant, more detailed and exhibits a much smoother animation style than any of the previous movies from Laika. It is an outstanding achievement from everyone involved and I am always in awe whenever I see the behind the scenes making of videos from Laika. However, despite looking amazing and featuring some very funny moments from a talented and on-form voice cast, I found Missing Link to the be the weakest in terms of story when compared to Coraline and Kubo. It's certainly not a bad movie, it just didn't grab me at any point, and I didn't feel it was particularly memorable when I'd finished it either.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Gerald's Game (2017) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
When I first heard about the Stephen King book called Gerald’s Game I was about 16 years old, and it scared the shit out of me! Just the concept and the idea of it happening to you. So I never read the book. In my mind, I had imagined the worst already and did not want to go there.
It was with some trepidation, then, that I stepped into this Netflix production, and may never have done so at all, were it not for some interesting reviews suggesting this was not normal horror fare, but more of a psychological exploration. Carla Gugino I barely knew. I have always liked Bruce Greenwood as an actor, however, so in I plunged…
For the next hour or so I was transfixed! The simplicity of the premise, the economy of the direction, and an innovative way of telling the story visually, had me hooked. It always felt like not a lot of money had been spent, but in a good way – no fancy tricks and gimmicks, just storytelling. And a few well placed shocks to the system that left me gasping out loud! (One moment in particular that had me jump to my feet shouting FFS involuntarily)
It isn’t a horror film in the way that genre has become in the last 20 years. No real jump shocks or manipulation, but some stomach churning moments of discomfort that genuinely disturb and make you want to look away! And all because we are invited to imagine ourselves in this situation. What would we do? How would we feel. And I always felt that was the power of this particular idea.
Psychologically, the notion that we may never truly know anyone, even ourselves, until the very worst happens is a compelling theme. The secrets we hide; the traumas that build our personalities, and just how strong would we be in a survival situation. And that is where this film is at its best. Gugino is never less than believable and occasionally incredible in achieving this. Greenwood is fine, and plays his part, but it is her film, no doubt at all.
Sadly, where this film fails is the last 15 minutes, when inexplicably the entire mood shifts and we find ourselves watching a completely different film, with a different message, and some of the worst backward facing exposition I have even seen! I won’t go into details here for spoilers sake… but, anything good achieved to that point was ruined by the ending.
Perhaps in the book the twist end makes sense this way, somehow. Here it is laughable. So much so that I need to know why they chose to do it? 30 years on from first hearing about it, I am going to be brave and read the book, because I can only believe loyalty to the source material could have led this production to such a preposterous ant-climax.
It was with some trepidation, then, that I stepped into this Netflix production, and may never have done so at all, were it not for some interesting reviews suggesting this was not normal horror fare, but more of a psychological exploration. Carla Gugino I barely knew. I have always liked Bruce Greenwood as an actor, however, so in I plunged…
For the next hour or so I was transfixed! The simplicity of the premise, the economy of the direction, and an innovative way of telling the story visually, had me hooked. It always felt like not a lot of money had been spent, but in a good way – no fancy tricks and gimmicks, just storytelling. And a few well placed shocks to the system that left me gasping out loud! (One moment in particular that had me jump to my feet shouting FFS involuntarily)
It isn’t a horror film in the way that genre has become in the last 20 years. No real jump shocks or manipulation, but some stomach churning moments of discomfort that genuinely disturb and make you want to look away! And all because we are invited to imagine ourselves in this situation. What would we do? How would we feel. And I always felt that was the power of this particular idea.
Psychologically, the notion that we may never truly know anyone, even ourselves, until the very worst happens is a compelling theme. The secrets we hide; the traumas that build our personalities, and just how strong would we be in a survival situation. And that is where this film is at its best. Gugino is never less than believable and occasionally incredible in achieving this. Greenwood is fine, and plays his part, but it is her film, no doubt at all.
Sadly, where this film fails is the last 15 minutes, when inexplicably the entire mood shifts and we find ourselves watching a completely different film, with a different message, and some of the worst backward facing exposition I have even seen! I won’t go into details here for spoilers sake… but, anything good achieved to that point was ruined by the ending.
Perhaps in the book the twist end makes sense this way, somehow. Here it is laughable. So much so that I need to know why they chose to do it? 30 years on from first hearing about it, I am going to be brave and read the book, because I can only believe loyalty to the source material could have led this production to such a preposterous ant-climax.