Search
Search results
Karina Longworth recommended Caught (2015) in Movies (curated)
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Alphaville (1965) in Movies
Jan 28, 2021
This is one of the best bad films I have ever seen. It looks cheap (at one point the camera-man is clearly entirely visible in a mirror), the story is preposterous, the dialogue is insane, the characters behave like no one in reality ever, and it is sci-fi in name only, as no attempt whatsoever has been made to stretch the budget to anything remotely futuristic – and yet, I loved it! Perhaps it reminded me of Blake’s 7 and Doctor Who, and therefore my happy childhood relationship with cheap sci-fi? Or it could have been that there are so many essential ideas and tropes that exist in my favourite big budget sci-fi films, such as Blade Runner (for which it is an obvious influence), that it felt familiar and friendly from the start. Part hard boiled detective story and part pulp fiction fantasy, as with most Godard, I am discovering, it is all about mood and chic, not remotely about the plot.
Eddie Constantine is awful as an actor, but he looks and feels perfect here. And Anna Karina is entirely lovely, oozing intelligent sexuality and seductive vibes in every scene. Not a heroine that needs the man to save her, but a strong and independent woman as much the hero of the story as the trenchcoated lead. Every noir stereotype is adhered to without fail, punctuated with the bizarre and the incongruous whenever possible. Without this film existing there would be so many good things from The Prisoner to Predestination that wouldn’t have been the same. Groundbreaking and charming without even trying. It grows in my imagination as a cult entity by the week – I can’t wait to watch it again fairly soon.
Eddie Constantine is awful as an actor, but he looks and feels perfect here. And Anna Karina is entirely lovely, oozing intelligent sexuality and seductive vibes in every scene. Not a heroine that needs the man to save her, but a strong and independent woman as much the hero of the story as the trenchcoated lead. Every noir stereotype is adhered to without fail, punctuated with the bizarre and the incongruous whenever possible. Without this film existing there would be so many good things from The Prisoner to Predestination that wouldn’t have been the same. Groundbreaking and charming without even trying. It grows in my imagination as a cult entity by the week – I can’t wait to watch it again fairly soon.
Thin Air
7.0
Rate It
Book
An atmospheric tale of corruption and abduction set on Mars, from the author of the award-winning...
Science Fiction Mars
The Savage Garden
10.0
Rate It
Book
The lights here are all dark and vixens pull men into the shadows. Hers was a tale as old as...
romance
ClareR (5721 KP) rated Nasty Little Cuts in Books
Feb 24, 2022
I learnt a new phrase today: Domestic Noir. My ignorance is probably down to the fact that I would never normally read a book in this category. I’d avoid it. I’m glad that I didn’t let it put me off this time though, and after reading Tina’s previous book ‘Call Me Mummy’, I knew that I was going to be in for one hell of a good read.
This book is phenomenal. It’s read-it-thorough-your-fingers-with-your-eyes-shut kind of phenomenal.
Reading it on The Pigeonhole, one stave a day for 10 days was a feat of endurance - the wait between staves was tortuous. This is NOT an easy read, and should probably come with some sort of trigger warning. It’s dark, emotional, visceral. It’s violent and frankly traumatic.
Debs and Marc should probably have never got together, never mind got married and had children. They’re both emotionally scarred from terrible childhoods and have never confronted, or been treated for, these psychological and physical injuries. And now they just seem to vent their feelings on one another with physical violence.
There’s loads of backstory that explains why they are in their current predicament, and honestly, I did feel some sympathy for them. But then, and Tina Baker does this so well, she gives with one hand, and snatches away with the other. Every past revelation of abuse or trauma, is bookended by domestic violence.
Honestly, it sounds horrendous, doesn’t it? But I couldn’t stop reading. As I said on The Pigeonhole: What a reading experience this has been. I’ll leave a review, but what can I say that will do this book justice?
Well, I can say this: Read It.
This book is phenomenal. It’s read-it-thorough-your-fingers-with-your-eyes-shut kind of phenomenal.
Reading it on The Pigeonhole, one stave a day for 10 days was a feat of endurance - the wait between staves was tortuous. This is NOT an easy read, and should probably come with some sort of trigger warning. It’s dark, emotional, visceral. It’s violent and frankly traumatic.
Debs and Marc should probably have never got together, never mind got married and had children. They’re both emotionally scarred from terrible childhoods and have never confronted, or been treated for, these psychological and physical injuries. And now they just seem to vent their feelings on one another with physical violence.
There’s loads of backstory that explains why they are in their current predicament, and honestly, I did feel some sympathy for them. But then, and Tina Baker does this so well, she gives with one hand, and snatches away with the other. Every past revelation of abuse or trauma, is bookended by domestic violence.
Honestly, it sounds horrendous, doesn’t it? But I couldn’t stop reading. As I said on The Pigeonhole: What a reading experience this has been. I’ll leave a review, but what can I say that will do this book justice?
Well, I can say this: Read It.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Hotel Artemis (2018) in Movies
Feb 10, 2019
Not as interesting as it wanted to be
On my airplane ride from Mpls to San Diego I was able to catch up with gritty, action-noir thriller BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE and was really surprised by how much I enjoyed it. So, I was excited to see that another gritty,, action-noir film, HOTEL ARTEMIS was showing on the flight back.
Well...HOTEL ARTEMIS is no EL ROYALE and maybe that's not fair to Artemis, for I was constantly comparing the two films, so let me see if I can separate the 2 and hold HOTEL ARTEMIS up to it's own scrutiny.
Telling the tale of a JOHN WICK-type world where - instead of a safehouse Hotel for crooks, the HOTEL ARTEMIS is a safehouse HOSPITAL for crooks where the rules are that the crooks cannot hurt each other on the premises. When a riot breaks out in downtown Los Angeles, the rules go out the window and mayhem - and violence - ensue.
Well...this film is no JOHN WICK either. Oh shoot, I've done it again. I've compared this film to another film.
And that's the problem with HOTEL ARTEMIS, it treads ground that has been trod better - and with more style - before. So this film, no matter how well intention-ed, falls short in originality, style and substance. I was still entertained, but not as entertained as I was by JOHN WICK or EL ROYALE.
Jodie Foster (in her first acting role since 2013's ELYSIUM) stars as the person who runs the Artemis. She has a mysterious background (of course) and runs the Artemis with an emotional-less efficiency. Her performance is quirky and interesting and almost holds the film together - almost. She is joined by Sterling K. Brown, Charlie Day, Brian Tyree Henry and Sofia Boutella as patients in the Hotel - none of which were interesting or unusual. They all were playing variants of the characters they usually play, almost as if Director/Writer Drew Pearce said "Get my a Charlie Day-type and a Sterling K. Brown-type", and the Casting Director thought they "scored" by getting the original person - each of whom looks like they are coasting through this film at about 70% output.
Only Dave Bautista shines as the "Health Care Professional" who works with Foster. He brings an interesting charisma to his character and was almost the high point in the film.
Almost. All of the performances pale in comparison to the Mob Boss who shows up about 2/3 of the way through the film. This character is talked about in reverential and scary terms throughout the film. The build-up was huge for this character and I was prepared for the inevitable let down when the mob boss finally shows up, but when the elevator door opens up and I saw that is was Jeff Goldblum in "full Goldblum" mode, I was thrilled and he did not disappoint. He commanded the screen at a time that the film was getting tiresome and he wound up the characters, the energy of the film and the action to help it ride to its inevitable, bloody conclusion.
Ultimately, Pearce delivered a solid B- film, one that has moments of quirk and interest, but set against a backdrop - and supporting actors - that are subdued and not memorable. This is a cardinal sin for this kind of film, instead of subduing those parts, Pearce needed to enhance those and he just plainly did not.
If you want to see a good, stylized, gritty action film, with interesting locales and supporting players, check out JOHN WICK or BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE. If you've seen these, HOTEL ARTEMIS is fine, but the other two do it better.
Letter Grade: B-
6 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Well...HOTEL ARTEMIS is no EL ROYALE and maybe that's not fair to Artemis, for I was constantly comparing the two films, so let me see if I can separate the 2 and hold HOTEL ARTEMIS up to it's own scrutiny.
Telling the tale of a JOHN WICK-type world where - instead of a safehouse Hotel for crooks, the HOTEL ARTEMIS is a safehouse HOSPITAL for crooks where the rules are that the crooks cannot hurt each other on the premises. When a riot breaks out in downtown Los Angeles, the rules go out the window and mayhem - and violence - ensue.
Well...this film is no JOHN WICK either. Oh shoot, I've done it again. I've compared this film to another film.
And that's the problem with HOTEL ARTEMIS, it treads ground that has been trod better - and with more style - before. So this film, no matter how well intention-ed, falls short in originality, style and substance. I was still entertained, but not as entertained as I was by JOHN WICK or EL ROYALE.
Jodie Foster (in her first acting role since 2013's ELYSIUM) stars as the person who runs the Artemis. She has a mysterious background (of course) and runs the Artemis with an emotional-less efficiency. Her performance is quirky and interesting and almost holds the film together - almost. She is joined by Sterling K. Brown, Charlie Day, Brian Tyree Henry and Sofia Boutella as patients in the Hotel - none of which were interesting or unusual. They all were playing variants of the characters they usually play, almost as if Director/Writer Drew Pearce said "Get my a Charlie Day-type and a Sterling K. Brown-type", and the Casting Director thought they "scored" by getting the original person - each of whom looks like they are coasting through this film at about 70% output.
Only Dave Bautista shines as the "Health Care Professional" who works with Foster. He brings an interesting charisma to his character and was almost the high point in the film.
Almost. All of the performances pale in comparison to the Mob Boss who shows up about 2/3 of the way through the film. This character is talked about in reverential and scary terms throughout the film. The build-up was huge for this character and I was prepared for the inevitable let down when the mob boss finally shows up, but when the elevator door opens up and I saw that is was Jeff Goldblum in "full Goldblum" mode, I was thrilled and he did not disappoint. He commanded the screen at a time that the film was getting tiresome and he wound up the characters, the energy of the film and the action to help it ride to its inevitable, bloody conclusion.
Ultimately, Pearce delivered a solid B- film, one that has moments of quirk and interest, but set against a backdrop - and supporting actors - that are subdued and not memorable. This is a cardinal sin for this kind of film, instead of subduing those parts, Pearce needed to enhance those and he just plainly did not.
If you want to see a good, stylized, gritty action film, with interesting locales and supporting players, check out JOHN WICK or BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE. If you've seen these, HOTEL ARTEMIS is fine, but the other two do it better.
Letter Grade: B-
6 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A whole new universe of Spideys!
Finally got around to watching this after reading lots of great reviews and it really delivered.
Having not known anything about the Miles Morales storyline or origin story, I was excited going into this without much prescreen knowledge (which doesn't happen much these days).
Basically a Brooklyn teenager gets bit by the that darn radioactive spider and then starts to exhibit his own Spidey traits after the original Peter Parker is killed in action. Much to the surprise of Miles, another wisecracking out of shape Peter shows up and says he's from another alternate universe or something where things are different. Eventually, Spider-Gwen, Spider-Man Noir, Peni Parker, and Spider-Ham also arrive to take on the Kingpin and a female version of Doc Ock to try and save the Earth from destruction.
The humor in the film is rally good. I guess I would say equivalent to a PG version of Deadpool with lots of wisecracks and sarcasm. My kind of screenplay. While not necessarily made for adults, I think both young and not so young would enjoy the fast pace of the film with very few dull spots.
They don't focus very much on the Peter Parker origin which is great since we have seen this already many times within the last few incarnations of the character. It's actually kind of amusing the way the keep repeating it in slightly different ways when the new Spideys emerge. The colors are bright and vibrant (I only saw in 2D) and the environments and backgrounds are interesting and complex which makes you dazzle for the cinematic eye candy for sure.
Due to the success critically as well as box office cred, it looks like this is the beginning of a franchise which is all right by me. I would highly recommend.
Having not known anything about the Miles Morales storyline or origin story, I was excited going into this without much prescreen knowledge (which doesn't happen much these days).
Basically a Brooklyn teenager gets bit by the that darn radioactive spider and then starts to exhibit his own Spidey traits after the original Peter Parker is killed in action. Much to the surprise of Miles, another wisecracking out of shape Peter shows up and says he's from another alternate universe or something where things are different. Eventually, Spider-Gwen, Spider-Man Noir, Peni Parker, and Spider-Ham also arrive to take on the Kingpin and a female version of Doc Ock to try and save the Earth from destruction.
The humor in the film is rally good. I guess I would say equivalent to a PG version of Deadpool with lots of wisecracks and sarcasm. My kind of screenplay. While not necessarily made for adults, I think both young and not so young would enjoy the fast pace of the film with very few dull spots.
They don't focus very much on the Peter Parker origin which is great since we have seen this already many times within the last few incarnations of the character. It's actually kind of amusing the way the keep repeating it in slightly different ways when the new Spideys emerge. The colors are bright and vibrant (I only saw in 2D) and the environments and backgrounds are interesting and complex which makes you dazzle for the cinematic eye candy for sure.
Due to the success critically as well as box office cred, it looks like this is the beginning of a franchise which is all right by me. I would highly recommend.
HS
Hotel Scarface
Book
Miami, December 31, 1979. Lock your doors. Watch your backs. Raise your glasses. Miami is about to...
Gemini Rue
Games
App
Pocket Gamer: Game of the Week "You'll rue the day you missed this one." Kotaku "There's something...
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Sin City (2005) in Movies
Jan 7, 2021 (Updated Jan 11, 2021)
I absolutely adored Sin City when it first released way back in 2005, and I still do to a point, albeit a little less than I used to.
The main positives are of course the cast, and the style.
The cast is stacked - Bruce Willis, Rosario Dawson, Benicio Del Toro, Brittany Murphy, Michael Madsen, Clive Owen, Micky Rourke, Jessica Alba, Elijah Wood, Powers Boothe, Devon Aoki, Rutger Hauer, Michael Clarke Duncan, Carla Gugino, Jaime King... that's a fair ensemble if you ask me.
The style is of course a huge part of Sin City. It's neo noir black and white with splashes of colour translate perfectly from page to screen. 15 years later, the effects still look pretty decent and the overall look of the film is practically watching the graphic novels come to life, a strength that is bolstered by the cast involved.
It has a cheesy yet engaging screenplay - the runtime clocks in at over two hours, but never gets boring (just about), and the constant growly voiceovers and on the nose script beats could have potentially been laughable in anyone else's hands, but Robert Rodriguez somehow gets away with it.
The comics ultraviolence is well realised - the movie doesn't shy away from the grimness of proceedings. Some of the content however feels a little problematic in this day and age. The whole thing is plagued by a steady stream of misogyny, which would have probably been toned down if released today, but in my opinion, it's never glamorised. 95% of the male characters are grim shitbags, and the audience know it well.
I understand why a fair few people have an issue with Sin City and it's content, but personally, I find it to be a unique film with plenty of positives, a project that respects it's source material, and just about manages to avoid falling inside of its own arse.
The main positives are of course the cast, and the style.
The cast is stacked - Bruce Willis, Rosario Dawson, Benicio Del Toro, Brittany Murphy, Michael Madsen, Clive Owen, Micky Rourke, Jessica Alba, Elijah Wood, Powers Boothe, Devon Aoki, Rutger Hauer, Michael Clarke Duncan, Carla Gugino, Jaime King... that's a fair ensemble if you ask me.
The style is of course a huge part of Sin City. It's neo noir black and white with splashes of colour translate perfectly from page to screen. 15 years later, the effects still look pretty decent and the overall look of the film is practically watching the graphic novels come to life, a strength that is bolstered by the cast involved.
It has a cheesy yet engaging screenplay - the runtime clocks in at over two hours, but never gets boring (just about), and the constant growly voiceovers and on the nose script beats could have potentially been laughable in anyone else's hands, but Robert Rodriguez somehow gets away with it.
The comics ultraviolence is well realised - the movie doesn't shy away from the grimness of proceedings. Some of the content however feels a little problematic in this day and age. The whole thing is plagued by a steady stream of misogyny, which would have probably been toned down if released today, but in my opinion, it's never glamorised. 95% of the male characters are grim shitbags, and the audience know it well.
I understand why a fair few people have an issue with Sin City and it's content, but personally, I find it to be a unique film with plenty of positives, a project that respects it's source material, and just about manages to avoid falling inside of its own arse.