Search
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Ava (2020) in Movies
Jan 5, 2021
Dull and unoriginal
Ava is a 2020 spy action thriller directed by Tate Taylor and starring Jessica Chastain. It follows Ava (Chastain), an assassin working for a shadowy organisation who soon becomes hunted by her own, led by the mysterious Simon (Colin Farrell). Between missions and death threats, Ava is aided by her handler Duke (John Malkovich) while she attempts to resolve some long held family issues with her mother (Geena Davis), sister (Jess Weixler) and ex (Common).
From the outset, Ava appears to be like your typical female assassin style film – a loud, stylish electro/techno soundtrack overlaying an assassination featuring wigs, stylish clothes and cars and every other spy cliché you’d come to expect from a film like this. The only truly original and enjoyable thing in this opening scene is Ioan Gruffudd’s shady businessman, who looks like he’s having a whale of a time relishing playing a bad guy for a change. However what you don’t see coming with Ava after this initial scene is that instead of being a full on action film, it turns into a family melodrama with a few fight scenes thrown in almost as an afterthought.
Ava is a characterless film full of clichés, and lacking in any personality whatsoever. The spy and action elements, when we eventually see them that is, are entirely unoriginal and have been done so much better in any other spy film you could think of. The fight scenes are surprisingly dull and the camera work only results in highlighting how staged and choreographed the scenes are, they just don’t look real. It isn’t helped by all of the family drama either, with a large number of conversational dialogue scenes taking over the majority of the short but feels so long run time. It wouldn’t be too bad if these were scripted well but I’m afraid like everything else in this film, the script is lacklustre and clichéd.
Character development is poor and banal too, with the majority of the spy related characters lacking in any form of personality or likability. Ava herself is the worst, she reminded me of a personality-less robot who has no depth or emotions, no matter how much the opening credits scene or family interactions try to tell us otherwise. This film has really done it’s stellar cast a huge injustice and gives them absolutely nothing to work with.
Even the plot suffers from a complete absence of originality and seems to have been kept as vague as possible, whether on purpose or because the writers just couldn’t be bothered I’m not sure. The shadowy organisation that Ava, Duke and Simon all work for is never identified or discussed in any real detail. All we learn about them is that they employ assassins to make hits on possibly shady people, with no further elaboration on why or what these people have done wrong, which Ava herself seems fascinated about as we see her questioning her victims as they’re about to die. I’m all for creating a mysterious atmosphere giving away just enough to keep us intrigued, but I’m afraid this doesn’t work for Ava as it just comes across as lazy and complacent with sloppy writing.
I couldn’t help but compare Ava to Atomic Blonde, another female led assassin film that is worlds apart from this. Ava is lacking in everything that made Atomic Blonde - a fun watch, with style, substance and some brutal (but well executed) fight scenes - and I really wish Ava had followed the same formula as at least this would have made it watchable. As it is, it’s a completely dull and clichéd spy film lacking in pretty much everything.
From the outset, Ava appears to be like your typical female assassin style film – a loud, stylish electro/techno soundtrack overlaying an assassination featuring wigs, stylish clothes and cars and every other spy cliché you’d come to expect from a film like this. The only truly original and enjoyable thing in this opening scene is Ioan Gruffudd’s shady businessman, who looks like he’s having a whale of a time relishing playing a bad guy for a change. However what you don’t see coming with Ava after this initial scene is that instead of being a full on action film, it turns into a family melodrama with a few fight scenes thrown in almost as an afterthought.
Ava is a characterless film full of clichés, and lacking in any personality whatsoever. The spy and action elements, when we eventually see them that is, are entirely unoriginal and have been done so much better in any other spy film you could think of. The fight scenes are surprisingly dull and the camera work only results in highlighting how staged and choreographed the scenes are, they just don’t look real. It isn’t helped by all of the family drama either, with a large number of conversational dialogue scenes taking over the majority of the short but feels so long run time. It wouldn’t be too bad if these were scripted well but I’m afraid like everything else in this film, the script is lacklustre and clichéd.
Character development is poor and banal too, with the majority of the spy related characters lacking in any form of personality or likability. Ava herself is the worst, she reminded me of a personality-less robot who has no depth or emotions, no matter how much the opening credits scene or family interactions try to tell us otherwise. This film has really done it’s stellar cast a huge injustice and gives them absolutely nothing to work with.
Even the plot suffers from a complete absence of originality and seems to have been kept as vague as possible, whether on purpose or because the writers just couldn’t be bothered I’m not sure. The shadowy organisation that Ava, Duke and Simon all work for is never identified or discussed in any real detail. All we learn about them is that they employ assassins to make hits on possibly shady people, with no further elaboration on why or what these people have done wrong, which Ava herself seems fascinated about as we see her questioning her victims as they’re about to die. I’m all for creating a mysterious atmosphere giving away just enough to keep us intrigued, but I’m afraid this doesn’t work for Ava as it just comes across as lazy and complacent with sloppy writing.
I couldn’t help but compare Ava to Atomic Blonde, another female led assassin film that is worlds apart from this. Ava is lacking in everything that made Atomic Blonde - a fun watch, with style, substance and some brutal (but well executed) fight scenes - and I really wish Ava had followed the same formula as at least this would have made it watchable. As it is, it’s a completely dull and clichéd spy film lacking in pretty much everything.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Inferno (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Infernal
Dan Brown has had a bad rap over the years from snobbish reviewers who dismiss his work as “trash”. I’m sure to a large degree the multi-millionaire Dan Brown couldn’t give a toss! I personally enjoyed both the books and Ron Howard’s films of “The Da Vinci Code” and “Angels and Demons” as glossy escapism. Occasionally though books will generate a “WHHAAAT??” moment and Brown’s 2013 novel “Inferno” generated just such a response in its dramatic conclusion… and (for me at least) not in a good way. As someone always looking at script potential in books, the words “unfilmable” came to mind. So veteran screenwriter David Koepp (“Jurassic Park”, “Mission Impossible”, “Spiderman”) is to be congratulated in ‘adapting’ the story to provide a coherent screenplay.
But unfortunately it’s still arrant nonsense.
The film starts in promising style with famed symbologist Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) waking in hospital to horrific visions of hell on earth with only the attractive young nurse Dr Sienna Brooks (Felicity Jones) to soothe his nerves. A serious head wound prevents him from remembering the last 48 hours which makes it a bit tricky when a “Terminator”-style female cop (the striking Romanian actress Ana Ularu) arrives to try to kill him. Fleeing the scene, Langdon follows a typically convoluted trail of puzzles in a race to find the location of the source of a plague that if released will devastate the world’s population. In the process he has to dodge police, World Health Organisation (WHO) staff and members of a shadowy “private security organisation” trying to catch him.
The problem with the story is that it has a plague-sized hole in its plot. The actions of the main protagonist of the film, Bertrand Zobrist (Ben Foster, “The Program”), make absolutely zero sense. If he wanted to achieve his aims he would have just done it! (“No, Mr Bond – I won’t shoot you now”). Laying a devious cryptic trail for others to follow makes even less sense, particularly as he is even seen (in flashback) to be not very good at that! Quite bonkers!
Unfortunately, the more you ponder the story, the worse it gets, and it is this that fatally drags the film down despite all the good work that Hanks, Jones and director Ron Howard try to counter-balance it with.
For there are elements on the positive side of the scales. The Italian and Turkish scenes (in Florence, Venice and Istanbul) are gloriously filmed with lush colours and exotic and evocative locations. Tom Hanks is as solidly reliable as ever in the Langdon role, and its great to see Felicity “The Theory of Everything” Jones in a leading role before she disappears into obscurity again (humour: “Rogue One” is released in December).
Tom Hanks
The film has fun with romantic expectations of the Langdon and Brooks characters. Here though is Hanks with the more age-appropriate Knudsen.
The supporting cast is also of great quality. Sidse Babett Knudsen (“Borgen”) is Dr Sinsky, leader of the W.H.O. (not credited – as memorably done with Peter Capaldi in “World War Z” as “Doctor, W.H.O.”!). Irrfan (“Jurassic World”) Khan is striking as the mysterious and authoritarian “Provost”. And Omar Sy (who made such an impact in the brilliant “The Intouchables”) plays the lead W.H.O. officer in pursuit of Langdon.
Hans Zimmer again provides the soundtrack, with his beautiful series theme cleverly working its way into the music as Langdon’s memory returns. However, at various points the music become overtly noticeable, intrusive and not to my liking. A bombastic choral reworking of the theme over the end titles is stirring though.
In summary, a glossy and nonsensical disappointment.
But unfortunately it’s still arrant nonsense.
The film starts in promising style with famed symbologist Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) waking in hospital to horrific visions of hell on earth with only the attractive young nurse Dr Sienna Brooks (Felicity Jones) to soothe his nerves. A serious head wound prevents him from remembering the last 48 hours which makes it a bit tricky when a “Terminator”-style female cop (the striking Romanian actress Ana Ularu) arrives to try to kill him. Fleeing the scene, Langdon follows a typically convoluted trail of puzzles in a race to find the location of the source of a plague that if released will devastate the world’s population. In the process he has to dodge police, World Health Organisation (WHO) staff and members of a shadowy “private security organisation” trying to catch him.
The problem with the story is that it has a plague-sized hole in its plot. The actions of the main protagonist of the film, Bertrand Zobrist (Ben Foster, “The Program”), make absolutely zero sense. If he wanted to achieve his aims he would have just done it! (“No, Mr Bond – I won’t shoot you now”). Laying a devious cryptic trail for others to follow makes even less sense, particularly as he is even seen (in flashback) to be not very good at that! Quite bonkers!
Unfortunately, the more you ponder the story, the worse it gets, and it is this that fatally drags the film down despite all the good work that Hanks, Jones and director Ron Howard try to counter-balance it with.
For there are elements on the positive side of the scales. The Italian and Turkish scenes (in Florence, Venice and Istanbul) are gloriously filmed with lush colours and exotic and evocative locations. Tom Hanks is as solidly reliable as ever in the Langdon role, and its great to see Felicity “The Theory of Everything” Jones in a leading role before she disappears into obscurity again (humour: “Rogue One” is released in December).
Tom Hanks
The film has fun with romantic expectations of the Langdon and Brooks characters. Here though is Hanks with the more age-appropriate Knudsen.
The supporting cast is also of great quality. Sidse Babett Knudsen (“Borgen”) is Dr Sinsky, leader of the W.H.O. (not credited – as memorably done with Peter Capaldi in “World War Z” as “Doctor, W.H.O.”!). Irrfan (“Jurassic World”) Khan is striking as the mysterious and authoritarian “Provost”. And Omar Sy (who made such an impact in the brilliant “The Intouchables”) plays the lead W.H.O. officer in pursuit of Langdon.
Hans Zimmer again provides the soundtrack, with his beautiful series theme cleverly working its way into the music as Langdon’s memory returns. However, at various points the music become overtly noticeable, intrusive and not to my liking. A bombastic choral reworking of the theme over the end titles is stirring though.
In summary, a glossy and nonsensical disappointment.
JasonKeenan (9 KP) rated Kingsman: The Golden Circle (2017) in Movies
Sep 20, 2017
100% worth the watch
And this movie deserved every point
I loved the first Kingsman, it has brought a new style to the spy gadget movies, most of the characters are amazing, some not so much, but still enjoyable
Right, so, the movie carries on from the first film, I'd say about a year or so has past, Eggsy 'Taron Edgerton' is a full member of 'The Kingsman' and has taken over the roll of his mentor, Harry (Colin Firth), and even taken harry's codename 'Galahad' , he is living with his girlfriend and moving forward with his life, when all of a sudden the Kingsman's headquarters were attack and destroyed.
With the world being held hostage by 'The Golden Circule' led by Poppy (Julian Moore), who is head of a drug cartel, and with a scheme to add poision into all her drugs and will only give the cure to the infected people of the world is if all the worlds leader comply with her demands,
So Eggsy and Merlin (Mark Strong) have to jump the pond to ask for help from there American cusins, 'The Statesmen', who is led by Champ 'Jeff Bridges', there cover is an organisation posing as a Bourbon whiskey distillery in Kentucky, and together they have to try and stop Poppy (Jillian Moore) from completing her evil schemes
I have to say this movie is realllllly good, the fight sequences are amazing, and the music fits the film perfectly, Taron Edgertons screen presents is just top class, and working off Colin Firth and Mark Strong, just an amazing cast, with a sneaky addition to the cast from a well known person ?, which was surprisingly nicely done, there are a few little changes I would have made, but still as a whole still amazing
If you like the Kingsman, you will absolutely love the Kingsman: The Golden Circule, I recommend you looking for the next showing and watching it now......why are you still reading this GO!
I loved the first Kingsman, it has brought a new style to the spy gadget movies, most of the characters are amazing, some not so much, but still enjoyable
Right, so, the movie carries on from the first film, I'd say about a year or so has past, Eggsy 'Taron Edgerton' is a full member of 'The Kingsman' and has taken over the roll of his mentor, Harry (Colin Firth), and even taken harry's codename 'Galahad' , he is living with his girlfriend and moving forward with his life, when all of a sudden the Kingsman's headquarters were attack and destroyed.
With the world being held hostage by 'The Golden Circule' led by Poppy (Julian Moore), who is head of a drug cartel, and with a scheme to add poision into all her drugs and will only give the cure to the infected people of the world is if all the worlds leader comply with her demands,
So Eggsy and Merlin (Mark Strong) have to jump the pond to ask for help from there American cusins, 'The Statesmen', who is led by Champ 'Jeff Bridges', there cover is an organisation posing as a Bourbon whiskey distillery in Kentucky, and together they have to try and stop Poppy (Jillian Moore) from completing her evil schemes
I have to say this movie is realllllly good, the fight sequences are amazing, and the music fits the film perfectly, Taron Edgertons screen presents is just top class, and working off Colin Firth and Mark Strong, just an amazing cast, with a sneaky addition to the cast from a well known person ?, which was surprisingly nicely done, there are a few little changes I would have made, but still as a whole still amazing
If you like the Kingsman, you will absolutely love the Kingsman: The Golden Circule, I recommend you looking for the next showing and watching it now......why are you still reading this GO!
Hazel (1853 KP) rated On the Origin of Findo Gask in Books
Dec 14, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
“Sick, twisted, blasphemous, wrong and very, very funny.” That is how this book, <i>On the Origin of Findo Gask</i> by David McCreight, is described on the back cover. But how accurate is it? “Blasphemous”? Most definitely. “Very, very funny”? Not so much. Although it is obvious that there is an attempt a humour, it is too “sick” and “twisted” for it to be anywhere near hilarious.
Findo Gask is a rather unattractive sixteen-year-old living in the Scottish Highlands. The narrative, recounted from his point of view, alternates between present day and an account of past events. Findo was once a child prodigy until he began questioning religion openly in church. In order to get back at the Christians, who thought he was possessed by demons, he establishes the Darwin Terrorist Organisation along with Cousin Dan. This, however, eventually gets rather out of hand. Now Findo is living with his Gran and his Mum is in hospital with a mysterious illness. He also believes he has sold the universe.
The fact that Findo is a stereotypical, Scottish, working class teenager makes the amount of bad language almost acceptable; although, to tell the complete truth, it did border on excessive.
At first there did not seem to be much of a plot, but once the past and present join up it is possible to connect all the events included in the story, which results in a considerably explosive ending.
As everyone’s take on humour is different there will undoubtedly be people who love this book. It would not be fair to deliberately put people off from reading <i>On the Origin of Findo Gask</i>, yet at the same time it is not recommended for the easily offended readers, particularly those with strict religious principles and a dislike for foul language.
“Sick, twisted, blasphemous, wrong and very, very funny.” That is how this book, <i>On the Origin of Findo Gask</i> by David McCreight, is described on the back cover. But how accurate is it? “Blasphemous”? Most definitely. “Very, very funny”? Not so much. Although it is obvious that there is an attempt a humour, it is too “sick” and “twisted” for it to be anywhere near hilarious.
Findo Gask is a rather unattractive sixteen-year-old living in the Scottish Highlands. The narrative, recounted from his point of view, alternates between present day and an account of past events. Findo was once a child prodigy until he began questioning religion openly in church. In order to get back at the Christians, who thought he was possessed by demons, he establishes the Darwin Terrorist Organisation along with Cousin Dan. This, however, eventually gets rather out of hand. Now Findo is living with his Gran and his Mum is in hospital with a mysterious illness. He also believes he has sold the universe.
The fact that Findo is a stereotypical, Scottish, working class teenager makes the amount of bad language almost acceptable; although, to tell the complete truth, it did border on excessive.
At first there did not seem to be much of a plot, but once the past and present join up it is possible to connect all the events included in the story, which results in a considerably explosive ending.
As everyone’s take on humour is different there will undoubtedly be people who love this book. It would not be fair to deliberately put people off from reading <i>On the Origin of Findo Gask</i>, yet at the same time it is not recommended for the easily offended readers, particularly those with strict religious principles and a dislike for foul language.
Learn English with Johnny Grammar's Word Challenge
Education and Games
App
What’s the difference between “in time” and “on time”? What do you call a person who cuts...
Carrefour Drive - Courses
Shopping
App
Avec l’application Carrefour Drive, gagnez du temps et faites vos courses en ligne depuis votre...
Paediatric Emergencies
Medical
App
‘Paediatric Emergencies’ provides the healthcare professional with the time critical information...
Paediatric Emergencies Lite
Medical
App
‘Paediatric Emergencies’ provides the healthcare professional with the time critical information...
Planning Law and Practice
David Butler, David Travers, Noemi Byrd and Giles Atkinson
Book
Planning Law and Practice is a clear, comprehensive and up-to-date guide to Town and Country...