Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated Thirteen Days (2000) in Movies
Aug 26, 2019
Verdict: History Lesson
Story: Thirteen Days starts like a normal day in the Kennedy administration, his assistant Kenny O’Donnell (Costner) joins the President John F Kennedy (Greenwood), his brother Robert F Kennedy (Culp) and advisers from every side for an emergency meeting.
The meeting is called to discuss the appearance of nuclear warheads in Cuba, believing Russia are moving to a closer position which could destroy large parts of America in minutes. What follows in Kenny trying to help JFK make the smartest decision, despite how many different people are advising with multiply options, all leading to one of the most intense stand offs in military history.
Thoughts on Thirteen Days
Characters – Kenny O’Donnell is the assistant advisor to the President, he gives him advice which would see him make decisions which would support the image of the President and the country instead of agree with the fast track answers which would see America go to war, he is the man that people turn to if they are not prepared to challenge the President’s decisions. President John F Kennedy is the man in the middle of the situation, the man that needs to make the final decision after taking on all the advice from his experts, he wants to remain in control of the situation to the best of his ability. Robert F Kennedy is one of the men advising his brother, he knows how John thinks and knows how the help him make the right decisions to remain calm and in control. We do have plenty of different advisors who are trying to offer a plan to what could make this stand off end quicker.
Performances – Kevin Costner is always entertaining to watch in a political movie, this is no different as he plays the pivot to everything going on. Bruce Greenwood as the President is great to watch through the film, with the whole cast looking like they would have been the people they are playing.
Story – The story here follows the events around the Cuba Mission Crisis, from the point of view of the Americans. This does break down to be a political thriller that does keep us on edge as we see all the potential ideas that were thrown out which could have seen the world in a different place if different outcomes had been used, while this is a 2 hour story, we only focus on the different ideas, which is interesting to see. Each person could have their own agenda which could show the mindset of the public during the events. We could have more intense moments, but it just doesn’t really do that much more, which doesn’t display just how dangerous the event could have been.
History – This is a big historical moment and it does show how the people in power were put on panic station when the events started to unfold.
Settings – The film uses the political settings for the most part, which does show us just how the people stayed together through the events of the crisis.
Scene of the Movie – Putting the Admiral in his place.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We could have had more intense sequences.
Final Thoughts – This is an interesting look at one of the biggest stand offs in modern history, we do see how it could have gone very differently and how everything unfolded.
Overall: Interesting look at history.
Story: Thirteen Days starts like a normal day in the Kennedy administration, his assistant Kenny O’Donnell (Costner) joins the President John F Kennedy (Greenwood), his brother Robert F Kennedy (Culp) and advisers from every side for an emergency meeting.
The meeting is called to discuss the appearance of nuclear warheads in Cuba, believing Russia are moving to a closer position which could destroy large parts of America in minutes. What follows in Kenny trying to help JFK make the smartest decision, despite how many different people are advising with multiply options, all leading to one of the most intense stand offs in military history.
Thoughts on Thirteen Days
Characters – Kenny O’Donnell is the assistant advisor to the President, he gives him advice which would see him make decisions which would support the image of the President and the country instead of agree with the fast track answers which would see America go to war, he is the man that people turn to if they are not prepared to challenge the President’s decisions. President John F Kennedy is the man in the middle of the situation, the man that needs to make the final decision after taking on all the advice from his experts, he wants to remain in control of the situation to the best of his ability. Robert F Kennedy is one of the men advising his brother, he knows how John thinks and knows how the help him make the right decisions to remain calm and in control. We do have plenty of different advisors who are trying to offer a plan to what could make this stand off end quicker.
Performances – Kevin Costner is always entertaining to watch in a political movie, this is no different as he plays the pivot to everything going on. Bruce Greenwood as the President is great to watch through the film, with the whole cast looking like they would have been the people they are playing.
Story – The story here follows the events around the Cuba Mission Crisis, from the point of view of the Americans. This does break down to be a political thriller that does keep us on edge as we see all the potential ideas that were thrown out which could have seen the world in a different place if different outcomes had been used, while this is a 2 hour story, we only focus on the different ideas, which is interesting to see. Each person could have their own agenda which could show the mindset of the public during the events. We could have more intense moments, but it just doesn’t really do that much more, which doesn’t display just how dangerous the event could have been.
History – This is a big historical moment and it does show how the people in power were put on panic station when the events started to unfold.
Settings – The film uses the political settings for the most part, which does show us just how the people stayed together through the events of the crisis.
Scene of the Movie – Putting the Admiral in his place.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We could have had more intense sequences.
Final Thoughts – This is an interesting look at one of the biggest stand offs in modern history, we do see how it could have gone very differently and how everything unfolded.
Overall: Interesting look at history.
TM
The Making of the President 2016: How Donald Trump Orchestrated a Revolution
Book
In the tradition of Theodore White's landmark books, the definitive look at how Donald J. Trump...
TacoDave (3835 KP) rated Captain Marvel (2019) in Movies
Apr 10, 2019 (Updated Apr 10, 2019)
Special Effects (1 more)
90's Setting
Acting (2 more)
Story
Overt Politicalization
Captain "Meh"vel.
Contains spoilers, click to show
I finally saw Captain Marvel, just a few weeks after the rest of the world. It has already made over $1 billion, so I know I'm late to the game.
What can I say that hasn't already been said? It's a serviceable Marvel movie. It ranks up there with Iron Man 2 and Thor: The Dark World as well-made, enjoyable, yet forgettable superhero fare. At the end I realized it doesn't really explain anything and doesn't really amount to much except a mouthpiece for feminists raging against toxic masculinity and a cry to help refugees, and that's disappointing.
What are Captain Marvel's powers? It never really explains. She shoots energy beams. She learns to fly, somehow. And apparently she can breathe in space (?). But how or why or what the limits of her powers are is never discussed.
Neither are weaknesses. Superman has kryptonite. Batman and Iron Man are humans using technology to help them, but can be killed. Even Vision died without his infinity stone. But apparently Captain Marvel is just such a kick-ass woman that she can't be hurt. The film seems to suggest that her only weakness is her lack of self-empowerment.
And while I don't mind a movie having a political bent, everything in this movie that is trying to promote a social message is too on-the-nose, too in-your-face to work. "I'm Just a Girl" plays while she beats people up. A man says she should smile. A pilot says "You know why it's called the COCKpit, right?" Ninety percent of the music features a female singer (the only one I noticed that didn't was Nirvana's "Come As You Are"). It's just ... too much. Or too blatant. It kept pulling me out of the movie, as if the director(s) were seated next to me, poking me in the arm, saying "See what we did there? Subtext!"
One of the aliens even refers to earth as a sh!t-hole, a clear, obvious reference to Donald Trump.
So that's Captain Marvel. 10% muddled action, 30% jokes (mostly funny), 5% story, and 55% political message. Oh, and 127% GURL POWER.
I enjoyed it as a prelude to Avengers: Endgame, but I don't think I'll ever watch it again.
What can I say that hasn't already been said? It's a serviceable Marvel movie. It ranks up there with Iron Man 2 and Thor: The Dark World as well-made, enjoyable, yet forgettable superhero fare. At the end I realized it doesn't really explain anything and doesn't really amount to much except a mouthpiece for feminists raging against toxic masculinity and a cry to help refugees, and that's disappointing.
What are Captain Marvel's powers? It never really explains. She shoots energy beams. She learns to fly, somehow. And apparently she can breathe in space (?). But how or why or what the limits of her powers are is never discussed.
Neither are weaknesses. Superman has kryptonite. Batman and Iron Man are humans using technology to help them, but can be killed. Even Vision died without his infinity stone. But apparently Captain Marvel is just such a kick-ass woman that she can't be hurt. The film seems to suggest that her only weakness is her lack of self-empowerment.
And while I don't mind a movie having a political bent, everything in this movie that is trying to promote a social message is too on-the-nose, too in-your-face to work. "I'm Just a Girl" plays while she beats people up. A man says she should smile. A pilot says "You know why it's called the COCKpit, right?" Ninety percent of the music features a female singer (the only one I noticed that didn't was Nirvana's "Come As You Are"). It's just ... too much. Or too blatant. It kept pulling me out of the movie, as if the director(s) were seated next to me, poking me in the arm, saying "See what we did there? Subtext!"
One of the aliens even refers to earth as a sh!t-hole, a clear, obvious reference to Donald Trump.
So that's Captain Marvel. 10% muddled action, 30% jokes (mostly funny), 5% story, and 55% political message. Oh, and 127% GURL POWER.
I enjoyed it as a prelude to Avengers: Endgame, but I don't think I'll ever watch it again.
Kelly (279 KP) rated Babylon Berlin in TV
Dec 16, 2018
Realistic portal of post Great War Berlin (1 more)
Not your usual boy meets girl story
Gritty, thrilling, engaging... need I go on?!
I have not found a series in some while that I was so attached, as Babylon Berlin. I confess, I watched the subtitles version, as my knowledge of German is pretty poor, but even this did not detach from the enjoyment of the series.
Babylon Berlin follows Gereon Rath, a detective struggling to deal with the aftermath of the Great War. He is supported at times in his cases by Charlotte Ritter, an administrator by day who supplements her families income through prostitution at night. I found myself routing for both characters throughout both series 1 and 2 of Babylon Berlin, even knowing Charlottes less than legal background, which is never hidden from the viewer. There was/ is a clear attraction between the two characters, which frustratingly is never fulfilled. Both characters are played by incredibly strong actors and are fully believable throughout.
What grasped my attention from the start was the clear portrayal of poverty that people lived in post war Berlin. Despite knowing some of the issues in living standards, I was drawn to the accuracy of the portrayal, many other stories set in this era would seek to romanticise the period at the end of the Weimar’s golden era, however the stark reality of degradation, sickness, depression and crime is always at the forefront of the story, and the political complexity of the time is covered well. This makes the the series very dark at times.
I was also surprised by the lack of Nazi input there is across season 1 and 2. We see lots about involvement of communists within the political system in the series, but there are only a small handful of references to the brown shirts - this is in stark contrast to what we are taught in schools, where the impression is given that by the late 1920s, Nazi involment is promenant in German society. This actually challenged my thinking on the subject, allowing me to realise that this is still a period, where, although the Nazis are known, they are not yet that popular.
I cannot wait until season 3 is released in order to find out what is next in store for Gereon and Charlotte. This truly is German production at its best.
Babylon Berlin follows Gereon Rath, a detective struggling to deal with the aftermath of the Great War. He is supported at times in his cases by Charlotte Ritter, an administrator by day who supplements her families income through prostitution at night. I found myself routing for both characters throughout both series 1 and 2 of Babylon Berlin, even knowing Charlottes less than legal background, which is never hidden from the viewer. There was/ is a clear attraction between the two characters, which frustratingly is never fulfilled. Both characters are played by incredibly strong actors and are fully believable throughout.
What grasped my attention from the start was the clear portrayal of poverty that people lived in post war Berlin. Despite knowing some of the issues in living standards, I was drawn to the accuracy of the portrayal, many other stories set in this era would seek to romanticise the period at the end of the Weimar’s golden era, however the stark reality of degradation, sickness, depression and crime is always at the forefront of the story, and the political complexity of the time is covered well. This makes the the series very dark at times.
I was also surprised by the lack of Nazi input there is across season 1 and 2. We see lots about involvement of communists within the political system in the series, but there are only a small handful of references to the brown shirts - this is in stark contrast to what we are taught in schools, where the impression is given that by the late 1920s, Nazi involment is promenant in German society. This actually challenged my thinking on the subject, allowing me to realise that this is still a period, where, although the Nazis are known, they are not yet that popular.
I cannot wait until season 3 is released in order to find out what is next in store for Gereon and Charlotte. This truly is German production at its best.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Broken City (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In Broken City, Russell Crowe and Mark Wahlberg wade into the streets of a
fictional New York, portraying its mayor and a tormented cop, respectively. This film is very political, and it drives to the heart of an issue found all around our country: corruption at every level, especially the highest.
The story starts with a shooting. As one might imagine, officers are easily found innocent in shootings because of the nature of their job, and thus Billy Taggart(Wahlberg) is found innocent after facing accusations of murder. Unfortunately, Mayor Nicholas Hostetler (Crowe) has damning evidence that would cause considerable harm to the officer — who’s earned a reputation as a hero — as well
as the city leaders, if it were brought to light. He decides to let Taggart go, and allow everyone to save face, with a handshake and a promise of future remembrance.
Seven years later the tides turn, as Private Eye Taggart is asked by Mayor
Hostetler to investigate his wife (Catherine Zeta-Jones) for a hefty sum of money.
The cash-strapped Taggart takes the job, but finds himself diving headfirst into a political feeding frenzy two weeks prior to the election. Naturally, drama ensues.
Broken City is not a bad film. The problem is: it’s also not a great film. It has many of the elements of a good movie, but something is missing. It’s hard to blame the writing, as there was well-balanced humor and drama. It’s hard to blame
the cinematography, because the key shots are there. (But some awkward shots are there, too. For example, there’s an odd, segmented spinning shot of Crowe and Wahlberg in the mayor’s office.) It’s hard to blame the acting; everyone does a great job in that regard. But there was just something missing. I wasn’t drawn in.
The movie felt rushed in certain areas, and too long in others. It had major plot holes, like when (spoiler alert) Taggart’s girlfriend disappears, but never resurfaces. The main character never gets a true, deep, passionate call-to-action, which all heroes are supposed to have.
I enjoyed the role of Taggart’s assistant. Even the ending was a fresh take (though somewhat expected, because the main character wasn’t conflicted and chaotic enough to merit an unknown response).
All in all, Broken City is a good movie, but not a great one. You would be well-served to rent or stream it, and save your theater dollars.
fictional New York, portraying its mayor and a tormented cop, respectively. This film is very political, and it drives to the heart of an issue found all around our country: corruption at every level, especially the highest.
The story starts with a shooting. As one might imagine, officers are easily found innocent in shootings because of the nature of their job, and thus Billy Taggart(Wahlberg) is found innocent after facing accusations of murder. Unfortunately, Mayor Nicholas Hostetler (Crowe) has damning evidence that would cause considerable harm to the officer — who’s earned a reputation as a hero — as well
as the city leaders, if it were brought to light. He decides to let Taggart go, and allow everyone to save face, with a handshake and a promise of future remembrance.
Seven years later the tides turn, as Private Eye Taggart is asked by Mayor
Hostetler to investigate his wife (Catherine Zeta-Jones) for a hefty sum of money.
The cash-strapped Taggart takes the job, but finds himself diving headfirst into a political feeding frenzy two weeks prior to the election. Naturally, drama ensues.
Broken City is not a bad film. The problem is: it’s also not a great film. It has many of the elements of a good movie, but something is missing. It’s hard to blame the writing, as there was well-balanced humor and drama. It’s hard to blame
the cinematography, because the key shots are there. (But some awkward shots are there, too. For example, there’s an odd, segmented spinning shot of Crowe and Wahlberg in the mayor’s office.) It’s hard to blame the acting; everyone does a great job in that regard. But there was just something missing. I wasn’t drawn in.
The movie felt rushed in certain areas, and too long in others. It had major plot holes, like when (spoiler alert) Taggart’s girlfriend disappears, but never resurfaces. The main character never gets a true, deep, passionate call-to-action, which all heroes are supposed to have.
I enjoyed the role of Taggart’s assistant. Even the ending was a fresh take (though somewhat expected, because the main character wasn’t conflicted and chaotic enough to merit an unknown response).
All in all, Broken City is a good movie, but not a great one. You would be well-served to rent or stream it, and save your theater dollars.
I Knew Hitler: The Lost Testimony by a Survivor from the Night of the Long Knives
Bob Carruthers and Kurt G. W. Ludecke
Book
First published in 1938 "I Knew Hitler" is the missing link in the literary trail which traces the...
The Soviet Gulag: Evidence, Interpretation and Comparison
Book
Before the collapse of the Soviet Union and the subsequent archival revolution, Aleksandr...
Twenty-First Century Lesbian Studies
Katherine O'Donnell and Noreen Giffney
Book
An enlightening, entertaining look at what the term "lesbian" really means--and what it means to be...
Braddock's Defeat: The Battle of the Monongahela and the Road to Revolution
Book
On July 9, 1755, British and colonial troops under the command of General Edward Braddock suffered a...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Post (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
You can’t get on the internet these days without a political controversy smacking you right in the face. You also can’t help but notice the timing of this historical thriller directed by Steven Spielberg. Using the past’s political agenda to reaffirm the resistance we are facing today. The Post takes place in the deep thrones of the Vietnam War, the “Pentagon Papers” are leaked: a classified study of revealing a government cover up relating to the war. Kay Graham (Meryl Steep) is the owner and largest shareholder of the Washington Post newspaper. Taking on a position she never foresaw herself ever doing after the untimely death of her husband. And, finally having to make one of the toughest decision of her entire life, both personally and professionally. To not only bringing down the government, but some very close personal friends in the process. It takes her Editor-In-Chief, Ben Bradlee (Tom Hanks) to convince her the importance of the news and the role journalists must play to deliver the news and protect the governed and not the government.
When you hear the high caliber names such as Hanks, Streep, Speilberg, you can almost guarantee a top notch film with unbelievable emphasis on character development. They definitely did not disappoint! The Post works as a history lesson. Not only does it portray the events that took place with such thorough details, it exemplifies the relationship between not only a journalist and their source, but also the personal struggle between the editor, the owner of the newspaper, their friends who hold major positions within the government, and the moral obligation to at least get the truth out to the public.
The set design, the costume design, the characters’ mannerisms are flawless. Even the way social interaction was demonstrated between men and women. Women’s role is in the home, cooking, cleaning, and entertaining. Something so simple as the use of a rotary phone played such a nostalgic role. I can’t say enough about the wonderful acting skills of both Streep and Hanks. I suspect one or both with be receiving some serious accolades during awards season. Streep and Hanks both shine throughout the entire film. They both did a great job at relaying the emotions and the turmoil these characters faced.
Many lines throughout the movie–“if we don’t hold them accountable, than who will?”–ring true to a lot of the issues affecting us today.
When you hear the high caliber names such as Hanks, Streep, Speilberg, you can almost guarantee a top notch film with unbelievable emphasis on character development. They definitely did not disappoint! The Post works as a history lesson. Not only does it portray the events that took place with such thorough details, it exemplifies the relationship between not only a journalist and their source, but also the personal struggle between the editor, the owner of the newspaper, their friends who hold major positions within the government, and the moral obligation to at least get the truth out to the public.
The set design, the costume design, the characters’ mannerisms are flawless. Even the way social interaction was demonstrated between men and women. Women’s role is in the home, cooking, cleaning, and entertaining. Something so simple as the use of a rotary phone played such a nostalgic role. I can’t say enough about the wonderful acting skills of both Streep and Hanks. I suspect one or both with be receiving some serious accolades during awards season. Streep and Hanks both shine throughout the entire film. They both did a great job at relaying the emotions and the turmoil these characters faced.
Many lines throughout the movie–“if we don’t hold them accountable, than who will?”–ring true to a lot of the issues affecting us today.