Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Thor: Ragnarok (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Utterly preposterous
Thor is arguably one of Marvel’s strongest characters. Played by the superb Chris Hemsworth since 2011, the God of thunder is one of the MCUs most popular assets.
It’s unfortunate then that he’s been lambasted with the weakest solo films of the entire series, the son of Odin really has deserved much better.
Thor’s inception in the first of his three solo outings was a competent if unremarkable origins story and the less said about Thor: The Dark World, which remains the poorest film of the entire MCU, the better. Now, just in time for Infinity War,Thor: Ragnarok rolls into cinemas. But does it do its leading man justice?Imprisoned on the other side of the universe, the mighty Thor (Hemsworth) finds himself in a deadly gladiatorial contest that pits him against the Hulk (Bruce Banner), his former ally and fellow Avenger. Thor’s quest for survival leads him in a race against time to prevent the all-powerful goddess of death, Hela, (Cate Blanchett) from destroying his home world and the Asgardian civilisation.
This third film for our mighty Avenger is really something. A film more akin to Guardians of the Galaxy than its overly stuffy predecessors. Director Taika Waititi in his first big-budget feature has managed what many had thought was impossible, he’s given Thor a rather brilliant movie.
But how? Well, he’s realised what no-one else has. The premise surrounding our titular hero is utterly ridiculous. Rather than shy away from that and create something serious, he’s embraced it with humour, music and my goodness, a lot of colour.
If you thought Guardians of the Galaxy used every colour on the spectrum, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Thor: Ragnarok is quite something to watch. From the gold-tipped spears of Asgard that glisten like never before, to the trash-topped planet of Sakaar, everything is dripping in colour.
“Casting Goldblum in the role of an immortal game-player really is an inspired choice.”
Speaking of Sakaar, it contains one of the MCUs best new additions: Jeff Goldbum. Sorry, I mean the Grandmaster. Casting Goldblum in the role of an immortal game-player really is an inspired choice. The 65-year-old legend has made a career on playing himself and it works exceptionally well here. His improvisation is absolutely spot on.
Ragnarok throws up a few other surprises too. One being that Chris Hemsworth is absolutely hilarious. He and Tom Hiddleston bounce off each other incredibly well and we see real chemistry – the chemistry that should have been evident from the start. Cate Blanchett also turns the cheese up to 11 as the latest throwaway Marvel villain, Hela.
She fares better than the majority of Marvel villains and is certainly more interesting than Christopher Eccelston’s, Malekith, but they never quite make the impact that the scriptwriters were clearly looking for. Nevertheless, Blanchett is excellent.
Thankfully, Thor: Ragnarok doesn’t suffer from the absence of Natalie Portman’s dull Jane Foster, and though she is referenced early on, newcomer Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie provides a fitting replacement and possible future love-interest for our intrepid hero.
Unfortunately, it’s not all good news. Surprisingly the first 30 minutes feel incredibly rushed as numerous loose storylines are brought together and the improvised nature of the script lends itself to a little too much humour. Yes, we get it, Marvel films are funny, but this should not be at the expense of the more emotional sequences that the movie tries to put across.
Nevertheless, Thor: Ragnarok is a resounding success, created by a man who clearly has a passion for this corner of the MCU. He manages to make an absolutely preposterous film – and that’s exactly how Thor should be. Take a bow Mr. Waititi.
A little tip – there are two end credit sequences waiting for you. You’re welcome.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/26/thor-ragnarok-review/
It’s unfortunate then that he’s been lambasted with the weakest solo films of the entire series, the son of Odin really has deserved much better.
Thor’s inception in the first of his three solo outings was a competent if unremarkable origins story and the less said about Thor: The Dark World, which remains the poorest film of the entire MCU, the better. Now, just in time for Infinity War,Thor: Ragnarok rolls into cinemas. But does it do its leading man justice?Imprisoned on the other side of the universe, the mighty Thor (Hemsworth) finds himself in a deadly gladiatorial contest that pits him against the Hulk (Bruce Banner), his former ally and fellow Avenger. Thor’s quest for survival leads him in a race against time to prevent the all-powerful goddess of death, Hela, (Cate Blanchett) from destroying his home world and the Asgardian civilisation.
This third film for our mighty Avenger is really something. A film more akin to Guardians of the Galaxy than its overly stuffy predecessors. Director Taika Waititi in his first big-budget feature has managed what many had thought was impossible, he’s given Thor a rather brilliant movie.
But how? Well, he’s realised what no-one else has. The premise surrounding our titular hero is utterly ridiculous. Rather than shy away from that and create something serious, he’s embraced it with humour, music and my goodness, a lot of colour.
If you thought Guardians of the Galaxy used every colour on the spectrum, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Thor: Ragnarok is quite something to watch. From the gold-tipped spears of Asgard that glisten like never before, to the trash-topped planet of Sakaar, everything is dripping in colour.
“Casting Goldblum in the role of an immortal game-player really is an inspired choice.”
Speaking of Sakaar, it contains one of the MCUs best new additions: Jeff Goldbum. Sorry, I mean the Grandmaster. Casting Goldblum in the role of an immortal game-player really is an inspired choice. The 65-year-old legend has made a career on playing himself and it works exceptionally well here. His improvisation is absolutely spot on.
Ragnarok throws up a few other surprises too. One being that Chris Hemsworth is absolutely hilarious. He and Tom Hiddleston bounce off each other incredibly well and we see real chemistry – the chemistry that should have been evident from the start. Cate Blanchett also turns the cheese up to 11 as the latest throwaway Marvel villain, Hela.
She fares better than the majority of Marvel villains and is certainly more interesting than Christopher Eccelston’s, Malekith, but they never quite make the impact that the scriptwriters were clearly looking for. Nevertheless, Blanchett is excellent.
Thankfully, Thor: Ragnarok doesn’t suffer from the absence of Natalie Portman’s dull Jane Foster, and though she is referenced early on, newcomer Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie provides a fitting replacement and possible future love-interest for our intrepid hero.
Unfortunately, it’s not all good news. Surprisingly the first 30 minutes feel incredibly rushed as numerous loose storylines are brought together and the improvised nature of the script lends itself to a little too much humour. Yes, we get it, Marvel films are funny, but this should not be at the expense of the more emotional sequences that the movie tries to put across.
Nevertheless, Thor: Ragnarok is a resounding success, created by a man who clearly has a passion for this corner of the MCU. He manages to make an absolutely preposterous film – and that’s exactly how Thor should be. Take a bow Mr. Waititi.
A little tip – there are two end credit sequences waiting for you. You’re welcome.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/26/thor-ragnarok-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Hummingbird Project (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Contemporary technology drama comes to the silver screen in the form of The Hummingbird Project starring Jesse Eisenberg, Alexander Skarsgård, and Salma Hayek. The film’s premise is realistic enough: A pair of insiders at a big Wall Street company defect to start a project for a rival firm – to built a single fiber optic connection between a stock exchange in Kansas City and the New York Stock Exchange. This was realistic enough that my lack of knowledge on the history of Wall Street’s networking had me looking up later to see if there was any truth or basis to portions of the plot. Unfortunately, I can’t seem to find anything referencing a Kansas City Stock Exchange. Unless they were referring to livestock? Because there was a Kansas City Livestock Exchange. Anyway, my biases up front – despite my clear lacking of aforementioned knowledge, I am a tech geek with experience in networking and related technology fields. So, a premise like this has a lot to attract my attention. There is admittedly much to enjoy about dramas regarding our contemporary plights in the realm of technology, because that’s where a lot of work is centered. Gone are the days of building railroads. But our internet infrastructure…
The film does a fairly good job representing the intense difficulty of such a project: it’s something like one thousand miles of straight line to run one fiber optic connection without obstruction. Most people would not think about what goes into making that into reality, which is the draw for most of the film’s conflict. I do however recognize that centering the plot on a large scale construction job of an internet cable doesn’t exactly scream excitement for most people; and this is especially true when the end goal is to shave off one millisecond from their current transaction times. Yet, this arguably ironic dynamic actually ended up being somewhat of a draw for me. Halfway through the film the question arises, “All this for just a millisecond of increased speed?” That’s the point though, and I wish the film would have delved deeper into these kinds of themes. This represents my chief criticism: all of the elements are here for a truly stellar drama but everything is explored at only a shallow or moderate depth. The characters have decent arcs, thrown some difficult challenges and curveballs to overcome, but Jesse Eisenberg’s character only briefly touches on the back-story that truly drives him, and while Alexander Skarsgård‘s character is more fully fleshed out his arc is essentially basic. I do enjoy the role reversal as one would usually expect to see Jesse Eisenberg playing the socially awkward genius programmer and Alexander Skarsgård to play the ambitious go-getter who runs the project, but they take opposite roles to great effect. The actors all do great here for the most part, including the excellent Michael Mando in a supporting role. My only complaint here is the acting dips a bit into melodrama later in the film, but this is mostly attributed to subplots that edge into the unbelievable.
Ironically Hummingbird Project works best at representing its core premise of what most would consider a mundane construction project. The actors do well, and I especially enjoy Alexander Skarsgård‘s portrayal of the lonely genius, but their underlying drama and back-stories are a bit of a mixed bag. Some of it works decently well while other elements do not – particularly late in the film. Sadly the themes at play are a bit too obvious and underexplored, but it is an appreciated attempt to represent a seldom explored aspect of contemporary industry.
The film does a fairly good job representing the intense difficulty of such a project: it’s something like one thousand miles of straight line to run one fiber optic connection without obstruction. Most people would not think about what goes into making that into reality, which is the draw for most of the film’s conflict. I do however recognize that centering the plot on a large scale construction job of an internet cable doesn’t exactly scream excitement for most people; and this is especially true when the end goal is to shave off one millisecond from their current transaction times. Yet, this arguably ironic dynamic actually ended up being somewhat of a draw for me. Halfway through the film the question arises, “All this for just a millisecond of increased speed?” That’s the point though, and I wish the film would have delved deeper into these kinds of themes. This represents my chief criticism: all of the elements are here for a truly stellar drama but everything is explored at only a shallow or moderate depth. The characters have decent arcs, thrown some difficult challenges and curveballs to overcome, but Jesse Eisenberg’s character only briefly touches on the back-story that truly drives him, and while Alexander Skarsgård‘s character is more fully fleshed out his arc is essentially basic. I do enjoy the role reversal as one would usually expect to see Jesse Eisenberg playing the socially awkward genius programmer and Alexander Skarsgård to play the ambitious go-getter who runs the project, but they take opposite roles to great effect. The actors all do great here for the most part, including the excellent Michael Mando in a supporting role. My only complaint here is the acting dips a bit into melodrama later in the film, but this is mostly attributed to subplots that edge into the unbelievable.
Ironically Hummingbird Project works best at representing its core premise of what most would consider a mundane construction project. The actors do well, and I especially enjoy Alexander Skarsgård‘s portrayal of the lonely genius, but their underlying drama and back-stories are a bit of a mixed bag. Some of it works decently well while other elements do not – particularly late in the film. Sadly the themes at play are a bit too obvious and underexplored, but it is an appreciated attempt to represent a seldom explored aspect of contemporary industry.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Night Sitter (2019) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: The Night Sitter starts when a con-artist Amber (Dufour) poses as a babysitter for her latest job, she finds a wealthy occult enthusiast child Kevin (Champion) to babysit for the night, along with his father’s new girlfriend son Ronnie (Campbell).
With Amber setting up her plan with her partners in crime Rod (Rivers), Lindsey (Neukum) and her over-protective stalker who thinks he is her boyfriend Martin (Larmore), the boys enter the relic room and unwittingly release three witches upon the household.
Thoughts on The Night Sitter
Characters – Amber is a con-artist that poses as a babysitter for her latest job, she has the experience to trick the adult into believing she is qualified for the job and keeps the kids occupied enough to prepare for her robbery. She remains calm however many obstacles get thrown in her way including her partner bring his girlfriend, her stalker boyfriend and obsessed man from across the road. Kevin is the son from the house, he isn’t willing to get overly involved in searching around the house, he doesn’t want to be friends with Ronnie and spends time trying to prove the witches are real. Rod is the criminal partner, he brings his girlfriend on the latest job which shows him being a slacker when it comes to the jobs. Lindsey is the girlfriend of Rod’s she comes dressed like a cat burglar getting into the role of criminal thief, willing to get involved in everything going on.
Performances – Elyse Dufour in the leading role is the strongest of the cast, she shows the calm required while keeping her character in control through the night. Jack Champion is the young actor playing one of the children, he brings the nervous innocence needed for this film. Jermain Rivers does get a lot of the comedy to do with his character being the dumb one in the criminal act. Each actor does give their character enough to be a standout.
Story – The story here follows a con-artist working on her latest job which turns into a nightmare when three witches are released into the house searching for their latest victims. This is a story with plenty going on, in other films this hasn’t worked, for this one it does, the kids are troublesome like you would imagine, the criminal characters bring the laughs, which has moments that feel like we are watching the Home Alone thieves and once we add the witches into the mix, everything ties together effortlessly. If you have seen Annabelle Comes Home, you can see certain similarities, though this movie was made first before anyone thinks I am calling it a copy, having the household needing to deal with hauntings from a secret room, shows that this could be compared.
Comedy/Horror – The comedy in the film comes from criminals for the most part, with them not having everything going to plan, the horror comes from witches that have started to haunt the members of the household for the night.
Settings – The film is set in the one location of the house that has the occult material inside, they become trapped which plays into the idea of what the horror is coming for them.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are great, we get to see the blood covered moments that the witches put on their victims.
Scene of the Movie – Heading down to the basement.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Martin the character, mostly because he changes through the whole film, starting nervous, turning into the ass by the end.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun horror comedy that will get a couple of laughs, while giving us the blood needing for the witches getting the blood needed.
Overall: Three Witches, One Solution, Enjoy.
With Amber setting up her plan with her partners in crime Rod (Rivers), Lindsey (Neukum) and her over-protective stalker who thinks he is her boyfriend Martin (Larmore), the boys enter the relic room and unwittingly release three witches upon the household.
Thoughts on The Night Sitter
Characters – Amber is a con-artist that poses as a babysitter for her latest job, she has the experience to trick the adult into believing she is qualified for the job and keeps the kids occupied enough to prepare for her robbery. She remains calm however many obstacles get thrown in her way including her partner bring his girlfriend, her stalker boyfriend and obsessed man from across the road. Kevin is the son from the house, he isn’t willing to get overly involved in searching around the house, he doesn’t want to be friends with Ronnie and spends time trying to prove the witches are real. Rod is the criminal partner, he brings his girlfriend on the latest job which shows him being a slacker when it comes to the jobs. Lindsey is the girlfriend of Rod’s she comes dressed like a cat burglar getting into the role of criminal thief, willing to get involved in everything going on.
Performances – Elyse Dufour in the leading role is the strongest of the cast, she shows the calm required while keeping her character in control through the night. Jack Champion is the young actor playing one of the children, he brings the nervous innocence needed for this film. Jermain Rivers does get a lot of the comedy to do with his character being the dumb one in the criminal act. Each actor does give their character enough to be a standout.
Story – The story here follows a con-artist working on her latest job which turns into a nightmare when three witches are released into the house searching for their latest victims. This is a story with plenty going on, in other films this hasn’t worked, for this one it does, the kids are troublesome like you would imagine, the criminal characters bring the laughs, which has moments that feel like we are watching the Home Alone thieves and once we add the witches into the mix, everything ties together effortlessly. If you have seen Annabelle Comes Home, you can see certain similarities, though this movie was made first before anyone thinks I am calling it a copy, having the household needing to deal with hauntings from a secret room, shows that this could be compared.
Comedy/Horror – The comedy in the film comes from criminals for the most part, with them not having everything going to plan, the horror comes from witches that have started to haunt the members of the household for the night.
Settings – The film is set in the one location of the house that has the occult material inside, they become trapped which plays into the idea of what the horror is coming for them.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are great, we get to see the blood covered moments that the witches put on their victims.
Scene of the Movie – Heading down to the basement.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Martin the character, mostly because he changes through the whole film, starting nervous, turning into the ass by the end.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun horror comedy that will get a couple of laughs, while giving us the blood needing for the witches getting the blood needed.
Overall: Three Witches, One Solution, Enjoy.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Clue (1985) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
I wish I could remember the first time I saw Clue. It has been one of my favourites for years. Tim Curry as Wadsworth and Lesley Ann Warren as Miss Scarlet will always be the highlight of this for me. Looking at my sense of humour these days I see a lot of things I recognise from these older films that I grew up with.
FUN FACT - CASTING: Jonathan Lynn said that Carrie Fisher was originally cast as Miss Scarlet but went into rehab four days before filming began, so Warren was given the role instead.
Generally all round the cast is great and they all bring something memorable to their characters.
FUN FACT - COLOURS: The character's colourful monikers match with the colour of their playing pieces in the board game and their cars in the movie.
I'm not going to lie, the fact that they didn't wear their colours has always bothered me. Evidently they're all wearing the "opposite" of their colours... I'm not sure I care for that idea if I'm honest.
I can't put my finger on what I love so much about Clue. It's just so easy to watch. From the moment Wadsworth gives that dog a withering look to the triumphant ending it's just brilliant to watch. I can't think of a moment that I dislike, and trying to pick a favourite moment? Forget it. I'd just have to present you with the entire movie with ending C.
FUN FACT - ENDINGS: While there are three endings to the film that you can see on the blu-ray/DVD, there was actually a fourth one filmed where Wadsworth revealed that he had actually poisoned everyone earlier in the evening. It's still in the novelisation but was never shown.
There are so many laughs throughout and while I've seen it so often that I don't laugh out loud as much it still brings a smile to my face. I enjoy the slightly madcap interactions and the overly dramatic reactions.
Tim Curry really is amazing, I think basically all of us would agree with that. (Well apart from one person I found online who has evidently never liked anything he's been in.) This movie could be used as his emotional resume. I don't think there are any he missed!
FUN FACT - CASTING: Lynn was set to cast Leonard Rossiter (Rigsby from Rising Damp) as Wadsworth but he sadly passed away before production started. His second choice was Rowan Atkinson but the studio were worried he was too much of an unknown in the states at the time.
While I can definitely see Rossiter in his role I really can't imagine him having the same impact on screen. Curry's flamboyancy definitely lifted the film to pole position among comedies.
Watching Clue of course makes me want to watch Murder By Death which has a very similar feel, although not quite so manic towards the end.
"It's my defense mechanism!" - Miss Scarlet
Isn't it though!?
What you should do
I know older films aren't for everyone but Clue is amazingly fun and I feel like everyone need to see it, and if you don't love it... just tell me that you did in a text message so I can't tell you're lying to me.
Note: I brought a special edition of Clue from HMV. It was a blu-ray copy in a retro VHS type box. It also came with a small poster, a collectors card, a sticker and a DVD copy. It's fun and it's different, but ultimately that version really isn't worth the money. I would just get the cheapest thing that you can. The quality difference of the blu-ray isn't worth it and the VHS box gimmick is nice in theory but disappointing in reality.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Secret passageways in a house? Erm, yes please!
FUN FACT - CASTING: Jonathan Lynn said that Carrie Fisher was originally cast as Miss Scarlet but went into rehab four days before filming began, so Warren was given the role instead.
Generally all round the cast is great and they all bring something memorable to their characters.
FUN FACT - COLOURS: The character's colourful monikers match with the colour of their playing pieces in the board game and their cars in the movie.
I'm not going to lie, the fact that they didn't wear their colours has always bothered me. Evidently they're all wearing the "opposite" of their colours... I'm not sure I care for that idea if I'm honest.
I can't put my finger on what I love so much about Clue. It's just so easy to watch. From the moment Wadsworth gives that dog a withering look to the triumphant ending it's just brilliant to watch. I can't think of a moment that I dislike, and trying to pick a favourite moment? Forget it. I'd just have to present you with the entire movie with ending C.
FUN FACT - ENDINGS: While there are three endings to the film that you can see on the blu-ray/DVD, there was actually a fourth one filmed where Wadsworth revealed that he had actually poisoned everyone earlier in the evening. It's still in the novelisation but was never shown.
There are so many laughs throughout and while I've seen it so often that I don't laugh out loud as much it still brings a smile to my face. I enjoy the slightly madcap interactions and the overly dramatic reactions.
Tim Curry really is amazing, I think basically all of us would agree with that. (Well apart from one person I found online who has evidently never liked anything he's been in.) This movie could be used as his emotional resume. I don't think there are any he missed!
FUN FACT - CASTING: Lynn was set to cast Leonard Rossiter (Rigsby from Rising Damp) as Wadsworth but he sadly passed away before production started. His second choice was Rowan Atkinson but the studio were worried he was too much of an unknown in the states at the time.
While I can definitely see Rossiter in his role I really can't imagine him having the same impact on screen. Curry's flamboyancy definitely lifted the film to pole position among comedies.
Watching Clue of course makes me want to watch Murder By Death which has a very similar feel, although not quite so manic towards the end.
"It's my defense mechanism!" - Miss Scarlet
Isn't it though!?
What you should do
I know older films aren't for everyone but Clue is amazingly fun and I feel like everyone need to see it, and if you don't love it... just tell me that you did in a text message so I can't tell you're lying to me.
Note: I brought a special edition of Clue from HMV. It was a blu-ray copy in a retro VHS type box. It also came with a small poster, a collectors card, a sticker and a DVD copy. It's fun and it's different, but ultimately that version really isn't worth the money. I would just get the cheapest thing that you can. The quality difference of the blu-ray isn't worth it and the VHS box gimmick is nice in theory but disappointing in reality.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Secret passageways in a house? Erm, yes please!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Thor: Love and Thunder (2022) in Movies
Jul 8, 2022
Good Character Arcs for Thor and Jane
Under the Writing and Direction of Taika Waititi, the THOR franchise portion of the Marvel Cinematic Universe has gone in a more comedic, rather than Shakespearean, direction and THOR: LOVE AND THUNDER proves that this direction is a smart one both for THOR and for the overall health and diversity of the Marvel Cinematic Universe as well.
Starring Chris Hemsworth, of course, as the titular THOR, Love and Thunder shows our demi-god hero at a crossroads in his life and career. Into this world walks his ex-girlfriend, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) and chaos ensues as both are chasing the god-killer, Gorr (Christian Bale).
This sort of premise set-up (and the fact that Hemsworth is playing THOR for the 8th time), could have fallen victim to banality and dullness, but under the watchful eye of Waititi (Writer/Director of the severely under-rated JOJO RABBIT), this THOR soars with the best of them and develops the overall arc and (eventual) pay-off of both Thor’s and Jane’s arcs precisely and (upon retrospection) in the only satisfying way that they could have ended. So, kudos needs to be given to Waititi for walking this tightrope and sticking the landing.
Hemsworth, of course, is charming and buff as Thor and balances the action, romantic drama and comedic portions of this story well. Waititi brings more than just comic relief (though he has plenty of that as well) as the voice of Thor’s buddy KORG, while Christian Bale is more than just one-dimensional (how can this actor be anything but interesting) as the main villain of this piece..
What surprised me the most in this film is the portrayal of Jane Foster by Portman and how her character becomes the “female Thor” (that’s not a spoiler, it’s in the trailers) and does NOT become just “Thor’s girlfriend”. Portman has made no secret of her distaste of how her character became the femme fatale in THOR: THE DARK WORLD and refused to return to this character previously. Obviously, Waititi has been able to come up with a storyline - and an arc - that would interest an actress like Portman to return and Natalie nails it. She looked bright-eyed and energized by this part and by where her character goes in this film.
And then there is Tessa Thompson’s Valkyrie. This character is a strong part of Thor’s story - and the story of the survivors of Asgaard (their destroyed homeworld). Thompson owns this part and is engaging and interesting to watch on-screen. Out of necessity, her character and story play a supporting role to the main Thor/Jane story, so her character didn’t get quite enough to do for my tastes. But it did whet my appetite for a stand-alone Valkyrie film (make that happen Marvel).
There are cameos and extended-cameos galore in this film - as well as TWO end credits scenes - so to mention them would be to spoil them, except to say that the GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY play a pivotal role, but for those who came to see a GUARDIANS film, you’ll have to wait for GUARDIANS 3 to come out next year - this is a THOR film.
A very satisfying entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and while not a perfect film (it does try too hard, at times, to mine the same, surprise comic gold of THOR: RAGNAROK), THOR: LOVE AND THUNDER delivers a stand-alone Thor story that drives both the characters of Thor and Jane forward in a smart, intelligent way…and when is the last time the words “smart and intelligent” were used with a comic book film)?
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Starring Chris Hemsworth, of course, as the titular THOR, Love and Thunder shows our demi-god hero at a crossroads in his life and career. Into this world walks his ex-girlfriend, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) and chaos ensues as both are chasing the god-killer, Gorr (Christian Bale).
This sort of premise set-up (and the fact that Hemsworth is playing THOR for the 8th time), could have fallen victim to banality and dullness, but under the watchful eye of Waititi (Writer/Director of the severely under-rated JOJO RABBIT), this THOR soars with the best of them and develops the overall arc and (eventual) pay-off of both Thor’s and Jane’s arcs precisely and (upon retrospection) in the only satisfying way that they could have ended. So, kudos needs to be given to Waititi for walking this tightrope and sticking the landing.
Hemsworth, of course, is charming and buff as Thor and balances the action, romantic drama and comedic portions of this story well. Waititi brings more than just comic relief (though he has plenty of that as well) as the voice of Thor’s buddy KORG, while Christian Bale is more than just one-dimensional (how can this actor be anything but interesting) as the main villain of this piece..
What surprised me the most in this film is the portrayal of Jane Foster by Portman and how her character becomes the “female Thor” (that’s not a spoiler, it’s in the trailers) and does NOT become just “Thor’s girlfriend”. Portman has made no secret of her distaste of how her character became the femme fatale in THOR: THE DARK WORLD and refused to return to this character previously. Obviously, Waititi has been able to come up with a storyline - and an arc - that would interest an actress like Portman to return and Natalie nails it. She looked bright-eyed and energized by this part and by where her character goes in this film.
And then there is Tessa Thompson’s Valkyrie. This character is a strong part of Thor’s story - and the story of the survivors of Asgaard (their destroyed homeworld). Thompson owns this part and is engaging and interesting to watch on-screen. Out of necessity, her character and story play a supporting role to the main Thor/Jane story, so her character didn’t get quite enough to do for my tastes. But it did whet my appetite for a stand-alone Valkyrie film (make that happen Marvel).
There are cameos and extended-cameos galore in this film - as well as TWO end credits scenes - so to mention them would be to spoil them, except to say that the GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY play a pivotal role, but for those who came to see a GUARDIANS film, you’ll have to wait for GUARDIANS 3 to come out next year - this is a THOR film.
A very satisfying entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and while not a perfect film (it does try too hard, at times, to mine the same, surprise comic gold of THOR: RAGNAROK), THOR: LOVE AND THUNDER delivers a stand-alone Thor story that drives both the characters of Thor and Jane forward in a smart, intelligent way…and when is the last time the words “smart and intelligent” were used with a comic book film)?
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Rhubarbio (27 KP) rated The Resistance: Avalon in Tabletop Games
May 25, 2019
Excellent gateway game (1 more)
Amazing for playing with large groups
Great Bluffing Game!
Avalon is an enhancement to the Resistance,l (which in turn is a revision of Mafia/Werewolf) as it includes special player roles. This card game requires players to select a card each, which tells them if they are a good character (loyal servant of King Arthur) or a bad character (minion of Mordred), which defines how they play the game. As a good guy, you must try and succeed 3 of 5 missions, whilst the bad guys will try to make the missions fail. No one knows who the other good guys are, except for the player who receives the Merlin card. Merlin knows who the good guys are, and will therefore try to persuade the group towards ensuring only the good guys go on missions. However, there is a special role for the bad guys too. If the bad guys lose, the player who is the Assassin has a last chance to claim victory for the bad guys, if the Assassin can guess who Merlin is. Therefore, Merlin has to be subtle, otherwise the bad guys will win.
This is essentially a bluffing game where you just convince others that you are good and, inevitably, accuse others of being bad. This game, for the right group, is hours of fun! You need a ln engaged group of people who are willing to chat and be enthusiastic about engaging with this; the game and fun C Mrs from this interaction, and layer dissecting who was good and bad and how they fooled or misled everyone. I thoroughly recommend this game for gateway gamers i.e. those making the transition from everyday well known games such as Monopoly, to more designer games that have flourished over the past 20 years or so.
This game, whilst great, falters at lower or highest playcounts. At the lower end, it is very difficult to play as a bad guy, unless you use other roles included in the game. At the higher gamecount, things get very confusing and overly exhausting. However, this is an exceptional game and is likely only bettered as a bluffing game by the soon to be released Blood on the Clocktower.
I have played this hundreds of time, with the same group of people. Whilst I am now fatigued by the game, given this game only costs around £15, it is a solid investment for so many hours of fun.
This is essentially a bluffing game where you just convince others that you are good and, inevitably, accuse others of being bad. This game, for the right group, is hours of fun! You need a ln engaged group of people who are willing to chat and be enthusiastic about engaging with this; the game and fun C Mrs from this interaction, and layer dissecting who was good and bad and how they fooled or misled everyone. I thoroughly recommend this game for gateway gamers i.e. those making the transition from everyday well known games such as Monopoly, to more designer games that have flourished over the past 20 years or so.
This game, whilst great, falters at lower or highest playcounts. At the lower end, it is very difficult to play as a bad guy, unless you use other roles included in the game. At the higher gamecount, things get very confusing and overly exhausting. However, this is an exceptional game and is likely only bettered as a bluffing game by the soon to be released Blood on the Clocktower.
I have played this hundreds of time, with the same group of people. Whilst I am now fatigued by the game, given this game only costs around £15, it is a solid investment for so many hours of fun.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Europa Europa (1992) in Movies
Nov 5, 2019
A Steady Boil That Produces a Successful Stew
A Jewish boy tries to survive the holocaust by pretending he is a German soldier.
Acting: 10
This movie can’t be found in many places. In fact, I had to watch the full version on Youtube, something I typically hate to do. We can get into supporting art later. The point I’m trying to make is, I didn’t really know many of these actors, but I was captivated by a lot of their performances, especially the main actor Marco Hofschneider playing the role of Solomon the Jewish boy trying to survive. He captures such a wave of emotions, sometimes in the same scene and you can feel him throughout his entire journey. Before the end of it, his character seemingly feels like a friend that you want to reach out to and help. It wasn’t hard to connect with the characters here.
Beginning: 10
We learn early on why Solomon ends up having to become a German. Essentially everything around him is destroyed and we get to see that in the first ten minutes of the movie. There were a couple of hard scenes involving explosions that really leant themselves to the reality of the movie as a whole.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
There is a heartbreaking scene towards the beginning of the movie where men are trying to escape the gruesome war by boat. One of the men jumps back into the ocean as he decides it would be better to go back to the fate they were trying to escape. It’s a scene shot so well in such a bleak fashion of hopelessness as you see throughout the movie.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
Keeps you engaged from beginning to end. Just about everything a movie should be. This action-drama war mix definitely does not disappoint.
Memorability: 8
Pace: 8
Just over an hour in, things start to slow down a taste and you feel the conflict starting to fade. Fortunately it doesn’t take too long for the pace to pick right back up. There is a lingering intensity here from the threat of Solomon being uncovered that keeps the movie at a steady boil.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 96
I honestly had no idea I would like Europa Europa as much as I did, but was pleasantly surprised. It’s not only thought-provoking but it tugs at your heartstrings while giving you a unique look at a dark time. A highly recommended classic.
Acting: 10
This movie can’t be found in many places. In fact, I had to watch the full version on Youtube, something I typically hate to do. We can get into supporting art later. The point I’m trying to make is, I didn’t really know many of these actors, but I was captivated by a lot of their performances, especially the main actor Marco Hofschneider playing the role of Solomon the Jewish boy trying to survive. He captures such a wave of emotions, sometimes in the same scene and you can feel him throughout his entire journey. Before the end of it, his character seemingly feels like a friend that you want to reach out to and help. It wasn’t hard to connect with the characters here.
Beginning: 10
We learn early on why Solomon ends up having to become a German. Essentially everything around him is destroyed and we get to see that in the first ten minutes of the movie. There were a couple of hard scenes involving explosions that really leant themselves to the reality of the movie as a whole.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
There is a heartbreaking scene towards the beginning of the movie where men are trying to escape the gruesome war by boat. One of the men jumps back into the ocean as he decides it would be better to go back to the fate they were trying to escape. It’s a scene shot so well in such a bleak fashion of hopelessness as you see throughout the movie.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
Keeps you engaged from beginning to end. Just about everything a movie should be. This action-drama war mix definitely does not disappoint.
Memorability: 8
Pace: 8
Just over an hour in, things start to slow down a taste and you feel the conflict starting to fade. Fortunately it doesn’t take too long for the pace to pick right back up. There is a lingering intensity here from the threat of Solomon being uncovered that keeps the movie at a steady boil.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 96
I honestly had no idea I would like Europa Europa as much as I did, but was pleasantly surprised. It’s not only thought-provoking but it tugs at your heartstrings while giving you a unique look at a dark time. A highly recommended classic.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Jayden's Cybermountain (The Sanctum Series #1) in Books
Nov 15, 2019
I read this book on my recent holiday and it kept me enthralled, my eReader didn't leave my side and I was always itching to read a bit more to see what happened next.
At the start of the story Jayden is 11 and due to family problems is sleeping rough. One night he is given an opportunity to turn his life around from an unexpected source. Dubious at first, Jayden accepts and is soon settling into a new life, studying at a secret school where all the pupils are from disadvantaged backgrounds. Clearly there is a purpose behind the school, but what exactly is it?
This is a hard book to review simply because it's tough to give any idea of the story without spoiling it. And really this is a story I don't want to spoil for anyone.
Although aimed at young adults (particularly around 11, the same age as Jayden) as with all the best young adult fiction it's an excellent read for anyone.
The plot is really well handled; The journey of Jayden and his friends is one aspect, the purpose of the school another and the reader is kept on their toes by regular twists and turns. Some of these are totally unexpected, others are nicely flagged for the observant reader who will feel very pleased with themselves for having spotted the clue.
The characters are all clearly drawn and the descriptions are detailed enough to sketch them out out not laboured and allow enough space for the reader's imagination to add the finishing touches. All the main characters are very positive role models for young people and many will identify with them and hopefully appreciate how they develop. The writing moves at a really good pace and it is never slow and always grabs attention.
There are moments of humour - mostly around the student's antics either trying to break the rules or playing tricks on each other. Much darker threads are wound in with skill by Cope covering topics such as drug abuse, bullying and terrorism but these are never laboured and always dealt with sympathetically and optimistically. As a parent it is great to see these topics mentioned.
My 9-going-on-10 year old read this book and said it was 'great' and could he have 'more like that'. I don't think you could get a better recommendation.
Overall this is definitely a must read, not just for its target audience but anyone who wants to read a thoughtfully constructed, engaging and thrilling story. I will definitely be reading the sequel.
At the start of the story Jayden is 11 and due to family problems is sleeping rough. One night he is given an opportunity to turn his life around from an unexpected source. Dubious at first, Jayden accepts and is soon settling into a new life, studying at a secret school where all the pupils are from disadvantaged backgrounds. Clearly there is a purpose behind the school, but what exactly is it?
This is a hard book to review simply because it's tough to give any idea of the story without spoiling it. And really this is a story I don't want to spoil for anyone.
Although aimed at young adults (particularly around 11, the same age as Jayden) as with all the best young adult fiction it's an excellent read for anyone.
The plot is really well handled; The journey of Jayden and his friends is one aspect, the purpose of the school another and the reader is kept on their toes by regular twists and turns. Some of these are totally unexpected, others are nicely flagged for the observant reader who will feel very pleased with themselves for having spotted the clue.
The characters are all clearly drawn and the descriptions are detailed enough to sketch them out out not laboured and allow enough space for the reader's imagination to add the finishing touches. All the main characters are very positive role models for young people and many will identify with them and hopefully appreciate how they develop. The writing moves at a really good pace and it is never slow and always grabs attention.
There are moments of humour - mostly around the student's antics either trying to break the rules or playing tricks on each other. Much darker threads are wound in with skill by Cope covering topics such as drug abuse, bullying and terrorism but these are never laboured and always dealt with sympathetically and optimistically. As a parent it is great to see these topics mentioned.
My 9-going-on-10 year old read this book and said it was 'great' and could he have 'more like that'. I don't think you could get a better recommendation.
Overall this is definitely a must read, not just for its target audience but anyone who wants to read a thoughtfully constructed, engaging and thrilling story. I will definitely be reading the sequel.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Joy (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Jennifer Lawrence (Joy), Robert De Niro (Rudy, Joy’s father),
Bradley Cooper (Neil Walker, Joy’s eventual boss), Edgar Ramirez (Tony,
Joy’s ex-husband), Isabella Rossellini (Trudy, Rudy’s girlfriend), Diane
Ladd (Mimi, Joy’s grandmother), Virginia Madsen (Terry, Joys mother),
and Elisabeth Röhm (Peggy, Joys half-sister)
Also making appearances that were notable to me were Susan Lucci as
Danica, a character seen on the TV soap opera that Joys mother Terry is
constantly watching, and Melissa Rivers, playing her mother Joan Rivers
on the TV channel QVC.
David O. Russel wrote, directed and produced the film, bringing the
headliners back for yet another go ‘round, after the successes of Silver
Linings Playbook and American Hustle.
Joy is a divorced mother of 2, living in a house with her Grandmother
Mimi, who she adores, her mother, who practically never leaves her room,
her 2 kids, and her ex-husband in the basement. Shortly after the film
begins, her father Rudy also moves into the basement.
Joy struggles through her life every day, never quite able to get ahead,
and always just barely making ends meet. Her grandmother has big dreams
for her and insists that Joy will “rise above” and “make something” of
her life, but Joy struggles to have faith, and indeed, to even begin to
figure out how to go about such a seeming monumental task.
The story follows Joy and her family through somewhat ridiculous
scenarios, and while it was acted well by Jennifer Lawrence, De Niro,
and most of the rest of the cast, I had a hard time really getting into
the film.
I kept finding myself wondering why Joys family wasn’t more supportive
and why they all, with the exception of her Mimi and her ex-husband,
seemed to be more trying to bring her down and keep her down, than
giving her a boost and a push up. I always have liked Robert De Niro,
but in this film found myself seriously disliking him. I suppose that
speaks to his ability as an actor and being able to portray a role in
which he is “supposed to be” less than 100% likeable.
Jennifer Lawrence as Joy shows tenaciousness, grit and a will to succeed
and “rise above”, at least once she gets to the point in the film where
she has “HAD ENOUGH” of being walked on and disregarded, and plays the
part wonderfully.
I kept hoping to like the movie better, but sadly, also kept waiting for
it to GET better.
Bradley Cooper (Neil Walker, Joy’s eventual boss), Edgar Ramirez (Tony,
Joy’s ex-husband), Isabella Rossellini (Trudy, Rudy’s girlfriend), Diane
Ladd (Mimi, Joy’s grandmother), Virginia Madsen (Terry, Joys mother),
and Elisabeth Röhm (Peggy, Joys half-sister)
Also making appearances that were notable to me were Susan Lucci as
Danica, a character seen on the TV soap opera that Joys mother Terry is
constantly watching, and Melissa Rivers, playing her mother Joan Rivers
on the TV channel QVC.
David O. Russel wrote, directed and produced the film, bringing the
headliners back for yet another go ‘round, after the successes of Silver
Linings Playbook and American Hustle.
Joy is a divorced mother of 2, living in a house with her Grandmother
Mimi, who she adores, her mother, who practically never leaves her room,
her 2 kids, and her ex-husband in the basement. Shortly after the film
begins, her father Rudy also moves into the basement.
Joy struggles through her life every day, never quite able to get ahead,
and always just barely making ends meet. Her grandmother has big dreams
for her and insists that Joy will “rise above” and “make something” of
her life, but Joy struggles to have faith, and indeed, to even begin to
figure out how to go about such a seeming monumental task.
The story follows Joy and her family through somewhat ridiculous
scenarios, and while it was acted well by Jennifer Lawrence, De Niro,
and most of the rest of the cast, I had a hard time really getting into
the film.
I kept finding myself wondering why Joys family wasn’t more supportive
and why they all, with the exception of her Mimi and her ex-husband,
seemed to be more trying to bring her down and keep her down, than
giving her a boost and a push up. I always have liked Robert De Niro,
but in this film found myself seriously disliking him. I suppose that
speaks to his ability as an actor and being able to portray a role in
which he is “supposed to be” less than 100% likeable.
Jennifer Lawrence as Joy shows tenaciousness, grit and a will to succeed
and “rise above”, at least once she gets to the point in the film where
she has “HAD ENOUGH” of being walked on and disregarded, and plays the
part wonderfully.
I kept hoping to like the movie better, but sadly, also kept waiting for
it to GET better.
BS
Beyond Shareholder Wealth Maximisation: Towards a More Suitable Corporate Objective for Chinese Companies
Book
Corporate objective, namely, for whose interests should a company be run, is the most important...