Search
Search results

J.K. Simmons recommended Juno (2007) in Movies (curated)

PrompterPal
Productivity and Business
App
PrompterPal turns your iPad and iPhone into a teleprompter or speech assistant! PrompterPal...

Comic Life 3
Comics, Education and Photo & Video
App
The Most Powerful Photo Comic Creation App Available. "Of the comic book apps I’ve used, Comic...

Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Respect (2021) in Movies
Oct 14, 2021
Re, re, re, re, ‘spect… Just a little bit.
What with holidays and Bond, it’s taken me a few weeks to get to see this Aretha Franklin biopic. But I finally caught it this week.
Plot Summary:
‘Re’ is a 10-year old growing up in relative middle-class affluence in Birmingham, Alabama with her high-profile preacher father C.L. Franklin (Forest Whitaker). She is blessed with a wonderful singing voice. We follow her career, as Aretha Franklin (Jennifer Hudson), through her struggles with controlling men and alcohol. This is against the backdrop of supporting the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King (Gilbert Glenn Brown).
“Respect” Review: Positives:
Jennifer Hudson gives a tremendous performance as Franklin, delivering both the vocals and the acting admirably. (Apparently, the lady herself, before she died in August 2018, named Hudson as the best person to play her.)
Coming out of this movie, you have to admire Aretha Franklin’s legacy. Although there are moments when her ‘demons’ got the better of her (and the movie is unafraid to paint her in a negative light for these) she led a tumultuous life and yet was still a strong force for both feminism and equality. I think the movie highlights that admirably. “Have you lost your mind?” her father (Forest Whitaker) asks. “Maybe…. maybe I’ve found it.” she replies.
I loved the clip during the end titles (at a Carole King concert and in front of the Obamas) of Franklin well into her 70’s belting out “Natural Woman”. Classy stuff.
Negatives:
It’s long. Very long. Approaching Bond long.
There’s a curious ‘cookie-cutter-ness’ to these biopics of classic female singers (controlling and abusive men; alcohol/drug abuse; prejudice through sex/race; etc). (Would they even have emanated the same level of soul without all the grief? Perhaps not.) The similarities lead you to naturally compare this movie with “The US vs Billie Holiday“. The Billie Holiday story felt like it had a lot more grit and angst in it, making it, for me at least, more memorable. The script for “Respect” – although still rather episodic – flows better. Whilst still great, Hudson’s performance (an Oscar nomination perhaps?) doesn’t come close to the Oscar-nominated stellar job done by Andra Day.
I didn’t like how the script introduced us to its characters. For example, Ted White (Marlon Wayans) is introduced at a church barbeque. He’s painted as a disreputable character, but why? And you have no idea if he is supposed to be a famous singer, a songwriter, a promoter, or a producer (as in fact he is). As another example, Kelvin Hair plays Sam Cooke in the movie, but – unless I missed it – this doesn’t seem to be highlighted in the script.
Summary Thoughts on “Respect”
“Respect” is the feature debut for female director Liesl Tommy. And it’s certainly an ambitious target for a first-timer to shoot at, so ‘Respect’ for that! And it comes across as a solid and enjoyable biopic, not least to remind yourself of some of the classic tunes that Aretha Franklin belted out. At 145 minutes though, it takes its time telling its story, and I think a tighter, shorter film would have worked better.
Did I enjoy it though? Yes, I did. But it’s worth pointing out that the illustrious Mrs Movie Man – who normally begrudges every minute over 90 minutes in a movie – really loved this one.
Plot Summary:
‘Re’ is a 10-year old growing up in relative middle-class affluence in Birmingham, Alabama with her high-profile preacher father C.L. Franklin (Forest Whitaker). She is blessed with a wonderful singing voice. We follow her career, as Aretha Franklin (Jennifer Hudson), through her struggles with controlling men and alcohol. This is against the backdrop of supporting the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King (Gilbert Glenn Brown).
“Respect” Review: Positives:
Jennifer Hudson gives a tremendous performance as Franklin, delivering both the vocals and the acting admirably. (Apparently, the lady herself, before she died in August 2018, named Hudson as the best person to play her.)
Coming out of this movie, you have to admire Aretha Franklin’s legacy. Although there are moments when her ‘demons’ got the better of her (and the movie is unafraid to paint her in a negative light for these) she led a tumultuous life and yet was still a strong force for both feminism and equality. I think the movie highlights that admirably. “Have you lost your mind?” her father (Forest Whitaker) asks. “Maybe…. maybe I’ve found it.” she replies.
I loved the clip during the end titles (at a Carole King concert and in front of the Obamas) of Franklin well into her 70’s belting out “Natural Woman”. Classy stuff.
Negatives:
It’s long. Very long. Approaching Bond long.
There’s a curious ‘cookie-cutter-ness’ to these biopics of classic female singers (controlling and abusive men; alcohol/drug abuse; prejudice through sex/race; etc). (Would they even have emanated the same level of soul without all the grief? Perhaps not.) The similarities lead you to naturally compare this movie with “The US vs Billie Holiday“. The Billie Holiday story felt like it had a lot more grit and angst in it, making it, for me at least, more memorable. The script for “Respect” – although still rather episodic – flows better. Whilst still great, Hudson’s performance (an Oscar nomination perhaps?) doesn’t come close to the Oscar-nominated stellar job done by Andra Day.
I didn’t like how the script introduced us to its characters. For example, Ted White (Marlon Wayans) is introduced at a church barbeque. He’s painted as a disreputable character, but why? And you have no idea if he is supposed to be a famous singer, a songwriter, a promoter, or a producer (as in fact he is). As another example, Kelvin Hair plays Sam Cooke in the movie, but – unless I missed it – this doesn’t seem to be highlighted in the script.
Summary Thoughts on “Respect”
“Respect” is the feature debut for female director Liesl Tommy. And it’s certainly an ambitious target for a first-timer to shoot at, so ‘Respect’ for that! And it comes across as a solid and enjoyable biopic, not least to remind yourself of some of the classic tunes that Aretha Franklin belted out. At 145 minutes though, it takes its time telling its story, and I think a tighter, shorter film would have worked better.
Did I enjoy it though? Yes, I did. But it’s worth pointing out that the illustrious Mrs Movie Man – who normally begrudges every minute over 90 minutes in a movie – really loved this one.

Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Gemini Man (2019) in Movies
Nov 10, 2019
Will Smith plays top US hit-man Henry Brogan who is making the world "safer" one bullet at a time! With the mirror telling him his age, Henry hands in his firearm (not withstanding the arsenal under his stairs) to spend more time going fishing and doing the crossword.
But all is not well when Henry's 'one for the road' hit turns out to not be quite what it seems.
Teaming up with marina manager Danny (Danny??) Zakarweski (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), the pair go on the run from operatives of a government-funded black-ops organization called Gemini. Gemini is a private semi-military organization (didn't we just go here with "Angel Has Fallen"?!). These 'baddie goodies' would rather see Henry - and all who know him - fed to the fishes rather than have him catching them.
But one of these guys, under the direct command of Gemini-boss Clay Verris (Clive Owen), looks kinda familiar...
Let's focus on the positives for a minute. This is a spy movie that has all of the polish that the recent "Angel has Fallen" didn't have. Some nice photogenic locations fly in and out again (Georgia, Budapest and Colombia: the latter for no obvious reason I can remember!). It occasionally reminded me of a glossy Bond film, but without Bond.
There are also some high-class special effects (the special effects coordinator is Mark Hawker). A moonlit CGI Gulfstream with a zoom into the cockpit is particularly impressive.
Some of the action set pieces also entertain. A Will-on-Will bike chase is well done, and I've not seen a bike used as a hand-to-hand weapon in this way before!
And Will Smith is no doubt a class act, with his 'youngification' (I'm not sure what the official word is) also being effectively done. I also enjoyed Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who was great in "10 Cloverfield Lane". The lady has real screen presence.
But man oh man, that script. Let's name the guilty parties in this film: the scriptwriters David Benioff (Game of Thrones), Darren Lemke and Billy Ray. (I'll put Ray last in the list, since the story was by Benioff and Lemke and this has the smell to me of Ray - who has a history of some great scripts like Captain Phillips under his name - being drafted in to steady a listing ship).
Some of the dialogue in this film is not just a bit dodgy. It's head in the hands groan-worthy (and I actually did at times: fortunately the cinema was barely half full and I was on my own in the whole row). And some of it is just plain offensive. Henry meets his old pal Jack Willis (Douglas Hodge) on his yacht where he explains his wife is on a trip to Paris as a scantily clad dolly-bird wanders past. Henry comically rolls his eyes at this adulterous behaviour, with some sort of "Jack, what are you loike!" comment. Cringe-worthy.
Will Smith, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Benedict Wong (their ally, adding some comic relief) are clearly good actors. But the script often makes them look utterly vacuous and stupid. And Lee seems to have a "good enough, move on" approach to the filming. One jaw-dropping moment has Will Smith telling the others that they are going to Budapest. "Budapest?" Winstead and Wong are supposed to say in union, but mistime it. "Can we do that again?". Nope. It's on the screen.
As for Clive Owen... sorry, he's really not in the same acting league, and the script does him even fewer favours. As he says at one point "It's like the Hindenburg crashing into the Titanic". I couldn't have put it better myself.
"Uncanny Valley". You know this phrase. The Princess Leia and Moff Tarkin scenes in "Rogue One" is the classic example. Effects that don't quite work on the big screen. "But" - you say to yourself - "Dr Bob just said that the 'youngification' of Will Smith was done really well?". And I'll repeat again that it was. It's on a par with Samuel L. Jackson's 'youngification' in "Captain Marvel". Where something strange happens is in the film's overall projection. Ang Lee has tried again with his experiment of filming at a massive 120 frames per second..... five times the normal movie frame rate of 24 fps. And the quality of the picture - particularly during high-speed action scenes - becomes outstandingly good! But equally it just doesn't 'look right'.
When the human eye presumably works at an equivalent "fps" of thousands of 'frames per second' you'd think that it should all be fine. But for some reason I just found it distracting. Presumably the audiences for "The Jazz Singer" thought the same about sound; and those for "Gone with the Wind" and the "Wizard of Oz" about colour. Maybe we've seen the future, and its the new norm that we just need to get used to. We'll see.
Ang Lee's "Life of Pi" was extraordinary. His "Hulk" was one of the poorest of the Marvel canon. Unfortunately, this movie is at the "Hulk" end of the spectrum. Which is a real shame. The duo of the 51 year old Smith and the 35 year old Winstead work really well together. They have great chemistry, but, you'll be relieved to hear, avoid any icky love interest.
What a shame. With a different script, and some good production values, this could have been a very different story.
(For the full graphical review, please check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/10/18/one-manns-movies-film-review-gemini-man-2019/ )
But all is not well when Henry's 'one for the road' hit turns out to not be quite what it seems.
Teaming up with marina manager Danny (Danny??) Zakarweski (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), the pair go on the run from operatives of a government-funded black-ops organization called Gemini. Gemini is a private semi-military organization (didn't we just go here with "Angel Has Fallen"?!). These 'baddie goodies' would rather see Henry - and all who know him - fed to the fishes rather than have him catching them.
But one of these guys, under the direct command of Gemini-boss Clay Verris (Clive Owen), looks kinda familiar...
Let's focus on the positives for a minute. This is a spy movie that has all of the polish that the recent "Angel has Fallen" didn't have. Some nice photogenic locations fly in and out again (Georgia, Budapest and Colombia: the latter for no obvious reason I can remember!). It occasionally reminded me of a glossy Bond film, but without Bond.
There are also some high-class special effects (the special effects coordinator is Mark Hawker). A moonlit CGI Gulfstream with a zoom into the cockpit is particularly impressive.
Some of the action set pieces also entertain. A Will-on-Will bike chase is well done, and I've not seen a bike used as a hand-to-hand weapon in this way before!
And Will Smith is no doubt a class act, with his 'youngification' (I'm not sure what the official word is) also being effectively done. I also enjoyed Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who was great in "10 Cloverfield Lane". The lady has real screen presence.
But man oh man, that script. Let's name the guilty parties in this film: the scriptwriters David Benioff (Game of Thrones), Darren Lemke and Billy Ray. (I'll put Ray last in the list, since the story was by Benioff and Lemke and this has the smell to me of Ray - who has a history of some great scripts like Captain Phillips under his name - being drafted in to steady a listing ship).
Some of the dialogue in this film is not just a bit dodgy. It's head in the hands groan-worthy (and I actually did at times: fortunately the cinema was barely half full and I was on my own in the whole row). And some of it is just plain offensive. Henry meets his old pal Jack Willis (Douglas Hodge) on his yacht where he explains his wife is on a trip to Paris as a scantily clad dolly-bird wanders past. Henry comically rolls his eyes at this adulterous behaviour, with some sort of "Jack, what are you loike!" comment. Cringe-worthy.
Will Smith, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Benedict Wong (their ally, adding some comic relief) are clearly good actors. But the script often makes them look utterly vacuous and stupid. And Lee seems to have a "good enough, move on" approach to the filming. One jaw-dropping moment has Will Smith telling the others that they are going to Budapest. "Budapest?" Winstead and Wong are supposed to say in union, but mistime it. "Can we do that again?". Nope. It's on the screen.
As for Clive Owen... sorry, he's really not in the same acting league, and the script does him even fewer favours. As he says at one point "It's like the Hindenburg crashing into the Titanic". I couldn't have put it better myself.
"Uncanny Valley". You know this phrase. The Princess Leia and Moff Tarkin scenes in "Rogue One" is the classic example. Effects that don't quite work on the big screen. "But" - you say to yourself - "Dr Bob just said that the 'youngification' of Will Smith was done really well?". And I'll repeat again that it was. It's on a par with Samuel L. Jackson's 'youngification' in "Captain Marvel". Where something strange happens is in the film's overall projection. Ang Lee has tried again with his experiment of filming at a massive 120 frames per second..... five times the normal movie frame rate of 24 fps. And the quality of the picture - particularly during high-speed action scenes - becomes outstandingly good! But equally it just doesn't 'look right'.
When the human eye presumably works at an equivalent "fps" of thousands of 'frames per second' you'd think that it should all be fine. But for some reason I just found it distracting. Presumably the audiences for "The Jazz Singer" thought the same about sound; and those for "Gone with the Wind" and the "Wizard of Oz" about colour. Maybe we've seen the future, and its the new norm that we just need to get used to. We'll see.
Ang Lee's "Life of Pi" was extraordinary. His "Hulk" was one of the poorest of the Marvel canon. Unfortunately, this movie is at the "Hulk" end of the spectrum. Which is a real shame. The duo of the 51 year old Smith and the 35 year old Winstead work really well together. They have great chemistry, but, you'll be relieved to hear, avoid any icky love interest.
What a shame. With a different script, and some good production values, this could have been a very different story.
(For the full graphical review, please check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/10/18/one-manns-movies-film-review-gemini-man-2019/ )

Leah Surette (3 KP) rated Winchester: The House That Ghosts Built (2018) in Movies
Mar 14, 2018
Dame Helen Mirren locks you to the screen.
I don't go see movies in theaters often. If you haven't noticed tickets have got insanely pricey. I don't know what prices are everywhere else, but here in Boston, it's almost 19 bucks a ticket. The last movie I watched in Theaters was Jurassic World a few years back. I figured what the hell, I brought my mom along, and we went and saw Winchester. My experience is probably going to be a bit different than yours who might be viewing it at home in a few months when it comes out on VOD of DVD/Blu-ray obviously. So I might have hyped up this review a bit.
I knew nothing of the Winchester house or it's story. Sure I heard the name before, and that it was some type of firearm. I also went into this movie almost blind. Just seeing a few second clip, not even a trailer. I knew Helen Mirren was in it. As a huge fan of Mirren, I was sold at just that. The movie follows Sarah Winchester the grieving widow of the co-owner of the Winchester gun company. (Helen Mirren) Troubled about her mental state, people close to her and affairs ask a doctor to come and examine her mental state. Dr Price ( Jason Clarke) soon finds something else lurks in the walls other than her hallucinations.
I will say this, the script was silly, and by silly it was not good. I think if the script was written a bit differently, the film would have been a 5 star. If you're looking for a gross horror movie, then this is not. However what the film is , is a beautifully made light paranormal movie with a couple messages. At least this is how I feel. Yes this movie used the jump scare tactic.
Which probably had more effect on me, sitting in a loud theater than it would at home. The acting was solid I thought especially from Mirren who is always a powerful performer. The effects were O.K. , There was maybe one part that the effects made a ghost look almost like something out of Lord of the Rings, and it looked quite silly.
I knew nothing of the Winchester house or it's story. Sure I heard the name before, and that it was some type of firearm. I also went into this movie almost blind. Just seeing a few second clip, not even a trailer. I knew Helen Mirren was in it. As a huge fan of Mirren, I was sold at just that. The movie follows Sarah Winchester the grieving widow of the co-owner of the Winchester gun company. (Helen Mirren) Troubled about her mental state, people close to her and affairs ask a doctor to come and examine her mental state. Dr Price ( Jason Clarke) soon finds something else lurks in the walls other than her hallucinations.
I will say this, the script was silly, and by silly it was not good. I think if the script was written a bit differently, the film would have been a 5 star. If you're looking for a gross horror movie, then this is not. However what the film is , is a beautifully made light paranormal movie with a couple messages. At least this is how I feel. Yes this movie used the jump scare tactic.
Which probably had more effect on me, sitting in a loud theater than it would at home. The acting was solid I thought especially from Mirren who is always a powerful performer. The effects were O.K. , There was maybe one part that the effects made a ghost look almost like something out of Lord of the Rings, and it looked quite silly.

JT (287 KP) rated Blood Out (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
I'm not quite sure what my thinking was behind watching this, I mean did I for one second think it was going to be any good with a cast list that included Luke Goss and Vinnie Jones.
I should have turned off within the first few minutes, but stuck it out till the bitter end. It was painful all the way through, Goss who has had some mainstream success with his turns in Blade II and Hell Boy II, looked like he hadn’t bothered to read the script.
Tamar Hassan will always be cast as the hard man, and this time it was Vinnie Jones playing the supporting nutter role. As for Val Kilmer and 50 Cent, they hardly make an appearance in the film, popping up on a few occasions and offering next to nothing.
So to the plot then, in short, Goss plays Michael Savion a hard nosed cop whose gang banging brother is brutally murdered. In an attempt to find the culprit and bring them to justice he goes deep undercover to get close to the killers.
Along the way Goss discovers that his brother’s pregnant fiancée is also involved and looks to try and get her out before its too late, while at the same time trying not to step on the toes of the FEDs who have their own mole in deep cover.
Did I for one second think it was going to be any good with a cast list that included Luke Goss and Vinnie Jones?
Goss is always going to be cast as an action B-movie star, and in no way is he going to be offered too many bigger roles. Why? Well he just isn’t good enough, simple as that.
The action set pieces are poor, the ending car chase and spectacular crash which sees just about everyone walk away without a scratch is hardly surprising of a film that has no believability whatsoever.
If Blood Out is supposed to depict a narrative of the street gang culture it does it poorly, the acting is shocking and the script seems like it was written by a two-year old.
This is Jason Hewitt’s début feature, and he is going to have to work very hard to redeem himself.
I should have turned off within the first few minutes, but stuck it out till the bitter end. It was painful all the way through, Goss who has had some mainstream success with his turns in Blade II and Hell Boy II, looked like he hadn’t bothered to read the script.
Tamar Hassan will always be cast as the hard man, and this time it was Vinnie Jones playing the supporting nutter role. As for Val Kilmer and 50 Cent, they hardly make an appearance in the film, popping up on a few occasions and offering next to nothing.
So to the plot then, in short, Goss plays Michael Savion a hard nosed cop whose gang banging brother is brutally murdered. In an attempt to find the culprit and bring them to justice he goes deep undercover to get close to the killers.
Along the way Goss discovers that his brother’s pregnant fiancée is also involved and looks to try and get her out before its too late, while at the same time trying not to step on the toes of the FEDs who have their own mole in deep cover.
Did I for one second think it was going to be any good with a cast list that included Luke Goss and Vinnie Jones?
Goss is always going to be cast as an action B-movie star, and in no way is he going to be offered too many bigger roles. Why? Well he just isn’t good enough, simple as that.
The action set pieces are poor, the ending car chase and spectacular crash which sees just about everyone walk away without a scratch is hardly surprising of a film that has no believability whatsoever.
If Blood Out is supposed to depict a narrative of the street gang culture it does it poorly, the acting is shocking and the script seems like it was written by a two-year old.
This is Jason Hewitt’s début feature, and he is going to have to work very hard to redeem himself.

FileMaker Go 16
Business and Productivity
App
FILEMAKER GO 16 FILEMAKER GO 16 IN ACTION Transform your business with FileMaker Go 16. FileMaker...

Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Independence Day: Resurgence (2016) in Movies
Aug 11, 2017
Poor CGI (3 more)
Rubbish script
Uncharismatic performances
Lazy direction
Why did they bother?
You know that way when sequels to 90's movies are released and you think, "if this came out 20 years ago it might have worked, but there is no place for this in today's movie landscape?" Well this movie is the prime example of that sentiment.
Sloppy writing, lazy performances, and cheap call-backs plague this poor attempt at resetting up this franchise. The whole thing feels so dated, how can this be? CGI and filmmaking in general has advanced so much in the last 20 years, yet this piece of trash still feels two decades old.
I didn't love the original and to be honest I don't really feel that the first movie has stood the test of time very well, but next to Resurgence, the original film is a masterpiece.
Don't give this crap your time. Fans of the original will be disgusted at this sorry attempt at a sequel and folk that haven't seen the original will just see an outdated, lazy, sci-fi flopped attempt at a blockbuster.
Sloppy writing, lazy performances, and cheap call-backs plague this poor attempt at resetting up this franchise. The whole thing feels so dated, how can this be? CGI and filmmaking in general has advanced so much in the last 20 years, yet this piece of trash still feels two decades old.
I didn't love the original and to be honest I don't really feel that the first movie has stood the test of time very well, but next to Resurgence, the original film is a masterpiece.
Don't give this crap your time. Fans of the original will be disgusted at this sorry attempt at a sequel and folk that haven't seen the original will just see an outdated, lazy, sci-fi flopped attempt at a blockbuster.

Sarah (7800 KP) rated The Hurricane Heist (2018) in Movies
Apr 9, 2018
Well at least it lived up expectations
You know it's not a good sign when a film is released on Sky Cinema the same day it apparently comes out in actual cinemas (despite the fact it isn't showing anywhere local to me).
Yes this film is bad, but it just about verges on so bad it's vaguely entertaining for an hour or so. It reminds me a little of Sharknado (although Hurricane Heist is nowhere near as ridiculous), with the pretty poor CGI, terrible script and bad acting. Some of the Southern accents are hilarious, even you Toby Kebbell, and Maggie Grace is really not a good actress. And casting Ralph Ineson? He's a good actor but he's got bad guy stamped all over him which makes the first part of this story a tad predictable. I'd have been more surprised if he'd have turned out to be a good guy. The plot is silly although doesn't come across quite as farfetched as the trailer made out.
But despite all of this, it is partly entertaining brainless fodder, just don't go expecting too much.
Yes this film is bad, but it just about verges on so bad it's vaguely entertaining for an hour or so. It reminds me a little of Sharknado (although Hurricane Heist is nowhere near as ridiculous), with the pretty poor CGI, terrible script and bad acting. Some of the Southern accents are hilarious, even you Toby Kebbell, and Maggie Grace is really not a good actress. And casting Ralph Ineson? He's a good actor but he's got bad guy stamped all over him which makes the first part of this story a tad predictable. I'd have been more surprised if he'd have turned out to be a good guy. The plot is silly although doesn't come across quite as farfetched as the trailer made out.
But despite all of this, it is partly entertaining brainless fodder, just don't go expecting too much.