Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Dracula Untold (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The latest Dracula movie attempts to honor an ancient story while adding some new spice and bringing the usual graphics flair we’ve come to expect from Hollywood, but falls short.
Dracula Untold, as the name implies, is an origin story for the pop culture father-of-all-vampires. Luke Evans bears the mantle of Prince Vlad Tepes of the Dracula Clan. (Not Count, but Prince.) What about the King, you ask? Well, they didn’t cover this, but there is no King.
Luke Evans is one of my favorite actors in Hollywood right now, and he does this role justice. The rest of the cast contributed solid performances as well, as best they could with sub par script, and poor direction. Charles Dance was a particular pleasure to witness.
This film is Gary Shore’s directorial debut, and it’s easy to see the marks of a neophyte director. Had it been in the hands of someone more experienced, it would have been a juggernaut of a Fall film. Even so, he did pretty well enough, all things considered. According to his work history, Shore was an electrician until 1998, then disappeared until 2014. This is his second film so far this year.
Dracula Untold opens with the story of Vlad the Impaler, as told by his son. Vlad was shipped off to the Turks to become a trained and conditioned weapon. He earned his title by impaling an entire village for the Turkish army. Vlad was a deadly force on the battlefield, but they eventually allowed him to go home, where he could start a family and rule Transylvania. It is painfully obvious that the usual blood-thirsty character was meant to become a hero for this new tale.
The Turks return to take more boys, like they did him, but he refuses. This draws the Turks’ ire, and they demand retribution for the insult and insubordination. Desperate, he seeks out a monster in the mountains who was the REAL first vampire — a man who made a deal with a demon.
Vlad is granted temporary powers, paying a heavy price in the process. After this, the story really ramps up.
This film left me feeling as if something was missing. I attribute this to missing explanations, plot holes (like the lack of King), and several other missteps. Normally, I can look past plot holes. A strong enough movie will keep me from noticing them until I’m rethinking it later. In this case, they were too distracting. The music was unimpressive and not at all memorable. The one liners were forced and distracting, instead of powerful and emotional.
This movie is worth seeing if you’re a fan of vampires in general or Dracula in particular. That said, I wouldn’t advise high expectations. Great aspects were abundant, but there were just as many failings. If you feel compelled to see it, wait until you can see it at home, and save the money.
Dracula Untold, as the name implies, is an origin story for the pop culture father-of-all-vampires. Luke Evans bears the mantle of Prince Vlad Tepes of the Dracula Clan. (Not Count, but Prince.) What about the King, you ask? Well, they didn’t cover this, but there is no King.
Luke Evans is one of my favorite actors in Hollywood right now, and he does this role justice. The rest of the cast contributed solid performances as well, as best they could with sub par script, and poor direction. Charles Dance was a particular pleasure to witness.
This film is Gary Shore’s directorial debut, and it’s easy to see the marks of a neophyte director. Had it been in the hands of someone more experienced, it would have been a juggernaut of a Fall film. Even so, he did pretty well enough, all things considered. According to his work history, Shore was an electrician until 1998, then disappeared until 2014. This is his second film so far this year.
Dracula Untold opens with the story of Vlad the Impaler, as told by his son. Vlad was shipped off to the Turks to become a trained and conditioned weapon. He earned his title by impaling an entire village for the Turkish army. Vlad was a deadly force on the battlefield, but they eventually allowed him to go home, where he could start a family and rule Transylvania. It is painfully obvious that the usual blood-thirsty character was meant to become a hero for this new tale.
The Turks return to take more boys, like they did him, but he refuses. This draws the Turks’ ire, and they demand retribution for the insult and insubordination. Desperate, he seeks out a monster in the mountains who was the REAL first vampire — a man who made a deal with a demon.
Vlad is granted temporary powers, paying a heavy price in the process. After this, the story really ramps up.
This film left me feeling as if something was missing. I attribute this to missing explanations, plot holes (like the lack of King), and several other missteps. Normally, I can look past plot holes. A strong enough movie will keep me from noticing them until I’m rethinking it later. In this case, they were too distracting. The music was unimpressive and not at all memorable. The one liners were forced and distracting, instead of powerful and emotional.
This movie is worth seeing if you’re a fan of vampires in general or Dracula in particular. That said, I wouldn’t advise high expectations. Great aspects were abundant, but there were just as many failings. If you feel compelled to see it, wait until you can see it at home, and save the money.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (2019) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Delivers EXACTLY what is expected - and that's a good thing
If you are heading into the multi-plex to check out FAST AND FURIOUS PRESENTS: HOBBS & SHAW, the 9th(!) entry in the Fast and Furious Universe, you pretty much know (and expect) what you are about to watch.
And HOBBS & SHAW does not disappoint - delivering over-the-top action with unsinkable heroes and unblinking villains battling each other with explosions galore and disposable henchmen being...well...disposed of left and right.
Reprising their roles as "Lawman" Luke Hobbs and "Outcast" Deckard Shaw (F&F terms for them) are the charismatic Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson and the smoldering Jason Statham. Their two characters can't stand each other, so - naturally - they are forced to work in concert with each other to stop Super-Villain Brixton (Edris Elba). Can these 2 "frenemies" learn to put aside their differences and work together to stop a Villain that they cannot stop by themselves?
What do you think?
But...it's the journey...not the destination that's the fun of this film and this film is fun, fun, fun, indeed. Both Johnson and Statham know EXACTLY what type of film they are in - and know what their core audience is coming to this film to see - and they deliver in spades. They are perfect for these characters and are perfectly paired together. While the script, at times, seemed forced, these 2 action SuperStars make even the clunkiest of dialogue work and they are "game" for whatever is thrown at them.
Elba joins in strongly as the villain and newcomer (at least to this franchise) Vanessa Kirby (the White Widow in MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: FALLOUT) just as strongly counterbalances all 3 of them as the "McGuffin" of this film - the thing that the good guys and the bad guys are fighting each other for. Dame Helen Mirren is back as the criminal mother of Statham's character and she understands what type of film she's in as well. So does Eddie Marsan, who looks like he is having an absolute ball as a scientist brought into the fray.
There are also 2 "secret cameos" in this film that are fun - and I perked up in my seat when both of these cameos injected energy into this testosterone-infused flick.
Former Stuntman and Director David Leitch (DEADPOOL 2, ATOMIC BLONDE) throws a ton of action, car chases, guns, fights and explosions at the audience - all to good effect. His answer to bad acting and huge, implausible plot holes? Blow things up! And that works very, very well for this film. Leitch delivers exactly what is expected here - and that's just fine for me.
I was extremely entertained by this movie. I was in the mood for it - and it delivered exactly what I was looking for. Kind of like eating a good burger.
Letter Grade: A- (though, don't expect to break into "discussion groups" afterward)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And HOBBS & SHAW does not disappoint - delivering over-the-top action with unsinkable heroes and unblinking villains battling each other with explosions galore and disposable henchmen being...well...disposed of left and right.
Reprising their roles as "Lawman" Luke Hobbs and "Outcast" Deckard Shaw (F&F terms for them) are the charismatic Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson and the smoldering Jason Statham. Their two characters can't stand each other, so - naturally - they are forced to work in concert with each other to stop Super-Villain Brixton (Edris Elba). Can these 2 "frenemies" learn to put aside their differences and work together to stop a Villain that they cannot stop by themselves?
What do you think?
But...it's the journey...not the destination that's the fun of this film and this film is fun, fun, fun, indeed. Both Johnson and Statham know EXACTLY what type of film they are in - and know what their core audience is coming to this film to see - and they deliver in spades. They are perfect for these characters and are perfectly paired together. While the script, at times, seemed forced, these 2 action SuperStars make even the clunkiest of dialogue work and they are "game" for whatever is thrown at them.
Elba joins in strongly as the villain and newcomer (at least to this franchise) Vanessa Kirby (the White Widow in MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: FALLOUT) just as strongly counterbalances all 3 of them as the "McGuffin" of this film - the thing that the good guys and the bad guys are fighting each other for. Dame Helen Mirren is back as the criminal mother of Statham's character and she understands what type of film she's in as well. So does Eddie Marsan, who looks like he is having an absolute ball as a scientist brought into the fray.
There are also 2 "secret cameos" in this film that are fun - and I perked up in my seat when both of these cameos injected energy into this testosterone-infused flick.
Former Stuntman and Director David Leitch (DEADPOOL 2, ATOMIC BLONDE) throws a ton of action, car chases, guns, fights and explosions at the audience - all to good effect. His answer to bad acting and huge, implausible plot holes? Blow things up! And that works very, very well for this film. Leitch delivers exactly what is expected here - and that's just fine for me.
I was extremely entertained by this movie. I was in the mood for it - and it delivered exactly what I was looking for. Kind of like eating a good burger.
Letter Grade: A- (though, don't expect to break into "discussion groups" afterward)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Evil Dead (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
One of the greatest horror movies of all time would have to be “The Evil Dead” which had been spawned by Sam Raimi and his original short film “Within the Woods”. “Within the Woods” was filmed with the intent of gaining investors to collaborate on a full length film starring the then unknown God of “B” horror movies Bruce Campbell. “The Evil Dead” and its predecessor “Within the Woods” was meant to be serious and horrifying, though that proved to be hard with a smaller budget that Raimi and Campbell had originally hoped for. Little did they know that Evil Dead would become one of the largest trilogies in cult film histories.
Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.
The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.
If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.
The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.
If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
Nelly Cootalot: The Fowl Fleet
Games, Entertainment and Stickers
App
Best of Mac App Store 2016 game now on iOS! "The funniest mobile game of 2017 if not all time." -...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Payback (1999) in Movies
Jul 15, 2020
Get Ready To Root For The Bad Guy
Payback- is a intresting revenge action thriller. Maybe its me, but i fell like this movie is boring. Its good, but some what boring, like nothing going on. Also its kinda of confusing, again it might just be me, but i fell like its confusing as well. Like i said before its good, but in the end its both boring and confusing.
The plot: Porter (Mel Gibson) is a thief betrayed by both his wife, Lynn (Deborah Kara Unger), and his partner, Val (Gregg Henry), when he is shot in the back after a heist. Slowly, Porter recovers from his wounds and begins a search for Val, intent on recovering his share of the money they stole together. With the aid of prostitute Rosie (Maria Bello), Porter captures Val but still cannot find his cash. For this, Porter will have to challenge an imposing crime syndicate called the Outfit.
Although credited as director, Brian Helgeland's cut of the film was not the theatrical version released to audiences. After the end of principal photography, Helgeland's version was deemed too dark for the mainstream public. Following a script rewrite by Terry Hayes, director Helgeland was replaced by the production designer John Myhre, who reshot 30% of the film. The intent was to make the Porter character accessible. The film's tagline became: "Get Ready to Root for the Bad Guy." A potentially controversial scene between Porter and Lynn which arguably involves spousal abuse was excised and more plot elements were added to the third act. After 10 days of reshoots, a new opening scene and voiceover track also were added, and Kris Kristofferson walked on as a new villain.
The Director's Cut version features a female Bronson, that is never seen only heard over the phone voiced by Sally Kellerman, does not include the voice-over by Porter and several Bronson-related scenes. During their scuffle (which is longer than in the theatrical version and was the main source of controversy), Porter earlier tells Lynn that his picture with Rosie was taken before they met, thereby rendering her jealousy unjustified. This version has an entirely different, ambiguous ending where Porter is seriously wounded in a train station shootout and driven off by Rosie.
A June 4, 2012, look at "movies improved by directors' cuts" by The A.V. Club described Payback: Straight Up as "a marked improvement on the unrulier original.
Mel Gibson stated in a short interview released as a DVD extra that it "would've been ideal to shoot in black and white." He noted that "people want a color image" and that the actual film used a bleach bypass process to tint the film. In addition to this, the production design used muted shades of red, brown, and grey for costumes, sets, and cars for further effect.
Like i said its a good revenge action thriller but to me its both boring and confusing. Maybe i have to watch the directors cut.
The plot: Porter (Mel Gibson) is a thief betrayed by both his wife, Lynn (Deborah Kara Unger), and his partner, Val (Gregg Henry), when he is shot in the back after a heist. Slowly, Porter recovers from his wounds and begins a search for Val, intent on recovering his share of the money they stole together. With the aid of prostitute Rosie (Maria Bello), Porter captures Val but still cannot find his cash. For this, Porter will have to challenge an imposing crime syndicate called the Outfit.
Although credited as director, Brian Helgeland's cut of the film was not the theatrical version released to audiences. After the end of principal photography, Helgeland's version was deemed too dark for the mainstream public. Following a script rewrite by Terry Hayes, director Helgeland was replaced by the production designer John Myhre, who reshot 30% of the film. The intent was to make the Porter character accessible. The film's tagline became: "Get Ready to Root for the Bad Guy." A potentially controversial scene between Porter and Lynn which arguably involves spousal abuse was excised and more plot elements were added to the third act. After 10 days of reshoots, a new opening scene and voiceover track also were added, and Kris Kristofferson walked on as a new villain.
The Director's Cut version features a female Bronson, that is never seen only heard over the phone voiced by Sally Kellerman, does not include the voice-over by Porter and several Bronson-related scenes. During their scuffle (which is longer than in the theatrical version and was the main source of controversy), Porter earlier tells Lynn that his picture with Rosie was taken before they met, thereby rendering her jealousy unjustified. This version has an entirely different, ambiguous ending where Porter is seriously wounded in a train station shootout and driven off by Rosie.
A June 4, 2012, look at "movies improved by directors' cuts" by The A.V. Club described Payback: Straight Up as "a marked improvement on the unrulier original.
Mel Gibson stated in a short interview released as a DVD extra that it "would've been ideal to shoot in black and white." He noted that "people want a color image" and that the actual film used a bleach bypass process to tint the film. In addition to this, the production design used muted shades of red, brown, and grey for costumes, sets, and cars for further effect.
Like i said its a good revenge action thriller but to me its both boring and confusing. Maybe i have to watch the directors cut.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Laundromat (2019) in Movies
May 18, 2021
Is this the dullest movie title in film history?
In "The Laundromat", Ellen Martin (Meryl Streep) loses her husband Joe (James Cromwell) in a boating accident. She expects a multi-million dollar insurance payout, but is frustrated that the insurance companies evaporate in a miasma of shell-companies and double-dealing. Her compulsive investigations lead her to two Panamanian-based double dealers: Jürgen Mossack (Gary Oldman) and Ramón Fonseca (Antonio Banderas).
Based on a true story, a hack of the company's 2.6 TB of email data led to the 2016 scandal known as "The Panama Papers": something that dragged into the headlines the alleged dodgy-dealings of many celebrities including David Cameron.
Positives:
- Meryl Steep delivers another superb performance as the grieving avenging widow.
- There's a "twist" in the final scene which I didn't see coming, and which was impressive.
Negatives:
- This is a really strange and disjointed movie. It seems to be trying to be "The Big Short", but is a significant fail. There are numerous quirky scenes, most involving Oldman and Banderas. But there is enough bat-shit crazy stuff in here to make you think that either Sonderbergh, or the writers, or both were on acid. What was with the "Dawn of Man" sequence at the start? And why the anonymisation of the 'hominids'? Lots of bonkers stuff.
- The movie is made up of a series of chapters ("Lessons"), but the connection between the lesson title and the "message" conveyed is loose at best. It's all a bit of a convoluted mess.
- The script seems to assume a school-boy level of knowledge of the subject matter. As a result, some of the explanations of Mssrs, Oldman and Banderas come across as extremely patronising 'mansplaining'.
Summary Thoughts on "The Laundromat": There's a stellar cast involved with this one, and the subject matter in the hands of an Adam McKay could have been compelling. But as it is, it's rather a disjointed mess. It's worth a watch just to see the actors at work. But that's about the long and the short of it. Watch "The Big Short" again instead.
This has been sitting on my Netflix box for a long time without a watch, and this is mostly because the title suggested something completely different (and not of great interest). (Yes, I understand in retrospect that the movie is partially concerned with money laundering!) It was only my wife suggesting we watch it that pushed it onto the list. If it had been titled something like "The Panama Papers" I would have probably watched it sooner!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/05/18/the-laundromat-is-this-the-worst-title-of-any-movie-in-film-history/. Thanks.)
Based on a true story, a hack of the company's 2.6 TB of email data led to the 2016 scandal known as "The Panama Papers": something that dragged into the headlines the alleged dodgy-dealings of many celebrities including David Cameron.
Positives:
- Meryl Steep delivers another superb performance as the grieving avenging widow.
- There's a "twist" in the final scene which I didn't see coming, and which was impressive.
Negatives:
- This is a really strange and disjointed movie. It seems to be trying to be "The Big Short", but is a significant fail. There are numerous quirky scenes, most involving Oldman and Banderas. But there is enough bat-shit crazy stuff in here to make you think that either Sonderbergh, or the writers, or both were on acid. What was with the "Dawn of Man" sequence at the start? And why the anonymisation of the 'hominids'? Lots of bonkers stuff.
- The movie is made up of a series of chapters ("Lessons"), but the connection between the lesson title and the "message" conveyed is loose at best. It's all a bit of a convoluted mess.
- The script seems to assume a school-boy level of knowledge of the subject matter. As a result, some of the explanations of Mssrs, Oldman and Banderas come across as extremely patronising 'mansplaining'.
Summary Thoughts on "The Laundromat": There's a stellar cast involved with this one, and the subject matter in the hands of an Adam McKay could have been compelling. But as it is, it's rather a disjointed mess. It's worth a watch just to see the actors at work. But that's about the long and the short of it. Watch "The Big Short" again instead.
This has been sitting on my Netflix box for a long time without a watch, and this is mostly because the title suggested something completely different (and not of great interest). (Yes, I understand in retrospect that the movie is partially concerned with money laundering!) It was only my wife suggesting we watch it that pushed it onto the list. If it had been titled something like "The Panama Papers" I would have probably watched it sooner!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/05/18/the-laundromat-is-this-the-worst-title-of-any-movie-in-film-history/. Thanks.)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Judas and the Black Messiah (2021) in Movies
Feb 23, 2021
Kaluuya in an Oscar worthy performance
Ever since Daniel Kaluuya burst onto the scene in 2017’s GET OUT, he has been an actor to watch - one who’s brilliance bursts off the screen in whatever project he is in.
This brilliance shines brightly in his latest effort JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH that teams him up with his GET OUT co-star LaKeith Stanfield in the true story of 1960’s Chicago Black Panther leader Fred Hampton (Kaluuya) and his friend/Security Chief, Bill O’Neal (Stanfield) who just happens to be an FBI informant.
Directed and Written by Shaka King, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH tells an important, under-told story of the African-American struggle in the wild, changing times of America in the 1960’s.
Kaluuya’s performance as Hampton is up to the challenge of a story this big and bold - his Fred Hampton is charismatic and involving, drawing all into his world. He’s a bigger-than-life icon that demands attention whenever Kaluuya/Hampton is on the stage. I expect an Oscar nomination (at least) for this performance.
The problem with this film is that Kaluuya’s Hampton is such a strong and commanding presence that the rest of the story and characters pale in comparison to him.
Such is the case with Stanfield’s portrayal of O’Neal. I really like LaKeith Stanfield as a performer and was really looking forward to seeing him and Kaluuya go toe-to-toe, but his character is swallowed up in the largess of the Hampton character and, so, I never connected or sympathized with him. I don’t blame this on the actor, I blame this on the script and the direction of King, making the O’Neal character weak - especially when he is up against Hampton.
The character/actor that WAS able to hold their own with Kaluuya/Hampton is Dominique Fishback as Hampton’s lover (and mother of his child), Deborah Johnson. The scenes of Hampton and Johnson together were sharp and interesting - perhaps because Hampton was toned down, but also because Fishback’s portrayal of Johnson was strong enough to stand up to Kaluuya’s portrayal of Hampton.
In addition, Kaluuya’s performance is so strong in this film that it is noticeable when it is absent, so when his character is sent to prison (and disappears) for the middle 1/3 of this film, the movie drags considerably.
Finally, the film hits a plateau at about the 4/5 mark and doesn’t really build to a crescendo at the end - an ending that should be powerful, but just sorts of lies there.
All-in-all, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH is worth seeing for the powerful performance by Daniel Kaluuya that more than makes up for the shortcomings of the rest of the film.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This brilliance shines brightly in his latest effort JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH that teams him up with his GET OUT co-star LaKeith Stanfield in the true story of 1960’s Chicago Black Panther leader Fred Hampton (Kaluuya) and his friend/Security Chief, Bill O’Neal (Stanfield) who just happens to be an FBI informant.
Directed and Written by Shaka King, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH tells an important, under-told story of the African-American struggle in the wild, changing times of America in the 1960’s.
Kaluuya’s performance as Hampton is up to the challenge of a story this big and bold - his Fred Hampton is charismatic and involving, drawing all into his world. He’s a bigger-than-life icon that demands attention whenever Kaluuya/Hampton is on the stage. I expect an Oscar nomination (at least) for this performance.
The problem with this film is that Kaluuya’s Hampton is such a strong and commanding presence that the rest of the story and characters pale in comparison to him.
Such is the case with Stanfield’s portrayal of O’Neal. I really like LaKeith Stanfield as a performer and was really looking forward to seeing him and Kaluuya go toe-to-toe, but his character is swallowed up in the largess of the Hampton character and, so, I never connected or sympathized with him. I don’t blame this on the actor, I blame this on the script and the direction of King, making the O’Neal character weak - especially when he is up against Hampton.
The character/actor that WAS able to hold their own with Kaluuya/Hampton is Dominique Fishback as Hampton’s lover (and mother of his child), Deborah Johnson. The scenes of Hampton and Johnson together were sharp and interesting - perhaps because Hampton was toned down, but also because Fishback’s portrayal of Johnson was strong enough to stand up to Kaluuya’s portrayal of Hampton.
In addition, Kaluuya’s performance is so strong in this film that it is noticeable when it is absent, so when his character is sent to prison (and disappears) for the middle 1/3 of this film, the movie drags considerably.
Finally, the film hits a plateau at about the 4/5 mark and doesn’t really build to a crescendo at the end - an ending that should be powerful, but just sorts of lies there.
All-in-all, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH is worth seeing for the powerful performance by Daniel Kaluuya that more than makes up for the shortcomings of the rest of the film.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Rocky (1976) in Movies
Nov 24, 2020
Underdog Tale
Rocky is a classic. A tale of a underdog rising to the top. At the same time its a story of rocky. A underdog, a fighter, a lover, a southpaw, a man who wont give up.
The plot: Rocky Balboa (Sylvester Stallone), a small-time boxer from working-class Philadelphia, is arbitrarily chosen to take on the reigning world heavyweight champion, Apollo Creed (Carl Weathers), when the undefeated fighter's scheduled opponent is injured. While training with feisty former bantamweight contender Mickey Goldmill (Burgess Meredith), Rocky tentatively begins a relationship with Adrian (Talia Shire), the wallflower sister of his meat-packer pal Paulie (Burt Young).
The film, made on a budget of just over $1 million, was a sleeper hit; it earned $225 million in global box office receipts, becoming the highest-grossing film of 1976. The film was critically acclaimed and solidified Stallone's career as well as commenced his rise to prominence as a major movie star of that era.
Among other accolades, it went on to receive ten Academy Award nominations, winning three, including Best Picture. In 2006, the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically or aesthetically significant". Rocky is considered to be one of the greatest sports films ever made and was ranked as the second-best in the genre, after Raging Bull, by the American Film Institute in 2008.
The film has spawned seven sequels: Rocky II (1979), Rocky III (1982), Rocky IV (1985), Rocky V (1990), Rocky Balboa (2006), Creed (2015), and Creed II (2018). Stallone portrays Rocky in all eight films, wrote seven of the eight films, and directed four of the six titular installments.
Sylvester Stallone wrote the screenplay for Rocky in three and a half days.
United Artists liked Stallone's script, and viewed it as a possible vehicle for a well-established star such as Robert Redford, Ryan O'Neal, Burt Reynolds, or James Caan.
Stallone's agents, Rumar and Kubik, insisted that Stallone portray the title character, to the point of issuing an ultimatum. Stallone later said that he would never have forgiven himself, had the film become a success with somebody else in the lead.
During filming, both Stallone and Weathers suffered injuries during the shooting of the final fight; Stallone suffered bruised ribs and Weathers suffered a damaged nose, the opposite injuries of what their characters had.
The first date between Rocky and Adrian, in which Rocky bribes a janitor to allow them to skate after closing hours in a deserted ice skating rink, was shot that way only because of budgetary pressures. This scene was originally scheduled to be shot in a skating rink during regular business hours. However, the producers decided that they could not afford to hire the hundreds of extras that would have been necessary for that scene.
Its a excellent movie.
The plot: Rocky Balboa (Sylvester Stallone), a small-time boxer from working-class Philadelphia, is arbitrarily chosen to take on the reigning world heavyweight champion, Apollo Creed (Carl Weathers), when the undefeated fighter's scheduled opponent is injured. While training with feisty former bantamweight contender Mickey Goldmill (Burgess Meredith), Rocky tentatively begins a relationship with Adrian (Talia Shire), the wallflower sister of his meat-packer pal Paulie (Burt Young).
The film, made on a budget of just over $1 million, was a sleeper hit; it earned $225 million in global box office receipts, becoming the highest-grossing film of 1976. The film was critically acclaimed and solidified Stallone's career as well as commenced his rise to prominence as a major movie star of that era.
Among other accolades, it went on to receive ten Academy Award nominations, winning three, including Best Picture. In 2006, the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically or aesthetically significant". Rocky is considered to be one of the greatest sports films ever made and was ranked as the second-best in the genre, after Raging Bull, by the American Film Institute in 2008.
The film has spawned seven sequels: Rocky II (1979), Rocky III (1982), Rocky IV (1985), Rocky V (1990), Rocky Balboa (2006), Creed (2015), and Creed II (2018). Stallone portrays Rocky in all eight films, wrote seven of the eight films, and directed four of the six titular installments.
Sylvester Stallone wrote the screenplay for Rocky in three and a half days.
United Artists liked Stallone's script, and viewed it as a possible vehicle for a well-established star such as Robert Redford, Ryan O'Neal, Burt Reynolds, or James Caan.
Stallone's agents, Rumar and Kubik, insisted that Stallone portray the title character, to the point of issuing an ultimatum. Stallone later said that he would never have forgiven himself, had the film become a success with somebody else in the lead.
During filming, both Stallone and Weathers suffered injuries during the shooting of the final fight; Stallone suffered bruised ribs and Weathers suffered a damaged nose, the opposite injuries of what their characters had.
The first date between Rocky and Adrian, in which Rocky bribes a janitor to allow them to skate after closing hours in a deserted ice skating rink, was shot that way only because of budgetary pressures. This scene was originally scheduled to be shot in a skating rink during regular business hours. However, the producers decided that they could not afford to hire the hundreds of extras that would have been necessary for that scene.
Its a excellent movie.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Stowaway (2021) in Movies
Apr 30, 2021
Good physics but otherwise bland and forgettable
In "Stowaway", three astronauts - Commander Marina Bartlett (Toni Collette), doctor and scientist Zoe Levensen (Anna Kendrick) and scientist David Kim (Daniel Dae Kim) - have left earth on a mission to Mars. Bartlett is a bit surprised when she removes an overhead panel and technician Michael Adams (Shamier Anderson) falls out on her, injuring her arm.
This is problematic. The ship was designed for two (with the specs pushed for three - - ed: really???!). With oxygen levels depleting, the crew are left with some difficult decisions to make.
Positives:
- For once, I have no issues with the physics of this sci-fi movie! As a PhD physicist by training, you will generally hear me huffing and puffing in sci-fi movies about loud noises in space; implausible decompressions; and the like. But here, I really liked the design of the spaceship and its implementation of artificial gravity. No massive and wasteful 'wheel' construction as in "2001: A Space Odyssey" here. Just units on the ends of a sufficiently long tether to get the right G.
- Equally - again physics related - the 'climb' and 'descent' scenes are nicely executed.
- Toni Collette adds gravitas to the (otherwise OK) cast. Shamier Anderson is also good in his emotional scenes. And the ensemble works well enough together.
Negatives:
- The screenplay is so vanilla and linear in its storytelling that you could ask me what happened in this movie in six months time and I think I would struggle to answer. When the 'stowaway' was discovered, my mind went crazy with options: was he there by accident? (which I don't think can strictly be defined as a "stowaway"); had he smuggled himself on-board deliberately?; did he have nefarious intentions towards the crew or the mission?; when push came to shove, would the 'short-straw' candidate fight back? Literally NONE of this was explored. True that we have a "will they survive" story, as the oxygen depletes, but this has been done much better in films like "Apollo 13" (with CO2 instead of O2).
- Sorry. I've never been a fan of Anna Kendrick. She's fine in fluffier fare like "Pitch Perfect" and "A Simple Favor". But as the brave and all action heroine here, I didn't buy it.
- Why have Toni Collette in a movie if you are going to give her so little to do?
Summary Thoughts on "Stowaway":
I've seen a number of extremely positive reviews of this one, which I've found a bit mystifying. I really like Sci-fi films, and particularly space-based sci-fi flicks. But this was all very "meh" for me. The premise was full of potential, but failed to deliver on much of it.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review on One Mann's Movies here https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/30/stowaway-bland-and-forgettable-sci-fi-fare/. Thanks.).
This is problematic. The ship was designed for two (with the specs pushed for three - - ed: really???!). With oxygen levels depleting, the crew are left with some difficult decisions to make.
Positives:
- For once, I have no issues with the physics of this sci-fi movie! As a PhD physicist by training, you will generally hear me huffing and puffing in sci-fi movies about loud noises in space; implausible decompressions; and the like. But here, I really liked the design of the spaceship and its implementation of artificial gravity. No massive and wasteful 'wheel' construction as in "2001: A Space Odyssey" here. Just units on the ends of a sufficiently long tether to get the right G.
- Equally - again physics related - the 'climb' and 'descent' scenes are nicely executed.
- Toni Collette adds gravitas to the (otherwise OK) cast. Shamier Anderson is also good in his emotional scenes. And the ensemble works well enough together.
Negatives:
- The screenplay is so vanilla and linear in its storytelling that you could ask me what happened in this movie in six months time and I think I would struggle to answer. When the 'stowaway' was discovered, my mind went crazy with options: was he there by accident? (which I don't think can strictly be defined as a "stowaway"); had he smuggled himself on-board deliberately?; did he have nefarious intentions towards the crew or the mission?; when push came to shove, would the 'short-straw' candidate fight back? Literally NONE of this was explored. True that we have a "will they survive" story, as the oxygen depletes, but this has been done much better in films like "Apollo 13" (with CO2 instead of O2).
- Sorry. I've never been a fan of Anna Kendrick. She's fine in fluffier fare like "Pitch Perfect" and "A Simple Favor". But as the brave and all action heroine here, I didn't buy it.
- Why have Toni Collette in a movie if you are going to give her so little to do?
Summary Thoughts on "Stowaway":
I've seen a number of extremely positive reviews of this one, which I've found a bit mystifying. I really like Sci-fi films, and particularly space-based sci-fi flicks. But this was all very "meh" for me. The premise was full of potential, but failed to deliver on much of it.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review on One Mann's Movies here https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/30/stowaway-bland-and-forgettable-sci-fi-fare/. Thanks.).
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Herself (2020) in Movies
Oct 6, 2020
I was keen to see this from recommendations I'd spotted online, but I wasn't overly enthused by the description... boy am I glad that the internet has great taste in movies.
Sandra is trying to keep her life together for her two daughters after she escapes from her abusive husband. Feeling isolated, overworked and living in a terrible situation Sandra has an off the wall idea that seems like a pipe dream. With the help of those around her she makes a true home for her girls and regains pieces of herself she'd lost.
Herself has some very serious topics in it, domestic violence and childhood trauma being at the top of the list, so that's definitely something to keep in mind if you're thinking of watching it. These topics are very effectively done and those feelings jumped out and affected me in a way I really didn't expect... I cried through a significant amount of the film, so probably just as well I was sitting in my living room and not a crowded cinema.
An interesting discovery on this was that one of the writers was Clare Dunne who plays the lead role of Sandra. I don't know what the process was between her and Malcolm Campbell but that involvement undoubtedly helps Dunne relay the true intent of the script, which I felt was incredibly well written.
Dunne's performance blew me away, barely minutes into the film you realise just what you're in for, it was such a brutal switch that my jaw nearly hit the floor. At every tense moment Dunne's acting is flawless and she conveys the emotions to a T. She does it so well that you get caught up in her anxiety, I found myself waiting for the bad things she was living in fear of and it was agonising... in a good way.
Along with her performance they use footage so well to help convey the story. When Sandra has an anxiety attack they cut clips into the scene, the quick changing back and forth between memory and present day brings the unsettling familiarity of panic and brings about a deeply emotional moment in the film. It might not conjure the exact same feeling as your own personal anxiety attack but it was closer than any other films I've seen it in.
Herself is a strong reminder that the vulnerable have the power within them to overcome anything through the right support and people who care. And sadly, it also reminds us that the system is a little messed up. I'm so pleased that I got the opportunity to see this, it's a well crafted film and I can say without a doubt it's already one of the highlights of this year's LFF.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/10/herself-movie-review.html
Sandra is trying to keep her life together for her two daughters after she escapes from her abusive husband. Feeling isolated, overworked and living in a terrible situation Sandra has an off the wall idea that seems like a pipe dream. With the help of those around her she makes a true home for her girls and regains pieces of herself she'd lost.
Herself has some very serious topics in it, domestic violence and childhood trauma being at the top of the list, so that's definitely something to keep in mind if you're thinking of watching it. These topics are very effectively done and those feelings jumped out and affected me in a way I really didn't expect... I cried through a significant amount of the film, so probably just as well I was sitting in my living room and not a crowded cinema.
An interesting discovery on this was that one of the writers was Clare Dunne who plays the lead role of Sandra. I don't know what the process was between her and Malcolm Campbell but that involvement undoubtedly helps Dunne relay the true intent of the script, which I felt was incredibly well written.
Dunne's performance blew me away, barely minutes into the film you realise just what you're in for, it was such a brutal switch that my jaw nearly hit the floor. At every tense moment Dunne's acting is flawless and she conveys the emotions to a T. She does it so well that you get caught up in her anxiety, I found myself waiting for the bad things she was living in fear of and it was agonising... in a good way.
Along with her performance they use footage so well to help convey the story. When Sandra has an anxiety attack they cut clips into the scene, the quick changing back and forth between memory and present day brings the unsettling familiarity of panic and brings about a deeply emotional moment in the film. It might not conjure the exact same feeling as your own personal anxiety attack but it was closer than any other films I've seen it in.
Herself is a strong reminder that the vulnerable have the power within them to overcome anything through the right support and people who care. And sadly, it also reminds us that the system is a little messed up. I'm so pleased that I got the opportunity to see this, it's a well crafted film and I can say without a doubt it's already one of the highlights of this year's LFF.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/10/herself-movie-review.html