Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
We left off at the end of John Wick 2 with our lead's imminent excommunication. He's been given an hours grace, in a city that's filled with assassins his odds don't look good, but even for John Wick... bad odds are still pretty good.
I've been contemplating the story to this since I watched it. There doesn't feel like much of one. He's attempting to save his life, sure, but that's really the only thing. It feels very much like a set up for the sequel, which depending on what you read is either already planned or not planned at all.
I don't really think we go to see John Wick movies for the plot though, do we? So on that front it delivers spectacularly. The opening was immense, we come in knowing that it's all going to kick off pretty quickly after the last instalment so the anticipation is with you from the off, and it doesn't disappoint. Sheer kick-assery that we've come to expect from the franchise.
As the clock ticks over the hour and John Wick's own time is now running out he dashes through the streets (rather bold for someone with a $14 million bounty on his head) trying to make his way to people who might actually help him. Of course he's spotted by one of the thousands of assassins and villains that seem to litter the streets of New York. He ends up in a handily weaponised building and we see him take on a gang of knife proficient bad guys. The scene in this sequence, with the weapons cupboards, had everyone in the cinema chuckling.
Laughter was a surprising feature of the film, the same chuckling rippled through several scenes and broke up the violence. Some of that violence did also bring out the odd pained "ooh" as we recoiled from the screen in sympathetic pain for the character.
The complexities of the fight scenes are epic, but there was one moment in particular that stuck out as being scripted... yes, yes, I know it's all scripted! We see a very brief pause and the reaction's slow in a moment that was such a departure from everything around it that it was very noticeable to me. (On second viewing, while I still saw it, it wasn't as bad as I had seen it the first time.)
One other fight scene made me pause with a moment of being picky. John and Sofia are fighting every bad guy in Morocco. It was epic, it was fun... but everywhere I looked, "someone's going to fall off that and land on that". The set-up of the scenery was such a giveaway to upcoming action that it took some edge of the action.
The cast is filled to the brim with wonderful actors. Ian McShane, Laurence Fishburne, Lance Reddick and Anjelica Huston were brilliant. I was a little taken aback to see Jerome Flynn appear as Sofia's old boss, Berrada. I winced a little when I noticed that he was playing it with an accent, but I had to take it back because he was rather good with it. There was no one that I thought was "letting the side down", everyone brought their A-game.
There's only one character that did something that disappointed. Zero, played by Mark Dacascos, is a very disciplined man. He's a master with the knife, a master of death, and his action sequences are incredible. He also gets a very funny moment in The Continental before my moment of disappointment. They turn him into a fanboy, and while the contrast has the potential to be amusing it's actually better achieved with characters later in the film. Zero's change felt uncomfortable and out of place.
I shouldn't put all of that in one place, there's one other very short moment in the film that seems out of character/place, and that's at the very end of the film. It felt so odd that I would have ended it a scene earlier. I liked the reveal, but it would have left a bit more intrigue without it.
We can't talk about John Wick without talking about doggos, and these ones were exceptionally good. The two new additions are very talented and look like they get to have a lot of fun. But my heart belongs to Dog though. When he turns up in a taxi... đ˘
Can we all face up to some facts at this point, please? John Wick... super assassin... well, he isn't really is he? He's just really resilient when taking a beating, and very persistent when it comes to shooting things! He'd waste a lot less ammo if he didn't put a minimum of three bullets into every body.
Parabellum was action packed and showed us some very imaginative pieces, but it didn't feel quite as well rounded as either of the other two. I'm still looking forward to what's to come, the pure action is amazing I love to see what they think of next. On the horizon we've got a fourth film, which is listed as Ballerina, and a TV series called The Continental. From this installment I could see some potential routes for the film, but it's the series I'm excited about. I would absolutely love it if each episode was in a different Continental.
What you should do
This movie is an "anyone" kind of thing. Old, young, couples, friends, lone cinema nerds... we were all there. If you love mindless violence and action then you should go and watch this, and look out for the best line of the whole film, "I get it."
If you don't like seeing bad things happen to good books, perhaps don't watch the first ten minutes or so.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I've been contemplating the story to this since I watched it. There doesn't feel like much of one. He's attempting to save his life, sure, but that's really the only thing. It feels very much like a set up for the sequel, which depending on what you read is either already planned or not planned at all.
I don't really think we go to see John Wick movies for the plot though, do we? So on that front it delivers spectacularly. The opening was immense, we come in knowing that it's all going to kick off pretty quickly after the last instalment so the anticipation is with you from the off, and it doesn't disappoint. Sheer kick-assery that we've come to expect from the franchise.
As the clock ticks over the hour and John Wick's own time is now running out he dashes through the streets (rather bold for someone with a $14 million bounty on his head) trying to make his way to people who might actually help him. Of course he's spotted by one of the thousands of assassins and villains that seem to litter the streets of New York. He ends up in a handily weaponised building and we see him take on a gang of knife proficient bad guys. The scene in this sequence, with the weapons cupboards, had everyone in the cinema chuckling.
Laughter was a surprising feature of the film, the same chuckling rippled through several scenes and broke up the violence. Some of that violence did also bring out the odd pained "ooh" as we recoiled from the screen in sympathetic pain for the character.
The complexities of the fight scenes are epic, but there was one moment in particular that stuck out as being scripted... yes, yes, I know it's all scripted! We see a very brief pause and the reaction's slow in a moment that was such a departure from everything around it that it was very noticeable to me. (On second viewing, while I still saw it, it wasn't as bad as I had seen it the first time.)
One other fight scene made me pause with a moment of being picky. John and Sofia are fighting every bad guy in Morocco. It was epic, it was fun... but everywhere I looked, "someone's going to fall off that and land on that". The set-up of the scenery was such a giveaway to upcoming action that it took some edge of the action.
The cast is filled to the brim with wonderful actors. Ian McShane, Laurence Fishburne, Lance Reddick and Anjelica Huston were brilliant. I was a little taken aback to see Jerome Flynn appear as Sofia's old boss, Berrada. I winced a little when I noticed that he was playing it with an accent, but I had to take it back because he was rather good with it. There was no one that I thought was "letting the side down", everyone brought their A-game.
There's only one character that did something that disappointed. Zero, played by Mark Dacascos, is a very disciplined man. He's a master with the knife, a master of death, and his action sequences are incredible. He also gets a very funny moment in The Continental before my moment of disappointment. They turn him into a fanboy, and while the contrast has the potential to be amusing it's actually better achieved with characters later in the film. Zero's change felt uncomfortable and out of place.
I shouldn't put all of that in one place, there's one other very short moment in the film that seems out of character/place, and that's at the very end of the film. It felt so odd that I would have ended it a scene earlier. I liked the reveal, but it would have left a bit more intrigue without it.
We can't talk about John Wick without talking about doggos, and these ones were exceptionally good. The two new additions are very talented and look like they get to have a lot of fun. But my heart belongs to Dog though. When he turns up in a taxi... đ˘
Can we all face up to some facts at this point, please? John Wick... super assassin... well, he isn't really is he? He's just really resilient when taking a beating, and very persistent when it comes to shooting things! He'd waste a lot less ammo if he didn't put a minimum of three bullets into every body.
Parabellum was action packed and showed us some very imaginative pieces, but it didn't feel quite as well rounded as either of the other two. I'm still looking forward to what's to come, the pure action is amazing I love to see what they think of next. On the horizon we've got a fourth film, which is listed as Ballerina, and a TV series called The Continental. From this installment I could see some potential routes for the film, but it's the series I'm excited about. I would absolutely love it if each episode was in a different Continental.
What you should do
This movie is an "anyone" kind of thing. Old, young, couples, friends, lone cinema nerds... we were all there. If you love mindless violence and action then you should go and watch this, and look out for the best line of the whole film, "I get it."
If you don't like seeing bad things happen to good books, perhaps don't watch the first ten minutes or so.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Solo? So-so.
When the whole Disney âbroaden out the Star Wars universeâ thing was first mooted I was NOT enthusiastic about the prospect. Then, in Christmas 2016 âRogue Oneâ burst onto our screens as a breath of fresh air, and I thought âOK, I can be wrong!â. But even jolted by that pleasant surprise, I always thought that the second proposed diversion off the main hyperspace highway into âRadiator Springsâ â a Han Solo back-story flick â might fall short. It just didnât float my boat.
Add into that proposition the decision to give the film initially to âThe Lego Movieâ directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller (why Disney? why?); them trying to forge it as a âcomedyâ; them falling horribly short and being fired by Disney; Disney bringing Ron Howard (âInfernoâ, âRushâ) in to try to salvage the project; and Howard reportedly re-shooting 75% of the film and you have the makings of a turkey of galactic proportions.
With all that being said, I was surprised I enjoyed it as much as I did. But thatâs off a very low base of expectation.
As you might guess, we go back to see Han⌠just Han⌠as a delinquent youth trying to keep his head above water under the thrall of the Fagin-like Lady Proxima (who â no pun intended â keeps her head under the water for most of the time). He is desperate to pull off a con thatâs lucrative enough that it will get him and his girlfriend Qiâra (Emilia Clarke, âMe Before Youâ; âTerminator: Genisysâ; âGame of Thronesâ) off-planet and into a free life. Things donât go to plan though and Han â now Han Solo â finds himself a trooper of the Galactic Empire. He links up with fellow rogues Beckett (Woody Harrelson, âWar for the Planet of the Apesâ; âThree Billboards in Ebbing, Missouriâ), Val (Thandie Newton, âWestworldâ, â2012â), Rio (voiced by Jon Favreau, âSpider-Man: Homecomingâ; âIron Man Threeâ) and their assertive and rebellious droid L3-37 (voiced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge) in a get-rich-or-die mission for vicious gang-boss Dryden Vos (Paul Bettany, âAvengers: Infinity Warâ).
The film has its moments for sure:
There are some nice background touches: an army recruitment video plays to the sound of John Williamâs empire march (played I am assured by my more musical wife in a major key to sound more uplifting and positive!);
Hanâs first meeting with that famous walking carpet (played by Joonas Suotamo) is memorable, as is the introduction to that âcard player, gambler and scoundrelâ Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover, âThe Martianâ, âSpider-Man: Homecomingâ): all flamboyance, self-regard and well-dressed ego;
solo2
Never count your money while youâre sitting at the table. Lando Calrissian played by Donald Glover putting his ship (you probably havenât heard of it) on the line. (Source: Lucasfilm).
the character of L3-37 is an excellent addition to the saga, forcefully demanding equality for droids: I would have liked to have seen much more of her;
there is a nice twist on the Greedo/Han âwho shot firstâ debate;
production design and special effects are up to standard for a Star Wars film, and I enjoyed John Powellâs score, incorporating a new âyoung Hanâ theme from John Williams himself;
and Erin Kellyman (in here movie debut) is just breathtaking and strikingly brilliant as the be-freckled renegade Enfys Nest.
But overall itâs all a bit disjointed and jumbled, probably as befits its growing pains. We are introduced to Solo within five seconds of the filmâs openingâŚ.. BAM! No exquisite ârevealâ as we saw with River Phoenix in âIndiana Jones and the Last Crusadeâ. I found this disconcerting and it took me ten minutes to get into the film as a result.
When it gets going it rather tries too hard to join up more Star Wars dots than it needs to. âRogue Oneâ did that exceedingly well, but that was because it needed to as âEpisode 3.5â. Here there are visual and verbal references everywhere as the screenwriters (Lawrence and Jonathan Kasdan) desperately try to knit their story into the canon. As an example, the action moves to the mines of Kessel at one point. Kessel? Kessel? Wasnât that a throwaway C3PO line from the âA New Hopeâ about being âsmashed to who knows whatâ in said mines?. So obviously, in the WHOLE GALAXY thatâs where the story leads us, with the local lingo for the hyperspace fuel McGuffin at the heart of the plot being âspiceâ! Itâs all a bit too trite for my liking.
And while a key protagonist appearing near the end of the film (no spoilers) is both a startling surprise and great fun, donât get me started on the timeline implicationsâŚ. (see the spoiler section below the trailer for more).
Alden Ehrenreich, who was just brilliant in âHail Caesarâ (âWas that it tâWERRRE so simpleâ) for me barely makes it past bland in the lead role. One of the defining characteristics of Harrison Fordâs Solo was his swagger and bravado and unfortunately Ehrenreich barely rates a three out of ten on the scale. I also found the chemistry with Emelia Clarke to be lukewarm. Clarke still seems to be struggling to make a significant breakthrough to the big screenâŚ. âMe Before Youâ still seems to be her high water mark so far. Here she has a key and complex role, but comes over as just plain unconvincing and âmehâ.
Ron Howard has clearly done a good job in buffing up a poisoned chalice so it can at least share space on the Star Wars shelf without being laughed out of the Cantina. Perhaps with a more coordinated and thought-through run-up to a Solo sequel (more Enfys Nest please!) this offshoot might have legs.
Add into that proposition the decision to give the film initially to âThe Lego Movieâ directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller (why Disney? why?); them trying to forge it as a âcomedyâ; them falling horribly short and being fired by Disney; Disney bringing Ron Howard (âInfernoâ, âRushâ) in to try to salvage the project; and Howard reportedly re-shooting 75% of the film and you have the makings of a turkey of galactic proportions.
With all that being said, I was surprised I enjoyed it as much as I did. But thatâs off a very low base of expectation.
As you might guess, we go back to see Han⌠just Han⌠as a delinquent youth trying to keep his head above water under the thrall of the Fagin-like Lady Proxima (who â no pun intended â keeps her head under the water for most of the time). He is desperate to pull off a con thatâs lucrative enough that it will get him and his girlfriend Qiâra (Emilia Clarke, âMe Before Youâ; âTerminator: Genisysâ; âGame of Thronesâ) off-planet and into a free life. Things donât go to plan though and Han â now Han Solo â finds himself a trooper of the Galactic Empire. He links up with fellow rogues Beckett (Woody Harrelson, âWar for the Planet of the Apesâ; âThree Billboards in Ebbing, Missouriâ), Val (Thandie Newton, âWestworldâ, â2012â), Rio (voiced by Jon Favreau, âSpider-Man: Homecomingâ; âIron Man Threeâ) and their assertive and rebellious droid L3-37 (voiced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge) in a get-rich-or-die mission for vicious gang-boss Dryden Vos (Paul Bettany, âAvengers: Infinity Warâ).
The film has its moments for sure:
There are some nice background touches: an army recruitment video plays to the sound of John Williamâs empire march (played I am assured by my more musical wife in a major key to sound more uplifting and positive!);
Hanâs first meeting with that famous walking carpet (played by Joonas Suotamo) is memorable, as is the introduction to that âcard player, gambler and scoundrelâ Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover, âThe Martianâ, âSpider-Man: Homecomingâ): all flamboyance, self-regard and well-dressed ego;
solo2
Never count your money while youâre sitting at the table. Lando Calrissian played by Donald Glover putting his ship (you probably havenât heard of it) on the line. (Source: Lucasfilm).
the character of L3-37 is an excellent addition to the saga, forcefully demanding equality for droids: I would have liked to have seen much more of her;
there is a nice twist on the Greedo/Han âwho shot firstâ debate;
production design and special effects are up to standard for a Star Wars film, and I enjoyed John Powellâs score, incorporating a new âyoung Hanâ theme from John Williams himself;
and Erin Kellyman (in here movie debut) is just breathtaking and strikingly brilliant as the be-freckled renegade Enfys Nest.
But overall itâs all a bit disjointed and jumbled, probably as befits its growing pains. We are introduced to Solo within five seconds of the filmâs openingâŚ.. BAM! No exquisite ârevealâ as we saw with River Phoenix in âIndiana Jones and the Last Crusadeâ. I found this disconcerting and it took me ten minutes to get into the film as a result.
When it gets going it rather tries too hard to join up more Star Wars dots than it needs to. âRogue Oneâ did that exceedingly well, but that was because it needed to as âEpisode 3.5â. Here there are visual and verbal references everywhere as the screenwriters (Lawrence and Jonathan Kasdan) desperately try to knit their story into the canon. As an example, the action moves to the mines of Kessel at one point. Kessel? Kessel? Wasnât that a throwaway C3PO line from the âA New Hopeâ about being âsmashed to who knows whatâ in said mines?. So obviously, in the WHOLE GALAXY thatâs where the story leads us, with the local lingo for the hyperspace fuel McGuffin at the heart of the plot being âspiceâ! Itâs all a bit too trite for my liking.
And while a key protagonist appearing near the end of the film (no spoilers) is both a startling surprise and great fun, donât get me started on the timeline implicationsâŚ. (see the spoiler section below the trailer for more).
Alden Ehrenreich, who was just brilliant in âHail Caesarâ (âWas that it tâWERRRE so simpleâ) for me barely makes it past bland in the lead role. One of the defining characteristics of Harrison Fordâs Solo was his swagger and bravado and unfortunately Ehrenreich barely rates a three out of ten on the scale. I also found the chemistry with Emelia Clarke to be lukewarm. Clarke still seems to be struggling to make a significant breakthrough to the big screenâŚ. âMe Before Youâ still seems to be her high water mark so far. Here she has a key and complex role, but comes over as just plain unconvincing and âmehâ.
Ron Howard has clearly done a good job in buffing up a poisoned chalice so it can at least share space on the Star Wars shelf without being laughed out of the Cantina. Perhaps with a more coordinated and thought-through run-up to a Solo sequel (more Enfys Nest please!) this offshoot might have legs.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Alien: Covenant (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Horrific Beasts and How to Avoid Them.
I seem to be in a bit of a minority in quite liking Ridley Scottâs last Alien outing â 2012âs âPrometheusâ: a heady, if at times ponderous, theory to the origins of man. The first hour of that film is really good. But for me, what made the original 1979 film so enthralling was the life cycle of the âtraditionalâ Xenomorph aliens through egg to evil hatchling to vicious killing machine. This somewhat got lost with âPrometheusâ with a range of alien-like-things ranging from wiggly black goo to something more familiar⌠and frankly I was confused. Some â repeat, some â of the explanation for that diversity of forms in âPrometheusâ is made clearer in the sequel âAlien: Covenantâ.
âCovenantâ (named again after the spaceship at its heart) is a follow-on sequel to âPrometheusâ, so it is worth re-watching it if you can before a cinema trip. At the end of that film we saw Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace, âThe Girl with the Dragon Tattooâ) and a reconstructed android David (Michael Fassbender, âSteve Jobsâ) flying off in an alien craft still loaded with its cargo of nasty alien black goo. Shaw had a mission to seek out The Engineerâs home world â named âParadiseâ â to find out why after creating man they were intent on going back to finish them off with a WMD. A neat prologue has been released which documents this⌠here:
We pick up the action 10 years later in a totally improbable 2104. (Give us a break writing team! [Story by Jack Paglen and Michael Green; screenplay by John Logan and Dante Harper]. We know they wonât have got through planning permission on the third Heathrow runway by then, let alone invented interplanetary travelâŚ! 2504, maybe!)
Daniels (Katherine Waterston, âFantastic Beasts And Where To Find Themâ) has just suffered a sudden bereavement (an uncredited James Franco â â blink and youâll miss him). She has also been rudely awakened from hypersleep due to a sudden system mishap: no, not to find Chris Pratt there like âPassengersâ, but by the shipâs android Walter (also Michael Fassbender) whoâs also revived the rest of the crew. While effecting repairs they receive a garbled John Denver track mysteriously beamed to them from an earth-like planet not too far away. As this might be a suitable homestead, and as spending weeks more in hypersleep is unattractive, Captain Oram (Billy Crudup, âSpotlightâ) votes to check it out, against Danielsâ strong objections. Needless to say, this proves to be a BIG MISTAKE as the new film neatly links hands with the first film.
Kick-ass⌠Katherine Waterston being careful not to slip in the shower.
Thereâs a limit to what more I can say about the film without delivering spoilers (so I have added a few more comments in the spoiler section BELOW the trailer). Itâs a far more action-oriented film than âPrometheusâ and has enough jump scares and gore to please most Alien fans. (In fact, itâs a surprise to me that it got a UK â15â certificate rather than an â18â: how much more violence do you need to show in the film?) A shower scene towards the end of the film is particularly effective and will likely put an end to relaxing shower sex for many people for good!
It also looks visually stunning (cinematography is by Dariusz Wolski (âThe Martianâ, âPirates of the Caribbeanâ) with location shooting in Milford Sound in New Zealand. The special effects are also a cut-above the normal CGI with a devastated Pompeii-like city, a picture of blacks and greys, being particularly effective.
In the acting stakes it is really all down to Waterston and Fassbinder. I wasnât a great fan of Waterston in âFantastic Beastsâ â a bit insipid I thought â but here she adopts Ripleyâs kick-ass mantle with ease but blends it beautifully with doe-eyed vulnerability. Some of her scenes reminded me strongly of Demi Moore in âGhostâ. Fassbinder is fascinating to watch with his dual roles of Walter and David, both slightly different versions of the same being. And the special effects around the Fassbinder-on-Fassbinder action, tending somewhat towards the homoerotic in places, are well done.
Unfortunately the rest of the crew get little in the way of background development, which limits the impact of the inevitable demises. They are also about as clinically stupid as the spaceship crew in âLifeâ in some of their actions; I guess you could put some of this down to the effects of panic, but in other cases you might see it as a simple cleansing of the gene pool in Darwinian fashion.
Also making uncredited guest appearances are Guy Pearce as Weyland (in a flashback scene) and Noomi Rapace.
Music is âbyâ Jed Kurzel, but to be honest he does little than wrap around re-versions of the original Jerry Goldsmith classics: not that this is a bad thing, since those themes are iconic and a joy to hear again on the big screen.
My expectations for this movie were sky-high, as it was hinted as a return to form for the franchise. And in many ways it was, with a âman, Gods and androidsâ theme adding depth to the traditional anatomical-bursting gore. But to be honest, some of the storytelling was highly predictable, and I left slightly disappointed with the overall effort. If my expectations were an 11/10, my reality was more like a 7/10. Itâs still a good film, and I look forward to watching it again. But perhaps this is a franchise that has really run its course now for Mr Scott and he should look to his next âMartianâ-type movie for a more novel foundation to build his next movie âlog cabin on the lakeâ on.
âCovenantâ (named again after the spaceship at its heart) is a follow-on sequel to âPrometheusâ, so it is worth re-watching it if you can before a cinema trip. At the end of that film we saw Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace, âThe Girl with the Dragon Tattooâ) and a reconstructed android David (Michael Fassbender, âSteve Jobsâ) flying off in an alien craft still loaded with its cargo of nasty alien black goo. Shaw had a mission to seek out The Engineerâs home world â named âParadiseâ â to find out why after creating man they were intent on going back to finish them off with a WMD. A neat prologue has been released which documents this⌠here:
We pick up the action 10 years later in a totally improbable 2104. (Give us a break writing team! [Story by Jack Paglen and Michael Green; screenplay by John Logan and Dante Harper]. We know they wonât have got through planning permission on the third Heathrow runway by then, let alone invented interplanetary travelâŚ! 2504, maybe!)
Daniels (Katherine Waterston, âFantastic Beasts And Where To Find Themâ) has just suffered a sudden bereavement (an uncredited James Franco â â blink and youâll miss him). She has also been rudely awakened from hypersleep due to a sudden system mishap: no, not to find Chris Pratt there like âPassengersâ, but by the shipâs android Walter (also Michael Fassbender) whoâs also revived the rest of the crew. While effecting repairs they receive a garbled John Denver track mysteriously beamed to them from an earth-like planet not too far away. As this might be a suitable homestead, and as spending weeks more in hypersleep is unattractive, Captain Oram (Billy Crudup, âSpotlightâ) votes to check it out, against Danielsâ strong objections. Needless to say, this proves to be a BIG MISTAKE as the new film neatly links hands with the first film.
Kick-ass⌠Katherine Waterston being careful not to slip in the shower.
Thereâs a limit to what more I can say about the film without delivering spoilers (so I have added a few more comments in the spoiler section BELOW the trailer). Itâs a far more action-oriented film than âPrometheusâ and has enough jump scares and gore to please most Alien fans. (In fact, itâs a surprise to me that it got a UK â15â certificate rather than an â18â: how much more violence do you need to show in the film?) A shower scene towards the end of the film is particularly effective and will likely put an end to relaxing shower sex for many people for good!
It also looks visually stunning (cinematography is by Dariusz Wolski (âThe Martianâ, âPirates of the Caribbeanâ) with location shooting in Milford Sound in New Zealand. The special effects are also a cut-above the normal CGI with a devastated Pompeii-like city, a picture of blacks and greys, being particularly effective.
In the acting stakes it is really all down to Waterston and Fassbinder. I wasnât a great fan of Waterston in âFantastic Beastsâ â a bit insipid I thought â but here she adopts Ripleyâs kick-ass mantle with ease but blends it beautifully with doe-eyed vulnerability. Some of her scenes reminded me strongly of Demi Moore in âGhostâ. Fassbinder is fascinating to watch with his dual roles of Walter and David, both slightly different versions of the same being. And the special effects around the Fassbinder-on-Fassbinder action, tending somewhat towards the homoerotic in places, are well done.
Unfortunately the rest of the crew get little in the way of background development, which limits the impact of the inevitable demises. They are also about as clinically stupid as the spaceship crew in âLifeâ in some of their actions; I guess you could put some of this down to the effects of panic, but in other cases you might see it as a simple cleansing of the gene pool in Darwinian fashion.
Also making uncredited guest appearances are Guy Pearce as Weyland (in a flashback scene) and Noomi Rapace.
Music is âbyâ Jed Kurzel, but to be honest he does little than wrap around re-versions of the original Jerry Goldsmith classics: not that this is a bad thing, since those themes are iconic and a joy to hear again on the big screen.
My expectations for this movie were sky-high, as it was hinted as a return to form for the franchise. And in many ways it was, with a âman, Gods and androidsâ theme adding depth to the traditional anatomical-bursting gore. But to be honest, some of the storytelling was highly predictable, and I left slightly disappointed with the overall effort. If my expectations were an 11/10, my reality was more like a 7/10. Itâs still a good film, and I look forward to watching it again. But perhaps this is a franchise that has really run its course now for Mr Scott and he should look to his next âMartianâ-type movie for a more novel foundation to build his next movie âlog cabin on the lakeâ on.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Amazing Spider-Man 2 in Video Games
Jul 21, 2017
Poor Graphics (3 more)
Awkward Animation
Glitches Galore
Rushed Ending
Can He Swing From A Web? Yeah, But Thatâs About All He Can DoâŚ
You may be thinking Dan, why the hell are you reviewing a low rated movie tie in game that came out three years ago? Well, I would say, that is a very valid question. I am reviewing this game because I actually believe it is one of the most relevant games Iâve played so far this year in terms of the wider gaming landscape, so yeah you have me rumbled, this wonât be so much a review of The Amazing Spiderman 2 for PS4 as it will be a commentary on bad games in general and their place in the modern gaming landscape.
I had just come off of finally getting around to playing Until Dawn at the start of January. A well made, well written, well acted, well executed teen horror story that had atmosphere and intrigue in spades. I then went on to play a game that I thought was mediocre by comparison, DMC Definitive Edition. When playing through the story I was so underwhelmed and disappointed in what they had turned this once great franchise into, an angsty, melodramatic, arcade slash âem up with as much depth as the shallow end of the kiddies swimming pool. I thought what a waste of cash and time. What a piece of garbage. Oh how naive I was, I had no idea how much worse it could get. After beating DMC and the attached story DLC that came with the Definitive Edition, I popped out the game and slid in The Amazing Spiderman 2. The first thing that I noticed was that the game graphically is at the same level if not worse than the first Amazing Spiderman game on PS3, but I thought hey, games with under par graphics can still be fun, UIâs and poly counts arenât everything so I began working my way through the main story. Letâs start with the only positive that this game has going for it, the web slinging. Traversal feels and looks great in the game, zipping around NYC is a treat and when everything works correctly, you can pull off some truly spectacular acrobatics while shooting around in mid air. The shoulder buttons on the controller are matched to Spideyâs arms, left trigger for left swing, right trigger for right swing, and unlike the last game, in this one the web shooters have to be aimed at a building in order to perform a successful swing. The important phrase here, is âwhen it works.â There were several times when I would be right next to a building and press the trigger to swing, only to hear Spidey say, âHey, this just in, web slingers need something to stick to.â No shit Spidey, thatâs why Iâm pressing the trigger on the side where the huge fucking skyscraper is. Also, there would be times when I had a decent amount of momentum going, swing left, right, left, right consecutively and as I pressed the left trigger again to attach to the building on my left, for some odd reason, Spidey would fire his right hand web shooter, attaching to a distant building on the right, turning me away from the direction I was swinging and totally ruining my momentum, this was particularly frustrating during boss fights and chase sequences or when swinging against the clock. Overall though traversal is fun, okay now that the positive is out of the way, letâs rip this thing apart. Animations are stiff, glitches are common and every cutscene in the game ends abruptly with an awkward animation that resembles the look of a news anchor when they run out of words to read off the teleprompter, but the camera is still rolling. Why they decided to add a dialogue system, I have no idea, it is so unnecessary and out of place and has absolutely no effect on the outcome of the gameâs narrative, itâs simply there for the sake of having a dialogue option. The plot is fairly standard, but is bearable for the first two thirds of the game, however the point that the publishers told the development team to get a move on and meet the deadline to coincide with the release of the movie becomes instantly clear. The last 5 or so chapters in the game are so rushed itâs like going through a checklist. The first bossfight in the last third of the game is pretty mundane, but at least there is an attempt at a build up to it. However after that fight you are teleported to the top of a skyscraper to battle Electro in a boss fight with the least build up ever. So you do that and then you are corrected, this next boss fight with the Green Goblin is the least build up to a boss fight ever. You donât see the transformation of either Electro or the Goblin and honestly, if I hadnât seen the movie that goes with this game, I would not have had a clue about what was going on. Then itâs as if the game remembers that they made a half arsed attempt at introducing Carnage away back at the beginning of the story and so they throw in another out of the blue boss fight to end the game. Wow, this lack of story build up and context wouldnât have been acceptable in a PS1 game, it certainly isnât acceptable here. Also the game again (just like the first one,) tries to copy the Arkham games in terms of the stealth and combat systems and miserably fails.
In my opinion, games like this; lazy, half arsed cash grabs, just arenât acceptable in todayâs modern landscape of video games. I thought DMC was a slog, but after playing this piece of dogshit, DMC is game of the year material. So please, please stop. Until you have a dedicated team who genuinely want to make a good game for fans of a franchise, donât bother. Signed by everyone.
I had just come off of finally getting around to playing Until Dawn at the start of January. A well made, well written, well acted, well executed teen horror story that had atmosphere and intrigue in spades. I then went on to play a game that I thought was mediocre by comparison, DMC Definitive Edition. When playing through the story I was so underwhelmed and disappointed in what they had turned this once great franchise into, an angsty, melodramatic, arcade slash âem up with as much depth as the shallow end of the kiddies swimming pool. I thought what a waste of cash and time. What a piece of garbage. Oh how naive I was, I had no idea how much worse it could get. After beating DMC and the attached story DLC that came with the Definitive Edition, I popped out the game and slid in The Amazing Spiderman 2. The first thing that I noticed was that the game graphically is at the same level if not worse than the first Amazing Spiderman game on PS3, but I thought hey, games with under par graphics can still be fun, UIâs and poly counts arenât everything so I began working my way through the main story. Letâs start with the only positive that this game has going for it, the web slinging. Traversal feels and looks great in the game, zipping around NYC is a treat and when everything works correctly, you can pull off some truly spectacular acrobatics while shooting around in mid air. The shoulder buttons on the controller are matched to Spideyâs arms, left trigger for left swing, right trigger for right swing, and unlike the last game, in this one the web shooters have to be aimed at a building in order to perform a successful swing. The important phrase here, is âwhen it works.â There were several times when I would be right next to a building and press the trigger to swing, only to hear Spidey say, âHey, this just in, web slingers need something to stick to.â No shit Spidey, thatâs why Iâm pressing the trigger on the side where the huge fucking skyscraper is. Also, there would be times when I had a decent amount of momentum going, swing left, right, left, right consecutively and as I pressed the left trigger again to attach to the building on my left, for some odd reason, Spidey would fire his right hand web shooter, attaching to a distant building on the right, turning me away from the direction I was swinging and totally ruining my momentum, this was particularly frustrating during boss fights and chase sequences or when swinging against the clock. Overall though traversal is fun, okay now that the positive is out of the way, letâs rip this thing apart. Animations are stiff, glitches are common and every cutscene in the game ends abruptly with an awkward animation that resembles the look of a news anchor when they run out of words to read off the teleprompter, but the camera is still rolling. Why they decided to add a dialogue system, I have no idea, it is so unnecessary and out of place and has absolutely no effect on the outcome of the gameâs narrative, itâs simply there for the sake of having a dialogue option. The plot is fairly standard, but is bearable for the first two thirds of the game, however the point that the publishers told the development team to get a move on and meet the deadline to coincide with the release of the movie becomes instantly clear. The last 5 or so chapters in the game are so rushed itâs like going through a checklist. The first bossfight in the last third of the game is pretty mundane, but at least there is an attempt at a build up to it. However after that fight you are teleported to the top of a skyscraper to battle Electro in a boss fight with the least build up ever. So you do that and then you are corrected, this next boss fight with the Green Goblin is the least build up to a boss fight ever. You donât see the transformation of either Electro or the Goblin and honestly, if I hadnât seen the movie that goes with this game, I would not have had a clue about what was going on. Then itâs as if the game remembers that they made a half arsed attempt at introducing Carnage away back at the beginning of the story and so they throw in another out of the blue boss fight to end the game. Wow, this lack of story build up and context wouldnât have been acceptable in a PS1 game, it certainly isnât acceptable here. Also the game again (just like the first one,) tries to copy the Arkham games in terms of the stealth and combat systems and miserably fails.
In my opinion, games like this; lazy, half arsed cash grabs, just arenât acceptable in todayâs modern landscape of video games. I thought DMC was a slog, but after playing this piece of dogshit, DMC is game of the year material. So please, please stop. Until you have a dedicated team who genuinely want to make a good game for fans of a franchise, donât bother. Signed by everyone.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Dredd (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
The mid 90âs was a strange time for movies. Sure, there were quite a few remembered fondly (just like with any era) but there were also many movies that are forgotten due to their ridiculousness. It was a time that gave us the style of adaptions on par with Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection, or the two Joel Schumacher Batman films. Likewise, there was a Judge Dredd film right in the middle of that time period.
It was a mess. It exemplified everything wrong with many adaptions in the 90âs. Big name actors, over-the-top designs, cheesy dialogue. It tried very hard to be akin to the original Total Recall but instead succeeded at only being a movie fun to laugh at. It featured Sylvester Stallone and Rob Schneider. That is all that needs to be said about that film. So, when Hollywood comes along and decides to make a new adaption, of course the originalâs ridiculousness looms over the whole affair. Not helping is the fact that most of the cast and crew are relatively obscure, and its source material (the Judge Dredd comics) is not as well-known as most of Marvelâs or DCâs pantheon. Yet, this brand new adaption, Dredd 3D, soars much higher than the original and manages to be one of those well-hidden gems of Fall 2012. I donât imagine this film breaking box office records, but it is a wholly worthwhile piece of screen entertainment, even if it has some notable flaws and is overshadowed by past outings in the franchise.
The future America is an irradiated waste land known as the Cursed Earth. On the east coast of North America lies Mega-City One, a vast, violent metropolis containing 800 million residents, where 17,000 crimes are reported daily and âSlo-Moâ, an addictive new drug that slows the userâs perception of time, has been introduced. The only force of order is the Judges, who act as police, judge, jury and executioner. Judge Dredd (Karl Urban) is tasked by the Chief Judge (Rakie Ayola) with evaluating rookie Judge Cassandra Anderson (Olivia Thirlby), a psychic who has failed the tests to become a full Judge. They become involved in a raid upon a crime and Slo-Mo ridden apartment complex known as Peach-Trees, which is ruled by a vicious crime boss Ma-Ma (Lena Heady).
You can guess from the title that the movie is meant to be watched in 3D. But that is where personal opinions of 3D come into play. For me personally, I cannot ding the filmâs use of 3D because it uses it well enough that it becomes unnoticeable, which is to say it does not obnoxiously remind you at all times it is meant to be watched in 3D by throwing random things at the camera. But I will say that, although somewhat gimmicky, the âSlo-Moâ segments (which are shot from the perspective of those on the mind-altering drug âSlo-Moâ) do use 3D very well and manage to be some of the most visually striking and beautiful shots in the entire film.
The plot is simple to understand and straight forward. There are not huge twists and turns, and manages to be tightly written. It is not extremely memorable for plot standards, but it does not need to be. The story is held up by focusing on three major characters, which some good additional characterization of two more side characters. In that sense, the plot and characters do not pop off the screen into greatness, yet they are still tightly written enough that both elements (plot and characters) are not muddled or confusing. The simple plot, and the fact it all takes place in one apartment complex, makes it easier to focus on action and visuals.
While the visuals are all extremely well-done, the action could use some work. The setting of Mega-City One is extremely well established, as opposed to the original Judge Dredd adaption. It seems like it could be a real place not far off in the future, as it is set up with a realistic visual design â just with added grittiness and subtle science fictional elements. Also, there is not a huge amount of CG and the Judge uniforms especially look like iconic yet possibly realistic futuristic police suits. But the action could use some work, as stated. I could not help but constantly compare it to the recently released film, âThe Raid: Redeptionâ, the Indonesian martial arts police film centering on a single police raid on an apartment complex. The similarities are there.
Both movies have very similar locations and plots, but the difference is that while Dredd has more interesting setting and science fiction elements (and arguably more interesting characters), The Raid: Redemptionâs action is far more entertaining and engrossing. The real problem with Dredd is that there are never any real amazing feats of heroics on part of Judge Dredd. They set up the film in a sort of ââDie Hardâ in the future vibeâ but that requires the hero to barely overcome overwhelming odds. As it stands, it never really feels like Judge Dredd is in a ton of danger. There are some cool shooting moments, and some even more interesting usage of Judge Andersonâs psychic powers. But at the end of the day, there simply are not many memorable action moments.
Overall, it does not ruin the film at all. It still manages to be an entertaining and interesting movie regardless of memorable action sequences. It has a tightly plotted narrative with fairly well done characters, not muddled by overuse of complexity or plot twists. It manages to be visually excellent with interesting science fictional elements, but never does it soar with its action set-pieces. It would have benefitted with some better use of gunplay or more clever feats of heroics on Judge Dreddâs part. But at least it takes itself seriously enough to not have anything akin to Rob Schneider following Sylvester Stallone around in a cheesy script.
It was a mess. It exemplified everything wrong with many adaptions in the 90âs. Big name actors, over-the-top designs, cheesy dialogue. It tried very hard to be akin to the original Total Recall but instead succeeded at only being a movie fun to laugh at. It featured Sylvester Stallone and Rob Schneider. That is all that needs to be said about that film. So, when Hollywood comes along and decides to make a new adaption, of course the originalâs ridiculousness looms over the whole affair. Not helping is the fact that most of the cast and crew are relatively obscure, and its source material (the Judge Dredd comics) is not as well-known as most of Marvelâs or DCâs pantheon. Yet, this brand new adaption, Dredd 3D, soars much higher than the original and manages to be one of those well-hidden gems of Fall 2012. I donât imagine this film breaking box office records, but it is a wholly worthwhile piece of screen entertainment, even if it has some notable flaws and is overshadowed by past outings in the franchise.
The future America is an irradiated waste land known as the Cursed Earth. On the east coast of North America lies Mega-City One, a vast, violent metropolis containing 800 million residents, where 17,000 crimes are reported daily and âSlo-Moâ, an addictive new drug that slows the userâs perception of time, has been introduced. The only force of order is the Judges, who act as police, judge, jury and executioner. Judge Dredd (Karl Urban) is tasked by the Chief Judge (Rakie Ayola) with evaluating rookie Judge Cassandra Anderson (Olivia Thirlby), a psychic who has failed the tests to become a full Judge. They become involved in a raid upon a crime and Slo-Mo ridden apartment complex known as Peach-Trees, which is ruled by a vicious crime boss Ma-Ma (Lena Heady).
You can guess from the title that the movie is meant to be watched in 3D. But that is where personal opinions of 3D come into play. For me personally, I cannot ding the filmâs use of 3D because it uses it well enough that it becomes unnoticeable, which is to say it does not obnoxiously remind you at all times it is meant to be watched in 3D by throwing random things at the camera. But I will say that, although somewhat gimmicky, the âSlo-Moâ segments (which are shot from the perspective of those on the mind-altering drug âSlo-Moâ) do use 3D very well and manage to be some of the most visually striking and beautiful shots in the entire film.
The plot is simple to understand and straight forward. There are not huge twists and turns, and manages to be tightly written. It is not extremely memorable for plot standards, but it does not need to be. The story is held up by focusing on three major characters, which some good additional characterization of two more side characters. In that sense, the plot and characters do not pop off the screen into greatness, yet they are still tightly written enough that both elements (plot and characters) are not muddled or confusing. The simple plot, and the fact it all takes place in one apartment complex, makes it easier to focus on action and visuals.
While the visuals are all extremely well-done, the action could use some work. The setting of Mega-City One is extremely well established, as opposed to the original Judge Dredd adaption. It seems like it could be a real place not far off in the future, as it is set up with a realistic visual design â just with added grittiness and subtle science fictional elements. Also, there is not a huge amount of CG and the Judge uniforms especially look like iconic yet possibly realistic futuristic police suits. But the action could use some work, as stated. I could not help but constantly compare it to the recently released film, âThe Raid: Redeptionâ, the Indonesian martial arts police film centering on a single police raid on an apartment complex. The similarities are there.
Both movies have very similar locations and plots, but the difference is that while Dredd has more interesting setting and science fiction elements (and arguably more interesting characters), The Raid: Redemptionâs action is far more entertaining and engrossing. The real problem with Dredd is that there are never any real amazing feats of heroics on part of Judge Dredd. They set up the film in a sort of ââDie Hardâ in the future vibeâ but that requires the hero to barely overcome overwhelming odds. As it stands, it never really feels like Judge Dredd is in a ton of danger. There are some cool shooting moments, and some even more interesting usage of Judge Andersonâs psychic powers. But at the end of the day, there simply are not many memorable action moments.
Overall, it does not ruin the film at all. It still manages to be an entertaining and interesting movie regardless of memorable action sequences. It has a tightly plotted narrative with fairly well done characters, not muddled by overuse of complexity or plot twists. It manages to be visually excellent with interesting science fictional elements, but never does it soar with its action set-pieces. It would have benefitted with some better use of gunplay or more clever feats of heroics on Judge Dreddâs part. But at least it takes itself seriously enough to not have anything akin to Rob Schneider following Sylvester Stallone around in a cheesy script.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated GoodFellas (1990) in Movies
Aug 25, 2020
Cast (3 more)
Sets
Script
Directing
Masterpiece
Contains spoilers, click to show
At the weekend, I was lucky enough to go and see one of my favourite films ever made on the big screen; Goodfellas. I thoroughly enjoyed the experience of seeing the movie in an actual cinema, but it has been a few years since I have last seen it and seeing it after seeing some of Scorseseâs more recent efforts, I actually saw the story in a different light.
Here me out here; Goodfellas is a religious story.
I know what you are thinking, âBut Scorsese has already made religious movies with The Last Temptation of Christ and Silence. Goodfellas is about gangsters and murder and the only brief mention of religion in the movie is the fact that Karen is Jewish and Henry wears a cross.â Well none of that is strictly untrue, but there were just several points of the movie that I just couldnât help but feel an implied religious undertone.
The first of which is in the opening scene of the movie, when Henry, Tommy and Jimmy open the boot of the car to finish off Billy Batts. The bright red tail light shines harshly on Henryâs face as he watches a man die and delivers his iconic voiceover: âAs far back as I can remember, Iâve always wanted to be a gangster.â Here we are being introduced to a man who is capable of literally staring death in the face and metaphorically staring into the jaws of hell without even flinching.
From this point on, Henry is our guide into this forbidden underworld. He treats us the viewers as total newcomers to this chaotic landscape as he attempts to sell to us how great it is to live this way. Itâs akin to Virgil guiding Dante through the various circles of hell in the Divine Comedy. This idea of Henry being a guide into hell is most explicit in the scene of his and Karenâs first real date at the Copacabana nightclub. In this scene we are treated to a glorious tracking shot that follows the couple all the way from their car to their seat directly in front of the stage. The first major direction we are taken is down. We descend down a staircase into a hallway painted red, in fact if you pay attention to the background in this entire sequence, there is almost always at least one red object onscreen. All the way to the table, Henry is greeted by various sinners as the âThen He Kissed Me,â plays in the background; a song of seduction and lust.
Another example of this is the famous scene where Henry introduces us to various gangsters such as Jimmy Two Times through voiceover. Once again, the environment is littered with red light and dark shadowed areas as we are being introduced to a batch of sinners, thieves and murderers.
After Tommyâs death, the period of seduction in the movie is over. From this point on, we are seeing the intense fall of Henryâs world. It is just as chaotic as the first half of the movie, but now Henry and his friends are no longer in charge of the chaos and slowly they are beginning to lose control of everything that was once theirs. All of a sudden the momentum that has carried the movie and Henryâs life up until this point is brought to a halt, most obviously manifested in the scene of Henry driving far too fast despite being unaware of wait awaits him ahead and having to slam on his breaks and come to a screeching stop mere inches away from crashing. What direction is he looking just prior to this? Heâs looking up for the chopper that he suspects has been following him, however he is also looking in the direction of Heaven, looking for a threat of something bigger than him that threatens to put a stop to his sinful lifestyle.
In the movieâs epilogue, once Henry gives up Jimmy and Paulie to the FBI, we see him in an entirely different environment. Heâs dressed different, the weather is different and he describes how he is now just a nobody like everyone else as if that to him is a fate worse that death. Almost as if, he is in Limbo. No longer is he amongst the sinners in a world of gratification and sin, but instead he is in a âsafe,â environment where he canât do anything even remotely illegal or morally questionable because he is being monitored by people just waiting for him to slip up. Then the very last shot we see is Tommy shooting at the audience. This is not only a very neat bookend as both the opening scene and final scene of the movie see Tommy committing a violent act, but it signifies that elements of Henryâs old life still follow him and he will spend the rest of his days looking over his shoulder for demons from his old life, like Tommy waiting to snuff him out.
Maybe Iâm reaching slightly with this, but I feel like at least a few of these choices were intentionally put in by Scorsese. Especially the opening scene showing the murder of Billy Batts and the tracking shot as we are taken into the Copacabana. After watching recently watching Silence and The Irishman, it is clear that faith and mortality are both things that heavily weigh on Scorseseâs mind, so I donât think that it is too much of a stretch to say that it was probably something that was at least in the back of his mind in 1990.
Regardless, this movie is a masterpiece and is still great no matter how many times you have seen it previously. It feels so authentic and genuine through the direction and presentation and the fantastic performances given by the respective cast members allow the characters to feel so real and deep. There is a reason that this is still considered as one of the seminal gangster movies. 10/10
Here me out here; Goodfellas is a religious story.
I know what you are thinking, âBut Scorsese has already made religious movies with The Last Temptation of Christ and Silence. Goodfellas is about gangsters and murder and the only brief mention of religion in the movie is the fact that Karen is Jewish and Henry wears a cross.â Well none of that is strictly untrue, but there were just several points of the movie that I just couldnât help but feel an implied religious undertone.
The first of which is in the opening scene of the movie, when Henry, Tommy and Jimmy open the boot of the car to finish off Billy Batts. The bright red tail light shines harshly on Henryâs face as he watches a man die and delivers his iconic voiceover: âAs far back as I can remember, Iâve always wanted to be a gangster.â Here we are being introduced to a man who is capable of literally staring death in the face and metaphorically staring into the jaws of hell without even flinching.
From this point on, Henry is our guide into this forbidden underworld. He treats us the viewers as total newcomers to this chaotic landscape as he attempts to sell to us how great it is to live this way. Itâs akin to Virgil guiding Dante through the various circles of hell in the Divine Comedy. This idea of Henry being a guide into hell is most explicit in the scene of his and Karenâs first real date at the Copacabana nightclub. In this scene we are treated to a glorious tracking shot that follows the couple all the way from their car to their seat directly in front of the stage. The first major direction we are taken is down. We descend down a staircase into a hallway painted red, in fact if you pay attention to the background in this entire sequence, there is almost always at least one red object onscreen. All the way to the table, Henry is greeted by various sinners as the âThen He Kissed Me,â plays in the background; a song of seduction and lust.
Another example of this is the famous scene where Henry introduces us to various gangsters such as Jimmy Two Times through voiceover. Once again, the environment is littered with red light and dark shadowed areas as we are being introduced to a batch of sinners, thieves and murderers.
After Tommyâs death, the period of seduction in the movie is over. From this point on, we are seeing the intense fall of Henryâs world. It is just as chaotic as the first half of the movie, but now Henry and his friends are no longer in charge of the chaos and slowly they are beginning to lose control of everything that was once theirs. All of a sudden the momentum that has carried the movie and Henryâs life up until this point is brought to a halt, most obviously manifested in the scene of Henry driving far too fast despite being unaware of wait awaits him ahead and having to slam on his breaks and come to a screeching stop mere inches away from crashing. What direction is he looking just prior to this? Heâs looking up for the chopper that he suspects has been following him, however he is also looking in the direction of Heaven, looking for a threat of something bigger than him that threatens to put a stop to his sinful lifestyle.
In the movieâs epilogue, once Henry gives up Jimmy and Paulie to the FBI, we see him in an entirely different environment. Heâs dressed different, the weather is different and he describes how he is now just a nobody like everyone else as if that to him is a fate worse that death. Almost as if, he is in Limbo. No longer is he amongst the sinners in a world of gratification and sin, but instead he is in a âsafe,â environment where he canât do anything even remotely illegal or morally questionable because he is being monitored by people just waiting for him to slip up. Then the very last shot we see is Tommy shooting at the audience. This is not only a very neat bookend as both the opening scene and final scene of the movie see Tommy committing a violent act, but it signifies that elements of Henryâs old life still follow him and he will spend the rest of his days looking over his shoulder for demons from his old life, like Tommy waiting to snuff him out.
Maybe Iâm reaching slightly with this, but I feel like at least a few of these choices were intentionally put in by Scorsese. Especially the opening scene showing the murder of Billy Batts and the tracking shot as we are taken into the Copacabana. After watching recently watching Silence and The Irishman, it is clear that faith and mortality are both things that heavily weigh on Scorseseâs mind, so I donât think that it is too much of a stretch to say that it was probably something that was at least in the back of his mind in 1990.
Regardless, this movie is a masterpiece and is still great no matter how many times you have seen it previously. It feels so authentic and genuine through the direction and presentation and the fantastic performances given by the respective cast members allow the characters to feel so real and deep. There is a reason that this is still considered as one of the seminal gangster movies. 10/10
Nicola Jane (6 KP) created a post
May 7, 2019 (Updated May 7, 2019)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Cloud Atlas (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
While I am not familiar with the novel, I was not excited to review the film adaptation of David Mitchellâs Cloud Atlas. Though the Screenplay was written and directed by the Wachowskis (The Matrix) and Tom Tykwer (Run Lola Run) I did not know exactly what I was getting into. The trailer shows it as an epic sci-fi film crossing the time and lives of several stories and how everything and everyone is connected. Needless to say my curiosity was piqued. But I was nervous because I knew it would take a grand effort to keep this epic and ambitious project from falling flat. And well, I can honestly say that I am not quite sure if the combined effort succeeded.
Allow me to explain. About an hour into the film I had a young film reviewer to my left and I noticed he started to nod his head in approval at each new developing story throughout the film. To my right was a friend of mine, I would consider as an average film viewer, who at this same time I could tell was counting the minutes till the lights came up but felt trapped with nowhere to go but forward. And for me, I can see both sides of these reactions.
The plot is comprised of a multi-narrative of six stories, each with a complete beginning, middle and end. These stories are told from different timelines following a group of souls throughout the ages to show how everything is woven together and the connection between them; From the 1849 slave trader, to a young composer in 1936 Britain, to a 1973 journalist attempting to uncover corruption of the big business ruling class, to a 2012 literary publisher whoâs life becomes a daring escape from a geriatric home, to a 2144 Neo-Soul synthetic learning to become human, to a post-apocalyptic tribesman trying to save his world and family⌠Lost yet? Believe me you will want to focus during the first hour of this film as we are introduced to the sudden shift of timelines. All of the main actors appear as varying characters of significance in every narrative, each with different accents and types of language. It is a bit of an unexpected bother to keep everything straight at first, however if you pay attention it is fairly easy to follow. This first hour is where I feel the film becomes a make or break for those actively thinking about what they are watching and the average movie viewer who is just there to be entertained and see the new Tom Hanks (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) or Halle Berry (Perfect Stanger) movie. For those who make it through that first hour still engaged, the film moves along at a steady pace and provides everything from romance to action that keeps you guessing and intrigued at what is next to come.
The Wachowskis and Tykwer do an outstanding job of visually fleshing out each timeline in its own visual style, especially the futuristic ones, which subtlety organize each narrative for the viewer. Additionally, there are so many talented actors in this film and it is somewhat fascinating to try and pick them out throughout the film. It is almost like a giant game of Whereâs Waldo on screen as the makeup and special effects artists do a fantastic job of making the actors fit each character in every timeline. In fact, during the fourth or fifth timeline a lady in my row asked her partner if the man on screen was Forrest Gump, which was surprising because Hanks was the easiest character to pick out among them all.
Tom Hanks delivers one of his better performances in years. We watch his characterâs soul transition from a sinister and vile doctor to a tribesman making the righteous choice while struggling with that inkling of evil that is the devil within us all. It was refreshing to see Hanks play parts that were not just an âeverymanâ that he has played in recent years.
Halle Berryâs performance is mostly average in her parts with the exception of 1973 journalist role where she is the main protagonist. Hugo Weaving channels a bit of his Agent Smith role from The Matrix as he plays a villain throughout the timelines. Hugh Grant (Love Actually) makes unexpected soild appearances throughout the timelines. With Jim Sturgess (One Day), James DâArcy (Mansfield Park) and Ben Whishaw (who is the new Q in the upcoming James Bond film Skyfall) rounding out the cast with a young contrast to the already heavy acting handled by the bigger names of this film. Each of these young actors holdâs their own against their older more notable counterparts. Whishawâs performance as the lead in the 1936 composer role is especially noteworthy.
The other stand out performance in the film comes from Jim Broadbent best known in the states as Professor Slughorn in the Harry Potter Films. His performance in the 1936 composer and 2012 literary publisher are excellent. The Publisher story was my favorite timeline throughout the film. Not only did it deliver some much needed comic relief to an emotionally engaging and heavy film, but it also made me care the most about the elderly characters trying to escape the clutches of the geriatric prison of a nursing home. Unfortunately, other than the aforementioned comic relief this timeline seemed the most unnecessary to the overarching story at hand.
When I left the film and talked it over with my friend I was indifferent to the film. It was not great, it was not bad either. As my friend described it, it was a movie that was trying too hard. We agreed that somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but we were not sure if we watched it.
However as the days have passed I have found myself thinking about the stories constantly. More specifically about how the main protagonist played by a different actor in each narrative has the same birthmark of a shooting star that in some way symbolizes some universal soul encompassing a new shell of a body in each timeline. Like some kind of reincarnation of that soul is fighting the same revolution throughout the ages against the powerful class and illusion of natural order. Additionally how each of the central characters found themselves connected with the main characters in the stories that preceded them through some kind of medium; whether it was by an old journal, or love letters, or a written story, or film, or message of hope. These subtle insights of growth and change for this main soul leaping into a new life in each timeline has caused me to examine our world and how we as people can be truly connected to one another not only today, but throughout the ages. I want to view the film again and am inspired to read the novel in some sort of effort to better understand these concepts.
Nevertheless as a film that is almost three hours long it does its best to be an epic sci-fi film and give something for everyone. And while it succeeds in many aspects of feel, it also falls short in aspects that are probably best accomplished in a literary form. As I said above, somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but I am not sure if I watched it. Or maybe I am not intelligent enough to comprehend it. Because of that I can only give it an average score. Though I believe if you ask me after a second viewing, I may be inclined to raise it.
Allow me to explain. About an hour into the film I had a young film reviewer to my left and I noticed he started to nod his head in approval at each new developing story throughout the film. To my right was a friend of mine, I would consider as an average film viewer, who at this same time I could tell was counting the minutes till the lights came up but felt trapped with nowhere to go but forward. And for me, I can see both sides of these reactions.
The plot is comprised of a multi-narrative of six stories, each with a complete beginning, middle and end. These stories are told from different timelines following a group of souls throughout the ages to show how everything is woven together and the connection between them; From the 1849 slave trader, to a young composer in 1936 Britain, to a 1973 journalist attempting to uncover corruption of the big business ruling class, to a 2012 literary publisher whoâs life becomes a daring escape from a geriatric home, to a 2144 Neo-Soul synthetic learning to become human, to a post-apocalyptic tribesman trying to save his world and family⌠Lost yet? Believe me you will want to focus during the first hour of this film as we are introduced to the sudden shift of timelines. All of the main actors appear as varying characters of significance in every narrative, each with different accents and types of language. It is a bit of an unexpected bother to keep everything straight at first, however if you pay attention it is fairly easy to follow. This first hour is where I feel the film becomes a make or break for those actively thinking about what they are watching and the average movie viewer who is just there to be entertained and see the new Tom Hanks (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) or Halle Berry (Perfect Stanger) movie. For those who make it through that first hour still engaged, the film moves along at a steady pace and provides everything from romance to action that keeps you guessing and intrigued at what is next to come.
The Wachowskis and Tykwer do an outstanding job of visually fleshing out each timeline in its own visual style, especially the futuristic ones, which subtlety organize each narrative for the viewer. Additionally, there are so many talented actors in this film and it is somewhat fascinating to try and pick them out throughout the film. It is almost like a giant game of Whereâs Waldo on screen as the makeup and special effects artists do a fantastic job of making the actors fit each character in every timeline. In fact, during the fourth or fifth timeline a lady in my row asked her partner if the man on screen was Forrest Gump, which was surprising because Hanks was the easiest character to pick out among them all.
Tom Hanks delivers one of his better performances in years. We watch his characterâs soul transition from a sinister and vile doctor to a tribesman making the righteous choice while struggling with that inkling of evil that is the devil within us all. It was refreshing to see Hanks play parts that were not just an âeverymanâ that he has played in recent years.
Halle Berryâs performance is mostly average in her parts with the exception of 1973 journalist role where she is the main protagonist. Hugo Weaving channels a bit of his Agent Smith role from The Matrix as he plays a villain throughout the timelines. Hugh Grant (Love Actually) makes unexpected soild appearances throughout the timelines. With Jim Sturgess (One Day), James DâArcy (Mansfield Park) and Ben Whishaw (who is the new Q in the upcoming James Bond film Skyfall) rounding out the cast with a young contrast to the already heavy acting handled by the bigger names of this film. Each of these young actors holdâs their own against their older more notable counterparts. Whishawâs performance as the lead in the 1936 composer role is especially noteworthy.
The other stand out performance in the film comes from Jim Broadbent best known in the states as Professor Slughorn in the Harry Potter Films. His performance in the 1936 composer and 2012 literary publisher are excellent. The Publisher story was my favorite timeline throughout the film. Not only did it deliver some much needed comic relief to an emotionally engaging and heavy film, but it also made me care the most about the elderly characters trying to escape the clutches of the geriatric prison of a nursing home. Unfortunately, other than the aforementioned comic relief this timeline seemed the most unnecessary to the overarching story at hand.
When I left the film and talked it over with my friend I was indifferent to the film. It was not great, it was not bad either. As my friend described it, it was a movie that was trying too hard. We agreed that somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but we were not sure if we watched it.
However as the days have passed I have found myself thinking about the stories constantly. More specifically about how the main protagonist played by a different actor in each narrative has the same birthmark of a shooting star that in some way symbolizes some universal soul encompassing a new shell of a body in each timeline. Like some kind of reincarnation of that soul is fighting the same revolution throughout the ages against the powerful class and illusion of natural order. Additionally how each of the central characters found themselves connected with the main characters in the stories that preceded them through some kind of medium; whether it was by an old journal, or love letters, or a written story, or film, or message of hope. These subtle insights of growth and change for this main soul leaping into a new life in each timeline has caused me to examine our world and how we as people can be truly connected to one another not only today, but throughout the ages. I want to view the film again and am inspired to read the novel in some sort of effort to better understand these concepts.
Nevertheless as a film that is almost three hours long it does its best to be an epic sci-fi film and give something for everyone. And while it succeeds in many aspects of feel, it also falls short in aspects that are probably best accomplished in a literary form. As I said above, somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but I am not sure if I watched it. Or maybe I am not intelligent enough to comprehend it. Because of that I can only give it an average score. Though I believe if you ask me after a second viewing, I may be inclined to raise it.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Ghoulash: The Game of Card Calamity in Tabletop Games
Sep 3, 2019
Ghoulash! I cannot say that word without using a Dracula-esque accent nor without my tummy grumbling (goulash is a yummy traditional Hungarian dish). Anyway, lunch time hangriness aside, Ghoulash is not a new game. In fact, the original version of Ghoulash was released in 2001 under Ghoulash Games. It is a pen-and-paper dungeon crawler for 2 players that we are reviewing as well. This game we are reviewing here is a card version prototype. So how does it play?
In Ghoulash: The Game of Card Calamity (which I will shorten to Ghoulash for the purpose of this review â even though there is the OG Ghoulash as well, I think you know what Iâm talking about) players are Ghoul hunters. Ghouls are monstrous green blobsters that are coming for you. You fight them by shooting Ghoo, a purply substance, at them to exploit their weak spots and vanquish them. The first Ghoul hunter to reach 10 Victory Points (VPs) will be crowned the winner!
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. As this is a preview copy of the game, I do not know if the final rules or components will be similar or different to what we were provided. -T
To setup the game, shuffle the deck and place a 6Ă3 grid of cards in the middle of the table. This is the âfloorâ and will be the game board for the duration of the game. When the floor is out of cards (I will explain), set out a new 6Ă3 grid floor and continue play. Deal each hunter a hand of seven cards and you are ready to play!
Each of the face down cards that comprise the floor are opportunities for encounters. You, as a Ghoul hunter, will enter the floor from any border card. On your turn you may fill your hand up to your current hand limit â which changes based on whether you have taken wounds or not. Next you must move orthogonally onto a space that contains a card or an empty space, but you must move â or take your Action first, THEN move. If you move to a space with a card, you encounter the card. Depending on what type of card is flipped face up you will be taking cards into your hand, following Command instructions, or fighting Ghouls. When you have finished your turn it is the next hunterâs turn.
Should your flipped card reveal an Action or Special card, you simply collect the card into your hand. If the flipped card is an Battle card (which has Ghoo splats â like the ones pictured above on the far right), you must follow the Command instructions at the bottom of the card before collecting to your hand. And if itâs a Ghoul you will begin battle!
Battling Ghouls is mechanically simple, but the overall battle may not be. When you face a Ghoul its card will tell you what the strength of the monster is (the white number). It could have four, five, or six hit points (HPs). To vanquish the Ghoul you will need to play cards whose Ghoo value (splats) is equal to or greater than the Ghoulâs HP amount. From this point the other hunters can intervene in the battle by playing cards whose battle Ghoo tips the scales toward the Ghoul thus making it more difficult to defeat (a la the ganging up mechanic in Munchkin). As only one hunter may affect the battle in this way, it is the playerâs cards whose strength is greater that wins the challenge. Now the original combatant must spend more Ghoo cards to overcome the super-buffed Ghoul. Should the hunter prevail they will collect the Ghoul card and display it in front of them to show the table how many VPs they have earned. If the hunter is unsuccessful in the battle, they suffer wounds in the amount of VPs that would have been awarded with a successful battle (the green dots at the bottom of the card). Wounds are reflected by cards in hand, so if a hunter suffers two wounds, their hand limit is now five instead of the original seven. Play continues in this fashion until a hunter has accumulated 10 VPs and earned victory!
Components. Per my disclaimer, the game that was sent to us is a prototype version of the completed game, so components may (and probably will) change or be improved as a result of further development, and/or a successful Kickstarter campaign. That said, I can comment only on the components that were provided to us. The game is a deck of cards in a deck box. The cards themselves are of fine quality. The art upon them is okay. Nothing too stellar, but it gets the job done. I think the art is one thing that can be improved with development. Donât get me wrong, the art is not at all bad. Perhaps itâs the card layout or graphic design. Something with a bit more punch would be appreciated.
Our thoughts on this one are that it needs some sprucing up a bit. Yes, it is in prototype format currently, and we know that. The card design needs to be updated a bit, but the game itself was also lacking a bit. One of the major concerns we had when playing through it was the card grid of the floor. We did not use any sort of player marker, token, meeple, or anything to mark our locations, and I really think that may have helped. We just had a hard time visualizing where our hunter was in relation to the face-down cards and how many turns it would take us to travel to them. There were several times where we just guessed as to who was actually closer and they were able to encounter the card. I am unsure how to fix that without supplying a grid or some sort of tracker. We should have maybe just played with meeples or dice for position markers. Oh heck I just thought of this: we could have also placed out dice or whatever on an x and y axis to denote where floor cards should be. Ugh. Battles were run somewhat smoothly, even though there were times where I was down to one card because I had suffered so many wounds and I could not get a First-Aid Kit to save my life (literally). The battle challenges did not work with us and we were trying to find a good way to make them happen, but our minds must not have been at their peak. We werenât quite sure if, like in Munchkin, you could just add one card to your challenge total, or if you had to commit the entire bunch of cards you wish to play. It is not clear in the rules, so we went with our guts.
Overall, this could be a good dungeon crawler type card game. The theme is good, but for us it didnât quite clickâŚyet. If it sounds like something you would like to have in your collection, check Kickstarter for the campaign (if Ghoulash Games decides to crowd-fund this), contact the publisher directly, or (depending on date you read this) purchase from your FLGS. Oh, and keep the Ghoo Gone away â this time Ghoo is good for your health!
In Ghoulash: The Game of Card Calamity (which I will shorten to Ghoulash for the purpose of this review â even though there is the OG Ghoulash as well, I think you know what Iâm talking about) players are Ghoul hunters. Ghouls are monstrous green blobsters that are coming for you. You fight them by shooting Ghoo, a purply substance, at them to exploit their weak spots and vanquish them. The first Ghoul hunter to reach 10 Victory Points (VPs) will be crowned the winner!
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. As this is a preview copy of the game, I do not know if the final rules or components will be similar or different to what we were provided. -T
To setup the game, shuffle the deck and place a 6Ă3 grid of cards in the middle of the table. This is the âfloorâ and will be the game board for the duration of the game. When the floor is out of cards (I will explain), set out a new 6Ă3 grid floor and continue play. Deal each hunter a hand of seven cards and you are ready to play!
Each of the face down cards that comprise the floor are opportunities for encounters. You, as a Ghoul hunter, will enter the floor from any border card. On your turn you may fill your hand up to your current hand limit â which changes based on whether you have taken wounds or not. Next you must move orthogonally onto a space that contains a card or an empty space, but you must move â or take your Action first, THEN move. If you move to a space with a card, you encounter the card. Depending on what type of card is flipped face up you will be taking cards into your hand, following Command instructions, or fighting Ghouls. When you have finished your turn it is the next hunterâs turn.
Should your flipped card reveal an Action or Special card, you simply collect the card into your hand. If the flipped card is an Battle card (which has Ghoo splats â like the ones pictured above on the far right), you must follow the Command instructions at the bottom of the card before collecting to your hand. And if itâs a Ghoul you will begin battle!
Battling Ghouls is mechanically simple, but the overall battle may not be. When you face a Ghoul its card will tell you what the strength of the monster is (the white number). It could have four, five, or six hit points (HPs). To vanquish the Ghoul you will need to play cards whose Ghoo value (splats) is equal to or greater than the Ghoulâs HP amount. From this point the other hunters can intervene in the battle by playing cards whose battle Ghoo tips the scales toward the Ghoul thus making it more difficult to defeat (a la the ganging up mechanic in Munchkin). As only one hunter may affect the battle in this way, it is the playerâs cards whose strength is greater that wins the challenge. Now the original combatant must spend more Ghoo cards to overcome the super-buffed Ghoul. Should the hunter prevail they will collect the Ghoul card and display it in front of them to show the table how many VPs they have earned. If the hunter is unsuccessful in the battle, they suffer wounds in the amount of VPs that would have been awarded with a successful battle (the green dots at the bottom of the card). Wounds are reflected by cards in hand, so if a hunter suffers two wounds, their hand limit is now five instead of the original seven. Play continues in this fashion until a hunter has accumulated 10 VPs and earned victory!
Components. Per my disclaimer, the game that was sent to us is a prototype version of the completed game, so components may (and probably will) change or be improved as a result of further development, and/or a successful Kickstarter campaign. That said, I can comment only on the components that were provided to us. The game is a deck of cards in a deck box. The cards themselves are of fine quality. The art upon them is okay. Nothing too stellar, but it gets the job done. I think the art is one thing that can be improved with development. Donât get me wrong, the art is not at all bad. Perhaps itâs the card layout or graphic design. Something with a bit more punch would be appreciated.
Our thoughts on this one are that it needs some sprucing up a bit. Yes, it is in prototype format currently, and we know that. The card design needs to be updated a bit, but the game itself was also lacking a bit. One of the major concerns we had when playing through it was the card grid of the floor. We did not use any sort of player marker, token, meeple, or anything to mark our locations, and I really think that may have helped. We just had a hard time visualizing where our hunter was in relation to the face-down cards and how many turns it would take us to travel to them. There were several times where we just guessed as to who was actually closer and they were able to encounter the card. I am unsure how to fix that without supplying a grid or some sort of tracker. We should have maybe just played with meeples or dice for position markers. Oh heck I just thought of this: we could have also placed out dice or whatever on an x and y axis to denote where floor cards should be. Ugh. Battles were run somewhat smoothly, even though there were times where I was down to one card because I had suffered so many wounds and I could not get a First-Aid Kit to save my life (literally). The battle challenges did not work with us and we were trying to find a good way to make them happen, but our minds must not have been at their peak. We werenât quite sure if, like in Munchkin, you could just add one card to your challenge total, or if you had to commit the entire bunch of cards you wish to play. It is not clear in the rules, so we went with our guts.
Overall, this could be a good dungeon crawler type card game. The theme is good, but for us it didnât quite clickâŚyet. If it sounds like something you would like to have in your collection, check Kickstarter for the campaign (if Ghoulash Games decides to crowd-fund this), contact the publisher directly, or (depending on date you read this) purchase from your FLGS. Oh, and keep the Ghoo Gone away â this time Ghoo is good for your health!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Ad Astra (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Impressive visuals, but rather disappointing as an overall package.
Like father, like son?
I really love sci-fi films with high ambitions. âPsychologicalâ sci-fi like âSolarisâ for example. And âArrivalâ topped my movie list for 2016. In similar vein, âAd Astraâ is also a movie concerning attempted contact with alien life. So I had high hopes for it. But would this Sci-fi epic ultimately challenge my brain again, or end up in the âCrystal Skullâ sin bin with a dodgy alien meeting?
The Plot
Set a few years into the future, Roy McBride (Brad Pitt) is the son of a legend. H. Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones) was a space exploration pioneer. His picture hangs in the NASA hall of fame next to Buzz Aldrinâs. McBride senior went missing presumed dead near Neptune during a mission. The mission was to get outside the Sunâs heliosphere to scan for potential alien transmissions from nearby solar systems.
But something went badly wrong, and now the earth (and potentially all human life migrating into the solar system) is at risk from massive electromagnetic bursts arising from Neptune. Is Clifford alive and involved in the emerging crisis? The authorities send Roy on a secret mission to Mars to try to communicate with his father.
Majestic cinematography
Letâs start with a real positive. The cinematography here is first rate. Hoyte Van-Hoytema â well known for âInterstellarâ, âSpectreâ and âDunkirkâ â knocks this out of the park. In the same manner as âBlade Runner 2049â, many of the frames of this film could be blown up and placed on art gallery walls around the world.
Add to that some cracking film editing from John Axelrad and Lee Haugen, and some beautiful sound design and I predict the movie should feature strongly in the technical awards at the Oscars.
But âscience fictionâ has the word âscienceâ in itâŚ.
Iâd like to park my physics brain sometimes when I go to the movies, but I just canât. So I really need sci-fi films to live up to the science part of their name. There are a number of areas, particularly at the back end of the film, when credibility goes out the window.
I canât really say more here without giving spoilers, so I will leave them to a âSpoiler sectionâ below the trailerâŚ. donât read this if you havenât seen the film!
What IS this movie trying to be?
In my view the film is pretty schizophrenic in nature. This is what confused me about the trailer, jumping from a cerebral sci-fi vibe to moon buggy shoot-outs.
On one hand, its the standard (but always interesting) tale of a child abandoned by a hero-father and his attempts to reconcile what thatâs done to his life and relationships. How can he ever square that circle without contacting his dad? As the filmâs tag-line goes âThe answers we seek are just outside our reachâ.
On the other there are episodes of action that would fit happily into an action scene from Star Trek.
The two elements never really gel, leading to the feeling of the film having been written as a set of disconnected pages and the writers then saying âHey, Jimmy, once youâve finished making us the tea, could you just write a few lines to join those pages up into a shooting script?â. Then later, âWhat do you mean Jimmy you used BOTH piles of paper?!â.
The greatest sin of all
Unfortunately, the film commits a cardinal sin in my book. Those of you who follow my blog regularly might know what Iâm going to sayâŚ.
Voiceovers! I BLOODY HATE THEM!! Itâs at the very extreme of what the great Mark Kermode calls âshow donât tellâ.
Here, we donât just have a little Brad Pitt set-up intro and he then shuts up. He just drones on and on and on with his inner thoughts. At least Matt Damon in âThe Martianâ got away with it by cleverly filming his video blog. And itâs not as if there isnât a prime opportunity to use that device here! He is constantly having to talk to a computer to do his regular psychological tests! But that option is not picked up.
BIG BLACK MARK!
But the film has its moments
Bubbling under all of this are some stand-out moments where, for me, the film soared. One of them (ultimately setting me up for as much of a disappointing fall as some of the characters!) is the stunning opening shots aboard the âSky Antennaâ structure. Impressive and exciting, with falling bits of metal playing Russian Roulette with Royâs iife.
Another strength for me is Brad Pitt. Iâve seen wildly differing views on this, but for me its a quiet but strong acting performance. There are many scenes when he has no lines, his inner (and our outer) voice gives it a miss, and he acts the socks off his peers. What with âOnce Upon A Time⌠In Hollywoodâ its been a really good year for Pitt. I suspect âHollywoodâ might be the one though that gets him his fourth acting Oscar nomination.
For a 2019 film, itâs actually a very male-heavy film, made more so by Pittâs love-interest (Liv Tyler) being given virtually nothing to do other that look a bit sulky from a distance. Iâm not even sure she gets a single line in the whole film! (âMiss Tyler â please sign for your scriptâ. âBut, thereâs nothing in the envelope?â. âQuite Miss Tyler, Quiteâ).
The only decent female role goes to Ruth Negga as the Mars colony leader. Even then, she only has limited screen time and although having the title âMars CEOâ really doesnât seem to have much power.
Elsewhere, its great to see both Tommy Lee Jones and Donald Sutherland back on the big screen again.
Final Thoughts
As any veteran RAF person will know, âAd Astraâ is Latin for âTo the starsâ. In space terms this is less âto the starsâ and more âjust beyond your front doorâ.
James Grayâs film undoubtedly has high ambitions but, through its spasmodic script, never really gets there. It has the beauty of âGravityâ but none of the refinement; thereâs an essence of âSpace Odysseyâ in places, but it never goes for the mystical angle; it has the potential to reflect the near-insanity through loneliness of âSilent Runningâ but never commits fully to that storyline. But if its novelty youâre looking for, it ticks the âfloating monkeys in spaceâ box!
I think itâs worth seeing on the big screen just for its visual beauty and Pittâs performance. And as a major block-buster sci-fi film I enjoyed it to a degree. But for me it had just so many irritations that it failed to live up to my high expectations. A great shame and a frustrating disappointment.
But at least itâs great news for Richard Branson and Virgin Atlantic shareholders. They can be assured that the future is bright for their âlong distanceâ flights in the future!
I really love sci-fi films with high ambitions. âPsychologicalâ sci-fi like âSolarisâ for example. And âArrivalâ topped my movie list for 2016. In similar vein, âAd Astraâ is also a movie concerning attempted contact with alien life. So I had high hopes for it. But would this Sci-fi epic ultimately challenge my brain again, or end up in the âCrystal Skullâ sin bin with a dodgy alien meeting?
The Plot
Set a few years into the future, Roy McBride (Brad Pitt) is the son of a legend. H. Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones) was a space exploration pioneer. His picture hangs in the NASA hall of fame next to Buzz Aldrinâs. McBride senior went missing presumed dead near Neptune during a mission. The mission was to get outside the Sunâs heliosphere to scan for potential alien transmissions from nearby solar systems.
But something went badly wrong, and now the earth (and potentially all human life migrating into the solar system) is at risk from massive electromagnetic bursts arising from Neptune. Is Clifford alive and involved in the emerging crisis? The authorities send Roy on a secret mission to Mars to try to communicate with his father.
Majestic cinematography
Letâs start with a real positive. The cinematography here is first rate. Hoyte Van-Hoytema â well known for âInterstellarâ, âSpectreâ and âDunkirkâ â knocks this out of the park. In the same manner as âBlade Runner 2049â, many of the frames of this film could be blown up and placed on art gallery walls around the world.
Add to that some cracking film editing from John Axelrad and Lee Haugen, and some beautiful sound design and I predict the movie should feature strongly in the technical awards at the Oscars.
But âscience fictionâ has the word âscienceâ in itâŚ.
Iâd like to park my physics brain sometimes when I go to the movies, but I just canât. So I really need sci-fi films to live up to the science part of their name. There are a number of areas, particularly at the back end of the film, when credibility goes out the window.
I canât really say more here without giving spoilers, so I will leave them to a âSpoiler sectionâ below the trailerâŚ. donât read this if you havenât seen the film!
What IS this movie trying to be?
In my view the film is pretty schizophrenic in nature. This is what confused me about the trailer, jumping from a cerebral sci-fi vibe to moon buggy shoot-outs.
On one hand, its the standard (but always interesting) tale of a child abandoned by a hero-father and his attempts to reconcile what thatâs done to his life and relationships. How can he ever square that circle without contacting his dad? As the filmâs tag-line goes âThe answers we seek are just outside our reachâ.
On the other there are episodes of action that would fit happily into an action scene from Star Trek.
The two elements never really gel, leading to the feeling of the film having been written as a set of disconnected pages and the writers then saying âHey, Jimmy, once youâve finished making us the tea, could you just write a few lines to join those pages up into a shooting script?â. Then later, âWhat do you mean Jimmy you used BOTH piles of paper?!â.
The greatest sin of all
Unfortunately, the film commits a cardinal sin in my book. Those of you who follow my blog regularly might know what Iâm going to sayâŚ.
Voiceovers! I BLOODY HATE THEM!! Itâs at the very extreme of what the great Mark Kermode calls âshow donât tellâ.
Here, we donât just have a little Brad Pitt set-up intro and he then shuts up. He just drones on and on and on with his inner thoughts. At least Matt Damon in âThe Martianâ got away with it by cleverly filming his video blog. And itâs not as if there isnât a prime opportunity to use that device here! He is constantly having to talk to a computer to do his regular psychological tests! But that option is not picked up.
BIG BLACK MARK!
But the film has its moments
Bubbling under all of this are some stand-out moments where, for me, the film soared. One of them (ultimately setting me up for as much of a disappointing fall as some of the characters!) is the stunning opening shots aboard the âSky Antennaâ structure. Impressive and exciting, with falling bits of metal playing Russian Roulette with Royâs iife.
Another strength for me is Brad Pitt. Iâve seen wildly differing views on this, but for me its a quiet but strong acting performance. There are many scenes when he has no lines, his inner (and our outer) voice gives it a miss, and he acts the socks off his peers. What with âOnce Upon A Time⌠In Hollywoodâ its been a really good year for Pitt. I suspect âHollywoodâ might be the one though that gets him his fourth acting Oscar nomination.
For a 2019 film, itâs actually a very male-heavy film, made more so by Pittâs love-interest (Liv Tyler) being given virtually nothing to do other that look a bit sulky from a distance. Iâm not even sure she gets a single line in the whole film! (âMiss Tyler â please sign for your scriptâ. âBut, thereâs nothing in the envelope?â. âQuite Miss Tyler, Quiteâ).
The only decent female role goes to Ruth Negga as the Mars colony leader. Even then, she only has limited screen time and although having the title âMars CEOâ really doesnât seem to have much power.
Elsewhere, its great to see both Tommy Lee Jones and Donald Sutherland back on the big screen again.
Final Thoughts
As any veteran RAF person will know, âAd Astraâ is Latin for âTo the starsâ. In space terms this is less âto the starsâ and more âjust beyond your front doorâ.
James Grayâs film undoubtedly has high ambitions but, through its spasmodic script, never really gets there. It has the beauty of âGravityâ but none of the refinement; thereâs an essence of âSpace Odysseyâ in places, but it never goes for the mystical angle; it has the potential to reflect the near-insanity through loneliness of âSilent Runningâ but never commits fully to that storyline. But if its novelty youâre looking for, it ticks the âfloating monkeys in spaceâ box!
I think itâs worth seeing on the big screen just for its visual beauty and Pittâs performance. And as a major block-buster sci-fi film I enjoyed it to a degree. But for me it had just so many irritations that it failed to live up to my high expectations. A great shame and a frustrating disappointment.
But at least itâs great news for Richard Branson and Virgin Atlantic shareholders. They can be assured that the future is bright for their âlong distanceâ flights in the future!