Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Underworld: Evolution (2006) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
The battle between the Death Dealers (Vampires) and Lychans (Werewolves) continues in Underworld Evolution, the sequel to the smash “Underworld” that detailed the battles between the two horror mainstays. The sequel picks up shortly after the film and deals with Selene (Kate Beckinsale), and Michael (Scott Speedman), on the run after Selene was forced to turn on the Vampires following events at the conclusion of the previous film.
Of course being a Vampire traveling with a Vampire/Werewolves hybrid is not an easy thing, especially when Selene can only move around at night and must seek refuge from daylight. Through a series of flashbacks, we learn that the war between Lychans and Death Dealers began centuries ago, when two brothers each heading one faction of the conflict were drawn to a decisive battle. The losing Lychan brother, William, is imprisoned for all ages in a specially designed tomb, thanks to his brother Marcus’s insistence that he would only help capture him, if he were to remain alive.
Since William is capable of utter destruction, his location is a closely guarded secret for centuries that is until Marcus re-emerges and seeks to locate Selene. Marcus upon emerging from hibernation learns what Selene has done, and is convinced she has betrayed her own kind, unaware of the real reasons behind her actions. In short order, Marcus, Selene, and Michael play a deadly game of cat and mouse with each trying to unlock the mystery of Williams’s location. Marcus wants to exploit the power of William while Selene to protect the world from the evil that William and his followers would represent.
Along the way, there are plenty of battles, odd characters, and romance to keep most viewers entertained, which leads up to an action packed finale, that for me was the high point of the film. The plot has its share of holes but also deals with a series of complexities as it attempts to take the topics of bloodlines, centuries of history, and mythos in a tight 100 minute package. The two leads work well with one another though their do not have the most dynamic chemistry ever seen on screen. For this type of film, it does work as one does not come to a monster film expecting great acting, story, or characterization.
What Underworld Evolution has going for it, are good effects, a few good action moments and a plot, that at times tricky for the casual viewer to follow, more than surpasses the average storyline for the genre. The tight pacing of the film by Director Len Wiseman keeps the film moving a clip that was much brisker than the original and allowed the film to get to the highlights quickly and not be weighed down by fluff.
The finale as I mentioned was the highlight for me, as the buildup to that point was at times, slow, and had me wishing for more. That being said, the final 15 minutes of the film more than saved it, and got more than a few cheers from the audience at my press screening.
While it would be easy to find faults with the film, the important thing to remember is the spirit and intention of the film. They were not out to make classic cinema, they were out to make a fun and entertaining monster film, blemishes and all. In that, Underworld Evolution succeeds.
Of course being a Vampire traveling with a Vampire/Werewolves hybrid is not an easy thing, especially when Selene can only move around at night and must seek refuge from daylight. Through a series of flashbacks, we learn that the war between Lychans and Death Dealers began centuries ago, when two brothers each heading one faction of the conflict were drawn to a decisive battle. The losing Lychan brother, William, is imprisoned for all ages in a specially designed tomb, thanks to his brother Marcus’s insistence that he would only help capture him, if he were to remain alive.
Since William is capable of utter destruction, his location is a closely guarded secret for centuries that is until Marcus re-emerges and seeks to locate Selene. Marcus upon emerging from hibernation learns what Selene has done, and is convinced she has betrayed her own kind, unaware of the real reasons behind her actions. In short order, Marcus, Selene, and Michael play a deadly game of cat and mouse with each trying to unlock the mystery of Williams’s location. Marcus wants to exploit the power of William while Selene to protect the world from the evil that William and his followers would represent.
Along the way, there are plenty of battles, odd characters, and romance to keep most viewers entertained, which leads up to an action packed finale, that for me was the high point of the film. The plot has its share of holes but also deals with a series of complexities as it attempts to take the topics of bloodlines, centuries of history, and mythos in a tight 100 minute package. The two leads work well with one another though their do not have the most dynamic chemistry ever seen on screen. For this type of film, it does work as one does not come to a monster film expecting great acting, story, or characterization.
What Underworld Evolution has going for it, are good effects, a few good action moments and a plot, that at times tricky for the casual viewer to follow, more than surpasses the average storyline for the genre. The tight pacing of the film by Director Len Wiseman keeps the film moving a clip that was much brisker than the original and allowed the film to get to the highlights quickly and not be weighed down by fluff.
The finale as I mentioned was the highlight for me, as the buildup to that point was at times, slow, and had me wishing for more. That being said, the final 15 minutes of the film more than saved it, and got more than a few cheers from the audience at my press screening.
While it would be easy to find faults with the film, the important thing to remember is the spirit and intention of the film. They were not out to make classic cinema, they were out to make a fun and entertaining monster film, blemishes and all. In that, Underworld Evolution succeeds.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Ringu 2 (Ring 2) (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
When the American version of the classic Japanese horror film “Ringu” became a smash hit at the box office it did not take a rocket scientist to realize that “The Ring” would soon generate a sequel.
The film had all of the elements for success, a creepy supernatural tale, a twisting and complex storyline that kept viewers guessing, and plenty of frights that made even the most jaded horror viewers squirm.
Sadly, the newest film in the series The Ring Two plays as an uninspired effort that seems to exist simply to cash in on the first film with little to no effort to add to the series.
The film opens with Rachel Keller (Naomi Watts), having left Seattle with her son Aidan (David Dorfman), in an effort to put the horrors of their experiences in the first film behind them. Settling into a bland but comfortable existence in a coastal town named Astoria.
Rachel spends her days working for the tiny local paper though it is obvious that she is struggling to cope with the step down from working for a major metropolitan paper. When an unexplained homicide occurs, the local media crew is excited as for once, they will have a real story to cover. That is all of the staff aside t for Rachel who finds details of the murder disturbingly familiar to what she has witnessed in the past.
A study of the crime scene discovers a copy of the tape from the first film, that when viewed causes the viewer to die in seven days. Rachel is convinced that destroying the tape will end the terror once and for all, but despite her best efforts bizarre events continue.
The fact that her son has become ill and is acting odd, (even for him), is cause for Rachel to try to determine what is causing the changes. What is missing though is the energy and eeriness that drove the first film. Instead the audience gets paper thin characters, a very slow and plodding story, and very few frights.
The film has a couple of good scares but they are very few and far apart. The film also has gigantic lapses in logic as characters act as if their brains are in a deep freeze. During one moment, Rachel is told by her son to drive, instead she decides to stop and chat. Something goes awry, and Rachel is again told to drive, yet again she decides to stop and chat oblivious to what has happened.
All of this could be forgiven but not the very tired fallbacks that the film uses instead of offering anything fresh. What made the first film so good was the way it kept surprising the audience by coming up with new twists and turns as well as clever misdirection that kept viewers on edge and guessing what was to come next.
This time out, the cleverness and originality of the first film seems to have been sucked out of the film in favor of a few gimmick effects and a paper thin plot that seems to have been culled from other films. Add this all up, and sadly The Ring franchise has become an imitator rather than an innovator and this effort will leave fans in the cold.
The film had all of the elements for success, a creepy supernatural tale, a twisting and complex storyline that kept viewers guessing, and plenty of frights that made even the most jaded horror viewers squirm.
Sadly, the newest film in the series The Ring Two plays as an uninspired effort that seems to exist simply to cash in on the first film with little to no effort to add to the series.
The film opens with Rachel Keller (Naomi Watts), having left Seattle with her son Aidan (David Dorfman), in an effort to put the horrors of their experiences in the first film behind them. Settling into a bland but comfortable existence in a coastal town named Astoria.
Rachel spends her days working for the tiny local paper though it is obvious that she is struggling to cope with the step down from working for a major metropolitan paper. When an unexplained homicide occurs, the local media crew is excited as for once, they will have a real story to cover. That is all of the staff aside t for Rachel who finds details of the murder disturbingly familiar to what she has witnessed in the past.
A study of the crime scene discovers a copy of the tape from the first film, that when viewed causes the viewer to die in seven days. Rachel is convinced that destroying the tape will end the terror once and for all, but despite her best efforts bizarre events continue.
The fact that her son has become ill and is acting odd, (even for him), is cause for Rachel to try to determine what is causing the changes. What is missing though is the energy and eeriness that drove the first film. Instead the audience gets paper thin characters, a very slow and plodding story, and very few frights.
The film has a couple of good scares but they are very few and far apart. The film also has gigantic lapses in logic as characters act as if their brains are in a deep freeze. During one moment, Rachel is told by her son to drive, instead she decides to stop and chat. Something goes awry, and Rachel is again told to drive, yet again she decides to stop and chat oblivious to what has happened.
All of this could be forgiven but not the very tired fallbacks that the film uses instead of offering anything fresh. What made the first film so good was the way it kept surprising the audience by coming up with new twists and turns as well as clever misdirection that kept viewers on edge and guessing what was to come next.
This time out, the cleverness and originality of the first film seems to have been sucked out of the film in favor of a few gimmick effects and a paper thin plot that seems to have been culled from other films. Add this all up, and sadly The Ring franchise has become an imitator rather than an innovator and this effort will leave fans in the cold.
JT (287 KP) rated Elysium (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Neill Blomkamp came pretty much out of nowhere. Having only directed a handful of shorts he was handed $30m by Peter Jackson and told to make any film he wanted. That offer for any up and coming director would be as good as winning the lottery and he didn’t disappoint, making the dystopian District 9 which went on to become a smash hit.
So when it was announced that his next project would be called Elysium there was much talk, excitement and anticipation about what it would entail. Blomkamp again focuses on a dystopian society, L.A. to be exact (but not an Alien in sight). With Earth quite literally turned into a shit hole it’s ravaged by crime, poverty and disease along with an ever growing population just looking to survive.
The rich and wealthy made their escape from the planet and reside on a beautiful man made space station called Elysium. Here there is no poverty or sickness and one can be cured instantly by stepping into a medical pod. Dropped into all of this is Max (Matt Damon), a former convict who is trying to get by in life but who still holds a fascination that one day he too will get to live on Elysium as we find out through an early back story.
Elysium is an enjoyable ride of thrills and spills and as a sci-fi actioner it ticks all the relevant boxes.
When an accident at work leaves him with only a few days to live he steps back into the criminal underworld in order to get himself a one way ticket onto Elysium and cure himself and in the process become a saviour for the suffering hordes on Earth. Blomkamp sticks with District 9′s Sharlto Copley an actor plucked from obscurity and who has gone on to make a real name for himself. Here he plays sleeper agent Kruger complete with distinguished South African accent and beard.
Pairing up with him from the safe confines of Elysium is Jodie Foster’s Delacourt, the Secretary of Homeland Security whose cool and unassuming personality gives her licence to literally blast people from outer space while drinking tea. She wants her place as the next Elysium president and so enlists the help of the slimy John Carlyle (William Fichtner) who helps to organise a reboot program for the station which falls into the wrong hands.
Blomkamp keeps the story very much as close to reality as possible without overstepping the mark. A world of poverty and hardship with the rich living the high life, sound familiar?
Filmed on location in the slums of Mexico as opposed to South Africa it lends itself to real life and the harsh reality that this isn’t a film set built with a large overblown budget but a place where everyday folk have to live. The action is captivating both on Earth and in space. A car chase and data heist that encounters a flying Bugatti Veyron. While in space, ships explode and crash into the tranquil surroundings of normality (well as normal as you can get in 2154).
The shaven headed Damon gives a good account of himself whether it’s delivering the dramatic line or battling through the action – complete with exoskeleton he is always reliable.
So when it was announced that his next project would be called Elysium there was much talk, excitement and anticipation about what it would entail. Blomkamp again focuses on a dystopian society, L.A. to be exact (but not an Alien in sight). With Earth quite literally turned into a shit hole it’s ravaged by crime, poverty and disease along with an ever growing population just looking to survive.
The rich and wealthy made their escape from the planet and reside on a beautiful man made space station called Elysium. Here there is no poverty or sickness and one can be cured instantly by stepping into a medical pod. Dropped into all of this is Max (Matt Damon), a former convict who is trying to get by in life but who still holds a fascination that one day he too will get to live on Elysium as we find out through an early back story.
Elysium is an enjoyable ride of thrills and spills and as a sci-fi actioner it ticks all the relevant boxes.
When an accident at work leaves him with only a few days to live he steps back into the criminal underworld in order to get himself a one way ticket onto Elysium and cure himself and in the process become a saviour for the suffering hordes on Earth. Blomkamp sticks with District 9′s Sharlto Copley an actor plucked from obscurity and who has gone on to make a real name for himself. Here he plays sleeper agent Kruger complete with distinguished South African accent and beard.
Pairing up with him from the safe confines of Elysium is Jodie Foster’s Delacourt, the Secretary of Homeland Security whose cool and unassuming personality gives her licence to literally blast people from outer space while drinking tea. She wants her place as the next Elysium president and so enlists the help of the slimy John Carlyle (William Fichtner) who helps to organise a reboot program for the station which falls into the wrong hands.
Blomkamp keeps the story very much as close to reality as possible without overstepping the mark. A world of poverty and hardship with the rich living the high life, sound familiar?
Filmed on location in the slums of Mexico as opposed to South Africa it lends itself to real life and the harsh reality that this isn’t a film set built with a large overblown budget but a place where everyday folk have to live. The action is captivating both on Earth and in space. A car chase and data heist that encounters a flying Bugatti Veyron. While in space, ships explode and crash into the tranquil surroundings of normality (well as normal as you can get in 2154).
The shaven headed Damon gives a good account of himself whether it’s delivering the dramatic line or battling through the action – complete with exoskeleton he is always reliable.
Snake Robot Transformation Pro
Games and Entertainment
App
Play this robot snake game and feel like a real snake to hunt on the streets of the big city in this...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
Jun 26, 2019
Hulk Continues to Smash...and I'm Here For All of it
When an artificial intelligence outthinks its creator and forms itself into dozens of destructive robots, Earth's mightiest heroes come together once again to put a stop to the threat.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
As most MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) films tend to do, Avengers: Age of Ultron gets off to a really quick start wasting no time with action. Everyone gets a piece in the first ten minutes and they're working even better together than they did in the first film. While Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) and Thor (Chris Hemsworth) flex their muscle and rip tanks in half, Hawkeye Jeremy Renner) pierces through dudes like the modern-day Legolas.
Characters: 10
A part of what works so well for these characters is how grossly different their backstories and personalities are. Hawkeye is a family man that uses humor to mask his annoyance in certain situations. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is constantly pushing the boundary envelope and acts superior to the ideas and thoughts of the rest of the group. Normally you hate a guy like this but he wears the hat so well. Throw in Vision, a benevolent AI with a sense of purpose, and the rest of the crew and you have a pretty solid character-base.
AI of the hour Ultron (James Spader) is a villain with a surprising amount of depth. He fights for his own cause which, in his mind, is the only necessary option for balance and preservation. His smooth, even-keeled voice can be chilling at times making for some pretty solid scenes.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
There is enough action in the film for two films. The plot steamrolls into new scenes of combat, one after the next. Dull moments are nonexistent. There is something about having all of these characters on the screen at the same time that keeps the film exciting and fresh. Teamups are especially cool, watching pairs like Captain America (Chris Evans) and Thor perform unique combo moves. You want eye candy? The film delivers.
Genre: 8
Not the best superhero film I've seen, although I believe that says more about the emergence of the genre than the film itself. This century has ushered in some phenomenal superhero movies that do the genre proud, including ones that set themselves apart by having enriched characters and deeper meaning. Age of Ultron is solid, but falls just slightly out of the Cream of the Crop territory.
Memorability: 9
The action sequences alone played throughout my mind well after having watched the film. Among other things, Age of Ultron gives you a falling city along with a classic matchup between Hulk and Stark in the Hulkbuster suit. Perhaps the most memorable part came at the very end when Ultron and Vision are having a conversation about the fate of humanity. Part foreshadowing, part introspection, it was a very fitting way to bring the curtain down on the action.
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Resolution: 8
Overall: 94
No, it's not the best MCU film made to date, but it's still a high-quality film with a solid story and memorable sequences that keep you glued to your seat. Thankful for the rewatch as I enjoyed it even more the second time around.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
As most MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) films tend to do, Avengers: Age of Ultron gets off to a really quick start wasting no time with action. Everyone gets a piece in the first ten minutes and they're working even better together than they did in the first film. While Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) and Thor (Chris Hemsworth) flex their muscle and rip tanks in half, Hawkeye Jeremy Renner) pierces through dudes like the modern-day Legolas.
Characters: 10
A part of what works so well for these characters is how grossly different their backstories and personalities are. Hawkeye is a family man that uses humor to mask his annoyance in certain situations. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is constantly pushing the boundary envelope and acts superior to the ideas and thoughts of the rest of the group. Normally you hate a guy like this but he wears the hat so well. Throw in Vision, a benevolent AI with a sense of purpose, and the rest of the crew and you have a pretty solid character-base.
AI of the hour Ultron (James Spader) is a villain with a surprising amount of depth. He fights for his own cause which, in his mind, is the only necessary option for balance and preservation. His smooth, even-keeled voice can be chilling at times making for some pretty solid scenes.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
There is enough action in the film for two films. The plot steamrolls into new scenes of combat, one after the next. Dull moments are nonexistent. There is something about having all of these characters on the screen at the same time that keeps the film exciting and fresh. Teamups are especially cool, watching pairs like Captain America (Chris Evans) and Thor perform unique combo moves. You want eye candy? The film delivers.
Genre: 8
Not the best superhero film I've seen, although I believe that says more about the emergence of the genre than the film itself. This century has ushered in some phenomenal superhero movies that do the genre proud, including ones that set themselves apart by having enriched characters and deeper meaning. Age of Ultron is solid, but falls just slightly out of the Cream of the Crop territory.
Memorability: 9
The action sequences alone played throughout my mind well after having watched the film. Among other things, Age of Ultron gives you a falling city along with a classic matchup between Hulk and Stark in the Hulkbuster suit. Perhaps the most memorable part came at the very end when Ultron and Vision are having a conversation about the fate of humanity. Part foreshadowing, part introspection, it was a very fitting way to bring the curtain down on the action.
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Resolution: 8
Overall: 94
No, it's not the best MCU film made to date, but it's still a high-quality film with a solid story and memorable sequences that keep you glued to your seat. Thankful for the rewatch as I enjoyed it even more the second time around.
Virtual Families for iPad
Games and Entertainment
App
Happy Holidays from the LDW Team! The full, original version of Virtual Families from your desktop...
Best Park in the Universe – Beat 'Em Up With Mordecai and Rigby in a Regular Show Brawler Game
Games and Entertainment
App
Ready for the BIGGEST BEATDOWN in the cosmos? Help Mordecai, Rigby, Muscle Man and Pops battle...
Thinkrolls
Education and Games
App
Set your child's mind in motion! Thinkrolls are the 26 smart characters in this award-winning app...
Word BINGO
Education and Games
9.0
Rate It
App
The maker of the number 1 smash hit Math BINGO presents Word BINGO! Practice reading and spelling...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Battle of the Sexes (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tennis and sex, but without the grunting.
Here’s a good test of someone’s age…. ask the question “Billie-Jean?”. Millennials will probably come back with “Huh?”; those in their 30’s or 40’s might come back with “Michael Jackson!”; those older than that will probably reply “King!”.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.