Search
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Son of Frankenstein (1939) in Movies
Oct 9, 2020
Boris Karloff (3 more)
Bela Lugosi
Basil Rathbone
Lionel Atwill
The Monster's Alive Once More
Son of Frankenstein- is a great continuation of the frankenstein franchise. Boris Karloff os back as the monster but this would be the last time he would play the monster in the universal monster universe. Its sad cause when you think of frankenstein, you think of Boris.
The plot: Baron Wolf von Frankenstein (Basil Rathbone) is determined to prove the legitimacy of his father's scientific work, thus rescuing the family name from disgrace. With the help of Ygor (Bela Lugosi), a grave robber, Wolf successfully reanimates the monster (Boris Karloff) his father originally brought back from the dead. But when several villagers are killed mysteriously, Wolf must find the culprit in order to vindicate his creation, or face the possibility that he may be responsible.
Universal's declining horror output was revitalized with the enormously successful Son of Frankenstein, in which the studio cast both stars.
After the ousting of the Laemmles from Universal and the British embargo on American horror films in 1936, Karloff and Lugosi found themselves in a career slump. For two years, horror films were out of favor at Universal Studios. On April 5, 1938, a nearly bankrupt theater in Los Angeles staged a desperate stunt by showing Frankenstein, Dracula and King Kong as a triple feature. The impressive box office results led to similarly successful revivals nationwide. Universal soon decided to make a big-budget Frankenstein sequel.
Son of Frankenstein marks changes in the Monster's character from Bride of Frankenstein. The Monster is duller and no longer speaks, explained by being injured by a lightning strike. The monster also wore a giant fur vest, not seen in the first two Frankenstein films, perhaps to add color to his appearance when the film was planned to be shot in color. He is fond of Ygor and obeys his orders. The Monster shows humanity in three scenes: first when he is disturbed by his image in a mirror, especially when compared to the Baron. Next, when he discovers Ygor's body, letting out a powerful scream, and later when he contemplates killing Peter but changes his mind. While the first two films were clearly set in the 1900s, this film appears to take place in the 1930s, judging by the appearance of a modern automobile.
Peter Lorre was originally cast as Baron Wolf von Frankenstein, but he had to leave the production when he became ill. Replacing Lorre was Basil Rathbone, who had scored a major triumph as Sir Guy of Gisbourne in The Adventures of Robin Hood, released the previous year.
According to the documentary Universal Horror (1998), the film was intended to be shot in color and some Technicolor test footage was filmed, but for artistic or budgetary reasons the plan was abandoned. No color test footage is known to survive, but a clip from a Kodachrome color home movie filmed at the studio and showing Boris Karloff in the green monster makeup, clowning around with makeup artist Jack Pierce, is included in the same documentary.
Its a excellent universal monster film.
The plot: Baron Wolf von Frankenstein (Basil Rathbone) is determined to prove the legitimacy of his father's scientific work, thus rescuing the family name from disgrace. With the help of Ygor (Bela Lugosi), a grave robber, Wolf successfully reanimates the monster (Boris Karloff) his father originally brought back from the dead. But when several villagers are killed mysteriously, Wolf must find the culprit in order to vindicate his creation, or face the possibility that he may be responsible.
Universal's declining horror output was revitalized with the enormously successful Son of Frankenstein, in which the studio cast both stars.
After the ousting of the Laemmles from Universal and the British embargo on American horror films in 1936, Karloff and Lugosi found themselves in a career slump. For two years, horror films were out of favor at Universal Studios. On April 5, 1938, a nearly bankrupt theater in Los Angeles staged a desperate stunt by showing Frankenstein, Dracula and King Kong as a triple feature. The impressive box office results led to similarly successful revivals nationwide. Universal soon decided to make a big-budget Frankenstein sequel.
Son of Frankenstein marks changes in the Monster's character from Bride of Frankenstein. The Monster is duller and no longer speaks, explained by being injured by a lightning strike. The monster also wore a giant fur vest, not seen in the first two Frankenstein films, perhaps to add color to his appearance when the film was planned to be shot in color. He is fond of Ygor and obeys his orders. The Monster shows humanity in three scenes: first when he is disturbed by his image in a mirror, especially when compared to the Baron. Next, when he discovers Ygor's body, letting out a powerful scream, and later when he contemplates killing Peter but changes his mind. While the first two films were clearly set in the 1900s, this film appears to take place in the 1930s, judging by the appearance of a modern automobile.
Peter Lorre was originally cast as Baron Wolf von Frankenstein, but he had to leave the production when he became ill. Replacing Lorre was Basil Rathbone, who had scored a major triumph as Sir Guy of Gisbourne in The Adventures of Robin Hood, released the previous year.
According to the documentary Universal Horror (1998), the film was intended to be shot in color and some Technicolor test footage was filmed, but for artistic or budgetary reasons the plan was abandoned. No color test footage is known to survive, but a clip from a Kodachrome color home movie filmed at the studio and showing Boris Karloff in the green monster makeup, clowning around with makeup artist Jack Pierce, is included in the same documentary.
Its a excellent universal monster film.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Creed II (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Since his spectacular fight which ended in a loss at the conclusion of “Creed”, Adonis Johnson Creed (Michael B. Jordan) has won his next six bouts and then pulls off an impressive victory to become the new Heavyweight Champion.
Life is good for the new champion as he believes he has moved out of the shadow of his legendary father and is ready to settle down with Bianca (Tessa Thompson) and move ahead with life.
At the same time, former Russian Champion Ivan Drago (Dolph Lundgren) is training his son Viktor (Florian Munteanu) in Kiev to become and even more devastating boxer than he was. Ivan has suffered much since losing to Rocky in “Rocky IV” as his wife has left him and he has been shunned and cast out of the country which once lauded him as their prize athlete. Losing to Rocky in Moscow in front of numerous dignitaries has ruined him and made his life a shell of what he was leaving him and his son cold, bitter, and driven.
When the opportunity for Viktor and Adonis to box is presented, Rocky (Sylvester Stallone) advises Adonis not to take the match. Rocky recounts that not only did Ivan kill his father in the ring, but in beating him, Rocky suffered injuries which ended his boxing career and have never fully healed.
Despite the warnings, Adonis takes the match and is unprepared for the raw brutality that Viktor presents and sufferers a horrific beating but manages to hold his title due to a technicality.
The film then follows a standard redemption story of Adonis trying to recover, face his fears, train, and find a new level of strength that he has never shown before. The climatic fight is very entertaining and well-staged and had fans at our screening reacting with cheers and dismay as the punches landed.
The film does follow some very familiar territory for the series from the emotional highs and lows of the ring, battling yourself as well as an opponent, the grueling training session, and of course the big match at the end.
Stallone gives another moving and solid performance as the aging Rocky showing that his Academy Award nominated turn in the prior film was not a fluke. What was also impressive was how Dolph Lundgren returned to a role he initially had reservations about doing and gave Drago a sympathetic side even though he is a bad guy in the film. We see a man desperate to recover what he was and who is devastated by what life has dealt him but forces himself to examine the past as he guides his son’s future.
Jordan carries a lot of swagger with his character and while the story attempts to show a softer side of his character; he is not as sympathetic as he was in the past film. I noted that Rocky was much easier to get behind as he was a more sympathetic underdog at times. That is part of what makes the series so interesting in that Rocky is still there as a presence over Adonis to guide and inform him to try to make him a true champion while allowing him to have his own identity and style.
If you are a fan of the series, then you should enjoy this next offering as long as you do not mind the formula for much of the series repeated.
http://sknr.net/2018/11/20/creed-ii/
Life is good for the new champion as he believes he has moved out of the shadow of his legendary father and is ready to settle down with Bianca (Tessa Thompson) and move ahead with life.
At the same time, former Russian Champion Ivan Drago (Dolph Lundgren) is training his son Viktor (Florian Munteanu) in Kiev to become and even more devastating boxer than he was. Ivan has suffered much since losing to Rocky in “Rocky IV” as his wife has left him and he has been shunned and cast out of the country which once lauded him as their prize athlete. Losing to Rocky in Moscow in front of numerous dignitaries has ruined him and made his life a shell of what he was leaving him and his son cold, bitter, and driven.
When the opportunity for Viktor and Adonis to box is presented, Rocky (Sylvester Stallone) advises Adonis not to take the match. Rocky recounts that not only did Ivan kill his father in the ring, but in beating him, Rocky suffered injuries which ended his boxing career and have never fully healed.
Despite the warnings, Adonis takes the match and is unprepared for the raw brutality that Viktor presents and sufferers a horrific beating but manages to hold his title due to a technicality.
The film then follows a standard redemption story of Adonis trying to recover, face his fears, train, and find a new level of strength that he has never shown before. The climatic fight is very entertaining and well-staged and had fans at our screening reacting with cheers and dismay as the punches landed.
The film does follow some very familiar territory for the series from the emotional highs and lows of the ring, battling yourself as well as an opponent, the grueling training session, and of course the big match at the end.
Stallone gives another moving and solid performance as the aging Rocky showing that his Academy Award nominated turn in the prior film was not a fluke. What was also impressive was how Dolph Lundgren returned to a role he initially had reservations about doing and gave Drago a sympathetic side even though he is a bad guy in the film. We see a man desperate to recover what he was and who is devastated by what life has dealt him but forces himself to examine the past as he guides his son’s future.
Jordan carries a lot of swagger with his character and while the story attempts to show a softer side of his character; he is not as sympathetic as he was in the past film. I noted that Rocky was much easier to get behind as he was a more sympathetic underdog at times. That is part of what makes the series so interesting in that Rocky is still there as a presence over Adonis to guide and inform him to try to make him a true champion while allowing him to have his own identity and style.
If you are a fan of the series, then you should enjoy this next offering as long as you do not mind the formula for much of the series repeated.
http://sknr.net/2018/11/20/creed-ii/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Resident Evil: Apocalypse (2004) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
2004 has been the year of the Zombie film. from the remake of “Dawn of the Dead”, to the upcoming “Shaun of the Dead”, the walking dead have been big business at the box office. In the new film “Resident Evil Apocalypse”, the Zombie genre takes a few new twists with the inclusion of the evil corporation and science going horribly wrong.
Picking up where the last film ended, the underground compound of the Umbrella Corporation has been destroyed by a virus that was unleashed in an accident causing the dead to reanimate and go on a rampage of carnage and destruction.
Alice (Milla Jovovich), was one of two survivors of the first film and finds herself waking in an empty lab with her last memories of her and the other survivor being removed from her and detained by agents of the corporation. Making her way to the surface, Alice discovers that Racoon City has been evacuated and barricaded by the company trapping some survivors inside the ravaged city.
At the same time, a group of survivors has taken up refuge in a church, they are headed by police officer Jill Valentine (Sienna Guillory), who is watching over a fellow officer who has been bitten by a zombie and a reporter who sees the tragic events as the key to her career success. Alice soon meets up with the group and they battle the strange manner of creatures who surround them as they attempt to make their way out of the city.
A combat team headed by Carlos Olivera (Oded Fehr), is also trapped in the city and they soon meet up with Alice and the other survivors. It is learned that Alice has been enhanced by the company and her amazing strength and agility are by design of the company. It is also discovered that an unstoppable creature known as Nemesis is on the lose and is destroying everything it encounters. As if this is not enough to worry about, Alice reveals that at dawn the company will destroy the infected city with a nuclear device and blame it on a faulty reactor. Faced with legions of the walking dead, Nemesis, and the coming nuclear blast, the survivors are in a severe situation. A way out arrives when a scientist informs the group that if they recover his daughter from a nearby school, he will direct them to a helicopter and out of the doomed city. What follows is a race against time as the team must battle the odds to survive.
Although slow and predictable to start, the film does gain speed and the last 20 minutes of the film are very entertaining and set the stage well for a potential third chapter in the series. The FX in the film is interesting if not ground breaking and the action is well staged and interesting. The action is not bad though nothing spectacular though Jovovich gives a very energetic performance. The film does have a few chills in it as people at my press screener people in the audience jumped on more than one occasion. The script by Paul Anderson is better then the first film in the series though Anderson chose to direct “Alien VS Predator” instead of this film, and despite its early missteps it is an improvement upon the original film and should delight fans as it is a worthy new step in the series.
Picking up where the last film ended, the underground compound of the Umbrella Corporation has been destroyed by a virus that was unleashed in an accident causing the dead to reanimate and go on a rampage of carnage and destruction.
Alice (Milla Jovovich), was one of two survivors of the first film and finds herself waking in an empty lab with her last memories of her and the other survivor being removed from her and detained by agents of the corporation. Making her way to the surface, Alice discovers that Racoon City has been evacuated and barricaded by the company trapping some survivors inside the ravaged city.
At the same time, a group of survivors has taken up refuge in a church, they are headed by police officer Jill Valentine (Sienna Guillory), who is watching over a fellow officer who has been bitten by a zombie and a reporter who sees the tragic events as the key to her career success. Alice soon meets up with the group and they battle the strange manner of creatures who surround them as they attempt to make their way out of the city.
A combat team headed by Carlos Olivera (Oded Fehr), is also trapped in the city and they soon meet up with Alice and the other survivors. It is learned that Alice has been enhanced by the company and her amazing strength and agility are by design of the company. It is also discovered that an unstoppable creature known as Nemesis is on the lose and is destroying everything it encounters. As if this is not enough to worry about, Alice reveals that at dawn the company will destroy the infected city with a nuclear device and blame it on a faulty reactor. Faced with legions of the walking dead, Nemesis, and the coming nuclear blast, the survivors are in a severe situation. A way out arrives when a scientist informs the group that if they recover his daughter from a nearby school, he will direct them to a helicopter and out of the doomed city. What follows is a race against time as the team must battle the odds to survive.
Although slow and predictable to start, the film does gain speed and the last 20 minutes of the film are very entertaining and set the stage well for a potential third chapter in the series. The FX in the film is interesting if not ground breaking and the action is well staged and interesting. The action is not bad though nothing spectacular though Jovovich gives a very energetic performance. The film does have a few chills in it as people at my press screener people in the audience jumped on more than one occasion. The script by Paul Anderson is better then the first film in the series though Anderson chose to direct “Alien VS Predator” instead of this film, and despite its early missteps it is an improvement upon the original film and should delight fans as it is a worthy new step in the series.
April Fool's Day (1986)
7.1
Rate It
Movie
On the weekend leading up to April Fools' Day, a group of college friends, consisting of Harvey,...
Sarah (7799 KP) rated Snatch (2001) in Movies
Dec 20, 2020
Hilarious
Film #7 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Snatch
Snatch (2000) is Guy Ritchie’s second film following on from his hugely successful debut, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998). Critically Snatch wasn’t quite as well received as it’s predecessor but the general movie going public found it a lot more enjoyable, and personally I agree with the public. I’ve always loved Snatch and prefer it over Lock, Stock.
Snatch tells a rather convoluted and twisting tale about gangsters, diamonds and unlicensed boxing. In a number of intersecting storylines, we see unlicensed boxing promoters Turkish (Jason Statham) and Tommy (Stephen Graham) get pulled into the world of match fixing with violent bookmaker Brick Top (Alan Ford), recruiting Brad Pitt’s gypsy Mickey along the way. And then you have inept criminals Sol (Lennie James), Vinny (Robbie Gee) and Tyrone (Ade) as they attempt to steal a valuable diamond from Franky Four Fingers (Benicio Del Toro) on behalf of Russian Boris the Blade (Rade Serbedzija), also involving Vinnie Jones’s Bullet-Tooth Tony, Mike Reid’s Doug the Head and Dennis Farina’s Cousin Avi along the way. As you can see, the plot isn’t exactly straight forward but despite it’s complexity, it’s a fun and entertaining watch to see all of these separate storylines come together.
What makes this complex and quite frankly bonkers story so good to watch is the script and absolutely superb dialogue. Considering this isn’t what you’d class as a typical comedy fun, it is downright hilarious. No matter how many times I’ve seen this film, it still makes me laugh every time with it’s smart, witty and funny dialogue. From Turkish’s narration to Cousin Avi’s scathing remarks about London and pretty much every interaction between Sol, Vinny and Tyrone, Snatch is extremely amusing. Admittedly there are some lines and exchanges that feel a little too forced and staged, and I think this may be due to some questionable acting and the sometimes unnatural sounding London accents.
Guy Ritchie has undoubtedly put together a stylish and slick film, and Snatch definitely encompasses the dark and gritty feel of London. Maybe a little too much as it can feel a bit gloomy at times. It has a great soundtrack and this really works with Ritchie’s directing style for the most part. There are some questionable camera angles and not all of these work – the most grating for me was in the opening scenes with Franky Four Finger’s heist where the camera jumped around far too much.
Despite this, his style works well in general and is aided by the fantastic cast that has been assembled. I’ve never been a fan of Jason Statham, but this is by far his best work, although the star of Snatch is certainly Brad Pitt, who is virtually unrecognisable as gypsy Mickey, both in looks and with his purposely indecipherable Irish accent. Snatch came out the year after Fight Club at a time that would likely be classed as the peak of Pitt’s career, so to see him play a character like Mickey was surprising to say the least. But the entire cast shine with the material they’ve got to work with.
Snatch isn’t a film for everyone and definitely not for the easily offended. For me, I could watch this repeatedly and still laugh every time, and it’s absolutely deserving of a place on this list.
Snatch (2000) is Guy Ritchie’s second film following on from his hugely successful debut, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998). Critically Snatch wasn’t quite as well received as it’s predecessor but the general movie going public found it a lot more enjoyable, and personally I agree with the public. I’ve always loved Snatch and prefer it over Lock, Stock.
Snatch tells a rather convoluted and twisting tale about gangsters, diamonds and unlicensed boxing. In a number of intersecting storylines, we see unlicensed boxing promoters Turkish (Jason Statham) and Tommy (Stephen Graham) get pulled into the world of match fixing with violent bookmaker Brick Top (Alan Ford), recruiting Brad Pitt’s gypsy Mickey along the way. And then you have inept criminals Sol (Lennie James), Vinny (Robbie Gee) and Tyrone (Ade) as they attempt to steal a valuable diamond from Franky Four Fingers (Benicio Del Toro) on behalf of Russian Boris the Blade (Rade Serbedzija), also involving Vinnie Jones’s Bullet-Tooth Tony, Mike Reid’s Doug the Head and Dennis Farina’s Cousin Avi along the way. As you can see, the plot isn’t exactly straight forward but despite it’s complexity, it’s a fun and entertaining watch to see all of these separate storylines come together.
What makes this complex and quite frankly bonkers story so good to watch is the script and absolutely superb dialogue. Considering this isn’t what you’d class as a typical comedy fun, it is downright hilarious. No matter how many times I’ve seen this film, it still makes me laugh every time with it’s smart, witty and funny dialogue. From Turkish’s narration to Cousin Avi’s scathing remarks about London and pretty much every interaction between Sol, Vinny and Tyrone, Snatch is extremely amusing. Admittedly there are some lines and exchanges that feel a little too forced and staged, and I think this may be due to some questionable acting and the sometimes unnatural sounding London accents.
Guy Ritchie has undoubtedly put together a stylish and slick film, and Snatch definitely encompasses the dark and gritty feel of London. Maybe a little too much as it can feel a bit gloomy at times. It has a great soundtrack and this really works with Ritchie’s directing style for the most part. There are some questionable camera angles and not all of these work – the most grating for me was in the opening scenes with Franky Four Finger’s heist where the camera jumped around far too much.
Despite this, his style works well in general and is aided by the fantastic cast that has been assembled. I’ve never been a fan of Jason Statham, but this is by far his best work, although the star of Snatch is certainly Brad Pitt, who is virtually unrecognisable as gypsy Mickey, both in looks and with his purposely indecipherable Irish accent. Snatch came out the year after Fight Club at a time that would likely be classed as the peak of Pitt’s career, so to see him play a character like Mickey was surprising to say the least. But the entire cast shine with the material they’ve got to work with.
Snatch isn’t a film for everyone and definitely not for the easily offended. For me, I could watch this repeatedly and still laugh every time, and it’s absolutely deserving of a place on this list.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated 1917 (2020) in Movies
Jan 12, 2020
Tour-de-Force filmmaking
I have just viewed the film that WILL WIN the Oscars for Best Picture, Director and Cinematography (and probably many, many more).
Yes, 1917 is that good.
A tour-de-force presentation of a film, 1917 tells the tale of 2 soldiers in WW 1 that are tasked with bringing a message across "no man's land" to prevent a company of soldiers from walking into an ambush.
Director Sam Mendes (SKYFALL) chose to shoot this film in such a way as to give the impression that this film is just one long shot. While it is not (he shot it in about 8 minute bursts), the choreography of the action is staged in such a way that the cuts are seamless and unnoticeable. It is a master class in Directing from Mendes, for - though it is an interesting "gimmick" that puts us (literally) in the shoes (and steps) of the 2 young soldiers on their mission - this gimmick does not get in the way of the film. It helps and enhances the film, you can sit back in your chair and forget about "the gimmick" and just get wrapped up, emotionally, in the story that is being told.
And...getting wrapped up, emotionally, you will be. For the story, events, struggles and triumphs of these 2 soldiers are brilliantly brought to the screen from Director Mendes and Cinematograper-extraordinaire Roger Deakins (14 time Oscar nominee - from SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION to his win, finally, in BLADE RUNNER 2049). These 2 (and their crew) suck you into the action and tensions of the situation. You feel every step that these soldiers take.
Since you spend the entire movie with them, Mendes has done a tremendous job of casting 2 charismatic (but not overly so) actors as the 2 soldiers. Dean-Charles Chapman (Tommen Baratheon in GAME OF THRONES) is determined, focused and single-minded as the lead soldier on this trek - he has personal stakes in this mission - as his brother is in the invasion force that is going to be ambushed. Chapman does a nice job of finding the balance - and making a true person - out of a character that has a single, over-arching mission. It is strong subtle work.
But, to me, the standout in this film is George MacKay (CAPTAIN FANTASTIC) as the buddy who is "brought along". This could have been just another "reluctant war hero" character, but MacKay brings a sense of decency and vulnerability to the early scenes of his character (where he could have just as easily played the "reluctant companion"). These nuanced character dimensions take root later on in the film and elevate this actor - and this role - above the norm.
Mendes brings in a "who's who" of modern British acting stars to fill important extended cameo roles - Colin Firth, Andrew Scott, Mark Strong and Benedict Cumberbatch all bring gravitas and heft to their brief appearances on screen.
This is not the fastest paced film you will ever see - and I think that this serves the film well. It earns its pace and I was drawn in, emotionally, in a way that would not have worked had Mendes rushed the pace (especially early on).
But this film (and Mendes and Deakins) shines during the battle scenes. Even though we are following 2 foot soldiers, they set up the boundaries of these battles in such a way that you understand what is going on - and what is at stake - at least to the 2 soldiers we are following. It is in these scenes that this film really finds its footing. I was drawn even further into the intimate, emotional stakes of these characters at those moments.
A marvelous piece of film making that shows a Director and Cinematographer at the top of their games.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Yes, 1917 is that good.
A tour-de-force presentation of a film, 1917 tells the tale of 2 soldiers in WW 1 that are tasked with bringing a message across "no man's land" to prevent a company of soldiers from walking into an ambush.
Director Sam Mendes (SKYFALL) chose to shoot this film in such a way as to give the impression that this film is just one long shot. While it is not (he shot it in about 8 minute bursts), the choreography of the action is staged in such a way that the cuts are seamless and unnoticeable. It is a master class in Directing from Mendes, for - though it is an interesting "gimmick" that puts us (literally) in the shoes (and steps) of the 2 young soldiers on their mission - this gimmick does not get in the way of the film. It helps and enhances the film, you can sit back in your chair and forget about "the gimmick" and just get wrapped up, emotionally, in the story that is being told.
And...getting wrapped up, emotionally, you will be. For the story, events, struggles and triumphs of these 2 soldiers are brilliantly brought to the screen from Director Mendes and Cinematograper-extraordinaire Roger Deakins (14 time Oscar nominee - from SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION to his win, finally, in BLADE RUNNER 2049). These 2 (and their crew) suck you into the action and tensions of the situation. You feel every step that these soldiers take.
Since you spend the entire movie with them, Mendes has done a tremendous job of casting 2 charismatic (but not overly so) actors as the 2 soldiers. Dean-Charles Chapman (Tommen Baratheon in GAME OF THRONES) is determined, focused and single-minded as the lead soldier on this trek - he has personal stakes in this mission - as his brother is in the invasion force that is going to be ambushed. Chapman does a nice job of finding the balance - and making a true person - out of a character that has a single, over-arching mission. It is strong subtle work.
But, to me, the standout in this film is George MacKay (CAPTAIN FANTASTIC) as the buddy who is "brought along". This could have been just another "reluctant war hero" character, but MacKay brings a sense of decency and vulnerability to the early scenes of his character (where he could have just as easily played the "reluctant companion"). These nuanced character dimensions take root later on in the film and elevate this actor - and this role - above the norm.
Mendes brings in a "who's who" of modern British acting stars to fill important extended cameo roles - Colin Firth, Andrew Scott, Mark Strong and Benedict Cumberbatch all bring gravitas and heft to their brief appearances on screen.
This is not the fastest paced film you will ever see - and I think that this serves the film well. It earns its pace and I was drawn in, emotionally, in a way that would not have worked had Mendes rushed the pace (especially early on).
But this film (and Mendes and Deakins) shines during the battle scenes. Even though we are following 2 foot soldiers, they set up the boundaries of these battles in such a way that you understand what is going on - and what is at stake - at least to the 2 soldiers we are following. It is in these scenes that this film really finds its footing. I was drawn even further into the intimate, emotional stakes of these characters at those moments.
A marvelous piece of film making that shows a Director and Cinematographer at the top of their games.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Powered Now: Invoice & Quote
Business and Utilities
App
Award winning invoice, quoting and scheduling app for small businesses, tradesmen, contractors and...
Sarah (7799 KP) rated Ava (2020) in Movies
Jan 5, 2021
Dull and unoriginal
Ava is a 2020 spy action thriller directed by Tate Taylor and starring Jessica Chastain. It follows Ava (Chastain), an assassin working for a shadowy organisation who soon becomes hunted by her own, led by the mysterious Simon (Colin Farrell). Between missions and death threats, Ava is aided by her handler Duke (John Malkovich) while she attempts to resolve some long held family issues with her mother (Geena Davis), sister (Jess Weixler) and ex (Common).
From the outset, Ava appears to be like your typical female assassin style film – a loud, stylish electro/techno soundtrack overlaying an assassination featuring wigs, stylish clothes and cars and every other spy cliché you’d come to expect from a film like this. The only truly original and enjoyable thing in this opening scene is Ioan Gruffudd’s shady businessman, who looks like he’s having a whale of a time relishing playing a bad guy for a change. However what you don’t see coming with Ava after this initial scene is that instead of being a full on action film, it turns into a family melodrama with a few fight scenes thrown in almost as an afterthought.
Ava is a characterless film full of clichés, and lacking in any personality whatsoever. The spy and action elements, when we eventually see them that is, are entirely unoriginal and have been done so much better in any other spy film you could think of. The fight scenes are surprisingly dull and the camera work only results in highlighting how staged and choreographed the scenes are, they just don’t look real. It isn’t helped by all of the family drama either, with a large number of conversational dialogue scenes taking over the majority of the short but feels so long run time. It wouldn’t be too bad if these were scripted well but I’m afraid like everything else in this film, the script is lacklustre and clichéd.
Character development is poor and banal too, with the majority of the spy related characters lacking in any form of personality or likability. Ava herself is the worst, she reminded me of a personality-less robot who has no depth or emotions, no matter how much the opening credits scene or family interactions try to tell us otherwise. This film has really done it’s stellar cast a huge injustice and gives them absolutely nothing to work with.
Even the plot suffers from a complete absence of originality and seems to have been kept as vague as possible, whether on purpose or because the writers just couldn’t be bothered I’m not sure. The shadowy organisation that Ava, Duke and Simon all work for is never identified or discussed in any real detail. All we learn about them is that they employ assassins to make hits on possibly shady people, with no further elaboration on why or what these people have done wrong, which Ava herself seems fascinated about as we see her questioning her victims as they’re about to die. I’m all for creating a mysterious atmosphere giving away just enough to keep us intrigued, but I’m afraid this doesn’t work for Ava as it just comes across as lazy and complacent with sloppy writing.
I couldn’t help but compare Ava to Atomic Blonde, another female led assassin film that is worlds apart from this. Ava is lacking in everything that made Atomic Blonde - a fun watch, with style, substance and some brutal (but well executed) fight scenes - and I really wish Ava had followed the same formula as at least this would have made it watchable. As it is, it’s a completely dull and clichéd spy film lacking in pretty much everything.
From the outset, Ava appears to be like your typical female assassin style film – a loud, stylish electro/techno soundtrack overlaying an assassination featuring wigs, stylish clothes and cars and every other spy cliché you’d come to expect from a film like this. The only truly original and enjoyable thing in this opening scene is Ioan Gruffudd’s shady businessman, who looks like he’s having a whale of a time relishing playing a bad guy for a change. However what you don’t see coming with Ava after this initial scene is that instead of being a full on action film, it turns into a family melodrama with a few fight scenes thrown in almost as an afterthought.
Ava is a characterless film full of clichés, and lacking in any personality whatsoever. The spy and action elements, when we eventually see them that is, are entirely unoriginal and have been done so much better in any other spy film you could think of. The fight scenes are surprisingly dull and the camera work only results in highlighting how staged and choreographed the scenes are, they just don’t look real. It isn’t helped by all of the family drama either, with a large number of conversational dialogue scenes taking over the majority of the short but feels so long run time. It wouldn’t be too bad if these were scripted well but I’m afraid like everything else in this film, the script is lacklustre and clichéd.
Character development is poor and banal too, with the majority of the spy related characters lacking in any form of personality or likability. Ava herself is the worst, she reminded me of a personality-less robot who has no depth or emotions, no matter how much the opening credits scene or family interactions try to tell us otherwise. This film has really done it’s stellar cast a huge injustice and gives them absolutely nothing to work with.
Even the plot suffers from a complete absence of originality and seems to have been kept as vague as possible, whether on purpose or because the writers just couldn’t be bothered I’m not sure. The shadowy organisation that Ava, Duke and Simon all work for is never identified or discussed in any real detail. All we learn about them is that they employ assassins to make hits on possibly shady people, with no further elaboration on why or what these people have done wrong, which Ava herself seems fascinated about as we see her questioning her victims as they’re about to die. I’m all for creating a mysterious atmosphere giving away just enough to keep us intrigued, but I’m afraid this doesn’t work for Ava as it just comes across as lazy and complacent with sloppy writing.
I couldn’t help but compare Ava to Atomic Blonde, another female led assassin film that is worlds apart from this. Ava is lacking in everything that made Atomic Blonde - a fun watch, with style, substance and some brutal (but well executed) fight scenes - and I really wish Ava had followed the same formula as at least this would have made it watchable. As it is, it’s a completely dull and clichéd spy film lacking in pretty much everything.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Stan & Ollie (2018) in Movies
Jan 28, 2021
My relationship with Laurel & Hardy is a tentative one. I do enjoy their short films, full of ingenuity and genuinely funny moments. But, they’d be down the list a bit for me on the greatest black and white comedy stars – Chaplin, Keaton, Lloyd, then the Marx Brothers maybe, then the slapstick duo next, maybe. It’s not that I don’t think they are great! They are, they definitely are. I just can’t sit down and take to much of them at once. Maybe because their schtick is very stagey, vaudevillian even, rather than cinematic. And that is because they were primary stage actors and clowns. Not necessarily in that order.
So, my anticipation of a movie about them in 2018 was not huge. I was happy to wait, and it was consigned deep down the watchlist for a while. Until one Sunday evening in October, when it suddenly felt like exactly what I wanted to see that day – a nice, calm biopic that probably had a few laughs and a soppy ending. And that is pretty much what this is. Except that it also has two very very impressive performances from the eponymous leads, the consumately talented John C. Reilly and Steve Coogan.
When I say impressive I mean that at times it feels like you are magically watching the real Oliver Hardy and Stan Laurel. So detailed and well observed are their characterisations that nothing whatsoever (other than maybe the makeup on Reilly’s double chin) strikes you as false. Which helps you invest in their story entirely; told in professional if unspectacular style by Jon S. Baird, who demonstrates an understanding of the people, if not a full understanding of how to make a scene truly fly.
The story here is not a full biopic, but rather a snapshot of the end of their careers, when, amazingly, they embarked on a tour of UK theatres in an attempt to keep working once their film career had lost its shine and popularity. What we see are two older men, once treated as superstars, who are now brought down to earth by all things fading, including their youth. They are bitter and argumentative with each other, and their long suffering wives (played satisfyingly by Shirley Henderson and Nina Arianda). Long stewed resentments come to the surface and the smiles of the clowns are seen at their lowest ebb as things begin to fall apart.
What rings true are the observations of a love / hate friendship that has lasted a full lifetime, and how that affects a working relationship and a public legacy. Jeff Pope, who also worked with Coogan on Philomena, gives us a stoic but often deeply meaningful screenplay here, that isn’t bothered by showing off, in favour of colouring the relationship accurately, which is commendably, and feels quite anti-Hollywood and a bit more British.
The physical gags and set-pieces are also beautifully staged, and look gorgeous, evoking the period superbly. My face was almost permanently smiling, although I can’t remember laughing out loud once. And that is what this film feels like, ultimately – a nice, gentle, Sunday afternoon drive into the past. Your grandparents will love it! Personally, I felt it was fine and dandy, but lacked a spark or two to make it properly come to life.
Watch this if you enjoy great acting that doesn’t need to wave its arms around to get attention. Both Reilly and Coogan are extraordinary! Interestingly, the American was nominated for a Golden Globe over there, and the Brit was nominated for a Bafta over here. Neither won, but they were never going to, as this production is almost embarrassed to announce itself as being good. It is good. Just not amazing. Give it a go when a nice cosy, sleepy mood takes you one day.
So, my anticipation of a movie about them in 2018 was not huge. I was happy to wait, and it was consigned deep down the watchlist for a while. Until one Sunday evening in October, when it suddenly felt like exactly what I wanted to see that day – a nice, calm biopic that probably had a few laughs and a soppy ending. And that is pretty much what this is. Except that it also has two very very impressive performances from the eponymous leads, the consumately talented John C. Reilly and Steve Coogan.
When I say impressive I mean that at times it feels like you are magically watching the real Oliver Hardy and Stan Laurel. So detailed and well observed are their characterisations that nothing whatsoever (other than maybe the makeup on Reilly’s double chin) strikes you as false. Which helps you invest in their story entirely; told in professional if unspectacular style by Jon S. Baird, who demonstrates an understanding of the people, if not a full understanding of how to make a scene truly fly.
The story here is not a full biopic, but rather a snapshot of the end of their careers, when, amazingly, they embarked on a tour of UK theatres in an attempt to keep working once their film career had lost its shine and popularity. What we see are two older men, once treated as superstars, who are now brought down to earth by all things fading, including their youth. They are bitter and argumentative with each other, and their long suffering wives (played satisfyingly by Shirley Henderson and Nina Arianda). Long stewed resentments come to the surface and the smiles of the clowns are seen at their lowest ebb as things begin to fall apart.
What rings true are the observations of a love / hate friendship that has lasted a full lifetime, and how that affects a working relationship and a public legacy. Jeff Pope, who also worked with Coogan on Philomena, gives us a stoic but often deeply meaningful screenplay here, that isn’t bothered by showing off, in favour of colouring the relationship accurately, which is commendably, and feels quite anti-Hollywood and a bit more British.
The physical gags and set-pieces are also beautifully staged, and look gorgeous, evoking the period superbly. My face was almost permanently smiling, although I can’t remember laughing out loud once. And that is what this film feels like, ultimately – a nice, gentle, Sunday afternoon drive into the past. Your grandparents will love it! Personally, I felt it was fine and dandy, but lacked a spark or two to make it properly come to life.
Watch this if you enjoy great acting that doesn’t need to wave its arms around to get attention. Both Reilly and Coogan are extraordinary! Interestingly, the American was nominated for a Golden Globe over there, and the Brit was nominated for a Bafta over here. Neither won, but they were never going to, as this production is almost embarrassed to announce itself as being good. It is good. Just not amazing. Give it a go when a nice cosy, sleepy mood takes you one day.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Ad Astra (2019) in Movies
Sep 21, 2019
It’s the near future. Humans are trying to reach out to extraterrestrial life. Veteran astronaut Roy McBride (Brad Pitt) is working high up on an antenna built with the sole purpose of trying to communicate with aliens. And when I mean high up, Roy is literally in full astronaut gear, as this thing reaches from the Earths surface, all the way up into space! Suddenly, a mysterious power surge hits the antenna, triggering a series of explosions and sending other astronaut workers tumbling. Roy manages to leap between a few levels in order to shut off the power, but he eventually has no choice other than abandon the structure and tumble down to Earth. Obviously, he makes it, but it’s an impressive, intense opening – beautifully staged and shot and indicative of the kind of quality to come for the rest of the movie.
Fully recovered, and ready for debriefing, Roy learns that the power surge is one of many which are now hitting the Earth and threatening the stability of the solar system. Furthermore, it is believed that Roy’s father, Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones), who embarked on a deep space mission some 30 years ago, is responsible for the surges. All contact was lost with that ship and it’s crew 16 years into their mission, known as The Lima Project, and the source of these surges is the region surrounding Neptune. Roy has been selected to send a message to his father in the hopes that he might respond and help to prevent further catastrophic surges.
Roy is a loner, committed to his work above all else. In an early scene we see his wife (Liv Tyler) walking out on him while he carries out a psych evaluation for work. He comes across as cold, distant and uncaring, and his pessimistic narration throughout the movie gives us a real insight into his character and history. He’s proved that he can keep his cool under pressure, always maintaining a low blood pressure, but suddenly losing his father 30 years ago has obviously resulted in some serious daddy issues for Roy. Issues which these latest events now bring to the forefront.
The message Roy must send to his father needs to be transmitted by laser from Mars to Neptune, so Roy must first travel to the moon and then onward to Mars. This being the near future, space travel has now been commercialised, so fairly easy to just hop on a flight, and the moon is now a hive of human activity – there’s even a Subway restaurant there for hungry travellers arriving from Earth! As Roy makes his way across the moon, to the rocket which will take him to Mars, we learn about it’s colonisation and the disputes that occur there involving the countries of Earth. Consequently, Roy’s journey is not without peril.
What is so incredible about the time we spend on the moon, and then Mars, is just how plausible and realistic it all feels. For the most part, I was totally mesmerised by it all – fully engrossed in what is an epic space adventure into the unknown, desperate to find out how it was all going to end. After emerging as one of the highlights of an otherwise disappointing movie recently in ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’, Brad Pitt once again shows us just what a real star he is. Outstanding.
Despite the beautiful cinematography, the engrossing storyline and the occasional bursts of action though, Ad Astra is a real slow burn of a movie, which won’t be for everyone. What let the movie down for me was the last 20 minutes or so, which proved to be something of an anticlimax in my opinion. However, this is still an incredible movie, held together by an amazing actor and some beautiful visual storytelling.
Fully recovered, and ready for debriefing, Roy learns that the power surge is one of many which are now hitting the Earth and threatening the stability of the solar system. Furthermore, it is believed that Roy’s father, Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones), who embarked on a deep space mission some 30 years ago, is responsible for the surges. All contact was lost with that ship and it’s crew 16 years into their mission, known as The Lima Project, and the source of these surges is the region surrounding Neptune. Roy has been selected to send a message to his father in the hopes that he might respond and help to prevent further catastrophic surges.
Roy is a loner, committed to his work above all else. In an early scene we see his wife (Liv Tyler) walking out on him while he carries out a psych evaluation for work. He comes across as cold, distant and uncaring, and his pessimistic narration throughout the movie gives us a real insight into his character and history. He’s proved that he can keep his cool under pressure, always maintaining a low blood pressure, but suddenly losing his father 30 years ago has obviously resulted in some serious daddy issues for Roy. Issues which these latest events now bring to the forefront.
The message Roy must send to his father needs to be transmitted by laser from Mars to Neptune, so Roy must first travel to the moon and then onward to Mars. This being the near future, space travel has now been commercialised, so fairly easy to just hop on a flight, and the moon is now a hive of human activity – there’s even a Subway restaurant there for hungry travellers arriving from Earth! As Roy makes his way across the moon, to the rocket which will take him to Mars, we learn about it’s colonisation and the disputes that occur there involving the countries of Earth. Consequently, Roy’s journey is not without peril.
What is so incredible about the time we spend on the moon, and then Mars, is just how plausible and realistic it all feels. For the most part, I was totally mesmerised by it all – fully engrossed in what is an epic space adventure into the unknown, desperate to find out how it was all going to end. After emerging as one of the highlights of an otherwise disappointing movie recently in ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’, Brad Pitt once again shows us just what a real star he is. Outstanding.
Despite the beautiful cinematography, the engrossing storyline and the occasional bursts of action though, Ad Astra is a real slow burn of a movie, which won’t be for everyone. What let the movie down for me was the last 20 minutes or so, which proved to be something of an anticlimax in my opinion. However, this is still an incredible movie, held together by an amazing actor and some beautiful visual storytelling.