Search
Awix (3310 KP) rated The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (1943) in Movies
Apr 26, 2020
Classic drama from Powell and Pressburger. The life of a British army officer throughout the first part of the 20th century is explored, particularly his friendship with his German counterpart and the women he loves (all played by Deborah Kerr).
Typically inventive and imaginative stuff from the Archers, with bold and witty transitions across time and space, moving depictions of romance and friendship, and an understanding that you can deal with serious topics while remaining playful and creative. Terrific performances and direction: acknowledged as an influence by Scorsese and (less predictably) Tarantino. Churchill tried to have the production of the film halted, feeling it was unpatriotic, but as well as being one of the greatest British movies of all time, it is also one of the finest films about what it means to be British.
Typically inventive and imaginative stuff from the Archers, with bold and witty transitions across time and space, moving depictions of romance and friendship, and an understanding that you can deal with serious topics while remaining playful and creative. Terrific performances and direction: acknowledged as an influence by Scorsese and (less predictably) Tarantino. Churchill tried to have the production of the film halted, feeling it was unpatriotic, but as well as being one of the greatest British movies of all time, it is also one of the finest films about what it means to be British.
Dean (6926 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Aug 22, 2019
Way too long (2 more)
Painfully slow
A bit pointless
Disappointing
There will always be a lot of hype for a new Tarantino film. After seeing a trailer for a peek of Hollywood in '69 this looked interesting. It has a large ensemble talented cast playing many of the stars of the era.
Unfortunately there doesn't appear much point to this film until the last 15 minutes. Up to then it's very slow and overly long at nearly 2 hours 40 minutes long. It jumps from scenes of characters to others with little connecting them. I thought this was going to be a fairly accurate account of events that took place at the time... But it's far from that. It has its good elements but overall it was a bit of a dissapointment.
Unfortunately there doesn't appear much point to this film until the last 15 minutes. Up to then it's very slow and overly long at nearly 2 hours 40 minutes long. It jumps from scenes of characters to others with little connecting them. I thought this was going to be a fairly accurate account of events that took place at the time... But it's far from that. It has its good elements but overall it was a bit of a dissapointment.
Dianne Robbins (1738 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Apr 22, 2021
What the hell was that?
I've never watched a full Tarantino movie. They're long. They drag on. I get bored. I've heard that they're ultraviolent, which usually isn't my thing but since I'm interested in true crime and this movie is based in LA at the time of the Manson murders, when I had nothing better to do on a Saturday afternoon and it was on the station the tv was tuned to when I turned it on, I decided to give it a go. I missed most of the Leo parts. I think he was throwing a fit in the trailer when I flipped it on. Either that or Brad Pitt was driving down the strip and picked up a cute girl and drove her to her friend's place (you know where it was.) So, okay. Very long scenes with not much dialogue happening. Lots of establishment of mood and atmosphere. I'm pretty sure I lost three hours while Pitt walked around her friend's place. Eventually, and I dunno when, I got confused, we come to the night of the event, and I was expecting a fact-based, but a gruesome retelling of the Manson murders. Is that what I got? Hell no! What did I get? I don't have any idea. It certainly wasn't that. Seriously, it was so stupid. It was laughable if it wasn't so embarrassingly stupid. Unrealistic and stupid. Obnoxiously stupid. Why did I waste my time watching the part of this movie I watched? Those are hours I will never get back.
This kind of cinema is lost of me, guys. I'm glad you enjoy it. But I'll never watch anything like it again. It's okay, though. I'm sure Tarantino will be just fine without my money. He seems to be doing all right for himself.
This kind of cinema is lost of me, guys. I'm glad you enjoy it. But I'll never watch anything like it again. It's okay, though. I'm sure Tarantino will be just fine without my money. He seems to be doing all right for himself.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Band a Part (1964) in Movies
Jan 28, 2021
Of all the directors I have flirted with in my opening months with the BFI player, Godard is the one I am finding most accessible and least intimidating. He is the guy whose movies I am most tempted by when I don’t want to think or analyse too much, but simply sit back and enjoy for being cool. I also wanted to see why Quentin Tarantino named his production company after this movie. And now I have seen it his whole oeuvre makes total sense, at last! The exact feel of this Nouvelle Vague cornerstone is exactly what you find in 80% of what Tarantino is trying to do. The plot is incidental, of course. What is happening is only there to pin the characters and quirky dialogue on. Being cool is all. And this mid 60s confection is so cool, so French and so much style over content in the best possible way.
On the surface it is about two dodgy guys who take a shine to a girl and rope her into a heist. But the most memorable moments are the trivialities of them dancing the Maddison in a cafe because they are bored; reading the news aloud from newspapers whilst sat in the woods; driving erratically in a speedy little jalopy with a broken roof; and just making faces at one another as they flirt and express the bittersweet tediousness of being alive. It epitomises the time and place almost more than A Bout de Souffle, and in my opinion is the more mature, more knowing film. Ultimately it means very little, but is impossible not to like. It also sparked a greater interest in Anna Karina as a film icon, being the 2nd film on this list in which she impressed me.
On the surface it is about two dodgy guys who take a shine to a girl and rope her into a heist. But the most memorable moments are the trivialities of them dancing the Maddison in a cafe because they are bored; reading the news aloud from newspapers whilst sat in the woods; driving erratically in a speedy little jalopy with a broken roof; and just making faces at one another as they flirt and express the bittersweet tediousness of being alive. It epitomises the time and place almost more than A Bout de Souffle, and in my opinion is the more mature, more knowing film. Ultimately it means very little, but is impossible not to like. It also sparked a greater interest in Anna Karina as a film icon, being the 2nd film on this list in which she impressed me.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Hateful Eight (2015) in Movies
Aug 30, 2019 (Updated Sep 11, 2019)
A modern masterpiece
Honestly, there is nothing I dislike about the 8th film from Quentin Tarantino. Absolutely nothing.
From the minute The Hateful Eight starts it's meaty runtime, we're treated to some stunning long distance shots. The setting is gorgeous, and every shot in the opening moments has been shot with care.
It's not long until the cast start getting introduced, specifically Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L. Jackson), John Ruth (Kurt Russell), Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh), and Chris Mannix (Walton Goggins), as they all make their way to the town of Red Rock for various reasons.
All four of them are fantastic, as they masterfully work Tarantino's wonderful script. As usual, the dialogue throughout The Hateful Eight is thoroughly engaging, and didn't lose my attention for one second.
On the way there, they stop at an inn to shelter from the violent blizzard - Minnie's Haberdashery - where the rest of the film takes place. It's here we meet Bob (Demián Bichir), Oswald Mobray (Tom Roth), Joe Gabe (Michael Madsen), and General Sandy Smithers (Bruce Dern), rounding out our eight strong cast of hateful characters.
What follows is a dialogue heavy, intense ride as these characters begin to find themselves at odds with each other, revealing hidden secrets along the way, in the aftermath of American Civil War.
It's an intriguing set up that I can't say anymore about without spoiling anything.
It's certainly a film that benefits from knowing nothing about it before going in.
As I said, this is an amazing looking movie, with an extremely solid cast, and a tight and often funny script. The music score is beautiful just to add a lovely finishing touch.
I can't praise this masterpiece enough - Tarantino at his best.
From the minute The Hateful Eight starts it's meaty runtime, we're treated to some stunning long distance shots. The setting is gorgeous, and every shot in the opening moments has been shot with care.
It's not long until the cast start getting introduced, specifically Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L. Jackson), John Ruth (Kurt Russell), Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh), and Chris Mannix (Walton Goggins), as they all make their way to the town of Red Rock for various reasons.
All four of them are fantastic, as they masterfully work Tarantino's wonderful script. As usual, the dialogue throughout The Hateful Eight is thoroughly engaging, and didn't lose my attention for one second.
On the way there, they stop at an inn to shelter from the violent blizzard - Minnie's Haberdashery - where the rest of the film takes place. It's here we meet Bob (Demián Bichir), Oswald Mobray (Tom Roth), Joe Gabe (Michael Madsen), and General Sandy Smithers (Bruce Dern), rounding out our eight strong cast of hateful characters.
What follows is a dialogue heavy, intense ride as these characters begin to find themselves at odds with each other, revealing hidden secrets along the way, in the aftermath of American Civil War.
It's an intriguing set up that I can't say anymore about without spoiling anything.
It's certainly a film that benefits from knowing nothing about it before going in.
As I said, this is an amazing looking movie, with an extremely solid cast, and a tight and often funny script. The music score is beautiful just to add a lovely finishing touch.
I can't praise this masterpiece enough - Tarantino at his best.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated From Dusk Till Dawn (1996) in Movies
Jul 9, 2019
A underrated action horror film
From dusk till dawn- was directed by robert roderguiz and had a great cast.
The plot: the run from a bank robbery that left several police officers dead, Seth Gecko (George Clooney) and his paranoid, loose-cannon brother, Richard (Quentin Tarantino), hightail it to the Mexican border. Kidnapping preacher Jacob Fuller (Harvey Keitel) and his kids, the criminals sneak across the border in the family's RV and hole up in a topless bar. Unfortunately, the bar also happens to be home base for a gang of vampires, and the brothers and their hostages have to fight their way out.
A tv series was made back in 2014 and had 3 seasons.
From dusk till dawn- has horror, action and fantasy all mixed into one film. Overall its very underrated and more people should watch it.
The plot: the run from a bank robbery that left several police officers dead, Seth Gecko (George Clooney) and his paranoid, loose-cannon brother, Richard (Quentin Tarantino), hightail it to the Mexican border. Kidnapping preacher Jacob Fuller (Harvey Keitel) and his kids, the criminals sneak across the border in the family's RV and hole up in a topless bar. Unfortunately, the bar also happens to be home base for a gang of vampires, and the brothers and their hostages have to fight their way out.
A tv series was made back in 2014 and had 3 seasons.
From dusk till dawn- has horror, action and fantasy all mixed into one film. Overall its very underrated and more people should watch it.
TA
Time and Place are Nonsense: The Films of Seijun Suzuki
Book
Japanese film director Seijun Suzuki began his career making increasingly outrageous B movies for...
The Treatment
9.0
Rate It
Podcast
The Treatment is a weekly journey into the heart of film led by film critic Elvis Mitchell. From an...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Harder They Fall (2021) in Movies
Nov 13, 2021
Terrific Ending
I am a “bitter-ender”, I will stay until the end of a Sporting Event or a Movie in the hopes that something interesting will happen.
And, in the case of the Netflix Original Film THE HARDER THEY FALL, I was rewarded for my patience.
Based on real-life African-American characters - and with an All-Black Cast - THE HARDER THEY FALL tells the tale of 2 rival gangs in the “Old West” (circa 1880 or so) as they rob, cheat, outsmart and kill each other.
This 2 1/2 hour epic has 2 distinct parts. The first 2 hours is all set up. A film that looks like a pale imitation of a Quentin Tarantino film by Writer/Director Jaymes Samuel (best known as collaborating with Baz Luhrman and Jay Z on the soundtrack for THE GREAT GATSBY). He is clearly influenced by Tarantno and tries to mimic Tarantino’s style - and, like most imitators - falls short mainly because he focused on the style and not the substance of what Tarantino does.
He populates this film with some of the finest Black Actors working today - Idris Elba, DelRoy Lindo, Jonathan Majors, Lakeith Stanfield and Zazie Bettz are all underutilized during the first 2 hours of this film and I had myself wondering why they agreed to do this film.
And then came the last 1/2 hour.
The final portion of THE HARDER THEY FALL is about as good a piece of film-making that you will see, with the showdown between the 2 rival gangs really paying off and Majors, Lindo and Elba (especially) finally get their chance to shine - and answers the question as to why these fine performers were in this film. It’s as if Samuels had a great ending in mind and patched together a film (and plot) that would get the characters to that point.
And then there is the case of Regina King - who was acting in a different kind of film all along. She reigns in this film like a true MOVIE STAR, commanding the screen - and your attention - whenever she shows up. She has a wonderful monologue in the underwhelming first 2 hours of this film - that is worthy of Tarantino - and shows why King is undeniably a MOVIE STAR. This monologue alone almost makes the first 2 hours bearable.
You will have a conundrum when contemplating seeing THE HARDER THEY FALL. Will you be willing to sit through 2 hours of a B- film (a “C” film, if it wasn’t for King) to, finally, be rewarded with an A+ ending?
The choice is yours.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And, in the case of the Netflix Original Film THE HARDER THEY FALL, I was rewarded for my patience.
Based on real-life African-American characters - and with an All-Black Cast - THE HARDER THEY FALL tells the tale of 2 rival gangs in the “Old West” (circa 1880 or so) as they rob, cheat, outsmart and kill each other.
This 2 1/2 hour epic has 2 distinct parts. The first 2 hours is all set up. A film that looks like a pale imitation of a Quentin Tarantino film by Writer/Director Jaymes Samuel (best known as collaborating with Baz Luhrman and Jay Z on the soundtrack for THE GREAT GATSBY). He is clearly influenced by Tarantno and tries to mimic Tarantino’s style - and, like most imitators - falls short mainly because he focused on the style and not the substance of what Tarantino does.
He populates this film with some of the finest Black Actors working today - Idris Elba, DelRoy Lindo, Jonathan Majors, Lakeith Stanfield and Zazie Bettz are all underutilized during the first 2 hours of this film and I had myself wondering why they agreed to do this film.
And then came the last 1/2 hour.
The final portion of THE HARDER THEY FALL is about as good a piece of film-making that you will see, with the showdown between the 2 rival gangs really paying off and Majors, Lindo and Elba (especially) finally get their chance to shine - and answers the question as to why these fine performers were in this film. It’s as if Samuels had a great ending in mind and patched together a film (and plot) that would get the characters to that point.
And then there is the case of Regina King - who was acting in a different kind of film all along. She reigns in this film like a true MOVIE STAR, commanding the screen - and your attention - whenever she shows up. She has a wonderful monologue in the underwhelming first 2 hours of this film - that is worthy of Tarantino - and shows why King is undeniably a MOVIE STAR. This monologue alone almost makes the first 2 hours bearable.
You will have a conundrum when contemplating seeing THE HARDER THEY FALL. Will you be willing to sit through 2 hours of a B- film (a “C” film, if it wasn’t for King) to, finally, be rewarded with an A+ ending?
The choice is yours.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jul 27, 2019 (Updated Jul 27, 2019)
Overhyped and disappointed
Contains spoilers, click to show
This review will contain spoilers.... and this is my opinon.
Once upon a time in hollywood is Quentin Tarantino’s ninth film and has a large ensemble cast.
This to me didnt seem like a quentin tarantino film, i mean it had some elements that he does but overall it didnt seem like a tarantino film, it was missing all of elements pervious used in his other films. There are only three storylines in this film. Rick's storyline, Cliff's storyline and Sharon's storyline and thats it. When in reservoir dogs, pulp fiction, jackie brown and four roons their were more than three storylines. Its also missing all the blood and gore like in his other films. Yes that sence at the end, and one of Rick's movies he has a flamflower but thats it. When as the other films that tarantino did had alot of blood and gore and violence and swearing. This movie seemed like it had none of that.
I was very disappointed because iam a huge quentin tarantino fan, i think he is one of the best directors of all time and like his other movies. So i was very excited for this movie and turns out i was very disappointed.
It didnt seem like it was a 2h and 40min movie.
Also lets talk about charles manson and his family throwed into this movie. I thought the movie was going to be about Rick and Cliff invisagating the murder of sharon taron and invisagating the manson family. Their are only three sences that have to do with the manson family.
1. The scene were charles introduces himself to polanski home.
2. When cliff goes to Spahn ranch run by the manson family and thier meanching charlies and cliff should meet him. This sence right here is the best part of the movie. Its myserious, dramatic, you dont know if the family is going to murder cliff or not. So your questioning if thats going to happen. But unfourtaly this sence is only like 5-15 mins long and at no point charles comes. You think something is going to happen than boom sence ends.
3. The end, were some of the manson family are about to kill tate and her friends and then thier try to kill rick and cliff because cliff was mad at them for being hillbillys and being on privite property. Which was like a unexpected turn but why??? Cliff fights them off and kills two of them and then rick kills one with a flameflower.
Thats it, three sences with the manson family and one with charles what a let down.
This whole movie was a let down,
Dakota Fanning, Bruce Dern, Luke Perry , Damian Lewis, Timothy Olyphant and micheal madsen all had one sence and these are big movie stars. To waste all of this talent is sad. Basically most of the supporting cast was wasted and only had one sence.
Also the ending, after rick and cliff fight off some of the manson family, cliff is being taking off to the hostipal and rick finally meets sharon tate then the movie's title comes on and then boom movie off. I thought that cant be it, that wasnt 2h and 40mins. It didnt feel like it, but it was. I thought why are the credits showing. Their should be more, but no the credits are showing.
Once upon a time in hollywood, is alternate timeline movie about the late 1960's in hollywood. But why have the manson family in it when your not going to use them that much. Why develop this alternate storyline, when their is a real life story and your using the real life people in the movie. Stupid it.
I can go on and on how this movie was very disappointed but i think i did this movie its justice.
Overall, once upon a time in hollywood is a very dissappointed movie.
:(
Once upon a time in hollywood is Quentin Tarantino’s ninth film and has a large ensemble cast.
This to me didnt seem like a quentin tarantino film, i mean it had some elements that he does but overall it didnt seem like a tarantino film, it was missing all of elements pervious used in his other films. There are only three storylines in this film. Rick's storyline, Cliff's storyline and Sharon's storyline and thats it. When in reservoir dogs, pulp fiction, jackie brown and four roons their were more than three storylines. Its also missing all the blood and gore like in his other films. Yes that sence at the end, and one of Rick's movies he has a flamflower but thats it. When as the other films that tarantino did had alot of blood and gore and violence and swearing. This movie seemed like it had none of that.
I was very disappointed because iam a huge quentin tarantino fan, i think he is one of the best directors of all time and like his other movies. So i was very excited for this movie and turns out i was very disappointed.
It didnt seem like it was a 2h and 40min movie.
Also lets talk about charles manson and his family throwed into this movie. I thought the movie was going to be about Rick and Cliff invisagating the murder of sharon taron and invisagating the manson family. Their are only three sences that have to do with the manson family.
1. The scene were charles introduces himself to polanski home.
2. When cliff goes to Spahn ranch run by the manson family and thier meanching charlies and cliff should meet him. This sence right here is the best part of the movie. Its myserious, dramatic, you dont know if the family is going to murder cliff or not. So your questioning if thats going to happen. But unfourtaly this sence is only like 5-15 mins long and at no point charles comes. You think something is going to happen than boom sence ends.
3. The end, were some of the manson family are about to kill tate and her friends and then thier try to kill rick and cliff because cliff was mad at them for being hillbillys and being on privite property. Which was like a unexpected turn but why??? Cliff fights them off and kills two of them and then rick kills one with a flameflower.
Thats it, three sences with the manson family and one with charles what a let down.
This whole movie was a let down,
Dakota Fanning, Bruce Dern, Luke Perry , Damian Lewis, Timothy Olyphant and micheal madsen all had one sence and these are big movie stars. To waste all of this talent is sad. Basically most of the supporting cast was wasted and only had one sence.
Also the ending, after rick and cliff fight off some of the manson family, cliff is being taking off to the hostipal and rick finally meets sharon tate then the movie's title comes on and then boom movie off. I thought that cant be it, that wasnt 2h and 40mins. It didnt feel like it, but it was. I thought why are the credits showing. Their should be more, but no the credits are showing.
Once upon a time in hollywood, is alternate timeline movie about the late 1960's in hollywood. But why have the manson family in it when your not going to use them that much. Why develop this alternate storyline, when their is a real life story and your using the real life people in the movie. Stupid it.
I can go on and on how this movie was very disappointed but i think i did this movie its justice.
Overall, once upon a time in hollywood is a very dissappointed movie.
:(