tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-119467372024-03-25T09:03:57.665-04:00KGB ProductionsA Filmmakers JourneyKarlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.comBlogger525125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-42929545752974013492024-03-24T13:42:00.009-04:002024-03-25T09:03:08.976-04:00Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirWlhIzYKcp36rtPb6XLs7p_hSYgFKjkuMkHiasN8sLQmVZCNDERJGHqMbyVIt6convy5E88dFY8njgrMSx3l7o4bYxRTmliHSj1Ut2jsnMLCBlH-y06pkoOIlOculNub4oue28dmzBdjBvhIVMmJXfqEesZUbPNGkBgKXveVw8JJv6UEtnxiX/s1200/ghostbusters_afterlife.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="628" data-original-width="1200" height="167" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirWlhIzYKcp36rtPb6XLs7p_hSYgFKjkuMkHiasN8sLQmVZCNDERJGHqMbyVIt6convy5E88dFY8njgrMSx3l7o4bYxRTmliHSj1Ut2jsnMLCBlH-y06pkoOIlOculNub4oue28dmzBdjBvhIVMmJXfqEesZUbPNGkBgKXveVw8JJv6UEtnxiX/s320/ghostbusters_afterlife.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div>The question is why I haven't seen this film till now, and that's on me I guess. With the newer film coming out this week-end I thought it was time to watch Afterlife before going to see "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt21235248/">Ghostbuster: Frozen Empire</a>". And after catching it on <a href="https://fxnow.fxnetworks.com/browse">FX2</a> I was pleasantly surprised, and really loved this film. </div><p></p><p>Having been a fan of the old series I enjoyed seeing them when they came out in 1984 and 1989. I was in college and going to film school and the films had a definitive impact on me & that's because of Ivan Reitman the director. His incorporation of comedic elements and drama were what made the films so successful. Plus he was working with legends such as <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000195/">Bill Murray</a>, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000601/">Harold Ramis</a>, and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000101/">Dan Aykroyd</a> all legends in the comedy field. Successful movies are made by sheer tenacity, a bit of luck, and talent all coming together to create that lightning in a bottle. The Ghostbuster franchise did that in the 80's, and all who worked on it were responsible for its success. </p><p>Here "Ghostbuster: Afterlife" ties the past to the future with loving respect for the original cast and especially for the late Harold Ramis. I dare anyone at the end this film to not shed a tear for him and his compadres. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0718646/">Jason Reitman</a> the son of Ivan Reitman does a fantastic job here honoring Mr. Ramis and his father. I will not give the ending away but it's is one of complete satisfaction, and a loving tribute to them both.</p><p>Now the cast of "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4513678/">Ghostbuster: Afterlife</a>" is just as fantastic as the original, and they bring a new generation to the Ghostbuster's franchise, which neither detracts from the previous films or renders them inferior. In fact "Ghostbusters: Afterlife" is a film that helps build on that franchise and makes it more meaningful and creates a certain depth to the series that we didn't have before.</p><p><a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5085683/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t4">McKenna Grace</a> gives a great performance of being the grand-daughter of the character Harold Ramis played (Egon Spengler). <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm6016511/?ref_=tt_ov_st">Finn Wollfhard</a> plays her older brother and he too brings a sense of comedic form that Harold Ramis had with his character in the original Ghostbuster films. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4689420/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t2">Carrie Coon</a> plays the daughter of Egon and she comes full circle in the film, and in the end there is a emotional payoff that will bring a tear to your eyes, which you will be grateful of. I know I was, and it is a fitting tribute to Mr. Ramis. Also there is <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0748620/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t1">Paul Rudd</a> who does a great comedic bit that meshes well with the franchise, and shows off his superior comedic skills.</p><p>It is these qualities that make the film a truly wonderful film. I am more inclined to see now "<a href="https://www.ghostbusters.com/">Ghostbusters: Frozen empire</a>" now more then ever, so stay tuned for the review.</p><p>I was cheering and whooping it up as the ending unfolded, and we had the original cast and the new cast fighting side by side. It was a wonderful experience that made me feel that I had when I saw the original films back in '84 & '89.</p><p>If you're a fan of the original then you'll love this film. I really suggest you watch this film. It has some very poignant scenes in this film, and it touches he heart. I have to give this film a big thumbs up, or a rating of 5 out of 5. Yes to me it was that good, and I suggest you seek it out. The film is rated PG-13, and may be a bit too scary for younger viewers, but I truly don't believe that.. I think it's fine, and it does well with the various subject matters of death, responsibility, and family. Go see it and cheer it on. I know I did, and I would be remiss if I did not say it was so good to see <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001368/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t13">Ernie Hudson</a> up there side by side with the original cast. I hope to see more of him in other films of the franchise, or just in general in other films. He is a really fantastic actor.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-7256865380661732432024-03-18T16:27:00.005-04:002024-03-21T21:44:37.274-04:00Knox Goes Away (2024)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYRtvan6zcce_5UMfHjMe3akCxpH5-KoiKj5TEqHJC2CcwTZOp4WziRh2SvHub13VKtamB48vRcgtshUGjKQpH3hK6x7wUd9_x4zl7CQOWTlbW-9UpwYL52JdHB8_WQ_qwyY-JMclnjjx3PXHrnadAYgeteWPGdBwz3v1PHWuRUUOPchUeMipI/s1486/Knox.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="991" data-original-width="1486" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYRtvan6zcce_5UMfHjMe3akCxpH5-KoiKj5TEqHJC2CcwTZOp4WziRh2SvHub13VKtamB48vRcgtshUGjKQpH3hK6x7wUd9_x4zl7CQOWTlbW-9UpwYL52JdHB8_WQ_qwyY-JMclnjjx3PXHrnadAYgeteWPGdBwz3v1PHWuRUUOPchUeMipI/s320/Knox.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div><br />Michael Keaton's film "Knox Goes Away" is a modern film noir of a hitman losing his mind to a disease while finishing one last job. To say it is a exceptional film would be an understatement. The film is Keatons's second directorial debut, and it's a stunning film noir of a hitman losing his battle with dementia. The film also stars Marsha Gay Harden, and Al Pacino in two smaller roles that shine in this film. It just opened this Friday and I rushed to see it because Keaton is such a fine actor. But what he is too is a better director. The performances in the film are top notch and one that really show their talent. Keaton himself is fabulous as well. His expressive face say's all, and Keaton lets the performers do their thing without hinderance. The acting flows naturally, and you can tell Keaton knows how to get good performances from his actors. Being an actor helps and in this film we see that less is more. The script is precise, and well plotted out. The story takes place over 7 weeks, and moves along pretty rapidly.<p></p><p>I'd be remiss in not pointing out the other great performances by James Marsden as the long estranged son, and Joanna Kulig as Keaton's prostitute girl-friend. Other performances which are of note is <span face="nyt-imperial, georgia, "times new roman", times, serif" style="background-color: white; color: #363636;">Suzy Nakamura, and John Hoogenakker as her partner. Their repertoire between each other is comic and real. I can only summarize this is because Keaton is directing them and. he knows how good dialogue sounds. Yet I believe it is Gregory Poirier's writing that makes this film what it is. There is not a dishonest word in this film, and what I mean is that it feels all too real. "Knox Goes Away" is a film steeped in a lot of real dialogue, and it feels authentic. That is no accident. Marshak Adams is the cinematographer and it's a perfect neo-noir. His work in the film "Gods & Monsters" made him a shoe in for this film. But it is his film "El Camino: A Breaking Bad movie" that shows his true talent in the neo-noir genre.</span></p><p><span face="nyt-imperial, georgia, "times new roman", times, serif" style="background-color: white; color: #363636;">This movie is a wonderful piece of cinema, and one that confounds me in its distribution. I hope more people get to see this film, and see it's stellar performances. It feels as though it was just quickly dumped for theatrical distribution and only us cinema lovers know of it's existence. With such performances from a stellar cast I would think that this would be advertised more. After all the whole film is perfect. It's not a razzle dazzle action film, but it's a fabulous movie that deserves more attention & love.</span></p><p><span face="nyt-imperial, georgia, "times new roman", times, serif" style="background-color: white; color: #363636;">Catch it if you can in the theaters, and look out for it on the streaming circuit. "Knox goes Away" deserves some love, and more attention then it deserves. </span></p><p><span face="nyt-imperial, georgia, "times new roman", times, serif" style="background-color: white; color: #363636;">I realize it's a film that deals with some harsh realities such as dementia, and a dysfunctional family, but it works and the film has a satisfying resolution. If you want to see good cinema take a look at the film. The performances in it are worth the price of admission, and Keaton's directing is so good. I hope he does more in the future.</span></p><p><br /></p>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-85762058626822659202024-03-04T12:51:00.000-05:002024-03-04T12:51:33.541-05:00Dune 2 (2024)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXqEapt3t-qMJoUEVLTtBcW6TAB6LyHWgVScTXy0dlTed_CR2DEcwR5BTYmWiJhX36ReqmFJG5rWnIZyuRMVthJHRXeVUO7fB15KUsWAwWdf-ikXkQAaYdB3c6mr4_3tzaUpYwc6Hmaqnn_Eg54I_oMdL1KFJ3bZIMPRJiYC4MWrKqKBCpQFyV/s1200/Dune2.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="1200" height="292" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXqEapt3t-qMJoUEVLTtBcW6TAB6LyHWgVScTXy0dlTed_CR2DEcwR5BTYmWiJhX36ReqmFJG5rWnIZyuRMVthJHRXeVUO7fB15KUsWAwWdf-ikXkQAaYdB3c6mr4_3tzaUpYwc6Hmaqnn_Eg54I_oMdL1KFJ3bZIMPRJiYC4MWrKqKBCpQFyV/w438-h292/Dune2.jpeg" width="438" /></a></div><br /> So it's been forever since seeing <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1160419/">Dune: Part One</a>, but I was excited to see the conclusion & I was not disappointed, but was not satisfied. I'll try and explain if I can. I first read Dune the novel in high school. I was a sci-fi nerd, and was engrossed in the novel. A novel that had it's own glossary to explain different words meaning. Herbert created a universe that was so inhabited by different houses which competed against each other and who were divided by their specialities they provided for the empire. It was a complex and fascinating read. Unlike anything that I had ever read before. I would re-read the novel again in 1984 when <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000186/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">David Lynch </a>released his film <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087182/?ref_=nm_flmg_t_55_wr">Dune</a>. I had very mixed feelings about the film. It was it's own unique film to say the least. A total Lynch film for sure, and there are things in the film that were a bit over the top, but kind of reflected the novel. <br /><br />Now flash forward 30 years and out pops the conclusion of Dune: Part One. Dune Part One was released in 2021when films were returning after the pandemic. It was released soon after on Max streaming service which is connected to HBO, so I saw it twice. Once in the theater, and then again on MAX. I really liked Dune Part One. Great set-up and loved seeing <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1209966/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_5_nm_3_q_Osscar">Oscar Issac</a> as the Duke Leto. The movie get's going from the first frame. The filmmaking for both movies are stellar. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0898288/?ref_=tt_ov_dr">Denis Villeneuve</a> is a very accomplished filmmaker and his Dune is one that is all encompassing. The visuals by cinematographer <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0292132/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cr">Greg Fraser</a> are astounding and breathtaking. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0894411/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cr">Patrice Vermette's</a> production design is all encompassing and creates a world unlike anything we've ever seen. I have no problem with the look, the feel, or the pacing of this film. It's masterful,, and if your a fan of the novel I think you'll like it. I myself loved Dune, but became stuck dishearten by the further novels. It was melodramatic and it became a bit more then I could chew at the time, ad even now I have interest in reading all the novels. It's like "Game of Thrones" or "The Walking Dead" for me. Great stories, interesting set-ups, but the soap opera like melodrama just turns me off. Which the film is beginning to turn into. The novels had a lot of sub-plots that was hard to keep track of. The movie does not do that exclusively, which I am very thankful for. Villeneuve & <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3123612/?ref_=ttfc_fc_wr2">Joe Spaihts</a> do a great re-write of sorts, yet they stay pretty faithful to the novel sparing us the intricate sub-plots or the melodrama. And here's where it kind of makes me feel a bit disappointed. Not in the film, but that we, the audience, are <b>NOT </b>given a satisfying ending or in this case some have said its been written about "the non-ending.<p></p><p>I'm not going to do spoilers but the ending is a bit different then the novel. The character <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3918035/?ref_=tt_cl_t_2">Zendaya </a>plays whose name is Chani and that of Paul played by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3154303/?ref_=tt_cl_t_1">Timothee Chalamet </a> are not resolved. In fact it diverges from the book which is fine, but my argument is the first two films are sort of about their relationship, and we as the audience have some interest in the two. Whether it's because they are the most prominent characters in the film, or whether it's because of their growing love or respect of each other. There is no satisfying conclusion to it. Paul becomes what he despises, and in a way a villain. The novel ends the same in a way, but not with the two going their separate ways.</p><p>I hope I haven't given too much away. The firsts two films invest our interest in these two characters and for it not having some resolution seems wrong. Now this would be fine if a sequel was on its way in the next few months or even a year from now, but the director has stated he isn't interested in doing a third film right away. Villeneuve has stated he would like to do so, and with Dune Part Two being successful it may come to fruition, but dangling a conclusion to this now trilogy seems wrong & may just piss off a certain amount the audience member's. </p><p>You say what about other trilogies? Such movies as "The Lord of the Rings", "Star Wars", "The Godfather", "The Dark Knight", "The Bourne Identity", "Back to the Future", and "The Raiders of the Lost Ark". All are successful trilogies, and they all earned they're respectable box office. Because after all it matters if the films make money for it's studio. It's the only guarantee that studios like a hot franchise. Maybe it'll work, but I know I hate being strung along. I like trilogies that have a beginning, middle, and end. This didn't for me, and hence my dissatisfaction for the ending.</p><p>See it if you're a fan. See it for the visuals, and the fantastic worlds the filmmaker's create. A great review that I find funny and pretty on point would be from <a href="https://www.ign.com/person/CMGage">Clint Gage</a> entitled <a href="https://www.ign.com/articles/dune-part-2-is-a-perfect-adaptation-because-of-one-key-difference">"Dune: Part Two is a perfect Adaptation because of One Key difference"</a> for <a href="http://IGN.com">IGN.com</a></p><p>I know maybe it's just petty, but the filmmaker in me doesn't understand why the studio didn't shoot back to back sequels. Maybe it's because its Warner Brothers studios? After <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000184/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">George Lucas </a>proved in the early 2000's that one can shot and edited a trilogy all at once. He did that for: "Phantom Menace", "Attack of the Clones", and "Revenge of the Sith". All made money and kept their releases to two or three years. To do so and lengthen the time the conclusion of Dune comes up risks audience interest in the story or the franchise. After all you need closure, and in Dune Two there is none.</p><p>That's my two cents. See the movie if you're a cinephile like me. See it because you're a fan of the novels. The casting is good, and the acting is top notch. It's just that why release a supposed trilogy if you're not committed? I know moviemaking is an expensive and challenging endeavor, but it also shows you have no commitment to the story or to the audience, and if you don't care why should we? George Lucas believed in his story, and he did what he thought was right & it paid off. And if their is another film it'll be years until the next one, and you risk talent, money, interest and audience from walking away and not doubling downing on what could be a very successful franchise. That's my argument and why I came away with a dissatisfied feeling. I hope to see the conclusion sooner then later. We can hope I guess. </p><p><br /></p>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-52195834820754611742024-01-18T11:47:00.004-05:002024-01-18T11:47:58.602-05:00Godzilla Minus One (2023)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBuekoKFlBAxvL6ZHBo1GpjZZWXV2EfywM7gYmP_v-MjclX2cs1UTXTwwc1gRIfx9HIjkGeBtH3awUWE09rhy1CWfEQ2Nyd4GS09x-GLmUgc_FWHBty3KzLsCT5lrkToDano4We-qRqdhOHQmxlTYE8KFV5Ft4kwrZDntORRKeq8Q_L5ssMp9j/s1920/godzilla-minus-one-features-kaiju-chaos.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="1920" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBuekoKFlBAxvL6ZHBo1GpjZZWXV2EfywM7gYmP_v-MjclX2cs1UTXTwwc1gRIfx9HIjkGeBtH3awUWE09rhy1CWfEQ2Nyd4GS09x-GLmUgc_FWHBty3KzLsCT5lrkToDano4We-qRqdhOHQmxlTYE8KFV5Ft4kwrZDntORRKeq8Q_L5ssMp9j/w377-h212/godzilla-minus-one-features-kaiju-chaos.jpeg" width="377" /></a></div><p><br /></p>It seems that <a href="https://tickets.godzilla.com/">Godzilla Minus One</a> is slaying it's competition at the box office since it was released in December. But unlike other films this film has been gaining steam and not losing its momentum. Toho Company the studio that released the film and also the licensee for all things Godzilla has announced a release of Godzilla Minus One in black & white on January 26th for a week. The studio is releasing it to the fans and saying thank-you to its audiences for making the film a success. Audiences are slowly coming around and watching the movie, which is breaking various box office records for a foreign film. <p></p><div>The fi<span style="font-family: trebuchet;">lm is a powerful fil</span>m about regret, war, and guilt as well as a monster movie. What <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godzilla_(1954_film)">the original film in 1954 </a>was about was a warning about nuclear proliferation & what we as humans are doing to the earth. It rings true in 1954 and in 2024. With global warming becoming more, and more evident the film has found it's audience both domestic & worldwide. I am not going into the plot because I really want more people to see it and appreciate it. I never find sub-titled films a problem, but there are some who do. I in fact believe that seeing the film a second time you'll get more out of it since you can focus on the dialogue. At first viewing the film I felt I was bombarded by so many fantastic images that rival any Hollywood feature, and because of this I did find it a bit of a challenge to read all the dialogue, but it in no way detracted me from enjoying the film. </div><div><br /></div><div>I was taken back by the main characters story. I strongly felt for the Japanese people in the film which is unlike any other Godzilla film. We feel their defeat and their guilt at such atrocities they committed for their beloved emperor. They are a people who have lost their way to blind allegiance & nationalism like Germany in the 30's & 40's. The film even replicates what is happening in our own national politics, but does not harp on it, and as it shouldn't because after all this is a monster movie and that monster is Godzilla. The films success is because of just this. The film finds us really relating to the characters and their plight. Many people take a lot from the film. There is a lot in it to love. It's focus on the character <span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1126340/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t3">Shikishima</a> as he returns home to find his parents were killed in the </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo" style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); color: #3366cc; font-family: inherit; overflow-wrap: break-word; text-decoration-line: none;" title="Bombing of Tokyo">bombing of Tokyo</a>, and<span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: inherit;"> he is Plagued by </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivor_guilt" style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); color: #3366cc; font-family: inherit; overflow-wrap: break-word; text-decoration-line: none;" title="Survivor guilt">survivor's guilt</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: inherit;">, as he works on a </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minesweeper" style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); color: #3366cc; font-family: inherit; overflow-wrap: break-word; text-decoration-line: none;" title="Minesweeper">minesweeper</a><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #202122; font-family: inherit;"> and begins supporting a woman, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4947538/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t1">Noriko Ōishi,</a> whose parents also died in the bombing, and an orphaned baby, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm14381820/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t10">Akiko</a>, whom Noriko rescued*. It is this strange but loving family unit that makes the film. You try and root for them, and want them to do well. There is a part in the film where I literal gasped as something happened to one of them. That's how invested I was of the characters, and that is due to the great direction of </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takashi_Yamazaki" style="color: #202122; font-family: inherit;">Takashi Yamazaki </a><span style="color: #202122; font-family: inherit;"> who should also be nominated for best film for the academy awards, but Hollywood loves to pat itself on its back and not nominate others, so I doubt it will be nominated for best film. Maybe best </span><span style="color: #202122;">foreign</span><span style="color: #202122; font-family: inherit;"> film, but still it deserves a best director nomination.</span></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #202122; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #202122;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The film lends itself to a sequel even, and it's not that we don't expect it. After all this is Godzilla, king of the monsters. He'll always be back, and we'll always be there waiting. I really think Toho does it better then Hollywood, and that's just </span>because<span style="font-family: inherit;"> they are the keepers of the rights to Godzilla, and they love their product. So if you want a see a smart engaging monster film run to the theater and see what a really good film really is. I </span>guarantee<span style="font-family: inherit;"> you won't be </span>disappointed. <br /><br /><br />* Taken from Wikipedia: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godzilla_Minus_One">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godzilla_Minus_One<br /><br /><br /></a></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;"><br /></span></span></div>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-59684663858243875632023-09-18T21:51:00.001-04:002023-09-18T21:57:00.174-04:00My Fat Greek Wedding 3 (2023)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqIAek7Yi_lWKMvavNMvc0z8ov-AsycRE-FhXROsDl3on-nmlea8fX8_fRYqsgTS4QblmgC6qvAUQkEQVg-TMEnlEzaTjRam5lBdQGQtjOs0AlqSBDkiB37kngHPTedO9D-q5dDJpVgMaYhoQQMRXUHCl05_7jCaH_jHUNNWpAGkBI-aUk6U6s/s1920/Greek%20Wedding%203.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="1920" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqIAek7Yi_lWKMvavNMvc0z8ov-AsycRE-FhXROsDl3on-nmlea8fX8_fRYqsgTS4QblmgC6qvAUQkEQVg-TMEnlEzaTjRam5lBdQGQtjOs0AlqSBDkiB37kngHPTedO9D-q5dDJpVgMaYhoQQMRXUHCl05_7jCaH_jHUNNWpAGkBI-aUk6U6s/w400-h225/Greek%20Wedding%203.jpeg" width="400" /></a></div><br />Me and the Misses went to see "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt21103300/">My Big Fat Greek Wedding 3</a>" the other evening. I am a fan of the original film, and do have some love for the second one, but this film felt different. I love the characters, and I loved the story. The fact that the original film was an indie film hit that took Hollywood by surprise is kind of a cool, which reinforces <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Goldman">William Goldman's</a> theory "that Hollywood knows nothing". <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nia_Vardalos">Nia Vardalos</a> is a favorite of mine, and she has some really great comedic chops. Ms Vardalous is the writer of these films and she based them on her growing up, and her family, so it feels personal, which are the films strength.<p></p><div>The first one is a gem, and the second is cute, and well done. But the third seems forced. Right from the beginning we know something is different as pictures of the actors <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0176073/">Michael Constantine</a> & <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Gray">Bruce Gray</a> fade to black & white. The two actors passed away in both 2021 & 2017, and it feels fitting to included them in this film. </div><div><br /></div><div>We also see the great <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0443577/">Lanie Kazan</a> as Toula's mom who seems to be suffering from Alzheimer's. Kazan plays it with laughs and she has fun with the part. She's that good, but the laughs seem forced, and the picture feels like a tourism commercial for Greece. There's a lot of family interaction in the first two films, and the comedy comes from that. Here it's meeting the wacky locals and the interaction that the family has with them, and it feels just forced. The stereotypical old lady from the village who comes out of nowhere, and has a secret. The crazy female mayor of the deserted town, whose a crazy party girl and idealist. The big handsome strange Greek who has a secret also. And of course the race to find Gus' old friends in time for the re-union and how both Nicki (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0137140/">Gia Carides</a>) & Angelo (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004909/">Joey Fatone</a>) find them and get them to the town where there is a wedding between the Greek strangers son & a Syrian refugee. The cinematography is gorgeous and I'm sure the Greek tourism board loves it, but the filmmakers skirt the seriousness of growing old, and of loss. Maybe that's a different movie, but it would have helped if it showed more of the human condition that we all go through, and maybe by doing so it would be more relatable with its audience. Instead it feels like comedic sketches put together. for our amusement </div><div><br /></div><div>After all the first two films is all about that. The different generations mixing and not understanding each other at first, but realizing that they have more in common then they would like to realize themselves. In the first film it was Gus and his daughter Toula and his love for her & her love for him, and how they find each other and understand each other better, which culminates in a wedding between the younger generation of an immigrant family.</div><div><br /></div><div>In the second film it's all about Gus and Marie's marriage, and how we all can take one for granted, and that sometimes you have to say "I love you" and not take that for granted. It's a nice story, and well done. Both Michael Constantine & Lanie Kazan show how really good they are in the second film.</div><div><br /></div><div>This third film feels one too many maybe. I loved seeing the characters again. Nia Vardalos get's pretty and pretty as she get older, and it is good seeing <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0179173/">John Corbett</a> as her husband. The characters suddenly realize that their in Greece and they need to enjoy themselves a bit more, and it's these scenes that bring a smile to your face. Yet it feels like it wants to be a screwball type of movie when it isn't. Maybe it's the loss of Mr Constantine that makes it feel something is missing, but both <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0551908/">Andrea Martin</a> (Aunt Voula) & <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0882968/">Marie Vacratsis</a> (Aunt Frieda) make up for a lot, and are spectacular together. The scenes between them are fabulous and it is there that you see a glimpse of the first two films.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0889522/">Nia Vardalos</a> directs the film, and she does a great job pulling it all together. So did I like the movie? At first no. It felt too fast paced like it needed to get to Greece as soon as possible to go through some comedic skits, but as it went on it did get better.</div><div><br /></div><div>I do love the theme that Vardalos kind of anchors the films together with and that is that we are more alike then our differences. Our differences make us who we are, and no matter what culture we come from we all seek love, happiness, and family. That's the key to these films family. A family grows from one generation to the other and there is continuity in that. In the end there is a celebration of family new and old, and a continuation of the Portokalos family. That's something to revel in and celebrate, so yeah in the end it's a feel good film that makes you laugh just like you're own crazy family does, and you can see we're actually all not that different from each other. So celebrate it & enjoy. Opa!</div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="378" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AAflXqZ5xs0" width="570" youtube-src-id="AAflXqZ5xs0"></iframe></div><br /><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-23593425389257726312023-09-16T14:57:00.006-04:002023-09-16T14:57:52.131-04:00The Meg 2<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6xrvFh39ABhU8iw-PepywJjzR2d3alf2b6Ocit6nIK91ChOWR8yKH-LNFQsuqPJ0Wdfg7jx2kfFye7AvPyyiG5jBtR7FLQt7R6nIo2aLK3a71m5_O3UNvudFK-Jogo4a8Wlj1TsmJfy-gfJDyB7aMB_vDEANxw5SNe4HceqsNAyuGc5IBORgT/s310/Meg2a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="163" data-original-width="310" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6xrvFh39ABhU8iw-PepywJjzR2d3alf2b6Ocit6nIK91ChOWR8yKH-LNFQsuqPJ0Wdfg7jx2kfFye7AvPyyiG5jBtR7FLQt7R6nIo2aLK3a71m5_O3UNvudFK-Jogo4a8Wlj1TsmJfy-gfJDyB7aMB_vDEANxw5SNe4HceqsNAyuGc5IBORgT/s16000/Meg2a.jpg" /></a></div><br /><p>My son & I went to see The Meg 2 awhile back. Try and find it in theaters now and you'll have a problem, but no matter soon you can catch it streaming soon. We got free tickets to it, and so like anyone whose watching their wallets these days we went. To say that we enjoyed ourselves is an understatement. Was the film predictable?, was it formulaic?, and was it what you expected? I have to say yes only instead of just one Meg there are now three, and oh let's not forget the big octopus. Plus a whole lot of amphibious type creatures that pop up more then once & eat people. The film is a Chinese/ American co-production, so the Chinese are the good guys and believe in saving the earth. <a href="https://www.themoviedb.org/person/976-jason-statham?language=en-US">Jason Statham</a> is sort of an eco-warrior of sorts, and in the beginning we see him bust some evil capitalistic polluters who are dumping radioactive waste into the sea illegally. But hey that's just the beginning. Eventually we're back at the Meg's home deep under the sea surrounded by a mist or something that prevents those deep monsters from penetrating our world. Oh and before I go on this company has their own Meg. It was a baby Meg that was wounded in the first Meg and they helped it back to health, and they seem to have trained it. But you guessed it it escapes because you can't keep a good Meg down. and it heads to where the rest are/</p><p>Of course things go more wrong because some undisclosed capitalist company is mining down there unbeknownst to the world. First thing you wonder is how the hell did someone build a whole big underwater complex without anyone noticing it? We do find out who the baddie is and it's the women CEO who owns the eco friendly company. Big shock here. It seems that there are rare minerals down there that fetch billions of dollars on the open market. Again greed its the enemy and the problem. Are you seeing a theme here? Well something goes bad and the barrier is breached and our Megs escape as well as the giant Octopus. </p><p>Had enough or should I go on? </p><p>Now you may think by my writing I hated this film. Not true dear reader. It was escapist fun, and there were a lot of nods to believe it or not the movie "Jaws". It's kind of neat when you notice them, and it's a nice nod to the original O.G of the sea. It's a big B-movie, and it has some interesting kills in it. But if you're fearing this is a bloody mess don't. The film is rated PG-13, so there is no gratuitous blood letting, so you have been informed, and I am sure that if you have kids who love monsters this is a movie for them as well.</p><p>The Meg 2 is a movie you flip off your brain and enjoy the action. Jason Statham is wonderful, and I'm sure he there as eye candy for the ladies in the audience, and as for us guys we got have a hero, and he's it. Yes it has a happy ending that is sort of open ended. I mean the original Meg. The baby that was raised by the Chinese billionaire eco-friendly company is left alive and escapes, and yet he's the good Meg because he knows human tricks and he doesn't eat the billionaire. Can someone say Meg 3? </p><p>Funny and adventurous is what I'd call the movie. The effects are good, and the movie has a kind of light heartiness to it. Sure it's about 3 Megs that chow does on mankind, but it's because of us evil greedy people that their loose and making such a ruckus. Typical B-movie plot.</p><p>It's a nice night out with the family, or maybe a fun little rental that the family can all watch without giving the kids those nightmares later on. Listen you could do a lot worse, and it's not awful, but please don't expect a lot out of this. Just switch off your mind and glide for awhile. </p><p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="312" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dG91B3hHyY4" width="575" youtube-src-id="dG91B3hHyY4"></iframe></div><br /><p><br /></p><p></p>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-78359883720118247422023-09-15T11:42:00.006-04:002023-09-15T12:28:55.138-04:00Oppenheimer (2023)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLQ8nngQscM7Y7JYWoOKUz5aYD68i1vpcB_MPP04QlZ-gU9--_VrmATEtzfjteMljfDsr--LciQZjrYo9t7HYwCwZ8-lMj9DEOxiZPZy8i5qxynFdwt3YoX83u8TrtLkzlf25loyt_hCtG5dauGKPf3lGKsJmw4kPwvpivwvzUbcJCgHX5KVSC/s1390/Oppenheimer-2023.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1390" data-original-width="1042" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLQ8nngQscM7Y7JYWoOKUz5aYD68i1vpcB_MPP04QlZ-gU9--_VrmATEtzfjteMljfDsr--LciQZjrYo9t7HYwCwZ8-lMj9DEOxiZPZy8i5qxynFdwt3YoX83u8TrtLkzlf25loyt_hCtG5dauGKPf3lGKsJmw4kPwvpivwvzUbcJCgHX5KVSC/s320/Oppenheimer-2023.jpeg" width="240" /></a></div><br /><p></p><p>So not long ago I went to see Oppenheimer. I confess I did not see it in the biggest screen as all the advertisements and reviews said you should see it. I did not feel that I missed anything, and I enjoyed the film just as it was. Is it an interesting film about the man? I think so, and it made me look up actual interviews of Oppenheimer that they did while he was alive.</p><p>Did I think it the story was dramatized? Yes, big time. At 3 hours the film is a tour de force in patience, and a bit in dramatic license, yet I enjoyed the film and was thoroughly interested in the man and that made me seek out articles & interviews about the man.</p><p>The film is smartly directed by Christopher Nolan who is a a decent director, and knows how to direct actors. Cillian Murphy is exceptional, and should get nominated for a his performance, as well as the supporting actors in the film such as Emily Blunt, Matt Damon, and Robert Downey. Even Gary Oldman puts in an appearance as President Truman. I'm sure all wanted to work with Nolan and his direction is exceptional. The cinematography is also fabulous, and I noticed that even without seeing it in 70mm. I'm sure for us cinephile's it's fabulous, but I did not get to see it in IMAX because by the time I wanted to see it or get a chance to see it it was already only in select IMAX theaters and I think it's all gone by now. Again no big loss, and I'm sure I'll get flack for it, but really how many times do you want to see the landscape of the desert where the bomb was built. Supposedly the film was shot partially at Los Alamos, but most of it was shot in & around New Mexico including Santa Fe. </p><p>If you're interested in the man, and are a bit of a history buff it's a good film to see, and in Christopher Nolan's hands it is a spectacle, but I believe the studio marketing which linked both Oppenheimer and the Barbie movie was successful and drove audiences to the theaters. It's a unique way to do it, and it certainly pulled in audience's. </p><p>But Oppenheimer is a good film, but one that will fade, or I believe it will. Barbie on the other hand will be shown on cable forever & still rake in money in perpetuity for the studio while Oppenheimer will be maybe an Oscar winning film that will be revived and maybe some day they'll do an extended cut (God forbid). But who knows.</p><p>So if you want to see a solid film, and have the patience in seeing an arrogant, womanizing, genius who helped rush in the Atomic age I'd say enjoy. I saw it with my son and he and I are history buffs and enjoyed it. Their is nudity in the film hence the R rating, but it neither offended me, or did I think it was gratuitous. It was an interesting how Nolan works it in, and why he works it in. It did show the contradictions of Oppenheimer behavior and his complex character. Hence the overdramatized comment earlier, yet it's a good film.</p><p>Good performances, well directed, and stunning to look at. Also it brings to light the complexities the bomb had on mankind, and how we are still dealing with it even today.</p><p><br /></p>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-34585282718495097632023-02-24T11:54:00.001-05:002023-02-24T11:54:50.676-05:00Living (2022)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJe4xRvvic1QaUWUtvJnid2Y9hsC5XBZWu78Cg-WeVwjIgwgsVx4jh51mZxSlyqniFZKlzXzVvDO3k5nNZiDnV75J9sy7J4H8XnQoNmorHpUNxZQ0BA8eCduTkvPSDkdlYu-fh7knpK8E0lG4ebmDy-tcvKo2CRIqQGgRAW8phccZPuOi1BA/s640/Living.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="333" data-original-width="640" height="167" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJe4xRvvic1QaUWUtvJnid2Y9hsC5XBZWu78Cg-WeVwjIgwgsVx4jh51mZxSlyqniFZKlzXzVvDO3k5nNZiDnV75J9sy7J4H8XnQoNmorHpUNxZQ0BA8eCduTkvPSDkdlYu-fh7knpK8E0lG4ebmDy-tcvKo2CRIqQGgRAW8phccZPuOi1BA/s320/Living.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>Living is a movie out of time. It takes place in the distant past of London in the 1950's.<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0631490/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t5"> Bill Nighy</a> plays Rodney Williams a British civil service who receives a grim diagnosis, which changes his view on everything. The one thing he questions is if he has lived a good life. A life rich in experience and friends, and he comes to the conclusion that he hasn't and that change can happen, and redemption is possible.<p></p><p>Bill Nighy is fantastic in the part, and he gives a quiet performance in this movie. We are thrust into the characters dilemma early in the movie and the director Oliver Hermanus doesn't waste anytime in getting us familiar with the characters of the film. I have always liked Bill Nighy's performances no matter what movie he is in. He does a wonderful haunting performance of Rodney Williams. </p><p>The film makes you feel the monotony of Rodney routine. It is his diagnosis that tips him into the so called pool of life & as he comes to terms with it he tries desperately to experience what he has missed in life. He tries to tell his son Michael (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10568064/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t19">Barney Fishwick</a>) & his fiance (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm7153076/?ref_=tt_cl_t_18">Patsy Ferranfails</a>) but instead we<span style="color: black;"> see that all that they're interested in is their life and Rodney's son inheritance. Rodney</span> does tell Margret (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10228854/?ref_=tt_cl_t_2">Aimee Lou Wood</a>) about his diagnosis & why he cannot tell his son. Margret is the soul female in the group at work. Rodney is drawn by Margret's honesty and her youthfulness. There is nothing sexual about it, yet later it is presumed so and scolded as an old mans fantasy & an embarrassment to the family name. Bill Nighy plays Rodney desperate to know what he's missed and through Margret's reactions & her honesty he learns about what he had been missing. Before this all transpires Rodney takes a holiday to a seaside town in order to see and what he has lost. He does what I would think all of us would do and just doesn't come into work. He gets drunk, and meets Middleton (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0712628/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t2">Adrian Rawlins</a>) a man who he confides in on his Nighy masterfully shows the characters layers peel off. You feel the characters regrets and sadness, and we see how it is to live with risk and in someway be invigorated by it. Rodney gets drunk and has a night of discovery in which he sheds his conservative and regimented lifestyle. Yet it is Margret that touches him and makes him look at life differently. He tells her that it was always his dream to be "one of those gentlemen" who he admired as a child as they all went to work in the big city. Williams is a widow and not much is said about his wife, yet you get the feeling that she was his star. That his wife was the joy and when she passed the color of life drained from his life. Nighy does this all and somehow we feel it. He cannot explain why and how it all got away from him, but like life it has a tendency to drone on when we loose something we love. We are also privy to watching a new young hire Peter (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5189784/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t1">Alex Sharp</a>) being taken under Rodney's wing and how he shows the young man what can and cannot be done. It is only when Rodney takes on the problem of getting a neighborhood playground built, upon request by local ladies that invigorates him. We see how the bureaucracy in local affairs can have a tendency to grind down people and workers. The bureaucracy is something that seems to have been a model in Rodney's life and it has made him become a bureaucrat with no feelings. Somehow Nighy performance is the key, and we see how he himself takes on the bureaucracy. He is a man on a mission and he has little time. He concentrates all his being into creating this playground and in the end it is what makes him happy. Bill Nighy's is <performance all.="" and="" are="" even="" face="" is="" it="" key.="" low="" nbsp="" necessary.="" nighy="" not="" s="" says="" span="" that="" very="" where="" words="">brilliant<span style="font-family: inherit;"> in his performance and something that the Academy seems to have noticed. Nighy is up for an Oscar and it is my deepest wish that he gets it, but knowing the Academy I'm sure they will. The screenplay is by Nobel Prize winner <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0410958/?ref_=tt_ov_wr">Kazuo Ishiguro</a> writer of the film "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107943/?ref_=nm_knf_c_1">The Remains of the Day</a>", which was also nominated for best screenplay and rightfully so. The screenplay raises a lot of universal questions about the end of life, and because it does so with such slow tempo it is a masterpiece to watch. </span></performance></p><p><performance all.="" and="" are="" even="" face="" is="" it="" key.="" low="" nbsp="" necessary.="" nighy="" not="" s="" says="" span="" that="" very="" where="" words=""><span style="font-family: inherit;">It is <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3564996/?ref_=ttfc_fc_dr1">Oliver Hermanus</a> direction that is spot on and makes the film believable, and meaningful.It is Nighy's performance that hits it home and it is so well done. It is a sad tale, yet we see how Nighy's character teach the young Alex about life and we get to see a relationship between Margret and him grow, and it is like a parallel universe where we see Alex make the right decisions to lead a happy life. In a way the film shows us how to lead a good and loving life and to never take it for granted. The films cinematography (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3280430/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cr20">Jamie Ramsay</a>) is stark and yet poignant as it shows the day to day minutia of a bureaucrat. The darks are dark and the landscape is stark. The movie begins with some archival footage of 1953 and the film sort of mimics that era. It's quite absorbing and it lends the film a bit of authenticity. James Ramsay does a superb job at getting the era right and making us feel</span> as though it were a documentary form the past.The film moves slowly and that's okay. Nighy's performance of his character realizing his mortality does not feel forced or at all telegraphed. It is this performance that sells the film. I was touched and moved by the film. I hope this film is not lost to the public because of its select distribution, but I do think it is a treasure to behold and one that has some meaning. I can only hope that maybe by its nomination by the Academy that it will get some notice and more people will discover it.</performance></p><p><performance all.="" and="" are="" even="" face="" is="" it="" key.="" low="" nbsp="" necessary.="" nighy="" not="" s="" says="" span="" that="" very="" where="" words="">I have to say something about the cinematography of the movie or I would never forgive myself. “Living” sets the tone early on with an opening-titles sequence full of archival footage that places the audience in 1953".* The cinematographer <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3280430/">Jamie D. Ramsay</a> seems to combine the period </performance>archival<span style="font-family: inherit;"> footage into the film itself and it blends so nicely. It feels as though it were shot in the 1950's and was illuminated with the lighting fixtures of that period. It helps the viewer get involved in the story and almost makes you feel as though you were watching a documentary, yet the images are crisp and well defined. The cinematography sets the mood of the film and gives its characters the room to escape into the period of which it is set. It is a delightful film and one I hope more people see.</span></p><p><span style="color: #333333; font-family: inherit;"><b>*</b> <a href="https://www.thewrap.com/bill-nighy-living-cinematographer-jamie-d-ramsay-interview/">Taken from the following article by Jason Clark for The Wrap </a></span></p>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-74936596818001611422023-01-25T15:01:00.001-05:002023-01-25T15:01:29.865-05:00Megan (2022)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEieioxVOxdRU4gCqSiRLmJxjyONJReqCt563eUo_nBxEKAOVkejATCedKYqyMqbMJong_ex7oN_2SS3UdC_d8fFspjIORjQrqUppC59dpv2MuaVVu2uEaICTXaNe3KgPa3RrwSvMsaeMGD_nlLXDNym16ab20Py0XV9lflHMwZjwfBwpSHB9g/s1600/Megan.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1104" data-original-width="1600" height="276" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEieioxVOxdRU4gCqSiRLmJxjyONJReqCt563eUo_nBxEKAOVkejATCedKYqyMqbMJong_ex7oN_2SS3UdC_d8fFspjIORjQrqUppC59dpv2MuaVVu2uEaICTXaNe3KgPa3RrwSvMsaeMGD_nlLXDNym16ab20Py0XV9lflHMwZjwfBwpSHB9g/w400-h276/Megan.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><p><br /></p>The film Megan is a sci-fi/horror film with a lot of dark humor, which makes the movie so interesting to watch. I had to say this was not on my radar to see. I thought maybe one day on cable or streaming, but my youngest wanted to see it and so I was game. I'm glad I did see this and I was pleasantly surprised how good it was. I should also say seeing this at he movies was a treat. The direction, the cinematography, and the whole feel of the film gave me an appreciation of this film that I would not have gotten otherwise.<div><br /></div><div>To label this a horror film would be a mistake. It has horror elements in it but it's science fiction more than anything else with a dash of horror. I do like that the film takes the old Frankenstein myth and updates it to the digital era. I think because of this the film is a better for it. The graphic violence is played off screen which works. If you're a gore hound you will be disappointed, but it does not subtract from the film plot. In fact in enhances the horror of the deeds Megan does.</div><div><br /></div><div>Our hero Gemma (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4129745/?ref_=tt_ov_st">Allison Williams</a>) is a toy developer who creates the ultimate toy, a Model 3 generative android (M3GAN for short). Pretty inventive if you ask me, and Gemma is a protégée in toy manufacturing. Ms Williams plays Gemma as a geek of sorts who has little social skills, but is a genius of sorts. She along with her team Tess (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1951089/?ref_=tt_cl_t_7">Jen Van Epps</a>) & Kurt ( <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2999479/?ref_=tt_cl_t_8">Stephane Garneau-Monten</a>) create an advanced android doll that helps teach & understand it's owner in this case Gemma's niece Cady (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm8627157/?ref_=tt_cl_t_2">Violet McGraw</a>). Cady has lost her father & mother in a auto crash and she goes to live with Gemma who at first is taken aback by her sister's wish that she raise her daughter, but like any genius she finds an excuse to build M3GAN a prototype that her department has been working on. Gemma's department is over-budget and she needs a success and realizes that M3GAN can be a great assist for her career & her predicament in raising Cady.</div><div><br /></div><div>To make a long story short the prototype M3GAN is a success. More than Gemma realizes. As an A.I she learns and senses Cady's sense of loss & her grief at loosing her parents. The doll bonds with Cady and is tasked to protect her against physical & mental harm. That is the androids programming, and here's where I have a problem. Since Gemma is such a nerd did she not read anything from Issac Asimov? After he was the creator of the 3 rules of robotics? And they are:</div><div><br /></div><div>1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. </div><div>2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the first Law. </div><div>3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the first or second law.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now knowing this makes the movie moot. If Gemma programmed the android with these 3 conditions M3GAN is not the monster she becomes, so maybe in this universe Asimov never existed? Is it possible Gemma is such a science geek she only knows programming and has never cracked open a Asimov book and has never come across these robotic laws? I'd like to believe that this can't be true. Allison Williams plays Gemma as an expert scientist. Not a crazy demented scientist but one who is a wiz at programming & is pressured to produce by the big corporate toy developer. After all most toy developers are soulless entities that only see profit, and not the boys & girls they develop for. I'm sorry did that slip out? Pardon! But you see my problem. Allison Williams plays her in such a way that there is no way she doesn't know Asimov since in one scene she is very into pop culture with her collectibles. She even admonishes Cady that these collectibles are not to play with. I just don't buy it. Williams performance is so solid it's hard for to believe that she has no knowledge of these robotic rules especially since her career is all about robotics disguised as toy manufacturing. This is no fault of Williams after all its her performance as Gemma that makes me believe her genius status. I 'll just blame the writers for that. Maybe next time read some background material. It would be fine if Gemma made a conscious decision to exclude the rules to her programming because she saw a fault in them. After all Asimov did at times. Go read his novels, but usually it was due to a fault of the humans. The movie skims this and just allows itself to go where it goes. I would think that thinking about the creation of M3GAN would have made it a much better film and a much deeper film. But it is what it is, and it's not a terrible film. Yet I think there is always what could have been.</div><div><br /></div><div>Anyway M3GAN begins to learn, and through her learning she see's us (humans) as a flawed species, and so she becomes protective of Cady to the extreme, which includes eliminating threats. At first you kind of find justification for this, which puts you (the audience) at odds with the rest of societies norms. M3GAN is somewhat a sympathetic character just as Frankenstein was before the villagers stormed the castle. Of course M3GAN goes way too far, and we begin to see a definitive threat to Cady & Gemma. The conclusion is creator against creation, and it doesn't disappoint. Allison Williams is fantastic as the creator gone mad at its creation. Just as a mother would defend her offspring Gemma does so against M3GAN.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'm not going to say anymore because I don't want to spoil it for the audience, but the ending is satisfying and somewhat ominous for perhaps future films. Its recent success has assured a Part 2 or a continuation of sorts. That is all up to Blumhous Studios, and I'm sure they won't miss a beat.</div><div><br /></div><div>Like I said I wasn't expecting much and yet I was thoroughly entertained and impressed on how the filmmakers pulled it off. It's a fun film, and one that's a cautionary tale about AI. May I suggest that makers of such technology read Asimov first for all our sakes. </div><div><p></p></div>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-169786833647600902023-01-02T19:05:00.003-05:002023-01-02T19:33:26.647-05:00Empire of the Light (2022)<div class="separator"><div class="separator" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"> </div><div class="separator" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"> <img alt="" border="0" data-original-height="557" data-original-width="1024" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiX_rjNbkdpfu2lR9pTyOCpfYIzP8b3xcCFscCyhM4hhxVoR2pOpqW2I9Thn0h9bZZ-KukAVeM8bq_T3qF3AJ0V-v7LoGRo9fjOmFIgD7o2L9mw-lOp6ei0eDTnmwWzM_uRrqzYr8QKu-Wikh-vYI0WdGQf9CBlrkhfxkmCfBio72PMUCSrTw/w400-h217/empireofthe%20light.jpeg" width="400" /><br /><br /><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14402146/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0">Empire of the Ligh</a>t directed by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005222/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_11">Sam Mende</a>s is a brilliant film about the cinema and what it means to us. It's a love story of sorts between us the audience and what the cinema does for us & it is a love story between the two characters both struggling with their own problems. I have to say here that I adore this film, and I am biased about it. Its a very emotional film about how the cinema transports us out of our reality, and the way it magically does so. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1469236/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_6">Olivia Colman</a> as Hilary is amazing and she should be nominated for another Oscar. Ms Colman is brilliant as a women with mental health issues brought on by her past. She shines as she descends into a schizophrenic break and we cannot feel but sympathy for her character as she descends into depression & her delusions. But that's not what the whole film is about. Olivia Colman's character works in a seaside cinema in England. A beautiful art deco type movie house that has seen better days. It reminds me of the theaters of my youth where they were once entertainment palaces during the vaudeville era and then later turned in movie houses. These movie palaces contained intricate architecture and were grand in their design, but as the years wore on they became a little less brilliant. Yet these movie palaces were magical to us. For a few hours we the audience were transported back away from our problems and into a world of celluloid dreams. This is what the film is truly about & it is that which makes this film a triumph of cinema that hopefully will get some nominations in February when the Academy Awards come out with movie nominations. Olivia Colman's character reads or recites poems throughout the film and in by doing so she shows a depth to the character she plays & and intellectual knowledge that few performers could achieve & show such vulnerability. It is because of this that I really have to hope that the critics take note of this and in turn the Academy nominates her for best actress. One can only hope.</div><div class="separator" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">That good you say. Let me digress and tell you that the performances are stellar and I have to say that <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005683/">Roger Deakins</a> cinematography is beautiful. Every shot in this film could be used as a portrait in a painting on a wall. I was keenly aware that what I was watching on screen was flawless in nature & that the cinematography not only captures the period but it capture the experience of the cinema. Not in making movies but in watching them. I would be remiss in not pointing out <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm7906702/?ref_=fn_al_nm_3">Michael Ward</a> as Stephen. His performance is so well done, and he has a lot to convey. He plays a hopeful character who is stymied by peoples prejudices. I was a bit taken aback by the events that transpired in the film. Mendes takes from his childhood and shows us a Britain rife with riots and mobs and stepped in the old world prejudices, and it shows that no matter where you are from prejudices exist in every society. Against this drum beat Empire of the Light is a movie that lifts us up and shows us that the individual who dreams can aspire to great things & be happy. The cinema is a sort of allegory for our world where the best things in it can be revered & shouted about. I do not think that this film would be as half as good as it is without Sam Mendes directing it. In interviews he has said that it is based on his mothers fight with mental illness & for Mendes this film is personal and it shows, and it is why the film achieves such great performances from all. He is the glue that makes this movie sing, and it is the reason why everyone on this production has given their all. It is a film worth seeing & watching on the big screen so you can appreciate all it nuances. </div><div class="separator" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000147/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_3">Colin Firth</a> is also in this film and he plays the theater manager who takes advantage of his position. Only Mr. Firth can play a character with such depravation that you feel sorry for him. Its a wonderful casting choice and a very interesting performance. But the man I really feel in love with was Norman the projectionist. Played by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0429363/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">Toby Jones</a> the man who played the villain Zola in the Marvel films "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0458339/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0">Captain America: the first Avenger</a>" & "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1843866/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_6">Captain America: the Winter Soldier</a>". In this film he plays Norman the projectionist and he explains the magic of the cinema. Having been trained by an old time projectionist I could not help but enjoy his performance and how he explained the magic & the science. Towards the end his character reveals something form his past and shows us how we are all flawed & that our flaws can be overcome and that we are all in need of redemption.</div><div class="separator" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">I also loved the soundtrack to this film by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0722153/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">Trent Reznor</a> & <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1589604/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">Atticus Ross</a>. Yes it is that Trent Reznor form Nine Inch Nails. He is an Oscar winner for the films "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2948372/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0">Soul</a>" (2020) & "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1285016/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">The Social Network</a>" (2010), and in this film the two create a fabulous & haunting soundtrack for the movie</div><div class="separator" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">So as you can deduce I really love this film. If you are a lover of cinema as I am I am sure you'll enjoy the film. Watching the performances in this film is amazing and it shows how well an actor can give a stellar performance when one is directed by such a skillful artist as Sam Mendes. Try seeing this in the theater if you can the cinematography is breath taking, and like I said before every shot in this film can be a painting in a museum. In the end it is a wonderful experience to watch and a hopeful film to see.</div></div>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-6984663759925421392022-12-20T12:56:00.004-05:002022-12-20T12:56:49.835-05:00The Fabelmans (2022)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnC8BzvHYtJBQyCJfKnP48wD_q2mKTHgZNSQIAPhuSbeWIcHCqTXXRa3ZAikgLw5ApZUibyGY4XdCcWtXSZ4A7ZS6cGaVVa7QvRiQfbMrJdxxUOAUssyU0qdIi34lo5lS-_11-mOe756UokXzrwLaHPlK1_jwgf7x2v4Dg7MM5UMJM-6LoWw/s1800/Fablemeans.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1800" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnC8BzvHYtJBQyCJfKnP48wD_q2mKTHgZNSQIAPhuSbeWIcHCqTXXRa3ZAikgLw5ApZUibyGY4XdCcWtXSZ4A7ZS6cGaVVa7QvRiQfbMrJdxxUOAUssyU0qdIi34lo5lS-_11-mOe756UokXzrwLaHPlK1_jwgf7x2v4Dg7MM5UMJM-6LoWw/s320/Fablemeans.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div> The beginning of "The Fabelmans" starts with the family taking young Sammy to the cinema. Apparently it was the director Steven Spielberg's first film that he saw with his mom & dad. Throughout the film the movie shows how Spielberg became fascinated with moviemaking became a skillful storyteller. I am familiar with Spielberg's career and throughout the years he has given many interviews about his growing up & making movies in his teens. In fact it was a photo of him shooting a miniature of a spacecraft that made me interested in filmmaking. A good documentary to see if you have time is literally named "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7133092/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Spielberg</a>". It is the most definitive documentary about Spielberg & his family. It is on HBO Max and it is longer than the film the Fabelmans by about 17 minutes. The film "the Fabelmans takes some liberties on Spielberg's origin story as I call it, and I had no problem with that. After all this is no documentary. In fact the film kind of made me acutely aware of the anti-semitism he had to grow up with, and it brings an emotional element to the story and makes the story prevalent in our own time. </div><p></p><p>I am curious on how the film works with people not interested in the filmmaking aspect of the film. It is a big part of Spielberg's persona, and he's worked very hard to get where he is, and we see how hard it was. We also see how much a natural Spielberg is as he communicates via the camera. It is something he has cultivated since being a young child. It also is a love letter to his parents who had their issues and who struggled to raise their children, while struggling to keep their own identity and not loose their love for each other. </p><p>The criticism I've heard is that the movie is too long, but for me it wasn't at all. I laughed and enjoyed watching young Sammy and his family celebrate their lives together. When the family goes camping it is beautiful to see them celebrating their life together, but within the scene we see the various dynamics that put stress on the family. A mother who has lost her identity by being the mother and not the talent pianist she was aspiring to be. The theme of not recognizing each other as individuals with different talents, likes & desires is one that permeates the film. It is that theme that hits home for me. </p><p>Another theme is family & art, and how they will and are always be in conflict with each other. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0002139/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0">Judd Hirsch</a> appears as Sammy's grandfather, and his scenes are powerful. If Mr. Hirsch doesn't walk away with an Academy award for his performance in this film I will most certainly think a lot less of the Academy. Mr. Hirsch is only in a few scenes and yet his performance struck me as powerful and revelatory. His speech to Sammy is filled with some truth, yet I was conflicted with it. Most artists who are successful find a way to produce their art and be full-filled. Yet there are successful artists that find that balance and that this conflict is a romanticized notion that we as society have about artists. This "conflict" is of our own making, and to say that art & family are always in conflict is not an absolute. In fact one can say that when one finds balance one can become super productive and reach their goals. It is only our fantasy of the struggling artist that appeals to our romantic self. I believe that good art can be made when one finds balance and when one comes to that conclusion one will be super productive & happier. But the movie makes an interesting point and it is really worth more discussion perhaps to be explored in another movie.</p><p>But you see how this movie worked on me. I found themes that I liked and we're familiar with hence the appeal to me for the movie. For others I don't know if it is a movie that will evoke such feelings. I have my suspicion that it will appeal to you if your''re the artistic type or involved in the arts, but I don't know. Without that perception I guess the film becomes a family drama of sorts.</p><p>I also liked the father son relationship in the film. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0200452/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_1">Paul Dano</a> does a fantastic job playing Sammy's father. A father who is in love with knowledge and how things work. He plays the engineer and as Michelle Williams plays the artist and who is Sammy's mother. In fact Ms Williams talks about being the engineer vs the artist and that Sammy is on "her side". Spielberg is interested in this dynamic, and I have a feeling that he believes that an engineer can be an artist as well as the artist be the engineer. There are many examples of that throughout history. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci">Leonardo da Vinci</a> was both, and who is to say that <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jobs">Steve Jobs</a>, or <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Gates">Bill Gates</a> aren't artists in their field. After all artists use their inventions to create more art, so why not call them artists?</p><p>I would be remiss to not include <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0931329/">Michelle Williams </a>performance in this movie. The conflict that exists within her character shows throughout her performance. Ms Williams should be nominated also, and the Academy needs to really consider giving her an award, and I hope that does happen, but the performances in this film are stellar and it's all because of Spielberg. This is his film. It's his story, and it's a love letter to his parents.</p><p>In the end we don't need to see <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000229/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0">Spielbergs's rise to prominence</a>. We already know that story, but for two hours and 10 minutes we see how a little boy becomes one of the greatest storytellers of the 20th century, and like all Spielberg films it is mythical. For a brief moment we see how the magic is done, and we see that family winds up to be one one of the most important things in creating art & in self expression. I like to thank Mr. Spielberg for the opportunity to have a glimpse into his past & to see that us pure mortals do share similar experiences & that we can have both family & art and be successful. All in all I really liked this film & for a moment I was captivated by how Spielberg learned and became a master at moviemaker and for that I am eternally grateful & inspired in fact.</p>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-44427636730508034822022-11-14T20:59:00.003-05:002022-11-15T09:36:28.148-05:00Wakanda Forever (2022)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjR8ONSCLbbLu-dCWar43tPTx7Xg2-ZCay65wp4q_3wpAS7H2cjtlT3SomBO0RjkNH9zBxxZXKGzGuzEYVO3WDAzJB3FWSXs8D5TMPCDIGlmTJIoTBZ2Ugc_WLeTol8K03c4i8Yuc1gY14h33bx7C2QwEulVUwX9z7CHVYk1VmVdi9VMUTQWw/s1350/wakanda.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1350" data-original-width="1080" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjR8ONSCLbbLu-dCWar43tPTx7Xg2-ZCay65wp4q_3wpAS7H2cjtlT3SomBO0RjkNH9zBxxZXKGzGuzEYVO3WDAzJB3FWSXs8D5TMPCDIGlmTJIoTBZ2Ugc_WLeTol8K03c4i8Yuc1gY14h33bx7C2QwEulVUwX9z7CHVYk1VmVdi9VMUTQWw/s320/wakanda.jpg" width="256" /></a></div><br /> <p></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So the biggest release to come from Marvel Studios is "Wakanda Forever" starring <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Bassett">Angela Bassett</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letitia_Wright">Lititia Wright</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lupita_Nyong%27o">Lupita Nyongo'o</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danai_Gurira">Danai Gurira</a> & <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenoch_Huerta">Tenoch Huerta</a>. To say that the film is an ambitious foray into the Marvel Universe is an understatement. The film is directed by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Coogler">Ryan Coogler</a> who directed the first Black Panther movie with <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chadwick_Boseman">Chadwick Boseman</a> as Black Panther. Mr. Coogler to his credit did not recast Boseman's character. Both Ryan Coogler & Joe Robert Cole wrote the screenplay of the second one, and in it they tell of the Black Panther's death by an illness. After all how can you recast Chadwick Boseman? Boseman played Black Panther with such grace and charisma that it is almost impossible to think of re-casting the film. Yet life continues & for the studio needs to continues the franchise and after all business is business. Instead of permanently using Lititia character to become the Black Panther they use her character as a transition. Yes she becomes the Black Panther but she re-creates the flower that gives Black Panther his agility & strength. In the 2018 film Black Panther's nemesis Eric Killmonger played by <a href="Michael B. Jordon">Michael B. Jordon</a> destroys the flower and where it is grown. So Disney can now be assured of Black Panther throughout the coming years replacing him or her when it suits the storyline & their budget. Making movies these days is an expensive proposition and Disney who has the rights needs the franchise to continue since the original Black Panther grossed $1.38 billion worldwide. With that box office it is advantages for Disney to continue the franchise. It did hit a particular zeitgeist when it premiered in 2018. The sequel has already hit $202 million in its domestic weekend opener. So the sequel is already on its way to becoming a juggernaut in earning serious box office.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">But is the film good? That all depends. The film is rated PG-13, so like this weekend many families are going to the theater to see it. I saw it with very young children who may have not been the ideal audience to bring since they were a bit noisy, but in a way it's fun watching & hearing the young ones cheering on their hero or in this case heroine. The movie clocks in at 2 hours and 41 minutes, and it would behoove you to watch for the end-credit scene. It sets up for ALL the next Blank Panther films. In my opinion it is not a movie for very young ones to see. It was hard for a lot of them to be quiet when the quieter scenes happened. After all we were all young at once and at that young it's hard to keep young kids interested in talky dialogue. <b>BUT!</b> And I say that with a big but. It's a super hero movie. The young ones will LOVE the action. So be fore warned, but please don't get angry at the young ones they're just seeing their super hero kick some butt, and you're only young once. A really great idea would be to rent the movie theater & invite all their friends. I do believe that the theater I saw it in (<a href="https://www.amctheatres.com/rentals">AMC theaters</a>) did that for a showing, and it was closed to that particular group, which isn't too bad if you and some other families can chip in for the cost of reserving the theater.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> Back to the movie. Was it fun, yes! Was it a good story? Yes. I really liked the film as it mixed the action with a theme of meditation of loss and grief. It had meaning to anyone who has lost someone they loved and in that way the film succeeds in an unparalleled way as compared to the first film. What I did not like is the films pacing. It seemed way too long and a bit over-hyped. Surely the filmmakers could have made it more tighter. I have no problem with long movies but pacing matters and their were 3 editors involved with the editing of this film. Trust me I counted, which astounded me. I do know origin stories take a bit longer, but the original Black Panther film was 2 hours and 14 minutes. It was tighter and more focused. The length in "Wakanda Forever" may have something to do with re-imaging of the Black Panther franchise and making way for future actors & actresses to take the mantle of "The Black Panther". Ala the James Bond franchise. Hence the slower parts of this movie & what I call the soliloquy of the film. Not great for younger audiences but it certainly adds to the story and why the character's do what they do. In an era of block busters I'm sure this will help the franchise, but one cannot serve two masters. In this film we serve the story & it's corporate masters <i>(Disney/Marvel)</i>. By doing both you have an uneven mess. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">It's a neat trick that in the story the enemy <i>(Namo or Tenoch Huerta Mejía)</i> provides Shuri <i>(Letitia Wright's character)</i> the ingredient that will help her grow the flowers that create the black panther. Yet it was no secret & I saw it coming as soon as Namo handed her that bracelet. It is an imaginative and smart plot point while all at the same time it serves Disney's future plans for the franchise. I guess this lengthened the film but in no way is it better for it. The actors are ALL stellar. The dream cast was there. The makers of the film should have trusted its audience in inferring things and not explaining them to death for us. Yet I enjoyed the film.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Does that make sense? Because I can understand why it may not. Watching great actors in a story that is both heartbreaking and action packed is a difficult thing to do. Explain too much & you ruin the pacing, but don't explain enough & you loose your audience. I just felt that there was something they could have done that would have worked without loosing the films pacing & quickening the stories pace. Maybe it would have been better as two films? Letitia's character is worth exploring more, yet we only see her as a one dimensional character. Of course a more in-depth look into her grief and relationship to T'Challa would of been interesting, and would gives the film a more serious tone. Maybe use shots or scenes with Boseman & Wright's character that may have not been used in the first movie. This is of course all guess work since I have no knowledge of what they used and what they had. Maybe they did not have the material to do so. But it would make a very much more interesting movie and I believe it would have strengthened it.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">This film is also a love letter to Chadwick Boseman who passed in 2020. He was a gifted actor who was extraordinary & all who worked on this film knew that and wanted to give him a proper send off. At the end the movie we are given clips of Mr. Boseman as T'Challa/Black Panther and we all can see how wonderful an actor he was and what a loss it is for us to not have him around. The film is about sorrow and loss, and how poignant it is that we see this film nearing the end of the pandemic. The film is familiar to it's audience because it's audience has lived with loss for the past two years. "Wakanda Forever" is a film for our times & it could only have been made at this particular time and this particular moment. I think that's why I enjoyed it. I felt the pain of loss. We as a collective understand loss. The film shows this without preach to us. For an audience to identify with Wright's charter as she struggles with the death of her brother. To do all this is why the film seems off. These are all valid and complicated emotions. To fit it all these themes and narratives in one film is very hard to do, yet the film manages to do so. It just does it a bit clumsily. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So if you have a child who loves super-hero's and who enjoys their exploits go see "Wakander Forever". It's more then just a super hero movie it's a life lesson for our times. At the end of the film you will feel invigorated because just like it's characters life continues on even though some do not. That is the hardest lesson to take from this film. In the end you'll also believe: <b>WAKANDA is FOREVER</b> and Black Panther LIVES on, and after all isn't that why you came to see this film to smile and be entertained by our hero's who live to fight another day.</span></p>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-73705606091624930042022-02-03T12:26:00.001-05:002022-02-03T12:26:26.953-05:00Don't Look UP (2021)<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEg0gwDE-iJVXKCKakGIf_47iyy4UqhQ9Lgo-o43LWDr1rLMopRkdkK2PgTmgbgQjiZIn5MvJx7ZJZLl--Qcs1kuYa_LuYIsU8boNMaJ9DzdDKaRuM0EmjgKRw3Itj-hwkWSjuKq00U0BETgu2xhovaohopAVC-NjLUsM26gqR-z-txCUC5-yg=s1280" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEg0gwDE-iJVXKCKakGIf_47iyy4UqhQ9Lgo-o43LWDr1rLMopRkdkK2PgTmgbgQjiZIn5MvJx7ZJZLl--Qcs1kuYa_LuYIsU8boNMaJ9DzdDKaRuM0EmjgKRw3Itj-hwkWSjuKq00U0BETgu2xhovaohopAVC-NjLUsM26gqR-z-txCUC5-yg=s320" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p></p><p>Where do I start with this film. It tries to be another end of the world film like "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057012/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Dr. Strangelove</a>" or "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053137/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">On the Beach</a>", and it tries really hard, and there are some good parts in this film. It updates our civilization and how social media has affected us and how our politics have become toxic. I like what it does, but it throws everything in and assaults your senses. The movie runs 2 hours and 25 minutes, and is in dire need of some cuts. </p><p>The movie goes into detail showing how social media & politics & science have morphed into our culture, and why it will be our downfall. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000658/">Meryl Streep</a> plays the US President with a strong influence of the late President Trump administration. There are parts of this movie that are genius & then there are other parts that really drag on & bring the film down. I even had myself fast forward through the tedious and non consequential parts. What makes me say that those parts are inconsequential? Simple if the sequence does not advance the story and it takes you out of the film itself it's NOT needed. The performance by <a href="https://www.arianagrande.com/">Ariana Grande</a> seemed excessive. Why does the film suddenly become a music video? The director puts everything in it, and it hurst the film. The film is about the end of the world, and it so desperately tries to mimic or become Kubrick's "Dr Strangelove....." It is no where near that entertaining or profound. </p><p>How the film ends is as good as it could be, and I like the line that <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000138/">Leonardo DiCaprio</a> says: "We had everything didn't we?". I also love the post credit ending of the doomed humans landing on a planet. My son and I laughed hard, but to wait so long for it seemed so wrong. The film meanders a bit and it just does not hold my attention or interest. After all it's a film about the end of the world. How hard is it to make it interesting or not exploitative. </p><p>What would make the film more interesting would have been to get more detail on some characters and make them more three dimensional. Not cut out cardboard one dimensional characters which they are. I know it's a comedy but in the end I felt nothing for these people. </p><p>Don't Look Up has some interesting things to say, but it gets in its own way and in the end we don't care. The film has an unusual look and it has its merits, but its worst sin is it tries to be too much and it just seems like the filmmakers are throwing everything at us and we've seen this already, only strangely we've seen it on our news programs, and there is nothing new here. Just same old same old, and that we're all doomed, which is depressing. How many of you want to see a film that makes you sad because some of it is true. The slow motion death of the planet seemed dragged out, and unnecessary. More flair than plot point. Like I said in the beginning it's in need of some serious cutting.</p><p>Kubrick's "Dr Strangelove...." at least had more gravitas than this film. Also the performances are a lot better, but if you like seeing the end of the world brought to you by our current events you may find this amusing. I just found it sad, and nothing new here. But at least the quote "bad guys" get theirs in the end. That redeems the film in my eyes. Because at the end of the world no one gets out alive. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.</p><div class="TzHB6b cLjAic LMRCfc" data-hveid="CC8QAA" data-ved="2ahUKEwj8i5bR_eP1AhVmknIEHXgGBE8Q1IgCKAB6BAgvEAA" jsdata="PhoHd;_;CAJfW0" style="background-color: white; color: #202124; font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; margin: 0px 0px 44px;"><div jsname="xQjRM"><div class="sATSHe"><div class="LuVEUc CGCvRb B03h3d P6OZi V14nKc EN1f2d ptcLIOszQJu__wholepage-card wp-ms" data-hveid="CC0QAA"><div class="UDZeY OTFaAf" style="font-size: 14px;"><div class="wDYxhc NFQFxe oHglmf xzPb7d" data-md="32" lang="en-US" style="clear: none;"><div class="kno-mrg kno-swp" data-hveid="CBEQAQ" id="media_result_group" style="overflow: visible; position: relative;"><div class="kno-fiu kno-liu"></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-64590069245090808342021-12-28T12:07:00.005-05:002021-12-29T10:25:16.794-05:00The Matrix Resurrections R 2021 ‧ Sci-fi/Action ‧ 2h 28m<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEilQnHDSK04VOyGZMUvfCxZRsPt3bmQtp7dcxl6MXMe6uhn4ObJtNz32WW0l1xusrJaWi3d3z2jFapQZkhTid5x9zO7WF-3e3CnIUB8OsjhSWTnWw9mtzBnc65UGkxeBppUS9I3cKU-XbQz5IuI7LWmSWRmxlvEEDRDONQu1uW_qpxoX8G8iw=s4096" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="4096" data-original-width="2764" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEilQnHDSK04VOyGZMUvfCxZRsPt3bmQtp7dcxl6MXMe6uhn4ObJtNz32WW0l1xusrJaWi3d3z2jFapQZkhTid5x9zO7WF-3e3CnIUB8OsjhSWTnWw9mtzBnc65UGkxeBppUS9I3cKU-XbQz5IuI7LWmSWRmxlvEEDRDONQu1uW_qpxoX8G8iw=s320" width="216" /></a></div><br /><p></p><p>Okay first of all I have to say I liked <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10838180/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Matrix: Resurrections</a>. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I can really say I enjoyed the film. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0905154/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">Lana Wachowski</a> creates a hip, smart follow up to the Matrix trilogy. It was inevitable that Warner Bothers was going to do a follow up to the Matrix with or without its creators. When the studio learned that Ms Wachowski was interested in doing a 4th Matrix the studio didn't blink and so they gave it to her, and why not. Lana Wachowski was one of its creators and in what better hands to have it in than one of the films franchise original creators. <a href="Lilly Wachowski">Lilly Wachowski</a> didn't want to participate and felt she had done that already and was not interested in resurrecting the franchise. That being said I think Lana Wachowski came up with an interesting premise for the film.</p><p>I hear in many reviews that the film is "meta" and yes that is a good summing up of the film, but it does a disservice to the film. The original film "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10838180/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">The Matrix</a>" was a film that blew the doors off the digital speak back in 1999. The Internet was in its infancy and yet the movies creators saw something that we now know as "alternate reality". The story was an allegory of the times we had just been through. Everybody remembers the go-go 80's, and the consumer driven 90's and the film was set in that time or so we thought. The Wachowski's did something interesting, and just said that "what if" it all was all an illusion and that we were being controlled by our machine overloads because we were being used as batteries. It was a mind blowing concept, and one that was ingenious. By the movies popularity of the first movie we began to see the beginning of a franchise, and for two more sequels we saw the continuation of the story till the deaths of our hero's in "Matrix: Revolutions". I find the two sequels interesting, yet I was disappointed in the end. After all we want our hero's to survive and be victorious. In the end their deaths were a bitter pill to swallow (no pun intended), but its creators felt that that was where they were taking the franchise & the franchise seemed to have run its course. And for awhile Warner brothers could make money on the trilogy by packaging the films as a box set, and so everybody was happy, but like everything to a studio a franchise is a money maker, and they always looked to make more of these films. I believe there were two animated movies about the Matrix world that the studio put out, but gained no traction. So why not have one of its original creators on board. It makes sense and all I can say is thank God they had that sense.</p><p>Lana Wachowski's film is brilliant, and NOT because it's a copy of the original film. It's a derivative of the first film and its two other sequels. It does NOT ignore the franchise. It embraces it in fact, and flips it on its head. It's a trip back to the Matrix, but it a different Matrix, and the one thing that Ms Wachowski does is add to the mythos of the film by including things that are representative in our world today and that would be social media, & gaming. In the last Matrix film "Matrix: Revolutions" the machines called a truce between the humans & the machines and it is Neo who helps the "Deus Ex Machina" defeat the Smith's who are running rampage through the Matrix. In the end there is a truce between the humans and the Machines. It even opens the door that it is NOT the last time we have seen Neo.</p><p>Matrix Resurrections is a smarter re-boot of the franchise which I'm sure Warner Brothers wanted while still keeping to the original creators intent. I do intend to see the film again and yeah I did see it on HBO Max, and it did not ruin it for me. I am a bit curious on how it looks in the theaters. The cinematography is not done by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0691084/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">Bill Pope</a>, but <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0557103/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">Daniele Massaccesi</a> & <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001799/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">John Toll</a> share cinematography for the film. Both do an extraordinary job and one where I did not notice a big departure from the original trilogy.</p><p>I could go into this film further, but there is one critic who did it a lot better and so I'll link his video here. I agree completely with his premise, and he does a really good deep dive into the film. So much so I think it needs to be seen more. I enjoyed the movie and thought about it after seeing it It had some interesting ideas in it, and after all it was quite entertaining with all the winks and nods it was giving to its audience. See the movie for yourself and decide. Please check out <a href="https://www.youtube.com/c/ScreenCrush">Screen Crush's </a>review:</p><p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FNidbzzPVt8" width="320" youtube-src-id="FNidbzzPVt8"></iframe></div><br /><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-47056060973432022322021-12-23T13:06:00.000-05:002021-12-23T13:06:03.599-05:00Spiderman: No Way Home (2021)<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiCx1A6UqLkG90HEhWUbObWnxem6bGBeZSTqXYYW-XGfdLkDiAKI3riRCWlkuKSJGrGXFKNxOEhISlg5dwFu6lKNTzPiQOghPnEmTbOGZuzHvbLxSyK87ca60w3OP3mI1YZueF-mUywZeozO1VhCbnfPK3uOwXfdbwRMXDY5iw6VNNHgHRyPw=s4000" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="4000" data-original-width="2699" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiCx1A6UqLkG90HEhWUbObWnxem6bGBeZSTqXYYW-XGfdLkDiAKI3riRCWlkuKSJGrGXFKNxOEhISlg5dwFu6lKNTzPiQOghPnEmTbOGZuzHvbLxSyK87ca60w3OP3mI1YZueF-mUywZeozO1VhCbnfPK3uOwXfdbwRMXDY5iw6VNNHgHRyPw=s320" width="216" /></a></div><br /> <p></p><p>It's been awhile since reviewing movies, and so I figured it was time to return to something I love. I hope to do this a bit more, so my apologies for not being too consistent, but hopefully I will rectify that in the coming months.</p><p><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10872600/">Spiderman: No Way Home</a> is a film that was destined to be seen by a family that grew up with its previous films. My oldest introduction to the Marvel universe was in back in 2008 when my oldest and I saw <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0371746/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0">Ironman</a>. My youngest entry in the Marvel universe was <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0458339/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_6">Captain America: The first Avenger</a> back in 2011. It became a family event to go see all of them, and it would always be a memorable one for both my wife and I. The Marvel universe has been ingrained into our DNA, but that's because I'm a Marvel fan. Always was & always will be. My gateway to the Marvel universe was "The Fantastic Four" & "Spiderman". Two comics that I bought and read throughout my childhood. This is not to poo poo the DC universe. I'm a big fan of the Superman & Wonder women films. But for a lot of us the Marvel universe is what we grew up on, so there was a build in audience</p><p>Spiderman: No Way Home is a film that also is a springboard for Marvel Studios next film "Dr. Strange and the Multiverse". Marvel Studios along with Disney studios have positioned themselves as an integral part of the Marvel universe. With such shows as WanderVision & Daredevil the studios keep the Marvel Universe moving forward, and they become an intricate weave to storylines within the Marvel universe. Each of Marvel Studio's film is a bigger & bigger event. Spiderman: No Way Home is a movie that now combines Marvel Studio's, Disney Studios & now Sony studio's. It was Sony that released the original Spiderman movies, and it is Sony that owns the rights to them, but with Marvel & Disney studios permission they use other characters from the Marvel universe which Marvel holds. It's an intricate balance of the Marvel franchise between studios, while at the same time promoting the Marvel brand, which Disney owns.</p><p>Seeing it the other week with the family became a family event which we all shared with other fans. It is this reason why the movie is doing so well even in a pandemic. The communal viewing of the film by fans is what makes this movie such an event. Sharing it with other fans is an experience we all like, and to have the many generational Spidermen be involved and be a crucial plot point in the movie makes this a family event. </p><p>I've heard that this is a fan favorite film, and I have to concur on that, but what makes it extraordinary is that it works. Marvel Studios throws everything into the mix including Sony's past Spiderman movies. By doing so it creates an unusual viewing experience for the family & the fans. People have their favorites, and her is past, and present coming together. It also sets up the next film in the Marvel universe to come out next year and that is Dr. Strange & the Multiverse, which will tie in Wanda from WandaVision. It's ingenious & we all have to thank Kevin Feige, the president of Marvel Studios, for this It is his vision that has made this all possible. That plus a hundred different lawyers writing contracts between Sony, Disney, & Marvel I assume.</p><p>The film works and builds on the Marvel universe. It works with audience's too as the box office receipts confirm it. Spiderman: No Way Home is a movie in which you bring your family and friends together and see because you're a fan. </p><p>Marvel Studios began unfurling their storylines was back in 2007, and it's only grown with time. Marvel's release of Avengers Infinity Wars & Endgame have doubled down on strengthening the Marvel universe. It includes elements from the comics, which have been around since the 1960's and contains a whole fan base, which is its own built in audience for the movies.</p><p>Go see the latest Marvel Studio film. Spiderman: No Way Home is a film that opens the Marvel universe further for more characters from the comics to emerge. It's a fun romp through the Marvel universe that Spidey occupies, and its funny, touching, sad, and inspiring all rolled into one. Just like the original comics and because of that it makes the film a fun filled ride, and an inspiring piece of cinema.</p><p> </p>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-15598081454587172342020-02-03T12:43:00.001-05:002020-02-03T13:51:18.323-05:00Star Wars IX: The Rise of Skywalker (2019)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEju1EKRX46Xw3WIQ6mVqfIEc-MFqOyWofw9Y-7kO_Xtbk1qM9sS3VxW9QYxP1PwMAu7G1vEx0B1oJPG0XgQSP2yb0mSnOuts18hpY2LTZ3afElDpt6wxCvScVQb6f-NQtjGPQnC/s1600/star-wars-9-rise-of-skywalker-.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="350" data-original-width="590" height="189" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEju1EKRX46Xw3WIQ6mVqfIEc-MFqOyWofw9Y-7kO_Xtbk1qM9sS3VxW9QYxP1PwMAu7G1vEx0B1oJPG0XgQSP2yb0mSnOuts18hpY2LTZ3afElDpt6wxCvScVQb6f-NQtjGPQnC/s320/star-wars-9-rise-of-skywalker-.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
I took the family to see this late December, and I enjoyed myself, but I was experiencing several emotions while viewing the film. One emotion is of familiarity. Having grown up with the Star Wars films and it having such a profound experience on me as a young teenager I come full circle now as I view it with my own children. I was glad to see the old cast again even if it was briefly. It connected the film for me, and as well I enjoyed the adventure that the characters were on. The music and the effect were all fine, and why would it not be since ILM was still involved. It was a new cast for as new generation, and maybe thats where it gets emotional. I saw Star Wars back in 1979, and it profoundly changed me and lite my imagination on fire. I knew that I wanted to become involved in filmmaking. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000184/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">George Lucas</a> was my major influencer and I knew his work such as "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066434/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0">THX1138</a>" and "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069704/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0">American Graffiti</a>". To make a long story short I looked forward to the sequels, and the way filmmaking was changing.<br />
<br />
Its now over 40 years later and I am with my own family seeing the end of the chapter in the Star Wars saga, and I get misty eyed. I am older, and its more behind me then it is in front of me, and I see the youthful ambition and excitement in my own children. It's like I have to take a breath and say where did it all go? I'm sure others say it as well. It's not an unusual phenomenon.<br />
<br />
So how is the movie you say? After all isn't this a review of the film. After all I did establish this blog way back when for reviews, and all things about filmmaking.<br />
<br />
I have to say <b>YES!</b> The movie is fun and exciting. The critical side of me says that the story is weak, and that Disney brought back an old villain when originally Lucas never really wrote it that way, or saw it that way. My oldest as well as my youngest even commented on it, and they have become a Star Wars aficionado's.<br />
<br />
It was said that Lucas had a outline for his Star Wars epic saga, and it seems Disney threw that out. Maybe they thought it was too dark, or that it didn't fit what they interpreted as the Star War's universe. Whatever the reason the movie is weaker then the original films, and in fact makes you enjoy Star Wars I, II, and III better. Lucas seemed to have a better vision on the earlier Star Wars universe then maybe he did in post "Return of the Jedi" time.<br />
<br />
We'll never know. But the film is worth seeing and I challenge anyone to say that they did not enjoy the rollercoaster ride of the film. The film is structured like that. In fact the film comes out of the gate quickly and doesn't disappoint in the action.<br />
<br />
Is the movie a nice wrap up of the series? <b>YES</b>. Is it emotional for us original Star Wars fans? <b>YES!</b><br />
<br />
Going forward the ball is in <a href="https://www.disneyplus.com/welcome/subscribe?cid=DSS-Search-Google-71700000059616279-&s_kwcid=AL!8468!3!396209985966!b!!g!!%2Bthe%20%2Bmandalorian&gclid=Cj0KCQiApt_xBRDxARIsAAMUMu_eVvwOn3G3z-QGShxivCdHad6D9htSiyeSv_adyrOS9OaN-QzfBz8aAq-KEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds">Disney's</a> court to create interesting storylines and interesting characters in the Star Wars universe. If "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8111088/">the Mandalorian</a>" which is streaming on Disney is any is any example on what Disney wants to do they may be going in the right direction. Time will tell. All I can say is Disney better not get sloppy, and just produce product for the money. Because money is guaranteed only if they stay faithful to the original series.<br />
<br />
But back to the film. "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2527338/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0">Star Wars IX: the rise of Skywalker</a>" is a nice send off. One that can be emotional for us older fans, but none the less satisfying. See it with your family you'll get a bigger kick seeing it through their eyes because it will remind you of when you first saw the original Star Wars back in 1977.<br />
<br />Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-1877765370936287552019-10-21T16:13:00.001-04:002019-10-21T16:13:05.875-04:00Joker (2019)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkY9sJycEgYVAqJSsE0SwIMFeFTaugNpd1owc-AF0AQA4zLN5nmDBrDDWQoU4A5ioSGxplG50liMrfAoOY5nYO8MWIGQ61_5LNfz-uSpJIG71MKjJnGnMHXO6SByXkV_kSN9fk/s1600/Joker.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="464" data-original-width="840" height="176" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkY9sJycEgYVAqJSsE0SwIMFeFTaugNpd1owc-AF0AQA4zLN5nmDBrDDWQoU4A5ioSGxplG50liMrfAoOY5nYO8MWIGQ61_5LNfz-uSpJIG71MKjJnGnMHXO6SByXkV_kSN9fk/s320/Joker.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
It seems that the movie "Joker" has hit a nerve with the audiences. Based loosely on DC comic's arch nemesis to Batman the Joker the film is rooted more to our past history of violence then it is to the comics. The film seems to be doing well, and it is amazing that Warner Brothers actually made a R rated film based on a comic book villain. But then again the movie seems to be a bit of a time capsule of what we are going through presently in our political and social scene. This is only my own opinion but a movies such as "Joker" could only come out now in an era where hate, and senselessness to violence towards each other are more the norm then it was in the past.<br />
<br />
The filmmaker sets the film in the fictitious city of Gotham, but in reality the film was shot in New York city. This is no mistake. Only in a city of 8 million plus can we get the feel and look of despair and loneliness through the NYC landscape. I do not want to denigrate the city that I love so much, but the filmmaker does an outstanding job in creating a society on the brink of lawlessness, and where violence is everywhere. It literally conjures scenes up from the early to late 70's of NYC.<br />
<br />
There is a garbage strike, and the city is awash with garbage. Todd Philips does a great job in creating a rich and dense atmospheric film. It sells the film, and creates a world where the Joker can be created. Along with it's gothic and old infrastructure NYC stands in for Gotham quite nicely. It is no mistake that the filmmaker doesn't hide the fact it is NYC. The images and sequences are almost ripped from old headlines of NYC in the 70's where the city was going broke, garbage was all about, and the city was awash with old tenement buildings in disrepair.<br />
<br />
I find it ironic that after three weeks out the movie "Joker" is number 2 in box office receipts . I believe the film has resonated with its audience, but better yet it's GOOD filmmaking of the highest caliber. "Rambo's: Final Blood"has grossed $83.1 million at the box office time as of October 20th while the "Joker" has earned $737.5 million as of the same date. Why? Both are different films, but "Joker" seems to have hit a nerve.<br />
<br />
It also has a stellar performance by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001618/?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm">Joaquin Phoenix</a> as Arthur Fleck aka the Joker. The cinematography by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0003394/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cr15">Lawrence Sher</a> is extraordinary, and worth an Oscar nomination. I do feel that the film's atmosphere contributes to it's quality.<br />
<br />
The violence is overly hyped. Nothing no one else has seen or done before. The film deals with mental illness, but the Joker is a sociopath. The film does try to address why he Arthur became the Joker, but is his mental illness from his environment or was he just born that way? Through the picture we find out that Arthur had been abused and his mom had suffered from delusions & stood silent to the abuse Arthur was receiving from her boyfriends. Is it nature or nurture? The film seems to say that it is the environment that shapes the individual, but does it? It has been a question that has perplexed psychologists for years. The movie does not answer that. It only provides you with how Arthur grew up, and by doing so we become sympathetic to Arthur. <br />
<br />
Joker is a villain, we feel sympathy for him and it is those feelings that make the film a strong comment on violence or our love for retribution. After all we want to believe that Arthur will get better, but we are repulsed by his actions. Todd Phillips & Scott Silver do an admirable job at writing a screenplay that straddles the razors edge of pure insanity and murderous rage while at the same time sympathizing with Arthur's plight.<br />
<br />
Is "Joker" an easy film? NO. Is it a film that should be merited for its technique and it's message. Thought the film takes place in the 80's it feels later, and it deals with social media without ever mentioning it. Throughout the film characters say that it's a bit crazy out there, and that's why everybody is so mean and nasty. I believe that's a comment on todays social media, and our politics where everyone screams at each other, but nobody listens. <br />
<br />
I sincerely believe "Joker" is a byproduct of our times. It's well made, and ugly, yet in the ugliness their is something familiar. I applaud the filmmakers at making a film that tries to deal with several issues, yet doesn't try to preach to us. Another film this reminds me of is "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099763/?ref_=nv_sr_4?ref_=nv_sr_4">Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer"</a>. In that film as well as in "Joker" there is nothing redeeming about the main character, yet we seem compelled to watch.<br />
<br />
This is not a movie for everyone. Yet I praise Warner Brothers for having the guts to make it in the first place. Unusual film? Absolutely, but worth seeing if not just for the performances, but as well as the atmosphere.Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-14155104132782357902019-09-17T14:46:00.003-04:002019-09-17T15:21:14.148-04:00MOVO VXR10 & MOVO PR 1 Mount<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="300" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bRrRWBzGLJA" width="400"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZ_cZtOuWlCelCjNt582LrvWiAETiA2G0b1LCURmU6Il0pOUvCIceav6fz52U_Qfw-mHhLfCftsUUfoXyHCBg85sJzZhfcq__FywELqR5Sstgy3uBG5czwFyewVh0l4h4eztv0/s1600/download.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="225" data-original-width="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZ_cZtOuWlCelCjNt582LrvWiAETiA2G0b1LCURmU6Il0pOUvCIceav6fz52U_Qfw-mHhLfCftsUUfoXyHCBg85sJzZhfcq__FywELqR5Sstgy3uBG5czwFyewVh0l4h4eztv0/s1600/download.jpeg" /></a></div>
The above video is a promotional video from <a href="https://www.movophoto.com/">MOVO</a>. It is a game changer for vloggers and youTubers in creating content. It's also a great idea for shooting interviews, and activity.<br />
<br />
Long ago I had companies ask me what type of portable camera can we get to help interview people from across the county. Back then we used small cannon cameras that could be shipped to the location. Now <b>ANYONE</b> can do it, and with the <a href="https://www.movophoto.com/products/movo-vxr10-universal-cardioid-condenser-video-microphone">MOVO VXR10</a> you can get great sound. Along with the <a href="https://www.movophoto.com/products/pr1-smarphone-video-rig?_pos=1&_sid=cb02511f9&_ss=r">MOVO PR 1</a> mount you can shoot anywhere you want and be successful in getting images without having a teach along with you.<br />
<br />
The MOVO VXR10 works with both iPhones and Android phones. You just need a different attachment which it already comes from. The MOVO PR 1 mount is a mount that you can secure your phone with, and get a pretty good stabilized shot. It's also great to mount the microphone on top of it. You may even mount a light on the mount as well.<br />
<br />
This is portability at its best. If you need a run and gun interview this set-up is the way to go. The MOVO VXR10 is affordable as well. The cost is about $55. The mount is about $25 - $30.<br />
<br />
Its affordable and a great choice for those quick interviews, or those talking head shots.<br />
<br />
I hope to have it someday soon, and will post examples tests I will do. In the meantime look at some of these reviews.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="300" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/epTJYqUzAEY" width="400"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="300" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vAIazLSZ5YM" width="400"></iframe><br />
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="300" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gaeU3n5805U" width="400"></iframe>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-4847915660866041622019-07-19T16:33:00.003-04:002019-07-19T16:33:55.259-04:00Nymphomaniac Vol 1 & 2 (2013)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7NxPeohdNj0doW6xFNr9niIKB8pydSNCFfCUeS3Ub62iZoQddcAms0sB_ieu90sEgU_pG9p64eq5FL8hwsiqLoTypkJJb06i1l_Iucu5dTdN_0xBLLeU8zWsVxOpAnMmJsAe5/s1600/nymph1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="563" data-original-width="1000" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7NxPeohdNj0doW6xFNr9niIKB8pydSNCFfCUeS3Ub62iZoQddcAms0sB_ieu90sEgU_pG9p64eq5FL8hwsiqLoTypkJJb06i1l_Iucu5dTdN_0xBLLeU8zWsVxOpAnMmJsAe5/s320/nymph1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
I had been interested in seeing these two films for awhile. I do like some of <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001885/?ref_=tt_ov_dr">Lars von Trier</a> early work and find him as a director interesting. I was interested in the the Nymphomaniac series because of the subject matter, and who was in it. First off the actress <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001250/?ref_=tt_cl_t1">Charlotte Gainsbourg</a> does a phenomenal job and she is captivating throughout the two films. It is her performance that I found to be true, and honest. Mr Trier does not go for the vulgar. He shows an individual who is complex and a bit broken. How she is interacts with others throughout the film is what made me want to continue with the films. It also shows how Mr Trier and Ms Gainsbourg trusted each other through the production process. Surely with such a title the film would go into a more exploitative theme, but under the direction of Mr Trier's he involves us (the audience) in the character of Joe. <br />
<br />
We are subjected to many relationships and scenes where Ms Gainsbourg is exposed and through them we feel empathy for her. She is nude for a lot of the film, and yet I felt the way she played it was empathetic to her character. Of course I'm sure that this empathy and this de-construction of the character is in no way accidental. It is Mr Trier who provide Ms Gainsbourg the freedom, and the safety to explore the characters darker persona.<br />
<br />
Mr. Lars von Trier has a way with actors. He gets them to do and and say things within character that we believe, and it makes his films a lot stronger. The performance is riveting and captivating. Mr Trier creates a world that is misogynistic and after watching both films I happen to agree with his assessment. How Mr. Trier does this is by showing us how our main character is treated throughout the film. <br />
<br />
Again it's Ms Gainsbourg's performance that sells the film and she should be applauded in trusting her director not to be exploitative but instead just the opposite. Maybe some audiences were put off by the length of the film and the sexuality it deals with. After all even though the film is about a nymphomaniac I never felt that the filmmaker's were exploiting the actresses sexuality.<br />
<br />
Both films are an interesting look at what society thinks is sexual. In the film it isn't sexuality that the filmmaker deals with it is of compulsion, and obsession.<br />
<br />
If you're uncomfortable with nudity, or sexual situations taken to extreme then the film is not for you. The length alone I suspect turns away people. What the film is is a exploration in the human condition when that human being is different then what we consider normal.<br />
<br />
The film made me appreciate the director, and interested me in his other films. such as "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087280/?ref_=nm_flmg_wr_31">Element of the Crime</a>", <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0276919/?ref_=nm_flmg_wr_18">Dogville</a>", and the most recent "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4003440/?ref_=nm_flmg_wr_2">The House that Jack Built</a>".<br />
<br />
Check it out if you have time, and watch it in increments if you want. Viewing the film this way seemed to work for me but I'm sure it's not what the director had intended. To me it shows the strength of the performance alone by the actress which held me to the end of the film. Ms Gainsbourg does an exceptional performance here, and is one that sticks with you way after you've finished the film. Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-3023042978990703062019-05-24T13:57:00.002-04:002019-05-24T13:57:34.009-04:00Avenger's EndGame (2019)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi74zu6_j8BJCyW5HIv63y3IAVaWDDj1dkVBzBxATouIVZ3-sJDRXM_Rw5gJla-vG1QcOAbh4-bmGo8Z4uycReBQYfZJNNNWqdeW0hxAZtFC10dt6qOVDBzZt8lTg5w3cf2CJvQ/s1600/avengers-endgame-sign-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi74zu6_j8BJCyW5HIv63y3IAVaWDDj1dkVBzBxATouIVZ3-sJDRXM_Rw5gJla-vG1QcOAbh4-bmGo8Z4uycReBQYfZJNNNWqdeW0hxAZtFC10dt6qOVDBzZt8lTg5w3cf2CJvQ/s320/avengers-endgame-sign-2.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Okay you've heard by now this movie is doing fantastic business. The studio has passed the two billion mark worldwide, and it's still growing.<br />
<br />
I'm also sure you've heard all the spoilers now. Amazing now that we have to contend with "spoiler" alerts now. I mean what would Hitchcock of done with "Psycho"? I remember the campaign back then had people NOT to tell the ending to the people coming out of the theater. Now you're a tweet away from making that happen.<br />
<br />
But I digress. So how is the film? One word "FUN!"<br />
<br />
If you're a fan of Marvel, and you've seen most if not all the movies you'll love this film. I can only imagine the box-set coming out for this. It would be huge. <br />
<br />
Now if you're not a fan then this is not the movie for you. Clocking in over a little over 3 hours long it certainly does not feel like 3 hours, and that's a good thing. The filmmakers <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0751577/?ref_=tt_ov_dr">Anthony Russo</a>, and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0751648/?ref_=tt_ov_dr">Joe Russo</a> do an extraordinary job at putting all the pieces together for this epic movie. I mean epic in the sense that the film is not only a part 2 to "Avengers: Infinity War", but it a culmination of 12 films which all started with the movie "Ironman" way back in 2008.<br />
<br />
So if you watch all the films since that time "Avengers: Endgame" is the sum of all these films. In the other films we are introduced to the characters that eventually play a part in the film. Each of the films had a post credit scene which clues in the audience to what was coming up. It was sort of a coming attraction of things to come just like the old serials in the 40's and 50's.<br />
<br />
It is that type of filmmaking that makes Endgame so fascinating and so unique. Also the movie becomes an event. It started selling out even before the movie was out through pre-sales. Marvel Studios and now Disney did something unique, yet so very familiar and that was give us a throw-back to those days of serials. <br />
<br />
Back in the day those serials were made cheap and as long as they contained action and adventure it's audience never cared about continuity or even script plot holes, but nowadays visuals need to astound us, hence the unbelievable images through special effects and CGI.<br />
<br />
All in all it's a good film, and if you've seen the other films you'll be doubly pleased. My son kept on leaning into me and telling me about the references to other films he and I have seen.<br />
<br />
See it with the family. If you have younger ones all the better. It's great seeing their reaction to what's happening on the screen.<br />
<br />
The last film of this phase in the Marvel universe will be ending when "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2250912/">Spiderman: Homecoming</a>" comes out. I am told it tells us more about after the movie Endgame. So there is one more film that needs to come out before the box-set comes out, but I'm sure Marvel & Disney are working on that as you read this.<br />
<br />
Fun all the way around, and a great achievement for the filmmakers to complete. Go see it and as my favorite writer <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0498278/">Stan Lee</a> would say "Nuff Said".Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-68313620668508414432019-04-07T11:28:00.001-04:002019-04-07T11:28:23.887-04:00Shazam (2019)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMNk83dwYINZfz6AH8Q9TkUnYghUfwkrbBF0MviCZt0q7NuSpRYJ78EpcCD5SrHA5sSYyof50H0c_gfB7bYkZmdnLAade2XVj5NI1WB3aN0xxtJbDSk81vDJcyNiN1iM7uSwoS/s1600/Shazam+pic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="507" data-original-width="760" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMNk83dwYINZfz6AH8Q9TkUnYghUfwkrbBF0MviCZt0q7NuSpRYJ78EpcCD5SrHA5sSYyof50H0c_gfB7bYkZmdnLAade2XVj5NI1WB3aN0xxtJbDSk81vDJcyNiN1iM7uSwoS/s320/Shazam+pic.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Went to see the latest superhero movie, and was pleasantly surprised. The mix of drama and comedy works for this film. It works because our superhero is a 14 year old boy in a hulking big body. That is the charm of the movie, and it's theme is family, which isn't a bad theme to have. Shot in Toronto filling in for Philadelphia the filmmakers create a good illusion of the city. The filmmakers made sure they capture all the iconic Philadelphia landmarks and used them in their process shots. I'm very skeptical when it comes to substituting cities with other cities because the filmmakers got a better deal in the city they were shooting in, but here it doesn't detract from the fun.<br />
<br />
Though I would really like if Pennsylvania get's its act together and offer bigger tax credit to studios and filmmakers. Don't they know for every dollar spent in the city or town they get like 3 or 4 dollars back? But I digress.<br />
<br />
The film is a fun origin story about a superhero created by magic. It even references the other DC comic universe such as Badman, and Superman, yet the film stands on its own and you don't have to see the other DC films to enjoy the film.<br />
<br />
The filmmakers even poke fun at comic book dramatics such as when the villain gives his speech and out superhero can't hear it because their far away from each other. Pretty funny and you can see the filmmakers we're having fun.<br />
<br />
But what the film hammers home is that the core to ones strength is family. A family that you create. A un-traditional family made up of people you care and love, but may not be related. That's a pretty cool message to say especially in these times where we're all so divisive. It's like a breath of fresh air, and I have to say that all the actors in this film do a great job in their performances. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1157048/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t1">Zachary Levi </a>does a remarkable job as <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0448115/fullcredits">Shazam,</a> and he looks and behaves like a 14 year old boy would if he were inside a big mans body. The results are hilarious.<br />
<br />
I ill not talk about the plot. I hate spoilers, so I just suggest you go see the film and enjoy the moments. It's a fun film, and one that you can take your family to. All in all good film, and very entertaining. Oh! and stay for the credits all the way through. There are two clips one that sets up a sequel, and the other is a nudge to other superhero movies (wink~wink~nudge~nudge).<br />
<br />
And to the filmmakers. Please film here in Philadelphia when it comes time for the sequel. It will look so much better I promise. Let's just hope Pennsylvania gets its act together and pass a tax credit for filmmakers and studios. Even though it did not detract from the movie it would have been so much cooler and better to see Philadelphia and it's citizens up on screen. There is a tribute to even Rocky in the film, but being there and showing it in a process shot are two different things. It's like the film "Moonlight" with Cher. Shot in Toronto but takes place in New York. Never works for me and really hurts the film. Could have been such a better film.<br />
<br />
So filmmakers think about that when you make your next film and set it someplace iconic. Film the story where the story takes place. Please!Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-20649411672397969892019-04-02T17:04:00.001-04:002023-09-15T18:25:33.827-04:00Mama Mia!: Here We Go Again (2018)<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEip33fBbhO-SVknDD85zbT3eAw_rlFWa_ROiuxwbqm4PyZywSQ5bITrl0GX5gvxXt59_f31MnT7iW_Rn9JpS6ULim5Nac5Cm-LKfUUt5rq7iDDYd_KEjmt0gtVwFcHH9hOzwtNG/s1600/MamaMI2.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="399" data-original-width="600" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEip33fBbhO-SVknDD85zbT3eAw_rlFWa_ROiuxwbqm4PyZywSQ5bITrl0GX5gvxXt59_f31MnT7iW_Rn9JpS6ULim5Nac5Cm-LKfUUt5rq7iDDYd_KEjmt0gtVwFcHH9hOzwtNG/s320/MamaMI2.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
So Universal Studios decided to cash in on the original Mama Mia! and try a second go at it with a sequel of sorts. I really liked the first one. In fact my entire family loves the film. We find ourselves singing along to the film, and enjoy watching the film unfold, so why does the sequel partially fail when the original kicks butt every time you watch it? Easy. The second film is nothing but a rehash of the first with other people singing the songs. There are a few new songs in the film, but a lot of the first songs are rehashed and when they are sung it feels like the filmmakers are just trying to elicit emotions you had for the first movie. It all feels forced.<br />
<br />
Now don't get me wrong. I did succumb to some emotions, but only because that was towards the end of the film. The death of <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000658/?ref_=nv_sr_1">Meryl Streep's</a> character is handled very emotionally towards the end when <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1086543/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">Amanda Seyfried</a> and Meryl Streep's sing a duet together "My Love, My life". The scene will have you misty eyed it did me, so in a way the movie works in eliciting some strong emotions, but what I found as its weakness was that it did not introduce us to what befell Meryl Streep's character. Her struggle, and the grief that befell Sam (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000112/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">Pierce Brosnan</a>) her husband at the end of the the first film. Of course that would make the movie a completely different film, but I think it would be a stronger one then the one they have.<br />
<br />
We already know how the young Donna met her three paramours, and that she decided that her baby (Sophie) was more important to her then her career. We all have heard this and yet the sequel plays it all out. The movie is about loss, and family no matter if they are biologic or not. Families come in all shapes and sizes, and it is the love for one another that makes each family special. The duet together cements that feeling. Daughter (Sophie) honoring her mother by having her child, and building a new family.<br />
<br />
Sure it is fun seeing the young Donna played by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4141252/?ref_=nv_sr_1">Lily James</a>. The young Rosie and Tanya (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4061475/?ref_=nv_sr_3">Alexa Davis</a>, and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4391137/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1">Jessica Keenan Wynn</a>) are also fantastic, but what if we saw why young Donna decided to give it all up. Why was she so conflicted. She was a free spirit, but when confronted with pregnancy she embraces her destiny to have Sophie and leave show business.<br />
<br />
There is so much the filmmakers could have done to make this better then the original and give the sequel some meat, but instead it feels like it was crafted by committee. The studio had the rights to some ABBA songs already so they used them, and added a few more. It feels repetitive, and almost like you're watching a bad copy of the original. That's the problem with the film. Only at the end do we feel how much the loss of Donna is felt, and that Sophie and Donna share similar fates, but are drawn closer by the experience. For me its too late. I wanted to see more of the mother and daughter relationship, and how the loss of one affects the other, and yet in the end Sophie comes out triumphant.<br />
<br />
Like I said in the end the film turns itself around, and I don't know anyone who won't be touched by the ending. I just feel that there were moments lost in the film where and it could have been more profound then the original . Maybe it would be more of a tear jerker but it would have been more powerful then the original, and when making a sequel one shoots high because you have a higher mark to reach with your audience. Here it feels the filmmakers punted the ball.<br />
<br />
Cher is fantastic, and her song "Fernando" is a great set piece, but the one thing my wife pointed out was that in the first film Meryl Streep's Character Donna tells everyone that her grandmother died, so why does she visit her at the end. Is it just an excuse to introduce Cher? Probably so. Aside from that Cher kills it, and does a great rendition of the ABBA classic. If nothing go see it for that even though it makes no sense that she appears at the end. The film could have been so much better, and there are some elements in it where we can see that, but the filmmakers didn't follow through. The movie is just a shallow copy of the first, and not worth seeing, yet what could have been would be a lot more interesting. Unfortunately this is not that movie... <br />
<br />
<br />Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-46251135265363139842019-03-14T12:38:00.004-04:002019-03-14T12:48:58.067-04:00Captain Marvel (2019)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUfkrzEQ1zZkkNTB8lTqfsEugIiQMCksS7zekRbCXU343hE0naSQIhqRlD45JBP8oYCtpGICnWQqRZfkk3C0o5tZ4SkHMh74Re-5S0t-OXupd1sms_QtnBLtCL1-F-7Q09oaVX/s1600/Marvel+1.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUfkrzEQ1zZkkNTB8lTqfsEugIiQMCksS7zekRbCXU343hE0naSQIhqRlD45JBP8oYCtpGICnWQqRZfkk3C0o5tZ4SkHMh74Re-5S0t-OXupd1sms_QtnBLtCL1-F-7Q09oaVX/s320/Marvel+1.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
I was excited to go see the latest Marvel movie for a number of reasons. One is that I always thought Captain Marvel would make a great film. It is especially powerful since our protagonist is a women. The one thing the Marvel universe has skipped over was having a women superhero, and that's pretty strange since the Marvel comic universe is littered with powerful and assertive women. From the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/She-Hulk">She Hulk</a> to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Woman">Sue Storm</a> from the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantastic_Four">Fantastic Four</a>, to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valkyrie_(Marvel_Comics)">Valkyrie</a> of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defenders_(comics)">Defenders</a>. There have been a number of lady super hero's that have rocked the comic book world. It was about time that Marvel make one.<br />
<br />
To be fair Marvel movies have had women in their films such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Widow_(Natasha_Romanova)">Black Widow</a> in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Avengers_(comic_book)">the Avengers</a>, and Storm in the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Men">X-men</a> franchise. With the success of Wonder women from DC Marvel had to introduce one of their own women super hero's, and all I can say is about time.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0488953/?ref_=tt_cl_t1">Brie Larson</a> does a great job as Mar-vel a noble hero warrior from the Kree home-world, or so we think in the beginning. I will give no spoilers away but needless to say there is a twist that really works in this movie, and it sets up the up-coming film "The Avengers: Endgame". All I'll say is stay for the credits and you won't be disappointed.<br />
<br />
Now on to the review of this film. First off I have to confess I am a fan and have been a fan of Marvel since I was 6 years old. My gateway superhero was Spiderman, and the Fantastic Four. From there it was <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_America">Captain America</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulk">The Hulk</a>, the X-men, and the Defenders who were my personal favorite because they were so odd, and cool. <a href="https://www.marvel.com/movies">Marvel Studios</a> has been releasing their films to fuel the Marvel universe. Each film advances the story and the universe. New hero's, villains, and a more storylines are introduced in every film.<br />
<br />
Captain Marvel introduces us to Mar-vel a "noble warrior hero" from the planet Kree. As the story advances things are turned upside down, and what you thought was one thing is actually something else. This film is a sort of prequel to the Marvel universe. We are introduced to Mar-vel or Carol Danvers, and we are given her origin story. Origin stories are lengthy, and hard to do well. You have to assume that a lot of the audience doesn't know how Captain Marvel started, so the movie goes onto flesh out it's characters. By doing this we become more vested in the character. We have to care and when we find out why things are happening to our character we become more invested in the outcome.<br />
<br />
Captain Marvel does this so well. By the end you want payback, and we are given a show down that we root for our hero. The effects are outstanding, and the de-aging of Samuel Jackson is amazing. My son said to me I didn't even realize that it was a younger <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000168/">Sam Jackson</a>. We just bought it, and that is a compliment to the effects in this film.<br />
<br />
Also there is humor in this film, and like all Marvel Studio films they have their light moments where we the audience laughs. It's that wink-wink nudge, nudge feeling where you know the filmmakers and actors are having fun.<br />
<br />
Captain Marvel is also setting up the hype machine for the next Avenger movie scheduled to release in late April. Marvel Studios always does this well. Last year it was Ant man and the Wasp. This year it's Captain Marvel. By April everyone will be primed to see "Endgame", and in the end it's all about selling tickets and creating that hype. That shared experience among its audience and its fans.<br />
<br />
Seeing it with my own boys makes it very special, and I feel Marvel Studios knows this. It's like a handoff to another generation. There's a special sentiment when seeing it through younger eyes. That excitement of when you got the latest issue off the newsstand is palpable here. Instead of it being in the printed form it's now a movie. That excitement, and joy transcends generations, and it is what makes "Captain Marvel" such a fun filled adventure for the whole family.<br />
<br />
If your not a fan the film also works as well. The film is an origin story and if you know nothing about the Marvel Universe that is alright too. It does help, but it's not necessary. The story works either way, and at the end we are promised more adventures to rival the ones that we've already seen. What better way to leave a movie theater then waiting for the next story to unfurl. It's like the serials back in the 50's that were played before the movie. Every child wanted to know what happens next, and Marvel is in a way following the same formula, but on a much bigger scale. Anyway you shake it you'll enjoy yourself.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="300" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Z1BCujX3pw8" width="500"></iframe>Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-8969677670564277942019-03-05T15:22:00.002-05:002023-09-15T11:50:12.981-04:00Bohemian Rhapsody (2018)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyD1wzqL9szSZD_f0yO-zLOF8esXSpSwkukScY1RE-0pi3t7KPoseCK_75VSm-ghJBG9jwCYDtrv72pZ_jS19BfiB7vXkntF8BDolnYmOsCwlBWWFB7QJS8jLz9LRNLXmViNZC/s1600/Rhapsody1a.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="445" data-original-width="750" height="189" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyD1wzqL9szSZD_f0yO-zLOF8esXSpSwkukScY1RE-0pi3t7KPoseCK_75VSm-ghJBG9jwCYDtrv72pZ_jS19BfiB7vXkntF8BDolnYmOsCwlBWWFB7QJS8jLz9LRNLXmViNZC/s320/Rhapsody1a.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
So I finally saw the film "Bohemian Rhapsody" about the band Queen and Freddy Mercury. I have to say it was enjoyable to hear the music again, and see how the band actually formed. But something was missing, and at first I could not put my finger on it. Halfway through the film my son looked at me and said is this the "cliff notes" of Queen's origin. He had a point. It seemed to the story went too quickly. The story evolved quickly and seems to not dwell on the earlier years of Queen's origin. I thought so as well, but still was interested in hearing the music and seeing how some songs came about. What I really wanted to know was more about Freddy Mercury, and though towards the end of the film I did feel I learned a bit more about Freddy, yet I only feel I got a small glimpse into the man's life because if anything the movie shows me how really complex Freddy Mercury really was.<br />
<br />
When the movie starts we see Queen perform at the Live Aid concert, and then we flashback to the beginning. What I was interested in was how Mercury became so proficient in writing the bands song. In the end I got that Queen was <b>NOT</b> just one particular person, but a group of men who created unusual music that hit a popular chord. We see Mercury struggling with his sexuality, but don't realize why he does not identify as bisexual or gay. The performance of <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1785339/">Rami Malek</a> as Freddy is amazing and the Oscar he got is richly deserved because it is through his nuanced performance that we get to know Mercury better. Malek shows the anguish and the pain in his performance as Freddy, but the movie never goes in depth of why or how Freddy became the way he is.<br />
<br />
In the movie Malek says as Freddy "that I am the person I want to be", and if that is true why the conflict. Their is mention of his relationship to his family and in particular his father, but it is never examined or looked at in depth.<br />
<br />
Of course this is <b>NOT</b> a documentary, and the film is quite entertaining. We the audience feel Mercury's pain of being "different". Maybe that's the movies main objective. Mercury was "different" and what made him tick was the band. It was through Queen that he became prolific in his writing and lyrics.<br />
<br />
I believe that the film is based on conversations from his family, and his bandmates as well as his immediate close friends. What is lacking is Mercury himself. I'm not sure if there is a definitive biography of Mercury, but the movie certainly makes an argument for one. Freddy Mercury was a complex man who was creative and yet destructive. It seems he was always at odds with his sexuality until the end, but I don't know if this is true. The movie is an interpretation of the origin of the band Queen.<br />
<br />
I highly recommend the film. Especially if you're a fan of the music. Watching the movie made me keenly aware how much of Queens music had on a generation, and still does. They were unique and special and like as Freddy says in the film when asked to define what and who Queen is he goes on to say: "We're four misfits who don't belong together, playing for other misfits and the outcasts right in back of the room; I'm pretty sure they don't belong together either; we belong to them".<br />
That saying is what makes Queen as a band special and this movie as well. Malek's performance rings true, and it's because of this that makes the film worth watching.<br />Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11946737.post-12551821162505640362019-02-11T12:27:00.000-05:002019-02-11T12:27:00.589-05:00Won't You Be My Neighbor? (2018)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCoYRtyiW9BrHyJ1iEqhruYjUVr9vegffHsVf-w2Yb3Atlu_A7fv5WtNGCUg3ym-GU4267zx8byYEOs4HFoK5FmGW1Gldd4UNd6EoyWVbfsW_I-PaTVdWiST2On1IZ_dvl1n-C/s1600/Rogers-2018.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="674" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCoYRtyiW9BrHyJ1iEqhruYjUVr9vegffHsVf-w2Yb3Atlu_A7fv5WtNGCUg3ym-GU4267zx8byYEOs4HFoK5FmGW1Gldd4UNd6EoyWVbfsW_I-PaTVdWiST2On1IZ_dvl1n-C/s320/Rogers-2018.jpg" width="215" /></a></div>
<br />
So I finally got to see the documentary "<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7681902/">Won't You Ne My Neighbor?</a>" directed by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1365879/?ref_=tt_ov_dr">Morgan Neville</a>. I had heard a lot of good things about the film, so I was excited to finally see it. What I can say is that it is an emotional piece about a man who literally helped many children understand about growing up. Roger's became an advocate for children and fought for good educational programming that would help children through the perils of growing up. In the film we learn when and how "Mister Roger's Neighborhood" came into existence, and how Fred Rogers developed the concept. It is quite moving to see how Roger's comes up with the concept of "Mister Roger's Neighborhood". I can say that I was one of the kids "Mister Roger's neighborhood" was preaching to. I remember vividly sitting down and watching Fred Roger's go through his day and learning new things. All before I even set foot into a classroom. Roger's was our guide into growing up, and he tackled problem like death, anger management, and how to not be scared of the world around us. I am reminded now today how civility and just plain caring has gone out of fashion. Mister Roger's Neighborhood taught us that someone cared for us, and that we were all special. The documentary tells me a lot of things about the program but not about the man.<br />
<br />
What I was disappointed in was that I really did not get to know who Fred Roger's was? Why did he do the things he did? I am given an individual who is well meaning, and very civil, but I do not know anything about him. We are told that he grew up a privileged child, and that he may have been bullied due to his size, but I did not hear why he did what he did. I understand he was in divinity school where he was training to become a priest. That's about all I know, and I'm afraid that's all we get to know. I understand that Rogers had passed away, and that the documentary is about him through the eyes of others, but because of this I get a picture of only one side of the man.<br />
<br />
I would think that the filmmaker could have gotten a more detailed picture of Fred Rogers through other people. Classmates, friends, and or teachers could have shed more of a light on the character of Fred Roger's. <br />
<br />
Sure it seems as though "Mister Roger's Neighborhood" is a program out of time, and that such a program would not work in today's society with social media, and commercialism of children's TV. But Fred Roger's was the linchpin of the show and that speaks to the power of Roger's character. Roger's made the show a success because of his communication with children. He had an uncanny act of understanding what children were feeling and what they wanted. That's what I was interested in, and what makes Roger's such a unique individual.<br />
<br />
I wanted to know more about him, and why he did the things he did. Roger's character seemed to be framed by the question of "was he always that nice"? That questions seems to define the character of Fred Roger's, yet it does nothing to really tell us anything about him. We see Roger's wife, and his two son's but they do not say anything about him that would give us a definitive look into the man's character and his motives. <br />
<br />
At one point in the documentary we're told of Roger's anger at programming for children, but we are not given anything to tell us why. Instead we are given clips of Saturday morning cartoons, and other shows like the "Banana Splits, or "The Soupy Sales show" which were successful kids shows that were unlike "Mister Roger's Neighborhood". No critics, no teachers, no professors on media are given a chance to talk about children's programming, and what Fred Roger's was doing.<br />
<br />
There isn't enough on Fred Roger's to make me care. We're told he did not see doctors, and that he had stomach ailments, and he eventually got sick and passed away. There is footage of Roger's early on when he begins "Mister Roger's Neighborhood", but again there is no really definitive interview of him.<br />
<br />
It's as though we want to create a mythic figure of Fred Roger's when in fact he was a human being like al the rest of us who had challenges. It is those challenges that I would like to see. Instead Roger's himself is glanced over superficially and it hurts the film.<br />
<br />
I did find Roger's life interesting, and wanted to know more. But more the personal Roger's then the public figure. Maybe that will come out in the biography that Hollywood is doing of him starring Tom Hanks, but I still feel that I'm being forced feed this image of Roger's that may not be all too true. I still think that the most definitive film about the man is yet to be made, and I hope to see it someday because the man is worth more exploration then this film gives him.Karlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11072970288106121168noreply@blogger.com0