Directed By: Todd Phillips Written By: Todd Phillips, Stephen Chin & Jason Smilovic Based on the ROLLING STONE Article “Arms and The Dudes” By: Guy Lawson Cinematography: Lawrence Sher Editor: Jeff Groth
Cast: Miles Teller, Jonah Hill, Ana De Armas, Kevin Pollak, Bradley Cooper, Eddie Jemison, Wallace Langham
Two friends in their early 20s living in Miami Beach during the Iraq War exploit a little-known government initiative that allows small businesses to bid on U.S. Military contracts. Starting small, they begin raking in big money and are living the high life. But the pair gets in over their heads when they land a 300 million dollar deal to arm the Afghan Military – a deal that puts them in business with some very shady people, not the least of which turns out to be the U.S. Government. Based on true events.
The film is surprising while based on a true story. It comes across one film PAIN AND GAIN another based on a True story. Though Left out some important true details. To be either more comedic or dramatic. Though this one Manages to drag you Back down to earth. Amongst the fantasy and convenience.
The film never becomes as gritty as it could be and always feels Like it has a shiny coat that keeps it away from Being as deep and serious as it might seek to be.
The strength of this film is that you can tell director Todd Phillips is trying to do something different than his usual comedies. While this has bits of humor and his touch. It is more dramatic and of more importance. As in this film not only Is it based on a true story but it deals with consequences that can be fatal. This feels more devoted to a rebellious spirit. Just like the main characters.
So while the film doesn’t entirely succeed at its Aim. You Can tell the director, cast and crew really tried and put their hearts into it.
Jonah Hill is memorable in the film. As his character is more The showboat but also the more Loathsome of the main characters. By the end, he is the one you Remember. While Miles Teller is more the innocent heart of the film.
The film Is overly Stylish which can become distracting at times but also adds visual Flourish to scenes especially The action-oriented Ones and the scenes showcasing their success and wealth.
Despite the epic storytelling the film surprisingly in size and scope still feels smaller.
The character Teller plays particularly has a lot of heavy lifting yet never feels engaging or appealing until taken advantage of.
The film also feels like a chance for the actors and directors to be seen in a different way. A little more adult and show their strengths, as well as more range than maybe others, might have thought them capable of, just lien the two main characters they want to be viewed a little more serious and taken that way while still having some fun.
Bradley Cooper plays a more minor but integral role in the film. As his character is always in style and always surprising in action and some of the things he says. Though comes off like a minor James Bond villain only in real life.
Directed By: Jake Kasdan Written By: Mike White Cinematography By: Greg Gardiner Editor: Tara Timpone
Cast: Colin Hanks, Jack Black, Schuyler Fisk, John Lithgow, Catherin O’Hara, Leslie Mann, Carly Pope, Lily Tomlin, Chevy Chase, Dana Ivey, Brett Harrison, Natasha Melnick, Harold Ramis, Kyle Howard, Mike White, Fran Kranz, Nat Faxon, Monica Keena, Lizzy Caplan
Shaun Brumder is a local surfer kid from Orange County who dreams of going to Stanford to become a writer and to get away from his disfunctional family household. Except Shaun runs into one complication after another starting when his application is rejected after his dim-witted guidance counselor sends the wrong application. So, Shaun goes to great lengths with a little help from his girlfriend Ashley and his drugged-out loser brother Lance to get into Stanford any way they see fit.
Screenwriter, Mike White seems so seething with ideas and quirky characters ready to bust out on screen. You want to follow in further stories and adventures with the characters. So they usually feel like extended pilots for a new series. Maybe it’s his background in television writing. In turn, his television series always seem like set-ups for films. While he is usually a writer-director here he only handles the script.
Jake Kasdan directs the film. He usually is an inspired comedy director. He has a more subdued, subtle dead own style when it comes to style and scripts. with films like ZERO EFFECT, BAD TEACHER and THE TV SET
This feels like a film that is distracted as we see the cavalcade of well-known actors. Half the time the film’s scenes feel like a set-up for a celebrity cameo. Like there are most to the other characters but we only get to see them at their craziest. Trying to make the celebrities more recognizable or introduce them to a younger audience. The film also plays it smart even when stupid.
This film feels like an MTV film while it tries to match its demographic and quirky style for a built-in audience. That leaves the film inspired but also grasping for something. So that it works more times than not, but still doesn’t shine. Maybe because it seems to try too hard.
Jack Black plays well in the film. What a lot of critics have labeled him, as here I found him quite humorous. As the film has a bunch of standout hilarious scenes, Involving him, but though top-billed he is more here as a supporting actor.
The film’s humor is more sold by more minor performances and supporting characters. Rather than the set-up’s
The leads and the director are both children of Hollywood superstars. They more than hold their own though these are ones they could play in their sleep.
This film feels like a minor work not deep at all. It’s mildly amusing. All could do better and have this seems to like them trying to be more mainstream.
Plus the premise of the film is that his writing is so good because of the characters in his stories. Only they aren’t characters as much as real people. So he is just writing his real-life not that creative. Which is what goes against the premise. At least as far as the ending goes. And seems dependent on.
Plus it feels like his decision at the end is supposed to be heartwarming. It more feels deceptive like he needs more material and inspiration.
Through as much as I criticize. I find myself re-watching it from time to time. It has a highly rewatchable quality. The film is short and sweet. It’s a fun time while it lasts, but never comes close to being a classic
I can’t call it a good movie, more of a precious film that doesn’t seem forced. That younger people can look at it like it belongs in a museum. Like our own personal definite gift shop as a souvenir for others to share and see.
It really says you are a good writer. If you can tell the truth and bring it all together to be told vividly for an audience.
Directed By: Michael Dougherty Written By: Zach Shields, Michael Dougherty & Todd Casey Cinematography By: Jules O’Loughlin Editor: John Axelrad
Cast: Toni Collette, Adam Scott, David Koechner, Allison Tolman , Conchetta Ferrell, Emjay Anthony
When his dysfunctional family clashes over the holidays, young Max is disillusioned and turns his back on Christmas. Little does he know, this lack of festive spirit has unleashed the wrath of Krampus: a demonic force of ancient evil intent on punishing non-believers. All hell breaks loose as beloved holiday icons take on a monstrous life of their own, laying siege to the fractured family’s home and forcing them to fight for each other if they hope to survive.
At first, this film seems to play up the more comedic elements of the story.
It plays like a darker version of GREMLINS, Only more supernatural.
The cast sets the tone, though with Toni Colette. The film can go either way from horror to drama to comedy. As she is good, versatile, and established in all, but most of the recognizable cast are comedic veterans especially both Adam Scott and David Koechner. Which it seems like this film is a warm-up for them to do a buddy movie. With the two of them instantly memories of comedic horror films such as PIRAHNA 3D come to mind and what you expect. Except only, this one is less explosive but tries more for a hard edge family-friendly vibe. That’s more well thought out.
The second act of the film has more humor. Horror at times, but slowly becomes more serious and thrilling as it goes along.
Director Michael Dougherty is making his second feature and again another horror-themed holiday film. (After TRICK R’ TREAT) Full of folklore, energy, and fun.
At first, this film takes a more cynical attitude and looks at the holidays and situations that traditionally go along with them. Though children are in peril. You know nothing truly violent will happen to them at least on screen. There are scares, but an Absence of stakes.
In his films so far there always is an Augustus Gloop type of character. A grossly overweight yet cute character who has victim written all over him, but is there for a few good pokes of humor. The director backs the silliness of the film with a strong backstory that enriches the film and helps the audience forgive the more ridiculous elements. Which serves the film from the tone and fate of films such as SANTA’S SLAY. Which seek to be made and written around the title rather than have a good story thought out.
As here the film like JAWS only suggests a phantom who we see glimpses of and shadows. As we see the hard work was done mainly by possessed toys and appliances.
The film is almost like a nightmare supernatural version of HOME ALONE or NATIONAL LAMPOON’S CHRISTMAS VACATION.
It’s more a film of scares than actual macabre violence or graphic horror. The most objectionable thing here is language and some blood.
The creatures in the attic are truly terrifying. Even if the demented gingerbread men seem more like cute gremlins. That truly makes you wonder if the film is trying to be more innocent and family-friendly.
This film Makes more for a starter horror film. More made for those who get scared easily or are uneasy with the horror genre. As it contains the elements but does so with a lighter touch. It could almost be a harder-edged family film. Though can easily be enjoyed by horror aficionados as long as they can accept more of a mainstream and lightweight horror product.
Another aspect to enjoy here is that the special effects seem to be more practical and less extravagant then a cgi production.
The film feels too knowing and knowledgeable to be a classic. Too glossy to be quite as noteworthy. Though entertaining throughout the viewings with plenty of gothic designs. Especially the terror toys.
The film is a creepy confection with a nod to JEEPERS CREEPERS. As the film is fun yet allows it to be downtrodden and unhappy.
The film fits right in with the directors oeuvre so far
Directed By: Leos Carax Written by: Ron Mael & Russell Mael (Sparks) Cinematography: Caroline Champetier Editor: Nelly Quettier
Cast: Adam Driver, Marion Cotillard, Simon Helberg, Devyn McDowell
Against all logic, Henry and Ann–he, a struggling stand-up comedian, she, a beloved opera diva. fall madly in love and become inseparable after a chance encounter in bustling, modern Los Angeles. However, all great romances are fraught with pain. Faced with the public’s surprise and the dark side of success, Ann gives birth to gifted Annette: the fruit of their love, a miracle, a child prodigy, and the couple’s damnation.
I didn’t Love it, But I like it, kind of. There is A lot to dissect.
Starts off purely cinematic then the following film has its Moments and looks beautiful but never matches. As it seems more satirical at times and less an intimate story maybe taking on so many subjects and story beats rather than keeping it simple.
It’s special as it is not typical or something you see often. Or is it lazy or subpar filmmaking but didn’t white make the connection or inspire amazement. Though keeps interest throughout but feels overwrought at times.
Amazing how it starts off with so much promise and the belief that anything can happen or at least if what will happen and steadily loses steam, But manages to keep you watching with hope. Interested to hear others’ opinions about this film. I certainly have mine.
Director Leos Carax The French David lynch obviously loves films and cinema. Only he has his own vibe and influence.
Always excited when he makes a new film, never knowing what we are going to get and will it be something to enjoy, study or both.
I believe most of his films Are meant to be seen in theaters as a requirement. Having said that I will admit I have never seen one in a theater but am fascinated and taken away by all of his films.
As they are constantly Alive. Unpredictable, breathing, moving, emotional they have hearts and minds. Where by the end you have an opinion or the both in them as they engage and make you think stylish and able to shock they have their eccentricities and personality.
As they strive to be different yet tell stories that are recognizable and somewhat identifiable in their own way. You can always call them different and yet seem exactly to come out of an individual’s Imagination. Who has made no compromises and told the tale the exact way they wanted to, no matter how it is taken. Not made necessarily to entertain or even be understood completely but to share and experience. Which ultimately shows its personality.
This is Definitely a film made by an auteur, not by committee, more like An expression of thoughts that come to a point, A theory
Movies have usually been driven by romantic notions and definitely influenced by music seeming like they are albums themselves with each scene or section of film being their own song or ballad.
The film is Stylish above all else. Bringing his passion and interests into the story. That still seems filled with surreal shots that seem straight out of a perfume ad or filmed perfectly for one.
The Director even cameoed at the start to show that he is the engineer behind it all before introducing his collaborators in a musical sequence in which they are all together. Keep in mind this was also written by the band sparks. Who has a cult following for their music which is original on its own. So this was going to be far from conventional in the first place.
Did the advertisement influence a certain kind of filmmaking or just copy the artistic type European style and Concepts?
Maybe as a more American English language production steers it not as homemade and comfortable but as a work that is more foreign common and for him a little more straightforward and normal
Obviously a musical. It wants to be an opera of its own, a kind of grand tragedy with big feelings and scenery yet personal and between few characters to keep it intimate with a huge Falsetto voice as it is not within the range of normal but gets attention and can be achieved.
Which will Make you notice and hit several notes, Not that easy to do. Yet lying seems to be easier for most than others but then again to maintain a lie you must create others to maintain which takes creativity
Whereas the truth is easier a s it is natural but hard when wanting to go against or refuse to believe it .
The film can be Graphic sexually but manages to make it sexy.
Instead of Driven showstoppers or performances more seems to be little ditties to go with the story or to tell with a few full song show stoppers.
The Camera always exploring as he creates his own world or a world that is quite different
Like a true musical the film feels constantly performed but within the confines of a certain reality in all of its absurd ness and artistic design.
There is a certain sadness that hangs over his films but also a current and electricity that makes the films somewhat exciting. Definitely a journey and excursion that feels like a trip.
Sacred It feels monotonous and more staged, artificial doesn’t cut straight to the heart. As it usually does not emotionally truthful yet is still emotional.
Adam Driver with long hair can go from heartthrob or ruggedly Handsome. Looking like a grown geek who loves with his parents or worse the guy who still not only has a ponytail. But thinks it is still cool. Of course the stand-up that he performs isn’t funny but more of a one-man show that is theatrical but is most Stand up like that? Confessional with laughs and jokes or a humorous way to look at situations and stories of your life personal and all, opinions.
Knew it was fake or skewed as his audience drank exclusively wine and cocktails and not one beer in sight.
The fleeting emotions and feelings, care and moods of crowds and fans especially. if you do any meet their idealism of what they want from
You Don’t give them what they want as they feel if they pay to see you they have made an investment into you and you are supposed to give them what they want out of you. But they never say exactly so you are supposed to guess or do what you supposedly normally do to entertain, only they want the same if what they have seen or updated new material in the same vein but if you evolve some will stay but others will go against. As how some people in your life want you to stay the same and any time you move on or change for the better personally they take it as an insult or against it because it is not the same they remember.
The rejection of the conventional or being dismayed that it is unconventional and challenging that makes one not a fan or that makes one a fan as it is different and outsider art.
The film while being indulgent is also about toxic male masculinity. Having to control and be in control. So much so that as the film goes on Marie Cotillard’s Character seems to shrink not physically but from the film. As we see her less and less and spend more time with him and when they are together he seems to take over. Physically because of his size and his direction.
It doesn’t help that we get many dimensions of him, but for her she forever stays mroe representative and never really get any inner life form her. So much so that she remains a symbol throughout instead of a real character
At the end Playful and silly. It always feels like a full on experiment project rather than a heartfelt and committed one .
Directed By: Patricia Birch Written By: Ken Finkelman Based On Characters Created By: Jim Jacobs & Warren Casey Cinematography: Frank Stanley Editor: John F. Burnett
Cast: Michelle Pfeiffer, Maxwell Caulfield, Didi Conn, Lorna Luft, Pamela Segall, Adrian Zmed, Eve Arden, Sid Caeser, Connie Stevens, Christopher McDonald, Tab Hunter
Two years after the life-altering events in Grease. Sandy’s cousin Michael, a straight-laced English student, is the new guy at Rydell High. Stephanie, the Pink Ladies’ foxy blonde leader, is about to break up with Johnny, the T-Birds’ leader, but she still likes her men dangerous, even as Michael starts to attract her attention. Now Michael needs to up his game: learn how to ride a motorcycle and transform himself into Stephanie’s hot leather-clad fantasy. Is he up to the task?
Directed by a noted choreographer Patricia birch. Who was the choreographer for the first film. The film’s showmanship is all there unfortunately the film isn’t. As it feels like a rerun of what we have already seen.
This film is the epitome of 1950’s nostalgia that seems to be big in the 1980s. Though also an unneeded sequel.
I loved this movie as a kid. Watching it so many times. Even owning the soundtrack which I managed to get again a few years ago and enjoying it. As I know quite a few songs by heart. The songs are catchy and actually pretty good, but unfortunately still as memorable as the first film or its songs.
As there it comes off as an inferior copy that isn’t quite as sharp at all. It’s duller and the cast isn’t as memorable as their roles seem more uninspired. Making the t-birds more idiotic and not tough.
Though the characters trying to carry on in the grand legend and showing that they fall short isn’t intentional. It pretty much sums up this movie and its relationship to the first film.
Here they come off as imposing yet more jokes and comic relief caricatures as they Aren’t threatening. It’s an interesting case study in trying to act cool when truly scared in the role that you choose.
Everyone tries to give it they’re all but watching certain things come standing out. Such as it’s set in the 1950s yet Michelle Pfeiffer seems to be the only character who dresses in 1980s (when the film was made) fashion. This also helps showcase her future stardom as she definitely shows star potential more than anyone else. The movie is a true stepping stone for her
Other than most of the cast being obviously Too old to play teenagers. You can tell everyone in the background is a dancer just waiting to start dancing and singing on camera. Especially when it comes to their enthusiastic acting and facial movements.
It’s also ridiculous that no one can recognize the cool rider as Michael. As he doesn’t really change his voice. Only lowers it, and even though he wears a helmet he takes it off and only wears goggles that are barely shaded.
He even makes out with Michelle Pfeiffer and she never still recognizes him. Then singing the big number HANDS OF TIME comes off as one of the most unintentionally overblown ridiculous numbers.
No one is truly a character. They all play types. It doesn’t help that unfortunately, Maxwell Caulfield has the looks but his singing can’t hit certain notes.
Even his plans to seduce her come off as douche. As they are more about manipulation and falsehoods. Even if the film tries to portray it as some kind of cute romantic turn. As he is basically dishonest throughout with her.
Though the film is a cash-in. The production also has earnestness and energy. As well as campy as hell. Even if the plan was a quick cash-in and hoping to ride the success of the first film for the producer Allan Carr. Though the script for a proposed third film was resurrected later and made into HIGH SCHOOL THE MUSICAL.
Directed By: Richard Lester Written By: Alun Owen Cinematography: Gilbert Taylor Editor: John Jympson
Cast: The Beatles, John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr, George Harrison, Wilfrid Brambell, Norman Rossington, John Junkin, Victor Spinetti, Anna Quayle
Over two “typical” days in the life of The Beatles, the boys struggle to keep themselves and Sir Paul McCartney’s mischievous grandfather in check while preparing for a live TV performance.
The film is shot in black and white that makes the film feel timeless. As well as give it a classic fresh feel.
The movie moves along briskly is pretty episodic almost like a Group or music video and live performances with a rather than story built around it.
Director Richard Lester was ahead of his time based off of this film. He paved the way for music videos. Not just putting out clips of live performances. Fast-paced, rapid editing videos of songs with the band and a storyline of sorts that can be self-contained.
Wilfrod Brambell plays a frisky uncle to Paul. Here to add comedy and have a reason for the hijinks and confusion that keeps the story afloat.
The film tries to give each member a different personality to play off and their own space to have a singular adventure. It also allows them to be goofier and show a sense of humor and enjoy their youth giving them range And full personalities. After all, this movie is about them.
Even though most of the film feels like filler and comes off as a lark to kill time. Though it has its fair share of memorable visuals.
The film is energetic and freewheeling that feels loose like you can go anywhere at any time.
It also seems to show how normal the Beatles are despite the fame and situations they find themselves in. More a service to their fans to get somewhat up close and personal.
The film works as a time capsule of the times and culture. As well as a place to show and satirize the level of fame they had, that was the beginning and how they dealt with It in behavior and attitudes.
It’s a fun film that helps if you are a fan. As it’s an inside look to a degree. This first film is their best film. Not quite as surreal as the others, but more artistic, comedic, and simple.
So that there are constantly scenes and moments to remember. Even if just the songs as the soundtrack is an original album itself.
Remember the excitement for this movie when it got re-released and finally came out on DVD. Which is when I first saw it. It was kind of my introduction to the Beatles. As I had heard of them and a few songs from them before but never quite got into them to kind of learn about them and investigate them and their music until I saw this film.
Directed By: John Slattery Written By: Alex Metcalf & John Slattery Based on the Novel By: Pete Dexter Cinematography By: Lance Acord Editor: Tom McArdle
Cast: Philip Seymour Hoffman, John Turturro, Richard Jenkins, Joyce Van Patten, Eddie Marsan, Christina Hendricks, Molly Price, Dominic Lombardozzi, Caleb Landry Jones, Sophie Takal
When Mickey’s crazy step-son Leon is killed in a construction ‘accident’, nobody in the working-class neighborhood of God’s Pocket is sorry he’s gone. Mickey tries to bury the bad news with the body, but when the boy’s mother demands the truth, Mickey finds himself stuck in a life-and-death struggle between a body he can’t bury, a wife he can’t please, and a debt he can’t pay
This is a film that’s hard to describe as the fact that you have seen stories like this on-screen before. Though this one feels strangely authentic and that is the scary part. As the film is so downtrodden it seems almost the product of nightmares.
Luckily the film stays low-key. It goes by quickly and with nary a kick. Though it takes its time to tell its story. It doesn’t feel like it’s dragging. It’s surprisingly lean, though it feels indulgent. There is no real fat in the film.
The film has an amazing group of actors, who are all good and believable. You only wish the film had more to give them as far as story and quality. While the film relies heavily on the atmosphere it feels at times like it has very few places to go. It presents circumstances and challenges but very little action and story.
This being one of Philip Seymour Hoffman’s last performances it is noteworthy as he is our put upon the protagonist. Trying to figure his way out of an increasingly sticky situation. While also being his own worst enemy. He seems to be one of the few semi-decent characters who while not being from the neighborhood which everyone reminds him. Still seems very much the product of it as he seems to fit perfectly in.
The film is the story of more a neighborhood that seems to be its own trap. We just watch the inhabitants as they go about their day-to-day life. The main story selling point the death of a young man seems to be just one of those things. An act of senseless violence. That seems like it will become some story of the investigation and seeking justice. Though it ends up just being a catalyst for changes and actions for some characters and setting in motion events.
The film seems constantly depressing as the characters seem to always make the wrong decisions and there is little to no humanity. Everyone is out for themselves. Anytime there is humanity shown it is rather surprising and usually followed by acts of merciless violence.
Christina Hendricks continues to come across as a desirable screen icon. She is luminous and beautiful and though she plays a grieving mother. Later in the film, as she seems to be irresistible to any male. She seems oddly emotionless as her character knows better yet is shocked by the attention paid to her. She commits an act but does so with what seems little care. That has incriminating results that she oddly seems to have no concerns about. Though they affect her.
Richard Jenkins truly makes a mark as a columnist in the middle of all this investigation. While being from the neighborhood has his own demons to deal with while trying to get the story. As he is easily distracted and we get some clues for his condition. We observe his questionable prowess with women also.
In fact, the entire third act of the film becomes strange at how quickly the neighborhood turns from favorable to certain inhabitants to just pure hate and the reason seems rather thin. Like it happens more because the script and story demand it rather than naturally or organically.
John Slattery making his feature film debut, Picked an exemplary story to tell. It always seems when actors choose to direct they pick material more character-based and depressing that has to be gritty to bring more of a reality, but smartly pick material that allows for an ensemble to play off of and includes actors friends who are more the character actor types. He could have done slot worse in the material.
The film at times feels like it is trying too hard to be gritty and showcase all his grime and crime. Then at other times it wisely becomes more understated.
The film has a strangely happy ending or as close as this type of film can have.
This is a film that feels in the same world as TREE’S LOUNGE only not as optimistic and also would go well with a viewing of THE DROP only this is less exciting and feels more authentic.
Written & Directed By: Joshua Safdie & Ben Safdie Inspired By The Book Written By: Arielle Holmes Cinematography By: Sean Price Williams Editor: Ben Safdie & Ronald Bronstein
Harley loves Ilya. He gives her life purpose and sets her passion ablaze. So, when he asks her to prove her love by slitting her wrists, she obliges with only mild hesitation, perhaps because of her other all-consuming love: heroin.
This movie is crazy as it seeks to keep you on your toes and off-center throughout. It is a slice of life that feels like it lacks are tidier and goes out of its way to show the downside of drug abuse. Which yes we have seen many times. Though it has been a while. Then again just as we have seen many other stories a bunch of times. So one more won’t hurt and all that matters is how it is told and the individual’s story. Here we get more of an insider’s guide. Cinema verite style.
The film feels a bit like misery porn as there is no shame throughout this film. We see the rarely good, but plenty of the bad and ugly. I can’t really call the film exploitive as it is stylized a bit but feels like an experimental attempt to tell a story but also a show-off film to show how edgy the filmmakers are by going after the truth. Like a less surrealistic, more realistic drug addiction tail like REQUIEM FOR A DREAM. Though we are thrust right into the tale rather than showing the beginning like how the characters started in the addiction. We also get very little told about anyone’s past.
Think of this film as a modern-day PANIC IN NEEDLE PARK. Without the luster of seeing classic New York locations.
For some, it might be like seeing the day-to-day life of those addicts or characters you see it encounter on the train or New York streets.
Caleb Landry Jones is barely recognizable. Which is how deep he goes into character here. He is also the only recognizable cast member who might be a professional actor. As the character of Ilya this ghost-like a menace. Who is the main character’s ex who at the beginning of the film demands that she commit suicide as an appropriate apology for cheating on him? He seems to haunt the film as he stares in judgment and treats her like crap but seems to give off a sense of caring
Arielle Holmes makes an impressive debut. This film is based on her book a kind of journal/biography of her life on the streets as a drug addict. Written in an Apple Store using the free computers there. It’s interesting to see her now clean having to relive all these moments.
The film almost seems like a documentary. It is more docudrama as there seems to be a voice and reason for this film and why it was made. Not to mention keeps moving forward.
Throughout the film stays realistic as the level of dirt and grime is a supporting character that could easily take over as the lead.
At times it’s hard to believe it is going anywhere. Though stays hard-hitting and feels disturbing half of the time. The film is not an empty endeavor.
The film feels almost like an 80’s film with its washed-out look and man-on-the-street type camera work as well as a soundtrack that feels ambient. Then sometimes it adds to the scenes and comes along naturally.
There is no pretension in any of the performances. Which is a danger sometimes that you encounter in films of this nature. They all feel like characters you have encountered it seen like this.
Seems filmed on the streets with no permits as it seems rate that there are rarely any actual sets or setups or grand camera shots.
Goes into detail on how these junkies who are often homeless survive and hustle for money and drugs. Sometimes shelter
Throughout the film, it is hard to see why she is in love with Ilya so deeply and cares so much about what he thinks. Throughout the film things ha he yet remains the same which the ending clearly illustrates.
The film never comes close to having a message nor having its characters clean up their act though you might hope for it.
Directed By: Clint Eastwood Written By: Billy Ray Based Upon the article “American Nightmare: The Ballad Of Richard Jewell” By: Marie Brenner Based Upon The Book “The Suspect” By: Kent Alexander & Kevin Salwen Cinematography: Yves Belanger Editor: Joel Cox
Cast: Paul Walter Hauser, Sam Rockwell, Kathy Bates, Jon Hamm, Olivia Wilde, Ian Gomez, Nina Arianda, Mike Pniewski
During the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, security guard Richard Jewell discovers a suspicious backpack under a bench in Centennial Park. With little time to spare, he helps to evacuate the area until the incendiary device inside the bag explodes. Hailed as a hero who saved lives, Jewell’s own life starts to unravel when the FBI names him the prime suspect in the bombing.
A film about a man who at first was a national hero than a suspect. Shows how fast admiration can turn on a person.
While this film is an interesting investigation and feels stronger than a television movie. It still feels like the handiwork of one just with better talent. It oddly also feels rushed throughout.
What saves the film is the tremendous cast. Especially Paul Walter Hauser in a more dramatic role than the comedic ones we are used to. This is the time where someone is more seen as a character actor. Gets a chance to not only star in a film but show they have the right stuff to play a lead in the movie.
This is a film about a man who has been raised to believe in the American dream. Only for it to turn its back on him and despite it all. While he is seen increasingly as a suspect and mistreated he still believes in due process and only seems to help incriminate himself.
Olivia Wilde is over the top in the role as a reporter who seems out to ruin Richard Jewell. In her performance, she feels like she came from another movie. The film also treats her character as misogynistic. As she seems to use sex and sex appeal to get her stories more than research and talent.
She also stands out, as most of the film and the characters come off as subdued and she comes off like a shining bright light comparatively.
The film Is at least fright forward in its telling there is no fat here. It gets straight to the point.
Again Paul Walter Hauser gives a strong performance that could be seen as both comedic as Dramatic. as this is a sad character whose world falls around him but still believes in law and order despite it all. He has bravado but proves to be quite delicate. Not necessarily likable especially these days but quite identifiable.
As this is a character who could easily come off as slow or more comedic but Hauser gives him heart and a presence. Where he deserves more respect than most give him.
Sam Rockwell’s character is a kind of frustrated standoffish type lawyer, but believes in Richard and ends up being his closest and true ally. Even if he seems ornery or distrusting most times.
The film feels like a thorough truthful docudrama. As there is little grandstanding. No overly dramatic scenes though based on a true story there is an end but not necessarily any closure or satisfying nature or narrative.
The film gives Jon Hamm’s character motivation to basically try to hide his leaking of info and trying to quickly close the case by trying to find a patsy who fit the Bill and to be a hero himself by solving the case as this crime happened on his watch.
This comes across as Another story of the people of the Midwest for director Clint Eastwood. Where the characters are more salt of the earth and face their destiny abs have to deal with the aftermath. As this film is a dramatization of a more recent evening witch hunt. Where the film villainized the press as the government to a degree. Showing the common man no matter how overzealous to be a pawn rather than letting them live their lives naturally and non-corrupt.
It also shows Eastwood’s passion to show a dying Americana from which he believes in and comes. Though his politics are old school and tricky. He’s not above showing the atrocities of those in power, but also like John Ford with his wearers where they showed the disappearing plains and modernization taking over. Eastwood does the same only with it seems American culture and values
Directed by: Martin Scorsese Written By: Terence Winter Based on the Book “The Wolf Of Wall Street” By: Jordan Belfort Cinematography: Rodrigo Prieto Editor: Thelma Schoonmaker
Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Jonah Hill, Margot Robie, Matthew McConaughey, Jon Bernthal, Kyle Chandler, Rob Reiner, Jon Favreau, Shea Whigham, Jean Dujardin, Joanna Lumley, Cristin Milioti, Aya Cash, Christine Ebersole, Ethan Suplee, P.J. Byrne, Kenneth Choi, Jake Hoffman, Rizwan Manji, Thomas Middleditch, Fran Lebowitz
Based on the true story of Jordan Belfort, from his rise to a wealthy stock-broker living the high life to his fall involving crime, corruption and the federal government.
This film at heart is more of a dark comedy than a drama. Yes, it’s based on a true story and there are many victims in this tale who barely get any attention. As the film’s protagonist is the con-man who ripped them off, but the film feels like no matter what it wants us to root for him and feel for him overall.
Leonardo DiCaprio gives one of his best performances and one of his out-and-out funny comedic performances. As we have never seen him this loose and open in a performance. that truly astonishes
It’s not only him the film is filled with recognizable actors playing real-life people but while they are characters and three-dimensional they are also played so big that they come off naturally more comedic. Even though their crimes hurt many. As Jonah Hill, Matthew McConaughey, and Jon Berenthal all have their times to shine and at least a scene to highlight.
At a certain point, they are doing so many illegal things that you can barely tell what is right and what is wrong. As the business they build seems to get off on debauchery and the film treats it as both revelatory letting us participate In The mayhem and experience the 1980’s excess but also giving us enough details to see it as a cautionary tale and see the harsh aftermath for some.
This also is Margot Robbie’s debut and introduction to the public as a sex symbol. Just as Charlize Theron made her debut in the movie 2 DAYS IN THE VALLEY. Here at first, you notice Ms. Robbie’s looks then you notice she is actually quite a good actress and one of the memorable ingredients to this movie.
Now this tale could have been told in a smaller way but just like the main character it must be told larger than life and feel rather epic in size. As it is a rare film where we kind of root for the bad guys. Even if we know they are horrible. As we have been following them from the beginning and in essence living the life of excess with them in the film. So that even when we see them do bad things we have a weakness for them and want to see them succeed even at the expense of others.
The film feels like a crime spree as it is episodic as we are taken throughout the crimes and how the businessmen stay afloat and the deals they have to make to keep laundering their money and stay on top. The film even follows their international adventures that open up the film to be more global and have more consequences. As they have their overseas adventures. Even with the law on their tails embodied by a character played by Kyle Chandler who seems to be incorruptible and always right behind.
The film even though his character later In The film asks if it is worth it. Being honest and in the straight and narrow. Still having to scrape by when you could easily turn a blind eye, do the wrong thing, and live in Luxury.
This is the most electrifying and energetic director Martin Scorsese has been with a film. Also, his first film has come close to a comedy since AFTER HOURS. Though the film condemns the characters. The film also has a lot of fun with them. Leaving behind plenty of classic moments.
The film gets to glorify and highlight the 80’s and 90’s excess and over-the-top nature of business and the stock market. A kind of juvenile version of the movie WALL STREET, but just as powerful and memorable. Only here do you see more behavior outside of the office than necessarily the more business side. Which marks the film all the more attractive.
In the end, even for a somber tale, the film is a good time. A misogynistic fantasy that offers what happens after you wake up from the dream and have to pay for it. As the film presents its a tale with the highs like being on drugs but then eventually you have to come down and sober up and the pain of what sobering up feels like.
Cut To The Chase 