Today I saw Knives Out, starring Ana de Armas and Daniel Craig.
Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer) is a wealthy novelist who is found dead of an apparent suicide. While his family swarms to line up for their inevitable inheritances, investigator Benoit Blanc (Craig) appears on scene with the cops to determine whether or not it was really a suicide.
All along, Marta (de Armas), Thrombey's nurse, has a painful secret she's desperately trying to keep under wraps, and the family's black sheep —who cleverly goes by 'Ransom'—(Chris Evans) is most certainly up to something, but we don't know what.
The film starts out as a straight whodunnit with all of the suspicious parties interviewed separately by law enforcement. After the presentation of a certain scenario, it's obvious what happened, so as an audience member you wonder why the reveal was done so early ... until you realize there is a twist. And then another. And then more after that.
All throughout, crackling dialog laced with hilarious listen-close-or-you'll-miss-them lines pepper the story with a strong dose of humor, making this modern mystery a lot of fun.
The only thing I could have done without was the vomiting. Future viewers: Tere's a lot of that, so be forewarned.
Otherwise, sit back and let the ride take you where it will—you won't be disappointed.
~~~
Showing posts with label mystery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mystery. Show all posts
Saturday, December 21, 2019
Wednesday, January 24, 2018
Loving Vincent
Tonight I saw Loving Vincent, starring Douglas Booth and Saoirse Ronan.
Do everything in your power to see this in the theater if it's still available in your area. Seriously.
What Dorota Kobiela, Hugh Welchman and over 100 painters did is simply magnificent. They shot an entire movie—then painted over every frame (over 65,000 of them). So trust me when I say that you'll experience the first hand-painted full-length film in a much more immersive way if the images envelop you from the brilliance of a gigantic screen vs. a television or home theater.
The story picks up after the death of Vincent Van Gogh, when Armand Roulin (Booth), one of Van Gogh's subjects, attempts to solve the questions behind the famous artist's suicide (or murder, depending on what theory you believe) and travels to various scenes in the style of Van Gogh's works to do so. I'll admit I got so lost in the visuals that the dialog/plot points suffered for me, but perhaps if I watch it again, I'll pay more attention?
Probably not. But as a huge Van Gogh admirer, this was an incredible visual treat. It was as if all of the scenes I'd witnessed my entire life in museums and on postcards had come to life, straight from my mind's eye.
Of course, I was then preoccupied wondering (hoping) this technique gets explored via other artists too (Andrew Wyeth and Claude Monet would be my first choices, but I could also be happy with Georges Seurat if anyone's up for it).
I certainly hope this isn't the last we've seen of such beauty.
~~~
Do everything in your power to see this in the theater if it's still available in your area. Seriously.
What Dorota Kobiela, Hugh Welchman and over 100 painters did is simply magnificent. They shot an entire movie—then painted over every frame (over 65,000 of them). So trust me when I say that you'll experience the first hand-painted full-length film in a much more immersive way if the images envelop you from the brilliance of a gigantic screen vs. a television or home theater.
The story picks up after the death of Vincent Van Gogh, when Armand Roulin (Booth), one of Van Gogh's subjects, attempts to solve the questions behind the famous artist's suicide (or murder, depending on what theory you believe) and travels to various scenes in the style of Van Gogh's works to do so. I'll admit I got so lost in the visuals that the dialog/plot points suffered for me, but perhaps if I watch it again, I'll pay more attention?
Probably not. But as a huge Van Gogh admirer, this was an incredible visual treat. It was as if all of the scenes I'd witnessed my entire life in museums and on postcards had come to life, straight from my mind's eye.
Of course, I was then preoccupied wondering (hoping) this technique gets explored via other artists too (Andrew Wyeth and Claude Monet would be my first choices, but I could also be happy with Georges Seurat if anyone's up for it).
I certainly hope this isn't the last we've seen of such beauty.
~~~
Thursday, September 14, 2017
It
Last night I saw It, starring Jaeden Lieberher and Sophia Lillis.
Based on the famous Stephen King novel, It certainly delivers on its promise of shivers and scares.
When we first meet the residents of Derry, Maine, it's because we're watching a sick Bill (Lieberher) finish making a paper boat for his younger brother Georgie (Jackson Robert Scott) to float out in the rainstorm. He can't go out in the storm to supervise because of his illness and mom is busy playing the piano.
Once ready to set sail, Georgie takes the boat outside and giggles happily along the street as he communicates via Walkie Talkie with Bill, who is watching out his bedroom window. Of course, before long, Georgie veers out of view and the boat sails right into the sewer. Worried that his brother will be angry with him, Georgie attempts to retrieve it and is met by a "friendly" clown, Pennywise (Bill Skarsgard), who offers to hand it back to him.
We know where this is going before it happens, but it's still jarring to see the young boy snatched up by this menacing monster. The story continues as other kids disappear, and one of the new students in town does historical research on the town. He discovers that awful things have been happening every 27 years.
The group of Bill's friends, made up of kids who consider themselves "losers" because they are bullied, teased, abused, etc. bands together to confront the evil—and in the process face their own demons.
There are many opportunities for the film to go cheesy, but it really never does. Skarsgard's Pennywise is angry and creepy, but not the least bit campy. The other manifestations a la Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, such as a painting that comes to life, are even more disturbing.
What's great about the film is the heart of the kids we get to know and the faithful nod to the era of Walkmans and Rubik's Cubes.
If you can stand the occasional gore and potential nightmares, nothing should stop you from seeing It.
~~~
Based on the famous Stephen King novel, It certainly delivers on its promise of shivers and scares.
When we first meet the residents of Derry, Maine, it's because we're watching a sick Bill (Lieberher) finish making a paper boat for his younger brother Georgie (Jackson Robert Scott) to float out in the rainstorm. He can't go out in the storm to supervise because of his illness and mom is busy playing the piano.
Once ready to set sail, Georgie takes the boat outside and giggles happily along the street as he communicates via Walkie Talkie with Bill, who is watching out his bedroom window. Of course, before long, Georgie veers out of view and the boat sails right into the sewer. Worried that his brother will be angry with him, Georgie attempts to retrieve it and is met by a "friendly" clown, Pennywise (Bill Skarsgard), who offers to hand it back to him.
We know where this is going before it happens, but it's still jarring to see the young boy snatched up by this menacing monster. The story continues as other kids disappear, and one of the new students in town does historical research on the town. He discovers that awful things have been happening every 27 years.
The group of Bill's friends, made up of kids who consider themselves "losers" because they are bullied, teased, abused, etc. bands together to confront the evil—and in the process face their own demons.
There are many opportunities for the film to go cheesy, but it really never does. Skarsgard's Pennywise is angry and creepy, but not the least bit campy. The other manifestations a la Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, such as a painting that comes to life, are even more disturbing.
What's great about the film is the heart of the kids we get to know and the faithful nod to the era of Walkmans and Rubik's Cubes.
If you can stand the occasional gore and potential nightmares, nothing should stop you from seeing It.
~~~
Friday, December 30, 2011
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Tonight I saw The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, starring Rooney Mara and Daniel Craig.
It would be impossible not to compare this film to its Swedish predecessor or to the book where the story originated, so I won't pretend I'm trying not to; that said, I'll do my best to focus less on the differences and more on the core quality of the film.
Mikael Blomkvist (Craig) is a Swedish journalist being brought down in the court of public opinion for a story he wrote that turned out to be less than factual. He was most likely set up by the subject of the story, but that is beside the point now that his and his magazine's reputations are ruined. To remove himself from the public eye, he takes a job with a wealthy family to investigate a murder that happened several decades ago.
Lisbeth Salander (Mara) is the damaged, disturbed, unconventional investigator brought in to act as Blomkvist's research assistant. Because of her past mental health issues, she is forced to report to a guardian who is responsible for dispensing her allowances. Unfortunately, her caring guardian becomes hospitalized and she is assigned to a sadistic, horrible guardian who demands sexual favors in return for her own money. She devises a way to prevent this from happening, but in the meantime is brutally raped by the man.
Christopher Plummer plays Henrik Vanger, the wealthy member of a troubled family with a nazi past, desperate to find his niece's killer. As usual, Plummer gives a superb, believable performance in the role, but unfortunately his screen time is too brief.
I think the same of Robin Wright, who makes a fantastic Erika Berger, Mikael's boss and married lover. She's pitch perfect in the scenes she appears in, but they are few and far between.
Overall, the story stays somewhat close to the novel, though a few ridiculous details make me groan with American shame (the McDonald's product placement is blatant; there is a somewhat predictable mention of Ikea). I also agree with other critics who have mentioned that Mara's version of Lisbeth is far too feminine.
Aside from making Lisbeth 'pretty' in certain intimate scenes, she also appears to register emotion with Mikael, which is something the true character never would have done. They aren't a couple, but here, they behave like one.
Daniel Craig is also too good looking and too physically fit to be playing the smoking, eating Mikael. And far to few cups of coffee were consumed to stay true to the native text.
However, Fincher does work his magic in many ways.
The lighting and the shadows and the mood of the film are always spot on. Whether Liseth is blazing down the street on her motorcycle or watching a night vision camera to see who is prowling about the property, the aura of the story is captured in a more spiritual way than that of the original film.
The more linear script by Steven Zaillian also manages to put the sequence of events in layman's terms for the intended American audience, which is probably a good thing for those who became too frustrated and abandoned the book, or are afraid of films with subtitles. The story deserves to be seen, even if digested in a more obvious way.
The violent scenes are no less horrific (especially a post-rape glimpse of Liseth in the shower); the chases no less tense.
All in all, a satisfying, if not yet as accurate retelling of a classic mystery that will certainly be shared for years to come.
~~~
It would be impossible not to compare this film to its Swedish predecessor or to the book where the story originated, so I won't pretend I'm trying not to; that said, I'll do my best to focus less on the differences and more on the core quality of the film.
Mikael Blomkvist (Craig) is a Swedish journalist being brought down in the court of public opinion for a story he wrote that turned out to be less than factual. He was most likely set up by the subject of the story, but that is beside the point now that his and his magazine's reputations are ruined. To remove himself from the public eye, he takes a job with a wealthy family to investigate a murder that happened several decades ago.
Lisbeth Salander (Mara) is the damaged, disturbed, unconventional investigator brought in to act as Blomkvist's research assistant. Because of her past mental health issues, she is forced to report to a guardian who is responsible for dispensing her allowances. Unfortunately, her caring guardian becomes hospitalized and she is assigned to a sadistic, horrible guardian who demands sexual favors in return for her own money. She devises a way to prevent this from happening, but in the meantime is brutally raped by the man.
Christopher Plummer plays Henrik Vanger, the wealthy member of a troubled family with a nazi past, desperate to find his niece's killer. As usual, Plummer gives a superb, believable performance in the role, but unfortunately his screen time is too brief.
I think the same of Robin Wright, who makes a fantastic Erika Berger, Mikael's boss and married lover. She's pitch perfect in the scenes she appears in, but they are few and far between.
Overall, the story stays somewhat close to the novel, though a few ridiculous details make me groan with American shame (the McDonald's product placement is blatant; there is a somewhat predictable mention of Ikea). I also agree with other critics who have mentioned that Mara's version of Lisbeth is far too feminine.
Aside from making Lisbeth 'pretty' in certain intimate scenes, she also appears to register emotion with Mikael, which is something the true character never would have done. They aren't a couple, but here, they behave like one.
Daniel Craig is also too good looking and too physically fit to be playing the smoking, eating Mikael. And far to few cups of coffee were consumed to stay true to the native text.
However, Fincher does work his magic in many ways.
The lighting and the shadows and the mood of the film are always spot on. Whether Liseth is blazing down the street on her motorcycle or watching a night vision camera to see who is prowling about the property, the aura of the story is captured in a more spiritual way than that of the original film.
The more linear script by Steven Zaillian also manages to put the sequence of events in layman's terms for the intended American audience, which is probably a good thing for those who became too frustrated and abandoned the book, or are afraid of films with subtitles. The story deserves to be seen, even if digested in a more obvious way.
The violent scenes are no less horrific (especially a post-rape glimpse of Liseth in the shower); the chases no less tense.
All in all, a satisfying, if not yet as accurate retelling of a classic mystery that will certainly be shared for years to come.
~~~
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Super 8
This morning I saw Super 8, starring Joel Courtney and Elle Fanning.
Joe (Courtney) is the son of the town deputy—an only child who lost his mother earlier in the year to a workplace accident. Alice (Fanning) is a girl from school who has a father who is always in trouble and a mother who has abandoned them. The two kids are, of course, destined to be together.
Their mutual friend Charles (Riley Griffiths) is making a film and they are both helping. As they become each other's certain first loves, they find themselves entangled in the aftermath of a local train crash, which has epic consequences.
You see, a creature of some sort (probably of the alien variety) has emerged from the crash and begun to wreak havoc on the entire town, apparently stealing dogs, people and copper. And let's just say each time "it" arrives, it "makes an entrance."
In the fashion of classic Spielberg hits like E.T. and The Goonies, the kids know more than the adults and are therefore tasked with saving the day.
Really, that was all fine with me.
Predictable as it was (and toward the end I was practically mouthing lines, though I'd never seen Super 8 before today), it was still incredibly enjoyable to watch a film set in the 70s that actually felt like the real 70s.
I loved seeing a dish on the table at one of the family's homes that was in my home as a kid, and I couldn't help but smile at the nod to the "new invention" of the Walkman.
I'm glad to see in our world of 3D, CGI, bigger-is-better film mentality that the studios are still willing to green light the occasional coming-of-age caper.
This one doesn't disappoint.
~~~
Joe (Courtney) is the son of the town deputy—an only child who lost his mother earlier in the year to a workplace accident. Alice (Fanning) is a girl from school who has a father who is always in trouble and a mother who has abandoned them. The two kids are, of course, destined to be together.
Their mutual friend Charles (Riley Griffiths) is making a film and they are both helping. As they become each other's certain first loves, they find themselves entangled in the aftermath of a local train crash, which has epic consequences.
You see, a creature of some sort (probably of the alien variety) has emerged from the crash and begun to wreak havoc on the entire town, apparently stealing dogs, people and copper. And let's just say each time "it" arrives, it "makes an entrance."
In the fashion of classic Spielberg hits like E.T. and The Goonies, the kids know more than the adults and are therefore tasked with saving the day.
Really, that was all fine with me.
Predictable as it was (and toward the end I was practically mouthing lines, though I'd never seen Super 8 before today), it was still incredibly enjoyable to watch a film set in the 70s that actually felt like the real 70s.
I loved seeing a dish on the table at one of the family's homes that was in my home as a kid, and I couldn't help but smile at the nod to the "new invention" of the Walkman.
I'm glad to see in our world of 3D, CGI, bigger-is-better film mentality that the studios are still willing to green light the occasional coming-of-age caper.
This one doesn't disappoint.
~~~
Monday, February 21, 2011
Unknown
Today I saw Unknown, starring Liam Neeson and Diane Kruger.
An upper-class American couple arrives in Berlin to find some of their luggage didn't make it from the airport, so the husband catches a Taxi to return to the airport and retrieve it. Unfortunately, during that ride, he's in a terrible car accident and ends up in a coma for four days. When he wakes up, he remembers everything about his life, but no one will confirm it—not even his wife of five years.
So here we have the story of Martin Harris (Neeson). A supposed brilliant scientist who is in Germany to give a presentation at an intellectual conference until he is made to believe that his life is not his own after all.
There are folks who swear they don't know who he is. His wife Liz (January Jones) and the alleged real Martin Harris (Aidan Quinn), for starters.
Then, there are those sympathetic like his doctor and nurse, who just want proof before they agree that he is indeed Dr. Harris.
The folks at the hotel and the conference don't know what to believe, but the police are called multiple times just in case he's nuts.
Left without any options, Dr. Harris tracks down the taxi driver (Kruger) who saved him after the accident for additional answers and seeks the help of a former spy who is now a private investigator. As this is happening, at least two people (not those two) die trying to help him.
To say that it's boring would be unfair, to call it "smart" would be equally unfair.
Liam Neeson is his usual good "desperate" character. There are car chases and flashed knives and guns pulled and men in black leather jackets there to let you know they are bad guys.
There is also sexual tension (with the taxi driver) and enough flashback shots of a flirtatious Liz to make you wish you were watching re-runs of Mad Men instead.
As for figuring out the mystery, after a certain point I quit caring about Dr. Harris.
Unfortunately, the box office returns didn't, so more empty action films like this are sure to be made.
~~~
An upper-class American couple arrives in Berlin to find some of their luggage didn't make it from the airport, so the husband catches a Taxi to return to the airport and retrieve it. Unfortunately, during that ride, he's in a terrible car accident and ends up in a coma for four days. When he wakes up, he remembers everything about his life, but no one will confirm it—not even his wife of five years.
So here we have the story of Martin Harris (Neeson). A supposed brilliant scientist who is in Germany to give a presentation at an intellectual conference until he is made to believe that his life is not his own after all.
There are folks who swear they don't know who he is. His wife Liz (January Jones) and the alleged real Martin Harris (Aidan Quinn), for starters.
Then, there are those sympathetic like his doctor and nurse, who just want proof before they agree that he is indeed Dr. Harris.
The folks at the hotel and the conference don't know what to believe, but the police are called multiple times just in case he's nuts.
Left without any options, Dr. Harris tracks down the taxi driver (Kruger) who saved him after the accident for additional answers and seeks the help of a former spy who is now a private investigator. As this is happening, at least two people (not those two) die trying to help him.
To say that it's boring would be unfair, to call it "smart" would be equally unfair.
Liam Neeson is his usual good "desperate" character. There are car chases and flashed knives and guns pulled and men in black leather jackets there to let you know they are bad guys.
There is also sexual tension (with the taxi driver) and enough flashback shots of a flirtatious Liz to make you wish you were watching re-runs of Mad Men instead.
As for figuring out the mystery, after a certain point I quit caring about Dr. Harris.
Unfortunately, the box office returns didn't, so more empty action films like this are sure to be made.
~~~
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Sherlock Holmes
Tonight I saw Sherlock Holmes, starring Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law.
Guy Ritchie's dumbed-down version of Holmes is not without appeal, it's just not what I've pictured of the character all my life.
The dapper Sherlock (Downey Jr.) is in between cases after solving a big one and has turned into somewhat of a hermit. His faithful Watson (Law) encourages him to get back to work, and additional motivation is found by Irene (Rachel McAdams). I don't think I'd be out of line here mentioning that the chemistry between Downey Jr. and Law is far more electric than that of Downey Jr. and McAdams.
Anyway, soon the three are on the chase with Holmes predictably outwitting everyone in his path (and stopping to explain himself after each feat). The fight scenes are predictably exciting (since that's Ritchie's "thing"), but at times it's almost expected that a "BOOM" or "POW" will emerge from a puffy cloud above their heads. It's that comic book-ish.
Nevertheless, I'd say the greatest elements of the film are the cinematography and the art direction. London looks so gray and spooky, I remembered how I felt years ago when visiting the city, I took a Jack the Ripper murder mystery tour that led me well into the night. It creeped me out; not only because the stories I was hearing were true, but because the mood was "just right."
And while I don't believe the character portrayals (though undeniably entertaining) are faithful enough to their literary counterparts, I do appreciate how cool it all was to watch.
Guy Ritchie's dumbed-down version of Holmes is not without appeal, it's just not what I've pictured of the character all my life.
The dapper Sherlock (Downey Jr.) is in between cases after solving a big one and has turned into somewhat of a hermit. His faithful Watson (Law) encourages him to get back to work, and additional motivation is found by Irene (Rachel McAdams). I don't think I'd be out of line here mentioning that the chemistry between Downey Jr. and Law is far more electric than that of Downey Jr. and McAdams.
Anyway, soon the three are on the chase with Holmes predictably outwitting everyone in his path (and stopping to explain himself after each feat). The fight scenes are predictably exciting (since that's Ritchie's "thing"), but at times it's almost expected that a "BOOM" or "POW" will emerge from a puffy cloud above their heads. It's that comic book-ish.
Nevertheless, I'd say the greatest elements of the film are the cinematography and the art direction. London looks so gray and spooky, I remembered how I felt years ago when visiting the city, I took a Jack the Ripper murder mystery tour that led me well into the night. It creeped me out; not only because the stories I was hearing were true, but because the mood was "just right."
And while I don't believe the character portrayals (though undeniably entertaining) are faithful enough to their literary counterparts, I do appreciate how cool it all was to watch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)