12 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Margin Call (2011)
4/10
Much Ado About Nothing
2 October 2014
Warning: Spoilers
The only really good thing about this movie is Jeremy Iron's show-stealing performance as head of the Nameless Bank. Other than that I have to say I don't understand the positive reviews. It is, frankly, boring. It's not a "thriller" as there isn't one single thrilling moment. Most of the characters are a bit ridiculous and there's so many of them vying for position on the screen it's hard to know who you're supposed to be rooting for: Zachary Quinto? Stanley Tucci? Kevin Spacey? Spacey's fake tan is unintentionally hilarious. Also I don't think morally centered characters suit him. He's always cast as a bad guy these days and it suits him better.

The non-existent plot is repeated over and over: analyst discovers model was incorrect and predicts impending doom for the Nameless Bank. Calls his boss and explains it. His boss calls HIS boss and explains it. His boss calls HIS BOSS and so on and so forth. Helicpoters fly in with execs on board. Eventually they decide what they're going to do and they do it. They're afraid that Stanley Tucci will go rogue but they talk to him and he's fine. Nothing really happens. There's no tension.

Perhaps the most laughable character is Seth, the 23 year old junior analyst who for the entire movie doesn't seem to give a crap about this job or the Nameless Bank as a whole - he spends most of the first few hours drinking for crying out loud. Then when he realises he's going to probably lose his job we find him crying in a toilet cubicle and saying this is all he ever wanted to do. Really?? Demi Moore phones it in and shares one of the most bafflingly boring scenes ever committed to screen with Stanley Tucci when she learns she will have to fall on her sword.

Much ado about nothing.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
No (I) (2012)
8/10
It's a Yes from me
25 September 2014
This is a well-made, stylistically heavy, slightly whimsical view of the the 1988 plebiscite to unseat Pinochet as Chile's autocratic military ruler. The first thing to say is that as a period piece, the late 80's are rendered in all their grainy, blotchy glory using what I can only assume is technology from that time, and while at times this can be a bit off-putting (the wobbly camera work is reminiscent of "found footage" type movies) eventually it becomes just part of the furniture.

It is also a satirical look at the advertising industry, not just in Chile, but in general. One of the leading lights of the industry in Chile is Gael Garcia Bernal's character who is approached to run the No campaign. He applies all of his cynical abilities in selling "No" as a product to the undecided or the non-voters, much to the disgust of those who have suffered brutally at the hands of Pinochet's regime. He is also pitched against the owner of the advertising agency he works for who decides to work for the Yes campaign.

We get a very narrow view of the plebiscite here. There's no real look at how all of the political parties (12 or so) that are against Pinochet all managed to unite for the single cause. The focus is very much on the campaign itself and the pressure put on the campaigners by the Government and the Yes side. The scenes of the protests and riots are brilliantly shot, mixing old newsreel with staged shots.

There are plenty of funny moments too, particularly when they are first trying to decide on a theme for the No campaign and the ideas they are coming up with are laughable.

Well worth a look.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Hilarious Documentary
26 August 2014
Wow, this was not what I expected. I haven't laughed this hard at a documentary since Michael Moore stopped doing them. Briefly, it's loosely based on Matt Berninger's brother Tom's attempts to make a movie about the band.

I have to admit, I had to suppress my inner cynic at many points (who's doing all the filming of Tom? Who's idea was it to come on tour really? Is he really that thick??) but whoever came up with the idea of having Tom do this obviously had some idea what the results would be. I mean one meeting with Tom would have indicated that he would not be capable in pulling together some kind of coherent documentary. As they say, it takes a very smart person to act dumb. But then again some people are just dumb.

When Tom is behind the camera he is strangely reminiscent of Jack Black at his bratty best. He's disappointed that being on tour with a rock band is actually quite boring. He doesn't really have much interest in any band members other than his brother and he uses these conversations to try and understand his relationship with his brother a bit better. The most arresting scenes are when Matt loses it with Tom - they feel very real and you know you are watching that fraternal relationship that has a lot of history.

I love the National but, to be honest, that's of little consequence. Love them or hate them, you will laugh at this (very short) film.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Self Indulgent Ego Trip
26 August 2014
I really had looked forward to this movie, being a big LCD Soundystem fan for years, but it really opened my eyes to the ego of James Murphy, who I had once thought to be one of the coolest guys making music today. Everything felt staged or scripted. The movie opens with Murphy "waking" to his phone ringing, but was there a camera man filming him all night waiting for him to wake? I don't think so. There are several other moments like this peppered throughout the film.

The interview that forms the backbone to the documentary is more cringey than anything else. Murphy's ego can't be kept in check and some of his answers make you wish he would stop talking and cut back to the farewell concert in Madison Square Garden, which is really the only thing that feels natural here. It's a fantastic, huge performance and is captured brilliantly.

Towards the end, where we see Murphy going to the store where all the band's gear is kept and breaking down and crying in an Oscar-worthy performance. Again, it all feels staged: "now for the emotional bit". I actually ended up feeling slightly sorry for the guy, crying over a few synthesizers.

They were a great band but they were only around for 9-10 years. I think the guy needs some perspective. "Shut Up and Play the Hits" is a more apt title than they probably realized.
8 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A Collection of Comedy Sketches
26 August 2014
This the Coen's weakest movie that I've seen. It's not really a movie in the traditional sense, more like a series of sketches strung together rather tenuously. What makes it work is the immense likability of the 3 leads and some genuinely hilarious moments. What doesn't is its length and the broken nature of the plot. You could leave during the screening, return in 10 minutes and it really wouldn't matter. Perhaps if I'd seen this before some the Coens' more accomplished recent films I wouldn't have felt so let down. The scenarios that our 3 protagonists find themselves in grow more surreal and ridiculous as the film progresses, and then, bizarrely, for the last half an hour it's extended into a kind of boring melodrama before fading out with a whimper.
9 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Wanted (2008)
5/10
What I expected but not what I Wanted
19 November 2012
I really only have myself to blame for this. Having seen the trailers which show the stunts and the bending bullets I knew what I was in for: some mindless visual popcorn.

In many ways you have to just suspend your disbelief for this movie and then you can enjoy it more. If, like me, you struggle with that then this movie will irritate the heck out of you.

For me, the most entertaining parts of this movie were Wesley's (James McAvoy) interactions with his friend, his boss, his girlfriend. Like superhero movies, it's when the hero first discovers his powers that are the most fun as we can identify with him. However, once Wesley learns his trade and turns into some kind of cross between Superman and James Bond that it becomes a bit tedious.

Angelina Jolie adds the requisite hotness. Morgan Freeman adds the requisite gravitas. Neither of them break a sweat. Angelina in particular manages to maintain the exact same face for the whole movie which is quite an achievement.

There is also too many slow motion exploding heads for my liking. It takes gratuitous violence to an extreme.

Overall, if your brain is too tired to watch something good, this will divert you and frustrate you. Don't expect any more than what you see in the trailer though.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Trashed (2012)
6/10
Meandering but well-intentioned documentary
19 November 2012
I saw this at the Cork Film Festival this weekend. Unfortunately the director couldn't make it due to family illness.

Overall I felt the message was a bit muddled at times - particularly when Jeremy Irons visits the orphanages in Vietnam - and it dragged in parts. They spend an awful lot of time interviewing people involved in various incinerators around the world but the message is always the same so after a while it gets a bit boring. When they focus on the sea and the amount of plastic in it again they get different people to say the same thing which again gets a little irritating. Probably the most glaring example of this is the very beginning when it focuses on the trash mountain in Lebanon that is leaking into the sea. It alternates between long shots of the mountain, to Jeremy sitting on a trash covered beach looking pensive, then back to the mountain, then Jeremy.... I felt like standing up and going "OK I GET IT!! LET'S MOVE ON!!" Having said that, Jeremy was a great choice of protagonist as he is both engaging and humane in terms of those that he encounters, and quite funny at times too. It ends on an optimistic note which is important for these kinds of documentaries as most of the content is fairly depressing. But I feel they could easily shaved at least 20 minutes off the running time without in any way affecting the narrative.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
And then there was George.
3 October 2011
I've read a few of the reviews here already. I was interested to read some of the negative ones by people who clearly had not done their homework before going to see it. And by that I don't mean reading the book - simply reading a review would provide all the information necessary.

First there was James.

Then Jason.

And then there was George.

This film is as much a reaction to the "spy" movies of recent times as it is an adaptation of a classic novel. The reality, as portrayed in this fascinating movie, is the a good spy does not go around blowing up cars and killing scores of people... it does not assist in staying incognito. The spies all work in drab, grey government buildings. Flashbacks to the a Christmas party help to portray the "Circus" as just another workplace.

And yet there are killings in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Graphic, horrific deaths. But it is not the deaths themselves but the tension and the feeling of dread that precedes such moments.

This is a film for grown ups. You have to watch, listen and take it all in. Not just sit back and wait for the next fight scene or car chase to keep you engaged.

It is not a film without flaws. Many of the characters are introduced too quickly so we have a litany of names and faces but difficulty in matching them up. This does not aid in interpreting what is a considerably complex plot.

But there are great performances from an all-star British cast and from the set designers who portray Cold War-era London in all its oppressive greatness.

See this if you are willing to engage your brain.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Way (I) (2010)
4/10
An American, A Dutchman and an Irishman walk into a bar...
23 May 2011
Warning: Spoilers
An American, A dutchman and an Irishman walk into a bar...It sounds like the beginning of a bad joke but it's the middle of a mediocre movie that could have (should have!) been great.

Frankly I'm a little baffled by the glowing reviews and the "best movie ever" superlatives from some of the other users here. In the end this is an overlong, highly unoriginal movie with clumsy dialogue and clichéd characters.

The story of Martin Sheen walking the camino to complete his dead son's journey had all the potential to be great. Instead it stayed so far within its comfort zone it was a real bore.

A special mention goes to the clichéd characters: a dutchman who does drugs and parties (no way!) but has decided to walk the 800km to "lose weight" for a wedding. I'm sorry? There are far more effective ways to lose some weight; an Irish writer with writer's block whose every utterance made me cringe - particularly his opening monologue about writers. And a Canadian woman, who is angry at....what exactly? Throw in some clichéd, unbelievably friendly locals who react to our four pilgrims arrival in the various towns as if they're the first they've seen in months in spite of the fact that literally hundreds of people are doing this trek everyday. A particular shout-out goes to the Spanish gypsy in this respect.

I was also kind of surprised that Estevez's character, Daniel, is still yelled at by his Dad for not doing anything with his life even though he's nearly 40. Time to get over it I think.

I have some friends who did the last part of the Camino de Santiago and they said that you had to get to each town early to be sure of a bed that night - not like our 4 intrepid trekkers who can rock up whenever they want and have a choice of hostels! Also, they had sores and blisters on their feet after 2 days and they would be fairly fit guys. Sheen on the other hand, despite not being fit enough to walk around a golf course, hardly has to stop for a breath.

But OK, there is some poetic licence involved in movie-making.

The positives: The scenery is beautiful; Sheen is in standard Sheen mode, uptight and dignified; and there are a few genuinely funny and moving moments.

But every time something happens that makes you think "maybe this movie is alright" something happens that is completely unrealistic and condescending. The final scene was the nail in the coffin, so to speak, with all characters giving an only-in-the-movies one line sign off before leaving individually.

A real disappointment.
35 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Shoes and socks remain on.
5 November 2008
I am a fan of all three of the main actors in this movie but I have to say I left the cinema disappointed. There are some great scenes in this movie and some laugh-out-loud visual gags. The fake trailers at the start an the opening scene are extremely funny. But after a while the main running jokes end up wearing thin. Take Downey Jr's character for example. Sure at first his playing of the stereotypical black sergeant is funny but half way through the movie I was already tired of his shtick. Plus I found a lot of his dialogue hard to understand. Another example is Tom Cruise's turn as Lex Grossman. Sure it's hilarious to see him as a fat, bald exec with a foul mouth and a short fuse, but when all that comes out of his mouth is expletives then it becomes old extremely quickly. Same with his dance routine, funny at first but then they had to bring it back for the closing credits and run it into the ground.

I always enjoy watching Ben Stiller and Jack Black. I find them genuinely funny, but here it's almost as if I was laughing in anticipation of a joke that never happened. I really wanted this movie to knock my socks off, but unfortunately all that happened was one of my shoelaces came undone.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Infinitely Rewatchable
24 October 2008
I am not one for watching movies repeatedly but this movie is an exception to the rule. Perhaps it is the fact that there is no discernible plot or major twist that makes numerous viewings possible. Or perhaps it is the sheer joy to be taken from the two main performances of Johnny Depp and Benicio del Toro. This has to be del Toro's greatest achievement as an actor, he is positively terrifying as Depp's drug buddy and "attorney". And Depp's wacky mannerisms and rambling monologues are pitch perfect.

Depp plays Hunter S. Thompson, who, for the purposes of the movie goes by the pseudonym of Raoul Duke, the father of so-called "Gonzo journalism". The official purpose of his trip to the titular city is to cover a desert motorcycle race. The actual purpose being a mind bending, all-you-can-eat drug buffet.

Terry Gilliam brings his unique style to this movie. The psychedelic visuals that the viewer experiences through Duke's eyes are a real joy, and are straight out of the Gilliam school of bizarre animation first seen in his Monty Python days. It would be hard to imagine anyone else at the helm.

Interestingly, on my most recent viewing of this movie I was watching it with a number of non-native English speakers. None of them had seen it before so I thought, given the leads' slurred speech throughout, it would be a good idea to opt for English subtitles. It was a revelation! I hadn't realised how much dialogue I hadn't grasped or even heard before. There were some truly hilarious lines newly discovered that night. And you know, that is another reason this movie is suitable for multiple screenings, as there is always something new to discover.

The only reason this movie did not get the full 10 from me is that every time I watch it I am surprised by how long it is. It definitely starts to sag a little bit when Duke returns to Vegas for the second time but then quickly picks up again, only to sag again towards the end. 15-20 minutes shorter would have been perfect.

And no, you don't have to be on drugs to enjoy this movie. In fact I think that would defeat the purpose.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Oh good lord
22 October 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Well this movie actually made me feel so strongly that I signed up for an IMDb account just to warn people. It is patently AWFUL!! NOTHING makes sense in this movie. There is way too many subplots for a start. Josh Hartnett's character is an aspiring actor and yoga instructor as well as a cop who seems to be living way beyond his means and only teaches yoga to hot girls (Some of whom wait naked in his jacuzzi for when he comes back from work). Add to that the fact that his dad was killed by a crooked cop who just so happens to be in on the current crime being investigated by the hapless duo. Harrison Ford's character is trying to sell real estate on the side and is sleeping with the Internal Affairs investigator's ex-wife who happens to run a psychic radio show which Ford's character calls from time to time. NONSENSE!!

I can't remember the characters names (that's how forgettable this is) so I'll refer to them as Ford and Hartnett.

Then there's the dialogue which is brutal. I mean cringe-inducing stuff here. Throw in every cliché in the book (having a heart-to-heart in a dark bar during the day over a drink where the bartender knows his name; the duo being investigated by internal affairs (why??); hartnett confronting his dad's killer) and you've got one hell of a mess.

As I mentioned the plot is preposterous and continuity is non-existent: 1) When Ford's car is being repossessed, how the hell did the repo guys know where it would be parked? Were they following him?? 2) When Hartnett goes to the morgue and it just so happens that the only clue from the crime scene (an earring) is replicated on of the charred bodies there (that was lucky!) 3) When the two are arrested and taken in for questioning - Ford keeps answering his phone and Hartnett "centers himself" with a yoga pose on the table. Instead of taking the phone from Ford the IA guy waits for it to ring each time and then tries to grab it off the table before Ford does. Meanwhile the female IA officer in with Hartnett is rubbing herself all over him. Then, inexplicably, the two are released without answering any questions. 4) During the car chase Hartnett's car is crashing and smashing its way around Hollywood but then suddenly the car is perfect again. Not a scratch! 5) When Ford chases the bad guy into the building and he gets in the elevator how the hell does he know which floor the bad guy got off at?? 6) When the two are chasing the bad guy around in hartnett's car, Ford is trying to close a real estate deal. Come on! 7) The bad guy is the most unconvincing record exec ever. His motivation for killing an aspiring group of rappers on his label? They might leave his label and it's a warning to keep his other groups loyal. But hang on, how is he ever going to sign anyone new with that business plan?? 8) Why is the IA guy who is investigating Ford arrested in the end? There is no explication!! 9) And Hartnett gets to use his "acting" to capture the bad guy in the end.

I could go on, I really could. Anyone who is looking deeper into this movie than a straight up action comedy needs their head examined because that's all it is. There's nothing else to it! It's not supposed to be satirical or ironic. It's just crap.
26 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed