Showing posts with label Richard E. Grant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Richard E. Grant. Show all posts

Sunday, February 2, 2025

Loki (2021-3)

The Marvel universe has gotten unwieldy.  In the early years, they used to be pretty good at making standalone movies. But now they've started making TV shows too, it's all so interconnected. Season 1 was actually pretty decent. But I did not follow a single plot point in Season 2. Single season contained shows is the sweet spot for Marvel. There's too much happening in between seasons. 

The Time Variance Authority is not named accidentally. The acronym TVA recalls the New Deal Tennessee Valley Authority program. The design of the TVA evokes the FDR era. The production design is the best part of the show. That and Owen Wilson playing his usual self. Ke Huy Quan is fun too. I don't know if I completely buy into the message of the show either. We're made to believe that the sacred timeline is the inherently correct one. But the fact that there are branches suggests that to be untrue. And I think I had other problems with it back at season one but I don't really remember now.

Friday, November 2, 2018

The Nutcracker and the Four Realms (2018)

Disney's latest attempt at a live-action re-imagining of a beloved tale is almost incoherent. It's ostensibly the Nutcracker, but it tries to emanate the Chronicles of Narnia, Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, and Wizard of Oz, making it wholly unoriginal. Some of the characters have the same names as the ones from the ballet but the story is totally different and that's a bad thing. Nothing is really quite explained enough to satisfaction. And there are a handful of plot points that frustratingly don't go anywhere. I love Keira Knightley and I've never heard her voice sound so unnatural. Also beware the mice; there are A LOT of mice in this movie.

But let's try to focus on the good. The cinematography and art direction are beautiful. Linus Sandgren's visuals are stunning as usual. The music of the Nutcracker is iconic. The score by James Newton Howard does not merely copy Tchaikovsky's composition. It does includes short snippets here and there. But Howard's excellent soundtrack has noticeable variations on the themes from the Nutcracker. There is one scene of the movie that rises above the rest: it's obviously the ballet scene featuring none other than Misty Copeland. In a movie full of CGI, the most magical scene is the one featuring practical sets on a ballet stage. I actually wouldn't have minded if more of the story was told through dance. That wouldn't have been inappropriate for the Nutcracker. They couldn't done a Chicago-esque kind of thing. The ballet is preceded by maestro Gustavo Dudamel taking his place in front of the orchestra in silhouette a la Fantasia. That's Disney invoking itself; I don't know if anyone else would be so bold but Disney.

Can You Ever Forgive Me? (2018)

Melissa McCarhthy is obviously a comedienne.When I heard she was doing a drama, I was naturally surprised. But there is a lot more comedy in the movie than I was led to believe. And good thing there is because McCarthy is phenomenal. She gets to shine in this dramatic-comedic hybrid role as a cynical writer who can't find work who turns to literary forgery. Director Marielle Heller does an incredible job at making something that is extremely niche accessible to a broad audience. Cause really who knows or cares anything about literary collectibles? Richard E. Grant plays her partner in crime and his character is somehow simultaneously sleazy and charming. Grant and McCarthy play off of each other brilliantly. I think Dolly Wells as Anna is really charming too. It's really surprisingly enjoyable overall.

Wednesday, August 16, 2017

The Hitman's Bodyguard (2017)

I saw an advance screening of The Hitman's Bodyguard. It's decently funny but not nearly as funny as the loud man in the movie theater would have you believe. It kind of works. Samuel L. Jackson and Ryan Reynolds have this buddy chemistry because this genre of film, that is ridiculous action comedy, suits them both. Ryan Reynolds will never get away from this genre post-Deadpool. And Samuel L. Jackson is well known for yelling profanities in a forceful manner thanks to Quentin Tarantino. It's funny enough to be entertaining and bloody violent. We're in a John Wick-era of violence nowadays--it's becoming rather normalized I think.

The film does do a ridiculous disservice to international law. It has a terrible understanding of the purpose of international law, which I took some offense to as a student of international law. It also does not feature the actual ICC, which I went to in the Hague. The real deal has much more intense security than the movie version I know it's not the point of the movie, but they could've done some research.

Sunday, February 19, 2017

Logan (2017)

We lucked out at Berlinale, catching the premiere of Logan. Gianna waited in the standby line and with a little bit of luck, got us 3 tickets to the 10pm screening. We thought the cast was the 7 o'clock, but they were at our screening. We saw Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart and the rest of the cast and crew. I actually sat 8 rows behind them in the orchestra. It was very cool.

But now the movie...this is the final film in the Wolverine trilogy, and allegedly Hugh Jackman's swan song in the iconic role, after almost two decades. The ageless Wolverine has aged. The immortal Wolverine is...mortal?  Yes, he's still the same hot tempered, badmouthed bad ass. But after 8 films, Jackman has matured his character. In a series largely about evolution, the character of Wolverine has evolved emotionally. What really sets this film apart from the previous X-Men movies is that it's a film, in the words of Hugh Jackman post-credits from the stage (that's why it's premiering at Berlin). It stands on its own. If you know nothing about X-Men, you can still appreciate this film for what it is.  It is a character driven movie that doesn't rely on the super-ness of the characters. It's not a superhero movie. It doesn't rely on the fight scenes, though they are plentiful (perhaps too gritty and plentiful)--it certainly earns its R rating in terms of blood). The movie has an R-level tone of seriousness.

What I like most about X-Men is the political overtones. This film doesn't really use it. And I am ok with that. This film is something different. It plays out like a Western, driving across the Great Plains. It scoffs at the comic book origins of Wolverine, and paves its own way. It will be a landmark in the Marvel canon, hopefully having changed the superhero genre for good because I, for one, have gotten tired of the Avengers.