The King's Speech is directed by Tom Hooper, and stars Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush, and Helena Bonham Carter. It first premiered at Toronto International Film Festival, where it won the People's Choice Award before getting a limited release on November 26, 2010.
A subject that has always interested me is the monarchy. Ever since I was little, both my parents would always talk about Queen Elizabeth II, what life would be like with Charles as King, grieving over Diana's death, and more recently, the engagement of William and Kate. Due to this, I had quite a bit of knowledge going into this film. The film is about the monarch before Elizabeth II, her father, King George VI. Before he was the King, he was the Duke of York, Prince Albert, the son of the King. He had a terrible stammer, which gave him an aversion to public speaking. After a terrible incident Wembley, in 1925, he began to meet with Dr. Lionel Logue, a speech therapist. By 1927, he was able to speak almost perfectly.
The film takes a few liberties with the plot, the biggest one being that the majority of the film takes place in the 30s, where instead, he cured his stammer in the 20s, but oh well, who cares? And to tell you the truth, it was a smart decision to set the film in the 1930s, because it added drama to the film, making it all the more interesting. I feel this was a smart decision by Hooper, and I applaud him for it.
In the film, the incident at Wembley happens, but he doesn't start to meet Lionel Logue regularily until 1934. In 1936, his father, King George V (Michael Gambon) dies, leaving his older brother, David, (Guy Pearce) to become King Edward VIII. He wants to marry an American divorcee, Wallis Simpson, (Eve Best) but because she is divorced, he cannot. He chooses to abdicate so he can marry Ms. Simpson, leaving Albert as the new King.
Colin Firth does a tremendous job as King George VI. It's not easy to fake a stammer, yet he does it brilliantly. You also feel for his character, as he is afraid for the majority of his life, and does not want to be King, yet he is thrust into the role, to save the monarchy. Also, the film adds the drama of World War II beginning, to make his situation even harder. Quite obviously, he will be one of the 5 men nominated for for Best Actor at the Academy Awards next year.
Geoffrey Rush also does a fantastic job as Lionel Logue. In my opinion, he did a better job than Colin Firth, and if you ask me, is the favorite this year for Best Supporting Actor, despite having already won the award.
The supporting cast also does a very good job. Just to name a few, Helena Bonham Carter as Queen Elizabeth, later the Queen Mother portrays an opposite to the characters she mainly does. Instead of being an evil, vengeful bitch, she now portrays a kind, sweet woman, who truly loves her husband. Guy Pearce as Edward VIII was interesting, portraying a sort of rebellios son of sorts. And Timothy Spall as Winston Churchill. Let me tell you, he doesn't quite look the part, but he sure plays it.
The film is still in limited release, but if you get a chance to see it, I recommend it. You don't even have to know a lot about the monarchy to enjoy this film. Overall, I give this film an 8.5/10, a definite a-must.
Well, that's it for this review, and I'll see you in the next review.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Monday, November 22, 2010
Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 1
Harru Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 is the seventh film in the famous Harry Potter series, about a boy's adventures as he goes to wizarding school, and fights the evil Lord Voldemort. It is directed by David Yates, screenplay by Steve Kloves, and stars the usual trio, Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson.
It is the beginning of the end. A decade of Quidditch, spells, and gingers. It comes to this. Dumbledore is dead. Hogwarts has fallen to the Death Eaters, with the Ministry of Magic soon to follow. Our favorite characters are dying across the board; Hedwig, Mad-Eye Moody, even Dobby. (DOBBY? NO!!!!)
As the end draws closer, Harry and his friends, Ron and Hermione, start traveling to find the remaining Horcruxes, and destroy them. A mysterious R.A.B. has taken one of the Horcruxes, Salazar Slytherin's locket, and replaced it with a phony. The bulk of this film shows them traveling with this locket, attempting to find ways to destroy it.
This film was very different than the others, and yet, felt so familiar. Despite the majority of this film showing them traveling, and not at their familiar Hogwarts, it still has that classic Harry Potter feel to it, which is a good thing. We see our main characters have now grown up. They are no longer arguing over how you really say, "Wingardium Leviosa," but instead dealing with their adult situations in adult ways. Just with wands as well. The actors have grown with them, being extremely tremendous in their roles. They can hold this entire film, and do, successfully and tremendously. Along with them, we also have a strong British cast, including newcomers to the series, Bill Nighy as new Minister of Magic Rufus Scrimgeor, Rhys Ifans as Quibbler editor Xenophilius Lovegood, and Jaime Campbell Bower as the teenage dark wizard Gellert Grindelwald. However, this film isn't about them, it's about our three leads. We see less of everyone, including Snape, Voldemort, and McGonnagall (who doesn't even make an appearance). They all take a backseat to our leads, and thank god for it.
This film also tried some new things. There was an animated sequence in the film, which surprisingly works. It looks amazing as well. They also went for something in this film that is sure to make some fan-fiction writers happy. I'm not spoiling anything, but it was Harry, and not Ron. Ron has yet to happen.
Overall, this was a very good film, it's only problem is that it ended, and we have to wait 8 months to find out what happens. I give this film a 9/10. I would recommend it, but it's very likely that everyone has seen it already.
That's it for this review, and I'll see you in the next review.
P.S. There was one bit in the film, I get the feeling it wasn't well noticed, but they put it in anyways. Hermione is telling a story, and she says something like, "in the twilight," and Ron corrects her with midnight. When Hermione looks at him with anger, he quickly says, "Twilight's not bad."
It is the beginning of the end. A decade of Quidditch, spells, and gingers. It comes to this. Dumbledore is dead. Hogwarts has fallen to the Death Eaters, with the Ministry of Magic soon to follow. Our favorite characters are dying across the board; Hedwig, Mad-Eye Moody, even Dobby. (DOBBY? NO!!!!)
As the end draws closer, Harry and his friends, Ron and Hermione, start traveling to find the remaining Horcruxes, and destroy them. A mysterious R.A.B. has taken one of the Horcruxes, Salazar Slytherin's locket, and replaced it with a phony. The bulk of this film shows them traveling with this locket, attempting to find ways to destroy it.
This film was very different than the others, and yet, felt so familiar. Despite the majority of this film showing them traveling, and not at their familiar Hogwarts, it still has that classic Harry Potter feel to it, which is a good thing. We see our main characters have now grown up. They are no longer arguing over how you really say, "Wingardium Leviosa," but instead dealing with their adult situations in adult ways. Just with wands as well. The actors have grown with them, being extremely tremendous in their roles. They can hold this entire film, and do, successfully and tremendously. Along with them, we also have a strong British cast, including newcomers to the series, Bill Nighy as new Minister of Magic Rufus Scrimgeor, Rhys Ifans as Quibbler editor Xenophilius Lovegood, and Jaime Campbell Bower as the teenage dark wizard Gellert Grindelwald. However, this film isn't about them, it's about our three leads. We see less of everyone, including Snape, Voldemort, and McGonnagall (who doesn't even make an appearance). They all take a backseat to our leads, and thank god for it.
This film also tried some new things. There was an animated sequence in the film, which surprisingly works. It looks amazing as well. They also went for something in this film that is sure to make some fan-fiction writers happy. I'm not spoiling anything, but it was Harry, and not Ron. Ron has yet to happen.
Overall, this was a very good film, it's only problem is that it ended, and we have to wait 8 months to find out what happens. I give this film a 9/10. I would recommend it, but it's very likely that everyone has seen it already.
That's it for this review, and I'll see you in the next review.
P.S. There was one bit in the film, I get the feeling it wasn't well noticed, but they put it in anyways. Hermione is telling a story, and she says something like, "in the twilight," and Ron corrects her with midnight. When Hermione looks at him with anger, he quickly says, "Twilight's not bad."
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Buried
Buried premiered at Sundance on January 23, 2010, was picked up by Lionsgate, and given a limted release on September 24, with a more widespread release on October 8. It is directed by Rodrigo Cortes, written by Chris Sparling, and starring Ryan Reynolds.
The plot involves a man, Paul Conroy (Ryan Reynolds), a truck driver in Irag, 2006, kidnapped and buried alive by a group of Iraqis, who demand $5 million by 9 P.M., or he will be left to die. He only has a Zippo and a cell phone.
This film is arguably, the toughest film ever to do for a writer, director, and especially actor. The entire film is inside of a coffin. That's right, inside of a coffin. Not one single frame shows us outside of the coffin.
Ryan Reynolds, the popular Canadian actor, has an extremely tough job in this film, as the film takes place entirely in the coffin. Ryan Reynolds has to carry the enitre film on his shoulders, attempting to make us believe that he is in fact, stuck inside of a coffin. He was astounding. Simply astounding. I have never really liked Ryan Reynolds, but here, he was AMAZING. He showed true fear, as if he really was inside of a coffin, buried alive. A lot of the praise here also has to go to Rodrigo Cortes, the director, and Chris Sparling, the writer. One of the most interesting things that Rodrigo Cortes did was having a vairety of shots, where they took part of the coffin away, and moved the camera back very slowly, showing us Reynolds from a distance, while still in the coffin. These shots looked beautiful, and were some of my favorite parts of the movie. Also, kudos to Chris Sparling, who had to write the majority of the film as a monologue for Reynolds, but credit is also due for his dialogue, where Reynolds talks on the phone to his wife, boss, the man who is trying to rescue him, and the Iraqis that put him there.
This film was so incredible, that I can't even call it a film. I have to call it an experience. It still only plays in limited theatres, but if you ever get the chance, go see it. Every second I sat in the theatre, I was scared for Paul Conroy, hoping he would live. And I don't want to spoil the ending for you, but, my God. That's all I say.
This film was extremely amazing, well acted, well directed, and well written. It was well everything. I give this film a perfect 10/10.
That's it for this review, and I'll see you in the next review.
The plot involves a man, Paul Conroy (Ryan Reynolds), a truck driver in Irag, 2006, kidnapped and buried alive by a group of Iraqis, who demand $5 million by 9 P.M., or he will be left to die. He only has a Zippo and a cell phone.
This film is arguably, the toughest film ever to do for a writer, director, and especially actor. The entire film is inside of a coffin. That's right, inside of a coffin. Not one single frame shows us outside of the coffin.
Ryan Reynolds, the popular Canadian actor, has an extremely tough job in this film, as the film takes place entirely in the coffin. Ryan Reynolds has to carry the enitre film on his shoulders, attempting to make us believe that he is in fact, stuck inside of a coffin. He was astounding. Simply astounding. I have never really liked Ryan Reynolds, but here, he was AMAZING. He showed true fear, as if he really was inside of a coffin, buried alive. A lot of the praise here also has to go to Rodrigo Cortes, the director, and Chris Sparling, the writer. One of the most interesting things that Rodrigo Cortes did was having a vairety of shots, where they took part of the coffin away, and moved the camera back very slowly, showing us Reynolds from a distance, while still in the coffin. These shots looked beautiful, and were some of my favorite parts of the movie. Also, kudos to Chris Sparling, who had to write the majority of the film as a monologue for Reynolds, but credit is also due for his dialogue, where Reynolds talks on the phone to his wife, boss, the man who is trying to rescue him, and the Iraqis that put him there.
This film was so incredible, that I can't even call it a film. I have to call it an experience. It still only plays in limited theatres, but if you ever get the chance, go see it. Every second I sat in the theatre, I was scared for Paul Conroy, hoping he would live. And I don't want to spoil the ending for you, but, my God. That's all I say.
This film was extremely amazing, well acted, well directed, and well written. It was well everything. I give this film a perfect 10/10.
That's it for this review, and I'll see you in the next review.
Saturday, October 2, 2010
First Review - The Social Network
I'd like to welcome you all to my new form of reviews, a blog of them. I realize some of my die-hard fans(ha) probably have a problem with this, and I can understand that. I used to do video reviews, and while they weren't great, I enjoyed doing them, and my fans, all 4 of them, enjoyed watching them.
I have switched to a blog for two reasons. One, I have been meaning to start writing my reviews, and publishing them for quite a while now. Two, the true catalyst for this: the audio function on my main computer is broken, making it impossible for me to edit my videos at all. It costs too much for a 17 year old to fix. My only solutions were buy a new computer, or switch to writing. Yes, I could just edit on my other computer, for those of you who know me, but my camera has problems with this computer, making writing easier.
With that out of the way, let's get started with the first review: The Social Network.
The Social Network was released on October 1, 2010. It is directed by David Fincher, screenplay by Aaron Sorkin, and starring Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield, Justin Timberlake, and Armie Hammer.
The plot of the movie is a dramatized account of the creation and early years of facebook, the popular social networking site created by Mark Zuckerberg, Eduardo Saverin, Dustin Moskovitz, and Chris Hughes. It was initially created for Harvard students, but soon expanded worldwide. Today, it is the most popular social networking site of all time, and Mark Zuckerberg is the youngest billionaire in the world. He is currently 26, and owns 24% of the company, with a net worth of roughly $6.9 billion.
Let me start off by saying this: in terms of cinema, 2010 is an interesting year for my generation. We have had 3 films released this year, just for our generation. Those films are Kick-Ass, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, and The Social Network. Kick-Ass was a tribute to comic books and the kids who read them, wanting to be superheroes. Scott Pilgrim vs. The World was a tribute to video games, particularily the early Nintendo consoles. And finally, The Social Network is a film about facebook, the website that we all use to get in touch with people. I think that was quite interesting, and I thank Matthew Vaughn, Edgar Wright, and David Fincher for making these movies. They might not have been thinking about us, but in the end, these films were for us.
Bold statement time. Jesse Eisenberg will win Best Actor at the Oscars this year. He was simply amazing in this role. Just think of it: a year ago, Zombieland was released, and Jesse Eisenberg's status as a comedic actor was solidfied. A year later, The Social Network is released, and his status as a dramatic actor is solidfied. He was simply brilliant as Zuckerberg, he added such dimension to the character. Despite being the protagonist of the story, he is often portrayed as a jerk, a bad guy, and possibly, a touch of Asperger's syndrome. He was amazing in the role, and so far, is my lead choice for Best Actor this year. I haven't been a big fan of him before this, but now, he's in the top of my list.
And now for the other actors. I have never seen Andrew Garfield act before, but have always heard great things about him. They were all true, he is also a terrific actor, on par with Eisenberg. He is a possibility for Best Supporting Actor this year, but I am not 100% sure of that, due to Joseph Gordon-Levitt's role in Inception. One of the reasons I went to see this was to see if Andrew Garfield could play Spiderman successfully, which was very hard for me to accept, because I love Tobey Maguire as Spiderman. However, I think Garfield could possibly be a replacement for him. Armie Hammer, who plays Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss, the twins who sue Zuckerberg, was very good in his role, with some amazing special effects being applied to make it appear there were two of him in the room. There is one particular line which is just terrific delivered by Cameron Winklevoss, "I'm 6"5, 220, and there's two of me." I love that line so much. Justin Timberlake was also really impressive. I was actually surprised at him, cause I thought he was just some pop star. But no, he is a terrific actor, playing the playboy founder of Napster perfectly. I would also like to touch on Rooney Mara, an actress who I treated very similarily to Andrew Garfield, because I had never seen her act in anything. Despite having a small role in the film, appearing in only 3 scenes, if I remember correctly, she was quite impressive, to me at least. Also, like Andrew Garfield, in the future, she is playing a role that I wasn't sure if she could do: Lisbeth Salander, from the Millenium trilogy. I'm still not sure if she can pull it off, compared to Noomi Rapace, but she seems like she could at the very least, do a decent performance.
The direction by David Fincher was brilliant, as always is. I particularily like how he chose to have the film constantly switching between the lawsuits, and the early years of facebook, while not establishing which was the true timeline. The writing by Aaron Sorkin is brilliant, as always is. He is a terrific writer, expecially with dialogue. He wrote the film very satirical, and quite humorous. He truly is a skilled writer. One thing I would also like to mention is the score, composed by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross. I am a big NIN fan, so I was extremely excited hearing that he was doing the score. The way that these two did the score was quite interesting, as if they played classical electronically. Quite brilliant. I especially loved the song during the rowing scene, "In the Hall of the Mountain King." It was done very similar to NIN, quite enjoyable.
Overall, I give this film a perfect score of 10/10. (This is my new scoring system, rather simple and self-explanatory.) The brilliant acting, writing, and directing all worked perfectly together, and I recommend this film as a definite a-must for anyone in my generation, born in the mid 80s-mid 90s. Go see it.
That's it for this review, leave comments letting me know which movie you would like me to review next. Until then, I'll see you in the next review. (Yes, I am keeping my catchphrase.)
I have switched to a blog for two reasons. One, I have been meaning to start writing my reviews, and publishing them for quite a while now. Two, the true catalyst for this: the audio function on my main computer is broken, making it impossible for me to edit my videos at all. It costs too much for a 17 year old to fix. My only solutions were buy a new computer, or switch to writing. Yes, I could just edit on my other computer, for those of you who know me, but my camera has problems with this computer, making writing easier.
With that out of the way, let's get started with the first review: The Social Network.
The Social Network was released on October 1, 2010. It is directed by David Fincher, screenplay by Aaron Sorkin, and starring Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield, Justin Timberlake, and Armie Hammer.
The plot of the movie is a dramatized account of the creation and early years of facebook, the popular social networking site created by Mark Zuckerberg, Eduardo Saverin, Dustin Moskovitz, and Chris Hughes. It was initially created for Harvard students, but soon expanded worldwide. Today, it is the most popular social networking site of all time, and Mark Zuckerberg is the youngest billionaire in the world. He is currently 26, and owns 24% of the company, with a net worth of roughly $6.9 billion.
Let me start off by saying this: in terms of cinema, 2010 is an interesting year for my generation. We have had 3 films released this year, just for our generation. Those films are Kick-Ass, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, and The Social Network. Kick-Ass was a tribute to comic books and the kids who read them, wanting to be superheroes. Scott Pilgrim vs. The World was a tribute to video games, particularily the early Nintendo consoles. And finally, The Social Network is a film about facebook, the website that we all use to get in touch with people. I think that was quite interesting, and I thank Matthew Vaughn, Edgar Wright, and David Fincher for making these movies. They might not have been thinking about us, but in the end, these films were for us.
Bold statement time. Jesse Eisenberg will win Best Actor at the Oscars this year. He was simply amazing in this role. Just think of it: a year ago, Zombieland was released, and Jesse Eisenberg's status as a comedic actor was solidfied. A year later, The Social Network is released, and his status as a dramatic actor is solidfied. He was simply brilliant as Zuckerberg, he added such dimension to the character. Despite being the protagonist of the story, he is often portrayed as a jerk, a bad guy, and possibly, a touch of Asperger's syndrome. He was amazing in the role, and so far, is my lead choice for Best Actor this year. I haven't been a big fan of him before this, but now, he's in the top of my list.
And now for the other actors. I have never seen Andrew Garfield act before, but have always heard great things about him. They were all true, he is also a terrific actor, on par with Eisenberg. He is a possibility for Best Supporting Actor this year, but I am not 100% sure of that, due to Joseph Gordon-Levitt's role in Inception. One of the reasons I went to see this was to see if Andrew Garfield could play Spiderman successfully, which was very hard for me to accept, because I love Tobey Maguire as Spiderman. However, I think Garfield could possibly be a replacement for him. Armie Hammer, who plays Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss, the twins who sue Zuckerberg, was very good in his role, with some amazing special effects being applied to make it appear there were two of him in the room. There is one particular line which is just terrific delivered by Cameron Winklevoss, "I'm 6"5, 220, and there's two of me." I love that line so much. Justin Timberlake was also really impressive. I was actually surprised at him, cause I thought he was just some pop star. But no, he is a terrific actor, playing the playboy founder of Napster perfectly. I would also like to touch on Rooney Mara, an actress who I treated very similarily to Andrew Garfield, because I had never seen her act in anything. Despite having a small role in the film, appearing in only 3 scenes, if I remember correctly, she was quite impressive, to me at least. Also, like Andrew Garfield, in the future, she is playing a role that I wasn't sure if she could do: Lisbeth Salander, from the Millenium trilogy. I'm still not sure if she can pull it off, compared to Noomi Rapace, but she seems like she could at the very least, do a decent performance.
The direction by David Fincher was brilliant, as always is. I particularily like how he chose to have the film constantly switching between the lawsuits, and the early years of facebook, while not establishing which was the true timeline. The writing by Aaron Sorkin is brilliant, as always is. He is a terrific writer, expecially with dialogue. He wrote the film very satirical, and quite humorous. He truly is a skilled writer. One thing I would also like to mention is the score, composed by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross. I am a big NIN fan, so I was extremely excited hearing that he was doing the score. The way that these two did the score was quite interesting, as if they played classical electronically. Quite brilliant. I especially loved the song during the rowing scene, "In the Hall of the Mountain King." It was done very similar to NIN, quite enjoyable.
Overall, I give this film a perfect score of 10/10. (This is my new scoring system, rather simple and self-explanatory.) The brilliant acting, writing, and directing all worked perfectly together, and I recommend this film as a definite a-must for anyone in my generation, born in the mid 80s-mid 90s. Go see it.
That's it for this review, leave comments letting me know which movie you would like me to review next. Until then, I'll see you in the next review. (Yes, I am keeping my catchphrase.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)