Showing posts with label Blake Lively. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Blake Lively. Show all posts

October 3, 2020

The Town.


Review #1554: The Town.

Cast: 
Ben Affleck (Douglas "Doug" MacRay), Rebecca Hall (Claire Keesey), Jon Hamm (FBI Special Agent Adam Frawley), Jeremy Renner (James "Jem" Coughlin), Blake Lively (Krista "Kris" Coughlin), Chris Cooper (Stephen MacRay), Pete Postlethwaite (Fergus "Fergie" Colm), Slaine (Albert "Gloansy" MacGloan), Owen Burke (Desmond "Dez" Elden), and Titus Welliver (Officer Dino Ciampa) Directed by Ben Affleck.

Review: 
"It was concealing a character-based drama centered around themes that I was interested in, particularly the theme of children paying for the sins of their parents...But wrapping that in the sort of candy shell of a heist movie."

There is always room for another actor to find additional calling in directing, particularly if they have the instinct to accomplish it well. Ben Affleck (born in Berkeley, California but raised in Cambridge, Massachusetts) had started in acting since he was a child with television such as The Voyage of the Mimi (1984) before eventually moving on to search for work after high school in film (initially with small roles before his first lead role in Glory Daze in 1995). His prominent moment came at the age of 25, where he co-wrote and co-starred with Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting (1997, which resulted in his first of two Academy Awards). The years that followed resulted in a varying quality of films, but he moved on to directing with Gone Baby Gone (2007, which he also co-wrote), which led to fair notice. It is adapted from the 2004 novel Prince of Thieves written by Chuck Hogan (born in Massachusetts that based his story upon the dubious reputation of the neighborhood of Charlestown), which was adapted to the screen by Affleck, Peter Craig, and Aaron Stockard. After a few years of shuffling in development struggle (including a failed attempt to have Adrian Lyne to direct and Hogan to write a script for), Affleck found himself attached to star and direct. He was attracted to its similar to Gone, Baby, Gone in how he could use its structure of the story alongside its characters and dialogue that could inspire him to add on to it for a film adaptation. This naturally led to research being done within the region alongside consultation with the FBI and actual bank robbers, with Affleck finding his note-taking of the latter particularly fascinating. It should be noted that there exists three versions of the film - the theatrical version, which runs at 124 minutes (as per request by the studio), and an extended cut that runs at 153 minutes, alongside with a 154 minute version that has an ending more faithful to the novel (which is more darker; I picked the original cut because that seemed like the right one to pick).

What we have is a film wrapped entirely in Boston that might as well be summed up by its opening quote involving pride in one's city despite it ruining their life - one could almost think of it as Affleck's attempt to make a city crime movie in the style of Mean Streets (1973), although Affleck has cited influences being films in the crime genre like Heat (1995) and The Departed (2006). It is a fine film building on delivering a heist and drama worth investing some time with, headlined by a usefully-crafted ensemble cast and some usefully crafted action sequences that make a worthwhile sophomore effort from Affleck. For a film that builds itself on part-heist/part-human interest, Affleck handles acting/directing just fine, displaying range in getting what he needs from his fellow actors while displaying wavering charm in directing himself that works most of its points of finding oneself apart from what was and instead trying to look somewhere else for satisfaction in life. Hall does fine in going along with Affleck in unassuming prevalence that does fine with the occasional task needed that makes decent chemistry with Affleck. Hamm has something of interest to do in terms of authority and pursuit, which he handles alright in terms of terse usefulness in that segmented time needed. Renner outshines the others in terms of hardened edge and menace that drives the film in various scenes that can be as simple as entering in a lunch conversation with Affleck and Hall. Lively does alright when quivering against Affleck, while Cooper and Postlethwaite (in his penultimate role before his death in 2011) each do well in momentary scenes involving wat it means to wrapped in a web of crime. On the whole, I liked the film in what it manages to accomplish in its heist aspects mixed in with its attempts at looking at life beyond the score that lend itself to some useful points of interest without being too wrapped up in cliché. It's a nice movie, honing itself with some realism and atmosphere for a useful film to start off another decade of heist drama cinema.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

And now, the list for the final decade of focus this year. The decade will start and end with new directors to make their first spotlight moment, which includes a few notable films for the decade we just left along with some other ones to highlight that I hope you enjoy.

August 24, 2019

Accepted.


Review #1264: Accepted.

Cast: 
Justin Long (Bartleby Gaines), Jonah Hill (Sherman Schrader III), Adam Herschman (Glen), Columbus Short (Darryl "Hands" Holloway), Maria Thayer (Rory Thayer), Lewis Black (Ben Lewis), Blake Lively (Monica Moreland), Mark Derwin (Jack Gaines), Ann Cusack (Diane Gaines), Hannah Marks (Lizzie Gaines), Robin Lord Taylor (Abernathy Darwin Dunlap), and Anthony Heald (Dean Richard Van Horne) Directed by Steve Pink.

Review: 
Do you remember your path to college? The acceptance letters, the campus visits, et cetera, et cetera. Of course some of us didn't actually do these things, much like how not everyone simply just went to the college they wanted (or went at all). But I don't think I ever thought to make my own university to make up for previous failures, really. Whether one is big on their college lives or not, I'm sure we can all agree that this is a rather lame comedy that wastes its premise with inconsistent humor. Inevitably, one would probably make a comparison to Animal House (1978) because one really can just use that as the measuring stick for college comedies involving ridiculous stunts, preppy adversaries and people who look at least a decade too old to be in college (minus Lively, though). Actually, why stop there, why not just make a comparison to American Pie (1999) with its crude nature with a young cast? At least one thing can be said about that film - it wasn't completely predictable and it actually did something with its rating (R-rated, as opposed to being PG-13 like this is, which even bleeps out a curse word at the end). What is there to be expected from a fake university named the South Harmon Institute of Technology (S.H.I.T, get it, hardy har har so clever) that came out of an old mental hospital? These characters are more generic than soda simply named Tasty Soda, right down to the bad guys with the truly compelling goal of wanting to raze the aptly named fake university to make a...gateway to make their college more prestigious. Gee, and the only way to stop the plan is to try and fight their case for education accreditation in front of the state board. Really, this should be like one of those choose your own adventure things, where you don't know the obvious decision (or joke) from the get-go. 

But enough about the shaky foundation, how are the actors when it comes to actually trying to make laughs. Is a guy in a hot dog costume imploring people to ask him about his frankfurter (obvious word change from me because I felt like it) really amusing? No? Too bad, it doesn't get that much better from there. Black seems able with a grouchy curmudgeon role, at least, since he actually seems to be trying to say something interesting in his cynicism about the system. Maybe he actually would've been a better lead than Long (no guesses allowed over who thought Bartleby was a clever character name), who doesn't seem as persuasive with generating laughs as opposed to just making smirks. I never really seem to ever care about his scheme, which honestly could've just been some cheesy drama more than anything. Hill is fine, making more of a presence than Herschman, Short, and Thayer combined. How? Ask yourself this: can you remember any interesting "funny" moment with that particular trio as opposed to Hill? Welp, there's your answer. Lively is here and there, having as much chemistry with Long as a bag of hammers. Some people are just destined to be stars, it just so happens some get to be in a lame one to accompany their earlier work. This whole review can really summed up by me just sighing and looking at the run-time every ten minutes, wondering if I should check on my phone or make a doodle. On the whole, this is just a mediocre comedy movie, bland enough to have three writers attached to it (Adam Cooper, Bill Collage and Mark Perez) but not smart enough to really make an involving winner that matters more than just its 92 minute run-time. Not every comedy needs to be a smart one, but I'll be darned if one has to suffer through a lame one when there is always a better choice somewhere else that doesn't waste my time as much as the next viewer.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

September 20, 2018

A Simple Favor.


Review #1134: A Simple Favor.

Cast: 
Anna Kendrick (Stephanie Smothers), Blake Lively (Emily Nelson), Henry Golding (Sean Townsend-Nelson), Andrew Rannells (Darren), Ian Ho (Nicky Townsend-Nelson), Joshua Satine (Miles Smothers), Linda Cardellini (Diana Hyland), Rupert Friend (Dennis Nylon), and Jean Smart (Margaret McLanden) Directed by Paul Feig.

Review: 
What makes for a good mystery thriller film? Is it a commendable cast? The fun in where it can go with its story threads? Or competent craftsmanship? Perhaps it is a combination of these categories that apply to making a mystery thriller worth watching, and this is apparent with this film as well. Based on the novel of the same name by Darcey Bell, A Simple Favor aspires to throw in as many thrills and twists wrapped with bits of humor that makes this a satisfying piece of entertainment. It certainly comes off a surprise, since I hadn't heard about this movie until roughly a week ago, but the real surprise is how weird the film gets itself with the cliches of a thriller that manage to come off positively, where it never devolves into trying to get cheap laughs or not lose charm by twisting itself too thin. At the heart of the film's success is its cast of characters and its main duo of Kendrick and Lively. Kendrick is fun to watch, having an energetic and capable nature to her, having a spunky charm while also being interesting to follow in her pursuits throughout the film, inspiring attention and occasional laughs. Lively does well at playing a character best described as an enigma in a suit, having a biting wit that certainly fits with what the film wants to be, wrapped in mystery and bonkers nature that goes just fine with a film like this. Kendrick and Lively have a fun charm together in their scenes together, whether while drinking or dealing with the twists that go on. Golding does pretty well in his time on screen, having a fair charm to him that goes along with the main duo at times. The rest of the cast don't have too much time on screen, but they do fine with keeping the flow of the film going at a fair pace, with Cardellini standing out with a rough amusing charm for her one scene on screen. At 117 minutes, I didn't mind its length too much, particularly since the film takes a bit of a turn half-way through, throwing a few twists that makes this come off as a bit campy, but I enjoyed where it wanted to go, even if it may (amusingly) remind me of a Lifetime movie - for better or worse. The screenplay from Jessica Sharzer (writer for a few episodes of American Horror Story and Nerve from 2016) is executed well by Feig to make a film that doesn't relent on its mystery and thrills while not devolving too much into farce or being too complex. It's a weird and wild mystery thriller that will surely prove itself well for its audience looking for a fun time.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

August 17, 2012

Movie Night: Green Lantern.

Review #220: Green Lantern.

Cast
Ryan Reynolds (Hal Jordan / Green Lantern), Blake Lively (Carol Ferris), Peter Sarsgaard (Hector Hammond), Mark Strong (Sinestro), Angela Bassett (Dr. Amanda Waller), Tim Robbins (Senator Robert Hammond), Temuera Morrison (Abin Sur / Green Lantern), Geoffrey Rush (Tomar-Re / Green Lantern), Michael Clarke Duncan (Kilowog / Green Lantern), Taika Waititi (Thomas Kalmaku), and Clancy Brown (Parallax) Directed by Martin Campbell (#173 - Goldeneye, #285 - Casino Royale)

Review
My first question is: "This was made for how much?" The answer is $200 Million, which is odd, given that this film doesn't look like it. This is Warner Brothers' attempt to venture into a different superhero not named Batman or Superman. And it...doesn't work out well. The biggest problem is that it has tries for more style then substance. Reynolds is allright, given what he has to work with, but the other characters aren't really memorable. I kept calling the others "girl interest", and "Guy with effects make him look like the kid from Mask". The effects aren't even that memorable. My question is "How come the costume looks CGI and not just something they could've made?" Is it me or does Jordan's mask look like a [green] Fruit Roll-Up stretched out? Maybe it's just me. All in all, the film just isn't as memorable, and is a failure by Warner and DC to have a new hero franchise to rival Marvel (Which already has a giant head start that won't end anytime soon) But Reynolds is succeeding either way (Given that he'll be playing Deadpool a few years from now) And lastly, this film blows the opportunity for Lantern to rise to something more.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.