Suspect's Reviews

that does sound like quite a film and I'm a fan of Idris.

(Bradley King)





"Don't get caught at the window"

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

US, great review, you got me so hot to see this one, that I immediately Netflixed it -- WOW, yer right, this is an accomplishment. Amazing movie.

__________________
Under-the-radar Movie Awesomeness.
http://earlsmoviepicks.blogspot.com/

I'm glad you liked it. I hope to see it some recognition, it deserves it.

"He was my son..."

I remember seeing a trailer for Rudderless and the music that was showcased really grabbed my attention. It didn't have much of a theatrical run and it never made its way over here, so when I saw that it was on Netflix, I decided to give it a shot. I'm glad I did.

Sam (Billy Crudup) is still on a downward depressed alcoholic spiral after losing his son. His ex-wife (Felicity Huffman) finally has the courage to clean out their sons room and comes across from demo tapes and lyrics that neither of them knew about. Sam uses his sons music to help with the grieving process and unwittingly forms a band with a young kid Quentin (Anton Yelchin) whom reminds him of his son.

The directorial debut of William H. Macy, Rudderless is a depressingly optimistic film with a lot of heart. Some people will find the film a bit melodramatic or manipulative, I found it engaging and honest. Macy doesn't make light of a serious situation, we simply see a different side of a story. The fact that the son is dead isn't the main issue with the film, it's how he dies and how we are suppose to feel about his father using his music to gain popularity and success. Some people think what he is doing is wrong, I just looked at is as a way for a father to finally find a way to grieve about his dead son.

As I mentioned before, the music is what grabbed my attention in the trailer. This is still true with the film itself. I was nodding my head, tapping my toes and when the film was finished, purchased a copy of the soundtrack. I really got into the musical aspect of the film and the fact that it is really Crudup and Yelchin playing and singing helps the process. The music in this film conveys just as much, if not more emotion. I listened to the lyrics on display here and fade away at times. I found it to be comforting and sad all at the same time.

Both Crudup and Yelchin deliver strong performances. Crudup has the more difficult task of being an alcoholic depressed *******, yet still try and find the sympathy he needs from the audience. It works. Yelchin is simply the talented kid that needs guidance. He finds it in Crudup and they both acknowledge that they need the other for their own reasons. Huffman has a small role as the ex-wife. With only three or four scenes, she isn't given much to work with and the story doesn't really seem to care that much about her. She has her own way to process the grief, but the film is more concerned with Crudup. Laurence Fishburn has a small role as a music shop owner who befriends Sam. He's more of a comic relief character with some sage wisdom. Cliched, but it doesn't hurt it.

Macy, who has a small role as the owner of a bar where the band plays, does a serviceable job as director. The film doesn't have any flashy aspects to it, it's more concerned with getting the story right. Macy decides to hide a certain aspect of the story until the third act. I'm not sure if it was suppose to be some surprise or not. I found myself thinking about the reveal once or twice before it actually was shown on screen, but I forgot about it really fast. I didn't feel angry, or manipulated by anything, as some people seem to be. I found it to be a different take on a similar story. We see things from the other side.

Not a lot of people know about the film, or will even bother to watch it. I'm here to say that it is good. I'll be the voice for Rudderless and champion it to others. Watch the film, you'll be pleasantly surprised by the end. Even if you don't really like it, it has great music.

I liked this movie

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

See!!!! It is good.

Ant-Man had the opportunity to be one of the most visually bizarre and interesting Marvel films to date. I think back to the pre-production stages of the film and was pretty puzzled that Edgar Wright was the man behind this project. Could he work with such a big studio, being the visually distinct director that he is? The answer was of course no. He left the project and we got The Break-Up's Peyton Reed. That's not a negative to Reed, he does his job in giving the audience an approachable Marvel superhero film. But...I keep asking myself that questions; "What could have been?"

Scott Lang is a master thief who just got out of prison. Hank Pym is a genius inventor who's been keeping an eye on Lang for some time. You see, Pym was the original Ant-Man. He has hidden the suit and the secrets to it for years in fear of it falling into the wrong hands. His predecessor, Darren Cross is trying to replicate the same formula and Pym must train a new Ant-Man is stop Cross from achieving his diabolic plans. Scott Lang is the new Ant-Man.

Much like Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man had an uphill battle to be taken seriously. A superhero that is the size of an ant? How can that possibly be good? Well, Marvel has done it again, they delivered a good movie. That's all this film is though, a good movie. The film plays it so safe and by the book that I was actually taken back a bit. If anyone of the new superheroes could fall in line with the rough edged Guardians, surely it would be this one right? Nope. Ant-Man is so safe it could be a kids movie....in fact, it just might be a kids movie.

CGI overload of course, every time we shrink to the size of an ant. Interesting perspective at times, blurry at others due to the kinetic nature of the plot. The most impressive use of CGI has to be in the first 5 minutes, with a young Michael Douglas being all Benjamin Button on us. I was hoping that the effects flipping our protagonist and antagonist would result in something new, something fun or interesting in the fight or chase sequences, but Reed doesn't seem interested in that. He seems more interested in playing ball with the suits behind the camera. "We need this to be shown so we can see it develop at a later time in another film". Hence the entire Falcon sequence, which seems out of place, if neat.

Rudd is a decent superhero. He has the comedic timing to be likable, much like Chris Pratt. He was able to work his body into shape, much like Chris Pratt. Also, he walks that fine line of bad-boy, likeable schmuck. Much like....you get the idea. Douglas plays mentor here and has one scene where he gets to act a little bit with his on screen daughter, played by Evangeline Lilly. If Paul Rudd isn't funny enough for everyone, Michael Peña fills that void as the sidekick. I think Corey Stoll, who hams it up a bit as the villain, does the more interesting things. Everyone else seems to simply service the role, not taking any chances, or bringing anything new to the table. I'm glad to see Stoll get some bigger roles now.

All in all, Ant-Man is serviceable to the big budget superhero genre. It doesn't really further the Marvel agenda, nor does it re-invent anything. It will most likely be forgotten in a few years and find itself somewhere in the middle road of the list on people's "Best Marvel Films". That's the problem with this film, it's just perfectly content with being good movie and nothing more.

I don't have any desire to see this nice review

I made the mistake of letting my wife pick the film we got to watch tonight. She decided to choose a childhood favourite of hers that she had seen at least a dozen times. She grew up in the middle of the Spice Girl fad and was a fan. So I sat here tonight, Mofo's, and watched one of the weirdest, most inane and down right confusing films I have ever seen.

I can't really get into the plot of the film because in my opinion, there is none. From what I could gather from it though, is that there is a big concert going on and some big wig at a magazine company wants to create rumours of bad events concerning the girls, in an effort to sell more papers. The girls meet aliens, day dream about their future, help deliver a baby, speed around london, jump bridges, perform their big hits and enforce girl power all while looking chic.

I remember the Spice Girls when I was a kid. I guess I was a "Ginger" fan, despite her looking like the mom of the group. The film came out smack in the middle of their two big hit albums. All I believe within a year of each other??? If that's true, they were all over the place in a quick time frame. Could that explain what the hell I just saw?

The film feels meta at times, specifically the climax sequence when the "writer" is describing what will happen in a Spice Girls movie he is pitching, while the exact actions he describes take place on screen. The many weird and odd events that take place, such as; alien encounter and boot camp, make it seem like this film is really about all the possible Spice Girl films that 'could' be. We technically could have a film about the girls meeting aliens, going to a boot camp, having kids or being a super spy group, the spice force five. So why not throw everything in a blunder and hit start.

The film feels like a vomit of colours and noise. Their entire album probably plays throughout this film. We hear their music play over the most mundane parts of the film, so no matter what you will hear their songs...all of their songs. More than once. The film itself feels like it has a bad case of ADD.

With all that being said, the girls do look like they are having fun and they do gel well with each other. Chemistry is key and these girls have it, unfortunately for the film, it's the only thing.

I have extremely vague memories of watching Spice World (or bits of it, anyway) back when it first came out on VHS. I'm morbidly curious about actually giving it a proper watch.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

Glad I gave it a miss

You should have exercised your vito rights on Spice World Suspect.

But marriage is supposed to be about compromise...isn't it?

Spice World is awful. I think it was supposed to be an attempt to do a Spice Girls version of A Hard Day's Night or something.

I'm gonna watch Ant-Man very soon. Don't really know what to expect, but I kind of look forward to it actually. Especially because I'm watching it in 3D, which seems to be great with this particular film.

I remember thinking The Spice Girls was OK for what it was. Ridiculous, inane, sometimes annoying but fun overall.

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

Every saga has a beginning.

After negotiations for peace fail, two Jedi Knights take refuge on a nearby planet called Tatoonie, while there Jedi Master Qui-Gon Jinn meets a young boy by the name of Anakin Skywalker. Qui-Gon believes that this boy is the chosen one, who will bring balance to the force. While there is a lot more to the film than this, I won't try to slug my way through the confusing and over-plotted excuse for a storyline.

Episode I had expectations that it could never and would never meet. This film was everywhere and I was caught up in the hype as a young kid. All that aside and looking at the film today as just a film and not something else, it still fails to meet basic expectations. The biggest problem this film has is the story. I watched this film with my wife and when it finished, I asked her what the story was. She had no idea. Lucas throws taxation plotlines, trade federations at us and this film feels like something other than a sci/fi space opera, which is exactly what the original films were. Let;s not forget that these are prequels, so we immediately know what will happen by the end of these films. Therefore the elements of surprise are gone. No moments of revelations in this film, nor the sequels. This makes for a by the numbers telegraphed film.

Lucas sold these films to us as the origins of Darth Vader. How does Anakin become Darth Vader. Our introduction to Anakin is when he is a young kid, played by Jake Lloyd. I feel sorry for him because his life after this film must have been traumatic. Yes, he is a kid, but there are levels of annoyance that go beyond what one can undertake. This is the kid that will become Vader, shouldn't there be at least some sort of ominous aspect towards him? Llyod plays him way to sincere and juvenile. Add another character that some people say destroyed the franchise, Jar Jar Binks. Is the fact that he is an all CG character impressive? At the time, but that didn't distract from the utter insanity that this character brings forth. Lucas did the right thing in limiting, severely, his screen time in the future films. Maybe the prospect of more money from the merchandising clouded his vision because all I see when I see a character like this is dollar signs and little kids yelling YIPPIE. *poor Anakin impression*

The acting doesn't fare much better. I've seen a lot of wooden and stale performances before, but what the actors deliver here is even worse. I've already mentioned Jake Lloyd and Jar Jar Binks, two of the worst offenders in the Star Wars universe. Let's move onto Natalie Portman, I don't know if I want to call what she delivers a performance or not because what she does with Queen Amidala rivals android performances. It was awkward watching some of her scenes, zero emotion. Is this suppose to make her a better leader? She comes off as a mannequin. Ewan McGregor is given next to nothing here. He sits out most of the film until the climatic light sabre fight, clearly the highlight of the film. We spend most of our time with Liam Neeson's Qui-Gon Jinn. I don't think he ever smiles, not even once. Is he suppose to be stoic? As bland as he was, he was still the best thing about the film.

What I once thought was a thrilling sequence as a child, now plays like fodder for special effects. The pod racing sequence looks great, but isn't as entertaining as I originally remember. It further cements the fact that Lucas is more concerned with the extravagant special effects than an engaging story. The film does boast some good visuals. The space fighting is particularly good. Some of the ground battles seem a bit dated now. The real standout is still the impressive fight scene with the two Jedi and Darth Maul. Without a doubt, my personal favourite light sabre dual in the entire series. I'll have to re-watch the final one from Revenge of the Sith, but Phantom Menace has the most memorable for sure. Another missed opportunity is a constant villain. Darth Maul is a fan favourite and should have been the one continued villain throughout. Him and his master. The villains that came after offer nothing better and fall short of expectations.

In the end, The Phantom Menace is not only a poor Star Wars films, but a pretty poor film in general. It's way too stiff, no fun and simply meanders around not knowing how to tell a real story. It has no Han Solo character for us to have fun with, crack jokes and say what we are thinking. It takes itself way too seriously and doesn't do what the film really should have done. Lucas seems to have lost the touch he once had and his directing style matches the performance; stiff and uncreative. Phantom Menace isn't the worst in the series, but it's a horrible start to the destruction of a loved franchise.

Well, I've seen a bit of behind the scenes footage, and George Lucas simply seemed to think that people would actually like Jar Jar. It was basically just another comic relief character like R2-D2 and C-3PO. I don't really agree with you about what you said concerning the acting from Natalie Portman. First of all she wasn't the android queen, that was played by Kiera Knightley. But even for the scenes that Portman did play the Queen in all her makeup and emotionlessness, that's not so much her fault as the director telling her to do that. And I thought Liam Neeson's performance is one of the only things that makes The Phantom Menace even watchable. To be fair the bad acting is more of a fault with the director than the actors when all of the acting is bad. You can see that these actors have done amazing jobs in other films, so why is their acting not as good in this one? Because George Lucas doesn't know how to coach actors, or to prepare them for their roles in advance. He just assumes the actor knows how to act and the director doesn't have to do anything to make them act well. And since he's a legend no one tells him he's wrong about anything. He's like a spoiled brat. I think that's why the first three Star Wars movies were better, because he wasn't a legend yet and he was probably working a lot harder and passionately back when he was trying to build a career.

Anyway, that's my attempt at constructive criticism. It was a great review!

I don't think Lucas was really trying to build a career. He sacrificed his career for these films and these films alone. There is a reason he hasn't directed anything other than Star Wars since A New Hope.

Yes, he is a mediocre director at best and none of the acting within the Star Wars franchise has been good. I'm just pointing out that it is particularly bad here. Both Knightley and Portman portray the Queen too cold. It could have been Lucas giving them bad direction, but at the end of the day it is still their performance on the screen. I mention that the material they had to work with was terrible, but none of them really seem to be trying at all. Portman looks dead behind the eyes. Maybe her concentration was elsewhere, like studying for exams. McGregor does get better in the later films, but then we are also introduced to another robot, Hayden Christensen.