Posts Tagged ‘actor’
Heavy Metal/Heavy Metal 2000 Movie Streaming
 |
Heavy Metal/Heavy Metal 2000 Movie Streaming.
Movie Title: Heavy Metal/Heavy Metal 2000 Heavy Metal/Heavy Metal 2000 is available for streaming or downloading. Click Here to Stream or Download Heavy Metal/Heavy Metal 2000 |
I began buying HEAVY METAL magazine when it was first introduced in our country (it is based on the French magazine METAL HURLANT), and when I saw the first HEAVY METAL movie in its theatrical release, I considered it a handsome qualified representation of the magazine–funny, bizarre, sexy in a mischievous scheme, and begin to various types of artistic interpretation. The DVD of HEAVY METAL appeals to me because it preserves the characteristics that made those early years of the magazine special.
HEAVY METAL 2000, however, is itsy-bitsy more than a vanity project for Julie Strain, the wife of the new publisher of HEAVY METAL and one of the producers of the film, Kevin Eastman. One would contemplate that Eastman, who gained fame as one of the creators of the modern Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, would display a modern HEAVY METAL film that would have the same qualities as the novel. But where HM offers violence to illustrate the depth of execrable, HM2K focusses on the gore. Where HM offers a forum for various stylistic approaches, HM2K offers jarring combinations of animation techniques. Where HM tantalizes viewers with sexuality, HM2K invites us to look. HM2K defines “gratuitous” in every scene and, in doing so, seemingly confirms every dirty stereotype about arrested adolescence in grown-ups who read comics. The only redeemable fraction of the HM2K DVD is the bio on Julie Strain–the pure unintended camp of the allotment is appealing. But HM2K as a whole offers a predictable narrative with yelp acting less bewitching than the standard digital recording on an answering machine. If you’re looking for a current sci-fi movie that captures the incandescent, satirical and adventurous spirit of the first HM movie, assume STARSHIP TROOPERS. HM2K did not score theatrical distribution for a reason, folks. Grasp the hint.
I give this item two stars because the movies are bundled together. HM by itself is worth four stars, and HM2K deserves none.
Heavy Metal 2000: About 15 years ago two guys came up with a cute plan about turtles in a sewer who turn into valiant ninjas. The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles were born and became the Beanie babies of their time — vastly overrated, trendy, and Gracious. So what does this have to do with Heavy Metal 2000? Well, TMNT gave those creators stout names in the amusing book industry as well as enormous bank accounts. One of them, Kevin Eastman, mature his ample name to become Editor of Heavy Metal magazine and his expansive money to marry broken-down Penthouse Pet of the Year Julie Strain. So how does geekboy retain his nude-model bride gratified? He uses his magazine to promote/worship her at every turn. Eastman wrote the fable which became Heavy Metal 2000, his company made the movie, and his wife is the star. Hmmm… something smells fishy here and I don’t contemplate it’s Julie Strain-Eastman this time. This inbred, self-promoting aspect is the biggest plight (among several) that this movie has. Not only do you have the writer’s wife as the star, you also have things like billboards in the set plot saying, “Play Heavy Metal 2000: FAKK2 The Video Game!” The accomplish is jarring and annoying and makes your suspension of disbelief difficult. It would be like seeing a heed in the background of Phantom Menace saying, “Star Wars share II coming soon!” You are trying to forget you are watching a movie and this reminds you that you are. The storyline is extremely simple and about as linear as you can accept. There is one miniature twist at the slay but it is neither surprising nor clever. Don’t spy for any subplots here because you won’t come by any. Bewitch out the T&A and tone down the violence and this is a Saturday morning cartoon. A simple storyline might have been okay if it were at least logical. In one scene Julie (the character’s name as well as the actor’s) tries to ruin the villain in a bar. She stands up with her two pistols in front of the villain and three accomplices, all armed with automatic weapons, and doesn’t net hit with a single bullet until the villain’s FINAL bullet hits her in the arm. Once that shot winged her all four guys stopped firing — remarkably convenient. But it gets worse. Shortly afterward the villain asks for a hooker and Julie walks in to try a second assassination. But the villain recognizes her when he moves the hair away from her eyes! OH NO! She’s dumb meat, just? Nope. He seems mildly fearful and says, “You! What do you want? ” When she says she wants immortality he says it comes with a sign then rips her top off and goes to work on her chest. HUH?!?! I guess this guy really, REALLY doesn’t absorb a grudge! He is actually surprised when she tries to raze him again, for the second time in about an hour! Someone else said the CGI and standard animation were blended seamlessly. I’m not clear what they were watching. Grand of the animation is pleasant and SOME of the CGI is well done. But at the climax there is a surprise villain who appears who is all CGI. The guys who couldn’t come by a job on Reboot must have gotten the HM2000 job, because this CGI villain looks like an amateur version of the Reboot villain. Abominable. Mrs. Eastman voices the main character about as well as she acts in those “Savage Beach” movies.I’m running out of dwelling so I’ll wrap this up. Two stars for the movie. The extras are quite excellent, even though there is more wife-worship with the “Julie Strain, Supergoddess” feature. That segment actually has the highlight of the entire DVD — a very revealing shot of Julie’s “protege” Arban Arnalis. She is HOT! FstFwd to 8:40 and steal a gander. If one of these two is a supergoddess it’s Arban. The extras glean 4 stars, but so what? This is like a abominable pizza with really helpful pepperoni on top, so the marvelous extras don’t raise the final gain — TWO STARS.
Buy,Download, Or Stream Heavy Metal/Heavy Metal 2000! Click Here
Heavy Metal: Very valid animation for its time, a variety of stories of differing quality (mostly honorable to very ample), well-behaved soundtrack, and no shameless self-promotion. This is Distinguished better than HM2000. Then again, Heavy Metal magazine was great better serve then than it is now. Maybe there’s a connection. Comparing the two HM movies is like comparing Toy Record to the straight-to-video Buzz Lightyear cartoon. In fact, HM2000 did go straight to video while the first Heavy Metal is a classic of adult animiation. This DVD would be a nice piece of any SF and/or animation fan’s collection. It’s a expedient, chilly, fun SF movie and I recommend you steal this one on its bear. But it ain’t The Godfather so it only gets THREE+ STARS. I haven’t watched the extras yet but there are deleted scenes so they should be ample and may have bumped it to 4 stars.
The boxed status averages out to 3 STARS but skip the boxed dwelling unless you are a completist, have lots of money, or really want to earn a nice study of Arban Arnalis (and you can rent HM2000 for that) .
speed reading software
selling on amazon
X2 Discount.
|
|
X2 Discount.
Compare & Purchase X2 at Amazon by clicking here! List Price: —- Amazon Price: $2.99 |
X2 Description:
- Amazon Sales Rank: #1396 in Movie
- Released on: 2007-07-25
- Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
- Running time: 134 minutes
Customer Reviews:
So Good It’s Uncanny…
Hey, pardon my pun, but it’s so refreshing to see a comic book movie that doesn’t feel like solely a comic book movie that could never happen even in a parallel dimension that looked like a comic book. I mean, yes, Daredevil and Batman and all the rest were fun and all, but they never had the “look” that made you say, “by God, they’ve done it, I’m looking at life anew!” Well, with X-2, they’ve done it, my friends…
The first X-Men film was a necessary sacrificial lamb. With so many characters, good and bad, and each character having all their own ongoing multiple storylines and backgrounds and yadda yadda yadda, the first flick chopped all the excess fat and brought the comic book to life in a very realistic and engrossing world…However, it did have its flaws as well as a flat climax that felt like merely a prologue for future X-Films rather than a memorable first entry (though still better than most comic book tripe nevertheless).
X-2 one-ups all of that, though…Everyone from the first is back for more and even some newbies hitch a ride. Nightcrawler has been made into a gem of a character by Alan Cumming. The opening sequence with him involved in an assassination attempt is awesome and unrelenting. Pyro was always a silly “goofy-villain-with-bad-costume” in the X-books but he’s much more compelling as an angst-ridden teen fighting temptation from the dark side of mutant powers, kind of like Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars Episode 2, but in this film it doesn’t make you the moviegoer roll your eyes or consider suicide. There’s a brief cameo from Colossus, another goodie mutie who will no doubt have a bigger and highly anticiapted role in the inevitable (and very welcome) X-3…
All the other charaters from the original are even better here and it’s hard to give all of them equal playing time in such a movie, but in the end everyone knows the real title of these movies: “Wolverine and his Amazing Friends.” Got it? Get used to it. Hugh Jackman as Wolvie is so good that it should be illegal to play a comic character that well. Absolutely criminal. Quick, someone call the acting police and give Michael Jai White a copy of X1 and X2, tell him that’s how to play a badass. Then laugh at him for ruining “Spawn” anyway.
Needless to say, the plot is a foregone conclusion here and it’s all just an excuse to -gasp- develop the characters. What? A popcorn movie with unobtrusive character development? Yep, that’s X-2 alright; and it’s all a hell of a lot of fun…
***** BIGGER & BETTER *****
The X-Men are back, with 2003′s first blockbuster X2 directed by Bryan Singer. What’s more it is bigger (some $50million), better, darker, longer, more action-packed and generally more exciting, with a substantial increase in the sexual tension.
In this highly enjoyable sequel, the warring parties from the first instalment are forced into a partnership of necessity to battle against an army scientist, Colonel William Stryker (Brian Cox), who is determined to wipe all mutant life. To this end, in an excellent opening sequence, he coerces a teleporting mutant by the name of Nightcrawler into an attempt on the President’s life with the purpose of turning both the public and the oval office against mutant kind.
All the favourite X-people from the first instalment including Wolverine (Hugh Jackman), Magneto (Sir Ian McKellen), Professor X (Patrick Stewart), Storm (Halle Berry), Rogue (Anna Paquin), Mystique (Rebecca Romijn-Stamos), Cyclops (James Marsden) and Famke Janssen (as Dr Jean Grey). In addition they are joined by three very noteable additions, Nightcrawler (Alan Cumming), Pyro (Aaron Stamford) and Yuriko Oyama (Kelly Hu). Although Sabretooth and Toad are missing in action from the first movie they’re not exactly missed (because lets face it they aren’t the most exciting X-characters anyway)!
One of the things I most enjoyed about X2 is how much more there was than the first movie. More action, more humour, more X-Men (and X-children) a longer running time, and in particular, more Halle Berry, more Rebecca Romijn-Stamos and Famke Janssen, looking even more glamorous, more alluring and displaying more X-powers (as Dr Jean Grey) than she did in the first movie.
That said, the film is still dominated by two actors; Brian Cox (one of Scotland’s finest actors) who makes an excellent villain as Colonel Stryker and Australian actor Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. For it is their personal conflict and previous history that encapsulates the battle between good and evil that is at the heart of this sequel. However, they are ably supported by all the previously mentioned cast members and the addition of the excellent character Nightcrawler, played by another Scotsman, Alan Cumming.
Kudos must also go to scriptwriters Mike Dougherty and Dan Harris and Director Bryan Singer, who was much criticised for the lack of action in the opening movie of this very profitable franchise. Dougherty and Harris have injected some subtle humour mainly absent from X-Men and Singer (with help from Editors John Ottman & Elliot Graham) has done well to seamlessly cram it all into 130 minutes, whilst still managing to keep to his promise of a darker sequel. Although critics may argue that much of the intelligence and thought-provoking elements from the first movie are much diluted X2 is still one of the finest comic book movie to date and exactly what X-fans were looking for in a sequel. Not only does X2 pave the way for a summer of superheroes, with The Matrix Reloaded and The Hulk imminent, but it also sets us up for the inevitable X3, although this is going to be hard to top.
Top shelf superhero movie
The defining characteristic of “X2: X-Men United” is the approval bestowed upon it by fans of the origin comic books; whereas the original “X-Men” movie was seen as truncated and flat in parts, the sequel delivers the goods fans craved: a full half-hour more action, and a dazzling opening sequence that features a mutant attack on the U.S. President. The mutant is a newcomer: Nightcrawler (Alan Cumming) a German circus runaway with blue skin that can bounce and teleport at alarming speeds. Director Bryan Singer watched his first “X-Men” effort start with a slow burn of introducing the setup and character; “X2″ had the “geeks” bouncing out of their seats.
What follows is a superhero movie on par with “Spider-Man” and the best parts of the “Superman” and “Batman” series. “X2″ is a too busy and farfetched, but it keeps twisting, and it features a great villain in Col. Styker (Brian Cox) a military scientist bent on erasing the mutants from the Earth. In theme and approach, “X2″ is similar to the second and best installment of the “Star Trek” series, “Wrath of Khan” — “X2″ features a large sacrifice from a major character, and serves as a launching pad for future installments. Just about anything could happen in “X3,” and that’s a testament to how well this movie is structured. Every important mutant is still on the playing field.
After the Nightcrawler attack — a spectacular, dizzying assault through the hallways of the White House right to the president’s desk — “X2″ sends its characters in various directions. Stryker, who has the president’s ear, convinces the chief that the mysterious mutant school run by wheelchair-bound Xavier (Patrick Stewart) could be behind the attack. The real source is a nifty twist, but Stryker nonetheless storms the school while Xavier is away visiting his imprisoned enemy/friend Magneto (Ian McKellen).
Though human, Stryker is as formidable as either Xavier or Magneto — he has methods of coercing mutants, putting him in position to rid the world of them through Cerebro, a special tracking machine only Xavier can use; how Stryker tricks Xavier into using it is one of the movie’s best secrets. Because Stryker means to destroy the mutants for good; Magneto sets aside his grudge match with Xavier to save both their hides, hence the title.
Stryker also holds the key to the identity of Wolverine (Hugh Jackman), the steel-knuckled, mutton-chopped tough man of the mutant school. “X2″ has a full plate of characters, but Jackman’s the star; Wolverine does most of the fighting, and serves as a romantic possibility for X-woman Jean Grey (Famke Janssen), a telekinetic with growing strength and X-girl Rogue (Anna Paquin), whose powers were coveted in the original movie, but not worth much this time.
Also onboard is Storm (Halle Berry) who finds and connects with a confused Nightcrawler, and bad-girl Mystique (Rebecca Romejn-Stamos) whose shape-shifting gifts bust Magneto out of prison and hack into Stryker’s computer for his master plan.
Singer strains to offer every mutant decent screen time, which spreads “X2″ a little too thin in the middle; one mutant that figured prominently in the first movie, Cyclops (James Marsden), mostly tags along in the sequel. Despite the generosity, Cox and Jackman return the forefront again and again as Stryker and Wolverine size each other up. Cox, actually, has played a similar role once before in the terrible Keanu Reeves vehicle “Chain Reaction;” what seemed cartoonish about his military monster in that movie works just about perfect here. Jackman has a look about him that fits the part, and he’s surprisingly funny to boot — the throwaway lines of David Hayter’s script are one of “X2′s” prime pleasures.
There aren’t as many action sequences as you’d expect — the canvas is so big, a good part of the movie is spent just leaving and arriving — and none match the opening Nightcrawler attack, but there is enough for a fight junkie to appreciate. And though there’s a bit of social commentary mixed into the movie’s fabric, “X2″ is nothing less than a fantasy. There’s a climax, so to speak, beyond the climax, and then another climax beyond that, which is annoying, but it sets the table for a major transformation of Jean’s character. Singer obviously has his options wide open for the third installment, which will presumably pit good and bad mutants against one another again. “X2″ ends with Magneto having gained a precious new weapon for round three.
For what it does, “X2″ does it very well. Singer is clearly serious about not letting the franchise descend into camp as “Batman” and “Superman” eventually did — there are dumb moments, but they’re quickly forgotten. It improves on the original and improves the chances of the series at the same time.
A Perfect Getaway Discount.
 |
A Perfect Getaway
Product: A Perfect Getaway Discount. List Price: —- Amazon Price: $3.99 Add to cart to see low price@ Availability: In Stock Usually ships in 24 Hours Free Shipping Available |
Compare Prices on A Perfect Getaway
- Amazon Sales Rank: #1238 in Movie
- Released on: 2009-12-29
- Rating: R (Restricted)
- Running time: 98 minutes
I’m just difficult to kill…I guess
“I’m just difficult to kill, I guess…” – as soon as one of the main characters of A Perfect Getaway utters these words, you KNOW someone will try to prove him wrong. And they DO (try ;o) ). The story seems simple at first: a couple is honeymooning in Hawaii, while news spreads thru the Islands of a brutal murder of another newlywed couple. The suspected murderers, a man and a woman, are still at large and likely still in Hawaii. As our city-dwellers hike thru the Park, alone and out of their element, can they trust the strangers with whom they inevitably cross paths? (OF COURSE, NOT!) And that’s when an interesting twist takes this story from predictable to… well… no spoilers here! ;o)
I did not have high hopes for this flick…I went to see it mainly because I have a secret crush on Milla Jovovich (if I were a lesbian, Milla and Mariska Hargitay from Law and Order would be my dream dates ;-P…). Was the film perfect? No. Nonetheless, to my utmost surprise, I enjoyed this thriller far more then I did many supposed “blockbusters” this year. It had some laughs, but was also quite unnerving, tense, and creepy with a light sprinkling of gore: everything a good thriller should have on offer. There were signs from the audience that I was not alone in my enjoyment. However, the film did develop its creep factor slowly as the initial 45 minutes were devoted mainly to character development. The story needed time before it graduated from “fluff” to “nail biter”. It worked for me. In the end, I felt the super plot twist more then made up for the wait!
Two names are worth mentioning (in addition to Jovovich): it was the first time I saw Steve Zahn competently playing a complex “grown up” character, a role totally different from the usual “doofus” types he seems to favour. Also, Timothy Olyphant surprised me with his performance. His acting skills often leave a lot to desire. Not here. He was PERFECT as the perennially confident and “difficult to kill” owner of a metal plate in his head…
PS: David Twohy, writer/director, also directed Pitch Black. Watch the chase scene at the end of A Perfect Getaway. It is identical in style to one of the chase scenes in Pitch Black…
Guys… that was a perfectly good story.
A Perfect Getaway: 7 out of 10: For a slow moving thriller that cheats… a little, A Perfect Getaway isn’t that bad. It has gorgeous cinematography and while it moves slowly, it successfully builds up tension with character development rather than relying on black cats jumping out of closets or severed body parts every ten minutes.
The tale is about three couples in Hawaii and one couple could be a pair of murders from the big island.
Our protagonist couple (Steve Zahn and Milla Jovovich) is a bit nerdy and a bit goofy. Jovovich in particular gives a wonderfully awkward performance in body language and facial expressions.
Trying to get into the Hawaii spirit our protagonist honeymooners attempt to do a favor for a second couple hitchhiking (Marley Shelton and Chris Hemsworth), but Hemsworth gives off such a bad vibe that the Zahn and Jovoich are naturally concerned about running into him on the trail again.
They take refuge with the “cool” couple (Timothy Olyphant and Kiele Sanchez). Olyphant in particular simply cascades charisma onto the screen even when attempting to convince others he has a plate in his head from his Special Forces days. But even the cool couple could just as easily be the killers (after all Olyphant seems to like fondling his special forces knife a bit two much and this is a movie.)
All this interaction is among well placed news reports that a non-nondescript couple is wanted for questioning for a murder and are suspected in being on the same trail as our plucky honeymooners.
Director Twohy isn’t back in Pitch Black form but he shows a surer directing hand than he did in Chronicles of Riddick and he gets better performances out of his actors than he did in Below. In fact for a movie with basically six people and very little action the film rests almost exclusively on the actor’s shoulders. The actors certainly hold up their end of the bargain across the board.
The movie does cheat a bit as I stated before but this is a thriller rather than a mystery (after all there are only three couples in the whole film) and the journey is more fun than the reveal. In fact the movie has such a relaxed pace and vibe you can easily forget it is a thriller at all. That’s when it gets you.
Lots of fun
At first I was worried about the gore level (not for me, for the rest of the audience) as hinted at by other reviews, but it’s really minimal. And this is a fun thrill ride of a film, with a doozy of a twist. I guessed it halfway through, but you might enjoy it more if you don’t – and even if you do, the exposition is still interesting. Likeable characters you can root for, a decent script, better acting than you might expect, a twisted plot and great action towards the end make this a movie to enjoy.
Buy Star Maps At Amazon!
|
|
Buy Star Maps At Amazon!
Compare & Purchase Star Maps at Amazon by clicking here! List Price: —- Amazon Price: $5.99 |
Star Maps Description:
- Amazon Sales Rank: #14822 in Movie
- Released on: 2008-12-09
- Rating: R (Restricted)
- Running time: 89 minutes
Customer Reviews:
Star Maps is filled with the promise of dreams
I saw Star Maps twice in the theaters, and still can’t get it out of my mind. I keep checking to see when the sell-through VHS will be available (at an affordable price). The film’s music is top-notch. This may be a so-called Indie film, but it’s performances, especially from Douglas Spain as Carlos, the young man with a dream, are believable. This a gritty, realistic picture about people struggling to stay focused and to survive. Carlos wants to be an actor; he sells maps to the stars homes in Beverly Hills. He believes that all he needs is one chance at the acting brass ring. To earn more money he is forced to hustle, but he knows that what he deeply wants is to be an actor. A touching, poignant movie. There is nudity and adult situations, and even some comedy, but this is a strong film and well worth viewing.
Touching , Heartbreaking story
To understand this film you should understand whats its like to be from a family like this. Themovie played out like a home movie for me. The first reviewer from Mexico, is typical in his narrow mindedness about how “chicanos” live. How do you clearly represent a culture? This young boy was not “abused” by his father, he was ABUSED by his father. THis happenes a lot, in Mexico and America. The use of Cantinflas was not to link the characters to their Mexican roots,it was used by the mentally ill Mother as her escape from her painful existence. I don’t know how the first reviewer lives or if he ever visited LA,and i don’t mean the tourist locations, the real Barrios with real Chicanos, but, some lives are aggresive and crude. Everything in this movie has substance. It is not sexy though. You care so much about Carlito, that it is stomach churning watching him be voilated. Sure life is not this difficult for everyone, but this is what its like when you are f-up by your parents, and unless you stop the cycle yourself you end up being f-ed by everyone else too. This is fact, ive seen it with my own eyes. Why esle do Street childern exist? Besides all,that the music rocks in this film and makes it unique. All the musical interludes are so appropriate for each seen. Miguel Arteta is genuis.
Breaks the Latin Mold
Most reviewers have missed that Star Maps steps out from the Latino film routine of re-establishing the father as the rightful patriarch (Selena, La Familia, Rooster, ad nauseum). This is more than just another gay boy/prostitute movie; in narrative terms, it’s a revolution.
Streaming Nell Online
 |
Streaming Nell Online.
Movie Title: Nell Nell is available for streaming or downloading. |
While Hollywood is filled with movie stars, it can boast of only a scant few bona fide actresses. Jodie Foster, the consummate professional, is the cream of that microscopic gash, and I respect no other actor or actress on earth as noteworthy as I respect her. Nell is a testament to her unlimited talent as well as her unmatched commitment to what she does. The character of Nell is a role most actresses would never reflect taking; it’s a far too difficult challenge to meet for a film that holds itsy-bitsy promise to bring in money hand over fist. For Jodie Foster, though, what matters is the account to be told, not the glamour or the projected box office receipts. She gives an absolutely astounding performance in this film, one that has deserved far more attention than it has received; as I write this, there is not even a DVD version of the film available. If Nell is mentioned at all, it is almost always in reference to Jodie’s Foster nudity in the film, and I would like to say straight out that her nudity is very tastefully done, principal if not absolutely principal for the memoir, and in no design attractive.
Nell is a poignant, emotional drama that saddens as well as inspires you; it is the kind of tearjerker in which your tears of empathy and misfortune are accented by a smile and sense of heartwarming joy. The anecdote is location deep in the wilderness of western North Carolina, where an feeble woman has lived for years all by herself. People always belief she lived alone, at least, until she died and the local doctor discovered a pitiful woman-child hiding inside the shack, the only home she had ever known. Nell’s mother had suffered a stroke many years earlier and spoke with a pronounced speech impediment; as a result, Nell speaks a tongue that is almost completely foreign to both the local doctor and the psychiatric professional he calls in from Charlotte. Dr. Lovell (Liam Neeson) becomes a guardian angel of sorts to Nell, fighting the courts and the mental health professionals to maintain Nell in her native environment as opposed to being stuck in some institution where she will be treated as a lab subject. He gets three months to work with Nell himself, and his potential foe in the create of psychologist Paula Olsen (Natasha Richardson) becomes his ally in time, as they both work with Nell to learn her fresh language and prepare her for a life completely unlike that which she has always known. In her acquire special procedure, Nell helps the two doctors as worthy as they wait on her, yet their ability to protect her from a dire future of lonely clinical existence remains in doubt up until the very waste.
Neeson and Richardson are astounding in their roles, but Jodie Foster is simply fabulous. She had to learn a completely current, invented language as well as adopt a wide range of meaningful facial and body expressions and original mannerisms in order to narrate this “wild child” as a very actual, very human individual. Nell is easily one of Foster’s most impressive performances, and how she did not obtain an Oscar for this role is beyond me. It should also be famous that Foster produced as well as starred in this unforgettable film. The scenery, I might add in closing, is also spectacular. Filmed largely in the Nantahala National Forest in Graham County, North Carolina, a space unprejudiced west of my maintain home, Nell is a aesthetic discover to peep in more ways than one. Hollywood needs more much, enchanting films such as this.
In “Nell,” Jodie Foster wows us, as usual, with a deeply felt, passionate performance. She is Nell, the “wild child” daughter of a backwoods aphasic hermit woman, who raised her all alone with no human contact. Nell’s speech is all her acquire — it is a striking combination of a private language she had once shared with her deceased identical twin sister, and an imitation of her mother’s speech. Her mother, as I mentioned earlier, had aphasia, which includes major speech processing problems. Nell’s speech was the basis for the title of the play upon which this film was based — “Idioglossia.” (I enjoy, for anyone out there who’s into things like this, that the fair term would have been “idiolect,” as the term for a language spoken by only one person.) Natasha Richardson and Liam Neeson bring constant admire and warmth to Nell, and to the film, as medical/social-work professionals who attempt to demolish through to Nell by trying to learn her language. In the background lurk The Media, and The Scientific Establishment, both of which threaten at any moment to swoop in and gain Nell’s life glum. The film builds to a heartrending and passionate, albeit rather unrealistic, courtroom self-defence speech by Nell, in which she calls the precepts of novel civilization itself into request.
Buy,Download, Or Stream Nell! Click Here
Liam Neeson’s performance is described by one of the editorial reviewers on this page as being “at his teddy absorb best.” I assume that sounds slightly emasculating — he set aside more definite, warm energy into this film than many actors project in their entire careers. Exhibit some appreciation! Near on!
Anyone who enjoys this film should also be told about “Wild Child,” a Francois Truffaut film that deals, through decidedly less rose-colored glasses, with a lawful fable that was very similar to this one. Another film that has positive parallel resonances, in the sense of a “freakish” individual seeking a chance to be themself in the face of major obstacles coming from the scientific establishment, is “Charlie,” starring Cliff Robertson and Claire Bloom.
I plan about giving this movie four stars, only because it puts Nell in the rather unrealistic location of delivering a profound courtroom speech. I decided to go with five, however, because the basic energy of the movie is so terrific. Absolutely worth checking out.
womens black knee high boots
buy pontoon boats
Buy For Love of the Game At Amazon!
|
|
Buy For Love of the Game At Amazon!
Compare & Purchase For Love of the Game at Amazon by clicking here! List Price: —- Amazon Price: $2.99 |
For Love of the Game Description:
- Amazon Sales Rank: #3276 in Movie
- Released on: 2008-11-24
- Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
- Running time: 139 minutes
Customer Reviews:
For The Love of the Game
Kevin Costner gives a very compelling performance as a baseball player at the end of his career. He is very realistic in the role and brings thought provoking issues to light. How do you decide to hang up your glove and leave a game that has been the most important thing in your life? It was great that he could personally do the pitching in this movie because it would have lost a lot of the realism and credibility if they had to use someone else.
Not a baseball fan
I am not a baseball fan but i can tell you this movie is really good it is really deep full of emotion. I don’t know anything about the game basball i live in England but yet i was able to really enjoy it bcoz it doesn’t really focus on the game but on the personal life of a successful baseball player. Brilliant buy it.
Excellent Baseball Story
This is an excellent baseball movie and a decent romantic entry as well. Billy Chapel (Kevin Costner) is a veteran pitcher with an accomplished career who is headed for the Hall of Fame. On the day we meet him he has a lot on his mind. He is informed that his team is being sold, he is being traded and the love of his life is moving to England. Add to this the pain in his pitching arm, his impending decision on whether to retire and the fact that winning this game is critical in determining if the Yankees go to the playoffs, and you have a man with overloaded neurons.
The story unfolds as an introspective retrospective. As he is pitching this important game, he is thinking about his childhood, his relationship with Jane (Kelly Preston) and how he is going to get the next batter out. He is so preoccupied that it doesn’t even dawn on him until the eighth inning that there have been no Yankee hits and he has been pitching a perfect game.
The flashback elements are expertly woven into the game, giving us a genuine feeling for his distraction. This is a fresh perspective for a sports movie. Instead of simply focusing on what the player is doing, the film focuses on what he is thinking while he is doing it. It gives us an authentic look at how athletes get “in the zone”, filtering out all the noise and concentrating totally on their performance. Those who have been involved in athletic competition can identify with this state, although only the best can achieve it at will.
Sam Raimi’s direction on this film was excellent. His direction of the love story was nothing special, but he did a superb job on the baseball scenes. The combination of on the field action, commentary by Vin Scully and simulated TV telecast footage was so well done that it was impossible to differentiate it from a major league game in progress.
The acting ranged from fair to excellent. Kelly Preston was very good as Jane. She brought a full range of emotional expression to the part, though she sometimes got a little shrill, like the scene in the hospital where she screams out “Is this America? Is baseball still the national pastime.” Overall though, she played the part of the torn lover very well.
Kevin Costner is no great lead actor and it is hard to understand why he is so popular. Perhaps it is his whiny lost boy charm that makes women want to mother him. In the love story, he again presented as listless and uninspired. But in the baseball scenes, he came alive. In fact, in these scenes Costner was not acting so much as acting out. He loves baseball and was obsessed with doing all his own baseball scenes. He is a top notch athlete, so he really could throw a curveball and his fastball had plenty of pop. His ability to portray a professional athlete in this instance was superlative, probably due to his having played the game scholastically. So overall, I would have to rate his performance here as very good.
John Reilly gets a very honorable mention as Chapel’s catcher. He was quietly supportive and unobtrusive, the way catchers usually are. He portrayed intense desire in a demure and low key way without overacting. It was a nice performance by an actor in a supporting role playing a baseball player in a supporting role.
I love baseball and this was a great baseball movie so I rated it 8/10. Anyone who enjoys sports will probably enjoy this film.
Being There Sale-$2.99!
|
|
Being There Sale-$2.99!
Compare & Purchase Being There at Amazon by clicking here! List Price: —- Amazon Price: $2.99 |
Being There Description:
- Amazon Sales Rank: #9963 in Movie
- Released on: 2008-12-05
- Running time: 130 minutes
Customer Reviews:
In the garden, growth has its season.
This is my favorite movie of all time. And I don’t particularly like Peter Sellers!
It’s a slow starter. First time I saw it, I remember being somewhat puzzled by the opening, where Chance is revealed as a very retarded middle-aged man, trained as a gardener, who apparantly has reached his full–and extremely limited–potential. He loses his livelihood and his sheltered place to live when “the old man”–his mysterious benefactor–dies, and the lawyers in charge of the estate evict him.
My first chuckle came soon after, when he tried using his TV remote on a mugger, trying to change the experience into something more pleasant; it wasn’t until this point in the film that things began to make sense to me.
Throughout the rest of the movie, scene after scene shows ‘Chauncy Gardener’ as a complete misfit–and highlights how we human beings, in all our frailty, create ourselves and our world through what we decide to believe. When Chancy speaks, his words are mysterious because they are short and puzzling–when those around him try to make sense of them, they take what he says as metaphors, and read wildly profound meanings in his words.
(This leads to Jerzy Kosinski’s purpose for writing the novel, to highlight the foolish way people blindly swallow whatever tripe the media–and our politicians–serve up. IMO director Hal Ashby caught Jerzy’s intention with this movie even better than the book did.)
At the same time that people read wisdom into his simple words, Chauncy is fully present and honest in the moment, and the other characters–to whom this is foreign–treasure that, even while they completely miss that Chance is totally clueless as to what’s really going on (with one notable exception).
The irony is that those people closest to Chauncy are led by the meanings they insert to personal growth and transformation–even, in a performance that won Melvyn Douglas a well-deserved Oscar, acceptance of approaching death, as just another season in the eternal cycle of life.
Other reviews I’ve read on Amazon villify the walking-on-water scene, at the end of the movie; I believe they completely miss the point.
Chance has, by chance, walked out on a stone quay in the lake, and doesn’t even know that he should be drowning. He slowly bends over, inserting his umbrella into the water, and looks at it with some puzzlement; he is once again demonstrating that his total innocence is protected–and he gives the audience the experience that the characters in the movie have, namely, to read into this enigma of a film whatever meaning they choose to see.
Being There In The Time
Chauncey Gardner was the role of a lifetime for Peter Sellers. He first read the book, wrote the author and said “I’ll meet you in the garden” and left his phone number. Years later after much effort the movie was made. Chauncey was Peter Sellers, there is no doubt.
Chauncey was what we would call a mentally disabled man. He grew up a sheltered man in Washington, DC, and his life revolved around his gardening and television. What Chauncey knew of life came from that televison, and wherever Chauncey went was a remote control. When the owner of the home he lived in died, Chauncey was left out in the cold and walking the streets of Washington. He tried to control his life with his remote control-pointing it at a mugger to rid himself of this scene. A chance auto accident and Chauncey is now in the mansion of one of the wealthiest men in Washington, Melvyn Douglas. Who by the way won an Oscar for this performance. He is brought to this mansion by this man’s wife, Eve played by Shirley McLain. The mansion was the Biltmore Mansion in North Carolina, and quite a place it is
Life changes for Chauncey. His innocence and simplicity is taken for extreme intelligence and foresight. The President comes to call. and he is so taken with Chauncey’s remarks comparing life, finance and government to gardening that he mentions his name on a televisions address. The populace being what we are believed everything that Chauncey says is true because everyone in Washington believes it is true. Chauncey is wanted for interviews by all of the television stations and newspapers. Chauncey tells them he does not read newspapers or write he watches television. Everyone is struck by this man’s ability to reveal his inner self. Even, Eve loves Chauncey, and when she wants to become romantic, he tells her he likes to watch. Eve performs for him and she certainly enjoys it, but Chauncey is enjoying his television. Chauncey becomes a household name, although he is quite oblivious to this as his life centers around what television show he will watch from day to day. The lesson to be learned is that nothing is as it seems. We all need to listen to our own voices and not become part of the gaggle that follows and believes everything said by our celebrities and politicians. Peter Sellers died soon after this role and never lived to reap the rewards of this stellar performance. However, we are left with this marvelous movie and a small piece of history. Highly recommended. prisrob
Underappreciated Masterpiece
“Being There” is one of my favorite movies of all time, starring Peter Sellers in his last major film role. How Sellers was cheated out of an Oscar is still a mystery to me, as this has to be one of the greatest performances by an actor in the last 40 years. Maybe voters for the Academy Award weren’t in the mood for a black comedy, which this show is, or maybe they didn’t like its political overtones? Or, maybe they just couldn’t give such a serious award to someone who’d played Inspector Clouseau? In any case, this movie was way before its time in style and substance; Academy voters missed the boat. Among other things, they should have asked themselves if anyone else could have played this part so well? Could anyone else have done the blank, languid stares so convincingly? Could anyone else have delivered the dead-pan lines so flawlessly? The answers would have been a resounding, No.
The movie tells the story of a half-retarded gardener, Chance, whom one supposes is the illegitimate son of a prominent business man in Washington, D. C. This occurs in 1979, when the Carter Administration was in its last stages of faded glory. Chance, played by Peter Sellers, is left homeless when the old man dies. He then wanders the streets of the big city in search of his new life. Whatever he has learned has come from watching TV and he uses his remote control to change channels. While roaming the streets of Washington, Chance even tries his clicker in real life situations, which is very funny.
Chance then stumbles upon one of the main power brokers in D. C., a gravely-ill Ben Rand. He is played by Melvyn Douglas who won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in this portrayal. Rand’s wife Eve, played by Shirley MacLane, falls for Chance and a tawdry affair (on her side) ensues. Later on, Chance becomes a media sensation, of sorts, and appears on late-night TV to present his simplistic views. They’re all couched in terms of keeping a garden prosperous which rings a responsive chord with all concerned. Almost everyone takes Chance for a modern day genius when he really is just the opposite. Various private and government security agencies do research on Chance’s background and can find nothing. He wears expensive clothes and underwear, dating from the 1930′s, that apparently are hand-me-downs from the old man. It’s as if Chance suddenly dropped out of the sky, which he practically has.
At Mr. Rand’s funeral, the surviving power brokers talk of making Chance the next U. S. President. The closing scene shows Chance stepping out onto a lake appearing to walk on water. Maybe this is to serve as final proof that he deserves the #1 job? As far as I know, no one has ever explained the significance of the scene which is as it should be. As with the best art, it’s up to the viewer to decide its meaning.
To me the movie shows the power of television and other forms of mass media in shaping the public mind. Taken to the extreme, a total idiot might be foisted off on the public to hold the highest political office if only he has the right handlers and avoids any whiff of scandal. The biting sarcasm and irony of “Being There” would not appeal to everyone’s taste but most thinking adults should be captivated by the story and by Sellers’ amazing performance.
Before buying the DVD, I tried to find out either on websites or on the outside of the package, if the hilarious out-takes appear on this recording. These were superimposed over the closing credits in the original version shown in theaters but often do not appear when the film is shown on TV. To my relief, the out-takes are there are and just as hilarious as I remember them.
Lost in Translation Review.
|
|
Lost in Translation Review.
Compare & Purchase Lost in Translation at Amazon by clicking here! List Price: —- Amazon Price: $2.99 |
Lost in Translation Description:
- Amazon Sales Rank: #1521 in Movie
- Released on: 2008-09-11
- Rating: R (Restricted)
- Running time: 103 minutes
Customer Reviews:
Lonely Days, Lonely Nights
Bill Murray is Bob Harris, a once popular American actor who now, in his middle-age, has found more acceptance and money from the people of Japan than from his own country. He arrives at a prestigious hotel in Tokyo and is given a royal treatment by his greeters and hosts. He is by himself in the land of the rising sun, his wife and kids having stayed behing in the US while he travels across the globe to do some liquor commercials. This Tokyo excursion will take about a week, and the monetary reward will be quite handsome. Contrast this with Charlotte (Scarlett Johansson), who is at the same hotel tagging along with her photographer husband, John (Giovanni Ribisi), as he does a multiple-day photo shoot. John is at work most of the time, and so Charlotte is by herself at the hotel, her attempts to keep from being bored proving fruitless. Both Bob and Charlotte are married people, but they are also very lonely people, and that is what “Lost In Translation” is all about.
Bob and Charlotte catch glimpses of one another at different places in the hotel, and finally decide to converse in earnest at the hotel bar. The entire plot of the film is about these two people getting to know each other. The story revolves around them. In fact, the story *is* them. Bob, in his early-fifties, is old enough to be Charlotte’s dad, but that doesn’t matter here. It’s not about age. It’s about the place, and the points that each of these people are at in their lives. Bob loves his children very much, but we do not sense he feels the same for his wife. We hear her on the phone when she calls him, and the same weary sentiment seems to flow from her voice. They are becoming a couple in name only. Then there’s Charlotte & John. Both are young, and both are self-possessed. John is into his photography to the point of neglecting Charlotte. But we get the idea that even if gave her more attention, Charlotte might not really warm up to him. She has issues of her own. If Bob is going through a mid-life crisis, then Charlotte seems to be going through a young-life crisis.
“Lost In Translation” is about being alone. Loneliness doesn’t always mean that someone is physically separated from loved ones or from people in general. One can be alone in the middle of a crowded room. Such is the case with Bob & Charlotte. They’re in Japan for a week. They don’t really speak the language. Bob’s wife is in the US, and Charlotte’s husband is always at a photo shoot. The two lost souls find each other at the hotel, spend time with one another, and even sleep in the same bed together. But we know that while this is providing a small comfort for the time being, it is not a lasting solution to their problems. And we also understand that both Bob and Charlotte — even if Bob’s wife were in Tokyo with him, and John was by Charlotte’s side all the time — would still be lonely. Their life struggles lie deeper than what one person can provide, especially the persons they have chosen to settle down with.
This is probably Bill Murray’s most understated performance, and it works brilliantly. He lets you in on Bob’s emotions without betraying too much sentimentality. He conveys so much with just a smile, a frown, his body language, or simply the look in his eyes. He should get an Oscar nomination for this. Scarlett Johansson, who left me unimpressed in the movie “Ghost World” a few years ago, is excellent in her role here. She portrays Charlotte as a deep, troubled, yet intelligent young woman and, like her co-star, does it without overstating it. She spends much of her screen time walking around a hotel room in her pink panties, and does it so simply and matter-of-factly that it becomes both vulnerable and sexy at the same time. Johansson is definitely an actress to watch for in the coming years.
Sofia Coppola has succeeded in creating a sliver of time & place with “Lost In Translation”. It creates two of the most realistic characters to ever grace the cinema. You forget this is a movie, and start to really care for these people as though they really exist. And you get the feeling that this is a single, solitary moment that will be over with and then fondly remembered by the characters for a long time to come. This sweeps over you before the film is even over, much like when you are in the middle of a special occurence or event in your own life, and you stop and think about the fact that at one point – very soon – it will cease to be the present, and will instead become only a nostalgic memory.
And there you have “Lost In Translation”
A classic for grown-ups
This movie is slow paced. However I didn’t find it boring at all. I loved the scenery and the small glimpses into everyday Japanese life, all meshed together with this love story of two people brought together by loneliness and uncertainty, with a musical soundtrack that brings out the best in all of it.
After watching this film, the first thing that sprang to my mind was that I’m so glad I don’t rely on Amazon reviewers to make a decision about whether I am going to see a film or not. That’s almost as dumb as asking a fifteen year old to sit through it and not go crazy or pass out. This film is too mature, dealing with grown-up questions, situations and problems that the kiddies here have yet to grasp.
Bill Murray’s character is going through a midlife crisis; Scarlet Johansen’s is tormented that she cannot seem to discover her purpose in life. Both are trapped in a place where they know no one, and understand nothing. They gravitate to one another and fall into a kind of love that is very unique, but also not at all uncommon under the circumstances. They don’t pursue it physically, because they live in a real world with real consequences and have to respect the promises they made to people they both still love.
No kid fresh out of tenth grade will ever be able to comprehend these emotions… no wonder most of these reviews are from people who were bored stiff. “No sex? No violence? This movie SUCKS”, seems to be the way it works with these Amazon reviews.
Too bad. Maybe when they all grow up they’ll get it. I recommend this movie to grown ups who like minimalist dramas and romantic comedies. If you’re expecting a samurai to jump out with a sword, pass this movie up. This film is about human emotions.
Marvelous – subtle, moving; one of the great films of 2003
I saw Translation for the first time and liked it, but didn’t really know what they saw in the movie that was so beyond-belief spectacular. But alas, I believe that every movie deserves a second chance, so recently I sat down and experienced director Sophia Coppola’s Lost In Translation again.
Lost in Translation tells the story of Bob Harris (Bill Murray in a role tailor-made, if not even Heaven-sent for him), an American movie star that comes to Tokyo to film a whiskey commerical for which he will be paid 2 million bucks. Staying in the same Tokyo hotel is Charlotte (Scarlett Johanssen, radiant and mature at only 18), a newlywed tagging along with her rock photographer husband, John (a typically awkward Giovanni Ribisi). Along the way, Charlotte and Bob run into each other and begin a ‘brief encounter’ that profoundly affects them both.
When the movie hits you right, it’s a pure pleasure from its unassuming start (a beautifully lit shot up Johanssen’s underwear-clothed behind) to its ambiguous but meaningful ending. It begins as a comedy of culture clash, Harris sarcastic and confused at the Japanese when entering his hotel, and even more befuddled in a hilarious scene where he shoots the whiskey commercial. Coppola delivers Bob into her movie with the impression that it’ll be all about him, but Charlotte enters the story, and we’re never quite the same. Scarlett Johanssen plays Charlotte with just the right amount of emotion that her initially morose and soul-searching character doesn’t seem silly. At one point, she tearfully admits over the phone, “I don’t know who I married.” Bob, on the other hand, seems to have it made, but Murray lets a current of loneliness run across that memorable face. He gets comical faxes from his wife about bookshelves and carpet samples, but he gives off the impression that he’s come to the point where he doesn’t even care anymore. Bob is certainly alone for a time in Tokyo, but Murray alludes that things at home aren’t too hot either.
For the first third of the movie, director Coppola displays her first brave choice in filmmaking by keeping Bob and Charlotte apart. Upon my first viewing of Translation, I wasn’t convinced of Coppola’s choice to keep the movie so predominantly low-key, but I’ve realized that there’s a reason for it. The movie sustains this amazing vibe that doesn’t stunt its progress, but propels it with a driving fluidity. A few times, though, Bob and Charlotte do see each other without officially meeting. One time in particular occurs in a crowded elevator – the two glance at each other, faintly smile, and possibility is born. The first section of the film doesn’t just serve to show its two characters completely apart – it makes you think of how many life-changing connections you’ve missed in the past by just being passive and solitary.
The two meet and begin voyages out into the hustle and bustle of Tokyo, and the film takes on a perspective that differs from its earlier view. Before, we saw Bob Harris and Charlotte, respectively, at their most private and vulnerable. While out on the town, the film seems to sit back and just let them have fun. Thank God, for Bill Murray’s rousing rendition of Elvis Costello’s “(What’s So Funny ‘Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding” is a blast. During this time, it seems that Bob and Charlotte have forgotten their insomnia and loneliness, but it’s not gone forever. Even during their night on the town, we see moments where they sit silently, pensive and confused. The movie is a comedy in some sense, but it escalates into a pervading tragic feel. At one point, Charlotte says to Bob: “Let’s never come back here again, because it will never be as much fun.” They had fun, but only in the sense of putting off more loneliness.
It takes a while, but the motivations of each character become fully-realized in a marvelous scene where Bob and Charlottelay fully-clothed in bed together. Here, they handle the ‘big’ questions in life, and not “Where did you go to college?” or “What did you want to be when you were little?” but “What is my purpose?” and “Does marraige get easier?” I was amazed at the honesty of the character’s responses. Bob relates to Charlotte the experience of having children and the ongoing struggles of marraige, but a tinge of fear and apprehension runs through his speech. Charlotte hasn’t really figured things out for herself yet – she says she’s tried just about everything but hasn’t found that niche. Coppola’s screenplay makes the statement that both are in the same exact emotional limbo. Charlotte is confused and worried, but Bob is regretful and washed-up. In a way, these two are some form of deeply odd soul-mates. That is the heart and soul of Coppola’s amazing work.
Translation has great comedic flair with Murray’s wonderful work, but it’s also perhaps one of the saddest and most moving films I’ve seen in a long time. It’s some form of a romance, too, but it’s not about when they’ll kiss or when they’ll hit the sheets. It also has that Affair to Remember vibe too, where the journey of two souls that find comfort will eventually have to come to an end. Its end, though, defies classification, as does the rest of the film. Coppola simply lets her two amazing leads do the work. When the film does arrive at its final, ambiguous moment, it all just seems perfect. The catchy Japan-pop soundtrack that runs brilliantly throughout the film begins to play, and I find myself with a huge regret: that I won’t be able to savor the subtle chemistry of Bob and Charlotte, and that a flat-out masterpiece in American film is at its end.
Streaming 11:14 Online
 |
Streaming 11:14 Online.
Movie Title: 11:14 11:14 is available for streaming or downloading. |
“11:14″ is writer/director Greg Marcks’ first feature film, and it is a fresh and riveting sight at the randomness of life, and how our lives interconnect amid the chaos of it. Starting with the imaginative titles, it’s keeps one’s interest for all of its 85 runt length. All the action takes status on a single night in “Middletown”, which represents any runt USA town, the kind that closes up by 9 PM. Only 10 characters (as well as an overworked policeman and 2 paramedics) are left to obtain a position so clever one can peek this film several times, and be entertained by it.
Buy,Download, Or Stream 11:14! Click Here
The ensemble cast is astonishing, with Patrick Swayze (wearing a “tubby suit” to conceal his athletic physique) as Frank, the father of devious wench Cheri (Rachael Leigh Cook) and husband of Norma (Barbara Hershey) . There is honorable interaction between Buzzy and Duffy, 2 convenience store clerks, superbly played by Hilary Swank and Shawn Hatosy. Others in the graceful cast include Henry Thomas as Jack, Clark Gregg as the beleaguered cop, and Stark Sands, Colin Hanks, and Ben Foster, as 3 kids out for a night of fun and mayhem.
Filmed on a shoestring in 26 nights in Altadena, California, Marcks was only 24 when he wrote the script, and filmed it a year later. He is very explain, and the agreeable DVD extras include informative commentary by him, as well as a “making of” featurette, deleted scenes (the final one is terrific), and more. The music by Clint Mansell is also spacious and adds mighty to the film. Marcks says about the randomness of life that “perhaps there is a larger obtain…but we’re incapable of seeing it”, and the film is also about choices, whether or not one takes responsibility for those choices, and how they affect other people. Though some may pick up this film too bizarre, it is is a shimmering debut for Marcks, and I eagerly view forward to seeing his future work.
Buy,Download, Or Stream 11:14! Click Here
Its a shame that I never even heard of this movie except by chance on amazon.com’s list of “best movies you’ve never even heard of” (or something like that) . As I read the list of actors in the film, I was surprised how this one fell through the cracks. It has Henry Thomas, Patrick Swayze, Barbara Hershey, Hilary Swank, Colin Hanks, Rachel Leigh Cook, and the always pleasant Sean Hatosy. With a cast like that, how did it not gain the kind of media attention that “Shatter” got?
Maybe because it was made by a debut “Generation X” director, Greg Marcks. Like “Donnie Darko” director Richard Kelly before him, Marcks got shafted on the publicity machine. I saw “Shatter” in theaters and really liked it. But for all its clever coincidences, I found the account quite unbelievably contrived (as the film characters are connected in surprising ways, which takes area in the grand megatropolis of Los Angeles) . When I read the description for “11:14″, it sounded a lot like “Demolish” but came out a year or two earlier. After watching it, let me squawk you…I have never had such a mind-blowing experience watching a film before. This film had me riveted as I watched how all the myth segments plunge into spot. By the raze of the movie, I was like “whoa!” Lustrous, man. Absolutely knowing!
Like the movie “Rupture”, this one involves a couple car accidents and the ways the people fervent are all connected to one another. To affirm any more is to destroy the film experience. All I can say is that the performances were really generous. I’ve been a fan of Henry Thomas since “E.T.”, since he is the same age as me and I related to his Elliot character serve then. He’s a first-rate actor who deserves to be in more films. Patrick Swayze in this reminds me of the cramped but pivotal role he played in “Donnie Darko”, which leads me to wonder why he’s playing in such minor roles, being directed by Generation X director. Barbara Hershey, another actress I like from the 1980s, seems to reprise her role in the film “Lantana”, but this role is simply too exiguous, but she manages it well. However, I assume this film showcases the talents of Sean Hatosy, who is becoming one of my well-liked actors by how well he makes his facial expressions. From “Soldier Girl” to “Faith of My Fathers” to “11:14″, I really hope his career launches into more leading man site or at least a buddy film. He is definitely the actor to witness.
When the final scene occurs and all the pieces drop together, I was so amazed by its brilliance that I had to glimpse it again, and then again with the director’s commentary track. This is a film that I would’ve seen in theaters had it been better publicized and distributed. As far as first films go, you can’t gather better than this. Like director Richard Kelly, I maintain Greg Marcks is another one to notice. If you enjoyed “Rupture” and “Memento”, you’ll probably worship this film as well. And memo to Hollywood…don’t be terrified to capture risks on unconventional storylines. This movie far exceeds the formulaic action/romantic-comedy/suspense films you dish out to audiences year after year. This film leaves a lasting impression and really blows your mind away with its implication. Its what every viewer wants to experience when they explore a movie.
quietcomfort 3
ear force x4 dolby digital
Stream Entourage – The Complete First Season Online
 |
Stream Entourage – The Complete First Season Online.
Movie Title: Entourage – The Complete First Season Entourage – The Complete First Season is available for streaming or downloading. Click Here to Stream or Download Entourage – The Complete First Season |
Fame, fortune, luxury, and letting it all go to your head; agents, managers, publicists, and everyone else that will lie, cheat, or lift to gain a portion of you; and remembering your proper friends. These are all key ingredients that design “Entourage” thoroughly intelligent, as well as freighting when you judge about how it’s based on reality.
Buy,Download, Or Stream Entourage – The Complete First Season! Click Here
I assume the explain as a cautionary tale; the entertainment industry is where I have impartial barely started to bag my feet wet. There is a lot of truth in this fictional show: either everyone wants a share of you or no one knows your name and can’t spare a shrimp of their time. From my shrimp time spent dealing with people of the industry, on either glide, I have already found more jerks and egos-out-of-control than I care to narrate. “Entourage” does an proper job of exposing the dangers of the L.A. lifestyle, while simultaneously managing to expose them in a thoroughly savory manner.
The superficial world that is the entertainment business is navigated successfully through the four different personalities that form up the entourage. The four personalities of the Rising Star, Has-Been, Bum, and Serene Average Guy balance out the cast and provide a character for everyone to appreciate or represent to. Their friendship and their dependence on each other construct the characters a success, as well as a success in the world of the point to.
Buy,Download, Or Stream Entourage – The Complete First Season! Click Here
Jeremy Piven’s role as agent to rising star, Vincent Rush, is thoroughly spirited as well as aggravating. He’s not quite the villain, but the perfect embodiment of the guy you don’t want working against you. His rapidly one-liners and perfect delivery create it a joy to examine the prove, whereas a real-life encounter with a guy such as him would probably beget you want to deck him.
“Entourage” is rife with inside jokes, but not enough to lose the average viewer. Instead, the average viewer might impartial glance the present as a bunch of losers whining about the capable life and living high off the hog without really working. I bask in it, but it’s certainly not for everybody. I gaze it as another example of why I don’t, and never want to, live in Los Angeles.
Show business is unlike any other business: they work by their occupy rules and settle who to let into their microscopic clique. It’s about as noble as sleeping in a pit chubby of vipers, but our look at what it’s like to live on top is sterling a one.
Having heard about Entourage for a couple years now, I decided to finally give it a shot after prolonging it for quite some time. The exhibit didn’t ogle that spicy to me and the main actor who plays Vincent, Adrian Grenier, objective seemed like a `B’ actor to me. But after I kept hearing my friends talk about the present, I decided to purchase it up at a store here in Iraq. It has all 4 seasons in it for like 30 bucks… hehe.
After a few episodes I was really into the point to. It’s definitely laughable and that’s what I wanted. To truly delight in the present, you must let well-liked sense go, because it unprejudiced doesn’t go well with this indicate. One prime example is that Vincent Pace is a lead star that’s honest had a tremendous movie premier. He’s a colossal name actor (sorta) now and he’s got a gorgeous boy face to go with that role. But he can go anywhere he wants around town and never seem to acquire swamped with fans or the paparazzi. If you can let the limited things go, I own you’ll truly appreciate the display.
Now Vince is an up and coming star and he has his boys from high school with him along with his primitive brother Johnny `Drama’ Slouch. Drama, as most call him, is what you would call a `B’ actor. Most of his stints have been not grand characters on some accepted shows such as Melrose Dwelling and Viking Quest (which I’m thinking is supposed to be Hercules) and some not so known shows as well. Turtle is one of the suitable friends, and his main job is to be a driver and do obvious errands Vinny needs. He’s not Vin’s slave by no means, but this is how he earns his sustain so he doesn’t have to be a burly blown moocher. Eric is Vince’s best friend and has been since they were about 6 years weak. Eric has his head on his shoulders and is here to try and relieve Vince with his career. He’s not trying to be a mooch, but honest trying to assist his friend. Vince makes Eric his manager to succor with scripts and to perform his life easier. And when I say easier…I mean it as in Vinny doesn’t have to talk to Ari Gold (played BRILLIANTLY by Jeremy Piven), a frosty hearted, hard as nails, wise cracking, brilliant butt, genius, and on the top of his game agent. Ari and Eric’s arguments are some of the best parts of the exhibit. Both hard headed and both trying to assist Vincent, but in somewhat different ways. The whole cast is big and definitely grow on you as the season(s) goes on. Along with the cast you also have a LOT of gargantuan name cameos. I was quite surprised to peruse so many.
What I treasure about the point to is that it makes life seem so fun being rich. Once Vinny makes millions from his first movie, he buys a mountainous house for him and friends to live in. Cars for them. They win trips when they want. Fair hang out and do things we all wished we could do. And when someone like Jessica Alba talks to them, everything is so nonchalant. If it was me, I don’t judge I’d be able to even allege. Ok maybe I would, but my words would near out all Jibba Jabba like.
And yes there is a narrative that goes with the point to. In season one the sizable thing is getting Vincent another movie while he’s hot. Eric puts a hurting on that because Ari fair wants whatever will glean Vincent titanic money, while Eric wants to encourage rep Vinny a righteous script regardless of the money. Like other shows, it has one `main’ theme for the season, while each episode has a mini-story itself.
All in all, I’m very contented I tried this expose out. Very droll and I highly recommend it. Especially to guys, even though I know a lot of girls like it too. But like another reviewer mentioned… Entourage is sorta like a Sex in the City for guys.
The indicate does have a LOT of language that isn’t excellent for children in my understanding. Some nudity (though not distinguished) is also in here…like boobs!
hunter air filters
training my dog