Author: mfordfeeney

  • Brilliance (2013)

    Brilliance (2013)

    Brilliance
    Brilliance by Marcus Sakey

    My rating: 3 of 5 stars

    Less science fiction than a thriller with a “what if” premise, Marcus Sakey’s Brilliance is a well-written and engaging novel that nevertheless makes you eager to get on to the next book in the series.
    The concept is as simple as it is good: since 1980 1% of new children are born “brilliant” or “abnorm” – they have unique talents and abilities, almost superhuman in nature. The story, set in an alternate history, picks up during the current time, when this first generation of abnorm children have grown up and are impacting daily life.

    The book cover prominently features a quote from Lee Child that boasts, “The Kind of Story You’ve Never Read Before”. Nonsense. The story completely echoes the X-Men series of comics and novels. Even if you’re not a reader you can’t have failed to notice they’ve made like 10 movies about them. And there are plenty of other stories that have trod on this ground. The quote doesn’t do the novel any favors. But if you put aside this pre-conceived idea of the incredible originality that was thrust upon you, you can appreciate the book for what it is – a very solid thriller that examines the real-life issues that would necessarily arise from such a seismic shift in the makeup of the human race.

    Despite the obvious parallels to X-Men and other superhuman fare, the brilliants of Sakey’s series don’t vary in appearance from the “norms”. Their gifts don’t allow them to fly or change the weather or shape-shift or anything like that. Many of them have natural abilities supernaturally enhanced: being able to “read” thoughts by body language; recognizing intent in other so as to see the areas where one can move undetected; accurately interpreting the patterns of the stock market to the extent that they have to shut it down.

    A most common trait is pattern recognition and this is the one possessed by protagonist Nick Cooper, a brilliant who has chosen to become a federal agent uniquely skilled at finding the more dangerous abnorms. He has dedicated his life to hunting terrorists and his gift has helped him to become very good at it. But predictably the narrative will find him seeing things from the other side and question which side he’s on, yada yada…

    As I said, it’s not groundbreaking stuff, but that doesn’t detract from the enjoyment of it. The quality of the book lies in the telling. Sakey does a great job positing the necessary changes that these gifted individuals have affected upon the world and placing realistic human characters (whether brilliant or norm) in believable situations. The political realities, the social and personal elements are all well represented and examined here and it makes for good storytelling.

    I enjoyed the author’s style. It does read a bit like a movie – it comes as absolutely no surprise whatsoever that this story has already been optioned for film – but I accept that as a reality of thrillers, which often feel aimed for the screen. The adjective cinematic is not supposed to be a criticism – I want to feel swept away. Brilliance mostly achieves this.

    The book suffers a touch from being the first in a series – just in that you’re sort of anxious to get on with it – but I think that speaks more to the quality of the overall story than it suggests dissatisfaction with the novel itself. I’m writing this review after reading the first two books, so my perspective is necessarily skewed; I enjoyed the second novel heaps more and so I may be downgrading my assessment of Brilliance accordingly. It was a great book and obviously made me snap up the second in the series, so mission accomplished.

    [schema type=”book” url=”http://marcussakey.com/bk_brilliance.php” name=”Brilliance” description=”In Wyoming, a little girl reads people’s darkest secrets by the way they fold their arms. In New York, a man sensing patterns in the stock market racks up $300 billion. In Chicago, a woman can go invisible by being where no one is looking. They’re called “brilliants,” and since 1980, one percent of people have been born this way. Nick Cooper is among them; a federal agent, Cooper has gifts rendering him exceptional at hunting terrorists. His latest target may be the most dangerous man alive, a brilliant drenched in blood and intent on provoking civil war. But to catch him, Cooper will have to violate everything he believes in – and betray his own kind. From Marcus Sakey, “a modern master of suspense” (Chicago Sun-Times) and “one of our best storytellers” (Michael Connelly), comes an adventure that’s at once breakneck thriller and shrewd social commentary; a gripping tale of a world fundamentally different and yet horrifyingly similar to our own, where being born gifted can be a terrible curse.(” author=”Marcus Sakey” publisher=”Thomas & Mercer” pubdate=”2013-07-16″ isbn=”1611099692″ ebook=”yes” paperback=”yes” ]

  • All of Me (1984)

    All of Me (1984)

    140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

    Fun, screwball physical comedy is slightly more mature than what Martin had been doing, but not much. Dated but leads are still very funny.

    All of Me

    Spoiler-free Movie Review of All of Me:

    In 1984, Carl Reiner and Steve Martin teamed up for the fourth and final time with All of Me, a slight body-swap comedy based on an unpublished novel (Me Two by Edwin Davis) and titled after the 1930’s jazz hit.

    Millionaire Edwina Cutwater (Tomlin) has been sickly and bedridden all of her life, and now that she’s dying she’s arranged to have her soul transferred into the body of a beautiful young woman named Terry Hoskins (Victoria Tennant) so that Edwina can get another chance at life. She enlists the help of attorney Roger Cobb (Martin) to amend her will, making Hoskins the sole heir so that the Cutwater fortune will be awaiting her in her new body. Through a chain of events that would be unlikely anywhere but in a screwball comedy, Edwina’s soul ends up in Roger’s body – and he’s still in there. The two must work together to exist in one body until they can get Edwina back where she belongs. Of course, it isn’t going to be easy…

    The physical comedy of Martin is top-shelf, right up there with his other 80’s hits, but the dialogue and interplay between the stars is even better. In some ways this is a somewhat insubstantial picture, but the pairing of Martin & Tomlin is comedic gold. The filmmakers utilize a device in which Edwina’s visage is visible to Roger in mirrors, allowing the actors to play directly off of each other, making for great interaction.

    Further comedic excellence is delivered by Roger’s blind friend Tyrone Wattell (played by the always enjoyable Jason Bernard) who nearly steals the picture with his deadpan deliver of lines like “Well, if I can be of any help at all, you are in worse trouble than I thought.”.

    While not one of his more famous pictures, All of Me was a solid hit for Martin, who has the perfect foil in comedy superheroine Tomlin. They are sadly, if predictably, planning a remake, but the original still plays.

    Poster:

    Trailer:

    Bechdel Test:

    Pass

    The Representation Test Score: B (7 pts)

    (http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

    All of Me Representation Test

     

    [schema type=”movie” name=”All of Me” description=”When rich, eccentric Edwina Cutwater died, a crazy guru tried to transport her soul into the body of a beautiful young woman. But the guru goofed. And Edwina’s soul has accidentially taken over the entire right side of her lawyer, Roger Cobb. He still controls what’s left. Now, Edwina and Roger are living together in the same body. He’s losing his job. He’s losing his girlfriend. And he just can’t seem to get her out of his system. No matter how hard he tries.” director=”Carl Reiner” actor_1=”Steve Martin” actor_2=”Lily Tomlin]

    Main Cast Steve Martin Roger Cobb, Lily Tomlin Edwina Cutwater, Victoria Tennant Terry Hoskins, Madolyn Smith Osborne (as Madolyn Smith) Peggy Schuyler
    Rating PG
    Release Date Fri 21 Sep 1984 UTC
    Director Carl Reiner
    Genres Comedy, Fantasy, Romance
    Plot A dying millionnaire has her soul transferred into a younger, willing woman. But something goes wrong, and she finds herself in her lawyer’s body – together with the lawyer.
    Poster All of Me
    Runtime 93
    Tagline The funniest movie since TOOTSIE [Australia Theatrical]
    Writers Edwin Davis (novel), Henry Olek (adaptation)
    Year 1984
  • Dolphin Tale 2 (2014)

    Dolphin Tale 2 (2014)

    140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

    Like the 1st, only less so. If you liked the first film, you’ll enjoy this as well, but it’s a less significant picture in most respects…

    Dolphin Tale 2

    Spoiler-free Movie Review of Dolphin Tale 2:

    This review is going to feel like déjà vu all over again, which is fitting, since so does the film.

    The first Dolphin Tale was a huge financial and (mostly) critical success, but a sequel wouldn’t seem to make any sense were it not for a most unlikely – but true – series of events. As in the case of the original picture, the dramatized recreations of the true story were more interesting than the fictionalized extra story material. Unlike in the first film, the extra story material is weak and undeserving of so much screen time.

    Dolphin Tale 2

    It’s really remarkable that they could make a sequel to a true story, following it up with another true story, and the tale (heh heh) is almost too perfect to believe. At a wrap party for the first film, volunteers and staff from the Clearwater Marine Aquarium were called away from the event to care for a young female bottlenose dolphin who had been rescued. This dolphin would be named Hope and is the film’s raison d’être.

    The film opens with the rescue of a bottlenose dolphin in a sequence narrated by Sawyer (Nathan Gamble), the protagonist of the first picture. It’s been three years and he’s now thriving as an essential staff member at the aquarium. Business has been booming at the facility, which has now expanded and is more of a tourist attraction, which raises the pressures on the team when something goes wrong – which of course it does.

    Dolphin Tale 2

    Because part of my mission is to look at these films from a family-friendly perspective, I must tell you that the first act contains the heartbreaking death of Panama, the bottlenose tankmate of Winter. (This isn’t a spoiler – it’s the story catalyst.) It’s done very respectfully but it’s still quite upsetting, so prep your young ones.

    With the death of Panama, Winter is now alone in the tank – a regulatory violation – and has become depressed. The Clearwater team will need hope if they are going to be able to keep Winter from being sent to another aquarium.

    Dolphin Tale 2

    Story-wise, though, so far, so good. But it’s the whole other story that is tedious. In the first picture screenwriters Karen Janszen & Noam Dromi crafted an interesting allegorical story about humans coping with loss and change much like Winter. Director Charles Martin Smith handled writing duties for this film and is not as successful. It’s basically a coming of age / “should I stay or should I go” story mixed in with a “keep the aquarium going” storyline that’s a retread of the first film. It is appropriately shorter than the first film, but considering how much story there isn’t, it could have been shorter still.

    Dolphin Tale 2

    Nearly all of the primary characters have their roles severely reduced, with the exception of Sawyer. Morgan Freeman, Ashley Judd & Kris Kristofferson probably could have filmed all of their scenes in an afternoon. I’m not even sure they bothered to check in with the costume department – I think they just walked on to the set in their street clothes. Freeman in particular seems operating on autopilot – he could have (and may have) done this in his sleep.

    Dolphin Tale 2

    One character that doesn’t lose any screen time is Rufus the pelican, following the Louis Tully rule of sequels. That’s fine – he’s funny and most of his scenes are with new character Mavis, a rescued sea turtle – and I love sea turtles!

    Dolphin Tale 2

    So am I saying to give this film a miss? Not at all. It’s still sweet and cute and fun and the animals are always spellbinding. It’s just the human stuff is a little more pedestrian in this film and I don’t think it’s quite as inspirational of a story. But it is an entertaining film and I could watch these dolphins for hours. The child audience in the theater loved it, including the one I brought, and the rest of us seemed to find it an enjoyable and solid enough movie.

    Poster:

    Trailer:

    Bechdel Test:

    Pass

    The Representation Test Score: B (10 pts)

    (http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

    Dolphin Tale 2 Representation Test

    [schema type=”movie” url=”http://www.dolphintale2.com/” name=”Dolphin Tale 2″ description=”It has been several years since young Sawyer Nelson (Gamble) and the dedicated team at the Clearwater Marine Hospital, headed by Dr. Clay Haskett (Connick, Jr.), rescued Winter. With the help of Dr. Cameron McCarthy (Freeman), who developed a unique prosthetic tail for the injured dolphin, they were able to save her life. Yet their fight is not over. Winter’s surrogate mother, the very elderly dolphin Panama, has passed away, leaving Winter without the only poolmate she has ever known. However, the loss of Panama may have even greater repercussions for Winter, who, according to USDA regulations, cannot be housed alone, as dolphins’ social behavior requires them to be paired with other dolphins. Time is running out to find a companion for her before the team at Clearwater loses their beloved Winter to another aquarium.” director=”Charles Martin Smith” actor_1=”Harry Connick Jr.” actor_2=”Morgan Freeman” actor_3=”Ashley Judd” actor_4=”Nathan Gamble” actor_5=”Cozi Zuehlsdorff” actor_6=”Bethany Hamilton” ]

    Main Cast Morgan Freeman Dr. Cameron McCarthy, Ashley Judd Lorraine Nelson, Nathan Gamble Sawyer Nelson, Cozi Zuehlsdorff Hazel Haskett
    Rating PG
    Release Date Fri 12 Sep 2014 UTC
    Director Charles Martin Smith
    Genres Drama, Family
    Plot The team of people who saved Winter’s life reassemble in the wake of her surrogate mother’s passing in order to find her a companion so she can remain at the Clearwater Marine Hospital.
    Poster Dolphin Tale 2
    Runtime 107
    Tagline WINTER’s amazing true story… now has HOPE.
    Writers Charles Martin Smith (written by), Karen Janszen (characters) …
    Year 2014
  • Amadeus (1984)

    Amadeus (1984)

    140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

    Peter Shaffer brilliantly adapts his own play, Director Miloš Forman delivers a masterpiece. 30 years later still one of the best ever made.

    Amadeus

    Spoiler-free Movie Review of Amadeus:

    In 1984, after a summer of blockbusters and in the middle of an age obsessed with synthesizers, video games, computers, electronics and everything “new”, producer Saul Zaentz presented a two and a half hour movie about classical music composers that had been dead for almost two hundred years. That takes some nerve…

    It helps that the film in question would be based on a successful play and was being written for the screen by the playwright, Peter Shaffer. Amadeus would also be directed by Miloš Forman, an accomplished and challenging filmmaker both in his native country (the former Czechoslovakia) and throughout the world. It was still a big risk, however.

    Amadeus

    Zaentz’s gamble paid off big, bringing in well over twice its budget and winning 8 Oscars including Best Picture. More importantly it is a tremendous movie that plays exactly as well as it did 30 years ago today.

    The quality of the filmmakers is on display almost immediately, as the story opens with an aged Antonio Salieri (F. Murray Abraham in his greatest role) shouting his confession that he killed Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, begging for forgiveness as he cuts open his throat. What a grabber! You can practically hear those who were dragged to the movie theater whispering admiringly to their spouses, “Whoa! I thought this was going to be boring music and people in wigs?”

    Amadeus

    The premise of the play and film is at once wonderful writing and complete nonsense. Salieri did not kill Mozart, he did not suggest that he killed Mozart, no serious people think that he killed Mozart. According to scholars of the men, the two may have had some rivalry between them, but nothing suggests the level of disrespect or hatred shown here. They were both competing for work and the favor of Emperor Joseph II, but there is plenty of correspondence signifying that they were respectful colleagues. It is true that Mozart complained in his lifetime that Salieri was more at favor and trying to obstruct his career, but this seems to be mostly based on Mozart’s complaints against the Italians in general, and there are other letters from Mozart implying a friendship.

    What I didn’t realize before doing research for this review is that Shaffer’s play is actually based on a tragedy called Mozart and Salieri by Alexander Pushkin that was staged only six years after Salieri’s death. Rimsky-Korsakov would adapt it into an opera at the turn of the century. It was here that the apocryphal tale that Salieri, filled with jealousy at the musical superiority of an “idle” man, poisoned Mozart were first aired. So there were rumors, but none that were taken seriously. What we really have here is a clever writer taking a fascinating bit of history and fictionalizing it dramatically to make for an entertaining tale about genius and jealousy.

    Amadeus

    The story is set in 1823, when Salieri, recovering in an insane asylum from his suicide attempt, narrates his tale to a priest who has come for his confession. The film plays out over a number of years through flashbacks, but mainly focuses on the ten year period from 1781-91 in which Salieri and Mozart were colleagues in Vienna.

    The story is captivating, with whip-smart dialogue and a brilliant narrative that, along with Forman’s expert direction, leads to an engrossing picture whose pace is more engaging than a 153-minute movie has any right to be. The tale ebbs and flows and there’s a diversity of scenes and emotions that make the film always seem fresh and never long.

    Amadeus

    The acting, of course, is wonderful. Abraham delivers a best in show performance as Salieri, with a range of emotion and subtlety that is a perfect match with the complex score. Tom Hulce is charismatic and mesmerizing as Mozart, greatly humanizing such a legendary figure. Both were nominated for Best Actor and while Abraham justly was awarded the statue, I feel Hulce was robbed by not being classified as Supporting Actor.

    Amadeus

    Elizabeth Berridge put in a great performance as Mozart’s wife Constanze, though a lot of her work was left on the cutting room floor. (Restored with the 2002 Director’s Cut.) All of the supporting players are excellent, with Jeffrey Jones’ humorous turn as Emperor Joseph II standing out. Also exceptional is Simon Callow, who played Mozart in the original London production, as Emanuel Schikaneder, Mozart’s friend and author of the libretto for The Magic Flute.

    It’s a quality production in all respects. The score is predictably brilliant, the costumes, makeup and art direction are award-winning and it’s really just a gorgeous picture. Forman invited choreography legend Twyla Tharp to work her magic on the picture. They had previously collaborated on Hair & Ragtime.

    Amadeus

    Amadeus is a captivating story and an amazing film. Enjoy it often…

    Poster:

    Trailer:

    Bechdel Test:

    Fail

    The Representation Test Score: C (5 pts)

    (http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

    Amadeus Representation Test[schema type=”movie” name=”Amadeus” description=”The incredible story of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, told by his peer and secret rival Antonio Salieri – now confined to an insane asylum.” director=”Milos Forman” actor_1=”F. Murray Abraham” actor_2=”Tom Hulce” actor_3=”Elizabeth Berridge”]

    Main Cast F. Murray Abraham Antonio Salieri, Tom Hulce Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Elizabeth Berridge Constanze Mozart, Roy Dotrice Leopold Mozart
    Rating PG
    Release Date Wed 19 Sep 1984 UTC
    Director Milos Forman
    Genres Biography, Drama, Music
    Plot The incredible story of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, told by his peer and secret rival Antonio Salieri – now confined to an insane asylum.
    Poster Amadeus
    Runtime 160
    Tagline Amadeus. The man. The music. The magic. The madness. The murder. The mystery. The motion picture.
    Writers Peter Shaffer (original stage play), Peter Shaffer (original screenplay)
    Year 1984
  • Goldfinger (1964)

    Goldfinger (1964)

    140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

    Probably the best, certainly the most iconic James Bond film. Quintessential: if you only could screen one 007 film, this would be the one.

    Goldfinger

    Spoiler-free Movie Review of Goldfinger:

    Today is the 50th anniversary of the release of the third James Bond film, Goldfinger. This one kind of snuck up on me; I had this on my editorial calendar for December 22nd. (Yes, I do plan these things.) That date wasn’t wrong exactly – that was the date of the US premiere – but the London premiere was September 17, 1964 (debuted to the UK public the next day – full release in USA January 9, 1965). I need an assistant researcher…

    Goldfinger

    So this is possibly going to be much shorter than I intended. I plan to revisit the entire series eventually – I am a huge Bond fan. For now I’ll keep it pretty simple – Goldfinger is the best James Bond film.

    Goldfinger

    In retrospect, it’s very easy to understand why Goldfinger was a smash hit, critically and commercially.

    • After two pictures, producers Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli and star Sean Connery knew exactly what they were doing. Goldfinger is the archetypical well-oiled machine.
    • Screenwriter Richard Maibaum was also operating in familiar territory with two Bond films under his belt. He would write or co-write 13 of the first 16 Bond films – most of them adapted from Ian Fleming’s novels.

    Goldfinger

    • Though the third film in the series, it is based on the seventh 007 novel, and Fleming is in good form by that point. (It was the last novel he wrote before the Thunderball debacle and in some ways he never really recovered from that. He passed away a few months before the film release of Goldfinger.)
    • It’s a fairly linear story. The bad guy is immediately identified – he even appears in the pre-credits scene. Other than his henchman Oddjob, he doesn’t have a massive organization behind him or secret underground lair. His plan is involved but not overly elaborate.

    Goldfinger

    • Production Designer Ken Adam, who was so important on Dr. No but absent for From Russia With Love, is back to great effect. The same is true of stunt coordinator Bob Simmons, another unsung hero of the series.
    • It doesn’t hang around for no reason – it’s only 110 minutes and those are all used efficiently. Only Dr. No & Quantum of Solace are so short.
    • The image of the deceased Jill Masterson (Shirley Eaton) completely covered in gold paint is one of the most striking images the series has ever produced.

    Goldfinger

    • It has possibly the most famous title song in Bond history, and it’s up there in screen history.
    • The car. The Aston Martin DB5. So classic.

    Goldfinger

    • The other car. First film appearance of a Ford Mustang.
    • The girl. Honor Blackman as Pussy Galore (really?) was 39 at the time, making her the oldest Bond girl ever. Which is pretty appalling for a lot of reasons, chief among them being that she projects such credibility and capability that you wonder why they never again cast an older (?) woman.

    Goldfinger

    • The villain. Auric Goldfinger is sort of interesting in that he doesn’t really get his hands dirty. Even Dr. No put up a fight in the end, and he was a stick.

    Goldfinger

    • First time putting 007 in the United States, even if Connery never set foot on the continent.
    • Q (Desmond Llewelyn) makes his second appearance in this film, but it’s the first time we go to Q Branch’s workshop and see all of the toys.

    Goldfinger

    Of course, it’s not all sunshine and lollipops, but most of the issues with the film are more “what could have been” thoughts:

    • Q Branch: while this is fun, knowing that this stuff would soon start being the tail wagging the dog makes it a little less enjoyable. This was pretty much the end of James Bond actually spying; he was strictly an action hero after this film.
    • Gert Fröbe has a definite presence on screen, even if all of his dialogue is dubbed, but I’ll never really be comfortable with an admitted former Nazi Party member actually gassing people, even if they are gangsters. At least there’s Harold Sakata’s Oddjob to keep things light. I still think it would have been interesting if they got their first choice, Orson Welles…

    Goldfinger

    • At the end the credits state “James Bond will return in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service“. But he didn’t. They couldn’t get it happening and went with the lawsuit riddled Thunderball. I know it was an even bigger film than Goldfinger and the height of Bond mania, but I have very mixed feelings about the picture, considering it to be a very flawed film despite containing some series highlights. Even after that they still didn’t do OHMSS, but they went with You Only Live Twice, one of the weakest films of the entire series. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is one of the best Bond films and one of my personal favorites, and while I think George Lazenby did a wonderful job, I would have loved to see Connery’s take on it.

    Goldfinger

    • In the book, Pussy Galore is gay – this may have allowed me to give the picture at least one point on the Representation Test had it not been changed for the film…
    • Finally, “skin suffocation”? Great plot point, but it’s total nonsense…

    Goldfinger

    Goldfinger is one of those landmark films that you wish you could see with fresh eyes. It’s nearly perfect and there’s a reason it tops most peoples lists. Picking your favorite Bond is like picking your favorite Beatles album – there’s no wrong answer. But picking the best? Got to go with Goldfinger.

    Poster:

    Trailer:

    Bechdel Test:

    Fail

    The Representation Test Score: F (0 pts)

    (http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

    Goldfinger Representation Test

    [schema type=”movie” url=”http://www.007.com/” name=”Goldfinger” description=”Investigating a gold magnate’s smuggling, James Bond uncovers a plot to contaminate the Fort Knox gold reserve.” director=”Guy Hamilton” actor_1=”Sean Connery” ]

    Main Cast Sean Connery James Bond, Gert Fröbe (as Gert Frobe) Goldfinger/Auric Goldfinger, Honor Blackman Pussy Galore, Shirley Eaton Jill Masterson
    Rating TV-PG
    Release Date Sat 09 Jan 1965 UTC
    Director Guy Hamilton
    Genres Action, Adventure, Thriller
    Plot Investigating a gold magnate’s smuggling, James Bond uncovers a plot to contaminate the Fort Knox gold reserve.
    Poster Goldfinger
    Runtime 110
    Tagline Miss Honey and Miss Galore Have James Bond Back For More!
    Writers Richard Maibaum (screenplay) &, Paul Dehn (screenplay)
    Year 1964