Wednesday, April 1, 2026

Tag: Thriller

In the Heart of the Sea (2015)

InTheHeartOfTheSeaPoster

Title: In the Heart of the Sea
Rating: PG-13
Directed by: Ron Howard
Written by: Charles Leavitt, Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver
Based on the novel by: Nathaniel Philbrick
Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Cillian Murphy and Brendan Gleeson
Release Date: 12/11/2015
Running Time: 121 minutes

Official Site
IMDb

Based on the 1820 event, a whaling ship is preyed upon by a sperm whale, stranding its crew at sea for 90 days, thousands of miles from home.


What did you think of this film?

During Credits? No

After Credits? No

[wpolling_archive id=”65″ vote=”true” type=”open”]

Special thanks to Frank S. for this submission


Wannabe, The (2015)

TheWannabePoster

Title: The Wannabe
Rating: R
Directed by: Nick Sandow
Written by: Nick Sandow
Starring: Patricia Arquette, Michael Imperioli, David Zayas and Vincent Piazza
Release Date: 12/4/2015
Running Time: 90 minutes

IMDb

Obsessed with mob culture, and desperate to fit in, Thomas sets out to fix the 1992 trial of John Gotti. He believes if the plan is executed, it will put him at the center of all that he idolizes. The plot is foiled, setting off events worthy of mob lore. The Wannabe intertwines real people and true events, past and present, with fantasy.


What did you think of this film?

During Credits? No

After Credits? No

Special thanks to Frank S. for this submission


Spotlight Review – 3.5 out of 5 Stars

SpotlightPoster
We haven’t had a good film about journalism in what feels like decades. A part of the reason for this is that people don’t have the same level of respect for the media that they had in the past. Before internet culture, people saw reporters and journalist as the intelligent heroes in All the Presidents Men and The China Syndrome, using there intellect to bring out the truth. Nowadays, it’s hard not to see the media as it’s shown in the once thought to be preposterous world of Network. TMZ, Fox News and CNN live on shoddy reporting that exploits tragedies, rushes stories before finding facts and generally manipulates the viewers. Modern mainstream media has become so bad that people go to more comedic shows for actuals news. It says something when the best movie about reporting that I’ve seen in years was Nightcrawler.

So while there are several flaws that keep Thomas McCarthy’s Spotlight from being perfect or even great in my mind, I can at least understand why this film will be a huge breath of fresh air for audiences and reporters alike. After duds like Truth and True Story, we have a movie that gives a truly heroic portrait of journalists and the steps they take to research a story and affect the culture surrounding them.

In 2002, The Boston Globe’s Spotlight team (Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams, Liev Schreiber, Brian d’Arcy James, John Slattery) decided to begin a secret investigation into sexual abuse involving Catholic priests in the state of Massachusetts. They originally believe there to be five priests that have been covered up by the church but the list of people expands as more investigating is done.

I think one of the few things people will agree on with this movie is its intelligence. The movie tries to really explore every nook and cranny of how the story was handled. You get to see all the details from them talking about choosing this subject in a board room to them going back to work after publishing the story in there paper. You watch them go through thousands of pages looking for guilty priests and you see the conversations they have with lawyers, friends, victims and sometimes even the perpetrators in the hopes of finding out more information. The movie is about capturing all of these little things that they had to do in order to release this story and if anything, the movie gives you a new found respect for the work journalists go through.

What’s impressive about this movie is that you would assume that it would be relatively boring to watch for two hours and ten minutes. I was suspicious about a movie being made about the subject in the first place and it didn’t help that before Spotlight I saw Truth, an ungodly long and boring movie about the news.

To be honest, I was a little bored near the start of the movie. Not a lot of things were happening and I was worried that the film would be like this for the rest of its running time. But as the story develops and they gather more information, the movie becomes faster and more thrilling until it’s suddenly over. Now having seen the entire movie, this is one of the rare times where I compliment a part of the film for being boring. This transformation from slower, more atmospheric storytelling into non-stop information is a creative and accurate representation of what it was like for the people who were working on this story. In the beginning, there might be a lot of dead ends and useless clues. But all it takes is for a few of these tiny clues to piece together for you to start picking up on bigger and bigger material to work with.

Besides its sheer competence when it came to handling the story, Spotlights biggest hit is in the overall message it tries to give. What this movie tries to heroize is a rarity in modern pop culture. The heroes in Spotlight aren’t big, larger than life super heroes who save the day with over the top action scenes and gigantic speeches about how what they do is the right thing. The heroes in Spotlight work on the bottom floor, they take the bus to work and they spend their nights researching in libraries. They create answers and they help victims with their quiet intellect. And after hundreds of hours of perfecting until they have something they can give to the public, they rest and then there back on Monday, sitting at their desks finding out about a new topic they can give to the world. It isn’t pretty or filled with stirring speeches. But at the end of the day, the smart, quiet people are the ones who get results and create change.

It’s so easy to make a movie that tries to glamorize heroism and shows a hero as being someone who does the biggest thing or says something the loudest. Current mainstream news certainly seems to believe this. You can’t turn on Fox News these days without finding some new thing for them to get angry about without providing any evidence. But real journalism and being a real hero looks like Spotlight, it’s slow, detailed and calculated. It’s quiet, silent figures performing a thankless job not in the hopes of achieving accolades or honor, but a beautiful outcome that can hopefully in some small way inch us towards a better future for everyone around us. Stanley Tucci excellently portrays Michael Garabedian, an attorney for sexually abused children that helps the Globe with their case. At the end of the movie, he shares a brief moment of kindness with Mark Ruffallo’s character and then he goes right back to his job in a small room helping two kids who were sexually abused. I think that quietly devastating sequence is the heart of Spotlight.

That’s not to say the movie is a perfect delivery of that theme. In the process of showing the creation of the article in the most accurate and complex way possible, it sometimes doesn’t create the same level of standards for its characters. I hate to talk about real people like this because I have to assume there all good people but in the case of this movie I found many of the main characters to be underwritten. The smaller characters like Garabedian and the abuse victims are very well written because they are more blatantly showing the subject matter but I think the movie gives a lot of exposition to everyone who worked on the Spotlight team and it makes the movie more distant and cold. The movie spends so much time giving them information to tell the audience that they don’t have that much time to reveal anything about their personal lives or even some of the tiny quirks that they might have.

I honestly can’t tell you anything about Ruffalo and McAdams’ characters beyond the fact that they’re reporters. The movie tries to make them more calculated to show quiet heroism but it goes a little too far and it created a distance between me and the main characters. I shouldn’t feel like I’m waiting for the supporting characters to show up but that’s how this film felt to me. In one of the weakest scenes in the movie, Ruffalo desperately tries to breathe life into an absolutely one note character in a rant that no doubt will be shown at next year’s Oscars ceremony. I have nothing against him as an actor but it was painfully obvious how he was trying to add things that weren’t there for the most mediocre character in the movie.

I also found Thomas McCarthy’s direction to be perfectly fine but nothing to write home about. It’s not at all a poorly made movie; it’s well edited and it has great cinematography. At the same time, McCarthy doesn’t add the extra kick to this movie that could’ve turned it from good to outstanding. He does a competent job with spotlight but that’s it, he does a competent job. He does give any nuances, quirks or originality to the screenplay and he doesn’t seem to have any real vision besides just shooting the movie. The music is repetitive, generic and distracting which is something that can seriously damage a movie in my eyes. McCarthy doesn’t show any creativity with this movie and I don’t think he gives Spotlight anything that couldn’t have been done by another filmmaker.

Spotlight is a film that’s much easier to appreciate than enjoy. I respect the accurate portrayal of journalism and the way it advocates for smarter, less reactionary reporting. I think the movie tries to present a unique perspective on what it means to be a hero. Unfortunately, I think there are too many things in the movie that I found to be middle of the road. The story is great but the main characters are forgettable. McCarthy’s direction is fine but he doesn’t give the movie any of the heart or soul it needed to take it home. Spotlight is very competent and simply going down a checklist, this is a movie that seems to do everything right. I just feel like the movie lacks a heart and an intimacy that’s necessary for me to fall in love with it.

Rating:[star rating=”3.5″ numeric=”yes”]

Review by: Ryan M.

Release Date: 11/25/2015

Rating: R

Cast: Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams, Liev Schreiber, Brian d’Arcy James, John Slattery and Stanley Tucci

Directed by: Tom McCarthy

Screenplay by: Josh Singer and Tom McCarthy

Priests, The (2015)

ThePriestsPoster

Title: The Priests
Rating: NR
Directed by: Jae-hyun Jang
Written by: Jae-hyun Jang
Starring: Dong-won Kang, Yun-seok Kim and So-dam Park
Release Date: 12/4/2015
Running Time: 103 minutes

IMDb
Buy on Amazon

Two priests have to find out if a young girl was attacked by an evil spirit or human molester in order to save her life.


What did you think of this film?

During Credits? No

After Credits? No

Special thanks to Frank S. for this submission


MI-5 (2015)

MI5Poster

Title: MI-5 (aka. Spooks: The Greater Good)
Rating: R
Directed by: Bharat Nalluri
Written by: Jonathan Brackley and Sam Vincent
Based on the show “Spooks” by: David Wolstencroft
Starring: Kit Harington, Peter Firth and Jennifer Ehle
Release Date: 12/4/2015
Running Time: 104 minutes

Official Site
IMDb

When a terrorist escapes custody during a routine handover, Will Holloway must team with disgraced MI5 Intelligence Chief Harry Pearce to track him down before an imminent terrorist attack on London.


What did you think of this film?

During Credits? No

After Credits? No


Phone, The (2015)

ThePhonePoster

Title: The Phone (aka. Deo Pon)
Rating: NR
Directed by: Kim Bong-joo
Written by: Kim Bong-joo
Starring: Seong-woo Bae, Son Hyun-joo and Jang In-sub
Release Date: 10/22/2015
Running Time: 115 minutes

IMDb
Buy on Amazon

A magnetic field anomaly allows a man to phone back into the past to his wife, who was murdered years ago. But to save her, he must identify the killer now and warn her until the anomaly disappears.


What did you think of this film?

During Credits? No

After Credits? No

Special thanks to Frank S. for this submission


Secret in Their Eyes (2015)

SecretInTheirEyesPoster

Title: Secret in Their Eyes
Rating: PG-13
Directed by: Billy Ray
Written by: Billy Ray
Starring: Chiwetel Ejiofor, Nicole Kidman and Julia Roberts
Release Date: 11/20/2015
Running Time: 111 minutes

Official Site
IMDb

A tight-knit team of rising investigators, along with their supervisor, is suddenly torn apart when they discover that one of their own teenage daughters has been brutally murdered.


What did you think of this film?

During Credits? No

After Credits? No


Legend (2015)

LegendPoster

Title: Legend
Rating: R
Directed by: Brian Helgeland
Written by: Brian Helgeland
Based on the book by: John Pearson
Starring: Tom Hardy, Emily Browning and Taron Egerton
Release Date: 11/20/2015
Running Time: 131 minutes

Official Site
IMDb

The film tells the story of the identical twin gangsters Reggie and Ronnie Kray, two of the most notorious criminals in British history, and their organised crime empire in the East End of London during the 1960s.


What did you think of this film?

During Credits? No

After Credits? No


#Horror (2015)

HorrorPoster

Title: #Horror
Rating: NR
Directed by: Tara Subkoff
Written by: Tara Subkoff
Starring: Sadie Seelert, Haley Murphy and Bridget McGarry
Release Date: 11/20/2015
Running Time: 101 minutes

IMDb

Inspired by actual events, a group of 12 year old girls face a night of horror when the compulsive addiction of an online social media game turns a moment of cyber bullying into a night of insanity.


What did you think of this film?

During Credits? No

After Credits? No


Spectre Review – 2 out of 5 Stars

SpectrePoster10
Four spy movies have come out this year that ranged from excellent to okay. Starting in February, we got the release of Kingsman: The Secret Service (A-), Spy (B), The Man from U.N.C.L.E (B+) and Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation (B). These are all movies that are highly entertaining and in some way clearly influenced by past Bond films. I mention these movies because one of my biggest regrets this year was how I treated these movies in relation to my high anticipation for the latest 007 movie Spectre. Okay, Rogue Nation was fun but its premise is a clear rip off of the criminal organization in the James Bond films. Trust me, by the time Spectre comes around, nobody will even be talking about Mission Impossible.

After the events of Skyfall, James Bond (Daniel Craig) is going after Spectre, a secret Illuminati like organization that is responsible for everything evil in the world. The group is run by Ernest Stavo Blofeld (Christoph Waltz), a man mysteriously hell bent on destroying the things that are around Bond. All while this is happening, his spy agency is becoming dangerously close to being terminated in the name of supporting a worldwide organization that would track the online records of every country.

To understand how much of a flavorless let down this movie was, you have to understand how much I loved Skyfall. I was never really on board with Craig bond movies until this film. This film managed to take all of the elements that people loved about the franchise and they were able to present us with something that was nostalgic and innovative at the same time. On the 50th anniversary of Dr. No, Skyfall gave us an unforgettable villain, excellent back stories, breath taking action scenes, intelligent writing and absolutely striking cinematography from Roger Deakins. Director Sam Mendes wasn’t afraid to take risks and go even bigger than the franchise had ever gone before. For my money, this is still one of the best action movies we’ve seen so far this century.

Now that you know that, this is how Spectre was built. Take bits and pieces of the past few Bond movies, hold all of the humor and joy that made those aspects entertaining, take out any of the originality that the previous Craig Bond films included and give it a half assed ending that’s supposed to present itself like this was everything that it has been leading up to for the past 6 or so years. Oh wait, forgive me, I’ve forgotten the most important thing. Above all else, remember to stretch the movie out to an ungodly 2 hours and 30 minutes.

This movie is the definition of the sophomore slump. Skyfall was a huge hit that everyone loved and it seems that MGM basically told Mendes that he could do anything that he wanted for the next film. In reaction to that, he has taken everything people loved about Skyfall and milked it for all it’s worth. The big story, the funny elements, the villain who has a past with 007, he took all of these things and he did them again but this time with the sincerity and the soul of a greatest hits compilation. Yeah, you’re technically getting everything you wanted from Bond but it all seems too unsubstantial and presented with no love.

There has been a lot of news recently about this being Craig’s final movie and you can honestly tell that he’s tired of playing Bond. All of the charisma and energy he has had in the previous Bond movies feels lost and he doesn’t seem to be having any fun with the part anymore. All of the attempts the movie makes to make him seem funny or charming don’t work and they make the movie occasionally awkward. Craig way always best when he was a playing grittier and darker Bond and it feels like after Skyfall, we’ve seen every aspect of this Bond that we can. There’s nothing new that Craig can add to this character and he mostly seems to just be going through the motions like everyone else who worked on this movie.

The love interests are also one of the poorer elements of this movie. One of the amazing things Skyfall did was how little it forced James Bond to be in a relationship. He has a brief amount of time with a girl in the first half but in the later parts of the movie, it becomes a lot more focused on finally dissecting what it is that James Bond is a symbol and as a person. In this movie, we’re back to forcing James Bond to be a relationship with someone. Léa Seydoux plays the daughter of a dead crime boss who is helping Bond get to Blofeld. She’s a great actress (hell, she’s already been in a Mission Impossible movie before) but her character represents some of the worst elements of the Bond girl. Bond is disgusting older than her, she isn’t given any development and finally, despite disliking Bond at first and not spending much time with him, she still falls in love with him. It’s unrealistic and it doesn’t help that Seydoux and Craig have horrible chemistry with each other because of their ages and Craig’s inability to escape being cinematic dead weight here. Their romance honestly reminds me a bit of those old Moore films where he would be in his 50’s and he would be paired with someone in their 20’s, I honestly thought we were over doing that.

Early this year I complained about how The Syndicate from Rogue Nation was a cheaper, more forced version of the old Spectre and now the new Spectre is an even more forced and useless version of the old Spectre. This movies shady criminal organization is even more poorly explained and generic because we basically only get to see Spectre as a whole for one small scene and then for the rest of it it’s just Blofeld doing average, mediocre villain stuff. At least The Syndicate was in some way explained by its characters but Spectre feels like something they added just to be there without really thinking it out, ironic considering that it’s the title of their movie. Rogue Nation is also a lot more light hearted whereas Spectre seems to be taking everything way too seriously; this makes the story much easier to forgive in the former.

Blofeld is especially disappointing since he’s being played by Waltz, a terrific actor. In the original Bond movies, Blofeld was clever, mysterious and always able to get away. Here, they basically cash in and give him a half-baked, under explained back story and a villain arc that is predictable, abrupt and disappointing. It doesn’t help that they also have Waltz playing the exact same character he’s played in almost every movie since Inglorious Bastards.

The thing that kills Spectre isn’t that it’s poorly written and clichéd in everything from the villain to the romance to the main characters but it’s the fact that despite all of this, they try to pass this off as being the final, epic conclusion to James Bond’s arc. The way they conclude this movie is that this is the end of Daniel Craig’s Bond and this is what it’s all been leading to since Casino Royale. Spectre is the reason Bond’s always been unhappy and if you’ve been watching these movies carefully, you can see how Blofeld has been carefully setting everything up because of his past with James Bond. Léa Seydoux was the woman who was the perfect match for him and everything in this franchise has been leading up to him meeting her and falling in love with her like Batman and Catwomen in The Dark Knight Rises or Hermione and Ron in The Deathly Hallows. Léa Seydoux is the final Bond Girl and this isn’t just some cheap, half assed scheme they thought of at the last second because they needed an end to Bond’s arc.

I don’t usually try to curse on this website but the sweeping conclusion to this movie is complete and utter bullsh*t and you’re kidding yourself if you legitimately believe that this is something the writers didn’t just pull out of there ass because they had to. I get it, Skyfall took everything out of you and you’re failing to come up with something new. Whatever, you can still make a simple, mildly entertaining Bond movie out of that like Quantum of Solace. One of the worst things you can do is to take that mediocrity and actively destroy the franchise for no reason simply because you had to do something different. It is offensive the level of things they put into this movie that they expect the audience to go along with.

If that killed Spectre, the final nail in the coffin is the pacing. In Skyfall, there was so much going on that it had to be 2 hours and 30 minutes. Spectre on the other hand is a movie that is only 2 hours and 30 minutes because having a longer running time makes them look cooler and it makes there film appear more “epic”. There are too many scenes here that are either unnecessary or go on forever and it’s clear they only made this movie super long because a longer running time infers that this is going to be a large and gigantic conclusion when in reality the movie could probably be easily told in about 90 minutes or so. This is the most arrogant example of a movie being long for the sake of being long since The Lone Ranger. And believe me; you do not want to put in a category of any sort with The Lone Ranger.

It’s almost a Greek Tragedy how there were all of these movies in 2015 clearly inspired by James Bond that did things from those movies in fresh and exciting ways. Kingsman, Spy, Rogue Nation and The Man from U.N.C.L.E all made great arguments for the legacy of Bond and the fun and charm that come from those sorts of movies. It’s just funny in a warped way that in a year of terrific spy blockbusters, the worst one came from the franchise that inspired them all. Spectre is long, half cooked, passionless and patronizing to the fans of the series. It has the occasional action scene and as a whole it’s a well-made movie but substance wise, this is the weakest of the Craig films to date. It says something about how little people care about the Craig movies at this point that more people are speculating who will be the next Bond than discussing the actual Bond film in theaters right now.

Rating:[star rating=”2″ numeric=”yes”]

Review by: Ryan M.

Release Date: 11/6/2015

Rating: PG-13

Cast: Daniel Craig, Christoph Waltz, Léa Seydoux, Ralph Fiennes, Monica Bellucci, Ben Whishaw, Naomie Harris, Dave Bautista, Andrew Scott, Rory Kinnear and Jesper Christensen

Directed by: Sam Mendes

Screenplay by: John Logan, Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and Jez Butterworth

Based on Characters Created by: Ian Fleming