Over the weekend I finally saw Hidden Figures and I really enjoyed it. As someone who loves math, science, and technology, I really wanted to see more about the people who made our ventures into space possible. It is a movie about people that history tried very hard to ignore and forget.
When the space race began, multitudes of people were needed to figure out the science and math necessary to not only get us into space, but also to safely return. This is the story of three strong willed and very intelligent women who assisted with the math and engineering behind that effort.
In the highly segregated 1960’s, although the three worked for NASA, they lived and endured a culture that assumed the worst of them because of their skin color. The movie follows some of their struggles as they try to be heard and make a difference in the world around them.
The movie has an all-star cast that includes Robert Redford as Bill Bryson, Nick Nolte as Stephen Katz, and Emma Thompson as Catherine Bryson, Bill’s wife.
The movie is an adaptation of a 1998 book with the same name. It is about Bill Bryson, a travel writer, who late in life decides to hike the Appalachian Trail with an old friend, Stephen Katz. The two men set off on the journey and find some of the problems that had driven them apart long ago still exist. However, over the course of their adventure, they begin to work out some of their differences.
For me, the movie sparked an incredible urge to be out on a trail. The natures scenes, mixed in with the comedy that these two actors bring to the screen, made me want to drive to the nearest mountain. In fact, I went home and pulled up some of my unprocessed videos and pictures to keep myself from driving to Colorado (because it is where the nearest mountain is located, not because the AT is there, which it is not).
This weekend I saw The Man From U.N.C.L.E, which stars Henry Cavill (as Solo), Armie Hammer (as Illya), and Alicia Vikander (as Gaby).
The story is set in the 1960’s with a backdrop of the cold war and the threat of nuclear weapons spreading. It involves a number of European settings and plenty of action. I must say I have been itching for a classic spy movie (I was planning to get out my Get Smart DVD collection) and this movie fit the bill for me. It was not overly gadget-heavy, but there were some boxy tools they pulled out from time to time and I liked the break from the micro-sized batbelt with everything you need.
I found the settings well done and I didn’t see anything jumping out as being out of place (though I was not watching for that explicitly). The streets were filled with old cars and I even wondered how they had managed to round-up all of them. With computers these days, they could have easily been CG, but if it was, I didn’t notice.
The movie is tied into the old 1964-68 television series with the same name. It is reported that Ian Fleming contributed to the concepts in the original series and if you want some additional details, check out the Wikipedia article on it.
The main focus of the movie, and the series, is a pairing of Solo (an American spy) with Illya (a Soviet spy). While they are ordered to work together, there is still the underlying issues of national pride and competing governments.
Overall, I found the movie well done and would recommend seeing it. I give it 4 out of 5 stars.
I was worried a little bit about the CGI before seeing the film, but I have to say, I think the technology really is there. I don’t know for certain, but I would not be surprised if the hair programming they developed for Brave was used for Paddington’s fur. It had a very natural look and movement. I think they knew it was done well, since there was at least one shot that emphasized his fur blowing in the breeze.
The story is a classic tale that has been around for generations (the books were first published in 1958). I am not overly familiar with them. I seem to remember having at least one book as a kid, but if I did, I don’t have it now. This means I cannot say how well the movie holds to the books, but the story in the movie was done well.
I also loved seeing so much of London in the shots. I’ve been itching to go back and I can say I spent some of the film going: “I’ve been there and if they’d move the camera, you could see…”
The only thing I really had trouble with was the easy acceptance of a talking bear running around the city without causing more wonder and excitement among the people. However, it is a children’s story and I know enough about the story to know that is just part of it.
Overall, I would recommend it as a nice, mostly light-hearted tale (there are a couple of parts that might be sad for little kids, but they pass quickly). I’ll give it 4 out of 5 stars.
Dreamworks’ second installment in this series, How to Train Your Dragons 2, shows the kids from the first movie older and more mature. Hiccup (voiced by Jay Baruchel), Astrid (voiced by America Ferrera), and the others are still in the line-up, as are their dragons. However, this movie is definitely about Hiccup, him discovering his past, and dealing with aspects of growing into an adult. I felt this more so than I did in the first movie. Astrid still plays a significant role, but the others less so.
While some of the story line was more mature, overall the movie is still targeted for a younger audience. To me, some of the plot lines were more sophisticated, but the humor was closer to the first movie. There were also some motivations that were simplified for younger viewers. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but perhaps shows a gradual transition for the movie.
Avoiding spoilers, a new villain is introduced who has control of an army of dragons. It is against this new threat to Berk and their dragons that Hiccup must fight. Being pretty much as hard-headed as his father, Stoick (voiced by Gerard Butler), Hiccup decides he has to solve the problem on his own. This decision precipitates a series of events where Hiccup discovers a number of secrets from his past as well as develops a better understanding of dragons.
One item that I had trouble with was what appeared to be a slight change in the rules of how dragons work from the first movie. It is not a huge change and it could even be argued that things worked that way in the first movie, but was simply not explained that way. It was not a huge issue, but it did feel to me like a slight change in the lore.
Overall, I would give it a smidge less than 4 out of 5 stars. If you have kids, they will like it and I will end up buying the Blu-ray.
Last weekend I went to Maleficent. I have seen a number of reviews of the movie and some of them have been mixed. So, let me add opinions on Disney’s recent movie featuring a protagonist traditionally portrayed as pure evil. (Review spoiler: I recommend seeing the moving.)
First, a bit of a warning, when I went to see the movie, there were a number of people bringing children who were definitely under 10 years old, some perhaps as young as 6 or 7. I would say the movie is a little dark for kids that young. It is rated PG13 and while I’ve never been a fan of the movie industries rating scheme, there is enough violence that I’d tend to make sure the kinds are mature enough to handle it. For the adults, as with most Disney movies, there is plenty of adult themes running throughout the film.
I saw Captain America 2 this weekend and I found the movie entertaining and worth the watch.
The story picked up with The Captain (played by Chris Evans) and Black Widow (played by Scarlett Johansson) leading a team on a mission. The events of the mission lead to a string of questions and a thread of activity that brings up many aspects of the history of the characters and even SHIELD.
Along the way, they also add the Falcon (played by Anthony Mackie) to the small team of heroes. It would be good to see him in future movies or even in theMarvel’s Agents of SHIELDtelevision series (I’m a bit behind in the show at the moment, so if he has already made an appearance, that would be good). Continue reading →
Epic is the story of a young girl, Mary Katherine (or M.K.) who is about sixteen or seventeen years old. She is returning home to live with her father, whom she has not seen in years. Her parents had split up and I got the impression her mother had died before the start of the film, which is what caused her to return home.
Her father is obsessed, to the point of total distraction, with finding proof that there are wood spirits or little people running about the lands around his home. She is angered by her father’s continued obsession and desire to run off to investigate one of his monitors, despite the fact that she just arrived. She gets ready to run away, including leaving a note to that effect, when she becomes caught up in the struggle of good versus evil (or life versus decay) that is taking place in the woods.
My intent is to review SciFi and fantasy movies from time to time. Now You See Me, might stretch this definition. It was a movie I saw last Thursday (date night with my wife after work). I can say that from the previews I had a little different expectation for the film than what I saw. However, I will start off saying that I liked it.
The movie is about four street magicians, or really hustlers, who are recruited by a mysterious person to perform a spectacular magic show. There are things that cross almost into the scifi realm with 3-d effects in the movie (not 3-d visuals for the audience, but for the characters in the movie). These stretch the believability slightly for current technology, but add a slight sense of mysticism.