The Man From UNCLE is a proper '60s spy movie with great characters, a good plot and witty dialogue. Henry Cavill is poetry in a three piece suit. Moreover, it is an utterly beautiful film with a gorgeous cast, yet Henry Cavill is still the most attractive thing in it. Fangirling over, I'd like to expand and I'm going to do this as a criticism sandwich - positive, negative, positive: Positive: The film passed two very important tests (1) the 50 year old film enthusiast husband thought it was great, can't wait to see it again and would definitely want to see a sequel and (2) the 11 year old daughter also loved it and thought it was great fun. Negatives: Firstly, I think they have revealed too many of the highlights of the film in the …show more content…
clips which have been released for marketing purposes (though I obviously understand why). Secondly, I found the music overwhelming at points and also (controversially) too slow in some of the action sequences. The Husband, who is also something of a film music aficianado does not agree with this. More positives: It is a fully-realised, proper grown-up movie - as the Husband said, in the style of "The Ipcress Files". Those who are expecting a faster or possibly steampunk type production (like the "Sherlock" films) will be disappointed. This film is stylish, rather than stylised. It reminded me a little of some of Tarantino's films - it is unrushed, it takes it's time and tells the story properly. It is a magnificent origins story and really sets things up for a sequel. But it's a great stand-alone tale as well. Henry is magnetic when he is on-screen and he pitches the performance to perfection (not just my biased opinion, the Husband said so too!).
Ignore the haters, his accent's fine. We loved his unruffled, witty, gentleman spy. Plus he actually IS James Bond (there is a sequence with a hotel receptionist, which thoroughly establishes his super sexy spy credentials). The chemistry between Henry and Armie is key, and you just can't manufacture that. The way their relationship develops is extremely enjoyable and half the fun of the film. Armie (who the Husband preferred ... no, really?!) is equally as watchable and his brutish Kuryakin is the perfect counterpoint to the suave Solo. His Russian accent works really well and his scenes with the charming Alicia Vikander are adorable. It is not a boys' club/film, the women's characters are fully fleshed-out and developed, and Alicia is captivating (I already loved her in "Ex Machina" if you haven't seen it, do give it a go). Elizabeth Debicki is breathtakingly beautiful and a wonderful badass villain. The rest of the cast is impeccable (extra points to Luca Calvani, who is delicious and Hugh Grant, always a pleasure to watch). And as I have already said it is, literally, one of the most visually impressive, elegant and stunning films ever made - it is like watching a work of lovingly-crafted 1960's period
art. Verdict: unmissable.
All characters in the movie were played well by the actors in my opinion. They
In all, the directing and acting both had its good points and its bad points. Unfortunately, the one well directed scene and the one convincing actor would not have been enough to satisfy my friend, and it was not enough to satisfy me.
The casting of both Leonardo DiCaprio and fresh-faced Claire Danes influence how the film is viewed. Baz Luhrmann is smart in using young, attractive characters to make the adaptation more appealing to a more adolescent
The book had a lot of thought put into it by the author and it appeals to many audiences of different ages. The book put me on the edge of my seat throughout the whole book, and it was one of those books that you never want to put down. The way the author wrote it had quite a suspenseful, eerie, dramatic feel to it and that is what made the book so great, on top of the plot. The plot of the book was also very well thought out and put together, and I enjoyed reading it. Although the movie was great, I don’t think that it did the book enough justice. There were so many great aspects of the book that they left out, that would’ve made the movie just that much better. They should have put in some of the missing scenes and still portrayed the characters the same as they were in the book. However, I think that it would be hard to create the same feel as Ray Bradbury did in writing the book. It was the way that he connected with his audience that made the book appealing. Both the book and the movie were fantastic ways of portraying the story. If they had kept all of the scenes and properties of characters as they did in the book, the movie would have appealed to me more. But, the movie version of the story could appeal to others more than the book
The film then releases the full fury of what corrupt politicians can do to a truthful man. The plot of the film will grab the viewer within the first five minutes and will not let go until the astonishing end. Even though this type of thing is implausible it's still very funny and unique in its own way. The acting was superb! James Stewart will always represent the good guy trying to make his way
The supporting players do well, though, specifically the two villains. James Mason is fantastic as Phillip Vandamm, the chief antagonist. He brings the perfect amount of collected cool to the role, but also adds a touch of menace to the character. Martin Landau, in an early role, also does well as Leonard, Vandamm’s right hand man. He’s the more sinister of the two and conveys it well, but he is also charismatic in a mysterious sort of
It made you feel as if you were in the movie. The movie depicts so much violence and evilness between the two characters. When Anton Chigurh first appeared in the movie, he made you feel like you as if you were his prey, his victim. Just by looking at him, you felt his evilness and his tolerance to pain. The actor was perfectly chosen due to his appearance.
in the way he speaks in a sly voice. He is the perfect actor to play
With the help of superb editing, sound, mise en scene, and cinematography, this film cannot be topped. The fist scene of the movie creates an atmosphere that helps the viewer know that he/she will enjoy this wonderful classic. Throughout the movie there are surprises and fun that makes this a movie that people will want to watch again and again. Gene Kelly said it best when he said, "Dignity, always dignity. " That is what this movie has from beginning to end, dignity.
you hate to the return to present day world. This film dazzles it’s viewers by
Right off the bat, the acting in this movie is amazing. Many of the actors in
As Oskar Schindler, Liam Neeson does an outstanding job of portraying a savy buisness man and a caring human being. Ben Kingsley plays his part with heart and cleverness. Ralph Fiennes is so completely believable as Amon Goeth. I would have never wanted to cross the path of that man. The people who played the jews were so convincing in their parts. This film truly has the feel of a documentary.
Overall this film was exciting to watch and was good to help learn a little about the Elizabethan Era. Although the goriness is too much for someone who is sensitive to that kind of thing, you can still enjoy the movie. The costumes are eccentric, the set design is, although outdated, extremely detailed, and was a good movie if you were looking for something to watch and enjoyed a little bit of history in your life.
Perhaps the most impressive aspect of this rather old fashioned romance is how funny it actually is, while still maintaining a sense of subtlety throughout. This is not a story driven plot, but rather, a collection of charming and amusing moments that, when added up for the duration, becomes something quite substantial. The character development involved is flawless, as we grow to like, and in some senses love, the main players, thanks in large part to the terrific Academy Award winning screenplay by Dalton Trumbo here credited as Ian McLellan Hunter due to a blacklisting that forced him to write under a pseudonym. Even with the quality writing, none of this could have worked if overplayed by the director or if stars were cast who weren't as likeable, and on all fronts,
He almost always holds this massive smile throughout the film and it is seriously creepy. He often drools slightly when he talks but he never changes his expression or reacts to it. This really enhances his creepiness and immediately lets you know something is off about him. He undoubtedly elevates the whole film and makes it what it is. I can’t think of a single person who could have replaced him the