We watched Bank of Dave , about a person in the UK who wants to set up a bank. Based on a true story and the person in question was loaning money to help people and made a whole lot of charitable donations, so a solid chap. The movie is ok , the conflict with the banking institutions is all made up though , anyway passed the time.
We also watched Pain Hustlers , Emily Blunt and Chris Evans as pharma sales people pushing opioids onto doctors , also based on a true story . Worth watching, and depressing because of the true nature of the story but not depressing to watch if that makes sense .
Sounds interesting, I’ll have to give that one a look.
It sounds vaguely similar to Dopesick, a true story about Purdue Pharma and the tragedy of Oxycontin. Technically that doesn’t belong here because it’s a miniseries and not a movie, but it’s just so damn good and such a powerful drama that I had to mention it. It’s in eight parts of close to an hour each, so effectively a very long movie, but very highly recommended and worth every minute. Definitely see it if you get the chance.
My wife and I watched this today.
Great film.
We have watched every season of F1-Drive to Survive, so this was really enjoyable for us - a look back at how car racing evolved, and how strong personalities have always been a part of it.
The reality of Dave Fishwick is basically “well-intentioned guy discovers there’s a reason all those banking regulations exist but insists that it’s okay because he would never harm his customers”. I believe the company still exists as an S&L.
Godzilla Minus One. If you like Godzilla movies, of course, go see it (but you probably already have). If you don’t like Godzilla movies, still go see it. It’s really not a movie about a giant monster smashing Tokyo (though it does have that). It’s a movie about the horrors of war, on a very personal level, and the main character’s struggle with PTSD and survivor’s guilt. It’d almost work even if you removed the monster entirely (though of course, the monster is a powerful symbol).
Young Einstein (Prime, $2, 1988) A cult classic from my youth so I had to put it on for my kids to watch one night with dinner. I’d say it mostly holds up. For those who don’t know, Yahoo Serious was an Australian knock off of Weird Al Yankovic and enjoyed 15 minutes in Australia in the late 80’s. This is his UHF about a mythical Albert Einstein who invents Rock and Roll when he is not splitting beer atoms with a chisle. The good news is there is loads of good music from that place and era that never made it off the continent so this film is your chance to hear some. It’s also kinda funny still in a childish humor sort of way.
Anyway, perhaps not as great as I remember and my teen girl left after finishing dinner, but my youngest stayed and like it.
I had totally forgotten that guy. This is funny, though less humorously it might speak about falling on hard times:
In August 2000, Yahoo Serious sued the search engine Yahoo! for trademark infringement. The case was thrown out because Serious could not prove that he sells products or services under the name “Yahoo” and therefore could not prove that he suffered harm or confusion due to the search engine.[18]
Sabrina, the 1954 Humphrey Bogart/ Audrey Hepburn version.
It was okay to watch, but reminded me why i don’t like that style of movie. The “hero” is an ass. His ne’erdowell brother goes to great lengths to help him for no discernable reason. The women are all cardboard characters. Heck, they are all cardboard characters. The only genuinely sympathetic character is the random guy in the cooking class who takes Sabrina under his wing, and we barely see him.
I saw Sabrina not long ago, and her dad, the chauffeur, is also a sympathetic character, I’d say. The movie is pretty dated and Bogart is definitely too long in the tooth for his role, even played for laughs. But Audrey Hepburn is, of course, sweetly luminous. Le sigh.
The dad seems a little over the top to me. The rest of the household staff are sympathetic, but together only add up to no more than one character, we don’t even know which one does what, what their names are, etc.
Audrey Hepburn was gorgeous, but her character wasn’t terribly appealing. He role was “love a man”, and that’s pretty much it.
Well, I’d disagree, puzzlegal. She had some agency, going off to Paris to learn to be a master chef. And she could choose between the two brothers, this being a Hollywood movie, or neither of them, I suppose. But love is love.
Now You See Me, a movie I have never heard of, starring Jesse Eisenberg, Mark Ruffalo, Woody Harrelson, and others. Turn your brain off, don’t ask any of the millions of questions one would ask, enjoy the style, and you’ll find this to be a mildly entertaining 2 hours.
Eh, that was just the device for her to go away and “develop.” She didn’t do anything with it when she came back. It was all brother vs. brother from that point on. She was a cardboard chess piece. This is a movie I didn’t much like either. Very thin.
I actually like this one a lot … even though Jesse Eisenberg bugs the heck out of me. The funny thing about the movie is that I commented on how they were making Mark Ruffalo unlikable and the butt of the obnoxious magicians when Ruffalo is usually a very sympathetic and likable actor. I spoke too soon.
But she didn’t choose to learn to cook, her father packed her off to Paris do she’d learn to cook. “Which man does she love” is pretty much all she does.
Just got back from seeing The Boys in the Boat, about the 1936 rowing team. I’ve read the book and can say that the story sticks with history for the most part. A lot of up-swelling music to make you feel all emotional, but a pretty solid cast and the story moves right along.
