nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Knives Out [Rian Johnson]

pixelburp

Johnson's new film; appears to be an Agatha Christie style whodunnit, complete with the suitably impressive cast-list. Not sure about Craig southern accent, the one he pulled in Logan Lucky was better...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGqiHJTsRkQ

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Easy Rod

nix wrote: »

I enjoyed it but found it far too predictable to warrant it amazing, i loved the cast and performances, but the whole "mystery" was all too meh, he telegraphs everything throughout, like absolutely everything, didnt bury anything in any actual conversations

Two things immediately stick out in my head in terms of things being buried in earlier conversations. I’m on the phone so can’t spoiler tag.

Fysh

Easy Rod wrote: »

Two things immediately stick out in my head in terms of things being buried in earlier conversations. I’m on the phone so can’t spoiler tag.

First one that comes to mind for me is

setting up Ransom's attempt to use a prop knife to kill someone in a seemingly off the cuff remark

pixelburp

Ah, there's always one who'll claim they "predicted" everything, too cool for school; I suppose given a significant number of people watching, statistically it's likely anyway that some of them will have guessed the outcome.

But honestly, it's a Murder Mystery film; it'd be kinda weird if you DIDN'T sit there trying to work out the culprit as you watched - that's half the fun

kerplun k

One of the many, many highlights for me was the quality in the writing and acting for these characters. It’s kinda amazing when you think about it, for a whodunit murder mystery film, it’s very honest about who these characters are, right from the get go, your told upfront who these characters are, and they never deviate from that,
at no point does Johnson pull a fast one, sure, he kinda does this with

Ransom, but that’s a character deception, and something you’d expect him to do. it really is impressive at how forthright it all is while keeping you guessing until the very end.

I kept expecting these twists, gothcha moments, but no, it just naturally unfolds, and reveals the mystery in the most perfect way.

gmisk

Saw today, it was a lot of fun, I think the scene with the mum watching an episode of murder she wrote was about right....it wasn't a million miles away from an episode!
Great cast having a great time, twists a tad predictable imo but enjoyable all the same
7.5/10
No sure why it's getting such insanely positive reviews though...

OwaynOTT

Having watched it twice, I have to say it’s a little gem of a film and Daniel Craig shines.
Go see it before it’s gone!!

Mitch Connor

Saw this last night, and really enjoyed it. I did think there might be an additional twist towards the end, that didn't seem to come.

Though myself and my friend had a disagreement over Marta's intentions. I contend

that she did have a goal of getting the inheritance, just when he died of natural causes rather than planning on murdering him. During the flashbacks of her conversations with the granddad he specifically says something like "I should have made X build themselves up from the ground long ago, like you said". She was clearly encouraging him to remove the children from the will". My mate didn't read it like that at all.

I am hoping it was the case, cause I enjoyed the idea of her getting what she planned for, playing everyone and while it was said in the movie it was specifically called back to and made abundantly clear. I enjoyed it being a nugget of info that was mentioned, but never returned to.

A moment she had with the mother (just before the reveal of the blood on her shoe) and the look she gave the family at the end while holding the 'my house' mug confirmed it for me.

cdgalwegian

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Saw this last night, and really enjoyed it. I did think there might be an additional twist towards the end, that didn't seem to come.

Though myself and my friend had a disagreement over Marta's intentions. I contend
that she did have a goal of getting the inheritance, just when he died of natural causes rather than planning on murdering him. During the flashbacks of her conversations with the granddad he specifically says something like "I should have made X build themselves up from the ground long ago, like you said". She was clearly encouraging him to remove the children from the will". My mate didn't read it like that at all.

I am hoping it was the case, cause I enjoyed the idea of her getting what she planned for, playing everyone and while it was said in the movie it was specifically called back to and made abundantly clear. I enjoyed it being a nugget of info that was mentioned, but never returned to.

A moment she had with the mother (just before the reveal of the blood on her shoe) and the look she gave the family at the end while holding the 'my house' mug confirmed it for me.

Same- saw last night and thought similar; though I thought from early on

Marta did murder him, and the whole getting-sick-when-lying thing was part of the ruse. Disappointed it was more straightforwardly whodunnit.

.
In the end then, I was somewhat underwhelmed, though I still quite enjoyed it. It wasn't as funny as I thought it was going to be, though I suppose RJ is more sly humour than belly-laugh. Definitely will watch it again sometime; the whole thing oozes class, and I'm certain there is much missed on first viewing. I've a feeling it's one of those that gets better with repeated viewings.
Rian Johhson really shows how to craft a film with this, and gets great milage out of his ensemble cast, but what a find in Ana de Armas.

Harry Palmr

Sounds a bit like "the Last of Sheila" (1973) or "Sleuth" for 2019/20, the sort of solid crowd pleaser that doesn't assume the crowd are sumblering idiots. Hopefully it's success (it'll top out at about 200m by the looks of it) will inspire more of this sort of thing.

Relikk

cdgalwegian wrote: »

It wasn't as funny as I thought it was going to be, though I suppose RJ is more sly humour than belly-laugh.

It was very funny for the first third, especially during the character interviews. It definitely waned from then on, which wasn't necessarily a bad thing as they were delving into more serious issues.

kerplun k

My House, My Rules.

My brother just dropped a bombshell over Christmas dinner. I thought he was mad at first, but now thinking about it, he could be onto something.

He reckons that Johnson made the effort to highlight how good a strategist Marta was when playing Go with Harlon. This is the game which in itself is a board game where players compete to control the territory on the board.

There was a quote from Ranson when talking about how he was the only person that could beat Harlon in Go until Marta came along,

It roughly went something like this.

I used to think that meant something, I guess it doesn’t.

Well, Maybe it does. Maybe it means everything.

The question is this, could Marta have orchestrated the whole thing? If she’s as brilliant a strategist as Johnson makes out, could she have moved the pieces so to speak to gain control of board?

Sad Professor

It's a cynical reading of the film.

Marta wasn't a brilliant strategist. Even when playing Go, she was never playing to win, she was just trying to make a beautiful pattern. The whole point of the film's final twist is that she wins the game without even playing it. By just being a kind hearted nurse.

pixelburp

Yeah I agree with Sad Prof, and read the film that way as well;

the machinations of the family were undone by Marta's straightforward empathy and kindness, mixed with her own panic when caught up in the investigation. Her talent at Go just showed an accidental ability to strategize, albeit from the point of view of a victim, than that of a grand schemer. The twist with the bottles the underlining of that inherent decency

kerplun k

Sad Professor wrote: »

Marta wasn't a brilliant strategist.

There’s a valid argument here that she is.

While not only being good at the game, she also makes some power plays at the right times.

The power move outside her apartment with Walt and the lawyer chat is the first big indication that she’s more in control than we think. The other big moment is when she outplays Ranson at the very end.

Fysh

kerplun k wrote: »

There’s a valid argument here that she is.
While not only being good at the game, she also makes some power plays at the right times.

The power move outside her apartment with Walt and the lawyer chat is the first big indication that she’s more in control than we think. The other big moment is when she outplays Ranson at the very end.

Is it a power move if it's defensive, though? I don't think she made any overt moves that were not responses to someone else's action - if

Harlan hadn't left her the money, it didn't seem like she's have taken any action to get "her share" or anything like that; it's only when the family start trying to bully her into giving up what has been willed that she reacts.

I think this is a flawed reading of the film because

it seems to me the only way for it to work would require Marta to not be an empathic, caring and frequently selfless individual. For instance - her playing the long game would involve her knowingly letting Harlan kill himself in a painful and distressing way after the injection mixup is revealed. That seems at odds with the character as shown in the rest of the film, and also seems something that Blanc would pick up on.

cdgalwegian

I wonder has Johnson pulled a master-stroke here? Before seeing this i had posted that I hoped that the film would not be overwrought. Where the film came as a little underwhelming to me though, because

it hadn't turned out that Marta had masterminded the whole thing, where I thought she had, and perhaps repeated viewings might uncover more clues left behind by Johnson... it now might have been written to be a post-conclusion mystery unravelling! IOWS, rather than giving us an overtly ambiguous ending, he has left us with a satisfying conclusion, so that only after the film has ended, and some seeds of doubt have crept in, do we later become the sleuths.
I think he may have deliberately given us a clear-cut delivery of the guilty party, but left subtle clues to show otherwise: IOWS, he left the clues, but left out the final twist on purpose

.
It's easy to think I may be overthinking this, but I think he's that clever.

kerplun k

Fysh wrote: »

Is it a power move if it's defensive, though? I don't think she made any overt moves that were not responses to someone else's action - if
Harlan hadn't left her the money, it didn't seem like she's have taken any action to get "her share" or anything like that; it's only when the family start trying to bully her into giving up what has been willed that she reacts.

I think this is a flawed reading of the film because
it seems to me the only way for it to work would require Marta to not be an empathic, caring and frequently selfless individual. For instance - her playing the long game would involve her knowingly letting Harlan kill himself in a painful and distressing way after the injection mixup is revealed. That seems at odds with the character as shown in the rest of the film, and also seems something that Blanc would pick up on.

Of course, and while I do agree that Marta is inherently a “good” character, and to meticulously plan everything would be quite outlandish and unrealistic, however, when the theory came up that “it was her all along”, it did get me thinking that she’s not as innocent as I thought upon my first viewing.

At various points of the film there’s some sprinkles of game playing from Marta, which I don’t think comes from nefarious character traits, but rather a survival instinct. I’m convinced now, more than ever that her being a good strategist definitely comes into play which results in her position at the end.

As to what degree of how much she exercised her strategic ability to influence the outcome will require repeat viewings.

inorderofage

Very poor movie. Tried to give it the benefit of the doubt but should have known from Brick tho and the last jedi, both rubbish. Looper was a bit of luck

al87987

Loved it.

I was hoping that they would reveal how she was originallly hired to be his nurse. I think that they said he hired her directly and think that could have revealed her true intentions but the speculation is probably better

Homelander

A great film, it's a bit daft but it's an intriguing watch driven by some brilliant performances. While I love the who-dunnit murder mystery aspect of it, I think the bulk of the endgame was a bit too obvious from fairly early on. But as some reviewers have put it, it's a film that leans on a great story more than any random twists for the sake of it.

Overall I would say it's a film that should appeal to almost anyone and is well worth watching.

ShaneU

For some reason I imagined this movie would be like The Hateful Eight with a bunch of characters locked in a mansion killing each other off. Enjoyed it regardless, Daniel Craig was excellent.

seenitall

I'm feeling underwhelmed, insofar as it is a solid addition in the murder mystery genre, however I feel it is no more than that and cannot understand the hype.

And I am certainly disappointed as far as Rian Johnson goes. 'Brick' is, IMV, a helluva great movie, not even just as a throwback to noirs of yesteryear, but as an incredibly tight little masterpiece in its own right, with the perfect noir pacing, the balanced atmosphere, and the subtle humour to die for.
'Knives Out' offers us only some occasional flashes of all this brilliance. Again, disappointing.

[Deleted User]

seenitall wrote: »

I'm feeling underwhelmed, insofar as it is a solid addition in the murder mystery genre, however I feel it is no more than that and cannot understand the hype.

'Knives Out' offers us only some occasional flashes of all this brilliance. Again, disappointing.

I'm very much the same. Pretty over-rated from my viewpoint.

It was a bit like an elongated Cluedo game with an aran jumper (don't say sweater ffs) thrown in. And Ana de Armas' roe deer eye stares were annoying me by the end.

Slydice

Gave it a watch! That was excellent! Had me thinking all the way throughout. I was worried it was gonna be boring but it was not.

I had guessed

wrong in the begining that it might be Linda

and I stuck to that and

kept trying to work it out in my head

. Hoooo boy..

[Deleted User]

Watched half of it so far... would the

toxicology report not clearly identify that it was on overdose

kerplun k

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Watched half of it so far... would the
toxicology report not clearly identify that it was on overdose
?

Ahhhh. See, this is why it’s pointless asking questions when you’ve only watched part of the film

Sad Professor

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Watched half of it so far... would the
toxicology report not clearly identify that it was on overdose
?

Yes, you’ve watched half of it alright.

pixelburp

Surprised how quickly it has obviously arrived in "the usual places". Awards season? Or is partyjungle just one of THOSE cinema patrons?

FunLover18

Rian Johnson has confirmed he's starting writing a sequel.

pixelburp

It goes without saying, but Johnson also confirmed that it'll have Benoit Blanc as its lead; hard to imagine how to go to the well a second time & keep things fresh.

The obvious conundrum here is standard with sequels to a surprise success: do the same thing all over again, and invite comparison / disappointment, or do something completely different, and invite disappointment with those who did want the same again?