Atomic Blonde
POSTED BY: SHINYGOODGUY
UPDATED: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 13:41
VIEWED: 7200
PAGE 1 of 4
What do you get when you mix James Bond, Jason Borne and John Wick....well, you get Lorraine Broughton, a British secret agent who must track down a secret list (is there any other kind?) of top secret agents identities which was stolen by a renegade bad guy (obviously Russian) before he sells it to the highest bidder. If she fails all the good guy spies will be exposed including her. Got That!
That's the premise of the story, and we have secret agents of all types running about in London and Berlin (circa 1989, right around the tumbling of the Berlin Wall) chasing after this list, but too, the man behind the development of the list who committed it to memory, so naturally, they have to kill him or the list would lose it's value and the good guys could not save the lives of its agents. Now, to make things more interesting; there's a double agent, a dead lover/agent, a beautiful French spy, several Russian baddies, car chases and crashes, and some great music. Typical spy movie stuff, circa 1989. Piece of cake.
I went to see it because of Theron (I really liked her in Mad Max), Goodman, James McAvoy, Toby Jones and newcomer Sofia Boutella (who?). Remember that name, she's going places. She was the Mummy (with Tom Cruise) and she was in the recent Star Trek movie; Star Trek Beyond. But there was an unseen factor that I wasn't aware was in the movie, and that's director David Leitch (who co-directed John Wick and John Wick, Chapter 2). His first solo venture in that capacity. Aha! I thought I recognized the action sequences - quick paced and shot almost entirely in "two shot" mode (that's where you the viewer gets to see the actors and stunt crew in full body mode. For me that's a much better way to show all of the action and full range of motion within the sequence).
Here's what I didn't like: The story, other than a short action sequence, takes almost the first half of the movie (which ran 1:55) to develop and felt more like a fashion show than a spy vs spy thriller. It was painstakingly slow and deliberate. Broughton is called in to debrief her boss at MI6 (played by the wonderful Toby Jones) and a CIA official as the story unfolds in fits and starts. Meanwhile Broughton describes what took place during her mission. And, if you weren't paying close attention, you could have easily gotten lost in order to know "who's on first, what's on second."
The plot took more twists than a pretzel in a tornado, but what seemed like slow motion. The overall story is based on a 2012 graphic novel named The Coldest City, and I was beginning to fall asleep as the debriefing continued. Here's how the story is described in Wikipedia:
"...revolves around a spy who has to find a list of double agents who are being smuggled into the Weston the eve of the collapse of the Berlin Wall..."
Got it. I thought I was about to go under when the real fun begins: Broughton has to take the double agent with the photographic memory across the border to freedom; and the chase begins. The baddies are looking to kill "Spyglass" and Broughton must run the gauntlet to save him. It is suspenseful, action packed and quite simple to follow. The fight scenes seemed exhilaratingly "real" and exhausting, where both our hero and the baddies fight tooth and nail in a seeming brawl as Charlize's character desperately works her way to the border and freedom.
All I can say is Wow.
Leitch took the action in John Wick much further by presenting actual human reactions and responses and putting them in the mix. Brilliant! No superhero and unrealistic type sequences of our hero coming out of the fray unscathed. It reminded me somewhat of the early Bond movies with Sean Connery, as he would use household appliances and props to battle with the bad guys. Loved the second half of the movie and I would pit it against the best that Borne, or even John Wick has to offer.
I give this movie 3 out of 5 stars. Not bad for his first outing under his o
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Recently Charlize has been giving interviews about how she has always been stoned out of her gourd, and then oblivious about why she kept getting replaced in roles she was already cast in.
I did enjoy her in 2 Days in The Valley, and can understand she might need to be stoned to strut around in all those skimpy outfits, but now that I understand that she's been addicted all these years makes more sense about why she hasn't been more successful.
I'm kinda hoping that this film will help me forget all of her woeful whining enough to enjoy it.
SGG, did any of this distract you during your viewing?
IIRC The Berlin Wall was opened in Nov 1989, and disassembled from June 1990 to 1992.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Weed isn't really a drug.
Take it from somebody who knows a thing or two about addiction.
I've easily stopped using it twice now for years at a time.
Booze is much harder, and cigarettes are damn near impossible.
Hell... even coffee is a hell of a lot harder to quit.
If she was actually losing track of her roles, it wasn't because of weed. She either had a drinking problem or was doing some other drugs that she hasn't confessed to.
I maintained two very good jobs for years while smoking weed regularly, and I know quite a few successful people personally who partake.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No, no distraction because I don't think about the rumors of her addiction or of her being a total bitch to fans and other actors. I remember when she won the Oscar for Best Actress she didn't even acknowledge Christina Ricci for her support in the movie Monster. Ricci was so in tune with Theron in her role as the girlfriend that it made it much easier for Charlize to react to.
I'm not into boycotting an actor unless it involves something of substance, like support for a good cause. Otherwise, no I don't think of it. She does a really good job in this movie, apparently she was sober enough to pay attention to her role.
By the way, she helped produce it. So there's that.
The Berlin Wall was a backdrop against the highly charged espionage scene, so it may not have been wholly accurate (not important), but this was an action spy thriller. But no, I was totally in to the movie, except for the first half, which was slow, like I said.
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Recently Charlize has been giving interviews about how she has always been stoned out of her gourd, and then oblivious about why she kept getting replaced in roles she was already cast in.
I did enjoy her in 2 Days in The Valley, and can understand she might need to be stoned to strut around in all those skimpy outfits, but now that I understand that she's been addicted all these years makes more sense about why she hasn't been more successful.
I'm kinda hoping that this film will help me forget all of her woeful whining enough to enjoy it.
SGG, did any of this distract you during your viewing?
IIRC The Berlin Wall was opened in Nov 1989, and disassembled from June 1990 to 1992.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Spoken like a true addict.
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
Weed isn't really a drug.
Take it from somebody who knows a thing or two about addiction.
I've easily stopped using it twice now for years at a time.
Booze is much harder, and cigarettes are damn near impossible.
Hell... even coffee is a hell of a lot harder to quit.
If she was actually losing track of her roles, it wasn't because of weed. She either had a drinking problem or was doing some other drugs that she hasn't confessed to.
I maintained two very good jobs for years while smoking weed regularly, and I know quite a few successful people personally who partake.
There is a river in Egypt named after you.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You obviously never did it.
It's okay. Everybody talks about something they don't know anything about. This happens to be your thing.
They're finally legalizing it now, so get used to it.
EDIT: BTW... I never denied my addictive personality. Not only have I had quite a lot of experience with illicit and legal substance abuse, but I've known quite a few other people who have. A lot of them are either dead now or in prison. I consider myself somewhat of a "street smart" expert on the subject, if for no other reason that I'm still alive and "free" to tell the tales.
Spend some time around people who use things like heroin or meth, and then tell me that weed is any more of a drug than coffee or cigarettes.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'm not sure if facts will penetrate your belief system, but here are a few items to consider:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
You obviously never did it.
It's okay. Everybody talks about something they don't know anything about. This happens to be your thing.
They're finally legalizing it now, so get used to it.
EDIT: BTW... I never denied my addictive personality. Not only have I had quite a lot of experience with illicit and legal substance abuse, but I've known quite a few other people who have. A lot of them are either dead now or in prison. I consider myself somewhat of a "street smart" expert on the subject, if for no other reason that I'm still alive and "free" to tell the tales.
Spend some time around people who use things like heroin or meth, and then tell me that weed is any more of a drug than coffee or cigarettes.
I grew up near Madison, WI - which has had weed legal to possess since April 1977. The annual weed celebrations include Weedstock, Mifflin Street Block Party (known for the brownies), and Harvest Fest (with the parade on the pedestrian mall of State Street, passing out free baggies).
The study which detailed the effects and dosages of pot was conducted by the University of Wisconsin - Madison. IIRC the year was something like 1973.
I suspect one of us knows more about pot than the other one.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Spend some time around people who use things like heroin or meth, and then tell me that weed is any more of a drug than coffee or cigarettes.
There are still people in this world that believe:
-Pot is a dangerous drug
-That pot leads to other drugs such as heroin or meth
-And that it should be put on equal footing with the illicit drugs
It is legal in a lot of states; it is not a dangerous drug; there are people with addictive personalities that abuse "hard" drugs without having touched pot.
Quiet as it's kept, it is not habit forming. I smoked it on and off for many years and here I am NOT addicted to anything other than coffee, if you could call it an addiction. So, if there's anyone still thinking 'that' way, well set them straight.
By the way, the AG Sessions is cracking down mightily on marijuana and all peoples either buying, selling, using or what have you regardless if it is legal or not. This is the guy who said that he felt the KKK was fine until he learned that they smoked pot. Trump sure knows how to pick 'em.
Ah, this country...full of "surprises."
SGG
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:I'm not sure if facts will penetrate your belief system, but here are a few items to consider:
Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
You obviously never did it.
It's okay. Everybody talks about something they don't know anything about. This happens to be your thing.
They're finally legalizing it now, so get used to it.
EDIT: BTW... I never denied my addictive personality. Not only have I had quite a lot of experience with illicit and legal substance abuse, but I've known quite a few other people who have. A lot of them are either dead now or in prison. I consider myself somewhat of a "street smart" expert on the subject, if for no other reason that I'm still alive and "free" to tell the tales.
Spend some time around people who use things like heroin or meth, and then tell me that weed is any more of a drug than coffee or cigarettes.
I grew up near Madison, WI - which has had weed legal to possess since April 1977. The annual weed celebrations include Weedstock, Mifflin Street Block Party (known for the brownies), and Harvest Fest (with the parade on the pedestrian mall of State Street, passing out free baggies).
The study which detailed the effects and dosages of pot was conducted by the University of Wisconsin - Madison. IIRC the year was something like 1973.
I suspect one of us knows more about pot than the other one.
Yep. Me.
I lived just south of Milwaukee for 5 years. I'm familiar with all of that.
I notice you didn't actually introduce any facts though... at least any that were against weed.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:Quote:
Spend some time around people who use things like heroin or meth, and then tell me that weed is any more of a drug than coffee or cigarettes.
There are still people in this world that believe:
-Pot is a dangerous drug
-That pot leads to other drugs such as heroin or meth
-And that it should be put on equal footing with the illicit drugs
It is legal in a lot of states; it is not a dangerous drug; there are people with addictive personalities that abuse "hard" drugs without having touched pot.
Quiet as it's kept, it is not habit forming. I smoked it on and off for many years and here I am NOT addicted to anything other than coffee, if you could call it an addiction. So, if there's anyone still thinking 'that' way, well set them straight.
By the way, the AG Sessions is cracking down mightily on marijuana and all peoples either buying, selling, using or what have you regardless if it is legal or not. This is the guy who said that he felt the KKK was fine until he learned that they smoked pot. Trump sure knows how to pick 'em.
Ah, this country...full of "surprises."
SGG
Yup. Not addictive.
As far as the "gateway drug" bullshit, that doesn't hold any water unless they also made cigarettes and booze illegal. I have never seen any evidence that shows that pot is any more a gateway drug to harder substances than either booze or cigarettes.
Can anybody tell me if William and Jeff Sessions are related other than their aversion to drugs?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME