Search
Search results
Brecoles Nine (16 KP) rated Godzilla (2014) in Movies
Mar 12, 2019
Godzilla (2014) Review
Contains spoilers, click to show
Godzilla (2014) was a really good movie, it had a lot action and a lot suspense. However it didn't really contain too many scenes with Godzilla, it had a lot of facial expressions from Aaron Taylor Johnson, and by a lot I mean the same expression. ? <- That one.
The whole movie, I believe was definitely a set up for Godzilla: King of the Monsters due out in 2019, though it could have used a little bit more "monster" in it. I liked it though, but it's missing some key elements to make it Godzilla, but once you get passed the obvious problems with it, it proves to be a really great film. The roar they created for this new take on Godzilla is by far my favorite aside from the 1999 Toho film. America has finally done Godzilla justice however, especially compared to the Matthew Broderick starring Godzilla in the early 2000's whom is now labeled as simply "Zilla." Great film to watch, get caught up before Godzilla: King of the Monsters hits theaters on May 31, 2019.
The whole movie, I believe was definitely a set up for Godzilla: King of the Monsters due out in 2019, though it could have used a little bit more "monster" in it. I liked it though, but it's missing some key elements to make it Godzilla, but once you get passed the obvious problems with it, it proves to be a really great film. The roar they created for this new take on Godzilla is by far my favorite aside from the 1999 Toho film. America has finally done Godzilla justice however, especially compared to the Matthew Broderick starring Godzilla in the early 2000's whom is now labeled as simply "Zilla." Great film to watch, get caught up before Godzilla: King of the Monsters hits theaters on May 31, 2019.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated The Exorcist (1973) in Movies
Oct 14, 2018 (Updated Oct 15, 2018)
The best ever!
I remember when I was a kid sneaking into the living room and watching 10 minutes of The Exorcist from behind my mother's recliner when I was like 8. Even that 10 minutes messed me up for a long time as a kid. I would have dreams of my bed shaking and wake up sweaty and exhausted.
Not until I was an adult in my 30s did I truly appreciate the perfection masterpiece craft of the film.
Simple, slow burn storytelling. Not the scariest or goriest film ever made. More the idea of the film, how it transforms a young innocent girl into a satanic, cruel, vulgar monster which is the most visceral.
When it was released in 2000 with the "Version you've never seen" I happened to be working as a projectionist at the local theatre when I lived in Oregon. I always used to go into the theatre itself or turn the volume up while in the projector room so I could listen to it while I was doing other work.
It truly is one of my favorite films and is a tradition now I watch it every single October 31st.
Not until I was an adult in my 30s did I truly appreciate the perfection masterpiece craft of the film.
Simple, slow burn storytelling. Not the scariest or goriest film ever made. More the idea of the film, how it transforms a young innocent girl into a satanic, cruel, vulgar monster which is the most visceral.
When it was released in 2000 with the "Version you've never seen" I happened to be working as a projectionist at the local theatre when I lived in Oregon. I always used to go into the theatre itself or turn the volume up while in the projector room so I could listen to it while I was doing other work.
It truly is one of my favorite films and is a tradition now I watch it every single October 31st.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Rise of the Superheroes (2018) in Movies
Oct 2, 2020
Rise of the Superheroes is a "good enough" look into the history of comic book movies if you have a couple of hours to kill.
It covers a lot of ground from the 40s Batman serial series, all the way up to 2018s Black Panther, and has some notable comic book alumni amongst the interviewers, including the likes of Chris Claremont, Chuck Dixon, Scott Beauty, and Neal Adams.
The problem is however, a genre as big as comic book movies needs a big budget documentary to go with it. It would be nice to see some of the actors involved in the interviews, it would benefit from flashier graphics, it would benefit from a longer run time or even a series to properly explore the ever growing number of properties making the jump from page to screen.
The boom of comic movies from X-Men (2000) onwards is all crammed into the last 30 minutes as the feature rushes to wrap up, and as a result, Rise of the Superheroes doesn't feel that comprehensive, and offers nothing new to an audience who will likely already know what is talked about here.
It's an easy and casual watch if you have an interest in the subject, but nothing more.
It covers a lot of ground from the 40s Batman serial series, all the way up to 2018s Black Panther, and has some notable comic book alumni amongst the interviewers, including the likes of Chris Claremont, Chuck Dixon, Scott Beauty, and Neal Adams.
The problem is however, a genre as big as comic book movies needs a big budget documentary to go with it. It would be nice to see some of the actors involved in the interviews, it would benefit from flashier graphics, it would benefit from a longer run time or even a series to properly explore the ever growing number of properties making the jump from page to screen.
The boom of comic movies from X-Men (2000) onwards is all crammed into the last 30 minutes as the feature rushes to wrap up, and as a result, Rise of the Superheroes doesn't feel that comprehensive, and offers nothing new to an audience who will likely already know what is talked about here.
It's an easy and casual watch if you have an interest in the subject, but nothing more.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Bring Me Home in Books
Dec 14, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
To tell the truth, despite knowing that Alan Titchmarsh is a celebrity gardener and TV presenter, I was unaware that he was also a novelist; so I honestly had no idea what to expect. <i>Bring Me Home</i>, Titchmarsh’s latest piece of fiction, is located in the Scottish Highlands and tells the life story of Charlie Stuart who lives in Castle Sodhail.
The opening chapter is set in the year 2000 at the end of a summer party hosted by Charlie in the castle grounds. We find out that Charlie needs to tell his children about something he has done and he is worried about their reactions. I immediately assumed this would be something along the lines of financial difficulties: someone who owns a castle must be in need of a vast amount of money. This assumption, however, was way off the mark.
The subsequent chapters tell of Charlie’s past, beginning in 1960, when he was ten years old, and progressing chronologically until 2000 where we, once again, meet with the familiar opening scene. Throughout these sections we read of Egglestone Academy in Inverness, which he attended with his friend, Gordon Mackenzie; we learn of his mother’s death and how he copes with his new, typically not very nice, stepmother. He marries a childhood friend, Eleanor – this happened a bit too suddenly in my view – and this is where things begin to transpire; events which could be what Charlie wants to speak to his children about.
To be frank, I sometimes found the narrative a little boring, particularly throughout the first half in which, I felt, nothing particularly significant occurred. The latter half was better with more events taking place, which made me wonder how things would be resolved. There was one part of the storyline which, although keeps Gordon in the book as an important character, felt rather pointless particularly as it had nothing to do with the final few chapters.
One thing I did like about this book was that Titchmarsh and included relevant quotes from various sources at the beginning of each chapter. These always related in some way to what that particular chapter was about. As I have not read any other books by the author, I do not know if this was a one off idea or whether he always does this, but it reminded me of the character Gordon Mackenzie who has a literary quote for every occasion.
Overall I did not think much of this novel but it was not terrible. The writing style was easy to read and understand but I personally thought the storyline needed to be stronger.
To tell the truth, despite knowing that Alan Titchmarsh is a celebrity gardener and TV presenter, I was unaware that he was also a novelist; so I honestly had no idea what to expect. <i>Bring Me Home</i>, Titchmarsh’s latest piece of fiction, is located in the Scottish Highlands and tells the life story of Charlie Stuart who lives in Castle Sodhail.
The opening chapter is set in the year 2000 at the end of a summer party hosted by Charlie in the castle grounds. We find out that Charlie needs to tell his children about something he has done and he is worried about their reactions. I immediately assumed this would be something along the lines of financial difficulties: someone who owns a castle must be in need of a vast amount of money. This assumption, however, was way off the mark.
The subsequent chapters tell of Charlie’s past, beginning in 1960, when he was ten years old, and progressing chronologically until 2000 where we, once again, meet with the familiar opening scene. Throughout these sections we read of Egglestone Academy in Inverness, which he attended with his friend, Gordon Mackenzie; we learn of his mother’s death and how he copes with his new, typically not very nice, stepmother. He marries a childhood friend, Eleanor – this happened a bit too suddenly in my view – and this is where things begin to transpire; events which could be what Charlie wants to speak to his children about.
To be frank, I sometimes found the narrative a little boring, particularly throughout the first half in which, I felt, nothing particularly significant occurred. The latter half was better with more events taking place, which made me wonder how things would be resolved. There was one part of the storyline which, although keeps Gordon in the book as an important character, felt rather pointless particularly as it had nothing to do with the final few chapters.
One thing I did like about this book was that Titchmarsh and included relevant quotes from various sources at the beginning of each chapter. These always related in some way to what that particular chapter was about. As I have not read any other books by the author, I do not know if this was a one off idea or whether he always does this, but it reminded me of the character Gordon Mackenzie who has a literary quote for every occasion.
Overall I did not think much of this novel but it was not terrible. The writing style was easy to read and understand but I personally thought the storyline needed to be stronger.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated House on Haunted Hill (1999) in Movies
Jul 17, 2019 (Updated Jul 17, 2019)
Sweet Dreams
So this movie excist, house on haunted hill should of never been remade or touching in the first place, the oringal is a classic with vincent price introducing the movie and also starring in it.
Who stars in this one ohh fanke janssen, geoffrey rush who is a good actor but wasted in this movie, Taye diggs i never heard of him since the early 2000's, and ali larter who was only good in heroes. So not a good start.
The plot: A millionaire with theatrical tendencies, Stephen Price (Geoffrey Rush) invites a number of people to stay in a vast creepy building that used to be an insane asylum. Stephen, accompanied by his bitter wife, Evelyn (Famke Janssen), offers a million dollars to anyone who can stay the whole night without leaving out of fear. When Stephen and Evelyn become trapped with their guests, they quickly realize that the house really is haunted -- and the spirits dwelling within are very angry.
This movie is not scary, not oringal, not celver, not haunted, its not good.
Also for no pair of reason sweams by marlyon manson plays for no pair of reason, not once but twice. Once when the guess are driving to hill house and once at the end cridits.
Dont watch this movie it is a waste of your time, just watch the oringal movie.
Who stars in this one ohh fanke janssen, geoffrey rush who is a good actor but wasted in this movie, Taye diggs i never heard of him since the early 2000's, and ali larter who was only good in heroes. So not a good start.
The plot: A millionaire with theatrical tendencies, Stephen Price (Geoffrey Rush) invites a number of people to stay in a vast creepy building that used to be an insane asylum. Stephen, accompanied by his bitter wife, Evelyn (Famke Janssen), offers a million dollars to anyone who can stay the whole night without leaving out of fear. When Stephen and Evelyn become trapped with their guests, they quickly realize that the house really is haunted -- and the spirits dwelling within are very angry.
This movie is not scary, not oringal, not celver, not haunted, its not good.
Also for no pair of reason sweams by marlyon manson plays for no pair of reason, not once but twice. Once when the guess are driving to hill house and once at the end cridits.
Dont watch this movie it is a waste of your time, just watch the oringal movie.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Atlantis - The Lost Empire (2001) in Movies
Mar 25, 2020
Low Expections
Atlantis: The Lost Empire- is a strange movie, it came out in the early 2000's and thats when Disney was running out of ideas or starting to. I believe that their were starting to run out of ideas. Atlantis: The Lost Empire - is a strange movie, cause it came out after "The Lion King". And the movie's after "The Lion King" were stange. What im saying is after "The Lion King", disney decided to go really strange/a huge left turn/didn't expect that/disappointed and overall a huge downfall. But i will get to those movies. Oh this is one of them.
I mean it was a good premise, just was kinda of boring. It was a mix of sci-fi, adventure and thats pretty much it.
The plot: An inexperienced young adventurer becomes the key to unraveling an ancient mystery when he joins up with a group of daredevil explorers to find the legendary lost empire of Atlantis. A naive-but-determined museum cartographer Milo Thatch (Michael J. Fox), dreams of completing the quest begun by his late grandfather, a famous explorer. When a journal surfaces, an eccentric billionaire funds an expedition and the action shifts to high gear.
You can skip this one, dont need to watch it.
I mean it was a good premise, just was kinda of boring. It was a mix of sci-fi, adventure and thats pretty much it.
The plot: An inexperienced young adventurer becomes the key to unraveling an ancient mystery when he joins up with a group of daredevil explorers to find the legendary lost empire of Atlantis. A naive-but-determined museum cartographer Milo Thatch (Michael J. Fox), dreams of completing the quest begun by his late grandfather, a famous explorer. When a journal surfaces, an eccentric billionaire funds an expedition and the action shifts to high gear.
You can skip this one, dont need to watch it.
Tom Turner (388 KP) rated Skallagrigg in Books
Jun 15, 2021
I very rarely post about books while I'm still reading them, but for this book I had to, because I felt, and still feel it is criminal that this is book is not that well known. It should be in the pantheon of novels that get read my millions each year. However, I doubt given its obscurity that this is the case.
This story is so much more than its basics of being an exploration of disability. Though as someone with a disability it did bring home to me how much my life could have been different if I had been born in a different era - but also, how far society has yet to travel. It's as much a story about the human spirit and the importance of wholeness. To be honest, there are many levels one could read this book. If one has the tearducts strong enough, I am sure it's the kind of book that a reread would give even greater insight than the first read through. I first picked this up in the early 2000's, and for various reasons never finished a complete read through until now. But it was definitely one of those books that kept calling me back, and I'm so glad it did!
If you can get hold of a copy, it really is a must read!
This story is so much more than its basics of being an exploration of disability. Though as someone with a disability it did bring home to me how much my life could have been different if I had been born in a different era - but also, how far society has yet to travel. It's as much a story about the human spirit and the importance of wholeness. To be honest, there are many levels one could read this book. If one has the tearducts strong enough, I am sure it's the kind of book that a reread would give even greater insight than the first read through. I first picked this up in the early 2000's, and for various reasons never finished a complete read through until now. But it was definitely one of those books that kept calling me back, and I'm so glad it did!
If you can get hold of a copy, it really is a must read!
David McK (3562 KP) rated Angels and Demons in Books
Jul 4, 2021
First published back at the turn of the century (in the year 2000), this - while the second of the two Tom Hanks starring Robert Langdon movies, after The Da Vinci Code - is actually the first book in that particular series, albeit less well known than its sequel (the aforementioned The Da Vinci Code).
And, like, I'm sure, many others, I actually read that sequel first, only later discovering it was such (although, admittedly, not a direct sequel) and going back to read the first on the series.
This is the one largely set in and around Rome, with a high-tech ticking time-bomb counting down in Vatican City as the Cardinals all meet to elect a new Pope following the death of the previous incumbent of that role. It also makes lots of the (supposed?) divide between religion and science, drawing on lots of conspiracy theories and bringing back into the realms of popular culture that old secret society, the illuminati.
I have no problem with any of that, and I do like a bit of derring-do, mystery and romance, but even I found it hard at times to swallow some of the outlandish scenarios and set pieces of this novel - I think, for me, the icing on the cake was the surviving-a-jump-out-of-a-helicopter-without-a-parachute bit towards the end!
And, like, I'm sure, many others, I actually read that sequel first, only later discovering it was such (although, admittedly, not a direct sequel) and going back to read the first on the series.
This is the one largely set in and around Rome, with a high-tech ticking time-bomb counting down in Vatican City as the Cardinals all meet to elect a new Pope following the death of the previous incumbent of that role. It also makes lots of the (supposed?) divide between religion and science, drawing on lots of conspiracy theories and bringing back into the realms of popular culture that old secret society, the illuminati.
I have no problem with any of that, and I do like a bit of derring-do, mystery and romance, but even I found it hard at times to swallow some of the outlandish scenarios and set pieces of this novel - I think, for me, the icing on the cake was the surviving-a-jump-out-of-a-helicopter-without-a-parachute bit towards the end!
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Leprechaun 2 (1994) in Movies
Oct 28, 2020
Right, so Leprechaun 2 is basically just a whole set of questions... Is it a sequel? I honestly don't know. It doesn't explain how Lep himself is back after the ending of the first movie, and zero characters return (other than the titular bastard of course)
Is his weakness four leaf clovers as established in the previous film? Nah, it's iron now apparently. Is he still 600 years old as claimed in the first film? Sit down, he's 2000 years old now.
What I'm saying is, Leprechaun 2 just flat out does what the fuck it wants, continuaty be damned, which is kind of annoying, but then again, I hardly care.
It feels like a more ambitious project though, expanding on the origins of the Leprechaun lore, and it feels like it has a bigger budget (honestly not sure if that's true or not). Warwick Davis is once again doing what he does, which is no bad thing, but all of the other characters are just kind of there, although I appreciate the cameos from Clint Howard, Kimmy Robertson, and Michael McDonald.
Leprechaun 2 is alright I guess. It's still run-of-the-mill slasher trash, but I actually had more fun with it than the first one, and am just trying to enjoy the little quality that is there whilst it lasts...
Is his weakness four leaf clovers as established in the previous film? Nah, it's iron now apparently. Is he still 600 years old as claimed in the first film? Sit down, he's 2000 years old now.
What I'm saying is, Leprechaun 2 just flat out does what the fuck it wants, continuaty be damned, which is kind of annoying, but then again, I hardly care.
It feels like a more ambitious project though, expanding on the origins of the Leprechaun lore, and it feels like it has a bigger budget (honestly not sure if that's true or not). Warwick Davis is once again doing what he does, which is no bad thing, but all of the other characters are just kind of there, although I appreciate the cameos from Clint Howard, Kimmy Robertson, and Michael McDonald.
Leprechaun 2 is alright I guess. It's still run-of-the-mill slasher trash, but I actually had more fun with it than the first one, and am just trying to enjoy the little quality that is there whilst it lasts...
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated The Matrix (1999) in Movies
Sep 3, 2021
Put simply, The Matrix is almost the perfect action/science-fiction/mind fuck movie. It has a deliciously dystopian concept that leans into the state of the real world today (well, 1999 to be exact but it still works now). It has an aesthetic style that still looks incredible, and was unarguably ahead of its time. This includes some truly inspired set pieces. It has a fantastic cast of actors playing well realised characters, from the tranquil nature of the good guys, to the uncomfortably sinister Terminator-esque agents. It has an instantly recognisable music score. Everything about it just flows, and two+ hours fly by in no time.
Sure, The Matrix was the catalyst for countless copycats and IRL edgelords (I remember seeing this back in 2000 as a humble 12 year old, thinking it was the coolest fucking thing ever, before having my perceptions unceremoniously shattered by the influx of middle aged men walking around my tiny countryside hometown in leather dusters) but it did it first, and looked good doing it. I can even get past the blaring breakbeat music, because it's The Matrix dammit.
All these years later, a fair chunk of the dialogue is cheesy as all hell, and occasionally a little cringey, but other than that, it still stands the test of time.
Also, Rage Against the Machine.
Sure, The Matrix was the catalyst for countless copycats and IRL edgelords (I remember seeing this back in 2000 as a humble 12 year old, thinking it was the coolest fucking thing ever, before having my perceptions unceremoniously shattered by the influx of middle aged men walking around my tiny countryside hometown in leather dusters) but it did it first, and looked good doing it. I can even get past the blaring breakbeat music, because it's The Matrix dammit.
All these years later, a fair chunk of the dialogue is cheesy as all hell, and occasionally a little cringey, but other than that, it still stands the test of time.
Also, Rage Against the Machine.