Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Rampage (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
I have long written about the troubled history of bringing video game movies to the screen. For every success such as “Resident Evil” there are failures such as “Super Mario Bros”, “Wing Commander”, “DOOM”, and countless others. In recent years studios have taken more control of films based on their titles and we have seen some better success at least from a financial point. I was on set and very briefly in “Postal” and “Far Cry” and between scenes it was explained to me that with many video game films, you can use names and a basic premise from the game, but visuals, scenarios and such are usually forbidden as they cannot follow past stories or impede on any possible new projects. What is left is usually something with the name of the game and a very loose association.
“Tomb Raider” and “Assassin’s Creed” recently had a solid box office and while “Warcraft” fizzled domestically it did well overseas but not enough to trigger a sequel but showed an upward trend of star power and bigger budgets for game related films.
All of which brings us to “Rampage”; which is based on a classic arcade game which spawned version on multiple gaming platforms and sequels over the years.
The movie stars Dwayne Johnson as Davis Okoye; a former military operative who joined an anti-poaching task force and now resides in San Diego caring for Primates. His associates note that he has a better relationship with the animals in his care than he does the people around him and Davis is more than fine with this.
His favorite animal is an Albino Gorilla named George and Davis has even managed to teach him and other members of the group to speak to him via sign language.
All seems well until debris from a satellite crashes into George’s enclosure one night as well as various locales around the country.
George begins to grow at an alarming rate and shows increased aggression which is troubling to Davis and draws the attention of a genetics company who are involved in a rogue genetics experiment and a disgraced scientist named Dr. Kate Caldwell (Naomie Harris) who strive to help George and get control of the situation. Naturally the people behind the experiment are not going to let this happen and involve Government Agent Russell (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), to transport them all to a secure locale.
Naturally things do not go as planned and with multiple creatures now on the loose and heading to Chicago, and the military powerless to stop the carnage, it is up to Davis to save George and save the day.
The film uses some lavish visuals to depict the creatures and the action scenes are very entertaining. For a game with a very basic premise, it was nice to see the attempt made to flesh out the backstory and characters and not make the film just an extended FX reel.
There are some scenes and lines that would not be appropriate for younger viewers as a couple at our screener seemed to have some issues with the intensity at times. That being said, “Rampage” delivers an over the top, campy, and fully entertaining mix of video games and classic monster movies. The strong cast and great effects make for an enjoyable action film as long as you accept things with a wink and a smile. I hope this is a success as I would love to see a future film in the series and Johnson, Morgan, and Harris were a very winning combination.
http://sknr.net/2018/04/11/rampage/
“Tomb Raider” and “Assassin’s Creed” recently had a solid box office and while “Warcraft” fizzled domestically it did well overseas but not enough to trigger a sequel but showed an upward trend of star power and bigger budgets for game related films.
All of which brings us to “Rampage”; which is based on a classic arcade game which spawned version on multiple gaming platforms and sequels over the years.
The movie stars Dwayne Johnson as Davis Okoye; a former military operative who joined an anti-poaching task force and now resides in San Diego caring for Primates. His associates note that he has a better relationship with the animals in his care than he does the people around him and Davis is more than fine with this.
His favorite animal is an Albino Gorilla named George and Davis has even managed to teach him and other members of the group to speak to him via sign language.
All seems well until debris from a satellite crashes into George’s enclosure one night as well as various locales around the country.
George begins to grow at an alarming rate and shows increased aggression which is troubling to Davis and draws the attention of a genetics company who are involved in a rogue genetics experiment and a disgraced scientist named Dr. Kate Caldwell (Naomie Harris) who strive to help George and get control of the situation. Naturally the people behind the experiment are not going to let this happen and involve Government Agent Russell (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), to transport them all to a secure locale.
Naturally things do not go as planned and with multiple creatures now on the loose and heading to Chicago, and the military powerless to stop the carnage, it is up to Davis to save George and save the day.
The film uses some lavish visuals to depict the creatures and the action scenes are very entertaining. For a game with a very basic premise, it was nice to see the attempt made to flesh out the backstory and characters and not make the film just an extended FX reel.
There are some scenes and lines that would not be appropriate for younger viewers as a couple at our screener seemed to have some issues with the intensity at times. That being said, “Rampage” delivers an over the top, campy, and fully entertaining mix of video games and classic monster movies. The strong cast and great effects make for an enjoyable action film as long as you accept things with a wink and a smile. I hope this is a success as I would love to see a future film in the series and Johnson, Morgan, and Harris were a very winning combination.
http://sknr.net/2018/04/11/rampage/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Pacific Rim: Uprising (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
It has been ten years since humanity triumphed over the invading Kaiju in “Pacific Rim”. The world has begun rebuilding from the devastation caused by the conflict and for the most part humanity has moved on. However for Jake Pentecost (John Boyega), he exists as a hustler in a yet to be recovered zone that was heavily damaged by the conflict. Jake lives for the hustle, finding and trading one item of value for another from cookies and cereal to parts from down Jaegers.
Looting and operating parts from the former combat giants is very illegal but with the massive payout from their parts, the lure is too great for Jake to ignore. This pursuit leads him into trouble and reluctantly paired with young scrapper Amari Namani (Cailee Spaeny). Jake gets a choice of prison or returning to train Jaeger pilots as he is the son of the late hero Stacker Pentecost (Idris Elba), and naturally has many unresolved issues of sharing the name of the beloved hero.
Figuring training a class beats jail, Jake agrees to teach Amara and a new class of Jaeger pilots with his former rival Nate Lambert (Scott Eastwood), and to say they still have issues with one another would be an understatement.
Despite this, training moves along as planned and Nate and Jake even work well enough to pilot a Jaeger at a ceremony that will usher in a new but controversial new age in protection for humanity.
When an unexpected threat arrives and causes mass devastation and chaos, Jake and Nate must get to the bottom of the threat. As their investigation moves along a massive threat is discovered which pits them and their untested recruits against a threat old and new which threatens to end humanity.
What follows is a FX laden finale where cities are laid waste to and massive combatants engage is a truly impressive visual spectacle
While “Pacific Rim: Uprising” does use a familiar plot threads, it does so in an engaging way. The film does have a very basic plot and does not delve too much into character development and leaves some of the threads it opened unresolved. What it does have is a good amount of action after a slower than expected buildup. The action is visually appealing and exciting and delivers a much better experience than the last few “Transformer” films did. The cast works well with one another and it was nice to see Charlie Day and others from the first film return as Day always makes his scenes engaging.
While you may have a sense of seeing much of this before in giant monster and robot films, it is done in an appealing way. There is much of the film that you can see was clearly included to make sure the film appeals to audiences in China and Japan but in the new global film market, it is vital for films to do well in those markets, and with a film based in the Asian Pacific Rim, it only makes sense to do this. Eastwood and Boyega work well with one another and the finale opens the door wide open for a third film that looks like it would extend the franchise by taking things in a new and exciting direction.
http://sknr.net/2018/03/21/pacific-rim-uprising/
Looting and operating parts from the former combat giants is very illegal but with the massive payout from their parts, the lure is too great for Jake to ignore. This pursuit leads him into trouble and reluctantly paired with young scrapper Amari Namani (Cailee Spaeny). Jake gets a choice of prison or returning to train Jaeger pilots as he is the son of the late hero Stacker Pentecost (Idris Elba), and naturally has many unresolved issues of sharing the name of the beloved hero.
Figuring training a class beats jail, Jake agrees to teach Amara and a new class of Jaeger pilots with his former rival Nate Lambert (Scott Eastwood), and to say they still have issues with one another would be an understatement.
Despite this, training moves along as planned and Nate and Jake even work well enough to pilot a Jaeger at a ceremony that will usher in a new but controversial new age in protection for humanity.
When an unexpected threat arrives and causes mass devastation and chaos, Jake and Nate must get to the bottom of the threat. As their investigation moves along a massive threat is discovered which pits them and their untested recruits against a threat old and new which threatens to end humanity.
What follows is a FX laden finale where cities are laid waste to and massive combatants engage is a truly impressive visual spectacle
While “Pacific Rim: Uprising” does use a familiar plot threads, it does so in an engaging way. The film does have a very basic plot and does not delve too much into character development and leaves some of the threads it opened unresolved. What it does have is a good amount of action after a slower than expected buildup. The action is visually appealing and exciting and delivers a much better experience than the last few “Transformer” films did. The cast works well with one another and it was nice to see Charlie Day and others from the first film return as Day always makes his scenes engaging.
While you may have a sense of seeing much of this before in giant monster and robot films, it is done in an appealing way. There is much of the film that you can see was clearly included to make sure the film appeals to audiences in China and Japan but in the new global film market, it is vital for films to do well in those markets, and with a film based in the Asian Pacific Rim, it only makes sense to do this. Eastwood and Boyega work well with one another and the finale opens the door wide open for a third film that looks like it would extend the franchise by taking things in a new and exciting direction.
http://sknr.net/2018/03/21/pacific-rim-uprising/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Tomb Raider (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The third film in the “Tomb Raider” film series has arrived and much like
the recent entries in the video game series that inspire it; the film
serves as a reboot of the franchise.
This time out Alicia Vikander takes over the title role from Angelina
Jolie and brings us a younger and far less experienced Lara Croft who
toils as a bike messenger struggling to get by in London. She has a feisty
and competitive nature but is haunted by the absence of her father
(Dominic West), who has been missing for seven years and is presumed dead.
As such, Lara is his sole heir and is being pressured to sign documents
that will legally declare him dead and turn over a vast corporation and
fortune to Lara. True to her nature, Lara resists this as she is
unwilling to move on from her father and cannot bring herself to declare
him dead and take her inheritance.
In time Lara learns that her father was also a dabbler in the supernatural
and artifacts and may have vanished trying to find a secluded tomb on a
remote Japanese island.
Undaunted, Lara sets off to get answers and finds herself in the company
of a boat Captain named Lu Ren (Daniel Wu), who reluctantly takes her to
the dangerous island. Danger arrives first in a storm then in the form of
a Mercenary named Matthias Vogel (Walton Goggins), who wants to find the
mysterious tomb as well for nefarious reasons and will stop at nothing
including murder to get it.
Lara is soon faced with the fight of her life as she must battle Vogel and
his men as well as the island and other forces in order to survive and
protect the world.
The film moves at a pace slower than you might expect as the first half of
the film is mostly setup but there are a few moments of action included to
keep things interesting. While many of the action sequences may seem like
they are either restrained or influenced from other films, they do still
work and entertain. While some may call this a female “Indiana Jones”
film, Lara is very much her own character as she has a spunk and grit that
makes her equal adapt in a cultured setting as she is solving a dangerous
trap or mixing it up with deadly threats.
Vikander also portrays Lara with a sense of vulnerability as she does get
injured, bruised and tormented. This is not an unstoppable action machine,
but rather a real person who knows there is a time use your brain and then
a time to take action, but is also remorseful about the consequences of
her actions at times.
The film does move to a satisfying finale and sets up a further chapter
very well. There are some great nods to prior games in the film which was
refreshing as I joked to my wife during some of the more intense scenes
that I feel like I need to be pushing the X and O button on our Dualshock
4 controllers to help Lara run faster and jump higher.
In the end “Tomb Raider” is a satisfying if safe reboot for the franchise
that I expect should keep fans of the series happy. I do think that
audiences in North America may want a bit more action but the film should
play well in the Asian and European markets.
http://sknr.net/2018/03/16/tomb-raider/
the recent entries in the video game series that inspire it; the film
serves as a reboot of the franchise.
This time out Alicia Vikander takes over the title role from Angelina
Jolie and brings us a younger and far less experienced Lara Croft who
toils as a bike messenger struggling to get by in London. She has a feisty
and competitive nature but is haunted by the absence of her father
(Dominic West), who has been missing for seven years and is presumed dead.
As such, Lara is his sole heir and is being pressured to sign documents
that will legally declare him dead and turn over a vast corporation and
fortune to Lara. True to her nature, Lara resists this as she is
unwilling to move on from her father and cannot bring herself to declare
him dead and take her inheritance.
In time Lara learns that her father was also a dabbler in the supernatural
and artifacts and may have vanished trying to find a secluded tomb on a
remote Japanese island.
Undaunted, Lara sets off to get answers and finds herself in the company
of a boat Captain named Lu Ren (Daniel Wu), who reluctantly takes her to
the dangerous island. Danger arrives first in a storm then in the form of
a Mercenary named Matthias Vogel (Walton Goggins), who wants to find the
mysterious tomb as well for nefarious reasons and will stop at nothing
including murder to get it.
Lara is soon faced with the fight of her life as she must battle Vogel and
his men as well as the island and other forces in order to survive and
protect the world.
The film moves at a pace slower than you might expect as the first half of
the film is mostly setup but there are a few moments of action included to
keep things interesting. While many of the action sequences may seem like
they are either restrained or influenced from other films, they do still
work and entertain. While some may call this a female “Indiana Jones”
film, Lara is very much her own character as she has a spunk and grit that
makes her equal adapt in a cultured setting as she is solving a dangerous
trap or mixing it up with deadly threats.
Vikander also portrays Lara with a sense of vulnerability as she does get
injured, bruised and tormented. This is not an unstoppable action machine,
but rather a real person who knows there is a time use your brain and then
a time to take action, but is also remorseful about the consequences of
her actions at times.
The film does move to a satisfying finale and sets up a further chapter
very well. There are some great nods to prior games in the film which was
refreshing as I joked to my wife during some of the more intense scenes
that I feel like I need to be pushing the X and O button on our Dualshock
4 controllers to help Lara run faster and jump higher.
In the end “Tomb Raider” is a satisfying if safe reboot for the franchise
that I expect should keep fans of the series happy. I do think that
audiences in North America may want a bit more action but the film should
play well in the Asian and European markets.
http://sknr.net/2018/03/16/tomb-raider/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Death Wish (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
For Dr. Paul Kersey (Bruce Willis), life is good but at a crossroads. With his birthday coming up, his daughter Jordan (Camila Morrone) is preparing to leave their affluent Chicago home to start college in New York.
His wife Lucy (Elisabeth Shue) knows this is a good thing for their daughter but also knows that it is a turning point in their lives as they will soon be facing an empty nest.
Sadly their ideal life is turned upside down when a home invasion and robbery turns unexpectedly violent leaving Lucy dead and Jordan in a coma. A distraught Paul finds little solace in therapy or in the support of his brother Frank (Vincent D’Onofrio) who is putting his own life back together.
Frustrated by the inability of the police to find those responsible and bring them to justice; Paul becomes even more and more frustrated as the weeks pass. Paul eventually comes into possession of a gun and begins to practice with it which eventually leads him to taking to the streets in a Hoody. When a chance encounters has him gun down two criminals, Paul finds a sudden rush from his experience, especially when it was captured by an onlooker and posted online. Thanks to his face being hidden, the media dubs him the “Grim Reaper” and Paul begins a campaign of vigilante justice as he tracks down those responsible for his suffering and looks to exact a brutal revenge.
The movie directed by horror icon Eli Roth is a faithful update of the Charles Bronson classic. Paul is now Doctor Vs an Architect and Chicago not New York serves as the setting, but the tone and subject matter of the film is very much the same. Roth does show his horror background with a couple of killings that are a bit gruesome but they are not overly gratuitous as he cuts away from the carnage instead of lingering on it.
What I found most satisfying is how the film moved at a slow and almost deliberate pace. This was not a run and gun action film like many of the past films Willis has done. His Kersey is an everyman who decides to take extraordinary measures when he believes the law has failed him.
He moves at a steady pace and even in the most frantic moments, moves with the speed one would expect of a man of his years who has only recently fired a gun. Although effective he is at times unsteady with his shorts and actions and his inexperience shows.
It was refreshing to see combat on screen by a character that seemed real vs a polished officer or combat vet.
The cast was solid and really worked well with one another and you could see the struggle they faced with the situations presented to them. The audience at my press screening responded well to the film and seemed to get behind Paul as he embarked on his crusade. I am very curious to see in this time of controversy about gun laws how the film will be received.
For me, “Death Wish” is a very entertaining retelling of a well-known story that still holds up and still asks many difficult questions about our society and how to best protect the ones we love.
http://sknr.net/2018/03/01/death-wish/
His wife Lucy (Elisabeth Shue) knows this is a good thing for their daughter but also knows that it is a turning point in their lives as they will soon be facing an empty nest.
Sadly their ideal life is turned upside down when a home invasion and robbery turns unexpectedly violent leaving Lucy dead and Jordan in a coma. A distraught Paul finds little solace in therapy or in the support of his brother Frank (Vincent D’Onofrio) who is putting his own life back together.
Frustrated by the inability of the police to find those responsible and bring them to justice; Paul becomes even more and more frustrated as the weeks pass. Paul eventually comes into possession of a gun and begins to practice with it which eventually leads him to taking to the streets in a Hoody. When a chance encounters has him gun down two criminals, Paul finds a sudden rush from his experience, especially when it was captured by an onlooker and posted online. Thanks to his face being hidden, the media dubs him the “Grim Reaper” and Paul begins a campaign of vigilante justice as he tracks down those responsible for his suffering and looks to exact a brutal revenge.
The movie directed by horror icon Eli Roth is a faithful update of the Charles Bronson classic. Paul is now Doctor Vs an Architect and Chicago not New York serves as the setting, but the tone and subject matter of the film is very much the same. Roth does show his horror background with a couple of killings that are a bit gruesome but they are not overly gratuitous as he cuts away from the carnage instead of lingering on it.
What I found most satisfying is how the film moved at a slow and almost deliberate pace. This was not a run and gun action film like many of the past films Willis has done. His Kersey is an everyman who decides to take extraordinary measures when he believes the law has failed him.
He moves at a steady pace and even in the most frantic moments, moves with the speed one would expect of a man of his years who has only recently fired a gun. Although effective he is at times unsteady with his shorts and actions and his inexperience shows.
It was refreshing to see combat on screen by a character that seemed real vs a polished officer or combat vet.
The cast was solid and really worked well with one another and you could see the struggle they faced with the situations presented to them. The audience at my press screening responded well to the film and seemed to get behind Paul as he embarked on his crusade. I am very curious to see in this time of controversy about gun laws how the film will be received.
For me, “Death Wish” is a very entertaining retelling of a well-known story that still holds up and still asks many difficult questions about our society and how to best protect the ones we love.
http://sknr.net/2018/03/01/death-wish/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Life Finds A Way
After really enjoying Jurassic World back in 2015, I was excited when they announced that a sequel was in the works. I felt optimistic about it because the ending of Jurassic World left it wide open for a story continuation, and I didn’t feel like they were just making a new one to milk a franchise. It’s no surprise that I can be hugely critical of sequels, but I was willing to give this one a fighting chance.
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom is set three years after the destruction of the Jurassic World park, and characters are faced with the dilemma of what to do now a volcano on the island is beginning to erupt. It’s a huge moral dilemma: let the dinosaurs die again, or move them to a safe location where they can thrive. Ultimately, Claire and Owen end up back on Isla Nublar with the help of a rescue team to round up the dinosaurs. As you can expect, things don’t go according to plan and we soon realise the rescue team has other, darker intentions.
Whilst this film is not the strongest in the franchise, it’s still an enjoyable watch. I wasn’t expecting it to be as thought provoking as it was, which was a pleasant surprise. I felt like the storyline had a lot of depth to it, and a lot of emotional moments too. One thing I really love about the Jurassic franchise is how they make you connect and feel emotions towards CGI dinosaurs. You know they aren’t real, yet you get so invested in the narrative that you quickly forget. In Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom we see some familiar dinosaurs from the previous films, as well as some new ones too. In classic Jurassic nature, we also see a brand new dinosaur that humans thought was a good idea to create… for some reason.
Another thing that surprised me was the horror-like elements that were present in the film. Without giving too much away, there’s a couple of scenes that are very reminiscent of classic horror and plummets the film into a much darker, creepier atmosphere. These scenes were incredibly well done and didn’t feel out of place, even though they could’ve easily felt too jarring. It was fun to witness the franchise experimenting with this, and enhances the scary side of the dinosaurs. There’s some really impressive shots during these scenes too, that emphasises the imposing nature of these creatures.
My biggest criticism of this film is that I felt like too much was going on, and consequently the narrative felt rushed. Despite it running at just over 2 hours, I almost felt like we needed another half hour to properly tell the story without glossing over some really important plot points. The main narrative was paced okay but then we had random side storylines that seemed unnecessary and just left me confused more than anything. It’s a shame they tried to cram so much into such a short space of time as there was no need to do that.
Long time fans of Jurassic Park should definitely give this a go as I think it’s a solid entry into the franchise, though it doesn’t do enough to ascend above its predecessors. It’s what I’ve described as a “fun, Monday night film” to people who’ve asked, so if you’re looking for a visually impressive blockbuster with loud roars and some creepy elements, this film is perfect for you.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/06/24/life-finds-a-way-jurassic-world-fallen-kingdom-review/
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom is set three years after the destruction of the Jurassic World park, and characters are faced with the dilemma of what to do now a volcano on the island is beginning to erupt. It’s a huge moral dilemma: let the dinosaurs die again, or move them to a safe location where they can thrive. Ultimately, Claire and Owen end up back on Isla Nublar with the help of a rescue team to round up the dinosaurs. As you can expect, things don’t go according to plan and we soon realise the rescue team has other, darker intentions.
Whilst this film is not the strongest in the franchise, it’s still an enjoyable watch. I wasn’t expecting it to be as thought provoking as it was, which was a pleasant surprise. I felt like the storyline had a lot of depth to it, and a lot of emotional moments too. One thing I really love about the Jurassic franchise is how they make you connect and feel emotions towards CGI dinosaurs. You know they aren’t real, yet you get so invested in the narrative that you quickly forget. In Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom we see some familiar dinosaurs from the previous films, as well as some new ones too. In classic Jurassic nature, we also see a brand new dinosaur that humans thought was a good idea to create… for some reason.
Another thing that surprised me was the horror-like elements that were present in the film. Without giving too much away, there’s a couple of scenes that are very reminiscent of classic horror and plummets the film into a much darker, creepier atmosphere. These scenes were incredibly well done and didn’t feel out of place, even though they could’ve easily felt too jarring. It was fun to witness the franchise experimenting with this, and enhances the scary side of the dinosaurs. There’s some really impressive shots during these scenes too, that emphasises the imposing nature of these creatures.
My biggest criticism of this film is that I felt like too much was going on, and consequently the narrative felt rushed. Despite it running at just over 2 hours, I almost felt like we needed another half hour to properly tell the story without glossing over some really important plot points. The main narrative was paced okay but then we had random side storylines that seemed unnecessary and just left me confused more than anything. It’s a shame they tried to cram so much into such a short space of time as there was no need to do that.
Long time fans of Jurassic Park should definitely give this a go as I think it’s a solid entry into the franchise, though it doesn’t do enough to ascend above its predecessors. It’s what I’ve described as a “fun, Monday night film” to people who’ve asked, so if you’re looking for a visually impressive blockbuster with loud roars and some creepy elements, this film is perfect for you.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/06/24/life-finds-a-way-jurassic-world-fallen-kingdom-review/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Mad To Be Normal (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Mental Health in the 60s
I’ll admit, whenever I see David Tennant’s name on a cast list I get excited. As a long time fan, I’ve watched him play a variety of roles brilliantly. So when I was given the opportunity to review Mad To Be Normal and I learned what the plot was, how could I refuse? Set in the 60s, the film follows Scottish psychiatrist R.D. Laing and his unconventional approach to mental health treatment, causing controversy within the psychiatry field.
Although I don’t know much about Laing, Tennant really shone in the central role and delivered a truly captivating character who was riddled with his own underlying issues. He’s a tricky one because sometimes you really sympathise and agree with him, but other times he’s so utterly frustrating. The film showed us many different sides to him, and created a well-rounded exploration of the man in question. He’s compassionate but also terribly naive, and that’s a dangerous combination indeed. Tennant is joined by Elisabeth Moss, Michael Gambon and Gabriel Byrne which is an excellent line up.
One of the best things about this film is the characters, because everyone does such an amazing job of portraying complex characters with equally as complex relationships. Moss plays student Angie who quickly becomes a love interest of Laing’s, and joins him in his work. Much like Laing, she is also well-rounded and has good traits and bad ones, the latter resulting in rather turbulent moments throughout the film.
I especially enjoyed the way mental health was portrayed by characters, as you could tell they were struggling and trying so hard to deal with their illnesses. It was dealt with respectfully and honestly, whilst still showing the risks of untreated mental health conditions. Gabriel Byrne in particular stands out in his portrayal of Jim, going from someone friendly and sentimental to someone violent and dangerous very quickly. It would have been good to learn more about each character and their individual backgrounds for context’s sake, replacing the unnecessary scenes with this. Nevertheless, the insight into mental health in this era was fascinating, particularly scenes involving the inhumane treatment known as electroshock therapy. It shows we have come a long way since then, but we still have a long way to go.
The stellar performances are accompanied with some great set design, which I imagine would provide some welcome nostalgia for those familiar with the era. I loved Laing’s quirky style both in his interior design, behaviour and clothing choices, making him stand out even more. He’s flamboyant in every sense of the word, but not always for the right reasons. For his time, Laing was clearly very open minded, caring and in favour of self-expression, further conflicting with the beliefs of wider society. Although open mindedness is a good thing, his goes too far which ultimately would lead to his eventual downfall.
Robert Mullan has done a great job bringing this important figure to life on screen, putting together a cast that perfectly delivered this story. Whilst I would have liked more context around both the patients and Laing himself, the film still delivered a powerful message in its 1 hour 45 minute run time. It’s definitely worth a watch.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/08/04/mental-health-in-the-60s-mad-to-be-normal-review/
Although I don’t know much about Laing, Tennant really shone in the central role and delivered a truly captivating character who was riddled with his own underlying issues. He’s a tricky one because sometimes you really sympathise and agree with him, but other times he’s so utterly frustrating. The film showed us many different sides to him, and created a well-rounded exploration of the man in question. He’s compassionate but also terribly naive, and that’s a dangerous combination indeed. Tennant is joined by Elisabeth Moss, Michael Gambon and Gabriel Byrne which is an excellent line up.
One of the best things about this film is the characters, because everyone does such an amazing job of portraying complex characters with equally as complex relationships. Moss plays student Angie who quickly becomes a love interest of Laing’s, and joins him in his work. Much like Laing, she is also well-rounded and has good traits and bad ones, the latter resulting in rather turbulent moments throughout the film.
I especially enjoyed the way mental health was portrayed by characters, as you could tell they were struggling and trying so hard to deal with their illnesses. It was dealt with respectfully and honestly, whilst still showing the risks of untreated mental health conditions. Gabriel Byrne in particular stands out in his portrayal of Jim, going from someone friendly and sentimental to someone violent and dangerous very quickly. It would have been good to learn more about each character and their individual backgrounds for context’s sake, replacing the unnecessary scenes with this. Nevertheless, the insight into mental health in this era was fascinating, particularly scenes involving the inhumane treatment known as electroshock therapy. It shows we have come a long way since then, but we still have a long way to go.
The stellar performances are accompanied with some great set design, which I imagine would provide some welcome nostalgia for those familiar with the era. I loved Laing’s quirky style both in his interior design, behaviour and clothing choices, making him stand out even more. He’s flamboyant in every sense of the word, but not always for the right reasons. For his time, Laing was clearly very open minded, caring and in favour of self-expression, further conflicting with the beliefs of wider society. Although open mindedness is a good thing, his goes too far which ultimately would lead to his eventual downfall.
Robert Mullan has done a great job bringing this important figure to life on screen, putting together a cast that perfectly delivered this story. Whilst I would have liked more context around both the patients and Laing himself, the film still delivered a powerful message in its 1 hour 45 minute run time. It’s definitely worth a watch.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/08/04/mental-health-in-the-60s-mad-to-be-normal-review/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated The Meg (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Statham vs Massive Prehistoric Shark
Before I start my review, I think I should add a quick disclaimer. I knew fine well that I wasn’t walking into a Oscar-worthy, perfect film as soon as I booked my ticket for The Meg. With the exception of Jaws, how many shark films have actually been award worthy? We’ve seen a huge boom in shark popularity ranging from plausible to the downright stupid (yes Sharknado, I’m looking at you and your buddies). But despite my already low expectations, I still have a fair amount of criticism for what I saw.
My biggest problem from the get-go is that we get no explanation for why the megalodon, a shark that’s been extinct for 2 million years has suddenly came back to gobble people up. How did it survive? Why is it there? Even the most low budget, downright awful creature features try to offer some silly scientific explanation for why the antagonist exists at all. It’s dumb, but hey, at least they tried. The Meg makes no effort to try and explain anything which was frustrating to me. The most we got was “Oh hey, there’s this really big creature that we thought was extinct but it’s actually living down in the Marianas trench – surprise!”. This might be a sufficient explanation for some, but not for me.
Having said that, was it an entertaining film? Sure. I did really enjoy the visuals especially and thought they did an excellent job with the CGI and actually bringing this creature and the underwater facility to life. Cinematically it’s a stunning film to look at, and despite all this implausibility, it still transports you to this huge, unknown, underwater world for the duration. I’ve seen some terrible CGI in my time, but thankfully The Meg doesn’t fall into this category. These visuals make up for the cringe-worthy script and lines that were supposed to be serious and instead made me burst out laughing. But let’s be honest, I’d be disappointed if the script wasn’t this god-awful. You walk into a film like this expecting to face palm a couple of times, don’t you?
I would’ve liked a bit more brutality as the Meg is supposed to be a terrifying, monster shark that’s approximately 60 feet in length. (The Great White shark can grow up to 20 feet for comparison). Despite it’s 12 rating I’m sure more blood and violence would’ve been acceptable as Jaws managed to get away with it back in 1975. Who could forget that scene where an unfortunate fellow slides down into the shark’s mouth? Brutal. Whilst I appreciate this isn’t necessarily a horror film, it actually needed more violence and less filler scenes in my opinion. It’s not often that I ask for more violence,` especially in an action film, yet here we are.
To conclude, The Meg is a fun way to spend your evening, but it ultimately felt like a high budget B-Movie. The actors tried their best with the script they had, but even people like Jason Statham and Ruby Rose couldn’t make it better. (what was up with Statham’s accent, by the way?!). If you’re wanting a silly shark film with more substance, I’d recommend Deep Blue Sea instead
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/08/19/statham-vs-massive-prehistoric-shark-my-thoughts-on-the-meg/
My biggest problem from the get-go is that we get no explanation for why the megalodon, a shark that’s been extinct for 2 million years has suddenly came back to gobble people up. How did it survive? Why is it there? Even the most low budget, downright awful creature features try to offer some silly scientific explanation for why the antagonist exists at all. It’s dumb, but hey, at least they tried. The Meg makes no effort to try and explain anything which was frustrating to me. The most we got was “Oh hey, there’s this really big creature that we thought was extinct but it’s actually living down in the Marianas trench – surprise!”. This might be a sufficient explanation for some, but not for me.
Having said that, was it an entertaining film? Sure. I did really enjoy the visuals especially and thought they did an excellent job with the CGI and actually bringing this creature and the underwater facility to life. Cinematically it’s a stunning film to look at, and despite all this implausibility, it still transports you to this huge, unknown, underwater world for the duration. I’ve seen some terrible CGI in my time, but thankfully The Meg doesn’t fall into this category. These visuals make up for the cringe-worthy script and lines that were supposed to be serious and instead made me burst out laughing. But let’s be honest, I’d be disappointed if the script wasn’t this god-awful. You walk into a film like this expecting to face palm a couple of times, don’t you?
I would’ve liked a bit more brutality as the Meg is supposed to be a terrifying, monster shark that’s approximately 60 feet in length. (The Great White shark can grow up to 20 feet for comparison). Despite it’s 12 rating I’m sure more blood and violence would’ve been acceptable as Jaws managed to get away with it back in 1975. Who could forget that scene where an unfortunate fellow slides down into the shark’s mouth? Brutal. Whilst I appreciate this isn’t necessarily a horror film, it actually needed more violence and less filler scenes in my opinion. It’s not often that I ask for more violence,` especially in an action film, yet here we are.
To conclude, The Meg is a fun way to spend your evening, but it ultimately felt like a high budget B-Movie. The actors tried their best with the script they had, but even people like Jason Statham and Ruby Rose couldn’t make it better. (what was up with Statham’s accent, by the way?!). If you’re wanting a silly shark film with more substance, I’d recommend Deep Blue Sea instead
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/08/19/statham-vs-massive-prehistoric-shark-my-thoughts-on-the-meg/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Christopher Robin (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Return to Hundred Acre Wood
As a child I adored Winnie The Pooh. From owning soft toys of Pooh bear and his friends to playing Pooh sticks in the woods with my grandad, it shaped a lot of my childhood. Perhaps this explains why I was so drawn to this film from the day it was released. I was excited yet quietly apprehensive as you often are when your favourite childhood characters are revived on the big screen. There’s always a risk that it just won’t be the same.
Thankfully Christopher Robin did a fantastic job of bringing audiences back to Hundred Acre Wood, and telling the story of an adult Christopher Robin. As you can probably imagine; he soon outgrows his toys and is forced to grow up very quickly as he’s sent off to boarding school. Beyond that, he is soon conscripted and upon his return, has to work tirelessly to provide for his wife and daughter. This level of stress soon turns Christopher Robin into a serious workaholic who would much rather see his child study hard than play games. All that changes when Robin is reunited with Winnie The Pooh, and he soon remembers all the fun he once had as a child.
Ewan McGregor delivers a stunning performance as an adult Christopher Robin, perfectly encapsulating the serious businessman persona, as well as one filled with child-like glee. It’s refreshing to see McGregor in a much more playful role than usual, and I believe he’s appealing for all audiences, both adult and children alike. His performance made me cry in places, because the script tugs at your heartstrings and delivers a jolt of welcome nostalgia. In all honesty it makes you want to grab your bear and be a child again, just for a few moments. And even more honestly, is there anything wrong with that? It’s a film that reminds you to stop working so hard, and make sure you enjoy those precious moments with those dear to you. Pass the tissues, please!
Pooh and his friends are animated wonderfully, they blend in effortlessly with the scenes and create this illusion of toys coming to life. It’s very easy to forget that they’re not actually real. I especially loved classic grumpy Eeyore, as he resonates well with the adult audience and makes you think “you know what Eeyore, I can relate to that”. He’s a hilarious antidote to the mushier characters, and reminded me why I’ve always loved his character. It was so fun seeing Pooh and friends again, and I’m so happy they were portrayed the way they should’ve been.
Christopher Robin is an all-round beautiful family film, full of playful visuals, genuinely funny one-liners, and moments that make you feel warm and fuzzy inside. It is very cheesy in places but you have to remember that this is a sweet, family film, so overly mushy moments don’t feel too out of place. I soon learned to roll with it and found myself genuinely beaming at the chemistry between characters, and the love that radiated from the screen. Frankly, it’s a welcome change from the blood and guts I’m used to, and I’m happy about that. Sometimes even a die hard horror fan needs a teddy bear in their lives.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/08/22/return-to-hundred-acre-wood-a-review-of-christopher-robin/
Thankfully Christopher Robin did a fantastic job of bringing audiences back to Hundred Acre Wood, and telling the story of an adult Christopher Robin. As you can probably imagine; he soon outgrows his toys and is forced to grow up very quickly as he’s sent off to boarding school. Beyond that, he is soon conscripted and upon his return, has to work tirelessly to provide for his wife and daughter. This level of stress soon turns Christopher Robin into a serious workaholic who would much rather see his child study hard than play games. All that changes when Robin is reunited with Winnie The Pooh, and he soon remembers all the fun he once had as a child.
Ewan McGregor delivers a stunning performance as an adult Christopher Robin, perfectly encapsulating the serious businessman persona, as well as one filled with child-like glee. It’s refreshing to see McGregor in a much more playful role than usual, and I believe he’s appealing for all audiences, both adult and children alike. His performance made me cry in places, because the script tugs at your heartstrings and delivers a jolt of welcome nostalgia. In all honesty it makes you want to grab your bear and be a child again, just for a few moments. And even more honestly, is there anything wrong with that? It’s a film that reminds you to stop working so hard, and make sure you enjoy those precious moments with those dear to you. Pass the tissues, please!
Pooh and his friends are animated wonderfully, they blend in effortlessly with the scenes and create this illusion of toys coming to life. It’s very easy to forget that they’re not actually real. I especially loved classic grumpy Eeyore, as he resonates well with the adult audience and makes you think “you know what Eeyore, I can relate to that”. He’s a hilarious antidote to the mushier characters, and reminded me why I’ve always loved his character. It was so fun seeing Pooh and friends again, and I’m so happy they were portrayed the way they should’ve been.
Christopher Robin is an all-round beautiful family film, full of playful visuals, genuinely funny one-liners, and moments that make you feel warm and fuzzy inside. It is very cheesy in places but you have to remember that this is a sweet, family film, so overly mushy moments don’t feel too out of place. I soon learned to roll with it and found myself genuinely beaming at the chemistry between characters, and the love that radiated from the screen. Frankly, it’s a welcome change from the blood and guts I’m used to, and I’m happy about that. Sometimes even a die hard horror fan needs a teddy bear in their lives.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/08/22/return-to-hundred-acre-wood-a-review-of-christopher-robin/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated King of Thieves (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
A Surprisingly Disappointing Heist Film
Upon seeing King of Thieves listed as a Limitless preview screening, I immediately snapped up the opportunity to see it because I had been looking forward to it since the first trailer I saw. With a well-known cast, an iconic real life heist story, and a classic ‘British crime’ aura, I was anticipating something great. I really can’t understand how they managed to mess that combo up, but here we are. Out of all the reviews I’ve ever written, this one is probably the hardest because of how disappointed I feel. As a film fan it’s difficult when you get yourself hyped up, only to be let down by the finished result.
For me, King of Thieves started off promising then rapidly declined into a bit of a mess. If it weren’t for a few redeeming features, I would’ve rated it even lower. One of the positives to come out of this film is the performances; it’s no surprise to any of you that these are actors at the top of their game, and I believe they worked as hard as they could with what they had. I don’t have a problem with any of the actors, my main problem lies with how utterly awful and cringe-worthy the screenplay was. They had an opportunity to work with some brilliant talent, but even they couldn’t save this film.
I appreciate the script was trying to encapsulate the ‘tough, working class London’ stereotype through these characters, but for me there was too much swearing and casual racism/homophobia than actual exposition. We learn barely anything about these characters, with the exception of Michael Caine’s, so all we see for almost two hours is a bunch of old men arguing and swearing constantly. We aren’t encouraged to connect or sympathise with any of them, none of them are particularly three dimensional, so you find yourself hating everyone on screen. Even a little emotional moment here and there would’ve been nice. With no chemistry between characters, the heist becomes very dull indeed.
If the weak script wasn’t bad enough, I wasn’t impressed with the cinematography either. The film seems confused throughout, not really sure what visual styles it wants to settle on so it jumps about here and there. As a result, this is very jarring and I found it hard to watch. The camera is all over the place, it doesn’t seem to have any fixed techniques, and it becomes a nuisance more than anything. That being said, the heist scenes themselves were very well-shot which is even more frustrating for me. How can you shoot certain things brilliantly, then mess up others? It doesn’t make any sense. If anything, it’s proven that the people involved did have the potential to create something great, but somehow managed to throw it all away.
King of Thieves feels a lot like a straight-to-DVD crime film that you might watch on a lazy Sunday afternoon when you’re a bit tired or hungover. It’s certainly not the kind of cinematic, high-quality film I would expect to see on the big screen. It’s mildly entertaining and delivered a few laughs, but ultimately it’s forgettable. My advice for this film would be: don’t let them rob you of a ticket, catch it on TV instead.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/09/08/king-of-thieves-a-surprisingly-disappointing-heist-film/
For me, King of Thieves started off promising then rapidly declined into a bit of a mess. If it weren’t for a few redeeming features, I would’ve rated it even lower. One of the positives to come out of this film is the performances; it’s no surprise to any of you that these are actors at the top of their game, and I believe they worked as hard as they could with what they had. I don’t have a problem with any of the actors, my main problem lies with how utterly awful and cringe-worthy the screenplay was. They had an opportunity to work with some brilliant talent, but even they couldn’t save this film.
I appreciate the script was trying to encapsulate the ‘tough, working class London’ stereotype through these characters, but for me there was too much swearing and casual racism/homophobia than actual exposition. We learn barely anything about these characters, with the exception of Michael Caine’s, so all we see for almost two hours is a bunch of old men arguing and swearing constantly. We aren’t encouraged to connect or sympathise with any of them, none of them are particularly three dimensional, so you find yourself hating everyone on screen. Even a little emotional moment here and there would’ve been nice. With no chemistry between characters, the heist becomes very dull indeed.
If the weak script wasn’t bad enough, I wasn’t impressed with the cinematography either. The film seems confused throughout, not really sure what visual styles it wants to settle on so it jumps about here and there. As a result, this is very jarring and I found it hard to watch. The camera is all over the place, it doesn’t seem to have any fixed techniques, and it becomes a nuisance more than anything. That being said, the heist scenes themselves were very well-shot which is even more frustrating for me. How can you shoot certain things brilliantly, then mess up others? It doesn’t make any sense. If anything, it’s proven that the people involved did have the potential to create something great, but somehow managed to throw it all away.
King of Thieves feels a lot like a straight-to-DVD crime film that you might watch on a lazy Sunday afternoon when you’re a bit tired or hungover. It’s certainly not the kind of cinematic, high-quality film I would expect to see on the big screen. It’s mildly entertaining and delivered a few laughs, but ultimately it’s forgettable. My advice for this film would be: don’t let them rob you of a ticket, catch it on TV instead.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/09/08/king-of-thieves-a-surprisingly-disappointing-heist-film/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Venom (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
It’s not as bad as you might think…
It feels like everyone has something to say about Venom. Amongst critics and fans, it’s caused a lot of debate and controversy. Whenever this happens, I tend to find myself becoming even more curious about the film because if everyone else has strong words to say, maybe I will too?
Before I begin my review I just want to put in a quick disclaimer: I am by no means a comic book expert, and I don’t claim to be Marvel’s number one fan. If anything I’m a casual fan. So this review is coming from the mind of a film lover and nothing more. Now that’s out of the way…
Venom was quick to grab my attention when it was first announced, as I’m always interested when Marvel move into darker, grittier territories. I have a soft spot for villains and Venom’s character is definitely one of the coolest ones in the franchise. There are few things scarier than the thought of a parasite taking over your body, so the horror elements definitely drew me towards the film. Visually, Venom does utilise things we would associate with horror, such as long, lingering shots and sudden jumpy moments. Whilst they’re nothing new or particularly outstanding, I did enjoy this side to the film. Symbiotes as a concept are terrifying, so it only seemed fair to portray them in this way.
Tom Hardy gives a great performance as Eddie Brock, especially during his interactions with Venom. The comedic side to this film was genuinely funny, and gave the audience some light relief after the more horrifying scenes. This dynamic between Eddie and Venom is what really stood out to me, as they owned the vast majority of screen time and had to keep the audience entertained. For me, it worked and it had some serious laugh-out-loud moments.
Some of the scenes are a bit ridiculous, but I’ve quickly learned to expect a bit of implausibility when it comes to comic book movies. I wasn’t bothered by some of the sillier scenes, though I can see why someone would want to criticise them. The one thing I was bothered by, however, was the plot holes and confusing lines within the film that, so I felt this did weaken the script in places. I’m certainly in agreement that the writing was lazy overall. Nonetheless, I was still entertained by 90% of the film and I don’t think that’s a bad thing. The action scenes were fun, chaotic, and made even better by Venom’s presence inside Eddie’s head. Without that, I might not have enjoyed them as much.
I liked the visual effects throughout the film, and was particularly creeped out by the way the symbiote looked before it finds a host. The scenes set within The Life Foundation’s facility stood out to me, reminiscent of other films where science ‘goes wrong’. It’s clinical, confusing and isolating, making you feel just as uncomfortable and scared as those undergoing the trials. I really enjoyed the twisted side to this narrative, showing us a dark side to corporations as films often do.
Is Venom the best film I’ve seen this year? Of course it’s not. But it was a fun way to spend 2 hours on a Sunday evening and that’s good enough for me. It’s a very average, very three star film that kept me entertained. It’s nothing more than that, and to me, that’s okay.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/10/14/venom-its-not-as-bad-as-you-might-think/
Before I begin my review I just want to put in a quick disclaimer: I am by no means a comic book expert, and I don’t claim to be Marvel’s number one fan. If anything I’m a casual fan. So this review is coming from the mind of a film lover and nothing more. Now that’s out of the way…
Venom was quick to grab my attention when it was first announced, as I’m always interested when Marvel move into darker, grittier territories. I have a soft spot for villains and Venom’s character is definitely one of the coolest ones in the franchise. There are few things scarier than the thought of a parasite taking over your body, so the horror elements definitely drew me towards the film. Visually, Venom does utilise things we would associate with horror, such as long, lingering shots and sudden jumpy moments. Whilst they’re nothing new or particularly outstanding, I did enjoy this side to the film. Symbiotes as a concept are terrifying, so it only seemed fair to portray them in this way.
Tom Hardy gives a great performance as Eddie Brock, especially during his interactions with Venom. The comedic side to this film was genuinely funny, and gave the audience some light relief after the more horrifying scenes. This dynamic between Eddie and Venom is what really stood out to me, as they owned the vast majority of screen time and had to keep the audience entertained. For me, it worked and it had some serious laugh-out-loud moments.
Some of the scenes are a bit ridiculous, but I’ve quickly learned to expect a bit of implausibility when it comes to comic book movies. I wasn’t bothered by some of the sillier scenes, though I can see why someone would want to criticise them. The one thing I was bothered by, however, was the plot holes and confusing lines within the film that, so I felt this did weaken the script in places. I’m certainly in agreement that the writing was lazy overall. Nonetheless, I was still entertained by 90% of the film and I don’t think that’s a bad thing. The action scenes were fun, chaotic, and made even better by Venom’s presence inside Eddie’s head. Without that, I might not have enjoyed them as much.
I liked the visual effects throughout the film, and was particularly creeped out by the way the symbiote looked before it finds a host. The scenes set within The Life Foundation’s facility stood out to me, reminiscent of other films where science ‘goes wrong’. It’s clinical, confusing and isolating, making you feel just as uncomfortable and scared as those undergoing the trials. I really enjoyed the twisted side to this narrative, showing us a dark side to corporations as films often do.
Is Venom the best film I’ve seen this year? Of course it’s not. But it was a fun way to spend 2 hours on a Sunday evening and that’s good enough for me. It’s a very average, very three star film that kept me entertained. It’s nothing more than that, and to me, that’s okay.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/10/14/venom-its-not-as-bad-as-you-might-think/