Search
Search results
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Eternal Soul in Books
Feb 3, 2020
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
#1 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2720127654">Eternal Soul</a> - ★★★
#2 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2720128155">Eternal Love</a> - Not Read Yet
<img src="https://i0.wp.com/diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Book-Review-Banner-4.png?ssl=1&w=510"/>;
Eternal Soul by Karimah Colden was a mysterious and adventurous read for me. The author contacted me and the book seemed to have an interesting plot, so I said - yes, I would love to read it.
Reign is a very private person and keeps everything close to her heart. She is a descendant of powerful hoodoo magick and her family has some dark secrets.
One day, her father appears in her life, which happens very rarely. She can feel trouble and danger, and before she knows it, her world is full of magick and discovering herself again. The one thing that she always denied - her powers - will now be something she will have to embrace and live with.
I really liked Reign and how she was portrayed. There was great character development, which was something I really admired. I loved how she slowly was finding herself throughout the book and did what felt was the best decision for her at each time. I am not sure about the romance and the relationships she formed with both men. It all happened too fast, too unrealistic and too predictable. The book also had a lot of repetitiveness as well, especially in the many scenes when it came to fashion choices and Reign was standing in from of her closet. It felt like deja-vu every time I read about it.
<b>But I still enjoyed Eternal Soul a lot.</b>
Despite the deja-vu's, despite the grammar errors. It is a cute short-ish read and I loved finding out what happens next. I also have the second book of the series as well, and will definitely be reading it soon.
If you like something young-adult, with a bit of magic and self-discovery, and something new and different, go for it, and you might be surprised! Definitely worth giving it a chance!
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
#1 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2720127654">Eternal Soul</a> - ★★★
#2 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2720128155">Eternal Love</a> - Not Read Yet
<img src="https://i0.wp.com/diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Book-Review-Banner-4.png?ssl=1&w=510"/>;
Eternal Soul by Karimah Colden was a mysterious and adventurous read for me. The author contacted me and the book seemed to have an interesting plot, so I said - yes, I would love to read it.
Reign is a very private person and keeps everything close to her heart. She is a descendant of powerful hoodoo magick and her family has some dark secrets.
One day, her father appears in her life, which happens very rarely. She can feel trouble and danger, and before she knows it, her world is full of magick and discovering herself again. The one thing that she always denied - her powers - will now be something she will have to embrace and live with.
I really liked Reign and how she was portrayed. There was great character development, which was something I really admired. I loved how she slowly was finding herself throughout the book and did what felt was the best decision for her at each time. I am not sure about the romance and the relationships she formed with both men. It all happened too fast, too unrealistic and too predictable. The book also had a lot of repetitiveness as well, especially in the many scenes when it came to fashion choices and Reign was standing in from of her closet. It felt like deja-vu every time I read about it.
<b>But I still enjoyed Eternal Soul a lot.</b>
Despite the deja-vu's, despite the grammar errors. It is a cute short-ish read and I loved finding out what happens next. I also have the second book of the series as well, and will definitely be reading it soon.
If you like something young-adult, with a bit of magic and self-discovery, and something new and different, go for it, and you might be surprised! Definitely worth giving it a chance!
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated The Battle of Trafalgar Square in Books
Feb 3, 2020
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://gipostcards.files.wordpress.com/2019/03/new-blog-banner-8.png"/>;
I have this rule about books being sent to me - I try to read and review them all, because people spent time, effort and resources to write and share their works with readers. I received this book through a giveaway on LibraryThing almost a year ago, and decided it was time to give it a go.
This being said, my readers are the most important thing in the world, and my reviews simply cannot be compromised, no matter how I have gotten a certain book in my hands.
I think I should stop babbling now, and start talking about this book.
I dived into ‘’The Battle of Trafalgar Square’ not knowing what to expect. This is a book where two pigeons are the main characters and through dialogue and presentation they share this historic battle, but from their point of view.
It is lucky that this book is only 120 pages long, because otherwise I wouldn’t have finished it. It is a boring book, where one pigeon is desperately trying to tell this story of the battle, and the other pigeon is disturbingly annoying and keeps interrupting. The second pigeon also has terrible grammar knowledge, and even though I know this made purposely done, and I applaud the author for the wittiness, I couldn’t make myself enjoy it. Some people might find this funny though, and that’s also okay.
The idea of pigeons telling a story is quite interesting and unique to me, and this is something I admire about this book (therefore, the two stars I decided to give). However, the plot is unstable, and the story keeps being interrupted and delayed to a point where I started to get fed up. I also expected some more references of the actual historical moment. The only references in the book are the pigeons that were in the battle and had names of famous leaders, but their pigeon story was not similar to our history books. I really think that keeping the story as close as possible to the real event would have made a difference in this book.
<b>Not an enjoyable read for me, but if the plot sounds like something you might enjoy - I say go for it. Try it out. Your opinion is also valid!</b>
Until next time! x
<img src="https://gipostcards.files.wordpress.com/2019/03/new-blog-banner-8.png"/>;
I have this rule about books being sent to me - I try to read and review them all, because people spent time, effort and resources to write and share their works with readers. I received this book through a giveaway on LibraryThing almost a year ago, and decided it was time to give it a go.
This being said, my readers are the most important thing in the world, and my reviews simply cannot be compromised, no matter how I have gotten a certain book in my hands.
I think I should stop babbling now, and start talking about this book.
I dived into ‘’The Battle of Trafalgar Square’ not knowing what to expect. This is a book where two pigeons are the main characters and through dialogue and presentation they share this historic battle, but from their point of view.
It is lucky that this book is only 120 pages long, because otherwise I wouldn’t have finished it. It is a boring book, where one pigeon is desperately trying to tell this story of the battle, and the other pigeon is disturbingly annoying and keeps interrupting. The second pigeon also has terrible grammar knowledge, and even though I know this made purposely done, and I applaud the author for the wittiness, I couldn’t make myself enjoy it. Some people might find this funny though, and that’s also okay.
The idea of pigeons telling a story is quite interesting and unique to me, and this is something I admire about this book (therefore, the two stars I decided to give). However, the plot is unstable, and the story keeps being interrupted and delayed to a point where I started to get fed up. I also expected some more references of the actual historical moment. The only references in the book are the pigeons that were in the battle and had names of famous leaders, but their pigeon story was not similar to our history books. I really think that keeping the story as close as possible to the real event would have made a difference in this book.
<b>Not an enjoyable read for me, but if the plot sounds like something you might enjoy - I say go for it. Try it out. Your opinion is also valid!</b>
Until next time! x
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Playmobil: The Movie (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
What can I say about Playmobil The Movie? You know how in real life Playmobil is naff when you compare it to Lego? ... Yeah.
"It's obviously a rip off of the Lego movies!" - Direct quote from my friend's son, and he's not wrong. It's basically a reverse, here people go into the fictional world whereas in the Lego movies the fictional world experiences the real world. There are many things that are reversed. Lego remembers its characters limitations, Playmobil doesn't. Lego is entertaining, Playmobil... isn't. I like daft humour so this should have been a hit with me. "But Emma, it isn't made for you." Well yes, but even I laugh at children's films, and there's definitely an aspect of it directed at adults and they don't hit either.
The beginning of the film is an experience. It opens with a musical number that doesn't have any impact at all, it's also quickly forgotten as the fun is interrupted by police officers arriving at the house. I saw with my jaw slowly dropping, this is a U rated films, they weren't really going to start it by... oh, yep, they did.
This change of mood was quite shocking to watch. It's an emergency stop of plot points, and not something that just adults would notice. A child a few rows in front turned to his mum and said "what happened?!" I unfortunately couldn't hear how she responded.
When it comes to humour, apart from one chuckle that appears in the trailer there was only one thing that I laughed at. I really did laugh out loud. It wasn't a great joke, it was verging on dad joke territory but the delivery was incredible.
I was surprisingly annoyed by the fact that at the beginning (and in the trailer) Marla doesn't know how to walk with her new Playmobil legs, yet moments later she's crawling before going back to not knowing how to walk. I don't expect a masterpiece, but I do expect at least some consistency.
Playmobil leaves me at a loss, I can't really identify anything exciting about the film. The story isn't very inspiring and the characters don't give you anything to identify with despite having the opportunity. The film also suffers from excess, storyline that goes nowhere, characters that don't get used for any real purpose... I don't think this was a particularly good attempt at bringing this toy to life, it might have been more suited to short skits in a TV series or the cutting room floor.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/playmobil-movie-review.html
"It's obviously a rip off of the Lego movies!" - Direct quote from my friend's son, and he's not wrong. It's basically a reverse, here people go into the fictional world whereas in the Lego movies the fictional world experiences the real world. There are many things that are reversed. Lego remembers its characters limitations, Playmobil doesn't. Lego is entertaining, Playmobil... isn't. I like daft humour so this should have been a hit with me. "But Emma, it isn't made for you." Well yes, but even I laugh at children's films, and there's definitely an aspect of it directed at adults and they don't hit either.
The beginning of the film is an experience. It opens with a musical number that doesn't have any impact at all, it's also quickly forgotten as the fun is interrupted by police officers arriving at the house. I saw with my jaw slowly dropping, this is a U rated films, they weren't really going to start it by... oh, yep, they did.
This change of mood was quite shocking to watch. It's an emergency stop of plot points, and not something that just adults would notice. A child a few rows in front turned to his mum and said "what happened?!" I unfortunately couldn't hear how she responded.
When it comes to humour, apart from one chuckle that appears in the trailer there was only one thing that I laughed at. I really did laugh out loud. It wasn't a great joke, it was verging on dad joke territory but the delivery was incredible.
I was surprisingly annoyed by the fact that at the beginning (and in the trailer) Marla doesn't know how to walk with her new Playmobil legs, yet moments later she's crawling before going back to not knowing how to walk. I don't expect a masterpiece, but I do expect at least some consistency.
Playmobil leaves me at a loss, I can't really identify anything exciting about the film. The story isn't very inspiring and the characters don't give you anything to identify with despite having the opportunity. The film also suffers from excess, storyline that goes nowhere, characters that don't get used for any real purpose... I don't think this was a particularly good attempt at bringing this toy to life, it might have been more suited to short skits in a TV series or the cutting room floor.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/playmobil-movie-review.html
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Corrupted (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
The first thing you notice about The Corrupted is that it's filmed like a TV crime drama. The atmosphere, the style, everything screamed mini-series. It's an interesting story and I enjoyed it, but it gives a very different vibe to a "normal" film. It's difficult to explain. It's something you'd watch while ironing or when you've got a take away coming. It's the perfect accompaniment to doing something else not sitting in silence in the dark, it needs interaction, someone to discuss with while it's on.
Timothy Spall makes a pretty good villain in this, I probably would have also accepted Tim Roth in this role. Spall did seem to be channelling some of his mannerisms.
Sam Claflin as Liam brings the interesting mix of warmth and no-nonsense in his character to life. He turns on a knife edge from family man to criminal, although the latter is more of a protective quality than criminal endeavour.
It's been a long time since I've seen a film where I thought all the acting was excellent, The Corrupted has a fantastic bunch of actors and actresses in it. At the same time as being excited about them all though, I'm sad. This probably would have got more notice as a TV series. I went in with no real knowledge of this, I hadn't even seen it advertised anywhere apart from checking upcoming listings. It was criminally under publicised considering how much marketing King Of Thieves got and didn't deserve.
Noel Clarke as a detective really works for me. He seemed very comfortable in the role and it was nice to see him without a dubious accent... I'm looking at you Fisherman's Friends. I can't say I liked where his story went but the journey there was fantastic. I've been trying to find a listing online of character names, I can only find things listing him as Beckett but I'm sure I heard him call himself "Noel" but at another point his partner calls him "Neil"... of course I can't guarantee my hearing wasn't shot.
Loosely based on real events, The Corrupted offers a surprisingly gritty crime drama. While it does have the odd moments that make you wonder how it made the cut, those are greatly outweighed by the good points. I'll definitely be watching this again at some point, I'm also seeing a potential gift for my dad coming up.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-corrupted-movie-review.html
Timothy Spall makes a pretty good villain in this, I probably would have also accepted Tim Roth in this role. Spall did seem to be channelling some of his mannerisms.
Sam Claflin as Liam brings the interesting mix of warmth and no-nonsense in his character to life. He turns on a knife edge from family man to criminal, although the latter is more of a protective quality than criminal endeavour.
It's been a long time since I've seen a film where I thought all the acting was excellent, The Corrupted has a fantastic bunch of actors and actresses in it. At the same time as being excited about them all though, I'm sad. This probably would have got more notice as a TV series. I went in with no real knowledge of this, I hadn't even seen it advertised anywhere apart from checking upcoming listings. It was criminally under publicised considering how much marketing King Of Thieves got and didn't deserve.
Noel Clarke as a detective really works for me. He seemed very comfortable in the role and it was nice to see him without a dubious accent... I'm looking at you Fisherman's Friends. I can't say I liked where his story went but the journey there was fantastic. I've been trying to find a listing online of character names, I can only find things listing him as Beckett but I'm sure I heard him call himself "Noel" but at another point his partner calls him "Neil"... of course I can't guarantee my hearing wasn't shot.
Loosely based on real events, The Corrupted offers a surprisingly gritty crime drama. While it does have the odd moments that make you wonder how it made the cut, those are greatly outweighed by the good points. I'll definitely be watching this again at some point, I'm also seeing a potential gift for my dad coming up.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-corrupted-movie-review.html
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Polar (2019) in Movies
Jul 5, 2020
The Black Kaiser - 8/10
Polar is a 2019 neo-noir/action movie based on the Dark Horse Comics, webcomic series Polar: Came From The Cold, written by Victor Santos. It is directed by Jonas Akerlund and written by Jayson Rothwell. Starring Mads Mikkelsen, Vanessa Hudgens, Katheryn Winnick, and Matt Lucas.
Duncan Vizla, a.k.a. "the Black Kaiser" (Mads Mikkelsen), is an assassin for the Damocles corporation. It is company policy that all assassins retire at age 50. He checks with a doctor about his health which is good and his accountant about his wealth; which having made the maximum pension fund contributions as possible, has him set for life. In 14 days, on his 50th birthday, he'll be entitled to a payout of $8 million dollars. Mr. Blut (Matt Lucas), has Vivian (Katheryn Winnick), Duncan's handler, contact him for one last mission. Unbeknownst to Duncan this is a plan to have him killed to avoid paying out his pension.
This me was awesome despite what critics say. I read a lot of bad comments talking about it being abhorrent and vulgar. It is rated TV-MA and not for kids and it is very adult. Plus it is a movie about assassins, people who kill for money, so what do you expect. I was surprised how much I liked the Black Kaiser character, since he didn't speak much during the film. Almost felt like a spaghetti-western in some ways, with the silent gunslinger aspect to it. I thought the film was very well done when it came to the acting, the action, and the plot. I'm sure that there are points to what the critics have said but the movie was too awesome for me to care. One thing, the main bad guy i didn't much care for. He did get me to not like him and with acting that's harder than getting people to like you. Also I enjoyed the group of assassins who are employed with the Damocles corporation, for the most part they were pretty interesting and diverse and added something extra to the film. And I was not prepared for Vanessa Hudgen's character but she had a surprising role and did very well too. I give this movie a 8/10.
Duncan Vizla, a.k.a. "the Black Kaiser" (Mads Mikkelsen), is an assassin for the Damocles corporation. It is company policy that all assassins retire at age 50. He checks with a doctor about his health which is good and his accountant about his wealth; which having made the maximum pension fund contributions as possible, has him set for life. In 14 days, on his 50th birthday, he'll be entitled to a payout of $8 million dollars. Mr. Blut (Matt Lucas), has Vivian (Katheryn Winnick), Duncan's handler, contact him for one last mission. Unbeknownst to Duncan this is a plan to have him killed to avoid paying out his pension.
This me was awesome despite what critics say. I read a lot of bad comments talking about it being abhorrent and vulgar. It is rated TV-MA and not for kids and it is very adult. Plus it is a movie about assassins, people who kill for money, so what do you expect. I was surprised how much I liked the Black Kaiser character, since he didn't speak much during the film. Almost felt like a spaghetti-western in some ways, with the silent gunslinger aspect to it. I thought the film was very well done when it came to the acting, the action, and the plot. I'm sure that there are points to what the critics have said but the movie was too awesome for me to care. One thing, the main bad guy i didn't much care for. He did get me to not like him and with acting that's harder than getting people to like you. Also I enjoyed the group of assassins who are employed with the Damocles corporation, for the most part they were pretty interesting and diverse and added something extra to the film. And I was not prepared for Vanessa Hudgen's character but she had a surprising role and did very well too. I give this movie a 8/10.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Kitchen (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Very Messy Kitchen: Good Ingredients But No Flavor
The Kitchen is a 2019 action crime movie written and directed by Andrea Berloff and producers Michael Dell Luca and Marcus Viscidi. It's based on the Vertigo comic created by Ollie Masters and Ming Doyle and produced by New Line Cinema, Bron Creative, D.C. Vertigo and Michael Dell Luca Productions with distribution by Warner Bros. Pictures. The film stars Melissa McCarthy, Tiffany Haddish, Elisabeth Moss and Common.
In 1978 Hell's Kitchen, 3 women married to husbands in the Irish mob face hardship as all 3 of their husbands are arrested and sentenced to 3 years in prison. The new head of the mob ensures that they will be taken care of financially but gives them each a tiny pittance. When they go to ask him for more they are aggressively refused. At a loss for what to do next the women seize an opportunity when they are told that despite local businesses paying protection fees, the mob has done little to help them. They themselves begin collecting protection fees and helping the neighborhood becoming beloved and making a huge profit as well as lots of enemies.
This movie was not what I expected. I was really let down, especially for it having a great cast of actors. I don't think it was over hyped either, I felt like it was false advertising. From the trailer it looked like it was supposed to be a gritty female led mob movie but didn't deliver. From the beginning and throughout the movie it felt really lackluster and didn't have enough going for it to remain interesting. I honestly don't know how I made it through the movie, I guess I just kept waiting for it to get better and it never really did. I did like certain things, Melissa McCarthy's acting was good for being a drama and Tiffany Haddish did a decent job, also Elisabeth Moss's character was probably the one that had the most character development, but even then, you'll see what I'm talking about if you ever decide to watch this movie. It also didn't have a very compelling plot, and with the girl's situation and what they were dealing with, you would think it would be more gripping but there was not enough tension for a movie dealing with the mob and the dangers of being killed. I would have to give this movie a 4/10 because I felt it was really below average.
In 1978 Hell's Kitchen, 3 women married to husbands in the Irish mob face hardship as all 3 of their husbands are arrested and sentenced to 3 years in prison. The new head of the mob ensures that they will be taken care of financially but gives them each a tiny pittance. When they go to ask him for more they are aggressively refused. At a loss for what to do next the women seize an opportunity when they are told that despite local businesses paying protection fees, the mob has done little to help them. They themselves begin collecting protection fees and helping the neighborhood becoming beloved and making a huge profit as well as lots of enemies.
This movie was not what I expected. I was really let down, especially for it having a great cast of actors. I don't think it was over hyped either, I felt like it was false advertising. From the trailer it looked like it was supposed to be a gritty female led mob movie but didn't deliver. From the beginning and throughout the movie it felt really lackluster and didn't have enough going for it to remain interesting. I honestly don't know how I made it through the movie, I guess I just kept waiting for it to get better and it never really did. I did like certain things, Melissa McCarthy's acting was good for being a drama and Tiffany Haddish did a decent job, also Elisabeth Moss's character was probably the one that had the most character development, but even then, you'll see what I'm talking about if you ever decide to watch this movie. It also didn't have a very compelling plot, and with the girl's situation and what they were dealing with, you would think it would be more gripping but there was not enough tension for a movie dealing with the mob and the dangers of being killed. I would have to give this movie a 4/10 because I felt it was really below average.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020 (Updated Nov 1, 2020)
A Really Good Remake
Pet Semetary is a 2019 supernatural horror movie directed by Kevin Kolsch and Dennis Widmyer. The movie was written by Jeff Buhler with screen story by Matt Greenberg. It is a remake/reboot of the original 1989 film adaptation of the 1983 Stephen King novel. Starring Jason Clarke, Amy Seimetz, and John Lithgow.
Moving to the small town of Ludlow, Maine with his family: wife, Rachel (Amy Seimetz), children, Ellie (Jete Laurence) and Gage (Hugo & Lucas Lavoie), and Church, Ellie's cat, Louis Creed takes a job at the university's hospital. Ellie stumbles upon a procession of children, while exploring the nearby woods of their new home, who are taking a dead dog to a pet cemetery. Their neighbor, Jud Crandall (John Lithgow), finds Ellie climbing a large stack of branches forming a wall and warns Rachel and Ellie not to venture out alone as the woods can be dangerous.. The following day, Louis fails to save a student Victor Pascow (Obssa Ahmed) fatally injured from a car accident, and is left shaken. That night Louis meets Pascow in a vivid dream, where he is lead to the pet cemetery and warned not to "venture beyond". When Louis awakens he is disturbed to find his bed sheets and feet, muddy and dirty suggesting his "vision" could be more than just a bad dream.
As far as remakes go this one was really good. Especially for the horror genre. I mean I can't tell you how many remakes/reboots I've seen that just bomb and don't do the original justice. This one however seemed to keep the original in mind, while still making changes to keep it fresh and relatively different. That being said I do feel it was a bit over-hyped and didn't live up to certain expectations. To me it was a very creepy movie and had me wanting to cover my eyes in one part as memories from the original played back in my head. The sounds of the character Rachel's sister calling out to her got goosebumps on my forearms. Those parts were very unsettling to me but I didn't feel enough was "scary". I really enjoyed the twists and changes or differences from the original. They were welcome and kept it from being an exact replica and a copy of the original. As another critic stated, Jeffrey M. Anderson-Common Sense Media, the film was "...effectively unsettling, focusing on the characters and their understandable emotions rather than on overt gore and FX." I give it a 7/10.
Moving to the small town of Ludlow, Maine with his family: wife, Rachel (Amy Seimetz), children, Ellie (Jete Laurence) and Gage (Hugo & Lucas Lavoie), and Church, Ellie's cat, Louis Creed takes a job at the university's hospital. Ellie stumbles upon a procession of children, while exploring the nearby woods of their new home, who are taking a dead dog to a pet cemetery. Their neighbor, Jud Crandall (John Lithgow), finds Ellie climbing a large stack of branches forming a wall and warns Rachel and Ellie not to venture out alone as the woods can be dangerous.. The following day, Louis fails to save a student Victor Pascow (Obssa Ahmed) fatally injured from a car accident, and is left shaken. That night Louis meets Pascow in a vivid dream, where he is lead to the pet cemetery and warned not to "venture beyond". When Louis awakens he is disturbed to find his bed sheets and feet, muddy and dirty suggesting his "vision" could be more than just a bad dream.
As far as remakes go this one was really good. Especially for the horror genre. I mean I can't tell you how many remakes/reboots I've seen that just bomb and don't do the original justice. This one however seemed to keep the original in mind, while still making changes to keep it fresh and relatively different. That being said I do feel it was a bit over-hyped and didn't live up to certain expectations. To me it was a very creepy movie and had me wanting to cover my eyes in one part as memories from the original played back in my head. The sounds of the character Rachel's sister calling out to her got goosebumps on my forearms. Those parts were very unsettling to me but I didn't feel enough was "scary". I really enjoyed the twists and changes or differences from the original. They were welcome and kept it from being an exact replica and a copy of the original. As another critic stated, Jeffrey M. Anderson-Common Sense Media, the film was "...effectively unsettling, focusing on the characters and their understandable emotions rather than on overt gore and FX." I give it a 7/10.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Spies in Disguise (2019) in Movies
Dec 7, 2020
Strong chemistry between Smith and Holland
Blue Sky Animation Studios has often been seen as the "poor little sister" in the animation game - behind Disney/Pixar and Dreamworks - and is often listed as the "Ice Age" studio. But, if you look into their filmography, you will see a solid mark of quality throughout.
This studio has delivered solid animated outings with such fare as ROBOTS, HORTON HEARS A WHO, RIO and FERDINAND (along with the myriad of ICE AGE films) and their latest feature - 2019's SPIES IN DISGUISE - is no exception. I was pleasantly surprised by the fun, action, comedy and suspense of this film and was entertained throughout.
Blue Sky, of course, IS the "poor little sister" to the "Big 2" and it shows in some of their casting choices. Where I thought vocal work was being done by Tina Fey and Holly Hunter, I soon discovered that it is Rachel Brosnahan and Reba Mcintyre - not shabby at all, but not quite the "A" team either (it's like you are listening to the Broadway replacement actors for the Original Cast).
That is probably because they spent all of their casting money on the 2 leads - Will Smith and Tom Holland - and they are TERRIFIC together. Unlike Holland's lackluster (and lack of chemistry) turn with Chris Pratt in the PIXAR film ONWARD, Holland and Smith work well together in this film and I enjoyed their interactions with each other. Of course, Will Smith is in a league of his own when it comes to charming, cocky adventure hero with raw emotions and a soul - and that is EXACTLY what his character is and it works very, very well. Add to that Holland's riff on his Spiderman Peter Parker character - a scientific genius who is socially awkward and we have a fun duo to root for throughout this film.
Other outstanding voice talents in this cast include Masi Oka (who's voice would be terrific in just about ANY animation film), Rashida Jones, Karen Gillen and the always good Ben Mendelsohn as the villain.
Directors Nick Bruno (in his Directorial debut) and Troy Quane (in only his 2nd Animated outing) do a professional job keeping the plot moving, the fun brewing and the plot and action scenes simple and easy to follow (an easy thing to screw up) and this makes SPIES IN DISGUISE a very fun escape for an hour and 42 minutes.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This studio has delivered solid animated outings with such fare as ROBOTS, HORTON HEARS A WHO, RIO and FERDINAND (along with the myriad of ICE AGE films) and their latest feature - 2019's SPIES IN DISGUISE - is no exception. I was pleasantly surprised by the fun, action, comedy and suspense of this film and was entertained throughout.
Blue Sky, of course, IS the "poor little sister" to the "Big 2" and it shows in some of their casting choices. Where I thought vocal work was being done by Tina Fey and Holly Hunter, I soon discovered that it is Rachel Brosnahan and Reba Mcintyre - not shabby at all, but not quite the "A" team either (it's like you are listening to the Broadway replacement actors for the Original Cast).
That is probably because they spent all of their casting money on the 2 leads - Will Smith and Tom Holland - and they are TERRIFIC together. Unlike Holland's lackluster (and lack of chemistry) turn with Chris Pratt in the PIXAR film ONWARD, Holland and Smith work well together in this film and I enjoyed their interactions with each other. Of course, Will Smith is in a league of his own when it comes to charming, cocky adventure hero with raw emotions and a soul - and that is EXACTLY what his character is and it works very, very well. Add to that Holland's riff on his Spiderman Peter Parker character - a scientific genius who is socially awkward and we have a fun duo to root for throughout this film.
Other outstanding voice talents in this cast include Masi Oka (who's voice would be terrific in just about ANY animation film), Rashida Jones, Karen Gillen and the always good Ben Mendelsohn as the villain.
Directors Nick Bruno (in his Directorial debut) and Troy Quane (in only his 2nd Animated outing) do a professional job keeping the plot moving, the fun brewing and the plot and action scenes simple and easy to follow (an easy thing to screw up) and this makes SPIES IN DISGUISE a very fun escape for an hour and 42 minutes.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Oct 8, 2019 (Updated Oct 8, 2019)
Hmm...
A couple of years ago Joaquin Phoenix starred in a movie called You Were Never Really Here. It was directed by Lynne Ramsay and from the trailers looked like it could be something pretty great. Unfortunately when I saw the movie, I felt that it was nothing more than a poor man's Taxi Driver, with the same regurgitated ideas and not much more to say.
Then I saw 2019's Joker.
Let's forget about the incredibly engaging performances and solid technical filmmaking elements in this movie for a minute. And let's forget all of the baggage and background lore that comes with the huge pop culture characters of the Joker, the Wayne family and Gotham City.
Instead, ask yourself this; if this you removed all of the DC elements from this movie, for example Gotham is just NYC, Thomas Wayne is just a rich powerful man running for office and Arthur Fleck is just a random loner with a screw loose, would this movie be remarkable in any way?
Like, overall I enjoyed this movie, but I enjoyed it because it was a version of my favourite fictional character that I hadn't seen before, but it wasn't a story that I haven't seen before outside of a Joker story. I liked the movie because it reminded me HEAVILY of Taxi Driver, which is one of my favourite movies of all time, but I still prefer Taxi Driver.
I can't give the movie a bad review because it was clearly well made by a bunch of very talented people and I did enjoy my time with it, but after reading the intensely positive reviews this thing got at the film festivals I was looking for something more than a story I have seen before done better decades ago.
At the same time though, I am definitely going to need a second viewing. I have hardly stopped thinking and talking about the movie since I seen it and it has led to me writing my first review on this website in 5 months, so there is something to be said about that element of it.
My rating may change after a second viewing, but for now this is an enjoyable retread of a story we have seen before told several times over. Just because you throw a popular comic book character's name over the top of it, is that enough to make it more worthwhile than all of the other Taxi Driver homages we have gotten over the years?
Then I saw 2019's Joker.
Let's forget about the incredibly engaging performances and solid technical filmmaking elements in this movie for a minute. And let's forget all of the baggage and background lore that comes with the huge pop culture characters of the Joker, the Wayne family and Gotham City.
Instead, ask yourself this; if this you removed all of the DC elements from this movie, for example Gotham is just NYC, Thomas Wayne is just a rich powerful man running for office and Arthur Fleck is just a random loner with a screw loose, would this movie be remarkable in any way?
Like, overall I enjoyed this movie, but I enjoyed it because it was a version of my favourite fictional character that I hadn't seen before, but it wasn't a story that I haven't seen before outside of a Joker story. I liked the movie because it reminded me HEAVILY of Taxi Driver, which is one of my favourite movies of all time, but I still prefer Taxi Driver.
I can't give the movie a bad review because it was clearly well made by a bunch of very talented people and I did enjoy my time with it, but after reading the intensely positive reviews this thing got at the film festivals I was looking for something more than a story I have seen before done better decades ago.
At the same time though, I am definitely going to need a second viewing. I have hardly stopped thinking and talking about the movie since I seen it and it has led to me writing my first review on this website in 5 months, so there is something to be said about that element of it.
My rating may change after a second viewing, but for now this is an enjoyable retread of a story we have seen before told several times over. Just because you throw a popular comic book character's name over the top of it, is that enough to make it more worthwhile than all of the other Taxi Driver homages we have gotten over the years?
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Kitchen (2019) in Movies
May 17, 2020
Thinly written and directed
A rainy weekend is the perfect time to catch up with films that I meant to see in the Cineplex, but just didn't get around to it. So it was with some excitement that I flipped on the "Women Run The Mafia" movie THE KITCHEN from 2019.
I should have watched 21 BRIDGES.
Based on the DC/VERTIGO graphic novel, THE KITCHEN is set in the late 1970's in NYC and offers up the "what if" scenario of 3 women that take over the Mafia. A pretty interesting premise that could have been the GODFATHER or GOODFELLA's of the day (or...at least...another WIDOWS from 2018), but instead THE KITCHEN falls flat like the all female GHOSTBUSTERS from a few year's ago.
A star of that Ghostbuster's film, Melissa McCarthy leads the cast as Kathy Brennan, the wife of a mobster who was sent to jail and becomes the leader of the group. McCarthy has shown that she has the "chops" as an actress to tackle this role, but she never really gets there. There is no real depth or emotional stakes to her character throughout the course of the film. The screenplay (and McCarthy's performance) does pick up at the end, but by then, it is too little, too late. Also not fairing well is comedienne Tiffany Hadish as Ruby O'Carroll - an African-American female trying to dominate in a predominately white male world. Again...this character had potential, but the writing and, quite frankly, Hadish's performance just didn't quite succeed.
What did succeed is the always excellent Elisabeth Moss as the 3rd part of this triumvirate. Her "mousy, abused housewife turned stone cold killer" was interesting to watch - especially when paired with Domhnall Gleeson's assassin about 1/2 way through the movie. I wanted to watch a movie with these 2 criminals on the run.
I've mentioned the weak writing as part the issue here, so I'll have to mention first time Veteran Writer and first-time Director Andrea Berloff as the main culprit here. She wrote STRAIGHT OUTTA COMPTON so she has it in her, but here, the screenplay and characterizations are "thin". Perhaps, a good Director could have made something out of this, but she also made her Directing debut with this film, so it just didn't work well enough.
This isn't a bad film, it just isn't a very good - or very interesting - one.
Letter Grade B- (for the Moss/Gleeson portion of this film)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I should have watched 21 BRIDGES.
Based on the DC/VERTIGO graphic novel, THE KITCHEN is set in the late 1970's in NYC and offers up the "what if" scenario of 3 women that take over the Mafia. A pretty interesting premise that could have been the GODFATHER or GOODFELLA's of the day (or...at least...another WIDOWS from 2018), but instead THE KITCHEN falls flat like the all female GHOSTBUSTERS from a few year's ago.
A star of that Ghostbuster's film, Melissa McCarthy leads the cast as Kathy Brennan, the wife of a mobster who was sent to jail and becomes the leader of the group. McCarthy has shown that she has the "chops" as an actress to tackle this role, but she never really gets there. There is no real depth or emotional stakes to her character throughout the course of the film. The screenplay (and McCarthy's performance) does pick up at the end, but by then, it is too little, too late. Also not fairing well is comedienne Tiffany Hadish as Ruby O'Carroll - an African-American female trying to dominate in a predominately white male world. Again...this character had potential, but the writing and, quite frankly, Hadish's performance just didn't quite succeed.
What did succeed is the always excellent Elisabeth Moss as the 3rd part of this triumvirate. Her "mousy, abused housewife turned stone cold killer" was interesting to watch - especially when paired with Domhnall Gleeson's assassin about 1/2 way through the movie. I wanted to watch a movie with these 2 criminals on the run.
I've mentioned the weak writing as part the issue here, so I'll have to mention first time Veteran Writer and first-time Director Andrea Berloff as the main culprit here. She wrote STRAIGHT OUTTA COMPTON so she has it in her, but here, the screenplay and characterizations are "thin". Perhaps, a good Director could have made something out of this, but she also made her Directing debut with this film, so it just didn't work well enough.
This isn't a bad film, it just isn't a very good - or very interesting - one.
Letter Grade B- (for the Moss/Gleeson portion of this film)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)