Search
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Oppenheimer (2023) in Movies
Jul 27, 2023
Gonna Win A Ton of Awards
Clear your shelves, Christopher Nolan and many of those involved in the making of his new movie OPPENHEIMER, you’re going to need the space for the many, many trophies you are going to receive next spring.
Based on the life of the “Father of the Atomic Bomb”, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Nolan’s latest epic is a rarity in today’s Motion Picture landscape - a prestige picture, bankrolled lavishly, filmed gorgeously and populated with a veritable who’s who of “A” list actors that tells a complex story of a complicated man who ends up remorseful of what he has unleashed in this world.
And it works very, very well.
Nolan regular, Cillian Murphy, is equal parts quirky, driven, determined and haunted in his multi-layered performance as the titular character - who is in almost every scene of this 3 hour film. He is fascinating to watch and his “more internal than external” performance draws the audience in throughout the events depicted in this film. It is the Best Performance of the career of one of the most interesting actors of this generation and one should not be surprised if his name is called during awards season next year.
Murphy is capably supported by a long list of strong performers giving strong performances in roles that are much smaller than ones they normally receive. Matt Damon, Florence Pugh, Josh Hartnett(!), Casey Affleck, Rami Malek, Matthew Modine, Kenneth Branagh (of course, it’s a Nolan film), Jason Clarke and Alden Ehrenreich bring their “A” game to roles that could have been thrown away.
Also, good ol’ Tom Conti (one of the most interesting actors from the late ‘70’s and early ‘80’s) shows up in this film as Albert Einstein and reminds us all why he is such a good performer…and…wait until you see who shows up for one scene in this film as President Harry S. Truman!
Oh…and don’t forget Emily Blunt (as Oppenheimer’s wife) and (surprisingly) Robert Downey, Jr. (as a politician using Oppenheimer for his own purposes). Both of them put in Award-winning-level uspporting performances, elevating two “A” list actors to the “A+ list”.
But this film is more than just it’s performers. Nolan demands - and receives - top notch work from the Cinematographer, the Sound Designer, the Editor, the Costume Designer and the Composer (Ludwig Goranssson, NOT Nolan regular Hans Zimmer). They (along with Nolan) craft a beautifully made and put together film that will dazzle the senses. If you get a chance, see this film in a movie theater and, if you can, see it in either iMAX or 70mm, you will be glad you did.
What holds this film back - just a little bit - is the story that is being told. Nolan (as he is want to do) plays with time and pretty frenetically cuts back and forth between about 4 different timelines to tell this story. It’s effective most of the time, but at other times, it becomes distracting and….with a 3 hour run time…does drag a bit at times.
But these are quibbles to a film that is “as good as it gets” by the BEST DIRECTOR plying his trade today. It is another triumph for Nolan and he will be making many, many acceptance speeches in just a few short months.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Based on the life of the “Father of the Atomic Bomb”, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Nolan’s latest epic is a rarity in today’s Motion Picture landscape - a prestige picture, bankrolled lavishly, filmed gorgeously and populated with a veritable who’s who of “A” list actors that tells a complex story of a complicated man who ends up remorseful of what he has unleashed in this world.
And it works very, very well.
Nolan regular, Cillian Murphy, is equal parts quirky, driven, determined and haunted in his multi-layered performance as the titular character - who is in almost every scene of this 3 hour film. He is fascinating to watch and his “more internal than external” performance draws the audience in throughout the events depicted in this film. It is the Best Performance of the career of one of the most interesting actors of this generation and one should not be surprised if his name is called during awards season next year.
Murphy is capably supported by a long list of strong performers giving strong performances in roles that are much smaller than ones they normally receive. Matt Damon, Florence Pugh, Josh Hartnett(!), Casey Affleck, Rami Malek, Matthew Modine, Kenneth Branagh (of course, it’s a Nolan film), Jason Clarke and Alden Ehrenreich bring their “A” game to roles that could have been thrown away.
Also, good ol’ Tom Conti (one of the most interesting actors from the late ‘70’s and early ‘80’s) shows up in this film as Albert Einstein and reminds us all why he is such a good performer…and…wait until you see who shows up for one scene in this film as President Harry S. Truman!
Oh…and don’t forget Emily Blunt (as Oppenheimer’s wife) and (surprisingly) Robert Downey, Jr. (as a politician using Oppenheimer for his own purposes). Both of them put in Award-winning-level uspporting performances, elevating two “A” list actors to the “A+ list”.
But this film is more than just it’s performers. Nolan demands - and receives - top notch work from the Cinematographer, the Sound Designer, the Editor, the Costume Designer and the Composer (Ludwig Goranssson, NOT Nolan regular Hans Zimmer). They (along with Nolan) craft a beautifully made and put together film that will dazzle the senses. If you get a chance, see this film in a movie theater and, if you can, see it in either iMAX or 70mm, you will be glad you did.
What holds this film back - just a little bit - is the story that is being told. Nolan (as he is want to do) plays with time and pretty frenetically cuts back and forth between about 4 different timelines to tell this story. It’s effective most of the time, but at other times, it becomes distracting and….with a 3 hour run time…does drag a bit at times.
But these are quibbles to a film that is “as good as it gets” by the BEST DIRECTOR plying his trade today. It is another triumph for Nolan and he will be making many, many acceptance speeches in just a few short months.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Ready Player One (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Virtually brilliant with Easter Eggs a plenty.
Of all the Spielberg films of recent years – and possibly with the exception of “The BFG” – this was the film whose trailer disconcerted me the most. It really looked dire: CGI over heart; gimmicks over substance. I was right about ‘The BFG”, one of my least favourite Spielberg flicks. I was definitely wrong about “Ready Player One”: it’s a blast.
The film is fun in continually throwing surprises at you, including those actors not included in the trailer and only on small print on the poster. So I won’t spoil that here for you (you can of course look them up on imdb if you want to: but I suggest you try to see this one ‘cold’).
It’s 2044, and the majority of the population have taken the next logical step of video gaming and virtual reality and retreated into their own headsets, living out their lives primarily as avatars within the fanciful landscapes of “The Oasis”. You can “be” anyone and (subject to gaining the necessary credits) “do” anything there.
When the housing market is stacked against you. Columbus Ohio circa 2044.
The Oasis was the brainchild of a (Steve Wozniak-like) genius called James Halliday (played in enormous style by “Actor R”) and supported by his (Steve Jobs-like) business partner Ogden Morrow (“Actor P”). The two had a big falling out leaving Halliday in total control of the Oasis. But he died, and his dying “game” was to devise a devious competition that left a trail of three virtual keys in the Oasis leading to an ‘easter egg’: which if found would provide the finder with total ownership of the Oasis and the trillions of dollars that it is worth.
But the game is not only played by amateur “gunters” (egg-hunters) like our hero Wade Watts (Tye Sheridan, “X-Men: Apocalypse“) and his in-Oasis flirting partner Samantha (Olivia Cooke, “Me and Earl and the Dying Girl”); there are big corporate game-hunters involved like IoI (that’s eye-oh-eye, not one-oh-one as I assumed from the trailer) who fill warehouses with combinations of nerd-consultants and professional game players to try to find the keys before anyone else. Which hardly seems fair does it? Ruthless boss Sorrento (Ben Mendelsohn, “Rogue One“) and his tough-as-nails hench-woman F’Nale Zandor (Hannah John-Kamen, “Tomb Raider“) really couldn’t give a toss!
In the future, everyone is reaching out for something.
What follows is two-hours of high-octane game-play and eye-popping 3D (it is good in 3D by the way) that melds a baseline of “Avatar” with soupçons of “Tron”, “Minority Report” and Dan Brown novels. But its a blend that works.
I was afraid as I said that CGI would squash flat any hope of character development and story, and – yes – to be sure this is ‘suppressed’ a bit. You never get to really know many of the ‘pack’ members to any great level other than Wade and Samantha. And exactly what drives the corporate protagonists, other than “corporate greed”, is not particularly clear. What gives the film heart though are the performances of “Actor P” and (particularly) “Actor R”, who again steals every scene he is in. For their limited screen time together, the pair bounce off each other in a delightful way.
I have to make a confession at this point that I spent the whole film thinking “Miles Teller is way too old for the part of Wade”! Tye Sheridan (who I think *does* bear a likeness!) is actually much more age appropriate, and is fine in the role. But the star performance for me, out of the youngsters at least, was Oldham’s-own Olivia Cooke, who has a genuinely magnetic screen presence. She is most definitely a name to watch for the future.
Ready Player One
Young star of the show for me – Olivia Cooke as Samantha.
Lena Waithe (“Master of None”) plays Wade’s inventor friend Helen.
The story, although simple and quite one-dimensional, in the main intrigues: there is nothing like a Mario-style chase for keys to entertain when it is done well (I am so old and crusty that in my day it was “Manic Miner” on a ZX-Spectrum!).
He’s iron and he’s just gigantic! Reb’s creation becomes a force to be reckoned with when needed.
And there’s not just one “Easter Egg” in this film: the film is rammed to the rafters with throwbacks to classic pop-culture icons of past decades, and particularly the 80’s…. the film could have been subtitled “I ❤ 80’s”. Some of these are subliminal (Mayor Goldie Wilson anyone?), and others are more prominent but very clever: “The Zemekis cube” and “The Holy Hand Grenade” being prime examples. This is a film that deserves buying on Blu-ray and then slo-mo-ing through! The nostalgia extends to the music by Alan Silvestri, with occasional motifs from his most famous soundtrack!
For me though, the highspot of the film is a journey into a recreation of a classic ’80’s film which – while a scary sequence, earning for sure its 12A UK rating – is done with verve and chutzpah.
Wade’s avatar, Parzival.
Although a little overlong (2 hours 20 mins) and getting rather over-blown and LOTR-esque in the finale, the ending is very satisfying – roll on Tuesdays and Thursdays!
Spielberg’s recent films have been largely solid and well-constructed watches (“The Post” and “Bridge of Spies” for example) but they have been more niche than mainstream box office draws. I firmly predict that “Ready Player One” will change that: here Spielberg has a sure-fire hit on his hands and word of mouth (rather than the ho-hum trailer) should assure that.
The film is fun in continually throwing surprises at you, including those actors not included in the trailer and only on small print on the poster. So I won’t spoil that here for you (you can of course look them up on imdb if you want to: but I suggest you try to see this one ‘cold’).
It’s 2044, and the majority of the population have taken the next logical step of video gaming and virtual reality and retreated into their own headsets, living out their lives primarily as avatars within the fanciful landscapes of “The Oasis”. You can “be” anyone and (subject to gaining the necessary credits) “do” anything there.
When the housing market is stacked against you. Columbus Ohio circa 2044.
The Oasis was the brainchild of a (Steve Wozniak-like) genius called James Halliday (played in enormous style by “Actor R”) and supported by his (Steve Jobs-like) business partner Ogden Morrow (“Actor P”). The two had a big falling out leaving Halliday in total control of the Oasis. But he died, and his dying “game” was to devise a devious competition that left a trail of three virtual keys in the Oasis leading to an ‘easter egg’: which if found would provide the finder with total ownership of the Oasis and the trillions of dollars that it is worth.
But the game is not only played by amateur “gunters” (egg-hunters) like our hero Wade Watts (Tye Sheridan, “X-Men: Apocalypse“) and his in-Oasis flirting partner Samantha (Olivia Cooke, “Me and Earl and the Dying Girl”); there are big corporate game-hunters involved like IoI (that’s eye-oh-eye, not one-oh-one as I assumed from the trailer) who fill warehouses with combinations of nerd-consultants and professional game players to try to find the keys before anyone else. Which hardly seems fair does it? Ruthless boss Sorrento (Ben Mendelsohn, “Rogue One“) and his tough-as-nails hench-woman F’Nale Zandor (Hannah John-Kamen, “Tomb Raider“) really couldn’t give a toss!
In the future, everyone is reaching out for something.
What follows is two-hours of high-octane game-play and eye-popping 3D (it is good in 3D by the way) that melds a baseline of “Avatar” with soupçons of “Tron”, “Minority Report” and Dan Brown novels. But its a blend that works.
I was afraid as I said that CGI would squash flat any hope of character development and story, and – yes – to be sure this is ‘suppressed’ a bit. You never get to really know many of the ‘pack’ members to any great level other than Wade and Samantha. And exactly what drives the corporate protagonists, other than “corporate greed”, is not particularly clear. What gives the film heart though are the performances of “Actor P” and (particularly) “Actor R”, who again steals every scene he is in. For their limited screen time together, the pair bounce off each other in a delightful way.
I have to make a confession at this point that I spent the whole film thinking “Miles Teller is way too old for the part of Wade”! Tye Sheridan (who I think *does* bear a likeness!) is actually much more age appropriate, and is fine in the role. But the star performance for me, out of the youngsters at least, was Oldham’s-own Olivia Cooke, who has a genuinely magnetic screen presence. She is most definitely a name to watch for the future.
Ready Player One
Young star of the show for me – Olivia Cooke as Samantha.
Lena Waithe (“Master of None”) plays Wade’s inventor friend Helen.
The story, although simple and quite one-dimensional, in the main intrigues: there is nothing like a Mario-style chase for keys to entertain when it is done well (I am so old and crusty that in my day it was “Manic Miner” on a ZX-Spectrum!).
He’s iron and he’s just gigantic! Reb’s creation becomes a force to be reckoned with when needed.
And there’s not just one “Easter Egg” in this film: the film is rammed to the rafters with throwbacks to classic pop-culture icons of past decades, and particularly the 80’s…. the film could have been subtitled “I ❤ 80’s”. Some of these are subliminal (Mayor Goldie Wilson anyone?), and others are more prominent but very clever: “The Zemekis cube” and “The Holy Hand Grenade” being prime examples. This is a film that deserves buying on Blu-ray and then slo-mo-ing through! The nostalgia extends to the music by Alan Silvestri, with occasional motifs from his most famous soundtrack!
For me though, the highspot of the film is a journey into a recreation of a classic ’80’s film which – while a scary sequence, earning for sure its 12A UK rating – is done with verve and chutzpah.
Wade’s avatar, Parzival.
Although a little overlong (2 hours 20 mins) and getting rather over-blown and LOTR-esque in the finale, the ending is very satisfying – roll on Tuesdays and Thursdays!
Spielberg’s recent films have been largely solid and well-constructed watches (“The Post” and “Bridge of Spies” for example) but they have been more niche than mainstream box office draws. I firmly predict that “Ready Player One” will change that: here Spielberg has a sure-fire hit on his hands and word of mouth (rather than the ho-hum trailer) should assure that.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Old (2021) in Movies
Jul 28, 2021
Cinematography and Sound Design - very Hitchcockian (1 more)
Concept and initial set-up of the movie
Dafter than the Dharma initiative.
"Old" is the latest from the gloriously inconsistent writer/director M. Night Shyamalan. Will this be great Shyamalan (à la "The Sixth Sense") or dire Shyamalan (à la "The Last Airbender")? The answer, in my view, is somewhere in the middle. It's a curate's egg of a movie.
Positives:
- The premise feels very familiar (desert island beach; time slips; weird things happening.... "Lost" anyone?). But as a shell for a big screen adventure it kept me well-engaged.
- Shyamalan and his "Glass" cinematographer Mike Gioulakis use some novel techniques to portray the ageing effects. The angles they utilize feel quite Hitchcockian at times. Shyamalan supports this with the sound design, which makes this a REALLY good movie to watch in a cinema with good surround sound. Often the camera will be spinning showing nothing but ocean or rocks, with the character's conversation rotating behind you in the cinema. It's really quite effective.
- Shyamalan knows that no visual effects can improve on the horrors your mind can come up with. Although a '15' certificate, the "sustained threat, strong violence and injury detail" referenced by the BBFC pales into insignificance (in terms of what you actually see) compared to the equally rated "Freaky".
- I've seen other reviews comment that the "twist" (no spoilers here) was obvious. But, although not a ground-breaking idea, I was sufficiently satisfied with the denouement. It made sense, albeit twisted sense.
Negatives:
- I enjoyed the movie's leisurely set-up, introducing the characters and the movie's concept. (In many ways, it felt like the start of one of Irwin Allen's disaster movies of the 70's and 80's). But then Shyamalan turns the dial up to 11 and the action becomes increasingly farcical. Add into that the fact that you can see some of the 'jolts' coming a mile off, and the movie becomes progressively more disappointing, with a high ERQ (eye-rolling quotient) by the end.
- In particular, there are inconsistencies to the story that get you asking uncomfortable questions. For example, wounds can heal in the blink of an eye.... but not stab wounds apparently.
- The cast is truly global in nature: Vicky ("Phantom Thread") Krieps hails from Luxembourg; Bernal is Mexican; Sewell is a Brit; Amuka-Bird ("David Copperfield") is Nigerian; Leung is American; Eliza Scanlan is an Aussie; and Thomasin McKenzie (so good in "Jojo Rabbit", and good here too) is a Kiwi. But although it's clearly quite natural that an exotic beach resort would attract guests from all over the world, the combination of accents here makes the whole thing, unfortunately, sound like a dodgy spaghetti western!
Summary Thoughts: 'Time' and 'ageing' have of course been a popular movie topic for many years. I remember being both gripped and horrified by George Pal's wonderful 1960's version of "The Time Machine" when Rod Taylor threw his machine into fast forward and the dead Morlock decomposed in front of his eyes! Ursula Andress did the same as the rapidly ageing Ayesha in 1965's "She". And, more recently and with better effects, Julian Glover did the same in "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade".
Unfortunately, "Old" isn't likely to join any of these classic movies in my consciousness. It's a diverting enough movie, with fabulous views of the Dominican Republic (which the local tourist board will no doubt be delighted with). A "less is more" approach might have made this a classic. But unfortunately, that's not what Shyamalan delivered here. Since what we get is a 'Lost-lite' with farcical elements.
And, by the way.... The movie that Charles (Rufus Sewell) refers to starring Jack Nicholson and Marlon Brando is "The Missouri Breaks". It has a very unusual John Williams soundtrack, which I have on vinyl somewhere and is probably worth a few bob!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on t'interweb, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks.)
Positives:
- The premise feels very familiar (desert island beach; time slips; weird things happening.... "Lost" anyone?). But as a shell for a big screen adventure it kept me well-engaged.
- Shyamalan and his "Glass" cinematographer Mike Gioulakis use some novel techniques to portray the ageing effects. The angles they utilize feel quite Hitchcockian at times. Shyamalan supports this with the sound design, which makes this a REALLY good movie to watch in a cinema with good surround sound. Often the camera will be spinning showing nothing but ocean or rocks, with the character's conversation rotating behind you in the cinema. It's really quite effective.
- Shyamalan knows that no visual effects can improve on the horrors your mind can come up with. Although a '15' certificate, the "sustained threat, strong violence and injury detail" referenced by the BBFC pales into insignificance (in terms of what you actually see) compared to the equally rated "Freaky".
- I've seen other reviews comment that the "twist" (no spoilers here) was obvious. But, although not a ground-breaking idea, I was sufficiently satisfied with the denouement. It made sense, albeit twisted sense.
Negatives:
- I enjoyed the movie's leisurely set-up, introducing the characters and the movie's concept. (In many ways, it felt like the start of one of Irwin Allen's disaster movies of the 70's and 80's). But then Shyamalan turns the dial up to 11 and the action becomes increasingly farcical. Add into that the fact that you can see some of the 'jolts' coming a mile off, and the movie becomes progressively more disappointing, with a high ERQ (eye-rolling quotient) by the end.
- In particular, there are inconsistencies to the story that get you asking uncomfortable questions. For example, wounds can heal in the blink of an eye.... but not stab wounds apparently.
- The cast is truly global in nature: Vicky ("Phantom Thread") Krieps hails from Luxembourg; Bernal is Mexican; Sewell is a Brit; Amuka-Bird ("David Copperfield") is Nigerian; Leung is American; Eliza Scanlan is an Aussie; and Thomasin McKenzie (so good in "Jojo Rabbit", and good here too) is a Kiwi. But although it's clearly quite natural that an exotic beach resort would attract guests from all over the world, the combination of accents here makes the whole thing, unfortunately, sound like a dodgy spaghetti western!
Summary Thoughts: 'Time' and 'ageing' have of course been a popular movie topic for many years. I remember being both gripped and horrified by George Pal's wonderful 1960's version of "The Time Machine" when Rod Taylor threw his machine into fast forward and the dead Morlock decomposed in front of his eyes! Ursula Andress did the same as the rapidly ageing Ayesha in 1965's "She". And, more recently and with better effects, Julian Glover did the same in "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade".
Unfortunately, "Old" isn't likely to join any of these classic movies in my consciousness. It's a diverting enough movie, with fabulous views of the Dominican Republic (which the local tourist board will no doubt be delighted with). A "less is more" approach might have made this a classic. But unfortunately, that's not what Shyamalan delivered here. Since what we get is a 'Lost-lite' with farcical elements.
And, by the way.... The movie that Charles (Rufus Sewell) refers to starring Jack Nicholson and Marlon Brando is "The Missouri Breaks". It has a very unusual John Williams soundtrack, which I have on vinyl somewhere and is probably worth a few bob!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on t'interweb, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks.)
Mike Wilder (20 KP) rated The Expendables (2010) in Movies
May 30, 2018
Action movies really don't get any better than this.
Contains spoilers, click to show
When I first heard about this film I had really high expectations. Sylvester Stallone writing, directing and starring in an action film. He was trying to bring together some of the greatest stars of action films past and present, it sounded too good to be true. As the months went by I kept hearing rumours as to who was in it. Pretty much every name from action films was mentioned. Then the biggest rumour of them all, it was going to star Sylvester Stallone, Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger! Never gonna happen I thought. I was never so glad to be wrong. The scene they appeared in may only be a few minutes long but it was perfect.
I went to see this film the week it came out. The cinema was fairly full, and as the film started I noticed something about the audience, they were loving the movie. As the film continued it started to feel like I was seeing this in my living room with a large group of friends. Everyone was laughing, gasping and really getting into the spirit of the film. This really added something special to the film. I have not experienced this during a normal screening of a film.
The film itself follows a very basic formula, big characters, big explosions, big guns and lots of bad guys dying. But what makes this one stand out from modern action films is it doesn't try to be anything more. It is a throw back to the great action films from the 80's and 90's like Commando, Predator, Die Hard and Rambo: First Blood Part II. Films that are so over the top but so very entertaining.
The cast is an action movie fans wet dream. Action movie legends Sylvester Stallone, Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dolph Lundgren Gary Daniels and Mickey Rourke star alongside modern day action stars Jason Statham, Jet Li, Steve Austin, Randy Couture and Terry Crews. Add to the cast Eric Roberts, David Zayas and Charisma Carpenter and you have probably the greatest cast assembled since Ocean's Eleven was remade in 2001. The cast works well. I always believe that if the cast had a good time making a movie then it will show in their performance. They must have had the time of their lives filming this.
A film like this will never get any major awards (it did win awards for the stunt work), but then again you don't go to see this looking for award winning performances. You go to see this to escape from the reality of life and to just be entertained. I am a major action movie fan and it really doesn't get any better than this.
I went to see this film the week it came out. The cinema was fairly full, and as the film started I noticed something about the audience, they were loving the movie. As the film continued it started to feel like I was seeing this in my living room with a large group of friends. Everyone was laughing, gasping and really getting into the spirit of the film. This really added something special to the film. I have not experienced this during a normal screening of a film.
The film itself follows a very basic formula, big characters, big explosions, big guns and lots of bad guys dying. But what makes this one stand out from modern action films is it doesn't try to be anything more. It is a throw back to the great action films from the 80's and 90's like Commando, Predator, Die Hard and Rambo: First Blood Part II. Films that are so over the top but so very entertaining.
The cast is an action movie fans wet dream. Action movie legends Sylvester Stallone, Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dolph Lundgren Gary Daniels and Mickey Rourke star alongside modern day action stars Jason Statham, Jet Li, Steve Austin, Randy Couture and Terry Crews. Add to the cast Eric Roberts, David Zayas and Charisma Carpenter and you have probably the greatest cast assembled since Ocean's Eleven was remade in 2001. The cast works well. I always believe that if the cast had a good time making a movie then it will show in their performance. They must have had the time of their lives filming this.
A film like this will never get any major awards (it did win awards for the stunt work), but then again you don't go to see this looking for award winning performances. You go to see this to escape from the reality of life and to just be entertained. I am a major action movie fan and it really doesn't get any better than this.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated It Follows (2015) in Movies
Jan 2, 2018
Terrifying
Perhaps It Follows could have done with a little more resolution. Or maybe it ended exactly where it was supposed to. Either way, the movie was flat-out phenomenal from start to finish.
After sleeping with a guy she has been dating for awhile, Jay (Maika Monroe) wakes up to find herself tied to a chair in an abandoned building. Her boyfriend explains to her that he has passed on to her a mark that will cause something horrific to come after her. She has to kill it before it kills her and comes after the others that have been marked.
It Follows opens with a girl bursting out of a home in her underclothes. She is frazzled and looks to be terrified by something. She runs home, grabs her car keys, and races for the beach. It's not two minutes in before we see what comes of this girl and the horrifying entity we will be dealing with in the film. Three minutes in and you're totally hooked.
Although director David Robert Mitchell confirmed that there is no set time period in which the movie takes place, both the setting and soundtrack gave me an 80's vibe a la "Stranger Things". I can't explain it, but the little touches--cord phone, small tube tv's, etc.--gave the film even more of an unsettling feel.
I can't tell you the number of times I had to leave my chair to hide out in the kitchen, watching the film from around a corner. What terrified me the most was not having any idea what was coming next. The entity antagonist literally could be anyone and could show up at anytime. Edge of my seat doesn't even begin to define it.
The movie benefits from both an interesting premise and a phenomenal performance from Monroe. I hope to see her again in more films, one of which I just added to my Movies 365 list: The Guest (2014)! I give It Follows a very well-deserved 97. See it.
After sleeping with a guy she has been dating for awhile, Jay (Maika Monroe) wakes up to find herself tied to a chair in an abandoned building. Her boyfriend explains to her that he has passed on to her a mark that will cause something horrific to come after her. She has to kill it before it kills her and comes after the others that have been marked.
It Follows opens with a girl bursting out of a home in her underclothes. She is frazzled and looks to be terrified by something. She runs home, grabs her car keys, and races for the beach. It's not two minutes in before we see what comes of this girl and the horrifying entity we will be dealing with in the film. Three minutes in and you're totally hooked.
Although director David Robert Mitchell confirmed that there is no set time period in which the movie takes place, both the setting and soundtrack gave me an 80's vibe a la "Stranger Things". I can't explain it, but the little touches--cord phone, small tube tv's, etc.--gave the film even more of an unsettling feel.
I can't tell you the number of times I had to leave my chair to hide out in the kitchen, watching the film from around a corner. What terrified me the most was not having any idea what was coming next. The entity antagonist literally could be anyone and could show up at anytime. Edge of my seat doesn't even begin to define it.
The movie benefits from both an interesting premise and a phenomenal performance from Monroe. I hope to see her again in more films, one of which I just added to my Movies 365 list: The Guest (2014)! I give It Follows a very well-deserved 97. See it.
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Ablaze in Books
Feb 15, 2019
Actually the back cover is wrong and he never makes an offer of money for dinner with her.
As with most other books of the 80's, there are a lot of "endearments", which drive me crazy for some reason. Maybe because there’s one in every sentence the "hero" utters in the beginning? I don't know, I just get tired of hearing, "little one", "darling", and let us not forget in this book, "Heller mine"! Ugh, how awful that one is!! Not to mention all the comments about her voice going squeaky. *rolls eyes* The typical overbearing, bulldozing male is once again used in this book. Why he can't just let Heller tell things in her own time is beyond me, instead he has a private investigator (or the like) pry into her business to find out.
Some other things I didn't like about the book:
1. There was too much going on in it; mother's health, a fire, the Witness Protection Program, misunderstandings (which are usually the main or only thing in a romance book). Just pick one and stick with that, don't go over-the-top.
2. Heller was worried about endangering Conrad's life but not Simeon's, I found that wrong. Some convoluted thinking there.
3. Why-oh-why did the author decide to name Heller's best friend Doodie?
Even with all that I still found myself enjoying it more and more as I progressed through the book. Both Con and Heller became more likeable and Heller started showing more spunk. I do have to say that everything tied itself up rather nicely in the end and their relationship was rather sweet and instead of not being together until the end, they actually had a relationship during the book. And the after-party was highly entertaining, too. :)
If you can get through the first 50 or so pages it's actually rather rewarding! I ended up enjoying it way more than I thought I would. :)
As with most other books of the 80's, there are a lot of "endearments", which drive me crazy for some reason. Maybe because there’s one in every sentence the "hero" utters in the beginning? I don't know, I just get tired of hearing, "little one", "darling", and let us not forget in this book, "Heller mine"! Ugh, how awful that one is!! Not to mention all the comments about her voice going squeaky. *rolls eyes* The typical overbearing, bulldozing male is once again used in this book. Why he can't just let Heller tell things in her own time is beyond me, instead he has a private investigator (or the like) pry into her business to find out.
Some other things I didn't like about the book:
1. There was too much going on in it; mother's health, a fire, the Witness Protection Program, misunderstandings (which are usually the main or only thing in a romance book). Just pick one and stick with that, don't go over-the-top.
2. Heller was worried about endangering Conrad's life but not Simeon's, I found that wrong. Some convoluted thinking there.
3. Why-oh-why did the author decide to name Heller's best friend Doodie?
Even with all that I still found myself enjoying it more and more as I progressed through the book. Both Con and Heller became more likeable and Heller started showing more spunk. I do have to say that everything tied itself up rather nicely in the end and their relationship was rather sweet and instead of not being together until the end, they actually had a relationship during the book. And the after-party was highly entertaining, too. :)
If you can get through the first 50 or so pages it's actually rather rewarding! I ended up enjoying it way more than I thought I would. :)
Jessica - Where the Book Ends (15 KP) rated Ready Player One in Books
Jan 30, 2019
Honestly, I’m not really sure where to start with this review. I guess I need to preface by saying that I wanted to like this book. I mean REALLY wanted to like it. I love video games, I love the 80’s and the idea of living almost exclusively in virtual reality sounds like an amazing combination for a story. Unfortunately, it didn’t work for me… at all. I totally respect that there is a HUGE following for this book, and I am sooooooooooooo glad that so many people loved this book. I think that’s great. I really wanted to like it.
The author’s writing style was the biggest problem for me. The book started off strong for the first couple of chapters, but then became a huge info-dump for about 6 chapters. Then it would get interesting again, and then another mega epic info-dump was upon us, until about the last 6-8 chapters. It was great that the author wanted to give detail to world build and help you become part of the book/game, but at times it was just too much for me.
I also found that the author did a poor job of explaining what life was like outside of the major cities, it was almost as if we were supposed to just know that it was a wasteland. The author also was not consistent with their acronyms (GSS, PVP, MMO, etc). He would use the acronym and provide no explanation, and then the next page he would spell it out with the acronym, and then the page after that it would be spelled out with no acronym… It was all over the place.
The other glaring issue for me was the fact that Wade was fighting the sixers and their huge corporation but then was trying to find the egg and in the end became the head of a super-mega-corporation. It didn’t jive for me at all.
The author’s writing style was the biggest problem for me. The book started off strong for the first couple of chapters, but then became a huge info-dump for about 6 chapters. Then it would get interesting again, and then another mega epic info-dump was upon us, until about the last 6-8 chapters. It was great that the author wanted to give detail to world build and help you become part of the book/game, but at times it was just too much for me.
I also found that the author did a poor job of explaining what life was like outside of the major cities, it was almost as if we were supposed to just know that it was a wasteland. The author also was not consistent with their acronyms (GSS, PVP, MMO, etc). He would use the acronym and provide no explanation, and then the next page he would spell it out with the acronym, and then the page after that it would be spelled out with no acronym… It was all over the place.
The other glaring issue for me was the fact that Wade was fighting the sixers and their huge corporation but then was trying to find the egg and in the end became the head of a super-mega-corporation. It didn’t jive for me at all.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Willy's Wonderland (2021) in Movies
Apr 15, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
I feel I should start this with something like 'I watched this so you don't have to' but that wouldn't be true. I watched this because I love 'So bad they're good' movies, so how could I not watch ' Nicolas Cage vs possessed animatronics in a family restaurant'.
So lets start with the obvious, Yes this is a 'Five nights at Freddy's' clone but that's never hidden, the poster, the trailer and even the films name tells you that.
Next, is it good? Hell yes. There are a lot of people out there who will say NO but that's the point. Willy's Wonderland is a modern 80's B movie and it's down there with the likes of 'Killer Klowns from Outer space' and "the Attack of the killer tomato's' or maybe something from Troma.
The animatronic costumes are creepy, their back story has been done before (but that's the point) and a lot of things make little sense, the restaurant seems to big, especially if you take the size of the air vents into consideration.
Then there's the Janitor, played by Nicolas Cage, who doesn't speak, has an alarm set so he knows when to have his next energy drink and who easily kicks the butt of the animatronics. That's it, there is no back story, almost no motivation and almost no reason for him being there. And we don't need it.
Willy's Wonderland is full of slasher and horror tropes. We have teens having sex and getting killed, we have Satanic cults, blood and creepy animatronics and almost nothing new. Except Nicolas Cage makes it his own. His performance is heading up to 'Mandy' levels but not quite as intense.
So, if you want to see a terrifying, serious horror then this isn't for you but, if you want to see Nicolas Cage beat up and animatronic ostrich then rip out it's spine ala Predator then this is the film for you (not really a spoiler, it's mostly in the trailer.)
So lets start with the obvious, Yes this is a 'Five nights at Freddy's' clone but that's never hidden, the poster, the trailer and even the films name tells you that.
Next, is it good? Hell yes. There are a lot of people out there who will say NO but that's the point. Willy's Wonderland is a modern 80's B movie and it's down there with the likes of 'Killer Klowns from Outer space' and "the Attack of the killer tomato's' or maybe something from Troma.
The animatronic costumes are creepy, their back story has been done before (but that's the point) and a lot of things make little sense, the restaurant seems to big, especially if you take the size of the air vents into consideration.
Then there's the Janitor, played by Nicolas Cage, who doesn't speak, has an alarm set so he knows when to have his next energy drink and who easily kicks the butt of the animatronics. That's it, there is no back story, almost no motivation and almost no reason for him being there. And we don't need it.
Willy's Wonderland is full of slasher and horror tropes. We have teens having sex and getting killed, we have Satanic cults, blood and creepy animatronics and almost nothing new. Except Nicolas Cage makes it his own. His performance is heading up to 'Mandy' levels but not quite as intense.
So, if you want to see a terrifying, serious horror then this isn't for you but, if you want to see Nicolas Cage beat up and animatronic ostrich then rip out it's spine ala Predator then this is the film for you (not really a spoiler, it's mostly in the trailer.)
Slayaway Camp
Games
App
“A killer puzzle! 5/5 stars” - Touch Arcade Become Skullface, a psycho slasher bent on...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Mario Party in Video Games
Nov 5, 2019
Ready To Party
Mario Party- you got to love it but at the same time you got to hate it. Cough - Chance Time. Anways Mario Party is a game that if you havent played yet, than i highly reccordmend it. Its fun, entertaining, fustrating, you will get a blister from rotating your plam from those rotating minigames and also chance time.
Lets talk more about it...
Mario Party is a party video game with six playable characters: Mario, Luigi, Princess Peach, Yoshi, Wario, or Donkey Kong. In the game's storyline, Mario and his friends argue about which of them is the Super Star. To settle their dispute, they set out for adventure to determine which of them is best.
Upon starting a board, players each hit a dice block to determine turn order, with the highest number going first on each turn and the lowest number going last.
Blue spaces give three coins to any player who lands on them, and red spaces take away three coins (both increased to six coins during the last five turns). Bowser also has his own spaces on the board map which hinder the players' progress.
Each player's goal is to collect the most stars. Purchasing stars requires coins, which can be earned through mini-games that are played once at the end of each turn. Each mini-game is chosen randomly. Mario Party features more than 50 mini-games, divided into several categories:
1. 4-player mini-game: each player competes against one another
2. 1 vs. 3 mini-game: a team of three players competes against a lone competitor.
3. 2 vs. 2 mini-game: competing teams of two against two.
4. 1-player mini-game: a lone player works toward a goal to win the mini-game.
Several characters appear throughout each board map, and each character can have an effect on players who reach them. Stars can be purchased from Toad for 20 coins. Boo can steal coins or a star from another player on behalf of anyone who requests it; stealing coins is free, but stealing a star costs 50 coins. Koopa Troopa appears at the starting point on board maps and will give 10 coins to each player who passes him. Bowser tries to foil the efforts of any player who passes him by taking coins.
Three bonus stars are awarded at the end of each board map: two are given to the player(s) who collected the most coins in mini-games and throughout the board map game, and the third is given to the player(s) who landed on the most "?" spaces.
In Mario Party, certain minigames required players to rotate the Nintendo 64 controller's analog stick as fast as they can. Some players reportedly got blisters, friction burns and lacerations from rotating the analog stick using the palms of their hands instead of using their thumb.
complaints were received by New York's attorney general's office and Nintendo of America eventually agreed to a settlement, which included providing gloves for anyone who had hurt their hand(s) while playing the game and paying the state's $75,000 legal fees. At the time, providing gloves for the estimated 1.2 million users of the game who might have been affected could have cost Nintendo up to $80 million.
The analog stick rotation has been used sparingly since Mario Party 2. Despite Nintendo's current analog sticks being better suited to play these games than the hard plastic of the N64 controller, Mario Party has not been re-released for the Virtual Console. For the Wii Virtual Console, Nintendo skipped it and instead re-released Mario Party 2, which was later also made available for the Wii U Virtual Console.
Mario Party is a must play game, like i said before its fun, enteraining, fustrating and you can either play with your friends or your family.
Lets talk more about it...
Mario Party is a party video game with six playable characters: Mario, Luigi, Princess Peach, Yoshi, Wario, or Donkey Kong. In the game's storyline, Mario and his friends argue about which of them is the Super Star. To settle their dispute, they set out for adventure to determine which of them is best.
Upon starting a board, players each hit a dice block to determine turn order, with the highest number going first on each turn and the lowest number going last.
Blue spaces give three coins to any player who lands on them, and red spaces take away three coins (both increased to six coins during the last five turns). Bowser also has his own spaces on the board map which hinder the players' progress.
Each player's goal is to collect the most stars. Purchasing stars requires coins, which can be earned through mini-games that are played once at the end of each turn. Each mini-game is chosen randomly. Mario Party features more than 50 mini-games, divided into several categories:
1. 4-player mini-game: each player competes against one another
2. 1 vs. 3 mini-game: a team of three players competes against a lone competitor.
3. 2 vs. 2 mini-game: competing teams of two against two.
4. 1-player mini-game: a lone player works toward a goal to win the mini-game.
Several characters appear throughout each board map, and each character can have an effect on players who reach them. Stars can be purchased from Toad for 20 coins. Boo can steal coins or a star from another player on behalf of anyone who requests it; stealing coins is free, but stealing a star costs 50 coins. Koopa Troopa appears at the starting point on board maps and will give 10 coins to each player who passes him. Bowser tries to foil the efforts of any player who passes him by taking coins.
Three bonus stars are awarded at the end of each board map: two are given to the player(s) who collected the most coins in mini-games and throughout the board map game, and the third is given to the player(s) who landed on the most "?" spaces.
In Mario Party, certain minigames required players to rotate the Nintendo 64 controller's analog stick as fast as they can. Some players reportedly got blisters, friction burns and lacerations from rotating the analog stick using the palms of their hands instead of using their thumb.
complaints were received by New York's attorney general's office and Nintendo of America eventually agreed to a settlement, which included providing gloves for anyone who had hurt their hand(s) while playing the game and paying the state's $75,000 legal fees. At the time, providing gloves for the estimated 1.2 million users of the game who might have been affected could have cost Nintendo up to $80 million.
The analog stick rotation has been used sparingly since Mario Party 2. Despite Nintendo's current analog sticks being better suited to play these games than the hard plastic of the N64 controller, Mario Party has not been re-released for the Virtual Console. For the Wii Virtual Console, Nintendo skipped it and instead re-released Mario Party 2, which was later also made available for the Wii U Virtual Console.
Mario Party is a must play game, like i said before its fun, enteraining, fustrating and you can either play with your friends or your family.