Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated 21 Bridges (2019) in Movies
Sep 22, 2020
Direction and Lead Performances elevate a "so-so" script
The world lost a tremendous talent when 44 year old Chadwick Boseman lost his battle with cancer. Whether it was as Jackie Robinson in 42, Thurgood Marshall in THURGOOD or as T'Challa/Black Panther in the Marvel movies, Boseman's charm and charisma lept off the screen and drew you into whatever project he is in.
This charm and charisma is very much in evidence in the by-the-book cops chasing robbers action flick 21 BRIDGES. As the cop chasing "the fugitive", Boseman elevates the proceedings to a level above what this average script had to offer.
Set in NYC, 21 BRIDGES tells the tale of Detective Andre Davis (Bozeman) who must chase down a couple of thieves - and cop killers - before they can escape New York. Told in one night, Davis makes the call to close the "21 Bridges" of the island of Manhattan so the bad guys are stuck on the island.
And...that's the first disappointment with this film, it doesn't do anything with that premise. Do the bad guys try to escape on one of those "21 Bridges"? Nope. The bridges are never really mentioned again...so why call this film "21 Bridges"?
What does work is Boseman's performance. His Davis is competent, honest, smart and earnest and you are drawn into his work. As is the work of the person who is thrust into the action as his partner, Vice Cop Frankie Burns (Sienna Miller). You might roll your eyes when you hear Miller's name for her early career was more about being on the tabloid pages than it was about being on the screen, but she has morphed herself - and her career - into something quite interesting through turns in films like FOXCATCHER and AMERICAN SNIPER and she is as equally interesting as Bozeman in this film. The 2 make a good pair.
The rest of the supporting cast - Taylor Kitsch, Keith David and the great J.K. Simmons - are solid, if not spectacular. But there are 2 standouts. Alexander Siddig (Dr. Bashir in STAR TREK: DEEP SPACE 9) is interesting as the "money launderer" and Stephan James (IF BEALE STREET COULD TALK) is just as charming and charismatic as Bozeman as one of the the thieves on the run. If you are looking for a young, charismatic actor to fill the hole created by Bozeman's death, James could very well fit the bill.
I've mentioned that the script by Adam Mervis and Matthew Michael Carnahan is nothing special, but what is special is the Direction by Brian Kirk (a TV Director of such shows as GAME OF THRONES and LUTHER). This is his Major Motion Picture debut (as far as I could tell) and there were some VERY interesting shots and some taught, tense moments. He'll be a director to watch in the future.
While nothing too special, 21 BRIDGES is better than "good enough" - a cops 'n robbers film that will hold your interest for the relatively quick 1 hour and 39 minute running time.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This charm and charisma is very much in evidence in the by-the-book cops chasing robbers action flick 21 BRIDGES. As the cop chasing "the fugitive", Boseman elevates the proceedings to a level above what this average script had to offer.
Set in NYC, 21 BRIDGES tells the tale of Detective Andre Davis (Bozeman) who must chase down a couple of thieves - and cop killers - before they can escape New York. Told in one night, Davis makes the call to close the "21 Bridges" of the island of Manhattan so the bad guys are stuck on the island.
And...that's the first disappointment with this film, it doesn't do anything with that premise. Do the bad guys try to escape on one of those "21 Bridges"? Nope. The bridges are never really mentioned again...so why call this film "21 Bridges"?
What does work is Boseman's performance. His Davis is competent, honest, smart and earnest and you are drawn into his work. As is the work of the person who is thrust into the action as his partner, Vice Cop Frankie Burns (Sienna Miller). You might roll your eyes when you hear Miller's name for her early career was more about being on the tabloid pages than it was about being on the screen, but she has morphed herself - and her career - into something quite interesting through turns in films like FOXCATCHER and AMERICAN SNIPER and she is as equally interesting as Bozeman in this film. The 2 make a good pair.
The rest of the supporting cast - Taylor Kitsch, Keith David and the great J.K. Simmons - are solid, if not spectacular. But there are 2 standouts. Alexander Siddig (Dr. Bashir in STAR TREK: DEEP SPACE 9) is interesting as the "money launderer" and Stephan James (IF BEALE STREET COULD TALK) is just as charming and charismatic as Bozeman as one of the the thieves on the run. If you are looking for a young, charismatic actor to fill the hole created by Bozeman's death, James could very well fit the bill.
I've mentioned that the script by Adam Mervis and Matthew Michael Carnahan is nothing special, but what is special is the Direction by Brian Kirk (a TV Director of such shows as GAME OF THRONES and LUTHER). This is his Major Motion Picture debut (as far as I could tell) and there were some VERY interesting shots and some taught, tense moments. He'll be a director to watch in the future.
While nothing too special, 21 BRIDGES is better than "good enough" - a cops 'n robbers film that will hold your interest for the relatively quick 1 hour and 39 minute running time.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bong Mines Entertainment (15 KP) rated Seasons by American Authors in Music
Jun 17, 2019
American Authors is a four-piece alternative outfit based in Brooklyn, New York. Not too long ago, they released a heartfelt music video for their “Before I Go” single.
“I hope I find peace of mind in all of my woes. I hope the rain, it brings a light To my broken soul. And I hope I lose myself in the city but find my home. I hope I live my life before I go.” – lyrics
‘Before I Go’ tells an interesting tale of a young guy who doesn’t know where his life is going.
Apparently, he’s afraid of what’s to come, and even though he keeps on keeping on, he wonders if he has done all that he can.
Later, he admits that he wants to live life to the fullest before he goes to the Great Beyond.
‘Before I Go’ contains a relatable storyline, ear-welcoming vocals, and cinematic instrumentation flavored with sentimental elements.
Also, the stunning audiovisual was filmed last October during Matt Sanchez’s wedding.
“The biggest thing is the change American Authors went through to get here. We had to go through all of these experiences and moments of experimentation to reach this body of work, which is the most genuine and pure thing we’ve ever done. It encompasses every season of our music: the ups, the downs, the highs, the lows, and everything in between. We let go of where we started, fell into the place of writing from the heart, and captured what came out naturally.” – Zac Barnett
American Authors consists of Zac Barnett (vocals), James Adam Shelley (guitar, banjo), Dave Rublin (bass), and Matt Sanchez (drums).
So far, they have impressively generated over 1 billion global streams on a string of alternately striking and soaring smashes.
Their ‘Before I Go’ single is featured on their latest album, entitled, “Seasons”, which has amassed close to 30M streams online via Spotify.
“I want people to see a different side of American Authors. I hope they realize there’s a message of hope. But it’s transmitted in a new and more exciting way for our band. Growing up, listening to my favorite artists helped me through so many hard times. It was the best therapy. I’ve seen fans take that away from our music in the past, and I hope they continue to do so. That’s the ultimate goal for us.” – Zac Barnett
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/american-authors-before-i-go/
“I hope I find peace of mind in all of my woes. I hope the rain, it brings a light To my broken soul. And I hope I lose myself in the city but find my home. I hope I live my life before I go.” – lyrics
‘Before I Go’ tells an interesting tale of a young guy who doesn’t know where his life is going.
Apparently, he’s afraid of what’s to come, and even though he keeps on keeping on, he wonders if he has done all that he can.
Later, he admits that he wants to live life to the fullest before he goes to the Great Beyond.
‘Before I Go’ contains a relatable storyline, ear-welcoming vocals, and cinematic instrumentation flavored with sentimental elements.
Also, the stunning audiovisual was filmed last October during Matt Sanchez’s wedding.
“The biggest thing is the change American Authors went through to get here. We had to go through all of these experiences and moments of experimentation to reach this body of work, which is the most genuine and pure thing we’ve ever done. It encompasses every season of our music: the ups, the downs, the highs, the lows, and everything in between. We let go of where we started, fell into the place of writing from the heart, and captured what came out naturally.” – Zac Barnett
American Authors consists of Zac Barnett (vocals), James Adam Shelley (guitar, banjo), Dave Rublin (bass), and Matt Sanchez (drums).
So far, they have impressively generated over 1 billion global streams on a string of alternately striking and soaring smashes.
Their ‘Before I Go’ single is featured on their latest album, entitled, “Seasons”, which has amassed close to 30M streams online via Spotify.
“I want people to see a different side of American Authors. I hope they realize there’s a message of hope. But it’s transmitted in a new and more exciting way for our band. Growing up, listening to my favorite artists helped me through so many hard times. It was the best therapy. I’ve seen fans take that away from our music in the past, and I hope they continue to do so. That’s the ultimate goal for us.” – Zac Barnett
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/american-authors-before-i-go/
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Justice League Dark, Volume 1: The Last Age of Magic in Books
Nov 30, 2020
I finally finished up the first JLD volume from new series writer James Tynion IV. I already remarked on how I was quite pleased with his handle of the core members, bringing a real sense of belonging in a very dark (but not THE BOYS dark! THANK GOD!) setting.
I am 50, right? I remember when Zatanna was simply a top hat, coat and tails, plus fishnets. I was a totally fanboying her character back in the day. I even went so far as to request a sketch (back when sketches could run you simply $20, and no attendees were trying to make money off the art acquired) of her from then-new artist Adam Hughes.
When I first saw the art for JLD, wherein Zee's token "top hat and fishnets" were gone. Instead, she was now attired in black slacks, thigh-high black leather boots, white bodice, and stockings are now on her arms as sleeves of a sort. I have to admit, by the end of this volume, as well as the subsequent one (WW + JLD: THE WITCHING HOUR), it gives her a more "sensible sorceress" look. It feels less objectifying, no?
Oh, Constantine, how you've grown as a character! No longer just a likeable (sort of) a-hole with a flair for dark things magical, he seemed to have matured as a character. He seems to, indirectly or otherwise, fit in the team, despite being more akin to a lone wolf character. Tynion really should be given a chance at writing a Constantine mini, perhaps. just sayin'!
The art by Alvaro Martinez Bueno and Daniel Sampiere, with inks by Raul Fernandez and Juan Albarran, is super spot-on. All the regular characters are rendered well, never once veering away from their token looks. Fortunately, DC at least recognizes some good fits, as this seems to be the ongoing art team on the series going forward. Good stuff, indeed!
Now, while the main story held my attention until the very end, the last story, "Tales From The Otherkind", not so much. I get what Tynion was going for, but it just wasn't doing it for me. It was this final story in the volume which prevented this from being a 5-Star review.
But, don't let that sway you! There's some solid creepiness within, as well as some real tense moments. You may even enjoy that last story in the volume. So, that said, I urge you to check this one out. No disappointments, even if you don't like the last story as much as I did!
I am 50, right? I remember when Zatanna was simply a top hat, coat and tails, plus fishnets. I was a totally fanboying her character back in the day. I even went so far as to request a sketch (back when sketches could run you simply $20, and no attendees were trying to make money off the art acquired) of her from then-new artist Adam Hughes.
When I first saw the art for JLD, wherein Zee's token "top hat and fishnets" were gone. Instead, she was now attired in black slacks, thigh-high black leather boots, white bodice, and stockings are now on her arms as sleeves of a sort. I have to admit, by the end of this volume, as well as the subsequent one (WW + JLD: THE WITCHING HOUR), it gives her a more "sensible sorceress" look. It feels less objectifying, no?
Oh, Constantine, how you've grown as a character! No longer just a likeable (sort of) a-hole with a flair for dark things magical, he seemed to have matured as a character. He seems to, indirectly or otherwise, fit in the team, despite being more akin to a lone wolf character. Tynion really should be given a chance at writing a Constantine mini, perhaps. just sayin'!
The art by Alvaro Martinez Bueno and Daniel Sampiere, with inks by Raul Fernandez and Juan Albarran, is super spot-on. All the regular characters are rendered well, never once veering away from their token looks. Fortunately, DC at least recognizes some good fits, as this seems to be the ongoing art team on the series going forward. Good stuff, indeed!
Now, while the main story held my attention until the very end, the last story, "Tales From The Otherkind", not so much. I get what Tynion was going for, but it just wasn't doing it for me. It was this final story in the volume which prevented this from being a 5-Star review.
But, don't let that sway you! There's some solid creepiness within, as well as some real tense moments. You may even enjoy that last story in the volume. So, that said, I urge you to check this one out. No disappointments, even if you don't like the last story as much as I did!
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968) in Movies
Mar 7, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
This was the first time that I've seen this children's classic since I was a child, and I suppose that I'd hoped that it would live up to its reputation. In all fairness though, I din't like it that much when I was a child, if I'm honest and my children, though some DO like it, others seemed to have mixed feelings. At best, it's likable but never lovable and at worst, it just isn't liked at all.
So, as an adult I watched this loose adaptation of James Bond's, Ian Flemming's novel, with every good intention, but in the end was left disappointed. Firstly, at 2 hours and 20 minutes long, it feels like an epic, and a completely unnecessary one at that. Its intermission is turned into a Batfink or Adam West's Batman styled cliffhanger rather than a thematic or narrative break that it traditionally should have been, even going so far as to recap the action in the second act!
The songs weren't great either, generally bordering on tedium rather than holding my interest. The story seems to be a little off kilter too, with a seemingly fatal crash destroying the eponymous car before its eventual restoration by Dick van Dyke. This was the culmination of a five-minute title sequence showcasing the early Grand Prix's of 1907 and '08 which for a family film seemed to drag somewhat.
But after an hour of songs and character development, we finally take off in the flying car to the fantasy land of Vulgaria, only for the whole experience to be a fantastical story told by Van Dyke's, Caractacus Potts! All in all, this was a strange film, but not in an entertaining way like Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory, the connection being Roald Dahl's involvement with the screenplay, but in a rather boring way, with events just seeing to happen without any really cause or need. One hour of story, then another one of fantasy. How many other films can boast this kind narrative twist and get away with it. It just seemed to be indulgent and plodding.
It would defiantly have been improved if the car was actually magical and did actually take them on this adventure rather than suggesting that it is perfectly okay to sing and dance around the real world but it's a stretch too far to have a flying car! It should have been a fantasy through and through rather than six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Ultimately, Overrated in my opinion and since the view of FOUR children, boys and girls ranging from 7 – 15, is that it's watchable rather than fully enjoyable, I suspect that this film is being viewed through rose tinted glasses.
So, as an adult I watched this loose adaptation of James Bond's, Ian Flemming's novel, with every good intention, but in the end was left disappointed. Firstly, at 2 hours and 20 minutes long, it feels like an epic, and a completely unnecessary one at that. Its intermission is turned into a Batfink or Adam West's Batman styled cliffhanger rather than a thematic or narrative break that it traditionally should have been, even going so far as to recap the action in the second act!
The songs weren't great either, generally bordering on tedium rather than holding my interest. The story seems to be a little off kilter too, with a seemingly fatal crash destroying the eponymous car before its eventual restoration by Dick van Dyke. This was the culmination of a five-minute title sequence showcasing the early Grand Prix's of 1907 and '08 which for a family film seemed to drag somewhat.
But after an hour of songs and character development, we finally take off in the flying car to the fantasy land of Vulgaria, only for the whole experience to be a fantastical story told by Van Dyke's, Caractacus Potts! All in all, this was a strange film, but not in an entertaining way like Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory, the connection being Roald Dahl's involvement with the screenplay, but in a rather boring way, with events just seeing to happen without any really cause or need. One hour of story, then another one of fantasy. How many other films can boast this kind narrative twist and get away with it. It just seemed to be indulgent and plodding.
It would defiantly have been improved if the car was actually magical and did actually take them on this adventure rather than suggesting that it is perfectly okay to sing and dance around the real world but it's a stretch too far to have a flying car! It should have been a fantasy through and through rather than six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Ultimately, Overrated in my opinion and since the view of FOUR children, boys and girls ranging from 7 – 15, is that it's watchable rather than fully enjoyable, I suspect that this film is being viewed through rose tinted glasses.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Laundromat (2019) in Movies
May 18, 2021
Is this the dullest movie title in film history?
In "The Laundromat", Ellen Martin (Meryl Streep) loses her husband Joe (James Cromwell) in a boating accident. She expects a multi-million dollar insurance payout, but is frustrated that the insurance companies evaporate in a miasma of shell-companies and double-dealing. Her compulsive investigations lead her to two Panamanian-based double dealers: Jürgen Mossack (Gary Oldman) and Ramón Fonseca (Antonio Banderas).
Based on a true story, a hack of the company's 2.6 TB of email data led to the 2016 scandal known as "The Panama Papers": something that dragged into the headlines the alleged dodgy-dealings of many celebrities including David Cameron.
Positives:
- Meryl Steep delivers another superb performance as the grieving avenging widow.
- There's a "twist" in the final scene which I didn't see coming, and which was impressive.
Negatives:
- This is a really strange and disjointed movie. It seems to be trying to be "The Big Short", but is a significant fail. There are numerous quirky scenes, most involving Oldman and Banderas. But there is enough bat-shit crazy stuff in here to make you think that either Sonderbergh, or the writers, or both were on acid. What was with the "Dawn of Man" sequence at the start? And why the anonymisation of the 'hominids'? Lots of bonkers stuff.
- The movie is made up of a series of chapters ("Lessons"), but the connection between the lesson title and the "message" conveyed is loose at best. It's all a bit of a convoluted mess.
- The script seems to assume a school-boy level of knowledge of the subject matter. As a result, some of the explanations of Mssrs, Oldman and Banderas come across as extremely patronising 'mansplaining'.
Summary Thoughts on "The Laundromat": There's a stellar cast involved with this one, and the subject matter in the hands of an Adam McKay could have been compelling. But as it is, it's rather a disjointed mess. It's worth a watch just to see the actors at work. But that's about the long and the short of it. Watch "The Big Short" again instead.
This has been sitting on my Netflix box for a long time without a watch, and this is mostly because the title suggested something completely different (and not of great interest). (Yes, I understand in retrospect that the movie is partially concerned with money laundering!) It was only my wife suggesting we watch it that pushed it onto the list. If it had been titled something like "The Panama Papers" I would have probably watched it sooner!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/05/18/the-laundromat-is-this-the-worst-title-of-any-movie-in-film-history/. Thanks.)
Based on a true story, a hack of the company's 2.6 TB of email data led to the 2016 scandal known as "The Panama Papers": something that dragged into the headlines the alleged dodgy-dealings of many celebrities including David Cameron.
Positives:
- Meryl Steep delivers another superb performance as the grieving avenging widow.
- There's a "twist" in the final scene which I didn't see coming, and which was impressive.
Negatives:
- This is a really strange and disjointed movie. It seems to be trying to be "The Big Short", but is a significant fail. There are numerous quirky scenes, most involving Oldman and Banderas. But there is enough bat-shit crazy stuff in here to make you think that either Sonderbergh, or the writers, or both were on acid. What was with the "Dawn of Man" sequence at the start? And why the anonymisation of the 'hominids'? Lots of bonkers stuff.
- The movie is made up of a series of chapters ("Lessons"), but the connection between the lesson title and the "message" conveyed is loose at best. It's all a bit of a convoluted mess.
- The script seems to assume a school-boy level of knowledge of the subject matter. As a result, some of the explanations of Mssrs, Oldman and Banderas come across as extremely patronising 'mansplaining'.
Summary Thoughts on "The Laundromat": There's a stellar cast involved with this one, and the subject matter in the hands of an Adam McKay could have been compelling. But as it is, it's rather a disjointed mess. It's worth a watch just to see the actors at work. But that's about the long and the short of it. Watch "The Big Short" again instead.
This has been sitting on my Netflix box for a long time without a watch, and this is mostly because the title suggested something completely different (and not of great interest). (Yes, I understand in retrospect that the movie is partially concerned with money laundering!) It was only my wife suggesting we watch it that pushed it onto the list. If it had been titled something like "The Panama Papers" I would have probably watched it sooner!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/05/18/the-laundromat-is-this-the-worst-title-of-any-movie-in-film-history/. Thanks.)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Laundromat (2019) in Movies
Aug 1, 2021
Fun and Interesting
Do remember the Oscar nominated film THE BIG SHORT from 2015, where Director Adam McKay would make sense out of a dry subject (the financial crisis of 2008) by breaking the 4th wall and speaking directly to the audience, while also wrapping in a very strong emotional drama?
Well…Director Steven Soderbergh (ERIN BROCKOVICH) has taken that recipe and attached it to another dry subject (this time money laundering through off-shore “Shell Companies”) and has turned in a very good and interesting (though not quite as intense) film that got lost in the shuffle in 2019.
Starring Meryl Streep as a widow who is trying to get her Insurance Company to pay off after the death of her husband, THE LAUNDROMAT follows the trail through shell company after shell company as the money is Laundered by 2 unscrupulous Bankers (Gary Oldman and Antonio Banderas) in a series of vignettes.
While THE LAUNDROMAT doesn’t pack the punch of THE BIG SHORT (where the real life consequences of what happened impacted many, many people throughout the world), THE LAUNDROMAT falls just short in that only Meryl Streep’s character really suffers the consequences (though many unscrupulous players do get theirs in the end).
Soderbergh is a Director who’s work I have really, really liked throughout his career as he has a tendency to focus on the people, rather than spectacle, when telling a story, and it works well in this film. He gets the audience to care about the victims of the scheming money men and root like crazy for the “bad guys” to get theirs.
As for the acting, Meryl Streep (of course) is marvelous as Ellen Martin, the widow who’s tragic experience (the death of her husband - played by the great James Cromwell) sets off the course of events in this film.
Oldman and Banderas are equally as good as the narrators and antagonists of this piece. They play their roles with a slight wink in their eyes and a “devil-may-care” attitude which makes them charming, but does take a notch (or so) off of the drama of the piece.
Soderbergh, as he is want to do, fills this film with many memorable actors/characters in what amounts to extended cameos - Jeffrey Wright, Robert Patrick, David Schwimmer, Will Forte, Chris Parnell, Larry Wilmore and even Sharon Stone stop by for a moment to bring other characters into play and they all work well.
To be fair, some of the vignettes work better than the others, but all-in-all Soderbergh has crafted an interesting, fun and IMPORTANT film that will teach it’s audience about the inner workings of a system that most of us have heard about but never really looked into.
Check out THE LAUNDROMAT the next time you are scrolling through Netflix looking for something good to watch.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Well…Director Steven Soderbergh (ERIN BROCKOVICH) has taken that recipe and attached it to another dry subject (this time money laundering through off-shore “Shell Companies”) and has turned in a very good and interesting (though not quite as intense) film that got lost in the shuffle in 2019.
Starring Meryl Streep as a widow who is trying to get her Insurance Company to pay off after the death of her husband, THE LAUNDROMAT follows the trail through shell company after shell company as the money is Laundered by 2 unscrupulous Bankers (Gary Oldman and Antonio Banderas) in a series of vignettes.
While THE LAUNDROMAT doesn’t pack the punch of THE BIG SHORT (where the real life consequences of what happened impacted many, many people throughout the world), THE LAUNDROMAT falls just short in that only Meryl Streep’s character really suffers the consequences (though many unscrupulous players do get theirs in the end).
Soderbergh is a Director who’s work I have really, really liked throughout his career as he has a tendency to focus on the people, rather than spectacle, when telling a story, and it works well in this film. He gets the audience to care about the victims of the scheming money men and root like crazy for the “bad guys” to get theirs.
As for the acting, Meryl Streep (of course) is marvelous as Ellen Martin, the widow who’s tragic experience (the death of her husband - played by the great James Cromwell) sets off the course of events in this film.
Oldman and Banderas are equally as good as the narrators and antagonists of this piece. They play their roles with a slight wink in their eyes and a “devil-may-care” attitude which makes them charming, but does take a notch (or so) off of the drama of the piece.
Soderbergh, as he is want to do, fills this film with many memorable actors/characters in what amounts to extended cameos - Jeffrey Wright, Robert Patrick, David Schwimmer, Will Forte, Chris Parnell, Larry Wilmore and even Sharon Stone stop by for a moment to bring other characters into play and they all work well.
To be fair, some of the vignettes work better than the others, but all-in-all Soderbergh has crafted an interesting, fun and IMPORTANT film that will teach it’s audience about the inner workings of a system that most of us have heard about but never really looked into.
Check out THE LAUNDROMAT the next time you are scrolling through Netflix looking for something good to watch.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Lee (2222 KP) rated Blair Witch (2016) in Movies
Aug 14, 2017
Yeah, I preferred this to the original...
The original Blair Witch movie came out in 1999 (wow, where has the time gone?!) in the good old days when you could get hold of a US DVD import in the UK before a movie was even released on UK cinema screens. I remember The Blair Witch Project being released in the UK on Halloween, the same day that the US DVD was delivered to my house! I excitedly sat down to watch it that evening with my family while everyone else had to go out in the cold rainy weather to watch it at the cinema, and I remember at the end of the movie we all kind of looked at each other as if to say “is that it…?!” All the hype, all the usual crap about it being absolutely terrifying and the scariest movie ever made and it was just a bunch of people getting spooked in the woods! To be fair, it wasn’t that bad, but it just wasn’t as scary or as fantastic as we’d been led to believe. The movie spawned a forgettable sequel and since then, despite being done to death, far superior found footage movies have come along and done it all a hell of a lot better. Then, out of the blue in July last year, a movie which had been previously marketed as ‘The Woods’ was revealed to actually be ‘Blair Witch’. The trailer looked OK, not great but interesting enough. But, once again we’re being subjected to all the usual marketing crap about it being terrifying and the scariest thing you’ve ever seen… blah, blah, blah…
James Donahue is the brother of Heather, who was one of the central characters in the first film. We join him 22 years after the original, as he prepares to lead a new bunch of characters into the Burkittsville woods. They meet up with a couple of young locals, who offer to be their guide, and off they head, into the woods where their video footage will later be discovered. This time round, the array of cameras capturing the footage has vastly improved. As well as the standard handhelds, we’ve got ear piece cams, drone cams, night cams. All offering new and interesting ways to capture the action.
Things mostly follow a similar path to the original – strange noises, weird stuff happening with time, thinking you’re heading in one direction when you’re going around in circles, juddery camera movements where it’s difficult to tell what the hell is going on. But… you do actually see things this time, the noises that you hear are terrifying, the characters are far more interesting and believable than those in the original. And the final act when we find ourselves back in the house from the first movie is seriously the stuff of nightmares.
Director Adam Wingard and writer Simon Barrett, both have an excellent recent track record (see You’re Next and The Guest) and their influence on this movie has taken this story to another level. This is a far superior movie to the original and yes, it is truly terrifying.
James Donahue is the brother of Heather, who was one of the central characters in the first film. We join him 22 years after the original, as he prepares to lead a new bunch of characters into the Burkittsville woods. They meet up with a couple of young locals, who offer to be their guide, and off they head, into the woods where their video footage will later be discovered. This time round, the array of cameras capturing the footage has vastly improved. As well as the standard handhelds, we’ve got ear piece cams, drone cams, night cams. All offering new and interesting ways to capture the action.
Things mostly follow a similar path to the original – strange noises, weird stuff happening with time, thinking you’re heading in one direction when you’re going around in circles, juddery camera movements where it’s difficult to tell what the hell is going on. But… you do actually see things this time, the noises that you hear are terrifying, the characters are far more interesting and believable than those in the original. And the final act when we find ourselves back in the house from the first movie is seriously the stuff of nightmares.
Director Adam Wingard and writer Simon Barrett, both have an excellent recent track record (see You’re Next and The Guest) and their influence on this movie has taken this story to another level. This is a far superior movie to the original and yes, it is truly terrifying.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated That's My Boy (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Adam Sandler movies have often been a mixed bag. For every “The Wedding Singer” and “50 First Dates” there are several forgettable offerings like “Little Nicky”, “I Now Prounounce You Chuck and Larry”, and “8 Crazy Nights”. To be fair there’ve also been several guilty pleasures such as “Happy Gilmore” and “The Waterboy” along the way. Sadly, his recent offerings, culminating in the disastrous “Jack and Jill”, have given me very low expectations for his new film “That’s My Boy” which pairs Sandler with former Saturday Night Live star Andy Samberg.
Sandler stars as Donny, a down-on his luck former celebrity who gained notoriety after impregnating his teacher at 13. While the teacher (Eva Amurri Martino) went on to a 30-year prison sentence, Donny used his notoriety to become a pop culture sensation. Unfortunately for Donny fame was fleeting and he wasted the money he had accumulated along the way. We soon learn Donny faces a prison sentence unless he comes up with $45,000 to pay back taxes.
Desperate, he turns to his estranged son Todd (Andy Samberg), who has pretty much disowned his father and does not even go by is given birth name. Todd is about to marry a socialite named Jamie (Leighton Meester), and since he is a numbers genius with an extremely bright future with a partnership pending, the arrival of his crude, drunken father, is a disaster in the making. Passing himself off as long-lost friend, Donny attempts to reconnect with his son and naturally this happens over some very vulgar and awkward moments, not all of which are limited to bachelor party scenes.
Of course anybody who has seen any of Sandler’s films will know the formula that follows: crude situations followed by conflict, mixed with celebrity cameos and an ’80s soundtrack tossed in with a few laughs along the way towards a tidy ending. To say that there is a definite formula to his films would be an understatement and Sandler gives the impression that he’s making up many of the scenes as he goes along, all the while sporting a hybrid Boston/Little Nicky accent.
What ultimately sells the film is the energy and effort that the cast puts into their performances. While the plot can be charitably described as disjointed, there are several scenes that are LOL-inducing, especially those with James Caan as an angry priest and with Vanilla Ice and Todd Bridges lampooning their faded glory.
While the film is a bit cruder than most of Sandler’s usual fare it is, for the most part, good-natured and lighthearted. Obviously nobody is expected to take the film seriously. Samberg does a good job playing the restrained uptight Todd, and in the scenes where he lets loose, shows solid working chemistry with Sandler.
While it is not a great cinematic comedy it certainly has more than its fair share of laughs along the way, just as long as you’re willing to overlook the lackluster plot and uneven pacing of the film.
Sandler stars as Donny, a down-on his luck former celebrity who gained notoriety after impregnating his teacher at 13. While the teacher (Eva Amurri Martino) went on to a 30-year prison sentence, Donny used his notoriety to become a pop culture sensation. Unfortunately for Donny fame was fleeting and he wasted the money he had accumulated along the way. We soon learn Donny faces a prison sentence unless he comes up with $45,000 to pay back taxes.
Desperate, he turns to his estranged son Todd (Andy Samberg), who has pretty much disowned his father and does not even go by is given birth name. Todd is about to marry a socialite named Jamie (Leighton Meester), and since he is a numbers genius with an extremely bright future with a partnership pending, the arrival of his crude, drunken father, is a disaster in the making. Passing himself off as long-lost friend, Donny attempts to reconnect with his son and naturally this happens over some very vulgar and awkward moments, not all of which are limited to bachelor party scenes.
Of course anybody who has seen any of Sandler’s films will know the formula that follows: crude situations followed by conflict, mixed with celebrity cameos and an ’80s soundtrack tossed in with a few laughs along the way towards a tidy ending. To say that there is a definite formula to his films would be an understatement and Sandler gives the impression that he’s making up many of the scenes as he goes along, all the while sporting a hybrid Boston/Little Nicky accent.
What ultimately sells the film is the energy and effort that the cast puts into their performances. While the plot can be charitably described as disjointed, there are several scenes that are LOL-inducing, especially those with James Caan as an angry priest and with Vanilla Ice and Todd Bridges lampooning their faded glory.
While the film is a bit cruder than most of Sandler’s usual fare it is, for the most part, good-natured and lighthearted. Obviously nobody is expected to take the film seriously. Samberg does a good job playing the restrained uptight Todd, and in the scenes where he lets loose, shows solid working chemistry with Sandler.
While it is not a great cinematic comedy it certainly has more than its fair share of laughs along the way, just as long as you’re willing to overlook the lackluster plot and uneven pacing of the film.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated John Carpenter's Vampires (1998) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
A group of eccentric vampire hunters lead by the rugged and cold-hearted Jack Crow (James Woods) never really stop working. Taking great pride in the fruits of their labor, they work hard and play even harder as their celebrations after a job well done consist of alcohol flowing freely and plenty of women to take their minds off of work. But this particular job didn't go exactly as planned and it's weighing heavily on the mind of Jack Crow. Even after killing what's referred to as a "nest" of nine vampires, the master was no where to be found. Hardly a reason to celebrate in Jack's eyes. Unfortunately, his gut instinct was right as things get a hell of a lot worse for Jack's team when the master shows up to their little shindig. But this master is different from the others; stronger, more powerful, and why does he know Jack's name? There's something more elaborate going on and Jack Crow is going to find out exactly what it is while eradicating as many vampires as he possibly can along the way.
Judging by the ratings this film has (34% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, 5.8/10 on IMDb), I guess it's safe to say that this could be a guilty pleasure of mine. I love most of John Carpenter's work and I really enjoyed his take on vampires. Jack Crow is certainly reason alone to sit through this and although the character originated in John Steakley's novel, I feel Crow is just as strong of a character in Carpenter's world as Snake Plissken from Escape From New York. Even though he's basically a mean spirited SOB, you can't help but sympathize with the character as the film moves on. Considering all that's happened to him in his lifetime, he seems to be a decent guy deep down underneath that extremely thick and rough exterior. His dialogue was also a lot of fun. Gems such as him asking Father Adam Guiteau if he had wood after the fight they just had or when he's explaining the true mythos behind vampires and to "forget whatever you've seen in the movies" was just classic.
Other than Jack Crow, I actually really enjoyed the storyline which seemed to be a breaking point for a lot of people. A vampire seeking a black cross to finish a reverse exorcism, so he can walk in daylight without turning to dust. Only Carpenter could pull something like that off. Their methods of killing vampires were also a bit more original and unorthodox compared to other vampire films of the past. Jack Crow would shoot an arrow from a crossbow, which would be attached to a wire on the bottom of a jeep that would be reeled in by Daniel Baldwin's Anthony Montoya that would drag the vampire into the sunlight where their body would burst into flames. Maybe it's considered cheesy to some, but it was refreshing to see something different for a change. As big of a horror fan that I am, I don't really think of myself as a fan of vampires. I'm not sure if it's because I'm picky or because it seems like everything is being recycled when it comes to storylines in horror films these days, but I like to think when a vampire film does make an impact on me that it says more than the average horror film containing vampires.
John Carpenter, the master of horror, delivers a refreshing and interesting take on vampires with the aptly named Vampires. It also dawns another strong lead character in a Carpenter film in the form of Jack Crow and contains some of the most witty and enjoyable dialogue of any horror film from the late '90s. The storyline is also magnificently peculiar, which is a definite plus in my book. This would definitely make my list of favorite vampire films, if I ever decided to make one. If you're a fan of John Carpenter and haven't seen this gem, I highly recommend doing so. Or if you have, maybe it's time to dust it off and give it another watch.
Judging by the ratings this film has (34% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, 5.8/10 on IMDb), I guess it's safe to say that this could be a guilty pleasure of mine. I love most of John Carpenter's work and I really enjoyed his take on vampires. Jack Crow is certainly reason alone to sit through this and although the character originated in John Steakley's novel, I feel Crow is just as strong of a character in Carpenter's world as Snake Plissken from Escape From New York. Even though he's basically a mean spirited SOB, you can't help but sympathize with the character as the film moves on. Considering all that's happened to him in his lifetime, he seems to be a decent guy deep down underneath that extremely thick and rough exterior. His dialogue was also a lot of fun. Gems such as him asking Father Adam Guiteau if he had wood after the fight they just had or when he's explaining the true mythos behind vampires and to "forget whatever you've seen in the movies" was just classic.
Other than Jack Crow, I actually really enjoyed the storyline which seemed to be a breaking point for a lot of people. A vampire seeking a black cross to finish a reverse exorcism, so he can walk in daylight without turning to dust. Only Carpenter could pull something like that off. Their methods of killing vampires were also a bit more original and unorthodox compared to other vampire films of the past. Jack Crow would shoot an arrow from a crossbow, which would be attached to a wire on the bottom of a jeep that would be reeled in by Daniel Baldwin's Anthony Montoya that would drag the vampire into the sunlight where their body would burst into flames. Maybe it's considered cheesy to some, but it was refreshing to see something different for a change. As big of a horror fan that I am, I don't really think of myself as a fan of vampires. I'm not sure if it's because I'm picky or because it seems like everything is being recycled when it comes to storylines in horror films these days, but I like to think when a vampire film does make an impact on me that it says more than the average horror film containing vampires.
John Carpenter, the master of horror, delivers a refreshing and interesting take on vampires with the aptly named Vampires. It also dawns another strong lead character in a Carpenter film in the form of Jack Crow and contains some of the most witty and enjoyable dialogue of any horror film from the late '90s. The storyline is also magnificently peculiar, which is a definite plus in my book. This would definitely make my list of favorite vampire films, if I ever decided to make one. If you're a fan of John Carpenter and haven't seen this gem, I highly recommend doing so. Or if you have, maybe it's time to dust it off and give it another watch.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Hotel Transylvania 4 (2021) in Movies
Jan 22, 2022
The transformation sequences. (1 more)
The 2D animated end credits
Genndy Tartakovsky not directing (2 more)
Humor exchanged for annoying behavior
Feels almost like a soft reboot for a final film.
A Monstrous Monstrosity
Hotel Transylvania: Tranformania is the final film in the Hotel Transylvania franchise. With Genndy Tartakavsky no longer directing (he co-writes and executive produces this time around) and Adam Sandler and Kevin James not returning (Brian Hull and Brad Abrell now voice Dracula and Frankenstein), Transformania takes an awkward step back from the previous three films.
Despite some character designs (Bela in the second film, the Kraken in the third) and some tremendous end credit animations that are done in a very recognizable Tartakavsky style (think Dexter’s Lab or Powerpuff Girls), the films are mediocre at best and yet became a billion dollar franchise.
Hull and Abrell do a decent job matching their voices to the Drac and Frank characters. You may not have noticed the characters were voiced by someone else if you hadn’t known beforehand. However, the animation looks noticeably different. Maybe new directors Jennifer Kluska and Derek Drymon are to credit for that. Kluska was a storyboard artist on Hotel Transylvania 2 and 3 while Drymon was an executive producer of Adventure Time and was a storyboard artist on The Spongebob Squarepants Movie.
The film was also moved around several times thanks to COVID and the pandemic. Sony Pictures Releasing eventually nixed the film’s theatrical run and sold distribution rights to Amazon Studios. This is the only Hotel Transylvania film to be released directly to a streaming platform.
Considering that this is the fourth film, Transformania basically rewrites several characters to an extent that it ignores key details from other films. Johnny is now akin to Homer Simpson since he is dumber than he has ever been here. He had a stoner or frat boy with a heart of gold kind of vibe about him originally. He was very mellow by nature, but had seen a good chunk of the world and knew more than his behavior let on. He had stories even though he was young and he was likeable. Transformania turns him into a dumb and unfunny dork that is borderline offensive due to how annoying he is.
Dracula has lost whatever made him somewhat charming in the previous three films, as well. In Transformania, he’s looking to settle down with Ericka and retire from running the hotel. The intention is to give the hotel to Mavis and Johnny, but all of a sudden Dracula hates Johnny. The first three films are built around how close Johnny and Dracula become. Now Dracula just finds Johnny unbearable.
After establishing in the second film that Dennis is part vampire and has powers, that concept is totally erased in Transformania. Dracula hypnotizes Dennis in the beginning of the film and he remains that way for the bulk of the film without ever utilizing any sort of power or doing anything remotely relevant.
Instead of downright telling Johnny that he can’t stand him, Dracula lies and says that he can’t leave the hotel in the hands of a human; it can only be inherited by monsters. Johnny then discusses the matter with Abraham Van Helsing who uses his Monsterfication Ray to turn Johnny into a giant lizard-like monster. But the ray can also turn monsters into humans. Once Dracula discovers what Johnny has done, he attempts to turn Johnny back before Mavis finds out. The plan backfires and Dracula gets hit with the ray and is turned human. His friends Wayne, Griffin, Murray, and Frankenstein are also turned human. If a cure isn’t found, the results may be permanent.
The highlight of the film is the transformation sequences since they are noticeably inspired by the horror film genre; specifically An American Werewolf in London. The end credits sequence is also done in a similar style to the first three films, so that sequence is fairly entertaining as well.
Transformania otherwise feels like a downgrade all around and the bar wasn’t all the high to begin with. As expected, there is a dancing sequence that may or may not be something you look forward to. None of the gags come off as humorous as every character mostly seems to be aiming to be more obnoxious than the other. The “fun” lies within seeing the monster characters as humans. The most notable is Griffin who has been totally invisible until now.
Hotel Transylvania: Transformania had a lot of obstacles relating to its release and after viewing the film you can understand why. It’s a lukewarm sendoff that mostly feels like a lethargic attempt to recapture its former glory. It’s built around an entertaining concept that it doesn’t fully capitalize on. It ultimately obliterates character traits for trite gags and cliché punch lines.
Despite some character designs (Bela in the second film, the Kraken in the third) and some tremendous end credit animations that are done in a very recognizable Tartakavsky style (think Dexter’s Lab or Powerpuff Girls), the films are mediocre at best and yet became a billion dollar franchise.
Hull and Abrell do a decent job matching their voices to the Drac and Frank characters. You may not have noticed the characters were voiced by someone else if you hadn’t known beforehand. However, the animation looks noticeably different. Maybe new directors Jennifer Kluska and Derek Drymon are to credit for that. Kluska was a storyboard artist on Hotel Transylvania 2 and 3 while Drymon was an executive producer of Adventure Time and was a storyboard artist on The Spongebob Squarepants Movie.
The film was also moved around several times thanks to COVID and the pandemic. Sony Pictures Releasing eventually nixed the film’s theatrical run and sold distribution rights to Amazon Studios. This is the only Hotel Transylvania film to be released directly to a streaming platform.
Considering that this is the fourth film, Transformania basically rewrites several characters to an extent that it ignores key details from other films. Johnny is now akin to Homer Simpson since he is dumber than he has ever been here. He had a stoner or frat boy with a heart of gold kind of vibe about him originally. He was very mellow by nature, but had seen a good chunk of the world and knew more than his behavior let on. He had stories even though he was young and he was likeable. Transformania turns him into a dumb and unfunny dork that is borderline offensive due to how annoying he is.
Dracula has lost whatever made him somewhat charming in the previous three films, as well. In Transformania, he’s looking to settle down with Ericka and retire from running the hotel. The intention is to give the hotel to Mavis and Johnny, but all of a sudden Dracula hates Johnny. The first three films are built around how close Johnny and Dracula become. Now Dracula just finds Johnny unbearable.
After establishing in the second film that Dennis is part vampire and has powers, that concept is totally erased in Transformania. Dracula hypnotizes Dennis in the beginning of the film and he remains that way for the bulk of the film without ever utilizing any sort of power or doing anything remotely relevant.
Instead of downright telling Johnny that he can’t stand him, Dracula lies and says that he can’t leave the hotel in the hands of a human; it can only be inherited by monsters. Johnny then discusses the matter with Abraham Van Helsing who uses his Monsterfication Ray to turn Johnny into a giant lizard-like monster. But the ray can also turn monsters into humans. Once Dracula discovers what Johnny has done, he attempts to turn Johnny back before Mavis finds out. The plan backfires and Dracula gets hit with the ray and is turned human. His friends Wayne, Griffin, Murray, and Frankenstein are also turned human. If a cure isn’t found, the results may be permanent.
The highlight of the film is the transformation sequences since they are noticeably inspired by the horror film genre; specifically An American Werewolf in London. The end credits sequence is also done in a similar style to the first three films, so that sequence is fairly entertaining as well.
Transformania otherwise feels like a downgrade all around and the bar wasn’t all the high to begin with. As expected, there is a dancing sequence that may or may not be something you look forward to. None of the gags come off as humorous as every character mostly seems to be aiming to be more obnoxious than the other. The “fun” lies within seeing the monster characters as humans. The most notable is Griffin who has been totally invisible until now.
Hotel Transylvania: Transformania had a lot of obstacles relating to its release and after viewing the film you can understand why. It’s a lukewarm sendoff that mostly feels like a lethargic attempt to recapture its former glory. It’s built around an entertaining concept that it doesn’t fully capitalize on. It ultimately obliterates character traits for trite gags and cliché punch lines.