Search
Search results
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Doom Patrol in TV
Jul 4, 2020
Not Your Average Superhero Show - 7/10
Doom Patrol Is a 2019 action/sci-fi, comedy/drama superhero TV series based on the DC comic created by writers Arnold Drake and Bob Haney and artist Bruno Premiani. It was developed by Jeremy Carver, and produced by DC Entertainment and Warner Bros. Television for DC Universe. Doom Patrol is a spin-off of Titans, a superhero TV series also on DC Universe. Starring Brendan Fraser, Timothy Dalton, Alan Tudyk, Matt Bomer and April Bowlby.
Doom Patrol picks up after the events of Titans, and finds the titular heroes in the town of Cloverton, Ohio. However they are a long, long way from being anything resembling heroes. The group consisting of Robotman/Clifford "Cliff" Steele (Brendan Fraser), Negative-man/Larry Trainor (Matt Bomer), Elasti-woman/Rita Farr (April Bowlby) and Crazy Jane/Kay (Diane Guerrero) are taken in by Chief/Dr. Niles Caulder (Timothy Dalton).
They each have suffered horrible accidents that have left them scarred or disfigured but also imbued them with superpowers. They have come together in Doom Manor under the guidance of Dr. Caulder to try and overcome their own demons. However when the good Dr. leaves the manor, a quick venture into the town for the team has far-reaching consequences. An enemy called Mr. Nobody (Alan Tudyk) comes to exact revenge and takes the doctor and everyone in the town with him. Luckily they are left with a possible new member and old friend of the doctor, who has come to check on the town and him, Cyborg (Jovian Wade) from Titans.
This show is really weird and definitely not for everyone. I didn't have the opportunity to watch the Titans show before this, so I don't know how much it affects it in anyway or if it's in the same vein. I also never read the Doom Patrol comics. It didn't seem to me like there was a clear plot at first but the writers are definitely going for a unique and captivating way of grabbing the audience. It's also rated TV-MA and it feels like they're kind of going for that Deadpool audience and a dark humor comedy feel. That being said it's not terrible, it really grows on you. To me the first episode was kind of hit or miss but by the second episode it really pulls you in. The characters motivations and backgrounds are very unique and emotionally appealing. The general atmosphere of the show was kind of all over the place; I mean it's a little bit drama, a little bit action, sometimes slightly horror and kind of gory and a superhero element on top of all all of it, plus sci-fi.
There is a pretty exclusively entertaining character, the narrator/villain Mr. nobody who is played by Alan Tudyk. He is very funny and charismatic and isn't afraid to break the fourth wall, right away in the beginning of the first episode. I guess it's a pretty good show but not for everyone, I would give it a 7/10.
Doom Patrol picks up after the events of Titans, and finds the titular heroes in the town of Cloverton, Ohio. However they are a long, long way from being anything resembling heroes. The group consisting of Robotman/Clifford "Cliff" Steele (Brendan Fraser), Negative-man/Larry Trainor (Matt Bomer), Elasti-woman/Rita Farr (April Bowlby) and Crazy Jane/Kay (Diane Guerrero) are taken in by Chief/Dr. Niles Caulder (Timothy Dalton).
They each have suffered horrible accidents that have left them scarred or disfigured but also imbued them with superpowers. They have come together in Doom Manor under the guidance of Dr. Caulder to try and overcome their own demons. However when the good Dr. leaves the manor, a quick venture into the town for the team has far-reaching consequences. An enemy called Mr. Nobody (Alan Tudyk) comes to exact revenge and takes the doctor and everyone in the town with him. Luckily they are left with a possible new member and old friend of the doctor, who has come to check on the town and him, Cyborg (Jovian Wade) from Titans.
This show is really weird and definitely not for everyone. I didn't have the opportunity to watch the Titans show before this, so I don't know how much it affects it in anyway or if it's in the same vein. I also never read the Doom Patrol comics. It didn't seem to me like there was a clear plot at first but the writers are definitely going for a unique and captivating way of grabbing the audience. It's also rated TV-MA and it feels like they're kind of going for that Deadpool audience and a dark humor comedy feel. That being said it's not terrible, it really grows on you. To me the first episode was kind of hit or miss but by the second episode it really pulls you in. The characters motivations and backgrounds are very unique and emotionally appealing. The general atmosphere of the show was kind of all over the place; I mean it's a little bit drama, a little bit action, sometimes slightly horror and kind of gory and a superhero element on top of all all of it, plus sci-fi.
There is a pretty exclusively entertaining character, the narrator/villain Mr. nobody who is played by Alan Tudyk. He is very funny and charismatic and isn't afraid to break the fourth wall, right away in the beginning of the first episode. I guess it's a pretty good show but not for everyone, I would give it a 7/10.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Justice League: War (2014) in Movies
Aug 16, 2019
February 4th saw the release of another Warner Bros. Animation film in the
Justice League franchise titled ‘War.’ DC Comics is continuing to bolster
its brand with regular animated releases, and they are doing a great job.
The film opens as an obvious origin story. Fans of the previous animated
films or TV series will notice some overt departures from the standard fare
of the last few years.
Green Lantern (Hal Jordan) and Batman lead off the film with their first
meeting in Gotham City, working quickly to solve a strange spree of
criminal abductions. As the two broker a tenuous peace and learn to work
together, they realize the Mother Box they found is linked to others like
it, and they head to Metropolis.
Wonder Woman, on her way to meet the President of the United States,
encounters winged beasts similar to ones fought by Green Lantern, Batman,
and Superman. What’s unusual is that this time she uses a sword to
dispatch her enemies. It’s something I’ve rarely seen in previous comics
or animated works.
The Flash, Shazam, and Cyborg all make appearances, and the team’s
structure gradually comes together. Meanwhile, the villain reveals himself:
Darkseid (who is one of my favorite DC villains).
This story is told wonderfully, with great action sequences and voice
acting (Sean Astin and Alan Tudyk – notable names). Overall, I was pleased
and entertained.
That said, there are a few major oddities within the film that stuck out as
strong deviations from the norm.
First, Superman kills someone. Despite the circumstances, I was still
shocked to see his character taken in that direction.
Second, somebody drops the S-bomb. I’ve never seen swearing in a “young
adult” film before, and though it was only used once, I was still taken
aback.
Third, the portrayal of Darkseid. He’s a great villain because of his
physical prowess, omega beams, and intellect. The first two were
represented in fine fashion, but the last was woefully lacking. Nothing
about this film showcased his intellect at all.
Fourth, Shazam seems to favor his lightening powers over his physical
assaults, which again, is in contradiction to most other comics and
animations.
While I found all of these examples strange and uncharacteristic with
respect to the usual formula, none of them were significant enough to be
considered a problem. I’m curious to see where this new trend goes. Will
DC use this as a platform to start a new chain of films or TV shows? Will
the language and body count continue to escalate? These are questions for
the ages.
Bottom line: if you are a fan of the genre, please watch it. You won’t be
disappointed.
Justice League franchise titled ‘War.’ DC Comics is continuing to bolster
its brand with regular animated releases, and they are doing a great job.
The film opens as an obvious origin story. Fans of the previous animated
films or TV series will notice some overt departures from the standard fare
of the last few years.
Green Lantern (Hal Jordan) and Batman lead off the film with their first
meeting in Gotham City, working quickly to solve a strange spree of
criminal abductions. As the two broker a tenuous peace and learn to work
together, they realize the Mother Box they found is linked to others like
it, and they head to Metropolis.
Wonder Woman, on her way to meet the President of the United States,
encounters winged beasts similar to ones fought by Green Lantern, Batman,
and Superman. What’s unusual is that this time she uses a sword to
dispatch her enemies. It’s something I’ve rarely seen in previous comics
or animated works.
The Flash, Shazam, and Cyborg all make appearances, and the team’s
structure gradually comes together. Meanwhile, the villain reveals himself:
Darkseid (who is one of my favorite DC villains).
This story is told wonderfully, with great action sequences and voice
acting (Sean Astin and Alan Tudyk – notable names). Overall, I was pleased
and entertained.
That said, there are a few major oddities within the film that stuck out as
strong deviations from the norm.
First, Superman kills someone. Despite the circumstances, I was still
shocked to see his character taken in that direction.
Second, somebody drops the S-bomb. I’ve never seen swearing in a “young
adult” film before, and though it was only used once, I was still taken
aback.
Third, the portrayal of Darkseid. He’s a great villain because of his
physical prowess, omega beams, and intellect. The first two were
represented in fine fashion, but the last was woefully lacking. Nothing
about this film showcased his intellect at all.
Fourth, Shazam seems to favor his lightening powers over his physical
assaults, which again, is in contradiction to most other comics and
animations.
While I found all of these examples strange and uncharacteristic with
respect to the usual formula, none of them were significant enough to be
considered a problem. I’m curious to see where this new trend goes. Will
DC use this as a platform to start a new chain of films or TV shows? Will
the language and body count continue to escalate? These are questions for
the ages.
Bottom line: if you are a fan of the genre, please watch it. You won’t be
disappointed.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Hail To The King Baby
Godzilla: King of The Monsters is a 2019 monster movie directed by Michael Dougherty and written by Dougherty, Zach Shields, and Max Borenstein. It was produced by Legendary Pictures and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. The film was dedicated to the original Godzilla suit performer Haruo Nakajima and executive producer Yoshimitsu Banno. The movie stars Kyle Chandler, Vera Farmiga, Millie Bobby Brown, Ken Watanabe and Zhang Ziyi.
Working to track down and study Titans (giant-God like monsters) for the organization Monarch, Paleobiologist Emma Russell (Vera Farmiga) and her daughter Madison (Millie Bobby Brown) witness the birth of a giant larva monster named Mothra. The monster is hostile until Emma uses a device called "Orca", which only Titans can hear, to calm it down until eco-terrorists attack, led by Alan Jonah (Charles Dance) and kidnap both her and her daughter. Monarch scientists and soldiers approach Mark (Kyle Chandler), Emma's ex-husband, to track them down and soon they are headed towards Antarctica, where Jonah intends to free a Titan encased in ice called "Monster Zero".
This movie had classic Godzilla flick written all over it and it did not disappoint. The visual effects were awesome, from the way the monsters looked, to the blasts they utilized and even things like explosions were all top notch. The music was also outstanding, as many classic Godzilla themes made a comeback including Mothra's theme. The action sequences far exceeded those of it's predecessor Godzilla 2014, There was plenty of monster battles to make this a fan favorite for years to come. Now I do have to agree with some of the critics and say that the storyline was a little thin and predictable but that didn't stop the film from being enjoyable. And some critics complained about underdeveloped human characters, but in all honesty, the human characters are not why the fans are going to see this movie. I thought the main cast of characters had enough development, it's just that compared to a normal Godzilla film or even the last one, there were a lot of secondary characters or supporting cast. Which to me personally, made the film feel more full. This movie checked a lot of my boxes for what I've come to expect in a Godzilla/giant monster movie and made me happy when I watched it in theaters. It had its down time in certain parts and slow building scenes or moments where it seemed the audience in consensus chose to use that time to run to the restroom and back. But other than that and some predictable plot points and character actions this movie was great.
Working to track down and study Titans (giant-God like monsters) for the organization Monarch, Paleobiologist Emma Russell (Vera Farmiga) and her daughter Madison (Millie Bobby Brown) witness the birth of a giant larva monster named Mothra. The monster is hostile until Emma uses a device called "Orca", which only Titans can hear, to calm it down until eco-terrorists attack, led by Alan Jonah (Charles Dance) and kidnap both her and her daughter. Monarch scientists and soldiers approach Mark (Kyle Chandler), Emma's ex-husband, to track them down and soon they are headed towards Antarctica, where Jonah intends to free a Titan encased in ice called "Monster Zero".
This movie had classic Godzilla flick written all over it and it did not disappoint. The visual effects were awesome, from the way the monsters looked, to the blasts they utilized and even things like explosions were all top notch. The music was also outstanding, as many classic Godzilla themes made a comeback including Mothra's theme. The action sequences far exceeded those of it's predecessor Godzilla 2014, There was plenty of monster battles to make this a fan favorite for years to come. Now I do have to agree with some of the critics and say that the storyline was a little thin and predictable but that didn't stop the film from being enjoyable. And some critics complained about underdeveloped human characters, but in all honesty, the human characters are not why the fans are going to see this movie. I thought the main cast of characters had enough development, it's just that compared to a normal Godzilla film or even the last one, there were a lot of secondary characters or supporting cast. Which to me personally, made the film feel more full. This movie checked a lot of my boxes for what I've come to expect in a Godzilla/giant monster movie and made me happy when I watched it in theaters. It had its down time in certain parts and slow building scenes or moments where it seemed the audience in consensus chose to use that time to run to the restroom and back. But other than that and some predictable plot points and character actions this movie was great.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Marriage Story (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
One Mann’s Movies Review of “Marriage Story” – a “Kramer vs Kramer lite” in my book, albeit with some great acting performances.
K vs K Lite.
For me, mention the phrase “divorce movie” and there’s only one film that comes to mind – the Oscar-laden classic from 1979 starring an immaculate Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep. THAT toy plane; THOSE stiches! (Gulp). This is the yardstick by which I judge such movies… and to be honest, “Marriage Story” didn’t measure up.
The story.
We start the movie seeing the apparently idyllic married life of theatre impresario Charlie (Adam Driver) and his lead actress and muse Nicole (Scarlett Johansson), together bringing up their young child. But spin forwards and the pair are in the middle of an ‘amicable’ separation, with Nicole returning to her home roots in California and Charlie having an expensive commute to and from New York where he’s struggling to premiere his show on Broadway.
But despite an agreement to keep lawyers out of the equation, Nicole is persuaded to lawyer up with Nora Fanshaw (Laura Dern) tightening up the legal screws until Charlie’s life risks being torn apart. It’s time for him to fight back.
Well regarded by the Academy.
As for “Kramer vs Kramer”, this is a movie that has been garlanded with multiple Oscar nominations. Both Driver and Johansson are nominated in the lead acting roles and Laura Dern seems to be favourite for the Best Supporting Actress gong (after winning the Golden Globe and the BAFTA). Three more Oscar nominations come for the score (by Randy Newman); the original screenplay (by director Noah Baumbach); and a Best Film nomination.
Both leads deliver really emotional performances, with Johansson in particular being very believable in the role. But who knew she was so short?! She always strikes me as a statuesque beauty, but she’s only 5′ 3” and it’s particularly noticeable in a scene filmed at Warner Brothers Studios.
It’s also fabulous to see both the great Alan Alda (here showing signs of his Parkinson’s) and Ray Liotta on screen again, as both low-rent and top-dollar lawyers respectively.
But WHY exactly are they divorcing?
I found the whole set up of the movie as frustrating. There seemed no clear understanding of why the separation is happening. True there is an affair involved (and Mrs Movie Man and I have always lived our nearly 40 years of marriage with the understanding that a “one strike” rule applies). But notwithstanding that, it seems to be more of a ‘drifting apart’ that’s gone on. I just wanted to give them a good shaking and get them to work it out!
This is all obviously unfair – because (and I also know this from experience) that in many marriages ‘shit happens’: some people do just want to do different things; feel suffocated; etc. And – thinking about it – I’m not sure there was any real reason given for Meryl Streep‘s departure in K vs K: which was part of the reason for Dustin Hoffman‘s character’s frustration.
Who do you sympathise with?
This is a movie where the audience is bound to take a side. But for me, there was only one side to take and that was Charlie’s. The actions of Nicole seem reprehensible and unforgivable, and when there are lines to be crossed she seems to have little hesitation in crossing them.
Many people seem to rave about this movie, but…
…I found the pace to be inconsistent. At one point, the story just stops for a soulful rendition by Charlie of a song in a bar, and I frankly just got bored with it. And while there’s a steady build up of the legal case involved, suddenly we seem to skip to a resolution without any real rationale for it. Or did I fall asleep??
A further irritation for me was Julie Hagerty as Nicole’s mum Sandra. She does the kooky mum turn that she did perfectly well in last year’s funny “Instant Family“, but its a role that really didn’t seem to fit in this movie. There’s an element of slapstick comedy in these scenes that just didn’t suit the general tone of the movie.
Overall, I just don’t share the love for this movie. Given the choice, I’d much rather watch Kramer vs Kramer again.
And what was that punchline?
By the way, Alan Alda is a fantastic comedian, and really knows how to deliver a joke. In this movie he’s regaling Charlie with a long-winded story (on the clock) when Charlie interrupts him. How did it end…. Alda revealed the full joke after a press screening at the New York Film Festival… and it’s a corker!
This woman’s at her hairdresser’s, and she says, “I’m going to Rome on holiday.”
He says, “Oh really, what airline are you taking?”
She says, “Alitalia.”
He says, “Alitalia, are you crazy? That’s terrible, don’t take that.”
He says, “Where are you gonna stay?”
She says, “I’m gonna stay at The Hassler.”
“The Hassler! What, are you kidding? They’re renovating the Hassler. You’ll hear hammering all night long. You won’t sleep! What are you gonna see?”
She says, “I think I’m going to try to go to the Vatican.” “The Vatican? You’ll be standing in line all day long—”
(Charlie interrupts at this point, but the joke goes on)
So she goes to Rome. She comes back, and the hairdresser says, “How was it?”
She says, “It was a great trip, it was wonderful.”
“How was the Vatican?”
“Wonderful! We happened to meet the Pope.”
“You met the Pope?”
“Yeah, and he spoke to me.”
“What did he say to you?”
“He said, ‘Where’d you get that f***ing haircut?’”
LOL!
For me, mention the phrase “divorce movie” and there’s only one film that comes to mind – the Oscar-laden classic from 1979 starring an immaculate Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep. THAT toy plane; THOSE stiches! (Gulp). This is the yardstick by which I judge such movies… and to be honest, “Marriage Story” didn’t measure up.
The story.
We start the movie seeing the apparently idyllic married life of theatre impresario Charlie (Adam Driver) and his lead actress and muse Nicole (Scarlett Johansson), together bringing up their young child. But spin forwards and the pair are in the middle of an ‘amicable’ separation, with Nicole returning to her home roots in California and Charlie having an expensive commute to and from New York where he’s struggling to premiere his show on Broadway.
But despite an agreement to keep lawyers out of the equation, Nicole is persuaded to lawyer up with Nora Fanshaw (Laura Dern) tightening up the legal screws until Charlie’s life risks being torn apart. It’s time for him to fight back.
Well regarded by the Academy.
As for “Kramer vs Kramer”, this is a movie that has been garlanded with multiple Oscar nominations. Both Driver and Johansson are nominated in the lead acting roles and Laura Dern seems to be favourite for the Best Supporting Actress gong (after winning the Golden Globe and the BAFTA). Three more Oscar nominations come for the score (by Randy Newman); the original screenplay (by director Noah Baumbach); and a Best Film nomination.
Both leads deliver really emotional performances, with Johansson in particular being very believable in the role. But who knew she was so short?! She always strikes me as a statuesque beauty, but she’s only 5′ 3” and it’s particularly noticeable in a scene filmed at Warner Brothers Studios.
It’s also fabulous to see both the great Alan Alda (here showing signs of his Parkinson’s) and Ray Liotta on screen again, as both low-rent and top-dollar lawyers respectively.
But WHY exactly are they divorcing?
I found the whole set up of the movie as frustrating. There seemed no clear understanding of why the separation is happening. True there is an affair involved (and Mrs Movie Man and I have always lived our nearly 40 years of marriage with the understanding that a “one strike” rule applies). But notwithstanding that, it seems to be more of a ‘drifting apart’ that’s gone on. I just wanted to give them a good shaking and get them to work it out!
This is all obviously unfair – because (and I also know this from experience) that in many marriages ‘shit happens’: some people do just want to do different things; feel suffocated; etc. And – thinking about it – I’m not sure there was any real reason given for Meryl Streep‘s departure in K vs K: which was part of the reason for Dustin Hoffman‘s character’s frustration.
Who do you sympathise with?
This is a movie where the audience is bound to take a side. But for me, there was only one side to take and that was Charlie’s. The actions of Nicole seem reprehensible and unforgivable, and when there are lines to be crossed she seems to have little hesitation in crossing them.
Many people seem to rave about this movie, but…
…I found the pace to be inconsistent. At one point, the story just stops for a soulful rendition by Charlie of a song in a bar, and I frankly just got bored with it. And while there’s a steady build up of the legal case involved, suddenly we seem to skip to a resolution without any real rationale for it. Or did I fall asleep??
A further irritation for me was Julie Hagerty as Nicole’s mum Sandra. She does the kooky mum turn that she did perfectly well in last year’s funny “Instant Family“, but its a role that really didn’t seem to fit in this movie. There’s an element of slapstick comedy in these scenes that just didn’t suit the general tone of the movie.
Overall, I just don’t share the love for this movie. Given the choice, I’d much rather watch Kramer vs Kramer again.
And what was that punchline?
By the way, Alan Alda is a fantastic comedian, and really knows how to deliver a joke. In this movie he’s regaling Charlie with a long-winded story (on the clock) when Charlie interrupts him. How did it end…. Alda revealed the full joke after a press screening at the New York Film Festival… and it’s a corker!
This woman’s at her hairdresser’s, and she says, “I’m going to Rome on holiday.”
He says, “Oh really, what airline are you taking?”
She says, “Alitalia.”
He says, “Alitalia, are you crazy? That’s terrible, don’t take that.”
He says, “Where are you gonna stay?”
She says, “I’m gonna stay at The Hassler.”
“The Hassler! What, are you kidding? They’re renovating the Hassler. You’ll hear hammering all night long. You won’t sleep! What are you gonna see?”
She says, “I think I’m going to try to go to the Vatican.” “The Vatican? You’ll be standing in line all day long—”
(Charlie interrupts at this point, but the joke goes on)
So she goes to Rome. She comes back, and the hairdresser says, “How was it?”
She says, “It was a great trip, it was wonderful.”
“How was the Vatican?”
“Wonderful! We happened to meet the Pope.”
“You met the Pope?”
“Yeah, and he spoke to me.”
“What did he say to you?”
“He said, ‘Where’d you get that f***ing haircut?’”
LOL!