Search
Search results
JT (287 KP) rated The Bounty Hunter (2010) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Jennifer Aniston is the queen of the rom-com no one would disagree with that. But she is running the risk (if not already) of becoming so type cast we wonder if she’ll ever be able to leave the genre again. It’s not all bad, but one can sometimes have too much of a good thing.
In The Bounty Hunter she is paired along side heart throb Gerard Butler who is no stranger to the more sensitive side of his persona having ventured into romance with Hilary Swank in P.S. I Love You. (a better film I would say).
It’s a fun filled plot and for sheer entertainment value its good, but the storyline is weak using Aniston’s reporter to scrape together a story surrounding a mysterious suicide while at the same time avoiding her bounty hunting ex husband (Butler) is clutching at comedy straws.
The on screen chemistry between the pair is one of the few positive things to come out of the film, both look like they enjoyed each other both played well off each other. The problem is that from the off you know exactly what the ending is going to be and how the pair will reach the conclusion by way of slightly un funny dialogue and poorly executed action.
Director Andy Turner brings us nothing that we haven’t already seen, and nothing unique that we would have like to have seen. If you’re an Aniston fan then it might be worth the run time, but it certainly doesn’t warrant a place at the top of any list.
In The Bounty Hunter she is paired along side heart throb Gerard Butler who is no stranger to the more sensitive side of his persona having ventured into romance with Hilary Swank in P.S. I Love You. (a better film I would say).
It’s a fun filled plot and for sheer entertainment value its good, but the storyline is weak using Aniston’s reporter to scrape together a story surrounding a mysterious suicide while at the same time avoiding her bounty hunting ex husband (Butler) is clutching at comedy straws.
The on screen chemistry between the pair is one of the few positive things to come out of the film, both look like they enjoyed each other both played well off each other. The problem is that from the off you know exactly what the ending is going to be and how the pair will reach the conclusion by way of slightly un funny dialogue and poorly executed action.
Director Andy Turner brings us nothing that we haven’t already seen, and nothing unique that we would have like to have seen. If you’re an Aniston fan then it might be worth the run time, but it certainly doesn’t warrant a place at the top of any list.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Old Guard (2020) in Movies
Jul 26, 2020
Decent entertainment
I never hold out much hope for Netflix original films, however I was pleasantly surprised with this as it managed to hold my attention throughout with a decent amount of entertainment.
The star of this film is undoubtedly Charlize Theron. There no one better to call when you want a kick ass female lead, and she plays this role to perfection in the same way she did Atomic Blonde. She is without a doubt the best thing about this film. However the rest of the cast are decent - it’s been a while since I’ve seen Matthias Schoenaerts in anything and Chiwetel Ejiofor is always good, but I do think they have been let down a little by the majority of the focus being on Andy.
The plot is probably the biggest letdown with this film as immortality aside, this is nothing new. It’s full of one dimensional bad guys (Harry Melling hamming it up to the max) and plot twists that you can see coming a mile off. However despite the plot unoriginality, the action and the general fast pace of the film along with the endearing cast, the fitting flashbacks and the decision not to explain the immortality origins (I hate it when films concoct overelaborate explanations that are entirely unnecessary) make for a pretty enjoyable and entertaining watch. The 2 hours virtually fly by. I’m not convinced by the sequel baiting ending as I dislike films doing this, but would I watch a sequel? Actually yes I would.
The star of this film is undoubtedly Charlize Theron. There no one better to call when you want a kick ass female lead, and she plays this role to perfection in the same way she did Atomic Blonde. She is without a doubt the best thing about this film. However the rest of the cast are decent - it’s been a while since I’ve seen Matthias Schoenaerts in anything and Chiwetel Ejiofor is always good, but I do think they have been let down a little by the majority of the focus being on Andy.
The plot is probably the biggest letdown with this film as immortality aside, this is nothing new. It’s full of one dimensional bad guys (Harry Melling hamming it up to the max) and plot twists that you can see coming a mile off. However despite the plot unoriginality, the action and the general fast pace of the film along with the endearing cast, the fitting flashbacks and the decision not to explain the immortality origins (I hate it when films concoct overelaborate explanations that are entirely unnecessary) make for a pretty enjoyable and entertaining watch. The 2 hours virtually fly by. I’m not convinced by the sequel baiting ending as I dislike films doing this, but would I watch a sequel? Actually yes I would.
MasterSolace (19 KP) rated Toy Story 4 (2019) in Movies
Jun 30, 2019
Pixar animation on point. (3 more)
All the familiar... voices?
Great story, as always(suck it Illumination)
You WILL cry
Expected... unexpected jump scare is expected. (1 more)
You WILL cry
The Necessary Unnecessary Sequel
Contains spoilers, click to show
Here is Toy Story 4. When you thought it was all over with Toy Story 3, how in the hell did we need this one. Well... lemme tell you... we did.
Quick recap, what happened at the end of Toy Story 3? Andy went off to college, and gave ALL of his toys to a little girl named Bonnie. That was it.
But was it?
So why was this story necessary? Without telling you EXACTLY how the movie goes...... what happens with toys when they go to a new owner? How about the idea of toys that are unwanted? And what about defective toys? Or those that are sitting on the shelf of an antique shop?
It also tackles the mystery of what happened to Bo Peep. Great to tie up that one loose end.
And then we come to Forkie. The "toy" that Bonnie made her first day of kindergarten. It's a spork. With pipe cleaner, popsicle stick, and googly eyes. In a parallel from the first movie, Buzz thought he was the REAL Buzz, and Woody has to help him realize he is a toy...... well... Forkie thinks he is trash... and Woody has to explain to him that he is a toy. Weird, but satisfying. And dammit... Trash!!!!
Watching this movie, made me miss Jim Varney. If you don't know who that is, lemme find an Ernest DVD box for ya, and I slap you with it. Also. Rest In Potatohead Parts, Don Rickles.
Last note... Toy Story 4 is another example of amazing animation AND story. Illumination Studios can't grasp that yet.
If you haven't seen it, go see it. Not like a "maybe you should". No... go see it.
Take some Kleenex
Quick recap, what happened at the end of Toy Story 3? Andy went off to college, and gave ALL of his toys to a little girl named Bonnie. That was it.
But was it?
So why was this story necessary? Without telling you EXACTLY how the movie goes...... what happens with toys when they go to a new owner? How about the idea of toys that are unwanted? And what about defective toys? Or those that are sitting on the shelf of an antique shop?
It also tackles the mystery of what happened to Bo Peep. Great to tie up that one loose end.
And then we come to Forkie. The "toy" that Bonnie made her first day of kindergarten. It's a spork. With pipe cleaner, popsicle stick, and googly eyes. In a parallel from the first movie, Buzz thought he was the REAL Buzz, and Woody has to help him realize he is a toy...... well... Forkie thinks he is trash... and Woody has to explain to him that he is a toy. Weird, but satisfying. And dammit... Trash!!!!
Watching this movie, made me miss Jim Varney. If you don't know who that is, lemme find an Ernest DVD box for ya, and I slap you with it. Also. Rest In Potatohead Parts, Don Rickles.
Last note... Toy Story 4 is another example of amazing animation AND story. Illumination Studios can't grasp that yet.
If you haven't seen it, go see it. Not like a "maybe you should". No... go see it.
Take some Kleenex
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated It: Chapter Two (2019) in Movies
Sep 13, 2019
Part of this post is sponsored by 4DX Cinemas. With poignancy and heart on its side, 2017’s IT managed to avoid its occasional flaws to become an unnerving addition to the horror genre. While the film could never be classed as outright terrifying, the character of Pennywise, portrayed exceptionally by Bill Skarsgard, is an unsettling antagonist and one of the best in film.
Two years later, the town of Derry is back on the big screen in Andy Muschietti’s epic conclusion. But at nearly 3 hours long, is IT: Chapter Two just a bloated mess, or does it float to new heights?
Defeated by members of the Losers’ Club, the evil clown Pennywise returns 27 years later to terrorise the town of Derry, Maine, once again. Now adults, the childhood friends have long since gone their separate ways. But when people start disappearing, Mike Hanlon (Isaiah Mustafa) calls the others home for one final stand. Damaged by scars from the past, the united Losers must conquer their deepest fears to destroy the shape-shifting Pennywise – who is now more powerful than ever.
The film follows many of the same tropes as its predecessor, with beautiful cinematography and excellent performances masking some shoddy CGI and an over-reliance on jump scares, and while it does lack the simplicity and tightly-wound script of its predecessor, IT: Chapter Two is even more unsettling.
For director Andy Muschietti, it’s clear that the training wheels are off. After being guided through the process by Warner Bros. first time around, the success of IT (it grossed over $700million worldwide) now means he’s been free to splash his creative vision all over the screen – and it shows. A deeply disconcerting opening involving two of Derry’s LGBT community and some town bigots lets the audience know early on that this is going to be even darker and much more graphic than its predecessor.
From a casting point of view, they couldn’t have done better. Each adult version of the Loser’s Club nicely embodies their child counterpart, even if we spend more time with some than others. James McAvoy is as reliable as ever and Jessica Chastain plays Beverly nicely but it’s in Bill Hader and James Ransome that we find the perfect embodiments of their juvenile characters.
Hader and Ransome share the same chemistry that made Eddie and Richie so watchable in the first instalment and there is even some well-judged poignancy to go with their playful teasing. The Chinese restaurant scene, a fan favourite from the book and the TV mini-series, is present and correct and remains a highlight over the course of the running time.
IT: Chapter Two is a confident finale to one of 2017’s best films; filled with exceptional performances
Praise must be given to the scriptwriters here as ensembles of this size can all too often get lost with little character development. Thankfully, each cast member feels fully fleshed out, meaning we care for them a lot more than your typical horror-movie character.
However, this is Bill Skarsgard’s film and Pennywise is as menacing as ever. Skarsgard turns up the ante here with his physical performance being absolutely incredible. This portrayal is Heath Ledger Joker levels of good. It would be a shame if he wasn’t recognised officially for the exceptional work he has done to bring this wretched character to life.
While much of the film sees the Loser’s Club separate from each other as they try to locate tokens from their pasts, this allows the production team to create some truly staggering set pieces – although it’s unfortunate that many of them have been spoilt in the trailers. The much-marketed house of mirrors scene is brief but leaves a lasting impression and there’s a sequence early on involving a small girl that was really troubling.
Unfortunately, it’s not all good news. While the pacing for such a long film is spot on, the appearances of our titular character are not. Despite being billed as appearing more often, the movie’s gargantuan length means that Pennywise doesn’t feel like he’s on screen for any longer than in the first instalment. With such a great character and performance, it would have been nice to see him a little more.
And while you’ll have noticed me using adjectives like ‘unsettling’ and ‘unnerving’, the film isn’t truly scary unless Pennywise in clown form is on the screen. That’s mainly down to some of the CGI used to create the monsters. As in its predecessor, IT: Chapter Two’s monsters feel too glossy, lacking in any true sense of realism.
Nevertheless, IT: Chapter Two is a confident finale to one of 2017’s best films; filled with exceptional performances and the wit and humour that made its predecessor such a hit. While not reaching quite the same dizzy heights as that film and relying even more on jump scares, as a pair, it’s hard to think of a horror series that has made its mark in the last decade quite as much as IT.
⭐⭐⭐⭐ IT: Chapter Two in 4DX
I was unsure how a horror film would translate to 4DX but the good news is that the experience became even more immersive, with sight, smell and feel all being utilised to great effect.
Soaring over Derry, the advanced seating that 4DX provides means that you feel like you’re flying over the town too. Of course, while this is a pleasant experience when the film is playing nicely, as soon as the horror hits, 4DX jolts you back to reality with some well-timed movement, strobe lighting and weather effects.
A nice touch in this film was the use of smell, something not utilised in Hobbs & Shaw. Every time Pennywise was about to appear on screen, a sweet aroma would fill the cinema, lulling you into a false sense of security. It was a nice effect that added to the drama of the film beautifully.
Naturally, being a horror film, rain was utilised a lot and having the spray nozzle behind your seat was great. Although you are able to turn it off if you so wish, having the weather effects left on meant that you became immersed in what was happening on screen.
This was my first experience of 4D cinema utilised in a horror film and the overall impact was one that added to the terror rather than detracted from it. I would highly recommend viewing IT: Chapter Two in 4DX, and you can book tickets at 19 Cineworld locations across the UK.
Two years later, the town of Derry is back on the big screen in Andy Muschietti’s epic conclusion. But at nearly 3 hours long, is IT: Chapter Two just a bloated mess, or does it float to new heights?
Defeated by members of the Losers’ Club, the evil clown Pennywise returns 27 years later to terrorise the town of Derry, Maine, once again. Now adults, the childhood friends have long since gone their separate ways. But when people start disappearing, Mike Hanlon (Isaiah Mustafa) calls the others home for one final stand. Damaged by scars from the past, the united Losers must conquer their deepest fears to destroy the shape-shifting Pennywise – who is now more powerful than ever.
The film follows many of the same tropes as its predecessor, with beautiful cinematography and excellent performances masking some shoddy CGI and an over-reliance on jump scares, and while it does lack the simplicity and tightly-wound script of its predecessor, IT: Chapter Two is even more unsettling.
For director Andy Muschietti, it’s clear that the training wheels are off. After being guided through the process by Warner Bros. first time around, the success of IT (it grossed over $700million worldwide) now means he’s been free to splash his creative vision all over the screen – and it shows. A deeply disconcerting opening involving two of Derry’s LGBT community and some town bigots lets the audience know early on that this is going to be even darker and much more graphic than its predecessor.
From a casting point of view, they couldn’t have done better. Each adult version of the Loser’s Club nicely embodies their child counterpart, even if we spend more time with some than others. James McAvoy is as reliable as ever and Jessica Chastain plays Beverly nicely but it’s in Bill Hader and James Ransome that we find the perfect embodiments of their juvenile characters.
Hader and Ransome share the same chemistry that made Eddie and Richie so watchable in the first instalment and there is even some well-judged poignancy to go with their playful teasing. The Chinese restaurant scene, a fan favourite from the book and the TV mini-series, is present and correct and remains a highlight over the course of the running time.
IT: Chapter Two is a confident finale to one of 2017’s best films; filled with exceptional performances
Praise must be given to the scriptwriters here as ensembles of this size can all too often get lost with little character development. Thankfully, each cast member feels fully fleshed out, meaning we care for them a lot more than your typical horror-movie character.
However, this is Bill Skarsgard’s film and Pennywise is as menacing as ever. Skarsgard turns up the ante here with his physical performance being absolutely incredible. This portrayal is Heath Ledger Joker levels of good. It would be a shame if he wasn’t recognised officially for the exceptional work he has done to bring this wretched character to life.
While much of the film sees the Loser’s Club separate from each other as they try to locate tokens from their pasts, this allows the production team to create some truly staggering set pieces – although it’s unfortunate that many of them have been spoilt in the trailers. The much-marketed house of mirrors scene is brief but leaves a lasting impression and there’s a sequence early on involving a small girl that was really troubling.
Unfortunately, it’s not all good news. While the pacing for such a long film is spot on, the appearances of our titular character are not. Despite being billed as appearing more often, the movie’s gargantuan length means that Pennywise doesn’t feel like he’s on screen for any longer than in the first instalment. With such a great character and performance, it would have been nice to see him a little more.
And while you’ll have noticed me using adjectives like ‘unsettling’ and ‘unnerving’, the film isn’t truly scary unless Pennywise in clown form is on the screen. That’s mainly down to some of the CGI used to create the monsters. As in its predecessor, IT: Chapter Two’s monsters feel too glossy, lacking in any true sense of realism.
Nevertheless, IT: Chapter Two is a confident finale to one of 2017’s best films; filled with exceptional performances and the wit and humour that made its predecessor such a hit. While not reaching quite the same dizzy heights as that film and relying even more on jump scares, as a pair, it’s hard to think of a horror series that has made its mark in the last decade quite as much as IT.
⭐⭐⭐⭐ IT: Chapter Two in 4DX
I was unsure how a horror film would translate to 4DX but the good news is that the experience became even more immersive, with sight, smell and feel all being utilised to great effect.
Soaring over Derry, the advanced seating that 4DX provides means that you feel like you’re flying over the town too. Of course, while this is a pleasant experience when the film is playing nicely, as soon as the horror hits, 4DX jolts you back to reality with some well-timed movement, strobe lighting and weather effects.
A nice touch in this film was the use of smell, something not utilised in Hobbs & Shaw. Every time Pennywise was about to appear on screen, a sweet aroma would fill the cinema, lulling you into a false sense of security. It was a nice effect that added to the drama of the film beautifully.
Naturally, being a horror film, rain was utilised a lot and having the spray nozzle behind your seat was great. Although you are able to turn it off if you so wish, having the weather effects left on meant that you became immersed in what was happening on screen.
This was my first experience of 4D cinema utilised in a horror film and the overall impact was one that added to the terror rather than detracted from it. I would highly recommend viewing IT: Chapter Two in 4DX, and you can book tickets at 19 Cineworld locations across the UK.
Kristin (149 KP) rated When the Siren Calls (The Siren, #1) in Books
Dec 7, 2018
Disclaimer: I was given an e-copy from the author in exchange for an honest review.
Infidelity, fraud, and just plain ol' lying: That's what Julian "Jay" Brooke is all about. Whether he's running around with his mistress Lucy, trying to get into the pants of assistant Gina or the married Isobel, or selling timeshares at inflated prices to the filthy rich, Jay always has something up his sleeve. Can he get away with it all, or is it just a house of cards, waiting to come down?
Isobel Roberts is a married woman, on vacation with her husband in Morocco when she first encounters Jay, who saves her from an unsightly development in the market. From that point on, she thinks of him, her feelings growing into more than she's ready for, or so she thinks. What will she choose to do: Stay committed to her husband, or stray into the arms (and bed) of another (married) man?
There are so many characters in this book whose stories grab your attention (aside from Jay and Isobel). Lucy's feisty in trying to get her way in her relationship with Jay; Isobel's friend Maria is the no-nonsense birdie on Isobel's shoulder, helping her along throughout her decisions, whether good or bad; Andy Skinner is always trying to figure out just what Jay has pulled him into with this timeshare business in Tuscany, and whether or not he's getting screwed in the process; and so many more. With all the people involved, how long will it take for Jay's lies to come to the surface, or will he get away with everything?
Honestly, almost from the jump I wanted Jay to get caught at something, whether it was the infidelity, the fraud in Tuscany, just something. There's so many people in the world just like him, who think they're above everything and everyone and nothing can touch them, and I REALLY wanted someone to knock him down a peg (or several). There's schemes going on, underhanded business deals, price-gouging against "holiday tourists", and so much more. For the life of me, I wanted to just scream at all the characters to get them to catch onto it all.
The reason I dropped to 4 stars is because I got a little confused in the beginning as to the timeline, as weeks/months would pass between chapters, which bounce back and forth between characters, so I had a hard time keeping track for a little while. However, the time frame slows down, and it's easier to tell what's going on after the first quarter or so of the story.
Now, all that being said, DOES Jay ever get caught? Do his lies catch up to him, either in his personal or professional life, or does he get away scot-free? You'll have to read and see! =)
4 stars
Infidelity, fraud, and just plain ol' lying: That's what Julian "Jay" Brooke is all about. Whether he's running around with his mistress Lucy, trying to get into the pants of assistant Gina or the married Isobel, or selling timeshares at inflated prices to the filthy rich, Jay always has something up his sleeve. Can he get away with it all, or is it just a house of cards, waiting to come down?
Isobel Roberts is a married woman, on vacation with her husband in Morocco when she first encounters Jay, who saves her from an unsightly development in the market. From that point on, she thinks of him, her feelings growing into more than she's ready for, or so she thinks. What will she choose to do: Stay committed to her husband, or stray into the arms (and bed) of another (married) man?
There are so many characters in this book whose stories grab your attention (aside from Jay and Isobel). Lucy's feisty in trying to get her way in her relationship with Jay; Isobel's friend Maria is the no-nonsense birdie on Isobel's shoulder, helping her along throughout her decisions, whether good or bad; Andy Skinner is always trying to figure out just what Jay has pulled him into with this timeshare business in Tuscany, and whether or not he's getting screwed in the process; and so many more. With all the people involved, how long will it take for Jay's lies to come to the surface, or will he get away with everything?
Honestly, almost from the jump I wanted Jay to get caught at something, whether it was the infidelity, the fraud in Tuscany, just something. There's so many people in the world just like him, who think they're above everything and everyone and nothing can touch them, and I REALLY wanted someone to knock him down a peg (or several). There's schemes going on, underhanded business deals, price-gouging against "holiday tourists", and so much more. For the life of me, I wanted to just scream at all the characters to get them to catch onto it all.
The reason I dropped to 4 stars is because I got a little confused in the beginning as to the timeline, as weeks/months would pass between chapters, which bounce back and forth between characters, so I had a hard time keeping track for a little while. However, the time frame slows down, and it's easier to tell what's going on after the first quarter or so of the story.
Now, all that being said, DOES Jay ever get caught? Do his lies catch up to him, either in his personal or professional life, or does he get away scot-free? You'll have to read and see! =)
4 stars
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated American Horror Story - Season 7 in TV
Mar 8, 2020
Season 7 of American Horror Story, subtitled Cult, is a weird one. Instead of focusing on the supernatural, ghosts, witches, haunted houses, Cult is a trip through the delicacy of the human mind. It instead looks at fears, real world issues, and of course, the presence of an all too familiar cult like family.
This makes for some of the best and worst aspects of AHS Cult. The plot leans heavily into politics this time around, originally airing not long Donald Trump was sworn in. I personally like that this season takes this real world event, and explores the horror that some people experienced during this time. Others would argue that it's very on-the-nose, which is somewhat true. Some of the political leanings carry all the subtlety of a stampeding cattle herd, andnat times can feel heavy handed.
Underneath all of the IRL shit that's going on, we also have a plot of intrigue and mystery, as the main character Ally (Sarah Paulson) is being apparently being stalked and pursued by clowns - her worst fear. We are given reason to believe that perhaps Ally is losing her mind, off her meds, upset with the election result, but as the season continues, you find yourself questioning whether she is in fact being gaslighted. Manipulation of what you believe to be true or false is a terrible horror all on its own, and a big reason why I rate this season highly.
The star of Cult for me though was of course Evan Peters. Playing a deranged political candidate called Kai Anderson, it's not long before his extreme right views Garner him a following, and the titular cult is created. To say anymore would be considered spoilers, but rest assured that all of these plot strands weave together by the time the story climaxes.
Evan Peters role in Cult is my favourite performance if his to date. His character is simultaneously charming, terrifying, smart, and unhinged, and he does a fantastic job in bringing him to life.
The plot also touches upon other real world figures, such as Charles Manson. Those parts were pretty interesting, but when the show flashes back and focuses on Valerie Solanis (Lena Dunham), it lost me a bit. I like when AHS includes real life characters, and it's always fun to see how they are interpreted in this kind of media, but it goes a bit overboard with it's hammy stuff (again) at times - the whole Andy Warhol plot was a massive eye roll in my book - and the Solanis stuff is just plain unenjoyable to watch.
This whole side plot really drags down the quality of cult to me, but the strong performances by Sarah Paulson and Evan Peters is enough to keep it in a higher placing for me.
Certainly not my favourite, and certainly not my least, Cult sits somewhere in the middle, and I can only praise the writers for trying something new with the horror element. Good stuff.
This makes for some of the best and worst aspects of AHS Cult. The plot leans heavily into politics this time around, originally airing not long Donald Trump was sworn in. I personally like that this season takes this real world event, and explores the horror that some people experienced during this time. Others would argue that it's very on-the-nose, which is somewhat true. Some of the political leanings carry all the subtlety of a stampeding cattle herd, andnat times can feel heavy handed.
Underneath all of the IRL shit that's going on, we also have a plot of intrigue and mystery, as the main character Ally (Sarah Paulson) is being apparently being stalked and pursued by clowns - her worst fear. We are given reason to believe that perhaps Ally is losing her mind, off her meds, upset with the election result, but as the season continues, you find yourself questioning whether she is in fact being gaslighted. Manipulation of what you believe to be true or false is a terrible horror all on its own, and a big reason why I rate this season highly.
The star of Cult for me though was of course Evan Peters. Playing a deranged political candidate called Kai Anderson, it's not long before his extreme right views Garner him a following, and the titular cult is created. To say anymore would be considered spoilers, but rest assured that all of these plot strands weave together by the time the story climaxes.
Evan Peters role in Cult is my favourite performance if his to date. His character is simultaneously charming, terrifying, smart, and unhinged, and he does a fantastic job in bringing him to life.
The plot also touches upon other real world figures, such as Charles Manson. Those parts were pretty interesting, but when the show flashes back and focuses on Valerie Solanis (Lena Dunham), it lost me a bit. I like when AHS includes real life characters, and it's always fun to see how they are interpreted in this kind of media, but it goes a bit overboard with it's hammy stuff (again) at times - the whole Andy Warhol plot was a massive eye roll in my book - and the Solanis stuff is just plain unenjoyable to watch.
This whole side plot really drags down the quality of cult to me, but the strong performances by Sarah Paulson and Evan Peters is enough to keep it in a higher placing for me.
Certainly not my favourite, and certainly not my least, Cult sits somewhere in the middle, and I can only praise the writers for trying something new with the horror element. Good stuff.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Old Guard (2020) in Movies
Aug 27, 2020
Kick Ass Action (2 more)
Good Casting and Supporting Actors/Characters
Cool Concept
The Musical Score/ Soundtrack (3 more)
Some characters were a little cliché
Characters not fully developed or given enough backstory
Dialogue
In With The Old Guard (7/10)
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Old Guard is 2020 action movie directed by Gina Prince-Bythewood and written by Greg Rucka, The film was produced by Skydance Media, Denver and Delilah Productions and Marc Evans Productions and distributed by Netflix. Producers on the movie include David Ellison, Dana Goldberg, Don Granger, Charlize Theron, AJ Dix, Beth Kono and Marc Evans. The film stars Charlize Theron, Kiki Layne, Marwan Kenzari, Luca Marinelli and Matthias Schoenaerts.
Andy (Charlize Theron), and her covert group of tight-knit immortals have fought and protected the mortal world for centuries with their mysterious inability to die. With their extraordinary abilities suddenly exposed on an emergency mission, the group finds themselves hunted by those who will stop at nothing to replicate their power. Nile (Kiki Layne), the newest soldier, joins their ranks, to help the group eliminate the threat and avoid capture as they find out who's found them.
This move was pretty bad ass. I liked it quite a bit. Charlize Theron definitely kicks ass as Andy in this flick and has a bunch of really cool action sequences throughout the film. The supporting cast was really good as well. I hadn't heard of the graphic novel or comic that it was based off of by the film's writer Greg Rucka but now I really want to check it out because the backstory they give the characters and their actions seem really cool. Now I know a lot of people give the whole girl power thing bad energy online and a lot of stuff gets hate and trolls for stuff like that but I dig this film. (examples Captain Marvel, The girl power scene in Endgame, etc...) I definitely got that vibe that the director was a woman without even paying attention to it in the opening credits and that's not a bad thing, just an observation. The way certain things happened in the movie, the soundtrack (which was good but felt like it didn't match) and the two main characters/protagonists are female as well. I think Gina Prince-Bythewood did a great job in mixing in the story and the action in this movie. Of course when coming up with a cool concept like this there always going to be plot holes or things that don't make sense and this movie is no exception, some characters are a little cliché but there acting pretty good and their performances were good but the dialogue definitely suffered from the writing. There was some weird lines in there and some scenes that just kind of faltered. The villain wasn't that memorable and the film had some slow places, not that pacing was off but maybe dragged on a little too long. I think this movie was still great good though and if you're looking for a good action flick to check out you should definitely give it a try, I give it a 7/10.
Spoiler Section Review:
Man, I have seen this movie getting ripped on reviews online and a lot of it is actually on the soundtrack. Now I understand completely, to me the song choices were off for the mood or tone of the film from the beginning but I saw what "they" were going for because all the songs had a similar theme which was connected by women. It was one of the reasons I felt like the movie was directed by a woman before I looked it up. Now I didn't hate the music, I actually liked some of the songs but for some people I can understand how it distracts, how it lessens in a way the impact of the cinematography and graphic violence of the film. Also the plot holes and logic when it comes to cool concept like the one for this movie. Like when they heal, the bullets get pushed out of their body, but what about Andy's earrings? That's literally the only example of plot holes I've found in other reviews, but every review hating on it says that. Other people hated on it's "woke politics" whatever that means and cheap and lacking in most places. I'll admit that they dropped the ball on putting in decent enough backstory for the characters who were supposed to have live for hundreds of years. You would think they would have some good flashback scenes but they only show a couple and some are weird and blurry sometimes. They just really dropped the ball on developing the characters more or giving you a reason to like them or care about them. They're were the two gay guys but for some people that is a little cliché already because everyone movie is trying to be inclusive now so it comes off as unoriginal. I'll admit that Kiki Layne's performance could be better in certain scenes especially in the beginning some of the girl soldiers didn't seem like "real soldiers" whatever that means, lol. but didn't look the part or act the part. And even at the end her character totally just shifts into kill mode when the whole time she couldn't get over the first person she killed and we're supposed to believe that she believes in the cause the fight for now. I mean she has some good scenes too though. There's just a lot of convenience or hand of god ("deus ex machina") throughout the movie. It's hard for me to give this a higher score when some of the points against it are legitimate but I think some of them are just haters. Anyways I give this movie a 7/10 and I for one personally can't wait for the sequel.
Andy (Charlize Theron), and her covert group of tight-knit immortals have fought and protected the mortal world for centuries with their mysterious inability to die. With their extraordinary abilities suddenly exposed on an emergency mission, the group finds themselves hunted by those who will stop at nothing to replicate their power. Nile (Kiki Layne), the newest soldier, joins their ranks, to help the group eliminate the threat and avoid capture as they find out who's found them.
This move was pretty bad ass. I liked it quite a bit. Charlize Theron definitely kicks ass as Andy in this flick and has a bunch of really cool action sequences throughout the film. The supporting cast was really good as well. I hadn't heard of the graphic novel or comic that it was based off of by the film's writer Greg Rucka but now I really want to check it out because the backstory they give the characters and their actions seem really cool. Now I know a lot of people give the whole girl power thing bad energy online and a lot of stuff gets hate and trolls for stuff like that but I dig this film. (examples Captain Marvel, The girl power scene in Endgame, etc...) I definitely got that vibe that the director was a woman without even paying attention to it in the opening credits and that's not a bad thing, just an observation. The way certain things happened in the movie, the soundtrack (which was good but felt like it didn't match) and the two main characters/protagonists are female as well. I think Gina Prince-Bythewood did a great job in mixing in the story and the action in this movie. Of course when coming up with a cool concept like this there always going to be plot holes or things that don't make sense and this movie is no exception, some characters are a little cliché but there acting pretty good and their performances were good but the dialogue definitely suffered from the writing. There was some weird lines in there and some scenes that just kind of faltered. The villain wasn't that memorable and the film had some slow places, not that pacing was off but maybe dragged on a little too long. I think this movie was still great good though and if you're looking for a good action flick to check out you should definitely give it a try, I give it a 7/10.
Spoiler Section Review:
Man, I have seen this movie getting ripped on reviews online and a lot of it is actually on the soundtrack. Now I understand completely, to me the song choices were off for the mood or tone of the film from the beginning but I saw what "they" were going for because all the songs had a similar theme which was connected by women. It was one of the reasons I felt like the movie was directed by a woman before I looked it up. Now I didn't hate the music, I actually liked some of the songs but for some people I can understand how it distracts, how it lessens in a way the impact of the cinematography and graphic violence of the film. Also the plot holes and logic when it comes to cool concept like the one for this movie. Like when they heal, the bullets get pushed out of their body, but what about Andy's earrings? That's literally the only example of plot holes I've found in other reviews, but every review hating on it says that. Other people hated on it's "woke politics" whatever that means and cheap and lacking in most places. I'll admit that they dropped the ball on putting in decent enough backstory for the characters who were supposed to have live for hundreds of years. You would think they would have some good flashback scenes but they only show a couple and some are weird and blurry sometimes. They just really dropped the ball on developing the characters more or giving you a reason to like them or care about them. They're were the two gay guys but for some people that is a little cliché already because everyone movie is trying to be inclusive now so it comes off as unoriginal. I'll admit that Kiki Layne's performance could be better in certain scenes especially in the beginning some of the girl soldiers didn't seem like "real soldiers" whatever that means, lol. but didn't look the part or act the part. And even at the end her character totally just shifts into kill mode when the whole time she couldn't get over the first person she killed and we're supposed to believe that she believes in the cause the fight for now. I mean she has some good scenes too though. There's just a lot of convenience or hand of god ("deus ex machina") throughout the movie. It's hard for me to give this a higher score when some of the points against it are legitimate but I think some of them are just haters. Anyways I give this movie a 7/10 and I for one personally can't wait for the sequel.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Toy Story 4 (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Funny, Heartwarming, And Beautifully Animated
Toy Story 4 is a 2019 CG/comedy movie directed by Josh Cooley and based on screenplay written by Andrew Stanton, and Stephany Folsom; along with John Lasseter, Rashida Jones, Will McCormack, Valerie LaPointe, and Martin Hynes. It was produced by Picard Animation Studios for Walt Disney Pictures and distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures. The film stars Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Annie Potts, Tony Hale, Keegan-Michael Key, Jordan Peele and Keanu Reeves.
Woody (Tom Hanks) and the other toys are happy in their new life after Andy donates his toys to Bonnie; but Woody worries Bonnie will feel overwhelmed at school when she starts kindergarten. Woody sneaks into her backpack and recovers her arts and crafts supplies when a classmate throws them away. She uses the supplies, including a spork Woody grabbed to create a handmade toy she names "Forky" (Tony Hale). And when Bonnie and her family go on a road trip, Forky jumps out of the window setting off a chain of events that will change the group forever.
This movie was funny, stunningly animated, and emotionally touching. They really were shooting to impress with the amount of detail they had in this movie, from the glossy porcelain shine of Bopeep, to the fur on the cat, to all the other toys little details. I liked how the action was very character driven and how the storytelling was really well done. The character growth/arc for Bopeep was one of my favorites and I really enjoyed the cast of new characters and how they were incorporated as well like, Keanu Reeves and Key and Peele. This was such a great movie and it got me choked up at the end of the movie and I couldn't find anything to really complain about but then I read an article that made me question how I felt about it and what I saw. I'll see if I can add the link to it at the end of my review. It ultimately made me drop my rating by a point, I almost gave this movie a 9, but I give it a 8/10. But I do give it my "Must See Seal Of Approval".
Here is the link to the article: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/theres-a-problem-with-toy-story-4-opinion/1100-6468073/
Woody (Tom Hanks) and the other toys are happy in their new life after Andy donates his toys to Bonnie; but Woody worries Bonnie will feel overwhelmed at school when she starts kindergarten. Woody sneaks into her backpack and recovers her arts and crafts supplies when a classmate throws them away. She uses the supplies, including a spork Woody grabbed to create a handmade toy she names "Forky" (Tony Hale). And when Bonnie and her family go on a road trip, Forky jumps out of the window setting off a chain of events that will change the group forever.
This movie was funny, stunningly animated, and emotionally touching. They really were shooting to impress with the amount of detail they had in this movie, from the glossy porcelain shine of Bopeep, to the fur on the cat, to all the other toys little details. I liked how the action was very character driven and how the storytelling was really well done. The character growth/arc for Bopeep was one of my favorites and I really enjoyed the cast of new characters and how they were incorporated as well like, Keanu Reeves and Key and Peele. This was such a great movie and it got me choked up at the end of the movie and I couldn't find anything to really complain about but then I read an article that made me question how I felt about it and what I saw. I'll see if I can add the link to it at the end of my review. It ultimately made me drop my rating by a point, I almost gave this movie a 9, but I give it a 8/10. But I do give it my "Must See Seal Of Approval".
Here is the link to the article: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/theres-a-problem-with-toy-story-4-opinion/1100-6468073/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Devil Wears Prada (2006) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
I was watching The Devil Wears Prada the other day on ITV2 and forgot just how brilliant a film it is, it really did exceed expectations back then in 2006 and even now in 2011. Here’s the review I wrote all those years ago. Enjoy!
David Frankel, a rather unknown television director makes his debut on the silver screen in this stunning adaptation of Lauren Weisberger’s not so stunning novel, The Devil Wears Prada.
Anne Hathaway and Meryl Streep join a mesmerising cast in this surprisingly brilliant rom-com. The premise is simple and kept that way to ensure all detail is carried across in depth without missing any major points from the novel. Weisberger should be astounded that Frankel managed to turn her rather lacklustre book into a first-rate movie.
Anne Hathaway plays ‘Andy Sax’, an unknown journalist with no eye for fashion who wants to get her foot on the bottom ladder of the media industry. Her character simply leaps off the screen, from her dopey, lovable personality to her cheap, second rate clothing; she is truly a joy to watch. Emily Blunt plays the fashion conscious assistant who would do anything and everything to get as high as possible in the clothing industry; again, her character is played with a love/hate finesse that few actresses of 2006 can match.
However, by far the best performance is given by Meryl Streep as ‘Miranda Priestly’, editor and chief of ‘Runway’ magazine. Sly, career obsessed with a dash of emotionality added in, she is exceptional in her role and should be seriously considered for an Oscar at this years awards. Her dialogue is spoken with a heartless brilliance that no other actress could even hold a candle to, she is perfectly cast in this role.
Stanley Tucci plays a somewhat flat member of the team, possibly due to his little screen time, but he is by no means dull, with personality abound.
The soundtrack is genius, and perfectly matched to the film, from the outset right up until the closing credits, each song is flawlessly integrated into the feature. Camera-work is also on par with the best of this year and really helps the characters stand out in their roles.
Where most rom-coms use cheap gags to gain laughs from the audience, Prada expects you to think a little more about what you’re laughing at, a deep message about ones self discovery is incorporated, but well hidden in the film. Of course there are a few laughs of the cheap kind, but unusually, they are actually funny. Comedy really doesn’t get much better than right here.
Some scenes in the film have been directed so well, that the more emotional among us may be reaching for the tissues. The transition from comedy to seriousness is exceptionally watertight, you’ll be laughing one minute and on the edge of your seat the next.
The ending of the film is perhaps of a slight anti-climax, but it portrays a wonderfully deep message about inner emotion, leaving a huge smile on your face as the credits role.
To put it simply, The Devil Wears Prada is a practically faultless movie which should appeal to a huge and diverse range of people. The acting, direction and soundtrack are all absolutely perfect and I think we may have a found a future classic character in ‘Miranda Priestly.’ It’s a joy to watch. Be a devil and go see it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/01/19/a-blast-from-the-past-the-devil-wears-prada-2006/
David Frankel, a rather unknown television director makes his debut on the silver screen in this stunning adaptation of Lauren Weisberger’s not so stunning novel, The Devil Wears Prada.
Anne Hathaway and Meryl Streep join a mesmerising cast in this surprisingly brilliant rom-com. The premise is simple and kept that way to ensure all detail is carried across in depth without missing any major points from the novel. Weisberger should be astounded that Frankel managed to turn her rather lacklustre book into a first-rate movie.
Anne Hathaway plays ‘Andy Sax’, an unknown journalist with no eye for fashion who wants to get her foot on the bottom ladder of the media industry. Her character simply leaps off the screen, from her dopey, lovable personality to her cheap, second rate clothing; she is truly a joy to watch. Emily Blunt plays the fashion conscious assistant who would do anything and everything to get as high as possible in the clothing industry; again, her character is played with a love/hate finesse that few actresses of 2006 can match.
However, by far the best performance is given by Meryl Streep as ‘Miranda Priestly’, editor and chief of ‘Runway’ magazine. Sly, career obsessed with a dash of emotionality added in, she is exceptional in her role and should be seriously considered for an Oscar at this years awards. Her dialogue is spoken with a heartless brilliance that no other actress could even hold a candle to, she is perfectly cast in this role.
Stanley Tucci plays a somewhat flat member of the team, possibly due to his little screen time, but he is by no means dull, with personality abound.
The soundtrack is genius, and perfectly matched to the film, from the outset right up until the closing credits, each song is flawlessly integrated into the feature. Camera-work is also on par with the best of this year and really helps the characters stand out in their roles.
Where most rom-coms use cheap gags to gain laughs from the audience, Prada expects you to think a little more about what you’re laughing at, a deep message about ones self discovery is incorporated, but well hidden in the film. Of course there are a few laughs of the cheap kind, but unusually, they are actually funny. Comedy really doesn’t get much better than right here.
Some scenes in the film have been directed so well, that the more emotional among us may be reaching for the tissues. The transition from comedy to seriousness is exceptionally watertight, you’ll be laughing one minute and on the edge of your seat the next.
The ending of the film is perhaps of a slight anti-climax, but it portrays a wonderfully deep message about inner emotion, leaving a huge smile on your face as the credits role.
To put it simply, The Devil Wears Prada is a practically faultless movie which should appeal to a huge and diverse range of people. The acting, direction and soundtrack are all absolutely perfect and I think we may have a found a future classic character in ‘Miranda Priestly.’ It’s a joy to watch. Be a devil and go see it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/01/19/a-blast-from-the-past-the-devil-wears-prada-2006/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Hamilton (2020) in Movies
Jul 5, 2020
Captures the power of being in "the room where it happens"
I'll just cut to the chase, the filmed version of the mega-hit stage musical HAMILTON (now streaming on Disney+) is terrific. If you are one of the few that have not seen this, check it out - you'll be glad you did.
I could go on and on about the Pulitzer-Prize winning show, the script, the music, the performances and/or the cross-cultural casting - all of which works to perfection, but what separates this film from the other hit Broadway shows that are converted to film is how well that the filmmakers were able to translate the power of being inside the theater during a live performance of this show.
Credit, of course, needs to go to the visionaries responsible for this show, creator/writer/star Lin-Manuel Miranda and Director Thomas Kail. They realized pretty early on (when the show was becoming the phenomenon that it has become) that they wanted to preserve this event for future generations, so started making plans to film the show - in High Def - with an audience and without an audience (for close-ups). In June 2016, about a month before the original cast started leaving the show (and right after the show won 11 Tony Awards), they spent $10 million to capture the show - with live audiences on Sunday and Tuesday and then spent the rest of Sunday night and all day Monday doing close-ups and crane shots to augment the action.
The results are outstanding. The wide-shots show the breadth of the production - showing the strong, Tony Award winning choreography by Andy Blankenbuehler, the unique, minimal and highly versatile set, the Tony Award winning costumes by Paul Tazewell and the Lighting Design that earned Howell Blinkley a Tony. All of these are showcased in this film - special note should be made about the Lighting that needed to be tweaked on the spot for the filming.
As for the close-ups, they showcase the wry smile and comedic delight that Tony winner Daveed Diggs shows in his roles as Lafayette/Jefferson, the power and sorrow of Tony Award winner Renee Elise Goldsberry - her spotlight number SATISFIED is as "perfect" a musical number as you will ever see. The powerful acting of Leslie Odom, Jr. as Aaron Burr (who won the Tony as Best Actor over Lin-Manuel's performance as Hamilton) as well as terrific supporting turns by the likes of Anthony Ramos (Lawrence/Phillip), Chris Jackson (showing real leadership as George Washington) and Okieriete Onaodwoan as Hercules Mulligan (one of my absolute favorite characters in this show)./James Madison.
Special note should be made to Jonathan Groff's portrayal of King George III - it is, basically, a cameo role, but he is filmed with such tight close-ups (showing spittle rolling down has chin as he sings) that marvelously juxtaposes King George's real emotions with that of the words he is speaking.
But, of course, the real star is Lin-Manuel Miranda - the genius creative force behind Hamilton. Interestingly enough, I thought his performance was the weakest of the lead cast (don't get me wrong, he was still excellent - just not "as excellent" as some of the others). His true vision, of course, was to tell the story of "the people of that era" as told by "the people of our era".
That is the true genius of Hamilton.
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars out of 10 (can I turn this up to 11)?
I could go on and on about the Pulitzer-Prize winning show, the script, the music, the performances and/or the cross-cultural casting - all of which works to perfection, but what separates this film from the other hit Broadway shows that are converted to film is how well that the filmmakers were able to translate the power of being inside the theater during a live performance of this show.
Credit, of course, needs to go to the visionaries responsible for this show, creator/writer/star Lin-Manuel Miranda and Director Thomas Kail. They realized pretty early on (when the show was becoming the phenomenon that it has become) that they wanted to preserve this event for future generations, so started making plans to film the show - in High Def - with an audience and without an audience (for close-ups). In June 2016, about a month before the original cast started leaving the show (and right after the show won 11 Tony Awards), they spent $10 million to capture the show - with live audiences on Sunday and Tuesday and then spent the rest of Sunday night and all day Monday doing close-ups and crane shots to augment the action.
The results are outstanding. The wide-shots show the breadth of the production - showing the strong, Tony Award winning choreography by Andy Blankenbuehler, the unique, minimal and highly versatile set, the Tony Award winning costumes by Paul Tazewell and the Lighting Design that earned Howell Blinkley a Tony. All of these are showcased in this film - special note should be made about the Lighting that needed to be tweaked on the spot for the filming.
As for the close-ups, they showcase the wry smile and comedic delight that Tony winner Daveed Diggs shows in his roles as Lafayette/Jefferson, the power and sorrow of Tony Award winner Renee Elise Goldsberry - her spotlight number SATISFIED is as "perfect" a musical number as you will ever see. The powerful acting of Leslie Odom, Jr. as Aaron Burr (who won the Tony as Best Actor over Lin-Manuel's performance as Hamilton) as well as terrific supporting turns by the likes of Anthony Ramos (Lawrence/Phillip), Chris Jackson (showing real leadership as George Washington) and Okieriete Onaodwoan as Hercules Mulligan (one of my absolute favorite characters in this show)./James Madison.
Special note should be made to Jonathan Groff's portrayal of King George III - it is, basically, a cameo role, but he is filmed with such tight close-ups (showing spittle rolling down has chin as he sings) that marvelously juxtaposes King George's real emotions with that of the words he is speaking.
But, of course, the real star is Lin-Manuel Miranda - the genius creative force behind Hamilton. Interestingly enough, I thought his performance was the weakest of the lead cast (don't get me wrong, he was still excellent - just not "as excellent" as some of the others). His true vision, of course, was to tell the story of "the people of that era" as told by "the people of our era".
That is the true genius of Hamilton.
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars out of 10 (can I turn this up to 11)?