Search
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Willy's Wonderland (2021) in Movies
Mar 20, 2021
Could’ve been so much better
If you’ve seen the trailer for Willy’s Wonderland, you were no doubt wondering what on earth your eyes had just been witness to, and I’m afraid the full film doesn’t get any less demented. Willy’s Wonderland is a 2021 horror comedy from director Kevin Lewis that is every bit a modern day B-movie, complete with cheesy script and questionable acting. On paper it sounds like it should be entertainingly bad but silly, but unfortunately in reality it’s just bad.
Willy’s Wonderland follows a drifter (Nicolas Cage) who experiences car troubles on his way cross country, and is tricked into becoming a janitor overnight for the condemned Willy’s Wonderland to pay off his car repairs. Willy’s is a kids restaurant slash indoor play area themed around Willy the weasel and his animatronic friends, including a crocodile, chameleon, gorilla and ostrich. However Willy’s isn’t just your ordinary run down restaurant as it has a dark and horrific history involving murderers, criminals and satanic rituals. Now the friendly animatronic creatures have taken on a murderous life of their own and in a bid to appease them, the town elders (including the sheriff played by Beth Grant) have turned to tricking people travelling through into Willy’s to act as human sacrifices. Unfortunately the townsfolk don’t get quite what they expected with Cage’s unnamed drifter, who alongside local girl Liv (Emily Tosta), gives the demonic creatures a lot more than they bargained for.
I have been dying to watch this film since seeing the trailer. It looked like it’d be absolutely crazy silliness from start to finish and one of those films that are so bad they’re good. But as much as I wanted to like this, I feel like it fell short from what was promised. The first major problem is that it’s meant to be a horror comedy, but there was little humour on offer and the only time I really found myself laughing was at the sheer bizarreness of this entire film. Horror-wise there is a decent amount of blood and gore, but some of it looks badly done and unrealistic and there’s little to be scared of here either. Towards the start of the film there are a few creepy scenes with the animatronic animals, but as the story progresses the scares are lost and this is where the film suffers. It is possible to make a film that’s scary, funny and good (Cabin in the Woods is a shining example), but sadly Willy’s Wonderland doesn’t pull it off.
The fight scenes are lost due to the crazy artistic and surreal style of camera work, meaning you barely have a clue what’s going on and the backing music to accompany these fight scenes doesn’t always work either. And then there’s Nicolas Cage. For some unknown reason, they’ve decided to make his character completely mute with absolutely no dialogue whatsoever. This works in the first few scenes, but as the story unfolds you find yourself crying out for him to say something, anything. If any film was suitable for Cage’s signature crazy eyed overacting, it’s this one and not utilising this is criminal. What were they thinking?! The script isn’t great and the majority of characters are entirely wasted and one dimensional, even for a horror film, with only Emily Tosta coming out of this relatively unscathed, so a bit of Cage’s acting could’ve really helped make this a lot more entertaining.
Willy’s Wonderland had a lot of promise, with an interesting and crazy B-movie horror storyline. However it’s the execution which has let it down, as it’s severely lacking in horror or comedy and doesn’t make use of the cast or promising story. It’s a shame as it’s semi enjoyable as is, but could’ve been so much better!
Willy’s Wonderland follows a drifter (Nicolas Cage) who experiences car troubles on his way cross country, and is tricked into becoming a janitor overnight for the condemned Willy’s Wonderland to pay off his car repairs. Willy’s is a kids restaurant slash indoor play area themed around Willy the weasel and his animatronic friends, including a crocodile, chameleon, gorilla and ostrich. However Willy’s isn’t just your ordinary run down restaurant as it has a dark and horrific history involving murderers, criminals and satanic rituals. Now the friendly animatronic creatures have taken on a murderous life of their own and in a bid to appease them, the town elders (including the sheriff played by Beth Grant) have turned to tricking people travelling through into Willy’s to act as human sacrifices. Unfortunately the townsfolk don’t get quite what they expected with Cage’s unnamed drifter, who alongside local girl Liv (Emily Tosta), gives the demonic creatures a lot more than they bargained for.
I have been dying to watch this film since seeing the trailer. It looked like it’d be absolutely crazy silliness from start to finish and one of those films that are so bad they’re good. But as much as I wanted to like this, I feel like it fell short from what was promised. The first major problem is that it’s meant to be a horror comedy, but there was little humour on offer and the only time I really found myself laughing was at the sheer bizarreness of this entire film. Horror-wise there is a decent amount of blood and gore, but some of it looks badly done and unrealistic and there’s little to be scared of here either. Towards the start of the film there are a few creepy scenes with the animatronic animals, but as the story progresses the scares are lost and this is where the film suffers. It is possible to make a film that’s scary, funny and good (Cabin in the Woods is a shining example), but sadly Willy’s Wonderland doesn’t pull it off.
The fight scenes are lost due to the crazy artistic and surreal style of camera work, meaning you barely have a clue what’s going on and the backing music to accompany these fight scenes doesn’t always work either. And then there’s Nicolas Cage. For some unknown reason, they’ve decided to make his character completely mute with absolutely no dialogue whatsoever. This works in the first few scenes, but as the story unfolds you find yourself crying out for him to say something, anything. If any film was suitable for Cage’s signature crazy eyed overacting, it’s this one and not utilising this is criminal. What were they thinking?! The script isn’t great and the majority of characters are entirely wasted and one dimensional, even for a horror film, with only Emily Tosta coming out of this relatively unscathed, so a bit of Cage’s acting could’ve really helped make this a lot more entertaining.
Willy’s Wonderland had a lot of promise, with an interesting and crazy B-movie horror storyline. However it’s the execution which has let it down, as it’s severely lacking in horror or comedy and doesn’t make use of the cast or promising story. It’s a shame as it’s semi enjoyable as is, but could’ve been so much better!
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated The ABCs of Death (2013) in Movies
Oct 3, 2020 (Updated Oct 3, 2020)
"𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴𝘯'𝘵 𝘢 𝘴𝘯𝘶𝘧𝘧 𝘧𝘪𝘭𝘮, 𝘪𝘵'𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘵." - Adam Wingard.
Q > O > T > L > J > I > Y > F > H > R > Z > A > D > G > M > P > S > U > X > B > W > V > C > K > N > E
I know everyone else generally has a distaste for them but I have such a soft spot for horror anthology films. Even the ones I don't really like such as 𝘟𝘟 I always find myself remembering vividly. This one in particular I not only thought was an absolute blast, but it also has a mightily commendable gimmick at the forefront (26 different directors of 26 different nationalities). Legit one of the weirdest, most devilishly fucked-up, humorous, grotesquely fetishistic + scatological horror films I've ever seen - a few of these segments I'm convinced are just actual kink porn lmfao. As you can probably surmise, a handful of the segments aren't so hot but truthfully none of them I thought were even close to awful (well, E was kind of crappy); the vast majority of them I found to be immensely enjoyable and all of them strung together make this a super fun ride as a whole. Guessing which word each director will utilize for their assigned letter is nearly as fun as watching them all play out. Luridly singular, sincerely morbid, and entertaining as hell - I'm fine with being one of the only ones who finds this surreal curio legitimately great.
Q > O > T > L > J > I > Y > F > H > R > Z > A > D > G > M > P > S > U > X > B > W > V > C > K > N > E
I know everyone else generally has a distaste for them but I have such a soft spot for horror anthology films. Even the ones I don't really like such as 𝘟𝘟 I always find myself remembering vividly. This one in particular I not only thought was an absolute blast, but it also has a mightily commendable gimmick at the forefront (26 different directors of 26 different nationalities). Legit one of the weirdest, most devilishly fucked-up, humorous, grotesquely fetishistic + scatological horror films I've ever seen - a few of these segments I'm convinced are just actual kink porn lmfao. As you can probably surmise, a handful of the segments aren't so hot but truthfully none of them I thought were even close to awful (well, E was kind of crappy); the vast majority of them I found to be immensely enjoyable and all of them strung together make this a super fun ride as a whole. Guessing which word each director will utilize for their assigned letter is nearly as fun as watching them all play out. Luridly singular, sincerely morbid, and entertaining as hell - I'm fine with being one of the only ones who finds this surreal curio legitimately great.
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Swamp Thing, Vol. 4: A Murder of Crows in Books
Nov 30, 2020
Earlier this year I had finished Vol. 3 and was ready to start on Vol. 4, but I just wasn't feeling it. The timing just wasn't right. So, I put off my re-visitation of Alan Moore's <b>EFFING BRILLIANT</b> SWAMP THING run...until the other night, when the "timing" returned and I devoured it two nights! Now, with that out of the way, onto my review...
In my reviews for the first three volumes, I mentioned that this was a re-visitation of sorts. It was always something I had intended, returning to a series I had not read since it first came out in the 80s, but it wasn't until going the digital route that I felt the time was due.
This is the volume that introduces that ol' bastard John Constantine, and for that alone, this volume is worth the price of admission! However, it was the path that Constantine sets Swampy on, and the tense and unforgettable finale that culminates in Issue 50, the last part of this volume! For that turns it all the way up to Eleven! Yeah, no Spoilers, despite it's age, but it is intense as a comic could be and then some!
Moore has become, in my eyes, some of a pain in the ass over the last few years. However, with SWAMP THING, as well as WATCHMEN and THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, he was totally on his game! There was not one issue in this volume that had me thinking, <i>"Yeah, this was good, but that one story was just absolute rubbish!"</i>. It was pure gold!
Now let it be said that I think the artwork of Jock is about as good as it gets as far as stirring horror images that stay with you long after the story is finished! However, after seeing the art of Stephen R. Bissette and John Tottleben, I was reminded of being scared reading this the first time out, and even now, on the re-read! Man, what I wouldn't give to seem them do another Swampy run, maybe even a guest spot on JUSTICE LEAGUE DARK! Oh, I am excited just imagining how frikkin' <b>AWESOME</b> that would be!
Look, there are a ton of great reviews out there, wherein the writer takes and analyzes everything of importance in this volume. And a number of those great reviews are right here on Goodreads! But, I can't add much to what has already been said! All I can add is this: You soooooo need to read this series! That's all I'm gonna say!
In my reviews for the first three volumes, I mentioned that this was a re-visitation of sorts. It was always something I had intended, returning to a series I had not read since it first came out in the 80s, but it wasn't until going the digital route that I felt the time was due.
This is the volume that introduces that ol' bastard John Constantine, and for that alone, this volume is worth the price of admission! However, it was the path that Constantine sets Swampy on, and the tense and unforgettable finale that culminates in Issue 50, the last part of this volume! For that turns it all the way up to Eleven! Yeah, no Spoilers, despite it's age, but it is intense as a comic could be and then some!
Moore has become, in my eyes, some of a pain in the ass over the last few years. However, with SWAMP THING, as well as WATCHMEN and THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, he was totally on his game! There was not one issue in this volume that had me thinking, <i>"Yeah, this was good, but that one story was just absolute rubbish!"</i>. It was pure gold!
Now let it be said that I think the artwork of Jock is about as good as it gets as far as stirring horror images that stay with you long after the story is finished! However, after seeing the art of Stephen R. Bissette and John Tottleben, I was reminded of being scared reading this the first time out, and even now, on the re-read! Man, what I wouldn't give to seem them do another Swampy run, maybe even a guest spot on JUSTICE LEAGUE DARK! Oh, I am excited just imagining how frikkin' <b>AWESOME</b> that would be!
Look, there are a ton of great reviews out there, wherein the writer takes and analyzes everything of importance in this volume. And a number of those great reviews are right here on Goodreads! But, I can't add much to what has already been said! All I can add is this: You soooooo need to read this series! That's all I'm gonna say!
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Mandy (2018) in Movies
Mar 16, 2019
What did I just watch?
Part of me was expecting or hoping this film to be like a cheesy old horror film, a proper B movie type with silly but impressive physical effects. Or something like Hobo with a Shotgun. Sadly apart from some fairly sparse decent physical effects, this film is nothing like what I expected.
This is obviously trying to be a very stylish 80s style trippy film, but for me the problem was it was too trippy. The almost constant red toned scenes had me feeling like I’d gone colourblind by the end, and I spent most of this film wondering what the hell was going on. It was far too trippy, to the point where I wish I had actually taken something to get me through the very long and dragging two hours! The only compliment I could really give this film is to say that it at least fitted in with Nicholas Cage and his terribly acting.
Sorry @Andy K !
This is obviously trying to be a very stylish 80s style trippy film, but for me the problem was it was too trippy. The almost constant red toned scenes had me feeling like I’d gone colourblind by the end, and I spent most of this film wondering what the hell was going on. It was far too trippy, to the point where I wish I had actually taken something to get me through the very long and dragging two hours! The only compliment I could really give this film is to say that it at least fitted in with Nicholas Cage and his terribly acting.
Sorry @Andy K !
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Rosemary's Baby (Rosemary's Baby, #1) in Books
Mar 15, 2018
<b><i>This is no dream, she thought. This is real, this is happening.</i></b>
<b>Note to self and others:</b> beware of overly friendly neighbours.
This is amazing. At just over 200 pages, this novel takes you on a hell (excuse the pun) of a journey that you wont forget anytime soon. Levin has managed to make a novel so witty, and at the same time, so terrifying. In a way, the tone of this book is reminiscent of American Psycho (or rather American Psycho is reminiscent of this as it came out afterwards), but rather than in-your-face vulgar gore, this is far more psychologically disturbing. Never has such a mundane life, as Rosemarys and Guys, ever been so horrifying.
Id already watched the movie when I picked this up, so I knew what this novel was about and what happened, and I think, maybe, that made me enjoy this <i>more.</i> When you know how the story plays out, the tension in this really grips you and you find yourself angry and empathetic towards Rosemarys naivety. I think if I went into this novel not knowing, Rosemary would have simply pissed me off, shes that sort of weak and dependant woman I oh-so hate in books, but it was a different experience for me, knowing what I know. Thats not to say you wont like this going into it blind, Im sure the tension and horror of this will affect you just the same way <i>and</i>_ you'll get the pleasure of the pure shock of the discovery, something I didn't.
Ive said previously that I find it hard to really <i>hate</i> a character in a book, as I often find things to like about them, despite all their bad ways, but thats not the case in this one. Lets just say there is one specific character in this I hate more than anyone (in any other book ever, so far) for their betrayal, all for their own selfish gain.
The ending of this novel is one of the hardest, if not <i>the</i> hardest to swallow. Its <i>so</i> distressing and <i>so</i> upsetting. I cant say anything more than that, but its truly awful.
Im really trying not to give too much away with this review, its hard not to say so many things, but I think its OK to mention the fact this book is about devilry (its written on the book as a quote from Capote so it cant exactly be ignored)! This is a truly terrifying novel, and if you had qualms about having children before, youll definitely have more after reading this book.
This is a one-sitting read for me and Im actually excited to re-read it sometime in the future. This work is a masterpiece. Levin is an incredible writer and Im now aiming to read the rest of his work by the end of the year (yes, even <i>Son of Rosemary</i>, even though it has the worst ratings ever).
P.S. Even if you dont like horror, youll most likely enjoy this book as its not openly trying to freak you out. Its far more a suspense novel that gets in your head.
<b>Note to self and others:</b> beware of overly friendly neighbours.
This is amazing. At just over 200 pages, this novel takes you on a hell (excuse the pun) of a journey that you wont forget anytime soon. Levin has managed to make a novel so witty, and at the same time, so terrifying. In a way, the tone of this book is reminiscent of American Psycho (or rather American Psycho is reminiscent of this as it came out afterwards), but rather than in-your-face vulgar gore, this is far more psychologically disturbing. Never has such a mundane life, as Rosemarys and Guys, ever been so horrifying.
Id already watched the movie when I picked this up, so I knew what this novel was about and what happened, and I think, maybe, that made me enjoy this <i>more.</i> When you know how the story plays out, the tension in this really grips you and you find yourself angry and empathetic towards Rosemarys naivety. I think if I went into this novel not knowing, Rosemary would have simply pissed me off, shes that sort of weak and dependant woman I oh-so hate in books, but it was a different experience for me, knowing what I know. Thats not to say you wont like this going into it blind, Im sure the tension and horror of this will affect you just the same way <i>and</i>_ you'll get the pleasure of the pure shock of the discovery, something I didn't.
Ive said previously that I find it hard to really <i>hate</i> a character in a book, as I often find things to like about them, despite all their bad ways, but thats not the case in this one. Lets just say there is one specific character in this I hate more than anyone (in any other book ever, so far) for their betrayal, all for their own selfish gain.
The ending of this novel is one of the hardest, if not <i>the</i> hardest to swallow. Its <i>so</i> distressing and <i>so</i> upsetting. I cant say anything more than that, but its truly awful.
Im really trying not to give too much away with this review, its hard not to say so many things, but I think its OK to mention the fact this book is about devilry (its written on the book as a quote from Capote so it cant exactly be ignored)! This is a truly terrifying novel, and if you had qualms about having children before, youll definitely have more after reading this book.
This is a one-sitting read for me and Im actually excited to re-read it sometime in the future. This work is a masterpiece. Levin is an incredible writer and Im now aiming to read the rest of his work by the end of the year (yes, even <i>Son of Rosemary</i>, even though it has the worst ratings ever).
P.S. Even if you dont like horror, youll most likely enjoy this book as its not openly trying to freak you out. Its far more a suspense novel that gets in your head.
JT (287 KP) rated Child's Play (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Re-imagining of classic horror films can go either way. They can stick close to the original while giving it a fresh injection of gore to satisfy the bloodthirsty millennials. Or deviate it from the storyline altogether to put its own spin on the narrative.
In the Child’s Play remake the original ‘Good Guy’ dolls have been replaced by 21st-century technology in the form of ‘Buddi’ dolls which, have been produced by Kaslan Industries. And instead of a psychotic serial killer transferring his soul to the body of a doll, Buddi has all of his safety features disabled by a disgruntled Kaslan employee. The change from possession to A.I. fits perfectly within the modern world where people rely heavily on their phones and various voice-activated gadgets.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars
Best friends, Chucky and Andy (Gabriel Bateman) share a moment
Chucky, as he will inevitably call himself, makes his way to Chicago and into the home of the Barclay’s, where mum Karen (Aubrey Plaza) gets her hands on the defective doll as an early birthday present for son Andy (Gabriel Bateman). After a few small glitches (eyes turning red) Andy and Chucky start to form a close bond. But the bond takes a sinister turn when Chucky starts to act differently in his pursuit of the ultimate friendship.
One of the highlights of the film is the brilliant casting of Mark Hamill as the voice of the murderous doll. Hamill (outside of Star Wars) is well known as a talented voice actor, having provided the voice of the Joker in the animated series. Hamill uses his full range of softly spoken innocence and demented rage to portray a character who is influenced by everything around him (there are blatant references to E.T.) and then uses it to the best of his ability in killing off people in a range of horrific (and comical) ways.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars. It’s not without its faults but this satirical take on the slasher genre is certainly B-movie levels at best.
In the Child’s Play remake the original ‘Good Guy’ dolls have been replaced by 21st-century technology in the form of ‘Buddi’ dolls which, have been produced by Kaslan Industries. And instead of a psychotic serial killer transferring his soul to the body of a doll, Buddi has all of his safety features disabled by a disgruntled Kaslan employee. The change from possession to A.I. fits perfectly within the modern world where people rely heavily on their phones and various voice-activated gadgets.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars
Best friends, Chucky and Andy (Gabriel Bateman) share a moment
Chucky, as he will inevitably call himself, makes his way to Chicago and into the home of the Barclay’s, where mum Karen (Aubrey Plaza) gets her hands on the defective doll as an early birthday present for son Andy (Gabriel Bateman). After a few small glitches (eyes turning red) Andy and Chucky start to form a close bond. But the bond takes a sinister turn when Chucky starts to act differently in his pursuit of the ultimate friendship.
One of the highlights of the film is the brilliant casting of Mark Hamill as the voice of the murderous doll. Hamill (outside of Star Wars) is well known as a talented voice actor, having provided the voice of the Joker in the animated series. Hamill uses his full range of softly spoken innocence and demented rage to portray a character who is influenced by everything around him (there are blatant references to E.T.) and then uses it to the best of his ability in killing off people in a range of horrific (and comical) ways.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars. It’s not without its faults but this satirical take on the slasher genre is certainly B-movie levels at best.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Freaky (2021) in Movies
Jul 3, 2021
No, not like the Disney version
Some B-movies really pack a much bigger punch than you would expect. "Nobody" is a perfect recent example. But movie karma needs to be balanced with something. Ladies and gentlemen - "Freaky"!
Positives:
- If you are into your "teen slasher" movies, then this is more of the same and features some innovative ways to dispatch the victims. One is certainly no way to treat a fine wine!
- Vince Vaughn has fun mincing around as his alter-ego and Kathryn Newton (soon to be in the next "Ant-Man" movie) is personable enough as the cutie-cum-serial-killer.
- It's always good to see Ferris-actor Alan Ruck on the big screen. Here, he actually plays two parts in the film. (This joke (C) One Mann's Movies.)
Negatives:
- It's flagged as "comedy/horror" but failed to meet my personal 6-laugh test. It's just not funny enough to pass muster unless, that is, you view crude dialogue as "funny". And the dialogue does get ickily crude at some points. For example, when evil-Millie ends up alone with three jocks, there's a line of misogynist dialogue (that I won't repeat) but which sets the level.
- As a Blumhouse production, the horror is ultra-gory which will put off many viewers lacking a strong stomach. But because of the associated black comedy, the horror isn't remotely tense or scary. This might be why the film only got a UK-15 certificate. But my personal view is that, with the violence and the offensive dialogue, the BBFC under called this one, and it should have been an 18.
- There's a lot of schmaltz layered on regarding the relationship between Millie and her mum (Katie Finneran, channelling a Laura Dern look). A store cubicle exchange between Finneran and Vaughn is particularly stomach-churning.
- The movie leaves logic at the door many times. A formulaic post-finale ending assumes a superhero ability to shrug off bullets.
Summary Thoughts on "Freaky": The 'body-swap idea has gone through dozens of movie versions, with Disney's "Freaky Friday" the most well known: it's actually had two outings, once in 1976 with a young Jodie Foster and Barbara Harris and again in 2003 with Lindsay Lohan and Jamie-Lee Curtis. (The latter is a firm Mann-family favourite).
This new version tries a serial-killer twist on the story, which is a good idea. But the movie fails to execute well on the concept. The director is Christopher Landon who did the "Happy Death Day" movies. This is in a similar vein. So teens who enjoyed those flicks might get a fun Saturday night out with this. But, for me, this fell between the stools of comedy and horror and is instantly forgettable.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/07/03/freaky-no-its-not-remotely-like-the-disney-version/. One Mann's Movies is also on Facebook and Tiktok (@onemannsmovies). Thanks.)
Positives:
- If you are into your "teen slasher" movies, then this is more of the same and features some innovative ways to dispatch the victims. One is certainly no way to treat a fine wine!
- Vince Vaughn has fun mincing around as his alter-ego and Kathryn Newton (soon to be in the next "Ant-Man" movie) is personable enough as the cutie-cum-serial-killer.
- It's always good to see Ferris-actor Alan Ruck on the big screen. Here, he actually plays two parts in the film. (This joke (C) One Mann's Movies.)
Negatives:
- It's flagged as "comedy/horror" but failed to meet my personal 6-laugh test. It's just not funny enough to pass muster unless, that is, you view crude dialogue as "funny". And the dialogue does get ickily crude at some points. For example, when evil-Millie ends up alone with three jocks, there's a line of misogynist dialogue (that I won't repeat) but which sets the level.
- As a Blumhouse production, the horror is ultra-gory which will put off many viewers lacking a strong stomach. But because of the associated black comedy, the horror isn't remotely tense or scary. This might be why the film only got a UK-15 certificate. But my personal view is that, with the violence and the offensive dialogue, the BBFC under called this one, and it should have been an 18.
- There's a lot of schmaltz layered on regarding the relationship between Millie and her mum (Katie Finneran, channelling a Laura Dern look). A store cubicle exchange between Finneran and Vaughn is particularly stomach-churning.
- The movie leaves logic at the door many times. A formulaic post-finale ending assumes a superhero ability to shrug off bullets.
Summary Thoughts on "Freaky": The 'body-swap idea has gone through dozens of movie versions, with Disney's "Freaky Friday" the most well known: it's actually had two outings, once in 1976 with a young Jodie Foster and Barbara Harris and again in 2003 with Lindsay Lohan and Jamie-Lee Curtis. (The latter is a firm Mann-family favourite).
This new version tries a serial-killer twist on the story, which is a good idea. But the movie fails to execute well on the concept. The director is Christopher Landon who did the "Happy Death Day" movies. This is in a similar vein. So teens who enjoyed those flicks might get a fun Saturday night out with this. But, for me, this fell between the stools of comedy and horror and is instantly forgettable.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/07/03/freaky-no-its-not-remotely-like-the-disney-version/. One Mann's Movies is also on Facebook and Tiktok (@onemannsmovies). Thanks.)
Otway93 (567 KP) rated Resident Evil 2: The Board Game in Tabletop Games
Oct 25, 2019
Game (4 more)
Pieces
Expansions Available
1-4 Players
Tension
Cost (1 more)
Packaging
Excellent game, though far too expensive!
A truly superb game that thoroughly surprised me!
At first I was a little sceptical about how Resident Evil 2 would translate to a board game, but the creators managed to capture the story and the horror perfectly, somehow making everybody involved absolutely terrified, just like the game!
The game is slightly complicated for those new to dice based games (me included), but I believe it to be an excellent starter for beginners.
The game is also unusually for 1-4 players, though I can't imagine it being much fun solo.
Another plus is the number of expansions, all enjoyable, but just like the core game, they are all considerably expensive for what's involved.
The cost is the main issue with this game, the core game costing between £60-80, and expansions anywhere between £15-30 each.
The expansions, with the exception of the rather good B-Files Expansion, contain very little, and add very little. They contain very little and still use the same amount of packaging, using a lot of plastic and wasting paper and cardboard.
At first I was a little sceptical about how Resident Evil 2 would translate to a board game, but the creators managed to capture the story and the horror perfectly, somehow making everybody involved absolutely terrified, just like the game!
The game is slightly complicated for those new to dice based games (me included), but I believe it to be an excellent starter for beginners.
The game is also unusually for 1-4 players, though I can't imagine it being much fun solo.
Another plus is the number of expansions, all enjoyable, but just like the core game, they are all considerably expensive for what's involved.
The cost is the main issue with this game, the core game costing between £60-80, and expansions anywhere between £15-30 each.
The expansions, with the exception of the rather good B-Files Expansion, contain very little, and add very little. They contain very little and still use the same amount of packaging, using a lot of plastic and wasting paper and cardboard.