Search
Search results
James P. Sumner (65 KP) rated Men in Black International (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Not quite a noisy cricket.
I saw this film with an open mind, figuring (as is sadly the case more and more nowadays) I had seen the best parts of the movie in the trailers. I had seen other reviews which had been overwhelmingly negative. I wasn't expecting much, but it was two hours away from the world, so what the hell.
Definitely not the best film I've ever seen, but surprisingly far from the worst.
The plot is simple enough - there's a mole within MiB that's trying to start a war between a long-forgotten enemy and another race of aliens, which will ultimately endanger the earth. Nothing we haven't seen before.
But it's actually pretty good fun. The chemistry between the two leads (Thor and Valkyrie!) is a joy to watch, and if nothing else, this movie serves to reiterate what we first found out in the "Ghostbusters" remake - Chris Hemsworth is hilarious! His comedic timing is brilliant, and he's a genuinely funny guy which shines in the right role (see "Thor: Ragnarok").
Sadly, I guessed the *big twist* from watching the trailers. Figured it was obvious, as we've all seen this type of film/story before. And if I could figure it out, most other people probably can, too. As the film entered its third act, I found myself hoping my prediction was wrong, just to inject a little more life into the experience, but nope... nailed it.
Whilst there are subtle nods to the original films, they aren't required viewing ahead of watching this. A cross between a sequel and a reboot, it stands well on its own merits.
I think with a film like this, you're never going to get an "Avatar" or a "Shawshank Redemption" experience. Not that this is bad, per se, but because the level of potential quality will always be limited by its content and genre. Same way an "Expendables" movie would never win an Oscar. I think they're brilliant, but they are what they are and nothing more. Same here. It's not a bad film. It's not a great film. It's just a film. Would I have paid to see it in hindsight? Perhaps not. But definitely catch it when it's on Netflix.
Definitely not the best film I've ever seen, but surprisingly far from the worst.
The plot is simple enough - there's a mole within MiB that's trying to start a war between a long-forgotten enemy and another race of aliens, which will ultimately endanger the earth. Nothing we haven't seen before.
But it's actually pretty good fun. The chemistry between the two leads (Thor and Valkyrie!) is a joy to watch, and if nothing else, this movie serves to reiterate what we first found out in the "Ghostbusters" remake - Chris Hemsworth is hilarious! His comedic timing is brilliant, and he's a genuinely funny guy which shines in the right role (see "Thor: Ragnarok").
Sadly, I guessed the *big twist* from watching the trailers. Figured it was obvious, as we've all seen this type of film/story before. And if I could figure it out, most other people probably can, too. As the film entered its third act, I found myself hoping my prediction was wrong, just to inject a little more life into the experience, but nope... nailed it.
Whilst there are subtle nods to the original films, they aren't required viewing ahead of watching this. A cross between a sequel and a reboot, it stands well on its own merits.
I think with a film like this, you're never going to get an "Avatar" or a "Shawshank Redemption" experience. Not that this is bad, per se, but because the level of potential quality will always be limited by its content and genre. Same way an "Expendables" movie would never win an Oscar. I think they're brilliant, but they are what they are and nothing more. Same here. It's not a bad film. It's not a great film. It's just a film. Would I have paid to see it in hindsight? Perhaps not. But definitely catch it when it's on Netflix.
Matt Geiger (15 KP) rated Cars 2 (2011) in Movies
Jun 27, 2020 (Updated Jun 27, 2020)
Perhaps the first indication that Pixar could still lose sight of its capabilities, it should be common knowledge that CARS 2 is the worst Pixar film. While the first Cars movie was not Pixar's finest outing itself, the eccentricities of its premise and the likeable residents of Radiator Springs were enough to draw attention away from any holes the story had, numerous as they were. What we get here is an utterly incoherent and inconceivable sequel that makes just about every mistake a sequel can make. While the central espionage-based plot initially appears as a thoughtful homage to 007, and ultimately proves that Larry the Cable Guy has plenty of star power as Tow Mater, it devolves into an overstuffed, mediocre snoozefest that just keeps driving in a circle, content with giving the viewer vertigo. In fact, it is so flawed, audiences finally have to consider the implications imposed by the concept of living cars operating freely in their own world. It's not just that it's bad, but creating an entirely different story of this nature requires shoving all of the original characters to the side, including Lightning McQueen. You would think that a character who grew on audiences and learned some valuable lessons in such a short amount of time would've played a more notable role in the outcome of the film, but here he is reduced to a yammering motor of a damsel in distress, and hilarious stock characters like Luigi, Guido, and Fillmore are given literally nothing to work with. Not even the new characters make an impression, wasting the talent of Michael Caine and John Turturro among others. Honestly, there really isn't much about this movie to justify its existence. Whereas better Pixar sequels ring in on the success of their predecessor for the sake of inviting us to invest in the world they are trying to build, CARS 2 is a blown gasket that ultimately crashes the once profitable cash grab vehicle that the nostalgic first film helped to create. With this film, Pixar achieved the impossible: they made a bad movie.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie (2019) in Movies
Oct 11, 2019
What ar*ehole doesn't like pinapple?
El Camino is an impressive gritty follow up to breaking bad that finally gives fans the closure they've been longing for. Now I liked Breaking Bad (id give it a solid 8/10) but its not something ive ever desired to watch again so when I saw El Camino on Netflix I wasn't that desperate to see it but thank goodness I did because it surpasses the show in every way. Starting off where the show ends yet it feels immediately aparent this movie has a different tone/style to it. Its way more gritty, grainy looking, atmospheric and overall feels much more raw and dark. Theres such an over powering sadness too and as we follow Jesse we see just how traumatised and broken he's become from past events and its hard to not feel really emotionally attached, drained, exhausted for him. Playing out as a kind of character progression movie we follow Jesse as he struggles to survive on his own scared and with nothing but a car. Its his progress and changing as a person that keeps the film incredibly engaging and as we whiteness him mature, grown, learn and adapt in this harsh world we see he becomes stronger and while he might hate Heisenberg he almost has to become and learn from him to be stronger as a person and to ensure his survival. Arron Paul is stunning especialy when Jesse is pushed past his breaking point really nailing a great character change from pathetic insignificant bug into a dangerous calculating intimidating danger. What also makes Jesse great is he still knows where he came from and hes always thankful/appreciative and never forgets what he lost or the people that have helped him and inspired him. Cinematography is simply stunning as is camera work and the chill inducing soundtrack really helps make some really tense scenes too. Highly recomended and with a great thought provoking ending that proves trauma/sadness never really leave us once weve experienced it. El Camino is a very pleasant surprise especially for a netflix movie.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Hellboy (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Entertaining Hell Yes, Great Hell No
Hellboy is a 2019 supernatural superhero movie based on the Dark Horse Comics character created by Mike Mignola. It is the third film in the franchise and is also a reboot of the series. It is directed by Neil Marshall with screenplay by Andrew Cosby and distributed by Lionsgate. The film stars David Harbour, Millar Jovovich, Ian McShane and Daniel Dae Kim.
In the Dark Ages, Nimue, the Blood Queen, nearly destroyed humanity with a deadly plague. Immortal, she was only defeated by King Arthur with the help of Merlin and the magical blade Excalibur. She was beheaded, dismembered, and her remains scattered over Europe. In present day Tijuana, Hellboy (David Harbour), searches for a missing B.P.R.D. agent, Ruiz. Hellboy discovers Ruiz has been turned into a vampire and while trying to reason with him, Hellboy is forced into a confrontation which ultimately leads to the death of the agent. Meanwhile a mysterious person speaks with Baba Yaga, a witch-like creature, seeking revenge on Hellboy, and is told to locate the remains of Nimue and resurrect her.
This has been a really hard movie for me to review. I genuinely enjoyed it while watching it in theaters. That being said, this movie is a train wreck and I can't recommend for people to spend money to see it unless you wait for it to be at the dollar movies or Redbox. There were just so many things that I guess I was blind to while watching it, that i just shrugged off or didn't pay much attention to. Like all my reviews this will be as spoiler free as possible but i have to acknowledge major flaws that other critics and reviewers brought up. And there were a lot, I mean right now the critics are tearing this movie a new one. First, I thought David Harbour did as good a job as anyone could do replacing Ron Pearlman as Hellboy in this film. But replacing such a beloved and likeable character with a funny and charismatic personality which Pearlman made his own, he had his work cut out for him. I don't think he's ever acted with all the makeup and prosthetics and it showed because I don't think he was as expressive as he could have been. Plus this movie was also made with a different director and not Guillermo Del Toro, so it was already going to have a way different feel to it. To me though, those weren't the things that contributed the most to the failure of this movie, it's more of the other things I'm still getting to. This was a reboot of the series and they decided to go with a different group of supporting characters, and to also make the plot or story more closely related or similar to the comics (the source material). Now usually sticking with what the comics have for the story is always better than changing it in my opinion but it seems for this film that they chose to incorporate several different storylines and characters and felt like it was too much crammed into too little. Also this movie was all over the place, story wise and literally. It seemed the characters kept having to travel unnecessarily. It felt like the supporting characters were just thrown into the story and it didn't bother to introduce them to the audience correctly. Everyone just got a flashback and or had themselves or their origin "expositioned" into the movie. I liked a lot of the character designs and thought a lot of the CGI was well done, in places, however it seems like they had different animators or studios work on different scenes or characters and some of it was horrible. The dialogue was really bad too. There were a lot of jokes and one liners that just fell flat and nobody laughed, plus like i said way too much exposition. There was a character who wears a headdress that was so big it looked ridiculous, which I wonder if it was done on purpose. And there was a character whose clothes tear when they transform and they automatically have pants when they transform back, which makes no sense. The plot too was not very sound and full of plot holes and things that didn't make sense, were just added in, or were part of scenes that got cut along the way. It hurts me to give this movie a score so low but I give this movie a 5/10.
Now I'm not saying don't watch it. I just can't recommend you drop as much cash as you usually do to see it in theaters. I personally still really enjoyed it and was genuinely entertained. It was awesome to see the blood and gore in a darker Hellboy movie and the action was great even if the CGI always wasn't. The music even if it didn't fit the tone or every scene was great. If your expecting the Hellboy from the Guillermo Del Toro films you might just hate this movie. But if you're just looking for "Big Red" to beat up on some baddies then I think you might get a kick out of this movie. Hey, some critics are saying that it's so bad it's good.
In the Dark Ages, Nimue, the Blood Queen, nearly destroyed humanity with a deadly plague. Immortal, she was only defeated by King Arthur with the help of Merlin and the magical blade Excalibur. She was beheaded, dismembered, and her remains scattered over Europe. In present day Tijuana, Hellboy (David Harbour), searches for a missing B.P.R.D. agent, Ruiz. Hellboy discovers Ruiz has been turned into a vampire and while trying to reason with him, Hellboy is forced into a confrontation which ultimately leads to the death of the agent. Meanwhile a mysterious person speaks with Baba Yaga, a witch-like creature, seeking revenge on Hellboy, and is told to locate the remains of Nimue and resurrect her.
This has been a really hard movie for me to review. I genuinely enjoyed it while watching it in theaters. That being said, this movie is a train wreck and I can't recommend for people to spend money to see it unless you wait for it to be at the dollar movies or Redbox. There were just so many things that I guess I was blind to while watching it, that i just shrugged off or didn't pay much attention to. Like all my reviews this will be as spoiler free as possible but i have to acknowledge major flaws that other critics and reviewers brought up. And there were a lot, I mean right now the critics are tearing this movie a new one. First, I thought David Harbour did as good a job as anyone could do replacing Ron Pearlman as Hellboy in this film. But replacing such a beloved and likeable character with a funny and charismatic personality which Pearlman made his own, he had his work cut out for him. I don't think he's ever acted with all the makeup and prosthetics and it showed because I don't think he was as expressive as he could have been. Plus this movie was also made with a different director and not Guillermo Del Toro, so it was already going to have a way different feel to it. To me though, those weren't the things that contributed the most to the failure of this movie, it's more of the other things I'm still getting to. This was a reboot of the series and they decided to go with a different group of supporting characters, and to also make the plot or story more closely related or similar to the comics (the source material). Now usually sticking with what the comics have for the story is always better than changing it in my opinion but it seems for this film that they chose to incorporate several different storylines and characters and felt like it was too much crammed into too little. Also this movie was all over the place, story wise and literally. It seemed the characters kept having to travel unnecessarily. It felt like the supporting characters were just thrown into the story and it didn't bother to introduce them to the audience correctly. Everyone just got a flashback and or had themselves or their origin "expositioned" into the movie. I liked a lot of the character designs and thought a lot of the CGI was well done, in places, however it seems like they had different animators or studios work on different scenes or characters and some of it was horrible. The dialogue was really bad too. There were a lot of jokes and one liners that just fell flat and nobody laughed, plus like i said way too much exposition. There was a character who wears a headdress that was so big it looked ridiculous, which I wonder if it was done on purpose. And there was a character whose clothes tear when they transform and they automatically have pants when they transform back, which makes no sense. The plot too was not very sound and full of plot holes and things that didn't make sense, were just added in, or were part of scenes that got cut along the way. It hurts me to give this movie a score so low but I give this movie a 5/10.
Now I'm not saying don't watch it. I just can't recommend you drop as much cash as you usually do to see it in theaters. I personally still really enjoyed it and was genuinely entertained. It was awesome to see the blood and gore in a darker Hellboy movie and the action was great even if the CGI always wasn't. The music even if it didn't fit the tone or every scene was great. If your expecting the Hellboy from the Guillermo Del Toro films you might just hate this movie. But if you're just looking for "Big Red" to beat up on some baddies then I think you might get a kick out of this movie. Hey, some critics are saying that it's so bad it's good.
BobbiesDustyPages (1259 KP) rated Kick-Ass Vol. 1 in Books
Sep 6, 2017
Well it is pretty damn kick-ass.
I didn't read the comic until after the movie came out and at the time I still hadn't really delved very deep into comic books just yet only reading a few here and there but I really think Kick-Ass was a great start because holy hell did I freaking love it the blood, the gore, the action and all the smart ass remarks definitely drew me. What can I say I love asshole characters and this comic is chalk full of them.
I loved hit-girl the most she was even more bad-ass in the comics the only thing I genuinely didn't care for and the reason I couldn't give this a full 10/10 was Big Daddy all I can say is I'm so glad they changed it for the film.
I loved hit-girl the most she was even more bad-ass in the comics the only thing I genuinely didn't care for and the reason I couldn't give this a full 10/10 was Big Daddy all I can say is I'm so glad they changed it for the film.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Can You Ever Forgive Me? (2018) in Movies
Feb 8, 2019
Slightly curious true-life tale of literary forger Lee Israel (McCarthy) and her accomplice Jack Hock (Grant). Somewhat unevenly pitched between cheerily amoral caper comedy and downbeat, naturalistic drama exploring big ideas about creativity and authenticity, but the story is well told and fairly involving.
I'm not entirely sure how the two stars have both managed to swing Oscar nominations, for this particular movie at least - it's not as if either of them is actually bad, but they're both essentially delivering variations on their standard performance (McCarthy: abrasive, acid-tongued loudmouth; Grant: pantomime dame). It's hard to shake the impression that McCarthy has managed to get herself Oscar nominated mainly for putting on a wig, but there is a long if somewhat ignoble tradition of the academy rewarding actresses for being brave enough to de-glam themselves on screen. So it goes.
I'm not entirely sure how the two stars have both managed to swing Oscar nominations, for this particular movie at least - it's not as if either of them is actually bad, but they're both essentially delivering variations on their standard performance (McCarthy: abrasive, acid-tongued loudmouth; Grant: pantomime dame). It's hard to shake the impression that McCarthy has managed to get herself Oscar nominated mainly for putting on a wig, but there is a long if somewhat ignoble tradition of the academy rewarding actresses for being brave enough to de-glam themselves on screen. So it goes.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Why Girls Love Sailors (1927) in Movies
Feb 22, 2019
So-so Laurel and Hardy movie from the days before Laurel and Hardy even existed as an idea. No sign of the usual characterisations, bowler hats, or tit-for-tat; Stan plays Willie the winkle-fisherman whose sweetheart is abducted by the captain of a ship largely crewed by thugs and scoundrels; Ollie plays the unnamed first mate. Stan's plan involves a surprising amount of cross-dressing.
More of a curiosity than anything else, though I'm not sure I'd go as far as those suggesting this once-lost film would have been better off staying that way. It certainly lends weight to the suggestion that Stan was the more gifted comedian but Ollie was a more versatile actor - he still keeps doing those looks to camera, though. In the end, it's not outrageously bad, but mainly of historical interest.
More of a curiosity than anything else, though I'm not sure I'd go as far as those suggesting this once-lost film would have been better off staying that way. It certainly lends weight to the suggestion that Stan was the more gifted comedian but Ollie was a more versatile actor - he still keeps doing those looks to camera, though. In the end, it's not outrageously bad, but mainly of historical interest.
Awix (3310 KP) rated The Viking Queen (1967) in Movies
Mar 1, 2018 (Updated Mar 2, 2018)
Wildly historically inaccurate, wholly absurd Hammer exploitation movie based on the events of the Iceni revolt led by Boudicca in 1st-century Britain. Roman governor (American) falls unconvincingly for Briton queen (Finnish); their imminent marriage promises to be bad for the business of the local merchants and their corrupt ally, a Roman general (Scottish), so a conflict is provoked, leading to rebellion...
Problems are mostly with the script, which appears to be only vaguely familiar with the concept of historical research, although a lot of the acting and staging is also pretty poor. Some usually reliable actors (Andrew Keir, Patrick Troughton) do the best they can with the material they're given. Probably best viewed as a high-camp piece of unintentional comedy. The widely-circulated story that one of the Roman actors can be seen wearing a wristwatch appears to be apocryphal.
Problems are mostly with the script, which appears to be only vaguely familiar with the concept of historical research, although a lot of the acting and staging is also pretty poor. Some usually reliable actors (Andrew Keir, Patrick Troughton) do the best they can with the material they're given. Probably best viewed as a high-camp piece of unintentional comedy. The widely-circulated story that one of the Roman actors can be seen wearing a wristwatch appears to be apocryphal.
The Marinated Meeple (1853 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in the West (1968) in Movies
Mar 23, 2018
Harmonica, and the orchestra of sounds (3 more)
The strength of a woman in this time period
a lesson in cinematography
Action has a lot of suspense before it, very thought out.
An epic opera of a western and an amazing feat of cinematography as well.
I adore this movie, it's my favorite western of all time, and the acting is top notch, it's visually stunning, it's a symphony of sounds to the ears. just the scene of the welcoming committee waiting on the train is an amazing piece of cinema. I could go on an on. I love how strong the women are in the film in unexpected ways. I love the traditional good guy as a bad guy. It's just plain amazing. It can be slow by modern standards, but isn't that also part of it's beauty, measured time.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Baby Driver (2017) in Movies
Feb 12, 2018
Criminal Records
Edgar Wright's high-energy jukebox thriller may be your last chance to see Kevin Spacey in a new movie. Brilliant young music-loving hearing-impaired getaway driver ends up in hock to criminal mastermind; must decide whether to run for it with his lovely new girlfriend or carry out one last job with some rather suspect associates.
Slightly retro crime thriller with a central gimmick - action sequences are frequently choreographed to the soundtrack - that isn't quite as innovative as it thinks it is. As technically proficient as you would expect from Wright; what's unusual is that the film has a degree of heart you wouldn't expect, not to mention an impressively twisty-turny plotline - just who the main bad guy will turn out to be is not at all clear until quite late on. Good performances all round, too.
Slightly retro crime thriller with a central gimmick - action sequences are frequently choreographed to the soundtrack - that isn't quite as innovative as it thinks it is. As technically proficient as you would expect from Wright; what's unusual is that the film has a degree of heart you wouldn't expect, not to mention an impressively twisty-turny plotline - just who the main bad guy will turn out to be is not at all clear until quite late on. Good performances all round, too.