Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Girl in the Spider's Web (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
There has definitely been a shift in the characters that women are portraying in the movies. No longer happy to be relegated to the damsel in distress who is looking for their Prince Charming to rescue them, they become bad-ass avengers who aren’t afraid to kick-butt and take names. There is no better example of this than Lisbeth Salander, everyone’s favorite goth super-hacker and vigilante. In The Girl in the Spider’s Web, based on the best-selling novel of the same name, we see Lisbeth at her finest and it is an action packed, butt kicking good time.
Lisbeth (Claire Foy) leads a life as a vigilante who targets men that abuse woman ensuring they pay for their evil deeds. She’s not afraid to play hardball and threaten their very existence to ensure that justice is served. In the middle of punishing all the right people, Lisbeth receives a hacking opportunity that she can’t refuse, involving an application where simply logging in allows you to take over the world’s nuclear weapons. This super application was originally created and sold to the NSA in Washington and Lisbeth is tasked with stealing it back and returning it to the original creator so that it can be properly destroyed. Lisbeth successfully steals the application but that then makes her the target of not only the NSA whom she had stolen it from originally, but also another secretive group who has their own nefarious plans.
The film quickly goes from Lisbeth and her “simple” vigilante ways to becoming a global thriller that spans multiple countries and agencies. Not only does the plot change quickly but Lisbeth’s character also morph’s from being a Black Canary type vigilante to becoming a female version of Mission Impossible’s Ethan Hunt. Even though playing a female Ethan Hunt is different from Lisbeth’s usual trope her skills fit nicely into her new role. Her ability to hack into any computer system comes in handy quite a few times and lets us have a tie to the Lisbeth we know and love, but we also get to see her flex her wits and general bad-assery a bit deeper during her “impossible mission”. The film was definitely not what I expected but I was still pleasantly surprised.
The Swedish setting where the movie takes place was gorgeous and varies from desolate abandoned buildings to chases in the middle of sprawling cities. It utilizes the snow-covered landscape and decrepit buildings to create a sense of isolation, even when the streets themselves are packed with cars. Along with the isolation from the setting we also see the use of both old and new technology, which gives a low-tech feel to what is an otherwise a high stakes mission. Both the setting and the technology allows us to see that Lisbeth is a force to be reckoned with no matter what type of adversity she faces.
Which brings me to the one of the best parts of the movie and that is Claire Foy’s absolutely amazing portrayal of Lisbeth. We already knew she did a great job playing a royal in The Crown and as the wife of astronaut Neil Armstrong in First Man but relinquishing her usual elegant and classy portrayals to spectacularly play one of the biggest, baddest female characters around shows the true depth of her talent. She is definitely the star of the show and now I am an even bigger fan of hers than I already was. I was also impressed with the other main characters, including investigative journalist Mikael Blomkvist (Sverrir Gudnason), who plays less of role than in the original The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo but does a great job nonetheless, and the young boy, August Balder (Christopher Convery) that holds the key to the entire mission excellently played by Christopher Convery. The trio make an unusual team, but how the characters (and actors) play on each other’s strengths and weaknesses to complement each other brings heart to a movie that could have easily been 100% an action adventure.
The one aspect I feel could (and should) have been fleshed out more, was Lisbeth’s character as a battered woman’s vigilante. The movie started off with a very strong vigilante scene, but the vigilante theme is quickly forgotten until the very end of the film where we find out it was the sole catalyst of the main adversary. This oversight sadly turned what could have been a woman’s justice vigilante movie into a more run-of-the-mill super spy movie. That’s not necessarily bad, it is still action packed and full of twists and turns, but it’s definitely a missed opportunity to show more of who Lisbeth is.
The Girl in the Spider’s Web is filled with action, gadgets, and car chases though beautiful scenery and it is an excellent movie to see if you are looking for something different than green grinches and Nazi zombies. It’s not the movie I went in expecting to see, but I’m not complaining as it is still a solid film. Even though it diverts away from the more artistic The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo it is a very good action-packed thriller that would stack up nicely next to the Mission Impossible movies it is reminiscent of. It’s definitely a movie I recommend to action movie fans everywhere.
Lisbeth (Claire Foy) leads a life as a vigilante who targets men that abuse woman ensuring they pay for their evil deeds. She’s not afraid to play hardball and threaten their very existence to ensure that justice is served. In the middle of punishing all the right people, Lisbeth receives a hacking opportunity that she can’t refuse, involving an application where simply logging in allows you to take over the world’s nuclear weapons. This super application was originally created and sold to the NSA in Washington and Lisbeth is tasked with stealing it back and returning it to the original creator so that it can be properly destroyed. Lisbeth successfully steals the application but that then makes her the target of not only the NSA whom she had stolen it from originally, but also another secretive group who has their own nefarious plans.
The film quickly goes from Lisbeth and her “simple” vigilante ways to becoming a global thriller that spans multiple countries and agencies. Not only does the plot change quickly but Lisbeth’s character also morph’s from being a Black Canary type vigilante to becoming a female version of Mission Impossible’s Ethan Hunt. Even though playing a female Ethan Hunt is different from Lisbeth’s usual trope her skills fit nicely into her new role. Her ability to hack into any computer system comes in handy quite a few times and lets us have a tie to the Lisbeth we know and love, but we also get to see her flex her wits and general bad-assery a bit deeper during her “impossible mission”. The film was definitely not what I expected but I was still pleasantly surprised.
The Swedish setting where the movie takes place was gorgeous and varies from desolate abandoned buildings to chases in the middle of sprawling cities. It utilizes the snow-covered landscape and decrepit buildings to create a sense of isolation, even when the streets themselves are packed with cars. Along with the isolation from the setting we also see the use of both old and new technology, which gives a low-tech feel to what is an otherwise a high stakes mission. Both the setting and the technology allows us to see that Lisbeth is a force to be reckoned with no matter what type of adversity she faces.
Which brings me to the one of the best parts of the movie and that is Claire Foy’s absolutely amazing portrayal of Lisbeth. We already knew she did a great job playing a royal in The Crown and as the wife of astronaut Neil Armstrong in First Man but relinquishing her usual elegant and classy portrayals to spectacularly play one of the biggest, baddest female characters around shows the true depth of her talent. She is definitely the star of the show and now I am an even bigger fan of hers than I already was. I was also impressed with the other main characters, including investigative journalist Mikael Blomkvist (Sverrir Gudnason), who plays less of role than in the original The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo but does a great job nonetheless, and the young boy, August Balder (Christopher Convery) that holds the key to the entire mission excellently played by Christopher Convery. The trio make an unusual team, but how the characters (and actors) play on each other’s strengths and weaknesses to complement each other brings heart to a movie that could have easily been 100% an action adventure.
The one aspect I feel could (and should) have been fleshed out more, was Lisbeth’s character as a battered woman’s vigilante. The movie started off with a very strong vigilante scene, but the vigilante theme is quickly forgotten until the very end of the film where we find out it was the sole catalyst of the main adversary. This oversight sadly turned what could have been a woman’s justice vigilante movie into a more run-of-the-mill super spy movie. That’s not necessarily bad, it is still action packed and full of twists and turns, but it’s definitely a missed opportunity to show more of who Lisbeth is.
The Girl in the Spider’s Web is filled with action, gadgets, and car chases though beautiful scenery and it is an excellent movie to see if you are looking for something different than green grinches and Nazi zombies. It’s not the movie I went in expecting to see, but I’m not complaining as it is still a solid film. Even though it diverts away from the more artistic The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo it is a very good action-packed thriller that would stack up nicely next to the Mission Impossible movies it is reminiscent of. It’s definitely a movie I recommend to action movie fans everywhere.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) in Movies
Feb 6, 2019
Check Into the El Royale, You'll Be Glad You Did
BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE is a bloody movie about bloody people doing bloody things at a bloody hotel.
It's also bloody good.
Showing the same original style and panache that I have come to expect from Director/Writer Drew Goddard (THE CABIN IN THE WOODS), BAD TIMES...follows the storytelling device of a Quentin Tarantino flick like PULP FICTION or THE HATEFUL EIGHT in that it follows a seemingly disparate group of people - each with their own story - who's lives intersect.
Goddard's reputation has, obviously, preceded him as on the surface this film looks like a "B" flick filled with gore and violence, but in Goddard's hands - and with some strong acting talent and VERY strong production qualities (the sets, costumes and music help tell the story), this film is elevated to something much more than a "B" flick.
Jeff Bridges (HELL AND HIGH WATER) stars (at least in one storyline) as a mysterious Priest who shows up at the El Royale for some reason - and it's not to change the Bibles in the rooms. He is joined in the lobby at check-in by a lounge singer played by Cynthia Ervino (WIDOWS), vacuum cleaner salesman portrayed by John Hamm (BABY DRIVER) and by a mystery women played by Dakota Johnson (50 SHADES...) - all have secrets to hide and through flashbacks and chance encounters, their stories erupt on each other. And erupt they do when into the mix comes charismatic, mostly shirtless Cult Leader Billy Lee (Chris Hemsworth) and his cult followers.
Goddard orchestrates this group of strong actors well, giving each character/actor moments to shine and play off each other. The dialogue, while not at a Tarantino level, was interesting and intriguing as much as what was NOT said then what WAS said.
But, make no mistake about it, this is an action movie - and action there is. Bodies, bullets and blood start flying as soon as these characters collide at the El Royale and bad times happen, for sure.
But, for me, this was a GOOD TIME AT THE EL ROYALE. If you like Pulp Fiction, Baby Driver, Hell and High Water or John Wick, then you'll like this flick. Check in to the El Royale, you'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
It's also bloody good.
Showing the same original style and panache that I have come to expect from Director/Writer Drew Goddard (THE CABIN IN THE WOODS), BAD TIMES...follows the storytelling device of a Quentin Tarantino flick like PULP FICTION or THE HATEFUL EIGHT in that it follows a seemingly disparate group of people - each with their own story - who's lives intersect.
Goddard's reputation has, obviously, preceded him as on the surface this film looks like a "B" flick filled with gore and violence, but in Goddard's hands - and with some strong acting talent and VERY strong production qualities (the sets, costumes and music help tell the story), this film is elevated to something much more than a "B" flick.
Jeff Bridges (HELL AND HIGH WATER) stars (at least in one storyline) as a mysterious Priest who shows up at the El Royale for some reason - and it's not to change the Bibles in the rooms. He is joined in the lobby at check-in by a lounge singer played by Cynthia Ervino (WIDOWS), vacuum cleaner salesman portrayed by John Hamm (BABY DRIVER) and by a mystery women played by Dakota Johnson (50 SHADES...) - all have secrets to hide and through flashbacks and chance encounters, their stories erupt on each other. And erupt they do when into the mix comes charismatic, mostly shirtless Cult Leader Billy Lee (Chris Hemsworth) and his cult followers.
Goddard orchestrates this group of strong actors well, giving each character/actor moments to shine and play off each other. The dialogue, while not at a Tarantino level, was interesting and intriguing as much as what was NOT said then what WAS said.
But, make no mistake about it, this is an action movie - and action there is. Bodies, bullets and blood start flying as soon as these characters collide at the El Royale and bad times happen, for sure.
But, for me, this was a GOOD TIME AT THE EL ROYALE. If you like Pulp Fiction, Baby Driver, Hell and High Water or John Wick, then you'll like this flick. Check in to the El Royale, you'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Equalizer 2 (2018) in Movies
Jul 29, 2018
Smart action flick with a tremendous Denzel performance
I really enjoyed the first EQUALIZER film. Based on the TV show of the same name, it followed the exploits of Denzel Washington as he "righted wrongs". I nicknamed this film "how to kill bad guys with things you find at your local Home Depot", for that is what happens. Denzel's character improvises traps and weapons to dispatch the evil-doers.
So...I was "all in" when they announced a sequel to this flick. I figured that Washington and his frequent collaborator, Director Antoine Fuqua (both Equalizer's as well as helming Denzel's Oscar winning performance in TRAINING DAY) would make things "bigger and badder" as often happens in sequels - bigger stakes, more bad guys, bigger - and trickier - improvisations - this time, perhaps at a Walmart!
But I was wrong - they didn't go bigger, they went smaller and smarter - and the movie is better for it.
In EQUALIZER 2, we get more personal with Denzel's character, Robert McCall. There still are plenty of bad guys getting the punishment they deserve, but it is the toll on McCall and the reasoning behind why he is doing what he is doing that is at center stage in this film, putting the weight of this film, rightfully so, on Denzel's more than capable shoulders. He comes through - as he always does - tremendously well. There is one scene where Denzel is trying to get a teenage boy to walk away from a gang. I was amazed that I was watching an "Academy Award" level scene in the middle of an action flick, but that is absolutely what it is.
Now...make no mistake...there is plenty of action, chases and violence in this film, but Fuqua shows great restraint, giving the violence a purpose instead of being gratuitous. Even when they have a final battle in the middle of a hurricane-level storm, Fuqua rightfully focuses on the people element of things - and not the spectacle of the elements and circumstances.
Both Fuqua and Washington make some smart choices in this film, which makes it a smart movie, well made with just enough action to please all.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
So...I was "all in" when they announced a sequel to this flick. I figured that Washington and his frequent collaborator, Director Antoine Fuqua (both Equalizer's as well as helming Denzel's Oscar winning performance in TRAINING DAY) would make things "bigger and badder" as often happens in sequels - bigger stakes, more bad guys, bigger - and trickier - improvisations - this time, perhaps at a Walmart!
But I was wrong - they didn't go bigger, they went smaller and smarter - and the movie is better for it.
In EQUALIZER 2, we get more personal with Denzel's character, Robert McCall. There still are plenty of bad guys getting the punishment they deserve, but it is the toll on McCall and the reasoning behind why he is doing what he is doing that is at center stage in this film, putting the weight of this film, rightfully so, on Denzel's more than capable shoulders. He comes through - as he always does - tremendously well. There is one scene where Denzel is trying to get a teenage boy to walk away from a gang. I was amazed that I was watching an "Academy Award" level scene in the middle of an action flick, but that is absolutely what it is.
Now...make no mistake...there is plenty of action, chases and violence in this film, but Fuqua shows great restraint, giving the violence a purpose instead of being gratuitous. Even when they have a final battle in the middle of a hurricane-level storm, Fuqua rightfully focuses on the people element of things - and not the spectacle of the elements and circumstances.
Both Fuqua and Washington make some smart choices in this film, which makes it a smart movie, well made with just enough action to please all.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Bad Boys for Life (2020) in Movies
Jan 28, 2020
It's says a lot about this third entry into the Bad Boys franchise, when there's been a 17 year gap between movies, and it still manages to be this good!
The Bad Boys films are known for being over the top, sweary, violent, funny, and action packed, and thankfully, this tried and tested formula sticks again.
It's silliness is hugely toned down from the overly gratuitous Bad Boys II, (it's still pretty silly mind), and we're presented with a host of characters that actually ground the franchise a little, and it's all the better for it.
Will Smith and Martin Lawrence are once again hugely likable as detectives Mike Lowrey and Marcus Burnett, the chemistry between the two is still hilariously beautiful and bro-tastic after all these years.
BBFL also introduces a group of new characters, a law enforcement response team known as AMMO, who are also all pretty likable. I feel that the writers are perhaps testing the waters for a potential spin off.
The movies bad guys are drug-queen Isabel Aretas and her son Armando (Kate del Castillo and Jacob Scipio respectively) who both do a pretty good job at playing imposing and dangerous villains.
We also get some back story regarding Mike Lowrey that has never been touched on before - a possible avenue for a prequel maybe?
The action set pieces are exciting and well choreographed (best motorbike chase since John Wick 3) and directors Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah - taking over from Michael Bay - do a solid job of delivering a well shot action packed adventure, with just enough nods to the original duology's style.
The only criticisms I have really stem from pacing. The movie feels very staggered for much of the first half and takes a while to really kick into gear, but once it does, it's hugely entertaining.
Also, the comedy is laid on pretty thick and fast from the get go, and there were quite a few moments that didn't land, (predictably, there was plenty of too-old-for-this-shit jokes) but by the same merit, there were plenty that did.
Bad Boys For Life is overall a fun time that is pretty hard to not enjoy, and it actually might just be the best of the series, if not, then it's certainly on par with the first.
The narrative makes a good effort to set up potential directions for the franchise going forward (I counted at least three obvious set ups) but based on the strength of this entry, it something that I would actually like to see, and considering I went to the cinema content in the apparent knowledge that this would be the last one, that can only be a good thing.
The Bad Boys films are known for being over the top, sweary, violent, funny, and action packed, and thankfully, this tried and tested formula sticks again.
It's silliness is hugely toned down from the overly gratuitous Bad Boys II, (it's still pretty silly mind), and we're presented with a host of characters that actually ground the franchise a little, and it's all the better for it.
Will Smith and Martin Lawrence are once again hugely likable as detectives Mike Lowrey and Marcus Burnett, the chemistry between the two is still hilariously beautiful and bro-tastic after all these years.
BBFL also introduces a group of new characters, a law enforcement response team known as AMMO, who are also all pretty likable. I feel that the writers are perhaps testing the waters for a potential spin off.
The movies bad guys are drug-queen Isabel Aretas and her son Armando (Kate del Castillo and Jacob Scipio respectively) who both do a pretty good job at playing imposing and dangerous villains.
We also get some back story regarding Mike Lowrey that has never been touched on before - a possible avenue for a prequel maybe?
The action set pieces are exciting and well choreographed (best motorbike chase since John Wick 3) and directors Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah - taking over from Michael Bay - do a solid job of delivering a well shot action packed adventure, with just enough nods to the original duology's style.
The only criticisms I have really stem from pacing. The movie feels very staggered for much of the first half and takes a while to really kick into gear, but once it does, it's hugely entertaining.
Also, the comedy is laid on pretty thick and fast from the get go, and there were quite a few moments that didn't land, (predictably, there was plenty of too-old-for-this-shit jokes) but by the same merit, there were plenty that did.
Bad Boys For Life is overall a fun time that is pretty hard to not enjoy, and it actually might just be the best of the series, if not, then it's certainly on par with the first.
The narrative makes a good effort to set up potential directions for the franchise going forward (I counted at least three obvious set ups) but based on the strength of this entry, it something that I would actually like to see, and considering I went to the cinema content in the apparent knowledge that this would be the last one, that can only be a good thing.
365Flicks (235 KP) rated Peelers (2016) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
Last night I watched a movie that was so rotten that not only was I not able to write a review for it, but I felt like a needed a palette cleanser. When I received the trailer for Peelers I thought to myself ‘A Zombie Horror Comedy set in a Strip Club sooooo Boobies’ okay I am in lets have a look at Peelers. Holy crap was this the palette cleanser I needed.
Blue Jean (Wren Walker) is an ex Major League Baseball player seeing out her days as the super sexy, super sassy owner of a small-town strip club. BJ (ha BJ) has decided tonight is going to be her last night as she sells up to some local douche-bag who has every intention of pulling the place down. So with this being Blue’s last night she wants it to go out with a bang and we are introduced to all the right characters to make this happen (Mostly diaper wearing peeing on stage strippers). Throw in some recently exposed to some crazy shit coal miners, a mass blood bath and shenanigans and this movie becomes less Striptease and more From Dusk till Dawn.
This movie is an absolute riot, I had so much fun watching this and was pleasantly surprised with what waited around every corner. So often an independent movie can either be great but look terrible or Terrible but look great. I found Peelers to be both it looks great and is great. The movie looks polished as hell for a movie that I assume didn’t have the biggest budget. The script from Lisa DeVita is refreshingly original but manages to throw most of the Zombie tropes at us that we know and love, remember people jump scares can still be effective. Dialogue wise the chemistry and banter just flows.
Seve Schlenz has turned out a great movie here and considering this is second Feature as a director you really wouldn’t know it. Lets talk about effects for a second. Its pretty much all practical, which you would expect. Great care and attention has been taken by the team to make them A. Scary but B. not shit. The cast is on point making this a fun as hell enjoyable romp (with Boobies) from start to finish. Wren Walker as Blue Jean is incredible and you could easily draw comparisons to Uma Thurman in the bad ass stakes with this actress, I look forward to seeing her in more.
This is a solid recommend from me, it was exactly what I needed after the tripe I watched the night before. It may be indie and low budget as balls but it has more fun being exactly that than most. I genuinely thoroughly enjoyed this Flick and think you will too. You have to seek this one out. Did I mention it has Boobies???
Blue Jean (Wren Walker) is an ex Major League Baseball player seeing out her days as the super sexy, super sassy owner of a small-town strip club. BJ (ha BJ) has decided tonight is going to be her last night as she sells up to some local douche-bag who has every intention of pulling the place down. So with this being Blue’s last night she wants it to go out with a bang and we are introduced to all the right characters to make this happen (Mostly diaper wearing peeing on stage strippers). Throw in some recently exposed to some crazy shit coal miners, a mass blood bath and shenanigans and this movie becomes less Striptease and more From Dusk till Dawn.
This movie is an absolute riot, I had so much fun watching this and was pleasantly surprised with what waited around every corner. So often an independent movie can either be great but look terrible or Terrible but look great. I found Peelers to be both it looks great and is great. The movie looks polished as hell for a movie that I assume didn’t have the biggest budget. The script from Lisa DeVita is refreshingly original but manages to throw most of the Zombie tropes at us that we know and love, remember people jump scares can still be effective. Dialogue wise the chemistry and banter just flows.
Seve Schlenz has turned out a great movie here and considering this is second Feature as a director you really wouldn’t know it. Lets talk about effects for a second. Its pretty much all practical, which you would expect. Great care and attention has been taken by the team to make them A. Scary but B. not shit. The cast is on point making this a fun as hell enjoyable romp (with Boobies) from start to finish. Wren Walker as Blue Jean is incredible and you could easily draw comparisons to Uma Thurman in the bad ass stakes with this actress, I look forward to seeing her in more.
This is a solid recommend from me, it was exactly what I needed after the tripe I watched the night before. It may be indie and low budget as balls but it has more fun being exactly that than most. I genuinely thoroughly enjoyed this Flick and think you will too. You have to seek this one out. Did I mention it has Boobies???
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Return of The King
The Lion King is a 2019 computer-animated musical movie directed and produced by Jon Favreau. It was written by Jeff Nathanson, and produced by Fairview Entertainment and Walt Disney Pictures and distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures. The film stars Donald Glover, Seth Rogen, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Beyonce and James Earl Jones.
King Mufasa (James Earl Jones) and Queen Sarabi rule over the animal kingdom with their pride of lions from Pride Rock, in the African Pride Lands. Things change with the birth of their son, Simba, the new Prince. Mufasa's younger brother, and former heir to the throne, Scar, covets the throne and plots to eliminate Mufasa and Simba, so he may become king. The battle for Pride Rock is filled with betrayal, tragedy and drama and circumstances are forever changed after the events of the stampede.
This movie was really good, but of course it was. The original Lion King was one of Disney's best animated films to date. There was a lot of build up to the release of this movie, with fans every anticipating when they could finally see this story on the big screen again. Jon Favreau did not disappoint, but there was a lot of negativity and bad review scores when it first released. I think the big problem was that in all the previews/trailers leading up to the movie coming out showed how realistic the animals looked and how they were able to recreate iconic scenes in stunning state of the art CGI, but they never showed the animals talking or singing. This for me made it difficult to get fully immersed in the film when the very realistic animals began talking and singing, but eventually it went away or I got used to it a couple minutes into the movie. Also they changed very little in this remake and it was almost literally a shot for shot or scene for scene recreation of the original Lion King, which I think bothered the critics. I personally liked little changes they made that I felt made the movie just a little bit better, like the dialogue between Mufasa's and Scar implying Mufasa's gave him the scar, Zimbabwe catching up with Nala for the journey back to Pride Rock, and Nala leading the female lions in the fight against the hyenas. I also thought it was cool how they made it more clear that one of the hyenas was the leader and it was the female and the scene where Scar makes the deal with them. Overall though I feel like they could have shown more emotion in the animals if they had chosen a style that was so detailed to look so realistic. I give this movie a 7/10. It is worth watching for nostalgia and to see it in theaters is a treat, especially when getting children or younger family members to see it for the first time, but the original is still the better film.
King Mufasa (James Earl Jones) and Queen Sarabi rule over the animal kingdom with their pride of lions from Pride Rock, in the African Pride Lands. Things change with the birth of their son, Simba, the new Prince. Mufasa's younger brother, and former heir to the throne, Scar, covets the throne and plots to eliminate Mufasa and Simba, so he may become king. The battle for Pride Rock is filled with betrayal, tragedy and drama and circumstances are forever changed after the events of the stampede.
This movie was really good, but of course it was. The original Lion King was one of Disney's best animated films to date. There was a lot of build up to the release of this movie, with fans every anticipating when they could finally see this story on the big screen again. Jon Favreau did not disappoint, but there was a lot of negativity and bad review scores when it first released. I think the big problem was that in all the previews/trailers leading up to the movie coming out showed how realistic the animals looked and how they were able to recreate iconic scenes in stunning state of the art CGI, but they never showed the animals talking or singing. This for me made it difficult to get fully immersed in the film when the very realistic animals began talking and singing, but eventually it went away or I got used to it a couple minutes into the movie. Also they changed very little in this remake and it was almost literally a shot for shot or scene for scene recreation of the original Lion King, which I think bothered the critics. I personally liked little changes they made that I felt made the movie just a little bit better, like the dialogue between Mufasa's and Scar implying Mufasa's gave him the scar, Zimbabwe catching up with Nala for the journey back to Pride Rock, and Nala leading the female lions in the fight against the hyenas. I also thought it was cool how they made it more clear that one of the hyenas was the leader and it was the female and the scene where Scar makes the deal with them. Overall though I feel like they could have shown more emotion in the animals if they had chosen a style that was so detailed to look so realistic. I give this movie a 7/10. It is worth watching for nostalgia and to see it in theaters is a treat, especially when getting children or younger family members to see it for the first time, but the original is still the better film.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Bad Boys II (2003) in Movies
Feb 25, 2019
What ya gonna do
this time?
Contains spoilers, click to show
Whilst the first outing of the Bad Boys shocked me by how good it actually was, this one left me a little disappointed. I was hardly expecting an Oscar winning deal here, as this was always going to be a Michael Bay adrenalin rush, but for a film with a two and a half hour running time, the adrenalin came in too short a bursts.
Bad Boys was Bay's first film and was but a taster of his over the top film making, which first arrives in The Rock a year afterwards, but this made eight years later was obviously going to take this to the next level, if not several levels further than that. But to me, it didn't. Granted, the action was thrilling, outrageous and very enjoyable, but the character development was barely visible. They bicker, Lawrence moaned a lot and Smith was cool and likable but there was just a shell of what there should have been. The entire story, including what's left of their character dynamics are only present to set up the next great action sequence.
Then, the was the taste issue. The crux of the plot as it developed was that the drug dealing villains where using corpses to smuggle drugs, and this was used to "Comic Effect" in two major set-pieces. Though in the first, a car chase, it was black comedy as bodies came thick and fast from the back of a van to be run over by the pursuing cars, the second was pushing the boundaries in a to a more disturbing area.
A criticism levied at Michael Bay by British critic Mark Kermode has been that he is a filmmaker with "pornographic sensibilities". Not just in the literal sense, but in the way that he views everything from cars, women and explosions for example. But this was no more clearly re- enforced than in a scene about 90 minutes in, when our two 'bad boys' are searching a morgue and after pulling back the sheets on fat white guys, they reveal a large breasted young woman, who is refer to as "The Bimbo" if my memory serves. It's worrying because I don't know whether this was being played for laughs or was supposed to be a titillating shot of a well endowed woman? Is it right to show a dead woman, who looks to have been strangled to death and referred to a bimbo in a mainstream 15 certificated movie?
I don't want to sound like a prude but the tone of this and pretty much every scene with the bodies being used, seemed to be in plain Bad, BAD taste and though this humour can play well in the right genre of movie, this just simply wasn't the film to do it in, in my opinion. But, that criticism aside, my main issues are the pacing. It was just too hollow to sustain its running time and my mind was beginning to wander from time to time between the spectacular action and the few moments of decent comedy.
It just didn't have the magic of the 90′s actioner, a genre which had faded considerably by the early 2000′s, and without offering anything new besides improved action, which was worth the ticket or DVD price in its own right, or even retaining the original character of the original, this was a sequel failed to hold its own.
Bad Boys was Bay's first film and was but a taster of his over the top film making, which first arrives in The Rock a year afterwards, but this made eight years later was obviously going to take this to the next level, if not several levels further than that. But to me, it didn't. Granted, the action was thrilling, outrageous and very enjoyable, but the character development was barely visible. They bicker, Lawrence moaned a lot and Smith was cool and likable but there was just a shell of what there should have been. The entire story, including what's left of their character dynamics are only present to set up the next great action sequence.
Then, the was the taste issue. The crux of the plot as it developed was that the drug dealing villains where using corpses to smuggle drugs, and this was used to "Comic Effect" in two major set-pieces. Though in the first, a car chase, it was black comedy as bodies came thick and fast from the back of a van to be run over by the pursuing cars, the second was pushing the boundaries in a to a more disturbing area.
A criticism levied at Michael Bay by British critic Mark Kermode has been that he is a filmmaker with "pornographic sensibilities". Not just in the literal sense, but in the way that he views everything from cars, women and explosions for example. But this was no more clearly re- enforced than in a scene about 90 minutes in, when our two 'bad boys' are searching a morgue and after pulling back the sheets on fat white guys, they reveal a large breasted young woman, who is refer to as "The Bimbo" if my memory serves. It's worrying because I don't know whether this was being played for laughs or was supposed to be a titillating shot of a well endowed woman? Is it right to show a dead woman, who looks to have been strangled to death and referred to a bimbo in a mainstream 15 certificated movie?
I don't want to sound like a prude but the tone of this and pretty much every scene with the bodies being used, seemed to be in plain Bad, BAD taste and though this humour can play well in the right genre of movie, this just simply wasn't the film to do it in, in my opinion. But, that criticism aside, my main issues are the pacing. It was just too hollow to sustain its running time and my mind was beginning to wander from time to time between the spectacular action and the few moments of decent comedy.
It just didn't have the magic of the 90′s actioner, a genre which had faded considerably by the early 2000′s, and without offering anything new besides improved action, which was worth the ticket or DVD price in its own right, or even retaining the original character of the original, this was a sequel failed to hold its own.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Marriage Story (2019) in Movies
Dec 7, 2019
A bad movie disguised as a good movie
Wow what a disappointment.
I would say for a movie without out of the ordinary cinematography, art direction, costumes, lighting locations, sets or soundtrack; it had better have a good screenplay. And it didn't. I found the dialogue to be unbelievable, corny and not the way real people talk. I'll forgive this on occasion if I am listening to screenplay prose, like Tarantino maybe, where I don't care if his characters go on and on about nothing because the way they say it is so interesting. Here there is none of that.
Divorce is not a pleasant subject and the portrayal of their profession in this film makes them out to be all scum sucking horrible people. I know acting in the best interest of their clients is what they are supposed to do, but the way they twist every conversation or nonchalant occurrence between two people into something that happens to their client's advantage is just horrible.
While watching I was trying to decide if these reasons were why I was not enjoying and that was just not the case.
It's poor writing. The scene that everyone is talking about where Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver yell at each other and become increasingly emotional at the same time is all right, but honestly I felt overacting. I kind of felt that way through the entire film to be honest.
Not sure why this is getting all the accolades it is and am hoping it gets snubbed during awards season (but not likely).
What a disappointment...
I would say for a movie without out of the ordinary cinematography, art direction, costumes, lighting locations, sets or soundtrack; it had better have a good screenplay. And it didn't. I found the dialogue to be unbelievable, corny and not the way real people talk. I'll forgive this on occasion if I am listening to screenplay prose, like Tarantino maybe, where I don't care if his characters go on and on about nothing because the way they say it is so interesting. Here there is none of that.
Divorce is not a pleasant subject and the portrayal of their profession in this film makes them out to be all scum sucking horrible people. I know acting in the best interest of their clients is what they are supposed to do, but the way they twist every conversation or nonchalant occurrence between two people into something that happens to their client's advantage is just horrible.
While watching I was trying to decide if these reasons were why I was not enjoying and that was just not the case.
It's poor writing. The scene that everyone is talking about where Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver yell at each other and become increasingly emotional at the same time is all right, but honestly I felt overacting. I kind of felt that way through the entire film to be honest.
Not sure why this is getting all the accolades it is and am hoping it gets snubbed during awards season (but not likely).
What a disappointment...
Tim McGuire (301 KP) rated Grabbers (2012) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
Fun Creature Feature
388. Grabbers. Aliens attack Ireland, must be for the women. One night off the coast of Ireland a piece of a meteor comes crashing down into the ocean, and with it, a multi-legged mouth essentially that seems to just eat anything alive that gets in the way, and its making its way to land. Story centers on a small fishing town that's about to be invaded, and the two police taking care of it. As with many stories of small Irish towns, most of the population are drunk, racists, oh wait, it's made by the Irish, so it's ok then. The two officers, O'Shea, an alcoholic, suffering from the past, and Lisa, who is there only temporarily and takes her job seriously... of course. They clash, they flirt, O'Shea gets jealous when investigating the creatures they visit a scientist dude that isn't shy about flirting with Lisa. So after a few attacks, randomly around, they come to the conclusion that they won't attack you if you're intoxicated, tho there is no evidence of this at all, except that the town's biggest drunk has survived, hmm. So the plan is to round up the town folk in the bar, get drunk, and wait for reinforcements. It was an amusing movie, definitely fits into the 'B-Movie' variety. Like I said though, the alcohol thing, only seems to work when the story needed it too, plenty of tipsy people were getting turned into snacks, then again it's not really a movie you have to think all that much about, my bad. Enjoy. Filmbufftim on FB
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Jeepers Creepers 2 (2003) in Movies
Sep 19, 2020
Competent. Scumbag Salva finally learned how to shoot something that doesn't look like a bad TV movie that they show you in like driver's ed class or something; but while this unquestionably looks more professional than the (still superior) first movie it's near totally gutted of all its weirdness and idiosyncrasy. This had all the ingredients to be a recipe for some real legendary success: pristine top-notch effects which lend themselves to some bang-up imagery like The Creeper flying in front of the moon or swooping down onto a group of fleeing high school students, an inherently winning plot which basically amounts to "fill up bus with walking appetizers then Creeper eats them one by one while they go mad and form a hierarchy based off of who the creeper wants to eat the most and hellbent Ray Wise hunts it down with a giant truck-mounted speargun (lol)", numerous bombastic action setpieces, a much larger arsenal of Creeper weaponry, etc. It's a testament to how overtly basic this was executed that this classic in the making somehow - against all odds - came out as "just fine". Still adore The Creeper, hanging upside down while pointing finger guns and licking at his next victims just as memorable as ever - the javelin skewer and head-replacement segments are *wickedly* gruesome. But it's clear that they tried to make him (and this) a more conventional horror movie product rather than the odd French Extremity curio the first one was, and that's a shame even as flawed as that one was. For sure still has enough flickers of inspiration to ultimately satisfy but fire and jail Salva already.