Search
Search results
Jackjack (877 KP) rated Love and Monsters (2021) in Movies
Apr 16, 2021
Not too bad!!!
OK so I will start out by saying, do not watch the trailer! Unfortunately it is one of those trailers that show most if not all of the monsters your about to watch!
The film itself is pretty good it's cheesy got a bit of comedy but overall its just a good monster movie, it didn't wow me but kept me hooked enough to stick to it. It starts out explaining how and where all the big monsters came from, you slowly get introduced to the characters as the story unfolds. The main reason for the film if this guy hasn't seen the love of his life in 7 years, and is fed up of waiting around so decides to take a dangerous 7 day hike to reach her, but with monsters in his way every day is a struggle but he has good company with him, the adorable dog he met called Boy. But when he finally reaches his girlfriend a few problems are thrown into the mix.
Definitely worth the watch if you have the time!
The film itself is pretty good it's cheesy got a bit of comedy but overall its just a good monster movie, it didn't wow me but kept me hooked enough to stick to it. It starts out explaining how and where all the big monsters came from, you slowly get introduced to the characters as the story unfolds. The main reason for the film if this guy hasn't seen the love of his life in 7 years, and is fed up of waiting around so decides to take a dangerous 7 day hike to reach her, but with monsters in his way every day is a struggle but he has good company with him, the adorable dog he met called Boy. But when he finally reaches his girlfriend a few problems are thrown into the mix.
Definitely worth the watch if you have the time!
Awix (3310 KP) rated The Producers (1967) in Movies
Jul 9, 2021
Relentless knockabout bad-taste farce from Mel Brooks. A corrupt theatrical producer and his accountant embark upon a scheme to fraudulently make a fortune by mounting the worst play in history. Promising idea, and the brilliantly-staged opening number from Springtime for Hitler (all dancing SS officers and goose-stepping showgirls) is inspired, but the rest of the film struggles to meet the same standards.
The movie feels like a frenetic mixture of old-fashioned vaudeville and scatter-gun satire; there was probably something curiously dated about it even fifty-odd years ago. While it does acknowledge the counter-culture of the 60s (there's a hippy beatnik character, amongst other things), it doesn't feel like it was made by or for a young audience. Viewers nowadays may not be troubled by deliberately provocative jokes about Hitler or over-sexed pensioners, but jokes about dumb blondes in bikinis and camp transvestites feel a bit uncomfortable. Passes the time amiably, and worth watching just to see Springtime for Hitler in context, but I'd struggle to call it an actual classic.
The movie feels like a frenetic mixture of old-fashioned vaudeville and scatter-gun satire; there was probably something curiously dated about it even fifty-odd years ago. While it does acknowledge the counter-culture of the 60s (there's a hippy beatnik character, amongst other things), it doesn't feel like it was made by or for a young audience. Viewers nowadays may not be troubled by deliberately provocative jokes about Hitler or over-sexed pensioners, but jokes about dumb blondes in bikinis and camp transvestites feel a bit uncomfortable. Passes the time amiably, and worth watching just to see Springtime for Hitler in context, but I'd struggle to call it an actual classic.
Jordan Binkerd (567 KP) rated The Scorpion King 2: Rise Of A Warrior (2008) in Movies
Sep 5, 2019 (Updated Sep 5, 2019)
Michael Copon almost sells being a young Rock. (3 more)
Karen David does her job well: look good while kicking ass.
Fight scenes are well executed
Sets and locations are pretty
The Minotaur and giant scorpion sequences look like crap. (2 more)
Did we need this? I feel like we didn't need this....
No Rock
Unnecessary and derivative, but not bad for direct-to-video.
Was this necessary? Did we really need to examine the Scorpion King's childhood and early adulthood? The film raises more questions than it resolves, in that now they have a thriving kingdom to dispose of somehow before the events of the original film. That said, the film is decently fun to watch. The performances aren't any worse than you'd expect from a movie like this, even better in some cases. Michael Copon was even trying to infuse the character with some of The Rock's mannerisms, unless that was unintentional. The fights are fun to watch, which is mostly the point here. The scenery, locations, and general production design is on point. Bottom line: it's not great, but it's better than I feared.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Konga (1961) in Movies
Sep 7, 2019 (Updated Sep 7, 2019)
Staggeringly camp entry to the annals of man-in-a-gorilla-suit fantasy deserves about a 2 as a serious drama, but earns a much higher mark for sheer entertainment value. Michael Gough chews the scenery energetically as a mad scientist whose stated plans to discover the secrets of life by breeding giant rubber Venus fly traps actually seem to revolve around him leching all over his attractive female students and sending his pet ape Konga to strangle people. It all ends badly, as you might expect.
You have admire a film where people are given lines like 'There's a monster gorilla that's constantly growing to outlandish proportions loose in the streets!' and manage to deliver them with a relatively straight face - or perhaps that's just me. Much here to appreciate if you enjoy overacting, dodgy special effects, absurd melodrama, and terrible dialogue. The climax feels a bit bolted on considering what has come before, and it's disappointingly limp and static, but a hugely enjoyable Bad Movie in all other respects.
You have admire a film where people are given lines like 'There's a monster gorilla that's constantly growing to outlandish proportions loose in the streets!' and manage to deliver them with a relatively straight face - or perhaps that's just me. Much here to appreciate if you enjoy overacting, dodgy special effects, absurd melodrama, and terrible dialogue. The climax feels a bit bolted on considering what has come before, and it's disappointingly limp and static, but a hugely enjoyable Bad Movie in all other respects.
Awix (3310 KP) rated North by Northwest (1959) in Movies
Sep 30, 2020 (Updated Oct 1, 2020)
Super-slick espionage thriller from Hitchcock's late-50s imperial phase is one of the greatest pieces of escapist cinema ever made. Hapless ad executive Cary Grant finds himself mistaken for a secret agent and pursued across America by the bad guys and the cops, and forced to become a non-existent adventurer. Sparkling dialogue and effortless suspense is intercut with iconic set-pieces (the crop duster attack, the chase across the faces of Mount Rushmore).
Hitchcock makes it all look bafflingly easy, assisted by a very smart script and some charismatic performers (Grant is perhaps a touch too old - he was 55 at the time - but makes up for it with sheer star power). Maybe the plot doesn't completely hang together and the title has no relation to the story, but who cares? A deservedly enduring film, perhaps in more ways than one: add a touch more grit and some globetrotting to this recipe and you'd have something that looks very much like the formula for a Bond movie. Superb entertainment.
Hitchcock makes it all look bafflingly easy, assisted by a very smart script and some charismatic performers (Grant is perhaps a touch too old - he was 55 at the time - but makes up for it with sheer star power). Maybe the plot doesn't completely hang together and the title has no relation to the story, but who cares? A deservedly enduring film, perhaps in more ways than one: add a touch more grit and some globetrotting to this recipe and you'd have something that looks very much like the formula for a Bond movie. Superb entertainment.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Edge of Darkness (2010) in Movies
May 5, 2020 (Updated May 6, 2020)
The legendary TV mini-series is retooled for the big screen as a bog-standard Mel Gibson revenge thriller. A detective's daughter is killed, and his investigations lead him to discover she was a target of forces within the military-industrial complex operating above the law.
As well as two-thirds of the running time and most of the plot, the movie version of Edge of Darkness also cheerfully dispenses with virtually everything that made the TV show so memorable: theoretically a fiendishly convoluted thriller, it also contained an environmentalist subtext, an incest subtext, a subtext about Anglo-US relations, even some borderline SF & fantasy elements. All of this is gone and just replaced with Mel Gibson looking intense and beating people up. As a result it is very hard to care about what's happening, although the illogicality of much of it does manage to cut through (someone poisoning someone else and then deciding to shoot them as well is practically a motif). Ray Winstone is not bad as Jedburgh, but given the source material the rest of it is unforgivably lousy.
As well as two-thirds of the running time and most of the plot, the movie version of Edge of Darkness also cheerfully dispenses with virtually everything that made the TV show so memorable: theoretically a fiendishly convoluted thriller, it also contained an environmentalist subtext, an incest subtext, a subtext about Anglo-US relations, even some borderline SF & fantasy elements. All of this is gone and just replaced with Mel Gibson looking intense and beating people up. As a result it is very hard to care about what's happening, although the illogicality of much of it does manage to cut through (someone poisoning someone else and then deciding to shoot them as well is practically a motif). Ray Winstone is not bad as Jedburgh, but given the source material the rest of it is unforgivably lousy.
David McK (3557 KP) rated Waterworld (1995) in Movies
Jun 21, 2022
The movie that all-but-sank Kevin Costner's career
In the early to mid 90s, Kevin Costner was riding high in Hollywood.
Then he had the one-two misfore of this (at one point, the most expensive flop ever made, I believe) and 'The Postman'.
Both are set in a post-apocalyptic future: here, one where the world has flooded 'due to the melting of the ice shelves' (don't even), with 'dry land' now virtually a myth and where gangs of bikers roam the outlands on custom-built vehicles in search of fuel ...
Sorry, sorry, that's Mad Max.
But you can definitely see the similarities: swap the bikers for jet ski's, replace the loner character played by Mel Gibson for one played by with Kevin Costner and you're virtually there!
Add a bit of Dennis Hopper to completely ham it up, a soupcon of mystery around The Mariner and his mutation, and a search for the mysterious Dryland and there you have it ...
Not as bad as it's made out to be, but nor is it brilliant by any stretch of the imagination
Then he had the one-two misfore of this (at one point, the most expensive flop ever made, I believe) and 'The Postman'.
Both are set in a post-apocalyptic future: here, one where the world has flooded 'due to the melting of the ice shelves' (don't even), with 'dry land' now virtually a myth and where gangs of bikers roam the outlands on custom-built vehicles in search of fuel ...
Sorry, sorry, that's Mad Max.
But you can definitely see the similarities: swap the bikers for jet ski's, replace the loner character played by Mel Gibson for one played by with Kevin Costner and you're virtually there!
Add a bit of Dennis Hopper to completely ham it up, a soupcon of mystery around The Mariner and his mutation, and a search for the mysterious Dryland and there you have it ...
Not as bad as it's made out to be, but nor is it brilliant by any stretch of the imagination
Mike Wilder (20 KP) rated 2012 (2009) in Movies
May 30, 2018
As a disaster movie it doesn't get much better than this.
Contains spoilers, click to show
Roland Emmerich has done it again. He seems to get a kick out of bringing out humanities worst fears and putting them on screen in all its glory. After destroying a large part of the world in Independence Day: ID4, and trashing New York with Godzilla, he decides to go the rest of the way and change the face of the earth forever and in the process kill off most of humanity. What is the enemy this time? Aliens? Nope done that. Monsters? Nope also done that. Bad weather? Once again done that. What is left? I know lets have the sun spit out solar flares that heat up the earth's core and destabilize the planet! Whatever his problem with humanity is, it translates well on to film. This is an epic disaster movie. No part of the world is safe and there is no magic quick fix here.
The film itself is simple, massive destruction minimal plot. But in this case it really works. With amazing effects and a great cast that includes John Cusack, Thandie Newton, Oliver Platt, Danny Glover and the story is played out well and the acting is good. It is not too over the top except the stand out performance from the great Woody Harrelson. He is your go to guy when you are looking for crazy, and once again he pulls off the crazy guy effortlessly.
I really enjoyed this film and I think it has been given an unfairly hard time by critics and movie goers alike. I don't understand what people expected from this film. It is a disaster film not The Shawshank Redemption! I expected disaster and destruction and it exceeded my expectations. I didn't expect award winning performances by the actors (many of who are award nominees and winners), and I didn't expect a plot more complicated than oh s**t, we are going to die what can we do? Many viewers and critics must have forgotten the other films by Roland Emmerich when viewing this or they were comparing it to other films that were released at the same time. However I judge a film on its own merit and not comparing it to films that are in a different category. As a disaster movie it doesn't get much better than this.
The film itself is simple, massive destruction minimal plot. But in this case it really works. With amazing effects and a great cast that includes John Cusack, Thandie Newton, Oliver Platt, Danny Glover and the story is played out well and the acting is good. It is not too over the top except the stand out performance from the great Woody Harrelson. He is your go to guy when you are looking for crazy, and once again he pulls off the crazy guy effortlessly.
I really enjoyed this film and I think it has been given an unfairly hard time by critics and movie goers alike. I don't understand what people expected from this film. It is a disaster film not The Shawshank Redemption! I expected disaster and destruction and it exceeded my expectations. I didn't expect award winning performances by the actors (many of who are award nominees and winners), and I didn't expect a plot more complicated than oh s**t, we are going to die what can we do? Many viewers and critics must have forgotten the other films by Roland Emmerich when viewing this or they were comparing it to other films that were released at the same time. However I judge a film on its own merit and not comparing it to films that are in a different category. As a disaster movie it doesn't get much better than this.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Something Borrowed (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
“Sometimes good people do bad things!”
Rachel (Ginnifer Goodwin) is a successful New York City lawyer, the ever-loyal and perpetual good girl, who, on the night of her surprise 30th birthday party, sleeps with Dex, her old study buddy and secret crush from law school. Unfortunately, Dex happens to be the fiancé of Rachel’s egotistical best friend Darcy’s (Kate Hudson). Throughout the movie you find Rachel conflicted with the thought of hurting her best friend because she has just realized she is in love with Dex (Colin Egglesfield). Dex feels equally guilty for having fallen for Rachel but would rather do what everyone expects him to do, as opposed to following his heart.
As Rachel tries to assist the self-absorbed party girl Darcy plan her wedding, she finds it difficult to to hide her feelings for Dex. Rachel and Darcy’s childhood friend Ethan (John Krasinski) figures out that Rachel and Dex are more than just friends. He lends a shoulder for Rachel to lean on as well as some very harsh criticisms to help her realize that she does deserve to be happy.
Based on the novel written by Emily Giffin, Something Borrowed is a romantic comedy that explores the true meaning of friendship, love and ethics. Always a fan of Ginnifer Goodwin, she does a decent job at playing our heroine/doormat, Rachel White. Kate Hudson was spot-on with the role of self-centered, always-gets-her-way Darcy. And let’s not forget the Tom Cruise look-alike, Colin Egglesfield, who for some reason didn’t impress me much as Dex. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there was definitely something missing there. Plug in some weekend getaways to the Hamptons, some awkward drinking and partying moments, some flashback moments of Darcy and Rachel’s childhood as well as flashbacks to Rachel’s law school days when she was swooning over Dex and voila! A mediocre, very predictable movie. I’d have to say if it wasn’t for the sarcastic comedic stylings of John Krasinski as Ethan, this movie would have been a major flop.
This film is definitely a twist on My Best Friend’s Wedding, but not in the best way. If nothing else, it’s worth seeing as a “girls night out” kind of movie!
Rachel (Ginnifer Goodwin) is a successful New York City lawyer, the ever-loyal and perpetual good girl, who, on the night of her surprise 30th birthday party, sleeps with Dex, her old study buddy and secret crush from law school. Unfortunately, Dex happens to be the fiancé of Rachel’s egotistical best friend Darcy’s (Kate Hudson). Throughout the movie you find Rachel conflicted with the thought of hurting her best friend because she has just realized she is in love with Dex (Colin Egglesfield). Dex feels equally guilty for having fallen for Rachel but would rather do what everyone expects him to do, as opposed to following his heart.
As Rachel tries to assist the self-absorbed party girl Darcy plan her wedding, she finds it difficult to to hide her feelings for Dex. Rachel and Darcy’s childhood friend Ethan (John Krasinski) figures out that Rachel and Dex are more than just friends. He lends a shoulder for Rachel to lean on as well as some very harsh criticisms to help her realize that she does deserve to be happy.
Based on the novel written by Emily Giffin, Something Borrowed is a romantic comedy that explores the true meaning of friendship, love and ethics. Always a fan of Ginnifer Goodwin, she does a decent job at playing our heroine/doormat, Rachel White. Kate Hudson was spot-on with the role of self-centered, always-gets-her-way Darcy. And let’s not forget the Tom Cruise look-alike, Colin Egglesfield, who for some reason didn’t impress me much as Dex. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there was definitely something missing there. Plug in some weekend getaways to the Hamptons, some awkward drinking and partying moments, some flashback moments of Darcy and Rachel’s childhood as well as flashbacks to Rachel’s law school days when she was swooning over Dex and voila! A mediocre, very predictable movie. I’d have to say if it wasn’t for the sarcastic comedic stylings of John Krasinski as Ethan, this movie would have been a major flop.
This film is definitely a twist on My Best Friend’s Wedding, but not in the best way. If nothing else, it’s worth seeing as a “girls night out” kind of movie!
Kim Pook (101 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Jun 2, 2022
As the movie starts we see an open car door and muddy prints and a blood trail leading to the front door of a house, cut to white and a family are driving to their new home. This family consists of mum, dad, baby gage, daughter Ellie and a cat called church all names from the original movie we know and love.
One day whilst dad is in work, mum and Ellie witness a strange prossesion involving a group of masked people wheeling what looks like a dead dog in a wheelbarrow towards the woods, Ellie decides to investigate and walks into a pet cemetery. As she proceeds to climb the stick wall to see what's on the other side, she is stopped by a passerby who informs Ellie and her mum that the woods aren't safe.
Whilst dad is working a guy comes in losing a lot of blood with half of his face missing and he dies, coming back momentarily in a vision to tell him the barrier isn't meant to be broken, but what does this mean?? Of course if you're familiar with the original you'll know the meaning of this.
Just like the original, we see the dad have his dream which turns out not to be a dream, we see the trauma Rachel still lives with about her sister and of course church dying and being buried in the pet cemetery.
The day after church is buried, the cat turns up alive and well, but smelly and bad tempered, what is going on? You will have to watch and find out.
I was put off watching this for so long, due to the mention of cults and wendigos in the trailer, so I expected it to be awful and completely different from the original, but apart from a few changes such as a different breed of cat and a role reversal of who dies, the movie more or less stayed true to the original and moves at a steady pace. The ending, however, is very different and unexpected. It definitely leaves a lasting impression that's for sure. I very much enjoyed this movie, everybody's acting Is spot on and believable, and would probably go as far as preferring it to the original.
One day whilst dad is in work, mum and Ellie witness a strange prossesion involving a group of masked people wheeling what looks like a dead dog in a wheelbarrow towards the woods, Ellie decides to investigate and walks into a pet cemetery. As she proceeds to climb the stick wall to see what's on the other side, she is stopped by a passerby who informs Ellie and her mum that the woods aren't safe.
Whilst dad is working a guy comes in losing a lot of blood with half of his face missing and he dies, coming back momentarily in a vision to tell him the barrier isn't meant to be broken, but what does this mean?? Of course if you're familiar with the original you'll know the meaning of this.
Just like the original, we see the dad have his dream which turns out not to be a dream, we see the trauma Rachel still lives with about her sister and of course church dying and being buried in the pet cemetery.
The day after church is buried, the cat turns up alive and well, but smelly and bad tempered, what is going on? You will have to watch and find out.
I was put off watching this for so long, due to the mention of cults and wendigos in the trailer, so I expected it to be awful and completely different from the original, but apart from a few changes such as a different breed of cat and a role reversal of who dies, the movie more or less stayed true to the original and moves at a steady pace. The ending, however, is very different and unexpected. It definitely leaves a lasting impression that's for sure. I very much enjoyed this movie, everybody's acting Is spot on and believable, and would probably go as far as preferring it to the original.