Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Apocalypse Tomorrow (2014) in Movies
Jun 11, 2020
We get thrown into the disasters pretty quickly, so quickly in fact that I really thought I'd missed something, you will be glad to know that it's isn't so complex that you can't pick it up, it's just ridiculous.
The main characters of Neil and Colin are introduced very quickly and we get a rather clumsy potted backstory before they get swept up into the action. Joel Gretsch is a face I know from various things but it's The 4400 that sticks out the most, his acting in this isn't much of a stretch beyond what he's had experience with and he probably has the best character next to Marty.
Apocalypse Tomorrow, or Zodiac: Signs Of The Apocalypse, ticks all the classic TV disaster movie points... animals fleeing from impending danger, terrible CGI, vehicles and people being able to outrun nature, terrible CGI, and a dubious love interest moment... credit where credit is due, they did catch me out with this one. What I was severely upset by though was the fact that we hear about devastation around the world and there were no crappy shots of world famous landmarks being destroyed, don't they know that's what we come to these films for?!
You may know that I hate bouncy camera work, I was pleasantly surprised when (excluding in-car scenes) the camera was solid and not frustrating, TV movies tend to be a little erratic on that point. Sadly they do randomly have one scene where it appears that the cameraman was wearing trampoline shoes while going through caffeine withdrawal, even more confusingly there was a scene where I could have forgiven it happening but they chose a very calm moment to have it and it did nothing but annoy.
The props that are introduced suddenly looked very familiar and if I didn't know any better I'd have said they were original concept pieces for Stargate that had been found in a shed somewhere. The physical pieces don't actually look too bad visually, but the CGI is a mix of passable, bad and terrible, at no time convincing. Bizarrely that gives it pretty good marks for this sort of film.
As with many films that want to be more action than story our characters all get to jump to conclusions and accurate deductions without any work being put in. Significantly in this one it means that right near the beginning we jump from one scene to another and skip what feels like two scenes in the middle. From a tense situation everything goes calm instantly and everything is back to normal. With some better scripting there are a lot of moments like this that could have been avoided.
I feel like my score could be misleading, was this film bad? Yes. But it's just ridiculous enough to be amusing.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/apocalypse-tomorrow-movie-review.html
The main characters of Neil and Colin are introduced very quickly and we get a rather clumsy potted backstory before they get swept up into the action. Joel Gretsch is a face I know from various things but it's The 4400 that sticks out the most, his acting in this isn't much of a stretch beyond what he's had experience with and he probably has the best character next to Marty.
Apocalypse Tomorrow, or Zodiac: Signs Of The Apocalypse, ticks all the classic TV disaster movie points... animals fleeing from impending danger, terrible CGI, vehicles and people being able to outrun nature, terrible CGI, and a dubious love interest moment... credit where credit is due, they did catch me out with this one. What I was severely upset by though was the fact that we hear about devastation around the world and there were no crappy shots of world famous landmarks being destroyed, don't they know that's what we come to these films for?!
You may know that I hate bouncy camera work, I was pleasantly surprised when (excluding in-car scenes) the camera was solid and not frustrating, TV movies tend to be a little erratic on that point. Sadly they do randomly have one scene where it appears that the cameraman was wearing trampoline shoes while going through caffeine withdrawal, even more confusingly there was a scene where I could have forgiven it happening but they chose a very calm moment to have it and it did nothing but annoy.
The props that are introduced suddenly looked very familiar and if I didn't know any better I'd have said they were original concept pieces for Stargate that had been found in a shed somewhere. The physical pieces don't actually look too bad visually, but the CGI is a mix of passable, bad and terrible, at no time convincing. Bizarrely that gives it pretty good marks for this sort of film.
As with many films that want to be more action than story our characters all get to jump to conclusions and accurate deductions without any work being put in. Significantly in this one it means that right near the beginning we jump from one scene to another and skip what feels like two scenes in the middle. From a tense situation everything goes calm instantly and everything is back to normal. With some better scripting there are a lot of moments like this that could have been avoided.
I feel like my score could be misleading, was this film bad? Yes. But it's just ridiculous enough to be amusing.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/apocalypse-tomorrow-movie-review.html
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Toy Story 4 (2019) in Movies
Jul 29, 2019
About Life and Letting Go...
In yet another crazy adventure, Toy Story 4 sees Woody and the gang protecting Forky, Bonnie’s new toy she created from a spork in Kindergarten class.
Acting: 10
I mentioned this in my review of Toy Story 3, but it bears repeating: the ability to bring back the same cast from one movie to the next guarantees stellar voice-acting performances. Tom Hanks and Tim Allen have perfected their roles as Woody and Buzz and their performances take you out of the realm of thinking these are mere toys, but actual sentient beings. Beyond these two and the rest of the traditional gang you have rib-splitting performances from Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele as Bunny and Ducky along with more hilarity from Keanu Reeves playing Duke Caboom, a stunt toy. Their ability to make their characters as endearing as they are funny makes the viewing experience that much more enjoyable.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
To expand on the above, it’s not just about the characters but how they develop as the story progresses. These are animated movies meant for kids yet these characters manage to grow as they would in a typical (great) movie. Characters like Woody are faced with difficult choices they have to make and I found myself wondering if they would have made those same choice two or three movies ago.
On another note, I appreciate that the movies have grown since the first in the way of their villains. It’s always refreshing when villains aren’t just innately bad and they have a backstory of some sort. Gabby Gabby, the babydoll with a broken voicebox, is no exception here.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Like its predecessors, Toy Story 4 is meant to take you on an adventure and it doesn’t disappoint. Continuing from a similar motif of the third movie, the gang is involved in a heist that includes great stakes. From the planning to the execution of it all, it’s nonstop great fun.
Entertainment Value: 10
Some of the most fun I’ve had in the theater in 2019. This movie has everything you want. There’s action, laughter, and yes maybe a tear or two. This movie doesn’t disappoint in the slightest.
Memorability: 8
From the beautiful visuals (seriously, it’s not even fair at this point) to a number of hilarious and touching moments, this one is absolutely one to remember. In a message that spoke to me directly, it’s all about being willing to let go and start new chapters of your life, getting out of your comfort zone and starting fresh. I dig it.
Pace: 10
For the most part, things are smooth sailing here as this film very rarely gets boring. There is a minor blip where I felt like they could have sped things along a little quicker, but big emphasis on “minor”. I was invested the whole way.
Plot: 10
Yet another great story that’s believable and doesn’t harbor any major holes. Seriously, how do they keep doing this? How do they keep creating brand new experiences that are vastly different from the last? Beyond impressed.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 98
This series truly answers the question: How long should a movie series go before you call it quits? The answer: As long as you have a good story, tell it! What was once one of the greatest trilogies of all time is now one of the greatest quadrilogies of all time. Toy Story 4 is a masterpiece.
Acting: 10
I mentioned this in my review of Toy Story 3, but it bears repeating: the ability to bring back the same cast from one movie to the next guarantees stellar voice-acting performances. Tom Hanks and Tim Allen have perfected their roles as Woody and Buzz and their performances take you out of the realm of thinking these are mere toys, but actual sentient beings. Beyond these two and the rest of the traditional gang you have rib-splitting performances from Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele as Bunny and Ducky along with more hilarity from Keanu Reeves playing Duke Caboom, a stunt toy. Their ability to make their characters as endearing as they are funny makes the viewing experience that much more enjoyable.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
To expand on the above, it’s not just about the characters but how they develop as the story progresses. These are animated movies meant for kids yet these characters manage to grow as they would in a typical (great) movie. Characters like Woody are faced with difficult choices they have to make and I found myself wondering if they would have made those same choice two or three movies ago.
On another note, I appreciate that the movies have grown since the first in the way of their villains. It’s always refreshing when villains aren’t just innately bad and they have a backstory of some sort. Gabby Gabby, the babydoll with a broken voicebox, is no exception here.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Like its predecessors, Toy Story 4 is meant to take you on an adventure and it doesn’t disappoint. Continuing from a similar motif of the third movie, the gang is involved in a heist that includes great stakes. From the planning to the execution of it all, it’s nonstop great fun.
Entertainment Value: 10
Some of the most fun I’ve had in the theater in 2019. This movie has everything you want. There’s action, laughter, and yes maybe a tear or two. This movie doesn’t disappoint in the slightest.
Memorability: 8
From the beautiful visuals (seriously, it’s not even fair at this point) to a number of hilarious and touching moments, this one is absolutely one to remember. In a message that spoke to me directly, it’s all about being willing to let go and start new chapters of your life, getting out of your comfort zone and starting fresh. I dig it.
Pace: 10
For the most part, things are smooth sailing here as this film very rarely gets boring. There is a minor blip where I felt like they could have sped things along a little quicker, but big emphasis on “minor”. I was invested the whole way.
Plot: 10
Yet another great story that’s believable and doesn’t harbor any major holes. Seriously, how do they keep doing this? How do they keep creating brand new experiences that are vastly different from the last? Beyond impressed.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 98
This series truly answers the question: How long should a movie series go before you call it quits? The answer: As long as you have a good story, tell it! What was once one of the greatest trilogies of all time is now one of the greatest quadrilogies of all time. Toy Story 4 is a masterpiece.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs Evil (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Does anyone remember the original Hoodwinked movie? Nobody else does, either. Blue Yonder Films, the studio that brought you Doogal tries to pull another rabbit out of their hat by releasing a sequel to the twisted fairy-tale movie titled Hoodwinked Too: Hood vs. Evil. All of the original voice characters are present from the first film, except for Red (Anne Hathaway was replaced by Hayden Panettiere), and Kirk the Woodsman (Jim Belushi , who was replaced by Martin Short).
It doesn’t really matter if you’ve seen the first movie, as a storybook opening catches the audience up on the current situation. A short intro introduces the HEA (Happily Ever After Agency; shouldn’t that be HEAA?) staking out a Wicked Witch who is holding Hansel & Gretel (Bill Hader & Amy Poehler) hostage in her Gingerbread House. The main protagonist, Red Riding Hood (Panettiere) is off on training, and her former partner, The Big Bad Wolf (Patrick Warburton) is handling the situation with Granny (Glen Close).
Of course, the seemingly simple scenario changes to a conspiracy which has actually been masterminded by the hostages, in order to drag a secret from Granny. Granny is a part of the Sisterhood of Kung-Fu Bakers (the “Hood” in the film’s title), and possesses the recipe of a secret weapon known as the Super Truffle, which supposedly makes those who consume it invincible. The movie has a small army of all-star cast members, and each one makes the most of their parts.
Unfortunately nearly everything else in the film misses the mark, from the writing, direction, and even the animation. Many other computer-animated movies today feel a lot more organic, and although the visuals of this sequel are better than the first there are times when character movements appear more programmed than motion-captured. Most of the jokes in the movie require one to have lived during the 70s or 80s, and nearly all of them are groaners. Jokes like “Dog is your co-pilot”, and a backwards sign where “dyslexic” is clearly visible are just too obscure even for the average adult. Sure, this is a family movie that should have something for everyone, but the preview theater I was in had a large mix of children and their parents, and there was only one time when the audience laughed as a whole.
There are a few running gags that did receive a positive audience response. Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong play two of the Three Little Pigs (hitmen for hire), and they received most of the genuine laughs. Another running gag was of a banjo-playing goat, who is constantly being fallen upon by other characters. This gag did get some chuckles, particularly from children, but was an obvious rip-off of “Scrat” from the Ice Age series, but just didn’t have the same charm. Most animated films either have amazing visuals, humor or heart, and the best ones blend these essentials together. Unfortunately none of these elements are present in Hoodwinked Too to make the audience feel for Red’s story, and the semi-warm victory at the end is simply “meh”.
You won’t be missing anything by skipping this film at the box office. It might be worth a rental when it comes out on DVD, but you and your family can still live a full and satisfying life without it.
It doesn’t really matter if you’ve seen the first movie, as a storybook opening catches the audience up on the current situation. A short intro introduces the HEA (Happily Ever After Agency; shouldn’t that be HEAA?) staking out a Wicked Witch who is holding Hansel & Gretel (Bill Hader & Amy Poehler) hostage in her Gingerbread House. The main protagonist, Red Riding Hood (Panettiere) is off on training, and her former partner, The Big Bad Wolf (Patrick Warburton) is handling the situation with Granny (Glen Close).
Of course, the seemingly simple scenario changes to a conspiracy which has actually been masterminded by the hostages, in order to drag a secret from Granny. Granny is a part of the Sisterhood of Kung-Fu Bakers (the “Hood” in the film’s title), and possesses the recipe of a secret weapon known as the Super Truffle, which supposedly makes those who consume it invincible. The movie has a small army of all-star cast members, and each one makes the most of their parts.
Unfortunately nearly everything else in the film misses the mark, from the writing, direction, and even the animation. Many other computer-animated movies today feel a lot more organic, and although the visuals of this sequel are better than the first there are times when character movements appear more programmed than motion-captured. Most of the jokes in the movie require one to have lived during the 70s or 80s, and nearly all of them are groaners. Jokes like “Dog is your co-pilot”, and a backwards sign where “dyslexic” is clearly visible are just too obscure even for the average adult. Sure, this is a family movie that should have something for everyone, but the preview theater I was in had a large mix of children and their parents, and there was only one time when the audience laughed as a whole.
There are a few running gags that did receive a positive audience response. Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong play two of the Three Little Pigs (hitmen for hire), and they received most of the genuine laughs. Another running gag was of a banjo-playing goat, who is constantly being fallen upon by other characters. This gag did get some chuckles, particularly from children, but was an obvious rip-off of “Scrat” from the Ice Age series, but just didn’t have the same charm. Most animated films either have amazing visuals, humor or heart, and the best ones blend these essentials together. Unfortunately none of these elements are present in Hoodwinked Too to make the audience feel for Red’s story, and the semi-warm victory at the end is simply “meh”.
You won’t be missing anything by skipping this film at the box office. It might be worth a rental when it comes out on DVD, but you and your family can still live a full and satisfying life without it.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Doom: Annihilation (2019) in Movies
Feb 7, 2020
Doom Annihilation is not a good film, no sir, but it's honestly not as terrible as I expected it to be.
The main problem stems from the low budget - a low budget doesn't always mean a bad end product, but when that end product is a sci-fi horror based on a hyper violent video game, there are going to be issues.
The whole film has a plastic cheap look to it. It works to a certain degree - it does have a kind of Starship Troopers-esque aesthetic (a good thing), but the cheap looking weapons and re used sets are a glaring eyesore.
The monsters a very generic for the most part, but I do respect that the bulk of them are practical. The CGI that is used is mostly awful, with a few exceptions - the occasional exterior shots of the base are passable, and the ending sequence doesn't look too bad - but otherwise, it's used infrequently, and for good reason.
The actors involved all do the best with what they're given - lead Amy Manson is likable enough - but the poor character writing provides us with a group of cliché ridden Marines and scientists that feel like cannon fodder.
The only concrete connection to the Doom game series that I noticed was the character of Dr Betruger, but that's it. The fact that Bethesda and id Software stayed well away from this, and that the production team were not allowed to use anything from the 2016 Doom reboot onwards, shows that maybe this shouldn't have been a thing.
As a schlocky B-movie sci-fi horror, it's not completely terrible, but I can't help but feel it shouldn't have the Doom brand attached to it, and even a cheeky Wolfenstein reference won't change my mind on that.
The main problem stems from the low budget - a low budget doesn't always mean a bad end product, but when that end product is a sci-fi horror based on a hyper violent video game, there are going to be issues.
The whole film has a plastic cheap look to it. It works to a certain degree - it does have a kind of Starship Troopers-esque aesthetic (a good thing), but the cheap looking weapons and re used sets are a glaring eyesore.
The monsters a very generic for the most part, but I do respect that the bulk of them are practical. The CGI that is used is mostly awful, with a few exceptions - the occasional exterior shots of the base are passable, and the ending sequence doesn't look too bad - but otherwise, it's used infrequently, and for good reason.
The actors involved all do the best with what they're given - lead Amy Manson is likable enough - but the poor character writing provides us with a group of cliché ridden Marines and scientists that feel like cannon fodder.
The only concrete connection to the Doom game series that I noticed was the character of Dr Betruger, but that's it. The fact that Bethesda and id Software stayed well away from this, and that the production team were not allowed to use anything from the 2016 Doom reboot onwards, shows that maybe this shouldn't have been a thing.
As a schlocky B-movie sci-fi horror, it's not completely terrible, but I can't help but feel it shouldn't have the Doom brand attached to it, and even a cheeky Wolfenstein reference won't change my mind on that.
Laura lou (304 KP) rated Halloween Kills (2021) in Movies
Nov 1, 2021
Gory. (1 more)
Good special effects
Plot holes (4 more)
Bad acting
Mistakes
Boring story
Ridiculously unrealistic
So many plot holes
Contains spoilers, click to show
Honestly one of the worst horror movies I’ve seen.
The acting throughout was so bad, particularly considering how high profile this movie series is.
There were multiple mistakes throughout, but the worst was during the mental patients fall from the hospital window. The camera switches to his point of view and you see the view he would have falling face first onto the floor, however when the camera switches back to a normal view he is lying face up on the floor. So unless he bounced and turned over this is a badly glaring mistake.
There were so many ridiculous plot holes but some of the worst were:
No parent would encourage teenage kids to join them, with weapons, on a manhunt for a seemingly indestructible mass murderer. It just would not happen.
Laurie had a major stomach surgery, no way would she be able to get up and run around the hospital like she did, even on pain killers.
And where did Vanessa go when she got out of the car and Michael began killing her husband and the others in the car. She had a gun, got out of the car and Michael was on the roof grabbing through the windows so why didn’t she at least try to shoot him. He was attacking her husband. She just seemingly disappeared then reappeared when he had done some killing..
All in all a poor film that I came so close to walking out of. The only reason I didn’t was because my partner thought I was joking she. I said let’s go home.
The acting throughout was so bad, particularly considering how high profile this movie series is.
There were multiple mistakes throughout, but the worst was during the mental patients fall from the hospital window. The camera switches to his point of view and you see the view he would have falling face first onto the floor, however when the camera switches back to a normal view he is lying face up on the floor. So unless he bounced and turned over this is a badly glaring mistake.
There were so many ridiculous plot holes but some of the worst were:
No parent would encourage teenage kids to join them, with weapons, on a manhunt for a seemingly indestructible mass murderer. It just would not happen.
Laurie had a major stomach surgery, no way would she be able to get up and run around the hospital like she did, even on pain killers.
And where did Vanessa go when she got out of the car and Michael began killing her husband and the others in the car. She had a gun, got out of the car and Michael was on the roof grabbing through the windows so why didn’t she at least try to shoot him. He was attacking her husband. She just seemingly disappeared then reappeared when he had done some killing..
All in all a poor film that I came so close to walking out of. The only reason I didn’t was because my partner thought I was joking she. I said let’s go home.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Wedlocked in Books
Feb 11, 2019
While the cover of the book gives the impression that the story is exclusively about the main character Rebecca's bad marriage. The book actually encompasses her life leading up to the bad marriage and what happens as a result of the rocky nuptials. The actual ceremony is understood to have happened sort of "between the lines," so to speak. The book is a before and after image in prose.
The prologue to the book is the immediate aftermath of the ceremony when Rebecca is undergoing the realization of her mistake. I was a bit confused at this point since I could not figure out if the ceremony took place or not. The next chapter starts in Rebecca's childhood, growing up with two sisters and a very marriage-minded mother in a strict Jewish household. To her mother's dismay, Rebecca is quickly influenced by her grandma Emma into a love for acting, movies, and theater. From there, the book walks us through Rebecca's pursuit of an acting career and near-absence of dating material.
Though Rebecca is likable enough, I had a difficult time relating to her career struggles, since I have little interest in that side of the business. I also did wonder if she was really as talented as she claimed to be, since her struggles were so great.
When a man, Evan, finally lays claim to Rebecca's heart, both Rebecca and Evan handle the relationship poorly and Rebecca abandons her suffering career with a broken heart. The man she eventually becomes "wedlocked" to, Craig, then shows up in her life, and a rebound relationship becomes a permanent one before Rebecca thinks to learn a bit more about her new husband. A honeymoon from hell makes the reality of her situation quite clear as Craig's bad behavior and numerous secrets get him in trouble with the Italian government, until a new friend, Michael, flies in to save the day.
Without spoiling the ending, I think Rebecca handled her problems remarkably well, with a little help, and ended the book with a humorous twist. If I suspend my opinions of the Hollywood-influenced methods of dating, marriage, and divorce that is so common in America today, the book was an entertaining read, and likely would make an even better movie.
The prologue to the book is the immediate aftermath of the ceremony when Rebecca is undergoing the realization of her mistake. I was a bit confused at this point since I could not figure out if the ceremony took place or not. The next chapter starts in Rebecca's childhood, growing up with two sisters and a very marriage-minded mother in a strict Jewish household. To her mother's dismay, Rebecca is quickly influenced by her grandma Emma into a love for acting, movies, and theater. From there, the book walks us through Rebecca's pursuit of an acting career and near-absence of dating material.
Though Rebecca is likable enough, I had a difficult time relating to her career struggles, since I have little interest in that side of the business. I also did wonder if she was really as talented as she claimed to be, since her struggles were so great.
When a man, Evan, finally lays claim to Rebecca's heart, both Rebecca and Evan handle the relationship poorly and Rebecca abandons her suffering career with a broken heart. The man she eventually becomes "wedlocked" to, Craig, then shows up in her life, and a rebound relationship becomes a permanent one before Rebecca thinks to learn a bit more about her new husband. A honeymoon from hell makes the reality of her situation quite clear as Craig's bad behavior and numerous secrets get him in trouble with the Italian government, until a new friend, Michael, flies in to save the day.
Without spoiling the ending, I think Rebecca handled her problems remarkably well, with a little help, and ended the book with a humorous twist. If I suspend my opinions of the Hollywood-influenced methods of dating, marriage, and divorce that is so common in America today, the book was an entertaining read, and likely would make an even better movie.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Personal History of David Copperfield (2019) in Movies
Jan 29, 2020
Hard Cake
The personal history of david copperfield really disappointed me especially after such a cracking trailer and while no means a bad film it just really wasnt a film I enjoyed. What I was expecting was a sharply written, quirky yet dry and playful adaptation of the Charles Dickens novel something similar to a yorgos lanthimos film like the favorite for instance but sadly I found this movie to be extreamly dull, uninteresting and severely lacking overall. I wouldnt say its necessarily bad however it all just felt very flat to me. Characters didnt feel believable, humour seemed forced and while david patel burts at the seemes constantly with energy the film around him didnt seem to follow along the same. Very interesting ideas are present here and the emphases is on life almost being like a stage play with people we meet being the characters in it. See everyone in life is unique and has their own distinctive traits/interesting stories and no matter what happenes in our lives neither one is no less meaningless or important than the other. This does come across brilliantly and shows the bad traits of human nature, see everyone is on the path to happiness its just what they do and who they exploit or how much they choose to lie to get there and achieve sucess is diffrent from person to person. Then on a positive side it also shows how we should all realise where we have come from, to be greatful for what we have, to let our creativity flow and to appreciate these characters that enter our lives and inspire/care for us. So heres where I feel conflicted as much as I like these great ideas I feel they they just aren't integrated well enough with the dull story or the forced comedy and sure the film is well made but to watch its just not exciting or that engaging and the characters all became forgettable once off screen just like when watching a sketch show. Failing to keep my intrest constantly made the runtime feel a drag too and by the time I left I struggled to remember much of what had just happened infront of me wishing I'd of just stayed home and watched Perfume or The Favorite instead in the warm. No doubt some will enjoy this but will they be talking about it in a month? I highly doubt it.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Lola on Fire in Books
Feb 25, 2021
A dark, fast-paced thriller
Brody Ellis has lost his job: desperate for cash to pay rent and to help take care of his younger sister, he robs a gas station. On his way out, he bumps into a woman. It's only once he's home that the realizes he's lost his wallet. He's waiting for the cops to arrest him when he receives a call. A woman named Blair Mayo, the one whom he ran into, has the wallet. She'll return it if he'll do something in return: steal her late mother's diamonds from her father's hateful new wife. But when Brody executes Blair's plan, he finds something else: a murdered woman and a security camera watching his every move. After he flees, slipping in blood, Blair tells him someone has already taken care of the footage. The woman's husband, the notorious mobster Jimmy Latzo. But he wants his own special revenge on Brody (and his sister, Molly, by default). The two flee, with the mob hot on their tail, and get caught up in a tangled web that involves Jimmy, Blair, and a woman named Lola Bear who came up against Jimmy years ago.
This book was amazing: completely raw, emotional, and brutal. Reading it felt like watching a "shoot 'em up" movie (one with a little heart, though). It's gory and dark, so if you're not able to handle some blood and violence, this read isn't for you. However, I found it nearly impossible to put down. I was completely invested in Brody, Molly, and Lola. This book weaves a tangled web, and I was there for every little spin.
It was honestly great to read a book where there's a pretty clear delineation between "good versus bad." Still, the story is certainly complex, filled with deep emotions and complex familial tensions, but you always know who to root for. It takes your mind off things (aka real life) for a bit.
Overall, I really enjoyed this one. I love violent movies, where the good guys are good and the bad guys really bad. It was fun seeing that translated into a book. I also loved the rawness of this book and the underlying tenderness that accompanied it. It's a fast, dark read. 4.5 stars.
I received a copy of this book from Netgalley and William Morrow / Custom House in return for an unbiased review. It releases in the U.S. on 2/16/2021.
This book was amazing: completely raw, emotional, and brutal. Reading it felt like watching a "shoot 'em up" movie (one with a little heart, though). It's gory and dark, so if you're not able to handle some blood and violence, this read isn't for you. However, I found it nearly impossible to put down. I was completely invested in Brody, Molly, and Lola. This book weaves a tangled web, and I was there for every little spin.
It was honestly great to read a book where there's a pretty clear delineation between "good versus bad." Still, the story is certainly complex, filled with deep emotions and complex familial tensions, but you always know who to root for. It takes your mind off things (aka real life) for a bit.
Overall, I really enjoyed this one. I love violent movies, where the good guys are good and the bad guys really bad. It was fun seeing that translated into a book. I also loved the rawness of this book and the underlying tenderness that accompanied it. It's a fast, dark read. 4.5 stars.
I received a copy of this book from Netgalley and William Morrow / Custom House in return for an unbiased review. It releases in the U.S. on 2/16/2021.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The House with a Clock in Its Walls (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
This isn't a bad film all in all, it certainly fills a more traditional (?) magical gap in recent releases.
The best thing about The House With A Clock In Its Walls is definitely Cate Blanchett, she plays eccentric beautifully in this one and I don't think there were any of her scenes that I wasn't fond of. She bounces well with Jack Black, and their little moments of bickering are amusing and express their playful friendship really well.
Jack Black is very, well, Jack Black in this. He's a good comedic actor, but his roles are always quite similar in ways. That's not a negative thing as such, I like that he's consistent and you know you'll enjoy his performance.
We've been blessed with some great performances from kids in films recently, Shuya Sophia Cai as Meiying in The Meg and Jacob Tremblay as Rory McKenna in The Predator, were both brilliant in their roles and were blessed with some great scenes and lines. Owen Vaccaro in this portrayed the awkward Lewis with conviction and was on point for what the film set out for him, but what he was given was on par with the film as a whole. It was good, but it didn't have any oomph behind it.
The story itself seemed to be jogging along nicely in the background, but I'm always left wondering about the baddie reveals. Would the film have felt better if there was less lead up and more of the spooky bad guy moments? I'm honestly not sure, but he seemed to appear and then disappear in a puff of smoke. I wonder how much screen time he had in total?
I will say this... I don't ever need to see "baby" Jack Black ever again. It was creepy, the graphics were horrendous and it was completely inaccurate to the events that were about to unfold, as was evident with the rest of the town who we see experiencing the same thing.
Based on the book The House With A Clock In It's Walls by John Bellairs.
What should you do?
It's not a bad family film to go and see if you've got a couple of hours to spare.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Having the magic would be too cliché, I'd like a topiary winged lion please.
The best thing about The House With A Clock In Its Walls is definitely Cate Blanchett, she plays eccentric beautifully in this one and I don't think there were any of her scenes that I wasn't fond of. She bounces well with Jack Black, and their little moments of bickering are amusing and express their playful friendship really well.
Jack Black is very, well, Jack Black in this. He's a good comedic actor, but his roles are always quite similar in ways. That's not a negative thing as such, I like that he's consistent and you know you'll enjoy his performance.
We've been blessed with some great performances from kids in films recently, Shuya Sophia Cai as Meiying in The Meg and Jacob Tremblay as Rory McKenna in The Predator, were both brilliant in their roles and were blessed with some great scenes and lines. Owen Vaccaro in this portrayed the awkward Lewis with conviction and was on point for what the film set out for him, but what he was given was on par with the film as a whole. It was good, but it didn't have any oomph behind it.
The story itself seemed to be jogging along nicely in the background, but I'm always left wondering about the baddie reveals. Would the film have felt better if there was less lead up and more of the spooky bad guy moments? I'm honestly not sure, but he seemed to appear and then disappear in a puff of smoke. I wonder how much screen time he had in total?
I will say this... I don't ever need to see "baby" Jack Black ever again. It was creepy, the graphics were horrendous and it was completely inaccurate to the events that were about to unfold, as was evident with the rest of the town who we see experiencing the same thing.
Based on the book The House With A Clock In It's Walls by John Bellairs.
What should you do?
It's not a bad family film to go and see if you've got a couple of hours to spare.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Having the magic would be too cliché, I'd like a topiary winged lion please.
Steven Sklansky (231 KP) rated Live By Night (2017) in Movies
Sep 10, 2017
Cast (2 more)
Gun play
Costumes and Sets
Gangsters, Guns and Money. What more is there?
To me Ben Affleck has always been a good actor. It doesn't matter if it is a good movie or a bad one, he seems to make his acting ability known. Live by Night was no different, he played gangster very well. It might be because he was also directing himself. Some movies you can tell that the movie is being directed by the actor in the movie, but in this one you could not see that line. The senses he was in you could tell they were done with the same quality as a director sitting in a chair.
Ben Affleck really does love Boston, because once again that where this whole thing begins. I didn't live in the 20's but the Boston accent must not have been established yet. It was quite refreshing not to hear it in a movie. I really didn't know Boston's backstory but I guess like everywhere on the East Coast there was a mob presence. They did a really good job showing the life of someone in the mob. It wasn't just the killing and booze. It really went deep with the love story of both women and what he had to go though to keep the love and them alive. Even though one of them turned out to be a backstabbing bitch.
When the story progressed to Tampa it was interesting to see something that I don't think has been portrayed in movies. Or I have never seen it. The mob in Florida. The interactions between the Irish and Italian mob in a world of Mexicans and Cubans was done very well. There was a lot going on and it never got boring. The only part of the story that got a little off was rivalry of the mob in Tampa and Miami. You never saw the fights between them until the end. I just thought it was over and done with after the Italians were run out of town. Or maybe I just missed it.
I won't tell you what happened to anyone at the end but the gun fight was amazing. So may parts put in and the chirography was done very well. I think the very end could have been done differently. To me it was very off putting and didn't understand why they choose to go that direction. Granted it was based off a book that I never read and maybe that's the way it had to be. But it could have been written better in the book too. Books seem to get the point across better anyway.
If you like gangster movies, see it. If you like Ben Affleck, see it. If you just want to watch a movie not to be bored, see it.
Ben Affleck really does love Boston, because once again that where this whole thing begins. I didn't live in the 20's but the Boston accent must not have been established yet. It was quite refreshing not to hear it in a movie. I really didn't know Boston's backstory but I guess like everywhere on the East Coast there was a mob presence. They did a really good job showing the life of someone in the mob. It wasn't just the killing and booze. It really went deep with the love story of both women and what he had to go though to keep the love and them alive. Even though one of them turned out to be a backstabbing bitch.
When the story progressed to Tampa it was interesting to see something that I don't think has been portrayed in movies. Or I have never seen it. The mob in Florida. The interactions between the Irish and Italian mob in a world of Mexicans and Cubans was done very well. There was a lot going on and it never got boring. The only part of the story that got a little off was rivalry of the mob in Tampa and Miami. You never saw the fights between them until the end. I just thought it was over and done with after the Italians were run out of town. Or maybe I just missed it.
I won't tell you what happened to anyone at the end but the gun fight was amazing. So may parts put in and the chirography was done very well. I think the very end could have been done differently. To me it was very off putting and didn't understand why they choose to go that direction. Granted it was based off a book that I never read and maybe that's the way it had to be. But it could have been written better in the book too. Books seem to get the point across better anyway.
If you like gangster movies, see it. If you like Ben Affleck, see it. If you just want to watch a movie not to be bored, see it.