Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Strange world (2022) in Movies
Jan 7, 2023
Takes Too Long To Find It's Legs
If a film is going to be 1/2 good and 1/2 bad, is it better to have the good part first (which will get you to watch until the end) or last (which will leave you with a good feeling, if you make it that far). With the new Disney Animated Film STRANGE WORLD it is bad first, good second. So, if you stick through the disjointed first part of this film, you’ll be rewarded for your persistence with an interesting and satisfying finale.
A nod to the “Pulp Magazine” Science Fiction works of the 1950’s, STRANGE WORLD follows the adventures of the Clade clan as they try to find out what is beyond the hills of their land with the central conflict of this movie being that the Grandfather - the great explorer Jaeger Clade - wanting to explore. His son, Searcher Clade, wanting to stay put and the Grandson, Ethan Clade, caught between the 2.
It is pretty standard fare that is made all the more confusing by the setup of the premise and the clumsy introduction of the myriad of characters and situations that leads the audience to the exploration adventure that is to come.
Written and Co-Directed by Qui Nguyen (and directed by Don Hall) - both of whom are responsible for the criminally under-rated RAYA AND THE LAST DRAGON - Strange World stumbles out of the gate and spends the first 1/2 (maybe even the first 2/3) trying to recover from that stumble.
It finally does get it’s legs under itself and the end is worth the patience one must have to get through the beginning.
The voice cast is steady - but unspectacular. Jake Gyllenhaal (Searcher), Gabrielle Union (Meridian Clade - the Mom and pilot), Jaboukie Young-White (Ethan, the Grandson), Lucy Liu (explorer Callisto Mal) and Dennis Quaid (Jaeger, the Grandfather) all put in “professional” work, but none of them stick out - which is especially disappointing in Quaid’s case, for his character looks like it was written to be the quirky, different, interesting character.
Disney animation has had a mixed bag with “action/adventure” animated films. For every BIG HERO 6, there are TREASURE PLANET attempts that seemed earnest and well-meaning, but just don’t hit the mark.
If you are in the mood for a good Disney/Animated adventure that comes from Hall and Nguyen, skip STRANGE WORLD and, instead, check out RAYA AND THE LAST DRAGON.
Letter Grade: C+
5 1/2 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
A nod to the “Pulp Magazine” Science Fiction works of the 1950’s, STRANGE WORLD follows the adventures of the Clade clan as they try to find out what is beyond the hills of their land with the central conflict of this movie being that the Grandfather - the great explorer Jaeger Clade - wanting to explore. His son, Searcher Clade, wanting to stay put and the Grandson, Ethan Clade, caught between the 2.
It is pretty standard fare that is made all the more confusing by the setup of the premise and the clumsy introduction of the myriad of characters and situations that leads the audience to the exploration adventure that is to come.
Written and Co-Directed by Qui Nguyen (and directed by Don Hall) - both of whom are responsible for the criminally under-rated RAYA AND THE LAST DRAGON - Strange World stumbles out of the gate and spends the first 1/2 (maybe even the first 2/3) trying to recover from that stumble.
It finally does get it’s legs under itself and the end is worth the patience one must have to get through the beginning.
The voice cast is steady - but unspectacular. Jake Gyllenhaal (Searcher), Gabrielle Union (Meridian Clade - the Mom and pilot), Jaboukie Young-White (Ethan, the Grandson), Lucy Liu (explorer Callisto Mal) and Dennis Quaid (Jaeger, the Grandfather) all put in “professional” work, but none of them stick out - which is especially disappointing in Quaid’s case, for his character looks like it was written to be the quirky, different, interesting character.
Disney animation has had a mixed bag with “action/adventure” animated films. For every BIG HERO 6, there are TREASURE PLANET attempts that seemed earnest and well-meaning, but just don’t hit the mark.
If you are in the mood for a good Disney/Animated adventure that comes from Hall and Nguyen, skip STRANGE WORLD and, instead, check out RAYA AND THE LAST DRAGON.
Letter Grade: C+
5 1/2 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Five years after Godzilla saved us from the MUTO attack the world (or some of it at least) wants to see an end to the potential threat of the Titans. Monarch are studying them and hiding them away from the world, but there are calls to destroy the monsters before more devastation befalls the planet?
Dr Emma Russell has developed the Orca, a device that communicates with the Titans and can be used to calm them and stop any further destruction. Not everyone has the same idea about how to use the Orca though and it's taken, along with Dr Russell and her daughter Madison, after its successful test run. The race is on to recover the device and avert the impending crisis.
Godzilla is one of my favourite monsters. For years the 1998 film with Matthew Broderick and Jean Reno in it was one of my favourite films. I also love the "proper" Godzilla movies where they destroy Tokyo at every given opportunity. To have new films felt like a wonderful thing... until I saw 2014 Godzilla. I rewatched it before going to see King Of The Monsters and I remembered how underwhelmed I was. The characters didn't grab me and I found the whole thing uninspiring. The prospect of a second wasn't great, but then I saw the trailers, they were spectacular.
I really enjoyed this and went to see it again in 3D, a much more peaceful screening than the first viewing. The girl who was sitting a couple of seats away was animatedly jumping at every opportunity, her reaction was far scarier than anything that happened on the screen.
This was much improved on the last instalment. I loved that it embraced the original films and the fact that it switched its focus more to the monsters than the humans. You go to a monster movie to see monsters, and Godzilla 2014 felt like it had forgotten that fact.
If I had to describe this film to someone I'd say it was a combination of Infinity War and Jurassic Park, just with slightly larger monsters... yep, I'm fairly happy with that comparison. I may have been imagining it but I felt like there were a few nods to JP jumbled in there... maybe that's just me.
There's a collection of recognisable faces in the cast and I don't think there's a single person who underperforms. I thought that Millie Bobby Brown gave a great performance as Madison, she managed to give us a child character that wasn't particularly annoying, which may actually be a first in creature features.
Charles Dance makes an excellent bad guy, there's something about his look, a cross between a vampire and the restaurant critic from Ratatouille that works for me. He also gets to have a great moment of silent humour with Brown when they're in a lift together, it was very unexpected for their potential on-screen relationship.
We get to see four of our Titans in this movie as main players. Godzilla, obvs, Mothra, Rodan and Monster Zero, or King Ghidorah to his friends. The sheer scale they've gone to is amazing, and I thought the way they were created with their individual traits was beautiful. The one drawback to the beautiful glowing monster bodies is that the scenes have to be fairly dark to appreciate that aspect. They manage to use those aspects of the creatures to give the extra lighting the scenes need meaning that you get something that's both dark and scary as well as light and hopeful. The colours were something that really stood out to me in the advertising, the lightness of the blue and green against the anger of the orange and yellow, it shows the good and evil relationship really well.
The size of the creatures is mad and sometimes a little impossible to gauge, we get a few moments where we're given some perspective with man-made structures but they do a good job of trying to get it across in basic visual techniques too. You see a lot of them from "human" angles, from the ground running, from buildings and vehicles. It feels like an exercise in shock and awe and takes you back to Dr Serizawa's point at the beginning of the film that we're Godzilla's pets, it's not the other way around.
The effects/animation looked solid, at no point did I see anything on-screen that drew my attention away from the action. One moment in particular stood out and that was a large explosion somewhere in the middle of the movie. It was given an old fashioned kind of a look and it gave me the impression that they'd really looked at things that had come before it for inspiration.
You have to obviously accept the facts that in these sorts of films, parents will willingly put their children in immense danger, bad guys will always have prepared a short video presentation to explain their motivations and just because there's destruction happening all around you does not mean you will die. It's got all the classic monster/disaster movie moments that you love to hate in it. "Movie Reality" is awesome.
If you couldn't already tell, I loved this. Much improvement from the last instalment and an entertaining action-packed addition to the monsterverse. Oscar winner? Probably not. Entertaining escapism? Most definitely. I am a little concerned about how the story will progress from here. They had plenty of scope for lots of movies after some of the things they showed in the film, but the events of KotM mean that there's little room to move with it all, we'll have to see what happens in Godzilla Vs Kong next year.
What you should do
This really deserves to be seen on the big screen. The sound and the effects combine to make some great viewing.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
If they could adapt the Orca for human use I'd be interested.
Dr Emma Russell has developed the Orca, a device that communicates with the Titans and can be used to calm them and stop any further destruction. Not everyone has the same idea about how to use the Orca though and it's taken, along with Dr Russell and her daughter Madison, after its successful test run. The race is on to recover the device and avert the impending crisis.
Godzilla is one of my favourite monsters. For years the 1998 film with Matthew Broderick and Jean Reno in it was one of my favourite films. I also love the "proper" Godzilla movies where they destroy Tokyo at every given opportunity. To have new films felt like a wonderful thing... until I saw 2014 Godzilla. I rewatched it before going to see King Of The Monsters and I remembered how underwhelmed I was. The characters didn't grab me and I found the whole thing uninspiring. The prospect of a second wasn't great, but then I saw the trailers, they were spectacular.
I really enjoyed this and went to see it again in 3D, a much more peaceful screening than the first viewing. The girl who was sitting a couple of seats away was animatedly jumping at every opportunity, her reaction was far scarier than anything that happened on the screen.
This was much improved on the last instalment. I loved that it embraced the original films and the fact that it switched its focus more to the monsters than the humans. You go to a monster movie to see monsters, and Godzilla 2014 felt like it had forgotten that fact.
If I had to describe this film to someone I'd say it was a combination of Infinity War and Jurassic Park, just with slightly larger monsters... yep, I'm fairly happy with that comparison. I may have been imagining it but I felt like there were a few nods to JP jumbled in there... maybe that's just me.
There's a collection of recognisable faces in the cast and I don't think there's a single person who underperforms. I thought that Millie Bobby Brown gave a great performance as Madison, she managed to give us a child character that wasn't particularly annoying, which may actually be a first in creature features.
Charles Dance makes an excellent bad guy, there's something about his look, a cross between a vampire and the restaurant critic from Ratatouille that works for me. He also gets to have a great moment of silent humour with Brown when they're in a lift together, it was very unexpected for their potential on-screen relationship.
We get to see four of our Titans in this movie as main players. Godzilla, obvs, Mothra, Rodan and Monster Zero, or King Ghidorah to his friends. The sheer scale they've gone to is amazing, and I thought the way they were created with their individual traits was beautiful. The one drawback to the beautiful glowing monster bodies is that the scenes have to be fairly dark to appreciate that aspect. They manage to use those aspects of the creatures to give the extra lighting the scenes need meaning that you get something that's both dark and scary as well as light and hopeful. The colours were something that really stood out to me in the advertising, the lightness of the blue and green against the anger of the orange and yellow, it shows the good and evil relationship really well.
The size of the creatures is mad and sometimes a little impossible to gauge, we get a few moments where we're given some perspective with man-made structures but they do a good job of trying to get it across in basic visual techniques too. You see a lot of them from "human" angles, from the ground running, from buildings and vehicles. It feels like an exercise in shock and awe and takes you back to Dr Serizawa's point at the beginning of the film that we're Godzilla's pets, it's not the other way around.
The effects/animation looked solid, at no point did I see anything on-screen that drew my attention away from the action. One moment in particular stood out and that was a large explosion somewhere in the middle of the movie. It was given an old fashioned kind of a look and it gave me the impression that they'd really looked at things that had come before it for inspiration.
You have to obviously accept the facts that in these sorts of films, parents will willingly put their children in immense danger, bad guys will always have prepared a short video presentation to explain their motivations and just because there's destruction happening all around you does not mean you will die. It's got all the classic monster/disaster movie moments that you love to hate in it. "Movie Reality" is awesome.
If you couldn't already tell, I loved this. Much improvement from the last instalment and an entertaining action-packed addition to the monsterverse. Oscar winner? Probably not. Entertaining escapism? Most definitely. I am a little concerned about how the story will progress from here. They had plenty of scope for lots of movies after some of the things they showed in the film, but the events of KotM mean that there's little room to move with it all, we'll have to see what happens in Godzilla Vs Kong next year.
What you should do
This really deserves to be seen on the big screen. The sound and the effects combine to make some great viewing.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
If they could adapt the Orca for human use I'd be interested.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Run All Night (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Neeson at his gritty best
It’s fair to say Liam Neeson has picked some decidedly dodgy acting jobs since his rise to become an A-list Hollywood action hero. From a disappointing turn in the most recent A Team movie to the laughably bad Taken 3, he seems to have been turned from fan favourite to the butt of so many jokes.
After January’s poorly received Taken 3, Neeson returns to give the genre another go in Run All Night, but does Jaume Collet-Serra’s intriguing direction return him to the top of the food chain?
Run All Night follows the story of Neeson’s Jimmy Conlon as he does his best to keep his son Michael, played by Joel Kinnaman, away from the deadly clutches of Sean Maguire, a brutal underworld gangster portrayed by Ed Harris, after the murder of Sean’s son Danny over the course of 16 hours.
What ensues is a formulaic action thriller featuring by-the-numbers set pieces that are interspersed with some inspiring cinematography and all the actors at the top of their game.
Neeson’s Jimmy is an alcoholic former hit man, previously employed by Maguire, who has decided to move away from his shady past and become a more rounded individual. His interactions with Ed Harris’ brilliant Sean are excellent and the pair have genuine chemistry – it’s just a shame that their backstory isn’t built on a little more.
As the audience follows Jimmy and Michael evading the police, mobsters and professional hired killers, the film traces their backstory, almost using the action-packed set pieces as checkpoints for a bit more history and from a genre that rarely utilises character development, this is a welcome addition.
The cinematography is truly stunning. The sweeping shots of New York City are inspired and the use of tracking and aerial panning instead of simply fading between scenes stylises the film like no other action movie from the last few years.
There is an air of The Taking of Pelham 123 in Serra’s direction, and of course the similarities to Neeson’s Taken and Serra’s very own Non-Stop that also starred the Irish actor are obvious.
Unfortunately, all these comparisons mean that Run All Night isn’t particularly original in premise despite its unique direction. We’ve seen it all before, we saw Neeson running about and shooting bad guys in Taken, Taken 2 and Taken 3. We saw him try to get the bottom of a serious problem in Non-Stop and we saw him take on the role of a troubled alcoholic in The Grey.
Yes, after Taken 3, Run All Night showcases Neeson at his gritty best, but it’s in Ed Harris that we find the most intriguing
character and he puts everything into Sean Maguire – despite his more than familiar name.
Thankfully, Serra and the production crew steered away from creating a film that would please the masses and opted for an often brutal, yet strangely warming action thriller – along the way avoiding the pitfalls of some of Neeson’s previous efforts.
Overall, Run All Night isn’t the disaster it could have been and shows what everyone’s favourite Irish actor is capable of when given the right material to work with. Ed Harris is also on point and Jaume Collet-Serra’s direction goes above and beyond what the genre asks for.
Only an underwhelming final act and a highly unoriginal story stop it from becoming the film it so deeply wanted to be.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/15/neeson-at-his-gritty-best-run-all-night-review/
After January’s poorly received Taken 3, Neeson returns to give the genre another go in Run All Night, but does Jaume Collet-Serra’s intriguing direction return him to the top of the food chain?
Run All Night follows the story of Neeson’s Jimmy Conlon as he does his best to keep his son Michael, played by Joel Kinnaman, away from the deadly clutches of Sean Maguire, a brutal underworld gangster portrayed by Ed Harris, after the murder of Sean’s son Danny over the course of 16 hours.
What ensues is a formulaic action thriller featuring by-the-numbers set pieces that are interspersed with some inspiring cinematography and all the actors at the top of their game.
Neeson’s Jimmy is an alcoholic former hit man, previously employed by Maguire, who has decided to move away from his shady past and become a more rounded individual. His interactions with Ed Harris’ brilliant Sean are excellent and the pair have genuine chemistry – it’s just a shame that their backstory isn’t built on a little more.
As the audience follows Jimmy and Michael evading the police, mobsters and professional hired killers, the film traces their backstory, almost using the action-packed set pieces as checkpoints for a bit more history and from a genre that rarely utilises character development, this is a welcome addition.
The cinematography is truly stunning. The sweeping shots of New York City are inspired and the use of tracking and aerial panning instead of simply fading between scenes stylises the film like no other action movie from the last few years.
There is an air of The Taking of Pelham 123 in Serra’s direction, and of course the similarities to Neeson’s Taken and Serra’s very own Non-Stop that also starred the Irish actor are obvious.
Unfortunately, all these comparisons mean that Run All Night isn’t particularly original in premise despite its unique direction. We’ve seen it all before, we saw Neeson running about and shooting bad guys in Taken, Taken 2 and Taken 3. We saw him try to get the bottom of a serious problem in Non-Stop and we saw him take on the role of a troubled alcoholic in The Grey.
Yes, after Taken 3, Run All Night showcases Neeson at his gritty best, but it’s in Ed Harris that we find the most intriguing
character and he puts everything into Sean Maguire – despite his more than familiar name.
Thankfully, Serra and the production crew steered away from creating a film that would please the masses and opted for an often brutal, yet strangely warming action thriller – along the way avoiding the pitfalls of some of Neeson’s previous efforts.
Overall, Run All Night isn’t the disaster it could have been and shows what everyone’s favourite Irish actor is capable of when given the right material to work with. Ed Harris is also on point and Jaume Collet-Serra’s direction goes above and beyond what the genre asks for.
Only an underwhelming final act and a highly unoriginal story stop it from becoming the film it so deeply wanted to be.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/15/neeson-at-his-gritty-best-run-all-night-review/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald (2018) in Movies
Nov 21, 2018
For the "true" Potter fan
It is a misnomer to call FANTASTIC BEASTS: THE CRIMES OF GRINDELWALD a "Harry Potter" movie. True, it is a film that takes place in the "Harry Potter-verse", but it should, more accurately, be called an "Albus Dumbledore" movie.
"Crimes of Grindelwald" (or COG as I will call it from now on) has a tone more in keeping with the later films in the Harry Potter original grouping of films. Gone is the "fun" and "whimsey" of building a world based on magic. In is a dark, grainy and grey film that focuses on relationship building that will pay off down the road. Keep in mind that this is the 2nd film of a proposed 5 film series, so there's quite a bit of "set-up" and very little payoff here.
Because of all of this, the younger members of the audience in the theater I saw COGS in were antsey in their seats (as were the "casual" Harry Potter viewers who were just there to see "Magic Battles").
But...and this is a BIG but...those of us (including me) who are "into" the world that J.K. Rowling has built were rewarded with a rich, complex tapestry of backstory and legend building, bringing in characters that were merely mentioned in the original books (and films) and filling out parts of this universe to make it much, much richer, indeed.
And that's the problem with this film - and the problem that this film is going to have in finding an audience. I have heard criticisms such as "it's too dense", "it moves too slow" and there are "too many characters". And that is justified, if you're a casual fan. If you're "into it", then those criticisms don't hold water.
I've also heard that Eddie Redmayne as Newt Scamander, the "hero" of the Fantastic Beasts franchise is too bland to hold the center of these films. I couldn't disagree more. I found that Redmayne's characterization of the magizooligist to be interesting and quirky. True, his characterization is subtle, maybe too subtle for some, but it was intriguing and interesting for me.
Returning from the first film are Katherine Waterson, Dan Fogler and Alison Sudol as comrades of Scamandars. They were "serviceable" in the first film and they are "serviceable" in the 2nd film.
It is the newcomers to this series that were of most interest to me starting with Jude Law as a young Albus Dumbledore. I liked his interpretation of this character - he has the same "mysterious" atmosphere about him that Richard Harris (and later) Michael Gambon brought to the character. Johnny Depp is also well cast as the titular bad guy, Grindelwald. Finally, Zoe Kravitz gives a strong performance as a conflicted wizard constantly battling her compulsion to be "good" and "bad".
David Yates returns to helm his 6th "Potter" film and he shows that he knows what he's doing. The world is rich (if grainy) and the action moves along as fast as the script allows. He does have a tendency to become enamored with the CGI aspects of the world he is building, but that is part of the charm of these films.
Remember, this is the 2nd of 5 films, so don't expect loose ends to be tied up. Expect cliff-hangers.
Letter Grade A- (B- if you are a casual fan)
8 (out of 10) stars (6 stars if you are a casual fan) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
"Crimes of Grindelwald" (or COG as I will call it from now on) has a tone more in keeping with the later films in the Harry Potter original grouping of films. Gone is the "fun" and "whimsey" of building a world based on magic. In is a dark, grainy and grey film that focuses on relationship building that will pay off down the road. Keep in mind that this is the 2nd film of a proposed 5 film series, so there's quite a bit of "set-up" and very little payoff here.
Because of all of this, the younger members of the audience in the theater I saw COGS in were antsey in their seats (as were the "casual" Harry Potter viewers who were just there to see "Magic Battles").
But...and this is a BIG but...those of us (including me) who are "into" the world that J.K. Rowling has built were rewarded with a rich, complex tapestry of backstory and legend building, bringing in characters that were merely mentioned in the original books (and films) and filling out parts of this universe to make it much, much richer, indeed.
And that's the problem with this film - and the problem that this film is going to have in finding an audience. I have heard criticisms such as "it's too dense", "it moves too slow" and there are "too many characters". And that is justified, if you're a casual fan. If you're "into it", then those criticisms don't hold water.
I've also heard that Eddie Redmayne as Newt Scamander, the "hero" of the Fantastic Beasts franchise is too bland to hold the center of these films. I couldn't disagree more. I found that Redmayne's characterization of the magizooligist to be interesting and quirky. True, his characterization is subtle, maybe too subtle for some, but it was intriguing and interesting for me.
Returning from the first film are Katherine Waterson, Dan Fogler and Alison Sudol as comrades of Scamandars. They were "serviceable" in the first film and they are "serviceable" in the 2nd film.
It is the newcomers to this series that were of most interest to me starting with Jude Law as a young Albus Dumbledore. I liked his interpretation of this character - he has the same "mysterious" atmosphere about him that Richard Harris (and later) Michael Gambon brought to the character. Johnny Depp is also well cast as the titular bad guy, Grindelwald. Finally, Zoe Kravitz gives a strong performance as a conflicted wizard constantly battling her compulsion to be "good" and "bad".
David Yates returns to helm his 6th "Potter" film and he shows that he knows what he's doing. The world is rich (if grainy) and the action moves along as fast as the script allows. He does have a tendency to become enamored with the CGI aspects of the world he is building, but that is part of the charm of these films.
Remember, this is the 2nd of 5 films, so don't expect loose ends to be tied up. Expect cliff-hangers.
Letter Grade A- (B- if you are a casual fan)
8 (out of 10) stars (6 stars if you are a casual fan) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Doctor Sleep (2019) in Movies
Nov 11, 2019 (Updated Nov 12, 2019)
39 Years Later: Redrum aka Murder
Doctor Sleep- if you dont know is the sequel to the shining. I have been waiting for this movie to come out ever since it got announced. I read the book over two years again and i loved it. I didnt even know their was a sequel to the shining until i read the book. The book is phenomenal, it is acutally my first stephen king novel that i read and finshed, so to say at less, i was hyped and very anticpated, so what did i think. I thought it was good. I liked it alot.
Ewan McGregor was a perfect cast for Danny Torrance and Rebecca Ferguson was excellent as Rose The Hat and newcomer actress Kyliegh Curran was great as Abra Stone. Mike Flanagan was amazing choice for the dirctor. I liked his other movies that he directed and also loved The Haunting of Hill House which he created and directed.
The Recreated sences from the oringal film was intresting, i liked it not to bad. The hotel looks the same, old, crooked, haunted, scary, horrorfying and terrorfying. The replacements for Dick Hallorann, young Danny, Wendy and Llyod/Jack were intresting. I really liked the actress who played Wendy. As for Dick, i liked the actor who played him. As for young Danny he was good and Llyod/Jack the actor who played him was okay/bad, he just did a impression of Jack Nichoslon and looked like a young Jack Nicolson.
This is intresting, i just found this out: Danny Lloyd, who played Danny Torrance in The Shining, makes a cameo appearance as Bradley Trevor's father. Lloyd had been retired from acting for roughly 38 years, and was direct-messaged on Twitter by Flanagan to appear in the film. Producer Trevor Macy said of Lloyd's involvement, "[Lloyd] was excited to do [the cameo]. He hadn't acted since [the original]. He's a schoolteacher, and a very successful one at that, [who] like[s] making the world better. He came back for a day, and we were thrilled to have him." When pressed as to why the filmmakers did not extend the same offer to Jack Nicholson, Macy responded, "With Jack, I knew that they approached him for Ready Player One, and that he seems to be very serious about being retired. I had known that he was supportive [of the sequel] but retired." Flanagan admitted, "I didn't know how that would really work. Even if he were to come back, if he were appearing as a different character, I thought that would set people's hair on fire. He was absolutely a presence on set, though, whether he knew it or not."
So thats intresting. I would of loved to see Jack Nichloson come out of retirement and play old Jack Torrance.
Doctor Sleep was a great/excellent sequel to the shining and what Mike Flanagan did was perfect he toke elements from Stanley Kubrick's film and made it his own. The cast is great, the story is great, the hotel is great.
If you havent seen the shining than watch it and read it. If you havent seen this movie, than go watch it and read it.
Ewan McGregor was a perfect cast for Danny Torrance and Rebecca Ferguson was excellent as Rose The Hat and newcomer actress Kyliegh Curran was great as Abra Stone. Mike Flanagan was amazing choice for the dirctor. I liked his other movies that he directed and also loved The Haunting of Hill House which he created and directed.
The Recreated sences from the oringal film was intresting, i liked it not to bad. The hotel looks the same, old, crooked, haunted, scary, horrorfying and terrorfying. The replacements for Dick Hallorann, young Danny, Wendy and Llyod/Jack were intresting. I really liked the actress who played Wendy. As for Dick, i liked the actor who played him. As for young Danny he was good and Llyod/Jack the actor who played him was okay/bad, he just did a impression of Jack Nichoslon and looked like a young Jack Nicolson.
This is intresting, i just found this out: Danny Lloyd, who played Danny Torrance in The Shining, makes a cameo appearance as Bradley Trevor's father. Lloyd had been retired from acting for roughly 38 years, and was direct-messaged on Twitter by Flanagan to appear in the film. Producer Trevor Macy said of Lloyd's involvement, "[Lloyd] was excited to do [the cameo]. He hadn't acted since [the original]. He's a schoolteacher, and a very successful one at that, [who] like[s] making the world better. He came back for a day, and we were thrilled to have him." When pressed as to why the filmmakers did not extend the same offer to Jack Nicholson, Macy responded, "With Jack, I knew that they approached him for Ready Player One, and that he seems to be very serious about being retired. I had known that he was supportive [of the sequel] but retired." Flanagan admitted, "I didn't know how that would really work. Even if he were to come back, if he were appearing as a different character, I thought that would set people's hair on fire. He was absolutely a presence on set, though, whether he knew it or not."
So thats intresting. I would of loved to see Jack Nichloson come out of retirement and play old Jack Torrance.
Doctor Sleep was a great/excellent sequel to the shining and what Mike Flanagan did was perfect he toke elements from Stanley Kubrick's film and made it his own. The cast is great, the story is great, the hotel is great.
If you havent seen the shining than watch it and read it. If you havent seen this movie, than go watch it and read it.
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated The Giver in Books
Sep 7, 2017
A strange book.
So, I know The Giver has been out for a long time, and I know they made a movie, but somehow I’d never read or watched it. But on the recommendation of a friend, I finally have. What a strange little book! It definitely belongs in the same realm as Brave New World, Fahrenheit 451, 1984, and The Handmaid’s Tale – which are among my favorite books – but the ending was tremendously unsatisfying. It’s the first book in a quartet, though, so I’m hoping the other three, which I have requested from the library, will tie up the loose ends. It definitely feels like it’s only the first installment of a story.
The dystopian society in this book has effectively banished most feelings. But to get rid of hate and war and prejudice, they also had to banish the memories and feelings of individuality and difference. With everyone and everything the same, they’re mostly incapable of feeling true love or happiness. So they all live in peace – but it’s a complacent, uncaring peace. It’s not peace because of love, it’s peace because of the absence of passionate feelings. Whether this is good or not, well, that’s up to the reader to decide for themselves. The actions of the main character, who aims to disrupt that peace, could be seen as good or bad.
I’m not actually entirely sure how I feel about this book. After reading the next three – Gathering Blue (2000), Messenger (2004), and Son (2012), I'm still at a bit of a loss. These were just...odd.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
The dystopian society in this book has effectively banished most feelings. But to get rid of hate and war and prejudice, they also had to banish the memories and feelings of individuality and difference. With everyone and everything the same, they’re mostly incapable of feeling true love or happiness. So they all live in peace – but it’s a complacent, uncaring peace. It’s not peace because of love, it’s peace because of the absence of passionate feelings. Whether this is good or not, well, that’s up to the reader to decide for themselves. The actions of the main character, who aims to disrupt that peace, could be seen as good or bad.
I’m not actually entirely sure how I feel about this book. After reading the next three – Gathering Blue (2000), Messenger (2004), and Son (2012), I'm still at a bit of a loss. These were just...odd.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Kayla Ackerman (15 KP) rated Bird Box (2018) in Movies
Jun 5, 2019
Sandra Bullock (2 more)
Sort of original plot?
Nice scenery
A combination of 'A Quiet Place' and 'The Happening' (3 more)
Two timelines were not needed to convey the story
The big bad is merely suggested, never revealed
Too much build up for a climax that never comes
Too much hype, not enough follow through.
Maybe in a linear timeline, this would have been a good story: It would have been about a cold, cut off woman learning to open up to those around her in the face of tragedy, only to be met with misery again, which she responds to by closing herself off and becoming cold, rational, and kinda mean, but in the end she has to learn that there is more to life than just survival. That sounds much better than the time jumpy nonsense that spoiled itself every step of the way and took all tension out of half the film because we know they survive at least as long as we have already seen them get.Battling an enemy that literally is the embodiment of your worst fear (or salvation to fractured minds?) is a pretty scary concept, or it would be if I could picture anything other than a Boggart from Harry Potter, which is the issue because I do have to make up my own mind about what it is that they are seeing that makes them kill themselves, since the film never saw fit to show us a sliver of anything. Watching someone react to something that you have never seen is not a lot of fun, and that was the whole movie: characters reacting to vague, off-screen monsters.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Gods Of Egypt (2016) in Movies
Feb 10, 2018 (Updated Feb 10, 2018)
Set Piece Defence
Not-quite-as-bad-as-its-reputation knockabout fantasy that does a serious number on the wonders of Egyptian mythology. Evil god Set (Gerard Butler in shouty mode) takes over the kingdom and sets about harvesting the signature body-parts of his fellow immortals; hapless mortal Brenton Thwaites must persuade wronged heir-to-the-throne Horus (Nicolaj Coster-Waldau) to help get rid of him.
Well, the plot is nothing special and the film often seems to be on the verge of sending itself up, but on the other hand it's visually interesting and the choice to treat the weirder bits of Egyptian mythology as being literally true (boss-god Ra is obliged to drag the sun around the Earth every day, on a length of chain attached to the back of his flying boat) means the story is at least a bit different.
You can, I suppose, complain that none of the people playing Egyptians in this film are actually Egyptian; many did, and I suppose I must have missed them complaining in a similar vein when Japanese and coloured actors were cast as inhabitants of Scandinavian fantasyland in the Thor movies. But c'mon, guys, it's a film about Gerard Butler in a flying space chariot pulled by giant beetles - it is possible to take this sort of thing a bit too seriously. (I look forward to retiring to my bunker and listening to the flaming-torch-wielding mob as they mill around outside.)
Anyway, not a great movie by any stretch of the imagination, but hardly terrible, either, and at least it is pleasing to the eye and has a certain novelty.
Well, the plot is nothing special and the film often seems to be on the verge of sending itself up, but on the other hand it's visually interesting and the choice to treat the weirder bits of Egyptian mythology as being literally true (boss-god Ra is obliged to drag the sun around the Earth every day, on a length of chain attached to the back of his flying boat) means the story is at least a bit different.
You can, I suppose, complain that none of the people playing Egyptians in this film are actually Egyptian; many did, and I suppose I must have missed them complaining in a similar vein when Japanese and coloured actors were cast as inhabitants of Scandinavian fantasyland in the Thor movies. But c'mon, guys, it's a film about Gerard Butler in a flying space chariot pulled by giant beetles - it is possible to take this sort of thing a bit too seriously. (I look forward to retiring to my bunker and listening to the flaming-torch-wielding mob as they mill around outside.)
Anyway, not a great movie by any stretch of the imagination, but hardly terrible, either, and at least it is pleasing to the eye and has a certain novelty.
Erika (17789 KP) rated Mary Poppins Returns (2018) in Movies
Dec 22, 2018 (Updated Dec 22, 2018)
A sequel no one asked for, but Disney was going to give it to us whether we wanted it or not...
Unnecessary is the main word I would use to describe this film. Mary Poppins (1964) is actually practically perfect in every way, like the lady herself; and anything to follow was going to pale in comparison. Maybe I would have been more tolerant if Christopher Robin hadn't had an extremely similar plot, but I was honestly just counting down the minutes until it was over.
The music was ok, I guess, sufficient. I just can't believe Emily Blunt in period pieces, she has a face that knows about text messaging (I am a huge Blunt fan, btw). I'm glad Disney decided to keep the whole, American doing the crappiest Cockney accent thing going. I get why they chose Lin-Manuel Miranda, he's very entertaining, and I know he did that Hamilton thing (zero interest in that). The only parts I loved him in was when he was just dancing, no singing with the bad accent. The lamplighter song was by far the best out of the lot.
In the end, I've seen this same movie several times. I'm really doubting whether I want to see Aladdin, and I'll never give Disney my money again for a remake/sequel to a classic film (aside from possibly Aladdin).
Honestly, I don't know who would actually love this film. Who was it even made for? I think the reason they want everyone to see it the first weekend is so it doesn't get around how just ok the film was.
The music was ok, I guess, sufficient. I just can't believe Emily Blunt in period pieces, she has a face that knows about text messaging (I am a huge Blunt fan, btw). I'm glad Disney decided to keep the whole, American doing the crappiest Cockney accent thing going. I get why they chose Lin-Manuel Miranda, he's very entertaining, and I know he did that Hamilton thing (zero interest in that). The only parts I loved him in was when he was just dancing, no singing with the bad accent. The lamplighter song was by far the best out of the lot.
In the end, I've seen this same movie several times. I'm really doubting whether I want to see Aladdin, and I'll never give Disney my money again for a remake/sequel to a classic film (aside from possibly Aladdin).
Honestly, I don't know who would actually love this film. Who was it even made for? I think the reason they want everyone to see it the first weekend is so it doesn't get around how just ok the film was.
Leigh J (71 KP) rated Midsommar (2019) in Movies
Nov 11, 2019
The Wicker Man 2.0
Contains spoilers, click to show
Grieving over the Murder/Suicide of her mentally ill Sister and Parents, Dani decides to get away for a while to Hårga, in Hälsingland, the Swedish community that her and her Boyfriend Christian's mutual friend Pele lives in. Christian and Dani's relationship is at breaking point (unbeknownst to Dani) and the other 2 friends of Christian are encouraging him to finally split with Dani. However, feeling bad about what happened to her Family, Christian and Pele ask Dani to take the trip with them and on to Hälsingland the group of 5 friends go. On the first leg of the road to Hälsinglang, where it is their time to have a special festival called Midsommar, they hang out in a field where they are prompted to partake in some Magic Mushrooms, to which they all have a nice trip before moving on to the "Community". Hälsinglang is a beautiful and seemingly gentle and friendly community, however small cracks start to appear... and Dani's friends start to go missing. Is this community, in fact, a Cult? Or will Dani find the salvation she so desperately needs...
I have to admit, Ari Aster hasn't had me from the jump. Hereditary in my opinion is a bit beige and "meh", but the Culty look of Midsommar attracted my attention straight away and did not disappoint! It's visually beautiful and the story is actually very tragic and gives you a realistic look as to why and how some people actually do join cults. It's an absolutely mind blowing watch and a Movie that I see myself watching many more times in the future. Well done, Ari Aster!
I have to admit, Ari Aster hasn't had me from the jump. Hereditary in my opinion is a bit beige and "meh", but the Culty look of Midsommar attracted my attention straight away and did not disappoint! It's visually beautiful and the story is actually very tragic and gives you a realistic look as to why and how some people actually do join cults. It's an absolutely mind blowing watch and a Movie that I see myself watching many more times in the future. Well done, Ari Aster!