Search
Search results
Andy K (10827 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Oct 19, 2019
I like the idea of a horror superhero genre but...
Brightburn is a classic modern example of a great idea, with mediocre execution.
The classic "Superman" story is turned on its head in a way when a spaceship falls to Earth with a baby within. The young couple who live on a farm decide to adopt the infant as their own. Now 12 years old, young Brandon starts to feel differently. He is compelled to seek out his mother ship now locked inside the depths of a barn where he seems to receive unknown demonic instruction.
Things aren't going well at school either. He injures a young girl's hand after an incident where she fails to catch his fall while playing a game of trust during their physical education class. Afterwards, the girl's mother has some distasteful words to say about Brandon which he overhears and his lust for retribution emerges.
The lack of specific direction or even which genre this movie wanted to inhabit is its biggest flaw (which means bad screenplay). At some points it was underdog outcast teen drama and at others darkened house jump scare or even some scenes involving gruesome gory horror. The first half of the short 90 minutes was devoted to establishing Brandon's status at school and with his family and wasn't terribly interesting while the 2nd half was just the standard gruesome kill after gruesome kill which were cool I guess, but won't stay with me.
Going in, I really thought the film was going to be more epic and concentrate on his emerge and then quest for world domination (which was only shown during the end credits) which I think would have been way more interesting, similar to Chronicle which was done in a much more interesting way than this.
Maybe they were hoping for huge success so the 2nd film could've explained more of the origin story. I guess I don't mind that nothing as to the source of the spaceship or the creatures within were explained. I don't need every plot point spoon fed to me, but it was a wasted opportunity to create a new completely original super villain universe which they could've drawn from indefinitely.
Is Brightburn supposed to be an antihero? Are you supposed to root for him to avenge the wrongs he has had in his ife or are you simply supposed to cringe like you would when Jason or Michael hack into a sex crazed teenager?
The classic "Superman" story is turned on its head in a way when a spaceship falls to Earth with a baby within. The young couple who live on a farm decide to adopt the infant as their own. Now 12 years old, young Brandon starts to feel differently. He is compelled to seek out his mother ship now locked inside the depths of a barn where he seems to receive unknown demonic instruction.
Things aren't going well at school either. He injures a young girl's hand after an incident where she fails to catch his fall while playing a game of trust during their physical education class. Afterwards, the girl's mother has some distasteful words to say about Brandon which he overhears and his lust for retribution emerges.
The lack of specific direction or even which genre this movie wanted to inhabit is its biggest flaw (which means bad screenplay). At some points it was underdog outcast teen drama and at others darkened house jump scare or even some scenes involving gruesome gory horror. The first half of the short 90 minutes was devoted to establishing Brandon's status at school and with his family and wasn't terribly interesting while the 2nd half was just the standard gruesome kill after gruesome kill which were cool I guess, but won't stay with me.
Going in, I really thought the film was going to be more epic and concentrate on his emerge and then quest for world domination (which was only shown during the end credits) which I think would have been way more interesting, similar to Chronicle which was done in a much more interesting way than this.
Maybe they were hoping for huge success so the 2nd film could've explained more of the origin story. I guess I don't mind that nothing as to the source of the spaceship or the creatures within were explained. I don't need every plot point spoon fed to me, but it was a wasted opportunity to create a new completely original super villain universe which they could've drawn from indefinitely.
Is Brightburn supposed to be an antihero? Are you supposed to root for him to avenge the wrongs he has had in his ife or are you simply supposed to cringe like you would when Jason or Michael hack into a sex crazed teenager?
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Chuck Steak in Books
Nov 11, 2019
Remember those action movies from the 80s and 90s? The ones where the chisel-jawed hero catches the bad guy via a convoluted and improbable plot, over the top action scenes and mass collateral damage? Chuck Steak doesn't just remember them. He IS them.
Maverick stop-at-nothing-even-if-it-causes-millions-of-dollars-of-damage-and-gets-me-suspended-again cop Chuck Steak (not the meat) has a new adversary. A bomb has been planted in his girlfriend and Chuck is being blackmailed into doing things he doesn't want to do, like be nice to his in-laws-to-be, become tolerant and accepting of minorities and work with a partner. He blunders through each increasingly ridiculous task, always managing it in unlikely ways, in the nick of time and causing maximum destruction in the process. But the mastermind behind the plan is always one step ahead. Has the apparently invincible Chuck Steak finally met his match?
First things first, this is in no way a serious book. As is fitting for the movie genre it is inspired by, everything is larger than life and twice as loud. There is however coherence to the plot (even though it does meander around for some gratuitous action scenes) and the twists, turns and red herrings thrown out in the final chapters as to who the villain is will certainly wrong foot many readers and in the end it does make some kind of sense.
There is also a subtext around acceptance of people who are different; Chuck and the police are portrayed very much as the intolerant knuckleheads of action movies, but his realisations that how he normally behaves could be grossly offensive provide some of the more striking moments of the book.
The prose is fast and loose, with flashbacks, changes of point of view and the occasional sub plot thrown in. The characterisation is bold, from the incredibly clichรฉd police captain to the more nuanced father in law. They bounce of each other in interesting ways and are each a key part of Chuck's journey. Some of the writing is a little cluttered and confused but that just adds to the feeling of this being a headlong rush to the final chapter.
80s and 90s action flicks were just 2 hours of pure escapist entertainment, never intended to be anything other than enormous fun. Chuck Steak captures the spirit of these well. An absolute riot to read.
Rated R for pretty much everything that makes things R rated
Maverick stop-at-nothing-even-if-it-causes-millions-of-dollars-of-damage-and-gets-me-suspended-again cop Chuck Steak (not the meat) has a new adversary. A bomb has been planted in his girlfriend and Chuck is being blackmailed into doing things he doesn't want to do, like be nice to his in-laws-to-be, become tolerant and accepting of minorities and work with a partner. He blunders through each increasingly ridiculous task, always managing it in unlikely ways, in the nick of time and causing maximum destruction in the process. But the mastermind behind the plan is always one step ahead. Has the apparently invincible Chuck Steak finally met his match?
First things first, this is in no way a serious book. As is fitting for the movie genre it is inspired by, everything is larger than life and twice as loud. There is however coherence to the plot (even though it does meander around for some gratuitous action scenes) and the twists, turns and red herrings thrown out in the final chapters as to who the villain is will certainly wrong foot many readers and in the end it does make some kind of sense.
There is also a subtext around acceptance of people who are different; Chuck and the police are portrayed very much as the intolerant knuckleheads of action movies, but his realisations that how he normally behaves could be grossly offensive provide some of the more striking moments of the book.
The prose is fast and loose, with flashbacks, changes of point of view and the occasional sub plot thrown in. The characterisation is bold, from the incredibly clichรฉd police captain to the more nuanced father in law. They bounce of each other in interesting ways and are each a key part of Chuck's journey. Some of the writing is a little cluttered and confused but that just adds to the feeling of this being a headlong rush to the final chapter.
80s and 90s action flicks were just 2 hours of pure escapist entertainment, never intended to be anything other than enormous fun. Chuck Steak captures the spirit of these well. An absolute riot to read.
Rated R for pretty much everything that makes things R rated
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) in Movies
Dec 19, 2019
A journeys end
Star Wars The Rise Of Skywalker never quite manages at any point to achieve anything I would consider epic or even memorable making it ultimately fall flat when it comes to thrill, excitement and unique moments that you would expect the last film in a trilogy to be full of. That being said while its not exactly a very engaging film its definitely a very entertaining scifi adventure its just lacking in a personality of its own instead serving us more of the same again. My biggest problem is mainly with the first 2 acts, the first felt extremely rushed with no time at all spent with any one character or location instead zipping from scene to scene like a quick montage making me ultimately care very little for anyone or whats going on. The second act fairs much better but becomes very slow with the film focusing more on fixing the last jedis problems rather than progressing its story. Luckily the third act is top notch and contains enough space battles, lightsabre fights and warm messages that you can almost forgive all the problems the first two acts bring and leave the cinema feeling if anything entertained at the very least. Its a story about how our actions no matter how big or small have an effect on other peoples lives be it in the form of motivation, inspiration or by our actions. It all matters and if we all stand together, keep each other positive with hope in our hearts we can fight even the strongest of evils united as one. I found there to be a lot about being appreciated too and towards the end characters felt like they had actually progressed as people which was nice. Current political refrences are also quite strong too and theres a surprising amount about the struggles of being an orphan also which I found intresting. Action wise its fine but I found the film really lacking in thirlls and excitment a lot of the time (this could be down to characters feeling invincible which significantly decreased the feeling of threat). While not a bad movie its definitely the worst for me out of the new trilogy and im in no hurry to see it again. Not quite the epic ending we all expected more of a correction piece for past mistakes made but without a doubt an enjoyable film that finally means we can move on and hopefully explore some more intresting parts of the star wars universe now.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Playing with Fire (2019) in Movies
Jan 9, 2020
Seeing the trailer for this I was mildly excited, this sort of daft family humour holds a place in my heart and it looked like I was going to get another film to add to the "pick me up" watchlist. But oh my, everything about this experience rubbed me the wrong way.
Jake Carson runs a rugged group of smokejumpers that swoop into action and stop fires from taking hold. On their latest callout they find a cabin about to be engulfed by flames and trapped inside are three children in need of help.
Following the rules, Jake calls Child Protective Services, but being so remote they won't be able to get to them quickly. It's now their duty to keep the three of them safe until they arrive. Four grown men, three kids... what could possibly go wrong?
Where to start? How about that humour I was looking forward to? Or perhaps the severe lack of it. Over the whole runtime I laughed more at the end credits that I did at the whole film. Keegan-Michael Key is by far the funniest thing about the film, but it still isn't a perfect part. Key's way of sliding into scenes and just taking over was excellent, it made me smile, but when these moments started he was funny with just the right amount of over the top but the script would quite often throw him over that fine line and it became tiresome.
John Cena generally isn't bad when it comes to comedy offerings, but in Playing With Fire he's very stiff even for the by-the-books character he's playing. It felt like Jake had been made too straight-laced, he needs to make the transition from uptight to more relaxed but they could have brought it down just one step and it would have been something a lot easier to watch.
Brianna Hildebrand plays the oldest of the rescued children, Brynn. She gives a solid performance and probably has the best character overall, no frustrating quirks, nothing over the top. While she manages to make a good show of it being up against the over the top nature of everything else means it gets lost in the background.
While there might be a twist on the sort of story it doesn't feel new in any respects. I'm feeling rather let down with the whole thing but thankfully we're not short of other films that do this exact thing.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/playing-with-fire-movie-review.html
Jake Carson runs a rugged group of smokejumpers that swoop into action and stop fires from taking hold. On their latest callout they find a cabin about to be engulfed by flames and trapped inside are three children in need of help.
Following the rules, Jake calls Child Protective Services, but being so remote they won't be able to get to them quickly. It's now their duty to keep the three of them safe until they arrive. Four grown men, three kids... what could possibly go wrong?
Where to start? How about that humour I was looking forward to? Or perhaps the severe lack of it. Over the whole runtime I laughed more at the end credits that I did at the whole film. Keegan-Michael Key is by far the funniest thing about the film, but it still isn't a perfect part. Key's way of sliding into scenes and just taking over was excellent, it made me smile, but when these moments started he was funny with just the right amount of over the top but the script would quite often throw him over that fine line and it became tiresome.
John Cena generally isn't bad when it comes to comedy offerings, but in Playing With Fire he's very stiff even for the by-the-books character he's playing. It felt like Jake had been made too straight-laced, he needs to make the transition from uptight to more relaxed but they could have brought it down just one step and it would have been something a lot easier to watch.
Brianna Hildebrand plays the oldest of the rescued children, Brynn. She gives a solid performance and probably has the best character overall, no frustrating quirks, nothing over the top. While she manages to make a good show of it being up against the over the top nature of everything else means it gets lost in the background.
While there might be a twist on the sort of story it doesn't feel new in any respects. I'm feeling rather let down with the whole thing but thankfully we're not short of other films that do this exact thing.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/playing-with-fire-movie-review.html
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Angel Has Fallen (2019) in Movies
Jul 4, 2020
Honestly, if you put a gun to my head and asked me to recite what actually happens either Olympus Has Fallen or London Has Fallen, then I'd be shit out of luck. The recent third entry Angel Has Fallen will be no different in a week or two...
It's not awful (some of the action is fairly entertaining) but it's so by the numbers and boring. Jesus Christ, even Nick Nolte doing his by-now-expected-crazy-old-guy schtick is tiresome after roughly 5 seconds.
The plot revolves around Gerard Butler's Mike Banning, who is high up in the White Houses security detail, being framed for an assassination attempt on the President (Morgan Freeman). He is then chased down by the FBI, whilst he tries to figure out who is actually behind it, take them down, and clear his name.
I don't even need to spoil who the bad guys are because it's painfully obvious from the precise second we meet them.
I don't mind Gerard Butler by any means, but he seems to be phoning it in at this point, as he goes through the motions and runs through a gauntlet of action movie cliches - including but not limited to:
- a dramatic dimly lit and gun heavy opening scene that is blatantly a training excercise
- the hero throwing down an effective weapon to face of with the villain in hand to hand
- the hero walking away from an important family conversation at a pivotal moment to go and do hero stuff
- Danny Huston playing a smug arsehole
- A political sub plot involving Russia that doesn't actually go anywhere
Etc, etc.
I, like most people, love a good bit of Morgan Freeman, but unfortunately, they did a Leia on him and just had him in a coma for most of the film, yaaaaay. Jada Pinkett-Smith is in here somewhere as well, but I can't even remember what happens to her.
Just to top it all off, some of the effects work in this is terrible by any standard, but considering it's a big budget action film, it's pretty embarrassing.
I mean, I can be a miserable bastard sometimes, and I appreciate that maybe I'm railing too hard on a film that should just be a dumb popcorn film, but honestly, Angel Has Fallen feels like the result of someone forcing a bot to sit through the first two, and then produce a script for a sequel.
It's not awful (some of the action is fairly entertaining) but it's so by the numbers and boring. Jesus Christ, even Nick Nolte doing his by-now-expected-crazy-old-guy schtick is tiresome after roughly 5 seconds.
The plot revolves around Gerard Butler's Mike Banning, who is high up in the White Houses security detail, being framed for an assassination attempt on the President (Morgan Freeman). He is then chased down by the FBI, whilst he tries to figure out who is actually behind it, take them down, and clear his name.
I don't even need to spoil who the bad guys are because it's painfully obvious from the precise second we meet them.
I don't mind Gerard Butler by any means, but he seems to be phoning it in at this point, as he goes through the motions and runs through a gauntlet of action movie cliches - including but not limited to:
- a dramatic dimly lit and gun heavy opening scene that is blatantly a training excercise
- the hero throwing down an effective weapon to face of with the villain in hand to hand
- the hero walking away from an important family conversation at a pivotal moment to go and do hero stuff
- Danny Huston playing a smug arsehole
- A political sub plot involving Russia that doesn't actually go anywhere
Etc, etc.
I, like most people, love a good bit of Morgan Freeman, but unfortunately, they did a Leia on him and just had him in a coma for most of the film, yaaaaay. Jada Pinkett-Smith is in here somewhere as well, but I can't even remember what happens to her.
Just to top it all off, some of the effects work in this is terrible by any standard, but considering it's a big budget action film, it's pretty embarrassing.
I mean, I can be a miserable bastard sometimes, and I appreciate that maybe I'm railing too hard on a film that should just be a dumb popcorn film, but honestly, Angel Has Fallen feels like the result of someone forcing a bot to sit through the first two, and then produce a script for a sequel.
Mel Rodriguez recommended GoodFellas (1990) in Movies (curated)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Soul (2020) in Movies
Feb 5, 2021
Good...but wished it touched my Soul more
The creators at PIXAR have done it again. They have crafted a beautifully drawn, incredibly imaginative, wonderfully performed, heartwarming story for young and old alike to enjoy.
I just wished it touched my Soul more.
Written and Directed by Pete Docter (UP!, INSIDE OUT) - who I would argue is theโฆahemโฆsoul of Pixar - SOUL tells the story of Joe, a middle school band teacher who aspires to be a jazz musician. On the cusp of realzing his dream, Joe (or, rather, Joeโs soul) finds himself in the afterlife desperately trying to return to his life to fulfill his dream.
Strongly voiced by Jamie Foxx, Joe is singularly focused on his goal and he wonโt let anything get in his way, not even a โlost soulโ (voiced by Tina Fey).
Now, I am a big fan of Tina Feyโs and she does just as good a job in her voice acting as Foxx, but for me, I just didnโt sense a gel of characters between these two. Part of that issue just might be in the storytelling - as Joeโs character is constantly pushing Feyโs character away and, so, was pushing me away as well.
And that is too bad as this relationship is at theโฆwellโฆsoul of this film and I really wanted this to work better because the rest of the film is WONDERFUL.
Docterโs depiction of the afterlife is sublimely abstract and I really felt that this worked well and was a smart way to deal with that portion of the film. The script moves along and the assorted situations and characters that Joe and โ22โ (Feyโs character) encounter are fun.
And thatโs because Pixar, once again, populates the film with a strong array of voice talent that brings โsomething moreโ to their characters - Graham Norton, Phylicia Rashad, Wes Studi and Daveed Diggs all shine in what are, essentially, extended cameo roles.
Which brings me back to my central issue - Foxx and Fey are on screen together for most of this film and I just wanted to connect with them more. Perhaps I was just not in the mood for this film at the time I viewed it. I will definitely give this movie another look (because there are so many good things going on).
Perhaps, I just need to open my soul more.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I just wished it touched my Soul more.
Written and Directed by Pete Docter (UP!, INSIDE OUT) - who I would argue is theโฆahemโฆsoul of Pixar - SOUL tells the story of Joe, a middle school band teacher who aspires to be a jazz musician. On the cusp of realzing his dream, Joe (or, rather, Joeโs soul) finds himself in the afterlife desperately trying to return to his life to fulfill his dream.
Strongly voiced by Jamie Foxx, Joe is singularly focused on his goal and he wonโt let anything get in his way, not even a โlost soulโ (voiced by Tina Fey).
Now, I am a big fan of Tina Feyโs and she does just as good a job in her voice acting as Foxx, but for me, I just didnโt sense a gel of characters between these two. Part of that issue just might be in the storytelling - as Joeโs character is constantly pushing Feyโs character away and, so, was pushing me away as well.
And that is too bad as this relationship is at theโฆwellโฆsoul of this film and I really wanted this to work better because the rest of the film is WONDERFUL.
Docterโs depiction of the afterlife is sublimely abstract and I really felt that this worked well and was a smart way to deal with that portion of the film. The script moves along and the assorted situations and characters that Joe and โ22โ (Feyโs character) encounter are fun.
And thatโs because Pixar, once again, populates the film with a strong array of voice talent that brings โsomething moreโ to their characters - Graham Norton, Phylicia Rashad, Wes Studi and Daveed Diggs all shine in what are, essentially, extended cameo roles.
Which brings me back to my central issue - Foxx and Fey are on screen together for most of this film and I just wanted to connect with them more. Perhaps I was just not in the mood for this film at the time I viewed it. I will definitely give this movie another look (because there are so many good things going on).
Perhaps, I just need to open my soul more.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated The Hunger Games (2012) in Movies
Sep 20, 2020 (Updated Nov 26, 2020)
One of the most clueless things I've ever seen, as painstakingly unintelligent as it is one-dimensional and blunt. My problem isn't so much that every YA movie from then until at least 2018 cribbed from it (and for the most part, did it better lol) mercilessly until they left nothing left to this one but its picked-clean carcass - but moreso with the fact that it does only a couple steps above the bare minimum. How awesome would this have been as a Battle Royale-style, anti-fascist bloodbath where a bunch of kids are picked at random and exposed to both the elements and a shit-ton of weapons in a ๐๐ณ๐ถ๐ฎ๐ข๐ฏ ๐๐ฉ๐ฐ๐ธ-esque battlefield commentated by a flamboyant Stanley Tucci and Toby Jones? But no, fuck that right? Instead we get a garbage-looking, shakycam exercise in going through the motions with bad characters and toothless action (wasps? most of the characters dying offscreen? are you kidding me?). Plus we're treated to another awful forced romance, dull-arrowed swipes at classism which amount to nothing more than overtly-obvious visual signifiers with nothing to actually chew on (I assume out of cowardice - which makes it worse), and one of the most infamous cases of vaguely misogynistic attempts at a 'strong female lead' by making her mean and stripped of any actual personality. Somehow it doesn't really drag, but it's pretty viciously unexciting. There's some real bite to the scenes where Katniss's every expression let alone word is picked apart by a capricious crowd and disingenuous MC, and Haymitch painfully watching the rich children play with the toy sword - though not only does it refuse to dive into the treasure trove of possible commentary it sets up, but I actually have to apologize to the (worlds better) ๐๐ช๐ท๐ฆ๐ณ๐จ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ต for goofing on its idiotic politics because this is somehow even dumber. "We want to make sure there's never another uprising again, show we're a gracious + caring government, and entertain the public all at once. How do we do that? Well we'll just start abducting and killing children at random on national television of course!" Lmfao. Doesn't lean into anything that could have made this enjoyable, and there's a lot - so they had to have *tried* to make it this flat. Also one of those movies that only knows how to express its limited emotion through unbearable "everything sucks" world-building. Great... that would be another thing entirely if it even earned the right to do that, which naturally this doesn't. Cheesy and unintentionally funny.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Oct 11, 2019
Oof
I had a horrible horrible feeling that Justice League was going to be rubbish. After the double whammy of raw sewage that was BvS and Suicide Squad, my hopes for a third ensemble film weren't high at all.
The finished result was worse than I thought it was going to be be though...
Firstly, we will start with the characters - a collection of some of the finest heroes the world of comics has to offer.
Batman, who I thought was the best part about BvS, is relegated to a boring and tired waste, who acts as occasional comic relief. It doesn't help that at this point, Ben Affleck seems completely uninterested in even being involved (can't blame the guy).
After a pretty good solo outing, Wonder Woman has gone from an empowered female badass, to someone who mopes around about her ex boyfriend (but is still admittedly badass).
The Flash (one of my favourite DC characters) is LITERALLY useless from start to finish.
Cyborg has the remnants of a potential interesting back story, but the rushed nature of the whole affair gives us next to nothing there.
Aquaman isn't too bad, but is there, like Batman, for light comic relief whilst he shouts generic gym-bro nonsense everywhere.
Superman, when he turns up, is ok. Just not really given much to do - it's all just a big mess.
The villain of the piece is Steppenwolf, a bland, forgettable and generic CGI demon who has little-to-no impact as he shouts his way through the bare bones narrative.
Talking of the CGI, it's just not that great, again. I'm not sure how this keeps happening with the amount of money being pumped into these things?
The third act of the film is draped in CGI, and it all looks cheap! And I just can't get my head around it! Ahhhhh!
(I'm not even going to talk about Henry Cavill's now infamous and hideous CGI mouth)
When it comes to the DCEU, the better films have been the solo outings, and it really shows here - the three characters who had not yet appeared properly at this point (Cyborg, Aquaman, and The Flash) just seem hugely wasted in a movie that is obviously trying to play catch up with the MCU - something that's not necessary! DC has a wealth of great source material to draw from, and it's yet to be utilised properly!
It would seem that going forward, Warner Bros are concentrating more on these solo films, and judging by the putrid mess of Justice League, that's is definitely the right direction to go in.
The finished result was worse than I thought it was going to be be though...
Firstly, we will start with the characters - a collection of some of the finest heroes the world of comics has to offer.
Batman, who I thought was the best part about BvS, is relegated to a boring and tired waste, who acts as occasional comic relief. It doesn't help that at this point, Ben Affleck seems completely uninterested in even being involved (can't blame the guy).
After a pretty good solo outing, Wonder Woman has gone from an empowered female badass, to someone who mopes around about her ex boyfriend (but is still admittedly badass).
The Flash (one of my favourite DC characters) is LITERALLY useless from start to finish.
Cyborg has the remnants of a potential interesting back story, but the rushed nature of the whole affair gives us next to nothing there.
Aquaman isn't too bad, but is there, like Batman, for light comic relief whilst he shouts generic gym-bro nonsense everywhere.
Superman, when he turns up, is ok. Just not really given much to do - it's all just a big mess.
The villain of the piece is Steppenwolf, a bland, forgettable and generic CGI demon who has little-to-no impact as he shouts his way through the bare bones narrative.
Talking of the CGI, it's just not that great, again. I'm not sure how this keeps happening with the amount of money being pumped into these things?
The third act of the film is draped in CGI, and it all looks cheap! And I just can't get my head around it! Ahhhhh!
(I'm not even going to talk about Henry Cavill's now infamous and hideous CGI mouth)
When it comes to the DCEU, the better films have been the solo outings, and it really shows here - the three characters who had not yet appeared properly at this point (Cyborg, Aquaman, and The Flash) just seem hugely wasted in a movie that is obviously trying to play catch up with the MCU - something that's not necessary! DC has a wealth of great source material to draw from, and it's yet to be utilised properly!
It would seem that going forward, Warner Bros are concentrating more on these solo films, and judging by the putrid mess of Justice League, that's is definitely the right direction to go in.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Mega Shark vs Kolossus (2015) in Movies
Aug 16, 2020
Amendment to the shark rules, having "mega" in the title... *chef's kiss*
When the hunt for the power source known as Red Mercury takes a team to an underground bunker they accidentally awaken the giant doomsday machine that's been idle since the Cold War. While the Kolossus runs rampage a new megalodon is terrorising the coast... what will happen when the two inexplicably meet?
I will say that of the Mega-Shark "franchise" the best is Mega Shark Vs. Mecha Shark. It is obviously much more sensible having two things that are designed to be in the same environment battling together, a robot fighting a shark is epic... but a stretch. This duo does mean that it feels very much like two films, but honestly, the ridiculousness of this makes up a bit for that.
It does at last start with a super realistic submarine that's manned by a lot of women in tight pleather that doesn't look like it would offer any kind of protection against water or action. This is why we come for these films... the accuracy.
The acting is exactly what you'd expect from a shark film, probably something you'd rather wasn't on your resume. You've got all the stereotypes with all the cringeable moments and the actors don't do a bad job with what they're given.
There's a little issue right at the beginning of the film. When the team meet up outside the bunker there's an obviously pointless exchange to explain what's going on, two of the actors have subtitles. I don't have an issue with subtitles when they're needed, but while both the actors have accents in the scene they're actually speaking perfectly understandable English. It might have been a glitch on the copy I watched, I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but if it wasn't then I don't know what they were thinking.
When it comes to the shark scale this film is good because it has the requisite bag CGI, stupid storyline and classic quotes... the famous last words "No sign of the mega shark" and my personal favourite "...or you can die hiding under your desk searching for your balls." Glorious. Despite the amazing lines and the fact it's got a shark in it, the sheer impossibility of the pairing and the fact it feels like two films forced together makes it fall short of high marks.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/mega-shark-vs-kolossus-movie-review.html
When the hunt for the power source known as Red Mercury takes a team to an underground bunker they accidentally awaken the giant doomsday machine that's been idle since the Cold War. While the Kolossus runs rampage a new megalodon is terrorising the coast... what will happen when the two inexplicably meet?
I will say that of the Mega-Shark "franchise" the best is Mega Shark Vs. Mecha Shark. It is obviously much more sensible having two things that are designed to be in the same environment battling together, a robot fighting a shark is epic... but a stretch. This duo does mean that it feels very much like two films, but honestly, the ridiculousness of this makes up a bit for that.
It does at last start with a super realistic submarine that's manned by a lot of women in tight pleather that doesn't look like it would offer any kind of protection against water or action. This is why we come for these films... the accuracy.
The acting is exactly what you'd expect from a shark film, probably something you'd rather wasn't on your resume. You've got all the stereotypes with all the cringeable moments and the actors don't do a bad job with what they're given.
There's a little issue right at the beginning of the film. When the team meet up outside the bunker there's an obviously pointless exchange to explain what's going on, two of the actors have subtitles. I don't have an issue with subtitles when they're needed, but while both the actors have accents in the scene they're actually speaking perfectly understandable English. It might have been a glitch on the copy I watched, I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but if it wasn't then I don't know what they were thinking.
When it comes to the shark scale this film is good because it has the requisite bag CGI, stupid storyline and classic quotes... the famous last words "No sign of the mega shark" and my personal favourite "...or you can die hiding under your desk searching for your balls." Glorious. Despite the amazing lines and the fact it's got a shark in it, the sheer impossibility of the pairing and the fact it feels like two films forced together makes it fall short of high marks.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/mega-shark-vs-kolossus-movie-review.html