Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Bad Santa 2 (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
The last time we heard from Willie Soke (Billy Bob Thornton) he was recovering in jail after being shot eight times. We catch up with him today in maybe worse shape. He is out of jail but finds himself unable to hold a job and drinking to extreme excess. Th only visitor he has is a delusional, simple minded and well intentioned Thurman Merman (Brett Kelly). On the verge of ending it all he receives an invitation from his old partner, Marcus Skidmore (Tony Cox), to make a big score by robbing a Chicago charity on Christmas Eve. Wary, mostly because Marcus double crossed and shot him on their last job, Willie decides he needs the money and it’s a chance to double cross Marcus. So, he takes the job and heads to Chicago. When he arrives, he finds that Marcus has not told him everything. The job was put together by his arch nemesis. Someone who is more vile, crude and despicable than he is…his mother Sunny (Kathy Bates). Driven by greed and with the agreement that Marcus and him will cut his mother out at the end of the job Willie agrees to go forward with the robbery. The unlikely trio set out to infiltrate and rob the charity.
It is surprising to say but this sequel to 2003s Bad Santa is even more outrageous and raunchy than the original. Billy Bob Thornton is perfect in this role as a sex crazed and barely functioning alcoholic. Willie is truly the Anti-Santa Claus. But with Thurman having faith in him and in his very out of the box way of trying to do good, you can’t help but root for him to succeed. Kathy Bates performance as a crude as can be equal to Thornton’s character was fun and unexpected. The full cast of characters are all unique and all bring something to the film. The story however is very familiar and not that far off from the first film. There were definitely jokes and plot lines that followed too closely, in my opinion, to the original film. This is definitely not a film for young audiences, as most of the film is profanity laced and full of sexual situations and innuendos. But for the adult audience there are a lot of laughs to be had. For me this was a perfect film to shut off for an hour and a half and just enjoy the craziness happening on screen. It is not an overthought or over complicated film. They took things from the original film that were successful changed them up a little, not enough at some points, and made everything a little more over the top.
I wouldn’t necessarily recommend paying movie theater prices for this film but it is definitely worth a watch for the right audiences.
It is surprising to say but this sequel to 2003s Bad Santa is even more outrageous and raunchy than the original. Billy Bob Thornton is perfect in this role as a sex crazed and barely functioning alcoholic. Willie is truly the Anti-Santa Claus. But with Thurman having faith in him and in his very out of the box way of trying to do good, you can’t help but root for him to succeed. Kathy Bates performance as a crude as can be equal to Thornton’s character was fun and unexpected. The full cast of characters are all unique and all bring something to the film. The story however is very familiar and not that far off from the first film. There were definitely jokes and plot lines that followed too closely, in my opinion, to the original film. This is definitely not a film for young audiences, as most of the film is profanity laced and full of sexual situations and innuendos. But for the adult audience there are a lot of laughs to be had. For me this was a perfect film to shut off for an hour and a half and just enjoy the craziness happening on screen. It is not an overthought or over complicated film. They took things from the original film that were successful changed them up a little, not enough at some points, and made everything a little more over the top.
I wouldn’t necessarily recommend paying movie theater prices for this film but it is definitely worth a watch for the right audiences.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Little Stranger (2018) in Movies
Sep 2, 2019
Thoughts on The Little Stranger
Characters – Dr Faraday is a young doctor who takes a fondness of an outcasted family, he wants to help the injured brother, wants to save Caroline, while being left in the middle being able to help them or a potential supernatural presence in the house. Roderick is the injured war hero, he was left with a limp and burns to his face, which make him feel outcasted from the rest of the village and useless to his family, he is struggling with the mental side of everything too, leaving him to make rash decisions. Caroline is the daughter of the household, she is the one that they family has hope of seeing escape their impending poverty and becomes the ones that Faraday takes an interest in. she comes off unsure of what to make of her own future. Mrs Ayres is the mother of the house, she wants the best for her children and is still haunted by the one that she lost.
Performances – I don’t think any of the performances in this film are bad, Domhnall Gleeson does everything he can in the leading role, as does Will Poulter in his supporting role, Ruth Wilson and Charlotte Rampling don’t disappoint with what they try to bring to the film, the problem with most of this film, comes from the characters be so bland and the story not going anywhere.
Story – The story here follows a doctor getting close to a family that are seen as outcasts only to start to fall in love with one member of the family just as the strange events start to happen within the mansion. This is where the story just doesn’t get going, we are promised a horror element to this film which just never comes to life, which makes the story feel like more of a class position story. if that sounds confusing, well that doesn’t change from the story in full, because we have very little happening here and end up just shrugging our shoulders at the end, wondering if anything was actually meant to happen.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in this film does seem to be non-existent, where anything supernatural does seem to only be part of the mystery over anything else going on in the film.
Settings – The film is set mostly in the mansion in a village in the English countryside, it shows how the family can be seen as outcasts and how people can look out at these types of buildings hoping to be part of this society.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are down the practical additions to Will Poulter, they look great, everything else just seems basic.
Scene of the Movie – The dog attack.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The aftermath of the dog attack.
Final Thoughts – This is a film that seems to hint at something big, only to end up feeling dull and uninspiring.
Overall: Just fails to deliver.
Characters – Dr Faraday is a young doctor who takes a fondness of an outcasted family, he wants to help the injured brother, wants to save Caroline, while being left in the middle being able to help them or a potential supernatural presence in the house. Roderick is the injured war hero, he was left with a limp and burns to his face, which make him feel outcasted from the rest of the village and useless to his family, he is struggling with the mental side of everything too, leaving him to make rash decisions. Caroline is the daughter of the household, she is the one that they family has hope of seeing escape their impending poverty and becomes the ones that Faraday takes an interest in. she comes off unsure of what to make of her own future. Mrs Ayres is the mother of the house, she wants the best for her children and is still haunted by the one that she lost.
Performances – I don’t think any of the performances in this film are bad, Domhnall Gleeson does everything he can in the leading role, as does Will Poulter in his supporting role, Ruth Wilson and Charlotte Rampling don’t disappoint with what they try to bring to the film, the problem with most of this film, comes from the characters be so bland and the story not going anywhere.
Story – The story here follows a doctor getting close to a family that are seen as outcasts only to start to fall in love with one member of the family just as the strange events start to happen within the mansion. This is where the story just doesn’t get going, we are promised a horror element to this film which just never comes to life, which makes the story feel like more of a class position story. if that sounds confusing, well that doesn’t change from the story in full, because we have very little happening here and end up just shrugging our shoulders at the end, wondering if anything was actually meant to happen.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in this film does seem to be non-existent, where anything supernatural does seem to only be part of the mystery over anything else going on in the film.
Settings – The film is set mostly in the mansion in a village in the English countryside, it shows how the family can be seen as outcasts and how people can look out at these types of buildings hoping to be part of this society.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are down the practical additions to Will Poulter, they look great, everything else just seems basic.
Scene of the Movie – The dog attack.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The aftermath of the dog attack.
Final Thoughts – This is a film that seems to hint at something big, only to end up feeling dull and uninspiring.
Overall: Just fails to deliver.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Death on the Nile (2022) in Movies
Mar 16, 2022
Well Done
The old adage “they don’t make movies like this anymore” is no truer than when one is speaking about large budget, big name cast murder mysteries and with what must surely be a disappointing box office for DEATH ON THE NILE, they just might not try again.
And that is too bad for the latest Kenneth Branagh Hercule Poirot mystery DEATH ON THE NILE with Branagh starring, again, as the great Agatha Christie Belgian Detective is the stuff that makes going to movies fun - big characters, major stars, gorgeous scenery and a plot that will keep one guessing until the end.
Branagh’s previous work as Director and star of MURDER OF THE ORIENT EXPRESS was a bit of a disappointment as it was gorgeous and well cast - but the pacing of the film dragged and Branagh decided, inexplicably, to add an action scene to a drawing room mystery.
In DEATH ON THE NILE, Branagh (who Directed this film from an screenplay by Michael Green who adapted the Agatha Christie novel), corrected these mistakes and the film moves along spritely with the actors chewing the scenery - but quickly - making this a very enjoyable movie-going experience.
Branagh, in his second go-around as Poirot, seems much more relaxed and comfortable with his character. This is, perhaps, because they add a backstory to Poirot, so he has much more to set his character upon. On the surface, purists of the the Agatha Christie character will blanche at the thought of adding a backstory, but I’ll be darned if it doesn’t work and adds a layer of depth to the character and the film that I wasn’t expecting.
The All-Star cast knows what type of film they are in - and what is expected of them - and they deliver. Gal Gadot, Armie Hammmer, Rose Leslie, Letitia Wright, Jennifer Saunders, Sophie Okonedo and, surprisingly, Russell Brand all shine brightly in their “moment” that their character gets with Poirot. Special notice needs to be made of Annette Bening’s performance. It was GREAT to see this wonderful actress get a role she could sink her teeth into.
As always, with this type of film, the settings and costumes take a prominent position and they do not disappoint. Cinematographer Haris Zambarloukos should be hired by the Egyptian Chamber of Commerce for he lovingly shows the sites along the Nile River (circa ‘1930’s) in a beautiful poetic way while the Costumes by Pago Delgado are gorgeous and ornate - without being over-the-top.
If you get a chance to see DEATH ON THE NILE on the big screen, do so, you will be well rewarded for your efforts - and just might help get another of these big budget, big star mysteries made. If not, make sure to check this film out when it starts streaming near you - it’s a ton of fun.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And that is too bad for the latest Kenneth Branagh Hercule Poirot mystery DEATH ON THE NILE with Branagh starring, again, as the great Agatha Christie Belgian Detective is the stuff that makes going to movies fun - big characters, major stars, gorgeous scenery and a plot that will keep one guessing until the end.
Branagh’s previous work as Director and star of MURDER OF THE ORIENT EXPRESS was a bit of a disappointment as it was gorgeous and well cast - but the pacing of the film dragged and Branagh decided, inexplicably, to add an action scene to a drawing room mystery.
In DEATH ON THE NILE, Branagh (who Directed this film from an screenplay by Michael Green who adapted the Agatha Christie novel), corrected these mistakes and the film moves along spritely with the actors chewing the scenery - but quickly - making this a very enjoyable movie-going experience.
Branagh, in his second go-around as Poirot, seems much more relaxed and comfortable with his character. This is, perhaps, because they add a backstory to Poirot, so he has much more to set his character upon. On the surface, purists of the the Agatha Christie character will blanche at the thought of adding a backstory, but I’ll be darned if it doesn’t work and adds a layer of depth to the character and the film that I wasn’t expecting.
The All-Star cast knows what type of film they are in - and what is expected of them - and they deliver. Gal Gadot, Armie Hammmer, Rose Leslie, Letitia Wright, Jennifer Saunders, Sophie Okonedo and, surprisingly, Russell Brand all shine brightly in their “moment” that their character gets with Poirot. Special notice needs to be made of Annette Bening’s performance. It was GREAT to see this wonderful actress get a role she could sink her teeth into.
As always, with this type of film, the settings and costumes take a prominent position and they do not disappoint. Cinematographer Haris Zambarloukos should be hired by the Egyptian Chamber of Commerce for he lovingly shows the sites along the Nile River (circa ‘1930’s) in a beautiful poetic way while the Costumes by Pago Delgado are gorgeous and ornate - without being over-the-top.
If you get a chance to see DEATH ON THE NILE on the big screen, do so, you will be well rewarded for your efforts - and just might help get another of these big budget, big star mysteries made. If not, make sure to check this film out when it starts streaming near you - it’s a ton of fun.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Day Shift (2022) in Movies
Oct 12, 2022
Vampires vs. The Bronx, Night Teeth, and now Day Shift. Someone over at Netflix really likes investing in vampire horror-comedies of varying quality. Day Shift, for the most part, is a competent and entertaining action flick, thanks in no small part to the cast. Jamie Foxx has shown time and again that he's more than capable of taking on lead duties, whether he's winning Oscars for music biopics, or kicking vampire ass up and down California. His chemistry with Dave Franco lays the foundation for much of the films humour, and introduces a kind of buddy cop dynamic into the mix. The cast is further bolstered with some smaller roles from industry veteran Peter Stormare, and living legend Snoop Dogg (patiently waiting for a Big John spin-off project).
The action scenes are a whole lot of fun. The vampires contort and twist in horrible ways, and are dispatched in equally horrible ways. There's plenty of blood and viscera, limbs flying about the place, decapitations. It's all well choreographed, fast paced, and hugely entertaining.
There's a lot going for Day Shift, but it does faulter at times. After an exciting opening scene, there's quite a lengthy dip in pacing. This leads to a lot of exposition dumps and world building. Crafting lore for a new IP is something that can be tricky to navigate, and Day Shift misses the mark in this instance. It's all well and good providing the audience with background information that would be everyday knowledge for these characters, but it's executed in a way that feels wayward and messy, and almost 100% through dialogue. And example of a film that does this kind of thing well would be Zombieland. Withing minutes, we know plenty of in-universe rules for surviving the zombie apocalypse, and it's done in a fun, breezy, and brisk manner. In contrast, Day Shift puts a pin in any sort of excitement to throw all sorts of exposition at us in a way that feels like it's relying on potential sequels for any kind of pay off. It's just a little deflating, and not even Foxx's charisma can keep it from becoming boring.
To add to the negative side of things, the villain of the piece is aggressively forgettable. There's a semi-clever reference to how estate realtors are evil, but other than that, she's just an uninspired bad guy that causes the protagonists mild peril. The narrative also suffers from the age old issue of characters doing stupid things to drive the plot forward. Some of the events that unfold don't make a huge amount of sense with what we've been told previously.
Despite these misgivings and a messy middle, Day Shift ends on a high note, with an entertaining final third, and ultimately manages to be a perfectly passable popcorn movie. What it lacks in substance, it's makes up for in style, and will surely leave most with a smile on their faces by the time the credits roll.
The action scenes are a whole lot of fun. The vampires contort and twist in horrible ways, and are dispatched in equally horrible ways. There's plenty of blood and viscera, limbs flying about the place, decapitations. It's all well choreographed, fast paced, and hugely entertaining.
There's a lot going for Day Shift, but it does faulter at times. After an exciting opening scene, there's quite a lengthy dip in pacing. This leads to a lot of exposition dumps and world building. Crafting lore for a new IP is something that can be tricky to navigate, and Day Shift misses the mark in this instance. It's all well and good providing the audience with background information that would be everyday knowledge for these characters, but it's executed in a way that feels wayward and messy, and almost 100% through dialogue. And example of a film that does this kind of thing well would be Zombieland. Withing minutes, we know plenty of in-universe rules for surviving the zombie apocalypse, and it's done in a fun, breezy, and brisk manner. In contrast, Day Shift puts a pin in any sort of excitement to throw all sorts of exposition at us in a way that feels like it's relying on potential sequels for any kind of pay off. It's just a little deflating, and not even Foxx's charisma can keep it from becoming boring.
To add to the negative side of things, the villain of the piece is aggressively forgettable. There's a semi-clever reference to how estate realtors are evil, but other than that, she's just an uninspired bad guy that causes the protagonists mild peril. The narrative also suffers from the age old issue of characters doing stupid things to drive the plot forward. Some of the events that unfold don't make a huge amount of sense with what we've been told previously.
Despite these misgivings and a messy middle, Day Shift ends on a high note, with an entertaining final third, and ultimately manages to be a perfectly passable popcorn movie. What it lacks in substance, it's makes up for in style, and will surely leave most with a smile on their faces by the time the credits roll.
Neil Goddard (3 KP) rated Hellboy (2019) in Movies
Feb 27, 2020
It all looked soooo promising
Contains spoilers, click to show
Let me say this upfront; David Harbour looks f---ing boss as Hellboy. The makeup is far superior to that of Ron Perlman, not that there was anything wrong with Ron Perlman’s, but with this new incarnation it’s all in the eyes. Deep red, sunken, pained. Sadly, that is all I can say about this movie that is one hundred percent genuinely positive. There are positives however, but they come with a big ‘however’.
I was initially a little concerned that we were getting a re-boot and not a direct sequel to Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008), especially as it still seemed so recent and was so well made. I know it was over a decade ago but quality is timeless, yeah? Then David Harbour was cast and Neil Marshall announced as director. Great, thought I, an actor I like and a director who’s put out some solid genre material. I saw the first picture of Harbour as Hellboy and I was genuinely excited. I saw the trailer and again, excited. Then I watched the film.
Eurgh, where to start?
Firstly, Ian McShane’s initial voice over is clunky and ill fitting, then they throw in some b@llocks about King Arthur and Excalibur. I had my first wobble here, as some of the effects seemed less than special.
Cue opening titles.
The film starts with a Mexican wrestling match that is purely exposition to let us know Hellboy is a hard drinking and hard fighting anti-hero working for an organisation that deals with the paranormal. The make up for his vampiric opponent is also great (can’t fault the makeup department), but the scene seemed superfluous. We get the nubbin of the story forming now; some horrible witchy wench from way back when was cut into bits and flung around jolly old England to prevent her from spreading a right ‘orrible plague. Turns out a potty-mouthed Liverpudlian pig-monster is collecting said bits in the hope of putting her back together in exchange for his normal appearance. Scouse pig-monster is quite entertaining.
Hellboy goes to England at the request of an upper-class paranormal society to help them kill giants; this goes t1ts up. Again, this seems like unnecessary exposition to introduce Alice, a medium who he rescued as a baby, who now rescues him in a transit van. We also get introduced to M11’s Agent Daimio. There something wrong with him, he keeps injecting himself with a serum to stop something happening. I knew at this point we’d get to see what it was eventually, probably at a juncture where something is needed to rescue someone important. However, at this point I had a feeling it would be bad, I just didn’t know how bad.
There some more fighting, some good effects, some mediocre effects and some terrible effects. There’s some good one-liners, there’s some dull and/or terrible dialogue and then we get the film’s conclusion.
There’s something I’ve been putting off mentioning as I didn’t want the entire review to be about it, and it could have been; the witchy wench at the heart of all this paranormal consternation, Nimue, is played by Milla Jovovich and she is terrible. From when she first opens her mouth to her predictable demise, she is terrible. Terrible. TERRIBLE.
I love some of the Resident Evil films but all she’s required to do is some slow-motion scissor kicks and shoot zombies and zombie-dogs in the face. She is tolerated, rather than enjoyed. Here she is emoting, or at least I think that’s what she was going for, and as a depiction of an evil entity bent of the destruction of all mankind, she is, for want of a better word, cack.
David Harbour and the Hellboy franchise deserve better than this. To be blunt, the franchise has better than this and Mike Mignola should be a bit more f---ing precious with his creation.
Hellboy (2004) was genuinely exciting; it was an origin story that bought that story full circle for its thrilling and apocalyptical conclusion. It has a wonderful nemesis, great support and breath-taking visuals. The re-tread of the origin story in Hellboy (2019) is, again, one more unnecessary diversion from a sketchy plot, which, for all its meagre bones takes a f-ck load of time to tell.
Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008) was equally impressive. It also introduced a fully formed community of creatures and customs hiding alongside mankind. It did so with nonchalant aplomb. Nothing seemed irrelevant or forced. For two films with almost identical running times, Hellboy (2019) tells less of a story with way more waffle.
So, I did mention there were some positives. David Harbour is great. He’s dour, sarcastic, defiant and funny, he just has no engaging story in which to be all those things. Ian McShane is good as the father figure but he is overshadowed by memories of the late, unbelievably great John Hurt. The story of a witch trying to destroy mankind is solid fantasy movie gold and the unleashing of her plague late in the final act is suitably hellish; bizarre demons emerging from city streets and tearing humans limb from limb, it’s bloody wonderful and wonderfully bloody. They all could have come straight out of a Clive Barker fever dream. However, it’s too little too late, by this point in the story we’ve had too many cutaways, too much shoddy CGI, and Agent Daimio stinking up many a scene with his ‘will he won’t he’ turn into something rubbish… he does.
The worst part of all this is I don’t know if they can come back from this. The film may have sunk the franchise at least for the next few years.
I do however, look forward to a re-boot in a decade or so, if we haven’t all been assimilated by aliens, overrun by AI robots or decimated by a supernatural plague bought on by some witchy wench with an axe to grind.
THREE WORD SUMMATION: Big Red Turd.
I was initially a little concerned that we were getting a re-boot and not a direct sequel to Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008), especially as it still seemed so recent and was so well made. I know it was over a decade ago but quality is timeless, yeah? Then David Harbour was cast and Neil Marshall announced as director. Great, thought I, an actor I like and a director who’s put out some solid genre material. I saw the first picture of Harbour as Hellboy and I was genuinely excited. I saw the trailer and again, excited. Then I watched the film.
Eurgh, where to start?
Firstly, Ian McShane’s initial voice over is clunky and ill fitting, then they throw in some b@llocks about King Arthur and Excalibur. I had my first wobble here, as some of the effects seemed less than special.
Cue opening titles.
The film starts with a Mexican wrestling match that is purely exposition to let us know Hellboy is a hard drinking and hard fighting anti-hero working for an organisation that deals with the paranormal. The make up for his vampiric opponent is also great (can’t fault the makeup department), but the scene seemed superfluous. We get the nubbin of the story forming now; some horrible witchy wench from way back when was cut into bits and flung around jolly old England to prevent her from spreading a right ‘orrible plague. Turns out a potty-mouthed Liverpudlian pig-monster is collecting said bits in the hope of putting her back together in exchange for his normal appearance. Scouse pig-monster is quite entertaining.
Hellboy goes to England at the request of an upper-class paranormal society to help them kill giants; this goes t1ts up. Again, this seems like unnecessary exposition to introduce Alice, a medium who he rescued as a baby, who now rescues him in a transit van. We also get introduced to M11’s Agent Daimio. There something wrong with him, he keeps injecting himself with a serum to stop something happening. I knew at this point we’d get to see what it was eventually, probably at a juncture where something is needed to rescue someone important. However, at this point I had a feeling it would be bad, I just didn’t know how bad.
There some more fighting, some good effects, some mediocre effects and some terrible effects. There’s some good one-liners, there’s some dull and/or terrible dialogue and then we get the film’s conclusion.
There’s something I’ve been putting off mentioning as I didn’t want the entire review to be about it, and it could have been; the witchy wench at the heart of all this paranormal consternation, Nimue, is played by Milla Jovovich and she is terrible. From when she first opens her mouth to her predictable demise, she is terrible. Terrible. TERRIBLE.
I love some of the Resident Evil films but all she’s required to do is some slow-motion scissor kicks and shoot zombies and zombie-dogs in the face. She is tolerated, rather than enjoyed. Here she is emoting, or at least I think that’s what she was going for, and as a depiction of an evil entity bent of the destruction of all mankind, she is, for want of a better word, cack.
David Harbour and the Hellboy franchise deserve better than this. To be blunt, the franchise has better than this and Mike Mignola should be a bit more f---ing precious with his creation.
Hellboy (2004) was genuinely exciting; it was an origin story that bought that story full circle for its thrilling and apocalyptical conclusion. It has a wonderful nemesis, great support and breath-taking visuals. The re-tread of the origin story in Hellboy (2019) is, again, one more unnecessary diversion from a sketchy plot, which, for all its meagre bones takes a f-ck load of time to tell.
Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008) was equally impressive. It also introduced a fully formed community of creatures and customs hiding alongside mankind. It did so with nonchalant aplomb. Nothing seemed irrelevant or forced. For two films with almost identical running times, Hellboy (2019) tells less of a story with way more waffle.
So, I did mention there were some positives. David Harbour is great. He’s dour, sarcastic, defiant and funny, he just has no engaging story in which to be all those things. Ian McShane is good as the father figure but he is overshadowed by memories of the late, unbelievably great John Hurt. The story of a witch trying to destroy mankind is solid fantasy movie gold and the unleashing of her plague late in the final act is suitably hellish; bizarre demons emerging from city streets and tearing humans limb from limb, it’s bloody wonderful and wonderfully bloody. They all could have come straight out of a Clive Barker fever dream. However, it’s too little too late, by this point in the story we’ve had too many cutaways, too much shoddy CGI, and Agent Daimio stinking up many a scene with his ‘will he won’t he’ turn into something rubbish… he does.
The worst part of all this is I don’t know if they can come back from this. The film may have sunk the franchise at least for the next few years.
I do however, look forward to a re-boot in a decade or so, if we haven’t all been assimilated by aliens, overrun by AI robots or decimated by a supernatural plague bought on by some witchy wench with an axe to grind.
THREE WORD SUMMATION: Big Red Turd.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Alien: Covenant (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Horrific Beasts and How to Avoid Them.
I seem to be in a bit of a minority in quite liking Ridley Scott’s last Alien outing – 2012’s “Prometheus”: a heady, if at times ponderous, theory to the origins of man. The first hour of that film is really good. But for me, what made the original 1979 film so enthralling was the life cycle of the ‘traditional’ Xenomorph aliens through egg to evil hatchling to vicious killing machine. This somewhat got lost with “Prometheus” with a range of alien-like-things ranging from wiggly black goo to something more familiar… and frankly I was confused. Some – repeat, some – of the explanation for that diversity of forms in “Prometheus” is made clearer in the sequel “Alien: Covenant”.
“Covenant” (named again after the spaceship at its heart) is a follow-on sequel to “Prometheus”, so it is worth re-watching it if you can before a cinema trip. At the end of that film we saw Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”) and a reconstructed android David (Michael Fassbender, “Steve Jobs“) flying off in an alien craft still loaded with its cargo of nasty alien black goo. Shaw had a mission to seek out The Engineer’s home world – named “Paradise” – to find out why after creating man they were intent on going back to finish them off with a WMD. A neat prologue has been released which documents this… here:
We pick up the action 10 years later in a totally improbable 2104. (Give us a break writing team! [Story by Jack Paglen and Michael Green; screenplay by John Logan and Dante Harper]. We know they won’t have got through planning permission on the third Heathrow runway by then, let alone invented interplanetary travel…! 2504, maybe!)
Daniels (Katherine Waterston, “Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them“) has just suffered a sudden bereavement (an uncredited James Franco – – blink and you’ll miss him). She has also been rudely awakened from hypersleep due to a sudden system mishap: no, not to find Chris Pratt there like “Passengers“, but by the ship’s android Walter (also Michael Fassbender) who’s also revived the rest of the crew. While effecting repairs they receive a garbled John Denver track mysteriously beamed to them from an earth-like planet not too far away. As this might be a suitable homestead, and as spending weeks more in hypersleep is unattractive, Captain Oram (Billy Crudup, “Spotlight“) votes to check it out, against Daniels’ strong objections. Needless to say, this proves to be a BIG MISTAKE as the new film neatly links hands with the first film.
Kick-ass… Katherine Waterston being careful not to slip in the shower.
There’s a limit to what more I can say about the film without delivering spoilers (so I have added a few more comments in the spoiler section BELOW the trailer). It’s a far more action-oriented film than “Prometheus” and has enough jump scares and gore to please most Alien fans. (In fact, it’s a surprise to me that it got a UK “15” certificate rather than an “18”: how much more violence do you need to show in the film?) A shower scene towards the end of the film is particularly effective and will likely put an end to relaxing shower sex for many people for good!
It also looks visually stunning (cinematography is by Dariusz Wolski (“The Martian“, “Pirates of the Caribbean”) with location shooting in Milford Sound in New Zealand. The special effects are also a cut-above the normal CGI with a devastated Pompeii-like city, a picture of blacks and greys, being particularly effective.
In the acting stakes it is really all down to Waterston and Fassbinder. I wasn’t a great fan of Waterston in “Fantastic Beasts” – a bit insipid I thought – but here she adopts Ripley’s kick-ass mantle with ease but blends it beautifully with doe-eyed vulnerability. Some of her scenes reminded me strongly of Demi Moore in “Ghost”. Fassbinder is fascinating to watch with his dual roles of Walter and David, both slightly different versions of the same being. And the special effects around the Fassbinder-on-Fassbinder action, tending somewhat towards the homoerotic in places, are well done.
Unfortunately the rest of the crew get little in the way of background development, which limits the impact of the inevitable demises. They are also about as clinically stupid as the spaceship crew in “Life” in some of their actions; I guess you could put some of this down to the effects of panic, but in other cases you might see it as a simple cleansing of the gene pool in Darwinian fashion.
Also making uncredited guest appearances are Guy Pearce as Weyland (in a flashback scene) and Noomi Rapace.
Music is “by” Jed Kurzel, but to be honest he does little than wrap around re-versions of the original Jerry Goldsmith classics: not that this is a bad thing, since those themes are iconic and a joy to hear again on the big screen.
My expectations for this movie were sky-high, as it was hinted as a return to form for the franchise. And in many ways it was, with a “man, Gods and androids” theme adding depth to the traditional anatomical-bursting gore. But to be honest, some of the storytelling was highly predictable, and I left slightly disappointed with the overall effort. If my expectations were an 11/10, my reality was more like a 7/10. It’s still a good film, and I look forward to watching it again. But perhaps this is a franchise that has really run its course now for Mr Scott and he should look to his next “Martian”-type movie for a more novel foundation to build his next movie “log cabin on the lake” on.
“Covenant” (named again after the spaceship at its heart) is a follow-on sequel to “Prometheus”, so it is worth re-watching it if you can before a cinema trip. At the end of that film we saw Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”) and a reconstructed android David (Michael Fassbender, “Steve Jobs“) flying off in an alien craft still loaded with its cargo of nasty alien black goo. Shaw had a mission to seek out The Engineer’s home world – named “Paradise” – to find out why after creating man they were intent on going back to finish them off with a WMD. A neat prologue has been released which documents this… here:
We pick up the action 10 years later in a totally improbable 2104. (Give us a break writing team! [Story by Jack Paglen and Michael Green; screenplay by John Logan and Dante Harper]. We know they won’t have got through planning permission on the third Heathrow runway by then, let alone invented interplanetary travel…! 2504, maybe!)
Daniels (Katherine Waterston, “Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them“) has just suffered a sudden bereavement (an uncredited James Franco – – blink and you’ll miss him). She has also been rudely awakened from hypersleep due to a sudden system mishap: no, not to find Chris Pratt there like “Passengers“, but by the ship’s android Walter (also Michael Fassbender) who’s also revived the rest of the crew. While effecting repairs they receive a garbled John Denver track mysteriously beamed to them from an earth-like planet not too far away. As this might be a suitable homestead, and as spending weeks more in hypersleep is unattractive, Captain Oram (Billy Crudup, “Spotlight“) votes to check it out, against Daniels’ strong objections. Needless to say, this proves to be a BIG MISTAKE as the new film neatly links hands with the first film.
Kick-ass… Katherine Waterston being careful not to slip in the shower.
There’s a limit to what more I can say about the film without delivering spoilers (so I have added a few more comments in the spoiler section BELOW the trailer). It’s a far more action-oriented film than “Prometheus” and has enough jump scares and gore to please most Alien fans. (In fact, it’s a surprise to me that it got a UK “15” certificate rather than an “18”: how much more violence do you need to show in the film?) A shower scene towards the end of the film is particularly effective and will likely put an end to relaxing shower sex for many people for good!
It also looks visually stunning (cinematography is by Dariusz Wolski (“The Martian“, “Pirates of the Caribbean”) with location shooting in Milford Sound in New Zealand. The special effects are also a cut-above the normal CGI with a devastated Pompeii-like city, a picture of blacks and greys, being particularly effective.
In the acting stakes it is really all down to Waterston and Fassbinder. I wasn’t a great fan of Waterston in “Fantastic Beasts” – a bit insipid I thought – but here she adopts Ripley’s kick-ass mantle with ease but blends it beautifully with doe-eyed vulnerability. Some of her scenes reminded me strongly of Demi Moore in “Ghost”. Fassbinder is fascinating to watch with his dual roles of Walter and David, both slightly different versions of the same being. And the special effects around the Fassbinder-on-Fassbinder action, tending somewhat towards the homoerotic in places, are well done.
Unfortunately the rest of the crew get little in the way of background development, which limits the impact of the inevitable demises. They are also about as clinically stupid as the spaceship crew in “Life” in some of their actions; I guess you could put some of this down to the effects of panic, but in other cases you might see it as a simple cleansing of the gene pool in Darwinian fashion.
Also making uncredited guest appearances are Guy Pearce as Weyland (in a flashback scene) and Noomi Rapace.
Music is “by” Jed Kurzel, but to be honest he does little than wrap around re-versions of the original Jerry Goldsmith classics: not that this is a bad thing, since those themes are iconic and a joy to hear again on the big screen.
My expectations for this movie were sky-high, as it was hinted as a return to form for the franchise. And in many ways it was, with a “man, Gods and androids” theme adding depth to the traditional anatomical-bursting gore. But to be honest, some of the storytelling was highly predictable, and I left slightly disappointed with the overall effort. If my expectations were an 11/10, my reality was more like a 7/10. It’s still a good film, and I look forward to watching it again. But perhaps this is a franchise that has really run its course now for Mr Scott and he should look to his next “Martian”-type movie for a more novel foundation to build his next movie “log cabin on the lake” on.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Zoolander 2 (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A Fashion Faux pas
It pains me to say it, but Ben Stiller hasn’t really been relevant for quite some time. His last film, the final movie in the Night at the Museum franchise struggled with critics and audiences alike.
Once dubbed part of the so-called “Fratpack”, alongside Will Ferrell, Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn to name a few, their success has fallen by the wayside since introducing rising stars like Melissa McCarthy and Chris Pratt to the comedy genre.
Here, Stiller gives one of his most memorable characters, Derek Zoolander, a sequel that no-one was really asking for. But is it worthy of your time?
In Zoolander 2, titular male model Derek Zoolander has fallen out of favour with the public and has retreated into hiding away from the prying eyes of the media to focus on getting his life back together. By a stroke of luck, a chance encounter with old friend Hansel (Owen Wilson) sets them on a path to help stop high-profile celebrity deaths, finding out who is behind them in the process.
The story is a little nondescript with the intentions of both the ‘heroes’ and ‘villains’ not quite clear. There are elements of the first live-action Scooby Doo film in its design – and that’s not a good thing.
An all-star cast that includes the exceptionally beautiful Penelope Cruz, Will Ferrell and Kristen Wiig is bolstered by more celebrity cameos than you can shake a stick at. Justin Bieber, Anna Wintour, Sting, Ariana Grande, MC Hammer and Kiefer Sutherland are just a few on a list that is nearly endless.
Unfortunately, these cameos are the highlights in a film full of recycled gags and very poor camerawork. As we follow our two leads on their journey across a dreary looking Rome, Zoolander 2 drags with only a couple of laughs in the first hour – something the first one managed to avoid.
In fact, things are so bad, they only pick up in the final 30 minutes when Will Ferrell’s villain Mugatu makes a much-needed appearance, steering this near-trainwreck of a comedy into fairly decent territory. Ferrel’s comic timing is as usual, on point, but it’s unfortunate he puts Stiller and Wilson to shame.
Penelope Cruz is her ever-watchable self but piles on the shtick to such an extent that it takes away from her character, making her almost cartoonish in personality and actions.
Elsewhere, the clever parodies relating to the fashion industry are taken away; instead Zoolander 2 is lumped with cheap laughs that constantly try too hard to raise even the smallest smirk from its audience.
Overall, Zoolander 2 is not a patch on its predecessor with Will Ferrell providing the film with its only genuine moments of hilarity and this comes within the final 30 minutes of a 102 minute feature. Stiller may have tried to resurrect one of his finest characters, but in doing so, has tarnished that reputation.
Much like its lead star, Zoolander 2 tries desperately to stay relevant, and unfortunately this type of comedy just doesn’t cut the mustard anymore.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/21/a-fashion-faux-pas-zoolander-2-review/
Once dubbed part of the so-called “Fratpack”, alongside Will Ferrell, Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn to name a few, their success has fallen by the wayside since introducing rising stars like Melissa McCarthy and Chris Pratt to the comedy genre.
Here, Stiller gives one of his most memorable characters, Derek Zoolander, a sequel that no-one was really asking for. But is it worthy of your time?
In Zoolander 2, titular male model Derek Zoolander has fallen out of favour with the public and has retreated into hiding away from the prying eyes of the media to focus on getting his life back together. By a stroke of luck, a chance encounter with old friend Hansel (Owen Wilson) sets them on a path to help stop high-profile celebrity deaths, finding out who is behind them in the process.
The story is a little nondescript with the intentions of both the ‘heroes’ and ‘villains’ not quite clear. There are elements of the first live-action Scooby Doo film in its design – and that’s not a good thing.
An all-star cast that includes the exceptionally beautiful Penelope Cruz, Will Ferrell and Kristen Wiig is bolstered by more celebrity cameos than you can shake a stick at. Justin Bieber, Anna Wintour, Sting, Ariana Grande, MC Hammer and Kiefer Sutherland are just a few on a list that is nearly endless.
Unfortunately, these cameos are the highlights in a film full of recycled gags and very poor camerawork. As we follow our two leads on their journey across a dreary looking Rome, Zoolander 2 drags with only a couple of laughs in the first hour – something the first one managed to avoid.
In fact, things are so bad, they only pick up in the final 30 minutes when Will Ferrell’s villain Mugatu makes a much-needed appearance, steering this near-trainwreck of a comedy into fairly decent territory. Ferrel’s comic timing is as usual, on point, but it’s unfortunate he puts Stiller and Wilson to shame.
Penelope Cruz is her ever-watchable self but piles on the shtick to such an extent that it takes away from her character, making her almost cartoonish in personality and actions.
Elsewhere, the clever parodies relating to the fashion industry are taken away; instead Zoolander 2 is lumped with cheap laughs that constantly try too hard to raise even the smallest smirk from its audience.
Overall, Zoolander 2 is not a patch on its predecessor with Will Ferrell providing the film with its only genuine moments of hilarity and this comes within the final 30 minutes of a 102 minute feature. Stiller may have tried to resurrect one of his finest characters, but in doing so, has tarnished that reputation.
Much like its lead star, Zoolander 2 tries desperately to stay relevant, and unfortunately this type of comedy just doesn’t cut the mustard anymore.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/21/a-fashion-faux-pas-zoolander-2-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Sausage Party (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Utterly Ridiculous
Just when Sharknado: the 4th Awakens made you think film-making couldn’t get any more ridiculous, a movie like Sausage Party comes along to remind you that Hollywood can always go that one step further to mind-boggling peculiarity.
Of course, that’s not always a bad thing, there have been countless weird and wacky films over the years that have gone on to become cult classics – look at Kick-Ass or even Pulp Fiction for examples of that. But for every Pulp Fiction there’s a Sharknado. So is Sausage Party good weird or as stale as a month-old bagel?
From the mind of Seth Rogen, Sausage Party is a strictly adults only animation that combines hugely offensive language and racial stereotypes with surprisingly meaningful religious undertones. And do you know what? It’s a breath of fresh air.
Life is good for all the food items that occupy the shelves at the local supermarket. Frank (Seth Rogen) the sausage, Brenda (Kristen Wiig) the hot dog bun, Teresa Taco and Sammy Bagel Jr. (Edward Norton) can’t wait to go home with a happy customer. Soon, their world comes crashing down as poor Frank learns the horrifying truth that he will eventually become a meal. After warning his pals about their similar fate, the panicked perishables devise a plan to escape from their human enemies.
Directors Conrad Vernon and Greg Tiernan take Rogen’s intriguing premise and inject a warmly familiar animation style, distancing itself just enough to make any comparisons simply inconceivable. Sausage Party is like nothing you will have ever seen.
The voice-acting is great too. Rogen plays his usual film staple – in sausage form – with the spicy Salma Hayek outdoing everyone else as a lustful taco. Kristen Wiig, Bill Hader, Michael Cera and Jonah Hill also lend their familiar voices to a hot-dog bun, a bottle of spirit and two other frankfurters respectively.
Elsewhere, the comedy, for the most part, hits the spot. As dreadful as it sounds, the racial stereotyping works incredibly well in food form. British tea, Mexican taco shells and German sauerkraut will have you rolling about the aisles with their outrageous vulgarity, but everyone needs to release their inner teenager once in a while.
Unfortunately, the films standout sequence has already been shown in the trailer – a side-splitting food-eye view of a normal kitchen, before every edible item is butchered; that poor Irish potato didn’t stand a chance. This is a real shame as the rest of the film doesn’t quite match up to the standard of that scene.
Nevertheless, there’ll be chuckles throughout as numerous celebrities are parodied in food form. One in particular, immortalised in chewing gum, is incredibly well thought out.
And that’s where Sausage Party succeeds the most. Underneath the polished animation and crude humour, this film is actually kind of clever. It tackles religion, war, race, sexuality and food waste very well indeed and that’s something the genre doesn’t ask for. It’s just unfortunate that it’s not quite as funny as the trailer would have you believe.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/09/03/utterly-ridiculous-sausage-party-review/
Of course, that’s not always a bad thing, there have been countless weird and wacky films over the years that have gone on to become cult classics – look at Kick-Ass or even Pulp Fiction for examples of that. But for every Pulp Fiction there’s a Sharknado. So is Sausage Party good weird or as stale as a month-old bagel?
From the mind of Seth Rogen, Sausage Party is a strictly adults only animation that combines hugely offensive language and racial stereotypes with surprisingly meaningful religious undertones. And do you know what? It’s a breath of fresh air.
Life is good for all the food items that occupy the shelves at the local supermarket. Frank (Seth Rogen) the sausage, Brenda (Kristen Wiig) the hot dog bun, Teresa Taco and Sammy Bagel Jr. (Edward Norton) can’t wait to go home with a happy customer. Soon, their world comes crashing down as poor Frank learns the horrifying truth that he will eventually become a meal. After warning his pals about their similar fate, the panicked perishables devise a plan to escape from their human enemies.
Directors Conrad Vernon and Greg Tiernan take Rogen’s intriguing premise and inject a warmly familiar animation style, distancing itself just enough to make any comparisons simply inconceivable. Sausage Party is like nothing you will have ever seen.
The voice-acting is great too. Rogen plays his usual film staple – in sausage form – with the spicy Salma Hayek outdoing everyone else as a lustful taco. Kristen Wiig, Bill Hader, Michael Cera and Jonah Hill also lend their familiar voices to a hot-dog bun, a bottle of spirit and two other frankfurters respectively.
Elsewhere, the comedy, for the most part, hits the spot. As dreadful as it sounds, the racial stereotyping works incredibly well in food form. British tea, Mexican taco shells and German sauerkraut will have you rolling about the aisles with their outrageous vulgarity, but everyone needs to release their inner teenager once in a while.
Unfortunately, the films standout sequence has already been shown in the trailer – a side-splitting food-eye view of a normal kitchen, before every edible item is butchered; that poor Irish potato didn’t stand a chance. This is a real shame as the rest of the film doesn’t quite match up to the standard of that scene.
Nevertheless, there’ll be chuckles throughout as numerous celebrities are parodied in food form. One in particular, immortalised in chewing gum, is incredibly well thought out.
And that’s where Sausage Party succeeds the most. Underneath the polished animation and crude humour, this film is actually kind of clever. It tackles religion, war, race, sexuality and food waste very well indeed and that’s something the genre doesn’t ask for. It’s just unfortunate that it’s not quite as funny as the trailer would have you believe.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/09/03/utterly-ridiculous-sausage-party-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Brothers Grimsby (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
It's grim in England (apparently)
It’s probably accurate to say that Sacha Baron Cohen’s sense of humour is a little like marmite, it’s a love or hate kind of affair. Offering up characters like Borat and Bruno to the unsuspecting public has proved beneficial to him over the years; with the outlandish antics of those personalities drawing in massive audiences.
His latest offering, English football hooligan Nobby Butcher, promises to be one of his most controversial roles to date, but does the corresponding film, simply titled Grimsby, push the boundaries a little too far?
Cohen’s beer-drinking, benefit-swindling character stars alongside his long-lost brother Sebastian, played by an incredibly wasted Mark Strong. It just so happens that Seb is a secret agent, on the run after an incident at a global health event. What ensues is a formulaic Cohen comedy that utilises every orifice known to the human body – this is definitely low-brow humour.
After getting over the truly horrific portrayal of life up north, and the appalling representation of a town that is no-where near as bad as is reflected, Grimsby is actually a reasonably funny spy caper – not in the league of last year’s Spy – but certainly better than say Johnny English: Reborn or to some extent, Get Smart.
A talented cast bolsters Cohen and Strong with Nobby’s girlfriend Dawn, played by Rebel Wilson, providing some of the film’s funniest moments, despite her lack of screen time.
Elsewhere, Penelope Cruz’s role is a wasted opportunity and she suffers the same fate here as she did in Zoolander 2. Isla Fisher, Ricky Tomlinson and Johnny Vegas are unfortunately all underused as Clash of the Titans director Louis Leterrier focuses on the main pair.
Leterrier’s work on big blockbusters also helps move Grimsby through its ridiculously swift run time. At less than 90 minutes, the story is stretched to the brink, though there are some clever scenes, including a brilliantly choreographed chase through tight urban streets at the beginning.
Unfortunately, the gags miss their targets more than they hit. Your individual views on toilet humour will ultimately decide whether or not Grimsby is funny and some of the comedic elements intermittently cross the line, an ill-timed HIV joke being one of them.
It’s fair to say you’ll be cringing one minute, and roaring with embarrassed laughter the next.
Nevertheless, Cohen has promised time and time again that he has no time for personal opinions on his films and with each new character; he continues to deliver on that promise. Whether or not his target audience is getting tired is another story completely.
Overall, Grimsby is a movie that is unapologetic with what it is trying to achieve. From homophobic comments, casual racism and a grim depiction of life in Northern England, it’s everything we should despise in modern film-making. However, there’s just something about Cohen’s brazen attitude that keeps us coming back for more.
If you’re reading this Sacha, don’t visit Grimsby for a while, there’s a bounty on your head.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/27/its-grim-in-england-apparently-grimsby-review/
His latest offering, English football hooligan Nobby Butcher, promises to be one of his most controversial roles to date, but does the corresponding film, simply titled Grimsby, push the boundaries a little too far?
Cohen’s beer-drinking, benefit-swindling character stars alongside his long-lost brother Sebastian, played by an incredibly wasted Mark Strong. It just so happens that Seb is a secret agent, on the run after an incident at a global health event. What ensues is a formulaic Cohen comedy that utilises every orifice known to the human body – this is definitely low-brow humour.
After getting over the truly horrific portrayal of life up north, and the appalling representation of a town that is no-where near as bad as is reflected, Grimsby is actually a reasonably funny spy caper – not in the league of last year’s Spy – but certainly better than say Johnny English: Reborn or to some extent, Get Smart.
A talented cast bolsters Cohen and Strong with Nobby’s girlfriend Dawn, played by Rebel Wilson, providing some of the film’s funniest moments, despite her lack of screen time.
Elsewhere, Penelope Cruz’s role is a wasted opportunity and she suffers the same fate here as she did in Zoolander 2. Isla Fisher, Ricky Tomlinson and Johnny Vegas are unfortunately all underused as Clash of the Titans director Louis Leterrier focuses on the main pair.
Leterrier’s work on big blockbusters also helps move Grimsby through its ridiculously swift run time. At less than 90 minutes, the story is stretched to the brink, though there are some clever scenes, including a brilliantly choreographed chase through tight urban streets at the beginning.
Unfortunately, the gags miss their targets more than they hit. Your individual views on toilet humour will ultimately decide whether or not Grimsby is funny and some of the comedic elements intermittently cross the line, an ill-timed HIV joke being one of them.
It’s fair to say you’ll be cringing one minute, and roaring with embarrassed laughter the next.
Nevertheless, Cohen has promised time and time again that he has no time for personal opinions on his films and with each new character; he continues to deliver on that promise. Whether or not his target audience is getting tired is another story completely.
Overall, Grimsby is a movie that is unapologetic with what it is trying to achieve. From homophobic comments, casual racism and a grim depiction of life in Northern England, it’s everything we should despise in modern film-making. However, there’s just something about Cohen’s brazen attitude that keeps us coming back for more.
If you’re reading this Sacha, don’t visit Grimsby for a while, there’s a bounty on your head.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/27/its-grim-in-england-apparently-grimsby-review/
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated That Snow Moon in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019 (Updated Jun 12, 2019)
Many years ago, in a star system located quite a long ways away from our own…… Remind you of a wildly successful fantasy film series involving laser swords, telekinetic powers, and space travel? That snow coincidence. Ha! See what I did there?
That Snow Moon is a card game of dexterity, mixed with some bluffing. Players are divided between two ‘teams’ – the Liberation (good guys) and the Dynasty (bad guys). The goals are simple. The Liberation is trying to assemble a set of plans to be used in the destruction of the Snow Moon. The Dynasty is trying to destroy the Liberation base and stop them from acquiring those plans. I don’t know about you, but if they turned this into a movie, I would probably watch it.
Here’s the kicker though – you don’t simply PLAY cards in this game. You toss/drop them. Yep, you read that right. In this game, you throw cards. Each team takes turns tossing cards into the play area, in hopes of creating clusters of touching cards that activate powers to aid in the completion of their respective goals. Bluffing comes into play because Liberation cards can be played face-down, and remain that way until exposed by a Dynasty card. Can you trick the Dynasty into revealing a card whose power you want to use, or will they see through your ruse and expose and eliminate your more powerful cards? On the flip side, can you foil the plans of the rebellious Liberation, or will they be sly enough to avoid detection? The final fate of your galaxy is up in the air – literally.
The premise of this game sounded really cool to me, but when I actually got to play it, it was quite….underwhelming. In theory, tossing cards puts a unique twist on the standard card game. But the unpredictability of actually tossing/dropping cards makes this game way more luck-driven than strategic to me. It should be noted that we have a PnP of this game – sleeved and with regular playing cards added to beef up the cards. Maybe if we had a retail version, the cards would be easier to manipulate? I’m not sure. At times it just felt futile to try to strategize certain tosses because they cards are going to fall where they may. The actual gameplay is a little bland too – it feels like it’s missing something. Maybe adding more action options or more complex/powerful card powers would up the ante a little bit. The game, as is, just kind of feels like 16-Card-Pick-Up to me.
As a huge fan of the brand-name muse of this game, That Snow Moon fell flat for me. It feels a little too simple, yet wildly unpredictable at the same time. Is it a game I’d pull out to play again? I don’t know – maybe? It’s not high on my list. That snow joke, Purple Phoenix Games gives it a disappointing 9 / 18.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/05/30/that-snow-moon-review/
That Snow Moon is a card game of dexterity, mixed with some bluffing. Players are divided between two ‘teams’ – the Liberation (good guys) and the Dynasty (bad guys). The goals are simple. The Liberation is trying to assemble a set of plans to be used in the destruction of the Snow Moon. The Dynasty is trying to destroy the Liberation base and stop them from acquiring those plans. I don’t know about you, but if they turned this into a movie, I would probably watch it.
Here’s the kicker though – you don’t simply PLAY cards in this game. You toss/drop them. Yep, you read that right. In this game, you throw cards. Each team takes turns tossing cards into the play area, in hopes of creating clusters of touching cards that activate powers to aid in the completion of their respective goals. Bluffing comes into play because Liberation cards can be played face-down, and remain that way until exposed by a Dynasty card. Can you trick the Dynasty into revealing a card whose power you want to use, or will they see through your ruse and expose and eliminate your more powerful cards? On the flip side, can you foil the plans of the rebellious Liberation, or will they be sly enough to avoid detection? The final fate of your galaxy is up in the air – literally.
The premise of this game sounded really cool to me, but when I actually got to play it, it was quite….underwhelming. In theory, tossing cards puts a unique twist on the standard card game. But the unpredictability of actually tossing/dropping cards makes this game way more luck-driven than strategic to me. It should be noted that we have a PnP of this game – sleeved and with regular playing cards added to beef up the cards. Maybe if we had a retail version, the cards would be easier to manipulate? I’m not sure. At times it just felt futile to try to strategize certain tosses because they cards are going to fall where they may. The actual gameplay is a little bland too – it feels like it’s missing something. Maybe adding more action options or more complex/powerful card powers would up the ante a little bit. The game, as is, just kind of feels like 16-Card-Pick-Up to me.
As a huge fan of the brand-name muse of this game, That Snow Moon fell flat for me. It feels a little too simple, yet wildly unpredictable at the same time. Is it a game I’d pull out to play again? I don’t know – maybe? It’s not high on my list. That snow joke, Purple Phoenix Games gives it a disappointing 9 / 18.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/05/30/that-snow-moon-review/