Search
Search results
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Midsommar (2019) in Movies
Mar 22, 2020
Can't Deny it's a Solid Movie
Typically when I write a review, I try to watch the movie as I’m writing to bring back any lost memories to mind. Now, as I watch Midsommar on Prime, I’m trying to type as fast as I can so I can move on from this movie. It’s not that the movie is bad, not in the least. It’s just unsettling as hell, a movie that leaves you with an eery feeling that’s undeniable. The plot: Trying to escape a family tragedy, Dani (Florence Pugh) escapes with her boyfriend to a Swedish village for a midsummer festival. What she finds is the furthest things from what she expected.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Here’s what I loved most about the characters in Midsommar: They are, all of them, true to form. When situations arise, they act just like you expect them to act based on their personality traits. If it weren’t for these main characters, the movie never would have played out the way it did as they all experienced their doubts about the village at one point, but continued to stay for one personal reason to the next. As a result, shit hits the fan and things get juicier by the minute.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 1
Memorability: 10
Pace: 8
Plot: 9
Resolution: 5
It was…an ending to say the least. Bananas. Crazy. Threw me for a loop. Did I love it, though? Meh.
Overall: 80
Thankfully, it’s only taken me about eleven minutes to get all this typed so I’ll be shutting Midsommar off real soon. In my overall opinion, the movie falls short a few paces of being in the classic category because it gets a bit humdrum after awhile. However, I applaud it’s bold originality and its desire to be like nothing else that’s out there right now. That is something I ultimately respect whether or not I loved the movie. It won’t have universal appeal, but I definitely recommend it if you are a movie buff and have yet to see it.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Here’s what I loved most about the characters in Midsommar: They are, all of them, true to form. When situations arise, they act just like you expect them to act based on their personality traits. If it weren’t for these main characters, the movie never would have played out the way it did as they all experienced their doubts about the village at one point, but continued to stay for one personal reason to the next. As a result, shit hits the fan and things get juicier by the minute.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 1
Memorability: 10
Pace: 8
Plot: 9
Resolution: 5
It was…an ending to say the least. Bananas. Crazy. Threw me for a loop. Did I love it, though? Meh.
Overall: 80
Thankfully, it’s only taken me about eleven minutes to get all this typed so I’ll be shutting Midsommar off real soon. In my overall opinion, the movie falls short a few paces of being in the classic category because it gets a bit humdrum after awhile. However, I applaud it’s bold originality and its desire to be like nothing else that’s out there right now. That is something I ultimately respect whether or not I loved the movie. It won’t have universal appeal, but I definitely recommend it if you are a movie buff and have yet to see it.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Snow White & the Huntsman in Books
Apr 27, 2018
You know what I love? Creatively re-told fairy-tales. You know what I hate? Terribly re-told fairy-tales made into crappy movies and then made into a book, written with poor prose. That pretty much summarizes how I feel about this (audio)book.
Let's start with the good:
1. The narrator was excellent. She also read for Daughter of Smoke and Bone, Why We Broke Up, the Iron King, and many other audiobooks. She made even the dullest most pointless sentences, pieces of dialogue, and descriptions sound interesting, and managed to hold my attention most of they way through the audiobook (until I stopped for dinner, and then realized I really didn't want to start listening again.)
2. It was fast-paced. The plot never slowed... but there were parts where the unneeded descriptions seemed to slow down and break the tension, or unnecessary interior monologue broke the mood.
3. The bad guys were very bad, and the good guys were very good. It made it a classic hero-vilan fairy-tale.
Now for the not-so-good:
1. Poor writing. It wasn't Stephenie-Meyer Terrible, but every sentence started with "he..." "she..." "He said," "She felt..." and it felt repetitive and boring. There was no sentence structure besides basic subject-verb-direct object. Also, the adjectives, adverbs, and overall descriptions and vocabulary was boring, expected, and unfeeling.
2. Who names a princess "Snow White?" Really? I can see naming her "Snow" or something, but if you're going to re-tell a fairy-tale, at least give your heroine a name that doesn't stick out like a sore thumb. I realize that this is a complaint about the movie screenplay, not the book adaption... but still. It felt awkward to have all these names like William, Eric, Gus, Anna, Lilly, and... Snow White.
3. The bad guys were soul-less, and the good guys were perfect. Even bad characters have some redeeming value as to why you kind of wish they didn't have to die, but they're bad so you have to kill them. The bad guys in this story were just so bad, there was no way you could not hate them. The good guys were flawless: children obeyed their parents, men saved their women, women sacrificed for their families, and Snow White was a sweet innocent little angel. I'm sorry, but even good guys have a bad side. And if you're perfect, I couldn't care less what happens to you, because I can't relate to you.
So that is, essentially, why I stopped listening to the audiobook halfway through.
Let's start with the good:
1. The narrator was excellent. She also read for Daughter of Smoke and Bone, Why We Broke Up, the Iron King, and many other audiobooks. She made even the dullest most pointless sentences, pieces of dialogue, and descriptions sound interesting, and managed to hold my attention most of they way through the audiobook (until I stopped for dinner, and then realized I really didn't want to start listening again.)
2. It was fast-paced. The plot never slowed... but there were parts where the unneeded descriptions seemed to slow down and break the tension, or unnecessary interior monologue broke the mood.
3. The bad guys were very bad, and the good guys were very good. It made it a classic hero-vilan fairy-tale.
Now for the not-so-good:
1. Poor writing. It wasn't Stephenie-Meyer Terrible, but every sentence started with "he..." "she..." "He said," "She felt..." and it felt repetitive and boring. There was no sentence structure besides basic subject-verb-direct object. Also, the adjectives, adverbs, and overall descriptions and vocabulary was boring, expected, and unfeeling.
2. Who names a princess "Snow White?" Really? I can see naming her "Snow" or something, but if you're going to re-tell a fairy-tale, at least give your heroine a name that doesn't stick out like a sore thumb. I realize that this is a complaint about the movie screenplay, not the book adaption... but still. It felt awkward to have all these names like William, Eric, Gus, Anna, Lilly, and... Snow White.
3. The bad guys were soul-less, and the good guys were perfect. Even bad characters have some redeeming value as to why you kind of wish they didn't have to die, but they're bad so you have to kill them. The bad guys in this story were just so bad, there was no way you could not hate them. The good guys were flawless: children obeyed their parents, men saved their women, women sacrificed for their families, and Snow White was a sweet innocent little angel. I'm sorry, but even good guys have a bad side. And if you're perfect, I couldn't care less what happens to you, because I can't relate to you.
So that is, essentially, why I stopped listening to the audiobook halfway through.
Justin (2 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Feb 2, 2018 (Updated Feb 2, 2018)
The second recent dcu movie i didnt regret sitting through
Im plesantly supprised by justice league. Comming off the back of the ok and not too bad but could have been better wonder woman. DC have actually done what i was starting to think might have been impossible for them. They created a pretty enjoyable movie that actually holds its head in the good catagory rather than turds or just above average they have been making the past few years. Plenty of comic moments as well that wouldnt seem out of place in a marvel flick. Star of the show has to go to the flash and im preparing myself to regret looking forward to the stand flash movie as Ezra Miller does a great job at changing my mind on wishing they had cast the series flash in the role. The only reason i wont put spoilers in is as like all other dcu i can hardly remember anything of merit plot wise that was worth taking in lol. Although its enjoyably action orientated from start to finish and a good waste of a couple of spare hours
Kevin Wilson (179 KP) rated Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children (2016) in Movies
Jul 14, 2018
Unique characters (2 more)
Great cast
Another great tim burton style
Great movie, rather unique
This was a great Tim Burton movie. I do believe it is underrated, I've heard many bad things about this movie mainly being told it's boring but its far from it.
Each character is very unique and sometimes kinda creepy and there were some very interesting parts of the story I found very very interested, more specific the loops.
The cast was great but was surprised not to see Helana Boham Carter playing the lead. I've not heard anything about a sequel but I really hope it happens with the cast returning and maybe add a few new characters (I'm yet to read the books).
It was shot really well, you can see Tim Burton all over it and the CGI was pretty good. I loved the design of the monsters. I would have loved more and it is missing something that I can't quite put my finger on.
However, I could see myself going back and watching this again and that is the sign of a good movie. It was predictable and it's not going on my list of the greatest movies ever but it did not disappoint me.
Each character is very unique and sometimes kinda creepy and there were some very interesting parts of the story I found very very interested, more specific the loops.
The cast was great but was surprised not to see Helana Boham Carter playing the lead. I've not heard anything about a sequel but I really hope it happens with the cast returning and maybe add a few new characters (I'm yet to read the books).
It was shot really well, you can see Tim Burton all over it and the CGI was pretty good. I loved the design of the monsters. I would have loved more and it is missing something that I can't quite put my finger on.
However, I could see myself going back and watching this again and that is the sign of a good movie. It was predictable and it's not going on my list of the greatest movies ever but it did not disappoint me.
Caitlin Ann Cherniak (85 KP) rated Pete's Dragon (2016) in Movies
Oct 4, 2018
CGI (2 more)
Acting choice
Interesting twist to a retelling
Plot? Dragon being real or save the environment? (2 more)
Who's the bad guy?
Where was Pete the whole dang time?
Letterboxd review: https://letterboxd.com/caitcher/film/petes-dragon-2016/
First impressions video:
When I first saw this movie two years ago, I thought it was okay at best. There were plenty of good things about it, but there are the downsides that kinda take over.
The first thing I noticed was the plot. I haven't seen the original movie, but considering this was Disney in the 70's, it looked charming as Disney should. But because this is a live-action retelling, we can't have that luxury. I didn't ask for Pete's Dragon to do much. I just asked for it to be a good movie. However, throughout the entire time, I think this movie didn't know what it wanted to be about either. Did it wanna be the ripoff of a 90's "save the environment" flick or did it actually wanna be like the original involving Pete's actual existence? Hence why I called this movie a pancake to my family after coming home from seeing it. It constantly flips on the cooking pan, and it won't stop.
But what are the good things after my bad things "rant." First of all, I really liked how Pete got along with the main family, especially the daughter. It was an adorable relationship and all of the actors'...well, acting was the way it should've been. The soundtrack was also pretty decent, despite the fact that this retelling was not a musical. Lastly, the CGI on Pete actually made him look adorable and scary at the same time considering the tone of the film, which worked in its favor.
If you want more details, feel free to click on my other review links at the top of this review.
First impressions video:
When I first saw this movie two years ago, I thought it was okay at best. There were plenty of good things about it, but there are the downsides that kinda take over.
The first thing I noticed was the plot. I haven't seen the original movie, but considering this was Disney in the 70's, it looked charming as Disney should. But because this is a live-action retelling, we can't have that luxury. I didn't ask for Pete's Dragon to do much. I just asked for it to be a good movie. However, throughout the entire time, I think this movie didn't know what it wanted to be about either. Did it wanna be the ripoff of a 90's "save the environment" flick or did it actually wanna be like the original involving Pete's actual existence? Hence why I called this movie a pancake to my family after coming home from seeing it. It constantly flips on the cooking pan, and it won't stop.
But what are the good things after my bad things "rant." First of all, I really liked how Pete got along with the main family, especially the daughter. It was an adorable relationship and all of the actors'...well, acting was the way it should've been. The soundtrack was also pretty decent, despite the fact that this retelling was not a musical. Lastly, the CGI on Pete actually made him look adorable and scary at the same time considering the tone of the film, which worked in its favor.
If you want more details, feel free to click on my other review links at the top of this review.
Nick Beaty (70 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Nov 25, 2019 (Updated Nov 26, 2019)
And the Oscar goes to...
First things first, you can not start a review of Joker without mentioning the lead performance from Joaquin Phoenix as Arthur Fleck. I would say he is probably an evens favourite to take home the best actor Oscar at next years ceremony.
As for the movie itself, Tod Phillips take on Joker almost feels like a tribute to early Martin Scorsese movies, with the most obvious being Taxi Driver & The King of Comedy, both starring Robert De Niro who also appears here. This is certainly not a bad thing as they are brilliant pieces of cinema, that will stand the test of time. As will Joker in my opinion for it's excellent cinematography & gritty authenticity, I think people will still be talking about this movie for many years to come.
There are a few very slight flaws that I could point out. The first being that because it is so Scorsese like, for me it loses the feeling of being set in Gotham city and just feels very much like we are in New York city. Secondly the Wayne's and Alfred are very much portrayed as the bad guys in this movie, in my opinion I felt myself siding with Arthur/Joker a little too much maybe, which makes you lose all sympathy for the reason Batman became the Dark Knight in the first place. Last but not least the very controversial choice of adding a Gary Glitter song at a pivotal point of the movie, is a strange choice to say the least.
Overall Joker is an exceptional character study of a very disturbed individual with many mental health issues, add to that a superb performance by Joaquin Phoenix and I think you have a movie that will only get better with time and become a genre classic. With the huge box office success, I just hope DC keep this grim, very true to life approach for their future Batman projects.
As for the movie itself, Tod Phillips take on Joker almost feels like a tribute to early Martin Scorsese movies, with the most obvious being Taxi Driver & The King of Comedy, both starring Robert De Niro who also appears here. This is certainly not a bad thing as they are brilliant pieces of cinema, that will stand the test of time. As will Joker in my opinion for it's excellent cinematography & gritty authenticity, I think people will still be talking about this movie for many years to come.
There are a few very slight flaws that I could point out. The first being that because it is so Scorsese like, for me it loses the feeling of being set in Gotham city and just feels very much like we are in New York city. Secondly the Wayne's and Alfred are very much portrayed as the bad guys in this movie, in my opinion I felt myself siding with Arthur/Joker a little too much maybe, which makes you lose all sympathy for the reason Batman became the Dark Knight in the first place. Last but not least the very controversial choice of adding a Gary Glitter song at a pivotal point of the movie, is a strange choice to say the least.
Overall Joker is an exceptional character study of a very disturbed individual with many mental health issues, add to that a superb performance by Joaquin Phoenix and I think you have a movie that will only get better with time and become a genre classic. With the huge box office success, I just hope DC keep this grim, very true to life approach for their future Batman projects.
TheDefunctDiva (304 KP) rated Lone Wolf McQuade (1983) in Movies
Oct 6, 2017
L is for Lethal
Contains spoilers, click to show
Lone Wolf McQuade (P. 2/9/08)
As my ex-husband and his co-workers once discussed, this 1983 Chuck Norris classic contains an inexhaustible list of “man movie” elements. I shall enumerate just a few of the highlights here (spoiler warning):
Turbo-charged truck that hasn’t been washed in 20 years…check.
Multiple cut-away scenes containing only foul language…check.
Good guy silhouetted on cliff…check.
Too-tight pants…check.
Too-hairy chest…check.
Good guy lives in filthy, ramshackle bachelor pad…check.
Good guy assigned a partner that he doesn’t want…check.
Feds interfering with good guy’s investigation…check.
Evil, maniacally laughing, midget villain in a wheelchair…check.
Bad guys attempting to kill good guy’s daughter…check.
Same daughter later gets abducted by bad guys…check.
Good guy has disproportionately hot girlfriend…check.
Same girlfriend wears nothing but good-guy’s shirt, post coital…check.
Good guy hanging off hood of moving vehicle…check.
Good guys outnumbered by bad guys in every fight scene…check.
Single, long-range gunshot or arrow from crossbow causing car explosion…check.
Bad guy using a contrived mechanism to kill good guy, instead of simply shooting him in the head…check.
Beer, beer, and more beer, which magically revitalizes the good guy…check.
Strategically placed blood…check.
Flaming barrels…check.
Women totally incapable of defending themselves…check.
Good guy and bad guy putting down their weapons and facing off in physical fight…check.
Hot girlfriend dying in good guy’s arms, while professing her guilt and undying love…check.
More flaming barrels…check.
I could go on and on.
Among many other cheesy elements in this movie, I especially enjoyed the moments of obvious symbolism. The opening shot contains a psychedelic-looking, lone wolf accompanied by nothing but whistling. Later, when the bad guys attempt to kill Lone Wolf McQuade, they first assassinate his pet wolf. Foreshadowing, anyone? Another blatant symbol appears when Captain Tyler lectures McQuade about the public image of a ranger. The Captain holds a ruler in his hand, presumably because McQuade doesn’t “measure up” to his expectations. Ha!
In the most entertaining scene of the movie, Lone Wolf has been buried alive in his truck by the bad guy. Beaten and broken, he opens a can of beer found on the front seat, pours it over his effusively sweaty self, takes a sip, and then finds the strength to go on. With his eyes closed, and his head thrown back, he alternately opens and clenches his jaw while emitting a prolonged man-grunt. He then steps dramatically on the accelerator of his super-charged vehicle and is able to drive out of his own grave.
With the ridiculous costuming, cliché dialogue, subpar acting, and utterly horrible score, this film would have worked far better as a comedy. If you plan to watch it, expect to be incredulous, and try to avoid staring directly at Chuck’s hairy chest.
As my ex-husband and his co-workers once discussed, this 1983 Chuck Norris classic contains an inexhaustible list of “man movie” elements. I shall enumerate just a few of the highlights here (spoiler warning):
Turbo-charged truck that hasn’t been washed in 20 years…check.
Multiple cut-away scenes containing only foul language…check.
Good guy silhouetted on cliff…check.
Too-tight pants…check.
Too-hairy chest…check.
Good guy lives in filthy, ramshackle bachelor pad…check.
Good guy assigned a partner that he doesn’t want…check.
Feds interfering with good guy’s investigation…check.
Evil, maniacally laughing, midget villain in a wheelchair…check.
Bad guys attempting to kill good guy’s daughter…check.
Same daughter later gets abducted by bad guys…check.
Good guy has disproportionately hot girlfriend…check.
Same girlfriend wears nothing but good-guy’s shirt, post coital…check.
Good guy hanging off hood of moving vehicle…check.
Good guys outnumbered by bad guys in every fight scene…check.
Single, long-range gunshot or arrow from crossbow causing car explosion…check.
Bad guy using a contrived mechanism to kill good guy, instead of simply shooting him in the head…check.
Beer, beer, and more beer, which magically revitalizes the good guy…check.
Strategically placed blood…check.
Flaming barrels…check.
Women totally incapable of defending themselves…check.
Good guy and bad guy putting down their weapons and facing off in physical fight…check.
Hot girlfriend dying in good guy’s arms, while professing her guilt and undying love…check.
More flaming barrels…check.
I could go on and on.
Among many other cheesy elements in this movie, I especially enjoyed the moments of obvious symbolism. The opening shot contains a psychedelic-looking, lone wolf accompanied by nothing but whistling. Later, when the bad guys attempt to kill Lone Wolf McQuade, they first assassinate his pet wolf. Foreshadowing, anyone? Another blatant symbol appears when Captain Tyler lectures McQuade about the public image of a ranger. The Captain holds a ruler in his hand, presumably because McQuade doesn’t “measure up” to his expectations. Ha!
In the most entertaining scene of the movie, Lone Wolf has been buried alive in his truck by the bad guy. Beaten and broken, he opens a can of beer found on the front seat, pours it over his effusively sweaty self, takes a sip, and then finds the strength to go on. With his eyes closed, and his head thrown back, he alternately opens and clenches his jaw while emitting a prolonged man-grunt. He then steps dramatically on the accelerator of his super-charged vehicle and is able to drive out of his own grave.
With the ridiculous costuming, cliché dialogue, subpar acting, and utterly horrible score, this film would have worked far better as a comedy. If you plan to watch it, expect to be incredulous, and try to avoid staring directly at Chuck’s hairy chest.
Kevin Wilson (179 KP) rated Cool as Ice (1991) in Movies
Jul 16, 2018
Horrible acting (3 more)
Characters are not likeable
Lack of plot
Rap music
Errr what was it about again?
I found this to be a horrible movie and so boring. I went into it hoping it was going to be so bad it's good but it wasn't.
Firstmost I hate rap music so this was not for me. The dancing was fun but that's all there was.
I could not explain the plot to you, I didn't get it. Vanilla Ice's character was not likeable 1 bit and the other characters felt as bad. I don't even remember any of the characters names. However I do feel the female lead did the best with what she was given. The writing was pretty horrible.
Completely forgettable, wouldn't watch again. If your going to watch it for a laugh, have a few drinks with some friends.
Firstmost I hate rap music so this was not for me. The dancing was fun but that's all there was.
I could not explain the plot to you, I didn't get it. Vanilla Ice's character was not likeable 1 bit and the other characters felt as bad. I don't even remember any of the characters names. However I do feel the female lead did the best with what she was given. The writing was pretty horrible.
Completely forgettable, wouldn't watch again. If your going to watch it for a laugh, have a few drinks with some friends.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated NYPD Red (NYPD Red, #1) in Books
May 10, 2018
Detective Zach Jordan works for NYPD Red. A distinct branch of the NYPD that is in charge of cases involving the rich and famous He's about to het a new partner and a new case all in the same day. The new partner, Detective Kylie MacDonald is an old lover The new case comes at the start of Hollywood on the Hudson, where the L.A. elite come to examine movie making in New York City. So people in the T.V./movie business will be everywhere.
The Good News: NYPD Red will be busy.
The Bad News: They have a serial killer on their hands.
The first murder is at the Regency Hotel. A movie producer takes a nose dive into his breakfast plate. Not long after arriving on the scene, do they get a call for a murder at Silvercup Studios....and the day begins.
Will they find the killer before half of Hollywood is dead in NYC?
I'm a big James Patterson fan, and this book didn't have as much Umph to it that the Cross or Women's Murder Club books do.
The Good News: NYPD Red will be busy.
The Bad News: They have a serial killer on their hands.
The first murder is at the Regency Hotel. A movie producer takes a nose dive into his breakfast plate. Not long after arriving on the scene, do they get a call for a murder at Silvercup Studios....and the day begins.
Will they find the killer before half of Hollywood is dead in NYC?
I'm a big James Patterson fan, and this book didn't have as much Umph to it that the Cross or Women's Murder Club books do.
Mothergamer (1568 KP) rated Crazy Rich Asians (2018) in Movies
Jun 13, 2019
I did enjoy the movie for the characters and the story. The jokes were funny and I did find myself entertained. I also giggled at the aspects of the nosy aunties because my Filipino family is very much like that, always knowing your business or wanting to know. While I did like Nick, I found at times that he was rather a terrible boyfriend. For example, it seemed bad form to not tell Jessica that his family party would absolutely be a black tie affair or expecting her to be able to somehow get a ride to his house without really knowing where his family house was in another country. I know it's typical romantic comedy fare, but honestly if someone I was dating did that to me I would be pretty irritated with them. That being said, I did appreciate the movie for the engaging cast and the moments that had me smiling or laughing. It's a good, entertaining popcorn movie and has a lovely and cheerful optimism to it.