Search
Search results
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part (2019) in Movies
Aug 28, 2020
Fun Film
The heroes of Bricksburg are back to save their city from the evil invaders LEGO DUPLO. Though not nearly as good as the first movie, The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part packs enough punch to be an entertaining watch.
Acting: 10
Chris Pratt is back playing the lovable Emmet. The depth of voice-acting in animated movies has grown stronger over the years and this movie is no exception. So many great actors and actresses lend their voices, my favorite of which being Will Arnett as Batman. Seriously, he just might be the best Batman out of all the Batmen that have graced the big screen.
Beginning: 2
Weak start for me. Not that it lacked action, it just didn’t quite suck me into the world as successfully as the first managed to do. I was mildly entertained after watching the first ten minutes.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The movie is surprisingly ambitious, sprawling across a number of different worlds that are visually stunning. From wasteland to spaceworld, you get a taste of a little bit of everything. I especially enjoyed Emmet’s home (and all of its features) out in the middle of nowhere, really nice touch.
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 9
In addition to its creative setpieces, the movie succeeds in hilarity. It’s not perfect by any means, but I’m happy to say that it’s funny from start to finish. I was also pleasantly impressed with how creative some of the action sequences were. Sure, they were nods to other movies, but they did it with their own LEGO spin.
Memorability: 10
I commend the movie for going the extra mile to leave a mark. It was nice seeing appearances from characters like Gary Payton and members of the Harry Potter crew. I also appreciated the messaging around growing up but still keeping your childlike spirit.
Pace: 6
Plot: 10
Clever story that keeps the world fresh. I thought they would have a hard time matching the originality of the first, but they definitely succeeded here. Loved how they incorporate things like Ourmomaggedon to keep the tie to the real world. The story seamlessly provided a clear growth for the characters overall.
Resolution: 10
Great ending that was even better than the overall story itself. Makes up for the weak start. It had me looking forward to a potential third movie. Potential? Let’s be honest, there will be a third without a doubt.
Overall: 84
A part of what made the first movie so successful is not finding out about the tie to the real world until its conclusion. Knowing that throughout made the movie just slightly less enjoyable. For the most part, I liked this new addition to the franchise and I’m excited to see where it goes from here.
Acting: 10
Chris Pratt is back playing the lovable Emmet. The depth of voice-acting in animated movies has grown stronger over the years and this movie is no exception. So many great actors and actresses lend their voices, my favorite of which being Will Arnett as Batman. Seriously, he just might be the best Batman out of all the Batmen that have graced the big screen.
Beginning: 2
Weak start for me. Not that it lacked action, it just didn’t quite suck me into the world as successfully as the first managed to do. I was mildly entertained after watching the first ten minutes.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The movie is surprisingly ambitious, sprawling across a number of different worlds that are visually stunning. From wasteland to spaceworld, you get a taste of a little bit of everything. I especially enjoyed Emmet’s home (and all of its features) out in the middle of nowhere, really nice touch.
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 9
In addition to its creative setpieces, the movie succeeds in hilarity. It’s not perfect by any means, but I’m happy to say that it’s funny from start to finish. I was also pleasantly impressed with how creative some of the action sequences were. Sure, they were nods to other movies, but they did it with their own LEGO spin.
Memorability: 10
I commend the movie for going the extra mile to leave a mark. It was nice seeing appearances from characters like Gary Payton and members of the Harry Potter crew. I also appreciated the messaging around growing up but still keeping your childlike spirit.
Pace: 6
Plot: 10
Clever story that keeps the world fresh. I thought they would have a hard time matching the originality of the first, but they definitely succeeded here. Loved how they incorporate things like Ourmomaggedon to keep the tie to the real world. The story seamlessly provided a clear growth for the characters overall.
Resolution: 10
Great ending that was even better than the overall story itself. Makes up for the weak start. It had me looking forward to a potential third movie. Potential? Let’s be honest, there will be a third without a doubt.
Overall: 84
A part of what made the first movie so successful is not finding out about the tie to the real world until its conclusion. Knowing that throughout made the movie just slightly less enjoyable. For the most part, I liked this new addition to the franchise and I’m excited to see where it goes from here.
Often cited as one of the most influential comic-books/graphic novels, alongside the likes of [b:V for Vendetta|5805|V for Vendetta|Alan Moore|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1343668985s/5805.jpg|392838]'V for Vendetta' and [b:Batman: The Dark Knight Returns|59960|Batman The Dark Knight Returns (The Dark Knight Saga, #1)|Frank Miller|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1327892039s/59960.jpg|1104159]'The Dark Knight Returns', this was, if I'm honest, one such that I'd never even heard of until the 2009 movie of the same name.
Set in an alternate 1985 America in which costumed superhero's are (were) real but have since been outlawed, there's a definite argument to be made that this would inspire the Pixar film The Incredibles: family drama, costumed superheroes coming out of retirement, conspiracies afoot ... see what I mean?
But whereas The Incredibles is aimed at a family audience, this is anything but: violent throughout, slow (at times seemingly glacial) moving and even dealing with the effects of (and fallout from) rape, this is definitely not one for the younger reader!
On the plus side, it does have a stunningly realised world alongside a compelling backstory to several of the characters: like several other literary classics, this is one that I can now say that I've read but wouldn't really be rushing back to do so again anytime soon.
Set in an alternate 1985 America in which costumed superhero's are (were) real but have since been outlawed, there's a definite argument to be made that this would inspire the Pixar film The Incredibles: family drama, costumed superheroes coming out of retirement, conspiracies afoot ... see what I mean?
But whereas The Incredibles is aimed at a family audience, this is anything but: violent throughout, slow (at times seemingly glacial) moving and even dealing with the effects of (and fallout from) rape, this is definitely not one for the younger reader!
On the plus side, it does have a stunningly realised world alongside a compelling backstory to several of the characters: like several other literary classics, this is one that I can now say that I've read but wouldn't really be rushing back to do so again anytime soon.
David McK (3623 KP) rated Brothers in Blood (Eagles of the Empire 13) in Books
Jan 30, 2019
13. Unlucky for some?
The reason I bring that up is because this is the 13th entry in the Cato and Macro series that began way back in 2001 with [b: Under the Eagle|578428|Under the Eagle (Eagle, #1)|Simon Scarrow|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1315349321s/578428.jpg|565359] and, by now, you pretty much know what to expect!
Taking place not long after [b: The Blood Crows|18484220|The Blood Crows (Eagle, #12)|Simon Scarrow|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1380275584s/18484220.jpg|25144364], this is also set back in Brittania, with the culmination (?) of the campaign against Caratacus.
Somehow, however, I found this to be 'flatter' than the previous novels; just not as engaging as before. I don't know whether this is to do with the change in the circumstances between Cato and Macro or in the fact that I've been reading quite a few historical fiction novels recently or what, but this (I felt) was just not as good as the earlier entries in the series.
(Oh, and as an aside: my version came with a short story 'The Red Sail' included, with that story having two endings. All in all, I think I actually preferred the alternative ending - every hero, after all, needs his nemesis. Batman has the Joker, Superman has Lex Luthor, Sherlock Holmes had Moriarity .. )
The reason I bring that up is because this is the 13th entry in the Cato and Macro series that began way back in 2001 with [b: Under the Eagle|578428|Under the Eagle (Eagle, #1)|Simon Scarrow|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1315349321s/578428.jpg|565359] and, by now, you pretty much know what to expect!
Taking place not long after [b: The Blood Crows|18484220|The Blood Crows (Eagle, #12)|Simon Scarrow|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1380275584s/18484220.jpg|25144364], this is also set back in Brittania, with the culmination (?) of the campaign against Caratacus.
Somehow, however, I found this to be 'flatter' than the previous novels; just not as engaging as before. I don't know whether this is to do with the change in the circumstances between Cato and Macro or in the fact that I've been reading quite a few historical fiction novels recently or what, but this (I felt) was just not as good as the earlier entries in the series.
(Oh, and as an aside: my version came with a short story 'The Red Sail' included, with that story having two endings. All in all, I think I actually preferred the alternative ending - every hero, after all, needs his nemesis. Batman has the Joker, Superman has Lex Luthor, Sherlock Holmes had Moriarity .. )
David McK (3623 KP) rated Wonder Woman (2017) in Movies
Jul 27, 2019 (Updated Jun 22, 2021)
Like, I'm sure, many others, if you'd mentioned the words 'Wonder Woman' to me prior to 2016 Batman Vs Superman: Dawn of Justice I probably would have thought of the 1970s(?) Linda Carter starring TV series.
That was a role that Gal Gadot took in in the 2016 movie, portraying a different take on the character: one who has largely remained in the background throughout history, only revealing herself (and her powers) towards the end of that movie.
This film takes place at an earlier period in her life (albeit 'bookended' by a modern day setting, with Diana receiving a vintage photo of her in costume): during the First World War, to be precise, when Diana first leaves the Amazonian island paradise of Thermiscyra and enters the world, discovering her powers and heritage in the process.
While there may be an element of truth in the criticism that the plot of this movie is - largely - a role-reversed Captain America (World War setting? Sacrificial ending?) and that it probably could have done without the CGI battle at the end (which, IMO, lessened the impact the movie would have had without it) this is still a very enjoyable movie indeed!
As an aside: the stand-out scene where Diana crosses No-Mans land on her own? That was nearly cut from the movie.
That was a role that Gal Gadot took in in the 2016 movie, portraying a different take on the character: one who has largely remained in the background throughout history, only revealing herself (and her powers) towards the end of that movie.
This film takes place at an earlier period in her life (albeit 'bookended' by a modern day setting, with Diana receiving a vintage photo of her in costume): during the First World War, to be precise, when Diana first leaves the Amazonian island paradise of Thermiscyra and enters the world, discovering her powers and heritage in the process.
While there may be an element of truth in the criticism that the plot of this movie is - largely - a role-reversed Captain America (World War setting? Sacrificial ending?) and that it probably could have done without the CGI battle at the end (which, IMO, lessened the impact the movie would have had without it) this is still a very enjoyable movie indeed!
As an aside: the stand-out scene where Diana crosses No-Mans land on her own? That was nearly cut from the movie.
Madbatdan82 (341 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Jul 6, 2019
Dark Justice anyone??
First thing to clear up - This is a comic book film. The premise - what if Superman wasnt all about truth, justice and the American way? Familiar story - couple discover crashed spaceship with baby inside and raise him as their own. As child gets older it starts to realise it has powers but rather than use them for good he uses them for his own gain. All the performances are excellent but the one thing the really surprised me is the gore. There are 3 scenes in particular that are possibly the best gore I've scene in years - an eye, a jaw and the first time we've ever seen heat vision to the face properly in live action...now this part involves some SPOILERS - this was written by James Gunn's brothers and produced by Gunn himself. This is an audition for Gunn to direct a Dark Justice League film. This is further teased at the end during Michael Rookers news program where he talks about other threats and shows rough drawings and describes wonder woman, batman and Martian manhunter - obviously not by name as it's not a DC film. Yet! This needs to be made - give the Gunn's the keys and let's start a new Dark DC universe! I'm in!!
The Philosophy of Tim Burton
Jennifer L McMahon, Ken Hada, Ryan Weldon and Daniel Sullivan
Book
Director and producer Tim Burton impresses audiences with stunning visuals, sinister fantasy worlds,...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Darkman (1990) in Movies
Mar 5, 2021
In The Shadows
Darkman- is a dark twisted superhero movie directed by horror icon Sam Raimi. Its a excellent film as well.
The plot: When thugs employed by a crime boss lead a vicious assault on Dr. Peyton Wilder (Liam Neeson), leaving him literally and psychologically scarred, an emergency procedure allows him to survive. Upon his recovery, Wilder can find solace only by returning to his scientific work developing synthetic skin, and seeking revenge against the crime boss. He assumes a phantom avenger persona called Darkman, who, with malleable facial qualities, is able to infiltrate and sow terror in the criminal community.
Unable to secure the rights to either The Shadow or Batman, Raimi decided to create his own superhero and struck a deal with Universal Studios to make his first Hollywood studio film.
Initially, Raimi's longtime friend and collaborator Bruce Campbell was set to play Darkman, but the studio balked at the idea because they did not think Campbell could carry the role. Gary Oldman and Bill Paxton were also considered.
Sam had wanted to work with Frances McDormand but the studio resisted this notion and almost cast Julia Roberts before Pretty Woman made her a star. At one point, they wanted Demi Moore for the role. The director even tested Bridget Fonda but felt that she was too young for Neeson.
Its a excellent film.
The plot: When thugs employed by a crime boss lead a vicious assault on Dr. Peyton Wilder (Liam Neeson), leaving him literally and psychologically scarred, an emergency procedure allows him to survive. Upon his recovery, Wilder can find solace only by returning to his scientific work developing synthetic skin, and seeking revenge against the crime boss. He assumes a phantom avenger persona called Darkman, who, with malleable facial qualities, is able to infiltrate and sow terror in the criminal community.
Unable to secure the rights to either The Shadow or Batman, Raimi decided to create his own superhero and struck a deal with Universal Studios to make his first Hollywood studio film.
Initially, Raimi's longtime friend and collaborator Bruce Campbell was set to play Darkman, but the studio balked at the idea because they did not think Campbell could carry the role. Gary Oldman and Bill Paxton were also considered.
Sam had wanted to work with Frances McDormand but the studio resisted this notion and almost cast Julia Roberts before Pretty Woman made her a star. At one point, they wanted Demi Moore for the role. The director even tested Bridget Fonda but felt that she was too young for Neeson.
Its a excellent film.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Harley Quinn - Season 1 in TV
Jul 31, 2020 (Updated Jul 31, 2020)
In short, Harley Quinn is probably my new favourite show... Seriously.
I really wasn't too bothered when it was originally announced but I'm really glad I got round to it eventually.
To start with, it's fucking hilarious. The dialogue and humour arrives in waves, never lets up, and is pretty much constantly funny and pretty clever. Cast your mind back to when Family Guy was actually good (it's been a while my friends) and you're sort of in the right ball park. Every character offers something in this respect.
The main characters - Harley Quinn, Poison Ivy, King Shark, Clayface, Dr Psycho - are really well written, and are a great group of anti-heroes to get behind.
The show also fits in appearances from other DC veterans - Joker, Batman, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Superman, Bane, Queen of Fables, Black Manta, The Flash, Lex Luthor, Scarecrow, Giganta, The Riddler, Kite Man, Robin - are just a few that get a look in. It's great for DC fans, and funny enough to appeal to wider audiences.
It's very adult orientated as well - whilst looking like a typical kids superhero show, the illusion will suddenly be shattered by a tirade of swearing, or over the top gore, it's truly not messing around, and it works really well!
Harley Quinn was a massive pleasant surprise for me. Can't wait to watch more!
I really wasn't too bothered when it was originally announced but I'm really glad I got round to it eventually.
To start with, it's fucking hilarious. The dialogue and humour arrives in waves, never lets up, and is pretty much constantly funny and pretty clever. Cast your mind back to when Family Guy was actually good (it's been a while my friends) and you're sort of in the right ball park. Every character offers something in this respect.
The main characters - Harley Quinn, Poison Ivy, King Shark, Clayface, Dr Psycho - are really well written, and are a great group of anti-heroes to get behind.
The show also fits in appearances from other DC veterans - Joker, Batman, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Superman, Bane, Queen of Fables, Black Manta, The Flash, Lex Luthor, Scarecrow, Giganta, The Riddler, Kite Man, Robin - are just a few that get a look in. It's great for DC fans, and funny enough to appeal to wider audiences.
It's very adult orientated as well - whilst looking like a typical kids superhero show, the illusion will suddenly be shattered by a tirade of swearing, or over the top gore, it's truly not messing around, and it works really well!
Harley Quinn was a massive pleasant surprise for me. Can't wait to watch more!
David McK (3623 KP) rated Spider-Man (2002) in Movies
Oct 3, 2021
"Remember, Peter: with great power comes great responsibility"
2002.
So that's back before the Marvel Cinematic Universe was a thing (Iron Man was '08).
It's also not long after the twin Towers disaster, which - I believe - had to be edited out of this film.
This was also the first big-screen take on Spider-Man, with a mainly 20 something cast all playing characters in their late teens, headlined by Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker/Spider-Man and by Kirsten Dunst's redhead Mary-Jane Watson.
The early portions of this movie basically retells Spider-Mans origins story (although, here, Parker is bitten by a Genetically modified Spider instead of a Radioactive one and does not need web-shooters: they come out of his actual wrists), complete with the death of Uncle Ben who gets to utter the immortal lines to Parker that 'with great power comes great responsibility'.
Yes, Stan Lee makes a 'blink and you'll miss it' cameo.
Yes, the soundtrack owes a fair deal to that of 1989s 'Batman'
Yes, the Green Goblin costume does look a bit like a Power Rangers reject.
Yes, the film still holds up nearly 20 year later: there's a reason that 'upside-down' kiss is now iconic!
(Oh, and TK Simmons J Jonah Jameson? *Chef's Kiss*.)
So that's back before the Marvel Cinematic Universe was a thing (Iron Man was '08).
It's also not long after the twin Towers disaster, which - I believe - had to be edited out of this film.
This was also the first big-screen take on Spider-Man, with a mainly 20 something cast all playing characters in their late teens, headlined by Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker/Spider-Man and by Kirsten Dunst's redhead Mary-Jane Watson.
The early portions of this movie basically retells Spider-Mans origins story (although, here, Parker is bitten by a Genetically modified Spider instead of a Radioactive one and does not need web-shooters: they come out of his actual wrists), complete with the death of Uncle Ben who gets to utter the immortal lines to Parker that 'with great power comes great responsibility'.
Yes, Stan Lee makes a 'blink and you'll miss it' cameo.
Yes, the soundtrack owes a fair deal to that of 1989s 'Batman'
Yes, the Green Goblin costume does look a bit like a Power Rangers reject.
Yes, the film still holds up nearly 20 year later: there's a reason that 'upside-down' kiss is now iconic!
(Oh, and TK Simmons J Jonah Jameson? *Chef's Kiss*.)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) in Movies
Mar 30, 2021
The Last 45 minutes (out of 4 hours) is decent
When Zach Snyder was filming JUSTICE LEAGUE in 2016, a tragedy occurred in his family and he was forced to drop out and the job of Directing that film went to Joss Whedon (THE AVENGERS). This version of the film was met by many (including me) with a collective “meh”, it was an unintelligible mess of a movie that paid lip service to fan boys (maybe) and gave very little to anyone not well versed in all things DC Comics. Many, many fans assumed that there was much left on the cutting room floor (or not filmed at all) that would correct the many mistakes of this film.
After a large outcry to “Restore The Snyder Cut”, Warner Brothers and HBO Max gave the fans what they wanted - a 4 hour redone version of this film that was intended to clear up the many, many confusing moments of the first film.
And that is EXACTLY what has happened. Zach Snyder has created a film that is very long on explanation and exposition - exactly what the fanboys wanted. What it didn’t do was to clear up the mess that is the plot, pacing and characters of this film.
ZACH SNYDER’S JUSTICE LEAGUE unites many of the great SuperHeroes of DC Comics - Superman (Henry Cavill), Batman (Ben Affleck), Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Aquaman (Jason Momoa), The Flash (Ezra Miller) and Cyborg (Ray Fisher) - to fight an intergalactic villain.
So..how many of those heroes are you anxious to see on screen together and really dive deep into their backstories and motivations? If you said The Flash and Cyborg - then this is the film for you for Snyder really delves deeply into these 2 characters.
Unfortunately, what this has done is to push the heroes that the “average Joe” knows and loves - Batman, WonderWoman and Aquaman - to the background and, most damning of all, relinquished Superman to an extended cameo. He also throws almost every DC Character that has appeared in a previous film in - most really quickly. So, thanks for stopping by the party Lois Lane (Amy Adams), Commissioner Gordon (J.K. Simmons), Vulko (Willem Dafoe), Lex Luther (Jesse Eisenberg), Alfred (Jeremy Irons), Martha Kent (Diane Lane), Queen Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen) and Mira (Amber Heard). If I blinked I would have missed you.
To be fair, the last 45 minutes of this film are really interesting (including an Epilogue that sets up a sequel that we’ll never see), but in order to get there, you need to slog through 3 hours and 15 minutes of this disjointed film.
Worth the effort for the “Fanboys” and “Hardcores”, not worth the effort for the “Average Joe”.
Letter Grade: B (I really, really liked the Epilogue)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
After a large outcry to “Restore The Snyder Cut”, Warner Brothers and HBO Max gave the fans what they wanted - a 4 hour redone version of this film that was intended to clear up the many, many confusing moments of the first film.
And that is EXACTLY what has happened. Zach Snyder has created a film that is very long on explanation and exposition - exactly what the fanboys wanted. What it didn’t do was to clear up the mess that is the plot, pacing and characters of this film.
ZACH SNYDER’S JUSTICE LEAGUE unites many of the great SuperHeroes of DC Comics - Superman (Henry Cavill), Batman (Ben Affleck), Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Aquaman (Jason Momoa), The Flash (Ezra Miller) and Cyborg (Ray Fisher) - to fight an intergalactic villain.
So..how many of those heroes are you anxious to see on screen together and really dive deep into their backstories and motivations? If you said The Flash and Cyborg - then this is the film for you for Snyder really delves deeply into these 2 characters.
Unfortunately, what this has done is to push the heroes that the “average Joe” knows and loves - Batman, WonderWoman and Aquaman - to the background and, most damning of all, relinquished Superman to an extended cameo. He also throws almost every DC Character that has appeared in a previous film in - most really quickly. So, thanks for stopping by the party Lois Lane (Amy Adams), Commissioner Gordon (J.K. Simmons), Vulko (Willem Dafoe), Lex Luther (Jesse Eisenberg), Alfred (Jeremy Irons), Martha Kent (Diane Lane), Queen Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen) and Mira (Amber Heard). If I blinked I would have missed you.
To be fair, the last 45 minutes of this film are really interesting (including an Epilogue that sets up a sequel that we’ll never see), but in order to get there, you need to slog through 3 hours and 15 minutes of this disjointed film.
Worth the effort for the “Fanboys” and “Hardcores”, not worth the effort for the “Average Joe”.
Letter Grade: B (I really, really liked the Epilogue)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)