Search
Search results
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Girl With All the Gifts (2017) in Movies
Mar 4, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Girl With All the Gifts is a slow paced zombie movie based on the book of the same name. Unlike a lot of zombie movies, 'The Girl With All the Gifts' doesn't go in for gore, although there is a bit. Instead it uses it's slow pace to build suspense as the protagonists try to find safety as they pass through zombie infested England. As they travel the group find out more about both the zombies and the strange children that now inhabit the earth.
As I said, 'The Girl With All the Gifts' is slow but it uses this pace to let us know about the new world, the zombies and the other characters. The scenery is both beautiful and harsh as the characters travel through the now overgrown city of London and the visual effects are built on by the eerie soundtrack.
If you have read the book then you should find that the film is close to the main story, of course the film cuts out some of the back story's and there are some scenes missing but over all the film does well and manages to show how the events of the story change some of the characters (although even this is a bit lacking from the book but that is too be expected) and, over all the film does manage to get the feel of the book.
As I said, 'The Girl With All The Gifts' does not really go for gore so, if you want to see lots of action and people getting eaten then this isn't really for you. 'The Girl With All the Girts' focus more on what lies ahead, both for the reaming humans and for the zombies who will be left and the answer is bleak.
So, 'The Girl With All the Gifts' is a slow, story based zombie film with an interesting, well thought out take on the popular monster.
As I said, 'The Girl With All the Gifts' is slow but it uses this pace to let us know about the new world, the zombies and the other characters. The scenery is both beautiful and harsh as the characters travel through the now overgrown city of London and the visual effects are built on by the eerie soundtrack.
If you have read the book then you should find that the film is close to the main story, of course the film cuts out some of the back story's and there are some scenes missing but over all the film does well and manages to show how the events of the story change some of the characters (although even this is a bit lacking from the book but that is too be expected) and, over all the film does manage to get the feel of the book.
As I said, 'The Girl With All The Gifts' does not really go for gore so, if you want to see lots of action and people getting eaten then this isn't really for you. 'The Girl With All the Girts' focus more on what lies ahead, both for the reaming humans and for the zombies who will be left and the answer is bleak.
So, 'The Girl With All the Gifts' is a slow, story based zombie film with an interesting, well thought out take on the popular monster.
Erika (17789 KP) rated Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway (2021) in Movies
Jun 15, 2021
Full disclosure, I absolutely loved the first Peter Rabbit film. I found it completely hilarious and cackled numerous times. The sequel did not make me laugh.
I typically don’t watch straight-up kid movies anymore, because they’re not funny, and they are as annoying as the kids in the audience. This movie completely reminded me of that.
The film begins with the wedding of Bea and Thomas, the rabbits and other members of McGregor’s Garden are all present. The animals are mixed in with the humans, and it looked very odd. I can’t figure out why. Bea and Thomas enter married bliss (?), running a shop in town, and tending the garden. Bea’s first Peter Rabbit book has been published by Thomas himself. Bea receives an offer from a publisher, Nigel Basil-Jones, played by David Oyelowo, to have her book republished so it can reach a wider audience. Bea begins to compromise her integrity to please Nigel and make the rabbits hipper to boost sales. Meanwhile, Peter embraces his bad boy/ mischievous image and makes friends with this super creepy rabbit from the city, participating in food heists.
The two main plotlines really didn’t make sense together and seemed to only be related because they were both about family. Yawn.
James Corden, who I can tolerate most of the time, was so completely annoying. His performance killed any motivation I had to see a possible third movie. This movie was just dumb, but I guess it probably entertained children.
There were a few positives. Oyelowo was hilarious, and one of the best parts of the film. He is the only reason I’m giving this film two-stars His comedy skills are on point and his interactions with Domhnall Gleeson were the best source of adult laughs. I also loved the voice acting of Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail. Though, I was a little bummed that Daisy Ridley did not return as Cottontail.
The recent marketing stated, “In Theaters. Finally”. I’m not sure this film should have been released in theaters, they should have released it on VOD at Easter-time either in 2020, or 2021.
I typically don’t watch straight-up kid movies anymore, because they’re not funny, and they are as annoying as the kids in the audience. This movie completely reminded me of that.
The film begins with the wedding of Bea and Thomas, the rabbits and other members of McGregor’s Garden are all present. The animals are mixed in with the humans, and it looked very odd. I can’t figure out why. Bea and Thomas enter married bliss (?), running a shop in town, and tending the garden. Bea’s first Peter Rabbit book has been published by Thomas himself. Bea receives an offer from a publisher, Nigel Basil-Jones, played by David Oyelowo, to have her book republished so it can reach a wider audience. Bea begins to compromise her integrity to please Nigel and make the rabbits hipper to boost sales. Meanwhile, Peter embraces his bad boy/ mischievous image and makes friends with this super creepy rabbit from the city, participating in food heists.
The two main plotlines really didn’t make sense together and seemed to only be related because they were both about family. Yawn.
James Corden, who I can tolerate most of the time, was so completely annoying. His performance killed any motivation I had to see a possible third movie. This movie was just dumb, but I guess it probably entertained children.
There were a few positives. Oyelowo was hilarious, and one of the best parts of the film. He is the only reason I’m giving this film two-stars His comedy skills are on point and his interactions with Domhnall Gleeson were the best source of adult laughs. I also loved the voice acting of Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail. Though, I was a little bummed that Daisy Ridley did not return as Cottontail.
The recent marketing stated, “In Theaters. Finally”. I’m not sure this film should have been released in theaters, they should have released it on VOD at Easter-time either in 2020, or 2021.
5 Minute Movie Guy (379 KP) rated Tomorrowland (2015) in Movies
Jun 29, 2019
With Tomorrowland's lifeless fantasy world, bland characters, second-rate special effects, forced dialogue, and uninspired story, your future will undoubtedly be better off if it doesn't involve watching this movie.
Disney’s Tomorrowland implores us to imagine a world without limitation. One where nothing is impossible, and all of our wildest dreams can come true. (Sounds very trademark Disney, doesn’t it?) In the movie, that world exists in the form of a secret utopian society that has been built by only the brightest of minds. It is a place that exists free of politics and corruption, where people can push the boundaries of possibility as far as their imaginations will take them. Tomorrowland is a world meant to inspire, to evoke wonder, and to nurture creativity. It’s a stunning shame then, that all I ever felt while watching the movie was sheer boredom. For all of its endless opportunity, Tomorrowland ends up being almost completely uninteresting. With Tomorrowland‘s lifeless fantasy world, bland characters, second-rate special effects, forced dialogue, and uninspired story, your own future will undoubtedly be better off if it doesn’t involve ever watching this movie.
With the star talent of George Clooney, the directorial skill of Brad Bird, and the film’s promising trailers, I must admit that I was caught off guard by Tomorrowland‘s lackluster execution. The greatest compliment I can give the film is that it’s blandly passable, but in no area is it particularly good, engaging, or thought-provoking. For being a film that is about celebrating creativity, it sure is lacking in that regard. Tomorrowland itself feels like a poorly-realized pipe dream. It’s supposed to be this wonderfully ingenious world of innovation, but nothing about it struck me as notably exciting or exceptional. From the surface, it looks like your typical futuristic metropolis, complete with jetpacks and flying cars. Beyond that, I couldn’t really tell you what makes Tomorrowland so special, and I believe that’s largely because we’re given so little access to it. The movie treats us as outsiders to this place, and we spend the majority of the film tagging alongside the two main characters as they try to get in, but we’re never given any sort of rewarding payoff once we get there. The world of Tomorrowland is practically nothing more than a shallow, fantasy world facade.
The movie starts off with an uncomfortably awkward recruitment video recorded by Tomorrowland’s two main characters, Frank Walker (George Clooney) and Casey Newton (Britt Robertson), in which they argue over how they should tell their story. It’s a poor attempt at humor with banter that feels entirely forced. If anything, this overly long introduction should have served as an early indicator that I was about to embark on a two-hour snooze-fest. From there we transition to each of their character’s respective origin stories, and their separate journeys that led them to Tomorrowland.
Frank’s story takes us to the 1964 World’s Fair at Disneyland where as a young boy he’s trying to enter with his faulty jetpack creation. His invention is rejected, but he still manages to catch the attention of a girl named Athena, who gives him a special pin with the Tomorrowland logo. Young Frank is ordered to secretly follow her in the theme park, leading to the “It’s A Small World” ride, where he’s magically transported to Tomorrowland. Here we’re given our first glimpse of this futuristic world, but the entire sequence isn’t nearly as fun or awe-inspiring as it should be. Frank takes to the skies in his newly-repaired jetpack and yet this significant moment somehow winds up feeling surprisingly empty. The movie fails to capture that youthful element of whimsy and excitement that comes from discovery.
Next we learn the much more recent story of Casey, an enthusiastic high school student with a passion for making the world a better place. She’s the daughter of a struggling inventor who gets herself in trouble with the law after trying to sabotage the government’s planned demolition of a NASA launch pad. Once bailed out of jail, Casey finds a mysterious Tomorrowland token among her belongings, and upon touching it, she is magically transported to a wheat field with the distinguished metropolis of Tomorrowland in the distance. However, when trying to reach this futuristic city, she finds that boundaries in the real world inhibit her in this golden future world, even though she cannot see them while holding the token. It’s a novel idea, and one of the movie’s better moments, but if you’ve seen the film’s trailers then you’ve already seen most of how it plays out.
The trailers also spoiled Tomorrowland‘s best, and arguably only good action sequence, in which androids invade Frank’s house in an attempt to capture Casey, who possesses that coveted Tomorrowland token. It’s a well-crafted and exciting moment that demonstrates Brad Bird’s talent, but it’s also an unfortunately rare instance of entertainment in what is otherwise a dull film. As for the aforementioned androids, they’re unbelievably cheesy and lame. These robot villains are sourced from the pinnacle of technological advancement, and yet they’re remarkably derivative and hokey. The most original thing about them is that they blink their eyelids alternatively. That’s some real cutting edge creativity right there! To top it off, Tomorrowland even throws in an android-to-human love story for good measure, because why not? Robots need love too, you guys!
You know what the most troubling thing about Tomorrowland is for me? The fact that Brad Bird was the very first choice to direct Star Wars: Episode 7 and he turned it down to make this movie instead. That is almost incomprehensible to me. Even more so when you consider that Tomorrowland features a comic book store scene that is literally brimming with Star Wars props. It’s a decision that may come back to haunt him, but given how poor this movie is, I’m now actually thanking my lucky Death Stars that he’s not the one making the upcoming Star Wars: The Force Awakens.
In the end, Tomorrowland is a movie that I don’t feel any connection to. I wasn’t captivated by the characters or the performances (not even George Clooney could save this one). The plot was a total bore. The sci-fi elements missed the mark. The visuals were mostly just decent, and tended to look more fake than impressive. The underlying message of hope was weak, and please, don’t even get me started on that cliché “two wolves” story that was needlessly tacked in. Nothing about the movie ever reminded me of the actual Tomorrowland from Disneyland Park, nor did it share its level of creativity. The longer the movie went on, the more I wanted it to end. I can honestly tell you that I have had more enjoyment standing in line for two hours for a ride in Disneyland’s Tomorrowland than I ever had while watching this movie. If this is how dull our ideal future is going to be, then sign me up for a front row ticket to the apocalypse where the future belongs to the mad!
(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 5.26.15.)
With the star talent of George Clooney, the directorial skill of Brad Bird, and the film’s promising trailers, I must admit that I was caught off guard by Tomorrowland‘s lackluster execution. The greatest compliment I can give the film is that it’s blandly passable, but in no area is it particularly good, engaging, or thought-provoking. For being a film that is about celebrating creativity, it sure is lacking in that regard. Tomorrowland itself feels like a poorly-realized pipe dream. It’s supposed to be this wonderfully ingenious world of innovation, but nothing about it struck me as notably exciting or exceptional. From the surface, it looks like your typical futuristic metropolis, complete with jetpacks and flying cars. Beyond that, I couldn’t really tell you what makes Tomorrowland so special, and I believe that’s largely because we’re given so little access to it. The movie treats us as outsiders to this place, and we spend the majority of the film tagging alongside the two main characters as they try to get in, but we’re never given any sort of rewarding payoff once we get there. The world of Tomorrowland is practically nothing more than a shallow, fantasy world facade.
The movie starts off with an uncomfortably awkward recruitment video recorded by Tomorrowland’s two main characters, Frank Walker (George Clooney) and Casey Newton (Britt Robertson), in which they argue over how they should tell their story. It’s a poor attempt at humor with banter that feels entirely forced. If anything, this overly long introduction should have served as an early indicator that I was about to embark on a two-hour snooze-fest. From there we transition to each of their character’s respective origin stories, and their separate journeys that led them to Tomorrowland.
Frank’s story takes us to the 1964 World’s Fair at Disneyland where as a young boy he’s trying to enter with his faulty jetpack creation. His invention is rejected, but he still manages to catch the attention of a girl named Athena, who gives him a special pin with the Tomorrowland logo. Young Frank is ordered to secretly follow her in the theme park, leading to the “It’s A Small World” ride, where he’s magically transported to Tomorrowland. Here we’re given our first glimpse of this futuristic world, but the entire sequence isn’t nearly as fun or awe-inspiring as it should be. Frank takes to the skies in his newly-repaired jetpack and yet this significant moment somehow winds up feeling surprisingly empty. The movie fails to capture that youthful element of whimsy and excitement that comes from discovery.
Next we learn the much more recent story of Casey, an enthusiastic high school student with a passion for making the world a better place. She’s the daughter of a struggling inventor who gets herself in trouble with the law after trying to sabotage the government’s planned demolition of a NASA launch pad. Once bailed out of jail, Casey finds a mysterious Tomorrowland token among her belongings, and upon touching it, she is magically transported to a wheat field with the distinguished metropolis of Tomorrowland in the distance. However, when trying to reach this futuristic city, she finds that boundaries in the real world inhibit her in this golden future world, even though she cannot see them while holding the token. It’s a novel idea, and one of the movie’s better moments, but if you’ve seen the film’s trailers then you’ve already seen most of how it plays out.
The trailers also spoiled Tomorrowland‘s best, and arguably only good action sequence, in which androids invade Frank’s house in an attempt to capture Casey, who possesses that coveted Tomorrowland token. It’s a well-crafted and exciting moment that demonstrates Brad Bird’s talent, but it’s also an unfortunately rare instance of entertainment in what is otherwise a dull film. As for the aforementioned androids, they’re unbelievably cheesy and lame. These robot villains are sourced from the pinnacle of technological advancement, and yet they’re remarkably derivative and hokey. The most original thing about them is that they blink their eyelids alternatively. That’s some real cutting edge creativity right there! To top it off, Tomorrowland even throws in an android-to-human love story for good measure, because why not? Robots need love too, you guys!
You know what the most troubling thing about Tomorrowland is for me? The fact that Brad Bird was the very first choice to direct Star Wars: Episode 7 and he turned it down to make this movie instead. That is almost incomprehensible to me. Even more so when you consider that Tomorrowland features a comic book store scene that is literally brimming with Star Wars props. It’s a decision that may come back to haunt him, but given how poor this movie is, I’m now actually thanking my lucky Death Stars that he’s not the one making the upcoming Star Wars: The Force Awakens.
In the end, Tomorrowland is a movie that I don’t feel any connection to. I wasn’t captivated by the characters or the performances (not even George Clooney could save this one). The plot was a total bore. The sci-fi elements missed the mark. The visuals were mostly just decent, and tended to look more fake than impressive. The underlying message of hope was weak, and please, don’t even get me started on that cliché “two wolves” story that was needlessly tacked in. Nothing about the movie ever reminded me of the actual Tomorrowland from Disneyland Park, nor did it share its level of creativity. The longer the movie went on, the more I wanted it to end. I can honestly tell you that I have had more enjoyment standing in line for two hours for a ride in Disneyland’s Tomorrowland than I ever had while watching this movie. If this is how dull our ideal future is going to be, then sign me up for a front row ticket to the apocalypse where the future belongs to the mad!
(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 5.26.15.)
BobbiesDustyPages (1259 KP) rated Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children in Books
Jul 22, 2017
The characters (2 more)
The pictures
The setting
Peculiar and Wonderful
Before I even finished the first chapter I got a very 'Big Fish'(a movie which I love) feeling from this and I became even more excited to read it. The plot is wonderful as well as all the characters they all just come to life, I do feel like the detail of the Miss Peregrine and the children kind of overshadow the plot because they are just so interesting and I wouldn't have minded the book being about them and just all their lives.
I have no idea why but I kept picturing Jacob as being in his early twenties for some reason so when he would act like the typical annoying no one understands me teenager I just started disliking him I really do hope that in the second book you see him grow more and mature as a character.
The only reason I couldn't give it a full five star was the pacing of the book was just odd for me like each section was just leading up to the next set of photos instead of the photos being an exciting extra to the plot. Also the ending just felt so rushed I almost got whiplash at how fast it came at me.
I did really enjoy the ending though and that it left it open for more books.
I have no idea why but I kept picturing Jacob as being in his early twenties for some reason so when he would act like the typical annoying no one understands me teenager I just started disliking him I really do hope that in the second book you see him grow more and mature as a character.
The only reason I couldn't give it a full five star was the pacing of the book was just odd for me like each section was just leading up to the next set of photos instead of the photos being an exciting extra to the plot. Also the ending just felt so rushed I almost got whiplash at how fast it came at me.
I did really enjoy the ending though and that it left it open for more books.
Christine A. (965 KP) rated The Grace Year in Books
Jan 22, 2020
has been described as The Handmaid's Tale plus Lord of the Flies with The Hunger Games thrown in
I was provided with a complimentary copy of this book so I could give an honest review.
The Grace Year by Kim Liggett has been described as The Handmaid's Tale plus Lord of the Flies with The Hunger Games thrown in. Every book, movie, song, etc can make us think of other work. It does not mean it is not a good story. Actually, those are pretty good books to be compared to.
In The Grace Year, girls are banished for their sixteenth year. No one talks about what they call the grace year. All Tierney James knows is not everyone returns. Those who do are changed. Some are mentally changed. Others are physically damaged with missing limbs, scars, etc.
I enjoyed the storyline but it was a very slow burn. It took a while for me to get into the story. Once I did, I was hooked. It just took too long to capture my attention.
I read her earlier book, The Last Harvest, and found it was also a slow burn but worth reading. Knowing I will enjoy her books overall means I will keep reading until they grab me. With both books, once they did, I could not stop reading.
The Grace Year was a 2019 Goodreads Choice Award Nominee for Young Adult Fiction.
This 200-word review was published on Philomathinphila.com on 1/21/20.
The Grace Year by Kim Liggett has been described as The Handmaid's Tale plus Lord of the Flies with The Hunger Games thrown in. Every book, movie, song, etc can make us think of other work. It does not mean it is not a good story. Actually, those are pretty good books to be compared to.
In The Grace Year, girls are banished for their sixteenth year. No one talks about what they call the grace year. All Tierney James knows is not everyone returns. Those who do are changed. Some are mentally changed. Others are physically damaged with missing limbs, scars, etc.
I enjoyed the storyline but it was a very slow burn. It took a while for me to get into the story. Once I did, I was hooked. It just took too long to capture my attention.
I read her earlier book, The Last Harvest, and found it was also a slow burn but worth reading. Knowing I will enjoy her books overall means I will keep reading until they grab me. With both books, once they did, I could not stop reading.
The Grace Year was a 2019 Goodreads Choice Award Nominee for Young Adult Fiction.
This 200-word review was published on Philomathinphila.com on 1/21/20.
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2352 KP) rated Something Wicked in Books
May 23, 2021 (Updated May 23, 2021)
Not all the Dead Bodies on Set are Fake
Annie Lawrence and her finance, Max Darling, have landed parts in the local theater’s summer production of Arsenic and Old Lace. Annie loves the play, so she wants to be enjoying it more, but a series of pranks, growing more serious, have dampened her enthusiasm. Just days before the curtain is supposed to open, one of her fellow actors is killed backstage during the rehearsal. When Max becomes the only suspect in the eyes of the law, Annie jumps in to try to figure out what happened. Can she free Max?
As a fan of Arsenic and Old Lace (the play, which is better than the movie), I really got a kick out of the scenes involving the play. While I did enjoy the book, I’m of two minds about it. The plot is complex, yet everything makes sense when Annie confronts the villain. Yet I felt like the pacing was off. The characters are fun and provide some laughs, but instead of growing over the course of the story, they slip into caricature. The plans for Annie and Max’s wedding provide a funny sub-plot that makes me wonder just what their wedding winds up looking like. This book originally came out in 1988, so it and some of the authors name-dropped are dated, but as long as you know that going in, you’ll be fine. This is another case where the flaws are easy to spot, but I still enjoyed the book overall.
As a fan of Arsenic and Old Lace (the play, which is better than the movie), I really got a kick out of the scenes involving the play. While I did enjoy the book, I’m of two minds about it. The plot is complex, yet everything makes sense when Annie confronts the villain. Yet I felt like the pacing was off. The characters are fun and provide some laughs, but instead of growing over the course of the story, they slip into caricature. The plans for Annie and Max’s wedding provide a funny sub-plot that makes me wonder just what their wedding winds up looking like. This book originally came out in 1988, so it and some of the authors name-dropped are dated, but as long as you know that going in, you’ll be fine. This is another case where the flaws are easy to spot, but I still enjoyed the book overall.
J.K. Simmons recommended To Kill A Mockingbird (1962) in Movies (curated)
A Darkness More Than Night (Harry Bosch, #7; Terry McCaleb, #2; Harry Bosch Universe, #9)
7.8
Rate It
Book
Harry Bosch is up to his neck in a case that has transfixed all of celebrity-mad Los Angeles: a...
5 Minute Movie Guy (379 KP) rated If I Stay (2014) in Movies
Jun 28, 2019
The film's "live or die" premise is dumb, dangerous, and downright offensive. (4 more)
A totally lousy and illogical love story that lacks any heart.
The dialogue is almost as bad as Adam's 8-year-old-grade-level music lyrics.
It's far too frustrating and bland to be emotionally effective. The only pity I felt was for myself for having to sit through it for two hours.
If I Stay is unforgivable and reprehensible garbage. It should be avoided like the plague.
Had I not seen this film with a friend, it would have been the first movie I’ve ever walked out of. I haven’t hated a movie this much all year. If I Stay disappoints and offends on nearly every conceivable level.
Imagine yourself in a situation where your whole life is turned upside-down in an instant, and nothing will ever be the same again. That’s the troubling position young Mia Hall is faced with in If I Stay, after her and her family are involved in a terrible car accident. Mia wakes up from the crash, only to discover that she’s having some sort of transcendental experience, where she sees her own lifeless body being treated by paramedics. In her ghost-like form, no one is able to see or hear her, leaving her helpless as she watches her tragedy unfold. The devastating crash put her into a comatose state, and as she teeters on the verge of life and death, she’s informed by her nurse that whether or not she lives is entirely predicated on her will to survive. Based on the young adult novel by Gayle Forman, If I Stay asks us if life is still worth living even when all hope appears to be lost. Whether it’s really even worth it to endure life’s cruel hardship and heartache, and to muster the courage to face another day.
Well, if you answered that question with a resounding “yes!”, then like me, you’ll probably find this movie to be pretty darn stupid. Actually, regardless of your opinion on the matter, I think it would be hard for anyone to escape the fact that this movie is pretty darn stupid. However, as much as I find the central question of the movie to be absurd and even offensive, it didn’t detract from my interest in seeing the film. So let’s not make the assumption that I disliked this movie from the get-go, because that’s really just not true. Even though I may disagree with it, I can certainly sympathize with the idea of a teenager who is experiencing a life-shattering trauma and is afraid to continue living on afterward. However, I would personally argue that she hasn’t actually experienced any of that at all. She’s living in an extra dimensional safe-zone. Her horror can’t be real unless she makes it real by returning to life to face it. To look at it another way, couldn’t we say that if she chose death instead, that she never would have experienced the tragedy at all since she was stuck in a coma, and that she would be dead without ever knowing the fate of her family? That’s what I think, though I’ll admit it’s rather complicated as it draws upon unanswerable questions. To be frank, it’s a bogus scenario for a bogus movie that isn’t even worthy of that much thought, and clearly wasn’t ever given that much thought.
Before I digress on this topic, I’d like to look into a few of its implications, because I think it’s sending a terrible and dangerous message to its viewers, particularly the teenagers it’s targeted to. Basically, I believe the film is implying that death is a perfectly okay alternative to facing an undesirable change. I find that very idea to be immoral, irresponsible, and horribly atrocious. “Sorry your dad died, Timmy. If you can’t bear to live another day and want to end it all right here, well that’s okay with us. We understand and we won’t judge!” Are you kidding me? What kind of a message are they trying to send here? “Bad day? Just give up! Things are great here in Heaven! Join us today!” Is that really what they’re trying to tell us? How is anyone possibly okay with this? The film is essentially preaching that killing yourself is a perfectly acceptable option when life gets hard, and I have a really big problem with that. Whether we want to think about it or not, suicide is always an option we have in life, but that doesn’t mean that we should encourage it or try to pretend that it’s ever a favorable opportunity. Mia doesn’t even know what life will be like if she wakes up because she hasn’t lived it yet. Her fears are fully based off of negative assumptions. Yeah, maybe things will be really hard if she comes out of her coma. Maybe she’ll wish she was dead. Or maybe she’ll go through some difficult times, but then maybe things will get better and she’ll pick up the pieces and end up living a wonderful and happy life. Had she actually endured this new life and struggled with thoughts about suicide, I think it would have made for a far more compelling narrative, rather than all of this hypothetic nonsense. Either way, good or bad, life goes on. It’s up to us to adapt to it. Where there is hope, there is always possibility. With all that said, I would still contend that If I Stay’s premise is only the tip of the iceberg of its problems. This supposed tear-jerked failed to stir up any sympathy or sadness from me, and there are a few major reasons why.
First of all, it completely fails as a love story. The film is almost entirely devoid of romance, and has no believable connection between Mia and her boyfriend, Adam. Rather than being a Prince Charming type, Adam’s mostly just a jerk that she shouldn’t be wasting her time with in the first place. Yet the movie tries to make you believe that it’s love, and that this is what all normal relationships are like. It’s a complete crock. Movies like this give girls a false understanding of what love should be, and I find that to be an unforgivable offense. Adam’s the local hot shot rocker who falls for Mia, the talented young cello player who aspires to go to the renowned music school Julliard in New York. Adam manages to win her heart and the two of them start dating. Unfortunately though, their relationship can be pretty unpleasant to watch. Adam’s living the life of a local rock star and is blindly dragging Mia along for the ride, introducing the sweet, young girl to a world of parties, sex, and alcohol. Adam’s utterly oblivious to her disinterest in such a lifestyle and he rarely shows any concern for her feelings anyway. Yet she’s so foolishly committed to him that she follows this path of corruption, all for a guy who only thinks about himself. I thought this was supposed to be a love story, but it’s severely lacking in the love department. Just because Adam occasionally does something nice, we’re supposed to think he’s a good guy and forgive him for the majority of the time when he’s a lousy boyfriend and a loser? Of course, how romantic! Their whole relationship is lifeless and immensely frustrating. If living with him was my alternative to death, believe me, I’d choose death without hesitation.
Had I not seen this film with a friend, it would have been the first movie I’ve ever walked out of. I haven’t hated a movie this much all year. Even with my friend there, I still thought about leaving, then had a good laugh about the film’s title being so perfectly appropriate, as I contemplated to myself whether or not I should go. As much as I wanted to leave, I stuck it out all the way to the end. Then the entire audience ended up laughing at the ending, which goes to show I was far from the only one that thought this movie was a complete joke and waste of time. I had more than a few laughs at the film’s expense, from its dumb and derivative dialogue, to the way Chloe Grace Moretz slightly crosses her eyes whenever she’s upset. While I think I still remained open-minded about the film despite my issues with the story, I really don’t think the film itself was any good, nor does it appear to serve any purpose. Seriously, what’s the point of this movie? To give people hope that you can overcome obstacles in life? To justify suicide? I don’t know. Halfway through the movie, I was so disengaged from it that I was imagining how fun it would be to do cartwheels in the theater. That must be the lesson that I learned from all this. Well, that and to steer clear of crummy musicians, I suppose. While I’ve heard a lot of praise about the film’s soundtrack, I thought Adam’s band was quite horrendous. They do have a moment of redemption when they cover a Smashing Pumpkins song, which may have been the only good moment in this otherwise pitiful movie. I also found the lyrics of that song to be unusually appropriate to my misery when they said, “I’ll rip my eyes out, before I get out.” It’s almost funny that this might have been the only moment of the movie I could actually relate to: the thought of ripping my eyes out before being able to leave.
If I Stay is a movie that disappoints and offends on nearly every conceivable level. The saddest thing about this film is that garbage like this actually exists. Its pro-death agenda is just plain horrible and ill-conceived. It also troubles me greatly to think that teenage girls might watch this film and think that Mia and Adam’s tumultuous relationship is a desirable model of love. Lastly, I’d like to note that the If I Stay novel does have a follow-up book titled Where She Went. Wherever she goes, I sure hope it’s not back to theaters. If I have to sit through another If I Stay movie, I might just give up on life myself.
(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 9.5.14.)
Well, if you answered that question with a resounding “yes!”, then like me, you’ll probably find this movie to be pretty darn stupid. Actually, regardless of your opinion on the matter, I think it would be hard for anyone to escape the fact that this movie is pretty darn stupid. However, as much as I find the central question of the movie to be absurd and even offensive, it didn’t detract from my interest in seeing the film. So let’s not make the assumption that I disliked this movie from the get-go, because that’s really just not true. Even though I may disagree with it, I can certainly sympathize with the idea of a teenager who is experiencing a life-shattering trauma and is afraid to continue living on afterward. However, I would personally argue that she hasn’t actually experienced any of that at all. She’s living in an extra dimensional safe-zone. Her horror can’t be real unless she makes it real by returning to life to face it. To look at it another way, couldn’t we say that if she chose death instead, that she never would have experienced the tragedy at all since she was stuck in a coma, and that she would be dead without ever knowing the fate of her family? That’s what I think, though I’ll admit it’s rather complicated as it draws upon unanswerable questions. To be frank, it’s a bogus scenario for a bogus movie that isn’t even worthy of that much thought, and clearly wasn’t ever given that much thought.
Before I digress on this topic, I’d like to look into a few of its implications, because I think it’s sending a terrible and dangerous message to its viewers, particularly the teenagers it’s targeted to. Basically, I believe the film is implying that death is a perfectly okay alternative to facing an undesirable change. I find that very idea to be immoral, irresponsible, and horribly atrocious. “Sorry your dad died, Timmy. If you can’t bear to live another day and want to end it all right here, well that’s okay with us. We understand and we won’t judge!” Are you kidding me? What kind of a message are they trying to send here? “Bad day? Just give up! Things are great here in Heaven! Join us today!” Is that really what they’re trying to tell us? How is anyone possibly okay with this? The film is essentially preaching that killing yourself is a perfectly acceptable option when life gets hard, and I have a really big problem with that. Whether we want to think about it or not, suicide is always an option we have in life, but that doesn’t mean that we should encourage it or try to pretend that it’s ever a favorable opportunity. Mia doesn’t even know what life will be like if she wakes up because she hasn’t lived it yet. Her fears are fully based off of negative assumptions. Yeah, maybe things will be really hard if she comes out of her coma. Maybe she’ll wish she was dead. Or maybe she’ll go through some difficult times, but then maybe things will get better and she’ll pick up the pieces and end up living a wonderful and happy life. Had she actually endured this new life and struggled with thoughts about suicide, I think it would have made for a far more compelling narrative, rather than all of this hypothetic nonsense. Either way, good or bad, life goes on. It’s up to us to adapt to it. Where there is hope, there is always possibility. With all that said, I would still contend that If I Stay’s premise is only the tip of the iceberg of its problems. This supposed tear-jerked failed to stir up any sympathy or sadness from me, and there are a few major reasons why.
First of all, it completely fails as a love story. The film is almost entirely devoid of romance, and has no believable connection between Mia and her boyfriend, Adam. Rather than being a Prince Charming type, Adam’s mostly just a jerk that she shouldn’t be wasting her time with in the first place. Yet the movie tries to make you believe that it’s love, and that this is what all normal relationships are like. It’s a complete crock. Movies like this give girls a false understanding of what love should be, and I find that to be an unforgivable offense. Adam’s the local hot shot rocker who falls for Mia, the talented young cello player who aspires to go to the renowned music school Julliard in New York. Adam manages to win her heart and the two of them start dating. Unfortunately though, their relationship can be pretty unpleasant to watch. Adam’s living the life of a local rock star and is blindly dragging Mia along for the ride, introducing the sweet, young girl to a world of parties, sex, and alcohol. Adam’s utterly oblivious to her disinterest in such a lifestyle and he rarely shows any concern for her feelings anyway. Yet she’s so foolishly committed to him that she follows this path of corruption, all for a guy who only thinks about himself. I thought this was supposed to be a love story, but it’s severely lacking in the love department. Just because Adam occasionally does something nice, we’re supposed to think he’s a good guy and forgive him for the majority of the time when he’s a lousy boyfriend and a loser? Of course, how romantic! Their whole relationship is lifeless and immensely frustrating. If living with him was my alternative to death, believe me, I’d choose death without hesitation.
Had I not seen this film with a friend, it would have been the first movie I’ve ever walked out of. I haven’t hated a movie this much all year. Even with my friend there, I still thought about leaving, then had a good laugh about the film’s title being so perfectly appropriate, as I contemplated to myself whether or not I should go. As much as I wanted to leave, I stuck it out all the way to the end. Then the entire audience ended up laughing at the ending, which goes to show I was far from the only one that thought this movie was a complete joke and waste of time. I had more than a few laughs at the film’s expense, from its dumb and derivative dialogue, to the way Chloe Grace Moretz slightly crosses her eyes whenever she’s upset. While I think I still remained open-minded about the film despite my issues with the story, I really don’t think the film itself was any good, nor does it appear to serve any purpose. Seriously, what’s the point of this movie? To give people hope that you can overcome obstacles in life? To justify suicide? I don’t know. Halfway through the movie, I was so disengaged from it that I was imagining how fun it would be to do cartwheels in the theater. That must be the lesson that I learned from all this. Well, that and to steer clear of crummy musicians, I suppose. While I’ve heard a lot of praise about the film’s soundtrack, I thought Adam’s band was quite horrendous. They do have a moment of redemption when they cover a Smashing Pumpkins song, which may have been the only good moment in this otherwise pitiful movie. I also found the lyrics of that song to be unusually appropriate to my misery when they said, “I’ll rip my eyes out, before I get out.” It’s almost funny that this might have been the only moment of the movie I could actually relate to: the thought of ripping my eyes out before being able to leave.
If I Stay is a movie that disappoints and offends on nearly every conceivable level. The saddest thing about this film is that garbage like this actually exists. Its pro-death agenda is just plain horrible and ill-conceived. It also troubles me greatly to think that teenage girls might watch this film and think that Mia and Adam’s tumultuous relationship is a desirable model of love. Lastly, I’d like to note that the If I Stay novel does have a follow-up book titled Where She Went. Wherever she goes, I sure hope it’s not back to theaters. If I have to sit through another If I Stay movie, I might just give up on life myself.
(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 9.5.14.)
Becca Major (96 KP) rated The Nutcracker Prince (1990) in Movies
Jan 20, 2018
Decent writing (3 more)
Good animation
Semi-active heroine
Loyal to the book
Dance sequence, especially the Pas de Deux (3 more)
Music placement
Weak and confusing ending
Marie
The Nutcracker Prince
Contains spoilers, click to show
Summary:
The Nutcracker Prince is an enjoyable little children's movie that is a strange mashup of the novel by E.T.A. Hoffman and the popular ballet. The story is fairly simple and follows Clara as she interacts with her family at the yearly Christmas party, where she and her siblings receive the titular Nutcracker from their Uncle Drosselmeyer, as well as a golden castle. He then proceeds to tell Clara about the Nutcracker’s backstory. Then Fritz, Clara’s little brother, breaks the Nutcracker and she scolds him.
Later that night, the Mouse King attacks, attempting to kill the Nutcracker, and Clara watches the toys do battle with the Mouse King’s army. Clara ends up tripping and hurting herself, which makes her bedridden. During this time, Fritz brings her a partially eaten box of chocolates, which she puts in her nightstand drawer. Later that night, the Mouse King approaches her and threatens her. Clara offers him the box of chocolates and when he hops in the drawer to eat them, she shuts him in. She runs downstairs to protect the Nutcracker, which transitions to the second attack of the Mouse King and his army. The toys and mice battle, and eventually the Nutcracker runs the Mouse King through (off-screen of course), and the day is won.
The Nutcracker invites Clara to visit the Land of the Dolls. She does and is impressed by the beauty around her, and the Nutcracker asks her to stay and become his Queen. She turns him down, for good reasons, and everyone in the Land of the Dolls starts to turn back into lifeless objects. Then, to make everything weirder, the “dead” Mouse King shows up for one more hurrah and fights with Clara. He ends up falling over the balcony and dying. Clara returns home via “It was just a dream,” freaks out, runs to her Uncle Drosselmeyer’s house, and meets his nephew, who looks exactly like the Nutcracker, but not really.
Overall:
When all is said and done, I would have to say that I like the beginning of the movie a lot more than the end. The rules for how the magic works make sense, and the characters are pretty well defined. Clara is competitive with her siblings and thinks they are weird, and she is basically about as active as the material allows her to be. The Nutcracker himself is pretty bland and soft-spoken in comparison, but he does try his best with the situation he’s in, so I can’t dislike him. The Mouse King is somewhat threatening, if one dimensional. There isn’t much to say about the side characters. Clara’s siblings are fine, as are most of the side characters. With the exception of Marie, none of them are particularly annoying.
The music is fine, if occasionally distracting. It is Tschaikowsky, after all.
The animation is pretty good for a direct to VHS movie. The run-cycles are pretty goofy, but it flows and has detail.
I like the obvious nods to the aspects of the book that the writers changed, such as naming the new doll Marie. As someone who read the book recently, it was nice to know that they cared about the material they were adapting.
In the end, I feel that considering the movie is twenty-eight years old, it holds up pretty good. I would definitely watch it again and probably share it with the students in my class, or with my nephew.
The Nutcracker Prince is an enjoyable little children's movie that is a strange mashup of the novel by E.T.A. Hoffman and the popular ballet. The story is fairly simple and follows Clara as she interacts with her family at the yearly Christmas party, where she and her siblings receive the titular Nutcracker from their Uncle Drosselmeyer, as well as a golden castle. He then proceeds to tell Clara about the Nutcracker’s backstory. Then Fritz, Clara’s little brother, breaks the Nutcracker and she scolds him.
Later that night, the Mouse King attacks, attempting to kill the Nutcracker, and Clara watches the toys do battle with the Mouse King’s army. Clara ends up tripping and hurting herself, which makes her bedridden. During this time, Fritz brings her a partially eaten box of chocolates, which she puts in her nightstand drawer. Later that night, the Mouse King approaches her and threatens her. Clara offers him the box of chocolates and when he hops in the drawer to eat them, she shuts him in. She runs downstairs to protect the Nutcracker, which transitions to the second attack of the Mouse King and his army. The toys and mice battle, and eventually the Nutcracker runs the Mouse King through (off-screen of course), and the day is won.
The Nutcracker invites Clara to visit the Land of the Dolls. She does and is impressed by the beauty around her, and the Nutcracker asks her to stay and become his Queen. She turns him down, for good reasons, and everyone in the Land of the Dolls starts to turn back into lifeless objects. Then, to make everything weirder, the “dead” Mouse King shows up for one more hurrah and fights with Clara. He ends up falling over the balcony and dying. Clara returns home via “It was just a dream,” freaks out, runs to her Uncle Drosselmeyer’s house, and meets his nephew, who looks exactly like the Nutcracker, but not really.
Overall:
When all is said and done, I would have to say that I like the beginning of the movie a lot more than the end. The rules for how the magic works make sense, and the characters are pretty well defined. Clara is competitive with her siblings and thinks they are weird, and she is basically about as active as the material allows her to be. The Nutcracker himself is pretty bland and soft-spoken in comparison, but he does try his best with the situation he’s in, so I can’t dislike him. The Mouse King is somewhat threatening, if one dimensional. There isn’t much to say about the side characters. Clara’s siblings are fine, as are most of the side characters. With the exception of Marie, none of them are particularly annoying.
The music is fine, if occasionally distracting. It is Tschaikowsky, after all.
The animation is pretty good for a direct to VHS movie. The run-cycles are pretty goofy, but it flows and has detail.
I like the obvious nods to the aspects of the book that the writers changed, such as naming the new doll Marie. As someone who read the book recently, it was nice to know that they cared about the material they were adapting.
In the end, I feel that considering the movie is twenty-eight years old, it holds up pretty good. I would definitely watch it again and probably share it with the students in my class, or with my nephew.