Search
Search results
I didn't want it to end
I love Horror so I was really excited for this to come out. I didn'y really know what to expect as I haven't watched the original 'IT' yet, or read the book by Stephen King, but I knew the basics of what this movie was about.
I loved the way this film makes you feel and the style of it, it's not like all other horror movies out there. There is a bit of a Stranger Things vibe to it, which I loved.
I absolutely adored Pennywise in this remake, I loved the way he moved his body, it added to the creepyness of the film.
I found it more creepy and a bit disturbing than I did scary, there was one jump scare that got me though.
I loved the way this film makes you feel and the style of it, it's not like all other horror movies out there. There is a bit of a Stranger Things vibe to it, which I loved.
I absolutely adored Pennywise in this remake, I loved the way he moved his body, it added to the creepyness of the film.
I found it more creepy and a bit disturbing than I did scary, there was one jump scare that got me though.
Jessica Erdas (463 KP) rated Brain on Fire (2016) in Movies
Jun 26, 2018
Based on a true story
Based on the life and book by the same name by Susannah Cahalan, this movie follows the events of a 21 year old girl who suddenly begins experiencing strange flu-like symptoms. She goes to a doctor who tells her that all of her tests came back clear and there's nothing wrong with her. As she continues to work through the strange symptoms, they become increasingly severe. She begins to have seizures, psychotic episodes of paranoia, and is diagnosed with one mental illness after another. None of which explain why Susannah was previously a perfectly healthy 21 year old girl or what brought on the strange symptoms. Her family pushes to find answers where the team of doctors believe she belongs in a psychiatric facility. The movie is a little slow paced but I believe it was necessary to really encompass the severity and impact of the situation that Susannah and her family experienced. Definitely worth a watch.
Jon Dieringer recommended The Night of the Hunter (1955) in Movies (curated)
Jcadden76 (64 KP) rated Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007) in Movies
Jun 19, 2018
We lose a good character but the plot rockets forward.
Order of the Phoenix is almost the Empire Strikes Back of the Harry Potter series. You don't end with a whole lot of good feels at the end of this movie. The lot does really take off and you stay on the edge of your seat for the better part of the film.
This might have the best pacing of the entire series. The ups and downs the good vibes and the bad fall at just the right time. To me this is the movie that had to be made because it is the "book" but there is not a whole lot of upside in this one - except for some tremendous acting all the way around.
This might have the best pacing of the entire series. The ups and downs the good vibes and the bad fall at just the right time. To me this is the movie that had to be made because it is the "book" but there is not a whole lot of upside in this one - except for some tremendous acting all the way around.
BookInspector (124 KP) rated The Year of No Rules in Books
Sep 24, 2020
The blurb of this book, describes it quite accurately, however, there is way more to this book. It goes through all the parts of the relationship: love, separation, depression, acceptance and moving on.
The main characters of this book were Sasha and Kirk, later joined by Sam. The whole narrative was told only from Sasha’s perspective, so we have to believe of how Sasha portrayed them and don’t really have an insight into their personalities to judge them ourselves. Even though Sasha was the lead in this story, my favorite character in this book was Sam. I honestly liked him for his charisma, understanding nature, and all women should have a partner like him. Some of Sasha’s actions really annoyed me, it’s like watching a horror movie, where the actress is going to a dark cellar willingly when we know she is going to die. In these cases, I really want to shout to her “danger, don’t go!”/ “don’t be stupid, you are going to die!”, but the actress still does it and gets hurt in the end… Why Sasha? Why?
The whole book was divided into three parts: “The year with rules”; “After Kirk”; “The year of no rules”. In the first part, Sasha was sharing her life with Kirk. How their dates used to go, what Kirk did in the past, and how she loved to spoil him. In the second part, Sasha was telling how she was dealing (or not) with her life after Kirk walked off. She shared he sorrows, memories, and how Kirk was psychologically tormenting her even many months after their break up. (Sasha why did you allow it? WHY?) In the third part, Sasha started to gather her life again, by setting little goals to fight her major depression and finding a fantastic man.
The plot of this novel often jumped between past and present through Sasha’s memories about Kirk and their relationship. What I loved the most about this book, was the topics which McClelland discussed in this book: the danger of controlling partners; forgiving person even after grand betrayal; major depression and how people can fight it; how to deal with broken trust. I think this book can really help women who were/are in Sasha’s situation and need help, I think it could be a guide to taking those first steps to help yourself.
The writing style of this book was pleasant and really easy to read, with short chapters, which made it a great weekend read. It has a nice ending to the book, I would say realistic ending, not “happily ever after” one, which you can read in most fiction books. So, to conclude, even though there are many, many Sasha’s actions which made me question “Woman, why would you do this?”, I loved this book because it is funny, carries a strong message, and how relate-able it can be to some people. I do recommend it to all chick lit fans, and to all who are going through a nasty break up. Enjoy! :)
Was given this book by the author for honest review.
The main characters of this book were Sasha and Kirk, later joined by Sam. The whole narrative was told only from Sasha’s perspective, so we have to believe of how Sasha portrayed them and don’t really have an insight into their personalities to judge them ourselves. Even though Sasha was the lead in this story, my favorite character in this book was Sam. I honestly liked him for his charisma, understanding nature, and all women should have a partner like him. Some of Sasha’s actions really annoyed me, it’s like watching a horror movie, where the actress is going to a dark cellar willingly when we know she is going to die. In these cases, I really want to shout to her “danger, don’t go!”/ “don’t be stupid, you are going to die!”, but the actress still does it and gets hurt in the end… Why Sasha? Why?
The whole book was divided into three parts: “The year with rules”; “After Kirk”; “The year of no rules”. In the first part, Sasha was sharing her life with Kirk. How their dates used to go, what Kirk did in the past, and how she loved to spoil him. In the second part, Sasha was telling how she was dealing (or not) with her life after Kirk walked off. She shared he sorrows, memories, and how Kirk was psychologically tormenting her even many months after their break up. (Sasha why did you allow it? WHY?) In the third part, Sasha started to gather her life again, by setting little goals to fight her major depression and finding a fantastic man.
The plot of this novel often jumped between past and present through Sasha’s memories about Kirk and their relationship. What I loved the most about this book, was the topics which McClelland discussed in this book: the danger of controlling partners; forgiving person even after grand betrayal; major depression and how people can fight it; how to deal with broken trust. I think this book can really help women who were/are in Sasha’s situation and need help, I think it could be a guide to taking those first steps to help yourself.
The writing style of this book was pleasant and really easy to read, with short chapters, which made it a great weekend read. It has a nice ending to the book, I would say realistic ending, not “happily ever after” one, which you can read in most fiction books. So, to conclude, even though there are many, many Sasha’s actions which made me question “Woman, why would you do this?”, I loved this book because it is funny, carries a strong message, and how relate-able it can be to some people. I do recommend it to all chick lit fans, and to all who are going through a nasty break up. Enjoy! :)
Was given this book by the author for honest review.
Jon Bernthal recommended The Silence of the Lambs (1991) in Movies (curated)
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Polar (2019) in Movies
Feb 7, 2019 (Updated Feb 7, 2019)
Extremely Polarizing
Wow, what a train wreck this turned out to be..
Think diet John Wick meets an immature, garish comic book full of pantomime villains and you have Polar. Sometimes you see a movie and can't help but wonder, "What the hell were they thinking?" Unfortunately this is one of those times. There are folks out there that have crafted a solid script and are struggling to get their movie funded and made, meanwhile there is low level trash like this being paid for and distributed by a huge platform like Netflix?! It is an outrageous and pretty sad state of affairs.
Without a doubt the worst part of this thing is the god awful assortment of villains. They are so annoying and infuriating in every scene they are in and only get worse as the movie goes on. Half the movie is spent following this massively irritating group as they hunt for Mads Mikkelsen's character and they are so unlikable, but not in the way that they are supposed to be. They all work for the main villain, who is inexplicably played by Matt Lucas from Little Britain. That's right, Vicky Pollard is this movie's main antagonist. He is god awful here and I genuinely don't even know what they were attempting to do with this character. Every scene that he is in feels like a discarded Little Britain sketch.
The one bright spot in the film is Mads Mikkelsen's turn as Duncan, the ex-hitman being hunted throughout the film by his ex-employers who serves as our main protagonist. I love seeing Mads in anything he appears in, so I actually found the scenes with him in them pretty enjoyable, and frankly they were the only thing that stopped this movie from being scored a pathetic 1/10.
Overall, this is total mess. It is the worst type of comic book movie and doesn't seem appealing to anyone over the age of 12. Please don't waste your time with this garbage, there are much better movies out there based on graphic novels that don't only cater to horny, brain-dead teenagers.
Think diet John Wick meets an immature, garish comic book full of pantomime villains and you have Polar. Sometimes you see a movie and can't help but wonder, "What the hell were they thinking?" Unfortunately this is one of those times. There are folks out there that have crafted a solid script and are struggling to get their movie funded and made, meanwhile there is low level trash like this being paid for and distributed by a huge platform like Netflix?! It is an outrageous and pretty sad state of affairs.
Without a doubt the worst part of this thing is the god awful assortment of villains. They are so annoying and infuriating in every scene they are in and only get worse as the movie goes on. Half the movie is spent following this massively irritating group as they hunt for Mads Mikkelsen's character and they are so unlikable, but not in the way that they are supposed to be. They all work for the main villain, who is inexplicably played by Matt Lucas from Little Britain. That's right, Vicky Pollard is this movie's main antagonist. He is god awful here and I genuinely don't even know what they were attempting to do with this character. Every scene that he is in feels like a discarded Little Britain sketch.
The one bright spot in the film is Mads Mikkelsen's turn as Duncan, the ex-hitman being hunted throughout the film by his ex-employers who serves as our main protagonist. I love seeing Mads in anything he appears in, so I actually found the scenes with him in them pretty enjoyable, and frankly they were the only thing that stopped this movie from being scored a pathetic 1/10.
Overall, this is total mess. It is the worst type of comic book movie and doesn't seem appealing to anyone over the age of 12. Please don't waste your time with this garbage, there are much better movies out there based on graphic novels that don't only cater to horny, brain-dead teenagers.
AT (1676 KP) rated A Simple Favor in Books
Jan 3, 2019 (Updated Jan 3, 2019)
I received this book from one of the Smashbomb giveaways in exchange for my review. I didn't think I'd like it very much because the movie trailer looked kind of stupid, but it was still exciting to see the package in the mail! (I haven't seen the movie yet, and don't know if I will.) I began the book not expecting much, but was pleasantly surprised. It read very smoothly, and had just enough tension at the beginning to keep me coming back. I enjoyed the story for quite awhile. Then the plot found its way into a weird twist. Not that I didn't expect some sort of twist. I just didn't expect the one character to be...like she was. For the rest of the novel, I wasn't sure how strange the plot was going to get. The story was tolerable for the most part and I was going to give it a higher rating, but I am not a fan of the ending. While I wasn't surprised by it, I wished that it would have ended in a different manner. Therefore, I'm a bit torn over my review. I didn't hate the story, itself, for a fictional escape, but the ending sunk the whole thing for me. I'd say that it's a decent beach read, if you're looking for something with a little suspense and mystery. I wouldn't recommend it to any deep-thinking book clubs, though.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Beastly in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I have a small obsession with the classic fairy tale of Beauty and the Beast, so any time a new retelling comes out, I must read it. This version written by Alex Flinn is both modernized and aimed at the Young Adult genre. I was curious to see how closely it would parallel the original fairy tale and still feel like an original story, and I think that it succeeded fairly well. There were parts that felt cliche, and it certainly verged into the realm of fantasy with the presence of the witch, but not so much that I was bothered by these elements. Plus, I liked the ways that the author diverged from the original tale and added new elements, such as the continuing involvement of the witch and the character of Kyle's father.
The plot wraps around the character of Kyle Kingsbury, who becomes the Beast. The book mainly felt like a character study as he progressed from a conceited, self-involved boy to a self-sacrificing, repentant young man. This is certainly a change from most retellings of this tale, since it is usually from the viewpoint of the character who plays the role of "Beauty." Many of the side characters were also just as fascinating, such as the blind tutor who comes to live with Kyle. I love the fascination that Kyle adopted for roses and the details of their care that were included in the book, it gave the book more depth. Probably the most exciting part of the book was his frantic race through New York City and the way that he handled the reactions that he created during this foray.
I know that this book was turned into a movie recently. I have not seen it as of yet, other than the previews, but I do look forward to it. But I already know of one major difference that the movie has from the book, and that is Kyle's beastly appearance is changed to resemble extravagant and disfiguring tattoos. I'll reserve opinion on this until after I've seen the movie.
The plot wraps around the character of Kyle Kingsbury, who becomes the Beast. The book mainly felt like a character study as he progressed from a conceited, self-involved boy to a self-sacrificing, repentant young man. This is certainly a change from most retellings of this tale, since it is usually from the viewpoint of the character who plays the role of "Beauty." Many of the side characters were also just as fascinating, such as the blind tutor who comes to live with Kyle. I love the fascination that Kyle adopted for roses and the details of their care that were included in the book, it gave the book more depth. Probably the most exciting part of the book was his frantic race through New York City and the way that he handled the reactions that he created during this foray.
I know that this book was turned into a movie recently. I have not seen it as of yet, other than the previews, but I do look forward to it. But I already know of one major difference that the movie has from the book, and that is Kyle's beastly appearance is changed to resemble extravagant and disfiguring tattoos. I'll reserve opinion on this until after I've seen the movie.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Thor: The Dark World (2013) in Movies
Oct 10, 2017 (Updated Oct 10, 2017)
Loki was fun to watch. (1 more)
Good SFX.
Totally forgettable villain. (1 more)
Any scene involving Kat Dennings and her intern.
Thor: God Of Meh
In the run up to the release of Thor: Ragnarok, the third Thor movie, I decided to go back and watch the only movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe that I have not seen yet. I never had anything against this movie before I saw it, I had just heard it is mediocre and a bit unnecessary and to be honest Thor is one of my least favourite Avengers. Funnily enough what I got was a fairly unnecessary, mediocre superhero sequel with some fun moments sprinkled throughout.
This isn't a bad movie overall, it's just painfully mediocre. The direction is uninspired, the performances are phoned in and the plot is run of the mill for a superhero story. The new characters introduced are extraordinarily vanilla, the score is okay and the script is pretty pedestrian in terms of the kind of story it is telling. The whole thing is just passable and yet extremely unremarkable.
I know Marvel movies have become notorious for their obvious lack of decent antagonists, (other than Loki,) but this takes it to a new level of generic. This group of villains makes the Ultron bots look like deep, fleshed out characters.
I found myself getting extremely annoyed every time that Kat Dennings was in the screen and I don't hate this actress, I don't even remember hating her in the first Thor movie, but in this she was insufferable. Her over the top pantomime acting was painful to watch and none of the snarky remarks that she hit out with landed. The guy that was her intern was just as bad and there wasn't even any real need for these characters to be in the movie.
In summary, it's okay. Not much focus is put on Tom Hiddleston's Loki in this one, but when it is, these are the best parts of the movie. He is easily the highlight of a sub par movie overall. Even Chris Hemsworth was bad in this and I know that the guy is a good actor, I've seen him give brilliant performances in movies both within and outside of the MCU. Every part of this movie is positively conventional and these moderately successful parts add up to a tolerable film that is by no means required viewing, not even for the most die hard of comic book fans.
This isn't a bad movie overall, it's just painfully mediocre. The direction is uninspired, the performances are phoned in and the plot is run of the mill for a superhero story. The new characters introduced are extraordinarily vanilla, the score is okay and the script is pretty pedestrian in terms of the kind of story it is telling. The whole thing is just passable and yet extremely unremarkable.
I know Marvel movies have become notorious for their obvious lack of decent antagonists, (other than Loki,) but this takes it to a new level of generic. This group of villains makes the Ultron bots look like deep, fleshed out characters.
I found myself getting extremely annoyed every time that Kat Dennings was in the screen and I don't hate this actress, I don't even remember hating her in the first Thor movie, but in this she was insufferable. Her over the top pantomime acting was painful to watch and none of the snarky remarks that she hit out with landed. The guy that was her intern was just as bad and there wasn't even any real need for these characters to be in the movie.
In summary, it's okay. Not much focus is put on Tom Hiddleston's Loki in this one, but when it is, these are the best parts of the movie. He is easily the highlight of a sub par movie overall. Even Chris Hemsworth was bad in this and I know that the guy is a good actor, I've seen him give brilliant performances in movies both within and outside of the MCU. Every part of this movie is positively conventional and these moderately successful parts add up to a tolerable film that is by no means required viewing, not even for the most die hard of comic book fans.
