Search
Search results
Matthew (7 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Jan 10, 2018
A strong move in the right direction
A brighter and more humorous movie (compared to B v S which I also enjoyed) For me it did the job of putting a smile on my face throughout most of the movie. I still wish Green Lantern was properly in the mix but I know the Green Lantern Corps movie is upcoming. I've waited for this movie to be made since I was a kid and while it's a long way from perfect, it's fun to watch and watching Batman interactions with heroes new to the screen was always going to be exciting for me
The CGI was pretty poor in places and the story workman like,but like I said before I had a smile on my face a lot of the time. To me it was a good movie,just wish I could be writing that it was great. Hopefully we will still get to see the hero's in a movie truly worthy of their comic book counterparts
The CGI was pretty poor in places and the story workman like,but like I said before I had a smile on my face a lot of the time. To me it was a good movie,just wish I could be writing that it was great. Hopefully we will still get to see the hero's in a movie truly worthy of their comic book counterparts
Awix (3310 KP) rated King Kong (2005) in Movies
Mar 5, 2019
Audacious film-maker attempts to mount spectacular entertainment featuring giant ape, finds he's bitten off more than he can chew - handily, this covers both the plot of King Kong and the movie itself. The equivalent of one of those bloated Harry Potter books written when JK Rowling was so successful no-one was brave enough to say 'this needs an edit': movie is exhaustingly long with a lot of dead wood in every department.
Main problem is that Jackson and his co-writers seem to think they are making Titanic rather than a pulp monster movie: this film takes itself very, very seriously considering the subject matter; sorely needs a sense of humour. Only really comes to life in the big set-piece CGI sequences, most of which are original to this film - Jackson is obviously having fun during the sauropod stampede and the bit with the giant man-eating crabs, not so much the rest of the time. Technically superior in every department to the 1976 version, but still less entertaining somehow.
Main problem is that Jackson and his co-writers seem to think they are making Titanic rather than a pulp monster movie: this film takes itself very, very seriously considering the subject matter; sorely needs a sense of humour. Only really comes to life in the big set-piece CGI sequences, most of which are original to this film - Jackson is obviously having fun during the sauropod stampede and the bit with the giant man-eating crabs, not so much the rest of the time. Technically superior in every department to the 1976 version, but still less entertaining somehow.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Suicide Squad (2016) in Movies
Jan 21, 2018
One of the better DC films... and it’s awful
The only good thing I have to say about this film is it has a pretty good soundtrack. And it’s probably one of the better DC films (although I haven’t seen Wonder Woman). But that isn’t saying much.
Everything else in this film is atrocious. The acting is terrible, even coming from some fairly established actors. Jared Leto’s Performance as the Joker is so over the top and unnecessary that it’s cringeworthy and laughable. Enchantress and her brother as the villains, along with their squid head army, are possibly the lamest villains in any superhero film. The CGI is really bad for the most part, and the script is terrible along with the very weak plot. Continuity also seems to be a big issue, flitting between evening and daylight for a number of scenes and expecting us not to notice. This isn’t even one of those that is so bad it’s good, it’s just plain old bad. Avoid at all costs.
Everything else in this film is atrocious. The acting is terrible, even coming from some fairly established actors. Jared Leto’s Performance as the Joker is so over the top and unnecessary that it’s cringeworthy and laughable. Enchantress and her brother as the villains, along with their squid head army, are possibly the lamest villains in any superhero film. The CGI is really bad for the most part, and the script is terrible along with the very weak plot. Continuity also seems to be a big issue, flitting between evening and daylight for a number of scenes and expecting us not to notice. This isn’t even one of those that is so bad it’s good, it’s just plain old bad. Avoid at all costs.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Godzilla 2000 (1999) in Movies
Mar 17, 2018 (Updated May 30, 2019)
Not quite the two-thousandth Godzilla movie, though it might feel that way to non-fans of this kind of thing. Aliens who've spent sixty million years asleep at the bottom of the sea wake up and try to steal Godzilla's DNA; things do not go according to plan, with bad results for everyone (except perhaps Godzilla himself).
The first Japanese movie to follow the reviled American Godzilla reboots the series again; you would have thought this was a splendid opportunity for Toho to show just how this sort of thing should be done. Alas no: there are some good bits here, and baddie monster Orga is quite impressive (though not in the film for long enough), but the film has the usual problem of not seeming to be that interested in Godzilla himself - it's not clear whether Godzilla is meant to be anti-hero or antagonist, either. Some duff CGI on display, too. Rather than being a showcase for the series, this is a dull and derivative movie that's not especially interesting to look at.
The first Japanese movie to follow the reviled American Godzilla reboots the series again; you would have thought this was a splendid opportunity for Toho to show just how this sort of thing should be done. Alas no: there are some good bits here, and baddie monster Orga is quite impressive (though not in the film for long enough), but the film has the usual problem of not seeming to be that interested in Godzilla himself - it's not clear whether Godzilla is meant to be anti-hero or antagonist, either. Some duff CGI on display, too. Rather than being a showcase for the series, this is a dull and derivative movie that's not especially interesting to look at.
Darren Pattison (2 KP) rated Black Panther (2018) in Movies
Mar 12, 2018
Over rated and disappointing
Way too much hype for a distinctly below average/bad film. Civil War is by far the better Marvel film. Black Panther (character) was great in a supporting role but he has zero on-screen charisma and fails to carry a film solo. I struggle to see how anybody was entertained by those awful challenge fight scenes and that ludicrous end battle. it was not a good movie. It looked cheap, the characters had no development. It played like low-rent TV show with unnbearably cheesy & clunky dialogue, boring unoriginal fights and god-awful CGI. I didn’t care about the fate of Wakanda because I wasn’t allowed to care for any of the characters in the film. The only consolation was the comic relief provided by Letitia Wright and Andy Serkis. For all the records it smashed and the praise it received, it wasn’t even the best Marvel film of the last 6 months. Thor Ragnarok was a lot more entertaining, genuine and had actual heart.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Biggles (1986) in Movies
Mar 28, 2018 (Updated Mar 28, 2018)
Biggles Cocks It Up
Startlingly incompetent big-screen version of the classic boy's-adventure hero. New York yuppie discovers he is 'time twin' of First World War fighter ace, is plucked back through time to help him destroy a German secret weapon. Don't worry, it doesn't make any more sense in the actual movie.
Potentially charming adventure movie is utterly torpedoed by fatal uncertainty of tone; what started off as a 'straight' period movie is reduced to gibberish by the addition of witless time-travel plotline, which drags crass 80s 'comedy' bits in with it. The fact it largely seems to be the work of people who've never actually seen a film before, let alone worked on one, is the just the coup de grace. Even Peter Cushing's usual near-supernatural ability to lift a dubious script mostly fails him; no wonder this was his final (non-CGI) big-screen appearance. Soundtrack contains Queen bassist John Deacon's only recordings away from the band; this is almost certainly not a good enough reason to watch the damn thing.
Potentially charming adventure movie is utterly torpedoed by fatal uncertainty of tone; what started off as a 'straight' period movie is reduced to gibberish by the addition of witless time-travel plotline, which drags crass 80s 'comedy' bits in with it. The fact it largely seems to be the work of people who've never actually seen a film before, let alone worked on one, is the just the coup de grace. Even Peter Cushing's usual near-supernatural ability to lift a dubious script mostly fails him; no wonder this was his final (non-CGI) big-screen appearance. Soundtrack contains Queen bassist John Deacon's only recordings away from the band; this is almost certainly not a good enough reason to watch the damn thing.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Peter Rabbit (2018) in Movies
Mar 28, 2018
Childhood memories, ruined
I'll be frankly honest, I knew I was going to hate this film. For one, I didn't want to watch it and got dragged against my will for a friends birthday. And I also really don't like James Corden, so this was destined to fail in my eyes.
And it really did fail. James Corden just isn't right as Peter and I really couldn't listen to him and the rest of the voice actors seemed to not quite fit either. Domhnall Gleeson is a great actor but he really hams it up to the point it gets cringeworthy. The CGI was horrific and painful to watch at times too. What happened to good old fashioned animation (which the film does use briefly)? And the script and jokes are cheesy and really miss the mark - I'll admit to having a discerning sense of humour but I didn't laugh once.
This is great puerile fun for the little ones, but all it did for me is ruin all the fond memories I have of Beatrix Potter stories from my childhood.
And it really did fail. James Corden just isn't right as Peter and I really couldn't listen to him and the rest of the voice actors seemed to not quite fit either. Domhnall Gleeson is a great actor but he really hams it up to the point it gets cringeworthy. The CGI was horrific and painful to watch at times too. What happened to good old fashioned animation (which the film does use briefly)? And the script and jokes are cheesy and really miss the mark - I'll admit to having a discerning sense of humour but I didn't laugh once.
This is great puerile fun for the little ones, but all it did for me is ruin all the fond memories I have of Beatrix Potter stories from my childhood.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Starship Troopers (1997) in Movies
Feb 22, 2018
Not so much an adaptation of Heinlein's novel as a parody of it, Verhoeven's SF spectacular works equally well as storming action movie and outrageous black satire. Johnny Rico (Van Dien) joins the army for the wrong reasons, finds himself rising through the ranks as Earth provokes a war with the invertebrate Arachnids and finds itself facing a much more dangerous opponent than expected.
Verhoeven displays his usual uncanny ability to turn a movie on a dime - one second this is a deliberately cheesy deadpan comedy about growing up in a fascist utopia, the next it's delivering a genuinely thrilling action sequence that pushes the boundaries of CGI. Much, much smarter than it initially appears - even the decision to cast good-looking but essentially wooden young people (e.g. Denise Richards) in the lead roles seems calculated to make a point. Michael Ironside is genuinely good as the grizzled old soldier; another belting score from Basil Poledouris. Also weirdly prescient of the way the US and its media reacted after 9/11. Thoroughly enjoyable on many levels.
Verhoeven displays his usual uncanny ability to turn a movie on a dime - one second this is a deliberately cheesy deadpan comedy about growing up in a fascist utopia, the next it's delivering a genuinely thrilling action sequence that pushes the boundaries of CGI. Much, much smarter than it initially appears - even the decision to cast good-looking but essentially wooden young people (e.g. Denise Richards) in the lead roles seems calculated to make a point. Michael Ironside is genuinely good as the grizzled old soldier; another belting score from Basil Poledouris. Also weirdly prescient of the way the US and its media reacted after 9/11. Thoroughly enjoyable on many levels.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Apollo 13 (1995) in Movies
Jul 21, 2018
No problems here!
Everyone was waiting to see what Tom Hanks would do next after winning his back-to-back Oscars for Philadelphia and Forrest Gump. It ended up being another wondrous film about the true story of the doomed space mission and the many people who banded together to help save the lives of the three astronauts.
Everything about the film is fantastic including the acting, screenplay and special effects. If this film were made today, I think filmmakers would have tried to go too high tech and CGI when this is a human story and a triumph of the human spirit vs. something more savvy.
I really miss Bill Paxton most of all. His performance in the film was magnificent and hilarious, just like all his memorable characters. I truly miss him every day.
Through my melancholies, I was able to enjoy a perfect film like this. You know you are watching something truly awe-inspiring when you know how it's going to end and it still chokes you up.
Everything about the film is fantastic including the acting, screenplay and special effects. If this film were made today, I think filmmakers would have tried to go too high tech and CGI when this is a human story and a triumph of the human spirit vs. something more savvy.
I really miss Bill Paxton most of all. His performance in the film was magnificent and hilarious, just like all his memorable characters. I truly miss him every day.
Through my melancholies, I was able to enjoy a perfect film like this. You know you are watching something truly awe-inspiring when you know how it's going to end and it still chokes you up.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Kingsman: The Secret Service (2015) in Movies
Jul 4, 2018
Avengers meets John Wick
Having been completely unfamiliar with the source comic book material, I was unsure the tone or visuals I viewed in this film are consistent with that or not, so I just have to judge on their own merits.
Anyone who follows my reviews knows I am not the hugest fan of nonsense or robust excessive CGI in place of good acting story and screenplay, so I have to say this film suffered from a little bit of that. Some of the kill scenes bordered on a little silly, having been done much better and more realistic in John Wick.
Having said that, I was never bored while watching and thought the acting, especially that of Samuel L. Jackson, was pretty good for the most part.
It definitely feels like more style than substance in some parts, but maybe that was the point. I will always side with realism over hyper-realism unless done very well, and I feel this film falls a bit short.
Anyone who follows my reviews knows I am not the hugest fan of nonsense or robust excessive CGI in place of good acting story and screenplay, so I have to say this film suffered from a little bit of that. Some of the kill scenes bordered on a little silly, having been done much better and more realistic in John Wick.
Having said that, I was never bored while watching and thought the acting, especially that of Samuel L. Jackson, was pretty good for the most part.
It definitely feels like more style than substance in some parts, but maybe that was the point. I will always side with realism over hyper-realism unless done very well, and I feel this film falls a bit short.