Search
Search results
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Cube Zero (2004) in Movies
Jan 19, 2021
Somewhere between the competent tightness of Cube and the rancid excrement of Cube 2: Hypercube, lies the average but relatively entertaining Cube Zero. Cube.
I was honestly expecting some flaming garbage at this point, but this prequel to the series improves on Cube 2 in every way. Its characters are either more compelling or more schlocky, the design of the rooms and traps are much better and less bland, the godawful CGI has been switched out for a mostly practical effort, and it's gory again! Like the first one, the gore is fairly seldom, but it's pretty grim when it hits. The opening kill (again, like the first movie) is a doozy.
It doesn't just ape the first film however, as Cube Zero actually attempts to do something different with the narrative. Whilst a chunk of the plot follows a group of people once again stuck in the trap filled maze, trying to figure out how to leave, the other half takes place outside of the Cube, more specifically, in a place where engineers work, and monitor the test subjects progress. It holds back on telling us too much, which is a wise move, and changes up what has already become a stale formula. However, this is also a big negative as it's just a bit boring.... When the film kept cutting back to the people inside the Cube, I found myself engaged way more, before swiftly being back to watching some dude playing chess... It just drags.
The last third is a bit more interesting, and kind of links back to the first film (I think? The last scene was really confusing) and overall, doesn't over complicate things to the point of extreme boredom like the second film.
Overall, Cube Zero is a perfectly watchable bit of fluff. Its never going to set anyone's world on fire but it's serviceable in what it does, and is entertaining enough to warrant one last dip into this series before an inevitable remake surfaces at somepoint.
I was honestly expecting some flaming garbage at this point, but this prequel to the series improves on Cube 2 in every way. Its characters are either more compelling or more schlocky, the design of the rooms and traps are much better and less bland, the godawful CGI has been switched out for a mostly practical effort, and it's gory again! Like the first one, the gore is fairly seldom, but it's pretty grim when it hits. The opening kill (again, like the first movie) is a doozy.
It doesn't just ape the first film however, as Cube Zero actually attempts to do something different with the narrative. Whilst a chunk of the plot follows a group of people once again stuck in the trap filled maze, trying to figure out how to leave, the other half takes place outside of the Cube, more specifically, in a place where engineers work, and monitor the test subjects progress. It holds back on telling us too much, which is a wise move, and changes up what has already become a stale formula. However, this is also a big negative as it's just a bit boring.... When the film kept cutting back to the people inside the Cube, I found myself engaged way more, before swiftly being back to watching some dude playing chess... It just drags.
The last third is a bit more interesting, and kind of links back to the first film (I think? The last scene was really confusing) and overall, doesn't over complicate things to the point of extreme boredom like the second film.
Overall, Cube Zero is a perfectly watchable bit of fluff. Its never going to set anyone's world on fire but it's serviceable in what it does, and is entertaining enough to warrant one last dip into this series before an inevitable remake surfaces at somepoint.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Suicide Squad (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2020
Entirely crackbrained and nonsensical - I'm not even sure there's a single theme in either this nor the extended cut - but way better than šš©š¦ šš·š¦šÆšØš¦š³š“ for the chief purposes that it doesn't look like pure ass and doesn't really try to act like it's anything more than religiously entertaining dirtpunk grit-fetish trash. It's just about as thinly-written as the former, but if you're going to make one-note characters and a bullshit plot I'd rather them sport this sort of wildly memorable, freakish cringe rather than the flat, market-tested cringe of most modern day Marvel. There's more meme-worthy, hilariously dumbass quotes in here than you can shake a stick at and the designwork on display is simply delicious imo - the lush, matted mess of CGI is actually quite stunning and the production is exquisite: the sickly makeup + vibrant costuming against the sets where you often see opulent golds and corporate lucre juxtaposed with a dank coat of dirt and graffiti - it's total eye candy. The image of Harley Quinn and Joker laughing in the chemical bath while Kehlani's "Gangster" blasts in the background and the colors from their clothes melt away is nothing less than a knockout piece of moving imagery. Smith is the weak link, not only horribly miscast but it also seems like he isn't even trying - otherwise everyone else does a bangup job from Jared Leto's "Pimp Daddy" chilling street tweaker Joker to Viola Davis' business-casual demon Waller to Cara Delevingne's gonzo, always sauntering, Meryl Streep-sounding Enchantress. Very dynamically idiotic in that random fun shit is just allowed to happen because it's clear this isn't at all concerned with making any sort of sense to begin with. All this and with a soundtrack that can only be described as epic, I truly believe this is a fascinating curio that got way too bad of a rap. As dumb as everyone says but also better than the last five MCU entries.
DaveySmithy (107 KP) rated Wicked (2024) in Movies
Dec 3, 2024
A Magical, If Slightly Uneven Journey
The long-awaited Wicked movie finally graces the big screen in 2024, bringing the beloved Broadway musical to life with all the magic, heart, and soaring melodies that made it iconic. Directed by Jon M. Chu, this adaptation dives deep into the untold story of the witches of Oz, offering stunning visuals, powerhouse performances, and emotional depth that will captivate fans of the musical and newcomers alike.
The film explores the complex relationship between Elphaba (played by Cynthia Erivo), the misunderstood green-skinned girl who will become the Wicked Witch of the West, and Glinda (Ariana Grande), the glamorous and ambitious witch-in-training. Both actresses deliver strong performances, with Erivoās soulful voice shining in ballads like āDefying Gravityā and āIām Not That Girl.ā Grande brings charm and humor to Glinda, though her performance occasionally leans into caricature rather than character depth.
Visually, Wicked is breathtaking. The vibrant and intricate production design transports viewers to a fantastical Oz, from the emerald spires of the Emerald City to the mystical forests of Shiz University. Coupled with dazzling costume design and vivid CGI, the world feels alive and immersive.
However, the film does falter in pacing. At over two hours, certain scenesāparticularly in the first actāfeel overly drawn out, while others are rushed. Some of the musical numbers lose their emotional weight due to awkward transitions from dialogue to song, a challenge many stage-to-screen adaptations face.
Despite these shortcomings, Wicked soars where it matters most: its emotional core. The themes of friendship, identity, and the cost of doing whatās right resonate deeply. By the time the climactic āFor Goodā duet arrives, the film earns its tears and applause.
While not perfect, Wicked (2024) is a spellbinding adaptation that captures much of the magic of the original musical. Fans will walk away satisfied, and newcomers will find themselves enchanted. A solid 8/10.
The long-awaited Wicked movie finally graces the big screen in 2024, bringing the beloved Broadway musical to life with all the magic, heart, and soaring melodies that made it iconic. Directed by Jon M. Chu, this adaptation dives deep into the untold story of the witches of Oz, offering stunning visuals, powerhouse performances, and emotional depth that will captivate fans of the musical and newcomers alike.
The film explores the complex relationship between Elphaba (played by Cynthia Erivo), the misunderstood green-skinned girl who will become the Wicked Witch of the West, and Glinda (Ariana Grande), the glamorous and ambitious witch-in-training. Both actresses deliver strong performances, with Erivoās soulful voice shining in ballads like āDefying Gravityā and āIām Not That Girl.ā Grande brings charm and humor to Glinda, though her performance occasionally leans into caricature rather than character depth.
Visually, Wicked is breathtaking. The vibrant and intricate production design transports viewers to a fantastical Oz, from the emerald spires of the Emerald City to the mystical forests of Shiz University. Coupled with dazzling costume design and vivid CGI, the world feels alive and immersive.
However, the film does falter in pacing. At over two hours, certain scenesāparticularly in the first actāfeel overly drawn out, while others are rushed. Some of the musical numbers lose their emotional weight due to awkward transitions from dialogue to song, a challenge many stage-to-screen adaptations face.
Despite these shortcomings, Wicked soars where it matters most: its emotional core. The themes of friendship, identity, and the cost of doing whatās right resonate deeply. By the time the climactic āFor Goodā duet arrives, the film earns its tears and applause.
While not perfect, Wicked (2024) is a spellbinding adaptation that captures much of the magic of the original musical. Fans will walk away satisfied, and newcomers will find themselves enchanted. A solid 8/10.
DaveySmithy (107 KP) rated Venom: The Last Dance (2024) in Movies
Dec 4, 2024
A Chaotic Farewell with Flashes of Brilliance
Venom: Last Dance marks the end of Eddie Brockās wild, symbiotic saga, and while it doesnāt entirely stick the landing, itās a fittingly chaotic swan song for the antihero. With Tom Hardy once again embracing the absurdity of his dual role, the film offers plenty of the franchiseās trademark blend of humor, action, and madnessābut itās also weighed down by an uneven plot and overambitious storytelling.
One of the highlights of this film is, unsurprisingly, Tom Hardy. His commitment to playing both the brooding Eddie and the wisecracking, gluttonous Venom remains the beating heart of this franchise. Their banter is sharper than ever, delivering both laughs and surprisingly tender moments as their unconventional ārelationshipā reaches new levels of complexity. Hardyās performance makes it easy to forgive some of the filmās narrative shortcomings.
Visually, Last Dance is a mixed bag. The action sequences are bigger and flashier than ever, with symbiote battles that explode across the screen in frenetic bursts of CGI. Some of these moments are thrilling, but others veer into sensory overload, leaving me wishing for a bit more clarity and restraint. The filmās attempt to lean into darker, more gothic visuals works in some scenes but feels inconsistent overall.
The plot, while ambitious, tries to juggle too many elements at once. A new villain, played with gusto by a high-profile (but slightly underutilized) actor, brings menace to the story, but their motivations are murky and underdeveloped. Meanwhile, the filmās exploration of Venomās origins is intriguing but feels rushed, leaving me craving more depth and fewer loose ends.
Despite its flaws, Venom: Last Dance manages to deliver an entertaining and emotional farewell to the character. Itās messy, but thereās a charm in its willingness to embrace the absurd. Fans of the series will find plenty to enjoy, though itās unlikely to win over newcomers. For me, itās a 7/10āan imperfect but enjoyable final ride with one of Marvelās most unpredictable antiheroes.
One of the highlights of this film is, unsurprisingly, Tom Hardy. His commitment to playing both the brooding Eddie and the wisecracking, gluttonous Venom remains the beating heart of this franchise. Their banter is sharper than ever, delivering both laughs and surprisingly tender moments as their unconventional ārelationshipā reaches new levels of complexity. Hardyās performance makes it easy to forgive some of the filmās narrative shortcomings.
Visually, Last Dance is a mixed bag. The action sequences are bigger and flashier than ever, with symbiote battles that explode across the screen in frenetic bursts of CGI. Some of these moments are thrilling, but others veer into sensory overload, leaving me wishing for a bit more clarity and restraint. The filmās attempt to lean into darker, more gothic visuals works in some scenes but feels inconsistent overall.
The plot, while ambitious, tries to juggle too many elements at once. A new villain, played with gusto by a high-profile (but slightly underutilized) actor, brings menace to the story, but their motivations are murky and underdeveloped. Meanwhile, the filmās exploration of Venomās origins is intriguing but feels rushed, leaving me craving more depth and fewer loose ends.
Despite its flaws, Venom: Last Dance manages to deliver an entertaining and emotional farewell to the character. Itās messy, but thereās a charm in its willingness to embrace the absurd. Fans of the series will find plenty to enjoy, though itās unlikely to win over newcomers. For me, itās a 7/10āan imperfect but enjoyable final ride with one of Marvelās most unpredictable antiheroes.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Godzilla (2014) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Simply Stunning
The king of the Kaiju, Godzilla, has had a very chequered cinematic history. From the classic original Japanese films to Roland Emmerichās 1998 disaster, the famous beast hasnāt always been given the respect deserved of such an iconic monster.
Now, 16 years after Emmerichās critical flop, Monsters director Gareth Edwards resurrects the gargantuan reptile in this yearās reboot, simply titled Godzilla, but is it a return to form?
Yes, is the short answer. From an engaging story to a stellar cast, Edwards recreates the fan favourite with the utmost care and attention, and comes out smelling of roses.
Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad) stars as Joe Brody, an American nuclear power officer living and working in Japan with his wife Sandra (Juliette Binoche) and their son Ford,bryan-cranston-fans-will-be-disappointed-with-godzilla just as a nuclear disaster begins. Fast-forward 15 years and a disheveled Joe is trying to find the truth about what happened at the nuclear plant, believing the authorities are trying to hide something from the general public. As his descent into madness continues, a fully grown Ford, played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson decides to come to his aid.
What ensues is a great story of father bonding with son as they try to work out exactly what is going on together. Though what they find shocks the globe.
Within the first hour of Godzilla, the titular monsterās appearances are limited to shots of spines poking from the ocean, keeping the audience guessing as to how the creature has been designed by Edwards and his team.
This can become increasingly tiresome as we make do with the filmās primary antagonists MUTO, and as impressive as they are to look at, all we really want to see is Godzilla in all his glory. Though Edwardsā constant teasers are brilliantly varied.
Thankfully after numerous jaw-dropping set pieces ranging from a Japanese nuclear plant to a Hawaiian airport, Godzilla is finally revealed and the result is exceptional.
Gone is the T-Rex on steroids look that Emmerich shoved down our throats in the 1998 monstrosity and in its place is how the beast used to look in the original foreign classics ā of course with revolutionary special effects to keep things looking tip-top.
The CGI, of which there is a huge amount, is breath-taking. Godzilla, the MUTO and all of the set pieces are of the highest quality, with no visible lapses whatsoever, and what Edwards does that so many other directors donāt is to keep the story going instead of letting the CGI take over, it never becomes overly loud and obnoxious.
One scene in particular, involving a group of paratroopers infiltrating a desolate San Francisco as Godzilla and the MUTO do battle is probably one of the most beautifully shot and eerily quiet action sequences in cinematic history with one section involving some perfectly positioned Chinese lanterns being the highlight.
A really enjoyable aspect of the film is spotting the homages to previous Godzilla films as well as other monster classics like Jurassic Park. There are many scattered throughout the film.
Moreover, the acting is generally very good. Cranston is sublime and shows what a brilliant actor he is. The character of Joe is the one you care about the most throughout the film. Taylor-Johnson is good, if a little staid as the generic armed forces stereotype.
Elizabeth Olsen, David Strathairn and Sally Hawkins also star. Unfortunately, a weak link is Ken Watanabe who plays Dr Ishiro Serizawa. His over-the-top and hammy performance begins to grate after an hour of seeing him on screen.
Thankfully though, Godzillaās inevitable weak points are far outshone by the incredible special effects, interesting story and excellent acting. Bryan Cranston is a real highlight and the beast himself is a wonder to behold.
Gareth Edwards has not only created one of the best monster films ever with some of the most breath-taking shots ever seen on celluloid, he has also whet our appetites for Colin Trevorrowās Jurassic World set to be released in June next year ā that can only be a good thing.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2014/05/20/godzilla-review/
Now, 16 years after Emmerichās critical flop, Monsters director Gareth Edwards resurrects the gargantuan reptile in this yearās reboot, simply titled Godzilla, but is it a return to form?
Yes, is the short answer. From an engaging story to a stellar cast, Edwards recreates the fan favourite with the utmost care and attention, and comes out smelling of roses.
Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad) stars as Joe Brody, an American nuclear power officer living and working in Japan with his wife Sandra (Juliette Binoche) and their son Ford,bryan-cranston-fans-will-be-disappointed-with-godzilla just as a nuclear disaster begins. Fast-forward 15 years and a disheveled Joe is trying to find the truth about what happened at the nuclear plant, believing the authorities are trying to hide something from the general public. As his descent into madness continues, a fully grown Ford, played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson decides to come to his aid.
What ensues is a great story of father bonding with son as they try to work out exactly what is going on together. Though what they find shocks the globe.
Within the first hour of Godzilla, the titular monsterās appearances are limited to shots of spines poking from the ocean, keeping the audience guessing as to how the creature has been designed by Edwards and his team.
This can become increasingly tiresome as we make do with the filmās primary antagonists MUTO, and as impressive as they are to look at, all we really want to see is Godzilla in all his glory. Though Edwardsā constant teasers are brilliantly varied.
Thankfully after numerous jaw-dropping set pieces ranging from a Japanese nuclear plant to a Hawaiian airport, Godzilla is finally revealed and the result is exceptional.
Gone is the T-Rex on steroids look that Emmerich shoved down our throats in the 1998 monstrosity and in its place is how the beast used to look in the original foreign classics ā of course with revolutionary special effects to keep things looking tip-top.
The CGI, of which there is a huge amount, is breath-taking. Godzilla, the MUTO and all of the set pieces are of the highest quality, with no visible lapses whatsoever, and what Edwards does that so many other directors donāt is to keep the story going instead of letting the CGI take over, it never becomes overly loud and obnoxious.
One scene in particular, involving a group of paratroopers infiltrating a desolate San Francisco as Godzilla and the MUTO do battle is probably one of the most beautifully shot and eerily quiet action sequences in cinematic history with one section involving some perfectly positioned Chinese lanterns being the highlight.
A really enjoyable aspect of the film is spotting the homages to previous Godzilla films as well as other monster classics like Jurassic Park. There are many scattered throughout the film.
Moreover, the acting is generally very good. Cranston is sublime and shows what a brilliant actor he is. The character of Joe is the one you care about the most throughout the film. Taylor-Johnson is good, if a little staid as the generic armed forces stereotype.
Elizabeth Olsen, David Strathairn and Sally Hawkins also star. Unfortunately, a weak link is Ken Watanabe who plays Dr Ishiro Serizawa. His over-the-top and hammy performance begins to grate after an hour of seeing him on screen.
Thankfully though, Godzillaās inevitable weak points are far outshone by the incredible special effects, interesting story and excellent acting. Bryan Cranston is a real highlight and the beast himself is a wonder to behold.
Gareth Edwards has not only created one of the best monster films ever with some of the most breath-taking shots ever seen on celluloid, he has also whet our appetites for Colin Trevorrowās Jurassic World set to be released in June next year ā that can only be a good thing.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2014/05/20/godzilla-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2 (2012) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
The Twilight Saga has had a tough time in its short screen life. Constant comparisons to Harry Potter and now The Hunger Games have ensured that it has taken a back seat to these franchises. After 3 bitterly disappointing instalments in the series, Breaking Dawn Part 1 which was released last year lifted the bar and promised a fine end to the series. One year later, Part 2 has been released, but can it keep up the momentum set by its predecessor?
The answer, unfortunately is no and as Robert Pattinson (Edward Cullen), Taylor Lautner, (Jacob Black) and Kristen Stewart (Bella Swan) pull the curtains over the long suffering franchise, you canāt help but feel a strange sense of sadness. These films havenāt been as good as they couldāve.
Breaking Dawn Part 2 starts immediately where the last film finished as Bella Swan (Stewart) gives birth to her half-human, half-vampire child. For some bizarre reason, the blood and childbirth elements of the last film have been completely thrown to the wind as Bella awakens as a vampire and is better than ever. Not reminding viewers of what went before was a major oversight on the part of director Bill Condon and those not familiar with the books will have a hard time remembering what happened last year.
It just so happens that Bella and Edwardās daughter Renesmee is growing at an astonishing rate. To show this, the producers have created her with a CGI layering effect which means using a real baby with a CGI face. Unfortunately, this means that Renesmee is the creepiest baby you will have ever had the misfortune to see. Surely there mustāve been some money left over from the $120m budget to create a real treat for fans. As it is, the first time you lay eyes on Renesmee, there is a gasp of horror rather than adoration.
Unfortunately, the sinister Volturi have gotten wind of Renesmeeās existence thanks to a brief cameo by Maggie Grace (Taken 2) as Irina. She mistakenly believes that the child is a pure vampire which is, under no circumstances allowed. Michael Sheen is a highlight as Aro, leader of the Volturi, his camp, unbelievably over the top performance, highlighted perfectly in the filmās finale, is a breath of fresh air against the heavy breathing, downtrodden characterisations from the rest of the cast.
Special effects have never been a strong point for this movie franchise and things really havenāt improved in this latest instalment. Weāve already mentioned the horror of Bellaās demon baby, but the werewolves are pretty bad too and really donāt move the game on at all. In fact, in some sequences itās like weāre back in the 90s.
Itās not all bad news however; a real highlight for me throughout the course of the films has been the excellent cinematography. The setting is absolutely wonderful, from the snow-capped peaks and plains, to the cliff edges and forests, everything looks fantastic and director Bill Condon really knows how to maximise the environment he has been given to work with.
Unfortunately, no amount of scenery can save a film which, ultimately is a bit of a damp squib. This is more apparent in the finale, which I can honestly say is one of the worst I have ever seen in a film franchise. This is, partly down to Stephenie Meyerās amateurish writing in the novel, which ensures the final scenes which shouldāve been a joy to watch, are completely disregarded and frankly, stupid.
So, there we have it, The Twilight Saga has ended and what a saga it has been. Three average films at best gave way to Breaking Dawn Part 1, which showed promise and could possibly have been the saviour of the franchise. However, the release of Breaking Dawn Part 2 has pushed things back to where it was before the 3rd instalment, Eclipse. The seriesā passionate fans have deserved much better and when it shouldāve been going out with a bit of bite, instead, we leave Twilight on a bit of a whimper.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2012/12/03/twilight-breaking-dawn-pt-2-review/
The answer, unfortunately is no and as Robert Pattinson (Edward Cullen), Taylor Lautner, (Jacob Black) and Kristen Stewart (Bella Swan) pull the curtains over the long suffering franchise, you canāt help but feel a strange sense of sadness. These films havenāt been as good as they couldāve.
Breaking Dawn Part 2 starts immediately where the last film finished as Bella Swan (Stewart) gives birth to her half-human, half-vampire child. For some bizarre reason, the blood and childbirth elements of the last film have been completely thrown to the wind as Bella awakens as a vampire and is better than ever. Not reminding viewers of what went before was a major oversight on the part of director Bill Condon and those not familiar with the books will have a hard time remembering what happened last year.
It just so happens that Bella and Edwardās daughter Renesmee is growing at an astonishing rate. To show this, the producers have created her with a CGI layering effect which means using a real baby with a CGI face. Unfortunately, this means that Renesmee is the creepiest baby you will have ever had the misfortune to see. Surely there mustāve been some money left over from the $120m budget to create a real treat for fans. As it is, the first time you lay eyes on Renesmee, there is a gasp of horror rather than adoration.
Unfortunately, the sinister Volturi have gotten wind of Renesmeeās existence thanks to a brief cameo by Maggie Grace (Taken 2) as Irina. She mistakenly believes that the child is a pure vampire which is, under no circumstances allowed. Michael Sheen is a highlight as Aro, leader of the Volturi, his camp, unbelievably over the top performance, highlighted perfectly in the filmās finale, is a breath of fresh air against the heavy breathing, downtrodden characterisations from the rest of the cast.
Special effects have never been a strong point for this movie franchise and things really havenāt improved in this latest instalment. Weāve already mentioned the horror of Bellaās demon baby, but the werewolves are pretty bad too and really donāt move the game on at all. In fact, in some sequences itās like weāre back in the 90s.
Itās not all bad news however; a real highlight for me throughout the course of the films has been the excellent cinematography. The setting is absolutely wonderful, from the snow-capped peaks and plains, to the cliff edges and forests, everything looks fantastic and director Bill Condon really knows how to maximise the environment he has been given to work with.
Unfortunately, no amount of scenery can save a film which, ultimately is a bit of a damp squib. This is more apparent in the finale, which I can honestly say is one of the worst I have ever seen in a film franchise. This is, partly down to Stephenie Meyerās amateurish writing in the novel, which ensures the final scenes which shouldāve been a joy to watch, are completely disregarded and frankly, stupid.
So, there we have it, The Twilight Saga has ended and what a saga it has been. Three average films at best gave way to Breaking Dawn Part 1, which showed promise and could possibly have been the saviour of the franchise. However, the release of Breaking Dawn Part 2 has pushed things back to where it was before the 3rd instalment, Eclipse. The seriesā passionate fans have deserved much better and when it shouldāve been going out with a bit of bite, instead, we leave Twilight on a bit of a whimper.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2012/12/03/twilight-breaking-dawn-pt-2-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
I'm a celebrity... Get me out of here
Itās been 22 years since Joe Johnston thrilled cinemagoers with a little film called Jumanji. Starring the late, great Robin Williams, it has amassed a huge following over the years and has become nearly as loved as its leading star.
Whatās surprising given the filmās success is the lack of a sequel. For over 20 years the non-franchise stayed completely dormant until now. Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle sees Columbia Pictures resurrect this classic property for a high-action, CGI-filled blockbuster. But is it actually any good?
Four high school kids discover an old video game console and are drawn into the gameās jungle setting, literally becoming the adult avatars they chose. What they discover is that you donāt just play Jumanji ā you must survive it. To beat the game and return to the real world, theyāll have to go on the most dangerous adventure of their lives, discover what Alan Parrish left 20 years ago, and change the way they think about themselves ā or theyāll be stuck in the game forever.
Considering the overwhelmingly negative response to the filmās first trailer, itās a pleasant surprise to see an enjoyable romp that has likeable characters and some nicely filmed set pieces. The problem is, it really doesnāt feel anything like Jumanji and regularly feels like the producers down at Sony had dollar signs in their eyes more than anything else.
Thereās only one reference to its now classic predecessor, an homage to Robin Williamās Alan Parrish but this is such a fleeting indication of any connection to the 1995 film, itās barely noticeable. The film may as well lose the Jumanji tag from its name and be done with it: of course that wouldnāt sell half as many tickets now would it?
Of the school-age characters, none of them make any impact before being sucked into Jumanji, now a video game, and director Jake Kasdan (Bad Teacher) wisely focusses on their avatar characters instead. Dwayne Johnson is always reliable and plays the fish-out-of-water nerd surprisingly well. He also has great chemistry with Kevin Hart and the two share some of the filmās best sequences.
Jack Black is hilarious as his inner female tries to break through at numerous points throughout the movie and Karen Gillan shows particular warmth as the awkward Martha. Nick Jonas also stars in a role originally destined for Tom Holland and continues to prove what a versatile actor he has become.
Itās a pleasant surprise to see an enjoyable romp that has likeable characters and some nicely filmed set pieces.
Jake Kasdan films the action confidently and with visual panache but the CGI at times is left wanting, disappointing in this day and age. A helicopter ride across a rhino-infested canyon is particularly fun to watch and the way in which the writers write the film around video game lore is exciting and makes for a pleasant distraction from an otherwise mediocre script.
What the film does have in abundance however is laughs. Indeed, they are of the Dairylea variety, cheesy, but sometimes thatās exactly what you need. Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is a very funny film that knows how to squeeze every last drop of humour from its writing.
Itās also very well paced. Apart from a few lapses in judgement where the screenwriters desperately try to make us feel emotion towards the characters ā we donāt ā the film really doesnāt have a boring moment to its name and at 119 minutes, thatās a real achievement.
Overall, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is a film that is fun to watch, if a little lacking in originality. All the lead actors perform their roles well, with Jack Black being a particular highlight. Unfortunately, while Iām not usually one for sickly nostalgia, the film really needed to provide a few more tasteful references to its predecessor, especially considering its link to the wonderful Robin Williams.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/12/10/jumanji-welcome-to-the-jungle-review-im-a-celebrity-get-me-out-of-here/
Whatās surprising given the filmās success is the lack of a sequel. For over 20 years the non-franchise stayed completely dormant until now. Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle sees Columbia Pictures resurrect this classic property for a high-action, CGI-filled blockbuster. But is it actually any good?
Four high school kids discover an old video game console and are drawn into the gameās jungle setting, literally becoming the adult avatars they chose. What they discover is that you donāt just play Jumanji ā you must survive it. To beat the game and return to the real world, theyāll have to go on the most dangerous adventure of their lives, discover what Alan Parrish left 20 years ago, and change the way they think about themselves ā or theyāll be stuck in the game forever.
Considering the overwhelmingly negative response to the filmās first trailer, itās a pleasant surprise to see an enjoyable romp that has likeable characters and some nicely filmed set pieces. The problem is, it really doesnāt feel anything like Jumanji and regularly feels like the producers down at Sony had dollar signs in their eyes more than anything else.
Thereās only one reference to its now classic predecessor, an homage to Robin Williamās Alan Parrish but this is such a fleeting indication of any connection to the 1995 film, itās barely noticeable. The film may as well lose the Jumanji tag from its name and be done with it: of course that wouldnāt sell half as many tickets now would it?
Of the school-age characters, none of them make any impact before being sucked into Jumanji, now a video game, and director Jake Kasdan (Bad Teacher) wisely focusses on their avatar characters instead. Dwayne Johnson is always reliable and plays the fish-out-of-water nerd surprisingly well. He also has great chemistry with Kevin Hart and the two share some of the filmās best sequences.
Jack Black is hilarious as his inner female tries to break through at numerous points throughout the movie and Karen Gillan shows particular warmth as the awkward Martha. Nick Jonas also stars in a role originally destined for Tom Holland and continues to prove what a versatile actor he has become.
Itās a pleasant surprise to see an enjoyable romp that has likeable characters and some nicely filmed set pieces.
Jake Kasdan films the action confidently and with visual panache but the CGI at times is left wanting, disappointing in this day and age. A helicopter ride across a rhino-infested canyon is particularly fun to watch and the way in which the writers write the film around video game lore is exciting and makes for a pleasant distraction from an otherwise mediocre script.
What the film does have in abundance however is laughs. Indeed, they are of the Dairylea variety, cheesy, but sometimes thatās exactly what you need. Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is a very funny film that knows how to squeeze every last drop of humour from its writing.
Itās also very well paced. Apart from a few lapses in judgement where the screenwriters desperately try to make us feel emotion towards the characters ā we donāt ā the film really doesnāt have a boring moment to its name and at 119 minutes, thatās a real achievement.
Overall, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is a film that is fun to watch, if a little lacking in originality. All the lead actors perform their roles well, with Jack Black being a particular highlight. Unfortunately, while Iām not usually one for sickly nostalgia, the film really needed to provide a few more tasteful references to its predecessor, especially considering its link to the wonderful Robin Williams.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/12/10/jumanji-welcome-to-the-jungle-review-im-a-celebrity-get-me-out-of-here/
Lee (2222 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
What if Clark Kent grew up to be evil? What if, instead of growing up to be this all powerful protector of Earth and humanity, he decided he wanted to take the world, cruelly toying with and destroying humanity in the process? That's the premise behind Brightburn, a superhero horror movie from producer James Gunn, of Guardians of the Galaxy fame. Comic books are littered with plenty of 'what if' story-lines and alternate takes on popular superheroes, but up until now probably the most famous onscreen version of an evil Superman we've seen was in Superman III. And even then we only really got a drunk, unshaven, but still family friendly Superman, who felt a bit mischievous and blew out the Olympic torch for a bit of a laugh. Brightburn goes a lot darker, leaning heavily into horror with some wonderful, wince-inducing gory moments. If you're looking for Dark Phoenix levels of dark - moody, crying in the corner, that kind of thing - then you're going to be disappointed.
Brightburn begins by mirroring the origin story of Superman very closely - even the soundtrack reminded me of the music from 2013 movie Man of Steel on more than one occasion! Tori (Elizabeth Banks) and Kyle Bryer (David Denman) are a happily married couple, living on a farm and longing for a child of their own. And then one night, a meteor crash lands out in the nearby woods, bringing them a baby boy who they adopt as their own. We see home movies of a normal baby/toddler as he grows up as part of a normal, loving family. And then we move forward 10 years to present day.
As an adolescent, Brandon (Jackson A. Dunn) begins to experience some change in his life. His parents put it down to hormones, and attempt to give him the talk on girls and the facts of life, but it's a lot more than that. The rock shaped vessel which carried Brandon to Earth as a baby has been locked away in the family barn all these years, hidden from Brandon, but has now started glowing red. At the same time, something within Brandon appears to have been activated, and a number of small but disturbing incidents that follow leave his parents worried. They also realise that they've never actually seen their son bleed, or even hurt before. From there, the severity of these incidents increases greatly, and it becomes clear that there is definitely something very, very wrong with Brandon.
What I loved about Brightburn was the confined, low key setting of it all. The action is restricted primarily to the town of Brightburn, never really expanding into the worldwide, CGI heavy destruction of other superhero movies. We have an incredibly relatable mother who is out to love and protect her son until the bitter end, a father who becomes scared and horrified by everything that is unfolding, and then this powerful boy tearing the family apart - unpredictable and showing no sign of remorse or inner turmoil over everything that is happening. Outside of that, the action is confined to a relatively small cast - the local police, extended family and some other kids from school who we all follow throughout the movie - there's a lot of character depth to be found in Brightburn, which greatly adds to its overall enjoyment.
As is the norm these days though, the trailer does give away the majority of Brandon's targets and where he attacks them, meaning you kind of know what to expect for a lot of it. However, what the trailer doesn't give away is the atmosphere and the eeriness that builds to each of those shocking (and gory) moments and there are still plenty of jump scares and shocking scenes to keep you on your toes throughout. It builds to a climax which once again isn't a CGI overload, relying on shock and horror to deliver it's interesting conclusion. And, most importantly, it leaves the door open for what could be a very interesting sequel. I'm all up for that, and the direction that hints at, as I found Brightburn to be a very enjoyable and fresh take on the superhero genre.
Brightburn begins by mirroring the origin story of Superman very closely - even the soundtrack reminded me of the music from 2013 movie Man of Steel on more than one occasion! Tori (Elizabeth Banks) and Kyle Bryer (David Denman) are a happily married couple, living on a farm and longing for a child of their own. And then one night, a meteor crash lands out in the nearby woods, bringing them a baby boy who they adopt as their own. We see home movies of a normal baby/toddler as he grows up as part of a normal, loving family. And then we move forward 10 years to present day.
As an adolescent, Brandon (Jackson A. Dunn) begins to experience some change in his life. His parents put it down to hormones, and attempt to give him the talk on girls and the facts of life, but it's a lot more than that. The rock shaped vessel which carried Brandon to Earth as a baby has been locked away in the family barn all these years, hidden from Brandon, but has now started glowing red. At the same time, something within Brandon appears to have been activated, and a number of small but disturbing incidents that follow leave his parents worried. They also realise that they've never actually seen their son bleed, or even hurt before. From there, the severity of these incidents increases greatly, and it becomes clear that there is definitely something very, very wrong with Brandon.
What I loved about Brightburn was the confined, low key setting of it all. The action is restricted primarily to the town of Brightburn, never really expanding into the worldwide, CGI heavy destruction of other superhero movies. We have an incredibly relatable mother who is out to love and protect her son until the bitter end, a father who becomes scared and horrified by everything that is unfolding, and then this powerful boy tearing the family apart - unpredictable and showing no sign of remorse or inner turmoil over everything that is happening. Outside of that, the action is confined to a relatively small cast - the local police, extended family and some other kids from school who we all follow throughout the movie - there's a lot of character depth to be found in Brightburn, which greatly adds to its overall enjoyment.
As is the norm these days though, the trailer does give away the majority of Brandon's targets and where he attacks them, meaning you kind of know what to expect for a lot of it. However, what the trailer doesn't give away is the atmosphere and the eeriness that builds to each of those shocking (and gory) moments and there are still plenty of jump scares and shocking scenes to keep you on your toes throughout. It builds to a climax which once again isn't a CGI overload, relying on shock and horror to deliver it's interesting conclusion. And, most importantly, it leaves the door open for what could be a very interesting sequel. I'm all up for that, and the direction that hints at, as I found Brightburn to be a very enjoyable and fresh take on the superhero genre.
Joe Julians (221 KP) rated Black Panther (2018) in Movies
Feb 19, 2018
The cast (2 more)
Wakanda
The villain
Some side characters feel under developed (1 more)
Some CGI not great
Following on from the light-hearted romps that made up the MCU last year, Black Panther comes along and reminds us that the franchise can be dark, it can be gritty, and it can combine comedic elements with its more serious stories seamlessly when it puts its mind to it.
Last seen in Captain America: Civil War, we re-join Tāchalla not long after that films conclusion. Heās about to be made king and heās apprehensive about what that means and what the future of his country, Wakanda, holds. On top of that, heās struck with a disturbing secret from his now deceased fathers past that threatens to alter everything.
First up, the cast. Chadwick Boseman is once again superb in the lead role. He plays Tāchalla with a degree of calmness that really makes him feel like a real and well-rounded character. But the surprise here is just how well everyone else does. Some characters donāt get quite as much attention as they deserve (there are two romance plots that feel a little shoehorned in) but when it comes to the people playing these roles- they all do superb work. Danai Gurira has shown what she can do on The Walking Dead (a show she is now so much better than), she brings a whole new level to her performance here and steals many scenes sheās in. Andy Serkis is another highlight. He reprises his role as Ulysses Klaue from Avengers: Age of Ultron and is clearly having a ball in the role. Always an underrated actor, he brings life and comedy to the role here and heās another scene stealer. Props too to Martin Freeman. He is able to turn his character from an unlikable smug man to someone I found myself truly rooting for. Best of the bunch for me though is Letitia Wright as Shuri, in fact I think she could well be one of my favourite characters in the whole MCU so far. Sheās a delight every single time I saw her and I really hope her role continues to develop as the franchise continues.
Now, about the villain. The MCU has almost always had a villain problem (one not exclusive to the MCU to be fair). The list of memorable villains for me only really consists of Loki and Vulture (Spiderman: Homecoming), now though- Killmonger can be added to that short list. His backstory isnāt overly original, but thanks to the always dependable Michael B Jordan he is utterly compelling. The performance here sells it and I found myself feeling sympathy for him despite the things he was doing. Hell, there were even times that I was rooting for him. That doesnāt happy very often and Iāve got to give the film credit for pulling it off.
Onto Wakanda, this is a fully realised and fascinating place to spend time. It was so much bigger than I expected and Iām excited to rewatch this (in 4k) to see all the details about I may have missed. It does however lead me on to a fault with the film. The CGI here isnāt always as great as it could be. There were numerous times when I felt I was watching actors perform against green screen and the mountain location was one of the more notable. It wouldnāt be such an issue if this wasnāt a prominent location that is used repeatedly for some of the movies biggest moments. Thereās other instances too where Black Pantherās ideas arenāt realised as well as Iām sure they hoped. It doesnāt ruin the film by any means, but it is disappointing when lesser movies have managed better.
All in all though, this was a delightful movie and my favourite entry in the MCU since Guardians of the Galaxy. Director Ryan Coogler continues to bring the goods to the work he does and I canāt wait to see what he does next. Even more so I canāt wait to see what Black Panther does next. Now, onto Avengers: Infinity War in just two monthsā time.
Last seen in Captain America: Civil War, we re-join Tāchalla not long after that films conclusion. Heās about to be made king and heās apprehensive about what that means and what the future of his country, Wakanda, holds. On top of that, heās struck with a disturbing secret from his now deceased fathers past that threatens to alter everything.
First up, the cast. Chadwick Boseman is once again superb in the lead role. He plays Tāchalla with a degree of calmness that really makes him feel like a real and well-rounded character. But the surprise here is just how well everyone else does. Some characters donāt get quite as much attention as they deserve (there are two romance plots that feel a little shoehorned in) but when it comes to the people playing these roles- they all do superb work. Danai Gurira has shown what she can do on The Walking Dead (a show she is now so much better than), she brings a whole new level to her performance here and steals many scenes sheās in. Andy Serkis is another highlight. He reprises his role as Ulysses Klaue from Avengers: Age of Ultron and is clearly having a ball in the role. Always an underrated actor, he brings life and comedy to the role here and heās another scene stealer. Props too to Martin Freeman. He is able to turn his character from an unlikable smug man to someone I found myself truly rooting for. Best of the bunch for me though is Letitia Wright as Shuri, in fact I think she could well be one of my favourite characters in the whole MCU so far. Sheās a delight every single time I saw her and I really hope her role continues to develop as the franchise continues.
Now, about the villain. The MCU has almost always had a villain problem (one not exclusive to the MCU to be fair). The list of memorable villains for me only really consists of Loki and Vulture (Spiderman: Homecoming), now though- Killmonger can be added to that short list. His backstory isnāt overly original, but thanks to the always dependable Michael B Jordan he is utterly compelling. The performance here sells it and I found myself feeling sympathy for him despite the things he was doing. Hell, there were even times that I was rooting for him. That doesnāt happy very often and Iāve got to give the film credit for pulling it off.
Onto Wakanda, this is a fully realised and fascinating place to spend time. It was so much bigger than I expected and Iām excited to rewatch this (in 4k) to see all the details about I may have missed. It does however lead me on to a fault with the film. The CGI here isnāt always as great as it could be. There were numerous times when I felt I was watching actors perform against green screen and the mountain location was one of the more notable. It wouldnāt be such an issue if this wasnāt a prominent location that is used repeatedly for some of the movies biggest moments. Thereās other instances too where Black Pantherās ideas arenāt realised as well as Iām sure they hoped. It doesnāt ruin the film by any means, but it is disappointing when lesser movies have managed better.
All in all though, this was a delightful movie and my favourite entry in the MCU since Guardians of the Galaxy. Director Ryan Coogler continues to bring the goods to the work he does and I canāt wait to see what he does next. Even more so I canāt wait to see what Black Panther does next. Now, onto Avengers: Infinity War in just two monthsā time.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Gemini Man (2019) in Movies
Oct 17, 2019
The Effects Just Aren't Good Enough
Ang Lee is a visionary Director that loves to push the envelope of advances in movie-making technology, so the plot contrivance of GEMINI MAN (a Government Assassin is being chased by his much younger clone) was right up his alley - and he makes good (enough) work of the technology that "de-ages" Will Smith and puts the older and younger version of himself on screen at the same time. This was also his 2nd film (after BILLY FLYNN'S LONG HALFTIME WALK) that Lee shot in 4K 3D at 120 frames per second (the "normal" shooting speed is 24 FPS).
He should have spent more of his time on the script..
Based on a long gestating screenplay written in the 1990's by David Lemke (and re-written in the 2010's by Billy Ray - THE HUNGER GAMES - and Mr. GAME OF THRONES himself, David Benioff), GEMINI MAN follows a Government Contract Killer, Henry Brogan (Will Smtih) who does "one last job" and is looking forward to retirement. His agency (under the leadership of Clive Owen) decides to "take him out" and sends "Gemini" after him. Brogan tries to escape but his every move is anticipated by the Gemini - a younger clone of himself (this is not a spoiler, it's in the trailer and ON THE POSTER). He is joined by a pair of "buddies" (Mary Elizabeth Winsted and Benedict Wong) in plotting how to outsmart himself.
This film had all the markings of a bad "B" film, but under the watchful eye of Lee and the charismatic performances of Winsted, Wong - and most especially - Smith, this film is actually quite watchable.
What doesn't work - the plot. To say it is contrived is to do a disservice to the word "contrived". It really doesn't give us anything new, it just gives us a bridge from action scene to action. Also, the reasoning of the Government to get rid of Brogan doesn't really work and Clive Owen - as the head of the Gemini program - and the main "suit" that is chasing Smith looks like he is sleepwalking his way through this film.
What works - the interplay and "fun" of Smith, Winsted and Wong as the 3 "professionals" on the run - and outsmarting - "the Agency". These 3 work really well off each other and I would love to have seen a "Mission Impossible" style film of these 3 doing some sort of impossible mission. Special note needs to be made of Smith's performance - as the older Brogan. He is world weary and heavy, but still has the twinkle in his eye and the physical acumen to be a top assassin. This is the type of role that Smith - especially at his age and experience - is ideal for. His charisma shines and he holds his own in the physical/fight scenes. Also, Ang Lee knows how to shoot an action sequence. True, there is nothing "new", revolutionary or evolutionary in any of the fight/chase scenes, but they are put together in a competent, professional manner and did a good enough job.
And then there is the younger Brogan - "Junior" - played by a CGI "de-aged" Will Smith.
We've seen the CGI "de-aging" effect before - most notably in some Marvel Movies like CAPTAIN MARVEL - and while it works well enough, I just don't think it is quite there yet. You can tell that something is just a little off - not enough for it to really bother you, but enough to know that something isn't quite right - especially when Junior spends most of this film on screen with his older self. You see the "real" Will Smith up against the "copy" and the "copy" looks like...a copy. Also, the "de-aging" of the voice didn't really work for me. It sounded "off" and at times it sounded like bad ADR.
I was able to shrug off these slight technical anomalies and enjoy this film for what it is - a breezy action-er that certainly entertains for 2 hours. But it is no masterpiece and no "major" technological breakthrough. That will have to wait for another movie.
Letter Grade: B (mostly for the fun interplay between older Smith, Winsted and Wong)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
He should have spent more of his time on the script..
Based on a long gestating screenplay written in the 1990's by David Lemke (and re-written in the 2010's by Billy Ray - THE HUNGER GAMES - and Mr. GAME OF THRONES himself, David Benioff), GEMINI MAN follows a Government Contract Killer, Henry Brogan (Will Smtih) who does "one last job" and is looking forward to retirement. His agency (under the leadership of Clive Owen) decides to "take him out" and sends "Gemini" after him. Brogan tries to escape but his every move is anticipated by the Gemini - a younger clone of himself (this is not a spoiler, it's in the trailer and ON THE POSTER). He is joined by a pair of "buddies" (Mary Elizabeth Winsted and Benedict Wong) in plotting how to outsmart himself.
This film had all the markings of a bad "B" film, but under the watchful eye of Lee and the charismatic performances of Winsted, Wong - and most especially - Smith, this film is actually quite watchable.
What doesn't work - the plot. To say it is contrived is to do a disservice to the word "contrived". It really doesn't give us anything new, it just gives us a bridge from action scene to action. Also, the reasoning of the Government to get rid of Brogan doesn't really work and Clive Owen - as the head of the Gemini program - and the main "suit" that is chasing Smith looks like he is sleepwalking his way through this film.
What works - the interplay and "fun" of Smith, Winsted and Wong as the 3 "professionals" on the run - and outsmarting - "the Agency". These 3 work really well off each other and I would love to have seen a "Mission Impossible" style film of these 3 doing some sort of impossible mission. Special note needs to be made of Smith's performance - as the older Brogan. He is world weary and heavy, but still has the twinkle in his eye and the physical acumen to be a top assassin. This is the type of role that Smith - especially at his age and experience - is ideal for. His charisma shines and he holds his own in the physical/fight scenes. Also, Ang Lee knows how to shoot an action sequence. True, there is nothing "new", revolutionary or evolutionary in any of the fight/chase scenes, but they are put together in a competent, professional manner and did a good enough job.
And then there is the younger Brogan - "Junior" - played by a CGI "de-aged" Will Smith.
We've seen the CGI "de-aging" effect before - most notably in some Marvel Movies like CAPTAIN MARVEL - and while it works well enough, I just don't think it is quite there yet. You can tell that something is just a little off - not enough for it to really bother you, but enough to know that something isn't quite right - especially when Junior spends most of this film on screen with his older self. You see the "real" Will Smith up against the "copy" and the "copy" looks like...a copy. Also, the "de-aging" of the voice didn't really work for me. It sounded "off" and at times it sounded like bad ADR.
I was able to shrug off these slight technical anomalies and enjoy this film for what it is - a breezy action-er that certainly entertains for 2 hours. But it is no masterpiece and no "major" technological breakthrough. That will have to wait for another movie.
Letter Grade: B (mostly for the fun interplay between older Smith, Winsted and Wong)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)