Search
Search results
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated American Horror Story - Season 7 in TV
Mar 8, 2020
Season 7 of American Horror Story, subtitled Cult, is a weird one. Instead of focusing on the supernatural, ghosts, witches, haunted houses, Cult is a trip through the delicacy of the human mind. It instead looks at fears, real world issues, and of course, the presence of an all too familiar cult like family.
This makes for some of the best and worst aspects of AHS Cult. The plot leans heavily into politics this time around, originally airing not long Donald Trump was sworn in. I personally like that this season takes this real world event, and explores the horror that some people experienced during this time. Others would argue that it's very on-the-nose, which is somewhat true. Some of the political leanings carry all the subtlety of a stampeding cattle herd, andnat times can feel heavy handed.
Underneath all of the IRL shit that's going on, we also have a plot of intrigue and mystery, as the main character Ally (Sarah Paulson) is being apparently being stalked and pursued by clowns - her worst fear. We are given reason to believe that perhaps Ally is losing her mind, off her meds, upset with the election result, but as the season continues, you find yourself questioning whether she is in fact being gaslighted. Manipulation of what you believe to be true or false is a terrible horror all on its own, and a big reason why I rate this season highly.
The star of Cult for me though was of course Evan Peters. Playing a deranged political candidate called Kai Anderson, it's not long before his extreme right views Garner him a following, and the titular cult is created. To say anymore would be considered spoilers, but rest assured that all of these plot strands weave together by the time the story climaxes.
Evan Peters role in Cult is my favourite performance if his to date. His character is simultaneously charming, terrifying, smart, and unhinged, and he does a fantastic job in bringing him to life.
The plot also touches upon other real world figures, such as Charles Manson. Those parts were pretty interesting, but when the show flashes back and focuses on Valerie Solanis (Lena Dunham), it lost me a bit. I like when AHS includes real life characters, and it's always fun to see how they are interpreted in this kind of media, but it goes a bit overboard with it's hammy stuff (again) at times - the whole Andy Warhol plot was a massive eye roll in my book - and the Solanis stuff is just plain unenjoyable to watch.
This whole side plot really drags down the quality of cult to me, but the strong performances by Sarah Paulson and Evan Peters is enough to keep it in a higher placing for me.
Certainly not my favourite, and certainly not my least, Cult sits somewhere in the middle, and I can only praise the writers for trying something new with the horror element. Good stuff.
This makes for some of the best and worst aspects of AHS Cult. The plot leans heavily into politics this time around, originally airing not long Donald Trump was sworn in. I personally like that this season takes this real world event, and explores the horror that some people experienced during this time. Others would argue that it's very on-the-nose, which is somewhat true. Some of the political leanings carry all the subtlety of a stampeding cattle herd, andnat times can feel heavy handed.
Underneath all of the IRL shit that's going on, we also have a plot of intrigue and mystery, as the main character Ally (Sarah Paulson) is being apparently being stalked and pursued by clowns - her worst fear. We are given reason to believe that perhaps Ally is losing her mind, off her meds, upset with the election result, but as the season continues, you find yourself questioning whether she is in fact being gaslighted. Manipulation of what you believe to be true or false is a terrible horror all on its own, and a big reason why I rate this season highly.
The star of Cult for me though was of course Evan Peters. Playing a deranged political candidate called Kai Anderson, it's not long before his extreme right views Garner him a following, and the titular cult is created. To say anymore would be considered spoilers, but rest assured that all of these plot strands weave together by the time the story climaxes.
Evan Peters role in Cult is my favourite performance if his to date. His character is simultaneously charming, terrifying, smart, and unhinged, and he does a fantastic job in bringing him to life.
The plot also touches upon other real world figures, such as Charles Manson. Those parts were pretty interesting, but when the show flashes back and focuses on Valerie Solanis (Lena Dunham), it lost me a bit. I like when AHS includes real life characters, and it's always fun to see how they are interpreted in this kind of media, but it goes a bit overboard with it's hammy stuff (again) at times - the whole Andy Warhol plot was a massive eye roll in my book - and the Solanis stuff is just plain unenjoyable to watch.
This whole side plot really drags down the quality of cult to me, but the strong performances by Sarah Paulson and Evan Peters is enough to keep it in a higher placing for me.
Certainly not my favourite, and certainly not my least, Cult sits somewhere in the middle, and I can only praise the writers for trying something new with the horror element. Good stuff.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Evil Dead (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
One of the greatest horror movies of all time would have to be “The Evil Dead” which had been spawned by Sam Raimi and his original short film “Within the Woods”. “Within the Woods” was filmed with the intent of gaining investors to collaborate on a full length film starring the then unknown God of “B” horror movies Bruce Campbell. “The Evil Dead” and its predecessor “Within the Woods” was meant to be serious and horrifying, though that proved to be hard with a smaller budget that Raimi and Campbell had originally hoped for. Little did they know that Evil Dead would become one of the largest trilogies in cult film histories.
Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.
The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.
If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.
The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.
If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Blade Runner 2049 (2017) in Movies
Oct 9, 2017 (Updated Oct 13, 2017)
One of the most visually stunning movies I have ever seen. (8 more)
Awesome production design.
Brilliant direction.
Beautiful cinematography.
Solid performances.
Incredible SFX.
Great score.
Good use of lighting.
Well written script and dialogue.
Villeneuve Strikes Gold Yet Again
Wow, this movie is a feast for your eyeballs. I won't go on about the visuals too much, as I'm sure that you have already heard how good looking this movie is, all I'll say is this; the movie deserves to be seen in the biggest screen possible. What is even better though, is unlike a Zack Snyder film, Blade Runner 2049 has more to it than just surface level, pretty visuals.
Somehow, Denis Villeneuve has achieved the impossible. He has directed a movie every year for the last five years and they have all been absolutely incredible, also he has managed to pull off a fantastic sequel to a 35 year old classic.
I loved almost every part of this movie. The direction was masterful to watch, with the movie being moved along at a deliberate, purposeful pace, rather than rushing through from action scene to action scene. The sets in this were out of this world, some props were really cool to look at and the use of mostly practical backdrops made a huge difference as opposed to using an abundance of green screen. Rodger Deakins' cinematography was astonishing, you could honestly screen grab an image from any time stamp in this movie and it would work perfectly as a beautiful desktop background.
I also thought that the performances were fantastic and everyone did a great job. Although Ford doesn't appear until the movie's third act, when he does he is great. Gosling commands his leading man role as we've come to expect him to. Robin Wright and Dave Bautista were the other standouts for me in terms of their performances.
The more technical elements of the movie worked perfectly in tandem with the story being told as well. The special effects were beautifully implemented and the lighting in the movie added a whole other layer of visual depth as well. The score also worked for the tone that the movie was aiming to achieve. The script was also solid and tightly woven.
The only thing I will say is; if you are going into the film expecting a sci-fi action blockbuster, you will come out disappointed. This is a slow paced, sci-fi noir, detective story. There are a few sparse moments of action and it does feel impactful when it occurs, but it is not the focus of the movie at all.
The one small element that bothered me was Jared Leto's performance. He took me out of the movie and was the only cast member who didn't feel like a real character within this world. Maybe I'm just being biased, as Jared Leto has always annoyed me in general, but for me he was the one bad part of this near masterpiece. Thankfully he doesn't get that much screen time, so it could have been worse. Also, the fact that David Bowie was originally cast in that role adds an extra sprinkle of salt in the wound.
Unfortunately, much like the original movie, this hasn't done great at the box office on its opening weekend. If like me, you are sick of mindless sequel cash cows that are total garbage such as Jurassic World, go and see this movie and vote with your wallet. If you don't, we are telling Hollywood that as a collective, we don't want sequels with depth and integrity, we want dumb, rushed, forgettable nonsense and that is what we will end up getting. Support this movie for the betterment of filmmaking and cinema, even if you haven't seen the original.
Overall I loved the movie, but I can see why people are finding it divisive. For me though, the vast majority of this movie's parts were absolutely fantastic and come together to form a journey that you must experience for yourself.
Somehow, Denis Villeneuve has achieved the impossible. He has directed a movie every year for the last five years and they have all been absolutely incredible, also he has managed to pull off a fantastic sequel to a 35 year old classic.
I loved almost every part of this movie. The direction was masterful to watch, with the movie being moved along at a deliberate, purposeful pace, rather than rushing through from action scene to action scene. The sets in this were out of this world, some props were really cool to look at and the use of mostly practical backdrops made a huge difference as opposed to using an abundance of green screen. Rodger Deakins' cinematography was astonishing, you could honestly screen grab an image from any time stamp in this movie and it would work perfectly as a beautiful desktop background.
I also thought that the performances were fantastic and everyone did a great job. Although Ford doesn't appear until the movie's third act, when he does he is great. Gosling commands his leading man role as we've come to expect him to. Robin Wright and Dave Bautista were the other standouts for me in terms of their performances.
The more technical elements of the movie worked perfectly in tandem with the story being told as well. The special effects were beautifully implemented and the lighting in the movie added a whole other layer of visual depth as well. The score also worked for the tone that the movie was aiming to achieve. The script was also solid and tightly woven.
The only thing I will say is; if you are going into the film expecting a sci-fi action blockbuster, you will come out disappointed. This is a slow paced, sci-fi noir, detective story. There are a few sparse moments of action and it does feel impactful when it occurs, but it is not the focus of the movie at all.
The one small element that bothered me was Jared Leto's performance. He took me out of the movie and was the only cast member who didn't feel like a real character within this world. Maybe I'm just being biased, as Jared Leto has always annoyed me in general, but for me he was the one bad part of this near masterpiece. Thankfully he doesn't get that much screen time, so it could have been worse. Also, the fact that David Bowie was originally cast in that role adds an extra sprinkle of salt in the wound.
Unfortunately, much like the original movie, this hasn't done great at the box office on its opening weekend. If like me, you are sick of mindless sequel cash cows that are total garbage such as Jurassic World, go and see this movie and vote with your wallet. If you don't, we are telling Hollywood that as a collective, we don't want sequels with depth and integrity, we want dumb, rushed, forgettable nonsense and that is what we will end up getting. Support this movie for the betterment of filmmaking and cinema, even if you haven't seen the original.
Overall I loved the movie, but I can see why people are finding it divisive. For me though, the vast majority of this movie's parts were absolutely fantastic and come together to form a journey that you must experience for yourself.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Halloween (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
“He’s waited for me; I’ve waited for him”.
A blood-soaked history.
There’s such a familiarity with the content of these films that it’s difficult to put yourself back in 1978 for Jamie Lee Curtis‘s original battle with Michael Myers when the teen-slasher genre was in its infancy. Arguably “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” four years earlier booted the 70’s/80’s genre; but thanks to its huge success John Carpenter’s “Halloween” opened the flood-gates… or should I say, blood-gates.
The plot.
40 years after the terrifying events of Halloween night in Haddonfield, Illinois, Michael Myers is still mute and incarcerated in a psychiatric unit being studied by Dr Sartain (Haluk Bilginer). He is joined by two investigative journalists – Aaron Korey (Jefferson Hall) and Dana Haines (Basingstoke’s-own Rhian Rees: “Where are your loos?”… classic!). They are keen to reunite Myers with his nemesis Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) to watch the fireworks.
Strode is unfortunately damaged goods: still mentally traumatised and with failed marriages and a child taken into care, she lives in a fortified home in the middle of the woods. But she knows she has a date with destiny. As Halloween 2018 approaches, an ‘incident’ puts Myers on a collision course with Haddonfield’s teenage population all over again.
The turns.
Wow… you forget what an effective actress Jamie Lee Curtis is and here she absolutely owns every single scene she’s in, bringing enormous energy to the screen as the paranoid but ever-prepared hunter-in-waiting. The original Halloween was Lee Curtis’s movie debut and the film that made her a household name, and it almost feels like this is a passion-project for her to say “thanks for all the fish” for her career. Impressive.
As her eye-rolling daughter, Judy Greer rather pales in comparison (I found her character is a bit whiny and annoying), but the acting stakes pick up again with Andi Matichak as the granddaughter Allyson.
Of the other teens, Virginia Gardner is particularly effective as Vicky: the cute “favourite” babysitter who you can’t help but empathise with.
The review.
It’s very easy to make a very bad slasher movie, but this isn’t such a movie. Although having a wonderfully retro feel (when is the last time you saw “traditional” opening titles like this?) and despite mining every horror cliché known to man (ALWAYS look in the back seat when you get in a car!) it’s all obviously been done with loving care by the director David Gordon Green.
Above all, the director knows that what’s more scary than seeing violent murders is what your imagination can visualise happening off-screen. Don’t get me wrong, there is some SERIOUS gore meted out, with a few ‘cover your eyes’ moments. However, a good proportion of the violence is not shown, and very effective that is too, supported by Carpenter’s classic and insistent theme and some kick-ass foley work to add spice to your imagination!
The script (by the writing team of David Gordon Green, Danny McBride and Jeff Fradley) also wickedly plays with your darkest fear of where the plot *could* go if it wanted to: in a brilliant piece of misdirection (you’ll know the scene) your “OMG surely not” nerves twang and then un-twang with relief.
The script also works well to help you care about the teens on the menu, in much the same way as “Jaws” did with the tourists to Amity Beach.
Where the plot nearly lost me was in a rather daft twist before the final reel (which actually made more sense of what happened in the first reel, but was still hugely improbable). The ship rights itself fairly quickly (if messily) and normal order is resumed for the finale it deserves.
Final thoughts.
I’m not really a “horror nut” but this was popcorn horror of the best sort and I enjoyed it. Reverential to the original classic, it made for some entertaining reactions in the sparsely populated showing I attended: I imagine if seen in a packed auditorium on a Saturday night (or perhaps tomorrow night!) it would literally be a scream.
One’s thing for sure: when I got into my car in the dark cinema car park, I did take a sneaky look into the back seat!
There’s such a familiarity with the content of these films that it’s difficult to put yourself back in 1978 for Jamie Lee Curtis‘s original battle with Michael Myers when the teen-slasher genre was in its infancy. Arguably “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” four years earlier booted the 70’s/80’s genre; but thanks to its huge success John Carpenter’s “Halloween” opened the flood-gates… or should I say, blood-gates.
The plot.
40 years after the terrifying events of Halloween night in Haddonfield, Illinois, Michael Myers is still mute and incarcerated in a psychiatric unit being studied by Dr Sartain (Haluk Bilginer). He is joined by two investigative journalists – Aaron Korey (Jefferson Hall) and Dana Haines (Basingstoke’s-own Rhian Rees: “Where are your loos?”… classic!). They are keen to reunite Myers with his nemesis Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) to watch the fireworks.
Strode is unfortunately damaged goods: still mentally traumatised and with failed marriages and a child taken into care, she lives in a fortified home in the middle of the woods. But she knows she has a date with destiny. As Halloween 2018 approaches, an ‘incident’ puts Myers on a collision course with Haddonfield’s teenage population all over again.
The turns.
Wow… you forget what an effective actress Jamie Lee Curtis is and here she absolutely owns every single scene she’s in, bringing enormous energy to the screen as the paranoid but ever-prepared hunter-in-waiting. The original Halloween was Lee Curtis’s movie debut and the film that made her a household name, and it almost feels like this is a passion-project for her to say “thanks for all the fish” for her career. Impressive.
As her eye-rolling daughter, Judy Greer rather pales in comparison (I found her character is a bit whiny and annoying), but the acting stakes pick up again with Andi Matichak as the granddaughter Allyson.
Of the other teens, Virginia Gardner is particularly effective as Vicky: the cute “favourite” babysitter who you can’t help but empathise with.
The review.
It’s very easy to make a very bad slasher movie, but this isn’t such a movie. Although having a wonderfully retro feel (when is the last time you saw “traditional” opening titles like this?) and despite mining every horror cliché known to man (ALWAYS look in the back seat when you get in a car!) it’s all obviously been done with loving care by the director David Gordon Green.
Above all, the director knows that what’s more scary than seeing violent murders is what your imagination can visualise happening off-screen. Don’t get me wrong, there is some SERIOUS gore meted out, with a few ‘cover your eyes’ moments. However, a good proportion of the violence is not shown, and very effective that is too, supported by Carpenter’s classic and insistent theme and some kick-ass foley work to add spice to your imagination!
The script (by the writing team of David Gordon Green, Danny McBride and Jeff Fradley) also wickedly plays with your darkest fear of where the plot *could* go if it wanted to: in a brilliant piece of misdirection (you’ll know the scene) your “OMG surely not” nerves twang and then un-twang with relief.
The script also works well to help you care about the teens on the menu, in much the same way as “Jaws” did with the tourists to Amity Beach.
Where the plot nearly lost me was in a rather daft twist before the final reel (which actually made more sense of what happened in the first reel, but was still hugely improbable). The ship rights itself fairly quickly (if messily) and normal order is resumed for the finale it deserves.
Final thoughts.
I’m not really a “horror nut” but this was popcorn horror of the best sort and I enjoyed it. Reverential to the original classic, it made for some entertaining reactions in the sparsely populated showing I attended: I imagine if seen in a packed auditorium on a Saturday night (or perhaps tomorrow night!) it would literally be a scream.
One’s thing for sure: when I got into my car in the dark cinema car park, I did take a sneaky look into the back seat!
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Batman: Arkham Knight in Video Games
Jun 19, 2019
Playing as Batman never gets old for fans of the Caped Crusader and in the latest video game offering Arkham Knight from Warner Bros Interactive and Rocksteady Studios, fans can once again climb, soar, and now drive through the streets of Gotham City to make the world a safer place.
After the Scarecrow has launched an attack on the city, it is up to Batman to save the day as the mass exodus caused by the attack has left Gotham a shell of its former self and allowed more of the seedy underbelly of the city to come to ground.
As Batman investigates he encounters all sorts of foes ranging from Poison Ivy to the Arkham Knight who stand in his way. Of course there are legions of henchmen and goons for you to fight through and the free-form combat that has been established in the previous games in the series really shines as the action is as fast and smooth as you would want.
Driving segments played a big part in the game and while I loved racing through the city, I did find the vehicle combat a bit linear and repetitive for my taste, but there are some great side missions such as one in the sewers with the Riddler that will put your driving skills to the test.
What I loved about the game was that the city was a true living and breathing city. It is vast, complex, and something to enjoy when you’re gliding or rappelling your way across the rooftops.
The plot of the game is also a huge selling point as it is filled with twists and turns that will keep you hooked during the entire time that you are playing the game.
From the great graphics and action, the sound quality in the game really makes things come to life, especially the thuds of your fists hitting the next bad guy who was crazy enough to think that they could get away from Batman.
If you are a fan of the previous Batman games in the series, there is much to like about Arkham Knight as aside from the Batmobile issues, I had very little to complain about. The control system works well, the graphics, and sound are first-rate, and the storyline is gripping and engaging.
I look forward to playing the game again and focusing more on the side quests, but for now, let me say that Batman: Arkham Knight is a must own for fan of the series as it is on par with the amazing Arkham Asylum for the best Batman adaptation to date.
http://sknr.net/2015/07/28/batman-arkham-knight/
After the Scarecrow has launched an attack on the city, it is up to Batman to save the day as the mass exodus caused by the attack has left Gotham a shell of its former self and allowed more of the seedy underbelly of the city to come to ground.
As Batman investigates he encounters all sorts of foes ranging from Poison Ivy to the Arkham Knight who stand in his way. Of course there are legions of henchmen and goons for you to fight through and the free-form combat that has been established in the previous games in the series really shines as the action is as fast and smooth as you would want.
Driving segments played a big part in the game and while I loved racing through the city, I did find the vehicle combat a bit linear and repetitive for my taste, but there are some great side missions such as one in the sewers with the Riddler that will put your driving skills to the test.
What I loved about the game was that the city was a true living and breathing city. It is vast, complex, and something to enjoy when you’re gliding or rappelling your way across the rooftops.
The plot of the game is also a huge selling point as it is filled with twists and turns that will keep you hooked during the entire time that you are playing the game.
From the great graphics and action, the sound quality in the game really makes things come to life, especially the thuds of your fists hitting the next bad guy who was crazy enough to think that they could get away from Batman.
If you are a fan of the previous Batman games in the series, there is much to like about Arkham Knight as aside from the Batmobile issues, I had very little to complain about. The control system works well, the graphics, and sound are first-rate, and the storyline is gripping and engaging.
I look forward to playing the game again and focusing more on the side quests, but for now, let me say that Batman: Arkham Knight is a must own for fan of the series as it is on par with the amazing Arkham Asylum for the best Batman adaptation to date.
http://sknr.net/2015/07/28/batman-arkham-knight/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated See You Yesterday (2019) in Movies
Oct 23, 2019
Highly Entertaining and Thought-Provoking
After successfully creating a time machine, high school scientist CJ Walker (Eden Duncan-Smith) decides to go back in time and save her brother from being gunned down by police. She soon learns that it’s harder to change the past than she once thought.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
With an eighty-seven-minute runtime, the movie doesn’t linger getting you into the action immediately. We see CJ and her partner Sebastian Thomas (Dante Chrichlow) working through trials of time machine testing which prove for hilarious results. It quickly brought me into the world of the characters and laid the foundation for the story.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
See You Yesterday captures the full essence of New York. The teens walk through busy streets past bodegas and fruit stands. They hit corner stores and picnics, the subway their primary means of transportation. Although the time travel aspect is slightly cheesy to watch (ok, extremely cheesy), it doesn’t diminish the impactful moments director Stefon Bristol is able to capture.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
The movie makes full use of its short runtime, not slowing down for a second. It does a masterful job of sprinkling in comedic moments into a movie that could otherwise lull you into a sense of helplessness. I was riveted throughout by all the potential outcomes that could await.
Memorability: 10
So much to say about how powerful this movie is. It explores time travel like never before with decisions that revolve around what’s happening right now in the public eye. You walk away not sure of what’s right or what’s wrong or if you would’ve approached the situation in the same way. This movie will definitely sit with you long after you watch it.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Great story through and through. The movie never cheats itself and carries things through no matter how tough it can be at times. The story works largely in part due to the two main characters having such opposing views to approaching the conflict. It creates friction and an uncomfortable tension necessary for the checks and balances of the movie.
Resolution: 7
While I wasn’t in love with the ending, I understand that it was necessary and I also understand the point that was being driven home. If nothing else, it was definitely an ending that left you wanting more.
Overall: 95
See You Yesterday represents everything I love about movies. As of late October 2019, this definitely falls into my Top Ten list for the year. See it, asap. Not only will you love it, but it won’t take up a lot of time in your day.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
With an eighty-seven-minute runtime, the movie doesn’t linger getting you into the action immediately. We see CJ and her partner Sebastian Thomas (Dante Chrichlow) working through trials of time machine testing which prove for hilarious results. It quickly brought me into the world of the characters and laid the foundation for the story.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
See You Yesterday captures the full essence of New York. The teens walk through busy streets past bodegas and fruit stands. They hit corner stores and picnics, the subway their primary means of transportation. Although the time travel aspect is slightly cheesy to watch (ok, extremely cheesy), it doesn’t diminish the impactful moments director Stefon Bristol is able to capture.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
The movie makes full use of its short runtime, not slowing down for a second. It does a masterful job of sprinkling in comedic moments into a movie that could otherwise lull you into a sense of helplessness. I was riveted throughout by all the potential outcomes that could await.
Memorability: 10
So much to say about how powerful this movie is. It explores time travel like never before with decisions that revolve around what’s happening right now in the public eye. You walk away not sure of what’s right or what’s wrong or if you would’ve approached the situation in the same way. This movie will definitely sit with you long after you watch it.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Great story through and through. The movie never cheats itself and carries things through no matter how tough it can be at times. The story works largely in part due to the two main characters having such opposing views to approaching the conflict. It creates friction and an uncomfortable tension necessary for the checks and balances of the movie.
Resolution: 7
While I wasn’t in love with the ending, I understand that it was necessary and I also understand the point that was being driven home. If nothing else, it was definitely an ending that left you wanting more.
Overall: 95
See You Yesterday represents everything I love about movies. As of late October 2019, this definitely falls into my Top Ten list for the year. See it, asap. Not only will you love it, but it won’t take up a lot of time in your day.
James P. Sumner (65 KP) rated Yesterday (2019) in Movies
Jul 18, 2019
The best British film in years!
Despite not really being a fan of The Beatles or their music, when I first saw the trailer for this at the start of the year, I was genuinely intrigued by the concept. An aspiring musician (and huge Beatles fan) is hit by a bus during an inexplicable global blackout, only to wake up to a world in which The Beatles seemingly never existed. As the only one who remembers their songs, he releases them as his own and conquers the music world.
The trailer did a good job of letting you know what to expect without giving too much away, believe it or not. There are a few twists and turns along the way, which were a nice surprise. Ultimately, this IS a British rom-com underneath it all, and the final third is as predictable as every other film in the genre.
Yet this film oozes charm and whimsicality, and sets itself apart from everything that's come before it. Say what you want about Love Actually, but for me, that was the last British film to really make a splash on this level - which was 16 years ago!
The script is amazing. No scene feels unnecessary. No dialogue feels pointless. Richard Curtis, yet again, proves he's a true master of his craft. The lead roles are perfectly cast. Lily James, in particular, puts in another great performance, showing she's worthy of more heavyweight roles (although she's definitely found her niche in this type of film).
What I really loved about this film was how thought-provoking it was. Relative newcomer, Himesh Patel's portrayal of Jack Malek is spot-on, playing with your own emotions and morals, forcing you to ask yourself if you could remain as grounded and humble as he did if something like this happened to you. Despite being over the top at times, it all felt surprisingly real. I can imagine this is exactly how it would play out if something like this were to happen to someone - the media frenzy, the explosion of popularity online, the whirlwind of life-changing moments...
The film is about big moments in your life, and what you choose to do with them when they happen. It's about chasing your dreams and what you would do if you caught them. It's about how to follow your heart when it wants two things at once. I left the cinema smiling, but also genuinely thinking about my entire outlook on life.
Danny Boyle has done an excellent job with this film, and it deserves to go down as one of the best British films in recent years. Whether you're a fan of the music or not, this should not be missed. Near perfect!
The trailer did a good job of letting you know what to expect without giving too much away, believe it or not. There are a few twists and turns along the way, which were a nice surprise. Ultimately, this IS a British rom-com underneath it all, and the final third is as predictable as every other film in the genre.
Yet this film oozes charm and whimsicality, and sets itself apart from everything that's come before it. Say what you want about Love Actually, but for me, that was the last British film to really make a splash on this level - which was 16 years ago!
The script is amazing. No scene feels unnecessary. No dialogue feels pointless. Richard Curtis, yet again, proves he's a true master of his craft. The lead roles are perfectly cast. Lily James, in particular, puts in another great performance, showing she's worthy of more heavyweight roles (although she's definitely found her niche in this type of film).
What I really loved about this film was how thought-provoking it was. Relative newcomer, Himesh Patel's portrayal of Jack Malek is spot-on, playing with your own emotions and morals, forcing you to ask yourself if you could remain as grounded and humble as he did if something like this happened to you. Despite being over the top at times, it all felt surprisingly real. I can imagine this is exactly how it would play out if something like this were to happen to someone - the media frenzy, the explosion of popularity online, the whirlwind of life-changing moments...
The film is about big moments in your life, and what you choose to do with them when they happen. It's about chasing your dreams and what you would do if you caught them. It's about how to follow your heart when it wants two things at once. I left the cinema smiling, but also genuinely thinking about my entire outlook on life.
Danny Boyle has done an excellent job with this film, and it deserves to go down as one of the best British films in recent years. Whether you're a fan of the music or not, this should not be missed. Near perfect!
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Gender Outlaw: On Men, Women and the Rest of Us in Books
Jul 23, 2019
This book has one of the best forewords I've ever seen. Bornstein explains that since 1994, when the book was first published, language has changed a lot, and terms that were used regularly then, like transsexual, are highly offensive now. So she has heavily rewritten the book to change the language, but she goes on to say that language is an always-changing thing, and in five or six years this edition, too, might be offensive in the language used. Then she apologizes for that. My favorite lines are one of the last paragraphs of the foreword:
"Now, if anything you read in this book makes you feel bad or wrong or small and weak, then please know that I said something wrong. This book was written many years ago, and the culture I wrote it in is not the culture in which you're reading it. So, if you find anything to be personally insulting, please accept my apology and keep reading with the knowledge that your identity and how you express your gender are correct only when you feel they are correct."
It was a wonderful note to start the book on. I just loved "if you are offended, if this invalidates your identity, then I AM WRONG." Bornstein transitioned in the 80s, and has been an outspoken advocate of queer and trans people most of her life. She is definitely a figure in queer history that more people should read about.
The rest of the book is every bit as good as the foreword. Bornstein absolutely destroys the concept of gender in this book, dissecting it and looking at all the parts and pieces to attempt to figure out why society is so set on the binary system. She more than makes her case that gender is a spectrum, not an either/or. And not just a spectrum between "more male" and "more female" but a colorful kaleidoscope of gender expression and identity. She does not shy away from sensitive topics like surgeries and anatomy. She talks to the reader like she's your favorite outrageous aunt, sitting in the family room gossiping over heavily-spiked tea.
The formatting was occasionally confusing; she has the usual justified text, but then she has left-aligned passages (usually quotes from other people) and right-aligned passages (side-bar like content; I'm unclear if these are notes she made on the original text or what, but it generally clarifies or alters what the main text is talking about.)
I would HIGHLY recommend this book for anyone who wants to learn more about gender issues. Bornstein has an incredibly entertaining way of writing, and she loves to challenge what we think of as gender.
You can find all my reviews and more at http://goddessinthestacks.com
"Now, if anything you read in this book makes you feel bad or wrong or small and weak, then please know that I said something wrong. This book was written many years ago, and the culture I wrote it in is not the culture in which you're reading it. So, if you find anything to be personally insulting, please accept my apology and keep reading with the knowledge that your identity and how you express your gender are correct only when you feel they are correct."
It was a wonderful note to start the book on. I just loved "if you are offended, if this invalidates your identity, then I AM WRONG." Bornstein transitioned in the 80s, and has been an outspoken advocate of queer and trans people most of her life. She is definitely a figure in queer history that more people should read about.
The rest of the book is every bit as good as the foreword. Bornstein absolutely destroys the concept of gender in this book, dissecting it and looking at all the parts and pieces to attempt to figure out why society is so set on the binary system. She more than makes her case that gender is a spectrum, not an either/or. And not just a spectrum between "more male" and "more female" but a colorful kaleidoscope of gender expression and identity. She does not shy away from sensitive topics like surgeries and anatomy. She talks to the reader like she's your favorite outrageous aunt, sitting in the family room gossiping over heavily-spiked tea.
The formatting was occasionally confusing; she has the usual justified text, but then she has left-aligned passages (usually quotes from other people) and right-aligned passages (side-bar like content; I'm unclear if these are notes she made on the original text or what, but it generally clarifies or alters what the main text is talking about.)
I would HIGHLY recommend this book for anyone who wants to learn more about gender issues. Bornstein has an incredibly entertaining way of writing, and she loves to challenge what we think of as gender.
You can find all my reviews and more at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Color Out of Space (2019) in Movies
Feb 8, 2020
You had me at Nicolas Cage.
The Gardners are settling into the secluded family home nicely, no city hustle and bustle to bother them. That peaceful life is shattered when a curious meteorite crashes into their garden. Far from a normal bit of space debris, the rock seems to be changing everything around it. It's taking over, the plants, pace and time, even the family themselves.
Briefly hearing Richard Stanley before this screening made me feel this adaptation of Lovecraft's work of the same name was in good hands, he clearly has an appreciation for what he's was working on and the imagery he creates makes for incredible viewing.
So, straight to Nic Cage... he doesn't quite go full Cage, but he's pretty close. It's the usual insanity we've all come to love.
This film is a little crazy on many levels, the family as a whole are very off before we even get to the magical meteorite. Each member seemingly has their own little corner of crazy town mapped out, and yet when you look at them as a whole you'd wouldn't put them in the same family.
As the film progresses and things get even more bizarre the family feel even less connected than at the beginning. The alien influence is pushing them further apart, but on top of that the script falls away in the middle and chaotic devolving of sanity replaces it. Each member of the family has their own experience with the meteorite, apart from chaos and the underlying cause none of it feels connected.
To say it plainly, there's some really messed up stuff. I would love to see how some of it was achieved because if Richardson is doing half the things it appears she is then she deserves some kind of award. I've got the short story to read so I can compare the two because honestly I can't visualise the written version of this story.
The creatures that evolve are made to be terrifying, and they do scare, but the comedy moments that come through from the performances (mostly unintentionally I guess) detract from it being all that shocking.
Our meteorite has a great influence over the sets for most of the movie, the colours and the growth are used to good effect. The progression is clear and well balanced, it might not always look realistic but the fact that that's the point helps.
When you look at Color Out Of Space as a whole it's all over the place, interesting but ambling, understandable and confusing. Despite that, it's an experience that I enjoyed having.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/color-out-of-space-movie-review.html
The Gardners are settling into the secluded family home nicely, no city hustle and bustle to bother them. That peaceful life is shattered when a curious meteorite crashes into their garden. Far from a normal bit of space debris, the rock seems to be changing everything around it. It's taking over, the plants, pace and time, even the family themselves.
Briefly hearing Richard Stanley before this screening made me feel this adaptation of Lovecraft's work of the same name was in good hands, he clearly has an appreciation for what he's was working on and the imagery he creates makes for incredible viewing.
So, straight to Nic Cage... he doesn't quite go full Cage, but he's pretty close. It's the usual insanity we've all come to love.
This film is a little crazy on many levels, the family as a whole are very off before we even get to the magical meteorite. Each member seemingly has their own little corner of crazy town mapped out, and yet when you look at them as a whole you'd wouldn't put them in the same family.
As the film progresses and things get even more bizarre the family feel even less connected than at the beginning. The alien influence is pushing them further apart, but on top of that the script falls away in the middle and chaotic devolving of sanity replaces it. Each member of the family has their own experience with the meteorite, apart from chaos and the underlying cause none of it feels connected.
To say it plainly, there's some really messed up stuff. I would love to see how some of it was achieved because if Richardson is doing half the things it appears she is then she deserves some kind of award. I've got the short story to read so I can compare the two because honestly I can't visualise the written version of this story.
The creatures that evolve are made to be terrifying, and they do scare, but the comedy moments that come through from the performances (mostly unintentionally I guess) detract from it being all that shocking.
Our meteorite has a great influence over the sets for most of the movie, the colours and the growth are used to good effect. The progression is clear and well balanced, it might not always look realistic but the fact that that's the point helps.
When you look at Color Out Of Space as a whole it's all over the place, interesting but ambling, understandable and confusing. Despite that, it's an experience that I enjoyed having.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/color-out-of-space-movie-review.html
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Guncle in Books
Jul 22, 2021
A beautiful, funny, and sweet story of finding hope after loss
Patrick and Sara were best friends in college. Then she married his brother, had two kids, and life went on. Until Sara dies, leaving Patrick's niece and nephew motherless. Patrick has always adored Maisie and Grant--for small time periods. But when his brother Greg asks Patrick, aka "Gay Uncle Patrick," or "GUP," to take the kids for a bit, he's faced with a dilemma. It's time to actually step up. So GUP and the kids head to Patrick's house in Palm Springs, where Patrick leads the life of a very single (and gay) slightly faded actor. Once there, he institutes the "Guncle Rules" and they set out trying to survive. But as Patrick bumbles his way through parenting and trying to help his little charges heal, he realizes they may be helping them more than he could have ever imagined.
"He promised when they'd met that he would never let her go. And then life intervened. She went north and married his brother. He went west and found fame on TV. And slowly, over time, he did. Let go."
Oh this book. I'm not sure a book has ever made me cry so many times, yet I loved it so much. It's often sad but also incredibly funny and heartwarming. Rowley does something special here, capturing Patrick, Maisie, and Grant so beautifully and authentically. This is a lovely story about family and coming together after loss.
There's not much I can say to do this wonderful book justice. The Guncle is made up of a million little moments--obviously Maisie and Grant are hurting, but you learn Patrick is as well. Who needs who more? Patrick is bitingly caustic, and he talks to the kids as if they are tiny adults. But the warmth and love that comes across in his humor--that he uses as his shield--is so clear. The book is a quiet and beautiful journey of all three characters learning to live again, and it's so well-done. It's such a tender and honest story. And the acceptance that comes across here--oh, it just warmed my heart. (A scene where Maisie didn't want to wear her bathing suit, and Patrick didn't force her, but let her wear a t-shirt instead, promising to buy her a rash guard--well it brought tears to my eyes.)
I promise if you give this sweet book a try, you will love it. I love Patrick, Maisie, and Grant. I adored the welcoming message of the book. It's a sad premise, but a hopeful book. 4.5+ stars.
"He promised when they'd met that he would never let her go. And then life intervened. She went north and married his brother. He went west and found fame on TV. And slowly, over time, he did. Let go."
Oh this book. I'm not sure a book has ever made me cry so many times, yet I loved it so much. It's often sad but also incredibly funny and heartwarming. Rowley does something special here, capturing Patrick, Maisie, and Grant so beautifully and authentically. This is a lovely story about family and coming together after loss.
There's not much I can say to do this wonderful book justice. The Guncle is made up of a million little moments--obviously Maisie and Grant are hurting, but you learn Patrick is as well. Who needs who more? Patrick is bitingly caustic, and he talks to the kids as if they are tiny adults. But the warmth and love that comes across in his humor--that he uses as his shield--is so clear. The book is a quiet and beautiful journey of all three characters learning to live again, and it's so well-done. It's such a tender and honest story. And the acceptance that comes across here--oh, it just warmed my heart. (A scene where Maisie didn't want to wear her bathing suit, and Patrick didn't force her, but let her wear a t-shirt instead, promising to buy her a rash guard--well it brought tears to my eyes.)
I promise if you give this sweet book a try, you will love it. I love Patrick, Maisie, and Grant. I adored the welcoming message of the book. It's a sad premise, but a hopeful book. 4.5+ stars.