Search
Search results
Ronyell (38 KP) rated How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000) in Movies
Jul 24, 2020
The Jim Carrey Grinch!
In the town of Whoville, all the Whos were getting ready it celebrate Christmas, but there was one Who that was curious about the true meaning of Christmas and that was Cindy Lou Who herself. Not only was Cindy Lou wondering about the true meaning of Christmas, but she was curious about one person who doesn't live in Whoville and that's the Grinch himself. The Whos almost never talk about the Grinch or want to be reminded of him, but Cindy Lou wanted to be friends with the Grinch and tried to invite him to the Whoville celebration. But, when the Grinch is humiliated at the celebration, he decided that he will steal all the Whos' presents on Christmas Eve.
Wow! I was actually pretty surprised that I enjoyed this movie! I never would have thought that Jim Carrey would do a great job at portraying the Grinch! Jim Carrey made the Grinch's character much more humorous and hammy, which made the film much funnier in tone and the Grinchs' jokes easily land at the right times. Taylor Momsen was fantastic as Cindy Lou Who as Cindy is shown as being a friendly and determined girl who only wanted to be friends with the Grinch and I liked the fact that she truly cares for the Grinch and only wanted to make him happy. James Horner's music was probably the highlight of this film as it surprisingly goes well with the emotional scenes in the movie, such as during the scene where we learn about the Grinch's tragic backstory. The special effects were surprisingly well done for the year 2000 and the film did a fantastic job at showcasing the bizarre yet beautiful world of Whoville and greatly captured the creative style from the original Dr. Seuss book.
My biggest issue with this movie is that the Whos seem to be portrayed in a negative way as they are much more cruel towards the Grinch in this version than in the original book and the 1960s cartoon special. Also, there were times where Jim Carrey's performance as the Grinch got so hammy that I couldn't take his more emotional scenes seriously, like he constantly gets upset whenever the Whos teased him. I also didn't like the fact that Martha, the Grinch's love interest, didn't have much of a role in the film other than just standing around and looking at the scenery and being a love interest.
I always have a problem with certain love interests not having much to do in the film other than just being defined as a love interest to the protagonist and not having a personality of their own. It would have been great if Martha had more scenes with the Grinch so that their relationship would be much more believable to me.
Overall, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" is one of the most hilarious interpretations of the Grinch ever made on film and it is definitely worth the watch!
Originally posted on: https://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/movie-review-how-grinch-stole-christmas.html
Wow! I was actually pretty surprised that I enjoyed this movie! I never would have thought that Jim Carrey would do a great job at portraying the Grinch! Jim Carrey made the Grinch's character much more humorous and hammy, which made the film much funnier in tone and the Grinchs' jokes easily land at the right times. Taylor Momsen was fantastic as Cindy Lou Who as Cindy is shown as being a friendly and determined girl who only wanted to be friends with the Grinch and I liked the fact that she truly cares for the Grinch and only wanted to make him happy. James Horner's music was probably the highlight of this film as it surprisingly goes well with the emotional scenes in the movie, such as during the scene where we learn about the Grinch's tragic backstory. The special effects were surprisingly well done for the year 2000 and the film did a fantastic job at showcasing the bizarre yet beautiful world of Whoville and greatly captured the creative style from the original Dr. Seuss book.
My biggest issue with this movie is that the Whos seem to be portrayed in a negative way as they are much more cruel towards the Grinch in this version than in the original book and the 1960s cartoon special. Also, there were times where Jim Carrey's performance as the Grinch got so hammy that I couldn't take his more emotional scenes seriously, like he constantly gets upset whenever the Whos teased him. I also didn't like the fact that Martha, the Grinch's love interest, didn't have much of a role in the film other than just standing around and looking at the scenery and being a love interest.
I always have a problem with certain love interests not having much to do in the film other than just being defined as a love interest to the protagonist and not having a personality of their own. It would have been great if Martha had more scenes with the Grinch so that their relationship would be much more believable to me.
Overall, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" is one of the most hilarious interpretations of the Grinch ever made on film and it is definitely worth the watch!
Originally posted on: https://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/movie-review-how-grinch-stole-christmas.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Jungle Cruise (2021) in Movies
Jul 30, 2021
A Ton of Fun - Reminiscent of the first PIRATES film
Are you looking for a family friendly action/adventure/comedy that will be good entertainment for the entire family? Then look no further than the Disney Live Action film JUNGLE BOOK.
Yes…Disney has made another movie based on one of it’s them park rides and this one is more like the first PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN film than most of the other attempts.
Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra (several Liam Neeson action flicks like NON-STOP), JUNGLE CRUISE is part PIRATES, part INDIANA JONES and part AFRICAN QUEEN (look it up, kids) as we follow an adventurous young lady in the 1910’s. She heads to the Amazon and hires a ne’er do well Jungle Cruise skipper to take her up river.
Pretty standard set-up, right? We’ve seen this “mis-matched” frenemies premise before but in the hands of Emily Blunt and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, it is a very entertaining (albeit familiar) ride with 2 tremendously charismatic performers working off each other very well and they look like they are having as good a time in this film as we are.
They are joined by a bevy of assorted characters that help fill out this journey. Edgar Ramirez and Veronica Falcon are enjoyable enough as a couple of characters along the way, while Jack Whitehall surprised the heck out of me as the wimpy brother to Blunt’s character who becomes more and more three dimensional as the film progressed - something I didn’t think this film would even think about doing.
A pair of wiley veterans - Jesse Plemons and good ol’ Paul Giamatti - are also on board and each add some (but not a lot) to this film. Plemons is the main villain and he just wasn’t villainous enough for my tastes while I wanted much, much more of Giamatti’s character than was in this film (and it is a rare film, indeed, that you are left wanting more with a Giamatti character).
But make no mistake, this is a Rock and Blunt flick and these two professionals hold the center of this film together very, very well.
Director Collet-Serra keeps the action (and comedy) moving along at about the right pace, never dwelling too long on any of the plot points (for if you were to think too much about any of it, it would fall apart) and (for the most part) keeps the action sequences fun and coherent and avoiding over-directing, over-CGI-ing and over-loading these sequences.
Speaking of CGI, the main issue with this film is the special effects work - it is not the best (probably a budget issue) and, at times, you really need to suspend disbelief in watching the CGI and convincing yourself that it is a Live Action film you are watching and not a cartoon.
But, since the intended audience for this film are families, the less-than-perfect CGI (at times) is forgivable as JUNGLE CRUISE provides plenty of PG-Rated action and fun that the entire family will enjoy.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Yes…Disney has made another movie based on one of it’s them park rides and this one is more like the first PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN film than most of the other attempts.
Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra (several Liam Neeson action flicks like NON-STOP), JUNGLE CRUISE is part PIRATES, part INDIANA JONES and part AFRICAN QUEEN (look it up, kids) as we follow an adventurous young lady in the 1910’s. She heads to the Amazon and hires a ne’er do well Jungle Cruise skipper to take her up river.
Pretty standard set-up, right? We’ve seen this “mis-matched” frenemies premise before but in the hands of Emily Blunt and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, it is a very entertaining (albeit familiar) ride with 2 tremendously charismatic performers working off each other very well and they look like they are having as good a time in this film as we are.
They are joined by a bevy of assorted characters that help fill out this journey. Edgar Ramirez and Veronica Falcon are enjoyable enough as a couple of characters along the way, while Jack Whitehall surprised the heck out of me as the wimpy brother to Blunt’s character who becomes more and more three dimensional as the film progressed - something I didn’t think this film would even think about doing.
A pair of wiley veterans - Jesse Plemons and good ol’ Paul Giamatti - are also on board and each add some (but not a lot) to this film. Plemons is the main villain and he just wasn’t villainous enough for my tastes while I wanted much, much more of Giamatti’s character than was in this film (and it is a rare film, indeed, that you are left wanting more with a Giamatti character).
But make no mistake, this is a Rock and Blunt flick and these two professionals hold the center of this film together very, very well.
Director Collet-Serra keeps the action (and comedy) moving along at about the right pace, never dwelling too long on any of the plot points (for if you were to think too much about any of it, it would fall apart) and (for the most part) keeps the action sequences fun and coherent and avoiding over-directing, over-CGI-ing and over-loading these sequences.
Speaking of CGI, the main issue with this film is the special effects work - it is not the best (probably a budget issue) and, at times, you really need to suspend disbelief in watching the CGI and convincing yourself that it is a Live Action film you are watching and not a cartoon.
But, since the intended audience for this film are families, the less-than-perfect CGI (at times) is forgivable as JUNGLE CRUISE provides plenty of PG-Rated action and fun that the entire family will enjoy.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Comic Caption Meme Maker
Comics, Entertainment and Photo & Video
9.0
Rate It
App
Transform your pictures into authentic looking comics! Add word balloons, stickers, and filters to...
Onet - wiadomości
News and Business
App
WIADOMOŚCI ONET: CZYTAM, SŁUCHAM, #WIEM Z ONET! Szukasz najświeższych wiadomości z kraju i ze...
Quiver - 3D Coloring App
Entertainment and Education
App
The original augmented reality coloring app “colAR Mix” is now Quiver! Coloring pages have...
Hopster: Kids TV & Learning
Education and Games
App
Explore the immersive, award-winning world of Hopster. With fun, educational games, nursery rhymes,...
Little Princess Coloring Book!
Education and Games
App
~~> An enchanting, sparkling and interactive experience fit for Royalty ~~> 150+ beautiful...
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Jungle Book (2016) in Movies
Jul 21, 2017
Incredible CGI (2 more)
Amazing voice acting
New versions of classic songs
The King Of The Swingers
I was sceptical going in, as I’m not a huge fan of the original Disney cartoon version and the fact that the only live action performance in the movie was being delivered by a child actor definitely made me fairly dubious. However I actually enjoyed this movie. The young actor portraying Mowgli is a bit cringeworthy at times, but when you think that all he had to work with was a bunch of green screens and voiceovers, he did a remarkably good job, especially considering his age. He wasn’t anywhere near as good as Jaeden Lieberher was in Midnight Special, but he did a decent job of carrying the movie’s plot along. The CG work in this movie is mind blowing. Disney have gone all out and went for a hyper realistic style of animation and at times, even as an animator myself, I forgot that these animals and environments were cartoons and totally bought them as real world objects and environments. Also the cast is made up of Hollywood gold and all of the voice performances are spot on. Ben Kingsley does a great job as the parental panther who guides Mowgli along his journey and whoever decided to cast Bill Murray as Baloo deserves a raise, as that is a stroke of casting genius. Murray is hilarious here and his relationship with Mowgli is also fantastic. Scarlett Johannsen does a decent job as the snake, but to be honest it is more of a cameo role as she is in the movie for under five minutes. Of course it would be a crime not to mention the legend that is Christopher Walken and his fantastic performance as King Louie. He gives off a perfect blend of charm and villainy and his rendition of King Of The Swingers is also very entertaining. However, although all of the above voice performances were great, there is one that completely steals the show and that is Idris Elba as the antagonist Lion, Sher Khan. The command that Elba has over his vocal performance is incredible, he is such a threatening presence throughout the entire movie and he completely steals every single scene that he is in. Several people have also complained about the use of the music in the film, but that was actually one of my favourite parts of the film, Bare Necessities is used as more of a shanty than an actual song, and King Of The Swingers performed by Walken, is in my opinion very well implemented and serves as an awesome new take on the classic song. The one gripe that I have about the film is that, it is quite slow at times and I was left fairly bored several times, as were a lot of the kids in the theatre by the looks of it. If I didn’t have to keep an eye on the kids we were looking after I probably would have drifted off and to be honest I don’t know if they really enjoyed much either, they seemed to either be scared by Sher Khan and hiding their eyes or bored and fidgety. Although it’s hard to deny that this is a very well made movie and while not totally faithful to its source material, it is a fresh new take on the classic story for a new generation. I would like to see the film again without a wriggling child on my knee, but I did enjoy myself with this movie overall.
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Slide (Slide, #1) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
<b>2.5 stars
Slide</b> features an intriguing idea though the results left me with mixed feelings. The concept is awesome, but the execution? Yeah, not so much. The writing is serviceable, neither bad nor great and it didn't draw me into the story straightaway. Both the way it is written and the storyline reminds me of some of the books I read as a pre-teen/teen way back during the Pleistocene epoch, otherwise known as the 1990s, with authors like Christopher Pike, R.L. Stine, Diane Hoh, Lois Duncan, Richie Tankersley Cusick, among others. It especially seems to fall right in between Pike and Stine. While the writing is more mature than Stine's, it's not quite as sophisticated as Pike's. The mystery is weak, and by the end, seems pointless as it's totally anti-climactic, over in a flash, like it was written just to finish the book up, and absurdly contrived. The whole ending is totally ludicrous and unbelievable. The clues leading up to it are obvious and not incorporated into the story well at all. These clues were so glaring they all but had a flashing sign pointing to them in cartoon-like fashion whenever they fell into the main character's path. Sylvia a.k.a. Vee wasn't written as a dummy, at first, but boy she was an absolute idiot about those clues and putting two and two together, or really much of anything until it slapped her in the face. While Vee is sympathetic, I can't say I felt much of anything for her, and even less for anyone else in book because of their lack of depth. No one is explained in any detail, either personality or looks, motivations, or whatever. Just a brief shallow summary if lucky. Speaking of.... What has happened in books today where there are no descriptions of how anybody looks, except "I have pink hair," "his blonde hair," or some other toss away adjective? I've seen it over and over again and all I'm left with is the visualization that these people have no faces, much like that episode of Doctor Who (The Idiot's Lantern). Frankly it's all rather creepy.
I feel like this could have been a great book if it was longer (the copy I read is only 250 pages of at least 1.5 spaced lines) and had much more depth. Add in a couple more suspects, motivations, etc., and maybe a little more information on Vee's "sliding" powers. Unfortunately it's only an "okay" read that's easy and moves at a rapid pace. I didn't hate the book by any means, it's just not one that'll stick in my head for more than a few days. On the plus side I love the cover composition and colors, so kudos to the artist(s). This works fine as a standalone, but is now part of a series, for some unfathomable reason. Frankly, I'm getting sick of every book that comes out, most usually in the YA genre, becoming a series. It's ridiculous how few standalone books there are anymore. Still, even with all my grumbling about the numerous series and everything else, I think I will check out [b:Impostor|13423265|Impostor (Slide, #2)|Jill Hathaway|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1341084724s/13423265.jpg|18870053], the second book in the <i>Slide</i> series, as it sounds interesting. Who knows, this might have just been the stepping stone to bigger and better things. Although if Vee is as stupid as she was in this one, I'm outta there.
Originally Reviewed: October 16, 2012
Received: Amazon Vine
Slide</b> features an intriguing idea though the results left me with mixed feelings. The concept is awesome, but the execution? Yeah, not so much. The writing is serviceable, neither bad nor great and it didn't draw me into the story straightaway. Both the way it is written and the storyline reminds me of some of the books I read as a pre-teen/teen way back during the Pleistocene epoch, otherwise known as the 1990s, with authors like Christopher Pike, R.L. Stine, Diane Hoh, Lois Duncan, Richie Tankersley Cusick, among others. It especially seems to fall right in between Pike and Stine. While the writing is more mature than Stine's, it's not quite as sophisticated as Pike's. The mystery is weak, and by the end, seems pointless as it's totally anti-climactic, over in a flash, like it was written just to finish the book up, and absurdly contrived. The whole ending is totally ludicrous and unbelievable. The clues leading up to it are obvious and not incorporated into the story well at all. These clues were so glaring they all but had a flashing sign pointing to them in cartoon-like fashion whenever they fell into the main character's path. Sylvia a.k.a. Vee wasn't written as a dummy, at first, but boy she was an absolute idiot about those clues and putting two and two together, or really much of anything until it slapped her in the face. While Vee is sympathetic, I can't say I felt much of anything for her, and even less for anyone else in book because of their lack of depth. No one is explained in any detail, either personality or looks, motivations, or whatever. Just a brief shallow summary if lucky. Speaking of.... What has happened in books today where there are no descriptions of how anybody looks, except "I have pink hair," "his blonde hair," or some other toss away adjective? I've seen it over and over again and all I'm left with is the visualization that these people have no faces, much like that episode of Doctor Who (The Idiot's Lantern). Frankly it's all rather creepy.
I feel like this could have been a great book if it was longer (the copy I read is only 250 pages of at least 1.5 spaced lines) and had much more depth. Add in a couple more suspects, motivations, etc., and maybe a little more information on Vee's "sliding" powers. Unfortunately it's only an "okay" read that's easy and moves at a rapid pace. I didn't hate the book by any means, it's just not one that'll stick in my head for more than a few days. On the plus side I love the cover composition and colors, so kudos to the artist(s). This works fine as a standalone, but is now part of a series, for some unfathomable reason. Frankly, I'm getting sick of every book that comes out, most usually in the YA genre, becoming a series. It's ridiculous how few standalone books there are anymore. Still, even with all my grumbling about the numerous series and everything else, I think I will check out [b:Impostor|13423265|Impostor (Slide, #2)|Jill Hathaway|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1341084724s/13423265.jpg|18870053], the second book in the <i>Slide</i> series, as it sounds interesting. Who knows, this might have just been the stepping stone to bigger and better things. Although if Vee is as stupid as she was in this one, I'm outta there.
Originally Reviewed: October 16, 2012
Received: Amazon Vine