Search
MelanieTheresa (997 KP) rated Men in Black International (2019) in Movies
Aug 26, 2019
This turned out to be pretty much what I expected: the weakest movie in the series.
This may be an unpopular opinion, but I'm not the biggest fan of Tessa Thompson to begin with. She's very bland, and this movie did nothing to change my opinion. I guess it was nice to look at Chris Hemsworth for a couple of hours, and there were a couple of moments that gave me a chuckle, but I found myself wistfully flashing back to that first MIB movie and wishing Hollywood would stop ruining things.
I mean, it was ok. By no means a bad movie, and at the very least it was mildly entertaining....but meh.
This may be an unpopular opinion, but I'm not the biggest fan of Tessa Thompson to begin with. She's very bland, and this movie did nothing to change my opinion. I guess it was nice to look at Chris Hemsworth for a couple of hours, and there were a couple of moments that gave me a chuckle, but I found myself wistfully flashing back to that first MIB movie and wishing Hollywood would stop ruining things.
I mean, it was ok. By no means a bad movie, and at the very least it was mildly entertaining....but meh.
Mark Jaye (65 KP) rated Thor: The Dark World (2013) in Movies
May 18, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
Thor: The Dark World is one of a few MCU movies that I hadn't seen many times, and never since its' initial release. It has the reputation of been one of the weakest/worst entries in the 'continuity' however my memory of it was that it was okay. Having watched 'Endgame ' (several times!) and seeing that movie revisit a segment of the God of Thunders second solo outing I decided to give it another viewing.
Personally speaking, I still enjoyed it and think the reputation is a bit harsh. I prefer it to the first film but it falls way behind 'Ragnarok'. The visual effects are first rate and surpass some of those that would be seen in later Marvel movies.
Hemsworth is great however I can see why Hemsworth could have grown weary with the part (The Thor of Ragnarok onwards is a delight). Likewise with Hiddleston. The two have great on screen chemistry.
The story is simple enough - the dark Elf Malkeith awakens after a long period of sleep/exile to harness the power of the Aether, with the aim of plunging the Universe into darkness. Natalie Portman returns as Jane Foster in a role key to events, effectively serving as the plot device with which events kick start. This is also the first MCU entry to start referencing the Infinity Stones and tying together the various macguffins seen so far.
The film drags in places, more so during the second act, however the final battle is a visual delight.
Not therefore the worst, but certainly not the best!
Personally speaking, I still enjoyed it and think the reputation is a bit harsh. I prefer it to the first film but it falls way behind 'Ragnarok'. The visual effects are first rate and surpass some of those that would be seen in later Marvel movies.
Hemsworth is great however I can see why Hemsworth could have grown weary with the part (The Thor of Ragnarok onwards is a delight). Likewise with Hiddleston. The two have great on screen chemistry.
The story is simple enough - the dark Elf Malkeith awakens after a long period of sleep/exile to harness the power of the Aether, with the aim of plunging the Universe into darkness. Natalie Portman returns as Jane Foster in a role key to events, effectively serving as the plot device with which events kick start. This is also the first MCU entry to start referencing the Infinity Stones and tying together the various macguffins seen so far.
The film drags in places, more so during the second act, however the final battle is a visual delight.
Not therefore the worst, but certainly not the best!
Erika (17788 KP) rated Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) in Movies
Oct 18, 2018 (Updated Oct 18, 2018)
Ok is the perfect descriptor for this film.
I have two major gripes, first of which is that around half an hour needed to be edited out. Some of the scenes were excruciatingly long, and the use of the singing over and over again was really tiresome. The second gripe is that there was nothing new or original about this film. Everything was kind of obvious from the very beginning.
Jeff Bridges acted the same as he has in films for the last 10 years, so nothing new or original there. Chris Hemsworth was nice to look at, and he was a convincing Charles Manson-esque dude. I'm also not sure as to why they'd give Jon Hamm's character an interesting story, only to discard him.
I have two major gripes, first of which is that around half an hour needed to be edited out. Some of the scenes were excruciatingly long, and the use of the singing over and over again was really tiresome. The second gripe is that there was nothing new or original about this film. Everything was kind of obvious from the very beginning.
Jeff Bridges acted the same as he has in films for the last 10 years, so nothing new or original there. Chris Hemsworth was nice to look at, and he was a convincing Charles Manson-esque dude. I'm also not sure as to why they'd give Jon Hamm's character an interesting story, only to discard him.
Ross (3282 KP) rated Thor: Ragnarok (2017) in Movies
Dec 4, 2017
Hulk smash plenty (2 more)
Jeff Goldblum
More cameos than an Edwardian garden party
Having suffered through the first Thor film, given up on the second one, and detested him in the Avengers films I wasn't expecting to enjoy Thor all that much and was really only in it for the Hulk. However I was pleasantly surprised. Chris Hemsworth seems to have learned to act in the last few years, and seems to have developed an awareness of comic timing.
The film sees Thor team up with Loki, Hulk and a former Valkyrie to defeat Thor's sister Hela and avoid Ragnarok as she looks to lead an army of the dead throughout the galaxy.
There is a great deal of comedy throughout the film but also top notch action sequences, most notably Thor vs Hulk and Hela's assault on Asgard.
Having been disappointed with the absence of Thor and Hulk from Captain America: Civil War (Huffy Cry-baby) I had hoped this film would make amends, and it did indeed.
Of particular enjoyment was the theatrical interpretation of Loki's death where Matt Damon and the other Hemsworth act out Loki's apparent death, overseen by Sam Neill's Odin.
The film sees Thor team up with Loki, Hulk and a former Valkyrie to defeat Thor's sister Hela and avoid Ragnarok as she looks to lead an army of the dead throughout the galaxy.
There is a great deal of comedy throughout the film but also top notch action sequences, most notably Thor vs Hulk and Hela's assault on Asgard.
Having been disappointed with the absence of Thor and Hulk from Captain America: Civil War (Huffy Cry-baby) I had hoped this film would make amends, and it did indeed.
Of particular enjoyment was the theatrical interpretation of Loki's death where Matt Damon and the other Hemsworth act out Loki's apparent death, overseen by Sam Neill's Odin.
Ollie SB (2279 KP) rated Extraction (2020) in Movies
Apr 26, 2020 (Updated Apr 26, 2020)
All out Action
If you're a fan of action films, you'll probably enjoy this one. The fight scenes and gun fire is pretty much non-stop from the start. There are some very impressive looking scenes shot up-close from a handheld camera. However, behind this constant action is a mediocre storyline.
Chris Hemsworth plays Tyler Rake, a ruthless mercenary who is hired to complete the 'extraction' of the kidnapped son of an international crime lord. After collecting the child (Ovi), Tyler embarks on a dangerous mission to get him to safety.
Whilst they are being hunted, Tyler and Ovi find unlikely friendship in each other and Tyler decides he will do anything to ensure that Ovi makes it to safety.
Chris Hemsworth plays Tyler Rake, a ruthless mercenary who is hired to complete the 'extraction' of the kidnapped son of an international crime lord. After collecting the child (Ovi), Tyler embarks on a dangerous mission to get him to safety.
Whilst they are being hunted, Tyler and Ovi find unlikely friendship in each other and Tyler decides he will do anything to ensure that Ovi makes it to safety.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Spiderhead (2022) in Movies
Jun 26, 2022
Weak Script Sinks This Flick
The history of cinema is littered with tales of the Mad Scientist who gets too caught up in their own experiments to the detriment of all. Once the human cost of the experiment is revealed to this seemingly sane inventor, he (it usually is a he) turns with a wild-eyed look and justifies the human expense in the name of science.
Such is the case with the Netflix Original movie SPIDERHEAD with Chris Hemsworth as the mad scientist in this scenario and Miles Teller and Jurnee Smollett as 2 of the prisoners who trade in their life sentences to be used as guinea pigs in his experiment.
It’s an interesting enough premise - one that is not new - so it is always the execution of this concept that makes (or breaks) this type of film.
Unfortunately for SPIDERHEAD, Writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick are unable to elevate the premise (based on a short story by George Saunders) into anything new, unique or interesting.
Director Joseph Kosinski (TOP GUN: MAVERICK) does a yeoman’s job trying to elevate this material to something better than it is. But…kind of like trying to get me to be a Prima Ballerina…Kosinski just cannot make something out of raw material that is fundamentally flawed. He uses a few interesting camera moves and draws out suspense in enough areas to catch the audience’s interests…but not much else.
He is helped by the casting of some top notch talent. Chris Hemsworth is engaging and charismatic (initially) as the Elon Musk/Steve Jobs-esque new age inventor who is trying out some new medical serums on prisoner/volunteers. The problem with Hemsworth - who I think is a pretty good actor - is that once you start seeing the cracks in his character’s façade (and those cracks appear early on), Hemsworth’s performance turns fairly one-dimensional and he becomes a caricature of the “crazed scientist”.
The surprises to me here are the performances of Miles Teller (TOP GUN: MAVERICK) and Jurnee Smollett (LOVECRAFT COUNTRY). These are 2 performers who I’ve always felt were good but not great, but they are intriguing to watch in this. They have strong chemistry with each other and they are 2 protagonists that are easy to root for against crazed antagonist Hemsworth.
In look and feel and tone, this film reminded my of the 2014 Alex Garland marvel EX MACHINA, but where that film easily was lifted by a tremendously strong script and ideas by Garland (check it out if you haven’t seen it - it is well worth your time), SPIDERHEAD, ultimately, sinks into the chasm of a weak script with no real strong ideas/themes behind it.
Letter Grade B+ (for the Direction of Kosinksi and the performances of Teller and Smollett)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such is the case with the Netflix Original movie SPIDERHEAD with Chris Hemsworth as the mad scientist in this scenario and Miles Teller and Jurnee Smollett as 2 of the prisoners who trade in their life sentences to be used as guinea pigs in his experiment.
It’s an interesting enough premise - one that is not new - so it is always the execution of this concept that makes (or breaks) this type of film.
Unfortunately for SPIDERHEAD, Writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick are unable to elevate the premise (based on a short story by George Saunders) into anything new, unique or interesting.
Director Joseph Kosinski (TOP GUN: MAVERICK) does a yeoman’s job trying to elevate this material to something better than it is. But…kind of like trying to get me to be a Prima Ballerina…Kosinski just cannot make something out of raw material that is fundamentally flawed. He uses a few interesting camera moves and draws out suspense in enough areas to catch the audience’s interests…but not much else.
He is helped by the casting of some top notch talent. Chris Hemsworth is engaging and charismatic (initially) as the Elon Musk/Steve Jobs-esque new age inventor who is trying out some new medical serums on prisoner/volunteers. The problem with Hemsworth - who I think is a pretty good actor - is that once you start seeing the cracks in his character’s façade (and those cracks appear early on), Hemsworth’s performance turns fairly one-dimensional and he becomes a caricature of the “crazed scientist”.
The surprises to me here are the performances of Miles Teller (TOP GUN: MAVERICK) and Jurnee Smollett (LOVECRAFT COUNTRY). These are 2 performers who I’ve always felt were good but not great, but they are intriguing to watch in this. They have strong chemistry with each other and they are 2 protagonists that are easy to root for against crazed antagonist Hemsworth.
In look and feel and tone, this film reminded my of the 2014 Alex Garland marvel EX MACHINA, but where that film easily was lifted by a tremendously strong script and ideas by Garland (check it out if you haven’t seen it - it is well worth your time), SPIDERHEAD, ultimately, sinks into the chasm of a weak script with no real strong ideas/themes behind it.
Letter Grade B+ (for the Direction of Kosinksi and the performances of Teller and Smollett)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Erika (17788 KP) rated Thor: Ragnarok (2017) in Movies
Nov 3, 2017
So initially, the only reason I wanted to see this movie was because of the director, Taika Waititi. The Thor movies haven't been the greatest, but I was hoping, somehow, they could manage to make a good Thor film. I've loved everything Waititi has directed, so it's no surprise that I also loved this movie.. I'm definitely suffering from superhero movie fatigue, and this is what Marvel needed.
There were actual character arcs! Chris Hemsworth did well with the comedy, as did Tom Hiddleston. I might actually start watching Hiddleston's movies again.
The reason this only gets a 9, rather than 10: Hulk. I can't stand the Hulk, and I feel like they only put him in there for the children.
1st post-credit scene was great, 2nd was lame.
ALSO, that MATT DAMON cameo was hilarious.
I can't wait to see it again on Sunday.
There were actual character arcs! Chris Hemsworth did well with the comedy, as did Tom Hiddleston. I might actually start watching Hiddleston's movies again.
The reason this only gets a 9, rather than 10: Hulk. I can't stand the Hulk, and I feel like they only put him in there for the children.
1st post-credit scene was great, 2nd was lame.
ALSO, that MATT DAMON cameo was hilarious.
I can't wait to see it again on Sunday.
Film and stuff (30 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
May 15, 2019 (Updated May 15, 2019)
A great second Avengers outing
Starring: Robert Downey JR, Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Rennee, James Spader, Samuel L Jackson and Paul Bettany.
Directed by: Joss Whedon.
Plot - Tony Stark creates an AI that turns psychopathic and is determined to destroy the world. The Avengers must stop the AI known as Ultron.
With spectacular visuals and an amusing villain this is on the surface of things, exactly what you would want a sequel to the excellent Avengers Assemble to be. The way in which the Avengers are reintroduced is quit simply one of the coolest things I've seen for a while.
The issue is that it treads over a great deal of previous material and doesn't feel as original and fresh as the previous.
Surprisingly something that is handled brilliantly is the volume of characters that are in this. Something that many have tried and failed. Huge kudos for this Mr Whedon.
With a great deal more humour, a romance that feels slightly forced and amazing action sequences I would rate this marginally below Avengers Assemble. That being said, I enjoyed it immensely and would definitely recommend seeing it.
Directed by: Joss Whedon.
Plot - Tony Stark creates an AI that turns psychopathic and is determined to destroy the world. The Avengers must stop the AI known as Ultron.
With spectacular visuals and an amusing villain this is on the surface of things, exactly what you would want a sequel to the excellent Avengers Assemble to be. The way in which the Avengers are reintroduced is quit simply one of the coolest things I've seen for a while.
The issue is that it treads over a great deal of previous material and doesn't feel as original and fresh as the previous.
Surprisingly something that is handled brilliantly is the volume of characters that are in this. Something that many have tried and failed. Huge kudos for this Mr Whedon.
With a great deal more humour, a romance that feels slightly forced and amazing action sequences I would rate this marginally below Avengers Assemble. That being said, I enjoyed it immensely and would definitely recommend seeing it.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Thor: The Dark World (2013) in Movies
May 10, 2019
"i didn't do it for him"
I was hoping to see something in The Dark World that I had missed the previous two viewings...something to help me enjoy this a bit more. Unfortunately, I hadn't missed anything. This is a drag.
Where do I start with the flaws? A lot of characters are criminally underutilised including Jane Foster, Erik Selvig, Odin, Heimdall and perhaps most important, the main antagonist, Malekith. I like the idea of the Dark Elves being used here but the execution is terribly flawed. It doesn't help that the likes of Natalie Portman and Anthony Hopkins are seemingly coasting here; the former with literally no chemistry with her love interest. Although the latter's sheer presence helps boost scenes he is in, even if he isn't trying. The other issue is this whole film is essentially flashes of brilliance drowning in a sea of mediocrity. Every now and then we get a cool scene involving Loki or Thor will crack a joke or there will be a cool action sequence but then that 5 minutes is followed by 20 minutes of characters having little to do. It's criminally boring.
I bet you can all guess the good...Chris Hemsworth who plays Thor and Tom Hiddleston who plays Loki. These two are the stars (obviously) and if it wasn't for them, this would probably get only one star. I mean, I like Thor's friends but they don't get much screentime in this. I like the look of Asgard but the story that accompanies it is boring.
It's a shame that two great lead characters are wasted by weak writing and unmotivated performances from some other cast members.
Where do I start with the flaws? A lot of characters are criminally underutilised including Jane Foster, Erik Selvig, Odin, Heimdall and perhaps most important, the main antagonist, Malekith. I like the idea of the Dark Elves being used here but the execution is terribly flawed. It doesn't help that the likes of Natalie Portman and Anthony Hopkins are seemingly coasting here; the former with literally no chemistry with her love interest. Although the latter's sheer presence helps boost scenes he is in, even if he isn't trying. The other issue is this whole film is essentially flashes of brilliance drowning in a sea of mediocrity. Every now and then we get a cool scene involving Loki or Thor will crack a joke or there will be a cool action sequence but then that 5 minutes is followed by 20 minutes of characters having little to do. It's criminally boring.
I bet you can all guess the good...Chris Hemsworth who plays Thor and Tom Hiddleston who plays Loki. These two are the stars (obviously) and if it wasn't for them, this would probably get only one star. I mean, I like Thor's friends but they don't get much screentime in this. I like the look of Asgard but the story that accompanies it is boring.
It's a shame that two great lead characters are wasted by weak writing and unmotivated performances from some other cast members.
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated Extraction (2020) in Movies
Apr 28, 2020
I thought this was an okay film. I can say that it's almost 100% likely that I'll watch anything with Chris Hemsworth in it and he's great. I will say that I wish I held onto him a little more. I feel like if they would've rolled out his story sooner or built the connection with Ovi more, I would've really felt a connection to him. I just felt like it came a little too late.
I've said it before, but I love it when films have a short timeline because I feel like it allows for a richer story with more details and not as much to contend with in making sure the details align and it all makes sense. I think that if this film would've had a longer plot time, it would've messed up the rhythm.
I liked that they left an ending that could provide for a sequel but didn't need it. If it does end up standing alone, it's a film that can do that. But it could also benefit from a sequel. It doesn't feel like this entire first film was a set up for a second film. This movie has enough to stand on its own and still be a good watch.
I am glad I watched it and I will probably watch the sequel if they do release one, but I can't say I'll ever come back to it or that I highly recommend. Watch it for Hemsworth or don't watch it at all.
I've said it before, but I love it when films have a short timeline because I feel like it allows for a richer story with more details and not as much to contend with in making sure the details align and it all makes sense. I think that if this film would've had a longer plot time, it would've messed up the rhythm.
I liked that they left an ending that could provide for a sequel but didn't need it. If it does end up standing alone, it's a film that can do that. But it could also benefit from a sequel. It doesn't feel like this entire first film was a set up for a second film. This movie has enough to stand on its own and still be a good watch.
I am glad I watched it and I will probably watch the sequel if they do release one, but I can't say I'll ever come back to it or that I highly recommend. Watch it for Hemsworth or don't watch it at all.