Search
Search results
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.
David McK (3169 KP) rated Extraction (2020) in Movies
Jul 25, 2020
Brutal and bloody Netflix actioner starring a post-Avengers Chris Hemsworth, that harkens back to the heyday of just these type of 80's action man movies i.e. little in the way of plot, relying instead on the charisma of its leading man, and on the action scenes.
And that's a good thing (sometimes you just want junk food, or the cinematic equivalent thereof).
In this, Hemsworth plays a black marker mercenary named Tyler Rake (and with a name like that, you *know* there's going to be at least one scene where he uses said implement to dispose of some goons), who is hired to rescue the kidnapped son of an imprisoned Bangladeshian international crime lord, with said son held in a city run by a rival of that crime lord.
He easily rescues the son, but then things take a turn for the complicated when they are betrayed, and he must escort that kid out of the city whilst being hunted by both those who wish to recapture Ovi (the teenage kid), and by those who don't want to pay him for the rescue ...
As I said earlier, little in the way of plot - a straight 'get the package from point A to point B - but that is made up for in some stunning (and bruising) action scenes: in particular, the one seemingly-long-take as Tyler and Ovi are hunted through an apartment bloke, across the rooftops, and out on the streets.
Ambiguous ending also leaves it open for a sequel!
And that's a good thing (sometimes you just want junk food, or the cinematic equivalent thereof).
In this, Hemsworth plays a black marker mercenary named Tyler Rake (and with a name like that, you *know* there's going to be at least one scene where he uses said implement to dispose of some goons), who is hired to rescue the kidnapped son of an imprisoned Bangladeshian international crime lord, with said son held in a city run by a rival of that crime lord.
He easily rescues the son, but then things take a turn for the complicated when they are betrayed, and he must escort that kid out of the city whilst being hunted by both those who wish to recapture Ovi (the teenage kid), and by those who don't want to pay him for the rescue ...
As I said earlier, little in the way of plot - a straight 'get the package from point A to point B - but that is made up for in some stunning (and bruising) action scenes: in particular, the one seemingly-long-take as Tyler and Ovi are hunted through an apartment bloke, across the rooftops, and out on the streets.
Ambiguous ending also leaves it open for a sequel!
Awix (3310 KP) rated Men in Black International (2019) in Movies
Jun 18, 2019 (Updated Jun 18, 2019)
Actors move back and forth in front of a camera, occasionally saying words; armies of people sit before computers adding special effects to digital footage; lucrative deals are struck advertising cars, watches and sunglasses. But none of it really seems to mean anything to anyone - there is a vague, superficial resemblance to a franchise that was very popular 15-20 years ago, but everything that made it distinctive and entertaining has been scraped out of the carcass and what remains is almost wholly affectless.
Chris Hemsworth gives his usual performance (he will have to come up with another if he wants a viable career beyond playing Thor), Tessa Thompson has arguably been promoted too far in being given co-lead of a film aiming to be a blockbuster. Not much chemistry between the leads, though, and the plot is wholly transactional. This film is rarely full-on dull, but it doesn't engage the brain, emotions, or sense of humour either.
Chris Hemsworth gives his usual performance (he will have to come up with another if he wants a viable career beyond playing Thor), Tessa Thompson has arguably been promoted too far in being given co-lead of a film aiming to be a blockbuster. Not much chemistry between the leads, though, and the plot is wholly transactional. This film is rarely full-on dull, but it doesn't engage the brain, emotions, or sense of humour either.
Emma (519 KP) rated Wonder Woman (2017) in Movies
Feb 10, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
I am in no way a comic book reader, and maybe that doesn't give me any entitlement to judge. But my god was this film boring.
We decided to watch it tonight. I happened to enjoy the first quarter of the movie, I love Greek mythology so it appealed to me. However why they felt to make the movie so long and drawn out I don't know. In the first half I liked wonder woman, women's solidarity and all that haha, but by the second half I wanted her gone. She annoyed the crap out of me. Everyone raved about the scene in no mans land, I found it ridiculous.
And who on earth thought of casting David Thewlis as Ares god of war. I mean really? REALLY?! I love the guy but come on, marvel have Chris Hemsworth as Thor, he's literally a god in day to day life. DC decide on the nerdy dark arts teacher.
Think I'll stick with marvel in the future.
We decided to watch it tonight. I happened to enjoy the first quarter of the movie, I love Greek mythology so it appealed to me. However why they felt to make the movie so long and drawn out I don't know. In the first half I liked wonder woman, women's solidarity and all that haha, but by the second half I wanted her gone. She annoyed the crap out of me. Everyone raved about the scene in no mans land, I found it ridiculous.
And who on earth thought of casting David Thewlis as Ares god of war. I mean really? REALLY?! I love the guy but come on, marvel have Chris Hemsworth as Thor, he's literally a god in day to day life. DC decide on the nerdy dark arts teacher.
Think I'll stick with marvel in the future.
Rebecca Billcliff (2409 KP) rated Thor: Ragnarok (2017) in Movies
Mar 1, 2020 (Updated Sep 6, 2021)
Tom Hiddleston (6 more)
Chris (I would let him do things to me) Hemsworth.
My name is Korg. I'm made of rocks, as you can see.
Hulk vs Giant Wolf
Redemption, redemption accross the bord!
🤣
Jeff Goldbloom!
THAT is how you make a film!
Okay, I know what you are going to say... "Marvel, its okay for us to go 30 seconds without laughing" But DAM! This is how you make a movie! There is so much more to it than just the humor, which is just the right amount of silly, cheesy, perfectly timed.
I just love the 80s vibes, it's done to perfection, form soundtrack to colour palet to end credits it is a wonderful blend of Nors awesomeness and Back to the Future mixed with a little Sat Wars.
Can not get enough of this one, defo in my top 5 Marvel films. Oh Deadpool, you know you my guy 😘
I just love the 80s vibes, it's done to perfection, form soundtrack to colour palet to end credits it is a wonderful blend of Nors awesomeness and Back to the Future mixed with a little Sat Wars.
Can not get enough of this one, defo in my top 5 Marvel films. Oh Deadpool, you know you my guy 😘
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Thor (2011) in Movies
May 9, 2019
Two worlds, One hero
Thor is presented with a difficult challenge - believably incorporating a god into the Marvel Cinematic Universe that has already been established. This task falls to director Kenneth Branagh, who devotes sufficient time to both Asgard, Thor's (Chris Hemsworth) home realm, and Earth, where he is exiled to. Asgard is depicted through a heavy use of special effects which creates a sense of wonder, but the story is steeped in relatable familial issues. When Thor disobeys his father, Odin (Anthony Hopkins), he is cast to Earth as a mortal. His hammer, Mjolnir, is the source of his powers, and it is also sent to Earth to await someone worthy enough to wield such power.
Most superhero movies spend a large amount of time introducing their hero to their superpower, and then invest yet more time discovering the full potential of this power. In the case of Thor, this is reversed. He begins the film a powerful god and is then stripped of such a gift, forced to learn to live without such capabilities. It is here that the film really shines, as Thor attempts to adapt to life on Earth. He is not accustomed to human ways, and this fish out of water scenario is wisely played for laughs.
Of course, this being a superhero movie means a love interest is required to be drafted in. Enter Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), an astrophysicist who discovers Thor. She is accompanied by her mentor, Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård), and her assistant, Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings). They all become entangled with S.H.I.E.L.D, who have previously been glimpsed in Iron Man (2008), The Incredible Hulk (2008), and Iron Man 2 (2010). Throughout this series of films it has been evident that there is something larger at play, and with Thor this bigger picture begins to come into sharper focus.
Thor's brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is presented as the villain, but he mostly stays in the shadows and pulls the strings of others to do his fighting. This results in less CGI-laden battles but a stronger character-based story. Thor strikes a pleasing balance between plot and spectacle, effectively setting up a likeable hero and an interesting big bad. However, with most of the Earth-based action set in a small town in New Mexico, the threat never feels particularly palpable.
I was skeptical but intrigued by Thor, and Branagh does do a marvellous job of incorporating myth and legend into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I would have liked to see Kat Dennings given a meatier role to play, but that minor quibble aside Thor is a highly enjoyable superhero movie. Chris Hemsworth is great as Thor, delivering in both the heroics and comedy and Loki played by Tom Hiddelston is a fantastic villian. Sadly, the film doesn't quite rise to the bar set by Iron Man, but it does come impressively close.
Most superhero movies spend a large amount of time introducing their hero to their superpower, and then invest yet more time discovering the full potential of this power. In the case of Thor, this is reversed. He begins the film a powerful god and is then stripped of such a gift, forced to learn to live without such capabilities. It is here that the film really shines, as Thor attempts to adapt to life on Earth. He is not accustomed to human ways, and this fish out of water scenario is wisely played for laughs.
Of course, this being a superhero movie means a love interest is required to be drafted in. Enter Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), an astrophysicist who discovers Thor. She is accompanied by her mentor, Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård), and her assistant, Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings). They all become entangled with S.H.I.E.L.D, who have previously been glimpsed in Iron Man (2008), The Incredible Hulk (2008), and Iron Man 2 (2010). Throughout this series of films it has been evident that there is something larger at play, and with Thor this bigger picture begins to come into sharper focus.
Thor's brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is presented as the villain, but he mostly stays in the shadows and pulls the strings of others to do his fighting. This results in less CGI-laden battles but a stronger character-based story. Thor strikes a pleasing balance between plot and spectacle, effectively setting up a likeable hero and an interesting big bad. However, with most of the Earth-based action set in a small town in New Mexico, the threat never feels particularly palpable.
I was skeptical but intrigued by Thor, and Branagh does do a marvellous job of incorporating myth and legend into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I would have liked to see Kat Dennings given a meatier role to play, but that minor quibble aside Thor is a highly enjoyable superhero movie. Chris Hemsworth is great as Thor, delivering in both the heroics and comedy and Loki played by Tom Hiddelston is a fantastic villian. Sadly, the film doesn't quite rise to the bar set by Iron Man, but it does come impressively close.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Thor: Ragnarok (2017) in Movies
May 11, 2019
The humour
Chris Hemsworth as Thor
Tom Hiddleston as Loki
Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner/The Hulk
Taika Waititi as Korg
Cate Blanchett as Hela
Jeff Goldblum's Grandmaster is a God send (1 more)
Tessa Thompson as Valkiyrie
The Action was awesome specifically Hulk vs Thor and the final bridge battle
The synth score
"Piss off Ghost"
Perhaps, the most entertaining and enjoyable movie in the MCU since Iron Man?
There’s so many reasons why I enjoy Thor: Ragnarok, but it has to start with the direction and vision of Taika Waititi. He’s a genre changer in the comic book man movie universe. From his Kiwi sense of humor, to the choice in mood music, to the simply fun action sequences; Thor: Ragnarok is a two hour smile that would make it appear I had Botox injections, since my facial expression stayed happy.
Thor is one of my favorite characters in the MCU and I like the way the fat has been chewed off in his movies. Less memorable characters are disposed of, and screen time is given to the characters you want to see. Jeff Goldblum’s Grandmaster is a gift from God. Loki is Loki and who doesn’t love Loki? Tessa Thompson’s Valkyrie has a lot of depth. Cate Blanchett’s Hela might be in the top 5 in baddest of bad MCU villains, and puts the D in dysfunctional families. Plus, Idris Elba’s Heimdall deserved his own movie, and perhaps the number one scene stealer, and one of the reasons why this movie is truly special is Taika Waititi’s Korg. Who knew a CGI rock could be so hilarious? His voice is infectious, and I want to see more of Korg.
Hulk and Banner are both used just right. The synth-pop score makes me want to dance a boogie groove. Thor’s flaw is there’s too many interesting storylines, which causes the film to jump some from character to character. Watching Chris Hemsworth ham it up as Thor is what these types of movies should be all about. Putting the F back in fun and having a helluva time in the process doing so.
There’s so many reasons why I enjoy Thor: Ragnarok, but it has to start with the direction and vision of Taika Waititi. He’s a genre changer in the comic book man movie universe. From his Kiwi sense of humor, to the choice in mood music, to the simply fun action sequences; Thor: Ragnarok is a two hour smile that would make it appear I had Botox injections, since my facial expression stayed happy.
Thor is one of my favorite characters in the MCU and I like the way the fat has been chewed off in his movies. Less memorable characters are disposed of, and screen time is given to the characters you want to see. Jeff Goldblum’s Grandmaster is a gift from God. Loki is Loki and who doesn’t love Loki? Tessa Thompson’s Valkyrie has a lot of depth. Cate Blanchett’s Hela might be in the top 5 in baddest of bad MCU villains, and puts the D in dysfunctional families. Plus, Idris Elba’s Heimdall deserved his own movie, and perhaps the number one scene stealer, and one of the reasons why this movie is truly special is Taika Waititi’s Korg. Who knew a CGI rock could be so hilarious? His voice is infectious, and I want to see more of Korg.
Hulk and Banner are both used just right. The synth-pop score makes me want to dance a boogie groove. Thor’s flaw is there’s too many interesting storylines, which causes the film to jump some from character to character. Watching Chris Hemsworth ham it up as Thor is what these types of movies should be all about. Putting the F back in fun and having a helluva time in the process doing so.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) in Movies
Oct 16, 2018 (Updated Oct 16, 2018)
Nice mystery thriller
The El Royale is a bi-state establishment. A painted red line runs straight through the centre of the car park and right through the centre of reception, leading to a jukebox. One half of this hotel lies in Nevada, the other half in California. The rooms on the California side are a little more expensive because.... well, because it's California!
A number of guests arrive in reception - Jon Hamm is a vacuum cleaner salesmen, keen to stay in the honeymoon suite, Jeff Bridges is a priest and Cynthia Erivo a singer. They chat a while as they wait for somebody to return to the reception desk so that they can check in. And then another woman arrives, played by Dakota Fanning. She's not so chatty.
They all head off to their rooms and begin behaving in very different and mysterious ways. One is taking the room apart, removing microphones and phone taps, another is lifting up floorboards, another is singing into the mirror while another is bringing in a body from the boot of a car.
There's not a lot else that can be said without giving things away but much of the movie is spent exploring each of these characters and what they're all up to. We go back in time days, even years, exploring their past a little and discovering what brought them all to the El Royale. Stories within the hotel overlap and affect each other, with twists and turns revealing different motives for various people. It's all very mysterious, very well executed and very enjoyable.
Where I felt the movie falters is in the latter third, with the introduction of Chris Hemsworth. I didn't really buy into his character at all and that's when the pacing, the mystery and the enjoyment fell apart somewhat for me. It picks up with a couple more twists and surprises towards the but at 141 minutes, I feel the movie could have easily benefited from losing 20-30 minutes from its run time. Overall though, this was an enjoyable bit of fun.
A number of guests arrive in reception - Jon Hamm is a vacuum cleaner salesmen, keen to stay in the honeymoon suite, Jeff Bridges is a priest and Cynthia Erivo a singer. They chat a while as they wait for somebody to return to the reception desk so that they can check in. And then another woman arrives, played by Dakota Fanning. She's not so chatty.
They all head off to their rooms and begin behaving in very different and mysterious ways. One is taking the room apart, removing microphones and phone taps, another is lifting up floorboards, another is singing into the mirror while another is bringing in a body from the boot of a car.
There's not a lot else that can be said without giving things away but much of the movie is spent exploring each of these characters and what they're all up to. We go back in time days, even years, exploring their past a little and discovering what brought them all to the El Royale. Stories within the hotel overlap and affect each other, with twists and turns revealing different motives for various people. It's all very mysterious, very well executed and very enjoyable.
Where I felt the movie falters is in the latter third, with the introduction of Chris Hemsworth. I didn't really buy into his character at all and that's when the pacing, the mystery and the enjoyment fell apart somewhat for me. It picks up with a couple more twists and surprises towards the but at 141 minutes, I feel the movie could have easily benefited from losing 20-30 minutes from its run time. Overall though, this was an enjoyable bit of fun.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Expendables 2 (2012) in Movies
Nov 22, 2019
Mumble Mumble Mumble Part 2
This one, this one to me is the best one out of all three of them. It has more action, more comedy, more one-liners and more mumbling is that a good thing probley not because you cant understand one who that their saying.
The Plot: Mercenary leader Barney Ross (Sylvester Stallone), Lee Christmas (Jason Statham) and the rest of the Expendables team reunite when Mr. Church (Bruce Willis) hires them for a seemingly easy job. But things go terribly wrong, compelling the mercenaries to seek revenge for a comrade's murder. With the odds against them, Barney and his team are hell-bent on payback and cut a path of destruction through opposing forces, only to encounter an unexpected threat: six pounds of weapons-grade plutonium.
Is Bruce and Arnold in this one more yes their are and their say each other's one-liner's to each other. Its really funny.
So which 80's star is in this one? Liam Hemsworth, who? Oh the brother of Chris Hensworth.
Anways its a great time and fun to watch.
The Plot: Mercenary leader Barney Ross (Sylvester Stallone), Lee Christmas (Jason Statham) and the rest of the Expendables team reunite when Mr. Church (Bruce Willis) hires them for a seemingly easy job. But things go terribly wrong, compelling the mercenaries to seek revenge for a comrade's murder. With the odds against them, Barney and his team are hell-bent on payback and cut a path of destruction through opposing forces, only to encounter an unexpected threat: six pounds of weapons-grade plutonium.
Is Bruce and Arnold in this one more yes their are and their say each other's one-liner's to each other. Its really funny.
So which 80's star is in this one? Liam Hemsworth, who? Oh the brother of Chris Hensworth.
Anways its a great time and fun to watch.