Search
Search results
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Carrie (1976) in Movies
Oct 28, 2019
They're All Gonna Laugh At You!
If you are Carrie White, your life has not been an easy one. You have had to endure years of abuse and torture at the hand of your crazed, ultra religious and protective mother, the scorn and subject of ridicule of your entire school and the emergence of your unexplained abilities to move objects with your mind.
After a horribly embarrassing episode in the high school shower involving the onset of mensuration in the teen, Carrie is reduced to a sobby mess as her schoolmates laugh, point and ridicule her to no end. She finds no solace from her mother who now thinks of her as "dirty". The gym teacher comes to Carrie's defense and outlines to the rest of the class they will be in detention for one week as their penance and any further unruly behavior will result in their suspension and remove from attending their senior prom.
This does not sit well with Chris a popular girl with a cool boyfriend and an attitude toward authority. Another classmate, Sue, feels guilt upon her participation in the shower scene event so much so she forces her boyfriend to ask Carrie to the prom despite his reservation. Once at the prom, Carrie is delighted by the event, fighting through her embarrassment and demure feelings to try and enjoy her newfound appearance as a beautiful young woman.
All hell is about to break loose!
The original film Carrie, is a lot of premature exposition and character introductions for the inevitable culmination of Carrie's triumph, ridicule and retribution during the prom, but it is worth the wait.
Almost every character Carrie interacts with does not like her including most of her classmates, her teachers who can't remember her name and then there's her mother. Not only does she shame her daughter whenever possible and tell her she is a go good sinner, she even says at one point she wishes Carrie had not been born since she thinks of any sex act as a sin.
Both Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie who played Carrie's mother were nominated for Academy Awards in 1977 for their work and it was very well deserved. Carrie is so timid at times and then so filled with desire for vengeance and the willingness to murder her character arc was one you don't often see in film. Her mother annoyed everyone she met including the neighbors she tried to convert and her daughter who I don't think she loved at all. You instantly hated her for what she did to her fragile young daughter and Laurie brought her to life well.
Any movie which is over 40 years old will look somewhat dated with the music, costumes and hair styles (and lots of nudity, wow, forgot about that!), but that does not diminish the fine acting performances and the very fulfilling payoff the movie delivers.
A horror classic!
After a horribly embarrassing episode in the high school shower involving the onset of mensuration in the teen, Carrie is reduced to a sobby mess as her schoolmates laugh, point and ridicule her to no end. She finds no solace from her mother who now thinks of her as "dirty". The gym teacher comes to Carrie's defense and outlines to the rest of the class they will be in detention for one week as their penance and any further unruly behavior will result in their suspension and remove from attending their senior prom.
This does not sit well with Chris a popular girl with a cool boyfriend and an attitude toward authority. Another classmate, Sue, feels guilt upon her participation in the shower scene event so much so she forces her boyfriend to ask Carrie to the prom despite his reservation. Once at the prom, Carrie is delighted by the event, fighting through her embarrassment and demure feelings to try and enjoy her newfound appearance as a beautiful young woman.
All hell is about to break loose!
The original film Carrie, is a lot of premature exposition and character introductions for the inevitable culmination of Carrie's triumph, ridicule and retribution during the prom, but it is worth the wait.
Almost every character Carrie interacts with does not like her including most of her classmates, her teachers who can't remember her name and then there's her mother. Not only does she shame her daughter whenever possible and tell her she is a go good sinner, she even says at one point she wishes Carrie had not been born since she thinks of any sex act as a sin.
Both Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie who played Carrie's mother were nominated for Academy Awards in 1977 for their work and it was very well deserved. Carrie is so timid at times and then so filled with desire for vengeance and the willingness to murder her character arc was one you don't often see in film. Her mother annoyed everyone she met including the neighbors she tried to convert and her daughter who I don't think she loved at all. You instantly hated her for what she did to her fragile young daughter and Laurie brought her to life well.
Any movie which is over 40 years old will look somewhat dated with the music, costumes and hair styles (and lots of nudity, wow, forgot about that!), but that does not diminish the fine acting performances and the very fulfilling payoff the movie delivers.
A horror classic!
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Huntsman: Winter's War (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Hemsworth and Chastain Disappoint
Snow White & the Huntsman was a film that garnered much more attention than it deserved, purely because of the goings on behind the scenes between Twilight starlet, Kristen Stewart and director Rupert Sanders. The film itself was a hollow take on the classic fairy-tale that lacked the magic and sparkle of Disneyâs wonderful animation.
Itâs fair to say then that it never really deserved any kind of follow up, despite a charismatic performance from the wonderful Charlize Theron. Nevertheless, Universal Studios approved another film soon after its release. But is The Huntsman: Winterâs War better than what came before it?
Taking place before and directly alongside the events of its predecessor, Winterâs War follows Emily Bluntâs Ice Queen, Freya, as she struggles to come to terms with the death of her baby. She becomes so consumed by rage and guilt that she banishes herself to an ice castle, much like Elsa from Frozen, training an army of kidnapped children to pass her time.
Chris Hemsworth and Jessica Chastain star as two of these warriors, taken from their families at a young age and taught how to fight and how to block out any feelings of love â as per the Queenâs orders. Naturally, this becomes increasingly difficult and provides the film with its romantic subplot.
Unfortunately, the usually excellent Hemsworth and former Oscar-winner Chastain have next-to-no chemistry and their truly dreadful Celtic accents stop the film dead in its tracks. Itâs a shame that Winterâs War relies so heavily on these two when Emily Blunt and a sorely underused Charlize Theron are much, much better.
So much better in fact that the screen comes alive whenever they are on screen, whether that is together or flying solo. Blunt suffers slightly due to the nature of her role, after all, she is known to be a bubbly and happy-go-lucky person, but her Ice Queen is mesmerising and heart-breaking to watch nonetheless.
Theron steals the show yet again, despite her lack of screen time and as she did in its predecessor, lifts Winterâs War well above its average plot and dialogue. Elsewhere, British favourite Sheridan Smith is a pleasant comedic break as a foul-mouthed dwarf.
The cinematography is on the whole very good, with pleasant landscapes, reminiscent of Harry Potter dotted alongside CGI castles, polar bears and goblins. The use of practical effects by first-time director Cedric Nicolas-Troyan is also a pleasure to see in this day and age.
Alas, the plot and dialogue of Winterâs War leaves much to be desired and the lack of screen time for Blunt and Theron hampers what could have been an interesting and unique backstory for this particular duo of films.
Overall, The Huntsman: Winterâs War is an average film hampered further by its two leading stars. Fortunately, the inclusion of Blunt and Theron manages to lift it slightly above the standard of its predecessor, but not by enough for it to warrant another follow up. However, the signposts throughout the 115 minute running time confess a sequel is more than likely.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/04/07/hemsworth-and-chastain-disappoint-the-huntsman-review/
Itâs fair to say then that it never really deserved any kind of follow up, despite a charismatic performance from the wonderful Charlize Theron. Nevertheless, Universal Studios approved another film soon after its release. But is The Huntsman: Winterâs War better than what came before it?
Taking place before and directly alongside the events of its predecessor, Winterâs War follows Emily Bluntâs Ice Queen, Freya, as she struggles to come to terms with the death of her baby. She becomes so consumed by rage and guilt that she banishes herself to an ice castle, much like Elsa from Frozen, training an army of kidnapped children to pass her time.
Chris Hemsworth and Jessica Chastain star as two of these warriors, taken from their families at a young age and taught how to fight and how to block out any feelings of love â as per the Queenâs orders. Naturally, this becomes increasingly difficult and provides the film with its romantic subplot.
Unfortunately, the usually excellent Hemsworth and former Oscar-winner Chastain have next-to-no chemistry and their truly dreadful Celtic accents stop the film dead in its tracks. Itâs a shame that Winterâs War relies so heavily on these two when Emily Blunt and a sorely underused Charlize Theron are much, much better.
So much better in fact that the screen comes alive whenever they are on screen, whether that is together or flying solo. Blunt suffers slightly due to the nature of her role, after all, she is known to be a bubbly and happy-go-lucky person, but her Ice Queen is mesmerising and heart-breaking to watch nonetheless.
Theron steals the show yet again, despite her lack of screen time and as she did in its predecessor, lifts Winterâs War well above its average plot and dialogue. Elsewhere, British favourite Sheridan Smith is a pleasant comedic break as a foul-mouthed dwarf.
The cinematography is on the whole very good, with pleasant landscapes, reminiscent of Harry Potter dotted alongside CGI castles, polar bears and goblins. The use of practical effects by first-time director Cedric Nicolas-Troyan is also a pleasure to see in this day and age.
Alas, the plot and dialogue of Winterâs War leaves much to be desired and the lack of screen time for Blunt and Theron hampers what could have been an interesting and unique backstory for this particular duo of films.
Overall, The Huntsman: Winterâs War is an average film hampered further by its two leading stars. Fortunately, the inclusion of Blunt and Theron manages to lift it slightly above the standard of its predecessor, but not by enough for it to warrant another follow up. However, the signposts throughout the 115 minute running time confess a sequel is more than likely.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/04/07/hemsworth-and-chastain-disappoint-the-huntsman-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Vampires Suck (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Vampires suck â but does the movie? We open on the San Salvatore Festival with the angsty Becca watching her beau, Edward Sullen, disrobe and expose his sparkly secrets- heâs a vampire! Cue the âTrue Blood- 40ozâ toting, Mono-fang vampire to take Edward outâŚ.wait, we have to get the rest of the story! What follows is a parody of the first two movies of the Twilight Saga. Most of the characters analogous to the spoofâs target are introduced in the first 30 minutes; few of them are actually seen again throughout the movie.
Becca (newcomer Jenn Proske) is forced to move to Sporks, Washington, with her deadbeat father and town sheriff, Frank Crane (Diedrich Bader of The Drew Carey Show). Frankâs best friend is the rough-and-tumble paraplegic Native American, Bobby. His contribution to the plot is his hunky teenage son, Jacob White (Chris Riggi of Gossip Girl). The town of Sporks seems to have vampires on the brain and its population is only growing smaller.
Our heroine is introduced to Edward Sullen (Matt Lanter of Disaster Movie) and what follows is the âclassicâ story of girl-meets-vampire, girl-loses-vampire, girl-gets-threatened-by-vampire-nemesis, etc. Writers/Directors Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer use their formulaic approach to spoof movies by making the plot a cliff-notes version of the Stephanie Meyerâs original material, with ample jokes thrown in-in an attempt to beef up their rendition.
In fact, there are so many visual jokes in the movie that it left me wondering what a sight-impaired person might conclude of the movie. âWhat are all these people laughing at?â I noticed a few of the dialogue driven jokes werenât even played off by the actors. They seemed to have been missed by everyone, including the editors. Other jokes are pop-culture references that will get stale with time. Theyâre integrated well, but definitely dated. The movie is redolent with the classic American comedy tradition of slapstick, which occasionally comes off as funny.
The production value left something to be desired as several scenes were obviously one-takes. I counted several instances where Beccaâs kiss left Edwardâs mouth with a smudge of his own flesh-tone showing through. But hey- at least single takes have continuity, right? The contacts, no doubt purchased in bulk, gave the characters an occasional Marty Feldman goggly-look. The effect is hilarious, although Iâm not always sure if itâs intentional.
The cast has its standouts. Jenn Proskeâs Becca comes dangerously close (like copyright-violating close) to the performance of Kristen Stewartâs Bella as the fidgety, twitchy, sullen and hormone-y heroine. And Ken Jeong (The Hangover) as Daro, while not appearing on screen much, definitely makes his comedic presence felt.
All in all, âVampires Suckâ didnât really suck⌠it kind of chews, like gum. Gum out of the package is fresh, flavorful, but the longer you chew it, the tougher and more stale it becomes. This movie is fresh, funny, and quirky right now, but it wonât stand the test of time like more accomplished parodies.
Becca (newcomer Jenn Proske) is forced to move to Sporks, Washington, with her deadbeat father and town sheriff, Frank Crane (Diedrich Bader of The Drew Carey Show). Frankâs best friend is the rough-and-tumble paraplegic Native American, Bobby. His contribution to the plot is his hunky teenage son, Jacob White (Chris Riggi of Gossip Girl). The town of Sporks seems to have vampires on the brain and its population is only growing smaller.
Our heroine is introduced to Edward Sullen (Matt Lanter of Disaster Movie) and what follows is the âclassicâ story of girl-meets-vampire, girl-loses-vampire, girl-gets-threatened-by-vampire-nemesis, etc. Writers/Directors Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer use their formulaic approach to spoof movies by making the plot a cliff-notes version of the Stephanie Meyerâs original material, with ample jokes thrown in-in an attempt to beef up their rendition.
In fact, there are so many visual jokes in the movie that it left me wondering what a sight-impaired person might conclude of the movie. âWhat are all these people laughing at?â I noticed a few of the dialogue driven jokes werenât even played off by the actors. They seemed to have been missed by everyone, including the editors. Other jokes are pop-culture references that will get stale with time. Theyâre integrated well, but definitely dated. The movie is redolent with the classic American comedy tradition of slapstick, which occasionally comes off as funny.
The production value left something to be desired as several scenes were obviously one-takes. I counted several instances where Beccaâs kiss left Edwardâs mouth with a smudge of his own flesh-tone showing through. But hey- at least single takes have continuity, right? The contacts, no doubt purchased in bulk, gave the characters an occasional Marty Feldman goggly-look. The effect is hilarious, although Iâm not always sure if itâs intentional.
The cast has its standouts. Jenn Proskeâs Becca comes dangerously close (like copyright-violating close) to the performance of Kristen Stewartâs Bella as the fidgety, twitchy, sullen and hormone-y heroine. And Ken Jeong (The Hangover) as Daro, while not appearing on screen much, definitely makes his comedic presence felt.
All in all, âVampires Suckâ didnât really suck⌠it kind of chews, like gum. Gum out of the package is fresh, flavorful, but the longer you chew it, the tougher and more stale it becomes. This movie is fresh, funny, and quirky right now, but it wonât stand the test of time like more accomplished parodies.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Thor: Love and Thunder (2022) in Movies
Aug 8, 2022
Phase four of the MCU has been interesting so far to say the least. Some projects have been great, some have been a little uninspired, but in its attempts to set up multiple overarching story threads, it feels a little wayward, especially in comparison to the recently concluded Infinity Saga. Thor: Love & Thunder has unfortunately arrived right in the middle of this new era of uncertainty, and is a film that ultimately feels a little directionless itself. It adapts a hugely beloved comic arc, an arc that could have potentially used two movies to flesh everything out properly. In this arc, Gorr the God Butcher is a big deal, he feels threatening, menacing, dangerous. In the film, Christian Bale is giving it his all, and there are moments when Gorr is genuinely creepy as hell, but the stakes never feel particularly high, resulting in a villain that feels like a shadow of his comic counterpart. Chris Hemsworth has proven by now that he is a perfect fit for Thor himself, but by this fourth entry, it genuinely feels that he is a straight up dumbass, and is miles away from his character growth in the first Thor. Herein lies the main issue I had with Love & Thunder. Ragnarok was a well balanced MCU film in terms of tone. It provided a much needed shakeup after the disappointment of The Dark World, and Taika Waititi was an inspired choice to bring the quirk. The comedy is tight, lands more often than not, whilst boasting some memorable set pieces. L&T takes the comedy aspect, and doubles down hard. It's joke after joke, to a point where a lot of it falls flat. It reminded me of Guardians of the Galaxy 2 in that respect. It's not terrible by any means, but it's balance feels completely off. There are some great set pieces to be fair. An early scene that involves an attack on New Asgard is a highlight, and almost feels like a horror film at times. It's also where we meet Jane Fosters Thor, who looks comic accurate, and is a genuinely great addition to the movie overall. There's another scene later on that takes place in the shadow realm that provides another highlight. It's mostly in black and white, and it feels unique to the MCU. It's one of a few inspired moments that prevent L&T from becoming a complete misfire.
Any other gripes from me would require stepping into spoiler territory so I'll leave it there. Love & Thunder is frequently dumb, but equally fun, colourful and loud, despite being a bit of a mess. The more Marvel Studios venture into Phase Four, the more sporadic and shaky it feels. I have no doubt that everything will plateau into a solid narrative again, I just hope that moment comes sooner, rather than later.
On a final note, the person I watched this with leaned over to me around the halfway point, and said that Thor just sounds like Boris Johnson when he talks, and now I can't unhear it. If I have to suffer, then you do to.
Any other gripes from me would require stepping into spoiler territory so I'll leave it there. Love & Thunder is frequently dumb, but equally fun, colourful and loud, despite being a bit of a mess. The more Marvel Studios venture into Phase Four, the more sporadic and shaky it feels. I have no doubt that everything will plateau into a solid narrative again, I just hope that moment comes sooner, rather than later.
On a final note, the person I watched this with leaned over to me around the halfway point, and said that Thor just sounds like Boris Johnson when he talks, and now I can't unhear it. If I have to suffer, then you do to.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Little Women (2019) in Movies
Feb 5, 2020
A Worthy Adaptation
There have been many adaptations of Louisa May Alcott's 19th Century Classic novel LITTLE WOMEN following the adventures, loves and losses of the 4 March sisters - Jo, Meg, Amy and Beth.. My favorite is the Orono High School's production of the musical version of LITTLE WOMEN (starring my daughter as Jo), but coming in a close second is the 1933 version with Katherine Hepburn starring as Jo (the quintessential Jo, in my book). So was there really a need for ANOTHER version of this?
Well...yes...and...no.
As adapted and directed by Greta Gerwig, this version of LITTLE WOMEN stars Saoirse Ronan as Jo, Emma Watson as Meg, Florence Pugh as Amy and Eliza Scanlen as Beth and has a strong "2019" female empowerment vibe to it (this is intended to be a compliment). I've seen this called a "Little Women for the #metoo era" and I think this is misguided branding - for it does disservice to the #metoo movement - and to this film.
Ronan - as expected - was Oscar nominated for her strong, independent turn as the strong and independent Jo. This is a perfect marriage of performer and material (almost as good as the Hepburn turn) and Ronan lands this character strongly (and correctly) at every turn. Timothee Chalamet matches her beat for beat as her erstwhile love, Laurie. This is the 2nd time that these two have played opposite each other (LADYBIRD was the other time) and there is a strong chemistry between these two - I look forward to many, many more pairings of Ronan and Chalamet in the future.
Famously (or maybe, it's infamously) Greta Gerwig did NOT receive and Oscar nomination for her Direction - and I think that is a shame (there are at least 2 nominated Directors that I would take off the list in favor of her). Because she adapted the screen play (a piece of work that she WAS Oscar nominated for - and will win in an effort to make up for the Directing snub), her Direction is sure-handed and strong throughout. She has a very good feel for the material and knows what she wants to do throughout, to interesting results.
This is because Gerwig chooses to focus much of this version on the relationship between Jo and Amy - a relationship that gets short shrift in most of the other adaptations. By casting Florence Pugh (also Oscar nominated) in the Amy role, Gerwig has a strong antagonist to Ronan's protagonist - with shades of both being grey. Neither character (or performance) is black and white they are both interacting with each other as realistic sisters would, both taking turns being "in the right"....and "the wrong".
Because of the focus on the Jo and Amy characters, the other 2 sisters - Meg and (especially) Beth - get short changed and even though both Watson and Scanlen are "game", they have precious little to do. The same goes with Meryl Streep (Aunt March), Laura Dern (Marmie), Tracy Letts (who seems to be in EVERYTHING right now) and Bob Odenkirk (of all people). They are all strong - and earnest - in their limited time on screen, but NONE of them have that much to do. Only Chris Cooper shines brightly in his small, supporting role.
I have to admit that because I've seen this story many, many times, I found my mind wandering a bit - especially at the beginning. But by the time Ronan/Chalamet/Pugh started working off of each other, the film - and my interest - rose.
So...is another version of LITTLE WOMEN necessary? I'd say no. But...if this version of LITTLE WOMEN is the one that the Little Women of today see - and can identify with - then I say "bring it on."
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Well...yes...and...no.
As adapted and directed by Greta Gerwig, this version of LITTLE WOMEN stars Saoirse Ronan as Jo, Emma Watson as Meg, Florence Pugh as Amy and Eliza Scanlen as Beth and has a strong "2019" female empowerment vibe to it (this is intended to be a compliment). I've seen this called a "Little Women for the #metoo era" and I think this is misguided branding - for it does disservice to the #metoo movement - and to this film.
Ronan - as expected - was Oscar nominated for her strong, independent turn as the strong and independent Jo. This is a perfect marriage of performer and material (almost as good as the Hepburn turn) and Ronan lands this character strongly (and correctly) at every turn. Timothee Chalamet matches her beat for beat as her erstwhile love, Laurie. This is the 2nd time that these two have played opposite each other (LADYBIRD was the other time) and there is a strong chemistry between these two - I look forward to many, many more pairings of Ronan and Chalamet in the future.
Famously (or maybe, it's infamously) Greta Gerwig did NOT receive and Oscar nomination for her Direction - and I think that is a shame (there are at least 2 nominated Directors that I would take off the list in favor of her). Because she adapted the screen play (a piece of work that she WAS Oscar nominated for - and will win in an effort to make up for the Directing snub), her Direction is sure-handed and strong throughout. She has a very good feel for the material and knows what she wants to do throughout, to interesting results.
This is because Gerwig chooses to focus much of this version on the relationship between Jo and Amy - a relationship that gets short shrift in most of the other adaptations. By casting Florence Pugh (also Oscar nominated) in the Amy role, Gerwig has a strong antagonist to Ronan's protagonist - with shades of both being grey. Neither character (or performance) is black and white they are both interacting with each other as realistic sisters would, both taking turns being "in the right"....and "the wrong".
Because of the focus on the Jo and Amy characters, the other 2 sisters - Meg and (especially) Beth - get short changed and even though both Watson and Scanlen are "game", they have precious little to do. The same goes with Meryl Streep (Aunt March), Laura Dern (Marmie), Tracy Letts (who seems to be in EVERYTHING right now) and Bob Odenkirk (of all people). They are all strong - and earnest - in their limited time on screen, but NONE of them have that much to do. Only Chris Cooper shines brightly in his small, supporting role.
I have to admit that because I've seen this story many, many times, I found my mind wandering a bit - especially at the beginning. But by the time Ronan/Chalamet/Pugh started working off of each other, the film - and my interest - rose.
So...is another version of LITTLE WOMEN necessary? I'd say no. But...if this version of LITTLE WOMEN is the one that the Little Women of today see - and can identify with - then I say "bring it on."
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Snowpiercer (2013) in Movies
Jun 7, 2020
You know when someone tells you you should watch something... and then someone else does... and after every new "oh my god, you haven't seen it?!" you become more stubborn about watching it? That's exactly why it has taken me so long to watch Snowpiercer.
With the world on the edge of a complete climate collapse scientists launched what they hoped was the solution to the crisis, they would cool the atmosphere and save everyone... but their solution proved to be the world's undoing. What's left of the human race now rides a purpose-built train outrunning an icy end. The people of the tail section are living a terrible life, no natural light, barely any food... they want things to change, but the rest of the train has other ideas.
There's an all star cast on board for Snowpiercer, they've definitely not scrimped in that department. Together everyone works, even with some strong character personalities.
Chris Evans plays our lead, Curtis. Evans can do a lot of different genres but this sort of science fiction didn't seem to suit him. Curtis is a flawed character by design but at no point did he feel like someone to get behind, it's possible to like a flawed leader but this one didn't have the strength to make it convincing.
Tilda Swinton pops up and gives us the much expected slightly nuts performance that only she could muster. While I enjoyed it I'm not sure what it added to the proceedings apart from a very over the top sci-fi edge.
In the confined spaces of the train you get a great sense of how they're living and the cameras are placed in such a way that it never feels claustrophobic. Even in the tail section where you'd expect that, the closeness boosts the bond between characters and the way their planning comes together.
The film has a very clear divide when it comes to life both inside and out of the train. The sweeping bright white landscape with the dark and vibrant interiors, the dull tones of the tail to the richness of the ticketed sections. There's a lot to see in all of it and I'm certainly keen to give it another watch to try and pick out more details from inside the train and what's hidden in the snow... though I have some issues believing that some of that stuff would have still been visible with the wind and weather... but anyway.
There's some movie "magic" that I have a problem with in Snowpiercer, specifically a shoot-out scene that I actively dislike because it's ridiculous. I happily suspend my logical thinking for so many things but this scene annoyed me a lot, there were so many alternative ways to do it that would have been believable... ugh... *deep breath*. I'm going to stop on that now to avoid ranting and spoilers.
It's a great idea and the original story from the graphic novel is an excellent piece to work off, and while the adaptation might not be faithful to that it does add something that's necessary for a single film format. Because of the story and the design of the set there's automatically a natural progression to everything but the film isn't entirely balanced. The beginning feels very heavy and drawn out then we get a sprint for the finish. There's a lot of opportunity for expanded story in the middle but it's not taken up, including it may have changed the tone of the film as it definitely wasn't in keeping with the rest but it would have been interesting to find out more about it. (This is one thing I'm hoping we get to see a bit more of in the TV show.)
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/snowpiercer-movie-review.html
With the world on the edge of a complete climate collapse scientists launched what they hoped was the solution to the crisis, they would cool the atmosphere and save everyone... but their solution proved to be the world's undoing. What's left of the human race now rides a purpose-built train outrunning an icy end. The people of the tail section are living a terrible life, no natural light, barely any food... they want things to change, but the rest of the train has other ideas.
There's an all star cast on board for Snowpiercer, they've definitely not scrimped in that department. Together everyone works, even with some strong character personalities.
Chris Evans plays our lead, Curtis. Evans can do a lot of different genres but this sort of science fiction didn't seem to suit him. Curtis is a flawed character by design but at no point did he feel like someone to get behind, it's possible to like a flawed leader but this one didn't have the strength to make it convincing.
Tilda Swinton pops up and gives us the much expected slightly nuts performance that only she could muster. While I enjoyed it I'm not sure what it added to the proceedings apart from a very over the top sci-fi edge.
In the confined spaces of the train you get a great sense of how they're living and the cameras are placed in such a way that it never feels claustrophobic. Even in the tail section where you'd expect that, the closeness boosts the bond between characters and the way their planning comes together.
The film has a very clear divide when it comes to life both inside and out of the train. The sweeping bright white landscape with the dark and vibrant interiors, the dull tones of the tail to the richness of the ticketed sections. There's a lot to see in all of it and I'm certainly keen to give it another watch to try and pick out more details from inside the train and what's hidden in the snow... though I have some issues believing that some of that stuff would have still been visible with the wind and weather... but anyway.
There's some movie "magic" that I have a problem with in Snowpiercer, specifically a shoot-out scene that I actively dislike because it's ridiculous. I happily suspend my logical thinking for so many things but this scene annoyed me a lot, there were so many alternative ways to do it that would have been believable... ugh... *deep breath*. I'm going to stop on that now to avoid ranting and spoilers.
It's a great idea and the original story from the graphic novel is an excellent piece to work off, and while the adaptation might not be faithful to that it does add something that's necessary for a single film format. Because of the story and the design of the set there's automatically a natural progression to everything but the film isn't entirely balanced. The beginning feels very heavy and drawn out then we get a sprint for the finish. There's a lot of opportunity for expanded story in the middle but it's not taken up, including it may have changed the tone of the film as it definitely wasn't in keeping with the rest but it would have been interesting to find out more about it. (This is one thing I'm hoping we get to see a bit more of in the TV show.)
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/snowpiercer-movie-review.html
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Live By Night (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
âSleep by dayâŚâ.
Ben Affleckâs new movie could best be described as âsprawlingâ. In both directing and writing the screenplay (based on a novel by Dennis Lehane), Affleck has aimed for a âGodfatherâ style gangster epic and missed: not missed by a country mile, but missed nonetheless.
Morally bankrupted by his experiences in the trenches, Joe Coughlin (Affleck) returns to Boston to pick and choose which social rules he wants to follow. Not sociopathic per se, as he has a strong personal code of conduct, but Coughlin turns to robbery walking a delicate path between the warring mob factions of the Irish community, led by Albert White (the excellent Robert Glenister from TVâs âHustleâ), and the Italian community, led by Maso Pescatore (Remo Girone). Trying to keep him out of jail is his father (âHarry Potterââs Brendan Gleeson) who â usefully â is the Deputy Police Chief. Life gets complicated when he falls in love with Whiteâs moll, Emma Gould (Sienna Miller). The scene is set for a drama stretching from Boston to the hot and steamy Everglades over a period of the next twenty years.
Although a watchable popcorn film, the choppy episodic nature of the movie is hugely frustrating, with no compelling story arc to glue all of the disparate parts together. The (often very violent) action scenes are very well done and exciting but as a viewer you donât feel invested in a âjourneyâ from the beginning of the film to the (unsatisfactory) ending. In my experience itâs never a good sign when the writer considers it necessary to add a voiceover to the soundtrack, and here Affleck mutters truisms about his thoughts and motives that irritate more than illuminate.
The sheer volume of players in the piece (there are about three filmâs worth in here) and the resulting minimal screen time given to each allows no time for character development. Unfortunately the result is that you really care very little about whether people live or die and big plot developments land as rather an âohâ than an âOH!â.
Affleck puts in a great turn as the autistic central character whose condition results in a cold, calculating demeanor and a complete lack of emotion reflecting on his face. Oh, hang on⌠no, wait a minute⌠sorry⌠Iâve got the wrong filmâŚ. Iâm thinking about âThe Accountantâ. I donât know whether he filmed these films in parallel. I generally enjoy Ben Affleckâs work (he was excellent in âThe Townâ) but for 95% of this film his part could have been completed by a burly extra with an Affleck mask on. In terms of acting range, his facial muscles barely get to a â2â on the scale. Given the double problem that he is barely credible as the âyoung manâ returning mentally wounded from the trenches, then in my opinion he would have been better to have focused on the writing and directing and found a lead of the likes of an Andrew Garfield to fill Coughlinâs shoes.
Thatâs not to say there is not some good acting present in the rest of the castâs all too brief supporting roles. Elle Fanning (âTrumboâ, âMaleficentâ) in particular shines as the Southern belle Loretta Figgis: a religious zealot driving her police chief father (Chris Cooper, âThe Bourne Identityâ) to distraction. Cooper also delivers a star turn as the moral but pragmatic law-man.
Sienna Miller (âFoxcatcherâ) delivers a passable Cork accent and does her best to develop some believable chemistry with the rock-like Affleck. Zoe Saldana (âStar Trekâ) is equally effective as a Cuban humanitarian.
In summary, itâs sprawlingly watchable⌠but overall a disappointment, with Affleck over-reaching. One day we surely will get a gangster film the likes of another âGodfatherâ, âGoodfellasâ or âUntouchablesâ. Although this has its moments, unfortunately itâs more towards the âPublic Enemiesâ end of the genre spectrum.
Morally bankrupted by his experiences in the trenches, Joe Coughlin (Affleck) returns to Boston to pick and choose which social rules he wants to follow. Not sociopathic per se, as he has a strong personal code of conduct, but Coughlin turns to robbery walking a delicate path between the warring mob factions of the Irish community, led by Albert White (the excellent Robert Glenister from TVâs âHustleâ), and the Italian community, led by Maso Pescatore (Remo Girone). Trying to keep him out of jail is his father (âHarry Potterââs Brendan Gleeson) who â usefully â is the Deputy Police Chief. Life gets complicated when he falls in love with Whiteâs moll, Emma Gould (Sienna Miller). The scene is set for a drama stretching from Boston to the hot and steamy Everglades over a period of the next twenty years.
Although a watchable popcorn film, the choppy episodic nature of the movie is hugely frustrating, with no compelling story arc to glue all of the disparate parts together. The (often very violent) action scenes are very well done and exciting but as a viewer you donât feel invested in a âjourneyâ from the beginning of the film to the (unsatisfactory) ending. In my experience itâs never a good sign when the writer considers it necessary to add a voiceover to the soundtrack, and here Affleck mutters truisms about his thoughts and motives that irritate more than illuminate.
The sheer volume of players in the piece (there are about three filmâs worth in here) and the resulting minimal screen time given to each allows no time for character development. Unfortunately the result is that you really care very little about whether people live or die and big plot developments land as rather an âohâ than an âOH!â.
Affleck puts in a great turn as the autistic central character whose condition results in a cold, calculating demeanor and a complete lack of emotion reflecting on his face. Oh, hang on⌠no, wait a minute⌠sorry⌠Iâve got the wrong filmâŚ. Iâm thinking about âThe Accountantâ. I donât know whether he filmed these films in parallel. I generally enjoy Ben Affleckâs work (he was excellent in âThe Townâ) but for 95% of this film his part could have been completed by a burly extra with an Affleck mask on. In terms of acting range, his facial muscles barely get to a â2â on the scale. Given the double problem that he is barely credible as the âyoung manâ returning mentally wounded from the trenches, then in my opinion he would have been better to have focused on the writing and directing and found a lead of the likes of an Andrew Garfield to fill Coughlinâs shoes.
Thatâs not to say there is not some good acting present in the rest of the castâs all too brief supporting roles. Elle Fanning (âTrumboâ, âMaleficentâ) in particular shines as the Southern belle Loretta Figgis: a religious zealot driving her police chief father (Chris Cooper, âThe Bourne Identityâ) to distraction. Cooper also delivers a star turn as the moral but pragmatic law-man.
Sienna Miller (âFoxcatcherâ) delivers a passable Cork accent and does her best to develop some believable chemistry with the rock-like Affleck. Zoe Saldana (âStar Trekâ) is equally effective as a Cuban humanitarian.
In summary, itâs sprawlingly watchable⌠but overall a disappointment, with Affleck over-reaching. One day we surely will get a gangster film the likes of another âGodfatherâ, âGoodfellasâ or âUntouchablesâ. Although this has its moments, unfortunately itâs more towards the âPublic Enemiesâ end of the genre spectrum.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Independence Day: Resurgence (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Why Will Smith is a wise, wise man.
Iâm catching up on a few of the big films I missed during 2016. But Roland Emmerich has a lot to answer for with this one. Twenty years after Independence Day smashed the summer box office of 1996, the aliens are back: bigger and badder than ever. Steven Hiller (Will Smith) is no longer on the scene but, to give Emmerich a little credit, he has gathered an impressive array of the original stars to return led by Hillerâs wife Jasmine (Vivica Fox), President Whitmore (Bill Pullman), Dr Okun (Brent Spiner), David Levinson (Jeff Goldblum) and his dad (Judd Hirsch). The great Robert Loggia even turns up, who played the original General Grey, looking like he is about to expire (which unfortunately he did late last year, and the film is in memorial to him). All of them have weathered over the years apart from Judd Hirsch who must have a picture in his attic.
Playing the new generation (Hillerâs young son Dylan and the presidentâs daughter Patricia) are Jessie Usher and the comely Maika Monroe respectively, the latter having the pout of a young Jessica Alba and showing promise. Rounding off the young âuns, and playing an enormously irritating hunk/hero and his sidekick buddy are Jake (Liam Hemsworth â yes, younger brother of Chris) and Floyd (Nicolas Wright). And with the obvious needs of summer blockbusters to appeal to the ravenous Chinese market there is also Shanghai-born Angelababy as a young hotshot pilot and Chin Han as her uncle, moonbase commander Commander Jiang.
Itâs hard to know where to start with criticism of this film. Itâs like youâve caught someone desecrating the grave of a dearly departed relative. The plot is ludicrousâŚ. Uh ohâŚhere comes another One Mannâs Movies Showcase TheatreâŚ.
The scene: onboard the alien craft high above central Asia
DRONE KâFAALL: âThe use of the anti-gravity weapon worked a treat your Majesty. We have ripped up Shanghai and dumped in from a great height on London! Take that Queenie! All hail our weapons superiority! I take it we should just ârinse and repeatâ around the world to wipe them all out? â
QUEEN ALIEN BEE: âNo KâFall. Letâs land in the Atlantic and then go fight them one-on-one with our little ships in the desert near Area 51.â
DRONE KâFALL: âB-b-b-but your Majesty, with our gravity weapon we could eliminate all threat, drill out the earthâs core and find what we came here for in perfect safety!â.
QUEEN ALIEN BEE: âNo⌠thatâs just what theyâll be expecting us to doâŚâ
I thought the Oscar for the dumbest aliens of the year was a shoe-in for the ones who chose a similar tactic in âThe 5th Waveâ â but no⌠we have another contender for the crown. This ridiculous London-based CGI sequence â a virtual re-shoot of the ridiculous CGI sequence in Emmerichâs â2012â where John Cusack is fleeing by plane a collapsing Los Angeles â is mitigated only by Goldblumâs witty comment about them âAlways going for the landmarksâ â the best line in the film.
Elsewhere, the story and screenplay â by an army of writers (never a good sign) â is risible and an insult to intelligence, alien or otherwise. The ludicrous plot points go on and onâŚ
Why on earth is the single landed alien craft from 1996 owned by an African warlord? If mankind have âbenefitedâ so much from the alien technology that must surely have been through the UN-dismantling of that ship?
There seems to be no logical connection between the âvisionsâ (stolen from âClose Encountersâ) and the alien craft. The visions might have well have been of the alienâs last shopping list (âsix cans of Kraag beans; one bottle of Vollufi ale; ⌠â);
The alien craft is big enough to span the WHOLE Atlantic when it lands, but â who would believe it? â comes to a stop with its edge in Washington JUST ENOUGH to dip the White House flag to a jaunty angle. #cringe;
The alien ship â apparently open to the elements â allows our heroic hunks to wander around without spacesuits;
Breathless⌠or not. Jessie T Usher and Liam Hemsworth (foreground) not dying of asphyxiation or cold.
At one point it looked like our curvaceous heroine was going to defeat the alien queen in good olâ Wild West fashion armed only with a handgun (but no, my head could come out of my hands again);
And donât even get me started on the opening âexcitementâ about propping up a collapsing supergun on the moon with a spaceship. Gerry Anderson would be spinning in his grave.
The dialogue is little better. The original âIndependence Dayâ was probably most famous for two scenes: the impressive destruction of the White House and Bill Paxtonâs ludicrously corny âWe will not go quietly into the nightâ speech. Here trying to go one better we have not just one version of this but two with William Fichnerâs General Adams chipping one in from the rough before Paxton delivers an impromptu hanger speech that is toe-curlingly excruciating.
Much of the acting is of the âI really donât want to be here but itâs good for the pensionâ variety with Paxton and Goldblum going through the motions and Charlotte Gainsborough being horribly miscast as a French anthropologist running around the world on the trail of Pokemon Go characters⌠or symbols⌠or something. Only Brent Spiner and Judd Hirsch really get into their stride with likeably over-the-top performances.
Goldblum and Charlotte Gainsborough. A less likely historic romantic attachment its difficult to imagine.
If this was a standalone story it might scrape a double-Fad⌠but as it so horrendously sullies a classic movie experience it incurs my cinematic wrath. It might have made Roland Emmer-richer (sic)âŚ. but my recommendation would be to get a big bag of popcorn, the original 1996 movie on DVD and enjoy. Avoid, avoid, avoid.
Playing the new generation (Hillerâs young son Dylan and the presidentâs daughter Patricia) are Jessie Usher and the comely Maika Monroe respectively, the latter having the pout of a young Jessica Alba and showing promise. Rounding off the young âuns, and playing an enormously irritating hunk/hero and his sidekick buddy are Jake (Liam Hemsworth â yes, younger brother of Chris) and Floyd (Nicolas Wright). And with the obvious needs of summer blockbusters to appeal to the ravenous Chinese market there is also Shanghai-born Angelababy as a young hotshot pilot and Chin Han as her uncle, moonbase commander Commander Jiang.
Itâs hard to know where to start with criticism of this film. Itâs like youâve caught someone desecrating the grave of a dearly departed relative. The plot is ludicrousâŚ. Uh ohâŚhere comes another One Mannâs Movies Showcase TheatreâŚ.
The scene: onboard the alien craft high above central Asia
DRONE KâFAALL: âThe use of the anti-gravity weapon worked a treat your Majesty. We have ripped up Shanghai and dumped in from a great height on London! Take that Queenie! All hail our weapons superiority! I take it we should just ârinse and repeatâ around the world to wipe them all out? â
QUEEN ALIEN BEE: âNo KâFall. Letâs land in the Atlantic and then go fight them one-on-one with our little ships in the desert near Area 51.â
DRONE KâFALL: âB-b-b-but your Majesty, with our gravity weapon we could eliminate all threat, drill out the earthâs core and find what we came here for in perfect safety!â.
QUEEN ALIEN BEE: âNo⌠thatâs just what theyâll be expecting us to doâŚâ
I thought the Oscar for the dumbest aliens of the year was a shoe-in for the ones who chose a similar tactic in âThe 5th Waveâ â but no⌠we have another contender for the crown. This ridiculous London-based CGI sequence â a virtual re-shoot of the ridiculous CGI sequence in Emmerichâs â2012â where John Cusack is fleeing by plane a collapsing Los Angeles â is mitigated only by Goldblumâs witty comment about them âAlways going for the landmarksâ â the best line in the film.
Elsewhere, the story and screenplay â by an army of writers (never a good sign) â is risible and an insult to intelligence, alien or otherwise. The ludicrous plot points go on and onâŚ
Why on earth is the single landed alien craft from 1996 owned by an African warlord? If mankind have âbenefitedâ so much from the alien technology that must surely have been through the UN-dismantling of that ship?
There seems to be no logical connection between the âvisionsâ (stolen from âClose Encountersâ) and the alien craft. The visions might have well have been of the alienâs last shopping list (âsix cans of Kraag beans; one bottle of Vollufi ale; ⌠â);
The alien craft is big enough to span the WHOLE Atlantic when it lands, but â who would believe it? â comes to a stop with its edge in Washington JUST ENOUGH to dip the White House flag to a jaunty angle. #cringe;
The alien ship â apparently open to the elements â allows our heroic hunks to wander around without spacesuits;
Breathless⌠or not. Jessie T Usher and Liam Hemsworth (foreground) not dying of asphyxiation or cold.
At one point it looked like our curvaceous heroine was going to defeat the alien queen in good olâ Wild West fashion armed only with a handgun (but no, my head could come out of my hands again);
And donât even get me started on the opening âexcitementâ about propping up a collapsing supergun on the moon with a spaceship. Gerry Anderson would be spinning in his grave.
The dialogue is little better. The original âIndependence Dayâ was probably most famous for two scenes: the impressive destruction of the White House and Bill Paxtonâs ludicrously corny âWe will not go quietly into the nightâ speech. Here trying to go one better we have not just one version of this but two with William Fichnerâs General Adams chipping one in from the rough before Paxton delivers an impromptu hanger speech that is toe-curlingly excruciating.
Much of the acting is of the âI really donât want to be here but itâs good for the pensionâ variety with Paxton and Goldblum going through the motions and Charlotte Gainsborough being horribly miscast as a French anthropologist running around the world on the trail of Pokemon Go characters⌠or symbols⌠or something. Only Brent Spiner and Judd Hirsch really get into their stride with likeably over-the-top performances.
Goldblum and Charlotte Gainsborough. A less likely historic romantic attachment its difficult to imagine.
If this was a standalone story it might scrape a double-Fad⌠but as it so horrendously sullies a classic movie experience it incurs my cinematic wrath. It might have made Roland Emmer-richer (sic)âŚ. but my recommendation would be to get a big bag of popcorn, the original 1996 movie on DVD and enjoy. Avoid, avoid, avoid.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Fright Night (1985) in Movies
Oct 30, 2020
You Can't Murder a Vampire
Fright Night- is a excellent vampire movie. Directed by Tom Holland. It has comedy, horror, lots of gory and Peter Vincent.
The plot: Teenage Charley Brewster (William Ragsdale) is a horror-film junkie, so it's no surprise that, when a reclusive new neighbor named Jerry Dandridge (Chris Sarandon) moves next-door, Brewster becomes convinced he is a vampire. It's also no surprise when nobody believes him. However, after strange events begin to occur, Charlie has no choice but to turn to the only person who could possibly help: washed-up television vampire killer Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall).
While writing the script for Cloak & Dagger, Tom Holland amused himself when he conceived the idea of a horror-movie fan becoming convinced that his next-door neighbor was a vampire, but he did not initially think this premise was enough to sustain a story. "What's he gonna do", Holland asked, "because everybody's gonna think he's mad!"
The Peter Vincent character was named after horror icons Peter Cushing and Vincent Price, and Holland specifically wrote the part for Price, but at this point in his career, Price had been so badly typecast that he had stopped accepting roles in horror movies.
Holland and McDowall built a lasting friendship, and McDowall eventually invited Holland to a dinner party where he introduced him to Vincent Price, who was flattered that the part was an homage to him and commented that the film "was wonderful and he thought Roddy did a wonderful job."
Once his cast was in place, Holland got input from each of the actors and made numerous revisions to the script. Some were slight and others were major â such as the ending, which originally featured Peter Vincent transforming into a vampire as he returned to host Fright Night.
The cast could only wear them for a maximum of 20 minutes because they were virtually blind in them, and they were thick and painful, and dried out their eyes. A set was made for Stark to wear when he was in his final pursuit of Peter and Charley, but he kept tripping on the stairs. Holland told him to take one out, and he was then able to perform the scene.
Three sets were made for Amanda Bearse, but one of them caused her agonizing pain, which she initially tried to endure. When it finally became too much to bear, she took the contacts out and the crew realized they had forgotten to buff them. For the scene in Mrs. Brewster's bedroom, Geoffreys kept his contacts in for nearly 40 minutes, resulting in scratches on his eyeballs for months afterward.
For the transformation sequences, up to 8 hours were needed to prepare Sarandon's makeup.
The makeup for Evil Ed's wolf transformation took 18 hours.
On Christmas Eve, during the shooting of a scene where he is running down a staircase, Ragsdale accidentally tripped and broke his ankle, resulting in the film being temporarily put on a hold until he could recover. "
Many scenes were shot with his foot in a cast, including the scene in which Jerry comes to Charley's room to attack him. For shots in which Charley's feet were visible, the costumers slit Ragsdale's shoes in several places, slipped them on and then covered the portions of white cast that peeked through the slits with black cloth. For the scene in which Jerry is carrying Charley by the throat with one hand, Sarandon was simultaneously pushing Ragsdale along on a furniture dolly.
The shot of Jerry pulling the pencil out of his hand was achieved by having a spring-loaded, collapsible pencil glued to his palm and an eraser-tip loosely attached to the back of his hand. When he turns his hand and pulls the spring-loaded piece from his palm, out of shot a |monofilament wire jerked away the tip, so when he turns it back, it appears as though he hss pulled it straight through his hand.
Filming of the sequence with the bat was difficult for effects veteran Randall Cook, who kept winding up on film while puppeteering the creature.
Its a excellent movie.
The plot: Teenage Charley Brewster (William Ragsdale) is a horror-film junkie, so it's no surprise that, when a reclusive new neighbor named Jerry Dandridge (Chris Sarandon) moves next-door, Brewster becomes convinced he is a vampire. It's also no surprise when nobody believes him. However, after strange events begin to occur, Charlie has no choice but to turn to the only person who could possibly help: washed-up television vampire killer Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall).
While writing the script for Cloak & Dagger, Tom Holland amused himself when he conceived the idea of a horror-movie fan becoming convinced that his next-door neighbor was a vampire, but he did not initially think this premise was enough to sustain a story. "What's he gonna do", Holland asked, "because everybody's gonna think he's mad!"
The Peter Vincent character was named after horror icons Peter Cushing and Vincent Price, and Holland specifically wrote the part for Price, but at this point in his career, Price had been so badly typecast that he had stopped accepting roles in horror movies.
Holland and McDowall built a lasting friendship, and McDowall eventually invited Holland to a dinner party where he introduced him to Vincent Price, who was flattered that the part was an homage to him and commented that the film "was wonderful and he thought Roddy did a wonderful job."
Once his cast was in place, Holland got input from each of the actors and made numerous revisions to the script. Some were slight and others were major â such as the ending, which originally featured Peter Vincent transforming into a vampire as he returned to host Fright Night.
The cast could only wear them for a maximum of 20 minutes because they were virtually blind in them, and they were thick and painful, and dried out their eyes. A set was made for Stark to wear when he was in his final pursuit of Peter and Charley, but he kept tripping on the stairs. Holland told him to take one out, and he was then able to perform the scene.
Three sets were made for Amanda Bearse, but one of them caused her agonizing pain, which she initially tried to endure. When it finally became too much to bear, she took the contacts out and the crew realized they had forgotten to buff them. For the scene in Mrs. Brewster's bedroom, Geoffreys kept his contacts in for nearly 40 minutes, resulting in scratches on his eyeballs for months afterward.
For the transformation sequences, up to 8 hours were needed to prepare Sarandon's makeup.
The makeup for Evil Ed's wolf transformation took 18 hours.
On Christmas Eve, during the shooting of a scene where he is running down a staircase, Ragsdale accidentally tripped and broke his ankle, resulting in the film being temporarily put on a hold until he could recover. "
Many scenes were shot with his foot in a cast, including the scene in which Jerry comes to Charley's room to attack him. For shots in which Charley's feet were visible, the costumers slit Ragsdale's shoes in several places, slipped them on and then covered the portions of white cast that peeked through the slits with black cloth. For the scene in which Jerry is carrying Charley by the throat with one hand, Sarandon was simultaneously pushing Ragsdale along on a furniture dolly.
The shot of Jerry pulling the pencil out of his hand was achieved by having a spring-loaded, collapsible pencil glued to his palm and an eraser-tip loosely attached to the back of his hand. When he turns his hand and pulls the spring-loaded piece from his palm, out of shot a |monofilament wire jerked away the tip, so when he turns it back, it appears as though he hss pulled it straight through his hand.
Filming of the sequence with the bat was difficult for effects veteran Randall Cook, who kept winding up on film while puppeteering the creature.
Its a excellent movie.
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated Masters of Horror: A Horror Anthology in Books
Jun 26, 2020
112 of 200
Kindle
Masters of Horror: A Horror anthology
Presented by Matt Shaw
Collection of authors
Masters of Horror A selection of some of the finest horror writers of today were invited by Matt Shaw to bring him their twisted tales for this anthology. A book put together with the sole purpose of reminding readers what the horror genre is really about. Each author was told they could write about any subject matter they wanted so long as it was set in a world of horror. The only rule they had: No Paranormal Romance. Vampires do not sparkle, werewolves do not date, Witches do not scour Tinder for Virgins and ghosts do not declare their undying love whilst tidying the apartment... This is horror... Featuring work from: Introduction- Matt Shaw Brian Lumley - The Cyprus Shell Ramsey Campbell- Again Sam West- Survival J R Park - Mary Peter McKeirnon- Doll Face Andrew Freudenberg- A Taste of Mercy Mason Sabre - Chocolate Shaun Hutson- The Contract Anton Palmer- Dead-Eyed Dick Wrath James White- Beast Mode Shane McKenzie- Dewey Davenport Tonia Brown - Zolem Graeme Reynolds- The Pit Adam L.G. Nevill- Hippocampus Gary McMahon- You Can Go Now Ryan Harding - Down There Matt Shaw - Letter From Hell Matt Hickman- Eye For An Eye Daniel Marc Chant - Three Black Dogs Amy Cross- Checkout Kit Power- Loco Parentis Adam Millard - In The Family Guy N. Smith - The Priest Hole Jaime Johnesee- Just Breathe Craig Saunders- Raintown Sam Michael Bray - The End Is Where Youâll Find It Jeff Strand- Donât Make Fun Of The Haunted House Mark Cassell - Trust Issues Paul Flewitt- The Silent Invader Clare Riley Whitfield- The Clay Man Jim Goforth- Animus Brian Lumley - The Deep-Sea Conch Chris Hall- Afterword
A few comments on the ones I enjoyed the most!
1. The Cyprus shell by Brain Lumley
This is a letter to a friend explaining his recent early departure from a dinner party. He explains his awful experience and aversion to oysters! Got to say I loved it and it captured so much in a short letter!
2. Again by Ramsey Campbell
This is a strange little story about a hiker discovering a strange old woman keeping her almost dead husband tied to a bed. It was a little strange.
4. Mary by J R Park
Ooo this was good religious symbols and lots of murder and blood!!
5 Doll Face by Peter McKeirnon
This was creepy as f**k there are no limits to what a father would do for his little girl!
6. A taste of Mercy by Andrew Freudenburg
Brilliant so sad and yet so gross! You felt every word of the woe the trenches brought these men!
7 chocolate by Mason Sabre
Ok so I will be keeping a close eye on my kids and their imaginary friends needing chocolate haha loved it!
8 The Contract by Shaun Hutson
Well this taught us one thing is certain killing death would be a very silly thing to do!!
9 Dead-eyed Dick by Anton Palmer
This had me in tears laughing and must be every mans worst nightmare! Iâm definitely getting my husband to read it! Brilliant!!
11 Hippocampus by Adam L.G. Nevill
Nevill is one of my favourite authors he has a way of taking you every step of the journey with every book he writes. This one did not disappoint I walked the length of that vessel
With him! I know have some pretty gruesome scenes in my head.
12 you can go now. By Gary McMahon
Totally heartbreaking in some way and utterly creepy in others! Also an eye opener to mental illness which I took from it!
13 letter from hell by Matt Shaw
Reading this made me sick to my stomach being a mum I think itâs my worst nightmare! I can just imagine how those mothers felt when their children never came home! Totally gut wrenching!!
14 Eye for an eye by Matt Hickman
Brilliant! Gruesome and totally what youâd expect from the afterlife of a murderer!
16 Loco Parentis by Kit Power
About a man rounding up a pedophile ring and breaking some bones but in a strange twist he turns it on the reader lol very good!!
I absolutely loved most of these stories I think there is something in there for every Horror fan Iâve also found a few more authors!
Kindle
Masters of Horror: A Horror anthology
Presented by Matt Shaw
Collection of authors
Masters of Horror A selection of some of the finest horror writers of today were invited by Matt Shaw to bring him their twisted tales for this anthology. A book put together with the sole purpose of reminding readers what the horror genre is really about. Each author was told they could write about any subject matter they wanted so long as it was set in a world of horror. The only rule they had: No Paranormal Romance. Vampires do not sparkle, werewolves do not date, Witches do not scour Tinder for Virgins and ghosts do not declare their undying love whilst tidying the apartment... This is horror... Featuring work from: Introduction- Matt Shaw Brian Lumley - The Cyprus Shell Ramsey Campbell- Again Sam West- Survival J R Park - Mary Peter McKeirnon- Doll Face Andrew Freudenberg- A Taste of Mercy Mason Sabre - Chocolate Shaun Hutson- The Contract Anton Palmer- Dead-Eyed Dick Wrath James White- Beast Mode Shane McKenzie- Dewey Davenport Tonia Brown - Zolem Graeme Reynolds- The Pit Adam L.G. Nevill- Hippocampus Gary McMahon- You Can Go Now Ryan Harding - Down There Matt Shaw - Letter From Hell Matt Hickman- Eye For An Eye Daniel Marc Chant - Three Black Dogs Amy Cross- Checkout Kit Power- Loco Parentis Adam Millard - In The Family Guy N. Smith - The Priest Hole Jaime Johnesee- Just Breathe Craig Saunders- Raintown Sam Michael Bray - The End Is Where Youâll Find It Jeff Strand- Donât Make Fun Of The Haunted House Mark Cassell - Trust Issues Paul Flewitt- The Silent Invader Clare Riley Whitfield- The Clay Man Jim Goforth- Animus Brian Lumley - The Deep-Sea Conch Chris Hall- Afterword
A few comments on the ones I enjoyed the most!
1. The Cyprus shell by Brain Lumley
This is a letter to a friend explaining his recent early departure from a dinner party. He explains his awful experience and aversion to oysters! Got to say I loved it and it captured so much in a short letter!
2. Again by Ramsey Campbell
This is a strange little story about a hiker discovering a strange old woman keeping her almost dead husband tied to a bed. It was a little strange.
4. Mary by J R Park
Ooo this was good religious symbols and lots of murder and blood!!
5 Doll Face by Peter McKeirnon
This was creepy as f**k there are no limits to what a father would do for his little girl!
6. A taste of Mercy by Andrew Freudenburg
Brilliant so sad and yet so gross! You felt every word of the woe the trenches brought these men!
7 chocolate by Mason Sabre
Ok so I will be keeping a close eye on my kids and their imaginary friends needing chocolate haha loved it!
8 The Contract by Shaun Hutson
Well this taught us one thing is certain killing death would be a very silly thing to do!!
9 Dead-eyed Dick by Anton Palmer
This had me in tears laughing and must be every mans worst nightmare! Iâm definitely getting my husband to read it! Brilliant!!
11 Hippocampus by Adam L.G. Nevill
Nevill is one of my favourite authors he has a way of taking you every step of the journey with every book he writes. This one did not disappoint I walked the length of that vessel
With him! I know have some pretty gruesome scenes in my head.
12 you can go now. By Gary McMahon
Totally heartbreaking in some way and utterly creepy in others! Also an eye opener to mental illness which I took from it!
13 letter from hell by Matt Shaw
Reading this made me sick to my stomach being a mum I think itâs my worst nightmare! I can just imagine how those mothers felt when their children never came home! Totally gut wrenching!!
14 Eye for an eye by Matt Hickman
Brilliant! Gruesome and totally what youâd expect from the afterlife of a murderer!
16 Loco Parentis by Kit Power
About a man rounding up a pedophile ring and breaking some bones but in a strange twist he turns it on the reader lol very good!!
I absolutely loved most of these stories I think there is something in there for every Horror fan Iâve also found a few more authors!
Andy K (10821 KP) Oct 29, 2019
MelanieTheresa (997 KP) Oct 30, 2019