Search
Search results
Kayla Ackerman (15 KP) rated Halloween (2018) in Movies
Jun 5, 2019
Hints at the original just enough to make you go "oooh I got that reference!" without being too overbearing. (4 more)
Amazing soundtrack, they took what we all know and love and used it to gain inspiration for new music, rather than just remixing the original.
Halloween was brought into modern times without succumbing to the Hollywood Horror cliches that plague the cinema today.
They made an excellent decision to ignore the many previous sequels, which allowed them to create a plot that made sense, and welcomed newcomers who haven't followed the entire franchise.
Jamie Lee Curtis, and everything that she had to do with this film. Heck yes.
This is a Halloween film. It's revamped and revitalised, but it still feels like it belongs, it's got those good vibes that you associate with the first Halloween, and if you say it doesn't then you probably missed the point because you were rocking those nostalgia goggles a little too hard. This isn't a film made for nostalgia, this is an extension of the franchise, not a copy. There are throwback and recalls to the original, it is heavily inspired by it in all the right ways, but they took it and modernised it and they did a damn good job. Is it the best film ever? God no, its a still a horror, but it is so difficult to take a beloved classic and try to make something new, and they did such a good job. I feel a sense of irrational pride that they even attempted this and managed to not massacre that Halloween vibe, like a certain other attempt did. This was a highly enjoyable experience and I got so hyped feeling the Halloween energy pouring off of this shiny new film.
This film is like visiting your childhood home after many years and finding that someone completely redecorated. If you long for things to stay the same all the time, you're gonna have a bad time. But if you appreciate someone elses vision and attempt to make improvements, then you can enjoy the whole experience, from exploration of the new, to recognition of the familiar hidden behind it all.
This film is like visiting your childhood home after many years and finding that someone completely redecorated. If you long for things to stay the same all the time, you're gonna have a bad time. But if you appreciate someone elses vision and attempt to make improvements, then you can enjoy the whole experience, from exploration of the new, to recognition of the familiar hidden behind it all.
Lee (2222 KP) rated A Quiet Place (2018) in Movies
Apr 3, 2018 (Updated Apr 3, 2018)
Superb tension, great monster movie
We're on day 79 of what we assume is some kind of apocalyptic event. A general store is deserted, without power, and in a complete mess. A man and his wife (John Krasinski and off screen wife Emily Blunt) along with their 3 children, are quietly scavenging for drugs for one of the sick children, along with general supplies. They move quietly, carefully moving objects so as to not make a sound. They communicate only by sign language, and the youngest of the children is refused a battery operated rocket toy, because it will make a noise. The family quietly walk back home, and you begin to wonder what exactly could be so dangerous that it's wiped out most of humanity and left this family in fear, desperately trying to remain silent. We soon find out though, in one quick, and shocking moment.
Then we skip forward a few hundred days, joining the family once more in their home in the forest. We discover that the creatures responsible for the apocalypse are blind, with armoured skin and a superb sense of hearing which attracts them to their prey, and also explains why everyone is now being so quiet. The family walk about barefoot, still communicating in sign language and taking care not to make a sound with everything they do. It's very quiet, and very tense, which consequently amplifies every sneeze and every noisy rustle in the cinema I'm sitting in. Some of these idiots wouldn't last 5 minutes if they were in this movie!!
And then we discover that Emily Blunts character is pregnant! We see the family preparing a sound proof cot, in an underground room where the other children are also trying to make the walls soundproof. How on earth are they going to keep a baby from being heard?
Occasionally the creatures make an appearance. All teeth and claws, and genuinely scary as the family try and contain their terror to avoid making a sound. The first half of the movie follows this formula - prolonged periods of silent tension, followed by the odd burst of terror. It's extremely effective. So when the final third of the movie shifts towards more lengthy moments of monster action, with the separated family all having their own problems to overcome, it's hugely enjoyable edge of seat stuff. This really is a refreshingly smart horror movie.
Then we skip forward a few hundred days, joining the family once more in their home in the forest. We discover that the creatures responsible for the apocalypse are blind, with armoured skin and a superb sense of hearing which attracts them to their prey, and also explains why everyone is now being so quiet. The family walk about barefoot, still communicating in sign language and taking care not to make a sound with everything they do. It's very quiet, and very tense, which consequently amplifies every sneeze and every noisy rustle in the cinema I'm sitting in. Some of these idiots wouldn't last 5 minutes if they were in this movie!!
And then we discover that Emily Blunts character is pregnant! We see the family preparing a sound proof cot, in an underground room where the other children are also trying to make the walls soundproof. How on earth are they going to keep a baby from being heard?
Occasionally the creatures make an appearance. All teeth and claws, and genuinely scary as the family try and contain their terror to avoid making a sound. The first half of the movie follows this formula - prolonged periods of silent tension, followed by the odd burst of terror. It's extremely effective. So when the final third of the movie shifts towards more lengthy moments of monster action, with the separated family all having their own problems to overcome, it's hugely enjoyable edge of seat stuff. This really is a refreshingly smart horror movie.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated A Wrinkle in Time (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The classic children’s book A Wrinkle In Time has come to the big screen with a big-budget presentation under the direction of noted Director Ava DuVernay.
The story had been adapted prior in a 2003 television movie but this time out the scope is much larger as are the names associated with it.
The story follows a young girl named Meg (Storm Reid), who has withdrawn following the disappearance of her father (Chris Pine), four years earlier. Her brilliant adopted brother Charles Wallace (Deric McCabe) is very protective of Meg and wants to help ease the suffering she has endured over the loss of their father.
Enter the quirky Mrs. Whatsit (Reese Witherspon), who Charles Wallace has been talking to unbeknownst to his family who in turn seem taken aback by her arrival and strange nature. Charles Wallace soon introduces his sister and schoolmate Calvin (Levi Miller), to Mrs. Who (Mindy Kaling), who also shares some unusual quirks as well. With the arrival of the final piece in Mrs. Which (Oprah Winfrey), the children are whisked away to another planet on a search to find the missing father and help restore light to the universe from a dark threat that endangers the universe.
What follows is a series of adventures, quirky characters, and bright visuals as the children and mysterious strangers embark on a grand adventure.
The cast is very appealing but I would love to know if the three stars filmed their scenes at the same time as it did appear at times if they were added in post-production as they did not seem to have much direct interactions with one another. The film does tackle some deep and at times dark subject matter which may be a bit much for younger viewers. One would think that Quantum Entanglements and folding space would be subjects more likely found in Star Trek vs a family film but the film does have some good messages and themes which are essential for younger viewers to note.
The film moves at a deliberate pace and does not erupt into overblown action sequences so viewers expecting a rousing action/adventure will need to temper their expectations.
For those looking for a film with an empowering message aimed at younger viewers, than “A Wrinkle in Time”, may be just the thing for an enjoyable family outing to the local cinema.
http://sknr.net/2018/03/07/a-wrinkle-in-time/
The story had been adapted prior in a 2003 television movie but this time out the scope is much larger as are the names associated with it.
The story follows a young girl named Meg (Storm Reid), who has withdrawn following the disappearance of her father (Chris Pine), four years earlier. Her brilliant adopted brother Charles Wallace (Deric McCabe) is very protective of Meg and wants to help ease the suffering she has endured over the loss of their father.
Enter the quirky Mrs. Whatsit (Reese Witherspon), who Charles Wallace has been talking to unbeknownst to his family who in turn seem taken aback by her arrival and strange nature. Charles Wallace soon introduces his sister and schoolmate Calvin (Levi Miller), to Mrs. Who (Mindy Kaling), who also shares some unusual quirks as well. With the arrival of the final piece in Mrs. Which (Oprah Winfrey), the children are whisked away to another planet on a search to find the missing father and help restore light to the universe from a dark threat that endangers the universe.
What follows is a series of adventures, quirky characters, and bright visuals as the children and mysterious strangers embark on a grand adventure.
The cast is very appealing but I would love to know if the three stars filmed their scenes at the same time as it did appear at times if they were added in post-production as they did not seem to have much direct interactions with one another. The film does tackle some deep and at times dark subject matter which may be a bit much for younger viewers. One would think that Quantum Entanglements and folding space would be subjects more likely found in Star Trek vs a family film but the film does have some good messages and themes which are essential for younger viewers to note.
The film moves at a deliberate pace and does not erupt into overblown action sequences so viewers expecting a rousing action/adventure will need to temper their expectations.
For those looking for a film with an empowering message aimed at younger viewers, than “A Wrinkle in Time”, may be just the thing for an enjoyable family outing to the local cinema.
http://sknr.net/2018/03/07/a-wrinkle-in-time/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Ratchet & Clank (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Based on the popular video game series for the Playstation systems, “Ratchet and Clank” has arrived looking to take the duo’s success to the big screen in a new animated adventure. The film follows the diabolical Chairman Drek (Paul Giamatti), who has a nefarious scheme that leaves planets destroyed in his wake. The government decides to hire an additional Ranger for protection which leads lowly mechanic Ratchet (James Arnold Taylor), to see his chance for greatness. Sadly the head of the Rangers; an ego-maniac named Captain Qwark (Jim Ward), dismisses the physically unimpressive Ratchet and thus crushes his dreams.
Fate steps in when a defective robot named Clank (David Kaye) arrives with news that will shake the very fabric of the galaxy. Ratchet and Clank team up to help the Rangers and must overcome all obstacles on all sides to save the day. The animation of the film is solid and it was a bit of a surprise that the film was not presented to us in 3D which has become the norm for animated film. The solid voice cast does a good job and there are more than a few nice celebrity voices along the way. The biggest issue I had with the film was that it was a bit dull and dragged in places. Our screener was loaded with children and families and I saw some leave the cinema during the film and did not return.
The movies takes a while to get going and there are more than a few nods to the game and other Playstation characters along the way. The biggest issue is that it seems as if the film is dedicated to hardcore fans of the series. I have played the last three games in the series and I found myself lost at times as it was clear that this was for those who have been there from the start. This is not to say that new fans will not be gained by the film, but one has to wonder how many children who are not familiar with the characters will have the patience to wait for things to get rolling in the film.
As it stands the film is a good first effort but may or may not be enough to successfully launch a long term franchise.
http://sknr.net/2016/04/28/ratchet-and-clank/
Fate steps in when a defective robot named Clank (David Kaye) arrives with news that will shake the very fabric of the galaxy. Ratchet and Clank team up to help the Rangers and must overcome all obstacles on all sides to save the day. The animation of the film is solid and it was a bit of a surprise that the film was not presented to us in 3D which has become the norm for animated film. The solid voice cast does a good job and there are more than a few nice celebrity voices along the way. The biggest issue I had with the film was that it was a bit dull and dragged in places. Our screener was loaded with children and families and I saw some leave the cinema during the film and did not return.
The movies takes a while to get going and there are more than a few nods to the game and other Playstation characters along the way. The biggest issue is that it seems as if the film is dedicated to hardcore fans of the series. I have played the last three games in the series and I found myself lost at times as it was clear that this was for those who have been there from the start. This is not to say that new fans will not be gained by the film, but one has to wonder how many children who are not familiar with the characters will have the patience to wait for things to get rolling in the film.
As it stands the film is a good first effort but may or may not be enough to successfully launch a long term franchise.
http://sknr.net/2016/04/28/ratchet-and-clank/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Deep Blue Sea 2 (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Back in 1999 I fondly remember covering “Deep Blue Sea”. The press screening was a pleasant surprise as the film presented a fresh take on the shark on the loose genre and gave what was one of the more enjoyable films in the genre since “Jaws 2”.
I had always wondered why the film had never generated a sequel and talk of a direct to DVD follow up a few years later never materialized.
Now in 2018, we finally get the long-awaited follow up as “Deep Blue Seas 2” has arrived as a direct to DVD from Warner Bros Home Entertainment.
I eagerly awaited the arrival of my review copy as not only do I enjoy Shark movies, but my son is very big on the study of sharks and his insights always add a new dimension to me as he can tell me things like the difference between the species being portrayed, number of offspring they have, and their behavior.
The story centers on Dr. Misty Calhoun (Danielle Savre), who is tasked to give her professional opinions to a facility headed by billionaire Carl Durant (Michael Beach). At an underwater lab in South Africa, Dr. Calhoun arrives with a team and learns that the group is experimenting on Bull Sharks with a method that will increase brain abilities in humans.
Naturally things do not go as planned and before long, there are several very angry and genetically enhanced sharks on the loose with the humans desperately trying to find a way to escape and survive.
The story and characters are not overly complex but the goal is clearly to get the cast into the path of the CGI sharks as soon as possible and letting the carnage begin.
I had expected visuals on par with the SYFY films due to the direct to video nature of the film but what we were given was much better than expected.
The CGI effects are quite good and the cinema photography of the film is quite good as there are many really impressive shots in the film of the aquatic setting.
The film is hampered by the thin plot and characters and a lack of star power but it is worth a watch and is certainly better quality than many of the other creature on the loose films out there.
http://sknr.net/2018/05/07/deep-blue-sea-2/
I had always wondered why the film had never generated a sequel and talk of a direct to DVD follow up a few years later never materialized.
Now in 2018, we finally get the long-awaited follow up as “Deep Blue Seas 2” has arrived as a direct to DVD from Warner Bros Home Entertainment.
I eagerly awaited the arrival of my review copy as not only do I enjoy Shark movies, but my son is very big on the study of sharks and his insights always add a new dimension to me as he can tell me things like the difference between the species being portrayed, number of offspring they have, and their behavior.
The story centers on Dr. Misty Calhoun (Danielle Savre), who is tasked to give her professional opinions to a facility headed by billionaire Carl Durant (Michael Beach). At an underwater lab in South Africa, Dr. Calhoun arrives with a team and learns that the group is experimenting on Bull Sharks with a method that will increase brain abilities in humans.
Naturally things do not go as planned and before long, there are several very angry and genetically enhanced sharks on the loose with the humans desperately trying to find a way to escape and survive.
The story and characters are not overly complex but the goal is clearly to get the cast into the path of the CGI sharks as soon as possible and letting the carnage begin.
I had expected visuals on par with the SYFY films due to the direct to video nature of the film but what we were given was much better than expected.
The CGI effects are quite good and the cinema photography of the film is quite good as there are many really impressive shots in the film of the aquatic setting.
The film is hampered by the thin plot and characters and a lack of star power but it is worth a watch and is certainly better quality than many of the other creature on the loose films out there.
http://sknr.net/2018/05/07/deep-blue-sea-2/
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Ben Is Back (2018) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
We seem to be knee deep in movies like this at the moment, Ben Is Back being the second from Lucas Hedges. This one is penned and directed by his father, Peter Hedges, though it doesn't appear that he was a shoo-in for the role.
After seeing Boy Erased I wasn't overly sure about Hedges as an actor, if I'm honest this has done little to sway that opinion in me. I don't feel like we get a massive range from him, possibly because these movies all feel like they've been made to win things over everything else? I'm not sure.
Hedges performance is brought up a level by the incredible performance from Julia Roberts, that woman truly is a treasure. The desperate nature of her character is so evident in every scene, wanting to do anything she can for her son and trying to fix everything. I don't think there was a single point where she faltered, and the part she played in the ending was immensely emotional.
There's also a solid support cast in Courtney B. Vance and Kathryn Newton. They drew in the much-needed family element which could have been lost to all the scenes with Ben and Holly out on their own.
You have to compare this to Beautiful Boy, it's difficult not to. They could be the same film, Ben Is Back just edges ahead for me though. I wasn't overly keen on the main actors in either film and both were carried by their parental leads. Both cover the drugs topic well from their own angles but here I felt we got a much better look at the family impact.
This rounded out a very emotional double bill at the cinema and what I actually came out thinking wasn't about this film in particular but that this year has given us some fantastic mum performances. Julia Roberts, Penelope Cruz and Nicole Kidman have managed to use their films to prove that they're giants in the acting world.
What you should do
I'd add Ben Is Back to my list of films to watch at least once.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
All I would really like is an attic that was as easy to get into as theirs.
After seeing Boy Erased I wasn't overly sure about Hedges as an actor, if I'm honest this has done little to sway that opinion in me. I don't feel like we get a massive range from him, possibly because these movies all feel like they've been made to win things over everything else? I'm not sure.
Hedges performance is brought up a level by the incredible performance from Julia Roberts, that woman truly is a treasure. The desperate nature of her character is so evident in every scene, wanting to do anything she can for her son and trying to fix everything. I don't think there was a single point where she faltered, and the part she played in the ending was immensely emotional.
There's also a solid support cast in Courtney B. Vance and Kathryn Newton. They drew in the much-needed family element which could have been lost to all the scenes with Ben and Holly out on their own.
You have to compare this to Beautiful Boy, it's difficult not to. They could be the same film, Ben Is Back just edges ahead for me though. I wasn't overly keen on the main actors in either film and both were carried by their parental leads. Both cover the drugs topic well from their own angles but here I felt we got a much better look at the family impact.
This rounded out a very emotional double bill at the cinema and what I actually came out thinking wasn't about this film in particular but that this year has given us some fantastic mum performances. Julia Roberts, Penelope Cruz and Nicole Kidman have managed to use their films to prove that they're giants in the acting world.
What you should do
I'd add Ben Is Back to my list of films to watch at least once.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
All I would really like is an attic that was as easy to get into as theirs.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Maleficent: Mistress of Evil (2019) in Movies
Oct 20, 2019
Peace and Iron
Maleficent 2 is a wonderful, enchanting and breathtakingly beautiful sequel that constantly dazzles and delights. Within the few moments of watching Maleficent 2 I was so teeming with excitement and so engaged in its amazing world that I knew it was going to be something special. With a deliciously dark opening scene followed by a beautiful camera dive from the sky over the kingdom down into the forests bellow it was immediately a parent just how magical, creative and down right gorgeous this movie was going to be. Luckily it doesnt stop there and Maleficent 2 might just be one of the most breathtakingly beautiful films ive ever seen. This really adds to immersion/atmosphere and helps create such a believable lived in and vast world you can simply just get lost in. Angelina jolie is sensational almost as if she was born to play this character really bringing her alive by giving her character a real elegance, beauty, charm, anger and intelligence. Her prescence is increadibly intimidating and her temper is so firey that it brings great tension and unpredicatbility to even the smallest of scenes. Elle fanning fits here role perfectly too with her nervous, playful and innocent acting style well suited to her character. Make up and set design are jaw droping the sheer ammount of detail and intracacy thats gone into everything constantly blew me away and every single scene is a visual feast for your eyes to explore. Scale is fantastic too making battles increadibly epic/huge and establishing shots also help you see just how vast and expansive the world really is. Story is a little predictable at time but always feel engaging, fun and enjoyable with enough twists, turns and set pieces to keep it exciting. Theres surprising depth also with themes of hatred, racisum, abandonment, female empowerment, betrayal, loyalty, entrapment and theres even a toutch of politics in there too. Malifecent 2 really blew me away I really did not expect this kind of quality, scale or enjoyment going in to it and thus left the cinema thouroughly happy and entertained. I felt the film had given me the kind of magical experience that ive longed for in a film for a long time and made me feel enthrilled, awe inspired and nostalgic echoing back to the fantasty stories and fables I grew up with. Maleficent is magnificent.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) created a post
Dec 23, 2019
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 19, 2019 (Updated Jul 19, 2019)
If this is where the monarchy is headed Count me out!
Lion king 2019 is by far the worst of the Disney live action remakes & while newcomers/children will certainly love it many of the people that hold the original close to their hearts will leave wishing they had just stayed home with the far superior predecessor instead. Aladdin & The Lion King are two of the greatest animated feature films of all time & as I experienced them both in cinema on release they are very special to me. Now i loved the Aladdin remake & im not one for comparing these to the animated features but while I was watching this all i could think about was how much better the original is. While it looks absolutely gorgeous (until anything starts to move) the animation at times is so unnatural especially when animals are walking slowly that its constantly distracting & kills the illusion of these creatures being real. Voice work is bland/mediocre & delivered with almost no enthusiasm at all like the cast were more concerned with sounding different to the original than giving the characters charm & personality. Voices also dont feel connected to the characters like your watching a nature documentary thats been dubbed over. While Aladdin did its own thing & changed up the movie Lion King is practically & infuriatingly a scene for scene remake which would be ok if it had the charm, colour, grand scale, imagination, excitement, thrill, humour & emotional impact of the original but it doesnt. Songs are butchered/dull with seemingly no energy or spectacle to them at all feeling significantly toned down/grounded rather than fun & toe tapping (they have also ruined 'Be Prepared'). So whats new? theres new humour & yup you guessed it its really bad with awkward timing & dragged out jokes that just fall flat. I wanted so bad to love this movie but not even a scense of nostalgia kicked in either because the film is just soulless, unenthusiastic, boring, bland, lacking in excitement & magic. Kids will no doubt love it but for me its this years biggest let down. If it were a silent film with an epic score over the top it might of at least been unique/watchable & helped be bearable but as it is I just cant recomend seeing it. A big fat cash grab.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Blade (1998) in Movies
Jan 15, 2020
Blade is undeniably a product of it's time. It's the late 90s, everyone loves leather and shades, everyone loves Wesley Snipes, everyone loves dumb one liners, so the character of Blade is ripe for adaption.
But the importance of this gory action flick should absolutely not be understated. Not only was it the first proper big (ish) budget Marvel film, but it's pre dates Black Panther as the first superhero film with a black lead, and it pre dates The Punisher as the first R-rated Marvel blockbuster.
But in a pre X-Men world, comic book movies weren't a big deal at this point. I actually remember me and my friends sneakily renting and watching it (we were 10 at the time...) and none of them even knowing that Blade was even a comic book!
Here we are all these years later and the Blade trilogy is now remembered fondly (well, at least the first two are!)
Wesley Snipes is of course the star of this particular vehicle, and here, he is the most Wesley Snipes he's ever been. The cheesy one liners still come off well, and lend a nice comedic edge to the buckets of blood on display. The charm that he brings to the Blade character is the main reason why it's been hard to imagine anyone else in the role for so long (although I am here all day long for Mahershala Ali)
The other big character throughout the trilogy is Whistler, played by Kris Kristofferson, just generally being old, grumpy and badass, and is honestly the best character in the whole thing (here's hoping the MCU introduce a Whistler series on Disney+...)
Stephen Dorff plays Deacon Frost, the films villain, and he's really not much more than a generic superhero bad guy (the first of many).
The choreography and the fight scenes are pretty great, and the willingness to go hard R is what set Blade apart before comic book movies became a thing. It's sooooo bloody in parts, that it verges heavily into horror territory.
The CGI effects are utterly horrible by todays standards, but it's not used nearly enough to discredit the film too much.
Blade is a decent enough adaption of the cult Marvel series, and is a fun, gory blockbuster, but as mentioned, it's an important step in comic book cinema. Long live Blade!
But the importance of this gory action flick should absolutely not be understated. Not only was it the first proper big (ish) budget Marvel film, but it's pre dates Black Panther as the first superhero film with a black lead, and it pre dates The Punisher as the first R-rated Marvel blockbuster.
But in a pre X-Men world, comic book movies weren't a big deal at this point. I actually remember me and my friends sneakily renting and watching it (we were 10 at the time...) and none of them even knowing that Blade was even a comic book!
Here we are all these years later and the Blade trilogy is now remembered fondly (well, at least the first two are!)
Wesley Snipes is of course the star of this particular vehicle, and here, he is the most Wesley Snipes he's ever been. The cheesy one liners still come off well, and lend a nice comedic edge to the buckets of blood on display. The charm that he brings to the Blade character is the main reason why it's been hard to imagine anyone else in the role for so long (although I am here all day long for Mahershala Ali)
The other big character throughout the trilogy is Whistler, played by Kris Kristofferson, just generally being old, grumpy and badass, and is honestly the best character in the whole thing (here's hoping the MCU introduce a Whistler series on Disney+...)
Stephen Dorff plays Deacon Frost, the films villain, and he's really not much more than a generic superhero bad guy (the first of many).
The choreography and the fight scenes are pretty great, and the willingness to go hard R is what set Blade apart before comic book movies became a thing. It's sooooo bloody in parts, that it verges heavily into horror territory.
The CGI effects are utterly horrible by todays standards, but it's not used nearly enough to discredit the film too much.
Blade is a decent enough adaption of the cult Marvel series, and is a fun, gory blockbuster, but as mentioned, it's an important step in comic book cinema. Long live Blade!