Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Playing with Fire (2019) in Movies
Jan 9, 2020
Seeing the trailer for this I was mildly excited, this sort of daft family humour holds a place in my heart and it looked like I was going to get another film to add to the "pick me up" watchlist. But oh my, everything about this experience rubbed me the wrong way.
Jake Carson runs a rugged group of smokejumpers that swoop into action and stop fires from taking hold. On their latest callout they find a cabin about to be engulfed by flames and trapped inside are three children in need of help.
Following the rules, Jake calls Child Protective Services, but being so remote they won't be able to get to them quickly. It's now their duty to keep the three of them safe until they arrive. Four grown men, three kids... what could possibly go wrong?
Where to start? How about that humour I was looking forward to? Or perhaps the severe lack of it. Over the whole runtime I laughed more at the end credits that I did at the whole film. Keegan-Michael Key is by far the funniest thing about the film, but it still isn't a perfect part. Key's way of sliding into scenes and just taking over was excellent, it made me smile, but when these moments started he was funny with just the right amount of over the top but the script would quite often throw him over that fine line and it became tiresome.
John Cena generally isn't bad when it comes to comedy offerings, but in Playing With Fire he's very stiff even for the by-the-books character he's playing. It felt like Jake had been made too straight-laced, he needs to make the transition from uptight to more relaxed but they could have brought it down just one step and it would have been something a lot easier to watch.
Brianna Hildebrand plays the oldest of the rescued children, Brynn. She gives a solid performance and probably has the best character overall, no frustrating quirks, nothing over the top. While she manages to make a good show of it being up against the over the top nature of everything else means it gets lost in the background.
While there might be a twist on the sort of story it doesn't feel new in any respects. I'm feeling rather let down with the whole thing but thankfully we're not short of other films that do this exact thing.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/playing-with-fire-movie-review.html
Jake Carson runs a rugged group of smokejumpers that swoop into action and stop fires from taking hold. On their latest callout they find a cabin about to be engulfed by flames and trapped inside are three children in need of help.
Following the rules, Jake calls Child Protective Services, but being so remote they won't be able to get to them quickly. It's now their duty to keep the three of them safe until they arrive. Four grown men, three kids... what could possibly go wrong?
Where to start? How about that humour I was looking forward to? Or perhaps the severe lack of it. Over the whole runtime I laughed more at the end credits that I did at the whole film. Keegan-Michael Key is by far the funniest thing about the film, but it still isn't a perfect part. Key's way of sliding into scenes and just taking over was excellent, it made me smile, but when these moments started he was funny with just the right amount of over the top but the script would quite often throw him over that fine line and it became tiresome.
John Cena generally isn't bad when it comes to comedy offerings, but in Playing With Fire he's very stiff even for the by-the-books character he's playing. It felt like Jake had been made too straight-laced, he needs to make the transition from uptight to more relaxed but they could have brought it down just one step and it would have been something a lot easier to watch.
Brianna Hildebrand plays the oldest of the rescued children, Brynn. She gives a solid performance and probably has the best character overall, no frustrating quirks, nothing over the top. While she manages to make a good show of it being up against the over the top nature of everything else means it gets lost in the background.
While there might be a twist on the sort of story it doesn't feel new in any respects. I'm feeling rather let down with the whole thing but thankfully we're not short of other films that do this exact thing.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/playing-with-fire-movie-review.html
What's My IQ?™ PRO
Games and Entertainment
App
Stupidness 2 & 3 ranked overall #1 in more than 20 countries, you will definitely won't want to miss...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
Why is this even prefaced everywhere with Fast & Furious? Apart from a couple of characters and the fact there are cars with a crapload of action they aren't really the same thing.
Hattie Shaw and her MI6 team have secured a virus that could threaten everyone if it gets into the wrong hands. In a surprise attacked by Brixton, an enhanced "bad guy", her entire team is killed and she has to make a quick decision.
As the story of the missing vial gets out handlers call in their top assets to retrieve it. The trouble is that they hate each other and working together isn't something that's going to work. Hobbs goes looking for Hattie on the streets and Shaw heads to her flat, both set some action they weren't expecting to, highlighting just what they're up against.
As an offshoot from the Fast & Furious franchise you expect the action, but Hobbs & Shaw takes a much bigger step towards comedy, which thankfully both Johnson and Statham are good at. Individually they'll get me to see a film, I might wish I hadn't when I come out of it, but you can pretty much guarantee that they'll give you a consistent result when it comes to the acting.
The two of them together are fun and they bounce off each other with impeccable timing, but there might be just a little bit too much insulting back and forth thrown into this one. It's not that it's bad, it's just that when it happens it can occasionally feel too long. It's almost as if they told them to improvise and they'd cut out a whole load of it and then never did. [One of my favourite bits of them together in the film is at the beginning of the trailer above.]
Vanessa Kirby as Shaw's sister Hattie is a bit more sensible than the leading men, that doesn't mean she's any less engaged in the action though. Right from the off they're showing her as tough and no-nonsense which fits in with the family characteristics. You get some great glimpses of the Shaw kids showing shared traits and it's really nice to see that link on the screen. Outside of the action and the family moments she sadly doesn't feel like a very well-formed character, there are several inconsistencies in her that I found to be confusing. You'd think one of those would be the age gap between her and Deckard, but honestly, until I saw some people mention it online I hadn't noticed it... it's a summer blockbuster... who's watching for those sorts of technicalities?!
Our bad guy Brixton, portrayed by Idris Elba is... yummy. I don't feel like there's much to say about Brixton, he kicks ass, he's got great tech and there's a good history with Shaw... but... he didn't really feel like a bad guy. Eteon certainly felt like an evil empire, but Brixton is just a minion in the grand scheme of things. I have my theories about Eteon, but that would mean major spoilers I'm afraid. I imagine we'll see more of them in the next one.
We get another wonderful pop up from Helen Mirren. Yeeeeeess, Queen! She's brilliant as always. There are a few cameos, and I'm impressed they managed to keep them secret. It was a fun discovery and definitely added to the humour of the whole thing, had you taken them out of the mix then you would have been left a much more "sensible" action film, but they went with it and it was certainly entertaining.
Obviously there's a lot of action, in a lot of different scenes. As ridiculous as it is, I did like the London chase that happens shortly after the jog down the building that you see in the trailer. It includes some good jaw-dropping moments and ends with a particularly satisfying moment. As fun as this sequence was, it does include the most dubious bit of CGI in the whole film... watch for that bike.
My other favourite scene is the finale, the whole thing is kind of long but specifically I'm thinking about Hobbs, Shaw and Brixton facing off. Even before going into the film you know exactly what needs to happen to get to the resolution, so when they get to that point you're sat going "about time!" As the storm sets in we get an amazing sequence with slow-mo of the three of them fighting in the rain. It was immense... some may say daft, but that's totally why I turned up for it. There's also some great glitching of Brixton's tech that I thought worked really well with everything. My only issue is that there's one moment where Jason Statham appears to genuinely smile and it feels completely out of character.
There are some things I want to mention before I finish.
- There feels like a lot of product placement happening throughout, including for things that aren't even real products.
- You do not... I repeat... DO NOT drive by a Greggs without stopping for a chicken bake.
Let's face it, if you even remotely enjoy action and comedy together then you're going to be enjoying this movie. You don't need to switch your brain on to watch this, it's just pure entertainment.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/hobbs-shaw-movie-review.html
Hattie Shaw and her MI6 team have secured a virus that could threaten everyone if it gets into the wrong hands. In a surprise attacked by Brixton, an enhanced "bad guy", her entire team is killed and she has to make a quick decision.
As the story of the missing vial gets out handlers call in their top assets to retrieve it. The trouble is that they hate each other and working together isn't something that's going to work. Hobbs goes looking for Hattie on the streets and Shaw heads to her flat, both set some action they weren't expecting to, highlighting just what they're up against.
As an offshoot from the Fast & Furious franchise you expect the action, but Hobbs & Shaw takes a much bigger step towards comedy, which thankfully both Johnson and Statham are good at. Individually they'll get me to see a film, I might wish I hadn't when I come out of it, but you can pretty much guarantee that they'll give you a consistent result when it comes to the acting.
The two of them together are fun and they bounce off each other with impeccable timing, but there might be just a little bit too much insulting back and forth thrown into this one. It's not that it's bad, it's just that when it happens it can occasionally feel too long. It's almost as if they told them to improvise and they'd cut out a whole load of it and then never did. [One of my favourite bits of them together in the film is at the beginning of the trailer above.]
Vanessa Kirby as Shaw's sister Hattie is a bit more sensible than the leading men, that doesn't mean she's any less engaged in the action though. Right from the off they're showing her as tough and no-nonsense which fits in with the family characteristics. You get some great glimpses of the Shaw kids showing shared traits and it's really nice to see that link on the screen. Outside of the action and the family moments she sadly doesn't feel like a very well-formed character, there are several inconsistencies in her that I found to be confusing. You'd think one of those would be the age gap between her and Deckard, but honestly, until I saw some people mention it online I hadn't noticed it... it's a summer blockbuster... who's watching for those sorts of technicalities?!
Our bad guy Brixton, portrayed by Idris Elba is... yummy. I don't feel like there's much to say about Brixton, he kicks ass, he's got great tech and there's a good history with Shaw... but... he didn't really feel like a bad guy. Eteon certainly felt like an evil empire, but Brixton is just a minion in the grand scheme of things. I have my theories about Eteon, but that would mean major spoilers I'm afraid. I imagine we'll see more of them in the next one.
We get another wonderful pop up from Helen Mirren. Yeeeeeess, Queen! She's brilliant as always. There are a few cameos, and I'm impressed they managed to keep them secret. It was a fun discovery and definitely added to the humour of the whole thing, had you taken them out of the mix then you would have been left a much more "sensible" action film, but they went with it and it was certainly entertaining.
Obviously there's a lot of action, in a lot of different scenes. As ridiculous as it is, I did like the London chase that happens shortly after the jog down the building that you see in the trailer. It includes some good jaw-dropping moments and ends with a particularly satisfying moment. As fun as this sequence was, it does include the most dubious bit of CGI in the whole film... watch for that bike.
My other favourite scene is the finale, the whole thing is kind of long but specifically I'm thinking about Hobbs, Shaw and Brixton facing off. Even before going into the film you know exactly what needs to happen to get to the resolution, so when they get to that point you're sat going "about time!" As the storm sets in we get an amazing sequence with slow-mo of the three of them fighting in the rain. It was immense... some may say daft, but that's totally why I turned up for it. There's also some great glitching of Brixton's tech that I thought worked really well with everything. My only issue is that there's one moment where Jason Statham appears to genuinely smile and it feels completely out of character.
There are some things I want to mention before I finish.
- There feels like a lot of product placement happening throughout, including for things that aren't even real products.
- You do not... I repeat... DO NOT drive by a Greggs without stopping for a chicken bake.
Let's face it, if you even remotely enjoy action and comedy together then you're going to be enjoying this movie. You don't need to switch your brain on to watch this, it's just pure entertainment.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/hobbs-shaw-movie-review.html
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Ready or Not (2019) in Movies
Nov 5, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
I enjoyed this because it was basically bat shit crazy, but I also had some issues with it. The trailers looked great but going back to them now you see quite a lot of action from key points in the film. Because of the haphazard nature of everything I don't think it spoils anything but at the time I couldn't remember many of the trailers going in. The vibe I remembered getting from them was very much You're Next with a vague hint of Clue.
What stopped me in my tracks a little was what the film was trying to be. I thought it was going to be a homedy (yes I'm still trying to make my horror-comedy hybrid work), your traditional crazy horror with a comedic leaning... but what happened was a lot of drama, they were actually trying to be serious. Well, as serious as you can get when you're in the middle of hunting a bride on her wedding night. When mother and son sit to have a heart to heart I was actually taken out of the film for a moment as it wasn't in keeping with what else was happening.
Had this gone all the way over to crazy horror I would have given it a higher rating, they're fast paced and entertaining, the slight indecisiveness of what came to the screen really knocked it down for me. Even with the bizarre magic box tradition this film could have been something more serious but not by the time we get to that ending.
I'm really thankful that this game adaptation was at least better than Truth Or Dare. I don't think I could stand another stinker like that. The story is a nice easy one to get along with, family acquire a magic box that keeps them thriving and all they have to do is occasionally sacrifice someone that's loved deeply by one of the family... good old Satan bringing us a solid storyline.
Samara Weaving, or as I have to keep reminding myself "not Margot Robbie", plays our blushing bride, Grace. Boy does she throw a lot at this role, I like to think she got a lot of stress relief out of this as she fights back at her would be murderers. Thankfully Grace didn't end up in many of the drama-y bits so there was little to be annoyed about. Her magic moments included punching Georgie, swearing at the car and wailing like a banshee at the end like she'd gone feral. Bravo! But I think the best and worst bit was when she climbed out of hell, you knew what she was thinking, you knew she had no option and oh my god did I hurt in sympathy.
Adam Brody has to be the other stand out performance for me as the brother-in-law, Daniel Le Domas. We get a very small introduction to his character as a child but it really did help you to understand the way he is and why he reacts the way he does as they hunt Grace. The guilt he has from the first Hide & Seek he participated in is clearly part of the reason he's the son who's off the rails, but he keeps his protective nature from his childhood in adulthood towards his brother and Grace. He stops and talks with Grace during the hunt and you can see him switching allegiances as we get further through the story. Brody conveys this well and is actually the one character that you can sort of sympathise with. His death is the beginning of the end and it's an emotional moment that played out well on screen. I think he probably came out better not surviving to the end of the film.
There are lots of highs and lows with various characters throughout. Fitch is the "dumb" one and there was something magical about seeing him YouTubing how to use a crossbow and later asking Charity at what point they should cut and run.
Mark O'Brien as Alex Le Domas was probably my least favourite character. His scripting felt rather bland compared to some of the others... but mainly... what an arsehole! Just live in sin man! Why potentially doom her, I'm sure it wouldn't have been too hard to fall off the radar somehow. If he was already slightly estranged I can't see that going altogether would be much of a stretch.
Alex also gets what is possibly the most annoying part of the script, he's handcuffed to the bed and he starts using the chain as a saw to try to get through the ornamental bar... these aren't bit of Ikea furniture... in what universe is that going to work in this timeframe?! Stand up and throw your weight on it until it snaps! I was wondering if he was actually trying to break the handcuffs (an equally stupid idea), and do we actually see how he gets out of them? Now I've confused myself.
Anyway, this will become an epic if I don't move on.
I quite liked the way the film looked, once we got to the evening the whole set became a beautiful golden autumnal palette and it gave you a sense of wealth and history, but when you add in the blood and seeking you get a real sense of the hiding (that makes sense in my head). It did at times become dark, it was never so bad that you couldn't see what was happening but it allowed for the reintroduction of light at the end as the house burns behind her which was a nice touch.
The final sequence should probably get its own mention. Alex, obviously about to break after seeing his brother die and Grace bludgeoning his mother, is bizarrely confirming his fears that the pair will not be together after what has happened. He then turns on her so he can get back the only thing left in his life, his (now slightly smaller) family. I loved the slightly vampiric turn the scene took as they're exposed to the morning sun, I'm not sure I'd have recoiled from it quite so much but I appreciated the comedic value it added. The family's actual demise and Grace's ghost sighting are the reason this needed to be a homedy (Still no? Whatever.), there's no way that fits in with anything more serious. And I'm sorry but overall I didn't find it that funny, much like Last Blood I was reacting to the ridiculous violence.
I like to think that as the last bit of the house disintegrates in the fire and Grace is still sitting bleeding on the steps that a firefighter comes over with the seemingly untouched magic box and hands it to her because it looks like a family heirloom. She's a Le Domas now, and everything is hers...
Full review originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/ready-or-not-spoilers-movie-review.html
What stopped me in my tracks a little was what the film was trying to be. I thought it was going to be a homedy (yes I'm still trying to make my horror-comedy hybrid work), your traditional crazy horror with a comedic leaning... but what happened was a lot of drama, they were actually trying to be serious. Well, as serious as you can get when you're in the middle of hunting a bride on her wedding night. When mother and son sit to have a heart to heart I was actually taken out of the film for a moment as it wasn't in keeping with what else was happening.
Had this gone all the way over to crazy horror I would have given it a higher rating, they're fast paced and entertaining, the slight indecisiveness of what came to the screen really knocked it down for me. Even with the bizarre magic box tradition this film could have been something more serious but not by the time we get to that ending.
I'm really thankful that this game adaptation was at least better than Truth Or Dare. I don't think I could stand another stinker like that. The story is a nice easy one to get along with, family acquire a magic box that keeps them thriving and all they have to do is occasionally sacrifice someone that's loved deeply by one of the family... good old Satan bringing us a solid storyline.
Samara Weaving, or as I have to keep reminding myself "not Margot Robbie", plays our blushing bride, Grace. Boy does she throw a lot at this role, I like to think she got a lot of stress relief out of this as she fights back at her would be murderers. Thankfully Grace didn't end up in many of the drama-y bits so there was little to be annoyed about. Her magic moments included punching Georgie, swearing at the car and wailing like a banshee at the end like she'd gone feral. Bravo! But I think the best and worst bit was when she climbed out of hell, you knew what she was thinking, you knew she had no option and oh my god did I hurt in sympathy.
Adam Brody has to be the other stand out performance for me as the brother-in-law, Daniel Le Domas. We get a very small introduction to his character as a child but it really did help you to understand the way he is and why he reacts the way he does as they hunt Grace. The guilt he has from the first Hide & Seek he participated in is clearly part of the reason he's the son who's off the rails, but he keeps his protective nature from his childhood in adulthood towards his brother and Grace. He stops and talks with Grace during the hunt and you can see him switching allegiances as we get further through the story. Brody conveys this well and is actually the one character that you can sort of sympathise with. His death is the beginning of the end and it's an emotional moment that played out well on screen. I think he probably came out better not surviving to the end of the film.
There are lots of highs and lows with various characters throughout. Fitch is the "dumb" one and there was something magical about seeing him YouTubing how to use a crossbow and later asking Charity at what point they should cut and run.
Mark O'Brien as Alex Le Domas was probably my least favourite character. His scripting felt rather bland compared to some of the others... but mainly... what an arsehole! Just live in sin man! Why potentially doom her, I'm sure it wouldn't have been too hard to fall off the radar somehow. If he was already slightly estranged I can't see that going altogether would be much of a stretch.
Alex also gets what is possibly the most annoying part of the script, he's handcuffed to the bed and he starts using the chain as a saw to try to get through the ornamental bar... these aren't bit of Ikea furniture... in what universe is that going to work in this timeframe?! Stand up and throw your weight on it until it snaps! I was wondering if he was actually trying to break the handcuffs (an equally stupid idea), and do we actually see how he gets out of them? Now I've confused myself.
Anyway, this will become an epic if I don't move on.
I quite liked the way the film looked, once we got to the evening the whole set became a beautiful golden autumnal palette and it gave you a sense of wealth and history, but when you add in the blood and seeking you get a real sense of the hiding (that makes sense in my head). It did at times become dark, it was never so bad that you couldn't see what was happening but it allowed for the reintroduction of light at the end as the house burns behind her which was a nice touch.
The final sequence should probably get its own mention. Alex, obviously about to break after seeing his brother die and Grace bludgeoning his mother, is bizarrely confirming his fears that the pair will not be together after what has happened. He then turns on her so he can get back the only thing left in his life, his (now slightly smaller) family. I loved the slightly vampiric turn the scene took as they're exposed to the morning sun, I'm not sure I'd have recoiled from it quite so much but I appreciated the comedic value it added. The family's actual demise and Grace's ghost sighting are the reason this needed to be a homedy (Still no? Whatever.), there's no way that fits in with anything more serious. And I'm sorry but overall I didn't find it that funny, much like Last Blood I was reacting to the ridiculous violence.
I like to think that as the last bit of the house disintegrates in the fire and Grace is still sitting bleeding on the steps that a firefighter comes over with the seemingly untouched magic box and hands it to her because it looks like a family heirloom. She's a Le Domas now, and everything is hers...
Full review originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/ready-or-not-spoilers-movie-review.html
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters (2013) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
2013 is the year of the fairy-tale and the year of the witch, or so it looks that way from what seems to be a never-ending bombardment of films related to the two age-old topics. This year sees the release of Bryan Singer’s Jack the Giant Slayer as well as Sam Raimi’s Oz: The Great & the Powerful and whilst the latter has opened to mixed reviews, it is Bryan Singer’s effort which really looks like it’ll sparkle.
Sat between these two behemoths is the critical and somewhat commercial failure, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, but is it as bad as the reviews would have you believe? Let’s find out.
The fairy-tale of Hansel & Gretel is as well-known as Jack & the Beanstalk and to some extent the story in the Wizard of Oz, but films of this classic have been limited to low-budget television movies because finding the audience for such a difficult genre is not to be underestimated.
Here however, Tommy Wirkola directs his first English-language film with some degrees of success, though, a few niggling factors stop it from being the success it could’ve been. In a darker tale than perhaps we’re used to with a story such as this, Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton star as Hansel & Gretel respectively and for the most part, fulfil their roles well as they battle numerous dark witches in a plot which never really gets to grips with the genre it is trying to be.
Herein lays the problem, do you direct the fairy-tale genre as a family comedy or as something a little darker? Clearly director Wirkola has had his work cut out to find the balance between the two and the result is confusing, he has ended up with a 15 certificate which mixes comedy with a bloodbath that wouldn’t look out of place in a Quentin Tarantino picture; it really is that over-the-top. The use of swear-words also feels out of place, like they’re there just to shock rather than add anything to the film’s narrative.
Hansel & Gretel have grown up deciding to kill witches after they were left abandoned in the woods by their father. To cut a long story short, they are captured by a witch and forced to work for her; whilst doing this, Hansel develops ‘sugar sickness’ (diabetes) from all the candy he is forced to consume and must inject himself often. After killing said witch, they flee and the story begins; with them being hired to kill witches who have stolen children from a small town to allow them to become immune to fire; their major weakness.
It’s an interesting take on the story and Famke Janssen plays the wicked grand witch brilliantly, she manages to be both endearing and rightly terrifying in the same scene, though this is helped with the prosthetics used to alter her face. The other actors, including the main two are a little uninspired, especially Arterton who looks positively bored with the work she’s been given. In saying that, Renner isn’t much better and the majority of the film suffers as a result. In fact, you’ll probably be rooting for Janssen’s Muriel to succeed in her evil plot.
Thankfully, the special effects are very good, although I was expecting a little more witch-on-witch action, a la Harry Potter. Atli Orvarsson’s score is excellent and a real highlight of the film. The music in the brilliant opening credits is fantastic.
Overall, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters is a solid but uninspiring adaptation of a fairy-tale which was never meant for the big screen. Director Tommy Wirkola has obviously tried very hard to create a film which caters for most palates and whilst the score, special effects and acting from Famke Janssen are all top notch, the confusing mish-mash of genres and hammy acting from Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton stop it being anything more than a forgettable action flick. After all, when your lead characters look like they can’t be bothered, you’ve got a serious problem.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2013/03/02/hansel-gretel-witch-hunters-review-2013/
Sat between these two behemoths is the critical and somewhat commercial failure, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, but is it as bad as the reviews would have you believe? Let’s find out.
The fairy-tale of Hansel & Gretel is as well-known as Jack & the Beanstalk and to some extent the story in the Wizard of Oz, but films of this classic have been limited to low-budget television movies because finding the audience for such a difficult genre is not to be underestimated.
Here however, Tommy Wirkola directs his first English-language film with some degrees of success, though, a few niggling factors stop it from being the success it could’ve been. In a darker tale than perhaps we’re used to with a story such as this, Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton star as Hansel & Gretel respectively and for the most part, fulfil their roles well as they battle numerous dark witches in a plot which never really gets to grips with the genre it is trying to be.
Herein lays the problem, do you direct the fairy-tale genre as a family comedy or as something a little darker? Clearly director Wirkola has had his work cut out to find the balance between the two and the result is confusing, he has ended up with a 15 certificate which mixes comedy with a bloodbath that wouldn’t look out of place in a Quentin Tarantino picture; it really is that over-the-top. The use of swear-words also feels out of place, like they’re there just to shock rather than add anything to the film’s narrative.
Hansel & Gretel have grown up deciding to kill witches after they were left abandoned in the woods by their father. To cut a long story short, they are captured by a witch and forced to work for her; whilst doing this, Hansel develops ‘sugar sickness’ (diabetes) from all the candy he is forced to consume and must inject himself often. After killing said witch, they flee and the story begins; with them being hired to kill witches who have stolen children from a small town to allow them to become immune to fire; their major weakness.
It’s an interesting take on the story and Famke Janssen plays the wicked grand witch brilliantly, she manages to be both endearing and rightly terrifying in the same scene, though this is helped with the prosthetics used to alter her face. The other actors, including the main two are a little uninspired, especially Arterton who looks positively bored with the work she’s been given. In saying that, Renner isn’t much better and the majority of the film suffers as a result. In fact, you’ll probably be rooting for Janssen’s Muriel to succeed in her evil plot.
Thankfully, the special effects are very good, although I was expecting a little more witch-on-witch action, a la Harry Potter. Atli Orvarsson’s score is excellent and a real highlight of the film. The music in the brilliant opening credits is fantastic.
Overall, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters is a solid but uninspiring adaptation of a fairy-tale which was never meant for the big screen. Director Tommy Wirkola has obviously tried very hard to create a film which caters for most palates and whilst the score, special effects and acting from Famke Janssen are all top notch, the confusing mish-mash of genres and hammy acting from Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton stop it being anything more than a forgettable action flick. After all, when your lead characters look like they can’t be bothered, you’ve got a serious problem.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2013/03/02/hansel-gretel-witch-hunters-review-2013/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Dukes of Hazzard (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Those good ol’ boys from Hazzard County are back, in the film version of one of the most enduring series from the 70’s.
For those unfamiliar with the series, each week Cousins Bo and Luke Duke used their super charged Dodge Charger, christened “The General Lee”, to avoid corrupt police, city overlord Boss Hogg, and bad guys of the week.
If this sounds very simplistic, it is, yet the show was a huge ratings sensation as were subsequent T.V. reunions after the show completed its run. Thanks to reruns on syndication and the recent DVD sales, a new generation is encountering the Dukes and in many ways, that is who the new film is targeted to.
Starring Johnny Knoxville and Sean William Scott as Luke and Bo Duke, the film follows the basic theme of the series as the two cousins joke with one another as they run Moonshine for their Uncle Jessie (Willie Nelson), and try to stay one step ahead of the Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane (M.C. Gainey),
As the film opens, Bo is concerned about defending his title in the annual road rally and tying the record with his 4th consecutive win. Luke is concerned about staying one step ahead of a shotgun toting father & son duo who aren’t thrilled about his numerous dalliances with the daughter.
It is all fun and games until local overlord Boss Hogg (Burt Reynolds), seizes the family farm when he plants a still on the property and drives the Dukes out. Not ones to take it sitting down, Bo, Luke, and Cousin Daisy (Jessica Simpson), set out to discover why Boss Hogg is acquiring through ruthless means all of the land in the outlying areas of Hazzard County.
Bo and Luke are forced to flee Hazzard County and venture to Atlanta in order to gain further insight into Boss Hogg’s plans, which results in some funny fish-out-of-water moments when Bo and Luke have to deal with yuppies, college dorms, and the ‘hood as well as city police and the Boss himself.
Of course in keeping with the show, there will be countless car chases, spectacular jumps, and more than enough T&A thanks to Simpson, but what is surprising is that the film’s humor for the most part works.
Directed by Jay Chandrasekher of the Broken Lizard comedy troupe, the film does have its share of moments that may raise a few eyebrows as drug use, sex, and shots to the groin are present in this film, as is language that is more colorful than anything from the original series.
That being said, it is important to remember, that times have changed greatly since the Dukes first aired and you cannot blame the film makers for attempting to reach out to a broader audience. Such is the running joke of Bo being more concerned with his car than with woman, and his inability to speak with the object of his affections without fainting. This is quite a change from the unflappable character of the television show, yet one that still allows the good natured appeal of the character to remain intact.
The cast works well, especially the chemistry between Knoxville and Scott, as well as the scenery chewing performance of Reynolds who seems to be having the time of his life in the role. Much has been made of Simpson’s part, but it is mostly a limited role that offers her little chance to do much more than serve as eye candy, and does not show if she is capable of doing much more.
Nelson is sadly underused, but when he is on screen he raises the bar as his easygoing charm is a perfect match for Uncle Jessie.
While the film is in no way great cinema, it is at times an enjoyable bit of nostalgia to the days when Friday nights growing up meant dinner in front of the television watching the Dukes.
If car chases and some light comedy are what you are in the mood for, and you do not mind a thin story, you can do a lot worse than the Dukes.
For those unfamiliar with the series, each week Cousins Bo and Luke Duke used their super charged Dodge Charger, christened “The General Lee”, to avoid corrupt police, city overlord Boss Hogg, and bad guys of the week.
If this sounds very simplistic, it is, yet the show was a huge ratings sensation as were subsequent T.V. reunions after the show completed its run. Thanks to reruns on syndication and the recent DVD sales, a new generation is encountering the Dukes and in many ways, that is who the new film is targeted to.
Starring Johnny Knoxville and Sean William Scott as Luke and Bo Duke, the film follows the basic theme of the series as the two cousins joke with one another as they run Moonshine for their Uncle Jessie (Willie Nelson), and try to stay one step ahead of the Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane (M.C. Gainey),
As the film opens, Bo is concerned about defending his title in the annual road rally and tying the record with his 4th consecutive win. Luke is concerned about staying one step ahead of a shotgun toting father & son duo who aren’t thrilled about his numerous dalliances with the daughter.
It is all fun and games until local overlord Boss Hogg (Burt Reynolds), seizes the family farm when he plants a still on the property and drives the Dukes out. Not ones to take it sitting down, Bo, Luke, and Cousin Daisy (Jessica Simpson), set out to discover why Boss Hogg is acquiring through ruthless means all of the land in the outlying areas of Hazzard County.
Bo and Luke are forced to flee Hazzard County and venture to Atlanta in order to gain further insight into Boss Hogg’s plans, which results in some funny fish-out-of-water moments when Bo and Luke have to deal with yuppies, college dorms, and the ‘hood as well as city police and the Boss himself.
Of course in keeping with the show, there will be countless car chases, spectacular jumps, and more than enough T&A thanks to Simpson, but what is surprising is that the film’s humor for the most part works.
Directed by Jay Chandrasekher of the Broken Lizard comedy troupe, the film does have its share of moments that may raise a few eyebrows as drug use, sex, and shots to the groin are present in this film, as is language that is more colorful than anything from the original series.
That being said, it is important to remember, that times have changed greatly since the Dukes first aired and you cannot blame the film makers for attempting to reach out to a broader audience. Such is the running joke of Bo being more concerned with his car than with woman, and his inability to speak with the object of his affections without fainting. This is quite a change from the unflappable character of the television show, yet one that still allows the good natured appeal of the character to remain intact.
The cast works well, especially the chemistry between Knoxville and Scott, as well as the scenery chewing performance of Reynolds who seems to be having the time of his life in the role. Much has been made of Simpson’s part, but it is mostly a limited role that offers her little chance to do much more than serve as eye candy, and does not show if she is capable of doing much more.
Nelson is sadly underused, but when he is on screen he raises the bar as his easygoing charm is a perfect match for Uncle Jessie.
While the film is in no way great cinema, it is at times an enjoyable bit of nostalgia to the days when Friday nights growing up meant dinner in front of the television watching the Dukes.
If car chases and some light comedy are what you are in the mood for, and you do not mind a thin story, you can do a lot worse than the Dukes.
Kung Fu Panda Holiday Storybook
Book and Entertainment
App
★ Featured in "What's Hot" in the Apple App Store iStoryTime brings you Kung Fu Panda Holiday...
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Umbrella Academy in TV
Jul 5, 2020
A Gamble That Pays Off - 8/10
The Umbrella Academy is a 2019 dark comedy sci-fi/drama superhero tv show developed by Steve Blackman and Jeremy Slater for Netflix. It's an adaptation of the comic book series created by Gerard Way and Gabriel Ba and published by Dark Horse Comics. The series was produced by Borderline Entertainment, Dark Horse Entertainment, and Universal Cable Productions. Starring Ellen Page, Tom Hopper, David Castaneda, and Kate Walsh.
On October 1st, 1989, 43 women around the world give birth although none of them were pregnant that morning. Eccentric billionaire Sir Reginald Hargreeves (Colman Feore) adopts 7 of the children and turns them into a superhero team called, "The Umbrella Academy. The children are given numbers instead of names and even though 6 of them fight crime, 1 of them, Vanya/#7 (Ellen Page) is kept apart for not having any powers. Present day, the estranged siblings reunite when they learn their father has died. At the funeral, #5 (Aidan Gallagher), which has been missing for over a decade, reappears from the future out of a blue portal and reveals to the others, that the world will end in a matter of days.
This show is stellar. It's a ride that you shouldn't miss. It's good to see a comic book series adaptation that is not from Marvel or DC and you can feel that it's a fresh take and different. I think the writers for the show did a good job on making it very three-dimensional. It's rated TV-14 so it's for teenagers and adults but also for comic book fans and sci-fi fans. That being said it does get pretty weird and far out there, so might not be for everybody but it's definitely better than what the critics are saying. Yes it does have some issues; like the dialogue might not be the best, there being some plot holes possibly, and some complaints of other comic book shows or movies having done that before. But it does have plenty of pluses; the soundtrack is phenomenal, the CGI is on par with that of big-budget movies, and the casting is very good. They were able to pull off the whole dysfunctional family vibe very well. I wanted to give it a point higher but I did understand some of the other points that other critics made about it. I give it a 8/10 but I also give it my "Must See" seal of approval. So if you haven't seen it yet what are you waiting for.
On October 1st, 1989, 43 women around the world give birth although none of them were pregnant that morning. Eccentric billionaire Sir Reginald Hargreeves (Colman Feore) adopts 7 of the children and turns them into a superhero team called, "The Umbrella Academy. The children are given numbers instead of names and even though 6 of them fight crime, 1 of them, Vanya/#7 (Ellen Page) is kept apart for not having any powers. Present day, the estranged siblings reunite when they learn their father has died. At the funeral, #5 (Aidan Gallagher), which has been missing for over a decade, reappears from the future out of a blue portal and reveals to the others, that the world will end in a matter of days.
This show is stellar. It's a ride that you shouldn't miss. It's good to see a comic book series adaptation that is not from Marvel or DC and you can feel that it's a fresh take and different. I think the writers for the show did a good job on making it very three-dimensional. It's rated TV-14 so it's for teenagers and adults but also for comic book fans and sci-fi fans. That being said it does get pretty weird and far out there, so might not be for everybody but it's definitely better than what the critics are saying. Yes it does have some issues; like the dialogue might not be the best, there being some plot holes possibly, and some complaints of other comic book shows or movies having done that before. But it does have plenty of pluses; the soundtrack is phenomenal, the CGI is on par with that of big-budget movies, and the casting is very good. They were able to pull off the whole dysfunctional family vibe very well. I wanted to give it a point higher but I did understand some of the other points that other critics made about it. I give it a 8/10 but I also give it my "Must See" seal of approval. So if you haven't seen it yet what are you waiting for.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Promising Young Woman (2020) in Movies
Apr 10, 2021
Powerful
Emerald Fennell’s feature length motion picture Directing debut, PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN, is a difficult film to categorize. Is it a Dark Comedy? A RomCom? A family drama? A portrait of a character’s descent? A hard critique of sexism and sexual predators? A revenge fantasy?
The answer is - it is ALL of these and thanks to a wonderful script (by Fennell), strong Direction (again, by Ferrell) and a terrific, Oscar-worthy performance in the lead role (by Carey Mulligan) it is a very effective, very powerful film.
PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN tells the tale of Cassandra who we are introduced to at a bar, obviously drunk, getting picked up (and taken advantage of) by a “nice guy” at the bar. Once back at his place, it is clear that she is NOT drunk and she confronts the “nice guy”.
To say anything else would spoil this wonderful film.
At the center of this film is Carey Mulligan (deservedly) Oscar nominated turn as Cassandra. This is a tortured soul who is looking for some sort of catharsis from a previous trauma and seeks various ways to achieve this. You see an intelligence and sadness in Cassandra at every turn and Mulligan’s performance seemed rooted in reality and was, ultimately, an effective, chillingly and (yes) sad character brought to life. It is the type of performance that I will be rooting for in the Oscar race, it’s that good.
Most of the other characters in this film fleet in and out of Cassandra’s life but all are strong performances, seemingly willing to bring their “A” game to match Mulligan’s performance and the strong script. Kudos to Jennifer Coolidge, Alison Brie, Laverne Cox, Bo Burnham, Christopher Mintz-Plasse (yes, a McLovin’ sighting!), Alfred Molina, Moly Shannon, Connie Britton and, especially, the great Clancy Brown. They all enhanced the film with their performances, working off of Mulligan effectively.
But, credit to all of this must go to Writer/Director Emerald Fennell (probably best known for playing Camilla Parker Bowles in THE CROWN) who's script is smart and thought-provoking and who’s Direction is crisp and sure. She clearly had a certain type of film in her head - the type of film that does not easily lend itself to definition/classification and packs a powerful punch at it’s conclusion. Without spoiling anything, she “ups her game” at the end of this film and I sat in thoughtful silence as the end credits ran.
Fennell is up for the Oscar for both Best Director and Best Original Screenplay and I, for one, would vote for her Screenplay hands-down.
An intriguing film that is sticking with me a few days later…always a mark of quality.
Letter Grade: A
9 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The answer is - it is ALL of these and thanks to a wonderful script (by Fennell), strong Direction (again, by Ferrell) and a terrific, Oscar-worthy performance in the lead role (by Carey Mulligan) it is a very effective, very powerful film.
PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN tells the tale of Cassandra who we are introduced to at a bar, obviously drunk, getting picked up (and taken advantage of) by a “nice guy” at the bar. Once back at his place, it is clear that she is NOT drunk and she confronts the “nice guy”.
To say anything else would spoil this wonderful film.
At the center of this film is Carey Mulligan (deservedly) Oscar nominated turn as Cassandra. This is a tortured soul who is looking for some sort of catharsis from a previous trauma and seeks various ways to achieve this. You see an intelligence and sadness in Cassandra at every turn and Mulligan’s performance seemed rooted in reality and was, ultimately, an effective, chillingly and (yes) sad character brought to life. It is the type of performance that I will be rooting for in the Oscar race, it’s that good.
Most of the other characters in this film fleet in and out of Cassandra’s life but all are strong performances, seemingly willing to bring their “A” game to match Mulligan’s performance and the strong script. Kudos to Jennifer Coolidge, Alison Brie, Laverne Cox, Bo Burnham, Christopher Mintz-Plasse (yes, a McLovin’ sighting!), Alfred Molina, Moly Shannon, Connie Britton and, especially, the great Clancy Brown. They all enhanced the film with their performances, working off of Mulligan effectively.
But, credit to all of this must go to Writer/Director Emerald Fennell (probably best known for playing Camilla Parker Bowles in THE CROWN) who's script is smart and thought-provoking and who’s Direction is crisp and sure. She clearly had a certain type of film in her head - the type of film that does not easily lend itself to definition/classification and packs a powerful punch at it’s conclusion. Without spoiling anything, she “ups her game” at the end of this film and I sat in thoughtful silence as the end credits ran.
Fennell is up for the Oscar for both Best Director and Best Original Screenplay and I, for one, would vote for her Screenplay hands-down.
An intriguing film that is sticking with me a few days later…always a mark of quality.
Letter Grade: A
9 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Schitt's Creek in TV
Jan 22, 2021
This show was a little off my radar until it went ahead and won 9 Emmys earlier this year. I made a point of adding it to my watchlist, but remained largely unconvinced that it was going to be for me. Not based on anything solid, I just had a feeling.
One season in and I have to admit I find it very easy to watch (often in the background to doing something else) but am still a little on the fence. I can go an entire episode without raising a smile, but there have also been several moments that have had me rolling off my chair. My new instinct about it is that I am gonna need a lot more than the first season under my belt before I develop a true relationship with it. Maybe that was also the thinking of the Emmys, who mostly ignored it for 5 years and then threw everything at in retrospect once they realised it was ending and how fond they had become of it.
Eugene Levy and Maureen O’Hara, as the disfunctuonal parents of two grown up brats forced to slum it in a bumsville town once the family business goes bust, demonstrate terrific comic understanding and timing after years of practice in cringe comedy movies such as Best In Show. The fly on the wall style is not quite The Office, or Parks and Rec, but closest to Arrested Development – which I also struggled with at first, until the joke sunk in.
O’Hara especially, always teetering on the edge of wasted is a joy to watch; just naturally amusing and worth this kind of attention after a long and distinguished career. The kids also have their moments, the pan-sexual man-child David, played by Dan Levy, and the shallow vacuum that is Alexis, played by Annie Murphy, are deliberately annoying at first, but do become strangely endearing over time, a sign of great writing. Levy snr. is more the straight guy in the main, wallowing in pathos and his own ineffectual weaknesses as a father and husband, but also has some great moments here and there.
At this point I can’t honestly say if I will continue to the end, I’m just not that attached to it to face 5 more seasons for sure, but I may dip in from time to time. I do think it is worth a bigger audience than it already has stateside, I’m just not convinced a British / European audience really need it at this point in time, and if it has a time it is probably now or never, as its reference points are very of the moment, 2015-2020, before 2020 became something else entirely.
One season in and I have to admit I find it very easy to watch (often in the background to doing something else) but am still a little on the fence. I can go an entire episode without raising a smile, but there have also been several moments that have had me rolling off my chair. My new instinct about it is that I am gonna need a lot more than the first season under my belt before I develop a true relationship with it. Maybe that was also the thinking of the Emmys, who mostly ignored it for 5 years and then threw everything at in retrospect once they realised it was ending and how fond they had become of it.
Eugene Levy and Maureen O’Hara, as the disfunctuonal parents of two grown up brats forced to slum it in a bumsville town once the family business goes bust, demonstrate terrific comic understanding and timing after years of practice in cringe comedy movies such as Best In Show. The fly on the wall style is not quite The Office, or Parks and Rec, but closest to Arrested Development – which I also struggled with at first, until the joke sunk in.
O’Hara especially, always teetering on the edge of wasted is a joy to watch; just naturally amusing and worth this kind of attention after a long and distinguished career. The kids also have their moments, the pan-sexual man-child David, played by Dan Levy, and the shallow vacuum that is Alexis, played by Annie Murphy, are deliberately annoying at first, but do become strangely endearing over time, a sign of great writing. Levy snr. is more the straight guy in the main, wallowing in pathos and his own ineffectual weaknesses as a father and husband, but also has some great moments here and there.
At this point I can’t honestly say if I will continue to the end, I’m just not that attached to it to face 5 more seasons for sure, but I may dip in from time to time. I do think it is worth a bigger audience than it already has stateside, I’m just not convinced a British / European audience really need it at this point in time, and if it has a time it is probably now or never, as its reference points are very of the moment, 2015-2020, before 2020 became something else entirely.