Search
Search results
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Zombieland: Double Tap (2019) in Movies
Jan 17, 2020
Implausibility Can't Stop This Fun Movie
The gang from the original are back to deal with new issues and square off against new zombies. Definitely not as good as the first, Zombieland: Double Tap packs enough of an entertaining punch to be worth your while.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 8
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
Conflict: 10
Between the group’s personal issues and loads beyond loads of zombies, the movie definitely isn’t short of conflict. The film wins ultimately with the originality and variety of the zombie kills. The action is fun and, although lighthearted at times, it keeps you engaged in the movie.
Entertainment Value: 8
There was some implausibility here that made it a challenge at times to enjoy the movie. I also felt like the movie spent more time than needed trying to “chase a ghost” rather than just stand out and be its own thing. In spite of those shortcomings, man was this movie fun to watch!
Memorability: 5
Its been-there-done-that feel keeps this movie out of the classics range. There are quite a few bright spots, but nothing that made me say, “I want to watch this again right now!” Good? Absolutely. Memorable? Meh…
Pace: 10
A quick adventure that moves at a solid clip. I was never bored at any point. In fact, I had to pee extremely bad at one point and was pissed (pun intended) I had to get up. Not surprising, I missed a pretty important part of the movie. Damn you, Alamo Drafthouse, for having bathrooms so far away! What I’m saying is, the story’s flow was extremely smooth.
Plot: 2
The story is so weak it’s maddening at times. I swear, if it wasn’t such an insanely fun movie to watch, I wouldn’t have scored it nearly as high. I say maddening because the first film had so many layers to it while this one seems content on being mediocre in story.
Resolution: 10
Fun ending with a great payoff. If you’re a fan of the original, make sure not to leave right away as the credits are coming up. Cracked me up for sure!
Overall: 80
Despite a plot as strong as Jello, Zombieland: Double Tap will entertain you if you allow yourself a suspension of disbelief. The fun characters and consistent action are enough to carry the movie as a whole. Not as good as the first, but certainly not the first sequel to suffer from that issue. I recommend!
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 8
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
Conflict: 10
Between the group’s personal issues and loads beyond loads of zombies, the movie definitely isn’t short of conflict. The film wins ultimately with the originality and variety of the zombie kills. The action is fun and, although lighthearted at times, it keeps you engaged in the movie.
Entertainment Value: 8
There was some implausibility here that made it a challenge at times to enjoy the movie. I also felt like the movie spent more time than needed trying to “chase a ghost” rather than just stand out and be its own thing. In spite of those shortcomings, man was this movie fun to watch!
Memorability: 5
Its been-there-done-that feel keeps this movie out of the classics range. There are quite a few bright spots, but nothing that made me say, “I want to watch this again right now!” Good? Absolutely. Memorable? Meh…
Pace: 10
A quick adventure that moves at a solid clip. I was never bored at any point. In fact, I had to pee extremely bad at one point and was pissed (pun intended) I had to get up. Not surprising, I missed a pretty important part of the movie. Damn you, Alamo Drafthouse, for having bathrooms so far away! What I’m saying is, the story’s flow was extremely smooth.
Plot: 2
The story is so weak it’s maddening at times. I swear, if it wasn’t such an insanely fun movie to watch, I wouldn’t have scored it nearly as high. I say maddening because the first film had so many layers to it while this one seems content on being mediocre in story.
Resolution: 10
Fun ending with a great payoff. If you’re a fan of the original, make sure not to leave right away as the credits are coming up. Cracked me up for sure!
Overall: 80
Despite a plot as strong as Jello, Zombieland: Double Tap will entertain you if you allow yourself a suspension of disbelief. The fun characters and consistent action are enough to carry the movie as a whole. Not as good as the first, but certainly not the first sequel to suffer from that issue. I recommend!
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Light of My Life (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Not Revolutionary But Decent
A father and daughter try to survive in a post-apocalyptic world where a virus has taken out nearly all of the female population. Light of My Life isn’t going to revolutionize post-apocalyptic movies, but I would say it’s a worthy addition. It makes you care and, more importantly, it makes you think.
Acting: 10
Casey Afleck is sensational in his role as Dad. You can feel the love he has for his daughter Rag (Anna Pniowsky) and see how torn he is between trying to be strong for her while trying not to break down himself. Pniowsky is solid as well playing the daughter. She reads the role with a defiant attitude, as a girl having to quickly grow up in a crazy world. They work perfectly together onscreen.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 6
Conflict: 6
Casey Afleck, also the director, effectively builds tension throughout the journey. However, there are a number of times where you expect something to happen and it doesn’t. Ultimately, the conflict wasn’t quite so strong as I would have hoped.
Entertainment Value: 5
Because not as much action is happening in a movie that’s almost two hours, my level of being entertained was up and down. I did find myself checking out quite a few times especially when it’s the rinse and repeat of finding a campground, scouting, and laying down for the night. I just wish there were a few more close scrapes to keep me guessing.
Memorability: 3
This type of movie has been done before on the big screen and in video games. Unfortunately there’s not quite enough here to make it stand out. Don’t get me wrong, it’s definitely not a bad movie. It just lacks the necessary oompf to be much more than “just ok”.
Pace: 6
Attempts to move steadily before it slows down to a crawl again and again. There is no sense of urgency in the film and it drove me mad at times. Would have been much happier with the pace had the runtime been shorter.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 6
Decent ending, but…just decent. I question the decision of closure. Like a lot of the other facets of the movie, I was hoping for more.
Overall: 72
Light of My Life made me smile at times, but infuriated me at times when I knew I was watching something that could be better. It’s a decent movie and a few tweaks would have really done the trick for me. Now that I’ve seen it once, it’s not one I need to check out again.
Acting: 10
Casey Afleck is sensational in his role as Dad. You can feel the love he has for his daughter Rag (Anna Pniowsky) and see how torn he is between trying to be strong for her while trying not to break down himself. Pniowsky is solid as well playing the daughter. She reads the role with a defiant attitude, as a girl having to quickly grow up in a crazy world. They work perfectly together onscreen.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 6
Conflict: 6
Casey Afleck, also the director, effectively builds tension throughout the journey. However, there are a number of times where you expect something to happen and it doesn’t. Ultimately, the conflict wasn’t quite so strong as I would have hoped.
Entertainment Value: 5
Because not as much action is happening in a movie that’s almost two hours, my level of being entertained was up and down. I did find myself checking out quite a few times especially when it’s the rinse and repeat of finding a campground, scouting, and laying down for the night. I just wish there were a few more close scrapes to keep me guessing.
Memorability: 3
This type of movie has been done before on the big screen and in video games. Unfortunately there’s not quite enough here to make it stand out. Don’t get me wrong, it’s definitely not a bad movie. It just lacks the necessary oompf to be much more than “just ok”.
Pace: 6
Attempts to move steadily before it slows down to a crawl again and again. There is no sense of urgency in the film and it drove me mad at times. Would have been much happier with the pace had the runtime been shorter.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 6
Decent ending, but…just decent. I question the decision of closure. Like a lot of the other facets of the movie, I was hoping for more.
Overall: 72
Light of My Life made me smile at times, but infuriated me at times when I knew I was watching something that could be better. It’s a decent movie and a few tweaks would have really done the trick for me. Now that I’ve seen it once, it’s not one I need to check out again.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Haunt (2019) in Movies
Feb 15, 2020
Not Thought-Provoking But Fun!
In Haunt, a group of friends experience terror like no other when they go to a haunted house expecting a scare. For a movie that wasn’t done by a major studio, I have to say it ain’t half bad.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 3
If it wasn’t for such a slow start, I would definitely have put Haunt on the great level. Things don’t get moving nearly as fast as you like making me wonder if the rest of the movie was going to be like this. Fortunately things do pick up and, once things get rolling, the movie is good to go.
Characters: 7
The antagonists in this movie are super creepy, creepy enough to keep you entertained the whole movie. Meanwhile, the friends that are stalked can be pretty cardboard and plain, although I did appreciate how character development was worked in with a select few. It ultimately kept the story interesting.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 10
The creepiness level is on 1,000 here as there is danger around every turn. The movie definitely keeps you guessing, building on intensity scene after scene like a true-to-form horror movie. I loved that I was scared when I didn’t need to be. I also appreciated that, once the movie kicks into gear, no shot is wasted from that point on. Conflict abounds consistently throughout.
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 8
The movie succeeds by providing a lot of different setpieces that remain etched in your memory. The kills aren’t half bad either. Sure, it’s not the most thought-provoking film, but not bad as slashers go.
Pace: 10
Plot: 5
Resolution: 10
This movie ramps up the intensity right up to its thrilling conclusion where probably one of the most awesome kills in the film happens. I always gripe about the payoff in scary movies and how they can sometimes end abruptly so as to preserve a sequel. Haunt avoids that pitfall and goes all in with its ending that’s both engaging and fun.
Overall: 78
I would say this isn’t a bad movie to watch if it’s October and you’re tired of the same old Krueger and Jason song and dance. Had the characters been a twinge more interesting and the beginning hit with a little more boom, I would be leaning more towards the side of great horror to watch anytime. I love when independent horror and sci-fi hit the mark.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 3
If it wasn’t for such a slow start, I would definitely have put Haunt on the great level. Things don’t get moving nearly as fast as you like making me wonder if the rest of the movie was going to be like this. Fortunately things do pick up and, once things get rolling, the movie is good to go.
Characters: 7
The antagonists in this movie are super creepy, creepy enough to keep you entertained the whole movie. Meanwhile, the friends that are stalked can be pretty cardboard and plain, although I did appreciate how character development was worked in with a select few. It ultimately kept the story interesting.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 10
The creepiness level is on 1,000 here as there is danger around every turn. The movie definitely keeps you guessing, building on intensity scene after scene like a true-to-form horror movie. I loved that I was scared when I didn’t need to be. I also appreciated that, once the movie kicks into gear, no shot is wasted from that point on. Conflict abounds consistently throughout.
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 8
The movie succeeds by providing a lot of different setpieces that remain etched in your memory. The kills aren’t half bad either. Sure, it’s not the most thought-provoking film, but not bad as slashers go.
Pace: 10
Plot: 5
Resolution: 10
This movie ramps up the intensity right up to its thrilling conclusion where probably one of the most awesome kills in the film happens. I always gripe about the payoff in scary movies and how they can sometimes end abruptly so as to preserve a sequel. Haunt avoids that pitfall and goes all in with its ending that’s both engaging and fun.
Overall: 78
I would say this isn’t a bad movie to watch if it’s October and you’re tired of the same old Krueger and Jason song and dance. Had the characters been a twinge more interesting and the beginning hit with a little more boom, I would be leaning more towards the side of great horror to watch anytime. I love when independent horror and sci-fi hit the mark.
Modern Greece: What Everyone Needs to Know
Book
Just a few years ago, Greece appeared to be a politically secure nation with a healthy economy....
AI
An Introduction to Non-Perturbative Foundations of Quantum Field Theory
Book
Quantum Field Theory (QFT) has proved to be the most useful strategy for the description of...
The Art of War by Sun Tzu
8.0
Rate It
Podcast
The Art of War is a 6th Century BC Chinese treatise on war and military strategy known for its...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Crank (2006) in Movies
Jun 26, 2020
Quick Pacing, Bad Movie
When a former hitman’s enemies inject him with a lethal poison that will stop his heart if it goes below an active rate, that hitman Chev Chelios is on a race to find the antidote while keeping his heart pumping at the same time.
Acting: 10
I could think of worse actors to play the role of Chev outside of Jason Statham. He seems like he was made for this type of movie. He brings a successful intensity to the role that kicks the movie into a new gear. Unfortunately it wasn’t enough to save the film as a whole. While other performances didn’t necessarily warrant a 10, Chev is pretty much the entire centerpiece so I’m basing the score off Statham’s performance alone.
Beginning: 10
I honestly didn’t hate how the movie began. It actually gets off to a pretty fast start only to let me down later. If only I knew what I was getting myself into.
Characters: 1
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
For what' it’s worth, the film does a good job of making you feel like you are in Chelios’ shoes. The camera relies on close up shots and jarring movement when Chelios has to “charge up”. The action is also captured fairly well, giving you a true sense of being in the moment.
Conflict: 10
Consistent action abounds throughout the movie. In addition to Chelios kicking much ass, there’s also the matter of him trying to keep his heart pumping while he finds the antidote. There is more than enough conflict to drive the story.
Entertainment Value: 6
While there are flashes of greatness in Crank, much of it is hyped up hyperbole so extreme it makes the movie really hard to get into. I lost count of the number of times I rolled my eyes throughout the movie. What did intrigue me throughout was just how much crazier the movie could potentially get.
Memorability: 4
Pace: 10
Plot: 0
What a dumbass story. That is all.
Resolution: 6
I give it props for an inventive ending. However, it wasn’t a successful resolution in my opinion. We followed Chelios on this entire journey for it to come to this? Nah, just…nah.
Overall: 64
You could tell this movie was going to be a mess from the trailer. Surprisingly enough it has a positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes and it seems to have a cult following. I really don’t get it, even as an action lover. It’s a pass for me.
Acting: 10
I could think of worse actors to play the role of Chev outside of Jason Statham. He seems like he was made for this type of movie. He brings a successful intensity to the role that kicks the movie into a new gear. Unfortunately it wasn’t enough to save the film as a whole. While other performances didn’t necessarily warrant a 10, Chev is pretty much the entire centerpiece so I’m basing the score off Statham’s performance alone.
Beginning: 10
I honestly didn’t hate how the movie began. It actually gets off to a pretty fast start only to let me down later. If only I knew what I was getting myself into.
Characters: 1
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
For what' it’s worth, the film does a good job of making you feel like you are in Chelios’ shoes. The camera relies on close up shots and jarring movement when Chelios has to “charge up”. The action is also captured fairly well, giving you a true sense of being in the moment.
Conflict: 10
Consistent action abounds throughout the movie. In addition to Chelios kicking much ass, there’s also the matter of him trying to keep his heart pumping while he finds the antidote. There is more than enough conflict to drive the story.
Entertainment Value: 6
While there are flashes of greatness in Crank, much of it is hyped up hyperbole so extreme it makes the movie really hard to get into. I lost count of the number of times I rolled my eyes throughout the movie. What did intrigue me throughout was just how much crazier the movie could potentially get.
Memorability: 4
Pace: 10
Plot: 0
What a dumbass story. That is all.
Resolution: 6
I give it props for an inventive ending. However, it wasn’t a successful resolution in my opinion. We followed Chelios on this entire journey for it to come to this? Nah, just…nah.
Overall: 64
You could tell this movie was going to be a mess from the trailer. Surprisingly enough it has a positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes and it seems to have a cult following. I really don’t get it, even as an action lover. It’s a pass for me.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Men in Black (1997) in Movies
Jan 6, 2021
Visually Brilliant and Gorgeous
A New York police officer gets thrown into a crazy world when he stumbles upon a special group trying to stop intergalactic threats.
Acting: 10
Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones have to be one my most favorite duos of all time. Playing Agent J and Agent K respectively, their partnership is one of new blood versus old head. I love how each of them took on their respective role, Smith with air of cockiness and bravado and Jones with the nature of one who has been there and done that too many times before. And I haven’t even dove into the fun performances of actors like Rip Torn and Tony Shalhoub. Very well casted movie.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
J and K are magnificent to watch, but it’s the broad scope of aliens for me that take the cake. There’s Jeebs whose head can explode and grow back. Then there’s Edgar who eventually becomes a massive bug wearing an “Edgar Suit” played by the amazing Vincent D’Onofrio. Those are only to name a couple from a large list of enriching characters that shed a fun new light on the underground of New York.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
The first ten minutes of the movie gives you a taste of what the action is going to be like. That dives right into the next scene and the next. Great action with high stakes that races across the city of New York. I appreciate the high level of conflict that kept me engaged.
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 7
Pace: 10
Ninety-eight minutes goes by quick in Men In Black. It’s one of those movies that you almost don’t want to end but you know it has to. It races through its story, but just quickly enough so that you don’t miss any important details. I love when movies can move at a pace like this without ruining with exposition.
Plot: 7
Resolution: 8
I wanted a little more from the ending but it was satisfactory for the most part. Definitely leaves room for the obvious sequel that follows it. Decent way to wrap things up.
Overall: 89
From the beginning, I had no doubt that I was going to like Men In Black. It wraps solid sci-fi action into a nice gift with quick pacing and a solid story for a bow. Director Barry Sonnenfeld masterfully captures the “aliens among us” idea and makes it inventive. Definitely a necessary piece of sci-fi movie history.
Acting: 10
Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones have to be one my most favorite duos of all time. Playing Agent J and Agent K respectively, their partnership is one of new blood versus old head. I love how each of them took on their respective role, Smith with air of cockiness and bravado and Jones with the nature of one who has been there and done that too many times before. And I haven’t even dove into the fun performances of actors like Rip Torn and Tony Shalhoub. Very well casted movie.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
J and K are magnificent to watch, but it’s the broad scope of aliens for me that take the cake. There’s Jeebs whose head can explode and grow back. Then there’s Edgar who eventually becomes a massive bug wearing an “Edgar Suit” played by the amazing Vincent D’Onofrio. Those are only to name a couple from a large list of enriching characters that shed a fun new light on the underground of New York.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
The first ten minutes of the movie gives you a taste of what the action is going to be like. That dives right into the next scene and the next. Great action with high stakes that races across the city of New York. I appreciate the high level of conflict that kept me engaged.
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 7
Pace: 10
Ninety-eight minutes goes by quick in Men In Black. It’s one of those movies that you almost don’t want to end but you know it has to. It races through its story, but just quickly enough so that you don’t miss any important details. I love when movies can move at a pace like this without ruining with exposition.
Plot: 7
Resolution: 8
I wanted a little more from the ending but it was satisfactory for the most part. Definitely leaves room for the obvious sequel that follows it. Decent way to wrap things up.
Overall: 89
From the beginning, I had no doubt that I was going to like Men In Black. It wraps solid sci-fi action into a nice gift with quick pacing and a solid story for a bow. Director Barry Sonnenfeld masterfully captures the “aliens among us” idea and makes it inventive. Definitely a necessary piece of sci-fi movie history.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Swing Time (1936) in Movies
Aug 14, 2020
Entertaining Despite Some Flaws
Fucking blackface, am I right? I’ll warn you now if you plan to watch Swing Time: There is a blackface scene. In spite of this touch of ignorance, as a black man, I have to say that I rather enjoyed the movie. The plot: When John Garnet (Fred Astaire) gets cold feet on his wedding day, his fiance opts to give him another chance if he can find a way to earn $25,000. John is all for it until he falls in love with a dance instructor and tries to find every way in the world to avoid making the money.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 6
In the beginning John’s dance troupe tries to distract him by keeping him from getting married. They feel like if he doesn’t go through with it, he can keep working with them. Despite their efforts, it was much more annoying than it was funny. Not a great way to kick off the story.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
For the most part, the movie is cinematically gorgeous. I loved the dance numbers, well most of them anyway. It all reverts back to that damn blackface scene. It was an unnecessary piece of the film that did absolutely nothing for the story. Other than that, the movie is shot in a gorgeous fashion.
Conflict: 10
Most of the conflict stems from John’s rising feelings for Penelope the dance instructor (Ginger Rogers). You get the sense that they are meant to be together but John is working towards trying to be with another woman. You hope before the story’s end that he ends up in the right place. It’s a journey getting there.
Entertainment Value: 8
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 2
The premise and the way it unfolds is a miss for me. Fortunately the characters and setpieces were enough to carry the movie. it was a really hard buy-in for me.
Resolution: 10
While not perfect, the ending is a satisfying completion to the story. You can definitely see it coming the closer you get, but it’s still good. Great closure for the main characters.
Overall: 84
Not my favorite of the classics, Swing Time still deserves its place in history. As far as the blackface is concerned, I think we owe it to ourselves not to shy away from things that happened in history. Even the bad things. In spite being on the wrong side of history, I enjoyed it.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 6
In the beginning John’s dance troupe tries to distract him by keeping him from getting married. They feel like if he doesn’t go through with it, he can keep working with them. Despite their efforts, it was much more annoying than it was funny. Not a great way to kick off the story.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
For the most part, the movie is cinematically gorgeous. I loved the dance numbers, well most of them anyway. It all reverts back to that damn blackface scene. It was an unnecessary piece of the film that did absolutely nothing for the story. Other than that, the movie is shot in a gorgeous fashion.
Conflict: 10
Most of the conflict stems from John’s rising feelings for Penelope the dance instructor (Ginger Rogers). You get the sense that they are meant to be together but John is working towards trying to be with another woman. You hope before the story’s end that he ends up in the right place. It’s a journey getting there.
Entertainment Value: 8
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 2
The premise and the way it unfolds is a miss for me. Fortunately the characters and setpieces were enough to carry the movie. it was a really hard buy-in for me.
Resolution: 10
While not perfect, the ending is a satisfying completion to the story. You can definitely see it coming the closer you get, but it’s still good. Great closure for the main characters.
Overall: 84
Not my favorite of the classics, Swing Time still deserves its place in history. As far as the blackface is concerned, I think we owe it to ourselves not to shy away from things that happened in history. Even the bad things. In spite being on the wrong side of history, I enjoyed it.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Skyscraper (2018) in Movies
Feb 21, 2019
Not the Worst, But...
When a former FBI hostage team leader is hired to survey the security of a skyscraper, he finds himself in a battle to save himself and his family after terrorists take over the building.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 2
I remember watching the first ten minutes of the film thinking, “Is this ever going to pick up?” I could have showed up late and missed nothing. No intrigue, no strong plot advancement. Just…blah.
Characters: 7
Cinematography/Visuals: 2
Conflict: 10
If nothing else, Skyscraper succeeds by moving the story along with action. There is always something happening from death defying leaps to shootouts with thugs. It’s never really a boring film, just more flat than anything. For the most part, I appreciated the consistency of movement.
Genre: 4
Memorability: 2
Pace: 9
Plot: 8
Resolution: 6
Overall: 60
I honestly thought I would end up scoring Skyscraper lower. It does what it sets out to do, lull you into a mindless stupor with action, but so does the Transformers franchise and that’s not very good either. It’s a brainless movie with no real substance. If you can deal with a movie that has too many over-the-top scenes to count, Skyscraper might be worth your time.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 2
I remember watching the first ten minutes of the film thinking, “Is this ever going to pick up?” I could have showed up late and missed nothing. No intrigue, no strong plot advancement. Just…blah.
Characters: 7
Cinematography/Visuals: 2
Conflict: 10
If nothing else, Skyscraper succeeds by moving the story along with action. There is always something happening from death defying leaps to shootouts with thugs. It’s never really a boring film, just more flat than anything. For the most part, I appreciated the consistency of movement.
Genre: 4
Memorability: 2
Pace: 9
Plot: 8
Resolution: 6
Overall: 60
I honestly thought I would end up scoring Skyscraper lower. It does what it sets out to do, lull you into a mindless stupor with action, but so does the Transformers franchise and that’s not very good either. It’s a brainless movie with no real substance. If you can deal with a movie that has too many over-the-top scenes to count, Skyscraper might be worth your time.