Search
Search results
Dean (6921 KP) rated Forza Motorsport 7 in Video Games
May 16, 2021
Amazing graphics, true 4k racing (2 more)
Weather conditions
100's of cars
Loading times (6 more)
Rewind Button
So many menus
Computer AI
Multiplayer races
Grid position
Endurance races
Technically excellent Racing Simulation
A very good Racing Simulation with amazing graphics, true 4k details but with a lot of flaws.
The graphics are the highlight really so much detail on every car and track. While some of the track circuits are sparse, the city tracks especially Prague and Rio de Janeiro look great. Along with the lighting and weather conditions, including thunderstorms make it very realistic.
There is a huge variety of cars from street to every form of racing thinkable, even truck racing.
Unfortunately there are a lot of minor things that add up which are disappointing. Because of the detail in the graphics and large circuits the loading times for the races can be slow. There are so many menus to go through as well. You need to apply Mod cards before most races, like finish in top 5,3,1st, clean laps, races and turning off assists to gain more credits or xp. I'm not a fan of this system. Even after the race you have a few menus to get your rewards.
This is a tough simulation which is why no doubt there is a rewind button for when you go of track or crash. You will need it especially when the computer drivers ram into you or don't observe the racing line. It feels like cheating though. You will need the braking line on most of the time or you are very likely to overrun corners.
With this largely being track racing these are the same tracks mostly that have featured in so many previous Forza Motorsport games. How about a Monaco track? The few street tracks really do look great.
You can full simulation mode where you can do longer races, look after tyres and pit for petrol if you wish. I can't imagine many choosing this option though.
If you are a completist and want to do every race for the cups, you don't need to in order to win the cup, then prepare for the endurance races. At least 2 taking 2.5 hours and one race lasting almost 3 hours long. Why would anyone want to do one race for that long? Most races are 2-4 laps so doing a 60-80 lap race is a huge jump.
There are a wide range of multiplayer races but you really need to tune your car to the max and hope you don't get rammed off at the 1st corner to do well.
The races are big, up to 24 players or computer drivers. Often you start 12th on the grid in the computer races which can make it hard to win when the race is 2 or 3 laps until you get use to the game.
There are a few events like overtake challenges, cone races, bowling but not enough of these for much variety.
So a technically excellent Racing game which is definitely aimed more at the track racing hardcover gamer. Unfortunately it has many minor flaws that do add up which are a bit annoying. Once you win all the cups it's not one you will take for a spin that often. If you want a fun racer the Horizon series is more enjoyable.
The graphics are the highlight really so much detail on every car and track. While some of the track circuits are sparse, the city tracks especially Prague and Rio de Janeiro look great. Along with the lighting and weather conditions, including thunderstorms make it very realistic.
There is a huge variety of cars from street to every form of racing thinkable, even truck racing.
Unfortunately there are a lot of minor things that add up which are disappointing. Because of the detail in the graphics and large circuits the loading times for the races can be slow. There are so many menus to go through as well. You need to apply Mod cards before most races, like finish in top 5,3,1st, clean laps, races and turning off assists to gain more credits or xp. I'm not a fan of this system. Even after the race you have a few menus to get your rewards.
This is a tough simulation which is why no doubt there is a rewind button for when you go of track or crash. You will need it especially when the computer drivers ram into you or don't observe the racing line. It feels like cheating though. You will need the braking line on most of the time or you are very likely to overrun corners.
With this largely being track racing these are the same tracks mostly that have featured in so many previous Forza Motorsport games. How about a Monaco track? The few street tracks really do look great.
You can full simulation mode where you can do longer races, look after tyres and pit for petrol if you wish. I can't imagine many choosing this option though.
If you are a completist and want to do every race for the cups, you don't need to in order to win the cup, then prepare for the endurance races. At least 2 taking 2.5 hours and one race lasting almost 3 hours long. Why would anyone want to do one race for that long? Most races are 2-4 laps so doing a 60-80 lap race is a huge jump.
There are a wide range of multiplayer races but you really need to tune your car to the max and hope you don't get rammed off at the 1st corner to do well.
The races are big, up to 24 players or computer drivers. Often you start 12th on the grid in the computer races which can make it hard to win when the race is 2 or 3 laps until you get use to the game.
There are a few events like overtake challenges, cone races, bowling but not enough of these for much variety.
So a technically excellent Racing game which is definitely aimed more at the track racing hardcover gamer. Unfortunately it has many minor flaws that do add up which are a bit annoying. Once you win all the cups it's not one you will take for a spin that often. If you want a fun racer the Horizon series is more enjoyable.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated A Quiet Place: Part II (2021) in Movies
Jun 3, 2021
A Good, Maybe Very Good, But Not Great Sequel
Did you enjoy the first A QUIET PLACE film? This horror/thriller from 2018 was unique in that it emphasized the suspense portion of the horror genre while relying, heavily, on sound (or the lack thereof).
The inevitable sequel picks up right where the first film ends, following the survivors of the first film as they make their way to a new “Quiet Place”…and, while not as unique as the first film, certainly holds its own as an entertainment and if you enjoyed the first one, you’ll enjoy this, the 2nd of what is promised to be a Trilogy.
Written and Directed by John Krasinski (who wrote and directed the first one) A QUIET PLACE PART II has an opening sequence (pre-credits) that is as good of an opening sequence as I have seen for quite some time (maybe all the way back to SAVING PRIVATE RYAN - it’s that good of an opening sequence). Again, Krasinski infuses sound (and the lack thereof) as he changes the focus of this opening scene from a deaf character (with the lack of sound) to non-deaf characters (with LOTS of sound). It is this juxtaposition of sound (and not sound) that makes an indelible impression. This opening scene is worth the price of admission all by itself.
And…that’s important… for the rest of the film is good, maybe even very good, but not great. Emily Blunt returns and is a formidable screen presence, but since this film focuses as much (if not more) on the 2 kids (Noah Jupe and Millicent Simmonds - more on them later), Blunt is relegated to a co-starring (and maybe a supporting) role, which is too little Emily Blunt in this film for my taste.
The always dependable Cillian Murphy is along for the ride this time around as a fellow survivor who has to work through some cowardice issues. While, at first, it looked like Murphy was putting in a “workmanlike, but unspectacular” performance, by the end of the film it becomes much, much better. A good, maybe even very good, but not great, performance.
As for the kids, Noah Jupe does a good, maybe even very good (but not great) performance, but that might be because Millicent Simmonds as the deaf child (she is a deaf actress herself) is REMARKABLE in her role - and this is needed for a large portion of this film follows her journey - and it is a journey worth watching. I hope this young actress gets a ton more work after these series of movies. I am going to be very interested in seeing her do other things.
Director Krasinski pulls many of the right levers in stringing out the audience - and the tension - throughout the film (though, as is often the case in these types of films, I wanted to yell at the screen a couple of times when characters did stupid things that you knew were gonna end up poorly for them). He, again, relies on suspense (and not gore) in scaring his audience and succeeds much more than he fails in this flim.
All-in-all, a movie that would be a wise choice to bring you back into the Cineplex. The (albeit small) crowd that saw the film in the theater I watched it in had more than 1 time where we all jumped and screamed together - and I realized that I had missed that.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The inevitable sequel picks up right where the first film ends, following the survivors of the first film as they make their way to a new “Quiet Place”…and, while not as unique as the first film, certainly holds its own as an entertainment and if you enjoyed the first one, you’ll enjoy this, the 2nd of what is promised to be a Trilogy.
Written and Directed by John Krasinski (who wrote and directed the first one) A QUIET PLACE PART II has an opening sequence (pre-credits) that is as good of an opening sequence as I have seen for quite some time (maybe all the way back to SAVING PRIVATE RYAN - it’s that good of an opening sequence). Again, Krasinski infuses sound (and the lack thereof) as he changes the focus of this opening scene from a deaf character (with the lack of sound) to non-deaf characters (with LOTS of sound). It is this juxtaposition of sound (and not sound) that makes an indelible impression. This opening scene is worth the price of admission all by itself.
And…that’s important… for the rest of the film is good, maybe even very good, but not great. Emily Blunt returns and is a formidable screen presence, but since this film focuses as much (if not more) on the 2 kids (Noah Jupe and Millicent Simmonds - more on them later), Blunt is relegated to a co-starring (and maybe a supporting) role, which is too little Emily Blunt in this film for my taste.
The always dependable Cillian Murphy is along for the ride this time around as a fellow survivor who has to work through some cowardice issues. While, at first, it looked like Murphy was putting in a “workmanlike, but unspectacular” performance, by the end of the film it becomes much, much better. A good, maybe even very good, but not great, performance.
As for the kids, Noah Jupe does a good, maybe even very good (but not great) performance, but that might be because Millicent Simmonds as the deaf child (she is a deaf actress herself) is REMARKABLE in her role - and this is needed for a large portion of this film follows her journey - and it is a journey worth watching. I hope this young actress gets a ton more work after these series of movies. I am going to be very interested in seeing her do other things.
Director Krasinski pulls many of the right levers in stringing out the audience - and the tension - throughout the film (though, as is often the case in these types of films, I wanted to yell at the screen a couple of times when characters did stupid things that you knew were gonna end up poorly for them). He, again, relies on suspense (and not gore) in scaring his audience and succeeds much more than he fails in this flim.
All-in-all, a movie that would be a wise choice to bring you back into the Cineplex. The (albeit small) crowd that saw the film in the theater I watched it in had more than 1 time where we all jumped and screamed together - and I realized that I had missed that.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Black Widow (2021) in Movies
Jun 29, 2021
After a delay lasting 19 months; the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) has returned to the big screen with “Black Widow”. The film takes place between “Captain America: Civil War” and “Avengers: Infinity War”; audiences get more of the backstory of Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson), as we are introduced to her early life before the Red Room.
This is not to say that the film is an origin story as it uses her backstory through a clever introduction that establishes her “family” as sleeper agents in Ohio before they escape and she and her cover sister are tuned over for conditioning and training.
Since Natasha is on the run from the authorities; she finds a remote location in Norway to bide her time. This does not last as a dangerous adversary known as the Taskmaster arrives and sets a chain of events into motion.
Natasha has been sent a package from her cover sister Yelena (Florence Pugh) who also went through the Red Room and became a top assassin in the years since she and Natasha last saw one another.
Despite her mixed feelings; Natasha ventures to Budapest and confronts Yelena who in turn reveals the package she sent her contains a compound that can free the other Black Widows from the control of the Red Room which despite Natasha’s insistence is still very much alive as is the head of the institute which she is convinced she killed long ago.
With Taskmaster and other Widows hot on their trail, Natasha and Yelena are forced to seek the help of their former “Father” the imprisoned hero Red Guardian (David Harbour), and their cover Mother Melina (Rachel Weisz), to find the location of the new Red Room; free the Widows, and end the program once and for all.
What follows is an engaging story with solid action and effects that remains at its core a character story as Natasha attempts to reconcile her cover family with her new Avengers family and the pain of her upbringing and conditioning.
Marvel resisted calls from some to release the film on Disney+ last year when the Pandemic caused multiple delays to the planned release dates. This decision to me was very wise as this is a film that needs to be seen and heard on the big screen as it is an experience that is best experienced in a cinema with others.
While many attempts were made over the decades to adapt comic heroes to film and television; most of them came up lacking and disappointed fans of the source material. Marvel for over a decade has continued to succeed as they have a clear plan, cast well, and have engaging characters that develop over time.
“Black Widow” fills in a missing gap of time in the MCU well and also sets up future adventures as a scene in the credits clearly links two of the live-action Disney+ series and shows that the long-term plan for the MCU continues and incorporates the film and television series well.
From the moment the Marvel intro and music appeared on the screen until the very end; “Black Widow” was a very enjoyable and engaging blockbuster adventure that shows Marvel at the top of their game; and why they continue to set event-level movies not to miss.
This is not to say that the film is an origin story as it uses her backstory through a clever introduction that establishes her “family” as sleeper agents in Ohio before they escape and she and her cover sister are tuned over for conditioning and training.
Since Natasha is on the run from the authorities; she finds a remote location in Norway to bide her time. This does not last as a dangerous adversary known as the Taskmaster arrives and sets a chain of events into motion.
Natasha has been sent a package from her cover sister Yelena (Florence Pugh) who also went through the Red Room and became a top assassin in the years since she and Natasha last saw one another.
Despite her mixed feelings; Natasha ventures to Budapest and confronts Yelena who in turn reveals the package she sent her contains a compound that can free the other Black Widows from the control of the Red Room which despite Natasha’s insistence is still very much alive as is the head of the institute which she is convinced she killed long ago.
With Taskmaster and other Widows hot on their trail, Natasha and Yelena are forced to seek the help of their former “Father” the imprisoned hero Red Guardian (David Harbour), and their cover Mother Melina (Rachel Weisz), to find the location of the new Red Room; free the Widows, and end the program once and for all.
What follows is an engaging story with solid action and effects that remains at its core a character story as Natasha attempts to reconcile her cover family with her new Avengers family and the pain of her upbringing and conditioning.
Marvel resisted calls from some to release the film on Disney+ last year when the Pandemic caused multiple delays to the planned release dates. This decision to me was very wise as this is a film that needs to be seen and heard on the big screen as it is an experience that is best experienced in a cinema with others.
While many attempts were made over the decades to adapt comic heroes to film and television; most of them came up lacking and disappointed fans of the source material. Marvel for over a decade has continued to succeed as they have a clear plan, cast well, and have engaging characters that develop over time.
“Black Widow” fills in a missing gap of time in the MCU well and also sets up future adventures as a scene in the credits clearly links two of the live-action Disney+ series and shows that the long-term plan for the MCU continues and incorporates the film and television series well.
From the moment the Marvel intro and music appeared on the screen until the very end; “Black Widow” was a very enjoyable and engaging blockbuster adventure that shows Marvel at the top of their game; and why they continue to set event-level movies not to miss.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Memento (2000) in Movies
Nov 29, 2020
One of my favourite films
Film #5 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Memento
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Boys - Season 2 in TV
Oct 10, 2020
Excellent, but not quite as good as the first
For me, the first series of The Boys was a brilliant surprise and the wait for this second series has been a rather frustrating and impatient experience, especially as Amazon decided not to release the entire series at once. Fortunately by the time the credits rolled on the series 2 finale, it was definitely worth the wait.
This second series follows on from the reveal at the end of the series 1 finale, and features more dodgy supes and the Boys trying to take down both them and Vought.
Series 2 is very similar to the first. It’s just as rude and crude as before, full of dark and often hilarious humour and the blood and gore ante seems to have been upped considerably. It definitely provides a refreshing change to the Marvel universe and the majority of other superheroes that stick to their PG or 12A ratings. This has a very smart and funny take on politics and also on pop culture and the media, and even superhero films don’t escape this unscathed when we see The Seven making their own movie.
The cast are as fantastic as they were in the first series. Antony Starr is outstanding as Homelander, playing the homicidal maniac with some semblance of a heart – after 2 series I think I both love and hate him in equal parts, he’s such a complex character. It was very nice to see Dominique McElligott get more to work with as Maeve as well and to see more depth to her character. The rest of the cast and the new additions do very well too - Goran Visjnic, Shawn Ashmore and Jim Beaver are especially welcome, and it was very clever of Eric Kripke to name Beaver’s character as Robert Singer, the same name as his character from Supernatural.
Despite this, I don’t think this series is perfect and I do think it’s a slight baby step down from the rather excellent first series. Some of the episodes feel like they drag a little, although they do end up picking up towards the end (usually with a bang). The final two episodes definitely try and make up for this and I think the finale itself was especially good as we get to see Stormfront get her much deserved comeuppance. I also think some of the interactions between Starlight and the other characters are slightly badly scripted and feel a little forced and cringeworthy, but I’m not entirely sure if this is on purpose to show how awkwardly Starlight interacts with others.
The Deep has also been done a disservice in this series. He starts off brilliantly and the scene with the whale in the third episode is downright genius, however as the series moves on we see less and less of him and he’s sorely missed. Admittedly when he does pop up in the later episodes he has some cracking lines, but it’s not enough. I also think that Shawn Ashmore as Lamplighter was fantastic for the brief time we saw him, and I really wish he’d been kept around for much longer.
The Boys series 2 is overall a very good series that for the most part lives up to it’s predecessor and after the final few scenes in episode 8, definitely leaves us crying out for more.
This second series follows on from the reveal at the end of the series 1 finale, and features more dodgy supes and the Boys trying to take down both them and Vought.
Series 2 is very similar to the first. It’s just as rude and crude as before, full of dark and often hilarious humour and the blood and gore ante seems to have been upped considerably. It definitely provides a refreshing change to the Marvel universe and the majority of other superheroes that stick to their PG or 12A ratings. This has a very smart and funny take on politics and also on pop culture and the media, and even superhero films don’t escape this unscathed when we see The Seven making their own movie.
The cast are as fantastic as they were in the first series. Antony Starr is outstanding as Homelander, playing the homicidal maniac with some semblance of a heart – after 2 series I think I both love and hate him in equal parts, he’s such a complex character. It was very nice to see Dominique McElligott get more to work with as Maeve as well and to see more depth to her character. The rest of the cast and the new additions do very well too - Goran Visjnic, Shawn Ashmore and Jim Beaver are especially welcome, and it was very clever of Eric Kripke to name Beaver’s character as Robert Singer, the same name as his character from Supernatural.
Despite this, I don’t think this series is perfect and I do think it’s a slight baby step down from the rather excellent first series. Some of the episodes feel like they drag a little, although they do end up picking up towards the end (usually with a bang). The final two episodes definitely try and make up for this and I think the finale itself was especially good as we get to see Stormfront get her much deserved comeuppance. I also think some of the interactions between Starlight and the other characters are slightly badly scripted and feel a little forced and cringeworthy, but I’m not entirely sure if this is on purpose to show how awkwardly Starlight interacts with others.
The Deep has also been done a disservice in this series. He starts off brilliantly and the scene with the whale in the third episode is downright genius, however as the series moves on we see less and less of him and he’s sorely missed. Admittedly when he does pop up in the later episodes he has some cracking lines, but it’s not enough. I also think that Shawn Ashmore as Lamplighter was fantastic for the brief time we saw him, and I really wish he’d been kept around for much longer.
The Boys series 2 is overall a very good series that for the most part lives up to it’s predecessor and after the final few scenes in episode 8, definitely leaves us crying out for more.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Untouchables (1987) in Movies
Dec 16, 2020 (Updated Dec 16, 2020)
A little melodramatic
(not) Film #7 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: The Untouchables
As with most of the films on this list, The Untouchables is a film that has garnered a great deal of acclaim over the years, and yet if I’ve ever seen it, I’m ashamed to admit that I don’t remember it.
The Untouchables (1987) was directed by Brian De Palma and stars Kevin Costner as Eliot Ness, a treasury agent who recruits a group of fellow cops and agents to take down mob boss Al Capone (Robert De Niro) in Prohibition-era Chicago, with Ness and his agents soon becoming known as the “untouchables” after refusing large bribes. Sean Connery, Andy Garcia and Charles Martin Smith make up the rest of the Untouchables.
An American gangster film is a dime a dozen, there have been countless over the years and the 1920s and 30s are always featured fairly heavily, no doubt due to the large number of criminal gangs and mobsters around in that era. Personally whilst The Untouchables is a good film, I don’t think there’s a lot in this to make it particularly notable or outstanding above any of the others. It’s engaging and interesting, which it should be considering the subject matter – it is based on a true story after all. The entire production looks great too; the sets, costumes and locations are very well done and definitely look the part.
The issue with The Untouchables is it’s too melodramatic, too over the top and clichéd. This isn’t helped by Ennio Morricone’s score, which feels far too heavy handed, cheesy and out of place for the scenes. Even the open title credits is ridiculously over dramatic. You can definitely tell this film was made in the 80s and I’m afraid that’s not a good thing. There’s also some questionable acting from Kevin Costner, and while admittedly I’ve never been a big fan of his, the script and some of the almost cringeworthy scenes with Ness’s wife don’t help matters. And De Niro’s Capone pops up in scenes that feel rather random and forced during the first hour, and seem completely out of place with the rest of the story.
Despite this, The Untouchables is still fairly enjoyable and this is mostly due to Sean Connery’s Malone, the role that he won his only Oscar for. The Irishman, despite sounding very Scottish, injects some much needed heart, humour and spirit into the film and without him, this would have been a very lacklustre film indeed. Even Connery’s horrific Irish accent is a source of amusement, and without the character having been described as Irish, I would’ve just assumed he was Scottish.
Overall, I found The Untouchables to be a decent and entertaining gangster film as long as you can ignore the melodramatic overtones. But I’m not convinced that it’s anything memorable or above average, and if it even deserves a place on this list.
Update: So after having watched this film and headed to my Bucket List to scratch it off, I realised that the film on this list is actually The Intouchables, a French film from 2012 also known as Untouchable. Oops. So I’m afraid The Untouchables isn’t number 7 ticked off my bucket list after all 😆
As with most of the films on this list, The Untouchables is a film that has garnered a great deal of acclaim over the years, and yet if I’ve ever seen it, I’m ashamed to admit that I don’t remember it.
The Untouchables (1987) was directed by Brian De Palma and stars Kevin Costner as Eliot Ness, a treasury agent who recruits a group of fellow cops and agents to take down mob boss Al Capone (Robert De Niro) in Prohibition-era Chicago, with Ness and his agents soon becoming known as the “untouchables” after refusing large bribes. Sean Connery, Andy Garcia and Charles Martin Smith make up the rest of the Untouchables.
An American gangster film is a dime a dozen, there have been countless over the years and the 1920s and 30s are always featured fairly heavily, no doubt due to the large number of criminal gangs and mobsters around in that era. Personally whilst The Untouchables is a good film, I don’t think there’s a lot in this to make it particularly notable or outstanding above any of the others. It’s engaging and interesting, which it should be considering the subject matter – it is based on a true story after all. The entire production looks great too; the sets, costumes and locations are very well done and definitely look the part.
The issue with The Untouchables is it’s too melodramatic, too over the top and clichéd. This isn’t helped by Ennio Morricone’s score, which feels far too heavy handed, cheesy and out of place for the scenes. Even the open title credits is ridiculously over dramatic. You can definitely tell this film was made in the 80s and I’m afraid that’s not a good thing. There’s also some questionable acting from Kevin Costner, and while admittedly I’ve never been a big fan of his, the script and some of the almost cringeworthy scenes with Ness’s wife don’t help matters. And De Niro’s Capone pops up in scenes that feel rather random and forced during the first hour, and seem completely out of place with the rest of the story.
Despite this, The Untouchables is still fairly enjoyable and this is mostly due to Sean Connery’s Malone, the role that he won his only Oscar for. The Irishman, despite sounding very Scottish, injects some much needed heart, humour and spirit into the film and without him, this would have been a very lacklustre film indeed. Even Connery’s horrific Irish accent is a source of amusement, and without the character having been described as Irish, I would’ve just assumed he was Scottish.
Overall, I found The Untouchables to be a decent and entertaining gangster film as long as you can ignore the melodramatic overtones. But I’m not convinced that it’s anything memorable or above average, and if it even deserves a place on this list.
Update: So after having watched this film and headed to my Bucket List to scratch it off, I realised that the film on this list is actually The Intouchables, a French film from 2012 also known as Untouchable. Oops. So I’m afraid The Untouchables isn’t number 7 ticked off my bucket list after all 😆
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Wolf (2019) in Movies
Sep 19, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
A group of Roman legionnaires in Britain are sent on a mission to find a group of missing messengers only to find themselves attacked by something that comes out with the full moon.
So basically it's Roman’s vs werewolves in the woods, a premise with so much potential. However it fails in oh so many ways. I feel a bit bad for this review because I did enjoy the film, admittedly I seemed to be the only one as everyone else left about half way through (ok there were only two other people there but they did leave) but as a film it was quite terrible. First off we have the legionnaires, the group have only been together for a few weeks and don't trust each other, and they consist of:
Shouting guy who has just been sent from Rome who can't seem to decide if he's channelling Nick Frost or Brian Blessed.
Not so shouting guy who is friends with shouting guy and likes to drink
Captain who doesn't seem very effective
Old guy who shouldn't be there, doesn’t get on with the captain
Tall blonde guy who is always on about his wife who about to have a baby
Germanic female scout that no one trusts
Ex slave woman who looks like she should be a witch (she’s not) who is friends with the captain
Black woman who has a brother
And two other guys I can't really remember
So, the film gets points for having a culturally mixed squad which is historically correct but they don’t act as a unit. They are always talking, even when hunting the creatures they never shut up. One of them say “We are Roman we do the hunting.” But they don't seem to know to be quite.
It does strike me that the film is trying to be (Or seem) historically accurate, there are mentions of tactical formations that can be used, everyone uses the names of an appropriate god and there is mention of what certain weapons are made of but all of this just adds to the feeling that the film has been made by a group of Roman reenactor enthusiasts.
I had a friend who said that ‘Cloverfield’ was one of the worst films ever because you never see the monster, we pointed out that you do but acknowledge that 'Cloverfield’ keeps the monster hidden to make it more mysterious and scary. Wolf does this as well, for most of the film all you see of the monsters are pink streaks that seem quite reminiscent of naked people and when you finally see the creatures they look like they could be extras in classic doctor who. The effects in general are a bit rubbish to the point of one the cast walking around with what looks like rice pudding or custard in his beard for ten minutes.
The camera work is sometimes shaky, shots of the sky blind you and there are times when it looks like the actors don't know how to hold a sword.
And the film doesn't end, there's a revelation, the survivors say they will continue the mission then the credits roll. There could be a sequel but if there is it will be because the cast want it and not on reviews (although I think I did enjoy it a bit).
So basically it's Roman’s vs werewolves in the woods, a premise with so much potential. However it fails in oh so many ways. I feel a bit bad for this review because I did enjoy the film, admittedly I seemed to be the only one as everyone else left about half way through (ok there were only two other people there but they did leave) but as a film it was quite terrible. First off we have the legionnaires, the group have only been together for a few weeks and don't trust each other, and they consist of:
Shouting guy who has just been sent from Rome who can't seem to decide if he's channelling Nick Frost or Brian Blessed.
Not so shouting guy who is friends with shouting guy and likes to drink
Captain who doesn't seem very effective
Old guy who shouldn't be there, doesn’t get on with the captain
Tall blonde guy who is always on about his wife who about to have a baby
Germanic female scout that no one trusts
Ex slave woman who looks like she should be a witch (she’s not) who is friends with the captain
Black woman who has a brother
And two other guys I can't really remember
So, the film gets points for having a culturally mixed squad which is historically correct but they don’t act as a unit. They are always talking, even when hunting the creatures they never shut up. One of them say “We are Roman we do the hunting.” But they don't seem to know to be quite.
It does strike me that the film is trying to be (Or seem) historically accurate, there are mentions of tactical formations that can be used, everyone uses the names of an appropriate god and there is mention of what certain weapons are made of but all of this just adds to the feeling that the film has been made by a group of Roman reenactor enthusiasts.
I had a friend who said that ‘Cloverfield’ was one of the worst films ever because you never see the monster, we pointed out that you do but acknowledge that 'Cloverfield’ keeps the monster hidden to make it more mysterious and scary. Wolf does this as well, for most of the film all you see of the monsters are pink streaks that seem quite reminiscent of naked people and when you finally see the creatures they look like they could be extras in classic doctor who. The effects in general are a bit rubbish to the point of one the cast walking around with what looks like rice pudding or custard in his beard for ten minutes.
The camera work is sometimes shaky, shots of the sky blind you and there are times when it looks like the actors don't know how to hold a sword.
And the film doesn't end, there's a revelation, the survivors say they will continue the mission then the credits roll. There could be a sequel but if there is it will be because the cast want it and not on reviews (although I think I did enjoy it a bit).
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Existenz (1999) in Movies
Sep 23, 2019
The 1999 body horror version of Ready Player One
Famed, innovative but reclusive software developer Allegra Geller is ready to unveil her latest virtual augmented reality game, eXistenZ, and has invited her biggest fans and followers to the first best test launch party ever. The game features bio-mechanical controller ports which actually get plugged into the gamer's spine for the fully immersive experience.
Unfortunately, her party was rudely interrupted by a would-be assassin who wants to put an end to Geller before the game is released. Wounded but not executed, her fate is given to be marketing assistant who has never played a game in his life. The two escape and begin a road trip like no other trying to navigate their situation and figure out who they can trust.
The game novice, Ted Pikul, soon gets himself a "port" so he can join Gellar in the game and to also ascertain whether her main controller hub was severely damaged in the attempt on her lie. Once jacked in, he begins to slowly morph into a more submersive version of the same gradually losing control of himself an becoming his in game character.
The other "participants" they meet serve to enhance the game experience either with conflict or assistance, but it is hard to tell which side everyone plays for. The two become passionate for each other, but still are unable to comprehend whether their feelings are real or just part of the game.
They need to figure out how to finish the game so they can return back to reality.
The last of David Cronenberg's "Body Horror" films before he took his career in a different direction in the 2000s with films like "Eastern Promises" and "A History of Violence", eXistenZ is one truly wild and unique ride. If you have seen some of his other film in the genre like "The Fly" or "The Brood" you would be used to the over-the-top gore, brutality and strange way of storytelling he has made his career.
His characters are flawed, but motivated and that is why you are interested in their situation and go along with them. This film has some remarkable visceral, macabre elements that make it extremely unique, which is why you watch a movie like this. The internet was only a few years old in 1999 and games like World of Warcraft were still years away; however, this film underscores the dangers of becoming too close to the online world and the dangers it could cause.
At many points during the film, you wonder whether you are still within the game itself similar to watching a "Nightmare on Elm Street" film and wondering if you are still dreaming.
Jennifer Jason Leigh has never really gotten the respect she deserves. Whether in the recent "The Hateful Eight" or in films like "Dolores Claiborne" or "Single White Female" she has shown longevity and the ability to play complex, sometimes unlikable characters with the charisma and charm. I liked the fact she was a female game designer, leading in her field, in 1999 when there were probably not many like her at the time.
This film will keep you guessing all the way to the end and even leave you to interpret what you have just seen as the credits roll.
Easily recommended for gruesome horror fans.
Unfortunately, her party was rudely interrupted by a would-be assassin who wants to put an end to Geller before the game is released. Wounded but not executed, her fate is given to be marketing assistant who has never played a game in his life. The two escape and begin a road trip like no other trying to navigate their situation and figure out who they can trust.
The game novice, Ted Pikul, soon gets himself a "port" so he can join Gellar in the game and to also ascertain whether her main controller hub was severely damaged in the attempt on her lie. Once jacked in, he begins to slowly morph into a more submersive version of the same gradually losing control of himself an becoming his in game character.
The other "participants" they meet serve to enhance the game experience either with conflict or assistance, but it is hard to tell which side everyone plays for. The two become passionate for each other, but still are unable to comprehend whether their feelings are real or just part of the game.
They need to figure out how to finish the game so they can return back to reality.
The last of David Cronenberg's "Body Horror" films before he took his career in a different direction in the 2000s with films like "Eastern Promises" and "A History of Violence", eXistenZ is one truly wild and unique ride. If you have seen some of his other film in the genre like "The Fly" or "The Brood" you would be used to the over-the-top gore, brutality and strange way of storytelling he has made his career.
His characters are flawed, but motivated and that is why you are interested in their situation and go along with them. This film has some remarkable visceral, macabre elements that make it extremely unique, which is why you watch a movie like this. The internet was only a few years old in 1999 and games like World of Warcraft were still years away; however, this film underscores the dangers of becoming too close to the online world and the dangers it could cause.
At many points during the film, you wonder whether you are still within the game itself similar to watching a "Nightmare on Elm Street" film and wondering if you are still dreaming.
Jennifer Jason Leigh has never really gotten the respect she deserves. Whether in the recent "The Hateful Eight" or in films like "Dolores Claiborne" or "Single White Female" she has shown longevity and the ability to play complex, sometimes unlikable characters with the charisma and charm. I liked the fact she was a female game designer, leading in her field, in 1999 when there were probably not many like her at the time.
This film will keep you guessing all the way to the end and even leave you to interpret what you have just seen as the credits roll.
Easily recommended for gruesome horror fans.
DisneyLife
Entertainment and Lifestyle
8.0
Rate It
App
Experience the Disney magic together with one easy monthly subscription and no contract. Start...
Yandex.Money — payments and transfers online
Finance and Business
App
This app allows you to pay for your mobile carrier services, internet services, and home utilities,...