Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Thor: Love and Thunder (2022) in Movies
Jul 23, 2022
When I came out of Endgame, I was disappointed. But on a second (sixth) viewing, I had come around. There was still disappointment there I'll admit, but it wasn't as big as I'd felt after that midnight screening. Where's this going you ask... As the credits began rolling, I turned to my friend and proclaimed - "Well that was a pile of s**t." Unlike Endgame, I'm not going to change my mind.
Thor is getting his life back on track. The Guardians have helped him get some perspective and it's time to go back to New Asgard and see his people. In his absence, however, there's a new superhero on the block... and she's kind of cramping his style.
One of my difficulties with this one is that it's hard to tell what the film is wanting to do. A redemption arc for Thor, introducing new characters, setting up for the next big finale? That all doesn't seem like a problem initially, but just wait.
I loved Thor: Ragnarok. It's my favourite MCU film. It mixed the underlying humour with the nuttiness of Guardians and it worked. But, something about Love and Thunder makes me feel like they said "Just go for it, anything you want"...
The last we saw of Thor he was flying off into the great unknown with a plucky band of heroes... and it's almost like they completely forgot that had happened, and at the last minute had to write the beginning of the movie again. The whole opening was so badly acted (and dull) that I was genuinely convinced that not all of the actors were back for these cameos. And not just GotG, every recalled character was wasted.
Christian Bale was Christian Bale, I expected nothing less, I imagine him being entirely terrifying on set. This is where the film does a real disservice. With a strong, dark performance and character, Gorr the God Butcher is surrounded by bright tomfoolery. Yes, I said tomfoolery. Gorr deserved a better film.
Possibly my least favourite bit that felt entirely at odds with Gorr's story, is all the gods being so over the top. They do try to explain this away at one point, but this and the fact you don't see Gorr on his godly murder spree led to more and more frustration.
Seemingly that and other cameos were left on the cutting room floor in order to keep the running time under 2 hours. Cutting that spree almost certainly had a negative impact on the film.
If it wasn't clear from everything above... I did not enjoy this film. (I saw it in a double bill, little did I know that Minions: The Rise of Gru would be the best film I saw that day.) I could go on and on about Love and Thunder. Don't get me wrong, there are things about it that I enjoyed, but those things definitely constitute spoilers.
Note: For those of you that stay through the credits, there are two scenes. Both of which give possibilities for the future of the next MCU phase. One I'm excited for, the other... not so much.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2022/07/thor-love-and-thunder-movie-review.html
Thor is getting his life back on track. The Guardians have helped him get some perspective and it's time to go back to New Asgard and see his people. In his absence, however, there's a new superhero on the block... and she's kind of cramping his style.
One of my difficulties with this one is that it's hard to tell what the film is wanting to do. A redemption arc for Thor, introducing new characters, setting up for the next big finale? That all doesn't seem like a problem initially, but just wait.
I loved Thor: Ragnarok. It's my favourite MCU film. It mixed the underlying humour with the nuttiness of Guardians and it worked. But, something about Love and Thunder makes me feel like they said "Just go for it, anything you want"...
The last we saw of Thor he was flying off into the great unknown with a plucky band of heroes... and it's almost like they completely forgot that had happened, and at the last minute had to write the beginning of the movie again. The whole opening was so badly acted (and dull) that I was genuinely convinced that not all of the actors were back for these cameos. And not just GotG, every recalled character was wasted.
Christian Bale was Christian Bale, I expected nothing less, I imagine him being entirely terrifying on set. This is where the film does a real disservice. With a strong, dark performance and character, Gorr the God Butcher is surrounded by bright tomfoolery. Yes, I said tomfoolery. Gorr deserved a better film.
Possibly my least favourite bit that felt entirely at odds with Gorr's story, is all the gods being so over the top. They do try to explain this away at one point, but this and the fact you don't see Gorr on his godly murder spree led to more and more frustration.
Seemingly that and other cameos were left on the cutting room floor in order to keep the running time under 2 hours. Cutting that spree almost certainly had a negative impact on the film.
If it wasn't clear from everything above... I did not enjoy this film. (I saw it in a double bill, little did I know that Minions: The Rise of Gru would be the best film I saw that day.) I could go on and on about Love and Thunder. Don't get me wrong, there are things about it that I enjoyed, but those things definitely constitute spoilers.
Note: For those of you that stay through the credits, there are two scenes. Both of which give possibilities for the future of the next MCU phase. One I'm excited for, the other... not so much.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2022/07/thor-love-and-thunder-movie-review.html
Elvis Fox (24 KP) rated Black Swan (2010) in Movies
May 3, 2019
Natalie Portman (2 more)
Mila Kunis
Barbara Hershey
What Does It Mean To Live One's Truth?
At its core, this film is about the physical and mental unraveling of gifted but mentally unbalanced ballerina Nina. She's poised and modest about her abilities but is easily one of (If not the best) dancers in her prestigious ballet company, which has decided to put on a production of 'Swan Lake' in order to save the company from going under financially. Going in for the first time viewing this masterpiece of modern day cinema, I had no idea the sheer scale of cerebral Horror I was about to witness. From the opening credits of Nina in full costume dancing a portion of 'Swan Lake' against a pitch black backdrop as the hauntingly beautiful score warns of something more sinister going on than meets the eye to the explosive end sequence (Which I won't spoil here), its easily apparent the workings of Nina's psyche is all but broken into a malleable mess of inner desires and heartfelt dreams of success. Mila Kunis is absolutely delicious as laid back and wild child Lily, whose mere presence fascinates and bewilders Nina as her longing for self realization begind to blur the lines of her reality in increasingly terrifying ways. Barbara Hershey gives what I believe is one of the most UNDERRATED and UNAPPRECIATIVED performances of all time as Nina's controlling and often times unbalanced Mother. Easily one of my all time favorite films you will either hate or love, I for one will never get tired of viewing this expertly crafted psychologically charged thriller for years to come and believe you will too!
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Tag (2018) in Movies
Jul 3, 2018
An interesting story, badly told
I feel like whenever I review a comedy film I need to give a warning - I have a very discerning sense of humour and mainstream comedies never really appeal. I can usually tell in advance if I'm going to like something or not, so take my reviews with a pinch of salt?
My biggest issue with this film is that it takes a fun and interesting true story and turns it into a pretty dull and unfunny movie. I can count on one hand the amount of times I laughed during this. The only people to come out of this unscathed are Hannibal Buress (the best and funniest lines) and Jeremy Renner (who looks like he's having the time of his life). Even Jon Hamm who I've loved since his Black Mirror episode couldn't make this any better. And the rest of the cast? Well the female characters are either vastly underused (Rashida Jones), pointless (Annabelle Wallis) or just plain awful (Isla Fisher). And why does Ed Helms play virtually the same character in everything he's in?! And he doesn't even do it well!
The story itself tries to hard to be both funny and heart warming, sombre and sentimental and doesn't succeed in any of these. Everything is just a bit out of place. The best bit was watching the guys from the real life story in the clips before the end credits.
Personally I think this film could've been so much better. I actually think a Jackass style prank film around tag would've been a lot funnier instead of this Hollywood-ised version.
My biggest issue with this film is that it takes a fun and interesting true story and turns it into a pretty dull and unfunny movie. I can count on one hand the amount of times I laughed during this. The only people to come out of this unscathed are Hannibal Buress (the best and funniest lines) and Jeremy Renner (who looks like he's having the time of his life). Even Jon Hamm who I've loved since his Black Mirror episode couldn't make this any better. And the rest of the cast? Well the female characters are either vastly underused (Rashida Jones), pointless (Annabelle Wallis) or just plain awful (Isla Fisher). And why does Ed Helms play virtually the same character in everything he's in?! And he doesn't even do it well!
The story itself tries to hard to be both funny and heart warming, sombre and sentimental and doesn't succeed in any of these. Everything is just a bit out of place. The best bit was watching the guys from the real life story in the clips before the end credits.
Personally I think this film could've been so much better. I actually think a Jackass style prank film around tag would've been a lot funnier instead of this Hollywood-ised version.
Fred (860 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Jul 26, 2018
Flash, Wonder Woman, Batman, Superman, Aquaman, Cyborg (3 more)
Steppenwolf is great!
Action was great
Story was good
Horrendous special effects. Cyborg looks terrible. (1 more)
Dialogue was iffy
Was surprised by this one. It's good!
I have to admit. Most time I avoid reviews of movies, because quite frankly, they may affect my feelings towards a film. However, I heard only bad things about Justice League & was totally going to skip it, considering what I did hear about it & my disappointment with the recent string of superhero films. So, when a friend of mine said it was actually good, I gave it a shot. I'm happy I did.
The film is very good. Not great, but when put up against Wonder Woman, Black Panther & Superman v Batman, it shines.
The chemistry between the actors is great. They really come across as a team, unlike the Avengers. The new guys are great! Flash is funny, as he should be. Aquaman is a badass, because if he wasn't, he'd be boring "Superfriends" Aquaman. And Cyborg, well...Cyborg let's just say, is a great character & acted well, but special effects that bring his body to life aren't so...special. He looks out of place, like a cartoon put against a real background. When he moves his head, it floats around on his neck. It's not just one time, but every time. And the end battle takes place in a CGI town that looks worse than the first season of Beast Wars:Transformers.
But I can overlook that, because besides the flaws, we got a fun film to watch. And stay after the credits. You won't be disappointed.
The film is very good. Not great, but when put up against Wonder Woman, Black Panther & Superman v Batman, it shines.
The chemistry between the actors is great. They really come across as a team, unlike the Avengers. The new guys are great! Flash is funny, as he should be. Aquaman is a badass, because if he wasn't, he'd be boring "Superfriends" Aquaman. And Cyborg, well...Cyborg let's just say, is a great character & acted well, but special effects that bring his body to life aren't so...special. He looks out of place, like a cartoon put against a real background. When he moves his head, it floats around on his neck. It's not just one time, but every time. And the end battle takes place in a CGI town that looks worse than the first season of Beast Wars:Transformers.
But I can overlook that, because besides the flaws, we got a fun film to watch. And stay after the credits. You won't be disappointed.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Outsider in TV
Apr 17, 2020
A great adaptation
I've had this series recorded on my box for quite a while, lockdown has finally allowed me time to watch it and it really is a brilliant adaptation of the King book.
It isnt an entirely accurate adaptation of the book, but it is a very good attempt. There are some changes but there are a lot of things that match the book too, and the majority of the changes aren't necessarily for the worst either. The story is a great one, not a surprise considering it's based on a King novel. It moves seamlessly from a detective crime thriller to a supernatural horror and the cinematography and soundtrack support this so well along with a decent amount of gore. It also has a fantastic cast. Ben Mendelsohn is perfect as Ralph and Cynthia Erivo is too as Holly, backed by a wonderful supporting cast.
There are some changes that I didn't appreciate as much though, some fairly small and minor nods towards the books - especially the references to Holly from the Bill Hodges trilogy series. Also I didn't appreciate the mid credits scene at the end of the final episode which appears to hint towards another series and a different ending. This series works so well as a standalone and I really dont appreciate them potentially looking at turning this into yet more series! It's also frustrating that the Bill Hodges trilogy has been turned into the Mr Mercedes series for another network, as really these 2 series should be linked with the same cast and theme.
Overall though this is a brilliant adaptation and definitely worth a watch.
It isnt an entirely accurate adaptation of the book, but it is a very good attempt. There are some changes but there are a lot of things that match the book too, and the majority of the changes aren't necessarily for the worst either. The story is a great one, not a surprise considering it's based on a King novel. It moves seamlessly from a detective crime thriller to a supernatural horror and the cinematography and soundtrack support this so well along with a decent amount of gore. It also has a fantastic cast. Ben Mendelsohn is perfect as Ralph and Cynthia Erivo is too as Holly, backed by a wonderful supporting cast.
There are some changes that I didn't appreciate as much though, some fairly small and minor nods towards the books - especially the references to Holly from the Bill Hodges trilogy series. Also I didn't appreciate the mid credits scene at the end of the final episode which appears to hint towards another series and a different ending. This series works so well as a standalone and I really dont appreciate them potentially looking at turning this into yet more series! It's also frustrating that the Bill Hodges trilogy has been turned into the Mr Mercedes series for another network, as really these 2 series should be linked with the same cast and theme.
Overall though this is a brilliant adaptation and definitely worth a watch.
Settle for More
Book
Whether it's asking tough questions during a presidential debate or pressing for answers to today's...
Sudoku Collection
Games and Education
App
"Logic Puzzle Collection" offers over 50 different puzzle types, you can share puzzles with your...
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated See No Evil (2006) in Movies
Feb 21, 2021
See No Evil is a whole big mixed bag of average. The first 20-25 minutes are abhorrently terrible. It manages to tick every mid-00s horror cliché in its opening scene. It introduces all of its eye rollingly awful characters with edgy freeze frames and name cards.
Beyond the opening third, the whole film is riddled with seizure inducing quick zoom edits, and music video quality effects, and the whole runtime is draped in a durgy shit-shaded sepia tone. The characters never become remotely likable and suffer through the cringey dialogue without any sort of reprieve, and the worst one of the bunch even survives to the end credits, which is deeply upsetting.
Despite all of this however, I don't completely hate it. The gore for one is pretty solid, and looks mostly practical which is a huge bonus considering the era (and if you completely ignore the gratuitous spaffing of atrocious CGI during the final sequence). Glenn Jacobs, better known as WWE's Kane, cuts an imposing figure as the brutal as fuck villain, and I enjoyed the plots obvious homage to Friday the 13th. It's also mercifully clocks in just shy of 90 minutes, which makes it ideal for a quick dose of bloody horror if that's what you're after.
There are a huge amount of piss poor elements to See No Evil but it's certainly not the worst slasher out there. It's very typical of it's time, so it delivers exactly what you would expect and is definitely the best WWE produced film I've seen - the other being Leprechaun Origins, so not exactly a huge feat, but hey, let's take the wins where we can...
Beyond the opening third, the whole film is riddled with seizure inducing quick zoom edits, and music video quality effects, and the whole runtime is draped in a durgy shit-shaded sepia tone. The characters never become remotely likable and suffer through the cringey dialogue without any sort of reprieve, and the worst one of the bunch even survives to the end credits, which is deeply upsetting.
Despite all of this however, I don't completely hate it. The gore for one is pretty solid, and looks mostly practical which is a huge bonus considering the era (and if you completely ignore the gratuitous spaffing of atrocious CGI during the final sequence). Glenn Jacobs, better known as WWE's Kane, cuts an imposing figure as the brutal as fuck villain, and I enjoyed the plots obvious homage to Friday the 13th. It's also mercifully clocks in just shy of 90 minutes, which makes it ideal for a quick dose of bloody horror if that's what you're after.
There are a huge amount of piss poor elements to See No Evil but it's certainly not the worst slasher out there. It's very typical of it's time, so it delivers exactly what you would expect and is definitely the best WWE produced film I've seen - the other being Leprechaun Origins, so not exactly a huge feat, but hey, let's take the wins where we can...
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Zombeavers (2015) in Movies
Sep 21, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Zombeavers is more an attempted at an 80's slasher film than a Zombie movie, you have your house by the lake, your horny teens and your monsters. The narrative is almost 'by the book' and once you work out what the threat is you could pretty much wright the script yourself. And it doesn't take much to work out the threat, between the title and opening credits you know what's going on before the protagonists do.
The effects are ok, the actual beavers are obviously fake animatronics but this is probably deliberate to help with the cheesy feel of the film, there is blood but not too much guts although there is a scene with a beaver ripped in half which is quite good (I'm not going to mention the scene meant to make any male's eyes water).
As with most 80's slashers there's sex, boobs and pruds. There are a few secondary characters, most of whom have no character and are really only there to flesh out the number victims and, to be honest the main characters don't really have much, well character.
Some of the water scenes seem to be going for a 'Friday the Thirteenth' feel but, where most films would have the characters messing about and joking about the monster and thus adding to their development, Zombeavers just gets down to the action and, as it's run time is is only around 1 hour 17 there is plenty of time for expansion.
If you like slashers then you may like Zombeavers, most of the elements are there but it's predictable, slightly funny and has mostly been done before, just not with Beavers.
The effects are ok, the actual beavers are obviously fake animatronics but this is probably deliberate to help with the cheesy feel of the film, there is blood but not too much guts although there is a scene with a beaver ripped in half which is quite good (I'm not going to mention the scene meant to make any male's eyes water).
As with most 80's slashers there's sex, boobs and pruds. There are a few secondary characters, most of whom have no character and are really only there to flesh out the number victims and, to be honest the main characters don't really have much, well character.
Some of the water scenes seem to be going for a 'Friday the Thirteenth' feel but, where most films would have the characters messing about and joking about the monster and thus adding to their development, Zombeavers just gets down to the action and, as it's run time is is only around 1 hour 17 there is plenty of time for expansion.
If you like slashers then you may like Zombeavers, most of the elements are there but it's predictable, slightly funny and has mostly been done before, just not with Beavers.
Fred (860 KP) rated Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) in Movies
Sep 18, 2019
Better than Spider-Verse
Now, this is a great Spider-Man movie!
So, ever since I was a kid, in the 70s, I've always wanted to see a Spider-Man movie featuring Mysterio. I mean, what better villain than the one who creates movie special-effects? However, I did know that the effects available weren't good enough to pull it off. I also knew they would eventually get there. It took a long time, but it was well worth the wait. This is what I wanted since I'm a kid. They pulled it off.
Tom Holland brings the usual to the role, which is perfect. I do love Jon Favreau's Happy, and he brings a lot of the humor to the film. In a way though, I wish Spider-Man was Spider-Man & not Iron-Spider-Man. I wish he was on his own, you know what I mean? But it's okay. It doesn't get in the way of the entertainment. And yes, this film is entertaining. There is no slow-down during this film. It's constantly moving. Not like Endgame, which only gets going at the end. Yes, this film is better than Endgame. It's better than Home Coming. And it's better than Spider-Verse.
Jake Gyllenhaal is great as Mysterio. I like the other co-stars too. The teachers are funny as hell. The Hawaiian kid is funny. MJ is okay. And Flash Thompson, well....he sucks. But anyway, the others are good.
And to finish off my review, I have to say, the secret cameo during the mid-credits made me jump with joy. Shocking to say the least. This is a definite must see!
So, ever since I was a kid, in the 70s, I've always wanted to see a Spider-Man movie featuring Mysterio. I mean, what better villain than the one who creates movie special-effects? However, I did know that the effects available weren't good enough to pull it off. I also knew they would eventually get there. It took a long time, but it was well worth the wait. This is what I wanted since I'm a kid. They pulled it off.
Tom Holland brings the usual to the role, which is perfect. I do love Jon Favreau's Happy, and he brings a lot of the humor to the film. In a way though, I wish Spider-Man was Spider-Man & not Iron-Spider-Man. I wish he was on his own, you know what I mean? But it's okay. It doesn't get in the way of the entertainment. And yes, this film is entertaining. There is no slow-down during this film. It's constantly moving. Not like Endgame, which only gets going at the end. Yes, this film is better than Endgame. It's better than Home Coming. And it's better than Spider-Verse.
Jake Gyllenhaal is great as Mysterio. I like the other co-stars too. The teachers are funny as hell. The Hawaiian kid is funny. MJ is okay. And Flash Thompson, well....he sucks. But anyway, the others are good.
And to finish off my review, I have to say, the secret cameo during the mid-credits made me jump with joy. Shocking to say the least. This is a definite must see!