Search
Search results
Lee Richmond (19 KP) rated Halloween (2018) in Movies
Mar 5, 2019
Face your fate.
It's 1999 and my twenty years younger self is spending the entire year getting hyped for The Phantom Menace. That movie dominated my year. I had queued at ToysRUs when they released the new figures just to get my hands on a Darth Maul and a Podracer. I had brought the CD of John Williams Soundtrack. I had seen every trailer countless times and as soon as they were put on sale I brought two tickets so that I could watch the movie twice on the same day. I sat in the theatre as the Lucasfilm logo appeared and thought 'this is it'. Then the end credits rolled and I left the movie and headed to get something to eat before the next showing, all the while trying to convince myself that I had loved what I had just watched. Truth is I couldn't do it. I hadn't loved it at all. It left me deflated and all I could think was that I had to sit and watch it all again as all that excitement turned to shit with every clunky piece of dialogue and every scene featuring Jar Jar fucking Binks. It hurt and I promised I would never get so hyped for a movie again.
Fast forward to 2018. I had been excited for the prospect of Halloween since it was announced. Jamie Lee was involved and it was a direct sequel. Both of these things had me invested. Then the trailer dropped and that old familiar feeling of hype that I had promised to forgo started to creep over me once more. Now I should add that John Carpenters original 1978 movie is one of my all time favourites. I love that movie. To me it is an example of perfect horror story telling. It's simple yet incredibly effective at doing what it says on the tin and I rewatch it every year on Haloween as a tradition.
Time came for opening night and I had purchased my ticket in advance (but only one this time just in case) and as we sat waiting for the movie to start even my wife commented that I appeared nervous. I was nervous. I had every right to be nervous because the mishandling of something that means so much to me would mean major disappointment. I am a movie geek. Movies mean so much to me, especially Halloween and I take disappointment pretty badly. So the movie played out. That old familiar score played over the top of bright orange titles against a black background as a pumpkin seemed to unrot and I loved it. I loved the steady build to Michaels escape. I loved how being locked up for so long just seemed to make him more relentless. Once he was out and let loose on Haddonfield I was hooked. The killing spree that followed as Michael went from house to house on a rampage fueled by 40 years of incarceration had me mentally punching the air with happiness. Jamie Lee Curtis though was something else all together. Her portrayal of Laurie suffering from four decades of pent up PTSD was nothing short of brilliant. I could really feel for this character that I have adored for so many years. Laurie will always be my number 1 final girl. She survived the original Halloween because she was smart, and wasn't distracted like her sex mad, airhead friends. Seeing how the events of the first film had effected her life so dramatically was like watching an old friend going through a really hard time. The closing twenty minutes literally had me on the edge of my seat as Laurie searches one dark room after another, the hunted becoming the hunter. You know Michael is there lurking somewhere, but where? The final image as a trapped Michael stares up at his escaping prey, so fixed on Laurie that he fails to even notice that he is being engulfed in flames really stuck with me after the credits rolled.
Now I'm not going as far as to say this film was perfect. Some of the humour fell a little flat and felt out of place and I hated the new Dr Loomis character and his plot twist. It felt crowbarred in and completely unnecessary. Had the rest of the film not been as tight it would have taken me out of the movie completely, but thankfully that was not the case. A lot of love and passion went into making this movie. Clearly the film makers are fans of the original and that really comes across on screen. It really honours Carpenters movie and evidently comes across as a love letter more than a cash in. I know this movie divided people. You either loved it or hated it and I am definitely in the camp of the former. Do I want another sequel? If the quality of this one is maintained then hell yeah. Halloween 2018 has taught me that allowing myself to get a little hyped now and again can sometimes be rewarding. Not everything has to be The Phantom Menace.
Fast forward to 2018. I had been excited for the prospect of Halloween since it was announced. Jamie Lee was involved and it was a direct sequel. Both of these things had me invested. Then the trailer dropped and that old familiar feeling of hype that I had promised to forgo started to creep over me once more. Now I should add that John Carpenters original 1978 movie is one of my all time favourites. I love that movie. To me it is an example of perfect horror story telling. It's simple yet incredibly effective at doing what it says on the tin and I rewatch it every year on Haloween as a tradition.
Time came for opening night and I had purchased my ticket in advance (but only one this time just in case) and as we sat waiting for the movie to start even my wife commented that I appeared nervous. I was nervous. I had every right to be nervous because the mishandling of something that means so much to me would mean major disappointment. I am a movie geek. Movies mean so much to me, especially Halloween and I take disappointment pretty badly. So the movie played out. That old familiar score played over the top of bright orange titles against a black background as a pumpkin seemed to unrot and I loved it. I loved the steady build to Michaels escape. I loved how being locked up for so long just seemed to make him more relentless. Once he was out and let loose on Haddonfield I was hooked. The killing spree that followed as Michael went from house to house on a rampage fueled by 40 years of incarceration had me mentally punching the air with happiness. Jamie Lee Curtis though was something else all together. Her portrayal of Laurie suffering from four decades of pent up PTSD was nothing short of brilliant. I could really feel for this character that I have adored for so many years. Laurie will always be my number 1 final girl. She survived the original Halloween because she was smart, and wasn't distracted like her sex mad, airhead friends. Seeing how the events of the first film had effected her life so dramatically was like watching an old friend going through a really hard time. The closing twenty minutes literally had me on the edge of my seat as Laurie searches one dark room after another, the hunted becoming the hunter. You know Michael is there lurking somewhere, but where? The final image as a trapped Michael stares up at his escaping prey, so fixed on Laurie that he fails to even notice that he is being engulfed in flames really stuck with me after the credits rolled.
Now I'm not going as far as to say this film was perfect. Some of the humour fell a little flat and felt out of place and I hated the new Dr Loomis character and his plot twist. It felt crowbarred in and completely unnecessary. Had the rest of the film not been as tight it would have taken me out of the movie completely, but thankfully that was not the case. A lot of love and passion went into making this movie. Clearly the film makers are fans of the original and that really comes across on screen. It really honours Carpenters movie and evidently comes across as a love letter more than a cash in. I know this movie divided people. You either loved it or hated it and I am definitely in the camp of the former. Do I want another sequel? If the quality of this one is maintained then hell yeah. Halloween 2018 has taught me that allowing myself to get a little hyped now and again can sometimes be rewarding. Not everything has to be The Phantom Menace.
Mark Jaye (65 KP) rated Avengers: Infinity War (2018) in Movies
May 12, 2019
To Infinity....and Beyond!
Contains spoilers, click to show
Perhaps it's the eternal child in me, the three year old boy who developed a passion for superheroes after first seeing the 1966 Batman movie in the cinema (re-run of course, this was the 70's!), but this is without doubt the best film I have ever seen! Running at around 2 hours and 20 minutes in length (that's prior to the end credits mind you!) this movie brings together plot strands and characters from the Marvel Cinematic Universe's 10 year tapestry in what I will only describe as an epic thrill-ride.
I'm sure if you're reading this you know the plot. Thanos - the granite jawed world killer from the planet Titan, is rounding up the 6 all powerful infinity stones with which he plans to restore the balance of the universe through essentially wiping out 50% of everything. All that stands in his way are The Avengers, the Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange, Spiderman, Black Panther, and probably a few I've forgotten to mention! And that's pretty much the story.
We pick things up directly from the mid credits scene of Thor: Ragnarok where the refugee Asgardians, Bruce Banner, and Loki encountered a spaceship of epic proportions. We all knew it at the time... Thanos! Within the first five minutes or so we already have our first casualties at the hands of the purple behemoth which sets the tone for what follows. In possession of two of the stones Thanos dispatches his 'children' - the Black Order, to Earth to retrieve the Mind and Time stones whilst he tracks down the remaining ones. At quite a quick pace our heroes are introduced into the chaos and by employing this structure the writers ably break down the ensemble into smaller manageable groups. Stark, Peter Parker, and Doctor Strange are hurled into the vastness of Space where they encounter Peter Quill and some of his merry misfits, Thor and some of the other Guardians go off in search off forging a weapon to defeat Thanos, and Rogers, Romanoff, Wilson, Rhodes and Maximoff take Vision to Wakanda in order to try and separate the Mind Stone from him with the aid of T'Challa, Shuri and Okaye. Gamora finds herself the prisoner of her adoptive father - a storyline that gives both Brolin and Saldana a chance to really show their worth. Those are effectively the four story strands at play and each is a joy in its own right.
Each character stays true to form with Hemsworth taking the character along he rediscovered in 'Ragnarok' - albeit with some added darkness from the movie's opening moments. Chris Pratt is sheer joy as Quill/Starlord and his interplay with Stark and Hemsworth is a joy to behold. Tom Holland gets one of the best lines when responding to a question from Quill regarding a certain Kevin Bacon movie! Top marks also go to the man who launched this universe a decade ago as Iron Man - yes, Robert Downey Jr knocks it out of the park as a Tony Stark far removed from that we encountered back in the first movie of the MCU. His performance at the climax is simply first rate.
With such a large cast there are characters who don't get as much to do as others although everyone get's a 'moment or two' amongst proceedings. Those that particularly stand out, however, are Robert Downey Jr's Iron Man (reiterating my earlier comments), Chris Hemsworth as Thor (likewise), Zoe Saldana as Gamora (ditto), Chris Pratt as Starlord/Peter Quill (and again), Paul Bettany as Vision and Elisabeth Olsen as Wanda/Scarlet Witch. Surprisingly, Chris Evans doesn't seem to get much to do other than play an active role in a number of excellent battle sequences, although his introduction into the movie along with Black Widow and Falcon as they turn up in Scotland to save the day for Vision and Wanda Maximoff from the Black Order was a personal fist thumping the air moment!
There's simply so much to talk about and I'll stop myself there. If, like myself, you just can't avoid spoilers then chances are you know what happens in this movie by now...including that ending!!
Thanos is the perfect villain, fantastically realised, and given real motivation for his actions - the guy thinks he's showing mercy to the universe! I wouldn't agree that this is his movie as the film-makers have repeatedly stated however he is the central cog that keeps things turning.~Josh Brolin does an exceptional job in bringing Thanos to life. Given the feedback and reaction to Steppenwolf in the DCEU there could have been obvious concerns around another CGI villain. Fear not, the technology is exceptional and Brolin's features are evident 100% making Thanos a living creation.
Alan Silvestri's score is the perfect fit and really compliments the action unfolding on the screen. During the aforementioned fist in the air moment as Steve Rogers, Black Widow, and Falcon make their first appearance to take on the Black Order, Silvestri's 'Avengers' theme kicks in creating pure movie magic.
Simply put, this movie is pure perfection.
I'm sure if you're reading this you know the plot. Thanos - the granite jawed world killer from the planet Titan, is rounding up the 6 all powerful infinity stones with which he plans to restore the balance of the universe through essentially wiping out 50% of everything. All that stands in his way are The Avengers, the Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange, Spiderman, Black Panther, and probably a few I've forgotten to mention! And that's pretty much the story.
We pick things up directly from the mid credits scene of Thor: Ragnarok where the refugee Asgardians, Bruce Banner, and Loki encountered a spaceship of epic proportions. We all knew it at the time... Thanos! Within the first five minutes or so we already have our first casualties at the hands of the purple behemoth which sets the tone for what follows. In possession of two of the stones Thanos dispatches his 'children' - the Black Order, to Earth to retrieve the Mind and Time stones whilst he tracks down the remaining ones. At quite a quick pace our heroes are introduced into the chaos and by employing this structure the writers ably break down the ensemble into smaller manageable groups. Stark, Peter Parker, and Doctor Strange are hurled into the vastness of Space where they encounter Peter Quill and some of his merry misfits, Thor and some of the other Guardians go off in search off forging a weapon to defeat Thanos, and Rogers, Romanoff, Wilson, Rhodes and Maximoff take Vision to Wakanda in order to try and separate the Mind Stone from him with the aid of T'Challa, Shuri and Okaye. Gamora finds herself the prisoner of her adoptive father - a storyline that gives both Brolin and Saldana a chance to really show their worth. Those are effectively the four story strands at play and each is a joy in its own right.
Each character stays true to form with Hemsworth taking the character along he rediscovered in 'Ragnarok' - albeit with some added darkness from the movie's opening moments. Chris Pratt is sheer joy as Quill/Starlord and his interplay with Stark and Hemsworth is a joy to behold. Tom Holland gets one of the best lines when responding to a question from Quill regarding a certain Kevin Bacon movie! Top marks also go to the man who launched this universe a decade ago as Iron Man - yes, Robert Downey Jr knocks it out of the park as a Tony Stark far removed from that we encountered back in the first movie of the MCU. His performance at the climax is simply first rate.
With such a large cast there are characters who don't get as much to do as others although everyone get's a 'moment or two' amongst proceedings. Those that particularly stand out, however, are Robert Downey Jr's Iron Man (reiterating my earlier comments), Chris Hemsworth as Thor (likewise), Zoe Saldana as Gamora (ditto), Chris Pratt as Starlord/Peter Quill (and again), Paul Bettany as Vision and Elisabeth Olsen as Wanda/Scarlet Witch. Surprisingly, Chris Evans doesn't seem to get much to do other than play an active role in a number of excellent battle sequences, although his introduction into the movie along with Black Widow and Falcon as they turn up in Scotland to save the day for Vision and Wanda Maximoff from the Black Order was a personal fist thumping the air moment!
There's simply so much to talk about and I'll stop myself there. If, like myself, you just can't avoid spoilers then chances are you know what happens in this movie by now...including that ending!!
Thanos is the perfect villain, fantastically realised, and given real motivation for his actions - the guy thinks he's showing mercy to the universe! I wouldn't agree that this is his movie as the film-makers have repeatedly stated however he is the central cog that keeps things turning.~Josh Brolin does an exceptional job in bringing Thanos to life. Given the feedback and reaction to Steppenwolf in the DCEU there could have been obvious concerns around another CGI villain. Fear not, the technology is exceptional and Brolin's features are evident 100% making Thanos a living creation.
Alan Silvestri's score is the perfect fit and really compliments the action unfolding on the screen. During the aforementioned fist in the air moment as Steve Rogers, Black Widow, and Falcon make their first appearance to take on the Black Order, Silvestri's 'Avengers' theme kicks in creating pure movie magic.
Simply put, this movie is pure perfection.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (2019) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Before you read this review of Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw, I just want you to know that I can’t stand this franchise. I gave up keeping up with them after Furious 7 and felt like the Fast & Furious franchise peaked/was tolerable around Fast Five and never really went anywhere worthwhile before or since. I have not seen all the films and really only seemed to watch every other entry, but whether you’re in a heist or a drag race that lethal dose of masculinity being projectile vomited all over you by an entire cast (women included) for two hours straight is dull and tiresome. In fact, just call this franchise “Dull & Tiresome” from here on out and I doubt anyone would notice. It’s even got “tire” in there for car…stuff.
Ignoring the fact that screenwriters Chris Morgan (writer of every Fast and Furious entry since Tokyo Drift) and Drew Pearce (writer and director of the flop known as Hotel Artemis) were involved, I actually like David Leitch’s work (co-director of John Wick, director of Deadpool 2 and Atomic Blonde) even if he is probably going to screw up that Enter the Dragon remake. The trailers also made Hobbs & Shaw look like the stupid kind of action film I might enjoy; a bunch of fight scenes and chase sequences that give the middle finger to physics. But when a big moment in the film is a group of the good guys willingly bringing a bunch of sharp sticks to a battle where the villains are loaded to the teeth with highly advanced firearms, then you know you’ve jumped headfirst into the deep end of ridiculous without a special needs helmet.
The film is quick to point out that even though Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) is in Los Angeles and Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham) is in London, they’re essentially similar characters. Hobbs is a big dude who likes to Hulk smash everything while Shaw likes to think he has more class and finesse to his ass beatings and exaggerated torture devices. Despite their different cultures and supposedly unique way of approaching their work, they do nothing but talk trash, jack things up, simultaneously kick unsuspecting guys in the balls, and track stuff that needs tracking because that’s what trackers do. They reluctantly join forces and are in constant competition with one another to find some CT17 virus, which is currently inside Shaw’s MI6 operative sister Hattie Shaw (Vanessa Kirby) and is being hunted by formerly dead, cyber genetically altered, and current superhuman criminal mastermind Brixton Lore (Idris Elba). Don’t get too attached to the whole virus thing since even the film can’t keep up with what the hell it’s supposed to be.
The highlight of Hobbs & Shaw is the amount of cameos it’s able to squeeze into its excruciating two-hour-and-fifteen-minute runtime. The film utilizes about a third of the cast of a certain sequel to a certain film starring a certain Regenerating Degenerate and that cast is responsible for the humor that works best in whatever this spinoff is supposed to accomplish. Idris Elba is unbelievably cool as Brixton Lore. He’s this cocky and unstoppable bad ass who has a history with Shaw and his car chase on his self-driving motorcycle where he slides under a bus in slow motion is too sick for words. Vanessa Kirby has this on-screen presence that outshines the consistent bickering between Hobbs and Shaw. She’s the one capable female character in the film (Helen Mirren sitting behind glass doesn’t count) who seems to be the only one thinking logically, but it took her doing the dumbest thing imaginable at the beginning of the film to get that way.
This action film smorgasbord rides on the chemistry between Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham, but that gets old as soon as they start sort-of working together. Their incessant ribbing of each other, desire to always outdo one another, and nonstop unfiltered machismo being this palpable elephant in the room leads to nothing but verbal dick size comparisons and leaves you thinking that maybe they’ll make out or grope each other by the end of the film. Spoiler alert: maybe they’re saving that for the sequel.
There isn’t enough of a differentiation between action sequences in Hobbs & Shaw to make it feel worthwhile. There’s chemistry between the cast that is undeniable and some of its outrageousness is entertaining, but it all begins to feel similar and falls apart far sooner than it should. For those who care, there is a mid-credits and after-credits scene but neither is surprising. The cheesy motivational speeches, forced heartfelt stories, and, “all technology in the world doesn’t beat heart,” mumbo jumbo doesn’t help matters. The supposed story for this film is basically a dunce cap disguised as a pocket protector. There are intelligent elements used in ludicrous ways and maybe that’s what could describe the Fast & Furious franchise as a whole. You can bury a diamond in a dog turd and say it’s extravagant and that it’s valuable, but it’s still a dog turd that smells awful and lingers long after it’s been flushed away.
Ignoring the fact that screenwriters Chris Morgan (writer of every Fast and Furious entry since Tokyo Drift) and Drew Pearce (writer and director of the flop known as Hotel Artemis) were involved, I actually like David Leitch’s work (co-director of John Wick, director of Deadpool 2 and Atomic Blonde) even if he is probably going to screw up that Enter the Dragon remake. The trailers also made Hobbs & Shaw look like the stupid kind of action film I might enjoy; a bunch of fight scenes and chase sequences that give the middle finger to physics. But when a big moment in the film is a group of the good guys willingly bringing a bunch of sharp sticks to a battle where the villains are loaded to the teeth with highly advanced firearms, then you know you’ve jumped headfirst into the deep end of ridiculous without a special needs helmet.
The film is quick to point out that even though Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) is in Los Angeles and Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham) is in London, they’re essentially similar characters. Hobbs is a big dude who likes to Hulk smash everything while Shaw likes to think he has more class and finesse to his ass beatings and exaggerated torture devices. Despite their different cultures and supposedly unique way of approaching their work, they do nothing but talk trash, jack things up, simultaneously kick unsuspecting guys in the balls, and track stuff that needs tracking because that’s what trackers do. They reluctantly join forces and are in constant competition with one another to find some CT17 virus, which is currently inside Shaw’s MI6 operative sister Hattie Shaw (Vanessa Kirby) and is being hunted by formerly dead, cyber genetically altered, and current superhuman criminal mastermind Brixton Lore (Idris Elba). Don’t get too attached to the whole virus thing since even the film can’t keep up with what the hell it’s supposed to be.
The highlight of Hobbs & Shaw is the amount of cameos it’s able to squeeze into its excruciating two-hour-and-fifteen-minute runtime. The film utilizes about a third of the cast of a certain sequel to a certain film starring a certain Regenerating Degenerate and that cast is responsible for the humor that works best in whatever this spinoff is supposed to accomplish. Idris Elba is unbelievably cool as Brixton Lore. He’s this cocky and unstoppable bad ass who has a history with Shaw and his car chase on his self-driving motorcycle where he slides under a bus in slow motion is too sick for words. Vanessa Kirby has this on-screen presence that outshines the consistent bickering between Hobbs and Shaw. She’s the one capable female character in the film (Helen Mirren sitting behind glass doesn’t count) who seems to be the only one thinking logically, but it took her doing the dumbest thing imaginable at the beginning of the film to get that way.
This action film smorgasbord rides on the chemistry between Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham, but that gets old as soon as they start sort-of working together. Their incessant ribbing of each other, desire to always outdo one another, and nonstop unfiltered machismo being this palpable elephant in the room leads to nothing but verbal dick size comparisons and leaves you thinking that maybe they’ll make out or grope each other by the end of the film. Spoiler alert: maybe they’re saving that for the sequel.
There isn’t enough of a differentiation between action sequences in Hobbs & Shaw to make it feel worthwhile. There’s chemistry between the cast that is undeniable and some of its outrageousness is entertaining, but it all begins to feel similar and falls apart far sooner than it should. For those who care, there is a mid-credits and after-credits scene but neither is surprising. The cheesy motivational speeches, forced heartfelt stories, and, “all technology in the world doesn’t beat heart,” mumbo jumbo doesn’t help matters. The supposed story for this film is basically a dunce cap disguised as a pocket protector. There are intelligent elements used in ludicrous ways and maybe that’s what could describe the Fast & Furious franchise as a whole. You can bury a diamond in a dog turd and say it’s extravagant and that it’s valuable, but it’s still a dog turd that smells awful and lingers long after it’s been flushed away.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Allied (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
There's a great film in here somewhere
Director Robert Zemeckis has some impressive film credits to his name. From cult classics like Back to the Future to last year’s nausea inducing The Walk, there hasn’t been a genre his skills haven’t graced over the last four decades.
His most recent effort, Allied, sees the veteran director tackle the war genre with a film that certainly has its moments, but just how good is this wartime romantic drama?
Max Vatan (Brad Pitt) and Marianne Beauséjour (Marion Cotillard) are World War II operatives who never reveal their true identities. After falling in love during a risky mission, they hope to leave all that double-dealing behind them and start new lives. Instead, suspicion and danger envelop their marriage as both husband and wife become pitted against each other in an escalating, potentially lethal test that has global consequences.
Allied is an assured piece of film-making that tackles the claustrophobia of war incredibly well, but considering the talent at both ends of the camera, it lacks depth, harmony and above all; a plot that remains coherent throughout.
Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard are their usual dependable selves but they lack chemistry until the closing act and as a result, their relationship lacks believability, hampering what is in effect, a love story.
Elsewhere, the cinematography is too often blighted by poorly lit scenes that restrict the talents of Allied’s director. Robert Zemeckis is at his best embarking upon projects that leap off the screen with their vibrancy. Take Back to the Future and Forrest Gump as prime examples of this.
Nevertheless, the film’s final act almost makes up for these shortcomings and turns a plodding romantic drama into a tense, well-acted and above all interesting movie that has a great script; it’s just a shame the first hour lacks any punch.
When it comes to special effects, well, they’re used sparingly, with the upside of this being that they liven up the film nicely. The scenes of London during the blitz are harrowingly beautiful, with one sequence in particular being a standout throughout the entire running time.
Overall, Allied is a decent stab at constructing a meaningful wartime romantic drama, though looking to history should have perhaps sent alarm bells ringing; Pearl Harbour anyone. The story is intriguing most definitely, and it has some nice special effects, but the script it’s crafted around lacks depth until the final hour. It’s probably fair to say that this may slip under the radar when we look back at Robert Zemeckis’s illustrious career.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/11/26/theres-a-great-film-in-here-somewhere-allied-review/
His most recent effort, Allied, sees the veteran director tackle the war genre with a film that certainly has its moments, but just how good is this wartime romantic drama?
Max Vatan (Brad Pitt) and Marianne Beauséjour (Marion Cotillard) are World War II operatives who never reveal their true identities. After falling in love during a risky mission, they hope to leave all that double-dealing behind them and start new lives. Instead, suspicion and danger envelop their marriage as both husband and wife become pitted against each other in an escalating, potentially lethal test that has global consequences.
Allied is an assured piece of film-making that tackles the claustrophobia of war incredibly well, but considering the talent at both ends of the camera, it lacks depth, harmony and above all; a plot that remains coherent throughout.
Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard are their usual dependable selves but they lack chemistry until the closing act and as a result, their relationship lacks believability, hampering what is in effect, a love story.
Elsewhere, the cinematography is too often blighted by poorly lit scenes that restrict the talents of Allied’s director. Robert Zemeckis is at his best embarking upon projects that leap off the screen with their vibrancy. Take Back to the Future and Forrest Gump as prime examples of this.
Nevertheless, the film’s final act almost makes up for these shortcomings and turns a plodding romantic drama into a tense, well-acted and above all interesting movie that has a great script; it’s just a shame the first hour lacks any punch.
When it comes to special effects, well, they’re used sparingly, with the upside of this being that they liven up the film nicely. The scenes of London during the blitz are harrowingly beautiful, with one sequence in particular being a standout throughout the entire running time.
Overall, Allied is a decent stab at constructing a meaningful wartime romantic drama, though looking to history should have perhaps sent alarm bells ringing; Pearl Harbour anyone. The story is intriguing most definitely, and it has some nice special effects, but the script it’s crafted around lacks depth until the final hour. It’s probably fair to say that this may slip under the radar when we look back at Robert Zemeckis’s illustrious career.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/11/26/theres-a-great-film-in-here-somewhere-allied-review/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Up (2009) in Movies
Jan 30, 2018
Pixar Does it Again
Up is one of those films that sticks with you long after the credits are done rolling. It hits you on a number of different levels, bordering close to perfection. I don't think I've seen a film that manages to switch from hurt to hilarious in such an effortless fashion.
In the beginning you meet Ellie, a cute little girl full of adventure. Her energy and excitement bleed off the screen and you can't help but smile at her. She's perfect for Carl, an innocent kid who barely says more than a few words. Their imaginative adventures get you into the story immediately. It's a relationship that makes the first ten minutes that much harder to watch. There are moments in the film that never lose impact which is testament to the film's power to stand the test of time.
For a child's film, there are a lot of layers that really make the film special. It isn't long before we get to meet Russell, an innocent boyscout turned star of the movie. He's just trying to earn another badge by helping the elderly. Underneath this unassuming kid is hurt from all the painful things happening in his life. Each character has their own respective backstory that makes them relatable and lovable.
There's good ole Doug the runt of a talking dog pack who can't seem to do right even when he tries his best. He's an outcast amongst the other dogs while still harboring those wonderful dogs traits that humans can't help but love. And how can you not love the colorful snipe Kevin whose only goal is to take care of her kids (yes, HER name is Kevin)? All of these characters are worthy of their own standalone film which is why bringing them all together for one story makes the film spectacular.
At the core of the story is the odd couple relationship between Kevin and Russell. Young and old meet and it couldn't be funnier to see the two try and operate together. As they try and understand each other, they form an unlikely bond, a closeness that was lost from both of their lives. At the risk of sounding like a teenager, it will give you all the feels.
There could be some missteps in this wonderful adventure about a man who decides to fly away in his house using thousands of balloons, but those missteps are minute. Not only are the visuals amazing, but the message is also a strong one: Don't get stuck in the past. Live life for the now.
Up is a classic. I give it a 99.
In the beginning you meet Ellie, a cute little girl full of adventure. Her energy and excitement bleed off the screen and you can't help but smile at her. She's perfect for Carl, an innocent kid who barely says more than a few words. Their imaginative adventures get you into the story immediately. It's a relationship that makes the first ten minutes that much harder to watch. There are moments in the film that never lose impact which is testament to the film's power to stand the test of time.
For a child's film, there are a lot of layers that really make the film special. It isn't long before we get to meet Russell, an innocent boyscout turned star of the movie. He's just trying to earn another badge by helping the elderly. Underneath this unassuming kid is hurt from all the painful things happening in his life. Each character has their own respective backstory that makes them relatable and lovable.
There's good ole Doug the runt of a talking dog pack who can't seem to do right even when he tries his best. He's an outcast amongst the other dogs while still harboring those wonderful dogs traits that humans can't help but love. And how can you not love the colorful snipe Kevin whose only goal is to take care of her kids (yes, HER name is Kevin)? All of these characters are worthy of their own standalone film which is why bringing them all together for one story makes the film spectacular.
At the core of the story is the odd couple relationship between Kevin and Russell. Young and old meet and it couldn't be funnier to see the two try and operate together. As they try and understand each other, they form an unlikely bond, a closeness that was lost from both of their lives. At the risk of sounding like a teenager, it will give you all the feels.
There could be some missteps in this wonderful adventure about a man who decides to fly away in his house using thousands of balloons, but those missteps are minute. Not only are the visuals amazing, but the message is also a strong one: Don't get stuck in the past. Live life for the now.
Up is a classic. I give it a 99.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated What Richard Did (2013) in Movies
Mar 26, 2018
Could Have Been Better
Teenage Richard Carlsen (Jack Reynor) is faced with terrible consequences after events at a party go awry. What Richard Did makes the mistake of assuming that its plot alone would be enough to hold the interest of the audience. Lack of intrigue is its ultimate downfall.
Acting: 10
One thing that wasn't lacking was strong acting performances. The cast was excellent from the top down. Reynor shines in his role as Richard having to express and master an array of emotions. He effortlessly controls scenes, evoking the proper emotion from the audience.
Beginning: 7
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
A multitude of beautiful one-shots were captured throughout the film. It helps when the ocean and sunsets are your backdrop, but those images still have to be captured just right at an appealing angle. Shot of the cast having an innocent good time at their parties helps you to warm up to the crew instantly and remember similar times.
Conflict: 4
While there is some initial friction when we uncover what the heart of the story is about, things taper out from there. There wasn't enough conflict to keep me interested. The movie moves straightforward towards its resolution like an arrow, not really creating much more intrigue along the way.
Genre: 6
I give it credit for its fork in the road, but I have definitely seen better dramas. Dramatic film is supposed to leave an impact and this one...just left me. There was potential there for more.
Memorability: 2
I would have scored this even lower, however, I like the depths of humanity that were touched on through Richard's character. The film explores the reality of what a crisis would probably look like: Us looking out for ourselves first before we think of others. Besides that, there was nothing else that stood out for me.
Pace: 7
As I stated earlier, the film goes through a long lull that it never fully rebounds from. The lack of conflict slows things way down and makes it hard to remain engaged. Had there been more points of intrigue or crisis depth, the pace would probably have righted itself.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 4
If it's one thing I hate, it's ambiguous endings that leave you scratching your head. Expect that here. I won't ruin it, but I will say that I was hoping to have some questions answered by the time the credits started rolling. Unfortunately, the ending left me completely and utterly in the dark.
Overall: 68
I was hoping to like this a lot more and was sadly disappointed. It's not a top notch drama, but easily could have been with just a few more cogs in the wheel. Definitely one you can skip.
Acting: 10
One thing that wasn't lacking was strong acting performances. The cast was excellent from the top down. Reynor shines in his role as Richard having to express and master an array of emotions. He effortlessly controls scenes, evoking the proper emotion from the audience.
Beginning: 7
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
A multitude of beautiful one-shots were captured throughout the film. It helps when the ocean and sunsets are your backdrop, but those images still have to be captured just right at an appealing angle. Shot of the cast having an innocent good time at their parties helps you to warm up to the crew instantly and remember similar times.
Conflict: 4
While there is some initial friction when we uncover what the heart of the story is about, things taper out from there. There wasn't enough conflict to keep me interested. The movie moves straightforward towards its resolution like an arrow, not really creating much more intrigue along the way.
Genre: 6
I give it credit for its fork in the road, but I have definitely seen better dramas. Dramatic film is supposed to leave an impact and this one...just left me. There was potential there for more.
Memorability: 2
I would have scored this even lower, however, I like the depths of humanity that were touched on through Richard's character. The film explores the reality of what a crisis would probably look like: Us looking out for ourselves first before we think of others. Besides that, there was nothing else that stood out for me.
Pace: 7
As I stated earlier, the film goes through a long lull that it never fully rebounds from. The lack of conflict slows things way down and makes it hard to remain engaged. Had there been more points of intrigue or crisis depth, the pace would probably have righted itself.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 4
If it's one thing I hate, it's ambiguous endings that leave you scratching your head. Expect that here. I won't ruin it, but I will say that I was hoping to have some questions answered by the time the credits started rolling. Unfortunately, the ending left me completely and utterly in the dark.
Overall: 68
I was hoping to like this a lot more and was sadly disappointed. It's not a top notch drama, but easily could have been with just a few more cogs in the wheel. Definitely one you can skip.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) in Movies
Jul 5, 2018
Does what a good sequel needs to do
I have to admit that I really liked, but did not LOVE the first Guardians of the Galaxy film, so when I entered the local cineplex to check out Volume 2, I had lowered my expectations, figuring I'd find a film that was filled with "sequel-itis" and be just a step down from the previous film.
Boy...was I wrong.
I LOVED GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, VOLUME 2. This sequel succeeded in doing what a good sequel needs to do - take the premise, feel, characters and style of the first film and build on it.
And build on it, it does. Director James Gunn states that the first Guardians was about "a family coming together", and the 2nd movie is about "a family staying together" - and this is a family I want around and staying together.
Starting with the "core 5" - StarLord (Chris Pratt), Gamora (Zoe Saldona), Drax (Dave Bautista), Rocket Racoon (voiced by Bradley Cooper) and Baby Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel). These are all welcome characters that grow from the first movie to the 2nd, each with a purpose in this film and with something important to do. I enjoyed seeing them all again. Special notice should be paid to Bautista, who's Drax left me somewhat cold in the first film. Here he is a delight. Add to this returning characters Yondu (Michael Rooker) and Nebula (Karen Gillan) as well as newcomers Mantis (Pom Klementieff), Ayesha (Elizabeth Debicki) and Ego (Kurt Russell) and you have an ensemble that is easy and fun to watch.
At some point in the film, I thought to myself "now, THIS is a comic book film!" and I think it is because of the action and the visuals. The action moves fast and furious all the while populating a Universe (literally) that is eye-popping and interesting to watch. Director Gunn keeps things moving along, never staying too long in one place whilst avoiding the shaky-cam action. I always knew where I was in an action scene, what the characters are working on or for and what the outcomes might be. It is a refreshing change from the disorienting "shaky-cam" that the Bourne movies have wrought.
And, of course, nothing can top the soundtrack. The first film's "Awesome Mix" was a strong, joyous part of that movie. "Awesome Mix, Vol. 2" picks right up where the first one left off. The songs picked for this film did not disappoint.
Nor did much of this film. I enjoyed myself - and the antics of this gang - from start to finish, including the 5(!) extra scenes in the credits.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Boy...was I wrong.
I LOVED GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, VOLUME 2. This sequel succeeded in doing what a good sequel needs to do - take the premise, feel, characters and style of the first film and build on it.
And build on it, it does. Director James Gunn states that the first Guardians was about "a family coming together", and the 2nd movie is about "a family staying together" - and this is a family I want around and staying together.
Starting with the "core 5" - StarLord (Chris Pratt), Gamora (Zoe Saldona), Drax (Dave Bautista), Rocket Racoon (voiced by Bradley Cooper) and Baby Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel). These are all welcome characters that grow from the first movie to the 2nd, each with a purpose in this film and with something important to do. I enjoyed seeing them all again. Special notice should be paid to Bautista, who's Drax left me somewhat cold in the first film. Here he is a delight. Add to this returning characters Yondu (Michael Rooker) and Nebula (Karen Gillan) as well as newcomers Mantis (Pom Klementieff), Ayesha (Elizabeth Debicki) and Ego (Kurt Russell) and you have an ensemble that is easy and fun to watch.
At some point in the film, I thought to myself "now, THIS is a comic book film!" and I think it is because of the action and the visuals. The action moves fast and furious all the while populating a Universe (literally) that is eye-popping and interesting to watch. Director Gunn keeps things moving along, never staying too long in one place whilst avoiding the shaky-cam action. I always knew where I was in an action scene, what the characters are working on or for and what the outcomes might be. It is a refreshing change from the disorienting "shaky-cam" that the Bourne movies have wrought.
And, of course, nothing can top the soundtrack. The first film's "Awesome Mix" was a strong, joyous part of that movie. "Awesome Mix, Vol. 2" picks right up where the first one left off. The songs picked for this film did not disappoint.
Nor did much of this film. I enjoyed myself - and the antics of this gang - from start to finish, including the 5(!) extra scenes in the credits.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Teen Titans Go! To the Movies (2018) in Movies
Aug 5, 2018
Hilarious (4 more)
Some great references
Surprise comedic cameo
Nice nods to the tv show
Credits scene
I wasn't sure what was even happening sometimes (1 more)
Seems a little extreme in places.
What did I just watch?
Okay so I haven't reviewed the tv show cos I haven't watched it in a while but I do love 'Teen Titans Go!' and many people ask me why?
Yes I was a fan of the original animated series and I'm a fan of Young Justice and they're both clearly superior animated shows, but it's nice to see something fun and childish starting your favourite characters now and then and the creators of TTG! Are DC fans as well so there's always some insanely great nods to other DC content from comics, to tv shows to Movies and more. So what's not to love?
This movie was hilarious because it's just so insane that you just have to think that the creators were high as hell when making this film. But it's easy to understand for children and has many great references to DC for the adult fans in the audience. A great soundtrack of silly songs and a great voice cast for the characters such as Will Arnett as Deathstroke and Nicholas Cage as Superman (an obvious reference to the Tim Burton Superman film that never got made that would have started Nicholas Cage as the Man of Steel himself). The humour was nothing really new compared to the tv show but they expanded upon it and seemed to drag some of the jokes out longer with some great comedic timing and a sense of "what the hell is going on!?"
Issues I had with the film was that in some parts it seemed to try a little too hard to make you laugh and it didn't always work. They tried to put in some serious messages as they do in the show but this seemed to slow down the pace all of a sudden so it wasn't smooth with the flow of the film and it just felt like it came to a sudden halt on the shenanigans and humour of the film.
The plot was pretty much obvious from the get go, but that's probably just the view as an adult. I'm sure to kids it might seem like a real movie.
But back to the good points. There was some great references to none DC content, such as the Stan Lee cameo, Starfire pointing at the Warner Brothers water tower and stating "That's where the animaniacs live" and even a reference to the Lion King which was brilliant.
Overall this was a really enjoyable movie with some flaws but I think the overall impression outweighs them, and the soundtrack is incredible ?
Yes I was a fan of the original animated series and I'm a fan of Young Justice and they're both clearly superior animated shows, but it's nice to see something fun and childish starting your favourite characters now and then and the creators of TTG! Are DC fans as well so there's always some insanely great nods to other DC content from comics, to tv shows to Movies and more. So what's not to love?
This movie was hilarious because it's just so insane that you just have to think that the creators were high as hell when making this film. But it's easy to understand for children and has many great references to DC for the adult fans in the audience. A great soundtrack of silly songs and a great voice cast for the characters such as Will Arnett as Deathstroke and Nicholas Cage as Superman (an obvious reference to the Tim Burton Superman film that never got made that would have started Nicholas Cage as the Man of Steel himself). The humour was nothing really new compared to the tv show but they expanded upon it and seemed to drag some of the jokes out longer with some great comedic timing and a sense of "what the hell is going on!?"
Issues I had with the film was that in some parts it seemed to try a little too hard to make you laugh and it didn't always work. They tried to put in some serious messages as they do in the show but this seemed to slow down the pace all of a sudden so it wasn't smooth with the flow of the film and it just felt like it came to a sudden halt on the shenanigans and humour of the film.
The plot was pretty much obvious from the get go, but that's probably just the view as an adult. I'm sure to kids it might seem like a real movie.
But back to the good points. There was some great references to none DC content, such as the Stan Lee cameo, Starfire pointing at the Warner Brothers water tower and stating "That's where the animaniacs live" and even a reference to the Lion King which was brilliant.
Overall this was a really enjoyable movie with some flaws but I think the overall impression outweighs them, and the soundtrack is incredible ?
Fred (860 KP) rated Dumbo (2019) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
This is how you ruin a classic
Dumbo is one of my favorite Disney films. The original, not this crap. When told that his film was not long enough to be considered a full-length movie & that he would have to add 10 more minutes or so, Disney said "No. It's perfect the way it is." And he was right. The people who made this live-action remake apparently never heard that story. It's almost 2 hours long. The original story of the first film is done in about the first 20 minutes of this film, then it's an original sequel, basically.
The first & main problem of the film is the most obvious. The focus on the human characters over the animal characters. There are no talking animals in this one. Sure, Dumbo didn't talk, but he had Timothy mouse with him to speak for him. There's no stork, the bully elephants are gone, even the racist, but very entertaining crows are completely gone.
Second problem: Some of the music from the original film is here, but instrumental versions. Only "Baby Mine" is sung. We hear a clip of "Casey Jr." at the beginning. At the very end of the credits, we hear a bit of "When I See a Elephant Fly", but no "Look Out For Mr. Stork". But the biggest mistake was what they did with "Pink Elephants on Parade" In the original film, Dumbo accidentally drinks some champagne & gets drunk. He then blows bubbles & the bubbles take shape & thus begins one of the greatest scenes in Disney history. The bubbles take the shape of dancing, skating & tromping elephants. The scene is a nightmare & probably scared some kids in the day. The song itself is both fun & creepy. This should be perfect Tim Burton stuff, but in this film, it is not. In this film, circus performers are creating giant bubbles & somehow they are taking the shape of the elephants. In fact, they're copies of the elephants (and camel) from the original film. The song plays, but again, no lyrics. It's also not very well directed. Instead of looking like a nightmare, they keep cutting to Dumbo, watching the performers, with a smile.
And that brings me to another problem. Tim Burton. Like most Tim Burton movies, it looks fantastic, but it's just boring. The story is boring & unoriginal (Free Willy anyone?) I didn't get to like any of the human characters to care. They kind of just go through the motions. Dumbo himself lacks character & I never really felt for him.
I know Disney is set on remaking their classics & I haven't seen any before (and probably will not see anymore after this one). It breaks my heart to see Disney reduced to this sort of thing. I'll stick with the originals, thank you.
The first & main problem of the film is the most obvious. The focus on the human characters over the animal characters. There are no talking animals in this one. Sure, Dumbo didn't talk, but he had Timothy mouse with him to speak for him. There's no stork, the bully elephants are gone, even the racist, but very entertaining crows are completely gone.
Second problem: Some of the music from the original film is here, but instrumental versions. Only "Baby Mine" is sung. We hear a clip of "Casey Jr." at the beginning. At the very end of the credits, we hear a bit of "When I See a Elephant Fly", but no "Look Out For Mr. Stork". But the biggest mistake was what they did with "Pink Elephants on Parade" In the original film, Dumbo accidentally drinks some champagne & gets drunk. He then blows bubbles & the bubbles take shape & thus begins one of the greatest scenes in Disney history. The bubbles take the shape of dancing, skating & tromping elephants. The scene is a nightmare & probably scared some kids in the day. The song itself is both fun & creepy. This should be perfect Tim Burton stuff, but in this film, it is not. In this film, circus performers are creating giant bubbles & somehow they are taking the shape of the elephants. In fact, they're copies of the elephants (and camel) from the original film. The song plays, but again, no lyrics. It's also not very well directed. Instead of looking like a nightmare, they keep cutting to Dumbo, watching the performers, with a smile.
And that brings me to another problem. Tim Burton. Like most Tim Burton movies, it looks fantastic, but it's just boring. The story is boring & unoriginal (Free Willy anyone?) I didn't get to like any of the human characters to care. They kind of just go through the motions. Dumbo himself lacks character & I never really felt for him.
I know Disney is set on remaking their classics & I haven't seen any before (and probably will not see anymore after this one). It breaks my heart to see Disney reduced to this sort of thing. I'll stick with the originals, thank you.
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Doctor Strange (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Doctor Stephan Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch), is a man of extremes. He is a brilliant and gifted surgeon who makes the impossible seem routine, but is also a self –centered egomaniac that spends money almost as fast as he makes it.
When a freak car accident deprives him of the use of his hands, his life spirals into self-pity and rage as he is no longer able to earn money at his profession nor accumulate the praise and accolades he has become accustomed to.
When one treatment after another fails to achieve any desired results and only serves to further deplete his dwindling resources, Strange heads to Nepal in search of a locale where a paraplegic was reported to make a full recovery after a visit. Although highly skeptical and arrogant, Strange is eventually taken in by The Ancient One (Tilda Swinton) who leads an order who protects Earth from other dimensions that would destroy all life as we know it.
Strange begins training in spells and archaic knowledge and in time becomes skilled at his craft although highly unwilling to get behind the true nature of his order as he sees his study as little more than a means to restore his hands and regain his former career.
When a rogue member of the order named Kaecillius (Mads Mikkelsen), and his followers begin a series of attacks designed to destroy the safeguards of Earth and bring a being of evil to earth from another dimension, Strange is forced into action and soon learns that the universe and the multiverse is threatened forcing him to reexamine his life and place in the grand scheme of things.
What follows is a thrilling adventure spanning multiple dimensions and the streets of London, New York and Hong Kong as Strange battles to save the day.
Marvel Studios has once again proved they have the Midas touch when it comes to their properties. Cumberbatch embodies the Doctor so well that he is a captivating and complex character who like many of the best Marvel characters is also a deeply flawed individual at his core.
Swinton does great work in her role as do Rachel McAdams, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Benedict Wong in their supporting roles.
The film does take some time getting to the action but Director Scott Derrickson allows his characters the time to establish their history, relationships with one another, and the setting before getting to the very impressive effects and action.
There are two scenes during the credits that set the stage very well for future adventures for the Doctor as Marvel continues to weave their complex tapestry of characters into their ever expanding universe.
http://sknr.net/2016/11/02/doctor-stange/
When a freak car accident deprives him of the use of his hands, his life spirals into self-pity and rage as he is no longer able to earn money at his profession nor accumulate the praise and accolades he has become accustomed to.
When one treatment after another fails to achieve any desired results and only serves to further deplete his dwindling resources, Strange heads to Nepal in search of a locale where a paraplegic was reported to make a full recovery after a visit. Although highly skeptical and arrogant, Strange is eventually taken in by The Ancient One (Tilda Swinton) who leads an order who protects Earth from other dimensions that would destroy all life as we know it.
Strange begins training in spells and archaic knowledge and in time becomes skilled at his craft although highly unwilling to get behind the true nature of his order as he sees his study as little more than a means to restore his hands and regain his former career.
When a rogue member of the order named Kaecillius (Mads Mikkelsen), and his followers begin a series of attacks designed to destroy the safeguards of Earth and bring a being of evil to earth from another dimension, Strange is forced into action and soon learns that the universe and the multiverse is threatened forcing him to reexamine his life and place in the grand scheme of things.
What follows is a thrilling adventure spanning multiple dimensions and the streets of London, New York and Hong Kong as Strange battles to save the day.
Marvel Studios has once again proved they have the Midas touch when it comes to their properties. Cumberbatch embodies the Doctor so well that he is a captivating and complex character who like many of the best Marvel characters is also a deeply flawed individual at his core.
Swinton does great work in her role as do Rachel McAdams, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Benedict Wong in their supporting roles.
The film does take some time getting to the action but Director Scott Derrickson allows his characters the time to establish their history, relationships with one another, and the setting before getting to the very impressive effects and action.
There are two scenes during the credits that set the stage very well for future adventures for the Doctor as Marvel continues to weave their complex tapestry of characters into their ever expanding universe.
http://sknr.net/2016/11/02/doctor-stange/