Search
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Doctor Sleep (2019) in Movies
Nov 9, 2019
A return to Room 237
***MINOR SPOILERS ONLY***
After the events which ruined his childhood at the Overlook Hotel, Dan Torrance has not had a profound life. He does drugs and has become addicted to alcohol. He decides to move to a small town where he tries to get his act together. He is still haunted by those events so long ago even seeing the ghost of long deceased Overlook cook Dick Hallorann who also possessed the ability to "shine". Dan always knew or assumed other in the world had the ability as well; however, had tried to lead a normal existence.
Meanwhile, a cult of soul swallowing degenerates emerges and preys on those who have the ability. Some not knowing their minor gifts are easy prey, but those who have remarkable abilities present more of a challenge. One of these such wunderkinds is 13 year old Abra Stone. Like Danny, she has had abilities all her life, her parents chose to ignore them, but now events are intensifying so profound she cannot ignore them. The cult leader, Rose The Hat, seeks out more victims for her flock to feed upon having an eventual confrontation with Abra.
***I don't want to say more so I don't ruin for anyone.***
I have decided when writing a review of a sequel of any kind, I will never refer to it as "unnecessary". I have read many recent critiques of movies like Zombieland: Double Tap or Maleficent: Mistress of Evil when this word is used and I don't agree with that as a criticism. People are only using that word if the sequel is a disappointment. Someone would never say The Empire Strikes Back or The Dark Knight were unnecessary because they were great films. Even mediocre sequels will get tagged with unnecessary and I guess I feel you should rate the film which was made on its own merits and not try to decide if it was worth making or not.
Much like the way 2010 tried to explain the monolith and the mystery from Kubrick's masterpiece and my favorite film of all time 2001: A Space Odyssey, Doctor Sleep explores and expands the "shining" universe and gives audiences another look into that world. I was reminded when watching for some reason the sequence in Ready Player One where the characters go back to the Overlook and interact with the unique setting and art direction the film possessed. The homages and settings in Doctor Sleep feel both modernized and a fond look back of what everyone loved from The Shining. I could tell writer/director Mike Flanagan loved this universe so intensely, he decided to adapt the Stephen King sequel novel and it is well done.
Most main characters from the original Shining film make an appearance here as well, most with smaller cameo type roles which I don't want to spoil here. The new characters of both Abra Stone and Rose The Hat are great additions and acting by Rebecca Ferguson (who is quickly becoming one of my faves) and young Kyliegh Curran really bring them to life. Other than the obvious Trainspotting, Ewan McGregor usually plays such happy and likable characters that it was interesting to see him in a darker light, especially at the beginning of the film.
The musical score felt much like The Shining at times (the best parts), but also foraged new ground and was truly haunting and beautiful throughout. The cinematography and art direction were beautiful when showing the dark forest and suburban landscapes as well as the recreation of some of the more familiar elements.
Doctor Sleep is the ceiling threshold of how good a sequel to a Kubrick classic iconic perfection piece of movie artwork onscreen. The feeling and fun of seeing new interpretations of classic characters was fine with me as the screenplay does them justice. Comparing it to The Shining is moot since Kubrick was the master and his films should be studied indefinitely by film students worldwide and Doctor Sleep is an admirable compliment to that.
I tried to find an instance where Kubrick made comment about the film 2010, but I could not other than he said he wished the director well with it. I would imagine he would have the same reaction here. I think he would feel his work stands on its own without need for further explanation or additional narrative, but that is not a criticism, just an observation.
After the events which ruined his childhood at the Overlook Hotel, Dan Torrance has not had a profound life. He does drugs and has become addicted to alcohol. He decides to move to a small town where he tries to get his act together. He is still haunted by those events so long ago even seeing the ghost of long deceased Overlook cook Dick Hallorann who also possessed the ability to "shine". Dan always knew or assumed other in the world had the ability as well; however, had tried to lead a normal existence.
Meanwhile, a cult of soul swallowing degenerates emerges and preys on those who have the ability. Some not knowing their minor gifts are easy prey, but those who have remarkable abilities present more of a challenge. One of these such wunderkinds is 13 year old Abra Stone. Like Danny, she has had abilities all her life, her parents chose to ignore them, but now events are intensifying so profound she cannot ignore them. The cult leader, Rose The Hat, seeks out more victims for her flock to feed upon having an eventual confrontation with Abra.
***I don't want to say more so I don't ruin for anyone.***
I have decided when writing a review of a sequel of any kind, I will never refer to it as "unnecessary". I have read many recent critiques of movies like Zombieland: Double Tap or Maleficent: Mistress of Evil when this word is used and I don't agree with that as a criticism. People are only using that word if the sequel is a disappointment. Someone would never say The Empire Strikes Back or The Dark Knight were unnecessary because they were great films. Even mediocre sequels will get tagged with unnecessary and I guess I feel you should rate the film which was made on its own merits and not try to decide if it was worth making or not.
Much like the way 2010 tried to explain the monolith and the mystery from Kubrick's masterpiece and my favorite film of all time 2001: A Space Odyssey, Doctor Sleep explores and expands the "shining" universe and gives audiences another look into that world. I was reminded when watching for some reason the sequence in Ready Player One where the characters go back to the Overlook and interact with the unique setting and art direction the film possessed. The homages and settings in Doctor Sleep feel both modernized and a fond look back of what everyone loved from The Shining. I could tell writer/director Mike Flanagan loved this universe so intensely, he decided to adapt the Stephen King sequel novel and it is well done.
Most main characters from the original Shining film make an appearance here as well, most with smaller cameo type roles which I don't want to spoil here. The new characters of both Abra Stone and Rose The Hat are great additions and acting by Rebecca Ferguson (who is quickly becoming one of my faves) and young Kyliegh Curran really bring them to life. Other than the obvious Trainspotting, Ewan McGregor usually plays such happy and likable characters that it was interesting to see him in a darker light, especially at the beginning of the film.
The musical score felt much like The Shining at times (the best parts), but also foraged new ground and was truly haunting and beautiful throughout. The cinematography and art direction were beautiful when showing the dark forest and suburban landscapes as well as the recreation of some of the more familiar elements.
Doctor Sleep is the ceiling threshold of how good a sequel to a Kubrick classic iconic perfection piece of movie artwork onscreen. The feeling and fun of seeing new interpretations of classic characters was fine with me as the screenplay does them justice. Comparing it to The Shining is moot since Kubrick was the master and his films should be studied indefinitely by film students worldwide and Doctor Sleep is an admirable compliment to that.
I tried to find an instance where Kubrick made comment about the film 2010, but I could not other than he said he wished the director well with it. I would imagine he would have the same reaction here. I think he would feel his work stands on its own without need for further explanation or additional narrative, but that is not a criticism, just an observation.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Ritual (2017) in Movies
May 12, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
If you’re browsing Netflix for a horror movie, The Ritual is definitely one worth checking out. Set in a foreboding, heavily wooded landscape of the Swedish mountains, this horror film reminds viewers that maybe, just maybe you should think twice about taking that shortcut – because you know, clearly that horror movie trope hasn’t been done enough.
Nevermind that, though. Starting off with a group of friends discussing their next vacation, we soon learn which character is the biggest coward of the troupe – Luke, The Ritual‘s first bloodletting comes fairly early on. Unintentionally, Luke and Robert (Rafe Spall and Paul Reid, respectively) stumble upon a robbery whilst they are inside a liquor store. Luke, in a cowardly manner, retreats and in his endeavor to do so, hits a few bottles and makes a noise, alerting the robbers to Robert’s presence and thus resulting directly in Robert’s murder. The guilt eats at him later on, but during the entire fiasco, Luke makes no attempt to come to Robert’s aid; he only watches as his friend is brutally slaughtered. (Okay, that one might be a bit of a hyperbole compared to later scenes, but I digress.)
As a direct result of this incident, the remaining quartet, which consists of Hutch (Robert James-Collier), Phil (Arsher Ali), and Dom (Sam Troughton) in addition to Luke, decide to go hiking in memory of Robert – a trip they’d originally ridiculed him about in the earlier bar scene. And thus, we have the set up of The Ritual.
Plotwise, I felt The Ritual was fairly solid as far as cult movies go – if a bit overplayed. Group of guys goes on a trip. Someone gets injured. They try to take a shortcut back. Things go badly. Of course, there’s a bit more of an occult flavor to it, one that’s a bit more haunting in quality which is nice, but overall it’s nothing new. The difference here is it is something that is done well as opposed to half-assed.
When we get to characters though, the only one that’s even remotely likable in my opinion is Phil. The others are all self-centered assholes or, in Luke’s case, cowards. Dom’s got the luck of a bag of rocks tossed into a lake and told to float, and Hutch… we’ll leave it at that. Luke’s character, on the other hand, experiences major growth. Earlier in the film, we watch him suffer from the inability to act; by the end of the film he is forced into action: either he redeems himself, or he dies.
Another aspect of this film that I love is its absolutely breathtaking shots. I hate using adverbs that I’ve already used earlier in a review, but haunting is such an apt description of the shots taken of the Swedish forests and mountains that we see in The Ritual. Those scenes, coupled with the disturbing echoes of Luke’s guilt really have a way of balancing out the movie.
Nevermind that, though. Starting off with a group of friends discussing their next vacation, we soon learn which character is the biggest coward of the troupe – Luke, The Ritual‘s first bloodletting comes fairly early on. Unintentionally, Luke and Robert (Rafe Spall and Paul Reid, respectively) stumble upon a robbery whilst they are inside a liquor store. Luke, in a cowardly manner, retreats and in his endeavor to do so, hits a few bottles and makes a noise, alerting the robbers to Robert’s presence and thus resulting directly in Robert’s murder. The guilt eats at him later on, but during the entire fiasco, Luke makes no attempt to come to Robert’s aid; he only watches as his friend is brutally slaughtered. (Okay, that one might be a bit of a hyperbole compared to later scenes, but I digress.)
As a direct result of this incident, the remaining quartet, which consists of Hutch (Robert James-Collier), Phil (Arsher Ali), and Dom (Sam Troughton) in addition to Luke, decide to go hiking in memory of Robert – a trip they’d originally ridiculed him about in the earlier bar scene. And thus, we have the set up of The Ritual.
Plotwise, I felt The Ritual was fairly solid as far as cult movies go – if a bit overplayed. Group of guys goes on a trip. Someone gets injured. They try to take a shortcut back. Things go badly. Of course, there’s a bit more of an occult flavor to it, one that’s a bit more haunting in quality which is nice, but overall it’s nothing new. The difference here is it is something that is done well as opposed to half-assed.
When we get to characters though, the only one that’s even remotely likable in my opinion is Phil. The others are all self-centered assholes or, in Luke’s case, cowards. Dom’s got the luck of a bag of rocks tossed into a lake and told to float, and Hutch… we’ll leave it at that. Luke’s character, on the other hand, experiences major growth. Earlier in the film, we watch him suffer from the inability to act; by the end of the film he is forced into action: either he redeems himself, or he dies.
Another aspect of this film that I love is its absolutely breathtaking shots. I hate using adverbs that I’ve already used earlier in a review, but haunting is such an apt description of the shots taken of the Swedish forests and mountains that we see in The Ritual. Those scenes, coupled with the disturbing echoes of Luke’s guilt really have a way of balancing out the movie.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Drive Angry (2011) in Movies
Mar 13, 2020
What Happens When a Movie Meets Zero Effort
Ok, let’s not waste time with this: Drive Angry is easily one of the worst movies I’ve ever watched in my life. To be more specific, third worst behind the awful 1994 version of Fantastic Four (look that doozy up when you have a chance) and Battlefield Earth where we got to see John Travolta sporting dreads. Yes, folks, Drive Angry is bad in every single way imaginable. It is a movie you will long to forget. As far as the plot is concerned, there is a lot I tried to blot out about this movie but I’m pretty sure it’s about a man who has returned from Hell in a car he stole from the set of Fast and the Furious to prevent the sacrifice of his granddaughter by an evil cult. You say what now?
Acting: 5
I feel like these actors knew after the first week of filming that this was going to be a shit-show so they all mailed it in. Nicholas Cage, star of said shit-show, delivers his lines with the excitement of someone getting a flu shot. I won’t linger on this point, but let’s just say I’ve seen the cast of a Hallmark movie do better than these lame-duck performances.
Beginning: 1
Much like the middle and the end, the beginning is an awful disaster. It sports one of the worst setups I think I have ever seen for a movie. After ten minutes, I knew I was in for a world of pain.
Characters: 2
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Honestly, the visuals could be a lot worse. There were some decent moments particularly when things slowed down that were bordering on looking pretty cool. While a lot of action sequences were pretty cheesy it was nice to see they at least put in a smidgeon of effort with the special effects.
Conflict: 5
Entertainment Value: 2
Memorability: 0
After the movie was over, I instantly started thinking, “Is there a time machine that I can use to get part of my life back?” There is absolutely no value in this movie, nothing to remember with the exception of the absolutely horrid filmmaking. I am still appalled this project made it through completion.
Pace: 0
Plot: 0
Story? We don’t need no stinking story! Oh, how I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during this pitch meeting. It seriously made my head hurt. They try and give you a story then throw it all out the window with repeated implausible occurrences that beat you into submission.
Resolution: 1
Overall: 24
In light of the Black Mamba Kobe Bryant’s passing, the number 24 should represent greatness. Not with my scoring of Drive Angry. Unless, of course, I’m referring to the greatness of sucking. If that’s the case, then yes, this movie is indeed great. Great and terrible.
Acting: 5
I feel like these actors knew after the first week of filming that this was going to be a shit-show so they all mailed it in. Nicholas Cage, star of said shit-show, delivers his lines with the excitement of someone getting a flu shot. I won’t linger on this point, but let’s just say I’ve seen the cast of a Hallmark movie do better than these lame-duck performances.
Beginning: 1
Much like the middle and the end, the beginning is an awful disaster. It sports one of the worst setups I think I have ever seen for a movie. After ten minutes, I knew I was in for a world of pain.
Characters: 2
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Honestly, the visuals could be a lot worse. There were some decent moments particularly when things slowed down that were bordering on looking pretty cool. While a lot of action sequences were pretty cheesy it was nice to see they at least put in a smidgeon of effort with the special effects.
Conflict: 5
Entertainment Value: 2
Memorability: 0
After the movie was over, I instantly started thinking, “Is there a time machine that I can use to get part of my life back?” There is absolutely no value in this movie, nothing to remember with the exception of the absolutely horrid filmmaking. I am still appalled this project made it through completion.
Pace: 0
Plot: 0
Story? We don’t need no stinking story! Oh, how I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during this pitch meeting. It seriously made my head hurt. They try and give you a story then throw it all out the window with repeated implausible occurrences that beat you into submission.
Resolution: 1
Overall: 24
In light of the Black Mamba Kobe Bryant’s passing, the number 24 should represent greatness. Not with my scoring of Drive Angry. Unless, of course, I’m referring to the greatness of sucking. If that’s the case, then yes, this movie is indeed great. Great and terrible.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated John Wick. Chapter 4 (2023) in Movies
Mar 18, 2023
John Wick is back and you know what to expect! The action is bigger, the fight scenes are more elaborate, and the killing is…normalized. It is an awesome and fun two-hour and forty-nine-minute joyride that is constantly moving and does not feel nearly that long.
It is crazy to think that in the world of John Wick, after how many bodies he has left in his wake over the last three movies, that anyone would bother even going after him. And yet, this is a popcorn action film in the trustiest since because if you aren’t suspending disbelief and enjoying the ride, you aren’t doing it right.
While it's normally John Wick against the world, this time he seeks help from old friends who help him reign death and destruction upon anyone in his way as he attempts to kill his way to freedom from the “high table.” It is this comradery that sets this film apart from its predecessors. For the first time since the first film, we actually get character development and emotional investment for Wick and his friends.
Most notably joining Keanu Reeves this time is Donnie Yen of Ip Man fame. Channeling traditional martial arts films, Yen plays a blind master assassin in his own right, who like Wick, was retired, but was brought back to save his family and hunt down his friend John Wick. Fans of his martial arts films will recognize Yen’s movement that is both graceful and precise as a dance. Additionally, Hiroyuki Sanada (Bullet Train, The Twilight Samurai), brings his strong and stoic presence as a loyal friend to help John Wick, despite the potential danger it will bring to him and his family. While Shamier Anderson (Race, Bruiser) introduces a new character to the series, tracking John Wick to score a payday. These three delightfully add story depth to series mainstays Ian McShane and Laurence Fishburne as we dive deeper into the lore of “everything under the table.”
Opposite them, Bill Skarsgard, plays a ranking Marquis, given the power to hunt down Wick and make an example of all those who fail to “serve under the high table.” He is exactly the type of pompous and ruthless villain that we all love to hate. It is through the exhibition of his power and arrogance that we learn more about the lore and rules of this world of assassins, which is intriguing and entertaining as John Wick must navigate not only people trying to kill him but also the “old rules” on his path to freedom.
These fresh faces and story elements help the John Wick series to feel more enjoyable than ever, while, fans of martial arts films, samurai films, and a certain 1979 cult classic, will recognize the various homage paid in John Wick Chapter 4. Making this the best addition to the series since the first film.
4.5 out of 5 stars
It is crazy to think that in the world of John Wick, after how many bodies he has left in his wake over the last three movies, that anyone would bother even going after him. And yet, this is a popcorn action film in the trustiest since because if you aren’t suspending disbelief and enjoying the ride, you aren’t doing it right.
While it's normally John Wick against the world, this time he seeks help from old friends who help him reign death and destruction upon anyone in his way as he attempts to kill his way to freedom from the “high table.” It is this comradery that sets this film apart from its predecessors. For the first time since the first film, we actually get character development and emotional investment for Wick and his friends.
Most notably joining Keanu Reeves this time is Donnie Yen of Ip Man fame. Channeling traditional martial arts films, Yen plays a blind master assassin in his own right, who like Wick, was retired, but was brought back to save his family and hunt down his friend John Wick. Fans of his martial arts films will recognize Yen’s movement that is both graceful and precise as a dance. Additionally, Hiroyuki Sanada (Bullet Train, The Twilight Samurai), brings his strong and stoic presence as a loyal friend to help John Wick, despite the potential danger it will bring to him and his family. While Shamier Anderson (Race, Bruiser) introduces a new character to the series, tracking John Wick to score a payday. These three delightfully add story depth to series mainstays Ian McShane and Laurence Fishburne as we dive deeper into the lore of “everything under the table.”
Opposite them, Bill Skarsgard, plays a ranking Marquis, given the power to hunt down Wick and make an example of all those who fail to “serve under the high table.” He is exactly the type of pompous and ruthless villain that we all love to hate. It is through the exhibition of his power and arrogance that we learn more about the lore and rules of this world of assassins, which is intriguing and entertaining as John Wick must navigate not only people trying to kill him but also the “old rules” on his path to freedom.
These fresh faces and story elements help the John Wick series to feel more enjoyable than ever, while, fans of martial arts films, samurai films, and a certain 1979 cult classic, will recognize the various homage paid in John Wick Chapter 4. Making this the best addition to the series since the first film.
4.5 out of 5 stars
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The DUFF (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Disappointingly Generic
The school-set comedy genre has been done to death over the last two decades. From body swap comedies like 17 Again that hang on the pulling power of their stars, to films that now have a cult following like 10 Things I Hate About You, each of them has little to offer once the end credits roll.
With the brilliant Mean Girls being one of the only exceptions to the trend, the latest film to tackle the genre is The DUFF, but is Ari Sandel’s directorial debut worthy of a recommendation?
The DUFF follows daily life at a typical American high-school with typical US teens separated into categories depending on their social standing.
Enter Bianca Piper, played by the brilliant Mae Whitman, a vastly intelligent girl who is unaware of her place in the rankings as the DUFF – Designated Ugly Fat Friend – that is until her hunky next door neighbour Wesley (Robbie Amell) informs her of that fact.
What ensues is a selection of mildly amusing scenes interspersed with some touching social commentary about what it means to be normal in an ever-changing world as Bianca tries to come to terms with her place in the school hierarchy.
Despite the obvious focus on looks and beauty, the film does have a deeper message of self-worth and it’s a shame this is rarely touched upon outside of the finale.
Perhaps The DUFF’s strongest suit is in its unique filming style. The use of technology and social media helps distinguish it from its rivals and what it lacks in story is made up for with clever uses of animation and an engaging soundtrack.
Just when you think the film has decided to settle in a rut and remain there for the duration, it throws you off course with a clever cut-scene or use of technology and there are two moments in particular that had the audience in stitches.
Unfortunately, the rest of the film isn’t that funny. The story is predictable and the will-they-won’t-they romantic subplot is massively clichéd and dull because the characters, apart from Bianca, simply don’t register – there is no reason to care for them.
Mae Whitman is a force to be reckoned with as Bianca and is by far the most intriguing member of a disappointingly bland cast. Elsewhere, Ken Jeong (Community, The Hangover) and Allison Janney (Hairspray) pop up as a concerned teacher and Bianca’s mother, but they are both wasted in ultimately thankless roles.
Overall, it’s easy to feel sorry for films like The DUFF. The school-set genre has fizzled out in recent years and hasn’t got its mojo back despite numerous efforts from movies much less accomplished than this one.
Mae Whitman and the use of Family Guy-esque cut-scenes are the main plus points here, but despite its best intentions, it’s hard to give it too much of a recommendation and is probably best reserved for a late-night DVD viewing.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/12/disappointingly-generic-the-duff-review/
With the brilliant Mean Girls being one of the only exceptions to the trend, the latest film to tackle the genre is The DUFF, but is Ari Sandel’s directorial debut worthy of a recommendation?
The DUFF follows daily life at a typical American high-school with typical US teens separated into categories depending on their social standing.
Enter Bianca Piper, played by the brilliant Mae Whitman, a vastly intelligent girl who is unaware of her place in the rankings as the DUFF – Designated Ugly Fat Friend – that is until her hunky next door neighbour Wesley (Robbie Amell) informs her of that fact.
What ensues is a selection of mildly amusing scenes interspersed with some touching social commentary about what it means to be normal in an ever-changing world as Bianca tries to come to terms with her place in the school hierarchy.
Despite the obvious focus on looks and beauty, the film does have a deeper message of self-worth and it’s a shame this is rarely touched upon outside of the finale.
Perhaps The DUFF’s strongest suit is in its unique filming style. The use of technology and social media helps distinguish it from its rivals and what it lacks in story is made up for with clever uses of animation and an engaging soundtrack.
Just when you think the film has decided to settle in a rut and remain there for the duration, it throws you off course with a clever cut-scene or use of technology and there are two moments in particular that had the audience in stitches.
Unfortunately, the rest of the film isn’t that funny. The story is predictable and the will-they-won’t-they romantic subplot is massively clichéd and dull because the characters, apart from Bianca, simply don’t register – there is no reason to care for them.
Mae Whitman is a force to be reckoned with as Bianca and is by far the most intriguing member of a disappointingly bland cast. Elsewhere, Ken Jeong (Community, The Hangover) and Allison Janney (Hairspray) pop up as a concerned teacher and Bianca’s mother, but they are both wasted in ultimately thankless roles.
Overall, it’s easy to feel sorry for films like The DUFF. The school-set genre has fizzled out in recent years and hasn’t got its mojo back despite numerous efforts from movies much less accomplished than this one.
Mae Whitman and the use of Family Guy-esque cut-scenes are the main plus points here, but despite its best intentions, it’s hard to give it too much of a recommendation and is probably best reserved for a late-night DVD viewing.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/12/disappointingly-generic-the-duff-review/
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Monty Python's Life of Brian (1979) in Movies
Mar 15, 2021
A classic
Film #16 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Monty Python’s Life of Brian
Life of Brian (1979] is an old school comedy classic, and alongside Python’s take on the Holy Grail, were fairly revered comedies when I was growing up and I doubt there’s many people over a certain age that haven’t seen these films. Films like this are my favourite type of comedy, and I just wish they still made films similar today.
Life of Brian follows Brian (Graham Chapman), who was born on the same night one stable down from Jesus, yet has lived an entirely different life. Fed up of the Romans, Brian joins the People’s Front of Judea led by Reggie (John a Cleese), whose aim is to get the Romans out of Judea. After being caught infiltrating the palace and put in front of Pontius Pilate (Michael Palin), Brian escapes capture and in his bid to hide from the Romans, winds up relaying some of the teachings he learnt from Jesus. This spurs a crowd into thinking he is the next Messiah, leaving Brian to try and evade his followers as well as the Romans, with rather dire consequences.
This is the Pythons second proper feature film, following on from the hugely successful Holy Grail and their tv series, Flying Circus. Directed by Terry Jones, the purpose of Life of Brian was to lampoon and satirise the New Testament, and more specifically, to make fun of followers of mistaken religious figures. To be quite honest, I don’t think they could make comedy films like this anymore. This lampoon, satire style was fairly rife even up until the 90s (with the likes of Hot Shots and The Naked Gun sequels), but I think they’d struggle to make anything like this nowadays which is a great shame. The humour in this isn’t offensive at all, it’s intelligent and adult and whipsmart and wonderfully done. Admittedly there are a few scenes that may cause some offence purely because it was made when times were different over 40 years ago, but there’s also a lot in here that is surprisingly relevant even in today’s society – one scene where the People’s Front of Judea discuss women’s rights and a request from Stan to be known as Loretta is unexpectedly well done and respectful, albeit with a Python comedy edge. There are some genius works of comedy in this film too that have become cult favourites, from Palin’s depiction of Pontius Pilate with a speech impediment (“Stwike him centuwion, vewy wuffly!”) to Terry Jones’ mother crying out to Brian’s followers that “he’s not the Messiah, he’s a very naughty boy!”. Personally, Palin’s take on Pilate and all of his scenes are my favourite of the entire film.
This isn’t to say that Life of Brian is perfect. There are some scenes and acting that are maybe a little too pantomime-esque (even for a parody) and there are some jokes and scenes that don’t quite land - the alien scene (yes I did say “alien”) is one that jumps to mind. Because of this some scenes can seem rather drawn out if you don’t get the gag. Humour like this isn’t for everyone, although for me it’s my favourite kind. This is British comedy at its best and a shining example that humour doesn’t be crude to be funny. I mean who else other than the Monty Python troupe could pull off crucified men singing “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life”?
Life of Brian (1979] is an old school comedy classic, and alongside Python’s take on the Holy Grail, were fairly revered comedies when I was growing up and I doubt there’s many people over a certain age that haven’t seen these films. Films like this are my favourite type of comedy, and I just wish they still made films similar today.
Life of Brian follows Brian (Graham Chapman), who was born on the same night one stable down from Jesus, yet has lived an entirely different life. Fed up of the Romans, Brian joins the People’s Front of Judea led by Reggie (John a Cleese), whose aim is to get the Romans out of Judea. After being caught infiltrating the palace and put in front of Pontius Pilate (Michael Palin), Brian escapes capture and in his bid to hide from the Romans, winds up relaying some of the teachings he learnt from Jesus. This spurs a crowd into thinking he is the next Messiah, leaving Brian to try and evade his followers as well as the Romans, with rather dire consequences.
This is the Pythons second proper feature film, following on from the hugely successful Holy Grail and their tv series, Flying Circus. Directed by Terry Jones, the purpose of Life of Brian was to lampoon and satirise the New Testament, and more specifically, to make fun of followers of mistaken religious figures. To be quite honest, I don’t think they could make comedy films like this anymore. This lampoon, satire style was fairly rife even up until the 90s (with the likes of Hot Shots and The Naked Gun sequels), but I think they’d struggle to make anything like this nowadays which is a great shame. The humour in this isn’t offensive at all, it’s intelligent and adult and whipsmart and wonderfully done. Admittedly there are a few scenes that may cause some offence purely because it was made when times were different over 40 years ago, but there’s also a lot in here that is surprisingly relevant even in today’s society – one scene where the People’s Front of Judea discuss women’s rights and a request from Stan to be known as Loretta is unexpectedly well done and respectful, albeit with a Python comedy edge. There are some genius works of comedy in this film too that have become cult favourites, from Palin’s depiction of Pontius Pilate with a speech impediment (“Stwike him centuwion, vewy wuffly!”) to Terry Jones’ mother crying out to Brian’s followers that “he’s not the Messiah, he’s a very naughty boy!”. Personally, Palin’s take on Pilate and all of his scenes are my favourite of the entire film.
This isn’t to say that Life of Brian is perfect. There are some scenes and acting that are maybe a little too pantomime-esque (even for a parody) and there are some jokes and scenes that don’t quite land - the alien scene (yes I did say “alien”) is one that jumps to mind. Because of this some scenes can seem rather drawn out if you don’t get the gag. Humour like this isn’t for everyone, although for me it’s my favourite kind. This is British comedy at its best and a shining example that humour doesn’t be crude to be funny. I mean who else other than the Monty Python troupe could pull off crucified men singing “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life”?
Andy K (10821 KP) rated The Fly (1986) in Movies
Oct 3, 2019
Be Afraid...Be Very Afraid
Seth Brundle is his own version of Dr Frankenstein. Instead of reanimating dead issue, his desire is to teleport flesh from one "telepod" to another.
After a chance meeting at a social magazine function, Veronica "Ronnie" Quaife meets the eccentric genius Brundle. She agrees to come back to his spacious, warehouse studio loft to see what he has been working on. He tells her about his masterpiece that will change the concept of travel throughout the world. After a short demonstration, Ronnie is not sure what to believe.
The next day, she explains what happened to her editor and scummy, sexist former boyfriend who suggests Brundle is just a con man. Eventually, Ronnie takes the offer to be Brundle's exclusive recorder of the evolution of his creation which has still one major flaw, it can only teleport inanimate objects. When tried on something living, the computer doesn't understand "the flesh" turn disembowels its subjects.Ronnie and Brundle begin a torrid affair amidst more work on the pods ultimately concluding with the successful teleportation of a baboon.
After Ronnie's boss and former lover threatens to publish her story early, Brundle gets drunk and decides it is time for a human trial of his newly perfected equipment. In his haste, he does not notice an insect guest present within his pod with him. Although successful, Brundle is not aware of his transformation yet to come.
His evolution from man to man/insect begins slowly, but continues relentlessly though Brundle does not know the cause. Once he looks through his records and discovers the genesis of his misfortune, he may be too late to stop it.
The Fly has to be director David Cronenberg's biggest financial hit grossing north of $40 million in 1986. Adjusted for inflation and considering the subject matter, genre and R rating, that would have to be much more if released today. It's hard to say the film would be Cronenberg's highest critical success, although most of his early films are now considered cult classics since they had a hard time finding mainstream audiences due to their "body horror" often gruesome visuals and offbeat subject matter.
Although most would classify as horror due to the shocking visuals within the last 30 minutes of the film, I have always felt it was more of a thriller. Once Bundle is infected, he has to use his sharp, but now deteriorating wits to figure a solution to his problem before it is too late. Every subsequent Ronnie visit to Brundle's loft finds unexpected results which keep the viewer on edge and wondering what horrors they will view next.
The make up effects in the film rivaled any of the top work ever at that time and garnered effect artist Chris Walas an Academy Award in 1986. By today's standards of CGI and film perfection, some elements could look a bit dated to modern audiences, but I believe still hold up to present day scrutiny.
The film score by frequent Cronenberg collaborator Howard Shore is haunting, bleak somber, and excellent.
Too often mesmerizing acting performances in horror/thriller movies get overlooked for the Oscars (except if you are Anthony Hopkins) which is a shame here. Jeff Goldblum undergoes not only a physical transformation, but his mannerisms, ticks and speech all go from human to insect and he deserves a lot of credit for what he did to bring "Brundlefly" to life.
After a chance meeting at a social magazine function, Veronica "Ronnie" Quaife meets the eccentric genius Brundle. She agrees to come back to his spacious, warehouse studio loft to see what he has been working on. He tells her about his masterpiece that will change the concept of travel throughout the world. After a short demonstration, Ronnie is not sure what to believe.
The next day, she explains what happened to her editor and scummy, sexist former boyfriend who suggests Brundle is just a con man. Eventually, Ronnie takes the offer to be Brundle's exclusive recorder of the evolution of his creation which has still one major flaw, it can only teleport inanimate objects. When tried on something living, the computer doesn't understand "the flesh" turn disembowels its subjects.Ronnie and Brundle begin a torrid affair amidst more work on the pods ultimately concluding with the successful teleportation of a baboon.
After Ronnie's boss and former lover threatens to publish her story early, Brundle gets drunk and decides it is time for a human trial of his newly perfected equipment. In his haste, he does not notice an insect guest present within his pod with him. Although successful, Brundle is not aware of his transformation yet to come.
His evolution from man to man/insect begins slowly, but continues relentlessly though Brundle does not know the cause. Once he looks through his records and discovers the genesis of his misfortune, he may be too late to stop it.
The Fly has to be director David Cronenberg's biggest financial hit grossing north of $40 million in 1986. Adjusted for inflation and considering the subject matter, genre and R rating, that would have to be much more if released today. It's hard to say the film would be Cronenberg's highest critical success, although most of his early films are now considered cult classics since they had a hard time finding mainstream audiences due to their "body horror" often gruesome visuals and offbeat subject matter.
Although most would classify as horror due to the shocking visuals within the last 30 minutes of the film, I have always felt it was more of a thriller. Once Bundle is infected, he has to use his sharp, but now deteriorating wits to figure a solution to his problem before it is too late. Every subsequent Ronnie visit to Brundle's loft finds unexpected results which keep the viewer on edge and wondering what horrors they will view next.
The make up effects in the film rivaled any of the top work ever at that time and garnered effect artist Chris Walas an Academy Award in 1986. By today's standards of CGI and film perfection, some elements could look a bit dated to modern audiences, but I believe still hold up to present day scrutiny.
The film score by frequent Cronenberg collaborator Howard Shore is haunting, bleak somber, and excellent.
Too often mesmerizing acting performances in horror/thriller movies get overlooked for the Oscars (except if you are Anthony Hopkins) which is a shame here. Jeff Goldblum undergoes not only a physical transformation, but his mannerisms, ticks and speech all go from human to insect and he deserves a lot of credit for what he did to bring "Brundlefly" to life.
Infuse Pro 5
Entertainment and Photo & Video
App
Ignite your video content with Infuse – the beautiful way to watch almost any video format on your...
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Annabelle (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Annabelle is the newest demon-based spooky fright film produced by James Wan (producer Saw II-IV & director Insidious 1&2). The trailers would have you believe that it is a prequel to the Conjuring. Well I suppose it is, although a very loose prequel.
Annabelle, the possessed doll, is mentioned a few times in “The Conjuring,” but it doesn’t contain any of the cast from the original . The film takes place in the 1970s and focuses on a married couple who have just moved in to a new house and the wife, Mia (Annabelle Wallis) is pregnant. Her husband (played extremely woodenly by actor Ward Horton) buys her a long sought after custom doll named Annabelle. Shortly after, the couple is attacked by their neighbors who we find are satanic cult members. Mia is stabbed in her belly (threatening the life of her child); the female Satanist neighbor dies clutching the Annabelle doll, her blood dripping and seemingly sucked into the eye socket of the doll, ushering in the demonic reign of Annabelle.
You’d assume that this is a standard “killer doll” horror flick, you’d also be a bit misled, and that’s a good thing in my opinion. This isn’t Chucky. You won’t see Annabelle speaking or running around the house brandishing a knife. That isn’t to say that the movie doesn’t have its share of genre tropes, it has plenty of those.
As so many other possession/haunting movies involving a couple, for the most part the lonely wife is preyed upon while the husband is away at work. Throughout the film the writers find multiple ways of keeping Mia at home alone with the demon. John is called away on a business trip on one of the more traumatic encounters Mia has with Annabelle, resulting in Mia being placed on bed rest, giving her a reason to stay at home in the demons clutches. Later John is placed on the night shift, once again placing him out of the way so the demon can terrorize Mia at night where things are scary. It is inevitable that a scene takes place where her husband doesn’t believe her and thinks she’s going crazy. I can think of so many films that go this same route. The prerequisite priest comes along to help the family figure out their demonic happenings and oh yes, let’s not forget the sagely African American that needs to help Mia find her way and lead her both in knowledge of the demon and its demise. The story manages to throw in some mysterious children to once scene just to make sure that the trope is checked off the list. The remainder of the movie after the introductory attack by the satanic neighbors has Mia and later her child being threatened by the demon possessing Annabelle, the search for what it is, and what it wants and then its climax and disposal. Nothing new to this genre found here.
Annabelle does come with its share of scares (most of these can be seen in the previews), however the pacing is bad. I found myself bored out of my mind by the plot between the scares. So bored and disinterested that once the scary scenes occurred which seemed to be paced almost on a timer there wasn’t enough scare to raise the adrenaline needed to make it to the next fright. I will say that having a child endangered and threatened by the demonic spirit does bump up the tension and nerves and was a necessary inclusion to raise the stakes and pull out some reason to care about the victims by the audience.
Mia and John are so one-imensional that one would be hard-pressed to care about what happens to either of them. The demon effects are about as scary as a guy in a rubber suit lurking around a two-bit horror house, I mean pretty bad. I’ve seen a scarier demon on a TV episode of “Unsolved Mysteries” from 1988. Annabelle is good for a fright or two, and a reason to grab some popcorn and pig-out, but just be prepared to take a siesta three or four times in-between bouts of popcorn binge.
Annabelle, the possessed doll, is mentioned a few times in “The Conjuring,” but it doesn’t contain any of the cast from the original . The film takes place in the 1970s and focuses on a married couple who have just moved in to a new house and the wife, Mia (Annabelle Wallis) is pregnant. Her husband (played extremely woodenly by actor Ward Horton) buys her a long sought after custom doll named Annabelle. Shortly after, the couple is attacked by their neighbors who we find are satanic cult members. Mia is stabbed in her belly (threatening the life of her child); the female Satanist neighbor dies clutching the Annabelle doll, her blood dripping and seemingly sucked into the eye socket of the doll, ushering in the demonic reign of Annabelle.
You’d assume that this is a standard “killer doll” horror flick, you’d also be a bit misled, and that’s a good thing in my opinion. This isn’t Chucky. You won’t see Annabelle speaking or running around the house brandishing a knife. That isn’t to say that the movie doesn’t have its share of genre tropes, it has plenty of those.
As so many other possession/haunting movies involving a couple, for the most part the lonely wife is preyed upon while the husband is away at work. Throughout the film the writers find multiple ways of keeping Mia at home alone with the demon. John is called away on a business trip on one of the more traumatic encounters Mia has with Annabelle, resulting in Mia being placed on bed rest, giving her a reason to stay at home in the demons clutches. Later John is placed on the night shift, once again placing him out of the way so the demon can terrorize Mia at night where things are scary. It is inevitable that a scene takes place where her husband doesn’t believe her and thinks she’s going crazy. I can think of so many films that go this same route. The prerequisite priest comes along to help the family figure out their demonic happenings and oh yes, let’s not forget the sagely African American that needs to help Mia find her way and lead her both in knowledge of the demon and its demise. The story manages to throw in some mysterious children to once scene just to make sure that the trope is checked off the list. The remainder of the movie after the introductory attack by the satanic neighbors has Mia and later her child being threatened by the demon possessing Annabelle, the search for what it is, and what it wants and then its climax and disposal. Nothing new to this genre found here.
Annabelle does come with its share of scares (most of these can be seen in the previews), however the pacing is bad. I found myself bored out of my mind by the plot between the scares. So bored and disinterested that once the scary scenes occurred which seemed to be paced almost on a timer there wasn’t enough scare to raise the adrenaline needed to make it to the next fright. I will say that having a child endangered and threatened by the demonic spirit does bump up the tension and nerves and was a necessary inclusion to raise the stakes and pull out some reason to care about the victims by the audience.
Mia and John are so one-imensional that one would be hard-pressed to care about what happens to either of them. The demon effects are about as scary as a guy in a rubber suit lurking around a two-bit horror house, I mean pretty bad. I’ve seen a scarier demon on a TV episode of “Unsolved Mysteries” from 1988. Annabelle is good for a fright or two, and a reason to grab some popcorn and pig-out, but just be prepared to take a siesta three or four times in-between bouts of popcorn binge.