Search
Joe Kline (10 KP) rated Beetlejuice (1988) in Movies
Dec 9, 2017
The style of Tim Burton makes this movie amazing visually (3 more)
Michael Keaton creates one of the funniest ghosts of all time
The score by Danny Elfman is phenomenal
Still unique after all these years
Some of the stop motion effects may turn off certain people (1 more)
Although originally rated PG it would easily be a PG13 by modern standards
80's Classic with Timeless Appeal
This is a movie about a young couple's struggle to cope with life, or rather their lack there of. The Maitlands discover that death is just the beginning and the living can be a nuisance.
Trouble is on the horizon as a yuppie couple and their terminally dismal daughter Lydia move in. The rustic country house is soon renovated into a warped view of abstract modernism. The Maitlands are unable to scare off the invaders. In a moment of desperation they respond to an erie advertisement by calling Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice.
After awakening this audacious spirit they soon realise why the other ghosts had warned against him. He is crass and crude and has no boundaries. However the Maitlands discover that putting this genie back in the bottle will not be easy.
Chaos ensues when Beetlejuice goes overboard and makes the family right back. Lydia, who has befriended the Maitlands, is caught in the middle.
This is one of my favorite movies of all time. It's a funny, quirky take on the afterlife. Tim Burton's signature style makes the world beyond both creepy and intriguing. It's paired perfectly with a brilliant score by Danny Elfman.
This is easily one of Michael Keaton best performances. Beetlejuice is the perfect villain that you love to hate, and you hate that you love. Every character is perfectly cast.
There are some negatives, but they're mostly nit-picks. This movie was PG when it came out, but some of the language and humor would easily make it a PG13 today. Some of the stop motion effects may look cheesey to some, although personally I love them. Finally, the eighties modern stylings of the Deets family may date the movie for some.
I cannot recommend this movie enough. If you love dark humor and the visual flare of Tim Burton you owe it to yourself to see this movie.
One final warning: The song Day-O will be stuck in your head for days.
Trouble is on the horizon as a yuppie couple and their terminally dismal daughter Lydia move in. The rustic country house is soon renovated into a warped view of abstract modernism. The Maitlands are unable to scare off the invaders. In a moment of desperation they respond to an erie advertisement by calling Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice.
After awakening this audacious spirit they soon realise why the other ghosts had warned against him. He is crass and crude and has no boundaries. However the Maitlands discover that putting this genie back in the bottle will not be easy.
Chaos ensues when Beetlejuice goes overboard and makes the family right back. Lydia, who has befriended the Maitlands, is caught in the middle.
This is one of my favorite movies of all time. It's a funny, quirky take on the afterlife. Tim Burton's signature style makes the world beyond both creepy and intriguing. It's paired perfectly with a brilliant score by Danny Elfman.
This is easily one of Michael Keaton best performances. Beetlejuice is the perfect villain that you love to hate, and you hate that you love. Every character is perfectly cast.
There are some negatives, but they're mostly nit-picks. This movie was PG when it came out, but some of the language and humor would easily make it a PG13 today. Some of the stop motion effects may look cheesey to some, although personally I love them. Finally, the eighties modern stylings of the Deets family may date the movie for some.
I cannot recommend this movie enough. If you love dark humor and the visual flare of Tim Burton you owe it to yourself to see this movie.
One final warning: The song Day-O will be stuck in your head for days.
Touch - Season 1
8.7
Rate It
TV Season
Widower Martin Bohm's wife, Sarah Bohm, died in the twin towers on September 11, 2001. Previously a...
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993) in Movies
Dec 22, 2019
A timeless classic
I can safely say that there is truly nothing I dislike about The Nightmare Before Christmas.
It's straight to the point, fantastically animated, full of unique characters, and still holds up all these years later.
Director Henry Selick obviously has a keen eye for stop-animation (he would go on to direct James & The Giant Peach, and Coraline, both great animated films in their own right), and his work with the combined animation, visual effects, and art departments create a visually striking adventure that quickly and understandably became iconic.
Tim Burton's story is easy to grasp (great for children as well as adults), and the characters he has created for this story are equal parts creepy and fun.
Jack Skellington and Sally are both tragic and sympathetic characters that are easy to care about. Oogie Boogie is suitably evil (scared the sh*t out of me when I was little), and the rest of the town of Halloween are filled but bizarre and quirky characters that create a weird but warm back drop to the leads.
Danny Elfman is at his very best here. All of the songs contained within are memorable, and pretty epic at points. The lyrics are quick and clever, and do a lot to advance our understanding of the characters.
I can't praise The Nightmare Before Christmas enough. It's simply wonderful and a film I will happily watch time and time again.
It's straight to the point, fantastically animated, full of unique characters, and still holds up all these years later.
Director Henry Selick obviously has a keen eye for stop-animation (he would go on to direct James & The Giant Peach, and Coraline, both great animated films in their own right), and his work with the combined animation, visual effects, and art departments create a visually striking adventure that quickly and understandably became iconic.
Tim Burton's story is easy to grasp (great for children as well as adults), and the characters he has created for this story are equal parts creepy and fun.
Jack Skellington and Sally are both tragic and sympathetic characters that are easy to care about. Oogie Boogie is suitably evil (scared the sh*t out of me when I was little), and the rest of the town of Halloween are filled but bizarre and quirky characters that create a weird but warm back drop to the leads.
Danny Elfman is at his very best here. All of the songs contained within are memorable, and pretty epic at points. The lyrics are quick and clever, and do a lot to advance our understanding of the characters.
I can't praise The Nightmare Before Christmas enough. It's simply wonderful and a film I will happily watch time and time again.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993) in Movies
Oct 29, 2019
Classic
Everything about this movie i love. The amimated, the visuals, the story, the songs, the charcters and so much more. It is both a halloween and christmas movie. It is not just one, but its both. Thats what i love. So lets talk about it...
The Plot: The film follows the misadventures of Jack Skellington, Halloweentown's beloved pumpkin king, who has become bored with the same annual routine of frightening people in the "real world." When Jack accidentally stumbles on Christmastown, all bright colors and warm spirits, he gets a new lease on life -- he plots to bring Christmas under his control by kidnapping Santa Claus and taking over the role. But Jack soon discovers even the best-laid plans of mice and skeleton men can go seriously awry.
Danny Elfman wrote the songs and score, and provided the singing voice of Jack.
The charcters are so memorable, you remember what their look like, what lines their say, who their are.
Even though Henry selick directed this film, it is Tim Burton's film. Everything about this movie is a Tim Burton film- the charcters, the setting, the story, the darkness and so much more. Makes this film a tim burton film. Its also called Tim Burtons: The Nightmare Before Christmas.
It is a classic animated fantasy stop motion horror film, that is loved by all. A must see film.
Lastly shout out to @LeftSideCut for getting the hints/clues for this review right.
The Plot: The film follows the misadventures of Jack Skellington, Halloweentown's beloved pumpkin king, who has become bored with the same annual routine of frightening people in the "real world." When Jack accidentally stumbles on Christmastown, all bright colors and warm spirits, he gets a new lease on life -- he plots to bring Christmas under his control by kidnapping Santa Claus and taking over the role. But Jack soon discovers even the best-laid plans of mice and skeleton men can go seriously awry.
Danny Elfman wrote the songs and score, and provided the singing voice of Jack.
The charcters are so memorable, you remember what their look like, what lines their say, who their are.
Even though Henry selick directed this film, it is Tim Burton's film. Everything about this movie is a Tim Burton film- the charcters, the setting, the story, the darkness and so much more. Makes this film a tim burton film. Its also called Tim Burtons: The Nightmare Before Christmas.
It is a classic animated fantasy stop motion horror film, that is loved by all. A must see film.
Lastly shout out to @LeftSideCut for getting the hints/clues for this review right.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated The Circle (2017) in Movies
Sep 20, 2020
Totally watchable. Before 2020 this would have played as a cockamamie exercise in "in-what-universe-would-this-actually-happen-?" filmmaking (and believe me this still pushes it), but after the anti-mask protests and general shrugging off of the coronavirus pandemic I'd now believe you stupid mfs would do *anything*. I'm not saying this is all brainless - there are some really sturdy ideas in here that aren't all executed terribly. The way it portrays big ticket corporations sliding their hands into every pocket they can find by way of offering up a "likable mascot" rather than a "founder" (played perfectly by Hanks as a clear riff on [a more likable and somehow less disingenuous] Steve Jobs - but what a waste of a perfectly good Oswalt) and "quotable quips" rather than "talking points" so they don't even have to attempt to hide it is sound. The scene where Hanks straightup manipulates Watson's bland cypher *on* stage to the point of tracking down live human beings to an adoring crowd is horrifying - but this is all still rather diluted, clunky, and bizarre in translation from the book. Looks phenomenal though, and is a notable return to form for Danny Elfman (in general every piece of music here slaps). Fine dumb fun imo, cheesy and laughable but not without some wit. But as a final defense - speaking as someone who has spent months in these cliquey millennial tech circles - the fact that no one acts like a live human being here would be way too on the nose if holy mother of God did they not actually act like this. The extended segment of those two overbearing recruiter types indirectly-but-very-directly pushing that "optional" and "extracurricular" really means "mandatory" is pure nightmare fuel because I have been in those situations - in spades - firsthand irl. Moments like that save this still moment-to-moment entertaining diet pulp when it actively refuses to explore anything else it offers up. Doesn't really have enough oomf but still miles better than your average "Black Mirror" episode.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Spider-Man 2 (2004) in Movies
Jul 1, 2019
"There's a hero in all of us"
One of the finest sequels ever made and still counted amongst the greatest superhero flicks in existence, Spider-Man 2 is a remarkable follow-up to its already-impressive predecessor that skilfully builds upon the solid foundation provided by the first film, presents significant upgrades in each filmmaking aspect and beautifully balances all its elements to succeed as not just a de-facto standard of its genre but also as one of the best films of its year.
Set two years after the events of the first film, the story of Spider-Man 2 finds Peter Parker struggling to balance his personal life & his obligations as Spider-Man. His love interest is engaged to someone else, his grades have been steadily declining and he also seems to be losing his powers. Meanwhile, a brilliant scientist named Dr. Otto Octavius transforms into a supervillain with four robotic tentacles fused to his spine after his effort to sustain a nuclear fusion reaction goes horribly wrong.
Directed by Sam Raimi, Spider-Man 2 is a far more mature effort from him in comparison to his previous venture and presents the director in sublime form for this sequel picks up the story right where it was left off the last time despite the 2 years span, progresses the arc of its reprising characters amazingly well while giving a proper introduction to the new ones, and also does an outstanding job in balancing its storytelling elements with moments of action in a seamless manner, due to which everything about this sequel just works.
Alvin Sargent's screenplay is worthy of praise as well for the story takes a darker approach than the last time yet packs in enough humour to prevent it from becoming too bleak, and although the cheesiness of the first chapter isn't reduced, the narrative flow is much more stream-lined than before. Production design team comes up with bigger, more refined set pieces, Cinematography preserves the vibrant camerawork but has a firmer grip on it this time while Editing is definitely one of its strongest aspects for there isn't a dull moment in the picture.
Visual effects is much improved as well and by not overdoing its CGI elements, it keeps the artificiality of its universe at bay for the most part. Sure a number of moments are over-the-top but most of them still fall under the realm of on-screen believability. Last but not the least, Danny Elfman delivers again with a splendid soundtrack that stays true to the original film's score, works as a wonderfully evolved successor, and captures the darker tone with finesse just like it did the last time. Even the existing songs used in the picture are nicely chosen & help compliment the respective sequences.
Coming to the performances, Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, James Franco & J.K. Simmons return to reprise their respective roles of Peter Parker, Mary Jane Watson, Harry Osborn & J. Jonah Jameson and do a better job than before. Maguire builds up on his earlier input to impress once again and what he lacks in star presence, he makes up for it by chipping in a complex performance. Simmons is hilarious as before, Dunst & Franco are still on base level but it's Alfred Molina who impresses the most in what is a sympathetic rendition of Doc Ock, thus making him a classic foe in every way.
On an overall scale, Spider-Man 2 delivers everything one can expect from a sequel. It goes bigger, better & more action-packed than before yet stays completely true to its origin, plus finishes on a high with enough open choices for where it can be headed in later instalments, something that Sony failed to take advantage of. Sam Raimi has weaved a magical web yet again that tightly grasps on to every necessary ingredient to come up with an incredibly fun, highly enjoyable, wildly entertaining & thoroughly satisfying extravaganza that promises yet another high-flying, web-sligning roller-coaster ride and effortlessly delivers it.
Set two years after the events of the first film, the story of Spider-Man 2 finds Peter Parker struggling to balance his personal life & his obligations as Spider-Man. His love interest is engaged to someone else, his grades have been steadily declining and he also seems to be losing his powers. Meanwhile, a brilliant scientist named Dr. Otto Octavius transforms into a supervillain with four robotic tentacles fused to his spine after his effort to sustain a nuclear fusion reaction goes horribly wrong.
Directed by Sam Raimi, Spider-Man 2 is a far more mature effort from him in comparison to his previous venture and presents the director in sublime form for this sequel picks up the story right where it was left off the last time despite the 2 years span, progresses the arc of its reprising characters amazingly well while giving a proper introduction to the new ones, and also does an outstanding job in balancing its storytelling elements with moments of action in a seamless manner, due to which everything about this sequel just works.
Alvin Sargent's screenplay is worthy of praise as well for the story takes a darker approach than the last time yet packs in enough humour to prevent it from becoming too bleak, and although the cheesiness of the first chapter isn't reduced, the narrative flow is much more stream-lined than before. Production design team comes up with bigger, more refined set pieces, Cinematography preserves the vibrant camerawork but has a firmer grip on it this time while Editing is definitely one of its strongest aspects for there isn't a dull moment in the picture.
Visual effects is much improved as well and by not overdoing its CGI elements, it keeps the artificiality of its universe at bay for the most part. Sure a number of moments are over-the-top but most of them still fall under the realm of on-screen believability. Last but not the least, Danny Elfman delivers again with a splendid soundtrack that stays true to the original film's score, works as a wonderfully evolved successor, and captures the darker tone with finesse just like it did the last time. Even the existing songs used in the picture are nicely chosen & help compliment the respective sequences.
Coming to the performances, Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, James Franco & J.K. Simmons return to reprise their respective roles of Peter Parker, Mary Jane Watson, Harry Osborn & J. Jonah Jameson and do a better job than before. Maguire builds up on his earlier input to impress once again and what he lacks in star presence, he makes up for it by chipping in a complex performance. Simmons is hilarious as before, Dunst & Franco are still on base level but it's Alfred Molina who impresses the most in what is a sympathetic rendition of Doc Ock, thus making him a classic foe in every way.
On an overall scale, Spider-Man 2 delivers everything one can expect from a sequel. It goes bigger, better & more action-packed than before yet stays completely true to its origin, plus finishes on a high with enough open choices for where it can be headed in later instalments, something that Sony failed to take advantage of. Sam Raimi has weaved a magical web yet again that tightly grasps on to every necessary ingredient to come up with an incredibly fun, highly enjoyable, wildly entertaining & thoroughly satisfying extravaganza that promises yet another high-flying, web-sligning roller-coaster ride and effortlessly delivers it.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Mummy (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Crushingly Mediocre
I’d read the bad reviews, but thought “Hey, it’s Tom Cruise – how bad could it be?” The answer is, “Pretty bad”.
It’s an ominous sign when a film starts with a voice-over (even if done by the sonorous tones of Russell Crowe). Regular readers of this blog will know I generally abhor voice-overs: it invariably belies a belief by the scriptwriters that they think the audience are too damn stupid to join up the plot-dots themselves. Here we portentously walk through the ancient Egyptian backstory of princess Ahmanet (Sofia Boutella, “Kingsman: The Secret Service“; “Star Trek Beyond“) cursed to become the titular Mummy. We then skip forward to the present day and the film settles down, promisingly enough, with scavenging adventurer Nick Morton (Cruise, in Indiana Jones mode), discovering a lost Egyptian temple in war-torn modern-day Mesopotamia that for the sake of the world should have stayed lost.
But after an impressive plane crash (with zero G scenes filmed for real in a “Vomit Comet”) the plot dissolves into a completely incoherent mush. With B-movie lines forcing B-movie acting performances, the film lurches from plot crisis to plot crisis in a similar manner to the comically lurching undead Zombie-like creatures that Ahmanet has sucked the life out of. (After 110 minutes of this, I know how they feel!)
What were actors of this calibre doing in this mess? When I first saw the trailer for this, and saw that Cruise was in it, I thought this felt like an unusual career misstep for the megastar. After seeing the film, I’m even more mystified. Nick Morton is supposed to be an immoral bad guy. Immoral bad guy?? Tom Cruise?? Nope, you lost the audience on that one in the first ten minutes. Cruise, who is STILL only a year younger than I am (damn him, for real!) is still in great shape and must spend ALL his time in the gym. There must be a time soon coming though where he gets to a “Roger Moore in View to a Kill” moment where these action hero roles just no longer become credible anymore.
And what was Russell Crowe, as a famous / infamous (yes, both!) doctor from literature doing in this? His character’s involvement in the plot was almost completely inconsequential. In fact his ‘affliction’ only serves as a coincidental diversion (how convenient!) for bad Mummy-related action to happen. His character has no backstory and seems to serve only as a backbone for Universal’s “Dark Universe” franchise that this movie is supposed to launch. (Good luck with that Universal after this stinker!) Surely it would have made more sense to have the first film in the series to be the origins story for Crowe’s character and the organisation he sets up. This would have made far more sense.
Annabelle Wallis, who is sweet and “only” 22 years his junior, plays Cruise’s love interest in the film and equips herself well, given the material she has to play with. However (after “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword“) she must be kicking herself for not picking the ‘right’ summer blockbusters for her CV.
The main culprit here is the plot, which again is mystifying given that the writing team includes David Koepp (“Jurassic Park”; “Mission Impossible”); Christopher McQuarrie (“The Usual Suspects”, “Edge of Tomorrow“) and Jon Spaihts (“Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation“, “Doctor Strange“). A poor script can sometimes be salvaged by a good director, but here we have Alex Kurtzman, who has only one other directing credit to his name. And I’m afraid it shows. All round, not a good day at the office.
Brian Tyler did the music (aside from the Danny Elfman opening “Dark Universe” fanfare) but it comprises what I would term “running and jumping music”, with few discernible leitmotifs for the characters breaking through.
“Was that supposed to be funny?” My wife’s reaction after the film sums up that this really is a bit of a stinker. Best avoided.
It’s an ominous sign when a film starts with a voice-over (even if done by the sonorous tones of Russell Crowe). Regular readers of this blog will know I generally abhor voice-overs: it invariably belies a belief by the scriptwriters that they think the audience are too damn stupid to join up the plot-dots themselves. Here we portentously walk through the ancient Egyptian backstory of princess Ahmanet (Sofia Boutella, “Kingsman: The Secret Service“; “Star Trek Beyond“) cursed to become the titular Mummy. We then skip forward to the present day and the film settles down, promisingly enough, with scavenging adventurer Nick Morton (Cruise, in Indiana Jones mode), discovering a lost Egyptian temple in war-torn modern-day Mesopotamia that for the sake of the world should have stayed lost.
But after an impressive plane crash (with zero G scenes filmed for real in a “Vomit Comet”) the plot dissolves into a completely incoherent mush. With B-movie lines forcing B-movie acting performances, the film lurches from plot crisis to plot crisis in a similar manner to the comically lurching undead Zombie-like creatures that Ahmanet has sucked the life out of. (After 110 minutes of this, I know how they feel!)
What were actors of this calibre doing in this mess? When I first saw the trailer for this, and saw that Cruise was in it, I thought this felt like an unusual career misstep for the megastar. After seeing the film, I’m even more mystified. Nick Morton is supposed to be an immoral bad guy. Immoral bad guy?? Tom Cruise?? Nope, you lost the audience on that one in the first ten minutes. Cruise, who is STILL only a year younger than I am (damn him, for real!) is still in great shape and must spend ALL his time in the gym. There must be a time soon coming though where he gets to a “Roger Moore in View to a Kill” moment where these action hero roles just no longer become credible anymore.
And what was Russell Crowe, as a famous / infamous (yes, both!) doctor from literature doing in this? His character’s involvement in the plot was almost completely inconsequential. In fact his ‘affliction’ only serves as a coincidental diversion (how convenient!) for bad Mummy-related action to happen. His character has no backstory and seems to serve only as a backbone for Universal’s “Dark Universe” franchise that this movie is supposed to launch. (Good luck with that Universal after this stinker!) Surely it would have made more sense to have the first film in the series to be the origins story for Crowe’s character and the organisation he sets up. This would have made far more sense.
Annabelle Wallis, who is sweet and “only” 22 years his junior, plays Cruise’s love interest in the film and equips herself well, given the material she has to play with. However (after “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword“) she must be kicking herself for not picking the ‘right’ summer blockbusters for her CV.
The main culprit here is the plot, which again is mystifying given that the writing team includes David Koepp (“Jurassic Park”; “Mission Impossible”); Christopher McQuarrie (“The Usual Suspects”, “Edge of Tomorrow“) and Jon Spaihts (“Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation“, “Doctor Strange“). A poor script can sometimes be salvaged by a good director, but here we have Alex Kurtzman, who has only one other directing credit to his name. And I’m afraid it shows. All round, not a good day at the office.
Brian Tyler did the music (aside from the Danny Elfman opening “Dark Universe” fanfare) but it comprises what I would term “running and jumping music”, with few discernible leitmotifs for the characters breaking through.
“Was that supposed to be funny?” My wife’s reaction after the film sums up that this really is a bit of a stinker. Best avoided.