Search
Search results
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Killer Klowns from Outer Space (1988) in Movies
Sep 10, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
A shooting star passes over a small American town, when a couple of teens go to investigate they find a big top circus tent that is not from this planet. When the occupants of the tent, a group of extra-terrestrial clowns (or Klowns if you will) start running amok and killing people it’s up to a group of young adults to stop them.
Killer Klowns from Outer Space is a goofy B movie from the late 1980’s that really doesn’t take itself too seriously. The effects are actually quite good for a film with such a low budget (Only $2 million) with the Klown costumes being just creepy enough not to come across as being too ridiculous, which takes some doing being as the Klowns are busy cocooning people in candy floss and shooting them with popcorn.
As with most B movies (and a lot of mainstream movies) the plot is quite simple, the Klowns have landed and are killing people and storing them as food and this goes in the films favour. If the plot was overly complicated, then it would not fit the feel of the effects.
Killer Klowns is one of those cult movies that has a few really good stand out scenes. My personal favourite being the encounter between the midget Klown and the biker gang. It also has memorable villains. Clowns as villains are quite common, but these are Klowns with alien technology and an interesting weakness. As the Klowns are alien they don’t speak English but this doesn’t mean they are mute, in fact they have a very creative way of bridging the language barrier and it is good see that the film doesn’t fall back on the old ‘communicator’ trope. It does fall back on other tropes though, we have the old isolated figure as the first victim, making it hard to prove that anyone has died, we have the young cop who is trying to make his way but coming into conflict with the older cop. The older cop doesn’t like the kids, he thinks they are just out to cause trouble. All this is ok though as it fits the low budget flow of the film and makes Killer Klowns feel as a cross between ‘Invasion of the body snatchers’ and ‘night of the living dead’.
Killer Klowns from Outer Space is a goofy B movie from the late 1980’s that really doesn’t take itself too seriously. The effects are actually quite good for a film with such a low budget (Only $2 million) with the Klown costumes being just creepy enough not to come across as being too ridiculous, which takes some doing being as the Klowns are busy cocooning people in candy floss and shooting them with popcorn.
As with most B movies (and a lot of mainstream movies) the plot is quite simple, the Klowns have landed and are killing people and storing them as food and this goes in the films favour. If the plot was overly complicated, then it would not fit the feel of the effects.
Killer Klowns is one of those cult movies that has a few really good stand out scenes. My personal favourite being the encounter between the midget Klown and the biker gang. It also has memorable villains. Clowns as villains are quite common, but these are Klowns with alien technology and an interesting weakness. As the Klowns are alien they don’t speak English but this doesn’t mean they are mute, in fact they have a very creative way of bridging the language barrier and it is good see that the film doesn’t fall back on the old ‘communicator’ trope. It does fall back on other tropes though, we have the old isolated figure as the first victim, making it hard to prove that anyone has died, we have the young cop who is trying to make his way but coming into conflict with the older cop. The older cop doesn’t like the kids, he thinks they are just out to cause trouble. All this is ok though as it fits the low budget flow of the film and makes Killer Klowns feel as a cross between ‘Invasion of the body snatchers’ and ‘night of the living dead’.
Mark Jaye (65 KP) rated The Conjuring (2013) in Movies
May 13, 2019
The Conjuring Review
Contains spoilers, click to show
Originally wrote in 2013:
As an avid fan of horror I look for a few little things which if aren't apparent within the first minute decide on whether I'm going to bother with the rest of the film. Usually the company releasing the movie is a good starting point, reputable/recognised director or producer, recognisable actor/s, good production values - that sort of thing. I've seen some hum-dingers over the years - those films where Johnny Nobody has gathered several of his buddies together with a cheap camcorder or two and filmed some alleged zombie epic in the woods at the back of their school.
**The Conjuring is not one of those**
I like to think I have a strong disposition when it comes to scares - usually it takes a lot to make me squint. Examples that come to mind are 'Sinister', 'The Grudge', the end of 'The Ring' (you know, the scary dark haired girl climbing out of the TV!). The Conjuring is one of those - I watched this in the middle of the morning and found it pretty scary in places.
James Wan certainly knows how to make a movie of this type and is great at evoking atmosphere and notching up the scares as the film develops. In a nutshell, this is the alleged real life story of the Perron family who in 1971 moved into a new farmhouse. It isn't long before the usual shenanigans begin - pictures pulled off walls, doors knocking in the dead of night, the children befriending mysterious 'imaginary' kids (who we all know watching are going to show up at some point). The film sticks to the tried and tested story - gradual possession of one of the adults (Lily Taylor), gradually increasing appearances by ghostly figures, calling in the ghostbusters, gathering the proof, then the exorcism. It may be join the dots territory but it works.
Patrick Wilson shines and seems to be making his mark in films of this nature (Insidious and Insidious Chapter 2) - he portrays real life paranormal investigator Ed Warren who with his wife Lorraine (played just as well by Vera Farmiga) become immersed in the life of the Perron's making themselves targets of the supernatural force at work in the process.
The demonic spirit at work is that of a witch who was married to the guy who built the house back in the 1800's who cursed the land before committing suicide after murdering their child whilst a few days old. There is one particularly pant browning scene where the witch makes her first appearance atop a bedroom wardrobe....and I'll leave it there!
Quality. Best horror I've seen since Sinister.
As an avid fan of horror I look for a few little things which if aren't apparent within the first minute decide on whether I'm going to bother with the rest of the film. Usually the company releasing the movie is a good starting point, reputable/recognised director or producer, recognisable actor/s, good production values - that sort of thing. I've seen some hum-dingers over the years - those films where Johnny Nobody has gathered several of his buddies together with a cheap camcorder or two and filmed some alleged zombie epic in the woods at the back of their school.
**The Conjuring is not one of those**
I like to think I have a strong disposition when it comes to scares - usually it takes a lot to make me squint. Examples that come to mind are 'Sinister', 'The Grudge', the end of 'The Ring' (you know, the scary dark haired girl climbing out of the TV!). The Conjuring is one of those - I watched this in the middle of the morning and found it pretty scary in places.
James Wan certainly knows how to make a movie of this type and is great at evoking atmosphere and notching up the scares as the film develops. In a nutshell, this is the alleged real life story of the Perron family who in 1971 moved into a new farmhouse. It isn't long before the usual shenanigans begin - pictures pulled off walls, doors knocking in the dead of night, the children befriending mysterious 'imaginary' kids (who we all know watching are going to show up at some point). The film sticks to the tried and tested story - gradual possession of one of the adults (Lily Taylor), gradually increasing appearances by ghostly figures, calling in the ghostbusters, gathering the proof, then the exorcism. It may be join the dots territory but it works.
Patrick Wilson shines and seems to be making his mark in films of this nature (Insidious and Insidious Chapter 2) - he portrays real life paranormal investigator Ed Warren who with his wife Lorraine (played just as well by Vera Farmiga) become immersed in the life of the Perron's making themselves targets of the supernatural force at work in the process.
The demonic spirit at work is that of a witch who was married to the guy who built the house back in the 1800's who cursed the land before committing suicide after murdering their child whilst a few days old. There is one particularly pant browning scene where the witch makes her first appearance atop a bedroom wardrobe....and I'll leave it there!
Quality. Best horror I've seen since Sinister.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Swinging Safari (2019) in Movies
Oct 29, 2019
Whomp Whomp...
I was strongly hoping I had found a hidden gem in Swinging Safari. Not so much…Taking place in 70’s Australia, it follows the lives of three neighborhood families and how their lives swing out of control when they get a little too close.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 3
Characters: 5
There are some instances in movies where the characters alone are enough to carry the movie (see Everybody Wants Some!!). Not so much here. Outside of the two main characters, the rest of the cast was pretty unlovable. Their lack of redeeming qualities made it hard for me to root for anything good to happen to any of them. Typically when the characters suck, the rest of the movie isn’t far behind. Unless of course it’s an action movie…
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
I have no idea what 1970’s Australia looks like but I feel like I was right in the heart of it here. The way this movie captures certain scenes is pure magic and, in some case, extremely original. One scene in particular features all the adults inside playing games and drinking while the kids are outside doing daredevil stunts for a makeshift film. It’s hilarious watching the adults argue while the kids are trying to put out a fire…a fire they purposefully set upon one of the kids. Extremely well done.
Conflict: 5
It’s not that there wasn’t conflict here. It’s just that I didn’t really care enough about it for it to be substantial. Again, conflict against characters you don’t care about is tough for me to enjoy. I was looking for more, something more meaningful.
Entertainment Value: 5
The fun factor of this movie is few and far between. It has its moments, but overall, it feels very average. Dead Horse: Drab characters really put a damper on this movie as a whole.
Memorability: 6
I can honestly say that there are a couple of unique scenes that I’ve never seen before in any other movie. I don’t want to ruin things by diving too much into the dynamics, but there are some flashes of greatness here that I really appreciated. As a whole, the movie was more forgettable than anything.
Pace: 6
Plot: 1
Resolution: 10
I have to say, despite its flaws, this movie has one of my favorite endings of film. Without spoiling anything, we’ll just say it definitely goes out with a bang. It’s a glimpse of what the movie could have been as a whole.
Overall: 61
Swinging Safari sadly strikes out for me. Despite an endearing relationship between the two young characters and a few beautiful shots and setpieces, the movie has glaring holes that can’t be plugged up. I will have to look for my gem elsewhere.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 3
Characters: 5
There are some instances in movies where the characters alone are enough to carry the movie (see Everybody Wants Some!!). Not so much here. Outside of the two main characters, the rest of the cast was pretty unlovable. Their lack of redeeming qualities made it hard for me to root for anything good to happen to any of them. Typically when the characters suck, the rest of the movie isn’t far behind. Unless of course it’s an action movie…
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
I have no idea what 1970’s Australia looks like but I feel like I was right in the heart of it here. The way this movie captures certain scenes is pure magic and, in some case, extremely original. One scene in particular features all the adults inside playing games and drinking while the kids are outside doing daredevil stunts for a makeshift film. It’s hilarious watching the adults argue while the kids are trying to put out a fire…a fire they purposefully set upon one of the kids. Extremely well done.
Conflict: 5
It’s not that there wasn’t conflict here. It’s just that I didn’t really care enough about it for it to be substantial. Again, conflict against characters you don’t care about is tough for me to enjoy. I was looking for more, something more meaningful.
Entertainment Value: 5
The fun factor of this movie is few and far between. It has its moments, but overall, it feels very average. Dead Horse: Drab characters really put a damper on this movie as a whole.
Memorability: 6
I can honestly say that there are a couple of unique scenes that I’ve never seen before in any other movie. I don’t want to ruin things by diving too much into the dynamics, but there are some flashes of greatness here that I really appreciated. As a whole, the movie was more forgettable than anything.
Pace: 6
Plot: 1
Resolution: 10
I have to say, despite its flaws, this movie has one of my favorite endings of film. Without spoiling anything, we’ll just say it definitely goes out with a bang. It’s a glimpse of what the movie could have been as a whole.
Overall: 61
Swinging Safari sadly strikes out for me. Despite an endearing relationship between the two young characters and a few beautiful shots and setpieces, the movie has glaring holes that can’t be plugged up. I will have to look for my gem elsewhere.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018) in Movies
Jan 15, 2019
Very Satisfying
When Miles Morales gets bit by a radioactive spider he assumes the role of Spider-Man. Except there’s more than one Spider-Man from separate dimensions crashing into one. The superheroes have to get to the bottom of what put them together and figure out how to right those wrongs for the sake of the universe.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
Characters: 10
Easily one of the shining moments of this movie is learning about each spider character. Their differing personalities make the team-ups and dialogue scenes hilarious. Peter B. Parker shows us what kind of man a hero becomes when his life completely falls apart. He’s nonchalant and sloppy, but not because he doesn’t care anymore. Meanwhile, Spider-Ham was just perfect in every single way. I won’t spoil any of his moments like trailers have already done, but his featured scenes don’t disappoint in the least.
Villains are solid as well. Kingpin is a coldhearted badass who intimidates everyone in his path. As the story progresses, you understand what helped to make him who he becomes. This movie did an excellent job of fleshing out each character and giving them purpose.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 10
Genre: 8
Animated film or not, this movie is as good as it gets. Though not in my upper echelon of superhero films, it still ranks right up there with some of the best. Incredibles 2 gets the nod for best animated superhero film this year, but Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not too far behind.
Memorability: 9The animation style alone is enough to make this movie one that sticks around in your head long after you’ve watched it. The action sequences are long and satisfying, really popping off the screen. A positive message puts a nice little bow on top of everything.
Pace: 10
Entertaining from beginning to end, Into the Spider-Verse sets a swift pace and doesn’t slow down. Even scenes between the action have something important or funny happening that keeps the audience involved in the story. No slow-downs or lulls, the movie remains fresh deep into its runtime.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 5
Ending was meh. Wasn’t bad, but it didn’t give me that Cherry On Top feel that I typically look for in an ending. It left me feeling a little…empty.
Overall: 88
When I first put Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse on my radar, I had no idea what to expect. I saw it as more of Sony trying to cash in on their one main Marvel character. After seeing it, I’m happy to report that I was dead wrong. I really enjoyed the movie and I can’t wait to check it out again at home in 4K!
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
Characters: 10
Easily one of the shining moments of this movie is learning about each spider character. Their differing personalities make the team-ups and dialogue scenes hilarious. Peter B. Parker shows us what kind of man a hero becomes when his life completely falls apart. He’s nonchalant and sloppy, but not because he doesn’t care anymore. Meanwhile, Spider-Ham was just perfect in every single way. I won’t spoil any of his moments like trailers have already done, but his featured scenes don’t disappoint in the least.
Villains are solid as well. Kingpin is a coldhearted badass who intimidates everyone in his path. As the story progresses, you understand what helped to make him who he becomes. This movie did an excellent job of fleshing out each character and giving them purpose.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 10
Genre: 8
Animated film or not, this movie is as good as it gets. Though not in my upper echelon of superhero films, it still ranks right up there with some of the best. Incredibles 2 gets the nod for best animated superhero film this year, but Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not too far behind.
Memorability: 9The animation style alone is enough to make this movie one that sticks around in your head long after you’ve watched it. The action sequences are long and satisfying, really popping off the screen. A positive message puts a nice little bow on top of everything.
Pace: 10
Entertaining from beginning to end, Into the Spider-Verse sets a swift pace and doesn’t slow down. Even scenes between the action have something important or funny happening that keeps the audience involved in the story. No slow-downs or lulls, the movie remains fresh deep into its runtime.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 5
Ending was meh. Wasn’t bad, but it didn’t give me that Cherry On Top feel that I typically look for in an ending. It left me feeling a little…empty.
Overall: 88
When I first put Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse on my radar, I had no idea what to expect. I saw it as more of Sony trying to cash in on their one main Marvel character. After seeing it, I’m happy to report that I was dead wrong. I really enjoyed the movie and I can’t wait to check it out again at home in 4K!
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In 2009, writer/director by Tommy Wirkola gained a cult following with his Zombie splatter film “Dead Snow”. Hollywood took notice and he was awarded with a larger budget and bigger stars for his follow up film “Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters”. The film chronicles the fairytale brother and sister duo after they escaped the gingerbread house and started hunting down witches. Originally supposed to be released in 2012, the film was pushed back to a January 2013 release in hopes of generating more buzz on Jeremy Renner’s rising star. When the film was complete, Renner had yet to appear in last year’s films “The Avengers” and “The Bourne Legacy”. A good strategy, if the standard TV trailers did not make this movie look worse than it actually is.
I have to be honest. I went into this movie expecting it to be terrible. Personally I do not have much faith in Renner (Hansel) as a leading man. I know he is somewhat hot right now but to me he is best as a supporting role. I also have only seen Gemma Arterton (Gretel) in “Clash of the Titans” (2010) where she was nothing more than a pretty face in that lack luster film. Perhaps it was because of such low expectations that together they worked. They were both “bad ass” as the brother sister bounty hunters. Not spectacular performances or anything but easily entertaining and likeable performances.
The story follows the duo as they attempt to hunt down some missing children form a small village that is troubled by witches. Famke Janssen (Taken 2) leads the supporting cast as Leader of the witches who is trying to cast a spell that will make the witches stronger than ever. The three clash it out and that is basically the story.
From a stylistic standpoint fans of Wirkola’s films will not be disappointed. The dark and grim fairytale world he creates is charming and helps us fall into the fantasy. Furthermore this film has several gruesome scenes that are shockingly comical in the way they are over the top. At no point do they feel unnecessary for shock value, but rather they happen in a way that seems normal and plausible in the world we are shown on film. Additionally the pacing of this film is fast. There was not a dull moment as the 88 minute run time is one action or story driven transition to the next. Together these aspects help the film feel fun, lighthearted and surprisingly entertaining. Also the 3D effects help the film and do not seem distracting.
The finished product accomplishes something that other fast paced ridiculous action flicks do not. It keeps it simple. Tommy Wirkola shows his talent by keeping various stylistic factors and pacing together in a way that makes the simplistic story complete. Often times in films like this there comes a point where your suspended disbelief is tested beyond its limits. But that is not the case here. Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters delivers an entertaining fast paced movie that the TV previews do not to justice. If you are a fan of zombies, vampires, witches or any other supernatural type characters then you will not want to miss this film.
I have to be honest. I went into this movie expecting it to be terrible. Personally I do not have much faith in Renner (Hansel) as a leading man. I know he is somewhat hot right now but to me he is best as a supporting role. I also have only seen Gemma Arterton (Gretel) in “Clash of the Titans” (2010) where she was nothing more than a pretty face in that lack luster film. Perhaps it was because of such low expectations that together they worked. They were both “bad ass” as the brother sister bounty hunters. Not spectacular performances or anything but easily entertaining and likeable performances.
The story follows the duo as they attempt to hunt down some missing children form a small village that is troubled by witches. Famke Janssen (Taken 2) leads the supporting cast as Leader of the witches who is trying to cast a spell that will make the witches stronger than ever. The three clash it out and that is basically the story.
From a stylistic standpoint fans of Wirkola’s films will not be disappointed. The dark and grim fairytale world he creates is charming and helps us fall into the fantasy. Furthermore this film has several gruesome scenes that are shockingly comical in the way they are over the top. At no point do they feel unnecessary for shock value, but rather they happen in a way that seems normal and plausible in the world we are shown on film. Additionally the pacing of this film is fast. There was not a dull moment as the 88 minute run time is one action or story driven transition to the next. Together these aspects help the film feel fun, lighthearted and surprisingly entertaining. Also the 3D effects help the film and do not seem distracting.
The finished product accomplishes something that other fast paced ridiculous action flicks do not. It keeps it simple. Tommy Wirkola shows his talent by keeping various stylistic factors and pacing together in a way that makes the simplistic story complete. Often times in films like this there comes a point where your suspended disbelief is tested beyond its limits. But that is not the case here. Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters delivers an entertaining fast paced movie that the TV previews do not to justice. If you are a fan of zombies, vampires, witches or any other supernatural type characters then you will not want to miss this film.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Vox Lux (2018) in Movies
Sep 18, 2019
Black Swan 2: The Return of Durant
In 1999, a middle school teenager Celeste has survived a horrific school shooting which has left multiple students and teacher dead. Through tragedy, the wounded girl triumphs through the singing of a tribute song which goes viral and becomes an anthem for heartbreak throughout the world.
She achieves instant success with her song, so much so, she gets a recording contract and her and her sister are whisked away to Sweden to record it officially and make a music video. Her manager chaperones her time there, but does not have much success. The girls have a good time partying and choosing every excess including the consequences. The video is a success and she becomes a star.
Eighteen years later, the aging pop star is trying to make a comeback and show she can still keep up. Her relationships with her sister, teenage daughter and sister as she has lived the ego-driven life of a celebrity now for too long. One the eve of a concert performance, another massive multi-person shooting happens at a beachfront, the perpetrators donning masks used in one of her videos making her the target of paparazzi and media scrutiny at a pivotal time in her life.
She tries to salvage her relationship with her daughter who is going through her own teenage angst with mixed success. It seems she is her own worst enemy questioning her choices and continuing leading the lifestyle of a demanding celebrity.
The movie seems like a tale of two halves with the teenage Celeste and the "grown up" version even having screen captures saying so. For me the first half was way more interesting than the second. The teenage Celeste was more believable, maybe because you didn't know her, but the screenplay was more interesting for her as well.
One can only imagine the emotions of having to live through such a tragedy and having to rebuild your life afterwards. Then adding on top of it, her instantaneous global stardom could not have done well to heal her physical, but emotional scars as well.
I felt Natalie Portman seemed out of place and her acting felt very wooden and dry to me unlike most of her portfolio. She even was an executive producer on the film along with her costar Jude Law, so she may have been focused on that instead of her acting performance. She doesn't appear in the film until close to an hour in and filmed her scenes over 10 days. It is unfortunate, but I really didn't believe her and took me out of several scenes as a result.
It is hard to empathize with the celebrity lifestyle of excess and demands having never lived it myself. It has certainly been portrayed onscreen much better than it is here and it really felt like the two halves of the film were disconnected and not resolved.
I certainly don't mind, or even encourage, the vague open-ended type of film generally speaking if it is left you to think about the plight of the characters their decisions, and ultimate destinations; however, this film accomplishes this only through bad writing.
The concert footage was well done and Portman certainly delivered on transforming into a Madonna/Britney Spears type icon. I was just hoping for more of a payoff and felt disappointed in the end.
She achieves instant success with her song, so much so, she gets a recording contract and her and her sister are whisked away to Sweden to record it officially and make a music video. Her manager chaperones her time there, but does not have much success. The girls have a good time partying and choosing every excess including the consequences. The video is a success and she becomes a star.
Eighteen years later, the aging pop star is trying to make a comeback and show she can still keep up. Her relationships with her sister, teenage daughter and sister as she has lived the ego-driven life of a celebrity now for too long. One the eve of a concert performance, another massive multi-person shooting happens at a beachfront, the perpetrators donning masks used in one of her videos making her the target of paparazzi and media scrutiny at a pivotal time in her life.
She tries to salvage her relationship with her daughter who is going through her own teenage angst with mixed success. It seems she is her own worst enemy questioning her choices and continuing leading the lifestyle of a demanding celebrity.
The movie seems like a tale of two halves with the teenage Celeste and the "grown up" version even having screen captures saying so. For me the first half was way more interesting than the second. The teenage Celeste was more believable, maybe because you didn't know her, but the screenplay was more interesting for her as well.
One can only imagine the emotions of having to live through such a tragedy and having to rebuild your life afterwards. Then adding on top of it, her instantaneous global stardom could not have done well to heal her physical, but emotional scars as well.
I felt Natalie Portman seemed out of place and her acting felt very wooden and dry to me unlike most of her portfolio. She even was an executive producer on the film along with her costar Jude Law, so she may have been focused on that instead of her acting performance. She doesn't appear in the film until close to an hour in and filmed her scenes over 10 days. It is unfortunate, but I really didn't believe her and took me out of several scenes as a result.
It is hard to empathize with the celebrity lifestyle of excess and demands having never lived it myself. It has certainly been portrayed onscreen much better than it is here and it really felt like the two halves of the film were disconnected and not resolved.
I certainly don't mind, or even encourage, the vague open-ended type of film generally speaking if it is left you to think about the plight of the characters their decisions, and ultimate destinations; however, this film accomplishes this only through bad writing.
The concert footage was well done and Portman certainly delivered on transforming into a Madonna/Britney Spears type icon. I was just hoping for more of a payoff and felt disappointed in the end.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Every Last Lie in Books
Jan 23, 2018
Irritating characters (1 more)
Letdown of an ending
A bit of a letdown
Clara Solberg's new son, Felix, is just days old when her husband, Nick, and four-year-old daughter, Maisie are in a terrible car crash. They are heading home from Maisie's ballet class when Nick takes a curve too fast and the car slams into a tree--Maisie is amazingly uninjured, but Nick is killed. Devastated, Clara finds herself unable to sleep or eat and soon, Maisie begins having nightmares, telling her mother a bad man is after her and showing fear about a particular kind of car. Clara begins to wonder if her husband's death was really an accident. As she investigates, she also starts to ponder if she knew Nick at all.
Kubica's latest is told in alternating perspectives: Clara, as she deals with the aftermath of her husband's untimely death, and Nick, in the months leading up to the car crash. It should be an effective format, causing things to unfurl slowly and build tension and suspense. Unfortunately, in this case, it also creates a layer of stress. Maybe I just caught this book at a bad time--I was busy with work and could only pick it up in bits and pieces for a while--but the first 2/3 or so just stressed me out. I found myself almost dreading picking it back up and finding out what Clara was up to. While we should have sympathy for Clara, as her husband is dead and she's left alone with two small children, I often found her annoying and, honestly, a borderline terrible parent.
As such, her parenting decisions and overall bad judgment left me unable to enjoy or even fathom huge portions of the novel. Maybe she's clouded by grief and fatigue, but I'm not sure I'd immediately go from my child having one nightmare to thinking my husband had been killed. Nor would I leave my children in the (hot) car alone everywhere I went, chasing down leads on this supposed murder. Good grief. Her unhinged behavior was hard to stomach after awhile.
Nick's portions were almost easier to read, even if he too is an unsympathetic character: a man who just needed to not lie constantly to his wife. (Why, why must characters just lie incessantly in some of these novels?)
The one redeeming facet for this novel was the last third--and again, I have to say that maybe I just found the book at a bad time, because when I finally found a little time to read it uninterrupted (e.g., stay up too late the night before my children started school--a decision I'm still regretting), it did pick up. I read the last third in one setting, because the dramatic tension was finally affecting me, and I needed to know what happened.
Still, even in the end, I felt let down by it all. Why did I read this? What was the point? I have read two other of Kubica's novels and enjoyed them, particularly Pretty Baby, but this one just didn't do it for me.
Overall: stressful, lacked the appropriate tension for most of the novel, belabored by annoying/irritating characters, and a letdown of an ending. Before writing this review, I was thinking 3 stars, but as I'm writing, I realized this was a 2.5 star read for me. Hopefully you will enjoy it more than me. I will definitely read whatever Kubica writes (and I still have The Good Girl waiting on my Kindle app), but I'm disappointed by this one.
More at http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/.
Kubica's latest is told in alternating perspectives: Clara, as she deals with the aftermath of her husband's untimely death, and Nick, in the months leading up to the car crash. It should be an effective format, causing things to unfurl slowly and build tension and suspense. Unfortunately, in this case, it also creates a layer of stress. Maybe I just caught this book at a bad time--I was busy with work and could only pick it up in bits and pieces for a while--but the first 2/3 or so just stressed me out. I found myself almost dreading picking it back up and finding out what Clara was up to. While we should have sympathy for Clara, as her husband is dead and she's left alone with two small children, I often found her annoying and, honestly, a borderline terrible parent.
As such, her parenting decisions and overall bad judgment left me unable to enjoy or even fathom huge portions of the novel. Maybe she's clouded by grief and fatigue, but I'm not sure I'd immediately go from my child having one nightmare to thinking my husband had been killed. Nor would I leave my children in the (hot) car alone everywhere I went, chasing down leads on this supposed murder. Good grief. Her unhinged behavior was hard to stomach after awhile.
Nick's portions were almost easier to read, even if he too is an unsympathetic character: a man who just needed to not lie constantly to his wife. (Why, why must characters just lie incessantly in some of these novels?)
The one redeeming facet for this novel was the last third--and again, I have to say that maybe I just found the book at a bad time, because when I finally found a little time to read it uninterrupted (e.g., stay up too late the night before my children started school--a decision I'm still regretting), it did pick up. I read the last third in one setting, because the dramatic tension was finally affecting me, and I needed to know what happened.
Still, even in the end, I felt let down by it all. Why did I read this? What was the point? I have read two other of Kubica's novels and enjoyed them, particularly Pretty Baby, but this one just didn't do it for me.
Overall: stressful, lacked the appropriate tension for most of the novel, belabored by annoying/irritating characters, and a letdown of an ending. Before writing this review, I was thinking 3 stars, but as I'm writing, I realized this was a 2.5 star read for me. Hopefully you will enjoy it more than me. I will definitely read whatever Kubica writes (and I still have The Good Girl waiting on my Kindle app), but I'm disappointed by this one.
More at http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Slaughterhouse Rulez (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Form-Prefect of the Dead.
The Plot
Meredith Houseman (Simon Pegg) is housemaster of Sparta house in Slaughterhouse school: an ancient public school establishment steering England’s future greats to greatness (which probably explains a lot about the current Brexit mess!). Houseman is not in a happy place, given that his girlfriend is now in deepest darkest African doing “good works” with handsome French doctors, and particularly that she is played by Margot Robbie: I would be also be sad… #punching!
New school starter Don Wallace (Finn Cole) is equally unhappy as he is a northern teen dragooned into attending the school by his well-meaning Mum (Jo Hartley). His strange room-mate Willoughby (Asa Butterfield) seems to be a chronic depressive; he is being picked on by the prefect-bully Clegg (Tom Rhys Harries); and his bed was previously occupied by a Viscount, since deceased under unpleasant circumstances that no-one wants to talk about. At least he has the distraction of the upper-sixth school goddess Clemsie Lawrence (Hermione Corfield) to take his mind off his woes.
All this washes over “The Bat” – the school’s headmaster (Michael Sheen) – since he is engrossed in some shady deal with an evil corporation doing fracking in the school grounds. The fracking though seems to be doing more than just causing a few minor earth tremors, as ancient forces are unleashed.
The Review
The movie is positioned as a “comedy/horror”, along the lines of “Shaun of the Dead”. The film also has Frost and Pegg as executive producers and they also have starring roles in the film. But there the similarities really end: this is a “Cornetto film” without a cone of solid chocolate lurking at the bottom to enjoy.
The script (by director Crispian Mills and first-time screenwriter Henry Fitzherbert) is nowhere near as sharp as the Frost/Pegg scripts for their famous collaborations. The story overall makes precious little sense: it’s a hodge-podge of elements from many Harry Potter films (especially “The Chamber of Secrets”), Lindsay Anderson’s “If…”; and Roy Boulting’s “The Guinea Pig”; with also a sprinkling of the anarchic essence of Michael Palin’s classic “Tomkinson’s Schooldays”. The whole thing never manages to gel into a cohesive whole.
After the second reel, the film completely loses sight of the plot: there’s a whole lot of running, screaming and dying going on but there’s little logic behind any of it that I could fathom. What didn’t help my comprehension of what was going on were some ‘Cornetto-esque’ sequences of manic editing. Images were thrown onto the screen so subliminally that any clever nuance was lost. I’m sure at one point there was a droll (if gross) segue at a “Roman orgy” of a girl receiving oral sex before being ‘eaten out’ in an entirely different way. But you would need a Blu-ray and a frame-by-frame pause function to get the joke.
That’s not to say that I didn’t laugh a few times along the way. There are some sight gags – for example, Wooten (Kit Connor) as the lad at the bottom of the bullying pecking order, chained to a U-bend – that made me laugh, and some running jokes – for example, Frost as the head of the anti-fracking camp offering the kids drugs at every encounter – that mildly amuse. But once again here’s a British comedy that, like the atrocious “The Brits are Coming“, thinks that “funny” largely revolves around swearing a lot – how useful that “frack” sounds so similar to another word – with added bodily dismemberment.
The turns
Pegg and Frost ham it up with their usual comedy schtick well enough, and it was quite fun to see Sheen try a comedy role for a change as the conniving and supercilious headmaster. Elsewhere all the young cast put their hearts into it, but it’s again Asa Butterfield that your eyes gravitate to, due to his striking features. I last saw Asa in the excellent if harrowing WW1 drama “Journey’s End“, and he here proves again that he is a One Mann’s Movies ‘name to watch for the future’.
Final thoughts
There’s a lot to irritate in this film. From the “z” in the title to… well… about 80% of the film. There is no nuance or subtlety to either the writing or the direction. I think that’s a great shame. The film has a good premise hidden in there. An adult comedy set around the ridiculous rules and rites of public schools (away from the light nonsense of “St Trinians”) is overdue. And the whole subject of fracking, and the conflicts surrounding the controversial techniques, hasn’t yet – to my knowledge – been explored in a fictional movie. The film does have a few very funny moments. But as a whole I left the cinema with that “wasted two hours” feeling. Not recommended.
Meredith Houseman (Simon Pegg) is housemaster of Sparta house in Slaughterhouse school: an ancient public school establishment steering England’s future greats to greatness (which probably explains a lot about the current Brexit mess!). Houseman is not in a happy place, given that his girlfriend is now in deepest darkest African doing “good works” with handsome French doctors, and particularly that she is played by Margot Robbie: I would be also be sad… #punching!
New school starter Don Wallace (Finn Cole) is equally unhappy as he is a northern teen dragooned into attending the school by his well-meaning Mum (Jo Hartley). His strange room-mate Willoughby (Asa Butterfield) seems to be a chronic depressive; he is being picked on by the prefect-bully Clegg (Tom Rhys Harries); and his bed was previously occupied by a Viscount, since deceased under unpleasant circumstances that no-one wants to talk about. At least he has the distraction of the upper-sixth school goddess Clemsie Lawrence (Hermione Corfield) to take his mind off his woes.
All this washes over “The Bat” – the school’s headmaster (Michael Sheen) – since he is engrossed in some shady deal with an evil corporation doing fracking in the school grounds. The fracking though seems to be doing more than just causing a few minor earth tremors, as ancient forces are unleashed.
The Review
The movie is positioned as a “comedy/horror”, along the lines of “Shaun of the Dead”. The film also has Frost and Pegg as executive producers and they also have starring roles in the film. But there the similarities really end: this is a “Cornetto film” without a cone of solid chocolate lurking at the bottom to enjoy.
The script (by director Crispian Mills and first-time screenwriter Henry Fitzherbert) is nowhere near as sharp as the Frost/Pegg scripts for their famous collaborations. The story overall makes precious little sense: it’s a hodge-podge of elements from many Harry Potter films (especially “The Chamber of Secrets”), Lindsay Anderson’s “If…”; and Roy Boulting’s “The Guinea Pig”; with also a sprinkling of the anarchic essence of Michael Palin’s classic “Tomkinson’s Schooldays”. The whole thing never manages to gel into a cohesive whole.
After the second reel, the film completely loses sight of the plot: there’s a whole lot of running, screaming and dying going on but there’s little logic behind any of it that I could fathom. What didn’t help my comprehension of what was going on were some ‘Cornetto-esque’ sequences of manic editing. Images were thrown onto the screen so subliminally that any clever nuance was lost. I’m sure at one point there was a droll (if gross) segue at a “Roman orgy” of a girl receiving oral sex before being ‘eaten out’ in an entirely different way. But you would need a Blu-ray and a frame-by-frame pause function to get the joke.
That’s not to say that I didn’t laugh a few times along the way. There are some sight gags – for example, Wooten (Kit Connor) as the lad at the bottom of the bullying pecking order, chained to a U-bend – that made me laugh, and some running jokes – for example, Frost as the head of the anti-fracking camp offering the kids drugs at every encounter – that mildly amuse. But once again here’s a British comedy that, like the atrocious “The Brits are Coming“, thinks that “funny” largely revolves around swearing a lot – how useful that “frack” sounds so similar to another word – with added bodily dismemberment.
The turns
Pegg and Frost ham it up with their usual comedy schtick well enough, and it was quite fun to see Sheen try a comedy role for a change as the conniving and supercilious headmaster. Elsewhere all the young cast put their hearts into it, but it’s again Asa Butterfield that your eyes gravitate to, due to his striking features. I last saw Asa in the excellent if harrowing WW1 drama “Journey’s End“, and he here proves again that he is a One Mann’s Movies ‘name to watch for the future’.
Final thoughts
There’s a lot to irritate in this film. From the “z” in the title to… well… about 80% of the film. There is no nuance or subtlety to either the writing or the direction. I think that’s a great shame. The film has a good premise hidden in there. An adult comedy set around the ridiculous rules and rites of public schools (away from the light nonsense of “St Trinians”) is overdue. And the whole subject of fracking, and the conflicts surrounding the controversial techniques, hasn’t yet – to my knowledge – been explored in a fictional movie. The film does have a few very funny moments. But as a whole I left the cinema with that “wasted two hours” feeling. Not recommended.
Here Come the Warm Jets
Book
"Warren's first book of poems is highly self-reflective, interestingly interrogative, and a lot of...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Angel Has Fallen (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
Full review: OMG explodey goodness! End.
Okay fine... the real full review is below.
Mike Banning is now on President Trumbull's secret service detail, past events have left him battered and bruised but he's not ready to stop doing what he was made to do.
When they take a short break so the President can get away from everything Mike is left in a life-changing situation. His team is all dead, the President is in a coma and all the evidence of the incident points to him. He needs to prove his innocence while evading every law enforcement agency that's hunting him, his only advantage? They aren't Mike Banning.
I loved Olympus Has Fallen, it was only narrowly edged out of the top spot the year it came out by White House Down. London Has Fallen was a completely different beast, it was much more aggressive and dark, and while entertaining it didn't feel like it fit with Olympus. Angel was always on my watchlist despite the dubious second instalment. At the very least it was going to be an action film where I didn't really have to think too much.
Angel Has Fallen is entirely predictable, I had two moments where I went "Oh... so this is what's going to happen..." I wasn't even mad that I guessed though, I was having too much fun.
Gerard Butler gets to flex his comedic muscles a bit more (look out for the wire), he does comedy so well that I've always got my fingers crossed for more of it. He mangles a lot of bad guys, naturally, but he managed to work in the fact that Mike isn't the spring chicken he used to be and it's a very convincing act. He also isn't phased by the fact his wife has had plastic surgery and transformed into a completely different woman.
Morgan Freeman reprises his role as Trumbull this time in the office of President. Freeman is one of my favourite actors and he always brings something to his roles. At one point he makes a very brief speech and that tone... it has a magical calming effect and instils great confidence. What are his political views? Is it worth considering him for office?
Nick Nolte also makes an appearance as Mike's estranger father. This leads to some very amusing scenes throughout. I'm not sure if it's because Nolte has the "grizzled back woodsman" look but it doesn't feel quite right that it's a father and son situation. The two have good chemistry though, especially while they're out in the woods.
There are some good and some bad things about the way the film is done. The worst is the CGI. Generally you'll always know where there's CGI in action but it will blend in well enough to be ignored. Some of the time that's true in Angel Has Fallen, but there's a lot that can't be ignored.
When it comes to the camera work it's quite good, you don't feel like you're missing anything and it helps you keep up with the action. There's just one point very early on that sticks out. We get a couple of first person shooter shots and while I understand why they were included it felt very out of place with the tone of everything around it.
After I saw London Has Fallen it felt like the franchise had already given up on itself a bit. Angel has definitely pulled it back. Olympus was a "serious" movie, London went much more ridiculous, and Angel did the only thing it could... go all out action. It feels very much like a classic 80s action storyline and I can't be mad at that.
Originally posted on: emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/angel-has-fallen-movie-review.html
Okay fine... the real full review is below.
Mike Banning is now on President Trumbull's secret service detail, past events have left him battered and bruised but he's not ready to stop doing what he was made to do.
When they take a short break so the President can get away from everything Mike is left in a life-changing situation. His team is all dead, the President is in a coma and all the evidence of the incident points to him. He needs to prove his innocence while evading every law enforcement agency that's hunting him, his only advantage? They aren't Mike Banning.
I loved Olympus Has Fallen, it was only narrowly edged out of the top spot the year it came out by White House Down. London Has Fallen was a completely different beast, it was much more aggressive and dark, and while entertaining it didn't feel like it fit with Olympus. Angel was always on my watchlist despite the dubious second instalment. At the very least it was going to be an action film where I didn't really have to think too much.
Angel Has Fallen is entirely predictable, I had two moments where I went "Oh... so this is what's going to happen..." I wasn't even mad that I guessed though, I was having too much fun.
Gerard Butler gets to flex his comedic muscles a bit more (look out for the wire), he does comedy so well that I've always got my fingers crossed for more of it. He mangles a lot of bad guys, naturally, but he managed to work in the fact that Mike isn't the spring chicken he used to be and it's a very convincing act. He also isn't phased by the fact his wife has had plastic surgery and transformed into a completely different woman.
Morgan Freeman reprises his role as Trumbull this time in the office of President. Freeman is one of my favourite actors and he always brings something to his roles. At one point he makes a very brief speech and that tone... it has a magical calming effect and instils great confidence. What are his political views? Is it worth considering him for office?
Nick Nolte also makes an appearance as Mike's estranger father. This leads to some very amusing scenes throughout. I'm not sure if it's because Nolte has the "grizzled back woodsman" look but it doesn't feel quite right that it's a father and son situation. The two have good chemistry though, especially while they're out in the woods.
There are some good and some bad things about the way the film is done. The worst is the CGI. Generally you'll always know where there's CGI in action but it will blend in well enough to be ignored. Some of the time that's true in Angel Has Fallen, but there's a lot that can't be ignored.
When it comes to the camera work it's quite good, you don't feel like you're missing anything and it helps you keep up with the action. There's just one point very early on that sticks out. We get a couple of first person shooter shots and while I understand why they were included it felt very out of place with the tone of everything around it.
After I saw London Has Fallen it felt like the franchise had already given up on itself a bit. Angel has definitely pulled it back. Olympus was a "serious" movie, London went much more ridiculous, and Angel did the only thing it could... go all out action. It feels very much like a classic 80s action storyline and I can't be mad at that.
Originally posted on: emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/angel-has-fallen-movie-review.html