Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated Horrible Bosses (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
We have all had them at some point in our life. You may even have one now. That’s right, I am talking about horrible bosses. So I was more than happy to go see Horrible Bosses, mostly to get suggestions on how to treat my subordinates. What? I never said that I was a great boss. But enough about me, the movie is about three friends whose superiors are making their lives unbearable, so they decide to murder their horrible bosses.
The three friends:
Nick Hendricks (Jason Bateman) has spent years being the dedicated, hard-working employee. He is the first to arrive at work and the last to leave. But for some reason his boss, the company president, Dave Harken (Kevin Spacey) feels the need to torment him on a daily basis. The one thing that has kept Nick going was the promotion to Vice President of Sales that his boss has been telling him that he would get. But when the day comes Dave decides that he will absorb the VP of Sales position within his own.
Dale Arbus (Charlie Day) is a caring dental hygienist who loves his job, with the one exception of his boss Dr. Julia Harris D.D.S. (Jennifer Aniston) who sexually harrasses him constantly. Now, personally, if I had a boss that looked like his boss she could sexually harass me all she wanted and I would be begging for overtime. However Dale is engaged to a wonderful woman, Stacy (Lindsay Sloane), and Dr. Harris demands that either Dale sleeps with her by the end of the week or else she will tell Stacy that Dale has been sleeping with her. Dr. Harris even has incriminating photos that she took of herself and Dale in questionable poses (of course he was unconscious during dental surgery when the pictures were taken but that’s beside the point).
Kurt Buckman (Jason Sudeikis) is an accountant at Pellit & Sons Chemical Plant. He’s dedicated, hard-working and actually loves his job and boss. But when his boss Jack Pellit (Donald Sutherland) suddenly passes away, Jack’s deranged coke-head son, Bobby (Colin Farrell) takes over and all he cares about is making as much money possible until he runs the company into the ground.
Now you may be asking “Why don’t they just quit their jobs?” They thought about that but then they bump into an old High School buddy of theirs, Kenny Sommerfeld (P.J. Byrne), and they see first-hand how hard it is to find a job.
The decision to murder:
Dale thought he had a fantastic plan on how to murder their bosses and it was rather inexpensive but that gets flushed down the toilet. Nick and Kurt were pissed at Dale for a while but luckily the GPS navigation system in Kurt’s car leads them to Dean ‘MF’ Jones (Jamie Foxx). Dean becomes their Murder Consultant and he gives them a wealth of information on how to go about getting away with murder, as well as the idea that they should murder each other’s bosses. Thus the three friends embark on an epic adventure to kill each other’s bosses and save the world.. well, at the very least, save their sanity.
The onscreen chemistry between Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day was so amazing you would think they have been a comedy team for years and friends for even longer. It really seemed very genuine. Walking out of the theatre I overheard some people discussing who out of the three main actors did the better job and I have to agree with pretty much what they said. Though they all did great jobs Charlie Day rocked the screen just a little harder than either Jason did.
Kevin Spacey, Jennifer Aniston & Colin Farrell were phenomenal. They brought such unique flair and realism to their characters. Kevin Spacey will always be the worst boss ever, Colin Farrell will always be the guy I want to party with and Jennifer Aniston is the boss I would love to have. I will be honest, I was guilty of type casting Jennifer but after seeing her in this role, I can safely say I have learned my lesson and I will not make that mistake again. (Psst, film industry, you can learn this lesson too).
While the screen time for Donald Sutherland, Jamie Foxx, Julie Bowen, Wendell Pierce, Ron White and Bob Newhart may have been shorter than I would have preferred, those scenes were still great. There’s even a really short scene with Isaiah Mustafa (fun fact: he attended the Seattle Seahawks’ training camp in 2000) and even though he was fully clothed in the scene I swear I heard “Yum” whispered by most of audience.
There were a couple of things in the movie that I felt could have been done better unfortunately to list those parts would be a major spoiler. But overall, the movie delivered what I expected and more. It was consistently funny, relatable, highly enjoyable, clever with some twists I didn’t see coming and all the actors (regardless of screen time) shined brightly as the stars they are.
The three friends:
Nick Hendricks (Jason Bateman) has spent years being the dedicated, hard-working employee. He is the first to arrive at work and the last to leave. But for some reason his boss, the company president, Dave Harken (Kevin Spacey) feels the need to torment him on a daily basis. The one thing that has kept Nick going was the promotion to Vice President of Sales that his boss has been telling him that he would get. But when the day comes Dave decides that he will absorb the VP of Sales position within his own.
Dale Arbus (Charlie Day) is a caring dental hygienist who loves his job, with the one exception of his boss Dr. Julia Harris D.D.S. (Jennifer Aniston) who sexually harrasses him constantly. Now, personally, if I had a boss that looked like his boss she could sexually harass me all she wanted and I would be begging for overtime. However Dale is engaged to a wonderful woman, Stacy (Lindsay Sloane), and Dr. Harris demands that either Dale sleeps with her by the end of the week or else she will tell Stacy that Dale has been sleeping with her. Dr. Harris even has incriminating photos that she took of herself and Dale in questionable poses (of course he was unconscious during dental surgery when the pictures were taken but that’s beside the point).
Kurt Buckman (Jason Sudeikis) is an accountant at Pellit & Sons Chemical Plant. He’s dedicated, hard-working and actually loves his job and boss. But when his boss Jack Pellit (Donald Sutherland) suddenly passes away, Jack’s deranged coke-head son, Bobby (Colin Farrell) takes over and all he cares about is making as much money possible until he runs the company into the ground.
Now you may be asking “Why don’t they just quit their jobs?” They thought about that but then they bump into an old High School buddy of theirs, Kenny Sommerfeld (P.J. Byrne), and they see first-hand how hard it is to find a job.
The decision to murder:
Dale thought he had a fantastic plan on how to murder their bosses and it was rather inexpensive but that gets flushed down the toilet. Nick and Kurt were pissed at Dale for a while but luckily the GPS navigation system in Kurt’s car leads them to Dean ‘MF’ Jones (Jamie Foxx). Dean becomes their Murder Consultant and he gives them a wealth of information on how to go about getting away with murder, as well as the idea that they should murder each other’s bosses. Thus the three friends embark on an epic adventure to kill each other’s bosses and save the world.. well, at the very least, save their sanity.
The onscreen chemistry between Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day was so amazing you would think they have been a comedy team for years and friends for even longer. It really seemed very genuine. Walking out of the theatre I overheard some people discussing who out of the three main actors did the better job and I have to agree with pretty much what they said. Though they all did great jobs Charlie Day rocked the screen just a little harder than either Jason did.
Kevin Spacey, Jennifer Aniston & Colin Farrell were phenomenal. They brought such unique flair and realism to their characters. Kevin Spacey will always be the worst boss ever, Colin Farrell will always be the guy I want to party with and Jennifer Aniston is the boss I would love to have. I will be honest, I was guilty of type casting Jennifer but after seeing her in this role, I can safely say I have learned my lesson and I will not make that mistake again. (Psst, film industry, you can learn this lesson too).
While the screen time for Donald Sutherland, Jamie Foxx, Julie Bowen, Wendell Pierce, Ron White and Bob Newhart may have been shorter than I would have preferred, those scenes were still great. There’s even a really short scene with Isaiah Mustafa (fun fact: he attended the Seattle Seahawks’ training camp in 2000) and even though he was fully clothed in the scene I swear I heard “Yum” whispered by most of audience.
There were a couple of things in the movie that I felt could have been done better unfortunately to list those parts would be a major spoiler. But overall, the movie delivered what I expected and more. It was consistently funny, relatable, highly enjoyable, clever with some twists I didn’t see coming and all the actors (regardless of screen time) shined brightly as the stars they are.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1 (2014) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Too slow in parts
The Hunger Games series has become something of a worldwide phenomenon over the last few years, with over $1bn in takings between two films, success is a bit of an understatement.
A year after the critically acclaimed Catching Fire, director Francis Lawrence returns with the first part of Suzanne Collins’ underwhelming finale – Mockingjay, but can it continue with the series’ success and improve on the lacklustre novel?
Partially is the short answer. Lawrence continues to provide a slick environment in which the film resides and commands the best from the actors, but severe pacing issues occasionally stop the movie dead in its tracks.
Mockingjay begins just hours after the end of the second film with Jennifer Lawrence becoming a completely deflated Katniss Everdeen when she realises that Peeta wasn’t rescued with her in the arena.
She is now hiding out in District 13, along with a host of familiar faces including Elizabeth Banks’ brilliant Effie Trinket who provides the majority of the film’s comedic moments – though these are few and far between this time around. The late Philip Seymour Hoffman also returns as Plutarch Heavensbee and completely commands the screen in every scene.
However, the standout performance doesn’t belong to one of the old favourites. Julianne Moore enters the series as President Alma Coin and is a complete joy, her warm yet steely persona is engaging and mesmerising and her character promises to be even more intriguing in the next instalment.
It’s also nice to see Liam Hemsworth take on a more central role as Gale, which leaves Josh Hutcherson’s whiny Peeta very much in the background.
The film centres around the creation of numerous propaganda videos, each designed to threaten the Capitol and President Snow, played by such a convincing Donald Sutherland you actually believe he is evil, made by the rebellion to show they are fighting back.
The lack of a games for a focus point could’ve had a huge impact on this film’s popularity, but Francis Lawrence gets around the lack of them with style and flair, blending truly horrific images of war with those of running water, forests and wild animals – all the while showing us how even in the darkest of times, there is beauty in this world.
Moreover, the special effects have once again been stepped up a gear. The onslaught of the Capitol’s bombers is realised beautifully and really drives home how brutal this film can be in parts. It is the first in the series where its 12A certification may have been slightly too lenient, with images of Snow’s increasing brutality proving a shock to the system.
Unfortunately, the decision to split Collins’ last novel into two films was a controversial one which hasn’t paid off. The pacing of the film is appalling and some of the worst I’ve seen. You can fill a 2 hour runtime with as much beautiful scenery as you like, but if there isn’t enough action to counterbalance it, you end up with something that feels a little hollow.
The story simply isn’t there and we spend the majority of the film watching Katniss recoil in shock at seeing Peeta in the Capitol and wandering around the different districts aimlessly, searching for more atrocities to become angry at.
Mercifully, there is one scene towards the climax which rivals Gareth Edward’s Godzilla for the most eerily quiet and exquisitely shot action sequence of the year – see if you can spot it.
Overall, Mockingjay: Part 1 is a decent film if not quite to the standard of last year’s Catching Fire. The decision to create two films has destroyed the series’ pacing and reeks of money grabbing.
However, stunning performances from all the actors, in particular Julianne Moore and Donald Sutherland ensure that fans of the series will be dying to see the next instalment in a year’s time.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2014/11/22/too-slow-in-parts-mockingjay-part-1-review/
A year after the critically acclaimed Catching Fire, director Francis Lawrence returns with the first part of Suzanne Collins’ underwhelming finale – Mockingjay, but can it continue with the series’ success and improve on the lacklustre novel?
Partially is the short answer. Lawrence continues to provide a slick environment in which the film resides and commands the best from the actors, but severe pacing issues occasionally stop the movie dead in its tracks.
Mockingjay begins just hours after the end of the second film with Jennifer Lawrence becoming a completely deflated Katniss Everdeen when she realises that Peeta wasn’t rescued with her in the arena.
She is now hiding out in District 13, along with a host of familiar faces including Elizabeth Banks’ brilliant Effie Trinket who provides the majority of the film’s comedic moments – though these are few and far between this time around. The late Philip Seymour Hoffman also returns as Plutarch Heavensbee and completely commands the screen in every scene.
However, the standout performance doesn’t belong to one of the old favourites. Julianne Moore enters the series as President Alma Coin and is a complete joy, her warm yet steely persona is engaging and mesmerising and her character promises to be even more intriguing in the next instalment.
It’s also nice to see Liam Hemsworth take on a more central role as Gale, which leaves Josh Hutcherson’s whiny Peeta very much in the background.
The film centres around the creation of numerous propaganda videos, each designed to threaten the Capitol and President Snow, played by such a convincing Donald Sutherland you actually believe he is evil, made by the rebellion to show they are fighting back.
The lack of a games for a focus point could’ve had a huge impact on this film’s popularity, but Francis Lawrence gets around the lack of them with style and flair, blending truly horrific images of war with those of running water, forests and wild animals – all the while showing us how even in the darkest of times, there is beauty in this world.
Moreover, the special effects have once again been stepped up a gear. The onslaught of the Capitol’s bombers is realised beautifully and really drives home how brutal this film can be in parts. It is the first in the series where its 12A certification may have been slightly too lenient, with images of Snow’s increasing brutality proving a shock to the system.
Unfortunately, the decision to split Collins’ last novel into two films was a controversial one which hasn’t paid off. The pacing of the film is appalling and some of the worst I’ve seen. You can fill a 2 hour runtime with as much beautiful scenery as you like, but if there isn’t enough action to counterbalance it, you end up with something that feels a little hollow.
The story simply isn’t there and we spend the majority of the film watching Katniss recoil in shock at seeing Peeta in the Capitol and wandering around the different districts aimlessly, searching for more atrocities to become angry at.
Mercifully, there is one scene towards the climax which rivals Gareth Edward’s Godzilla for the most eerily quiet and exquisitely shot action sequence of the year – see if you can spot it.
Overall, Mockingjay: Part 1 is a decent film if not quite to the standard of last year’s Catching Fire. The decision to create two films has destroyed the series’ pacing and reeks of money grabbing.
However, stunning performances from all the actors, in particular Julianne Moore and Donald Sutherland ensure that fans of the series will be dying to see the next instalment in a year’s time.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2014/11/22/too-slow-in-parts-mockingjay-part-1-review/
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Queens Corgi (2019) in Movies
Jul 13, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Queens Corgi is an animated children's movie about Rex, the Queen's favourite who, after a disastrous visit from Donald Trump, is tricked into leaving the palace and winds up in the dog pound. This is a common formula in children’s movies both animated and live action and I'm sure most of us can guess what happens next, Rex tries to get back home and, on the way makes some friends and falls in love. So when my daughter wanted to see it I though I'd be in for a funny, possibly sad film. God I was wrong. There is so much wrong with this film and it all seems to go wrong from the scene where Donald Trump visits the Queen and I really wish I could say my problems were politically motivated but unfortunately the film was just that bad.
The character of Trump was reduced to a stereotypical American tourist with Melania passing comments about the size of Donald’s (big) hands being one of the things that attracted her to him.
The problems really start when Melania and the Queen decided it will be a good idea to breed their respective corgis. Melania's Corgi, Mitzi, who is made up in heave eye shadow and lipstick is instantly judged and disliked by all the Queens corgis (both Male and female). Melania's Corgi then passes judgment on all the corgis until she comes to Rex who she decided she wants. The two dogs are then left in a room together after being told by Trump to grab him by the pups.
Now I just want to make the following clear:
1) I've seen plenty of movies where the (normally timid/nerdy) male character is hit on by the strong scary bully female and this normally for comedy value. Although these scenes could be seen as problematic they are normally played for laughs.
2) I understand that dog breeders do choose dogs and put them together to mate. However, as the animals in this film are given human personality's the situation is different.
So when the two dogs are left in the room we are treated to long scene where Mitzi tries to get Rex to mate with her, because Rex wants none of it Mitzi chases him around the room, grabs him, stops him from leaving and generally won’t take no for an answer. This is not done playfully.
Later in the film, Rex is in a dog pound, one of his cell mates starts listing the rules of the pound, rule one, there is no fight club. Now, this may have been ok if it was a one time throw away line, kids films often have little jokes for adults. However, it's not a throw away line, it's used more than once, including the first time the dogs are at a fight club. Yes, the top dog, called Butch, keeps order by making any dog he doesn't like fight. We see a dog carried off on stretcher, Rex is almost thrown into a fire and is only saved when Butch is knock out in one punch which also knocks out half his teeth.
Of course Rex and his new friends make it back to the palace and beat the main villain who is sent off with Trump and Mitzi. Remember non of the palace dogs liked Mitzi and she has all already said she doesn't understand the word no so this has implications for Charlie’s futures. It's ok though because he's the bad guy (not).
So we have a children's film with dog fights, attempted rape, implied rape, judging on appearance and a dull story, that seem find the line between children’s jokes and the adult ones the only reason I'm giving this one star is because it avoids getting political with Trump.
The character of Trump was reduced to a stereotypical American tourist with Melania passing comments about the size of Donald’s (big) hands being one of the things that attracted her to him.
The problems really start when Melania and the Queen decided it will be a good idea to breed their respective corgis. Melania's Corgi, Mitzi, who is made up in heave eye shadow and lipstick is instantly judged and disliked by all the Queens corgis (both Male and female). Melania's Corgi then passes judgment on all the corgis until she comes to Rex who she decided she wants. The two dogs are then left in a room together after being told by Trump to grab him by the pups.
Now I just want to make the following clear:
1) I've seen plenty of movies where the (normally timid/nerdy) male character is hit on by the strong scary bully female and this normally for comedy value. Although these scenes could be seen as problematic they are normally played for laughs.
2) I understand that dog breeders do choose dogs and put them together to mate. However, as the animals in this film are given human personality's the situation is different.
So when the two dogs are left in the room we are treated to long scene where Mitzi tries to get Rex to mate with her, because Rex wants none of it Mitzi chases him around the room, grabs him, stops him from leaving and generally won’t take no for an answer. This is not done playfully.
Later in the film, Rex is in a dog pound, one of his cell mates starts listing the rules of the pound, rule one, there is no fight club. Now, this may have been ok if it was a one time throw away line, kids films often have little jokes for adults. However, it's not a throw away line, it's used more than once, including the first time the dogs are at a fight club. Yes, the top dog, called Butch, keeps order by making any dog he doesn't like fight. We see a dog carried off on stretcher, Rex is almost thrown into a fire and is only saved when Butch is knock out in one punch which also knocks out half his teeth.
Of course Rex and his new friends make it back to the palace and beat the main villain who is sent off with Trump and Mitzi. Remember non of the palace dogs liked Mitzi and she has all already said she doesn't understand the word no so this has implications for Charlie’s futures. It's ok though because he's the bad guy (not).
So we have a children's film with dog fights, attempted rape, implied rape, judging on appearance and a dull story, that seem find the line between children’s jokes and the adult ones the only reason I'm giving this one star is because it avoids getting political with Trump.
The Chap - A Journal for the Modern Gentleman
Lifestyle and Magazines & Newspapers
App
Founded in 1999, The Chap takes a satirical look at the modern world through the eyes of an...
Justin Patchett (42 KP) rated The Trump Prophecy (2018) in Movies
Mar 9, 2019 (Updated Mar 24, 2019)
My prophetic vision of how bad it could get
Contains spoilers, click to show
Part of my bill-paying job is managing our store’s DVD section. This past Tuesday, I opened our new release boxes to find a number of copies of a movie called "The Trump Prophecy." I got physically ill. Not ill enough to go home, but I could feel my stomach turn. It wasn’t because I was holding in my hands a movie about Donald Trump, though, because I can make it through many a title about the Bedswerver-in-Chief. There’s something worse: Associating support of him with Christian faith.
Now, ordinarily, I do movie reviews. That’s where I have to watch a movie, first, before writing about it. This time, though, I feel obligated to attempt my own sort of prophecy and write a review of a movie before I see it. I'll take a bit of research on the subject of the film, but until the final paragraph, I'm not actually going to watch this film. Here goes nothing.
"The Trump Prophecy" follows a self-proclaimed prophet, Mark Taylor, as he and a pseudo-publicist, Mary Colbert, spread the word of his vision: That Trump will become President of the United States. They lead a prayer movement to try to see it through, and lo and behold, it works. Sort of. You see, Taylor first put pen to paper to write out his vision in April of 2011, stating that while “they will spend billions to keep this president in,” “the next election will be a clean sweep for the man [Trump] I have chosen.” Clearly, this can only refer to the 2012 election, the very next presidential election in which Barack Obama would end up successfully keeping the presidency for one more term. An election in which Donald Trump did not even run. With that in mind, Taylor’s self-glorification film glosses over the fact that he was completely wrong about that prophecy out of necessity, instead focusing on his rehash of the prophecy going into 2016.
This movie lazily creeps into both the political propaganda and faith-based film genres. Faith-based films generally serve as evangelistic tools. "The Trump Prophecy" fails that, as its characters are already faithful Christians prior to the events of the film, providing no real evangelistic moments for its unsaved audience. It's almost like they know nobody is coming to this film for that. Political propaganda films, on the other hand, intend to indoctrinate in a certain belief. "The Trump Prophecy" fails that, as well. In fact, it has to actively avoid political discussion at all. Could you imagine a movie like this having to make a failing attempt to reconcile Christian faith against supporting Donald Trump?
The cinematography looks like it was shot as a bootleg of "The Room." The leads act with a flatness on par with their cardboard cutouts. Its lone redeeming quality is not tricking you into anything other than what it is: A schlocky puff piece intended to associate Christianity with support of the President, as Trump was God’s chosen man. Allegedly.
Get past its worst cinematic qualities and you’re left with even more problems. "The Trump Prophecy" insults its target audience by minimizing God. It suggests God can't enact his will unless people pray for the things He reveals to them as visions of the future. It paradoxically says God is either not omnipotent to make Trump president, not omniscient to know whether or not Trump would be made president, or both. It also suggests gullibility being the key to godliness, urging the viewer not to question the source of a grammatically incorrect prophecy. (Seriously. Taylor confuses the homophones “waste” and “waist” in his 2011 "Commander in Chief" prophecy). This call to gullibility is precisely why Jerry Falwell Jr.'s Liberty University got itself involved in this mess. If you weren’t a fan of Trump before, you should be one because God said so. To a provably false prophet.
Which leads me to the point where I actually have to subject myself to this nonsense and tell you just how right I was about it.
And dear gosh, was I right. In fact, it’s stranger than I might have though. Remember how I mentioned Taylor’s false prophecy? The opening narration directly quotes from it, giving you the chance, if you haven’t already looked into it, to see exactly where he went from potential prophet to false prophet. And if you missed it the first time, you'll have it repeated twice more. Finally, I'll admit the fault to my prophetic review: Cinematically, "The Trump Prophecy" is closer to a bootleg of a movie produced by The Asylum, but Asylum films are actually enjoyable. But as a bonus, though, combine it with the special effects work of "Birdemic." The film "ends" with an embedded music video and a series of so-called reflective conversations--monologues by demagogues. I can't remember much about these because I had already tuned out. The only fairness I'll give is that "The Trump Prophecy" may be unintentionally hilarious on occasion, but it’s mostly cringe-worthy. The biggest cringe, though is when you realize how many people actually believe this film as fact.
Now, ordinarily, I do movie reviews. That’s where I have to watch a movie, first, before writing about it. This time, though, I feel obligated to attempt my own sort of prophecy and write a review of a movie before I see it. I'll take a bit of research on the subject of the film, but until the final paragraph, I'm not actually going to watch this film. Here goes nothing.
"The Trump Prophecy" follows a self-proclaimed prophet, Mark Taylor, as he and a pseudo-publicist, Mary Colbert, spread the word of his vision: That Trump will become President of the United States. They lead a prayer movement to try to see it through, and lo and behold, it works. Sort of. You see, Taylor first put pen to paper to write out his vision in April of 2011, stating that while “they will spend billions to keep this president in,” “the next election will be a clean sweep for the man [Trump] I have chosen.” Clearly, this can only refer to the 2012 election, the very next presidential election in which Barack Obama would end up successfully keeping the presidency for one more term. An election in which Donald Trump did not even run. With that in mind, Taylor’s self-glorification film glosses over the fact that he was completely wrong about that prophecy out of necessity, instead focusing on his rehash of the prophecy going into 2016.
This movie lazily creeps into both the political propaganda and faith-based film genres. Faith-based films generally serve as evangelistic tools. "The Trump Prophecy" fails that, as its characters are already faithful Christians prior to the events of the film, providing no real evangelistic moments for its unsaved audience. It's almost like they know nobody is coming to this film for that. Political propaganda films, on the other hand, intend to indoctrinate in a certain belief. "The Trump Prophecy" fails that, as well. In fact, it has to actively avoid political discussion at all. Could you imagine a movie like this having to make a failing attempt to reconcile Christian faith against supporting Donald Trump?
The cinematography looks like it was shot as a bootleg of "The Room." The leads act with a flatness on par with their cardboard cutouts. Its lone redeeming quality is not tricking you into anything other than what it is: A schlocky puff piece intended to associate Christianity with support of the President, as Trump was God’s chosen man. Allegedly.
Get past its worst cinematic qualities and you’re left with even more problems. "The Trump Prophecy" insults its target audience by minimizing God. It suggests God can't enact his will unless people pray for the things He reveals to them as visions of the future. It paradoxically says God is either not omnipotent to make Trump president, not omniscient to know whether or not Trump would be made president, or both. It also suggests gullibility being the key to godliness, urging the viewer not to question the source of a grammatically incorrect prophecy. (Seriously. Taylor confuses the homophones “waste” and “waist” in his 2011 "Commander in Chief" prophecy). This call to gullibility is precisely why Jerry Falwell Jr.'s Liberty University got itself involved in this mess. If you weren’t a fan of Trump before, you should be one because God said so. To a provably false prophet.
Which leads me to the point where I actually have to subject myself to this nonsense and tell you just how right I was about it.
And dear gosh, was I right. In fact, it’s stranger than I might have though. Remember how I mentioned Taylor’s false prophecy? The opening narration directly quotes from it, giving you the chance, if you haven’t already looked into it, to see exactly where he went from potential prophet to false prophet. And if you missed it the first time, you'll have it repeated twice more. Finally, I'll admit the fault to my prophetic review: Cinematically, "The Trump Prophecy" is closer to a bootleg of a movie produced by The Asylum, but Asylum films are actually enjoyable. But as a bonus, though, combine it with the special effects work of "Birdemic." The film "ends" with an embedded music video and a series of so-called reflective conversations--monologues by demagogues. I can't remember much about these because I had already tuned out. The only fairness I'll give is that "The Trump Prophecy" may be unintentionally hilarious on occasion, but it’s mostly cringe-worthy. The biggest cringe, though is when you realize how many people actually believe this film as fact.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated BlacKkKlansman (2018) in Movies
Oct 1, 2018 (Updated Oct 2, 2018)
Brilliant performances by the entire cast (1 more)
Funny, while still being relevant and sending a serious message
Spike Lee's Best In Years
BlackkKlansman released while I was on holiday, so after playing a bit of catchup at my local cinema, I eventually got around to seeing this film that I was looking forward to ever since seeing the first trailer for it. It lived up to my expectations and I really enjoyed it. Also, just a heads up; I usually don't like to get political in movie reviews, but I feel that with a film as politically charged as this one, it makes it inevitable to get around, so there may be some stuff in here that you disagree with.
The movie worked in several different ways, it definitely worked as a comedy and had me laughing raucously at certain points and then it would drop an important and relevant point on you and suddenly things wouldn't seem so funny any more. All of a sudden, these laughably ignorant racists suddenly became a very real threat, which I don't think was an accident in paralleling how Lee feels about a good amount of modern day Americans like Donald Trump. Remember when he first announced that he was running for office and everybody, (including the current president at that time,) laughed at him? Now he is the most powerful man in the world and poses a very real threat to minorities in the US. I thought that this was a very clever, subtle way to take a shot without being too blatant.
Then there was a slightly more obvious shot at him when characters are discussing a man filled with hate potentially working his way into power and getting the majority of the American public on his side and how awful that would be. Although this particular dig is way more obvious, it still didn't bother me too much and I accepted it as a filmmaker using his platform to send a message to someone that he morally disagrees with.
The final dig was a step too far for me. During a phone conversation between David Duke and Ron Stallworth, Duke says something about getting rid of non-whites to "make America great again." It was so heavy handed that the characters onscreen might as well have turned around and winked at the camera. Please don't get me wrong, I think that Donald Trump is a scumbag and am totally fine with Lee taking a couple of shots at him, but I much preferred the more subtle undertones that he sent his way earlier in the film to this blatantly obvious, slightly cringey callout.
I did enjoy Lee's references to Blaxploitation films of the 70's and I liked the whole aesthetic that this movie had. The score was brilliant and the cast did a great job, the performance that stayed with me the most after the film, was Corey Hawkins monologue as Kwame Ture. He only appears in one scene in the film, but his speech, (in which I felt he strongly channelled Denzel,) was mesmerising and electrifying to watch.
The way that Spike Lee chose to end this movie has stirred some controversy, but I found it to be incredibly powerful and moving. It really sent home the message that this kind of intense, despicable hatred isn't just something that was around in the 70's and 80's, it is something that is still sadly prevalent and happening in today's society and we have people in power, like Trump, who is willing to defend and stand by these people and their violent, hateful behaviour. It was also a fitting tribute to Heather Heyer who was killed when a car crashed into a crowd of people who had been peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia one-year prior to this film's release.
Overall, this is a funny, entertaining, uncomfortable and anger-inducing film and all of these emotion are equally relevant. I also feel that this movie does exactly what it intends to on a moral level, whether you agree with the ideals portrayed or not, Lee does a terrific job in turning a period piece movie into a painfully relevant message for modern audiences.
The movie worked in several different ways, it definitely worked as a comedy and had me laughing raucously at certain points and then it would drop an important and relevant point on you and suddenly things wouldn't seem so funny any more. All of a sudden, these laughably ignorant racists suddenly became a very real threat, which I don't think was an accident in paralleling how Lee feels about a good amount of modern day Americans like Donald Trump. Remember when he first announced that he was running for office and everybody, (including the current president at that time,) laughed at him? Now he is the most powerful man in the world and poses a very real threat to minorities in the US. I thought that this was a very clever, subtle way to take a shot without being too blatant.
Then there was a slightly more obvious shot at him when characters are discussing a man filled with hate potentially working his way into power and getting the majority of the American public on his side and how awful that would be. Although this particular dig is way more obvious, it still didn't bother me too much and I accepted it as a filmmaker using his platform to send a message to someone that he morally disagrees with.
The final dig was a step too far for me. During a phone conversation between David Duke and Ron Stallworth, Duke says something about getting rid of non-whites to "make America great again." It was so heavy handed that the characters onscreen might as well have turned around and winked at the camera. Please don't get me wrong, I think that Donald Trump is a scumbag and am totally fine with Lee taking a couple of shots at him, but I much preferred the more subtle undertones that he sent his way earlier in the film to this blatantly obvious, slightly cringey callout.
I did enjoy Lee's references to Blaxploitation films of the 70's and I liked the whole aesthetic that this movie had. The score was brilliant and the cast did a great job, the performance that stayed with me the most after the film, was Corey Hawkins monologue as Kwame Ture. He only appears in one scene in the film, but his speech, (in which I felt he strongly channelled Denzel,) was mesmerising and electrifying to watch.
The way that Spike Lee chose to end this movie has stirred some controversy, but I found it to be incredibly powerful and moving. It really sent home the message that this kind of intense, despicable hatred isn't just something that was around in the 70's and 80's, it is something that is still sadly prevalent and happening in today's society and we have people in power, like Trump, who is willing to defend and stand by these people and their violent, hateful behaviour. It was also a fitting tribute to Heather Heyer who was killed when a car crashed into a crowd of people who had been peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia one-year prior to this film's release.
Overall, this is a funny, entertaining, uncomfortable and anger-inducing film and all of these emotion are equally relevant. I also feel that this movie does exactly what it intends to on a moral level, whether you agree with the ideals portrayed or not, Lee does a terrific job in turning a period piece movie into a painfully relevant message for modern audiences.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies
May 11, 2019
"if you are nothing without the suit then you shouldn't have it."
A John Hughes-esque coming-of-age movie, disguised as a friendly neighborhood adventure from the MCU; Spider-Man: Homecoming is more about growing up, and less about saving the world.
Tom Holland is great as Spider-man. His Spidey is different, and in a way, refreshing. I like how the origin story is skipped, and instead, we dive head into the day-to-day adventures of a semi-awkward, fifteen-year-old. I'm more interested in the growth of Peter Parker, than the development of Holland's Spider-Man Spidey-Powers. I'm still undecided about the way Spidey looks in his costume. To me, he looks more like a CGI goofnut, than an Avenger. But, how many kids get to have Jennifer Connelly on standby, whenever they need a helpful voice?
Homecoming might not feel and act like your typical MCU movie, but it does prove we still need Tony Stark, Happy Hogan and Pepper Potts in our lives. I smiled with all the screen time Happy has. He's truly an underrated character in the MCU. Plus, Tony plays the "cool uncle" spot-on.
One of the biggest criticisms with the MCU people have is the boring villain. Not in this case. Michael Keaton plays reverse-Batman, and his character actually has depth, an interesting storyline and a surprise twist. Bookem Woodbine plays a fun henchman, and all movies benefit from the presence of Donald Glover. The bad guys are not a snore nor a bore at this Homecoming Dance with the Devil.
I hope I wasn't the only one laughing at the casting of Tony Revolori as Flash the Bully. He's about as intimidating as a can of ravioli. Zendaya is way underused, but she shines in her scenes. I wish Ned was my best friend, but the poor fella will probably be typecast for life. However, he's a hilarious guy. How can you not like him?
Did you think I forgot about Aunt May? Of course not! Marisa Tomei is smokin' and brings honest energy to her supporting role.
The final boss battle is fun. So are the scenes on a ferry and a national monument. There's action, and there's a lot of growing up for Peter Parker and his friends. I'm not MCU fatigued after watching, but I do have a sudden urge to revisit Pretty in Pink.
Tom Holland is great as Spider-man. His Spidey is different, and in a way, refreshing. I like how the origin story is skipped, and instead, we dive head into the day-to-day adventures of a semi-awkward, fifteen-year-old. I'm more interested in the growth of Peter Parker, than the development of Holland's Spider-Man Spidey-Powers. I'm still undecided about the way Spidey looks in his costume. To me, he looks more like a CGI goofnut, than an Avenger. But, how many kids get to have Jennifer Connelly on standby, whenever they need a helpful voice?
Homecoming might not feel and act like your typical MCU movie, but it does prove we still need Tony Stark, Happy Hogan and Pepper Potts in our lives. I smiled with all the screen time Happy has. He's truly an underrated character in the MCU. Plus, Tony plays the "cool uncle" spot-on.
One of the biggest criticisms with the MCU people have is the boring villain. Not in this case. Michael Keaton plays reverse-Batman, and his character actually has depth, an interesting storyline and a surprise twist. Bookem Woodbine plays a fun henchman, and all movies benefit from the presence of Donald Glover. The bad guys are not a snore nor a bore at this Homecoming Dance with the Devil.
I hope I wasn't the only one laughing at the casting of Tony Revolori as Flash the Bully. He's about as intimidating as a can of ravioli. Zendaya is way underused, but she shines in her scenes. I wish Ned was my best friend, but the poor fella will probably be typecast for life. However, he's a hilarious guy. How can you not like him?
Did you think I forgot about Aunt May? Of course not! Marisa Tomei is smokin' and brings honest energy to her supporting role.
The final boss battle is fun. So are the scenes on a ferry and a national monument. There's action, and there's a lot of growing up for Peter Parker and his friends. I'm not MCU fatigued after watching, but I do have a sudden urge to revisit Pretty in Pink.
The Craggus (360 KP) rated The Queens Corgi (2019) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
The Queen's Corgi is a vicious mongrel
There’re so many problematic aspects to “The Queen’s Corgi” it’s kind of baffling it ever made it to cinema screens. A cute cartoon fable about the Queen’s beloved pets may seem like a slam-dunk for the Saturday kid’s club crowd and, if you’re determined to see it, it’s definitely worth waiting for it to reach the bargain screening circuit. Nobody should pay full price to see this.
At its core, it’s a story of Rex (Jack Whitehall), an adorable but arrogant Corgi who lets being the ‘top dog’ go to his head and ends up in the doghouse, stranded outside the Palace and at the mercy of the ferocious leader of the pack at the local dog pound. So far, so predictable.
Where “The Queen’s Corgi” surprises is in its decision to include in cutesy cartoon the divisive figure of President Trump and his current wife, especially as it involves the real-life self-confessed sexual predator in a sub-plot about mating his (fictional) Corgi with one of the Queen’s pets, a storyline rife with casual coercion and canine sexual assault. From that tawdry and uncomfortable opening, we progress onwards to the meat of the plot which sees Rex encounter an underground dogfighting ring operating at the Pound.
Add in a couple of pretty scary sequences involving nearly getting run over, a surprisingly graphic near-drowning and an attempted murder by arson and you start to understand why this European production has been rated PG when its subject should be an easy-U. It earns it.
Some of this will, of course, pass over the heads of younger children, at least on a conscious level, but there’s such a nasty undertone to the whole movie that you should be thinking twice about seeing it. To UK children, of course, Donald Trump is something of a distant, already cartoonish figure, possibly a bit of a bogeyman but the casual humanisation and normalising of a figure like Trump is a dangerous and slippery slope (as Jimmy Kimmel can attest to) and sets an unpleasant precedent for future ‘family entertainment’. The fact that it pokes fun at him up to and including him getting bitten in the dick by a Corgi doesn’t mitigate his appearance, it just makes it more inappropriate.
I’m genuinely surprised this has been allowed to pass without comment from the Royal Household but perhaps they hope it will quickly fade into obscurity, even though this would benefit from a more activist Royal prerogative – this is one movie that should be sent to The Tower for the rest of its life.
At its core, it’s a story of Rex (Jack Whitehall), an adorable but arrogant Corgi who lets being the ‘top dog’ go to his head and ends up in the doghouse, stranded outside the Palace and at the mercy of the ferocious leader of the pack at the local dog pound. So far, so predictable.
Where “The Queen’s Corgi” surprises is in its decision to include in cutesy cartoon the divisive figure of President Trump and his current wife, especially as it involves the real-life self-confessed sexual predator in a sub-plot about mating his (fictional) Corgi with one of the Queen’s pets, a storyline rife with casual coercion and canine sexual assault. From that tawdry and uncomfortable opening, we progress onwards to the meat of the plot which sees Rex encounter an underground dogfighting ring operating at the Pound.
Add in a couple of pretty scary sequences involving nearly getting run over, a surprisingly graphic near-drowning and an attempted murder by arson and you start to understand why this European production has been rated PG when its subject should be an easy-U. It earns it.
Some of this will, of course, pass over the heads of younger children, at least on a conscious level, but there’s such a nasty undertone to the whole movie that you should be thinking twice about seeing it. To UK children, of course, Donald Trump is something of a distant, already cartoonish figure, possibly a bit of a bogeyman but the casual humanisation and normalising of a figure like Trump is a dangerous and slippery slope (as Jimmy Kimmel can attest to) and sets an unpleasant precedent for future ‘family entertainment’. The fact that it pokes fun at him up to and including him getting bitten in the dick by a Corgi doesn’t mitigate his appearance, it just makes it more inappropriate.
I’m genuinely surprised this has been allowed to pass without comment from the Royal Household but perhaps they hope it will quickly fade into obscurity, even though this would benefit from a more activist Royal prerogative – this is one movie that should be sent to The Tower for the rest of its life.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) in Movies
Mar 26, 2020
Let's be honest, Solo was getting un-earnt hate from the minute it was announced. "No one asked for this" was thrown around often. "It's not Harrison Ford" was another one, and as a result, it was met in release with a fair amount of vitriol, and underperformed at the box office (apparently, still made shit tons of money...)
This is a great shame in my opinion. Solo isn't a perfect film by any means but it's still a fun and enjoyable sci-fi adventure.
Seeming as the plot revolves mainly around Han Solo, who of course is a huge staple character in the original trilogy, set after this one, the stakes are relatively low, and this gives the film room to relax a present us with what is essentially a heist movie, just one thats set in the Star Wars universe.
Alden Ehrenreich is fine as the titular Solo. He isn't trying to just copy Harrison Ford, but still provides something that feels familiar, whilst giving his own take on the character.
Donald Glover is pitch perfect as a young Lando Calrissian, and is arguably the highlight cast member.
It's great to have the likes of Thandie Newton and Woody Harrelson involved as well.
As I've said in my GoT reviews, I've always struggled to full get on board with Emilia Clarke, and it's no different here. She's just kind of there, and I honestly feel that the film wouldn't have suffered to greatly without her character.
My main gripe with Solo is the constant need to over explain everything - ever wondered how Han got his blaster and jacket? No? Well tough shit because we're going to tell you! Ever wondered where he got those dice that hang in the Millennium Falcon for like two seconds in one of the films? No? Shut up and watch dammit. Ever wondered why Han's second name is Solo? No? Well fuck you, because you're about to find out (and it's horribly cringey) Ever wanted to see what the Kessel Run is that Han spoke about once in the history of Star Wars? Well, maybe, kind of, but surprise, ITS A BIG CGI SQUID HAHAHA.
Any mystery and intrigue that you may have about Han Solo is explained away in incessant detail to the point where it becomes quickly tiresome. Not everything needs a back story dammit.
Honestly though, Solo could have been soooo much worse, but as it happens, it actually decent. It's not perfect as I mentioned, but I would happily take it over episodes 8 and 9. If you're one is those fans who have just straight up refused to watch it for some reason, stop being a silly goose and give it a go.
This is a great shame in my opinion. Solo isn't a perfect film by any means but it's still a fun and enjoyable sci-fi adventure.
Seeming as the plot revolves mainly around Han Solo, who of course is a huge staple character in the original trilogy, set after this one, the stakes are relatively low, and this gives the film room to relax a present us with what is essentially a heist movie, just one thats set in the Star Wars universe.
Alden Ehrenreich is fine as the titular Solo. He isn't trying to just copy Harrison Ford, but still provides something that feels familiar, whilst giving his own take on the character.
Donald Glover is pitch perfect as a young Lando Calrissian, and is arguably the highlight cast member.
It's great to have the likes of Thandie Newton and Woody Harrelson involved as well.
As I've said in my GoT reviews, I've always struggled to full get on board with Emilia Clarke, and it's no different here. She's just kind of there, and I honestly feel that the film wouldn't have suffered to greatly without her character.
My main gripe with Solo is the constant need to over explain everything - ever wondered how Han got his blaster and jacket? No? Well tough shit because we're going to tell you! Ever wondered where he got those dice that hang in the Millennium Falcon for like two seconds in one of the films? No? Shut up and watch dammit. Ever wondered why Han's second name is Solo? No? Well fuck you, because you're about to find out (and it's horribly cringey) Ever wanted to see what the Kessel Run is that Han spoke about once in the history of Star Wars? Well, maybe, kind of, but surprise, ITS A BIG CGI SQUID HAHAHA.
Any mystery and intrigue that you may have about Han Solo is explained away in incessant detail to the point where it becomes quickly tiresome. Not everything needs a back story dammit.
Honestly though, Solo could have been soooo much worse, but as it happens, it actually decent. It's not perfect as I mentioned, but I would happily take it over episodes 8 and 9. If you're one is those fans who have just straight up refused to watch it for some reason, stop being a silly goose and give it a go.
Little Fox Music Box - Sing along fun for kids
Education and Games
App
A sing-along songbook with more than 100 interactive elements in 3 songs and the little fox music...