Search
Search results
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Transformers Revenge of the Fallen (2009) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
In 2009, I saw Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen in theaters during a midnight screening on its day of release. Somehow I managed to sit through a two and a half hour movie, drive home, write a review, post it, and promote it all before I went to bed that morning at 5am. Looking back, I still have no idea how something like that was accomplished while also juggling a full-time job. Needless to say, I've been eager to revisit Revenge of the Fallen ever since. Delirium begins to set in at that hour and midnight screenings are rarely ever not fun. Not to mention my skills as a movie critic have evolved greatly since then and my tastes have altered. The movie deserved a proper review with a sober state of mind. And yes, thankfully, the trip was worth taking because I'm not quite as enthusiastic about Revenge of the Fallen being such a great piece of cinema as its glaring flaws tend to overshadow what little good it had going for it.
The writing is obviously the sequel's biggest flaw and not just the storyline, but the dialogue as well. The Fallen touched down on earth all the way back in 17,000 B.C. and while we've been able to uncover the likes of cavemen existing thereabouts during that time period, there's no evidence of autobots or decepticons existing in that point in history. With the way they fight and their vast numbers, that seems pretty hard to believe. Oh, and look, Sam has held onto the shirt he wore when the world almost came to an end in the last movie and apparently hasn't ever washed it. A sliver of the allspark has just been sitting in that thing this entire time. Alice actually being a decepticon didn't feel right either. Probable maybe, but it just didn't seem to fit with all other transformers being vehicles of some kind. Meanwhile Soundwave is a satellite in this movie, but walks around on earth with some crazy worm thing in Dark of the Moon with no reason of him evolving between films.
The movie has a thing about humping, too. We see two male dogs humping on more than one occasion and Wheelie also humps the crap out of Megan Fox's leg, but that's not the only time male genitalia comes into play. We also get a good glimpse at the testicles of the Sun Harvester as John Turturro spits out a one-liner about its scrotum. Leo and his freaking out over absolutely everything is also really annoying and makes Shia LaBeouf's "BUM-BULL-BEE!!!" and "OP-TIM-US!!!" squawks feel like a breath of fresh air. Sam's parents are practically the kryptonite of the movie as they're featured way too much and in the worst of times. Sam's mom has the lamest dialogue while also overreacting to everything while his dad can't decide to let Sam go or protect him. Why they were ever even Egypt is a boggling question in itself. Why are there autobots in heaven? If Megatron's master was The Fallen and he took orders from Sentinel Prime in Dark of the Moon, just how many other Decepticons does he answer to? The questions and plot holes just seem endless.
The atrocious dialogue practically echoes through your bones. It starts with Ironhide saying, "Punk ass decepticon," and never really lets up. Between Sam's parents "smelling" a "$40,000 education," and Simmons telling everyone that what he was about to show them was "top secret" and "do not tell my mother," the bases are pretty much covered. Military sergeants listening to a kid in college seems outlandish anyway, but throwing their absolute blind faith in him seems really outrageous. I realize the cast of the movie had the writer's strike to deal with, but two of the three writers for Revenge of the Fallen also wrote Star Trek which showed none of the same problems that this movie had. The writing in a Michael Bay movie is already secondary. Throw in a writer's strike and you've got something as apocalyptic behind the camera as what's taking place on screen.
There is something entertaining deep within the loins of this cinematic abomination though. The special effects are more than satisfying and pretty much outshine the special effects in the first movie. Onscreen battles are more extraordinary, explosions are bigger, and the numbers are more massive. It feels more like an actual war this time around. Bumblebee also gets his time to shine in the sequel. His scene in the garage with Sam at the start of the movie is one of the better calm scenes in the entire thing and then there are his fight scenes. Several of the fight scenes seem inspired by Mortal Kombat; Bumblebee's spine-rip sequence and Optimus’ face ripping and hand bursting through the chest of The Fallen with its villainous heart. Optimus feels very scarcely used in the two Transformers sequels. He has a few scenes where he gets to be awesome and then spends a good portion of the movie being incapacitated. At least he was dead in this one, that's a liable excuse. In Dark of the Moon, he's basically just hanging out upside down for thirty to forty minutes while hundreds of people die. Even though The Fallen is dealt with in a matter of minutes, he is kind of cool. He teleports a lot like Nightcrawler and is voiced by Tony Todd. Unfortunately, he's only appealing on the surface, kind of sucks as a main villain, and is a total embarrassment to the decepticons.
Michael Bay needs to learn that more explosions and more destructive mayhem don't automatically make a film better than its predecessor. There are more battles between the autobots and decepticons, the stakes are higher, and the special effects are more impressive, but it's essentially just eye candy or like giving reconstructive facial surgery to a really hideous person; they're still ugly but their appearance is at least nice to look at now. With a storyline that jumps all over the place for no rhyme or reason, really terrible dialogue being spewed from just about every major character, and The Twins probably being more offensive than they are humorous, Revenge of the Fallen falls short of being half as good as Bay's original effort and is quite difficult to think of as anything more than a guilty pleasure.
The writing is obviously the sequel's biggest flaw and not just the storyline, but the dialogue as well. The Fallen touched down on earth all the way back in 17,000 B.C. and while we've been able to uncover the likes of cavemen existing thereabouts during that time period, there's no evidence of autobots or decepticons existing in that point in history. With the way they fight and their vast numbers, that seems pretty hard to believe. Oh, and look, Sam has held onto the shirt he wore when the world almost came to an end in the last movie and apparently hasn't ever washed it. A sliver of the allspark has just been sitting in that thing this entire time. Alice actually being a decepticon didn't feel right either. Probable maybe, but it just didn't seem to fit with all other transformers being vehicles of some kind. Meanwhile Soundwave is a satellite in this movie, but walks around on earth with some crazy worm thing in Dark of the Moon with no reason of him evolving between films.
The movie has a thing about humping, too. We see two male dogs humping on more than one occasion and Wheelie also humps the crap out of Megan Fox's leg, but that's not the only time male genitalia comes into play. We also get a good glimpse at the testicles of the Sun Harvester as John Turturro spits out a one-liner about its scrotum. Leo and his freaking out over absolutely everything is also really annoying and makes Shia LaBeouf's "BUM-BULL-BEE!!!" and "OP-TIM-US!!!" squawks feel like a breath of fresh air. Sam's parents are practically the kryptonite of the movie as they're featured way too much and in the worst of times. Sam's mom has the lamest dialogue while also overreacting to everything while his dad can't decide to let Sam go or protect him. Why they were ever even Egypt is a boggling question in itself. Why are there autobots in heaven? If Megatron's master was The Fallen and he took orders from Sentinel Prime in Dark of the Moon, just how many other Decepticons does he answer to? The questions and plot holes just seem endless.
The atrocious dialogue practically echoes through your bones. It starts with Ironhide saying, "Punk ass decepticon," and never really lets up. Between Sam's parents "smelling" a "$40,000 education," and Simmons telling everyone that what he was about to show them was "top secret" and "do not tell my mother," the bases are pretty much covered. Military sergeants listening to a kid in college seems outlandish anyway, but throwing their absolute blind faith in him seems really outrageous. I realize the cast of the movie had the writer's strike to deal with, but two of the three writers for Revenge of the Fallen also wrote Star Trek which showed none of the same problems that this movie had. The writing in a Michael Bay movie is already secondary. Throw in a writer's strike and you've got something as apocalyptic behind the camera as what's taking place on screen.
There is something entertaining deep within the loins of this cinematic abomination though. The special effects are more than satisfying and pretty much outshine the special effects in the first movie. Onscreen battles are more extraordinary, explosions are bigger, and the numbers are more massive. It feels more like an actual war this time around. Bumblebee also gets his time to shine in the sequel. His scene in the garage with Sam at the start of the movie is one of the better calm scenes in the entire thing and then there are his fight scenes. Several of the fight scenes seem inspired by Mortal Kombat; Bumblebee's spine-rip sequence and Optimus’ face ripping and hand bursting through the chest of The Fallen with its villainous heart. Optimus feels very scarcely used in the two Transformers sequels. He has a few scenes where he gets to be awesome and then spends a good portion of the movie being incapacitated. At least he was dead in this one, that's a liable excuse. In Dark of the Moon, he's basically just hanging out upside down for thirty to forty minutes while hundreds of people die. Even though The Fallen is dealt with in a matter of minutes, he is kind of cool. He teleports a lot like Nightcrawler and is voiced by Tony Todd. Unfortunately, he's only appealing on the surface, kind of sucks as a main villain, and is a total embarrassment to the decepticons.
Michael Bay needs to learn that more explosions and more destructive mayhem don't automatically make a film better than its predecessor. There are more battles between the autobots and decepticons, the stakes are higher, and the special effects are more impressive, but it's essentially just eye candy or like giving reconstructive facial surgery to a really hideous person; they're still ugly but their appearance is at least nice to look at now. With a storyline that jumps all over the place for no rhyme or reason, really terrible dialogue being spewed from just about every major character, and The Twins probably being more offensive than they are humorous, Revenge of the Fallen falls short of being half as good as Bay's original effort and is quite difficult to think of as anything more than a guilty pleasure.
Kyera (8 KP) rated Frozen (Heart of Dread, #1) in Books
Feb 1, 2018
The story Frozen, by Melissa de la Cruz and Michael Johnston, is a tale about a girl with powers who lives in a world unlike our own. In post-apocalyptic New Vegas, Nat fins the one object that might allow her to escape the frozen landscape. The map to help her find the Blue, a promised land untainted by the cold and destruction her world knows. A place that maybe she can live a good life and not spend each day fearful that she will be discovered.
For an established YA writer, this book is surprisingly wrought with errors and would make an English major cringe. It was a poorly written novel with a multitude of punctuation, grammar, and spelling errors. Those completely detracted from the book and made it difficult to read the novel fluidly. There was an overuse of commas, "For days upon days she had been left in the room, alone, in total silence, with little food and water, the weight of solitude becoming ever more oppressive, the silence a heaviness that she could not shake, punishment for refusing to do as she was told, punishment for being what she was." I ran out of breath just reading that incredibly long, run on sentence. It also illustrates another example, the banal repetitiveness. Some examples would be, "She walked down the road, the road that was smooth." Or "The fire that raged within her. The fire that destroyed and consumed. The fire that would destroy and consume her..." How many times does one need to write the fire? Many of the sentences are just reworded versions of the one that came before it. Unnecessarily repetitive and it makes the book sound like a novice writer threw it together in a slap-dash manner with no editor to speak of.
It also cannot decide what genre it wishes to fall under. The magical elements and new species lend itself to a label of fantasy, like books about faeries or nymphs. Paranormal romance perhaps, for the love story that blossoms over the course of the novel? Or the more recently popular zombie novels, with their diseases and alterations of the human dNA, like Forest of Teeth and Bones? Perhaps its a post-apocalyptic or dystopian style novel, akin to Divergent or the Hunger Games - with its frozen world, scarce resources, and tyrannical governments. Whatever it is, the fact that it cannot decide makes the book quite confusing. It does not flow well as a result of the colliding and conflicting worlds. There also is no world-building, which is incredibly important to me in a book. And character building, or even character personalities? Almost non-existent. I would recommend this book to young teen readers, but not anyone who finds themselves frequently noticing errors in novels (even minor ones)as this will drive you crazy. I almost didn't finish the first chapter because the book was so poorly written, but I wanted to see if it would improve.
For an established YA writer, this book is surprisingly wrought with errors and would make an English major cringe. It was a poorly written novel with a multitude of punctuation, grammar, and spelling errors. Those completely detracted from the book and made it difficult to read the novel fluidly. There was an overuse of commas, "For days upon days she had been left in the room, alone, in total silence, with little food and water, the weight of solitude becoming ever more oppressive, the silence a heaviness that she could not shake, punishment for refusing to do as she was told, punishment for being what she was." I ran out of breath just reading that incredibly long, run on sentence. It also illustrates another example, the banal repetitiveness. Some examples would be, "She walked down the road, the road that was smooth." Or "The fire that raged within her. The fire that destroyed and consumed. The fire that would destroy and consume her..." How many times does one need to write the fire? Many of the sentences are just reworded versions of the one that came before it. Unnecessarily repetitive and it makes the book sound like a novice writer threw it together in a slap-dash manner with no editor to speak of.
It also cannot decide what genre it wishes to fall under. The magical elements and new species lend itself to a label of fantasy, like books about faeries or nymphs. Paranormal romance perhaps, for the love story that blossoms over the course of the novel? Or the more recently popular zombie novels, with their diseases and alterations of the human dNA, like Forest of Teeth and Bones? Perhaps its a post-apocalyptic or dystopian style novel, akin to Divergent or the Hunger Games - with its frozen world, scarce resources, and tyrannical governments. Whatever it is, the fact that it cannot decide makes the book quite confusing. It does not flow well as a result of the colliding and conflicting worlds. There also is no world-building, which is incredibly important to me in a book. And character building, or even character personalities? Almost non-existent. I would recommend this book to young teen readers, but not anyone who finds themselves frequently noticing errors in novels (even minor ones)as this will drive you crazy. I almost didn't finish the first chapter because the book was so poorly written, but I wanted to see if it would improve.
Space Harrier II ™ Classic
Games, Entertainment and Stickers
App
The classic on-rails ground-breaking shooter, Space Harrier II is now available on mobile! Play free...
go! Kruger
Lifestyle and Travel
App
go! Kruger guide South Africa’s Kruger National Park offers tourists an unforgettable wildlife...
Re-Volt Classic
Games
App
Classic online multiplayer racing action! Race radio-controlled cars through the neighborhood and...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Death Race (2008) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In 1975, legendary B-movie producer Roger Corman showed audiences a look at the near future with a biting film that deftly blended action and political commentary and satire. The film was “Death Race 2000” and starred David Carradine and featured a pre-“Rocky” Sylvester Stallone as bitter rivals in a brutal cross country race where finishing first was second only to the amount of death and carnage a driver left in their wake.
The film became a cult hit, and paved the way for films such as “Rollerball”, “Arena”, and countless other films that featured bloodlust sporting events for the masses a la Rome in the age of gladiators at the coliseum. Thirty-three years later, audiences are given the new and upgraded “Death Race” which benefits from a bigger budget with more carnage than the original film that inspired it ever dreamed of.
The film opens with an eerie warning of today’s troubled economic times, stating that the U.S.
economy collapses in 2012 and record unemployment and crime sweep the nation. With prisons overcrowded, corporations run correctional facilities for a profit and soon offer caged matches between inmates for the viewing pleasure of the nation. At first the matches are a huge success but soon lose their appeal to an audience that is eager for even bloodier sport.
In an effort to keep the cash flowing, the Death Race is created which pits convicts against one another in a brutal mix of speed, firepower, and death which in a few years surpasses even the Super Bowl as the most watched sporting event in the world.
Jason Statham stars as Jensen Ames, a former race driver who is framed for the murder of his wife and faces the prospect of life in prison while his daughter is raised by strangers. With the Death Race losing some if its audience, its creator, and warden of the prison, Hennessey (Joan Allen), offers Jensen a solution to both of their problems. If Jensen will pose as the masked Frankenstein for the race and win, he will be granted his freedom. It is learned that the real Frankenstein has finally succumbed to the numerous injuries he has incurred racing, and rather than risk losing his vast legions of fans who drive the ratings, it is easier to replace him than lose him, especially since recent races without Frankenstein had not garnered the same ratings as his past races.
It is explained that should a driver win five death races, they will be set free. Since Frankenstein has won four races, all Jensen has to do is win the race and stay alive to earn his freedom. Jensen is faced with an menacing list of adversaries including the deadly Machine Gun Joe (Tyrese Gibson), who is the biggest threat to Jensen with an absolute hatred for Frankenstein. Gun Joe is a cold-blooded killer who wants nothing more than two more race wins to earn his freedom and will stop at nothing to get it.
Jensen is assisted by the talented Coach (Ian McShane), who dispenses wisdom while overseeing the crew that outfits Jensen’s suped up, armor-plated, and very heavily armed racer. Assigned to ride with Jensen as his Navigator is Case (Natalie Martinez), a female prisoner who, like many of her fellow navigators, sees the race as a chance to earn their freedom and other special perks which makes risking their lives a worthwhile endeavor.
As the race unfolds in three stages, Jensen is tasked with not only surviving the threats Machine Gun Joe and the other racers aim his way, but surviving the twisted scheme that has him in its grasp.
The action of the film is fast, brutal, and unforgiving and is easily the highlight of the film. Sadly there are plenty of scenes with stiff and uninspired characters, numerous plot holes and leaps of logic, and clichés that bog the film down.
Statham is his usual soft talking hard man, a character he has made a career out of playing in such films as the “Crank” and the “Transporter” series. But unlike those films, he is not given much material to work with here. Statham has done solid work in the past but Jensen is a paper thin character who never fully given a chance to develop nor be embraced by the audience.
The same is true for the rest of the cast, a talented ensemble left to languish in want of better material. The film is directed by Paul W.S. Anderson of the “Resident Evil” series who once again shows that he has an eye for action, but still has issues with pacing and unsympathetic characters. This is a shame as the premise of the film is solid, but unlike the original, lacks the social and political commentary needed to balance the carnage and mayhem.
With a little more time in shop and tinkering, this could have been a solid action film, instead it stalls at the starting line badly in need of a tune up.
The film became a cult hit, and paved the way for films such as “Rollerball”, “Arena”, and countless other films that featured bloodlust sporting events for the masses a la Rome in the age of gladiators at the coliseum. Thirty-three years later, audiences are given the new and upgraded “Death Race” which benefits from a bigger budget with more carnage than the original film that inspired it ever dreamed of.
The film opens with an eerie warning of today’s troubled economic times, stating that the U.S.
economy collapses in 2012 and record unemployment and crime sweep the nation. With prisons overcrowded, corporations run correctional facilities for a profit and soon offer caged matches between inmates for the viewing pleasure of the nation. At first the matches are a huge success but soon lose their appeal to an audience that is eager for even bloodier sport.
In an effort to keep the cash flowing, the Death Race is created which pits convicts against one another in a brutal mix of speed, firepower, and death which in a few years surpasses even the Super Bowl as the most watched sporting event in the world.
Jason Statham stars as Jensen Ames, a former race driver who is framed for the murder of his wife and faces the prospect of life in prison while his daughter is raised by strangers. With the Death Race losing some if its audience, its creator, and warden of the prison, Hennessey (Joan Allen), offers Jensen a solution to both of their problems. If Jensen will pose as the masked Frankenstein for the race and win, he will be granted his freedom. It is learned that the real Frankenstein has finally succumbed to the numerous injuries he has incurred racing, and rather than risk losing his vast legions of fans who drive the ratings, it is easier to replace him than lose him, especially since recent races without Frankenstein had not garnered the same ratings as his past races.
It is explained that should a driver win five death races, they will be set free. Since Frankenstein has won four races, all Jensen has to do is win the race and stay alive to earn his freedom. Jensen is faced with an menacing list of adversaries including the deadly Machine Gun Joe (Tyrese Gibson), who is the biggest threat to Jensen with an absolute hatred for Frankenstein. Gun Joe is a cold-blooded killer who wants nothing more than two more race wins to earn his freedom and will stop at nothing to get it.
Jensen is assisted by the talented Coach (Ian McShane), who dispenses wisdom while overseeing the crew that outfits Jensen’s suped up, armor-plated, and very heavily armed racer. Assigned to ride with Jensen as his Navigator is Case (Natalie Martinez), a female prisoner who, like many of her fellow navigators, sees the race as a chance to earn their freedom and other special perks which makes risking their lives a worthwhile endeavor.
As the race unfolds in three stages, Jensen is tasked with not only surviving the threats Machine Gun Joe and the other racers aim his way, but surviving the twisted scheme that has him in its grasp.
The action of the film is fast, brutal, and unforgiving and is easily the highlight of the film. Sadly there are plenty of scenes with stiff and uninspired characters, numerous plot holes and leaps of logic, and clichés that bog the film down.
Statham is his usual soft talking hard man, a character he has made a career out of playing in such films as the “Crank” and the “Transporter” series. But unlike those films, he is not given much material to work with here. Statham has done solid work in the past but Jensen is a paper thin character who never fully given a chance to develop nor be embraced by the audience.
The same is true for the rest of the cast, a talented ensemble left to languish in want of better material. The film is directed by Paul W.S. Anderson of the “Resident Evil” series who once again shows that he has an eye for action, but still has issues with pacing and unsympathetic characters. This is a shame as the premise of the film is solid, but unlike the original, lacks the social and political commentary needed to balance the carnage and mayhem.
With a little more time in shop and tinkering, this could have been a solid action film, instead it stalls at the starting line badly in need of a tune up.
Debbiereadsbook (1617 KP) rated Animal Attraction (San Francisco Dragons #2) in Books
Jun 6, 2019
a Nice easy read!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
6 months ago, Maggie’s dog, Kirby, goes missing. Her friend Jade finds him, and Maggie goes to the door of hockey player Spencer to get him back. But Kirby is looking after Spencer’s elderly dog, Lulu, who has perked up since Spencer found Kirby by the side of the road and he doesn’t want Lulu to go yet. Sharing the dog for the short term seemed the best idea. But as they get closer, secrets threaten to drive them apart.
If you follow my reviews, you’ll know I have a particular dislike of the N word for a book, but sometimes, that bloody word gets stuck in my throat and I cannot shift it, no matter what.
So, this was a NICE book. A good nice, easy read, that wiled away a few hours this morning before work.
Maggie finds herself in deep quick with Spencer, and vice versa but Maggie can’t give Spencer what he wants and when his ex turns up with news, she walks away. Spencer doesn’t want the ex though, and he must find a way to get Maggie back.
It’s well written, with both Maggie and Spencer having a say in the third person. Both voices are clear, concise and consistent through the book, although Spencer I found a little jumpy in his narrative. He seemed to flit about a bit, not really paying much attention to Maggie, until she wasn’t there!
It's not especially high on the heat level, or maybe I just read books with a MUCH higher level, but I didn’t mind it here. I do prefer my books high up that scale, in general, but I felt the level that this book gets to was hot enough for Maggie and Spencer. It IS sexy, though, don’t get me wrong! Just not super hot.
There isn’t any real drama, but there is a good deal of emotions involved, especially on Maggie’s part. Dealing what she did all those years ago must have been devastating and to not have told her best friend all of it? Too painful to think about.
I got what the ex was doing, very quickly! But again, Spencer couldn’t see that!
This is book 2 in the San Francisco Dragons series, and I have not read book one. I didn’t feel I was missing anything by not reading it, but from reading the blurb, the main character does pop up here, as a member of Spencer’s team. Some interesting characters on this team, too, and I would like to catch up with them all as they fall and fall hard.
First I’ve read by Ms Willoughby, I’d like to read more.
4 solid stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
6 months ago, Maggie’s dog, Kirby, goes missing. Her friend Jade finds him, and Maggie goes to the door of hockey player Spencer to get him back. But Kirby is looking after Spencer’s elderly dog, Lulu, who has perked up since Spencer found Kirby by the side of the road and he doesn’t want Lulu to go yet. Sharing the dog for the short term seemed the best idea. But as they get closer, secrets threaten to drive them apart.
If you follow my reviews, you’ll know I have a particular dislike of the N word for a book, but sometimes, that bloody word gets stuck in my throat and I cannot shift it, no matter what.
So, this was a NICE book. A good nice, easy read, that wiled away a few hours this morning before work.
Maggie finds herself in deep quick with Spencer, and vice versa but Maggie can’t give Spencer what he wants and when his ex turns up with news, she walks away. Spencer doesn’t want the ex though, and he must find a way to get Maggie back.
It’s well written, with both Maggie and Spencer having a say in the third person. Both voices are clear, concise and consistent through the book, although Spencer I found a little jumpy in his narrative. He seemed to flit about a bit, not really paying much attention to Maggie, until she wasn’t there!
It's not especially high on the heat level, or maybe I just read books with a MUCH higher level, but I didn’t mind it here. I do prefer my books high up that scale, in general, but I felt the level that this book gets to was hot enough for Maggie and Spencer. It IS sexy, though, don’t get me wrong! Just not super hot.
There isn’t any real drama, but there is a good deal of emotions involved, especially on Maggie’s part. Dealing what she did all those years ago must have been devastating and to not have told her best friend all of it? Too painful to think about.
I got what the ex was doing, very quickly! But again, Spencer couldn’t see that!
This is book 2 in the San Francisco Dragons series, and I have not read book one. I didn’t feel I was missing anything by not reading it, but from reading the blurb, the main character does pop up here, as a member of Spencer’s team. Some interesting characters on this team, too, and I would like to catch up with them all as they fall and fall hard.
First I’ve read by Ms Willoughby, I’d like to read more.
4 solid stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Zombieland (2009) in Movies
Nov 12, 2019
Great Cast Makes For the Perfect Movie
Four strangers have to learn to survive together during a zombie apocalypse. Talk about a movie that checks all the boxes, Zombieland does just that! It’s got a little something for everyone.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
The first ten minutes is a perfect setup for what you can expect throughout the movie. This isn’t your typical zombie-survival romp and I thought writer Rhett Reese did an amazing job of establishing that early. You meet and fall in love with the main character as he tries to survive a simple trip to the bathroom. You also learn how his “rules” have kept him alive so long.
Characters: 10
His name is Columbus, played by Jesse Eisenberg. He’s such an unlikely hero that you can’t help but root for the poor guy as he moves from one scene to the next. Many of the scenes would have played out much differently if it weren’t for his quirky personality.
The other three mains, Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) add their own flare to the film as well. Tallahassee is a badass to the point where it gets extremely comical. His character motivation of searching for a Twinkie (literally!) is priceless. The ladies share a fun backstory that make them an intriguing pair. You throw all four together and you have a perfect combination.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
This apocalyptic adventure is a blast across the board from beginning to end. Even the backstories are exciting to watch. The characters help drive the story as you can somehow manage to get on board with each of their motivations for survival. The action is a blast and the slower moments are underrated gems.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Zombie movies have been done over…and over…and over…It’s a rare treat when they get it right and try to think outside of the box. I love that the film manages to take a familiar theme and make it fresh. Not only is the movie original, but it harbors some of the most memorable scenes in film.
Resolution: 10
Always nice when a movie doesn’t overstay it’s welcome. Zombieland ties up its story in tidy fashion, ending with a heartfelt bang. It immediately makes you want to watch it again.
Overall: 100
I have the utmost respect for the sheer creativity in Zombieland. Sometimes movies try too hard while others don’t try hard enough. This movie never feels forced and always feels in control of its own destiny. Even the small scenes are impactful, like the night scene where they are taking turns driving and getting to know each other in the car. Zombieland is a cinematic treat.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
The first ten minutes is a perfect setup for what you can expect throughout the movie. This isn’t your typical zombie-survival romp and I thought writer Rhett Reese did an amazing job of establishing that early. You meet and fall in love with the main character as he tries to survive a simple trip to the bathroom. You also learn how his “rules” have kept him alive so long.
Characters: 10
His name is Columbus, played by Jesse Eisenberg. He’s such an unlikely hero that you can’t help but root for the poor guy as he moves from one scene to the next. Many of the scenes would have played out much differently if it weren’t for his quirky personality.
The other three mains, Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) add their own flare to the film as well. Tallahassee is a badass to the point where it gets extremely comical. His character motivation of searching for a Twinkie (literally!) is priceless. The ladies share a fun backstory that make them an intriguing pair. You throw all four together and you have a perfect combination.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
This apocalyptic adventure is a blast across the board from beginning to end. Even the backstories are exciting to watch. The characters help drive the story as you can somehow manage to get on board with each of their motivations for survival. The action is a blast and the slower moments are underrated gems.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Zombie movies have been done over…and over…and over…It’s a rare treat when they get it right and try to think outside of the box. I love that the film manages to take a familiar theme and make it fresh. Not only is the movie original, but it harbors some of the most memorable scenes in film.
Resolution: 10
Always nice when a movie doesn’t overstay it’s welcome. Zombieland ties up its story in tidy fashion, ending with a heartfelt bang. It immediately makes you want to watch it again.
Overall: 100
I have the utmost respect for the sheer creativity in Zombieland. Sometimes movies try too hard while others don’t try hard enough. This movie never feels forced and always feels in control of its own destiny. Even the small scenes are impactful, like the night scene where they are taking turns driving and getting to know each other in the car. Zombieland is a cinematic treat.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Side Effects (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Steven Soderbergh has been toying with the notion of retirement for a couple of years now, and has said that “Side Effects” will be his final film. I certainly hope not.
As its title intones, “Side Effects” is a movie about what can happen when prescription medications, such as anti-depressants, can do at their worst, leading to anyone who taking them wishing they weren’t. The movie certainly starts out looking like a propaganda-film about how Doctor’s push these drugs onto patients as they are paid by pharmaceutical representatives to test their drugs. It seems that everyone in the film is taking meds of some form or another. The cast for the film should be a recipe for success: Jude Law, Rooney Mara, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Channing Tatum. But because of this perception, the first two-thirds of the film nearly put me to sleep. And then a twist happened that the made the plot extremely complex and worth watching. In many ways, the less said about “Side Effects,” the better. This may produce a better experience for you than I had. But here’s the basic idea of the movie:
Emily Taylor, played by Rooney Mara, is introduced when she is visiting her husband Martin (Tatum), a man convicted of insider trading who is about to be released after four years behind bars. Martin’s discharge happens uneventfully, but adjusting to the new life of poverty rehashes the depression that first plagued Emily when her husband’s prison term started. This leads to Emily crashing her car head-on into the wall of the garage in her apartment building. While in the hospital, rules force her to see psychiatrist Jonathan Banks (Law).
Up until this point, I had trouble connecting with Mara’s character. While it is revealed that she had mental problems prior to this episode, you don’t really completely grasp what it is until later in the movie. Mara seemed to be very stiff, and way too much like her emotionless character from “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.” But then we enter Jude Law. Law’s character, Banks, is friendly, approachable and caring. He is what first drew me deeper into the movie. Though, you soon discover that he is a doctor who believes in the power of drugs. This character kept me interested because I couldn’t quite nail if he was going to be an antagonist or protagonist.
Of course our dear Dr. Banks prescribes some medications to Emily and she begins showing some disturbing side effects and… The side effects lead to really terrible, bloody things which ruins careers, lives, and even drive people to madness. Or does it?
As its title intones, “Side Effects” is a movie about what can happen when prescription medications, such as anti-depressants, can do at their worst, leading to anyone who taking them wishing they weren’t. The movie certainly starts out looking like a propaganda-film about how Doctor’s push these drugs onto patients as they are paid by pharmaceutical representatives to test their drugs. It seems that everyone in the film is taking meds of some form or another. The cast for the film should be a recipe for success: Jude Law, Rooney Mara, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Channing Tatum. But because of this perception, the first two-thirds of the film nearly put me to sleep. And then a twist happened that the made the plot extremely complex and worth watching. In many ways, the less said about “Side Effects,” the better. This may produce a better experience for you than I had. But here’s the basic idea of the movie:
Emily Taylor, played by Rooney Mara, is introduced when she is visiting her husband Martin (Tatum), a man convicted of insider trading who is about to be released after four years behind bars. Martin’s discharge happens uneventfully, but adjusting to the new life of poverty rehashes the depression that first plagued Emily when her husband’s prison term started. This leads to Emily crashing her car head-on into the wall of the garage in her apartment building. While in the hospital, rules force her to see psychiatrist Jonathan Banks (Law).
Up until this point, I had trouble connecting with Mara’s character. While it is revealed that she had mental problems prior to this episode, you don’t really completely grasp what it is until later in the movie. Mara seemed to be very stiff, and way too much like her emotionless character from “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.” But then we enter Jude Law. Law’s character, Banks, is friendly, approachable and caring. He is what first drew me deeper into the movie. Though, you soon discover that he is a doctor who believes in the power of drugs. This character kept me interested because I couldn’t quite nail if he was going to be an antagonist or protagonist.
Of course our dear Dr. Banks prescribes some medications to Emily and she begins showing some disturbing side effects and… The side effects lead to really terrible, bloody things which ruins careers, lives, and even drive people to madness. Or does it?
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Mom and Dad (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
A teenage girl and her little brother must survive a wild 24 hours during which a mass hysteria of unknown origins causes parents to turn violently on their own kids.
This. Was. Hilarious. It's a zombie movie without being a zombie movie.
Surprisingly not listed as a comedy though, horror/action/thriller all the way... did these guys watch their own film? Luckily I was the only one in the screen because I was pissing myself laughing.
As much as I love Nicolas Cage, seeing him rage always makes me laugh. I feel like he would make a good Batman villain... for the TV show. The redeeming bit for me though was hearing him say "anal beads" in a moment where he flips out at his daughter's boyfriend.
I had some sympathy for Selma Blair's mum character, I wanted to kill her kid for most of the film too. Mum was a much more subtle murderous switch, whereas dad looked like he'd been having a meltdown for months. Mum seemed to struggle more with the idea of killing her kids, but when she went, boy was she a force to be reckoned with. Being a woman I can quite happily say that the look on her face, and the slow but meaningful grab of the tenderiser really does sum up how we feel for at least a minute portion of the month. Usually though in real life it would be us getting that look, taking a deep breath, and then smiling politely and going about our day... but in our heads... yep.
If you're not going to see this on your own then I'd advise you to go with friends. Not parents. As much as I love mine I was left wondering if the hysteria would make them want to drive across the country to try and kill me. I'm putting together a battle plan just in case. It is very much like my zombie apocalypse plan but less armour against biting.
The real question is whether the hysteria that was affecting the parents was entirely working on genetics or emotional connection... I'd have been interested to see the odd husband standing there with his kids, not affected while his wife goes full axe murderer and seeing him realise that his kids look more like the milkman/best friend than him. Conversely it would have been an awkward moment to admit that your kids were adopted... or would you attempt to kill them to hide the fact from them longer? Hmm... you know I say these things in jest though... it is only a film, don't get on my case about it.
This. Was. Hilarious. It's a zombie movie without being a zombie movie.
Surprisingly not listed as a comedy though, horror/action/thriller all the way... did these guys watch their own film? Luckily I was the only one in the screen because I was pissing myself laughing.
As much as I love Nicolas Cage, seeing him rage always makes me laugh. I feel like he would make a good Batman villain... for the TV show. The redeeming bit for me though was hearing him say "anal beads" in a moment where he flips out at his daughter's boyfriend.
I had some sympathy for Selma Blair's mum character, I wanted to kill her kid for most of the film too. Mum was a much more subtle murderous switch, whereas dad looked like he'd been having a meltdown for months. Mum seemed to struggle more with the idea of killing her kids, but when she went, boy was she a force to be reckoned with. Being a woman I can quite happily say that the look on her face, and the slow but meaningful grab of the tenderiser really does sum up how we feel for at least a minute portion of the month. Usually though in real life it would be us getting that look, taking a deep breath, and then smiling politely and going about our day... but in our heads... yep.
If you're not going to see this on your own then I'd advise you to go with friends. Not parents. As much as I love mine I was left wondering if the hysteria would make them want to drive across the country to try and kill me. I'm putting together a battle plan just in case. It is very much like my zombie apocalypse plan but less armour against biting.
The real question is whether the hysteria that was affecting the parents was entirely working on genetics or emotional connection... I'd have been interested to see the odd husband standing there with his kids, not affected while his wife goes full axe murderer and seeing him realise that his kids look more like the milkman/best friend than him. Conversely it would have been an awkward moment to admit that your kids were adopted... or would you attempt to kill them to hide the fact from them longer? Hmm... you know I say these things in jest though... it is only a film, don't get on my case about it.