Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated Taking Lives (2004) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: Taking Lives starts as we see a young man kill another young man to steal his identity, years later a body is discovered in Canada which leads to the local French-Canadian police to call in FBI profiler Illeana (Jolie) to help with the new mystery body. Things take a turn when a man Costa (Hawke) believes he interrupted the next attempted murder before the killer is finished dealing with the body.
When the police learn this killer has been killing and stealing identities the case takes a turn and now they must figure out who the latest victim is and who he has become.
Thoughts on Taking Lives
Characters – Illeane Scott is an FBI Profiler bought in to help with the case of a killer that is stealing identities of the people he is murdering, she gets the profile correct and wants to had home after starting to become interested in one of the key witnesses. Costa is a key witness who interrupts one of the murders before the killer can complete his plan, he gives the information to track the killer. Hart is a man that soon enters Costa’s life after the incident making him the prime suspect as the killer.
Performances – Angelina Jolie is solid enough in this leading role which disappoints because we know she can be a fantastic cop figure. Ethan Hawke struggles with his role too which is only really filled with disappointment as he never convinces in his witness role. Kiefer Sutherland disappoints because we know how good he can be and want to see him more often in a film.
Story – The story is a FBI agent needing to help track down a serial killer who steals identity, yeah these are usually entertaining to watch but this just doesn’t reach the levels of mystery it needs, this might be because this is a repeat viewing and I know the ending, but there are never really any hints or suspects to work with through the film. the film lacks the true tension needed in a film that is filled with twisted crimes going on.
Crime/Mystery – The crime is interesting for a killer to be acting the way they do, the weakest part is the mystery as we just don’t meet enough potential suspects.
Settings – The film is sent in a big city which plays into the idea that someone could steal and identity and kill someone without people noticing someone going missing.
Special Effects – The effects are good because we get to see practical effects when it comes to the kills and aftermath from them.
Scene of the Movie – The lift opening.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Not enough suspects.
Final Thoughts – This is a crime thriller that lacks the punch to make it stand out from the crowded market, we always need a large group of suspects, but this didn’t give us enough, while it did create a great killer.
Overall: Lacklustre crime thriller
When the police learn this killer has been killing and stealing identities the case takes a turn and now they must figure out who the latest victim is and who he has become.
Thoughts on Taking Lives
Characters – Illeane Scott is an FBI Profiler bought in to help with the case of a killer that is stealing identities of the people he is murdering, she gets the profile correct and wants to had home after starting to become interested in one of the key witnesses. Costa is a key witness who interrupts one of the murders before the killer can complete his plan, he gives the information to track the killer. Hart is a man that soon enters Costa’s life after the incident making him the prime suspect as the killer.
Performances – Angelina Jolie is solid enough in this leading role which disappoints because we know she can be a fantastic cop figure. Ethan Hawke struggles with his role too which is only really filled with disappointment as he never convinces in his witness role. Kiefer Sutherland disappoints because we know how good he can be and want to see him more often in a film.
Story – The story is a FBI agent needing to help track down a serial killer who steals identity, yeah these are usually entertaining to watch but this just doesn’t reach the levels of mystery it needs, this might be because this is a repeat viewing and I know the ending, but there are never really any hints or suspects to work with through the film. the film lacks the true tension needed in a film that is filled with twisted crimes going on.
Crime/Mystery – The crime is interesting for a killer to be acting the way they do, the weakest part is the mystery as we just don’t meet enough potential suspects.
Settings – The film is sent in a big city which plays into the idea that someone could steal and identity and kill someone without people noticing someone going missing.
Special Effects – The effects are good because we get to see practical effects when it comes to the kills and aftermath from them.
Scene of the Movie – The lift opening.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Not enough suspects.
Final Thoughts – This is a crime thriller that lacks the punch to make it stand out from the crowded market, we always need a large group of suspects, but this didn’t give us enough, while it did create a great killer.
Overall: Lacklustre crime thriller
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Daybreakers (2009) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Jun 23, 2019)
In the not too distant future, the majority of the population are vampires and the world has been modified to adjust to the daylight. Remaining humans are "farmed" for blood, but the supply is running thin and the human race is on the verge of extinction. Dr. Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke) is a hematologist that works at Bromley Marks, the empire of Charles Bromley (Sam Neill), and is put in charge of finding a blood substitute, but has come up empty handed up until this point. Dalton is convinced that the vampire race has its work cut out for them with the blood supply being so low. He runs into a small group of humans one night at work and is eventually introduced to Lionel "Elvis" Cormac (Willem Dafoe), a former vampire who has something better than a blood substitute; a cure. Now Dalton finds himself risking everything on an experimental treatment that could be the key to saving mankind.
Daybreakers had all the ingredients of a film that should be loved by any horror fan. First and foremost, it's a new vampire movie that isn't Twilight. On top of that, it's R-rated so it doesn't pull any punches when it comes to blood and gore (and trust me, there's quite a bit). It also offers a bit of a new twist on what was otherwise exhausted when it comes to stories relating to vampires. With all that being said, however, it still wasn't as good as it should have been.
It was great to see Willem Dafoe and Sam Neill not only as part of the cast, but also both have decent amounts of screen time. Sam Neill was in John Carpenter's In the Mouth of Madness, which is a favorite of mine that managed to make me a fan of the Irish actor. Willem Dafoe just seems underrated and doesn't get the credit he deserves. Not that his role in this will really change anyone's minds regarding him as a great actor or anything, but that's jumping the gun a bit. The story is the film's strong point, but is still pretty flawed. Humans being farmed for blood and dying out is a great concept. The cure is rather different and unique than what you've become used to in vampire films, which lead to an interesting third act. The ending is probably where the film could potentially make someone dislike the film. Not everyone is going to like the finale, but it was a nice change of pace to not have the same recycled storyline or ending for once.
Regarding the acting though, there isn't much of it. Willem Dafoe shows a little personality and has a one-liner or two that will get a few laughs. Sam Neill also shows some signs of life and fits the role as the main villain of the film rather well. Every other character felt rather flat and showed no depth at all. While the blood used in the film was a fantastic color, some of the special effects seemed rather cheesy at times. Mainly the scene where a vampire is hanging from the ceiling fighting Ethan Hawke and his brother comes to mind. The cuts were quick, which seemed to try and cover up the fact, but it still stuck out. That may be nitpicking a bit since it was pretty top notch the rest of the time. The Underworld films (at least the first two) come to mind as they left the same kind of bitter aftertaste and seemed to suffer similar problems.
It's a shame Daybreakers didn't live up to its potential. It contains a strong cast and delivers an original take on something that's been associated with horror for nearly 200 years. The acting is what seems to hurt the film the most though since the way everyone says their lines makes it seem like they don't want to be there. It's still worth viewing, but you may want to rent before buying. In all honesty, it may be worth supporting just to get an R-rated vampire film a bit more recognition and slightly dim the spotlight currently shining on whatever teenage vampire franchise is currently taking off for whatever reason.
Daybreakers had all the ingredients of a film that should be loved by any horror fan. First and foremost, it's a new vampire movie that isn't Twilight. On top of that, it's R-rated so it doesn't pull any punches when it comes to blood and gore (and trust me, there's quite a bit). It also offers a bit of a new twist on what was otherwise exhausted when it comes to stories relating to vampires. With all that being said, however, it still wasn't as good as it should have been.
It was great to see Willem Dafoe and Sam Neill not only as part of the cast, but also both have decent amounts of screen time. Sam Neill was in John Carpenter's In the Mouth of Madness, which is a favorite of mine that managed to make me a fan of the Irish actor. Willem Dafoe just seems underrated and doesn't get the credit he deserves. Not that his role in this will really change anyone's minds regarding him as a great actor or anything, but that's jumping the gun a bit. The story is the film's strong point, but is still pretty flawed. Humans being farmed for blood and dying out is a great concept. The cure is rather different and unique than what you've become used to in vampire films, which lead to an interesting third act. The ending is probably where the film could potentially make someone dislike the film. Not everyone is going to like the finale, but it was a nice change of pace to not have the same recycled storyline or ending for once.
Regarding the acting though, there isn't much of it. Willem Dafoe shows a little personality and has a one-liner or two that will get a few laughs. Sam Neill also shows some signs of life and fits the role as the main villain of the film rather well. Every other character felt rather flat and showed no depth at all. While the blood used in the film was a fantastic color, some of the special effects seemed rather cheesy at times. Mainly the scene where a vampire is hanging from the ceiling fighting Ethan Hawke and his brother comes to mind. The cuts were quick, which seemed to try and cover up the fact, but it still stuck out. That may be nitpicking a bit since it was pretty top notch the rest of the time. The Underworld films (at least the first two) come to mind as they left the same kind of bitter aftertaste and seemed to suffer similar problems.
It's a shame Daybreakers didn't live up to its potential. It contains a strong cast and delivers an original take on something that's been associated with horror for nearly 200 years. The acting is what seems to hurt the film the most though since the way everyone says their lines makes it seem like they don't want to be there. It's still worth viewing, but you may want to rent before buying. In all honesty, it may be worth supporting just to get an R-rated vampire film a bit more recognition and slightly dim the spotlight currently shining on whatever teenage vampire franchise is currently taking off for whatever reason.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Magnificent Seven (2016) in Movies
Jul 15, 2019
Full disclosure, I have never seen The 1960s Magnificent Seven film, nor do I care that at its core it is a retelling of the Japanese legend of the Seven Samurai. This is not a comparison review. Instead this is a simple review of what I watched on screen. Not beholden to anything other than itself as film and it being a western.
That being said, I thoroughly enjoyed this film. The Magnificent Seven hits all the appropriate marks you would expect from a classic western. The sprawling landscapes, big gunfights against all odds, character musical cues, honor bound good guys and dastardly bad guys. The Magnificent Seven is an entertaining gallop for western fans both old and new alike.
That is not to say that this film is anything more thought provoking then a typical “White hats vs Black Hats” western story. However it is the performance of the actors and their portrayal of somewhat typical characters that is the soul and charm of the film. Led by Denzel Washington who plays Sam Chisolm, the deputized bounty hunter hired to free a simple town from under the tyranny of a rich minor who uses violence and intimidation to take what he wants. Chisolm puts together an unlikely posse of the jokester gun-shooter Josh Faraday (Chris Pratt), the civil war veteran sharpshooter Goodnight Robicheaux (Ethan Hawke), his knife welding companion Billy Rocks (Byung-hun Lee), the outlaw Vasquez (Manuel Garcia-Fulfo), the grizzly frontiersman Jack Horne (Vincent D’Onofrio) and the native warrior Red Harvest (Martin Sensmeier). Together they take on the dastardly greedy Bartholomew Bogue (Peter Sarsgaard) and his army of paid mercenaries. The entire ensemble gives solid and entertaining performances, however it is the chemistry among the cast that creates the feeling that they had a blast making this film together, much to our delight.
When we put these elements together the film works on an entertaining level. While some may find it forgettable once it is over, they will no doubt enjoy the ride along the way. In a year where the summer blockbusters have been mostly disappointing and forgettable, The Magnificent Seven is a bright spot on the film landscape than most big budget films this year.
That being said, I thoroughly enjoyed this film. The Magnificent Seven hits all the appropriate marks you would expect from a classic western. The sprawling landscapes, big gunfights against all odds, character musical cues, honor bound good guys and dastardly bad guys. The Magnificent Seven is an entertaining gallop for western fans both old and new alike.
That is not to say that this film is anything more thought provoking then a typical “White hats vs Black Hats” western story. However it is the performance of the actors and their portrayal of somewhat typical characters that is the soul and charm of the film. Led by Denzel Washington who plays Sam Chisolm, the deputized bounty hunter hired to free a simple town from under the tyranny of a rich minor who uses violence and intimidation to take what he wants. Chisolm puts together an unlikely posse of the jokester gun-shooter Josh Faraday (Chris Pratt), the civil war veteran sharpshooter Goodnight Robicheaux (Ethan Hawke), his knife welding companion Billy Rocks (Byung-hun Lee), the outlaw Vasquez (Manuel Garcia-Fulfo), the grizzly frontiersman Jack Horne (Vincent D’Onofrio) and the native warrior Red Harvest (Martin Sensmeier). Together they take on the dastardly greedy Bartholomew Bogue (Peter Sarsgaard) and his army of paid mercenaries. The entire ensemble gives solid and entertaining performances, however it is the chemistry among the cast that creates the feeling that they had a blast making this film together, much to our delight.
When we put these elements together the film works on an entertaining level. While some may find it forgettable once it is over, they will no doubt enjoy the ride along the way. In a year where the summer blockbusters have been mostly disappointing and forgettable, The Magnificent Seven is a bright spot on the film landscape than most big budget films this year.
JT (287 KP) rated Sinister (2012) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Has the found footage genre been done to death? Some would very much say it has, yet they keep on churning the films out. One thing to note with many of these is the budget, films like Paranormal Activity and Insidious were made for a pittance yet generated millions at the box office.
This is the same for Sinister, made for $3m it grossed almost $80m and was one of the surprise hits of last year, of course films like this are not going to be everyone’s cup of tea, but I love a good scare now and again and here I wasn’t disappointed.
Ethan Hawke is the clear standout in this one, here he plays true crime writer Ellison Oswalt who is looking for his next big thing to thrust him into the limelight. He and his family move into a house which he tells them is only a few doors down from a gruesome murder of a family who were all hung from a tree in their back garden.
When he finds a box in his attic containing reels of super 8 film and a camera he soon discovers more grisly murders and that somehow they are all linked to each other. Add to that a mysterious figure who appears in all the films and you have a character who goes a little stir crazy in trying to uncover the truth.
His family are desperate to leave, not happy with the current surroundings they are thrown into even more turmoil when its revealed that the house Oswalt said was two doors down is actually the house they are living in at the moment, don’t you just hate when that happens?
Director Scott Derrickson builds solid amounts of tension throughout, most disturbing are the super 8 films that show a number of families being killed off (you’ll never look at a lawn mower in the same light again). But then you have the same old horror cliché’s slipping back into it, things going bump in the night which leave you waiting for that revealing moment which comes with a consistent bang.
You’d be forgiven for thinking that this might not actually be classed as found footage, certainly not in the same vein as maybe Paranormal Activity or The Blair Witch Project. We’re not viewing anything from the point of view that the characters in this are dead….yet, and the resulting film is their story. But it is ‘found footage’, in that Oswalt has uncovered these films in his attic.
What makes Sinister that bit more unnerving is the somber mood, lighting and camera angles. Not quite giving us the full picture we have to let our imagination stay a few steps ahead of us. The musical score then connects everything together to give us a real horror treat.
Hawke gives a solid performance, he’s a man very much on the edge and that fame is the answer to his future. He’ll succeed at whatever the cost, and the cost is ultimately a big one. The end reveal some might have seen coming a mile off, personally I wasn’t expecting it so it was a good finish to a film that had rattled the nerves a few times.
Produced by the same team that brought us Paranormal Activity and Insidious, it’s a low budget success that shows big budget horrors how it should be done.
This is the same for Sinister, made for $3m it grossed almost $80m and was one of the surprise hits of last year, of course films like this are not going to be everyone’s cup of tea, but I love a good scare now and again and here I wasn’t disappointed.
Ethan Hawke is the clear standout in this one, here he plays true crime writer Ellison Oswalt who is looking for his next big thing to thrust him into the limelight. He and his family move into a house which he tells them is only a few doors down from a gruesome murder of a family who were all hung from a tree in their back garden.
When he finds a box in his attic containing reels of super 8 film and a camera he soon discovers more grisly murders and that somehow they are all linked to each other. Add to that a mysterious figure who appears in all the films and you have a character who goes a little stir crazy in trying to uncover the truth.
His family are desperate to leave, not happy with the current surroundings they are thrown into even more turmoil when its revealed that the house Oswalt said was two doors down is actually the house they are living in at the moment, don’t you just hate when that happens?
Director Scott Derrickson builds solid amounts of tension throughout, most disturbing are the super 8 films that show a number of families being killed off (you’ll never look at a lawn mower in the same light again). But then you have the same old horror cliché’s slipping back into it, things going bump in the night which leave you waiting for that revealing moment which comes with a consistent bang.
You’d be forgiven for thinking that this might not actually be classed as found footage, certainly not in the same vein as maybe Paranormal Activity or The Blair Witch Project. We’re not viewing anything from the point of view that the characters in this are dead….yet, and the resulting film is their story. But it is ‘found footage’, in that Oswalt has uncovered these films in his attic.
What makes Sinister that bit more unnerving is the somber mood, lighting and camera angles. Not quite giving us the full picture we have to let our imagination stay a few steps ahead of us. The musical score then connects everything together to give us a real horror treat.
Hawke gives a solid performance, he’s a man very much on the edge and that fame is the answer to his future. He’ll succeed at whatever the cost, and the cost is ultimately a big one. The end reveal some might have seen coming a mile off, personally I wasn’t expecting it so it was a good finish to a film that had rattled the nerves a few times.
Produced by the same team that brought us Paranormal Activity and Insidious, it’s a low budget success that shows big budget horrors how it should be done.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Magnificent Seven (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
A Hornery Exit.
As a big fan of the original – a staple of many Bank Holiday afternoons in my youth – I was prepared to be sniffy about this remake and came to the film on my high-horse (I left that tied to the rail outside the cinema by the way). But I was surprised to have my expectations reset.
Possibly on the basis that Trump has been given the Mexican’s a good bashing lately, the villain of the piece in this film is updated from Mexican bandit Calvera to Sacremento based land-snatcher and all round bad-egg Bartholomew Bogue (an expressionless Peter Sarsgaard). After ripping through some of the inhabitants of Rose Creek in a brutal pre-title sequence, widowed sharp-shooter Emma Cullen (Haley Bennett, “The Equalizer”) heads into the West on a recruiting mission for hired guns. She first recruits the bounty hunter Chisholm (sing “Chisum, John Chisum…”… no, sorry different Western) played by Denzel Washington. Washington matches Yul Brynner’s famous black outfit, and unlike Brynner is obviously able to finish off the ensemble naturally!
They recruit another six (who’d have thought it?) including wise-guy gambler Faraday (Chris “Guardians of the Galaxy” Pratt); famed confederate sniper Goodnight Robicheaux (Ethan Hawke); his nifty knife throwing Asian sidekick (but good for the Far East box office) Billy Rocks (Bjung-hun Lee, from Terminator: Genisys); and religious bear-of-a-man Indian-hunter Jack Horne (Vincent D’Onofrio, “Jurassic World”). After trying to whip the incompetent townsfolk into shape, and setting some Home-Alone style surprises, the stage is set for a showdown as Bogue whips up an army to re-take “his” town.
I like classic Westerns, with John Ford’s Rio Bravo being a particular favourite. In my view the problem with many modern Westerns is that they try too hard to shock (Tarentino’s recent “Hateful 8” was a case in point: a promising start ruined by gratuitous over-the-top violence). “The Magnificent Seven” doesn’t make that mistake, and while the squib-master and blood-bag boy are heavily employed throughout, nothing is too excessive: in fact, my view – and I don’t often tend in this direction – is that the censors rather over-egged the UK 12A rating on this one and could have gone with a 12. Director Antoine Fuqua has produced a film that is highly respectful of its heritage: perhaps to the point where many scenes might be deemed to be clichéd. But I personally warmed to that.
Denzel Washington was born to be in a Western like this and the emerging Chris Pratt does his star potential no harm by turning in a stellar performance adding both levity – with some whip-sharp lines – and screen presence in the role made famous by Steve McQueen. (Although no one comes close to the screen presence of McQueen…. Look up “real man” in the dictionary and his picture is there!) Also effective is Ethan Hawke in the nearest thing to the Robert Vaughan character in this film.
Where the adapted script by Richard Wenk and Nik Pizzolatto falters somewhat is in the motivations of the characters, which come across as superficial and unconvincing. (Perhaps “selling” was a whole lot easier in the Old West?) It is even unclear at the end of the film whether the survivors (and I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the seven don’t all make it!) actually take their payment, or even a “share of the gold” that the town is sitting on. It makes for an unsatisfactory closure. The degree of racial harmony present in the film is also difficult to buy into, and the script could have made something more of this.
The film soundtrack marks the swan-song of the late James Horner, so tragically killed in a plane crash last year at the age of just 61. As the natural successor to the great John Williams and the late Jerry Goldsmith, Horner’s loss was a terrible one. The film is dedicated to him. Although the soundtrack was completed by Simon Franglen, there are flourishes of classic Horner, most notably in the first Rose Creek showdown scene. There is also a treat to the ears over the closing credits which is very welcome.
Although the film draws natural comparison with its 5* classic predecessor, this is a good film in its own right – a genuinely pleasant surprise. Perhaps its done well enough that we might get to now see a remake of “The Return of the Seven”. I hope so… “the Western is dead… long live the Western”!
Possibly on the basis that Trump has been given the Mexican’s a good bashing lately, the villain of the piece in this film is updated from Mexican bandit Calvera to Sacremento based land-snatcher and all round bad-egg Bartholomew Bogue (an expressionless Peter Sarsgaard). After ripping through some of the inhabitants of Rose Creek in a brutal pre-title sequence, widowed sharp-shooter Emma Cullen (Haley Bennett, “The Equalizer”) heads into the West on a recruiting mission for hired guns. She first recruits the bounty hunter Chisholm (sing “Chisum, John Chisum…”… no, sorry different Western) played by Denzel Washington. Washington matches Yul Brynner’s famous black outfit, and unlike Brynner is obviously able to finish off the ensemble naturally!
They recruit another six (who’d have thought it?) including wise-guy gambler Faraday (Chris “Guardians of the Galaxy” Pratt); famed confederate sniper Goodnight Robicheaux (Ethan Hawke); his nifty knife throwing Asian sidekick (but good for the Far East box office) Billy Rocks (Bjung-hun Lee, from Terminator: Genisys); and religious bear-of-a-man Indian-hunter Jack Horne (Vincent D’Onofrio, “Jurassic World”). After trying to whip the incompetent townsfolk into shape, and setting some Home-Alone style surprises, the stage is set for a showdown as Bogue whips up an army to re-take “his” town.
I like classic Westerns, with John Ford’s Rio Bravo being a particular favourite. In my view the problem with many modern Westerns is that they try too hard to shock (Tarentino’s recent “Hateful 8” was a case in point: a promising start ruined by gratuitous over-the-top violence). “The Magnificent Seven” doesn’t make that mistake, and while the squib-master and blood-bag boy are heavily employed throughout, nothing is too excessive: in fact, my view – and I don’t often tend in this direction – is that the censors rather over-egged the UK 12A rating on this one and could have gone with a 12. Director Antoine Fuqua has produced a film that is highly respectful of its heritage: perhaps to the point where many scenes might be deemed to be clichéd. But I personally warmed to that.
Denzel Washington was born to be in a Western like this and the emerging Chris Pratt does his star potential no harm by turning in a stellar performance adding both levity – with some whip-sharp lines – and screen presence in the role made famous by Steve McQueen. (Although no one comes close to the screen presence of McQueen…. Look up “real man” in the dictionary and his picture is there!) Also effective is Ethan Hawke in the nearest thing to the Robert Vaughan character in this film.
Where the adapted script by Richard Wenk and Nik Pizzolatto falters somewhat is in the motivations of the characters, which come across as superficial and unconvincing. (Perhaps “selling” was a whole lot easier in the Old West?) It is even unclear at the end of the film whether the survivors (and I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the seven don’t all make it!) actually take their payment, or even a “share of the gold” that the town is sitting on. It makes for an unsatisfactory closure. The degree of racial harmony present in the film is also difficult to buy into, and the script could have made something more of this.
The film soundtrack marks the swan-song of the late James Horner, so tragically killed in a plane crash last year at the age of just 61. As the natural successor to the great John Williams and the late Jerry Goldsmith, Horner’s loss was a terrible one. The film is dedicated to him. Although the soundtrack was completed by Simon Franglen, there are flourishes of classic Horner, most notably in the first Rose Creek showdown scene. There is also a treat to the ears over the closing credits which is very welcome.
Although the film draws natural comparison with its 5* classic predecessor, this is a good film in its own right – a genuinely pleasant surprise. Perhaps its done well enough that we might get to now see a remake of “The Return of the Seven”. I hope so… “the Western is dead… long live the Western”!
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2017) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
Where to begin with Luc Besson? The masterpiece of Leon aside, he is notorious for creating beautifully bonkers visual treats that twist and turn like a monkey on cocaine, making as much sense. This comic book adaptation starts well, with some jaw dropping CG design and a decent concept – it truly is a dreamscape of glorious colour and imagination rarely matched… but so is Tim Burton’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and we all know how awful that is.
He just doesn’t have the knack with story and character in the same way as he does with the visuals, often leaving you with the impression that even the actors are confused by what is going on, and why, and what the hell is coming out of their mouths as an excuse for dialogue.
I like Dane De Haan, he has shown a lot of promise in some valiant near misses, such as Chronicle, The Place Beyond the Pines and The Cure For Wellness – three films I enjoyed, with reservations, that were better for him being in them – but he has not quite made it to the A-list as yet. Here, opposite the gorgeously cute but somehow hollow presence Cara Delevingne, he is burdened by a love story with no chemistry and some cringe-worthy banter. As the film ultimately focuses and depends on the likability of this relationship it inevitably fails; melting into comic book kookiness that loses a lot in translation.
I almost found myself hating them and wishing they would die painfully so the film could end, but not quite as much as I hated how fundamentally terrible Clive Owen was as the villain – I mean, so awkward and awful it made how uncomfortable Harrison Ford seemed in Ender’s Game look like an Oscar worthy performance. Risible. Inexcusable. Inexplicable. But that’s Besson where let loose into the realm of full sci-fi.
One corner of joy was Rihanna as the shape-shifting Bubble, who showed a charm and talent for film acting I hadn’t quite expected, and how much fun Ethan Hawke had dressing up and hamming it up as Jolly, her pimp. But essentially, you’d be better off turning the sound off completely and just drinking in the spectrum of imaginative design on display. A film that may hold some cult status into the future, and one small children may get oddly addicted to, but as a functioning and satisfying cinematic story… just, no.
He just doesn’t have the knack with story and character in the same way as he does with the visuals, often leaving you with the impression that even the actors are confused by what is going on, and why, and what the hell is coming out of their mouths as an excuse for dialogue.
I like Dane De Haan, he has shown a lot of promise in some valiant near misses, such as Chronicle, The Place Beyond the Pines and The Cure For Wellness – three films I enjoyed, with reservations, that were better for him being in them – but he has not quite made it to the A-list as yet. Here, opposite the gorgeously cute but somehow hollow presence Cara Delevingne, he is burdened by a love story with no chemistry and some cringe-worthy banter. As the film ultimately focuses and depends on the likability of this relationship it inevitably fails; melting into comic book kookiness that loses a lot in translation.
I almost found myself hating them and wishing they would die painfully so the film could end, but not quite as much as I hated how fundamentally terrible Clive Owen was as the villain – I mean, so awkward and awful it made how uncomfortable Harrison Ford seemed in Ender’s Game look like an Oscar worthy performance. Risible. Inexcusable. Inexplicable. But that’s Besson where let loose into the realm of full sci-fi.
One corner of joy was Rihanna as the shape-shifting Bubble, who showed a charm and talent for film acting I hadn’t quite expected, and how much fun Ethan Hawke had dressing up and hamming it up as Jolly, her pimp. But essentially, you’d be better off turning the sound off completely and just drinking in the spectrum of imaginative design on display. A film that may hold some cult status into the future, and one small children may get oddly addicted to, but as a functioning and satisfying cinematic story… just, no.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Daybreakers (2009) in Movies
Sep 8, 2019
A nice vampire surprise!
A vampire "plague" has killed off most of the human population, only about 5% or less now survives. (This film was made in 2009, so 2019 is the year this will happen!). Vampires now occupy our cities and have transformed the Earth to suit their needs including conduit walkways between buildings, underground tunnels they can walk so they don't have to walk through the sun and even automated cars which close off the sunlight so no risk of frying on the way to work.
Their culture is just like humans now: the rich get richer and the poor stay the same, but now there is a growing problem. Since there are so few humans left, blood is now a hot commodity since it is needed for survival. The search is on for a cure or a blood substitute which could pacify the population and prevent the newly discovered evolution from taking place. It has been discovered without blood, vampires will "de=evolve" into their more primal form becoming mindless bat-like creatures who will do anything for their next fix.
Enter Ed Dalton, a hematologist working to secure a blood substitute to ensure vampire continued survival. A synthetic blood serum has been found, tested and proven to be not successful. A chance "bat" encounter at Ed's home soon afterwards takes the vampire vampire plight close to home and scares Ed tremendously. If not for the appearance of Ed's brother, the situation could have ended a lot worse.
Ed has a chance encounter with some humans who come to trust Ed as a "friendly" vampire and take them in their ranks. They may have discovered a "cure" for vampirism which intrigues Ed. His brother has decided to covertly follow Ed and take matters into his own hands at the direction of Ed's employer, Charles Bromley.
Ed eventually has to decide on which side he is taking as he grows to know his new human friends. The situation is becoming quickly perilous and skirmishes with the ruling vampire forces become inevitable and more frequent.
What will they do to survive?
Writer/Directors The Spierig Brothers manage to forage a very interesting premise which I bought into almost immediately. The audience actually begins to sympathize with the bloodthirsty population as their situation becomes more desperate even to the point of killing one another for survival.
Very interesting to feature vampires as the ruling class of society just going to work and existing on a more "human" level most of the time than we normally see them portrayed onscreen.
If you round up the trio of Ethan Hawke, Willem Defoe, and Sam Neill in a genre-type film you should be ensured of some intense, spectacular acting and these three do not disappoint. Hawke plays Ed so well you are really not sure which side he will end up on and are constantly rooting for him. Dafoe isn't given as much to do, but his role as a human freedom fighter is crucial for Ed to start and see the truth of his situation. The antagonist Neill is a role he must love to play since he has done so several times in his career including The Final Conflict and Event Horizon.
As you would expect with a vampire film, there are a lot of scenes at night where the bloodthirsty can run amok, but also a surprising amount of daytime scenes as well since the vampires have adapted their environment to work for them.
The production value is well designed and the look of the cities is well thought out and a visual splendor. The creature effects are very believable and well put together and there is no scene where the bad CGI takes you out of the scene. There is no shortage of blood (of course), but it is also done well and there are plenty of gruesome bits for those who enjoy their gore.
At the end, I was left actually wanting the film to go one longer as I was really having a good time with the action and bloody carnage. Something I do not say very often.
Their culture is just like humans now: the rich get richer and the poor stay the same, but now there is a growing problem. Since there are so few humans left, blood is now a hot commodity since it is needed for survival. The search is on for a cure or a blood substitute which could pacify the population and prevent the newly discovered evolution from taking place. It has been discovered without blood, vampires will "de=evolve" into their more primal form becoming mindless bat-like creatures who will do anything for their next fix.
Enter Ed Dalton, a hematologist working to secure a blood substitute to ensure vampire continued survival. A synthetic blood serum has been found, tested and proven to be not successful. A chance "bat" encounter at Ed's home soon afterwards takes the vampire vampire plight close to home and scares Ed tremendously. If not for the appearance of Ed's brother, the situation could have ended a lot worse.
Ed has a chance encounter with some humans who come to trust Ed as a "friendly" vampire and take them in their ranks. They may have discovered a "cure" for vampirism which intrigues Ed. His brother has decided to covertly follow Ed and take matters into his own hands at the direction of Ed's employer, Charles Bromley.
Ed eventually has to decide on which side he is taking as he grows to know his new human friends. The situation is becoming quickly perilous and skirmishes with the ruling vampire forces become inevitable and more frequent.
What will they do to survive?
Writer/Directors The Spierig Brothers manage to forage a very interesting premise which I bought into almost immediately. The audience actually begins to sympathize with the bloodthirsty population as their situation becomes more desperate even to the point of killing one another for survival.
Very interesting to feature vampires as the ruling class of society just going to work and existing on a more "human" level most of the time than we normally see them portrayed onscreen.
If you round up the trio of Ethan Hawke, Willem Defoe, and Sam Neill in a genre-type film you should be ensured of some intense, spectacular acting and these three do not disappoint. Hawke plays Ed so well you are really not sure which side he will end up on and are constantly rooting for him. Dafoe isn't given as much to do, but his role as a human freedom fighter is crucial for Ed to start and see the truth of his situation. The antagonist Neill is a role he must love to play since he has done so several times in his career including The Final Conflict and Event Horizon.
As you would expect with a vampire film, there are a lot of scenes at night where the bloodthirsty can run amok, but also a surprising amount of daytime scenes as well since the vampires have adapted their environment to work for them.
The production value is well designed and the look of the cities is well thought out and a visual splendor. The creature effects are very believable and well put together and there is no scene where the bad CGI takes you out of the scene. There is no shortage of blood (of course), but it is also done well and there are plenty of gruesome bits for those who enjoy their gore.
At the end, I was left actually wanting the film to go one longer as I was really having a good time with the action and bloody carnage. Something I do not say very often.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated The Gate (1987) in Movies
Sep 29, 2019
Gremlins meets Explorers in some good 80's fun!
After a lightning storm, a major tree get uprooted in the suburban back yard of Glen and his sometimes nice big sister, Al. Glen and his best friend Terry proceed to investigate and discover some cool geode stones. At the same time, Glen and Al's parents are going away and leaving the teen and pre-teens home alone (doesn't this always happen in 80's movies).
All seems well enough until the boys split the geode and it spurts out some ancient writing that Glen reads aloud. Al decides to have a party while her parents are away (go figure) where Glen is levitated during a mini seance. Terry discovers during one of his headbanging sessions some of these events coincidentally are said to open a demonic gate where strange creatures can emerge, torment those they find and ravage the Earth.
The three protagonists decide to try and close the "gate" by reading ancient text and Bible verses. This proves successful and small, feisty demons begin to appear and creep into their house. After several run ins, more unusual things start happening within the home, possibly as a precursor for something even bigger on the horizon.
The teens must formulate a plan to dispose of their new house-guests before it is too late!
Funny that Glen is played by a very young Stephen Dorff in his very first role. He reminds me of a young Ethan Hawke in Explorers as his nerd friend Terry reminds me of River Phoenix in the same film.
The movie is cheesy with dated special and optical effects that modern audiences might get annoyed by or find lame and of poor quality. The small demons are more funny than they are scary, but I still enjoyed seeing them on screen. I actually thought it was stop motion animation similar to a Ray Harryhausen film like Clash of the Titans, but they were actually actors in demon costumes and then shot in forced perspective to make them seem smaller.
The movie is only 85 minutes and the plot does take a little while to get going. The first half of the movie is more like every 80's movie you have ever seen with dated hairstyles, clothing and dialogue, but once the demon stuff manifests it becomes more interesting.
Even though PG-13 with some semi scary moments, the movie does seem the style of Gremlins meaning maybe aiming more for a younger audience rather than being excessively disgusting or graphic.
Hopefully you can put aside the elements I mentioned that aren't up to today's standards and enjoy the cute, interesting story this film inhabits. I surely did.
All seems well enough until the boys split the geode and it spurts out some ancient writing that Glen reads aloud. Al decides to have a party while her parents are away (go figure) where Glen is levitated during a mini seance. Terry discovers during one of his headbanging sessions some of these events coincidentally are said to open a demonic gate where strange creatures can emerge, torment those they find and ravage the Earth.
The three protagonists decide to try and close the "gate" by reading ancient text and Bible verses. This proves successful and small, feisty demons begin to appear and creep into their house. After several run ins, more unusual things start happening within the home, possibly as a precursor for something even bigger on the horizon.
The teens must formulate a plan to dispose of their new house-guests before it is too late!
Funny that Glen is played by a very young Stephen Dorff in his very first role. He reminds me of a young Ethan Hawke in Explorers as his nerd friend Terry reminds me of River Phoenix in the same film.
The movie is cheesy with dated special and optical effects that modern audiences might get annoyed by or find lame and of poor quality. The small demons are more funny than they are scary, but I still enjoyed seeing them on screen. I actually thought it was stop motion animation similar to a Ray Harryhausen film like Clash of the Titans, but they were actually actors in demon costumes and then shot in forced perspective to make them seem smaller.
The movie is only 85 minutes and the plot does take a little while to get going. The first half of the movie is more like every 80's movie you have ever seen with dated hairstyles, clothing and dialogue, but once the demon stuff manifests it becomes more interesting.
Even though PG-13 with some semi scary moments, the movie does seem the style of Gremlins meaning maybe aiming more for a younger audience rather than being excessively disgusting or graphic.
Hopefully you can put aside the elements I mentioned that aren't up to today's standards and enjoy the cute, interesting story this film inhabits. I surely did.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Captor (2019) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
Story: The Captor starts when American Kaj Hansson (Hawke) walks into a bank taking hostages in bank clerks Bianca Lind (Rapace) and Klara Mardh (Santos), he wants Gunnar Sorensson (Strong) released from prison along with his outlandish demands that Chief Mattsson (Heyerdahl) must try to put together.
As the hostage situation continue we start to see the truth unravel and see how Bianca starts to respect Kaj even feeling like she is part of the heist herself, can they make it out of the heist as the origin of the term ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ is born here.
Thoughts on The Captor
Characters – Kaj Hansson is the American that has walked into the bank, he doesn’t really have a plan, he knows what he wants though, he wants to be fair to his hostages, never actually wanting to hurt anybody, just to make sure the police see him as a threat. He starts to make friends with the hostages too. Bianca Lind is the bank clerk that has her own family and finds herself being held hostage, she becomes the stronger of the two women, she starts to become attracted to Kaj believing he isn’t a bad guy, this is her story. Gunnar Sorensson is the man that Kaj wants released from prison, he is one of the most famous bank robbers in the country and he sees the mistakes that Kaj is making, while having a deal with the Chief. Chief Mattsson is the man trying to end the situation, he is trying to stay one step ahead of Kaj to get everyone out alive.
Performances – Ethan Hawke is a delight to watch in this film, he plays the over the top which sums up what the character needs to be through this film. Noomi Rapace plays her role well giving us a character which is both interested and scared through the film. Mark Strong is the supporting acting for a generation, he brings his complex character to life with ease once again. Christopher Heyerdahl is strong through the film showing a determined, though calm man through the film.
Story – The story here follows a bank heist which led to the first case of Stockholm Syndrome, where the hostage falls in love with the hostage taker, we see how this hostage situation unfolds with the outlandish demands as the woman starts to fall for him. When it comes to bank heist movies, we have seen plenty, they usually revolve around the criminals and the police trying to stay ahead of each other, with this one we do have that, but we have the added dynamic of seeing how the hostages and takers start to bond when they see that everything can be kept under control, remember this is set in 1973 so the technology isn’t going to be a game changer in how everything is solved. Seeing both sides get to the talking can go through moments of slow story telling, but it isn’t long until Kaj goes a little bit crazy demanding our attention once again. With a subplot involving Gunnar’s position in the situation, we get to see how Kaj really doesn’t know what he is doing making it easier to help the hostages take sympathy with him. It was nice to have just normal police that aren’t looking to solve a personal problem with this case, which is so often the case in these stories.
Comedy/Crime – The comedy in the film comes from everything Kaj seems to do, from his outfit with wig, cowboy hat and American swagger, to how he overreacts to everything that is going on, the crime is loosely based on a real incident, with the names changed, it is a hostage situation, but you never feel like there is a threat.
Settings – Most of the film is set within the walls of the bank, it is a simple and well craft set that shows us just how the people have been thrown together in this situation.
Scene of the Movie – Kaj shares a pear.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t feel like there is a threat in the film.
Final Thoughts – This is a different way to tell a heist movie, it does show us how hostages can fall in love with their captors and overtime even support them, we get the routine hostage talks and end up right where we need to for the story to flow with ease.
Overall: Nice spin on the heist genre.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/06/17/the-captor-2019/
As the hostage situation continue we start to see the truth unravel and see how Bianca starts to respect Kaj even feeling like she is part of the heist herself, can they make it out of the heist as the origin of the term ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ is born here.
Thoughts on The Captor
Characters – Kaj Hansson is the American that has walked into the bank, he doesn’t really have a plan, he knows what he wants though, he wants to be fair to his hostages, never actually wanting to hurt anybody, just to make sure the police see him as a threat. He starts to make friends with the hostages too. Bianca Lind is the bank clerk that has her own family and finds herself being held hostage, she becomes the stronger of the two women, she starts to become attracted to Kaj believing he isn’t a bad guy, this is her story. Gunnar Sorensson is the man that Kaj wants released from prison, he is one of the most famous bank robbers in the country and he sees the mistakes that Kaj is making, while having a deal with the Chief. Chief Mattsson is the man trying to end the situation, he is trying to stay one step ahead of Kaj to get everyone out alive.
Performances – Ethan Hawke is a delight to watch in this film, he plays the over the top which sums up what the character needs to be through this film. Noomi Rapace plays her role well giving us a character which is both interested and scared through the film. Mark Strong is the supporting acting for a generation, he brings his complex character to life with ease once again. Christopher Heyerdahl is strong through the film showing a determined, though calm man through the film.
Story – The story here follows a bank heist which led to the first case of Stockholm Syndrome, where the hostage falls in love with the hostage taker, we see how this hostage situation unfolds with the outlandish demands as the woman starts to fall for him. When it comes to bank heist movies, we have seen plenty, they usually revolve around the criminals and the police trying to stay ahead of each other, with this one we do have that, but we have the added dynamic of seeing how the hostages and takers start to bond when they see that everything can be kept under control, remember this is set in 1973 so the technology isn’t going to be a game changer in how everything is solved. Seeing both sides get to the talking can go through moments of slow story telling, but it isn’t long until Kaj goes a little bit crazy demanding our attention once again. With a subplot involving Gunnar’s position in the situation, we get to see how Kaj really doesn’t know what he is doing making it easier to help the hostages take sympathy with him. It was nice to have just normal police that aren’t looking to solve a personal problem with this case, which is so often the case in these stories.
Comedy/Crime – The comedy in the film comes from everything Kaj seems to do, from his outfit with wig, cowboy hat and American swagger, to how he overreacts to everything that is going on, the crime is loosely based on a real incident, with the names changed, it is a hostage situation, but you never feel like there is a threat.
Settings – Most of the film is set within the walls of the bank, it is a simple and well craft set that shows us just how the people have been thrown together in this situation.
Scene of the Movie – Kaj shares a pear.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t feel like there is a threat in the film.
Final Thoughts – This is a different way to tell a heist movie, it does show us how hostages can fall in love with their captors and overtime even support them, we get the routine hostage talks and end up right where we need to for the story to flow with ease.
Overall: Nice spin on the heist genre.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/06/17/the-captor-2019/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Purge: Election Year (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Deathly Dull
The Purge series has set itself as one of the front-runners in modern horror. The first film, starring Ethan Hawke, was a huge success, bringing with it one of the best stories seen in the genre for decades.
Its successor, Anarchy, was warmly received – namely for its greater focus on the night of crime itself, rather than the plight of one family. Naturally, another sequel was always going to be on the cards and Election Year continues the franchise. But does it continue the positive trend?
With only one returning cast member, Frank Grillo’s brooding Leo Barnes, The Purge: Election Year goes for a more political approach than its horror-rooted predecessors and director James DeMonaco was brave in altering the formula. He gets through it – but only by the skin of his teeth.
As a young girl, Senator Charlie Roan (Elizabeth Mitchell) survived the annual night of lawlessness that took the lives of her family members. As a presidential candidate, Roan is determined to end the yearly tradition of blood lust once and for all. When her opponents hatch a deadly scheme, the senator finds herself trapped on the streets of Washington, D.C., just as the latest Purge gets underway. Now, it’s up to Leo Barnes (Frank Grillo), her head of security, to keep her alive during the next 12 hours of mayhem.
The first major stumbling block Election Year faces is its lack of originality. Yes, the basic formula goes for a more political tone but the story itself is a near carbon copy of its predecessor. It’s unfortunate that once again, despite the plight of fans, the production studio continues to overlook the most fascinating part of the Purge, its inception.
Once again we are forced to sit through the hack and slash killings, only this time the acting isn’t as good and the majority of scares are signposted from the off. The ones that aren’t; well they’re in the trailer. It’s such a shame that a series with such promise has resorted to rehashing the same “tricks” to sell tickets.
The cast gel together well but the acting is below par and the dialogue is at times, dreadful with the same three expletives doing the rounds from character to character. Frank Grillo is underused with Elizabeth Mitchell’s preachy politician mistakenly put in the foreground. By far the most interesting person throughout the course of the film is Mykelti Williamson’s deli owner Joe, but he is lumbered with shockingly bad catchphrases.
The cinematography is very plain and the city setting isn’t utilised well at all. Washington should’ve been an exceptional place to helm a film about a night of legalised murder, but instead the audience is confined to its dimly-lit backstreets and alleys.
Overall, The Purge: Election Year is a step in the wrong direction for a series that showed such promise. Creating a film that, despite its intriguing political intentions, is exactly the same as its predecessor is sheer laziness and I don’t like to use this word when reviewing films, but it’s just completely and utterly boring.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/08/26/deathly-dull-the-purge-election-year-review/
Its successor, Anarchy, was warmly received – namely for its greater focus on the night of crime itself, rather than the plight of one family. Naturally, another sequel was always going to be on the cards and Election Year continues the franchise. But does it continue the positive trend?
With only one returning cast member, Frank Grillo’s brooding Leo Barnes, The Purge: Election Year goes for a more political approach than its horror-rooted predecessors and director James DeMonaco was brave in altering the formula. He gets through it – but only by the skin of his teeth.
As a young girl, Senator Charlie Roan (Elizabeth Mitchell) survived the annual night of lawlessness that took the lives of her family members. As a presidential candidate, Roan is determined to end the yearly tradition of blood lust once and for all. When her opponents hatch a deadly scheme, the senator finds herself trapped on the streets of Washington, D.C., just as the latest Purge gets underway. Now, it’s up to Leo Barnes (Frank Grillo), her head of security, to keep her alive during the next 12 hours of mayhem.
The first major stumbling block Election Year faces is its lack of originality. Yes, the basic formula goes for a more political tone but the story itself is a near carbon copy of its predecessor. It’s unfortunate that once again, despite the plight of fans, the production studio continues to overlook the most fascinating part of the Purge, its inception.
Once again we are forced to sit through the hack and slash killings, only this time the acting isn’t as good and the majority of scares are signposted from the off. The ones that aren’t; well they’re in the trailer. It’s such a shame that a series with such promise has resorted to rehashing the same “tricks” to sell tickets.
The cast gel together well but the acting is below par and the dialogue is at times, dreadful with the same three expletives doing the rounds from character to character. Frank Grillo is underused with Elizabeth Mitchell’s preachy politician mistakenly put in the foreground. By far the most interesting person throughout the course of the film is Mykelti Williamson’s deli owner Joe, but he is lumbered with shockingly bad catchphrases.
The cinematography is very plain and the city setting isn’t utilised well at all. Washington should’ve been an exceptional place to helm a film about a night of legalised murder, but instead the audience is confined to its dimly-lit backstreets and alleys.
Overall, The Purge: Election Year is a step in the wrong direction for a series that showed such promise. Creating a film that, despite its intriguing political intentions, is exactly the same as its predecessor is sheer laziness and I don’t like to use this word when reviewing films, but it’s just completely and utterly boring.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/08/26/deathly-dull-the-purge-election-year-review/