Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated Eminence Hill (2019) in Movies
Oct 31, 2019
Characters – Noah is the leader of a religious group, he takes it into his own hands to play judge jury and executioner in his community and doesn’t take to lightly towards the Tullis Gang coming into his territory. Royce Tullis is the leader of the gang with his love Gretchen, they have been targeting jurors who sentenced his brother to death and now finishing their killing spree, they look to escape, only they both find themselves questioning their actions while being held captive by Noah. Quincy is the lawman that is trying to track down the Tullis Gang, he is uses his gun skills when needed and can read a person through any conversation.
Performances – Barry Corbin does bring his character to life in this film to change the tone of what we had seen. Clint James and Dominique Swain are both strong as the outlaw figures, not being full blown crazy evil like members of their gang. Owen Conway is the star of the show with his calm calculated character.
Story – The story here follows an US Marshall tracking down a group of outlaws, who have fallen into the hands of a religion community that want to make them pay for their sins. We do follow three different sides of the stories unfold, we get the outlaws planning their escape, they have US Marshall planning his way of capturing them and the religious group wanting to stay out of world’s view. We do get to see each side develop and with secrets behind certain ones being held back long enough. We do get to see just how every does feel like a chapter in a Red Dead Redemption chapter, where the outlaws meet a random group which will be the problem they need to overcome, while avoiding a fate coming for them.
Western – The western side of the film is well designed, showing us the outlaws, bounty hunter and strange groups that could have been built up not knowing too much more outside their comfort zones.
Settings – The settings are well crafted sets for the town, while the open plains represent the world in the era the film would be set in.
Scene of the Movie – Noah’s dinner offer.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We could have spent more time on the Royce hunting down jurors.
Final Thoughts – This is a western that plays everything out well, without being as edgy as the subject matter wants to be, the religious group could have gone a lot darker, with plenty of signs of this, while the Marshall is the most interesting characters of the whole cast.
Overall: Western by the book.
Performances – Barry Corbin does bring his character to life in this film to change the tone of what we had seen. Clint James and Dominique Swain are both strong as the outlaw figures, not being full blown crazy evil like members of their gang. Owen Conway is the star of the show with his calm calculated character.
Story – The story here follows an US Marshall tracking down a group of outlaws, who have fallen into the hands of a religion community that want to make them pay for their sins. We do follow three different sides of the stories unfold, we get the outlaws planning their escape, they have US Marshall planning his way of capturing them and the religious group wanting to stay out of world’s view. We do get to see each side develop and with secrets behind certain ones being held back long enough. We do get to see just how every does feel like a chapter in a Red Dead Redemption chapter, where the outlaws meet a random group which will be the problem they need to overcome, while avoiding a fate coming for them.
Western – The western side of the film is well designed, showing us the outlaws, bounty hunter and strange groups that could have been built up not knowing too much more outside their comfort zones.
Settings – The settings are well crafted sets for the town, while the open plains represent the world in the era the film would be set in.
Scene of the Movie – Noah’s dinner offer.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We could have spent more time on the Royce hunting down jurors.
Final Thoughts – This is a western that plays everything out well, without being as edgy as the subject matter wants to be, the religious group could have gone a lot darker, with plenty of signs of this, while the Marshall is the most interesting characters of the whole cast.
Overall: Western by the book.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Running with the Devil (2019) in Movies
Oct 31, 2019
Characters – Noah is the leader of a religious group, he takes it into his own hands to play judge jury and executioner in his community and doesn’t take to lightly towards the Tullis Gang coming into his territory. Royce Tullis is the leader of the gang with his love Gretchen, they have been targeting jurors who sentenced his brother to death and now finishing their killing spree, they look to escape, only they both find themselves questioning their actions while being held captive by Noah. Quincy is the lawman that is trying to track down the Tullis Gang, he is uses his gun skills when needed and can read a person through any conversation.
Performances – Barry Corbin does bring his character to life in this film to change the tone of what we had seen. Clint James and Dominique Swain are both strong as the outlaw figures, not being full blown crazy evil like members of their gang. Owen Conway is the star of the show with his calm calculated character.
Story – The story here follows an US Marshall tracking down a group of outlaws, who have fallen into the hands of a religion community that want to make them pay for their sins. We do follow three different sides of the stories unfold, we get the outlaws planning their escape, they have US Marshall planning his way of capturing them and the religious group wanting to stay out of world’s view. We do get to see each side develop and with secrets behind certain ones being held back long enough. We do get to see just how every does feel like a chapter in a Red Dead Redemption chapter, where the outlaws meet a random group which will be the problem they need to overcome, while avoiding a fate coming for them.
Western – The western side of the film is well designed, showing us the outlaws, bounty hunter and strange groups that could have been built up not knowing too much more outside their comfort zones.
Settings – The settings are well crafted sets for the town, while the open plains represent the world in the era the film would be set in.
Scene of the Movie – Noah’s dinner offer.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We could have spent more time on the Royce hunting down jurors.
Final Thoughts – This is a western that plays everything out well, without being as edgy as the subject matter wants to be, the religious group could have gone a lot darker, with plenty of signs of this, while the Marshall is the most interesting characters of the whole cast.
Overall: Western by the book.
Performances – Barry Corbin does bring his character to life in this film to change the tone of what we had seen. Clint James and Dominique Swain are both strong as the outlaw figures, not being full blown crazy evil like members of their gang. Owen Conway is the star of the show with his calm calculated character.
Story – The story here follows an US Marshall tracking down a group of outlaws, who have fallen into the hands of a religion community that want to make them pay for their sins. We do follow three different sides of the stories unfold, we get the outlaws planning their escape, they have US Marshall planning his way of capturing them and the religious group wanting to stay out of world’s view. We do get to see each side develop and with secrets behind certain ones being held back long enough. We do get to see just how every does feel like a chapter in a Red Dead Redemption chapter, where the outlaws meet a random group which will be the problem they need to overcome, while avoiding a fate coming for them.
Western – The western side of the film is well designed, showing us the outlaws, bounty hunter and strange groups that could have been built up not knowing too much more outside their comfort zones.
Settings – The settings are well crafted sets for the town, while the open plains represent the world in the era the film would be set in.
Scene of the Movie – Noah’s dinner offer.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We could have spent more time on the Royce hunting down jurors.
Final Thoughts – This is a western that plays everything out well, without being as edgy as the subject matter wants to be, the religious group could have gone a lot darker, with plenty of signs of this, while the Marshall is the most interesting characters of the whole cast.
Overall: Western by the book.
Leah Lopez (7 KP) rated Gone Girl in Books
Nov 6, 2019
This book had many key elements to keep the reader constantly entertained.
1) The characters had their own voice; their own emotions and thoughts which was clearly recognised through per chapter dedicated to them. My mind alternated between which character I liked/hated understood/or not worth understanding. At the beginning of the book I was on Nick's side. It seemed Amy was some "nagging wife" and it would be easy to become annoyed by all her "stupid traditions" but then, I read Amy's side and then I was like..."Okay, now I understand why the traditions are important and how much she loves Nick..." When he come home to find his wife had disappeared and his house looked "ransacked" I began questioning the possible theories to her disappearance. I thought:
S.P.O.I.L.E.R. A.L.E.R.T
She hasn't been taken. She isn't dead. It is all but a set up: to get Nick to realise how much he loves Amy and he be lost without her. I thought she has just gone away for a few days.
My first shock? Nick cheating on Amy
but then; had it been a shock/ plot twist shock, or did I just not want to believe that of him?
It was easy from this point to hate Nick. He had been having an affair, he was violent, he was a liar.
I began siding with Amy.
Still...it became clear through Nick's request on finding out the truth that she too was a liar; but a more-well trained liar and not spontaneous? She was evil; she played people to her needs. She used them to better herself.
Towards the end of the book; when she came back home and reported her "kidnap and rape" from Desi it was here I thought this is going to end pretty shit now...but once again I was surprised. I began to hate Amy and like Nick. Still Nick demonstrated his violence towards Amy by strangling her and detailing his enjoyment of her pulsating struggle for breath. When Amy came back and explained the truth, and furthermore...I wanted her to be arrested; to find that tiny bit of evidence she didn't think of...something none of us would have thought of but maybe read and thought nothing of it at the time. Still, she still had things up her sleeve and still ten steps in front of Nick-the semen and her way of permanently keeping him in her life. I knew it had to end, but I think it would have been more entertaining on something she left out, rather than her once again winning.
Overall:
a great suspense-filled book that makes you yo-yo between liking/hating the characters!
Will be looking for more books written by her!
1) The characters had their own voice; their own emotions and thoughts which was clearly recognised through per chapter dedicated to them. My mind alternated between which character I liked/hated understood/or not worth understanding. At the beginning of the book I was on Nick's side. It seemed Amy was some "nagging wife" and it would be easy to become annoyed by all her "stupid traditions" but then, I read Amy's side and then I was like..."Okay, now I understand why the traditions are important and how much she loves Nick..." When he come home to find his wife had disappeared and his house looked "ransacked" I began questioning the possible theories to her disappearance. I thought:
S.P.O.I.L.E.R. A.L.E.R.T
She hasn't been taken. She isn't dead. It is all but a set up: to get Nick to realise how much he loves Amy and he be lost without her. I thought she has just gone away for a few days.
My first shock? Nick cheating on Amy
but then; had it been a shock/ plot twist shock, or did I just not want to believe that of him?
It was easy from this point to hate Nick. He had been having an affair, he was violent, he was a liar.
I began siding with Amy.
Still...it became clear through Nick's request on finding out the truth that she too was a liar; but a more-well trained liar and not spontaneous? She was evil; she played people to her needs. She used them to better herself.
Towards the end of the book; when she came back home and reported her "kidnap and rape" from Desi it was here I thought this is going to end pretty shit now...but once again I was surprised. I began to hate Amy and like Nick. Still Nick demonstrated his violence towards Amy by strangling her and detailing his enjoyment of her pulsating struggle for breath. When Amy came back and explained the truth, and furthermore...I wanted her to be arrested; to find that tiny bit of evidence she didn't think of...something none of us would have thought of but maybe read and thought nothing of it at the time. Still, she still had things up her sleeve and still ten steps in front of Nick-the semen and her way of permanently keeping him in her life. I knew it had to end, but I think it would have been more entertaining on something she left out, rather than her once again winning.
Overall:
a great suspense-filled book that makes you yo-yo between liking/hating the characters!
Will be looking for more books written by her!
JT (287 KP) rated The Cabin in the Woods (2012) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
What happens if you took a bunch of stereotypical and archetypal teenagers into the woods and let them party in a small cabin? In the eyes of Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard quite a bit it seems.
The college jock, the stoner, the virgin, the geek and the whore (or slut) are all grouped together ready to be ripped apart by a wide variety of insanely bonkers creatures.
A so called ‘love letter to horror’ Cabin in the Woods encapsulates everything we have ever seen in horror films over there years, and for any fan of the genre its what we all love to see.
What makes this film particularly special and something that sets it apart from all other horror films is apparent in the opening few minutes.
Deep in what seems to be a scientific layer, Sitterson (Richard Jenkins) and Hadley (Bradley Whitford) discuss and mull over the mundane as they make their way to a control centre ready for the days events to unfold. Just another day at the office then?
Meanwhile, the travelling party are making their way to the cabin, and after we see a bird of prey fly into what looks like a force field we known this isn’t going to be your normal run of the mill horror.
OK, move it a little to the right!
In one word its the Truman show with massive amounts of blood, which might be giving too much away for those that haven’t even seen it yet. The film has several nods to a number of past Hollywood horror greats such as Hellraiser and Evil Dead, and carries with it every cliche the genre has to offer.
Whedon’s popularity as a director is high, here though he keeps himself to writing duties only as Goddard gets the gig behind the camera in his first feature. It’s a thoroughly entertaining film, but you need to take it with a pinch of salt and remind yourself that this is a homage to horror with Hostel like tendencies.
It’s all balanced neatly with black comedy and has an a final 20 minutes which really has to been seen to be believed
It’s all balanced neatly with black comedy and has an a final 20 minutes which really has to been seen to be believed, with a great cameo thrown in for good measure. I loved every minute of this from start to finish, and it’s a film that doesn’t try and take itself too seriously.
It’s not going to sit with everyone, but for those true horror fans who have watched parties of teenagers getting picked off one by one in a creative way each time it will be one horror film they won’t forget in a hurry.
The college jock, the stoner, the virgin, the geek and the whore (or slut) are all grouped together ready to be ripped apart by a wide variety of insanely bonkers creatures.
A so called ‘love letter to horror’ Cabin in the Woods encapsulates everything we have ever seen in horror films over there years, and for any fan of the genre its what we all love to see.
What makes this film particularly special and something that sets it apart from all other horror films is apparent in the opening few minutes.
Deep in what seems to be a scientific layer, Sitterson (Richard Jenkins) and Hadley (Bradley Whitford) discuss and mull over the mundane as they make their way to a control centre ready for the days events to unfold. Just another day at the office then?
Meanwhile, the travelling party are making their way to the cabin, and after we see a bird of prey fly into what looks like a force field we known this isn’t going to be your normal run of the mill horror.
OK, move it a little to the right!
In one word its the Truman show with massive amounts of blood, which might be giving too much away for those that haven’t even seen it yet. The film has several nods to a number of past Hollywood horror greats such as Hellraiser and Evil Dead, and carries with it every cliche the genre has to offer.
Whedon’s popularity as a director is high, here though he keeps himself to writing duties only as Goddard gets the gig behind the camera in his first feature. It’s a thoroughly entertaining film, but you need to take it with a pinch of salt and remind yourself that this is a homage to horror with Hostel like tendencies.
It’s all balanced neatly with black comedy and has an a final 20 minutes which really has to been seen to be believed
It’s all balanced neatly with black comedy and has an a final 20 minutes which really has to been seen to be believed, with a great cameo thrown in for good measure. I loved every minute of this from start to finish, and it’s a film that doesn’t try and take itself too seriously.
It’s not going to sit with everyone, but for those true horror fans who have watched parties of teenagers getting picked off one by one in a creative way each time it will be one horror film they won’t forget in a hurry.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Re-Animator (1985) in Movies
Oct 30, 2020
Jeffrey Combs (2 more)
Bruce Abbott
Stuart Gordan
Mad Man
Re-Animator- is frankenstien. But alot more gorer. So much gory, so much viloence, so much horror. Its different than frankenstein, but has a lot in common.
The plot: Loosely based on H P Lovecraft's classic horror tale, Herbert West is a young scientist who has a good head on his shoulders and another on the lab table in front of him.
Originally devised by Gordon as a theatrical stage production and later a half-hour television pilot, the television script was revised to become a feature film.
The film originally received an X rating, and was later edited to obtain an R rating for video rental stores.
The idea to make Re-Animator came from a discussion Stuart Gordon had with friends one night about vampire films. He felt that there were too many Dracula films and expressed a desire to see a Frankenstein film. Someone asked if he had read "Herbert West–Reanimator" by H. P. Lovecraft.
Originally, Gordon was going to adapt Lovecraft's story for the stage, but eventually decided along with writers Dennis Paoli and William Norris to make it as a half-hour television pilot. The story was set around the turn of the century, and they soon realized that it would be too expensive to recreate. They updated it to the present day in Chicago with the intention of using actors from the Organic Theater company. They were told that the half hour format was not salable and so they made it an hour, writing 13 episodes. Special effects technician Bob Greenberg, who had worked on John Carpenter's Dark Star, repeatedly told Gordon that the only market for horror was in feature films, and introduced him to producer Brian Yuzna. Gordon showed Yuzna the script for the pilot and the 12 additional episodes.
Yuzna described the film as having the "sort of shock sensibility of an Evil Dead with the production values of, hopefully, The Howling."
Naulin said that Re-Animator was the bloodiest film he had ever worked on. In the past, he had never used more than two gallons of blood on a film; on Re-Animator, he used 24 gallons.
The biggest makeup challenge in the film was the headless Dr. Hill zombie. Tony Doublin designed the mechanical effects and was faced with the problem of proportion once the 9–10 inches of the head were removed from the body. Each scene forced him to use a different technique. For example, one technique involved building an upper torso that actor David Gale could bend over and stick his head through so that it appeared to be the one that the walking corpse was carrying around.
Its excellent gory film
The plot: Loosely based on H P Lovecraft's classic horror tale, Herbert West is a young scientist who has a good head on his shoulders and another on the lab table in front of him.
Originally devised by Gordon as a theatrical stage production and later a half-hour television pilot, the television script was revised to become a feature film.
The film originally received an X rating, and was later edited to obtain an R rating for video rental stores.
The idea to make Re-Animator came from a discussion Stuart Gordon had with friends one night about vampire films. He felt that there were too many Dracula films and expressed a desire to see a Frankenstein film. Someone asked if he had read "Herbert West–Reanimator" by H. P. Lovecraft.
Originally, Gordon was going to adapt Lovecraft's story for the stage, but eventually decided along with writers Dennis Paoli and William Norris to make it as a half-hour television pilot. The story was set around the turn of the century, and they soon realized that it would be too expensive to recreate. They updated it to the present day in Chicago with the intention of using actors from the Organic Theater company. They were told that the half hour format was not salable and so they made it an hour, writing 13 episodes. Special effects technician Bob Greenberg, who had worked on John Carpenter's Dark Star, repeatedly told Gordon that the only market for horror was in feature films, and introduced him to producer Brian Yuzna. Gordon showed Yuzna the script for the pilot and the 12 additional episodes.
Yuzna described the film as having the "sort of shock sensibility of an Evil Dead with the production values of, hopefully, The Howling."
Naulin said that Re-Animator was the bloodiest film he had ever worked on. In the past, he had never used more than two gallons of blood on a film; on Re-Animator, he used 24 gallons.
The biggest makeup challenge in the film was the headless Dr. Hill zombie. Tony Doublin designed the mechanical effects and was faced with the problem of proportion once the 9–10 inches of the head were removed from the body. Each scene forced him to use a different technique. For example, one technique involved building an upper torso that actor David Gale could bend over and stick his head through so that it appeared to be the one that the walking corpse was carrying around.
Its excellent gory film
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Matrix Resurrections (2021) in Movies
Dec 31, 2021
Unnecessary
And now from the unnecessary sequels department…
And, that, pretty much sums up THE MATRIX RESURRECTIONS - a title that is a confession of a studio and creator that is looking to milk a few more bucks out of a dormant franchise.
Written and Directed by Lana Wachowski (one of the creators/directors of the original Matrix trilogy), MATRIX RESURRECTIONS drops us back into the Matrix that is the same, yet different, and - intriguingly enough - brings us back to Neo and Trinity, 2 characters that died in the 3rd film.
Of course, this being Science Fiction/Fantasy, no one needs to stay dead, if another story can be built around them.
Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss are back as Neo & Trinity (this film would not have happened if they didn’t say yes to this) - and they are the best thing in this film. Their chemistry is strong and any film that can bring back Carrie-Anne Moss as a lead in a film, is okay by me.
The best newcomer in this film is Jonathan Groff as “Agent Smith” (Hugo Weaving was set to reprise his role, but had to drop out due to Theater Commitments). Groff channels his inner “King George” (the character that he was Tony Nominated for in the Stage Musical Hamilton) and it works well in this film.
As for the other “character/actors” - like the characters that Jada Pinkett-Smith (the only other returning actor from the original trilogy), Yahya Abdbul-Mateen II (playing a version of Morpheus), Thelma Hopkins, Jessica Henwick and…yes that IS Cristina Ricci - they are all pretty generic and serve as plot machinations to get us from one action set piece to another.
And, of course, there is Neil Patrick Harris as “THE ANALYST”, it’s an interesting, pivotal, role in this film and would have been better served being played by someone less “well known”. All I kept thinking as I watched this performance was - “it’s evil Neil Patrick Harris”!
As for the special effects/set pieces, they are “fine” but nothing “special”. The first Matrix film was a brilliant, groundbreaking and mind-bending piece of filmmaking that introduced cinema (for good or ill) to “bullet time” - a Special F/X that has been en vogue ever since. But this film is just a mismash of CGI that is neither brilliant nor groundbreaking and the dense mythology plot of this film is not “mind-bending”, it is more like “headache-inducing”.
Do yourself a favor and skip the Resurrection of The Matrix and, instead, check out the brilliant 1999 original - it holds up well (and is the subject of my January podcast).
Letter Grade: B- (thanks to Reeves, Moss and Groff)
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And, that, pretty much sums up THE MATRIX RESURRECTIONS - a title that is a confession of a studio and creator that is looking to milk a few more bucks out of a dormant franchise.
Written and Directed by Lana Wachowski (one of the creators/directors of the original Matrix trilogy), MATRIX RESURRECTIONS drops us back into the Matrix that is the same, yet different, and - intriguingly enough - brings us back to Neo and Trinity, 2 characters that died in the 3rd film.
Of course, this being Science Fiction/Fantasy, no one needs to stay dead, if another story can be built around them.
Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss are back as Neo & Trinity (this film would not have happened if they didn’t say yes to this) - and they are the best thing in this film. Their chemistry is strong and any film that can bring back Carrie-Anne Moss as a lead in a film, is okay by me.
The best newcomer in this film is Jonathan Groff as “Agent Smith” (Hugo Weaving was set to reprise his role, but had to drop out due to Theater Commitments). Groff channels his inner “King George” (the character that he was Tony Nominated for in the Stage Musical Hamilton) and it works well in this film.
As for the other “character/actors” - like the characters that Jada Pinkett-Smith (the only other returning actor from the original trilogy), Yahya Abdbul-Mateen II (playing a version of Morpheus), Thelma Hopkins, Jessica Henwick and…yes that IS Cristina Ricci - they are all pretty generic and serve as plot machinations to get us from one action set piece to another.
And, of course, there is Neil Patrick Harris as “THE ANALYST”, it’s an interesting, pivotal, role in this film and would have been better served being played by someone less “well known”. All I kept thinking as I watched this performance was - “it’s evil Neil Patrick Harris”!
As for the special effects/set pieces, they are “fine” but nothing “special”. The first Matrix film was a brilliant, groundbreaking and mind-bending piece of filmmaking that introduced cinema (for good or ill) to “bullet time” - a Special F/X that has been en vogue ever since. But this film is just a mismash of CGI that is neither brilliant nor groundbreaking and the dense mythology plot of this film is not “mind-bending”, it is more like “headache-inducing”.
Do yourself a favor and skip the Resurrection of The Matrix and, instead, check out the brilliant 1999 original - it holds up well (and is the subject of my January podcast).
Letter Grade: B- (thanks to Reeves, Moss and Groff)
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated The Legend of Hell House (1973) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Mr. Rudolph Deutsch has hired Lionel Barrett to investigate a haunted house. This isn't any normal haunted house though. It seems as though anyone who enters the house either leaves the house insane or winds up dead. In addition to Mr Barrett, his wife, Ann Barrett, a mental medium named Florence Tanner, and a physical medium who is also the only survivor of the last team of investigators to visit the house named Benjamin Fischer are all visiting Hell House to try and solve this phenomenon. $100,000 is theirs for the taking if they can do it within a week, but will they be able to survive what's caged inside Hell House? Emeric Belasco, a self-proclaimed genius ahead of his time, may have other plans.
The Legend of Hell House isn't your average horror film about paranormal activity. I'll be up front with you right now, I'm not a big fan of movies about ghosts. I'm just not. I've come across a few that were decent, but I didn't think they were anything special or I just wound up not liking them at all. I actually liked this a lot more than I thought I would. The film isn't heavy on blood, gore, or cheap scares. In fact, more often than not, the scares come from what you don't see rather than what you actually do.
The acting is definitely a strong point in the film. The entire cast has their moments of brilliance during the insanity Hell House is putting them through, but Roddy McDowall is the actor who stands out amonst the rest. His performance just seems to outshine everyone else and he steals just about every scene he's in. There's a scene in the film where he starts screaming and falls to the floor in a seizure like maneuver that reminded me a lot of some of the scenes with Bruce Campbell in Evil Dead. The explanation was that he was blocking himself off from the house since he had been there before. As a physical medium, he was basically putting up walls to defend himself from the house this time around. And in this scene, I guess he tried lowering his guard for a bit and...this happened. The speeches he gives though, his facial expressions and body language, and cold tone. It's weird, but a guy that you look at at the beginning of the film and say to yourself that you're going to hate him because he looks smarmy and only really cares about himself winds up being the highlight of the film.
Another aspect of the film I really enjoyed were the special effects of the film. There's no CGI or anything, but the effects in the film are done very well. There's a scene where Ms. Tanner looks into her bedroom and sees someone lying under the covers in her bed and when she lifts up the covers, you can't see anyone but the door opens and slams like someone was getting up and leaving. It was just done very well. The effects like that were done very well. There are a few that look cheesy(cat in the shower scene, anyone?), but overall they look very good given how old the film is.
The plot was surprising, as well. I wasn't expecting anything really original or anything, but the fact that science is involved so heavily in trying rid the house of its supernatural presence was not only interesting, but a breath of fresh air compared to other methods I would've expected based on other films.
I think it's safe to say that The Legend of Hell House is one of the best haunted house films ever made and the best one I've seen as of this review. It probably isn't the type of horror film for gorehounds or if you're looking for a bloodfest. It's more of a paranormal film with a slight psychological twist. The acting is top notch and the story is a bit more clever than you may give it credit for at first glance.
The Legend of Hell House isn't your average horror film about paranormal activity. I'll be up front with you right now, I'm not a big fan of movies about ghosts. I'm just not. I've come across a few that were decent, but I didn't think they were anything special or I just wound up not liking them at all. I actually liked this a lot more than I thought I would. The film isn't heavy on blood, gore, or cheap scares. In fact, more often than not, the scares come from what you don't see rather than what you actually do.
The acting is definitely a strong point in the film. The entire cast has their moments of brilliance during the insanity Hell House is putting them through, but Roddy McDowall is the actor who stands out amonst the rest. His performance just seems to outshine everyone else and he steals just about every scene he's in. There's a scene in the film where he starts screaming and falls to the floor in a seizure like maneuver that reminded me a lot of some of the scenes with Bruce Campbell in Evil Dead. The explanation was that he was blocking himself off from the house since he had been there before. As a physical medium, he was basically putting up walls to defend himself from the house this time around. And in this scene, I guess he tried lowering his guard for a bit and...this happened. The speeches he gives though, his facial expressions and body language, and cold tone. It's weird, but a guy that you look at at the beginning of the film and say to yourself that you're going to hate him because he looks smarmy and only really cares about himself winds up being the highlight of the film.
Another aspect of the film I really enjoyed were the special effects of the film. There's no CGI or anything, but the effects in the film are done very well. There's a scene where Ms. Tanner looks into her bedroom and sees someone lying under the covers in her bed and when she lifts up the covers, you can't see anyone but the door opens and slams like someone was getting up and leaving. It was just done very well. The effects like that were done very well. There are a few that look cheesy(cat in the shower scene, anyone?), but overall they look very good given how old the film is.
The plot was surprising, as well. I wasn't expecting anything really original or anything, but the fact that science is involved so heavily in trying rid the house of its supernatural presence was not only interesting, but a breath of fresh air compared to other methods I would've expected based on other films.
I think it's safe to say that The Legend of Hell House is one of the best haunted house films ever made and the best one I've seen as of this review. It probably isn't the type of horror film for gorehounds or if you're looking for a bloodfest. It's more of a paranormal film with a slight psychological twist. The acting is top notch and the story is a bit more clever than you may give it credit for at first glance.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Tomb Raider (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
A tremendously energetic and fun video game spin-off.
In this #TimesUp year, reviewing a film like “Tomb Raider” is just asking for trouble! So where shall I start digging my shallow grave?
Let’s start with the video game… “Tomb Raider” is of course the original video game phenomenon that started in 1993, featuring Lara Croft: someone that teenagers across the land mastur…. did their homework alongside in bedrooms up and down the land. Beauty; athleticism; a fierce independence; unfeasibly large breasts; ridiculously impossible leaps: in this film reboot, Alicia Vikander’s Lara differs from this ideal in just one respect. And before the Dora Milaje smash through my windows and drag me off for incarceration on Mysogeny Island, I’ll point out that this is OBVIOUSLY the least important omission! 🙂
For this film is good… very good.
“I’M SORRY….? WHAT DID YOU SAY DR BOB??” “But this is a film about a VIDEO GAME! … They are all uniformly s****e!”
Beauty, brains and talent: the GB Olympic team will likely be calling.
I know – I can barely bring myself to admit it. But this one really is good. Most of this is down to the reason I was looking forward so much to this one. Alicia Vikander (“Ex Machina“; “The Danish Girl“; “The Light Between Oceans“) is such a class act, and here she is so much more than just a one-dimensional action hero. She hurts, she mourns, she feels guilt, she’s vulnerable. And it’s all there on her face. Great acting skill. She also kicks ass like no woman on film since Emily Blunt in “Edge of Tomorrow“!
Don’t you just hate it when you drop a bag of flour in your kitchen?
The story by Evan Daugherty and Geneva Robertson-Dworet (with Alastair Siddons adding to the screenplay) rockets off in great style with a “fox and hounds” bike chase around the City of London which is brilliantly done and sets up Croft’s character with the minimum of tedious back story. Switch to the main story and Lara is struggling to face the fact that her father (Dominic West, “Money Monster“), seen in flashback, is finally dead after going off to Japan seven years previously in search of the legendary tomb of ancient sorceress Queen Himiko. The Croft corp. COO (Kristin Scott Thomas, “Darkest Hour“) persuades Lara its time to sign the necessary papers, but on the verge of this act the lawyer Mr Yaffe (Derek Jacobi, “Murder on the Orient Express“) lets a significant cat out of the bag and sets Lara off on the trail of her long-dead father’s original mission.
In happier times. Daddy (Dominic West) goes off on yet another trip from Croft Manor.
It’s a rollercoaster ride that’s really well done. But I reckon the writers should have named Jeffrey Boam, George Lucas and Menno Meyjes as co-collaborators, for the film plagerises terribly from “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade”. In two or three places, the similarities are shocking! As in the best of Lucas traditions though there are some breathtaking set-pieces, with the best of them staged at the top of a raging waterfall that’s just plane ridiculous! (Even if it plagerises blatantly from “The Lost World”!).
English and patient. Kristin Scott Thomas as the guiding hand at the Croft corporation.
The movie’s tremendous to look at too, with cinematography by George Richmond (“Kingsman“; “Eddie the Eagle“) and (aside from a dodgy helicopter effect) good special effect by Max Poolman (“District 9”) and his team.
My one criticism would be that Vogel – the chief villain, played by Walton Goggins (“The Hateful Eight“) – is rather too unremittingly evil to have two sweetly smiling young children in his desk photo. One can only hope he faces a nasty demise!
Never trust a guy with a beard. Walton Goggins, a bit over the top as the villain of the piece.
The film is directed by Norwegian director Roar Uthaug, in what looks to be his first “non-Norwegian” film. Roar by name; roar by nature! He does a great job. An early “summer blockbuster” actioner that gets two thumbs up from me. What a pleasant surprise!
Let’s start with the video game… “Tomb Raider” is of course the original video game phenomenon that started in 1993, featuring Lara Croft: someone that teenagers across the land mastur…. did their homework alongside in bedrooms up and down the land. Beauty; athleticism; a fierce independence; unfeasibly large breasts; ridiculously impossible leaps: in this film reboot, Alicia Vikander’s Lara differs from this ideal in just one respect. And before the Dora Milaje smash through my windows and drag me off for incarceration on Mysogeny Island, I’ll point out that this is OBVIOUSLY the least important omission! 🙂
For this film is good… very good.
“I’M SORRY….? WHAT DID YOU SAY DR BOB??” “But this is a film about a VIDEO GAME! … They are all uniformly s****e!”
Beauty, brains and talent: the GB Olympic team will likely be calling.
I know – I can barely bring myself to admit it. But this one really is good. Most of this is down to the reason I was looking forward so much to this one. Alicia Vikander (“Ex Machina“; “The Danish Girl“; “The Light Between Oceans“) is such a class act, and here she is so much more than just a one-dimensional action hero. She hurts, she mourns, she feels guilt, she’s vulnerable. And it’s all there on her face. Great acting skill. She also kicks ass like no woman on film since Emily Blunt in “Edge of Tomorrow“!
Don’t you just hate it when you drop a bag of flour in your kitchen?
The story by Evan Daugherty and Geneva Robertson-Dworet (with Alastair Siddons adding to the screenplay) rockets off in great style with a “fox and hounds” bike chase around the City of London which is brilliantly done and sets up Croft’s character with the minimum of tedious back story. Switch to the main story and Lara is struggling to face the fact that her father (Dominic West, “Money Monster“), seen in flashback, is finally dead after going off to Japan seven years previously in search of the legendary tomb of ancient sorceress Queen Himiko. The Croft corp. COO (Kristin Scott Thomas, “Darkest Hour“) persuades Lara its time to sign the necessary papers, but on the verge of this act the lawyer Mr Yaffe (Derek Jacobi, “Murder on the Orient Express“) lets a significant cat out of the bag and sets Lara off on the trail of her long-dead father’s original mission.
In happier times. Daddy (Dominic West) goes off on yet another trip from Croft Manor.
It’s a rollercoaster ride that’s really well done. But I reckon the writers should have named Jeffrey Boam, George Lucas and Menno Meyjes as co-collaborators, for the film plagerises terribly from “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade”. In two or three places, the similarities are shocking! As in the best of Lucas traditions though there are some breathtaking set-pieces, with the best of them staged at the top of a raging waterfall that’s just plane ridiculous! (Even if it plagerises blatantly from “The Lost World”!).
English and patient. Kristin Scott Thomas as the guiding hand at the Croft corporation.
The movie’s tremendous to look at too, with cinematography by George Richmond (“Kingsman“; “Eddie the Eagle“) and (aside from a dodgy helicopter effect) good special effect by Max Poolman (“District 9”) and his team.
My one criticism would be that Vogel – the chief villain, played by Walton Goggins (“The Hateful Eight“) – is rather too unremittingly evil to have two sweetly smiling young children in his desk photo. One can only hope he faces a nasty demise!
Never trust a guy with a beard. Walton Goggins, a bit over the top as the villain of the piece.
The film is directed by Norwegian director Roar Uthaug, in what looks to be his first “non-Norwegian” film. Roar by name; roar by nature! He does a great job. An early “summer blockbuster” actioner that gets two thumbs up from me. What a pleasant surprise!
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022) in Movies
Feb 19, 2022 (Updated Feb 19, 2022)
Wasted backstories that go nowhere. (3 more)
Rehashes and recreates the original film while not offering much of its own material.
New characters fall flat.
Feels like a half-cocked attempt at a new "film. "
Tearing the Face Off of a Horror Franchise
Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a direct sequel to the original 1974 film nearly 50 years later. Directed by David Blue Garcia with a screenplay by Chris Thomas Devlin and a story by Fede Alvarez (co-writer and director of the 2013 Evil Dead remake) and Rodo Sayagues (Don’t Breathe 1 & 2), Texas Chainsaw Massacre follows a group of young 20-somethings as they venture from Austin to Harlow, TX; a seven hour drive.
Dante (Jacob Latimore, Detroit) and Melody (Sarah Yarkin, Happy Death Day 2U) are business partners with somewhat of an impressive internet following. Dante is a chef who is looking to expand and Harlow is just the type of remote town to do it in. Melody’s teenage sister Lila (Elsie Fisher, Eighth Grade) and Dante’s fiancé Ruth (Nell Hudson) have tagged along mostly for emotional support.
With bank investors on the way to scout the location, the young foursome discovers a dilapidated orphanage with an old woman (Alice Krige, Gretel & Hansel) still living inside along with the last of what she refers to as, “her boys.” Dante and his friends awaken the mostly dormant monster known as Leatherface. Sally Hardesty (Olwen Fouéré) has been searching for Leatherface since he killed her friends all those years ago and now she can finally have the vengeful closure that she deserves.
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise is mostly trash. Leatherface has gotten the manure treatment outside of the original film, the 2003 remake, and maybe the 1986 sequel. The timeline is as messy and inconsistent as Halloween as whatever takes place behind the scenes between sequels, remakes, and reboots all seems to result in lackluster or sometimes atrocious outings for one of the most recognizable horror movie icons.
This new film can’t seem to decide what it wants to be. Sally is brought back for a half-hearted cameo as she does nothing but wear a cowboy hat, stare at a picture, cock a shotgun, and gut a pig. She’s meant to be the connection between this film and the original and it just doesn’t work. Texas Chainsaw Massacre also just seems to lift aspects from the original film as well as other non-genre films without ever offering its audience anything original or actually worthwhile.
The ending is basically lifted directly from the original as is the aspect of a group of young people running into trouble on a road trip far away from home. It’s young, city outsiders versus born-and-bred country veterans. The film also has a weird amount of homage to Terminator 2 (Melody’s leg wound and the shotgun blasts to Leatherface by the water being similar to Sarah Connor’s showdown with the T-1000 near the end of T2). It also feels like it’s trying to capitalize on the success Halloween has had since it follows a similar format (making a direct sequel to the original film decades later).
On the bright side, the kills and the gore are mostly satisfying. The wrist breaking scene followed by being stabbed in the neck with the broken bone is gnarly. There’s a brutal head smashing scene with a hammer and the bus sequence is essentially horror movie fan heaven even if the setup and dialogue in said sequence is awful. The swinging door kill feels like it could have been better than it was since it covers up more than it reveals. You can either leave the brutality to the audience’s imagination or show everything in its nasty and gruesome glory; trying to do both in the same sequence just results in disappointment.
You can make the argument that you watch a film like this for the gore and not the story anyway, but that isn’t the point. When there’s this much of a wait between new entries fans deserve better. The frustrating aspect is that Fede Alvarez and Rodo Sayagues are capable of providing a worthwhile story along with the blood and guts because they gave it to us with Evil Dead. There’s nothing here worth the nine year gap between this and the last Texas Chainsaw film (Texas Chainsaw 3D) or the five year gap between this and Leatherface. When it’s not recycling gags from the original film or borrowing from other franchises, it’s just young people being dumb for the sake of a cheap scare or kill.
Texas Chainsaw Massacre isn’t as unwatchable as some reviews are making it out to be, but it’s not a good film by any stretch of the imagination. It’s barely 80-minutes long, so it has a relatively quick pace and the kills are solid. But the story is seriously lacking as there are elements that literally go nowhere; Lila’s backstory about why she’s so quiet doesn’t add much of anything other than a reason for her to never leave a padded cell when and if a sequel to this is ever made.
The problem now is that the successful film formula revolves around nostalgia, rehashing familiar sequences and storylines, and bringing back survivors for one final confrontation. This has all proven to crush the box office, especially during the pandemic. This results in there being no originality or creativity anymore; it’s just a repetition of what we’ve already seen. Until Leatherface can get a fresh face to wear, the Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise is doomed to run in circles with a sputtering chainsaw on a mostly deserted road no one wants to travel down.
Dante (Jacob Latimore, Detroit) and Melody (Sarah Yarkin, Happy Death Day 2U) are business partners with somewhat of an impressive internet following. Dante is a chef who is looking to expand and Harlow is just the type of remote town to do it in. Melody’s teenage sister Lila (Elsie Fisher, Eighth Grade) and Dante’s fiancé Ruth (Nell Hudson) have tagged along mostly for emotional support.
With bank investors on the way to scout the location, the young foursome discovers a dilapidated orphanage with an old woman (Alice Krige, Gretel & Hansel) still living inside along with the last of what she refers to as, “her boys.” Dante and his friends awaken the mostly dormant monster known as Leatherface. Sally Hardesty (Olwen Fouéré) has been searching for Leatherface since he killed her friends all those years ago and now she can finally have the vengeful closure that she deserves.
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise is mostly trash. Leatherface has gotten the manure treatment outside of the original film, the 2003 remake, and maybe the 1986 sequel. The timeline is as messy and inconsistent as Halloween as whatever takes place behind the scenes between sequels, remakes, and reboots all seems to result in lackluster or sometimes atrocious outings for one of the most recognizable horror movie icons.
This new film can’t seem to decide what it wants to be. Sally is brought back for a half-hearted cameo as she does nothing but wear a cowboy hat, stare at a picture, cock a shotgun, and gut a pig. She’s meant to be the connection between this film and the original and it just doesn’t work. Texas Chainsaw Massacre also just seems to lift aspects from the original film as well as other non-genre films without ever offering its audience anything original or actually worthwhile.
The ending is basically lifted directly from the original as is the aspect of a group of young people running into trouble on a road trip far away from home. It’s young, city outsiders versus born-and-bred country veterans. The film also has a weird amount of homage to Terminator 2 (Melody’s leg wound and the shotgun blasts to Leatherface by the water being similar to Sarah Connor’s showdown with the T-1000 near the end of T2). It also feels like it’s trying to capitalize on the success Halloween has had since it follows a similar format (making a direct sequel to the original film decades later).
On the bright side, the kills and the gore are mostly satisfying. The wrist breaking scene followed by being stabbed in the neck with the broken bone is gnarly. There’s a brutal head smashing scene with a hammer and the bus sequence is essentially horror movie fan heaven even if the setup and dialogue in said sequence is awful. The swinging door kill feels like it could have been better than it was since it covers up more than it reveals. You can either leave the brutality to the audience’s imagination or show everything in its nasty and gruesome glory; trying to do both in the same sequence just results in disappointment.
You can make the argument that you watch a film like this for the gore and not the story anyway, but that isn’t the point. When there’s this much of a wait between new entries fans deserve better. The frustrating aspect is that Fede Alvarez and Rodo Sayagues are capable of providing a worthwhile story along with the blood and guts because they gave it to us with Evil Dead. There’s nothing here worth the nine year gap between this and the last Texas Chainsaw film (Texas Chainsaw 3D) or the five year gap between this and Leatherface. When it’s not recycling gags from the original film or borrowing from other franchises, it’s just young people being dumb for the sake of a cheap scare or kill.
Texas Chainsaw Massacre isn’t as unwatchable as some reviews are making it out to be, but it’s not a good film by any stretch of the imagination. It’s barely 80-minutes long, so it has a relatively quick pace and the kills are solid. But the story is seriously lacking as there are elements that literally go nowhere; Lila’s backstory about why she’s so quiet doesn’t add much of anything other than a reason for her to never leave a padded cell when and if a sequel to this is ever made.
The problem now is that the successful film formula revolves around nostalgia, rehashing familiar sequences and storylines, and bringing back survivors for one final confrontation. This has all proven to crush the box office, especially during the pandemic. This results in there being no originality or creativity anymore; it’s just a repetition of what we’ve already seen. Until Leatherface can get a fresh face to wear, the Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise is doomed to run in circles with a sputtering chainsaw on a mostly deserted road no one wants to travel down.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: The Last Ronin #1 - Director's Cut in Books
Sep 16, 2021
Lone Turtle On A Quest For Revenge
New York City has become a dark and depressing place as the Foot Clan has taken over quadrants of the city, with "synthetic ninja" or "synja's". It's ruled by totalitarianism and meticulous fascism at the hands of Oroku Hiroto, grandson of the Shredder. The last of the Ninja Turtles works hard to end Hiroto's evil reign. Alone and outnumbered he seeks to avenge his dead brothers, a seemingly hopeless mission and kill Hiroto, whom he blames for their murders.
So first off I think this comic is pretty bad ass. I had heard about it and decided to check it out and I totally liked the whole premise for it and how the story plays out in this first issue. The artwork was nice and there was plenty of action but what hooked me was the whole quest for revenge. I think I've said it before but if you don't know this about me, I'm a sucker for a good revenge story. I don't know what it is about being wronged or having something so bad happen to the hero/protagonist in stories but I immediately put myself in their place and think about what I would do if I was them. Plus it's always satisfying to see the bad guy get his "just desserts". I have to say that I'm a huge TMNT fan but I've actually never really read any of the comic stuff. I remember reading a crossover or team up of them with Erik Larsen's Savage Dragon but that's about the only thing I've ever seen or checked out before. So I might be a little biased but the story is also really compelling.
I like the way it starts off with the lone ninja turtle making his way into the city, sneaking into the Foot controlled zone by climbing over the wall. How they complain about the water being ruined from global warming and years of pollution as he has to swim through it. I like how people are talking to him the whole time and it's a shock to find out who they are. I really like the artwork, like the character designs and how they make it a mystery as to which Ninja Turtle is the one who survived. They even make him use various weapons instead of their signature one to keep the mystery going throughout the issue. I liked the way the city looked, it had modern looking places and but then futuristic parts with flying cars and stuff too. There's plenty of action as they take on plenty of "synja's" as well as elite ninja and some "Stockman tech", mainly some flying "mousers". Don't want to give away too much since this is my first comic book review and haven't figured out a format for it yet and if I'm going to do non-spoiler/spoiler style or not but I think this is where I'll leave it for now.
So first off I think this comic is pretty bad ass. I had heard about it and decided to check it out and I totally liked the whole premise for it and how the story plays out in this first issue. The artwork was nice and there was plenty of action but what hooked me was the whole quest for revenge. I think I've said it before but if you don't know this about me, I'm a sucker for a good revenge story. I don't know what it is about being wronged or having something so bad happen to the hero/protagonist in stories but I immediately put myself in their place and think about what I would do if I was them. Plus it's always satisfying to see the bad guy get his "just desserts". I have to say that I'm a huge TMNT fan but I've actually never really read any of the comic stuff. I remember reading a crossover or team up of them with Erik Larsen's Savage Dragon but that's about the only thing I've ever seen or checked out before. So I might be a little biased but the story is also really compelling.
I like the way it starts off with the lone ninja turtle making his way into the city, sneaking into the Foot controlled zone by climbing over the wall. How they complain about the water being ruined from global warming and years of pollution as he has to swim through it. I like how people are talking to him the whole time and it's a shock to find out who they are. I really like the artwork, like the character designs and how they make it a mystery as to which Ninja Turtle is the one who survived. They even make him use various weapons instead of their signature one to keep the mystery going throughout the issue. I liked the way the city looked, it had modern looking places and but then futuristic parts with flying cars and stuff too. There's plenty of action as they take on plenty of "synja's" as well as elite ninja and some "Stockman tech", mainly some flying "mousers". Don't want to give away too much since this is my first comic book review and haven't figured out a format for it yet and if I'm going to do non-spoiler/spoiler style or not but I think this is where I'll leave it for now.
