Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
Why is this even prefaced everywhere with Fast & Furious? Apart from a couple of characters and the fact there are cars with a crapload of action they aren't really the same thing.
Hattie Shaw and her MI6 team have secured a virus that could threaten everyone if it gets into the wrong hands. In a surprise attacked by Brixton, an enhanced "bad guy", her entire team is killed and she has to make a quick decision.
As the story of the missing vial gets out handlers call in their top assets to retrieve it. The trouble is that they hate each other and working together isn't something that's going to work. Hobbs goes looking for Hattie on the streets and Shaw heads to her flat, both set some action they weren't expecting to, highlighting just what they're up against.
As an offshoot from the Fast & Furious franchise you expect the action, but Hobbs & Shaw takes a much bigger step towards comedy, which thankfully both Johnson and Statham are good at. Individually they'll get me to see a film, I might wish I hadn't when I come out of it, but you can pretty much guarantee that they'll give you a consistent result when it comes to the acting.
The two of them together are fun and they bounce off each other with impeccable timing, but there might be just a little bit too much insulting back and forth thrown into this one. It's not that it's bad, it's just that when it happens it can occasionally feel too long. It's almost as if they told them to improvise and they'd cut out a whole load of it and then never did. [One of my favourite bits of them together in the film is at the beginning of the trailer above.]
Vanessa Kirby as Shaw's sister Hattie is a bit more sensible than the leading men, that doesn't mean she's any less engaged in the action though. Right from the off they're showing her as tough and no-nonsense which fits in with the family characteristics. You get some great glimpses of the Shaw kids showing shared traits and it's really nice to see that link on the screen. Outside of the action and the family moments she sadly doesn't feel like a very well-formed character, there are several inconsistencies in her that I found to be confusing. You'd think one of those would be the age gap between her and Deckard, but honestly, until I saw some people mention it online I hadn't noticed it... it's a summer blockbuster... who's watching for those sorts of technicalities?!
Our bad guy Brixton, portrayed by Idris Elba is... yummy. I don't feel like there's much to say about Brixton, he kicks ass, he's got great tech and there's a good history with Shaw... but... he didn't really feel like a bad guy. Eteon certainly felt like an evil empire, but Brixton is just a minion in the grand scheme of things. I have my theories about Eteon, but that would mean major spoilers I'm afraid. I imagine we'll see more of them in the next one.
We get another wonderful pop up from Helen Mirren. Yeeeeeess, Queen! She's brilliant as always. There are a few cameos, and I'm impressed they managed to keep them secret. It was a fun discovery and definitely added to the humour of the whole thing, had you taken them out of the mix then you would have been left a much more "sensible" action film, but they went with it and it was certainly entertaining.
Obviously there's a lot of action, in a lot of different scenes. As ridiculous as it is, I did like the London chase that happens shortly after the jog down the building that you see in the trailer. It includes some good jaw-dropping moments and ends with a particularly satisfying moment. As fun as this sequence was, it does include the most dubious bit of CGI in the whole film... watch for that bike.
My other favourite scene is the finale, the whole thing is kind of long but specifically I'm thinking about Hobbs, Shaw and Brixton facing off. Even before going into the film you know exactly what needs to happen to get to the resolution, so when they get to that point you're sat going "about time!" As the storm sets in we get an amazing sequence with slow-mo of the three of them fighting in the rain. It was immense... some may say daft, but that's totally why I turned up for it. There's also some great glitching of Brixton's tech that I thought worked really well with everything. My only issue is that there's one moment where Jason Statham appears to genuinely smile and it feels completely out of character.
There are some things I want to mention before I finish.
- There feels like a lot of product placement happening throughout, including for things that aren't even real products.
- You do not... I repeat... DO NOT drive by a Greggs without stopping for a chicken bake.
Let's face it, if you even remotely enjoy action and comedy together then you're going to be enjoying this movie. You don't need to switch your brain on to watch this, it's just pure entertainment.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/hobbs-shaw-movie-review.html
Hattie Shaw and her MI6 team have secured a virus that could threaten everyone if it gets into the wrong hands. In a surprise attacked by Brixton, an enhanced "bad guy", her entire team is killed and she has to make a quick decision.
As the story of the missing vial gets out handlers call in their top assets to retrieve it. The trouble is that they hate each other and working together isn't something that's going to work. Hobbs goes looking for Hattie on the streets and Shaw heads to her flat, both set some action they weren't expecting to, highlighting just what they're up against.
As an offshoot from the Fast & Furious franchise you expect the action, but Hobbs & Shaw takes a much bigger step towards comedy, which thankfully both Johnson and Statham are good at. Individually they'll get me to see a film, I might wish I hadn't when I come out of it, but you can pretty much guarantee that they'll give you a consistent result when it comes to the acting.
The two of them together are fun and they bounce off each other with impeccable timing, but there might be just a little bit too much insulting back and forth thrown into this one. It's not that it's bad, it's just that when it happens it can occasionally feel too long. It's almost as if they told them to improvise and they'd cut out a whole load of it and then never did. [One of my favourite bits of them together in the film is at the beginning of the trailer above.]
Vanessa Kirby as Shaw's sister Hattie is a bit more sensible than the leading men, that doesn't mean she's any less engaged in the action though. Right from the off they're showing her as tough and no-nonsense which fits in with the family characteristics. You get some great glimpses of the Shaw kids showing shared traits and it's really nice to see that link on the screen. Outside of the action and the family moments she sadly doesn't feel like a very well-formed character, there are several inconsistencies in her that I found to be confusing. You'd think one of those would be the age gap between her and Deckard, but honestly, until I saw some people mention it online I hadn't noticed it... it's a summer blockbuster... who's watching for those sorts of technicalities?!
Our bad guy Brixton, portrayed by Idris Elba is... yummy. I don't feel like there's much to say about Brixton, he kicks ass, he's got great tech and there's a good history with Shaw... but... he didn't really feel like a bad guy. Eteon certainly felt like an evil empire, but Brixton is just a minion in the grand scheme of things. I have my theories about Eteon, but that would mean major spoilers I'm afraid. I imagine we'll see more of them in the next one.
We get another wonderful pop up from Helen Mirren. Yeeeeeess, Queen! She's brilliant as always. There are a few cameos, and I'm impressed they managed to keep them secret. It was a fun discovery and definitely added to the humour of the whole thing, had you taken them out of the mix then you would have been left a much more "sensible" action film, but they went with it and it was certainly entertaining.
Obviously there's a lot of action, in a lot of different scenes. As ridiculous as it is, I did like the London chase that happens shortly after the jog down the building that you see in the trailer. It includes some good jaw-dropping moments and ends with a particularly satisfying moment. As fun as this sequence was, it does include the most dubious bit of CGI in the whole film... watch for that bike.
My other favourite scene is the finale, the whole thing is kind of long but specifically I'm thinking about Hobbs, Shaw and Brixton facing off. Even before going into the film you know exactly what needs to happen to get to the resolution, so when they get to that point you're sat going "about time!" As the storm sets in we get an amazing sequence with slow-mo of the three of them fighting in the rain. It was immense... some may say daft, but that's totally why I turned up for it. There's also some great glitching of Brixton's tech that I thought worked really well with everything. My only issue is that there's one moment where Jason Statham appears to genuinely smile and it feels completely out of character.
There are some things I want to mention before I finish.
- There feels like a lot of product placement happening throughout, including for things that aren't even real products.
- You do not... I repeat... DO NOT drive by a Greggs without stopping for a chicken bake.
Let's face it, if you even remotely enjoy action and comedy together then you're going to be enjoying this movie. You don't need to switch your brain on to watch this, it's just pure entertainment.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/hobbs-shaw-movie-review.html
Cthulhu (5 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Layers of Fear in Video Games
Sep 2, 2018
Disturbing Story (2 more)
Easy movement mechanics
Appealing creepy visuals
Not that scary (2 more)
Too easy
Cliché at times
Good Plot and Visuals, but not that Scary
Contains spoilers, click to show
When I started this game, I was expecting really good quality scares. Unfortunately, this game did not really "scare" me. It was mostly just pop scares with some loud creepy noises here and there. I don't mind a few pop scares, but I was hoping for more creative ways to get scared from a game. The game adds a lot of creepy whispers, running baby dolls, and lights that mysteriously go out-- which was all a bit too cliché for me. *Spoiler- you only see the main "ghost" a few times and I wish there were most instances where it was included.*
Now onto the good part. While the game didn't scare me, I found the plot and ending to be very surprising. It was definitely creative and something new I haven't seen in a game before. You have to pay attention to all readable items and you have to piece it together, but once you figure out what's going on, it's pretty messed up- which is exactly what I was looking for!
The game's mechanics, movements, and how you get around feels a lot like the game PT. I really loved PT and I enjoyed how this game made a similar feel. Every room is different and you don't know what's going to be in it. Most rooms you have to solve puzzles to get to the next one. Some of the puzzles felt a bit too easy for me, but I didn't really mind too much since there were a lot of rooms to get through. I wish some were a bit harder though. Movement wise, there's no fighting and it's all walk and interact with an object here and there. I enjoyed it since it let me focus on the story.
Visually, I liked how creepy the atmosphere was. It was interesting because while a lot of what you saw was "gross looking", there were bits of color and beauty in it from the dad being an artist. I thought the game was beautiful just from that aspect. I loved finding the art in all of the creepy surroundings. Sometimes it got a bit repetitive-- a pretty normal looking room then the next room is all destroyed and in shambles, but for the most part it was interesting to look at.
Overall I really did enjoy this game. It was fun to play for the plot and the visuals, but I wouldn't necessarily play it for the scares or the puzzles. This game is probably for you though if you do like pop scares.
Now onto the good part. While the game didn't scare me, I found the plot and ending to be very surprising. It was definitely creative and something new I haven't seen in a game before. You have to pay attention to all readable items and you have to piece it together, but once you figure out what's going on, it's pretty messed up- which is exactly what I was looking for!
The game's mechanics, movements, and how you get around feels a lot like the game PT. I really loved PT and I enjoyed how this game made a similar feel. Every room is different and you don't know what's going to be in it. Most rooms you have to solve puzzles to get to the next one. Some of the puzzles felt a bit too easy for me, but I didn't really mind too much since there were a lot of rooms to get through. I wish some were a bit harder though. Movement wise, there's no fighting and it's all walk and interact with an object here and there. I enjoyed it since it let me focus on the story.
Visually, I liked how creepy the atmosphere was. It was interesting because while a lot of what you saw was "gross looking", there were bits of color and beauty in it from the dad being an artist. I thought the game was beautiful just from that aspect. I loved finding the art in all of the creepy surroundings. Sometimes it got a bit repetitive-- a pretty normal looking room then the next room is all destroyed and in shambles, but for the most part it was interesting to look at.
Overall I really did enjoy this game. It was fun to play for the plot and the visuals, but I wouldn't necessarily play it for the scares or the puzzles. This game is probably for you though if you do like pop scares.
JT (287 KP) rated The Call (2013) in Movies
Mar 16, 2020
Don't Hang-Up on The Call
Brad Anderson directed one of my favourite horrors, Session 9, a film that is not particularly gory but is extremely unnerving in a variety of ways. It’s a film that leaves chills down your spine and fixates you to the screen, Anderson has a great way of building tension to almost breaking point, and with The Call, he’s achieved very much the same.
Halle Berry is 911 operator Jordan Turner who takes hundreds of distressing calls each day and generally manages to keep a cool head when the going gets tough. One particular day she takes a call from a young girl who has an intruder in the house, things don’t go well and as a result, Jordan takes a back seat from answering the phone to training the next generation of 911 operators.
It’s not long before she’s called back into the fray to face her fears and a familiar foe on the end of the phone, using her nerve and judgement she must help another young teenage girl from facing a similar fate. The acting is generally pretty good all-round, nothing wooden about these performances as everyone gives their all in making the situation as believable as it can be.
The film holds itself well, for the most part, maybe only wobbling when bog-standard clichés are introduced into the mix, but it’s not detracting at all and I genuinely cared about what the outcome would be. We know that suspense is driven through genuine fear, and there is no fear like being trapped inside the boot of a car which is what happens to young Abigail Breslin after she’s abducted.
During that part of the film where she is frantically on the phone to Jordan looking for a way out, we do wonder if it is going to be the end for her, and that every chance she gets to raise the alarm is thwarted as is always the case in these types of situations. The killer has a pretty good motive and the backstory is somewhat disturbing, it’s left to the audience to deduce just what his reasoning is for undertaking the horrific crimes.
The film then sets about racing away to the conclusion and it does feel a bit rushed, some have been harsh in their reviews of the way it ended, but I enjoyed it. There was a distinct nod to the original Saw which if that is correct, was a nice touch, although I think that is just me reading into it. Overall its a hell of a lot better than some other mainstream thrillers and is definitely worth the time.
Halle Berry is 911 operator Jordan Turner who takes hundreds of distressing calls each day and generally manages to keep a cool head when the going gets tough. One particular day she takes a call from a young girl who has an intruder in the house, things don’t go well and as a result, Jordan takes a back seat from answering the phone to training the next generation of 911 operators.
It’s not long before she’s called back into the fray to face her fears and a familiar foe on the end of the phone, using her nerve and judgement she must help another young teenage girl from facing a similar fate. The acting is generally pretty good all-round, nothing wooden about these performances as everyone gives their all in making the situation as believable as it can be.
The film holds itself well, for the most part, maybe only wobbling when bog-standard clichés are introduced into the mix, but it’s not detracting at all and I genuinely cared about what the outcome would be. We know that suspense is driven through genuine fear, and there is no fear like being trapped inside the boot of a car which is what happens to young Abigail Breslin after she’s abducted.
During that part of the film where she is frantically on the phone to Jordan looking for a way out, we do wonder if it is going to be the end for her, and that every chance she gets to raise the alarm is thwarted as is always the case in these types of situations. The killer has a pretty good motive and the backstory is somewhat disturbing, it’s left to the audience to deduce just what his reasoning is for undertaking the horrific crimes.
The film then sets about racing away to the conclusion and it does feel a bit rushed, some have been harsh in their reviews of the way it ended, but I enjoyed it. There was a distinct nod to the original Saw which if that is correct, was a nice touch, although I think that is just me reading into it. Overall its a hell of a lot better than some other mainstream thrillers and is definitely worth the time.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Umbrella Academy in TV
Jul 5, 2020
A Gamble That Pays Off - 8/10
The Umbrella Academy is a 2019 dark comedy sci-fi/drama superhero tv show developed by Steve Blackman and Jeremy Slater for Netflix. It's an adaptation of the comic book series created by Gerard Way and Gabriel Ba and published by Dark Horse Comics. The series was produced by Borderline Entertainment, Dark Horse Entertainment, and Universal Cable Productions. Starring Ellen Page, Tom Hopper, David Castaneda, and Kate Walsh.
On October 1st, 1989, 43 women around the world give birth although none of them were pregnant that morning. Eccentric billionaire Sir Reginald Hargreeves (Colman Feore) adopts 7 of the children and turns them into a superhero team called, "The Umbrella Academy. The children are given numbers instead of names and even though 6 of them fight crime, 1 of them, Vanya/#7 (Ellen Page) is kept apart for not having any powers. Present day, the estranged siblings reunite when they learn their father has died. At the funeral, #5 (Aidan Gallagher), which has been missing for over a decade, reappears from the future out of a blue portal and reveals to the others, that the world will end in a matter of days.
This show is stellar. It's a ride that you shouldn't miss. It's good to see a comic book series adaptation that is not from Marvel or DC and you can feel that it's a fresh take and different. I think the writers for the show did a good job on making it very three-dimensional. It's rated TV-14 so it's for teenagers and adults but also for comic book fans and sci-fi fans. That being said it does get pretty weird and far out there, so might not be for everybody but it's definitely better than what the critics are saying. Yes it does have some issues; like the dialogue might not be the best, there being some plot holes possibly, and some complaints of other comic book shows or movies having done that before. But it does have plenty of pluses; the soundtrack is phenomenal, the CGI is on par with that of big-budget movies, and the casting is very good. They were able to pull off the whole dysfunctional family vibe very well. I wanted to give it a point higher but I did understand some of the other points that other critics made about it. I give it a 8/10 but I also give it my "Must See" seal of approval. So if you haven't seen it yet what are you waiting for.
On October 1st, 1989, 43 women around the world give birth although none of them were pregnant that morning. Eccentric billionaire Sir Reginald Hargreeves (Colman Feore) adopts 7 of the children and turns them into a superhero team called, "The Umbrella Academy. The children are given numbers instead of names and even though 6 of them fight crime, 1 of them, Vanya/#7 (Ellen Page) is kept apart for not having any powers. Present day, the estranged siblings reunite when they learn their father has died. At the funeral, #5 (Aidan Gallagher), which has been missing for over a decade, reappears from the future out of a blue portal and reveals to the others, that the world will end in a matter of days.
This show is stellar. It's a ride that you shouldn't miss. It's good to see a comic book series adaptation that is not from Marvel or DC and you can feel that it's a fresh take and different. I think the writers for the show did a good job on making it very three-dimensional. It's rated TV-14 so it's for teenagers and adults but also for comic book fans and sci-fi fans. That being said it does get pretty weird and far out there, so might not be for everybody but it's definitely better than what the critics are saying. Yes it does have some issues; like the dialogue might not be the best, there being some plot holes possibly, and some complaints of other comic book shows or movies having done that before. But it does have plenty of pluses; the soundtrack is phenomenal, the CGI is on par with that of big-budget movies, and the casting is very good. They were able to pull off the whole dysfunctional family vibe very well. I wanted to give it a point higher but I did understand some of the other points that other critics made about it. I give it a 8/10 but I also give it my "Must See" seal of approval. So if you haven't seen it yet what are you waiting for.
Leanne Crabtree (480 KP) rated Boyfriend Material in Books
Jan 6, 2021
4.5 stars.
I'd seen this all over Goodreads and added it to my wish list on Amazon and a few weeks later, it went down to under £2 so I bought it.
It starts with Luc going to a fancy dress party and his inner musings over how he got to be wearing his bunny ears for the (mad hatters tea) party. He's the son of two has-been rock stars and is wary of some people as they may just be after some story to sell. When bad press leads to the charity he works for losing income, he decides to get himself a fake boyfriend with a good image so that he can then show his boss and their investors that he is reliable. His friend recommends Oliver, the guy he met about two years ago and who he tried to sleep with but Oliver turned him down. Oliver is also in need of a fake boyfriend so they work out a few details and run with it. Only things change between them the more time they spend together.
I really enjoyed this book. It wasn't only the romance either. Just the way it was written was brilliant. Luc didn't take himself too seriously and his thoughts and the situations he sometimes found himself in...? *snorts with laughter* He wasn't perfect in any way really. He was messy and forgetful but so likeable.
Oliver on the other hand, well, he was a little serious at times but he was also good in any situation. Put him in the middle of posh people, he could find something to talk about with everyone. Put him in the middle of a party and he fits in. He grew on me a lot with how he treated Luc and I really loved them as a couple.
I loved Luc's jokes to his colleague, Alex, at the start of some chapters. They weren't the greatest jokes in the world but...geez, Alex's reactions to them was priceless. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed, so his reactions through most of the book had me chuckling to myself. And then let's not forget his girlfriend/fiancée Miffy and that weird bar scene.
I also feel like Luc's mum, Odile, needs a mention. She's a riot. She's very forthcoming with her opinions on everything and doesn't care what people think about her and said opinions. Her curry and that scene was hilarious.
This was right up my street. I love me a good MM Romance and this one was more about the feelings that grew between our characters as there were no explicit sex scenes included in this. It was cute and very British with it's situations and humour. Recommend it to anyone who likes any of the above.
I'd seen this all over Goodreads and added it to my wish list on Amazon and a few weeks later, it went down to under £2 so I bought it.
It starts with Luc going to a fancy dress party and his inner musings over how he got to be wearing his bunny ears for the (mad hatters tea) party. He's the son of two has-been rock stars and is wary of some people as they may just be after some story to sell. When bad press leads to the charity he works for losing income, he decides to get himself a fake boyfriend with a good image so that he can then show his boss and their investors that he is reliable. His friend recommends Oliver, the guy he met about two years ago and who he tried to sleep with but Oliver turned him down. Oliver is also in need of a fake boyfriend so they work out a few details and run with it. Only things change between them the more time they spend together.
I really enjoyed this book. It wasn't only the romance either. Just the way it was written was brilliant. Luc didn't take himself too seriously and his thoughts and the situations he sometimes found himself in...? *snorts with laughter* He wasn't perfect in any way really. He was messy and forgetful but so likeable.
Oliver on the other hand, well, he was a little serious at times but he was also good in any situation. Put him in the middle of posh people, he could find something to talk about with everyone. Put him in the middle of a party and he fits in. He grew on me a lot with how he treated Luc and I really loved them as a couple.
I loved Luc's jokes to his colleague, Alex, at the start of some chapters. They weren't the greatest jokes in the world but...geez, Alex's reactions to them was priceless. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed, so his reactions through most of the book had me chuckling to myself. And then let's not forget his girlfriend/fiancée Miffy and that weird bar scene.
I also feel like Luc's mum, Odile, needs a mention. She's a riot. She's very forthcoming with her opinions on everything and doesn't care what people think about her and said opinions. Her curry and that scene was hilarious.
This was right up my street. I love me a good MM Romance and this one was more about the feelings that grew between our characters as there were no explicit sex scenes included in this. It was cute and very British with it's situations and humour. Recommend it to anyone who likes any of the above.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Tron Legacy (2010) in Movies
Nov 20, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Ok this was actually good which is a bit surprising as there have been a few sequels to older films released over the past few years and they haven't all be great, not that they haven't necessarily been bad but, depending on how they continuing they have been a bit problematic. Either by using now outdated concepts or trying to to match modern political standards and missing the mark, Ghostbusters I'm looking at you. Tron: Legacy goes down the path of of handing the franchise over to the next generation in a similar manner to Bill and Ted Face the Music and I think Tron does it better.
I'll start by saying that Tron: Legacy is not as original or forward thinking as it's predecessor but that is to be expected. The original had Ideas that were slightly before it's time which i talk about in my review of that film. Tron: Legacy can't re do that originality, partly because its a sequel and so is constrained by the world built in the original but also because a lot of the ideas have been used since, we've had the likes of 'The Matrix' and 'Wreck-it Ralph' and so Tron: Legacy seems to concentrate on being a Tron film and nothing more.
The film keeps close to the original by bringing back quite a few things, we have Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner reprising their roles of Kevin Flynn And Alan Bradley, with Kevin now trapped in the computer world known as the Grid. The light cycles are back as well as few other craft. The effects have been updated but the grid and it's games are still very recognisable and there are a few through back lines and scenes.
Tron: Legacy does feel a bit Matrixy at times, neither of the flynns are Neo but it does draw on the familiar God/Devil tropes that you often see. The costumes are more cyber punk than the original, still using the red/blue lighting but also being more PVC and trench coat in its aesthetic with many characters supporting visors or crash helmets, to the point that Daft Punk actually look like they belong there.
Like a lot of Cyberpunk films there is a night club and this has one of the films stand out characters, Castor, played by Michael Sheen who is doing his best 'Ziggy Stardust' impression.
The strange thing is, this is a good film, with good franchise potential and Disney don't seem to have marketed it well, it's 10 years old (at the time of writing) and isn't mentioned much and it's only due to watching this on Disney+ that I now know about the spin off animated series, Tron: Uprising, which I'm going to have to watch.
I'll start by saying that Tron: Legacy is not as original or forward thinking as it's predecessor but that is to be expected. The original had Ideas that were slightly before it's time which i talk about in my review of that film. Tron: Legacy can't re do that originality, partly because its a sequel and so is constrained by the world built in the original but also because a lot of the ideas have been used since, we've had the likes of 'The Matrix' and 'Wreck-it Ralph' and so Tron: Legacy seems to concentrate on being a Tron film and nothing more.
The film keeps close to the original by bringing back quite a few things, we have Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner reprising their roles of Kevin Flynn And Alan Bradley, with Kevin now trapped in the computer world known as the Grid. The light cycles are back as well as few other craft. The effects have been updated but the grid and it's games are still very recognisable and there are a few through back lines and scenes.
Tron: Legacy does feel a bit Matrixy at times, neither of the flynns are Neo but it does draw on the familiar God/Devil tropes that you often see. The costumes are more cyber punk than the original, still using the red/blue lighting but also being more PVC and trench coat in its aesthetic with many characters supporting visors or crash helmets, to the point that Daft Punk actually look like they belong there.
Like a lot of Cyberpunk films there is a night club and this has one of the films stand out characters, Castor, played by Michael Sheen who is doing his best 'Ziggy Stardust' impression.
The strange thing is, this is a good film, with good franchise potential and Disney don't seem to have marketed it well, it's 10 years old (at the time of writing) and isn't mentioned much and it's only due to watching this on Disney+ that I now know about the spin off animated series, Tron: Uprising, which I'm going to have to watch.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Skyfire (2019) in Movies
Mar 28, 2021
On a whim I put this one on, a disaster movie at just an hour and a half long felt like a good way to start my day.
Years after the volcano on Tianhuo Island erupts, businessman Jack Harris builds a paradise resort and theme park in the shadow of the volcano. Because no story that started that way ever ended badly...
Skyfire struck me in a very peculiar way that I want to address later, but for now let me just say that this is a classic sort of disaster movie. A classic with a lot of borrowing.
A state of the art resort is built on an out of the way island. But when disaster strikes, everybody is in danger... If I read that to you and asked you which film I was talking about, what would your answer be? Jurassic Park or Jurassic World? It won't be the only time you find something to reminisce on. I didn't write down all the connections I thought I saw, but if you took Jurassic World, Dante's Peak and Shape Of Water (a little odd I know, but I'm sure you'll see it too) you'll be most of the way there.
I feel like I'm about to do this film a disservice, but I don't really want to talk much about the acting in it. This is nothing against the actors, try all do a good job, chemistry is there, there's the balance of serious and light-hearted... it all works, but it's not the thing that makes this movie for me.
The effects throughout are pretty good on the scale of disaster movies. To look at it all in the heat of the moment it very rarely comes across as unbelievable (which given this scenario is quite impressive), and those scenes that could have crossed over into looking bad are blended in with some great action sequences... so they might be bad, but I really didn't notice.
What sold me on Skyfire is just how well it works visually. In my opinion (I'm going to exercise this phrase more often I think), you don't need to listen to this film to understand what's going on. If you cut out the dialogue and just had the reactions and the ambient sounds you'd still perfectly understand what was going on.
That may say to you it isn't a very complex film, but it makes for a very enjoyable watch, and whole the familiarities did occasionally verge on frustrating I did begin the enjoy the game of spotting them. Mix those things together and it might not become my go to disaster film over Geostorm, but I will absolutely watch it again if the mood takes me.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/03/skyfire-movie-review.html
Years after the volcano on Tianhuo Island erupts, businessman Jack Harris builds a paradise resort and theme park in the shadow of the volcano. Because no story that started that way ever ended badly...
Skyfire struck me in a very peculiar way that I want to address later, but for now let me just say that this is a classic sort of disaster movie. A classic with a lot of borrowing.
A state of the art resort is built on an out of the way island. But when disaster strikes, everybody is in danger... If I read that to you and asked you which film I was talking about, what would your answer be? Jurassic Park or Jurassic World? It won't be the only time you find something to reminisce on. I didn't write down all the connections I thought I saw, but if you took Jurassic World, Dante's Peak and Shape Of Water (a little odd I know, but I'm sure you'll see it too) you'll be most of the way there.
I feel like I'm about to do this film a disservice, but I don't really want to talk much about the acting in it. This is nothing against the actors, try all do a good job, chemistry is there, there's the balance of serious and light-hearted... it all works, but it's not the thing that makes this movie for me.
The effects throughout are pretty good on the scale of disaster movies. To look at it all in the heat of the moment it very rarely comes across as unbelievable (which given this scenario is quite impressive), and those scenes that could have crossed over into looking bad are blended in with some great action sequences... so they might be bad, but I really didn't notice.
What sold me on Skyfire is just how well it works visually. In my opinion (I'm going to exercise this phrase more often I think), you don't need to listen to this film to understand what's going on. If you cut out the dialogue and just had the reactions and the ambient sounds you'd still perfectly understand what was going on.
That may say to you it isn't a very complex film, but it makes for a very enjoyable watch, and whole the familiarities did occasionally verge on frustrating I did begin the enjoy the game of spotting them. Mix those things together and it might not become my go to disaster film over Geostorm, but I will absolutely watch it again if the mood takes me.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/03/skyfire-movie-review.html
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Sky Sharks (2020) in Movies
Aug 29, 2020
Fright Fest kicked off with a film that I absolutely had to see... Nazi zombies and flying sharks? No brainer.
A team of arctic explorers uncover an old Nazi lab that was developing ways to help them conquer the world. The team unwittingly let loose their two most powerful experiments that unleashes a swarm of flying sharks flown by unstoppable pilots.
Despite this having the word "sharks" in the title (and my love of shark films) I do have to be a buzzkill and say that this is not a shark film. I'd happily categorise it in zombie film territory, but the quality is way too good for this to be classified as a shark film. I don't want to take away from these fantastic flying finned devils though, they're brilliant and super happy looking.
It has the ridiculous ideas that make for an entertaining watch. but I can't help but think that a good budget actually had a negative effect. Once you get to a certain level of production value it goes against the nature of the story and "traditions".
With sky based villains you would obviously get something involving airplanes, but from the early action sequence I got heavy Sharknado 2 vibes. I don't want to ruin this bit for you so I'll just say that it's got the requisite amount of scientific impossibilities and graphic violence.
The CGI is a little hit and miss, the sharks are pretty good and I'm convinced have sneaky smiles on their faces, but the zombie aspects are a little ropey whenever they pop up.
When it comes to acting the cast deliver exactly what you'd expect from this sort of film, over the top when needed, dramatic in both serious and ridiculous ways, and I really hope that some of the female cast were appropriately compensated from some of their truly over the top scenes. You expect nudity because that's what these things do, but my goodness did they go to town with it.
Nazi scientists with extraordinary plans is a great storyline, you can take it in so many directions. I can't help but feel that Sky Sharks suffers from over complications. Discovery, accidental release followed by solution... that simple formula is cluttered with a lot of back story that could easily be cut back and made easier to follow, a fair amount seemed to have no purpose.
Even with all of this it's still something daft to enjoy, probably when drunk. I'm not sure if it's for zombie fans or shark fans, it doesn't quite fit in either classification properly but for those who want to free their brains from thinking then it's probably going to work for that.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/sky-sharks-movie-review.html
A team of arctic explorers uncover an old Nazi lab that was developing ways to help them conquer the world. The team unwittingly let loose their two most powerful experiments that unleashes a swarm of flying sharks flown by unstoppable pilots.
Despite this having the word "sharks" in the title (and my love of shark films) I do have to be a buzzkill and say that this is not a shark film. I'd happily categorise it in zombie film territory, but the quality is way too good for this to be classified as a shark film. I don't want to take away from these fantastic flying finned devils though, they're brilliant and super happy looking.
It has the ridiculous ideas that make for an entertaining watch. but I can't help but think that a good budget actually had a negative effect. Once you get to a certain level of production value it goes against the nature of the story and "traditions".
With sky based villains you would obviously get something involving airplanes, but from the early action sequence I got heavy Sharknado 2 vibes. I don't want to ruin this bit for you so I'll just say that it's got the requisite amount of scientific impossibilities and graphic violence.
The CGI is a little hit and miss, the sharks are pretty good and I'm convinced have sneaky smiles on their faces, but the zombie aspects are a little ropey whenever they pop up.
When it comes to acting the cast deliver exactly what you'd expect from this sort of film, over the top when needed, dramatic in both serious and ridiculous ways, and I really hope that some of the female cast were appropriately compensated from some of their truly over the top scenes. You expect nudity because that's what these things do, but my goodness did they go to town with it.
Nazi scientists with extraordinary plans is a great storyline, you can take it in so many directions. I can't help but feel that Sky Sharks suffers from over complications. Discovery, accidental release followed by solution... that simple formula is cluttered with a lot of back story that could easily be cut back and made easier to follow, a fair amount seemed to have no purpose.
Even with all of this it's still something daft to enjoy, probably when drunk. I'm not sure if it's for zombie fans or shark fans, it doesn't quite fit in either classification properly but for those who want to free their brains from thinking then it's probably going to work for that.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/sky-sharks-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) in Movies
May 29, 2018
Surprised by how much I enjoyed this film
I have a confession to make - I was surprised by how much I enjoyed SOLO: A STAR WARS STORY.
Going into this film, I felt that this film had a few things going against it:
1). Trying to replace Harrison Ford with another actor in the title role.
2). Bringing in Ron Howard to "rescue" the film.
3). Overcoming Star Wars "fatigue" from the less than enthusiastic response to THE LAST JEDI.
And you know what? It has overcome these things - and more!
Set sometime between Episode 3 and Episode 4 (and before ROGUE ONE), SOLO is, in essence, the origin story of everyone's favorite rascal, but is told in an interesting way - as a heist/caper film.
Credit must be given to writers Lawrence Kasdan (THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK) and his son Jonathan Kasdan. They have developed a fast paced, twisty, back and forth con-man film disguised as a sci-fi film set long ago in a galaxy far, far away.
Bringing in Howard was a good, competent move, for he moves the plot along sprightly and the special effects-laden chase sequences are tightly paced - if unspectacular - but they help move the action along - and doesn't get in the way. There is no "special effects for special effects-sake" sequences and Howard's workmanlike approach works well. He lets his strong cast strut on the screen with their strong characters which is wise of him for he inherited a film sprinkled with very good talent who looked like they were having fun with their characters.
Start with Woody Harrelson as Solo's mentor. He provides a solid anchor to the proceedings. As does Emilia Clarke as Solo's best friend/love interest. She more than holds her own with Solo and Harrelson - and is as much a "rascal" as the other two.. Also providing a good turn is Paul Bettany as the main villain.
As with most Star Wars films, the "non-human" continue to be interesting. Starting with Lady Proxima (voiced by Linda Hunt), followed by Rio Durant (voiced by Jon Favreau) and the robot L3 (voiced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge), all were interesting characters, rendered well.
And...of course...there is Chewbacca (performed by Joonas Suotamo). I was thrilled to revisit the friendship between "Chewie" and Han. It was really easy to forget that you were watching a person in a Wookie costume. There is a rumor of a Chewbacca movie - and I'm all for it.
Speaking of "friendships" - this film also explores the beginnings of the HAN SOLO/LANDO CALRISSIAN friendships - and Donald Glover almost steals the movie in his portrayal of Lando. He has the swagger, debonair (and slightly feminine) attitude of the character down.
Which leads me to Alden Ehrenreich's performance as Solo. I have mentioned Harrelson...and Clarke...and Glover...and Bettany...and the CG characters...and Chewbacca...and this leaves Ehreneich's portrayal somewhat in the background. Don't get me wrong, he does a GOOD job as Solo, but - I feel - he just lacks the charisma and screen presence of the rest of them, and, of course, of Harrison Ford. He grew on me as the film progressed, but I felt he faded into the background at times - where he should have been up front.
But...this is a quibble...in a film who's energy, pace and characters really worked for me - more than I thought it would.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Going into this film, I felt that this film had a few things going against it:
1). Trying to replace Harrison Ford with another actor in the title role.
2). Bringing in Ron Howard to "rescue" the film.
3). Overcoming Star Wars "fatigue" from the less than enthusiastic response to THE LAST JEDI.
And you know what? It has overcome these things - and more!
Set sometime between Episode 3 and Episode 4 (and before ROGUE ONE), SOLO is, in essence, the origin story of everyone's favorite rascal, but is told in an interesting way - as a heist/caper film.
Credit must be given to writers Lawrence Kasdan (THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK) and his son Jonathan Kasdan. They have developed a fast paced, twisty, back and forth con-man film disguised as a sci-fi film set long ago in a galaxy far, far away.
Bringing in Howard was a good, competent move, for he moves the plot along sprightly and the special effects-laden chase sequences are tightly paced - if unspectacular - but they help move the action along - and doesn't get in the way. There is no "special effects for special effects-sake" sequences and Howard's workmanlike approach works well. He lets his strong cast strut on the screen with their strong characters which is wise of him for he inherited a film sprinkled with very good talent who looked like they were having fun with their characters.
Start with Woody Harrelson as Solo's mentor. He provides a solid anchor to the proceedings. As does Emilia Clarke as Solo's best friend/love interest. She more than holds her own with Solo and Harrelson - and is as much a "rascal" as the other two.. Also providing a good turn is Paul Bettany as the main villain.
As with most Star Wars films, the "non-human" continue to be interesting. Starting with Lady Proxima (voiced by Linda Hunt), followed by Rio Durant (voiced by Jon Favreau) and the robot L3 (voiced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge), all were interesting characters, rendered well.
And...of course...there is Chewbacca (performed by Joonas Suotamo). I was thrilled to revisit the friendship between "Chewie" and Han. It was really easy to forget that you were watching a person in a Wookie costume. There is a rumor of a Chewbacca movie - and I'm all for it.
Speaking of "friendships" - this film also explores the beginnings of the HAN SOLO/LANDO CALRISSIAN friendships - and Donald Glover almost steals the movie in his portrayal of Lando. He has the swagger, debonair (and slightly feminine) attitude of the character down.
Which leads me to Alden Ehrenreich's performance as Solo. I have mentioned Harrelson...and Clarke...and Glover...and Bettany...and the CG characters...and Chewbacca...and this leaves Ehreneich's portrayal somewhat in the background. Don't get me wrong, he does a GOOD job as Solo, but - I feel - he just lacks the charisma and screen presence of the rest of them, and, of course, of Harrison Ford. He grew on me as the film progressed, but I felt he faded into the background at times - where he should have been up front.
But...this is a quibble...in a film who's energy, pace and characters really worked for me - more than I thought it would.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Trumbo (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
What is it that makes, not a great, but even a good biopic? It is certainly no enviable task, trying to condense decades of a person’s life into a mere two hours. Choosing what to keep and what to leave, stringing events together so that they feel as though they are one complete narrative opposed to a series of vignettes. And then there are the inevitable purists who will write off the entire product based on a single detail either left out or composited due to running time or budgetary restrictions. Over the years, I have found myself wrestling with my opinion of Braveheart. Do I enjoy it for its epic qualities, or do I cast it aside as the wretched historical inaccuracies fly in the face of what is one of the most important times in a country’s past?
The answer is simply, and stolen from another great historical epic, are you not entertained? Film can and should be powerful and informative. It can and should influence our thinking and encourage an emotional response, but above all, it should entertain. Trumbo does all of the above, ticks all the necessary boxes on the list of what makes a great biopic and whatever historical inaccuracies lie within be damned. Director Jay Roach, writer John McNamara and an ensemble so good it has to be seen to be believed have made, if not the best biopic of the year (that distinction still stays with Steve Jobs for now), then certainly the most enjoyable.
Where I find myself in reviewing Trumbo is trying not to sound monotonous in singing its high praises. Whether you’re interested in a message or not, because there is a good one in there, it’s a film that demands to be seen just on the strength of the cohesiveness that comes from the writing, the acting and (I still can’t believe I’m about to write this about the man who made all three Austin Powers movies) the directing.
I could prattle on endlessly about how overwhelmingly good this cast is, but the names speak for themselves. Bryan Cranston showcases that he is not just the best thing on television, but also a big-screen powerhouse. Helen Mirren, in her inimitable fashion and with beautiful understatement, is a force to be reckoned with, seething venom and self-righteousness. Louis C.K. finally breaks out of his stand-up comic persona to give a truly heartfelt performance played with surprisingly restrained vulnerability. The chemistry between him and Bryan Cranston will no doubt leave you wanting more. And John Goodman… well, it’s John Goodman. He continues to prove that no matter how small a part he has to play, it will stay with you long after you’ve left the theater. Hands down, and these are only four out of a dozen terrific performances, there hasn’t been an ensemble this stunning since L.A. Confidential.
It should also be mentioned that Michael Stuhlbarg, David James Elliott and Dean O’Gorman, who portray Edward G. Robinson, John Wayne and Kirk Douglas respectively, are unquestionably destined to go down as the unsung heroes of Trumbo. Their efforts, not just to imitate but to fully realize these Hollywood stars of a by-gone era, are a further complement to inspired casting and commitment to honoring the lives of the people portrayed on screen.
In short (and well done for making it this far through monotonous and truly well-deserved praise), if you have to see one film this Thanksgiving season that doesn’t star Tom Hardy as England’s notorious Kray brothers, see Trumbo.
The answer is simply, and stolen from another great historical epic, are you not entertained? Film can and should be powerful and informative. It can and should influence our thinking and encourage an emotional response, but above all, it should entertain. Trumbo does all of the above, ticks all the necessary boxes on the list of what makes a great biopic and whatever historical inaccuracies lie within be damned. Director Jay Roach, writer John McNamara and an ensemble so good it has to be seen to be believed have made, if not the best biopic of the year (that distinction still stays with Steve Jobs for now), then certainly the most enjoyable.
Where I find myself in reviewing Trumbo is trying not to sound monotonous in singing its high praises. Whether you’re interested in a message or not, because there is a good one in there, it’s a film that demands to be seen just on the strength of the cohesiveness that comes from the writing, the acting and (I still can’t believe I’m about to write this about the man who made all three Austin Powers movies) the directing.
I could prattle on endlessly about how overwhelmingly good this cast is, but the names speak for themselves. Bryan Cranston showcases that he is not just the best thing on television, but also a big-screen powerhouse. Helen Mirren, in her inimitable fashion and with beautiful understatement, is a force to be reckoned with, seething venom and self-righteousness. Louis C.K. finally breaks out of his stand-up comic persona to give a truly heartfelt performance played with surprisingly restrained vulnerability. The chemistry between him and Bryan Cranston will no doubt leave you wanting more. And John Goodman… well, it’s John Goodman. He continues to prove that no matter how small a part he has to play, it will stay with you long after you’ve left the theater. Hands down, and these are only four out of a dozen terrific performances, there hasn’t been an ensemble this stunning since L.A. Confidential.
It should also be mentioned that Michael Stuhlbarg, David James Elliott and Dean O’Gorman, who portray Edward G. Robinson, John Wayne and Kirk Douglas respectively, are unquestionably destined to go down as the unsung heroes of Trumbo. Their efforts, not just to imitate but to fully realize these Hollywood stars of a by-gone era, are a further complement to inspired casting and commitment to honoring the lives of the people portrayed on screen.
In short (and well done for making it this far through monotonous and truly well-deserved praise), if you have to see one film this Thanksgiving season that doesn’t star Tom Hardy as England’s notorious Kray brothers, see Trumbo.