Search
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Gerald's Game (2017) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
When I first heard about the Stephen King book called Gerald’s Game I was about 16 years old, and it scared the shit out of me! Just the concept and the idea of it happening to you. So I never read the book. In my mind, I had imagined the worst already and did not want to go there.
It was with some trepidation, then, that I stepped into this Netflix production, and may never have done so at all, were it not for some interesting reviews suggesting this was not normal horror fare, but more of a psychological exploration. Carla Gugino I barely knew. I have always liked Bruce Greenwood as an actor, however, so in I plunged…
For the next hour or so I was transfixed! The simplicity of the premise, the economy of the direction, and an innovative way of telling the story visually, had me hooked. It always felt like not a lot of money had been spent, but in a good way – no fancy tricks and gimmicks, just storytelling. And a few well placed shocks to the system that left me gasping out loud! (One moment in particular that had me jump to my feet shouting FFS involuntarily)
It isn’t a horror film in the way that genre has become in the last 20 years. No real jump shocks or manipulation, but some stomach churning moments of discomfort that genuinely disturb and make you want to look away! And all because we are invited to imagine ourselves in this situation. What would we do? How would we feel. And I always felt that was the power of this particular idea.
Psychologically, the notion that we may never truly know anyone, even ourselves, until the very worst happens is a compelling theme. The secrets we hide; the traumas that build our personalities, and just how strong would we be in a survival situation. And that is where this film is at its best. Gugino is never less than believable and occasionally incredible in achieving this. Greenwood is fine, and plays his part, but it is her film, no doubt at all.
Sadly, where this film fails is the last 15 minutes, when inexplicably the entire mood shifts and we find ourselves watching a completely different film, with a different message, and some of the worst backward facing exposition I have even seen! I won’t go into details here for spoilers sake… but, anything good achieved to that point was ruined by the ending.
Perhaps in the book the twist end makes sense this way, somehow. Here it is laughable. So much so that I need to know why they chose to do it? 30 years on from first hearing about it, I am going to be brave and read the book, because I can only believe loyalty to the source material could have led this production to such a preposterous ant-climax.
It was with some trepidation, then, that I stepped into this Netflix production, and may never have done so at all, were it not for some interesting reviews suggesting this was not normal horror fare, but more of a psychological exploration. Carla Gugino I barely knew. I have always liked Bruce Greenwood as an actor, however, so in I plunged…
For the next hour or so I was transfixed! The simplicity of the premise, the economy of the direction, and an innovative way of telling the story visually, had me hooked. It always felt like not a lot of money had been spent, but in a good way – no fancy tricks and gimmicks, just storytelling. And a few well placed shocks to the system that left me gasping out loud! (One moment in particular that had me jump to my feet shouting FFS involuntarily)
It isn’t a horror film in the way that genre has become in the last 20 years. No real jump shocks or manipulation, but some stomach churning moments of discomfort that genuinely disturb and make you want to look away! And all because we are invited to imagine ourselves in this situation. What would we do? How would we feel. And I always felt that was the power of this particular idea.
Psychologically, the notion that we may never truly know anyone, even ourselves, until the very worst happens is a compelling theme. The secrets we hide; the traumas that build our personalities, and just how strong would we be in a survival situation. And that is where this film is at its best. Gugino is never less than believable and occasionally incredible in achieving this. Greenwood is fine, and plays his part, but it is her film, no doubt at all.
Sadly, where this film fails is the last 15 minutes, when inexplicably the entire mood shifts and we find ourselves watching a completely different film, with a different message, and some of the worst backward facing exposition I have even seen! I won’t go into details here for spoilers sake… but, anything good achieved to that point was ruined by the ending.
Perhaps in the book the twist end makes sense this way, somehow. Here it is laughable. So much so that I need to know why they chose to do it? 30 years on from first hearing about it, I am going to be brave and read the book, because I can only believe loyalty to the source material could have led this production to such a preposterous ant-climax.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated A Star Is Born (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
I don't want you all to think I'm harsh here. "Only three and a half stars?!? What's wrong with this woman?!" This film is immense and the emotion is so real that I was bawling my eyes out, but that doesn't change the fact that I don't feel the need to rewatch this one. And yes, I do feel slightly terrible about that.
The introduction to both characters at the beginning works incredibly well, you get the chaotic and drunken nature of Jackson and I think Ally really sums up how many women and men feel about men that are in their lives.
When singing was involved with the two of them together their chemistry was undeniable. But the rest of the time I didn't particularly enjoy them. The story was still flowing well and the subject matter was being handled well, but I think the awkwardness of the situations was probably a little too real for me.
Lady Gaga, is just incredible. As a singer. As an actress. She's just marvelous. Her voice gives me goosebumps and I love that feeling.
The supporting cast were really good too. Her father's driver buddies offer some humour during the film, and Greg Grunberg as Jackson's drive is just adorable. By far my favourite was Dave Chappelle, I've loved him ever since Robin Hood: Men In Tights, this was a real step away from everything I've seen him in and it worked so well.
Sound was used incredibly well in this film, and not just for the songs. All the little touches that were used really helped get the message of the scene across.
On that note I will just give a brief mention the events at the end of the film. What transpires is really raw, and you can feel every emotion that's flying around. I always keep a notepad with me to scribble words to remind me of certain things to add to my reviews... all I wrote at the end of of this was "f****** dog"... it really got to me... and yep, there go the waterworks again!
What should you do?
You should see it, plain and simple. This film will stay with you. You will hum and sing the songs. 95% of you are going to cry whether you liked it or not.
As I left the cinema the night I watched this I sat in my car and looked at the clock. It was just 10pm and normally on a "school" night I'd go straight home to bed, but I knew I couldn't. I needed chocolate. I never need anything at this time of night apart from sleep on a normal night. I drove to Tesco to go shopping and then sat in bed eating chocolate buttons. It helped.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I would love Lady Gaga's voice, or just a smidgen of her talent.
The introduction to both characters at the beginning works incredibly well, you get the chaotic and drunken nature of Jackson and I think Ally really sums up how many women and men feel about men that are in their lives.
When singing was involved with the two of them together their chemistry was undeniable. But the rest of the time I didn't particularly enjoy them. The story was still flowing well and the subject matter was being handled well, but I think the awkwardness of the situations was probably a little too real for me.
Lady Gaga, is just incredible. As a singer. As an actress. She's just marvelous. Her voice gives me goosebumps and I love that feeling.
The supporting cast were really good too. Her father's driver buddies offer some humour during the film, and Greg Grunberg as Jackson's drive is just adorable. By far my favourite was Dave Chappelle, I've loved him ever since Robin Hood: Men In Tights, this was a real step away from everything I've seen him in and it worked so well.
Sound was used incredibly well in this film, and not just for the songs. All the little touches that were used really helped get the message of the scene across.
On that note I will just give a brief mention the events at the end of the film. What transpires is really raw, and you can feel every emotion that's flying around. I always keep a notepad with me to scribble words to remind me of certain things to add to my reviews... all I wrote at the end of of this was "f****** dog"... it really got to me... and yep, there go the waterworks again!
What should you do?
You should see it, plain and simple. This film will stay with you. You will hum and sing the songs. 95% of you are going to cry whether you liked it or not.
As I left the cinema the night I watched this I sat in my car and looked at the clock. It was just 10pm and normally on a "school" night I'd go straight home to bed, but I knew I couldn't. I needed chocolate. I never need anything at this time of night apart from sleep on a normal night. I drove to Tesco to go shopping and then sat in bed eating chocolate buttons. It helped.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I would love Lady Gaga's voice, or just a smidgen of her talent.
HerCrazyReviews (247 KP) rated Aladdin (2019) in Movies
Aug 27, 2019
Not As Bad As People Say
Going into this film I didn’t have high expectations. I had read some quick reviews and after watching the trailer when it was released it seemed to me like this film was not going to do well. However, it managed to surprise me. I will admit the first half of the film while being okay didn’t have my constant attention or enthusiasm. This changed when “Prince Ali” entered Agrabah and was introduced to Princess Jasmine. I loved how awkward Aladdin was and I could not stop laughing. From there on the movie just seemed to get better and better. (Maybe because the action/plot was picking up?)
One of the things I enjoyed the most was the fact that we get to see a lot more bonding happening between Jasmine and Aladdin. In the original film we get to see them connect mostly through the ‘Whole New World’ scene. What I thoroughly enjoyed about this film is that we get to see them courting and interacting more. “Prince Ali” is trying to make up for his failure of a first impression and is trying to open himself up to Jasmine. I loved that they decided it was important to include extra scenes like this because they do fall fast for one another and this makes their love seem all the more realistic.
Regarding the cast, when I first heard that Will Smith would be playing Genie I wasn’t a huge fan. When I first saw him in the trailer my initial impression was not a good one and while it took a little getting use too I now think he plays a wonderful Genie. While Robin Williams will always be my number one when it comes to Genie he (for obvious reasons) was not available for this remake and Will Smith did a wonderful job following in his footsteps. I feel like the main criticism this movie is receiving is the way Will Smith acts as the Genie and I will admit it isn’t the same but they are two different people with different directors. Of course they are going to act differently!
While it may not be one of my favorite movies I do not necessarily think it is as bad as most people are making it out to be. I do think it could have been better as the green screen in some parts wasn’t great. I feel like they definitely could have done better here but maybe the budget was limited? For the most part I felt like the CGI was standard but not standout in any way. I know some people are upset about changes made but while Disney was remaking their own movie it is good to change up some things as what is the point in watching if it is the exact same script? Overall, it was okay. Simply that. Nothing more or less.
One of the things I enjoyed the most was the fact that we get to see a lot more bonding happening between Jasmine and Aladdin. In the original film we get to see them connect mostly through the ‘Whole New World’ scene. What I thoroughly enjoyed about this film is that we get to see them courting and interacting more. “Prince Ali” is trying to make up for his failure of a first impression and is trying to open himself up to Jasmine. I loved that they decided it was important to include extra scenes like this because they do fall fast for one another and this makes their love seem all the more realistic.
Regarding the cast, when I first heard that Will Smith would be playing Genie I wasn’t a huge fan. When I first saw him in the trailer my initial impression was not a good one and while it took a little getting use too I now think he plays a wonderful Genie. While Robin Williams will always be my number one when it comes to Genie he (for obvious reasons) was not available for this remake and Will Smith did a wonderful job following in his footsteps. I feel like the main criticism this movie is receiving is the way Will Smith acts as the Genie and I will admit it isn’t the same but they are two different people with different directors. Of course they are going to act differently!
While it may not be one of my favorite movies I do not necessarily think it is as bad as most people are making it out to be. I do think it could have been better as the green screen in some parts wasn’t great. I feel like they definitely could have done better here but maybe the budget was limited? For the most part I felt like the CGI was standard but not standout in any way. I know some people are upset about changes made but while Disney was remaking their own movie it is good to change up some things as what is the point in watching if it is the exact same script? Overall, it was okay. Simply that. Nothing more or less.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Hangover Part III (2013) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
When “The Hangover” came out in 2009 it did so with modest expectations. Few critics expected it to become a box office smash much less the highest grossing R rated comedy of its time. Naturally a sequel followed and despite mixed reviews, “The Hangover 2” reaped in millions and vaulted over the original in terms of earnings. So, it was no surprise when “The Hangover 3” was announced and that the cast and writer/director Todd Phillips would be back again for the further adventures of The Wolfpack.
The films starts with dysfunctional Alan (Zach Galifianakis), creating a spectacular mess and being his usual spoiled and oblivious self though the consequences which have tragic ramifications. His friends Stu (Ed Helms), Phil (Bradley Cooper), and Doug (Justin Bartha), decide that an intervention is needed and convince a reluctant Alan to get some help from a clinic in Arizona.
En route, the group is run off the road which results in Doug being held hostage by a criminal (John Goodman) who wants to use the group to bring in insane criminal Leslie Chow (ken Jeong). The group is told they have three days to find Chow and save Doug. It turns out Alan is the only one to have any contact with Chow since he was incarcerated. The guys soon find themselves in Tijuana hatching a desperate attempt to capture and return the demented Chow.
Naturally things do not go as planned and despite their best intentions the group only makes matters worse and sets a chain of events into action which bring them full circle in a race against time to save Doug.
This time out the film has ramped down the gross out humor of the first films aside for one epic scene following the credits. The film has some chuckles along the way but lacks the jaw dropping shock humor that defined the previous films. I spent the majority of the film enjoying the cast but waiting for the big comedic payoff to arrive which sadly did not come until the after-credits scene.
The cast works well with the material but it does seem like they have run out of ideas and are going through the motions. The addition of Melissa McCarthy does add some nice moments to the film and does leave open some ideas should they decide to continue the series despite promising that this is the conclusion. In the end it is a nice enough diversion but for me was neither as enjoyable nor memorable as the previous efforts.
http://sknr.net/2013/05/24/the-hangover-iii/
The films starts with dysfunctional Alan (Zach Galifianakis), creating a spectacular mess and being his usual spoiled and oblivious self though the consequences which have tragic ramifications. His friends Stu (Ed Helms), Phil (Bradley Cooper), and Doug (Justin Bartha), decide that an intervention is needed and convince a reluctant Alan to get some help from a clinic in Arizona.
En route, the group is run off the road which results in Doug being held hostage by a criminal (John Goodman) who wants to use the group to bring in insane criminal Leslie Chow (ken Jeong). The group is told they have three days to find Chow and save Doug. It turns out Alan is the only one to have any contact with Chow since he was incarcerated. The guys soon find themselves in Tijuana hatching a desperate attempt to capture and return the demented Chow.
Naturally things do not go as planned and despite their best intentions the group only makes matters worse and sets a chain of events into action which bring them full circle in a race against time to save Doug.
This time out the film has ramped down the gross out humor of the first films aside for one epic scene following the credits. The film has some chuckles along the way but lacks the jaw dropping shock humor that defined the previous films. I spent the majority of the film enjoying the cast but waiting for the big comedic payoff to arrive which sadly did not come until the after-credits scene.
The cast works well with the material but it does seem like they have run out of ideas and are going through the motions. The addition of Melissa McCarthy does add some nice moments to the film and does leave open some ideas should they decide to continue the series despite promising that this is the conclusion. In the end it is a nice enough diversion but for me was neither as enjoyable nor memorable as the previous efforts.
http://sknr.net/2013/05/24/the-hangover-iii/
BookblogbyCari (345 KP) rated A Whole New World in Books
Sep 23, 2018
Book Review by Cari Mayhew. Rating 7/10.
This book is a much darker retelling of Disney’s Aladdin, and is the first in a series of darker Disney retellings! It starts off pretty much the same as the film – Princess Jasmine meets petty thief “Street Rat” Aladdin while sneaking out of the Palace, and later the conniving Jafar tricks Aladdin into obtaining the lamp - but things go a whole lot worse once Jafar gets hold of it!
Jafar wishes himself to be made the Sultan, and the most powerful sorcerer of the world. But that’s not enough – Jafar seeks to break the genie’s rules of magic, in order to bring the dead back to life to raise an army of the undead! Jafar kills the former Sultan and declares he wants to wed Princess Jasmine, who, meanwhile, meets up with the Street Rats to lead a full-on rebellion. They attempt to intercept the delivery of magic book sought by Jafar, but things don’t go according to plan!
Braswell imitates the original Disney tale for the first third of the book and really fleshes it out with scene description and attention to Aladdin’s and Jasmine’s thoughts. Some of these scenes are different, yet the first half remains very true to the original. After this point the action really heats up!
The genie took a less prominent role in the latter part of the book than he did in the film. The inclusion of more minor characters added a depth to the novel that was missing in the film, and allowed the underlying themes to develop. There was a strong theme on the grey area between right and wrong, and how doing a minor wrong can help the greater good.
Fortunately (IMO) the book didn’t include the lyrics to the musical numbers! Unfortunately, however, the book is only available in paperback. Some of the story was predictable, including how it ended, but there was the odd surprise in there - all in all, I feel this book has got the Twisted Tales series off to a great start!
You can follow all my book news and reviews on bookblogbycari.com
This book is a much darker retelling of Disney’s Aladdin, and is the first in a series of darker Disney retellings! It starts off pretty much the same as the film – Princess Jasmine meets petty thief “Street Rat” Aladdin while sneaking out of the Palace, and later the conniving Jafar tricks Aladdin into obtaining the lamp - but things go a whole lot worse once Jafar gets hold of it!
Jafar wishes himself to be made the Sultan, and the most powerful sorcerer of the world. But that’s not enough – Jafar seeks to break the genie’s rules of magic, in order to bring the dead back to life to raise an army of the undead! Jafar kills the former Sultan and declares he wants to wed Princess Jasmine, who, meanwhile, meets up with the Street Rats to lead a full-on rebellion. They attempt to intercept the delivery of magic book sought by Jafar, but things don’t go according to plan!
Braswell imitates the original Disney tale for the first third of the book and really fleshes it out with scene description and attention to Aladdin’s and Jasmine’s thoughts. Some of these scenes are different, yet the first half remains very true to the original. After this point the action really heats up!
The genie took a less prominent role in the latter part of the book than he did in the film. The inclusion of more minor characters added a depth to the novel that was missing in the film, and allowed the underlying themes to develop. There was a strong theme on the grey area between right and wrong, and how doing a minor wrong can help the greater good.
Fortunately (IMO) the book didn’t include the lyrics to the musical numbers! Unfortunately, however, the book is only available in paperback. Some of the story was predictable, including how it ended, but there was the odd surprise in there - all in all, I feel this book has got the Twisted Tales series off to a great start!
You can follow all my book news and reviews on bookblogbycari.com
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012) in Movies
Feb 10, 2020
I firmly believe that this is one of the best movies on the face of the planet. Anyone who knows me and knows my reviews knows how much it bothers me when film adaptations are so bad or so off or they just lose everything the book had. The exact opposite happens here. I think what makes this movie so good and so well put together is that it's still Stephen's story. He wrote the book, then the screenplay, then he directed it so it was his entire vision coming to life on screen and it worked. I think if anyone else would've directed or wrote the script, it wouldn't have translated so well.
Additionally, this cast is phenomenal. Logan Lerman, Emma Watson, Ezra Miller, Nina Dobrev, Mae Whitman, Kate Walsh, Paul Rudd, it just works. There are some parts from the book that didn't make it to the screen and that definitely bummed me out - I wish we could've seen Bill and Charlie's relationship more because it was really important in the book and it provided a lot for Charlie in terms of safety and comfort. I also wish some of the lines were verbatim. When Sam gets mad at Charlie after truth or dare, in the book she says, "what the fuck is wrong with you?" while in the movie she says, "what the hell is wrong with you?" I know that it's not a huge difference but I think that would've landed so much better. Also when Charlie defends Patrick. In the book, he says, "If you ever do this again, I'll tell everyone and I'll tell everyone for real. If you come after him again, I'll blind you." or something along those lines and I think that would've been great, especially with how low and solid Logan gave the line in the film. Just small things like that, I wish would've made it to screen.
Regardless, this film and this story are incredible and worth watching at least once for everyone. The same goes for the book. A must-read.
Additionally, this cast is phenomenal. Logan Lerman, Emma Watson, Ezra Miller, Nina Dobrev, Mae Whitman, Kate Walsh, Paul Rudd, it just works. There are some parts from the book that didn't make it to the screen and that definitely bummed me out - I wish we could've seen Bill and Charlie's relationship more because it was really important in the book and it provided a lot for Charlie in terms of safety and comfort. I also wish some of the lines were verbatim. When Sam gets mad at Charlie after truth or dare, in the book she says, "what the fuck is wrong with you?" while in the movie she says, "what the hell is wrong with you?" I know that it's not a huge difference but I think that would've landed so much better. Also when Charlie defends Patrick. In the book, he says, "If you ever do this again, I'll tell everyone and I'll tell everyone for real. If you come after him again, I'll blind you." or something along those lines and I think that would've been great, especially with how low and solid Logan gave the line in the film. Just small things like that, I wish would've made it to screen.
Regardless, this film and this story are incredible and worth watching at least once for everyone. The same goes for the book. A must-read.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Uncut Gems (2019) in Movies
Mar 2, 2020 (Updated Mar 3, 2020)
I despised this film so much, I can barely bring myself to look at Adam Sandler’s face ever again! I mean, I hated everything about it. Half a day after seeing it I am still feeling somewhat nauseous, and full of disbelief that it has been subject to such attention and favourable reviews.
Objectively, it isn’t a badly made film; it has a consistent visual and tonal style, and at least the semblance of a structure that drives towards a conclusion that makes sense. It is just that it is a nasty piece of work, about awful people in an awful world, doing awful things, presented as though that is somehow edgy and cool, rather than crass and offensive.
Not since Whiplash has a film felt so much like a heart-attack, such is the dizzying, unrelenting pace. If it is designed to unnerve then it accomplishes that in spades, but unlike Whiplash it is not a pleasant experience to be forced to feel that way for 2 hours in the presence of this despicable character. It lacks any kind of grace or empathy, replacing clever, tight dialogue with loud, grating rants that make you feel physically sick.
Much has been made by Netflix of publicising this as an awards worthy work, with Sandler at the centre of attention. And many have wondered why it has been shunned by every major awards, in every category. That is no mystery to me, because when you strip away the bling it is almost totally devoid of value or meaning. It is just about an arsehole being an arsehole, surrounded by arseholes, chasing something no one cares about but them.
Screaming and saying “fuck” a lot in every single scene does not constitute acting. It constitutes an annoying headache! This is not the Sandler of Punch Drunk Love or Reign Over Me, where he does demonstrate some skill, but the Sandler of his worst macho and misogynistic tendencies. Take my word for it and avoid this piece of trash at all costs. Life is too short. The only reason I am not giving this 1/10 is that it did have the power to offend me – insipid it isn’t, repugnant it surely is.
Objectively, it isn’t a badly made film; it has a consistent visual and tonal style, and at least the semblance of a structure that drives towards a conclusion that makes sense. It is just that it is a nasty piece of work, about awful people in an awful world, doing awful things, presented as though that is somehow edgy and cool, rather than crass and offensive.
Not since Whiplash has a film felt so much like a heart-attack, such is the dizzying, unrelenting pace. If it is designed to unnerve then it accomplishes that in spades, but unlike Whiplash it is not a pleasant experience to be forced to feel that way for 2 hours in the presence of this despicable character. It lacks any kind of grace or empathy, replacing clever, tight dialogue with loud, grating rants that make you feel physically sick.
Much has been made by Netflix of publicising this as an awards worthy work, with Sandler at the centre of attention. And many have wondered why it has been shunned by every major awards, in every category. That is no mystery to me, because when you strip away the bling it is almost totally devoid of value or meaning. It is just about an arsehole being an arsehole, surrounded by arseholes, chasing something no one cares about but them.
Screaming and saying “fuck” a lot in every single scene does not constitute acting. It constitutes an annoying headache! This is not the Sandler of Punch Drunk Love or Reign Over Me, where he does demonstrate some skill, but the Sandler of his worst macho and misogynistic tendencies. Take my word for it and avoid this piece of trash at all costs. Life is too short. The only reason I am not giving this 1/10 is that it did have the power to offend me – insipid it isn’t, repugnant it surely is.
T.V. for iPad
Reference
App
The simplest, easiest to use TV guide for your iPhone and iPad. See a customized schedule for any...
Steph Freeman (26 KP) rated The Shape of Water (2017) in Movies
Mar 5, 2018
Cinematography was excellent. (1 more)
Character development was perfect, not a lot of detail but enough to fall into their lives.
The Shape of Water - Visually Stunning
The Shape of Water, as discussed in other reviews, follows Eliza Esposito through a snapshot of her life. She has a clear love of water from the beginning, bordering on a fetish, and she connects with few people due to her mutism. The people around her are flawed. Her neighbor is fighting through a new advertising world that no longer values true artwork, her coworker Zelda has a painful home life with a husband that won't participate. Even the characters that are not part of Eliza's life have their struggles depicted within this movie. We see snapshots, just enough to understand these people are flawed, their lives are flawed, their relationships are flawed. Everyone in this movie is struggling towards a goal, though Eliza is the clear focus.
The cinematography reflects the 60's, from the lighting, to the sets and even how the cameras move with the characters. It's a world that engulfs the viewer, suspension of disbelief is a guarantee. The majority of the film is shot in drab, dark colors to reflect the loneliness of the characters, and the fear of the era. It's extremely effective at creating the unspoken sense of unease the country would have felt during the height of the communist scare.
As the movie moves towards the conclusion it becomes more fairy tale than reality. It was still beautiful, and the story still riveting, however, the transition to the more fantastic style was abrupt and could have been handled with more grace. I did appreciate the open ended conclusion, it's rare in American cinema to see, as most American film-goers prefer the ending tied up in a pretty bow.
The cinematography reflects the 60's, from the lighting, to the sets and even how the cameras move with the characters. It's a world that engulfs the viewer, suspension of disbelief is a guarantee. The majority of the film is shot in drab, dark colors to reflect the loneliness of the characters, and the fear of the era. It's extremely effective at creating the unspoken sense of unease the country would have felt during the height of the communist scare.
As the movie moves towards the conclusion it becomes more fairy tale than reality. It was still beautiful, and the story still riveting, however, the transition to the more fantastic style was abrupt and could have been handled with more grace. I did appreciate the open ended conclusion, it's rare in American cinema to see, as most American film-goers prefer the ending tied up in a pretty bow.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Upgrade (2018) in Movies
Aug 16, 2019
Robocop meets All of Me?
I found this film in a bargain bin at my local video shop for only $1 to purchase and after reading many good reviews I thought I couldn't go wrong and I was right.
Maybe a sci-fi/horror version of "The Six Million Dollar Man" is more appropriate.
In the future, a man and his wife have a car accident. Afterwards the woman is murdered and the man is shot leaving him paralyzed. Rather than living life with a severe handicap, the man decides to undergo an experimental medical procedure which would give him augmented abilities through the implantation of a mysterious computer chip which would control his ability to walk and use his arms.
Once he is back to "normal" he feels compelled to investigate the circumstances of his wife's death and hunt down those responsible. His ability start to manifest themselves once he is interacting with his new friend STEM.
His quest for vengeance and justice leads him through some interesting twists and turns before its unexpected conclusion.
This films pulls no punches (literally) and some of the fight scenes are not only well choreographed, but downright vicious and gory. The inaction between the main character and his mind are cool and unexpected. Even though you feel like you have seen this before in other movies, this one takes a fresh spin and keeps you guessing the majority of the time.
It appears writer/director Leigh Whannell (who also wrote the original Saw) is headed for great things probably because of this film as IMDb lists remakes of The Invisible Man and Escape From New York as his next projects.
Maybe a sci-fi/horror version of "The Six Million Dollar Man" is more appropriate.
In the future, a man and his wife have a car accident. Afterwards the woman is murdered and the man is shot leaving him paralyzed. Rather than living life with a severe handicap, the man decides to undergo an experimental medical procedure which would give him augmented abilities through the implantation of a mysterious computer chip which would control his ability to walk and use his arms.
Once he is back to "normal" he feels compelled to investigate the circumstances of his wife's death and hunt down those responsible. His ability start to manifest themselves once he is interacting with his new friend STEM.
His quest for vengeance and justice leads him through some interesting twists and turns before its unexpected conclusion.
This films pulls no punches (literally) and some of the fight scenes are not only well choreographed, but downright vicious and gory. The inaction between the main character and his mind are cool and unexpected. Even though you feel like you have seen this before in other movies, this one takes a fresh spin and keeps you guessing the majority of the time.
It appears writer/director Leigh Whannell (who also wrote the original Saw) is headed for great things probably because of this film as IMDb lists remakes of The Invisible Man and Escape From New York as his next projects.
