Search
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Get Out (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“It really doesn’t matter if you’re ‘Black or White”.
Due to a mixture of holiday, work commitments and sickness (I would not wish to inflict my bronchial cough on ANY cinema audience for a while) I haven’t been to the cinema in over a month… shocking. But it has given me a chance to catch up on some of the films in 2017 (and a few from last year) that I hadn’t got to see. So this will be the first of a series of such “DVD” reviews.
“Get Out” was written and directed by Jordan Peele and was his directorial debut. And a hot item on his resume it is too.
Daniel Kaluuya (“Sicario”) plays African-American Chris Washington who, nervously, takes a trip ‘upstate’ to meet the parents of his cute white girlfriend Rose (Allison Williams). The parents, Dean (Bradley Whitford, best known as Josh Lyman from “The West Wing”) and Missy (Catherine Keener, “ Captain Phillips”), are extremely welcoming.
But the weekend coincides with an “annual gathering” of family and friends, and events quickly take a left turn into “The Twilight Zone”, with anti-smoking hypnosis and a bizarre game of Bingo where the win is so substantial that playing becomes a ‘no brainer’. Can Chris ‘Get Out’, with his mind still intact, before it’s too late?
This is a really clever script by Peele. The film baits you into thinking this is some redneck-inter-racial-revenge flick, but actually the colour of the skin is almost irrelevant. (Or is it? This angle is left deliciously vague). Some of the filming is spectacularly creepy, with the hypnosis scene being reminiscent to me of the excellent “Under The Skin”. And never has a teaspoon in a cup of tea been a more devastating weapon.
I seemed to have talked at length this year in this blog on the subject of the “physics of horror”: the story elements hanging together in a satisfying – albeit sometimes in an unbelievable – way. “Get Out” delivers this to perfection, keeping its powder dry until the closing moments of the film before delivering a series of satisfying “Ah!” relevatory moments.
While the ‘physics’ of the film is good the ‘biology’ is bonkers, featuring a plot point from the terrible first episode of the 3rd season of the original “Star Trek” (if you can be bothered to look that up!). But I’ll forgive this, parking my incredulity, to salute what I think is one of the year’s most novel and impressive low-budget indie horror films.
“Get Out” was written and directed by Jordan Peele and was his directorial debut. And a hot item on his resume it is too.
Daniel Kaluuya (“Sicario”) plays African-American Chris Washington who, nervously, takes a trip ‘upstate’ to meet the parents of his cute white girlfriend Rose (Allison Williams). The parents, Dean (Bradley Whitford, best known as Josh Lyman from “The West Wing”) and Missy (Catherine Keener, “ Captain Phillips”), are extremely welcoming.
But the weekend coincides with an “annual gathering” of family and friends, and events quickly take a left turn into “The Twilight Zone”, with anti-smoking hypnosis and a bizarre game of Bingo where the win is so substantial that playing becomes a ‘no brainer’. Can Chris ‘Get Out’, with his mind still intact, before it’s too late?
This is a really clever script by Peele. The film baits you into thinking this is some redneck-inter-racial-revenge flick, but actually the colour of the skin is almost irrelevant. (Or is it? This angle is left deliciously vague). Some of the filming is spectacularly creepy, with the hypnosis scene being reminiscent to me of the excellent “Under The Skin”. And never has a teaspoon in a cup of tea been a more devastating weapon.
I seemed to have talked at length this year in this blog on the subject of the “physics of horror”: the story elements hanging together in a satisfying – albeit sometimes in an unbelievable – way. “Get Out” delivers this to perfection, keeping its powder dry until the closing moments of the film before delivering a series of satisfying “Ah!” relevatory moments.
While the ‘physics’ of the film is good the ‘biology’ is bonkers, featuring a plot point from the terrible first episode of the 3rd season of the original “Star Trek” (if you can be bothered to look that up!). But I’ll forgive this, parking my incredulity, to salute what I think is one of the year’s most novel and impressive low-budget indie horror films.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Old Guard (2020) in Movies
Aug 27, 2020
Kick Ass Action (2 more)
Good Casting and Supporting Actors/Characters
Cool Concept
The Musical Score/ Soundtrack (3 more)
Some characters were a little cliché
Characters not fully developed or given enough backstory
Dialogue
In With The Old Guard (7/10)
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Old Guard is 2020 action movie directed by Gina Prince-Bythewood and written by Greg Rucka, The film was produced by Skydance Media, Denver and Delilah Productions and Marc Evans Productions and distributed by Netflix. Producers on the movie include David Ellison, Dana Goldberg, Don Granger, Charlize Theron, AJ Dix, Beth Kono and Marc Evans. The film stars Charlize Theron, Kiki Layne, Marwan Kenzari, Luca Marinelli and Matthias Schoenaerts.
Andy (Charlize Theron), and her covert group of tight-knit immortals have fought and protected the mortal world for centuries with their mysterious inability to die. With their extraordinary abilities suddenly exposed on an emergency mission, the group finds themselves hunted by those who will stop at nothing to replicate their power. Nile (Kiki Layne), the newest soldier, joins their ranks, to help the group eliminate the threat and avoid capture as they find out who's found them.
This move was pretty bad ass. I liked it quite a bit. Charlize Theron definitely kicks ass as Andy in this flick and has a bunch of really cool action sequences throughout the film. The supporting cast was really good as well. I hadn't heard of the graphic novel or comic that it was based off of by the film's writer Greg Rucka but now I really want to check it out because the backstory they give the characters and their actions seem really cool. Now I know a lot of people give the whole girl power thing bad energy online and a lot of stuff gets hate and trolls for stuff like that but I dig this film. (examples Captain Marvel, The girl power scene in Endgame, etc...) I definitely got that vibe that the director was a woman without even paying attention to it in the opening credits and that's not a bad thing, just an observation. The way certain things happened in the movie, the soundtrack (which was good but felt like it didn't match) and the two main characters/protagonists are female as well. I think Gina Prince-Bythewood did a great job in mixing in the story and the action in this movie. Of course when coming up with a cool concept like this there always going to be plot holes or things that don't make sense and this movie is no exception, some characters are a little cliché but there acting pretty good and their performances were good but the dialogue definitely suffered from the writing. There was some weird lines in there and some scenes that just kind of faltered. The villain wasn't that memorable and the film had some slow places, not that pacing was off but maybe dragged on a little too long. I think this movie was still great good though and if you're looking for a good action flick to check out you should definitely give it a try, I give it a 7/10.
Spoiler Section Review:
Man, I have seen this movie getting ripped on reviews online and a lot of it is actually on the soundtrack. Now I understand completely, to me the song choices were off for the mood or tone of the film from the beginning but I saw what "they" were going for because all the songs had a similar theme which was connected by women. It was one of the reasons I felt like the movie was directed by a woman before I looked it up. Now I didn't hate the music, I actually liked some of the songs but for some people I can understand how it distracts, how it lessens in a way the impact of the cinematography and graphic violence of the film. Also the plot holes and logic when it comes to cool concept like the one for this movie. Like when they heal, the bullets get pushed out of their body, but what about Andy's earrings? That's literally the only example of plot holes I've found in other reviews, but every review hating on it says that. Other people hated on it's "woke politics" whatever that means and cheap and lacking in most places. I'll admit that they dropped the ball on putting in decent enough backstory for the characters who were supposed to have live for hundreds of years. You would think they would have some good flashback scenes but they only show a couple and some are weird and blurry sometimes. They just really dropped the ball on developing the characters more or giving you a reason to like them or care about them. They're were the two gay guys but for some people that is a little cliché already because everyone movie is trying to be inclusive now so it comes off as unoriginal. I'll admit that Kiki Layne's performance could be better in certain scenes especially in the beginning some of the girl soldiers didn't seem like "real soldiers" whatever that means, lol. but didn't look the part or act the part. And even at the end her character totally just shifts into kill mode when the whole time she couldn't get over the first person she killed and we're supposed to believe that she believes in the cause the fight for now. I mean she has some good scenes too though. There's just a lot of convenience or hand of god ("deus ex machina") throughout the movie. It's hard for me to give this a higher score when some of the points against it are legitimate but I think some of them are just haters. Anyways I give this movie a 7/10 and I for one personally can't wait for the sequel.
Andy (Charlize Theron), and her covert group of tight-knit immortals have fought and protected the mortal world for centuries with their mysterious inability to die. With their extraordinary abilities suddenly exposed on an emergency mission, the group finds themselves hunted by those who will stop at nothing to replicate their power. Nile (Kiki Layne), the newest soldier, joins their ranks, to help the group eliminate the threat and avoid capture as they find out who's found them.
This move was pretty bad ass. I liked it quite a bit. Charlize Theron definitely kicks ass as Andy in this flick and has a bunch of really cool action sequences throughout the film. The supporting cast was really good as well. I hadn't heard of the graphic novel or comic that it was based off of by the film's writer Greg Rucka but now I really want to check it out because the backstory they give the characters and their actions seem really cool. Now I know a lot of people give the whole girl power thing bad energy online and a lot of stuff gets hate and trolls for stuff like that but I dig this film. (examples Captain Marvel, The girl power scene in Endgame, etc...) I definitely got that vibe that the director was a woman without even paying attention to it in the opening credits and that's not a bad thing, just an observation. The way certain things happened in the movie, the soundtrack (which was good but felt like it didn't match) and the two main characters/protagonists are female as well. I think Gina Prince-Bythewood did a great job in mixing in the story and the action in this movie. Of course when coming up with a cool concept like this there always going to be plot holes or things that don't make sense and this movie is no exception, some characters are a little cliché but there acting pretty good and their performances were good but the dialogue definitely suffered from the writing. There was some weird lines in there and some scenes that just kind of faltered. The villain wasn't that memorable and the film had some slow places, not that pacing was off but maybe dragged on a little too long. I think this movie was still great good though and if you're looking for a good action flick to check out you should definitely give it a try, I give it a 7/10.
Spoiler Section Review:
Man, I have seen this movie getting ripped on reviews online and a lot of it is actually on the soundtrack. Now I understand completely, to me the song choices were off for the mood or tone of the film from the beginning but I saw what "they" were going for because all the songs had a similar theme which was connected by women. It was one of the reasons I felt like the movie was directed by a woman before I looked it up. Now I didn't hate the music, I actually liked some of the songs but for some people I can understand how it distracts, how it lessens in a way the impact of the cinematography and graphic violence of the film. Also the plot holes and logic when it comes to cool concept like the one for this movie. Like when they heal, the bullets get pushed out of their body, but what about Andy's earrings? That's literally the only example of plot holes I've found in other reviews, but every review hating on it says that. Other people hated on it's "woke politics" whatever that means and cheap and lacking in most places. I'll admit that they dropped the ball on putting in decent enough backstory for the characters who were supposed to have live for hundreds of years. You would think they would have some good flashback scenes but they only show a couple and some are weird and blurry sometimes. They just really dropped the ball on developing the characters more or giving you a reason to like them or care about them. They're were the two gay guys but for some people that is a little cliché already because everyone movie is trying to be inclusive now so it comes off as unoriginal. I'll admit that Kiki Layne's performance could be better in certain scenes especially in the beginning some of the girl soldiers didn't seem like "real soldiers" whatever that means, lol. but didn't look the part or act the part. And even at the end her character totally just shifts into kill mode when the whole time she couldn't get over the first person she killed and we're supposed to believe that she believes in the cause the fight for now. I mean she has some good scenes too though. There's just a lot of convenience or hand of god ("deus ex machina") throughout the movie. It's hard for me to give this a higher score when some of the points against it are legitimate but I think some of them are just haters. Anyways I give this movie a 7/10 and I for one personally can't wait for the sequel.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated BlacKkKlansman (2018) in Movies
Oct 1, 2018 (Updated Oct 2, 2018)
Brilliant performances by the entire cast (1 more)
Funny, while still being relevant and sending a serious message
Spike Lee's Best In Years
BlackkKlansman released while I was on holiday, so after playing a bit of catchup at my local cinema, I eventually got around to seeing this film that I was looking forward to ever since seeing the first trailer for it. It lived up to my expectations and I really enjoyed it. Also, just a heads up; I usually don't like to get political in movie reviews, but I feel that with a film as politically charged as this one, it makes it inevitable to get around, so there may be some stuff in here that you disagree with.
The movie worked in several different ways, it definitely worked as a comedy and had me laughing raucously at certain points and then it would drop an important and relevant point on you and suddenly things wouldn't seem so funny any more. All of a sudden, these laughably ignorant racists suddenly became a very real threat, which I don't think was an accident in paralleling how Lee feels about a good amount of modern day Americans like Donald Trump. Remember when he first announced that he was running for office and everybody, (including the current president at that time,) laughed at him? Now he is the most powerful man in the world and poses a very real threat to minorities in the US. I thought that this was a very clever, subtle way to take a shot without being too blatant.
Then there was a slightly more obvious shot at him when characters are discussing a man filled with hate potentially working his way into power and getting the majority of the American public on his side and how awful that would be. Although this particular dig is way more obvious, it still didn't bother me too much and I accepted it as a filmmaker using his platform to send a message to someone that he morally disagrees with.
The final dig was a step too far for me. During a phone conversation between David Duke and Ron Stallworth, Duke says something about getting rid of non-whites to "make America great again." It was so heavy handed that the characters onscreen might as well have turned around and winked at the camera. Please don't get me wrong, I think that Donald Trump is a scumbag and am totally fine with Lee taking a couple of shots at him, but I much preferred the more subtle undertones that he sent his way earlier in the film to this blatantly obvious, slightly cringey callout.
I did enjoy Lee's references to Blaxploitation films of the 70's and I liked the whole aesthetic that this movie had. The score was brilliant and the cast did a great job, the performance that stayed with me the most after the film, was Corey Hawkins monologue as Kwame Ture. He only appears in one scene in the film, but his speech, (in which I felt he strongly channelled Denzel,) was mesmerising and electrifying to watch.
The way that Spike Lee chose to end this movie has stirred some controversy, but I found it to be incredibly powerful and moving. It really sent home the message that this kind of intense, despicable hatred isn't just something that was around in the 70's and 80's, it is something that is still sadly prevalent and happening in today's society and we have people in power, like Trump, who is willing to defend and stand by these people and their violent, hateful behaviour. It was also a fitting tribute to Heather Heyer who was killed when a car crashed into a crowd of people who had been peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia one-year prior to this film's release.
Overall, this is a funny, entertaining, uncomfortable and anger-inducing film and all of these emotion are equally relevant. I also feel that this movie does exactly what it intends to on a moral level, whether you agree with the ideals portrayed or not, Lee does a terrific job in turning a period piece movie into a painfully relevant message for modern audiences.
The movie worked in several different ways, it definitely worked as a comedy and had me laughing raucously at certain points and then it would drop an important and relevant point on you and suddenly things wouldn't seem so funny any more. All of a sudden, these laughably ignorant racists suddenly became a very real threat, which I don't think was an accident in paralleling how Lee feels about a good amount of modern day Americans like Donald Trump. Remember when he first announced that he was running for office and everybody, (including the current president at that time,) laughed at him? Now he is the most powerful man in the world and poses a very real threat to minorities in the US. I thought that this was a very clever, subtle way to take a shot without being too blatant.
Then there was a slightly more obvious shot at him when characters are discussing a man filled with hate potentially working his way into power and getting the majority of the American public on his side and how awful that would be. Although this particular dig is way more obvious, it still didn't bother me too much and I accepted it as a filmmaker using his platform to send a message to someone that he morally disagrees with.
The final dig was a step too far for me. During a phone conversation between David Duke and Ron Stallworth, Duke says something about getting rid of non-whites to "make America great again." It was so heavy handed that the characters onscreen might as well have turned around and winked at the camera. Please don't get me wrong, I think that Donald Trump is a scumbag and am totally fine with Lee taking a couple of shots at him, but I much preferred the more subtle undertones that he sent his way earlier in the film to this blatantly obvious, slightly cringey callout.
I did enjoy Lee's references to Blaxploitation films of the 70's and I liked the whole aesthetic that this movie had. The score was brilliant and the cast did a great job, the performance that stayed with me the most after the film, was Corey Hawkins monologue as Kwame Ture. He only appears in one scene in the film, but his speech, (in which I felt he strongly channelled Denzel,) was mesmerising and electrifying to watch.
The way that Spike Lee chose to end this movie has stirred some controversy, but I found it to be incredibly powerful and moving. It really sent home the message that this kind of intense, despicable hatred isn't just something that was around in the 70's and 80's, it is something that is still sadly prevalent and happening in today's society and we have people in power, like Trump, who is willing to defend and stand by these people and their violent, hateful behaviour. It was also a fitting tribute to Heather Heyer who was killed when a car crashed into a crowd of people who had been peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia one-year prior to this film's release.
Overall, this is a funny, entertaining, uncomfortable and anger-inducing film and all of these emotion are equally relevant. I also feel that this movie does exactly what it intends to on a moral level, whether you agree with the ideals portrayed or not, Lee does a terrific job in turning a period piece movie into a painfully relevant message for modern audiences.
Darren (1599 KP) rated A Tale of Two Sisters (2003) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: A Tale of Two Sisters starts with Soo-mi Bae in a hospital with a doctor trying to convince her to tell her story. We flashback to when sisters Soo-mi Bae (Lim) and Soo-yeon Bae (Moon) move to the country home owned by their father Moo-hyeon Bae (Kim) and their new stepmother Eun-joo Heo (Yum).
The two sisters don’t like their new stepmother and to make matters worse the two discover that they are being haunted by a spirit, but is the spirit guiding them to uncover a truth or does it have another motive?
A Tale of Two Sisters really makes you wonder what is going on because once the big reveal happens you are left wondering what just happened. Everything is very well created with the suspense building up through the early part of the film and returning to the high level by the end of the film. This story does need a re-watch because you will want to check out everything that is finally reveal.
Actor Review
Kap-su Kim: Moo-hyeon Bae is the father of the family who does seem to end up becoming pretty much a background character to the three female characters. I feel this character falls to the background too much to get a high enough rating.
Jung-ah Yum: Eun-joo Heo is the stepmother of the family who doesn’t seem to like the two girls, she has a past that is hidden but once it gets discovered we see hat she is capable off. I think she makes for a very good menacing performance throughout while looking very normal to her husband.
Su-Jeong Lim: Soo-mi Bae is the eldest of the sisters who always protects her younger sister from the new stepmother, she learns more about the stepmother’s past but has past that ends up helping with the final reveal. This is a good performance showing the fear and the caring side being used throughout.
Geun-young Moon: Soo-Yeon Bae is the younger sister who always looks at her big sister for protection, constantly following her around the house, we learn about why she is being haunted and needing help as the film unfolds. This is good performance that ends up have a big secret.
Support Cast: A Tale of Two Sisters really doesn’t have much of a supporting cast but the very few we have all do what they need to do.
Director Review: Jee-woon Kim – Jee-woon gives us a very good horror that will keep you guessing until the very end where you will be left wonder what did happen.
Horror: A Tale of Two Sisters has real horror moments when they happen that will shock you.
Mystery: A Tale of Two Sisters creates a mystery about what is happening and what is the secret behind the stepmother.
Thriller: A Tale of Two Sisters keeps you guessing to what will happen by the end of the film.
Settings: A Tale of Two Sisters keeps all the action of the film in an isolated country house which adds to the horror because the girls have no where to go or no one to see.
Special Effects: A Tale of Two Sisters uses the effects for the haunting which are the only need for them.
Suggestion: A Tale of Two Sisters is one for the horror fans to try which is don’t go and watch remake first. (Horror Fans Try)
Best Part: Girl at the end of the bed nightmare.
Worst Part: You will need to double check the twist.
Scariest Scene: Girl at the end of the bed.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 55 Minutes
Tagline: Every family has its dark secrets.
Overall: Horror film that is filled with suspense filled scares but a final twist that makes you wonder what really happened.
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/12/25/movie-reviews-101-midnight-horror-a-tale-of-two-sisters-2003/
The two sisters don’t like their new stepmother and to make matters worse the two discover that they are being haunted by a spirit, but is the spirit guiding them to uncover a truth or does it have another motive?
A Tale of Two Sisters really makes you wonder what is going on because once the big reveal happens you are left wondering what just happened. Everything is very well created with the suspense building up through the early part of the film and returning to the high level by the end of the film. This story does need a re-watch because you will want to check out everything that is finally reveal.
Actor Review
Kap-su Kim: Moo-hyeon Bae is the father of the family who does seem to end up becoming pretty much a background character to the three female characters. I feel this character falls to the background too much to get a high enough rating.
Jung-ah Yum: Eun-joo Heo is the stepmother of the family who doesn’t seem to like the two girls, she has a past that is hidden but once it gets discovered we see hat she is capable off. I think she makes for a very good menacing performance throughout while looking very normal to her husband.
Su-Jeong Lim: Soo-mi Bae is the eldest of the sisters who always protects her younger sister from the new stepmother, she learns more about the stepmother’s past but has past that ends up helping with the final reveal. This is a good performance showing the fear and the caring side being used throughout.
Geun-young Moon: Soo-Yeon Bae is the younger sister who always looks at her big sister for protection, constantly following her around the house, we learn about why she is being haunted and needing help as the film unfolds. This is good performance that ends up have a big secret.
Support Cast: A Tale of Two Sisters really doesn’t have much of a supporting cast but the very few we have all do what they need to do.
Director Review: Jee-woon Kim – Jee-woon gives us a very good horror that will keep you guessing until the very end where you will be left wonder what did happen.
Horror: A Tale of Two Sisters has real horror moments when they happen that will shock you.
Mystery: A Tale of Two Sisters creates a mystery about what is happening and what is the secret behind the stepmother.
Thriller: A Tale of Two Sisters keeps you guessing to what will happen by the end of the film.
Settings: A Tale of Two Sisters keeps all the action of the film in an isolated country house which adds to the horror because the girls have no where to go or no one to see.
Special Effects: A Tale of Two Sisters uses the effects for the haunting which are the only need for them.
Suggestion: A Tale of Two Sisters is one for the horror fans to try which is don’t go and watch remake first. (Horror Fans Try)
Best Part: Girl at the end of the bed nightmare.
Worst Part: You will need to double check the twist.
Scariest Scene: Girl at the end of the bed.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 55 Minutes
Tagline: Every family has its dark secrets.
Overall: Horror film that is filled with suspense filled scares but a final twist that makes you wonder what really happened.
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/12/25/movie-reviews-101-midnight-horror-a-tale-of-two-sisters-2003/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters (2013) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
2013 is the year of the fairy-tale and the year of the witch, or so it looks that way from what seems to be a never-ending bombardment of films related to the two age-old topics. This year sees the release of Bryan Singer’s Jack the Giant Slayer as well as Sam Raimi’s Oz: The Great & the Powerful and whilst the latter has opened to mixed reviews, it is Bryan Singer’s effort which really looks like it’ll sparkle.
Sat between these two behemoths is the critical and somewhat commercial failure, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, but is it as bad as the reviews would have you believe? Let’s find out.
The fairy-tale of Hansel & Gretel is as well-known as Jack & the Beanstalk and to some extent the story in the Wizard of Oz, but films of this classic have been limited to low-budget television movies because finding the audience for such a difficult genre is not to be underestimated.
Here however, Tommy Wirkola directs his first English-language film with some degrees of success, though, a few niggling factors stop it from being the success it could’ve been. In a darker tale than perhaps we’re used to with a story such as this, Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton star as Hansel & Gretel respectively and for the most part, fulfil their roles well as they battle numerous dark witches in a plot which never really gets to grips with the genre it is trying to be.
Herein lays the problem, do you direct the fairy-tale genre as a family comedy or as something a little darker? Clearly director Wirkola has had his work cut out to find the balance between the two and the result is confusing, he has ended up with a 15 certificate which mixes comedy with a bloodbath that wouldn’t look out of place in a Quentin Tarantino picture; it really is that over-the-top. The use of swear-words also feels out of place, like they’re there just to shock rather than add anything to the film’s narrative.
Hansel & Gretel have grown up deciding to kill witches after they were left abandoned in the woods by their father. To cut a long story short, they are captured by a witch and forced to work for her; whilst doing this, Hansel develops ‘sugar sickness’ (diabetes) from all the candy he is forced to consume and must inject himself often. After killing said witch, they flee and the story begins; with them being hired to kill witches who have stolen children from a small town to allow them to become immune to fire; their major weakness.
It’s an interesting take on the story and Famke Janssen plays the wicked grand witch brilliantly, she manages to be both endearing and rightly terrifying in the same scene, though this is helped with the prosthetics used to alter her face. The other actors, including the main two are a little uninspired, especially Arterton who looks positively bored with the work she’s been given. In saying that, Renner isn’t much better and the majority of the film suffers as a result. In fact, you’ll probably be rooting for Janssen’s Muriel to succeed in her evil plot.
Thankfully, the special effects are very good, although I was expecting a little more witch-on-witch action, a la Harry Potter. Atli Orvarsson’s score is excellent and a real highlight of the film. The music in the brilliant opening credits is fantastic.
Overall, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters is a solid but uninspiring adaptation of a fairy-tale which was never meant for the big screen. Director Tommy Wirkola has obviously tried very hard to create a film which caters for most palates and whilst the score, special effects and acting from Famke Janssen are all top notch, the confusing mish-mash of genres and hammy acting from Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton stop it being anything more than a forgettable action flick. After all, when your lead characters look like they can’t be bothered, you’ve got a serious problem.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2013/03/02/hansel-gretel-witch-hunters-review-2013/
Sat between these two behemoths is the critical and somewhat commercial failure, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, but is it as bad as the reviews would have you believe? Let’s find out.
The fairy-tale of Hansel & Gretel is as well-known as Jack & the Beanstalk and to some extent the story in the Wizard of Oz, but films of this classic have been limited to low-budget television movies because finding the audience for such a difficult genre is not to be underestimated.
Here however, Tommy Wirkola directs his first English-language film with some degrees of success, though, a few niggling factors stop it from being the success it could’ve been. In a darker tale than perhaps we’re used to with a story such as this, Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton star as Hansel & Gretel respectively and for the most part, fulfil their roles well as they battle numerous dark witches in a plot which never really gets to grips with the genre it is trying to be.
Herein lays the problem, do you direct the fairy-tale genre as a family comedy or as something a little darker? Clearly director Wirkola has had his work cut out to find the balance between the two and the result is confusing, he has ended up with a 15 certificate which mixes comedy with a bloodbath that wouldn’t look out of place in a Quentin Tarantino picture; it really is that over-the-top. The use of swear-words also feels out of place, like they’re there just to shock rather than add anything to the film’s narrative.
Hansel & Gretel have grown up deciding to kill witches after they were left abandoned in the woods by their father. To cut a long story short, they are captured by a witch and forced to work for her; whilst doing this, Hansel develops ‘sugar sickness’ (diabetes) from all the candy he is forced to consume and must inject himself often. After killing said witch, they flee and the story begins; with them being hired to kill witches who have stolen children from a small town to allow them to become immune to fire; their major weakness.
It’s an interesting take on the story and Famke Janssen plays the wicked grand witch brilliantly, she manages to be both endearing and rightly terrifying in the same scene, though this is helped with the prosthetics used to alter her face. The other actors, including the main two are a little uninspired, especially Arterton who looks positively bored with the work she’s been given. In saying that, Renner isn’t much better and the majority of the film suffers as a result. In fact, you’ll probably be rooting for Janssen’s Muriel to succeed in her evil plot.
Thankfully, the special effects are very good, although I was expecting a little more witch-on-witch action, a la Harry Potter. Atli Orvarsson’s score is excellent and a real highlight of the film. The music in the brilliant opening credits is fantastic.
Overall, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters is a solid but uninspiring adaptation of a fairy-tale which was never meant for the big screen. Director Tommy Wirkola has obviously tried very hard to create a film which caters for most palates and whilst the score, special effects and acting from Famke Janssen are all top notch, the confusing mish-mash of genres and hammy acting from Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton stop it being anything more than a forgettable action flick. After all, when your lead characters look like they can’t be bothered, you’ve got a serious problem.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2013/03/02/hansel-gretel-witch-hunters-review-2013/
Nick Friesen (96 KP) rated Blade Runner (1982) in Movies
Jul 13, 2017
Dark and gorgeous setting (4 more)
Harrison Ford
Thought-provoking premise
That moody Vangelis score
Rutger Hauer
Best in Class Cyberpunk Neo-Noir
Most Sci-Fi fans these days probably rank Blade Runner somewhere in their top five favorites. Its status and influence on Sci-Fi, especially in the Cyberpunk sub-genre, is undeniable. When it was first released in 1982, however, it was not so well appreciated. It was met with polarized reviews and underwhelming domestic box office figures. This was probably due to some misplaced expectations of the movie. The studio erroneously marketed Blade Runner as an action/adventure, and not to mention, Harrison Ford was riding the fame of another Sci-Fi franchise that was much more action-oriented. It's no surprise then, that audiences and critics alike were initially turned off by the slow-burn pacing of detective noir that Blade Runner pulled into a science fiction setting. Today, Blade Runner is a celebrated masterpiece of filmmaking and adored by fans around the world. However, with a sequel coming soon, those new to the franchise might be a little confused due to the existence of multiple versions of the film. Let's clear that up a bit.
Fast-forward ten years to 1992, when the world received the Director's Cut of the film. At the time, Blade Runner had picked up in popularity through video rental and the international market, and the studio was prompted to release an official Director's Cut after an unofficial version was being made available from a workprint. The Director's Cut was the first introduction to Blade Runner for a whole new generation, including myself.
Fast-forward fifteen more years to 2007, when Ridley Scott brought Blade Runner fans his definitive version of the movie, the Final Cut. Blade Runner: The Final Cut was digitally remastered and reworked by Ridley Scott with complete artistic freedom, whereas the Director's Cut was created by the studio without his involvement. This version fixes some technical problems that persisted from the theatrical version to the Director's Cut, and adds back a little story to better fulfill Ridley Scott's original vision for the film.
If you're looking to get into Blade Runner before Blade Runner 2049 hits theatres in October, the Final Cut is probably the best place to start. It offers the most cohesive viewing experience, complete with restored visuals. Believe me when I tell you there is no movie quite like Blade Runner. Watching Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) track down and "retire" replicants on the streets of a dystopian Los Angeles awash in neon signs never ceases to fill me with awe. Rutger Hauer's performance as the main antagonist, Roy Batty, is both chilling and thought-provoking, making viewers question what being human truly means.
Blade Runner is now widely considered to be not just the first example of Cyberpunk in film, but also the best. And for good reason, as every frame is a work of art, and the philosophical questions it first posed 35 years ago are still being debated today. Us die-hard fans can only pray the upcoming sequel doesn't completely obliterate the mystery and pathos of the replicant condition.
Fast-forward ten years to 1992, when the world received the Director's Cut of the film. At the time, Blade Runner had picked up in popularity through video rental and the international market, and the studio was prompted to release an official Director's Cut after an unofficial version was being made available from a workprint. The Director's Cut was the first introduction to Blade Runner for a whole new generation, including myself.
Fast-forward fifteen more years to 2007, when Ridley Scott brought Blade Runner fans his definitive version of the movie, the Final Cut. Blade Runner: The Final Cut was digitally remastered and reworked by Ridley Scott with complete artistic freedom, whereas the Director's Cut was created by the studio without his involvement. This version fixes some technical problems that persisted from the theatrical version to the Director's Cut, and adds back a little story to better fulfill Ridley Scott's original vision for the film.
If you're looking to get into Blade Runner before Blade Runner 2049 hits theatres in October, the Final Cut is probably the best place to start. It offers the most cohesive viewing experience, complete with restored visuals. Believe me when I tell you there is no movie quite like Blade Runner. Watching Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) track down and "retire" replicants on the streets of a dystopian Los Angeles awash in neon signs never ceases to fill me with awe. Rutger Hauer's performance as the main antagonist, Roy Batty, is both chilling and thought-provoking, making viewers question what being human truly means.
Blade Runner is now widely considered to be not just the first example of Cyberpunk in film, but also the best. And for good reason, as every frame is a work of art, and the philosophical questions it first posed 35 years ago are still being debated today. Us die-hard fans can only pray the upcoming sequel doesn't completely obliterate the mystery and pathos of the replicant condition.
Darren (1599 KP) rated A Cure For Wellness (2017) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: A Cure for Wellness starts young executive Lockhart (DeHaan) is sent to a remote wellness centre in Switzerland to bring the CEO Pembroke (Groener) back to help close a merge in New York. After being involved in a car accident Lockhart finds himself with a broken leg and now a patient of the Wellness Program.
Still searching for Pembroke, Lockhart makes a deal with the director Volmer (Issacs) to stay for a couple of days to finish up the treatment for Pembroke. In this time Lockhart meets a mysterious young woman Hannah (Goth) the only other young patient who he tries to unlock the secrets of the program, which will test his own sanity.
Thoughts on A Cure for Wellness
Characters/Performance – Lockhart is the driven ambitious young man who has nearly reach the peak of his career at such a young age, he is haunted by his past which does include his father’s suicide and his mother’s death, this leaves him alone but in search for answers once he becomes the latest patient in the program. Volmer is the director of the clinic, he constantly remains calm through any incidents that occur and does have his own motives for the clinic. Hannah is the mysterious young woman also in the clinic, she is the only young patient there and she is Volmer’s main project but we are left to wonder about her past.
Performance wise, Dane DeHaan is good in this leading role and you can clearly see why he is tipped for a great career. Jason Isaacs always makes for a good doctor figure and this is no exception, while Mia Goth continues to make a name for herself in these stranger roles.
Story – The story is filled with questions which always makes for a good story, I will have to point out that this is a long film nearing the 2 and half hour’s mark and even at that you can see how the pace can be questioned but it doesn’t feel long. We get a new look into the asylum genre which I feel is something we needed but the weakness is that we never hit the full levels of any of the genres involved.
Fantasy/Horror/Mystery – The fantasy elements of this film come from the world we are placed into, this also comes for the sci-fi side of everything too. The horror comes from see what happens within the walls which is quite shocking at times but the best use of the genres comes from the mystery element which keeps us guessing from start to finish as we simply don’t know where it will go.
Settings – With most of the film taking place in the clinic we find ourselves trapped just like Lockhart in a place which doesn’t have an escape because being there means you don’t want to leave.
Final Thoughts – This is one long mystery thriller that doesn’t stop you wanting to see where the film will go and then it will leave you shocked by the end.
Overall: A rewarding mystery thriller
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/06/02/movie-reviews-101-midnight-horror-a-cure-for-wellness-2017/
Still searching for Pembroke, Lockhart makes a deal with the director Volmer (Issacs) to stay for a couple of days to finish up the treatment for Pembroke. In this time Lockhart meets a mysterious young woman Hannah (Goth) the only other young patient who he tries to unlock the secrets of the program, which will test his own sanity.
Thoughts on A Cure for Wellness
Characters/Performance – Lockhart is the driven ambitious young man who has nearly reach the peak of his career at such a young age, he is haunted by his past which does include his father’s suicide and his mother’s death, this leaves him alone but in search for answers once he becomes the latest patient in the program. Volmer is the director of the clinic, he constantly remains calm through any incidents that occur and does have his own motives for the clinic. Hannah is the mysterious young woman also in the clinic, she is the only young patient there and she is Volmer’s main project but we are left to wonder about her past.
Performance wise, Dane DeHaan is good in this leading role and you can clearly see why he is tipped for a great career. Jason Isaacs always makes for a good doctor figure and this is no exception, while Mia Goth continues to make a name for herself in these stranger roles.
Story – The story is filled with questions which always makes for a good story, I will have to point out that this is a long film nearing the 2 and half hour’s mark and even at that you can see how the pace can be questioned but it doesn’t feel long. We get a new look into the asylum genre which I feel is something we needed but the weakness is that we never hit the full levels of any of the genres involved.
Fantasy/Horror/Mystery – The fantasy elements of this film come from the world we are placed into, this also comes for the sci-fi side of everything too. The horror comes from see what happens within the walls which is quite shocking at times but the best use of the genres comes from the mystery element which keeps us guessing from start to finish as we simply don’t know where it will go.
Settings – With most of the film taking place in the clinic we find ourselves trapped just like Lockhart in a place which doesn’t have an escape because being there means you don’t want to leave.
Final Thoughts – This is one long mystery thriller that doesn’t stop you wanting to see where the film will go and then it will leave you shocked by the end.
Overall: A rewarding mystery thriller
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/06/02/movie-reviews-101-midnight-horror-a-cure-for-wellness-2017/
Fred (860 KP) rated Venom (2018) in Movies
Apr 10, 2019
Great fun!
If you've read my reviews, you'll see I'm not that keen on the new trend of superhero movies. Everything's gotta be "epic" & so dark. This is the problem with most of DC's films & some of Marvel's films as well. To me, Wonder Woman was terrible & Black Panther just so-so. Infinity Wars was rushed & an over-load of a mess of heroes. So, it was finally nice to see a movie like Venom, where they could take a villain from the comics, & make him a fun anti-hero.
Tom Hardy was excellent as the title character, and his alter-ego, Eddie Brock. And even though none of the other actors in the film were memorable enough that I can remember them by name, it's Hardy that holds this thing together. He's funny, strong & plays the character of a no-nonsense reporter perfectly. When Venom does show up, he's everything you want in the character. He vicious, with that touch of humor that he has in the comics.
The special effects are good as well. Venom really looks like he's there & the fight between him & the villain, Riot is done well.
Unlike most superhero movies of today, this is a fun watch. It's not too long, it's not too dark (which it could have easily been, considering) & I enjoyed myself from the beginning to the end. I'm glad to see they are making a part 2.
Tom Hardy was excellent as the title character, and his alter-ego, Eddie Brock. And even though none of the other actors in the film were memorable enough that I can remember them by name, it's Hardy that holds this thing together. He's funny, strong & plays the character of a no-nonsense reporter perfectly. When Venom does show up, he's everything you want in the character. He vicious, with that touch of humor that he has in the comics.
The special effects are good as well. Venom really looks like he's there & the fight between him & the villain, Riot is done well.
Unlike most superhero movies of today, this is a fun watch. It's not too long, it's not too dark (which it could have easily been, considering) & I enjoyed myself from the beginning to the end. I'm glad to see they are making a part 2.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Destroyer (2018) in Movies
Jul 23, 2019
Nicole Kidman: a career best performance (2 more)
Slow burn build of characters, through flashback
Brilliant twist in the third act I didn't see coming
Gritty but unpredictable version of an oft-told tale
The plot is both familiar (think “The Departed” mixed with “Hell or High Water”) but at the same time intricate. Nicole Kidman plays police detective Erin Bell who’s in a bad place. She looks to be on her last legs through drink and drugs, but she is being propped up in her post by an understanding boss and a tolerant partner (who spends most of his time leaving “Where the hell are you?” voicemails).
Erin is in pursuit of a truly evil man – Silas (Toby Kebbell) – who is back after a long absence. Erin and Silas have a past that is only unfolded as the film evolves. (To say more would ruin what is an outstandingly well-constructed screenplay). Aside from the “day job”, what Erin also has to contend with her truly wayward 16 year old daughter Shelby (Jade Pettyjohn).
“Destroyer” seems to have had mixed reviews, but it is really one of the most gripping watches I’ve seen in 2019. A career best from Kidman (imho) and an intelligent, slow and thoughtful motion picture.
For the full graphical review please go to One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/07/20/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-destroyer-2019/
Erin is in pursuit of a truly evil man – Silas (Toby Kebbell) – who is back after a long absence. Erin and Silas have a past that is only unfolded as the film evolves. (To say more would ruin what is an outstandingly well-constructed screenplay). Aside from the “day job”, what Erin also has to contend with her truly wayward 16 year old daughter Shelby (Jade Pettyjohn).
“Destroyer” seems to have had mixed reviews, but it is really one of the most gripping watches I’ve seen in 2019. A career best from Kidman (imho) and an intelligent, slow and thoughtful motion picture.
For the full graphical review please go to One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/07/20/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-destroyer-2019/
Darren (1599 KP) rated 2001 Maniacs (2005) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 2001 Maniacs starts as three history students Anderson (Gillespie), Nelson (Edrington) and Cory (Carey) failing through college before spring breaks gives them a chance to party some more. When the three friends meet fellow travellers including two hot girls Joey (Malcolm), Kat (Heekin) and Ricky (Gross) they arrange to meet back up on the beach and we continue our adventure with our three friends who find Pleasant Valley.
When the six find themselves being welcomed by the Mayor Buckman (Englund) for a celebration they decide to stay. As the strangers spend more time in the town they start to go missing before learning the truth about the people in the town. Who will make it out alive.
2001 Maniacs is one of those horrors that came out at the perfect time, it was the time when gore and nudity were big in the industry and this does everything needed. The story is pretty simple, strangers arrive in town and welcomed only to learn not everything is as it seems. Sure this is easy to watch but it is also important that nothing becomes over-complicated too.
Actor Review
Robert Englund: Mayor Buckman is the man running Pleasant Valley, he is from a time where the south was still in control meaning he only accepts white people in his town. It isn’t long till we learn his motives as the man who welcomes guests with arms wide open. Robert is always going to be a good lead for a film like this.mayr
Lin Shaye: Granny Boone is the host where the guests are staying. She is welcoming throughout the stay trying to make sure all the women look extra pretty. Lin is good in this role where we get to see the added quirky character.
Giuseppe Andrews: Harper is the charming man of the local town that seduces the women who come to town before finding his own way to kill them. Giuseppe is good in this role as you believe he will be calm and crazy in the same side.
Jay Gillespie: Anderson is the nice guy of the three friends travelling who meets the beautiful Joey where he sees a potential new girlfriend, when he learns what is going on he must try to survive. Jay is solid in this role but it could easily be any of the friends.
Support Cast: 2001 Maniacs has a supporting cast which is mostly the victims but also most of the women end up having to do some sort of nudity.
Director Review: Tim Sullivan – Tim gives us a film that reaches all the special effects levels and is filled with all the gore and nudity fitting the genre.
Comedy: 2001 Maniacs has a few good one liners when it comes to the kills.
Horror: 2001 Maniacs is gored filled for all of the kills but isn’t suspense filled.
Settings: 2001 Maniacs keeps most of the film in this small town showing how this is more of a tradition rather than mistake.
Special Effects: 2001 Maniacs has great effects when it comes to the kills which is important for the film.
Suggestion: 2001 Maniacs is one for the horror fans out there to sit down and watch. (Horror Fans Watch)
Best Part: The kills.
Worst Part: No suspense.
Kill Of The Film: Got Milk.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: Has one.
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $3 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 27 Minutes
Tagline: The south will rise again!
Overall: Enjoyable horror that pushes the boundaries on kills.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/10/08/movie-reviews-101-midnight-halloween-horror-2001-maniacs-2005/
When the six find themselves being welcomed by the Mayor Buckman (Englund) for a celebration they decide to stay. As the strangers spend more time in the town they start to go missing before learning the truth about the people in the town. Who will make it out alive.
2001 Maniacs is one of those horrors that came out at the perfect time, it was the time when gore and nudity were big in the industry and this does everything needed. The story is pretty simple, strangers arrive in town and welcomed only to learn not everything is as it seems. Sure this is easy to watch but it is also important that nothing becomes over-complicated too.
Actor Review
Robert Englund: Mayor Buckman is the man running Pleasant Valley, he is from a time where the south was still in control meaning he only accepts white people in his town. It isn’t long till we learn his motives as the man who welcomes guests with arms wide open. Robert is always going to be a good lead for a film like this.mayr
Lin Shaye: Granny Boone is the host where the guests are staying. She is welcoming throughout the stay trying to make sure all the women look extra pretty. Lin is good in this role where we get to see the added quirky character.
Giuseppe Andrews: Harper is the charming man of the local town that seduces the women who come to town before finding his own way to kill them. Giuseppe is good in this role as you believe he will be calm and crazy in the same side.
Jay Gillespie: Anderson is the nice guy of the three friends travelling who meets the beautiful Joey where he sees a potential new girlfriend, when he learns what is going on he must try to survive. Jay is solid in this role but it could easily be any of the friends.
Support Cast: 2001 Maniacs has a supporting cast which is mostly the victims but also most of the women end up having to do some sort of nudity.
Director Review: Tim Sullivan – Tim gives us a film that reaches all the special effects levels and is filled with all the gore and nudity fitting the genre.
Comedy: 2001 Maniacs has a few good one liners when it comes to the kills.
Horror: 2001 Maniacs is gored filled for all of the kills but isn’t suspense filled.
Settings: 2001 Maniacs keeps most of the film in this small town showing how this is more of a tradition rather than mistake.
Special Effects: 2001 Maniacs has great effects when it comes to the kills which is important for the film.
Suggestion: 2001 Maniacs is one for the horror fans out there to sit down and watch. (Horror Fans Watch)
Best Part: The kills.
Worst Part: No suspense.
Kill Of The Film: Got Milk.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: Has one.
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $3 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 27 Minutes
Tagline: The south will rise again!
Overall: Enjoyable horror that pushes the boundaries on kills.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/10/08/movie-reviews-101-midnight-halloween-horror-2001-maniacs-2005/