Search

Search only in certain items:

40x40

Cloris Leachman recommended High Anxiety (1977) in Movies (curated)

 
High Anxiety (1977)
High Anxiety (1977)
1977 | Comedy, Mystery
7.0 (4 Ratings)
Movie Favorite

"When Harvey Korman’s coming downstairs, before the line [about fruit cups], he shifts his cuffs and he’s very, you know, breezy — very on top of his game, whatever you want to say — he was sure he was gonna have that fruit cup. [Regarding how she got the mustache in High Anxiety:] I had been made up and I was sitting in my trailer waiting to be called and just doing nothing so I had a little black pencil. Just not even thinking about it, I put on a mustache, and all of a sudden, I got a knock on the door: “Okay, time. Come to set.” So I tore down there and Mel was there and I said, “How do you want me to play this part?” He said, “I’ll leave it to you.” I said, “Well, I did this already in Young Frankenstein.” He said, “Oh well, what do you want to do?” I said, “Well, I don’t know. I feel like in High Anxiety that I don’t want anyone to know me so I thought I’d just talk funny.” We went to the wardrobe department and they put this costume on that fit perfectly and was beautifully made. I said well let’s make the shoulders a little bit broader maybe. That didn’t work, and I had this big chest if you remember in High Anxiety. You remember that? So I thought we should put a back on to match the front, to balance it at least. That worked, that was good, but this thing about broader shoulders didn’t work. The costume didn’t look like it was mine, so by that doing that it really helped, it was very good. Then I wanted to raise the whole costume. I looked like a baby ostrich in it. My head was sticking out so I thought we should raise the dress. They just pulled the dress and everything way up. That’s what I looked like with a mustache and raised [dress]."

Source
  
40x40

Joe Dante recommended The Black Cat (1941) in Movies (curated)

 
The Black Cat (1941)
The Black Cat (1941)
1941 | Classics, Comedy, Horror
(0 Ratings)
Movie Favorite

"Growing up on movies on TV, part of the Universal package was a very, very weird and creepy movie called The Black Cat. Which is ostensibly based on Edgar Allen Poe’s story, but wasn’t. It’s a devil-worshiping movie with Karloff and Lugosi, and it’s directed by a guy named Edgar Ulmer, who was a very promising European director whose career ran afoul of the fact that he slept with the boss’s niece or something like that and got, basically, blackballed by the major studios. But before he did that, he was able to make this very, very dark and very dreamlike horror movie, which only runs about 65 minutes. It’s an art deco nightmare, and it’s got all these very perverse ideas and concepts running through it. It’s like watching somebody else’s bad dream. It’s really a wonderful picture. I mean, Karloff has given better performances. The Body Snatcher is probably his best performance outside of Frankenstein, and that was on my list, but between The Body Snatcher and The Black Cat, I have to go with The Black Cat, because it’s so off-beat and kind of unique. There aren’t a lot of other movies like it. The interesting thing is, now these movies are actually available to see. When I was growing up, you had to wait until two o’clock in the morning on Friday; they were going to run some movie, and if you didn’t watch it then, they weren’t gonna run it again for another year and a half or more. And you’d fall asleep anyway, you know. It was so hard to see these things. You had to really seek them out. The Mario Bava movies, I had to go to the lowest dives, the crappiest grindhouses, to see these things, and often the prints were all beat up. But now, all this stuff is available, and it looks great. I just don’t think film lovers realize what a paradise they’re living in right now. [laughs] For those of us who really had to go the distance to seek these things out, it was really quite arduous."

Source
  
Beauty and the Beast (1946)
Beauty and the Beast (1946)
1946 | Fantasy, Romance
6.4 (5 Ratings)
Movie Favorite

"""And then you get into the contentious fifth film, and I’ve jotted down a bunch of things I thought, well Ran is a possibility. I love Akira Kurosawa‘s take on King Lear, I love what he did to it. I love the movement, the battles. You know, there’s nothing about that film I do not enjoy. Laurel and Hardy’s Way Out West, because I thought that would be a wonderful choice, and it does have, to my mind, the finest dance in the whole of film. But, I thought about A Matter of Life and Death, which was a film that was enormously inspirational when making Good Omens. I felt like that was of the same DNA as the thing that we were doing … Also Bedazzled, the original Peter Cook and Dudley Moore Bedazzled, which again has a lot of the DNA of Good Omens in it. But eventually I came down on Belle et la bête, [Jean] Cocteau’s Beauty and the Beast. I remember watching it and feeling transported. For me, it’s like dreaming. It does the same that Bride of Frankenstein does, where I can never quite remember the plot when it’s over, I’m just aware that it’s finished now and this wonderful place that I went has gone away. My children do not like black-and-white films, and once, for Father’s Day, my daughters asked what I wanted for Father’s Day, and I asked, “Will you watch this film with me? It’s a foreign language film, so you won’t like it, and it’s black and white, so you won’t like it, but will you watch it with me?” They said, “Well yeah, for Father’s Day we will.” And what I loved was that after 10 minutes, they had forgotten that it was a foreign language film, and they had forgotten that it was a black-and-white film, and they were entranced by this retelling of Beauty and the Beast, made by Cocteau not even on a shoestring; he’s in post-war France, immediately post war, and they had no money for anything. Everything is being improvised. Everything is being created on the fly, and yet what they come up with is something that is so much cooler than any infinite amount of CGI."""

Source
  
Hotel Transylvania 4 (2021)
Hotel Transylvania 4 (2021)
2021 | Adventure, Animation, Comedy
3
5.0 (3 Ratings)
Movie Rating
The transformation sequences. (1 more)
The 2D animated end credits
Genndy Tartakovsky not directing (2 more)
Humor exchanged for annoying behavior
Feels almost like a soft reboot for a final film.
A Monstrous Monstrosity
Hotel Transylvania: Tranformania is the final film in the Hotel Transylvania franchise. With Genndy Tartakavsky no longer directing (he co-writes and executive produces this time around) and Adam Sandler and Kevin James not returning (Brian Hull and Brad Abrell now voice Dracula and Frankenstein), Transformania takes an awkward step back from the previous three films.

Despite some character designs (Bela in the second film, the Kraken in the third) and some tremendous end credit animations that are done in a very recognizable Tartakavsky style (think Dexter’s Lab or Powerpuff Girls), the films are mediocre at best and yet became a billion dollar franchise.

Hull and Abrell do a decent job matching their voices to the Drac and Frank characters. You may not have noticed the characters were voiced by someone else if you hadn’t known beforehand. However, the animation looks noticeably different. Maybe new directors Jennifer Kluska and Derek Drymon are to credit for that. Kluska was a storyboard artist on Hotel Transylvania 2 and 3 while Drymon was an executive producer of Adventure Time and was a storyboard artist on The Spongebob Squarepants Movie.

The film was also moved around several times thanks to COVID and the pandemic. Sony Pictures Releasing eventually nixed the film’s theatrical run and sold distribution rights to Amazon Studios. This is the only Hotel Transylvania film to be released directly to a streaming platform.

Considering that this is the fourth film, Transformania basically rewrites several characters to an extent that it ignores key details from other films. Johnny is now akin to Homer Simpson since he is dumber than he has ever been here. He had a stoner or frat boy with a heart of gold kind of vibe about him originally. He was very mellow by nature, but had seen a good chunk of the world and knew more than his behavior let on. He had stories even though he was young and he was likeable. Transformania turns him into a dumb and unfunny dork that is borderline offensive due to how annoying he is.

Dracula has lost whatever made him somewhat charming in the previous three films, as well. In Transformania, he’s looking to settle down with Ericka and retire from running the hotel. The intention is to give the hotel to Mavis and Johnny, but all of a sudden Dracula hates Johnny. The first three films are built around how close Johnny and Dracula become. Now Dracula just finds Johnny unbearable.

After establishing in the second film that Dennis is part vampire and has powers, that concept is totally erased in Transformania. Dracula hypnotizes Dennis in the beginning of the film and he remains that way for the bulk of the film without ever utilizing any sort of power or doing anything remotely relevant.

Instead of downright telling Johnny that he can’t stand him, Dracula lies and says that he can’t leave the hotel in the hands of a human; it can only be inherited by monsters. Johnny then discusses the matter with Abraham Van Helsing who uses his Monsterfication Ray to turn Johnny into a giant lizard-like monster. But the ray can also turn monsters into humans. Once Dracula discovers what Johnny has done, he attempts to turn Johnny back before Mavis finds out. The plan backfires and Dracula gets hit with the ray and is turned human. His friends Wayne, Griffin, Murray, and Frankenstein are also turned human. If a cure isn’t found, the results may be permanent.

The highlight of the film is the transformation sequences since they are noticeably inspired by the horror film genre; specifically An American Werewolf in London. The end credits sequence is also done in a similar style to the first three films, so that sequence is fairly entertaining as well.

Transformania otherwise feels like a downgrade all around and the bar wasn’t all the high to begin with. As expected, there is a dancing sequence that may or may not be something you look forward to. None of the gags come off as humorous as every character mostly seems to be aiming to be more obnoxious than the other. The “fun” lies within seeing the monster characters as humans. The most notable is Griffin who has been totally invisible until now.

Hotel Transylvania: Transformania had a lot of obstacles relating to its release and after viewing the film you can understand why. It’s a lukewarm sendoff that mostly feels like a lethargic attempt to recapture its former glory. It’s built around an entertaining concept that it doesn’t fully capitalize on. It ultimately obliterates character traits for trite gags and cliché punch lines.
  
Silver Streak (1976)
Silver Streak (1976)
1976 | Action, Comedy, Romance
8
7.4 (7 Ratings)
Movie Rating
The start of a wonderful comedic partnership
Most people remember Gene Wilder as the frazzled haired wild man in such Mel Brooks classic films as THE PRODUCERS, BLAZING SADDLES and YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN. Others will recall him as the mad genius that held our attention in WILLY WONKA AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY, but there was a 3rd phase to Wilder's career - his unlikely partnership with Richard Pryor - that started with 1976's SILVER STREAK.

Set aboard the titular passenger train, SILVER STREAK is part Alfred Hitchcock "wrong man" suspense thriller, part comedy and part action flick with strong performances at the center anchoring the action.

Surprisingly, Wilder brings a sincere quality to his "everyman" hero of this tale. His book editor, George Caldwell, just wants a quiet 2 1/2 day trip on the train from Los Angeles to Chicago. You root for George from the start. Wilder's performance is deftly tailored to this movie, keeping a lid on his more frenetic energy that helps keep his character grounded. He pairs nicely with Jill Clayburgh (remember her from the '70's?) as a women he meets (and falls in love with) along the way. Clayburgh burst into the spotlight with this performance - and the 2 have tremendous chemistry together.

They are joined by a bevy of wonderful character actors - Ray Walston, Richard "Jaws" Kiel, Ned Beatty, Clifton James, Valerie Curtin, Fred Willard and the great Scatman Crothers. All bring life and energy to this film. Patrick McGoohan is perfectly cast as the villain of the piece. His "buttoned-up" bad guy is the perfect balance to the Wilder's character.

But, of course, the person who steals this film is the great Richard Pryor as Grover T. Muldoon, a petty thief, con-man and "street-wise" hood who aids George in defeating the bad guys. Pryor doesn't show up in this movie until about 1/2 way through, but when he does, the energy (and pace) of this film picks up considerably and the roller coaster ride begins. The comedic partnership between Wilder and Pryor is magnificent, they play off each other very well and they will end up pairing together in 3 other films after this.

Director Arthur Hiller (THE AMERICANIZATION OF EMILY) does a strong, professional job of keeping the movie moving, keeping events grounded until a thrilling conclusion that is satisfying, indeed.

A fun action-thriller that is perfect summer fodder.

Letter Grade: A-

8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
  
40x40

Adam Ant recommended New York Dolls by New York Dolls in Music (curated)

 
New York Dolls by New York Dolls
New York Dolls by New York Dolls
1973 | Punk
8.3 (3 Ratings)
Album Favorite

"I saw the New York Dolls support Rod Stewart when he was in The Faces. That was at Wembley Empire Pool. It was the Dolls, the Pink Fairies and the Faces. I was there to see the Faces, and when the Dolls came on you've never seen a room empty so fast. Everybody just headed for the bar. David Johansen had a top hat on and Arthur Kane had some pink patent thigh-length boots and was being propped up at the back. They did a 15-minute version of 'Frankenstein', and that was good enough for me. I hadn't seen anything like it before. I gather Steve Jones was there as well – a few people were there who would go on to form groups. They were these five tough New York kids and dressed like that, it was so provocative, so over the top. They went on The Old Grey Whistle Test and Whisperin' Bob Harris said, ""I want nothing to do with this lot behind me."" I lived in Chelsea in this flat with an American writer and I woke up in the middle of the night once and went in his room and Johnny Thunders was there. He asked me if I had a guitar and showed me a few chords. He was quite a nice bloke. That was when I was first starting out, in '77. He'd been over with the Heartbreakers doing the Anarchy tour with the Pistols. But to wake up and see him sitting there was bizarre. He'd had his hair cut by then. He always looked really smart. I loved the whole look of the New York Dolls. They had a real influence on me. They looked good wearing make-up, but there was no doubt that they were blokes. It was like, ""Come on then, come and do something about it!"" To walk around like that in the 1970s anywhere in America you were risking your life. Tracks like 'Personality Crisis' – I think Malcolm [McLaren] lifted that wholesale for the Pistols, the rhythm section and the guitar sound, the heaviness, the weight of the rock & roll sound they made. That was a big influence on Malcolm. What you saw was what you got with the Dolls. I last saw Johnny Thunders at Dingwalls in Camden. I bought him a brandy. He was sitting there scowling. He was quite a dangerous person. When I was with him once, some girl came up to bug him or say something and he did that thing like in that James Cagney film – he just put his hand on her and pushed her away. He was a real tough nut. A real rotter."

Source
  
The Lighthouse (2019)
The Lighthouse (2019)
2019 | Drama, Horror
Robert Eggers made a striking introduction for himself in 2015 with the moody and disconcerting The Witch, bringing a future star to the world’s attention in Anya Taylor-Joy in the process. You could argue after seeing his sophomore effort, The Lighthouse, that in terms of creating deliberately nauseating landscapes his work is the third cog in the arthouse revival of intellectual “horror”, after Ari Aster (Hereditary / Midsommar) and Jordan Peele (Get Out / Us). The group actually sits quite well together, as there is an obvious social commentary by metaphor crossover going on here, as well as just a little bit of “crazy”.

The point of difference up front with Eggars seems to be an earthiness. He likes dirt, and straw and rain and holes in the ground, and a sense of temperature in a scene (usually very cold). He also loves to frame an image and hold it there simply for the bizarre beauty of it, much as David Lynch has done unapologetically and without explanation his whole career.

As perfect as Tayor-Joy was in The Witch for her innocent otherworldly qualities, so Willem Dafoe is also as a craggy, sweaty-toothed old man of the sea in this. Whatever else you take, or don’t take from The Lighthouse, it is hard to deny the absolute cinematic purity of Dafoe’s face! It alone will guarantee this film’s cult status (and his) forever. And I do mean forever; the very best images of this film are worthy to be frozen, framed and wondered at alongside the most enduring black and white iconography in the entire history of the art form. And most often the best images involve Dafoe.

He is just so damn interesting to look at, all the time, no matter what. His range as an actor over the years just gets more and more impressive the more you think about it. He is capable of being heartbreakingly vulnerable and tender, but can also be terrifying on demand. His streak of dark humour can not be underestimated either – consider the genius of his introduction here, where the simple touch of his pipe being upside down tells you everything you need to know about this man and where this film is going.

Except, we don’t know where it is going. Ever. It is a very odd experience in terms of a satisfying narrative. It never seems to settle or fit into a genre comfortably, which is fine if all elements sublimate magically, but I don’t think they quite do. Is it a horror, a comedy, a psychological thriller, a study of loneliness and isolation, a metaphor for… something? The closest I can get is to say it is as if Lynch remade Young Frankenstein with just Igor and Dr Frankenstein, at a lighthouse, but forgot to make it funny or cohere into a real story. Of course, the things that I am reaching for as shortcomings may be exactly what others see as strengths. There is something to be said for being taken on a journey you can’t define or easily explain.

Quite often on this journey we are teased and fed details that seem to go nowhere, and avenues that may have proved interesting to explore are closed with a bang, in favour of another drinking scene and another fight – which are great the first few times, but become repetitive to a baffling degree later on. Mythology and dreams of the sea are played with, but also not fully approached; we are only given brief flashes of Mermaids and Krakens, nightmares and visions only, before returning to the mundanity and drudgery of the job of a lighthouse keeper. You are often left wondering who is going more mad, the men in the film or you watching it. I definitely recommend the best way to watch this is a little or a lot drunk, very late at night… it demands it, somehow.

It is difficult for all these reasons to say with any true certainty then, after just one viewing, if I think it is any good… I don’t know yet, I will have to watch it again some time to find out, is my best answer. For sure the photography is 100% first rate and instantly unforgettable – Jarin Blaschke was deservedly Oscar nominated for the extremely fine work – and the design and feel of the whole thing is quite masterful. I really want to like it more than I do, and perhaps if I was still in my wide-eyed twenties I would be enthusing about it endlessly, but now… I can see a touch of the Emperor’s new clothes about it, so am cautious of praising it too much.

One other element that is impressive, however, that I have yet to touch on, is the continued rise of Mr Robert Pattinson as an actor of serious note. As I have already touched on recently in other reviews, I did not see this coming, that it would be him that I was naming as one of the most promising talents of his age group working in film today! But you just can’t deny his versatility and understanding of genre and character. He puts in another very solid effort here, full of interesting choices and nuance; he is certainly an exciting prospect for the decade ahead.

In summary. See it. Unless you absolutely hate things that don’t tie the strings up nice and neatly, and decide for yourself. Some people will hate it, and I get that. It is a film-lovers film, for sure. Mesmerising and Meticulous, as one critic put it. Admire it for the craft involved, and experience it with an open mind. Just don’t go in expecting traditional horror, or traditional drama, or traditional comedy, or even traditional surrealism… The Lighthouse, for all it’s debatable flaws is unique! I suggest you let it be that way by not over-reaching to define it.
  
Targets (1968)
Targets (1968)
1968 | Action, Classics, Mystery
9
8.0 (4 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Targeting Frankenstein: A Horror Icon
Targets- is a very suspenseful film that stars a old boris Karloff. His performance in this film is different. Usually he is type-cast in a horror movie. Targets is not the cast, its a more serious role for Karloff and I liked it alot. He is dramatic in Targets. It was Karloff's last appearance in a marjor american film, before he passed away in 1968.

The plot: After unhinged Vietnam vet Bobby Thompson (Tim O'Kelly) kills his wife and mother, he goes on a brutal shooting spree. Starting at an oil refinery, he evades the police and continues his murderous outing at a drive-in movie theater, where Byron Orlock (Boris Karloff), a retiring horror film icon, is making a promotional appearance. Before long, Orlock, a symbol of fantastical old-fashioned scares, faces off against Thompson, a remorseless psychopath rooted in a harsh modern reality.

Even Karloff's charcter is a retired horror film actor, so he can never get away from the horror genre/type-casting.

In the film's finale at a drive-in theater, Orlok – the old-fashioned, traditional screen monster who always obeyed the rules – confronts the new, realistic, nihilistic late-1960s "monster" in the shape of a clean-cut, unassuming multiple murderer.

Bogdanovich got the chance to make Targets because Boris Karloff owed studio head Roger Corman two days' work. Corman told Bogdanovich he could make any film he liked provided he used Karloff and stayed under budget. In addition, Bogdanovich had to use clips from Corman's Napoleonic-era thriller The Terror in the movie. The clips from The Terror feature Jack Nicholson and Boris Karloff. A brief clip of Howard Hawks' 1931 film The Criminal Code featuring Karloff was also used.

American International Pictures offered to release, but Bogdanovich wanted to try to see if the film could get a deal with a major studio. It was seen by Robert Evans of Paramount who bought it for $150,000, giving Corman an instant profit on the movie before it was even released.

Although the film was written and production photography completed in late 1967, it was released after the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy in early 1968 and thus had some topical relevance to then-current events. Nevertheless, it was not very successful at the box office.

Quentin Tarantino later called it "the most political movie Corman ever made since The Intruder. And forty years later it’s still one of the strongest cries for gun control in American cinema. The film isn’t a thriller with a social commentary buried inside of it (the normal Corman model), it’s a social commentary with a thriller buried inside of it... It was one of the most powerful films of 1968 and one of the greatest directorial debuts of all time. And I believe the best film ever produced by Roger Corman.

Its a excellent mystery suspenseful thrilling starring Boris Karloff, last appearance in a marjor american film, before he passed away in 1968. A great film to end your career on.
  
The Mummy (2017)
The Mummy (2017)
2017 | Action, Adventure
A new franchise is reborn
It seems that the Marvel Cinematic Universe has kicked off a trend over in tinseltown. Shared franchises are all the rage at the moment, and why not. Marvel has taken over $10billion. DC has finally found its footing with Wonder Woman and Legendary are fusing Godzilla with Kong: Skull Island to create their own monster universe.

But for every success story there is a failed series that didn’t quite grab the cinema-going public with The Golden Compass and The Last Airbender immediately springing to mind. Nevertheless, Universal Pictures has pushed ahead with creating its own ‘Dark Universe’. Proceedings kick off with The Mummy. But how does this reboot fare?

Nick Morton (Tom Cruise) is a soldier of fortune who plunders ancient sites for timeless artefacts and sells them to the highest bidder. When Nick and his partner (Jake Johnson) come under attack in the Middle East, the ensuing battle accidentally unearths Ahmanet, a betrayed Egyptian princess (Sofia Boutella) who was entombed under the desert for thousands of years. With her powers constantly evolving, Morton must now stop the resurrected monster as she embarks on a furious rampage through the streets of London.

First-time director and long-time screenwriter Alex Kurtzman crafts a film that moves at breakneck speed, features a lot of nifty set-pieces and is an intriguing precursor to the next instalment of the franchise. It’s pretty good fun to be honest.

Tom Cruise is as reliable as ever, and does all the Tom Cruise staples; running, heavy breathing, shirtless preening, but the stand-out performance here is Russell Crowe’s Dr. Henry Jekyll (yes, that’s right). Despite being slightly underused, Crowe is a fantastic choice to play this multi-layered character. Elsewhere, Sofia Boutella is very good as Ahmanet.

Unfortunately, Jake Johnson (Jurassic World) and Cruise’s love interest Annabelle Wallis (King Arthur: Legend of the Sword) feel miscast with Wallis in particular having no believable chemistry with her co-star.

To look at The Mummy is first-rate. Gone are the campy special effects of the Brendan Fraser-era films, instead replaced with crisp CGI – though the dark and gloomy filming style hampers the obviously great effects. Nevertheless, the aircraft and subsequent crash sequences that have been marketed in the trailers are gripping and produced very well indeed.

Unfortunately, The Mummy relies heavily on jump scares, of which there are far too many, and the trade-off for that rollercoaster pace is a film that feels disjointed, relying on visually stunning action sequences to cover over cracks in the story. Some of the humour also falls flat.

Ultimately though, these are small gripes in a vastly entertaining popcorn flick that is a very solid starting point to a series that will include films like The Invisible Man, Bride of Frankenstein and The Wolfman.

Whilst not the most original film you will see this year, The Mummy opens up some intriguing doors and whilst I’m in no rush to see it again, despite its competence, I’m excited to see how Universal will bring all of their iconic monsters back to the big screen in one unified franchise.

https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/06/10/a-new-franchise-is-reborn-the-mummy-review/
  
40x40

Josh Burns (166 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Vampyr in Video Games

Jun 21, 2019  
Vampyr
Vampyr
2018 | Action, Role-Playing
Great story (2 more)
Great Atmosphere
Adaptive gameplay
Protect or Prey on the people of London in Vampyr
Vampyr is a mixed bag that may not be for everyone. It really depends on the types of games you like on this one (as with Until Dawn).
The game draws inspiration from a real epedemic called the Spanish Flu, which for whatever reason, gets way less attention than the Black Plague. You play as an esteemed doctor who gets turned into a vampire after returning to London from being in World War 1. The game just drips in atmosphere as you travel the nearly abandoned streets and docks. It channels gothic horror but with a tasteful dose of modern genre updates. It has a very good story that reminds of a bit of Mary Shelley's book Frankenstein in the fact that you do not like what you are, or what it has caused you to do.
Now, this game is largely what you make it to be. The people of London all have fleshed out backstories, personalities, and many offer side quests, trade options, or useful info on certain things. You can either bond with then and work to keep them healthy, or you can feed on them and grow stronger. Your choice on how you handle this can dramatically effect the game. You gain a large amount of experience from feeding on them, even more if you gain their trust first. If you take that route it can take the game from challanging to being easy. There is are a lot of options when leveling up, without feeding you will not be able to max everything out. Another thing that depends on play style, is that there is a ton of talking if you choose to help tje people and gain their trust. This isn't a requirement, however. So the game can be very deep and story driven with a lot of dialogue, or it can be more of an action game, depending on what you do.
On that note, as a pure action game, I'm not sure if it would hold up for most. The combat mechanics are quite basic, attack, dodge, and a few specials, and ranged attack with gun. It's fun enough when not taking the feeding route because you still have to be strategic but if you feed a lot and are extremely powerful, I don't see it being very fun.
The game also features light crafting in the form of upgrading weapons, making blood, stanima, and health injections (same as potions in most games) and medicine for the people. It's semi open and semi linear. You have a map that you can go anywhere on, but only in certain buildings and some streets are blocked off. In fact, navigation can be infuriating at times because of dead ends, doors that need to be unlocked from the other side, and objective markers sometimes being in the wrong spot on the map. I spent a half hour trying to get into a mansion before looking it up and finding out the marker was wrong and I was at the wrong building.
So in conclusion: if you like games like the 1st Mass Effect where story, characters and dialogue are the focus of the game with a healthy dose of combat that isn't amazing but gets the job done, then you'll love it. If you want to just run arpund and hack shit up, it might not be for you.