Search
Search results
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Overlord (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
As someone who isn’t much of a war film fan, I was apprehensive about Overlord. I often find war films quite repetitive in nature, and they’ve never really appealed to me. So when I was kindly invited to a press screening on behalf of JUMPCUT, I really wasn’t sure what to expect. I tried not to set my expectations too high, but as a J.J. Abrams fan, I was interested to see what he’d brought to the table as a producer. Maybe a blend of war and horror is exactly what I needed.
Straight away, the thing that stood out to me was the quality of the sound, especially in a cinema setting. If you’re able to, I would absolutely recommend you catch Overlord on the big screen because of it. The film opens with soldiers on a plane, and the deafening booms of bombs combined with the roar of the plane really puts you right in the middle of the action. This sequence is one of the most immersive experiences I’ve ever had. You’re forced to witness the horrors of war straight off the bat and identify with the soldiers’ point of view. Later on in the film, this excellent use of sound really adds to the suspense and makes for a truly uncomfortable experience.
After loving Wyatt Russell in Black Mirror, I was looking forward to his performance in particular, but the whole cast really delivered. Each solider is believable, flawed, and different in their personality to the point where you feel like you’re there with them. The character development throughout is excellent, and no one feels two-dimensional or glossed over. This is one of the problems I have with war films, that sometimes everyone seems to blend into one group and no one is easily distinguishable. With Overlord, every character has both purpose and a personality; something I thoroughly enjoyed. The characters that the soldiers encounter along the way are treated exactly the same too, and it’s nice to see secondary characters being treated with respect.
If you’re a fan of gory special effects, this is one to watch for sure. When it finally becomes clear to us what’s going on, and dark secrets are revealed, it is a terrifying experience. It’s best you go into it not knowing any more than that, as it would be a shame to have it spoiled. What I can say, is that the effects are nightmare inducing and reminiscent of many body horror films. The rest you need to witness for yourself. I’ve seen my fair share of gruesome stuff, but this really stood out to me. Overlord deserves recognition for its visual effects alone, they are a welcome addition to the horror genre.
Overall, Overlord is a smart film that blends war and horror together effortlessly, resulting in a truly terrifying experience. I’m unsure how it’ll translate on my TV after experiencing it on such a large-scale, but I am certainly up for watching it again to see what it’s like. It’s a very entertaining couple of hours that are action-packed and gruesome throughout.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/review-overlord-2018/
Straight away, the thing that stood out to me was the quality of the sound, especially in a cinema setting. If you’re able to, I would absolutely recommend you catch Overlord on the big screen because of it. The film opens with soldiers on a plane, and the deafening booms of bombs combined with the roar of the plane really puts you right in the middle of the action. This sequence is one of the most immersive experiences I’ve ever had. You’re forced to witness the horrors of war straight off the bat and identify with the soldiers’ point of view. Later on in the film, this excellent use of sound really adds to the suspense and makes for a truly uncomfortable experience.
After loving Wyatt Russell in Black Mirror, I was looking forward to his performance in particular, but the whole cast really delivered. Each solider is believable, flawed, and different in their personality to the point where you feel like you’re there with them. The character development throughout is excellent, and no one feels two-dimensional or glossed over. This is one of the problems I have with war films, that sometimes everyone seems to blend into one group and no one is easily distinguishable. With Overlord, every character has both purpose and a personality; something I thoroughly enjoyed. The characters that the soldiers encounter along the way are treated exactly the same too, and it’s nice to see secondary characters being treated with respect.
If you’re a fan of gory special effects, this is one to watch for sure. When it finally becomes clear to us what’s going on, and dark secrets are revealed, it is a terrifying experience. It’s best you go into it not knowing any more than that, as it would be a shame to have it spoiled. What I can say, is that the effects are nightmare inducing and reminiscent of many body horror films. The rest you need to witness for yourself. I’ve seen my fair share of gruesome stuff, but this really stood out to me. Overlord deserves recognition for its visual effects alone, they are a welcome addition to the horror genre.
Overall, Overlord is a smart film that blends war and horror together effortlessly, resulting in a truly terrifying experience. I’m unsure how it’ll translate on my TV after experiencing it on such a large-scale, but I am certainly up for watching it again to see what it’s like. It’s a very entertaining couple of hours that are action-packed and gruesome throughout.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/review-overlord-2018/
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Freaky (2021) in Movies
Jul 3, 2021
No, not like the Disney version
Some B-movies really pack a much bigger punch than you would expect. "Nobody" is a perfect recent example. But movie karma needs to be balanced with something. Ladies and gentlemen - "Freaky"!
Positives:
- If you are into your "teen slasher" movies, then this is more of the same and features some innovative ways to dispatch the victims. One is certainly no way to treat a fine wine!
- Vince Vaughn has fun mincing around as his alter-ego and Kathryn Newton (soon to be in the next "Ant-Man" movie) is personable enough as the cutie-cum-serial-killer.
- It's always good to see Ferris-actor Alan Ruck on the big screen. Here, he actually plays two parts in the film. (This joke (C) One Mann's Movies.)
Negatives:
- It's flagged as "comedy/horror" but failed to meet my personal 6-laugh test. It's just not funny enough to pass muster unless, that is, you view crude dialogue as "funny". And the dialogue does get ickily crude at some points. For example, when evil-Millie ends up alone with three jocks, there's a line of misogynist dialogue (that I won't repeat) but which sets the level.
- As a Blumhouse production, the horror is ultra-gory which will put off many viewers lacking a strong stomach. But because of the associated black comedy, the horror isn't remotely tense or scary. This might be why the film only got a UK-15 certificate. But my personal view is that, with the violence and the offensive dialogue, the BBFC under called this one, and it should have been an 18.
- There's a lot of schmaltz layered on regarding the relationship between Millie and her mum (Katie Finneran, channelling a Laura Dern look). A store cubicle exchange between Finneran and Vaughn is particularly stomach-churning.
- The movie leaves logic at the door many times. A formulaic post-finale ending assumes a superhero ability to shrug off bullets.
Summary Thoughts on "Freaky": The 'body-swap idea has gone through dozens of movie versions, with Disney's "Freaky Friday" the most well known: it's actually had two outings, once in 1976 with a young Jodie Foster and Barbara Harris and again in 2003 with Lindsay Lohan and Jamie-Lee Curtis. (The latter is a firm Mann-family favourite).
This new version tries a serial-killer twist on the story, which is a good idea. But the movie fails to execute well on the concept. The director is Christopher Landon who did the "Happy Death Day" movies. This is in a similar vein. So teens who enjoyed those flicks might get a fun Saturday night out with this. But, for me, this fell between the stools of comedy and horror and is instantly forgettable.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/07/03/freaky-no-its-not-remotely-like-the-disney-version/. One Mann's Movies is also on Facebook and Tiktok (@onemannsmovies). Thanks.)
Positives:
- If you are into your "teen slasher" movies, then this is more of the same and features some innovative ways to dispatch the victims. One is certainly no way to treat a fine wine!
- Vince Vaughn has fun mincing around as his alter-ego and Kathryn Newton (soon to be in the next "Ant-Man" movie) is personable enough as the cutie-cum-serial-killer.
- It's always good to see Ferris-actor Alan Ruck on the big screen. Here, he actually plays two parts in the film. (This joke (C) One Mann's Movies.)
Negatives:
- It's flagged as "comedy/horror" but failed to meet my personal 6-laugh test. It's just not funny enough to pass muster unless, that is, you view crude dialogue as "funny". And the dialogue does get ickily crude at some points. For example, when evil-Millie ends up alone with three jocks, there's a line of misogynist dialogue (that I won't repeat) but which sets the level.
- As a Blumhouse production, the horror is ultra-gory which will put off many viewers lacking a strong stomach. But because of the associated black comedy, the horror isn't remotely tense or scary. This might be why the film only got a UK-15 certificate. But my personal view is that, with the violence and the offensive dialogue, the BBFC under called this one, and it should have been an 18.
- There's a lot of schmaltz layered on regarding the relationship between Millie and her mum (Katie Finneran, channelling a Laura Dern look). A store cubicle exchange between Finneran and Vaughn is particularly stomach-churning.
- The movie leaves logic at the door many times. A formulaic post-finale ending assumes a superhero ability to shrug off bullets.
Summary Thoughts on "Freaky": The 'body-swap idea has gone through dozens of movie versions, with Disney's "Freaky Friday" the most well known: it's actually had two outings, once in 1976 with a young Jodie Foster and Barbara Harris and again in 2003 with Lindsay Lohan and Jamie-Lee Curtis. (The latter is a firm Mann-family favourite).
This new version tries a serial-killer twist on the story, which is a good idea. But the movie fails to execute well on the concept. The director is Christopher Landon who did the "Happy Death Day" movies. This is in a similar vein. So teens who enjoyed those flicks might get a fun Saturday night out with this. But, for me, this fell between the stools of comedy and horror and is instantly forgettable.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/07/03/freaky-no-its-not-remotely-like-the-disney-version/. One Mann's Movies is also on Facebook and Tiktok (@onemannsmovies). Thanks.)
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Us (2019) in Movies
Sep 21, 2019
I wish I would've liked it more.
A married couple decide to take a vacation at a beach house. Their relaxation bliss is soon interrupted by four strangers who actually turn out to be evil counterparts or "doppelgangers" of the family who have come to torment them.
Each counterpart goes after their "normal" version in various ways including on the used power boat they had just purchased or having a conversation while sitting in their living room. Not known is why or who they are and what are their intentions. They family tried to take refuge at their neighbors home only to discover they met with their demise courtesy of their own set of demons hunting them.
The family eventually reunites and tried to escape, but are pursued. Several confrontations ensue at the beach where some carnage is executed by the demons and the family against each other.
Then the twist, kind of. A scene at the start of the film when the mother had a traumatic experience as a child getting separated from her family and finding her way into a hall of mirrors and seeing her other self as a child is explained. Truths you thought were truths end of being a lie or a different situation than you originally thought.
In trying to figure out a type for this film it is rather difficult. It is not particularly scary or gory. I suppose suspense/thriller would suit it best, but I'm not sure that is what writer/director Jordan Peele was going for. I liked the visuals, the acting, the musical score and some of the ideas, but not really the execution or the screenplay.
It had some jokes like the "Home Alone" reference and other scenes where the parents and children are together making fun of each other which were just not funny and took away from the tension.
My main problem with the script was the fact that the characters' actions were mostly not appropriate. No one seemed to be bothered by the fact that these other human/non humans existed and when family members, even children, begin performing heinous actions, they don't even seem to blink an eye. They also have to write in the scene where they try and call the police and they are unavailable.
I feel like there was a really great film in there somewhere, they just didn't get it quite right. The middle section dragged somewhat and the ending was interesting but didn't hold water the more you thought about it. I have no issue with a vague ending as long as it leaves you thinking and drawing your own conclusions; however, this film was vague not in a good way I think just due to a mediocre screenplay or maybe bad editing.
Peele certainly had his own big shoes t fill after getting a Best Picture nomination for his first film, Get Out. The box office and critical acclaim were paramount on that one.
Hopefully, he will rebound from this film and create something truly unique and interesting for his next effort. We certainly need more great horror writer/directors out there!
Each counterpart goes after their "normal" version in various ways including on the used power boat they had just purchased or having a conversation while sitting in their living room. Not known is why or who they are and what are their intentions. They family tried to take refuge at their neighbors home only to discover they met with their demise courtesy of their own set of demons hunting them.
The family eventually reunites and tried to escape, but are pursued. Several confrontations ensue at the beach where some carnage is executed by the demons and the family against each other.
Then the twist, kind of. A scene at the start of the film when the mother had a traumatic experience as a child getting separated from her family and finding her way into a hall of mirrors and seeing her other self as a child is explained. Truths you thought were truths end of being a lie or a different situation than you originally thought.
In trying to figure out a type for this film it is rather difficult. It is not particularly scary or gory. I suppose suspense/thriller would suit it best, but I'm not sure that is what writer/director Jordan Peele was going for. I liked the visuals, the acting, the musical score and some of the ideas, but not really the execution or the screenplay.
It had some jokes like the "Home Alone" reference and other scenes where the parents and children are together making fun of each other which were just not funny and took away from the tension.
My main problem with the script was the fact that the characters' actions were mostly not appropriate. No one seemed to be bothered by the fact that these other human/non humans existed and when family members, even children, begin performing heinous actions, they don't even seem to blink an eye. They also have to write in the scene where they try and call the police and they are unavailable.
I feel like there was a really great film in there somewhere, they just didn't get it quite right. The middle section dragged somewhat and the ending was interesting but didn't hold water the more you thought about it. I have no issue with a vague ending as long as it leaves you thinking and drawing your own conclusions; however, this film was vague not in a good way I think just due to a mediocre screenplay or maybe bad editing.
Peele certainly had his own big shoes t fill after getting a Best Picture nomination for his first film, Get Out. The box office and critical acclaim were paramount on that one.
Hopefully, he will rebound from this film and create something truly unique and interesting for his next effort. We certainly need more great horror writer/directors out there!
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Evil dead rise (2023) in Movies
Apr 19, 2023
Usually when a film series is embarking on a fifth outing the challenges
of keeping things fresh and original yet being new and creative can be a
massive obstacle.
Horror series ranging from “Halloween” to “Friday the 13th”, “SAW”, and
“A Nightmare on Elm Street” all faced issues with moving the series along
yet trying to stay true to the original film that inspired them and in
every case; failing to fully capture what made the original film a hit.
“Evil Dead Rise” is not only the latest entry into the series but a bold
take on the cinematic series as it abandons the remote cabin setting of
the first two films and the reboot in favor of an urban setting.
The film does open in a remote lakeside locale before jumping a day
earlier to California where estranged sisters Ellie (Alyssa Sutherland)
and Beth (Lilly Sullivan) reunite. Beth has been working as a guitar
technician and bristles that her sister refers to her as a groupie.
Ellie is raising three children after their father left and informs her
sister that the building they are living in is scheduled to be demolished
so they will have to move soon which is a shock to Beth as she has learned
that she is pregnant and is trying to figure out her life all the while
seeing what she thought would be a source of stability for her upended.
The arrival of an earthquake allows access to a hidden area in the parking
garage of their building and since the locale was a former bank; the kids
soon find a hidden book and records which the only son Danny (Morgan
Davies) hopes he can sell despite his sister Bridget (Gabrielle Echols)
admonishing him constantly to leave it alone and return it to where it was
found.
The book turns out to be a Necronomicon or “Book of the Dead” and as fans
of the series know; nothing good ever comes from one and thanks to playing
old records left by a Priest describing his thoughts on the book; a
summoning incantation is read and this causes Ellie to become possessed
and unleash grotesque carnage and terror on her family.
What follows is a gory and at times intense game of cat and mouse
punctuated by moments of levity as the demonic infestation knows no end.
The film has the over-the top- gore that is expected of the series and the
makeup and effects are very effective. Writer?Director Lee Cronin has done
a great job capturing the tone of the series while moving it forward as he
cleverly incorporates lines and nods to the series without making them
seem forced.
Some may find the excess of blood too much but the series has always been
known for taking things to the extreme as the blend of horror and comedic
parody is what made the original film such a success.
In the end “Evil Dead Rise” does enough to keep fans of the series happy
and hopefully we will be seeing a new entry in the series in the future.
3.5 stars out of 5
of keeping things fresh and original yet being new and creative can be a
massive obstacle.
Horror series ranging from “Halloween” to “Friday the 13th”, “SAW”, and
“A Nightmare on Elm Street” all faced issues with moving the series along
yet trying to stay true to the original film that inspired them and in
every case; failing to fully capture what made the original film a hit.
“Evil Dead Rise” is not only the latest entry into the series but a bold
take on the cinematic series as it abandons the remote cabin setting of
the first two films and the reboot in favor of an urban setting.
The film does open in a remote lakeside locale before jumping a day
earlier to California where estranged sisters Ellie (Alyssa Sutherland)
and Beth (Lilly Sullivan) reunite. Beth has been working as a guitar
technician and bristles that her sister refers to her as a groupie.
Ellie is raising three children after their father left and informs her
sister that the building they are living in is scheduled to be demolished
so they will have to move soon which is a shock to Beth as she has learned
that she is pregnant and is trying to figure out her life all the while
seeing what she thought would be a source of stability for her upended.
The arrival of an earthquake allows access to a hidden area in the parking
garage of their building and since the locale was a former bank; the kids
soon find a hidden book and records which the only son Danny (Morgan
Davies) hopes he can sell despite his sister Bridget (Gabrielle Echols)
admonishing him constantly to leave it alone and return it to where it was
found.
The book turns out to be a Necronomicon or “Book of the Dead” and as fans
of the series know; nothing good ever comes from one and thanks to playing
old records left by a Priest describing his thoughts on the book; a
summoning incantation is read and this causes Ellie to become possessed
and unleash grotesque carnage and terror on her family.
What follows is a gory and at times intense game of cat and mouse
punctuated by moments of levity as the demonic infestation knows no end.
The film has the over-the top- gore that is expected of the series and the
makeup and effects are very effective. Writer?Director Lee Cronin has done
a great job capturing the tone of the series while moving it forward as he
cleverly incorporates lines and nods to the series without making them
seem forced.
Some may find the excess of blood too much but the series has always been
known for taking things to the extreme as the blend of horror and comedic
parody is what made the original film such a success.
In the end “Evil Dead Rise” does enough to keep fans of the series happy
and hopefully we will be seeing a new entry in the series in the future.
3.5 stars out of 5
BackToTheMovies (56 KP) rated Child's Play (2019) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
After moving to a new city, young Andy Barclay receives a special present from his mother. A seemingly innocent Buddi doll that becomes his best friend. When the doll suddenly takes on a life of its own, Andy unites with other neighborhood children to stop the sinister toy from wreaking bloody havoc.
For months I’ve been hating on this reboot. Whilst I still don’t necessarily agree with the politics of how this film came to be. I left the theatre quite surprised at how much I enjoyed this movie. Child’s Play is reimagined for a modern generation. Whilst this film is an alternate timeline twist to the original it still manages to throw in that classic Chucky humor we all know and love. Here’s my Child’s Play 2019 review.
Lars Klevberg tells the story of Buddi, an artificial intelligence robot that can control your home appliances and become your best friend. He will play with you, interact with you like a real human being and you can do activities together. After a man is fired at the Buddi factory he reprograms one of the dolls to disobey its commands and the reign of Chucky begins when it falls into the hands of young Andy (Gabriel Bateman) given to him as a present by his mum Karen (Aubrey Plaza). What follows is a thoroughly enjoyable feature that flies by. Chucky’s murderous rage ramps up to artificial intelligence warfare with epic results.
Disregarding the original storyline of a serial killer whose soul inhabits a Good Guys doll the new Child’s Play tells a more chilling tale. The movie runs a very close to home social commentary about our reliance on technology and the implications that could follow. Buddi is your walking, talking Amazon Echo. Every home device is controlled at his fingertips from TV’s to telephones and even as far as automated cars. You can only imagine the terror that unfolds as Chucky learns to utilize his technological surroundings for evil.
Chucky starts off innocent enough. He’s programmed to be Andy’s best friend but what starts out as a unique interaction between boy and robot instantly changes when Chucky becomes sentient. Influenced by those around him and watching horror movies with Andy suddenly Buddi becomes more sinister in nature. Instead of a treasured companion, Chucky becomes possessive and will protect Andy by any means necessary. Quite the different approach from that of previous installments. Even when Chucky begins his reign of terror Andy is still loyal to him to some degree. Whilst he cannot understand why Chucky is doing the things he does there’s a loneliness about Andy’s character that almost seems to justify Chucky’s behavior. He doesn’t agree with it but at the same time, he has a friend, albeit a murderous little rampaging doll.
Child’s Play has some incredible humour mixed in throughout which allows the film to flow freely. Whilst Seed of Chucky and Bride of Chucky had free-speaking souls it’s harder to convey this type of humour within a robotic doll. Instead, the doll spills one-liners and is influenced by those around him leading to some comical results. Chucky’s infamous one-liners come to the fold and various facial expressions on the doll are hysterical.
The vocal work and comedic delivery from Mark Hamil is nothing short of wonderful. There is nothing this man cannot do. The force is strong with him even in a Chucky movie. Whilst more robotic in nature the way the lines are delivered with such dry-pan straight-faced edge is just brilliant. But once again we cannot compare this new Chucky to the sublime work of Brad Dourif. Brad is delivering dialogue as a human being whereas Mark is delivering lines as a robotic entity. They just cannot be compared and it would be a stupid comparison to make. All in all the voice work is great It’s just a shame I can’t take this ugly doll seriously for one second!
Whoever designed the Buddi doll in pre-production needs a serious talking to! I’m not quite sure what look they were going for with this but it certainly isn’t a good one. The film becomes even more of a comedy the more you look at it. The old dolls had that look of innocence in the originals, this one is just so damn weird. I can’t picture a production meeting where everyone in the room agreed that this is the final look of the doll without intense laughing involved. It’s like the production team are openly fucking with us. No one on this planet can take this doll seriously and for me, Child’s Play is way more of a comedy than it will ever be a horror movie.
For the most part, casting within Child’s Play is very strong. Gabriel Bateman (Andy) puts in a strong performance single-handedly carrying the film. Brian Tyree Henry (Mike) who plays a neighbor/detective is also a nice comedic relief within the feature. Ty Consiglio, Beatrice Kitsos and Carlease Burke also play strong supporting roles. Where casting failed for me however was Aubrey Plaza. I’ve seen Aubrey in comedies where her humor never really hits home in any roles she’s in.
Arrogant and annoying in many roles this cookie cutter casting has her playing the same role in every film she’s in. Playing Andy’s mum in this film doesn’t work for me whatsoever. There’s no conviction, no depth, no family dynamic feel of any sort. She almost plays an annoying older sister rather than a mother. Thankfully, she doesn’t play a key role as such to Andy’s arc and thus I can overlook her involvement as such. I think Aubrey should have played a sister role or similar, it would have played to her on-screen strengths.
When Chucky starts killing is when this movie comes into its own. It has nothing to compare it to previous Chucky films. Our new technologically manipulative little doll runs havoc on the millennial generation of mobile phone and gadget addicted humans. The death scenes are gory and for the most part, all have comedy elements to them. Whilst the kills are unimaginative it’s how Chucky delivers those kills that really add that star gore power to proceedings.
Endearing, gory and mostly hilarious. The contrast of tone in Child’s Play may even persuade the die-hard fans to enjoy this one. It shouldn’t really be compared to the originals in any way shape or form although it does have an 80’s flair to it. Child’s Play has taken a new direction but has stayed relevant to modern times and whilst it’s taking a different path than the upcoming TV series, it’s safe to say Chucky really is back!
Thanks for checking out my Child’s Play 2019 review. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did!
https://backtothemovies.com/childs-play-2019-review/
For months I’ve been hating on this reboot. Whilst I still don’t necessarily agree with the politics of how this film came to be. I left the theatre quite surprised at how much I enjoyed this movie. Child’s Play is reimagined for a modern generation. Whilst this film is an alternate timeline twist to the original it still manages to throw in that classic Chucky humor we all know and love. Here’s my Child’s Play 2019 review.
Lars Klevberg tells the story of Buddi, an artificial intelligence robot that can control your home appliances and become your best friend. He will play with you, interact with you like a real human being and you can do activities together. After a man is fired at the Buddi factory he reprograms one of the dolls to disobey its commands and the reign of Chucky begins when it falls into the hands of young Andy (Gabriel Bateman) given to him as a present by his mum Karen (Aubrey Plaza). What follows is a thoroughly enjoyable feature that flies by. Chucky’s murderous rage ramps up to artificial intelligence warfare with epic results.
Disregarding the original storyline of a serial killer whose soul inhabits a Good Guys doll the new Child’s Play tells a more chilling tale. The movie runs a very close to home social commentary about our reliance on technology and the implications that could follow. Buddi is your walking, talking Amazon Echo. Every home device is controlled at his fingertips from TV’s to telephones and even as far as automated cars. You can only imagine the terror that unfolds as Chucky learns to utilize his technological surroundings for evil.
Chucky starts off innocent enough. He’s programmed to be Andy’s best friend but what starts out as a unique interaction between boy and robot instantly changes when Chucky becomes sentient. Influenced by those around him and watching horror movies with Andy suddenly Buddi becomes more sinister in nature. Instead of a treasured companion, Chucky becomes possessive and will protect Andy by any means necessary. Quite the different approach from that of previous installments. Even when Chucky begins his reign of terror Andy is still loyal to him to some degree. Whilst he cannot understand why Chucky is doing the things he does there’s a loneliness about Andy’s character that almost seems to justify Chucky’s behavior. He doesn’t agree with it but at the same time, he has a friend, albeit a murderous little rampaging doll.
Child’s Play has some incredible humour mixed in throughout which allows the film to flow freely. Whilst Seed of Chucky and Bride of Chucky had free-speaking souls it’s harder to convey this type of humour within a robotic doll. Instead, the doll spills one-liners and is influenced by those around him leading to some comical results. Chucky’s infamous one-liners come to the fold and various facial expressions on the doll are hysterical.
The vocal work and comedic delivery from Mark Hamil is nothing short of wonderful. There is nothing this man cannot do. The force is strong with him even in a Chucky movie. Whilst more robotic in nature the way the lines are delivered with such dry-pan straight-faced edge is just brilliant. But once again we cannot compare this new Chucky to the sublime work of Brad Dourif. Brad is delivering dialogue as a human being whereas Mark is delivering lines as a robotic entity. They just cannot be compared and it would be a stupid comparison to make. All in all the voice work is great It’s just a shame I can’t take this ugly doll seriously for one second!
Whoever designed the Buddi doll in pre-production needs a serious talking to! I’m not quite sure what look they were going for with this but it certainly isn’t a good one. The film becomes even more of a comedy the more you look at it. The old dolls had that look of innocence in the originals, this one is just so damn weird. I can’t picture a production meeting where everyone in the room agreed that this is the final look of the doll without intense laughing involved. It’s like the production team are openly fucking with us. No one on this planet can take this doll seriously and for me, Child’s Play is way more of a comedy than it will ever be a horror movie.
For the most part, casting within Child’s Play is very strong. Gabriel Bateman (Andy) puts in a strong performance single-handedly carrying the film. Brian Tyree Henry (Mike) who plays a neighbor/detective is also a nice comedic relief within the feature. Ty Consiglio, Beatrice Kitsos and Carlease Burke also play strong supporting roles. Where casting failed for me however was Aubrey Plaza. I’ve seen Aubrey in comedies where her humor never really hits home in any roles she’s in.
Arrogant and annoying in many roles this cookie cutter casting has her playing the same role in every film she’s in. Playing Andy’s mum in this film doesn’t work for me whatsoever. There’s no conviction, no depth, no family dynamic feel of any sort. She almost plays an annoying older sister rather than a mother. Thankfully, she doesn’t play a key role as such to Andy’s arc and thus I can overlook her involvement as such. I think Aubrey should have played a sister role or similar, it would have played to her on-screen strengths.
When Chucky starts killing is when this movie comes into its own. It has nothing to compare it to previous Chucky films. Our new technologically manipulative little doll runs havoc on the millennial generation of mobile phone and gadget addicted humans. The death scenes are gory and for the most part, all have comedy elements to them. Whilst the kills are unimaginative it’s how Chucky delivers those kills that really add that star gore power to proceedings.
Endearing, gory and mostly hilarious. The contrast of tone in Child’s Play may even persuade the die-hard fans to enjoy this one. It shouldn’t really be compared to the originals in any way shape or form although it does have an 80’s flair to it. Child’s Play has taken a new direction but has stayed relevant to modern times and whilst it’s taking a different path than the upcoming TV series, it’s safe to say Chucky really is back!
Thanks for checking out my Child’s Play 2019 review. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did!
https://backtothemovies.com/childs-play-2019-review/
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated If I Stay (If I Stay, #1) in Books
Jun 6, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
This book has been on my shelf for awhile. I've also been wanting to read it since I first got it, but due to other commitments, I had never got around to it until now. This turned out to be a really touching book.
I think the title suits the book really well. Mia is trying to decide if she should live or just give in to death. She thinks about what her life was like before and what would happen if she decided to stay and live.
The cover is a little bit boring, I think. There's just not really anything going on. I don't know what I'd like to see on the cover, but this cover is too plain.
I did enjoy the world building very much. It made me wonder what happens when we're barely hanging on to life. Forman did a great job of making this sort of limbo, so to speak, feel like that's exactly what happens when someone's life is hanging by a thread. I, personally, felt as if Mia didn't really do too much grieving for her family. However, maybe this was just due to shock or because she was a sort of a ghostly like presence during the majority of the book.
The pacing was a bit hit and miss. I found some of the memories Mia had to be a bit boring thus slowing down the pacing a bit. I realize the memories were crucial to the book though, but I just felt that maybe they could've been written in a more interesting way if possible. The pacing doesn't stay slow all the time though, and a lot of the time, it does stay at a decent pace.
The plot of someone stuck outside their body while they are in a coma has been done many times before. Saying that, Gayle Forman did an excellent job of making it interesting for her book. Her lyrical writing helps the plot a lot and makes for an interesting read.
I thought the characters were very well written and well developed. I felt like Mia was a very down to Earth girl. Her emotions felt very real, and I sympathized with her. I did like Kim although I felt that she was a bit too disrespectful towards her mother. Kim was a great friend to Mia. This is made very obvious in the book. I felt bad for Kim when she finally saw Mia laid up in the hospital bed. Adam seemed like a really sweet boyfriend, and it was obvious how deeply he cared for Mia. He was willing to do whatever it took to visit Mia in the hospital, even if it meant going to jail.
The dialogue flows freely and smoothly, never disjointed. For the most part, the dialogue fits in with a young adult novel. This book is a tiny bit gory at the beginning of the book so be warned about that. There are a few swear words within the book.
Overall, If I Stay is an emotionally charged and intriguing read. The plot is interesting, the world building is fantastic, and the characters are lively!
I'd recommend this book to those aged 15+ who are after an emotionally captivating read.
<b>I'd give If I Stay by Gayle Forman a 3.75 out of 5.</b>
(I won a copy of this book from a giveaway. I was not required to write a review).
This book has been on my shelf for awhile. I've also been wanting to read it since I first got it, but due to other commitments, I had never got around to it until now. This turned out to be a really touching book.
I think the title suits the book really well. Mia is trying to decide if she should live or just give in to death. She thinks about what her life was like before and what would happen if she decided to stay and live.
The cover is a little bit boring, I think. There's just not really anything going on. I don't know what I'd like to see on the cover, but this cover is too plain.
I did enjoy the world building very much. It made me wonder what happens when we're barely hanging on to life. Forman did a great job of making this sort of limbo, so to speak, feel like that's exactly what happens when someone's life is hanging by a thread. I, personally, felt as if Mia didn't really do too much grieving for her family. However, maybe this was just due to shock or because she was a sort of a ghostly like presence during the majority of the book.
The pacing was a bit hit and miss. I found some of the memories Mia had to be a bit boring thus slowing down the pacing a bit. I realize the memories were crucial to the book though, but I just felt that maybe they could've been written in a more interesting way if possible. The pacing doesn't stay slow all the time though, and a lot of the time, it does stay at a decent pace.
The plot of someone stuck outside their body while they are in a coma has been done many times before. Saying that, Gayle Forman did an excellent job of making it interesting for her book. Her lyrical writing helps the plot a lot and makes for an interesting read.
I thought the characters were very well written and well developed. I felt like Mia was a very down to Earth girl. Her emotions felt very real, and I sympathized with her. I did like Kim although I felt that she was a bit too disrespectful towards her mother. Kim was a great friend to Mia. This is made very obvious in the book. I felt bad for Kim when she finally saw Mia laid up in the hospital bed. Adam seemed like a really sweet boyfriend, and it was obvious how deeply he cared for Mia. He was willing to do whatever it took to visit Mia in the hospital, even if it meant going to jail.
The dialogue flows freely and smoothly, never disjointed. For the most part, the dialogue fits in with a young adult novel. This book is a tiny bit gory at the beginning of the book so be warned about that. There are a few swear words within the book.
Overall, If I Stay is an emotionally charged and intriguing read. The plot is interesting, the world building is fantastic, and the characters are lively!
I'd recommend this book to those aged 15+ who are after an emotionally captivating read.
<b>I'd give If I Stay by Gayle Forman a 3.75 out of 5.</b>
(I won a copy of this book from a giveaway. I was not required to write a review).
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated BloodRayne (2006) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Turning a video game into a feature film is often a daunting task. With a large built in audience, gamers tend to be very picky over film adaptations and agitate very easily over even the slightest deviation from the source material.
Often in games, storylines are kept to the basic elements in order to keep the action flowing, unhindered by dialogue, character development, and plot twists as the notion is that gamers want action and will become bored if they have to wait through the elements listed above.
It is ironic that in films bases on games, the paring down of plot and characters in favor of a more linear setup and action often draws the wrath of critics and gamers for doing what game makers have been doing for years, letting gamers get to the goods.
In the new film Bloodrayne based on the hit game series of the same name by Majesco, Director Uwe Boll has crafted a film that explores the how and whys of the game series, focusing on the origins of the title character Rayne (Kristanna Loken), who toils as the half-human, half-vampire Dhampir in remote 18th century Romania as a freak in a traveling circus. Here ability to be burned by water yet healed by the blood of animals is a big drawing card to the circus, who has no problem exploiting her only to lock her in an animal cage when the show is over.
Unknown to Rayne, her fate is about to become entwined with a man named Vladamir (Michael Madsen), a vampire hunter and member of a secret society dedicated to eliminating the threat they pose. It is learned that the land is under the control of a powerful vampire named Kagan (Ben Kinglsey), who is seeking to locate and reunite three vampire relics in an effort to gain absolute power.
In time Rayne is brought into the order that sees her as a tool for fighting back the ever increasing army of Kagan. This movie is not met well by certain members of the group, especially Katarin (Michelle Rodriquez), who is not certain that bringing a person who is part vampire into their midst is a good idea.
Despite rising tensions and a steamy attraction to a hunter named Sebastian (Matt Davis), Rayne soon finds herself part of the group and firmly matched up against Kagan and his minions with the fate of the world in the balance.
While the film has some issues such as a thin plot and at times stiff acting and basic dialogue it is a marked improvement for Boll who has received harsh criticisms of his past works. Bloodrayne blends exotic visuals with classic gothic touches in a manner that compliments the material and is never heavy handed. The action scenes while gory are engaging and abundant, especially the inclusion of so called Boss battles that are common in video games.
While Bloodrayne has its blemishes, the film has its moments and is not nearly as bad as several mean spirited campaigns against it and Boll have suggested.
I have seen far worse films in the last 6 months such as The Cave, Into the Blue and Bewitched to name a few. As vampire films go, Bloodrayne is better than most of the horror offerings we have been inundated with in recent years less we forget “Wrong Turn” and “House of Wax”
Often in games, storylines are kept to the basic elements in order to keep the action flowing, unhindered by dialogue, character development, and plot twists as the notion is that gamers want action and will become bored if they have to wait through the elements listed above.
It is ironic that in films bases on games, the paring down of plot and characters in favor of a more linear setup and action often draws the wrath of critics and gamers for doing what game makers have been doing for years, letting gamers get to the goods.
In the new film Bloodrayne based on the hit game series of the same name by Majesco, Director Uwe Boll has crafted a film that explores the how and whys of the game series, focusing on the origins of the title character Rayne (Kristanna Loken), who toils as the half-human, half-vampire Dhampir in remote 18th century Romania as a freak in a traveling circus. Here ability to be burned by water yet healed by the blood of animals is a big drawing card to the circus, who has no problem exploiting her only to lock her in an animal cage when the show is over.
Unknown to Rayne, her fate is about to become entwined with a man named Vladamir (Michael Madsen), a vampire hunter and member of a secret society dedicated to eliminating the threat they pose. It is learned that the land is under the control of a powerful vampire named Kagan (Ben Kinglsey), who is seeking to locate and reunite three vampire relics in an effort to gain absolute power.
In time Rayne is brought into the order that sees her as a tool for fighting back the ever increasing army of Kagan. This movie is not met well by certain members of the group, especially Katarin (Michelle Rodriquez), who is not certain that bringing a person who is part vampire into their midst is a good idea.
Despite rising tensions and a steamy attraction to a hunter named Sebastian (Matt Davis), Rayne soon finds herself part of the group and firmly matched up against Kagan and his minions with the fate of the world in the balance.
While the film has some issues such as a thin plot and at times stiff acting and basic dialogue it is a marked improvement for Boll who has received harsh criticisms of his past works. Bloodrayne blends exotic visuals with classic gothic touches in a manner that compliments the material and is never heavy handed. The action scenes while gory are engaging and abundant, especially the inclusion of so called Boss battles that are common in video games.
While Bloodrayne has its blemishes, the film has its moments and is not nearly as bad as several mean spirited campaigns against it and Boll have suggested.
I have seen far worse films in the last 6 months such as The Cave, Into the Blue and Bewitched to name a few. As vampire films go, Bloodrayne is better than most of the horror offerings we have been inundated with in recent years less we forget “Wrong Turn” and “House of Wax”
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Re-Animator (1985) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
Herbert West is no ordinary doctor. He's brilliant and obviously knows quite a bit about the field of medicine, but something is peculiar about him. He acts strangely and tends to keep to himself while getting absorbed into his work. Throughout his research, Dr. West may have finally perfected his serum. A serum that brings the dead back to life. The consequences of the serum are hectic, as expected. The sooner the serum is injected into a fresh corpse in comparison to one that's been lying around for a few hours, the better the results. Based on the H.P. Lovecraft tale, Herbert West-Reanimator, West finds himself at a medical college when his stint in Switzerland ends a bit abruptly. There he meets Dan Cain, a student at the college who is held in high regard, and Dan's girlfriend, Meg, whose father is the dean to the medical college. When Dan puts a notice up looking for a roommate in his dorm, West comes knocking. Things seem to be a constant downward spiral from there as West continues his research and the bodies begin to pile up.
Re-Animator is one of the few cult classics that I'll stick up for. I usually wind up feeling like most classic horror films that are recommended or held in such high regard aren't good at all or are extremely overrated. This film is a lot of fun though. It's definitely got its campy qualities with a headless corpse stumbling around the third act of the film, but it doesn't feel out of place for a film built around a concoction that's injected into the brain to bring corpses back from the dead. The music, especially the opening theme, tends to get a bad wrap because it blatantly rips off (or pays homage, depending on how you look at it) the Psycho score. While the similarities are crystal clear once they're heard, I honestly didn't mind it. It's kind of hard to imagine this film with different music, so I have no complaints.
The Herbert West role really fits Jeffrey Combs like a glove. His attraction to weird and quirky roles pretty much began with films like this one. As West's unusual personality is revealed throughout the film, you can't help but get a sense of uneasiness as his character traits unravel before your very eyes. The best example is when West brings Dan's cat Rufus back to life. After it's been killed for the second time, Dan is shocked to discover it's Rufus and turns to look at West. West points at the cat and tells Dan to, "Look out!" Dan quickly turns his attention back to poor Rufus, who's still lying there motionless. West begins to burst into maniacal laughter as Dan looks on in horror. With the upcoming remake on the horizon, it's hard to imagine anyone else in the role of Herbert West especially with Jeffrey Combs confirmed for a cameo.
While Re-Animator could definitely be considered cheesy and campy at times, its strengths outweigh its flaws. The story is simple, but tends to unfold nicely and the acting is solid (David Gale as Dr. Hill is up for debate though). The film is pretty much exactly what you would expect a horror film to be like from the eighties; gory, cheesy, tons of nudity and sex, and a few creative twists along the way. And when it comes to horror, what else could you really ask for?
Re-Animator is one of the few cult classics that I'll stick up for. I usually wind up feeling like most classic horror films that are recommended or held in such high regard aren't good at all or are extremely overrated. This film is a lot of fun though. It's definitely got its campy qualities with a headless corpse stumbling around the third act of the film, but it doesn't feel out of place for a film built around a concoction that's injected into the brain to bring corpses back from the dead. The music, especially the opening theme, tends to get a bad wrap because it blatantly rips off (or pays homage, depending on how you look at it) the Psycho score. While the similarities are crystal clear once they're heard, I honestly didn't mind it. It's kind of hard to imagine this film with different music, so I have no complaints.
The Herbert West role really fits Jeffrey Combs like a glove. His attraction to weird and quirky roles pretty much began with films like this one. As West's unusual personality is revealed throughout the film, you can't help but get a sense of uneasiness as his character traits unravel before your very eyes. The best example is when West brings Dan's cat Rufus back to life. After it's been killed for the second time, Dan is shocked to discover it's Rufus and turns to look at West. West points at the cat and tells Dan to, "Look out!" Dan quickly turns his attention back to poor Rufus, who's still lying there motionless. West begins to burst into maniacal laughter as Dan looks on in horror. With the upcoming remake on the horizon, it's hard to imagine anyone else in the role of Herbert West especially with Jeffrey Combs confirmed for a cameo.
While Re-Animator could definitely be considered cheesy and campy at times, its strengths outweigh its flaws. The story is simple, but tends to unfold nicely and the acting is solid (David Gale as Dr. Hill is up for debate though). The film is pretty much exactly what you would expect a horror film to be like from the eighties; gory, cheesy, tons of nudity and sex, and a few creative twists along the way. And when it comes to horror, what else could you really ask for?
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Zombieland: Double Tap (2019) in Movies
Oct 17, 2019
It is hard to believe it has been ten years since audiences were introduced to the hysterical yet violent Post-Apocalypse world of Zombieland; but thankfully the crew is back again with the highly enjoyable “Zombieland: Double Tap”.
The story begins with Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), bringing the audience up to speed on what has happened since the last film. The Zombies have evolved into different classes of abilities and Columbus and his ersatz family have taken up residence in The White House.
Columbus and Wichita (Emma Stone) are still dating; well at least as best as one can do in a Zombie Apocalypse which is painfully short on options. This situation does not seem to bother Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), as he is happy to work on his loaded vehicle dubbed “The Beast” but for Little Rock (Abigail Breslin), the situation has become intolerable.
Little Rock is eager to find someone to have a relationship with and when her frustrations combine with Wichita’s insecurities; the girls take off leaving the men to fend for themselves.
While Tallahassee has no issues with this, Columbus is a moping mess and even a trip to the local mall cannot lighten his mood. Things change when they meet the ditzy and clueless Madison (Zoey Deutch); who steals her scenes with her Clueless Pop Culture Princess who is as oblivious to their situation as a person can be.
When Wichita returns to tell them that Little Rock has run off with a guy she met, the crew load up and take to the road to save the day but are blissfully unaware of the new dangers waiting for them.
This is the rare sequel that is as good if not better than the original. The cast works very well with one another and the introduction of new characters brought some additional comedy to the film as well as enhancement to the action sequences.
While the film is at times very gory; it is done in a humorous way that balances the dangers the characters are in with a wink and smile to let the audience know that this is still an Action/Comedy that is light on the darkness and big on the levity.
The film has some great continuity with the original film without repeating itself as Columbus’s rules for survival still pop up when they are used and we also get some hysterical new updates to the coveted Zombie Kill of the Week.
Director Ruben Fleischer knows what audiences want and does a great job giving them more of what he gave them in the first film without being gratuitous or heavy handed with the material.
The new cast works well with the returning players especially Rosario Dawson and the previously mentioned Zoey Deutch who fit seamlessly into the comedic Zombie mayhem.
You will want to make sure to stay into the credits for a fantastic bonus scene which puts a great capper on the film which was one of the best times I have had at the movies in recent years and one of the better movies of 2019.
Hopefully this is not the last outing for the crew as I would love to see further adventures in Zombieland but hopefully we will not have to wait 10 years for the next chapter.
4 stars out of 5
The story begins with Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), bringing the audience up to speed on what has happened since the last film. The Zombies have evolved into different classes of abilities and Columbus and his ersatz family have taken up residence in The White House.
Columbus and Wichita (Emma Stone) are still dating; well at least as best as one can do in a Zombie Apocalypse which is painfully short on options. This situation does not seem to bother Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), as he is happy to work on his loaded vehicle dubbed “The Beast” but for Little Rock (Abigail Breslin), the situation has become intolerable.
Little Rock is eager to find someone to have a relationship with and when her frustrations combine with Wichita’s insecurities; the girls take off leaving the men to fend for themselves.
While Tallahassee has no issues with this, Columbus is a moping mess and even a trip to the local mall cannot lighten his mood. Things change when they meet the ditzy and clueless Madison (Zoey Deutch); who steals her scenes with her Clueless Pop Culture Princess who is as oblivious to their situation as a person can be.
When Wichita returns to tell them that Little Rock has run off with a guy she met, the crew load up and take to the road to save the day but are blissfully unaware of the new dangers waiting for them.
This is the rare sequel that is as good if not better than the original. The cast works very well with one another and the introduction of new characters brought some additional comedy to the film as well as enhancement to the action sequences.
While the film is at times very gory; it is done in a humorous way that balances the dangers the characters are in with a wink and smile to let the audience know that this is still an Action/Comedy that is light on the darkness and big on the levity.
The film has some great continuity with the original film without repeating itself as Columbus’s rules for survival still pop up when they are used and we also get some hysterical new updates to the coveted Zombie Kill of the Week.
Director Ruben Fleischer knows what audiences want and does a great job giving them more of what he gave them in the first film without being gratuitous or heavy handed with the material.
The new cast works well with the returning players especially Rosario Dawson and the previously mentioned Zoey Deutch who fit seamlessly into the comedic Zombie mayhem.
You will want to make sure to stay into the credits for a fantastic bonus scene which puts a great capper on the film which was one of the best times I have had at the movies in recent years and one of the better movies of 2019.
Hopefully this is not the last outing for the crew as I would love to see further adventures in Zombieland but hopefully we will not have to wait 10 years for the next chapter.
4 stars out of 5
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Nightcrawler (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The concept of the American dream is generally thought of as ascending to great heights of success. For some, that means creating something out of nothing. They can do this either through lots of hard work, or by having a stroke of good luck.
“Nightcrawler” centers around Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal), a young man who is attempting to do just that – create something out of nothing and ascend to great heights of success.
Truly a schmuck by every definition of the word, Louis is a contemptible character. He lies, steals, and bends every rule in pursuit of the almighty dollar. This makes for a character that people will love to hate.
Louis discovers a grand opportunity to make money by essentially playing paparazzi to the world of crime. A skill in high demand in a news industry which sensationalizes violence and crime in order to gain ratings.
The film portrays the workings of the news media as somewhat twisted. The industry plays off of the naivety of the American public.
This theme builds throughout the movie, becoming more and more apparent. It hints at an uncertainty of the ethics of crime news coverage. This message is perhaps intended to extend beyond the silver screen and into the real world.
A thriller with depth, “Nightcrawler” is one hell of a debut for director Dan Gilroy. In addition to the unique and complex plot line, the cast is expertly selected.
Each character achieves a raw realness that turns the audience into witnesses rather than movie goers.
Gyllenhaal, who lost 20 pounds for the role, has mastered the art of portraying madness. His eyes communicate a certain detached sadness, yet at the same time he appears egotistical. His expression exudes an inner dialogue which is fleeting and somewhat absent from reality. He is the main character in the movie, as well as in his own mind.
The evolution which his character, Louis, exhibits is electrifying. He is a man in constant motion – doing whatever it takes to succeed, and sinking deeper into the dark side of a news media that lives off of ratings.
The film starts to resemble a gory train wreck which one cannot resist but to stare at as it follows Louis. In order to get the perfect shot, he pushes the line of morality further and further. His morally questionable character begins to blur into the realm of psychotic.
Human lives begin to be something of a commodity when on the other side of a lens. Nina (Rene Russo), a news director desperate to stay in demand is determined to stay focused on theme of urban crime creeping into suburban neighborhoods. She knows this is what grabs attention, and despite reality, she intends to deliver a particular story to viewers.
Russo’s tired eyes add to the realness of the dramatic story. She is just one of the characters which may confuse the audience in regards to who is “good” and who is “bad.” The interplay between characters who cannot be defined as good or bad creates a massively entertaining drama.
The deeper message of the film is left up for interpretation. Perhaps many people are just “not so good,” then there’s Louis who most people won’t be able to help but loath.
A true statement piece, “Nightcrawler” delivers a nauseating cinematic rush.
I give “Nightcrawler” 5 out of 5 stars.
“Nightcrawler” centers around Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal), a young man who is attempting to do just that – create something out of nothing and ascend to great heights of success.
Truly a schmuck by every definition of the word, Louis is a contemptible character. He lies, steals, and bends every rule in pursuit of the almighty dollar. This makes for a character that people will love to hate.
Louis discovers a grand opportunity to make money by essentially playing paparazzi to the world of crime. A skill in high demand in a news industry which sensationalizes violence and crime in order to gain ratings.
The film portrays the workings of the news media as somewhat twisted. The industry plays off of the naivety of the American public.
This theme builds throughout the movie, becoming more and more apparent. It hints at an uncertainty of the ethics of crime news coverage. This message is perhaps intended to extend beyond the silver screen and into the real world.
A thriller with depth, “Nightcrawler” is one hell of a debut for director Dan Gilroy. In addition to the unique and complex plot line, the cast is expertly selected.
Each character achieves a raw realness that turns the audience into witnesses rather than movie goers.
Gyllenhaal, who lost 20 pounds for the role, has mastered the art of portraying madness. His eyes communicate a certain detached sadness, yet at the same time he appears egotistical. His expression exudes an inner dialogue which is fleeting and somewhat absent from reality. He is the main character in the movie, as well as in his own mind.
The evolution which his character, Louis, exhibits is electrifying. He is a man in constant motion – doing whatever it takes to succeed, and sinking deeper into the dark side of a news media that lives off of ratings.
The film starts to resemble a gory train wreck which one cannot resist but to stare at as it follows Louis. In order to get the perfect shot, he pushes the line of morality further and further. His morally questionable character begins to blur into the realm of psychotic.
Human lives begin to be something of a commodity when on the other side of a lens. Nina (Rene Russo), a news director desperate to stay in demand is determined to stay focused on theme of urban crime creeping into suburban neighborhoods. She knows this is what grabs attention, and despite reality, she intends to deliver a particular story to viewers.
Russo’s tired eyes add to the realness of the dramatic story. She is just one of the characters which may confuse the audience in regards to who is “good” and who is “bad.” The interplay between characters who cannot be defined as good or bad creates a massively entertaining drama.
The deeper message of the film is left up for interpretation. Perhaps many people are just “not so good,” then there’s Louis who most people won’t be able to help but loath.
A true statement piece, “Nightcrawler” delivers a nauseating cinematic rush.
I give “Nightcrawler” 5 out of 5 stars.