Search
Search results
Maddi Zoe (6 KP) rated The Shape of Water (2017) in Movies
Feb 8, 2018
Storyline (1 more)
Cinematography
Weird (1 more)
Sometimes slow
What the hell am I watching?
I expected it to be weird because it's directed by Guillermo Del Toro but I was still surprised at how weird it is.
An amphibian man is something of general fantasy, but a mute cleaning lady who falls in love with the amphibian man is obscure.
However it does have a structured storyline, and brilliant cinematography.
An amphibian man is something of general fantasy, but a mute cleaning lady who falls in love with the amphibian man is obscure.
However it does have a structured storyline, and brilliant cinematography.
Nickg24 (492 KP) rated Hellboy (2019) in Movies
Jul 15, 2019
A horrific reboot
A rushed story..no character development and an ending that was about as exciting as watching paint dry,whoever authorised this reboot should never be allowed to work in the movie industry again.
Hellboy will always be Ron Perlman with Guillermo del Toro directing the way.How hellboy creator Mike Mignola gave the ok to this reboot is beyond comprehension.
Hellboy will always be Ron Perlman with Guillermo del Toro directing the way.How hellboy creator Mike Mignola gave the ok to this reboot is beyond comprehension.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated The Devil's Backbone (2001) in Movies
Jul 19, 2019
Who knew Pan's Labyrinth had a companion film?
Early film from Guillermo del Toro is similar to Pan's Labyrinth in a lot of ways. In watching an interview after viewing the film, del Toro actually says this is a companion film since they have a lot of the same themes and cinematic elements most notably a child being introduced to a foreign hostile environment and the element of the supernatural influencing the actions of other characters.
I can see how others might complain about the slow pacing of certain scenes or the noticeable subplots that don't all have conclusions, but I guess those didn't bother me as I was engaged in the story. The kids eventually learn of the existence of the "ghost" in the basement and try and figure out its motives and reason for existence.
I enjoyed the look of the film immensely and thought all the acting was solid. The film had a haunting soundtrack which supplemented the spooky scenes very well.
I could even see some scenes which could've been out of The Shape of Water as del Toro's films all seem to have the director's signature look which isn't a complaint; only an observation.
I enjoyed it a lot.
I can see how others might complain about the slow pacing of certain scenes or the noticeable subplots that don't all have conclusions, but I guess those didn't bother me as I was engaged in the story. The kids eventually learn of the existence of the "ghost" in the basement and try and figure out its motives and reason for existence.
I enjoyed the look of the film immensely and thought all the acting was solid. The film had a haunting soundtrack which supplemented the spooky scenes very well.
I could even see some scenes which could've been out of The Shape of Water as del Toro's films all seem to have the director's signature look which isn't a complaint; only an observation.
I enjoyed it a lot.
Suswatibasu (1701 KP) rated The Shape of Water (2017) in Movies
Mar 12, 2018 (Updated Mar 12, 2018)
Fish porn :D - not Del Toro's finest
I'm possibly in the minority when I say I didn't particularly enjoy this film though I really appreciated the themes explored such as prejudice, otherness, and boundless love. Not to mention, highlighting disability, racism and homophobia.
However, as a big fan of @Pan's Labyrinth (2006), @The Devil's Backbone (2001) and @Cronos (1994) - this felt like it had a bit of Hollywood stardust and Guillermo Del Toro seemed to dumb down his usual style i.e. turning to good versus bad.
Although Michael Shannon acted well, he was a bit of caricature of a villain. But I did like the flipside of the Soviet scientist being the hero. And at the end of it, it did appear like a non-comedic, Rated-R version of @Splash (1984). Not my cup of tea.
However, as a big fan of @Pan's Labyrinth (2006), @The Devil's Backbone (2001) and @Cronos (1994) - this felt like it had a bit of Hollywood stardust and Guillermo Del Toro seemed to dumb down his usual style i.e. turning to good versus bad.
Although Michael Shannon acted well, he was a bit of caricature of a villain. But I did like the flipside of the Soviet scientist being the hero. And at the end of it, it did appear like a non-comedic, Rated-R version of @Splash (1984). Not my cup of tea.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Cronos (1994) in Movies
Jul 27, 2019
A Vampire film?
Contains spoilers, click to show
The feature film debut of now Academy Award winning director Guillermo del Toro does not disappoint!
A mysterious scarab is found after 400+ years in hiding by an old man. He decided to use the device which activates and attached to his skin. He initial pain is followed by the man starting to feel and look younger.
The situation deteriorates as the man continues to look worse and worse but gain in strength becoming able to withstand pain that would slay a normal man.
I really enjoyed the tone and look of this film. Even though it was low budget, del Toro made the most of it and it never felt cheap or the special effects look fake. The scarab was an interesting device and reminded me of the puzzle box in Hellraiser or the flying silver balls in Phantasm.
I liked the slow developing degenerative story and it never really says it is a vampire film although it feels more and more like that as the story develops.
Whenever you are watching a great foreign film, the subtitles just go away and it feels like you are watching an English speaking movie.
It's too bad there was never a sequel to this as I would've liked to see where the story went once the movie ended.
Highly recommended. Thanks @Erika
A mysterious scarab is found after 400+ years in hiding by an old man. He decided to use the device which activates and attached to his skin. He initial pain is followed by the man starting to feel and look younger.
The situation deteriorates as the man continues to look worse and worse but gain in strength becoming able to withstand pain that would slay a normal man.
I really enjoyed the tone and look of this film. Even though it was low budget, del Toro made the most of it and it never felt cheap or the special effects look fake. The scarab was an interesting device and reminded me of the puzzle box in Hellraiser or the flying silver balls in Phantasm.
I liked the slow developing degenerative story and it never really says it is a vampire film although it feels more and more like that as the story develops.
Whenever you are watching a great foreign film, the subtitles just go away and it feels like you are watching an English speaking movie.
It's too bad there was never a sequel to this as I would've liked to see where the story went once the movie ended.
Highly recommended. Thanks @Erika
Lenard (726 KP) rated Hellboy (2019) in Movies
Aug 26, 2019
Here we go again. Yet another reboot of a popular movie series surgically removing the charm of the original actors and director. Guillermo Del Toro is a truly visionary director who turns monsters into romantically tragic figures, like a underworld Heathcliff or a mutated Rochester. To review, Hellboy was raised from the bowels of Hell toward the end of World War II by Nazi supporter Grigor Rasputin to turn the tide for the Axis. A squandron of Allied forces closed the portal before more "monsters" could come through, but Professor Broom, a paranormal investigator, adopted the baby Hellboy and raised him to protect the world from other forces of evil. Humans do not trust Hellboy since he was created by Evil and the supernatural beasts cannot trust him because fights for Good. Cast aside, Hellboy must prove himself as a immortal sorceress rebuilds her empire on Earth with Hellboy as the key.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Shape of Water (2017) in Movies
Mar 14, 2018
Beautiful, quirky love story
THE SHAPE OF WATER is the most romantic, beautiful, charming, weird and wonderful love story that I have seen in a long, long time.
The fact that the love story is between a mute woman and the Creature from the Black Lagoon makes it just that much more interesting.
From the fertile mind of Guillermo Del Toro (THE DEVIL'S BACKBONE, PAN'S LABYRINTH), TSOW answers a question that a young Del Toro had when he first saw the 1950's creature feature CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON. He thought, "what if the creature ended up with the girl?" In Del Toro's mind, the Creature was the leading man, not the generic hunk that was hunting him.
Wonderfully realized by Del Toro, TSOW tells the tale of mute cleaning woman, Eliza (Sally Hawkins) who works at a "secret Government agency" in Baltimore. When she is asked to mop blood up in a highly classified area, she soon realizes that a "creature" is being held there. It is her realization that this creature is not just "some creature", but an intelligent being that starts this lonely, mute woman and the "creature" on the road to a loving relationship.
Hawkins is mesmerizing as Eliza. Obviously, with her character being mute, she must express herself in other ways - and she does. Her eyes are truly the window to her soul and Hawkins' ability to "eye act" is astounding, she conveys more feeling with a look and a glance than most actors can with a mountain of work.
She is strongly aided by some really good co-stars - Richard Jenkins is marvelous (as always) as Eliza's neighbor/friend who, himself, has a handicap - he is a gay man in the 1950's. The strength of Jenkins' performance is that he is able to overcome the trap of "the sympathetic gay best friend" and bring to the screen a complete character. Michael Stuhlbarg is watchable (as always) as the main scientist that studies the creature. Here is an actor that has grown in my eyes and he is a "must watch" in anything he is in. Michael Shannon is a presence as the main "heavy" in this film and though his character is pretty one-note, Shannon hits that note strongly and holds our attention. Unfortunately, compared to these 3 (and Hawkins' lead role), Octavia Spencer's talents are not put to the test as Eliza's co-worker. She is capable of so much more and her character is severely underwritten.
But, while strong characters are a must in a successful film, it is Del Toro's direction and "sense of place" that embue this fable with the character and detail it needs. Set in a 1950's that is a bit more idealistic/stylized than is real, Del Toro steers us through a world that is fascinating to watch - and be in - and makes it seem almost plausible that such a creature could exist and that a woman could fall in love with him.
Much like how I fell in love with this film.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The fact that the love story is between a mute woman and the Creature from the Black Lagoon makes it just that much more interesting.
From the fertile mind of Guillermo Del Toro (THE DEVIL'S BACKBONE, PAN'S LABYRINTH), TSOW answers a question that a young Del Toro had when he first saw the 1950's creature feature CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON. He thought, "what if the creature ended up with the girl?" In Del Toro's mind, the Creature was the leading man, not the generic hunk that was hunting him.
Wonderfully realized by Del Toro, TSOW tells the tale of mute cleaning woman, Eliza (Sally Hawkins) who works at a "secret Government agency" in Baltimore. When she is asked to mop blood up in a highly classified area, she soon realizes that a "creature" is being held there. It is her realization that this creature is not just "some creature", but an intelligent being that starts this lonely, mute woman and the "creature" on the road to a loving relationship.
Hawkins is mesmerizing as Eliza. Obviously, with her character being mute, she must express herself in other ways - and she does. Her eyes are truly the window to her soul and Hawkins' ability to "eye act" is astounding, she conveys more feeling with a look and a glance than most actors can with a mountain of work.
She is strongly aided by some really good co-stars - Richard Jenkins is marvelous (as always) as Eliza's neighbor/friend who, himself, has a handicap - he is a gay man in the 1950's. The strength of Jenkins' performance is that he is able to overcome the trap of "the sympathetic gay best friend" and bring to the screen a complete character. Michael Stuhlbarg is watchable (as always) as the main scientist that studies the creature. Here is an actor that has grown in my eyes and he is a "must watch" in anything he is in. Michael Shannon is a presence as the main "heavy" in this film and though his character is pretty one-note, Shannon hits that note strongly and holds our attention. Unfortunately, compared to these 3 (and Hawkins' lead role), Octavia Spencer's talents are not put to the test as Eliza's co-worker. She is capable of so much more and her character is severely underwritten.
But, while strong characters are a must in a successful film, it is Del Toro's direction and "sense of place" that embue this fable with the character and detail it needs. Set in a 1950's that is a bit more idealistic/stylized than is real, Del Toro steers us through a world that is fascinating to watch - and be in - and makes it seem almost plausible that such a creature could exist and that a woman could fall in love with him.
Much like how I fell in love with this film.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Nightmare Alley (2021) in Movies
Feb 4, 2022
Sum Does Not Add Up To The Total Of The Parts
If you ever want to understand the meaning of the term “the sum does not equal the total of the parts”, you need to look no further than the latest film from Guillermo Del Toro, the neo-noir thriller, NIGHTMARE ALLEY.
This film looked like it had all the right elements for a fantastic, adult film. A neo-noir thriller with a distinctive period look, helmed by a first rate director and featuring an A-List cast that are (for the most part) perfectly cast in their roles.
So why doesn’t this film rise above ordinary?
Ultimately, it is because this type of film, a neo-noir crime thriller where none of the characters are likeable or are easy to root for, is a tricky tightrope walk and, in this instance, Director del Toro opted to play it safe, focusing on mood and atmosphere, while strapping his talented cast with characters (and, ultimately, performances) that are middle-of-the road.
Bradley Cooper is the right performer in today’s world to play Stanton Carlisle, the drifter that becomes a carney that becomes a a con-man “Mentalist” who is drawn into a sinister plot by the mysterious Dr. Lilith Ritter (Cate Blanchett - also the right performer in today’s world to play this part). These 2 have decent (but not great) chemistry with each other, for you know (they way del Toro has Directed Blanchett’s performance) that she is up to something, thus keeping us at arm’s length.
But I am getting ahead of myself, for that is the 2nd half of this film, I haven’t even touched on the first half - which is part of the issue here as well.
The first hour of this 2 1/2 hour film is all set up as we follow Cooper’s character as he is introduced into a Circus sideshow of the 1940’s - and all of the characters therein. This is an interesting - if kind of slow - setup as we are treated to some interesting character building performances by some pretty terrific actors - Toni Colette, Ron Perlman, David Strathairn and, of course, the always good Willem DaFoe.
Oh, and I haven’t even mentioned Rooney Mara who is sort of the “through-line” between the 2 halves of this film, but her character is so vanilla, that one forgets her character event exists.
But…after an hour of setting up this world and these characters - the film pivots away from this area and goes to a whole different world…and a different plot. It is like a SuperHero Origin film where the first 1/2 of the film is the Origin and the 2nd half is the first adventure of said SuperHero.
And this just doesn’t work all that well in this film (even with a callback at the end), it is jarring and creates 2 different movies, neither of which rises above the average.
I lay the blame for all of this on Director Guillermo del Toro who appeared to be more interested in the look of this film (and the look is AMAZING) and just let the actors act, but not get in the way. The direction is bland, the performances are bland and the plot just doesn’t hold together.
Which is very disappointing, considering what “could have been”.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars out of 10 and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This film looked like it had all the right elements for a fantastic, adult film. A neo-noir thriller with a distinctive period look, helmed by a first rate director and featuring an A-List cast that are (for the most part) perfectly cast in their roles.
So why doesn’t this film rise above ordinary?
Ultimately, it is because this type of film, a neo-noir crime thriller where none of the characters are likeable or are easy to root for, is a tricky tightrope walk and, in this instance, Director del Toro opted to play it safe, focusing on mood and atmosphere, while strapping his talented cast with characters (and, ultimately, performances) that are middle-of-the road.
Bradley Cooper is the right performer in today’s world to play Stanton Carlisle, the drifter that becomes a carney that becomes a a con-man “Mentalist” who is drawn into a sinister plot by the mysterious Dr. Lilith Ritter (Cate Blanchett - also the right performer in today’s world to play this part). These 2 have decent (but not great) chemistry with each other, for you know (they way del Toro has Directed Blanchett’s performance) that she is up to something, thus keeping us at arm’s length.
But I am getting ahead of myself, for that is the 2nd half of this film, I haven’t even touched on the first half - which is part of the issue here as well.
The first hour of this 2 1/2 hour film is all set up as we follow Cooper’s character as he is introduced into a Circus sideshow of the 1940’s - and all of the characters therein. This is an interesting - if kind of slow - setup as we are treated to some interesting character building performances by some pretty terrific actors - Toni Colette, Ron Perlman, David Strathairn and, of course, the always good Willem DaFoe.
Oh, and I haven’t even mentioned Rooney Mara who is sort of the “through-line” between the 2 halves of this film, but her character is so vanilla, that one forgets her character event exists.
But…after an hour of setting up this world and these characters - the film pivots away from this area and goes to a whole different world…and a different plot. It is like a SuperHero Origin film where the first 1/2 of the film is the Origin and the 2nd half is the first adventure of said SuperHero.
And this just doesn’t work all that well in this film (even with a callback at the end), it is jarring and creates 2 different movies, neither of which rises above the average.
I lay the blame for all of this on Director Guillermo del Toro who appeared to be more interested in the look of this film (and the look is AMAZING) and just let the actors act, but not get in the way. The direction is bland, the performances are bland and the plot just doesn’t hold together.
Which is very disappointing, considering what “could have been”.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars out of 10 and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Andy K (10821 KP) rated The Shape of Water (2017) in Movies
Dec 28, 2017
Visual splendor (1 more)
Great acting
Contains spoilers, click to show
When you see a Guillermo del Toro film, you usually know you will be met with striking visuals, intense characters and ride an adventure you have never been on before. Such is the case with The Shape of Water.
The mute heroine protagonist is played with such brilliance by Sally Hawkins, she is sure to win an Academy Award for this film. The love story between her and her unusual companion is clever, unique and so engaging you cannot look away for even a moment.
Michael Shannon is also diabolical as the military officer determined to have his own way with the fate of the reptilian creature.
I wouldn't have minded some more backstory on the creature. It was said he was found in South America and was worshiped like a god, but that's all that was said. Some may argue the film lacks a significant point; however, I disagree.
Sometimes the journey is good enough and the emotional payoff after the climactic events was more than sufficient for me.
The mute heroine protagonist is played with such brilliance by Sally Hawkins, she is sure to win an Academy Award for this film. The love story between her and her unusual companion is clever, unique and so engaging you cannot look away for even a moment.
Michael Shannon is also diabolical as the military officer determined to have his own way with the fate of the reptilian creature.
I wouldn't have minded some more backstory on the creature. It was said he was found in South America and was worshiped like a god, but that's all that was said. Some may argue the film lacks a significant point; however, I disagree.
Sometimes the journey is good enough and the emotional payoff after the climactic events was more than sufficient for me.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Shape of Water (2017) in Movies
Mar 29, 2019
A True Classic
A deaf woman working for a secret government agency finds a friend (and then some) when she stumbles across the creature the agency is hiding.
Acting; 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Strickland (played by Michael Shannon) ensured that strong action and tension remained throughout the film. Every scene he is a part of leaves you waiting for something bad to happen. The two opposing sides, those wishing to destroy the creature and those wishing to save it, are locked in a game of cat-and-mouse until the last twenty minutes when it’s more like a head-on collision. There were quite a few close calls that had me wondering whether or not the protagonists would make it.
Genre: 10
Just a beautiful film for the ages. Call it a drama. Call it fantasy or even science fiction. Wherever it’s classified, it hangs up there as one of the very best. Checks all the boxes and does so many things extremely well.
Memorability: 10
Guillermo Del Toro has a way of leaving an impression on your brain with his visual imagery. The movie is just stunning to look at in so many ways with a number of shots that you can’t forget. Del Toro has created a home for the weirdo here, a place of comfort for those that are different from the norm. It’s a movie so unique in its charm that it’s near impossible to shake.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 100
The Shape of Water has a charm you can’t get away from. When it won Best Picture, I was shocked and upset. That was, of course, before I had actually seen the movie. I get it now. A true classic.
Acting; 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Strickland (played by Michael Shannon) ensured that strong action and tension remained throughout the film. Every scene he is a part of leaves you waiting for something bad to happen. The two opposing sides, those wishing to destroy the creature and those wishing to save it, are locked in a game of cat-and-mouse until the last twenty minutes when it’s more like a head-on collision. There were quite a few close calls that had me wondering whether or not the protagonists would make it.
Genre: 10
Just a beautiful film for the ages. Call it a drama. Call it fantasy or even science fiction. Wherever it’s classified, it hangs up there as one of the very best. Checks all the boxes and does so many things extremely well.
Memorability: 10
Guillermo Del Toro has a way of leaving an impression on your brain with his visual imagery. The movie is just stunning to look at in so many ways with a number of shots that you can’t forget. Del Toro has created a home for the weirdo here, a place of comfort for those that are different from the norm. It’s a movie so unique in its charm that it’s near impossible to shake.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 100
The Shape of Water has a charm you can’t get away from. When it won Best Picture, I was shocked and upset. That was, of course, before I had actually seen the movie. I get it now. A true classic.