Search
Lee (2222 KP) rated The Shape of Water (2017) in Movies
Feb 8, 2018
Sally Hawkins (1 more)
Michael Shannon
Beautiful and Enchanting
The Shape of Water really is one of those movies where I feel the trailer doesn't really do it justice. From seeing the trailer, I wasn't really sure how much I was going to enjoy the movie. Like I'm sure many others will be, I was persuaded that I might be wrong by the 13 Oscar nominations it recently received. I shouldn't have had any doubts to be honest. Pan's Labyrinth, also directed by Guillermo del Toro, is one of my favourite movies and The Shape of Water shares many similarities with that. A beautiful and enchanting mix of fairy tale, love story and monster movie.
Sally Hawkins plays Elisa Esposito, a mute woman who works nights as a janitor for Occam Aerospace Research Center along with friend Zelda Fuller (Octavia Spencer). At home she lives a simple life, watching musicals with her gay neighbour Giles (Richard Jenkins) and finding joy in the simple things in life. One day a strange creature is brought into the research center to be studied, surrounded by military and medical personnel. Colonel Richard Strickland has accompanied 'the asset' from it's previous location, and appears to have developed a serious dislike to it. He carries an electrified cattle prod, which he takes great delight in using on the creature. In return though, the creature does manage to remove two of Stricklands fingers, and also inflicts serious injuries on others.
But Elisa takes pity on the creature and over time tries to befriend it, bringing him hard-boiled eggs and teaching him sign language. When she learns that plans for the creature involve vivisection, she hatches a plan to help him escape, and from that point their feelings for each other develop into love. A true Beauty and the Beast style fairy tale.
I found myself absolutely captivated, swept along by the story, and everything about it is just beautiful. Sally Hawkins is incredible, portraying such varied emotions without speaking, she provides much of the films humour, and shines in the more serious scenes too. Doug Jones does what he does best as the creature, but the real monster of the movie is Michael Shannon as Colonel Strickland. Terrifyingly brilliant.
For me, I'm not sure if this beats Pan's Labyrinth, but The Shape of Water is certainly worthy of all the praise, and hopefully the awards, it receives.
Sally Hawkins plays Elisa Esposito, a mute woman who works nights as a janitor for Occam Aerospace Research Center along with friend Zelda Fuller (Octavia Spencer). At home she lives a simple life, watching musicals with her gay neighbour Giles (Richard Jenkins) and finding joy in the simple things in life. One day a strange creature is brought into the research center to be studied, surrounded by military and medical personnel. Colonel Richard Strickland has accompanied 'the asset' from it's previous location, and appears to have developed a serious dislike to it. He carries an electrified cattle prod, which he takes great delight in using on the creature. In return though, the creature does manage to remove two of Stricklands fingers, and also inflicts serious injuries on others.
But Elisa takes pity on the creature and over time tries to befriend it, bringing him hard-boiled eggs and teaching him sign language. When she learns that plans for the creature involve vivisection, she hatches a plan to help him escape, and from that point their feelings for each other develop into love. A true Beauty and the Beast style fairy tale.
I found myself absolutely captivated, swept along by the story, and everything about it is just beautiful. Sally Hawkins is incredible, portraying such varied emotions without speaking, she provides much of the films humour, and shines in the more serious scenes too. Doug Jones does what he does best as the creature, but the real monster of the movie is Michael Shannon as Colonel Strickland. Terrifyingly brilliant.
For me, I'm not sure if this beats Pan's Labyrinth, but The Shape of Water is certainly worthy of all the praise, and hopefully the awards, it receives.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Nightmare Alley (2021) in Movies
Dec 2, 2021
Stanton Carlisle (Bradley Cooper); is a man trying to get by in late 1930s America in the new film “Nightmare Alley”. Our first introduction to Stanton is less than flattering and he soon finds himself employed at a Carnival after coming upon it by chance.
The eager Stanton is given advice and tools of the trade by his boss Clem (Willem Dafoe) as well as the mystic Zeena (Toni Collette) and Stanton eagerly wants to get ahead. While striking a friendship with fellow employee Molly (Rooney Mara); Stanton learns that Zeena’s older and alcoholic husband has a skill from a former act where he learns to read people and use verbal cues to appear to have the power of clairvoyance.
Eventually, Stanton seeks bigger opportunities and leaves with Molly for the city where they in time develop a successful act that offers them two shows a night at a fancy hotel and some of the finer things in life.
Unwilling to be content with what he has; Stanton becomes involved with a Psychologist named Lilith (Cate Blanchett) and uses her knowledge to set up higher-profile marks who will pay well for his supposed abilities and in doing so; sets a dangerous chain of events into motion.
The film is based on the 1946 book of the same name and an earlier 1947 film, and while it does an amazing job with the visuals and moody atmosphere of the era; it is a very long and slowly-paced film. The movie is over 2.5 hours long and comes across as overly long and self-indulgent as Director Guillermo del Toro could easily have shaved 30-45 minutes from the film and told the story without losing much.
The cast and performances are very good but a slow-paced and dour film is not an ideal way to spend 2.5 hours at the movies no matter how much it has going for it. The movie does have some good points but I think it will do much better on streaming and home video where audiences can pause and take a break.
If you are a fan of the Noir style of old; then this may be just what you are looking for, but I think it should have been so much more.
3.5 stars out of 5
The eager Stanton is given advice and tools of the trade by his boss Clem (Willem Dafoe) as well as the mystic Zeena (Toni Collette) and Stanton eagerly wants to get ahead. While striking a friendship with fellow employee Molly (Rooney Mara); Stanton learns that Zeena’s older and alcoholic husband has a skill from a former act where he learns to read people and use verbal cues to appear to have the power of clairvoyance.
Eventually, Stanton seeks bigger opportunities and leaves with Molly for the city where they in time develop a successful act that offers them two shows a night at a fancy hotel and some of the finer things in life.
Unwilling to be content with what he has; Stanton becomes involved with a Psychologist named Lilith (Cate Blanchett) and uses her knowledge to set up higher-profile marks who will pay well for his supposed abilities and in doing so; sets a dangerous chain of events into motion.
The film is based on the 1946 book of the same name and an earlier 1947 film, and while it does an amazing job with the visuals and moody atmosphere of the era; it is a very long and slowly-paced film. The movie is over 2.5 hours long and comes across as overly long and self-indulgent as Director Guillermo del Toro could easily have shaved 30-45 minutes from the film and told the story without losing much.
The cast and performances are very good but a slow-paced and dour film is not an ideal way to spend 2.5 hours at the movies no matter how much it has going for it. The movie does have some good points but I think it will do much better on streaming and home video where audiences can pause and take a break.
If you are a fan of the Noir style of old; then this may be just what you are looking for, but I think it should have been so much more.
3.5 stars out of 5
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Mama (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Mama is a ghostly tale about two young sisters Victoria and Lilly who had
vanished after their parents were killed.Their Uncle Lucas (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau)
and his girlfriend Annabelle (Jessica Chastain) never stopped looking for them.
After nearly five years of searching, the girls are found and with some careful
observation and a couple of changes are forced to adapt to their new lives with
their uncle and his girlfriend. Little do Lucas and Annabelle know, there is a
strong supernatural force that will not let go of the young girls. Though Anabelle
hates that she has to become the mother figure for the girls she must do so for
their well being. She soon starts to experience strange happenings in the home and
senses an evil presence that is surrounding the girls and is making Annabelle’s life
a living Hell! Will she and Lucas find out how the girls survived all those years in
the cabin and what the truth is behind the evil force that the girls
call Mama?
Guillermo Del Toro has yet to bring a dull film to the screen with maybe the
exception of a couple of films here and there. His latest one Mama is by far one of
the best supernatural thrillers I have seen in an extremely long time! The story is
one that will be stuck in my nightmares for a while. It brings a new fear of what
might be hiding under our beds at night. As most of all Toro’s films, Mama was well
thought out and had a great flow without long drawn out scenes. Although the ending
was a little disappointing it was quite unexpected and still proves to be one of
Toro’s best so far.
I must admit I have always been a little afraid of the dark, only now it’s a
little worse after seeing Mama but hey, if your looking for a good scare and an edge
of your seat type of supernatural thriller like I usually am, Mama is the one to
see. Especially for those guys that want to take their girlfriends on a date to see
a movie that will make the girls hold on and not let go. I am usually disappointed
with most supernatural movies as they usually show the best scenes in the previews.
Mama leaves all the best scenes out of the previews forcing you to go and experience
them for yourself!
This movie is definitely not for the faint of heart!
vanished after their parents were killed.Their Uncle Lucas (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau)
and his girlfriend Annabelle (Jessica Chastain) never stopped looking for them.
After nearly five years of searching, the girls are found and with some careful
observation and a couple of changes are forced to adapt to their new lives with
their uncle and his girlfriend. Little do Lucas and Annabelle know, there is a
strong supernatural force that will not let go of the young girls. Though Anabelle
hates that she has to become the mother figure for the girls she must do so for
their well being. She soon starts to experience strange happenings in the home and
senses an evil presence that is surrounding the girls and is making Annabelle’s life
a living Hell! Will she and Lucas find out how the girls survived all those years in
the cabin and what the truth is behind the evil force that the girls
call Mama?
Guillermo Del Toro has yet to bring a dull film to the screen with maybe the
exception of a couple of films here and there. His latest one Mama is by far one of
the best supernatural thrillers I have seen in an extremely long time! The story is
one that will be stuck in my nightmares for a while. It brings a new fear of what
might be hiding under our beds at night. As most of all Toro’s films, Mama was well
thought out and had a great flow without long drawn out scenes. Although the ending
was a little disappointing it was quite unexpected and still proves to be one of
Toro’s best so far.
I must admit I have always been a little afraid of the dark, only now it’s a
little worse after seeing Mama but hey, if your looking for a good scare and an edge
of your seat type of supernatural thriller like I usually am, Mama is the one to
see. Especially for those guys that want to take their girlfriends on a date to see
a movie that will make the girls hold on and not let go. I am usually disappointed
with most supernatural movies as they usually show the best scenes in the previews.
Mama leaves all the best scenes out of the previews forcing you to go and experience
them for yourself!
This movie is definitely not for the faint of heart!
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Hellboy (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Entertaining Hell Yes, Great Hell No
Hellboy is a 2019 supernatural superhero movie based on the Dark Horse Comics character created by Mike Mignola. It is the third film in the franchise and is also a reboot of the series. It is directed by Neil Marshall with screenplay by Andrew Cosby and distributed by Lionsgate. The film stars David Harbour, Millar Jovovich, Ian McShane and Daniel Dae Kim.
In the Dark Ages, Nimue, the Blood Queen, nearly destroyed humanity with a deadly plague. Immortal, she was only defeated by King Arthur with the help of Merlin and the magical blade Excalibur. She was beheaded, dismembered, and her remains scattered over Europe. In present day Tijuana, Hellboy (David Harbour), searches for a missing B.P.R.D. agent, Ruiz. Hellboy discovers Ruiz has been turned into a vampire and while trying to reason with him, Hellboy is forced into a confrontation which ultimately leads to the death of the agent. Meanwhile a mysterious person speaks with Baba Yaga, a witch-like creature, seeking revenge on Hellboy, and is told to locate the remains of Nimue and resurrect her.
This has been a really hard movie for me to review. I genuinely enjoyed it while watching it in theaters. That being said, this movie is a train wreck and I can't recommend for people to spend money to see it unless you wait for it to be at the dollar movies or Redbox. There were just so many things that I guess I was blind to while watching it, that i just shrugged off or didn't pay much attention to. Like all my reviews this will be as spoiler free as possible but i have to acknowledge major flaws that other critics and reviewers brought up. And there were a lot, I mean right now the critics are tearing this movie a new one. First, I thought David Harbour did as good a job as anyone could do replacing Ron Pearlman as Hellboy in this film. But replacing such a beloved and likeable character with a funny and charismatic personality which Pearlman made his own, he had his work cut out for him. I don't think he's ever acted with all the makeup and prosthetics and it showed because I don't think he was as expressive as he could have been. Plus this movie was also made with a different director and not Guillermo Del Toro, so it was already going to have a way different feel to it. To me though, those weren't the things that contributed the most to the failure of this movie, it's more of the other things I'm still getting to. This was a reboot of the series and they decided to go with a different group of supporting characters, and to also make the plot or story more closely related or similar to the comics (the source material). Now usually sticking with what the comics have for the story is always better than changing it in my opinion but it seems for this film that they chose to incorporate several different storylines and characters and felt like it was too much crammed into too little. Also this movie was all over the place, story wise and literally. It seemed the characters kept having to travel unnecessarily. It felt like the supporting characters were just thrown into the story and it didn't bother to introduce them to the audience correctly. Everyone just got a flashback and or had themselves or their origin "expositioned" into the movie. I liked a lot of the character designs and thought a lot of the CGI was well done, in places, however it seems like they had different animators or studios work on different scenes or characters and some of it was horrible. The dialogue was really bad too. There were a lot of jokes and one liners that just fell flat and nobody laughed, plus like i said way too much exposition. There was a character who wears a headdress that was so big it looked ridiculous, which I wonder if it was done on purpose. And there was a character whose clothes tear when they transform and they automatically have pants when they transform back, which makes no sense. The plot too was not very sound and full of plot holes and things that didn't make sense, were just added in, or were part of scenes that got cut along the way. It hurts me to give this movie a score so low but I give this movie a 5/10.
Now I'm not saying don't watch it. I just can't recommend you drop as much cash as you usually do to see it in theaters. I personally still really enjoyed it and was genuinely entertained. It was awesome to see the blood and gore in a darker Hellboy movie and the action was great even if the CGI always wasn't. The music even if it didn't fit the tone or every scene was great. If your expecting the Hellboy from the Guillermo Del Toro films you might just hate this movie. But if you're just looking for "Big Red" to beat up on some baddies then I think you might get a kick out of this movie. Hey, some critics are saying that it's so bad it's good.
In the Dark Ages, Nimue, the Blood Queen, nearly destroyed humanity with a deadly plague. Immortal, she was only defeated by King Arthur with the help of Merlin and the magical blade Excalibur. She was beheaded, dismembered, and her remains scattered over Europe. In present day Tijuana, Hellboy (David Harbour), searches for a missing B.P.R.D. agent, Ruiz. Hellboy discovers Ruiz has been turned into a vampire and while trying to reason with him, Hellboy is forced into a confrontation which ultimately leads to the death of the agent. Meanwhile a mysterious person speaks with Baba Yaga, a witch-like creature, seeking revenge on Hellboy, and is told to locate the remains of Nimue and resurrect her.
This has been a really hard movie for me to review. I genuinely enjoyed it while watching it in theaters. That being said, this movie is a train wreck and I can't recommend for people to spend money to see it unless you wait for it to be at the dollar movies or Redbox. There were just so many things that I guess I was blind to while watching it, that i just shrugged off or didn't pay much attention to. Like all my reviews this will be as spoiler free as possible but i have to acknowledge major flaws that other critics and reviewers brought up. And there were a lot, I mean right now the critics are tearing this movie a new one. First, I thought David Harbour did as good a job as anyone could do replacing Ron Pearlman as Hellboy in this film. But replacing such a beloved and likeable character with a funny and charismatic personality which Pearlman made his own, he had his work cut out for him. I don't think he's ever acted with all the makeup and prosthetics and it showed because I don't think he was as expressive as he could have been. Plus this movie was also made with a different director and not Guillermo Del Toro, so it was already going to have a way different feel to it. To me though, those weren't the things that contributed the most to the failure of this movie, it's more of the other things I'm still getting to. This was a reboot of the series and they decided to go with a different group of supporting characters, and to also make the plot or story more closely related or similar to the comics (the source material). Now usually sticking with what the comics have for the story is always better than changing it in my opinion but it seems for this film that they chose to incorporate several different storylines and characters and felt like it was too much crammed into too little. Also this movie was all over the place, story wise and literally. It seemed the characters kept having to travel unnecessarily. It felt like the supporting characters were just thrown into the story and it didn't bother to introduce them to the audience correctly. Everyone just got a flashback and or had themselves or their origin "expositioned" into the movie. I liked a lot of the character designs and thought a lot of the CGI was well done, in places, however it seems like they had different animators or studios work on different scenes or characters and some of it was horrible. The dialogue was really bad too. There were a lot of jokes and one liners that just fell flat and nobody laughed, plus like i said way too much exposition. There was a character who wears a headdress that was so big it looked ridiculous, which I wonder if it was done on purpose. And there was a character whose clothes tear when they transform and they automatically have pants when they transform back, which makes no sense. The plot too was not very sound and full of plot holes and things that didn't make sense, were just added in, or were part of scenes that got cut along the way. It hurts me to give this movie a score so low but I give this movie a 5/10.
Now I'm not saying don't watch it. I just can't recommend you drop as much cash as you usually do to see it in theaters. I personally still really enjoyed it and was genuinely entertained. It was awesome to see the blood and gore in a darker Hellboy movie and the action was great even if the CGI always wasn't. The music even if it didn't fit the tone or every scene was great. If your expecting the Hellboy from the Guillermo Del Toro films you might just hate this movie. But if you're just looking for "Big Red" to beat up on some baddies then I think you might get a kick out of this movie. Hey, some critics are saying that it's so bad it's good.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Crimson Peak (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
For Writer/Director Guillermo del Toro horror and the supernatural go hand in hand with much of his work. From Pan’s Labyrinth” to The Strain, and “Hellboy” his unique mix of visuals and compelling characters have made him a darling of the genre.
In his new film “Crimson Peak”, the setting is the cold locales of Buffalo New York and Rural England during the late 1800s, and one where the weather both cold and wet play important parts in the look and plot of the film.
For Edith Cushing (Mia Wasikowska), life is exciting as despite the loss of her mother, her wealthy and supportive father has arranged for her to see her potentially see her stories published. As an avid writer, Edith holds that she has seen the ghost of her mother a secret and uses this as central themes of her writing.
Naturally this does not go well with the times, and she is urged to focus on romantic stories instead. Undaunted, Edith soldiers on unaware that her sheltered and privileged world is going to be upended by the arrival of the dashing Thomas (Tom Hiddleston), and his sister Lucille (Jessica Chastain), who have come to America to secure funding for their business ventures.
Tom came from a wealthy background and has fallen on hard times which have forced him to look for backers abroad. Edith’s father takes a disliking to him and even more so when he begins to court his daughter.
When her father pays off Thomas to leave when parts of his past are uncovered, things become complicated when Edith’s father is brutally killed and it is passed off as an accident. Grief stricken Edith marries Thomas and relocates to his home in England with Lucille to await her inheritance.
Of course things are not as they seem, and the home in which she lives is filled with dark secrets and Edith must find a way to survive the nightmare to which she has become a part of.
The film has some great visuals and a strong cast, but does tend to plod along. It is less of a horror story and more of a drama as the Supernatural element is there mainly to support aspects of the story rather than be the driving point.
My biggest issue with the film aside from pacing was that I was able to figure out where the story was going, twists and all within the first 30 minutes so there were no real surprises for me as it unfolded.
That being said, it was a pleasant enough diversion, I just do not think it will deliver the thrills and chills that audiences are expecting as it is more of a turn of the century drama than a horror film.
http://sknr.net/2015/10/14/crimson-peak/
In his new film “Crimson Peak”, the setting is the cold locales of Buffalo New York and Rural England during the late 1800s, and one where the weather both cold and wet play important parts in the look and plot of the film.
For Edith Cushing (Mia Wasikowska), life is exciting as despite the loss of her mother, her wealthy and supportive father has arranged for her to see her potentially see her stories published. As an avid writer, Edith holds that she has seen the ghost of her mother a secret and uses this as central themes of her writing.
Naturally this does not go well with the times, and she is urged to focus on romantic stories instead. Undaunted, Edith soldiers on unaware that her sheltered and privileged world is going to be upended by the arrival of the dashing Thomas (Tom Hiddleston), and his sister Lucille (Jessica Chastain), who have come to America to secure funding for their business ventures.
Tom came from a wealthy background and has fallen on hard times which have forced him to look for backers abroad. Edith’s father takes a disliking to him and even more so when he begins to court his daughter.
When her father pays off Thomas to leave when parts of his past are uncovered, things become complicated when Edith’s father is brutally killed and it is passed off as an accident. Grief stricken Edith marries Thomas and relocates to his home in England with Lucille to await her inheritance.
Of course things are not as they seem, and the home in which she lives is filled with dark secrets and Edith must find a way to survive the nightmare to which she has become a part of.
The film has some great visuals and a strong cast, but does tend to plod along. It is less of a horror story and more of a drama as the Supernatural element is there mainly to support aspects of the story rather than be the driving point.
My biggest issue with the film aside from pacing was that I was able to figure out where the story was going, twists and all within the first 30 minutes so there were no real surprises for me as it unfolded.
That being said, it was a pleasant enough diversion, I just do not think it will deliver the thrills and chills that audiences are expecting as it is more of a turn of the century drama than a horror film.
http://sknr.net/2015/10/14/crimson-peak/
JT (287 KP) rated Mama (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
When a film is presented by a well-known director it initially has a certain weight to it that will place it above the shoulders of others. In the case of horror/thriller Mama it has the backing of Spanish director Guillermo del Toro which is a certain plus point for any one who is a fan.
However, any big name attachment is probably there to push the marketing of the film, sadly this one doesn’t quite do itself much justice and falls some way short of achieving any greatness.
It’s a film of two halves, which as the second and third acts take shape becomes more and more ridiculous.
The film is brought to the big screen by director by Andrés Muschietti who also helmed the short three minute piece. It follows the story of two girls Lily and Victoria who are taken away by their father Jeffrey after he goes a bit doolally and offs his co-workers and wife.
When the car they are travelling in crashes they take shelter in a house deep in the forest, riddled with guilt Jeffrey then decides to enter into murder suicide, but something supernatural stops him and the girls are left to fend for themselves.
Move ahead five years and Jeffrey’s brother Lucas continues his search for the girls hiring a couple of hicks to trail the forest looking for the derelict cabin. When they are finally found the girls are practically feral and need psychiatric supervision as they are welcomed back into society.
Lucas and his grunge girlfriend Annabel are given custody as well as a nice new house for them to live in, all under the watchful eye of Dr. Dreyfuss. Once inside the house its clear to see that the girls have brought something back with them, something that doesn’t want to let them go.
Mama starts well enough, with a frenetic opening that glimpses the supernatural entity through blurred vision it moves from eerie strength to strength building tension and then unleashing it in small doses not giving the audience long enough to draw breath.
Of course it sticks quite closely to now tried and tested horror clichés, with things lurking in the shadows, children talking to imaginary nothingness and the so old “what’s in the closet” routine?
Then the director, whether bored with just giving us tit bits of the mother like antagonist, decides to reveal ‘it’ in all its glory. It then moves from scare mongering horror to poorly constructed ghost story in the space of a few minutes.
The acting is nothing to write home about, Jessica Chastain while so dominant in Zero Dark Thirty is flat and a little off the mark here, why the need for the grunge look is beyond me. Maybe it was in keeping with the Gothic back story?
The young girls do well, sweet and innocent yet dependable when needed, the rest of the cast pretty much fall by the wayside. The ending was for me beyond ridiculous and undid most if not all of the good work the start gave us, although saying that it was pretty much on the decline when Mama herself becomes much more of a central character.
It’s not as main stream a horror as you would expect, but the protagonist shadows the central figure that graced the god awful Darkness Falls and that is one supernatural entity well worth staying away from.
However, any big name attachment is probably there to push the marketing of the film, sadly this one doesn’t quite do itself much justice and falls some way short of achieving any greatness.
It’s a film of two halves, which as the second and third acts take shape becomes more and more ridiculous.
The film is brought to the big screen by director by Andrés Muschietti who also helmed the short three minute piece. It follows the story of two girls Lily and Victoria who are taken away by their father Jeffrey after he goes a bit doolally and offs his co-workers and wife.
When the car they are travelling in crashes they take shelter in a house deep in the forest, riddled with guilt Jeffrey then decides to enter into murder suicide, but something supernatural stops him and the girls are left to fend for themselves.
Move ahead five years and Jeffrey’s brother Lucas continues his search for the girls hiring a couple of hicks to trail the forest looking for the derelict cabin. When they are finally found the girls are practically feral and need psychiatric supervision as they are welcomed back into society.
Lucas and his grunge girlfriend Annabel are given custody as well as a nice new house for them to live in, all under the watchful eye of Dr. Dreyfuss. Once inside the house its clear to see that the girls have brought something back with them, something that doesn’t want to let them go.
Mama starts well enough, with a frenetic opening that glimpses the supernatural entity through blurred vision it moves from eerie strength to strength building tension and then unleashing it in small doses not giving the audience long enough to draw breath.
Of course it sticks quite closely to now tried and tested horror clichés, with things lurking in the shadows, children talking to imaginary nothingness and the so old “what’s in the closet” routine?
Then the director, whether bored with just giving us tit bits of the mother like antagonist, decides to reveal ‘it’ in all its glory. It then moves from scare mongering horror to poorly constructed ghost story in the space of a few minutes.
The acting is nothing to write home about, Jessica Chastain while so dominant in Zero Dark Thirty is flat and a little off the mark here, why the need for the grunge look is beyond me. Maybe it was in keeping with the Gothic back story?
The young girls do well, sweet and innocent yet dependable when needed, the rest of the cast pretty much fall by the wayside. The ending was for me beyond ridiculous and undid most if not all of the good work the start gave us, although saying that it was pretty much on the decline when Mama herself becomes much more of a central character.
It’s not as main stream a horror as you would expect, but the protagonist shadows the central figure that graced the god awful Darkness Falls and that is one supernatural entity well worth staying away from.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (2019) in Movies
Aug 21, 2019
Obviously I'm not familiar with the Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark books that this movie is based on - a series of three books containing short horror stories for children and drawing heavily on urban legend and folklore for it's subject matter, first published in 1981. Apparently, the series is listed by the American Library Association as being the most challenged series of books from the 1990s, with complaints relating to the violence and disturbing subject matter portrayed within them not being suitable for the children it was aimed at. The illustrations within the book also drew criticism, vividly portraying the nightmare creatures and scenes contained within the stories. Perfect material for a movie version!
That movie version comes from Troll Hunter director André Øvredal and producer/co-writer Guillermo del Toro and attempts a Goosebumps style movie, taking some of the better known stories from the 80+ contained within the books and weaving them into a larger narrative, set in Mill Valley Pennsylvania during the fall of 1968.
It's Halloween and a group of teens are preparing to go out for an evening of trick or treating - applying makeup, getting into their costumes, fishing in the toilet for turds in preparation for a Halloween trick. They head out on their bikes but it's not long before they run into some idiot jocks from their local school, and that turd trick suddenly comes in handy! We've already been introduced to the jocks earlier in the movie, out in a cornfield where they were hitting a creepy looking scarecrow about the head with a baseball bat. Yep, they're certainly going to regret that a little bit later on!
The teens manage to escape the jocks, working their way into a drive through movie that's showing "Night of the Living Dead" and into the car of another teen called Ramón. The group strike up a bond with Ramón after he helps them out and they all decide to go and break into an abandoned local house which is reportedly haunted. They find their way into the basement where legend has it that Sarah Bellows, the daughter of a prominent local family, was locked away in the late 1800s. Horror nerd Stella comes across a book containing short scary stories that were written in blood by Sarah, and she decides to take it with them. As Stella opens the book’s pages, she sees that Sarah’s stories are literally beginning to write themselves - stories that put her friends in some pretty unpleasant situations, stories which immediately become reality the moment they're written. As Stella later puts it, "You don't read the book, the book reads you".
The setup and the scenarios within each story are enjoyable enough and are certainly creepy, however the execution doesn't always work so well and the payoffs aren't quite as scary as I would have liked. The movie also suffers from some slightly dodgy CGI at times too, which doesn't help. That said, I thoroughly enjoyed the final story, and the return to the house in order to try and stop Sarah Bellows worked really well for me. It all ends with a definite opportunity for a sequel and with plenty more scary stories to choose from within the source material, I'm sure we'll be seeing another one soon. Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark taps nicely into the "It" and "Stranger Thing" vibe, with it's group of teens rising up together against evil, and despite it's faults I did have a lot of fun with it. I'm definitely interested in seeing more.
That movie version comes from Troll Hunter director André Øvredal and producer/co-writer Guillermo del Toro and attempts a Goosebumps style movie, taking some of the better known stories from the 80+ contained within the books and weaving them into a larger narrative, set in Mill Valley Pennsylvania during the fall of 1968.
It's Halloween and a group of teens are preparing to go out for an evening of trick or treating - applying makeup, getting into their costumes, fishing in the toilet for turds in preparation for a Halloween trick. They head out on their bikes but it's not long before they run into some idiot jocks from their local school, and that turd trick suddenly comes in handy! We've already been introduced to the jocks earlier in the movie, out in a cornfield where they were hitting a creepy looking scarecrow about the head with a baseball bat. Yep, they're certainly going to regret that a little bit later on!
The teens manage to escape the jocks, working their way into a drive through movie that's showing "Night of the Living Dead" and into the car of another teen called Ramón. The group strike up a bond with Ramón after he helps them out and they all decide to go and break into an abandoned local house which is reportedly haunted. They find their way into the basement where legend has it that Sarah Bellows, the daughter of a prominent local family, was locked away in the late 1800s. Horror nerd Stella comes across a book containing short scary stories that were written in blood by Sarah, and she decides to take it with them. As Stella opens the book’s pages, she sees that Sarah’s stories are literally beginning to write themselves - stories that put her friends in some pretty unpleasant situations, stories which immediately become reality the moment they're written. As Stella later puts it, "You don't read the book, the book reads you".
The setup and the scenarios within each story are enjoyable enough and are certainly creepy, however the execution doesn't always work so well and the payoffs aren't quite as scary as I would have liked. The movie also suffers from some slightly dodgy CGI at times too, which doesn't help. That said, I thoroughly enjoyed the final story, and the return to the house in order to try and stop Sarah Bellows worked really well for me. It all ends with a definite opportunity for a sequel and with plenty more scary stories to choose from within the source material, I'm sure we'll be seeing another one soon. Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark taps nicely into the "It" and "Stranger Thing" vibe, with it's group of teens rising up together against evil, and despite it's faults I did have a lot of fun with it. I'm definitely interested in seeing more.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Splice (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
I consider myself a pretty well educated horror-movie buff. As a child, my brother lovingly showed me movies like Critters” and Ghoulies, along with the Halloween and Friday the 13th series. Freddy Krueger scared me no more than Ronald McDonald did (and no, I don’t have a fear of clowns). I have pretty much grown immune to horror films and their ilk, so it takes a lot to get a rise out of me. Sadly, like many many others, Splice failed miserably in doing so.
Meet Clive (Adrian Brody) and Elsa (Sarah Polley), two very cliché, defiant scientists who lead their industry by creating a prototype of the first ever genetically engineered creature. These two creatures, dubbed “Fred” and “Ginger”, claim a genetic code that they hope to someday use for veterinary and medicinal advances. In light of their success, Elsa conveys her desire to start working with human genes, a desire her supervisors immediately shoot down. Ever rebellious, Elsa and Clive begin splicing human genomes on their own, hoping to create a creature that will be unequaled in its genetic capabilities and advances. Yet their result turns out to be something far more humanoid than previously hoped. Soon they find themselves with a creature, lovingly named “Dren”, that’s startlingly human and yet embodies the abilities of amphibian and bird, a creature that’s capable of employing human emotion and intelligence while reveling in its animalistic tendencies. Even with Elsa's nurturing, their experiment takes a turn for the worse.
At first I had high hopes for this film. It was an independent film that premiered at Sundance (it's also being shown currently at the Seattle Independent Film Festival), had Adrian Brody as its lead, and one of my favorite directors, Guillermo Del Toro as one of its executive producers. All in all, I thought this might prove to be one of those rare horror-movie exceptions. But I was wrong.
Remember that time when you first watched Saw in the movie theater, and how comical that scene was where Cary Elwes' character is sawing off his leg to break free to save his family, only to have the game end less than an hour or so later? It was supposed to be one of those "dramatic" moments but everyone ends up laughing instead. Yeah, that's kind of what happens in Splice. Numerous times throughout the movie, the audience ended up laughing at the more dramatic moments. Sadly, the plot in and of itself was decent.
Perhaps if there had been a bigger budget or if more attention had been paid to the acting and the movie's resolution it might have turned out in much better form. It's my understanding that the original Sundance film had been edited and altered, thus resulting in what we see. Whether this was for better or worse, I've no clue. Given the ridiculous ending and the generic horror-movie allure, it flopped terribly and the ending just seemed thrown together more than anything else. Plus, if the plot didn't get under your skin, Dren's chirps and warbles would.
The opening credits were amazing (I have to give credit where credit is due) and the beginning scenes weren't terribly bad. Overall, the movie is more comical than terrifying and the plot weaker than watered-down instant coffee. There are far too many holes in the storyline and Adrian Brody's character wasn't strong enough to carry a cast as obscure as this. I would wait to see what the DVD would hold for this one. Maybe the extras will help fill in the gaps or the unedited film will present itself in a different light?
Meet Clive (Adrian Brody) and Elsa (Sarah Polley), two very cliché, defiant scientists who lead their industry by creating a prototype of the first ever genetically engineered creature. These two creatures, dubbed “Fred” and “Ginger”, claim a genetic code that they hope to someday use for veterinary and medicinal advances. In light of their success, Elsa conveys her desire to start working with human genes, a desire her supervisors immediately shoot down. Ever rebellious, Elsa and Clive begin splicing human genomes on their own, hoping to create a creature that will be unequaled in its genetic capabilities and advances. Yet their result turns out to be something far more humanoid than previously hoped. Soon they find themselves with a creature, lovingly named “Dren”, that’s startlingly human and yet embodies the abilities of amphibian and bird, a creature that’s capable of employing human emotion and intelligence while reveling in its animalistic tendencies. Even with Elsa's nurturing, their experiment takes a turn for the worse.
At first I had high hopes for this film. It was an independent film that premiered at Sundance (it's also being shown currently at the Seattle Independent Film Festival), had Adrian Brody as its lead, and one of my favorite directors, Guillermo Del Toro as one of its executive producers. All in all, I thought this might prove to be one of those rare horror-movie exceptions. But I was wrong.
Remember that time when you first watched Saw in the movie theater, and how comical that scene was where Cary Elwes' character is sawing off his leg to break free to save his family, only to have the game end less than an hour or so later? It was supposed to be one of those "dramatic" moments but everyone ends up laughing instead. Yeah, that's kind of what happens in Splice. Numerous times throughout the movie, the audience ended up laughing at the more dramatic moments. Sadly, the plot in and of itself was decent.
Perhaps if there had been a bigger budget or if more attention had been paid to the acting and the movie's resolution it might have turned out in much better form. It's my understanding that the original Sundance film had been edited and altered, thus resulting in what we see. Whether this was for better or worse, I've no clue. Given the ridiculous ending and the generic horror-movie allure, it flopped terribly and the ending just seemed thrown together more than anything else. Plus, if the plot didn't get under your skin, Dren's chirps and warbles would.
The opening credits were amazing (I have to give credit where credit is due) and the beginning scenes weren't terribly bad. Overall, the movie is more comical than terrifying and the plot weaker than watered-down instant coffee. There are far too many holes in the storyline and Adrian Brody's character wasn't strong enough to carry a cast as obscure as this. I would wait to see what the DVD would hold for this one. Maybe the extras will help fill in the gaps or the unedited film will present itself in a different light?
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The much anticipated second film in Peter Jackson’s Hobbit Trilogy has arrived in time to reap box office gold much the way the previous films based on Tolkien’s works have. The film continues the adventure started in the previous film and finds the band of adventurers chased by a pack of Orcs and faced with the deadly and dark Mirkwood Forest as they attempt to reach The Lonely Mountain in time.
The journey is long and filled with peril as everything from Orcs to giant spiders stand in the way and should the group be successful in reaching their destination, there is the little matter of a giant and very nasty dragon named Smaug to contend with.
Undaunted the group press on despite finding danger a constant companion and once again give us a series staples of endless shots of them walking and walking in locales lifted from the Tourism New Zealand film room in between the amazing visual work that makes up the battle sequence and other-worldly visuals of the film.
Bilbo (Martin Freeman), is becoming more and more under the spell of the ring he obtained in the previous film and Gandalf (Sir Ian McKellen), suspects that darker forces are growing and sets off to confirm his suspicions. This divides the film into two quest centric storylines that are sure to cause some division amongst fans of the series.
The film does manage to hold your attention throughout its 2.5 hr plus run time and does have a very enjoyable finale act as the arrival of Smug (Benedict Cumberbatch), for me has been honestly the most enjoyable of any of the four prior films in the series to date. His interactions with Bilbo and the group flesh him out to be more than a creation of CGI, but rather infuse him with a evil and complexity that make him a very compelling and dynamic character.
Despite the strong cast and amazing visual FX in the film that is captured very well by the 3D filming Jackson used, the movie does have it’s share of frustrations.
Jackson has once again loaded the film with tons of characters, scenarios, and padding that easily make up more than half of the film. The idea seems to be to show a greater connection to the original LOTR films and the inclusion of Orlando Bloom as Legolas and Evangeline Lilly as Tauriel is bound to cause controversy. On one hand it was great to see the two characters and the great amounts of action they brought to the film, but the entire time I kept thinking that there was no need for most of this extra stuff as it was included simply to stretch out the film in order to justify a third movie and ensure another big box office.
When the film reaches it’s conclusion it was very clear to me that they could have completed the film in two films had the removed all of the padding and fluff and stuck to the source material. Segments are drawn out or included that really do not need to be there no matter how exciting and visually appealing they may be.
When the film was first announced it was planned to be two films but was later expanded to three when Jackson took over as Director following the departure of Guillermo del Toro. If one film was sufficient to capture each book in the original series than three films for this one book is simply overkill to me and it undermines the source material.
That being said, I did enjoy the film as it works best for me if I look at it as “inspired by’ rather than a cinematic translation of the book and in doing so I was able to get caught up in the action of the film and the character’s.
In the end the film is a true delight filled with plenty of action and adventure and will keep fans old and new entertained as despite the issues I had with it, it was one of the better action/fantasy films of the year and is a great technological achievement.
http://sknr.net/2013/12/13/the-hobbit-the-desolation-of-smaug/
The journey is long and filled with peril as everything from Orcs to giant spiders stand in the way and should the group be successful in reaching their destination, there is the little matter of a giant and very nasty dragon named Smaug to contend with.
Undaunted the group press on despite finding danger a constant companion and once again give us a series staples of endless shots of them walking and walking in locales lifted from the Tourism New Zealand film room in between the amazing visual work that makes up the battle sequence and other-worldly visuals of the film.
Bilbo (Martin Freeman), is becoming more and more under the spell of the ring he obtained in the previous film and Gandalf (Sir Ian McKellen), suspects that darker forces are growing and sets off to confirm his suspicions. This divides the film into two quest centric storylines that are sure to cause some division amongst fans of the series.
The film does manage to hold your attention throughout its 2.5 hr plus run time and does have a very enjoyable finale act as the arrival of Smug (Benedict Cumberbatch), for me has been honestly the most enjoyable of any of the four prior films in the series to date. His interactions with Bilbo and the group flesh him out to be more than a creation of CGI, but rather infuse him with a evil and complexity that make him a very compelling and dynamic character.
Despite the strong cast and amazing visual FX in the film that is captured very well by the 3D filming Jackson used, the movie does have it’s share of frustrations.
Jackson has once again loaded the film with tons of characters, scenarios, and padding that easily make up more than half of the film. The idea seems to be to show a greater connection to the original LOTR films and the inclusion of Orlando Bloom as Legolas and Evangeline Lilly as Tauriel is bound to cause controversy. On one hand it was great to see the two characters and the great amounts of action they brought to the film, but the entire time I kept thinking that there was no need for most of this extra stuff as it was included simply to stretch out the film in order to justify a third movie and ensure another big box office.
When the film reaches it’s conclusion it was very clear to me that they could have completed the film in two films had the removed all of the padding and fluff and stuck to the source material. Segments are drawn out or included that really do not need to be there no matter how exciting and visually appealing they may be.
When the film was first announced it was planned to be two films but was later expanded to three when Jackson took over as Director following the departure of Guillermo del Toro. If one film was sufficient to capture each book in the original series than three films for this one book is simply overkill to me and it undermines the source material.
That being said, I did enjoy the film as it works best for me if I look at it as “inspired by’ rather than a cinematic translation of the book and in doing so I was able to get caught up in the action of the film and the character’s.
In the end the film is a true delight filled with plenty of action and adventure and will keep fans old and new entertained as despite the issues I had with it, it was one of the better action/fantasy films of the year and is a great technological achievement.
http://sknr.net/2013/12/13/the-hobbit-the-desolation-of-smaug/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (2019) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
I was introduced to Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (the amazing book series written by Alvin Schwartz back in 1981) in my Junior High history class. An odd place for sure to listen to this amazing collection of stories, and yet it displayed how these stories are impactful even if you aren’t reading them around a campfire in the middle of the woods. Schwartz had written two additional sequels to his stories in 1984 and 1991 and the incredibly creepy illustrations (by Stephen Gammell) helped to complete a collection of books that are at home in anyone’s collection both young and old.
The 80’s was a decade obsessed with the occult and works of fiction that parents thought were written to corrupt the minds of the youth of the age. Before video games were blamed for all the evil in the world there was Heavy Metal music, the fantastical role-playing games such as Dungeons and Dragons and books such as these that parents rallied around and attempted to ban from schools and after school functions. Looking back now at the hysteria that this caused is almost laughable, but for those of us growing up in that time it was a very real threat to the imaginations of youth around the globe. Outside of this brief history lesson however, I wondered how the books would translate into a movie.
Our story begins on Halloween night, the year is 1968 and the Vietnam War and the upcoming presidential elections are on everyone’s mind. Stella (Zoe Colletti) and her nerd friends Chuck (Austin Zajur) and Auggie (Gabriel Rush) decide that this will be the year that they get revenge on the local bully Tommy (Austin Abrams) for all his years of stealing candy from them on Halloween. After things go predictably wrong, the young group of kids are pursued to a drive-in theater where they seek refuge in a car that is owned by another out-of-town youngster named Ramon (Michael Garza). As thanks for “saving” them from a certain beating, Stella and the group decide to take Ramon to a real-life haunted house. A place where a young Sarah Bellows would tell stories to frighten children only for them to end up dead days later. While exploring the house the young group discover the hidden room of young Sarah Bellows and come across her book of “Scary Stories”. Unable to contain her own curiosity, Stella takes the book home with her and watches as the words on the pages turn into living nightmares of their own darkest fears.
Produced by Guillermo del Toro, Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan, Scary Stories takes a handful of fan favorites and weaves them into a “scary” story of their very own. Instead of simply being a collection of haunting tales, each one serves a purpose, whether it’s the “Red Dot” or “Harold”, each one is used to drive the story even further along. While at first, I was hoping that it would be a collection of short stories featuring these timeless classics, the way in which each individual story progresses the plot leads to a far more interesting experience overall.
Those looking for a movie filled with frightening tales that will have you reaching for the closest shoulder (whether you know who it belongs to or not) will be in for a bit of disappointment. That’s not to take away from the incredible amount of vision needed to bring these classic stories to life, but it takes on a far more contemporary feel, then the dark stories and supernatural visions of the books that came before it. The film comes away feeling more like Goosebumps and less like Freakshow which makes sense given its PG-13 rating and its obvious pre-teen to teen demographic. The movie is still fun however, particularly for those who fondly remember the stories from their youth and is one that will proudly sit beside the likes of Hocus Pocus when it comes to network television down the road as part of its likely Halloween line-up.
4 out of 5 stars
http://sknr.net/2019/08/08/scary-stories-to-tell-in-the-dark/
The 80’s was a decade obsessed with the occult and works of fiction that parents thought were written to corrupt the minds of the youth of the age. Before video games were blamed for all the evil in the world there was Heavy Metal music, the fantastical role-playing games such as Dungeons and Dragons and books such as these that parents rallied around and attempted to ban from schools and after school functions. Looking back now at the hysteria that this caused is almost laughable, but for those of us growing up in that time it was a very real threat to the imaginations of youth around the globe. Outside of this brief history lesson however, I wondered how the books would translate into a movie.
Our story begins on Halloween night, the year is 1968 and the Vietnam War and the upcoming presidential elections are on everyone’s mind. Stella (Zoe Colletti) and her nerd friends Chuck (Austin Zajur) and Auggie (Gabriel Rush) decide that this will be the year that they get revenge on the local bully Tommy (Austin Abrams) for all his years of stealing candy from them on Halloween. After things go predictably wrong, the young group of kids are pursued to a drive-in theater where they seek refuge in a car that is owned by another out-of-town youngster named Ramon (Michael Garza). As thanks for “saving” them from a certain beating, Stella and the group decide to take Ramon to a real-life haunted house. A place where a young Sarah Bellows would tell stories to frighten children only for them to end up dead days later. While exploring the house the young group discover the hidden room of young Sarah Bellows and come across her book of “Scary Stories”. Unable to contain her own curiosity, Stella takes the book home with her and watches as the words on the pages turn into living nightmares of their own darkest fears.
Produced by Guillermo del Toro, Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan, Scary Stories takes a handful of fan favorites and weaves them into a “scary” story of their very own. Instead of simply being a collection of haunting tales, each one serves a purpose, whether it’s the “Red Dot” or “Harold”, each one is used to drive the story even further along. While at first, I was hoping that it would be a collection of short stories featuring these timeless classics, the way in which each individual story progresses the plot leads to a far more interesting experience overall.
Those looking for a movie filled with frightening tales that will have you reaching for the closest shoulder (whether you know who it belongs to or not) will be in for a bit of disappointment. That’s not to take away from the incredible amount of vision needed to bring these classic stories to life, but it takes on a far more contemporary feel, then the dark stories and supernatural visions of the books that came before it. The film comes away feeling more like Goosebumps and less like Freakshow which makes sense given its PG-13 rating and its obvious pre-teen to teen demographic. The movie is still fun however, particularly for those who fondly remember the stories from their youth and is one that will proudly sit beside the likes of Hocus Pocus when it comes to network television down the road as part of its likely Halloween line-up.
4 out of 5 stars
http://sknr.net/2019/08/08/scary-stories-to-tell-in-the-dark/