Search

Search only in certain items:

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)
Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)
2017 | Action, Adventure
Spider-Man's first solo outing within the MCU is a frequently charming and grounded affair.
As the overarching narrative of this behemoth franchise becomes increasingly cosmic and out there, entries like Homecoming are a welcome change of pace.

Tom Holland is a picture perfect, high school era Peter Parker. There's a lot to love about the Spider-Man movies that have come before, but it's nice to see the focus being on his school years properly. He's a young kid, completely out of his depth juggling his civilian life with fighting, years away from the seasoned hero he eventually becomes. He struggles with friendships and relationships like an awkward teenager does whilst constantly craving more in life and aiming for bigger and better things. It's incredibly relatable in that sense.
The world-building surrounding all this is subtle too. The main villain is Vulture, a veteran Spidey rogue, and played by a genuinely intimidating Michael Keaton. His Vulture is equal parts bad-guy and sympathetic every-day-guy, trying to find his way in a post-Avengers world.
The story also finds time to sneak in a few more classic Marvel villains such as Shocker, Tinkerer, Prowler and Scorpion, and it's executed in a way that's not at all overwhelming.
Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) and Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) provide the concrete connections to the wider MCU without ever distracting from the main plot, and the rest of the stellar cast are rounded out by the likes of Marisa Tomei, Zendaya, and Jacob Batalon (as one of the most likable characters to ever grace this franchise FYI)
The set pieces are littered here and there throughout a fairly dialogue heavy screenplay, but they're all pretty solid, the ferry scene being a highlight.

All in all, Spider-Man: Homecoming is an incredibly enjoyable Marvel film, whilst being a touching story about growing up. It's fun, it's exciting, and it's pretty damn wholesome.
  
40x40

Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies

Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)  
Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)
Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)
2017 | Action, Adventure
The Marvel touch
The first thing I’m going to tell you about Spider-Man: Homecoming is that it has been gloriously undersold in its uninspiring trailers and promotional posters. In fact, most of the marketing materials shown made it look like this would be Iron Man 4 ft. Peter Parker. Thankfully that’s not the case.

The second thing I’ll tell you is that Tom Holland’s turn as Peter Parker is very good indeed. But is he better than Tobey Maguire or Andrew Garfield? Well, for that you’ll have to read on.

Still buzzing from his experiences with the Avengers in Captain America: Civil War, young Peter Parker (Tom Holland) returns home to live with his Aunt May (Marisa Tomei). Under the watchful eye of Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr), Peter starts to embrace Spider-Man. He also tries to return to his normal life — distracted by thoughts of proving himself to be more than just a bargain basement superhero. However, when danger emerges in the shape of the Vulture (Michael Keaton), Peter must soon put his powers to the test.

Jon Watts directs not only the best Spider-Man film to date, but probably the best film to come out of the Marvel Cinematic Universe since Guardians of the Galaxy. That is by no means and easy thing to achieve, but by golly he’s done it.

The best Marvel films don’t shout about their superhero roots. By that I mean Captain America: the Winter Soldier was first and foremost a heist movie and Guardians of the Galaxy was an epic space opera. Here, Watts and his two writers turn Spider-Man: Homecoming into a cheesy, fun high-school romance and it succeeds at that beautifully.

But is it a good superhero flick? In a word, yes. The action is shot exceptionally well with very little nonsensical shaky cam, the pacing is spot on; in fact it may be one of the best films I have ever seen for pacing and the characters are all utterly believable.

Tom Holland is, without a doubt the best iteration of Peter Parker ever put to the big screen. He is the school geek that the character always should have been. Gone are Tobey Maguire’s ridiculous facial expressions and Andrew Garfield’s unrealistic ‘high school nerd’ persona.

Elsewhere, Michael Keaton avoids the Marvel villain trap and becomes the universe’s best antagonist since Loki. It would be easy for Vulture to come across ridiculous rather than menacing and Keaton gets the latter absolutely spot on. In particular, a pivotal turning point in the film’s third act is exquisitely written and truly intimidating.

It’s not all good news unfortunately. Like a broken record, I have to mention the obligatory CGI-heavy finale. Thankfully though, the story is nicely twisted to give the scenes emotional gravitas. I’m also not sold on Marisa Tomei as Aunt May, but this may come with time. And if I’m really nit-picking, there’s a little too much obvious product placement for Audi.

So, I’ve managed to get through a full review with only a small paragraph of negative points, that doesn’t happen very often. Something else that doesn’t happen very often is for me to award a film a full five stars. On this occasion however, the Marvel touch has well and truly created a corker.


https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/07/06/spider-man-homecoming-review/
  
40x40

Josh Napper (40 KP) rated Spare Parts (2015) in Movies

Jun 12, 2019 (Updated Jun 12, 2019)  
Spare Parts (2015)
Spare Parts (2015)
2015 | Drama, Family
8
8.0 (1 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Plot
With the help of their high school's newest teacher (George Lopez), four Hispanic students form a robotics club. Although they have no experience, the youths set their sights on a national robotics contest. With $800 and parts scavenged from old cars, they build a robot and compete against reigning champion MIT. Along the way, the students learn not only how to build a robot but something far more important: how to forge bonds that will last a lifetime.

What lessons did you learn from this story (theme/moral)? What do you think others will learn from it?
One man can open eyes, and not just one or two eyes but a whole family, team, school, and community. It's not about where you are that truly matters; it’s about the people you are with here that truly matters. Even if you do not get the results you wanted to have when the final second ticks off the clock, you are, and you will always be a winner. No matter how much success you have on your own you are alone, so do it as a team, that way you are and never will be alone.

To summarize it, I liked the whole thing. The fact that the students and even the teacher faced those odds and still went after what they wanted and felt they could do it.

What group of people would like this movie? Who would you recommend it to? Who would you not recommend it to?
I would gladly recommend it to anyone. However, to break it down into smaller groups, I would recommend it to three groups. 1st of all, I would recommend it to students who are told they can’t do something they really wanna do due to one thing or another because the real-life characters of the movie had to go thru the same exact thing. 2nd of all, I would recommend it to teachers and other staff at school, mainly the high school level, so they could take a lesson from this inspiring movie and turn it into their own way of inspiring their students and to get their classmates to work together to turn their little old ideas and dreams into not just reality but also successes. 3rd of all, I would recommend it to people in general who are down on their knees wanting to watch something that would motivate them to not ever give up on their dreams.

What is your final word on the film: Is it good or bad?
The movie Spare Parts is a fantastic film that deals with real-life events. It is kinda incredible that it is simply another movie that was inspired by a true story. Once you look into what the real-life characters had to go thru– their struggle and their success– I was shocked simply due to the unbelievable amount of pain and struggle leading all up to an ending that saw them not only surprise everyone but also themselves. The actors and the actresses completely make it believable that they are not there themselves because it makes you believe they are really going through the events of the movie.

RATING SYSTEM:

1- crap

2- poor

3- decent

4- even

5- Good

6- Great

7- perfect

I give the movie spare parts a movie rating of 6
  
Accepted (2006)
Accepted (2006)
2006 | Comedy
8
7.3 (4 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Story: Accepted starts when serial slacker Bartleby (Long) fails to get accepted into any colleges when his high school run concludes. Bartleby isn’t the only one that lost his chance to go college, he decides to join Sherman (Hill) and Daryl (Short) in creating a fake college South Harmon Institute of Technology.

To make his parents believe this is a real college, he works with his friends to refurbish a building to be a college, only for the college to take off having numerous students turn up leading to a battle with the local real college.

 

Thoughts on Accepted

 

Characters – Bartleby is the student at high school everyone turns to for fake ids, he is a slacker at heart, not knowing where he wants to go and getting rejected by all the colleges that he applied to. To keep his parents happy, he creates a college only for everything to get out of hand he needs to use his quick-thinking ideas to keep the cover on. Sherman is the only one of the group of friends that did get into the college he wanted, he helps Bartleby get the college up and running while trying to keep everything in his own future together. Monica is the love interest for Bartleby, always been the girl that he dreams off, she has her own passion, which her college isn’t going to give her. We get plenty of characters that are struggling to find their place in the next stages of their life and the rich students who get into college without any problems.

Performances – This movie has a big cast of actors that would be great picks for any teen comedy in the early 2000s. Justin Long takes the leading role and he is great because the character he plays is the one we are seeing him play a lot. Jonah Hill gets good laughs from his role, but this is before he transformed his comedy to hit more often. Blake Lively is a good love interest for the film, the whole supporting cast does well through the film.

Story – The story is about one student that creates a fake college to cover up the fact he never got accepted into any college and things get out of hand. The story is told in a comic tone, even though it does tackle the serious problem school students face when it comes to the end of their run, before college, what happens if they don’t make it, what if they do make it and can’t handle the pressure. In fairness the telling of the story is done well for a teen comedy and is easily one that can be enjoyed by the fans of the genre.

Comedy – The comedy in this film does work for the most part, it is mostly teen comedy material which is fine to enjoy.

Settings – The film is a college set movie, it gives an idea of creativity the characters will be facing.


Scene of the Movie – The case.

That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t get enough focus on why so many students got rejected from other colleges.

Final Thoughts – This is one of the fun modern college movie, it tells an important message about dealing with the added pressure of college life.

 

Overall: One for the teen comedy movies.

https://moviesreview101.com/2018/06/03/justin-long-weekend-accepted-2006/
  
40x40

Jeff Nichols recommended The Hustler (1961) in Movies (curated)

 
The Hustler (1961)
The Hustler (1961)
1961 | Drama, Romance

"Then the next Paul Newman film has to be The Hustler — that’s as much about directing as anything else. I know that director [Robert Rossen] didn’t do a ton of stuff but that’s the first time I really started thinking about the frame. That’s not true; I thought about the frame before I even knew I was thinking about the frame when I saw Lawrence of Arabia. I saw The Hustler again on a film print in college. I’d seen it many times before, I actually owned it on video in high school. What high school student owns a video cassette of The Hustler? But I did. I just thought it was so beautiful — that black and white photography. The framing in that film — I think it’s cinema scope. I know it’s 235, so super wide frames. The way they would stack foreground-background action in that — that was a real lesson because I had done this thing in my first video project in film school. I was looking at the camera and I was looking at the shot and it was a video camera that they had on a little pee-wee dolly that had a hydraulic boom arm on it. I was just sitting there looking at this video and wondering, “This is in my infancy as a person thinking about visual storytelling.” I was messing with this hydraulic boom lift and looking at the monitor and all of a sudden I lowered the camera to the point to where this table that was right in front of the camera fell into the foreground. Then I had this thing in the foreground and this carriage in the background. And all of a sudden, it just got vastly more interesting to me. I know that might seem so remedial to people that take photographs and other things. This was a big breakthrough for me. When I went back and looked at The Hustler you see all of this complex foreground-background framing going on. Spielberg‘s the best at it too. Spielberg does it all the time. If you look at scenes in Indiana Jones where they’re sitting across the table the more he puts the camera — it’s awesome. But there’s an elegance to the camera placement and the camera movement in The Hustler that’s pretty undeniable. Not to mention, there’s a reason I’m talking about Paul Newman movies: there’s a behavior emerging in these films from the sixties that I really identified with. I almost felt like they valued it more than people in other decades, because they were so directly breaking free from the structures of studio films of the fifties and that acting style, more importantly. That it seemed like, “Now we’re going to take some seriously flawed characters for a run, for a test drive.” It’s when you start getting, I think, some of the best writing in film history — and character writing specifically. Stories that turn on character more than plot. What an odd plot for The Hustler. What an odd trajectory, but totally compelling. When I guess they’re going to the derby or whatever and that’s when his girlfriend — what an odd structure. That’s really something I strive for in my stuff. Structures that aren’t just a continual execution of plot, but are really driven by characters and their flaws."

Source