Search
Search results
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Follow You in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Initially, I really hated the title of this book, it sounds super cheesy and weird, but after finding out it relates to the Twitter Killer plot, I actually thought it was quite cool. The plotline here is that there was Twitter thread called '#BeMyKiller' where you could advertise yourself up to be killed (in a pranky way) but then a few people who responded to this thread were murdered. I thought this was a really unique motivation for the crimes in this and so my hatred for the title dissipated.
This is a fast paced book, with never a dull moment! If you're one of those people who pushes themselves through "just one more chapter", this book is going to stop you from sleeping... There are 130 chapters in this book, with some of them being just a page long!
I liked the plot for this, that they were making a film about the murders, that then turned into more murders. The setting was in the dark and dreary murder place of Meredith, "Fun Central" and because it was an old kids play area, with ball bits and go-kart tracks, it had an eerie feel to it that worked well alongside the gruesome murders. And yes, they were gruesome murders.
Writing was well done. It's not a challenging book to read, there's no amazing descriptive passages or hard-hitting themes, it's just an easy thriller read. One problem I did have with the writing is something so stupid and very specific that it almost seems pointless in saying it, but it got on my nerves enough times that I have to mention it. "So why did you use the #BeMyKiller hashtag?" - how do you read that sentence? I read it as "hashtag Be My Killer hashtag"... yes that's all that's annoyed me, the double use of the hashtag... don't use a # if you're then going to write out hashtag!!!
Our main character in this novel is Hazel, and while she's creating this film to get justice for Meredith's killer, I didn't particularly like her. The blurb makes it sound like Hazel is doing her documentary to get justice for Meredith, but to me, it felt like she was making the film to save her company from going under. She was too deceptive with all the characters about her reasoning behind creating this new film, that her passion to catch the killer felt fake. As for Meredith being a "childhood friend", I'd say that wasn't very realistic, the book makes it feel like they were more acquaintances than anything, and that Hazel just sort of pitied Meredith. It's never good when you don't like the main character, but I was reasonably happy still going along with this novel. Hazel was dislikable but she was tolerable.
I had my suspicions of who the killer might be, which turned out to be wrong, but I think I would have preferred my scenario to play out because the real reveal was pretty dramatic and out there. Although the last 40% of the book was super tense and horror-movie-like it got a little OTT in my opinion.
Overall this is a great thriller if you're looking for a book with non-stop action, but it's not particularly clever and it's very dark, so if you're not into that kinda thing, you won't enjoy this one. It's clear that Parker has a talent for writing and I will definitely look out for more books of his, but this, for me, was a very mediocre thriller novel.
This is a fast paced book, with never a dull moment! If you're one of those people who pushes themselves through "just one more chapter", this book is going to stop you from sleeping... There are 130 chapters in this book, with some of them being just a page long!
I liked the plot for this, that they were making a film about the murders, that then turned into more murders. The setting was in the dark and dreary murder place of Meredith, "Fun Central" and because it was an old kids play area, with ball bits and go-kart tracks, it had an eerie feel to it that worked well alongside the gruesome murders. And yes, they were gruesome murders.
Writing was well done. It's not a challenging book to read, there's no amazing descriptive passages or hard-hitting themes, it's just an easy thriller read. One problem I did have with the writing is something so stupid and very specific that it almost seems pointless in saying it, but it got on my nerves enough times that I have to mention it. "So why did you use the #BeMyKiller hashtag?" - how do you read that sentence? I read it as "hashtag Be My Killer hashtag"... yes that's all that's annoyed me, the double use of the hashtag... don't use a # if you're then going to write out hashtag!!!
Our main character in this novel is Hazel, and while she's creating this film to get justice for Meredith's killer, I didn't particularly like her. The blurb makes it sound like Hazel is doing her documentary to get justice for Meredith, but to me, it felt like she was making the film to save her company from going under. She was too deceptive with all the characters about her reasoning behind creating this new film, that her passion to catch the killer felt fake. As for Meredith being a "childhood friend", I'd say that wasn't very realistic, the book makes it feel like they were more acquaintances than anything, and that Hazel just sort of pitied Meredith. It's never good when you don't like the main character, but I was reasonably happy still going along with this novel. Hazel was dislikable but she was tolerable.
I had my suspicions of who the killer might be, which turned out to be wrong, but I think I would have preferred my scenario to play out because the real reveal was pretty dramatic and out there. Although the last 40% of the book was super tense and horror-movie-like it got a little OTT in my opinion.
Overall this is a great thriller if you're looking for a book with non-stop action, but it's not particularly clever and it's very dark, so if you're not into that kinda thing, you won't enjoy this one. It's clear that Parker has a talent for writing and I will definitely look out for more books of his, but this, for me, was a very mediocre thriller novel.
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated The Meg (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Statham vs Massive Prehistoric Shark
Before I start my review, I think I should add a quick disclaimer. I knew fine well that I wasn’t walking into a Oscar-worthy, perfect film as soon as I booked my ticket for The Meg. With the exception of Jaws, how many shark films have actually been award worthy? We’ve seen a huge boom in shark popularity ranging from plausible to the downright stupid (yes Sharknado, I’m looking at you and your buddies). But despite my already low expectations, I still have a fair amount of criticism for what I saw.
My biggest problem from the get-go is that we get no explanation for why the megalodon, a shark that’s been extinct for 2 million years has suddenly came back to gobble people up. How did it survive? Why is it there? Even the most low budget, downright awful creature features try to offer some silly scientific explanation for why the antagonist exists at all. It’s dumb, but hey, at least they tried. The Meg makes no effort to try and explain anything which was frustrating to me. The most we got was “Oh hey, there’s this really big creature that we thought was extinct but it’s actually living down in the Marianas trench – surprise!”. This might be a sufficient explanation for some, but not for me.
Having said that, was it an entertaining film? Sure. I did really enjoy the visuals especially and thought they did an excellent job with the CGI and actually bringing this creature and the underwater facility to life. Cinematically it’s a stunning film to look at, and despite all this implausibility, it still transports you to this huge, unknown, underwater world for the duration. I’ve seen some terrible CGI in my time, but thankfully The Meg doesn’t fall into this category. These visuals make up for the cringe-worthy script and lines that were supposed to be serious and instead made me burst out laughing. But let’s be honest, I’d be disappointed if the script wasn’t this god-awful. You walk into a film like this expecting to face palm a couple of times, don’t you?
I would’ve liked a bit more brutality as the Meg is supposed to be a terrifying, monster shark that’s approximately 60 feet in length. (The Great White shark can grow up to 20 feet for comparison). Despite it’s 12 rating I’m sure more blood and violence would’ve been acceptable as Jaws managed to get away with it back in 1975. Who could forget that scene where an unfortunate fellow slides down into the shark’s mouth? Brutal. Whilst I appreciate this isn’t necessarily a horror film, it actually needed more violence and less filler scenes in my opinion. It’s not often that I ask for more violence,` especially in an action film, yet here we are.
To conclude, The Meg is a fun way to spend your evening, but it ultimately felt like a high budget B-Movie. The actors tried their best with the script they had, but even people like Jason Statham and Ruby Rose couldn’t make it better. (what was up with Statham’s accent, by the way?!). If you’re wanting a silly shark film with more substance, I’d recommend Deep Blue Sea instead
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/08/19/statham-vs-massive-prehistoric-shark-my-thoughts-on-the-meg/
My biggest problem from the get-go is that we get no explanation for why the megalodon, a shark that’s been extinct for 2 million years has suddenly came back to gobble people up. How did it survive? Why is it there? Even the most low budget, downright awful creature features try to offer some silly scientific explanation for why the antagonist exists at all. It’s dumb, but hey, at least they tried. The Meg makes no effort to try and explain anything which was frustrating to me. The most we got was “Oh hey, there’s this really big creature that we thought was extinct but it’s actually living down in the Marianas trench – surprise!”. This might be a sufficient explanation for some, but not for me.
Having said that, was it an entertaining film? Sure. I did really enjoy the visuals especially and thought they did an excellent job with the CGI and actually bringing this creature and the underwater facility to life. Cinematically it’s a stunning film to look at, and despite all this implausibility, it still transports you to this huge, unknown, underwater world for the duration. I’ve seen some terrible CGI in my time, but thankfully The Meg doesn’t fall into this category. These visuals make up for the cringe-worthy script and lines that were supposed to be serious and instead made me burst out laughing. But let’s be honest, I’d be disappointed if the script wasn’t this god-awful. You walk into a film like this expecting to face palm a couple of times, don’t you?
I would’ve liked a bit more brutality as the Meg is supposed to be a terrifying, monster shark that’s approximately 60 feet in length. (The Great White shark can grow up to 20 feet for comparison). Despite it’s 12 rating I’m sure more blood and violence would’ve been acceptable as Jaws managed to get away with it back in 1975. Who could forget that scene where an unfortunate fellow slides down into the shark’s mouth? Brutal. Whilst I appreciate this isn’t necessarily a horror film, it actually needed more violence and less filler scenes in my opinion. It’s not often that I ask for more violence,` especially in an action film, yet here we are.
To conclude, The Meg is a fun way to spend your evening, but it ultimately felt like a high budget B-Movie. The actors tried their best with the script they had, but even people like Jason Statham and Ruby Rose couldn’t make it better. (what was up with Statham’s accent, by the way?!). If you’re wanting a silly shark film with more substance, I’d recommend Deep Blue Sea instead
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/08/19/statham-vs-massive-prehistoric-shark-my-thoughts-on-the-meg/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated BloodRayne (2006) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Turning a video game into a feature film is often a daunting task. With a large built in audience, gamers tend to be very picky over film adaptations and agitate very easily over even the slightest deviation from the source material.
Often in games, storylines are kept to the basic elements in order to keep the action flowing, unhindered by dialogue, character development, and plot twists as the notion is that gamers want action and will become bored if they have to wait through the elements listed above.
It is ironic that in films bases on games, the paring down of plot and characters in favor of a more linear setup and action often draws the wrath of critics and gamers for doing what game makers have been doing for years, letting gamers get to the goods.
In the new film Bloodrayne based on the hit game series of the same name by Majesco, Director Uwe Boll has crafted a film that explores the how and whys of the game series, focusing on the origins of the title character Rayne (Kristanna Loken), who toils as the half-human, half-vampire Dhampir in remote 18th century Romania as a freak in a traveling circus. Here ability to be burned by water yet healed by the blood of animals is a big drawing card to the circus, who has no problem exploiting her only to lock her in an animal cage when the show is over.
Unknown to Rayne, her fate is about to become entwined with a man named Vladamir (Michael Madsen), a vampire hunter and member of a secret society dedicated to eliminating the threat they pose. It is learned that the land is under the control of a powerful vampire named Kagan (Ben Kinglsey), who is seeking to locate and reunite three vampire relics in an effort to gain absolute power.
In time Rayne is brought into the order that sees her as a tool for fighting back the ever increasing army of Kagan. This movie is not met well by certain members of the group, especially Katarin (Michelle Rodriquez), who is not certain that bringing a person who is part vampire into their midst is a good idea.
Despite rising tensions and a steamy attraction to a hunter named Sebastian (Matt Davis), Rayne soon finds herself part of the group and firmly matched up against Kagan and his minions with the fate of the world in the balance.
While the film has some issues such as a thin plot and at times stiff acting and basic dialogue it is a marked improvement for Boll who has received harsh criticisms of his past works. Bloodrayne blends exotic visuals with classic gothic touches in a manner that compliments the material and is never heavy handed. The action scenes while gory are engaging and abundant, especially the inclusion of so called Boss battles that are common in video games.
While Bloodrayne has its blemishes, the film has its moments and is not nearly as bad as several mean spirited campaigns against it and Boll have suggested.
I have seen far worse films in the last 6 months such as The Cave, Into the Blue and Bewitched to name a few. As vampire films go, Bloodrayne is better than most of the horror offerings we have been inundated with in recent years less we forget “Wrong Turn” and “House of Wax”
Often in games, storylines are kept to the basic elements in order to keep the action flowing, unhindered by dialogue, character development, and plot twists as the notion is that gamers want action and will become bored if they have to wait through the elements listed above.
It is ironic that in films bases on games, the paring down of plot and characters in favor of a more linear setup and action often draws the wrath of critics and gamers for doing what game makers have been doing for years, letting gamers get to the goods.
In the new film Bloodrayne based on the hit game series of the same name by Majesco, Director Uwe Boll has crafted a film that explores the how and whys of the game series, focusing on the origins of the title character Rayne (Kristanna Loken), who toils as the half-human, half-vampire Dhampir in remote 18th century Romania as a freak in a traveling circus. Here ability to be burned by water yet healed by the blood of animals is a big drawing card to the circus, who has no problem exploiting her only to lock her in an animal cage when the show is over.
Unknown to Rayne, her fate is about to become entwined with a man named Vladamir (Michael Madsen), a vampire hunter and member of a secret society dedicated to eliminating the threat they pose. It is learned that the land is under the control of a powerful vampire named Kagan (Ben Kinglsey), who is seeking to locate and reunite three vampire relics in an effort to gain absolute power.
In time Rayne is brought into the order that sees her as a tool for fighting back the ever increasing army of Kagan. This movie is not met well by certain members of the group, especially Katarin (Michelle Rodriquez), who is not certain that bringing a person who is part vampire into their midst is a good idea.
Despite rising tensions and a steamy attraction to a hunter named Sebastian (Matt Davis), Rayne soon finds herself part of the group and firmly matched up against Kagan and his minions with the fate of the world in the balance.
While the film has some issues such as a thin plot and at times stiff acting and basic dialogue it is a marked improvement for Boll who has received harsh criticisms of his past works. Bloodrayne blends exotic visuals with classic gothic touches in a manner that compliments the material and is never heavy handed. The action scenes while gory are engaging and abundant, especially the inclusion of so called Boss battles that are common in video games.
While Bloodrayne has its blemishes, the film has its moments and is not nearly as bad as several mean spirited campaigns against it and Boll have suggested.
I have seen far worse films in the last 6 months such as The Cave, Into the Blue and Bewitched to name a few. As vampire films go, Bloodrayne is better than most of the horror offerings we have been inundated with in recent years less we forget “Wrong Turn” and “House of Wax”
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Vacancy (2007) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
While driving down a back road late one evening on their way to L.A. an embattled couple, are about to make a stop that could cost them their lives. In Vacancy, Amy and David Fox, are returning home from a trip to celebrate the anniversary of their in laws.
The fact that they had to hide their failing marriage, and the tensions that still remain as a result, have driven Amy and David to the point of irritability and they never cease to find new ways to verbally spar with one another.
When their car breaks down, they are happy to discover a gas station attendant who tells them that he can get their car repaired enough to make it to the next town where they will be able to get the help that they need in the morning.
This proves not to be the case as their car once again breaks down shortly after they resume their trip, which forces Amy and David to walk back into town and stay the night at the only hotel in the remote locale.
Frustrated by their situation, the two resign themselves to their situation and check into the hotel and soon make a startling discovery. A stack of video tapes in the room seems to indicate that a series of ghastly murders has been committed in their room, and when hidden cameras are discovered, Amy and David soon realize that they are to be the stars of a future tape.
Trapped and alone, the duo must stave off a series of attacks and find a way to survive, so they can escape the nightmare they have stumbled into.
At first the premise of the film seems to be a step above the usual genre film, as the two leads, Wilson and Beckinsale, bring acredibility to their roles, and do develop their characters beyond the paper thin constructs that are so common in films of this type.
Sadly the film does not take advantage of this advantage and soon becomes a series of pat situations and a surprisingly odd lack of tension and suspense in the film.
One of the biggest problems in the film is that it tips it’s hand way to early in the film, as we know what is going on as the discovery of the tapes eliminates much of the mystery. Had the film saved this piece of information until the end of the film, it might have had far more impact as the audience would be left wondering why the bizarre events were happening to the couple.
Another issue for me was the small cast, as with only Wilson and Beckinsale in peril for the majority of the film, the tension level was greatly reduced, as you know that neither of them is going to be killed early in the film, as that would leave the movie without any protagonists.
As much as I liked the concept and casting, especially Frank Whaley as the creepy hotel clerk, Vacancy is simply a good idea that never rises above its premise, and ends up content to recycle the same old formula from dozens of other horror films without offering any of the thrills or chills, and leaves you unsatisfied.
The fact that they had to hide their failing marriage, and the tensions that still remain as a result, have driven Amy and David to the point of irritability and they never cease to find new ways to verbally spar with one another.
When their car breaks down, they are happy to discover a gas station attendant who tells them that he can get their car repaired enough to make it to the next town where they will be able to get the help that they need in the morning.
This proves not to be the case as their car once again breaks down shortly after they resume their trip, which forces Amy and David to walk back into town and stay the night at the only hotel in the remote locale.
Frustrated by their situation, the two resign themselves to their situation and check into the hotel and soon make a startling discovery. A stack of video tapes in the room seems to indicate that a series of ghastly murders has been committed in their room, and when hidden cameras are discovered, Amy and David soon realize that they are to be the stars of a future tape.
Trapped and alone, the duo must stave off a series of attacks and find a way to survive, so they can escape the nightmare they have stumbled into.
At first the premise of the film seems to be a step above the usual genre film, as the two leads, Wilson and Beckinsale, bring acredibility to their roles, and do develop their characters beyond the paper thin constructs that are so common in films of this type.
Sadly the film does not take advantage of this advantage and soon becomes a series of pat situations and a surprisingly odd lack of tension and suspense in the film.
One of the biggest problems in the film is that it tips it’s hand way to early in the film, as we know what is going on as the discovery of the tapes eliminates much of the mystery. Had the film saved this piece of information until the end of the film, it might have had far more impact as the audience would be left wondering why the bizarre events were happening to the couple.
Another issue for me was the small cast, as with only Wilson and Beckinsale in peril for the majority of the film, the tension level was greatly reduced, as you know that neither of them is going to be killed early in the film, as that would leave the movie without any protagonists.
As much as I liked the concept and casting, especially Frank Whaley as the creepy hotel clerk, Vacancy is simply a good idea that never rises above its premise, and ends up content to recycle the same old formula from dozens of other horror films without offering any of the thrills or chills, and leaves you unsatisfied.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated 3 From Hell (2019) in Movies
Oct 18, 2019 (Updated Oct 18, 2019)
Very disappointing
It seems 3 From Hell was doomed before it began for several reasons.
First, why did Zombie wait so long between sequels? The time between House of 1,000 Corpses and The Devil's Rejects was only 2 years. Zombie was a hot director at the time. Maybe he felt his career as a prominent horror director would continue to blossom after he was handed the reigns of rebooting the Halloween franchise.
Second, talk about painting yourself into a corner thematically having your three main characters go up against a police roadblock at the end of the last film getting sprayed with an onslaught of law enforcement ammunition. These are not immortal characters here, so explaining that circumstance would be difficult one indeed.
Third, and probably most importantly for fans, one of your leads has become deathly ill, lost a lot of weight, and probably cannot handle the strain of a large acting role at this time. Sid Haig dies only a few days after this film's release and his role was reduced to basically a cameo within the first few minutes of the movie disappointing fans of his unique personality as Captain Spaulding to minimal screen time. This eventuality made Rob Zombie have to do extensive rewrites to reinvent his third 3 From Hell baddie, and it was definitely a step down.
Explaining the plot of the film would almost mirror exactly that of the previous film. Somehow, the 3 survive their being riddled with 20 bullets each and get incarcerated for their convictions of the years of murder , torture and other bad deeds they have inflicted on their victims. Otis breaks free and escapes one day on his prison work detail and goes after the family and friends of the warden. A plan is put in place to execute the release of his beautiful, but deadly sister, Baby, by smuggling her out in a prison guard uniform.
After she returns to the warden's home full of kidnap victims (carbon copy of the motel scenes from Rejects) the two baddies along with their badass stepbrother decide to make their way to Mexico to evade capture and indulge in the good life of excess.
After they arrive, they have fun with the locals while secretly are betrayed to a band of south of the border hooligans looking to get revenge themselves on the 3 who had murdered a relative (again the same as the sheriff in Rejects).
I really couldn't believe the plot points being so very similar to Rejects. Zombie clearly ran out of good ideas and felt like the audience would just be happy to see more random bloody violence perpetrated by characters they knew and loved. Not true for me as I became bored quite quickly hoping for something interesting to happen which never really did.
The look of the film was also quite different. It seems Zombie's popularity is not what it once was and his budget this time must have been much smaller. The cinematography was weak and not very creative and the visual effects were just north of Sharknado level I thought with poor quality with the bullet wounds and stabbing injuring looking amateur.
Overall, very disappointed for a long wait with a poor 3rd film payoff. This is one of those times they should've quit with two movies and quit while they were ahead.
First, why did Zombie wait so long between sequels? The time between House of 1,000 Corpses and The Devil's Rejects was only 2 years. Zombie was a hot director at the time. Maybe he felt his career as a prominent horror director would continue to blossom after he was handed the reigns of rebooting the Halloween franchise.
Second, talk about painting yourself into a corner thematically having your three main characters go up against a police roadblock at the end of the last film getting sprayed with an onslaught of law enforcement ammunition. These are not immortal characters here, so explaining that circumstance would be difficult one indeed.
Third, and probably most importantly for fans, one of your leads has become deathly ill, lost a lot of weight, and probably cannot handle the strain of a large acting role at this time. Sid Haig dies only a few days after this film's release and his role was reduced to basically a cameo within the first few minutes of the movie disappointing fans of his unique personality as Captain Spaulding to minimal screen time. This eventuality made Rob Zombie have to do extensive rewrites to reinvent his third 3 From Hell baddie, and it was definitely a step down.
Explaining the plot of the film would almost mirror exactly that of the previous film. Somehow, the 3 survive their being riddled with 20 bullets each and get incarcerated for their convictions of the years of murder , torture and other bad deeds they have inflicted on their victims. Otis breaks free and escapes one day on his prison work detail and goes after the family and friends of the warden. A plan is put in place to execute the release of his beautiful, but deadly sister, Baby, by smuggling her out in a prison guard uniform.
After she returns to the warden's home full of kidnap victims (carbon copy of the motel scenes from Rejects) the two baddies along with their badass stepbrother decide to make their way to Mexico to evade capture and indulge in the good life of excess.
After they arrive, they have fun with the locals while secretly are betrayed to a band of south of the border hooligans looking to get revenge themselves on the 3 who had murdered a relative (again the same as the sheriff in Rejects).
I really couldn't believe the plot points being so very similar to Rejects. Zombie clearly ran out of good ideas and felt like the audience would just be happy to see more random bloody violence perpetrated by characters they knew and loved. Not true for me as I became bored quite quickly hoping for something interesting to happen which never really did.
The look of the film was also quite different. It seems Zombie's popularity is not what it once was and his budget this time must have been much smaller. The cinematography was weak and not very creative and the visual effects were just north of Sharknado level I thought with poor quality with the bullet wounds and stabbing injuring looking amateur.
Overall, very disappointed for a long wait with a poor 3rd film payoff. This is one of those times they should've quit with two movies and quit while they were ahead.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Turning (2020) in Movies
Mar 2, 2020
On reflection, I'm going to have to apologise to Like A Boss for saying it was the worst film I saw in January.
Another adaptation of another classic novel... I'll get this broken record fixed at some point, I promise. Though not until after Dolittle, oh and The Invisible Man, oh and The True History Of The Kelly Gang... you know what? Never mind!
Kate is looking for a different challenge and so she quits her teaching job to become governess to a young girl living on her uncle's estate with his housekeeper after her parent's tragic death. Life in the house is strange even before her brother arrives home suddenly from boarding school. There's something untoward going on but everything defies logic. Can she get out without it slowly eating away at her sanity?
But Emma, this is a horror and you don't like going to horrors at the cinema! No, you're right, but I'm still trying to be brave... but my god do I wish I'd picked a better film.
The first thing I would query is the time jump this film makes from its source material. I can understand wanting to modernise something to get a new audience, I really can, but its setting in 1994 didn't make a lot of sense and at the same time wasn't very noticeable. Within the house and grounds you'd be forgiven for thinking it was a period thriller because there was little to remind you it wasn't. Why not just go the whole hog and set it in the present day? The house could still have been off the grid, it would have allowed for extra backstory being inserted by her researching (I suspect the inclusion of Kate's friend was to allow for extra story details) and then in the climax of the film she could have been cut off from her access to the outside world. There's nothing quite like making an audience fear the technology they hold dear like that.
1 hour and 34 minutes, that was the entire runtime. Normally that's something to be applauded, but in this instance it was an agonising 94 minutes of programming. There was nothing in the film that gripped me, mild intrigue at times, but there was nothing to sustain that interest through any major sections of the film. Jump scares seemed to be the way it wanted to go but even I, the scardiest scaredy cat there ever was, could see them coming, meaning they made no impact.
Both Mackenzie Davis and Finn Wolfhard are good actors but there was no chemistry on screen. I felt no genuine tension between the two at all even though Miles was the certainly playing the creeper card a lot.
If you're talking about The Turning then you have to address the style of ending. A film that leaves you able to interpret what you want from certain events is something to be treasured and is a stroke of genius when done correctly. It's a great marketing tool because your audience are still thinking about the film and discussing it with people long after they've seen it. But for that discussion to be positive you need to have a film that hooks you in and The Turning just didn't do that for me.
Sometimes suspense works better as the written word.
Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-turning-movie-review.html
Another adaptation of another classic novel... I'll get this broken record fixed at some point, I promise. Though not until after Dolittle, oh and The Invisible Man, oh and The True History Of The Kelly Gang... you know what? Never mind!
Kate is looking for a different challenge and so she quits her teaching job to become governess to a young girl living on her uncle's estate with his housekeeper after her parent's tragic death. Life in the house is strange even before her brother arrives home suddenly from boarding school. There's something untoward going on but everything defies logic. Can she get out without it slowly eating away at her sanity?
But Emma, this is a horror and you don't like going to horrors at the cinema! No, you're right, but I'm still trying to be brave... but my god do I wish I'd picked a better film.
The first thing I would query is the time jump this film makes from its source material. I can understand wanting to modernise something to get a new audience, I really can, but its setting in 1994 didn't make a lot of sense and at the same time wasn't very noticeable. Within the house and grounds you'd be forgiven for thinking it was a period thriller because there was little to remind you it wasn't. Why not just go the whole hog and set it in the present day? The house could still have been off the grid, it would have allowed for extra backstory being inserted by her researching (I suspect the inclusion of Kate's friend was to allow for extra story details) and then in the climax of the film she could have been cut off from her access to the outside world. There's nothing quite like making an audience fear the technology they hold dear like that.
1 hour and 34 minutes, that was the entire runtime. Normally that's something to be applauded, but in this instance it was an agonising 94 minutes of programming. There was nothing in the film that gripped me, mild intrigue at times, but there was nothing to sustain that interest through any major sections of the film. Jump scares seemed to be the way it wanted to go but even I, the scardiest scaredy cat there ever was, could see them coming, meaning they made no impact.
Both Mackenzie Davis and Finn Wolfhard are good actors but there was no chemistry on screen. I felt no genuine tension between the two at all even though Miles was the certainly playing the creeper card a lot.
If you're talking about The Turning then you have to address the style of ending. A film that leaves you able to interpret what you want from certain events is something to be treasured and is a stroke of genius when done correctly. It's a great marketing tool because your audience are still thinking about the film and discussing it with people long after they've seen it. But for that discussion to be positive you need to have a film that hooks you in and The Turning just didn't do that for me.
Sometimes suspense works better as the written word.
Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-turning-movie-review.html
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Vivarium (2020) in Movies
Mar 8, 2020
I like the idea of these weird and wonderful takes, when I saw the synopsis I knew it needed to make my LFF shortlist.
Tom and Gemma are looking to take the next step in their relationship, getting their very own home. On a whim they visit an oddly minimal estate agents where they meet Martin. Martin is enthusiastic about the chance to show them the perfect home in the perfect community, Yonder.
When they arrive in the deserted town it's instantly strange. Every house looks like the last, every street looks like the next, and Martin's enthusiasm never waivers. They decide to "dine and dash", politely look around and then leave to laugh about the whole experience on the way home, but as they complete their tour they realise that Martin has gone.
As the couple head home in their car they realise they're somehow lost, the simply designed neighbourhood has become a labyrinth that keeps leading them back to that same house. Maybe this is home after all.
Writing that extended synopsis was an exciting reminder of the idea at the core of Vivarium. Its story would definitely fit well into the recent trends of Black Mirror, Dimension 404 and Twilight Zone, and that was something that slightly hindered my enjoyment. Those formats work well in a compact episode size chunk, the film is only 97 minutes long but the content seems to have been stretched out to fit that runtime.
Towards the end of Vivarium we're introduced to a lot of information that you don't really have enough time to process, so much so that it feels like a rather unsatisfying development. That's where the similarities to the TV show idea ends, could it have benefitted from a sharper end? I'm not sure, perhaps that is all just part of the intrigue.
Jesse Eisenberg and Imogen Poots made quite a good match in the leads, from the off you can see their nature coming through, they're in sync and happy. As the situation deepens and they get more confused and frustrated you see them pulling apart while simultaneously clinging to each other because they're all that they have in the world. It's a lot of ups and downs for the characters to go through and yet the pair manage to make it work, with so much of (basically all of) the film relying on this dynamic I'm pleased that there was such a strong performance from them both.
It's difficult to express the way I feel about this film, I love the idea, the acting was great and the design of the town and the sets were picture perfect in that agonising horror kind of way (it reminded me of the fake 1950s towns they'd set up for atomic bomb testing), where I'm on the fence is the ending. Throwing in the scene that was out of tune with the rest of the film didn't add intrigue for me, but that being said, I'm still thinking about the film months after seeing it so... did it?
While my score might not necessarily seem like a recommendation I honestly think that everyone will take something different away from this about a wide range of things. I swing wildly between remembering the film without that ending to with it, and I don't know which version of the town I prefer seeing in my head...
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/vivarium-movie-review.html
Tom and Gemma are looking to take the next step in their relationship, getting their very own home. On a whim they visit an oddly minimal estate agents where they meet Martin. Martin is enthusiastic about the chance to show them the perfect home in the perfect community, Yonder.
When they arrive in the deserted town it's instantly strange. Every house looks like the last, every street looks like the next, and Martin's enthusiasm never waivers. They decide to "dine and dash", politely look around and then leave to laugh about the whole experience on the way home, but as they complete their tour they realise that Martin has gone.
As the couple head home in their car they realise they're somehow lost, the simply designed neighbourhood has become a labyrinth that keeps leading them back to that same house. Maybe this is home after all.
Writing that extended synopsis was an exciting reminder of the idea at the core of Vivarium. Its story would definitely fit well into the recent trends of Black Mirror, Dimension 404 and Twilight Zone, and that was something that slightly hindered my enjoyment. Those formats work well in a compact episode size chunk, the film is only 97 minutes long but the content seems to have been stretched out to fit that runtime.
Towards the end of Vivarium we're introduced to a lot of information that you don't really have enough time to process, so much so that it feels like a rather unsatisfying development. That's where the similarities to the TV show idea ends, could it have benefitted from a sharper end? I'm not sure, perhaps that is all just part of the intrigue.
Jesse Eisenberg and Imogen Poots made quite a good match in the leads, from the off you can see their nature coming through, they're in sync and happy. As the situation deepens and they get more confused and frustrated you see them pulling apart while simultaneously clinging to each other because they're all that they have in the world. It's a lot of ups and downs for the characters to go through and yet the pair manage to make it work, with so much of (basically all of) the film relying on this dynamic I'm pleased that there was such a strong performance from them both.
It's difficult to express the way I feel about this film, I love the idea, the acting was great and the design of the town and the sets were picture perfect in that agonising horror kind of way (it reminded me of the fake 1950s towns they'd set up for atomic bomb testing), where I'm on the fence is the ending. Throwing in the scene that was out of tune with the rest of the film didn't add intrigue for me, but that being said, I'm still thinking about the film months after seeing it so... did it?
While my score might not necessarily seem like a recommendation I honestly think that everyone will take something different away from this about a wide range of things. I swing wildly between remembering the film without that ending to with it, and I don't know which version of the town I prefer seeing in my head...
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/vivarium-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Edward Scissorhands (1990) in Movies
Apr 23, 2020
Has more heart than later Burton/Depp collaborations
There have been many actor/director long term collaborations through the years - John Ford/John Wayne, Martin Scorcese/Robert DeNiro and Alfred Hitchock/Jimmy Stewart all come to mind. Another interesting collaboration is the unique one between Tim Burton and Johnny Depp. The films these 2 have made have shown an "outsider" being introduced into an environment - usually in a quirky and gothic dark manner. So it was interesting to go back to the film that started it all - 1990's EDWARD SCISSORHANDS.
Interestingly enough, this film works because of the lack of weight of previous Burton/Depp collaborations.
Let me explain...
If you were to hear today that Tim Burton and Johnny Depp were to collaborate on a film, what expectations would you have? Quirky, dark and gothic comes to mind. With EDWARD SCISSORHANDS, none of these expectations were in place. You can see the purity in the beginning of this collaboration with these 2 artists finding there footing together in a film that is...yes...quirky, dark and gothic.
It is also, unexpectedly, light, airy, funny and poignant - traits that I think get lost in later Burton/Depp collaborations....collaborations where the focus seemed to be on the design and look and less on the emotion.
Set in a timeless, stylized world that is part '50's, part '60's, part 80's and part "everything else", EDWARD SCISSORHANDS is Burton's loose retelling of the Frankenstein story, where an isolated inventor (in this case Vincent Price) creates life (Depp)...with scissors for hands (you'll have to see the film to see why). When a local resident (and door to door cosmetic saleslady) discovers Edward living alone, she invites him into her house - and into the lives of the the neighborhood that exists below.
Depp owns this character - and owns it well. He brings an innocence and integrity to this character that rides a fine line well. His character is naive - but not simpleminded. He is longing to please - and to be loved - but has his own mind. In Depp's performance, you see an actor coming into his own.
He is joined - wonderfully - by Diane Wiest as the lady that invites him into her home. Winona Ryder (who turned down Godfather 3 to appear in this film) as Wiest's daughter (and object of Edward's affections) and the great Alan Arkin as the patriarch of the family who is a fun stereo-type of the Suburban dad.
All of this is packaged - uniquely - by Burton with an "8 crayon" color palate that exaggerates the various styles of the time. It is an expert job of combining styles into a unique vision that works very, very well.
I also have to give Burton credit for casting the iconic horror movie veteran Vincent Price (in his last film role) as the inventor of Edward Scissorhands.
I was taken under the spell of this film - and not just because of the interesting visuals - it has a heart and soul (because of Depp's work) that, I think both Depp and Burton lose in some of their later collaborations.
If you haven't seen this film in awhile - check it out - I think you'll like it.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Interestingly enough, this film works because of the lack of weight of previous Burton/Depp collaborations.
Let me explain...
If you were to hear today that Tim Burton and Johnny Depp were to collaborate on a film, what expectations would you have? Quirky, dark and gothic comes to mind. With EDWARD SCISSORHANDS, none of these expectations were in place. You can see the purity in the beginning of this collaboration with these 2 artists finding there footing together in a film that is...yes...quirky, dark and gothic.
It is also, unexpectedly, light, airy, funny and poignant - traits that I think get lost in later Burton/Depp collaborations....collaborations where the focus seemed to be on the design and look and less on the emotion.
Set in a timeless, stylized world that is part '50's, part '60's, part 80's and part "everything else", EDWARD SCISSORHANDS is Burton's loose retelling of the Frankenstein story, where an isolated inventor (in this case Vincent Price) creates life (Depp)...with scissors for hands (you'll have to see the film to see why). When a local resident (and door to door cosmetic saleslady) discovers Edward living alone, she invites him into her house - and into the lives of the the neighborhood that exists below.
Depp owns this character - and owns it well. He brings an innocence and integrity to this character that rides a fine line well. His character is naive - but not simpleminded. He is longing to please - and to be loved - but has his own mind. In Depp's performance, you see an actor coming into his own.
He is joined - wonderfully - by Diane Wiest as the lady that invites him into her home. Winona Ryder (who turned down Godfather 3 to appear in this film) as Wiest's daughter (and object of Edward's affections) and the great Alan Arkin as the patriarch of the family who is a fun stereo-type of the Suburban dad.
All of this is packaged - uniquely - by Burton with an "8 crayon" color palate that exaggerates the various styles of the time. It is an expert job of combining styles into a unique vision that works very, very well.
I also have to give Burton credit for casting the iconic horror movie veteran Vincent Price (in his last film role) as the inventor of Edward Scissorhands.
I was taken under the spell of this film - and not just because of the interesting visuals - it has a heart and soul (because of Depp's work) that, I think both Depp and Burton lose in some of their later collaborations.
If you haven't seen this film in awhile - check it out - I think you'll like it.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Miniatlas Dentistry
Medical and Health & Fitness
App
The Miniatlas Dentistry is the perfect pocket tool for physicians. With just a few taps on their...
Sean Freese (4 KP) rated The Witch (2015) in Movies
Jun 25, 2020
THE VVITCH
The full title is, The Witch: A New England Folktale. Like Grimm’s fairytales, American folklore has taken revisions over the centuries to become a palatable collection of juvenile life lessons. Anyone who has read the original versions of these stories knows how brutal, horrifying, and far removed they are from our current values. As much as I would not condone reading original classic witch tales to a small child, they do contain much deeper implications and ideas than the simple “Don’t tell lies” that are gleaned from modern revisions. What’s fascinating about The Witch is how familiar the setting and story is, without a single cliché or moment of prediction to speak of. The evil that was feared in 17th Century Puritan America has been so eclipsed by the human horrors of The Salem Witch Trials, that we have forgotten what it was to fear a witch.
We know these characters only by their Christian names. William removes his family from their Colonial settlement due to an incompatibility of faith. The colony of Puritans isn’t Christian enough. With his wife, Katherine, William takes his 4 children into the wilds of the Northeast. Airs of The Crucible envelope the setting. Common pronouns are replaced with “thines” and “thous”. Dialogue is delivered as if quoted from Shakespeare or the Bible itself. In the past, this oral dynamic has always sounded ardently rehearsed. Somehow, it’s natural here. Considering William’s rigorous faith, you might expect him to be an overbearingly shrewd father. He is in fact a loving and good man of his time; often a pushover. Katherine is the more fearsome parent, with a shrill voice and gaunt pointed face. While they do live in hardship, this is a good family. Once Fall deadens the colors and greys the skies, things begin to take a disturbing turn.
Ralph Ineson and Kate Dickie play the parents without an exaggeration of the material. Remarkable still are the actors portraying their children. Harvey Scrimshaw plays William’s 10-year-old son, Caleb, as natural as can be imagined. The dramatic beats of a horror movie come with taxing climactic moments and Scrimshaw acts beyond his years. Anya Taylor-Joy plays the eldest daughter Thomasin; a doe-eyed blonde beauty who plays the most relatable character of the flock. The dynamic between Caleb and Thompsin has notes of innocent sexual tension. Their secluded life leaves a great deal of new feelings that can’t be addressed due to their customs. These feelings lead to foreign temptations that are preyed upon by the timeless evil beyond the trees.
The greatest achievement of this film is how faithful it is to its setting and story, while keeping enough behind the veil to become engrossing. The tale feels as old as any, drawing from universal fears and motivations. How it draws you in, keeping you tied to the victims and their perspective while keeping the evil at arm’s length, shows a discipline of craft that greatly compliments the material. Much like vampires, witches have been trivialized and diluted by film into something superficially attractive and entertainingly evil. As with Noseferatu, seeing a witch living a damnable existence of ugliness is much more appropriate. If they’re ever beautiful, they won’t be for long.
The full title is, The Witch: A New England Folktale. Like Grimm’s fairytales, American folklore has taken revisions over the centuries to become a palatable collection of juvenile life lessons. Anyone who has read the original versions of these stories knows how brutal, horrifying, and far removed they are from our current values. As much as I would not condone reading original classic witch tales to a small child, they do contain much deeper implications and ideas than the simple “Don’t tell lies” that are gleaned from modern revisions. What’s fascinating about The Witch is how familiar the setting and story is, without a single cliché or moment of prediction to speak of. The evil that was feared in 17th Century Puritan America has been so eclipsed by the human horrors of The Salem Witch Trials, that we have forgotten what it was to fear a witch.
We know these characters only by their Christian names. William removes his family from their Colonial settlement due to an incompatibility of faith. The colony of Puritans isn’t Christian enough. With his wife, Katherine, William takes his 4 children into the wilds of the Northeast. Airs of The Crucible envelope the setting. Common pronouns are replaced with “thines” and “thous”. Dialogue is delivered as if quoted from Shakespeare or the Bible itself. In the past, this oral dynamic has always sounded ardently rehearsed. Somehow, it’s natural here. Considering William’s rigorous faith, you might expect him to be an overbearingly shrewd father. He is in fact a loving and good man of his time; often a pushover. Katherine is the more fearsome parent, with a shrill voice and gaunt pointed face. While they do live in hardship, this is a good family. Once Fall deadens the colors and greys the skies, things begin to take a disturbing turn.
Ralph Ineson and Kate Dickie play the parents without an exaggeration of the material. Remarkable still are the actors portraying their children. Harvey Scrimshaw plays William’s 10-year-old son, Caleb, as natural as can be imagined. The dramatic beats of a horror movie come with taxing climactic moments and Scrimshaw acts beyond his years. Anya Taylor-Joy plays the eldest daughter Thomasin; a doe-eyed blonde beauty who plays the most relatable character of the flock. The dynamic between Caleb and Thompsin has notes of innocent sexual tension. Their secluded life leaves a great deal of new feelings that can’t be addressed due to their customs. These feelings lead to foreign temptations that are preyed upon by the timeless evil beyond the trees.
The greatest achievement of this film is how faithful it is to its setting and story, while keeping enough behind the veil to become engrossing. The tale feels as old as any, drawing from universal fears and motivations. How it draws you in, keeping you tied to the victims and their perspective while keeping the evil at arm’s length, shows a discipline of craft that greatly compliments the material. Much like vampires, witches have been trivialized and diluted by film into something superficially attractive and entertainingly evil. As with Noseferatu, seeing a witch living a damnable existence of ugliness is much more appropriate. If they’re ever beautiful, they won’t be for long.
