Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated Stephen King's A Good Marriage (2014) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: A Good Marriage starts with the anniversary party of Darcy (Allen) and Bob Anderson (LaPaglia) with their grown up children Petra (Connolly) and Donnie (Stockman). Everything on the outside looks like it is going great for the couple and what could possibly be shocking about them? The couple seem to have a follower in Holt Ramsey (Lang) but why?
Darcy’s life takes a sudden change when searching for batteries she finds a hidden box with the drivers licences of woman who are found dead. As Darcy struggles to deal with the realisation that she is married to a serial killer we watch how Bob is tracking down him latest victim while away on business. We have to watch how Bob and Darcy try to work through the problems because spilling the secret could ruin the family.
A Good Marriage really does end up coming off very dull, the concept sounds very interesting. I feel this story should have been a hell of a lot tenser because of the action of the husband especially with the idea that the wife doesn’t want to destroy her children’s lives with the secret. I can honestly say I was expecting a look into the husband’s killing and an actual confrontation rather than just a calm talking about his actions. Overall the story doesn’t come off very well at all and I can honestly say this will disappoint any and all the Stephen King Fans out there. (2/10)
Actor Review
Joan Allen: Darcy Anderson is the loving mother and wife who discovers her husband’s secret. Darcy has to try and figure out what to do because talking will destroy the family but she also knows the next victim will now be here fault. Joan does a solid job but doesn’t reach the levels you would expect to make you feel like her character is scared or keeping a brave face. (5/10)
Anthony LaPaglia: Bob Anderson is the account husband of Darcy who has been living a different life behind his family’s back as a serial killer. When his wife discovers his secret he has to convince her not to go to the cops and ruin the life the children think they have had. Anthony is an actor I would expect to be able to play this role really well but he doesn’t seem to get into the role enough to make us believe he is a killer. (3/10)
Support Cast: A Good Marriage has a supporting cast that are mostly people Darcy is trying to protect from the truth, but it also has a man trying to find out the truth about the killer.
Director Review: Peter Askin – Peter doesn’t give us enough tension in a film that should be filled to the rim with tension because of the subject matter. (3/10)
Thriller: A Good Marriage is a film that should be filled with tension but this manages to let it all go without capitalising on the idea. (2/10)
Settings: A Good Marriage keeps the settings great because the idea would be that the killer is in plain sight living a normal life. (9/10)
Suggestion: A Good Marriage has to go down as one to avoid because it really does disappoint trying to tell an easy story. (Avoid)
Best Part: Hard to find anything.
Worst Part: No Tension.
Improve Ideas: High tension level.
Believability: The idea does come from a real serial killer but the outcome on film doesn’t really work. (3/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 42 Minutes
Trivia: This is Stephen King’s first self-adapted screenplay since “Pet Sematary,” which was released 25 years earlier. The last feature film script he wrote was “Sleepwalkers,” released in 1992. Since then he has written TV movies, mini-series and shows, such as “The Stand,” “The Shining” and “Kingdom Hospital.”
Overall: Very disappointing thriller with no actual tension.
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/06/04/a-good-marriage-2014/
Darcy’s life takes a sudden change when searching for batteries she finds a hidden box with the drivers licences of woman who are found dead. As Darcy struggles to deal with the realisation that she is married to a serial killer we watch how Bob is tracking down him latest victim while away on business. We have to watch how Bob and Darcy try to work through the problems because spilling the secret could ruin the family.
A Good Marriage really does end up coming off very dull, the concept sounds very interesting. I feel this story should have been a hell of a lot tenser because of the action of the husband especially with the idea that the wife doesn’t want to destroy her children’s lives with the secret. I can honestly say I was expecting a look into the husband’s killing and an actual confrontation rather than just a calm talking about his actions. Overall the story doesn’t come off very well at all and I can honestly say this will disappoint any and all the Stephen King Fans out there. (2/10)
Actor Review
Joan Allen: Darcy Anderson is the loving mother and wife who discovers her husband’s secret. Darcy has to try and figure out what to do because talking will destroy the family but she also knows the next victim will now be here fault. Joan does a solid job but doesn’t reach the levels you would expect to make you feel like her character is scared or keeping a brave face. (5/10)
Anthony LaPaglia: Bob Anderson is the account husband of Darcy who has been living a different life behind his family’s back as a serial killer. When his wife discovers his secret he has to convince her not to go to the cops and ruin the life the children think they have had. Anthony is an actor I would expect to be able to play this role really well but he doesn’t seem to get into the role enough to make us believe he is a killer. (3/10)
Support Cast: A Good Marriage has a supporting cast that are mostly people Darcy is trying to protect from the truth, but it also has a man trying to find out the truth about the killer.
Director Review: Peter Askin – Peter doesn’t give us enough tension in a film that should be filled to the rim with tension because of the subject matter. (3/10)
Thriller: A Good Marriage is a film that should be filled with tension but this manages to let it all go without capitalising on the idea. (2/10)
Settings: A Good Marriage keeps the settings great because the idea would be that the killer is in plain sight living a normal life. (9/10)
Suggestion: A Good Marriage has to go down as one to avoid because it really does disappoint trying to tell an easy story. (Avoid)
Best Part: Hard to find anything.
Worst Part: No Tension.
Improve Ideas: High tension level.
Believability: The idea does come from a real serial killer but the outcome on film doesn’t really work. (3/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 42 Minutes
Trivia: This is Stephen King’s first self-adapted screenplay since “Pet Sematary,” which was released 25 years earlier. The last feature film script he wrote was “Sleepwalkers,” released in 1992. Since then he has written TV movies, mini-series and shows, such as “The Stand,” “The Shining” and “Kingdom Hospital.”
Overall: Very disappointing thriller with no actual tension.
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/06/04/a-good-marriage-2014/
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Stan & Ollie (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
When the laughter has to end.
The problem with any comedy double act is that if illness or death get in the way (think Dustin Gee and Les Dennis; or Morecambe and Wise) the wheels can come off for the other partner. “Stan and Ollie” tells the story of the comic duo starting in 1937 when they reached their peak of global popularity, albeit when Laurel was hardly on speaking terms with their long-term producer Hal Roach (Danny Huston).
As you might guess from this, the emotional direction for the film is downwards, but not necessarily in a totally depressing way. The film depicts the duo’s tour of Laurel’s native country (he was born in Lancashire) and this has its ups as well as its downs.
Not knowing their life story, this is one where when the trailer came on I shut my eyes and plugged my ears so as to avoid spoilers: as such I will say nothing further on the details of the plot.
My wife and I were reminiscing after seeing this flick about how our parents used to crack up over the film antics of Laurel and Hardy. And they were, in their own slapstick way, very funny indeed. The film manages to recreate (impecably) some of their more famous routines and parodies others: their travel trunk gallops to the bottom of the station steps, mimicking the famous scenes with a piano from 1932’s “The Music Box”. “Do we really need that trunk” Hardy deadpans to Laurel.
The turns
There are four star turns at the heart of the film and they are John C. Reilly as Ollie; Steve Coogan as Stan; Shirley Henderson (forever to be referenced as “Moaning Myrtle”) as Ollie’s wife Lucille and Nina Arianda (so memorable as the ‘pointer outer’ in the ‘Emperor’s New Clothes’ segment of “Florence Foster Jenkins“) as Stan’s latest wife Ida.
Coogan and Reilly do an outstanding job of impersonating the comic duo. Both are simply brilliant, playing up to their public personas when visible but subtly delivering similar traits in private. Of the two, John C. Reilly’s performance is the most memorable: he IS Oliver Hardy. Not taking too much away from the other performance, but there are a few times when Coogan poked through the illusion (like a Partridge sticking its head out from a Pear Tree you might say).
Henderson and Arianda also add tremendous heart to the drama, and Arianda’s Ida in particular is hilarious. Also delivering a fabulous supporting role is Rufus Jones as the famous impressario Bernard Delfont: all smarm and Machiavellian chicanery that adds a different shape of comedy to the film.
Another Fine Mess?
Actually, no: it’s one of those pleasant and untaxing cinema experiences that older audiences in particular will really enjoy. However, the film’s far from perfect in my view: the flash-forwards/flash-backs I felt made the story bitty and disjointed; and ultimately the life story of the duo doesn’t have a huge depth of drama in it to amaze or excite, the way that 2004’s “Beyond the Sea” (the biopic of Bobby Darin) did for example. But the film never gets boring or disappoints.
I’d like to say that the script by Jeff Pope (“Philomena“) is historically accurate, but a look at the wikipedia entries for the pair show that it was far from that. Yes, the tours of the UK and Europe did happen, but over multiple years and the actual events in their lives are telescoped into a single trip for dramatic purposes. But I think the essence of the pair comes across nicely. Laurel’s wikipedia entry records a nice death-bed scene that sums up the guy:
“Minutes before his death, he told his nurse that he would not mind going skiing, and she replied that she was not aware that he was a skier. “I’m not,” said Laurel, “I’d rather be doing that than this!” A few minutes later, the nurse looked in on him again and found that he had died quietly in his armchair.”
“Stan and Ollie” has a few preview screenings before the New Year, but goes on UK general release on January 11th. Recommended.
As you might guess from this, the emotional direction for the film is downwards, but not necessarily in a totally depressing way. The film depicts the duo’s tour of Laurel’s native country (he was born in Lancashire) and this has its ups as well as its downs.
Not knowing their life story, this is one where when the trailer came on I shut my eyes and plugged my ears so as to avoid spoilers: as such I will say nothing further on the details of the plot.
My wife and I were reminiscing after seeing this flick about how our parents used to crack up over the film antics of Laurel and Hardy. And they were, in their own slapstick way, very funny indeed. The film manages to recreate (impecably) some of their more famous routines and parodies others: their travel trunk gallops to the bottom of the station steps, mimicking the famous scenes with a piano from 1932’s “The Music Box”. “Do we really need that trunk” Hardy deadpans to Laurel.
The turns
There are four star turns at the heart of the film and they are John C. Reilly as Ollie; Steve Coogan as Stan; Shirley Henderson (forever to be referenced as “Moaning Myrtle”) as Ollie’s wife Lucille and Nina Arianda (so memorable as the ‘pointer outer’ in the ‘Emperor’s New Clothes’ segment of “Florence Foster Jenkins“) as Stan’s latest wife Ida.
Coogan and Reilly do an outstanding job of impersonating the comic duo. Both are simply brilliant, playing up to their public personas when visible but subtly delivering similar traits in private. Of the two, John C. Reilly’s performance is the most memorable: he IS Oliver Hardy. Not taking too much away from the other performance, but there are a few times when Coogan poked through the illusion (like a Partridge sticking its head out from a Pear Tree you might say).
Henderson and Arianda also add tremendous heart to the drama, and Arianda’s Ida in particular is hilarious. Also delivering a fabulous supporting role is Rufus Jones as the famous impressario Bernard Delfont: all smarm and Machiavellian chicanery that adds a different shape of comedy to the film.
Another Fine Mess?
Actually, no: it’s one of those pleasant and untaxing cinema experiences that older audiences in particular will really enjoy. However, the film’s far from perfect in my view: the flash-forwards/flash-backs I felt made the story bitty and disjointed; and ultimately the life story of the duo doesn’t have a huge depth of drama in it to amaze or excite, the way that 2004’s “Beyond the Sea” (the biopic of Bobby Darin) did for example. But the film never gets boring or disappoints.
I’d like to say that the script by Jeff Pope (“Philomena“) is historically accurate, but a look at the wikipedia entries for the pair show that it was far from that. Yes, the tours of the UK and Europe did happen, but over multiple years and the actual events in their lives are telescoped into a single trip for dramatic purposes. But I think the essence of the pair comes across nicely. Laurel’s wikipedia entry records a nice death-bed scene that sums up the guy:
“Minutes before his death, he told his nurse that he would not mind going skiing, and she replied that she was not aware that he was a skier. “I’m not,” said Laurel, “I’d rather be doing that than this!” A few minutes later, the nurse looked in on him again and found that he had died quietly in his armchair.”
“Stan and Ollie” has a few preview screenings before the New Year, but goes on UK general release on January 11th. Recommended.
Story: 71 starts as we see Gary Hook (O’Connell) going through his training with his regiment before they get deployed to Belfast to deal with the riot situation. In Ireland the regiment receive their instructions and onto the Catholic side of the war. When the riots get out of hand Gary finds himself on the wrong side of the barrier alone and unarmed in the Irish territory.
With tensions rising Gary finds himself in the middle of the battle not knowing which side to trust as both side are preparing to attack each other as Gary learns the harsh reality of what these riots are causing.
71 puts us into the middle of the Irish riots showing just one soldier’s experience behind enemy lines, this works well. My issue with the story is unless you know the history which I only know the basics you are left kind of wondering why the riots are happening in the first place. Another problem I found was telling what was going on with the supporting characters like who was on whose side which I do understand adds to the mystery but in this situation we should be able to identify them easily. As a film about survival in an urban setting this is great though.
Actor Review
Jack O’Connell: Gary Hook is the young soldier who is on his first mission on the streets on Belfast during the riots of 71, trying to receive a lost weapon he gets separated by his unit and stranded alone behind enemy lines never sure who to trust. Jack is great in this leading role in what was an outstanding year for the young actor.gary
Sam Reid: Lt. Armitage is one of the men that wants to start searching for Gary but constantly gets put down Captain Browning. Sam is solid in this role but doesn’t get enough screen time.
Sean Harris: Captain Sandy Browning is the man running the situation he knows that Gary is alive but really is playing both sides of the battle. Sean is also solid but only in a supporting role.
Killian Scott: Quinn is one of the leaders out trying to kill Gary, he takes his men and boys out on the streets on the hunt for him and will hurt anyone who gets in his way. Killian is good in what seems like one of the primary villains.
Support Cast: 71 has a large supporting cast but working out which side they are on gets confusing at times.
Director Review: Yann Demange – Yann gives us wonderfully shot sequences throughout but not enough back story to the events on the film.
Action: 71 has intensely shot action sequences involved.
Thriller: 71 keeps us on edge as we watch Gary trying to survive the warzone.
War: 71 puts us into a warzone as we see Gary trying to avoid conflict seemingly around every single corner.
Settings: 71 puts us in the warzone of the Belfast streets which really works to pull us into the story.
Special Effects: 71 has great effects when needed without having to just go overboard with them.
Suggestion: 71 is one for fans of the genre but otherwise people might find it slightly hard to keep up with. (War Film Fans Watch)
Best Part: Bomb shock.
Worst Part: Not enough history of the events.
Believability: The riots were real but story is fictional.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Similar Too: Behind Enemy Lines
Awards: Nominated for One BAFTA.
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 39 Minutes
Trivia: Most scenes within the film were shot in Northern England, not in the film’s setting of Belfast.
Overall: Good history war thriller that is intense but never fully drags you into believing everything.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/11/08/71-2014/
With tensions rising Gary finds himself in the middle of the battle not knowing which side to trust as both side are preparing to attack each other as Gary learns the harsh reality of what these riots are causing.
71 puts us into the middle of the Irish riots showing just one soldier’s experience behind enemy lines, this works well. My issue with the story is unless you know the history which I only know the basics you are left kind of wondering why the riots are happening in the first place. Another problem I found was telling what was going on with the supporting characters like who was on whose side which I do understand adds to the mystery but in this situation we should be able to identify them easily. As a film about survival in an urban setting this is great though.
Actor Review
Jack O’Connell: Gary Hook is the young soldier who is on his first mission on the streets on Belfast during the riots of 71, trying to receive a lost weapon he gets separated by his unit and stranded alone behind enemy lines never sure who to trust. Jack is great in this leading role in what was an outstanding year for the young actor.gary
Sam Reid: Lt. Armitage is one of the men that wants to start searching for Gary but constantly gets put down Captain Browning. Sam is solid in this role but doesn’t get enough screen time.
Sean Harris: Captain Sandy Browning is the man running the situation he knows that Gary is alive but really is playing both sides of the battle. Sean is also solid but only in a supporting role.
Killian Scott: Quinn is one of the leaders out trying to kill Gary, he takes his men and boys out on the streets on the hunt for him and will hurt anyone who gets in his way. Killian is good in what seems like one of the primary villains.
Support Cast: 71 has a large supporting cast but working out which side they are on gets confusing at times.
Director Review: Yann Demange – Yann gives us wonderfully shot sequences throughout but not enough back story to the events on the film.
Action: 71 has intensely shot action sequences involved.
Thriller: 71 keeps us on edge as we watch Gary trying to survive the warzone.
War: 71 puts us into a warzone as we see Gary trying to avoid conflict seemingly around every single corner.
Settings: 71 puts us in the warzone of the Belfast streets which really works to pull us into the story.
Special Effects: 71 has great effects when needed without having to just go overboard with them.
Suggestion: 71 is one for fans of the genre but otherwise people might find it slightly hard to keep up with. (War Film Fans Watch)
Best Part: Bomb shock.
Worst Part: Not enough history of the events.
Believability: The riots were real but story is fictional.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Similar Too: Behind Enemy Lines
Awards: Nominated for One BAFTA.
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 39 Minutes
Trivia: Most scenes within the film were shot in Northern England, not in the film’s setting of Belfast.
Overall: Good history war thriller that is intense but never fully drags you into believing everything.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/11/08/71-2014/
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Every Fifteen Minutes in Books
Feb 1, 2018
Dr. Eric Parrish is a busy psychiatrist juggling his work as Chief at a hospital unit, as well as his own private practice. He is also reeling from his recent separation from his wife and the subsequent time he must spend away from his daughter, Hannah, who is only seven-years-old. One day, Eric is called to treat an elderly woman who is dying from cancer, but it quickly becomes clear the real patient is her grandson Max, who, at 17, is having difficulty dealing with his grandmother's impending death. Eric quickly discovers that Max is depressed, struggling with OCD, and having violent thoughts about a girl he knows from his job. However, as Eric treats Max, he suddenly finds his own life breaking apart around him. There is a murder, a violent incident, problems with his wife and daughter, issues at work, and much more.
I never really got "into" this book. To me, Eric is not a likeable character. Throughout the course of the novel he seems to make a remarkable number of questionable decisions, even if his life is somewhat spiraling out of control. For instance, as he goes through the divorce with Caitlin, Eric is constantly lamenting about Hannah and the effects of the divorce on her. So much so that he comes by the house unasked, calls his wife and daughter at all hours, completely ignores the advice of his lawyer, etc. He seems to lack knowledge of any basic divorce or legal protocol - not to mention common sense.
The lack of common sense prevails throughout the book. So much of the plot is supposedly driven by what Eric knows about Max, this teenage kid he meets at the hospital, but really they have two sessions together before things go awry. It seems insane that he would have learned so much about his patient in this time. So much of the plot just seemed implausible and annoying. We hear constant talk about Eric's past anxiety and how he overcame it. OK - so what?
Overall, I just found myself irritated by Eric and annoyed by his decisions. Parts of the book seem completely improbable and the plot is so thinly constructed that once you figure out how everything comes together, it seems barely possible. Then Scottoline throws in another twist that seems completely unnecessary. Overall, rather disappointing read.
I never really got "into" this book. To me, Eric is not a likeable character. Throughout the course of the novel he seems to make a remarkable number of questionable decisions, even if his life is somewhat spiraling out of control. For instance, as he goes through the divorce with Caitlin, Eric is constantly lamenting about Hannah and the effects of the divorce on her. So much so that he comes by the house unasked, calls his wife and daughter at all hours, completely ignores the advice of his lawyer, etc. He seems to lack knowledge of any basic divorce or legal protocol - not to mention common sense.
The lack of common sense prevails throughout the book. So much of the plot is supposedly driven by what Eric knows about Max, this teenage kid he meets at the hospital, but really they have two sessions together before things go awry. It seems insane that he would have learned so much about his patient in this time. So much of the plot just seemed implausible and annoying. We hear constant talk about Eric's past anxiety and how he overcame it. OK - so what?
Overall, I just found myself irritated by Eric and annoyed by his decisions. Parts of the book seem completely improbable and the plot is so thinly constructed that once you figure out how everything comes together, it seems barely possible. Then Scottoline throws in another twist that seems completely unnecessary. Overall, rather disappointing read.
InfusiCalc
Medical and Education
App
InfusiCalc is a drug dose calculator which can be used for either continuous infusions or bolus...
Life After Life: A Guildford Four Memoir
Book
What is it like to spend 15 years in prison for a crime you didn’t commit? Paddy Armstrong was...
biography crime true crime
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Stranger Behind You in Books
Jul 15, 2021
An atmospheric and twisty thriller
Reporter Joan Lurie becomes famous when her story in Manhatta exposes Globe owner Caspar Osgood as a sexual harasser. But as she returns home the night of the publication, she's attacked in her apartment. Terrified and feeling ill from a severe blow to the head, she moves to a super secure building in Manhattan, called the Refuge, to write a book that further details what she's discovered about Casper. At the Refuge, she meets her elderly neighbor, Lillian, who has lived there since it was the Magdalen Laundry and Refuge for Fallen Women in the 1940s. She becomes sucked into Lillian's stories, which often remind Joan of her own life. Meanwhile, Caspar's wife Melissa must deal with the aftermath of learning her husband is sexual predator. Soon, these women's lives will intertwine: in potentially dangerous ways.
"I'm here because four weeks ago someone tried to kill me."
This was an often confusing but incredibly intriguing book that combines the #MeToo movement with a story about wayward girls. You're never quite sure what's going on, as Joan can be an unreliable narrator (head injury + fear, anyone?), leaving one feeling very off balance for the entire book. There's a story within a story here, as Joan goes after Caspar and his transgressions, combined with Lillian's story and her past.
"What kind of person is more concerned about their hard drive than their body?"
I loved the 1940s piece, learning about Lily, the Magdalen laundry, and the Refuge when it was a home for girls. It's fascinating even while being quite sad. Joan could be a very frustrating character (just go to the doctor for your head injury and stop drinking already), but you cannot fault her reporting skills. Caspar's wife Melissa adds a certain depth to the tale, as she wrestles with what her husband has done. Telling the story from Joan and Melissa's point of view really expands what we learn. This is also an atmospheric read, with the Refuge becoming its own character, especially as we learn about its history from the 1940s on. Goodman is always excellent at setting the scene.
While I sometimes found this book frustrating, it was also a page-turner, with compelling characters and an interesting story with some great twists. 4 stars.
"I'm here because four weeks ago someone tried to kill me."
This was an often confusing but incredibly intriguing book that combines the #MeToo movement with a story about wayward girls. You're never quite sure what's going on, as Joan can be an unreliable narrator (head injury + fear, anyone?), leaving one feeling very off balance for the entire book. There's a story within a story here, as Joan goes after Caspar and his transgressions, combined with Lillian's story and her past.
"What kind of person is more concerned about their hard drive than their body?"
I loved the 1940s piece, learning about Lily, the Magdalen laundry, and the Refuge when it was a home for girls. It's fascinating even while being quite sad. Joan could be a very frustrating character (just go to the doctor for your head injury and stop drinking already), but you cannot fault her reporting skills. Caspar's wife Melissa adds a certain depth to the tale, as she wrestles with what her husband has done. Telling the story from Joan and Melissa's point of view really expands what we learn. This is also an atmospheric read, with the Refuge becoming its own character, especially as we learn about its history from the 1940s on. Goodman is always excellent at setting the scene.
While I sometimes found this book frustrating, it was also a page-turner, with compelling characters and an interesting story with some great twists. 4 stars.
Electronics Engineering ToolKit PRO for iPad
Productivity and Education
App
This is the brand-new Electronics Engineering ToolKit PRO for iPad! The HIGHLY RATED and RECOMMENDED...
Sarah (7798 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of The Dark Pictures Anthology: Man of Medan in Video Games
May 29, 2020
A thrilling play
Games like this dont appeal to everyone. It's not full of action, beating people up or a massive open world full of free play. It also doesnt drag on for 40+ hours. However for people like me who struggle with those type of games, Man of Medan is a breath of fresh air.
I'd previously played and rather enjoyed Until Dawn, and I'm pleased to say this follows much in the same vein although it's probably a much shorter story. Graphically this is very impressive looking and like Until Dawn, they've thrown in yet another recognisable face (this time it's Shawn Ashmore aka Bobby from X-Men). The characters look amazing and the setting too. The story too is a good and interesting one, although it does feel a little similar to other stories (like Ghost Ship) and may be a tad predictable. We worked out what was going on well before the third act. That said, I still found it to be absolutely terrifying. Playing a game like this is a lot scarier than watching any horror film!
The gameplay works really well. The fact that you can play this with friends, either online or couch co-op, adds another fun dimension to it all. The decision making also means that there are so many different endings and outcomes (I believe there's over 60 possible ways for the characters to die) that the replayability is surprisingly better than you'd expect. Admittedly it would probably get a bit tedious trying to uncover absolutely everything and all possible outcomes, but playing a few times over is still enjoyable.
The only downsides are the lag and load issues. Most likely due to the decision making process and actions, there is a noticeable lag in some of the cut scenes and movements which is bearable but can noticeably affect the smooth running of the game. There's also the characters themselves. They look great, but they're very cliched and have very little personality or interest too them. And the script is a little cheesy at times which only further impacts with a slight dislike of the characters. Part of me actually wanted to kill them all off...
Overall a great story and an interesting game to play, if you're looking for something a little different.
I'd previously played and rather enjoyed Until Dawn, and I'm pleased to say this follows much in the same vein although it's probably a much shorter story. Graphically this is very impressive looking and like Until Dawn, they've thrown in yet another recognisable face (this time it's Shawn Ashmore aka Bobby from X-Men). The characters look amazing and the setting too. The story too is a good and interesting one, although it does feel a little similar to other stories (like Ghost Ship) and may be a tad predictable. We worked out what was going on well before the third act. That said, I still found it to be absolutely terrifying. Playing a game like this is a lot scarier than watching any horror film!
The gameplay works really well. The fact that you can play this with friends, either online or couch co-op, adds another fun dimension to it all. The decision making also means that there are so many different endings and outcomes (I believe there's over 60 possible ways for the characters to die) that the replayability is surprisingly better than you'd expect. Admittedly it would probably get a bit tedious trying to uncover absolutely everything and all possible outcomes, but playing a few times over is still enjoyable.
The only downsides are the lag and load issues. Most likely due to the decision making process and actions, there is a noticeable lag in some of the cut scenes and movements which is bearable but can noticeably affect the smooth running of the game. There's also the characters themselves. They look great, but they're very cliched and have very little personality or interest too them. And the script is a little cheesy at times which only further impacts with a slight dislike of the characters. Part of me actually wanted to kill them all off...
Overall a great story and an interesting game to play, if you're looking for something a little different.
365Flicks (235 KP) rated Bornless Ones (2016) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
Take 4 Outrageously good looking guys and gals, A 5th guy with some sort of life challenging disease… Move them into a new out of the way house with a secret history, not to far from an Institution, Have them desecrate and destroy what look to be supernatural symbols boarding up the windows and you have Bornless Ones… Oh and there is scary possession, Craziness and a fair bit of really well done gore, Seriously well done Gore!!!
Now that’s not to say that this movie lacks originality in any way because it really does not. Ok we may have seen the creepy house in the middle of nowhere that scares the crap out of its occupants before, but can we really ever get too much of that. The difference I found was that Bornless Ones is in many ways a spiritual cousin to movies like Evil Dead and in many ways actually betters what has come before in its Genre. One of those ways is the performance our cast put in.
Emily (Margaret Judson – The Newsroom) has decided that she cant look after her Cerebal Palsy suffering brother Zach (Micheal Johnston – MTV’s Teen Wolf) anymore, she is going to move him to an institution. However fearing he is going to be too far away from her, Emily and her boyfriend Jesse (Devin Goodsell) buy a house nearby, the house has a past. Emily and Jesse are accompanied by there friends Woodrow (Mark Furze – Home and Away, Underbelly) and Michelle (Bobby T) to help them move in. That’s when the movie cranks it up to 11 and everything goes nuts as our core characters are taken hold of by a paranormal force one by one and must fight for survival.
My horror kick has absolutely continued into 2017 and Bornless Ones was a fantastic place to start. Its a hell of a lot more Evil Dead than the Evil Dead Remake which sucked and this movie really had me in from the start. It does help that it wastes no time at all, no sooner had they all moved in and the shenanigans began.
Alexander Babaev has done a great job on Directing and Writing with this movie and while it falls into the Indie bracket of movies it deserves to be seen by a wider audience. The acting from our core cast is better than you might expect, infact they all smash it out of the park. The acting once possession has taken hold is creepy as shit and utterly compelling.
Bornless Ones is definitely worth a watch if you are a fan of this genre, it is a lot better than most of the possession movies coming out these days. Give it a try…
Now that’s not to say that this movie lacks originality in any way because it really does not. Ok we may have seen the creepy house in the middle of nowhere that scares the crap out of its occupants before, but can we really ever get too much of that. The difference I found was that Bornless Ones is in many ways a spiritual cousin to movies like Evil Dead and in many ways actually betters what has come before in its Genre. One of those ways is the performance our cast put in.
Emily (Margaret Judson – The Newsroom) has decided that she cant look after her Cerebal Palsy suffering brother Zach (Micheal Johnston – MTV’s Teen Wolf) anymore, she is going to move him to an institution. However fearing he is going to be too far away from her, Emily and her boyfriend Jesse (Devin Goodsell) buy a house nearby, the house has a past. Emily and Jesse are accompanied by there friends Woodrow (Mark Furze – Home and Away, Underbelly) and Michelle (Bobby T) to help them move in. That’s when the movie cranks it up to 11 and everything goes nuts as our core characters are taken hold of by a paranormal force one by one and must fight for survival.
My horror kick has absolutely continued into 2017 and Bornless Ones was a fantastic place to start. Its a hell of a lot more Evil Dead than the Evil Dead Remake which sucked and this movie really had me in from the start. It does help that it wastes no time at all, no sooner had they all moved in and the shenanigans began.
Alexander Babaev has done a great job on Directing and Writing with this movie and while it falls into the Indie bracket of movies it deserves to be seen by a wider audience. The acting from our core cast is better than you might expect, infact they all smash it out of the park. The acting once possession has taken hold is creepy as shit and utterly compelling.
Bornless Ones is definitely worth a watch if you are a fan of this genre, it is a lot better than most of the possession movies coming out these days. Give it a try…