Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Moonlight (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Waxing or Waning?
Seldom do I go to see a movie where I know so little about the plot as this one. I knew it was a “coming of age” drama about a young man growing up in a black neighbourhood in Miami. Period. That ignorance was bliss (so that’s the way this review will stay: I will avoid my usual high-level summary here). For there are twists in this story that you don’t see coming, and moments of such dramatic force that they are cinematically searing.
Playing the young man, Chiron, over three stages of his life are the actors Alex Hibbert, Ashton Sanders and Trevante Rhodes. However, Mahershala Ali, who plays Juan – the drug dealer with a heart – has been the one with all the awards visibility (having this week won the Screen Actors Guild Supporting Actor award, as well as being within the ensemble cast award for the upcoming “Hidden Numbers”). For the avoidance of doubt, Ali and all of these other actors are excellent, as is Jharrel Jerome (in his feature film debut) as Chiron’s 16-year old friend Kevin. But the performance that really spoke to me was that of Ashton Sanders, who has both an uplifting and heartbreaking role as the “middle” Chiron and delivers it supremely well. A real breakout role for him.
Also shining with a dramatic and extremely emotional performance is London’s own Naomie Harris (“Spectre“), justifiably nominated for a Supporting Actress Oscar. Unlike last year’s insipid and dull “Our Kind of Traitor“, where she was given criminally little to do, here she is blisteringly real as a caring mother spiralling down an addiction plug-hole. A career best.
Grammy-nominated musician Janelle Monáe, in her feature film debut, is also eminently watchable alongside Mahershala Ali as Juan’s girlfriend Teresa.
Above all, this powerful ensemble is the best evidence possible that the diversity arguments all over last year’s Oscars were 100% correct. These are all indisputably realistic performances by black actors that must surely move viewers regardless of their colour or creed.
The film has eight Oscar nominations, and I definitely agree with the acting nominations to Maharhala Ali and Naomie Harris. I’d also agree with the award for music to Nicolas Britell (“The Big Short”) which is astonishingly eclectic and jarringly appropriate to the story that unfolds. I could even go along with the Best Film Editing nomination, although I am hardly an expert in the subject.
The remaining nominations are for Best Picture, Best Director (Barry Jenkins), Best Writing Adapted Screenplay (also Barry Jenkins) and Best Cinematography (James Laxton). However, here my opinion diverges with the Academy and – I suspect – many critics. Yes, this is a really engrossing film with a fine and surprisingly non-standard Hollywood ending. It is certainly well worth watching, but is it a top film of the year? No, I don’t think so. There are some aspects of the film that just plain irritated me.
Firstly, the camera work is frequently of the hand-held variety, particularly in the first half of the film, that leads to a serious case of seasickness if you are sitting anywhere other than the back row of the cinema.
More crucially for me, the film introduces two fantastic and atypical characters, but then – inexplicably – the script just unceremoniously dumps them with hardly any further reference made. I found that enormously frustrating and mystifying and spent the rest of the film waiting for a closure that never came.
There is also enormously pervasive use of the “N-word”, right from the opening music track. I appreciate this is probably perfectly appropriate to the ‘hood that the characters occupy, but the continual usage is shocking (at least to a white audience). It is probably designed to shock, but after a while the shock wears off and it becomes more tiresome than offensive.
Based on all the Oscar hype then, this was a bit of a disappointment. But that view is purely relative to all of the great Oscar Best Film candidates I’ve seen in the last few weeks. It is still a very interesting film due to the story that goes off in a novel and surprising direction, and one that is worthy of your movie dollar investment.
Playing the young man, Chiron, over three stages of his life are the actors Alex Hibbert, Ashton Sanders and Trevante Rhodes. However, Mahershala Ali, who plays Juan – the drug dealer with a heart – has been the one with all the awards visibility (having this week won the Screen Actors Guild Supporting Actor award, as well as being within the ensemble cast award for the upcoming “Hidden Numbers”). For the avoidance of doubt, Ali and all of these other actors are excellent, as is Jharrel Jerome (in his feature film debut) as Chiron’s 16-year old friend Kevin. But the performance that really spoke to me was that of Ashton Sanders, who has both an uplifting and heartbreaking role as the “middle” Chiron and delivers it supremely well. A real breakout role for him.
Also shining with a dramatic and extremely emotional performance is London’s own Naomie Harris (“Spectre“), justifiably nominated for a Supporting Actress Oscar. Unlike last year’s insipid and dull “Our Kind of Traitor“, where she was given criminally little to do, here she is blisteringly real as a caring mother spiralling down an addiction plug-hole. A career best.
Grammy-nominated musician Janelle Monáe, in her feature film debut, is also eminently watchable alongside Mahershala Ali as Juan’s girlfriend Teresa.
Above all, this powerful ensemble is the best evidence possible that the diversity arguments all over last year’s Oscars were 100% correct. These are all indisputably realistic performances by black actors that must surely move viewers regardless of their colour or creed.
The film has eight Oscar nominations, and I definitely agree with the acting nominations to Maharhala Ali and Naomie Harris. I’d also agree with the award for music to Nicolas Britell (“The Big Short”) which is astonishingly eclectic and jarringly appropriate to the story that unfolds. I could even go along with the Best Film Editing nomination, although I am hardly an expert in the subject.
The remaining nominations are for Best Picture, Best Director (Barry Jenkins), Best Writing Adapted Screenplay (also Barry Jenkins) and Best Cinematography (James Laxton). However, here my opinion diverges with the Academy and – I suspect – many critics. Yes, this is a really engrossing film with a fine and surprisingly non-standard Hollywood ending. It is certainly well worth watching, but is it a top film of the year? No, I don’t think so. There are some aspects of the film that just plain irritated me.
Firstly, the camera work is frequently of the hand-held variety, particularly in the first half of the film, that leads to a serious case of seasickness if you are sitting anywhere other than the back row of the cinema.
More crucially for me, the film introduces two fantastic and atypical characters, but then – inexplicably – the script just unceremoniously dumps them with hardly any further reference made. I found that enormously frustrating and mystifying and spent the rest of the film waiting for a closure that never came.
There is also enormously pervasive use of the “N-word”, right from the opening music track. I appreciate this is probably perfectly appropriate to the ‘hood that the characters occupy, but the continual usage is shocking (at least to a white audience). It is probably designed to shock, but after a while the shock wears off and it becomes more tiresome than offensive.
Based on all the Oscar hype then, this was a bit of a disappointment. But that view is purely relative to all of the great Oscar Best Film candidates I’ve seen in the last few weeks. It is still a very interesting film due to the story that goes off in a novel and surprising direction, and one that is worthy of your movie dollar investment.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968) in Movies
Mar 7, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
This was the first time that I've seen this children's classic since I was a child, and I suppose that I'd hoped that it would live up to its reputation. In all fairness though, I din't like it that much when I was a child, if I'm honest and my children, though some DO like it, others seemed to have mixed feelings. At best, it's likable but never lovable and at worst, it just isn't liked at all.
So, as an adult I watched this loose adaptation of James Bond's, Ian Flemming's novel, with every good intention, but in the end was left disappointed. Firstly, at 2 hours and 20 minutes long, it feels like an epic, and a completely unnecessary one at that. Its intermission is turned into a Batfink or Adam West's Batman styled cliffhanger rather than a thematic or narrative break that it traditionally should have been, even going so far as to recap the action in the second act!
The songs weren't great either, generally bordering on tedium rather than holding my interest. The story seems to be a little off kilter too, with a seemingly fatal crash destroying the eponymous car before its eventual restoration by Dick van Dyke. This was the culmination of a five-minute title sequence showcasing the early Grand Prix's of 1907 and '08 which for a family film seemed to drag somewhat.
But after an hour of songs and character development, we finally take off in the flying car to the fantasy land of Vulgaria, only for the whole experience to be a fantastical story told by Van Dyke's, Caractacus Potts! All in all, this was a strange film, but not in an entertaining way like Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory, the connection being Roald Dahl's involvement with the screenplay, but in a rather boring way, with events just seeing to happen without any really cause or need. One hour of story, then another one of fantasy. How many other films can boast this kind narrative twist and get away with it. It just seemed to be indulgent and plodding.
It would defiantly have been improved if the car was actually magical and did actually take them on this adventure rather than suggesting that it is perfectly okay to sing and dance around the real world but it's a stretch too far to have a flying car! It should have been a fantasy through and through rather than six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Ultimately, Overrated in my opinion and since the view of FOUR children, boys and girls ranging from 7 – 15, is that it's watchable rather than fully enjoyable, I suspect that this film is being viewed through rose tinted glasses.
So, as an adult I watched this loose adaptation of James Bond's, Ian Flemming's novel, with every good intention, but in the end was left disappointed. Firstly, at 2 hours and 20 minutes long, it feels like an epic, and a completely unnecessary one at that. Its intermission is turned into a Batfink or Adam West's Batman styled cliffhanger rather than a thematic or narrative break that it traditionally should have been, even going so far as to recap the action in the second act!
The songs weren't great either, generally bordering on tedium rather than holding my interest. The story seems to be a little off kilter too, with a seemingly fatal crash destroying the eponymous car before its eventual restoration by Dick van Dyke. This was the culmination of a five-minute title sequence showcasing the early Grand Prix's of 1907 and '08 which for a family film seemed to drag somewhat.
But after an hour of songs and character development, we finally take off in the flying car to the fantasy land of Vulgaria, only for the whole experience to be a fantastical story told by Van Dyke's, Caractacus Potts! All in all, this was a strange film, but not in an entertaining way like Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory, the connection being Roald Dahl's involvement with the screenplay, but in a rather boring way, with events just seeing to happen without any really cause or need. One hour of story, then another one of fantasy. How many other films can boast this kind narrative twist and get away with it. It just seemed to be indulgent and plodding.
It would defiantly have been improved if the car was actually magical and did actually take them on this adventure rather than suggesting that it is perfectly okay to sing and dance around the real world but it's a stretch too far to have a flying car! It should have been a fantasy through and through rather than six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Ultimately, Overrated in my opinion and since the view of FOUR children, boys and girls ranging from 7 – 15, is that it's watchable rather than fully enjoyable, I suspect that this film is being viewed through rose tinted glasses.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Truth (2015) in Movies
Aug 11, 2019
The truth is out there...
Doubtful anyone from outside the United States (or even many within the US) would remember "Rathergate", the subject this film explores, but I found it fascinating nonetheless.
The US during the 2004 presidential election between George W Bush and John Kerry saw the usual mudslinging back and forth, but this film is not really about that. The film focuses on a news story by CBS news involving then airmen George W Bush and his "attempt" to get out of going to Vietnam and certain important military paper which were supposed to have corroborated these events.
Producer Mary Mapes and then anchor Dan Rather decided to air the story on 60 Minutes before they had flushed out all their sources and may have brushed aside criticism which happened to be against their political beliefs and ran with the story anyways. After airing in the fall of 2004 certain aspects of the documents came into question as to whether they could've been written with typewriters of the time or whether these documents were forgeries made by someone who could've merely used Microsoft Word instead.
Repeated attempts to legitimize their accuracy ended up having the opposite effects having witnesses change their stories, allegiances or even admit they had not been honest when presenting their original facts.
Since this is based on actual events, I can say this ended up costing producer Mapes and Rather their careers and sullied their reputations for the rest of their lives.
Even though the film has a very specific set of facts it has to deal with, I found it just as interesting when the director showed scenes of the audience viewing the story when it aired and then began to think about the state of modern news.
Nowadays, most people get their news cycle from internet headlines, scrolling information at the bottoms of television screens and even siloed one-sided stories that support only their own personal political beliefs
I think the broader message this film is trying to convey is that news organizations have the utmost responsibility to not only the report the news, but to keep their biases out of the mix and to make sure every fact is checked and rechecked to make sure they report accurately. News can change public opinion and even though they mostly get things correct, mostly isn't good enough.
I love Cate Blanchett and the legend Robert Redford and they don't disappoint here. The screenplay by writer and first time director James Vanderbilt is pointed and mostly avoids injecting opinion into the facts and presents an interesting and fascinating film I would easily recommend.
The US during the 2004 presidential election between George W Bush and John Kerry saw the usual mudslinging back and forth, but this film is not really about that. The film focuses on a news story by CBS news involving then airmen George W Bush and his "attempt" to get out of going to Vietnam and certain important military paper which were supposed to have corroborated these events.
Producer Mary Mapes and then anchor Dan Rather decided to air the story on 60 Minutes before they had flushed out all their sources and may have brushed aside criticism which happened to be against their political beliefs and ran with the story anyways. After airing in the fall of 2004 certain aspects of the documents came into question as to whether they could've been written with typewriters of the time or whether these documents were forgeries made by someone who could've merely used Microsoft Word instead.
Repeated attempts to legitimize their accuracy ended up having the opposite effects having witnesses change their stories, allegiances or even admit they had not been honest when presenting their original facts.
Since this is based on actual events, I can say this ended up costing producer Mapes and Rather their careers and sullied their reputations for the rest of their lives.
Even though the film has a very specific set of facts it has to deal with, I found it just as interesting when the director showed scenes of the audience viewing the story when it aired and then began to think about the state of modern news.
Nowadays, most people get their news cycle from internet headlines, scrolling information at the bottoms of television screens and even siloed one-sided stories that support only their own personal political beliefs
I think the broader message this film is trying to convey is that news organizations have the utmost responsibility to not only the report the news, but to keep their biases out of the mix and to make sure every fact is checked and rechecked to make sure they report accurately. News can change public opinion and even though they mostly get things correct, mostly isn't good enough.
I love Cate Blanchett and the legend Robert Redford and they don't disappoint here. The screenplay by writer and first time director James Vanderbilt is pointed and mostly avoids injecting opinion into the facts and presents an interesting and fascinating film I would easily recommend.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Suicide Squad (2021) in Movies
Aug 8, 2021
More Fun Than I Expected
It is almost an effort in futility to review a movie such as THE SUICIDE SQUAD, for most folks fall into 1 of 2 camps:
1). Are a DC (or Comic Book Movie) Fan, and will go see this no matter what.
2). Are not of fan of the darker DCEU movies (as compared to the MCU films) and might have checked out the first SUICIDE SQUAD, but have no intention to watch this one.
This review is for the folks in the 2nd camp - for THE SUICIDE SQUAD is a fun summer action flick with silliness, action, humor and HEART at it’s core.
Directed by James Gunn (GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY), THE SUICIDE SQUAD starts out like the first SUICIDE SQUAD film (and most of the DCEU films) - dark, gritty and intense - with a new pack of anti-heroes joining in on a fight that absolutely cements this team as THE SUICIDE SQUAD.
After that, the film makes an interesting adjustment, actually giving the audience anti-heroes that you can root for with just enough of a balance between the dark grittiness that one has come to expect from a DCEU film with a bit more humane touch that really is the hallmark of the MCU.
And, under the Direction of James Gunn, this film finds that balance very, very well.
Gunn, of course, knows how to make these films - his balance of action and character moments is accurate, his action sequences are well plotted and choreographed (no need for “shaky cam” to hide the faults) and he populates this Suicide Squad with some memorable characters.
Margot Robbie, of course, is in another stratosphere in her portrayal of Harley Quinn. This is the 3rd film that Robbie stars as Quinn and she has this part down pat. The problem with the other 2 films that she starred in as Quinn (2016’s SUICIDE SQUAD and 2020’s BIRDS OF PREY) is that she was SO GOOD in those films, that everyone else paled in comparison, but in this film, she has some strong actors/characters to play off of, and this benefits the movie.
Starting with Idris Elba as Bloodsport the “Leader” of the Squad (in essence, replacing Will Smith) and this is a smart move for Elba has the commanding presence of a Leader with that sense of foreboding that he might not be such a good guy underneath - a quality that I just didn’t buy from Smith in the first movie.
Joining Elba as characters that were interesting and strong were RatCatcher 1 (Taiki Waititi - in an extended cameo) and RatCatcher 2 (Daniela Melchior), Savant (Michael Rooker), freedom fighter Sol Soria (Sonya Braga), Thinker (Peter Capaldi) and the “Groot” of this piece, King Shark (Sylvester Stallone).
Oh…and special notice needs to be made of the character of Polka Dot Man (David Dastmalchian). Director Gunn has stated he wanted to find the dumbest villain in the DCEU and make him into one of the heroes of this piece. He found him in Polka Dot Man and is played with great pathos by Dastmalchian.
Fairing less well is the great Viola Davis as the hard-nosed Amanda Waller who seems to be still acting in the gritty, dark style of the first SUICIDE SQUAD film, so misses out on some of the fun of this film as well as Joel Kinneman as Colonel Rick Flagg (the military leader of the group). I really wasn’t invested in Flagg (or Kinneman’s portrayal of Flagg) in the first film - and I am not in this one either. He just isn’t at nearly the same level of performance as the others listed above.
Also…a note about John Cena (and his character PeaceMaker). This is the 2nd 2021 Summer Blockbuster Action flick that I have seen Cena in (following his turn in F9) and in both these films I found his performance to be “flat”. It just didn’t fill the screen, nor does he have enough charisma (a la The Rock) to charm his way through. I was bored by him in this film (as well as in F9).
But…this is a James Gunn film - and he doesn’t spend much time with the characters/actors that don’t really work, but rather, spends his camera time on the ones that do - and the over-the-top action sequences (and villain) that are filmed with a slight grin and a wink-in-the-eye.
It’s a much needed shot-in-the-arm for DCEU films, but - I’m afraid - it might be too little too late, as most folks have already tuned out the DCEU for being “too dark”. Which is too bad, for this is the fun summer blockbuster film action and comic book fans have been looking for.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
1). Are a DC (or Comic Book Movie) Fan, and will go see this no matter what.
2). Are not of fan of the darker DCEU movies (as compared to the MCU films) and might have checked out the first SUICIDE SQUAD, but have no intention to watch this one.
This review is for the folks in the 2nd camp - for THE SUICIDE SQUAD is a fun summer action flick with silliness, action, humor and HEART at it’s core.
Directed by James Gunn (GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY), THE SUICIDE SQUAD starts out like the first SUICIDE SQUAD film (and most of the DCEU films) - dark, gritty and intense - with a new pack of anti-heroes joining in on a fight that absolutely cements this team as THE SUICIDE SQUAD.
After that, the film makes an interesting adjustment, actually giving the audience anti-heroes that you can root for with just enough of a balance between the dark grittiness that one has come to expect from a DCEU film with a bit more humane touch that really is the hallmark of the MCU.
And, under the Direction of James Gunn, this film finds that balance very, very well.
Gunn, of course, knows how to make these films - his balance of action and character moments is accurate, his action sequences are well plotted and choreographed (no need for “shaky cam” to hide the faults) and he populates this Suicide Squad with some memorable characters.
Margot Robbie, of course, is in another stratosphere in her portrayal of Harley Quinn. This is the 3rd film that Robbie stars as Quinn and she has this part down pat. The problem with the other 2 films that she starred in as Quinn (2016’s SUICIDE SQUAD and 2020’s BIRDS OF PREY) is that she was SO GOOD in those films, that everyone else paled in comparison, but in this film, she has some strong actors/characters to play off of, and this benefits the movie.
Starting with Idris Elba as Bloodsport the “Leader” of the Squad (in essence, replacing Will Smith) and this is a smart move for Elba has the commanding presence of a Leader with that sense of foreboding that he might not be such a good guy underneath - a quality that I just didn’t buy from Smith in the first movie.
Joining Elba as characters that were interesting and strong were RatCatcher 1 (Taiki Waititi - in an extended cameo) and RatCatcher 2 (Daniela Melchior), Savant (Michael Rooker), freedom fighter Sol Soria (Sonya Braga), Thinker (Peter Capaldi) and the “Groot” of this piece, King Shark (Sylvester Stallone).
Oh…and special notice needs to be made of the character of Polka Dot Man (David Dastmalchian). Director Gunn has stated he wanted to find the dumbest villain in the DCEU and make him into one of the heroes of this piece. He found him in Polka Dot Man and is played with great pathos by Dastmalchian.
Fairing less well is the great Viola Davis as the hard-nosed Amanda Waller who seems to be still acting in the gritty, dark style of the first SUICIDE SQUAD film, so misses out on some of the fun of this film as well as Joel Kinneman as Colonel Rick Flagg (the military leader of the group). I really wasn’t invested in Flagg (or Kinneman’s portrayal of Flagg) in the first film - and I am not in this one either. He just isn’t at nearly the same level of performance as the others listed above.
Also…a note about John Cena (and his character PeaceMaker). This is the 2nd 2021 Summer Blockbuster Action flick that I have seen Cena in (following his turn in F9) and in both these films I found his performance to be “flat”. It just didn’t fill the screen, nor does he have enough charisma (a la The Rock) to charm his way through. I was bored by him in this film (as well as in F9).
But…this is a James Gunn film - and he doesn’t spend much time with the characters/actors that don’t really work, but rather, spends his camera time on the ones that do - and the over-the-top action sequences (and villain) that are filmed with a slight grin and a wink-in-the-eye.
It’s a much needed shot-in-the-arm for DCEU films, but - I’m afraid - it might be too little too late, as most folks have already tuned out the DCEU for being “too dark”. Which is too bad, for this is the fun summer blockbuster film action and comic book fans have been looking for.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Darren (64 KP) rated Any Which Way You Can (1980) in Movies
Nov 1, 2019
Right Turn Clyde
Contains spoilers, click to show
This was the first film i ever rented as a kid from the video shop. I was 5 at the time and the cover just drew me to it. My mum bless her let me have this and The Snowman. That was way back in 1985 and i have never lost any love for it.
Clint stars as Philo Bedo a bare knuckle brawler who has decided after his last fight (Which he easily wins) Enough is enough and he no longer wants to fight as, He is getting to enjoy the pain a little too much. When he is offered $25,000 by Patrick Scarfe ( Michael Cavanaugh) to fight Jack Wilson played by B movie great William Smith, Philo finds the offer to tempting to resist and accepts. Meanwhile, Lynn Halsey Taylor (Sondra Locke) returns to town and plays at the local bar in an attempt to reconcile with Philo, who she betrayed in the first film. Add to this, The Black Widows, the notorious and bumbling local biker gang, plan revenge on Philo for previous misdeeds from the first film.
When circumstances lead Philo to reconcile with Lynn, She and Philo's half brother Orville (Geoffrey Lewis) find out that Jack has killed a guy in his previous fight leading no one wanting to fight him. After much pressure, Philo decides not to fight and attempts to give the money back but Scarfe and his partner James Beekman ( Harry Guardino) won't take no for an answer and have Lynn kidnapped so that Philo has no choice but to fight.
Wilson finds out about this and helps Philo get Lynn back with both of them taking down a Beekmans mob guys.. When the fight is called off again because of the under handed tactics of Scarfe and Beekman, Pride between Philo and Wilson makes them wonder who would of won the fight?
Knowing it can't end how it is, Bedo and Wilson have a wild fight through the streets of Jackson to find out, Just who is the best between them.
Clint stars as Philo Bedo a bare knuckle brawler who has decided after his last fight (Which he easily wins) Enough is enough and he no longer wants to fight as, He is getting to enjoy the pain a little too much. When he is offered $25,000 by Patrick Scarfe ( Michael Cavanaugh) to fight Jack Wilson played by B movie great William Smith, Philo finds the offer to tempting to resist and accepts. Meanwhile, Lynn Halsey Taylor (Sondra Locke) returns to town and plays at the local bar in an attempt to reconcile with Philo, who she betrayed in the first film. Add to this, The Black Widows, the notorious and bumbling local biker gang, plan revenge on Philo for previous misdeeds from the first film.
When circumstances lead Philo to reconcile with Lynn, She and Philo's half brother Orville (Geoffrey Lewis) find out that Jack has killed a guy in his previous fight leading no one wanting to fight him. After much pressure, Philo decides not to fight and attempts to give the money back but Scarfe and his partner James Beekman ( Harry Guardino) won't take no for an answer and have Lynn kidnapped so that Philo has no choice but to fight.
Wilson finds out about this and helps Philo get Lynn back with both of them taking down a Beekmans mob guys.. When the fight is called off again because of the under handed tactics of Scarfe and Beekman, Pride between Philo and Wilson makes them wonder who would of won the fight?
Knowing it can't end how it is, Bedo and Wilson have a wild fight through the streets of Jackson to find out, Just who is the best between them.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Sonic the Hedgehog (2020) in Movies
Feb 14, 2020
I'm pretty sure everyone will be going into Sonic the Hedgehog expecting the worse. I definitely did, but by the end, I found myself grinning from ear to ear.
When Sonic accidentally creates a coast wide blackout, he finds himself the subject of a government manhunt, lead by the criminally insane Dr. Robotnik, and employs the help of Montana Sheriff Tom Wachowski, to help him escape Earth.
The film serves as an introduction to Sonic, shying away (although not completely) from the wider game universe, and concentrating on the titular character, and the human characters he meets along the way.
The relationship formed between Sonic and Tom (James Marsden) is sweet, and pretty convincing.
The dialogue between the two is full of quips and jokes, and honestly, a fair few of them don't land too well. Combine this with the odd fart joke, and I had to remind myself that this is a film aimed at kids (who were all laughing, so mission accomplished), and there's just enough funny to buy into their friendship. Thank goodness then for Jim Carrey. I have a deep rooted live for Jim Carrey, growing up with films such as Ace Ventura and The Mask, and it's absolutely joyous to see him having a blast playing Robotnik. He's genuinely menacing, and pretty damn funny throughout, perfect casting when it comes to capturing the not-to-serious attitude of the games.
The plot is ok, there's not a huge amount going on, and it seems fairly throw away, but the characters and visuals are enough to carry the film to a satisfying degree.
Sonic looks great, a far cry from what we saw in the original trailer, and the cartoony look of him, and Robitnik's machines work suprisingly well with the real world setting.
Sonic the Hedgehog is a genuinely good time, don't take it too seriously, and I'm sure you'll have a blast too. With the passable Rampage, and the great Detective Pikachu, could it be that Hollywood is slowly starting to crack video game movies?? Let's hope so!
When Sonic accidentally creates a coast wide blackout, he finds himself the subject of a government manhunt, lead by the criminally insane Dr. Robotnik, and employs the help of Montana Sheriff Tom Wachowski, to help him escape Earth.
The film serves as an introduction to Sonic, shying away (although not completely) from the wider game universe, and concentrating on the titular character, and the human characters he meets along the way.
The relationship formed between Sonic and Tom (James Marsden) is sweet, and pretty convincing.
The dialogue between the two is full of quips and jokes, and honestly, a fair few of them don't land too well. Combine this with the odd fart joke, and I had to remind myself that this is a film aimed at kids (who were all laughing, so mission accomplished), and there's just enough funny to buy into their friendship. Thank goodness then for Jim Carrey. I have a deep rooted live for Jim Carrey, growing up with films such as Ace Ventura and The Mask, and it's absolutely joyous to see him having a blast playing Robotnik. He's genuinely menacing, and pretty damn funny throughout, perfect casting when it comes to capturing the not-to-serious attitude of the games.
The plot is ok, there's not a huge amount going on, and it seems fairly throw away, but the characters and visuals are enough to carry the film to a satisfying degree.
Sonic looks great, a far cry from what we saw in the original trailer, and the cartoony look of him, and Robitnik's machines work suprisingly well with the real world setting.
Sonic the Hedgehog is a genuinely good time, don't take it too seriously, and I'm sure you'll have a blast too. With the passable Rampage, and the great Detective Pikachu, could it be that Hollywood is slowly starting to crack video game movies?? Let's hope so!
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Dora and the Lost City of Gold (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Fun Family Film For Everyone
Dora and the Lost City of Gold is a 2019 adventure comedy movie directed by James Bobin and producer Kristin Burr, with screenplay by Nicholas Stoller and Matthew Robinson from a story by Tom Wheeler and Nicholas Stoller. It is a loose based continuation and live-action adaptation of the kids show created by Chris Gifford, Valerie Walsh Valdes and Eric Weiner and produced by Paramount Players, Nickelodeon Movies, Walden Media, Media Rights Capital and Burnt Productions with distribution by Paramount Pictures. The film stars Isabela Moner, Eva Longoria, Michael Pena, Jeff Wahlberg and Eugenio Derbez.
Spending her days going on adventures with her cousin Diego (Jeff Wahlberg), her monkey friend Boots (Danny Trejo) and imaginary friends "Map" and "Backpack", Dora (Isabela Moner), daughter of explorers, Cole (Michael Pena) and Elena (Eva Longoria) lives deep in the Peruvian jungle. Diego leaves to be with his family in Los Angeles one day while Dora's family remains searching for Parapata, the lost Inca city of gold. 10 years later, Dora's parents decide to send her to live with her cousin Diego in LA when they decipher the location of Parapata. While on a class trip, Dora and others are lured and captured by mercenaries who fly them to Peru where they plan to force her to find her parents for them.
I was pleasantly surprised with this movie. I guess that happens when you really don't have any expectations at all. I thought this movie was pretty funny and also pretty good for expanding on what was originally a 30 minute kids show that was mostly educational. The girl playing Dora, Isabela Moner, did a great job in her role of Dora. She was optimistically upbeat the whole film even when things didn't go her way but still showed a fragile side to her at the same time that she did incredible feats. Eugenio Derbez was also incredibly funny and did an awesome job as well. The movie was everything you expect for a fun family film and at the same time had good lessons or values to take away from it at the same time. I give this movie a 6/10.
Spending her days going on adventures with her cousin Diego (Jeff Wahlberg), her monkey friend Boots (Danny Trejo) and imaginary friends "Map" and "Backpack", Dora (Isabela Moner), daughter of explorers, Cole (Michael Pena) and Elena (Eva Longoria) lives deep in the Peruvian jungle. Diego leaves to be with his family in Los Angeles one day while Dora's family remains searching for Parapata, the lost Inca city of gold. 10 years later, Dora's parents decide to send her to live with her cousin Diego in LA when they decipher the location of Parapata. While on a class trip, Dora and others are lured and captured by mercenaries who fly them to Peru where they plan to force her to find her parents for them.
I was pleasantly surprised with this movie. I guess that happens when you really don't have any expectations at all. I thought this movie was pretty funny and also pretty good for expanding on what was originally a 30 minute kids show that was mostly educational. The girl playing Dora, Isabela Moner, did a great job in her role of Dora. She was optimistically upbeat the whole film even when things didn't go her way but still showed a fragile side to her at the same time that she did incredible feats. Eugenio Derbez was also incredibly funny and did an awesome job as well. The movie was everything you expect for a fun family film and at the same time had good lessons or values to take away from it at the same time. I give this movie a 6/10.
Kara Skinner (332 KP) rated Eternity in Books
Jun 12, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
300 years ago, Raven St. James was hanged for witchcraft. But she revives among the dead to find herself alive. She is an Immortal High Witch, one of the light. A note from her mother warns that there are others, those of the Dark, who preserve their own lives by taking the hearts of those like her.
Duncan Wallace’s forbidden love for the secretive lass costs him his life.
300 years later, he loves her again, tormented by hazy memories of a past that can’t be real. She tells him of another lifetime, claims to be immortal. Though he knows she’s deluded, he can’t stay away. And the Dark Witch after her heart is far closer than either of them know.
After reading and loving the Once Upon a Time boxed set by Maggie Shayne, I was super excited to find her book Eternity free on Smashwords. But while I liked it a lot, I didn’t like it as much as Once Upon a Time. Perhaps my expectations were too high.
Raven and her sister Arianna are both good characters. I like Raven’s spirit and loyalty a lot, as well as Arianna’s sass. Duncan is pretty fine himself. His devotion to Raven is incredibly sexy and I’ve always enjoyed a good Scottish brogue myself. In one scene, she heals him from a fever while trying to keep her identity a secret from him. That is a very delicious scene and it’s one of the first real tastes of magic we see. Gotta love that scene, as well as reading about Duncan trying to protect Raven in the Americas.
But the initial meeting was a little lacking. Sure, it’s pretty powerful, having Duncan speak up on Raven’s behalf and then quit the Catholic church for her. I love the compassion he shows there, despite Raven telling him to stop before he’s hanged himself.
But they’re practically in love within two minutes of meeting each other. Sure, that would be fine if Raven, unaware of her immense power, accidentally put a spell on him. But she didn’t. There’s no real explanation for their insta-love. The most we get is their souls recognized each other. Yippee.
The insta-love wasn’t necessary, either. A young, idealistic man can be sickened by an execution without being in love with her. There was plenty of time to introduce more romantic feelings later.
Duncan and Raven in the Americas are excellent together, though. I wish we had seen more of them in the seventeenth century. Because Duncan in the twentieth is bland.
There’s no better word for it, really. He’s bland. Modern-day Duncan is easily confused and manipulated and even after he gets memories from his past life, he still doesn’t believe Raven when she tells him of their past. It takes him forever to realize Raven’s not mentally unbalanced and actually knows what she’s talking about.
There is a second book with Raven’s sister, Arianna. Even though I was a little disappointed in this book, I still might buy Infinity. After all, this wasn’t even close to being a bad book. It’s certainly well-written and entertaining. Now that my expectations for Maggie Shayne’s work has gotten a reality check– honestly, any book she wrote would have been a letdown after the two amazing love stories in Once Upon a Time.
Duncan Wallace’s forbidden love for the secretive lass costs him his life.
300 years later, he loves her again, tormented by hazy memories of a past that can’t be real. She tells him of another lifetime, claims to be immortal. Though he knows she’s deluded, he can’t stay away. And the Dark Witch after her heart is far closer than either of them know.
After reading and loving the Once Upon a Time boxed set by Maggie Shayne, I was super excited to find her book Eternity free on Smashwords. But while I liked it a lot, I didn’t like it as much as Once Upon a Time. Perhaps my expectations were too high.
Raven and her sister Arianna are both good characters. I like Raven’s spirit and loyalty a lot, as well as Arianna’s sass. Duncan is pretty fine himself. His devotion to Raven is incredibly sexy and I’ve always enjoyed a good Scottish brogue myself. In one scene, she heals him from a fever while trying to keep her identity a secret from him. That is a very delicious scene and it’s one of the first real tastes of magic we see. Gotta love that scene, as well as reading about Duncan trying to protect Raven in the Americas.
But the initial meeting was a little lacking. Sure, it’s pretty powerful, having Duncan speak up on Raven’s behalf and then quit the Catholic church for her. I love the compassion he shows there, despite Raven telling him to stop before he’s hanged himself.
But they’re practically in love within two minutes of meeting each other. Sure, that would be fine if Raven, unaware of her immense power, accidentally put a spell on him. But she didn’t. There’s no real explanation for their insta-love. The most we get is their souls recognized each other. Yippee.
The insta-love wasn’t necessary, either. A young, idealistic man can be sickened by an execution without being in love with her. There was plenty of time to introduce more romantic feelings later.
Duncan and Raven in the Americas are excellent together, though. I wish we had seen more of them in the seventeenth century. Because Duncan in the twentieth is bland.
There’s no better word for it, really. He’s bland. Modern-day Duncan is easily confused and manipulated and even after he gets memories from his past life, he still doesn’t believe Raven when she tells him of their past. It takes him forever to realize Raven’s not mentally unbalanced and actually knows what she’s talking about.
There is a second book with Raven’s sister, Arianna. Even though I was a little disappointed in this book, I still might buy Infinity. After all, this wasn’t even close to being a bad book. It’s certainly well-written and entertaining. Now that my expectations for Maggie Shayne’s work has gotten a reality check– honestly, any book she wrote would have been a letdown after the two amazing love stories in Once Upon a Time.
Hadley (567 KP) rated Ghostly Tales: Spine-Chilling Stories of the Victorian Age in Books
Jan 20, 2021
Ghost stories (1 more)
Well-written
This collection of tales will transport you to a time when staircases creaked in old manor houses, and a candle could be blown out by a gust of wind, or by a passing ghost. Penned by some of the greatest Victorian novelists and masters of the ghost story genre, these stories come alive alongside exquisitely eerie art in this special illustrated edition.
Since this is a short story collection, I will list the stories with a short synopsis and what I liked and disliked about them.
"Oh, Whistle, and I'll Come to You, My Lad" by M.R. James
A professor decides to go on vacation to work on his golf game while doing a little side work in the town's archaeology, but when he digs up an old whistle and blows into it, he instantly regrets what the whistle brings.
Liked: the buildup to the climax was done masterfully, and the superstition that was used as the premise of the story
Disliked: that the ending is never explained
"The Old Nurse's Story" by Elizabeth Gaskell
When a governess and her ward are taken to a haunted house, they found out that everyone has to pay for their misdeeds.
Liked: the perfect example of what Victorian ghost stories were
Disliked: Nothing; I really enjoyed this one
"The Signalman" by Charles Dickens
A railroad signalman tells a co-worker that he is seeing a ghost that warns him of future accidents, but his co-worker can't tell if he's telling the truth or losing his mind.
Liked: an excellent ghost story; I wish it were an entire novel
Disliked: nothing
"The Body-Snatcher" by Robert Louis Stevenson
When a medical student realizes that the 'donated' bodies are murder victims, he's not so sure he can live with the consequences.
Liked: the ending wasn't predictable
Disliked: at the start, there's a little confusion among who is who
" The Captain of the Pole-Star" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
A group of whalers are stuck in the middle of the ocean because of ice burgs, but the ice is the least of their problems when they begin to hear and see supernatural things out on the ice.
Liked: the plot of the story was really good
Disliked: the run-on sentences, some of the accents were hard to decipher, and the ending wasn't explained
"The Phantom Coach" by Amelia B. Edwards
A young man loses his way while on a hunt, but soon finds help with an old man that is convinced the supernatural is real, and when he senses the young man does not, he puts him up against forces from the other side.
Liked: the story never lulled, and the descriptions of the undead were amazing
Disliked: nothing, I thought the story was really good
"The Screaming Skull" by F. Marion Crawford
When the friend of a family finds a skull in the latter's home, he begins to question whether or not the husband murdered his wife.
Liked: I love that this story is actually based off an urban legend
Disliked: the way the author kept breaking away from the story to talk to the audience; it caused the flow of the story to stop
Overall, the Victorian-era authors knew how to write a ghost story. I absolutely loved this collection of short stories. I highly recommend this book to people who love a good 'ol fashioned ghost story (not the gory ones we have today).
Since this is a short story collection, I will list the stories with a short synopsis and what I liked and disliked about them.
"Oh, Whistle, and I'll Come to You, My Lad" by M.R. James
A professor decides to go on vacation to work on his golf game while doing a little side work in the town's archaeology, but when he digs up an old whistle and blows into it, he instantly regrets what the whistle brings.
Liked: the buildup to the climax was done masterfully, and the superstition that was used as the premise of the story
Disliked: that the ending is never explained
"The Old Nurse's Story" by Elizabeth Gaskell
When a governess and her ward are taken to a haunted house, they found out that everyone has to pay for their misdeeds.
Liked: the perfect example of what Victorian ghost stories were
Disliked: Nothing; I really enjoyed this one
"The Signalman" by Charles Dickens
A railroad signalman tells a co-worker that he is seeing a ghost that warns him of future accidents, but his co-worker can't tell if he's telling the truth or losing his mind.
Liked: an excellent ghost story; I wish it were an entire novel
Disliked: nothing
"The Body-Snatcher" by Robert Louis Stevenson
When a medical student realizes that the 'donated' bodies are murder victims, he's not so sure he can live with the consequences.
Liked: the ending wasn't predictable
Disliked: at the start, there's a little confusion among who is who
" The Captain of the Pole-Star" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
A group of whalers are stuck in the middle of the ocean because of ice burgs, but the ice is the least of their problems when they begin to hear and see supernatural things out on the ice.
Liked: the plot of the story was really good
Disliked: the run-on sentences, some of the accents were hard to decipher, and the ending wasn't explained
"The Phantom Coach" by Amelia B. Edwards
A young man loses his way while on a hunt, but soon finds help with an old man that is convinced the supernatural is real, and when he senses the young man does not, he puts him up against forces from the other side.
Liked: the story never lulled, and the descriptions of the undead were amazing
Disliked: nothing, I thought the story was really good
"The Screaming Skull" by F. Marion Crawford
When the friend of a family finds a skull in the latter's home, he begins to question whether or not the husband murdered his wife.
Liked: I love that this story is actually based off an urban legend
Disliked: the way the author kept breaking away from the story to talk to the audience; it caused the flow of the story to stop
Overall, the Victorian-era authors knew how to write a ghost story. I absolutely loved this collection of short stories. I highly recommend this book to people who love a good 'ol fashioned ghost story (not the gory ones we have today).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Mercy (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“With shroud, and mast, and pennon fair”.
It’s 1968. Donald Crowhurst (Colin Firth, “Kingsman: The Golden Circle“; “Magic in the Moonlight“), an amateur sailor and entrepreneur based in Teignmouth, Devon, is inspired by listening to single-handed round-the-world yachtsman Sir Francis Chichester and does a a crazy thing. He puts his business, his family’s house and his own life on the line by entering the Sunday Times single-handed round-the-world yacht race. It’s not even as if he has a boat built yet!
Lending him the money, under onerous terms, are local businessman Mr Best (Ken Stott, “The Hobbit“) and local newspaper editor Rodney Hallworth (David Thewlis, “Wonder Woman“, “The Theory of Everything“). With the race deadline upon him, Crowhurst is pressed into sailing away from his beloved wife Clare (Rachel Weisz, “Denial“, “The Lobster“) and young family in a trimaran that is well below par.
But what happens next is so ludicrous that it makes a mockery of whoever wrote this ridiculous work of fiction. Ah… but wait a minute… it’s a true story!
It is in fact such an astonishing story that this is a film that is easy to spoil in a review, a fact that seems to have passed many newspaper reviewers by (Arrrggghhh!!). So I will leave much comment to a “spoiler section” that follows the trailer (which is also best avoided). This is honestly a film worth seeing cold. What can I say that is spoiler-free then?
Firth and Weisz make a well-matched couple, and the rest of the cast is peppered with well-known faces from British film and (particularly) TV: Andrew Buchan and Jonathan Bailey (from “Broadchurch”); Mark Gatiss (“Sherlock”, “Out Kind of Traitor“); Adrian Schiller (“Victoria”; “Beauty and the Beast“).
The first part of the film is well executed and excellent value for older viewers. 60’s Devon is warm, bucolic and nostalgic. In fact, the film beautifully creates the late 60’s of my childhood, from the boxy hardwood furniture of the Crowhurst’s house to the Meccano set opened at Christmas time.
Once afloat though, the film is less successful at getting its sea-legs. The story is riveting, but quite a number of the scenes raise more questions than they answer. As stress takes hold it is perhaps not surprising that there are a few fantastical flights of movie fancy. But some specific elements in Scott Burns’ script don’t quite gel: a brass clock overboard is a case in point. What? Why?
And it seems to be light on the fallout from the race: there is a weighty scene in the trailer between Best and Hallworth that (unless I dozed off!) I don’t think appeared in the final cut, and I think was needed.
All in all, I was left feeling mildly dissatisfied: a potentially good film by “Theory of Everything” director James Marsh that rather goes off the rails in the final stretch.
This was a time where morality and honour were often rigidly adhered to – British “stiff upper lip” and all that – and seemed to carry a lot more weight than they do today. So some of the decisions in the film might mystify younger viewers. But for the packed older audience in my showing (Cineworld: this needs to be put on in a bigger screen!) then it was a gripping, stressful, but far from flawless watch.
I’d also like to take this opportunity to pay my respects to the film’s composer Jóhann Jóhannsson, who shockingly died last week at the ridiculously young age of 48. His strange and atmospheric music for films including “The Theory of Everything“, “Sicario” and (particularly) “Arrival” set him on the path to be a film composing great of the future. Like James Horner, another awful and untimely loss to the film music industry.
Lending him the money, under onerous terms, are local businessman Mr Best (Ken Stott, “The Hobbit“) and local newspaper editor Rodney Hallworth (David Thewlis, “Wonder Woman“, “The Theory of Everything“). With the race deadline upon him, Crowhurst is pressed into sailing away from his beloved wife Clare (Rachel Weisz, “Denial“, “The Lobster“) and young family in a trimaran that is well below par.
But what happens next is so ludicrous that it makes a mockery of whoever wrote this ridiculous work of fiction. Ah… but wait a minute… it’s a true story!
It is in fact such an astonishing story that this is a film that is easy to spoil in a review, a fact that seems to have passed many newspaper reviewers by (Arrrggghhh!!). So I will leave much comment to a “spoiler section” that follows the trailer (which is also best avoided). This is honestly a film worth seeing cold. What can I say that is spoiler-free then?
Firth and Weisz make a well-matched couple, and the rest of the cast is peppered with well-known faces from British film and (particularly) TV: Andrew Buchan and Jonathan Bailey (from “Broadchurch”); Mark Gatiss (“Sherlock”, “Out Kind of Traitor“); Adrian Schiller (“Victoria”; “Beauty and the Beast“).
The first part of the film is well executed and excellent value for older viewers. 60’s Devon is warm, bucolic and nostalgic. In fact, the film beautifully creates the late 60’s of my childhood, from the boxy hardwood furniture of the Crowhurst’s house to the Meccano set opened at Christmas time.
Once afloat though, the film is less successful at getting its sea-legs. The story is riveting, but quite a number of the scenes raise more questions than they answer. As stress takes hold it is perhaps not surprising that there are a few fantastical flights of movie fancy. But some specific elements in Scott Burns’ script don’t quite gel: a brass clock overboard is a case in point. What? Why?
And it seems to be light on the fallout from the race: there is a weighty scene in the trailer between Best and Hallworth that (unless I dozed off!) I don’t think appeared in the final cut, and I think was needed.
All in all, I was left feeling mildly dissatisfied: a potentially good film by “Theory of Everything” director James Marsh that rather goes off the rails in the final stretch.
This was a time where morality and honour were often rigidly adhered to – British “stiff upper lip” and all that – and seemed to carry a lot more weight than they do today. So some of the decisions in the film might mystify younger viewers. But for the packed older audience in my showing (Cineworld: this needs to be put on in a bigger screen!) then it was a gripping, stressful, but far from flawless watch.
I’d also like to take this opportunity to pay my respects to the film’s composer Jóhann Jóhannsson, who shockingly died last week at the ridiculously young age of 48. His strange and atmospheric music for films including “The Theory of Everything“, “Sicario” and (particularly) “Arrival” set him on the path to be a film composing great of the future. Like James Horner, another awful and untimely loss to the film music industry.