Search
Search results
JT (287 KP) rated Annabelle Comes Home (2019) in Movies
Mar 2, 2020 (Updated Mar 10, 2020)
The Conjuring Universe has grown steadily over the years. The introduction of Annabelle was a sinister spin-off for a genre that was kicked started in terrifying style by James Wan. Since then it’s been up and down. The Conjuring spawned a sequel, with one more scheduled for next year. The Nun was introduced (poorly in my opinion) and with this, Annabelle has her trilogy.
Paranormal investigators Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine Warren (Vera Farmiga) are back again. The opening events serve as a continuation of the first film. When they leave their daughter Judy (Mckenna Grace), in the hands of babysitter Mary Ellen (Madison Iseman) and her friend Daniela (Katie Sarife) the inquizitive trio release the unwanted entity into the house.
These films are a mine field of jump scares and elongated tension. But that seems to be lacking as it takes time to really get going. When it does it is nothing that we haven’t experienced before. There are a few effective moments. Ghosts with coins on their eyes and a woman in a wedding dress provide some spine chilling scenes – but that is as far as it goes.
Paranormal investigators Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine Warren (Vera Farmiga) are back again. The opening events serve as a continuation of the first film. When they leave their daughter Judy (Mckenna Grace), in the hands of babysitter Mary Ellen (Madison Iseman) and her friend Daniela (Katie Sarife) the inquizitive trio release the unwanted entity into the house.
These films are a mine field of jump scares and elongated tension. But that seems to be lacking as it takes time to really get going. When it does it is nothing that we haven’t experienced before. There are a few effective moments. Ghosts with coins on their eyes and a woman in a wedding dress provide some spine chilling scenes – but that is as far as it goes.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Jan 10, 2019
Momoa saves it from being a complete disaster
I have been a defender of the darker DC Universe films. While not as popular (nor, generally, as good) as their Marvel counterparts, they all do have their good points - until now.
AQUAMAN is not a very good film and I could really only come up with 1 good point - Jason Momoa as Aquaman. Some are calling him "the next Rock" and he certainly has the physique, the screen presence and the charm to pull this off. This movie ALMOST worked because of Momoa's presence on the screen.
Almost.
Director James Wan (Furious 7, The Conjuring) certainly had the "chops" to Direct a film like this, unfortunately, I found his Direction to be choppy. What I mean by that is that this film never really settled into a good flow. It cut back and forth - both in content and in tone - to such an extent that I, the movie-goer, could never settle back into my seat and enjoy the ride. I'm sure Mr. Wan would call this movie a "roller-coaster ride", but if it is, it is an old, wooden, rickety roller coaster, jarring the riders as they go.
As for the cast, they are "fine". From Patrick Wilson to Amber Heard to Willem DaFoe to Dolph Lundgren(!) to good ol' Nicole Kidman. They all do decent, professional jobs with what they are given, but what they are given is weak and disjointed.
I would like to point out Yahya Abdul-Mateen as the sub-villain of this piece, Black Manta. This is the most incompetent Super-Villain in any Super Hero movie to date. His Black Manta was there, obviously, to give Aquaman someone to beat. And he beats him...again...and again...and again.
All I wanted to do was "beat feet" out of the theater.
Letter Grade: C+ (for Momoa's efforts)
5 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
AQUAMAN is not a very good film and I could really only come up with 1 good point - Jason Momoa as Aquaman. Some are calling him "the next Rock" and he certainly has the physique, the screen presence and the charm to pull this off. This movie ALMOST worked because of Momoa's presence on the screen.
Almost.
Director James Wan (Furious 7, The Conjuring) certainly had the "chops" to Direct a film like this, unfortunately, I found his Direction to be choppy. What I mean by that is that this film never really settled into a good flow. It cut back and forth - both in content and in tone - to such an extent that I, the movie-goer, could never settle back into my seat and enjoy the ride. I'm sure Mr. Wan would call this movie a "roller-coaster ride", but if it is, it is an old, wooden, rickety roller coaster, jarring the riders as they go.
As for the cast, they are "fine". From Patrick Wilson to Amber Heard to Willem DaFoe to Dolph Lundgren(!) to good ol' Nicole Kidman. They all do decent, professional jobs with what they are given, but what they are given is weak and disjointed.
I would like to point out Yahya Abdul-Mateen as the sub-villain of this piece, Black Manta. This is the most incompetent Super-Villain in any Super Hero movie to date. His Black Manta was there, obviously, to give Aquaman someone to beat. And he beats him...again...and again...and again.
All I wanted to do was "beat feet" out of the theater.
Letter Grade: C+ (for Momoa's efforts)
5 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Jan 8, 2019 (Updated Jan 8, 2019)
Wishy Washy
I was excited to see this movie after hearing the glowing reviews and praise it was getting. I am also a fan of Jason Momoa and James Wan, so I was really hoping for this to be at least as good as Wonder Woman. Also, being a long time fan of DC Comics, I really want to see them find their footing cinematically and I thought that this could finally be the start of that. Unfortunately I left the cinema feeling pretty underwhelmed.
The movie opens by telling the story of how Aquaman's parents came to meet and fall in love, even though they are from vastly different worlds. This whole sequence is brilliant and I was totally on-board for what was to come afterwards. Sadly, this opening sequence is by far the best part of the entire movie. From this point on it descends into a mediocre action adventure flick with story elements very reminiscent of Thor and Black Panther, (two movies that are vastly superior to this one.)
From a direction standpoint, it is clear that James Wan knows how to visually capture a scene in the most beautiful and intriguing way possible, which is especially evident during the trench sequence. His direction during all of the action sequences is great, with Nicole Kidman's trident work in the opening scene and the rooftop sequence with Black Manta, Mera and Aquaman being the highlights. I don't think that my issue with this movie is due to the direction lacking in any aspect. The only questionable choice in my opinion, was the choice to shoot the big Black Manta scene in broad daylight. It just looked slightly naff and would have came across much better if shot in darker conditions at night.
Nor do I think that it is the fault of any of the cast members. I think that Momoa does a great job in the title role and he looks incredible in the full on Aquaman suit, (which I don't think many other actors could legitimately pull off.) I think that Patrick Wilson did a decent job as the evil slightly cheesy power hungry half brother of Aquaman. I also enjoyed Willem Dafoe, Dolph Lundgren and Nicole Kidman in each of their scenes.
I think that the major culprit in this movie feeling a bit forced at times, is the lazy script that the actors had to work with. Almost every scene plays out in the exact same way; with the characters that we are following turning up to a new location, meeting up with a character, (usually Willem Dafoe,) listening to them spout a bunch of expositional dialogue and then mid sentence bad guys will attack and an explosion will go off cutting the conversation short. Then we will get a well shot action sequence with super dynamic cinematography, then the characters will figure out where they need to go next, they will go to the next location and the process will be rinsed and repeated for the duration of the movie.
Overall, Aquaman is not a bad superhero movie, there is a lot of fun to be had here with the badass action sequences. Unfortunately the lazy script holds the movie back from being as good as the glowing reviews told me it would be and out of the DC solo movies, - this, Man of Steel and Wonder Woman, - this is probably the worst of the three.
PS. Although I don't think that the movie in general was up to the highest level of quality, the CGI is objectively breath-taking in every scene and I totally agree with James Wan that it is nothing short of an atrocity that the SFX team on this movie have been snubbed for this year's Oscars ceremony.
The movie opens by telling the story of how Aquaman's parents came to meet and fall in love, even though they are from vastly different worlds. This whole sequence is brilliant and I was totally on-board for what was to come afterwards. Sadly, this opening sequence is by far the best part of the entire movie. From this point on it descends into a mediocre action adventure flick with story elements very reminiscent of Thor and Black Panther, (two movies that are vastly superior to this one.)
From a direction standpoint, it is clear that James Wan knows how to visually capture a scene in the most beautiful and intriguing way possible, which is especially evident during the trench sequence. His direction during all of the action sequences is great, with Nicole Kidman's trident work in the opening scene and the rooftop sequence with Black Manta, Mera and Aquaman being the highlights. I don't think that my issue with this movie is due to the direction lacking in any aspect. The only questionable choice in my opinion, was the choice to shoot the big Black Manta scene in broad daylight. It just looked slightly naff and would have came across much better if shot in darker conditions at night.
Nor do I think that it is the fault of any of the cast members. I think that Momoa does a great job in the title role and he looks incredible in the full on Aquaman suit, (which I don't think many other actors could legitimately pull off.) I think that Patrick Wilson did a decent job as the evil slightly cheesy power hungry half brother of Aquaman. I also enjoyed Willem Dafoe, Dolph Lundgren and Nicole Kidman in each of their scenes.
I think that the major culprit in this movie feeling a bit forced at times, is the lazy script that the actors had to work with. Almost every scene plays out in the exact same way; with the characters that we are following turning up to a new location, meeting up with a character, (usually Willem Dafoe,) listening to them spout a bunch of expositional dialogue and then mid sentence bad guys will attack and an explosion will go off cutting the conversation short. Then we will get a well shot action sequence with super dynamic cinematography, then the characters will figure out where they need to go next, they will go to the next location and the process will be rinsed and repeated for the duration of the movie.
Overall, Aquaman is not a bad superhero movie, there is a lot of fun to be had here with the badass action sequences. Unfortunately the lazy script holds the movie back from being as good as the glowing reviews told me it would be and out of the DC solo movies, - this, Man of Steel and Wonder Woman, - this is probably the worst of the three.
PS. Although I don't think that the movie in general was up to the highest level of quality, the CGI is objectively breath-taking in every scene and I totally agree with James Wan that it is nothing short of an atrocity that the SFX team on this movie have been snubbed for this year's Oscars ceremony.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Lights Out (2016) in Movies
Oct 31, 2020
When The Lights Are Off
Lights Out- is a scary movie. Its terrorfying, horrorfying, suspenseful and twisted.
The plot: When Rebecca (Teresa Palmer) left home, she thought that her childhood fears were behind her. As a young girl growing up, she was never really sure of what was real when the lights went out at night. Now, her little brother Martin (Gabriel Bateman) is experiencing the same unexplained and terrifying events that jeopardized her safety and sanity. Holding a mysterious attachment to their mother (Maria Bello), a supernatural entity has returned with a vengeance to torment the entire family.
is based on Sandberg's 2013 short film of the same name and features Lotta Losten, who starred in the short.
Special effects of having the ghost appear and disappear were mostly done by using a split-screen technique as also used in the short. Sandberg said "Whenever she's in frame with another character, it's basically just a split screen. So you shoot it with her and without her. You turn the camera on with her, you turn it off and she walks off, and then you turn it on again. It's super simple, actually." Sandberg also made a list of what he called the "light gags", or different ways to create light sources from flashlights to cell phones and gunfire. In the scene when Diana appears in Rebecca's room, James Wan suggested replacing passing car headlights in an early treatment with the flashing neon sign that appears in the final film.
Sandberg originally based the character of Rebecca on a real girl that he knew who was suffering from depression, and who was engaging in self-harm, which is why Rebecca has scars on her arms, but the development of the film made it less about depression and more of a ghost story in which Diana would have been the real person who died and became a ghost. Wan came up with the idea of making Diana the ghost. Rebecca's boyfriend was also given a twist of being a rocker, but is actually committed and responsible, even driving a safe car like a Volvo. Another twist Sandberg liked was making the imaginary friend for the mother rather than the trope of having the friend be for the child
Its a excellent supernatural movie.
The plot: When Rebecca (Teresa Palmer) left home, she thought that her childhood fears were behind her. As a young girl growing up, she was never really sure of what was real when the lights went out at night. Now, her little brother Martin (Gabriel Bateman) is experiencing the same unexplained and terrifying events that jeopardized her safety and sanity. Holding a mysterious attachment to their mother (Maria Bello), a supernatural entity has returned with a vengeance to torment the entire family.
is based on Sandberg's 2013 short film of the same name and features Lotta Losten, who starred in the short.
Special effects of having the ghost appear and disappear were mostly done by using a split-screen technique as also used in the short. Sandberg said "Whenever she's in frame with another character, it's basically just a split screen. So you shoot it with her and without her. You turn the camera on with her, you turn it off and she walks off, and then you turn it on again. It's super simple, actually." Sandberg also made a list of what he called the "light gags", or different ways to create light sources from flashlights to cell phones and gunfire. In the scene when Diana appears in Rebecca's room, James Wan suggested replacing passing car headlights in an early treatment with the flashing neon sign that appears in the final film.
Sandberg originally based the character of Rebecca on a real girl that he knew who was suffering from depression, and who was engaging in self-harm, which is why Rebecca has scars on her arms, but the development of the film made it less about depression and more of a ghost story in which Diana would have been the real person who died and became a ghost. Wan came up with the idea of making Diana the ghost. Rebecca's boyfriend was also given a twist of being a rocker, but is actually committed and responsible, even driving a safe car like a Volvo. Another twist Sandberg liked was making the imaginary friend for the mother rather than the trope of having the friend be for the child
Its a excellent supernatural movie.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Saw (2004) in Movies
Sep 26, 2020
The first Saw film has become tarnished over the years, due to the relentless shit filled wave of increasingly torturous (both for the audience and the characters) sequels, when really, Saw is a relatively low budget but super tight thriller.
The premise of a serial killer who kidnaps people who don't appreciate life itself, puts them in a dire situation, but gives them a chance to escape if they fight hard enough for it, is one that is intriguing, and captured the imagination of thousands - Jigsaw has since become an iconic horror antagonist.
The unlucky victims first time around are played by Cary Elwes and writer Leigh Whannell.
The two of them are situated in a very minimalist setting. It's grimy and nasty. Director James Wan works wonders with what little he has in that respect.
The cast also includes Danny Glover, which is always a win in my book.
The gore on show in Saw is pretty minimal compared to what's to come, but what we do see is effective and was just right - coupled with a plot that keeps the audience guessing until the final minute, it was enough to get everyone talking back in 2004.
And that ending absolutely shattered me on first watch. An iconic 'Gotcha!' moment for the ages.
Saw is a genuinely decent horror thriller and a rewarding experience for those that like a good twist. Just a shame about those sequels!
The premise of a serial killer who kidnaps people who don't appreciate life itself, puts them in a dire situation, but gives them a chance to escape if they fight hard enough for it, is one that is intriguing, and captured the imagination of thousands - Jigsaw has since become an iconic horror antagonist.
The unlucky victims first time around are played by Cary Elwes and writer Leigh Whannell.
The two of them are situated in a very minimalist setting. It's grimy and nasty. Director James Wan works wonders with what little he has in that respect.
The cast also includes Danny Glover, which is always a win in my book.
The gore on show in Saw is pretty minimal compared to what's to come, but what we do see is effective and was just right - coupled with a plot that keeps the audience guessing until the final minute, it was enough to get everyone talking back in 2004.
And that ending absolutely shattered me on first watch. An iconic 'Gotcha!' moment for the ages.
Saw is a genuinely decent horror thriller and a rewarding experience for those that like a good twist. Just a shame about those sequels!
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Furious 7 (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
A Guilty Pleasure
Everyone needs a guilty pleasure and since 2001, audiences from across the globe have flocked to see The Fast & Furious franchise in all its over-the-top glory.
However, filming on the latest instalment, Fast & Furious 7, was delayed after the tragic death of lead actor Paul Walker, so does his untimely passing hurt the resulting movie?
Fast 7 continues after the events of Tokyo Drift and features the usual loveable rogues returning in their respective roles, including a beefed up part for Jason Statham who made a cameo in the sixth film.
Vin Diesel, Dwayne Johnson, Michelle Rodriguez, Jordana Brewster, Tyrese Gibson, Lucas Black and Ludacris all reprise their characters as they do battle against Statham’s villain, Deckard Shaw, who fans will remember is the brother of Owen Shaw from Fast 6.
The premise remains as simple as in previous instalments but continues the series’ trend for over-the-top action pieces that border on the ridiculous. Despite this, Fast 7 is the most watchable of the entire franchise with stunning locations, brilliant practical effects and surprising emotional heft.
James Wan directs what looks like a tourist information film for LA, Abu Dhabi and Tokyo but manages to keep the story flowing throughout the slightly overlong 137 minute running time. The fast cars and beautiful women are thrown at the audience thick and fast and the brakes aren’t applied until ten minutes before the end credits roll.
Thankfully, this is exactly what the series has become known for and the gorgeous settings are brilliantly juxtaposed with action-packed sequences including the much marketed mountain plane drop in Azerbaijan that is an absolute wonder to behold despite its use in the film’s trailers.
Vin Diesel’s Dom is what has grounded the series over the last 14 years but here it is Paul Walker’s Brian O’Conner that we find the most intriguing and it’s really no surprise. Ever since his death, fans were worried how tasteful the film would be, but there is no need to worry.
Despite the action, the fights and the sunshine, Fast 7 manages to provide a rollercoaster of emotion as the cameras linger on Walker’s face or put him at the forefront of each scene. As the final 10 minutes approach it’s clear that the movie is going to end on a deeply gut-wrenching tribute to him and there were a few tears in the cinema.
Nevertheless, it’s obvious a film that focuses on supercars isn’t going to have much of a plot but director James Wan, who comes to the franchise for the first time, should be commended for fashioning a half-coherent story despite going into the production with numerous delays and seven films in.
Overall, Fast 7 is a great slice of popcorn entertainment and should definitely rank high up as one of the better films in the series. However, the tragic circumstances surrounding its production make it so much more.
Yes it won’t be winning any awards for originality or acting prowess, but its emotional resonance means it’s worth a watch for fans of the series and newcomers alike.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/05/a-guilty-pleasure-fast-furious-7-review/
However, filming on the latest instalment, Fast & Furious 7, was delayed after the tragic death of lead actor Paul Walker, so does his untimely passing hurt the resulting movie?
Fast 7 continues after the events of Tokyo Drift and features the usual loveable rogues returning in their respective roles, including a beefed up part for Jason Statham who made a cameo in the sixth film.
Vin Diesel, Dwayne Johnson, Michelle Rodriguez, Jordana Brewster, Tyrese Gibson, Lucas Black and Ludacris all reprise their characters as they do battle against Statham’s villain, Deckard Shaw, who fans will remember is the brother of Owen Shaw from Fast 6.
The premise remains as simple as in previous instalments but continues the series’ trend for over-the-top action pieces that border on the ridiculous. Despite this, Fast 7 is the most watchable of the entire franchise with stunning locations, brilliant practical effects and surprising emotional heft.
James Wan directs what looks like a tourist information film for LA, Abu Dhabi and Tokyo but manages to keep the story flowing throughout the slightly overlong 137 minute running time. The fast cars and beautiful women are thrown at the audience thick and fast and the brakes aren’t applied until ten minutes before the end credits roll.
Thankfully, this is exactly what the series has become known for and the gorgeous settings are brilliantly juxtaposed with action-packed sequences including the much marketed mountain plane drop in Azerbaijan that is an absolute wonder to behold despite its use in the film’s trailers.
Vin Diesel’s Dom is what has grounded the series over the last 14 years but here it is Paul Walker’s Brian O’Conner that we find the most intriguing and it’s really no surprise. Ever since his death, fans were worried how tasteful the film would be, but there is no need to worry.
Despite the action, the fights and the sunshine, Fast 7 manages to provide a rollercoaster of emotion as the cameras linger on Walker’s face or put him at the forefront of each scene. As the final 10 minutes approach it’s clear that the movie is going to end on a deeply gut-wrenching tribute to him and there were a few tears in the cinema.
Nevertheless, it’s obvious a film that focuses on supercars isn’t going to have much of a plot but director James Wan, who comes to the franchise for the first time, should be commended for fashioning a half-coherent story despite going into the production with numerous delays and seven films in.
Overall, Fast 7 is a great slice of popcorn entertainment and should definitely rank high up as one of the better films in the series. However, the tragic circumstances surrounding its production make it so much more.
Yes it won’t be winning any awards for originality or acting prowess, but its emotional resonance means it’s worth a watch for fans of the series and newcomers alike.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/05/a-guilty-pleasure-fast-furious-7-review/
David McK (3188 KP) rated Labyrinth of Evil (Star Wars: The Dark Lord Trilogy, #1) in Books
Jan 30, 2019
Following the now-infamous Disney acquisition of Star Wars (which saw the abolition of the old Expanded Universe), I'm actually no-longer sure where this sits in the hierarchy of canon: is this 'Legends' (i.e pre acquisition) material, or is it stil canon?
This is set between the events of 'Attack of the Clones' and 'Revenge of the Sith' - actually leading directly into that movie, with Anakin and Obi-Wan jetting off back to Coruscant - and, in many ways, seeks to bolster the reputation of one of the missed opportunities from that movie: that of General Grievious (not his face on the cover ...).
I'm also not sure where it sits alongside the Genndy Tartakovsy animation which also seeked to do exactly that, though the latter portion of the novel does seem to describesome of the actions shown in that animation (the surprise attack on Coruscant, and the capturing of Senator Palpatine) in prose form.
This is also the first of the so-called 'Dark Lord' trilogy (comprising of this, [b:Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith|35458|Star Wars Episode III - Revenge of the Sith|Matthew Woodring Stover|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388228249s/35458.jpg|476816] and [b:The Rise of Darth Vader|359848|The Rise of Darth Vader (Star Wars The Dark Lord Trilogy, #3)|James Luceno|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388209667s/359848.jpg|574260]); while I have previously read - and enjoyed - the middle of those three, I now feel like reading the series in its entirity, from start to finish.
This is set between the events of 'Attack of the Clones' and 'Revenge of the Sith' - actually leading directly into that movie, with Anakin and Obi-Wan jetting off back to Coruscant - and, in many ways, seeks to bolster the reputation of one of the missed opportunities from that movie: that of General Grievious (not his face on the cover ...).
I'm also not sure where it sits alongside the Genndy Tartakovsy animation which also seeked to do exactly that, though the latter portion of the novel does seem to describesome of the actions shown in that animation (the surprise attack on Coruscant, and the capturing of Senator Palpatine) in prose form.
This is also the first of the so-called 'Dark Lord' trilogy (comprising of this, [b:Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith|35458|Star Wars Episode III - Revenge of the Sith|Matthew Woodring Stover|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388228249s/35458.jpg|476816] and [b:The Rise of Darth Vader|359848|The Rise of Darth Vader (Star Wars The Dark Lord Trilogy, #3)|James Luceno|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388209667s/359848.jpg|574260]); while I have previously read - and enjoyed - the middle of those three, I now feel like reading the series in its entirity, from start to finish.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated The Fate of the Furious (2017) in Movies
Sep 20, 2020
*Director's cut*
A thick protein shake of testosterone, motor oil, concrete, government tech, sweat, and smashed metal - features enough hilariously inflated machismo and mic drop one-liners to fuel at least fifty blockbusters. Obviously when going from James Wan to any other director you're going to see a downtick in visual quality, but Gray still makes this thing a gorgeous splashpad of obvious color signifiers to look at - with some of the most clean vehicle action you'll ever see. I'll always defend an unlimited number of these sequels no matter how little story there is, but it was a genuinely ballsy move to make Dom one of the villains (alongside a ripper Theron) - to which I'll convince every Diesel detractor to look at because this showcases how passionate and committed he is towards this character, every act of betrayal is played like it's physically tearing him apart from the inside. Another thing I love about this series post-fourth-one is how it features some of the coolest action superstars partaking in scenes of prolonged emotion that most other actioners would probably toss aside. Definitely the funniest installment but wtf happened to Luda here? The dude is usually charming but he sleepwalks through every scene in this one. Every gripe I do have is relatively minor considering this has sequences of a giant wrecking ball tearing through vehicles, The Rock and Statham beating their way through an entire prison, and an all-timer setpiece where dozens of cars start driving themselves tearing through the city.
A thick protein shake of testosterone, motor oil, concrete, government tech, sweat, and smashed metal - features enough hilariously inflated machismo and mic drop one-liners to fuel at least fifty blockbusters. Obviously when going from James Wan to any other director you're going to see a downtick in visual quality, but Gray still makes this thing a gorgeous splashpad of obvious color signifiers to look at - with some of the most clean vehicle action you'll ever see. I'll always defend an unlimited number of these sequels no matter how little story there is, but it was a genuinely ballsy move to make Dom one of the villains (alongside a ripper Theron) - to which I'll convince every Diesel detractor to look at because this showcases how passionate and committed he is towards this character, every act of betrayal is played like it's physically tearing him apart from the inside. Another thing I love about this series post-fourth-one is how it features some of the coolest action superstars partaking in scenes of prolonged emotion that most other actioners would probably toss aside. Definitely the funniest installment but wtf happened to Luda here? The dude is usually charming but he sleepwalks through every scene in this one. Every gripe I do have is relatively minor considering this has sequences of a giant wrecking ball tearing through vehicles, The Rock and Statham beating their way through an entire prison, and an all-timer setpiece where dozens of cars start driving themselves tearing through the city.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Swamp Thing in TV
Jul 7, 2020
One of DC's Current Bests
Swamp Thing is a 2019 superhero horror/drama tv series developed by Gary Dauberman and Mark Verheiden with Executive Producers James Wan, Len Wiseman and Michael Clear. It was produced by Big Shoe Productions, Inc., Atomic Monster Productions, DC Entertainment and Warner Bros. Television and distributed by Warner Bros. Entertainment. The show stars Crystal Reed, Virginia Madsen, Andy Bean, Derek Mears, Jessica Beals, and Will Patton.
Abby Arcane (Crystal Reed) returns to her hometown of Marais, Louisiana investigating a deadly swamp-borne virus for the CDC . She develops a bond with Alec Holland (Andy Bean), a disgraced scientist who dies tragically soon after, but Holland may not be dead after all, as Abby discovers the mysteries of the swamp transform him into Swamp Thing.
This show is really cool. It makes me want to go back and watch the old movies to compare how they hold up. I was amazed with how dark they kept the story with the rating being TV-MA and there being so much blood and gore. The actors are great and there are some amazing performances but I also feel that some characters are not introduced well and just kind of come out of nowhere. They feel kind of unnecessary or just extra but I love the tone and horror vibe the show has going and what feels like a bigger story arc they are trying to setup with "the Green" and "the darkness" in the swamp of Marais. The visual effects are really top notch and Swamp Thing himself looks impressive. I give this show a 9/10 and it also gets my "Must See Seal of Approval".
I just really hope it doesn't stay cancelled and that they get another season, it really deserves it.
Abby Arcane (Crystal Reed) returns to her hometown of Marais, Louisiana investigating a deadly swamp-borne virus for the CDC . She develops a bond with Alec Holland (Andy Bean), a disgraced scientist who dies tragically soon after, but Holland may not be dead after all, as Abby discovers the mysteries of the swamp transform him into Swamp Thing.
This show is really cool. It makes me want to go back and watch the old movies to compare how they hold up. I was amazed with how dark they kept the story with the rating being TV-MA and there being so much blood and gore. The actors are great and there are some amazing performances but I also feel that some characters are not introduced well and just kind of come out of nowhere. They feel kind of unnecessary or just extra but I love the tone and horror vibe the show has going and what feels like a bigger story arc they are trying to setup with "the Green" and "the darkness" in the swamp of Marais. The visual effects are really top notch and Swamp Thing himself looks impressive. I give this show a 9/10 and it also gets my "Must See Seal of Approval".
I just really hope it doesn't stay cancelled and that they get another season, it really deserves it.
Steve Fearon (84 KP) rated Insidious: Chapter 3 (2015) in Movies
Sep 7, 2018
A good antagonist for this one (1 more)
An interesting approach to character helplessness
Overall drop in quality of the cast and camerawork is noticable. (1 more)
Lacks some of the character of the first 2 movies
Whannell Takes the wheel...
So the third instalment sees co-writer Leigh Whannell take the wheel of this fledgling franchise, probably since James Wan is one of the busiest men in hollywood.
Whilst the familar faces of the first two movies are missing in this prequel, the mystic (Elise) returns as the point of familiarity, and one suspects the popularity of her character has led to this prequel.
The casting of the movie is interesting, with a generally weaker cast despite a bigger budget...the main protagonist does a decent job of essentially being a teenage scream queen, being pursued by a breathing-masked ghost/entity with mucky feet that torments her after she has her legs broken in a car accident.
Her claustrophobic situation, being essentially bed-bound, leads to a number of uncomfortable scenes, with the very creepy 'man who can't breath', as well as a hand, foot and faceless woman at one point.
The pacing of this film seems a little faster, getting to the ghostly scenes much quicker, and perhaps a little impatient to get to the moneymaking shots, some of which felt a little tacked on as 'additional scares' without any context, but they are mostly fun so I can let them slide.
The film answers a few questions about Elise, and how she meets the two goons that follow her around during the other films, as well as showing her talking with the other psychic from Insidious 2, and they are constantly making references to the family from the earlier movies, but most of this is pretty incidental to the core of the actual film itself.
All in all its a solid if unspectacular sequel, with some great moments, some clunky exposition and throwbacks, and some questions answered that you never knew needed answering!
Whilst the familar faces of the first two movies are missing in this prequel, the mystic (Elise) returns as the point of familiarity, and one suspects the popularity of her character has led to this prequel.
The casting of the movie is interesting, with a generally weaker cast despite a bigger budget...the main protagonist does a decent job of essentially being a teenage scream queen, being pursued by a breathing-masked ghost/entity with mucky feet that torments her after she has her legs broken in a car accident.
Her claustrophobic situation, being essentially bed-bound, leads to a number of uncomfortable scenes, with the very creepy 'man who can't breath', as well as a hand, foot and faceless woman at one point.
The pacing of this film seems a little faster, getting to the ghostly scenes much quicker, and perhaps a little impatient to get to the moneymaking shots, some of which felt a little tacked on as 'additional scares' without any context, but they are mostly fun so I can let them slide.
The film answers a few questions about Elise, and how she meets the two goons that follow her around during the other films, as well as showing her talking with the other psychic from Insidious 2, and they are constantly making references to the family from the earlier movies, but most of this is pretty incidental to the core of the actual film itself.
All in all its a solid if unspectacular sequel, with some great moments, some clunky exposition and throwbacks, and some questions answered that you never knew needed answering!