Search
Search results
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Final Girls in Books
Aug 20, 2018
Forgettable Book (1 more)
Overdone Plot
Just Okay
Final Girls by Riley Sager came highly recommended to. I was looking for a good horror book to read. While Final Girls wasn't a great read, it wasn't bad. Final Girls was just an okay read and nothing more.
The pacing is okay in Final Girls. It's not fast paced, but it's not slow either. I didn't hurry to finish this book at all. Every now and then the pacing would get better, but most times it was just okay.
The plot was alright. It's like every other slasher survival type books. Final Girls did have a few plot twists. Most were pretty predictable such as the one with Sam. I just felt like I had read and seen this plot line so many times before. Nothing really stood out with the plot of Final Girls.
The world building was done well. It was easy for me to be transported to the world of Final Girls. Even the attacks on the girls seemed realistic.
I liked the characters enough and felt that they were fairly well written. I did feel that Quincy was a little too gullible and trusting. There were times I had to shake my head at her. For example, I felt like she was too trusting of Samantha. It's like she just took her at her word all the time. Saying all that, I did love Quincy though. She did have a fighting spirit about her, and I loved her determination. Sam annoyed me. She was written well, but she annoyed me with how she said "babe" almost all the time. She was always so shady, and I never trusted her. Even though Jeff and Coop weren't major characters, I still liked them a lot. They just seemed like really nice guys.
There are some themes in this book such as violence, smoking, prescription drug abuse, alcohol, sex, and swearing. Nothing is too over the top, and it fits in with the book perfectly.
All in all, I feel as if Final Girls by Riley Sager is a forgettable book. Nothing really stands out plot wise or character wise. It's just an okay read, but it's been done before.
The pacing is okay in Final Girls. It's not fast paced, but it's not slow either. I didn't hurry to finish this book at all. Every now and then the pacing would get better, but most times it was just okay.
The plot was alright. It's like every other slasher survival type books. Final Girls did have a few plot twists. Most were pretty predictable such as the one with Sam. I just felt like I had read and seen this plot line so many times before. Nothing really stood out with the plot of Final Girls.
The world building was done well. It was easy for me to be transported to the world of Final Girls. Even the attacks on the girls seemed realistic.
I liked the characters enough and felt that they were fairly well written. I did feel that Quincy was a little too gullible and trusting. There were times I had to shake my head at her. For example, I felt like she was too trusting of Samantha. It's like she just took her at her word all the time. Saying all that, I did love Quincy though. She did have a fighting spirit about her, and I loved her determination. Sam annoyed me. She was written well, but she annoyed me with how she said "babe" almost all the time. She was always so shady, and I never trusted her. Even though Jeff and Coop weren't major characters, I still liked them a lot. They just seemed like really nice guys.
There are some themes in this book such as violence, smoking, prescription drug abuse, alcohol, sex, and swearing. Nothing is too over the top, and it fits in with the book perfectly.
All in all, I feel as if Final Girls by Riley Sager is a forgettable book. Nothing really stands out plot wise or character wise. It's just an okay read, but it's been done before.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Independence Day: Resurgence (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Good sci-fi, but a poor sequel
Independence Day: Resurgence has a lot in common with last year’s Jurassic World. They both are long-awaited sequels to fan-favourite blockbusters, bringing a new generation the same thrills and spills of their forbearers.
Unfortunately, it just so happens that they share the same pitfalls too. But is Independence Day: Resurgence a match for its 1996 predecessor? Or does it crash and burn?
Roland Emmerich returns to the director’s chair, bringing the same breadth of destruction he’s brought to all of his films. The Day After Tomorrow, 2012 and White House Down all prove he’s the master of the apocalypse and Resurgence is no exception.
As the Fourth of July nears, satellite engineer David Levinson (Jeff Goldblum) investigates a 3,000-mile-wide mother ship that’s approaching Earth. Fortunately, 20 years earlier, nations across the world started to use recovered extra-terrestrial technology to develop an immense defence program. When the alien invaders attack with unprecedented force, the U.S. president, teams of scientists and brave fighter pilots spring into action to save the planet from a seemingly invincible enemy.
Emmerich throws everything he can at the screen in a film just shy of two hours. The pace rarely lets up and it’s a rollercoaster ride to watch. Dozens of global landmarks are destroyed as our characters race to stop the new alien invasion.
Liam Hemsworth (The Hunger Games), Sela Ward (Gone Girl) and Jessie Usher make up the majority of the new cast with Bill Pullman and Judd Hirsch providing a warm sense of nostalgia from the first film. There’s no return for Will Smith, with Jessie Usher playing his step-son and his character is conveniently written out.
Unfortunately, despite the talents of the new cast, the script doesn’t really give them anything to sink their teeth into and the overabundance of, admittedly breath-taking CGI, means there’s nothing there for them to react to – and it shows. Nevertheless, it’s nice to see Jeff Goldblum front and centre after nearly a decade of small film roles.
It’s just a shame that the script is wholly unoriginal. We saw most of it done in 1996, and frankly done better. Since then, there have been countless generic sci-fi flicks that have pushed the same simple premise on their audience and Resurgence suffers due to its timing more than anything else.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s all good fun IF you’re a fan of the genre, and there are some nice references to the first film. The aliens themselves look fantastic and the cinematography is generally very impressive, especially during the aerial bound action sequences.
However, things unravel at the finale. With what is undoubtedly one of the most stupid endings ever put to film, it’s hard not to laugh in amazement as you ponder just what was said around the production table to end up with a final act as ill-advised as this.
Overall, Independence Day: Resurgence has a lot going for it. A likeable new and returning cast is bolstered by brilliant, if overused, CGI and a frantic pace. Unfortunately, it’s a victim of its timing and as such is a decent sci-fi flick, but a poor sequel to its fantastic predecessor.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/06/24/good-sci-fi-but-a-poor-sequel-independence-day-resurgence-review/
Unfortunately, it just so happens that they share the same pitfalls too. But is Independence Day: Resurgence a match for its 1996 predecessor? Or does it crash and burn?
Roland Emmerich returns to the director’s chair, bringing the same breadth of destruction he’s brought to all of his films. The Day After Tomorrow, 2012 and White House Down all prove he’s the master of the apocalypse and Resurgence is no exception.
As the Fourth of July nears, satellite engineer David Levinson (Jeff Goldblum) investigates a 3,000-mile-wide mother ship that’s approaching Earth. Fortunately, 20 years earlier, nations across the world started to use recovered extra-terrestrial technology to develop an immense defence program. When the alien invaders attack with unprecedented force, the U.S. president, teams of scientists and brave fighter pilots spring into action to save the planet from a seemingly invincible enemy.
Emmerich throws everything he can at the screen in a film just shy of two hours. The pace rarely lets up and it’s a rollercoaster ride to watch. Dozens of global landmarks are destroyed as our characters race to stop the new alien invasion.
Liam Hemsworth (The Hunger Games), Sela Ward (Gone Girl) and Jessie Usher make up the majority of the new cast with Bill Pullman and Judd Hirsch providing a warm sense of nostalgia from the first film. There’s no return for Will Smith, with Jessie Usher playing his step-son and his character is conveniently written out.
Unfortunately, despite the talents of the new cast, the script doesn’t really give them anything to sink their teeth into and the overabundance of, admittedly breath-taking CGI, means there’s nothing there for them to react to – and it shows. Nevertheless, it’s nice to see Jeff Goldblum front and centre after nearly a decade of small film roles.
It’s just a shame that the script is wholly unoriginal. We saw most of it done in 1996, and frankly done better. Since then, there have been countless generic sci-fi flicks that have pushed the same simple premise on their audience and Resurgence suffers due to its timing more than anything else.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s all good fun IF you’re a fan of the genre, and there are some nice references to the first film. The aliens themselves look fantastic and the cinematography is generally very impressive, especially during the aerial bound action sequences.
However, things unravel at the finale. With what is undoubtedly one of the most stupid endings ever put to film, it’s hard not to laugh in amazement as you ponder just what was said around the production table to end up with a final act as ill-advised as this.
Overall, Independence Day: Resurgence has a lot going for it. A likeable new and returning cast is bolstered by brilliant, if overused, CGI and a frantic pace. Unfortunately, it’s a victim of its timing and as such is a decent sci-fi flick, but a poor sequel to its fantastic predecessor.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/06/24/good-sci-fi-but-a-poor-sequel-independence-day-resurgence-review/
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2086 KP) rated May Day in Books
Jul 1, 2021 (Updated Jul 1, 2021)
Wasn’t What I Was Expecting
Mira’s life in Minneapolis is falling apart, so when a chance comes up to be an assistant librarian and part time reporter in the small town of Battle Lake, Minnesota, she jumps at the chance. She’s not expecting her love life to be super active there, but then she meets Jeff, and it is love at first sight. At least it is for a week until she finds his dead body in the middle of the library one morning when she goes to open it. Worried that she is a jinx, Mira decides to figure out what happened. The fact that she can turn it into an article for the paper is an added bonus. Will she figure out what happened?
This series has been on my radar for years, so it was with anticipation that I picked up this book. I was very disappointed with it. While we start out with Mira finding the dead body, we then flashback to get background on the characters. The result was a slow start to the book. The mystery was decent, with enough to keep me engaged and an ending that surprised me. The characters were more types, built to create comedy instead of be real characters. And most of the jokes didn’t land, especially since they were more raunchy than funny. This definitely isn’t one of my typical cozies, and I found that content off-putting. It was almost forced into the book. I really did want to like this book, especially since I have a few others in the series already. But I will probably move on without reading them.
This series has been on my radar for years, so it was with anticipation that I picked up this book. I was very disappointed with it. While we start out with Mira finding the dead body, we then flashback to get background on the characters. The result was a slow start to the book. The mystery was decent, with enough to keep me engaged and an ending that surprised me. The characters were more types, built to create comedy instead of be real characters. And most of the jokes didn’t land, especially since they were more raunchy than funny. This definitely isn’t one of my typical cozies, and I found that content off-putting. It was almost forced into the book. I really did want to like this book, especially since I have a few others in the series already. But I will probably move on without reading them.
Alexis Taylor recommended Music of My Mind by Stevie Wonder in Music (curated)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Hell or High Water (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“Sometimes a blind pig finds a truffle”.
One of the joys (and stresses) of the run up to the Oscar weekend is to try to catch all the major award films before the big event. As I bitched about in my BAFTA write-up, UK release dates do NOT make this an easy task, with some films like Paul Verhoeven’s “Elle”, featuring Best Actress nominee Isabelle Huppert, not released until mid March.
This week I have had the chance to catch up on two of the films with award potential that I missed at the cinema, and this is the write up of the first of those: “Hell or High Water”, was first released in September 2016, and what an excellent film it is.
Bank robberies have been featured in many hundreds of films since the early days of cinema: The Great Train Robbery for example dates back to 1903! More recent heist classics such as “Oceans 11”, “Die Hard”, “Run Lola Run” and “The Dark Knight Rises” tend towards the stylised end of the act. Where this film delivers interest is in aligning the protagonists’ drivers with the banking and mortgage ‘crimes’ featured in last year’s “The Big Short”. Add in to the movie Nutribullet a soupçon of the West Texan setting from Arthur Penn’s 1967 “Bonnie and Clyde”, turn it on and you have “Hell or High Water”.
Chris Pine (“Star Trek”) and Ben Foster (“Inferno“, “The Program“) play brothers Toby and Tanner Howard trying to rescue their deceased mother’s ranch from being foreclosed on by Texas Midlands bank. Rather than taking one of the “get out of debt” offers advertised on billboards – cleverly and insistently introduced in long panning highway shots – the brothers have their own financial plan: a scheme that involves early morning raids of the cash drawers of small-town Texas Midlands branches. But the meticulous planning of Toby, as the calm and intelligent one, are constantly at risk of upset by the unpredictable and violent actions of the loose-cannon Tanner.
Since the amounts of cash stolen are in the thousands rather than the millions, the FBI aren’t interested and the case is handed instead by aged and grumpy Texas Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges, “True Grit”) and his partner Alberto (Gil Birmingham). The pair have a respectful relationship but one built around racial banter, with Hamilton constantly referring to Alberto’s Mexican/Comanche heritage. A cat and mouse game ensues with the lawmen staking out the most likely next hits. The sonorous cello strings of the soundtrack portend a dramatic finale, and we as viewers are not disappointed.
The performances of the main leads are all excellent, with Chris Pine given the chance to show more acting chops than he has had chance to with his previous Kirk/Jack Ryan characters. His chemistry with Ben Foster is just sublime. Similarly, Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham make for a formidable double act. It is Jeff Bridges though who has the standout performance and one that is Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actor. (In fact with Michael Shannon also getting nominated in the same category for “Nocturnal Animals”, we can add ‘West Texan lawman’ to ‘Holocaust movies’ (a Winslet “Extras” reference there!) as the prime bait for Oscar nomination glory!)
The real winner here though is the whip-smart screenplay by Taylor Sheridan (“Sicario“) which sizzles with great lines: lines that make you grin inanely at the screen regularly through the running time.”In your last days in the nursing home, you’ll think of me and giggle” schmoozes Tanner to the pretty hotel check-in girl: a come-on clearly worth remembering as it delivers the goods, as it were.
The trick here is in building up a degree of empathy and sympathy for the characters on both sides. The ‘bad guys’ here are successfully portrayed as the banks. At the moment you can get 25/1 odds on this winning the Best Original Screenplay Oscar – but I would personally rate it right up there with “Manchester by the Sea“.
Deftly directed by Scot David Mackenzie (“Starred Up”) this is a film (the first of two!) that might well have elbowed it’s way into my Top 10 of 2016 if I’d seen it during its cinema release. Well worth catching on the small screen.
This week I have had the chance to catch up on two of the films with award potential that I missed at the cinema, and this is the write up of the first of those: “Hell or High Water”, was first released in September 2016, and what an excellent film it is.
Bank robberies have been featured in many hundreds of films since the early days of cinema: The Great Train Robbery for example dates back to 1903! More recent heist classics such as “Oceans 11”, “Die Hard”, “Run Lola Run” and “The Dark Knight Rises” tend towards the stylised end of the act. Where this film delivers interest is in aligning the protagonists’ drivers with the banking and mortgage ‘crimes’ featured in last year’s “The Big Short”. Add in to the movie Nutribullet a soupçon of the West Texan setting from Arthur Penn’s 1967 “Bonnie and Clyde”, turn it on and you have “Hell or High Water”.
Chris Pine (“Star Trek”) and Ben Foster (“Inferno“, “The Program“) play brothers Toby and Tanner Howard trying to rescue their deceased mother’s ranch from being foreclosed on by Texas Midlands bank. Rather than taking one of the “get out of debt” offers advertised on billboards – cleverly and insistently introduced in long panning highway shots – the brothers have their own financial plan: a scheme that involves early morning raids of the cash drawers of small-town Texas Midlands branches. But the meticulous planning of Toby, as the calm and intelligent one, are constantly at risk of upset by the unpredictable and violent actions of the loose-cannon Tanner.
Since the amounts of cash stolen are in the thousands rather than the millions, the FBI aren’t interested and the case is handed instead by aged and grumpy Texas Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges, “True Grit”) and his partner Alberto (Gil Birmingham). The pair have a respectful relationship but one built around racial banter, with Hamilton constantly referring to Alberto’s Mexican/Comanche heritage. A cat and mouse game ensues with the lawmen staking out the most likely next hits. The sonorous cello strings of the soundtrack portend a dramatic finale, and we as viewers are not disappointed.
The performances of the main leads are all excellent, with Chris Pine given the chance to show more acting chops than he has had chance to with his previous Kirk/Jack Ryan characters. His chemistry with Ben Foster is just sublime. Similarly, Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham make for a formidable double act. It is Jeff Bridges though who has the standout performance and one that is Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actor. (In fact with Michael Shannon also getting nominated in the same category for “Nocturnal Animals”, we can add ‘West Texan lawman’ to ‘Holocaust movies’ (a Winslet “Extras” reference there!) as the prime bait for Oscar nomination glory!)
The real winner here though is the whip-smart screenplay by Taylor Sheridan (“Sicario“) which sizzles with great lines: lines that make you grin inanely at the screen regularly through the running time.”In your last days in the nursing home, you’ll think of me and giggle” schmoozes Tanner to the pretty hotel check-in girl: a come-on clearly worth remembering as it delivers the goods, as it were.
The trick here is in building up a degree of empathy and sympathy for the characters on both sides. The ‘bad guys’ here are successfully portrayed as the banks. At the moment you can get 25/1 odds on this winning the Best Original Screenplay Oscar – but I would personally rate it right up there with “Manchester by the Sea“.
Deftly directed by Scot David Mackenzie (“Starred Up”) this is a film (the first of two!) that might well have elbowed it’s way into my Top 10 of 2016 if I’d seen it during its cinema release. Well worth catching on the small screen.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Steve Jobs (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Steve Jobs is written by Aaron Sorkin and directed by Danny Boyle, stars Micheal Fassbender, Kate Winslet, Seth Rogen, Jeff Daniels, and Michael Stuhlbarg.
Now that those formalities are out of the way I will just come out and say it. Steve Jobs is the best dramatic bio-pic I have seen. In fact, it is the best movie I have seen this year. Acted fantastically to the point of realism, the film takes the typical three act story arc and shows us the life of Steve Jobs at three periods of his life right before a product launch where we see Jobs as both innovator and villain alike. Each period consist of the 30-45 minutes of visually stimulating and aggressive cinematography leading up to each product launch and how the major people in Job’s life come in and out of those moments. These moments reveal that seemingly simple interactions with Jobs lead to a constant chess match of words and minds to maintain the reality distortion field of a seemingly great man but seemingly not a very good person. Clearly the film takes some Hollywood liberties, but with the screenplay based off the authorized biography of the same name by Walter Isaacson, the film Steve Jobs is probably the most realistic portrayal we may see of the man himself.
That portrayal is delivered splendidly by Michael Fassbender. Fassbender’s performance though each phase of the film is scary. That is to say he plays the egotistical narcissist to perfection. We get real moments of a cold and calculating manipulative intelligent person with quiet moments of compassion here or there. During arguments, Fassbender knows how to delivers bombs out of moments where you would not expect them and at points those arguments feel like high speed action scenes in an otherwise action less film. It is quite remarkable to witness.
Seth Rogen (uncredited) delivers the best dramatic performance of his career as Steve Wozniak. Michael Stuhlbarg likewise delivers a solid performance that stands in this film. While Jeff Daniels, coming off a great performance in the recently successful film The Martian, delivers an outstanding nuanced performance here across from Fassbender. When the two of them are on screen together it is as if they are speaking high prose to each other, albeit at times screaming. I would not be surprised if Daniels is nomination on his work for this film.
Finally we come to Kate Winslet who plays marketing executive Joanna Hoffman. To me she delivered the most fantastic performance in this film. Perhaps because she was the likable better half to Fassbender but more importantly we see this woman who is the only one to stand up to and in a sense understand Steve Jobs’s reality distortion field and work in and out of it as she desperately tries to hold everything together. We she her grow as someone who clearly loves and admires this man however recognizes his faults and is willing to call him out on them. Winslet reminds us yet again why she is one of the best actress in Hollywood and I predict she will be taking home a little gold statue to go with her performance in this film.
If you are still on the fence about watching this film, let me push you off it. Watch it. That may not mean in theaters, which is perhaps my only small complaint about this film. This is the type of film that would be great if it was released same day on digital distribution so you could watch it a few times from home over a few days while you think about it. But at some point you owe it to yourself to be amazed by the fantastic performances and cinematography of this film. While it may not be something you have to see on the big screen, it is absolutely worth the full price of admission. Do not miss it.
Now that those formalities are out of the way I will just come out and say it. Steve Jobs is the best dramatic bio-pic I have seen. In fact, it is the best movie I have seen this year. Acted fantastically to the point of realism, the film takes the typical three act story arc and shows us the life of Steve Jobs at three periods of his life right before a product launch where we see Jobs as both innovator and villain alike. Each period consist of the 30-45 minutes of visually stimulating and aggressive cinematography leading up to each product launch and how the major people in Job’s life come in and out of those moments. These moments reveal that seemingly simple interactions with Jobs lead to a constant chess match of words and minds to maintain the reality distortion field of a seemingly great man but seemingly not a very good person. Clearly the film takes some Hollywood liberties, but with the screenplay based off the authorized biography of the same name by Walter Isaacson, the film Steve Jobs is probably the most realistic portrayal we may see of the man himself.
That portrayal is delivered splendidly by Michael Fassbender. Fassbender’s performance though each phase of the film is scary. That is to say he plays the egotistical narcissist to perfection. We get real moments of a cold and calculating manipulative intelligent person with quiet moments of compassion here or there. During arguments, Fassbender knows how to delivers bombs out of moments where you would not expect them and at points those arguments feel like high speed action scenes in an otherwise action less film. It is quite remarkable to witness.
Seth Rogen (uncredited) delivers the best dramatic performance of his career as Steve Wozniak. Michael Stuhlbarg likewise delivers a solid performance that stands in this film. While Jeff Daniels, coming off a great performance in the recently successful film The Martian, delivers an outstanding nuanced performance here across from Fassbender. When the two of them are on screen together it is as if they are speaking high prose to each other, albeit at times screaming. I would not be surprised if Daniels is nomination on his work for this film.
Finally we come to Kate Winslet who plays marketing executive Joanna Hoffman. To me she delivered the most fantastic performance in this film. Perhaps because she was the likable better half to Fassbender but more importantly we see this woman who is the only one to stand up to and in a sense understand Steve Jobs’s reality distortion field and work in and out of it as she desperately tries to hold everything together. We she her grow as someone who clearly loves and admires this man however recognizes his faults and is willing to call him out on them. Winslet reminds us yet again why she is one of the best actress in Hollywood and I predict she will be taking home a little gold statue to go with her performance in this film.
If you are still on the fence about watching this film, let me push you off it. Watch it. That may not mean in theaters, which is perhaps my only small complaint about this film. This is the type of film that would be great if it was released same day on digital distribution so you could watch it a few times from home over a few days while you think about it. But at some point you owe it to yourself to be amazed by the fantastic performances and cinematography of this film. While it may not be something you have to see on the big screen, it is absolutely worth the full price of admission. Do not miss it.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Dirt (2019) in Movies
Apr 4, 2019 (Updated Apr 4, 2019)
Brainless Fun
The Dirt is a Motley Crue biopic that debuted on Netflix last month. It is Jeff Tremaine's, (the director of the Jackass movies,) first narrative feature film. This should maybe give you some idea of what to expect within the movie. If Bohemian Rhapsody, Wayne's World and Jackass had a baby, this would most likely be the result.
Your enjoyment of this movie will probably depend on what you are wanting out of it going in. I am a casual Motely Crue fan, I only know a few of their songs and have a very surface level knowledge of their history. I was watching this movie for a bit of dumb fun after I had seen the trailer and it delivered exactly what I expected it to. If however, you are a die hard Motley Crue fan looking for an in-depth biopic with a sense of grit and realism, you will most likely be sorely disappointed.
The plot to this thing plays out like a Wikipedia article, in the sense that it hits all of the major beats of the band's history, but glosses over so much more and leaves any sense of nuance at the door. It is also incredibly cartoonish and cheesy, at no point in the film do you ever feel that you are watching the actual members of Motley Crue and it is always painfully clear that you are watching a group of actors in bad wigs playing faux, characterture versions of real people.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think that the cast have anything to do with how shallow or glossy this thing is. I think that Daniel Webber did a decent job as Vince Neil and Douglas Booth is okay as Nikki Sixx. For some reason, Machine Gun Kelly plays Tommy Lee as a goofy, lovable rogue, as apposed to the aggressive violent abuser he is in real life. Iwan Rheon is by far the stand out as Mick Mars, the older, more jaded member of the group who totally dismisses the immature 'sex drugs and rock and roll,' bullshit mentality of his band-mates and comes away with some of the driest, funniest lines in the movie.
Overall, I gave this a 7 based on the brainless fun I had watching it, but it by no means feels accurate or realistic, nor does it feel like it's trying to be. Hardcore Motely Crue fans will probably feel like they were let down by this biopic, but I got exactly what I wanted out of it and enjoyed it for what it was.
Your enjoyment of this movie will probably depend on what you are wanting out of it going in. I am a casual Motely Crue fan, I only know a few of their songs and have a very surface level knowledge of their history. I was watching this movie for a bit of dumb fun after I had seen the trailer and it delivered exactly what I expected it to. If however, you are a die hard Motley Crue fan looking for an in-depth biopic with a sense of grit and realism, you will most likely be sorely disappointed.
The plot to this thing plays out like a Wikipedia article, in the sense that it hits all of the major beats of the band's history, but glosses over so much more and leaves any sense of nuance at the door. It is also incredibly cartoonish and cheesy, at no point in the film do you ever feel that you are watching the actual members of Motley Crue and it is always painfully clear that you are watching a group of actors in bad wigs playing faux, characterture versions of real people.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think that the cast have anything to do with how shallow or glossy this thing is. I think that Daniel Webber did a decent job as Vince Neil and Douglas Booth is okay as Nikki Sixx. For some reason, Machine Gun Kelly plays Tommy Lee as a goofy, lovable rogue, as apposed to the aggressive violent abuser he is in real life. Iwan Rheon is by far the stand out as Mick Mars, the older, more jaded member of the group who totally dismisses the immature 'sex drugs and rock and roll,' bullshit mentality of his band-mates and comes away with some of the driest, funniest lines in the movie.
Overall, I gave this a 7 based on the brainless fun I had watching it, but it by no means feels accurate or realistic, nor does it feel like it's trying to be. Hardcore Motely Crue fans will probably feel like they were let down by this biopic, but I got exactly what I wanted out of it and enjoyed it for what it was.
JasonKeenan (9 KP) rated Kingsman: The Golden Circle (2017) in Movies
Sep 20, 2017
100% worth the watch
And this movie deserved every point
I loved the first Kingsman, it has brought a new style to the spy gadget movies, most of the characters are amazing, some not so much, but still enjoyable
Right, so, the movie carries on from the first film, I'd say about a year or so has past, Eggsy 'Taron Edgerton' is a full member of 'The Kingsman' and has taken over the roll of his mentor, Harry (Colin Firth), and even taken harry's codename 'Galahad' , he is living with his girlfriend and moving forward with his life, when all of a sudden the Kingsman's headquarters were attack and destroyed.
With the world being held hostage by 'The Golden Circule' led by Poppy (Julian Moore), who is head of a drug cartel, and with a scheme to add poision into all her drugs and will only give the cure to the infected people of the world is if all the worlds leader comply with her demands,
So Eggsy and Merlin (Mark Strong) have to jump the pond to ask for help from there American cusins, 'The Statesmen', who is led by Champ 'Jeff Bridges', there cover is an organisation posing as a Bourbon whiskey distillery in Kentucky, and together they have to try and stop Poppy (Jillian Moore) from completing her evil schemes
I have to say this movie is realllllly good, the fight sequences are amazing, and the music fits the film perfectly, Taron Edgertons screen presents is just top class, and working off Colin Firth and Mark Strong, just an amazing cast, with a sneaky addition to the cast from a well known person ?, which was surprisingly nicely done, there are a few little changes I would have made, but still as a whole still amazing
If you like the Kingsman, you will absolutely love the Kingsman: The Golden Circule, I recommend you looking for the next showing and watching it now......why are you still reading this GO!
I loved the first Kingsman, it has brought a new style to the spy gadget movies, most of the characters are amazing, some not so much, but still enjoyable
Right, so, the movie carries on from the first film, I'd say about a year or so has past, Eggsy 'Taron Edgerton' is a full member of 'The Kingsman' and has taken over the roll of his mentor, Harry (Colin Firth), and even taken harry's codename 'Galahad' , he is living with his girlfriend and moving forward with his life, when all of a sudden the Kingsman's headquarters were attack and destroyed.
With the world being held hostage by 'The Golden Circule' led by Poppy (Julian Moore), who is head of a drug cartel, and with a scheme to add poision into all her drugs and will only give the cure to the infected people of the world is if all the worlds leader comply with her demands,
So Eggsy and Merlin (Mark Strong) have to jump the pond to ask for help from there American cusins, 'The Statesmen', who is led by Champ 'Jeff Bridges', there cover is an organisation posing as a Bourbon whiskey distillery in Kentucky, and together they have to try and stop Poppy (Jillian Moore) from completing her evil schemes
I have to say this movie is realllllly good, the fight sequences are amazing, and the music fits the film perfectly, Taron Edgertons screen presents is just top class, and working off Colin Firth and Mark Strong, just an amazing cast, with a sneaky addition to the cast from a well known person ?, which was surprisingly nicely done, there are a few little changes I would have made, but still as a whole still amazing
If you like the Kingsman, you will absolutely love the Kingsman: The Golden Circule, I recommend you looking for the next showing and watching it now......why are you still reading this GO!
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2086 KP) rated The Murder Pit in Books
Apr 22, 2020
Body in the Coal Chute
Life is going well for Daisy Savage. Recently remarried, she, her husband, and their blended family are settling into the old fixer upper they just bought. While her husband, Jake, bemoans the work, Daisy fell in love with the place despite the work. The house seems to have quite a few secrets, and Daisy finds one in their basement’s crawl space – an old coal chute. Unfortunately, that discovery also comes with a dead body, and the victim is someone that Daisy recognizes. With the small-town rumor mill kicking in, Daisy finds herself as a suspect. Can she figure out who really killed the victim and why he was dumped in their basement?
The plot started out well, and I enjoyed the added puzzle about why the victim was left in Daisy’s basement. There were some good twists before we reached the end. Sadly, I did have some issues with the book. The characters are a bit thin. I get that some of them were supposed to be comedic, but they still could have been stronger. Daisy’s kids seemed to act younger than they were supposed to be. She homeschools most of the kids, but she seems to justify letting them play and not actually doing any work with them. (Yes, I get that in a cozy, the main character spends all their time on the case instead of their job, but that’s not the case here.) There were some timelines issues as well, nothing that affected the plot, but the author clearly lost track of time. On the other hand, I loved Daisy and Jake’s relationship, and I laughed quite a bit at the character’s interactions. I’ve read other books from Jeff Shelby in the past and enjoyed them, so I will read one of his books again. Hopefully, this was just an off book. Overall, I enjoyed it, but there are some issues that need to be resolved.
The plot started out well, and I enjoyed the added puzzle about why the victim was left in Daisy’s basement. There were some good twists before we reached the end. Sadly, I did have some issues with the book. The characters are a bit thin. I get that some of them were supposed to be comedic, but they still could have been stronger. Daisy’s kids seemed to act younger than they were supposed to be. She homeschools most of the kids, but she seems to justify letting them play and not actually doing any work with them. (Yes, I get that in a cozy, the main character spends all their time on the case instead of their job, but that’s not the case here.) There were some timelines issues as well, nothing that affected the plot, but the author clearly lost track of time. On the other hand, I loved Daisy and Jake’s relationship, and I laughed quite a bit at the character’s interactions. I’ve read other books from Jeff Shelby in the past and enjoyed them, so I will read one of his books again. Hopefully, this was just an off book. Overall, I enjoyed it, but there are some issues that need to be resolved.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Cursed Films - Season 1 in TV
Oct 7, 2020
Cursed Films is a 5 part series focusing on the ins and outs of film productions that were deemed cursed for one reason or another - the 5 parts concentrate on The Exorcist, The Omen, Poltergeist, The Crow, and The Twilight Zone movie respectively.
When this series is focused on the films themselves, it's a real treat. Some of the interviews are moving as hell - in particular the conversations with Richard Sawyer, Lance Anderson, Jeff Most, and Gary Sherman. These guys are to this day still affected by some of the things that happened during their film productions.
The Twilight Zone episode includes footage of the infamous on set accident which is genuinely haunting, and is honestly a really powerful part of the documentary having Sawyer's interview running alongside it.
The Crow episode is great as well, and the look we get at Anderson's relationship with Brandon Lee is so human and raw.
These moments really shine a light on how ridiculous the curse theories are, when in fact, they are just tragic events that effected real people, people who then had to deal with a following media circus.
The big thing I really didn't like about this series is only really relevant to The Omen and Exorcist episodes. It's almost like they didn't have enough material to fill the runtime of these segments, and so opt to pad it out with interviews with real exorcists, or magicians that practice black magic. I'm sure that there are interesting stories to be told by these people, but it feels really out of place and forced here. It's even cringe inducing at times and feels like very obvious filler. It detracts somewhat from what is otherwise a pretty solid documentary series.
Cursed Films is certainly an interesting watch, and is easy to digest in the 30 minute episodes that are presented. Also, that theme music is wild (found out it's by an Italian space-prog band from the 70s called I Signori Della Galassia!)
Worth a watch for sure, just ignore the silly filler parts.
When this series is focused on the films themselves, it's a real treat. Some of the interviews are moving as hell - in particular the conversations with Richard Sawyer, Lance Anderson, Jeff Most, and Gary Sherman. These guys are to this day still affected by some of the things that happened during their film productions.
The Twilight Zone episode includes footage of the infamous on set accident which is genuinely haunting, and is honestly a really powerful part of the documentary having Sawyer's interview running alongside it.
The Crow episode is great as well, and the look we get at Anderson's relationship with Brandon Lee is so human and raw.
These moments really shine a light on how ridiculous the curse theories are, when in fact, they are just tragic events that effected real people, people who then had to deal with a following media circus.
The big thing I really didn't like about this series is only really relevant to The Omen and Exorcist episodes. It's almost like they didn't have enough material to fill the runtime of these segments, and so opt to pad it out with interviews with real exorcists, or magicians that practice black magic. I'm sure that there are interesting stories to be told by these people, but it feels really out of place and forced here. It's even cringe inducing at times and feels like very obvious filler. It detracts somewhat from what is otherwise a pretty solid documentary series.
Cursed Films is certainly an interesting watch, and is easy to digest in the 30 minute episodes that are presented. Also, that theme music is wild (found out it's by an Italian space-prog band from the 70s called I Signori Della Galassia!)
Worth a watch for sure, just ignore the silly filler parts.