Search
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Zombieland: Double Tap (2019) in Movies
Nov 1, 2019
I ended up enjoying this film
I really enjoyed the 2009 Horror/Comedy ZOMBIELAND - a truly unique and original film that blends the trendy (at the time) Zombie genre with really smart comedy populated by some truly charismatic comedic performers and a GREAT surprise cameo.
So...I greeted the news that there would be a sequel - 10 years later - with a shrug. Why would they want to revisit this tired (at this time) genre with performers that have (for the most part) gone on to "bigger and better" things (including a few Oscar nominations and 1 Oscar win). But...I enjoyed the first, so I figured I'd check it out. And...for the first 20 minutes or so of this film, I sat there with my arms folded across my chest thinking "they are just trying too hard to replicate the first film". And then an interesting thing happened...
I chuckled to myself. Then I chuckled some more, and then I started laughing out loud and at about the 1 hour mark, I realized, "I'm really enjoying myself".
Credit, I think, has to go the charm, charisma and chemistry between the 4 returning leads - Emma Stone, Jesse Eisenberg, Abigail Breslin and Woody Harrelson. It was like running into 4 old friends and old, comfortable, patterns re-emerge (kind of liking eating comfort food). These are ably assisted by good, fun turns by the likes of Rosario Dawson, Luke Wilson and Thomas Middleditch. Special mention has to be made of Zoey Deutsch's turn as blonde air-head, Madison. This could have easily been a one-note, annoyance. but she brings something more to role that makes her endearing, not cloying.
The original creative team - Director Ruben Fleischer and Writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick - are back as well, so the style and humor are similar to the first film - not really bringing much new to the proceedings, but not just "getting a paycheck" either.
This film is "nothing new", but I enjoyed it anyway - so if you liked the first Zombieland, you'll like this one as well. ONE NOTE - there is a "credits scene" as well as a "button scene" at the end of the credits that are MUST WATCH. So stick around for those, you'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
So...I greeted the news that there would be a sequel - 10 years later - with a shrug. Why would they want to revisit this tired (at this time) genre with performers that have (for the most part) gone on to "bigger and better" things (including a few Oscar nominations and 1 Oscar win). But...I enjoyed the first, so I figured I'd check it out. And...for the first 20 minutes or so of this film, I sat there with my arms folded across my chest thinking "they are just trying too hard to replicate the first film". And then an interesting thing happened...
I chuckled to myself. Then I chuckled some more, and then I started laughing out loud and at about the 1 hour mark, I realized, "I'm really enjoying myself".
Credit, I think, has to go the charm, charisma and chemistry between the 4 returning leads - Emma Stone, Jesse Eisenberg, Abigail Breslin and Woody Harrelson. It was like running into 4 old friends and old, comfortable, patterns re-emerge (kind of liking eating comfort food). These are ably assisted by good, fun turns by the likes of Rosario Dawson, Luke Wilson and Thomas Middleditch. Special mention has to be made of Zoey Deutsch's turn as blonde air-head, Madison. This could have easily been a one-note, annoyance. but she brings something more to role that makes her endearing, not cloying.
The original creative team - Director Ruben Fleischer and Writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick - are back as well, so the style and humor are similar to the first film - not really bringing much new to the proceedings, but not just "getting a paycheck" either.
This film is "nothing new", but I enjoyed it anyway - so if you liked the first Zombieland, you'll like this one as well. ONE NOTE - there is a "credits scene" as well as a "button scene" at the end of the credits that are MUST WATCH. So stick around for those, you'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
When I first heard that Warner Bros. was planning a series of films based on the classic DC Comics characters akin to what Marvel has successfully done, I was intrigued with the possibilities. With the release of Batman Vs Superman: Dawn of Justice, we get the first look into that universe and I have to say it is one that has more than a few stumbles.
The film follows Superman (Henry Cavill), as he deals with a plot that is set to discredit him and make the people of the world fearful of him and his abilities.
One person affected by this is Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), who has seen firsthand the devastation that Superman is capable of after seeing the city practically destroyed in the events that culminated in “Superman: Man of Steel”.
Wayne has devised a plan for his alter-ego Batman to put a stop to Superman before he can become an even greater threat to the public and despite the urgings of his butler Alfred (Jeremy Irons), Batman continues with his plan.
As if this was not enough for Superman to contend with, neurotic tech giant Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg), has decided to manipulate events into a larger and even more dangerous game as he has set his sights clearly on Superman but would also love to see Batman removed in the process.
One would think that with a premise such as this it would be a non-stop action fest that would thrill fans from start to finish. Sadly this is not the case. The first hour and change of the film plods along with little action and we get a cast, some of whom I believe are badly miscast, plodding along and blandly brooding. The characters are so unlikeable that I found myself not caring for them or their fates and was shocked how a film with so much potential and a reported $250 million budget could be so under-whelming.
The final part of the film is non-stop action but Director Zack Snyder allows his film to become awash in all the Hollywood action film stereotypes. I thought I was watching an over-the-top special effects reel as all of the action unfolded, it was very hard to get overly thrilled about it despite the skill that went into crafting it.
Affleck does a passable job in the role and hopefully as he has more outings he will grow on me, but I just never really embraced him in the part. His Batman acts out of character in many sequences as he jumps to an extreme conclusion without taking the steps in between. Eisenberg is so neurotic and annoying that you just want to slap him. He is so difficult to watch. The biggest issue I have is with Cavill. He is just so bland and uninteresting to me as Superman. Yes, I know it is unfair to compare him to Christopher Reeves, but even Brandon Routh did a more acceptable portrayal of Superman. He just is not very interesting to watch in the role, with his monotone delivery and lack of facial expressions. I want heroes that I can get behind and care about, not one-dimensional characters that do little to generate my interest and sympathy.
The most telling thing for me was for an audience that was so keyed up at the start of the film, they were pretty silent for most of it, save for when a certain character appeared and even at the end of the film, offered only a small round of applause.
The film did try to be epic in scale and it is clear that this is just the opening round of a much larger series, but for now, I could not help but feel disappointed with the result and I would be shocked if the next offerings from Marvel are not considerably better than this film.
http://sknr.net/2016/03/23/81808/
The film follows Superman (Henry Cavill), as he deals with a plot that is set to discredit him and make the people of the world fearful of him and his abilities.
One person affected by this is Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), who has seen firsthand the devastation that Superman is capable of after seeing the city practically destroyed in the events that culminated in “Superman: Man of Steel”.
Wayne has devised a plan for his alter-ego Batman to put a stop to Superman before he can become an even greater threat to the public and despite the urgings of his butler Alfred (Jeremy Irons), Batman continues with his plan.
As if this was not enough for Superman to contend with, neurotic tech giant Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg), has decided to manipulate events into a larger and even more dangerous game as he has set his sights clearly on Superman but would also love to see Batman removed in the process.
One would think that with a premise such as this it would be a non-stop action fest that would thrill fans from start to finish. Sadly this is not the case. The first hour and change of the film plods along with little action and we get a cast, some of whom I believe are badly miscast, plodding along and blandly brooding. The characters are so unlikeable that I found myself not caring for them or their fates and was shocked how a film with so much potential and a reported $250 million budget could be so under-whelming.
The final part of the film is non-stop action but Director Zack Snyder allows his film to become awash in all the Hollywood action film stereotypes. I thought I was watching an over-the-top special effects reel as all of the action unfolded, it was very hard to get overly thrilled about it despite the skill that went into crafting it.
Affleck does a passable job in the role and hopefully as he has more outings he will grow on me, but I just never really embraced him in the part. His Batman acts out of character in many sequences as he jumps to an extreme conclusion without taking the steps in between. Eisenberg is so neurotic and annoying that you just want to slap him. He is so difficult to watch. The biggest issue I have is with Cavill. He is just so bland and uninteresting to me as Superman. Yes, I know it is unfair to compare him to Christopher Reeves, but even Brandon Routh did a more acceptable portrayal of Superman. He just is not very interesting to watch in the role, with his monotone delivery and lack of facial expressions. I want heroes that I can get behind and care about, not one-dimensional characters that do little to generate my interest and sympathy.
The most telling thing for me was for an audience that was so keyed up at the start of the film, they were pretty silent for most of it, save for when a certain character appeared and even at the end of the film, offered only a small round of applause.
The film did try to be epic in scale and it is clear that this is just the opening round of a much larger series, but for now, I could not help but feel disappointed with the result and I would be shocked if the next offerings from Marvel are not considerably better than this film.
http://sknr.net/2016/03/23/81808/
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Zombieland (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg) is an unassuming young man who makes his way through life the best way he can despite being plagued by Irritable Bowel Syndrome. This particular affliction is a serious concern for Columbus as according to his rules for survival, bathrooms are a very dangerous place.
In the new horror/comedy “Zombieland”, Columbus finds himself as one of the few remaining people left alive, and is trying to make his way from Texas back to his family in Columbus in the hopes of finding them alive.
Despite being alone, Columbus keeps himself sharp through constant vigilance, and a list of rules he has created for surviving a world gone mad which he has dubbed Zombieland. As the film opens, Columbus establishes some of his most common rules which are then illustrated in very funny examples, which also serve to establish the backdrop of the film.
As he travels, Columbus crosses paths with Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), who is on a quest to find the last remaining Twinkies in the world. Tallahassee established a no names rule, hence the characters in the film are known by the locales they are from. When he is not cruising the roads in search of his elusive snack cake, Tallahassee is an avid Zombie killer and takes great delight in dispatching as many of them as he can.
When a stop introduces the duo to a pair of sisters named Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin), who are dedicated to survival at all costs, and are not above taking some serious measures of manipulation to get ahead.
After some initial difficulties, the group joins up and head for California where Wichita has convinced Little Rock that a local theme park is a Zombie free area that will provide them a safe haven.
Despite some skepticism but buoyed by his attraction to Wichita, Columbus tags along, and awkwardly attempts to impress her which results in some very touching and funny moments.
The film shifts into high gear when the group arrives in L.A. and takes refuge in a mansion which has tons of laughs as well as a very solid celebrity appearance which is a true gem.
Eventually the subplots of the film all converge in a frantic array of action, humor, and romance that had the audience at the preview screening cheering and laughing.
“Zombieland” is a very enjoyable film that provides plenty of laughs and a good mix of action yet remains a character driven story. The leads all work very well with one another and Eisenberg follows his turn in “Adventureland” with a performance that establishes him as a young actor to watch. His likeable everyman quality combined with his charming sincerity and awkwardness makes Columbus a great foil and companion for the outrageous antics of Tallahassee.
The young love storyline is handled well in the film, and does not resort to any of the usual staples, and unfolds as a very realistic event in a world where Zombies are commonplace.
Director Reuben Fleischer keeps things moving at a brisk pace yet allows time for the characters to shine.
Naturally the film will draw comparison to the classic British film “Shaun of the Dead”, which features normal guys trying to cope with a Zombie invasion. Shaun had plenty of laughs, but at times seemed unsure of what direction it was trying to go in, especially toward the end of the film.
“Zombieland” almost defies you to categorize it as it is great mix of horror, comedy, and action disguised as a romantic comedy. The winning cast and formula makes “Zombieland” one of the most enjoyable films of the summer and a real treat.
In the new horror/comedy “Zombieland”, Columbus finds himself as one of the few remaining people left alive, and is trying to make his way from Texas back to his family in Columbus in the hopes of finding them alive.
Despite being alone, Columbus keeps himself sharp through constant vigilance, and a list of rules he has created for surviving a world gone mad which he has dubbed Zombieland. As the film opens, Columbus establishes some of his most common rules which are then illustrated in very funny examples, which also serve to establish the backdrop of the film.
As he travels, Columbus crosses paths with Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), who is on a quest to find the last remaining Twinkies in the world. Tallahassee established a no names rule, hence the characters in the film are known by the locales they are from. When he is not cruising the roads in search of his elusive snack cake, Tallahassee is an avid Zombie killer and takes great delight in dispatching as many of them as he can.
When a stop introduces the duo to a pair of sisters named Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin), who are dedicated to survival at all costs, and are not above taking some serious measures of manipulation to get ahead.
After some initial difficulties, the group joins up and head for California where Wichita has convinced Little Rock that a local theme park is a Zombie free area that will provide them a safe haven.
Despite some skepticism but buoyed by his attraction to Wichita, Columbus tags along, and awkwardly attempts to impress her which results in some very touching and funny moments.
The film shifts into high gear when the group arrives in L.A. and takes refuge in a mansion which has tons of laughs as well as a very solid celebrity appearance which is a true gem.
Eventually the subplots of the film all converge in a frantic array of action, humor, and romance that had the audience at the preview screening cheering and laughing.
“Zombieland” is a very enjoyable film that provides plenty of laughs and a good mix of action yet remains a character driven story. The leads all work very well with one another and Eisenberg follows his turn in “Adventureland” with a performance that establishes him as a young actor to watch. His likeable everyman quality combined with his charming sincerity and awkwardness makes Columbus a great foil and companion for the outrageous antics of Tallahassee.
The young love storyline is handled well in the film, and does not resort to any of the usual staples, and unfolds as a very realistic event in a world where Zombies are commonplace.
Director Reuben Fleischer keeps things moving at a brisk pace yet allows time for the characters to shine.
Naturally the film will draw comparison to the classic British film “Shaun of the Dead”, which features normal guys trying to cope with a Zombie invasion. Shaun had plenty of laughs, but at times seemed unsure of what direction it was trying to go in, especially toward the end of the film.
“Zombieland” almost defies you to categorize it as it is great mix of horror, comedy, and action disguised as a romantic comedy. The winning cast and formula makes “Zombieland” one of the most enjoyable films of the summer and a real treat.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Zombieland (2009) in Movies
Nov 12, 2019
Great Cast Makes For the Perfect Movie
Four strangers have to learn to survive together during a zombie apocalypse. Talk about a movie that checks all the boxes, Zombieland does just that! It’s got a little something for everyone.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
The first ten minutes is a perfect setup for what you can expect throughout the movie. This isn’t your typical zombie-survival romp and I thought writer Rhett Reese did an amazing job of establishing that early. You meet and fall in love with the main character as he tries to survive a simple trip to the bathroom. You also learn how his “rules” have kept him alive so long.
Characters: 10
His name is Columbus, played by Jesse Eisenberg. He’s such an unlikely hero that you can’t help but root for the poor guy as he moves from one scene to the next. Many of the scenes would have played out much differently if it weren’t for his quirky personality.
The other three mains, Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) add their own flare to the film as well. Tallahassee is a badass to the point where it gets extremely comical. His character motivation of searching for a Twinkie (literally!) is priceless. The ladies share a fun backstory that make them an intriguing pair. You throw all four together and you have a perfect combination.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
This apocalyptic adventure is a blast across the board from beginning to end. Even the backstories are exciting to watch. The characters help drive the story as you can somehow manage to get on board with each of their motivations for survival. The action is a blast and the slower moments are underrated gems.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Zombie movies have been done over…and over…and over…It’s a rare treat when they get it right and try to think outside of the box. I love that the film manages to take a familiar theme and make it fresh. Not only is the movie original, but it harbors some of the most memorable scenes in film.
Resolution: 10
Always nice when a movie doesn’t overstay it’s welcome. Zombieland ties up its story in tidy fashion, ending with a heartfelt bang. It immediately makes you want to watch it again.
Overall: 100
I have the utmost respect for the sheer creativity in Zombieland. Sometimes movies try too hard while others don’t try hard enough. This movie never feels forced and always feels in control of its own destiny. Even the small scenes are impactful, like the night scene where they are taking turns driving and getting to know each other in the car. Zombieland is a cinematic treat.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
The first ten minutes is a perfect setup for what you can expect throughout the movie. This isn’t your typical zombie-survival romp and I thought writer Rhett Reese did an amazing job of establishing that early. You meet and fall in love with the main character as he tries to survive a simple trip to the bathroom. You also learn how his “rules” have kept him alive so long.
Characters: 10
His name is Columbus, played by Jesse Eisenberg. He’s such an unlikely hero that you can’t help but root for the poor guy as he moves from one scene to the next. Many of the scenes would have played out much differently if it weren’t for his quirky personality.
The other three mains, Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) add their own flare to the film as well. Tallahassee is a badass to the point where it gets extremely comical. His character motivation of searching for a Twinkie (literally!) is priceless. The ladies share a fun backstory that make them an intriguing pair. You throw all four together and you have a perfect combination.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
This apocalyptic adventure is a blast across the board from beginning to end. Even the backstories are exciting to watch. The characters help drive the story as you can somehow manage to get on board with each of their motivations for survival. The action is a blast and the slower moments are underrated gems.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Zombie movies have been done over…and over…and over…It’s a rare treat when they get it right and try to think outside of the box. I love that the film manages to take a familiar theme and make it fresh. Not only is the movie original, but it harbors some of the most memorable scenes in film.
Resolution: 10
Always nice when a movie doesn’t overstay it’s welcome. Zombieland ties up its story in tidy fashion, ending with a heartfelt bang. It immediately makes you want to watch it again.
Overall: 100
I have the utmost respect for the sheer creativity in Zombieland. Sometimes movies try too hard while others don’t try hard enough. This movie never feels forced and always feels in control of its own destiny. Even the small scenes are impactful, like the night scene where they are taking turns driving and getting to know each other in the car. Zombieland is a cinematic treat.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Social Network (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
It’s hard to find anyone who doesn’t know about Facebook. On any given day, at least 250 million active users log on to Facebook and spend over 700 billion minutes per month updating their status, posting pictures or playing casual games. So dominant is this social network, the name itself is both a brand and a verb. Who would have thought that sharing inanities about what we’re currently thinking, eating, reading, watching with our friends would garner such interest? In the new movie The Social Network, director David Fincher sets out to show how, from the very humblest beginnings, Facebook became the juggernaut that it is today.
In 2003, after a debate and breakup with his girlfriend, fueled by his frustration at his exclusion from the social elite, Harvard undergrad and computer programming genius, Mark Zuckerberg, sits at his computer one night and changes the face of the internet. In just a few hours Zuckerberg, deftly played by Jesse Eisenberg, circumvents the firewalls and security of Harvard and creates a website that allows visitors to rate the ladies of the campus. Within a few hours, the thousands of hits crash the vaunted computer network of the university.
While Harvard staff was not impressed with his efforts, it certainly caught the attention of his fellow students, most notably the Winklevoss brothers, who seek out Zuckerberg with the intention of creating an exclusive website for Harvard students. While seemingly mulling over the proposal of the new site, Zuckerberg rapidly, and obsessively, develops his own. The early version of what would eventually become Facebook soon becomes a campus sensation, much to the dismay of the Winklevoss brothers.
Andrew Garfield plays Zuckerberg’s friend Eduardo Severin who funds Zuckerberg’s efforts. Facebook rapidly became the height of social hipness as its exclusivity widened to more colleges and universities. College students across the country created profiles and quickly spread news of the site simply by word of mouth. Or rather word of email. The success of Facebook soon gains the attention of Sean Parker, played by Justin Timberlake. Parker had risen to prominence as the creator of the popular file sharing site Napster and was eager to become involved with the growing success of Facebook. While Mark is fascinated and inspired by Sean’s slick style, Eduardo isn’t impressed and is highly suspicious of Sean’s motives as well as his shady reputation. As the trailers and posters have touted, you can’t get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies. Jealousy feeds insecurities that feed accusations that eventually lead to lawsuits.
Eisenberg is fantastic as the egotistical, neurotic, and highly intelligent Mark Zuckerberg, but the true breakout performance of the film has to be that of Andrew Garfield, who has been cast to play Spiderman in the next trilogy of the very popular film series. The British actor who was born and raised in Los Angeles has an understated charisma and appears very capable of becoming a leading man. He infuses Eduardo with class and humanism as he tries to be the friend Zuckerberg doesn’t think he needs.
The film is told largely through flashbacks during a deposition hearing between the parties involved in the lawsuits. Director Fincher skillfully allows his characters to drive the film, letting the story unfold in telling scenes, giving the characters ample room to shine without becoming preachy or resorting to grandstanding.
The characters, despite their flaws, do come across as very believable and sympathetic, even though it’s difficult to imagine going from students to inventors of a pop culture phenomenon, to billionaires in just a few short years. Very few corporations that become dominant in their industry do so without critics, challengers, and those that claim they were responsible for whatever success a company gained.
While The Social Network does not overtly place blame, the light it shines on Zuckerberg isn’t altogether flattering. Surprisingly, the film does not go to the extreme with tech talk. It instead focuses on the relationship between the characters and how they handled the drastic and sudden changes in their lives brought on by a simple program called Face Mash, which became the basis for Facebook.
Strong supporting work in the film combined with the great performances of the lead characters makes The Social Network”a very solid and entertaining film that, for my money, is one of the better films of the year.
While it would be easy to jump to judgment and brand many in the film as egotistical rich people who should be grateful for what they have, I remembered that absolute power corrupts absolutely and I wondered just how well any of us in the audience would react if we were ever faced with a similar situation.
In 2003, after a debate and breakup with his girlfriend, fueled by his frustration at his exclusion from the social elite, Harvard undergrad and computer programming genius, Mark Zuckerberg, sits at his computer one night and changes the face of the internet. In just a few hours Zuckerberg, deftly played by Jesse Eisenberg, circumvents the firewalls and security of Harvard and creates a website that allows visitors to rate the ladies of the campus. Within a few hours, the thousands of hits crash the vaunted computer network of the university.
While Harvard staff was not impressed with his efforts, it certainly caught the attention of his fellow students, most notably the Winklevoss brothers, who seek out Zuckerberg with the intention of creating an exclusive website for Harvard students. While seemingly mulling over the proposal of the new site, Zuckerberg rapidly, and obsessively, develops his own. The early version of what would eventually become Facebook soon becomes a campus sensation, much to the dismay of the Winklevoss brothers.
Andrew Garfield plays Zuckerberg’s friend Eduardo Severin who funds Zuckerberg’s efforts. Facebook rapidly became the height of social hipness as its exclusivity widened to more colleges and universities. College students across the country created profiles and quickly spread news of the site simply by word of mouth. Or rather word of email. The success of Facebook soon gains the attention of Sean Parker, played by Justin Timberlake. Parker had risen to prominence as the creator of the popular file sharing site Napster and was eager to become involved with the growing success of Facebook. While Mark is fascinated and inspired by Sean’s slick style, Eduardo isn’t impressed and is highly suspicious of Sean’s motives as well as his shady reputation. As the trailers and posters have touted, you can’t get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies. Jealousy feeds insecurities that feed accusations that eventually lead to lawsuits.
Eisenberg is fantastic as the egotistical, neurotic, and highly intelligent Mark Zuckerberg, but the true breakout performance of the film has to be that of Andrew Garfield, who has been cast to play Spiderman in the next trilogy of the very popular film series. The British actor who was born and raised in Los Angeles has an understated charisma and appears very capable of becoming a leading man. He infuses Eduardo with class and humanism as he tries to be the friend Zuckerberg doesn’t think he needs.
The film is told largely through flashbacks during a deposition hearing between the parties involved in the lawsuits. Director Fincher skillfully allows his characters to drive the film, letting the story unfold in telling scenes, giving the characters ample room to shine without becoming preachy or resorting to grandstanding.
The characters, despite their flaws, do come across as very believable and sympathetic, even though it’s difficult to imagine going from students to inventors of a pop culture phenomenon, to billionaires in just a few short years. Very few corporations that become dominant in their industry do so without critics, challengers, and those that claim they were responsible for whatever success a company gained.
While The Social Network does not overtly place blame, the light it shines on Zuckerberg isn’t altogether flattering. Surprisingly, the film does not go to the extreme with tech talk. It instead focuses on the relationship between the characters and how they handled the drastic and sudden changes in their lives brought on by a simple program called Face Mash, which became the basis for Facebook.
Strong supporting work in the film combined with the great performances of the lead characters makes The Social Network”a very solid and entertaining film that, for my money, is one of the better films of the year.
While it would be easy to jump to judgment and brand many in the film as egotistical rich people who should be grateful for what they have, I remembered that absolute power corrupts absolutely and I wondered just how well any of us in the audience would react if we were ever faced with a similar situation.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Now You See Me (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
When you were little and you saw your very first magic show, you were probably amazed just by the simple action of a magician waving his magic wand and pulling a rabbit out of his hat. The only explanation you needed was that it was magic.
Not knowing that “the closer you look, the less you see as you become older you become less and less convinced that magic exists.
From French director Louis Leterrier who has brought us films like “The Transporter” and ” Unleashed” comes an “Ocean’s Eleven” style film about four magicians who pull off one of the biggest heists the world has ever seen by using magic.
Calling themselves The Four Horseman, four magicians with very different abilities come together as one to pull off something no other magician has ever attempted.
The leader of the pack is J. Daniel Atlas (Jesse Eisenberg), who is a master at sleight-of-hand and blatant arrogance. A mentalist who specializes in hypnosis and is no stranger to being devious himself is Merritt McKinney (Woody Harrelson). The very talented pickpocket Jack Wilder (Dave Franco) not only steals the audience’s hearts but also can pick a lock blindfolded if he had to.
Last but by no means least is Henley Reeves (Isla Fisher), the sexy escape artist who can even escape a tank full of piranhas without a scratch.
The story follows The Four Horseman embarking on a journey of teleporting and robbing a Parisian bank and reining it over the cheering Las Vegas audience at their first venue.
They don’t stop there. There show takes them from Vegas to the renewed city of New Orleans and then to New York where the grand finally takes place whilst spreading the wealth of their heists to the deserving audience members in grand Robin Hood fashion.
This film is excellent! It doesn’t leave you hanging and answers all your questions. The elaborate tricks performed proved to be very entertaining and exciting!
A neat touch was adding a woman to the mix as you don’t really see any women magicians out there other than the assistants who get sawed in half.
The cast was great and had great chemistry however I would have liked to see a bit more of character backstory. Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine and Mark Ruffalo are also a part of the seemingly big cast. The special effects were not only entertaining but extremely appealing to the eye.
Though the storyline is a little scatterbrained it is anything but a bore and leaves you wanting to experience more. After seeing the film, I had an overwhelming need to watch other magician movies like “The Great Houdini”, “The Prestige”, and “The Illusionist”. It also brought back those same feelings I had as a child experiencing the magic and mystery a true magician can provide. This film left me wanting to see it for a second time.
Not knowing that “the closer you look, the less you see as you become older you become less and less convinced that magic exists.
From French director Louis Leterrier who has brought us films like “The Transporter” and ” Unleashed” comes an “Ocean’s Eleven” style film about four magicians who pull off one of the biggest heists the world has ever seen by using magic.
Calling themselves The Four Horseman, four magicians with very different abilities come together as one to pull off something no other magician has ever attempted.
The leader of the pack is J. Daniel Atlas (Jesse Eisenberg), who is a master at sleight-of-hand and blatant arrogance. A mentalist who specializes in hypnosis and is no stranger to being devious himself is Merritt McKinney (Woody Harrelson). The very talented pickpocket Jack Wilder (Dave Franco) not only steals the audience’s hearts but also can pick a lock blindfolded if he had to.
Last but by no means least is Henley Reeves (Isla Fisher), the sexy escape artist who can even escape a tank full of piranhas without a scratch.
The story follows The Four Horseman embarking on a journey of teleporting and robbing a Parisian bank and reining it over the cheering Las Vegas audience at their first venue.
They don’t stop there. There show takes them from Vegas to the renewed city of New Orleans and then to New York where the grand finally takes place whilst spreading the wealth of their heists to the deserving audience members in grand Robin Hood fashion.
This film is excellent! It doesn’t leave you hanging and answers all your questions. The elaborate tricks performed proved to be very entertaining and exciting!
A neat touch was adding a woman to the mix as you don’t really see any women magicians out there other than the assistants who get sawed in half.
The cast was great and had great chemistry however I would have liked to see a bit more of character backstory. Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine and Mark Ruffalo are also a part of the seemingly big cast. The special effects were not only entertaining but extremely appealing to the eye.
Though the storyline is a little scatterbrained it is anything but a bore and leaves you wanting to experience more. After seeing the film, I had an overwhelming need to watch other magician movies like “The Great Houdini”, “The Prestige”, and “The Illusionist”. It also brought back those same feelings I had as a child experiencing the magic and mystery a true magician can provide. This film left me wanting to see it for a second time.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Rio (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
As the very colorful birds of the jungle in Rio de Janeiro are partying it up with singing and aeriel dancing some humans crash the party and capture some of the birds, one of them being a very young blue macaw. From there they are flown to the U.S. with final destinations unknown. Thanks to some poor driving habits the crate containing the young blue macaw is left stranded in the freezing snow of Minnesota but he is soon saved by a young girl named Linda who names him Blu (I know not very original).
Fast forward 15 years, Linda and Blu run a bookstore and even though he has never learned to fly he loves the indoor domestic lifestyle and has never thought of returning to Rio. That is until Dr. Barbosa arrives and informs them that Blu is the last known male blue macaw in the world and that at his bird sanctuary in Rio he has the last known female blue macaw, named Jewel. After some hesitation they decide it is species saving time and go with Dr. Barbosa to Rio. As Blu and Jewel get to know each other (that’s not an euphemism), Dr. Barbosa and Linda decide they should give them some alone time and leave. But while the humans are away making a connection of their own, someone breaks into the bird sanctuary and abducts Blu and Jewel.
The two blue macaws soon find themselves shackled together and locked away with many other birds to be taken to final destinations unknown (hmmm, deja vu). Blu and Jewel are able to escape from their captors but not from the shackles that bind them and thus begins their epic journey to freedom from the shackles. Along the way they befriend some very interesting characters who do their best to help them along the way. Will Jewel and Blu be free of the shackles? Will Blu and Linda ever be reunited? Will Blu ever learn to fly? What about the bookstore?
While the story is very predictable and at least once I could tell the kids were losing interest during a scene, the animation is beautiful and amazing, the humor is great and I saw many of the kids in the theater bobbing their heads along to the songs. They could not have done any better with the incredible voice cast: Blu and Jewel are voiced by Jesse Eisenberg and Anne Hathaway and Leslie Mann voices Linda. The incredible supporting cast voices iniclude Wanda Sykes, Lane Lynch, Jamie Fox, Will.I.Am and George Lopez.
Overall, regardless of age, everyone in the theater seemed to enjoy the film as much, if not more, as I did. But just to be sure I brought along a friend’s 10 year old to get his perspective and posed a few questions. I was very happy to mostly get more than one word answers:
Fast forward 15 years, Linda and Blu run a bookstore and even though he has never learned to fly he loves the indoor domestic lifestyle and has never thought of returning to Rio. That is until Dr. Barbosa arrives and informs them that Blu is the last known male blue macaw in the world and that at his bird sanctuary in Rio he has the last known female blue macaw, named Jewel. After some hesitation they decide it is species saving time and go with Dr. Barbosa to Rio. As Blu and Jewel get to know each other (that’s not an euphemism), Dr. Barbosa and Linda decide they should give them some alone time and leave. But while the humans are away making a connection of their own, someone breaks into the bird sanctuary and abducts Blu and Jewel.
The two blue macaws soon find themselves shackled together and locked away with many other birds to be taken to final destinations unknown (hmmm, deja vu). Blu and Jewel are able to escape from their captors but not from the shackles that bind them and thus begins their epic journey to freedom from the shackles. Along the way they befriend some very interesting characters who do their best to help them along the way. Will Jewel and Blu be free of the shackles? Will Blu and Linda ever be reunited? Will Blu ever learn to fly? What about the bookstore?
While the story is very predictable and at least once I could tell the kids were losing interest during a scene, the animation is beautiful and amazing, the humor is great and I saw many of the kids in the theater bobbing their heads along to the songs. They could not have done any better with the incredible voice cast: Blu and Jewel are voiced by Jesse Eisenberg and Anne Hathaway and Leslie Mann voices Linda. The incredible supporting cast voices iniclude Wanda Sykes, Lane Lynch, Jamie Fox, Will.I.Am and George Lopez.
Overall, regardless of age, everyone in the theater seemed to enjoy the film as much, if not more, as I did. But just to be sure I brought along a friend’s 10 year old to get his perspective and posed a few questions. I was very happy to mostly get more than one word answers:
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) in Movies
Mar 30, 2021
The Last 45 minutes (out of 4 hours) is decent
When Zach Snyder was filming JUSTICE LEAGUE in 2016, a tragedy occurred in his family and he was forced to drop out and the job of Directing that film went to Joss Whedon (THE AVENGERS). This version of the film was met by many (including me) with a collective “meh”, it was an unintelligible mess of a movie that paid lip service to fan boys (maybe) and gave very little to anyone not well versed in all things DC Comics. Many, many fans assumed that there was much left on the cutting room floor (or not filmed at all) that would correct the many mistakes of this film.
After a large outcry to “Restore The Snyder Cut”, Warner Brothers and HBO Max gave the fans what they wanted - a 4 hour redone version of this film that was intended to clear up the many, many confusing moments of the first film.
And that is EXACTLY what has happened. Zach Snyder has created a film that is very long on explanation and exposition - exactly what the fanboys wanted. What it didn’t do was to clear up the mess that is the plot, pacing and characters of this film.
ZACH SNYDER’S JUSTICE LEAGUE unites many of the great SuperHeroes of DC Comics - Superman (Henry Cavill), Batman (Ben Affleck), Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Aquaman (Jason Momoa), The Flash (Ezra Miller) and Cyborg (Ray Fisher) - to fight an intergalactic villain.
So..how many of those heroes are you anxious to see on screen together and really dive deep into their backstories and motivations? If you said The Flash and Cyborg - then this is the film for you for Snyder really delves deeply into these 2 characters.
Unfortunately, what this has done is to push the heroes that the “average Joe” knows and loves - Batman, WonderWoman and Aquaman - to the background and, most damning of all, relinquished Superman to an extended cameo. He also throws almost every DC Character that has appeared in a previous film in - most really quickly. So, thanks for stopping by the party Lois Lane (Amy Adams), Commissioner Gordon (J.K. Simmons), Vulko (Willem Dafoe), Lex Luther (Jesse Eisenberg), Alfred (Jeremy Irons), Martha Kent (Diane Lane), Queen Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen) and Mira (Amber Heard). If I blinked I would have missed you.
To be fair, the last 45 minutes of this film are really interesting (including an Epilogue that sets up a sequel that we’ll never see), but in order to get there, you need to slog through 3 hours and 15 minutes of this disjointed film.
Worth the effort for the “Fanboys” and “Hardcores”, not worth the effort for the “Average Joe”.
Letter Grade: B (I really, really liked the Epilogue)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
After a large outcry to “Restore The Snyder Cut”, Warner Brothers and HBO Max gave the fans what they wanted - a 4 hour redone version of this film that was intended to clear up the many, many confusing moments of the first film.
And that is EXACTLY what has happened. Zach Snyder has created a film that is very long on explanation and exposition - exactly what the fanboys wanted. What it didn’t do was to clear up the mess that is the plot, pacing and characters of this film.
ZACH SNYDER’S JUSTICE LEAGUE unites many of the great SuperHeroes of DC Comics - Superman (Henry Cavill), Batman (Ben Affleck), Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Aquaman (Jason Momoa), The Flash (Ezra Miller) and Cyborg (Ray Fisher) - to fight an intergalactic villain.
So..how many of those heroes are you anxious to see on screen together and really dive deep into their backstories and motivations? If you said The Flash and Cyborg - then this is the film for you for Snyder really delves deeply into these 2 characters.
Unfortunately, what this has done is to push the heroes that the “average Joe” knows and loves - Batman, WonderWoman and Aquaman - to the background and, most damning of all, relinquished Superman to an extended cameo. He also throws almost every DC Character that has appeared in a previous film in - most really quickly. So, thanks for stopping by the party Lois Lane (Amy Adams), Commissioner Gordon (J.K. Simmons), Vulko (Willem Dafoe), Lex Luther (Jesse Eisenberg), Alfred (Jeremy Irons), Martha Kent (Diane Lane), Queen Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen) and Mira (Amber Heard). If I blinked I would have missed you.
To be fair, the last 45 minutes of this film are really interesting (including an Epilogue that sets up a sequel that we’ll never see), but in order to get there, you need to slog through 3 hours and 15 minutes of this disjointed film.
Worth the effort for the “Fanboys” and “Hardcores”, not worth the effort for the “Average Joe”.
Letter Grade: B (I really, really liked the Epilogue)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Hummingbird Project (2018) in Movies
Jun 24, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
The trailer for this offered a glimpse at something that looked intriguing but the final result wasn't quite as impactful as you might have imagined.
Vincent has the drive and cunning to launch a project that could make them millions, Anton is the brains to make it a success. In investment you have to be a step ahead of the competition, so the competition is where you'll get the best deal on the next big thing. When they both quit with immediate effect their boss is suspicious does everything to find out what they're up to. She eventually gets a break and is soon hot on their heels to come up with something bigger and better. The stakes are high and the game is dirty, but someone has to win.
The Hummingbird Project certainly didn't lack acting talent. While I've not seen much from Jesse Eisenberg apart from Lex Luthor in the DCEU I was impressed with what he gives in this, there are a lot of powerful moments as we get towards the end of the film and he treats them well. Alexander Skarsgård plays Anton, the awkward genius cousin who spends most of his time with his eyes glued to a computer screen. His role is heavy on physical acting rather than dialogue and it's very effective against the pushy characters around him.
The duo are pitted against their ex-boss, Eva Torres, beautifully brought to life as a ruthless villain by Salma Hayek. Hayek has the bitchy boss thing down and had she been talking at me with heavily threatening undertones I think I'd have just started crying.
I found the story easy to get along with, the script wasn't overly complicated which was nice considering it could have been with all the technical things going on. As the story overall is about them fulfilling their project it means that at several points we get reminders about what's going on, and that probably helps it because every so often they get out some plans and go "this is what we're doing and this is the problem" so you don't have to really remember much as we progress.
At points it seems like it's a little rushed, which is intriguing because it feels like it's longer than billed. I assumed that some scenes are included because they're a nod to the real-life story... but it isn't a real-life story... and that in itself should be the most confusing thing about this film. I genuinely went in thinking it was "history", but it's not history, so why did they bother making it? It's just not thrilling enough to hold up as a new story. If I'm honest, finding out it's fictional after thinking it was real has knocked off some star rating.
What you should do
There are much more thrilling tales out there for this sort of story, despite the good acting I would suggest seeing something else. Seeing something else would also preserve the beautiful image of Alexander Skarsgård from being tarnished.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A multi-million dollar idea would be quite nice.
Vincent has the drive and cunning to launch a project that could make them millions, Anton is the brains to make it a success. In investment you have to be a step ahead of the competition, so the competition is where you'll get the best deal on the next big thing. When they both quit with immediate effect their boss is suspicious does everything to find out what they're up to. She eventually gets a break and is soon hot on their heels to come up with something bigger and better. The stakes are high and the game is dirty, but someone has to win.
The Hummingbird Project certainly didn't lack acting talent. While I've not seen much from Jesse Eisenberg apart from Lex Luthor in the DCEU I was impressed with what he gives in this, there are a lot of powerful moments as we get towards the end of the film and he treats them well. Alexander Skarsgård plays Anton, the awkward genius cousin who spends most of his time with his eyes glued to a computer screen. His role is heavy on physical acting rather than dialogue and it's very effective against the pushy characters around him.
The duo are pitted against their ex-boss, Eva Torres, beautifully brought to life as a ruthless villain by Salma Hayek. Hayek has the bitchy boss thing down and had she been talking at me with heavily threatening undertones I think I'd have just started crying.
I found the story easy to get along with, the script wasn't overly complicated which was nice considering it could have been with all the technical things going on. As the story overall is about them fulfilling their project it means that at several points we get reminders about what's going on, and that probably helps it because every so often they get out some plans and go "this is what we're doing and this is the problem" so you don't have to really remember much as we progress.
At points it seems like it's a little rushed, which is intriguing because it feels like it's longer than billed. I assumed that some scenes are included because they're a nod to the real-life story... but it isn't a real-life story... and that in itself should be the most confusing thing about this film. I genuinely went in thinking it was "history", but it's not history, so why did they bother making it? It's just not thrilling enough to hold up as a new story. If I'm honest, finding out it's fictional after thinking it was real has knocked off some star rating.
What you should do
There are much more thrilling tales out there for this sort of story, despite the good acting I would suggest seeing something else. Seeing something else would also preserve the beautiful image of Alexander Skarsgård from being tarnished.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A multi-million dollar idea would be quite nice.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
The Transformers of the superhero genre
It feels like eons ago that Batman v Superman was announced as a genuine movie. Way back in 2007 there was a poster that seemed to signify DC Comic’s plans in I am Legend, but fans just thought of it as a pipedream.
Now, in 2016, the moment has finally arrived. The marketing campaign has been relentless, the trailers have been criticised for showing far too much (which they have), and Ben Affleck’s casting as Batman was met with disdain rather than joy. So what is the finished product like?
Superman has now become a controversial figure after his climactic battle with General Zod, with Batman in particular being cautious of his true plans for Earth. After a new threat is created, Doomsday, they must put aside their differences to save the planet.
Following on directly from the events of Man of Steel, director Zak Snyder brings together DC Comics’ biggest superheroes in a film as loud as anything Michael Bay served up in the Transformers series.
Henry Cavill returns as the god from above with Ben Affleck taking over duties from Christian Bale as the Dark Knight. Both of them give great performances with Cavill in particular impressing. Affleck proves his doubters wrong and is more than a match for Bale, though his one facial expression wears thin over the course of the film.
Elsewhere, Jesse Eisenberg takes on the role of Lex Luthor in a portrayal reminiscent of Johnny Depp’s Willy Wonka – eerily creepy and well-acted but just trying that little bit too hard. Amy Adams makes a welcome return as Lois Lane and gets much more screen time here than she did in Man of Steel.
However, the most praise has to go to Gal Gadot. Her exceptional characterisation of Wonder Woman is one of the movie’s highlights and it’s such a shame she takes a backseat to the two titular characters. It’s clear the filmmakers thought highly of her too, as she gets her own thundering theme tune whenever she appears.
Unfortunately, the plot is just too nondescript and completely incomprehensible at times, with Lex Luthor’s motives remaining unclear throughout the 150 minute running time. This proves increasingly hard to swallow as the film progresses and makes his villain feel less menacing than he should be.
Nevertheless, Batman v Superman is visually spectacular. Snyder bombards the audience with breath-taking set pieces, dispersing them well enough to ensure the plot only drags in a few areas, namely at the beginning – though the film’s flabby length is a sticking point; it simply doesn’t need to be nearly three hours long.
It may all sound pretty negative, but the exciting and beautifully filmed final act almost makes up for these shortcomings. We also get to see an emotional side to the genre, something that has been sorely lacking more recently with the constant quipping of the Marvel Universe.
Overall, Batman v Superman was never going to live up to the hype and in some ways it does fall short. The battle between Bat of Gotham and Son of Krypton is disappointingly brief and the story lacks any real weight, until the final 30 minutes. But it’s filmed in such a unique fashion and with such confidence; it’s quite possible you may not see anything like it in the genre again.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/27/the-transformers-of-the-superhero-genre-batman-v-superman-review/
Now, in 2016, the moment has finally arrived. The marketing campaign has been relentless, the trailers have been criticised for showing far too much (which they have), and Ben Affleck’s casting as Batman was met with disdain rather than joy. So what is the finished product like?
Superman has now become a controversial figure after his climactic battle with General Zod, with Batman in particular being cautious of his true plans for Earth. After a new threat is created, Doomsday, they must put aside their differences to save the planet.
Following on directly from the events of Man of Steel, director Zak Snyder brings together DC Comics’ biggest superheroes in a film as loud as anything Michael Bay served up in the Transformers series.
Henry Cavill returns as the god from above with Ben Affleck taking over duties from Christian Bale as the Dark Knight. Both of them give great performances with Cavill in particular impressing. Affleck proves his doubters wrong and is more than a match for Bale, though his one facial expression wears thin over the course of the film.
Elsewhere, Jesse Eisenberg takes on the role of Lex Luthor in a portrayal reminiscent of Johnny Depp’s Willy Wonka – eerily creepy and well-acted but just trying that little bit too hard. Amy Adams makes a welcome return as Lois Lane and gets much more screen time here than she did in Man of Steel.
However, the most praise has to go to Gal Gadot. Her exceptional characterisation of Wonder Woman is one of the movie’s highlights and it’s such a shame she takes a backseat to the two titular characters. It’s clear the filmmakers thought highly of her too, as she gets her own thundering theme tune whenever she appears.
Unfortunately, the plot is just too nondescript and completely incomprehensible at times, with Lex Luthor’s motives remaining unclear throughout the 150 minute running time. This proves increasingly hard to swallow as the film progresses and makes his villain feel less menacing than he should be.
Nevertheless, Batman v Superman is visually spectacular. Snyder bombards the audience with breath-taking set pieces, dispersing them well enough to ensure the plot only drags in a few areas, namely at the beginning – though the film’s flabby length is a sticking point; it simply doesn’t need to be nearly three hours long.
It may all sound pretty negative, but the exciting and beautifully filmed final act almost makes up for these shortcomings. We also get to see an emotional side to the genre, something that has been sorely lacking more recently with the constant quipping of the Marvel Universe.
Overall, Batman v Superman was never going to live up to the hype and in some ways it does fall short. The battle between Bat of Gotham and Son of Krypton is disappointingly brief and the story lacks any real weight, until the final 30 minutes. But it’s filmed in such a unique fashion and with such confidence; it’s quite possible you may not see anything like it in the genre again.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/27/the-transformers-of-the-superhero-genre-batman-v-superman-review/