Search
Search results
Ronyell (38 KP) rated How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000) in Movies
Jul 24, 2020
The Jim Carrey Grinch!
In the town of Whoville, all the Whos were getting ready it celebrate Christmas, but there was one Who that was curious about the true meaning of Christmas and that was Cindy Lou Who herself. Not only was Cindy Lou wondering about the true meaning of Christmas, but she was curious about one person who doesn't live in Whoville and that's the Grinch himself. The Whos almost never talk about the Grinch or want to be reminded of him, but Cindy Lou wanted to be friends with the Grinch and tried to invite him to the Whoville celebration. But, when the Grinch is humiliated at the celebration, he decided that he will steal all the Whos' presents on Christmas Eve.
Wow! I was actually pretty surprised that I enjoyed this movie! I never would have thought that Jim Carrey would do a great job at portraying the Grinch! Jim Carrey made the Grinch's character much more humorous and hammy, which made the film much funnier in tone and the Grinchs' jokes easily land at the right times. Taylor Momsen was fantastic as Cindy Lou Who as Cindy is shown as being a friendly and determined girl who only wanted to be friends with the Grinch and I liked the fact that she truly cares for the Grinch and only wanted to make him happy. James Horner's music was probably the highlight of this film as it surprisingly goes well with the emotional scenes in the movie, such as during the scene where we learn about the Grinch's tragic backstory. The special effects were surprisingly well done for the year 2000 and the film did a fantastic job at showcasing the bizarre yet beautiful world of Whoville and greatly captured the creative style from the original Dr. Seuss book.
My biggest issue with this movie is that the Whos seem to be portrayed in a negative way as they are much more cruel towards the Grinch in this version than in the original book and the 1960s cartoon special. Also, there were times where Jim Carrey's performance as the Grinch got so hammy that I couldn't take his more emotional scenes seriously, like he constantly gets upset whenever the Whos teased him. I also didn't like the fact that Martha, the Grinch's love interest, didn't have much of a role in the film other than just standing around and looking at the scenery and being a love interest.
I always have a problem with certain love interests not having much to do in the film other than just being defined as a love interest to the protagonist and not having a personality of their own. It would have been great if Martha had more scenes with the Grinch so that their relationship would be much more believable to me.
Overall, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" is one of the most hilarious interpretations of the Grinch ever made on film and it is definitely worth the watch!
Originally posted on: https://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/movie-review-how-grinch-stole-christmas.html
Wow! I was actually pretty surprised that I enjoyed this movie! I never would have thought that Jim Carrey would do a great job at portraying the Grinch! Jim Carrey made the Grinch's character much more humorous and hammy, which made the film much funnier in tone and the Grinchs' jokes easily land at the right times. Taylor Momsen was fantastic as Cindy Lou Who as Cindy is shown as being a friendly and determined girl who only wanted to be friends with the Grinch and I liked the fact that she truly cares for the Grinch and only wanted to make him happy. James Horner's music was probably the highlight of this film as it surprisingly goes well with the emotional scenes in the movie, such as during the scene where we learn about the Grinch's tragic backstory. The special effects were surprisingly well done for the year 2000 and the film did a fantastic job at showcasing the bizarre yet beautiful world of Whoville and greatly captured the creative style from the original Dr. Seuss book.
My biggest issue with this movie is that the Whos seem to be portrayed in a negative way as they are much more cruel towards the Grinch in this version than in the original book and the 1960s cartoon special. Also, there were times where Jim Carrey's performance as the Grinch got so hammy that I couldn't take his more emotional scenes seriously, like he constantly gets upset whenever the Whos teased him. I also didn't like the fact that Martha, the Grinch's love interest, didn't have much of a role in the film other than just standing around and looking at the scenery and being a love interest.
I always have a problem with certain love interests not having much to do in the film other than just being defined as a love interest to the protagonist and not having a personality of their own. It would have been great if Martha had more scenes with the Grinch so that their relationship would be much more believable to me.
Overall, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" is one of the most hilarious interpretations of the Grinch ever made on film and it is definitely worth the watch!
Originally posted on: https://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/movie-review-how-grinch-stole-christmas.html
Bong Mines Entertainment (15 KP) rated Panic Attack - Single by Harriet Manice in Music
Jun 18, 2019
Harriet Manice is a singer-songwriter and photographer based in New York City. Not too long ago, she released a charming pop tune, entitled, “Panic Attack”.
“‘Panic Attack’ is a blend of Nashville storytelling and popular music. With a mix of acoustic and electronic instruments. The song provides the feelings one can go through dealing with anxiety and panic attacks. While the song raises an emotional and intense topic, the music generally stays upbeat, to give the hope that everything will be ok in the end. Just keep breathing in and breathing out.” – Harriet Manice
‘Panic Attack’ contains a relatable storyline, ear-welcoming vocals, and lush instrumentation flavored with a commercial pop aroma.
“What is happening? I can barely breathe. Feel the room is spinning quicking ’round me. Is this just a dream. Am I still asleep? Tell me how to stop this insanity.” – lyrics
This past year, Harriet Manice had the opportunity to perform at venues such as The Bitter End, Rockwood Music Hall, Sidewalk Cafe, Prohibition in New York City, and Jane Pickens Theatre and The Breakers in Newport, RI.
She grew up listening to James Taylor, Eric Clapton, Simon & Garfunkel, Jim Croce, The Dixie Chicks, Whitney Houston, Christina Aguilera, Mariah Carey, and Celine Dion.
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/harriet-manice-panic-attack/
“‘Panic Attack’ is a blend of Nashville storytelling and popular music. With a mix of acoustic and electronic instruments. The song provides the feelings one can go through dealing with anxiety and panic attacks. While the song raises an emotional and intense topic, the music generally stays upbeat, to give the hope that everything will be ok in the end. Just keep breathing in and breathing out.” – Harriet Manice
‘Panic Attack’ contains a relatable storyline, ear-welcoming vocals, and lush instrumentation flavored with a commercial pop aroma.
“What is happening? I can barely breathe. Feel the room is spinning quicking ’round me. Is this just a dream. Am I still asleep? Tell me how to stop this insanity.” – lyrics
This past year, Harriet Manice had the opportunity to perform at venues such as The Bitter End, Rockwood Music Hall, Sidewalk Cafe, Prohibition in New York City, and Jane Pickens Theatre and The Breakers in Newport, RI.
She grew up listening to James Taylor, Eric Clapton, Simon & Garfunkel, Jim Croce, The Dixie Chicks, Whitney Houston, Christina Aguilera, Mariah Carey, and Celine Dion.
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/harriet-manice-panic-attack/
Darren (1599 KP) rated How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000) in Movies
Nov 22, 2019
Verdict: Dated Christmas Movie
Story: The Grinch starts as we head to Whoville a small town in the snow covered mountain range, the whole town loves Christmas working all year around to get the most out of the season, with decoration you could see from space, above the town lives a grumpy outcast known as the Grinch (Carrey) who hates Christmas.
When a young Who Cindy Lou Who (Momsen) meets the Grinch and learns about his story, she decides to nominate him for the Christmas award, against the wishes of the town Mayor Augustus Maywho (Tambor), which he reluctantly accepts, going against all his own hatred for Christmas, here the Grinch gets embarrassed once again and comes up with a plan to steal Christmas from the whole village.
Thoughts on The Grinch
Characters – The Grinch is a Who that has lived above the town like an outsider who has always hated Christmas, he always looks for small ways to ruin the season, but this year he will steal everything from them and learn that his constant play for revenge has only ever held him back from enjoying his life. Cindy Lou Who is the little girl that is brave enough to stand up against the town in hopes of inviting the Grinch back into the town, she sees the good in him and wants everybody to be included in the Christmas spirit. Mayor Augustus Maywho has always seen and wanted to keep the Grinch out of the town, he believes he can destroy Christmas.
Performances – Jim Carrey is front and centre here, he is very hard to watch in this role because his turns into one of his routines, with unnatural energy for the role. Taylor Momsen as the young girl is the next strongest out of the whole cast, but if we are honest, most of the cast barely get any time to shine.
Story – The story here focuses on a community of Who’s that love Christmas and the one outsider Who that hates it and decides to get his revenge this year, despite a young girl trying to help him find his Christmas Spirit. This is a Dr Seuss book, so we know that everything is going to be very colourful and over the top with world created, at the heart of this film, we are looking to teach to accept everybody in life no matter how different they are. The problem with this comes with the fact that most of the film is Jim Carrey doing his comedy routine to an audience that isn’t even there, we just don’t get that magical feeling the film is trying to create.
Comedy/Fantasy – The comedy in this film does seem to focus on Jim Carrey’s routines, which just aren’t entertaining enough, while the fantasy side of the film shows us the world where the Who’s live in.
Settings – The film does build a nice setting of the town in the shadow of the city, this does help us learn more about the world we are entering.
Special Effects – The effects are used to turn Carrey into the Grinch, mostly all make up, but it ends up looking creepier rather than different.
Scene of the Movie – The door doing the right thing.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The comedy just gets boring.
Final Thoughts – This is a Christmas movie that just doesn’t get out of trying to be a comedy routine for Jim Carrey, losing the message it is trying to give us.
Overall: Sloppy Christmas Film.
Story: The Grinch starts as we head to Whoville a small town in the snow covered mountain range, the whole town loves Christmas working all year around to get the most out of the season, with decoration you could see from space, above the town lives a grumpy outcast known as the Grinch (Carrey) who hates Christmas.
When a young Who Cindy Lou Who (Momsen) meets the Grinch and learns about his story, she decides to nominate him for the Christmas award, against the wishes of the town Mayor Augustus Maywho (Tambor), which he reluctantly accepts, going against all his own hatred for Christmas, here the Grinch gets embarrassed once again and comes up with a plan to steal Christmas from the whole village.
Thoughts on The Grinch
Characters – The Grinch is a Who that has lived above the town like an outsider who has always hated Christmas, he always looks for small ways to ruin the season, but this year he will steal everything from them and learn that his constant play for revenge has only ever held him back from enjoying his life. Cindy Lou Who is the little girl that is brave enough to stand up against the town in hopes of inviting the Grinch back into the town, she sees the good in him and wants everybody to be included in the Christmas spirit. Mayor Augustus Maywho has always seen and wanted to keep the Grinch out of the town, he believes he can destroy Christmas.
Performances – Jim Carrey is front and centre here, he is very hard to watch in this role because his turns into one of his routines, with unnatural energy for the role. Taylor Momsen as the young girl is the next strongest out of the whole cast, but if we are honest, most of the cast barely get any time to shine.
Story – The story here focuses on a community of Who’s that love Christmas and the one outsider Who that hates it and decides to get his revenge this year, despite a young girl trying to help him find his Christmas Spirit. This is a Dr Seuss book, so we know that everything is going to be very colourful and over the top with world created, at the heart of this film, we are looking to teach to accept everybody in life no matter how different they are. The problem with this comes with the fact that most of the film is Jim Carrey doing his comedy routine to an audience that isn’t even there, we just don’t get that magical feeling the film is trying to create.
Comedy/Fantasy – The comedy in this film does seem to focus on Jim Carrey’s routines, which just aren’t entertaining enough, while the fantasy side of the film shows us the world where the Who’s live in.
Settings – The film does build a nice setting of the town in the shadow of the city, this does help us learn more about the world we are entering.
Special Effects – The effects are used to turn Carrey into the Grinch, mostly all make up, but it ends up looking creepier rather than different.
Scene of the Movie – The door doing the right thing.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The comedy just gets boring.
Final Thoughts – This is a Christmas movie that just doesn’t get out of trying to be a comedy routine for Jim Carrey, losing the message it is trying to give us.
Overall: Sloppy Christmas Film.
Ross (3282 KP) rated The Grinch (2018) in Movies
Nov 12, 2018
Festive fun but could have been better
I was hoping this version would go back to the book as its sole reference point, and ignore Jim Carrey's version (although I love it, I didn't just want to see an animated version of it). I think they must have started out like that but ended up creating something fairly similar to the previous film.
Everything is toned down a little here, the Grinch isn't some hideous monster to be feared (he has a decent bit of awkward banter with his neighbour and pops to the shops for example), and he doesn't hate Christmas anywhere near as much as the story has it.
Cindy-Lou is back, but is significantly less annoying than Taylor Momsen's portrayal, and rather than herself feeling anti-festive and Grinchy she just wants her mum to be happy.
I enjoyed the Wallace and Gromit-esque moments, where Max uses a number of contraptions to make The Grinch a coffee etc.
The film doesn't overdo the festive spirit so, while we were left feeling Christmassy (or at least Christmassy enough for early November!) it wasn't ad nauseum.
The soundtrack became quite grating - I think the same singer as in the Despicable Me films - and the re-mastered version of "You're a Mean One..." did not work.
Few lines of the book (which I know pretty much off by heart now) are used in the film, and when they are used they stand out as a little jarring or are changed and just don't seem to work. While I am no fan of Dr Seuss' poetry and lazy rhyming this seemed to be a step down even from there. I felt they should either have stuck with it or ditched it altogether.
All in all, a decent, funny festive film for all the family.
Everything is toned down a little here, the Grinch isn't some hideous monster to be feared (he has a decent bit of awkward banter with his neighbour and pops to the shops for example), and he doesn't hate Christmas anywhere near as much as the story has it.
Cindy-Lou is back, but is significantly less annoying than Taylor Momsen's portrayal, and rather than herself feeling anti-festive and Grinchy she just wants her mum to be happy.
I enjoyed the Wallace and Gromit-esque moments, where Max uses a number of contraptions to make The Grinch a coffee etc.
The film doesn't overdo the festive spirit so, while we were left feeling Christmassy (or at least Christmassy enough for early November!) it wasn't ad nauseum.
The soundtrack became quite grating - I think the same singer as in the Despicable Me films - and the re-mastered version of "You're a Mean One..." did not work.
Few lines of the book (which I know pretty much off by heart now) are used in the film, and when they are used they stand out as a little jarring or are changed and just don't seem to work. While I am no fan of Dr Seuss' poetry and lazy rhyming this seemed to be a step down even from there. I felt they should either have stuck with it or ditched it altogether.
All in all, a decent, funny festive film for all the family.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Ratchet & Clank (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Based on the popular video game series for the Playstation systems, “Ratchet and Clank” has arrived looking to take the duo’s success to the big screen in a new animated adventure. The film follows the diabolical Chairman Drek (Paul Giamatti), who has a nefarious scheme that leaves planets destroyed in his wake. The government decides to hire an additional Ranger for protection which leads lowly mechanic Ratchet (James Arnold Taylor), to see his chance for greatness. Sadly the head of the Rangers; an ego-maniac named Captain Qwark (Jim Ward), dismisses the physically unimpressive Ratchet and thus crushes his dreams.
Fate steps in when a defective robot named Clank (David Kaye) arrives with news that will shake the very fabric of the galaxy. Ratchet and Clank team up to help the Rangers and must overcome all obstacles on all sides to save the day. The animation of the film is solid and it was a bit of a surprise that the film was not presented to us in 3D which has become the norm for animated film. The solid voice cast does a good job and there are more than a few nice celebrity voices along the way. The biggest issue I had with the film was that it was a bit dull and dragged in places. Our screener was loaded with children and families and I saw some leave the cinema during the film and did not return.
The movies takes a while to get going and there are more than a few nods to the game and other Playstation characters along the way. The biggest issue is that it seems as if the film is dedicated to hardcore fans of the series. I have played the last three games in the series and I found myself lost at times as it was clear that this was for those who have been there from the start. This is not to say that new fans will not be gained by the film, but one has to wonder how many children who are not familiar with the characters will have the patience to wait for things to get rolling in the film.
As it stands the film is a good first effort but may or may not be enough to successfully launch a long term franchise.
http://sknr.net/2016/04/28/ratchet-and-clank/
Fate steps in when a defective robot named Clank (David Kaye) arrives with news that will shake the very fabric of the galaxy. Ratchet and Clank team up to help the Rangers and must overcome all obstacles on all sides to save the day. The animation of the film is solid and it was a bit of a surprise that the film was not presented to us in 3D which has become the norm for animated film. The solid voice cast does a good job and there are more than a few nice celebrity voices along the way. The biggest issue I had with the film was that it was a bit dull and dragged in places. Our screener was loaded with children and families and I saw some leave the cinema during the film and did not return.
The movies takes a while to get going and there are more than a few nods to the game and other Playstation characters along the way. The biggest issue is that it seems as if the film is dedicated to hardcore fans of the series. I have played the last three games in the series and I found myself lost at times as it was clear that this was for those who have been there from the start. This is not to say that new fans will not be gained by the film, but one has to wonder how many children who are not familiar with the characters will have the patience to wait for things to get rolling in the film.
As it stands the film is a good first effort but may or may not be enough to successfully launch a long term franchise.
http://sknr.net/2016/04/28/ratchet-and-clank/
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Bohemian Rhapsody (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
How many of these reviews are going to start with “Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?” A lot I am willing to bet. The thing is, it’s a good way to start. Bohemian Rhapsody has been a highly anticipated film for many years. I remember back when they were considering Johnny Depp for Freddie Mercury. Then it was Sasha Baren Cohen. And then they announced Rami Malek, and a majority of the country went, “Who?” Rami Malek is mostly known for his work as the lead in the USA Network series Mr. Robot. He got his start in the Night at the Museum series, and has scene big screen time in Need for Speed and, most recently, Papillion alongside Charlie Hunnam. I think it’s safe to say that after November 2, 2018, people will definitely know who he is.
Named for Queen’s most successful song in their portfolio, Bohemian Rhapsody tells the story of Freddie Mercury and how he rose from being a baggage boy at Heathrow, to a literal rock legend. We see how the band Queen was formed, how they got their name, how they made it big, and what made Queen… well Queen. Rami Malek delivers a powerful performance as the front man of the legendary band. For me, it started off a little shaky at first (coming from someone who is fan of Malek), but he quickly made the role his own and personified the late Mercury like no other can. Even Mercury’s own sister saw Malek in full costume and said, “There’s my Freddie.”
Not to downplay the rest of the cast. Rounding at the rest of the band is Joseph Mazzello as John Deacon, Ben Hardy as Roger Taylor, and Gwilym Lee as Brian May. All delivered powerful performances in their own right, and the chemistry between the 4 actors is undeniable. Veterans Aidan Gillen (as John Reid) and Tom Hollander (Jim Beach) deliver in their supporting roles, as does Lucy Boynton, who played Mary Austin. If some of these names do not seem familiar, get ready to learn a lot of the background of Queen in their rise, fall, and then rise again. Also, Mike Myers makes an appearance for a fun cameo as Ray Foster.
Clearly a majority of the film’s score revolves around the band’s expansive portfolio. But it wasn’t just the in your face, obvious music that was there. They did a great job with subtle melodies or bars from the band’s repertoire hanging in the background of impactful scenes throughout the film. Sometimes you’ll miss it, sometimes it’s obvious, and sometimes it might just make you cry.
The story begins with Mercury meeting Taylor and May, and ends with the ever-famous Live-Aid in 1985. While the film is essentially a love-story dedicated to Mercury, I feel it may have left out the rest of the members of the band. We see May, Taylor and Deacon, but we know little about their outside lives other than fleeting statements about their wives and kids, and what they were studying in university prior to Queen taking off. It’s a shame because Queen was not just about Mercury. The film did a really good job stating this, showing how they all contribute, all support each other, and how they are all different. But the focus is still on one man. Queen, the rock band, is an entity. Not an individual. But, I understand the decision behind the path that was chosen. Mercury, to many, was the embodiment of Queen. I am just glad the movie did put out there that he didn’t feel that way.
All of that aside, this film was fantastic. I have been a fan of Queen since I was in diapers, despite a majority of the band’s career having taken place before I was born. It was good to see this story told on screen, though slightly dramatized at points. It was an excellent telling of the story, and people may learn a lot about Freddie Mercury, like his love of cats, and who the love of his life is. Unless you’re absolutely cold-hearted, expect to get goosebumps as you progress through the band’s rise to the top, and to laugh as you how they interacted and developed their music. The movie is not without flaws, but they are so minor that looking past them is easy. Enjoy the film. Enjoy the music. Rock on.
Named for Queen’s most successful song in their portfolio, Bohemian Rhapsody tells the story of Freddie Mercury and how he rose from being a baggage boy at Heathrow, to a literal rock legend. We see how the band Queen was formed, how they got their name, how they made it big, and what made Queen… well Queen. Rami Malek delivers a powerful performance as the front man of the legendary band. For me, it started off a little shaky at first (coming from someone who is fan of Malek), but he quickly made the role his own and personified the late Mercury like no other can. Even Mercury’s own sister saw Malek in full costume and said, “There’s my Freddie.”
Not to downplay the rest of the cast. Rounding at the rest of the band is Joseph Mazzello as John Deacon, Ben Hardy as Roger Taylor, and Gwilym Lee as Brian May. All delivered powerful performances in their own right, and the chemistry between the 4 actors is undeniable. Veterans Aidan Gillen (as John Reid) and Tom Hollander (Jim Beach) deliver in their supporting roles, as does Lucy Boynton, who played Mary Austin. If some of these names do not seem familiar, get ready to learn a lot of the background of Queen in their rise, fall, and then rise again. Also, Mike Myers makes an appearance for a fun cameo as Ray Foster.
Clearly a majority of the film’s score revolves around the band’s expansive portfolio. But it wasn’t just the in your face, obvious music that was there. They did a great job with subtle melodies or bars from the band’s repertoire hanging in the background of impactful scenes throughout the film. Sometimes you’ll miss it, sometimes it’s obvious, and sometimes it might just make you cry.
The story begins with Mercury meeting Taylor and May, and ends with the ever-famous Live-Aid in 1985. While the film is essentially a love-story dedicated to Mercury, I feel it may have left out the rest of the members of the band. We see May, Taylor and Deacon, but we know little about their outside lives other than fleeting statements about their wives and kids, and what they were studying in university prior to Queen taking off. It’s a shame because Queen was not just about Mercury. The film did a really good job stating this, showing how they all contribute, all support each other, and how they are all different. But the focus is still on one man. Queen, the rock band, is an entity. Not an individual. But, I understand the decision behind the path that was chosen. Mercury, to many, was the embodiment of Queen. I am just glad the movie did put out there that he didn’t feel that way.
All of that aside, this film was fantastic. I have been a fan of Queen since I was in diapers, despite a majority of the band’s career having taken place before I was born. It was good to see this story told on screen, though slightly dramatized at points. It was an excellent telling of the story, and people may learn a lot about Freddie Mercury, like his love of cats, and who the love of his life is. Unless you’re absolutely cold-hearted, expect to get goosebumps as you progress through the band’s rise to the top, and to laugh as you how they interacted and developed their music. The movie is not without flaws, but they are so minor that looking past them is easy. Enjoy the film. Enjoy the music. Rock on.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Kick-Ass 2 (2013) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
After answering the call and brutally taking down a crime boss, self-proclaimed superhero and a high school student Dave Lizewski (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), has settled into a mundane life. The thrill of taking on bad guys has been replaced with hanging out with his friends, going to class, and pondering his future. His former cohort Mindy/ Hit Girl (Chloe Grace Moretz), however has not abandoned her vigilante ways as she still haunted by the death of her father in the previous film. This is the backdrop against which the new film “Kick-Ass 2” takes place and it delivers a funnier and well-paced film that is a worthy but less ultraviolent offering than its predecessor.
Dave eventually convinces Mindy to help train him as he’s itching to get back out on the streets. In a hysterical opening run, things go very well at the start but soon turned bad for Kick Ass which forces Mindy to come to his aid brutally dispatching a group of thugs. This catches the attention of Mindy’s Guardian (Morris Chestnut), who after serving as her father’s partner for several years, insist that Mindy have a normal upbringing and this includes giving up her vigilante persona and embracing life as a high school student.
Mindy agrees to do this and soon finds herself firmly in the sites of the ultra-chic clique in high school. The group of girls decides that it’s time to take Mindy under their wings and make her one of the in crowd which often causes Mindy to question her identity. At the same time, Dave seeks out a group of like-minded heroes under the leadership of Col. Stars & Stripes(Jim Carrey), who himself is a former enforcer for crime syndicate who found religion and now seeks to make up for his past misdeeds.
Their early efforts are highly successful and soon catch the attention of Chris D’Amico, (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), who is still haunted by the death of his father at the hands of Kick Ass. When fate steps in and suddenly puts them in control of the family fortune and resources, Chris reinvents himself as a super villain and proceeds to use his family wealth and influence to put together a team of heavy hitters as he attempts to bring mayhem and chaos to the city with the ultimate goal of destroying Dave and his group of heroes.
Toward that end, the awkwardly but inevitably moves forward and brings his plan of revenge forward which causes Dave and his l friends to realize the consequences of their actions and to question their duty as well as place in the world.
What follows is a solidly entertaining action fast complete with some surprisingly good humor as well as touching and effective moments between the two leads. Donald Faison does some fantastic supporting work and although I would’ve loved to have seen more of his character Jim Carrey deals the scenes whenever he is in them yet manages to stay remarkably in character to the point that one reviewer at the end of the film expressed to me that he could not believe that was the maniacal actor playing such an off character part.
Johnson and Moertz are the backbone of the series and naturally depend upon a strong villain which Mintz-Plasse is more than able to provide. The expanded roster of heroes and villains certainly propels the series forward and it was interesting for me to see that although the film has exceptional amounts of violence it was actually considerably toned down from what I had been expecting after the events of the last film. It was my understanding that the studio wish the film to be more mainstream and while not wanting to harm the message and tone of the film to rein in the violence in order to up the character development and storytelling.
Director Jeff Wadlow has done a great job following up Matthew Vaughn who is stayed on this time to produce the film. The crowd was laughing and sharing and enthralled throughout and I found myself absolutely captivated by the film and enjoying every minute of it. For me, this was without a doubt the most satisfying and enjoyable of the summer offerings this year and I am seriously looking forward and hoping to a third outing in the series.
http://sknr.net/2013/08/16/kick-ass-2/
Dave eventually convinces Mindy to help train him as he’s itching to get back out on the streets. In a hysterical opening run, things go very well at the start but soon turned bad for Kick Ass which forces Mindy to come to his aid brutally dispatching a group of thugs. This catches the attention of Mindy’s Guardian (Morris Chestnut), who after serving as her father’s partner for several years, insist that Mindy have a normal upbringing and this includes giving up her vigilante persona and embracing life as a high school student.
Mindy agrees to do this and soon finds herself firmly in the sites of the ultra-chic clique in high school. The group of girls decides that it’s time to take Mindy under their wings and make her one of the in crowd which often causes Mindy to question her identity. At the same time, Dave seeks out a group of like-minded heroes under the leadership of Col. Stars & Stripes(Jim Carrey), who himself is a former enforcer for crime syndicate who found religion and now seeks to make up for his past misdeeds.
Their early efforts are highly successful and soon catch the attention of Chris D’Amico, (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), who is still haunted by the death of his father at the hands of Kick Ass. When fate steps in and suddenly puts them in control of the family fortune and resources, Chris reinvents himself as a super villain and proceeds to use his family wealth and influence to put together a team of heavy hitters as he attempts to bring mayhem and chaos to the city with the ultimate goal of destroying Dave and his group of heroes.
Toward that end, the awkwardly but inevitably moves forward and brings his plan of revenge forward which causes Dave and his l friends to realize the consequences of their actions and to question their duty as well as place in the world.
What follows is a solidly entertaining action fast complete with some surprisingly good humor as well as touching and effective moments between the two leads. Donald Faison does some fantastic supporting work and although I would’ve loved to have seen more of his character Jim Carrey deals the scenes whenever he is in them yet manages to stay remarkably in character to the point that one reviewer at the end of the film expressed to me that he could not believe that was the maniacal actor playing such an off character part.
Johnson and Moertz are the backbone of the series and naturally depend upon a strong villain which Mintz-Plasse is more than able to provide. The expanded roster of heroes and villains certainly propels the series forward and it was interesting for me to see that although the film has exceptional amounts of violence it was actually considerably toned down from what I had been expecting after the events of the last film. It was my understanding that the studio wish the film to be more mainstream and while not wanting to harm the message and tone of the film to rein in the violence in order to up the character development and storytelling.
Director Jeff Wadlow has done a great job following up Matthew Vaughn who is stayed on this time to produce the film. The crowd was laughing and sharing and enthralled throughout and I found myself absolutely captivated by the film and enjoying every minute of it. For me, this was without a doubt the most satisfying and enjoyable of the summer offerings this year and I am seriously looking forward and hoping to a third outing in the series.
http://sknr.net/2013/08/16/kick-ass-2/
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Downsizing (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
Overpopulation is a growing problem in the world and two Doctors, Dr. Jorgen Asbjornsen (Rolf Lassgard) and Dr. Andreas Jacobsen (Soren Pilmark) have found what they believe is the answer. The have discovered how to shrink all kinds of living matter, including humans. Asbjornsen and a group of volunteers are shrunk and live for years before showing the world. They believe that they can help solve the worlds hunger crisis as well as overpopulation. When occupational therapist Paul Safranek (Matt Damon) first hears of this he is fascinated with the idea of doing something grand to help save the world. But it isn’t until years later when he and his wife, Audrey Safranek (Kristen Wiig), run into an old college friend, Dave Johnson (Jason Sudeikis), who has been shrunk that he realizes he might be able to have a better life at four inches tall. Because of how cheap everything is to build for new tiny people there is an opportunity to live lavishly on meager means. The Safrankek’s have been struggling to get by and really be able enjoy life. When they hear that their hundreds of thousands could be millions they see this as their chance to live the luxury life. The head out to Leisureland Estates, a tiny community, to see what the small world has to offer. After the visit they are convinced and decide to go through with the procedure and begin the irreversible process of becoming “small.” On the operation date they go to separate areas to get completely shaved and prepped. When Paul wakes up he is surprised that Audrey is not with him and she has decided she cannot go through the irreversible process. After his divorce he is left alone trying to find himself and where he fits in a whole new world, at a whole new size.
This Alexander Payne (The Descendants, Nebraska, Sideways) written (co-written by Jim Taylor) and directed film is interesting and fun. If you look at this movie as a satire and don’t get too caught up in is this actually plausible you will be fine. For instance they make mention to how the people who are shrunk are pretty much left alone by things like mosquitoes and other insects but never mention things like rodents or other predators that would be difficult to fend off. I also was surprised by how in depth they get into social issues as the trailer I saw made it look more comedic than the film turned out to be. Not saying that there are not funny moments but the emphasis was really on issues like global overpopulation, exploitation of the poor, etc. and how one man decides to tackle these issues as the present themselves. I was taken by surprise at first but by the end of the film it really put everything into perspective.
Hong Chau, as Ngoc Lan Tran in the film, stood out and was really funny at times. The rest of the cast was good and fit the story well. The story did tend to drift between comedy and drama and not always as smoothly as intended. The film comes in at 2 hours and 15 minutes which is a little long but really if it was shorter the story would be even more all over the place. The plausibility of most of the film was in question for me and that was definitely distracting. But looking back if I spent less time on that I would have enjoyed the film more. Visually nothing really stand out like I thought it would and there was potential. The novelty of everyday things being bigger did get over done a little.
This Alexander Payne (The Descendants, Nebraska, Sideways) written (co-written by Jim Taylor) and directed film is interesting and fun. If you look at this movie as a satire and don’t get too caught up in is this actually plausible you will be fine. For instance they make mention to how the people who are shrunk are pretty much left alone by things like mosquitoes and other insects but never mention things like rodents or other predators that would be difficult to fend off. I also was surprised by how in depth they get into social issues as the trailer I saw made it look more comedic than the film turned out to be. Not saying that there are not funny moments but the emphasis was really on issues like global overpopulation, exploitation of the poor, etc. and how one man decides to tackle these issues as the present themselves. I was taken by surprise at first but by the end of the film it really put everything into perspective.
Hong Chau, as Ngoc Lan Tran in the film, stood out and was really funny at times. The rest of the cast was good and fit the story well. The story did tend to drift between comedy and drama and not always as smoothly as intended. The film comes in at 2 hours and 15 minutes which is a little long but really if it was shorter the story would be even more all over the place. The plausibility of most of the film was in question for me and that was definitely distracting. But looking back if I spent less time on that I would have enjoyed the film more. Visually nothing really stand out like I thought it would and there was potential. The novelty of everyday things being bigger did get over done a little.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Lady In The Van (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019 (Updated Jun 11, 2019)
Like a particularly lethargic sloth
Cinema has a long lasting love of people having their homes invaded by unwanted intruders, and not just because that’s how most directors view anyone who tries to tell them their opinion on filmmaking. It’s because there’s a lot of different directions one can take with the drama and excitement of home invasion. The horror of Wait Until Dark, the brutality of Straw Dogs, the silliness of Home Alone, the potential is quite large. And now throwing in its own interpretation of this theme is The Lady in the Van, based on the somewhat true story of Alan Bennett’s relationship with a transient woman who parked her van on his driveway. So, how does he and the audience respond?
With a dull, mild curiosity.
Despite being from the viewpoint of two Alan Bennetts, described as one being the writer and the other living the life, the main character is Miss Sheppard, the lady in the van. The film insists that we should be interested in her mysterious life, her past as a pianist and a nun, and why she chooses to live in the van, but throughout most of the film I was only thinking “Oh, let’s just go back and hear Alan Bennett be cynical some more.” The words are witty and sharp, but it’s mostly said about things we don’t care about. Miss Sheppard is a flat, mostly dull character, and the audience is unwillingly handcuffed to her.
The highlight of the film is its acting, with the cast being a veritable who’s who of Britain’s finest talent, and James Corden. What dimension Miss Sheppard has is provided almost entirely by the volatile yet vulnerable performance by Maggie Smith, and Alex Jennings is as real an Alan Bennett as the actual Alan Bennett. Even in the small roles, everyone from Roger Allam to Gwen Taylor manage to force themselves to shine. The only bad performance is from, of all people, Jim Broadbent, who pops up to antagonise Miss Sheppard but appears less like a real human being and more like a cartoon supervillain. For a second, I thought the character’s name was Baron von Drakkhen.
But great players cannot save a bad game, and the story of the film is flat, predictable and boring. If you don’t immediately care about Miss Sheppard, then the film becomes more tedious and lifeless by the second. I guessed long before the end the mystery behind Miss Sheppard, but even if I hadn’t I would still have been bored due to the lack of any interest. The film believes that the existence of a mystery to be motivation enough to solve it, which just isn’t the case; I don’t know what John McCririck had for breakfast, but I’m not going to stare at his stools to find out.
Not helping matters is a very by the numbers direction by Nicholas Hytner. While not incompetent, there’s very little in the way of style or flair without being casual. The only parts that show any sort of imagination are the fourth wall breaks, but the best only happen towards the end. It’s a shame that the potential of having two Alan Bennetts and seeing the film from the perspective of the writer only starts to be explored as the film is drawing to a close. Otherwise, a robot could’ve directed this film.
Alan Bennett is a highly praised writer, and rightfully so, but The Lady in the Van just isn’t his best. The above-average but by no means stellar script is tied to a plot as lifeless and sluggish as a particularly lethargic sloth. If you’re really hurting to see Bennett at his best, it’d be a lot cheaper and a lot more entertaining to rent The Madness of King George or The History Boys or even one of The Secret Policeman’s Ball’s, plus you can order some pizza from your sofa. Otherwise, The Lady in the Van, unlike the real Miss Sheppard, can very safely be ignored.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/11/19/like-a-particularly-lethargic-sloth-the-lady-in-the-van-review/
With a dull, mild curiosity.
Despite being from the viewpoint of two Alan Bennetts, described as one being the writer and the other living the life, the main character is Miss Sheppard, the lady in the van. The film insists that we should be interested in her mysterious life, her past as a pianist and a nun, and why she chooses to live in the van, but throughout most of the film I was only thinking “Oh, let’s just go back and hear Alan Bennett be cynical some more.” The words are witty and sharp, but it’s mostly said about things we don’t care about. Miss Sheppard is a flat, mostly dull character, and the audience is unwillingly handcuffed to her.
The highlight of the film is its acting, with the cast being a veritable who’s who of Britain’s finest talent, and James Corden. What dimension Miss Sheppard has is provided almost entirely by the volatile yet vulnerable performance by Maggie Smith, and Alex Jennings is as real an Alan Bennett as the actual Alan Bennett. Even in the small roles, everyone from Roger Allam to Gwen Taylor manage to force themselves to shine. The only bad performance is from, of all people, Jim Broadbent, who pops up to antagonise Miss Sheppard but appears less like a real human being and more like a cartoon supervillain. For a second, I thought the character’s name was Baron von Drakkhen.
But great players cannot save a bad game, and the story of the film is flat, predictable and boring. If you don’t immediately care about Miss Sheppard, then the film becomes more tedious and lifeless by the second. I guessed long before the end the mystery behind Miss Sheppard, but even if I hadn’t I would still have been bored due to the lack of any interest. The film believes that the existence of a mystery to be motivation enough to solve it, which just isn’t the case; I don’t know what John McCririck had for breakfast, but I’m not going to stare at his stools to find out.
Not helping matters is a very by the numbers direction by Nicholas Hytner. While not incompetent, there’s very little in the way of style or flair without being casual. The only parts that show any sort of imagination are the fourth wall breaks, but the best only happen towards the end. It’s a shame that the potential of having two Alan Bennetts and seeing the film from the perspective of the writer only starts to be explored as the film is drawing to a close. Otherwise, a robot could’ve directed this film.
Alan Bennett is a highly praised writer, and rightfully so, but The Lady in the Van just isn’t his best. The above-average but by no means stellar script is tied to a plot as lifeless and sluggish as a particularly lethargic sloth. If you’re really hurting to see Bennett at his best, it’d be a lot cheaper and a lot more entertaining to rent The Madness of King George or The History Boys or even one of The Secret Policeman’s Ball’s, plus you can order some pizza from your sofa. Otherwise, The Lady in the Van, unlike the real Miss Sheppard, can very safely be ignored.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/11/19/like-a-particularly-lethargic-sloth-the-lady-in-the-van-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Lady In The Van (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
In the last two decades America has seen an almost literal ‘invasion’ of British film and television programming. Like the British ‘music invasion’ some 60 years ago we just can’t seem to get enough of it. Today’s film for your consideration is the 2015 British dramatic comedy ‘The Lady In The Van’. Based upon the 1999 West End play of the same name written by Alan Bennett and starring famed British actress Maggie Smith, who also portrayed the lead in the original stage production at Queens Theater in London and again in a 2009 BBC 4 radio adaption, ‘The Lady In The Van’ follows the true story of Maggie Shepherd. An elderly lady who lived in a rundown van in Bennett’s driveway for 15 years.
Directed by Nicholas Hytner, who also directed the stage play, the film stars legendary British actress Maggie Smith as Maggie Shepherd, Alex Jennings as Alan Bennett, Jim Broadbent as Underwood, Deborah Findlay as Pauline, Roger Allam as Rufus, Gwen Taylor as Mam, Cecillia Noble as Miss Brisco, Nicholas Burns as Giles Perry, Pandora Colin as Mrs Perry, and Frances de la Tour As Ursula Vaughan Williams.
‘The Lady In The Van’ follows the true story of playwright Alan Bennett’s strained and tested relationship with Miss Maggie Shepherd. An eccentric and frightened homeless woman whom he befriended in the 1970s shortly after he moved into London’s Camden neighborhood. Originally, Bennett invites Shepherd to park her aging Bedford van in his driveway so she can list it as an address in order to collect benefits and eventually move on. Instead, Shepherd ends up living in the van in Bennett’s driveway for 15 years. Just before her death in 1989, Alan learns that Maggie Shepherd is actually Margaret Fairchild. A gifted piano player who was a pupil of pianist Alfred Cortot and had a fondness for Chopin. So much so that when she tried to become a nun, she was kicked out of her religious order twice for wanting to play music. Bennett also learns that the reason Shepherd was homeless was that she was on the run for leaving the scene of a crime she didn’t commit after escaping an institution where she’d been committed by her own brother.
I found this movie to be a prime example of the concept ‘Everyone Has A Story To Tell’. Whether the person wants to tell the story or not is a whole other idea entirely. The strange friendship between Bennett and Shepherd is certainly an unusual one to be sure. While Bennett’s neighbors would be happy to see they as they describe ‘the crazy old lady leave the neighborhood, Bennett seems to follow his writer’s instincts and also his humanity. Maggie Smith’s and Alex Jennings’s performances as the oddly paired friends go far in helping to comprehend what went on between the two. Shepherd and Bennett both excelled as artists in their own way. One as a writer one as a musician. Both kinds of artists tell stories thorough their respective crafts. In this case though, the writer (Bennett) had the ‘responsibility’ of telling Shepherd’s story after debating with himself more than once whether he had the right to do so and whether it was moral or not. On top of that, it took over a decade to find the answers Bennett was looking for. In the end, it seems Bennett did what writers do. They use what’s around them in their lives to write about. And perhaps, by doing so, he helped give Shepherd some sort of closure and perhaps peace as well just before her death.
I’m going to give this film 4 out of 5 stars. The movie clocks in at 104 minutes so it is a long movie but honestly, how can you say ‘no’ to a movie with Maggie Smith? Honestly, explain that one to me. She definitely ‘carries the film’ with her performance as Miss Mary Shepherd but the combination of her performance and that of Alex Jennings as the writer Alan Bennett that really make the film. I think another one of the reasons this film was good was because you had so many of the people that were involved in the original play that worked on the film itself. I personally find some British films, comedies in particular, to be a bit quirky sometimes. As funny as British humor is its sometimes difficult to grasp at first and there’s a bit of that in this film. Don’t let that discourage you though. If you can find an awesome art house movie theater, I’d certainly recommend going to catch it there. If you can’t, watch it online.
This is your friendly neighborhood freelance photographer and movie fanatic ‘The CameraMan’ and on behalf of my fellows at Skewed & Reviewed I’d like to say ‘Thanks For Reading’ and we’ll see you at the movies.
Directed by Nicholas Hytner, who also directed the stage play, the film stars legendary British actress Maggie Smith as Maggie Shepherd, Alex Jennings as Alan Bennett, Jim Broadbent as Underwood, Deborah Findlay as Pauline, Roger Allam as Rufus, Gwen Taylor as Mam, Cecillia Noble as Miss Brisco, Nicholas Burns as Giles Perry, Pandora Colin as Mrs Perry, and Frances de la Tour As Ursula Vaughan Williams.
‘The Lady In The Van’ follows the true story of playwright Alan Bennett’s strained and tested relationship with Miss Maggie Shepherd. An eccentric and frightened homeless woman whom he befriended in the 1970s shortly after he moved into London’s Camden neighborhood. Originally, Bennett invites Shepherd to park her aging Bedford van in his driveway so she can list it as an address in order to collect benefits and eventually move on. Instead, Shepherd ends up living in the van in Bennett’s driveway for 15 years. Just before her death in 1989, Alan learns that Maggie Shepherd is actually Margaret Fairchild. A gifted piano player who was a pupil of pianist Alfred Cortot and had a fondness for Chopin. So much so that when she tried to become a nun, she was kicked out of her religious order twice for wanting to play music. Bennett also learns that the reason Shepherd was homeless was that she was on the run for leaving the scene of a crime she didn’t commit after escaping an institution where she’d been committed by her own brother.
I found this movie to be a prime example of the concept ‘Everyone Has A Story To Tell’. Whether the person wants to tell the story or not is a whole other idea entirely. The strange friendship between Bennett and Shepherd is certainly an unusual one to be sure. While Bennett’s neighbors would be happy to see they as they describe ‘the crazy old lady leave the neighborhood, Bennett seems to follow his writer’s instincts and also his humanity. Maggie Smith’s and Alex Jennings’s performances as the oddly paired friends go far in helping to comprehend what went on between the two. Shepherd and Bennett both excelled as artists in their own way. One as a writer one as a musician. Both kinds of artists tell stories thorough their respective crafts. In this case though, the writer (Bennett) had the ‘responsibility’ of telling Shepherd’s story after debating with himself more than once whether he had the right to do so and whether it was moral or not. On top of that, it took over a decade to find the answers Bennett was looking for. In the end, it seems Bennett did what writers do. They use what’s around them in their lives to write about. And perhaps, by doing so, he helped give Shepherd some sort of closure and perhaps peace as well just before her death.
I’m going to give this film 4 out of 5 stars. The movie clocks in at 104 minutes so it is a long movie but honestly, how can you say ‘no’ to a movie with Maggie Smith? Honestly, explain that one to me. She definitely ‘carries the film’ with her performance as Miss Mary Shepherd but the combination of her performance and that of Alex Jennings as the writer Alan Bennett that really make the film. I think another one of the reasons this film was good was because you had so many of the people that were involved in the original play that worked on the film itself. I personally find some British films, comedies in particular, to be a bit quirky sometimes. As funny as British humor is its sometimes difficult to grasp at first and there’s a bit of that in this film. Don’t let that discourage you though. If you can find an awesome art house movie theater, I’d certainly recommend going to catch it there. If you can’t, watch it online.
This is your friendly neighborhood freelance photographer and movie fanatic ‘The CameraMan’ and on behalf of my fellows at Skewed & Reviewed I’d like to say ‘Thanks For Reading’ and we’ll see you at the movies.