Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated My Spy (2019) in Movies
Apr 4, 2020
Eleven months after first being slated for release we finally got My Spy in the cinema. With its predecessors like Playing With Fire, The Pacifier and The Game Plan leaving a very mixed tough guy/kid's movie playing field I wasn't expecting great things.
JJ has stepped over the line one too many times and now he's relegated to surveillance with Bobbi, the agency tech wizard. Their mission is to stay put and watch the wife and child of a man who was connected to the case.
When they get to their stakeout position the last thing they expect is to be made by the very person they're watching. Sophie may only be 9 but she's no fool and she's about to use her new found leverage to her benefit.
I absolutely loved this, it was looking a little rough at the start but I genuinely enjoyed myself once it hit its stride.
But it was a 12A? Honestly astounded to see that pop up at the beginning, I would have assumed it would be a PG, but that extra allowance gave the film a bit more colour.
This comedy felt perfect for Dave Bautista, I don't think I've seen him in a role that really felt suited to him, I like his humour but even the lovable Drax was always a bit off. Everest in Hotel Artemis was probably the best until I saw this. I love that he got a chance to do a mix of drama and comedy all in one film.
His pairing with Kristen Schaal as Bobbi was such fun. Their completely different approaches coupled with her to-the-point attitude make for a great team. Bobbi's adoration and desire to do more fieldwork is played off incredibly well.
I'm not usually a fan of child actors, it can seem forced and unnatural, but Chloe Coleman as Sophie is savage and I love it. Her standing up to JJ and her vulnerable side comes over so well, I genuinely enjoyed her acting and her comic timing, I can't wait to see her in more things.
The only actor I would query is Ken Jeong, he's funny and I find him generally amusing in most things he does but in this A) he wasn't entirely believable in the role and B) his humour was a step apart from the rest of the script, his parts in particular weren't in scenes designed for humour. It was the only part of the film that made me pause as I watched it, but it wasn't a massively negative impact on the whole.
We get some great settings and amazing action style sequences, the ones with both Bautista and Coleman had some real heart and humour. The whole storyline where he teaches her how to spy is amusing and well done.
I really did enjoy My Spy, that 12A totally helped it from being like those before it, the script could be aimed more at adults and the humour could cover both adult and children's amusement, it's a great stress-free film and I would absolutely watch it again.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/04/my-spy-movie-review.html
JJ has stepped over the line one too many times and now he's relegated to surveillance with Bobbi, the agency tech wizard. Their mission is to stay put and watch the wife and child of a man who was connected to the case.
When they get to their stakeout position the last thing they expect is to be made by the very person they're watching. Sophie may only be 9 but she's no fool and she's about to use her new found leverage to her benefit.
I absolutely loved this, it was looking a little rough at the start but I genuinely enjoyed myself once it hit its stride.
But it was a 12A? Honestly astounded to see that pop up at the beginning, I would have assumed it would be a PG, but that extra allowance gave the film a bit more colour.
This comedy felt perfect for Dave Bautista, I don't think I've seen him in a role that really felt suited to him, I like his humour but even the lovable Drax was always a bit off. Everest in Hotel Artemis was probably the best until I saw this. I love that he got a chance to do a mix of drama and comedy all in one film.
His pairing with Kristen Schaal as Bobbi was such fun. Their completely different approaches coupled with her to-the-point attitude make for a great team. Bobbi's adoration and desire to do more fieldwork is played off incredibly well.
I'm not usually a fan of child actors, it can seem forced and unnatural, but Chloe Coleman as Sophie is savage and I love it. Her standing up to JJ and her vulnerable side comes over so well, I genuinely enjoyed her acting and her comic timing, I can't wait to see her in more things.
The only actor I would query is Ken Jeong, he's funny and I find him generally amusing in most things he does but in this A) he wasn't entirely believable in the role and B) his humour was a step apart from the rest of the script, his parts in particular weren't in scenes designed for humour. It was the only part of the film that made me pause as I watched it, but it wasn't a massively negative impact on the whole.
We get some great settings and amazing action style sequences, the ones with both Bautista and Coleman had some real heart and humour. The whole storyline where he teaches her how to spy is amusing and well done.
I really did enjoy My Spy, that 12A totally helped it from being like those before it, the script could be aimed more at adults and the humour could cover both adult and children's amusement, it's a great stress-free film and I would absolutely watch it again.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/04/my-spy-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Crazy Rich Asians (2018) in Movies
Aug 23, 2018
You don't have to be a CRA to enjoy this film
I am not Crazy (debatable), Rich (not even close) or Asian (not going to touch that one). So, it was an interesting test to see if I would be entertained by CRAZY RICH ASIANS, a RomCom focused on groups that I am not a part of.
Surprisingly, the answer is not just "yes", it's "heck, yes!"
Based on the bestselling book by Kevin Kwan, Crazy Rich Asians (CRA from hereout) tells the story of Asian-American College Economics Professor Rachel Chu (Constance Wu) who heads to Singapore for a wedding with her boyfriend, Nick Young (Henry Golding) unknowingly heading into the "belly of the beast" of his ultra-rich family and the various relatives, friends and hangers-on who are not shy about letting Rachel know if they approve of her.
This film is being hailed as a landmark in Cinema, for a mainstream movie is filled with nothing by Asian actors and actresses, and it acquits itself nicely not just as a mainstream film filled with Asian actors and actresses, but as a GOOD film regardless of the nationalities of the people portrayed and the actors portraying them.
For the most part, Director Jon M. Chu has crafted a beautiful, funny film that sends a message and brings the viewer into a world that is, heretofore, not seen on the screen. And he brings this to the viewer with a loving eye and deep, soulful heart that shines throughout.
As the lead couple, Wu and Golding are charming, charismatic and VERY GOOD TO LOOK AT, they are an easy pair of people to spend some time with. Most of the other actors on the screen are very well cast and some standouts include Nico Santos as Oliver and good ol' Ken Jeong as Wye Mun Goh.
But it is the work of three very good, very different, but very PROFESSIONAL actresses that caught my eye. The first is Awkwafina (OCEAN'S 8) as an old College roommate of Rachel's who is the funniest thing in the film (think Melissa McCarthy in Bridesmaids) she brings a much needed level of irreverence to the stodginess of Nick's family. Gemma Chan (TV's HUMANS) carries a good deal of the dramatic and emotional weight of this film as Nick's Sister - a "cool on the outside, emotionally troubled on the inside" soul who steals any scene she is in. I think we have a real star in the making with her.
And then there is Michelle Yeoh (CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON) as Nick's "Tiger Mom" who disapproves of his girlfriend and her "American ways". She's a traditionalist who gave up quite a bit for her family and expects the same level of familiar commitment from her children. It would be easy to make this character one-dimensional, but in Yeoh's capable hands, it is anything but.
It's not a perfect film - I felt it dragged a bit in the middle - but the beginning and (especially) the last 1/2 hour of this film is funny, poignant and emotional (bring your hankies - you're gonna need them).
Oh...and stay through the first part of the credits, there is a scene about 2 minutes in that sets up the sequel (there are 3 books in this series).
This is a good film for EVERYONE - whether your are a CRA or not!
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Surprisingly, the answer is not just "yes", it's "heck, yes!"
Based on the bestselling book by Kevin Kwan, Crazy Rich Asians (CRA from hereout) tells the story of Asian-American College Economics Professor Rachel Chu (Constance Wu) who heads to Singapore for a wedding with her boyfriend, Nick Young (Henry Golding) unknowingly heading into the "belly of the beast" of his ultra-rich family and the various relatives, friends and hangers-on who are not shy about letting Rachel know if they approve of her.
This film is being hailed as a landmark in Cinema, for a mainstream movie is filled with nothing by Asian actors and actresses, and it acquits itself nicely not just as a mainstream film filled with Asian actors and actresses, but as a GOOD film regardless of the nationalities of the people portrayed and the actors portraying them.
For the most part, Director Jon M. Chu has crafted a beautiful, funny film that sends a message and brings the viewer into a world that is, heretofore, not seen on the screen. And he brings this to the viewer with a loving eye and deep, soulful heart that shines throughout.
As the lead couple, Wu and Golding are charming, charismatic and VERY GOOD TO LOOK AT, they are an easy pair of people to spend some time with. Most of the other actors on the screen are very well cast and some standouts include Nico Santos as Oliver and good ol' Ken Jeong as Wye Mun Goh.
But it is the work of three very good, very different, but very PROFESSIONAL actresses that caught my eye. The first is Awkwafina (OCEAN'S 8) as an old College roommate of Rachel's who is the funniest thing in the film (think Melissa McCarthy in Bridesmaids) she brings a much needed level of irreverence to the stodginess of Nick's family. Gemma Chan (TV's HUMANS) carries a good deal of the dramatic and emotional weight of this film as Nick's Sister - a "cool on the outside, emotionally troubled on the inside" soul who steals any scene she is in. I think we have a real star in the making with her.
And then there is Michelle Yeoh (CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON) as Nick's "Tiger Mom" who disapproves of his girlfriend and her "American ways". She's a traditionalist who gave up quite a bit for her family and expects the same level of familiar commitment from her children. It would be easy to make this character one-dimensional, but in Yeoh's capable hands, it is anything but.
It's not a perfect film - I felt it dragged a bit in the middle - but the beginning and (especially) the last 1/2 hour of this film is funny, poignant and emotional (bring your hankies - you're gonna need them).
Oh...and stay through the first part of the credits, there is a scene about 2 minutes in that sets up the sequel (there are 3 books in this series).
This is a good film for EVERYONE - whether your are a CRA or not!
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Parasite (2019) in Movies
Feb 9, 2020
It’s so metaphorical.
Everyone said “Go see Parasite”. Everyone said “The one rule about Parasite is that you don’t talk about Parasite”. So I went to see Parasite. So this is a review about Parasite without talking about Parasite.
Kim Ki-Woo (Woo-sik Choi) is a student living with his family in poverty in a sub-basement room, sponging off internet signals and scrounging a living, of sorts, by assembling pizza boxes. Opportunity presents itself when his best friend, the slightly older Min (Seo-joon Park), goes abroad to study. For Min is an English tutor to the up-market Park family’s school-age daughter Da-hye (Ji-so Jung). Not wanting his fellow ‘frat-boys’ to move in on future romance – he’s lined up Ki-Woo as his replacement.
Ki-woo knows he’s lucked in when he visits the swanky Park residence and manages to pull the wool over the eyes of Da-hye’s not too bright mother Yeon-kyo (Yeo-jeong Jo). But the influence of the family’s “lucky rock” doesn’t stop there. Ki-woo sees an opportunity to get jobs for his sister Kim (So-dam Park), his father Ki-taek (Kang-ho Song) and his mother Chung-sook (Hye-jin Jang). And gradually the poor Kim family start to encroach on the rich Park family’s lives.
You might think that’s the story. It’s not. Just when you think you know where the film is going – a gentle comic tale with farcical elements – the movie takes a sudden left turn into The Twilight Zone.
To say more, if you’ve not seen the film, would be cruelty beyond measure. It’s a truly astonishing script, by writer/director Bong Joon Ho, and my nomination for the Oscar for best original screenplay.
It’s the details that get to you. This will be a superb film to watch multiple times. There are fabulous details scattered throughout. You know how the more expensive the car the more “solid” the clunk is as you shut the door? Listen to the sound effect when the Park front door shuts! Look what happens to the “one of a kind” lucky rock!
As for one of my favourite films from last year – “The Farewell” – you very quickly get to accept and embrace the subtitles. YOU MUST NOT LET THIS PUT YOU OFF. This is a masterpiece of cinema, well-deserving of its multiple Oscar nominations and its Cannes Palme d’Or award. At 132 minutes, it’s not a short film, but seldom have two hours flown by faster. It’s totally gripping. At times hysterically funny; at times shocking. A class struggle movie of a calibre that Ken Loach would never have imagined!
Gripes? I had just one. An action near the end of the movie seems bizarrely out of character and was a “WTF” moment that I didn’t think the film needed. However, it did set up a wonderful story-telling finale that I will think about for many months.
It provoked that seldom found reaction in the cinema when the end-titles ran. A hubbub of chatter and appreciation.
It comes with a highly recommended from me.
For the full graphical review, check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/09/one-manns-movies-film-review-parasite-2020/.
Kim Ki-Woo (Woo-sik Choi) is a student living with his family in poverty in a sub-basement room, sponging off internet signals and scrounging a living, of sorts, by assembling pizza boxes. Opportunity presents itself when his best friend, the slightly older Min (Seo-joon Park), goes abroad to study. For Min is an English tutor to the up-market Park family’s school-age daughter Da-hye (Ji-so Jung). Not wanting his fellow ‘frat-boys’ to move in on future romance – he’s lined up Ki-Woo as his replacement.
Ki-woo knows he’s lucked in when he visits the swanky Park residence and manages to pull the wool over the eyes of Da-hye’s not too bright mother Yeon-kyo (Yeo-jeong Jo). But the influence of the family’s “lucky rock” doesn’t stop there. Ki-woo sees an opportunity to get jobs for his sister Kim (So-dam Park), his father Ki-taek (Kang-ho Song) and his mother Chung-sook (Hye-jin Jang). And gradually the poor Kim family start to encroach on the rich Park family’s lives.
You might think that’s the story. It’s not. Just when you think you know where the film is going – a gentle comic tale with farcical elements – the movie takes a sudden left turn into The Twilight Zone.
To say more, if you’ve not seen the film, would be cruelty beyond measure. It’s a truly astonishing script, by writer/director Bong Joon Ho, and my nomination for the Oscar for best original screenplay.
It’s the details that get to you. This will be a superb film to watch multiple times. There are fabulous details scattered throughout. You know how the more expensive the car the more “solid” the clunk is as you shut the door? Listen to the sound effect when the Park front door shuts! Look what happens to the “one of a kind” lucky rock!
As for one of my favourite films from last year – “The Farewell” – you very quickly get to accept and embrace the subtitles. YOU MUST NOT LET THIS PUT YOU OFF. This is a masterpiece of cinema, well-deserving of its multiple Oscar nominations and its Cannes Palme d’Or award. At 132 minutes, it’s not a short film, but seldom have two hours flown by faster. It’s totally gripping. At times hysterically funny; at times shocking. A class struggle movie of a calibre that Ken Loach would never have imagined!
Gripes? I had just one. An action near the end of the movie seems bizarrely out of character and was a “WTF” moment that I didn’t think the film needed. However, it did set up a wonderful story-telling finale that I will think about for many months.
It provoked that seldom found reaction in the cinema when the end-titles ran. A hubbub of chatter and appreciation.
It comes with a highly recommended from me.
For the full graphical review, check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/09/one-manns-movies-film-review-parasite-2020/.
Fred (860 KP) rated Scoob (2020) in Movies
May 16, 2020
Enjoyable enough
The movie was enjoyable enough & I would probably watch it again, just to try to catch the little Hanna-Barbera references throughout it. The movie starts with the meeting of the gang & then, using a very cool remake of the original theme song sequence, moves ahead to when the gang are already seasoned "monster" hunters. But although I did enjoy it, it had a lot of problems.
Most notably, the voice acting. For some reason, instead of sticking with the current actors who do the character's voices, they decided to replace them with more well known actors. Problem is, most of them sound nothing like the characters, it kind of throws everything off. Will Forte may be the exception as his Shaggy is close enough & of course we do have Scooby's current voice, Frank Welker as Scooby. But then, this is where it gets silly. You have Frank Welker, the original voice of Fred in your movie, but you decide not to use him as Fred. WTF? Really? So you got Fred, Velma & Daphnie played by actors that sound nothing like the characters. Quick mention too about the voices of the main characters when they were kids. Terrible & annoying (quick enough?). The movie also features Blue Falcon & Dyno-Mutt. Since this is not supposed to be the original Blue Falcon, his voice change is acceptable. However, Ken Jeong is just a weird choice for Dyno-Mutt. The character has no personality & is nothing like the character should be. And to be honest, I didn't like the role reversal of Falcon being a coward & Dyno-Mutt not being a screw-up. The main villain of the film, Dick Dastardly, is voiced well, but just like the others, sounds nothing like the original voices, so it throws it off. In fact, if they had not said his name was Dick Dastardly, I would have no idea it was supposed to be Dick Dastardly.
So now, let's talk about Dick Dastardly. In the cartoons, it was either just he & his dog Muttley being the bad guys or he had a few others try to help him. But in this film, they instead have him with a whole slew of robot minions, who I guess were supposed to be like the Minions of Despicable Me, but these guys have no personality at all & the character & the film suffer because of this.
There is also another character in the film. She's Blue Falcon's.....something. Sidekick? Helper? I don't remember her name, nor do I care. She is utterly forgettable & useless. But she's the only person of color I can think of in the movie, so I guess that's why she's there. That's fine, but I wish she had a more prominent role, rather than just be there to fill a gap.
So, why did I like the movie then? Well, it's fun & there were many times I laughed out loud. there were jokes that kid's would definitely not get, that I did. The animation is top-notch & beautiful to watch. There is also a lot of nostalgia factor, whether you're a fan of Scooby or of the dozens of other Hanna-Barbera cartoons of the 70s. The story works well enough, for a Scooby Doo movie& the pacing is nice. There are no points where the movie gets slow or boring. Like I said, I'd probably watch it again & that's good enough.
Most notably, the voice acting. For some reason, instead of sticking with the current actors who do the character's voices, they decided to replace them with more well known actors. Problem is, most of them sound nothing like the characters, it kind of throws everything off. Will Forte may be the exception as his Shaggy is close enough & of course we do have Scooby's current voice, Frank Welker as Scooby. But then, this is where it gets silly. You have Frank Welker, the original voice of Fred in your movie, but you decide not to use him as Fred. WTF? Really? So you got Fred, Velma & Daphnie played by actors that sound nothing like the characters. Quick mention too about the voices of the main characters when they were kids. Terrible & annoying (quick enough?). The movie also features Blue Falcon & Dyno-Mutt. Since this is not supposed to be the original Blue Falcon, his voice change is acceptable. However, Ken Jeong is just a weird choice for Dyno-Mutt. The character has no personality & is nothing like the character should be. And to be honest, I didn't like the role reversal of Falcon being a coward & Dyno-Mutt not being a screw-up. The main villain of the film, Dick Dastardly, is voiced well, but just like the others, sounds nothing like the original voices, so it throws it off. In fact, if they had not said his name was Dick Dastardly, I would have no idea it was supposed to be Dick Dastardly.
So now, let's talk about Dick Dastardly. In the cartoons, it was either just he & his dog Muttley being the bad guys or he had a few others try to help him. But in this film, they instead have him with a whole slew of robot minions, who I guess were supposed to be like the Minions of Despicable Me, but these guys have no personality at all & the character & the film suffer because of this.
There is also another character in the film. She's Blue Falcon's.....something. Sidekick? Helper? I don't remember her name, nor do I care. She is utterly forgettable & useless. But she's the only person of color I can think of in the movie, so I guess that's why she's there. That's fine, but I wish she had a more prominent role, rather than just be there to fill a gap.
So, why did I like the movie then? Well, it's fun & there were many times I laughed out loud. there were jokes that kid's would definitely not get, that I did. The animation is top-notch & beautiful to watch. There is also a lot of nostalgia factor, whether you're a fan of Scooby or of the dozens of other Hanna-Barbera cartoons of the 70s. The story works well enough, for a Scooby Doo movie& the pacing is nice. There are no points where the movie gets slow or boring. Like I said, I'd probably watch it again & that's good enough.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Wonder Park (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Contains spoilers, click to show
First off, this is going to be awash with spoilers because I was absolutely amazed by the reaction I had to it. It's not unheard of for movies to turn out differently to how the trailer portrays them but in this case it felt like a rather low blow. I think there should have been some clues to what lay ahead without having to read reviews.
Second thing to get out of the way... the park is called Wonderland... why is the movie called Wonder Park? Pick one and stick to it!
June and her mum create their very own amusement park, it has amazing rides and its animal mascots love to amuse the crowds as they see the wonders that Wonderland has in store. The pair happily create together until June's mum is too sick to carry on. She needs treatment, which means that June and her father need to hold the fort while she's away. Playing with Wonderland isn't the same without her mother and in that moment she decides to pack everything away. Where fun once stood are now bare walls and a serious June who is hellbent on making sure her father doesn't stumble into anything bad.
What I had expected from the trailers was something comedic, the park was surely run down because June had grown up and make believe wasn't cool anymore... What I was served was something with a much more emotional twist of the knife. As soon as June's mother started looking unwell I knew it would be nothing like I'd expected.
We're never privy to what June's mum has, but the whole illness is a much more "glamorous" version of how real life goes. Ultimately we see her leave for treatment and then she comes back "better". No returning home between treatments, no visiting her at the hospital. In this, illness is obviously treated with magic, and while the film shows the more real aspects of the emotions it glosses over the rest.
Let's go to the cast of characters for a bit, and here comes a massive gripe... The UK version and the US version have a different cast. For whatever reason it's only the US cast that got an IMDb listing so I went off for a Google. Here's a quick comparison:
Peanut - Norbert Leo Butz
Greta - Milas Kunis
Steve - John Oliver
Gus & Cooper - UK version: Joe Sugg & Casper Lee, US version: Kenan Thompson & Ken Jeong
Boomer - UK version: Tom Baker, US version: Ken Hudson Campbell
I am at a loss. This film is absolutely not set in the UK, so why would you sub in a different cast when you have so much talent on the original roster? Suggs and Lee were weak and lacked any kind of dramatic quality. Kenan & Ken... I can hear them in my head now, they would have been wonderful together. I love Tom Baker, but he wasn't right either. It was a rather flat performance that needed a little more pep to boost the slightly bland character. My other query would be why John Oliver was cast as Steve for both versions. After seeing the "backing up" bit in the trailer I had hoped for something better in the expanded scene but no, it really was delivered that badly and the rest of his performance was no different. Having him up against Milas Kunis just added to the disaster, while Greta wasn't a great character Kunis did at least give us a good show.
Back to the story. June is sent off to math camp but on the way she has a panic about what might happen to him while he's on his own. There's actually quite a fun little montage here and that convinces her to get off the bus with the help of her friend so she can return home. Scheme executed she dashes off into the forest to make her way home... ba-da-bing ba-da-boom... magic tree portal.
We find that Wonderland is in tatters because it's cuddly little army of toys are dismantling everything that's fun and sacrificing it to the big black swirling vortex in the sky, a vortex that appeared just after the creative voice stopped whispering design ideas into Peanut's ear for the park... that's right... the swirling doom is June's depression, worry and anxiety caused by her mother going away because of her illness... well, shiiiiiiiiiiiiit.
Of course this movie land though, we know everything is going to get better. Our animal friends go from liking June to hating her when she admits the changes were her fault. She then has to redeem herself and everyone lives happily ever after.
I may be paraphrasing a whole section of the film there but that's the basic gist.
There's quite an odd balance in the film, it feels like we hardly get to see much of the park itself, and certainly not a lot in its full glory. The storyline is quite family heavy which for obvious reasons is a little on the serious side. We chop and change between events so quickly that we don't really get to know any of the characters at all, and it's difficult to see how they thought that was sensible in such a short space of time.
The animation is fine, nothing to write home about, but it just seemed to be a little bland on the scale of things. This is really not to say it's bad, we're just lucky to have so much great stuff around at the moment with a standard that is so high.
Wonder Park seems like it's trying to hit a Disney/Pixar level. The message is a surprisingly emotional one and I was surprised how much it affected me, I honestly don't know how I managed to contain my sobbing and on more than one occasion I had tears streaming down my face... there was nothing I could do about it, and I wasn't the only one.
Sadly overall this is a pretty mediocre film but it was so close to being something wonderful. I enjoyed it but there was a lot that could have made it so much better.
What you should do
All of the kids at the screening enjoyed it, for the adults it may well go either way. It definitely deserves a watch at some point.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
If I could have my own magic marker that requires nothing but imagination, I would be unstoppable.
Second thing to get out of the way... the park is called Wonderland... why is the movie called Wonder Park? Pick one and stick to it!
June and her mum create their very own amusement park, it has amazing rides and its animal mascots love to amuse the crowds as they see the wonders that Wonderland has in store. The pair happily create together until June's mum is too sick to carry on. She needs treatment, which means that June and her father need to hold the fort while she's away. Playing with Wonderland isn't the same without her mother and in that moment she decides to pack everything away. Where fun once stood are now bare walls and a serious June who is hellbent on making sure her father doesn't stumble into anything bad.
What I had expected from the trailers was something comedic, the park was surely run down because June had grown up and make believe wasn't cool anymore... What I was served was something with a much more emotional twist of the knife. As soon as June's mother started looking unwell I knew it would be nothing like I'd expected.
We're never privy to what June's mum has, but the whole illness is a much more "glamorous" version of how real life goes. Ultimately we see her leave for treatment and then she comes back "better". No returning home between treatments, no visiting her at the hospital. In this, illness is obviously treated with magic, and while the film shows the more real aspects of the emotions it glosses over the rest.
Let's go to the cast of characters for a bit, and here comes a massive gripe... The UK version and the US version have a different cast. For whatever reason it's only the US cast that got an IMDb listing so I went off for a Google. Here's a quick comparison:
Peanut - Norbert Leo Butz
Greta - Milas Kunis
Steve - John Oliver
Gus & Cooper - UK version: Joe Sugg & Casper Lee, US version: Kenan Thompson & Ken Jeong
Boomer - UK version: Tom Baker, US version: Ken Hudson Campbell
I am at a loss. This film is absolutely not set in the UK, so why would you sub in a different cast when you have so much talent on the original roster? Suggs and Lee were weak and lacked any kind of dramatic quality. Kenan & Ken... I can hear them in my head now, they would have been wonderful together. I love Tom Baker, but he wasn't right either. It was a rather flat performance that needed a little more pep to boost the slightly bland character. My other query would be why John Oliver was cast as Steve for both versions. After seeing the "backing up" bit in the trailer I had hoped for something better in the expanded scene but no, it really was delivered that badly and the rest of his performance was no different. Having him up against Milas Kunis just added to the disaster, while Greta wasn't a great character Kunis did at least give us a good show.
Back to the story. June is sent off to math camp but on the way she has a panic about what might happen to him while he's on his own. There's actually quite a fun little montage here and that convinces her to get off the bus with the help of her friend so she can return home. Scheme executed she dashes off into the forest to make her way home... ba-da-bing ba-da-boom... magic tree portal.
We find that Wonderland is in tatters because it's cuddly little army of toys are dismantling everything that's fun and sacrificing it to the big black swirling vortex in the sky, a vortex that appeared just after the creative voice stopped whispering design ideas into Peanut's ear for the park... that's right... the swirling doom is June's depression, worry and anxiety caused by her mother going away because of her illness... well, shiiiiiiiiiiiiit.
Of course this movie land though, we know everything is going to get better. Our animal friends go from liking June to hating her when she admits the changes were her fault. She then has to redeem herself and everyone lives happily ever after.
I may be paraphrasing a whole section of the film there but that's the basic gist.
There's quite an odd balance in the film, it feels like we hardly get to see much of the park itself, and certainly not a lot in its full glory. The storyline is quite family heavy which for obvious reasons is a little on the serious side. We chop and change between events so quickly that we don't really get to know any of the characters at all, and it's difficult to see how they thought that was sensible in such a short space of time.
The animation is fine, nothing to write home about, but it just seemed to be a little bland on the scale of things. This is really not to say it's bad, we're just lucky to have so much great stuff around at the moment with a standard that is so high.
Wonder Park seems like it's trying to hit a Disney/Pixar level. The message is a surprisingly emotional one and I was surprised how much it affected me, I honestly don't know how I managed to contain my sobbing and on more than one occasion I had tears streaming down my face... there was nothing I could do about it, and I wasn't the only one.
Sadly overall this is a pretty mediocre film but it was so close to being something wonderful. I enjoyed it but there was a lot that could have made it so much better.
What you should do
All of the kids at the screening enjoyed it, for the adults it may well go either way. It definitely deserves a watch at some point.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
If I could have my own magic marker that requires nothing but imagination, I would be unstoppable.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Crazy Rich Asians (2018) in Movies
Sep 3, 2018
Gemma Chan (1 more)
Constance Wu
OK. I don't do books, so I wouldn't have been aware of the best selling book that Crazy Rich Asians is based on. I don't usually do rom coms either, but that only tends to be the ones where they're the typical boy and girl hate each other and are thrown together until they love each other type movies. But, I do love a movie that's done well, regardless of genre. And as Crazy Rich Asians continues to receive much hype and success in the US (I'm in the UK), I thought I'd better go and see what all the fuss is about. So, as part of date night with the wife, we decided to go check it out!
Now, for this movie I think the trailer nailed it in terms of what you see is what you're going to get. And in my opinion, I'd say how you feel after seeing the trailer for this movie is a pretty good gauge for how you'll feel about the movie as a whole. Personally, I watched the trailer and I didn't think it looked that great. The story looked mildly interesting, there were some funny characters and some potentially great performances, but there was nothing in the trailer that grabbed me and stuck with me. And that's exactly how I felt about the movie after I'd seen it.
The story centres around Rachel and Nick, both living in New York and having been dating for a while. Nick is due to head home to Singapore for his best friends wedding and has asked Rachel to join him. The opening scene of the movie, featuring Nick as a young child, gives us some insight into how much wealth and power his family possess. We also see how an innocent photo of Nick and Rachel talking in a bar quickly hits Singapore social media, setting thousands of tongues wagging and giving us a pretty good idea just how big a deal Nick and his family are over there. And how much of a talking point it is that Nick is dating a girl raised in America, rather than Asia. It's only when they land in Singapore that Rachel realises the full extent of what she's let herself in for.
Nick is part of a big, rich family, with each family member having their own set of problems and insecurities to deal with. I actually had trouble keeping track of who's who for a while, but one thing this movie does do is allow sufficient time for all family members to be explored and for some particularly strong performances to blossom. Nicks mother Eleanor (Michelle Yeoh) is the one that Rachel is out to impress though, and although she remains polite at all times, it's clear that she doesn't approve. I thought this was going to be a variation of the boy and girl hate each other at first theme that I spoke about earlier, and while it kind of is in a way, it doesn't make for such a fun, easy ride like standard rom coms do.
For me, those strong performances I spoke about came from Gemma Chan as a millionaire cousin with an insecure cheating husband, and Constance Wu as Rachel. Michelle Yeoh is somebody we're probably a bit more familiar with, and she was also outstanding as Nicks mother Eleanor. There are plenty of characters providing comedy relief and bringing the 'crazy' to the films title. Most notably Awkwafina as Rachel’s best friend and Ken Jeong, who seemed slightly subdued for once.
Overall I didn't not enjoy this movie, but then I didn't enjoy it as much as I'd hoped I would either. I laughed, I was entertained, but I felt the movie dragged and stumbled at times, and didn't really elevate itself above just a standard rom com for me.
Now, for this movie I think the trailer nailed it in terms of what you see is what you're going to get. And in my opinion, I'd say how you feel after seeing the trailer for this movie is a pretty good gauge for how you'll feel about the movie as a whole. Personally, I watched the trailer and I didn't think it looked that great. The story looked mildly interesting, there were some funny characters and some potentially great performances, but there was nothing in the trailer that grabbed me and stuck with me. And that's exactly how I felt about the movie after I'd seen it.
The story centres around Rachel and Nick, both living in New York and having been dating for a while. Nick is due to head home to Singapore for his best friends wedding and has asked Rachel to join him. The opening scene of the movie, featuring Nick as a young child, gives us some insight into how much wealth and power his family possess. We also see how an innocent photo of Nick and Rachel talking in a bar quickly hits Singapore social media, setting thousands of tongues wagging and giving us a pretty good idea just how big a deal Nick and his family are over there. And how much of a talking point it is that Nick is dating a girl raised in America, rather than Asia. It's only when they land in Singapore that Rachel realises the full extent of what she's let herself in for.
Nick is part of a big, rich family, with each family member having their own set of problems and insecurities to deal with. I actually had trouble keeping track of who's who for a while, but one thing this movie does do is allow sufficient time for all family members to be explored and for some particularly strong performances to blossom. Nicks mother Eleanor (Michelle Yeoh) is the one that Rachel is out to impress though, and although she remains polite at all times, it's clear that she doesn't approve. I thought this was going to be a variation of the boy and girl hate each other at first theme that I spoke about earlier, and while it kind of is in a way, it doesn't make for such a fun, easy ride like standard rom coms do.
For me, those strong performances I spoke about came from Gemma Chan as a millionaire cousin with an insecure cheating husband, and Constance Wu as Rachel. Michelle Yeoh is somebody we're probably a bit more familiar with, and she was also outstanding as Nicks mother Eleanor. There are plenty of characters providing comedy relief and bringing the 'crazy' to the films title. Most notably Awkwafina as Rachel’s best friend and Ken Jeong, who seemed slightly subdued for once.
Overall I didn't not enjoy this movie, but then I didn't enjoy it as much as I'd hoped I would either. I laughed, I was entertained, but I felt the movie dragged and stumbled at times, and didn't really elevate itself above just a standard rom com for me.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Crazy Rich Asians (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Singapore Bling.
I’ve been catching up on films that I missed at the cinema during 2018. And this is one of the ones I most wanted to see but missed due to work commitments.
The Plot.
Rachel (Constance Wu) and Nick (Henry Golding) are young New Yorker professionals in love: Rachel is a successful economics professor and Nick… well, I’m not sure we ever find out what Nick ever does for a job, but his dress and confidence imply he’s doing well. Nick has an announcement: that his best friend Colin (Chris Pang) is getting married in Singapore and he invites Rachel to join him and meet his parents.
The trip discloses something previously hidden to Rachel: that Nick is actually heir to one of the richest families in Singapore. Indeed, as they got their money from property, the family effectively BUILT Singapore! But once in Singapore, life becomes hard for Rachel. She has to deal with the “not good enough for my Nick” disapproval of Nick’s family (led by Nick’s mother, the imperious Eleanor (Michelle Yeoh). Not only that, but thanks to Nick’s eligible-batchelor status and the pervasive nature of social media, everyone in Singapore knows about Nick and Rachel. As such, many of the ‘hens’ of Colin’s fiancee Araminta have it in for Rachel. (Araminta is played by Sonoya Mizuno, so memorable in “Ex Machina“).
Layers of rich characters.
This is not your average rom-com. Because here there’s a depth of characters within Nick’s broader family to entertain, each with their own set of quirks and issues. The dynamic of the family matriarch, grandmother (Lisa Lu), with the rest of the family is also fascinating; Friend or foe for Rachel? – it’s often difficult to tell.
Also entertaining is the introduction of Rachel’s old college room-mate Peil Lin Goh (a superbly over-the-top bonkers performance by Awkwafina) and her ‘nouveau-riche’ family. Her father (Ken Jeong) is simply hilarious in a bat-shit crazy sort of way.
But it’s the two engaging leads that impress most, particularly Henry Golding. Prior to this – his debut movie role – he was a Malaysian TV travel reporter! (He of course followed this performance up a month later with his equally impressive role as Blake Lively’s husband in “A Simple Favour“).
As sponsored by the Singapore tourist board.
Much of the action could be lifted from “My Best Friend’s Wedding”, “Meet the Parents” or “Mean Girls”. But it’s all given a refreshing asian facelift with its Singapore setting.
Singapore is one of my favourite cities: safe, clean and vibrant and with drop-dead gorgeous architecture. And I actually saw this movie while flying back out of Singapore itself. As such, I reflected on just what a great promotional flick for the tourist industry it was. From the wedding party at the Gardens by the Bay to the utterly jaw-dropping infinity pool at the “ship-hotel” (the Marina Bay Sands hotel, featured through a stunning fireworks-infused drone shot), all convey the excitement of the place.
A fun feel-good classic.
What’s impressive about the sharp writing is that this is the movie screenplay debut for co-writers Peter Chiarelli and Adele Lim. It’s a movie that makes you occasionally sit up and go ‘wow’. As an example, there’s a quirky ‘social media tsunami’ scene in the first 10 minutes. But the movie then builds with character-development stories that, while not particularly novel, are engagingly well-written and well delivered by the enthusiastic ensemble cast.
The director is John M Chu, whose less-than-stellar CV includes “GI: Joe” and “Now You See Me 2”, but here delivers a breathless momentum that lasts to the final scene.
The perfect wife and the perfect husband? Michael (Pierre Png), the boy who married well (which feels a plot borrowed from “Lost”), with the lovely Astrid (Gemma Chan). (Source: Warner Brothers).
And it’s that denouement that got to me. I don’t tend to get slushy about these sort of romantic comedies. But there’s a “reveal” in the final few minutes of the movie that completely surprised me (even though it should have been obvious!). It actually made me well-up!
It didn’t make a big dent in the awards nominations. But for fans of quirky romantic comedies it’s a recommended watch. It’s really difficult to dislike!
The Plot.
Rachel (Constance Wu) and Nick (Henry Golding) are young New Yorker professionals in love: Rachel is a successful economics professor and Nick… well, I’m not sure we ever find out what Nick ever does for a job, but his dress and confidence imply he’s doing well. Nick has an announcement: that his best friend Colin (Chris Pang) is getting married in Singapore and he invites Rachel to join him and meet his parents.
The trip discloses something previously hidden to Rachel: that Nick is actually heir to one of the richest families in Singapore. Indeed, as they got their money from property, the family effectively BUILT Singapore! But once in Singapore, life becomes hard for Rachel. She has to deal with the “not good enough for my Nick” disapproval of Nick’s family (led by Nick’s mother, the imperious Eleanor (Michelle Yeoh). Not only that, but thanks to Nick’s eligible-batchelor status and the pervasive nature of social media, everyone in Singapore knows about Nick and Rachel. As such, many of the ‘hens’ of Colin’s fiancee Araminta have it in for Rachel. (Araminta is played by Sonoya Mizuno, so memorable in “Ex Machina“).
Layers of rich characters.
This is not your average rom-com. Because here there’s a depth of characters within Nick’s broader family to entertain, each with their own set of quirks and issues. The dynamic of the family matriarch, grandmother (Lisa Lu), with the rest of the family is also fascinating; Friend or foe for Rachel? – it’s often difficult to tell.
Also entertaining is the introduction of Rachel’s old college room-mate Peil Lin Goh (a superbly over-the-top bonkers performance by Awkwafina) and her ‘nouveau-riche’ family. Her father (Ken Jeong) is simply hilarious in a bat-shit crazy sort of way.
But it’s the two engaging leads that impress most, particularly Henry Golding. Prior to this – his debut movie role – he was a Malaysian TV travel reporter! (He of course followed this performance up a month later with his equally impressive role as Blake Lively’s husband in “A Simple Favour“).
As sponsored by the Singapore tourist board.
Much of the action could be lifted from “My Best Friend’s Wedding”, “Meet the Parents” or “Mean Girls”. But it’s all given a refreshing asian facelift with its Singapore setting.
Singapore is one of my favourite cities: safe, clean and vibrant and with drop-dead gorgeous architecture. And I actually saw this movie while flying back out of Singapore itself. As such, I reflected on just what a great promotional flick for the tourist industry it was. From the wedding party at the Gardens by the Bay to the utterly jaw-dropping infinity pool at the “ship-hotel” (the Marina Bay Sands hotel, featured through a stunning fireworks-infused drone shot), all convey the excitement of the place.
A fun feel-good classic.
What’s impressive about the sharp writing is that this is the movie screenplay debut for co-writers Peter Chiarelli and Adele Lim. It’s a movie that makes you occasionally sit up and go ‘wow’. As an example, there’s a quirky ‘social media tsunami’ scene in the first 10 minutes. But the movie then builds with character-development stories that, while not particularly novel, are engagingly well-written and well delivered by the enthusiastic ensemble cast.
The director is John M Chu, whose less-than-stellar CV includes “GI: Joe” and “Now You See Me 2”, but here delivers a breathless momentum that lasts to the final scene.
The perfect wife and the perfect husband? Michael (Pierre Png), the boy who married well (which feels a plot borrowed from “Lost”), with the lovely Astrid (Gemma Chan). (Source: Warner Brothers).
And it’s that denouement that got to me. I don’t tend to get slushy about these sort of romantic comedies. But there’s a “reveal” in the final few minutes of the movie that completely surprised me (even though it should have been obvious!). It actually made me well-up!
It didn’t make a big dent in the awards nominations. But for fans of quirky romantic comedies it’s a recommended watch. It’s really difficult to dislike!
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Hangover Part II (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
It has been two years since writer-director producer Todd Phillips unleashed the mother of all benders on audiences with The Hangover. The film about four buddies on a lost weekend in Vegas was a comedic tour de force that left audiences laughing from start to finish and went on to be the highest grossing R-rated film in history. Naturally when a film does this kind of business, thoughts turned to a sequel and Phillips has returned with the original cast and crew to follow up this comedy classic.
Plot of the film mild-mannered dentist Stu (Ed Helms), who is getting married in Thailand to the girl of his dreams. Undaunted by the fact that his fiancé’s father despises everything about him, Stu convinces his best friends Phil (Bradley Cooper), and Doug (Justin Bartha), to take the 16 hour flight to attend the ceremony. When news reaches them that a crestfallen Alan (Zach Galifianikis), is waiting for his invitation to the ceremony, Stu is reluctant because he does not want a repeat of what happened in Vegas.
But despite their misgivings, the friends decide to include Alan in the ceremony and embark to the airport for the long flight to Thailand. They’re joined at the airport by Stu’s future brother-in-law Teddy (Mason Lee), a child prodigy who was already attending Stanford at 16 and has designs on a future medical career. As Stu’s fiance explains later in the film, Teddy is their father’s “most prized possession.”
Alan takes an instant disliking to Teddy and sees him as an outsider in their “wolf pack” and doesn’t miss an opportunity to try to exclude Teddy. Upon their arrival in beautiful Thailand, the friends get through a somewhat awkward dinner with the future in-laws and relax on the beach for a bonfire and bachelor party. Phil makes sure to be extra careful to avoid any of the issues they had in Vegas and selects bottled beer that was given to them by the hotel staff and makes sure that every one of them only gets an unopened bottle to drink.
Despite these precautions, Stu, Phil, and Alan wake up the next morning in a seedy hotel with absolutely no memory of how they got there and what happened the night before. Stu now sports a fresh facial tattoo while Alan has a completely shaved head. Matters are further complicated when the group realizes that Teddy is missing and that what appears to be his severed finger is found to be floating in a bucket of water.
As if things were not bad enough, matters take an even extreme turn for the worse when a monkey and Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong), show up and add even bigger complications to the already complex situation. The group learns that Doug is safely back at the resort and waiting for their arrival at breakfast after having left the bonfire early, leaving Stu, Alan and Phil to piece together the forgotten events of the night and locate Teddy before the wedding. Along the way they run into criminals, the sleazy side of Bangkok, upset monks, and much more as they race against time to solve the mystery and locate Teddy.
What follows is a comedic adventure complete with jaw-dropping sequences that leaves the audience shocked at just how far they push the envelope. The cast works well with one another and there are some truly funny moments in the film. The biggest issue with the movie is that it must walk a fine line between using the established formula of friends trying to remember and deal with the consequences of their lost evening while not repeating itself.
This is a very tricky proposition as the film essentially follows the same plot line of the original film: a group of friends are trying to remember the previous night and locate a missing member prior to a wedding. There are also similar jokes such as Stu dealing with a tattoo instead of a missing tooth and Alan’s constant nonsensical bantering and plethora of useless information.
Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel director Todd Phillips instead focuses on the relationship of the cast and allows the unique and exotic setting to be the new character and foil for the comedy. Many times in the film it is established that Teddy must be located before “Bangkok gets him” and as such the city offers endless opportunities for the cast.
The film does drag at the three quarters mark but recovers nicely, leading to a predictable finale. While the film was not as thoroughly funny as the original, in terms of humor and storytelling, but there are still plenty of laughs and eye-popping scenes that make it an enjoyable comedy. There are rumors that Phillips has plans for third film in the series to complete the trilogy. If this is indeed the case I would welcome a third film with the understanding that more care be put into the plot to avoid rehashing previous jokes and situations.
Plot of the film mild-mannered dentist Stu (Ed Helms), who is getting married in Thailand to the girl of his dreams. Undaunted by the fact that his fiancé’s father despises everything about him, Stu convinces his best friends Phil (Bradley Cooper), and Doug (Justin Bartha), to take the 16 hour flight to attend the ceremony. When news reaches them that a crestfallen Alan (Zach Galifianikis), is waiting for his invitation to the ceremony, Stu is reluctant because he does not want a repeat of what happened in Vegas.
But despite their misgivings, the friends decide to include Alan in the ceremony and embark to the airport for the long flight to Thailand. They’re joined at the airport by Stu’s future brother-in-law Teddy (Mason Lee), a child prodigy who was already attending Stanford at 16 and has designs on a future medical career. As Stu’s fiance explains later in the film, Teddy is their father’s “most prized possession.”
Alan takes an instant disliking to Teddy and sees him as an outsider in their “wolf pack” and doesn’t miss an opportunity to try to exclude Teddy. Upon their arrival in beautiful Thailand, the friends get through a somewhat awkward dinner with the future in-laws and relax on the beach for a bonfire and bachelor party. Phil makes sure to be extra careful to avoid any of the issues they had in Vegas and selects bottled beer that was given to them by the hotel staff and makes sure that every one of them only gets an unopened bottle to drink.
Despite these precautions, Stu, Phil, and Alan wake up the next morning in a seedy hotel with absolutely no memory of how they got there and what happened the night before. Stu now sports a fresh facial tattoo while Alan has a completely shaved head. Matters are further complicated when the group realizes that Teddy is missing and that what appears to be his severed finger is found to be floating in a bucket of water.
As if things were not bad enough, matters take an even extreme turn for the worse when a monkey and Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong), show up and add even bigger complications to the already complex situation. The group learns that Doug is safely back at the resort and waiting for their arrival at breakfast after having left the bonfire early, leaving Stu, Alan and Phil to piece together the forgotten events of the night and locate Teddy before the wedding. Along the way they run into criminals, the sleazy side of Bangkok, upset monks, and much more as they race against time to solve the mystery and locate Teddy.
What follows is a comedic adventure complete with jaw-dropping sequences that leaves the audience shocked at just how far they push the envelope. The cast works well with one another and there are some truly funny moments in the film. The biggest issue with the movie is that it must walk a fine line between using the established formula of friends trying to remember and deal with the consequences of their lost evening while not repeating itself.
This is a very tricky proposition as the film essentially follows the same plot line of the original film: a group of friends are trying to remember the previous night and locate a missing member prior to a wedding. There are also similar jokes such as Stu dealing with a tattoo instead of a missing tooth and Alan’s constant nonsensical bantering and plethora of useless information.
Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel director Todd Phillips instead focuses on the relationship of the cast and allows the unique and exotic setting to be the new character and foil for the comedy. Many times in the film it is established that Teddy must be located before “Bangkok gets him” and as such the city offers endless opportunities for the cast.
The film does drag at the three quarters mark but recovers nicely, leading to a predictable finale. While the film was not as thoroughly funny as the original, in terms of humor and storytelling, but there are still plenty of laughs and eye-popping scenes that make it an enjoyable comedy. There are rumors that Phillips has plans for third film in the series to complete the trilogy. If this is indeed the case I would welcome a third film with the understanding that more care be put into the plot to avoid rehashing previous jokes and situations.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Tom and Jerry (2021) in Movies
Mar 11, 2021 (Updated Mar 27, 2021)
The animation looks nice (2 more)
Decent laughs
Gets the Tom and Jerry part of the movie right
Too predictable (2 more)
Bad plot
Barely above average movie overall
Visually Pleasing With Decent Laughs Sprinkled Throughout
Tom and Jerry is a 2021 live-action/CGI animated comedy movie directed by Tim Story and written by Kevin Costello. The film was produced by Chris DeFaria and Warner Animation Group, The Story Company, and Turner Entertainment Co. and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. The movie stars Chloe Grace Moretz, Michael Pena, Colin Jost, Robe Delaney and Ken Jeong.
Kayla Forester (Chloe Grace Moretz) is a street smart woman doing odd jobs in Manhattan when she bumps into Tom while he's chasing Jerry in Central Park. Jerry, who picked a fight with Tom during a impromptu piano performance is also house hunting and in search of a new home. Kayla, is fortuitous when she goes to the Royal Gate Hotel for a "free" breakfast and presents a stolen resume as her own. She's given a position with helping event manager Terence Mendoza (Michael Pena) with a high profile wedding the very day that Jerry takes up residence in the hotel. Tom and Jerry's usual shenanigans ensue when Kayla hires Tom to "exterminate" him when Jerry begins stealing food and items causing concern about Ben (Colin Jost) and Preeta's (Pallavi Sharda) wedding and for the hotel's reputation to Mr. Dubros (Rob Delaney) the hotel's owner and general manager.
This was a movie that I watched on a whim and didn't have any expectations going into other than the animation looking really nice in the trailer when I first saw it. Also trying to get into the groove of getting back on doing my reviews on the regular again. I'm also a fan of both Chloe Grace Moretz from the Kick-Ass movies and Michael Pena from just about everything he comes out in. Plus I've always been a fan of Tom and Jerry, watching the cartoons as a kid was always fun and it's something that I can still enjoy anytime even though it's something that is really old. But enough of that and let's get to what I thought about the movie. I liked how the movie setup the Tom and Jerry character's similar to how it would in an episode. It showed both of them individually with their own goals before bringing them together. Tom is shown to have aspirations of becoming an accomplished pianist and Jerry is shown house hunting and looking for a new home to live in. That's when Jerry finds Tom pulling a scam in Central Park conning people as a "blind" piano player. Jerry tries to "cash in" on Tom's scheme and begins trying to get in on the action and adding himself and a little flair to the performance. That's when their usual antics ruin the opportunity for both of them. This was a pretty decent opening and I really liked how their animation looked and how the live-action aspect interacted with them, it was very visually pleasing. I really didn't like how it seemed Jerry was the agitator between the two or at least the one who starts the "rivalry" in this movie but I think I've always looked at him through rose colored glasses if you will since he is the smaller and more vulnerable of the two. The comedic antics were very spot on emulating a lot of classic moments from the cartoon with most not all working fairly well in a "real-world" setting. I think where this movie lost me the most was not the backdrop of the New York City being the setting or even the live-action part and actors like Chloe Grace Moretz and Michael Pena but the whole wedding plot being a primary focus of the film. I mean I can totally see it as a catalyst to the whole plot but for it to be the main focus didn't really thrill me. I thought the acting was decent and comedy was good but this movie didn't really strike me as a super funny movie, though it did have me laughing out loud at a couple of parts. I was happy that they also added Spike and the pretty white cat whose name is Toots which are regulars in the cartoon and a host of other cats as part of the alley cat gang who many of which looked familiar. The music soundtrack was good too and had a bunch of popular artists from music of today which didn't really go with the whole "vibe" of Tom and Jerry but didn't take a way from the movie either. Droopy the dog's cameo was also a nice added touch. All-in-all this movie was barely above average for me and I think that's me mainly having nostalgia for the characters and what the show used to be. Definitely not something I would see at theaters but if you have HBO Max you should give it a shot. I give this movie a 6/10.
-------------------------------------------------------
Spoiler Section Review:
So I gave this movie a 6/10 which for me is above average but this movie barely met that criteria. It started off pretty good and funny with Jerry looking for a new place to live and dealing with a dodgy real estate rat. It was also cool to see Tom having dreams or aspirations of becoming a pianist and then seeing how they collide when Jerry tries to own in on his action on the whole blind piano player scheme. That was all classic Tom and Jerry. I also enjoyed the way they interacted with the whole live-action aspect of the film and how the people reacted to them and the environments and how that all worked out was pretty good to me in my opinion. The pigeon singing opening was also pretty funny and cool and when he sings again later in the movie was awesome. I really like Chloe Grace Moretz as Kayla Forester and thought that she did a pretty good job for acting with what was probably people wearing green screen costumes or props and Michael Pena was pretty funny as the event manager. The movie was pretty predictable except for one thing that I guess I would have known about if I bothered to see the second trailer but I never did, and that's the whole sub-plot of the wedding being such a big focus for the film. I don't have anything against weddings except for when it comes to Tv shows and how if any of them run long enough then there's going to be a wedding episode somewhere. But I really felt that it kind of took a way from the whole vibe of it being a Tom and Jerry movie. It was cool how they brought Spike and Toots into the picture by them being the pets of Ben and Preeta. It was pretty obvious when they introduced the bartend character Cameron that he would be Kayla's love interest but I'm kind of glad that they didn't lean too hard into that. I thought that it was pretty funny how Kayla made Tom and Jerry be friends and go out on the town on their own and it was kind of fun to see them get a long for a while but I knew it would never last. I also thought it was pretty messed up that Kayla let Terence take the blame for Spike, Tom and Jerry tearing up the hotel when it all started with Jerry who returned when she said Tom had taken care of him already. I could totally tell that Terence would become the villain of the movie after that but most of the movie is predictable anyways. There was surprisingly an after credits scene where Ben is charged for two different weddings by the hotel which is pretty funny too. Not a great movie by no means and definitely barely above average but if you have HBO Max you should give it a watch for nostalgia's sake especially if your an old Tom and Jerry fan. I gave it a 6/10.
https://youtu.be/nrdsTy_KpwQ
Kayla Forester (Chloe Grace Moretz) is a street smart woman doing odd jobs in Manhattan when she bumps into Tom while he's chasing Jerry in Central Park. Jerry, who picked a fight with Tom during a impromptu piano performance is also house hunting and in search of a new home. Kayla, is fortuitous when she goes to the Royal Gate Hotel for a "free" breakfast and presents a stolen resume as her own. She's given a position with helping event manager Terence Mendoza (Michael Pena) with a high profile wedding the very day that Jerry takes up residence in the hotel. Tom and Jerry's usual shenanigans ensue when Kayla hires Tom to "exterminate" him when Jerry begins stealing food and items causing concern about Ben (Colin Jost) and Preeta's (Pallavi Sharda) wedding and for the hotel's reputation to Mr. Dubros (Rob Delaney) the hotel's owner and general manager.
This was a movie that I watched on a whim and didn't have any expectations going into other than the animation looking really nice in the trailer when I first saw it. Also trying to get into the groove of getting back on doing my reviews on the regular again. I'm also a fan of both Chloe Grace Moretz from the Kick-Ass movies and Michael Pena from just about everything he comes out in. Plus I've always been a fan of Tom and Jerry, watching the cartoons as a kid was always fun and it's something that I can still enjoy anytime even though it's something that is really old. But enough of that and let's get to what I thought about the movie. I liked how the movie setup the Tom and Jerry character's similar to how it would in an episode. It showed both of them individually with their own goals before bringing them together. Tom is shown to have aspirations of becoming an accomplished pianist and Jerry is shown house hunting and looking for a new home to live in. That's when Jerry finds Tom pulling a scam in Central Park conning people as a "blind" piano player. Jerry tries to "cash in" on Tom's scheme and begins trying to get in on the action and adding himself and a little flair to the performance. That's when their usual antics ruin the opportunity for both of them. This was a pretty decent opening and I really liked how their animation looked and how the live-action aspect interacted with them, it was very visually pleasing. I really didn't like how it seemed Jerry was the agitator between the two or at least the one who starts the "rivalry" in this movie but I think I've always looked at him through rose colored glasses if you will since he is the smaller and more vulnerable of the two. The comedic antics were very spot on emulating a lot of classic moments from the cartoon with most not all working fairly well in a "real-world" setting. I think where this movie lost me the most was not the backdrop of the New York City being the setting or even the live-action part and actors like Chloe Grace Moretz and Michael Pena but the whole wedding plot being a primary focus of the film. I mean I can totally see it as a catalyst to the whole plot but for it to be the main focus didn't really thrill me. I thought the acting was decent and comedy was good but this movie didn't really strike me as a super funny movie, though it did have me laughing out loud at a couple of parts. I was happy that they also added Spike and the pretty white cat whose name is Toots which are regulars in the cartoon and a host of other cats as part of the alley cat gang who many of which looked familiar. The music soundtrack was good too and had a bunch of popular artists from music of today which didn't really go with the whole "vibe" of Tom and Jerry but didn't take a way from the movie either. Droopy the dog's cameo was also a nice added touch. All-in-all this movie was barely above average for me and I think that's me mainly having nostalgia for the characters and what the show used to be. Definitely not something I would see at theaters but if you have HBO Max you should give it a shot. I give this movie a 6/10.
-------------------------------------------------------
Spoiler Section Review:
So I gave this movie a 6/10 which for me is above average but this movie barely met that criteria. It started off pretty good and funny with Jerry looking for a new place to live and dealing with a dodgy real estate rat. It was also cool to see Tom having dreams or aspirations of becoming a pianist and then seeing how they collide when Jerry tries to own in on his action on the whole blind piano player scheme. That was all classic Tom and Jerry. I also enjoyed the way they interacted with the whole live-action aspect of the film and how the people reacted to them and the environments and how that all worked out was pretty good to me in my opinion. The pigeon singing opening was also pretty funny and cool and when he sings again later in the movie was awesome. I really like Chloe Grace Moretz as Kayla Forester and thought that she did a pretty good job for acting with what was probably people wearing green screen costumes or props and Michael Pena was pretty funny as the event manager. The movie was pretty predictable except for one thing that I guess I would have known about if I bothered to see the second trailer but I never did, and that's the whole sub-plot of the wedding being such a big focus for the film. I don't have anything against weddings except for when it comes to Tv shows and how if any of them run long enough then there's going to be a wedding episode somewhere. But I really felt that it kind of took a way from the whole vibe of it being a Tom and Jerry movie. It was cool how they brought Spike and Toots into the picture by them being the pets of Ben and Preeta. It was pretty obvious when they introduced the bartend character Cameron that he would be Kayla's love interest but I'm kind of glad that they didn't lean too hard into that. I thought that it was pretty funny how Kayla made Tom and Jerry be friends and go out on the town on their own and it was kind of fun to see them get a long for a while but I knew it would never last. I also thought it was pretty messed up that Kayla let Terence take the blame for Spike, Tom and Jerry tearing up the hotel when it all started with Jerry who returned when she said Tom had taken care of him already. I could totally tell that Terence would become the villain of the movie after that but most of the movie is predictable anyways. There was surprisingly an after credits scene where Ben is charged for two different weddings by the hotel which is pretty funny too. Not a great movie by no means and definitely barely above average but if you have HBO Max you should give it a watch for nostalgia's sake especially if your an old Tom and Jerry fan. I gave it a 6/10.
https://youtu.be/nrdsTy_KpwQ
