Search
Search results
Andy K (10821 KP) created a poll
Mar 24, 2019
Nicole Hadley (380 KP) rated The Biggest Poutine in the World in Books
Jun 18, 2018
The Biggest Poutine in the World by Andrée Poulin is a cute, enjoyable, surprisingly emotional book about poutine and a world record attempt. I wish that the book had not ended so abruptly but it has a fantastic message and sympathetic and well-developed characters.
Our hero is twelve year old Thomas. His Mom disappeared on his fifth birthday. Dad has become withdrawn. Thomas feels abandoned. He develops a plan to put together the biggest poutine in the world in the hope that the attention that will draw will somehow lure his Mom back into his life. Three things gave me pause.
The book is loaded with sympathetic, supportive, decent real people who help and guide Thomas in the right direction. Thomas has a best friend, Sam, who is a real kid but is in fact a best friend. Thomas is extorted into taking on lonely Elie as a poutine project partner, and she turns out to be a lively, no-nonsense breath of fresh air. Sam's Mom, the city's mayor, Elie's Mom, and even the French Fry Guy are all adults who can see what's going on and provide gentle guidance and support. Finally, even Dad shows some spine. The effect of all of this is never sappy; it's upbeat and kind.
Thomas is insightful and the tale is told with great humor. As to Thomas, who narrates, we get a kid who may not be "real", but he feels real. I would suspect almost any middle grade reader would like and identify with this kid, which is most of the battle right there. Thomas has been dealt a bad hand, (his sense of abandonment, misplaced guilt, and anger is palpable, but he soldiers on pretty gamely and you root for him to get it together when his resolve wavers.
And, there is some very funny stuff that keeps us out of grim and depressing territory. The whole poutine project is a goof. Thomas and Sam have some great exchanges. Elie has a dry and deadpan style that keeps Thomas honest. A subplot involving the mayor's parrot, (don't ask), adds some slapstick. And behind it all you sense an author with a great command of the light and the dark and a good sense of how to ration them both out.
The upshot is that this is an honest, entertaining and very engaging story that I think would challenge, amuse and possibly touch a young reader. That's a nice combination.
I received this book from Annick Press via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
Our hero is twelve year old Thomas. His Mom disappeared on his fifth birthday. Dad has become withdrawn. Thomas feels abandoned. He develops a plan to put together the biggest poutine in the world in the hope that the attention that will draw will somehow lure his Mom back into his life. Three things gave me pause.
The book is loaded with sympathetic, supportive, decent real people who help and guide Thomas in the right direction. Thomas has a best friend, Sam, who is a real kid but is in fact a best friend. Thomas is extorted into taking on lonely Elie as a poutine project partner, and she turns out to be a lively, no-nonsense breath of fresh air. Sam's Mom, the city's mayor, Elie's Mom, and even the French Fry Guy are all adults who can see what's going on and provide gentle guidance and support. Finally, even Dad shows some spine. The effect of all of this is never sappy; it's upbeat and kind.
Thomas is insightful and the tale is told with great humor. As to Thomas, who narrates, we get a kid who may not be "real", but he feels real. I would suspect almost any middle grade reader would like and identify with this kid, which is most of the battle right there. Thomas has been dealt a bad hand, (his sense of abandonment, misplaced guilt, and anger is palpable, but he soldiers on pretty gamely and you root for him to get it together when his resolve wavers.
And, there is some very funny stuff that keeps us out of grim and depressing territory. The whole poutine project is a goof. Thomas and Sam have some great exchanges. Elie has a dry and deadpan style that keeps Thomas honest. A subplot involving the mayor's parrot, (don't ask), adds some slapstick. And behind it all you sense an author with a great command of the light and the dark and a good sense of how to ration them both out.
The upshot is that this is an honest, entertaining and very engaging story that I think would challenge, amuse and possibly touch a young reader. That's a nice combination.
I received this book from Annick Press via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
Annie Baker recommended Fanny and Alexander (1982) in Movies (curated)
Erika (17788 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
May 31, 2019
This is one of those films where the trailers were better than the end product. Honestly, I barely remember G14, only that the title character doesn't show up until the end. At least Skull Island had some good Kong kicking ass moments and Tom Hiddleston in a tight shirt.
The main characters are uninteresting, basically, we've got Coach, that kid from Stranger Things, and the chick that's a relative of that American Horror Story actress. The movie did not make me care about them at all, I would have been fine with them all biting the dust. There's a little more about Monarch, but seriously, Thomas Middleditch was annoying.
Basically, I was there for Godzilla, and all the other monsters fighting. There wasn't enough of it, as far as I'm concerned. I guess it was worth seeing the action on the big screen. I'm vaguely interested to see Godzilla vs Kong (plz let Toby Kebbell do the mo-cap again).
The main characters are uninteresting, basically, we've got Coach, that kid from Stranger Things, and the chick that's a relative of that American Horror Story actress. The movie did not make me care about them at all, I would have been fine with them all biting the dust. There's a little more about Monarch, but seriously, Thomas Middleditch was annoying.
Basically, I was there for Godzilla, and all the other monsters fighting. There wasn't enough of it, as far as I'm concerned. I guess it was worth seeing the action on the big screen. I'm vaguely interested to see Godzilla vs Kong (plz let Toby Kebbell do the mo-cap again).
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Concrete Rose in Books
Jan 28, 2021
A striking prequel to The Hate You Give
Maverick Carter feels the weight of the world on his shoulders. With his father in prison, he has to help his mother financially while still attending high school. To do so, he's secretly dealing drugs with some of his friends, and he's a member of the King Lords gang, same as his father, for protection. But when Mav finds out he's becoming a father too, everything changes. His son, Seven, alters his view on the world. He wants to stop dealing, to get a real job, maybe even leave the gang. And when a murder rocks his community, Maverick is forced to grow up quickly and figure out exactly what his future holds.
"When it comes to the streets, there’s rules. They ain’t written down, and you won’t find them in a book."
CONCRETE ROSE takes place around seventeen years before Thomas' hit THE HATE YOU GIVE, and it's absolutely riveting. Talk about the book you didn't know you needed, but once you read it, you'll never forget it. Thomas perfectly captures teen Maverick's voice and his early life, including all the pressures that come with being a young black man in his community.
Thomas deftly shows how institutionalized racism has affected Maverick's entire world--his father in prison, the gang life that surrounds him, the standards and judgements forced upon him. Maverick wants to go straight, but the pressures he faces--having to support his family as a kid, other family members who want him in a gang--are nearly overwhelming.
This book touches on friendship, family, belonging, and so much more. It's spellbinding and so well-done. The fact that it has ties to THUG is even better, giving insight into more of that world. Overall, it's incredibly engrossing and insightful. Honestly, I was sad it didn't cover more time up to THUG. 4.5 stars.
"When it comes to the streets, there’s rules. They ain’t written down, and you won’t find them in a book."
CONCRETE ROSE takes place around seventeen years before Thomas' hit THE HATE YOU GIVE, and it's absolutely riveting. Talk about the book you didn't know you needed, but once you read it, you'll never forget it. Thomas perfectly captures teen Maverick's voice and his early life, including all the pressures that come with being a young black man in his community.
Thomas deftly shows how institutionalized racism has affected Maverick's entire world--his father in prison, the gang life that surrounds him, the standards and judgements forced upon him. Maverick wants to go straight, but the pressures he faces--having to support his family as a kid, other family members who want him in a gang--are nearly overwhelming.
This book touches on friendship, family, belonging, and so much more. It's spellbinding and so well-done. The fact that it has ties to THUG is even better, giving insight into more of that world. Overall, it's incredibly engrossing and insightful. Honestly, I was sad it didn't cover more time up to THUG. 4.5 stars.
Erika (17788 KP) rated Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway (2021) in Movies
Jun 15, 2021
Full disclosure, I absolutely loved the first Peter Rabbit film. I found it completely hilarious and cackled numerous times. The sequel did not make me laugh.
I typically don’t watch straight-up kid movies anymore, because they’re not funny, and they are as annoying as the kids in the audience. This movie completely reminded me of that.
The film begins with the wedding of Bea and Thomas, the rabbits and other members of McGregor’s Garden are all present. The animals are mixed in with the humans, and it looked very odd. I can’t figure out why. Bea and Thomas enter married bliss (?), running a shop in town, and tending the garden. Bea’s first Peter Rabbit book has been published by Thomas himself. Bea receives an offer from a publisher, Nigel Basil-Jones, played by David Oyelowo, to have her book republished so it can reach a wider audience. Bea begins to compromise her integrity to please Nigel and make the rabbits hipper to boost sales. Meanwhile, Peter embraces his bad boy/ mischievous image and makes friends with this super creepy rabbit from the city, participating in food heists.
The two main plotlines really didn’t make sense together and seemed to only be related because they were both about family. Yawn.
James Corden, who I can tolerate most of the time, was so completely annoying. His performance killed any motivation I had to see a possible third movie. This movie was just dumb, but I guess it probably entertained children.
There were a few positives. Oyelowo was hilarious, and one of the best parts of the film. He is the only reason I’m giving this film two-stars His comedy skills are on point and his interactions with Domhnall Gleeson were the best source of adult laughs. I also loved the voice acting of Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail. Though, I was a little bummed that Daisy Ridley did not return as Cottontail.
The recent marketing stated, “In Theaters. Finally”. I’m not sure this film should have been released in theaters, they should have released it on VOD at Easter-time either in 2020, or 2021.
I typically don’t watch straight-up kid movies anymore, because they’re not funny, and they are as annoying as the kids in the audience. This movie completely reminded me of that.
The film begins with the wedding of Bea and Thomas, the rabbits and other members of McGregor’s Garden are all present. The animals are mixed in with the humans, and it looked very odd. I can’t figure out why. Bea and Thomas enter married bliss (?), running a shop in town, and tending the garden. Bea’s first Peter Rabbit book has been published by Thomas himself. Bea receives an offer from a publisher, Nigel Basil-Jones, played by David Oyelowo, to have her book republished so it can reach a wider audience. Bea begins to compromise her integrity to please Nigel and make the rabbits hipper to boost sales. Meanwhile, Peter embraces his bad boy/ mischievous image and makes friends with this super creepy rabbit from the city, participating in food heists.
The two main plotlines really didn’t make sense together and seemed to only be related because they were both about family. Yawn.
James Corden, who I can tolerate most of the time, was so completely annoying. His performance killed any motivation I had to see a possible third movie. This movie was just dumb, but I guess it probably entertained children.
There were a few positives. Oyelowo was hilarious, and one of the best parts of the film. He is the only reason I’m giving this film two-stars His comedy skills are on point and his interactions with Domhnall Gleeson were the best source of adult laughs. I also loved the voice acting of Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail. Though, I was a little bummed that Daisy Ridley did not return as Cottontail.
The recent marketing stated, “In Theaters. Finally”. I’m not sure this film should have been released in theaters, they should have released it on VOD at Easter-time either in 2020, or 2021.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Road to Perdition (2002) in Movies
Jul 4, 2021
A rich sensory experience until around the third act when I began choking on soap - could this be the most beautiful looking + sounding mob movie out there? Maybe, what with its otherworldly Thomas Newman score (which I can't believe people complained about) and downright tantalizing cinematography, paired with such lush period detail that never feels overbearing for a single second. Unfortunately (though expectedly) *too* pristine for its own good - tries so unsubtly to be a ''''serious'''' movie that's above the violent pulp this so desperately needed. It would be another thing entirely if they replaced it with something to say but this is perhaps the most simple mob story ever told. Initially presents itself as subdued mafia eye candy, which I was on board with until the jarring tonal shift beginning with the bank heists where it reveals its moral fiber to be the cloying relationship between Hanks and this annoying kid who can't act for shit. And don't even get me started on that dumbass narration which just spoon feeds you what this is supposed to be 'about' as if it wasn't already blatantly obvious. But Paul Newman and Jude Law are swell, and it's got a fair amount of good scenes that handle the simple melodrama well. Dazzling aesthetic showcase meets cringe Oscar bait which has been rendered mostly useless now that we have other movies of the genre/premise that aren't afraid to have some bite.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Predator (2018) in Movies
Sep 26, 2018
Waste of idea, talent and my time
If I was to show future generations a prototypical 1980's "Machismo, Blood and Guts Action Flick", I would pull the original 1987 PREDATOR (starring good ol' Arnold Schwarzenegger) off my dusty shelves and show this to them. It is a film so "of it's time".
In subsequent years, there have been more films that attempted to use the Predator character - PREDATOR 2 (1990), AVP: ALIENS VS. PREDATOR (2004), ALIENS VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM (2007) and PREDATORS (2010) - all disappointing. All failing to equal the balance of machismo, action and humor that is needed.
So...it was with great anticipation that I looked forward to THE PREDATOR, a new film written and directed by Shane Black (KISS KISS BANG BANG, IRON MAN 3, THE NICE GUYS) - one of the actors in the 1987 flick!
And...I was disappointed again.
This film fails because it never really got a grip on just what type of film it wanted to be - is it a Sci-Fi film? Is it an Action film? A buddy flick? A gore fest? A look at Autism? Black's script and direction spreads all these items out on the picnic blanket that is this film and then intermittently picks each one of these up to show us - sometimes a couple of them - like a kid trying to decide whether he wants the chips or the hot dogs or the Oreo cookies and just shoves them all in his mouth together.
And that's too bad, for Black has an interesting premise - rival Predators battling on Earth - with a ragtag group of Earthlings thrown in the middle - and what a "ragtag" group they are! Trevante Rhodes (MOONLIGHTING), Thomas Jane (THE MIST), Keegan-Michael Key (KEY & PEELE), Alfie Allen (GAME OF THRONES) and Augusto Aguilera (CHASING LIFE) make an intriguing band of misfit soldiers that easily could have been an equal to Arnold's ragtag group of soldiers from the 1987 original.
Unfortunately, they are the "back-up band" to the boring Boyd Holbrook (NARCOS) and Olivia Munn (X-MEN: APOCALYPSE) as a couple thrown together to defend Holbrook's Autistic son (Jacob Tremblay - so good in ROOM and wasted here) in a by-the-book "they hate each other when they first meet, so - naturally - they'll fall in love by the end" plot contrivance that doesn't work at all.
Add on top of that Sterling K. Brown (THIS IS US) as a "mysterious" Gov't Agent who is so much of a bad guy, all he was missing was a mustache twirl and the missed opportunities of actors such as Yvonne Stahovski (THE HANDMAID'S TALE) and NIall Matter (EUREKA) who both just stand around and do nothing. They even cast Jake Busey (Gary's kid) - who would be the perfect "over-the-top" bad guy for this sort of film, but...he is just misdirection and wasted as well.
What a wasted effort, a wasted opportunity and a waste of my time.
Letter Grade C_+: The ragtag group of soldiers were at least fun to watch (give Thomas Jane and Keegan-Michael Key their own "buddy" picture)!
5 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the BankofMarquis
In subsequent years, there have been more films that attempted to use the Predator character - PREDATOR 2 (1990), AVP: ALIENS VS. PREDATOR (2004), ALIENS VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM (2007) and PREDATORS (2010) - all disappointing. All failing to equal the balance of machismo, action and humor that is needed.
So...it was with great anticipation that I looked forward to THE PREDATOR, a new film written and directed by Shane Black (KISS KISS BANG BANG, IRON MAN 3, THE NICE GUYS) - one of the actors in the 1987 flick!
And...I was disappointed again.
This film fails because it never really got a grip on just what type of film it wanted to be - is it a Sci-Fi film? Is it an Action film? A buddy flick? A gore fest? A look at Autism? Black's script and direction spreads all these items out on the picnic blanket that is this film and then intermittently picks each one of these up to show us - sometimes a couple of them - like a kid trying to decide whether he wants the chips or the hot dogs or the Oreo cookies and just shoves them all in his mouth together.
And that's too bad, for Black has an interesting premise - rival Predators battling on Earth - with a ragtag group of Earthlings thrown in the middle - and what a "ragtag" group they are! Trevante Rhodes (MOONLIGHTING), Thomas Jane (THE MIST), Keegan-Michael Key (KEY & PEELE), Alfie Allen (GAME OF THRONES) and Augusto Aguilera (CHASING LIFE) make an intriguing band of misfit soldiers that easily could have been an equal to Arnold's ragtag group of soldiers from the 1987 original.
Unfortunately, they are the "back-up band" to the boring Boyd Holbrook (NARCOS) and Olivia Munn (X-MEN: APOCALYPSE) as a couple thrown together to defend Holbrook's Autistic son (Jacob Tremblay - so good in ROOM and wasted here) in a by-the-book "they hate each other when they first meet, so - naturally - they'll fall in love by the end" plot contrivance that doesn't work at all.
Add on top of that Sterling K. Brown (THIS IS US) as a "mysterious" Gov't Agent who is so much of a bad guy, all he was missing was a mustache twirl and the missed opportunities of actors such as Yvonne Stahovski (THE HANDMAID'S TALE) and NIall Matter (EUREKA) who both just stand around and do nothing. They even cast Jake Busey (Gary's kid) - who would be the perfect "over-the-top" bad guy for this sort of film, but...he is just misdirection and wasted as well.
What a wasted effort, a wasted opportunity and a waste of my time.
Letter Grade C_+: The ragtag group of soldiers were at least fun to watch (give Thomas Jane and Keegan-Michael Key their own "buddy" picture)!
5 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the BankofMarquis
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Near Perfect Film/Comic Book Movie With A Piece Missing
Contains spoilers, click to show
This film did a great job in making the Joker or rather Arthur a sympathetic character. Joaquin Phoenix did a phenomenal job in this movie. His laugh made me really feel for this character, it sounded sad but also painful, like it physically hurt him. I really felt for Arthur and it actually made me feel bad for him equally when he was getting beat up and assaulted but also just berated and treated bad by others. People were talking about the violence in the movie and how it was graphic and disturbing but what bothered me more were the parts where Arthur was having violence done on him, it made me sad for him. I thought a lot of the movie was well done. The double twist in him finding his mother's letter to Thomas Wayne saying he (Arthur) is his son only to find out that he was adopted was a great reveal. Still makes me wonder what the truth really is, because later he does find a photograph with Thomas Wayne's initials on the back. Either he really is his son and Wayne had it covered up, which he totally has the means to do, or maybe she was delusional about it. I also thought it was cool how they showed Arthur also had delusions of grandeur in the begging when he is watching the Murray show and he imagines himself as a guest there. Like I said this movie was really well done in a lot of ways but there were somethings that bothered me. One right off the back is that Bruce Wayne is just a kid in this movie and if Arthur is supposed to be the Joker he would be way older than he should be when Wayne becomes Batman. To mere there wasn't a lot that Arthur really did as Joker. Nothing grandiose or epic like what I've become accustomed to with the Joker in other incarnations. There was no plans or power moves like in The Dark Knight or parade and taking over the city like in 1989's Batman. They really could have called the movie something else since he really only becomes the Joker at the end of the movie for not really that long even. I know it's supposed to be an origin story of how he becomes the Joker but it wasn't even going off of any of the comics and just loosely based on the version of Joker from The Killing Joke and then given the "Hollywood" treatment. I think I just expected more Joker from a movie called Joker. I thought the ending was perfect if it would have ended with him on top of the car when they helped him escape. I honestly don't know why they should that little part with him in Arkham, I don't think it added anything and kind of took away from it. The only thing I can think of is they didn't want to end it that dark. I have to say that if your judging this film from not being a big fan of Joker, the comics or the films and only on as a stand alone film it's probably like a 9/10. But for me since at it's core it is a comic book movie I give it an 8/10.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Doctor Sleep (2019) in Movies
Oct 5, 2020
Better Than I Expected
Over the years, there has been "cash grab" sequels thrown out onto an unsuspecting public years after the beloved original film has settled into the warm memories of time. Films like THE TWO JAKES (sequel to CHINATOWN), THE EVENING STAR (sequel to TERMS OF ENDEARMENT) and, most notably, THE GODFATHER III (sequel to the first two, terrific GODFATHER films) all were filmed more than 10 years after the original classic and quickly died at the box office.
Thus, I steered very clear of the sequel to the great Stanley Kubrick film THE SHINING (based on the novel by Stephen King). This time it was Ewan MacGregor as a grown up Danny Torrance, otherwise known as DOCTOR SLEEP. True, this one was based on Stephen King's sequel novel, but still, I avoided it.
Well...2020 being 2020...I was searching for something "new" to watch and tripped across this, so thought "what the heck, I'll give it a go"...
And...I was pleasantly surprised - Doctor Sleep is actually a pretty good flick, capturing the flavor of the original while becoming an entity of it's own.
Doctor Sleep tells the tale of an adult Danny Torrance (Ewan MacGregor) the grown-up son of the Jack Nicholson character (Jack Torrance) in THE SHINING. Danny struggles to come to grips with what happened at the Overlook Hotel - and with his ability to "Shine".
As written and directed by Mike Flanagan (GERALD'S GAME), Doctor Sleep serves as a creepy "chase flick" and a homage to The Shining at the same time. Flanagan does a decent job of giving us motivations and meanings to Danny's own personal journey while weaving in a plausible, effective use of the characters and locations of The Shining.
Part of this success rests on the castings of actors to recreate the roles - and feelings - of characters from the original Stanley Kubrick film. Alex Essoe (Wendy Torrance), Carl Lumbly (Dick Halloran) and Henry Thomas - yes the kid from ET - (as "the bartender", who is clearly Jack Torrance) all bring the essence of the previous film's characters to the events while carving out their own versions of the characters. The same can be said for Flanagan's use (re-use?) of the Overlook Hotel locations and stylings. From the patterned carpet to the typewriter in the lobby to the elevators spewing blood to the hole in the bathroom door that the axe went through - all added to the creepy eeriness of "I've been here before".
But, I think Flanagan was more interested in that part of the story/film than the other part, for faring less successfully is Danny's journey. Fault cannot be made of Ewan MacGregor's performance, he is very good, considering the clunky dialogue he is given, and he gives Danny a haunted feeling, simultaneously chasing and running from his past. But Flanagan really skims over this part of the film - why/how Danny becomes the titular "Doctor Sleep" is almost in a "blink and you'll miss it" moment. While I like the pacing of this film, I think it could have used a little more care and feeding on the front end, to help us understand/invest in Danny's journey more.
Also not faring as well as it could have is the bad guys in this film - a group of characters called THE KNOT. Flanagan enlists a "decent enough" group of character actors for this group though, I think, this film pulls it's punches with these villains and it suffers from it. The leader of the group is "Rose The Hat", played by Rebecca Ferguson (THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN) and she is charismatic (as always) and draws you into her world, and her group. She is very seductive in this role - and that is really good. HOWEVER, when it is time for this "spider" to pounce on her prey, she just doesn't have the intimidation and fear factor, so I was never really scared or unnerved by her.
But, as far as sequels go, this one holds up very well and does a very good job of being an homage to the original film while driving it's own story - and characters - along.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Thus, I steered very clear of the sequel to the great Stanley Kubrick film THE SHINING (based on the novel by Stephen King). This time it was Ewan MacGregor as a grown up Danny Torrance, otherwise known as DOCTOR SLEEP. True, this one was based on Stephen King's sequel novel, but still, I avoided it.
Well...2020 being 2020...I was searching for something "new" to watch and tripped across this, so thought "what the heck, I'll give it a go"...
And...I was pleasantly surprised - Doctor Sleep is actually a pretty good flick, capturing the flavor of the original while becoming an entity of it's own.
Doctor Sleep tells the tale of an adult Danny Torrance (Ewan MacGregor) the grown-up son of the Jack Nicholson character (Jack Torrance) in THE SHINING. Danny struggles to come to grips with what happened at the Overlook Hotel - and with his ability to "Shine".
As written and directed by Mike Flanagan (GERALD'S GAME), Doctor Sleep serves as a creepy "chase flick" and a homage to The Shining at the same time. Flanagan does a decent job of giving us motivations and meanings to Danny's own personal journey while weaving in a plausible, effective use of the characters and locations of The Shining.
Part of this success rests on the castings of actors to recreate the roles - and feelings - of characters from the original Stanley Kubrick film. Alex Essoe (Wendy Torrance), Carl Lumbly (Dick Halloran) and Henry Thomas - yes the kid from ET - (as "the bartender", who is clearly Jack Torrance) all bring the essence of the previous film's characters to the events while carving out their own versions of the characters. The same can be said for Flanagan's use (re-use?) of the Overlook Hotel locations and stylings. From the patterned carpet to the typewriter in the lobby to the elevators spewing blood to the hole in the bathroom door that the axe went through - all added to the creepy eeriness of "I've been here before".
But, I think Flanagan was more interested in that part of the story/film than the other part, for faring less successfully is Danny's journey. Fault cannot be made of Ewan MacGregor's performance, he is very good, considering the clunky dialogue he is given, and he gives Danny a haunted feeling, simultaneously chasing and running from his past. But Flanagan really skims over this part of the film - why/how Danny becomes the titular "Doctor Sleep" is almost in a "blink and you'll miss it" moment. While I like the pacing of this film, I think it could have used a little more care and feeding on the front end, to help us understand/invest in Danny's journey more.
Also not faring as well as it could have is the bad guys in this film - a group of characters called THE KNOT. Flanagan enlists a "decent enough" group of character actors for this group though, I think, this film pulls it's punches with these villains and it suffers from it. The leader of the group is "Rose The Hat", played by Rebecca Ferguson (THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN) and she is charismatic (as always) and draws you into her world, and her group. She is very seductive in this role - and that is really good. HOWEVER, when it is time for this "spider" to pounce on her prey, she just doesn't have the intimidation and fear factor, so I was never really scared or unnerved by her.
But, as far as sequels go, this one holds up very well and does a very good job of being an homage to the original film while driving it's own story - and characters - along.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)