Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated Welcome To Happiness (2016) in Movies
Aug 28, 2019
Verdict: Strange and Quirky
Story: Welcome to Happiness starts as young man Woody (Gallner) a children’s author who welcomes strangers into his apartment to help them go through his erase their mistakes, this makes his life complicated when he starts becoming friendly with a fellow tenant Trudy (Thirlby). Meanwhile Nyles (Sexton III) a man that is cleaning up after his father’s death, learns that he has valuable baseball cards, which sees him getting drawn into a big adventure around the people who want in on the business.
When Woody sees the full effect of the visits, he starts to question why he can’t change moments from his past, which soon starts to put a strain on his relationship with Trudy, while his landlord Moses (Offerman) is encouraged with his work.
Thoughts on Welcome to Happiness
Characters – Woody is a children’s author that has just moved into an apartment which sees strangers visit, answer a string of questions before putting them in a closet where they vanish. He doesn’t know what happens next until he meets one of the visitors, which leaves him wondering why he can’t change his past, which only makes him out to be going crazy to his girlfriend. Trudy is the new neighbour to Woody who strikes up a relationship with him, she does question him about the visit and doesn’t believe him when he tells the story. Moses is the landlord that knows about the closet, he knows how it helps people and who should be the one that guides people through it. Nyles is a depressed man that learns about the treasure in his father’s attic, he ends up follow a string of instructions, which will sees him visiting the closet.
Performances – Kyle Gallner does well in the leading role, it shows us just how difficult being an author with pain in his life can be difficult to get through. This does have a big cast, with each actor doing their thing to make us understand figures they are playing.
Story – The story here follows a young man that finds himself in the unusual position of having to deal with strangers looking to answer questions, which would see them disappear in his closet, over time he wants to know more, which will soon start to push him to his limits. This is an interesting little story, it does show us how difficult living in despair could be on the people in life, they will need to learn to move on, because once you break down everything, you never know what could have been in the world. We do have to meet a lot of characters, which do seem to have moments of randomness, though it does all make sense by the end of the film.
Comedy/Fantasy – The comedy in the film comes from just how far out there certain ideas are, mixed in with certain characters too, the fantasy shows us how the closet works and just how life can be seen differently if people come into it.
Settings – The settings for the film does try to put everything into a position of everyday, leading down the same plan as people you see in life will have stories you might not always get to know.
Scene of the Movie – Behind the door.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Certain characters don’t seem needed at times.
Final Thoughts – This is a very strange movie, it does have an important message, that does need to help us reflect our own lives, even if it does lean away from it at times.
Overall: Interesting throughout.
Story: Welcome to Happiness starts as young man Woody (Gallner) a children’s author who welcomes strangers into his apartment to help them go through his erase their mistakes, this makes his life complicated when he starts becoming friendly with a fellow tenant Trudy (Thirlby). Meanwhile Nyles (Sexton III) a man that is cleaning up after his father’s death, learns that he has valuable baseball cards, which sees him getting drawn into a big adventure around the people who want in on the business.
When Woody sees the full effect of the visits, he starts to question why he can’t change moments from his past, which soon starts to put a strain on his relationship with Trudy, while his landlord Moses (Offerman) is encouraged with his work.
Thoughts on Welcome to Happiness
Characters – Woody is a children’s author that has just moved into an apartment which sees strangers visit, answer a string of questions before putting them in a closet where they vanish. He doesn’t know what happens next until he meets one of the visitors, which leaves him wondering why he can’t change his past, which only makes him out to be going crazy to his girlfriend. Trudy is the new neighbour to Woody who strikes up a relationship with him, she does question him about the visit and doesn’t believe him when he tells the story. Moses is the landlord that knows about the closet, he knows how it helps people and who should be the one that guides people through it. Nyles is a depressed man that learns about the treasure in his father’s attic, he ends up follow a string of instructions, which will sees him visiting the closet.
Performances – Kyle Gallner does well in the leading role, it shows us just how difficult being an author with pain in his life can be difficult to get through. This does have a big cast, with each actor doing their thing to make us understand figures they are playing.
Story – The story here follows a young man that finds himself in the unusual position of having to deal with strangers looking to answer questions, which would see them disappear in his closet, over time he wants to know more, which will soon start to push him to his limits. This is an interesting little story, it does show us how difficult living in despair could be on the people in life, they will need to learn to move on, because once you break down everything, you never know what could have been in the world. We do have to meet a lot of characters, which do seem to have moments of randomness, though it does all make sense by the end of the film.
Comedy/Fantasy – The comedy in the film comes from just how far out there certain ideas are, mixed in with certain characters too, the fantasy shows us how the closet works and just how life can be seen differently if people come into it.
Settings – The settings for the film does try to put everything into a position of everyday, leading down the same plan as people you see in life will have stories you might not always get to know.
Scene of the Movie – Behind the door.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Certain characters don’t seem needed at times.
Final Thoughts – This is a very strange movie, it does have an important message, that does need to help us reflect our own lives, even if it does lean away from it at times.
Overall: Interesting throughout.
Holby City - Series 19
6.1
Rate It
TV Show
The series was created by Tony McHale and Mal Young as a spin-off from the established BBC medical...
Drama
Gotham is the kind of show where I wonder whether they tried to save money by just having the interns write the script. It's got that stilted, on-the-nose kind of dialogue that makes me just feel bad for the actors. For a while I thought the quality of the writing varied from scene to scene, but it was really just that a certain few actors (those that play Fish Mooney, Ed Nygma, and Harvey Bullock spring to mind) that were able to transcend the material they were working with, while others struggled and some just seemed to give up.
Season one starts off promisingly enough for a superhero themed crime show. The premise is solid - we get to watch how these superheroes and supervillians come to be. And that is really the draw that keeps me watching - the character driven moments where we see Nygma descend into madness, the Penguin rise through the ranks of the underworld, Mooney wrestle to keep control of her little patch of Gotham. The conflict James Gordon faces in the first season - a Lawful Good character up against rampant, insidious, and impossible to root up corruption throughout every level of Gotham's government is genuinely interesting and feels like a relevant emotional thread that keeps you going through all of the schlocky and improbable events. All three seasons seem to have a firm grasp of their season plot arc and tentpole moments, setting up the next season nicely for whatever main villain and evil will be explored, but I feel like the tone of the show has shifted wildly. The show can't decide if it's gritty or campy, whether it's a comic book or a crime procedural. It handwaves technology and superpowers in a way that fails to establish in-world rules or limitations. So every super power is all-powerful until plot convenient. I also just personally hate the third season "blood virus" arc and the non-canonical Mad Hatter who speaks in rhyming couplets.
Speaking of which, I'd love to tell the writers that a mass of contradictory, plot-convenient impulses does not a strong female character make. Barbara Kean's story arc makes absolutely no sense. Lee Thompkins seems only to exist to push Gordon to do things he wouldn't otherwise, and Selina Kyle is easily swapped out with every spunky street urchin ever.
I almost want to be offended that every single queer character is, or ends up being, a baddie, but honestly I think that's probably just because the antagonists are more interesting and fleshed out characters to begin with. Still, there's some serious issues with representation (shocker). The third season introduces a really icky variant of the Born Sexy Yesterday trope (watch the video by the Pop Culture Detective, it's worth it.)
Still, I think the casting is pretty great, acting ability aside. The costuming is good, although everything is hampered by the show's refusal to nail down any sort of time period. The dream sequences in the first two seasons are beautiful. I love Oswald Cobblepot and Ed Nygma, and I'd love to see the actor who plays Bruce Wayne master more than just his admittedly very good "holding back tears" expression.
If you're looking for something campy, if you like your villians and your superheroes, and if you need something to watch while you fold laundry or go to sleep, I would recommend this show. It's a show that thrives on tired old tropes, but it lifts those tropes from its source material, so fans of comics might enjoy it, or might be aggrieved at the retconning of beloved old character's backstories.
Whatever you do, don't call Nymga insane. He's better now. He has a certificate.
Season one starts off promisingly enough for a superhero themed crime show. The premise is solid - we get to watch how these superheroes and supervillians come to be. And that is really the draw that keeps me watching - the character driven moments where we see Nygma descend into madness, the Penguin rise through the ranks of the underworld, Mooney wrestle to keep control of her little patch of Gotham. The conflict James Gordon faces in the first season - a Lawful Good character up against rampant, insidious, and impossible to root up corruption throughout every level of Gotham's government is genuinely interesting and feels like a relevant emotional thread that keeps you going through all of the schlocky and improbable events. All three seasons seem to have a firm grasp of their season plot arc and tentpole moments, setting up the next season nicely for whatever main villain and evil will be explored, but I feel like the tone of the show has shifted wildly. The show can't decide if it's gritty or campy, whether it's a comic book or a crime procedural. It handwaves technology and superpowers in a way that fails to establish in-world rules or limitations. So every super power is all-powerful until plot convenient. I also just personally hate the third season "blood virus" arc and the non-canonical Mad Hatter who speaks in rhyming couplets.
Speaking of which, I'd love to tell the writers that a mass of contradictory, plot-convenient impulses does not a strong female character make. Barbara Kean's story arc makes absolutely no sense. Lee Thompkins seems only to exist to push Gordon to do things he wouldn't otherwise, and Selina Kyle is easily swapped out with every spunky street urchin ever.
I almost want to be offended that every single queer character is, or ends up being, a baddie, but honestly I think that's probably just because the antagonists are more interesting and fleshed out characters to begin with. Still, there's some serious issues with representation (shocker). The third season introduces a really icky variant of the Born Sexy Yesterday trope (watch the video by the Pop Culture Detective, it's worth it.)
Still, I think the casting is pretty great, acting ability aside. The costuming is good, although everything is hampered by the show's refusal to nail down any sort of time period. The dream sequences in the first two seasons are beautiful. I love Oswald Cobblepot and Ed Nygma, and I'd love to see the actor who plays Bruce Wayne master more than just his admittedly very good "holding back tears" expression.
If you're looking for something campy, if you like your villians and your superheroes, and if you need something to watch while you fold laundry or go to sleep, I would recommend this show. It's a show that thrives on tired old tropes, but it lifts those tropes from its source material, so fans of comics might enjoy it, or might be aggrieved at the retconning of beloved old character's backstories.
Whatever you do, don't call Nymga insane. He's better now. He has a certificate.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated First Man (2018) in Movies
Oct 13, 2018
GREAT, Visceral Space Scenes - Boring, Soap-Opera-ish Earth Scenes
Get to the largest screen you can find with the best sound system and check out FIRST MAN. The visceral spectacle of space travel is expertly captured and needs to be seen on the BIG screen while your chair vibrates from the sound. You, the audience, fwill eel like you are in the spaceship with Neil Armstrong on his way to the moon.
Too bad the Earth-bound moments of this film don't go to the same heights.
Directed by Damien Chazelle in his follow-up to his Oscar winning Directorial stint with LA LA LAND, FIRST MAN tells the story of Neil Armstrong in the 1960s, going from test pilot to the First Man who stepped foot on the moon.
As I stated earlier, the times that we are in the space capsule, or flight plane or test simulator with Armstrong are a visceral experience not to be missed. Chazelle puts his camera close in, often times seeing what Armstrong is seeing - most of that time with loud, shimming and shaking noises and shimming and shaking cameras that left me wonder how these Pioneers of Space Flight ever made it to the Moon and back safely. These scenes - and especially the last 1/2 hour of the film when Armstrong & Co. go to the moon - are worth the price of admission alone. Add on top of that a driving, visceral (there's that word again) score by Chazelle's musical collaborator Justin Hurwitz (Oscar winner for the music for LA LA LAND) and your heart will be thumping loudly in your chest during these exhilarating scenes.
And that is good, for Chazelle and screenwriter Josh Singer (SPOTLIGHT) try to squeeze in a Soap-Opera-esque plot and motivation for Armstrong throughout this film that just didn't work for me. They tried too hard to give Armstrong some "personal" motivations for being stoic, pragmatic and driven to his vision.
As for the acting, Ryan Gosling is...well...stoic, pragmatic and driven to his vision as Armstrong. Do you see that look on Gosling/Armstrong's face in the picture that is accompanying this review? You get that 90% of the time with him. Most of the other actors - Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, Pablo Schreiber, Ethan Embry, Lukas Haas - all give the same stoic, pragmatic performance, so there is no real personality here. Even the great Ciaran Hinds - who normally can chew scenery with the best of them - was toned way down to stoic, pragmatic proportions.
This made the performance of Corey Stoll as Buzz Aldrin all the more jarring for he bursts into this film at about the halfway point, cracking jokes and having a personality. Unfortunately, this was annoying at this point, rather than refreshing and I ended up thinking what a jerk Aldrin is.
Add to that Claire Foy (THE CROWN) as Armstrong's wife who has a constant pained expression on her face. She will get an Oscar nomination, for she had the big "Oscars" speech as the worried wife and mother - a speech where Gosling/Armstrong looked at her pragmatically and with solid stoicism.
Fortunately, what saves this movie is that these Earth-bound scenes of fairly boring people in cliched situations are quickly wiped away with awe-inspiring action pieces - they really are worth the price of admission - even the higher price you will need to pay to see it in IMAX with a kick-butt sound system.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars - have I mentioned how great the space scenes in this film are?
And you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Too bad the Earth-bound moments of this film don't go to the same heights.
Directed by Damien Chazelle in his follow-up to his Oscar winning Directorial stint with LA LA LAND, FIRST MAN tells the story of Neil Armstrong in the 1960s, going from test pilot to the First Man who stepped foot on the moon.
As I stated earlier, the times that we are in the space capsule, or flight plane or test simulator with Armstrong are a visceral experience not to be missed. Chazelle puts his camera close in, often times seeing what Armstrong is seeing - most of that time with loud, shimming and shaking noises and shimming and shaking cameras that left me wonder how these Pioneers of Space Flight ever made it to the Moon and back safely. These scenes - and especially the last 1/2 hour of the film when Armstrong & Co. go to the moon - are worth the price of admission alone. Add on top of that a driving, visceral (there's that word again) score by Chazelle's musical collaborator Justin Hurwitz (Oscar winner for the music for LA LA LAND) and your heart will be thumping loudly in your chest during these exhilarating scenes.
And that is good, for Chazelle and screenwriter Josh Singer (SPOTLIGHT) try to squeeze in a Soap-Opera-esque plot and motivation for Armstrong throughout this film that just didn't work for me. They tried too hard to give Armstrong some "personal" motivations for being stoic, pragmatic and driven to his vision.
As for the acting, Ryan Gosling is...well...stoic, pragmatic and driven to his vision as Armstrong. Do you see that look on Gosling/Armstrong's face in the picture that is accompanying this review? You get that 90% of the time with him. Most of the other actors - Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, Pablo Schreiber, Ethan Embry, Lukas Haas - all give the same stoic, pragmatic performance, so there is no real personality here. Even the great Ciaran Hinds - who normally can chew scenery with the best of them - was toned way down to stoic, pragmatic proportions.
This made the performance of Corey Stoll as Buzz Aldrin all the more jarring for he bursts into this film at about the halfway point, cracking jokes and having a personality. Unfortunately, this was annoying at this point, rather than refreshing and I ended up thinking what a jerk Aldrin is.
Add to that Claire Foy (THE CROWN) as Armstrong's wife who has a constant pained expression on her face. She will get an Oscar nomination, for she had the big "Oscars" speech as the worried wife and mother - a speech where Gosling/Armstrong looked at her pragmatically and with solid stoicism.
Fortunately, what saves this movie is that these Earth-bound scenes of fairly boring people in cliched situations are quickly wiped away with awe-inspiring action pieces - they really are worth the price of admission - even the higher price you will need to pay to see it in IMAX with a kick-butt sound system.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars - have I mentioned how great the space scenes in this film are?
And you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Terminator Genisys (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The Terminator franchise has been as relentless and unstoppable as the series namesake. The first two films written and directed by James Cameron are cinematic icons and made many of the ten best lists when they were released.
The subsequent two films that lacked any input from Cameron and as such paled in comparison with the most recent, “Terminator Salvation” failing to achieve the success of the previous films in the series.
Undaunted, the series is back with “Terminator Genisys”, the first in a planned trilogy before the rights to the series revert back to James Cameron.
The new film shows parts of the final battle by the human resistance as they finally defeat the deadly Skynet system but as fans of the series know, learn that a Terminator was sent back to stop humanities savior John Connor (Jason Clarke), from being born.
As fans known, loyal soldier Kyle Reese (jai Courtney) volunteers to travel back to 1984 to save Sara Connor (Emilia Clarke) and preserve the future but upon his arrival in 1984, Reese learns that the mission he has been sent on has changed.
Someone has sent a Terminator back to protect a younger Sarah when she was a child and as such, this Sara is not the naïve waitress Reese had been expecting, rather she is a battle hardened and strong willed woman with a Terminator protector she named “Pops” played by series icon Arnold Schwarzenegger.
This is where any similarities to the original films end as what initially sets up to be moments from the first two films revisited in a new timeline quickly changes and moves to 2017 where Sara, Reese, and Pops, learn that Skynet is about to go live and accomplish the start of Judgement Day which puts the heroes in a race against time and overwhelming odds to save humanity.
This time however there are several new wrinkles to the mix as well as some epic action sequences that have been sorely missing from the series since Cameron’s departure. The 3D effects are solid but note that they are converted from a 2D source and the film was not shot with 3D cameras.
What really worked well for me was the fact that the film is very respectful to the source material and while telling a new chapter to the story does not do much to undermine the impact and the legacy of the first two films. It was reported that James Cameron himself has endorsed this film and had called it the third film in the series.
The action is solid from an epic bus chase to intense firefights across the timelines the film grabs your attention the way the best summer films do and takes you on an epic thrill ride. Action and effects aside, what really makes the film work is the cast. The characters are strong and well portrayed and mix humanity, empathy, and self-sacrifice in the manner to which the characters have been established.
Reese and Sara are strong and determined and in a twist, have a more complicated relationship in this timeline than had been previously established. Of course the star of the film is Schwarzenegger and he knows this character inside and out. From the stoic and intense action sequences to the rivalry and distrust he and Reese share which grows into a solid respect. Arnold knows what audiences want and delivers it again and again. Despite the years, he still remains the backbone of the series and it is great to see him back in form.
While some may have issues with a rebooted timeline to propel future films, there were enough great moments in the film and plenty of entertainments for me not only to recommend the film, but to say bring on the next chapter.
http://sknr.net/2015/07/01/terminator-genisys/
The subsequent two films that lacked any input from Cameron and as such paled in comparison with the most recent, “Terminator Salvation” failing to achieve the success of the previous films in the series.
Undaunted, the series is back with “Terminator Genisys”, the first in a planned trilogy before the rights to the series revert back to James Cameron.
The new film shows parts of the final battle by the human resistance as they finally defeat the deadly Skynet system but as fans of the series know, learn that a Terminator was sent back to stop humanities savior John Connor (Jason Clarke), from being born.
As fans known, loyal soldier Kyle Reese (jai Courtney) volunteers to travel back to 1984 to save Sara Connor (Emilia Clarke) and preserve the future but upon his arrival in 1984, Reese learns that the mission he has been sent on has changed.
Someone has sent a Terminator back to protect a younger Sarah when she was a child and as such, this Sara is not the naïve waitress Reese had been expecting, rather she is a battle hardened and strong willed woman with a Terminator protector she named “Pops” played by series icon Arnold Schwarzenegger.
This is where any similarities to the original films end as what initially sets up to be moments from the first two films revisited in a new timeline quickly changes and moves to 2017 where Sara, Reese, and Pops, learn that Skynet is about to go live and accomplish the start of Judgement Day which puts the heroes in a race against time and overwhelming odds to save humanity.
This time however there are several new wrinkles to the mix as well as some epic action sequences that have been sorely missing from the series since Cameron’s departure. The 3D effects are solid but note that they are converted from a 2D source and the film was not shot with 3D cameras.
What really worked well for me was the fact that the film is very respectful to the source material and while telling a new chapter to the story does not do much to undermine the impact and the legacy of the first two films. It was reported that James Cameron himself has endorsed this film and had called it the third film in the series.
The action is solid from an epic bus chase to intense firefights across the timelines the film grabs your attention the way the best summer films do and takes you on an epic thrill ride. Action and effects aside, what really makes the film work is the cast. The characters are strong and well portrayed and mix humanity, empathy, and self-sacrifice in the manner to which the characters have been established.
Reese and Sara are strong and determined and in a twist, have a more complicated relationship in this timeline than had been previously established. Of course the star of the film is Schwarzenegger and he knows this character inside and out. From the stoic and intense action sequences to the rivalry and distrust he and Reese share which grows into a solid respect. Arnold knows what audiences want and delivers it again and again. Despite the years, he still remains the backbone of the series and it is great to see him back in form.
While some may have issues with a rebooted timeline to propel future films, there were enough great moments in the film and plenty of entertainments for me not only to recommend the film, but to say bring on the next chapter.
http://sknr.net/2015/07/01/terminator-genisys/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Burning Dead (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
So, If you’re on the east coast you’re no doubt experiencing the unusually harsh ‘arctic waves’. If you’re on the west coast you have to deal with the unseasonably warm weather.
Whether it’s trying to stay warm and keep the fires burning or finding the shade and a cool beverage, either you or someone you know is going to bring up the following idea ‘ … B-Movie Horror Marathon’.
Today we’ve got a prime candidate for just such a marathon. ‘The Burning Dead’ staring the legendary Danny Trejo! Now, When I describe a B-movie of the horror genre, I’m not talking about legendary franchises like ‘Friday The 13th’ or ‘Nightmare On Elm Street’. No no no no no. I’m talking about a movie worthy of getting critiqued by the original crew of ‘Mystery Science Theater 3000’. Something like an episode of the ‘Buffy The Vampire Slayer’ T.V. show minus the awesome cast, a smaller budget, questionable computer-generated special effects, and no Joss Whedon at the helm. This movie isn’t without merit though. I mean c’mon. It’s got Danny Trejo in it so it definitely deserves a shot right?!
‘The Burning Dead’ stars Danny Trejo, Thomas Downey, Adam Gregor, Nicole Cummins, Moniqua Plante, Julia Lehman, Robert F. Lyons, Kyle T. Heffner, Kevin Norman, and Jenny Lin.
Our story opens with the Native American warrior Night Wolf (Trejo) and several members
of his family gathered around the campfire as he begins to share the tale the infamous ‘Donner Party’ and the madness that engulfed the early settlers was caused by an evil spirit that resided in the nearby mountain after defeating a ‘good spirit’ many years early. Fast forward to present day, Sheriff Denton is supervising the evacuation of a town in the shadow of the mountain after it begins to show signs of an impending eruption. Little do he and the townspeople know that
there will not only be a volcanic eruption, but the evil spirit residing within will unleash a horde of flesh-eating zombies that spit hot lava and ravage everything in their path!
Yeah yeah. I little too dramatic I know. I gotta give it some credit though. The actors and actresses do give a great performance under the circumstances attempting to be as serious as possible and the ‘lava zombie’ effects are quite well done considering. When the zombies ‘go to work’ there’s a definite ick factor too. Certainly not ‘Walking Dead’ gross but they get the point across. The soundtrack is almost annoying though as its the same track or variations of on a loop over and over again. I think from time to time, the writers may have consulted the ‘scary movie’ handbook because at one point, they do throw in hot chic who randomly shows up at the mountain during the evacuation, sets up a camera in front of the volcano and proceeds to strip while the camera is photographing the mountain in auto. We all know what happens to the ‘hot chic’ in a scary flick that strips down to her underwear or more yes? Predictable but mildly entertaining.
Honestly, I was expecting and hoping to see Trejo show up a lot more in the movie and kick some bad guy ass or in this case, some zombie ass. I think how I described it earlier is the best way to sum it up, ‘ It’s like a really bad episode of ‘Buffy The Vampire Slayer ‘ minus the cast and character line up and no Joss Whedon at the helm. I’m giving it 2 out of 5 stars. This one just barely scrapes by. Definitely NOT one for the kids. Don’t waste your money on seeing it in theaters. Take my advice, and add it to the lineup for a B-Movie Horror marathon at home.
Sorry Danny … You just barely saved this one.
Whether it’s trying to stay warm and keep the fires burning or finding the shade and a cool beverage, either you or someone you know is going to bring up the following idea ‘ … B-Movie Horror Marathon’.
Today we’ve got a prime candidate for just such a marathon. ‘The Burning Dead’ staring the legendary Danny Trejo! Now, When I describe a B-movie of the horror genre, I’m not talking about legendary franchises like ‘Friday The 13th’ or ‘Nightmare On Elm Street’. No no no no no. I’m talking about a movie worthy of getting critiqued by the original crew of ‘Mystery Science Theater 3000’. Something like an episode of the ‘Buffy The Vampire Slayer’ T.V. show minus the awesome cast, a smaller budget, questionable computer-generated special effects, and no Joss Whedon at the helm. This movie isn’t without merit though. I mean c’mon. It’s got Danny Trejo in it so it definitely deserves a shot right?!
‘The Burning Dead’ stars Danny Trejo, Thomas Downey, Adam Gregor, Nicole Cummins, Moniqua Plante, Julia Lehman, Robert F. Lyons, Kyle T. Heffner, Kevin Norman, and Jenny Lin.
Our story opens with the Native American warrior Night Wolf (Trejo) and several members
of his family gathered around the campfire as he begins to share the tale the infamous ‘Donner Party’ and the madness that engulfed the early settlers was caused by an evil spirit that resided in the nearby mountain after defeating a ‘good spirit’ many years early. Fast forward to present day, Sheriff Denton is supervising the evacuation of a town in the shadow of the mountain after it begins to show signs of an impending eruption. Little do he and the townspeople know that
there will not only be a volcanic eruption, but the evil spirit residing within will unleash a horde of flesh-eating zombies that spit hot lava and ravage everything in their path!
Yeah yeah. I little too dramatic I know. I gotta give it some credit though. The actors and actresses do give a great performance under the circumstances attempting to be as serious as possible and the ‘lava zombie’ effects are quite well done considering. When the zombies ‘go to work’ there’s a definite ick factor too. Certainly not ‘Walking Dead’ gross but they get the point across. The soundtrack is almost annoying though as its the same track or variations of on a loop over and over again. I think from time to time, the writers may have consulted the ‘scary movie’ handbook because at one point, they do throw in hot chic who randomly shows up at the mountain during the evacuation, sets up a camera in front of the volcano and proceeds to strip while the camera is photographing the mountain in auto. We all know what happens to the ‘hot chic’ in a scary flick that strips down to her underwear or more yes? Predictable but mildly entertaining.
Honestly, I was expecting and hoping to see Trejo show up a lot more in the movie and kick some bad guy ass or in this case, some zombie ass. I think how I described it earlier is the best way to sum it up, ‘ It’s like a really bad episode of ‘Buffy The Vampire Slayer ‘ minus the cast and character line up and no Joss Whedon at the helm. I’m giving it 2 out of 5 stars. This one just barely scrapes by. Definitely NOT one for the kids. Don’t waste your money on seeing it in theaters. Take my advice, and add it to the lineup for a B-Movie Horror marathon at home.
Sorry Danny … You just barely saved this one.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Beautiful Creatures (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Hollywood has seemed to turn to books these days for inspiration to try and bring audiences the latest and greatest to the big screen. Has the industry turned to teen novels to solely follow in the footsteps of the widely known Twilight Saga success to in turn bring more money to the box office? It certainly wouldn’t be a bad idea to do so. With the success of the over saturated archetype of vampires and zombies, the path through the supernatural teen based stories has now led us to witches, or should I say casters. Based on the best selling American young adult series by Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl, Beautiful Creatures is the first novel in the best selling series. The story is based in a small conservative town of Gatlin, South Carolina and is at first about Ethan Wate (Alden Ehrenreich) a seventeen year old young man who lives with his father that is stuck in morning over the death of his wife and the house keeper Amma (Viola Davis) who is also the towns all knowing librarian. Ethan dreams and hopes that one day he will break free of the small town of Gatlin and go to college far away. Lately though, he has been having a recurring dream of a young woman waiting for him on a Civil War battlefield. Every time he is close to reaching her a lightning bolt strikes just like a gunshot and he dies. Thankfully, it is only a dream but he doesn’t seem to be able to think about anything else other than the woman in his dreams and falls in love with this mystery woman, hoping one day he will be united with the girl of his dreams.
With the beginning of the first day of school a newcomer named Lena Duchannes (Alice Englert) seems to be an outcast because of her families history. Capturing the attention of Ethan he becomes more and more intrigued with her, despite the awful things that the other classmates are saying about her. Lena is the niece of Macon Ravenwood (Jeremy Irons), the owner of the one and only mysterious Gothic Ravenwood Manor. Lena has uncontrollable powers proving that some of what her classmates have been saying is true. Lena has until her sixteenth birthday to undergo the Claiming, a process that throughout the years makes a caster go to the light side or the dark side. The film also features an allstar cast such as: Alden Ehrenreich, (“Tetro”), Emmy Rossum, Thomas Mann, Emma Thompson, Rounding out the cast are Eileen Atkins, Margo Martindale, Zoey Deutch, Tiffany Boone, Rachel Brosnahan, Kyle Gallner, Pruitt Taylor Vince and Sam Gilroy.
The film Beautiful Creatures is a supernatural love story with some of the same ideas and themes as most of these supernatural teen movies based off of best selling novels. However, Beautiful Creatures was a refreshing take on the story of two young lovers, one who is human and the other who is a supernatural being. The scenery and use of the deep southern backdrops added to the mystery of the story. I have not read the book though I plan to, I am unable to comment on how close the movie was to the book. The special effects in the film were not overdone or out of place and were appropriate to each specific scene. Some comedic relief is found throughout the film and is not out of place. The flow of the story is also flawless including the music used for the soundtrack.
This film has been rated PG-13 for violence, scary images and some sexual material. I would recommend this to audiences of a variety of ages from young teen to older adult. Yes this film may have some similarities to other teen/supernatural films but all in all it is a film I definitely would recommend to our readers and I can’t wait for the second installment.
With the beginning of the first day of school a newcomer named Lena Duchannes (Alice Englert) seems to be an outcast because of her families history. Capturing the attention of Ethan he becomes more and more intrigued with her, despite the awful things that the other classmates are saying about her. Lena is the niece of Macon Ravenwood (Jeremy Irons), the owner of the one and only mysterious Gothic Ravenwood Manor. Lena has uncontrollable powers proving that some of what her classmates have been saying is true. Lena has until her sixteenth birthday to undergo the Claiming, a process that throughout the years makes a caster go to the light side or the dark side. The film also features an allstar cast such as: Alden Ehrenreich, (“Tetro”), Emmy Rossum, Thomas Mann, Emma Thompson, Rounding out the cast are Eileen Atkins, Margo Martindale, Zoey Deutch, Tiffany Boone, Rachel Brosnahan, Kyle Gallner, Pruitt Taylor Vince and Sam Gilroy.
The film Beautiful Creatures is a supernatural love story with some of the same ideas and themes as most of these supernatural teen movies based off of best selling novels. However, Beautiful Creatures was a refreshing take on the story of two young lovers, one who is human and the other who is a supernatural being. The scenery and use of the deep southern backdrops added to the mystery of the story. I have not read the book though I plan to, I am unable to comment on how close the movie was to the book. The special effects in the film were not overdone or out of place and were appropriate to each specific scene. Some comedic relief is found throughout the film and is not out of place. The flow of the story is also flawless including the music used for the soundtrack.
This film has been rated PG-13 for violence, scary images and some sexual material. I would recommend this to audiences of a variety of ages from young teen to older adult. Yes this film may have some similarities to other teen/supernatural films but all in all it is a film I definitely would recommend to our readers and I can’t wait for the second installment.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Parental Guidance (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
I don’t really know where to start with this review. I guess I’ll start with what I’m expecting to see when I see a preview. I’m really bad at assuming I know what’s going to happen. Sometimes I’m right, happily sometimes I’m wrong, and then there are times, like with this movie, where it’s half and half.
The movie starts out with Artie Decker (Billy Crystal) as ‘de voice’ of his local Grizzlies’ baseball team. He’s really good at commentating and he loves doing it but after the last game of the season he gets fired. It’s predictable why he’s fired, basically he doesn’t poke or tweet, and I think they thought they hit gold with that moment of comedy but for me, eh. When he gets home his wife Diane (Bette Midler) comforts him. He’s lost for a moment since he wasn’t ready to stop but then decides he should chase his dream to commentate for the Giants though he doesn’t know where to start.
We shoot over to Alice Simmons (Marisa Tomei) Artie and Diane’s daughter, and her husband Phil, (Tom Everett Scott) who live in such a modern electronic home that it’s actually all controlled by a beta system called Rlife. Rlife can be programmed for alarm times, music, food, pretty much everything for each family member. This Rlife is Phil’s dream he gets invited to a conference to get his Rlife hopefully in production. Alice is going to with him, kind of a semi work vacation and they need Artie and Diane to watch the kids for a week.
What makes the divide even greater between Alice and her kids from Artie is that Alice and Phil are raising their kids in a new school that is different from Artie’s old school, tough love and strict rules. They use phrases like ‘use your words’ or if you give a ‘put down’ you have to give ‘three ups’ and you can’t use the word ‘no’ you have to say ‘think about the consequences’.
Their oldest, a young teen, is their only daughter Harper, Bailee Madison, who is extremely uptight and carrying the weight of the world on her shoulders. Next we have the two boys, Turner, Joshua Rush, middle schooler, who stutters and is shy because of it, and the youngest Barker, Kyle Harrison Breitkopf, who is basically toddler with lots of energy, but seems to get away with a lot of bad behavior.
Diane realizes that they are the other grand parents, the ones that their grand kids don’t really like. Long story short, it’s supposed to be about being open to new ideas but it just feels like old school versus new school. Billy’s Crystal’s comedy and Bette Middler’s and Marisa Tomei’s acting can pull it out of the boredom for some laughs and good moments and there are a few situational laughs with the children as well, but that’s about it.
The truly redeeming quality to this movie, besides the three main actors is the ending, the last ten minutes. It’s a surprising heartwarming ending, and only slightly predictable. It sounds crazy but it actually brings the whole movie up from a two star to a three star for me. One last thing is that the guest I went with has two children of her own and tried to get me to change my rating from three to four. I really can’t do that but I think that means that if you have children of your own you might enjoy this a little bit more than I did.
Bottom line, renter, unless you love Bily Crystal.
The movie starts out with Artie Decker (Billy Crystal) as ‘de voice’ of his local Grizzlies’ baseball team. He’s really good at commentating and he loves doing it but after the last game of the season he gets fired. It’s predictable why he’s fired, basically he doesn’t poke or tweet, and I think they thought they hit gold with that moment of comedy but for me, eh. When he gets home his wife Diane (Bette Midler) comforts him. He’s lost for a moment since he wasn’t ready to stop but then decides he should chase his dream to commentate for the Giants though he doesn’t know where to start.
We shoot over to Alice Simmons (Marisa Tomei) Artie and Diane’s daughter, and her husband Phil, (Tom Everett Scott) who live in such a modern electronic home that it’s actually all controlled by a beta system called Rlife. Rlife can be programmed for alarm times, music, food, pretty much everything for each family member. This Rlife is Phil’s dream he gets invited to a conference to get his Rlife hopefully in production. Alice is going to with him, kind of a semi work vacation and they need Artie and Diane to watch the kids for a week.
What makes the divide even greater between Alice and her kids from Artie is that Alice and Phil are raising their kids in a new school that is different from Artie’s old school, tough love and strict rules. They use phrases like ‘use your words’ or if you give a ‘put down’ you have to give ‘three ups’ and you can’t use the word ‘no’ you have to say ‘think about the consequences’.
Their oldest, a young teen, is their only daughter Harper, Bailee Madison, who is extremely uptight and carrying the weight of the world on her shoulders. Next we have the two boys, Turner, Joshua Rush, middle schooler, who stutters and is shy because of it, and the youngest Barker, Kyle Harrison Breitkopf, who is basically toddler with lots of energy, but seems to get away with a lot of bad behavior.
Diane realizes that they are the other grand parents, the ones that their grand kids don’t really like. Long story short, it’s supposed to be about being open to new ideas but it just feels like old school versus new school. Billy’s Crystal’s comedy and Bette Middler’s and Marisa Tomei’s acting can pull it out of the boredom for some laughs and good moments and there are a few situational laughs with the children as well, but that’s about it.
The truly redeeming quality to this movie, besides the three main actors is the ending, the last ten minutes. It’s a surprising heartwarming ending, and only slightly predictable. It sounds crazy but it actually brings the whole movie up from a two star to a three star for me. One last thing is that the guest I went with has two children of her own and tried to get me to change my rating from three to four. I really can’t do that but I think that means that if you have children of your own you might enjoy this a little bit more than I did.
Bottom line, renter, unless you love Bily Crystal.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Godzilla vs. Kong (2021) in Movies
Apr 29, 2021
Monsters! Yay! Small screen... booooooo!
Godzilla and Kong come head to head in a vicious battle as the humans embark on a mission to discover the ultimate power source.
I won't harp on this point too much because we're nearly at the point where I won't have to... hopefully... but this needs the big screen. You need that experience to get the full effect.
Monsters fight... do we need any story? I didn't. Which is just as well because I wouldn't be able to tell you what specifically happened apart from what I wrote in the synopsis.
You could have had this film without the humans, or as a human focus film with the monsters just lurking in the background of the whole thing. (Though I don't think anyone would care about the latter.) The monsters could easily have done a film without the humans, there's only actually one point where they're needed, and that was quite frankly dubious.
Let's talk about those humans, but where to start? The film needed to commit to either being a companion to the last film or being a new film in the franchise. So far all the others have been quite independent of each other in comparison. It may not be a popular opinion, but I would have opted for a new film... and that means no Millie Bobby Brown and no Kyle Chandler (who was quite frankly underused anyway).
My definite highlight was Brian Tyree Henry in his role as the conspiracy podcaster, and I really enjoyed that whole thread. But it definitely could have been switched up a bit and resulted in a much more believable discovery sequence in the plot. That was quite a big thing in the film, when giant monster events are more believable than human ones, you need to rethink what you're doing.
As much as I love Alexander Skarsgård, I cannot tell you much of anything about his role. He's usually always an enjoyable actor, but even that couldn't save this bland character. So much so, that when I listened to a podcast on this film and they mentioned him, I went "oh yeah, he was in it".
My main take away was that most characters had very little development, and I know I was there for the monsters, but the humans needed to not be throwaways for the amount of time they spent on screen.
I'm not going to go into the effects, they were great, and I loved them just as much as in King of the Monsters. The colours were amazing.
I'm very pleased I didn't spot spoilers for the film before seeing it. The reveals were well done and I enjoyed some of the moments that came from them, but it leads me to something I've been pondering...
This sequence of films feels wrong, Had Godzilla vs. Kong been before King of the Monsters then you'd have been presented with the perfect way to introduce more creatures, but the character dynamics would not have been right with that shuffle. There are so many possibilities, that going over them would take way too long.
For a title that highlights Godzilla before Kong, it's oddly weighted, Kong is a much bigger feature than G-zee is. He gets his own personality and a bit more heart, and it was nice to see him become a new person... ape... giant fuzzball. I can't help but be a little sad that one of his moments from the original wasn't duplicated in all its glory here.
Overall it's a fun creature feature and the action is epic as expected, with some twists thrown in if you managed to avoid the spoilers. While I really do love moments from Godzilla vs. Kong, I'm not sure it's better than KotM, but it's well worth the watch either way.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/04/godzilla-vs-kong-movie-review.html
Godzilla and Kong come head to head in a vicious battle as the humans embark on a mission to discover the ultimate power source.
I won't harp on this point too much because we're nearly at the point where I won't have to... hopefully... but this needs the big screen. You need that experience to get the full effect.
Monsters fight... do we need any story? I didn't. Which is just as well because I wouldn't be able to tell you what specifically happened apart from what I wrote in the synopsis.
You could have had this film without the humans, or as a human focus film with the monsters just lurking in the background of the whole thing. (Though I don't think anyone would care about the latter.) The monsters could easily have done a film without the humans, there's only actually one point where they're needed, and that was quite frankly dubious.
Let's talk about those humans, but where to start? The film needed to commit to either being a companion to the last film or being a new film in the franchise. So far all the others have been quite independent of each other in comparison. It may not be a popular opinion, but I would have opted for a new film... and that means no Millie Bobby Brown and no Kyle Chandler (who was quite frankly underused anyway).
My definite highlight was Brian Tyree Henry in his role as the conspiracy podcaster, and I really enjoyed that whole thread. But it definitely could have been switched up a bit and resulted in a much more believable discovery sequence in the plot. That was quite a big thing in the film, when giant monster events are more believable than human ones, you need to rethink what you're doing.
As much as I love Alexander Skarsgård, I cannot tell you much of anything about his role. He's usually always an enjoyable actor, but even that couldn't save this bland character. So much so, that when I listened to a podcast on this film and they mentioned him, I went "oh yeah, he was in it".
My main take away was that most characters had very little development, and I know I was there for the monsters, but the humans needed to not be throwaways for the amount of time they spent on screen.
I'm not going to go into the effects, they were great, and I loved them just as much as in King of the Monsters. The colours were amazing.
I'm very pleased I didn't spot spoilers for the film before seeing it. The reveals were well done and I enjoyed some of the moments that came from them, but it leads me to something I've been pondering...
This sequence of films feels wrong, Had Godzilla vs. Kong been before King of the Monsters then you'd have been presented with the perfect way to introduce more creatures, but the character dynamics would not have been right with that shuffle. There are so many possibilities, that going over them would take way too long.
For a title that highlights Godzilla before Kong, it's oddly weighted, Kong is a much bigger feature than G-zee is. He gets his own personality and a bit more heart, and it was nice to see him become a new person... ape... giant fuzzball. I can't help but be a little sad that one of his moments from the original wasn't duplicated in all its glory here.
Overall it's a fun creature feature and the action is epic as expected, with some twists thrown in if you managed to avoid the spoilers. While I really do love moments from Godzilla vs. Kong, I'm not sure it's better than KotM, but it's well worth the watch either way.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/04/godzilla-vs-kong-movie-review.html