Search
Rickey A. Mossow Jr. (689 KP) rated Child's Play (2019) in Movies
Sep 14, 2019
A good modernization of the cult classic killer doll film.
As a man in my 30s, I grew up on the original Child's Play and the sequels that followed. So, I was half excited and half worried when this reboot/remake was announced. So many attempts by Hollywood to bring back beloved and cult classics have failed miserably and ruined the magic of the originals. Through the first 20 or so minutes of this one, I was worried this one would fall into this category. And while I wasn't completely thrilled with the film's liberties taken with the doll's origin story, it was easy to set aside due to some decent storytelling. You get to know Chucky in these scenes and a basis for his later acts is laid. You feel for him, and you laugh (a thing done often in the Child's Play canon.) Then, the 2nd and 3rd acts of the film ramp up and continue to build in an understandable, graphic gorefest with a horror plot to keep you riveted. Although I am a purist and would have preferred they stick closer to the original, I thoroughly enjoyed this modernization of the killer doll tale. (But I'll never forget Charles Lee Ray or the chant of dooey de dim bella, give me the power I beg of you!)
Wade-O Radio Weekly Podcast
Podcast
The Wade-O Radio Show is an international, terrestrial, Internet radio show, and podcast that...
The Many Lives of Miss K: Toto Koopman - Model, Muse, Spy
Jean-Noel Liaut and Denise Jacobs
Book
A life of glamour and tragedy, set against the watershed cultural and political movements of...
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Curse of Chucky (2013) in Movies
Dec 6, 2019
A horror franchise this many movies in should be on its arse at this point, but the Child's Play series still manages to be entertaining with it's sixth entry.
After the silliness if Bride and Seed, Curse of Chucky steps back in to horror territory a bit more.
The majority of the film takes place in a creepy old house, as Chucky stalks an entirely new set of victims.
The characters this time around aren't hugely likable, except for Nica (played by Fiona Dourif, Brad Dourif's daughter). Not only is she likable and realistic final girl type, but she pretty badass as well. She is also wheelchair bound, which is a refreshing direction to take in this kind of film, and her disability adds a whole new dynamic to the Chucky series and just makes her more badass.
The plot itself is straightforward slasher material, but the last 20 minutes or so, really hammer home the movies connections to the original film, and the rest of the series. The ret con of Charles Lee Ray's origins and work a treat, and learning about more about him is an unexpected highlight.
The Chucky doll this time around looks weird. Really unsettling actually. There's a semi twist halfway through that actually has something to do with the way Chucky looks, and he's still pretty horrible looking.
The effects are mostly passable - there's a kill quite early on involving a car, that boasts some genuinely impressive practical effects, but it does mean towards CGI after that. Not always a bad thing mind, but there's one shit in particular of Chucky walking down a staircase... It's could have been so so good, but the obvious CGI is horrible...bleughh.
Other than that though, Don Mancini throws some decent camera work at us (the title card is an early highlight) and he successfully makes Curse of Chucky into a decent little horror movie.
After the silliness if Bride and Seed, Curse of Chucky steps back in to horror territory a bit more.
The majority of the film takes place in a creepy old house, as Chucky stalks an entirely new set of victims.
The characters this time around aren't hugely likable, except for Nica (played by Fiona Dourif, Brad Dourif's daughter). Not only is she likable and realistic final girl type, but she pretty badass as well. She is also wheelchair bound, which is a refreshing direction to take in this kind of film, and her disability adds a whole new dynamic to the Chucky series and just makes her more badass.
The plot itself is straightforward slasher material, but the last 20 minutes or so, really hammer home the movies connections to the original film, and the rest of the series. The ret con of Charles Lee Ray's origins and work a treat, and learning about more about him is an unexpected highlight.
The Chucky doll this time around looks weird. Really unsettling actually. There's a semi twist halfway through that actually has something to do with the way Chucky looks, and he's still pretty horrible looking.
The effects are mostly passable - there's a kill quite early on involving a car, that boasts some genuinely impressive practical effects, but it does mean towards CGI after that. Not always a bad thing mind, but there's one shit in particular of Chucky walking down a staircase... It's could have been so so good, but the obvious CGI is horrible...bleughh.
Other than that though, Don Mancini throws some decent camera work at us (the title card is an early highlight) and he successfully makes Curse of Chucky into a decent little horror movie.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated A Fish Called Wanda (1988) in Movies
Jul 2, 2020
A Jolly Good Time
A member of my family mentioned when discussing the 1988 John Cleese comedy A FISH CALLED WANDA that you can tell much about a person over what part of this film that you like the most. Do you like:
a). The John Cleese/Jamie Lee Curtis love story
b). The "caper"
c). The beleaguered, unsuccessful hit-man Ken
d). The old lady and her 3 dogs
e). Kevin Kline as Otto
For me, that's easy - ALL OF IT! I find that A FISH CALLED WANDA is a very funny, richly acted comedy/caper that brings forth 4 characters that are easy to spend 2 hours with. Starting with John Cleese as Barrister Archie Leach. Cleese conceived, wrote, starred-in and (at times) directed this film and his "British humor" (honed from years as a member of the MONTY PYTHON comedy troupe) is in full force here. He has a reserved appearance about him that covers a wild man underneath yearning to break free.
Jamie Lee Curtis is quite good as the center of the film, Wanda Gershwitz, a cunning conman who will stop at nothing - and step over everyone - to get what she wants. I find that Curtis is under-rated as an actress and a comedienne and this picture shows that she can hold her own against 3 comedy greats at the top of their game.
The 2nd member of the Monty Python troupe to appear in this film is the remarkable Michael Palin as hapless hit-man, Ken. He becomes increasingly frustrated and frantic -and increasingly funny - as he attempts to complete his assignment throughout the course of this film.
But...the real star of this film...and the actor/character that steals the film away from everyone else...is Kevin Kline's Oscar winning performance as Otto, Wanda's erstwhile love who has a very high opinion of himself. It is rare that a comedic performance wins an Oscar - Kline's win is the the last one to do so - but it is easy to see why the Academy decided to reward Kline for it is a committed performance that is wild, wacky and over-the-top, but not overtly so. Kline has been very good in many other pictures/performances before and after this film, but he never reached the height that he reached in this film.
The film has veteran director Charles Crichton listed as Director with Cleese listed as co-Director (though Cleese insisted that Crichton did all the work and he only put his name on it to assuage the fears of studio executives over Crichton's advanced age). Well...Crichton does a wonderful job of letting the lunacy explode on the scene while keeping a lid on it and moving the action along at a brisk pace.
Wanda is one of those films that people remember fondly, but do not revisit. I would highly recommend you do, it's a jolly good time.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
a). The John Cleese/Jamie Lee Curtis love story
b). The "caper"
c). The beleaguered, unsuccessful hit-man Ken
d). The old lady and her 3 dogs
e). Kevin Kline as Otto
For me, that's easy - ALL OF IT! I find that A FISH CALLED WANDA is a very funny, richly acted comedy/caper that brings forth 4 characters that are easy to spend 2 hours with. Starting with John Cleese as Barrister Archie Leach. Cleese conceived, wrote, starred-in and (at times) directed this film and his "British humor" (honed from years as a member of the MONTY PYTHON comedy troupe) is in full force here. He has a reserved appearance about him that covers a wild man underneath yearning to break free.
Jamie Lee Curtis is quite good as the center of the film, Wanda Gershwitz, a cunning conman who will stop at nothing - and step over everyone - to get what she wants. I find that Curtis is under-rated as an actress and a comedienne and this picture shows that she can hold her own against 3 comedy greats at the top of their game.
The 2nd member of the Monty Python troupe to appear in this film is the remarkable Michael Palin as hapless hit-man, Ken. He becomes increasingly frustrated and frantic -and increasingly funny - as he attempts to complete his assignment throughout the course of this film.
But...the real star of this film...and the actor/character that steals the film away from everyone else...is Kevin Kline's Oscar winning performance as Otto, Wanda's erstwhile love who has a very high opinion of himself. It is rare that a comedic performance wins an Oscar - Kline's win is the the last one to do so - but it is easy to see why the Academy decided to reward Kline for it is a committed performance that is wild, wacky and over-the-top, but not overtly so. Kline has been very good in many other pictures/performances before and after this film, but he never reached the height that he reached in this film.
The film has veteran director Charles Crichton listed as Director with Cleese listed as co-Director (though Cleese insisted that Crichton did all the work and he only put his name on it to assuage the fears of studio executives over Crichton's advanced age). Well...Crichton does a wonderful job of letting the lunacy explode on the scene while keeping a lid on it and moving the action along at a brisk pace.
Wanda is one of those films that people remember fondly, but do not revisit. I would highly recommend you do, it's a jolly good time.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
Tarantino makes good movies, I like them, but I don't love them. When everyone was raving about the OUATIH trailer I was sitting back going "that looks okay, but..." I wasn't sure I could see how they were going to mix the two strands of the story together, or why. After seeing it I'm still not sure.
I'm not going to do an extended synopsis for this, partly because I'm not sure what the point was to a lot of it. 2 hours and 41 minutes is a lot of time to fill with such random stuff. There are essentially to films here, and I definitely would have wanted to watch one of them. It doesn't matter how many times I think about this film, I can't make sense of why these stories were put together.
There's a lot of acting talent in this, obviously. I'm not a particular fan of DiCaprio, I can't give you a real reason behind that. I don't mind some of his older films but recently nothing has really caught my eye. He has some excellent moments in this though. I particularly liked the scene where he's on set explaining the story of his novel to his young co-star. The audience and Rick are able to reach the realisation at the same time, it's a moving moment that was annoyingly ruined for me by Trudi's lines afterwards. I guess it does reflect the way Hollywood is though so in that respect it was spot on.
Brad Pitt swooped in and stole the show though. There's a very laid back and sometimes cheeky sense to Cliff, and most of his scenes had me engaged with what was going on. The only thing I would say though is that occasionally you just see Brad Pitt and other characters he's portrayed in this performance. He really does have a strong presence though and apart from those small blips he was by far the best performance of the film and my favourite scenes were his fight with Bruce Lee and the last ten minutes. Both of these were done so well and Pitt's reactions were perfect.
The cast has a lot of bit parters in it, I'm never quite sure what gets something classed as a cameo over a "proper" role. As we're in Hollywood there are obviously a lot of Hollywood stars making appearances and they've all got really strong casting behind them, but they barely get any screen time. We get some Sharon Tate background from Steve McQueen (Damien Lewis) at a party, later on we have Bruce Lee appear for the onset fight scene, there are a lot of faces popping up everywhere.
I briefly want to mention Bruce Lee in this film, since seeing the film I read a couple of pieces about his portrayal in this... I know nothing about him as a person beyond his martial arts skills and while I did find the Lee/Booth fight scene amusing I thought it was a little... off? Lee comes across as a bit of an arse, there's no denying that. Like I said, I know nothing about him, this could be a true depiction but I feel like I would have heard that before if he was. Regardless of the truth, the character didn't come across well, he could easily have been given a slightly cocky demeanour to allow for the challenge to happen without giving him that persona.
I haven't got enough time to talk about every actor in the film but there wasn't anyone who stuck out as being bad, every role was handled reasonably well. Whether they all needed to be there though is another matter.
Earlier I mentioned that the film has two story threads, those being Rick Dalton/Cliff Booth and Sharon Tate. We get the odd crossover moment with the two but ultimately there's no proper link until the end. One of the problems going into the film is that if you don't know anything about Sharon Tate and Charles Manson then one of these storylines isn't going to make a great deal of sense. I'd be interested to see how people going in without that knowledge found the story overall, there have to be some out there right?
OUATIH almost seems like an introduction to Manson being in Mindhunter season 2, you've even got potential crossover as he's played by the same guy. I found the Manson inclusion to be very misleading in the advertising. His appearance is beyond brief in the final cut and it felt like we were due a lot more after watching the trailer. I think I would have preferred the movie if it was weighted the other way with the Tate/Manson side as the focus and the Dalton/Booth side at the add on.
Despite Pitt's performance, the great setting and some other small highlight this film just didn't hit the right notes for me. It was so long, I could have forgiven that had there been a more complex link between the two bits of story. I went in with low expectations and when I came out those were only just met.
If you're considering leaving partway through this there are three reasons that you should stick it out.
- Brad Pitt as Cliff Booth
- Booth's dog
- The last ten minutes (give or take)
The 18 certificate is there for "strong bloody violence", somehow the large amount of drug use doesn't warrant inclusion on the card. Up until around the 2 hour 30 minutes mark this film is a 15. You've had drugs, language and some fights, but nothing that matches up to those last few minutes. They earn that 18 certificate... and it's hilarious. Cliff and his dog are epic and it was worth the rest of the film just to see that, there's some terrible (ridiculous) acting in it that potentially it could have done without but at least I came out slightly less annoyed.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/once-upon-time-in-hollywood-movie-review.html
I'm not going to do an extended synopsis for this, partly because I'm not sure what the point was to a lot of it. 2 hours and 41 minutes is a lot of time to fill with such random stuff. There are essentially to films here, and I definitely would have wanted to watch one of them. It doesn't matter how many times I think about this film, I can't make sense of why these stories were put together.
There's a lot of acting talent in this, obviously. I'm not a particular fan of DiCaprio, I can't give you a real reason behind that. I don't mind some of his older films but recently nothing has really caught my eye. He has some excellent moments in this though. I particularly liked the scene where he's on set explaining the story of his novel to his young co-star. The audience and Rick are able to reach the realisation at the same time, it's a moving moment that was annoyingly ruined for me by Trudi's lines afterwards. I guess it does reflect the way Hollywood is though so in that respect it was spot on.
Brad Pitt swooped in and stole the show though. There's a very laid back and sometimes cheeky sense to Cliff, and most of his scenes had me engaged with what was going on. The only thing I would say though is that occasionally you just see Brad Pitt and other characters he's portrayed in this performance. He really does have a strong presence though and apart from those small blips he was by far the best performance of the film and my favourite scenes were his fight with Bruce Lee and the last ten minutes. Both of these were done so well and Pitt's reactions were perfect.
The cast has a lot of bit parters in it, I'm never quite sure what gets something classed as a cameo over a "proper" role. As we're in Hollywood there are obviously a lot of Hollywood stars making appearances and they've all got really strong casting behind them, but they barely get any screen time. We get some Sharon Tate background from Steve McQueen (Damien Lewis) at a party, later on we have Bruce Lee appear for the onset fight scene, there are a lot of faces popping up everywhere.
I briefly want to mention Bruce Lee in this film, since seeing the film I read a couple of pieces about his portrayal in this... I know nothing about him as a person beyond his martial arts skills and while I did find the Lee/Booth fight scene amusing I thought it was a little... off? Lee comes across as a bit of an arse, there's no denying that. Like I said, I know nothing about him, this could be a true depiction but I feel like I would have heard that before if he was. Regardless of the truth, the character didn't come across well, he could easily have been given a slightly cocky demeanour to allow for the challenge to happen without giving him that persona.
I haven't got enough time to talk about every actor in the film but there wasn't anyone who stuck out as being bad, every role was handled reasonably well. Whether they all needed to be there though is another matter.
Earlier I mentioned that the film has two story threads, those being Rick Dalton/Cliff Booth and Sharon Tate. We get the odd crossover moment with the two but ultimately there's no proper link until the end. One of the problems going into the film is that if you don't know anything about Sharon Tate and Charles Manson then one of these storylines isn't going to make a great deal of sense. I'd be interested to see how people going in without that knowledge found the story overall, there have to be some out there right?
OUATIH almost seems like an introduction to Manson being in Mindhunter season 2, you've even got potential crossover as he's played by the same guy. I found the Manson inclusion to be very misleading in the advertising. His appearance is beyond brief in the final cut and it felt like we were due a lot more after watching the trailer. I think I would have preferred the movie if it was weighted the other way with the Tate/Manson side as the focus and the Dalton/Booth side at the add on.
Despite Pitt's performance, the great setting and some other small highlight this film just didn't hit the right notes for me. It was so long, I could have forgiven that had there been a more complex link between the two bits of story. I went in with low expectations and when I came out those were only just met.
If you're considering leaving partway through this there are three reasons that you should stick it out.
- Brad Pitt as Cliff Booth
- Booth's dog
- The last ten minutes (give or take)
The 18 certificate is there for "strong bloody violence", somehow the large amount of drug use doesn't warrant inclusion on the card. Up until around the 2 hour 30 minutes mark this film is a 15. You've had drugs, language and some fights, but nothing that matches up to those last few minutes. They earn that 18 certificate... and it's hilarious. Cliff and his dog are epic and it was worth the rest of the film just to see that, there's some terrible (ridiculous) acting in it that potentially it could have done without but at least I came out slightly less annoyed.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/once-upon-time-in-hollywood-movie-review.html
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Child's Play (1988) in Movies
Nov 13, 2019
Good Guy Doll
Childs Play- after the remake that came out early this year, i finally watched this one. Yes the remake was the first chucky movie that i watched, i wasnt really that intresting in the child's play franchise and still really not that intresting in it. But i wanted to watch the oringal one, i wanted to know where it all started from and what a start in a good way. This movie started Brad Drouif's iconic voice as chucky and went on to voice Chucky in the sequels followed. Also Chris Sarandon who started in Fright Night two years before star in this and Tom Holland, no not that one. The one who directed Fright Night directed this one. So lets talk about it...
The Plot: Gunned down by Detective Mike Norris (Chris Sarandon), dying murderer Charles Lee Ray (Brad Dourif) uses black magic to put his soul inside a doll named Chucky -- which Karen Barclay (Catherine Hicks) then buys for her young son, Andy (Alex Vincent). When Chucky kills Andy's baby sitter, the boy realizes the doll is alive and tries to warn people, but he's institutionalized. Now Karen must convince the detective of the murderous doll's intentions, before Andy becomes Chucky's next victim.
Their are so many iconic scenes and iconic lines in this movie, that people remember till this day. Lines like...
"Well John it's been fun, but i gotta go, i have a date with a 6 year-old boy. ..."
"I bled and it hurt like a son of a bitch."
"We're friends 'til the end, remember?"
"This is the end, friend."
"Andy remember, friends stick together till the end".
"Hi, I'm Chucky wanna play?"
"I said talk to me, damn it. Or else I'll throw you in the fire."
"You stupid bitch! You filthy slut! I'll teach you to fuck with me!"
So many iconic lines and scenes, Child's play is a iconic late 80's horror movie that had many sequels afterwards.
If you havent seen child's play, than i highly recordmend watching this film.
The Plot: Gunned down by Detective Mike Norris (Chris Sarandon), dying murderer Charles Lee Ray (Brad Dourif) uses black magic to put his soul inside a doll named Chucky -- which Karen Barclay (Catherine Hicks) then buys for her young son, Andy (Alex Vincent). When Chucky kills Andy's baby sitter, the boy realizes the doll is alive and tries to warn people, but he's institutionalized. Now Karen must convince the detective of the murderous doll's intentions, before Andy becomes Chucky's next victim.
Their are so many iconic scenes and iconic lines in this movie, that people remember till this day. Lines like...
"Well John it's been fun, but i gotta go, i have a date with a 6 year-old boy. ..."
"I bled and it hurt like a son of a bitch."
"We're friends 'til the end, remember?"
"This is the end, friend."
"Andy remember, friends stick together till the end".
"Hi, I'm Chucky wanna play?"
"I said talk to me, damn it. Or else I'll throw you in the fire."
"You stupid bitch! You filthy slut! I'll teach you to fuck with me!"
So many iconic lines and scenes, Child's play is a iconic late 80's horror movie that had many sequels afterwards.
If you havent seen child's play, than i highly recordmend watching this film.
Zones of Control: Perspectives on Wargaming
Matthew G. Kirschenbaum, Pat Harrigan and James F. Dunnigan
Book
Games with military themes date back to antiquity, and yet they are curiously neglected in much of...