Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Dumbo (2019) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Tim Burton and the flying elephant
If you had told me 15 years ago that Tim Burton would be directing a live-action adaptation of Disney’s classic, Dumbo I would’ve been overwhelmed with excitement. The director, famed for his unique sense of gothic style and visual flair has directed some of the best films ever made.
Edward Scissorhands, Sleepy Hollow and Beetlejuice are just a few classics on a resume populated by cracking movies. However, over the last decade Burton has become a director that has focused on style over substance. Charlie & the Chocolate Factory was a pale imitation of the original and his live-action remake of Alice in Wonderland was successful but hollow.
Therefore, we arrive in 2019 with a slight sense of apprehension. Dumbo is a classic Disney cartoon and there’s a risk of a little too much Burton for the little elephant’s good. But is that fear unfounded?
Struggling circus owner Max Medici (Danny DeVito) enlists a former star (Colin Farrell) and his two children to care for Dumbo, a baby elephant born with oversized ears. When the family discovers that the animal can fly, it soon becomes the main attraction – bringing in huge audiences and revitalising the run-down circus. The elephant’s magical ability also draws the attention of V.A. Vandevere (Michael Keaton), an entrepreneur who wants to showcase Dumbo in his latest, larger-than-life entertainment venture.
Updating Dumbo for the modern age was always going to be a difficult task. At just over an hour long and with some shall we say, less than PC story elements, the original needed some serious padding and editing to turn it into a fully-fledged feature film and while there are moments of brilliance here, Dumbo suffers from a disjointed and overthought script, flat characters and you guessed it, too much Burton.
We’ll start with the good. Dumbo is a beautiful film, filled to the brim with striking imagery that harks back to some of Burton’s previous work. The cinematography is absolutely astounding with stunning sunsets and vivid colours populating the screen at all points during the 112-minute running time. The opening in particular, a hark back to the original in which a train crosses a map of the US is inspired and nicely filmed.
For the most part though, Dumbo pushes the limits of visual effects to the point where everything feels far too artificial. The baby elephant himself is on the whole very good, and as adorable as you would expect, but there are moments dotted throughout the film that suffer from the limitations of CGI. A scene in which Dumbo gets a bath is terrifying. In fact, there are multiple sequences towards the finale in which the CGI is so poor that it looks like something out of a second generation video game.
Dumbo is a beautiful film, filled to the brim with striking imagery that harks back to some of Burton’s previous work
Elsewhere, the cast is by far the film’s weakest element. Colin Farrell is a disappointingly forgettable and miscast lead. Arriving home after losing his arm in the war, Farrell’s Holt is completely flat, not helped by some poor acting from the usually dependable star. Michael Keaton doesn’t get to do much apart from smile menacingly and Danny DeVito hams it up to 11 as struggling circus-owner Max Medici; oh dear.
There are some positives cast-wise however: Nico Parker as Milly Farrier, Holt’s curious science-minded daughter, is very good, even if the script beats you around the head with the fact that she’s an intelligent girl who wants more out of her life, but this is brought right back down to earth by Eva Green’s horrific French accent.
Then there’s Burton himself. While the shots of Dumbo circling the circus tent in the air are breath-taking, and scenes of the pachyderm covered in clown make-up as he’s abused for profit are as heart-breaking as they are in the original, they’re ruined by unusual story-telling choices. As the film steamrolls to its climax set in a theme-park that’s a third Scooby Doo, a third Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory and a third Jurassic Park, Burton piles on his usual tropes far too thick – it just doesn’t fit with the tale of the magical flying elephant.
Some of the more touching elements are handled well however. Dumbo’s separation from his mother is devastating and he feels like a real personality throughout the entire film, but for a film titled Dumbo, it needs more Dumbo!
Overall, Dumbo is a perfectly enjoyable adventure ride that’s spoilt by Burton’s once trademark filming style and a roster of flat and forgettable characters. With the boundaries of CGI being pushed to the max here, some of the film feels a little unfinished and as such, this live-action adaptation is a touch disappointing. One can only wonder what this film would have been like with a different director at the helm.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/03/30/dumbo-review-tim-burton-and-the-flying-elephant/
Edward Scissorhands, Sleepy Hollow and Beetlejuice are just a few classics on a resume populated by cracking movies. However, over the last decade Burton has become a director that has focused on style over substance. Charlie & the Chocolate Factory was a pale imitation of the original and his live-action remake of Alice in Wonderland was successful but hollow.
Therefore, we arrive in 2019 with a slight sense of apprehension. Dumbo is a classic Disney cartoon and there’s a risk of a little too much Burton for the little elephant’s good. But is that fear unfounded?
Struggling circus owner Max Medici (Danny DeVito) enlists a former star (Colin Farrell) and his two children to care for Dumbo, a baby elephant born with oversized ears. When the family discovers that the animal can fly, it soon becomes the main attraction – bringing in huge audiences and revitalising the run-down circus. The elephant’s magical ability also draws the attention of V.A. Vandevere (Michael Keaton), an entrepreneur who wants to showcase Dumbo in his latest, larger-than-life entertainment venture.
Updating Dumbo for the modern age was always going to be a difficult task. At just over an hour long and with some shall we say, less than PC story elements, the original needed some serious padding and editing to turn it into a fully-fledged feature film and while there are moments of brilliance here, Dumbo suffers from a disjointed and overthought script, flat characters and you guessed it, too much Burton.
We’ll start with the good. Dumbo is a beautiful film, filled to the brim with striking imagery that harks back to some of Burton’s previous work. The cinematography is absolutely astounding with stunning sunsets and vivid colours populating the screen at all points during the 112-minute running time. The opening in particular, a hark back to the original in which a train crosses a map of the US is inspired and nicely filmed.
For the most part though, Dumbo pushes the limits of visual effects to the point where everything feels far too artificial. The baby elephant himself is on the whole very good, and as adorable as you would expect, but there are moments dotted throughout the film that suffer from the limitations of CGI. A scene in which Dumbo gets a bath is terrifying. In fact, there are multiple sequences towards the finale in which the CGI is so poor that it looks like something out of a second generation video game.
Dumbo is a beautiful film, filled to the brim with striking imagery that harks back to some of Burton’s previous work
Elsewhere, the cast is by far the film’s weakest element. Colin Farrell is a disappointingly forgettable and miscast lead. Arriving home after losing his arm in the war, Farrell’s Holt is completely flat, not helped by some poor acting from the usually dependable star. Michael Keaton doesn’t get to do much apart from smile menacingly and Danny DeVito hams it up to 11 as struggling circus-owner Max Medici; oh dear.
There are some positives cast-wise however: Nico Parker as Milly Farrier, Holt’s curious science-minded daughter, is very good, even if the script beats you around the head with the fact that she’s an intelligent girl who wants more out of her life, but this is brought right back down to earth by Eva Green’s horrific French accent.
Then there’s Burton himself. While the shots of Dumbo circling the circus tent in the air are breath-taking, and scenes of the pachyderm covered in clown make-up as he’s abused for profit are as heart-breaking as they are in the original, they’re ruined by unusual story-telling choices. As the film steamrolls to its climax set in a theme-park that’s a third Scooby Doo, a third Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory and a third Jurassic Park, Burton piles on his usual tropes far too thick – it just doesn’t fit with the tale of the magical flying elephant.
Some of the more touching elements are handled well however. Dumbo’s separation from his mother is devastating and he feels like a real personality throughout the entire film, but for a film titled Dumbo, it needs more Dumbo!
Overall, Dumbo is a perfectly enjoyable adventure ride that’s spoilt by Burton’s once trademark filming style and a roster of flat and forgettable characters. With the boundaries of CGI being pushed to the max here, some of the film feels a little unfinished and as such, this live-action adaptation is a touch disappointing. One can only wonder what this film would have been like with a different director at the helm.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/03/30/dumbo-review-tim-burton-and-the-flying-elephant/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Far Cry (2008) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
On a remote island in the Pacific Northwest, a scientist named Dr. Krieger (Udo Kier) is conducting horrific genetic experiments in his secret facility.
Krieger is attempting to create the ultimate soldier for his financial backers and is not above using his own men as test subjects and fodder for his experiments as the morally lacking Krieger only cares about his work and his funding.
In the film “Far Cry”, Director Uwe Boll has taken the classic 3D shooter from Ubisoft and given it his own unique interpretation.
The film stars Til Schweiger as Jack Carver, a former special forces operative who spends his days as a boat captain chartering tourists on whale watching expeditions when he is not enjoying a beer and sleeping the day away.
Jack is hired by a determined investigative reporter named Valerie Cardinal (Emmanuelle Vaugier), to take her to the island so she can get further proof for her story about the bizarre experiments taking place on the island. Valerie has a personal interest in the story as her uncle Max (Ralf Moeller), is one of those stationed at the island facility.
While Jack is reluctant to go near the island he does agree to anchor of the coast and pick up Valerie in a few hours. Of course things do not go as planned as Valerie is captured and Jack’s boat is destroyed leaving him believed to be dead by the Doctor and his forces.
Jack is not one to let this go, and rescues Valerie and looks to find a way off the island while avoiding the ever present troops. The stubborn Valerie is unwilling to leave until she has the information she needs for her story and ignores the dangers.
As if the Doctor and his soldiers were not trouble enough, the super soldiers have escaped and have caused various factions within the Dr’s forces to turn against one another which results in a pitched battle between the factions and the super soldiers.
What follows is a lot of action that is hampered by a weak plot and bad dialogue, and sadly very disappointing monsters.
The leads in the film have very little chemistry with one another and the characters are wafer thin, even by action movie standards. There are attempts at romance and playful banter that fizzle badly leaving only the action sequences to carry the film. Sadly while they are decent enough, especially a good car chase, they cannot overcome the plot issues and the creatures that do not live up to the hype.
Boll has taken a step back here as his recent films have shown progress especially the solid
“Seed” and “1968 Tunnel Rats”. When I visited the set I learned that the production was not allowed to use large aspects of the game and that aside from names, title, and settings, they had to create a new story that was inspired by the game. While the effort is there, the results come up lacking and do not do justice to the game, premise, or talent assembled.
Krieger is attempting to create the ultimate soldier for his financial backers and is not above using his own men as test subjects and fodder for his experiments as the morally lacking Krieger only cares about his work and his funding.
In the film “Far Cry”, Director Uwe Boll has taken the classic 3D shooter from Ubisoft and given it his own unique interpretation.
The film stars Til Schweiger as Jack Carver, a former special forces operative who spends his days as a boat captain chartering tourists on whale watching expeditions when he is not enjoying a beer and sleeping the day away.
Jack is hired by a determined investigative reporter named Valerie Cardinal (Emmanuelle Vaugier), to take her to the island so she can get further proof for her story about the bizarre experiments taking place on the island. Valerie has a personal interest in the story as her uncle Max (Ralf Moeller), is one of those stationed at the island facility.
While Jack is reluctant to go near the island he does agree to anchor of the coast and pick up Valerie in a few hours. Of course things do not go as planned as Valerie is captured and Jack’s boat is destroyed leaving him believed to be dead by the Doctor and his forces.
Jack is not one to let this go, and rescues Valerie and looks to find a way off the island while avoiding the ever present troops. The stubborn Valerie is unwilling to leave until she has the information she needs for her story and ignores the dangers.
As if the Doctor and his soldiers were not trouble enough, the super soldiers have escaped and have caused various factions within the Dr’s forces to turn against one another which results in a pitched battle between the factions and the super soldiers.
What follows is a lot of action that is hampered by a weak plot and bad dialogue, and sadly very disappointing monsters.
The leads in the film have very little chemistry with one another and the characters are wafer thin, even by action movie standards. There are attempts at romance and playful banter that fizzle badly leaving only the action sequences to carry the film. Sadly while they are decent enough, especially a good car chase, they cannot overcome the plot issues and the creatures that do not live up to the hype.
Boll has taken a step back here as his recent films have shown progress especially the solid
“Seed” and “1968 Tunnel Rats”. When I visited the set I learned that the production was not allowed to use large aspects of the game and that aside from names, title, and settings, they had to create a new story that was inspired by the game. While the effort is there, the results come up lacking and do not do justice to the game, premise, or talent assembled.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Pokémon: Detective Pikachu (2019) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Detective Pikachu is the long awaited live action movie of the beloved video game and animated tv show franchise. The video game has sold over 1.31 billion units, so this movie has a very established fan base that is excited for new content, but also critical when new product doesn’t meet their expectations.
Video game movies in general are typically VERY bad. So bad that any time I hear they are making a movie out of a video game I immediately cringe out of reflex. I’ve been permanently scarred by the likes of Tekken, Super Mario Bros and Mortal Kombat. When Tomb Raider is your benchmark for the best of the best you have reason to be afraid when they say that Detective Pikachu is coming to theaters.
But fear not! This movie is not perfect but it does entertain!
Detective Pikachu is played by the voice of Ryan Reynolds, which in case you didn’t know Pokemon typically do not talk, so this is unusual right off the bat. Pokemon basically just repeat their name over and over again with different voice inflections in order to convey mood or urgency. It’s not as annoying as it sounds; it’s typically adorable actually. Reynolds does an excellent PG impersonation of Deadpool as Pikachu in a comedic role as detective Pikachu and it works surprisingly well. His comic timing is so perfect and the jokes don’t come off as childish or boorish, it really flows and works perfectly in the movie.
Justice Smith plays the lead character role of Tim Goodman who is trying to solve the murder of his estranged father. Justice Smith is very likable and you root for him to beat the bad guy and get the girl (played by Kathryn Newton), which is all you really need in a summer action movie; you need to want the hero or heroine to win. Justice Smith does a great job and I could see them building a franchise around his character going forward.
The visuals are fantastic! Its great seeing the characters from the video game walking around full size like that on the big screen and they did not just do a few, the movie is crawling with them and I loved that.
The story is fairly standard and does follow a formula but it moves along at a good pace and at 1 hour and 44 minutes long it feels like it’s not too long or too short. There are jokes that only the adults will get, there are game characters that only hardcore fans will recognize, but this movie was made for as wide an audience as a video game movie could be. They were trying to make it accessible to all, and I think they accomplished that.
It’s a big budget buddy cop popcorn movie with a lot of action, some laughs, a very light and fluffy kid friendly side love story and great special effects. There was a plot hole or two but it was forgivable and too entertaining to ruin it. I highly recommend turning off your brain, grabbing some popcorn and just enjoying this movie. Not perfect, but very good and fun!
Video game movies in general are typically VERY bad. So bad that any time I hear they are making a movie out of a video game I immediately cringe out of reflex. I’ve been permanently scarred by the likes of Tekken, Super Mario Bros and Mortal Kombat. When Tomb Raider is your benchmark for the best of the best you have reason to be afraid when they say that Detective Pikachu is coming to theaters.
But fear not! This movie is not perfect but it does entertain!
Detective Pikachu is played by the voice of Ryan Reynolds, which in case you didn’t know Pokemon typically do not talk, so this is unusual right off the bat. Pokemon basically just repeat their name over and over again with different voice inflections in order to convey mood or urgency. It’s not as annoying as it sounds; it’s typically adorable actually. Reynolds does an excellent PG impersonation of Deadpool as Pikachu in a comedic role as detective Pikachu and it works surprisingly well. His comic timing is so perfect and the jokes don’t come off as childish or boorish, it really flows and works perfectly in the movie.
Justice Smith plays the lead character role of Tim Goodman who is trying to solve the murder of his estranged father. Justice Smith is very likable and you root for him to beat the bad guy and get the girl (played by Kathryn Newton), which is all you really need in a summer action movie; you need to want the hero or heroine to win. Justice Smith does a great job and I could see them building a franchise around his character going forward.
The visuals are fantastic! Its great seeing the characters from the video game walking around full size like that on the big screen and they did not just do a few, the movie is crawling with them and I loved that.
The story is fairly standard and does follow a formula but it moves along at a good pace and at 1 hour and 44 minutes long it feels like it’s not too long or too short. There are jokes that only the adults will get, there are game characters that only hardcore fans will recognize, but this movie was made for as wide an audience as a video game movie could be. They were trying to make it accessible to all, and I think they accomplished that.
It’s a big budget buddy cop popcorn movie with a lot of action, some laughs, a very light and fluffy kid friendly side love story and great special effects. There was a plot hole or two but it was forgivable and too entertaining to ruin it. I highly recommend turning off your brain, grabbing some popcorn and just enjoying this movie. Not perfect, but very good and fun!
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Christopher Robin (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
A Future Classic
The characters of Pooh, Eeyore, Piglet and Tigger are synonymous with the childhood of millions of adults across the globe. A.A. Milne’s classic creatures are etched into the memories of many, passed down through generations with tatty old story books and stuffed animals.
Their film history is a little more chequered. True box-office domination has eluded the little critters, until now at least. Rolling off the success of Paddington and its arguably even better sequel, Disney gets in on the action, the live-action that is, and brings Pooh and co to life in Christopher Robin. But does it work?
Christopher Robin (Ewan McGregor) – now a family man living in London – receives a surprise visit from his old childhood pal, Winnie-the-Pooh. With Christopher’s help, Pooh embarks on a journey to find his friends — Tigger, Eeyore, Owl, Piglet, Rabbit, Kanga and Roo. Once reunited, the lovable bear and the gang travel to London to help Christopher rediscover the joy of life.
With Marc Forster’s name attached to directing duties, you’d be forgiven for thinking he’d been hired simply to get the job done. After all, this is the same Marc Forster that brought us the perfectly adequate Quantum of Solace and the enjoyable if undistinguished World War Z. These aren’t the directing credits you’d expect when looking at a film involving a honey-loving bear in a red jumper.
Nevertheless, Forster proves us wrong. Christopher Robin is a sumptuous tale, beautifully realised with a script that makes us stop and look at the little things in life. Much like the film itself as it happens. Ewan McGregor was the ideal choice to play a world-weary Robin. At the brink of exhaustion and close to losing the truly important things in life – his wife (Hayley Atwell) and daughter (Bronte Carmichael), McGregor plays the part beautifully. Watching his inner-child slowly but surely rise to the surface is wonderful to see.
Elsewhere, the entire cast of voices used to bring our cuddly cast to life are absolutely spot on. Jim Cummings’ return as Pooh and Tigger brings a warm familiarity to proceedings and this was a nice touch by Disney to have him back behind the microphone. Toby Jones and former Doctor Who Peter Capaldi are also great as Owl and Rabbit respectively. Brad Garrett’s turn as Eeyore really couldn’t be more perfect.
Christopher Robin…is sure to be a future classic that can be passed down for generations
To look at, Christopher Robin really is sublime. The spectacular Sussex countryside is brought to life in the Hundred Acre Wood and the post-war setting of London lives and breathes right before your eyes. This is a film that draws you in as the script moves our cast from 1940s London, rich with smoke and smog, to lush countryside, heavy with dew and dripping in colour.
The CGI to bring Pooh, Piglet, Eeyore, Tigger, Kanga, Roo, Owl and Rabbit to life is nothing short of astounding. The way their fur moves in the wind feels so real and it is this depth that proves to be the film’s strongest suit. Using Disney’s seemingly unending source of funds, Marc Foster and his team have managed to create something truly astonishing.
Above all though, this is a film about the importance of family, and on that level it succeeds, and then some. While brief, the moments in which we see McGregor and his family spending time together, with Pooh and company in tow, are Christopher Robin’s most poignant. In typical Disney fashion, the film tugs on the heartstrings on more than one occasion, just enough to wipe away a solitary tear, but not enough to dig out the Kleenex.
Christopher Robin is another success for Disney’s live-action arm. With understated performances, very much similar to 2016’s remake of Pete’s Dragon, the House of Mouse has achieved something rather extraordinary. Yes, they’ve brought these wonderful characters back to life, but in a way that honours the books and stuffed animals we will have all grown up with. Unlike this year’s Peter Rabbit that destroyed the legacy of a much-loved literary character, Christopher Robin builds on that and is sure to be a future classic that can be passed down for generations.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/08/18/christopher-robin-review-a-future-classic/
Their film history is a little more chequered. True box-office domination has eluded the little critters, until now at least. Rolling off the success of Paddington and its arguably even better sequel, Disney gets in on the action, the live-action that is, and brings Pooh and co to life in Christopher Robin. But does it work?
Christopher Robin (Ewan McGregor) – now a family man living in London – receives a surprise visit from his old childhood pal, Winnie-the-Pooh. With Christopher’s help, Pooh embarks on a journey to find his friends — Tigger, Eeyore, Owl, Piglet, Rabbit, Kanga and Roo. Once reunited, the lovable bear and the gang travel to London to help Christopher rediscover the joy of life.
With Marc Forster’s name attached to directing duties, you’d be forgiven for thinking he’d been hired simply to get the job done. After all, this is the same Marc Forster that brought us the perfectly adequate Quantum of Solace and the enjoyable if undistinguished World War Z. These aren’t the directing credits you’d expect when looking at a film involving a honey-loving bear in a red jumper.
Nevertheless, Forster proves us wrong. Christopher Robin is a sumptuous tale, beautifully realised with a script that makes us stop and look at the little things in life. Much like the film itself as it happens. Ewan McGregor was the ideal choice to play a world-weary Robin. At the brink of exhaustion and close to losing the truly important things in life – his wife (Hayley Atwell) and daughter (Bronte Carmichael), McGregor plays the part beautifully. Watching his inner-child slowly but surely rise to the surface is wonderful to see.
Elsewhere, the entire cast of voices used to bring our cuddly cast to life are absolutely spot on. Jim Cummings’ return as Pooh and Tigger brings a warm familiarity to proceedings and this was a nice touch by Disney to have him back behind the microphone. Toby Jones and former Doctor Who Peter Capaldi are also great as Owl and Rabbit respectively. Brad Garrett’s turn as Eeyore really couldn’t be more perfect.
Christopher Robin…is sure to be a future classic that can be passed down for generations
To look at, Christopher Robin really is sublime. The spectacular Sussex countryside is brought to life in the Hundred Acre Wood and the post-war setting of London lives and breathes right before your eyes. This is a film that draws you in as the script moves our cast from 1940s London, rich with smoke and smog, to lush countryside, heavy with dew and dripping in colour.
The CGI to bring Pooh, Piglet, Eeyore, Tigger, Kanga, Roo, Owl and Rabbit to life is nothing short of astounding. The way their fur moves in the wind feels so real and it is this depth that proves to be the film’s strongest suit. Using Disney’s seemingly unending source of funds, Marc Foster and his team have managed to create something truly astonishing.
Above all though, this is a film about the importance of family, and on that level it succeeds, and then some. While brief, the moments in which we see McGregor and his family spending time together, with Pooh and company in tow, are Christopher Robin’s most poignant. In typical Disney fashion, the film tugs on the heartstrings on more than one occasion, just enough to wipe away a solitary tear, but not enough to dig out the Kleenex.
Christopher Robin is another success for Disney’s live-action arm. With understated performances, very much similar to 2016’s remake of Pete’s Dragon, the House of Mouse has achieved something rather extraordinary. Yes, they’ve brought these wonderful characters back to life, but in a way that honours the books and stuffed animals we will have all grown up with. Unlike this year’s Peter Rabbit that destroyed the legacy of a much-loved literary character, Christopher Robin builds on that and is sure to be a future classic that can be passed down for generations.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/08/18/christopher-robin-review-a-future-classic/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Cinderella (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Sickly Sweet
Taking a look through Disney’s back catalogue of animation is like a lesson in film history. From Snow White to Bambi and The Lion King to The Princess & the Frog, there’s something in there for everyone to enjoy.
However, the studio has in recent times, taken to reimagining its classics as live-action adaptations with last year’s Maleficent starting a generation that will include Beauty & the Beast and a Tim Burton directed Dumbo. The latest offering is Cinderella, but does it hold a candle to its animated counterpart?
The plot of Cinderella needs no introduction, the classic tale of rags to riches and love conquering all doesn’t need an update and director Kenneth Branagh (Thor, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit) is just the man for the job.
Following the story of young Ella as she comes to terms with the loss of her parents and the arrival of her overbearing step-cinderella_poster_a_psisters and step-mother, Cinderella is a wonderfully acted and beautifully realised film that borders on a little syrupy at times.
Downton Abbey’s Lily James takes on the title role with a brilliant Cate Blanchett giving her all as Ella’s wicked step-mother. Helena Bonham Carter also stars as Ella’s fairy godmother and brings her usual brand of crazy to the character.
What sets this adaptation apart from Angelina Jolie’s Maleficent is its stunning visuals. Where Maleficent was beautiful in its own way and suited the film’s dark tone, here Kenneth Branagh throws every colour on the spectrum at the screen in breath-taking fashion.
The outfits are to die for and the locations are an explosion of bright colours and textures that are juxtaposed exceptionally with the dark, damp quarters our princess is confined to.
Elsewhere, the performances are, on the whole, sublime. James is good in the titular role but the plodding script lets her down. She comes across, as awful as this sounds, a little idiotic and lacks the charming spirit of her animated counterpart. The same can be said for her prince, played by Richard Madden – though this could be down to the story rushing their love somewhat.
By far the standout is Cate Blanchett, who is truly mesmerising as stepmother Lady Tremaine. Her brash and ridiculously over-the-top performance suits the pantomime feel of the production down to the ground. Unfortunately, her evil is heavily restrained by the film’s U certification, even more so when compared alongside the 1950 film.
Nevertheless, the visuals are simply stunning. Everything from the palace to Ella’s iconic ball gown and all of it in between is nearly flawless with only a few lapses in cartoonish CGI letting things down – though this can be forgiven with the film’s pantomime-esque nature.
Overall, this live-action reimagining of the 1950s classic musical does not in any way attempt to better its predecessor. Instead it wishes to sit alongside it as the studio tries to pave the way for a whole new generation of children to fall in love with Disney’s princesses once again.
Only a few lapses in CGI, a plodding script and a sickly sweet tone stop it from being enjoyable for everyone in the family, instead of just the kids.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/31/sickly-sweet-cinderella-review/
However, the studio has in recent times, taken to reimagining its classics as live-action adaptations with last year’s Maleficent starting a generation that will include Beauty & the Beast and a Tim Burton directed Dumbo. The latest offering is Cinderella, but does it hold a candle to its animated counterpart?
The plot of Cinderella needs no introduction, the classic tale of rags to riches and love conquering all doesn’t need an update and director Kenneth Branagh (Thor, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit) is just the man for the job.
Following the story of young Ella as she comes to terms with the loss of her parents and the arrival of her overbearing step-cinderella_poster_a_psisters and step-mother, Cinderella is a wonderfully acted and beautifully realised film that borders on a little syrupy at times.
Downton Abbey’s Lily James takes on the title role with a brilliant Cate Blanchett giving her all as Ella’s wicked step-mother. Helena Bonham Carter also stars as Ella’s fairy godmother and brings her usual brand of crazy to the character.
What sets this adaptation apart from Angelina Jolie’s Maleficent is its stunning visuals. Where Maleficent was beautiful in its own way and suited the film’s dark tone, here Kenneth Branagh throws every colour on the spectrum at the screen in breath-taking fashion.
The outfits are to die for and the locations are an explosion of bright colours and textures that are juxtaposed exceptionally with the dark, damp quarters our princess is confined to.
Elsewhere, the performances are, on the whole, sublime. James is good in the titular role but the plodding script lets her down. She comes across, as awful as this sounds, a little idiotic and lacks the charming spirit of her animated counterpart. The same can be said for her prince, played by Richard Madden – though this could be down to the story rushing their love somewhat.
By far the standout is Cate Blanchett, who is truly mesmerising as stepmother Lady Tremaine. Her brash and ridiculously over-the-top performance suits the pantomime feel of the production down to the ground. Unfortunately, her evil is heavily restrained by the film’s U certification, even more so when compared alongside the 1950 film.
Nevertheless, the visuals are simply stunning. Everything from the palace to Ella’s iconic ball gown and all of it in between is nearly flawless with only a few lapses in cartoonish CGI letting things down – though this can be forgiven with the film’s pantomime-esque nature.
Overall, this live-action reimagining of the 1950s classic musical does not in any way attempt to better its predecessor. Instead it wishes to sit alongside it as the studio tries to pave the way for a whole new generation of children to fall in love with Disney’s princesses once again.
Only a few lapses in CGI, a plodding script and a sickly sweet tone stop it from being enjoyable for everyone in the family, instead of just the kids.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/31/sickly-sweet-cinderella-review/
Lee (2222 KP) rated Zombieland: Double Tap (2019) in Movies
Oct 22, 2019
Not quite as good as the original
It's been 10 years since we last saw Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) and our TV and movie screens have since become even more saturated with zombie content. It's something which even gets acknowledged by Columbus during his opening narration to Zombieland: Double Tap as he thanks the audience for choosing this movie, now that there are "many choices in zombie entertainment."
The opening narration also hilariously introduces us to some of the specific variations of zombies currently being encountered - the Homer, the Hawking and the Ninja - before continuing the comic book violence that we know and love from the first movie. A hugely entertaining slo-mo zombie battle on the overgrown grounds in front of The White House while the opening credits roll. But after that, the foursome setup residence in the presidential home, making good use of the space available and even celebrating Christmas there (even though it's only November!).
Little has changed in the group dynamic, other than the fact that Little Rock is now all grown up, something which forms the basis for the main plot of the movie. Columbus and Wichita are struggling to settle into a routine as a couple, and Tallahassee serves only as an overbearing father figure to Little Rock. Tiring of this setup, and longing for friends her own age, Little Rock runs away with a peace loving boy called Berkeley, to a place called Bablyon, home to a community of pacifists where weapons are not allowed. The others, fearing for her safety, set out on a road trip to go find her.
Something about the humour of Double Tap doesn't seem to work as well as it did in the first movie and much of the bickering and interaction between this makeshift family doesn't feel quite as enjoyable this time around. The constant onscreen reminders of 'the rules' that the group live by becomes tiresome at times and it's therefore up to a number of new characters that the guys meet along the way to try and inject something fresh into it all.
First up is Madison (Zoey Deutch), a young woman that Columbus and Tallahassee meet at a mall early on. Madison is a typical ditzy blonde cliché, forming the butt of many of the jokes, but still managing to be endearing and a lot of fun. Then there's Nevada (Rosario Dawson), along with Tallahassee and Columbus meeting up with their doppelgängers Albuquerque (Luke Wilson) and Flagstaff (Thomas Middleditch). If you've seen the trailer then that manages to cover off a lot of these character meetings and interactions, along with a number of plot beats too unfortunately.
What the trailer doesn't show you though are the hugely satisfying, big action set-pieces, which manage to come along just at the right time in order to inject some serious entertainment into the flagging dialogue. Aside from the slo-mo opening battle that I've already mentioned, there's a wildly fun slapstick zombie fight in an Elvis themed motel and a finale that's packed full of zombie carnage. Not to mention a lengthy credits scene which starts off well, and just keeps on getting better! And the introduction of a more difficult to kill strain of zombie only adds to the fun too.
Overall, Double Tap doesn't quite live up to its predecessor. It's a fun ride though, still boasting some of the best zombie killing action out there, but ultimately doesn't leave much of a lasting impression.
The opening narration also hilariously introduces us to some of the specific variations of zombies currently being encountered - the Homer, the Hawking and the Ninja - before continuing the comic book violence that we know and love from the first movie. A hugely entertaining slo-mo zombie battle on the overgrown grounds in front of The White House while the opening credits roll. But after that, the foursome setup residence in the presidential home, making good use of the space available and even celebrating Christmas there (even though it's only November!).
Little has changed in the group dynamic, other than the fact that Little Rock is now all grown up, something which forms the basis for the main plot of the movie. Columbus and Wichita are struggling to settle into a routine as a couple, and Tallahassee serves only as an overbearing father figure to Little Rock. Tiring of this setup, and longing for friends her own age, Little Rock runs away with a peace loving boy called Berkeley, to a place called Bablyon, home to a community of pacifists where weapons are not allowed. The others, fearing for her safety, set out on a road trip to go find her.
Something about the humour of Double Tap doesn't seem to work as well as it did in the first movie and much of the bickering and interaction between this makeshift family doesn't feel quite as enjoyable this time around. The constant onscreen reminders of 'the rules' that the group live by becomes tiresome at times and it's therefore up to a number of new characters that the guys meet along the way to try and inject something fresh into it all.
First up is Madison (Zoey Deutch), a young woman that Columbus and Tallahassee meet at a mall early on. Madison is a typical ditzy blonde cliché, forming the butt of many of the jokes, but still managing to be endearing and a lot of fun. Then there's Nevada (Rosario Dawson), along with Tallahassee and Columbus meeting up with their doppelgängers Albuquerque (Luke Wilson) and Flagstaff (Thomas Middleditch). If you've seen the trailer then that manages to cover off a lot of these character meetings and interactions, along with a number of plot beats too unfortunately.
What the trailer doesn't show you though are the hugely satisfying, big action set-pieces, which manage to come along just at the right time in order to inject some serious entertainment into the flagging dialogue. Aside from the slo-mo opening battle that I've already mentioned, there's a wildly fun slapstick zombie fight in an Elvis themed motel and a finale that's packed full of zombie carnage. Not to mention a lengthy credits scene which starts off well, and just keeps on getting better! And the introduction of a more difficult to kill strain of zombie only adds to the fun too.
Overall, Double Tap doesn't quite live up to its predecessor. It's a fun ride though, still boasting some of the best zombie killing action out there, but ultimately doesn't leave much of a lasting impression.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Aladdin (2019) in Movies
Jan 28, 2020
Pleasantly Surprising
As I've mentioned before, I grew up during the 90s, and therefore, the Disney movies I have the fondest memories of run between Beauty & the Beast and Mulan. The original Aladdin's release in 1992 places it firmly it that era, and as such, is one that I lived as a kid. Couple this with the fact that I haven't particularly liked any of the live action Disney remakes so far, and this was one I was prepared to loathe.
But, dammit, Guy Ritchie wasn't going to let that happen! Aladdin is an adaption that is full with to the brim with positives.
The cast for one thing. Mena Massoud and Naomi Scott (as Aladdin and Jasmine) are likeable leads and carry the main bulk of the story with minimal effort. They share good chemistry and are instantly charming.
Will Smith was obviously the big talking point before the films release. I though he did a great job at bringing Genie to life. He doesn't try to imitate what Robin Williams did back in 1992, and manages to stop short of turning into a full blown Will Smith vehicle, and this results in a respectful and fun portrayal of one of Disney's most beloved characters.
Jafar (Marwan Kenzari) was fine - he never really goes full Disney villain and felt quite subdued. Both a little underwhelming, but maybe a bit more grounded?
Even the CGI characters of Apu and The Magic Carpet have a respectable amount of personality!
The CGI is actually (and maybe predictably) where one of the few negatives stems from. The CG effects use in Will Smith when he's in full blown genie mode are pretty jarring at first. I feel myself getting used to it, and accepting that it actually looked fine seeing as he is a magical being and all, but then there another close up of his face and it's terrifying again. The infamous carpet ride hand a few dodgy moments as well, but other than that, it was all pretty good. The wider shots of Agrabar looked stunning and full of colour, and the film is gorgeous looking for the most part.
I've also mentioned before that I'm not a massive musical fan, but the nostalgia in me give films like Aladdin a bit of a pass. The songs here are all fine (if you ignore the autotune here and there) and the cast all seem like they can sing mostly unaided. I didn't care much for the new song they put in - it absolutely reeked of Frozen, right down to Jasmine's posturing - and added nothing to the narrative, even if the message is an empowering one.
The film also gets a bit carried away during the pre-credits, with it's reliance on the audiences tolerance for the songs.
Other than that handful of gripes, I would say that Aladdin is safely the best of the bunch so far when it comes to these live action Disney remakes. It actually feels like that cast and crew care about what they're doing, and it's doesn't come across as a money grab anywhere near as much as say The Lion King.
If you haven't yet given it a chance due to your fondness for the original, try not to worry about that and enjoy it for what it is. It could have been a lot worse!
But, dammit, Guy Ritchie wasn't going to let that happen! Aladdin is an adaption that is full with to the brim with positives.
The cast for one thing. Mena Massoud and Naomi Scott (as Aladdin and Jasmine) are likeable leads and carry the main bulk of the story with minimal effort. They share good chemistry and are instantly charming.
Will Smith was obviously the big talking point before the films release. I though he did a great job at bringing Genie to life. He doesn't try to imitate what Robin Williams did back in 1992, and manages to stop short of turning into a full blown Will Smith vehicle, and this results in a respectful and fun portrayal of one of Disney's most beloved characters.
Jafar (Marwan Kenzari) was fine - he never really goes full Disney villain and felt quite subdued. Both a little underwhelming, but maybe a bit more grounded?
Even the CGI characters of Apu and The Magic Carpet have a respectable amount of personality!
The CGI is actually (and maybe predictably) where one of the few negatives stems from. The CG effects use in Will Smith when he's in full blown genie mode are pretty jarring at first. I feel myself getting used to it, and accepting that it actually looked fine seeing as he is a magical being and all, but then there another close up of his face and it's terrifying again. The infamous carpet ride hand a few dodgy moments as well, but other than that, it was all pretty good. The wider shots of Agrabar looked stunning and full of colour, and the film is gorgeous looking for the most part.
I've also mentioned before that I'm not a massive musical fan, but the nostalgia in me give films like Aladdin a bit of a pass. The songs here are all fine (if you ignore the autotune here and there) and the cast all seem like they can sing mostly unaided. I didn't care much for the new song they put in - it absolutely reeked of Frozen, right down to Jasmine's posturing - and added nothing to the narrative, even if the message is an empowering one.
The film also gets a bit carried away during the pre-credits, with it's reliance on the audiences tolerance for the songs.
Other than that handful of gripes, I would say that Aladdin is safely the best of the bunch so far when it comes to these live action Disney remakes. It actually feels like that cast and crew care about what they're doing, and it's doesn't come across as a money grab anywhere near as much as say The Lion King.
If you haven't yet given it a chance due to your fondness for the original, try not to worry about that and enjoy it for what it is. It could have been a lot worse!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Cruella (2021) in Movies
Jun 13, 2021
Fights to find the right tone - but succeeds more than it fails
The new Disney live action film CRUELLA (telling the origin story of one of the most well known villains in Disney animation history) is one of those strange films that is trying to walk a thin line between “G” rated “kid” entertainment and an “R” rated film intended for a more “mature” audience.
An that, ultimately, is the issue with this film, it bounces around tonally - sometimes bumping up against the “G” rating and often times landing closer to the “R”, so that, in the end, it will not be a totally satisfying experience for either the “G” or the “R” crowd.
Emma Stone takes on the title role of CRUELLA and in this film you watch her become the Cruella DeVille that you see in the Disney Animated Film (and the Glenn Close live action remake). Stone is very good in this role - almost a perfect fit. However, it looks to me that she is having a much better time playing the evil “R” rated version of Cruella rather then the comic-bookish “G” rated version, so her performance is, at times, brilliant and at other times, not as brillaint.
Emma Thompson steals just about every scene she is in as Cruella’s nemesis “The Baroness”. It’s good to see this terrific actress getting a role that she can really sink her teeth in. I hope this leads to other, strong important roles for this actress “of a certain age”.
The supporting players are strong…or should I say…Mark Strong (hehehehe). He brings his usual gravitas to the role of The Baroness’ right-hand man. But the players who impressed me the most were Joel Fry (YESTERDAY) and Paul Walter Hauser (RICHARD JEWELL) as Cruella’s 2 best friends/henchmen. They both were able to flesh out these characters (who are usually portrayed as bumbling buffoons) and both were able to find the line between “G” and “R” very well - and stay on it the entire film.
Director Craig Gillespie (I, TONYA) finds the correct tone for this film more often than not, but it is in the “not” portion of this that he fails this movie. The shifts in tone (often on a dime) are often jarring and the blame for this would have to be put right at the Director’s feet, though the look of this film (sort of a 1960’s Austin Powers meets SteamPunk look) succeeds VERY well and is as much a character in this film as the performers.
One final thing, the soundtrack used in CRUELLA is an interesting touch. Gillespie and Composer Nicholas Britell eschews (for the most part) a conventional score and highlights most of the scenes with a Pop song - though here Gillespie whips us around tonally as well. For, since the film is set in 1960’s London, a good many of the tunes used are ‘60 (and early ‘70’s) rock hits. But….every now and then…he will drop in a ‘80’s number.
But…as I sit and write this review, I am finding myself falling more and more on the side of “I Liked It”, so…set aside the tonal shifts…and you will be entertained by CRUELLA much more than you would expect.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
An that, ultimately, is the issue with this film, it bounces around tonally - sometimes bumping up against the “G” rating and often times landing closer to the “R”, so that, in the end, it will not be a totally satisfying experience for either the “G” or the “R” crowd.
Emma Stone takes on the title role of CRUELLA and in this film you watch her become the Cruella DeVille that you see in the Disney Animated Film (and the Glenn Close live action remake). Stone is very good in this role - almost a perfect fit. However, it looks to me that she is having a much better time playing the evil “R” rated version of Cruella rather then the comic-bookish “G” rated version, so her performance is, at times, brilliant and at other times, not as brillaint.
Emma Thompson steals just about every scene she is in as Cruella’s nemesis “The Baroness”. It’s good to see this terrific actress getting a role that she can really sink her teeth in. I hope this leads to other, strong important roles for this actress “of a certain age”.
The supporting players are strong…or should I say…Mark Strong (hehehehe). He brings his usual gravitas to the role of The Baroness’ right-hand man. But the players who impressed me the most were Joel Fry (YESTERDAY) and Paul Walter Hauser (RICHARD JEWELL) as Cruella’s 2 best friends/henchmen. They both were able to flesh out these characters (who are usually portrayed as bumbling buffoons) and both were able to find the line between “G” and “R” very well - and stay on it the entire film.
Director Craig Gillespie (I, TONYA) finds the correct tone for this film more often than not, but it is in the “not” portion of this that he fails this movie. The shifts in tone (often on a dime) are often jarring and the blame for this would have to be put right at the Director’s feet, though the look of this film (sort of a 1960’s Austin Powers meets SteamPunk look) succeeds VERY well and is as much a character in this film as the performers.
One final thing, the soundtrack used in CRUELLA is an interesting touch. Gillespie and Composer Nicholas Britell eschews (for the most part) a conventional score and highlights most of the scenes with a Pop song - though here Gillespie whips us around tonally as well. For, since the film is set in 1960’s London, a good many of the tunes used are ‘60 (and early ‘70’s) rock hits. But….every now and then…he will drop in a ‘80’s number.
But…as I sit and write this review, I am finding myself falling more and more on the side of “I Liked It”, so…set aside the tonal shifts…and you will be entertained by CRUELLA much more than you would expect.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Kill Shot Bravo
Games and Entertainment
App
Kill Shot Bravo - Play the #1 Shooter on Mobile! Become the Deadliest Special Forces Solider! Arm...
Ollie SB (2279 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order in Video Games
Feb 20, 2020 (Updated Feb 20, 2020)
Probably the best Star Wars game so far
There are so many great aspects of this game, mainly, the amazing lightsaber combat. Any Star Wars fan will have hoped to live the fantasy of owning their own lightsaber, and this game is as close as it gets. The combinations of fighting styles, from lightsaber to various force powers, are incredible.
The customisation options in this game are also impressive. You can customise the colour of your ship, droid, clothes, and most importantly, your lightsaber. There are various options for the saber, from the colour and style of the handle, to the colour of the blade.
Another impressive aspect of the game is the quality and depth of the story. Set a few years after the events of Episode III, it follows a young jedi named Cal, who is on the run from the Inquisitors who are hunting down any remaining jedi. The game features flashbacks to a younger Cal in training, which helps the player to learn new force powers. One negative I found was that some of the early missions in the story seem to drag slightly. There seems to be a lot of climbing and jumping between ledges, without much of the impressive action that features later in the game.
However, this a small negative in a very impressive game, and the tempo of the story does pick up later on. Reaching an amazing final mission, which (no spoilers) in my opinion features one of the best video game cut scenes I've seen.
I would highly recommend this game.
The customisation options in this game are also impressive. You can customise the colour of your ship, droid, clothes, and most importantly, your lightsaber. There are various options for the saber, from the colour and style of the handle, to the colour of the blade.
Another impressive aspect of the game is the quality and depth of the story. Set a few years after the events of Episode III, it follows a young jedi named Cal, who is on the run from the Inquisitors who are hunting down any remaining jedi. The game features flashbacks to a younger Cal in training, which helps the player to learn new force powers. One negative I found was that some of the early missions in the story seem to drag slightly. There seems to be a lot of climbing and jumping between ledges, without much of the impressive action that features later in the game.
However, this a small negative in a very impressive game, and the tempo of the story does pick up later on. Reaching an amazing final mission, which (no spoilers) in my opinion features one of the best video game cut scenes I've seen.
I would highly recommend this game.