Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Christopher Robin (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
Winnie the Pooh, the much love bear created by A.A. Milne and E.H. Shepard, has been brought by Disney in enchantingly live action in Christopher Robin. The story begins in the hundred acre woods where little Christopher Robin is spending his last day having a picnic with his dear friends: Eeyore(Brad Garrett), Owl(Toby Jones), Rabbit(Peter Capaldi), Kanga(Sophie Okonedo) and Roo(Sara Sheen), Piglet(Nick Mohammed) Tigger and Pooh(Both beautifully voiced by Jim Cummings). The voice actor cast was rather surprising, but quite spot on for each character. I was absolutely drawn into Christopher Robin’s world.
We are transported through Christopher Robin’s journey from boarding school as a child, his teenage years through secondary education, to becoming an adult, meeting Evelyn(Hayley Atwell) who becomes his wife, leaving for World War II, returning from war to his wife and young daughter Madeline(Bronte Carmichael). Christopher Robin(Ewan McGregor) is now a grown man, working for Winslow, making luggage for the travelling set. He has been tasked to find ways to reduce waste for efficiency. Times are tough after the war and not many people are spending money on travel, therefore no one is buying luggage for their trips. His boss, Giles Winslow(Mark Gatiss, who seems to enjoy playing this feckless git) expects him to work through the weekend to come up with ideas to meet an overall 20% reduction or else Winslow will cut the workforce.
The plan was to spend his weekend with his family down at the cottage. The order from his boss has once again upended his plans. Christopher Robin is a grown man indeed and he has not smiled or had any fun for the longest time. He has become so serious even his wife was looking for his smile. While he works through the weekend. Evelyn decides that Madelyn needs to play and proceeds with the visit to the cottage.
While we follow Christopher Robin as he walks through life, we also see Winnie the Pooh at the tree to the hundred acre woods waiting every day for Christopher Robin’s return. One day, Pooh wakes to an empty woods where he cannot find any of his friends. He goes through the door in the tree hoping to find Christopher Robin and get help because he fears that his friends have been taken by the Heffalumps and Woozles.
Ewan McGregor plays Christopher Robin as an adult with such sincerity and honesty, that we all believe that Pooh and his friends truly exist in the film. The hundred acre woods magically come alive in the movie, capturing the colors of autumn and the warmth of the sunshine on the meadows. The score includes favorites that are the signature of the characters. It will have you quietly singing the words to the well known tunes.
For those that love Winnie the Pooh as I do and have fond memories of your own childhood or of your children’s, this movie was so enjoyable, heartwarmingly satisfying. Go as an adult, go with the kids (grown and little) its not a summer action film, but it is such a lovely movie by Disney with such a well told tale of old friends.
We are transported through Christopher Robin’s journey from boarding school as a child, his teenage years through secondary education, to becoming an adult, meeting Evelyn(Hayley Atwell) who becomes his wife, leaving for World War II, returning from war to his wife and young daughter Madeline(Bronte Carmichael). Christopher Robin(Ewan McGregor) is now a grown man, working for Winslow, making luggage for the travelling set. He has been tasked to find ways to reduce waste for efficiency. Times are tough after the war and not many people are spending money on travel, therefore no one is buying luggage for their trips. His boss, Giles Winslow(Mark Gatiss, who seems to enjoy playing this feckless git) expects him to work through the weekend to come up with ideas to meet an overall 20% reduction or else Winslow will cut the workforce.
The plan was to spend his weekend with his family down at the cottage. The order from his boss has once again upended his plans. Christopher Robin is a grown man indeed and he has not smiled or had any fun for the longest time. He has become so serious even his wife was looking for his smile. While he works through the weekend. Evelyn decides that Madelyn needs to play and proceeds with the visit to the cottage.
While we follow Christopher Robin as he walks through life, we also see Winnie the Pooh at the tree to the hundred acre woods waiting every day for Christopher Robin’s return. One day, Pooh wakes to an empty woods where he cannot find any of his friends. He goes through the door in the tree hoping to find Christopher Robin and get help because he fears that his friends have been taken by the Heffalumps and Woozles.
Ewan McGregor plays Christopher Robin as an adult with such sincerity and honesty, that we all believe that Pooh and his friends truly exist in the film. The hundred acre woods magically come alive in the movie, capturing the colors of autumn and the warmth of the sunshine on the meadows. The score includes favorites that are the signature of the characters. It will have you quietly singing the words to the well known tunes.
For those that love Winnie the Pooh as I do and have fond memories of your own childhood or of your children’s, this movie was so enjoyable, heartwarmingly satisfying. Go as an adult, go with the kids (grown and little) its not a summer action film, but it is such a lovely movie by Disney with such a well told tale of old friends.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Christopher Robin (2018) in Movies
Aug 19, 2018
Hayley Atwell is very underused (1 more)
Not really much of a kids movie
A good dose of warm fuzzy feelings
After recently reading a fair few uncomplimentary critic reviews for Christopher Robin, I wasn't sure what to expect from this. But, I was actually pleasantly surprised. And my wife absolutely loved it!
The movie begins with Christopher Robin as the child we all know from the stories. He's having a farewell tea party with Pooh and the gang in the hundred acre wood - a chance to see this latest incarnation of them all, beautifully rendered, different from what we're used to, but still very familiar. Christopher Robin is leaving them to head off to boarding school, so it's going to be a while before we see them all again.
From there we quickly skip through the next few chapters of Christopher's life, while the opening credits play. Boarding school, the death of his father, meeting his wife (Hayley Atwell) and heading off to fight in the war, before returning home. We pick up again with him while working for Winslow, a luggage company. His manager (a brilliant performance from Mark Gatiss) is putting pressure on him to come up with cost saving measures, in order to save the failing company, and demands that he work the whole weekend in order to come up with a solution. Christopher was due to go away with his family that weekend to his childhood home in Sussex, so must let them down once again in favour of work. Hayley Atwell is greatly underused in this movie, but plays the disappointed wife very well. Daughter Madeline doesn't think her dad ever was a child as all he wants her to do is work hard in order to go to boarding school, read her boring books instead of fun books and work instead of play. He's a far cry from the young Christopher Robin we know.
The whole movie is very dark and gloomy looking, with bright vibrant Disney colours rarely to be seen, even more so in this first part of the movie. Aside from some small comedy moments, this isn't really a kids movie at all.
When Pooh arrives in London, seeking out Christopher Robin having lost Tigger and his other friends, the tone of the movie immediately changes. The wonderful, soothing, familiar voice of Jim Cummings bringing this silly old bear to life as he tries to adjust to Lon-don life. There are some wonderfully funny moments, full of heart, even more so when the whole gang are finally reunited and all causing chaos in London.
While never quite reaching the dizzyingly high standard set recently by the amazing Paddington 2, Christopher Robin still manages to provide you with a warm fuzzy feeling inside and a very funny, enjoyable experience. And with a lesson in making sure your embrace your inner child thrown in too!
The movie begins with Christopher Robin as the child we all know from the stories. He's having a farewell tea party with Pooh and the gang in the hundred acre wood - a chance to see this latest incarnation of them all, beautifully rendered, different from what we're used to, but still very familiar. Christopher Robin is leaving them to head off to boarding school, so it's going to be a while before we see them all again.
From there we quickly skip through the next few chapters of Christopher's life, while the opening credits play. Boarding school, the death of his father, meeting his wife (Hayley Atwell) and heading off to fight in the war, before returning home. We pick up again with him while working for Winslow, a luggage company. His manager (a brilliant performance from Mark Gatiss) is putting pressure on him to come up with cost saving measures, in order to save the failing company, and demands that he work the whole weekend in order to come up with a solution. Christopher was due to go away with his family that weekend to his childhood home in Sussex, so must let them down once again in favour of work. Hayley Atwell is greatly underused in this movie, but plays the disappointed wife very well. Daughter Madeline doesn't think her dad ever was a child as all he wants her to do is work hard in order to go to boarding school, read her boring books instead of fun books and work instead of play. He's a far cry from the young Christopher Robin we know.
The whole movie is very dark and gloomy looking, with bright vibrant Disney colours rarely to be seen, even more so in this first part of the movie. Aside from some small comedy moments, this isn't really a kids movie at all.
When Pooh arrives in London, seeking out Christopher Robin having lost Tigger and his other friends, the tone of the movie immediately changes. The wonderful, soothing, familiar voice of Jim Cummings bringing this silly old bear to life as he tries to adjust to Lon-don life. There are some wonderfully funny moments, full of heart, even more so when the whole gang are finally reunited and all causing chaos in London.
While never quite reaching the dizzyingly high standard set recently by the amazing Paddington 2, Christopher Robin still manages to provide you with a warm fuzzy feeling inside and a very funny, enjoyable experience. And with a lesson in making sure your embrace your inner child thrown in too!
Awix (3310 KP) rated Christopher Robin (2018) in Movies
Aug 22, 2019
Gentle family comedy-drama probably isn't anything really special, but compared to Peter Rabbit (which it has a number of similarities to) it looks like 2001: A Space Odyssey or Seven Samurai (or whatever you think one of History's Great Films is). Christopher Robin lives through the Second World War, grows up to become an unhappy office drone in danger of losing his soul; Pooh Bear and the other stuffed animals manifest to help him remember the Important Things in Life.
No real surprises, to be honest, but it's well-made, quite well-played, reasonably well-written, and it doesn't try to make Winnie the Pooh 'contemporary' or 'irreverent'. Some parts of it are genuinely quite sweet, others funny (Mark Gatiss' hairpiece always seems about to take on a CGI life of its own). Hardly essential viewing, but the whole family could probably watch this together and have a decent time doing so.
No real surprises, to be honest, but it's well-made, quite well-played, reasonably well-written, and it doesn't try to make Winnie the Pooh 'contemporary' or 'irreverent'. Some parts of it are genuinely quite sweet, others funny (Mark Gatiss' hairpiece always seems about to take on a CGI life of its own). Hardly essential viewing, but the whole family could probably watch this together and have a decent time doing so.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A Triumph
Brutal. Spectacular. Emotional. These are just some of the adjectives you could use to describe Christopher Nolan’s latest film, Dunkirk. The director of Inception, The Dark Knight, Memento and Interstellar is one of the greatest film-makers working today and he raises the bar once again with this bleak tale from World War II.
With war, you have to respect the past whilst allowing modern-day film-goers to truly understand the brutality that ordinary people like you and I went through on a daily basis.
In May 1940, Germany had advanced into France, trapping Allied troops on the beaches of Dunkirk. Under air and ground cover from British and French forces, troops were slowly and methodically evacuated from the beach using not only military ships but civilian boats too. At the end of this incredible story of courage, 330,000 French, British, Belgian and Dutch soldiers were safely evacuated.
I found a quote the other day that said “Christopher Nolan is like Michael Bay for people who have ever read a book” and in Dunkirk that seems more apt than ever. Of course there are explosions, many of them, but they are interweaved with some incredible storytelling.
Split into three separate timelines, Dunkirk follows fisherman Mark Rylance as he sails to the beaches as part of the civilian rescue effort. On land we shadow a group of young soldiers desperately trying to get back home. Finally, the film flies alongside Tom Hardy’s brave Spitfire pilot as he tries his best to keep the beaches safe.
Each of the stories has something to offer but Mark Rylance’s performance is definitely the best, making his timeline the most interesting and often the most emotional. Addressing the elephant in the room, Harry Styles, is probably best at this part of the review – he’s excellent and in a much larger part than I had imagined.
In fact, all the performances are excellent, helped in part by Christopher Nolan’s incredible use of close-ups. This is a living, breathing war and as the audience, you feel as claustrophobic as the 400,000 men did waiting on that beach in 1940.
Moreover, the sound is just astonishing. I have never known a film use sound to such an extent to convey sheer terror. The score by Hans Zimmer, coupled with the deafening aircraft flying overhead and the rapid gunfire is incredibly harrowing and makes Dunkirk very hard to watch at times – despite its 12A certification.
Dunkirk is also a masterclass in practical effects. Nearly everything you see on screen was shot without the use of CGI and my goodness you can tell. We’re so used to seeing blockbusters filled to the brim with computer generated imagery that it’s easy to forget just how good practical effects can be.
Overall, Christopher Nolan has created a tasteful homage to a day that has been etched into the minds of generations of people. It would’ve been easy to create a film that focused on the action rather than the human details of this incredible story, but Nolan has managed to craft an absolute triumph. It’s one of the best films of the year and an absolute must-watch.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/07/23/dunkirk-review-a-triumph/
With war, you have to respect the past whilst allowing modern-day film-goers to truly understand the brutality that ordinary people like you and I went through on a daily basis.
In May 1940, Germany had advanced into France, trapping Allied troops on the beaches of Dunkirk. Under air and ground cover from British and French forces, troops were slowly and methodically evacuated from the beach using not only military ships but civilian boats too. At the end of this incredible story of courage, 330,000 French, British, Belgian and Dutch soldiers were safely evacuated.
I found a quote the other day that said “Christopher Nolan is like Michael Bay for people who have ever read a book” and in Dunkirk that seems more apt than ever. Of course there are explosions, many of them, but they are interweaved with some incredible storytelling.
Split into three separate timelines, Dunkirk follows fisherman Mark Rylance as he sails to the beaches as part of the civilian rescue effort. On land we shadow a group of young soldiers desperately trying to get back home. Finally, the film flies alongside Tom Hardy’s brave Spitfire pilot as he tries his best to keep the beaches safe.
Each of the stories has something to offer but Mark Rylance’s performance is definitely the best, making his timeline the most interesting and often the most emotional. Addressing the elephant in the room, Harry Styles, is probably best at this part of the review – he’s excellent and in a much larger part than I had imagined.
In fact, all the performances are excellent, helped in part by Christopher Nolan’s incredible use of close-ups. This is a living, breathing war and as the audience, you feel as claustrophobic as the 400,000 men did waiting on that beach in 1940.
Moreover, the sound is just astonishing. I have never known a film use sound to such an extent to convey sheer terror. The score by Hans Zimmer, coupled with the deafening aircraft flying overhead and the rapid gunfire is incredibly harrowing and makes Dunkirk very hard to watch at times – despite its 12A certification.
Dunkirk is also a masterclass in practical effects. Nearly everything you see on screen was shot without the use of CGI and my goodness you can tell. We’re so used to seeing blockbusters filled to the brim with computer generated imagery that it’s easy to forget just how good practical effects can be.
Overall, Christopher Nolan has created a tasteful homage to a day that has been etched into the minds of generations of people. It would’ve been easy to create a film that focused on the action rather than the human details of this incredible story, but Nolan has managed to craft an absolute triumph. It’s one of the best films of the year and an absolute must-watch.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/07/23/dunkirk-review-a-triumph/
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Will Shaksper's Secret in Books
Feb 4, 2020
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
As there is nothing to prove otherwise I have to label Will Shaksper’s Secret by John Hole as a work of fiction through the way it is written would almost suggest otherwise. Without a works-cited or a bibliography or anything saying it is even loosely based in fact I can not give this book any other category.
In 1584 John Heminges is dismissed from his job largely due to sleeping with his boss’s wife. During his interactions with her, she robs him, leaving him penniless and alone. It is because of this that he ends up on the outside of a playhouse and saves Henry Condell thus connecting him to the theater. Within the preforming group he meats Christopher Marlowe and Will Shaksper.
As it happens Christopher Marlowe gets into quite a bit of trouble for preaching atheism in a time when the church is struggling to begin with. This results in the threat of execution hanging over him. To protect him from this fate, other performers create a plan to make it appear that Christopher Marlowe is dead, allowing him to disappear. After he has been gone for some time Will Shaksper stars producing some wonder plays of amazing quality but they always come following a visit from a messenger.
The concept of Will Shakespear not actually being the famous playwright that everyone knows him to be is interesting. Also, the circumstances that allowed to trade of writing from Christopher Marlowe to Will Shaksper was strange in a way that makes one question if things could actually have worked out that way. Sadly to say thought the title and description on the back promise an interesting read yet the book fails to deliver. The book itself ended up being very dry and the “blustering, boiserous journey” ended up dragging and slow.
Adults who enjoy Shakspere both in language and historically would be the type of person ideally interested in this book. They dry style and language used best suits this book for those who are true fand of literary classics. Others may attempt to read it but might find the language a bit difficult. I rate this book 1 out of 4. The back of this book promises a much more interesting story than what it actually is. Besides being dry the plot is largely lost among the language. I understand what was being attempted and give the author credit for it, but I believe it largely missed the mark.
https://nightreaderreviews.blogspot.com
https://facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
https://smashbomb.com/nightreader
In 1584 John Heminges is dismissed from his job largely due to sleeping with his boss’s wife. During his interactions with her, she robs him, leaving him penniless and alone. It is because of this that he ends up on the outside of a playhouse and saves Henry Condell thus connecting him to the theater. Within the preforming group he meats Christopher Marlowe and Will Shaksper.
As it happens Christopher Marlowe gets into quite a bit of trouble for preaching atheism in a time when the church is struggling to begin with. This results in the threat of execution hanging over him. To protect him from this fate, other performers create a plan to make it appear that Christopher Marlowe is dead, allowing him to disappear. After he has been gone for some time Will Shaksper stars producing some wonder plays of amazing quality but they always come following a visit from a messenger.
The concept of Will Shakespear not actually being the famous playwright that everyone knows him to be is interesting. Also, the circumstances that allowed to trade of writing from Christopher Marlowe to Will Shaksper was strange in a way that makes one question if things could actually have worked out that way. Sadly to say thought the title and description on the back promise an interesting read yet the book fails to deliver. The book itself ended up being very dry and the “blustering, boiserous journey” ended up dragging and slow.
Adults who enjoy Shakspere both in language and historically would be the type of person ideally interested in this book. They dry style and language used best suits this book for those who are true fand of literary classics. Others may attempt to read it but might find the language a bit difficult. I rate this book 1 out of 4. The back of this book promises a much more interesting story than what it actually is. Besides being dry the plot is largely lost among the language. I understand what was being attempted and give the author credit for it, but I believe it largely missed the mark.
https://nightreaderreviews.blogspot.com
https://facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
https://smashbomb.com/nightreader
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated All the Money in the World (2017) in Movies
Feb 14, 2018
Bland with the exception of Christopher Plummer
By now, almost everyone knows about the last minute switch of Christopher Plummer in place of current-pariah Kevin Spacey as pivotal Billionaire J. Paul Getty in Ridley Scott's ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD, so when I checked out Plummer's Oscar nominated turn, I couldn't but help see if I could tell when Scott put in a new scene and where he just "augmented" his scenes with Plummer. And then, a funny thing happened...
I stopped looking at this for I was captivated by Plummer's performance.
A 3 time Oscar nominee (he is the oldest person to win an Academy Award - at the age of 82 - for his Supporting Role in BEGINNERS in 2010), the 88 year old Plummer shows that he can still command a movie for anytime he is on screen this film crackles and becomes interesting.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the rest of the film.
Telling the story of the kidnapping of Getty's grandson, and the "richest man in the world's" refusal to pay the ransom, ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD stars Charlie Plummer (no relation) as John Paul Getty III (the kidnapped grandson), Mark Wahlberg as "fixer" Fletcher Chase, who was told by Getty to get his grandson back for "the lowest possible cost", Romain Duris as one of the kidnappers and the great Michelle Williams as the mother of the kidnapped boy - and the daughter-in-law of Getty, Gail Harris. Each one of these performances are good, but not great. Doing what needs to be done in what they are given to do but nothing more.
I think the problem with this film is one of focus. It spends about 50% of the time with William's character - and this is fine, but then it jumps to the kidnapped son, to "the fixer", to "the kidnapper", to the grandson and back to the mother, so no real through-line, continuity or strong character development can occur, with the exception of Christopher Plummer's J. Paul Getty. To be fair to Williams, C. Plummer has the showier role and she is just asked to be the center of this tale, the world in which all else revolves and that, ultimately, makes her character somewhat bland.
I place the blame for this on Screenwriter David Scarpa (based on the book by John Pearson) and Director Scott. I think their reach exceeded their grasp on this one. If they could have focused more on one of the characters - instead of spreading things out - perhaps this film would have become more interesting and less bland. It stays on one note - despite jumping to different people in vastly different situations - throughout it's 2 hour and 15 minute time frame.
All in all, a missed opportunity. It is a decent film that had the potential to be VERY good. The only one who was VERY good was Christopher Plummer - and certainly his performance is worth the price of admission.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
I stopped looking at this for I was captivated by Plummer's performance.
A 3 time Oscar nominee (he is the oldest person to win an Academy Award - at the age of 82 - for his Supporting Role in BEGINNERS in 2010), the 88 year old Plummer shows that he can still command a movie for anytime he is on screen this film crackles and becomes interesting.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the rest of the film.
Telling the story of the kidnapping of Getty's grandson, and the "richest man in the world's" refusal to pay the ransom, ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD stars Charlie Plummer (no relation) as John Paul Getty III (the kidnapped grandson), Mark Wahlberg as "fixer" Fletcher Chase, who was told by Getty to get his grandson back for "the lowest possible cost", Romain Duris as one of the kidnappers and the great Michelle Williams as the mother of the kidnapped boy - and the daughter-in-law of Getty, Gail Harris. Each one of these performances are good, but not great. Doing what needs to be done in what they are given to do but nothing more.
I think the problem with this film is one of focus. It spends about 50% of the time with William's character - and this is fine, but then it jumps to the kidnapped son, to "the fixer", to "the kidnapper", to the grandson and back to the mother, so no real through-line, continuity or strong character development can occur, with the exception of Christopher Plummer's J. Paul Getty. To be fair to Williams, C. Plummer has the showier role and she is just asked to be the center of this tale, the world in which all else revolves and that, ultimately, makes her character somewhat bland.
I place the blame for this on Screenwriter David Scarpa (based on the book by John Pearson) and Director Scott. I think their reach exceeded their grasp on this one. If they could have focused more on one of the characters - instead of spreading things out - perhaps this film would have become more interesting and less bland. It stays on one note - despite jumping to different people in vastly different situations - throughout it's 2 hour and 15 minute time frame.
All in all, a missed opportunity. It is a decent film that had the potential to be VERY good. The only one who was VERY good was Christopher Plummer - and certainly his performance is worth the price of admission.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
Suswatibasu (1701 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Jan 2, 2018
Wish it focused on the importance of this historic event
I might be an anomaly here, but sadly I didn't find Christopher Nolan's blockbuster as good as it should have been, and actually am fairly disappointed. The battle at Dunkirk is one of the most catastrophic moments in British military history, essentially British soldiers were completely out of their depth, with little backing and resources, and it was the tipping point in which Britain was very likely to lose the war - if it wasn't for a costly strategic mistake by the Germans to show leniency. It was then that Winston Churchill made his renowned speech, "We Shall Fight on the Beaches" - which we saw a glimpse of in the last scene.
Unfortunately none of this was apparent in the film, and as much as I love Nolan as a director, he seems to have concentrated too much on the cinematography rather than the importance of this event. No doubt, visually it was as beautiful as some of his previous work such as Interstellar, and the acting was subtle, yet stirring. As per usual, Mark Rylance stands out as the most understated and refined actor - but it was an all-round great cast. It's watchable, but it doesn't really show the true magnitude and significance of this period.
Unfortunately none of this was apparent in the film, and as much as I love Nolan as a director, he seems to have concentrated too much on the cinematography rather than the importance of this event. No doubt, visually it was as beautiful as some of his previous work such as Interstellar, and the acting was subtle, yet stirring. As per usual, Mark Rylance stands out as the most understated and refined actor - but it was an all-round great cast. It's watchable, but it doesn't really show the true magnitude and significance of this period.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Christopher Robin (2018) in Movies
Aug 22, 2018 (Updated Aug 22, 2018)
A wonderful piece of heartwarming nostalgia
I'd seen some of the not very positive reviews about this film so I hadn't been expecting much, but I cannot tell you how pleasantly surprised and happy I was watching this.
I was a Winnie the Pooh fan as a child but probably haven't seen much of it since, and this was a wonderful nostalgic trip back to my childhood. Right from the opening scene and any time Pooh and his friends were on screen, I couldn't wipe the silly warm grin off my face. The CGI on the characters is very well done and they look fantastic, and the voices too are just spot on (even those not voiced by Jim Cummings). The main problem with this film is that when Pooh and his friends aren't on screen it obvious and whilst it's never dull, you notice their huge absence.
I loved the inclusion of the drawings over parts of the title sequence, and I think the whole way they've briefed over Christopher Robin's life is done well. For once this is a film that shows us what we need to know, and nothing more. It's nice to watch something that isn't aiming for an over 2 hour runtime.
Mark Gatiss is suitably hammy as Robin's boss and Ewan McGregor is as good as he ever is. Hayley Atwell though is vastly underused. And yes this is a Disney film, so there is a small amount of sickly sweet schmaltz thrown in. But for once this is kept almost entirely to the end and isn't overbearing in the slightest, which is a refreshing change for Disney.
This is the most wonderful film I've seen at the cinema for quite some time. I can't remember the last time I smiled so much.
I was a Winnie the Pooh fan as a child but probably haven't seen much of it since, and this was a wonderful nostalgic trip back to my childhood. Right from the opening scene and any time Pooh and his friends were on screen, I couldn't wipe the silly warm grin off my face. The CGI on the characters is very well done and they look fantastic, and the voices too are just spot on (even those not voiced by Jim Cummings). The main problem with this film is that when Pooh and his friends aren't on screen it obvious and whilst it's never dull, you notice their huge absence.
I loved the inclusion of the drawings over parts of the title sequence, and I think the whole way they've briefed over Christopher Robin's life is done well. For once this is a film that shows us what we need to know, and nothing more. It's nice to watch something that isn't aiming for an over 2 hour runtime.
Mark Gatiss is suitably hammy as Robin's boss and Ewan McGregor is as good as he ever is. Hayley Atwell though is vastly underused. And yes this is a Disney film, so there is a small amount of sickly sweet schmaltz thrown in. But for once this is kept almost entirely to the end and isn't overbearing in the slightest, which is a refreshing change for Disney.
This is the most wonderful film I've seen at the cinema for quite some time. I can't remember the last time I smiled so much.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Thor: The Dark World (2013) in Movies
Oct 1, 2020
The second Thor movie is a visual representation of the word "meh". It has all the right ingredients, but somehow manages to fall flat.
The general plot is an issue. It's not a terrible narrative, but it's the kind of bloated fantasy stuff you would find in an early 2000s superhero movie, not a franchise that is eight films in and includes The Avengers.
The only purpose it serves in the grand scheme of things is the introduction of another Infinity Stone. Other than that it's just stuffed with exposition and kind of bland.
Another issue is, you guess it, the villain. Malekith isn't necessarily a bad choice for the movies antagonist, but his execution feels inconsequential and boring. Christopher Eccleston does the best with what he has but the stakes never feel high with this guy, although I do enjoy his comic- accurate appearance from the halfway mark.
Visually, The Dark World looks great. The CGI is pretty decent, the locations such as Asgard are just as well realised as the first film. Returning cast members include Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård, Rene Russo, Kat Dennings, Idris Elba and Natalie Portman, as well as the always awesome Chris Hemsworth. Nothing wrong here, although I do feel that Lady Sif and The Warriors Three are wasted this time around.
The final set piece is pretty damn entertaining to be fair, and borders on suitable comic-book absurdity at points. The attack on Asgard by the Dark Elves is also pretty thrilling, but everything else is a little so so.
I still like Thor: The Dark World for what it's worth, it's just a little by the numbers and uninspired, and is probably my least favourite of the MCU movies to date.
The general plot is an issue. It's not a terrible narrative, but it's the kind of bloated fantasy stuff you would find in an early 2000s superhero movie, not a franchise that is eight films in and includes The Avengers.
The only purpose it serves in the grand scheme of things is the introduction of another Infinity Stone. Other than that it's just stuffed with exposition and kind of bland.
Another issue is, you guess it, the villain. Malekith isn't necessarily a bad choice for the movies antagonist, but his execution feels inconsequential and boring. Christopher Eccleston does the best with what he has but the stakes never feel high with this guy, although I do enjoy his comic- accurate appearance from the halfway mark.
Visually, The Dark World looks great. The CGI is pretty decent, the locations such as Asgard are just as well realised as the first film. Returning cast members include Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård, Rene Russo, Kat Dennings, Idris Elba and Natalie Portman, as well as the always awesome Chris Hemsworth. Nothing wrong here, although I do feel that Lady Sif and The Warriors Three are wasted this time around.
The final set piece is pretty damn entertaining to be fair, and borders on suitable comic-book absurdity at points. The attack on Asgard by the Dark Elves is also pretty thrilling, but everything else is a little so so.
I still like Thor: The Dark World for what it's worth, it's just a little by the numbers and uninspired, and is probably my least favourite of the MCU movies to date.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Other Guys (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
The Other Guys is a stupid charmer of a movie that surprisingly works despite it’s penchant for odd humor and occasional missed targets. The story was slightly meandering and a few times boring, but made its way back to form before the third act. The laughs came in plentiful heaps, and although there were a few misses, overall The Other Guys was one of the funnier of this summer’s comedic ventures.
The Other Guys is a play on words against the stereotypical Good Guys: P.K. Highsmith and Christopher Danson are the big boy cops with big boy swagger, played by Samuel L. Jackson and Dwayne Johnson with bravado and just enough over-the-top asshole to make them lovable. Allen Gamble, a new type of character for a Will Ferrell comedy that finally isn’t a Ron Burgundy rerun, could perhaps be called eccentric because of the way he acts so conventional. Terry Hoitz, played by Mark Wahlberg, shines as a perfect complement to Ferrell. He plays every line perfectly straight, and this unexpectedly makes him even more hilarious. After seeing him in his last performance in Date Night, where he almost stole the show, I’ve no doubt this man can excel in comedic roles. Michael Keaton, as their boss, put forward a humorously feeble character as Captain Gene. The villain, billionaire David Ershon, was played by the always wonderful Steve Coogan to great effect. As a side note, whoever chose the narrator for the film had serious comedic inspiration of the genius type.
One might wonder how and when the Other Guys will get their shot at fame, and without spoiling it, I’ll say it’s one of the funniest moments in the movie. Scratch that, the funniest moment in the movie is… well, you’ll just have to see it, but when you do, you’ll know exactly what I’m talking about, and it’s gold.
The Other Guys is a play on words against the stereotypical Good Guys: P.K. Highsmith and Christopher Danson are the big boy cops with big boy swagger, played by Samuel L. Jackson and Dwayne Johnson with bravado and just enough over-the-top asshole to make them lovable. Allen Gamble, a new type of character for a Will Ferrell comedy that finally isn’t a Ron Burgundy rerun, could perhaps be called eccentric because of the way he acts so conventional. Terry Hoitz, played by Mark Wahlberg, shines as a perfect complement to Ferrell. He plays every line perfectly straight, and this unexpectedly makes him even more hilarious. After seeing him in his last performance in Date Night, where he almost stole the show, I’ve no doubt this man can excel in comedic roles. Michael Keaton, as their boss, put forward a humorously feeble character as Captain Gene. The villain, billionaire David Ershon, was played by the always wonderful Steve Coogan to great effect. As a side note, whoever chose the narrator for the film had serious comedic inspiration of the genius type.
One might wonder how and when the Other Guys will get their shot at fame, and without spoiling it, I’ll say it’s one of the funniest moments in the movie. Scratch that, the funniest moment in the movie is… well, you’ll just have to see it, but when you do, you’ll know exactly what I’m talking about, and it’s gold.