Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Martian (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Ridley Scott's best film since Alien
It’s safe to say that Ridley Scott knows his way around a camera. From Alien to Gladiator, the director has brought to the silver screen some of the greatest films of all time, heck even Prometheus wasn’t that bad in a muddled kind of way.
Now, after the underwhelming Exodus: Gods & Kings, Scott returns to the director’s chair doing what he does best, sci-fi. But is The Martian as good as his earlier works?
Thankfully, the answer is yes and The Martian proves how good the director can be when he’s given the right material to work with. Andy Weir’s 2011 novel of the same name lends a good starting point and Scott ends up with his best film since 1979’s masterpiece, Alien – that’s no joke.
Matt Damon stars as Mark Wateny, an astronaut and botanist left stranded on Mars after a mission goes horribly wrong. After being left behind by his colleagues, played by talent including Jessica Chastain (The Hurt Locker) and Kate Mara (Fantastic Four), Mark must find a way to survive on the red planet until a rescue operation can reach him – years later.
Sean Bean, Kristen Wiig, Donald Glover and Jeff Daniels also star as NASA directors, scientists and astrophysicists. Despite their limited screen time, each brings something to the table with a spirited performance.
Scott directs The Martian with a huge amount of confidence, clearly helped by his time on Alien and Prometheus, and his cinematography is absolute perfection. Never has Mars looked this good on film. The desolate, arid landscape is breath-taking and the numerous aerial shots that feature Damon’s character only add to the emptiness.
The special effects too are wonderful. CGI is mixed with amazing practical props that integrate so well together that it’s impossible to tell the difference. The numerous spacecraft, living quarters and vehicles all feel so real and continue to add more credibility to The Martian’s cause.
Damon is also second-to-none and over the course of the film develops new personality traits, all due to the intense stress of being stranded 50 million miles away from Earth. The film lives and dies on his efforts and thankfully, the ever-reliable actor gives one of his best performances in years.
Unfortunately, Jessica Chastain doesn’t have too much to do until the finale and feels a little side-lined – she has won an Oscar after all, though Damon’s magnetic presence is enough to forgive some of the shortcomings in other characters.
The script is, on the whole, very good indeed. Despite only featuring one character for the majority of its 140 minute run-time, The Martian is funny, witty and helped by a fantastic disco soundtrack that has hits from the likes of ABBA dotted about.
Overall, The Martian is sci-fi film-making at its peak. Ridley Scott has crafted a beautiful looking and deeply involving film that features the very best in special effects and scientific accuracy. With Matt Damon’s dry humour and emotional depth, it’s a winner all round.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/10/04/ridley-scotts-best-film-since-alien-the-martian-review/
Now, after the underwhelming Exodus: Gods & Kings, Scott returns to the director’s chair doing what he does best, sci-fi. But is The Martian as good as his earlier works?
Thankfully, the answer is yes and The Martian proves how good the director can be when he’s given the right material to work with. Andy Weir’s 2011 novel of the same name lends a good starting point and Scott ends up with his best film since 1979’s masterpiece, Alien – that’s no joke.
Matt Damon stars as Mark Wateny, an astronaut and botanist left stranded on Mars after a mission goes horribly wrong. After being left behind by his colleagues, played by talent including Jessica Chastain (The Hurt Locker) and Kate Mara (Fantastic Four), Mark must find a way to survive on the red planet until a rescue operation can reach him – years later.
Sean Bean, Kristen Wiig, Donald Glover and Jeff Daniels also star as NASA directors, scientists and astrophysicists. Despite their limited screen time, each brings something to the table with a spirited performance.
Scott directs The Martian with a huge amount of confidence, clearly helped by his time on Alien and Prometheus, and his cinematography is absolute perfection. Never has Mars looked this good on film. The desolate, arid landscape is breath-taking and the numerous aerial shots that feature Damon’s character only add to the emptiness.
The special effects too are wonderful. CGI is mixed with amazing practical props that integrate so well together that it’s impossible to tell the difference. The numerous spacecraft, living quarters and vehicles all feel so real and continue to add more credibility to The Martian’s cause.
Damon is also second-to-none and over the course of the film develops new personality traits, all due to the intense stress of being stranded 50 million miles away from Earth. The film lives and dies on his efforts and thankfully, the ever-reliable actor gives one of his best performances in years.
Unfortunately, Jessica Chastain doesn’t have too much to do until the finale and feels a little side-lined – she has won an Oscar after all, though Damon’s magnetic presence is enough to forgive some of the shortcomings in other characters.
The script is, on the whole, very good indeed. Despite only featuring one character for the majority of its 140 minute run-time, The Martian is funny, witty and helped by a fantastic disco soundtrack that has hits from the likes of ABBA dotted about.
Overall, The Martian is sci-fi film-making at its peak. Ridley Scott has crafted a beautiful looking and deeply involving film that features the very best in special effects and scientific accuracy. With Matt Damon’s dry humour and emotional depth, it’s a winner all round.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/10/04/ridley-scotts-best-film-since-alien-the-martian-review/
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Misery in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/misery-by-stephen-king
<b><i>Annie Annie oh Annie please please no please dont Annie I swear to you Ill be good I swear to God Ill be good please give me a chance to be good OH ANNIE PLEASE LET ME BE GOOD -
Just a little pain. Then this nasty business will be behind us for good Paul.</b></i>
Well hot fucking damn. Is this the best book Ive read all year? <b>I think it might be.</b> I am officially a Stephen King fan. A Stephen King convert as my mother is calling me. Misery is a goddamn masterpiece. Its <i>so</i> tense. I dont know how anyone can write so well that Im actually squirming. <b>LEGIT SQUIRMING AS I READ.</b>
Misery is about a bestselling author, Paul Sheldon, who, after celebrating his completion of his next (and best) book, drinks a little too much champagne and gets himself into a nasty car accident in the middle of nowhere. He wakes to find his legs shattered but splintered (splinted???) in a mysterious house. Luckily, or unluckily, hes found himself saved and in the capable hands of his number one fan and ex-nurse, Annie Wilkes.
I put off reading Misery for, oh I dont know, maybe 5 years? I watched the film, of course, because disliking a film can be down to a number of variables, the wrong director, actors you dislike, bad script etc, but not liking a book, <i>a Stephen King book</i>, is down to one and one thing only, the author. And I was <i>so</i> terrified I wouldnt like Stephen King! Honestly, terrified is this right word for it. I didnt want to turn around in a house, no, a society, that claims Stephen King is a modern day Charles Dickens, of sorts, and say nah, not that into him myself. But lo and behold, I ended up liking both the film and the book, thank Christ. The book more so than the film, but isnt that usually the case? Although the actors for both Paul and Annie in the film version were <i>spot on.</i>
I dont think Ive ever been so vocal whilst reading a book. Misery had me yelping and oohing and arring and laughing and yucking all the way through. Kings writing is so vivid you <i>are</i> Paul Sheldon for the duration of the book. Youre Paul, rolling around in his wheelchair, holding your breath and crying and sweating, hoping that car you hear isnt Annies. Hoping shes holding those Godsent Novril tablets every few hours to subdue your pain. Wondering how the hell youre ever going to be able to escape. You completely immerse yourself in the nail biting story, page by page. This is a perfect novel from start to finish, thats all I have left to say.
If youve never read Stephen King before, start with Misery. <b>I double donkey dare you.</b>
<b><i>Annie Annie oh Annie please please no please dont Annie I swear to you Ill be good I swear to God Ill be good please give me a chance to be good OH ANNIE PLEASE LET ME BE GOOD -
Just a little pain. Then this nasty business will be behind us for good Paul.</b></i>
Well hot fucking damn. Is this the best book Ive read all year? <b>I think it might be.</b> I am officially a Stephen King fan. A Stephen King convert as my mother is calling me. Misery is a goddamn masterpiece. Its <i>so</i> tense. I dont know how anyone can write so well that Im actually squirming. <b>LEGIT SQUIRMING AS I READ.</b>
Misery is about a bestselling author, Paul Sheldon, who, after celebrating his completion of his next (and best) book, drinks a little too much champagne and gets himself into a nasty car accident in the middle of nowhere. He wakes to find his legs shattered but splintered (splinted???) in a mysterious house. Luckily, or unluckily, hes found himself saved and in the capable hands of his number one fan and ex-nurse, Annie Wilkes.
I put off reading Misery for, oh I dont know, maybe 5 years? I watched the film, of course, because disliking a film can be down to a number of variables, the wrong director, actors you dislike, bad script etc, but not liking a book, <i>a Stephen King book</i>, is down to one and one thing only, the author. And I was <i>so</i> terrified I wouldnt like Stephen King! Honestly, terrified is this right word for it. I didnt want to turn around in a house, no, a society, that claims Stephen King is a modern day Charles Dickens, of sorts, and say nah, not that into him myself. But lo and behold, I ended up liking both the film and the book, thank Christ. The book more so than the film, but isnt that usually the case? Although the actors for both Paul and Annie in the film version were <i>spot on.</i>
I dont think Ive ever been so vocal whilst reading a book. Misery had me yelping and oohing and arring and laughing and yucking all the way through. Kings writing is so vivid you <i>are</i> Paul Sheldon for the duration of the book. Youre Paul, rolling around in his wheelchair, holding your breath and crying and sweating, hoping that car you hear isnt Annies. Hoping shes holding those Godsent Novril tablets every few hours to subdue your pain. Wondering how the hell youre ever going to be able to escape. You completely immerse yourself in the nail biting story, page by page. This is a perfect novel from start to finish, thats all I have left to say.
If youve never read Stephen King before, start with Misery. <b>I double donkey dare you.</b>
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Vertigo (1958) in Movies
Oct 20, 2019
An ex cop is asked to surveil the wife of a friend who seems to be exhibiting erratic behavior. Unfortunately, Scottie had to retire from active duty after an incident of vertigo caused the death of another officer. He takes the job and wanders with the woman as she visits an art gallery and cemetery among others. She inexplicably one day decides to hurl her body into San Francisco Bay and luckily he is there to retrieve her.
Once revived, Madeleine is no worse for wear, but does not remember the incident or the circumstances of her rescue at the hands of Scottie. They form a quick friendship that turns quickly into lust and a deepening feeling of obsession for Scottie. One day, they take a trip to Mission San Juan Bautista based on a nightmare vision described by Madeleine. She climbs the bell tower, but Scottie is unable to follow restrained by his vertigo and, unfortunately, has to just watch as she plunges to her death.
Afterwards, an investigation reveals Madeleine had been exhibiting irrational behavior which was the cause of her husband's concern in hiring Scottie, so her death is ruled a suicide. Scottie is distraught over the loss and takes consolation in his friend, Midge. On the mend, Scottie frequents locations Madeleine had visited previously hoping this would offer consolation to his grief. He meets a familiar, yet strange woman there.
Vertigo is usually not only considered Hitchcock's best film, but also on many critic lists as the greatest film of all time alongside Citizen Kane and Casablanca.
The movie does have a lot to admire including its complicated, intriguing screenplay which had smart discussions with its characters with lots of exposition given at various points challenging the audience to keep up. The film's situations are interesting and the plot keeps going at a vicious pace through the twists to the end.
I learned recently Hitchcock diva Vera Miles was initially cast for the role of Madeleine, but had to withdraw as she became pregnant before filming so Kim Novak replaced her. Due to several unforeseen delays, Miles had given birth and could've been available; however Hitchcock forged ahead with Novak anyways.
The harrowing initial scene where Scottie chases a random perpetrator across blackened rooftops only to stumble and discover his title affliction really sets the tone for the film both with the cinematography which is stunning and the blistering score at full pace.
Picking an absolute favorite Hitchcock movie has always been difficult for me. Vertigo would probably rank 3rd behind Psycho and The Birds, but still all masterpieces. I love the fact as in other Hitchcock classics, you think you know where the story is going, but he always keeps you guessing.
A magnificent performance by Jimmy Stewart as well. Well deserved of the praise he has gotten over the years for it. He is intense, charming and morose throughout the film which makes him electrifying to watch. His work with Hitchcock including Rope and Rear Window is among his best work.
A masterpiece.
Once revived, Madeleine is no worse for wear, but does not remember the incident or the circumstances of her rescue at the hands of Scottie. They form a quick friendship that turns quickly into lust and a deepening feeling of obsession for Scottie. One day, they take a trip to Mission San Juan Bautista based on a nightmare vision described by Madeleine. She climbs the bell tower, but Scottie is unable to follow restrained by his vertigo and, unfortunately, has to just watch as she plunges to her death.
Afterwards, an investigation reveals Madeleine had been exhibiting irrational behavior which was the cause of her husband's concern in hiring Scottie, so her death is ruled a suicide. Scottie is distraught over the loss and takes consolation in his friend, Midge. On the mend, Scottie frequents locations Madeleine had visited previously hoping this would offer consolation to his grief. He meets a familiar, yet strange woman there.
Vertigo is usually not only considered Hitchcock's best film, but also on many critic lists as the greatest film of all time alongside Citizen Kane and Casablanca.
The movie does have a lot to admire including its complicated, intriguing screenplay which had smart discussions with its characters with lots of exposition given at various points challenging the audience to keep up. The film's situations are interesting and the plot keeps going at a vicious pace through the twists to the end.
I learned recently Hitchcock diva Vera Miles was initially cast for the role of Madeleine, but had to withdraw as she became pregnant before filming so Kim Novak replaced her. Due to several unforeseen delays, Miles had given birth and could've been available; however Hitchcock forged ahead with Novak anyways.
The harrowing initial scene where Scottie chases a random perpetrator across blackened rooftops only to stumble and discover his title affliction really sets the tone for the film both with the cinematography which is stunning and the blistering score at full pace.
Picking an absolute favorite Hitchcock movie has always been difficult for me. Vertigo would probably rank 3rd behind Psycho and The Birds, but still all masterpieces. I love the fact as in other Hitchcock classics, you think you know where the story is going, but he always keeps you guessing.
A magnificent performance by Jimmy Stewart as well. Well deserved of the praise he has gotten over the years for it. He is intense, charming and morose throughout the film which makes him electrifying to watch. His work with Hitchcock including Rope and Rear Window is among his best work.
A masterpiece.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Boneseeker in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Okay, I have a question: who else, while reading this book (if you did), kept imagining Sherlock Holmes as Benedict Cumberbatch? And I don't even have cable to watch it, nor do I have time to watch Masterpiece Mystery....
<img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_kJ9pDaSzoQ/U2VHyusffEI/AAAAAAAADKw/2xCShmhbaAg/s1600/turnups.gif"; height="153" width="320">
Although imagining THE Sherlock Holmes having a kid is probably impossible. Yet in Boneseeker, it's the next generation of Holmes and Watson, only it's not the legendary duo (wait, they're legendary, right?). Instead of being set in London, the story is mainly set in Philadelphia and New York. Arabella, Sherlock's daughter, and Henry, John Watson's son, are on an expedition to find out if a giant hand found are from a Neanderthal or from Nephilim.
Boneseeker is actually quite scary. Sausage murder? Oh dear. But essentially the book is focused on 4 missing scientists who were on the hunt to prove what the hand really is in said expedition above. I think they were also looking for more giant bones hey, can't give anything away, eh? before they actually vanished into nowhere.
The notes at the end were really helpful. I was planning on doing some of my own research when I had the time, whether at school or at the library, but then I finished reading Boneseeker and saw "AUTHOR'S NOTES." Thus resulting in me going "Fantastic! Less research and Bing crap for me!" Search engines usually just give a) a bunch of crap, b) something entirely different from what you're searching for, or c) "I'm sorry, but that search term doesn't exist. Try again." That's like "Oh, GAME OVER." *plays funky music* I think my mom once said Google told her "Hahaha, you're so funny. What kind of search term is that?" Seems legit mom. I think that's just Option A or B for you.
<img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MPfbXCfaO6U/U2VIn0kF3WI/AAAAAAAADK4/nihGmv8QglM/s1600/seemslegit.gif"; height="180" width="320">
What's disappointing? Sherlock doesn't make much an appearance, to the dismay of Sherlock fans, unless you're just a fan of John Watson. He makes quite the appearance for the majority of the book. Oh, and it's a stand alone. *sigh* I was so hoping for a sequel. On the bright side, no waiting! Isn't that great, with so many series of books popping up by the day?
<img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_4sSv6F_1eg/U2VJFOLi7qI/AAAAAAAADLE/I9G2jTU62xc/s1600/too-many-people.gif"; height="156" width="320">
Despite the fact Sherlock doesn't make a huge appearance, mystery fans will find this an enjoyable reads. Oh, and maybe for those who enjoy reading about blood and gore...
EDIT: I stand corrected. This is NOT a stand alone (according to author)
------------------
Advance review copy provided by publisher
Original Rating: 4.5
Original Review posted on <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/06/arc-review-boneseeker-by-brynn-chapman.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>
<img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_kJ9pDaSzoQ/U2VHyusffEI/AAAAAAAADKw/2xCShmhbaAg/s1600/turnups.gif"; height="153" width="320">
Although imagining THE Sherlock Holmes having a kid is probably impossible. Yet in Boneseeker, it's the next generation of Holmes and Watson, only it's not the legendary duo (wait, they're legendary, right?). Instead of being set in London, the story is mainly set in Philadelphia and New York. Arabella, Sherlock's daughter, and Henry, John Watson's son, are on an expedition to find out if a giant hand found are from a Neanderthal or from Nephilim.
Boneseeker is actually quite scary. Sausage murder? Oh dear. But essentially the book is focused on 4 missing scientists who were on the hunt to prove what the hand really is in said expedition above. I think they were also looking for more giant bones hey, can't give anything away, eh? before they actually vanished into nowhere.
The notes at the end were really helpful. I was planning on doing some of my own research when I had the time, whether at school or at the library, but then I finished reading Boneseeker and saw "AUTHOR'S NOTES." Thus resulting in me going "Fantastic! Less research and Bing crap for me!" Search engines usually just give a) a bunch of crap, b) something entirely different from what you're searching for, or c) "I'm sorry, but that search term doesn't exist. Try again." That's like "Oh, GAME OVER." *plays funky music* I think my mom once said Google told her "Hahaha, you're so funny. What kind of search term is that?" Seems legit mom. I think that's just Option A or B for you.
<img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MPfbXCfaO6U/U2VIn0kF3WI/AAAAAAAADK4/nihGmv8QglM/s1600/seemslegit.gif"; height="180" width="320">
What's disappointing? Sherlock doesn't make much an appearance, to the dismay of Sherlock fans, unless you're just a fan of John Watson. He makes quite the appearance for the majority of the book. Oh, and it's a stand alone. *sigh* I was so hoping for a sequel. On the bright side, no waiting! Isn't that great, with so many series of books popping up by the day?
<img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_4sSv6F_1eg/U2VJFOLi7qI/AAAAAAAADLE/I9G2jTU62xc/s1600/too-many-people.gif"; height="156" width="320">
Despite the fact Sherlock doesn't make a huge appearance, mystery fans will find this an enjoyable reads. Oh, and maybe for those who enjoy reading about blood and gore...
EDIT: I stand corrected. This is NOT a stand alone (according to author)
------------------
Advance review copy provided by publisher
Original Rating: 4.5
Original Review posted on <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/06/arc-review-boneseeker-by-brynn-chapman.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
There are certain classic movies that should never be recreated or warrant a sequel. The 1939 cinematic musical masterpiece The Wizard of Oz happens to be one of them. I consider this movie to be the birth of the modern movie film industry, it set the standard for all movies to measure themselves against for many years to come. For those who have been living under a rock and are not familiar with the story of the Wizard of Oz, Dorothy, a young farm girl from Kansas, along with her dog Toto, get whisked in their house by a twister to the land of Oz, a magical fantasyland, where Dorothy wants nothing more than to return home. Per the advice of a Good Witch and some munchkins, and with a new pair of ruby slippers, Dorothy and Toto follow the yellow brick road to the Emerald City to meet the Wizard, who will hopefully help the two make their way back to Kansas. Along the way, she befriends a scarecrow in need of a brain, a tin man who is lacking a heart, and a cowardly lion desperate for courage. They each decide to join Dorothy on her adventure where she defeats the Wicked Witch of the West, who wanted those magical ruby slippers and in the end reaching the Emerald City and safely finds her way back home.
The Legend of Oz: Dorothy’s Return is 3-D animated musical follow up that begins shortly after Dorothy (Lea Michele) returns home from the Land of Oz. The aftermath of the tornado has left her hometown in shambles. Dorothy fights to try to convince everyone that this is their home and it can all be repaired despite the government demanding everyone to vacate the town and seek refuge elsewhere. Back in Oz, the Jester (Martin Short) who happens to be the brother of the Wicked Witch of the West, has sought to rule the World of Oz. He and his band of flying monkeys (same ones from the original movie), begin their reign of terror turning the leaders from all corners of the land into marionettes. The beloved trio of Scarecrow (Dan Akroyd), the Tin Man (Kelsey Grammer) and the Cowardly Lion (James Belushi) believe the only person who can stop the Jester’s tirade is Dorothy. With the help of Scarecrow’s new invention, a machine that can bring Dorothy back over the rainbow and to the land of Oz, they summon for Dorothy. Instead of arriving to the Emerald City, Dorothy arrives in a far off land where she tries to locate the yellow brick road, knowing it will lead her to the Emerald City. On her journey we are introduced to new lands, new people and creatures, new songs, and a new adventure and obstacles that she must overcome before it’s too late.
As a standalone movie, this is a great kids film, one the whole family can enjoy. Lots of fun musical numbers, a mediocre storyline, engaging characters, and beautiful scenery. I would recommend watching this movie with zero expectations and do not attempt to compare it to the original movie, it doesn’t hold a torch!
The Legend of Oz: Dorothy’s Return is 3-D animated musical follow up that begins shortly after Dorothy (Lea Michele) returns home from the Land of Oz. The aftermath of the tornado has left her hometown in shambles. Dorothy fights to try to convince everyone that this is their home and it can all be repaired despite the government demanding everyone to vacate the town and seek refuge elsewhere. Back in Oz, the Jester (Martin Short) who happens to be the brother of the Wicked Witch of the West, has sought to rule the World of Oz. He and his band of flying monkeys (same ones from the original movie), begin their reign of terror turning the leaders from all corners of the land into marionettes. The beloved trio of Scarecrow (Dan Akroyd), the Tin Man (Kelsey Grammer) and the Cowardly Lion (James Belushi) believe the only person who can stop the Jester’s tirade is Dorothy. With the help of Scarecrow’s new invention, a machine that can bring Dorothy back over the rainbow and to the land of Oz, they summon for Dorothy. Instead of arriving to the Emerald City, Dorothy arrives in a far off land where she tries to locate the yellow brick road, knowing it will lead her to the Emerald City. On her journey we are introduced to new lands, new people and creatures, new songs, and a new adventure and obstacles that she must overcome before it’s too late.
As a standalone movie, this is a great kids film, one the whole family can enjoy. Lots of fun musical numbers, a mediocre storyline, engaging characters, and beautiful scenery. I would recommend watching this movie with zero expectations and do not attempt to compare it to the original movie, it doesn’t hold a torch!
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Life Of Pi (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
When I heard that one of my favorite books was being converted into a movie, I was a little skeptical. Add one of my favorite directors, Ang Lee, and my skepticism started to recede. As many know, Lee is renowned for his artistic vision and cinematography. I fell in love with his vision of “Sense and Sensibility,” “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon,” and “Brokeback Mountain.” To me, if there was a director who could capture the beauty and imagery of this book, it was Lee.
The movie and the book are great parallels of one another. The story revolves around a young Indian boy named Piscine (“Pool” in French) who spent much of his youth in Pondicherry, a French colony of India. Much of the book, and movie, include flash-backs of Pi’s life in India – the ridicule of his name, his father’s ownership of a zoo, etc. When Pi and his family decide to move to Canada due to political concerns (the book covers much more of this, including Pi’s exploration of various spiritualties/religions), they are chartered on a ship. En route, they encounter a fierce storm which capsizes their vessel, leaving Pi on a lifeboat with a Bengal tiger, a hyena, an injured zebra, and an orangutan.
Being the only human on board with said animals, Pi naturally fears for his welfare. He observes the hyena killing the injured zebra and then turning on the orangutan. The orangutan, as one should note, cares for Pi in a very motherly fashion (remember that Pi’s whole family had drowned in the ship), and her death was very difficult for Pi to endure. Eventually, the hyena succumbs to death by the tiger. As further explained in the movie and novel, Pi names the tiger “Richard Parker” and the two of them set out to endure their lives aboard the ship in some strange sort of symbiotic relationship.
Lee’s vision transforms this novel into a brilliant masterpiece. Like “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon,” you will be awed by the cinematography and artistic interpretation he presents. The young actors employed for the role of Pi (Gautam Belur, Ayush Tandon, Suraj Sharma & Irrfan Khan) are downright perfect and I particularly enjoyed Gerard Depardieu as the grizzled and difficult French cook (not a difficult stretch for him as one can imagine). Overall, as an avid lover of Yann Martel’s novel and Ang Lee’s work, I can say this is a beautiful movie and one many will enjoy (even if you haven’t read the novel – which you MUST do).
My only complaint is that while it is a beautiful representation of CGI technology, sometimes it looked a bit too manufactured and fantastical. Their work on the tiger, however, was downright genius (and I personally hate when they create CGI animals instead of working with the real thing – but in this instance it worked very well). The ending and symbolism of this work is what makes it truly a piece of art. If you’re a fan of “Inception” and “The Sixth Sense,” you will enjoy the twist at the end.
Overall, I think this is a lovely representation of the novel and a great movie all around. I highly suggest checking it out.
The movie and the book are great parallels of one another. The story revolves around a young Indian boy named Piscine (“Pool” in French) who spent much of his youth in Pondicherry, a French colony of India. Much of the book, and movie, include flash-backs of Pi’s life in India – the ridicule of his name, his father’s ownership of a zoo, etc. When Pi and his family decide to move to Canada due to political concerns (the book covers much more of this, including Pi’s exploration of various spiritualties/religions), they are chartered on a ship. En route, they encounter a fierce storm which capsizes their vessel, leaving Pi on a lifeboat with a Bengal tiger, a hyena, an injured zebra, and an orangutan.
Being the only human on board with said animals, Pi naturally fears for his welfare. He observes the hyena killing the injured zebra and then turning on the orangutan. The orangutan, as one should note, cares for Pi in a very motherly fashion (remember that Pi’s whole family had drowned in the ship), and her death was very difficult for Pi to endure. Eventually, the hyena succumbs to death by the tiger. As further explained in the movie and novel, Pi names the tiger “Richard Parker” and the two of them set out to endure their lives aboard the ship in some strange sort of symbiotic relationship.
Lee’s vision transforms this novel into a brilliant masterpiece. Like “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon,” you will be awed by the cinematography and artistic interpretation he presents. The young actors employed for the role of Pi (Gautam Belur, Ayush Tandon, Suraj Sharma & Irrfan Khan) are downright perfect and I particularly enjoyed Gerard Depardieu as the grizzled and difficult French cook (not a difficult stretch for him as one can imagine). Overall, as an avid lover of Yann Martel’s novel and Ang Lee’s work, I can say this is a beautiful movie and one many will enjoy (even if you haven’t read the novel – which you MUST do).
My only complaint is that while it is a beautiful representation of CGI technology, sometimes it looked a bit too manufactured and fantastical. Their work on the tiger, however, was downright genius (and I personally hate when they create CGI animals instead of working with the real thing – but in this instance it worked very well). The ending and symbolism of this work is what makes it truly a piece of art. If you’re a fan of “Inception” and “The Sixth Sense,” you will enjoy the twist at the end.
Overall, I think this is a lovely representation of the novel and a great movie all around. I highly suggest checking it out.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
Murder on the Orient Express is a mystery drama directed by, and starring, Kenneth Branagh and is based on the 1934 Agatha Christie novel of the same name. The film brings in a spectacular cast alongside Branagh, including Penelope Cruz, Willem Dafoe, Judi Dench, Johnny Depp, Josh Gad, Michelle Pfeiffer and Daisy Ridley. Also part of the main cast, while not well known, but equally as talented, are Tom Bateman, Derek Jacobi, Leslie Odom Jr. and Lucy Boynton.
For those unfamiliar with the novel, or the 1974 and 2001 adaptations, Murder tells the story of, well… a murder. On a train. It’s really a lot more than that. Branagh portrays Hercule Poirot, a famed Belgian detective who is looking forward to some time off. But during his travels, a most unfortunate thing happens. Two things actually. Someone is murdered aboard the train he is traveling on, the Orient Express (naturally). And the murderer would’ve gotten away free and clear had storm not caused an avalanche, which thanks to a derailed engine, caused the train to become stuck and the body to be discovered. Poirot’s friend, Bouc (Bateman), runs the train and requested that Poirot solve the mystery before the police arrive in fear of someone innocent being accused, and to save himself from a heyday with his father. Can Poirot find out who is the killer between the star-studded cast?
I’ve read the novel. Seen both adaptations. This film blows those earlier adaptations out of the water. There is no contest here. Now clearly, nothing can beat the book. But Murder is about as great a film you can get in the murky land of Hollywood these days. As mentioned, Branagh directed and starred in the film, which he shot on 65 mm. The last time he did this was with Hamlet in 1996. It looked good then, and it looks even better now. With eye-popping visuals throughout the entirety of the film, and a masterful soundtrack that seamlessly blended with the tones and themes of each scene, the film is a modern masterpiece.
It wasn’t without its faults. (Most) every film has them. And there are a lot of people who are upset with Branagh’s portrayal of Poirot, particularly the representation of his eccentric facial hair. I am not one of those people. I believe it, along with other amazing moments, lent a bit of humor to the movie to break up what should otherwise be, and is, a serious whodunit mystery. Also, I felt they changed a few things in the adaptation that didn’t necessarily need to be changed.
I found it hard to sit and write about the film though. Given the nature of a great mystery, I can’t tell you too much about it without risk of giving out crucial details to the plot and outcome. So I will leave you with this, boys, girls, and everything in between and beyond… with a great and talented cast (bravo to Michelle Pfeiffer in particular) who nailed home their characters, to great visuals, and a great score, this movie is definitely one you want to catch.
For those unfamiliar with the novel, or the 1974 and 2001 adaptations, Murder tells the story of, well… a murder. On a train. It’s really a lot more than that. Branagh portrays Hercule Poirot, a famed Belgian detective who is looking forward to some time off. But during his travels, a most unfortunate thing happens. Two things actually. Someone is murdered aboard the train he is traveling on, the Orient Express (naturally). And the murderer would’ve gotten away free and clear had storm not caused an avalanche, which thanks to a derailed engine, caused the train to become stuck and the body to be discovered. Poirot’s friend, Bouc (Bateman), runs the train and requested that Poirot solve the mystery before the police arrive in fear of someone innocent being accused, and to save himself from a heyday with his father. Can Poirot find out who is the killer between the star-studded cast?
I’ve read the novel. Seen both adaptations. This film blows those earlier adaptations out of the water. There is no contest here. Now clearly, nothing can beat the book. But Murder is about as great a film you can get in the murky land of Hollywood these days. As mentioned, Branagh directed and starred in the film, which he shot on 65 mm. The last time he did this was with Hamlet in 1996. It looked good then, and it looks even better now. With eye-popping visuals throughout the entirety of the film, and a masterful soundtrack that seamlessly blended with the tones and themes of each scene, the film is a modern masterpiece.
It wasn’t without its faults. (Most) every film has them. And there are a lot of people who are upset with Branagh’s portrayal of Poirot, particularly the representation of his eccentric facial hair. I am not one of those people. I believe it, along with other amazing moments, lent a bit of humor to the movie to break up what should otherwise be, and is, a serious whodunit mystery. Also, I felt they changed a few things in the adaptation that didn’t necessarily need to be changed.
I found it hard to sit and write about the film though. Given the nature of a great mystery, I can’t tell you too much about it without risk of giving out crucial details to the plot and outcome. So I will leave you with this, boys, girls, and everything in between and beyond… with a great and talented cast (bravo to Michelle Pfeiffer in particular) who nailed home their characters, to great visuals, and a great score, this movie is definitely one you want to catch.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Need for Speed in Video Games
Apr 13, 2018 (Updated Apr 13, 2018)
Time To Move On
One of the reasons that I love the medium of video games so much, is because there are times that you absolutely do not expect to feel anything for a game that you download on a whim and end up pouring an abundance of hours into it until you have almost earned the platinum trophy without even realising it.
By no means am I saying that this is a masterpiece, but I had downloaded it months ago in a PSN sale and totally forgot about it, then while I was playing through Evil Within 2, I wanted something else to break up the time spent in Union, so I stuck it on as sort of a backburner game. At first I hated it, I cringed at every cheesy cutscene and longed for the old days of the Underground games and Most Wanted (OG version,) but slowly, I came to accept the updated version of NFS and before too long, I was spending more time with NFS than I was with Evil Within 2. In fact, I sort of rushed my way through Evil Within 2 against my better judgement, so that I could spend more time in NFS guilt free.
The game isn't very hard once you get the knack for drifting. Choose the Subaru at the start of the game and pour all of your in game cash into upgrades for the car until you max it out with what you have unlocked at that stage, then save up and buy the 1999 Skyline and max that out with upgrades, then buy the Lamborghini Aventador as soon as you can afford it and you won't be faced with many losses, as long as you don't wipe out too often. You will have to go back and buy a lower horsepower car for certain missions in the game, but other than that, just pour all of your money into upgrades and you are golden. (Note: don't waste your money on the F132 Hotrod. It's the most expensive car in the game, but it's balls compared to the Lambo and can't be upgraded.)
Also, this is my first platinum trophy since Infamous: First Light and is by far my most surprising platinum. (I'm not the trophy whore that I used to be.) I played through the story until the end and levelled up to 50 with very minimal grinding, then I checked the trophy list and saw that I was only 2 arbitrary trophies short of the platinum, so I worked towards them and popped the platinum. For those of you that aren't Playstation gamers or trophy hunters, this may mean nothing to you, but let's just say I sincerely didn't believe that I was going to platinum this game back when I first downloaded it, in fact I would have put money on the fact that I wouldn't.
Overall, this is hot trash, but it's fun. Need For Speed is never going to be what it was in the PS2 days, but if you can accept that and stomach the excessive amount of inane fistbumps and cringey dialogue spouted by the game's stereotypical cool kids, there is an enjoyable game in here.
By no means am I saying that this is a masterpiece, but I had downloaded it months ago in a PSN sale and totally forgot about it, then while I was playing through Evil Within 2, I wanted something else to break up the time spent in Union, so I stuck it on as sort of a backburner game. At first I hated it, I cringed at every cheesy cutscene and longed for the old days of the Underground games and Most Wanted (OG version,) but slowly, I came to accept the updated version of NFS and before too long, I was spending more time with NFS than I was with Evil Within 2. In fact, I sort of rushed my way through Evil Within 2 against my better judgement, so that I could spend more time in NFS guilt free.
The game isn't very hard once you get the knack for drifting. Choose the Subaru at the start of the game and pour all of your in game cash into upgrades for the car until you max it out with what you have unlocked at that stage, then save up and buy the 1999 Skyline and max that out with upgrades, then buy the Lamborghini Aventador as soon as you can afford it and you won't be faced with many losses, as long as you don't wipe out too often. You will have to go back and buy a lower horsepower car for certain missions in the game, but other than that, just pour all of your money into upgrades and you are golden. (Note: don't waste your money on the F132 Hotrod. It's the most expensive car in the game, but it's balls compared to the Lambo and can't be upgraded.)
Also, this is my first platinum trophy since Infamous: First Light and is by far my most surprising platinum. (I'm not the trophy whore that I used to be.) I played through the story until the end and levelled up to 50 with very minimal grinding, then I checked the trophy list and saw that I was only 2 arbitrary trophies short of the platinum, so I worked towards them and popped the platinum. For those of you that aren't Playstation gamers or trophy hunters, this may mean nothing to you, but let's just say I sincerely didn't believe that I was going to platinum this game back when I first downloaded it, in fact I would have put money on the fact that I wouldn't.
Overall, this is hot trash, but it's fun. Need For Speed is never going to be what it was in the PS2 days, but if you can accept that and stomach the excessive amount of inane fistbumps and cringey dialogue spouted by the game's stereotypical cool kids, there is an enjoyable game in here.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Snowman (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
No, not that one
Nordic noir is big business at the moment, but with the incredible scenery of the locations lending themselves perfectly to film, is there any wonder?
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Hypnotist are just a couple of movies that have fallen into this massively expanding genre.
Now, Jo Nesbø’s chilling The Snowman novel gets the silver screen treatment in a film of the same name. But can this continue the thrilling trend of whodunit novels being turned into fabulous crime dramas?For Detective Harry Hole (Michael Fassbender), the death of a young woman during the first snow of winter feels like anything but a routine homicide. His investigation leads him to “The Snowman Killer,” an elusive sociopath who continuously taunts Hole with ingeniously crafted cat-and-mouse games. As the brutal deaths show no sign of slowing, Harry teams up with a new recruit (Rebecca Ferguson) to try and lure the madman out of the shadows before it’s too late.
With Michael Fassbender at the helm, director Thomas Alfredson (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) manages to blend gorgeous imagery with an intriguing plot and excellent performances in a film that suffers from a couple of issues that stops it from becoming a must-see event.
These R-rated thrillers are ten-a-penny these days with the bar still being set incredibly high by Gone Girl. Last year’s Girl on the Train was a decent stab at dethroning David Fincher’s masterpiece, but it just fell a little short – well the same has happened here.
Michael Fassbender is uniformly excellent as troubled detective, Harry and the actor can do no wrong in his performances, but he’s suffered this year. After Assassin’s Creed failed to ignite the box-office, it looks to be a similar story this time. While The Snowman is technically competent and filmed beautifully, it lacks the sense of originality that breeds success.
It also doesn’t help that he’s surrounded by thinly padded supporting characters like former love interest Rakel (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and new police officer Katrine (Ferguson). Elsewhere, bizarre glorified cameos for Val Kilmer and Toby Jones leave you wondering if these actors expected a little more from their parts.
Perhaps I’m being a little harsh. After all, the cast is one of the film’s strongest suits. Add J.K. Simmons to the aforementioned roster and it really does have one of the best line-ups of the year. It’s just a shame the script doesn’t do more with them.
To look at, The Snowman is absolutely gorgeous. Helped obviously by magnificent Norwegian landscapes, Alfredson shoots using steady cam in scenes reminiscent of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining, high praise indeed. In a year populated by CGI-heavy blockbusters, this comes as a real breath of fresh air.
Unfortunately, the constant use of flashbacks and a peculiar subplot involving a Winter sporting event ruin the pacing, though at 130 minutes, this isn’t too much of an issue. The ending however, is disappointing and lacks an emotional payoff after the film’s events.
Overall, The Snowman is a gritty adaptation of Jo Nesbø’s successful novel and while some of the plot choices leave a little to be desired, a great anchor performance by Michael Fassbender and stunning cinematography mean it’s definitely worth a watch; just don’t expect too much.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/14/the-snowman-review/
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Hypnotist are just a couple of movies that have fallen into this massively expanding genre.
Now, Jo Nesbø’s chilling The Snowman novel gets the silver screen treatment in a film of the same name. But can this continue the thrilling trend of whodunit novels being turned into fabulous crime dramas?For Detective Harry Hole (Michael Fassbender), the death of a young woman during the first snow of winter feels like anything but a routine homicide. His investigation leads him to “The Snowman Killer,” an elusive sociopath who continuously taunts Hole with ingeniously crafted cat-and-mouse games. As the brutal deaths show no sign of slowing, Harry teams up with a new recruit (Rebecca Ferguson) to try and lure the madman out of the shadows before it’s too late.
With Michael Fassbender at the helm, director Thomas Alfredson (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) manages to blend gorgeous imagery with an intriguing plot and excellent performances in a film that suffers from a couple of issues that stops it from becoming a must-see event.
These R-rated thrillers are ten-a-penny these days with the bar still being set incredibly high by Gone Girl. Last year’s Girl on the Train was a decent stab at dethroning David Fincher’s masterpiece, but it just fell a little short – well the same has happened here.
Michael Fassbender is uniformly excellent as troubled detective, Harry and the actor can do no wrong in his performances, but he’s suffered this year. After Assassin’s Creed failed to ignite the box-office, it looks to be a similar story this time. While The Snowman is technically competent and filmed beautifully, it lacks the sense of originality that breeds success.
It also doesn’t help that he’s surrounded by thinly padded supporting characters like former love interest Rakel (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and new police officer Katrine (Ferguson). Elsewhere, bizarre glorified cameos for Val Kilmer and Toby Jones leave you wondering if these actors expected a little more from their parts.
Perhaps I’m being a little harsh. After all, the cast is one of the film’s strongest suits. Add J.K. Simmons to the aforementioned roster and it really does have one of the best line-ups of the year. It’s just a shame the script doesn’t do more with them.
To look at, The Snowman is absolutely gorgeous. Helped obviously by magnificent Norwegian landscapes, Alfredson shoots using steady cam in scenes reminiscent of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining, high praise indeed. In a year populated by CGI-heavy blockbusters, this comes as a real breath of fresh air.
Unfortunately, the constant use of flashbacks and a peculiar subplot involving a Winter sporting event ruin the pacing, though at 130 minutes, this isn’t too much of an issue. The ending however, is disappointing and lacks an emotional payoff after the film’s events.
Overall, The Snowman is a gritty adaptation of Jo Nesbø’s successful novel and while some of the plot choices leave a little to be desired, a great anchor performance by Michael Fassbender and stunning cinematography mean it’s definitely worth a watch; just don’t expect too much.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/14/the-snowman-review/
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Rosemary's Baby (Rosemary's Baby, #1) in Books
Mar 15, 2018
<b><i>This is no dream, she thought. This is real, this is happening.</i></b>
<b>Note to self and others:</b> beware of overly friendly neighbours.
This is amazing. At just over 200 pages, this novel takes you on a hell (excuse the pun) of a journey that you wont forget anytime soon. Levin has managed to make a novel so witty, and at the same time, so terrifying. In a way, the tone of this book is reminiscent of American Psycho (or rather American Psycho is reminiscent of this as it came out afterwards), but rather than in-your-face vulgar gore, this is far more psychologically disturbing. Never has such a mundane life, as Rosemarys and Guys, ever been so horrifying.
Id already watched the movie when I picked this up, so I knew what this novel was about and what happened, and I think, maybe, that made me enjoy this <i>more.</i> When you know how the story plays out, the tension in this really grips you and you find yourself angry and empathetic towards Rosemarys naivety. I think if I went into this novel not knowing, Rosemary would have simply pissed me off, shes that sort of weak and dependant woman I oh-so hate in books, but it was a different experience for me, knowing what I know. Thats not to say you wont like this going into it blind, Im sure the tension and horror of this will affect you just the same way <i>and</i>_ you'll get the pleasure of the pure shock of the discovery, something I didn't.
Ive said previously that I find it hard to really <i>hate</i> a character in a book, as I often find things to like about them, despite all their bad ways, but thats not the case in this one. Lets just say there is one specific character in this I hate more than anyone (in any other book ever, so far) for their betrayal, all for their own selfish gain.
The ending of this novel is one of the hardest, if not <i>the</i> hardest to swallow. Its <i>so</i> distressing and <i>so</i> upsetting. I cant say anything more than that, but its truly awful.
Im really trying not to give too much away with this review, its hard not to say so many things, but I think its OK to mention the fact this book is about devilry (its written on the book as a quote from Capote so it cant exactly be ignored)! This is a truly terrifying novel, and if you had qualms about having children before, youll definitely have more after reading this book.
This is a one-sitting read for me and Im actually excited to re-read it sometime in the future. This work is a masterpiece. Levin is an incredible writer and Im now aiming to read the rest of his work by the end of the year (yes, even <i>Son of Rosemary</i>, even though it has the worst ratings ever).
P.S. Even if you dont like horror, youll most likely enjoy this book as its not openly trying to freak you out. Its far more a suspense novel that gets in your head.
<b>Note to self and others:</b> beware of overly friendly neighbours.
This is amazing. At just over 200 pages, this novel takes you on a hell (excuse the pun) of a journey that you wont forget anytime soon. Levin has managed to make a novel so witty, and at the same time, so terrifying. In a way, the tone of this book is reminiscent of American Psycho (or rather American Psycho is reminiscent of this as it came out afterwards), but rather than in-your-face vulgar gore, this is far more psychologically disturbing. Never has such a mundane life, as Rosemarys and Guys, ever been so horrifying.
Id already watched the movie when I picked this up, so I knew what this novel was about and what happened, and I think, maybe, that made me enjoy this <i>more.</i> When you know how the story plays out, the tension in this really grips you and you find yourself angry and empathetic towards Rosemarys naivety. I think if I went into this novel not knowing, Rosemary would have simply pissed me off, shes that sort of weak and dependant woman I oh-so hate in books, but it was a different experience for me, knowing what I know. Thats not to say you wont like this going into it blind, Im sure the tension and horror of this will affect you just the same way <i>and</i>_ you'll get the pleasure of the pure shock of the discovery, something I didn't.
Ive said previously that I find it hard to really <i>hate</i> a character in a book, as I often find things to like about them, despite all their bad ways, but thats not the case in this one. Lets just say there is one specific character in this I hate more than anyone (in any other book ever, so far) for their betrayal, all for their own selfish gain.
The ending of this novel is one of the hardest, if not <i>the</i> hardest to swallow. Its <i>so</i> distressing and <i>so</i> upsetting. I cant say anything more than that, but its truly awful.
Im really trying not to give too much away with this review, its hard not to say so many things, but I think its OK to mention the fact this book is about devilry (its written on the book as a quote from Capote so it cant exactly be ignored)! This is a truly terrifying novel, and if you had qualms about having children before, youll definitely have more after reading this book.
This is a one-sitting read for me and Im actually excited to re-read it sometime in the future. This work is a masterpiece. Levin is an incredible writer and Im now aiming to read the rest of his work by the end of the year (yes, even <i>Son of Rosemary</i>, even though it has the worst ratings ever).
P.S. Even if you dont like horror, youll most likely enjoy this book as its not openly trying to freak you out. Its far more a suspense novel that gets in your head.