Search
Search results
Fred (860 KP) rated Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988) in Movies
Jan 22, 2019
Almost all of the classic characters are here! (2 more)
Roger is a great new "classic" character
Bob Hoskins & Christopher Lloyd are great!
A masterpiece of American animation
The movie starts with a cartoon that could just about pass as one of our favorite cartoons from the 40s (if not for the computer-hand-drawn objects within) & from there, it's non-stop. We're treated to a noir, but very colorful, detective story filled with American animations best characters. Characters from different studios share the screen for the first time ever. Bugs & Mickey, Donald & Daffy & a scene at the end which has just about everybody. The mixture of live-action with animation is nothing short of remarkable & a great technical achievement. Of course, they would not seem to interact so well if not for the human actors themselves. A lot of times, even today, when actors are working against nothing, they seem to stare to the wrong spot or past the character. But in Roger Rabbit, it's not the case. Hoskins is great at keeping this illusion. I heard there may be a sequel in the works & hope that it's true. Hopefully, they get the rights to Popeye this time.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Dumb and Dumber To (2014) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
It is hard to believe that it is been 20 years since Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels brought the moronic Harry and Lloyd to the big screen. The comedic adventures of the well-meaning but idiotic best friends became a box office smash and has maintained a loyal worker fans despite the highly disappointing prequel that was made in an attempt to extend series. With the Farrelly brothers back in place to write and direct the long-awaited follow-up it should come as no surprise as to what viewers are in store for with “Dumb and Dumber To”.
Lloyd (Jim Carrey) has been an institution for the past two decades while Harry (Jeff Daniels), visits him lawyerly once a week. When the reason behind Lloyd’s institutionalization becomes clear Harry informs his old friend that is in desperate need of a kidney transplant. With his options limited, Harry visits his family whom he has not seen in quite some time and goes through some mail that had been delivered over the years.
Harry learns that an old acquaintance was pregnant and in an effort to see if the child he never knew he had could be a donor, the bumbling duo sets out to find child Harry never knew he had. This is easier said than done as the mother (Kathleen Turner), give the child up for adoption and her only effort to communicate resulted in a letter being returned to her with a note asking her not to write again.
Undaunted Harry and Lloyd set out from their Rhode Island home and venture down to Maryland before learning that the object of their quest is already left for New Mexico to attend a very important conference. The duo decided to head on to New Mexico with a third person in tow not knowing that he secretly is aiming to do away with them in a con limited inheritance scheme.
As anyone who’s seen the previous film will remember, traveling with Harry and Lloyd can be extremely dangerous to one’s physical and mental sanity and the ensuing years have done nothing to change this. In short time duo arrives at their goal but finds their natural tendencies to get in and cause trouble has followed them resulting in a series of chaotic misadventures.
While many of the jokes and situations were recycled from previous films including Lloyd’s daydreaming about a perfect date and various car pranks, one thing that is undeniable is the great chemistry and timing between the two leads. The material certainly strains its PG-13 rating in terms of suggestiveness but even though some of the jokes do not quite succeed and the plot is at best paper thin, it was sure good to see these two back in action.
The film is at best a guilty pleasure because it will be easy to say it was kind of dumb and meandering at points and that the two characters were not given much to do other than an act that was funny 20 years earlier but may seem a bit strange to date considering both Daniels and Carrey have shown they are capable of doing so much more.
For me I looked at it is a bit of a nostalgic guilty pleasure that despite the shortcomings and faults offered some enjoyable although mostly forgettable distractions in between some good laughs. For those willing to take more the same and can temper their expectations accordingly you will likely find this trip one worth taking if nothing else than for the nostalgia.
I for one am hoping that we haven’t seen the last these two in action but I certainly would like to see them come back with a better script and certainly do not want have to wait 20 years for this to happen.
http://sknr.net/2014/11/14/dumb-dumber/
Lloyd (Jim Carrey) has been an institution for the past two decades while Harry (Jeff Daniels), visits him lawyerly once a week. When the reason behind Lloyd’s institutionalization becomes clear Harry informs his old friend that is in desperate need of a kidney transplant. With his options limited, Harry visits his family whom he has not seen in quite some time and goes through some mail that had been delivered over the years.
Harry learns that an old acquaintance was pregnant and in an effort to see if the child he never knew he had could be a donor, the bumbling duo sets out to find child Harry never knew he had. This is easier said than done as the mother (Kathleen Turner), give the child up for adoption and her only effort to communicate resulted in a letter being returned to her with a note asking her not to write again.
Undaunted Harry and Lloyd set out from their Rhode Island home and venture down to Maryland before learning that the object of their quest is already left for New Mexico to attend a very important conference. The duo decided to head on to New Mexico with a third person in tow not knowing that he secretly is aiming to do away with them in a con limited inheritance scheme.
As anyone who’s seen the previous film will remember, traveling with Harry and Lloyd can be extremely dangerous to one’s physical and mental sanity and the ensuing years have done nothing to change this. In short time duo arrives at their goal but finds their natural tendencies to get in and cause trouble has followed them resulting in a series of chaotic misadventures.
While many of the jokes and situations were recycled from previous films including Lloyd’s daydreaming about a perfect date and various car pranks, one thing that is undeniable is the great chemistry and timing between the two leads. The material certainly strains its PG-13 rating in terms of suggestiveness but even though some of the jokes do not quite succeed and the plot is at best paper thin, it was sure good to see these two back in action.
The film is at best a guilty pleasure because it will be easy to say it was kind of dumb and meandering at points and that the two characters were not given much to do other than an act that was funny 20 years earlier but may seem a bit strange to date considering both Daniels and Carrey have shown they are capable of doing so much more.
For me I looked at it is a bit of a nostalgic guilty pleasure that despite the shortcomings and faults offered some enjoyable although mostly forgettable distractions in between some good laughs. For those willing to take more the same and can temper their expectations accordingly you will likely find this trip one worth taking if nothing else than for the nostalgia.
I for one am hoping that we haven’t seen the last these two in action but I certainly would like to see them come back with a better script and certainly do not want have to wait 20 years for this to happen.
http://sknr.net/2014/11/14/dumb-dumber/
ClareR (5864 KP) rated The Memory Wood in Books
Feb 27, 2020 (Updated Feb 29, 2020)
The Memory Wood is a phenomenal book. I was on tenterhooks from the first chapter - mainly because I didn't really know what to expect. I usually avoid stories where child abductions are involved for reasons obvious to me (I know people who enjoy these themes, and are better able to detach fact from fiction than me!), but as The Pigeonhole chose it, I thought I'd give it a go - and I'm glad I did.
Elissa is abducted from outside the chess tournament that she's playing at, and wakes up manacled to the floor by a chain. Her only contact with another person is Elijah, a 12 year old boy who lives in the Memory Wood. He calls her Gretel, she calls him Hansel, and the house above the cellar she is imprisoned in is referred to as the Gingerbread House.
Meanwhile, the police have started the investigation, and are trying to locate Elissa. Detective Superintendent Mairead MacCullagh is in charge, and to be honest, Elissa couldn't have a more committed person to lead the hunt. Despite very upsetting personal circumstances, Mairead works hard and persistently to try and find Elissa.
I loved this book - it was non-stop action and so tense! I'm so glad I gave it a chance, because I'm sure it will be one of may favourite books of 2020!
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole and to Sam Lloyd for reading along with us.
Elissa is abducted from outside the chess tournament that she's playing at, and wakes up manacled to the floor by a chain. Her only contact with another person is Elijah, a 12 year old boy who lives in the Memory Wood. He calls her Gretel, she calls him Hansel, and the house above the cellar she is imprisoned in is referred to as the Gingerbread House.
Meanwhile, the police have started the investigation, and are trying to locate Elissa. Detective Superintendent Mairead MacCullagh is in charge, and to be honest, Elissa couldn't have a more committed person to lead the hunt. Despite very upsetting personal circumstances, Mairead works hard and persistently to try and find Elissa.
I loved this book - it was non-stop action and so tense! I'm so glad I gave it a chance, because I'm sure it will be one of may favourite books of 2020!
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole and to Sam Lloyd for reading along with us.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Iron Lady (2012) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Meryl Streep certainly has an impressive roster of films under her belt. She’s reduced Anne Hathaway to tears in The Devil Wears Prada, she’s played the role of struggling hotelier in the all singing, all dancing Mamma Mia and has racked up an astonishing 16 Oscar nominations for films like Kramer vs. Kramer and Sophie’s Choice. However, here, she perhaps takes on her biggest role to date portraying arguably the most controversial figure in British politics; Baroness Thatcher. Can she pull it off? Did you really need to ask?
Streep teams up with Mammia Mia director Phyllida Lloyd in the Iron Lady, a biopic surrounding the life of ex-Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher and between the two of them and a wonderful supporting cast, deliver a stunning but disappointingly safe take on the 86 year olds life.
The film opens with a frail looking woman wandering the streets and buying a bottle of milk, we soon learn that this woman is of course, Baroness Thatcher. After a thought provoking moment of silence, the scene is switched to her current home where she is kept under lock and key, struggling with ever worsening dementia. Her constant conversations with dead husband Dennis, played fabulously by Jim Broadbent are emotional and form the basis of the entire film.
It is in these scenes that we begin to ‘study’ Thatcher’s life from her youth right up until the present day. We see her refusing to give up after failing to gain a seat in the 1950 and 1951 general elections as well as her first steps into Number 10 as the first ever female Prime Minister. Lloyd displays these moments with great finesse and integrates Streep’s portrayal with real footage of Thatcher walking into 10 Downing Street amongst other key moments.
Most of the major events in Margaret’s career are carried over into the film, bar a few notable exceptions. The Grand Hotel bombing, the Falklands war, the death of Thatcher’s personal assistant at the hands of the IRA and of course the controversial Poll Tax all make the grade but are explained in a way that isn’t damaging to the reputation of the Baroness and this is perhaps where the film loses its way a little.
There’ll be no prizes in telling you that Margaret Thatcher was either a fantastic woman who turned around the fates of a country struggling with recession or a woman who nearly destroyed everything we hold dear; depending obviously on your thoughts of her. No matter what thoughts we all have, opinions are opinions. Here, however, the film tries to make up the minds of those watching, rather than allowing an opinion to form on its own and this is perhaps the biggest problem with a political biopic, there is always a sense of bias.
Fortunately, Lloyd stays on the right side of mass appeal and doesn’t give in to mindless brown-nosing.
It is in the films present day moments that really shine. Seeing a woman who wanted to change the world struggle to cope with the loss of her husband and fall into dementia is, no matter what your opinion on the ex-Prime Minister, heart-breaking. It is here, that sympathy is found.
Streep’s performance is stunning to say the least and she is a joy to watch. Her transgression from young, enthusiastic Thatcher to the old and frail woman we see today is yes, in part down to the astonishing make-up given to her throughout but mainly because of her ability as an actress. She, like the lady herself takes charge of every scene she is a part of, something which many actresses struggle to do. Streep may have had her critics in being cast for this film, but she has proved them wrong. It will be a crime if she isn’t nominated for an Oscar this year.
Of the films other cast, Olivia Colman does well as Margaret’s daughter Carole and as mentioned previously, Jim Broadbent is brilliant as the deceased Dennis Thatcher; he fits the role perfectly and again should be nominated for an Oscar later this year. The supporting cast includes the likes of Anthony Head as Geoffrey Howe and Nicholas Farrell as Thatcher’s murdered assistant Airey Neave, but the scenes with these characters are often overshadowed by Streep’s presence.
The Iron Lady is a joy to behold. It makes you proud to be British, to know that we as a country can produce films of this calibre and it shows the world just what a woman Margaret Thatcher was. In the scenes showing Thatcher’s spiral into dementia is where it becomes most touching, but throughout, we get a full, if slightly biased view of her 11 and a half years in office and Meryl Streep does the old girl proud.
Think what you will of the former Conservative leader, but The Iron Lady is worth a watch for Streep’s performance alone.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2012/01/12/review-the-iron-lady-2011/
Streep teams up with Mammia Mia director Phyllida Lloyd in the Iron Lady, a biopic surrounding the life of ex-Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher and between the two of them and a wonderful supporting cast, deliver a stunning but disappointingly safe take on the 86 year olds life.
The film opens with a frail looking woman wandering the streets and buying a bottle of milk, we soon learn that this woman is of course, Baroness Thatcher. After a thought provoking moment of silence, the scene is switched to her current home where she is kept under lock and key, struggling with ever worsening dementia. Her constant conversations with dead husband Dennis, played fabulously by Jim Broadbent are emotional and form the basis of the entire film.
It is in these scenes that we begin to ‘study’ Thatcher’s life from her youth right up until the present day. We see her refusing to give up after failing to gain a seat in the 1950 and 1951 general elections as well as her first steps into Number 10 as the first ever female Prime Minister. Lloyd displays these moments with great finesse and integrates Streep’s portrayal with real footage of Thatcher walking into 10 Downing Street amongst other key moments.
Most of the major events in Margaret’s career are carried over into the film, bar a few notable exceptions. The Grand Hotel bombing, the Falklands war, the death of Thatcher’s personal assistant at the hands of the IRA and of course the controversial Poll Tax all make the grade but are explained in a way that isn’t damaging to the reputation of the Baroness and this is perhaps where the film loses its way a little.
There’ll be no prizes in telling you that Margaret Thatcher was either a fantastic woman who turned around the fates of a country struggling with recession or a woman who nearly destroyed everything we hold dear; depending obviously on your thoughts of her. No matter what thoughts we all have, opinions are opinions. Here, however, the film tries to make up the minds of those watching, rather than allowing an opinion to form on its own and this is perhaps the biggest problem with a political biopic, there is always a sense of bias.
Fortunately, Lloyd stays on the right side of mass appeal and doesn’t give in to mindless brown-nosing.
It is in the films present day moments that really shine. Seeing a woman who wanted to change the world struggle to cope with the loss of her husband and fall into dementia is, no matter what your opinion on the ex-Prime Minister, heart-breaking. It is here, that sympathy is found.
Streep’s performance is stunning to say the least and she is a joy to watch. Her transgression from young, enthusiastic Thatcher to the old and frail woman we see today is yes, in part down to the astonishing make-up given to her throughout but mainly because of her ability as an actress. She, like the lady herself takes charge of every scene she is a part of, something which many actresses struggle to do. Streep may have had her critics in being cast for this film, but she has proved them wrong. It will be a crime if she isn’t nominated for an Oscar this year.
Of the films other cast, Olivia Colman does well as Margaret’s daughter Carole and as mentioned previously, Jim Broadbent is brilliant as the deceased Dennis Thatcher; he fits the role perfectly and again should be nominated for an Oscar later this year. The supporting cast includes the likes of Anthony Head as Geoffrey Howe and Nicholas Farrell as Thatcher’s murdered assistant Airey Neave, but the scenes with these characters are often overshadowed by Streep’s presence.
The Iron Lady is a joy to behold. It makes you proud to be British, to know that we as a country can produce films of this calibre and it shows the world just what a woman Margaret Thatcher was. In the scenes showing Thatcher’s spiral into dementia is where it becomes most touching, but throughout, we get a full, if slightly biased view of her 11 and a half years in office and Meryl Streep does the old girl proud.
Think what you will of the former Conservative leader, but The Iron Lady is worth a watch for Streep’s performance alone.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2012/01/12/review-the-iron-lady-2011/
Caffeinated Fae (464 KP) rated V for Vendetta in Books
Jul 10, 2018
I picked up V for Vendetta because my book club wanted to read it. I will admit, graphic novels are not my usual flavor, but every now and then it is nice to have something new. I tend to like reading books without having to analyze the photos. I like having more detail in the writing itself. With graphic novels, the pictures are the details. This can be great and I love the additional media but I found it a little lacking.
<blockquote> ÛÏEverybody is special. Everybody. Everybody is a hero, a lover, a fool, a villain. Everybody.Û </blockquote>
Ultimately, I want to read the details and not have to scour a picture for them. The artwork was beautiful in a grungy way. David LloydÛªs talent really did captivate me. But, I also found the artwork frustrating at times. When reading/viewing this graphic novel I found that the facial expressions were sometimes too similar to pick out. Someone could be crying in despair or screaming in rage, and it looked nearly identical. Also, there were some characters that just seemed to blend together. I discussed this book with the rest of the book club and we all tended to agree that the characters were too similar in their appearance. One member blended two characters together. Looking back at the novel, I definitely understand where he was coming from. I even had some problems interpreting one of the characters. I actually thought that one of the wives was the mother. I was quite surprised (I almost spit out my coffee) when there was a sexual scene between the mother and the sonÛ_ luckily, I went back in the novel and realized that she was the wife.
<blockquote> ÛÏThey made you into a victim, Evey. They made you into a statistic. But thatÛªs not the real you. ThatÛªs not who you are inside.Û </blockquote>
What I really liked about V for Vendetta was the fact that it was different from my typical books. The book was very political. I found it fascinating to see MilgramÛªs study discussed along with the concept of happiness. There were many times that I took a picture of the page so that I wouldnÛªt forget a certain passage. I also really loved the concepts of the book. I found myself enthralled by the thoughts and ideas in regards to social standing, political ideas, and the dystopian ideals that were present. I do wish that they would have continued with some of them. One amazing member of the Denver Coffeehouse Book Club summed up my frustrations about this beautifully: ÛÏThatÛªs a great conceptÛ_ *Shrug*Û. It seemed like every time Alan Moore and David Lloyd came up with a great idea they just shrugged and left it hanging in the air, leaving the reader with the hope that they might revisit it laterÛ_ *Spoiler* later never came.
<blockquote> ÛÏHappiness is the most insidious prison of all.Û </blockquote>
All in all, I enjoyed V for Vendetta and I will most likely read it again. ItÛªs like a cup of gas station coffee that you add a cinnamon stick to in hopes that the flavor may change. I liked the plot, the ideas, the concepts, but I do wish that the concepts were more flushed out. It seemed that they had great ideas that they just didnÛªt follow through with. Perhaps that was part of their ultimate concept. They could have wanted the reader to explore their own thoughts and draw their own conclusions. Ultimately, I found the graphic novel form fascinating, beautiful, and at times quite frustrating. It was great, just not my usual flavor.
<blockquote> ÛÏEverybody is special. Everybody. Everybody is a hero, a lover, a fool, a villain. Everybody.Û </blockquote>
Ultimately, I want to read the details and not have to scour a picture for them. The artwork was beautiful in a grungy way. David LloydÛªs talent really did captivate me. But, I also found the artwork frustrating at times. When reading/viewing this graphic novel I found that the facial expressions were sometimes too similar to pick out. Someone could be crying in despair or screaming in rage, and it looked nearly identical. Also, there were some characters that just seemed to blend together. I discussed this book with the rest of the book club and we all tended to agree that the characters were too similar in their appearance. One member blended two characters together. Looking back at the novel, I definitely understand where he was coming from. I even had some problems interpreting one of the characters. I actually thought that one of the wives was the mother. I was quite surprised (I almost spit out my coffee) when there was a sexual scene between the mother and the sonÛ_ luckily, I went back in the novel and realized that she was the wife.
<blockquote> ÛÏThey made you into a victim, Evey. They made you into a statistic. But thatÛªs not the real you. ThatÛªs not who you are inside.Û </blockquote>
What I really liked about V for Vendetta was the fact that it was different from my typical books. The book was very political. I found it fascinating to see MilgramÛªs study discussed along with the concept of happiness. There were many times that I took a picture of the page so that I wouldnÛªt forget a certain passage. I also really loved the concepts of the book. I found myself enthralled by the thoughts and ideas in regards to social standing, political ideas, and the dystopian ideals that were present. I do wish that they would have continued with some of them. One amazing member of the Denver Coffeehouse Book Club summed up my frustrations about this beautifully: ÛÏThatÛªs a great conceptÛ_ *Shrug*Û. It seemed like every time Alan Moore and David Lloyd came up with a great idea they just shrugged and left it hanging in the air, leaving the reader with the hope that they might revisit it laterÛ_ *Spoiler* later never came.
<blockquote> ÛÏHappiness is the most insidious prison of all.Û </blockquote>
All in all, I enjoyed V for Vendetta and I will most likely read it again. ItÛªs like a cup of gas station coffee that you add a cinnamon stick to in hopes that the flavor may change. I liked the plot, the ideas, the concepts, but I do wish that the concepts were more flushed out. It seemed that they had great ideas that they just didnÛªt follow through with. Perhaps that was part of their ultimate concept. They could have wanted the reader to explore their own thoughts and draw their own conclusions. Ultimately, I found the graphic novel form fascinating, beautiful, and at times quite frustrating. It was great, just not my usual flavor.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood (2019) in Movies
Feb 2, 2020 (Updated Feb 2, 2020)
Hello Neighbor
A Beautiful Day In The Neighborhood is an inspiring and delightful film about a man that was oh so smart and oh so pleasant. I just want to say from the start what an absolute joy this film was to watch, there was something so warm and wonderful there constantly that kept my full attention the entire time and when it ended I almost felt sad there wasnt more of it. Tom Hanks plays Fred Rogers aka Mr Rogers as hes known by most. An intriguing man who is almost investigated/interrogated by writer Lloyd Voge who has many troubles of his own. Hanks transforms seamlessly into Rogers with all his mannerisms replicated flawlessly even down to whats going on behined his eyes. Rogers may seem like theres something more sinister behined him at times but truth is he had a troubled past too and while maybe not a war veteran its almost as if you can see signs of depression or ptsd behined those eyes from the way he was treated in his youth of from the general weight of his job. But its the way the way hes learnt to deal with his anger, frustrations and demons thats so fascinating and how he manages to keep stong/humble so he can teach other children to overcome the harshness of life and the dark times they may face ahead of them thats trully inspiring and commendable. Llyods transformation during the film is also depicted amazingly too, hes so troubled hes almost beyond help, struggling with such emotions as grief, hatred and stress hes seemingly stuck on an ever declining path of sadness. That is until he meets rogers and the on screen interactions between these two are the absolute bread and butter to watch here as rogers uses his philosophy and good nature to help him find happiness in himself once again. See the thing is adults tend to dismiss anything they consider 'childish' but more often than not these so called childish things they dismiss contain more answers, escapism and advise for our problems than anything else be it by nostalgia, wisdom or philosophy or simple innocence. I loved how the tv show scenes felt so nostalgic that you could swear they were filmed way back in the past and the choice to use a different aspect ratio for them was smart. Its odd to say but theres definitely a subbtle element of horror and creepiness I found here too especially with some of the almost fever dream type scenes which worked extreamly well and broke up the film nicely. Lastly I would say if you are planning to see this be prepared to cry as its not only incredibly heartfelt it also constantly deals with very depressing subject matter too. So many times I found It depicted problems, situations, feelings and nostalgia to things that I have faced in my own life leading to me to tear up like it was speaking specifically to only me as I questioned my own life, feelings, relationships and decisions in my head. A splendid film that teaches us how life is to short to waste time on anger/hate and that we should instead spend and cherish the time we have here with the ones we love before its to late.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Cats (2019) in Movies
Jan 15, 2020
Stuff of nightmares
From the moment I saw the trailer, I knew I wasn't going to like this film. Having never seen the stage show, I went into this completely blind and to be honest, after 100 minutes of this nonsense I wish I was blind.
Usually I'll try to find something good to say about a film, but I'm really struggling with this. I feel like giving it a 2 is rather generous. Other than appreciating the amount of effort on the CGI and the song Memory, I really cannot identify any other good points whatsoever.
Now where do I start on the bad? The cats themselves are beyond disturbing. People dressed as cats in the stage show I can understand. Human features on cat bodies is just crazy and looks ridiculous. The fact that they alternate between 2 and 4 legged with human features, it beggars belief. I hoped I might get used to it, but i really didnt especially when they start hissing, preening and acting like real cats - it's terrifying and laughable all at once. The scaling of the cats against the scenery also looks a little misjudged, especially when they stand up.
The story and rest of the film doesn't fare much better. The songs (except for Memory) are surprisingly poor for an Andrew Lloyd Webber musical, and no others are particularly memorable. The plot itself is also very thin and has barely any substance, the fact that they've managed to drag this out to 100 minutes is impressive. I also couldn't stand the words "Jellicle" and "Heaviside" - they sound like something from a kids cartoon and they began to grate on me very quickly. And the cast: James Corden, Rebel Wilson and Ray Winstone - just no. They are all so cringingly bad I could barely watch. And even acting royalty like Ian McKellen and Judi Dench don't survive this car crash intact. The final song and scenes with the direct address to camera is possibly the most embarrassingly cringeworthy thing I've seen in a long time.
It may only be January, but I doubt anything else I see in 2020 will be worse than this. I would have happily walked out of this 15 minutes in and never thought twice. The fact that I've sat through the entire thing made me want to claw my eyes out. I cannot unsee this.
If you want to watch a film musical about cats, watch The Aristocats. Do not waste your time on this!
Usually I'll try to find something good to say about a film, but I'm really struggling with this. I feel like giving it a 2 is rather generous. Other than appreciating the amount of effort on the CGI and the song Memory, I really cannot identify any other good points whatsoever.
Now where do I start on the bad? The cats themselves are beyond disturbing. People dressed as cats in the stage show I can understand. Human features on cat bodies is just crazy and looks ridiculous. The fact that they alternate between 2 and 4 legged with human features, it beggars belief. I hoped I might get used to it, but i really didnt especially when they start hissing, preening and acting like real cats - it's terrifying and laughable all at once. The scaling of the cats against the scenery also looks a little misjudged, especially when they stand up.
The story and rest of the film doesn't fare much better. The songs (except for Memory) are surprisingly poor for an Andrew Lloyd Webber musical, and no others are particularly memorable. The plot itself is also very thin and has barely any substance, the fact that they've managed to drag this out to 100 minutes is impressive. I also couldn't stand the words "Jellicle" and "Heaviside" - they sound like something from a kids cartoon and they began to grate on me very quickly. And the cast: James Corden, Rebel Wilson and Ray Winstone - just no. They are all so cringingly bad I could barely watch. And even acting royalty like Ian McKellen and Judi Dench don't survive this car crash intact. The final song and scenes with the direct address to camera is possibly the most embarrassingly cringeworthy thing I've seen in a long time.
It may only be January, but I doubt anything else I see in 2020 will be worse than this. I would have happily walked out of this 15 minutes in and never thought twice. The fact that I've sat through the entire thing made me want to claw my eyes out. I cannot unsee this.
If you want to watch a film musical about cats, watch The Aristocats. Do not waste your time on this!
365Flicks (235 KP) rated Cold Moon (2017) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
At first glance this looks like most other by the numbers Horror/Thriller movies with a cast of people you will recognize straight away but take a while to place where from. However give it a minute because this movie has some really stellar performances from the core cast which considering the concept is just bonkers enough to take you out of it completely, I find this to be nothing short of incredible.
THE BLURB:
In a sleepy southern town, the Larkin family suffers a terrible tragedy. Now the Larkin’s are about to endure another: Traffic lights blink an eerie warning, a ghostly visage prowls in the streets, and graves erupt from the local cemetery in an implacable march of terror . . . And beneath the murky surface of the river, a shifting, almost human shape slowly takes form to seek a terrible vengeance.
I found this movie to be way more Thriller than Horror, sure there are some solid as hell jump scares but one of the defining points in a Horror is that we don’t find out who the man in the mask is till the last quarter of the movie. In Cold Moon we know who the killer is early on and the film interestingly begins to focus on the rapid decline of our killers mind. Being haunted by the eerie ghosts of his victims, leading him to drink heavily, become careless and basically begin to lose his shit… Well that is where this movie cuts its teeth and showcases not only what our core cast can do but how effortlessly our Director/Writer can craft his tale.
Griff Furst has crafted a pretty eerie, Good looking, Atmospheric and Clever movie from the original novel written by the late Michael McDowell, author of Beetlejuice and The Nightmare Before Christmas. Not only that but he managed to perfectly cast his roles from top to bottom **In my eyes, of course**. So lets touch on a couple of those people you know but may not place.
Josh Stewart from mostly everything, most notably for me he was Bane’s main henchmen in Dark Knight Rises. He is great in this flick, given a real chance to show us his range and I was pleased to see more of him. Frank Whaley from almost everything ever and he is fantastic in this. Up and Coming Robbie Kay from Tv show Once Upon A Time puts in a pretty strong performance. Ladies and Gentlemen we are even treated to some Christopher Lloyd, Doc Brown-ing all over the place.
Oh crap I almost forgot we are given a Tommy Wiseau cameo that is a real treat… Listen closely for his one line “He’s tearing him Apart”. Awww man now I wanna watch the room.
I recommend the hell out of this movie, is it amazing?? Not really… But its good fun, pretty clever, great performances and entertaining as hell. So a definite recommend.
THE BLURB:
In a sleepy southern town, the Larkin family suffers a terrible tragedy. Now the Larkin’s are about to endure another: Traffic lights blink an eerie warning, a ghostly visage prowls in the streets, and graves erupt from the local cemetery in an implacable march of terror . . . And beneath the murky surface of the river, a shifting, almost human shape slowly takes form to seek a terrible vengeance.
I found this movie to be way more Thriller than Horror, sure there are some solid as hell jump scares but one of the defining points in a Horror is that we don’t find out who the man in the mask is till the last quarter of the movie. In Cold Moon we know who the killer is early on and the film interestingly begins to focus on the rapid decline of our killers mind. Being haunted by the eerie ghosts of his victims, leading him to drink heavily, become careless and basically begin to lose his shit… Well that is where this movie cuts its teeth and showcases not only what our core cast can do but how effortlessly our Director/Writer can craft his tale.
Griff Furst has crafted a pretty eerie, Good looking, Atmospheric and Clever movie from the original novel written by the late Michael McDowell, author of Beetlejuice and The Nightmare Before Christmas. Not only that but he managed to perfectly cast his roles from top to bottom **In my eyes, of course**. So lets touch on a couple of those people you know but may not place.
Josh Stewart from mostly everything, most notably for me he was Bane’s main henchmen in Dark Knight Rises. He is great in this flick, given a real chance to show us his range and I was pleased to see more of him. Frank Whaley from almost everything ever and he is fantastic in this. Up and Coming Robbie Kay from Tv show Once Upon A Time puts in a pretty strong performance. Ladies and Gentlemen we are even treated to some Christopher Lloyd, Doc Brown-ing all over the place.
Oh crap I almost forgot we are given a Tommy Wiseau cameo that is a real treat… Listen closely for his one line “He’s tearing him Apart”. Awww man now I wanna watch the room.
I recommend the hell out of this movie, is it amazing?? Not really… But its good fun, pretty clever, great performances and entertaining as hell. So a definite recommend.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Thing (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
After the success of a videogame based on the original film, rumors of a sequel arose many times but never came to fruition, with creative differences between Universal and John Carpenter cited as the main reason. It was oft-speculated that Carpenter made a deal to write and produce a sequel provided he got to name has director. But when he opted to name himself director the studio balked and the project fell apart. In the aftermath, rumors of a miniseries on the SyfY channel arose along with the possibility of retelling the story with 20-somethings on a tropical island but (thankfully) they never saw the light of day.
Rather than do a sequel or remake, Universal opted to jump start the franchise with a prequel that covers the events leading up to the John Carpenter film. It is set in 1982 at a Norwegian research station in Antarctica shortly before the scientists make an amazing discovery. When they uncover an alien craft that had been buried in the ice for over 100,000 years, as well as a frozen crewmember from the craft, they quickly celebrate the scientific discovery of a lifetime.
Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), is recruited by a famed scientist to travel to the desolate continent to research the find. Told only that they are about to research an amazing discovery, Kate and a team of specialists arrive and are absolutely stunned by the magnitude of their discovery. Kate urges caution but is overridden by the expedition leader Dr. Halvorsan (Ulrich Thomsen), who insists on taking a tissue sample of the frozen creature encassed in a block of ice.
Later that evening while celebrating, the very much alive creature escapes from its icy prison and begins to systematically hunt the members of the research team. The creature is eventually trapped and burned which causes some consternation over the loss of the creature for further scientific study, but many in the camp applaud its loss after seeing firsthand the destruction it is capable of.
After a bizarre series of events, Kate makes the startling discovery that the cells of the creature are able to imitate and perfectly replicate any thing that it comes in contact with. As a result, not only is the creature very much alive, but the individuals in the camp may no longer be human. Trapped in a remote location with an advancing winter storm, suspicions and paranoia go through the roof as the survivors are pitted against one another, unsure of who is still human. What follows is a high-octane adventure awash in action and grisly special-effects as the two species are locked in the ultimate battle for survival.
The film has a good supporting cast and Joel Edgerton does solid supporting work as an American helicopter pilot assigned to the camp. Eric Christian Olsen provides a steadying presence as a research assistant but his character is not as developed as it could be. It is known that he and Kate know each other but their past history is undefined which makes their relationship a bit puzzling in the film especially when the survivors begin to pick sides.
While the movie is not going to make fans forget the original, it is a very worthy companion piece. As the film was winding down I found myself checking off a couple of inconsistencies with the original film, but was very pleasantly surprised when this was all explained during the end credits which perfectly synced the end of this film with the opening of John Carpenter’s classic.
In many ways the weakness of film is due to the success of John Carpenter’s previous film, in that the creature is not that much of a mystery this time around. Part of the suspense of the previous film was not knowing how the creature operated nor how it was capable of infecting and replicating numerous individuals.
This time around the suspense is lost due to the familiarity with the creature. As a result, director Matthijs van Heijningen focused his efforts on a more action adventure oriented film that gave very little time for character development. We are not told very much about many of the characters in the film as they simply exist to serve as potential victims for the creature. All one really needs to know is they are scientists or support staff as aside from a handful of characters we’re not really given much reason to care whether they survive.
Visually the film is sharp and it is clear that a lot of attention was paid to replicate the look of the previous film. The shots of vast fields of ice and snow emphasized the remote and isolated setting that the characters find themselves in and served as a reminder that danger lurks all around. The special-effects have obviously been upgraded since 1982 and it was nice to see that the creative elements did not go overboard on CGI effects, and actually used puppetry and animatronics to provide updated creature effects that were still in keeping with the look and tone from the previous film.
While the film is not likely to reach the iconic status of the previous film, it is still a worthy companion piece that has enough action and effects to keep it interesting to fans of the series – just so long as they keep their expectations reasonable and do not expect a film on par with the previous one.
Rather than do a sequel or remake, Universal opted to jump start the franchise with a prequel that covers the events leading up to the John Carpenter film. It is set in 1982 at a Norwegian research station in Antarctica shortly before the scientists make an amazing discovery. When they uncover an alien craft that had been buried in the ice for over 100,000 years, as well as a frozen crewmember from the craft, they quickly celebrate the scientific discovery of a lifetime.
Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), is recruited by a famed scientist to travel to the desolate continent to research the find. Told only that they are about to research an amazing discovery, Kate and a team of specialists arrive and are absolutely stunned by the magnitude of their discovery. Kate urges caution but is overridden by the expedition leader Dr. Halvorsan (Ulrich Thomsen), who insists on taking a tissue sample of the frozen creature encassed in a block of ice.
Later that evening while celebrating, the very much alive creature escapes from its icy prison and begins to systematically hunt the members of the research team. The creature is eventually trapped and burned which causes some consternation over the loss of the creature for further scientific study, but many in the camp applaud its loss after seeing firsthand the destruction it is capable of.
After a bizarre series of events, Kate makes the startling discovery that the cells of the creature are able to imitate and perfectly replicate any thing that it comes in contact with. As a result, not only is the creature very much alive, but the individuals in the camp may no longer be human. Trapped in a remote location with an advancing winter storm, suspicions and paranoia go through the roof as the survivors are pitted against one another, unsure of who is still human. What follows is a high-octane adventure awash in action and grisly special-effects as the two species are locked in the ultimate battle for survival.
The film has a good supporting cast and Joel Edgerton does solid supporting work as an American helicopter pilot assigned to the camp. Eric Christian Olsen provides a steadying presence as a research assistant but his character is not as developed as it could be. It is known that he and Kate know each other but their past history is undefined which makes their relationship a bit puzzling in the film especially when the survivors begin to pick sides.
While the movie is not going to make fans forget the original, it is a very worthy companion piece. As the film was winding down I found myself checking off a couple of inconsistencies with the original film, but was very pleasantly surprised when this was all explained during the end credits which perfectly synced the end of this film with the opening of John Carpenter’s classic.
In many ways the weakness of film is due to the success of John Carpenter’s previous film, in that the creature is not that much of a mystery this time around. Part of the suspense of the previous film was not knowing how the creature operated nor how it was capable of infecting and replicating numerous individuals.
This time around the suspense is lost due to the familiarity with the creature. As a result, director Matthijs van Heijningen focused his efforts on a more action adventure oriented film that gave very little time for character development. We are not told very much about many of the characters in the film as they simply exist to serve as potential victims for the creature. All one really needs to know is they are scientists or support staff as aside from a handful of characters we’re not really given much reason to care whether they survive.
Visually the film is sharp and it is clear that a lot of attention was paid to replicate the look of the previous film. The shots of vast fields of ice and snow emphasized the remote and isolated setting that the characters find themselves in and served as a reminder that danger lurks all around. The special-effects have obviously been upgraded since 1982 and it was nice to see that the creative elements did not go overboard on CGI effects, and actually used puppetry and animatronics to provide updated creature effects that were still in keeping with the look and tone from the previous film.
While the film is not likely to reach the iconic status of the previous film, it is still a worthy companion piece that has enough action and effects to keep it interesting to fans of the series – just so long as they keep their expectations reasonable and do not expect a film on par with the previous one.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Daisy's Vintage Cornish Camper Van in Books
Aug 3, 2020
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Book-Review-Banner-40.png"/>;
Daisy's Vintage Cornish Camper Van by Ali McNamara is exactly the book I thought I needed to put me in a better mood!
When Ana inherits a camper van from her best friend, she needs to go to Cornwall to get it. A nice sea air and fish and chips are enver a bad choice.
But when she arrives, she realises that the camper van is in a much worse state than she imagined. The fixing will take longer than she anticipated. On top of this, Ana finds a series of unsent postcards dating back to the 1940s, hidden in the van. This is a sign and Ana wants to make sure the postcards are delivered.
And while the camper van is restored and Ana is helping other people be happy, she may eventually notice she is finding her way back to happiness again.
<b><i>My Thoughts:</i></b>
Daisy's Vintage Cornish Camper Van got my attention from the moment I saw that beautiful cover. Then, I read the synopsis and I was sold.
For me, both camper vans and postcards have a big importance in my life. I have always wanted to have a camper van and be able to go on a road trips and experience that freedom. Even though I was lucky to be able to travel the world, it is never enough.
<b><i>"Yes, there's definitely something about a camper van that makes people smile. They're a happy vehicle, so people enjoy seeing them as much as their owners enjoy driving them."</i></b>
And postcards were always a way to travel without living my home. Get to meet other places and cultures, meet other people. It is extraordinary how many things I have learned about the world and the people from other countries just by reading their postcards.
<b><i>"Deltiology - it's the name for the study and collection of postcards. It comes from the Greek word deltios, which means "writing tablet" or "letter"."</i></b>
Ana is working in London, busy in her day-to-day job. When her best friend Daisy dies, she is completely lost. Daisy was everything she had, and now she is gone. When she inherits this van, Ana is eager to pick the van up and return to her normal London routine. She is not really a fan of travel, camper vans or camping. But Daisy was, and if she wanted for Ana to have this van and that was her last wish, this is the least Ana can do for her.
<b><i>"These old vehicles are very sensitive - especially camper vans. They're the worst, very temperamental they can be."</i></b>
Throughout her stay, Ana meets Malachi, the mechanic, who sold the van to Daisy and who will help Ana restore it. He is a very interesting character with an interesting point of view on life.
He was my favourite character in the book.
<b><i>"People pay a lot of money these days to find themselves. They're not really finding themselves, they're finding a version of themselves they feel happy to be for a while."
"We all change through our lives, and what you're happy to be when you're twenty is unlikely to be what you're happy being when you're older."</i></b>
Malachi also has a camper van himself. He always tells Ana why camper vans are amazing. If you are a fan of camper van, this book will be a favourite by default.
<b><i>"But... you'd be mad not to at least try camping in her. It's a wonderful experience. You can drive where you like, set up camp and cook your dinner in the open air, even bed down under the stars if you're lucky. The freedom is amazing."</i></b>
I loved everything about this book. The story was beautiful. All the characters were likeable and real. They all had their stories and points of development. It was nice to see Ana finally healing and learning to be happy again. Malachi's story was beautiful and it was the perfect closure to his mission. Noah's personal story was also heartwarming, as he learns to accept what happened in the past and be able to move on. I also really want to talk about the mystery couple from the postcards, but I won't, in fear that I will spoil anything. But the development on that story was amazing and it helped Ana in many ways to heal herself, which was magical!
<b><i>"If something is worth doing, Ana - I hear one of her favourite sayings echo in my ears - it's worth doing well."</i></b>
To summarize - Daisy's Vintage Cornish Camper Van is my new favorite!
Beautiful and heartwarming. It will make you want to go on a road trip. I definitely recommend Daisy's Vintage Cornish Camper Van. And as with every book, I love learning random things, and here are some things I learned:
<b><i>"Did you know the phrase "dilly-dally" is commonly attributed to the English music hall singer Marie Lloyd, but was actually in use much earlier than her 1918 song, as far back as the seventeenth century?"
"A Splitty. It's what we call a split screen camper van. All pre-1967 camper vans have a windscreen split in two. After that the new models all had the solid bay windows."</i></b>
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Book-Review-Banner-40.png"/>;
Daisy's Vintage Cornish Camper Van by Ali McNamara is exactly the book I thought I needed to put me in a better mood!
When Ana inherits a camper van from her best friend, she needs to go to Cornwall to get it. A nice sea air and fish and chips are enver a bad choice.
But when she arrives, she realises that the camper van is in a much worse state than she imagined. The fixing will take longer than she anticipated. On top of this, Ana finds a series of unsent postcards dating back to the 1940s, hidden in the van. This is a sign and Ana wants to make sure the postcards are delivered.
And while the camper van is restored and Ana is helping other people be happy, she may eventually notice she is finding her way back to happiness again.
<b><i>My Thoughts:</i></b>
Daisy's Vintage Cornish Camper Van got my attention from the moment I saw that beautiful cover. Then, I read the synopsis and I was sold.
For me, both camper vans and postcards have a big importance in my life. I have always wanted to have a camper van and be able to go on a road trips and experience that freedom. Even though I was lucky to be able to travel the world, it is never enough.
<b><i>"Yes, there's definitely something about a camper van that makes people smile. They're a happy vehicle, so people enjoy seeing them as much as their owners enjoy driving them."</i></b>
And postcards were always a way to travel without living my home. Get to meet other places and cultures, meet other people. It is extraordinary how many things I have learned about the world and the people from other countries just by reading their postcards.
<b><i>"Deltiology - it's the name for the study and collection of postcards. It comes from the Greek word deltios, which means "writing tablet" or "letter"."</i></b>
Ana is working in London, busy in her day-to-day job. When her best friend Daisy dies, she is completely lost. Daisy was everything she had, and now she is gone. When she inherits this van, Ana is eager to pick the van up and return to her normal London routine. She is not really a fan of travel, camper vans or camping. But Daisy was, and if she wanted for Ana to have this van and that was her last wish, this is the least Ana can do for her.
<b><i>"These old vehicles are very sensitive - especially camper vans. They're the worst, very temperamental they can be."</i></b>
Throughout her stay, Ana meets Malachi, the mechanic, who sold the van to Daisy and who will help Ana restore it. He is a very interesting character with an interesting point of view on life.
He was my favourite character in the book.
<b><i>"People pay a lot of money these days to find themselves. They're not really finding themselves, they're finding a version of themselves they feel happy to be for a while."
"We all change through our lives, and what you're happy to be when you're twenty is unlikely to be what you're happy being when you're older."</i></b>
Malachi also has a camper van himself. He always tells Ana why camper vans are amazing. If you are a fan of camper van, this book will be a favourite by default.
<b><i>"But... you'd be mad not to at least try camping in her. It's a wonderful experience. You can drive where you like, set up camp and cook your dinner in the open air, even bed down under the stars if you're lucky. The freedom is amazing."</i></b>
I loved everything about this book. The story was beautiful. All the characters were likeable and real. They all had their stories and points of development. It was nice to see Ana finally healing and learning to be happy again. Malachi's story was beautiful and it was the perfect closure to his mission. Noah's personal story was also heartwarming, as he learns to accept what happened in the past and be able to move on. I also really want to talk about the mystery couple from the postcards, but I won't, in fear that I will spoil anything. But the development on that story was amazing and it helped Ana in many ways to heal herself, which was magical!
<b><i>"If something is worth doing, Ana - I hear one of her favourite sayings echo in my ears - it's worth doing well."</i></b>
To summarize - Daisy's Vintage Cornish Camper Van is my new favorite!
Beautiful and heartwarming. It will make you want to go on a road trip. I definitely recommend Daisy's Vintage Cornish Camper Van. And as with every book, I love learning random things, and here are some things I learned:
<b><i>"Did you know the phrase "dilly-dally" is commonly attributed to the English music hall singer Marie Lloyd, but was actually in use much earlier than her 1918 song, as far back as the seventeenth century?"
"A Splitty. It's what we call a split screen camper van. All pre-1967 camper vans have a windscreen split in two. After that the new models all had the solid bay windows."</i></b>
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;