Search
Hard Prejudice (Dan Reno Novel #5)
9.0
Rate It
Book
The DNA evidence should have made the rape a slam dunk case… But after the evidence disappeared...
JT (287 KP) rated Halloween (1978) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Without a doubt Halloween was one of the finest horror films ever made, John Carpenter was spot on with his portrayal of a serial killer descending on a small American town.
Michael Myers was to become a horror icon and even though it spanned seven sequels, the original will always be the best in many people’s eyes. It is certainly my all time favourite horror film. Carpenter’s cinematic vision of Halloween was brilliant right from the opening credits. The long and short camera angles coupled with the “was he there or wasn’t he” shots of Myers were sublime.
The sinister musical score as well is paramount in making this film a household name in its genre. Jamie Lee Curtis was a scream queen for the 70s and although the acting talents were not up to scratch, it made no difference to the overall outcome of the film. Michael Myers was a disturbed child and after committing a horrific murder when he was just six years old he was committed to a mental institution where he escaped to stalk Laurie Strode, his long lost sister.
His the perfect boogeyman, and during the first part of the film he stalks Laurie sometimes just appearing out of shot as a blur between trees of a faceless driver passing by in his car. Laurie of course has no idea who he is but starts to feel like she is being watched, and her fears are finally realised one night descends and Carpenter ramps up the tension to breaking point.
What I love about this film is the pure simplicity of it, with a budget of just $320,000 it grossed $60m world world and was a massive hit with horror fans the world over. It didn’t want for fancy special effects, and the musical score was hardly a masterpiece but it did the job and it did it well. It is the model slasher flick and most of what has preceded it (maybe with the exception of the first Scream) have not been able to stand up in competition.
We’ve had Freddy and Jason, and we’re still having to sit and watch teenagers heading to remote and desolate locations to be butchered in a variety of unique ways while pints of blood are splashed across the screen. Halloween doesn’t require that, it will have you jumping out of your seat at least more than once and it just goes to prove that simple scares are the most effective.
Michael Myers was to become a horror icon and even though it spanned seven sequels, the original will always be the best in many people’s eyes. It is certainly my all time favourite horror film. Carpenter’s cinematic vision of Halloween was brilliant right from the opening credits. The long and short camera angles coupled with the “was he there or wasn’t he” shots of Myers were sublime.
The sinister musical score as well is paramount in making this film a household name in its genre. Jamie Lee Curtis was a scream queen for the 70s and although the acting talents were not up to scratch, it made no difference to the overall outcome of the film. Michael Myers was a disturbed child and after committing a horrific murder when he was just six years old he was committed to a mental institution where he escaped to stalk Laurie Strode, his long lost sister.
His the perfect boogeyman, and during the first part of the film he stalks Laurie sometimes just appearing out of shot as a blur between trees of a faceless driver passing by in his car. Laurie of course has no idea who he is but starts to feel like she is being watched, and her fears are finally realised one night descends and Carpenter ramps up the tension to breaking point.
What I love about this film is the pure simplicity of it, with a budget of just $320,000 it grossed $60m world world and was a massive hit with horror fans the world over. It didn’t want for fancy special effects, and the musical score was hardly a masterpiece but it did the job and it did it well. It is the model slasher flick and most of what has preceded it (maybe with the exception of the first Scream) have not been able to stand up in competition.
We’ve had Freddy and Jason, and we’re still having to sit and watch teenagers heading to remote and desolate locations to be butchered in a variety of unique ways while pints of blood are splashed across the screen. Halloween doesn’t require that, it will have you jumping out of your seat at least more than once and it just goes to prove that simple scares are the most effective.
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Halloween (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Michael’s back, back again
Happy Halloween everyone! What better way to celebrate than with my review of the latest in the Halloween franchise?
40 years after John Carpenter’s iconic horror film, we are greeted with a brand new instalment in Michael Myers’ saga. It feels like a really special moment for horror fans, as we reflect on the original decades later. The opening credits pay homage to the 1978 and provide some nostalgia for long time fans by using the same text and soundtrack that audiences would’ve seen on the big screen back then. This was a great stylistic choice as it really gets you feeling pumped for what’s to come.
The film opens with Myers in a high security facility, where two true crime podcasters attempt to communicate with him in order to learn more about him and the murders he committed. Unsurprisingly, Michael refuses to say anything, providing a seriously uncomfortable moment for the audience. Throughout the film, we don’t see or hear him, and shots of him without the mask are always the back of his head. I would have been very disappointed if they’d decided to show his face throughout, as this sense of facelessness is something that’s always scared me about him. He’s a silent killer, never jumping out and screaming, but hiding in the shadows waiting to strike at any point. Most interactions with Myers are tense, uncomfortable and nail biting. His presence alone has that effect on you.
As ever, it was a joy to see Jamie Lee Curtis reprise her role as original Myers’ victim, Laurie Strode. Throughout the film, Strode’s paranoia is hard to brush off, and actually makes you feel more on edge. It was great seeing how she’d aged, yet refused to move on, and Curtis really brought her to life once again. She was the highlight of the film for me, as she was far from a cowering victim, and someone who wanted Myers dead for good. Having said that, you can tell how much she still fears him and how she’s suffering with long-term PTSD after almost being murdered. Let’s face it, anyone would feel the same way.
Unfortunately, I did find some of the acting a bit cringeworthy and it took away from the overall experience. I know that horror films have a bit of a reputation for terrible acting and dialogue, but I felt like such an important franchise deserved better than that. In my screening there were a few laugh out loud moments, and I don’t think all of them were intentional. One thing I will say is that child actor Jibrail Nantambu is one to watch because he was such a character and brought some genuine humour to the scenes he was in. I hope he goes far. Michael’s handler Dr. Ranbir Sartain is also an interesting character that I won’t say much about, but his development throughout is particularly great.
Admittedly I would’ve preferred less focus on teenagers, families and their dramas, and more on Michael and the actual kills. The film was meant to be about him and Laurie, after all. Whilst I was mostly satisfied by the brutality and some really gruesome moments, I felt it had been hyped up to the point where I expected more. Is that bad? Have I just become desensitised to bloody moments? I’m not quite sure. Having said that, one scene in particular did have me on the edge of my seat so it was still able to provide that adrenaline rush despite all its flaws. I’m still really bloody scared of Michael Myers.
Overall, Halloween is certainly watchable and a great visit to the cinema, especially this evening. Whilst I’m not the world’s biggest Halloween fan and there are certain films in the franchise I haven’t even seen, I still enjoyed this and understood what was going on. If you’re a big horror fan, particularly of the classics, give this a go. It might give you some welcome nostalgia and scares, and maybe that’s enough.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/10/31/halloween-2018-michaels-back-back-again/
40 years after John Carpenter’s iconic horror film, we are greeted with a brand new instalment in Michael Myers’ saga. It feels like a really special moment for horror fans, as we reflect on the original decades later. The opening credits pay homage to the 1978 and provide some nostalgia for long time fans by using the same text and soundtrack that audiences would’ve seen on the big screen back then. This was a great stylistic choice as it really gets you feeling pumped for what’s to come.
The film opens with Myers in a high security facility, where two true crime podcasters attempt to communicate with him in order to learn more about him and the murders he committed. Unsurprisingly, Michael refuses to say anything, providing a seriously uncomfortable moment for the audience. Throughout the film, we don’t see or hear him, and shots of him without the mask are always the back of his head. I would have been very disappointed if they’d decided to show his face throughout, as this sense of facelessness is something that’s always scared me about him. He’s a silent killer, never jumping out and screaming, but hiding in the shadows waiting to strike at any point. Most interactions with Myers are tense, uncomfortable and nail biting. His presence alone has that effect on you.
As ever, it was a joy to see Jamie Lee Curtis reprise her role as original Myers’ victim, Laurie Strode. Throughout the film, Strode’s paranoia is hard to brush off, and actually makes you feel more on edge. It was great seeing how she’d aged, yet refused to move on, and Curtis really brought her to life once again. She was the highlight of the film for me, as she was far from a cowering victim, and someone who wanted Myers dead for good. Having said that, you can tell how much she still fears him and how she’s suffering with long-term PTSD after almost being murdered. Let’s face it, anyone would feel the same way.
Unfortunately, I did find some of the acting a bit cringeworthy and it took away from the overall experience. I know that horror films have a bit of a reputation for terrible acting and dialogue, but I felt like such an important franchise deserved better than that. In my screening there were a few laugh out loud moments, and I don’t think all of them were intentional. One thing I will say is that child actor Jibrail Nantambu is one to watch because he was such a character and brought some genuine humour to the scenes he was in. I hope he goes far. Michael’s handler Dr. Ranbir Sartain is also an interesting character that I won’t say much about, but his development throughout is particularly great.
Admittedly I would’ve preferred less focus on teenagers, families and their dramas, and more on Michael and the actual kills. The film was meant to be about him and Laurie, after all. Whilst I was mostly satisfied by the brutality and some really gruesome moments, I felt it had been hyped up to the point where I expected more. Is that bad? Have I just become desensitised to bloody moments? I’m not quite sure. Having said that, one scene in particular did have me on the edge of my seat so it was still able to provide that adrenaline rush despite all its flaws. I’m still really bloody scared of Michael Myers.
Overall, Halloween is certainly watchable and a great visit to the cinema, especially this evening. Whilst I’m not the world’s biggest Halloween fan and there are certain films in the franchise I haven’t even seen, I still enjoyed this and understood what was going on. If you’re a big horror fan, particularly of the classics, give this a go. It might give you some welcome nostalgia and scares, and maybe that’s enough.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/10/31/halloween-2018-michaels-back-back-again/
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Knives Out (2019) in Movies
Dec 9, 2019
The Donut Hole
Contains spoilers, click to show
So i watched the trailer and i really liked it and i went in thinking it will be really good and i would really enjoy it. I went thinking that was okay, not the greatest, not the best.
Some Spoilers..
Their are somethings that i liked...
1. Daniel Craig and his southern draw. He was the best in this movie.
2. The Rest of the cast.
3. Some of the comedy.
4. The Action
5. The Donut Joke, this to me was the best part of the movie.
Their are something that i didnt like...
1. Its confusing
2. You really have to invest into the plot to get it.
3. The Ending, how did Daniel Craig figure out all of that shit. He's like this happen than that happen than this happen. Its like how did you figure all of that shit out, least than a hour you said "i have no suspects" and than in the end its like "op you have done it", How!!!
4. Some of the comedy.
5. The Whodunit- this movie is a ripoff of clue. Clue is one of my all time favorite movies and this just said remember clue, where just going to be like that.
6. Wishing that someone else was the villian, i like chris evans but if it was michael shannon or don johnson or jamie lee curis or katherine langord or ana de armas. I would of cared more and gotten inresting more. In the end i was ohh really he done it, could see it a mile awhile, he wasnt in half of the movie, so of course he did it.
Overall Knives Out, to me was way overhyped and way overhyped to be as the next clue. This will never ever be like clue. Clue is 10x better than this. You might of just have waiting for it to come out on dvd.
Some Spoilers..
Their are somethings that i liked...
1. Daniel Craig and his southern draw. He was the best in this movie.
2. The Rest of the cast.
3. Some of the comedy.
4. The Action
5. The Donut Joke, this to me was the best part of the movie.
Their are something that i didnt like...
1. Its confusing
2. You really have to invest into the plot to get it.
3. The Ending, how did Daniel Craig figure out all of that shit. He's like this happen than that happen than this happen. Its like how did you figure all of that shit out, least than a hour you said "i have no suspects" and than in the end its like "op you have done it", How!!!
4. Some of the comedy.
5. The Whodunit- this movie is a ripoff of clue. Clue is one of my all time favorite movies and this just said remember clue, where just going to be like that.
6. Wishing that someone else was the villian, i like chris evans but if it was michael shannon or don johnson or jamie lee curis or katherine langord or ana de armas. I would of cared more and gotten inresting more. In the end i was ohh really he done it, could see it a mile awhile, he wasnt in half of the movie, so of course he did it.
Overall Knives Out, to me was way overhyped and way overhyped to be as the next clue. This will never ever be like clue. Clue is 10x better than this. You might of just have waiting for it to come out on dvd.
The Hamilcast: A Hamilton Podcast
Podcast
In this American podcast about an American musical about a bastard orphan, I (your host Gillian...
Talking Metal
10.0
Rate It
Podcast
Hosts Mark Strigl and John Ostronomy, talk and play METAL with special guests, headbangers, and...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated A Fish Called Wanda (1988) in Movies
Jul 2, 2020
A Jolly Good Time
A member of my family mentioned when discussing the 1988 John Cleese comedy A FISH CALLED WANDA that you can tell much about a person over what part of this film that you like the most. Do you like:
a). The John Cleese/Jamie Lee Curtis love story
b). The "caper"
c). The beleaguered, unsuccessful hit-man Ken
d). The old lady and her 3 dogs
e). Kevin Kline as Otto
For me, that's easy - ALL OF IT! I find that A FISH CALLED WANDA is a very funny, richly acted comedy/caper that brings forth 4 characters that are easy to spend 2 hours with. Starting with John Cleese as Barrister Archie Leach. Cleese conceived, wrote, starred-in and (at times) directed this film and his "British humor" (honed from years as a member of the MONTY PYTHON comedy troupe) is in full force here. He has a reserved appearance about him that covers a wild man underneath yearning to break free.
Jamie Lee Curtis is quite good as the center of the film, Wanda Gershwitz, a cunning conman who will stop at nothing - and step over everyone - to get what she wants. I find that Curtis is under-rated as an actress and a comedienne and this picture shows that she can hold her own against 3 comedy greats at the top of their game.
The 2nd member of the Monty Python troupe to appear in this film is the remarkable Michael Palin as hapless hit-man, Ken. He becomes increasingly frustrated and frantic -and increasingly funny - as he attempts to complete his assignment throughout the course of this film.
But...the real star of this film...and the actor/character that steals the film away from everyone else...is Kevin Kline's Oscar winning performance as Otto, Wanda's erstwhile love who has a very high opinion of himself. It is rare that a comedic performance wins an Oscar - Kline's win is the the last one to do so - but it is easy to see why the Academy decided to reward Kline for it is a committed performance that is wild, wacky and over-the-top, but not overtly so. Kline has been very good in many other pictures/performances before and after this film, but he never reached the height that he reached in this film.
The film has veteran director Charles Crichton listed as Director with Cleese listed as co-Director (though Cleese insisted that Crichton did all the work and he only put his name on it to assuage the fears of studio executives over Crichton's advanced age). Well...Crichton does a wonderful job of letting the lunacy explode on the scene while keeping a lid on it and moving the action along at a brisk pace.
Wanda is one of those films that people remember fondly, but do not revisit. I would highly recommend you do, it's a jolly good time.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
a). The John Cleese/Jamie Lee Curtis love story
b). The "caper"
c). The beleaguered, unsuccessful hit-man Ken
d). The old lady and her 3 dogs
e). Kevin Kline as Otto
For me, that's easy - ALL OF IT! I find that A FISH CALLED WANDA is a very funny, richly acted comedy/caper that brings forth 4 characters that are easy to spend 2 hours with. Starting with John Cleese as Barrister Archie Leach. Cleese conceived, wrote, starred-in and (at times) directed this film and his "British humor" (honed from years as a member of the MONTY PYTHON comedy troupe) is in full force here. He has a reserved appearance about him that covers a wild man underneath yearning to break free.
Jamie Lee Curtis is quite good as the center of the film, Wanda Gershwitz, a cunning conman who will stop at nothing - and step over everyone - to get what she wants. I find that Curtis is under-rated as an actress and a comedienne and this picture shows that she can hold her own against 3 comedy greats at the top of their game.
The 2nd member of the Monty Python troupe to appear in this film is the remarkable Michael Palin as hapless hit-man, Ken. He becomes increasingly frustrated and frantic -and increasingly funny - as he attempts to complete his assignment throughout the course of this film.
But...the real star of this film...and the actor/character that steals the film away from everyone else...is Kevin Kline's Oscar winning performance as Otto, Wanda's erstwhile love who has a very high opinion of himself. It is rare that a comedic performance wins an Oscar - Kline's win is the the last one to do so - but it is easy to see why the Academy decided to reward Kline for it is a committed performance that is wild, wacky and over-the-top, but not overtly so. Kline has been very good in many other pictures/performances before and after this film, but he never reached the height that he reached in this film.
The film has veteran director Charles Crichton listed as Director with Cleese listed as co-Director (though Cleese insisted that Crichton did all the work and he only put his name on it to assuage the fears of studio executives over Crichton's advanced age). Well...Crichton does a wonderful job of letting the lunacy explode on the scene while keeping a lid on it and moving the action along at a brisk pace.
Wanda is one of those films that people remember fondly, but do not revisit. I would highly recommend you do, it's a jolly good time.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The Auditory System at the Cocktail Party: 2017
John C. Middlebrooks, Jonathan Z. Simon, Arthur N. Popper and Richard R. Fay
Book
The Auditory System at the Cocktail Party is a rather whimsical title that points to the very...
Zones of Control: Perspectives on Wargaming
Matthew G. Kirschenbaum, Pat Harrigan and James F. Dunnigan
Book
Games with military themes date back to antiquity, and yet they are curiously neglected in much of...
General Lee's Immortals: The Battles and Campaigns of the Branch-Lane Brigade in the Army of Northern Virginia, 1861-1865
Book
Two decades after the end of the Civil War, former Confederate officer Riddick Gatlin bewailed the...