Search
Search results
Sarah (7799 KP) rated Steve Jobs (2015) in Movies
Aug 14, 2017
Michael Fassbender (2 more)
Interesting take on a biopic
Screenplay
A Great Biopic
You can't really go wrong with Danny Boyle and Michael Fassbender. This is a fascinating take on Jobs' life and an intriguing idea to have it focus on a few major events as opposed to his entire life. Fassbender puts in a fantastic performance with a great supporting cast, and Aaron Sorkin's script is packed with wit and humour. My only criticism would be it is slightly slow paced at times.
David McK (3453 KP) rated Relic (Pendergast, #1) in Books
Jan 28, 2019
I think I first read this back in the early to mid 90's, after the success of <i>Jurassic Park</i> (novel and film), but before <i>The Lost World</i>.
I remember thinking at the time how it would make a good movie due to the way it is written (very 'Michael Crichton'ish); it was later converted into such. Unfortunately, that film completely veered off the track from the novel, sharing only the title and a few key characters and settings - it would have worked so much better had they stayed truer to the source.
The novel is set primarily in and around New York's Museum of Natural History, leading up to (and in) the grand opening of a major new exhibition on superstition. There are rumors of a 'museum beast' in the museum, and I think I'm giving nothing away when I say that these prove to be more than rumors ...
As already stated, this is very like Michael Crichton's blend of techno-thriller so, if you like that, you should also like this.
I remember thinking at the time how it would make a good movie due to the way it is written (very 'Michael Crichton'ish); it was later converted into such. Unfortunately, that film completely veered off the track from the novel, sharing only the title and a few key characters and settings - it would have worked so much better had they stayed truer to the source.
The novel is set primarily in and around New York's Museum of Natural History, leading up to (and in) the grand opening of a major new exhibition on superstition. There are rumors of a 'museum beast' in the museum, and I think I'm giving nothing away when I say that these prove to be more than rumors ...
As already stated, this is very like Michael Crichton's blend of techno-thriller so, if you like that, you should also like this.
Lee KM Pallatina (951 KP) rated Spawn (1997) in Movies
Mar 16, 2020
Where you're going, every day is Halloween.
Spawn is a 1997 anti-hero film based on the comic book character of the same name. the film stars Michael Jai White in the title role, and is one of the first films to feature an African American actor portraying a major comic book superhero.
Al Simmons is a mercenary who, after accepting a mission is double-crossed and assassinated on the orders of Jason Wynn. After selling his soul to Malebolgia, Al soon returns to Earth as a demon, a hell spawn with a raging thirst for vengeance.
After being reborn, Spawn has little time to understand his new being and must act fast all whist learning new abilities along the way.
Though not as dark as it's comic book counterpart and a little more humorous, Spawn is a nice addition to a pre MCU world, which would have been amazing to see this version of him team up with the likes of Wesley snipes Blade and future hero's like tobey Maguires Spiderman & Nicholas cages Ghost Rider.
Visually entertaining & always a personal favourite.
Love the CGI Cape.
Al Simmons is a mercenary who, after accepting a mission is double-crossed and assassinated on the orders of Jason Wynn. After selling his soul to Malebolgia, Al soon returns to Earth as a demon, a hell spawn with a raging thirst for vengeance.
After being reborn, Spawn has little time to understand his new being and must act fast all whist learning new abilities along the way.
Though not as dark as it's comic book counterpart and a little more humorous, Spawn is a nice addition to a pre MCU world, which would have been amazing to see this version of him team up with the likes of Wesley snipes Blade and future hero's like tobey Maguires Spiderman & Nicholas cages Ghost Rider.
Visually entertaining & always a personal favourite.
Love the CGI Cape.
Gary Giddins recommended Mr. Arkadin (1962) in Movies (curated)
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2225 KP) rated Void Moon in Books
Mar 9, 2018
Six years ago, Cassie Black’s life went wrong when a casino hotel robbery went very wrong. She’s served time in prison and is now ten months into serving parole when she finds herself needing cash, so she takes on one last job, which takes her back to the casino where the job went wrong six years before. Is this job the windfall it appears to be or will it go wrong as well?
I’m being rather vague in my teaser because, like most Michael Connelly books, this is one you need to experience for yourself. I did find the beginning a little slow and technical, but when it took off, it grabbed me and I was along for the ride. This was despite the fact that I didn’t love any of the major characters. I can’t find myself rooting for a criminal, so it wasn’t until we met some characters even worse than Cassie that I found myself rooting for her.
Read my full review at <a href="http://carstairsconsiders.blogspot.com/2017/12/book-review-void-moon-by-michael.html">Carstairs Considers</a>.
I’m being rather vague in my teaser because, like most Michael Connelly books, this is one you need to experience for yourself. I did find the beginning a little slow and technical, but when it took off, it grabbed me and I was along for the ride. This was despite the fact that I didn’t love any of the major characters. I can’t find myself rooting for a criminal, so it wasn’t until we met some characters even worse than Cassie that I found myself rooting for her.
Read my full review at <a href="http://carstairsconsiders.blogspot.com/2017/12/book-review-void-moon-by-michael.html">Carstairs Considers</a>.
Laura lou (304 KP) rated Halloween Kills (2021) in Movies
Nov 1, 2021
Gory. (1 more)
Good special effects
Plot holes (4 more)
Bad acting
Mistakes
Boring story
Ridiculously unrealistic
So many plot holes
Contains spoilers, click to show
Honestly one of the worst horror movies I’ve seen.
The acting throughout was so bad, particularly considering how high profile this movie series is.
There were multiple mistakes throughout, but the worst was during the mental patients fall from the hospital window. The camera switches to his point of view and you see the view he would have falling face first onto the floor, however when the camera switches back to a normal view he is lying face up on the floor. So unless he bounced and turned over this is a badly glaring mistake.
There were so many ridiculous plot holes but some of the worst were:
No parent would encourage teenage kids to join them, with weapons, on a manhunt for a seemingly indestructible mass murderer. It just would not happen.
Laurie had a major stomach surgery, no way would she be able to get up and run around the hospital like she did, even on pain killers.
And where did Vanessa go when she got out of the car and Michael began killing her husband and the others in the car. She had a gun, got out of the car and Michael was on the roof grabbing through the windows so why didn’t she at least try to shoot him. He was attacking her husband. She just seemingly disappeared then reappeared when he had done some killing..
All in all a poor film that I came so close to walking out of. The only reason I didn’t was because my partner thought I was joking she. I said let’s go home.
The acting throughout was so bad, particularly considering how high profile this movie series is.
There were multiple mistakes throughout, but the worst was during the mental patients fall from the hospital window. The camera switches to his point of view and you see the view he would have falling face first onto the floor, however when the camera switches back to a normal view he is lying face up on the floor. So unless he bounced and turned over this is a badly glaring mistake.
There were so many ridiculous plot holes but some of the worst were:
No parent would encourage teenage kids to join them, with weapons, on a manhunt for a seemingly indestructible mass murderer. It just would not happen.
Laurie had a major stomach surgery, no way would she be able to get up and run around the hospital like she did, even on pain killers.
And where did Vanessa go when she got out of the car and Michael began killing her husband and the others in the car. She had a gun, got out of the car and Michael was on the roof grabbing through the windows so why didn’t she at least try to shoot him. He was attacking her husband. She just seemingly disappeared then reappeared when he had done some killing..
All in all a poor film that I came so close to walking out of. The only reason I didn’t was because my partner thought I was joking she. I said let’s go home.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Ghost in the Shell (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
A robot you could take home to meet mother.
I was intrigued to watch the other day (purely for the interest in the technology employed of course!) a short Guardian video on the development of the world’s first fully functioning sex robot: a disturbing watch, requiring a fairly broad mind. Watching it on the same day as going to see Scarlett Johansson’s new film “Ghost in the Shell” though was a mistake, since the similarities between Johansson’s character (‘Major’) and the animatronic sex doll (‘Harmony’) were… erm… distracting.
Johansson is a stunning actress, with unquestionably a stunning figure that she loves to show off, but you would have to start questioning her film choices: since there is hardly a hair’s breadth between the emotionally reserved superhero depiction here and her recent roles in “Lucy” and “Under the Skin“. With her other ongoing “Avengers” superhero work as Natasha Romanoff, and nothing much else beyond that other than brief cameos (“Hail Caesar“, “Hitchcock“) and voice work, its all getting a bit ‘samey’: I’d like to see her get back to her more dramatic roles like “Lost in Translation” that really launched her career.
Anyhoo, back to this flick. Set in the dazzling fictional Japanese city of Niihama, Johansson plays a terrorist victim saved only by having her brain transplanted into an android by the Hanka corporation. In this time (40 years in the future) human ‘upgrades’ with cybernetic technology are commonplace, but Major is a ‘first of a kind’ experiment. Hanka are not pure humanitarians though, since they have turned Major into a lethal fighting weapon with powers of invisibility and lightning reactions. She works for a shadowy anti-terrorism unit called Section 9, led by the Japanese speaking Aramaki (Takeshi Kitano, “Battle Royale”).
The upside of having no human form is that if you get burned or blown up, the team of cyber-surgeons back at Hanka, led by Dr. Ouelet (Juliette Binoche), can rebuild her – – they “have the technology” to quote another bionic hero.
But all is not necessarily well in the idyll of anti-terrorist slashing and burning. Major suffers from recurring ‘glitches’ of memories from her past life: a life that she has no clear memories of. Her latest mission against a deformed and vindictive terrorist called Kuze (Michael Pitt) progressively resurfaces more of these memories, since Kuze clearly knows more about Major than she does.
“Ghost in the Shell” looks glorious, with the Hong Kong-like city being in the style of Blade Runner but with more holograms. (What exactly the holograms are supposed to be doing or advertising is rather unclear!). The cinematography and special effects deserve an Oscar nomination.
Given the film is based on an original Manga series, written and illustrated by Masamune Shirow and well known for its complexity, this Hollywood version has a surprisingly simple and linear story. As such it may disappoint the hoard of fans who adore the original materials.
Treating it as a standalone film, it should have an emotional depth beyond the superficial action, dealing as it does with loyalty and family ties. However, the scripting and editing is rather pedestrian making the whole thing a bit dull. Johansson and Pilou Asbæk, as her co-worker Batou, breathe what life they can into the material; but Binoche is less convincing as the Dr Frankenstein-style doctor. The best act in the piece though is Takeshi Kitano as the kick-ass OAP with attitude.
Where I had particular issues was in some of the detail of the action. ‘Invisibility’ is an attribute that needs to be metered out very carefully in the movies: Harry Potter just about got away with it; in “Die Another Day” it nearly killed the Bond franchise for good. Here, exactly how the androids can achieve invisibility is never explained and I disliked that intently. Similarly, the androids can clearly be physically damaged, yet Major seems to start each mission by throwing herself headfirst off the tallest skyscraper. Again, never explained.
Even though the premise, and the opening titles, brought back bad memories of that truly terrible Star Trek episode “Spock’s Brain”, this is a dark and thoughtful adaptation with great CGI effects but unfortunately its pedestrian pace means it is one that never truly breaks through into the upper echelons of Sci Fi greatness. Worth a watch though.
Johansson is a stunning actress, with unquestionably a stunning figure that she loves to show off, but you would have to start questioning her film choices: since there is hardly a hair’s breadth between the emotionally reserved superhero depiction here and her recent roles in “Lucy” and “Under the Skin“. With her other ongoing “Avengers” superhero work as Natasha Romanoff, and nothing much else beyond that other than brief cameos (“Hail Caesar“, “Hitchcock“) and voice work, its all getting a bit ‘samey’: I’d like to see her get back to her more dramatic roles like “Lost in Translation” that really launched her career.
Anyhoo, back to this flick. Set in the dazzling fictional Japanese city of Niihama, Johansson plays a terrorist victim saved only by having her brain transplanted into an android by the Hanka corporation. In this time (40 years in the future) human ‘upgrades’ with cybernetic technology are commonplace, but Major is a ‘first of a kind’ experiment. Hanka are not pure humanitarians though, since they have turned Major into a lethal fighting weapon with powers of invisibility and lightning reactions. She works for a shadowy anti-terrorism unit called Section 9, led by the Japanese speaking Aramaki (Takeshi Kitano, “Battle Royale”).
The upside of having no human form is that if you get burned or blown up, the team of cyber-surgeons back at Hanka, led by Dr. Ouelet (Juliette Binoche), can rebuild her – – they “have the technology” to quote another bionic hero.
But all is not necessarily well in the idyll of anti-terrorist slashing and burning. Major suffers from recurring ‘glitches’ of memories from her past life: a life that she has no clear memories of. Her latest mission against a deformed and vindictive terrorist called Kuze (Michael Pitt) progressively resurfaces more of these memories, since Kuze clearly knows more about Major than she does.
“Ghost in the Shell” looks glorious, with the Hong Kong-like city being in the style of Blade Runner but with more holograms. (What exactly the holograms are supposed to be doing or advertising is rather unclear!). The cinematography and special effects deserve an Oscar nomination.
Given the film is based on an original Manga series, written and illustrated by Masamune Shirow and well known for its complexity, this Hollywood version has a surprisingly simple and linear story. As such it may disappoint the hoard of fans who adore the original materials.
Treating it as a standalone film, it should have an emotional depth beyond the superficial action, dealing as it does with loyalty and family ties. However, the scripting and editing is rather pedestrian making the whole thing a bit dull. Johansson and Pilou Asbæk, as her co-worker Batou, breathe what life they can into the material; but Binoche is less convincing as the Dr Frankenstein-style doctor. The best act in the piece though is Takeshi Kitano as the kick-ass OAP with attitude.
Where I had particular issues was in some of the detail of the action. ‘Invisibility’ is an attribute that needs to be metered out very carefully in the movies: Harry Potter just about got away with it; in “Die Another Day” it nearly killed the Bond franchise for good. Here, exactly how the androids can achieve invisibility is never explained and I disliked that intently. Similarly, the androids can clearly be physically damaged, yet Major seems to start each mission by throwing herself headfirst off the tallest skyscraper. Again, never explained.
Even though the premise, and the opening titles, brought back bad memories of that truly terrible Star Trek episode “Spock’s Brain”, this is a dark and thoughtful adaptation with great CGI effects but unfortunately its pedestrian pace means it is one that never truly breaks through into the upper echelons of Sci Fi greatness. Worth a watch though.
David McK (3453 KP) rated Corpse Thief (Joshua Hawke #1) in Books
Feb 26, 2022
I remember reading Michael Arnold's seemingly-abandoned Captain Stryker Civil War Chronicles books when they first came out, and quite enjoying them.
I wasn't so sure about the setting of his new series, of which this is the first (and currently only) entry.
None-the-less, I thought I would give it a chance anyway: after all, a gin-sodden opium addicted grave robber ex-policeman who previously participated in the Peterloo massacre is hardly, shall we say, your standard protagonist!
Set in and around London's seedy underground of the 1820s, I got a strong flavour of Jack the Ripper when reading this; of a murderer who strikes at his (or her?) victims before disappearing again, and of whom the authorities seemingly have little interest in apprehending until he - or she! - jeopardises their own interests.
It's interesting, therefore, seeing the life and time from the 'other side', as it were, from the points of view of the downtrodden masses rather than from the rich and powerful.
Be aware, however, that this is NOT a self-contained novel in its own right (well, it is and it isn't), in that some major plot threads are purposefully left hanging for the inevitable sequel.
I wasn't so sure about the setting of his new series, of which this is the first (and currently only) entry.
None-the-less, I thought I would give it a chance anyway: after all, a gin-sodden opium addicted grave robber ex-policeman who previously participated in the Peterloo massacre is hardly, shall we say, your standard protagonist!
Set in and around London's seedy underground of the 1820s, I got a strong flavour of Jack the Ripper when reading this; of a murderer who strikes at his (or her?) victims before disappearing again, and of whom the authorities seemingly have little interest in apprehending until he - or she! - jeopardises their own interests.
It's interesting, therefore, seeing the life and time from the 'other side', as it were, from the points of view of the downtrodden masses rather than from the rich and powerful.
Be aware, however, that this is NOT a self-contained novel in its own right (well, it is and it isn't), in that some major plot threads are purposefully left hanging for the inevitable sequel.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Red Riding Hood (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In a small village a wolf has been killing villagers who wander out alone. Yet for rule-breaking Valerie the desire to venture out and spend time with her true love overpowers all logic. However, drama sets in when Valerie finds she has been betrothed to a wealthy villager around the same time that that the big bad wolf returns.
Amanda Seyfried stars as Valerie in Red Riding Hood a reworking of the classic fairytale of the same name. The film also stars Shiloh Fernandez as Peter, Valerie’s childhood best friend turned love interest, and Max Irons as Henry, the wealthy suitor who has been selected to wed Valerie. The supporting cast includes some additional familiar faces such as Michael Hogan (The Reeve) best known for his work as Colonel Tigh in the Sci-Fi series Battlestar Galactica and Michael Shanks, known for his work on the hit television series Stargate SG-1 , who plays Adrien Lazer.
The concept of building more depth into the Red Riding Hood story is a good idea however the execution in this bland who-done-it comes a crossed as scattered. The film lacks cohesion and fails to build interest in the storyline focusing instead on sweeping landscapes and overly intense one-on-one character interactions.
The wardrobe is impressive with clothing that aptly represents both village life and fairytale ideals. However, much like the rest of the film, the wardrobe seems to be taking cues directly from other movies. Among the numerous familiar scenes is an ending that could have been plucked from The Lord of the Rings.
The film is not missing any major components but the lack of originality is a fatal flaw that impacts the entire tale. The scary moments are not scary. The intrigue lacks potency. And the romantic triangle fails to generate the intended drama.
Moviegoers will see far worse films this spring but Red Riding Hood does not deliver on what could have been a brilliant adaptation.
Amanda Seyfried stars as Valerie in Red Riding Hood a reworking of the classic fairytale of the same name. The film also stars Shiloh Fernandez as Peter, Valerie’s childhood best friend turned love interest, and Max Irons as Henry, the wealthy suitor who has been selected to wed Valerie. The supporting cast includes some additional familiar faces such as Michael Hogan (The Reeve) best known for his work as Colonel Tigh in the Sci-Fi series Battlestar Galactica and Michael Shanks, known for his work on the hit television series Stargate SG-1 , who plays Adrien Lazer.
The concept of building more depth into the Red Riding Hood story is a good idea however the execution in this bland who-done-it comes a crossed as scattered. The film lacks cohesion and fails to build interest in the storyline focusing instead on sweeping landscapes and overly intense one-on-one character interactions.
The wardrobe is impressive with clothing that aptly represents both village life and fairytale ideals. However, much like the rest of the film, the wardrobe seems to be taking cues directly from other movies. Among the numerous familiar scenes is an ending that could have been plucked from The Lord of the Rings.
The film is not missing any major components but the lack of originality is a fatal flaw that impacts the entire tale. The scary moments are not scary. The intrigue lacks potency. And the romantic triangle fails to generate the intended drama.
Moviegoers will see far worse films this spring but Red Riding Hood does not deliver on what could have been a brilliant adaptation.
John Garrett (27 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2017
Tom Holland (2 more)
The villain (thank god)
The script
No real stakes (1 more)
Not enough fighting scenes
Spiderman has never been better
Contains spoilers, click to show
Tom Holland is fantastic. Never has writing a review been so releaving. After the car wrecks that were the first 2 amazing Spiderman movies we finally get a great depiction of the friendly neighbourhood Spiderman. Tom played both the quick witted Spiderman and nerdy Peter Parker fantastically and actually looks like a high school kid.
Michael Keaton plays another winged comic book character in the vulture who unlike other marvel villains added some gravitas and was not just a throw away. He played almost a sympathetic villain where you understand his motivations.
The story was solid. We actually got to see a teenage Peter Parker with teenage worries in high school rather than trying to skip over his school life quickly in other iterations of the character. His high school sidekick Ned was a great comic relief and in my opinion created most of the laughs in this film.
One major worry going in was that iron man would steel the show. Luckily Robert Downey Jr was used almost sparingly and was there in just a mentoring capacity which was good to see.
Overall this was a funny, charming story with a great portrayal of one of the world's most loved characters.
Michael Keaton plays another winged comic book character in the vulture who unlike other marvel villains added some gravitas and was not just a throw away. He played almost a sympathetic villain where you understand his motivations.
The story was solid. We actually got to see a teenage Peter Parker with teenage worries in high school rather than trying to skip over his school life quickly in other iterations of the character. His high school sidekick Ned was a great comic relief and in my opinion created most of the laughs in this film.
One major worry going in was that iron man would steel the show. Luckily Robert Downey Jr was used almost sparingly and was there in just a mentoring capacity which was good to see.
Overall this was a funny, charming story with a great portrayal of one of the world's most loved characters.