Search
Kim Pook (101 KP) rated The Theory of Everything (2014) in Movies
Sep 4, 2020
Unless you have been living in a cave you will have heard of Stephen Hawking, this movie is the story of how he met and came to rely on his wife Jane.
It starts in the 1960s, Stephen is an awkward and nerdy college student attending classes, wondering about the universe and meeting the love of his life. Straight away it is evident from little things that his disease is taking a hold on him even before his diagnosis. Eddie Redmayne does such a good job of portraying him that his decline is hard to watch and you feel the frustration he must have felt too. It not only shows Stephens struggles with his motor neurons disease, but also Jane's struggles with helping him, which understandably pushes her into the arms of another man.
The film has its ups and downs, you feel for Stephen and the people around him, but you also laugh as despite his disease his personality remained intact. It is a long movie (just over 2 hours) and very intense, but worth every minute.
It starts in the 1960s, Stephen is an awkward and nerdy college student attending classes, wondering about the universe and meeting the love of his life. Straight away it is evident from little things that his disease is taking a hold on him even before his diagnosis. Eddie Redmayne does such a good job of portraying him that his decline is hard to watch and you feel the frustration he must have felt too. It not only shows Stephens struggles with his motor neurons disease, but also Jane's struggles with helping him, which understandably pushes her into the arms of another man.
The film has its ups and downs, you feel for Stephen and the people around him, but you also laugh as despite his disease his personality remained intact. It is a long movie (just over 2 hours) and very intense, but worth every minute.
The Secret (2018)
3.0
Rate It
Movie
Drawing from The Secret by Rhonda Byrne, The Secret film aims to craft a story around the core...
Thriller
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Eternals (2021) in Movies
Nov 10, 2021
Works Well Enough
The interesting thing about creating a Cinematic “Universe” (like Marvel has done and others are desperately trying to do) is that because it is a “Universe” you can tell different types of stories with different types of characters in differing styles.
In ETERNALS, Marvel has really attempted to open up their “Universe” by introducing their audience to the Eternals, celestial beings that are tangentially interested in the goings-on of the human world.
It’s not a Super-Hero movie, per se, it’s a world of “Gods and Monsters” (to steal a phrase) that has repercussions across the Universe.
So with this background in mind, the ETERNALS succeeds, mostly, because it is trying to be something…else. NOT a SUPERHERO film, but something on a different plane.
Unfortunately, this probably will put off “Fan-boys” who want “more of the same” (more Avengers, more Thanos, more F/X smashy-smashy, fight-fight) and ETERNALS just isn’t intended to be that.
Your first clue that this film is trying to be something else is the choice of Director - recent Oscar Winner Chloe Zhao (NOMADLAND), known for her personal stories and interesting visuals. She brings that sensibility to this film and it (mostly), though it is the type of Cinematic style that works best in low-res (like an independent film like Nomadland) rather than large IMAX Comic-book film event films.
The movie itself is entertaining…enough. It is, necessarily, slow at the beginning as Zhao needs to set up these characters and the realm that they are playing on (and orient the audience as to how this fits with the AVENGERS:ENDGAME of it all). There are 10 (yes, TEN) Eternals to introduce along with ancillary characters, so the film has to take some time to gather steam.
And…it gathers steam, not in the action sequences (which are serviceable) but in the characters and the character interactions and this is where the film really works for me.
Gemma Chan (CRAZY, RICH ASIANS) and Richard Madden (Rob Stark on GAME OF THRONES) are, basically, the lead characters as their relationship takes center stage for most of the film - and these 2 (especially Chan) holds the screen well, which is tough to do since there are so many characters - and so much other things going on.
The real hero of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, IMHO, is the Casting Director who, time-after-time, plucks relative unknowns and throws them into parts that they are perfectly cast for…Salma Hayak (leader of Eternals, Ajak), Lia McHugh (Sprite), Brian Tyree Henry (Phastos), Lauren Ridloff (Makkari) and Barry Keoghan (Druig) all fit their parts well, with the relationship between Makkari and Druig being particularly interesting.
Speaking of interesting relationships, Ma Dong-seok (so good in the Korean Zombie flick TRAIN TO BUSAN) as Gilgamesh almost steals the screen from MOVIE STAR Angelina Jolie’s Thena…almost. Jolie is a MOVIE STAR that just walks onto the screen and commands your attention - and she is perfectly cast as Thena. It is a very smart use of her talents…and her personae as a MOVIE STAR and works very well.
Finally, it took awhile for the film to figure out what to do with Kumail Nanjiani’s character of Kingo (and Nanjiani’s tremendous comedic talents), but, eventually, they do figure it out - but not entirely - which is really the problem with this film. It ALMOST figures out the formula to make this huge, broad, galactic film very personal, but doesn’t quite get there.
I liked, but didn’t LOVE, ETERNALS. I applaud what this film tries to do and I am fine with where it went and was entertained by it. If this is the first part of a journey, then I am anxious to see where ETERNALS goes from here. If this is a “one-off” film, then it doesn’t, quite, work well enough.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
In ETERNALS, Marvel has really attempted to open up their “Universe” by introducing their audience to the Eternals, celestial beings that are tangentially interested in the goings-on of the human world.
It’s not a Super-Hero movie, per se, it’s a world of “Gods and Monsters” (to steal a phrase) that has repercussions across the Universe.
So with this background in mind, the ETERNALS succeeds, mostly, because it is trying to be something…else. NOT a SUPERHERO film, but something on a different plane.
Unfortunately, this probably will put off “Fan-boys” who want “more of the same” (more Avengers, more Thanos, more F/X smashy-smashy, fight-fight) and ETERNALS just isn’t intended to be that.
Your first clue that this film is trying to be something else is the choice of Director - recent Oscar Winner Chloe Zhao (NOMADLAND), known for her personal stories and interesting visuals. She brings that sensibility to this film and it (mostly), though it is the type of Cinematic style that works best in low-res (like an independent film like Nomadland) rather than large IMAX Comic-book film event films.
The movie itself is entertaining…enough. It is, necessarily, slow at the beginning as Zhao needs to set up these characters and the realm that they are playing on (and orient the audience as to how this fits with the AVENGERS:ENDGAME of it all). There are 10 (yes, TEN) Eternals to introduce along with ancillary characters, so the film has to take some time to gather steam.
And…it gathers steam, not in the action sequences (which are serviceable) but in the characters and the character interactions and this is where the film really works for me.
Gemma Chan (CRAZY, RICH ASIANS) and Richard Madden (Rob Stark on GAME OF THRONES) are, basically, the lead characters as their relationship takes center stage for most of the film - and these 2 (especially Chan) holds the screen well, which is tough to do since there are so many characters - and so much other things going on.
The real hero of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, IMHO, is the Casting Director who, time-after-time, plucks relative unknowns and throws them into parts that they are perfectly cast for…Salma Hayak (leader of Eternals, Ajak), Lia McHugh (Sprite), Brian Tyree Henry (Phastos), Lauren Ridloff (Makkari) and Barry Keoghan (Druig) all fit their parts well, with the relationship between Makkari and Druig being particularly interesting.
Speaking of interesting relationships, Ma Dong-seok (so good in the Korean Zombie flick TRAIN TO BUSAN) as Gilgamesh almost steals the screen from MOVIE STAR Angelina Jolie’s Thena…almost. Jolie is a MOVIE STAR that just walks onto the screen and commands your attention - and she is perfectly cast as Thena. It is a very smart use of her talents…and her personae as a MOVIE STAR and works very well.
Finally, it took awhile for the film to figure out what to do with Kumail Nanjiani’s character of Kingo (and Nanjiani’s tremendous comedic talents), but, eventually, they do figure it out - but not entirely - which is really the problem with this film. It ALMOST figures out the formula to make this huge, broad, galactic film very personal, but doesn’t quite get there.
I liked, but didn’t LOVE, ETERNALS. I applaud what this film tries to do and I am fine with where it went and was entertained by it. If this is the first part of a journey, then I am anxious to see where ETERNALS goes from here. If this is a “one-off” film, then it doesn’t, quite, work well enough.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Godzilla vs. Kong (2021) in Movies
Apr 2, 2021
Could have used more Kong versus Godzilla
If you are going to sit down and watch a movie that is entitled GODZILLA vs. KONG, you pretty much know what you are going to get, the highest your expectation should be is a “pretty fun B picture” with a giant Gorilla and a giant Lizard punching it out.
And…that is pretty much what you get…though the “laws of diminishing returns” is catching up to this franchise.
It all started with the reboot of GODZILLA in 2014 - a better than B “B Movie” that introduced audiences to Monarch and the Monsters they were following. This was followed up by the “very much a B Movie” KONG: SKULL ISLAND where Samuel L. Jackson, John Goodman and a host of others run around, getting picked off one-by-one in an enjoyable romp and hopes remained high for the ongoing Kong/Godzilla “Universe”.
Unfortunately, 2019’s GODZILLA: KING OF THE MONSTERS was a step down and the franchise showed signs of weakness with weaker plot lines…even weaker human characters…and overblown special effects.
Next came this film, GODZILLA vs. KONG - it was supposed to be released in theaters last summer, but because of the pandemic made it’s theatrical release at the same time it was shown on HBO Max (where I viewed it) - and I’m glad they did that, for if I would have shelled out money in a movie theater to check out this mess, I would have been angry, indeed.
GODZILLA vs. KONG follows, unfortunately, the trend started by GODZILLA: KING OF THE THE MONSTERS in that it has overblown CGI action with very little in the way of coherent plot and characters that you couldn’t care less about. It’s a mess of a movie that strings together a slim plot to get from one CGI battle to another.
But…if it has CGI Giant Gorilla on CGI Radioactive Lizard fighting in it…it should be fine, right? Well…that’s where Director Adam Wingard (YOU’RE NEXT) really fails, for a movie called GODZILLA vs. KONG has very little Kong fighting Godzilla in it…so one cannot even get too excited by that.
To be fair to this film, it doesn’t try to be anything more than it is intended to be - a “B” flick with giant monsters fighting each other, but…it only manages to be a B- flick at best. So, feel free to kick back and watch the CGI action, you’ll enjoy most of it - just don’t spend too much time looking for plot or characters that you care about.
And…unfortunately…it’s making me care less and less about future sequels - or the future of the Kong/Godzilla Universe.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And…that is pretty much what you get…though the “laws of diminishing returns” is catching up to this franchise.
It all started with the reboot of GODZILLA in 2014 - a better than B “B Movie” that introduced audiences to Monarch and the Monsters they were following. This was followed up by the “very much a B Movie” KONG: SKULL ISLAND where Samuel L. Jackson, John Goodman and a host of others run around, getting picked off one-by-one in an enjoyable romp and hopes remained high for the ongoing Kong/Godzilla “Universe”.
Unfortunately, 2019’s GODZILLA: KING OF THE MONSTERS was a step down and the franchise showed signs of weakness with weaker plot lines…even weaker human characters…and overblown special effects.
Next came this film, GODZILLA vs. KONG - it was supposed to be released in theaters last summer, but because of the pandemic made it’s theatrical release at the same time it was shown on HBO Max (where I viewed it) - and I’m glad they did that, for if I would have shelled out money in a movie theater to check out this mess, I would have been angry, indeed.
GODZILLA vs. KONG follows, unfortunately, the trend started by GODZILLA: KING OF THE THE MONSTERS in that it has overblown CGI action with very little in the way of coherent plot and characters that you couldn’t care less about. It’s a mess of a movie that strings together a slim plot to get from one CGI battle to another.
But…if it has CGI Giant Gorilla on CGI Radioactive Lizard fighting in it…it should be fine, right? Well…that’s where Director Adam Wingard (YOU’RE NEXT) really fails, for a movie called GODZILLA vs. KONG has very little Kong fighting Godzilla in it…so one cannot even get too excited by that.
To be fair to this film, it doesn’t try to be anything more than it is intended to be - a “B” flick with giant monsters fighting each other, but…it only manages to be a B- flick at best. So, feel free to kick back and watch the CGI action, you’ll enjoy most of it - just don’t spend too much time looking for plot or characters that you care about.
And…unfortunately…it’s making me care less and less about future sequels - or the future of the Kong/Godzilla Universe.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
David McK (3405 KP) rated Shazam! Fury of the Gods (2023) in Movies
Mar 19, 2023
I've always quite liekd Zachary Levi, going back to when I first encountered him in his TV days on the spy comedy drama show 'Chuck' (remember that?)
Beyond that - and a few side character appearances in the early Thor films - I would struggle to name a single movie with him in it.
Except for 2019s Shazam!, where he took the leading role of the grown-up alter-ego of a teenager who is granted magic (superheroic) powers when he shouts the word Shazam!
That movie, itself, was enjoyable and a breath of fresh air from the grimdark of the DC brand (in the movies) at the time.
This follows on from the events of the first movie, with a certain select group of people now aware of who Shazam *is*, and with the same sprinkling of the horror genre throughout; albeit not quite so much 'on the nose' as the Seven Deadly Sins were. Instead, we have the mythical Daughters of Atlas out for revenge, viewing their powers as having been stolen and gifted to the mortals by the (still nameless) Wizard (who makes a return, despite having turned to dust previously - don't ask).
Whilst the future structure of the whole DC universe is currently 'under review', it may be interesting to see where this lesser-known (at least, to me) brand goes!
Beyond that - and a few side character appearances in the early Thor films - I would struggle to name a single movie with him in it.
Except for 2019s Shazam!, where he took the leading role of the grown-up alter-ego of a teenager who is granted magic (superheroic) powers when he shouts the word Shazam!
That movie, itself, was enjoyable and a breath of fresh air from the grimdark of the DC brand (in the movies) at the time.
This follows on from the events of the first movie, with a certain select group of people now aware of who Shazam *is*, and with the same sprinkling of the horror genre throughout; albeit not quite so much 'on the nose' as the Seven Deadly Sins were. Instead, we have the mythical Daughters of Atlas out for revenge, viewing their powers as having been stolen and gifted to the mortals by the (still nameless) Wizard (who makes a return, despite having turned to dust previously - don't ask).
Whilst the future structure of the whole DC universe is currently 'under review', it may be interesting to see where this lesser-known (at least, to me) brand goes!
MichaelS (0 KP) rated Thor: Ragnarok (2017) in Movies
Feb 20, 2018
Thor has always been the red headed stepchild of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. He's there, but nobody really seems to care all that much. His presence in the Avengers films is always more in the background, and his solo movies have been mediocre at best. Nothing that warrants more than one viewing. Now, with a healthy dose of Flash Gordon flair, Thor finally gets a movie that elevates this particular branch of the MCU to good, popcorn fun.
Visually, the movie is splendid. Bright colors and sweeping visuals create great backgrounds and settings. The hand to hand fights are impactful, and a aerial chase scene is exciting, and well shot. The music smacks of 70's science fiction, and 80's action movies, giving it a very retro feel. And the director is obviously a big fan of Led Zeppelin's "Immigrant Song". It's used in 2 fight scenes, which seems redundant, as Kiss' "God Of Thunder", or AC/DC's "Thunderstruck" would've been welcome additions.
But the film suffers from the same shortcomings as most other Marvel movies. First, the over reliance on humor continues to be crutch for the entire MCU. Way too often, the plot stops dead in it's track to tell a joke, and humor is injected into serious situations, completely erasing any feeling of something actually being at stake. After all, if the characters are cracking jokes, what they're fighting for must not be that important.
Once again, Marvel shits the bed when it comes to having a threatening villain. As Hela, Cate Blanchett is a step up from the useless villains Marvel usually produces, but even so, we're never really sure what exactly she's after. And when Thor devises a plan to stop her, it seemed to me that plan was simply doing Hela was out to accomplish in the first place. Other than that, she talks slow, walks, slow, and flicks her wrists a lot for various reasons.
The biggest problem with this movie is indicative of the entire MCU at this point. These movies simply can not stand on their own. They're so dependent on the viewer having seen all the other Marvel movies, that you'll be lost on many plot points if you go into this movie cold. Cameos by characters from other Marvel movies serve no point, other than to remind you that this movie is a part of a "cinematic universe"...two words, and a concept, I'd be glad to never deal with again.
Chris Hemsworth is solid as Thor, but he's always been rather unremarkable in the role. He does have a good chemistry with Mark Ruffalo's Bruce Banner/Hulk, but it's never really explained how Hulk was suddenly able to be such a chatterbox. Tessa Thompson is a welcome addition as Valkyrie. She has more layers to her character than any other in the movie, and looks great in tight leather. Tom Hiddleston is back...again...as Loki. It's never a good thing when the villain of your movie is more popular than the hero, and this movie completes Loki's transformation into full blown good guy. So, there's that.
All that being said, the movie is undeniable fun. It's has a very retro, Flash Gordon feel to it. Right down to a synthesized musical score that is a mixture of 70's science fiction, and 80's action movies. The action consists mostly of hand to hand fights, and for the most part, they're done very well. The final "three fights at once" scenario is reminiscent of movies like Return Of The Jedi, where the effects of all separate fights merge into one.
It's a fun, popcorn movie, and a major step up from the first two Thor movies. It's nothing great, or even memorable. But there's enough here to warrant additional viewings, and that's a first for this branch of the Marvel franchise.
Visually, the movie is splendid. Bright colors and sweeping visuals create great backgrounds and settings. The hand to hand fights are impactful, and a aerial chase scene is exciting, and well shot. The music smacks of 70's science fiction, and 80's action movies, giving it a very retro feel. And the director is obviously a big fan of Led Zeppelin's "Immigrant Song". It's used in 2 fight scenes, which seems redundant, as Kiss' "God Of Thunder", or AC/DC's "Thunderstruck" would've been welcome additions.
But the film suffers from the same shortcomings as most other Marvel movies. First, the over reliance on humor continues to be crutch for the entire MCU. Way too often, the plot stops dead in it's track to tell a joke, and humor is injected into serious situations, completely erasing any feeling of something actually being at stake. After all, if the characters are cracking jokes, what they're fighting for must not be that important.
Once again, Marvel shits the bed when it comes to having a threatening villain. As Hela, Cate Blanchett is a step up from the useless villains Marvel usually produces, but even so, we're never really sure what exactly she's after. And when Thor devises a plan to stop her, it seemed to me that plan was simply doing Hela was out to accomplish in the first place. Other than that, she talks slow, walks, slow, and flicks her wrists a lot for various reasons.
The biggest problem with this movie is indicative of the entire MCU at this point. These movies simply can not stand on their own. They're so dependent on the viewer having seen all the other Marvel movies, that you'll be lost on many plot points if you go into this movie cold. Cameos by characters from other Marvel movies serve no point, other than to remind you that this movie is a part of a "cinematic universe"...two words, and a concept, I'd be glad to never deal with again.
Chris Hemsworth is solid as Thor, but he's always been rather unremarkable in the role. He does have a good chemistry with Mark Ruffalo's Bruce Banner/Hulk, but it's never really explained how Hulk was suddenly able to be such a chatterbox. Tessa Thompson is a welcome addition as Valkyrie. She has more layers to her character than any other in the movie, and looks great in tight leather. Tom Hiddleston is back...again...as Loki. It's never a good thing when the villain of your movie is more popular than the hero, and this movie completes Loki's transformation into full blown good guy. So, there's that.
All that being said, the movie is undeniable fun. It's has a very retro, Flash Gordon feel to it. Right down to a synthesized musical score that is a mixture of 70's science fiction, and 80's action movies. The action consists mostly of hand to hand fights, and for the most part, they're done very well. The final "three fights at once" scenario is reminiscent of movies like Return Of The Jedi, where the effects of all separate fights merge into one.
It's a fun, popcorn movie, and a major step up from the first two Thor movies. It's nothing great, or even memorable. But there's enough here to warrant additional viewings, and that's a first for this branch of the Marvel franchise.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Nov 27, 2017
Decent cast performances (1 more)
Good fun
Varying quality of SFX (1 more)
Painfully safe
Justice At Last For DC Fans?
Last weekend, a movie dropped that most comic book fans have been hotly anticipating for the last few decades. The follow up to the disappointment that was Dawn of Justice, Justice League had a lot to live up to. I’m not going to try and convince you that it is a perfect movie, but I enjoyed it. If I was judging the movie on it’s own I would probably be much harsher with my rating etc, but in the context of other DCEU movies, it’s a breath of fresh air.
The first half of the movie is extremely choppy and unfocused and feels more like a grab bag of scenes cut together to resemble a story rather than any sort of coherent story. Then the last half of the movie plays it incredibly safe and plays out exactly how you would predict. There are no surprises or twists and then the credits roll and half heartedly set up a potential sequel, although with the huge amount of money Warner Bros lost on this movie if the rumoured budget amount of 300 million is to be believed, we may not be getting another entry any time soon. Which is sort of a shame because there are aspects of this movie that I really like, such as Batfleck and Jeremy Irons as Alfred.
There isn’t really much to talk about here, which is disappointing. Although Batman V Superman left a great deal to be desired as a decent comic book movie, it at least gave all of us something to talk about. The cast is alright, Affleck was just as great as Batman as he’s been up until now, Cavill puts in a decent Superman performance if you can get by that dodgy CGI upper lip, Gal Gadot is great as Wonder Woman, Ray Fisher does fine as Cyborg, Jason Momoa’s Aquaman is pretty one dimensional, but I think that’s more to do with the script than with the actor. Ezra Miller is annoying but clearly supposed to be the comic relief in the film. JK Simmons is wasted as Jim Gordon, but it’s nice to see Amy Adams in a reduced role here. I don’t hate Amy Adams, but I am not a fan of her portrayal as Lois Lane and surprisingly, she actually serves a purpose in this film, as opposed to pondering about with a camera looking surprised. The SFX varies greatly, with some really impressive visual effects and some that look like absolute garbage.
Slight spoilers going forwards I guess, but it’s not exactly a shocking revelation that they resurrect Superman from the dead in this movie, which as a long time comic book fan, I feel like could have been handled better.
Overall, it’s not the worst movie in the world; it’s not even the worst movie in this universe, but really it should be great. This movie should be so much better than, ‘okay,’ it’s the Justice League for Christssake. This film isn’t even as good as Thor Ragnarok, the third sequel in one of the least popular Avenger’s solo film. Justice League should have blown Thor out of the water, both commercially and critically! However, as a standalone film, without any context around it, it is a fun film and I did enjoy my time with it.
The first half of the movie is extremely choppy and unfocused and feels more like a grab bag of scenes cut together to resemble a story rather than any sort of coherent story. Then the last half of the movie plays it incredibly safe and plays out exactly how you would predict. There are no surprises or twists and then the credits roll and half heartedly set up a potential sequel, although with the huge amount of money Warner Bros lost on this movie if the rumoured budget amount of 300 million is to be believed, we may not be getting another entry any time soon. Which is sort of a shame because there are aspects of this movie that I really like, such as Batfleck and Jeremy Irons as Alfred.
There isn’t really much to talk about here, which is disappointing. Although Batman V Superman left a great deal to be desired as a decent comic book movie, it at least gave all of us something to talk about. The cast is alright, Affleck was just as great as Batman as he’s been up until now, Cavill puts in a decent Superman performance if you can get by that dodgy CGI upper lip, Gal Gadot is great as Wonder Woman, Ray Fisher does fine as Cyborg, Jason Momoa’s Aquaman is pretty one dimensional, but I think that’s more to do with the script than with the actor. Ezra Miller is annoying but clearly supposed to be the comic relief in the film. JK Simmons is wasted as Jim Gordon, but it’s nice to see Amy Adams in a reduced role here. I don’t hate Amy Adams, but I am not a fan of her portrayal as Lois Lane and surprisingly, she actually serves a purpose in this film, as opposed to pondering about with a camera looking surprised. The SFX varies greatly, with some really impressive visual effects and some that look like absolute garbage.
Slight spoilers going forwards I guess, but it’s not exactly a shocking revelation that they resurrect Superman from the dead in this movie, which as a long time comic book fan, I feel like could have been handled better.
Overall, it’s not the worst movie in the world; it’s not even the worst movie in this universe, but really it should be great. This movie should be so much better than, ‘okay,’ it’s the Justice League for Christssake. This film isn’t even as good as Thor Ragnarok, the third sequel in one of the least popular Avenger’s solo film. Justice League should have blown Thor out of the water, both commercially and critically! However, as a standalone film, without any context around it, it is a fun film and I did enjoy my time with it.
Star Wars: Vader Down
Kieron Gillen, Mike Deodato, Jason Aaron, Salvador Larroca and Mark Brooks (art)
7.8
Rate It
Book
Two of the biggest titles in comics collide in the first crossover of the new Marvel age of STAR...
Star-Wars Movie-Universe Comicbook
Justin Taylor (59 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies
Oct 31, 2018
Great comedy (3 more)
Relatable villain
John Hughes-esque movie disguised as a superhero movie and I dig it
Lots and lots of references
Best spider Man movie
Contains spoilers, click to show
While Tobey maguire will always be my spider man, Tom Holland is the second best (at Least he's better than Andrew Garfield) and Micheal Keaton is an awesome villain. The cast of side characters are hilarious and the jokes are on point. And the two side characters that stand out to me are Ned and Zendaya's character Michelle which later to be revealed that her nickname is MJ (do I smell an upcoming romance that they'll probably explore more in Far From Home?) Also there's no mention of Mary Jane or Gwen Stacy for those who haven't watched this movie and don't care about spoilers are wondering
Also there are tons of references to the spider Man mythology so make sure your following along.
If I had to pick one negative although not a bad thing its just it tries too much to tie in to the MCU although the stuff with reusing elements of the MCU weapons is kinda cool although Luke cage beat them to that plotline and let me make it clear referencing the universe isn't a bad thing because they bring stuff up that'll be important later on in either the upcoming sequels or the next avengers movies but when they do it constantly it just kinda distracts me but if u love the marvel movies like I do then u won't have a problem.
Also there are tons of references to the spider Man mythology so make sure your following along.
If I had to pick one negative although not a bad thing its just it tries too much to tie in to the MCU although the stuff with reusing elements of the MCU weapons is kinda cool although Luke cage beat them to that plotline and let me make it clear referencing the universe isn't a bad thing because they bring stuff up that'll be important later on in either the upcoming sequels or the next avengers movies but when they do it constantly it just kinda distracts me but if u love the marvel movies like I do then u won't have a problem.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Men in Black International (2019) in Movies
Jun 23, 2019
Perfectly Fine
MEN IN BLACK INTERNATIONAL is a perfectly fine movie that showcases two perfectly fine talents getting into a perfectly fine predicament that is perfectly fine to view. It's fun and action-packed with weird aliens and charismatic, bickering, leads.
It also is nothing new. We've seen this film before with MEN IN BLACK or MEN IN BLACK II or MEN IN BLACK III. So, while I walked out of the cineplex with a satisfying movie going experience, I was left wanting something...more.
In this version of MIB, Tessa Thompson takes over the Will Smith role as the "newbie" in the MIB Universe. We (the audience) experience unusual - and unexpected - things through her eyes and she is joined by a veteran MIB agent - this time played by Chris Hemsworth. The MIB Universe is expanded as agent "M" (Thompson) is sent to the London Bureau by her boss, "O" (an always welcome Emma Thompson". There she meets the head of MIB London (Liam Neeson being gruff and "boss-like") and his "golden boy", Agent "H" (a game Hemsworth). The two join forces to investigate a "mole" in MIB and are, eventually, joined by Alien "Pawney" (voiced, nicely, by Kumail Nanjiani).
The plot machinations are nothing new. I saw the 2 "plot twists" coming a mile off. So it is the journey, not the destination, that should be the fun of it and, ultimately, the journey is agreeable enough but nothing more. "H" and "M" bicker their way through the proceedings until they form a mutual respect for each other. "O", "High T" and Agent "C" (a rival for Hemsworth's "H") are gruff...enough...but never threatening.
And that, ultimately, is the issue here. The stakes weren't high enough, the conflicts weren't big enough, the special effects weren't new enough and, ultimately, the movie just isn't original enough. I kept thinking to myself..."This is the perfect "airplane" movie." By that, I mean I could watch this on an airplane and not be worried about who is looking over my shoulder at what I am watching on screen. It is a safe, pleasant enough, entertainment experience.
You won't be disappointed in this film, you also won't be challenged, thrilled or amazed at it, either.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
It also is nothing new. We've seen this film before with MEN IN BLACK or MEN IN BLACK II or MEN IN BLACK III. So, while I walked out of the cineplex with a satisfying movie going experience, I was left wanting something...more.
In this version of MIB, Tessa Thompson takes over the Will Smith role as the "newbie" in the MIB Universe. We (the audience) experience unusual - and unexpected - things through her eyes and she is joined by a veteran MIB agent - this time played by Chris Hemsworth. The MIB Universe is expanded as agent "M" (Thompson) is sent to the London Bureau by her boss, "O" (an always welcome Emma Thompson". There she meets the head of MIB London (Liam Neeson being gruff and "boss-like") and his "golden boy", Agent "H" (a game Hemsworth). The two join forces to investigate a "mole" in MIB and are, eventually, joined by Alien "Pawney" (voiced, nicely, by Kumail Nanjiani).
The plot machinations are nothing new. I saw the 2 "plot twists" coming a mile off. So it is the journey, not the destination, that should be the fun of it and, ultimately, the journey is agreeable enough but nothing more. "H" and "M" bicker their way through the proceedings until they form a mutual respect for each other. "O", "High T" and Agent "C" (a rival for Hemsworth's "H") are gruff...enough...but never threatening.
And that, ultimately, is the issue here. The stakes weren't high enough, the conflicts weren't big enough, the special effects weren't new enough and, ultimately, the movie just isn't original enough. I kept thinking to myself..."This is the perfect "airplane" movie." By that, I mean I could watch this on an airplane and not be worried about who is looking over my shoulder at what I am watching on screen. It is a safe, pleasant enough, entertainment experience.
You won't be disappointed in this film, you also won't be challenged, thrilled or amazed at it, either.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)