Search
It's Alright Between Us as It Is by Lindstrøm
Album Watch
On Hans-Peter Lindstrøm’s latest album, those northern disco lights are twinkling once more. Over...
dance electronic
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Hellraiser (1987) in Movies
Nov 14, 2021
All these years later, and Hellraiser is still a treat. I've always had respect for Clive Barker's directorial debut. It came out in a decade where the genre had become more schlocky and less serious with each passing year, and dared to go for the jugular with its straight shooting, no nonsense brand of horror.
It has an engaging plot, focusing primarily on a forbidden love between Julia, and her husband's brother Frank. When Frank is quite literally torn apart after messing with an ancient puzzle box, it quickly becomes apparent that he can return to the land of the living through blood sacrifice, resulting in Julia luring unsuspecting victims to their doom in order to be with Frank once again. It's a twisted love story, effectively making Hellraiser a romance-horror, centering around a toxic relationship. The cast performances are varied for sure, but of course Clare Higgins is a stand out. Her portrayal of Julia is sympathetic as she is quite clearly besotted with and somewhat scared of Frank, whilst also managing to be a confident and calculating villain.
Then there is the iconic Pinhead, one of several cenobites that are summoned when the puzzle box is completed, and a horror antagonist that stands shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Michael Myers and Freddy Krueger. His presence here is effective in the way that it's seldom. When he does appear, Doug Bradley delivers every line with terrifying conviction, with some hugely memorable dialogue.
The practical effects on display are fantastic as well. Frank's ressurection scene in particular is striking, and one of the finest examples of practical horror effects out there. The cenobites themselves boast some memorable designs, and looks suitably unsettling. It also has a haunting and beautiful music score, courtesy of Christopher Young, that really ties everything together nicely.
Hellraiser is an all timer. A film that deserves its place in the horror hall of fame without question.
It has an engaging plot, focusing primarily on a forbidden love between Julia, and her husband's brother Frank. When Frank is quite literally torn apart after messing with an ancient puzzle box, it quickly becomes apparent that he can return to the land of the living through blood sacrifice, resulting in Julia luring unsuspecting victims to their doom in order to be with Frank once again. It's a twisted love story, effectively making Hellraiser a romance-horror, centering around a toxic relationship. The cast performances are varied for sure, but of course Clare Higgins is a stand out. Her portrayal of Julia is sympathetic as she is quite clearly besotted with and somewhat scared of Frank, whilst also managing to be a confident and calculating villain.
Then there is the iconic Pinhead, one of several cenobites that are summoned when the puzzle box is completed, and a horror antagonist that stands shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Michael Myers and Freddy Krueger. His presence here is effective in the way that it's seldom. When he does appear, Doug Bradley delivers every line with terrifying conviction, with some hugely memorable dialogue.
The practical effects on display are fantastic as well. Frank's ressurection scene in particular is striking, and one of the finest examples of practical horror effects out there. The cenobites themselves boast some memorable designs, and looks suitably unsettling. It also has a haunting and beautiful music score, courtesy of Christopher Young, that really ties everything together nicely.
Hellraiser is an all timer. A film that deserves its place in the horror hall of fame without question.
HI
How it Feels to be Free: Black Women Entertainers and the Civil Rights Movement
Book
Winner of the Benjamin L. Hooks National Book Award Winnter of the Michael Nelson Prize of the...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Jimmy's Hall (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
It’s not to often that we folks in America have the opportunity to catch any movies from Ireland.
The few that do come along almost certainly rate high on the scale of exceptional movies that one would want to see. I myself can’t remember a ‘bad’ Irish film. Perhaps one of the reasons for that is the fact that this country has a solid history of countless Irish immigrants coming here and helping to build the foundations for America. Well, today’s film for your consideration doesn’t go back THAT far. It doesn’t even take place in America. However, the history of Irish immigrants (specifically one immigrant) does play a role. Only it involves an Irish immigrant how came to America and then several years later returned to Ireland only to be forcibly deported back to America. I know I know. That explanation makes it sound like a comedy and although the film has many lighthearted moments, I can assure you it’s NOT a comedy. In fact, it deals with an influential figure in one of the more politically turbulent periods in Ireland’s history just before the beginning of the Second World War.
‘Jimmy’s Hall’ is a 2014 Irish-British drama directed by English television and film director Kenneth ‘Ken’ Loach. The film focuses on the events leading up to the deportation from Ireland of Jimmy Gralton, who led a precursor to Ireland’s communist party in the county Leitrim.
Starring Barry Ward, Simone Kirby, and Irish character actor Jim Norton, the film opens in 1932. Jimmy (Ward) has just returned to his home to help his mother tend the family farm after spending 10 years in the United States in the midst of the Great Depression coinciding with the establishment of a new government in the aftermath of the Civil War between pro-British and anti-British forces.
Reluctant to anger his old enemies, the church and the landowners who forced him to leave Ireland, but eager to meet the needs of the people of Leitrim, Jimmy (Ward) decides to reopen the ‘Hall’, a center for young people where they can meet to study, talk, dance, play music, learn to read, debate issues of the day. Free to all and open to anyone who wishes to learn while respecting the views and opinions of others, the ‘Hall’ is an immediate success. Not everyone is pleased to see Jimmy resuming his old activities. In particular the church and local priest (Norton) who see Gralton as not only a ‘bad influence’, but also as a follower of Stalin who as history knows sent countless millions (including religious leaders) to their deaths.
Despite the complaints and at times violent reactions on the part of the supporters of the church and the landowners, Gralton tries desperately to make them realize he has absolutely no connection to Stalin and has no desire to bring down the church. Only to better the situation for everyone. Jimmy even invites the local priest to take a leadership role in the Hall’s committee. In the end though, the fears of the church and the state go unchanged. Jimmy is a communist and although he has no connection Stalin the church and the government see them as one in the same. The police take Jimmy into custody at his family’s farm and forcibly deport him back to America even so much as denying him on last chance to see his ailing mother.
In education systems there are books and films which are considered ‘required reading’ or in this case ‘required viewing’. This film should be required viewing. It is not just an excellent film about a historical Irish political figure or as I mentioned earlier a film about a turbulent point in Irish history. It’s an example of the greater ‘world conflict’ between what became the western bloc and the eastern bloc. Both sides in that grater conflict saw each other the same way the two sides in the Irish countryside of the 1930s saw each other. The ones that meant well and only wanted to better the situation for everyone including themselves inspired fear in those who had power and those who had the power inspired fear in those who meant well. This movie showed that not all political figures are evil … nor are all religious figures. It’s the individual or several individuals within those groups that are reluctant to change.
I would highly recommend this film. Regardless of the content it’s an excellent film. If this film is as good as most films made in Ireland, they definitely need to start exporting them on a grander scale. I’d give this film 4 out of 5 stars.
This is your friendly neighborhood photographer ‘The CameraMan’ and on behalf of my fellows at ‘Skewed & Reviewed’ I’d like to say thanks for reading and we’ll see you at the movies
The few that do come along almost certainly rate high on the scale of exceptional movies that one would want to see. I myself can’t remember a ‘bad’ Irish film. Perhaps one of the reasons for that is the fact that this country has a solid history of countless Irish immigrants coming here and helping to build the foundations for America. Well, today’s film for your consideration doesn’t go back THAT far. It doesn’t even take place in America. However, the history of Irish immigrants (specifically one immigrant) does play a role. Only it involves an Irish immigrant how came to America and then several years later returned to Ireland only to be forcibly deported back to America. I know I know. That explanation makes it sound like a comedy and although the film has many lighthearted moments, I can assure you it’s NOT a comedy. In fact, it deals with an influential figure in one of the more politically turbulent periods in Ireland’s history just before the beginning of the Second World War.
‘Jimmy’s Hall’ is a 2014 Irish-British drama directed by English television and film director Kenneth ‘Ken’ Loach. The film focuses on the events leading up to the deportation from Ireland of Jimmy Gralton, who led a precursor to Ireland’s communist party in the county Leitrim.
Starring Barry Ward, Simone Kirby, and Irish character actor Jim Norton, the film opens in 1932. Jimmy (Ward) has just returned to his home to help his mother tend the family farm after spending 10 years in the United States in the midst of the Great Depression coinciding with the establishment of a new government in the aftermath of the Civil War between pro-British and anti-British forces.
Reluctant to anger his old enemies, the church and the landowners who forced him to leave Ireland, but eager to meet the needs of the people of Leitrim, Jimmy (Ward) decides to reopen the ‘Hall’, a center for young people where they can meet to study, talk, dance, play music, learn to read, debate issues of the day. Free to all and open to anyone who wishes to learn while respecting the views and opinions of others, the ‘Hall’ is an immediate success. Not everyone is pleased to see Jimmy resuming his old activities. In particular the church and local priest (Norton) who see Gralton as not only a ‘bad influence’, but also as a follower of Stalin who as history knows sent countless millions (including religious leaders) to their deaths.
Despite the complaints and at times violent reactions on the part of the supporters of the church and the landowners, Gralton tries desperately to make them realize he has absolutely no connection to Stalin and has no desire to bring down the church. Only to better the situation for everyone. Jimmy even invites the local priest to take a leadership role in the Hall’s committee. In the end though, the fears of the church and the state go unchanged. Jimmy is a communist and although he has no connection Stalin the church and the government see them as one in the same. The police take Jimmy into custody at his family’s farm and forcibly deport him back to America even so much as denying him on last chance to see his ailing mother.
In education systems there are books and films which are considered ‘required reading’ or in this case ‘required viewing’. This film should be required viewing. It is not just an excellent film about a historical Irish political figure or as I mentioned earlier a film about a turbulent point in Irish history. It’s an example of the greater ‘world conflict’ between what became the western bloc and the eastern bloc. Both sides in that grater conflict saw each other the same way the two sides in the Irish countryside of the 1930s saw each other. The ones that meant well and only wanted to better the situation for everyone including themselves inspired fear in those who had power and those who had the power inspired fear in those who meant well. This movie showed that not all political figures are evil … nor are all religious figures. It’s the individual or several individuals within those groups that are reluctant to change.
I would highly recommend this film. Regardless of the content it’s an excellent film. If this film is as good as most films made in Ireland, they definitely need to start exporting them on a grander scale. I’d give this film 4 out of 5 stars.
This is your friendly neighborhood photographer ‘The CameraMan’ and on behalf of my fellows at ‘Skewed & Reviewed’ I’d like to say thanks for reading and we’ll see you at the movies
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Motherless Brooklyn (2019) in Movies
Jan 15, 2021
A little too slow and self-indulgent for my tastes
There is no denying that Edward Norton is a talented performer. Ever since he burst onto the scene with his Oscar nominated performance in PRIMAL FEAR, he has been a presence both on and off the screen as an Actor, Writer, Producer and Director.
With his latest effort, MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN (based on the base selling novel by Jonathan Lethem), Norton puts ALL of his skills to work as he Produced, Directed, Wrote and Starred in this Private Eye thriller from 2019.
If only Norton had handed at least 1 of those jobs over to someone else.
Norton stars as Lionel Essrog, a Private Eye with Tourette’s Syndrome, who’s investigation into the murder of a mentor of his exposes corruption, racism, greed and abuse of power in City Hall in New York City in the 1950’s.
As the star, Norton brings a nice edge to Lionel, who’s Tourette’s causes him to twitch and belt out words randomly, as well as gives him a photographic memory. While the twitching and random swearing are a bit over the top at times, the photographic memory helps Lionel solve the case (of course it does).
And that’s where I have issue with writer Norton - as he cannot resist the urge to showcase Actor Norton’s propensity to go over the top and puts in many, many “Tourette’s moments” as well as putting in long dialogue scenes that tries to show the audience how smart Lionel is.
Unfortunately, Director Norton indulges Writer Norton and Actor Norton so the film has a languid pace that just sits on Lionel’s actions and words. This is a 2 hour movie packed into a 2 1/2 hour run time. Now, to be fair to Director Norton, there are some absolutely gorgeous and interesting pictures put on the screen and the atmosphere (and characters) that are created are interesting (enough) to ALMOST forgive the self-indulgent ways of Writer/Actor/Director Norton.
As for the rest of the cast, Bruce Willis is…Bruce Willis as a Private Eye that works with Lionel and Willem DaFoe is at his “Willem DeFoe-iest” in portraying a critic of New York City Hall with a secret past. It’s as if Director Norton said to both of these 2 fine actors to just “do your thing” while he focused on the myriad of other jobs he had on this film.
Special notice needs to be made of the work of Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Femme Fatale Laura Rose (a part that Norton specifically added to the film - her character was not in the book - and wrote just for her). She is quite good in this role and her scenes with Norton crackle somewhat louder than the rest of the film.
And then there is Alec Baldwin as a corrupt, racist, politician who is looking out for only 1 person - himself. While Baldwin is very good in this 100% serious role, I couldn’t be help but be reminded of a certain comedic character he has played for the past few years on Saturday Night Live.
The music by Daniel Pemberton and the Cinematography by Dick Pope add greatly to the atmosphere of this film - and that is good - for when the story bogs down (and it bogs down A LOT), there usually is something interesting to look at or listen to.
Not a bad film, but it could have been a much better film if someone would have taken at least ONE of the jobs off of Norton (I would vote for Director) and tightened things up and tone down Norton’s tendency to “ham it up” on screen.
Letter Grade: B-
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
With his latest effort, MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN (based on the base selling novel by Jonathan Lethem), Norton puts ALL of his skills to work as he Produced, Directed, Wrote and Starred in this Private Eye thriller from 2019.
If only Norton had handed at least 1 of those jobs over to someone else.
Norton stars as Lionel Essrog, a Private Eye with Tourette’s Syndrome, who’s investigation into the murder of a mentor of his exposes corruption, racism, greed and abuse of power in City Hall in New York City in the 1950’s.
As the star, Norton brings a nice edge to Lionel, who’s Tourette’s causes him to twitch and belt out words randomly, as well as gives him a photographic memory. While the twitching and random swearing are a bit over the top at times, the photographic memory helps Lionel solve the case (of course it does).
And that’s where I have issue with writer Norton - as he cannot resist the urge to showcase Actor Norton’s propensity to go over the top and puts in many, many “Tourette’s moments” as well as putting in long dialogue scenes that tries to show the audience how smart Lionel is.
Unfortunately, Director Norton indulges Writer Norton and Actor Norton so the film has a languid pace that just sits on Lionel’s actions and words. This is a 2 hour movie packed into a 2 1/2 hour run time. Now, to be fair to Director Norton, there are some absolutely gorgeous and interesting pictures put on the screen and the atmosphere (and characters) that are created are interesting (enough) to ALMOST forgive the self-indulgent ways of Writer/Actor/Director Norton.
As for the rest of the cast, Bruce Willis is…Bruce Willis as a Private Eye that works with Lionel and Willem DaFoe is at his “Willem DeFoe-iest” in portraying a critic of New York City Hall with a secret past. It’s as if Director Norton said to both of these 2 fine actors to just “do your thing” while he focused on the myriad of other jobs he had on this film.
Special notice needs to be made of the work of Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Femme Fatale Laura Rose (a part that Norton specifically added to the film - her character was not in the book - and wrote just for her). She is quite good in this role and her scenes with Norton crackle somewhat louder than the rest of the film.
And then there is Alec Baldwin as a corrupt, racist, politician who is looking out for only 1 person - himself. While Baldwin is very good in this 100% serious role, I couldn’t be help but be reminded of a certain comedic character he has played for the past few years on Saturday Night Live.
The music by Daniel Pemberton and the Cinematography by Dick Pope add greatly to the atmosphere of this film - and that is good - for when the story bogs down (and it bogs down A LOT), there usually is something interesting to look at or listen to.
Not a bad film, but it could have been a much better film if someone would have taken at least ONE of the jobs off of Norton (I would vote for Director) and tightened things up and tone down Norton’s tendency to “ham it up” on screen.
Letter Grade: B-
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Star Trek (2009) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
As Leonard Nimoy says on the “making of” featurette, few directors can successfully deliver both ‘action’ and ’emotion’ in the same film, but J.J. Abrams can do. You can tell that he loved the original series, and adds both energy and ‘fan-friendly’ easter eggs into the movie:
We saw Kirk’s death in “Generations” – here we see his birth, with a pre-Thor Chris Hemsworth as his heroic Dad!;
The nasty Ceti Eel creatures are back from “The Wrath of Khan”!;
We see the historic event of Kirk beating the Kobayashi Maru starfleet test;
And we see all of the key characters meeting for the first time.
There are some surprises though. The fact that Spock and Uhuru are ‘a thing’ adds a spice to the film that feels like it messes with existing Trek lore. And similarly the destruction of Vulcan – giving this the highest body count of any of the movies! – has to be explained away with the old ‘parallel timeline’ ploy.
The action scenes work well, reliving the ‘submarine warfare in space’ elements that worked so well in the original series and the “Wrath of Khan”. A ‘space drop’ onto Nero’s ‘drill’ is particularly thrilling.
The casting is just about bang on, with Chris Pine pitch perfect as Kirk and Karl Urban particularly impressive as ‘Bones’ McCoy (although the evolution of the nickname – shown here – feels overly forced). The one character that I don’t get on with here is Simon Pegg’s Scotty: might be controversial, but he just doesn’t work for me.
Finally, the music by Michael Giacchino is a favourite score of mine. Simply thrilling and brilliant. I was lucky enough to hear it played live at a showing in the Royal Albert Hall a few years back, where both Giacchino and Abrams appeared on stage – – a truly memorable evening.
It’s not perfect. The whole “transportation of Scotty into the water works” irritates me enormously for some reason. And it’s somewhat glossed over what Nero and his crew have been doing for the 25 years while Kirk grows up: (Nero: “Man, I’ve finished ALL of my Sodoku books… when is this lockdown EVER GONNA END??”). And the JJ ‘lens flare’ is used to a level here that is mind-blowingly distracting! But as a reboot, in the main, it works.
We saw Kirk’s death in “Generations” – here we see his birth, with a pre-Thor Chris Hemsworth as his heroic Dad!;
The nasty Ceti Eel creatures are back from “The Wrath of Khan”!;
We see the historic event of Kirk beating the Kobayashi Maru starfleet test;
And we see all of the key characters meeting for the first time.
There are some surprises though. The fact that Spock and Uhuru are ‘a thing’ adds a spice to the film that feels like it messes with existing Trek lore. And similarly the destruction of Vulcan – giving this the highest body count of any of the movies! – has to be explained away with the old ‘parallel timeline’ ploy.
The action scenes work well, reliving the ‘submarine warfare in space’ elements that worked so well in the original series and the “Wrath of Khan”. A ‘space drop’ onto Nero’s ‘drill’ is particularly thrilling.
The casting is just about bang on, with Chris Pine pitch perfect as Kirk and Karl Urban particularly impressive as ‘Bones’ McCoy (although the evolution of the nickname – shown here – feels overly forced). The one character that I don’t get on with here is Simon Pegg’s Scotty: might be controversial, but he just doesn’t work for me.
Finally, the music by Michael Giacchino is a favourite score of mine. Simply thrilling and brilliant. I was lucky enough to hear it played live at a showing in the Royal Albert Hall a few years back, where both Giacchino and Abrams appeared on stage – – a truly memorable evening.
It’s not perfect. The whole “transportation of Scotty into the water works” irritates me enormously for some reason. And it’s somewhat glossed over what Nero and his crew have been doing for the 25 years while Kirk grows up: (Nero: “Man, I’ve finished ALL of my Sodoku books… when is this lockdown EVER GONNA END??”). And the JJ ‘lens flare’ is used to a level here that is mind-blowingly distracting! But as a reboot, in the main, it works.
Rick Astley recommended Greatest Hits by Al Green in Music (curated)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Rock of Ages (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Rock of Ages is a film adaptation of the 2006 Chris D’Arienzo comedy rock/jukebox Broadway musical.
It is lightly satirical, a parody at times, that seems to mock our beloved 80’s rock era, while honoring its eccentricities, its tight leopard print pants, big hair, shoulder pads and over the top MTV music videos.
I like to judge a movie not only by how it makes me feel but also by how the audience reacts. This wasn’t an in-your-face-slapstick comedy, yet the whole theater roared with laughter throughout the film. To sum up the experience of Rock of Ages, it’s like watching a string of 80’s music videos mashed into a weak plot, with well-timed laughing points. Some of us laughed because we remember being the ones with those crazy hair-dos and out-of-control fashion sense and some were just laughing because this movie was so well done. It walked the fine line between super over-the-top corny and truly honoring our rock heritage. This movie does play to a specific demographic of ages 30 to 50, those who, with great nostalgia, remember how the 80’s rock and fashion revolution shaped their lives.
As the song goes, just a small town girl, Sherrie Christian played by Julianne Hough, travels to the big city in search of her dreams of becoming a singer, where she meets her city boy, Drew Boley played by Diego Boneta. Together they embark on a musical romance while working at a rock club named The Bourbon Room. Alec Baldwin plays an old rocker named Dennis Dupree struggling to keep his legend of a night club/concert hall open. Russell Brand, as always, steps in as the comic relief while playing the club owner;s assistant named Lonny. Together they work to keep The Bourbon Room afloat while dealing with a vengeful Patricia Whitmore, played by Catherine Zeta-Jones, who wishes nothing more then to see The Bourbon Room burned to the ground.
There are points in this movie when the acting, the singing and yes, even the plot, grabs you and holds your attention, much like watching the train wreck we call 80’s fashion. Its painful but you can’t look away! There were other times in this movie when the singing felt like it would go on forever. I noticed that the low points would be immediately succeeded by a very entertaining turn of events, so my attention was not lost for long. There came a point, at about the third Glee style 80’s rock mash-up, where I felt like slapping the director, Adam Shankman. Even too much of a good thing can get boring and I felt Shankman reached that point several times in the film. Luckily, he redeemed himself by bringing in Tom Cruise to play the Satan worshiping, alcoholic, megalomaniacal rock god Stacee Jaxx who went above and beyond in perfecting his role.
This movie’s soundtrack features songs and power ballads from Guns N’ Roses, Def Leppard, Bon Jovi, Journey, Twisted Sister, Pat Benetar, Scorpions, Whitesnake, Poison, REO Speedwagon, Foreigner among other epic bands giving Rock of Ages it’s 80’s jukebox musical foundation.
Mary J. Blige, Cruise, Ale Baldwin, Boneta, Hough and the whole cast of mega stars went above and beyond in selling their characters and performing stunning and accurate vocals that really pulled this movie together. The corny 80’s fashion and authentic dance numbers were the real icing on the cake. If you can sit through two hours of 80’s rock and pop nostalgia and know you will enjoy it, then definitely check this movie out.
It is lightly satirical, a parody at times, that seems to mock our beloved 80’s rock era, while honoring its eccentricities, its tight leopard print pants, big hair, shoulder pads and over the top MTV music videos.
I like to judge a movie not only by how it makes me feel but also by how the audience reacts. This wasn’t an in-your-face-slapstick comedy, yet the whole theater roared with laughter throughout the film. To sum up the experience of Rock of Ages, it’s like watching a string of 80’s music videos mashed into a weak plot, with well-timed laughing points. Some of us laughed because we remember being the ones with those crazy hair-dos and out-of-control fashion sense and some were just laughing because this movie was so well done. It walked the fine line between super over-the-top corny and truly honoring our rock heritage. This movie does play to a specific demographic of ages 30 to 50, those who, with great nostalgia, remember how the 80’s rock and fashion revolution shaped their lives.
As the song goes, just a small town girl, Sherrie Christian played by Julianne Hough, travels to the big city in search of her dreams of becoming a singer, where she meets her city boy, Drew Boley played by Diego Boneta. Together they embark on a musical romance while working at a rock club named The Bourbon Room. Alec Baldwin plays an old rocker named Dennis Dupree struggling to keep his legend of a night club/concert hall open. Russell Brand, as always, steps in as the comic relief while playing the club owner;s assistant named Lonny. Together they work to keep The Bourbon Room afloat while dealing with a vengeful Patricia Whitmore, played by Catherine Zeta-Jones, who wishes nothing more then to see The Bourbon Room burned to the ground.
There are points in this movie when the acting, the singing and yes, even the plot, grabs you and holds your attention, much like watching the train wreck we call 80’s fashion. Its painful but you can’t look away! There were other times in this movie when the singing felt like it would go on forever. I noticed that the low points would be immediately succeeded by a very entertaining turn of events, so my attention was not lost for long. There came a point, at about the third Glee style 80’s rock mash-up, where I felt like slapping the director, Adam Shankman. Even too much of a good thing can get boring and I felt Shankman reached that point several times in the film. Luckily, he redeemed himself by bringing in Tom Cruise to play the Satan worshiping, alcoholic, megalomaniacal rock god Stacee Jaxx who went above and beyond in perfecting his role.
This movie’s soundtrack features songs and power ballads from Guns N’ Roses, Def Leppard, Bon Jovi, Journey, Twisted Sister, Pat Benetar, Scorpions, Whitesnake, Poison, REO Speedwagon, Foreigner among other epic bands giving Rock of Ages it’s 80’s jukebox musical foundation.
Mary J. Blige, Cruise, Ale Baldwin, Boneta, Hough and the whole cast of mega stars went above and beyond in selling their characters and performing stunning and accurate vocals that really pulled this movie together. The corny 80’s fashion and authentic dance numbers were the real icing on the cake. If you can sit through two hours of 80’s rock and pop nostalgia and know you will enjoy it, then definitely check this movie out.
Pinball Tristan
Games
App
Now you can enjoy the worldwide best selling, award winning Pinball Tristan in retro 3D! You'll love...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Limehouse Golem (2016) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
The community of Limehouse in Victorian London have been rocked by a series of murders. They have called the mudered the Golem, as only such a creature could have done these heinous acts.
Elizabeth Cree, the music hall star, has been arrested for the poisoning of her husband John Cree on the same night as the last Golem murder. But when evidence is found by Inspector John Kildare that links John Cree to the murders, he sets about trying to solve both cases so that he might save Elizabeth from hanging for her crime.
Their investigation leads them to an exclusive reading room at the library, and a book on the art of murder. Within its pages are hand written notes chronicling the Golem murders to date. Only four men entered the reading room when the last entry was made; Dan Leno, Karl Marx, George Gissing and John Cree. Can the inspector eliminate the other three men and prove Cree is the Golem in order to save Elizabeth?
I was looking forward to this one. Some top actors were involved, and I love a bit of Victorian era murder. The film itself was good throughout, I can't fault it for the scenery and acting.
But...
Those of you that know me, know that I don't think about films. I'm sure I keep saying this. I watch them to have some fun, to escape reality, so what's the point in picking apart something that's made as a fiction to entertain you?
Even with me suspending my brain function for the duration of the film, I paused and thought... oh, this is what's going to happen... and it did. It felt a bit cliche, like the twist had been overused in every film like this that I'd seen. I don't think it was designed that way though. There was a clear moment in the film where they want you to know what is happening, but the realisation of the ending cam much earlier than this. And it was disappointing. I was enjoying the film a lot until I realised what was coming. Talking to my movie buddy I discovered that I wasn't the only one who had this feeling. It's such a shame, but the twist felt so obvious to me that I was suddenly very disappointed.
I have taken to looking at Rotten Tomatoes after seeing a film, and this one is currently sitting at 77% with critics and 61% with the audience. I'd say that's about right. I've left the major spoiler out of here, but if you're familiar with this sort of story then I don't think you'd be hard pressed to work it out. It is an excellent film in it's genre, but it was let down, for me, by the obvious direction it went in.
Elizabeth Cree, the music hall star, has been arrested for the poisoning of her husband John Cree on the same night as the last Golem murder. But when evidence is found by Inspector John Kildare that links John Cree to the murders, he sets about trying to solve both cases so that he might save Elizabeth from hanging for her crime.
Their investigation leads them to an exclusive reading room at the library, and a book on the art of murder. Within its pages are hand written notes chronicling the Golem murders to date. Only four men entered the reading room when the last entry was made; Dan Leno, Karl Marx, George Gissing and John Cree. Can the inspector eliminate the other three men and prove Cree is the Golem in order to save Elizabeth?
I was looking forward to this one. Some top actors were involved, and I love a bit of Victorian era murder. The film itself was good throughout, I can't fault it for the scenery and acting.
But...
Those of you that know me, know that I don't think about films. I'm sure I keep saying this. I watch them to have some fun, to escape reality, so what's the point in picking apart something that's made as a fiction to entertain you?
Even with me suspending my brain function for the duration of the film, I paused and thought... oh, this is what's going to happen... and it did. It felt a bit cliche, like the twist had been overused in every film like this that I'd seen. I don't think it was designed that way though. There was a clear moment in the film where they want you to know what is happening, but the realisation of the ending cam much earlier than this. And it was disappointing. I was enjoying the film a lot until I realised what was coming. Talking to my movie buddy I discovered that I wasn't the only one who had this feeling. It's such a shame, but the twist felt so obvious to me that I was suddenly very disappointed.
I have taken to looking at Rotten Tomatoes after seeing a film, and this one is currently sitting at 77% with critics and 61% with the audience. I'd say that's about right. I've left the major spoiler out of here, but if you're familiar with this sort of story then I don't think you'd be hard pressed to work it out. It is an excellent film in it's genre, but it was let down, for me, by the obvious direction it went in.