Search
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated The Last Cabin Girl in Books
Aug 28, 2023
114 of 235
Kindle
The Last Cabin Girl
By
Tom Swyers
⭐️⭐️
As the pandemic begins, Josie Thompson is a struggling waitress, mom of two great kids. She wants a fresh start far from her abusive husband, the confining small town she calls home, and a long-held secret her family refuses to disclose.
But Josie isn’t going anywhere. After murder victims turn up floating in the river near her isolated cabin, the FBI quickly charges her in one of the killings. Thankfully, she’s freed on bond, but charges for the other deaths loom. The FBI thinks she’s a serial killer.
If convicted, she faces life in prison and a future forever apart from her children. Josie can’t let that happen. She must venture out of her comfort zone to prove her innocence, even if it means confronting her issues, including a growing fear of COVID-19.
Can she trust anyone to help? A friendly detective and former police officer? Her estranged lawyer-brother, David Thompson? Her cryptic parents? A wealthy bachelor who has eyes for her?
In a town where things are not what they seem and not everyone can be trusted, can Josie clear her name, or will her own dark secrets be her undoing?
I honestly don’t know what I just read. I hate giving 2 star reviews but I just don’t know what I feel about this book. It started well but I think there were to many ideas thrown into it I found it became completely bizarre towards the end I mean I can see what the author wanted to to do was twist , turn and shock but all it did for me was twist, turn and confuse. We have the covid 19 virus, conspiracy, incest and espionage that didn’t gel well in my opinion. So sorry 🙈
Kindle
The Last Cabin Girl
By
Tom Swyers
⭐️⭐️
As the pandemic begins, Josie Thompson is a struggling waitress, mom of two great kids. She wants a fresh start far from her abusive husband, the confining small town she calls home, and a long-held secret her family refuses to disclose.
But Josie isn’t going anywhere. After murder victims turn up floating in the river near her isolated cabin, the FBI quickly charges her in one of the killings. Thankfully, she’s freed on bond, but charges for the other deaths loom. The FBI thinks she’s a serial killer.
If convicted, she faces life in prison and a future forever apart from her children. Josie can’t let that happen. She must venture out of her comfort zone to prove her innocence, even if it means confronting her issues, including a growing fear of COVID-19.
Can she trust anyone to help? A friendly detective and former police officer? Her estranged lawyer-brother, David Thompson? Her cryptic parents? A wealthy bachelor who has eyes for her?
In a town where things are not what they seem and not everyone can be trusted, can Josie clear her name, or will her own dark secrets be her undoing?
I honestly don’t know what I just read. I hate giving 2 star reviews but I just don’t know what I feel about this book. It started well but I think there were to many ideas thrown into it I found it became completely bizarre towards the end I mean I can see what the author wanted to to do was twist , turn and shock but all it did for me was twist, turn and confuse. We have the covid 19 virus, conspiracy, incest and espionage that didn’t gel well in my opinion. So sorry 🙈
Final Cut
Book
Perfect for fans of Elle Cosimano and Nita Prose, when Hollywood costumer Joey Jessop stumbles...
Dreaming of a Hopeful Death
Book
"Our civilization, despite all its achievements, is hopelessly unaware of the dangers that lurk...
science fiction
Chelsee R Clawson (23 KP) rated Beautiful wreck in Books
Mar 18, 2018
Beautiful wreck. A beautiful book!
Step right up ladies and gents for the next time travelling extravaganza! Move over Jamie fraser Heirik's the new guy in town! With outlander on the continuous rise to the top it gives other time travel romances a good run for their money and rightly so who doesnt love jamie fraser and his swoon worthy quotes and fiery lingering gaze. He had me wanting to marry a fictional character from the get go!
Beautiful wreck by the not so well known author larissa brown deserves alot more attention and credit than it has been given. The story is about a woman named ginn who ends up travelling to tenth century iceland I've copied the description off the back of the book to give you a better taste of what the book is about;
In a bleak future built on virtual reality, Ginn is a romantic who yearns for something real. She designs environments for people who play at being Vikings. But when her project goes awry, she's stranded in the actual 10th century, on a storybook farm in Viking Iceland. Heirik is the young leader of his family, honored by the men and women who live on his land. But he is feared and isolated because of a terrible curse. Ginn and Heirik are two people who never thought they would find a home in someone else's heart. When forces rise against them to keep them apart, Ginn is called on to decide-- will she give up the brutal and beautiful reality of the past? Or will she have the courage to traverse time and become more of a Viking than she ever imagined?
Doesn't it sound awesome!? ?
Don't worry I'm not going to spoil the story but I will say that this book in my view is a high contender for the top spot in the time travel/ romance genre. it is so beautifully written and detailed that it feels like your actually there going through the trials and celebrations right along with ginn. It could also have something to do with my overactive imagination but I think it's the former in this case ? I will admit the ending seemed a little rushed, it could've had a bit more detailed but that is just my opinion. With the second book 'so wild a dream' following on in the series I'm not sure how it can get much better than beautiful wreck.
Overall an excellent and enjoyable read, this book will definitely be on my re-read list in the near future.
Beautiful wreck by the not so well known author larissa brown deserves alot more attention and credit than it has been given. The story is about a woman named ginn who ends up travelling to tenth century iceland I've copied the description off the back of the book to give you a better taste of what the book is about;
In a bleak future built on virtual reality, Ginn is a romantic who yearns for something real. She designs environments for people who play at being Vikings. But when her project goes awry, she's stranded in the actual 10th century, on a storybook farm in Viking Iceland. Heirik is the young leader of his family, honored by the men and women who live on his land. But he is feared and isolated because of a terrible curse. Ginn and Heirik are two people who never thought they would find a home in someone else's heart. When forces rise against them to keep them apart, Ginn is called on to decide-- will she give up the brutal and beautiful reality of the past? Or will she have the courage to traverse time and become more of a Viking than she ever imagined?
Doesn't it sound awesome!? ?
Don't worry I'm not going to spoil the story but I will say that this book in my view is a high contender for the top spot in the time travel/ romance genre. it is so beautifully written and detailed that it feels like your actually there going through the trials and celebrations right along with ginn. It could also have something to do with my overactive imagination but I think it's the former in this case ? I will admit the ending seemed a little rushed, it could've had a bit more detailed but that is just my opinion. With the second book 'so wild a dream' following on in the series I'm not sure how it can get much better than beautiful wreck.
Overall an excellent and enjoyable read, this book will definitely be on my re-read list in the near future.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Death on the Nile (2022) in Movies
Feb 7, 2022
Originally set to release in December of 2019; the long-delayed cinematic retelling of Agatha Christie’s “Death on the Nile” has finally arrived in cinemas. The last cinematic version of the classic book arrived in 1978 and this time; Director and star Kenneth Branagh beings his version of Master Detective Hercule Poirot to Egypt after a chance encounter with his friend Bouc (Tom Bateman) while on vacation; Poirot attends the wedding of wealthy socialite Linette Ridgeway (Gal Gadot) and notices that she has married a man named Simon Doyle (Armie Hammer).
The wedding is a bit of a shock to many as just six weeks prior Doyle was engaged to Jacqueline de Bellefort (Emma Mackey), and Poirot observed the two of them in a London club and how Ridgeway was introduced to Simon by her friend Jacqueline.
The wedding reception is disrupted by the arrival of Jacqueline and Linette and Simon confides in Poirot that she has been following them around the world and asks the Detective to encourage her to leave them alone so they can get on with their life.
Jacqueline is highly disturbed and pleads her love for Simon and shows a gun which leads Poirot to encourage the newlyweds to abandon their overseas plans and go home. Simon and Linette press on and decide to take their wedding party on a cruise of the Nile in an attempt to get away from Jacqueline.
The plan seems to be working well until Jacqueline shows up as a ticketed passenger at a stop along the way. When a near-fatal accident occurs followed by a murder; Poirot must investigate the guests to find the killer. Naturally, there is plenty of motivation to go around, and as the deaths mount; Poirot must use his genius to find the killer.
The movie takes its time getting started but the CGI-enhanced scenery and the strong cast are very compelling and set the pieces in place very well. While I was able to solve the mystery about halfway into the film, some of the details around it were cleverly concealed and there were plenty of twists that had me consider other possible suspects.
Some may find the film a bit slow but that is the nature of a good mystery as time is given to developing the characters and their motives which adds to the suspense of the film.
In the end, the film is an engaging mystery that recalls the classic movie mysteries of old and it will be very interesting to see if audiences will embrace the film in the same way as they did with “Murder on the Orient Express” and audiences will get more Poirot adventures from Branagh in the near future.
4 stars out of 5.
The wedding is a bit of a shock to many as just six weeks prior Doyle was engaged to Jacqueline de Bellefort (Emma Mackey), and Poirot observed the two of them in a London club and how Ridgeway was introduced to Simon by her friend Jacqueline.
The wedding reception is disrupted by the arrival of Jacqueline and Linette and Simon confides in Poirot that she has been following them around the world and asks the Detective to encourage her to leave them alone so they can get on with their life.
Jacqueline is highly disturbed and pleads her love for Simon and shows a gun which leads Poirot to encourage the newlyweds to abandon their overseas plans and go home. Simon and Linette press on and decide to take their wedding party on a cruise of the Nile in an attempt to get away from Jacqueline.
The plan seems to be working well until Jacqueline shows up as a ticketed passenger at a stop along the way. When a near-fatal accident occurs followed by a murder; Poirot must investigate the guests to find the killer. Naturally, there is plenty of motivation to go around, and as the deaths mount; Poirot must use his genius to find the killer.
The movie takes its time getting started but the CGI-enhanced scenery and the strong cast are very compelling and set the pieces in place very well. While I was able to solve the mystery about halfway into the film, some of the details around it were cleverly concealed and there were plenty of twists that had me consider other possible suspects.
Some may find the film a bit slow but that is the nature of a good mystery as time is given to developing the characters and their motives which adds to the suspense of the film.
In the end, the film is an engaging mystery that recalls the classic movie mysteries of old and it will be very interesting to see if audiences will embrace the film in the same way as they did with “Murder on the Orient Express” and audiences will get more Poirot adventures from Branagh in the near future.
4 stars out of 5.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Ad Astra (2019) in Movies
Sep 21, 2019
It’s the near future. Humans are trying to reach out to extraterrestrial life. Veteran astronaut Roy McBride (Brad Pitt) is working high up on an antenna built with the sole purpose of trying to communicate with aliens. And when I mean high up, Roy is literally in full astronaut gear, as this thing reaches from the Earths surface, all the way up into space! Suddenly, a mysterious power surge hits the antenna, triggering a series of explosions and sending other astronaut workers tumbling. Roy manages to leap between a few levels in order to shut off the power, but he eventually has no choice other than abandon the structure and tumble down to Earth. Obviously, he makes it, but it’s an impressive, intense opening – beautifully staged and shot and indicative of the kind of quality to come for the rest of the movie.
Fully recovered, and ready for debriefing, Roy learns that the power surge is one of many which are now hitting the Earth and threatening the stability of the solar system. Furthermore, it is believed that Roy’s father, Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones), who embarked on a deep space mission some 30 years ago, is responsible for the surges. All contact was lost with that ship and it’s crew 16 years into their mission, known as The Lima Project, and the source of these surges is the region surrounding Neptune. Roy has been selected to send a message to his father in the hopes that he might respond and help to prevent further catastrophic surges.
Roy is a loner, committed to his work above all else. In an early scene we see his wife (Liv Tyler) walking out on him while he carries out a psych evaluation for work. He comes across as cold, distant and uncaring, and his pessimistic narration throughout the movie gives us a real insight into his character and history. He’s proved that he can keep his cool under pressure, always maintaining a low blood pressure, but suddenly losing his father 30 years ago has obviously resulted in some serious daddy issues for Roy. Issues which these latest events now bring to the forefront.
The message Roy must send to his father needs to be transmitted by laser from Mars to Neptune, so Roy must first travel to the moon and then onward to Mars. This being the near future, space travel has now been commercialised, so fairly easy to just hop on a flight, and the moon is now a hive of human activity – there’s even a Subway restaurant there for hungry travellers arriving from Earth! As Roy makes his way across the moon, to the rocket which will take him to Mars, we learn about it’s colonisation and the disputes that occur there involving the countries of Earth. Consequently, Roy’s journey is not without peril.
What is so incredible about the time we spend on the moon, and then Mars, is just how plausible and realistic it all feels. For the most part, I was totally mesmerised by it all – fully engrossed in what is an epic space adventure into the unknown, desperate to find out how it was all going to end. After emerging as one of the highlights of an otherwise disappointing movie recently in ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’, Brad Pitt once again shows us just what a real star he is. Outstanding.
Despite the beautiful cinematography, the engrossing storyline and the occasional bursts of action though, Ad Astra is a real slow burn of a movie, which won’t be for everyone. What let the movie down for me was the last 20 minutes or so, which proved to be something of an anticlimax in my opinion. However, this is still an incredible movie, held together by an amazing actor and some beautiful visual storytelling.
Fully recovered, and ready for debriefing, Roy learns that the power surge is one of many which are now hitting the Earth and threatening the stability of the solar system. Furthermore, it is believed that Roy’s father, Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones), who embarked on a deep space mission some 30 years ago, is responsible for the surges. All contact was lost with that ship and it’s crew 16 years into their mission, known as The Lima Project, and the source of these surges is the region surrounding Neptune. Roy has been selected to send a message to his father in the hopes that he might respond and help to prevent further catastrophic surges.
Roy is a loner, committed to his work above all else. In an early scene we see his wife (Liv Tyler) walking out on him while he carries out a psych evaluation for work. He comes across as cold, distant and uncaring, and his pessimistic narration throughout the movie gives us a real insight into his character and history. He’s proved that he can keep his cool under pressure, always maintaining a low blood pressure, but suddenly losing his father 30 years ago has obviously resulted in some serious daddy issues for Roy. Issues which these latest events now bring to the forefront.
The message Roy must send to his father needs to be transmitted by laser from Mars to Neptune, so Roy must first travel to the moon and then onward to Mars. This being the near future, space travel has now been commercialised, so fairly easy to just hop on a flight, and the moon is now a hive of human activity – there’s even a Subway restaurant there for hungry travellers arriving from Earth! As Roy makes his way across the moon, to the rocket which will take him to Mars, we learn about it’s colonisation and the disputes that occur there involving the countries of Earth. Consequently, Roy’s journey is not without peril.
What is so incredible about the time we spend on the moon, and then Mars, is just how plausible and realistic it all feels. For the most part, I was totally mesmerised by it all – fully engrossed in what is an epic space adventure into the unknown, desperate to find out how it was all going to end. After emerging as one of the highlights of an otherwise disappointing movie recently in ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’, Brad Pitt once again shows us just what a real star he is. Outstanding.
Despite the beautiful cinematography, the engrossing storyline and the occasional bursts of action though, Ad Astra is a real slow burn of a movie, which won’t be for everyone. What let the movie down for me was the last 20 minutes or so, which proved to be something of an anticlimax in my opinion. However, this is still an incredible movie, held together by an amazing actor and some beautiful visual storytelling.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Back to the Future (1985) in Movies
Mar 30, 2018
Almost a perfect film
I was flipping channels the other day and ran across BACK TO THE FUTURE, it was just about to start and since I hadn't seen it in quite awhile, I figured I'd catch the first part of it before venturing off to other surfing opportunities. As often happens in this sort of situation, I ended up transfixed by this film and watched the whole thing. After it was over, I asked myself why did I enjoy this film so much and my answer was fascinating (at least to me) -
BACK TO THE FUTURE is about as perfect of a film as there is.
Why? Let's start with the structure of this film. It follows the classic 3 Act structure. ACT 1: set up the premise, the gimmick (if any) and the stakes. ACT 2: escalate the stakes and throw in complications and obstacles. ACT 3: Resolve everything.
Seems like a pretty simple formula, right? So why do so many get it wrong? Quite simply, they don't keep it simple and then execute (almost to perfection) the simplicity of the structure. Let's break down the 3 Acts of BACK TO THE FUTURE.
ACT 1 - set up the premise, the gimmick and the stakes. The premise & gimmick is simple, time travel is possible and our hero travels back in time and is stranded there. The stakes are even simpler - our hero must find a way to get Back to the Future.
ACT 2 - escalate the stakes and throw in complicaitons and obstacles. The stakes are escalated by the fact that our hero interrupts the timeline of when his mother met his father, thus there is the very real possibility that he will cease to exist for his parents never met. Our hero must find a way to bring his mother and father together. The complications are that his parents are not the boring old fuddy-duddy's that our hero thought they were, his father is a peeping-Tom nerd and his mother is a randy high-schooler who falls in love (lust?) with our hero, her son. Further complicating things is that the time machine must find enough power to make the time travel device (the flux-capacitor!) work, power that is not readily available in this timeline. Adding one more complication to the mix is the school bully who is constantly after our hero.
ACT 3 - resolve everything. This is where this film excels. EVERY loose end is tied up. Our hero find a way to reunite his mother and father, the bully is put in his place, a source of energy is found and our hero's journey comes to a succesful conclusion.
There is much, much more to this film than those plot points, but I just wanted to show how deceptively simple and efficient this plot is. Kudo's must go out to screenwriter's Robert Zemeckis (more on him later) and Bob Gale for coming up with this idea and executing it so well. Gale (1941, KOLCHAK: THE NIGHT STALKER) said he came up with this idea when he saw his father's high school yearbook and dreamed about going back to meet him. He stated that he doubted that he and his father would have been friends.
An interesting side fact: The University of Southern California Film school's writing classes use the screenplay for Back to the Future as the model of "The Perfect Screenplay". So, I rest my case.
But a "perfect" screenplay would be worthless without near perfect execution of putting the words and actions up on the screen - and this film achieves that as well. Director (and co-screenwriter) Robert Zemeckis (WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT, FORREST GUMP) cleary had a vision of how to make this film and did not waiver from it. The action is strong, the fluidness of the film is solid and the performances are all top-notch. The only thing that might knock this film down a peg or two is some of the 32 "special effects" shots that - to look at it these days - seem somewhat archaic (see the flames between Doc Brown's and Marty's feet when the DeLorean first goes forward in time). But for the time, these special effects are state-of-the-art.
Speaking of performances, Michael J. Fox became a movie star with this film, and rightfully so. His Marty McFly is charming, quirky, intelligent, dorky - all at the same time. His uncomfortableness with his teen age mother is palatable. Credit must go with Director Zemeckis, who - after he couldn't get Fox released from his contract on the TV show FAMILY TIES - went (famously) with his 2nd choice, Eric Stoltz. When Stolt's seriousness and "method" acting was not meshing with the type of film he wanted to make, Zemeckis made the bold decision to fire Stoltz and worked out a deal where he can use Fox at night while Fox shot Family ties during the day.
Playing against Fox, brilliantly, is Christopher Lloyd as "Doc" Emmit Brown. A two-time Emmy winner (at the time) for playing crazy Jim Ignatowski on the TV show TAXI, Lloyd played Doc Brown as "part Einstein, part composer Leopold Stokowski", creating what would be the benchmark for "brilliant, scatter-brained scientist". Leah Thompson does the finest performance of her career as Marty's mother and Crispin Glover was beyond quirky as Marty's nerd/loser Dad. Finally Thomas F. Wilson is the embodiment of bully as "Biff" Tannen.
After the success of this film, two other BACK TO THE FUTURE films were made - films that I feel were good, but somewhat diluted the perfection of this film. No matter. Sit down, relax and enjoy one of the most "perfect" films ever made.
Letter Grade: A+
A rare 10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BACK TO THE FUTURE is about as perfect of a film as there is.
Why? Let's start with the structure of this film. It follows the classic 3 Act structure. ACT 1: set up the premise, the gimmick (if any) and the stakes. ACT 2: escalate the stakes and throw in complications and obstacles. ACT 3: Resolve everything.
Seems like a pretty simple formula, right? So why do so many get it wrong? Quite simply, they don't keep it simple and then execute (almost to perfection) the simplicity of the structure. Let's break down the 3 Acts of BACK TO THE FUTURE.
ACT 1 - set up the premise, the gimmick and the stakes. The premise & gimmick is simple, time travel is possible and our hero travels back in time and is stranded there. The stakes are even simpler - our hero must find a way to get Back to the Future.
ACT 2 - escalate the stakes and throw in complicaitons and obstacles. The stakes are escalated by the fact that our hero interrupts the timeline of when his mother met his father, thus there is the very real possibility that he will cease to exist for his parents never met. Our hero must find a way to bring his mother and father together. The complications are that his parents are not the boring old fuddy-duddy's that our hero thought they were, his father is a peeping-Tom nerd and his mother is a randy high-schooler who falls in love (lust?) with our hero, her son. Further complicating things is that the time machine must find enough power to make the time travel device (the flux-capacitor!) work, power that is not readily available in this timeline. Adding one more complication to the mix is the school bully who is constantly after our hero.
ACT 3 - resolve everything. This is where this film excels. EVERY loose end is tied up. Our hero find a way to reunite his mother and father, the bully is put in his place, a source of energy is found and our hero's journey comes to a succesful conclusion.
There is much, much more to this film than those plot points, but I just wanted to show how deceptively simple and efficient this plot is. Kudo's must go out to screenwriter's Robert Zemeckis (more on him later) and Bob Gale for coming up with this idea and executing it so well. Gale (1941, KOLCHAK: THE NIGHT STALKER) said he came up with this idea when he saw his father's high school yearbook and dreamed about going back to meet him. He stated that he doubted that he and his father would have been friends.
An interesting side fact: The University of Southern California Film school's writing classes use the screenplay for Back to the Future as the model of "The Perfect Screenplay". So, I rest my case.
But a "perfect" screenplay would be worthless without near perfect execution of putting the words and actions up on the screen - and this film achieves that as well. Director (and co-screenwriter) Robert Zemeckis (WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT, FORREST GUMP) cleary had a vision of how to make this film and did not waiver from it. The action is strong, the fluidness of the film is solid and the performances are all top-notch. The only thing that might knock this film down a peg or two is some of the 32 "special effects" shots that - to look at it these days - seem somewhat archaic (see the flames between Doc Brown's and Marty's feet when the DeLorean first goes forward in time). But for the time, these special effects are state-of-the-art.
Speaking of performances, Michael J. Fox became a movie star with this film, and rightfully so. His Marty McFly is charming, quirky, intelligent, dorky - all at the same time. His uncomfortableness with his teen age mother is palatable. Credit must go with Director Zemeckis, who - after he couldn't get Fox released from his contract on the TV show FAMILY TIES - went (famously) with his 2nd choice, Eric Stoltz. When Stolt's seriousness and "method" acting was not meshing with the type of film he wanted to make, Zemeckis made the bold decision to fire Stoltz and worked out a deal where he can use Fox at night while Fox shot Family ties during the day.
Playing against Fox, brilliantly, is Christopher Lloyd as "Doc" Emmit Brown. A two-time Emmy winner (at the time) for playing crazy Jim Ignatowski on the TV show TAXI, Lloyd played Doc Brown as "part Einstein, part composer Leopold Stokowski", creating what would be the benchmark for "brilliant, scatter-brained scientist". Leah Thompson does the finest performance of her career as Marty's mother and Crispin Glover was beyond quirky as Marty's nerd/loser Dad. Finally Thomas F. Wilson is the embodiment of bully as "Biff" Tannen.
After the success of this film, two other BACK TO THE FUTURE films were made - films that I feel were good, but somewhat diluted the perfection of this film. No matter. Sit down, relax and enjoy one of the most "perfect" films ever made.
Letter Grade: A+
A rare 10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Logan (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Third time lucky?
The X-Men franchise is as convoluted as Spaghetti Junction. Littered with constantly changing timelines, it has become the epitome of tiring and fans are getting exasperated too. With every great film (X2, X-Men: Days of Future Past), the series has followed it with some truly awful movies (X-Men: Origins Wolverine, X-Men: Apocalypse).
To this end, Hugh Jackman has finally decided to hang up his Adamantium claws after Logan, his ninth and apparently final outing as the grizzly hero. Are we third time lucky for his solo films?
James Mangold, director of The Wolverine, returns to the director’s chair and helms an at times brutal and uncompromising film speckled with the sort of emotional heft you’d find in the saddest rom-com’s.
In the near future, a weary Logan (Hugh Jackman) cares for an ailing Professor Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) in a hide out on the Mexican border accompanied by long-time acquaintance Caliban (Stephen Merchant). But Logan’s attempts to hide from the world and his legacy are upended when a young mutant, Laura, (Dafne Keen) arrives, being pursued by unspeakable dark forces.
In parts, Logan feels very much like a Western. The bleak, unforgiving Mexican landscape is a beautiful change from the dreary concrete jungles that blight the majority of superhero films these days and this is where Logan will either succeed or fail. It doesn’t feel like a superhero film, despite its faithfulness to the Old Man Logan comics.
Much like a metaphor for the genre itself, Logan has grown weary of the world and it is a testament to Hugh Jackman’s acting capabilities that he is able to add yet another dimension to a character that has been a cinema staple since the Millennium. Patrick Stewart is also on top form showing a vulnerable side to the world’s smartest mutant. Newcomer, Dafne Keen is also exceptional despite her limited dialogue.
Heartfelt scenes in which the oddball family share dinner with kind strangers are strikingly juxtaposed with sequences of sheer brutality. If you thought Deadpool was bloody, you haven’t seen anything yet. And for all the violence, Logan is the most poignant film in the entire X-Men canon, wearing its 15 certification proudly when it needs to, but not shying away from sections of quiet contemplation.
Negatives? Well, in spite of its gargantuan length, the ending feels a little tacked on and rushed – something a lot of modern blockbusters seem to feel is necessary at the moment and the final 30 minutes are a slight anti-climax in comparison to what preceded it, but on the whole, this final outing for Hugh Jackman proves a fitting one. Third time’s a charm!
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/03/03/third-time-lucky-logan-review/
To this end, Hugh Jackman has finally decided to hang up his Adamantium claws after Logan, his ninth and apparently final outing as the grizzly hero. Are we third time lucky for his solo films?
James Mangold, director of The Wolverine, returns to the director’s chair and helms an at times brutal and uncompromising film speckled with the sort of emotional heft you’d find in the saddest rom-com’s.
In the near future, a weary Logan (Hugh Jackman) cares for an ailing Professor Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) in a hide out on the Mexican border accompanied by long-time acquaintance Caliban (Stephen Merchant). But Logan’s attempts to hide from the world and his legacy are upended when a young mutant, Laura, (Dafne Keen) arrives, being pursued by unspeakable dark forces.
In parts, Logan feels very much like a Western. The bleak, unforgiving Mexican landscape is a beautiful change from the dreary concrete jungles that blight the majority of superhero films these days and this is where Logan will either succeed or fail. It doesn’t feel like a superhero film, despite its faithfulness to the Old Man Logan comics.
Much like a metaphor for the genre itself, Logan has grown weary of the world and it is a testament to Hugh Jackman’s acting capabilities that he is able to add yet another dimension to a character that has been a cinema staple since the Millennium. Patrick Stewart is also on top form showing a vulnerable side to the world’s smartest mutant. Newcomer, Dafne Keen is also exceptional despite her limited dialogue.
Heartfelt scenes in which the oddball family share dinner with kind strangers are strikingly juxtaposed with sequences of sheer brutality. If you thought Deadpool was bloody, you haven’t seen anything yet. And for all the violence, Logan is the most poignant film in the entire X-Men canon, wearing its 15 certification proudly when it needs to, but not shying away from sections of quiet contemplation.
Negatives? Well, in spite of its gargantuan length, the ending feels a little tacked on and rushed – something a lot of modern blockbusters seem to feel is necessary at the moment and the final 30 minutes are a slight anti-climax in comparison to what preceded it, but on the whole, this final outing for Hugh Jackman proves a fitting one. Third time’s a charm!
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/03/03/third-time-lucky-logan-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Hot Tub Time Machine 2 (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
When “Hot Tub Time Machine” came out almost five years ago, it took a whacky concept of four friends whisked back in time during a getaway to the 80s giving them a chance to fix aspects of their lives they wished they had done differently.
The outrageous and bawdy humor as well as strong performances from John Cusack and Crispin Glover made the film a cult hit that earned over $64 million worldwide and did well on DVD sales as well.
Naturally a sequel was planned and when I first heard it was looking to be a direct to DVD sequel sans Cusack, I had an idea that the film may be little more than an effort to cash in on the success of the first film without offering much to the continued story of the characters.
I was encouraged by the early trailers for the sequel and as such went into the screener with better expectations than I had originally had when I first heard of the projects.
The film explains that “John Cusack’s character is off on adventure of self-discovery as the friends have all become wealthy and famous after the events of the first film. Lou (Rob Corddry) has milked Motley Crue and his knowledge of pending tech to establish himself as a major player, Nick (Craig Robinson) has cashed in on a recording career by covering famous songs from his day before they were ever released and Jacob (Clark Duke) is stuck playing Butler to his father Lou.
Lou has become an example of an ego run wild and during one of his lavish parties; he is shot and left near death. In a move of desperation, Nick and Jacob whisk Lou into the Hot Tub and attempt to go back in time to stop the shooting.
Things do not go as planned as the trio end up 15 years into the future and must find a way to put things right and get home.
One would think that this premise would be able to produce some funny moments, but sadly the film is painfully slow and plodding and most shocking of all, very, very unfunny. The film tries to get some crude laughs from a gameshow of the future and a homicidal Smart Car but the film just wanders from situation to situation looking for laughs and does not setup or execute them properly.
There is a montage scene at the end of the film which sadly is the best part and shows what could have been a much better sequel with the group going through time taking the place of famous individuals and interacting with them.
As it stands, “Hot Tub Time Machine 2”, is a trip you do not want to make.
http://sknr.net/2015/02/20/hot-tub-time-machine-2/
The outrageous and bawdy humor as well as strong performances from John Cusack and Crispin Glover made the film a cult hit that earned over $64 million worldwide and did well on DVD sales as well.
Naturally a sequel was planned and when I first heard it was looking to be a direct to DVD sequel sans Cusack, I had an idea that the film may be little more than an effort to cash in on the success of the first film without offering much to the continued story of the characters.
I was encouraged by the early trailers for the sequel and as such went into the screener with better expectations than I had originally had when I first heard of the projects.
The film explains that “John Cusack’s character is off on adventure of self-discovery as the friends have all become wealthy and famous after the events of the first film. Lou (Rob Corddry) has milked Motley Crue and his knowledge of pending tech to establish himself as a major player, Nick (Craig Robinson) has cashed in on a recording career by covering famous songs from his day before they were ever released and Jacob (Clark Duke) is stuck playing Butler to his father Lou.
Lou has become an example of an ego run wild and during one of his lavish parties; he is shot and left near death. In a move of desperation, Nick and Jacob whisk Lou into the Hot Tub and attempt to go back in time to stop the shooting.
Things do not go as planned as the trio end up 15 years into the future and must find a way to put things right and get home.
One would think that this premise would be able to produce some funny moments, but sadly the film is painfully slow and plodding and most shocking of all, very, very unfunny. The film tries to get some crude laughs from a gameshow of the future and a homicidal Smart Car but the film just wanders from situation to situation looking for laughs and does not setup or execute them properly.
There is a montage scene at the end of the film which sadly is the best part and shows what could have been a much better sequel with the group going through time taking the place of famous individuals and interacting with them.
As it stands, “Hot Tub Time Machine 2”, is a trip you do not want to make.
http://sknr.net/2015/02/20/hot-tub-time-machine-2/
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated The Incredible Hulk (2008) in Movies
Feb 11, 2020 (Updated Apr 7, 2020)
The second entry into the ever expanding MCU has it's flaws, but it's still an entertaining enough monster movie featuring one of Marvel Comics most beloved characters.
Edward Norton is a fantastic actor, and his involvement here as Bruce Banner is an inspired choice. It's a shame that behind the scenes politics resulted in him leaving the franchise so soon, even though I love Mark Ruffalo!
He plays Banner as a fairly broody individual, but with an awkward edge, a man who's constantly in fear if what he can turn into.
Liv Tyler plays Betty Ross, and she's pretty much just Liv Tyler throughout. She's actually pretty charming as the character and it would be nice to see her turn up in future MCU films (hey, if they can get Natalie Portman involved again then surely it's a possibility!)
Tim Roth and William Hurt play the antagonists to Banner, and are both enjoyable in the more villainous roles, even if Roth is more or less relegated to spouting out cheesy one liners. Hurt has of course reprised his role in later films and is a welcome main stay in the franchise.
We also have Tim Blake Nelson and Ty Burrell, set up as future characters (The Leader and Doc Samson respectively), but neither of these have yet to come to fruition, so as it stands, both feel like wasted opportunities.
The narrative is pretty straightforward as Banner is pursued across the planet, but it gets the job done, ending in a big showdown between Hulk and Abomination in the middle of Harlem.
One of my main criticisms stems from this scene actually, with the film climaxing in a big CGI fight, between the hero, and an evil version of the hero, exactly like in Iron Man, and unfortunately, in a fair few MCU films further down the line (Iron Man 2, Black Panther, Ant Man). The CGI, whilst still good enough, doesn't hold up anywhere near as well as Iron Man however (which came out in the same year), and the green/grey colour scheme of both characters, and the night-time setting, gives the whole scene a dull edge, even if Hulk does tear a car in half and use both halves as boxing gloves...
The Incredible Hulk is a mostly decent film, but it shows signs of a franchise still finding its feet, and these signs grow in obviousness the older it gets, which is a big contrast when compared to the confident nature of Iron Man.
It also feels a bit stuck in the "look at this cool shot" superhero formula that became rampant during the 2000s.
It's still a fun film however, and deserves it's place in a Marvel movie marathon.
Edward Norton is a fantastic actor, and his involvement here as Bruce Banner is an inspired choice. It's a shame that behind the scenes politics resulted in him leaving the franchise so soon, even though I love Mark Ruffalo!
He plays Banner as a fairly broody individual, but with an awkward edge, a man who's constantly in fear if what he can turn into.
Liv Tyler plays Betty Ross, and she's pretty much just Liv Tyler throughout. She's actually pretty charming as the character and it would be nice to see her turn up in future MCU films (hey, if they can get Natalie Portman involved again then surely it's a possibility!)
Tim Roth and William Hurt play the antagonists to Banner, and are both enjoyable in the more villainous roles, even if Roth is more or less relegated to spouting out cheesy one liners. Hurt has of course reprised his role in later films and is a welcome main stay in the franchise.
We also have Tim Blake Nelson and Ty Burrell, set up as future characters (The Leader and Doc Samson respectively), but neither of these have yet to come to fruition, so as it stands, both feel like wasted opportunities.
The narrative is pretty straightforward as Banner is pursued across the planet, but it gets the job done, ending in a big showdown between Hulk and Abomination in the middle of Harlem.
One of my main criticisms stems from this scene actually, with the film climaxing in a big CGI fight, between the hero, and an evil version of the hero, exactly like in Iron Man, and unfortunately, in a fair few MCU films further down the line (Iron Man 2, Black Panther, Ant Man). The CGI, whilst still good enough, doesn't hold up anywhere near as well as Iron Man however (which came out in the same year), and the green/grey colour scheme of both characters, and the night-time setting, gives the whole scene a dull edge, even if Hulk does tear a car in half and use both halves as boxing gloves...
The Incredible Hulk is a mostly decent film, but it shows signs of a franchise still finding its feet, and these signs grow in obviousness the older it gets, which is a big contrast when compared to the confident nature of Iron Man.
It also feels a bit stuck in the "look at this cool shot" superhero formula that became rampant during the 2000s.
It's still a fun film however, and deserves it's place in a Marvel movie marathon.