Search
Search results
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Death to 2020 in TV
Jan 22, 2021
The annual event of Charlie Brooker’s Yearly Wipe is the one piece of satire I have been sure not to miss over the years. But 2020 has been a bit different, and finding himself in lockdown like everyone else, Brooker re-imagines the format into a full on talking-heads mockumentary that does away with himself as host in favour of a cross Atlantic vibe and a narration from the bass tones of Laurence Fishburne, no less.
There are also some random big names delivering the sarcastic views on the headlines too: Samuel L. Jackson kicks it all off; Hugh Grant adds to his list of heavily made up characters (and is probably the highlight) as a crusty old historian who struggles to put it all into context; Lisa Kudrow represents the Trump mentality in the form of a Republican press officer who plays hard and loose with the facts and the enforcement of facts; and even Tracey Ullman is dragged out of obscurity to play The Queen (which I didn’t entirely see the point of).
Last, but actually far from least, is Joe Keery, who most will recognise as Steve Harrington in Stranger Things – he represents all youth and the social media generation, claiming some of the most pertinent lines of observation about attitudes and the need to be noticed and relevant, using the news as a basis to flaunt your own opinion and gain followers, as well as a soapbox to show the world how much you have suffered as the world suffers.
Diane Morgan, known for her hilarious regilar turns as Philomena Cunk, tries out an alternate role as the world’s most average woman, who has “finished” Netflix, but understands little of what has happened around her own bubble in the world at large. I mean, it is baffling, all of it! And together these voices and others fairly represent a lot of different types of fool to be lampooned. I missed Cunk, but essentially it served the same purpose.
You can expect from the Brooker team there will be no punches pulled, and at its best moments, Death to 2020, is almost worth standing up and applauding for making sense of things we have all been thinking for almost a year. Of course, part of the joke being that to make an historical documentary about a year that wasn’t even over at the time it was released on Netflix is as bizarre and ridiculous as the way any other news item has been the entire time we have experienced it in reality.
There is a British slant on things for a while, but inevitably the target becomes the US election and the Trump administration, which is a gold mine for all things silly, because it barely needs admonishing to become entirely bonkers! I felt like it could have been a little longer than just over an hour, to fit every angle of Covid and Trump and Boris and everything else in, but it also almost outstays its welcome as it is, so in the end I think they made the right call in leaving some issues out. Despite that it does move along at such a pace that often the joke flies past you before you can properly think about it.
The problem with it as a production is that it is neither a movie or a TV show, but some kind of inbetween thing, with as many ideas that don’t work as the ones that do, and not as many laugh out loud moments as there maybe should have been. Nor were there many moments of real weight, where the rug of comedy is pulled from under your feet and the truth and gravity of events is seen in terrifying reality and perspective for a moment – a trick Brooker usually employs on Yearly Wipe. And that was a shame. I missed that part of it, and felt it needed it.
For me, it was a take it or leave it kind of thing. Sure, it killed an hour or so and wasn’t bad in any way, but it wasn’t anything you’re gonna be shouting from the rooftops about. Maybe one or two moments will come up in conversation between two friends that saw it, but no one is saying “wow, that really hit the nail on the head”. Rather, it was a little silly, somewhat distracting and entirely throw-away.
Bring back the old format, Charlie, when you can. It was much more effective, and funny! I think you know that yourself.
There are also some random big names delivering the sarcastic views on the headlines too: Samuel L. Jackson kicks it all off; Hugh Grant adds to his list of heavily made up characters (and is probably the highlight) as a crusty old historian who struggles to put it all into context; Lisa Kudrow represents the Trump mentality in the form of a Republican press officer who plays hard and loose with the facts and the enforcement of facts; and even Tracey Ullman is dragged out of obscurity to play The Queen (which I didn’t entirely see the point of).
Last, but actually far from least, is Joe Keery, who most will recognise as Steve Harrington in Stranger Things – he represents all youth and the social media generation, claiming some of the most pertinent lines of observation about attitudes and the need to be noticed and relevant, using the news as a basis to flaunt your own opinion and gain followers, as well as a soapbox to show the world how much you have suffered as the world suffers.
Diane Morgan, known for her hilarious regilar turns as Philomena Cunk, tries out an alternate role as the world’s most average woman, who has “finished” Netflix, but understands little of what has happened around her own bubble in the world at large. I mean, it is baffling, all of it! And together these voices and others fairly represent a lot of different types of fool to be lampooned. I missed Cunk, but essentially it served the same purpose.
You can expect from the Brooker team there will be no punches pulled, and at its best moments, Death to 2020, is almost worth standing up and applauding for making sense of things we have all been thinking for almost a year. Of course, part of the joke being that to make an historical documentary about a year that wasn’t even over at the time it was released on Netflix is as bizarre and ridiculous as the way any other news item has been the entire time we have experienced it in reality.
There is a British slant on things for a while, but inevitably the target becomes the US election and the Trump administration, which is a gold mine for all things silly, because it barely needs admonishing to become entirely bonkers! I felt like it could have been a little longer than just over an hour, to fit every angle of Covid and Trump and Boris and everything else in, but it also almost outstays its welcome as it is, so in the end I think they made the right call in leaving some issues out. Despite that it does move along at such a pace that often the joke flies past you before you can properly think about it.
The problem with it as a production is that it is neither a movie or a TV show, but some kind of inbetween thing, with as many ideas that don’t work as the ones that do, and not as many laugh out loud moments as there maybe should have been. Nor were there many moments of real weight, where the rug of comedy is pulled from under your feet and the truth and gravity of events is seen in terrifying reality and perspective for a moment – a trick Brooker usually employs on Yearly Wipe. And that was a shame. I missed that part of it, and felt it needed it.
For me, it was a take it or leave it kind of thing. Sure, it killed an hour or so and wasn’t bad in any way, but it wasn’t anything you’re gonna be shouting from the rooftops about. Maybe one or two moments will come up in conversation between two friends that saw it, but no one is saying “wow, that really hit the nail on the head”. Rather, it was a little silly, somewhat distracting and entirely throw-away.
Bring back the old format, Charlie, when you can. It was much more effective, and funny! I think you know that yourself.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Nightly Disease in Books
May 16, 2018
I really don’t know how I feel about Max Booth III’s The Nightly Disease. Published initially as a serial in DarkFuse’s magazine, The Nightly Disease follows a hotel night auditor’s descent into madness as everything that can go wrong, does go wrong. In a series of darkly comedic and horrific events, the reader joins Isaac on a crazy ride, rife with some of the most outrageous occurrences a person could encounter.
Single, living alone, and working a job where he knows he’ll go nowhere, Isaac spends most of his nights between running the audit and preparing breakfast with his nose in a book, watching Netflix, or rubbing one out on the roof of the hotel he works at. He has a clear disdain for his job and spares no love for the guests that stay at his hotel, which all appear to be exceptionally rude (not that he’s any better). After he finds a wallet and decides to keep it, things escalate quickly and soon he is hiding bodies while trying to appease his invisible companions, Chowls and Owlbert.
I think what throws me off the most about this book is that it can be a bit difficult to follow at times. As Isaac loses his mind, the writing takes on a more frantic, senseless air that seriously messed with me reading it – to the point I almost put it down. It wasn’t a bad book, by any means. In fact, I think there’s a lot to be said about the fact that I felt like I was losing my mind reading it; Isaac’s perspective is extremely well-written.
Overall, I did not care that much for The Nightly Disease. It was nice to be able to identify with the main character to some degree – if only because I work the night audit shift at a hotel myself, and most hotels seem to work pretty much the same way. Other than that, I prefer books with a lot more depth and a bit more of a serious tone. While The Nightly Disease wasn’t really something I’m into, I definitely plan to look into Max Booth III’s other books. His writing style is great.
I would like to thank NetGalley and DarkFuse for providing me with an advance copy in exchange for an honest review.
Single, living alone, and working a job where he knows he’ll go nowhere, Isaac spends most of his nights between running the audit and preparing breakfast with his nose in a book, watching Netflix, or rubbing one out on the roof of the hotel he works at. He has a clear disdain for his job and spares no love for the guests that stay at his hotel, which all appear to be exceptionally rude (not that he’s any better). After he finds a wallet and decides to keep it, things escalate quickly and soon he is hiding bodies while trying to appease his invisible companions, Chowls and Owlbert.
I think what throws me off the most about this book is that it can be a bit difficult to follow at times. As Isaac loses his mind, the writing takes on a more frantic, senseless air that seriously messed with me reading it – to the point I almost put it down. It wasn’t a bad book, by any means. In fact, I think there’s a lot to be said about the fact that I felt like I was losing my mind reading it; Isaac’s perspective is extremely well-written.
Overall, I did not care that much for The Nightly Disease. It was nice to be able to identify with the main character to some degree – if only because I work the night audit shift at a hotel myself, and most hotels seem to work pretty much the same way. Other than that, I prefer books with a lot more depth and a bit more of a serious tone. While The Nightly Disease wasn’t really something I’m into, I definitely plan to look into Max Booth III’s other books. His writing style is great.
I would like to thank NetGalley and DarkFuse for providing me with an advance copy in exchange for an honest review.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Intern (2015) in Movies
Jun 6, 2018
In a word...charming
Like most of you, I did not make it to the movie theaters in September, 2015 to catch the Nancy Meyers "fish-out-of-water" comedy THE INTERN about a 70-ish man (Robert DeNiro) who goes to work at an Internet Start-up company headed by a a driven Millennial (Anne Hathaway). It seemed that this film was just going to be another Robert DeNiro phone-it-in "paycheck" comedy and not worth our time.
Boy, was I wrong.
In a word, I would call this film...charming. Hathaway is charming, the other workers and Interns at the start-up are charming and DeNiro (believe it or not) is the most charming of all.
Starring as Ben - a widower who is just withering away with inactivity and boredom who decides to go back to work - DeNiro shows he "still has it". His Ben is a strong character, as nuanced as one can be in this type of film and...yes...EXTREMELY charming. DeNiro most definitely is NOT phoning this one in - he gives it a very good effort (maybe not A+, but...) and it shows. He is on screen for almost every scene and holds our attention throughout.
Proving to be a worthy partner in this film is Anne Hathaway's driven Internet sensation, Jules. She spars with DeNiro throughout and the two make a fun pairing.
Also joining in on the fun is Rene Russo as a masseuse (and love interest for DeNiro and Andrew Rannels as Jules' ass't. But it is the trio of Adam Devine, Zack Pearlman and Jason Orley that almost steals this film as 3 knuckleheads that work with - and are mentored by - DeNiro's Yoda-like Intern. I almost would have preferred to see a film about these 4.
Nothing in this film is revolutionary or new and Director/Writer Meyers keeps it that way. It's like pulling on an old, comfortable sweater or a really well worn-in pair of shoes. It won't win any awards, but it is fun..and, yes...charming just the same.
THE INTERN is now streaming on NETFLIX and AMAZON PRIME, if you are looking for a...I'll say it one more time...charming...way to spend an evening - look no further than here.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Boy, was I wrong.
In a word, I would call this film...charming. Hathaway is charming, the other workers and Interns at the start-up are charming and DeNiro (believe it or not) is the most charming of all.
Starring as Ben - a widower who is just withering away with inactivity and boredom who decides to go back to work - DeNiro shows he "still has it". His Ben is a strong character, as nuanced as one can be in this type of film and...yes...EXTREMELY charming. DeNiro most definitely is NOT phoning this one in - he gives it a very good effort (maybe not A+, but...) and it shows. He is on screen for almost every scene and holds our attention throughout.
Proving to be a worthy partner in this film is Anne Hathaway's driven Internet sensation, Jules. She spars with DeNiro throughout and the two make a fun pairing.
Also joining in on the fun is Rene Russo as a masseuse (and love interest for DeNiro and Andrew Rannels as Jules' ass't. But it is the trio of Adam Devine, Zack Pearlman and Jason Orley that almost steals this film as 3 knuckleheads that work with - and are mentored by - DeNiro's Yoda-like Intern. I almost would have preferred to see a film about these 4.
Nothing in this film is revolutionary or new and Director/Writer Meyers keeps it that way. It's like pulling on an old, comfortable sweater or a really well worn-in pair of shoes. It won't win any awards, but it is fun..and, yes...charming just the same.
THE INTERN is now streaming on NETFLIX and AMAZON PRIME, if you are looking for a...I'll say it one more time...charming...way to spend an evening - look no further than here.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Fred (860 KP) rated The Haunting of Hill House in TV
Oct 24, 2018
Genuinely creepy (2 more)
The tall man
The amazing 6th episode
Horror done right
What is the chance that I would watch the original "The Haunting" movie, only to see that the following day, a TV show based on the book that spawned the original movie, would appear on Netflix? Well, this is what happened to me. I'll start by saying I love the original movie. I love the psychological aspect of the horror. Sounds & shapes can be so much more terrifying that gore & jump-scares. When I saw the show under my recommendations, I couldn't wait, so I just jumped in.
I am not one to binge watch shows. My time is limited & I watch lots of stuff. But I was immediately hooked on this show. I watched half the season in one day & the rest the following.
The show does a very good job in taking the original movie's plot, changing things around & creating a terrifying tale that takes the psychological horror of the original, mixes it with some minor jump-scares & a compelling story of a family dealing with it's own demons as well as the spirits that live within Hell House. Yes, that was a very long sentence, which reminds me of the 6th episode, which is filled with long shots. The camera spins around, while things change around them. in fact, throughout the series, things change all the time. Sometimes statues turn their heads, ghosts appear in the background, faces appear in the furniture. Once I noticed one of these faces, just there, staring at the family. My fiance didn't even notice. I backed it up to show her. She went "Ooh! How did I not see that?"
The story does jump around in time, showing when the family first moved into the house, with 5 children & their parents & then in current day, still being haunted & compelled by the house. Every actor in the show is fantastic. Even the children really pull it off.
The ghosts in the show are creepy as all hell. My favorite is the tall man. I haven't been freaked out by a movie or TV show in decades, but I held my breath & stared as he...well, just watch.
I have recommended this to all my friends & those who watched it all got back to me to thank me. So, I'm recommending it to all of you too.
I am not one to binge watch shows. My time is limited & I watch lots of stuff. But I was immediately hooked on this show. I watched half the season in one day & the rest the following.
The show does a very good job in taking the original movie's plot, changing things around & creating a terrifying tale that takes the psychological horror of the original, mixes it with some minor jump-scares & a compelling story of a family dealing with it's own demons as well as the spirits that live within Hell House. Yes, that was a very long sentence, which reminds me of the 6th episode, which is filled with long shots. The camera spins around, while things change around them. in fact, throughout the series, things change all the time. Sometimes statues turn their heads, ghosts appear in the background, faces appear in the furniture. Once I noticed one of these faces, just there, staring at the family. My fiance didn't even notice. I backed it up to show her. She went "Ooh! How did I not see that?"
The story does jump around in time, showing when the family first moved into the house, with 5 children & their parents & then in current day, still being haunted & compelled by the house. Every actor in the show is fantastic. Even the children really pull it off.
The ghosts in the show are creepy as all hell. My favorite is the tall man. I haven't been freaked out by a movie or TV show in decades, but I held my breath & stared as he...well, just watch.
I have recommended this to all my friends & those who watched it all got back to me to thank me. So, I'm recommending it to all of you too.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Velvet Buzzsaw (2019) in Movies
Oct 31, 2019
Lacking In the Entertainment Realm
Netflix has some solid hits on their hands…but they can’t all be hits. Velvet Buzzsaw is proof (just like The Dead Don’t Die) that you can add all the starpower in the world and it won’t be enough to save a bad movie. This satirical movie tells the story of what happens when art becomes real and consumes our lives.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 1
Characters: 9
The story revolves around a solid group of characters. In their own way, they each play a part in contributing to the chaos of the story as a whole. Their individual lives are unique and come crashing together to keep the story somewhat afloat. They are a great foundation indeed. Unfortunately, it’s the rest of the house that sucks.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
There is enough within the story to keep you intrigued for most of it. You don’t know what’s real and what’s not which helps to build the intrigue. Every new scene brings the possibility of something bad happening and it definitely made for a bumpy, fun ride.
Entertainment Value: 5
To counter the above, however, there were a number of times where I expected something to happen and I was left disappointed. I feel like the movie spent so much time trying to be artsy fartsy that it forgets to actually entertain in spots. I hate to say it, but I spent half the movie bored, hence the 5.
Memorability: 4
Pace: 7
Plot: 10
The premise is intriguing and unique. Despite the poor translation to the big screen, I can’t deny the daring it took to attempt something like this. The movie’s intent isn’t to wow you with big blockbuster moments, but to make you think. As our movie world continues to become more money-driven daily, this was a refreshing change.
Resolution: 2
Totally unnecessary. I’ll just leave it at that.
Overall: 68
To its credit, Velvet Buzzsaw does spin a great tune about the dangers of selling out and the downside of being willing to do anything to get ahead. What good is art if it’s never seen? Probably not very good at all, which is why I can tell you it’s safe to stay away from this movie.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 1
Characters: 9
The story revolves around a solid group of characters. In their own way, they each play a part in contributing to the chaos of the story as a whole. Their individual lives are unique and come crashing together to keep the story somewhat afloat. They are a great foundation indeed. Unfortunately, it’s the rest of the house that sucks.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
There is enough within the story to keep you intrigued for most of it. You don’t know what’s real and what’s not which helps to build the intrigue. Every new scene brings the possibility of something bad happening and it definitely made for a bumpy, fun ride.
Entertainment Value: 5
To counter the above, however, there were a number of times where I expected something to happen and I was left disappointed. I feel like the movie spent so much time trying to be artsy fartsy that it forgets to actually entertain in spots. I hate to say it, but I spent half the movie bored, hence the 5.
Memorability: 4
Pace: 7
Plot: 10
The premise is intriguing and unique. Despite the poor translation to the big screen, I can’t deny the daring it took to attempt something like this. The movie’s intent isn’t to wow you with big blockbuster moments, but to make you think. As our movie world continues to become more money-driven daily, this was a refreshing change.
Resolution: 2
Totally unnecessary. I’ll just leave it at that.
Overall: 68
To its credit, Velvet Buzzsaw does spin a great tune about the dangers of selling out and the downside of being willing to do anything to get ahead. What good is art if it’s never seen? Probably not very good at all, which is why I can tell you it’s safe to stay away from this movie.
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated Mowgli (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
When humans encroach on the jungle they get too close to the animals that call the jungle home. It’s inevitable that they clash. When Shere Khan (Benedict Cumberbatch), a tiger who has no regard for the rules of the jungle, slaughters a group of humans only a child survives. A black panther, Bagheera (Christian Bale), saves the boy, Mowgli (Rohan Chand), and takes him to live with a group of wolves. There he is raised by his mother, Nisha (Naomie Harris), and tried to become part of the pack by Baloo (Andy Serkis), a black bear. Mowgli must train with Baloo to become a member of the pack. As he trains he sees that man expand. With this expansion the man brings back Shere Khan. He kills many of the cows and leaves them for the humans to find. This makes the humans enlist a hunter, Lockwood (Matthew Rhys), to kill the tiger. Also Bagheera believes that sending Mowgli to the humans will keep him safe. Mowgli, just a young boy, must now try and bridge the animal world he knows in the jungle and the human world.
This is a live action retelling of the novel by Rudyard Kipling, The Jungle Book. Actor/Director Andy Serkis creates a beautiful story with really well done CGI. The visuals are really well done and by far the best part of the film. The cast, which also includes Cate Blanchett, Eddie Marsan, Tom Hollander, etc. make the animals they voice come to life. This take on the famous story is familiar but also changed ever so slightly from previous versions that it keeps it interesting. Young actor Rohan Chand does a decent job of carrying most of the live acting portions of the film.
The film really made me feel nostalgic at times. The film does take a little darker look at the old classic and would say it is for a little more mature audiences than the 1967 cartoon or 2016 live action, both The Jungle Book, takes on this story. The visuals are really good but the story does miss at times. I really thought that the climax really had a slow build but then really finished quickly. There was definitely room for improvement there but overall it was a pleasant movie experience. The theater viewing was visually really good and I am sure it would be a decent home experience with the Netflix release.
This is a live action retelling of the novel by Rudyard Kipling, The Jungle Book. Actor/Director Andy Serkis creates a beautiful story with really well done CGI. The visuals are really well done and by far the best part of the film. The cast, which also includes Cate Blanchett, Eddie Marsan, Tom Hollander, etc. make the animals they voice come to life. This take on the famous story is familiar but also changed ever so slightly from previous versions that it keeps it interesting. Young actor Rohan Chand does a decent job of carrying most of the live acting portions of the film.
The film really made me feel nostalgic at times. The film does take a little darker look at the old classic and would say it is for a little more mature audiences than the 1967 cartoon or 2016 live action, both The Jungle Book, takes on this story. The visuals are really good but the story does miss at times. I really thought that the climax really had a slow build but then really finished quickly. There was definitely room for improvement there but overall it was a pleasant movie experience. The theater viewing was visually really good and I am sure it would be a decent home experience with the Netflix release.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated The Rover (2014) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
Don't mess with a man's car!
If you have seen the current Netflix film, The King (hopefully watching this weekend), you will have seen a subsequent effort by writer/director David Michôd.
This film takes place 10 years after "the collapse", not really specified other than not many people around and the ones who are survive a desolate, isolated existence. The setting is the barren Australian outback wasteland where human beings are scarce and gratuity and benevolence are things of the past.
A lonely man (never spoke his name in the film) sees three men steal his vehicle after theirs is sidelined from an apparent crash. Incensed, the grizzled man takes off after the threesome rapidly wanted to reacquire it. The men are far in the lead down the infinity highway, but the man manages to catch them since they are unaware of the pursuit. After some cat and mouse along the highway, the man is unable to retrieve his vehicle at that time.
The makes his way through the harsh landscape eventually running across the wounded brother of one of his car thieves who he decides to bring along for the ride. The brother is willing to explain the possible destination of the thieves as well as he may want some sort of vengeance since his brother and companions left him to die on the side of the road.
Any post-apocalyptic film set in Australia immediately will remind you of the Mad Max films. Similar in setting only, this film is much less action and is an unlikely road film at its core. There are some well designed action scenes when the men encounter various scumbags and individuals along their route. You are never really sure why the man is so interested in getting his car back until the very end.
Guy Pearce shows he is up to the challenge of playing a very unlikable, hardened miscreant, while Robert Pattinson plays the simpleton sidekick role extremely well. His accent his so hard to understand at times (reminded me of Brad Pitt in Snatch) I actually had to rewind a few times because I missed the catchy dialogue.
The film does have a few dry spots, but I was very surprised how much I liked this.
This film takes place 10 years after "the collapse", not really specified other than not many people around and the ones who are survive a desolate, isolated existence. The setting is the barren Australian outback wasteland where human beings are scarce and gratuity and benevolence are things of the past.
A lonely man (never spoke his name in the film) sees three men steal his vehicle after theirs is sidelined from an apparent crash. Incensed, the grizzled man takes off after the threesome rapidly wanted to reacquire it. The men are far in the lead down the infinity highway, but the man manages to catch them since they are unaware of the pursuit. After some cat and mouse along the highway, the man is unable to retrieve his vehicle at that time.
The makes his way through the harsh landscape eventually running across the wounded brother of one of his car thieves who he decides to bring along for the ride. The brother is willing to explain the possible destination of the thieves as well as he may want some sort of vengeance since his brother and companions left him to die on the side of the road.
Any post-apocalyptic film set in Australia immediately will remind you of the Mad Max films. Similar in setting only, this film is much less action and is an unlikely road film at its core. There are some well designed action scenes when the men encounter various scumbags and individuals along their route. You are never really sure why the man is so interested in getting his car back until the very end.
Guy Pearce shows he is up to the challenge of playing a very unlikable, hardened miscreant, while Robert Pattinson plays the simpleton sidekick role extremely well. His accent his so hard to understand at times (reminded me of Brad Pitt in Snatch) I actually had to rewind a few times because I missed the catchy dialogue.
The film does have a few dry spots, but I was very surprised how much I liked this.
Lowri Catryn (229 KP) rated Playstation 4 in Tech
Jan 23, 2020
Software (2 more)
Design
Easy to use
Controller battery charge is poor (2 more)
Overheat easily
Playstation Plus expensive
Sleek design, great software
The playstation 4 was not cheap when it first appeared on the shelves, but it was a must have for most people, including me. The fashionable sleek design with the black panels against the blue light and touchpad controllers made it look incredibly stylish for a games console. Playstation Plus membership is unfortunately quite expensive, and the memory is poor on the console... having to download the game software to be able to play it.. not many different games can be played, depending on your memory. Simple to navigate and also the choice of installing applications. The touchpad controllers made it much easier to navigate on a keyboard, with quicker typing. The playstation allows you to connect with fellow players all around the world, and make new friends. The fact that there is an option for headphones and microphones is both positive and negative. It's great to communicate with others, however can lead to verbal abuse which is quite unsettling when gaming with trolls. The playstation consoles have always been my favourite and never will I change to an XBox, which is lumpy, ugly etc. The use of other applications such as YouTube and netflix on the playstation is amazing for people who do not have smart TVs or access to streaming sticks. Recently Playstation allowed players to change their username (a long and very much awaited change for users! Breathing a sigh of relief to get rid of cringy usernames, or usernames that included their ex lovers). However again, Playstation want to make money however they can... if you messed up the opportunity with the game tag change, you were only allowed one free opportunity so you had to consider wisely. Otherwise Playstation would charge you to change your game tag once more (slightly unfair I think!) A year ago I bought the PS4 VR headset.. exciting at first but a lumpy headset which is connected via cable (would have been much more effective to have had this wireless! Such as the controllers).. at first there is motion sickness, but you soon get the hang of it. Again a great selection of games, however quite pricey!
Dale Lawson (13 KP) rated The Stranger in TV
Mar 1, 2020 (Updated Mar 1, 2020)
Cliffhanger endings (1 more)
Mysterious plot twists
Shocking acting (2 more)
Incomplete plot
Character motivations
What started as an addictive watch, left me deflated...
This show has recently been released on Netflix and has a lot of buzz surrounding it. I was recommended it by three different people in the space of a few days. Even when I started to watch the series, I was quick to suggest it to friends. However, having finished the series and reflecting on the show, I wondered how I enjoyed it so much. It was full of plot holes, lost character motivations and had a selection of poor actors.
The premise of the show is that a stranger visits Richard Armitage’s character and unveils some unexpected and life changing news. As the series develops various crimes, including murder, end up being committed and they fuel a lot of the ‘twists’ or cliffhangers that end each episode.
These endings are what make the show enjoyable to watch, I think. They keep you wanting more. We watched three episodes in one evening because of the desire to ‘find out more’. Whilst the writers have done an excellent job in this regard and for the sub-plots, the content of each episode is often rushed, to progress the plot or just simply poorly written.
But it is the actors that let this show down the most; regularly, they are even laughable. The cast that play the children are extremely rough around the edges and provide much of the unintended humour. This said, the blame is not solely down to them. Many of the other supporting adult cast come across flat and dry, which is partly down to the poor writing.
Richard Armitage does the best he can with the script he has, yet it was good to see him on screen again after a large hiatus. The two main police officers also provide quality performances, and thankfully are on screen for much of the time to hold this show together. Stephen Rhea’s character is also very likeable for the first half of the story. It’s a shame to see a cast of strong actors struggling to provide quality performances.
With an ending that felt wrong and depressing, to the poorly acted episodes, The Stranger proves to be an addictive watch that leaves you feeling a little underwhelmed and deflated upon its conclusion.
The premise of the show is that a stranger visits Richard Armitage’s character and unveils some unexpected and life changing news. As the series develops various crimes, including murder, end up being committed and they fuel a lot of the ‘twists’ or cliffhangers that end each episode.
These endings are what make the show enjoyable to watch, I think. They keep you wanting more. We watched three episodes in one evening because of the desire to ‘find out more’. Whilst the writers have done an excellent job in this regard and for the sub-plots, the content of each episode is often rushed, to progress the plot or just simply poorly written.
But it is the actors that let this show down the most; regularly, they are even laughable. The cast that play the children are extremely rough around the edges and provide much of the unintended humour. This said, the blame is not solely down to them. Many of the other supporting adult cast come across flat and dry, which is partly down to the poor writing.
Richard Armitage does the best he can with the script he has, yet it was good to see him on screen again after a large hiatus. The two main police officers also provide quality performances, and thankfully are on screen for much of the time to hold this show together. Stephen Rhea’s character is also very likeable for the first half of the story. It’s a shame to see a cast of strong actors struggling to provide quality performances.
With an ending that felt wrong and depressing, to the poorly acted episodes, The Stranger proves to be an addictive watch that leaves you feeling a little underwhelmed and deflated upon its conclusion.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Black Mirror - Season 5 in TV
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Mar 3, 2020)
Contains spoilers, click to show
Striking Vipers - 5.5
Perhaps in retrospect, season 5 should have held out for some better scripts. All 3 (and notably there are only 3, because of the effort and time put into the stand alone feature length Bandersnatch) episodes seem a little rushed and weak in terms of depth of idea; replacing it with more gloss and production value. You can see the cash on the screen in this episode about the natural progression of VR becoming all about virtual sex, regardless of your sexuality in the real world (or maybe because of it). There is some irony in considering how Black Mirror began feeling very British and here feels entirely consumed by Netflix and American values. Is that a clever statement in itself? Not sure. Either way, I am not a big fan on this one. I mean, it’s fine, but we have come to expect more.
Smithereens - 6
If there are any clever links to anything else going on here, in what I am now thinking of as the Black Mirror Universe, then I haven’t picked up on it. This one feels quite surface, and just a very sad story about a man in distress that wants technology to answer for its responsibilities. Andrew Scott is ever excellent in the lead – man, he can really act! – but the rest of the cast seem a little lifeless and under-written. Perhaps they were trying for something more sharply focused, but, for me, the moral message of don’t use your phone whilst driving, is a bit weak.
Rachel, Jack and Ashley Too - 6.5
Known as the Miley Cyrus episode, because… she’s in it, and so is an electronic “toy” that replicates her personality for her teen fans. There is some intrigue around the nature of fandom and obsession; also the idea of media manipulation in projecting a saleable image that may be far from “the truth”. There is a lighter tone here, though, which betrays the Black Mirror ethos to some extent. It is an entertaining piece: the CGI on the toy Ashley is great, and there is a lovely twist 3/4 in when the true personality of it comes out to hilarious effect. But, on the whole, another under-written piece that leaves us hanging on the precipice of doubt leading into another season.
Perhaps in retrospect, season 5 should have held out for some better scripts. All 3 (and notably there are only 3, because of the effort and time put into the stand alone feature length Bandersnatch) episodes seem a little rushed and weak in terms of depth of idea; replacing it with more gloss and production value. You can see the cash on the screen in this episode about the natural progression of VR becoming all about virtual sex, regardless of your sexuality in the real world (or maybe because of it). There is some irony in considering how Black Mirror began feeling very British and here feels entirely consumed by Netflix and American values. Is that a clever statement in itself? Not sure. Either way, I am not a big fan on this one. I mean, it’s fine, but we have come to expect more.
Smithereens - 6
If there are any clever links to anything else going on here, in what I am now thinking of as the Black Mirror Universe, then I haven’t picked up on it. This one feels quite surface, and just a very sad story about a man in distress that wants technology to answer for its responsibilities. Andrew Scott is ever excellent in the lead – man, he can really act! – but the rest of the cast seem a little lifeless and under-written. Perhaps they were trying for something more sharply focused, but, for me, the moral message of don’t use your phone whilst driving, is a bit weak.
Rachel, Jack and Ashley Too - 6.5
Known as the Miley Cyrus episode, because… she’s in it, and so is an electronic “toy” that replicates her personality for her teen fans. There is some intrigue around the nature of fandom and obsession; also the idea of media manipulation in projecting a saleable image that may be far from “the truth”. There is a lighter tone here, though, which betrays the Black Mirror ethos to some extent. It is an entertaining piece: the CGI on the toy Ashley is great, and there is a lovely twist 3/4 in when the true personality of it comes out to hilarious effect. But, on the whole, another under-written piece that leaves us hanging on the precipice of doubt leading into another season.