Search
JT (287 KP) rated Knowing (2009) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Nicholas Cage is one of those hit and miss actors. One minute he’s acting out of his skin and the other he’s bumbling his way through another disappointment with a quietly spoken drawl.
Knowing is a film of two halves. The first half is a well thought out disaster thriller, the second is quite simply a shambles and totally ruined it. Why you ask? SPOILER ALERT: Aliens, the ending was all linked back to beings from another planet. Why they felt the need to go down this route is beyond me? But I lost any respect for director Alex Proyas .
It’s a real shame as there were some spectacular disaster sequences that ramped up the tension. Cage was accomplished in his role and was edgy enough to win the audience over. However, that all fell away in the later stages as his acting became desperate, as he tried to clutch at emotional straws.
The film’s ending has a very ‘The Day the Earth Stood Still’ feel about it. I felt like snapping the DVD in half and mailing in personally to screen writers Ryne Douglas Pearson and Juliet Snowden. I would only recommend this for the special effects and not at all for the weak script or storyline.
Knowing is a film of two halves. The first half is a well thought out disaster thriller, the second is quite simply a shambles and totally ruined it. Why you ask? SPOILER ALERT: Aliens, the ending was all linked back to beings from another planet. Why they felt the need to go down this route is beyond me? But I lost any respect for director Alex Proyas .
It’s a real shame as there were some spectacular disaster sequences that ramped up the tension. Cage was accomplished in his role and was edgy enough to win the audience over. However, that all fell away in the later stages as his acting became desperate, as he tried to clutch at emotional straws.
The film’s ending has a very ‘The Day the Earth Stood Still’ feel about it. I felt like snapping the DVD in half and mailing in personally to screen writers Ryne Douglas Pearson and Juliet Snowden. I would only recommend this for the special effects and not at all for the weak script or storyline.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Renfield (2023) in Movies
Apr 22, 2023
Cage feels Caged-In
Sometime you are in the mood for a drama, sometimes an action flick, other times a romantic comedy.
And then there are times you just want to watch Nicholas Cage camping it up on-screen as Dracula.
If that is the mood you are in, boy do I have a movie for you.
Based (very loosely) on the character created by Bram Stoker (and the classic 1931 film starring Bela Lugosi), RENFIELD tells the tale of an over-the-top Dracula in modern times as seen through his “familiar”, Renfield.
Nicholas Hoult (Beast in the latest series of X-Men films) plays Renfield as a put-upon assistant to Dracula - kind of a comedy/horror version of the relationship of Anne Hathaway and Meryl Streep in THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA - and it works (for the most part). Hoult is a winning (enough) and sympathetic presence on screen and you find yourself rooting for him in the end.
The surprising thing to me in this film is the sub-plot of Renfield finding love with a Police Office portrayed by (of all people) Awkwafina. This comedienne/actress has really grown on the BankofMarquis as a solid and dependable presence on screen and she doesn’t disappoint here. And that’s a good thing for the Renfield/Rebecca the Cop relationship ends up taking center stage during the 2nd act of this film (moving Nic Cage’s Dracula off-screen for a long stretch of time) and it works for Hoult and Awkwafina play off each other very well.
As for Cage, his Dracula is off-center, wacky, frenetic and out-of-this world. A true fish-out-of-water. But…if I’m being honest…his performance feels reigned in and it didn’t go far enough out-of-the-box and didn’t get nearly crazy enough for my tastes.
When something like that happens, one needs to look no further than the Director and Chris McKay (THE LEGO MOVIE, THE TOMORROW WAR) has a track record (at least for the BankofMarquis) of pulling his punches - and he pulls many, many punches in this film. But, he also DOESN’T pull punches at times (like in the scene where one guy gets his arms ripped off and then these arms are used as nunchucks on a bevy of bad guys). He doesn’t really know how far or how outlandish he should go. So he filters in a comedic amount of blood and gore - and then reigns Cage in. It’s an odd choice.
If you decide to watch Renfield, you already know what to expect - and for the most part you get it - except in the one spot that you really need it.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And then there are times you just want to watch Nicholas Cage camping it up on-screen as Dracula.
If that is the mood you are in, boy do I have a movie for you.
Based (very loosely) on the character created by Bram Stoker (and the classic 1931 film starring Bela Lugosi), RENFIELD tells the tale of an over-the-top Dracula in modern times as seen through his “familiar”, Renfield.
Nicholas Hoult (Beast in the latest series of X-Men films) plays Renfield as a put-upon assistant to Dracula - kind of a comedy/horror version of the relationship of Anne Hathaway and Meryl Streep in THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA - and it works (for the most part). Hoult is a winning (enough) and sympathetic presence on screen and you find yourself rooting for him in the end.
The surprising thing to me in this film is the sub-plot of Renfield finding love with a Police Office portrayed by (of all people) Awkwafina. This comedienne/actress has really grown on the BankofMarquis as a solid and dependable presence on screen and she doesn’t disappoint here. And that’s a good thing for the Renfield/Rebecca the Cop relationship ends up taking center stage during the 2nd act of this film (moving Nic Cage’s Dracula off-screen for a long stretch of time) and it works for Hoult and Awkwafina play off each other very well.
As for Cage, his Dracula is off-center, wacky, frenetic and out-of-this world. A true fish-out-of-water. But…if I’m being honest…his performance feels reigned in and it didn’t go far enough out-of-the-box and didn’t get nearly crazy enough for my tastes.
When something like that happens, one needs to look no further than the Director and Chris McKay (THE LEGO MOVIE, THE TOMORROW WAR) has a track record (at least for the BankofMarquis) of pulling his punches - and he pulls many, many punches in this film. But, he also DOESN’T pull punches at times (like in the scene where one guy gets his arms ripped off and then these arms are used as nunchucks on a bevy of bad guys). He doesn’t really know how far or how outlandish he should go. So he filters in a comedic amount of blood and gore - and then reigns Cage in. It’s an odd choice.
If you decide to watch Renfield, you already know what to expect - and for the most part you get it - except in the one spot that you really need it.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Acting: A Modern History of Filmmaking
Claudia Springer and Julie Levinson
Book
Screen acting is generally considered in terms of the on-screen performance, which is actually the...
Birdy
Book
An extraordinary story of war and friendship from one of America’s most revered authors of the...
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Mandy (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
Red Miller (Nicholas Cage) is sent on a rampaging quest for vengeance when an evil cult abducts and kill his partner, Mandy Bloom.
The story is simple, Mandy and Red live alone in a forest. By chance Mandy is spotted by a cult leader who decided that he wants her to join him. Things don’t go to plan and Mandy ends up dead and Red starts on a quest for revenge. Simple and familiar, it’s not an uncommon plot, however Mandy is part film, part drug filled dream with snippets of animation thrown in, overlaid with a psychedelic, prog rock soundtrack. It has drugs, cults, demonic, slipknot esc bikers, (male) nudity, chainsaws and crossbows, religious parables and Jesus parallels. There is a metaphorical decent to hell and there is Nicholas Cage. All this is shot with constantly changing, coloured filters and distorted voices.
You can probably tell that Mandy isn’t for everyone, at times the film feels like an Italian horror, something like Suspiria or Deep Red and other time it seems like someone has brought a 70’s or 80’s rock/metal album cover to life. Throw in some animation that would be at home in ‘Heavy Metal’ Magazine, turn the crazy dial up to 11 and let Nicolas Cage (slowly) off the sanity leash and you have Mandy.
There are plot point that are not explained, for example Red suddenly has a friend who has a cross bow stored away for him and Red suddenly has a forge and knows how to use it. Is Mandy some kind of witch and, of course, is Red dead at the end.
I would say that there are some crazy scenes but the whole film is crazy but it does lead to some great scene’s like a chainsaw duel.
As I said, Mandy isn’t for everyone, it has a simple plot that has been turned in to a surreal nightmare so if you don’t like weird don’t watch this.
Mandy is also slow to get started as it builds up the atmosphere. I think that, if the film kept the atmosphere it starts with it could have been a similar tone to something like Midsommar however by the halfway point it has past that and, by the end the film just takes a head dive down the rabbit hole (almost literally).
Given all that I found it hard to rate, it has the feel of a 70’s horror and an 80’s grindhouse, some of the filters make it hard to understand some of the lines and the colour filters were disturbing and distracting although most of this was on purpose but over all I did enjoy it.
The story is simple, Mandy and Red live alone in a forest. By chance Mandy is spotted by a cult leader who decided that he wants her to join him. Things don’t go to plan and Mandy ends up dead and Red starts on a quest for revenge. Simple and familiar, it’s not an uncommon plot, however Mandy is part film, part drug filled dream with snippets of animation thrown in, overlaid with a psychedelic, prog rock soundtrack. It has drugs, cults, demonic, slipknot esc bikers, (male) nudity, chainsaws and crossbows, religious parables and Jesus parallels. There is a metaphorical decent to hell and there is Nicholas Cage. All this is shot with constantly changing, coloured filters and distorted voices.
You can probably tell that Mandy isn’t for everyone, at times the film feels like an Italian horror, something like Suspiria or Deep Red and other time it seems like someone has brought a 70’s or 80’s rock/metal album cover to life. Throw in some animation that would be at home in ‘Heavy Metal’ Magazine, turn the crazy dial up to 11 and let Nicolas Cage (slowly) off the sanity leash and you have Mandy.
There are plot point that are not explained, for example Red suddenly has a friend who has a cross bow stored away for him and Red suddenly has a forge and knows how to use it. Is Mandy some kind of witch and, of course, is Red dead at the end.
I would say that there are some crazy scenes but the whole film is crazy but it does lead to some great scene’s like a chainsaw duel.
As I said, Mandy isn’t for everyone, it has a simple plot that has been turned in to a surreal nightmare so if you don’t like weird don’t watch this.
Mandy is also slow to get started as it builds up the atmosphere. I think that, if the film kept the atmosphere it starts with it could have been a similar tone to something like Midsommar however by the halfway point it has past that and, by the end the film just takes a head dive down the rabbit hole (almost literally).
Given all that I found it hard to rate, it has the feel of a 70’s horror and an 80’s grindhouse, some of the filters make it hard to understand some of the lines and the colour filters were disturbing and distracting although most of this was on purpose but over all I did enjoy it.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Mandy (2018) in Movies
Mar 16, 2019
What did I just watch?
Part of me was expecting or hoping this film to be like a cheesy old horror film, a proper B movie type with silly but impressive physical effects. Or something like Hobo with a Shotgun. Sadly apart from some fairly sparse decent physical effects, this film is nothing like what I expected.
This is obviously trying to be a very stylish 80s style trippy film, but for me the problem was it was too trippy. The almost constant red toned scenes had me feeling like I’d gone colourblind by the end, and I spent most of this film wondering what the hell was going on. It was far too trippy, to the point where I wish I had actually taken something to get me through the very long and dragging two hours! The only compliment I could really give this film is to say that it at least fitted in with Nicholas Cage and his terribly acting.
Sorry @Andy K !
This is obviously trying to be a very stylish 80s style trippy film, but for me the problem was it was too trippy. The almost constant red toned scenes had me feeling like I’d gone colourblind by the end, and I spent most of this film wondering what the hell was going on. It was far too trippy, to the point where I wish I had actually taken something to get me through the very long and dragging two hours! The only compliment I could really give this film is to say that it at least fitted in with Nicholas Cage and his terribly acting.
Sorry @Andy K !
Coppola
Book
More than any other director, Francis Coppola exemplifies the drive and invention of modern American...
Mayhawke (97 KP) rated Windtalkers (2002) in Movies
Feb 7, 2018
Not the film it was pitched as
I bought this when it first came out on video (yes, that long ago) excepecting a good action film centered around an interesting historical fact. If that is what you are hoping for, don't bother.
The trailers and the blurb made a great deal about the American use of the Navajo language as an unbreakable 'code' during WW2,and gave the impression that this was the central theme of the film. It is not. In fact that aspect of the story is almost completely incidental. Instead the film focuses on the character of Joe Enders (Nicholas Cage), in a thin and worn out story of the 'Only-Man-To-Survive-Out-Of-his-Unit-and-Now-he's-racked-with-Guilt' genre.
Trouble is, it's not even a good example of it's kind, and rapidly degenerates into the worst kind of John Wayne-esq war film, where one good/troubled/hard-arse American Marine manages to defeat the entire force of the Japanese/Germans/whoever.
It's a real shame, because the opportunity was there to do something really interesting and informative but - it seems - once again Hollywood has been blinded by the myopic belief that Testosterone, lots of big bangs and screaming characters makes for better entertainment.
The trailers and the blurb made a great deal about the American use of the Navajo language as an unbreakable 'code' during WW2,and gave the impression that this was the central theme of the film. It is not. In fact that aspect of the story is almost completely incidental. Instead the film focuses on the character of Joe Enders (Nicholas Cage), in a thin and worn out story of the 'Only-Man-To-Survive-Out-Of-his-Unit-and-Now-he's-racked-with-Guilt' genre.
Trouble is, it's not even a good example of it's kind, and rapidly degenerates into the worst kind of John Wayne-esq war film, where one good/troubled/hard-arse American Marine manages to defeat the entire force of the Japanese/Germans/whoever.
It's a real shame, because the opportunity was there to do something really interesting and informative but - it seems - once again Hollywood has been blinded by the myopic belief that Testosterone, lots of big bangs and screaming characters makes for better entertainment.
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Teen Titans Go! To the Movies (2018) in Movies
Aug 5, 2018
Hilarious (4 more)
Some great references
Surprise comedic cameo
Nice nods to the tv show
Credits scene
I wasn't sure what was even happening sometimes (1 more)
Seems a little extreme in places.
What did I just watch?
Okay so I haven't reviewed the tv show cos I haven't watched it in a while but I do love 'Teen Titans Go!' and many people ask me why?
Yes I was a fan of the original animated series and I'm a fan of Young Justice and they're both clearly superior animated shows, but it's nice to see something fun and childish starting your favourite characters now and then and the creators of TTG! Are DC fans as well so there's always some insanely great nods to other DC content from comics, to tv shows to Movies and more. So what's not to love?
This movie was hilarious because it's just so insane that you just have to think that the creators were high as hell when making this film. But it's easy to understand for children and has many great references to DC for the adult fans in the audience. A great soundtrack of silly songs and a great voice cast for the characters such as Will Arnett as Deathstroke and Nicholas Cage as Superman (an obvious reference to the Tim Burton Superman film that never got made that would have started Nicholas Cage as the Man of Steel himself). The humour was nothing really new compared to the tv show but they expanded upon it and seemed to drag some of the jokes out longer with some great comedic timing and a sense of "what the hell is going on!?"
Issues I had with the film was that in some parts it seemed to try a little too hard to make you laugh and it didn't always work. They tried to put in some serious messages as they do in the show but this seemed to slow down the pace all of a sudden so it wasn't smooth with the flow of the film and it just felt like it came to a sudden halt on the shenanigans and humour of the film.
The plot was pretty much obvious from the get go, but that's probably just the view as an adult. I'm sure to kids it might seem like a real movie.
But back to the good points. There was some great references to none DC content, such as the Stan Lee cameo, Starfire pointing at the Warner Brothers water tower and stating "That's where the animaniacs live" and even a reference to the Lion King which was brilliant.
Overall this was a really enjoyable movie with some flaws but I think the overall impression outweighs them, and the soundtrack is incredible ?
Yes I was a fan of the original animated series and I'm a fan of Young Justice and they're both clearly superior animated shows, but it's nice to see something fun and childish starting your favourite characters now and then and the creators of TTG! Are DC fans as well so there's always some insanely great nods to other DC content from comics, to tv shows to Movies and more. So what's not to love?
This movie was hilarious because it's just so insane that you just have to think that the creators were high as hell when making this film. But it's easy to understand for children and has many great references to DC for the adult fans in the audience. A great soundtrack of silly songs and a great voice cast for the characters such as Will Arnett as Deathstroke and Nicholas Cage as Superman (an obvious reference to the Tim Burton Superman film that never got made that would have started Nicholas Cage as the Man of Steel himself). The humour was nothing really new compared to the tv show but they expanded upon it and seemed to drag some of the jokes out longer with some great comedic timing and a sense of "what the hell is going on!?"
Issues I had with the film was that in some parts it seemed to try a little too hard to make you laugh and it didn't always work. They tried to put in some serious messages as they do in the show but this seemed to slow down the pace all of a sudden so it wasn't smooth with the flow of the film and it just felt like it came to a sudden halt on the shenanigans and humour of the film.
The plot was pretty much obvious from the get go, but that's probably just the view as an adult. I'm sure to kids it might seem like a real movie.
But back to the good points. There was some great references to none DC content, such as the Stan Lee cameo, Starfire pointing at the Warner Brothers water tower and stating "That's where the animaniacs live" and even a reference to the Lion King which was brilliant.
Overall this was a really enjoyable movie with some flaws but I think the overall impression outweighs them, and the soundtrack is incredible ?
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In what can only be described as a failed attempt at a sequel, Nicholas Cage reprises his role as Johnny Blaze, and Blaze’s alter ego Ghost Rider.
In this follow-up chapter to the 2007 film that first brought Marvel’s Ghost Rider to the big screen, Cage’s character has left the States to run from the demon inside him. His attempts to control the Rider work best when he is far from people, but his plans are derailed upon the entrance of a young boy and his attractive mother. The boy is the object of desire for Mephistopheles (the demon who turned Blaze into the Rider). The film takes you on a wild ride while Ghost Rider attempts to prevent the devil from getting his claws on the boy.
Lets cut right to the chase: this is, bar-none, one of the worst films I’ve seen in at least a decade. It’s right up there with D-Wars. While the first film had decent acting (minus Cage), a well-thought-out script, and special effects that made sense, the sequel is a complete failure even when compared to its predecessor.
The complete lack of a coherent script, the terrible acting, and the nonsensical actions of the Rider (not to mention the extremely cheesy dialog) make it clear that this film is an extremely poor attempt by Hollywood to capitalize on the recent success of other Marvel/DC titles. Unfortunately, this movie was cobbled together with one liners and special effects that weren’t convincing enough to pass the test.
Being a long time Marvel/DC comic fan, I always approach these films with low expectations, so I can be surprised when they’re done well — and at the very least, enjoy it. Despite this, I still feel like the hour and twenty minutes of my life spent watching Ghost Rider is time I can’t have back.
The only moment of hope this film had was Christopher Lambert as the tattooed monk.
I encourage all of you who wish to see it, even after reading this review, to wait until it’s available for cheap home viewing.
In this follow-up chapter to the 2007 film that first brought Marvel’s Ghost Rider to the big screen, Cage’s character has left the States to run from the demon inside him. His attempts to control the Rider work best when he is far from people, but his plans are derailed upon the entrance of a young boy and his attractive mother. The boy is the object of desire for Mephistopheles (the demon who turned Blaze into the Rider). The film takes you on a wild ride while Ghost Rider attempts to prevent the devil from getting his claws on the boy.
Lets cut right to the chase: this is, bar-none, one of the worst films I’ve seen in at least a decade. It’s right up there with D-Wars. While the first film had decent acting (minus Cage), a well-thought-out script, and special effects that made sense, the sequel is a complete failure even when compared to its predecessor.
The complete lack of a coherent script, the terrible acting, and the nonsensical actions of the Rider (not to mention the extremely cheesy dialog) make it clear that this film is an extremely poor attempt by Hollywood to capitalize on the recent success of other Marvel/DC titles. Unfortunately, this movie was cobbled together with one liners and special effects that weren’t convincing enough to pass the test.
Being a long time Marvel/DC comic fan, I always approach these films with low expectations, so I can be surprised when they’re done well — and at the very least, enjoy it. Despite this, I still feel like the hour and twenty minutes of my life spent watching Ghost Rider is time I can’t have back.
The only moment of hope this film had was Christopher Lambert as the tattooed monk.
I encourage all of you who wish to see it, even after reading this review, to wait until it’s available for cheap home viewing.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) Mar 11, 2020