Search
Search results
365Flicks (235 KP) rated Admins (2017) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
Glengarry Glen Ross, Clerks, A Few Good Men, The Big Short, Office Space and Waiting, What do these flicks have in common? No matter the genre they fall in they all have great writing, great dialogue and superb execution of both these factors from there core cast. While Admins may be a Low Budget independent movie it has all these key ingredients and deserves your attention.
Since Movies like Clerks and Office Space hit our screens and gave us a real good look into work life culture, well many movies have came and went since that tried to capture that magic but more often than not they fail because they lack the witty dialogue or lead cast delivery. Aaron Goodmiller and Eric Espejo have achieved a rare feat and brought us a movie that holds many similarity’s to the movies they (and we) love but also expertly elaborates becoming not only a love letter to the genre but an excellent reminder that there is still life in this genre yet.
Admins is a day in the life story of Dan and Randy. Dan and Randy are a couple of systems admins at a “government company” and much like your normal average Joe, spend most of there days figuring out how exactly to fill there work time. So yeah that’s pretty much all I can say plot wise other than what follows is a string of interesting, candid, funny as hell conversations (most notably the “Rape Card” conversation) as Dan is trying his damned hardest to better his position in the company and Randy just calls it like he sees it.
For me this flick lives in its performances and I don’t just mean from our two leads. Lets for a second talk about them though Jay Saunders as Dan the put upon employee who has the intelligence and the aspirations of making it, well I thought Saunders nailed this. Playing off him was Doug Henderson as Randy, please please please please someone pick this guy up and take him all the way. Henderson is an absolute scene stealing son of a bitch, his effortless delivery of some fairly complex dialogue makes him a joy to watch. I see a bright future for this guy. Just check out this delivery…
Both the leads are utterly brilliant but I cant take anything away from the supporting cast, Rebecca Wahls and Devon Brookshire in particular shine in there scenes as Vera and Kathy respectively, both playing very strongly off the cocky confident leads.
This recommend couldn’t be any stronger, I want you all to go check this flick out. Aaron Goodmiller has done a fantastic job on directing duties considering he was thrown into it at short notice after writer Eric Espejo had to bow out. Yes it is low budget, but this is a movie that knows where it lives and what its strengths are, complex witty dialogue and a brilliant cast that can deliver. Admins uses those strengths to there fullest and truly is a gem of a movie not to be missed.
So with that in mind here is where you can get a hold of it, and I suggest you do…
Since Movies like Clerks and Office Space hit our screens and gave us a real good look into work life culture, well many movies have came and went since that tried to capture that magic but more often than not they fail because they lack the witty dialogue or lead cast delivery. Aaron Goodmiller and Eric Espejo have achieved a rare feat and brought us a movie that holds many similarity’s to the movies they (and we) love but also expertly elaborates becoming not only a love letter to the genre but an excellent reminder that there is still life in this genre yet.
Admins is a day in the life story of Dan and Randy. Dan and Randy are a couple of systems admins at a “government company” and much like your normal average Joe, spend most of there days figuring out how exactly to fill there work time. So yeah that’s pretty much all I can say plot wise other than what follows is a string of interesting, candid, funny as hell conversations (most notably the “Rape Card” conversation) as Dan is trying his damned hardest to better his position in the company and Randy just calls it like he sees it.
For me this flick lives in its performances and I don’t just mean from our two leads. Lets for a second talk about them though Jay Saunders as Dan the put upon employee who has the intelligence and the aspirations of making it, well I thought Saunders nailed this. Playing off him was Doug Henderson as Randy, please please please please someone pick this guy up and take him all the way. Henderson is an absolute scene stealing son of a bitch, his effortless delivery of some fairly complex dialogue makes him a joy to watch. I see a bright future for this guy. Just check out this delivery…
Both the leads are utterly brilliant but I cant take anything away from the supporting cast, Rebecca Wahls and Devon Brookshire in particular shine in there scenes as Vera and Kathy respectively, both playing very strongly off the cocky confident leads.
This recommend couldn’t be any stronger, I want you all to go check this flick out. Aaron Goodmiller has done a fantastic job on directing duties considering he was thrown into it at short notice after writer Eric Espejo had to bow out. Yes it is low budget, but this is a movie that knows where it lives and what its strengths are, complex witty dialogue and a brilliant cast that can deliver. Admins uses those strengths to there fullest and truly is a gem of a movie not to be missed.
So with that in mind here is where you can get a hold of it, and I suggest you do…
JT (287 KP) rated Session 9 (2001) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Looking back I’ve written a number of horror film reviews which, probably highlights what my favourite genre is? I’ve not been into torture porn or serious amounts of gore. I don’t mind it in small doses, but I prefer films that get under your skin – case in point, Session 9.
In order to satisfy the millennials the majority of horror films today get their thrills from cheap jump scares. But real terror comes from the things that we can relate to. Things that go ‘bump‘ in the night or the sense that we are being watched. This for me, is real terror. Directed by Brad Anderson, Session 9 embodies all of that to perfection.
Despite being made in 2001 and with a low return at the box office, it has been able to creep out audiences years later.
An asbestos cleaning crew are set the task of clearing the abandoned Danvers State Hospital, a job that needs to be done within a week. Company owner Gordon (Peter Mullan) has put a lot of pressure on his team, consisting of Mike (Stephen Gevedon), Phil (David Caruso), Hank (Josh Lucas), and Jeff (Brendan Sexton III), to meet the deadline and collect a bonus. It’s pressure that starts to spill over right from the off.
The hospital is creepy as hell and even in the daylight the crew are plunged into darkness, which doesn’t sit well with Jeff who has a serious case of nyctophobia. They also have to deal with in-fighting amongst the group. On top of the tight deadline Gordon is struggling with the stress of raising a newborn child and arguments with his wife have not helped matters and slowly he becomes dissociated from the group. Meanwhile Mike stumbles across some tapes (nine of them) which are session interviews with a former patient called Mary Hobbes who has multiple personalities, that over the course of each session start to come out.
Phil (David Caruso) & Jeff (Brendan Sexton III) investigate the depths of the hospital
Like Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining – the location starts to take hold of each of the men, sending them spiraling into a world of personal madness. A number of subplots become interconnected the longer the film goes on and the pacing, while slow for some horror fans, is brilliantly orchestrated for those with patience. Despite being made in 2001 and with a low return at the box office, it has been able to creep out audiences years later.
What makes the film even more terrifying is the setting. The film was shot in the actual Danvers State Hospital so it needed little doing to it in terms of effects. The hospital was said to be the birth place of the prefrontal lobotomy (something which is referenced in the film), and part of me thinks that the fear on the actors faces as they walk the halls was in fact genuine terror. If that is the case then it only adds to the horror.
Session 9 will stay with you long after the credits. It doesn’t rely on heavy gore or CGI and builds tension with what you think you can see and at times – what you can’t.
In order to satisfy the millennials the majority of horror films today get their thrills from cheap jump scares. But real terror comes from the things that we can relate to. Things that go ‘bump‘ in the night or the sense that we are being watched. This for me, is real terror. Directed by Brad Anderson, Session 9 embodies all of that to perfection.
Despite being made in 2001 and with a low return at the box office, it has been able to creep out audiences years later.
An asbestos cleaning crew are set the task of clearing the abandoned Danvers State Hospital, a job that needs to be done within a week. Company owner Gordon (Peter Mullan) has put a lot of pressure on his team, consisting of Mike (Stephen Gevedon), Phil (David Caruso), Hank (Josh Lucas), and Jeff (Brendan Sexton III), to meet the deadline and collect a bonus. It’s pressure that starts to spill over right from the off.
The hospital is creepy as hell and even in the daylight the crew are plunged into darkness, which doesn’t sit well with Jeff who has a serious case of nyctophobia. They also have to deal with in-fighting amongst the group. On top of the tight deadline Gordon is struggling with the stress of raising a newborn child and arguments with his wife have not helped matters and slowly he becomes dissociated from the group. Meanwhile Mike stumbles across some tapes (nine of them) which are session interviews with a former patient called Mary Hobbes who has multiple personalities, that over the course of each session start to come out.
Phil (David Caruso) & Jeff (Brendan Sexton III) investigate the depths of the hospital
Like Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining – the location starts to take hold of each of the men, sending them spiraling into a world of personal madness. A number of subplots become interconnected the longer the film goes on and the pacing, while slow for some horror fans, is brilliantly orchestrated for those with patience. Despite being made in 2001 and with a low return at the box office, it has been able to creep out audiences years later.
What makes the film even more terrifying is the setting. The film was shot in the actual Danvers State Hospital so it needed little doing to it in terms of effects. The hospital was said to be the birth place of the prefrontal lobotomy (something which is referenced in the film), and part of me thinks that the fear on the actors faces as they walk the halls was in fact genuine terror. If that is the case then it only adds to the horror.
Session 9 will stay with you long after the credits. It doesn’t rely on heavy gore or CGI and builds tension with what you think you can see and at times – what you can’t.
Coco Fashion
Games and Entertainment
2.0
Rate It
App
~~> Welcome to the Coco Fashion Show! The trendiest 3D fashion show game on the app store! ~~> Be...
Sam (74 KP) rated Attachments in Books
Mar 27, 2019
I’ve wanted to read Attachments for the past few years, but I’ve always managed to find a book I wanted to read more, and it got forgotten about until I was looking to see what books I wanted for Christmas. I’m so glad I did finally get around to reading it.
Attachments follows the life of Lincoln, a man who works in IT at a newspaper office in 1999. Lincoln is a loner who works night shifts mainly monitoring ‘WebFence’, checking that employees emails aren’t inappropriate. This is where he discovers Beth and Jennifer – two best friends whose emails are constantly being flagged up. Lincoln finds himself reading these emails and falling for one of them.
I never expected this novel to be very deep, after all, it’s about a man who stalks the emails of two women. However, it goes into the issues both Beth and Jennifer have in their lives such as their relationships and happiness.
Lincoln is such a lovable character. He’s nerdy, rubbish at making friends and still lives with his mum.
I was shocked when I saw that the Goodreads rating for this one is only 3.9 because I actually preferred it to any of her other books I’ve read. I don’t know whether it’s because I’ve only ever read her YA before but I just thought this was so much better. In some places, it did feel a little bit slow, but it soon picked up again. It’s definitely better than Rainbow Rowell’s YA novels.
Attachments follows the life of Lincoln, a man who works in IT at a newspaper office in 1999. Lincoln is a loner who works night shifts mainly monitoring ‘WebFence’, checking that employees emails aren’t inappropriate. This is where he discovers Beth and Jennifer – two best friends whose emails are constantly being flagged up. Lincoln finds himself reading these emails and falling for one of them.
I never expected this novel to be very deep, after all, it’s about a man who stalks the emails of two women. However, it goes into the issues both Beth and Jennifer have in their lives such as their relationships and happiness.
Lincoln is such a lovable character. He’s nerdy, rubbish at making friends and still lives with his mum.
I was shocked when I saw that the Goodreads rating for this one is only 3.9 because I actually preferred it to any of her other books I’ve read. I don’t know whether it’s because I’ve only ever read her YA before but I just thought this was so much better. In some places, it did feel a little bit slow, but it soon picked up again. It’s definitely better than Rainbow Rowell’s YA novels.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated The Beautful Beureaucrat in Books
Apr 9, 2019
Josephine Jones has just move to the big city and is in need of a job. She finds one where her job is to input information into a database. She will sit in an office with smudged pink walls, in a building with no windows. Her only job is to enter the information and don't ask questions. But curiosity is a part of human nature. Will she be able to continue the job when she discovers what it is she is really doing?
Thank you to NetGalley and Henry Holt for the opportunity to read and review this book.
Josephine and Joseph Jones have left the hinterland(the place they call home) for the big city. I'm not sure what city they are in or what kind of people Josephine and Joseph are. Sometimes Josephine calls Joseph by a number 041-74-3400. They jump around their new city from sublet to sublet, each with one disgusting trait or another. Like black bubbling coming from the bathtub and gray sheets on the futon that were at some time in their life white.
This was a short story that captivated my attention, but also had me confused. There didn't seem to be enough time to tell the background of the story or develop the characters enough to really get to know them. There wasn't a name to the city they were living in and Josephine constantly refers to her boss as "The Person with Bad Breath". Overall this book was pretty good and I would read more by this author.
Thank you to NetGalley and Henry Holt for the opportunity to read and review this book.
Josephine and Joseph Jones have left the hinterland(the place they call home) for the big city. I'm not sure what city they are in or what kind of people Josephine and Joseph are. Sometimes Josephine calls Joseph by a number 041-74-3400. They jump around their new city from sublet to sublet, each with one disgusting trait or another. Like black bubbling coming from the bathtub and gray sheets on the futon that were at some time in their life white.
This was a short story that captivated my attention, but also had me confused. There didn't seem to be enough time to tell the background of the story or develop the characters enough to really get to know them. There wasn't a name to the city they were living in and Josephine constantly refers to her boss as "The Person with Bad Breath". Overall this book was pretty good and I would read more by this author.
Kristin (149 KP) rated Unfortunate Event in Books
Dec 7, 2018
Disclaimer: I received a copy from the author in exchange for an honest review.
This book, quite frankly, is one of the most honest looks into both the medical and legal professions I've read in a long time. Dr. Andrews is almost literally led around on a leash after a horrible tragedy, his reputation dragged through the mud while he's used as a scapegoat by not only his colleagues, but his malpractice insurer, the lawyer they appointed to him, and the divorce lawyers ultimately brought into the fray. One of my favorite quotes summarizing this issue is as follows:
As she watched the doctor exit her office, Jordan Davis found herself in a terrific mood. She'd lead this doctor through the legal system by the nose. She and the opposing attorney would take turns discovering controversies. The answers to those controversies would require long hours of expensive legal research. The attorneys, along with their teams of accountants and paralegals, were going to do very well.
It's horrifying to think about it, but our society is only focused on one thing, and that is money -- who has it, who doesn't, and the easiest ways to get it. This novel showcases that almost from the jump, and I think it is an excellent representation. In our country especially, the medical profession is a multi-billion-dollar business which continues to thrive on the backs of the less fortunate. Makes me happy I decided against med school.
5 stars, and I plan to recommend it to anyone in the medical and legal professions.
This book, quite frankly, is one of the most honest looks into both the medical and legal professions I've read in a long time. Dr. Andrews is almost literally led around on a leash after a horrible tragedy, his reputation dragged through the mud while he's used as a scapegoat by not only his colleagues, but his malpractice insurer, the lawyer they appointed to him, and the divorce lawyers ultimately brought into the fray. One of my favorite quotes summarizing this issue is as follows:
As she watched the doctor exit her office, Jordan Davis found herself in a terrific mood. She'd lead this doctor through the legal system by the nose. She and the opposing attorney would take turns discovering controversies. The answers to those controversies would require long hours of expensive legal research. The attorneys, along with their teams of accountants and paralegals, were going to do very well.
It's horrifying to think about it, but our society is only focused on one thing, and that is money -- who has it, who doesn't, and the easiest ways to get it. This novel showcases that almost from the jump, and I think it is an excellent representation. In our country especially, the medical profession is a multi-billion-dollar business which continues to thrive on the backs of the less fortunate. Makes me happy I decided against med school.
5 stars, and I plan to recommend it to anyone in the medical and legal professions.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Final Destination (2000) in Movies
Aug 10, 2019 (Updated Oct 25, 2019)
Final Destination is certainly a product of it's time. Releasing in the year 2000, it arrived amidst a wave of popular teen movies such as such as American Pie, Dude Where's My Car etc.
FD plays out like one of those films, but with gory death scenes thrown in - it's a winning formula that saw it perform nicely at the box office.
The premise is nice and simple - the main character (in this case, Alex Browning) experiences a premonition of an imminent horrible accident. He manages to avoid said accident, along with a handful of others, thus cheating death.
As the movie progresses, death comes for the survivors one by one, in ridiculously grisly ways as they desperately try to figure out how to escape deaths grip.
There are several reasons why I really don't mind Final Destination. For a start, it's nice to have a horror movie where the villain is a almost a force of nature, rather than a physical boogeyman.
It makes for some pretty inventive death scenes.
I also enjoyed just how silly it is. There are some corny one liners whilst you sit there in anticipation of what ridiculous thing is going to happen next. It's pure popcorn horror.
It's not particularly scary, and even though it has its moments, it's a pretty average watch.
It's certainly not deserving of standing side by side with the big boys of horror, but you could also do a lot worse.
Also it's got Tony Todd in it, and just who doesn't love that scary MF.
FD plays out like one of those films, but with gory death scenes thrown in - it's a winning formula that saw it perform nicely at the box office.
The premise is nice and simple - the main character (in this case, Alex Browning) experiences a premonition of an imminent horrible accident. He manages to avoid said accident, along with a handful of others, thus cheating death.
As the movie progresses, death comes for the survivors one by one, in ridiculously grisly ways as they desperately try to figure out how to escape deaths grip.
There are several reasons why I really don't mind Final Destination. For a start, it's nice to have a horror movie where the villain is a almost a force of nature, rather than a physical boogeyman.
It makes for some pretty inventive death scenes.
I also enjoyed just how silly it is. There are some corny one liners whilst you sit there in anticipation of what ridiculous thing is going to happen next. It's pure popcorn horror.
It's not particularly scary, and even though it has its moments, it's a pretty average watch.
It's certainly not deserving of standing side by side with the big boys of horror, but you could also do a lot worse.
Also it's got Tony Todd in it, and just who doesn't love that scary MF.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Blade Runner (1982) in Movies
Jul 24, 2019
Sci Fi Film Noir Masterpiece
When film scholars debate whether Alien or Blade Runner is director Ridley Scott's best film it is hard to make an argument against each as both are masterpieces It's funny that although they are both science fiction films, they are completely different in tone, style and action.
The art direction and cinematography are almost unmatched even under today's standards and then consider this movie is from 1982 and it is just astonishing. I won't argue with someone who says the film is slow developing or style or substance; however, I do not consider that a negative whatsoever. Consider it just another way to tell a story. Why do movies always have to follow the same formula to be considered a acceptable?
It is hard to believe the film only managed US box office of $27 million upon its original theatrical release. It's cult status was almost immediate along with the rise of home video and eventually DVD. The various cuts of the film and the vast and minor differences between them can make the meaning of the film quite different depending on how you interpret it.
The argument whether or not Deckard is a replicant could really depend on which version of the film you have seen or what you choose to believe.
Nevertheless, the film still stands the test of time as a sci fi classic and one of the most visually stunning films ever made!
The art direction and cinematography are almost unmatched even under today's standards and then consider this movie is from 1982 and it is just astonishing. I won't argue with someone who says the film is slow developing or style or substance; however, I do not consider that a negative whatsoever. Consider it just another way to tell a story. Why do movies always have to follow the same formula to be considered a acceptable?
It is hard to believe the film only managed US box office of $27 million upon its original theatrical release. It's cult status was almost immediate along with the rise of home video and eventually DVD. The various cuts of the film and the vast and minor differences between them can make the meaning of the film quite different depending on how you interpret it.
The argument whether or not Deckard is a replicant could really depend on which version of the film you have seen or what you choose to believe.
Nevertheless, the film still stands the test of time as a sci fi classic and one of the most visually stunning films ever made!
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Pinocchio (1940) in Movies
Dec 5, 2019
An Actor's Life For Me
Pinocchio- was the second animated feature film produced by Disney, made after the first animated success Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937).
The Plot- When the woodworker Geppetto (Christian Rub) sees a falling star, he wishes that the puppet he just finished, Pinocchio (Dickie Jones), could become a real boy. In the night, the Blue Fairy (Evelyn Venable) grants Geppetto's wish and asks Jiminy Cricket (Cliff Edwards) to serve as the wooden boy's conscience. But the naive and trusting Pinocchio falls into the clutches of the wicked Honest John (Walter Catlett), who leads him astray to the sinful Pleasure Island.
Critical analysis of Pinocchio identifies it as a simple morality tale that teaches children of the benefits of hard work and conventional values. Although it became the first animated feature to win a competitive Academy Award – winning two for Best Music, Original Score and for Best Music, Original Song for "When You Wish Upon a Star" – it was initially a box office disaster, due to World War II. It eventually made a profit in its 1945 reissue, and is considered one of the greatest animated films ever made, with a 100% rating on the website Rotten Tomatoes.
All the songs are great and fanstastic, classics and you remember till this day. When You Wish Upon a Star, Little Wooden Head, Give A Little Whistle, Hi-Diddle-Dee-Dee and I've Got No Strings. All classics and all excellent.
A must watch film.
The Plot- When the woodworker Geppetto (Christian Rub) sees a falling star, he wishes that the puppet he just finished, Pinocchio (Dickie Jones), could become a real boy. In the night, the Blue Fairy (Evelyn Venable) grants Geppetto's wish and asks Jiminy Cricket (Cliff Edwards) to serve as the wooden boy's conscience. But the naive and trusting Pinocchio falls into the clutches of the wicked Honest John (Walter Catlett), who leads him astray to the sinful Pleasure Island.
Critical analysis of Pinocchio identifies it as a simple morality tale that teaches children of the benefits of hard work and conventional values. Although it became the first animated feature to win a competitive Academy Award – winning two for Best Music, Original Score and for Best Music, Original Song for "When You Wish Upon a Star" – it was initially a box office disaster, due to World War II. It eventually made a profit in its 1945 reissue, and is considered one of the greatest animated films ever made, with a 100% rating on the website Rotten Tomatoes.
All the songs are great and fanstastic, classics and you remember till this day. When You Wish Upon a Star, Little Wooden Head, Give A Little Whistle, Hi-Diddle-Dee-Dee and I've Got No Strings. All classics and all excellent.
A must watch film.
JT (287 KP) rated Angel Has Fallen (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
The Fallen franchise has always been an enjoyable romp. It hasn’t taken itself too seriously – at least not until this third instalment. Gerard Butler returns as secret service agent Mike Banning, this time shadowing Morgan Freeman‘s President Trumbull who has worked his way up from Speaker of the House (Olympus Has Fallen) to Vice President (London Has Fallen) to his seat in Oval Office.
Banning is a broken-down mess of migraines and pills, currently on the verge of collapse. When the President’s fishing trip is rudely interrupted by a flock (not sure what the terminology is) of high tech exploding drones, Banning is framed for the assassination attempt and must go on the run to clear his name.
It’s a meat and potatoes kind of action flick. You always know where you stand when it comes to the plot and there is nothing complex to make you lose track of what is going on.
The action is over the top and at times executed lazily. With a $40m budget, you would have expected something a little bit slicker. Danny Huston is OK as the not-to-be-trusted old friend who ultimately goes bad, but his performance is easily forgotten.
Unlike the previous two films, there are no lame quips or one-liners (except for a rather humorous mid credits scene). Instead, the writers try and give us something with a little more emotion to it, tugging on the heartstrings when Banning Snr (Nick Nolte) is introduced ‘explosively’ into the fray.
Banning is a broken-down mess of migraines and pills, currently on the verge of collapse. When the President’s fishing trip is rudely interrupted by a flock (not sure what the terminology is) of high tech exploding drones, Banning is framed for the assassination attempt and must go on the run to clear his name.
It’s a meat and potatoes kind of action flick. You always know where you stand when it comes to the plot and there is nothing complex to make you lose track of what is going on.
The action is over the top and at times executed lazily. With a $40m budget, you would have expected something a little bit slicker. Danny Huston is OK as the not-to-be-trusted old friend who ultimately goes bad, but his performance is easily forgotten.
Unlike the previous two films, there are no lame quips or one-liners (except for a rather humorous mid credits scene). Instead, the writers try and give us something with a little more emotion to it, tugging on the heartstrings when Banning Snr (Nick Nolte) is introduced ‘explosively’ into the fray.