Search
Search results
Blazing Minds (92 KP) rated SAS: Red Notice (2021) in Movies
Oct 29, 2021 (Updated Nov 2, 2021)
SAS: Red Notice is one of those film that you really don’t have to think much about while you are watching it as you just roll with it as it plays along, not the best action movie out there but it has all the Sky Original movie trimmings that I think we have all got used to now.
Dean (6927 KP) rated My Bloody Valentine (1981) in Movies
Nov 12, 2022
A good early Slasher
A decent early Slasher film released just a year after Friday the 13th, set mainly on Saturday 14th Valentine's Day. A nice little back story to the legend, cool outfit with some original ideas and nice plot developments. Some great scenes filmed in a real mine. If you have missed this check it out.
Kevin Phillipson (10072 KP) rated Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022) in Movies
Feb 25, 2022
Watched on Netflix compared to the original classic film then there’s the remake which was okay film and now the latest version which isn’t classic and not very good film but it does have one good scene the massacre on the bus leatherface killing everybody on the bus very gory very good scene shame about the rest of the movie
David McK (3692 KP) rated Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990) in Movies
Jan 15, 2023
1190 sequel to the original Gremlins movie, relocating the action to New York and (largely) to the inside of a tech moguls hi-tech tower (think Trump Towers), with - of course - the Mogwai Gizmo getting wet and spawning more of the mischievous Gremlins, who basically run amok in what amounts to a live-action (well, puppeteer action) comedy horror Looney Tunes film!
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Aladdin (2019) in Movies
Jun 3, 2019
Not as bad as expected
I can't lie, when I heard Will Smith was playing the genie in this I pretty much wrote this film off for good. Whilst it isnt quite the car crash I'd expected, it pales in comparison to the original animated version.
Naomi Scott is great as Jasmine and has a fantastic voice, and she outperforms everyone else in this film. Mena Massoud is enjoyable to watch but lacking in a bit of Aladdin's charm. Strangely I didn't hate Will Smith as the genie. Don't get me wrong I didn't love him either but I didn't want to cry everytime he was on screen (although I did cringe a few times). In fact the worst person in this film was Jafar. I really don't know what they were thinking, he isn't sinister or slimy, he's just laughable. Not a villain youd be afraid of.
The film itself follows the original plot fairly well, with a lot of nods and quotes to the original too. I do think the ending and final stand off against Jafar was a little poor. Whilst I wasn't expecting them to completely follow the original, there are some bits that I'm disappointed weren't included. And of course there's the songs. The songs really make this watchable although sadly they don't have quite the magic of the animated version. It also made me laugh that Guy Ritchie couldn't resist throwing in some of his trademark slow motion and camera angles. Not many, admittedly he has toned it down a lot but there's still a few Ritchie moments.
This isnt a bad live action film, but sadly it isnt a great one either. But all things considered it could have been much worse!
Naomi Scott is great as Jasmine and has a fantastic voice, and she outperforms everyone else in this film. Mena Massoud is enjoyable to watch but lacking in a bit of Aladdin's charm. Strangely I didn't hate Will Smith as the genie. Don't get me wrong I didn't love him either but I didn't want to cry everytime he was on screen (although I did cringe a few times). In fact the worst person in this film was Jafar. I really don't know what they were thinking, he isn't sinister or slimy, he's just laughable. Not a villain youd be afraid of.
The film itself follows the original plot fairly well, with a lot of nods and quotes to the original too. I do think the ending and final stand off against Jafar was a little poor. Whilst I wasn't expecting them to completely follow the original, there are some bits that I'm disappointed weren't included. And of course there's the songs. The songs really make this watchable although sadly they don't have quite the magic of the animated version. It also made me laugh that Guy Ritchie couldn't resist throwing in some of his trademark slow motion and camera angles. Not many, admittedly he has toned it down a lot but there's still a few Ritchie moments.
This isnt a bad live action film, but sadly it isnt a great one either. But all things considered it could have been much worse!
Sarah (126 KP) rated Flatliners (2017) in Movies
Jul 14, 2018
The casting (1 more)
Keifer Sutherland
An Unnecessary Remake
I feel cheated. I've watched the original so many times, and wish I'd just watched it again. This was a completely unnecessary remake of what many consider to be a classic film (does it count as a classic from 1990?).
I can kind of "get" the idea of a remake or a "reboot", given the progress in technology and medical science in the space of almost 30 years, so to bring a more contemporary feel for a modern audience would make sense to some extent. Instead, a film that was really thought provoking was turned into something that felt like, in parts, Final Destination.
A couple of lines tied the new version to the old, as well as Keifer Sutherland - one of the original cast of medical students - plays the part of a "House"-type doctor teaching the "Flatliners" in the new version.
The casting wasn't ideal - for instance, James Norton's American accent is kind of concerning. If he was a must-have for the film, couldn't his part have been as an international student?! Nina Dobrev played Elena from The Vampire Diaries in a lab coat. Similarly, the characters were a bit flat and one-dimensional. For instance, Ray used to be a firefighter. Great, where are we going with that? Oh, right, it never gets mentioned again!
Strangely, a lot of the film feels very rushed, with no real development of the stories of the individual characters or of how they go about the actual flatlining itself, while simultaneously feeling like very little of note actually happens.
Honestly, although the original is going to feel a little dated now, watch that instead of this. I feel like I want my money back - and we watched it on TV...
I can kind of "get" the idea of a remake or a "reboot", given the progress in technology and medical science in the space of almost 30 years, so to bring a more contemporary feel for a modern audience would make sense to some extent. Instead, a film that was really thought provoking was turned into something that felt like, in parts, Final Destination.
A couple of lines tied the new version to the old, as well as Keifer Sutherland - one of the original cast of medical students - plays the part of a "House"-type doctor teaching the "Flatliners" in the new version.
The casting wasn't ideal - for instance, James Norton's American accent is kind of concerning. If he was a must-have for the film, couldn't his part have been as an international student?! Nina Dobrev played Elena from The Vampire Diaries in a lab coat. Similarly, the characters were a bit flat and one-dimensional. For instance, Ray used to be a firefighter. Great, where are we going with that? Oh, right, it never gets mentioned again!
Strangely, a lot of the film feels very rushed, with no real development of the stories of the individual characters or of how they go about the actual flatlining itself, while simultaneously feeling like very little of note actually happens.
Honestly, although the original is going to feel a little dated now, watch that instead of this. I feel like I want my money back - and we watched it on TV...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Day of the Dead (1985) in Movies
Apr 1, 2020
Bub The Zombie (1 more)
Capt. Rhodes
Night, Dawn and Day: The Perfect Trilogy
Day of the Dead- is the final movie in George's trilogy. It started with Night, than Dawn and now Day. The perfect trilogy about surival, surviving, surival of the finest and the livng dead. With great charcters, excellent villians and of course the zombies. In this one you have, Bub the zombie and the evil Capt. Rhodies. So thats a plus.
The plot: Trapped in a missile silo, a small team of scientists, civilians and trigger-happy soldiers battle desperately to ensure the survival of the human race, but tension inside the base is reaching breaking-point, and the zombies are gathering outside.
Romero originally intended the film to be "the Gone with the Wind of zombie films. This forced Romero to scale back his story, rewriting the script and adjusting his original vision to fit the smaller budget.
A total of five scripts were written as Romero wrestled with the film's concepts and the budgetary constraints. The first draft was over 200 pages, which he later condensed to 122 pages. This is the true original script, and to date no copies of it have come to light. This version was likely rejected because UFDC felt it was too expensive for them to produce even with an R rating. Romero subsequently scaled down the scope of this script into a 165-page draft (often erroneously referred to as the original version), then condensed it again to a 104-page draft labeled the 'second version, second draft' in an unsuccessful final attempt to get the story within budget parameters. When this failed, he drastically altered the original story concept and ultimately produced a shooting draft that numbered only 88 pages.
Its a perfect ending for a excellent and phenomenal trilogy.
The plot: Trapped in a missile silo, a small team of scientists, civilians and trigger-happy soldiers battle desperately to ensure the survival of the human race, but tension inside the base is reaching breaking-point, and the zombies are gathering outside.
Romero originally intended the film to be "the Gone with the Wind of zombie films. This forced Romero to scale back his story, rewriting the script and adjusting his original vision to fit the smaller budget.
A total of five scripts were written as Romero wrestled with the film's concepts and the budgetary constraints. The first draft was over 200 pages, which he later condensed to 122 pages. This is the true original script, and to date no copies of it have come to light. This version was likely rejected because UFDC felt it was too expensive for them to produce even with an R rating. Romero subsequently scaled down the scope of this script into a 165-page draft (often erroneously referred to as the original version), then condensed it again to a 104-page draft labeled the 'second version, second draft' in an unsuccessful final attempt to get the story within budget parameters. When this failed, he drastically altered the original story concept and ultimately produced a shooting draft that numbered only 88 pages.
Its a perfect ending for a excellent and phenomenal trilogy.
LF
Learning from Las Vegas
Robert Venturi, Denise Scott Brown and Steven Izenour
Book
Upon its publication by the MIT Press in 1972, Learning from Las Vegas was immediately influential...
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated My Bloody Valentine 3-D (2009) in Movies
Jan 13, 2021
One of the avalanche of classic horror remakes to surface during the 00s, My Bloody Valentine (in "spectacular" 3D of course) isn't the worst of them by a long shot, but it still suffers from the soul-less-ness that the majority of them seem all to keen to pack in.
Its certainly more action packed and gory than it's 80s older sibling. The violence on display packs a punch for sure, some of it looks great, some of its looks terrible. The Harry Warden killer, much like the Michaels and Jasons of this remake era, is more of a machine than before. Relentless, brutal, faster, and pretty intimidating as far as these things go. It also packs in a fair amount of character development, which is a nice touch that gives the whole narrative some much needed gravitas, and the cast all do a good job with the by-the-numbers slasher-remake screenplay, with highlights being Jaime King and the ever reliable Tom Atkins.
You know how these things go though, and the simple fact is that this do over isn't as good as the original. It lacks the realness and charm (there's that word again) that the original had. There's a twist near the end that is designed to pull the rug out from under fans of the original, and it's actually a pretty interesting one, albeit executed poorly, and requires the viewer to really suspend disbelief in order to glaze over some gaping plot holes.
All in all, it's gory and fun enough to easily pass a couple of hours, and manages to feel like a homage to the original, rather than a straight up copy, and that I can respect, but ultimately, it's not a strong argument for the case of remakes.
Its certainly more action packed and gory than it's 80s older sibling. The violence on display packs a punch for sure, some of it looks great, some of its looks terrible. The Harry Warden killer, much like the Michaels and Jasons of this remake era, is more of a machine than before. Relentless, brutal, faster, and pretty intimidating as far as these things go. It also packs in a fair amount of character development, which is a nice touch that gives the whole narrative some much needed gravitas, and the cast all do a good job with the by-the-numbers slasher-remake screenplay, with highlights being Jaime King and the ever reliable Tom Atkins.
You know how these things go though, and the simple fact is that this do over isn't as good as the original. It lacks the realness and charm (there's that word again) that the original had. There's a twist near the end that is designed to pull the rug out from under fans of the original, and it's actually a pretty interesting one, albeit executed poorly, and requires the viewer to really suspend disbelief in order to glaze over some gaping plot holes.
All in all, it's gory and fun enough to easily pass a couple of hours, and manages to feel like a homage to the original, rather than a straight up copy, and that I can respect, but ultimately, it's not a strong argument for the case of remakes.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Wowee! From the ridiculous to the sublime. This is how to make a Star Trek movie! If you were trying to bring back the action and fun of the original TV series, then what better than to bring back one of the original villains in a sequel to that story? And being able to cast the original actor (Ricardo Montalban) is just perfect.
Nicholas Meyer also clearly had the same frustrations about that first movie. The film barely pauses for breath. Interestingly, it clearly reuses footage from the original movie in travelling to the Enterprise in space dock, but cuts that 6 minute special-effects-porn-fest to about 20 seconds! It’s a striking comparison!
The movie “introduces” Kirstie (“Cheers”) Alley as Vulcan officer Saavik (although she was in a student-made feature the year before). She makes quite an impression. Also new to the series is Merritt Buttrick, playing Kirk’s son David. Sadly, like Khambatta from the last film, his Trek-voyage was to be short lived. Although he appeared in Star Trek III, he died of Aids just three years later.
The movie is also notable for launching the late James Horner onto the world stage as a leading film composer. Horner cleverly associates the “ship” in starship with a roistering seafaring motif that would be equally at home in a Hornblower movie as it is here. I remember leaving the cinema when this was released and heading STRAIGHT into HMV to buy the vinyl soundtrack!
There are very few things I can find to critique in this movie. It all holds up pretty well, even after nearly 40 years (MAN, I FEEL OLD NOW!) The only scene that perhaps grates with modern sensitivities is in the (supposedly comic) “lady driver” reactions from Kirk.
Nicholas Meyer also clearly had the same frustrations about that first movie. The film barely pauses for breath. Interestingly, it clearly reuses footage from the original movie in travelling to the Enterprise in space dock, but cuts that 6 minute special-effects-porn-fest to about 20 seconds! It’s a striking comparison!
The movie “introduces” Kirstie (“Cheers”) Alley as Vulcan officer Saavik (although she was in a student-made feature the year before). She makes quite an impression. Also new to the series is Merritt Buttrick, playing Kirk’s son David. Sadly, like Khambatta from the last film, his Trek-voyage was to be short lived. Although he appeared in Star Trek III, he died of Aids just three years later.
The movie is also notable for launching the late James Horner onto the world stage as a leading film composer. Horner cleverly associates the “ship” in starship with a roistering seafaring motif that would be equally at home in a Hornblower movie as it is here. I remember leaving the cinema when this was released and heading STRAIGHT into HMV to buy the vinyl soundtrack!
There are very few things I can find to critique in this movie. It all holds up pretty well, even after nearly 40 years (MAN, I FEEL OLD NOW!) The only scene that perhaps grates with modern sensitivities is in the (supposedly comic) “lady driver” reactions from Kirk.