Search
Search results
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Predator (2018) in Movies
Sep 27, 2018 (Updated Oct 5, 2018)
The Ultimate Hunter Becomes Hunted Trope
After letting my girlfriend drag me to see A Simple Favor at the weekend, it was my turn to drag her to see something and to be honest, I think that she enjoyed this thing more than I did. This is a film that you can look at a couple of ways. You can either look at it and take none of it seriously, in which case this is a fairly fun, if extremely dumb action sci-fi romp, or you can take a bit more seriously, which I think the moviemakers want you to, in which case it is messy and unbearably cringey at times.
The main problem here is that I am not sure how the director wants us to take this film because the tone is all over the place, with some characters playing it totally straight and some just having a laugh with the ridiculously cheesy material they have been given to work with. The cast are okay, but it is as if they are all working on different movies. Boyd Holbrook, Alfie Allen and Olivia Munn are taking the whole thing pretty seriously and playing it straight while everyone else around them plays it comically and the clash of tones never really sits well throughout the movie. I am a long time Predator fan, I love the original and I think that Predators is a solid sequel too, (let's not mention Predator 2,) I am also a fan of Shane Black. I love the Lethal Weapon movies, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and The Nice Guys, so I should have loved this movie, yet it just didn't work as well as it sounds on paper.
The VFX in the film was okay at times, but at others the CGI, especially on The Predator himself, felt light and floaty and weightless, which is kinda the opposite of how the Predator is supposed to look as he moves about onscreen.
The whole 'hunter becomes the hunted,' trope actually serves as an appropriate metaphor for what this series has become. The once king of action sci fi (Predator) is now on the back foot and being outdone by a bigger, stronger competitor, (Avengers,) and by comparison, the OG hunter can't stand up to it's superior successor.
Overall, it's not the best Predator movie by a long shot, but it's definitely not the worst either. There are some laughs and some cool kills sprinkled through the film, but there are better action films that have dropped this year and there are better sci fi movies out there too that are more worthy of your time.
The main problem here is that I am not sure how the director wants us to take this film because the tone is all over the place, with some characters playing it totally straight and some just having a laugh with the ridiculously cheesy material they have been given to work with. The cast are okay, but it is as if they are all working on different movies. Boyd Holbrook, Alfie Allen and Olivia Munn are taking the whole thing pretty seriously and playing it straight while everyone else around them plays it comically and the clash of tones never really sits well throughout the movie. I am a long time Predator fan, I love the original and I think that Predators is a solid sequel too, (let's not mention Predator 2,) I am also a fan of Shane Black. I love the Lethal Weapon movies, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and The Nice Guys, so I should have loved this movie, yet it just didn't work as well as it sounds on paper.
The VFX in the film was okay at times, but at others the CGI, especially on The Predator himself, felt light and floaty and weightless, which is kinda the opposite of how the Predator is supposed to look as he moves about onscreen.
The whole 'hunter becomes the hunted,' trope actually serves as an appropriate metaphor for what this series has become. The once king of action sci fi (Predator) is now on the back foot and being outdone by a bigger, stronger competitor, (Avengers,) and by comparison, the OG hunter can't stand up to it's superior successor.
Overall, it's not the best Predator movie by a long shot, but it's definitely not the worst either. There are some laughs and some cool kills sprinkled through the film, but there are better action films that have dropped this year and there are better sci fi movies out there too that are more worthy of your time.
Darren (1599 KP) rated After Earth (2013) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: On paper this is a very good idea for a story, but it gets put together so badly it feels messy and confusing from start to finish. The idea that only two people that survive are father and son is a bit farfetched too. The biggest flaw I see is that Kitai is meant to be trained and thinks he is ready but as soon as he is out in the field he makes mistake after mistake even with the so called best helping him through the situations. If I was to give the mark on just how the story unfolds it would only get a 2 but I like the idea and with better performers it could work. (5/10)
Actor Review: Jaden Smith – Kitai trained to become a soldier against creatures that sense fear but doesn’t seem to stop panicking. Poor performance in this film it clearly is too much too soon for the young man. Poor Performance Award, Miscasted Award (4/10)
jaden
Actor Review: Will Smith – Cypher the injured father who spends most of the film telling his son what to do and shouting because he doesn’t follow the instructions. Remember when Will Smith was a selling point for any movie, well this time he just sold out, gets the career back on track and stop working for money. Pay Check Performance Award (2/10)
will
Director Review: M. Night Shyamalan – You have to give this guy credit for being able to create an unusual world but this isn’t his written work, he creates some good scenes but still expect better. (5/10)
Action: Lacklustre action throughout. (5/10)
Adventure: It could have been a great adventure film. It is not. (5/10)
Sci-Fi: With the world creature it is a interesting look at the future. (7/10)
Special Effects: Some good but mostly poor CGI effects. (5/10)
Chemistry: The awkward chemistry between father and son tries to shine but fails. (6/10)
Believability: Anything could happen the future but this is too much to imagine. (1/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Settings: Earth in the future is an interesting setting and creates some atmosphere but it could have easily been in a normal jungle with real animals. (5/10)
Suggestion: This is poor it will most likely go down in Will Smith’s career as his worst film. (Avoid)
Best Part: The final battle is you make it that far
Worst Part: The first hour is boring.
Action Scene Of The Film: The final battle
Kill Of The Film: The final creature
Oscar Chances: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Overall: Terrible sci-fi thriller
https://moviesreview101.com/2014/12/02/after-earth-2013/
Actor Review: Jaden Smith – Kitai trained to become a soldier against creatures that sense fear but doesn’t seem to stop panicking. Poor performance in this film it clearly is too much too soon for the young man. Poor Performance Award, Miscasted Award (4/10)
jaden
Actor Review: Will Smith – Cypher the injured father who spends most of the film telling his son what to do and shouting because he doesn’t follow the instructions. Remember when Will Smith was a selling point for any movie, well this time he just sold out, gets the career back on track and stop working for money. Pay Check Performance Award (2/10)
will
Director Review: M. Night Shyamalan – You have to give this guy credit for being able to create an unusual world but this isn’t his written work, he creates some good scenes but still expect better. (5/10)
Action: Lacklustre action throughout. (5/10)
Adventure: It could have been a great adventure film. It is not. (5/10)
Sci-Fi: With the world creature it is a interesting look at the future. (7/10)
Special Effects: Some good but mostly poor CGI effects. (5/10)
Chemistry: The awkward chemistry between father and son tries to shine but fails. (6/10)
Believability: Anything could happen the future but this is too much to imagine. (1/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Settings: Earth in the future is an interesting setting and creates some atmosphere but it could have easily been in a normal jungle with real animals. (5/10)
Suggestion: This is poor it will most likely go down in Will Smith’s career as his worst film. (Avoid)
Best Part: The final battle is you make it that far
Worst Part: The first hour is boring.
Action Scene Of The Film: The final battle
Kill Of The Film: The final creature
Oscar Chances: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Overall: Terrible sci-fi thriller
https://moviesreview101.com/2014/12/02/after-earth-2013/
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Panda Chronicles Coloring Book in Books
Dec 14, 2018
Review with image example can be found here: https://hazelstainer.wordpress.com/2016/07/15/who-says-pandas-are-black-and-white/
Who says pandas are all black and white?
Anne Belov is a satirical cartoonist with an obsession for pandas. She has published several books in <i>The Panda Chronicles</i> and has now produced a colouring book to go with the series. Pandas may seem like a peculiar subject for a colouring book since they are, as Belov puts it, “chromatically challenged,” however the world around them is bursting with different tints and shades.
The pandas featured in <i>The Panda Chronicles</i> are not the typical bears you might see in a zoo, or endangered in the wild. Anne Belov’s pandas get up to all sorts of mischief. In this colouring book you can expect to find pandas in all sorts of locations, wearing a variety of odd outfits, taking part in highly suspicious activities. So despite monochromatic fur, there is so much to add colour to.
<i>The Panda Chronicles Colouring Book</i> contains approximately 60 single sided illustrations. Although the paper feels quite thin, the lack of anything on the reverse means that it is safe to use any medium you wish to fill the drawing with colour.
Belov’s drawing approach is not the typical style of the hundreds of colouring books you see in stores – i.e. thick, precise lines and patterns. Belov sticks to her sketchy manner that she has used in all the chronicles thus far. In fact there is reason to believe (although do not quote this) that many of the illustrations are from the original books. While standing out in such a niche market, these particular pages may be more difficult to colour in. Some contain many scribbles rather than clear objects, however that does not detract from the overall fun guaranteed with this book.
Pandas in unconventional settings are a great cause for hilarity and satire. Not only is it funny that these bears are parodying human life, but the things they are up to are highly amusing. One particularly comical scene contains a mother panda telling her child off for being the cause of the <b>LEANING</b> Tower of Pisa, to which the youngster protests, “I didn’t do it! It was leaning when we got here!” The wittiness continues throughout the remainder of the book.
I bought this book hoping it would be suitable for my “pandamaniac” friend, who on occasion tells farcical stories about her (imaginary) friend <i>Miss Panda</i>. Anne Belov’s colouring book is the absolutely perfect present for her. It is almost as if the scenes are written/drawn about <i>Miss Panda</i> herself, despite the artist and my friend having never met… Unless… oh the horror! Maybe <i>Miss Panda</i> IS real!
Who says pandas are all black and white?
Anne Belov is a satirical cartoonist with an obsession for pandas. She has published several books in <i>The Panda Chronicles</i> and has now produced a colouring book to go with the series. Pandas may seem like a peculiar subject for a colouring book since they are, as Belov puts it, “chromatically challenged,” however the world around them is bursting with different tints and shades.
The pandas featured in <i>The Panda Chronicles</i> are not the typical bears you might see in a zoo, or endangered in the wild. Anne Belov’s pandas get up to all sorts of mischief. In this colouring book you can expect to find pandas in all sorts of locations, wearing a variety of odd outfits, taking part in highly suspicious activities. So despite monochromatic fur, there is so much to add colour to.
<i>The Panda Chronicles Colouring Book</i> contains approximately 60 single sided illustrations. Although the paper feels quite thin, the lack of anything on the reverse means that it is safe to use any medium you wish to fill the drawing with colour.
Belov’s drawing approach is not the typical style of the hundreds of colouring books you see in stores – i.e. thick, precise lines and patterns. Belov sticks to her sketchy manner that she has used in all the chronicles thus far. In fact there is reason to believe (although do not quote this) that many of the illustrations are from the original books. While standing out in such a niche market, these particular pages may be more difficult to colour in. Some contain many scribbles rather than clear objects, however that does not detract from the overall fun guaranteed with this book.
Pandas in unconventional settings are a great cause for hilarity and satire. Not only is it funny that these bears are parodying human life, but the things they are up to are highly amusing. One particularly comical scene contains a mother panda telling her child off for being the cause of the <b>LEANING</b> Tower of Pisa, to which the youngster protests, “I didn’t do it! It was leaning when we got here!” The wittiness continues throughout the remainder of the book.
I bought this book hoping it would be suitable for my “pandamaniac” friend, who on occasion tells farcical stories about her (imaginary) friend <i>Miss Panda</i>. Anne Belov’s colouring book is the absolutely perfect present for her. It is almost as if the scenes are written/drawn about <i>Miss Panda</i> herself, despite the artist and my friend having never met… Unless… oh the horror! Maybe <i>Miss Panda</i> IS real!
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Videodrome: Days of O'Blivion in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>I received this book from the author in exchange for an honest review</i>
Written as a prequel to David Cronenberg’s horror film, Lee McGeorge explores the potential scenario that led up to the surrealist events in <i>Videodrome</i>. This short story is more science fiction than horror in nature as it only builds up the background and setting to the point in which the film begins.
<i>Days of O’Blivion</i>, as well as the original film, is set during the cold war between the US and USSR. It is a period of time threatened with atomic weapons of mass destruction, and the competition to create the most superior technology. In this particular scenario, two men: Professor Brian Olivier and his friend Barry have been experimenting with special television technology resulting in interesting outcomes. Their product, which they name <i>Veraceo</i> –a compound of Veracity and Video –, has the ability to make everyone believe what they are seeing on screen to be true. This could be a big boon to advertising establishments, however cause dire consequences if found in the wrong hands, i.e. communists.
Readers, including those unfamiliar with the film, should be able to ascertain several problems this technological advancement could pose, making it all the more foreboding when an unknown but powerful company pays out thousands of dollars to become partners with Brian and Barry. What makes it all the more ominous is Brian’s hesitancy in accepting the offer in contrast with Barry’s excitement. As the technology is adapted further it becomes clear that they are dealing with very dangerous concepts and people – hallucinations being only the smallest of side affects.
Although Lee McGeorge is using an already existing story, he makes this prequel his own by exploring the hows and whys <i>Veraceo</i> came to be developed. His narrative is accurate in terms of the way it builds up to coincide with the film script without damaging or giving new meaning to Cronenberg’s original storyline.
Although not horror as in scary, <i>Days of O’Blivion</i> contains many horrific scenes. Most of these are pornographic in nature and rather disturbing, particularly more so as the story progresses – something that lessened the general enjoyment of the book. The overall nature of the book (and film, probably) may appeal more towards a male market, particularly those with a less delicate temperament.
As with his previous books, which also incorporate pre-existing ideas, Lee McGeorge writes well in a way that engages the reader and even interests those without prior knowledge of the subject. There is also additional digital content alongside this book. Those lucky enough to own a paper back copy will be able to access these using an NFC enabled device.
Written as a prequel to David Cronenberg’s horror film, Lee McGeorge explores the potential scenario that led up to the surrealist events in <i>Videodrome</i>. This short story is more science fiction than horror in nature as it only builds up the background and setting to the point in which the film begins.
<i>Days of O’Blivion</i>, as well as the original film, is set during the cold war between the US and USSR. It is a period of time threatened with atomic weapons of mass destruction, and the competition to create the most superior technology. In this particular scenario, two men: Professor Brian Olivier and his friend Barry have been experimenting with special television technology resulting in interesting outcomes. Their product, which they name <i>Veraceo</i> –a compound of Veracity and Video –, has the ability to make everyone believe what they are seeing on screen to be true. This could be a big boon to advertising establishments, however cause dire consequences if found in the wrong hands, i.e. communists.
Readers, including those unfamiliar with the film, should be able to ascertain several problems this technological advancement could pose, making it all the more foreboding when an unknown but powerful company pays out thousands of dollars to become partners with Brian and Barry. What makes it all the more ominous is Brian’s hesitancy in accepting the offer in contrast with Barry’s excitement. As the technology is adapted further it becomes clear that they are dealing with very dangerous concepts and people – hallucinations being only the smallest of side affects.
Although Lee McGeorge is using an already existing story, he makes this prequel his own by exploring the hows and whys <i>Veraceo</i> came to be developed. His narrative is accurate in terms of the way it builds up to coincide with the film script without damaging or giving new meaning to Cronenberg’s original storyline.
Although not horror as in scary, <i>Days of O’Blivion</i> contains many horrific scenes. Most of these are pornographic in nature and rather disturbing, particularly more so as the story progresses – something that lessened the general enjoyment of the book. The overall nature of the book (and film, probably) may appeal more towards a male market, particularly those with a less delicate temperament.
As with his previous books, which also incorporate pre-existing ideas, Lee McGeorge writes well in a way that engages the reader and even interests those without prior knowledge of the subject. There is also additional digital content alongside this book. Those lucky enough to own a paper back copy will be able to access these using an NFC enabled device.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated How to Draw Anything in Books
Dec 17, 2018
Author/artist Mark Linley believes that anyone can learn to draw and inspires everyone to pick up a pencil and create a work of art. Unlike many ‘how to draw’ books – those that provide step by step visual aids but no further insight – Linley goes into a lot more written detail.
First of all an artist needs to be able to look properly. Without studying the subject or object properly, no one would be able to produce an accurate sketch. Starting with landscapes, Linley tells the reader how to and what to look for when beginning a drawing in order to get a basic outline. It is only after this is down on paper that specific details can be added.
Linley explains various methods of shading and line marks to give a suggestion of perspective, and emphasises that an illustration does not need to be 100% accurate – that is what cameras are for. After landscapes, Linley takes the reader/future artist through plants, animals, people and cartoons in a similar manner.
Each chapter provides the reader with a few assignments to undertake based on what they have read, or the example illustrations. Many of these tasks are to copy Linley’s own examples, however he stresses that the outcome does not need to – or rather should not – look exactly like his. Each artist needs to develop their own style.
I found <i>How To Draw Anything</i> a lot more useful than the ever popular step-by-step guides that most people gravitate to. In those types of books we are NOT taught to draw, we are taught to copy. You may be able to accurately draw the same cat as the artist/author of the book, but you would not know where to start when face with a real life cat. Linley tells us what to look out for and where to start in these situations – you feel like you are actually learning something.
Mark Linley comes across as a humorous individual – his writing is full of puns and quips, intending to make the reader smile or laugh out loud, thus making them feel more relaxed about the subject. Linley does not only attempt to teach people how to draw, he tries to make each of us feel more comfortable about our abilities and encourages us to keep on trying.
Before reading this book I had already begun developing my own illustration style, however I gave a few of Linley’s assignments a try (see <a href="https://hazelstainer.wordpress.com/2016/02/19/how-to-draw-anything-a-review/">here</a>;). I am pleased with my outcomes and feel inspired to try more landscape drawings in the future.
First of all an artist needs to be able to look properly. Without studying the subject or object properly, no one would be able to produce an accurate sketch. Starting with landscapes, Linley tells the reader how to and what to look for when beginning a drawing in order to get a basic outline. It is only after this is down on paper that specific details can be added.
Linley explains various methods of shading and line marks to give a suggestion of perspective, and emphasises that an illustration does not need to be 100% accurate – that is what cameras are for. After landscapes, Linley takes the reader/future artist through plants, animals, people and cartoons in a similar manner.
Each chapter provides the reader with a few assignments to undertake based on what they have read, or the example illustrations. Many of these tasks are to copy Linley’s own examples, however he stresses that the outcome does not need to – or rather should not – look exactly like his. Each artist needs to develop their own style.
I found <i>How To Draw Anything</i> a lot more useful than the ever popular step-by-step guides that most people gravitate to. In those types of books we are NOT taught to draw, we are taught to copy. You may be able to accurately draw the same cat as the artist/author of the book, but you would not know where to start when face with a real life cat. Linley tells us what to look out for and where to start in these situations – you feel like you are actually learning something.
Mark Linley comes across as a humorous individual – his writing is full of puns and quips, intending to make the reader smile or laugh out loud, thus making them feel more relaxed about the subject. Linley does not only attempt to teach people how to draw, he tries to make each of us feel more comfortable about our abilities and encourages us to keep on trying.
Before reading this book I had already begun developing my own illustration style, however I gave a few of Linley’s assignments a try (see <a href="https://hazelstainer.wordpress.com/2016/02/19/how-to-draw-anything-a-review/">here</a>;). I am pleased with my outcomes and feel inspired to try more landscape drawings in the future.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Truth (2015) in Movies
Aug 11, 2019
The truth is out there...
Doubtful anyone from outside the United States (or even many within the US) would remember "Rathergate", the subject this film explores, but I found it fascinating nonetheless.
The US during the 2004 presidential election between George W Bush and John Kerry saw the usual mudslinging back and forth, but this film is not really about that. The film focuses on a news story by CBS news involving then airmen George W Bush and his "attempt" to get out of going to Vietnam and certain important military paper which were supposed to have corroborated these events.
Producer Mary Mapes and then anchor Dan Rather decided to air the story on 60 Minutes before they had flushed out all their sources and may have brushed aside criticism which happened to be against their political beliefs and ran with the story anyways. After airing in the fall of 2004 certain aspects of the documents came into question as to whether they could've been written with typewriters of the time or whether these documents were forgeries made by someone who could've merely used Microsoft Word instead.
Repeated attempts to legitimize their accuracy ended up having the opposite effects having witnesses change their stories, allegiances or even admit they had not been honest when presenting their original facts.
Since this is based on actual events, I can say this ended up costing producer Mapes and Rather their careers and sullied their reputations for the rest of their lives.
Even though the film has a very specific set of facts it has to deal with, I found it just as interesting when the director showed scenes of the audience viewing the story when it aired and then began to think about the state of modern news.
Nowadays, most people get their news cycle from internet headlines, scrolling information at the bottoms of television screens and even siloed one-sided stories that support only their own personal political beliefs
I think the broader message this film is trying to convey is that news organizations have the utmost responsibility to not only the report the news, but to keep their biases out of the mix and to make sure every fact is checked and rechecked to make sure they report accurately. News can change public opinion and even though they mostly get things correct, mostly isn't good enough.
I love Cate Blanchett and the legend Robert Redford and they don't disappoint here. The screenplay by writer and first time director James Vanderbilt is pointed and mostly avoids injecting opinion into the facts and presents an interesting and fascinating film I would easily recommend.
The US during the 2004 presidential election between George W Bush and John Kerry saw the usual mudslinging back and forth, but this film is not really about that. The film focuses on a news story by CBS news involving then airmen George W Bush and his "attempt" to get out of going to Vietnam and certain important military paper which were supposed to have corroborated these events.
Producer Mary Mapes and then anchor Dan Rather decided to air the story on 60 Minutes before they had flushed out all their sources and may have brushed aside criticism which happened to be against their political beliefs and ran with the story anyways. After airing in the fall of 2004 certain aspects of the documents came into question as to whether they could've been written with typewriters of the time or whether these documents were forgeries made by someone who could've merely used Microsoft Word instead.
Repeated attempts to legitimize their accuracy ended up having the opposite effects having witnesses change their stories, allegiances or even admit they had not been honest when presenting their original facts.
Since this is based on actual events, I can say this ended up costing producer Mapes and Rather their careers and sullied their reputations for the rest of their lives.
Even though the film has a very specific set of facts it has to deal with, I found it just as interesting when the director showed scenes of the audience viewing the story when it aired and then began to think about the state of modern news.
Nowadays, most people get their news cycle from internet headlines, scrolling information at the bottoms of television screens and even siloed one-sided stories that support only their own personal political beliefs
I think the broader message this film is trying to convey is that news organizations have the utmost responsibility to not only the report the news, but to keep their biases out of the mix and to make sure every fact is checked and rechecked to make sure they report accurately. News can change public opinion and even though they mostly get things correct, mostly isn't good enough.
I love Cate Blanchett and the legend Robert Redford and they don't disappoint here. The screenplay by writer and first time director James Vanderbilt is pointed and mostly avoids injecting opinion into the facts and presents an interesting and fascinating film I would easily recommend.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Ocean’s 8 (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
For the last five plus years all Debbie Ocean (Sandra Bullock) has had to think about was how to steal a $150 million dollar necklace of the neck of a mark during the Met Gala. Why she had all that time to think about was because she was incarcerated. The plan is flawless on paper but it would have to be to pull off this caper at one of the most high profile events of the year. Meticulously thought out and every eventuality covered. Now all she needs is a crew to make it happen. She gets her right hand girl Lou (Cate Blanchett) and they set out to plan the heist. The start with getting down on her luck designer Rose Weil (Helena Bonham Carter), who must persuade the mark, socialite actress Daphne Kluger (Anne Hathaway), to wear her dress and the diamonds to the even. Then let add a fence, Tammy (Sarah Paulson), a pick-pocket, Constance (Awkwafina), diamond expert, Amita (Mindy Kaling), and a hacker, Nine Ball (Rihanna), everyone they need to make this plan happen. The plan is made, the crew is assembled and the Met Ball is days away and all they have to do is rob a highly protected necklace in a museum filled with people and more cameras than you can count.
David Ross (Pleasantville, Seabiscuit) wrote and directed the most recent film in the Ocean’s storyline. It definitely is in the same mold of the male dominated Ocean’s trilogy of films. There are even cameos from the old crew and the direct link of the main character being the sister of the protagonist of those films really ties them together. There are several nods to the original films and even the music and cinematography match up pretty well. At times I would say that it tries too hard to be like those films.
The cast does a great job. The character development is really good and if successful could definitely lead to follow up films. Awkwafina, who I had not heard of before going into this film, was a real bright spot and stood out in the scenes she was in. James Corden, as insurance investigator John Frazier, was also fun. The flow and pace of the film really went along well. There were definitely fun moments, also some moments that were a little cheesy, which are to be expected. Also to be expected in heist movie are some twist and turns, which this film delivers on. It keeps you guessing until the end.
Overall this was a fun movie going experience but maybe on I would be more likely to rent than see on the big screen.
David Ross (Pleasantville, Seabiscuit) wrote and directed the most recent film in the Ocean’s storyline. It definitely is in the same mold of the male dominated Ocean’s trilogy of films. There are even cameos from the old crew and the direct link of the main character being the sister of the protagonist of those films really ties them together. There are several nods to the original films and even the music and cinematography match up pretty well. At times I would say that it tries too hard to be like those films.
The cast does a great job. The character development is really good and if successful could definitely lead to follow up films. Awkwafina, who I had not heard of before going into this film, was a real bright spot and stood out in the scenes she was in. James Corden, as insurance investigator John Frazier, was also fun. The flow and pace of the film really went along well. There were definitely fun moments, also some moments that were a little cheesy, which are to be expected. Also to be expected in heist movie are some twist and turns, which this film delivers on. It keeps you guessing until the end.
Overall this was a fun movie going experience but maybe on I would be more likely to rent than see on the big screen.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Manhattan Night (Manhattan Nocturne) (2016) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
Characters – Porter Wren is a well-respected journalist in New York, he has a comfortable job in his paper because of his reputation for telling people’s stories. His latest case however will get him looking into the murder mystery that will push himself to the limits when he gets involved with the victim’s wife. He narrates a lot of this which is the films way of trying to have a dig a modern society. Caroline is the wife whose husband has been killed, she seduces Porter, which plays her out to be a siren, only she soon feels like a victim with this character get caught in the middle we never know which side she is meant to be, one that gets what she wants or just a victims. Simon is the husband that has been murdered meaning we only see him in flashback of how the two were married. Lisa is the wife of Porter, she is doctor and from how Porter tells the story they don’t get along as they once did.
Performances – Adrien Brody does well in the leading role in the film even if he doesn’t make his character feel much different than any others from the similar genre. Yvonne Strahovski fits the seductive side to her character, though without being the strongest in the serious side of the story. Campbell Scott and Jennifer Beals just don’t get enough time to show their skills off in this film.
Story – The story here follows an investigation into an unsolved murder which brings the investigative reporter into a series of cover ups and conspiracy in true noir style. Using the noir style is clear here, the execution of the noir style doesn’t quite come off though because the siren doesn’t feel like a siren and by the end you will be left wondering just why the investigation wasn’t solved by the police in the first place, let alone why the reporter is even asked to investigate it. Nothing really comes out of solving the case which is the biggest disappointment from everything we are getting invested in.
Crime/Mystery – The crime side of this mystery does involve a murder that hasn’t been solved, it does have other crime elements involved too which just confuse the simply plot.
Settings – The film is set in New York and uses a secret house to show a place of peace in this busy city and how people can meet and connect through life.
Scene of the Movie – The truth.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The case felt pointless to solve.
Final Thoughts – This is a noir styled crime mystery that gives us a case that almost doesn’t need to be solved in the end.
Overall: Mystery that didn’t need solving.
Performances – Adrien Brody does well in the leading role in the film even if he doesn’t make his character feel much different than any others from the similar genre. Yvonne Strahovski fits the seductive side to her character, though without being the strongest in the serious side of the story. Campbell Scott and Jennifer Beals just don’t get enough time to show their skills off in this film.
Story – The story here follows an investigation into an unsolved murder which brings the investigative reporter into a series of cover ups and conspiracy in true noir style. Using the noir style is clear here, the execution of the noir style doesn’t quite come off though because the siren doesn’t feel like a siren and by the end you will be left wondering just why the investigation wasn’t solved by the police in the first place, let alone why the reporter is even asked to investigate it. Nothing really comes out of solving the case which is the biggest disappointment from everything we are getting invested in.
Crime/Mystery – The crime side of this mystery does involve a murder that hasn’t been solved, it does have other crime elements involved too which just confuse the simply plot.
Settings – The film is set in New York and uses a secret house to show a place of peace in this busy city and how people can meet and connect through life.
Scene of the Movie – The truth.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The case felt pointless to solve.
Final Thoughts – This is a noir styled crime mystery that gives us a case that almost doesn’t need to be solved in the end.
Overall: Mystery that didn’t need solving.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Ninja Assassin (2009) in Movies
Dec 2, 2019
Bland Characters Equals Meh Movie
A former member of a sect of secret ninjas escapes the clan, but has to fight for his life when the past catches up to him.
Acting: 4
I have seen paper bags act better than Rain the actor who plays main character Raizo. I think the screenwriters knew this and tried to mask his lack of chops with less lines, but it definitely didn’t work. He is as bland as the chicken I feed my dog when he has diarrhea. The rest of the crew isn’t terribly better and aren’t worth much of a mention.
Beginning: 10
The movie actually gets off to a great start. It starts off in a gangster hideout and an old man is giving one of the gangsters a tattoo. A letter shows up with black sand in it. Black sand is basically the kiss of death for these ninjas so it’s not too long after that bedlam ensues. Dope scene, got me excited to watch more.
Characters: 2
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 10
The action was also a plus. The beginning is definitely an indicator of things to come. You want crazy martial fighting? Check. Blood and gore? Blamo! Insane slowmo sequences? Coming right up. This is basically an action junkie’s wet dream. Actually, I think I’m giving it too much credit…
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 7
Pace: 7
While I appreciate certain things like at least making an attempt at a backstory, there were other portions that slowed the movie down in a couple of spots. Like seriously, how much training do we need to see this dude do? A few rounds on the good ole speed bag will suffice for me, thanks. Nope, this dude is doing splits, using ninja swords, fighting air. I also thought they spent a bit too much time on the main detective Mika (Naomie Harris) researching the ninjas. Pretty painful, but mostly fine.
Plot: 8
I didn’t hate the story. As I mentioned above, it was cool that you got a look into Raizo’s earlier life in the ninja clan and what got him to where he was. Crappy character, but I appreciated the effort to develop him. While the story got sidetracked here and there, it got you from Point A to Point B fairly smoothly.
Resolution: 6
Overall: 69
What disappoints me most about Ninja Assassin is the sheer amount of potential it had. Because it didn’t invest in quality actors or working in characters we care about, there is little margin for error in the rest of the movie. It wants to be likable, yet it didn’t put in the work to earn your friendship. I do not recommend.
Acting: 4
I have seen paper bags act better than Rain the actor who plays main character Raizo. I think the screenwriters knew this and tried to mask his lack of chops with less lines, but it definitely didn’t work. He is as bland as the chicken I feed my dog when he has diarrhea. The rest of the crew isn’t terribly better and aren’t worth much of a mention.
Beginning: 10
The movie actually gets off to a great start. It starts off in a gangster hideout and an old man is giving one of the gangsters a tattoo. A letter shows up with black sand in it. Black sand is basically the kiss of death for these ninjas so it’s not too long after that bedlam ensues. Dope scene, got me excited to watch more.
Characters: 2
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 10
The action was also a plus. The beginning is definitely an indicator of things to come. You want crazy martial fighting? Check. Blood and gore? Blamo! Insane slowmo sequences? Coming right up. This is basically an action junkie’s wet dream. Actually, I think I’m giving it too much credit…
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 7
Pace: 7
While I appreciate certain things like at least making an attempt at a backstory, there were other portions that slowed the movie down in a couple of spots. Like seriously, how much training do we need to see this dude do? A few rounds on the good ole speed bag will suffice for me, thanks. Nope, this dude is doing splits, using ninja swords, fighting air. I also thought they spent a bit too much time on the main detective Mika (Naomie Harris) researching the ninjas. Pretty painful, but mostly fine.
Plot: 8
I didn’t hate the story. As I mentioned above, it was cool that you got a look into Raizo’s earlier life in the ninja clan and what got him to where he was. Crappy character, but I appreciated the effort to develop him. While the story got sidetracked here and there, it got you from Point A to Point B fairly smoothly.
Resolution: 6
Overall: 69
What disappoints me most about Ninja Assassin is the sheer amount of potential it had. Because it didn’t invest in quality actors or working in characters we care about, there is little margin for error in the rest of the movie. It wants to be likable, yet it didn’t put in the work to earn your friendship. I do not recommend.
JT (287 KP) rated The Raven (2012) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
I've never really been a massive fan of John Cusack, I find him a bit tenuous and someone who slightly over acts. The Raven gives him the chance to over act to his heart’s content, as he plays poet Edgar Allan Poe who is drawn into the world and mind of a serial killer.
The film is set in 18th century Maryland where the flamboyant Edgar Allan Poe is busy churning out poems and gruesome stories that he desperately tries to get published in the local paper, although frustratingly as he experiences no one really knows or cares who he is?
This leads to large quantities of booze and lots of shouting and aggression at anyone who stands in his way. When a series of killings alert the local police, Detective Fields (Luke Evans) is called in to investigate, and when it’s discovered that the killings are in some way a copy of Poe’s illustrious work the man himself is tasked with assisting.
Visually the film is very good and is in keeping with the traditions of the 18th century, dark and slightly gothic it certainly gives the sense of a disturbed horror film. The killer is masked for the majority until the reveal, but clues are dropped as to the identity giving the viewer the chance to play detective. Although you probably don’t need to be Inspector Morse to figure it out.
When Poe’s beloved fiancé Emily Hamilton (Alice Eve) is kidnapped and buried alive it adds a whole new twist to the plot. The killer is making this a personal vendetta against Poe who seems at a loss to who could be targeting him in such a horrific way, it then becomes a race against time as the killer leaves clues on his victims for Poe to follow that will lead him to a theatrical conclusion.
The film echos Se7en, in that both Fields and Poe are being taunted by a sadistic killer who is clearly making a bold statement with his work, that involve a huge swinging blade, being buried into a wall and having your tongue cut out. Also a young beautiful woman is at the killers mercy, can Poe race against time to save her?
Cusack does an admirable job in fairness to him and his portrayal of Poe is an accurate reincarnation. Brendan Gleeson who despite limited screen time still manages to command a presence that has to be respected, and here as Emily’s father he gives off a burning sense of desperation.
The rest of the cast amble a long and certainly don’t set any fires alight It’s an OK film and it does have the thrills but nothing that is going to set pulses racing. When you turn it off you just let out one big long “Meh!”
The film is set in 18th century Maryland where the flamboyant Edgar Allan Poe is busy churning out poems and gruesome stories that he desperately tries to get published in the local paper, although frustratingly as he experiences no one really knows or cares who he is?
This leads to large quantities of booze and lots of shouting and aggression at anyone who stands in his way. When a series of killings alert the local police, Detective Fields (Luke Evans) is called in to investigate, and when it’s discovered that the killings are in some way a copy of Poe’s illustrious work the man himself is tasked with assisting.
Visually the film is very good and is in keeping with the traditions of the 18th century, dark and slightly gothic it certainly gives the sense of a disturbed horror film. The killer is masked for the majority until the reveal, but clues are dropped as to the identity giving the viewer the chance to play detective. Although you probably don’t need to be Inspector Morse to figure it out.
When Poe’s beloved fiancé Emily Hamilton (Alice Eve) is kidnapped and buried alive it adds a whole new twist to the plot. The killer is making this a personal vendetta against Poe who seems at a loss to who could be targeting him in such a horrific way, it then becomes a race against time as the killer leaves clues on his victims for Poe to follow that will lead him to a theatrical conclusion.
The film echos Se7en, in that both Fields and Poe are being taunted by a sadistic killer who is clearly making a bold statement with his work, that involve a huge swinging blade, being buried into a wall and having your tongue cut out. Also a young beautiful woman is at the killers mercy, can Poe race against time to save her?
Cusack does an admirable job in fairness to him and his portrayal of Poe is an accurate reincarnation. Brendan Gleeson who despite limited screen time still manages to command a presence that has to be respected, and here as Emily’s father he gives off a burning sense of desperation.
The rest of the cast amble a long and certainly don’t set any fires alight It’s an OK film and it does have the thrills but nothing that is going to set pulses racing. When you turn it off you just let out one big long “Meh!”