Search
Search results
Kasey Davis (30 KP) rated Peter Pan (1953) in Movies
May 16, 2018
Miles Teller recommended The Wizard of Oz (1939) in Movies (curated)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Horror Express (1972) in Movies
Nov 23, 2020
Christopher Lee (1 more)
Peter Cushing
The Terror Express
Horror Express- is a great movie. The horror, the terror, the gory, the acting, all great.
The plot: Alexander Saxton (Christopher Lee), a brilliant British anthropologist researching in the Russian Far East, boards the Trans-Siberian Express with his latest discovery, a frozen specimen he hopes to prove is the missing link. But en route to Europe, passengers begin to turn up dead, and terror engulfs the train as Saxton and his partner, Dr. Wells (Peter Cushing), struggle to contain a mysterious -- and increasingly murderous -- force with the power to control minds.
According to Martin, the film was made because a producer obtained a train set from Nicholas and Alexandra (1971). "He came up with the idea of writing a script just so he would be able to use this prop," said Martin. "Now at that time, Phil was in the habit of buying up loads of short stories to adapt into screenplays, and the story for Horror Express was originally based on a tale written by a little-known American scriptwriter and playwright."
Securing Lee and Cushing was a coup for Gordon, since it lent an atmosphere reminiscent of Hammer Films, many of which starred both of the actors. When Cushing arrived in Madrid to begin work on the picture, however, he was still distraught over the recent death of his wife, and announced to Gordon that he could not do the film. With Gordon desperate over the idea of losing one of his important stars, Lee stepped in and put Cushing at ease simply by talking to his old friend about some of their previous work together. Cushing changed his mind and stayed on.
Its a great movie.
The plot: Alexander Saxton (Christopher Lee), a brilliant British anthropologist researching in the Russian Far East, boards the Trans-Siberian Express with his latest discovery, a frozen specimen he hopes to prove is the missing link. But en route to Europe, passengers begin to turn up dead, and terror engulfs the train as Saxton and his partner, Dr. Wells (Peter Cushing), struggle to contain a mysterious -- and increasingly murderous -- force with the power to control minds.
According to Martin, the film was made because a producer obtained a train set from Nicholas and Alexandra (1971). "He came up with the idea of writing a script just so he would be able to use this prop," said Martin. "Now at that time, Phil was in the habit of buying up loads of short stories to adapt into screenplays, and the story for Horror Express was originally based on a tale written by a little-known American scriptwriter and playwright."
Securing Lee and Cushing was a coup for Gordon, since it lent an atmosphere reminiscent of Hammer Films, many of which starred both of the actors. When Cushing arrived in Madrid to begin work on the picture, however, he was still distraught over the recent death of his wife, and announced to Gordon that he could not do the film. With Gordon desperate over the idea of losing one of his important stars, Lee stepped in and put Cushing at ease simply by talking to his old friend about some of their previous work together. Cushing changed his mind and stayed on.
Its a great movie.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017) in Movies
Jun 6, 2021
Three Billboards is a fricking masterpiece, and another home run from Martin McDonagh.
The cast is stacked to say the least. Frances McDormand and Sam Rockwell both give a career best performance. The supporting cast is made up of the likes of Woody Harrelson, Caleb Landry Jones, Abbie Cornish, Lucas Hedges, John Hawkes, Clarke Peters, Samara Weaving, and Peter Dinklage - all who are just great. McDonagh's screenplay is fantastic as per usual, and the runtime is filled with his token dark humour, as well as plenty of emotionally charged events. The narrative is sort of all over the place, with several plot strands all running alongside and throughout eachother, but it's messiness adds to the whole experience, almost like a sort of controlled chaos. All of this is backed by a truly wonderful music score by Carter Burwell.
Three Billboards is just one of those movies that springs off the screen and sticks in your head for all the right reasons.
The cast is stacked to say the least. Frances McDormand and Sam Rockwell both give a career best performance. The supporting cast is made up of the likes of Woody Harrelson, Caleb Landry Jones, Abbie Cornish, Lucas Hedges, John Hawkes, Clarke Peters, Samara Weaving, and Peter Dinklage - all who are just great. McDonagh's screenplay is fantastic as per usual, and the runtime is filled with his token dark humour, as well as plenty of emotionally charged events. The narrative is sort of all over the place, with several plot strands all running alongside and throughout eachother, but it's messiness adds to the whole experience, almost like a sort of controlled chaos. All of this is backed by a truly wonderful music score by Carter Burwell.
Three Billboards is just one of those movies that springs off the screen and sticks in your head for all the right reasons.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway (2021) in Movies
Jul 25, 2021
Script this time appeals to both Kids and Adults (1 more)
Gleeson, Byrne and Oyelowo are great together
This bunny has legs
I appreciate I'm over 2 months late in seeing "Peter Rabbit 2". But the grandkids were staying for the weekend and wanted to see it again!
Positives:
- This time the movie manages - "Paddington 2" style - to find a good balance between slapstick jokes that appeal to the target younger audience (my grandkids were roaring at certain bits) and the 'dragalong' adult audience. Some of these are gorgeously surreal - like the skiing badger in the Alps as a "university prank". It certainly passes the "6 laugh" test for a comedy, and generated a couple of good guffaws (the Austin Powers landing in the Aston Martin and the subsequent take-off was one for me).
- In the first movie, James Corden's voicing of Peter Rabbit tended to grate with me enormously. Here he gamely plays up to that, accepting that he is a bit of a "marmite" character with a lot of people. It's a fine comic moment.
- Rose Byrne and Domnhall Gleeson make a cute and watchable couple. (Rose Byrne could read the phone directory for me). They are well supported here by David Oyelowo ("Don't look into his eyes") who is the least villainous villain in any movie in recent memory! Also fun are trying to spot the guest voice artistes who include Margot Robbie, Sia, Elizabeth Debicki, Sam Neill, Lennie James and Hayley Atwell.
Negatives:
- A few of the jokes don't quite land (a one-note cockeral story, for example, is overplayed).
- As I've been doing some Supporting Artist work recently, I've become obsessed with observing Extras and the continuity of Extras in shots. There are a few inconsistencies in the mix on this one!
Summary Thoughts: It's fair to say (although I never actually wrote a full review for it) that I was NOT a fan of the original Peter Rabbit movie from 2018. Corden grated; there was not enough for adult viewers and some of the included scenes were highly questionable: try explaining to a three-year-old why Peter was stabbing a dead old man in the eye with his finger! I've avoided watching it again on the TV like the plague.
This sequel was, I thought, much better, being entertaining for both kids and adults. I wonder if I now watched the first movie I might find it, in hindsight, more palatable? Perhaps I will give it a try sometime.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on t'interweb, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks.)
Positives:
- This time the movie manages - "Paddington 2" style - to find a good balance between slapstick jokes that appeal to the target younger audience (my grandkids were roaring at certain bits) and the 'dragalong' adult audience. Some of these are gorgeously surreal - like the skiing badger in the Alps as a "university prank". It certainly passes the "6 laugh" test for a comedy, and generated a couple of good guffaws (the Austin Powers landing in the Aston Martin and the subsequent take-off was one for me).
- In the first movie, James Corden's voicing of Peter Rabbit tended to grate with me enormously. Here he gamely plays up to that, accepting that he is a bit of a "marmite" character with a lot of people. It's a fine comic moment.
- Rose Byrne and Domnhall Gleeson make a cute and watchable couple. (Rose Byrne could read the phone directory for me). They are well supported here by David Oyelowo ("Don't look into his eyes") who is the least villainous villain in any movie in recent memory! Also fun are trying to spot the guest voice artistes who include Margot Robbie, Sia, Elizabeth Debicki, Sam Neill, Lennie James and Hayley Atwell.
Negatives:
- A few of the jokes don't quite land (a one-note cockeral story, for example, is overplayed).
- As I've been doing some Supporting Artist work recently, I've become obsessed with observing Extras and the continuity of Extras in shots. There are a few inconsistencies in the mix on this one!
Summary Thoughts: It's fair to say (although I never actually wrote a full review for it) that I was NOT a fan of the original Peter Rabbit movie from 2018. Corden grated; there was not enough for adult viewers and some of the included scenes were highly questionable: try explaining to a three-year-old why Peter was stabbing a dead old man in the eye with his finger! I've avoided watching it again on the TV like the plague.
This sequel was, I thought, much better, being entertaining for both kids and adults. I wonder if I now watched the first movie I might find it, in hindsight, more palatable? Perhaps I will give it a try sometime.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on t'interweb, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks.)
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Initially when a franchise reboots a series not five years from its last installment this can often be seen as a sign that they’ve run out of ideas. It was reportedly the inability to find a suitable script that drove director-producer Sam Raimi and the stars of the Spider-man series away from a possible fourth outing and forced Sony/Columbia start fresh.
Selecting the relatively new Marc Webb who, outside of “500 Days of Summer”, had worked on music videos and most recently directed episode of The Office and the pilot for Lone Star, seemed like a very odd choice to turn over the billion-dollar franchise. The selection of American-born English actor Andrew Garfield also seemed to be an interesting choice to don the tights of the wall crawler.
Thankfully this is exactly the fresh start that the series needed. Even though I went into the film with guarded and reserved expectations I must say that I’m absolutely delighted with how the final product came out as this is a very fresh and faithful adaptation of the beloved comic book character that, in my opinion is the best adaptation to date on film.
The screenplay by James Vanderbilt was based on a story credited to three other writers all of whom clearly understand the character and the source material and are focused first and foremost with being respectful to it rather than putting their own unique stamp and take on the franchise.
The film does take a little bit of liberty by showing Peter Parker’s parents as they place young Peter in the custody of Ben and May Parker (Martin Sheen and Sally Fields) as they flee into a rainy night from implied danger, never to be seen again.
The film continues with teenage Peter (Andrew Garfield), plodding his way through high school. As brilliant as Peter is academically, he is extremely awkward around girls especially the lovely Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), who never fails to catch his eye. When a clue from his father’s past arises, Peter finds himself at Oscorp where Gwen works as an intern. Peter also finds himself on the radar of his dad’s former partner Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), who becomes intrigued by young Peter’s scientific theories and even more so in his abilities when he learns that he is the offspring of his former partner.
Dr. Connors is working on cross species genetics and hopes that not only will it someday replaces missing arm, but will also pave a bold new direction for humanity. During a visit to the lab Peter, is bitten by a radioactive spider, and as any fan of the series knows, begins to exhibit amazing strength, agility, and perception, as well as the ability to walk on walls and cling to ceilings. In a very refreshing return to form, Peter fashions his famous web slingers rather than have them be organic as the previous film series did.
When a twist of fate puts Peter on the path of vengeance, he becomes a masked vigilante who uses his newfound abilities to rid New York some of its less pleasant citizens. These activities do not sit well with Captain Stacy (Denis Leary), who also happens to be Gwen’s father. As Peter and Gwen become closer, the duality of hiding his new identity from Capt. Stacy and Aunt May becomes even more imperative.
Naturally, it would not be much of a superhero film without a super villain, and Dr. Connors is more than willing to step up to this. Faced with pressure from his bosses he decides to use an experimental serum on himself. At first he is delighted as he seems to regrow his lost limb, but then in a Jekyll & Hyde-like transformation he transforms into a gigantic lizard creature bent on revenge and destruction as he attempts to complete a plan that will devastate millions of New York citizens.
Since Peter helped provide the equation that led to the formula that transform Dr. Connors, he feels obligated to stop the raging creature and to save his mentor no matter the cost. What follows are some truly spectacular action sequences including sewer battles in an extremely memorable finale across the Manhattan skyline.
While the film did take its time getting started as it established its back story and introduced the characters, once it got rolling it was an extremely fun and exhilarating ride. Garfield and Stone have a very good chemistry with one another and the reports of them recently dating off screen further solidifies their on-screen bond. Garfield wonderfully captures the conflicted emotions of Peter Parker as well as the brilliantly awkward genius that he is.
He runs the gamut of emotions from showing his anger and frustration to the dopey awkwardness of his interactions with Gwen and very believable manner. When he becomes infused with his new abilities you can almost share the glee that he has as he swings and flips around the landscape. The sheltered, socially awkward young man disappears when he dons the mask. He’s free to let himself go and Garfield does this with a childlike delight as well as the trademark quips and wisecracks that made the character such a beloved icon.
Garfield handles the physical duties of the role quite well and shines both in and out of the costume. I thought Tobey Maguire did a fantastic job bringing the character to life previously, but in my opinion Garfield has captured the essence of Peter Parker/ Spider-man and made it his own with a truly wonderful performance all around.
Stone does a great job as the love interest in the film as she is more than just eye candy and the typical damsel in distress far too common with this type of film. She challenges Peter and you can see some gleeful delight in her eyes when Peter awkwardly stumbles around her in an attempt to ask her out. Because she clearly enjoys the situation Gwen is not about to make it any easier on Peter, even though she’s been waiting for him to muster the courage for ages. She’s a strong and determined woman who gives a good range of emotions in her scenes and complements Garfield exceptionally well.
The supporting cast was very good especially Leary and Fields and Ifans does a good job as the quietly restrained Connors. In what could’ve easily been a scenery chewing, over-the-top Machiavellian bad guy, Ifans portrays Connors as a very sympathetic and understandable figure. He is a scientist first and foremost who is trying to do what he believes is right. He is not suited for the political machinations of a large corporation and when he begins this transformation and the animal side takes over there is still a hint of humanity amongst all the CGI work for the re-imagined Lizard.
While it did take me a while to get used to the look of The Lizard having become accustomed to his portrayal in comics and cartoons, I have to say it was a good updating it still stayed faithful to the essence of the original character.
Webb wisely decided to shoot in 3-D and not do a post filming conversion. It is the visually captivating and at times stunning cinema photography that really sets the tone for the film. You can truly get an idea of what it is like to be Spider-man as he swings and flips through the city and the point of view shots of his web firing out to latch onto objects and take down opponents are a lot of fun. Webb clearly knows the subject matter and gets the most out of his very talented cast and tells a very entertaining yet human action story and lets the effects support the film rather than carry it.
The film was much better than “Spider-man 3”. I am so happy that the franchise is in good hands and is moving forward in the right direction. Although the movie did take a while to get up to speed once it got rolling I did not want it to end, and I commented to my wife that I don’t want to have to wait 2 to 3 years for the next installment of the film I’m ready for more now. As a lifelong fan of comic I can honestly say I am beyond delighted with the new film, cast, director, and direction for the series.
Selecting the relatively new Marc Webb who, outside of “500 Days of Summer”, had worked on music videos and most recently directed episode of The Office and the pilot for Lone Star, seemed like a very odd choice to turn over the billion-dollar franchise. The selection of American-born English actor Andrew Garfield also seemed to be an interesting choice to don the tights of the wall crawler.
Thankfully this is exactly the fresh start that the series needed. Even though I went into the film with guarded and reserved expectations I must say that I’m absolutely delighted with how the final product came out as this is a very fresh and faithful adaptation of the beloved comic book character that, in my opinion is the best adaptation to date on film.
The screenplay by James Vanderbilt was based on a story credited to three other writers all of whom clearly understand the character and the source material and are focused first and foremost with being respectful to it rather than putting their own unique stamp and take on the franchise.
The film does take a little bit of liberty by showing Peter Parker’s parents as they place young Peter in the custody of Ben and May Parker (Martin Sheen and Sally Fields) as they flee into a rainy night from implied danger, never to be seen again.
The film continues with teenage Peter (Andrew Garfield), plodding his way through high school. As brilliant as Peter is academically, he is extremely awkward around girls especially the lovely Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), who never fails to catch his eye. When a clue from his father’s past arises, Peter finds himself at Oscorp where Gwen works as an intern. Peter also finds himself on the radar of his dad’s former partner Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), who becomes intrigued by young Peter’s scientific theories and even more so in his abilities when he learns that he is the offspring of his former partner.
Dr. Connors is working on cross species genetics and hopes that not only will it someday replaces missing arm, but will also pave a bold new direction for humanity. During a visit to the lab Peter, is bitten by a radioactive spider, and as any fan of the series knows, begins to exhibit amazing strength, agility, and perception, as well as the ability to walk on walls and cling to ceilings. In a very refreshing return to form, Peter fashions his famous web slingers rather than have them be organic as the previous film series did.
When a twist of fate puts Peter on the path of vengeance, he becomes a masked vigilante who uses his newfound abilities to rid New York some of its less pleasant citizens. These activities do not sit well with Captain Stacy (Denis Leary), who also happens to be Gwen’s father. As Peter and Gwen become closer, the duality of hiding his new identity from Capt. Stacy and Aunt May becomes even more imperative.
Naturally, it would not be much of a superhero film without a super villain, and Dr. Connors is more than willing to step up to this. Faced with pressure from his bosses he decides to use an experimental serum on himself. At first he is delighted as he seems to regrow his lost limb, but then in a Jekyll & Hyde-like transformation he transforms into a gigantic lizard creature bent on revenge and destruction as he attempts to complete a plan that will devastate millions of New York citizens.
Since Peter helped provide the equation that led to the formula that transform Dr. Connors, he feels obligated to stop the raging creature and to save his mentor no matter the cost. What follows are some truly spectacular action sequences including sewer battles in an extremely memorable finale across the Manhattan skyline.
While the film did take its time getting started as it established its back story and introduced the characters, once it got rolling it was an extremely fun and exhilarating ride. Garfield and Stone have a very good chemistry with one another and the reports of them recently dating off screen further solidifies their on-screen bond. Garfield wonderfully captures the conflicted emotions of Peter Parker as well as the brilliantly awkward genius that he is.
He runs the gamut of emotions from showing his anger and frustration to the dopey awkwardness of his interactions with Gwen and very believable manner. When he becomes infused with his new abilities you can almost share the glee that he has as he swings and flips around the landscape. The sheltered, socially awkward young man disappears when he dons the mask. He’s free to let himself go and Garfield does this with a childlike delight as well as the trademark quips and wisecracks that made the character such a beloved icon.
Garfield handles the physical duties of the role quite well and shines both in and out of the costume. I thought Tobey Maguire did a fantastic job bringing the character to life previously, but in my opinion Garfield has captured the essence of Peter Parker/ Spider-man and made it his own with a truly wonderful performance all around.
Stone does a great job as the love interest in the film as she is more than just eye candy and the typical damsel in distress far too common with this type of film. She challenges Peter and you can see some gleeful delight in her eyes when Peter awkwardly stumbles around her in an attempt to ask her out. Because she clearly enjoys the situation Gwen is not about to make it any easier on Peter, even though she’s been waiting for him to muster the courage for ages. She’s a strong and determined woman who gives a good range of emotions in her scenes and complements Garfield exceptionally well.
The supporting cast was very good especially Leary and Fields and Ifans does a good job as the quietly restrained Connors. In what could’ve easily been a scenery chewing, over-the-top Machiavellian bad guy, Ifans portrays Connors as a very sympathetic and understandable figure. He is a scientist first and foremost who is trying to do what he believes is right. He is not suited for the political machinations of a large corporation and when he begins this transformation and the animal side takes over there is still a hint of humanity amongst all the CGI work for the re-imagined Lizard.
While it did take me a while to get used to the look of The Lizard having become accustomed to his portrayal in comics and cartoons, I have to say it was a good updating it still stayed faithful to the essence of the original character.
Webb wisely decided to shoot in 3-D and not do a post filming conversion. It is the visually captivating and at times stunning cinema photography that really sets the tone for the film. You can truly get an idea of what it is like to be Spider-man as he swings and flips through the city and the point of view shots of his web firing out to latch onto objects and take down opponents are a lot of fun. Webb clearly knows the subject matter and gets the most out of his very talented cast and tells a very entertaining yet human action story and lets the effects support the film rather than carry it.
The film was much better than “Spider-man 3”. I am so happy that the franchise is in good hands and is moving forward in the right direction. Although the movie did take a while to get up to speed once it got rolling I did not want it to end, and I commented to my wife that I don’t want to have to wait 2 to 3 years for the next installment of the film I’m ready for more now. As a lifelong fan of comic I can honestly say I am beyond delighted with the new film, cast, director, and direction for the series.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Don't Turn Around (PERSEF0NE, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Where there's walking, there's bound to be running. Ironically enough, it wasn't too long ago that I read a <a title="View Sophia's review of The Queen's Choice" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-queens-choice-by-cayla-kluver/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">book mainly focused on walking</a>.
Michelle Gagnon's first young adult thriller goes straight into the action as soon as the book starts Noa wakes up to find herself on a table in a warehouse with an IV in her arm and no clue of how she got to that table in the first place. Noa manages to get away from the warehouse and eventually teams up with fellow hacker Peter to find out more about a company called AMRF (who starts threatening Peter's life randomly for reasons of the unknown and attacks the hacktivist group he founded called ALLIANCE).
<i>Don't Turn Around</i> is basically about two hackers on the run not necessarily together and being chased by or threatened by an armed group of men. Running and being chased isn't typically my favorite book to read, but walking around and not being chased is much more boring to go through. In this particular case, an exception might have to be made Gagnon reveals more information about the two hackers as they're on the run and trying to find out the reasons why they're being attacked or got swooped up from somewhere and experimented on in an abandoned area.
Noa is also an interesting character and has officially landed in as my favorite characters of 2015 even though she didn't have a great childhood, it's amazingly admirable how she manages to remain a cucumber as everything around her falls apart. Noa actually reminds of <a title="View Sophia's ARC review of Tabula Rasa" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-tabula-rasa-by-kristen-lippert-martin/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">that one character (Sarah?) from <i>Tabula Rasa</i></a> a fearless female character. What's different between Noa and Sarah, however, is how Noa admits she's scared but doesn't appear to be scared even after she is eventually caught by the bad guys originally going after her and Peter from the beginning of the story.
Similar to the likes of Alex Rider and James Bond, <i>Don't Turn Around</i> is a slow (though fast-paced) yet sure beginning to a series Gagnon seems to be setting us up for better things to come in the future of the series, and I'm hoping it won't fail when the end finally comes.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-dont-turn-around-by-michelle-gagnon/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Michelle Gagnon's first young adult thriller goes straight into the action as soon as the book starts Noa wakes up to find herself on a table in a warehouse with an IV in her arm and no clue of how she got to that table in the first place. Noa manages to get away from the warehouse and eventually teams up with fellow hacker Peter to find out more about a company called AMRF (who starts threatening Peter's life randomly for reasons of the unknown and attacks the hacktivist group he founded called ALLIANCE).
<i>Don't Turn Around</i> is basically about two hackers on the run not necessarily together and being chased by or threatened by an armed group of men. Running and being chased isn't typically my favorite book to read, but walking around and not being chased is much more boring to go through. In this particular case, an exception might have to be made Gagnon reveals more information about the two hackers as they're on the run and trying to find out the reasons why they're being attacked or got swooped up from somewhere and experimented on in an abandoned area.
Noa is also an interesting character and has officially landed in as my favorite characters of 2015 even though she didn't have a great childhood, it's amazingly admirable how she manages to remain a cucumber as everything around her falls apart. Noa actually reminds of <a title="View Sophia's ARC review of Tabula Rasa" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-tabula-rasa-by-kristen-lippert-martin/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">that one character (Sarah?) from <i>Tabula Rasa</i></a> a fearless female character. What's different between Noa and Sarah, however, is how Noa admits she's scared but doesn't appear to be scared even after she is eventually caught by the bad guys originally going after her and Peter from the beginning of the story.
Similar to the likes of Alex Rider and James Bond, <i>Don't Turn Around</i> is a slow (though fast-paced) yet sure beginning to a series Gagnon seems to be setting us up for better things to come in the future of the series, and I'm hoping it won't fail when the end finally comes.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-dont-turn-around-by-michelle-gagnon/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Amazing Spider-Man in Apps
Sep 25, 2019
The Amazing Spider-man, starring Andrew Garfield, came out 10 years after Maguire's ill-fated first attempt, on 3rd July 2012. Co-starring some greats, including Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Martin Sheen and Sally Fields. You might as well read the last summary for this one too, but add in the fact that he's out to solve his parents' mysterious death.
Peter is less nerd, more loser this time around. And generally he comes across as a bit more sad than before. But you'd expect that as we started the movie with a sad farewell. He has a bit of a "moment" with his dad's old briefcase to push that fact home a bit more.
No field trip for this Peter, instead he gatecrashes an intern enrolment to get a nosy at what might have to do with his parent's past. We learn lessons from this film too... in this one it is super easy to break into what must be highly classified labs.
Peter's transformation happens a lot quicker in this one, much to the trauma of everyone in the subway carriage with him. His little morning rampage gives me visions of Wolverine destroying the sink in X-men Origins: Wolverine... and now I come to think of it, doesn't Cyclops have a meltdown with his powers in a bathroom? What can we learn about this? Superpowers make you hate bathroom fixtures.
Did anyone else notice the guy who runs Jurassic World? Is he trying to pick up tips on how to super charge those dinosaurs? And while we're talking about mystery appearances, I'm torn about Spidey helping The Reaper rescue his son.
Honestly, my favourite line has to be... "Yeah, nobody likes your meatloaf." Sheen and Fields reacting to each other is just priceless.
Uncle Ben dying in this one is a lot more dramatic and sets Peter off on a bit of a crusade that leads to some better green screened wall walking. And some handy falling through a roof into a wrestling arena, gives him an idea for his costume, and we see a montage of him honing his skills and tech... we're a little bit past shooting some white gunk out of our wrists at this point. I like that he points out everything is spandex, yes Parker, there should be other options.
After the big costume reveal I feel like the film drags a bit. It's good, and I enjoy it, but I feel like there's a lot of film for not a lot of plot... does that make sense? Possibly not, but I know what I mean, so it's all good.
Just goes to show you how much I was paying attention in the last one. I missed Stan Lee's cameo. This one was much better, listening to music in his library while it gets destroyed in a fight behind him. Stan Lee, I love you. Genuine hearts all around.
The crane moving scene is, well, a little bit moving. One good deed deserves another, and let's fly a flag in the background for added effect.
We started sad, we end sad. I definitely prefer this film to Spider-man. It isn't without its own flaws though. While Spider-man was just over two hours, it didn't feel like that's how long you were watching for. The Amazing Spider-man felt like 2 hours 16 minutes of screen time. But the ending... she's angry at him, and then he whispers to her, and she gives that little smile, and as she dips her head he knows she's going to forgive him. And we're left with a spark of joy.
Peter is less nerd, more loser this time around. And generally he comes across as a bit more sad than before. But you'd expect that as we started the movie with a sad farewell. He has a bit of a "moment" with his dad's old briefcase to push that fact home a bit more.
No field trip for this Peter, instead he gatecrashes an intern enrolment to get a nosy at what might have to do with his parent's past. We learn lessons from this film too... in this one it is super easy to break into what must be highly classified labs.
Peter's transformation happens a lot quicker in this one, much to the trauma of everyone in the subway carriage with him. His little morning rampage gives me visions of Wolverine destroying the sink in X-men Origins: Wolverine... and now I come to think of it, doesn't Cyclops have a meltdown with his powers in a bathroom? What can we learn about this? Superpowers make you hate bathroom fixtures.
Did anyone else notice the guy who runs Jurassic World? Is he trying to pick up tips on how to super charge those dinosaurs? And while we're talking about mystery appearances, I'm torn about Spidey helping The Reaper rescue his son.
Honestly, my favourite line has to be... "Yeah, nobody likes your meatloaf." Sheen and Fields reacting to each other is just priceless.
Uncle Ben dying in this one is a lot more dramatic and sets Peter off on a bit of a crusade that leads to some better green screened wall walking. And some handy falling through a roof into a wrestling arena, gives him an idea for his costume, and we see a montage of him honing his skills and tech... we're a little bit past shooting some white gunk out of our wrists at this point. I like that he points out everything is spandex, yes Parker, there should be other options.
After the big costume reveal I feel like the film drags a bit. It's good, and I enjoy it, but I feel like there's a lot of film for not a lot of plot... does that make sense? Possibly not, but I know what I mean, so it's all good.
Just goes to show you how much I was paying attention in the last one. I missed Stan Lee's cameo. This one was much better, listening to music in his library while it gets destroyed in a fight behind him. Stan Lee, I love you. Genuine hearts all around.
The crane moving scene is, well, a little bit moving. One good deed deserves another, and let's fly a flag in the background for added effect.
We started sad, we end sad. I definitely prefer this film to Spider-man. It isn't without its own flaws though. While Spider-man was just over two hours, it didn't feel like that's how long you were watching for. The Amazing Spider-man felt like 2 hours 16 minutes of screen time. But the ending... she's angry at him, and then he whispers to her, and she gives that little smile, and as she dips her head he knows she's going to forgive him. And we're left with a spark of joy.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated 7 Days In Entebbe (2018) in Movies
Mar 22, 2018
Doesn't really work
Most of us (including me), when we heard about the new film 7 DAYS IN ENTEBBE, thought to themselves "didn't they just make this film a few years ago...?" The answer is yes. A similar film to this - RAID ON ENTEBBE - was a TV movie made a few years ago - 42 years ago, to be precise. It starred Peter Finch, Martin Balsam, Jack Warden and good ol' Charles Bronson. Made a mere few months after the true events, this slapped together movie was an old-fashioned "shoot 'em up."
This film is most definitely not.
7 DAYS IN ENTEBBE tells the true story of the 1976 Air France Hijacking of (mostly) Israeli citizens that settle in Entebbe, Uganda (under the leadership of crazed dictator Idi Amin) - refusing to negotiate with terrorists, the Israeli government plan, stage and execute a daring rescue mission.
Sounds like a pretty good plot for a Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
In this version, Director Jose Padilha (the 2014 remake of ROBOCOP) decides to focus most of his attention not on the hijacked Israeli citizens, but rather, a pair of German hijackers juxtaposed against the political infighting in Israel between Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Defense Minister Shimon Peres. The Israeli governmental infighting was interesting to watch with intriguing characters and cat-and-mouse back-stabbing politics while the plight of the kidnappers was underwritten and underwhelming. Consequently, this film was "just okay".
Oh...and it had about an hour-fifteen minutes of content stretched over an hour-forty-five minutes, so to stretch things out, Padilha decided to cut back and forth between the action (what there was of it) and a modern dance recital. Clearly he was trying a metaphor of the dance punctuating the emotions and actions elsewhere. It just didn't work for me.
Neither did this film. Skip this one and check out the Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
Letter Grade C+
5 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This film is most definitely not.
7 DAYS IN ENTEBBE tells the true story of the 1976 Air France Hijacking of (mostly) Israeli citizens that settle in Entebbe, Uganda (under the leadership of crazed dictator Idi Amin) - refusing to negotiate with terrorists, the Israeli government plan, stage and execute a daring rescue mission.
Sounds like a pretty good plot for a Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
In this version, Director Jose Padilha (the 2014 remake of ROBOCOP) decides to focus most of his attention not on the hijacked Israeli citizens, but rather, a pair of German hijackers juxtaposed against the political infighting in Israel between Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Defense Minister Shimon Peres. The Israeli governmental infighting was interesting to watch with intriguing characters and cat-and-mouse back-stabbing politics while the plight of the kidnappers was underwritten and underwhelming. Consequently, this film was "just okay".
Oh...and it had about an hour-fifteen minutes of content stretched over an hour-forty-five minutes, so to stretch things out, Padilha decided to cut back and forth between the action (what there was of it) and a modern dance recital. Clearly he was trying a metaphor of the dance punctuating the emotions and actions elsewhere. It just didn't work for me.
Neither did this film. Skip this one and check out the Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
Letter Grade C+
5 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Saffy Alexandra (89 KP) rated The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) in Movies
Jun 15, 2019
A feel good film
I would like to first off state that I adore this film as a book, so straight off the bat I was a little worried on what would be happening with these films and how they would differ from the novel.
After watching it, I don’t know what I was so worried about especially when Peter Jackson is the one directing the films (when he did such a fantastic job at Lord of the Rings).
I think the casting for all the characters was spot on, and keeping characters that we were introduced to in Lord of the Rings the same was a fantastic (and so glad that those actors agreed to do these films). Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggin’s is/was an excellent choice that I really couldn’t see any other actor managing to incorporate Bilbo’s sassiness – because let’s face it, that Hobbit knew how to out wit someone and sass when there was need – to his vulnerability and fear of going out into the unknown. I felt he held the role with dignity and grace and made the humorous scenes even better but when he is needed for the more emotional scenes, Freeman is still fantastic at portraying all those reactions clear as day on his face pulling at your heart strings and showing you what a brilliant range he has as an actor!
Another actor I feel that needs credit is Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield. Having never really seen him in any films before then I was sceptical. I really shouldn’t have been. His portrayal as the scowling and grumpy Dwarf Prince/King is next to amazing! He managed to make you fall in love with the cantankerous Dwarf, which is a feat in all of itself, by the end. This man’s range as an actor is also very good and his ability to show you what Thorin is feeling just by his eye’s is an ability that not many actors have.
Now I was unsure when we were told that this book was being made into three films, and I still feel that the films were possibly stretched out more than they should have by us being presented with characters who were not even in the books. But, I enjoyed it more than I thought I would.
To be fully truthful, knowing that this would be the end of the Middle Earth saga that Peter Jackson was doing, I was not quite ready to say goodbye to the stories that we all grew up with. So I may be biased in saying that I enjoyed having the extra screen time to devour.
The Hobbit Trilogy might not be as fantastic as Lord of the Rings, but it is a trilogy that I would happily watch over and over again. The humour, the wit, and the general good-feeling of these films is something that just makes you feel like you are coming home again after a long trip. One feel good trilogy that I’d happily recommend to anyone.
After watching it, I don’t know what I was so worried about especially when Peter Jackson is the one directing the films (when he did such a fantastic job at Lord of the Rings).
I think the casting for all the characters was spot on, and keeping characters that we were introduced to in Lord of the Rings the same was a fantastic (and so glad that those actors agreed to do these films). Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggin’s is/was an excellent choice that I really couldn’t see any other actor managing to incorporate Bilbo’s sassiness – because let’s face it, that Hobbit knew how to out wit someone and sass when there was need – to his vulnerability and fear of going out into the unknown. I felt he held the role with dignity and grace and made the humorous scenes even better but when he is needed for the more emotional scenes, Freeman is still fantastic at portraying all those reactions clear as day on his face pulling at your heart strings and showing you what a brilliant range he has as an actor!
Another actor I feel that needs credit is Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield. Having never really seen him in any films before then I was sceptical. I really shouldn’t have been. His portrayal as the scowling and grumpy Dwarf Prince/King is next to amazing! He managed to make you fall in love with the cantankerous Dwarf, which is a feat in all of itself, by the end. This man’s range as an actor is also very good and his ability to show you what Thorin is feeling just by his eye’s is an ability that not many actors have.
Now I was unsure when we were told that this book was being made into three films, and I still feel that the films were possibly stretched out more than they should have by us being presented with characters who were not even in the books. But, I enjoyed it more than I thought I would.
To be fully truthful, knowing that this would be the end of the Middle Earth saga that Peter Jackson was doing, I was not quite ready to say goodbye to the stories that we all grew up with. So I may be biased in saying that I enjoyed having the extra screen time to devour.
The Hobbit Trilogy might not be as fantastic as Lord of the Rings, but it is a trilogy that I would happily watch over and over again. The humour, the wit, and the general good-feeling of these films is something that just makes you feel like you are coming home again after a long trip. One feel good trilogy that I’d happily recommend to anyone.