Search
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
When I heard the news last year that Spider-Man was going to be rebooted yet again, I was like “are you freaking serious”? After the successful Toby Maguire trilogy (though the less said about “Spider-Man 3” the better) and the mildly successful “Amazing Spider-Man” duo with Andrew Garfield only finishing in 2014, did we REALLY need another reboot? More dramatic spider biting? More Uncle Ben spouting then dying? The same old – same old, rewarmed in a pan with a bit of red wine added just to stop it feeling so dry and tasteless.
And I still feel the same way. I understand that its more to do with rights ownership between Sony, Marvel and Disney that this got made so quickly…. but in the words of Ian Malcolm “they didn’t stop to think if they should”.
But actually, although I still don’t really approve of it, they’ve done a pretty good job in rebooting in a different manner. I commented in my review for “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” that that first reboot was “much less earnest and quirkier than the original Tobey Maguire series, and reveling more in the fun to be had around a superhero’s schooldays.” This latest reboot moves even further along that scale, being very much more of a high-school comedy that a pure superhero flick.
Wearing the suit this time is a far more age-appropriate Tom Holland, winner of last year’s BAFTA Rising Star award. And very personable he is too. The suit in question has been jizzed up by Iron Man (Robert Downey Jnr) – perhaps I could have rephrased that better! Because here the Spider-Man story carries on from the brief cameo in “Captain America: Civil War” that crossed Spidey into the mainstream Marvel timeline.
Within the high-school setting, Peter Parker’s geeky, and almost too deliberately multi-racial, gang includes his pal Ned (Jacob Batalon), very funny with a “chair guy” sequence, the unattainable Liz (Laura Harrier) as the love-interest, Betty (the excellent Angourie Rice who made such a great impression in “The Nice Guys” but didn’t really move the meter for me here I’m afraid), Flash (Tony Revolori) and best of all for me the almost horizontally laconic Michelle (Zendaya, of Shoshone heritage) – uber-cool but harbouring a secret crush on Peter.
Chris Evans pops up for comic relief as Captain America doing motivational high-school videos. And older viewers might want to have fun watching out for Tyne Daly: Lacey in the old cop show “Cagney and Lacey”.
But stealing the show in the acting stakes is Michael Keaton as Adrian Toomes (aka “The Vulture”) who could for all the world be auditioning for “Birdman 2”. The well-judged thing about this villain is that he is no hyper-galactic being with superpowers, or a typical “rule the world” Bond villain, but just an ordinary Joe in search of financial profit to keep his family in the manner to which they are accustomed. I really liked that. The script (an army of people, but led by Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley, who also wrote the story) also nicely counterpoints the thin-line between the “good arms dealer” (Tony Stark) and the “bad arms dealer” (Toomes).
The script also very wisely leaps several months into where the reboot could have started. None of the tedious spider biting. No Uncle Ben – just a sly reference to “what Aunt May’s been through”. Now this might confuse anyone not familiar with the Spider-Man story, but the percentage of people in the Western world in that segment must be less than 2%.
There are however also significant character changes that may annoy Spider-Man devotees. Aunt May herself is no longer the frail old lady of previous depictions, but a hot and attractive middle-aged woman (AILF?) played by Marisa Tomei (who does indeed look ‘Mila Kunis‘).
Many of the action scenes are well done, with a scene at the Washington Monument being particularly exciting. It all gets rather overblown though with a later scene aboard the Avenger’s plane. And this scene sums up my problem with many of these films: the superhero characters are pretty well indestructible. You know they are. So the scenes of peril, that might thrill in an Indiana Jones, an M.I. or a Bond film, lack any sort of tension. Even when the protagonist does have a superhero on the ropes, they don’t carry on kicking the proverbial c**p out of them until they are “dead”…. they lay off so the superhero can recover and kick their ass in a few minutes time!
The director is Jon Watts in only his third directorial outing (with only the much praised “Cop Car” to pretty up his CV). With such a lot on his shoulders he does a good job.
At 133 minutes its a tad over-long (I watched this in a double bill with “War for the Planet of the Apes” so my eyes afterwards were 16:9!). But it’s a fun summer flick that both amuses and entertains. If you have the choice between this and Planet of the Apes though for your Saturday night at the movies, I would personally choose the latter.
By the way, in terms of “monkeys” – yep, it’s a Marvel film, of course there are monkeys! One early on in the credits and another one at the end… which is actually very funny indeed.
And I still feel the same way. I understand that its more to do with rights ownership between Sony, Marvel and Disney that this got made so quickly…. but in the words of Ian Malcolm “they didn’t stop to think if they should”.
But actually, although I still don’t really approve of it, they’ve done a pretty good job in rebooting in a different manner. I commented in my review for “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” that that first reboot was “much less earnest and quirkier than the original Tobey Maguire series, and reveling more in the fun to be had around a superhero’s schooldays.” This latest reboot moves even further along that scale, being very much more of a high-school comedy that a pure superhero flick.
Wearing the suit this time is a far more age-appropriate Tom Holland, winner of last year’s BAFTA Rising Star award. And very personable he is too. The suit in question has been jizzed up by Iron Man (Robert Downey Jnr) – perhaps I could have rephrased that better! Because here the Spider-Man story carries on from the brief cameo in “Captain America: Civil War” that crossed Spidey into the mainstream Marvel timeline.
Within the high-school setting, Peter Parker’s geeky, and almost too deliberately multi-racial, gang includes his pal Ned (Jacob Batalon), very funny with a “chair guy” sequence, the unattainable Liz (Laura Harrier) as the love-interest, Betty (the excellent Angourie Rice who made such a great impression in “The Nice Guys” but didn’t really move the meter for me here I’m afraid), Flash (Tony Revolori) and best of all for me the almost horizontally laconic Michelle (Zendaya, of Shoshone heritage) – uber-cool but harbouring a secret crush on Peter.
Chris Evans pops up for comic relief as Captain America doing motivational high-school videos. And older viewers might want to have fun watching out for Tyne Daly: Lacey in the old cop show “Cagney and Lacey”.
But stealing the show in the acting stakes is Michael Keaton as Adrian Toomes (aka “The Vulture”) who could for all the world be auditioning for “Birdman 2”. The well-judged thing about this villain is that he is no hyper-galactic being with superpowers, or a typical “rule the world” Bond villain, but just an ordinary Joe in search of financial profit to keep his family in the manner to which they are accustomed. I really liked that. The script (an army of people, but led by Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley, who also wrote the story) also nicely counterpoints the thin-line between the “good arms dealer” (Tony Stark) and the “bad arms dealer” (Toomes).
The script also very wisely leaps several months into where the reboot could have started. None of the tedious spider biting. No Uncle Ben – just a sly reference to “what Aunt May’s been through”. Now this might confuse anyone not familiar with the Spider-Man story, but the percentage of people in the Western world in that segment must be less than 2%.
There are however also significant character changes that may annoy Spider-Man devotees. Aunt May herself is no longer the frail old lady of previous depictions, but a hot and attractive middle-aged woman (AILF?) played by Marisa Tomei (who does indeed look ‘Mila Kunis‘).
Many of the action scenes are well done, with a scene at the Washington Monument being particularly exciting. It all gets rather overblown though with a later scene aboard the Avenger’s plane. And this scene sums up my problem with many of these films: the superhero characters are pretty well indestructible. You know they are. So the scenes of peril, that might thrill in an Indiana Jones, an M.I. or a Bond film, lack any sort of tension. Even when the protagonist does have a superhero on the ropes, they don’t carry on kicking the proverbial c**p out of them until they are “dead”…. they lay off so the superhero can recover and kick their ass in a few minutes time!
The director is Jon Watts in only his third directorial outing (with only the much praised “Cop Car” to pretty up his CV). With such a lot on his shoulders he does a good job.
At 133 minutes its a tad over-long (I watched this in a double bill with “War for the Planet of the Apes” so my eyes afterwards were 16:9!). But it’s a fun summer flick that both amuses and entertains. If you have the choice between this and Planet of the Apes though for your Saturday night at the movies, I would personally choose the latter.
By the way, in terms of “monkeys” – yep, it’s a Marvel film, of course there are monkeys! One early on in the credits and another one at the end… which is actually very funny indeed.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Cinematic Redbull
Up until a week ago, I was really looking forward to this film. Mad Max as a series has a criminally underestimated impact on our pop culture psyche thanks to its unique aesthetic. Everyone now knows exactly what they want to do in the event of the apocalypse; strap dustbin lids and S&M gear to our bodies.
Then I remembered that other recent reboot of a beloved 80’s sci-fi film, 2014’s Robocop. Specifically, I remembered that it was absolutely awful, a broken train-wreck of a movie that doesn’t understand and full on resents the original film, and drained all the personality out of a film bursting with it. 2012’s Total Recall shared similar problems, so the question came; would this modern reboot of an 80’s genre classic be the first of its kind to match the quality of the original?
The answer is no. It is far, far better.
The original Mad Max films each had the budget of a school nativity play and relied entirely on the scrapyard aesthetic and charismatic villains rather than action. Fury Road, on the other hand, is the cinematic equivalent of Red Bull; fast paced, frenetic and wild. The action sequences are almost constant, only broken up when the audience’s hearts are about to burst, accompanied by one of the most energetic and brilliant soundtracks I’ve ever heard. In the hands of a lesser filmmaker it would be too much to handle, but Miller makes sure to frame and edit each scene in a way that allows the audience to always follow the action.
Visually, the film is much more in line with Alejandro Jodorowsky’s failed Dune adaptation than anything else, with its deformed mutants, impractical clothes and grungy mechanics. Every image on screen is madder than the last; the audience will probably ask “Why does that guy have a flamethrower guitar?” or “Why is there a fat dude in a business suit with his nipples exposed?” and the film just says “Because you wanted to see it and didn’t know you did.” And it is totally right. Like Big Game, the landscapes are achingly beautiful too, turning a barren desert into a sea of colours.
The plot is utter gibberish; there is absolutely no reason that any series of events would lead to the world looking the way it does and the characters looking and acting the way they do. Most films would be ashamed of this and try to handwave it away or explain it; Fury Road, however, takes the smarter option, and full on embraces the insanity. Characters spout lines like “I have seen the three gates” and “You will ride with silver and chrome” without irony, and it all just works, sweeping the audience up into a world where logic is superfluous as long as what you’re saying is cool.
This wouldn’t work if the acting wasn’t on point, but every single actor is completely game for the madcap lunacy that is the
script. Everyone sings their lines, which might be nonsense but just sound so good. The only weak spot is Tom Hardy as Max himself, who tries to be a calming anchor to contrast everyone else but instead seems like he came out of a different, much more boring film. In fact, Max seems here only so the film can be called Mad Max, because really it is Charlize Theron’s movie; Imperator Furiosa is the true main character and Theron easily gives the most nuanced performance.
Upon seeing this film, I genuinely had to go for a jog to get all of the energy out of me. This film is mad glory from beginning to end, a fireworks show for the eyes and ears. One of the best action films of the year in an already good year for the genre. Certainly a much better reboot than Robocop. Now if you excuse me, I’m going to make a suit of armour out of washing machine parts and ball gags.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/05/19/cinematic-red-bull-mad-max-fury-road-review/
Then I remembered that other recent reboot of a beloved 80’s sci-fi film, 2014’s Robocop. Specifically, I remembered that it was absolutely awful, a broken train-wreck of a movie that doesn’t understand and full on resents the original film, and drained all the personality out of a film bursting with it. 2012’s Total Recall shared similar problems, so the question came; would this modern reboot of an 80’s genre classic be the first of its kind to match the quality of the original?
The answer is no. It is far, far better.
The original Mad Max films each had the budget of a school nativity play and relied entirely on the scrapyard aesthetic and charismatic villains rather than action. Fury Road, on the other hand, is the cinematic equivalent of Red Bull; fast paced, frenetic and wild. The action sequences are almost constant, only broken up when the audience’s hearts are about to burst, accompanied by one of the most energetic and brilliant soundtracks I’ve ever heard. In the hands of a lesser filmmaker it would be too much to handle, but Miller makes sure to frame and edit each scene in a way that allows the audience to always follow the action.
Visually, the film is much more in line with Alejandro Jodorowsky’s failed Dune adaptation than anything else, with its deformed mutants, impractical clothes and grungy mechanics. Every image on screen is madder than the last; the audience will probably ask “Why does that guy have a flamethrower guitar?” or “Why is there a fat dude in a business suit with his nipples exposed?” and the film just says “Because you wanted to see it and didn’t know you did.” And it is totally right. Like Big Game, the landscapes are achingly beautiful too, turning a barren desert into a sea of colours.
The plot is utter gibberish; there is absolutely no reason that any series of events would lead to the world looking the way it does and the characters looking and acting the way they do. Most films would be ashamed of this and try to handwave it away or explain it; Fury Road, however, takes the smarter option, and full on embraces the insanity. Characters spout lines like “I have seen the three gates” and “You will ride with silver and chrome” without irony, and it all just works, sweeping the audience up into a world where logic is superfluous as long as what you’re saying is cool.
This wouldn’t work if the acting wasn’t on point, but every single actor is completely game for the madcap lunacy that is the
script. Everyone sings their lines, which might be nonsense but just sound so good. The only weak spot is Tom Hardy as Max himself, who tries to be a calming anchor to contrast everyone else but instead seems like he came out of a different, much more boring film. In fact, Max seems here only so the film can be called Mad Max, because really it is Charlize Theron’s movie; Imperator Furiosa is the true main character and Theron easily gives the most nuanced performance.
Upon seeing this film, I genuinely had to go for a jog to get all of the energy out of me. This film is mad glory from beginning to end, a fireworks show for the eyes and ears. One of the best action films of the year in an already good year for the genre. Certainly a much better reboot than Robocop. Now if you excuse me, I’m going to make a suit of armour out of washing machine parts and ball gags.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/05/19/cinematic-red-bull-mad-max-fury-road-review/
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Girl in the Spider's Web (2018) in Movies
Feb 18, 2020 (Updated Feb 18, 2020)
Tangled
I love the american verison of "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo". And even the Swedish series was good. But i like the american verison better. So what about this film, its dull. It cant live up to the pervious film/series. I give Clarie Foy credit she was good as Lisbeth, but both Noomi Rapace and Rooney Mara were both excellent as Lisbeth and Clarie was a step down from them. She was the only good part of this film. The plot, the supporting charcters, the twist, the action were all dull and cant live up to the pervious movies.
The plot: Fired from the National Security Agency, Frans Balder recruits hacker Lisbeth Salander to steal FireWall, a computer programme that can access codes for nuclear weapons worldwide. The download soon draws attention from an NSA agent who traces the activity to Stockholm. Further problems arise when Russian thugs take Lisbeth's laptop and kidnap a math whiz who can make FireWall work. Now, Lisbeth and an unlikely ally must race against time to save the boy and recover the codes to avert disaster.
So this film acts as both a soft-reboot and a sequel to David Fincher's The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Which is confusing cause in the film Lisbeth already knows Mikael and has alredy a realtionship with him. Which was confusing to me and still is.
Also this film came out seven years later from "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo". For those who dont know, in December 2011, Fincher stated that the creative team involved planned to film the sequels The Girl Who Played with Fire and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest, "back to back. There was an announced release date of 2013 for a film version of The Girl Who Played with Fire, although by August 2012 it was delayed due to changes being done to the script, being written by Steven Zaillian. The following year, Fincher stated that a script for The Girl that Played with Fire had been written and that it was "extremely different from the book," and that "despite the long delay, he was confident that the film would be made given that the studio already has spent millions of dollars on the rights and the script". And than in 2015, their just decided to reboot the franchise and by 2017, their decided to have a whole new cast.
I whould of loved to see David Fincher's verison of "The Girl Who Played With Fire" and "The Girl Who Kicked The Hornet's Nest". Cause like i said Rooney Mara was excellent as Lisbeth and Daniel Craig as excellent as Mikeal.
So overall is movie was dull and didnt live up to its pervious movies.
The plot: Fired from the National Security Agency, Frans Balder recruits hacker Lisbeth Salander to steal FireWall, a computer programme that can access codes for nuclear weapons worldwide. The download soon draws attention from an NSA agent who traces the activity to Stockholm. Further problems arise when Russian thugs take Lisbeth's laptop and kidnap a math whiz who can make FireWall work. Now, Lisbeth and an unlikely ally must race against time to save the boy and recover the codes to avert disaster.
So this film acts as both a soft-reboot and a sequel to David Fincher's The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Which is confusing cause in the film Lisbeth already knows Mikael and has alredy a realtionship with him. Which was confusing to me and still is.
Also this film came out seven years later from "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo". For those who dont know, in December 2011, Fincher stated that the creative team involved planned to film the sequels The Girl Who Played with Fire and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest, "back to back. There was an announced release date of 2013 for a film version of The Girl Who Played with Fire, although by August 2012 it was delayed due to changes being done to the script, being written by Steven Zaillian. The following year, Fincher stated that a script for The Girl that Played with Fire had been written and that it was "extremely different from the book," and that "despite the long delay, he was confident that the film would be made given that the studio already has spent millions of dollars on the rights and the script". And than in 2015, their just decided to reboot the franchise and by 2017, their decided to have a whole new cast.
I whould of loved to see David Fincher's verison of "The Girl Who Played With Fire" and "The Girl Who Kicked The Hornet's Nest". Cause like i said Rooney Mara was excellent as Lisbeth and Daniel Craig as excellent as Mikeal.
So overall is movie was dull and didnt live up to its pervious movies.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Suicide Squad (2021) in Movies
Aug 4, 2021
The Suicide Squad is a (possible) reboot that may or may not follow on from Suicide Squad and (or only) Birds of Prey. Honestly I'm not sure that even DC knows what's going on with their movie time line. Anyway, Margot Robbie and Joel Kinnamen return as Harley Quinn and Rick Flagg to lead another team of criminal misfits on an impossible mission (or, if it's a reboot like James Gunn says then it's the first time they are together and we ignore that Flagg askes Harley why she's back in prison or that Waller's team are checking who has worked with who). This time task force X are sent to the island of Corto Maltese to find and destroy 'Project Starfish'.
Ok so 'The Suicide Squad' is a good film, it looks like it has learned form the problems of the first film and incorporated the humour from 'Birds of Prey'. Firstly It's not as formulaic as the first film, a problem that is caused by the premise of 'Task Force X', if each member of the task force is chosen because they have a skill that is useful for the mission then you would expect that skill to be used and the first film took this too literally, each member had a scene where they did their thing then they just faded into the background and 'The Suicide Squad' avoids this by focusing on the characters was, well characters and not powers.
The film is very action driven and very violent but, unlike some of the other recent DC films it's not dark, it has more of a 'Grindhouse' feel than the dark, brooding style of the Batman/Superman/Justice league films (I liked those but they were a bit heavy in parts). The Suicide Squad has humour in it, some of which is quite immature but it fits the tone of the film. The violence and humour is some what balanced out by the comic book feel the film has, King shark, Weasel and Staro are both some what cartoony in appearance and some of the costumes are straight out of the comic books and I think that this is what managed to keep it at a (UK) rating of 15 because (and I know I've said this) it's violent, it's bloody, people get ripped apart and there is torture and lots of talk about killing children.
Somehow 'The Suicide Squad' is a fun watchable film and defiantly one of the better DC films, don't be put of by the original Suicide Squad (no 'The).
Oh and also there's a, after credit scene that set's up for a film that's been announced so stick around until the credits finish.
Ok so 'The Suicide Squad' is a good film, it looks like it has learned form the problems of the first film and incorporated the humour from 'Birds of Prey'. Firstly It's not as formulaic as the first film, a problem that is caused by the premise of 'Task Force X', if each member of the task force is chosen because they have a skill that is useful for the mission then you would expect that skill to be used and the first film took this too literally, each member had a scene where they did their thing then they just faded into the background and 'The Suicide Squad' avoids this by focusing on the characters was, well characters and not powers.
The film is very action driven and very violent but, unlike some of the other recent DC films it's not dark, it has more of a 'Grindhouse' feel than the dark, brooding style of the Batman/Superman/Justice league films (I liked those but they were a bit heavy in parts). The Suicide Squad has humour in it, some of which is quite immature but it fits the tone of the film. The violence and humour is some what balanced out by the comic book feel the film has, King shark, Weasel and Staro are both some what cartoony in appearance and some of the costumes are straight out of the comic books and I think that this is what managed to keep it at a (UK) rating of 15 because (and I know I've said this) it's violent, it's bloody, people get ripped apart and there is torture and lots of talk about killing children.
Somehow 'The Suicide Squad' is a fun watchable film and defiantly one of the better DC films, don't be put of by the original Suicide Squad (no 'The).
Oh and also there's a, after credit scene that set's up for a film that's been announced so stick around until the credits finish.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Halloween (2007) in Movies
Oct 10, 2018
A successful re-imagining but turned up to 11!
When I first heard director Rob Zombie was going to have a hand at Halloween, I couldn't have been more excited. His films up to that point had been intense, scary, gruesome, gothic, sexual and down-rite awesome!
This reinvention had big shoes to fill since the original Halloween is not only a scary movie classic, but invented or perfected a lot of horror elements still used in films today.
The additions to the story proved successful seeing a lot more scenes of Michael as a child, his dysfunctional family roots (which could have been part of his inner demons) and more details around his escape from the psychiatric hospital. Then the original story plays out as you are familiar; although, more intense and evil.
The third act does seem to drag out just a bit as the movie is around 2 hours in length.
Great to see a lot of "B" movie actors appear in the film including Malcolm McDowell, Clint Howard, Brad Dourif, Dee Wallace and Richard Lynch. Also Danielle Harris who was the little girl in parts 4 & 5 is also there as another homage.
Overall, a successful reboot with enough mixture of old and new to keep me very well entertained.
This reinvention had big shoes to fill since the original Halloween is not only a scary movie classic, but invented or perfected a lot of horror elements still used in films today.
The additions to the story proved successful seeing a lot more scenes of Michael as a child, his dysfunctional family roots (which could have been part of his inner demons) and more details around his escape from the psychiatric hospital. Then the original story plays out as you are familiar; although, more intense and evil.
The third act does seem to drag out just a bit as the movie is around 2 hours in length.
Great to see a lot of "B" movie actors appear in the film including Malcolm McDowell, Clint Howard, Brad Dourif, Dee Wallace and Richard Lynch. Also Danielle Harris who was the little girl in parts 4 & 5 is also there as another homage.
Overall, a successful reboot with enough mixture of old and new to keep me very well entertained.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Halloween (2018) in Movies
Nov 2, 2018 (Updated Nov 2, 2018)
Tenth Halloween sequel is the eleventh film in the Halloween series and the third to actually be called Halloween; I'm sure there must have been a less confusing way of organising this but clearly no-one could be bothered to find it. Anyway: this film disregards all the previous sequels, allowing them to bring Jamie Lee Curtis back from the dead (again) and ignore all that stuff about occult curses and long-lost siblings in attempt to take the film back to the core notion of an unstoppable force of pure evil with a big knife and a William Shatner mask.
And it works rather well, although the decision to essentially turn Laurie Strode into Sarah Connor from Terminator 2 inevitably shifts the tone of the film somewhat. Many pleasingly tense sequences, and some clever and respectful call-backs to the original film. The ongoing characters are effectively presented although most of the new ones don't make much of an impression. In the end this feels much more like a reverent act of homage than the kind of horror film we usually get in 2018; whether this is a good thing or not is probably a matter of personal taste. I imagine this will keep most people quite happy until the next sequel or reboot comes along.
And it works rather well, although the decision to essentially turn Laurie Strode into Sarah Connor from Terminator 2 inevitably shifts the tone of the film somewhat. Many pleasingly tense sequences, and some clever and respectful call-backs to the original film. The ongoing characters are effectively presented although most of the new ones don't make much of an impression. In the end this feels much more like a reverent act of homage than the kind of horror film we usually get in 2018; whether this is a good thing or not is probably a matter of personal taste. I imagine this will keep most people quite happy until the next sequel or reboot comes along.
Trackie (153 KP) rated Bumblebee (2018) in Movies
Jan 19, 2019
Everything (3 more)
Just as good if not better the more you watch it.
Amazing Graphics
The transformation scenes
BumbleBee
This film is a complete reboot, a revolution in the Transformer cinematic world. Wow, this is the start of something special. It has a formula that could be repeated time and time again with other Transformer's characters building up to an enormous film on the scale of Avengers. Wow would ever of thought that Transformers would be on par with Avengers.
The more you watch it, the better it gets.
It has everything you could want! Action, loss, struggle, conflict, evil, and bright-shining goodness that will leave a deep impression on your soul.
It displays a friendship that will rip your heart out! Honestly, I cried several times during the movie because the relationship between the girl and the Transformer was so touching. It was just SO touching and heart-warming that it will leave you feeling good all over!
The Decepticons were believably menacing–even evoking emotions similar to the Terminator movies. They were dangerous beings. But they weren't two-dimensional villains. They had personality, motive, and intelligence.
The action scenes were excellent! Bumblebee demonstrates the power of well-placed action in a well-paced storyline.
I just can't say enough! Well done!! See this movie several times! I'm telling you, you won't regret it.
The more you watch it, the better it gets.
It has everything you could want! Action, loss, struggle, conflict, evil, and bright-shining goodness that will leave a deep impression on your soul.
It displays a friendship that will rip your heart out! Honestly, I cried several times during the movie because the relationship between the girl and the Transformer was so touching. It was just SO touching and heart-warming that it will leave you feeling good all over!
The Decepticons were believably menacing–even evoking emotions similar to the Terminator movies. They were dangerous beings. But they weren't two-dimensional villains. They had personality, motive, and intelligence.
The action scenes were excellent! Bumblebee demonstrates the power of well-placed action in a well-paced storyline.
I just can't say enough! Well done!! See this movie several times! I'm telling you, you won't regret it.
Sarah (7799 KP) rated Jumanji: The Next Level (2019) in Movies
Jan 8, 2020
Second rate sequel
I'm probably the only person who didn't really rate the first film in this reboot series. Yes it was better than I expected but not great, although having watched this sequel I can definitely now appreciate the first film.
This is by far a second rate sequel. The whole plot and game premise offered is just a little dull and predictable, and the bad guy is this is even less threatening in the first film (which is a shame seen as he's Rory McCann). They've tried to go even more extravagant with the set pieces and action scenes, but it doesn't quite hide the fact that the plot is fairly weak. Which is a shame as seeing the gang all back together again is actually quite fun. The way they've done the avatars this time round started off ridiculously funny, but there are a couple of characters who soon get very irritating very quickly. Thankfully we've got Jack Black who really shines in this no matter who he is, and he at least makes up for some of the more irritating characters. The inclusion of Danny DeVito and Danny Glover seemed entirely unnecessary.
Overall this was a vaguely enjoyable film but despite it's runtime being less than 2 hours, really seemed to drag. And I hate how they've set it up for yet another sequel.
This is by far a second rate sequel. The whole plot and game premise offered is just a little dull and predictable, and the bad guy is this is even less threatening in the first film (which is a shame seen as he's Rory McCann). They've tried to go even more extravagant with the set pieces and action scenes, but it doesn't quite hide the fact that the plot is fairly weak. Which is a shame as seeing the gang all back together again is actually quite fun. The way they've done the avatars this time round started off ridiculously funny, but there are a couple of characters who soon get very irritating very quickly. Thankfully we've got Jack Black who really shines in this no matter who he is, and he at least makes up for some of the more irritating characters. The inclusion of Danny DeVito and Danny Glover seemed entirely unnecessary.
Overall this was a vaguely enjoyable film but despite it's runtime being less than 2 hours, really seemed to drag. And I hate how they've set it up for yet another sequel.
Sarah (7799 KP) rated Jay and Silent Bob Reboot (2019) in Movies
Jul 3, 2020
Hilarious
Watching this film has really brightened up an otherwise rubbish week. I haven't laughed this much in a long time.
It's been quite some time since I watched the original Jay and Silent Bob, but i remember liking it alongside Dogma and everything else. This sequel has been a long time coming, but it is definitely welcome. Although it does highlight how long ago the original was as everyone now looks so old! I laughed out loud so many times watching this. If there's anything Kevin Smith does brilliantly is a smart, quick witted, intelligent script and this one is full of the quips and pop culture references you'd come to expect. Jason Lee's reboot vs remakes debate is possibly the funniest thing I've seen all year and even better, it's so true - right down to the comeback about Marvel films. As you'd expect as well there's a whole host of famous faces, both returning and new and they're great to see.
My only issue with this is that it dragged in the middle. It got a little too serious and the teenage girls characters and storylines were a little dull and boring, and we've seen this before (Dumb and Dumber Too for instance). But this aside, this is a marvellous fun and feel good film. There needs to be more films like this about.
It's been quite some time since I watched the original Jay and Silent Bob, but i remember liking it alongside Dogma and everything else. This sequel has been a long time coming, but it is definitely welcome. Although it does highlight how long ago the original was as everyone now looks so old! I laughed out loud so many times watching this. If there's anything Kevin Smith does brilliantly is a smart, quick witted, intelligent script and this one is full of the quips and pop culture references you'd come to expect. Jason Lee's reboot vs remakes debate is possibly the funniest thing I've seen all year and even better, it's so true - right down to the comeback about Marvel films. As you'd expect as well there's a whole host of famous faces, both returning and new and they're great to see.
My only issue with this is that it dragged in the middle. It got a little too serious and the teenage girls characters and storylines were a little dull and boring, and we've seen this before (Dumb and Dumber Too for instance). But this aside, this is a marvellous fun and feel good film. There needs to be more films like this about.
Darren Fisher (2454 KP) rated Leatherface (2017) in Movies
Dec 11, 2020
'The BoreGore Generation...'
Is it me or do the majority of films released via Lionsgate follow almost identical film making styles and patterns? It seems to me these days that you can take any old franchise that is currently doing well, take its name, say it's a prequel/reboot/origins and churn out a dull and predictable viewing experience.
It's all here... the pre-credits scene setting things up for us: Just watch that and you pretty much know what to expect for the rest of the film. Gore: Sadly the usual post Hostel/Saw kind of gore. Victims getting killed by unusual, elaborate and highly impractical devices (why murders can't be content with axing, stabbing and gutting their victims anymore is beyond me. Seems like these newbies get their kit from Acme these days). Crushed skulls. Removing of extremities. Gut ripping predictability. Plenty of graphic scenes but we have seen it all before. Hundreds of times. Personally I've become desensitized to this style of gore. Tedious. Maybe I'll nickname it "BoreGore"... Even the soundtrack is as generic as it comes, low moody noodling that goes nowhere. So at least it is keeping consistent with the film. Generic is actually the best way to describe this film. To be honest I didn't expect much going into this film. At least they got that right...
It's all here... the pre-credits scene setting things up for us: Just watch that and you pretty much know what to expect for the rest of the film. Gore: Sadly the usual post Hostel/Saw kind of gore. Victims getting killed by unusual, elaborate and highly impractical devices (why murders can't be content with axing, stabbing and gutting their victims anymore is beyond me. Seems like these newbies get their kit from Acme these days). Crushed skulls. Removing of extremities. Gut ripping predictability. Plenty of graphic scenes but we have seen it all before. Hundreds of times. Personally I've become desensitized to this style of gore. Tedious. Maybe I'll nickname it "BoreGore"... Even the soundtrack is as generic as it comes, low moody noodling that goes nowhere. So at least it is keeping consistent with the film. Generic is actually the best way to describe this film. To be honest I didn't expect much going into this film. At least they got that right...