Search
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Child's Play (2019) in Movies
Apr 11, 2020
Creepy but not in the way they intended
Let’s face it, nobody has high hopes when it comes to a reboot of a classic horror and Chucky is one of those characters that has been done to death over the years. Whilst this film wasn’t as terrible as I expected, it was still rather lacking.
To start with there’s the huge elephant in the room, or should I say the huge Buddi doll in the room. I really do not know what they were thinking with the design of the doll. It looks horrendous. It’s creepy, but not in a scary way. It’s creepy because of how awful it looks. The doll from the original looks a lot better (and scarier) than this. It spoilt a lot of the film for me as I spent most of my time cringing or cracking up laughing at how bad it looked.
Which was a shame, as I liked a lot of what they’d done with the rest of the film. It was a great idea to introduce the technology side with the smart devices and makes it a lot more relevant to modern society, and quite scarily realistic. At first I wasn’t keen that they’d changed Andy from a younger child to a teenager, but as the film goes on I started to realise this was actually a good idea. Sadly though Aubrey Plaza was a little underused, but I love that Mark Hamill was the voice of Chucky. There’s also a decent amount of blood and gore in this film which is always appreciated.
There is a slight sadness that this film hasn’t included more references to the original but overall it would’ve been a rather decent and enjoyable horror if it hadn’t been for the damn awful design of the doll.
To start with there’s the huge elephant in the room, or should I say the huge Buddi doll in the room. I really do not know what they were thinking with the design of the doll. It looks horrendous. It’s creepy, but not in a scary way. It’s creepy because of how awful it looks. The doll from the original looks a lot better (and scarier) than this. It spoilt a lot of the film for me as I spent most of my time cringing or cracking up laughing at how bad it looked.
Which was a shame, as I liked a lot of what they’d done with the rest of the film. It was a great idea to introduce the technology side with the smart devices and makes it a lot more relevant to modern society, and quite scarily realistic. At first I wasn’t keen that they’d changed Andy from a younger child to a teenager, but as the film goes on I started to realise this was actually a good idea. Sadly though Aubrey Plaza was a little underused, but I love that Mark Hamill was the voice of Chucky. There’s also a decent amount of blood and gore in this film which is always appreciated.
There is a slight sadness that this film hasn’t included more references to the original but overall it would’ve been a rather decent and enjoyable horror if it hadn’t been for the damn awful design of the doll.
The Wife: A Novel
Book
His Scandal Her Secret From New York Times bestselling author Alafair Burke, a stunning domestic...
mystery thriller
7th Son: Book One - Descent (The Beta Version)
Podcast
AUTHOR'S NOTE: This is "The Beta Version" of this podiobook. 7th Son: Descent is now available as a...
Guy Garvey recommended Sky At Night by I Am Kloot in Music (curated)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Scars of Dracula (1970) in Movies
Nov 17, 2020
Start From Scratch
Scars of Dracula- is the sixth Dracula film from Hammer and fifth starring Christopher Lee. Its a re-introducting to Dracula, even though its the six one in the Hammer franchise. Its also takes place after Taste, so im not sure why their did do a re-introducting. Anyways
The plot: Bat's blood hits Dracula's (Christopher Lee) ashes, and he rises again to fight a couple (Dennis Waterman, Jenny Hanley) looking for trouble.
It also gives Lee more to do and say than any other Hammer Dracula film except its first, 1958's Dracula.
This film breaks the continuity maintained through the previous entries in the Hammer Dracula series: whereas at the end of the preceding film, Taste the Blood of Dracula, the Count met his end in a disused church near London, this film opens with a resurrection scene set in Dracula's castle in Transylvania, with no explanation of how his ashes got there (although, they might have been returned from England, as a contingency, by the young acolyte from the prologue of Dracula A.D. 1972). Furthermore; in Scars of Dracula, the Count has a servant named Klove, played by Patrick Troughton; in the third film of the series, Dracula: Prince of Darkness, Dracula has a servant named Klove (played by Philip Latham) who appears to be a different character, though identically named. The disruption of continuity caused by Scars of Dracula reflects the fact the film was originally tooled as a possible reboot of the series in the event Christopher Lee elected not to reprise the role of Dracula.
The British Film group EMI took over distribution of the film after Warner Bros., Universal Pictures and other American studios refused to distribute it in the U.S. It was also the first of several Hammer films to get an 'R' rating.
Its a good film.
The plot: Bat's blood hits Dracula's (Christopher Lee) ashes, and he rises again to fight a couple (Dennis Waterman, Jenny Hanley) looking for trouble.
It also gives Lee more to do and say than any other Hammer Dracula film except its first, 1958's Dracula.
This film breaks the continuity maintained through the previous entries in the Hammer Dracula series: whereas at the end of the preceding film, Taste the Blood of Dracula, the Count met his end in a disused church near London, this film opens with a resurrection scene set in Dracula's castle in Transylvania, with no explanation of how his ashes got there (although, they might have been returned from England, as a contingency, by the young acolyte from the prologue of Dracula A.D. 1972). Furthermore; in Scars of Dracula, the Count has a servant named Klove, played by Patrick Troughton; in the third film of the series, Dracula: Prince of Darkness, Dracula has a servant named Klove (played by Philip Latham) who appears to be a different character, though identically named. The disruption of continuity caused by Scars of Dracula reflects the fact the film was originally tooled as a possible reboot of the series in the event Christopher Lee elected not to reprise the role of Dracula.
The British Film group EMI took over distribution of the film after Warner Bros., Universal Pictures and other American studios refused to distribute it in the U.S. It was also the first of several Hammer films to get an 'R' rating.
Its a good film.
Patrick Wilson recommended Fletch (1985) in Movies (curated)
Ross (3284 KP) rated Blindspot - Season 4 in TV
Jun 28, 2019
Gone are the puzzles. Now just a brain-deadening copy of 24
Blindspot started with such a strong premise - a woman found with no memory and covered in tattoos and each tattoo turning out to be a puzzle which leads the FBI to solve a crime or stop a terrorist attack. As with so many TV shows, however, the original premise of strong, isolated episodes was gradually eroded in favour of an over-arching larger plot.
Here we have that same issue, while the season 3 villain has been ousted, lo and behold a new one has cropped up to take his place. This relegates the show to be something of a low quality reboot of 24 as the team struggle with conspiracy, terrorism, underworld shenanigans and corruption to try and stop the eventual attack.
However, the producers seem to have set the number of episodes in advance and then struggled to fill the 22 episode series with quality output. So instead we get a number of rejected 24 scripts hashed out with implausible solving of tattoo puzzles that generally add nothing to the overall series. So many times, the team seem to have been staring at a puzzle for months, only to suddenly realise that if they convert the numbers to letters, turn those into chemical symbols, add up their periodic table entries and divide that by the square root of the number of bananas produced per annum in the Caribbean and lo and behold it gives the password to a Hotmail account of an international terrorist who literally just landed in the country. Almost every episode has one of these mind-farts where so much is just shat out the screen in lazy exposition. The writers should have abandoned the tattoo nonsense a long time ago as tired and exhausted.
Here we have that same issue, while the season 3 villain has been ousted, lo and behold a new one has cropped up to take his place. This relegates the show to be something of a low quality reboot of 24 as the team struggle with conspiracy, terrorism, underworld shenanigans and corruption to try and stop the eventual attack.
However, the producers seem to have set the number of episodes in advance and then struggled to fill the 22 episode series with quality output. So instead we get a number of rejected 24 scripts hashed out with implausible solving of tattoo puzzles that generally add nothing to the overall series. So many times, the team seem to have been staring at a puzzle for months, only to suddenly realise that if they convert the numbers to letters, turn those into chemical symbols, add up their periodic table entries and divide that by the square root of the number of bananas produced per annum in the Caribbean and lo and behold it gives the password to a Hotmail account of an international terrorist who literally just landed in the country. Almost every episode has one of these mind-farts where so much is just shat out the screen in lazy exposition. The writers should have abandoned the tattoo nonsense a long time ago as tired and exhausted.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Star Trek - Nemesis (2002) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
This film should have worked. They had four years to work up the film: the biggest gap between movies in the series to date. The sets and special effects deployed are a notable improvement on “Insurrection” and are, at times, very impressive. It’s a movie that has personal angst for Picard; an epic space battle; and the death of a major character. And a young Tom Hardy turns in a memorable performance, belying what was to come: it’s interesting that this is only Hardy’s third feature (following his debut in “Black Hawk Down” just the year before!). It’s also a full NINE years before he won the BAFTA Rising Star award!
And yet it’s just not very engaging: I find myself fiddling with my phone while its on, which is never a good sign. Gone are any of the comic asides that have tended to lighten the mood of these films: this is dark and plot-heavy throughout. It’s even got a ‘mind-rape’ scene that is quite disturbing.
Naturally, the Enterprise insurance premium has taken another hammering by the end of the film. You can just imagine the discussion back in space dock… “no mate…” – sucking air in through his front teeth “…that whole front bumper’s gonna have to be replaced, and that’ll cost you a pretty packet”!
Combined with poor marketing and fierce competition (the film opening in the same month as “Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers”), this ended up with the worse financial performance of any of the Trek movies (in terms of budget to return ratio). And it killed the franchise. The only option was to be a full reboot: something that was to take another seven years to happen.
And yet it’s just not very engaging: I find myself fiddling with my phone while its on, which is never a good sign. Gone are any of the comic asides that have tended to lighten the mood of these films: this is dark and plot-heavy throughout. It’s even got a ‘mind-rape’ scene that is quite disturbing.
Naturally, the Enterprise insurance premium has taken another hammering by the end of the film. You can just imagine the discussion back in space dock… “no mate…” – sucking air in through his front teeth “…that whole front bumper’s gonna have to be replaced, and that’ll cost you a pretty packet”!
Combined with poor marketing and fierce competition (the film opening in the same month as “Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers”), this ended up with the worse financial performance of any of the Trek movies (in terms of budget to return ratio). And it killed the franchise. The only option was to be a full reboot: something that was to take another seven years to happen.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Upgrade (2018) in Movies
May 14, 2019
Reboot
#upgrade #upgrademovie is insane & possibly the biggest surprise of the year. Its dark, dirty, gritty, raw & I absolutely #loved every second of it. Upgrade clearly wears its influences on its sleeve right from the start, there's elements of #Dredd, #Robocop, #TheMatrix & also #Terminator & its style is a straight #nostalgic mash up of #80s & #90s #scifi. What's so good about it however is amongst all this influence is an intricately woven style of its own. Its a low budget #film but you wouldn't know it as cgi is fantastic/minimal & works so well with some of the best #practicaleffects I've seen in ages. Gore is so realistic/#savage & shocking at one point I almost stood up out my seat in sheer shock. Cinematography is #beautiful/creative & at times wouldnt look out of place in a #bladerunner film. Environments look nasty, hostile & damn right grimy giving the film such a raw & depressing quality like it too is also a character. Ive always loved #loganmarshallgreen his physical acting here is next level. How he moves his body in this movie is out of this world impressive (especially when the system takes over his body). He plays the role perfect making his body act robotic while his face reacts with sheer fear & panic (its not only hilarious but terrible & utterly fascinating too). Camera work when he's moving is seriously impressive too moving in almost a robotic kind of way twisting, turning & jolting with every move #logan makes. With an unnerving/memorable score & an over all message of #technology enslaving us all/how no matter how much we hate machines we all eventually become reliant on them in some way Upgrade is a must see. Its not very often a small film like this comes along so we must all go see it to encourage directors to make more. One hell of a great time & a film I can't wait to own. #odeon #odeonlimitless #filmbuff #filmcritic #filmreview #saturdaynight #horror #gore #violent #cyberpunk #grindhouse
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) in Movies
Feb 24, 2018 (Updated Feb 24, 2018)
Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is a solid film-going experience, albeit a little cheesy at times. While its overdone ending keeps it just short of a being an action/adventure classic, I have to say I was impressed with how well they were able to take the source material of the original and truly make it something entirely new. In this newer version of the remake, four kids in detention get trapped inside a video game and have to play their way out. They are eached armed with a set of "lives" and, just like in a game, losing lives brings you closer to losing everything. They must rely on the skills of their avatars to traverse the dangerous jungle terrain.
Jumanji gives you conventional funny meaning it's not going to be one of those films where you spend half of it doubled over in laughter. When it comes to characteristics of a solid film, however, the film checks all the boxes. Solid, hilarious characters that make it easy to root for them. The Bethany/Jack Black role alone was enough to keep a smile on my face for the majority of the movie. He is the ringleader in a lot of the hilarious moments, but the other stars (Dwayne Johnson, Kevin Hart) provide plenty of comedy as well. While the comedy isn't side-splitting, I give it it's due respect for being consistent. A solid, flowing story gets the same recognition as it never lingers in one spot for too long. The action does a good job of connecting plot points while not being overbearing.
I thought that by the time I finally got around to writing this, I would be recommending Jumanji for a home viewing. However, due to some great box office success, it's still kicking in theaters. So....go see it if you haven't already! I give it a solid 90.
Jumanji gives you conventional funny meaning it's not going to be one of those films where you spend half of it doubled over in laughter. When it comes to characteristics of a solid film, however, the film checks all the boxes. Solid, hilarious characters that make it easy to root for them. The Bethany/Jack Black role alone was enough to keep a smile on my face for the majority of the movie. He is the ringleader in a lot of the hilarious moments, but the other stars (Dwayne Johnson, Kevin Hart) provide plenty of comedy as well. While the comedy isn't side-splitting, I give it it's due respect for being consistent. A solid, flowing story gets the same recognition as it never lingers in one spot for too long. The action does a good job of connecting plot points while not being overbearing.
I thought that by the time I finally got around to writing this, I would be recommending Jumanji for a home viewing. However, due to some great box office success, it's still kicking in theaters. So....go see it if you haven't already! I give it a solid 90.
Jackjack (877 KP) Apr 11, 2020
Sarah (7798 KP) Apr 12, 2020