Search
mimiCopy - Slow Down & Pitch Shift Player
Music and Business
App
**If you can not access the music library on iOS10, check that mimiCopy is ON in "Settings" in...
Kim Pook (101 KP) rated And Just Like That in TV
Feb 19, 2022
New character Seema (1 more)
More diversity
New character Che (3 more)
Too much diversity
No Samantha
Death of a major character
Just as good without Samantha
Contains spoilers, click to show
I wasn't sure if a sex and the city reboot would work without Samantha but I was pleasently surprised. At first I did very much notice Samantha's absence but after a few episodes I did get used to it, I liked that there was a couple of mentions of her and Carrie is seen texting her as well as an off screen meet up in Paris, I like that they didn't act as if she never existed and new character Seema is a pretty good replacement for the Samantha shaped hole left in the series.
I wasn't overly keen on the character Che, I found her pretty obnoxious and led Miranda down a path that she was adament she wouldn't go down in Season 1 of the original series. This might be because I liked Steve and Miranda together, I ended up feeling so sorry for Steve and I do hope that if there's a season 2 Miranda will realise once again that Steve is her one and only as her and Che don't make sense at all.
I like that there is more diversity this time around but I do feel they went over the top with the wide range of diverse characters, to the point that I felt the main characters wasn't the main focus and the writers seemed more interested in how much diversity they can fit into one show, there were even scenes which included none of the main girls that I had no interest in such as the couple trying for a baby through IVF, I just felt their characters wasn't strong enough to have scenes by themselves.
I won't spoil it too much, but In the final episode there is a very noticeable edit during a dream sequence. I understand why it was edited due to recent events but they should have dropped that entire scene completely and just have Carrie talk about it, although personally I would have liked to see that scene in its entirity.
All these points aside though, I did really enjoy it. It had all the humour and raunchiness of the original series, in fact I liked it so much I binge watched it in 2 days. I do hope there's another season as it would be interesting to see where the characters go.
I wasn't overly keen on the character Che, I found her pretty obnoxious and led Miranda down a path that she was adament she wouldn't go down in Season 1 of the original series. This might be because I liked Steve and Miranda together, I ended up feeling so sorry for Steve and I do hope that if there's a season 2 Miranda will realise once again that Steve is her one and only as her and Che don't make sense at all.
I like that there is more diversity this time around but I do feel they went over the top with the wide range of diverse characters, to the point that I felt the main characters wasn't the main focus and the writers seemed more interested in how much diversity they can fit into one show, there were even scenes which included none of the main girls that I had no interest in such as the couple trying for a baby through IVF, I just felt their characters wasn't strong enough to have scenes by themselves.
I won't spoil it too much, but In the final episode there is a very noticeable edit during a dream sequence. I understand why it was edited due to recent events but they should have dropped that entire scene completely and just have Carrie talk about it, although personally I would have liked to see that scene in its entirity.
All these points aside though, I did really enjoy it. It had all the humour and raunchiness of the original series, in fact I liked it so much I binge watched it in 2 days. I do hope there's another season as it would be interesting to see where the characters go.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Hellboy (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Entertaining Hell Yes, Great Hell No
Hellboy is a 2019 supernatural superhero movie based on the Dark Horse Comics character created by Mike Mignola. It is the third film in the franchise and is also a reboot of the series. It is directed by Neil Marshall with screenplay by Andrew Cosby and distributed by Lionsgate. The film stars David Harbour, Millar Jovovich, Ian McShane and Daniel Dae Kim.
In the Dark Ages, Nimue, the Blood Queen, nearly destroyed humanity with a deadly plague. Immortal, she was only defeated by King Arthur with the help of Merlin and the magical blade Excalibur. She was beheaded, dismembered, and her remains scattered over Europe. In present day Tijuana, Hellboy (David Harbour), searches for a missing B.P.R.D. agent, Ruiz. Hellboy discovers Ruiz has been turned into a vampire and while trying to reason with him, Hellboy is forced into a confrontation which ultimately leads to the death of the agent. Meanwhile a mysterious person speaks with Baba Yaga, a witch-like creature, seeking revenge on Hellboy, and is told to locate the remains of Nimue and resurrect her.
This has been a really hard movie for me to review. I genuinely enjoyed it while watching it in theaters. That being said, this movie is a train wreck and I can't recommend for people to spend money to see it unless you wait for it to be at the dollar movies or Redbox. There were just so many things that I guess I was blind to while watching it, that i just shrugged off or didn't pay much attention to. Like all my reviews this will be as spoiler free as possible but i have to acknowledge major flaws that other critics and reviewers brought up. And there were a lot, I mean right now the critics are tearing this movie a new one. First, I thought David Harbour did as good a job as anyone could do replacing Ron Pearlman as Hellboy in this film. But replacing such a beloved and likeable character with a funny and charismatic personality which Pearlman made his own, he had his work cut out for him. I don't think he's ever acted with all the makeup and prosthetics and it showed because I don't think he was as expressive as he could have been. Plus this movie was also made with a different director and not Guillermo Del Toro, so it was already going to have a way different feel to it. To me though, those weren't the things that contributed the most to the failure of this movie, it's more of the other things I'm still getting to. This was a reboot of the series and they decided to go with a different group of supporting characters, and to also make the plot or story more closely related or similar to the comics (the source material). Now usually sticking with what the comics have for the story is always better than changing it in my opinion but it seems for this film that they chose to incorporate several different storylines and characters and felt like it was too much crammed into too little. Also this movie was all over the place, story wise and literally. It seemed the characters kept having to travel unnecessarily. It felt like the supporting characters were just thrown into the story and it didn't bother to introduce them to the audience correctly. Everyone just got a flashback and or had themselves or their origin "expositioned" into the movie. I liked a lot of the character designs and thought a lot of the CGI was well done, in places, however it seems like they had different animators or studios work on different scenes or characters and some of it was horrible. The dialogue was really bad too. There were a lot of jokes and one liners that just fell flat and nobody laughed, plus like i said way too much exposition. There was a character who wears a headdress that was so big it looked ridiculous, which I wonder if it was done on purpose. And there was a character whose clothes tear when they transform and they automatically have pants when they transform back, which makes no sense. The plot too was not very sound and full of plot holes and things that didn't make sense, were just added in, or were part of scenes that got cut along the way. It hurts me to give this movie a score so low but I give this movie a 5/10.
Now I'm not saying don't watch it. I just can't recommend you drop as much cash as you usually do to see it in theaters. I personally still really enjoyed it and was genuinely entertained. It was awesome to see the blood and gore in a darker Hellboy movie and the action was great even if the CGI always wasn't. The music even if it didn't fit the tone or every scene was great. If your expecting the Hellboy from the Guillermo Del Toro films you might just hate this movie. But if you're just looking for "Big Red" to beat up on some baddies then I think you might get a kick out of this movie. Hey, some critics are saying that it's so bad it's good.
In the Dark Ages, Nimue, the Blood Queen, nearly destroyed humanity with a deadly plague. Immortal, she was only defeated by King Arthur with the help of Merlin and the magical blade Excalibur. She was beheaded, dismembered, and her remains scattered over Europe. In present day Tijuana, Hellboy (David Harbour), searches for a missing B.P.R.D. agent, Ruiz. Hellboy discovers Ruiz has been turned into a vampire and while trying to reason with him, Hellboy is forced into a confrontation which ultimately leads to the death of the agent. Meanwhile a mysterious person speaks with Baba Yaga, a witch-like creature, seeking revenge on Hellboy, and is told to locate the remains of Nimue and resurrect her.
This has been a really hard movie for me to review. I genuinely enjoyed it while watching it in theaters. That being said, this movie is a train wreck and I can't recommend for people to spend money to see it unless you wait for it to be at the dollar movies or Redbox. There were just so many things that I guess I was blind to while watching it, that i just shrugged off or didn't pay much attention to. Like all my reviews this will be as spoiler free as possible but i have to acknowledge major flaws that other critics and reviewers brought up. And there were a lot, I mean right now the critics are tearing this movie a new one. First, I thought David Harbour did as good a job as anyone could do replacing Ron Pearlman as Hellboy in this film. But replacing such a beloved and likeable character with a funny and charismatic personality which Pearlman made his own, he had his work cut out for him. I don't think he's ever acted with all the makeup and prosthetics and it showed because I don't think he was as expressive as he could have been. Plus this movie was also made with a different director and not Guillermo Del Toro, so it was already going to have a way different feel to it. To me though, those weren't the things that contributed the most to the failure of this movie, it's more of the other things I'm still getting to. This was a reboot of the series and they decided to go with a different group of supporting characters, and to also make the plot or story more closely related or similar to the comics (the source material). Now usually sticking with what the comics have for the story is always better than changing it in my opinion but it seems for this film that they chose to incorporate several different storylines and characters and felt like it was too much crammed into too little. Also this movie was all over the place, story wise and literally. It seemed the characters kept having to travel unnecessarily. It felt like the supporting characters were just thrown into the story and it didn't bother to introduce them to the audience correctly. Everyone just got a flashback and or had themselves or their origin "expositioned" into the movie. I liked a lot of the character designs and thought a lot of the CGI was well done, in places, however it seems like they had different animators or studios work on different scenes or characters and some of it was horrible. The dialogue was really bad too. There were a lot of jokes and one liners that just fell flat and nobody laughed, plus like i said way too much exposition. There was a character who wears a headdress that was so big it looked ridiculous, which I wonder if it was done on purpose. And there was a character whose clothes tear when they transform and they automatically have pants when they transform back, which makes no sense. The plot too was not very sound and full of plot holes and things that didn't make sense, were just added in, or were part of scenes that got cut along the way. It hurts me to give this movie a score so low but I give this movie a 5/10.
Now I'm not saying don't watch it. I just can't recommend you drop as much cash as you usually do to see it in theaters. I personally still really enjoyed it and was genuinely entertained. It was awesome to see the blood and gore in a darker Hellboy movie and the action was great even if the CGI always wasn't. The music even if it didn't fit the tone or every scene was great. If your expecting the Hellboy from the Guillermo Del Toro films you might just hate this movie. But if you're just looking for "Big Red" to beat up on some baddies then I think you might get a kick out of this movie. Hey, some critics are saying that it's so bad it's good.
Mothergamer (1511 KP) rated the PC version of Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood in Video Games
Apr 3, 2019
just got done playing Assassin's Creed Brotherhood and I'll level with you, the ending did cause me to have a what the heck is going on moment. The ending is abrupt and leaves you with a cliffhanger, only drawing forth more questions, and leaves one feeling a bit disappointed and frustrated. However, it does open up many possibilities for the story and for another Assassin's Creed game.
Cliffhanger ending aside, Brotherhood does not disappoint. You get to play as Ezio Auditore once again fighting against the Borgia clan. Ezio is now a leader and you can recruit assassins throughout the city of Rome and build up assassin signals to take out guards, enemies, and even send them out on contract missions. There are many great side quests, including one with Ezio's old friend Leonardo Da Vinci. Leonardo's Machines was one of my favorite side quests because not only was it fun to play, but it was interesting to see all the great designs spring to life for the various missions. The tank was my favorite by far! The rebuilding quest is back, only this time you rebuild Rome and there are many great rewards with it.
Brotherhood isn't completely perfect as there are a few bugs that the developers seem to have missed. One frustrating bug was if you went through one of the hidden tunnels before you were formally introduced to it in the game, you would spawn in front of it and desynchronize repeatedly. There was nothing to do about it, except start a new game. Another bug was a design graphic error with the cinematic of when you recruit an assassin to your cause. The new recruit was just a floating head with a body following it, and their neck was missing. There is also a bug where the game will freeze during game play for no reason at all and the only thing you can do is reboot everything. I only had this happen to me once, but a couple of my friends had it freeze up on them two or three times during missions.
Overall, the game was a blast to play and I did love that all you had to do was whistle or make a hand motion to call on several assassins to take out all your enemies. The historical notes are informative as well and the artwork and music enhance the experience of playing the main missions and the side ones. There's great downloadable content also to add to the fun. I will definitely be playing through it again and have a great time doing it. If you haven't picked up Assassin's Creed Brotherhood yet, I suggest you do so because it is a game that definitely entertains.
Cliffhanger ending aside, Brotherhood does not disappoint. You get to play as Ezio Auditore once again fighting against the Borgia clan. Ezio is now a leader and you can recruit assassins throughout the city of Rome and build up assassin signals to take out guards, enemies, and even send them out on contract missions. There are many great side quests, including one with Ezio's old friend Leonardo Da Vinci. Leonardo's Machines was one of my favorite side quests because not only was it fun to play, but it was interesting to see all the great designs spring to life for the various missions. The tank was my favorite by far! The rebuilding quest is back, only this time you rebuild Rome and there are many great rewards with it.
Brotherhood isn't completely perfect as there are a few bugs that the developers seem to have missed. One frustrating bug was if you went through one of the hidden tunnels before you were formally introduced to it in the game, you would spawn in front of it and desynchronize repeatedly. There was nothing to do about it, except start a new game. Another bug was a design graphic error with the cinematic of when you recruit an assassin to your cause. The new recruit was just a floating head with a body following it, and their neck was missing. There is also a bug where the game will freeze during game play for no reason at all and the only thing you can do is reboot everything. I only had this happen to me once, but a couple of my friends had it freeze up on them two or three times during missions.
Overall, the game was a blast to play and I did love that all you had to do was whistle or make a hand motion to call on several assassins to take out all your enemies. The historical notes are informative as well and the artwork and music enhance the experience of playing the main missions and the side ones. There's great downloadable content also to add to the fun. I will definitely be playing through it again and have a great time doing it. If you haven't picked up Assassin's Creed Brotherhood yet, I suggest you do so because it is a game that definitely entertains.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Boss (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Where's the comedy?
Melissa McCarthy is one of the biggest stars in Hollywood. Her rise to fame has been nothing short of extraordinary, helped in part by her leading roles in The Heat, Spy and of course the hilarious Bridesmaids.
However, each of those examples of comedic brilliance had one thing in common, apart from McCarthy, director Paul Feig. He brings out the very best in the actress and we’ll see if this formula continues to work with the controversial Ghostbusters reboot, released later this year.
For now, McCarthy teams up with director and real-life husband Ben Falcone (Tammy) in The Boss. But does it offer you a laugh a minute?
The Boss follows the fall from grace of Michelle Darnell (McCarthy), one of America’s wealthiest women, and her efforts to get back on top. Her plan? To start a cake-making empire. Alongside her for the ride is long-suffering assistant Claire (Kristen Bell). Side roles are reserved for Game of Thrones star Peter Dinklage as Michelle’s rival and Kathy Bates as her mentor.
Unfortunately, the biggest problem The Boss has is one that blights many films nowadays; the best bits have already been shown in the trailer. For an action adventure, this is disappointing, but for a comedy, it’s silver-screen suicide. Having laughed in the pre-release clips already, the rest of the film is as barren as the Sahara when it comes to raising a titter.
That’s a real shame as the film’s plot, whilst hardly ground-breaking, is fundamentally solid and the acting is, Dinklage’s hammy performance aside, decent. McCarthy in particular takes a poor script and injects some much-needed spice into it – a testament to her incredible talents as a comedienne. Bell is on-point and bounces off McCarthy’s presence very well while Kathy Bates provides the film with one of its more memorable scenes, albeit one already used in the trailer.
There’s also a well-choreographed bust-up between two groups of teenage girls that manages to raise a chuckle, but again the majority of it was added to the most recent trailer.
Overall, The Boss is McCarthy’s second true turkey with Tammy being the first, but there’s no blame to be placed on her shoulders here. Michelle Darnell is a cracking character, despite her striking resemblance to Rita from Coronation Street, and is one that deserves far better than a film that’s light on laughs and has to rest on the laurels of its lead star – now that’s just lazy.
Perhaps the next time her husband asks her to star in one of his comedies, she should really, really think about it first.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/06/11/wheres-the-comedy-the-boss-review/
However, each of those examples of comedic brilliance had one thing in common, apart from McCarthy, director Paul Feig. He brings out the very best in the actress and we’ll see if this formula continues to work with the controversial Ghostbusters reboot, released later this year.
For now, McCarthy teams up with director and real-life husband Ben Falcone (Tammy) in The Boss. But does it offer you a laugh a minute?
The Boss follows the fall from grace of Michelle Darnell (McCarthy), one of America’s wealthiest women, and her efforts to get back on top. Her plan? To start a cake-making empire. Alongside her for the ride is long-suffering assistant Claire (Kristen Bell). Side roles are reserved for Game of Thrones star Peter Dinklage as Michelle’s rival and Kathy Bates as her mentor.
Unfortunately, the biggest problem The Boss has is one that blights many films nowadays; the best bits have already been shown in the trailer. For an action adventure, this is disappointing, but for a comedy, it’s silver-screen suicide. Having laughed in the pre-release clips already, the rest of the film is as barren as the Sahara when it comes to raising a titter.
That’s a real shame as the film’s plot, whilst hardly ground-breaking, is fundamentally solid and the acting is, Dinklage’s hammy performance aside, decent. McCarthy in particular takes a poor script and injects some much-needed spice into it – a testament to her incredible talents as a comedienne. Bell is on-point and bounces off McCarthy’s presence very well while Kathy Bates provides the film with one of its more memorable scenes, albeit one already used in the trailer.
There’s also a well-choreographed bust-up between two groups of teenage girls that manages to raise a chuckle, but again the majority of it was added to the most recent trailer.
Overall, The Boss is McCarthy’s second true turkey with Tammy being the first, but there’s no blame to be placed on her shoulders here. Michelle Darnell is a cracking character, despite her striking resemblance to Rita from Coronation Street, and is one that deserves far better than a film that’s light on laughs and has to rest on the laurels of its lead star – now that’s just lazy.
Perhaps the next time her husband asks her to star in one of his comedies, she should really, really think about it first.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/06/11/wheres-the-comedy-the-boss-review/
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) in Movies
Jul 20, 2019
"You know in the future if you're gonna steal cars, don't dress like a car thief man"
So Sony had two choices, either sell the Spider-Man rights back to Marvel or press the reboot button on the Spider-Man franchise, so we got this and I see a lot of mixed opinions about this film, some love it, some don't, I think it's a good film but it's not as good as Sam Raimi's 2002 classic Spider-Man.
After Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is bitten by a genetically altered spider, he gains newfound, spider-like powers and ventures out to solve the mystery of his parent's mysterious death.
The action scenes in this film are enjoyable, especially the High School fight scene between Spidey and the Lizard and make for an enjoyable film, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone have better chemistry than Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst did, seeing as Garfield and Stone where dating at the time which made for a better on screen relationship between the two.
I do like Gwen Stacy more than Mary Jane thanks to Emma Stone seeing as Gwen is useful in this film and doesn't always need rescuing, also I like how they gave Spidey some quips to dish out in the film but it was only done for one scene.
There are a lot of problems with this film, I personally don't like the photographic style of the film, it's too dark and grainy for a Spider-Man film and I prefer the style Raimi used, speaking of Raimi, the director Marc Webb repeated a lot of stuff Raimi did in the first film, I'd much rather he had added something new to the blend.
I didn't really like Garfield as Peter Parker, he was just bland and I couldn't care for him due to bad writing, he is alright as Spidey but he's not the best, Rhys Ifans does a decent job as Dr. Curt Connors / The Lizard but he is just a forgettable villain, you can see the writing isn't up too scratch along with the story, the story isn't that good sadly and because most of the scenes where rushed characters suffer as a result along with the emotional and powerful scenes.
I can see why people might prefer this to the Raimi trilogy because of it's darker approach to Spider-Man but I prefer the light hearted approach Raimi took, overall I did like The Amazing Spider-Man, it's a good film but it was done so much better by Sam Raimi 17 years ago.
After Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is bitten by a genetically altered spider, he gains newfound, spider-like powers and ventures out to solve the mystery of his parent's mysterious death.
The action scenes in this film are enjoyable, especially the High School fight scene between Spidey and the Lizard and make for an enjoyable film, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone have better chemistry than Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst did, seeing as Garfield and Stone where dating at the time which made for a better on screen relationship between the two.
I do like Gwen Stacy more than Mary Jane thanks to Emma Stone seeing as Gwen is useful in this film and doesn't always need rescuing, also I like how they gave Spidey some quips to dish out in the film but it was only done for one scene.
There are a lot of problems with this film, I personally don't like the photographic style of the film, it's too dark and grainy for a Spider-Man film and I prefer the style Raimi used, speaking of Raimi, the director Marc Webb repeated a lot of stuff Raimi did in the first film, I'd much rather he had added something new to the blend.
I didn't really like Garfield as Peter Parker, he was just bland and I couldn't care for him due to bad writing, he is alright as Spidey but he's not the best, Rhys Ifans does a decent job as Dr. Curt Connors / The Lizard but he is just a forgettable villain, you can see the writing isn't up too scratch along with the story, the story isn't that good sadly and because most of the scenes where rushed characters suffer as a result along with the emotional and powerful scenes.
I can see why people might prefer this to the Raimi trilogy because of it's darker approach to Spider-Man but I prefer the light hearted approach Raimi took, overall I did like The Amazing Spider-Man, it's a good film but it was done so much better by Sam Raimi 17 years ago.
JT (287 KP) rated The Grey (2012) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Director Joe Carnahan has a popular back catalogue. One that is considered his best to date is Narc. Of course he helmed the bat shit crazy, guns-a-blazing Smokin Aces and who could forget for a minute the over the top and some what bonkers reboot of The A-Team.
Here, Carnahan teams up with Liam Neeson once again, although it was very nearly Bradley Cooper, but we’re glad that Neeson got the gig! Neeson plays Ottway, a crack shot with a rifle whose job it is is to keep the many oil drilling workers off the menu from the local four legged carnivores.
When the plane transporting the crew back from the end of season crashes in Alaskan no man’s land, Neeson must battle the elements and inhospitable terrain to find safety – while at the same time avoiding a rather pissed off pack of hungry wolves. If there is anyone you’d want by your side in this type of situation (Bear Grylls not present) it’s Nesson. With a few choice words for his new found friends “nobody’s going to find us….and if we don’t move we’re all fucked!” They abandon what little is left of the plane and set out into the wilderness.
This is clearly not the best idea, and it’s not long before the group are picked off one by one as the race to safety intensifies. With the Alpha male calling the shots wolf side, it’s Neeson doing the same for the humans, as he battles with his own issues as well as those around him. A few nights opening up round the fire and you realise that these men have a significant reason to want to get home alive.
Neeson is level headed and cool, but then put into a situation like this you have to be. The film, lacking in any visual landscape must use the survivors to really build the story, and Carnahan delivers enough tension to the audience to keep them on a knife edge.
The action is integrated well into the emotional side of the plot and that makes the film all the more enjoyable, as by the end you feel for each and everyone of those guys. The scenes are a little more believable, no tanks shooting down planes here. Although we do wonder if Carnahan took inspiration from Cliffhanger for one particular scene.
The Grey packs an intense punch all the way through and it will play on the heart strings as well. Neeson is the stand-out but has a solid supporting cast who don’t let him carry the burden all the way through till the end.
Here, Carnahan teams up with Liam Neeson once again, although it was very nearly Bradley Cooper, but we’re glad that Neeson got the gig! Neeson plays Ottway, a crack shot with a rifle whose job it is is to keep the many oil drilling workers off the menu from the local four legged carnivores.
When the plane transporting the crew back from the end of season crashes in Alaskan no man’s land, Neeson must battle the elements and inhospitable terrain to find safety – while at the same time avoiding a rather pissed off pack of hungry wolves. If there is anyone you’d want by your side in this type of situation (Bear Grylls not present) it’s Nesson. With a few choice words for his new found friends “nobody’s going to find us….and if we don’t move we’re all fucked!” They abandon what little is left of the plane and set out into the wilderness.
This is clearly not the best idea, and it’s not long before the group are picked off one by one as the race to safety intensifies. With the Alpha male calling the shots wolf side, it’s Neeson doing the same for the humans, as he battles with his own issues as well as those around him. A few nights opening up round the fire and you realise that these men have a significant reason to want to get home alive.
Neeson is level headed and cool, but then put into a situation like this you have to be. The film, lacking in any visual landscape must use the survivors to really build the story, and Carnahan delivers enough tension to the audience to keep them on a knife edge.
The action is integrated well into the emotional side of the plot and that makes the film all the more enjoyable, as by the end you feel for each and everyone of those guys. The scenes are a little more believable, no tanks shooting down planes here. Although we do wonder if Carnahan took inspiration from Cliffhanger for one particular scene.
The Grey packs an intense punch all the way through and it will play on the heart strings as well. Neeson is the stand-out but has a solid supporting cast who don’t let him carry the burden all the way through till the end.
JT (287 KP) rated Godzilla (2014) in Movies
Mar 23, 2020
Does what it says on the tin
Big action blockbusters probably don’t get much bigger than this, certainly, the budgets don’t. Just ask Gareth Edwards, who is making his second feature (again about monsters) brings to life one of the films most iconic.
Edwards as a director landed on peoples radar with his 2010 micro-budgeted Monsters which drew on strong character development and their ongoing relationships in the aftermath of an alien invasion. In this reboot, which if there was ever a need for a remake this might well have been it, Edwards plumps for well crafted central characters while teasing us with glimpses of prehistoric beings saving the money shots for the big action set pieces.
In an opening credits history lesson which gives us a background into the creation of the gargantuan predator, and the reason for all that nuclear testing, we are fast-forwarded to 1999 was the discovery of giant remains sparks fears that something else has been awoken and ready to cause some havoc.
I wasn’t particularly blown away by this one, the first half is exceptional as Cranston’s Joe Brody is encapsulated in a collapsing nuclear power plant disaster and then goes a bit crackpot as he looks to unearth his theory that the government are trying to cover something up.
Once the dust settles on that and the force of nature have revealed themselves in the shape of Godzilla and his foe the M.U.TO.s (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Objects) there is little to do but sit back and watch the carnage unfurl.
With so much going on the character performances are practically dwarfed by the 350 ft beasts going toe to toe, and you really pay little attention to what is going on in the background. Some of the cast add little if anything which is a shame, Ken Watanabe does a lot of starring into space with his jaw-dropping onto the floor. His partner in science Sally Hawkins merely attempts to add snippets of useless information and poor Elizabeth Olsen is reduced to a bit part love interest.
Taylor-Johnson looks suitably beefed up and manages to hold his own, taking centre stage to save the world from possible annihilation, as if that hasn’t already been achieved by the Dawrinesque nuclear creation. There are parts within the film that are ludicrous, and parts that you can stare in amazement at none more so than the final fight which if anything is certainly worth the admission price.
Visually as you would expect it’s a stunning film but is somewhat disjointed throughout. There were enough subtle references to suggest a sequel (which there was) and that Gareth Edwards will in someway get another crack and wreaking havoc somewhere else (which he didn’t).
Edwards as a director landed on peoples radar with his 2010 micro-budgeted Monsters which drew on strong character development and their ongoing relationships in the aftermath of an alien invasion. In this reboot, which if there was ever a need for a remake this might well have been it, Edwards plumps for well crafted central characters while teasing us with glimpses of prehistoric beings saving the money shots for the big action set pieces.
In an opening credits history lesson which gives us a background into the creation of the gargantuan predator, and the reason for all that nuclear testing, we are fast-forwarded to 1999 was the discovery of giant remains sparks fears that something else has been awoken and ready to cause some havoc.
I wasn’t particularly blown away by this one, the first half is exceptional as Cranston’s Joe Brody is encapsulated in a collapsing nuclear power plant disaster and then goes a bit crackpot as he looks to unearth his theory that the government are trying to cover something up.
Once the dust settles on that and the force of nature have revealed themselves in the shape of Godzilla and his foe the M.U.TO.s (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Objects) there is little to do but sit back and watch the carnage unfurl.
With so much going on the character performances are practically dwarfed by the 350 ft beasts going toe to toe, and you really pay little attention to what is going on in the background. Some of the cast add little if anything which is a shame, Ken Watanabe does a lot of starring into space with his jaw-dropping onto the floor. His partner in science Sally Hawkins merely attempts to add snippets of useless information and poor Elizabeth Olsen is reduced to a bit part love interest.
Taylor-Johnson looks suitably beefed up and manages to hold his own, taking centre stage to save the world from possible annihilation, as if that hasn’t already been achieved by the Dawrinesque nuclear creation. There are parts within the film that are ludicrous, and parts that you can stare in amazement at none more so than the final fight which if anything is certainly worth the admission price.
Visually as you would expect it’s a stunning film but is somewhat disjointed throughout. There were enough subtle references to suggest a sequel (which there was) and that Gareth Edwards will in someway get another crack and wreaking havoc somewhere else (which he didn’t).
Gruffalo: Games
Education and Games
App
Based on the UK's favorite bedtime story, 'The Gruffalo', from the creators of 'Room on the Broom'. ...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Godzilla vs. Kong (2021) in Movies
Apr 2, 2021
Could have used more Kong versus Godzilla
If you are going to sit down and watch a movie that is entitled GODZILLA vs. KONG, you pretty much know what you are going to get, the highest your expectation should be is a “pretty fun B picture” with a giant Gorilla and a giant Lizard punching it out.
And…that is pretty much what you get…though the “laws of diminishing returns” is catching up to this franchise.
It all started with the reboot of GODZILLA in 2014 - a better than B “B Movie” that introduced audiences to Monarch and the Monsters they were following. This was followed up by the “very much a B Movie” KONG: SKULL ISLAND where Samuel L. Jackson, John Goodman and a host of others run around, getting picked off one-by-one in an enjoyable romp and hopes remained high for the ongoing Kong/Godzilla “Universe”.
Unfortunately, 2019’s GODZILLA: KING OF THE MONSTERS was a step down and the franchise showed signs of weakness with weaker plot lines…even weaker human characters…and overblown special effects.
Next came this film, GODZILLA vs. KONG - it was supposed to be released in theaters last summer, but because of the pandemic made it’s theatrical release at the same time it was shown on HBO Max (where I viewed it) - and I’m glad they did that, for if I would have shelled out money in a movie theater to check out this mess, I would have been angry, indeed.
GODZILLA vs. KONG follows, unfortunately, the trend started by GODZILLA: KING OF THE THE MONSTERS in that it has overblown CGI action with very little in the way of coherent plot and characters that you couldn’t care less about. It’s a mess of a movie that strings together a slim plot to get from one CGI battle to another.
But…if it has CGI Giant Gorilla on CGI Radioactive Lizard fighting in it…it should be fine, right? Well…that’s where Director Adam Wingard (YOU’RE NEXT) really fails, for a movie called GODZILLA vs. KONG has very little Kong fighting Godzilla in it…so one cannot even get too excited by that.
To be fair to this film, it doesn’t try to be anything more than it is intended to be - a “B” flick with giant monsters fighting each other, but…it only manages to be a B- flick at best. So, feel free to kick back and watch the CGI action, you’ll enjoy most of it - just don’t spend too much time looking for plot or characters that you care about.
And…unfortunately…it’s making me care less and less about future sequels - or the future of the Kong/Godzilla Universe.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And…that is pretty much what you get…though the “laws of diminishing returns” is catching up to this franchise.
It all started with the reboot of GODZILLA in 2014 - a better than B “B Movie” that introduced audiences to Monarch and the Monsters they were following. This was followed up by the “very much a B Movie” KONG: SKULL ISLAND where Samuel L. Jackson, John Goodman and a host of others run around, getting picked off one-by-one in an enjoyable romp and hopes remained high for the ongoing Kong/Godzilla “Universe”.
Unfortunately, 2019’s GODZILLA: KING OF THE MONSTERS was a step down and the franchise showed signs of weakness with weaker plot lines…even weaker human characters…and overblown special effects.
Next came this film, GODZILLA vs. KONG - it was supposed to be released in theaters last summer, but because of the pandemic made it’s theatrical release at the same time it was shown on HBO Max (where I viewed it) - and I’m glad they did that, for if I would have shelled out money in a movie theater to check out this mess, I would have been angry, indeed.
GODZILLA vs. KONG follows, unfortunately, the trend started by GODZILLA: KING OF THE THE MONSTERS in that it has overblown CGI action with very little in the way of coherent plot and characters that you couldn’t care less about. It’s a mess of a movie that strings together a slim plot to get from one CGI battle to another.
But…if it has CGI Giant Gorilla on CGI Radioactive Lizard fighting in it…it should be fine, right? Well…that’s where Director Adam Wingard (YOU’RE NEXT) really fails, for a movie called GODZILLA vs. KONG has very little Kong fighting Godzilla in it…so one cannot even get too excited by that.
To be fair to this film, it doesn’t try to be anything more than it is intended to be - a “B” flick with giant monsters fighting each other, but…it only manages to be a B- flick at best. So, feel free to kick back and watch the CGI action, you’ll enjoy most of it - just don’t spend too much time looking for plot or characters that you care about.
And…unfortunately…it’s making me care less and less about future sequels - or the future of the Kong/Godzilla Universe.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
