Search
Search results
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Matrix Resurrections (2021) in Movies
Dec 25, 2021 (Updated Dec 30, 2021)
Before watching The Matrix Resurrections, I was pretty much in the mindset that it didn't need to exist. The finished product did nothing to change my mind, however, it was entertaining enough that I genuinely enjoyed being back in this universe for another spin.
The whole narrative kind of felt inconsequential. Whereas in the original trilogy, Neo was woken up to save humanity. This time round, he's woken up for reasons that aren't made clear whatsoever, or at least, if they were then I completely missed them. By the time the story concludes, I found myself thinking "that was cool, but did anything actually happen?"
Like so many franchises these days, Resurrections leans heavily into nostalgia territory. I'm indifferent to this in all honesty. I see why some take issue with it, but I don't hate it. It doesn't feel too over the top, but the movie tries to get away with it by including a lot of meta dialogue about sequels and reboots. Some if it lands, some of it is horrifically on the nose. All of this combined really gives the impression that Resurrections purely exists to make money. The original sequels are riddled with issues, but at least it felt like a story was being told.
All of this being said, I still had a damn good time. It's a pleasure to see Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss back together, and it successfully hammers home that The Matrix was always centered around the love between Neo and Trinity. The supporting cast ain't too shabby either. Jessica Henwick is great, as is Yahya Abdul-Mateen and Neil Patrick Harris. The action scenes don't quite reach iconic status, but are still a blast to watch unfold, and the whole thing is visually pleasing, as is expected.
Resurrections is ultimately a mixed bag. There's plenty of material to enjoy, but there's equally a whole bunch of ideas that aren't executed particularly well. Unfortunately for any films that followed, the original movie is pretty much untouchable, but to its credit, Resurrections doesn't flinch in its commitment to remain part of a layered sci-fi saga, despite its blockbuster status, and for that, I can respect what Lana Wachowski has cooked up, even if it feels a little shallow at times.
The whole narrative kind of felt inconsequential. Whereas in the original trilogy, Neo was woken up to save humanity. This time round, he's woken up for reasons that aren't made clear whatsoever, or at least, if they were then I completely missed them. By the time the story concludes, I found myself thinking "that was cool, but did anything actually happen?"
Like so many franchises these days, Resurrections leans heavily into nostalgia territory. I'm indifferent to this in all honesty. I see why some take issue with it, but I don't hate it. It doesn't feel too over the top, but the movie tries to get away with it by including a lot of meta dialogue about sequels and reboots. Some if it lands, some of it is horrifically on the nose. All of this combined really gives the impression that Resurrections purely exists to make money. The original sequels are riddled with issues, but at least it felt like a story was being told.
All of this being said, I still had a damn good time. It's a pleasure to see Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss back together, and it successfully hammers home that The Matrix was always centered around the love between Neo and Trinity. The supporting cast ain't too shabby either. Jessica Henwick is great, as is Yahya Abdul-Mateen and Neil Patrick Harris. The action scenes don't quite reach iconic status, but are still a blast to watch unfold, and the whole thing is visually pleasing, as is expected.
Resurrections is ultimately a mixed bag. There's plenty of material to enjoy, but there's equally a whole bunch of ideas that aren't executed particularly well. Unfortunately for any films that followed, the original movie is pretty much untouchable, but to its credit, Resurrections doesn't flinch in its commitment to remain part of a layered sci-fi saga, despite its blockbuster status, and for that, I can respect what Lana Wachowski has cooked up, even if it feels a little shallow at times.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Star Trek (2009) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
Just about everybody knows the stories revolving around the U.S.S. Enterprise and it's crew lead by Captain James Tiberius Kirk. This reboot is an alternate reality to what happened in those familiar stories chronicling the early days of how the crew came together, went through the ranks of star fleet, and basically became the characters every Trekkie knows and loves today. The only issues this movie may have had was if it would appeal to people who weren't fans of the original Star Trek and if it would be enjoyable to those people. Considering it was the number one movie in the country in its opening weekend, brought in another $43 million its second weekend in theaters (bringing its grand total to over $147 million), and has glowing reviews on both IMDb (8.5/10, over 50,000 votes, #71 in the top 250 movies) and Rotten Tomatoes (95% fresh, 245 fresh reviews, rated 8.1/10), the answer seems obvious.
Star Trek exceeded all of my expectations. I'm not a Trekkie, but this is the movie that should have kicked off the summer season. The film is somehow capable of keeping the same essence of the original series yet inject a breath of fresh air into the franchise with new faces representing familiar characters. The film really appears to a wide range of moviegoers since it has just about everything anyone is looking for when they go to the movies and affectively blends action, comedy, sci-fi, and romance into one sensational adventure. The cast is truly superb. Karl Urban practically channeled DeForest Kelley in his portrayal of Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy and Simon Pegg as Scotty stole every scene he was in. Zachary Quinto fit the young Spock character like a glove. I could go on and on. There really wasn't a poor performance from anyone.
The only minor complaint I have about the film was the lens flare effect they seemed to use throughout the film. It was hardly noticeable at times, but I remember it being a bit irritating towards the last half of the film. Other than that, I'd like to see more of Scotty in the sequel. But that's more of a suggestion than anything.
Star Trek is a fun and exciting film that's really for everyone. The film is a little over two hours long, but it feels much shorter. Go ahead and group this with Batman Begins as one of the successful reboots that's also incredibly enjoyable.
Star Trek exceeded all of my expectations. I'm not a Trekkie, but this is the movie that should have kicked off the summer season. The film is somehow capable of keeping the same essence of the original series yet inject a breath of fresh air into the franchise with new faces representing familiar characters. The film really appears to a wide range of moviegoers since it has just about everything anyone is looking for when they go to the movies and affectively blends action, comedy, sci-fi, and romance into one sensational adventure. The cast is truly superb. Karl Urban practically channeled DeForest Kelley in his portrayal of Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy and Simon Pegg as Scotty stole every scene he was in. Zachary Quinto fit the young Spock character like a glove. I could go on and on. There really wasn't a poor performance from anyone.
The only minor complaint I have about the film was the lens flare effect they seemed to use throughout the film. It was hardly noticeable at times, but I remember it being a bit irritating towards the last half of the film. Other than that, I'd like to see more of Scotty in the sequel. But that's more of a suggestion than anything.
Star Trek is a fun and exciting film that's really for everyone. The film is a little over two hours long, but it feels much shorter. Go ahead and group this with Batman Begins as one of the successful reboots that's also incredibly enjoyable.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020 (Updated Nov 1, 2020)
A Really Good Remake
Pet Semetary is a 2019 supernatural horror movie directed by Kevin Kolsch and Dennis Widmyer. The movie was written by Jeff Buhler with screen story by Matt Greenberg. It is a remake/reboot of the original 1989 film adaptation of the 1983 Stephen King novel. Starring Jason Clarke, Amy Seimetz, and John Lithgow.
Moving to the small town of Ludlow, Maine with his family: wife, Rachel (Amy Seimetz), children, Ellie (Jete Laurence) and Gage (Hugo & Lucas Lavoie), and Church, Ellie's cat, Louis Creed takes a job at the university's hospital. Ellie stumbles upon a procession of children, while exploring the nearby woods of their new home, who are taking a dead dog to a pet cemetery. Their neighbor, Jud Crandall (John Lithgow), finds Ellie climbing a large stack of branches forming a wall and warns Rachel and Ellie not to venture out alone as the woods can be dangerous.. The following day, Louis fails to save a student Victor Pascow (Obssa Ahmed) fatally injured from a car accident, and is left shaken. That night Louis meets Pascow in a vivid dream, where he is lead to the pet cemetery and warned not to "venture beyond". When Louis awakens he is disturbed to find his bed sheets and feet, muddy and dirty suggesting his "vision" could be more than just a bad dream.
As far as remakes go this one was really good. Especially for the horror genre. I mean I can't tell you how many remakes/reboots I've seen that just bomb and don't do the original justice. This one however seemed to keep the original in mind, while still making changes to keep it fresh and relatively different. That being said I do feel it was a bit over-hyped and didn't live up to certain expectations. To me it was a very creepy movie and had me wanting to cover my eyes in one part as memories from the original played back in my head. The sounds of the character Rachel's sister calling out to her got goosebumps on my forearms. Those parts were very unsettling to me but I didn't feel enough was "scary". I really enjoyed the twists and changes or differences from the original. They were welcome and kept it from being an exact replica and a copy of the original. As another critic stated, Jeffrey M. Anderson-Common Sense Media, the film was "...effectively unsettling, focusing on the characters and their understandable emotions rather than on overt gore and FX." I give it a 7/10.
Moving to the small town of Ludlow, Maine with his family: wife, Rachel (Amy Seimetz), children, Ellie (Jete Laurence) and Gage (Hugo & Lucas Lavoie), and Church, Ellie's cat, Louis Creed takes a job at the university's hospital. Ellie stumbles upon a procession of children, while exploring the nearby woods of their new home, who are taking a dead dog to a pet cemetery. Their neighbor, Jud Crandall (John Lithgow), finds Ellie climbing a large stack of branches forming a wall and warns Rachel and Ellie not to venture out alone as the woods can be dangerous.. The following day, Louis fails to save a student Victor Pascow (Obssa Ahmed) fatally injured from a car accident, and is left shaken. That night Louis meets Pascow in a vivid dream, where he is lead to the pet cemetery and warned not to "venture beyond". When Louis awakens he is disturbed to find his bed sheets and feet, muddy and dirty suggesting his "vision" could be more than just a bad dream.
As far as remakes go this one was really good. Especially for the horror genre. I mean I can't tell you how many remakes/reboots I've seen that just bomb and don't do the original justice. This one however seemed to keep the original in mind, while still making changes to keep it fresh and relatively different. That being said I do feel it was a bit over-hyped and didn't live up to certain expectations. To me it was a very creepy movie and had me wanting to cover my eyes in one part as memories from the original played back in my head. The sounds of the character Rachel's sister calling out to her got goosebumps on my forearms. Those parts were very unsettling to me but I didn't feel enough was "scary". I really enjoyed the twists and changes or differences from the original. They were welcome and kept it from being an exact replica and a copy of the original. As another critic stated, Jeffrey M. Anderson-Common Sense Media, the film was "...effectively unsettling, focusing on the characters and their understandable emotions rather than on overt gore and FX." I give it a 7/10.
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Justice League International, Vol. 1 in Books
Nov 30, 2020
I am a 50 year old comic reader. In this life, you should pick one hobby, stick with it, and make it your own. It's hard to do that when you have been reading "the funny pages" for pretty much most of your life. However, I am adapting, learning to leave the current Marvel and DC reboots and events be, as I am not the market they are aimed at. Instead, I have been content to re-read the old TPBs digitally, remembering what kept me interested in the comics.
I started re-reading JLI, as it was, and still is, one of my best memories of the late 80s-early 90s. The series was always sure to inspire me to laugh out loud, while reading what sort of crap Blue Beetle and Booster Gold would get themselves into. My strongest memories are of when then-unknown Adam Hughes took over the art, replacing Kevin Maguire. But, talking of that takes away from this particular Volume, where the magic, as it were, was to begin.
Let's jump into the art, since we were talking about that just a moment ago. Here, it is reminiscent of the 80s. Bright colors, fun attitude, new costumes. All of that was here, drawn perfectly by Kevin Maguire, with inks by Terry Austin (for issue 1) and Al Gordon thereafter. Everything about the series' art was a testament to the new direction the team was going, and it definitely worked!
The writing was okay. I remember the series as being funnier, but the first volume was necessary, as it was needed for the setting up, introducing the members and what their dynamic would be. The stories are not required reading, as I am just starting the third volume, and I feel you could skip this volume. Most notable, this was the first time we see Batman layout that misogynist of a GL, Guy Gardner. That alone is worth the price of admission indeed!
Look, there is nothing wrong with this Volume, other than the inside material overall was good, but not as great as I wanted to remember. Sure, the team was written in a fun way (something missing in the books today), but overall, I wanted to get to the bigger "Bwa-hahaha" that lay ahead.
So, final conclusion? It's up to you. I would say "Sure, give it a shot". There's a helluva lot worse graphic novels/TPBs you could be spending your hard earned cash on!
I started re-reading JLI, as it was, and still is, one of my best memories of the late 80s-early 90s. The series was always sure to inspire me to laugh out loud, while reading what sort of crap Blue Beetle and Booster Gold would get themselves into. My strongest memories are of when then-unknown Adam Hughes took over the art, replacing Kevin Maguire. But, talking of that takes away from this particular Volume, where the magic, as it were, was to begin.
Let's jump into the art, since we were talking about that just a moment ago. Here, it is reminiscent of the 80s. Bright colors, fun attitude, new costumes. All of that was here, drawn perfectly by Kevin Maguire, with inks by Terry Austin (for issue 1) and Al Gordon thereafter. Everything about the series' art was a testament to the new direction the team was going, and it definitely worked!
The writing was okay. I remember the series as being funnier, but the first volume was necessary, as it was needed for the setting up, introducing the members and what their dynamic would be. The stories are not required reading, as I am just starting the third volume, and I feel you could skip this volume. Most notable, this was the first time we see Batman layout that misogynist of a GL, Guy Gardner. That alone is worth the price of admission indeed!
Look, there is nothing wrong with this Volume, other than the inside material overall was good, but not as great as I wanted to remember. Sure, the team was written in a fun way (something missing in the books today), but overall, I wanted to get to the bigger "Bwa-hahaha" that lay ahead.
So, final conclusion? It's up to you. I would say "Sure, give it a shot". There's a helluva lot worse graphic novels/TPBs you could be spending your hard earned cash on!
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated The Batman Who Laughs in Books
Nov 30, 2020
I am really eating up DC's books of late, especially the Scott Snyder and James Tynion IV! Yes, there are some hiccups along the way, as true for even the best of publishers, but the overall good output far outshines the bad/MEH output! I am quite liking this whole "Rebirth" thing and the way it ties into WATCHMEN, can't wait to see it all wrapped with DOOMSDAY CLOCK #12. <i>*ahem*</i> Let's not get ahead of ourselves then, eh? Onto my thoughts on TBWL..
I liked it quite a bit! Yes, it probably could easily have been a 5-issue mini, but I don't feel the story suffered by the added length. It allowed for the crazy roller coaster ride that it was to be even crazier, helped to spread just a bit more darkness in Gotham! Oh, and it showed how Alfred truly is the necessary light in Batman/Bruce's life, something B-Man totally needs, far more than Selina (sorry, Tom King, but I don't think the romance between the two works. Jus' sayin' is all!).
I know a lot of folks absolutely <b>abhor</b> DARK NIGHTS: METAL and anything relating to it, including the Batman Who Laughs! Me? I am enjoying it to no great end! It reminds me of some of the best things about the 90's, just turned up to 11! I think it's an interesting concept, bringing some clever creepiness into DC's "Rebirth"! And besides, it is at least something fresh and different (unlike the umpteenth X-deaths/reboots over at Marvel!)!
One aspect of the mini that really drove it all home was the art by Jock. I loved what he did in the WYTCHES (also with Snyder), and here it is just as good, if not better. The use of shadows and angles brings the creepiness all up and about, leaving with you long after the lights have gone out and sleep comes over you!
I already mentioned it, and several others have as well in their reviews, but Alfred was clearly the MVP here! He was totally on board, taking being a butler to a whole new level beyond 100%! I think sometimes he is under-utilized, but here he definitely got some much needed appreciation and respect! Kudos to you, Scott Snyder, for giving Alfred his due!
And lastly, that ending, the last couple panels? Ewwwww... chills!! Now, I can not wait to read Joshua Williamson's BATMAN/SUPERMAN #1! No spoilers, tho', promise!
So, yes, I was super-impressed with THE BATMAN WHO LAUGHS, just as I was with Snyder's DARK NIGHTS: METAL. If you didn't like METAL, then, well, chances are pretty likely you won't like this one!
I liked it quite a bit! Yes, it probably could easily have been a 5-issue mini, but I don't feel the story suffered by the added length. It allowed for the crazy roller coaster ride that it was to be even crazier, helped to spread just a bit more darkness in Gotham! Oh, and it showed how Alfred truly is the necessary light in Batman/Bruce's life, something B-Man totally needs, far more than Selina (sorry, Tom King, but I don't think the romance between the two works. Jus' sayin' is all!).
I know a lot of folks absolutely <b>abhor</b> DARK NIGHTS: METAL and anything relating to it, including the Batman Who Laughs! Me? I am enjoying it to no great end! It reminds me of some of the best things about the 90's, just turned up to 11! I think it's an interesting concept, bringing some clever creepiness into DC's "Rebirth"! And besides, it is at least something fresh and different (unlike the umpteenth X-deaths/reboots over at Marvel!)!
One aspect of the mini that really drove it all home was the art by Jock. I loved what he did in the WYTCHES (also with Snyder), and here it is just as good, if not better. The use of shadows and angles brings the creepiness all up and about, leaving with you long after the lights have gone out and sleep comes over you!
I already mentioned it, and several others have as well in their reviews, but Alfred was clearly the MVP here! He was totally on board, taking being a butler to a whole new level beyond 100%! I think sometimes he is under-utilized, but here he definitely got some much needed appreciation and respect! Kudos to you, Scott Snyder, for giving Alfred his due!
And lastly, that ending, the last couple panels? Ewwwww... chills!! Now, I can not wait to read Joshua Williamson's BATMAN/SUPERMAN #1! No spoilers, tho', promise!
So, yes, I was super-impressed with THE BATMAN WHO LAUGHS, just as I was with Snyder's DARK NIGHTS: METAL. If you didn't like METAL, then, well, chances are pretty likely you won't like this one!
Darren Fisher (2436 KP) rated 13 Dolls In Darkness (2017) in Movies
Jul 24, 2022
I have been an obsessive fan of horror films since I was a kid in the 70's. Brought up on Hammer and Universal monster films it wasn't long before I delved into pre-cert exploitation films and that is where my preference has been ever since.
Over the last 20 years I have felt that the horror genre hasn't really offered it's fans anything new (bar a few exceptions). Having been left despondent, disappointed and bored senseless by the over-saturation of remakes, reboots and just plain dull horror fare, it comes with great surprise that a black and white silent film from Australia would be the breath of fresh air that the horror genre desperately needs.
The plot of 13 Dolls is pretty straightforward. Marjorie receives a letter from her ailing mother to return home after a 13 year absence. On her return home Marjorie realises that things are not what they seem...
Written and directed by the talented Zeda Müller, this is a film that demands your attention from the start. With its eerie score and moody camerawork it sets a very atmospheric and claustrophobic feel to proceedings. It's a great take on the 'old dark house' horrors of a bygone era, Robert Wiene and Tod Brownings early work springs to mind... yet draws on influences from the likes of Dario Argento, Mario Bava's gothic horrors, giallo and slasher films (there are some nicely placed references for the sharp-eyed viewer). The fact that this is a silent film (I'll get to the score in a bit) actually works in its favour. Gone are the usual mundane dialogue pieces that fill out most horror films these days and the viewer is reintroduced to dialogue cards when required to move the story along. This also means that the actors are given room to act through expression and emotion and they all do a sterling job.
The masterstroke of 13 Dolls though is the excellent use of camerawork and soundtrack. The soundtrack is interspliced with sound effects (church bells, howling wind, dripping taps etc) and moody piano/tension building synths, all used to full sensory effect. The footage and score intertwine brilliantly together and I found some scenes genuinely eerie and creepy (a rare feeling for me whilst watching a new film these days).
Overall 13 Dolls is a mesmerising experience, interspersed with some cleverly executed gore scenes, and at a scant 75 minutes long, it motors along at a cracking pace.
So, you have probably guessed that I liked this film a lot. I highly recommend checking it out, especially if you are looking for something different. It's a great film and I for one am looking forward to Zeda Müller & Co's next venture...!
Over the last 20 years I have felt that the horror genre hasn't really offered it's fans anything new (bar a few exceptions). Having been left despondent, disappointed and bored senseless by the over-saturation of remakes, reboots and just plain dull horror fare, it comes with great surprise that a black and white silent film from Australia would be the breath of fresh air that the horror genre desperately needs.
The plot of 13 Dolls is pretty straightforward. Marjorie receives a letter from her ailing mother to return home after a 13 year absence. On her return home Marjorie realises that things are not what they seem...
Written and directed by the talented Zeda Müller, this is a film that demands your attention from the start. With its eerie score and moody camerawork it sets a very atmospheric and claustrophobic feel to proceedings. It's a great take on the 'old dark house' horrors of a bygone era, Robert Wiene and Tod Brownings early work springs to mind... yet draws on influences from the likes of Dario Argento, Mario Bava's gothic horrors, giallo and slasher films (there are some nicely placed references for the sharp-eyed viewer). The fact that this is a silent film (I'll get to the score in a bit) actually works in its favour. Gone are the usual mundane dialogue pieces that fill out most horror films these days and the viewer is reintroduced to dialogue cards when required to move the story along. This also means that the actors are given room to act through expression and emotion and they all do a sterling job.
The masterstroke of 13 Dolls though is the excellent use of camerawork and soundtrack. The soundtrack is interspliced with sound effects (church bells, howling wind, dripping taps etc) and moody piano/tension building synths, all used to full sensory effect. The footage and score intertwine brilliantly together and I found some scenes genuinely eerie and creepy (a rare feeling for me whilst watching a new film these days).
Overall 13 Dolls is a mesmerising experience, interspersed with some cleverly executed gore scenes, and at a scant 75 minutes long, it motors along at a cracking pace.
So, you have probably guessed that I liked this film a lot. I highly recommend checking it out, especially if you are looking for something different. It's a great film and I for one am looking forward to Zeda Müller & Co's next venture...!
Darren (1599 KP) rated Scream 4 (2011) in Movies
Oct 31, 2019
Characters – Sidney has made a career in books after the events in the films, she is completing her latest book tour right where it all started. With her back in town the killings start up again, Sidney must be the role model for her cousin who is going through the same situation she once did. Gale is now married to Dewey, she has given up the spotlight, but craves getting back into the field with the new killings offering her the chance. Dewey is now the sheriff who must now control the situation before it gets out of hand. We get the new potential victims or suspects here with Jill being Sidney’s cousin always tired of being in the shadow of her more famous family member, Kirby the rebellious teenager, Robbie who is filming every moment of his life for a reality YouTube network and Charlie is the leader of the film club. These characters do fit around the moulds of the original teens too.
Performances – Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox and David Arquette all return giving us good performances without needing to bring anything new to the performances. Of the new cast members nobody comes off in a shining performance which can disappoint in places as we have a wonderful set of talents in the film.
Story – The story here brings back our original characters just as a new killing spree has started in the area where it all started, with a new generation of victims and horror fans. The idea for this story comes from the idea that we have too many sequels or reboots, which does help take away the serious nature from the film, the Ghostface does seem flat for the most part because they seem to get mixed into being too intense without a reason behind the killings. Of course this is more about poking fun with the meta of everything in the horror genre which is does achieve.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in this film comes from the slasher angle, only this time we get a bloodier version of the kills showing the change in the genre. The mystery in this film comes from just who the killer is going to be this time, though we don’t get enough signs this time.
Settings – The film returns to the original town which does help with the idea of a reboot sequel piss take that we are dealing with.
Special Effects – The effects are the most disappointing side of this film because we have moments of CGI that don’t look as true as the practical moments.
Scene of the Movie – Deputy Judy being like Dewey is the funniest moments.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The kids are not really likeable.
Final Thoughts – This is a solid look at the horror genre with the countless sequels and remakes that we are seeing, it brings back enough relevant characters back but does fail to give us enough interest new ones.
Overall: Simple fun sequel.
Performances – Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox and David Arquette all return giving us good performances without needing to bring anything new to the performances. Of the new cast members nobody comes off in a shining performance which can disappoint in places as we have a wonderful set of talents in the film.
Story – The story here brings back our original characters just as a new killing spree has started in the area where it all started, with a new generation of victims and horror fans. The idea for this story comes from the idea that we have too many sequels or reboots, which does help take away the serious nature from the film, the Ghostface does seem flat for the most part because they seem to get mixed into being too intense without a reason behind the killings. Of course this is more about poking fun with the meta of everything in the horror genre which is does achieve.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in this film comes from the slasher angle, only this time we get a bloodier version of the kills showing the change in the genre. The mystery in this film comes from just who the killer is going to be this time, though we don’t get enough signs this time.
Settings – The film returns to the original town which does help with the idea of a reboot sequel piss take that we are dealing with.
Special Effects – The effects are the most disappointing side of this film because we have moments of CGI that don’t look as true as the practical moments.
Scene of the Movie – Deputy Judy being like Dewey is the funniest moments.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The kids are not really likeable.
Final Thoughts – This is a solid look at the horror genre with the countless sequels and remakes that we are seeing, it brings back enough relevant characters back but does fail to give us enough interest new ones.
Overall: Simple fun sequel.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Mortal Kombat (2021) in Movies
Apr 22, 2021
Fans of the Mortal Kombat series have known that the path to bringing the violent and controversial game to live-action formats has been a mixed bag. While the first film in 1995 was a decent hit; the follow-up in 1997 disappointed fans who had grown weary of the PG-13 take on the series.
Subsequent efforts such as the 2011 television series also left fans wanting more; especially since the game series had become even more graphic and violent.
An animated film released in 2020 gave fans a taste of what they wanted as it featured graphical violence which many fans believed was essential to properly catch the spirit and action of the series.
The latest offering in the series “Mortal Kombat”; reboots the cinematic universe and gives fans the intense, brutal, and graphic violence that they have demanded. The film keeps the basic premise that the Outworld realm has won nine tournaments in a row, and based on the ancient laws; one more victory would allow them to take control of the Earth.
Raiden the Thunder God (Tadanobu Asano); who has been tasked with protecting Earth looks to assemble and train a band of champions to save Earth. Naturally, this is not going to be easy as Shang Tsung (Chin Han); is not willing to follow the rules of the tournament and dispatches his top fighter (Sub Zero (Joe Taslim) to dispatch the champions of Earth before the tournament in a clear violation of the rules in order to ensure total victory.
What follows is solid and very graphic action which contains gore and brutality on a level that almost kept the film from earning an R-rating. The action sequences are well-choreographed and there were some great recreations of classic moves by characters from the game series which were really well utilized and did not seem like gratuitous pandering.
While the plot is fairly simplistic and does not deviate greatly from the source material; it does give a larger backstory to the universe. It was really enjoyable to see many nods to the franchise throughout both subtle and overt and while some characters were glaringly absent which was a surprise; the characters that were included were really solid to see and the door was wide open for their inclusion at a later date.
While the cast does not contain any star power in terms of what Western audiences might expect from a major studio release; the ensemble works well and do a great job in bringing their characters to life.
The film leaves sequels wide open and teases a character that in my opinion was a glaring omission from the film. That being said; “Mortal Kombat” gives fans a solid adaptation that does not shy away from gore and violence and gives fans the cinematic experience that they have wanted.
3.5 stars out of 5
Subsequent efforts such as the 2011 television series also left fans wanting more; especially since the game series had become even more graphic and violent.
An animated film released in 2020 gave fans a taste of what they wanted as it featured graphical violence which many fans believed was essential to properly catch the spirit and action of the series.
The latest offering in the series “Mortal Kombat”; reboots the cinematic universe and gives fans the intense, brutal, and graphic violence that they have demanded. The film keeps the basic premise that the Outworld realm has won nine tournaments in a row, and based on the ancient laws; one more victory would allow them to take control of the Earth.
Raiden the Thunder God (Tadanobu Asano); who has been tasked with protecting Earth looks to assemble and train a band of champions to save Earth. Naturally, this is not going to be easy as Shang Tsung (Chin Han); is not willing to follow the rules of the tournament and dispatches his top fighter (Sub Zero (Joe Taslim) to dispatch the champions of Earth before the tournament in a clear violation of the rules in order to ensure total victory.
What follows is solid and very graphic action which contains gore and brutality on a level that almost kept the film from earning an R-rating. The action sequences are well-choreographed and there were some great recreations of classic moves by characters from the game series which were really well utilized and did not seem like gratuitous pandering.
While the plot is fairly simplistic and does not deviate greatly from the source material; it does give a larger backstory to the universe. It was really enjoyable to see many nods to the franchise throughout both subtle and overt and while some characters were glaringly absent which was a surprise; the characters that were included were really solid to see and the door was wide open for their inclusion at a later date.
While the cast does not contain any star power in terms of what Western audiences might expect from a major studio release; the ensemble works well and do a great job in bringing their characters to life.
The film leaves sequels wide open and teases a character that in my opinion was a glaring omission from the film. That being said; “Mortal Kombat” gives fans a solid adaptation that does not shy away from gore and violence and gives fans the cinematic experience that they have wanted.
3.5 stars out of 5
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Terminator Genisys (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Not a complete disaster
Sequels and reboots are making up the bulk of 2015’s cinematic offerings. With films added to franchises like Jurassic Park, Star Wars and James Bond, it was always going to be tough for others to make much of a dent.
It’s been six years since Christian Bale took over lead billing from Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Terminator series in the critically panned Terminator Salvation. But director Alan Taylor (Thor: the Dark World), a newcomer to the sci-fi adventure series, resurrects the franchise with Terminator Genisys. But is it worth a watch?
Acting as a reboot and a sequel, the film follows the story of a young Kyle Reece (Jai Courtney), sent back in time by John Connor (Jason Clarke) to protect his mother Sarah, played by Game of Thrones’ Emilia Clarke. His aim is to stop the war before it even begins.
The duo are joined on their travels by the naturally charismatic Arnold Schwarzenegger who is one of the only highlights in a film full of soulless set-pieces, meaningless dialogue and a sickening sense of nostalgia.
Genisys constantly reminds you of the brilliance radiating from James Cameron’s first two films. Herein lies the problem, this sequel has none of the soul or charm of its predecessors with the homages coming across as insulting attempts to cash in on the series.
Even the iconic “I’ll be back” phrase is shoehorned into an awkward position where it doesn’t really make much sense.
And there we move onto the second issue. It makes hardly any sense at all. With continuity errors abound, Genisys relies on your knowledge of Terminator and Judgement Day being in tip-top shape, and after more than two decades it’s safe to say the majority of people will need a refresher course first.
The set pieces are, on the whole, glorious and despite being slightly overlong at 126 minutes, Genisys is a well-paced film without a boring moment to its name. It’s just a shame the plot doesn’t make more of an impact.
It feels like the characters are stuck in a video game, with a climactic action piece signalling the next level, moving on up until the obligatory big-boss fight that makes a further sequel seem incredibly likely.
Emilia Clarke is well-worth noting however. Despite being more used to being in the company of dragons rather than robots, she plays her character well and steps into Linda Hamilton’s shoes with ease. The casting is spot on here with Clarke having more than a whiff of Hamilton in her appearance.
The rest of the cast, bar Schwarzenegger fail to make an impression with Jai Courtney’s character proving particularly dull.
Overall, Terminator Genisys isn’t a complete disaster but comes close to being a write off. The action pieces are thrilling but a lack of soul, comprehension and individuality ensures it’ll end up being forgotten once 2015 is over.
With a sequel almost definitely on the cards, all fans of the franchise can hope for is a film worthy of James Cameron’s brilliant original – and this is not it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/07/05/not-a-complete-disaster-terminator-genisys-review/
It’s been six years since Christian Bale took over lead billing from Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Terminator series in the critically panned Terminator Salvation. But director Alan Taylor (Thor: the Dark World), a newcomer to the sci-fi adventure series, resurrects the franchise with Terminator Genisys. But is it worth a watch?
Acting as a reboot and a sequel, the film follows the story of a young Kyle Reece (Jai Courtney), sent back in time by John Connor (Jason Clarke) to protect his mother Sarah, played by Game of Thrones’ Emilia Clarke. His aim is to stop the war before it even begins.
The duo are joined on their travels by the naturally charismatic Arnold Schwarzenegger who is one of the only highlights in a film full of soulless set-pieces, meaningless dialogue and a sickening sense of nostalgia.
Genisys constantly reminds you of the brilliance radiating from James Cameron’s first two films. Herein lies the problem, this sequel has none of the soul or charm of its predecessors with the homages coming across as insulting attempts to cash in on the series.
Even the iconic “I’ll be back” phrase is shoehorned into an awkward position where it doesn’t really make much sense.
And there we move onto the second issue. It makes hardly any sense at all. With continuity errors abound, Genisys relies on your knowledge of Terminator and Judgement Day being in tip-top shape, and after more than two decades it’s safe to say the majority of people will need a refresher course first.
The set pieces are, on the whole, glorious and despite being slightly overlong at 126 minutes, Genisys is a well-paced film without a boring moment to its name. It’s just a shame the plot doesn’t make more of an impact.
It feels like the characters are stuck in a video game, with a climactic action piece signalling the next level, moving on up until the obligatory big-boss fight that makes a further sequel seem incredibly likely.
Emilia Clarke is well-worth noting however. Despite being more used to being in the company of dragons rather than robots, she plays her character well and steps into Linda Hamilton’s shoes with ease. The casting is spot on here with Clarke having more than a whiff of Hamilton in her appearance.
The rest of the cast, bar Schwarzenegger fail to make an impression with Jai Courtney’s character proving particularly dull.
Overall, Terminator Genisys isn’t a complete disaster but comes close to being a write off. The action pieces are thrilling but a lack of soul, comprehension and individuality ensures it’ll end up being forgotten once 2015 is over.
With a sequel almost definitely on the cards, all fans of the franchise can hope for is a film worthy of James Cameron’s brilliant original – and this is not it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/07/05/not-a-complete-disaster-terminator-genisys-review/
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Stoker (2013) in Movies
Oct 5, 2019
Chan-wook Park, the director of Oldboy and Thirst brings audiences his unique visual style and unsettling themes in his first English speaking film.
After the death of the family's patriarch, his surviving wife and teenage daughter handle the grief in very different ways. Wife Evelyn cries at the funeral, then doesn't seem to be too morose after the appearance of her former brother-in-law, Charles. Daughter India thinks about times her and her father had together when she was a child. They seemed to have much more of a bond in hanging with one another hunting small game. Evelyn seems jealous of their relationship until brother Charlie arrives in her gazes full time.
Charlie just seems a bit to nice and proper and trying to fit in with his new female friends. Something not quite right about him. This is also noticed by the family's live in housekeeper and an aunt that drops by the house sometime after the funeral. Mysteriously, both women go missing sometime after.
India has her own issues at school dealing herself with bullies and an aggressive boy who tries to rape her. She deals with them herself, and with help from others. She seems very pleased with herself and remembers fondly what she has done.
Events then become very disturbing, family members start to show their true feelings for each and motives are explained and revealed for a memorable and unique third act.
Director Park's visual style of interesting camera angles, memorable images and close up photography here as well; however, muted compared to his usual over-the-top style of his Asian films. Disturbing images followed by exterior shots or interesting camera transitional moments are one I love to see if film and there are several of them in this piece.
The unraveling of the mystery and of the character motivations and the continually changing family dynamic are certainly the most interesting aspect of the story. Not sure if I completely understand some of the subtle thematic elements or how they relate to the overall message the film is trying to convey, but that is not a negative.
The ending is shocking and unexpected and not sure if I understand that either, but it ties the story up and makes the audience wonder what will happen to the characters after the credits roll.
Mia Wasikowska stood out to me as very good in this film. Her nuanced and emotional roller coaster of a character was done with conviction. You may remember her from the Alice in Wonderland Tim Burton reboots; however, she is much more wicked this time around.
Not sure if everyone would enjoy as it may seem boring or confusing to some. I did read several 1 and 3 star reviews along with many 9 and 10 star reviews which seem to be the type of movie I am watching lately. Those types of movies are divisive and I like to see which side I am on.
Watch for yourself and tell me what you think.
After the death of the family's patriarch, his surviving wife and teenage daughter handle the grief in very different ways. Wife Evelyn cries at the funeral, then doesn't seem to be too morose after the appearance of her former brother-in-law, Charles. Daughter India thinks about times her and her father had together when she was a child. They seemed to have much more of a bond in hanging with one another hunting small game. Evelyn seems jealous of their relationship until brother Charlie arrives in her gazes full time.
Charlie just seems a bit to nice and proper and trying to fit in with his new female friends. Something not quite right about him. This is also noticed by the family's live in housekeeper and an aunt that drops by the house sometime after the funeral. Mysteriously, both women go missing sometime after.
India has her own issues at school dealing herself with bullies and an aggressive boy who tries to rape her. She deals with them herself, and with help from others. She seems very pleased with herself and remembers fondly what she has done.
Events then become very disturbing, family members start to show their true feelings for each and motives are explained and revealed for a memorable and unique third act.
Director Park's visual style of interesting camera angles, memorable images and close up photography here as well; however, muted compared to his usual over-the-top style of his Asian films. Disturbing images followed by exterior shots or interesting camera transitional moments are one I love to see if film and there are several of them in this piece.
The unraveling of the mystery and of the character motivations and the continually changing family dynamic are certainly the most interesting aspect of the story. Not sure if I completely understand some of the subtle thematic elements or how they relate to the overall message the film is trying to convey, but that is not a negative.
The ending is shocking and unexpected and not sure if I understand that either, but it ties the story up and makes the audience wonder what will happen to the characters after the credits roll.
Mia Wasikowska stood out to me as very good in this film. Her nuanced and emotional roller coaster of a character was done with conviction. You may remember her from the Alice in Wonderland Tim Burton reboots; however, she is much more wicked this time around.
Not sure if everyone would enjoy as it may seem boring or confusing to some. I did read several 1 and 3 star reviews along with many 9 and 10 star reviews which seem to be the type of movie I am watching lately. Those types of movies are divisive and I like to see which side I am on.
Watch for yourself and tell me what you think.