Search
Search results
All That Has Flown Beyond (Natural Magic #2)
9.0
Rate It
Book
Kaiyo’s bloodline has been part of the Garrow pack for generations. He has been destined to be...
Paranormal M_M Romance
Darren (1599 KP) rated Black Christmas (2019) in Movies
Dec 13, 2019
Verdict: All Over the Place
Story: Black Christmas starts as we meet our sorority sisters Riley (Poots), Kris (Shannon), Marty (Donoghue), Jesse (O’Grady), Helena (Adams) and Fran (Morris) who are preparing for the Christmas break, with Riley having history with the alpha sorority, which never got dealt with by the authorities.
They decide to get revenge through song and soon find themselves getting picked of by a masked killer, where they need to find themselves fighting to survive.
Thoughts on Black Christmas
Characters – Riley is previously a victim of sexual assault by one of the rich college students, 3-years-later she is still dealing with the effects, being the big sister to the rest of the sisters and is one of the few that worries about the locations of the other girls. Kris has been on a crusade to get equality, she spends most of the time preaching about how men have it easy and mostly gets annoying. Marty is another member of the sorority and like Jesse, we don’t learn much more about any of the other girls.
Performances – Imogen Poots is a talent actress when she is given something to work with, she is the strongest of a weak story, where nobody comes off like they are giving a good acting performance.
Story – The story is meant to be following a group of sorority sisters that get picked off and attacked by a masked killer over the Christmas break. Well, where do we start to break this story down, first thing, this isn’t any sort of remake or sequel to either movie seen before, it uses the location of the house and one look at a death, don’t think this is a remake. Secondly, we spend more time trying to get the message over about men thinking they can walk all over women and the only good men in life are nervous wrecks around the women. Thirdly, this is meant to be a horror and doesn’t even know what tone to stick to. Finally, the trailer gives away everything. This is a social message that uses an existing horror franchise to try and get a point over, without using any sort of subtitle approach.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in this film is almost non-excitant, it tries to use the slow slasher traits early on, which show glimpses, only to go, ‘you know what, we want to do an action horror now’ by the end. The mystery is also poor, because we get zero potential suspects and the only person it could be is revealed in the trailer.
Settings – The college location is fine, though it is the weird college I have ever seen.
Special Effects – When it comes to the effects, we get basic horror ones, sadly, the film decides to hide away from showing any actual gore, even though the injuries are designed to show it.
Scene of the Movie – Nate grabs an axe.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The girls leave a party at what they say is midnight, we cut to one that left early and it is suddenly 10.45, seriously can people not tell the time?
Final Thoughts – This is a very bad social message horror that spends more time banging you over the head with the message, than actually giving us a coherent story or any scare.
Overall: Social Message, without a scare.
Story: Black Christmas starts as we meet our sorority sisters Riley (Poots), Kris (Shannon), Marty (Donoghue), Jesse (O’Grady), Helena (Adams) and Fran (Morris) who are preparing for the Christmas break, with Riley having history with the alpha sorority, which never got dealt with by the authorities.
They decide to get revenge through song and soon find themselves getting picked of by a masked killer, where they need to find themselves fighting to survive.
Thoughts on Black Christmas
Characters – Riley is previously a victim of sexual assault by one of the rich college students, 3-years-later she is still dealing with the effects, being the big sister to the rest of the sisters and is one of the few that worries about the locations of the other girls. Kris has been on a crusade to get equality, she spends most of the time preaching about how men have it easy and mostly gets annoying. Marty is another member of the sorority and like Jesse, we don’t learn much more about any of the other girls.
Performances – Imogen Poots is a talent actress when she is given something to work with, she is the strongest of a weak story, where nobody comes off like they are giving a good acting performance.
Story – The story is meant to be following a group of sorority sisters that get picked off and attacked by a masked killer over the Christmas break. Well, where do we start to break this story down, first thing, this isn’t any sort of remake or sequel to either movie seen before, it uses the location of the house and one look at a death, don’t think this is a remake. Secondly, we spend more time trying to get the message over about men thinking they can walk all over women and the only good men in life are nervous wrecks around the women. Thirdly, this is meant to be a horror and doesn’t even know what tone to stick to. Finally, the trailer gives away everything. This is a social message that uses an existing horror franchise to try and get a point over, without using any sort of subtitle approach.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in this film is almost non-excitant, it tries to use the slow slasher traits early on, which show glimpses, only to go, ‘you know what, we want to do an action horror now’ by the end. The mystery is also poor, because we get zero potential suspects and the only person it could be is revealed in the trailer.
Settings – The college location is fine, though it is the weird college I have ever seen.
Special Effects – When it comes to the effects, we get basic horror ones, sadly, the film decides to hide away from showing any actual gore, even though the injuries are designed to show it.
Scene of the Movie – Nate grabs an axe.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The girls leave a party at what they say is midnight, we cut to one that left early and it is suddenly 10.45, seriously can people not tell the time?
Final Thoughts – This is a very bad social message horror that spends more time banging you over the head with the message, than actually giving us a coherent story or any scare.
Overall: Social Message, without a scare.
JT (287 KP) rated RoboCop (2014) in Movies
Mar 17, 2020
Reboot taints the original's good name
If you’re going to remake one of the 80s most iconic action films you’ve got to do it with some balls. Sadly José Padilha dropped this particular ball, pretty spectacularly in fact, to give us a sorry remake and leave fans of the original baying for blood (something which was missing in this).
It’s a story that was disjointed, rushed and ill-conceived in every possible way, with a leading actor who was miscast and non-believable in the role he was trusted to uphold. Kinnaman is Alex Murphy a Detroit Detective whose ill-fated sting operation ends badly after his cover is blown leaving him high on the villains most wanted list.
In the background is OmniCorp a leading company in robot technology priding itself on making the world a safer place with drones and the all too familiar ED-209 looking to serve and protect. Lead by CEO Raymond Sellars (Michael Keaton) the initiative has not reached American soil due to Government legislation and a bill that prohibits the use of robots on the streets.
Needing a new way to reach the public, Sellars turns to Murphy as a part-man part machine creation to reach out and grab justice by the throat and give America the hope it longs for, and a hero to put their faith in. The PG-13 rating and lack of graphic violence is stark contrast to the original, while the action scenes might be slick and bolstered with nifty CGI it does little to hide the fact that there isn’t a drop of claret anywhere to be seen.
While not completely adhering to the original it nods in its direction a few times, but only because it has to appease the die-hard fan. Once Robocop is up and about after being resurrected under the watchful eye of Dr Dennett Norton (Gary Oldman) he goes on a quick hunt to bring the perpetrators who tried to have him killed to justice.
Unlike Clarence J. Boddicker, Antoine Vallon (Patrick Garrow) is only a bit part villain, hopelessly moving illegal guns around the city he’s duly finished off in one of the film’s more colourful action shoot outs. The film is comical but not in a good way when Murphy demands to see what is behind the suit you almost laugh and then hang your head that Padilha could have included and thought up such a ridiculous scene.
Supporting cast do little to add much either, Samuel L. Jackson waves his arms and shouts a lot like a current affairs news anchor that in some way pays homage to the cut to’s of the Casey Wong era. Abbie Cornish is shockingly bad, and Jackie Earle Haley as much so, all in all, a pity. Only Oldman provides any shinning light in something that was slumping before it had even made it halfway through.
Robocop continues his quest back into the Detroit Police department, where corruption is rife and all trailing back to OmniCorps big cheese in charge, culminating in a finale that does little to finish on a high note. Paul Verhoeven will be able to rest easy at night knowing that his 1987 classic will continue to live long in the memory of true Robocop fans, while its 2014 compatriot should be cast aside into the recycle bin.
It’s a story that was disjointed, rushed and ill-conceived in every possible way, with a leading actor who was miscast and non-believable in the role he was trusted to uphold. Kinnaman is Alex Murphy a Detroit Detective whose ill-fated sting operation ends badly after his cover is blown leaving him high on the villains most wanted list.
In the background is OmniCorp a leading company in robot technology priding itself on making the world a safer place with drones and the all too familiar ED-209 looking to serve and protect. Lead by CEO Raymond Sellars (Michael Keaton) the initiative has not reached American soil due to Government legislation and a bill that prohibits the use of robots on the streets.
Needing a new way to reach the public, Sellars turns to Murphy as a part-man part machine creation to reach out and grab justice by the throat and give America the hope it longs for, and a hero to put their faith in. The PG-13 rating and lack of graphic violence is stark contrast to the original, while the action scenes might be slick and bolstered with nifty CGI it does little to hide the fact that there isn’t a drop of claret anywhere to be seen.
While not completely adhering to the original it nods in its direction a few times, but only because it has to appease the die-hard fan. Once Robocop is up and about after being resurrected under the watchful eye of Dr Dennett Norton (Gary Oldman) he goes on a quick hunt to bring the perpetrators who tried to have him killed to justice.
Unlike Clarence J. Boddicker, Antoine Vallon (Patrick Garrow) is only a bit part villain, hopelessly moving illegal guns around the city he’s duly finished off in one of the film’s more colourful action shoot outs. The film is comical but not in a good way when Murphy demands to see what is behind the suit you almost laugh and then hang your head that Padilha could have included and thought up such a ridiculous scene.
Supporting cast do little to add much either, Samuel L. Jackson waves his arms and shouts a lot like a current affairs news anchor that in some way pays homage to the cut to’s of the Casey Wong era. Abbie Cornish is shockingly bad, and Jackie Earle Haley as much so, all in all, a pity. Only Oldman provides any shinning light in something that was slumping before it had even made it halfway through.
Robocop continues his quest back into the Detroit Police department, where corruption is rife and all trailing back to OmniCorps big cheese in charge, culminating in a finale that does little to finish on a high note. Paul Verhoeven will be able to rest easy at night knowing that his 1987 classic will continue to live long in the memory of true Robocop fans, while its 2014 compatriot should be cast aside into the recycle bin.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Mulan (2020) in Movies
Dec 18, 2020
Completely uninteresting
Mulan (2020) is the live action adaptation of the 1998 Disney animation of the same name, the latest in the live action remakes of Disney classics based on a young woman who disguises herself as a male soldier to save her father.
I’ll start with an admission: I’ve never seen the original animated Mulan. Despite being an avid Disney fan, growing up living and breathing everything Disney, somehow as an eleven year old when it was first released Mulan just passed me by, and has carried in doing so in the 20+ years since. Unlike the other live action Disney remakes in which I had so many preconceptions and so much love for the originals, I went into Mulan entirely open and with no expectations. This I hoped would prove to be a benefit when watching this remake, however I’m afraid to say that it actually may have put me at even more of a disadvantage.
The biggest issue with this film is that is entirely lacking in everything you’d usually expect from an animated Disney film and what I don’t doubt is present in the 1998 original. Disney films are full of heart, laughter, cutesy creatures and catchy songs whilst with an underlying serious plot with more menace and threat than you’d expect. This remake appears to have removed everything you know and love about Disney and replaced it with a very serious, very drawn out and actually quite dull plot. Yes there is still the good message in here that hopefully will motivate young women, but it’s lost behind a film that is severely lacking in any really spirit or character.
Yifei Liu does well as Mulan, at least with what she’s given to work with as far as the script goes. However she really suffers with the romance side, as there is zero chemistry between Mulan and Honghui, even with Yoson An’s charismatic performance. Jet Li is barely recognisable as the Emperor and Donnie Yen really needed to channel more of his Rogue One character to lighten the mood. Even the villains, Bori Khan (Jason Scott Lee) and Xianniang (Li Gong) have little to work with, with Xianniang’s witch being let down by the most by the poor writing and character development.
The cast however aren’t really at fault here. The film looks good, the sets and costumes are impressive and everything feels lush and colourful. However I felt the action scenes had been so obviously ‘Disney-fied’ that they lost all sense of fun and, well, action. They felt over choreographed and with the large amount of fight scenes in this, the lack of proper violence and blood was far too obvious. And the over-used slow motion alongside some questionable CGI was unbearable. Considering they wanted to make this a more accurate and serious Disney adaptation, it’s a shame they didn’t go far enough to make the action a little more adult.
I really wanted to like this, but for me it was just severely deficient in anything that makes a Disney film likeable. Had I seen the original, it may have at least brought some form of love and nostalgia. However all this has succeeded in doing is making me want to watch the original, both as a comparison and for some much needed fun and laughter.
I’ll start with an admission: I’ve never seen the original animated Mulan. Despite being an avid Disney fan, growing up living and breathing everything Disney, somehow as an eleven year old when it was first released Mulan just passed me by, and has carried in doing so in the 20+ years since. Unlike the other live action Disney remakes in which I had so many preconceptions and so much love for the originals, I went into Mulan entirely open and with no expectations. This I hoped would prove to be a benefit when watching this remake, however I’m afraid to say that it actually may have put me at even more of a disadvantage.
The biggest issue with this film is that is entirely lacking in everything you’d usually expect from an animated Disney film and what I don’t doubt is present in the 1998 original. Disney films are full of heart, laughter, cutesy creatures and catchy songs whilst with an underlying serious plot with more menace and threat than you’d expect. This remake appears to have removed everything you know and love about Disney and replaced it with a very serious, very drawn out and actually quite dull plot. Yes there is still the good message in here that hopefully will motivate young women, but it’s lost behind a film that is severely lacking in any really spirit or character.
Yifei Liu does well as Mulan, at least with what she’s given to work with as far as the script goes. However she really suffers with the romance side, as there is zero chemistry between Mulan and Honghui, even with Yoson An’s charismatic performance. Jet Li is barely recognisable as the Emperor and Donnie Yen really needed to channel more of his Rogue One character to lighten the mood. Even the villains, Bori Khan (Jason Scott Lee) and Xianniang (Li Gong) have little to work with, with Xianniang’s witch being let down by the most by the poor writing and character development.
The cast however aren’t really at fault here. The film looks good, the sets and costumes are impressive and everything feels lush and colourful. However I felt the action scenes had been so obviously ‘Disney-fied’ that they lost all sense of fun and, well, action. They felt over choreographed and with the large amount of fight scenes in this, the lack of proper violence and blood was far too obvious. And the over-used slow motion alongside some questionable CGI was unbearable. Considering they wanted to make this a more accurate and serious Disney adaptation, it’s a shame they didn’t go far enough to make the action a little more adult.
I really wanted to like this, but for me it was just severely deficient in anything that makes a Disney film likeable. Had I seen the original, it may have at least brought some form of love and nostalgia. However all this has succeeded in doing is making me want to watch the original, both as a comparison and for some much needed fun and laughter.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The little mermaid (2023) in Movies
Sep 20, 2023
You Will Want To Go Under The Sea
Back in 2013, the Baltimore Ravens won the Super Bowl with a QB, Joe Flacco, who was a “game manager”. His reputation was that he was NOT spectacular and wouldn’t win a game for you, but he also wouldn’t take chances and LOSE a game for you.
Such the same can be said of newcomer Halle Bailey as Ariel in Disney’s Live Action remake of THE LITTLE MERMAID. She produces a competent, steady (but unspectacular) performance that doesn’t really add all that much to the film, but (more importantly) it doesn’t detract either.
And that is a GOOD (enough) thing as Director Rob Marshall (Chicago) populates this remake with some wonderful performers/performances to go along with better-than-average CGI and some new songs that actually work well (and don’t just seem like “add-ons”). All of this adds up to a very enjoyable family time at the movies.
Following the plot of the Disney Animated film from 1989, this Little Mermaid does not sway too far from the basic plot, though it does cut down (a bit) on the musical numbers. But when it swings big, it swings BIG and these swings connect.
Daveed Diggs (Broadway’s Hamilton) almost steals the film as the voice of Sebastian the Crab and his UNDER THE SEA number is a visual and audible delight while Awkwafina (CRAZY, RICH ASIANS) fills in very well in the Buddy Hackett role as the bird Scuttle. Surprisingly, young Jacob Trembley (ROOM) more than holds his own in this crazy trio of sidekicks as the young fish Flounder. These three work together quite a bit more in this film than in the previous, animated one and they work well together.
But, make no mistake, this film is Melissa McCarthy’s and as the evil Sea Witch Ursula, she demands you pay attention - and keep paying attention - to her. Her big number, POOR UNFORTUNATE SOULS is deep, rich and powerful while her performance throughout the film is just enough over-the-top to work. Credit needs to go to both McCarthy and Marshall to understand when enough was enough or when they went too far and reigned it in.
Javier Bardem (NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN) also populates this film as Ariel’s father, King Triton, and while it looks like Bardem is trying very, very hard to audition for a serious Shakespeare role, it works well here.
Finally, the biggest surprise to me in this film is Jonah Hauer-King (he played Laurie in the Saoirse Ronan/Emma Watson/Florence Pugh LITTLE WOMEN) as Prince Eric. In the animated version of this film, poor Prince Eric has very little to do, except to be Ariel’s “Prince Charming”. In this version, writer David Magee (LIFE OF PI) turns Eric into a real character with some depth - and a song! The 2nd half of this film was as much about Prince Eric as it was about Ariel.
And, that is okay, for the ending of this film needed some energy in addition to Bailey’s to make it rise above the rest of film and with the help of all those other wonderful performers, it rises well above (and not under) the sea.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such the same can be said of newcomer Halle Bailey as Ariel in Disney’s Live Action remake of THE LITTLE MERMAID. She produces a competent, steady (but unspectacular) performance that doesn’t really add all that much to the film, but (more importantly) it doesn’t detract either.
And that is a GOOD (enough) thing as Director Rob Marshall (Chicago) populates this remake with some wonderful performers/performances to go along with better-than-average CGI and some new songs that actually work well (and don’t just seem like “add-ons”). All of this adds up to a very enjoyable family time at the movies.
Following the plot of the Disney Animated film from 1989, this Little Mermaid does not sway too far from the basic plot, though it does cut down (a bit) on the musical numbers. But when it swings big, it swings BIG and these swings connect.
Daveed Diggs (Broadway’s Hamilton) almost steals the film as the voice of Sebastian the Crab and his UNDER THE SEA number is a visual and audible delight while Awkwafina (CRAZY, RICH ASIANS) fills in very well in the Buddy Hackett role as the bird Scuttle. Surprisingly, young Jacob Trembley (ROOM) more than holds his own in this crazy trio of sidekicks as the young fish Flounder. These three work together quite a bit more in this film than in the previous, animated one and they work well together.
But, make no mistake, this film is Melissa McCarthy’s and as the evil Sea Witch Ursula, she demands you pay attention - and keep paying attention - to her. Her big number, POOR UNFORTUNATE SOULS is deep, rich and powerful while her performance throughout the film is just enough over-the-top to work. Credit needs to go to both McCarthy and Marshall to understand when enough was enough or when they went too far and reigned it in.
Javier Bardem (NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN) also populates this film as Ariel’s father, King Triton, and while it looks like Bardem is trying very, very hard to audition for a serious Shakespeare role, it works well here.
Finally, the biggest surprise to me in this film is Jonah Hauer-King (he played Laurie in the Saoirse Ronan/Emma Watson/Florence Pugh LITTLE WOMEN) as Prince Eric. In the animated version of this film, poor Prince Eric has very little to do, except to be Ariel’s “Prince Charming”. In this version, writer David Magee (LIFE OF PI) turns Eric into a real character with some depth - and a song! The 2nd half of this film was as much about Prince Eric as it was about Ariel.
And, that is okay, for the ending of this film needed some energy in addition to Bailey’s to make it rise above the rest of film and with the help of all those other wonderful performers, it rises well above (and not under) the sea.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Lou Grande (148 KP) rated Monster: A Novel of Extreme Horror and Gore in Books
May 9, 2018
Long exposition (3 more)
Shifting narratives
Many typos
Anticlimactic Ending
The authors of MONSTER preface the book with a warning to the readers, cautioning them about the contents of the book. They really play it up: debating whether or not the story was too dark or too extreme and needed to be censored. It's ridiculous. If you've seen the first five minutes of the remake of The Hills Have Eyes 2, you've read this book. Matt Shaw really phones it in. He seems to be doing pretty well, popping out a book every month or so, and probably making a decent bit of cash too. So you'd think he'd be able to afford an editor. MONSTER is riddled with typos that should embarrass professional writers, like the misuse of "it's" and "its" in the same sentence, and a complete lack of knowledge on how quoting dialogue works. Also, it's almost impossible to get a sense of where this book is set until they explicitly tell you. All the characters use British slang and spellings, but it's set in Indiana. Okay.
Matt Shaw says in the introduction that he writes his endings to leave the audience reeling. That's true. Because I wasted three hours or so on one of the most underwhelming, anticlimactic, predictable endings I've ever read. It felt like he was written into a corner, so he just STOPPED. That's how abruptly it ends. And yeah, we all get it. "Who's the real monster?" Really original.
Also, it's Patrick Bateman in American Psycho, not NIcholas. Wikipedia is a thing. So is imdb. Do your research!
Matt Shaw says in the introduction that he writes his endings to leave the audience reeling. That's true. Because I wasted three hours or so on one of the most underwhelming, anticlimactic, predictable endings I've ever read. It felt like he was written into a corner, so he just STOPPED. That's how abruptly it ends. And yeah, we all get it. "Who's the real monster?" Really original.
Also, it's Patrick Bateman in American Psycho, not NIcholas. Wikipedia is a thing. So is imdb. Do your research!
The claustrophobic setting (1 more)
The plot
Twists, turns, misdirection and murder
A murder mystery set on an oil rig with a skeleton staff couldn't possibly make an interesting TV series could it?
Surprisingly it works... The setting is perfect to make the tension greater, with the storm causing problems with power inside and making everything hazardous in the scenes out on the decks...
The crew distrust each other and don't get on, they have issues with the insurance assessor, the boss is about to lose control and its almost Christmas... Something has got to give....
I found it similar in feel (although obviously different) to Fortitude and is very much like a modern remake of a famous Agatha Christie novel (Which I won't mention the title of, as it could give the game away) although I'm sure it probably isn't actually based on it...
One criticism is, I think it was a little rushed in places and could probably have made a 8 or 10 episode series, and maybe explore some of the characters a little more, rather than cram it all into 6 Episodes...
I was going to rate the the ending as a good point and a bad point because I think it will divide people, for me it worked well, but I can see some people having issues with it (in my opinion) ... BUT, that is what makes a good story, something that causes debate......
I really recommend this as a series to slot in after finishing binge watching one long series and before starting another long show... 6 episodes about 45 min each, perfect for a lazy weekend...
Surprisingly it works... The setting is perfect to make the tension greater, with the storm causing problems with power inside and making everything hazardous in the scenes out on the decks...
The crew distrust each other and don't get on, they have issues with the insurance assessor, the boss is about to lose control and its almost Christmas... Something has got to give....
I found it similar in feel (although obviously different) to Fortitude and is very much like a modern remake of a famous Agatha Christie novel (Which I won't mention the title of, as it could give the game away) although I'm sure it probably isn't actually based on it...
One criticism is, I think it was a little rushed in places and could probably have made a 8 or 10 episode series, and maybe explore some of the characters a little more, rather than cram it all into 6 Episodes...
I was going to rate the the ending as a good point and a bad point because I think it will divide people, for me it worked well, but I can see some people having issues with it (in my opinion) ... BUT, that is what makes a good story, something that causes debate......
I really recommend this as a series to slot in after finishing binge watching one long series and before starting another long show... 6 episodes about 45 min each, perfect for a lazy weekend...
Dawn Marie (22 KP) rated The Watcher in the Woods (1981) in Movies
Jan 19, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
Disney had a dark period they were not making money horror films and sci fi films were all the rage so Disney decided that they needed to try to get away from the animated film and musicals to scary and sci fi films. This was one of the films. It had problems from the get go the watcher when showed to the preview audiences was not finished and people thought it wasn't scary which caused Disney to get scared and pulled the movie to refinish the movie with a new ending. If you get a dvd copy in the special features you will see the two different cut scenes with the watcher there are other scenes that anchor bay the distribution company wanted to put on a laser disc and a dvd but Disney refused to corporate so we may never see the deleted opening. That being said Jan and her family move into a family manor where the mrs. Elwood played by the great bette Davis lives in the cottage next to her old house. Jan finds out that mrs. Elwoods daughter disappeared in the woods during an eclipse and spooky things start happening to Jan and her sister Ellie could the watcher have something to do with this and could Jan or Ellie be the watchers next victim! The movie has some flaws and is a little cheesy but it is one of my favorite Disney forgotten films! Enjoyable but not what it could of been and defiantly better than the lifetime remake which changed everything that was good about this movie
Kevin Wilson (179 KP) rated Back to the Future (1985) in Movies
Jul 23, 2018
Amazing plot (3 more)
Fantastic cast
Lovable characters
Interesting take on a time machine
1 of my favourite movies of all time!
This is a masterpiece and a classic.
The writing is spot on, the acting and cast are perfect and could never be replaced if there was ever talk of a remake (please dont)
The idea to have the time machine as a car was genius. I know the initial idea was a refrigerator which would have been weird so I'm happy they changed their mind. The effects of going up to 88 miles per hour and see the light flash in front of the delorian before it speeds through time was impressive. They got the look of the 50s spot on.
Michael j fox and Christopher lloyd give excellent performances. Their characters are lovable, fun and just perfect. Crispin Glover is as weird as ever but great as George while lea Thompson was also great Lorraine but not as believable as an older version of herself.Tom Wilson was perfect as the bully biff and was shocked not to see him in more stuff afterwards.
The plot is great. Go back in time, make sure your parents get together to make sure your born. This was great chance for many funny scenes involving Marty and his parents. But this is where the logic didn't make sense. He went through all this so why don't his parents remember him from when they were younger.
If you ain't seen this before, where have you been? It's a classic and a must see for anyone. It's funny, it's charming and it's geeky at times.
The writing is spot on, the acting and cast are perfect and could never be replaced if there was ever talk of a remake (please dont)
The idea to have the time machine as a car was genius. I know the initial idea was a refrigerator which would have been weird so I'm happy they changed their mind. The effects of going up to 88 miles per hour and see the light flash in front of the delorian before it speeds through time was impressive. They got the look of the 50s spot on.
Michael j fox and Christopher lloyd give excellent performances. Their characters are lovable, fun and just perfect. Crispin Glover is as weird as ever but great as George while lea Thompson was also great Lorraine but not as believable as an older version of herself.Tom Wilson was perfect as the bully biff and was shocked not to see him in more stuff afterwards.
The plot is great. Go back in time, make sure your parents get together to make sure your born. This was great chance for many funny scenes involving Marty and his parents. But this is where the logic didn't make sense. He went through all this so why don't his parents remember him from when they were younger.
If you ain't seen this before, where have you been? It's a classic and a must see for anyone. It's funny, it's charming and it's geeky at times.
Erika (17788 KP) rated Mary Poppins Returns (2018) in Movies
Dec 22, 2018 (Updated Dec 22, 2018)
A sequel no one asked for, but Disney was going to give it to us whether we wanted it or not...
Unnecessary is the main word I would use to describe this film. Mary Poppins (1964) is actually practically perfect in every way, like the lady herself; and anything to follow was going to pale in comparison. Maybe I would have been more tolerant if Christopher Robin hadn't had an extremely similar plot, but I was honestly just counting down the minutes until it was over.
The music was ok, I guess, sufficient. I just can't believe Emily Blunt in period pieces, she has a face that knows about text messaging (I am a huge Blunt fan, btw). I'm glad Disney decided to keep the whole, American doing the crappiest Cockney accent thing going. I get why they chose Lin-Manuel Miranda, he's very entertaining, and I know he did that Hamilton thing (zero interest in that). The only parts I loved him in was when he was just dancing, no singing with the bad accent. The lamplighter song was by far the best out of the lot.
In the end, I've seen this same movie several times. I'm really doubting whether I want to see Aladdin, and I'll never give Disney my money again for a remake/sequel to a classic film (aside from possibly Aladdin).
Honestly, I don't know who would actually love this film. Who was it even made for? I think the reason they want everyone to see it the first weekend is so it doesn't get around how just ok the film was.
The music was ok, I guess, sufficient. I just can't believe Emily Blunt in period pieces, she has a face that knows about text messaging (I am a huge Blunt fan, btw). I'm glad Disney decided to keep the whole, American doing the crappiest Cockney accent thing going. I get why they chose Lin-Manuel Miranda, he's very entertaining, and I know he did that Hamilton thing (zero interest in that). The only parts I loved him in was when he was just dancing, no singing with the bad accent. The lamplighter song was by far the best out of the lot.
In the end, I've seen this same movie several times. I'm really doubting whether I want to see Aladdin, and I'll never give Disney my money again for a remake/sequel to a classic film (aside from possibly Aladdin).
Honestly, I don't know who would actually love this film. Who was it even made for? I think the reason they want everyone to see it the first weekend is so it doesn't get around how just ok the film was.
