Search
Search results
Sarah (7800 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 (17789 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.
Marylegs (44 KP) rated The Walking Dead: v. 1: Days Gone Bye in Books
Aug 14, 2019
So I have finally got started on reading these graphic novels. I have been an avid fan of the TV remake and am fully aware that the series and graphic novels do not run exactly scene for scene. Some characters have had longer roles or shorter roles, other characters added or omitted. That is not what I am concerning myself with whilst reading this novel.
What I am concerned with is how the book felt as I read it. I thought the frames were well drawn, if you take the time to look over each picture you really feel the emotions of each of the characters. At no point does it feel lacking from the sole use of greyscale, colour is unnecessary in this story. Considering there is limited writing used, the conversations between characters have been orchestrated to portray all the information and emotions needed.
It always takes me a few pages to get into a graphic novel, the switch to reading pictures and not written descriptions takes some getting used to, but this story is so gripping that it isn’t hard to get lost in it. Nothing is too gruesome or overdone (not that I mind gruesome) but some people may be put off as it is a tale set in a zombie ridden world, but actually this is a story about the effect on the people left standing. How they cope in this new harsh existence, and how they decide to make a new future for themselves. This is a great start to a series and I will be carrying on gladly and with a great deal of enthusiasm.
What I am concerned with is how the book felt as I read it. I thought the frames were well drawn, if you take the time to look over each picture you really feel the emotions of each of the characters. At no point does it feel lacking from the sole use of greyscale, colour is unnecessary in this story. Considering there is limited writing used, the conversations between characters have been orchestrated to portray all the information and emotions needed.
It always takes me a few pages to get into a graphic novel, the switch to reading pictures and not written descriptions takes some getting used to, but this story is so gripping that it isn’t hard to get lost in it. Nothing is too gruesome or overdone (not that I mind gruesome) but some people may be put off as it is a tale set in a zombie ridden world, but actually this is a story about the effect on the people left standing. How they cope in this new harsh existence, and how they decide to make a new future for themselves. This is a great start to a series and I will be carrying on gladly and with a great deal of enthusiasm.
Tim McGuire (301 KP) rated 1922 (2017) in Movies
Nov 2, 2019
Old Movie Revisited: 1922. Another sweet Netflix made Stephen King movie, within less than a month of Gerald's Game, another awesome sauce flick. This one brings back Thomas Jane into the King fold for at least the third time, a trend I hope he continues, seems to fit in well... a roll in the Dark Tower perhaps, well, isn't he already... In this one, taking place sometime before WW2 ;) we have farmer Wilfred James and his wife, Arlette, and son Henry. Now Arlette wants out of the midwest farm crap fest and move to the big city, sell the farm, get a divorce... Wilfred, well doesnt really seem to care about the divorce part, but losing the farm and Henry, cause of course the boy will go off with mommy, isnt going to happen. So what is a dad to do, duh, convince your 14 year old son to help murder your wife, invent a tale she ran off and expect everything to go well. You may have guessed, it doesn't... Hell, even little Henry becomes a outlaw. Good flick, bringing in some old Stephen King landmarks to tie in his universe a little tighter, takes place near Hemingford Home, where a few well known King characters hail from, big one being Abagail Freemantle, of The Stand... But more recently in theatres... IT, one little fat boy named Ben Hanscom also once roved it roads! Thomas Jane was awesome, if a Shining remake was ever in the works to be more true to the book, I'd love to see Mr. Jane as Jack, i think he'd be insane :) Filmbufftim on FB
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Predator (2018) in Movies
Feb 14, 2020
Halt and Catch Fire
The Predator- love the first one, hated the second one, liked the reboot/remake in 2010 and this one well could of been better. Let me explain the predator franchise is a intrest franchise, mixing togther horror, sci-fi, action and comedy all togther. Sometimes it works like in the oringal one and the 2010 verison, sometimes it doesnt like the sequel. So how does this one hold up. Well all i can say is that its a mix bag. Sometimes the comedy works and sometimes it doesnt. Mostly it doesnt. The sci-fi, action and horror work mostly, kind of, not really. This movie fails as a reboot and fails to live up to the oringal and the 2010 version.
The plot: From the outer reaches of space to the small-town streets of suburbia, the hunt comes home. The universe's most lethal hunters are stronger, smarter and deadlier than ever before, having genetically upgraded themselves with DNA from other species. When a boy accidentally triggers their return to Earth, only a ragtag crew of ex-soldiers and an evolutionary biologist can prevent the end of the human race.
Some of the cast is good like Boyd Holbrook, Jacob Tremblay and Oliva Munn. Some of the cast is just wasted like Thomas Jane, Jake Busey and Yvonne Strahovski. And than their is Keegan-Micheal Key who is both good and wasted at the same time.
All and all, this movie fails overall and should be skipped. But at the same time maybe watch it, if you like the predator franchise.
The plot: From the outer reaches of space to the small-town streets of suburbia, the hunt comes home. The universe's most lethal hunters are stronger, smarter and deadlier than ever before, having genetically upgraded themselves with DNA from other species. When a boy accidentally triggers their return to Earth, only a ragtag crew of ex-soldiers and an evolutionary biologist can prevent the end of the human race.
Some of the cast is good like Boyd Holbrook, Jacob Tremblay and Oliva Munn. Some of the cast is just wasted like Thomas Jane, Jake Busey and Yvonne Strahovski. And than their is Keegan-Micheal Key who is both good and wasted at the same time.
All and all, this movie fails overall and should be skipped. But at the same time maybe watch it, if you like the predator franchise.