Search
Search results
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Jaws (1975) in Movies
Apr 20, 2022
When you think of classic blockbusters, or classic horror, or classic creature features, Jaws is surely a title that will spring to mind. A true masterpiece of cinema that manages to fit and excel in all of the above categories.
Spielberg completely changed how films were planned and released with what is widely considered to be the first summer blockbuster, and all these years later, it's still an effective rollercoaster ride.
The opening scene is utterly harrowing without a drop of blood to be seen, and sets the tone in a dramatic and iconic manner. After some efficient character introductions, we're straight into one of the most anxiety inducing scenes in cinema history, as Chief Brody sits on a packed beach, scanning the shore for danger. The constant barrage of characters interrupting his line of view and talking at him, over him, over eachother, it's almost unbearable, and is paid off with a truly horrifying moment. It's one of many scenes in Jaws that flaunts some masterful editing.
The second half of the film is essentially the three leads - Roy Scheider, Robert Shaw, Richard Dreyfuss - all jostling to chew up the scenery. The chemistry between all of them is wonderful, from the thrilling chase of hunting the shark, to them kicking back, trading scar stories and singing shanties, to Quints incredible monologue, to the infamous Ahab-esque climax. It's a joy to watch unfold.
The shark itself has a tendency to look a little goofy by todays standards, but an incredible feat for the time.
Jaws is held in such high regard for a reason. It's a film that truly thrills, scares, and delights its audience in equal measure, and still stands tall almost 50 years later. One of the best of all time.
Spielberg completely changed how films were planned and released with what is widely considered to be the first summer blockbuster, and all these years later, it's still an effective rollercoaster ride.
The opening scene is utterly harrowing without a drop of blood to be seen, and sets the tone in a dramatic and iconic manner. After some efficient character introductions, we're straight into one of the most anxiety inducing scenes in cinema history, as Chief Brody sits on a packed beach, scanning the shore for danger. The constant barrage of characters interrupting his line of view and talking at him, over him, over eachother, it's almost unbearable, and is paid off with a truly horrifying moment. It's one of many scenes in Jaws that flaunts some masterful editing.
The second half of the film is essentially the three leads - Roy Scheider, Robert Shaw, Richard Dreyfuss - all jostling to chew up the scenery. The chemistry between all of them is wonderful, from the thrilling chase of hunting the shark, to them kicking back, trading scar stories and singing shanties, to Quints incredible monologue, to the infamous Ahab-esque climax. It's a joy to watch unfold.
The shark itself has a tendency to look a little goofy by todays standards, but an incredible feat for the time.
Jaws is held in such high regard for a reason. It's a film that truly thrills, scares, and delights its audience in equal measure, and still stands tall almost 50 years later. One of the best of all time.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Airplane! (1980) in Movies
Dec 8, 2020
Surely you can't be serious?
Film #6 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Airplane!
Airplane! is a well known comedy classic, but for me I’m ashamed to admit that aside from the infamous “Don’t call me Shirley” line, I could barely remember a thing about this film. Airplane! is undoubtedly the mother, and master, of all comedy spoof films. Written and directed by Jim Abrahams and David and Jerry Zucker, this focuses Ted Striker (Robert Hays) who despite his fear of flying boards a plane to win back his girlfriend Elaine (Julie Hagerty), only to wind up having to ensure the plane lands safely when the pilots get sick.
The plot is definitely basic, but what it lacks in proper story it more than makes up for in laughs. I’ve never seen a film so chock full of jokes and gags, and in such a wide variety too. This features everything from subtle(ish) background jokes to witty and smart dialogue and obvious physical humour, and aside for a few misses, the majority of these jokes land perfectly. There’s the crude and hilarious auto pilot scene, to the incredibly funny and smart lines like when stewardess Elaine asks Doctor Rumack (Leslie Nielsen) about the onboard illness, “A hospital? What is it?”, to which he replies “It’s a big building with patients”. There’s something incredibly simple about the humour in this film that works so well, and yet aside from those few misses, it never resorts to crudeness that becomes disgusting and overbearing like most modern comedies do. These gags paired with the spoofing and sending up of disaster movies (plus many other genres) is a winning formula that has been emulated many times over by the likes of The Naked Gun and Hot Shots films since this was released in 1980. Admittedly there are some jokes that nowadays would be considered unacceptable and would never see the light of day, but fortunately these are a small minority and don’t spoil the overall enjoyment of the film, even now 40 years later.
The cast excel too in pulling off the over the top cheesiness you’d expect from a parody, and this is no mean feat. Whilst Julie Hagerty and Robert Hays do well as the main characters, it’s the smaller supporting roles that really stand out especially as they appear to have been given the best lines. You have Leslie Nielsen as the deadpan Doctor Rumack who delivers some hilarious dialogue with such a straight face, Lloyd Bridges as Steve McCroskey with his immortal lines beginning with “Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop…” and my absolute favourite background character Johnny (Stephen Stucker) who has some of the funniest moments you’ll ever see from such a minor character. And a notable mention has to go to Otto the automatic pilot, who even gets a feature in the credits.
Airplane! is a rightful comedy classic that could beat modern comedy films hands down, and it truly is a shame they don’t make spoofs like this anymore. It’s hilariously funny, right until the very end of the credits and an entirely unforgettable comedy experience.
Airplane! is a well known comedy classic, but for me I’m ashamed to admit that aside from the infamous “Don’t call me Shirley” line, I could barely remember a thing about this film. Airplane! is undoubtedly the mother, and master, of all comedy spoof films. Written and directed by Jim Abrahams and David and Jerry Zucker, this focuses Ted Striker (Robert Hays) who despite his fear of flying boards a plane to win back his girlfriend Elaine (Julie Hagerty), only to wind up having to ensure the plane lands safely when the pilots get sick.
The plot is definitely basic, but what it lacks in proper story it more than makes up for in laughs. I’ve never seen a film so chock full of jokes and gags, and in such a wide variety too. This features everything from subtle(ish) background jokes to witty and smart dialogue and obvious physical humour, and aside for a few misses, the majority of these jokes land perfectly. There’s the crude and hilarious auto pilot scene, to the incredibly funny and smart lines like when stewardess Elaine asks Doctor Rumack (Leslie Nielsen) about the onboard illness, “A hospital? What is it?”, to which he replies “It’s a big building with patients”. There’s something incredibly simple about the humour in this film that works so well, and yet aside from those few misses, it never resorts to crudeness that becomes disgusting and overbearing like most modern comedies do. These gags paired with the spoofing and sending up of disaster movies (plus many other genres) is a winning formula that has been emulated many times over by the likes of The Naked Gun and Hot Shots films since this was released in 1980. Admittedly there are some jokes that nowadays would be considered unacceptable and would never see the light of day, but fortunately these are a small minority and don’t spoil the overall enjoyment of the film, even now 40 years later.
The cast excel too in pulling off the over the top cheesiness you’d expect from a parody, and this is no mean feat. Whilst Julie Hagerty and Robert Hays do well as the main characters, it’s the smaller supporting roles that really stand out especially as they appear to have been given the best lines. You have Leslie Nielsen as the deadpan Doctor Rumack who delivers some hilarious dialogue with such a straight face, Lloyd Bridges as Steve McCroskey with his immortal lines beginning with “Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop…” and my absolute favourite background character Johnny (Stephen Stucker) who has some of the funniest moments you’ll ever see from such a minor character. And a notable mention has to go to Otto the automatic pilot, who even gets a feature in the credits.
Airplane! is a rightful comedy classic that could beat modern comedy films hands down, and it truly is a shame they don’t make spoofs like this anymore. It’s hilariously funny, right until the very end of the credits and an entirely unforgettable comedy experience.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Driven (2001) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: Driven starts as we get to see how a racing season is going, Beau Brandenburg (Schweiger) the reigning champion starts shinning until rookie driver Jimmy Bly (Pardue) starts becoming competition for the title. When Jimmy starts to fade, team manager Carl Henry (Reynolds) brings back former champion Joe Tanto (Stallone) to help keep the head on straight of the rookie driver.
With Joe back to be used as an experienced blocker to help Jimmy, it is Jimmy that will need to make the difficult decisions and with his brother and manager Demille Bly (Leonard) who is trying to control the young drivers ever movement. Can he get the title won on his rookie season or will the pressure get to him?
Thoughts on Driven
Characters – Joe Tanto was the once great driver, former champion and past his prime, still considered one for the experience factor. He needs to help guide the rookie who is destining to become champion, while facing his own personal regrets. Carl Henry is the owner of the team, he knows Jimmy will become champion and will do anything to make sure his team brings the title back. Jimmy Bly is the rookie making big waves in the sport, controlled by his brother to avoid the pressure that comes with being at the top. He makes the rookie mistakes and need guidance to become champion. Beau Brandenburg is the champion, the best in the game right now even if he can come of arrogant at times. Sophia is the girlfriend of Beau, she has been for years now and after a disagreement she befriends Jimmy adding extra tension between the two potential champions. Demille Bly is the brother and manager of Jimmy, he is trying to control every decision of his career, he is the closest to being the villain in the film.
Performances – Sylvester Stallone is solid enough for this film he fills in the mentor role well enough. Burt Reynolds as the team manager works for the film, we needed an older figure in this role. Kip Pardue does suit the rookie driver well even certain parts of the script are poor. Til Schweiger, Estella Warren and Robert Sean Leonard are good in the supporting roles which give them a chance to have fun with their roles.
Story – The story follows a rookie facing a champion for an unlike season in race car driving, we see the good and bad moments for the whole field, the pressures thrown on the young driver, with a friendly rivalry being created between the two. We have the older mentor role needed to keep the head on the straight for the younger driver. While being a Formula One fan I can enjoy a good rivalry film which this does give us even if the races have been intensified for the cinematic audience. We get lesson to be learnt by the drivers, team and managers which this season will give us.
Action/Sports – The action in this film comes from the races, while the special effects used have dated horrendously the flat out racing is a join to watch. The sport side of the film gives us a look into the racing industry and just how dangerous it can be when racing for victory.
Settings – The film takes us around the world to different race tracks used in the sport in real life.
Scene of the Movie – The accident.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The special effects.
Final Thoughts – This is a film the fans of racing will enjoy, it has good sequence even if the special effects are weak, it does feel like we are watch Cars the live action movie.
Overall: Racing fun film.
With Joe back to be used as an experienced blocker to help Jimmy, it is Jimmy that will need to make the difficult decisions and with his brother and manager Demille Bly (Leonard) who is trying to control the young drivers ever movement. Can he get the title won on his rookie season or will the pressure get to him?
Thoughts on Driven
Characters – Joe Tanto was the once great driver, former champion and past his prime, still considered one for the experience factor. He needs to help guide the rookie who is destining to become champion, while facing his own personal regrets. Carl Henry is the owner of the team, he knows Jimmy will become champion and will do anything to make sure his team brings the title back. Jimmy Bly is the rookie making big waves in the sport, controlled by his brother to avoid the pressure that comes with being at the top. He makes the rookie mistakes and need guidance to become champion. Beau Brandenburg is the champion, the best in the game right now even if he can come of arrogant at times. Sophia is the girlfriend of Beau, she has been for years now and after a disagreement she befriends Jimmy adding extra tension between the two potential champions. Demille Bly is the brother and manager of Jimmy, he is trying to control every decision of his career, he is the closest to being the villain in the film.
Performances – Sylvester Stallone is solid enough for this film he fills in the mentor role well enough. Burt Reynolds as the team manager works for the film, we needed an older figure in this role. Kip Pardue does suit the rookie driver well even certain parts of the script are poor. Til Schweiger, Estella Warren and Robert Sean Leonard are good in the supporting roles which give them a chance to have fun with their roles.
Story – The story follows a rookie facing a champion for an unlike season in race car driving, we see the good and bad moments for the whole field, the pressures thrown on the young driver, with a friendly rivalry being created between the two. We have the older mentor role needed to keep the head on the straight for the younger driver. While being a Formula One fan I can enjoy a good rivalry film which this does give us even if the races have been intensified for the cinematic audience. We get lesson to be learnt by the drivers, team and managers which this season will give us.
Action/Sports – The action in this film comes from the races, while the special effects used have dated horrendously the flat out racing is a join to watch. The sport side of the film gives us a look into the racing industry and just how dangerous it can be when racing for victory.
Settings – The film takes us around the world to different race tracks used in the sport in real life.
Scene of the Movie – The accident.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The special effects.
Final Thoughts – This is a film the fans of racing will enjoy, it has good sequence even if the special effects are weak, it does feel like we are watch Cars the live action movie.
Overall: Racing fun film.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated 100 Fathoms Below in Books
Jan 31, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
I love books that take place under the sea–particularly horror books. If you’ve read my review on Something’s Alive on the Titanic, you probably already know that. (It’s a great book by the way, and its author is Robert Serling–brother to Rod Serling.) It’s only natural that I selected 100 Fathoms Below when I read its nautical, and eerie, description.
And here’s where my spoiler comes in, because I’m about to go on a mini-rant. The synopsis hints at a mysterious, evil monster hunting the crew of the ship, but it does not say what that creature is. Therefore, I feel that revealing this is a book about vampires is, in fact, a spoiler–contrary to popular belief of other reviewers. It’s pretty obvious early on, with the first hint coming in at 8%, however if I’d known this was a vampire book before I chose it, I wouldn’t have taken the time to read it. The key word there is BEFORE. Because I had it spoiled by a straight up summary of the prologue on Goodreads, coupled with a pretty hearty description about the… well, vampires. So, now that you know that overly used trope is here, let’s take a moment to discuss what Kent and Kaufmann do right, shall we?
The vampires in 100 Fathoms Below are good ol’ classic boys, in the sense that they’re bloodthirsty and want nothing more than to maim and breed more of their kind. They aren’t romanticized, either–and that’s a great thing. In fact, they’re written well enough that, despite having been spoiled by a fellow reviewer, I enjoyed the book enough to finish it. Mostly because I wanted to see how things ended.
Something else Kent and Kaufmann excel at is creating a connection between the readers and characters. I found myself sharing the hopes and dreams of many of the figures we meet. That made some of the deaths a lot more difficult on me.
The plot is quick, making it an easy read; however, the sense of intrigue isn’t really there. The whole discovering a prototype Soviet submarine takes the back burner with an occasional mention and even when it does come back into play toward the end of the book, there’s not exactly any excitement or fear of them being caught. I found that to be a bit disappointing.
Overall, it’s an entertaining read, but I probably wouldn’t take the time to re-read it. I’d like to thank NetGalley and Blackstone Publishing for providing me with a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
And here’s where my spoiler comes in, because I’m about to go on a mini-rant. The synopsis hints at a mysterious, evil monster hunting the crew of the ship, but it does not say what that creature is. Therefore, I feel that revealing this is a book about vampires is, in fact, a spoiler–contrary to popular belief of other reviewers. It’s pretty obvious early on, with the first hint coming in at 8%, however if I’d known this was a vampire book before I chose it, I wouldn’t have taken the time to read it. The key word there is BEFORE. Because I had it spoiled by a straight up summary of the prologue on Goodreads, coupled with a pretty hearty description about the… well, vampires. So, now that you know that overly used trope is here, let’s take a moment to discuss what Kent and Kaufmann do right, shall we?
The vampires in 100 Fathoms Below are good ol’ classic boys, in the sense that they’re bloodthirsty and want nothing more than to maim and breed more of their kind. They aren’t romanticized, either–and that’s a great thing. In fact, they’re written well enough that, despite having been spoiled by a fellow reviewer, I enjoyed the book enough to finish it. Mostly because I wanted to see how things ended.
Something else Kent and Kaufmann excel at is creating a connection between the readers and characters. I found myself sharing the hopes and dreams of many of the figures we meet. That made some of the deaths a lot more difficult on me.
The plot is quick, making it an easy read; however, the sense of intrigue isn’t really there. The whole discovering a prototype Soviet submarine takes the back burner with an occasional mention and even when it does come back into play toward the end of the book, there’s not exactly any excitement or fear of them being caught. I found that to be a bit disappointing.
Overall, it’s an entertaining read, but I probably wouldn’t take the time to re-read it. I’d like to thank NetGalley and Blackstone Publishing for providing me with a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The King (2019) in Movies
Oct 29, 2019
There has been a lot of talk about The King, it's not one that I would necessarily have picked but I do enjoy historical films and who doesn't like a good battle scene? With Timothée Chalamet in the lead and Robert Pattinson in a supporting role I had my doubts, I'm not a fan of either one particularly but in the end it changed my opinion... partly. What surprised me was that this was a Netflix film, from all the hype I had been expecting a general release and I think it would have done incredibly well at the cinema, but we shall see how it fairs online.
My historical knowledge is terrible, luckily the evening I saw this I was meeting a friend for dinner who would be my phone a friend for all things historical so I picked his brain. We compared notes and it seems like they haven't messed with the actual history of it too much, though he did admit to not being an expert on this period. Do let me know in the comments how it stands up against documented history if you're up to speed on the topic.
The film does a good job of keeping the timeline clear, it doesn't jump around unnecessarily and despite the obvious long time frame of real life the scenes capture and condense everything quite nicely.
I'm going to start covering the acting by talking about Robert Pattinson. I have never heard such a unanimous reaction to a performance in my life. From the sheer volume in the Odean Luxe I believe that as soon as he spoke everyone broke out laughing. It wasn't just the one time either, it was every time. I don't know anything about The Dauphin of France but perhaps he did have the stereotypical accent... I don't know if I want to give RPat the benefit of the doubt. Almost every scene he was in had a rather tragic comedy element, mostly that was the accent but later there's a scene that would have sat well in a silent black and white comedy skit, I did laugh, but it really didn't fit the tone of any part of the film that he wasn't in.
Timothée Chalamet hasn't made much of an impression on me so far in his acting career. Beautiful Boy wasn't my cup of tea and his parts in Lady Bird and Hostiles clearly didn't either as I only remembered them when skimming IMDb. In The King though I found him to be excellent, I didn't make a single negative note about his performance. Every scene, every emotion, every moment in battle landed perfectly. This really did turn my opinion of him around and I'll be looking forward to his next role a lot more.
Joel Edgerton as Sir John Falstaff is the comic relief this film needed, his moments were light and broke the tension in the perfect way. He's a very consistent actor whose a pleasure to watch on screen and he's a multi-talented fella to boot... writer, producer and actor in this, well played sir, well played.
Sean Harris will also be a familiar face to most of us, and I suspect the main go to for people would be the MI franchise though he's got over 50 acting credits including the UK actors' traditional stint on The Bill. Yet another great actor in the mix and he managed to bring the characteristics of William out with great effect in his performance.
Overall the cast was excellent, though a couple of performances may have been a little on the irritating side for me, that did feel more intentional than anything else when you took the scenes into consideration.
It's difficult to know whether I'm spoiling something or not, but this is based on historical fact so I'm going to say not... The build up to the battle seemed fitting and yet somehow understated for what was to follow. The sound and the visuals are stunning, I'm getting goosebumps just remembering it. The rumble of the horses, the arrows... the sound in the cinema was so powerful and it makes me a little sad that this is going straight to Netflix where that part won't meet its full potential for most of its streams.
The other worry is that the battle won't get the same impact on a smaller screen. The camera work in The King is amazing, you got the sense of claustrophobia and the crush of the fight as we were brought into the mob of actors. I was in awe watching it. I genuinely don't know how they successfully managed to film that whole sequence in what was essentially a pool of mud. It makes my mind boggle.
While I can't really get on board with Robert Pattinson in this film everyone else was a joy to watch. It's a shame it's a Netflix film, I commend them for making something this impressive but it really deserves a cinema experience, I'm thankful to LFF for giving me that honour.
Full review originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/10/the-king-movie-review.html
My historical knowledge is terrible, luckily the evening I saw this I was meeting a friend for dinner who would be my phone a friend for all things historical so I picked his brain. We compared notes and it seems like they haven't messed with the actual history of it too much, though he did admit to not being an expert on this period. Do let me know in the comments how it stands up against documented history if you're up to speed on the topic.
The film does a good job of keeping the timeline clear, it doesn't jump around unnecessarily and despite the obvious long time frame of real life the scenes capture and condense everything quite nicely.
I'm going to start covering the acting by talking about Robert Pattinson. I have never heard such a unanimous reaction to a performance in my life. From the sheer volume in the Odean Luxe I believe that as soon as he spoke everyone broke out laughing. It wasn't just the one time either, it was every time. I don't know anything about The Dauphin of France but perhaps he did have the stereotypical accent... I don't know if I want to give RPat the benefit of the doubt. Almost every scene he was in had a rather tragic comedy element, mostly that was the accent but later there's a scene that would have sat well in a silent black and white comedy skit, I did laugh, but it really didn't fit the tone of any part of the film that he wasn't in.
Timothée Chalamet hasn't made much of an impression on me so far in his acting career. Beautiful Boy wasn't my cup of tea and his parts in Lady Bird and Hostiles clearly didn't either as I only remembered them when skimming IMDb. In The King though I found him to be excellent, I didn't make a single negative note about his performance. Every scene, every emotion, every moment in battle landed perfectly. This really did turn my opinion of him around and I'll be looking forward to his next role a lot more.
Joel Edgerton as Sir John Falstaff is the comic relief this film needed, his moments were light and broke the tension in the perfect way. He's a very consistent actor whose a pleasure to watch on screen and he's a multi-talented fella to boot... writer, producer and actor in this, well played sir, well played.
Sean Harris will also be a familiar face to most of us, and I suspect the main go to for people would be the MI franchise though he's got over 50 acting credits including the UK actors' traditional stint on The Bill. Yet another great actor in the mix and he managed to bring the characteristics of William out with great effect in his performance.
Overall the cast was excellent, though a couple of performances may have been a little on the irritating side for me, that did feel more intentional than anything else when you took the scenes into consideration.
It's difficult to know whether I'm spoiling something or not, but this is based on historical fact so I'm going to say not... The build up to the battle seemed fitting and yet somehow understated for what was to follow. The sound and the visuals are stunning, I'm getting goosebumps just remembering it. The rumble of the horses, the arrows... the sound in the cinema was so powerful and it makes me a little sad that this is going straight to Netflix where that part won't meet its full potential for most of its streams.
The other worry is that the battle won't get the same impact on a smaller screen. The camera work in The King is amazing, you got the sense of claustrophobia and the crush of the fight as we were brought into the mob of actors. I was in awe watching it. I genuinely don't know how they successfully managed to film that whole sequence in what was essentially a pool of mud. It makes my mind boggle.
While I can't really get on board with Robert Pattinson in this film everyone else was a joy to watch. It's a shame it's a Netflix film, I commend them for making something this impressive but it really deserves a cinema experience, I'm thankful to LFF for giving me that honour.
Full review originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/10/the-king-movie-review.html
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Blackbeard in TV
May 28, 2017
Good cast (1 more)
Decent for a TV miniseries/movie
Not entirely accurate (2 more)
The characters and boats are far too clean
TV effects (or lack of) might spoil some scenes
Somewhat entertaining
So I was on the search for some more Pirate movies at my local DVD stores, in hopes of finding something with the effects of Pirates of the Caribbean, but a more serious plot like that of the Black Sails series. Something that feels more like how the golden age of piracy would seem, not quite as quirky and humorous as the Disney films, although I cannot fault them for they are some of my favourite movies. It was on my search, that I came across this, and my initial thoughts were that whilst it looked cheap, it could be an entertaining film. As it turns out, I discovered this was a TV miniseries, merged into roughly a 162 minute film.
It has some charm, I can say that much for it. The cast are decent with very few famous names, and the acting itself isn't dreadful. However, there seems to be some lacking in the actual filming and editing of the episodes/feature. It has a decent plot which involves a hunt for treasure, a hunt for justice and slight revenge, which makes the viewing, feel like a pirate experience should be, but there still seems to lack the proper visuals to complete the experience.
If you take a look at Pirates of the Caribbean, one aspect that makes those films so darn good is the visuals. The pirates are dirty, rotting teeth, golden teeth, dirty fingernails, and their ships are battle worn with scars in the woodwork and again, the dirt from barnicles, and land. The ships in this feature on the other hand, are the cleanest ships you'll see in a pirate themed show or movie, and they look as if they were freshly made straight from the ship builder themselves. There doesn't appear to be any barnicles clung onto them, nor are there any battle scars, even after you witness a battle in the beginning of the film. The pirates themselves are also clean, all with white teeth as though they visited a dentist and brushed their teeth with colgate or the next best brand. There's not a single sign of scurvy which was popular among pirates during the golden age, and I didn't really spot any scars from battles apart from the obvious ones where you witness a member of Blackbeards crew have part of his leg removed due to injury (you don't see the gruesome imagery, as it's 12 rated series). Other than that though, there no facial scars, no sign to tell us that Blackbeard has fought enough battles and lived through them to become reknowned as a devil instead of a man. We only see what appears to be a couple of weeks of him as a Captain, and yet he claims to already be known as the scurge of the seas, which is highly unlikely given that we only see him battle one ship and spend the rest of his time hunting treasure, never running across another opposing ship until the finale, which sees Blackbeard battle against a crew of Royal Navy soldiers led by Lieutenant Robert Maynard.
Whilst the plot had me intrigued for the most part, I can't say that this is a film I would 'Highly' recommend, but if you fancy watching a pirate movie, this could be somewhat sufficient until you find something else, despite some of the deaths in battle seeming very staged, as sometimes I would notice a sword being shoved theatrically into someones armpit, only for the victim of the blade to fall lifeless to the floor, some holding onto the blade as though left in their body, others being retrieved from the 'corpse' with no visible blood on the blade.
With very historical accuracy's, mostly about the legend of Captain Kidd, hiding treasure, and the title's that Blackbeard earned, before his life was taken by that of Robert Maynard, the location of his death, and some other less important factors, were dramatized for the series alone and should not be taken as historically accurate.
It's a decent film, but it's just not quite what I was hoping for, and certainly not as great as it could have been.
It has some charm, I can say that much for it. The cast are decent with very few famous names, and the acting itself isn't dreadful. However, there seems to be some lacking in the actual filming and editing of the episodes/feature. It has a decent plot which involves a hunt for treasure, a hunt for justice and slight revenge, which makes the viewing, feel like a pirate experience should be, but there still seems to lack the proper visuals to complete the experience.
If you take a look at Pirates of the Caribbean, one aspect that makes those films so darn good is the visuals. The pirates are dirty, rotting teeth, golden teeth, dirty fingernails, and their ships are battle worn with scars in the woodwork and again, the dirt from barnicles, and land. The ships in this feature on the other hand, are the cleanest ships you'll see in a pirate themed show or movie, and they look as if they were freshly made straight from the ship builder themselves. There doesn't appear to be any barnicles clung onto them, nor are there any battle scars, even after you witness a battle in the beginning of the film. The pirates themselves are also clean, all with white teeth as though they visited a dentist and brushed their teeth with colgate or the next best brand. There's not a single sign of scurvy which was popular among pirates during the golden age, and I didn't really spot any scars from battles apart from the obvious ones where you witness a member of Blackbeards crew have part of his leg removed due to injury (you don't see the gruesome imagery, as it's 12 rated series). Other than that though, there no facial scars, no sign to tell us that Blackbeard has fought enough battles and lived through them to become reknowned as a devil instead of a man. We only see what appears to be a couple of weeks of him as a Captain, and yet he claims to already be known as the scurge of the seas, which is highly unlikely given that we only see him battle one ship and spend the rest of his time hunting treasure, never running across another opposing ship until the finale, which sees Blackbeard battle against a crew of Royal Navy soldiers led by Lieutenant Robert Maynard.
Whilst the plot had me intrigued for the most part, I can't say that this is a film I would 'Highly' recommend, but if you fancy watching a pirate movie, this could be somewhat sufficient until you find something else, despite some of the deaths in battle seeming very staged, as sometimes I would notice a sword being shoved theatrically into someones armpit, only for the victim of the blade to fall lifeless to the floor, some holding onto the blade as though left in their body, others being retrieved from the 'corpse' with no visible blood on the blade.
With very historical accuracy's, mostly about the legend of Captain Kidd, hiding treasure, and the title's that Blackbeard earned, before his life was taken by that of Robert Maynard, the location of his death, and some other less important factors, were dramatized for the series alone and should not be taken as historically accurate.
It's a decent film, but it's just not quite what I was hoping for, and certainly not as great as it could have been.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Identity Thief (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Life for Sandy Patterson (Jason Bateman), is a comfortable middle class existence. He is a father of two daughters and is expecting a third child soon with his loving wife Trish (Amanda Peet). While they have financial concerns with the pending arrival of their new baby, Sandy is hoping for a bonus and promotion at his job working for a financial service company. Things take a turn for the worse for Sandy when not only does he get neither a bonus nor promotion, but he learns that his supervisors are authorizing themselves large bonus checks which he is in charge of issuing.
Sandy and his friend Daniel (John Cho), decide that enough is enough and decide to start their own company with Sandy as V.P. Although a risky move, this could be the answer to his financial needs and Sandy jumps aboard without a second thought. Enter Diana (Melissa McCarthy), a professional identity thief who packs her Florida home with all manner of items obtained via her knack for creating credit cards belonging to other people.
Sandy thanks to his unisex name, has become the latest target for Diana and in no time, finds that his credit cards are maxed out, and worst yet, he is wanted by the police. This does not sit well for his new position as a V.P. with credit issues and warrants will scare off investors. Sandy learns that the timeline for clearing his name can be extensive, so he hatches a plan after receiving a spa confirmation call from Florida. Sandy with the knowledge of the police plans to travel to Florida and bring the person who has stolen his identity to Denver to clear his name. He hopes that a promise of no prosecution will trick her into the trip and clearing his good name.
Since the film is a comedy, things naturally do not go as planned as Denise is crafty and will resort to anything from throat punches to vehicular assault to stay one step ahead of the law. Denise has run afoul of a criminal element for issuing them credit cards that she has already maxed out and they dispatch two killers to take her and anyone she is with out. As if this is not bad enough, a psycho skip tracer (Robert Patrick) is also in hot pursuit and set on capturing the large reward on Denise. What follows is a mixture of the buddy comedy formula and road trip film which more than once reminded me of the recent “Due Date”. “Identity Thief” has a great premise and cast to it, but it is saddled by long stretches that drag on. The film takes a while to get started and never seems to find a pace that works for it.
McCarthy has some great lines and moments and Bateman does a solid job as the straight main foil. The problem is, the laughs are to few and far between to justify the nearly two hour run time. This is a shame as with about 30 minutes trimmed this could have been a very tight and witty comedy but instead under director Seth Gordon best efforts, the film never reaches its potential.
Sandy and his friend Daniel (John Cho), decide that enough is enough and decide to start their own company with Sandy as V.P. Although a risky move, this could be the answer to his financial needs and Sandy jumps aboard without a second thought. Enter Diana (Melissa McCarthy), a professional identity thief who packs her Florida home with all manner of items obtained via her knack for creating credit cards belonging to other people.
Sandy thanks to his unisex name, has become the latest target for Diana and in no time, finds that his credit cards are maxed out, and worst yet, he is wanted by the police. This does not sit well for his new position as a V.P. with credit issues and warrants will scare off investors. Sandy learns that the timeline for clearing his name can be extensive, so he hatches a plan after receiving a spa confirmation call from Florida. Sandy with the knowledge of the police plans to travel to Florida and bring the person who has stolen his identity to Denver to clear his name. He hopes that a promise of no prosecution will trick her into the trip and clearing his good name.
Since the film is a comedy, things naturally do not go as planned as Denise is crafty and will resort to anything from throat punches to vehicular assault to stay one step ahead of the law. Denise has run afoul of a criminal element for issuing them credit cards that she has already maxed out and they dispatch two killers to take her and anyone she is with out. As if this is not bad enough, a psycho skip tracer (Robert Patrick) is also in hot pursuit and set on capturing the large reward on Denise. What follows is a mixture of the buddy comedy formula and road trip film which more than once reminded me of the recent “Due Date”. “Identity Thief” has a great premise and cast to it, but it is saddled by long stretches that drag on. The film takes a while to get started and never seems to find a pace that works for it.
McCarthy has some great lines and moments and Bateman does a solid job as the straight main foil. The problem is, the laughs are to few and far between to justify the nearly two hour run time. This is a shame as with about 30 minutes trimmed this could have been a very tight and witty comedy but instead under director Seth Gordon best efforts, the film never reaches its potential.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
This one belongs to James Spader
I doubt that Joss Whedon and the team down at Marvel knew just how successful 2012’s Avengers Assemble would go on to be. After just a few months of release it became the third highest-grossing film of all time, by no means an easy feat to achieve.
Therefore, Whedon and co had their work cut out trying to build on the solid foundations they had laid when it came to producing a sequel. However, three years and $250m later Avengers: Age of Ultron hits our screens. But is it the follow-up everyone was asking for?
Age of Ultron follows the dynamic team of superheroes as they continue to save the world following the near cataclysmic events of the 2009 predecessor and of course every Marvel film released since. Here however, they are tasked with taking down a robot hell bent on destroying the world – a tough day at the office to say the least.
All the fan favourites return as well as some new faces in a film that is technically spectacular but a little overambitious at times. There are 11, count them 11, major characters vying for screen time in Age of Ultron and while Whedon manages to give each of them their own story arc, at times it feels a little rushed.
Joining the cast is James Spader as the voice of Ultron, a robot accidentally created by Tony Stark, and he is by far the most intriguing character in an already impressive line-up. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be on fine form as the wise-cracking Iron Man/Stark with Chris Hemsworth providing the eye-candy as Thor.
It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner’s Black Widow and Hawkeye get some much-needed fleshing out after their fairly limited roles in previous Marvel films, and Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk is a joy to watch.
Kick-Ass’ Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Godzilla’s Elizabeth Olsen also join the cast as Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, two characters fans of the X-Men universe will recognise. However, due to legal requirements their origins are changed and the fact that they are mutants is never revealed, unfortunately limiting their appeal.
When it comes to special effects, Whedon has made sure every sequence is brimming with the highest quality CGI, and despite a couple of lapses early on in the film, the majority of the picture is flawless with some stunning global locations beautifully juxtaposed with the characters doing their thing.
What stands out in Age of Ultron however is the plot. Avengers Assemble was a fine film right up until the generic city-levelling, headache inducing climax that looked like it could have come straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
Thankfully, whilst the action is dialled up a few notches here, the plot is much more detailed and the final scenes are utterly breath-taking.
Overall, Avengers: Age of Ultron had a massive amount to live up to and in some respects it falls a little short, its overambitious nature is its downfall with too many characters needing screen time. However, as a good-time blockbuster it’s hard to find one better and James Spader is genuinely mesmerising as Ultron.
Is it the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Well, it’s definitely an improvement on its predecessor – but for me, Guardians of the Galaxy just takes that title by a whisker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/26/this-one-belongs-to-james-spader-avengers-age-of-ultron-review/
Therefore, Whedon and co had their work cut out trying to build on the solid foundations they had laid when it came to producing a sequel. However, three years and $250m later Avengers: Age of Ultron hits our screens. But is it the follow-up everyone was asking for?
Age of Ultron follows the dynamic team of superheroes as they continue to save the world following the near cataclysmic events of the 2009 predecessor and of course every Marvel film released since. Here however, they are tasked with taking down a robot hell bent on destroying the world – a tough day at the office to say the least.
All the fan favourites return as well as some new faces in a film that is technically spectacular but a little overambitious at times. There are 11, count them 11, major characters vying for screen time in Age of Ultron and while Whedon manages to give each of them their own story arc, at times it feels a little rushed.
Joining the cast is James Spader as the voice of Ultron, a robot accidentally created by Tony Stark, and he is by far the most intriguing character in an already impressive line-up. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be on fine form as the wise-cracking Iron Man/Stark with Chris Hemsworth providing the eye-candy as Thor.
It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner’s Black Widow and Hawkeye get some much-needed fleshing out after their fairly limited roles in previous Marvel films, and Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk is a joy to watch.
Kick-Ass’ Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Godzilla’s Elizabeth Olsen also join the cast as Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, two characters fans of the X-Men universe will recognise. However, due to legal requirements their origins are changed and the fact that they are mutants is never revealed, unfortunately limiting their appeal.
When it comes to special effects, Whedon has made sure every sequence is brimming with the highest quality CGI, and despite a couple of lapses early on in the film, the majority of the picture is flawless with some stunning global locations beautifully juxtaposed with the characters doing their thing.
What stands out in Age of Ultron however is the plot. Avengers Assemble was a fine film right up until the generic city-levelling, headache inducing climax that looked like it could have come straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
Thankfully, whilst the action is dialled up a few notches here, the plot is much more detailed and the final scenes are utterly breath-taking.
Overall, Avengers: Age of Ultron had a massive amount to live up to and in some respects it falls a little short, its overambitious nature is its downfall with too many characters needing screen time. However, as a good-time blockbuster it’s hard to find one better and James Spader is genuinely mesmerising as Ultron.
Is it the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Well, it’s definitely an improvement on its predecessor – but for me, Guardians of the Galaxy just takes that title by a whisker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/26/this-one-belongs-to-james-spader-avengers-age-of-ultron-review/
Midge (525 KP) rated The Duke of Fire in Books
Jan 29, 2019
Lots of Romance, drama, tension and conflict (2 more)
Main character is kind and compassionate
Captivating and engaging story
A Wonderful Romance
"The Duke Of Fire" is a delightful story that has a bit of everything. From romance and drama to tension and conflict, and joy and sorrow, there really is something for everyone. Reminiscent of Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre, it is a lovely, historical fiction novel set in the magnificent Wellesley Manor, part of the beautifully scenic Exeter Estate, in England.
What’s really likeable about it straight-away are the opening chapters that draw you into the main character, Miss Jane Harcourt. She is a kind, compassionate, strong, and clever governess, but has to leave her present employment due to the unwanted advances and desirous pursuits of her boss. She goes to stay with her cousin Anne and her husband David, until she is able to secure another position, working as a governess.
Jane finds herself further employment with Michael Blackstone, the Duke of Hayfield, also known as the Duke of Fire and his son, Samuel, a sweet eight-year-old little boy. Five years ago the Duke’s wife was killed in a fire and he has lived with the stress and guilt of her death ever since, as he was unable to save her from the fire before she perished. The Duke himself suffered terrible disfigurement and has become a virtual recluse in his own home.
The extremely wealthy Duke has a brother, Lord Robert Blackstone, who assists with all business matters concerning their vast estate, but, unfortunately, does not take much of a liking to Jane’s arrival. Jane in return is mistrustful of Lord Blackstone’s intentions.
I felt instantly on her side of the thoughtful, pretty, and caring Jane, particularly in her initial dealings with the Duke, with whom she was already in awe of. You can immediately sense that there was something going on, and one of the highlights of the book was following how they dealt with their emotional feelings. The Duke is, at first, hard to work out but you gradually get to know him as the story unfolds and see that he has many surprising qualities. Both the plot and the character development are excellent, and the story-line is very believable. The story is both captivating and engaging. It held my interest from start to finish, and I found myself rooting for both Jane and the Duke as they tried to deal with all of their conflicting emotions of that time and the courage they showed in confronting their challenges.
"The Duke of Fire" was an interesting novel particularly with regard to the interaction of the different characters - a loving, bright and energetic young boy, a handsome, but selfish and untrustworthy brother and a judgemental, gossiping, close-knit ton. Plenty of emotional angst and ups and downs along the way and plenty of surprises. I loved the authors writing style which I found very easy to read. It was a fantastic read!
I delighted in every page of the book from beginning to end and my only criticism would probably be that it could have been a little longer. I liked very much how the book was ended. I have been inspired to read more from Jennifer Monroe and I highly recommend this book. I suggest wholeheartedly that you add it to your reading list.
Thank you to Hidden Gems and the author, Jennifer Monroe for a free ARC of this book in exchange for a voluntary, honest review.
What’s really likeable about it straight-away are the opening chapters that draw you into the main character, Miss Jane Harcourt. She is a kind, compassionate, strong, and clever governess, but has to leave her present employment due to the unwanted advances and desirous pursuits of her boss. She goes to stay with her cousin Anne and her husband David, until she is able to secure another position, working as a governess.
Jane finds herself further employment with Michael Blackstone, the Duke of Hayfield, also known as the Duke of Fire and his son, Samuel, a sweet eight-year-old little boy. Five years ago the Duke’s wife was killed in a fire and he has lived with the stress and guilt of her death ever since, as he was unable to save her from the fire before she perished. The Duke himself suffered terrible disfigurement and has become a virtual recluse in his own home.
The extremely wealthy Duke has a brother, Lord Robert Blackstone, who assists with all business matters concerning their vast estate, but, unfortunately, does not take much of a liking to Jane’s arrival. Jane in return is mistrustful of Lord Blackstone’s intentions.
I felt instantly on her side of the thoughtful, pretty, and caring Jane, particularly in her initial dealings with the Duke, with whom she was already in awe of. You can immediately sense that there was something going on, and one of the highlights of the book was following how they dealt with their emotional feelings. The Duke is, at first, hard to work out but you gradually get to know him as the story unfolds and see that he has many surprising qualities. Both the plot and the character development are excellent, and the story-line is very believable. The story is both captivating and engaging. It held my interest from start to finish, and I found myself rooting for both Jane and the Duke as they tried to deal with all of their conflicting emotions of that time and the courage they showed in confronting their challenges.
"The Duke of Fire" was an interesting novel particularly with regard to the interaction of the different characters - a loving, bright and energetic young boy, a handsome, but selfish and untrustworthy brother and a judgemental, gossiping, close-knit ton. Plenty of emotional angst and ups and downs along the way and plenty of surprises. I loved the authors writing style which I found very easy to read. It was a fantastic read!
I delighted in every page of the book from beginning to end and my only criticism would probably be that it could have been a little longer. I liked very much how the book was ended. I have been inspired to read more from Jennifer Monroe and I highly recommend this book. I suggest wholeheartedly that you add it to your reading list.
Thank you to Hidden Gems and the author, Jennifer Monroe for a free ARC of this book in exchange for a voluntary, honest review.
