Search
Erika (17788 KP) rated Peter Rabbit (2018) in Movies
Feb 18, 2018
Disclaimer: I saw this movie on accident. I went to see Early Man, but the projectionist put the wrong movie in, then left. So, no one was able to change it over. Now, I just get to see Early Man for free tonight.
So, this movie is based solely on the illustrations of Peter Rabbit and his various friends from Beatrix Potter's children's books. The movie was amusing, and I laughed at it, as an adult, so I figure that's fairly impressive. The voice acting for all of the animals was great. I did think the difference in age between Rose Byrne and Domhnall Gleeson was a little off, I know there's only a 4 year difference, but it was just a little weird.
So, this movie is based solely on the illustrations of Peter Rabbit and his various friends from Beatrix Potter's children's books. The movie was amusing, and I laughed at it, as an adult, so I figure that's fairly impressive. The voice acting for all of the animals was great. I did think the difference in age between Rose Byrne and Domhnall Gleeson was a little off, I know there's only a 4 year difference, but it was just a little weird.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Peter Rabbit (2018) in Movies
Mar 19, 2018 (Updated Mar 23, 2018)
Almost wholly ghastly bastardisation of Beatrix Potter's charming, gentle tales. Starts off with Peter Rabbit essentially killing Mr McGregor (not before contemplating sticking a carrot up his rectum) and goes on from there. 'Hilarious' jokes about Asbestos poisoning and anaphylactic shock ensue, plus a sight gag where Mrs Tiggy-Winkle walks into an electric fence.
Made all the more indefensible by a lovely fully-animated segment which completely captures the style of the original stories. Film-makers clearly not interested in that, though: not nearly 'contemporary' or 'irreverent' enough for them. Often resembles a mean-spirited parody of Beatrix Potter, twisted so it can make knowing jokes about rom-coms and so on. Very nearly completely horrible; scrapes one point for the animation sequence, another for Rose Byrne (what can I say, I'm sentimental).
Made all the more indefensible by a lovely fully-animated segment which completely captures the style of the original stories. Film-makers clearly not interested in that, though: not nearly 'contemporary' or 'irreverent' enough for them. Often resembles a mean-spirited parody of Beatrix Potter, twisted so it can make knowing jokes about rom-coms and so on. Very nearly completely horrible; scrapes one point for the animation sequence, another for Rose Byrne (what can I say, I'm sentimental).
Ross (3282 KP) rated Insidious (2010) in Movies
Nov 27, 2017 (Updated Nov 27, 2017)
The idea (1 more)
The creepy assortment of ghosts
With my wife out for the night and the kids all tucked up in bed, I decided to treat myself to a horror film, and Insidious was what I opted for (having watched the set of Sinister films a few months ago).
The film follows a fairly similar trajectory: weird things happen, the house is haunted, no its not the house its the child that's haunted, demons, triumph, happy ending. I don't think that's a spoiler as it describes 90% of the recent horror films.
A family with three young children move to a new home and soon one of the children bumps his head and ends up in a coma. From there some weird things start to happen.
Rose Byrne is excellent as the housewife struggling to raise her three kids and write music to kickstart her new career. It is her who experiences most of the unpleasant visitations, being stuck at home all day with the baby and her son in a coma. In one particularly creepy scene in the new house, she plays the role superbly (and I will never again listen to Tiptoe through the Tulips without shivering).
As with most decent horror films, this doesn't try to do anything new with the bulk of the film, but has an underlying new idea shaping it (and revealing that would be a spoiler!) that looks to explain the haunting.
Apart from Rose Byrne, I found the rest of the cast really quite poor, but they're acting during the haunting scenes didn't manage to spoil them too much.
Overall, a great creepy film that ticks all the boxes and leaves you wanting to watch the sequel.
The film follows a fairly similar trajectory: weird things happen, the house is haunted, no its not the house its the child that's haunted, demons, triumph, happy ending. I don't think that's a spoiler as it describes 90% of the recent horror films.
A family with three young children move to a new home and soon one of the children bumps his head and ends up in a coma. From there some weird things start to happen.
Rose Byrne is excellent as the housewife struggling to raise her three kids and write music to kickstart her new career. It is her who experiences most of the unpleasant visitations, being stuck at home all day with the baby and her son in a coma. In one particularly creepy scene in the new house, she plays the role superbly (and I will never again listen to Tiptoe through the Tulips without shivering).
As with most decent horror films, this doesn't try to do anything new with the bulk of the film, but has an underlying new idea shaping it (and revealing that would be a spoiler!) that looks to explain the haunting.
Apart from Rose Byrne, I found the rest of the cast really quite poor, but they're acting during the haunting scenes didn't manage to spoil them too much.
Overall, a great creepy film that ticks all the boxes and leaves you wanting to watch the sequel.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway (2021) in Movies
Jul 25, 2021
Script this time appeals to both Kids and Adults (1 more)
Gleeson, Byrne and Oyelowo are great together
This bunny has legs
I appreciate I'm over 2 months late in seeing "Peter Rabbit 2". But the grandkids were staying for the weekend and wanted to see it again!
Positives:
- This time the movie manages - "Paddington 2" style - to find a good balance between slapstick jokes that appeal to the target younger audience (my grandkids were roaring at certain bits) and the 'dragalong' adult audience. Some of these are gorgeously surreal - like the skiing badger in the Alps as a "university prank". It certainly passes the "6 laugh" test for a comedy, and generated a couple of good guffaws (the Austin Powers landing in the Aston Martin and the subsequent take-off was one for me).
- In the first movie, James Corden's voicing of Peter Rabbit tended to grate with me enormously. Here he gamely plays up to that, accepting that he is a bit of a "marmite" character with a lot of people. It's a fine comic moment.
- Rose Byrne and Domnhall Gleeson make a cute and watchable couple. (Rose Byrne could read the phone directory for me). They are well supported here by David Oyelowo ("Don't look into his eyes") who is the least villainous villain in any movie in recent memory! Also fun are trying to spot the guest voice artistes who include Margot Robbie, Sia, Elizabeth Debicki, Sam Neill, Lennie James and Hayley Atwell.
Negatives:
- A few of the jokes don't quite land (a one-note cockeral story, for example, is overplayed).
- As I've been doing some Supporting Artist work recently, I've become obsessed with observing Extras and the continuity of Extras in shots. There are a few inconsistencies in the mix on this one!
Summary Thoughts: It's fair to say (although I never actually wrote a full review for it) that I was NOT a fan of the original Peter Rabbit movie from 2018. Corden grated; there was not enough for adult viewers and some of the included scenes were highly questionable: try explaining to a three-year-old why Peter was stabbing a dead old man in the eye with his finger! I've avoided watching it again on the TV like the plague.
This sequel was, I thought, much better, being entertaining for both kids and adults. I wonder if I now watched the first movie I might find it, in hindsight, more palatable? Perhaps I will give it a try sometime.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on t'interweb, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks.)
Positives:
- This time the movie manages - "Paddington 2" style - to find a good balance between slapstick jokes that appeal to the target younger audience (my grandkids were roaring at certain bits) and the 'dragalong' adult audience. Some of these are gorgeously surreal - like the skiing badger in the Alps as a "university prank". It certainly passes the "6 laugh" test for a comedy, and generated a couple of good guffaws (the Austin Powers landing in the Aston Martin and the subsequent take-off was one for me).
- In the first movie, James Corden's voicing of Peter Rabbit tended to grate with me enormously. Here he gamely plays up to that, accepting that he is a bit of a "marmite" character with a lot of people. It's a fine comic moment.
- Rose Byrne and Domnhall Gleeson make a cute and watchable couple. (Rose Byrne could read the phone directory for me). They are well supported here by David Oyelowo ("Don't look into his eyes") who is the least villainous villain in any movie in recent memory! Also fun are trying to spot the guest voice artistes who include Margot Robbie, Sia, Elizabeth Debicki, Sam Neill, Lennie James and Hayley Atwell.
Negatives:
- A few of the jokes don't quite land (a one-note cockeral story, for example, is overplayed).
- As I've been doing some Supporting Artist work recently, I've become obsessed with observing Extras and the continuity of Extras in shots. There are a few inconsistencies in the mix on this one!
Summary Thoughts: It's fair to say (although I never actually wrote a full review for it) that I was NOT a fan of the original Peter Rabbit movie from 2018. Corden grated; there was not enough for adult viewers and some of the included scenes were highly questionable: try explaining to a three-year-old why Peter was stabbing a dead old man in the eye with his finger! I've avoided watching it again on the TV like the plague.
This sequel was, I thought, much better, being entertaining for both kids and adults. I wonder if I now watched the first movie I might find it, in hindsight, more palatable? Perhaps I will give it a try sometime.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on t'interweb, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks.)
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Juliet, Naked (2018) in Movies
Jul 13, 2019
Not up to Nick Hornby’s usual standards
Nick Hornby’s books are marvellous, so adapting them into films is an obvious choice for getting a sure fire hit (a la About a Boy). However sadly this doesn’t quite work for Juliet, Naked.
The plot itself is fine, fairly interesting yet doesn’t appears to be very in depth and i feel like there’s probably a lot missing in this that was in the book. It’s a good idea, just not very well executed and a little dull. It tries for humour but isn’t particularly funny and the romance side is a little lacking too sadly. I’ve always liked Ethan Hawke and he’s good in this but perhaps a little underused, and Rose Byrne is good but her accent is definitely a bit dodgy! Not too sure what was going on with Chris O’Dowd though, I’m not his biggest fan anyway but I found him particularly irritating in this but that may have just been his character. It’s a shame really that this film appears to be lacking all of the usual magic you’d see with Nick Hornby. Think I’ll just go read the book.
The plot itself is fine, fairly interesting yet doesn’t appears to be very in depth and i feel like there’s probably a lot missing in this that was in the book. It’s a good idea, just not very well executed and a little dull. It tries for humour but isn’t particularly funny and the romance side is a little lacking too sadly. I’ve always liked Ethan Hawke and he’s good in this but perhaps a little underused, and Rose Byrne is good but her accent is definitely a bit dodgy! Not too sure what was going on with Chris O’Dowd though, I’m not his biggest fan anyway but I found him particularly irritating in this but that may have just been his character. It’s a shame really that this film appears to be lacking all of the usual magic you’d see with Nick Hornby. Think I’ll just go read the book.
The Traitor Beside Her
Book
The Traitor Beside Her is an intricately plotted WWII espionage novel weaving together mystery,...
Historical Mystery WWII
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Annie (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The 2014 re-make of Annie, starring Jamie Foxx as Will Stacks, Quvenzhané Wallis as
Annie, Rose Byrne as Grace, Bobby Cannavale as Guy and Cameron Diaz as Miss Hannigan
is a musical that is fun and caused me to sing along.
The story was cute, and obviously at least somewhat predictable if you are older
than 30-ish.
Parts of it were a very tiny bit scary for my son (6), mostly centered around Annie
being swept off by 'bad guys'.
Cameron Diaz does a pretty good job as Miss Hannigan and sings fairly well. She
doesn't 'copy' Carol Burnetts role as Miss Hannigan, but rather makes it her own,
modern version.
Jamie Foxx is great as Will Stacks and has a great voice. He portrays gruff and
unapproachable very well, and I liked him in the role.
The show stealer was Quvenzhané Wallis as Annie. Her performance was great and she
sang her little heart out. I connected with her emotionally and found her to be very
believable as a kid trying to find her place in the world.
I liked the film, and feel it is a good re-make. It isn't one hundred percent like
the original, but a new, modern twist on it.
My son liked it, and my husband liked it more than he thought he would.
We would be happy to see it again in the theatre.
I would give this over 3.5 out of 5 stars.
Annie, Rose Byrne as Grace, Bobby Cannavale as Guy and Cameron Diaz as Miss Hannigan
is a musical that is fun and caused me to sing along.
The story was cute, and obviously at least somewhat predictable if you are older
than 30-ish.
Parts of it were a very tiny bit scary for my son (6), mostly centered around Annie
being swept off by 'bad guys'.
Cameron Diaz does a pretty good job as Miss Hannigan and sings fairly well. She
doesn't 'copy' Carol Burnetts role as Miss Hannigan, but rather makes it her own,
modern version.
Jamie Foxx is great as Will Stacks and has a great voice. He portrays gruff and
unapproachable very well, and I liked him in the role.
The show stealer was Quvenzhané Wallis as Annie. Her performance was great and she
sang her little heart out. I connected with her emotionally and found her to be very
believable as a kid trying to find her place in the world.
I liked the film, and feel it is a good re-make. It isn't one hundred percent like
the original, but a new, modern twist on it.
My son liked it, and my husband liked it more than he thought he would.
We would be happy to see it again in the theatre.
I would give this over 3.5 out of 5 stars.
Ross (3282 KP) rated Insidious: Chapter 2 (2013) in Movies
Nov 28, 2017
This follow on film stays with the family after the events of the first film left the family reunited but with something decidedly not right about Josh, the father (played by The Conjuring's Patrick Wilson, who I really can't take to).
Everything seems to get back to normal for a short time with the family reunited and moving on from the trauma they've been through. But this doesn't last long and soon strange things start happening again, this time focused around the baby.
For me, this film fell down a little as many horror sequels do, trying to build on tiny parts of the original story rather than carrying on from it. I found the parts where the reality and past of the presence that haunted Josh in his childhood really engaging and exciting and creepy, but felt this should have been explored so much more.
Rose Byrne is good again, somehow keeping the family together through all the unpleasantness.
One thing that did spoil this for me was when, after a particularly creepy scene in which a ghost child's foot steps were heard running through the house, my 3 year old son decided to get up and run through to my bedroom so I suddenly heard footsteps eerily similar to those on the film directly above my head.
A decent follow on with some interesting exploration of small aspects of the first film, but largely more of the same.
Everything seems to get back to normal for a short time with the family reunited and moving on from the trauma they've been through. But this doesn't last long and soon strange things start happening again, this time focused around the baby.
For me, this film fell down a little as many horror sequels do, trying to build on tiny parts of the original story rather than carrying on from it. I found the parts where the reality and past of the presence that haunted Josh in his childhood really engaging and exciting and creepy, but felt this should have been explored so much more.
Rose Byrne is good again, somehow keeping the family together through all the unpleasantness.
One thing that did spoil this for me was when, after a particularly creepy scene in which a ghost child's foot steps were heard running through the house, my 3 year old son decided to get up and run through to my bedroom so I suddenly heard footsteps eerily similar to those on the film directly above my head.
A decent follow on with some interesting exploration of small aspects of the first film, but largely more of the same.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Peter Rabbit (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
Had they not attempt to make a movie based off a beloved children’s book
classic by Beatrix Potter, this film would be exceptional. Unfortunately,
they chose to deviate from the innocent storytelling and put a slapstick
comical spin on it. Peter Rabbit (James Corden) and his sisters, Flopsy,
Mopsy, Cottontail, and their cousin Benjamin are constantly trying to steal
vegetables from the unpleasant and always grumpy Mr. MacGregor’s garden.
Fortunately, the rabbits have one human on their side, MacGregor’s
neighbor, Bea (Rose Byrne), who reminds MacGregor, the animals were on the
land first and everyone should share.
One morning Mr. MacGregor (SamNeill) keels over after trying to save his garden from those pesky
rabbits. His straight-laced city boy grandnephew Thomas MacGregor (Dohmnall
Gleason) inherits the property and is left with trying to maintain the
“rodent” problem. An all-out war ensues between Peter and Thomas!
What made Beatrix Potter’s books so appealing, was her ability to show a
vulnerability to where the reader could sympathize with such
mischievous rabbits.
This film was chalked full of naughty behavior, jealousy, and entitlement
within the story line characters. As a film, it’s hilarious—Home Alone
type shenanigans with a little Dennis the Menace antics peppered in. Live
action mixed in with CGI effects is quite impressive—too good, you almost
think the rabbits were real. If you can deviate from the stories we’ve all
grown to love, this film is excellent, entertaining, and for the intended
audience-kids under the age of 10……… which all thought it was
“totally awesome!”
classic by Beatrix Potter, this film would be exceptional. Unfortunately,
they chose to deviate from the innocent storytelling and put a slapstick
comical spin on it. Peter Rabbit (James Corden) and his sisters, Flopsy,
Mopsy, Cottontail, and their cousin Benjamin are constantly trying to steal
vegetables from the unpleasant and always grumpy Mr. MacGregor’s garden.
Fortunately, the rabbits have one human on their side, MacGregor’s
neighbor, Bea (Rose Byrne), who reminds MacGregor, the animals were on the
land first and everyone should share.
One morning Mr. MacGregor (SamNeill) keels over after trying to save his garden from those pesky
rabbits. His straight-laced city boy grandnephew Thomas MacGregor (Dohmnall
Gleason) inherits the property and is left with trying to maintain the
“rodent” problem. An all-out war ensues between Peter and Thomas!
What made Beatrix Potter’s books so appealing, was her ability to show a
vulnerability to where the reader could sympathize with such
mischievous rabbits.
This film was chalked full of naughty behavior, jealousy, and entitlement
within the story line characters. As a film, it’s hilarious—Home Alone
type shenanigans with a little Dennis the Menace antics peppered in. Live
action mixed in with CGI effects is quite impressive—too good, you almost
think the rabbits were real. If you can deviate from the stories we’ve all
grown to love, this film is excellent, entertaining, and for the intended
audience-kids under the age of 10……… which all thought it was
“totally awesome!”
Darren (1599 KP) rated Peter Rabbit (2018) in Movies
Nov 29, 2019
Verdict: Poor Film
Story: Peter Rabbit starts as we see how Peter Rabbit and his family and friends had a battle with old Mr McGregor (Neill) after they continued to steal from his garden, until he passes away. The next-door neighbour Bea (Byrne) does try to keep them safe the best she can.
When Thomas McGregor (Gleeson) moves into the house with plans to sell it, which sees the war coming back for Peter and his family, this time it might become deadlier.
Thoughts on Peter Rabbit
Characters – Peter Rabbit is the mischievous little rabbit that always gets his siblings into trouble as they always seem to terrorise the McGregor family, that does seem to be the only thing he does each day, making him out to be a horrible little rabbit. Thomas McGregor is a completely by the book toy store employee wanting to get to management, when he loses his job, he ends up following in his uncle footsteps, getting into a battle with the rabbits. Bea is the nice neighbour that has always tried to look after the animals, loves nature and is an artist.
Performances – Domhnall Gleeson is great along with Rose Byrne are the two main live action stars that both work well with how they act towards the animals. Most of the voice acting is mixed, with the three sisters working well, but James Corden not suiting the character.
Story – The story follows the adventures of Peter Rabbit against the McGregor’s, which just seems to keep escalating. The story is strange because it doesn’t make Peter likeable at all, he just seems to annoy McGregor and never do anything else, surely there would have been another food supply for him. Most of the story revolves around pop culture jokes, which have dated quickly, but by the end the story just becomes boring more than anything else.
Adventure/Comedy – The adventure is just the troubles Peter gets himself in, we don’t seem to go any further, while the comedy is a miss already.
Settings – The film keeps the action in the country, which does seem to have only show how close the war between the two was.
Animation – The animated animals looks solid for the most part, but some of the moments seem weird.
Scene of the Movie – Harrods break down.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Peter Rabbit.
Final Thoughts – This is a big disappointment because the characters used are loveable for the most part, while this movie just makes them horrible.
Overall: Boring.
Story: Peter Rabbit starts as we see how Peter Rabbit and his family and friends had a battle with old Mr McGregor (Neill) after they continued to steal from his garden, until he passes away. The next-door neighbour Bea (Byrne) does try to keep them safe the best she can.
When Thomas McGregor (Gleeson) moves into the house with plans to sell it, which sees the war coming back for Peter and his family, this time it might become deadlier.
Thoughts on Peter Rabbit
Characters – Peter Rabbit is the mischievous little rabbit that always gets his siblings into trouble as they always seem to terrorise the McGregor family, that does seem to be the only thing he does each day, making him out to be a horrible little rabbit. Thomas McGregor is a completely by the book toy store employee wanting to get to management, when he loses his job, he ends up following in his uncle footsteps, getting into a battle with the rabbits. Bea is the nice neighbour that has always tried to look after the animals, loves nature and is an artist.
Performances – Domhnall Gleeson is great along with Rose Byrne are the two main live action stars that both work well with how they act towards the animals. Most of the voice acting is mixed, with the three sisters working well, but James Corden not suiting the character.
Story – The story follows the adventures of Peter Rabbit against the McGregor’s, which just seems to keep escalating. The story is strange because it doesn’t make Peter likeable at all, he just seems to annoy McGregor and never do anything else, surely there would have been another food supply for him. Most of the story revolves around pop culture jokes, which have dated quickly, but by the end the story just becomes boring more than anything else.
Adventure/Comedy – The adventure is just the troubles Peter gets himself in, we don’t seem to go any further, while the comedy is a miss already.
Settings – The film keeps the action in the country, which does seem to have only show how close the war between the two was.
Animation – The animated animals looks solid for the most part, but some of the moments seem weird.
Scene of the Movie – Harrods break down.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Peter Rabbit.
Final Thoughts – This is a big disappointment because the characters used are loveable for the most part, while this movie just makes them horrible.
Overall: Boring.