Search
Search results
Saffy Alexandra (89 KP) rated The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) in Movies
Jun 15, 2019
A feel good film
I would like to first off state that I adore this film as a book, so straight off the bat I was a little worried on what would be happening with these films and how they would differ from the novel.
After watching it, I don’t know what I was so worried about especially when Peter Jackson is the one directing the films (when he did such a fantastic job at Lord of the Rings).
I think the casting for all the characters was spot on, and keeping characters that we were introduced to in Lord of the Rings the same was a fantastic (and so glad that those actors agreed to do these films). Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggin’s is/was an excellent choice that I really couldn’t see any other actor managing to incorporate Bilbo’s sassiness – because let’s face it, that Hobbit knew how to out wit someone and sass when there was need – to his vulnerability and fear of going out into the unknown. I felt he held the role with dignity and grace and made the humorous scenes even better but when he is needed for the more emotional scenes, Freeman is still fantastic at portraying all those reactions clear as day on his face pulling at your heart strings and showing you what a brilliant range he has as an actor!
Another actor I feel that needs credit is Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield. Having never really seen him in any films before then I was sceptical. I really shouldn’t have been. His portrayal as the scowling and grumpy Dwarf Prince/King is next to amazing! He managed to make you fall in love with the cantankerous Dwarf, which is a feat in all of itself, by the end. This man’s range as an actor is also very good and his ability to show you what Thorin is feeling just by his eye’s is an ability that not many actors have.
Now I was unsure when we were told that this book was being made into three films, and I still feel that the films were possibly stretched out more than they should have by us being presented with characters who were not even in the books. But, I enjoyed it more than I thought I would.
To be fully truthful, knowing that this would be the end of the Middle Earth saga that Peter Jackson was doing, I was not quite ready to say goodbye to the stories that we all grew up with. So I may be biased in saying that I enjoyed having the extra screen time to devour.
The Hobbit Trilogy might not be as fantastic as Lord of the Rings, but it is a trilogy that I would happily watch over and over again. The humour, the wit, and the general good-feeling of these films is something that just makes you feel like you are coming home again after a long trip. One feel good trilogy that I’d happily recommend to anyone.
After watching it, I don’t know what I was so worried about especially when Peter Jackson is the one directing the films (when he did such a fantastic job at Lord of the Rings).
I think the casting for all the characters was spot on, and keeping characters that we were introduced to in Lord of the Rings the same was a fantastic (and so glad that those actors agreed to do these films). Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggin’s is/was an excellent choice that I really couldn’t see any other actor managing to incorporate Bilbo’s sassiness – because let’s face it, that Hobbit knew how to out wit someone and sass when there was need – to his vulnerability and fear of going out into the unknown. I felt he held the role with dignity and grace and made the humorous scenes even better but when he is needed for the more emotional scenes, Freeman is still fantastic at portraying all those reactions clear as day on his face pulling at your heart strings and showing you what a brilliant range he has as an actor!
Another actor I feel that needs credit is Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield. Having never really seen him in any films before then I was sceptical. I really shouldn’t have been. His portrayal as the scowling and grumpy Dwarf Prince/King is next to amazing! He managed to make you fall in love with the cantankerous Dwarf, which is a feat in all of itself, by the end. This man’s range as an actor is also very good and his ability to show you what Thorin is feeling just by his eye’s is an ability that not many actors have.
Now I was unsure when we were told that this book was being made into three films, and I still feel that the films were possibly stretched out more than they should have by us being presented with characters who were not even in the books. But, I enjoyed it more than I thought I would.
To be fully truthful, knowing that this would be the end of the Middle Earth saga that Peter Jackson was doing, I was not quite ready to say goodbye to the stories that we all grew up with. So I may be biased in saying that I enjoyed having the extra screen time to devour.
The Hobbit Trilogy might not be as fantastic as Lord of the Rings, but it is a trilogy that I would happily watch over and over again. The humour, the wit, and the general good-feeling of these films is something that just makes you feel like you are coming home again after a long trip. One feel good trilogy that I’d happily recommend to anyone.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Vampires Suck (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Vampires suck – but does the movie? We open on the San Salvatore Festival with the angsty Becca watching her beau, Edward Sullen, disrobe and expose his sparkly secrets- he’s a vampire! Cue the “True Blood- 40oz” toting, Mono-fang vampire to take Edward out….wait, we have to get the rest of the story! What follows is a parody of the first two movies of the Twilight Saga. Most of the characters analogous to the spoof’s target are introduced in the first 30 minutes; few of them are actually seen again throughout the movie.
Becca (newcomer Jenn Proske) is forced to move to Sporks, Washington, with her deadbeat father and town sheriff, Frank Crane (Diedrich Bader of The Drew Carey Show). Frank’s best friend is the rough-and-tumble paraplegic Native American, Bobby. His contribution to the plot is his hunky teenage son, Jacob White (Chris Riggi of Gossip Girl). The town of Sporks seems to have vampires on the brain and its population is only growing smaller.
Our heroine is introduced to Edward Sullen (Matt Lanter of Disaster Movie) and what follows is the “classic” story of girl-meets-vampire, girl-loses-vampire, girl-gets-threatened-by-vampire-nemesis, etc. Writers/Directors Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer use their formulaic approach to spoof movies by making the plot a cliff-notes version of the Stephanie Meyer’s original material, with ample jokes thrown in-in an attempt to beef up their rendition.
In fact, there are so many visual jokes in the movie that it left me wondering what a sight-impaired person might conclude of the movie. “What are all these people laughing at?” I noticed a few of the dialogue driven jokes weren’t even played off by the actors. They seemed to have been missed by everyone, including the editors. Other jokes are pop-culture references that will get stale with time. They’re integrated well, but definitely dated. The movie is redolent with the classic American comedy tradition of slapstick, which occasionally comes off as funny.
The production value left something to be desired as several scenes were obviously one-takes. I counted several instances where Becca’s kiss left Edward’s mouth with a smudge of his own flesh-tone showing through. But hey- at least single takes have continuity, right? The contacts, no doubt purchased in bulk, gave the characters an occasional Marty Feldman goggly-look. The effect is hilarious, although I’m not always sure if it’s intentional.
The cast has its standouts. Jenn Proske’s Becca comes dangerously close (like copyright-violating close) to the performance of Kristen Stewart’s Bella as the fidgety, twitchy, sullen and hormone-y heroine. And Ken Jeong (The Hangover) as Daro, while not appearing on screen much, definitely makes his comedic presence felt.
All in all, “Vampires Suck” didn’t really suck… it kind of chews, like gum. Gum out of the package is fresh, flavorful, but the longer you chew it, the tougher and more stale it becomes. This movie is fresh, funny, and quirky right now, but it won’t stand the test of time like more accomplished parodies.
Becca (newcomer Jenn Proske) is forced to move to Sporks, Washington, with her deadbeat father and town sheriff, Frank Crane (Diedrich Bader of The Drew Carey Show). Frank’s best friend is the rough-and-tumble paraplegic Native American, Bobby. His contribution to the plot is his hunky teenage son, Jacob White (Chris Riggi of Gossip Girl). The town of Sporks seems to have vampires on the brain and its population is only growing smaller.
Our heroine is introduced to Edward Sullen (Matt Lanter of Disaster Movie) and what follows is the “classic” story of girl-meets-vampire, girl-loses-vampire, girl-gets-threatened-by-vampire-nemesis, etc. Writers/Directors Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer use their formulaic approach to spoof movies by making the plot a cliff-notes version of the Stephanie Meyer’s original material, with ample jokes thrown in-in an attempt to beef up their rendition.
In fact, there are so many visual jokes in the movie that it left me wondering what a sight-impaired person might conclude of the movie. “What are all these people laughing at?” I noticed a few of the dialogue driven jokes weren’t even played off by the actors. They seemed to have been missed by everyone, including the editors. Other jokes are pop-culture references that will get stale with time. They’re integrated well, but definitely dated. The movie is redolent with the classic American comedy tradition of slapstick, which occasionally comes off as funny.
The production value left something to be desired as several scenes were obviously one-takes. I counted several instances where Becca’s kiss left Edward’s mouth with a smudge of his own flesh-tone showing through. But hey- at least single takes have continuity, right? The contacts, no doubt purchased in bulk, gave the characters an occasional Marty Feldman goggly-look. The effect is hilarious, although I’m not always sure if it’s intentional.
The cast has its standouts. Jenn Proske’s Becca comes dangerously close (like copyright-violating close) to the performance of Kristen Stewart’s Bella as the fidgety, twitchy, sullen and hormone-y heroine. And Ken Jeong (The Hangover) as Daro, while not appearing on screen much, definitely makes his comedic presence felt.
All in all, “Vampires Suck” didn’t really suck… it kind of chews, like gum. Gum out of the package is fresh, flavorful, but the longer you chew it, the tougher and more stale it becomes. This movie is fresh, funny, and quirky right now, but it won’t stand the test of time like more accomplished parodies.
365Flicks (235 KP) rated Never Let Go (2017) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
In truth, In my humble opinion this movie is actually way better than those Taken movies, I know I know I liked them when they first came out aswell, but this movie Never Let Go completely took me by surprise… In the best possible way. Ladies and Gents, Angela Bloody Dixon. This leading lady is fantastic, she grips the viewer by the balls and takes you on a Thrilling, Tour De Force leaving you wondering exactly how far would you go for your kids.
So I guess I should give the Pitch:
Lisa Brennan (Dixon) is a struggling single mother, her child is to a married man who is playing silly buggers with her. Lisa is having a pretty hard time of it all so decides to take a break to herself in Morroco (I know I could think of safer places too). From the outset in this country things seem a bit shady but this is due to some pretty fine camera work and we already know she is being medicated, so is this all just paranoia. It turns out not really because while relaxing on the beach Lisa is distracted for literally a minute by a looky looky man and **BOOM** her baby has been kidnapped. What follows is roughly 85 minutes of a mother who will do anything to get her daughter back in the harshest conditions. Add to this the local law enforcement are after her, The big bad is a massive sinister shit and the married man is a massive douche… However “she has a particular set of skills”.
Director Howard J Ford absolutely knocks this out of the park, by using the narrow streets and alleys of Morroco he really builds the tension with a deeper sense of paranoia and having this viewer feel a bit closed in. The camera work screams all the best action movements from the Bourne Saga. My only gripe about this is that it could at moments feel slightly disjointed in the way the Run Lola Run made me feel at times, you could say this was adding to the tension of the chase but it didnt always land with me.
Now there are 2 scenes in this movie that sold everything for me and I dont wanna do spoilers but I feel they deserve a quick mention. 1) Is the Kidnap of the child, my christ the erratic way this is shot (From the school of Tony Scott) and her instant reaction to chase them down and become a bad ass is visceral as hell. 2) There is a woman who try’s to help the child and pays the price for this, we get a 5 minute section of the movie where she is stumbling home and Lisa is stumbling through the desert and they end up meeting, this whole section is beautifully shot and the emotion of the two women hits you hard.
No surprises here, for me this is a solid recommend, you could do a hell of a lot worse for your money and for something that hasn’t had a lot of play this is most definitely a rare gem of a movie.
So I guess I should give the Pitch:
Lisa Brennan (Dixon) is a struggling single mother, her child is to a married man who is playing silly buggers with her. Lisa is having a pretty hard time of it all so decides to take a break to herself in Morroco (I know I could think of safer places too). From the outset in this country things seem a bit shady but this is due to some pretty fine camera work and we already know she is being medicated, so is this all just paranoia. It turns out not really because while relaxing on the beach Lisa is distracted for literally a minute by a looky looky man and **BOOM** her baby has been kidnapped. What follows is roughly 85 minutes of a mother who will do anything to get her daughter back in the harshest conditions. Add to this the local law enforcement are after her, The big bad is a massive sinister shit and the married man is a massive douche… However “she has a particular set of skills”.
Director Howard J Ford absolutely knocks this out of the park, by using the narrow streets and alleys of Morroco he really builds the tension with a deeper sense of paranoia and having this viewer feel a bit closed in. The camera work screams all the best action movements from the Bourne Saga. My only gripe about this is that it could at moments feel slightly disjointed in the way the Run Lola Run made me feel at times, you could say this was adding to the tension of the chase but it didnt always land with me.
Now there are 2 scenes in this movie that sold everything for me and I dont wanna do spoilers but I feel they deserve a quick mention. 1) Is the Kidnap of the child, my christ the erratic way this is shot (From the school of Tony Scott) and her instant reaction to chase them down and become a bad ass is visceral as hell. 2) There is a woman who try’s to help the child and pays the price for this, we get a 5 minute section of the movie where she is stumbling home and Lisa is stumbling through the desert and they end up meeting, this whole section is beautifully shot and the emotion of the two women hits you hard.
No surprises here, for me this is a solid recommend, you could do a hell of a lot worse for your money and for something that hasn’t had a lot of play this is most definitely a rare gem of a movie.
Unblock Me - Classic Block Puzzle Game
Games and Entertainment
App
Relax and start your brain workout with this smart and addictive puzzle game. Exercise your mind...
The Thief (The Queen's Thief #1)
6.5
Rate It
Book
Discover the world of the Queen's Thief New York Times-bestselling author Megan Whalen Turner's...
Unblock Me Premium - Classic Block Puzzle Game
Games and Entertainment
App
Unblock Me have more than 120 Million Downloads! Featured in the App Store's "What's Hot" list...
Star Wars™: Jedi Challenges
Games
7.4
Rate It
App
Awaken your inner Jedi with Star Wars™: Jedi Challenges, a smartphone-powered Star Wars™...
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Thor: Love and Thunder (2022) in Movies
Aug 8, 2022
Phase four of the MCU has been interesting so far to say the least. Some projects have been great, some have been a little uninspired, but in its attempts to set up multiple overarching story threads, it feels a little wayward, especially in comparison to the recently concluded Infinity Saga. Thor: Love & Thunder has unfortunately arrived right in the middle of this new era of uncertainty, and is a film that ultimately feels a little directionless itself. It adapts a hugely beloved comic arc, an arc that could have potentially used two movies to flesh everything out properly. In this arc, Gorr the God Butcher is a big deal, he feels threatening, menacing, dangerous. In the film, Christian Bale is giving it his all, and there are moments when Gorr is genuinely creepy as hell, but the stakes never feel particularly high, resulting in a villain that feels like a shadow of his comic counterpart. Chris Hemsworth has proven by now that he is a perfect fit for Thor himself, but by this fourth entry, it genuinely feels that he is a straight up dumbass, and is miles away from his character growth in the first Thor. Herein lies the main issue I had with Love & Thunder. Ragnarok was a well balanced MCU film in terms of tone. It provided a much needed shakeup after the disappointment of The Dark World, and Taika Waititi was an inspired choice to bring the quirk. The comedy is tight, lands more often than not, whilst boasting some memorable set pieces. L&T takes the comedy aspect, and doubles down hard. It's joke after joke, to a point where a lot of it falls flat. It reminded me of Guardians of the Galaxy 2 in that respect. It's not terrible by any means, but it's balance feels completely off. There are some great set pieces to be fair. An early scene that involves an attack on New Asgard is a highlight, and almost feels like a horror film at times. It's also where we meet Jane Fosters Thor, who looks comic accurate, and is a genuinely great addition to the movie overall. There's another scene later on that takes place in the shadow realm that provides another highlight. It's mostly in black and white, and it feels unique to the MCU. It's one of a few inspired moments that prevent L&T from becoming a complete misfire.
Any other gripes from me would require stepping into spoiler territory so I'll leave it there. Love & Thunder is frequently dumb, but equally fun, colourful and loud, despite being a bit of a mess. The more Marvel Studios venture into Phase Four, the more sporadic and shaky it feels. I have no doubt that everything will plateau into a solid narrative again, I just hope that moment comes sooner, rather than later.
On a final note, the person I watched this with leaned over to me around the halfway point, and said that Thor just sounds like Boris Johnson when he talks, and now I can't unhear it. If I have to suffer, then you do to.
Any other gripes from me would require stepping into spoiler territory so I'll leave it there. Love & Thunder is frequently dumb, but equally fun, colourful and loud, despite being a bit of a mess. The more Marvel Studios venture into Phase Four, the more sporadic and shaky it feels. I have no doubt that everything will plateau into a solid narrative again, I just hope that moment comes sooner, rather than later.
On a final note, the person I watched this with leaned over to me around the halfway point, and said that Thor just sounds like Boris Johnson when he talks, and now I can't unhear it. If I have to suffer, then you do to.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) created a post
Nov 11, 2022
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011) in Movies
Feb 25, 2019
Return to form
Based, believe it or not, loosely, on the Tim Powers novel, On Stranger Tides, Pirates 4 seemed about as appealing as hole in the head after the diabolical sequels to the excellent first outing. Then it was to be in 3D, scrap several key characters and shed the direction of Gore Verbinski, in favour of Chicago's, Rob Marshall. A recipe for disaster? It seemed that way.
Though saying that, Gore had certainly sealed his fate with me, turning what was a well conceived, action adventure romp with some very memorable characters into an unnecessary epic saga which seriously missed the point and derailed itself. One dubious decision taken in the production of Dead Man's Chest, was to keep Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightly's characters, let alone giving them so much prominence.
Knightly was fine, for the first film,. in fact, she was spot on, but she couldn't carry the role any further and began to look ridiculous as the series progressed. This should have been the adventures of Jack Sparrow, so excellently portrayed by Johnny Depp, and Geoffrey Rush's, Barbossa was the perfect pirate. So I was more than pleased to see the continuing adventures of these two characters, with Depp, returning to form after I felt that he had lost it in the sequels.
Penélope Cruz was another pleasant surprise, as never being a fan of her's, I was dubious but this was casting done properly. She was more than convincing as a pirate and put Knightly's efforts to shame. But what of Ian McShane's Blackbeard? Well, another great showing from him, but the inexplicable magic displayed as he waves in his 3D sword around and points it at the camera to remind us that 3D is here, not so much.
But the 3D was pretty naff. You could watch most of the film without the glasses, with the effect being limited to several sequences. It looked good, it was inoffensive and unobtrusive but what was the point again? I don't think that this film will do 3D any real harm but that's because nobody really noticed it in the first place.
The sense of adventure from the The Curse Of The Black Pearl was evident here and long over due. I find it puzzling as to why so many reviews have been so harsh, branding it boring, overly complicated and not pulled together properly, but I would disagree. Granted, it is a bit scrappy, it's not going to be used as case study in tight scripting, or deep character development and it is somewhat derivative, but it was fun, flashy and flamboyant.
Isn't this what these films are all about? Depp created a classic character with Sparrow back in 2003, and tough I felt that he was a one trick pony, Sparrow that is, not Depp, this was a partial return to form, under new direction from Marshall. But I am left feeling that no matter how much I enjoyed this for what it was, the first Pirates Of The Caribbean was a film which successfully transferred a theme park ride into a career defining blockbuster, but I feel that it should have remained one film, a single triumph and not a franchise that has been saved in my eyes, by the fourth installment.
Though saying that, Gore had certainly sealed his fate with me, turning what was a well conceived, action adventure romp with some very memorable characters into an unnecessary epic saga which seriously missed the point and derailed itself. One dubious decision taken in the production of Dead Man's Chest, was to keep Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightly's characters, let alone giving them so much prominence.
Knightly was fine, for the first film,. in fact, she was spot on, but she couldn't carry the role any further and began to look ridiculous as the series progressed. This should have been the adventures of Jack Sparrow, so excellently portrayed by Johnny Depp, and Geoffrey Rush's, Barbossa was the perfect pirate. So I was more than pleased to see the continuing adventures of these two characters, with Depp, returning to form after I felt that he had lost it in the sequels.
Penélope Cruz was another pleasant surprise, as never being a fan of her's, I was dubious but this was casting done properly. She was more than convincing as a pirate and put Knightly's efforts to shame. But what of Ian McShane's Blackbeard? Well, another great showing from him, but the inexplicable magic displayed as he waves in his 3D sword around and points it at the camera to remind us that 3D is here, not so much.
But the 3D was pretty naff. You could watch most of the film without the glasses, with the effect being limited to several sequences. It looked good, it was inoffensive and unobtrusive but what was the point again? I don't think that this film will do 3D any real harm but that's because nobody really noticed it in the first place.
The sense of adventure from the The Curse Of The Black Pearl was evident here and long over due. I find it puzzling as to why so many reviews have been so harsh, branding it boring, overly complicated and not pulled together properly, but I would disagree. Granted, it is a bit scrappy, it's not going to be used as case study in tight scripting, or deep character development and it is somewhat derivative, but it was fun, flashy and flamboyant.
Isn't this what these films are all about? Depp created a classic character with Sparrow back in 2003, and tough I felt that he was a one trick pony, Sparrow that is, not Depp, this was a partial return to form, under new direction from Marshall. But I am left feeling that no matter how much I enjoyed this for what it was, the first Pirates Of The Caribbean was a film which successfully transferred a theme park ride into a career defining blockbuster, but I feel that it should have remained one film, a single triumph and not a franchise that has been saved in my eyes, by the fourth installment.