Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Five years after Godzilla saved us from the MUTO attack the world (or some of it at least) wants to see an end to the potential threat of the Titans. Monarch are studying them and hiding them away from the world, but there are calls to destroy the monsters before more devastation befalls the planet?
Dr Emma Russell has developed the Orca, a device that communicates with the Titans and can be used to calm them and stop any further destruction. Not everyone has the same idea about how to use the Orca though and it's taken, along with Dr Russell and her daughter Madison, after its successful test run. The race is on to recover the device and avert the impending crisis.
Godzilla is one of my favourite monsters. For years the 1998 film with Matthew Broderick and Jean Reno in it was one of my favourite films. I also love the "proper" Godzilla movies where they destroy Tokyo at every given opportunity. To have new films felt like a wonderful thing... until I saw 2014 Godzilla. I rewatched it before going to see King Of The Monsters and I remembered how underwhelmed I was. The characters didn't grab me and I found the whole thing uninspiring. The prospect of a second wasn't great, but then I saw the trailers, they were spectacular.
I really enjoyed this and went to see it again in 3D, a much more peaceful screening than the first viewing. The girl who was sitting a couple of seats away was animatedly jumping at every opportunity, her reaction was far scarier than anything that happened on the screen.
This was much improved on the last instalment. I loved that it embraced the original films and the fact that it switched its focus more to the monsters than the humans. You go to a monster movie to see monsters, and Godzilla 2014 felt like it had forgotten that fact.
If I had to describe this film to someone I'd say it was a combination of Infinity War and Jurassic Park, just with slightly larger monsters... yep, I'm fairly happy with that comparison. I may have been imagining it but I felt like there were a few nods to JP jumbled in there... maybe that's just me.
There's a collection of recognisable faces in the cast and I don't think there's a single person who underperforms. I thought that Millie Bobby Brown gave a great performance as Madison, she managed to give us a child character that wasn't particularly annoying, which may actually be a first in creature features.
Charles Dance makes an excellent bad guy, there's something about his look, a cross between a vampire and the restaurant critic from Ratatouille that works for me. He also gets to have a great moment of silent humour with Brown when they're in a lift together, it was very unexpected for their potential on-screen relationship.
We get to see four of our Titans in this movie as main players. Godzilla, obvs, Mothra, Rodan and Monster Zero, or King Ghidorah to his friends. The sheer scale they've gone to is amazing, and I thought the way they were created with their individual traits was beautiful. The one drawback to the beautiful glowing monster bodies is that the scenes have to be fairly dark to appreciate that aspect. They manage to use those aspects of the creatures to give the extra lighting the scenes need meaning that you get something that's both dark and scary as well as light and hopeful. The colours were something that really stood out to me in the advertising, the lightness of the blue and green against the anger of the orange and yellow, it shows the good and evil relationship really well.
The size of the creatures is mad and sometimes a little impossible to gauge, we get a few moments where we're given some perspective with man-made structures but they do a good job of trying to get it across in basic visual techniques too. You see a lot of them from "human" angles, from the ground running, from buildings and vehicles. It feels like an exercise in shock and awe and takes you back to Dr Serizawa's point at the beginning of the film that we're Godzilla's pets, it's not the other way around.
The effects/animation looked solid, at no point did I see anything on-screen that drew my attention away from the action. One moment in particular stood out and that was a large explosion somewhere in the middle of the movie. It was given an old fashioned kind of a look and it gave me the impression that they'd really looked at things that had come before it for inspiration.
You have to obviously accept the facts that in these sorts of films, parents will willingly put their children in immense danger, bad guys will always have prepared a short video presentation to explain their motivations and just because there's destruction happening all around you does not mean you will die. It's got all the classic monster/disaster movie moments that you love to hate in it. "Movie Reality" is awesome.
If you couldn't already tell, I loved this. Much improvement from the last instalment and an entertaining action-packed addition to the monsterverse. Oscar winner? Probably not. Entertaining escapism? Most definitely. I am a little concerned about how the story will progress from here. They had plenty of scope for lots of movies after some of the things they showed in the film, but the events of KotM mean that there's little room to move with it all, we'll have to see what happens in Godzilla Vs Kong next year.
What you should do
This really deserves to be seen on the big screen. The sound and the effects combine to make some great viewing.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
If they could adapt the Orca for human use I'd be interested.
Dr Emma Russell has developed the Orca, a device that communicates with the Titans and can be used to calm them and stop any further destruction. Not everyone has the same idea about how to use the Orca though and it's taken, along with Dr Russell and her daughter Madison, after its successful test run. The race is on to recover the device and avert the impending crisis.
Godzilla is one of my favourite monsters. For years the 1998 film with Matthew Broderick and Jean Reno in it was one of my favourite films. I also love the "proper" Godzilla movies where they destroy Tokyo at every given opportunity. To have new films felt like a wonderful thing... until I saw 2014 Godzilla. I rewatched it before going to see King Of The Monsters and I remembered how underwhelmed I was. The characters didn't grab me and I found the whole thing uninspiring. The prospect of a second wasn't great, but then I saw the trailers, they were spectacular.
I really enjoyed this and went to see it again in 3D, a much more peaceful screening than the first viewing. The girl who was sitting a couple of seats away was animatedly jumping at every opportunity, her reaction was far scarier than anything that happened on the screen.
This was much improved on the last instalment. I loved that it embraced the original films and the fact that it switched its focus more to the monsters than the humans. You go to a monster movie to see monsters, and Godzilla 2014 felt like it had forgotten that fact.
If I had to describe this film to someone I'd say it was a combination of Infinity War and Jurassic Park, just with slightly larger monsters... yep, I'm fairly happy with that comparison. I may have been imagining it but I felt like there were a few nods to JP jumbled in there... maybe that's just me.
There's a collection of recognisable faces in the cast and I don't think there's a single person who underperforms. I thought that Millie Bobby Brown gave a great performance as Madison, she managed to give us a child character that wasn't particularly annoying, which may actually be a first in creature features.
Charles Dance makes an excellent bad guy, there's something about his look, a cross between a vampire and the restaurant critic from Ratatouille that works for me. He also gets to have a great moment of silent humour with Brown when they're in a lift together, it was very unexpected for their potential on-screen relationship.
We get to see four of our Titans in this movie as main players. Godzilla, obvs, Mothra, Rodan and Monster Zero, or King Ghidorah to his friends. The sheer scale they've gone to is amazing, and I thought the way they were created with their individual traits was beautiful. The one drawback to the beautiful glowing monster bodies is that the scenes have to be fairly dark to appreciate that aspect. They manage to use those aspects of the creatures to give the extra lighting the scenes need meaning that you get something that's both dark and scary as well as light and hopeful. The colours were something that really stood out to me in the advertising, the lightness of the blue and green against the anger of the orange and yellow, it shows the good and evil relationship really well.
The size of the creatures is mad and sometimes a little impossible to gauge, we get a few moments where we're given some perspective with man-made structures but they do a good job of trying to get it across in basic visual techniques too. You see a lot of them from "human" angles, from the ground running, from buildings and vehicles. It feels like an exercise in shock and awe and takes you back to Dr Serizawa's point at the beginning of the film that we're Godzilla's pets, it's not the other way around.
The effects/animation looked solid, at no point did I see anything on-screen that drew my attention away from the action. One moment in particular stood out and that was a large explosion somewhere in the middle of the movie. It was given an old fashioned kind of a look and it gave me the impression that they'd really looked at things that had come before it for inspiration.
You have to obviously accept the facts that in these sorts of films, parents will willingly put their children in immense danger, bad guys will always have prepared a short video presentation to explain their motivations and just because there's destruction happening all around you does not mean you will die. It's got all the classic monster/disaster movie moments that you love to hate in it. "Movie Reality" is awesome.
If you couldn't already tell, I loved this. Much improvement from the last instalment and an entertaining action-packed addition to the monsterverse. Oscar winner? Probably not. Entertaining escapism? Most definitely. I am a little concerned about how the story will progress from here. They had plenty of scope for lots of movies after some of the things they showed in the film, but the events of KotM mean that there's little room to move with it all, we'll have to see what happens in Godzilla Vs Kong next year.
What you should do
This really deserves to be seen on the big screen. The sound and the effects combine to make some great viewing.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
If they could adapt the Orca for human use I'd be interested.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated X-Men: Dark Phoenix (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
This was another screening that needed a second viewing because of challenging people, so now I've seen it in 2D and 3D. I'm seeing more films in 3D recently that actually work, I'm still not quite convinced by it but I'm certainly not annoyed by it.
The pre-"hype" for this was very mixed. I had been looking forward to the film for a long time but when the first trailer dropped I was disappointed and underwhelmed, it was however nice to see that others were having the opposite reaction to me. Perhaps I had just built it up too much in my head beforehand.
As we eeked closer the vibe became decidedly negative around it, and for the most part I avoided articles and rants as I just don't see the point in speculating so wildly about something that hasn't been seen. That climaxed again when the preview screening was interrupted by a fire alarm, and then when the internet seemed to go nuts over the fact the review embargo was so late. (It's not like embargos are unusual, I don't see how you can draw conclusions from release and embargo being on the same day... this seems entirely logical. *deep breath*)
Something I would like to query is the fact that someone decided it was sensible to put a reaction video of three of the stars seeing the Dark Phoenix trailer in 4DX. It's a little bit of fun, but frustrating if you've been trying to avoid trailers and spoilers before seeing the film.
Wow... waffle... to the film!
The team take on a mission to space when a shuttle loses control and is in the path of what appears to be solar flares. The mission seems successful until they realise there's still a crew member trapped. With the shuttle disintegrating the only ones who can safely make it are Jean and Nightcrawler. As Jean holds the shuttle in place Nightcrawler rescues the last man from the wreckage but when he returns for her she's already encountered the strange space energy.
Somehow despite the destruction of the shuttle Jean survives floating in space, Nightcrawler brings her back to the X-Jet and the whole team return to Earth as heroes. Jean wasn't left unchanged by her encounter though, she's changing, and as her mind begins to open the danger starts to grow.
Almost all of the characters in Dark Phoenix go through some sort of change. Jean comes face to face with her past and a power that is even more difficult to control than her own. Professor Xavier is less of a friend in his current persona than he's ever been before, and in this moment may not be the leader the X-Men need. Certainly by the end of the film each character has grown in some way. I'm not sure I was a fan of the changes in Professor Xavier, they were necessary in some respects but in the context of the rest of the series are a bit of a shock and out of the blue.
Thankfully some things don't change, and Quicksilver is still very funny, the occasional laugh was needed in what was quite a serious film.
Very briefly I want to talk about the effects. There's obviously a lot of them but I didn't spot anything that was outright terrible. (There's one moment in Cerebro, but that's more to do with how they choose to depict Cerebral's general imagery than anything.) My real standout moment is Jean's hair when she is embracing Dark Phoenix. We are given the floating underwater swirling effect that we should have seen in Aquaman.
It's been a while since I've seen all of the other films, although I did rewatch Last Stand and Apocalypse in the run up to this. There were a few moments where I saw flashes of Last Stand in Dark Phoenix which I thought was a nice touch.
I'm not sure there's a lot of point dwelling much on the acting for the main cast, it's consistent and what you'd expect for the franchise. Nicholas Hoult was able to bring a slightly bigger performance and he's probably one of the only regulars that had the ability to do that with his story.
Our villains were led by Jessica Chastain as Vuk. Vuk as a character and most of her group in general are actually quite bland. As emotionless aliens there's little to either love or hate. Had they been slightly more human than drone-like then they might have had a bigger impact. The only moment where I saw some good acting was when Vuk is with Jean near the very end and a look comes across her face and I thought, "oooh, acting!"
I wasn't entirely sure what was happening with Raven. She seemed to be a bundle of contradictions and got a terrible hand when it came to the script. I did want to slap her at one point, there was no need for what she did! NO NEED!
[Random thought: If Raven's scales/skin ripples when she transforms then how does she manage to do that when she's wearing an X-Suit? And also, why does she bother changing to her human look when she's in the mansion?]
The actions sequences were very good, the train scene felt like it had been crafted perfectly. Possibly a little too organised, but overall the entire scene came together. I particularly liked the choice of music when it coincided with Storm's piece, wonderfully atmospheric. (A pun? Perhaps.)
If there's anything I've taken from this it's that Dark Phoenix annoyed me less than Endgame did. It's not epic, but then I've never felt like the franchise has ever been that high on the scale. I'm reasonably happy with where it's left the sequence and what the future of the franchise might hold. I honestly don't think it deserves the hate that it's been getting.
What you should do
I think that you should go and see it, the action is good and a nice diversion for a couple of hours.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd always want a superpower, but my choice changes more than Raven does.
The pre-"hype" for this was very mixed. I had been looking forward to the film for a long time but when the first trailer dropped I was disappointed and underwhelmed, it was however nice to see that others were having the opposite reaction to me. Perhaps I had just built it up too much in my head beforehand.
As we eeked closer the vibe became decidedly negative around it, and for the most part I avoided articles and rants as I just don't see the point in speculating so wildly about something that hasn't been seen. That climaxed again when the preview screening was interrupted by a fire alarm, and then when the internet seemed to go nuts over the fact the review embargo was so late. (It's not like embargos are unusual, I don't see how you can draw conclusions from release and embargo being on the same day... this seems entirely logical. *deep breath*)
Something I would like to query is the fact that someone decided it was sensible to put a reaction video of three of the stars seeing the Dark Phoenix trailer in 4DX. It's a little bit of fun, but frustrating if you've been trying to avoid trailers and spoilers before seeing the film.
Wow... waffle... to the film!
The team take on a mission to space when a shuttle loses control and is in the path of what appears to be solar flares. The mission seems successful until they realise there's still a crew member trapped. With the shuttle disintegrating the only ones who can safely make it are Jean and Nightcrawler. As Jean holds the shuttle in place Nightcrawler rescues the last man from the wreckage but when he returns for her she's already encountered the strange space energy.
Somehow despite the destruction of the shuttle Jean survives floating in space, Nightcrawler brings her back to the X-Jet and the whole team return to Earth as heroes. Jean wasn't left unchanged by her encounter though, she's changing, and as her mind begins to open the danger starts to grow.
Almost all of the characters in Dark Phoenix go through some sort of change. Jean comes face to face with her past and a power that is even more difficult to control than her own. Professor Xavier is less of a friend in his current persona than he's ever been before, and in this moment may not be the leader the X-Men need. Certainly by the end of the film each character has grown in some way. I'm not sure I was a fan of the changes in Professor Xavier, they were necessary in some respects but in the context of the rest of the series are a bit of a shock and out of the blue.
Thankfully some things don't change, and Quicksilver is still very funny, the occasional laugh was needed in what was quite a serious film.
Very briefly I want to talk about the effects. There's obviously a lot of them but I didn't spot anything that was outright terrible. (There's one moment in Cerebro, but that's more to do with how they choose to depict Cerebral's general imagery than anything.) My real standout moment is Jean's hair when she is embracing Dark Phoenix. We are given the floating underwater swirling effect that we should have seen in Aquaman.
It's been a while since I've seen all of the other films, although I did rewatch Last Stand and Apocalypse in the run up to this. There were a few moments where I saw flashes of Last Stand in Dark Phoenix which I thought was a nice touch.
I'm not sure there's a lot of point dwelling much on the acting for the main cast, it's consistent and what you'd expect for the franchise. Nicholas Hoult was able to bring a slightly bigger performance and he's probably one of the only regulars that had the ability to do that with his story.
Our villains were led by Jessica Chastain as Vuk. Vuk as a character and most of her group in general are actually quite bland. As emotionless aliens there's little to either love or hate. Had they been slightly more human than drone-like then they might have had a bigger impact. The only moment where I saw some good acting was when Vuk is with Jean near the very end and a look comes across her face and I thought, "oooh, acting!"
I wasn't entirely sure what was happening with Raven. She seemed to be a bundle of contradictions and got a terrible hand when it came to the script. I did want to slap her at one point, there was no need for what she did! NO NEED!
[Random thought: If Raven's scales/skin ripples when she transforms then how does she manage to do that when she's wearing an X-Suit? And also, why does she bother changing to her human look when she's in the mansion?]
The actions sequences were very good, the train scene felt like it had been crafted perfectly. Possibly a little too organised, but overall the entire scene came together. I particularly liked the choice of music when it coincided with Storm's piece, wonderfully atmospheric. (A pun? Perhaps.)
If there's anything I've taken from this it's that Dark Phoenix annoyed me less than Endgame did. It's not epic, but then I've never felt like the franchise has ever been that high on the scale. I'm reasonably happy with where it's left the sequence and what the future of the franchise might hold. I honestly don't think it deserves the hate that it's been getting.
What you should do
I think that you should go and see it, the action is good and a nice diversion for a couple of hours.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd always want a superpower, but my choice changes more than Raven does.
Neil Goddard (3 KP) rated Hellboy (2019) in Movies
Feb 27, 2020
It all looked soooo promising
Contains spoilers, click to show
Let me say this upfront; David Harbour looks f---ing boss as Hellboy. The makeup is far superior to that of Ron Perlman, not that there was anything wrong with Ron Perlman’s, but with this new incarnation it’s all in the eyes. Deep red, sunken, pained. Sadly, that is all I can say about this movie that is one hundred percent genuinely positive. There are positives however, but they come with a big ‘however’.
I was initially a little concerned that we were getting a re-boot and not a direct sequel to Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008), especially as it still seemed so recent and was so well made. I know it was over a decade ago but quality is timeless, yeah? Then David Harbour was cast and Neil Marshall announced as director. Great, thought I, an actor I like and a director who’s put out some solid genre material. I saw the first picture of Harbour as Hellboy and I was genuinely excited. I saw the trailer and again, excited. Then I watched the film.
Eurgh, where to start?
Firstly, Ian McShane’s initial voice over is clunky and ill fitting, then they throw in some b@llocks about King Arthur and Excalibur. I had my first wobble here, as some of the effects seemed less than special.
Cue opening titles.
The film starts with a Mexican wrestling match that is purely exposition to let us know Hellboy is a hard drinking and hard fighting anti-hero working for an organisation that deals with the paranormal. The make up for his vampiric opponent is also great (can’t fault the makeup department), but the scene seemed superfluous. We get the nubbin of the story forming now; some horrible witchy wench from way back when was cut into bits and flung around jolly old England to prevent her from spreading a right ‘orrible plague. Turns out a potty-mouthed Liverpudlian pig-monster is collecting said bits in the hope of putting her back together in exchange for his normal appearance. Scouse pig-monster is quite entertaining.
Hellboy goes to England at the request of an upper-class paranormal society to help them kill giants; this goes t1ts up. Again, this seems like unnecessary exposition to introduce Alice, a medium who he rescued as a baby, who now rescues him in a transit van. We also get introduced to M11’s Agent Daimio. There something wrong with him, he keeps injecting himself with a serum to stop something happening. I knew at this point we’d get to see what it was eventually, probably at a juncture where something is needed to rescue someone important. However, at this point I had a feeling it would be bad, I just didn’t know how bad.
There some more fighting, some good effects, some mediocre effects and some terrible effects. There’s some good one-liners, there’s some dull and/or terrible dialogue and then we get the film’s conclusion.
There’s something I’ve been putting off mentioning as I didn’t want the entire review to be about it, and it could have been; the witchy wench at the heart of all this paranormal consternation, Nimue, is played by Milla Jovovich and she is terrible. From when she first opens her mouth to her predictable demise, she is terrible. Terrible. TERRIBLE.
I love some of the Resident Evil films but all she’s required to do is some slow-motion scissor kicks and shoot zombies and zombie-dogs in the face. She is tolerated, rather than enjoyed. Here she is emoting, or at least I think that’s what she was going for, and as a depiction of an evil entity bent of the destruction of all mankind, she is, for want of a better word, cack.
David Harbour and the Hellboy franchise deserve better than this. To be blunt, the franchise has better than this and Mike Mignola should be a bit more f---ing precious with his creation.
Hellboy (2004) was genuinely exciting; it was an origin story that bought that story full circle for its thrilling and apocalyptical conclusion. It has a wonderful nemesis, great support and breath-taking visuals. The re-tread of the origin story in Hellboy (2019) is, again, one more unnecessary diversion from a sketchy plot, which, for all its meagre bones takes a f-ck load of time to tell.
Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008) was equally impressive. It also introduced a fully formed community of creatures and customs hiding alongside mankind. It did so with nonchalant aplomb. Nothing seemed irrelevant or forced. For two films with almost identical running times, Hellboy (2019) tells less of a story with way more waffle.
So, I did mention there were some positives. David Harbour is great. He’s dour, sarcastic, defiant and funny, he just has no engaging story in which to be all those things. Ian McShane is good as the father figure but he is overshadowed by memories of the late, unbelievably great John Hurt. The story of a witch trying to destroy mankind is solid fantasy movie gold and the unleashing of her plague late in the final act is suitably hellish; bizarre demons emerging from city streets and tearing humans limb from limb, it’s bloody wonderful and wonderfully bloody. They all could have come straight out of a Clive Barker fever dream. However, it’s too little too late, by this point in the story we’ve had too many cutaways, too much shoddy CGI, and Agent Daimio stinking up many a scene with his ‘will he won’t he’ turn into something rubbish… he does.
The worst part of all this is I don’t know if they can come back from this. The film may have sunk the franchise at least for the next few years.
I do however, look forward to a re-boot in a decade or so, if we haven’t all been assimilated by aliens, overrun by AI robots or decimated by a supernatural plague bought on by some witchy wench with an axe to grind.
THREE WORD SUMMATION: Big Red Turd.
I was initially a little concerned that we were getting a re-boot and not a direct sequel to Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008), especially as it still seemed so recent and was so well made. I know it was over a decade ago but quality is timeless, yeah? Then David Harbour was cast and Neil Marshall announced as director. Great, thought I, an actor I like and a director who’s put out some solid genre material. I saw the first picture of Harbour as Hellboy and I was genuinely excited. I saw the trailer and again, excited. Then I watched the film.
Eurgh, where to start?
Firstly, Ian McShane’s initial voice over is clunky and ill fitting, then they throw in some b@llocks about King Arthur and Excalibur. I had my first wobble here, as some of the effects seemed less than special.
Cue opening titles.
The film starts with a Mexican wrestling match that is purely exposition to let us know Hellboy is a hard drinking and hard fighting anti-hero working for an organisation that deals with the paranormal. The make up for his vampiric opponent is also great (can’t fault the makeup department), but the scene seemed superfluous. We get the nubbin of the story forming now; some horrible witchy wench from way back when was cut into bits and flung around jolly old England to prevent her from spreading a right ‘orrible plague. Turns out a potty-mouthed Liverpudlian pig-monster is collecting said bits in the hope of putting her back together in exchange for his normal appearance. Scouse pig-monster is quite entertaining.
Hellboy goes to England at the request of an upper-class paranormal society to help them kill giants; this goes t1ts up. Again, this seems like unnecessary exposition to introduce Alice, a medium who he rescued as a baby, who now rescues him in a transit van. We also get introduced to M11’s Agent Daimio. There something wrong with him, he keeps injecting himself with a serum to stop something happening. I knew at this point we’d get to see what it was eventually, probably at a juncture where something is needed to rescue someone important. However, at this point I had a feeling it would be bad, I just didn’t know how bad.
There some more fighting, some good effects, some mediocre effects and some terrible effects. There’s some good one-liners, there’s some dull and/or terrible dialogue and then we get the film’s conclusion.
There’s something I’ve been putting off mentioning as I didn’t want the entire review to be about it, and it could have been; the witchy wench at the heart of all this paranormal consternation, Nimue, is played by Milla Jovovich and she is terrible. From when she first opens her mouth to her predictable demise, she is terrible. Terrible. TERRIBLE.
I love some of the Resident Evil films but all she’s required to do is some slow-motion scissor kicks and shoot zombies and zombie-dogs in the face. She is tolerated, rather than enjoyed. Here she is emoting, or at least I think that’s what she was going for, and as a depiction of an evil entity bent of the destruction of all mankind, she is, for want of a better word, cack.
David Harbour and the Hellboy franchise deserve better than this. To be blunt, the franchise has better than this and Mike Mignola should be a bit more f---ing precious with his creation.
Hellboy (2004) was genuinely exciting; it was an origin story that bought that story full circle for its thrilling and apocalyptical conclusion. It has a wonderful nemesis, great support and breath-taking visuals. The re-tread of the origin story in Hellboy (2019) is, again, one more unnecessary diversion from a sketchy plot, which, for all its meagre bones takes a f-ck load of time to tell.
Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008) was equally impressive. It also introduced a fully formed community of creatures and customs hiding alongside mankind. It did so with nonchalant aplomb. Nothing seemed irrelevant or forced. For two films with almost identical running times, Hellboy (2019) tells less of a story with way more waffle.
So, I did mention there were some positives. David Harbour is great. He’s dour, sarcastic, defiant and funny, he just has no engaging story in which to be all those things. Ian McShane is good as the father figure but he is overshadowed by memories of the late, unbelievably great John Hurt. The story of a witch trying to destroy mankind is solid fantasy movie gold and the unleashing of her plague late in the final act is suitably hellish; bizarre demons emerging from city streets and tearing humans limb from limb, it’s bloody wonderful and wonderfully bloody. They all could have come straight out of a Clive Barker fever dream. However, it’s too little too late, by this point in the story we’ve had too many cutaways, too much shoddy CGI, and Agent Daimio stinking up many a scene with his ‘will he won’t he’ turn into something rubbish… he does.
The worst part of all this is I don’t know if they can come back from this. The film may have sunk the franchise at least for the next few years.
I do however, look forward to a re-boot in a decade or so, if we haven’t all been assimilated by aliens, overrun by AI robots or decimated by a supernatural plague bought on by some witchy wench with an axe to grind.
THREE WORD SUMMATION: Big Red Turd.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Bad Boys for Life (2020) in Movies
Mar 9, 2020
Welcome to Miami - again!
Will Smith seems to have been having a lacklustre period in his career. His genie from "Aladdin" got a rather lukewarm reception. And his last movie - "Gemini Man" - billed as a big summer blockbuster - failed to impress. True it wasn't a commercial disaster (raking in at the time of writing about 150% of budget), but it's still a film on a plane for me that, even if I'm bored, I'll say "nah" to.
Perhaps it's for this reason that Smith reached for an old and reliable property to dust off for another outing.
And, do you know, it's not half bad.
I only recently saw this one, right at the end of its UK cinema run, because frankly it appealed to me like being hit round the head with a cold fish. Martin Lawrence is an actor who just grates on me enormously. I'm sure he's a lovely chap; kind to animals; donates to charity; etc - but I generally just don't find him funny. (Here though he has a killer line about condom use that made me chuckle.) It feels to me like he is on implausible ground here re-treading the role of aging detective Marcus Burnett. One look at Burnett lumbering along and you would think "well, he'd never pass the medical" for the on-street role he's portrayed doing. His buddy is detective Mike Lowrey (Will Smith), who has a sordid past that is set to catch up on him.
Since we start the story in Colombia, where Isabel Aretas (Kate Del Castillo), the witchy wife of a notorious deceased drug baron, is sprung from prison by her son Armando (Jacob Scipio) in what I admit is a clever and novel way. The Aretas family is bent on revenge - - and a key target in their sites is Lowrey.
Burnett is newly a grandparent and hell-bent on retirement. But with Lowrey and his associates with a target on their backs, will there be one last chance to "Ride Together, Die Together"?
Not seen the first two movies? Not to worry! There are movies, like LOTR, where if you've missed the first two movies in the series you will be left in serious "WTF" territory in trying to watch the third. This is not one of those movies. The story is entirely self-contained, and refers to events never seen prior to the first film in the series.
But whether the movie is for you will depend on your tolerance for loud and brash visuals and music with the knob turned up to 12. Directors Adil and Bilall (Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah - Belgian film school buddies best known for the critically acclaimed 2015 feature "Black") - don't do anything by halves.
There is a scene in "Lost Series 3" in which Sawyer, Kate, and Alex have to bust young Karl out of the mysterious room 23 where he is being tortured by having his eyes kept open while watching a collage of images continually smashed into his eyeballs. This movie feels a little like that after a while.
This is not by any means a criticism that it's poorly done. There is some truly stunning cinematography of the Miami skyline by Belgian cinematographer Robrecht Heyvaert, including a 'pull-back' drone shot from a conversation on the top of a building that is quite AWESOME! And there are more than enough "fast action - then slo-mo - then fast again" shots to keep music-video junkies happy!
The music score by Lorne Balfe is also pumping, adding a dynamism to the frantic action scenes that keeps you entertained.
The screenplay by Chris Bremner, Peter Craig and Joe Carnahan is assuredly familiar: it's not going to win any prizes for originality. We've seen the cartel/revenge plotline played out in multiple movies over the years. And we've also seen the "buddy cops with aging partner taking retirement" angle from the "Lethal Weapon" series. This just sticks them together.
Will Smith and Martin Lawrence wise-crack their way through the comedy well-enough, though for me it never reaches the heights of the pairing of Smith and Tommy Lee Jones from MiB (or indeed Mel Gibson and Danny Glover from Lethal Weapon). Elsewhere we have Vanessa Hudgens as a cute cop, still trying to break through from "Disneyfication" into mainstream flicks. For one horrible moment, when I saw her name on the cast, I thought she might be the love interest to Smith. But no. That honour goes to Mexican beauty Paola Nuñez who, with only a 10 year age gap, becomes a less gag-worthy pairing. She plays a female leadership role (every 20's film now needs one) as the head of a new crime division.
Also good value is Joe Pantoliano reprising his role as Captain Howard - Lowrie's exasperated boss. Playing it by the numbers, every film like this has to have one!
Where the plot does add some interest is in a surprising scene mid-film and a twist that I didn't see coming. But this twist felt - in the context of the release date or the film - like a mistake (a "Spoiler Section" in my review on the One Mann's Movies web site discusses this).
All of this happens of course against a backdrop of a body count of bad guys being killed in ever more graphic and gory ways, while the good guys generally dodge every bullet, grenade and crashing helicopter heading their way.
It's that time of year when films are released to die. Where studios drop their movies that are never going to trouble the Academy and are not deemed worthy of summer or even late spring release. But they should have had more faith in this one, for it's not half bad. True, you may need a couple of paracetamols afterwards, but if your corneas and ear-drums can stand the pace, its not short on entertainment value.
(For the full graphical review, check out the One Mann's Movies link here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/03/08/one-manns-movies-film-review-bad-boys-for-life-2020/ ).
Perhaps it's for this reason that Smith reached for an old and reliable property to dust off for another outing.
And, do you know, it's not half bad.
I only recently saw this one, right at the end of its UK cinema run, because frankly it appealed to me like being hit round the head with a cold fish. Martin Lawrence is an actor who just grates on me enormously. I'm sure he's a lovely chap; kind to animals; donates to charity; etc - but I generally just don't find him funny. (Here though he has a killer line about condom use that made me chuckle.) It feels to me like he is on implausible ground here re-treading the role of aging detective Marcus Burnett. One look at Burnett lumbering along and you would think "well, he'd never pass the medical" for the on-street role he's portrayed doing. His buddy is detective Mike Lowrey (Will Smith), who has a sordid past that is set to catch up on him.
Since we start the story in Colombia, where Isabel Aretas (Kate Del Castillo), the witchy wife of a notorious deceased drug baron, is sprung from prison by her son Armando (Jacob Scipio) in what I admit is a clever and novel way. The Aretas family is bent on revenge - - and a key target in their sites is Lowrey.
Burnett is newly a grandparent and hell-bent on retirement. But with Lowrey and his associates with a target on their backs, will there be one last chance to "Ride Together, Die Together"?
Not seen the first two movies? Not to worry! There are movies, like LOTR, where if you've missed the first two movies in the series you will be left in serious "WTF" territory in trying to watch the third. This is not one of those movies. The story is entirely self-contained, and refers to events never seen prior to the first film in the series.
But whether the movie is for you will depend on your tolerance for loud and brash visuals and music with the knob turned up to 12. Directors Adil and Bilall (Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah - Belgian film school buddies best known for the critically acclaimed 2015 feature "Black") - don't do anything by halves.
There is a scene in "Lost Series 3" in which Sawyer, Kate, and Alex have to bust young Karl out of the mysterious room 23 where he is being tortured by having his eyes kept open while watching a collage of images continually smashed into his eyeballs. This movie feels a little like that after a while.
This is not by any means a criticism that it's poorly done. There is some truly stunning cinematography of the Miami skyline by Belgian cinematographer Robrecht Heyvaert, including a 'pull-back' drone shot from a conversation on the top of a building that is quite AWESOME! And there are more than enough "fast action - then slo-mo - then fast again" shots to keep music-video junkies happy!
The music score by Lorne Balfe is also pumping, adding a dynamism to the frantic action scenes that keeps you entertained.
The screenplay by Chris Bremner, Peter Craig and Joe Carnahan is assuredly familiar: it's not going to win any prizes for originality. We've seen the cartel/revenge plotline played out in multiple movies over the years. And we've also seen the "buddy cops with aging partner taking retirement" angle from the "Lethal Weapon" series. This just sticks them together.
Will Smith and Martin Lawrence wise-crack their way through the comedy well-enough, though for me it never reaches the heights of the pairing of Smith and Tommy Lee Jones from MiB (or indeed Mel Gibson and Danny Glover from Lethal Weapon). Elsewhere we have Vanessa Hudgens as a cute cop, still trying to break through from "Disneyfication" into mainstream flicks. For one horrible moment, when I saw her name on the cast, I thought she might be the love interest to Smith. But no. That honour goes to Mexican beauty Paola Nuñez who, with only a 10 year age gap, becomes a less gag-worthy pairing. She plays a female leadership role (every 20's film now needs one) as the head of a new crime division.
Also good value is Joe Pantoliano reprising his role as Captain Howard - Lowrie's exasperated boss. Playing it by the numbers, every film like this has to have one!
Where the plot does add some interest is in a surprising scene mid-film and a twist that I didn't see coming. But this twist felt - in the context of the release date or the film - like a mistake (a "Spoiler Section" in my review on the One Mann's Movies web site discusses this).
All of this happens of course against a backdrop of a body count of bad guys being killed in ever more graphic and gory ways, while the good guys generally dodge every bullet, grenade and crashing helicopter heading their way.
It's that time of year when films are released to die. Where studios drop their movies that are never going to trouble the Academy and are not deemed worthy of summer or even late spring release. But they should have had more faith in this one, for it's not half bad. True, you may need a couple of paracetamols afterwards, but if your corneas and ear-drums can stand the pace, its not short on entertainment value.
(For the full graphical review, check out the One Mann's Movies link here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/03/08/one-manns-movies-film-review-bad-boys-for-life-2020/ ).
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Top Pop in Tabletop Games
Jul 22, 2021
THANK YOU, TALON STRIKES STUDIOS! I recently moved from Illinois to Tennessee (where things are mostly “Coke”) and I have always grown up calling soft drinks “pop,” so when I saw a group was creating a game using the proper terminology, I jumped at the chance. Stackable bottlecaps AND a bidding mechanic? I’m so in. This may not be everyone’s jam, but it’s working for me!
Top Pop is a 2-5 player (well, I would say 3-5) card game of market penetration and territory influence. In it, players are representatives of rival pop manufacturers bent on skyrocketing their company’s popularity in various major cities across the country. The winning rep is they who can diversify their influence and hit influential cities hard and often.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup a game of Top Pop, refer to the rulebook to determine the starting resources per number of players. Each game is setup differently depending on how many players are involved. Shuffle the deck of city cards, and if using the optional City Power or Scenario variants, place these cards on the table for all to access as well. Each player chooses a color, receives the appropriate starting resources and the game is ready to begin!
On the active player’s turn, they will complete the following steps: Collect City Cards, Play a City Card, Take Caps, Place Stacks, and then Draw a Card. The first turn of the game Collect City Cards is skipped, but after that, each card the active player owns the largest stack of tops on they will collect. Caps that were stacked on the card are redistributed depending on where the card was placed (in front of the active player or a rival player). Next, the player will Play a City Card from their hand either in front of themselves or in front of a rival player. This is an important step to consider because once a card has been claimed then caps are distributed according to card placement, as referenced in the first step. Also noteworthy here is that if a card is placed in front of a rival, the active player takes one of said rival’s caps (Take Caps) from the bank of caps in the middle of table as well as a cap of the active player’s choice.
Now that the active player presumably has some caps with which to play, they Place Stacks on any City Card(s) they wish. The stacks of caps need to be the tallest stack on the card, must include a cap of the same color of the player who currently owns the highest stack, and must also be topped with a cap of the active player’s color. Any amount of caps may be added to a City Card in order to achieve these requirements, and the active player may place stacks on any number of City Cards in play. Once the active player has placed all caps they wish, they must then Draw a Card and prepare for their next turn.
As City Cards are played, caps placed out in stacks, and players winning bids on cards, players are jockeying for endgame points. The game ends after a player collects their sixth City Card and every other player has a chance to spend their remaining caps to claim cards. At the end of the game, points are awarded for having simple majority in each city as well as points for collecting a more diversified set of City Cards. The player with the most points scored at the end of the game wins!
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game, so components are in no way final. Most notably, the final copies of Top Pop will include nice plastic stackable bottlecaps that look way better than the painted wooden discs (which for a prototype, are actually quite nice). The City Cards look and feel complete to me, and are pretty impressive. I like the art quite a bit and the game’s style is spot on. I am very excited to see how this one ends up, and I think gamers will love handling the finished bottlecaps.
There is a lot going on here that is hard to put into words. I played this solely three-player and included the City Powers with a few Scenarios (Kickstarter exclusives, I understand). I found the base game to be very good, but adding in those optional rules really makes it pop for me (I know you saw what I did there). Every player is constantly engaged throughout, and the tactical play always has me considering tons of options. I would not necessarily want to play this with extremely AP-prone players, but it is quick enough to include them as well from time to time.
What I like most about Top Pop, in addition to the overall aesthetic (even in the prototype), is the tactics in watching what other players are collecting, where the cards are placed, and cross-referencing all that with your personal bottlecap economy. There are just so many things to consider on each turn that makes me hungry for more and more plays. I say this a lot, but when I think about a game and ways I would attack it differently outside of the game session, that is a mark of a great game to me. And this one is a great game to me.
If you are looking for a uniquely-themed bidding card game with (promised) excellent components, I urge you to check out the Kickstarter campaign, which ends August 7, 2021. And on a personal note, I’m so excited to have both Chicago and New Orleans in this game. Two of my favorite cities in the world!
Top Pop is a 2-5 player (well, I would say 3-5) card game of market penetration and territory influence. In it, players are representatives of rival pop manufacturers bent on skyrocketing their company’s popularity in various major cities across the country. The winning rep is they who can diversify their influence and hit influential cities hard and often.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup a game of Top Pop, refer to the rulebook to determine the starting resources per number of players. Each game is setup differently depending on how many players are involved. Shuffle the deck of city cards, and if using the optional City Power or Scenario variants, place these cards on the table for all to access as well. Each player chooses a color, receives the appropriate starting resources and the game is ready to begin!
On the active player’s turn, they will complete the following steps: Collect City Cards, Play a City Card, Take Caps, Place Stacks, and then Draw a Card. The first turn of the game Collect City Cards is skipped, but after that, each card the active player owns the largest stack of tops on they will collect. Caps that were stacked on the card are redistributed depending on where the card was placed (in front of the active player or a rival player). Next, the player will Play a City Card from their hand either in front of themselves or in front of a rival player. This is an important step to consider because once a card has been claimed then caps are distributed according to card placement, as referenced in the first step. Also noteworthy here is that if a card is placed in front of a rival, the active player takes one of said rival’s caps (Take Caps) from the bank of caps in the middle of table as well as a cap of the active player’s choice.
Now that the active player presumably has some caps with which to play, they Place Stacks on any City Card(s) they wish. The stacks of caps need to be the tallest stack on the card, must include a cap of the same color of the player who currently owns the highest stack, and must also be topped with a cap of the active player’s color. Any amount of caps may be added to a City Card in order to achieve these requirements, and the active player may place stacks on any number of City Cards in play. Once the active player has placed all caps they wish, they must then Draw a Card and prepare for their next turn.
As City Cards are played, caps placed out in stacks, and players winning bids on cards, players are jockeying for endgame points. The game ends after a player collects their sixth City Card and every other player has a chance to spend their remaining caps to claim cards. At the end of the game, points are awarded for having simple majority in each city as well as points for collecting a more diversified set of City Cards. The player with the most points scored at the end of the game wins!
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game, so components are in no way final. Most notably, the final copies of Top Pop will include nice plastic stackable bottlecaps that look way better than the painted wooden discs (which for a prototype, are actually quite nice). The City Cards look and feel complete to me, and are pretty impressive. I like the art quite a bit and the game’s style is spot on. I am very excited to see how this one ends up, and I think gamers will love handling the finished bottlecaps.
There is a lot going on here that is hard to put into words. I played this solely three-player and included the City Powers with a few Scenarios (Kickstarter exclusives, I understand). I found the base game to be very good, but adding in those optional rules really makes it pop for me (I know you saw what I did there). Every player is constantly engaged throughout, and the tactical play always has me considering tons of options. I would not necessarily want to play this with extremely AP-prone players, but it is quick enough to include them as well from time to time.
What I like most about Top Pop, in addition to the overall aesthetic (even in the prototype), is the tactics in watching what other players are collecting, where the cards are placed, and cross-referencing all that with your personal bottlecap economy. There are just so many things to consider on each turn that makes me hungry for more and more plays. I say this a lot, but when I think about a game and ways I would attack it differently outside of the game session, that is a mark of a great game to me. And this one is a great game to me.
If you are looking for a uniquely-themed bidding card game with (promised) excellent components, I urge you to check out the Kickstarter campaign, which ends August 7, 2021. And on a personal note, I’m so excited to have both Chicago and New Orleans in this game. Two of my favorite cities in the world!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Avengers: Endgame (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
The final curtain.
So… thanks again to work and family commitments, I’ve spent 7 days dodging social media to arrive at my showing of “Endgame” spoiler free… and was successful in doing so! It is of course impossible to write just about anything on this film without dropping spoilers. So I will keep this first part of the review short, but add some footnotes (indexed with <#> symbols) to a “spoiler section” below the trailer video. Proceed at your peril if you haven’t yet seen it!
The Plot
The MCU has delivered an impressively well-connected movie series. In the case of Thanos, this is a story-arc that started in the mid-credit “monkey” at the end of 2012’s “The Avengers” and, at the conclusion of “Avengers: Infinity War”, saw half the universe’s population drift away – Voldemort-style – into grey ash. This, of course, also wiped out half of our heroes (good trivia question for future years: who was the first we saw drift away? Answer below* ). This included Spider-Man (Tom Holland); Dr Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch); Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman); Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson); half of the remaining Guardians; The Wasp (Evangeline Lilly) and Dr Pym (Michael Douglas). Oblivious to all of this is Ant Man (Paul Rudd), still stranded in the ‘quantum realm’ following the demise of his colleagues, and with no one to flick the ‘return’ switch.
After some early action, Endgame’s story revolves around a desperate attempt by the remaining Avengers, led by Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and a ‘retired’ Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jnr) to undo the undoable. Can they succeed against all the odds? (With a new Spider-Man film due out in the summer, I’ll give you a guess!). Of more relevance perhaps is whether the team can stay unscathed from their encounter with the scheming and massively powerful Thanos (Josh Brolin)?
Thoughtful
The film will not be to every fan’s taste. After the virtually non-stop rip-roaring action of “Infinity War”, “Endgame” takes a far more contemplative approach to its first hour.
The film starts with a devastating prologue, and a great lesson in statistics: that you need a decent sized population to guarantee getting a 50:50 split! There is also a very surprising twist in the first 15 minutes or so that I didn’t see coming AT ALL.
But then things settle down into a far more sombre section of the film: short on action; long on character development. The world is grieving for its loss, unable to move on past the non-stop counselling sessions that everyone is getting. This first hour was, for me, by far, my favourite part of the film. Seeing how the characters we know and love have been impacted – some for better rather than for worse – was terrific. Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk (with a rather glib plot-point) takes on an hilarious new aspect; and Chris Hemsworth adds hugely comedic value as Thor, setting up in Scotland a “New Asgard” settlement in uncharacteristically laid-back fashion.
Cast
As an ensemble cast, everyone plays their parts extremely well. But it is just the breadth of the cast that astounds in this film: just about everyone who is anyone in the Marvel Universe – at least, those who are still alive (alive!) and not dead (dead!) – pop up for an appearance! This is great fun with, in one particular case, the opportunity to try some more rejuvenation of an old timer as previously done with Samuel L. Jackson in “Captain Marvel”.
Inevitably, some of these appearances are overly brief, and characters that I wanted to see developed more in this film (particularly Brie Larson’s Captain Marvel) get very little screen time. Drax (Dave Bautista) and Mantis (Pom Klementieff) barely get a single line each. So it will depend on where your loyalties lie as to whether you are satisfied with the coverage or not. (I personally find Chris Evans‘ Captain America a bit of a po-faced bore, so I wasn’t keen on the amount of screen time he had).
Stan Lee again gets another cameo in the bag before his demise: will this actually be his last live one?
Overall view
I enjoyed this movie. It could obviously NEVER live up to the over-hyped expectations of the fan base. But as a cinematic spectacle, for me, it delivered on its billing as a blockbuster finale, but one filled with a degree of nuance I was not expecting. The problem with the way that the plot have been structured (no spoilers – <#>) is that it is easy to pick holes in the storyline. Indeed, some dramatic options (that to me seemed obvious ones to ‘mine’) were left ‘unmined’ <##>; others were left inexplicably hanging <###>.
I suspect the reason for some of this is that the initial cut of this film probably ran to 5 hours rather than the – still bladder-testing – 3 hours as released. There were probably a bunch of scenes left on the cutting room floor that might allow things to make more sense in the extended BluRay release.
It’s at times slow, but for me never dull. It does suffer from one significant flaw though: the “Return of the King” disease. It doesn’t know when to quit. There was a natural MCU arc to follow and a perfect time at which to end it: but the directors (the Russo Brothers, Anthony Russo and Joe Russo) kept adding additional scenes that detracted from the natural ending <####>.
Above all, unlike I think all but one film in MCU history, there is NO “MONKEY” in the end credits: either mid-credit or end-credit! So, after the long title crawl (and some rather odd choices for end-title music by Alan Silvestri), if you are not to look bloody stupid as the lights come up, and face a storm of derision from your partner, then leave after the dramatic roll-call sequence of the film’s stars!
(*BTW, the answer to the trivia question is, I believe, Bucky.)
So… thanks again to work and family commitments, I’ve spent 7 days dodging social media to arrive at my showing of “Endgame” spoiler free… and was successful in doing so! It is of course impossible to write just about anything on this film without dropping spoilers. So I will keep this first part of the review short, but add some footnotes (indexed with <#> symbols) to a “spoiler section” below the trailer video. Proceed at your peril if you haven’t yet seen it!
The Plot
The MCU has delivered an impressively well-connected movie series. In the case of Thanos, this is a story-arc that started in the mid-credit “monkey” at the end of 2012’s “The Avengers” and, at the conclusion of “Avengers: Infinity War”, saw half the universe’s population drift away – Voldemort-style – into grey ash. This, of course, also wiped out half of our heroes (good trivia question for future years: who was the first we saw drift away? Answer below* ). This included Spider-Man (Tom Holland); Dr Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch); Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman); Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson); half of the remaining Guardians; The Wasp (Evangeline Lilly) and Dr Pym (Michael Douglas). Oblivious to all of this is Ant Man (Paul Rudd), still stranded in the ‘quantum realm’ following the demise of his colleagues, and with no one to flick the ‘return’ switch.
After some early action, Endgame’s story revolves around a desperate attempt by the remaining Avengers, led by Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and a ‘retired’ Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jnr) to undo the undoable. Can they succeed against all the odds? (With a new Spider-Man film due out in the summer, I’ll give you a guess!). Of more relevance perhaps is whether the team can stay unscathed from their encounter with the scheming and massively powerful Thanos (Josh Brolin)?
Thoughtful
The film will not be to every fan’s taste. After the virtually non-stop rip-roaring action of “Infinity War”, “Endgame” takes a far more contemplative approach to its first hour.
The film starts with a devastating prologue, and a great lesson in statistics: that you need a decent sized population to guarantee getting a 50:50 split! There is also a very surprising twist in the first 15 minutes or so that I didn’t see coming AT ALL.
But then things settle down into a far more sombre section of the film: short on action; long on character development. The world is grieving for its loss, unable to move on past the non-stop counselling sessions that everyone is getting. This first hour was, for me, by far, my favourite part of the film. Seeing how the characters we know and love have been impacted – some for better rather than for worse – was terrific. Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk (with a rather glib plot-point) takes on an hilarious new aspect; and Chris Hemsworth adds hugely comedic value as Thor, setting up in Scotland a “New Asgard” settlement in uncharacteristically laid-back fashion.
Cast
As an ensemble cast, everyone plays their parts extremely well. But it is just the breadth of the cast that astounds in this film: just about everyone who is anyone in the Marvel Universe – at least, those who are still alive (alive!) and not dead (dead!) – pop up for an appearance! This is great fun with, in one particular case, the opportunity to try some more rejuvenation of an old timer as previously done with Samuel L. Jackson in “Captain Marvel”.
Inevitably, some of these appearances are overly brief, and characters that I wanted to see developed more in this film (particularly Brie Larson’s Captain Marvel) get very little screen time. Drax (Dave Bautista) and Mantis (Pom Klementieff) barely get a single line each. So it will depend on where your loyalties lie as to whether you are satisfied with the coverage or not. (I personally find Chris Evans‘ Captain America a bit of a po-faced bore, so I wasn’t keen on the amount of screen time he had).
Stan Lee again gets another cameo in the bag before his demise: will this actually be his last live one?
Overall view
I enjoyed this movie. It could obviously NEVER live up to the over-hyped expectations of the fan base. But as a cinematic spectacle, for me, it delivered on its billing as a blockbuster finale, but one filled with a degree of nuance I was not expecting. The problem with the way that the plot have been structured (no spoilers – <#>) is that it is easy to pick holes in the storyline. Indeed, some dramatic options (that to me seemed obvious ones to ‘mine’) were left ‘unmined’ <##>; others were left inexplicably hanging <###>.
I suspect the reason for some of this is that the initial cut of this film probably ran to 5 hours rather than the – still bladder-testing – 3 hours as released. There were probably a bunch of scenes left on the cutting room floor that might allow things to make more sense in the extended BluRay release.
It’s at times slow, but for me never dull. It does suffer from one significant flaw though: the “Return of the King” disease. It doesn’t know when to quit. There was a natural MCU arc to follow and a perfect time at which to end it: but the directors (the Russo Brothers, Anthony Russo and Joe Russo) kept adding additional scenes that detracted from the natural ending <####>.
Above all, unlike I think all but one film in MCU history, there is NO “MONKEY” in the end credits: either mid-credit or end-credit! So, after the long title crawl (and some rather odd choices for end-title music by Alan Silvestri), if you are not to look bloody stupid as the lights come up, and face a storm of derision from your partner, then leave after the dramatic roll-call sequence of the film’s stars!
(*BTW, the answer to the trivia question is, I believe, Bucky.)
Jamie (131 KP) rated The Handmaid's Tale - Season 1 in TV
Jul 15, 2017
Phenomenal casting (4 more)
Changes to the plot add more to the characters and world of Gilead
Gorgeous technicolor visuals
Retains the dark tone of it's source material
Wonderful original soundtrack
June's character is changed in a way that goes against one of the original messages of the book (1 more)
Soundtrack sometimes included pop songs that were jarring and obnoxiously loud
Adds new depth to an already incredible story
I LOVE The Handmaid's Tale. Both the book and now the television show. The show is stunningly beautiful in terms of it's visuals and soundtrack. The casting was outstanding, it is everything I ever wanted from an adaptation of this marvelous book.
The story is changed in some pretty big ways in an attempt to modernize the story. The setting has been changed to what seems like the present day in a more integrated United States. The television show added extra plot lines, giving more attention to some of the side characters and giving us their points of view seamlessly, something that would have been difficult and confusing in a written format. I loved seeing more of the side characters and with it, seeing Gilead be fully fleshed out and more terrifying than I ever could have imagined. It was wonderful seeing the story expanded to include the infertility epidemic, the fall of the United States, the protests and gradual rise of the nation of Gilead.
I was hesitant at first when I saw images of a young Commander and Serena Joy but the casting couldn't be more on point. Yvonne Strahovski is a powerhouse that really embodies Serena Joy, making her both a sympathetic and terrifying character. Elizabeth Moss, Samira Wiley, Ann Dowd, Alexis Bledel, and Madeline Brewer all deserve some serious praise for the way that they made all of their characters come alive.
An unfortunate casualty from the book were the changes to June's character, who went from being a disoriented every woman who did not recognize freedom when she had it and tragically lost everything. She wasn't ever meant to be the "hero," not like her mother or Moira who were outspoken feminists. This was an intentional set up in the book to be a cautionary tale of the importance of being vigilant and fighting to preserve one's autonomy. The June in the show on the other hand IS our hero, the fact that there is a season two means that we will have the resistance and the story will become more of your stereotypical dystopia where good will prevail and evil will always lose. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's a pretty standard plot that gets recycled over and over.
What the story added where the book was extremely bleak was that tiny glimmer of hope. Hope that Gilead won't last and that the bonds of family and friendship can overcome seemingly insurmountable odds. Be prepared to cry and those with triggers will probably have difficulty digesting some of the content in the show. The story doesn't shy away from difficult topics and the brutality can be startling.
The story is changed in some pretty big ways in an attempt to modernize the story. The setting has been changed to what seems like the present day in a more integrated United States. The television show added extra plot lines, giving more attention to some of the side characters and giving us their points of view seamlessly, something that would have been difficult and confusing in a written format. I loved seeing more of the side characters and with it, seeing Gilead be fully fleshed out and more terrifying than I ever could have imagined. It was wonderful seeing the story expanded to include the infertility epidemic, the fall of the United States, the protests and gradual rise of the nation of Gilead.
I was hesitant at first when I saw images of a young Commander and Serena Joy but the casting couldn't be more on point. Yvonne Strahovski is a powerhouse that really embodies Serena Joy, making her both a sympathetic and terrifying character. Elizabeth Moss, Samira Wiley, Ann Dowd, Alexis Bledel, and Madeline Brewer all deserve some serious praise for the way that they made all of their characters come alive.
An unfortunate casualty from the book were the changes to June's character, who went from being a disoriented every woman who did not recognize freedom when she had it and tragically lost everything. She wasn't ever meant to be the "hero," not like her mother or Moira who were outspoken feminists. This was an intentional set up in the book to be a cautionary tale of the importance of being vigilant and fighting to preserve one's autonomy. The June in the show on the other hand IS our hero, the fact that there is a season two means that we will have the resistance and the story will become more of your stereotypical dystopia where good will prevail and evil will always lose. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's a pretty standard plot that gets recycled over and over.
What the story added where the book was extremely bleak was that tiny glimmer of hope. Hope that Gilead won't last and that the bonds of family and friendship can overcome seemingly insurmountable odds. Be prepared to cry and those with triggers will probably have difficulty digesting some of the content in the show. The story doesn't shy away from difficult topics and the brutality can be startling.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated It Happened One Night in Books
Apr 27, 2018
IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT by Lisa Dale
Genre: Romance
Rating: 3.5/5
Summary (From Goodreads): Lana Biel has always wanted to shake the dust of Vermont off her feet and see the world, one exotic country after another. But when a lighthearted spring fling changes her life forever, she turns to the one man whose strong shoulders can lighten any burden: her best friend, Eli Ward.
Eli has always been there for Lana--after all, that's what best friends do. But Lana isn't the only one hiding something. Eli is keeping secrets of his own that threaten their relationship. Yet as summer turns to fall, new desires awaken between them, even as old fears tear them apart. Then, when another Vermont winter fills the valleys with snow, Eli and Lana are given the chance for an adventure greater than they ever dreamed possible...and a love that will last for all time.
Review:
It was really hard for me to give this book time, I felt like putting it down and giving up after the first few chapters. It wasn’t written particularly well, and I didn’t like the characters a whole lot. I still don’t. However, the story ended up being pretty good.
It was hard for me personally to look beyond the bottom line of the story: Lana had sex, got pregnant with a baby from a man she didn’t love, then she fell in love with her best friend. Her sister desperately wanted her to put her baby up for adoption so she could have it, and her father who never fathered them came back in the middle of it all and caused nothing but problems.
There were a few parts that just seemed out of place—Ron (the baby’s father) coming back and proposing, Gene (sister’s husband) walking out, and the apologies from the father. It just didn’t feel realistic. I’m not quite sure why.
But when I did look beyond that, I saw a very realistic story with good strong characters and the choices and words that they make and speak.
I got into the story about a quarter of the way through, and couldn’t put the book down. The events that happened lined up well, the pacing was good, and it was very original.
I really did like this book, I’m just not particularly sure why I liked it. Maybe it was the fact that the characters acted like real people, they weren't just characters. There were no “happily ever after” moments, although the ending was very good. I think, taking into consideration that in real life or fiction, it’s not really going to get better than it did, it was a very good story.
I’ve read a lot of really good reviews for this book, so don’t let my pessimism discourage you. Again, I liked it, but I’m not sure why. I doubt I’ll ever read it again, but then very few books make it to my “repeat” pile.
Content: For a romance book, this was free of details. There were some scenes, but they weren’t described. There was very very little language (I think there was one bad word total).
Recommendation: Ages 15+
Genre: Romance
Rating: 3.5/5
Summary (From Goodreads): Lana Biel has always wanted to shake the dust of Vermont off her feet and see the world, one exotic country after another. But when a lighthearted spring fling changes her life forever, she turns to the one man whose strong shoulders can lighten any burden: her best friend, Eli Ward.
Eli has always been there for Lana--after all, that's what best friends do. But Lana isn't the only one hiding something. Eli is keeping secrets of his own that threaten their relationship. Yet as summer turns to fall, new desires awaken between them, even as old fears tear them apart. Then, when another Vermont winter fills the valleys with snow, Eli and Lana are given the chance for an adventure greater than they ever dreamed possible...and a love that will last for all time.
Review:
It was really hard for me to give this book time, I felt like putting it down and giving up after the first few chapters. It wasn’t written particularly well, and I didn’t like the characters a whole lot. I still don’t. However, the story ended up being pretty good.
It was hard for me personally to look beyond the bottom line of the story: Lana had sex, got pregnant with a baby from a man she didn’t love, then she fell in love with her best friend. Her sister desperately wanted her to put her baby up for adoption so she could have it, and her father who never fathered them came back in the middle of it all and caused nothing but problems.
There were a few parts that just seemed out of place—Ron (the baby’s father) coming back and proposing, Gene (sister’s husband) walking out, and the apologies from the father. It just didn’t feel realistic. I’m not quite sure why.
But when I did look beyond that, I saw a very realistic story with good strong characters and the choices and words that they make and speak.
I got into the story about a quarter of the way through, and couldn’t put the book down. The events that happened lined up well, the pacing was good, and it was very original.
I really did like this book, I’m just not particularly sure why I liked it. Maybe it was the fact that the characters acted like real people, they weren't just characters. There were no “happily ever after” moments, although the ending was very good. I think, taking into consideration that in real life or fiction, it’s not really going to get better than it did, it was a very good story.
I’ve read a lot of really good reviews for this book, so don’t let my pessimism discourage you. Again, I liked it, but I’m not sure why. I doubt I’ll ever read it again, but then very few books make it to my “repeat” pile.
Content: For a romance book, this was free of details. There were some scenes, but they weren’t described. There was very very little language (I think there was one bad word total).
Recommendation: Ages 15+
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Son of a Witch in Books
Apr 16, 2018
I saw the musical version of Wicked two or three years ago, and ADORED it. I'd been wanting to pick up this book for sometime, and finally found both it and the sequel at my local library. (I just learned there are two more books, A Lion Among Men and Out of Oz, so I'll be requesting those from the library soon!) I started the book knowing, from other reviewers, that it was very different from the musical. Unlike most of the reviews I read, that didn't make me not like it. Quite the contrary. I loved seeing the politics and social unrest hidden behind the scenes. The musical hints at the pogroms against Animals (the sentient ones) but doesn't go into the Whys and Hows like the book does. Wicked and its sequel are much grittier, much darker. At times they feel like political commentary. I loved them.
Wicked is the story of Elphaba, Oz's Wicked Witch of the West. Her story tells us about her birth, her childhood, her school years, and how she eventually came to be the Wicked Witch of the West. Throughout the course of the book we meet Glinda, the Good Witch (and Elphaba's college roommate), the Wicked Witch's flying monkeys, and the Wizard of Oz. The Wicked Witch, unsurprisingly, is not as evil as she's painted to be. Her sister, though...I might not call her wicked, but dictatorial? Yes. Wicked also introduces Liir, Elphaba's son. His story is the sequel, Son of a Witch.
In Son of a Witch, we watch Liir try to decide who he is and what he wants to do with his life. Is he really Elphaba's son? What does that mean for his future? Should he take up her mantle and her responsibilities? So many people seem to think it's his duty to do so, but he's not Elphaba. She never confided her dreams and goals to him, so he doesn't even really know what those duties are, much less if he wants to take them up. Son of a Witch is really the story of an identity crisis, but it's an identity crisis with the added pressure of entire tribes and races of peoples looking to Liir for help, or guidance, or simply answers that he does not have.
I very much enjoyed both books, and I'm excited to find out there are two more in the series. I definitely had some unanswered questions at the end of Son of a Witch, and was disappointed when I thought that was the end. I also plan to look up the author's other, similar books - Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister (Cinderella), Mirror Mirror (Snow White), and many others not based on fairy tales. Or recognizable fairy tales, anyway.
Reading these two books has also made me want to re-read the Oz series - I read most of them years ago in middle school, but I think I may try to grab them from the library again. Oz is such an interesting world, and re-reading them after reading The Wicked Years might shine a whole new light on them.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Wicked is the story of Elphaba, Oz's Wicked Witch of the West. Her story tells us about her birth, her childhood, her school years, and how she eventually came to be the Wicked Witch of the West. Throughout the course of the book we meet Glinda, the Good Witch (and Elphaba's college roommate), the Wicked Witch's flying monkeys, and the Wizard of Oz. The Wicked Witch, unsurprisingly, is not as evil as she's painted to be. Her sister, though...I might not call her wicked, but dictatorial? Yes. Wicked also introduces Liir, Elphaba's son. His story is the sequel, Son of a Witch.
In Son of a Witch, we watch Liir try to decide who he is and what he wants to do with his life. Is he really Elphaba's son? What does that mean for his future? Should he take up her mantle and her responsibilities? So many people seem to think it's his duty to do so, but he's not Elphaba. She never confided her dreams and goals to him, so he doesn't even really know what those duties are, much less if he wants to take them up. Son of a Witch is really the story of an identity crisis, but it's an identity crisis with the added pressure of entire tribes and races of peoples looking to Liir for help, or guidance, or simply answers that he does not have.
I very much enjoyed both books, and I'm excited to find out there are two more in the series. I definitely had some unanswered questions at the end of Son of a Witch, and was disappointed when I thought that was the end. I also plan to look up the author's other, similar books - Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister (Cinderella), Mirror Mirror (Snow White), and many others not based on fairy tales. Or recognizable fairy tales, anyway.
Reading these two books has also made me want to re-read the Oz series - I read most of them years ago in middle school, but I think I may try to grab them from the library again. Oz is such an interesting world, and re-reading them after reading The Wicked Years might shine a whole new light on them.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Wicked in Books
Apr 16, 2018
I saw the musical version of Wicked two or three years ago, and ADORED it. I'd been wanting to pick up this book for sometime, and finally found both it and the sequel at my local library. (I just learned there are two more books, A Lion Among Men and Out of Oz, so I'll be requesting those from the library soon!) I started the book knowing, from other reviewers, that it was very different from the musical. Unlike most of the reviews I read, that didn't make me not like it. Quite the contrary. I loved seeing the politics and social unrest hidden behind the scenes. The musical hints at the pogroms against Animals (the sentient ones) but doesn't go into the Whys and Hows like the book does. Wicked and its sequel are much grittier, much darker. At times they feel like political commentary. I loved them.
Wicked is the story of Elphaba, Oz's Wicked Witch of the West. Her story tells us about her birth, her childhood, her school years, and how she eventually came to be the Wicked Witch of the West. Throughout the course of the book we meet Glinda, the Good Witch (and Elphaba's college roommate), the Wicked Witch's flying monkeys, and the Wizard of Oz. The Wicked Witch, unsurprisingly, is not as evil as she's painted to be. Her sister, though...I might not call her wicked, but dictatorial? Yes. Wicked also introduces Liir, Elphaba's son. His story is the sequel, Son of a Witch.
In Son of a Witch, we watch Liir try to decide who he is and what he wants to do with his life. Is he really Elphaba's son? What does that mean for his future? Should he take up her mantle and her responsibilities? So many people seem to think it's his duty to do so, but he's not Elphaba. She never confided her dreams and goals to him, so he doesn't even really know what those duties are, much less if he wants to take them up. Son of a Witch is really the story of an identity crisis, but it's an identity crisis with the added pressure of entire tribes and races of peoples looking to Liir for help, or guidance, or simply answers that he does not have.
I very much enjoyed both books, and I'm excited to find out there are two more in the series. I definitely had some unanswered questions at the end of Son of a Witch, and was disappointed when I thought that was the end. I also plan to look up the author's other, similar books - Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister (Cinderella), Mirror Mirror (Snow White), and many others not based on fairy tales. Or recognizable fairy tales, anyway.
Reading these two books has also made me want to re-read the Oz series - I read most of them years ago in middle school, but I think I may try to grab them from the library again. Oz is such an interesting world, and re-reading them after reading The Wicked Years might shine a whole new light on them.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Wicked is the story of Elphaba, Oz's Wicked Witch of the West. Her story tells us about her birth, her childhood, her school years, and how she eventually came to be the Wicked Witch of the West. Throughout the course of the book we meet Glinda, the Good Witch (and Elphaba's college roommate), the Wicked Witch's flying monkeys, and the Wizard of Oz. The Wicked Witch, unsurprisingly, is not as evil as she's painted to be. Her sister, though...I might not call her wicked, but dictatorial? Yes. Wicked also introduces Liir, Elphaba's son. His story is the sequel, Son of a Witch.
In Son of a Witch, we watch Liir try to decide who he is and what he wants to do with his life. Is he really Elphaba's son? What does that mean for his future? Should he take up her mantle and her responsibilities? So many people seem to think it's his duty to do so, but he's not Elphaba. She never confided her dreams and goals to him, so he doesn't even really know what those duties are, much less if he wants to take them up. Son of a Witch is really the story of an identity crisis, but it's an identity crisis with the added pressure of entire tribes and races of peoples looking to Liir for help, or guidance, or simply answers that he does not have.
I very much enjoyed both books, and I'm excited to find out there are two more in the series. I definitely had some unanswered questions at the end of Son of a Witch, and was disappointed when I thought that was the end. I also plan to look up the author's other, similar books - Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister (Cinderella), Mirror Mirror (Snow White), and many others not based on fairy tales. Or recognizable fairy tales, anyway.
Reading these two books has also made me want to re-read the Oz series - I read most of them years ago in middle school, but I think I may try to grab them from the library again. Oz is such an interesting world, and re-reading them after reading The Wicked Years might shine a whole new light on them.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com