Search
Search results
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Alita: Battle Angel (2019) in Movies
May 26, 2020 (Updated Jun 18, 2020)
Alita: Battle Angel is great. Is there a good helping of sci-fi dumbfuckery to be found? Of course. But the positives far outweigh any negatives in this instance.
Based on a Manga series and subsequent Anime from the early nineties, Alita brings the signature Japanese comic style to life in style, as a whole heap of (mostly) decent digital effects collides with real-life.
The world of A:BA is really well realised, with the film taking place in the 26th Century, a future that sees man and cyborg live side by side. The plot takes place in The Iron City on the ground, eclipsed by the floating city of Zalem above. It's a striking aesthetic that reminded me of something from a Final Fantasy game. The main narrative follows Dr. Ido (Christoph Waltz) who finds the remains of a deactivated cyborg in a trash heap. He gives the cyborg a new body and a new life, and gives her the name Alita. She has no memory of who she was before, but as she begins to explore the world, her memories slowly return. Alita (Rosa Salazar) is a stupidly likable protagonist. She's a fiery, lethal weapon who has a child like innocence. The motion capture combined with Salazar's performance work really well. In fact, the whole cast is great. Christoph Waltz, Mahershala Ali, Jennifer Connelly, Jackie Earl-Hailey - it's a stellar line up. The only cast member I couldn't get on with was Hugo (Keean Johnson) who mainly serves as Alita's love interest. I didn't particularly like his character and as a result didn't fully buy their romance side plot.
The main issue I had was the pacing. The plot is trying to pack so much into 2 hours, that it moved forward at breakneck speed at times. Some plot points become a bit lost in the whole thing, and a few of the characters seemed inconsequential as a result.
It does go a bit CGI overload at times but that's to be expected by the very nature of what A:BA is. The effects on some of the other cyborg characters are ropey as well, but honestly, these are small gripes against a film that I found myself really enjoying.
I sincerely hope a sequel gets green lit as I for one want more of this world to be explored.
Based on a Manga series and subsequent Anime from the early nineties, Alita brings the signature Japanese comic style to life in style, as a whole heap of (mostly) decent digital effects collides with real-life.
The world of A:BA is really well realised, with the film taking place in the 26th Century, a future that sees man and cyborg live side by side. The plot takes place in The Iron City on the ground, eclipsed by the floating city of Zalem above. It's a striking aesthetic that reminded me of something from a Final Fantasy game. The main narrative follows Dr. Ido (Christoph Waltz) who finds the remains of a deactivated cyborg in a trash heap. He gives the cyborg a new body and a new life, and gives her the name Alita. She has no memory of who she was before, but as she begins to explore the world, her memories slowly return. Alita (Rosa Salazar) is a stupidly likable protagonist. She's a fiery, lethal weapon who has a child like innocence. The motion capture combined with Salazar's performance work really well. In fact, the whole cast is great. Christoph Waltz, Mahershala Ali, Jennifer Connelly, Jackie Earl-Hailey - it's a stellar line up. The only cast member I couldn't get on with was Hugo (Keean Johnson) who mainly serves as Alita's love interest. I didn't particularly like his character and as a result didn't fully buy their romance side plot.
The main issue I had was the pacing. The plot is trying to pack so much into 2 hours, that it moved forward at breakneck speed at times. Some plot points become a bit lost in the whole thing, and a few of the characters seemed inconsequential as a result.
It does go a bit CGI overload at times but that's to be expected by the very nature of what A:BA is. The effects on some of the other cyborg characters are ropey as well, but honestly, these are small gripes against a film that I found myself really enjoying.
I sincerely hope a sequel gets green lit as I for one want more of this world to be explored.
Frosthaven
9.0
Rate It
Tabletop Game
Frosthaven is the story of a small outpost far to the north of the capital city of White Oak, an...
Where's My Water? 2
Games and Entertainment
App
Get ready to join Swampy, Allie, and Cranky on their NEXT exciting adventure! The sequel to the...
Draw a Stickman: EPIC 2
Games and Entertainment
App
** Winner of 5 Webby Awards - Draw a Stickman Franchise ** ** Played over 100 Million Times around...
Lola Panda’s Math Train 2 – Learn Counting, Addition, and Subtraction with Lola!
Games and Education
App
Lola is back for even more math train adventures in Lola’s Math Train 2! Even more challenging...
Nighty Night Circus - bedtime story for kids
Education and Book
App
“Nighty Night Circus“ is the sequel to the most popular bedtime app of all time, Apple App of...
On the Bright Side, I'm Now the Girlfriend of a Sex God (Confessions of Georgia Nicolson #2)
8.0
Rate It
Book
You don't have to be a teenager to appreciate the humorous and often self-absorbed ravings found in...
TheFiend13420 (21 KP) rated Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022) in Movies
Jun 2, 2022
Some inventive chainsaw massacr...ing (2 more)
Excellent Work by Leatherface Actor Mark Burnham
The Fucking Bus....
It's About Freaking Time!!!!!
Contains spoilers, click to show
I always go into a Chainsaw Massacre movie with as open of a mind as I can. Knowing full well, that the last few entries haven't been up to par.
Netflix....you beautiful bastards you...
From beginning to end, this film kept me going. I sat, literally on the edge of my chair the entire time. Waiting to see what this big, Momma face wearing Slasher would do next.
The first kill nearly made me spit out my Coke. I wasn't expecting such ferocity of the hop.
The writers making this a true after the first film sequel, did everything right in my book.
The cast, minus the lead, Sarah Yarkin, were not your basic, run into the basement kind of kids that have been cannon fodder for good ol' Leatherface in the past. They seemed as logical as they could for a bunch of 20 somethings fending off a once dormant serial killer, who has been woken by the death of his 'Mother'.
Yarkin, who was playing main character Melody, seemed to try and grasp hold of the Scream Queen crown left behind by prior Chainsaw Final Girls Marilyn Burns and Jessica Biel, but failed miserably. She is the one thing out of this movie that I just couldn't get in to.
And, I will admit. That ending. While waiting for the basic good old jump scare. I sat, clenching the sides of the chair I was in, waiting anxiously for it to come. And when it finally did. It did not disappoint.
Look out for a stand out preformance by Olwen Fouere, who plays the role of Sally Hardesty. The lone survivor of the original 1974 film. As well as Mark Burnham as Leatherface and Elsie Fisher as Lila, Mel's sister, and a survivor in her own right.
Texas Chainsaw Massacre was one of the first films in the horror genre that I ever seen. Leatherface will always hold a special place in my Dark little heart. And after some clusterfuck films in the series. It's nice to have one strike a chord and make me want more.
Netflix....you beautiful bastards you...
From beginning to end, this film kept me going. I sat, literally on the edge of my chair the entire time. Waiting to see what this big, Momma face wearing Slasher would do next.
The first kill nearly made me spit out my Coke. I wasn't expecting such ferocity of the hop.
The writers making this a true after the first film sequel, did everything right in my book.
The cast, minus the lead, Sarah Yarkin, were not your basic, run into the basement kind of kids that have been cannon fodder for good ol' Leatherface in the past. They seemed as logical as they could for a bunch of 20 somethings fending off a once dormant serial killer, who has been woken by the death of his 'Mother'.
Yarkin, who was playing main character Melody, seemed to try and grasp hold of the Scream Queen crown left behind by prior Chainsaw Final Girls Marilyn Burns and Jessica Biel, but failed miserably. She is the one thing out of this movie that I just couldn't get in to.
And, I will admit. That ending. While waiting for the basic good old jump scare. I sat, clenching the sides of the chair I was in, waiting anxiously for it to come. And when it finally did. It did not disappoint.
Look out for a stand out preformance by Olwen Fouere, who plays the role of Sally Hardesty. The lone survivor of the original 1974 film. As well as Mark Burnham as Leatherface and Elsie Fisher as Lila, Mel's sister, and a survivor in her own right.
Texas Chainsaw Massacre was one of the first films in the horror genre that I ever seen. Leatherface will always hold a special place in my Dark little heart. And after some clusterfuck films in the series. It's nice to have one strike a chord and make me want more.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) in Movies
May 11, 2022
I've taken a few days since seeing Multiverse of Madness to try and digest it as a whole, and decide how I felt about it. It's certainly wild, and leaves a hefty impression. My initial reservations stem from a couple of elements. Firstly, due to the nature of the multiverse, there are some big set pieces and character moments that feel a bit inconsequential. I hope that future projects might reveist these moments and the subsequent fallout from them, but I've got a sneaky feeling that might not happen. Secondly, there's a massive plot point that drives the entire movie that feels a little unearned, even if the execution packs a hell of a punch.
Overall though, I feel that these are minor detriments to what is a spectacular, and comic-book-as-fuck MCU entry, an entry that carries a unique signature, thanks in no small part to its director. It's no secret that I'm a big ol' Sam Raimi fan, and the entirety of MoM feels like a film straight from his mind. Sure, it has the standard Marvel Studios template, but his style shines through with little effort. There are definitely some moments that feel like a gateway horror flick, and even a bit of splatter that you might not expect from an MCU movie. There's even a few Evil Dead references chucked in for good measure.
It terms of wider connections, there's a lot goinh on here. The narrative does a lot to establish Dr Strange as a major player going forward, and introduces a great deep cut from the comics in America Chavez, another character that would fit right in with a Young Avenger film that is surely not too far off. It's also the first theater release to really feel impacted by the Disney+ shows, essentially acting as not just a sequel to Doctor Strange and No Way Home, but to WandaVision as well. On that note, Elizabeth Olsen all but steals the show here, and it's quite glorious. Elsewhere, the multiverse ensures that there are some crazy set pieces, and some fun cameos that will surely have fans talking and speculating for quite some time.
If nothing else, MoM is an incredibly fun Sam Raimi film, and a solid entry into the wider MCU, and I'm happy with that result.
Overall though, I feel that these are minor detriments to what is a spectacular, and comic-book-as-fuck MCU entry, an entry that carries a unique signature, thanks in no small part to its director. It's no secret that I'm a big ol' Sam Raimi fan, and the entirety of MoM feels like a film straight from his mind. Sure, it has the standard Marvel Studios template, but his style shines through with little effort. There are definitely some moments that feel like a gateway horror flick, and even a bit of splatter that you might not expect from an MCU movie. There's even a few Evil Dead references chucked in for good measure.
It terms of wider connections, there's a lot goinh on here. The narrative does a lot to establish Dr Strange as a major player going forward, and introduces a great deep cut from the comics in America Chavez, another character that would fit right in with a Young Avenger film that is surely not too far off. It's also the first theater release to really feel impacted by the Disney+ shows, essentially acting as not just a sequel to Doctor Strange and No Way Home, but to WandaVision as well. On that note, Elizabeth Olsen all but steals the show here, and it's quite glorious. Elsewhere, the multiverse ensures that there are some crazy set pieces, and some fun cameos that will surely have fans talking and speculating for quite some time.
If nothing else, MoM is an incredibly fun Sam Raimi film, and a solid entry into the wider MCU, and I'm happy with that result.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Artemis Fowl (2020) in Movies
Jun 13, 2020
Disney: "We're making a film of Artemis Fowl!"
Me: *wildly switches from happiness to devastation about the possibilities*
Artemis Fowl's father, Artemis Fowl Snr., has gone missing, the media is portraying him as a criminal and calling for answers. Shocked and confused by what's happening Artemis Jnr. receives a phone call from his father's kidnapper and must hand over an item to secure his release. But he's no idea what the item is, or where, he's about to learn a great deal about fantastical things in a very short space of time and meet an odd selection of new friends.
So... I'm going to break this down into two parts, the first bit will be just about the film and the second will be me ranting about the film in conjunction with the book... *calm thoughts* Let us begin.
From the very beginning I was thrown, the opening in no way seems like a family film and I was wondering if by avoiding reading about it all beforehand that I'd got the wrong idea about what to expect.
With such a good cast backing up our newcomers I had medium hopes for what was going to hit our screens...
Ferdia Shaw takes on the part of Artemis Fowl Jnr., putting aside the comparison between the two versions until later, the performance isn't bad but it's quite forgettable. The same sadly goes for Lara McDonnell as Holly Short. Neither one has much of a presence on screen and I think that's mostly to do with the fact that Artemis and Holly are both rather bland in the whole story.
There's something oddly appealing about Josh Gad as Mulch but I'm not sure that giving him such a large role as narrator worked. It's never really clear why he's given that role and the scene's where we cut back to him talking are given a strange noir look that doesn't match with the rest of the film. Even so, I'm willing to concede that he's my favourite character as he has just enough humour to carry it.
Judi Dench as Commander Root was a little bit of a challenge to see. Root is a gruff but caring character, the trouble come in the fact that the change comes quite unnaturally at times.
One of the main failings is that there are times when the script feels poor, the dialogue is a little forced and doesn't fit with the characters, couple that with a variety of scenes that don't fit with the style of everything else and the fact that some pieces could be removed without really affecting anything around it and I'm left less than inspired by the film.
I did like the look of Haven City, the animation of the overhead view looked really promising. As we got into the city though I couldn't help but think it looked a little cheap and the aesthetic wasn't great. Effects, in general, were not good if I'm honest, particularly when you get to the siege on Fowl manor, when the siege is ending it comes with some chaos that is a perfect example of this coupled with another example of how the story glosses over an explanation of what's happening that could have offered some extra development for characters. (Specifically in this instance, Foley, who was woefully underused. He might not have been as majestic as a Brosnan centaur but he deserved better than the film gave him.)
By the end a lot of things get resolved seemingly by fairy magic because it's not clear how any of it happens. Potentially it's something that I wouldn't have noticed as there's a certain amount of this kind of wrapping up that you can forgive, but by this point I was so frustrated by everything that I was spotting everything.
I'm aware I'm waffling more than I intended so let me "briefly" mention things regarding the book...
The film is, in my opinion, only vaguely based on the book. It has kept ideas and pieces of story while removing and adding characters to varying degrees. Notably Artemis' mother is gone and his father is there instead. Removing mum makes Juliet's inclusion surplus to requirements, I can understand wanting to keep her for a young female character for viewers to identify with, but the role she ends up with is bland and in no way lives up to the book's version. The blandness also extends to her brother, Butler, and that's partly because of the major change they made...
Artemis. He is barely recognisable in comparison. He's a jeans-wearing, surfing, tween? He's much more casual than the original and this fluffier version doesn't have the same edge that book Artemis does. In their revamp they have changed his story and I very quickly felt like it could have been a sequel to the books, Artemis Snr. felt more like the Artemis from the books grown up and he was teaching his son about all the things he learnt. Part of the thing I enjoyed about the books is that Artemis was always an anti-hero of sorts, he was very difficult to like at times because of his actions, film Artemis is a little bit jumbled in this respect as they give him a very clear reason for the things he does so when he tries to show that tough side it doesn't have any impact.
There are a lot of differences, but I will leave that analysis for someone who is much more thorough at scouring the books and film than I am. I'll be keeping my eye out for other reviews with the comparisons in, if you spot any then please leave a link in the comments below.
When it came to scoring this I thought about it on two levels.
As a film from such a big company I was quite shocked by the quality of script and effects, there was a baddie that didn't really participate in anything and there were scenes and characters which weren't needed... and to finish it off in such an obvious set up for a sequel... I was done. I had marked it down for a generous score of 2 stars, that's normally my "I didn't like it but I can see why other people might" score, but I can't quite see what would appeal to people in it if I'm honest.
As an adaptation of the book I was too frustrated by the changes they made to Artemis, they essentially changed the fundamentals of the character and that had a knock-on effect to other characters as well. No one came out unscathed, but even though Mulch was heavily adapted I was glad that some of his humour was still there. Scoring on this basis I would have given it 1 star, but again, that felt generous to me.
In the end I will always score something on my enjoyment, in this instance it seems fair to even out the two scores. They've taken a great book and removed most of its personality, the final product was not exciting to watch and I don't think I could bring myself to watch a sequel.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/artemis-fowl-movie-review.html
Me: *wildly switches from happiness to devastation about the possibilities*
Artemis Fowl's father, Artemis Fowl Snr., has gone missing, the media is portraying him as a criminal and calling for answers. Shocked and confused by what's happening Artemis Jnr. receives a phone call from his father's kidnapper and must hand over an item to secure his release. But he's no idea what the item is, or where, he's about to learn a great deal about fantastical things in a very short space of time and meet an odd selection of new friends.
So... I'm going to break this down into two parts, the first bit will be just about the film and the second will be me ranting about the film in conjunction with the book... *calm thoughts* Let us begin.
From the very beginning I was thrown, the opening in no way seems like a family film and I was wondering if by avoiding reading about it all beforehand that I'd got the wrong idea about what to expect.
With such a good cast backing up our newcomers I had medium hopes for what was going to hit our screens...
Ferdia Shaw takes on the part of Artemis Fowl Jnr., putting aside the comparison between the two versions until later, the performance isn't bad but it's quite forgettable. The same sadly goes for Lara McDonnell as Holly Short. Neither one has much of a presence on screen and I think that's mostly to do with the fact that Artemis and Holly are both rather bland in the whole story.
There's something oddly appealing about Josh Gad as Mulch but I'm not sure that giving him such a large role as narrator worked. It's never really clear why he's given that role and the scene's where we cut back to him talking are given a strange noir look that doesn't match with the rest of the film. Even so, I'm willing to concede that he's my favourite character as he has just enough humour to carry it.
Judi Dench as Commander Root was a little bit of a challenge to see. Root is a gruff but caring character, the trouble come in the fact that the change comes quite unnaturally at times.
One of the main failings is that there are times when the script feels poor, the dialogue is a little forced and doesn't fit with the characters, couple that with a variety of scenes that don't fit with the style of everything else and the fact that some pieces could be removed without really affecting anything around it and I'm left less than inspired by the film.
I did like the look of Haven City, the animation of the overhead view looked really promising. As we got into the city though I couldn't help but think it looked a little cheap and the aesthetic wasn't great. Effects, in general, were not good if I'm honest, particularly when you get to the siege on Fowl manor, when the siege is ending it comes with some chaos that is a perfect example of this coupled with another example of how the story glosses over an explanation of what's happening that could have offered some extra development for characters. (Specifically in this instance, Foley, who was woefully underused. He might not have been as majestic as a Brosnan centaur but he deserved better than the film gave him.)
By the end a lot of things get resolved seemingly by fairy magic because it's not clear how any of it happens. Potentially it's something that I wouldn't have noticed as there's a certain amount of this kind of wrapping up that you can forgive, but by this point I was so frustrated by everything that I was spotting everything.
I'm aware I'm waffling more than I intended so let me "briefly" mention things regarding the book...
The film is, in my opinion, only vaguely based on the book. It has kept ideas and pieces of story while removing and adding characters to varying degrees. Notably Artemis' mother is gone and his father is there instead. Removing mum makes Juliet's inclusion surplus to requirements, I can understand wanting to keep her for a young female character for viewers to identify with, but the role she ends up with is bland and in no way lives up to the book's version. The blandness also extends to her brother, Butler, and that's partly because of the major change they made...
Artemis. He is barely recognisable in comparison. He's a jeans-wearing, surfing, tween? He's much more casual than the original and this fluffier version doesn't have the same edge that book Artemis does. In their revamp they have changed his story and I very quickly felt like it could have been a sequel to the books, Artemis Snr. felt more like the Artemis from the books grown up and he was teaching his son about all the things he learnt. Part of the thing I enjoyed about the books is that Artemis was always an anti-hero of sorts, he was very difficult to like at times because of his actions, film Artemis is a little bit jumbled in this respect as they give him a very clear reason for the things he does so when he tries to show that tough side it doesn't have any impact.
There are a lot of differences, but I will leave that analysis for someone who is much more thorough at scouring the books and film than I am. I'll be keeping my eye out for other reviews with the comparisons in, if you spot any then please leave a link in the comments below.
When it came to scoring this I thought about it on two levels.
As a film from such a big company I was quite shocked by the quality of script and effects, there was a baddie that didn't really participate in anything and there were scenes and characters which weren't needed... and to finish it off in such an obvious set up for a sequel... I was done. I had marked it down for a generous score of 2 stars, that's normally my "I didn't like it but I can see why other people might" score, but I can't quite see what would appeal to people in it if I'm honest.
As an adaptation of the book I was too frustrated by the changes they made to Artemis, they essentially changed the fundamentals of the character and that had a knock-on effect to other characters as well. No one came out unscathed, but even though Mulch was heavily adapted I was glad that some of his humour was still there. Scoring on this basis I would have given it 1 star, but again, that felt generous to me.
In the end I will always score something on my enjoyment, in this instance it seems fair to even out the two scores. They've taken a great book and removed most of its personality, the final product was not exciting to watch and I don't think I could bring myself to watch a sequel.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/artemis-fowl-movie-review.html