Search
Search results
Kevin Phillipson (10072 KP) rated Day Shift (2022) in Movies
Aug 25, 2022
Jamie foxx (1 more)
Dave Franco
Watched on Netflix and it’s rather amusing the vampires are great especially the look of the vampires and the way they move especially with their feet u have to watch this movie to believe it. Also let’s talk about Jamie foxx as a vampire hunter made me laugh at his scenes with Dave Franco has the potential for a sequel like too see more snoop dogg especially
Kevin Phillipson (10072 KP) rated Sing 2 (2021) in Movies
Feb 1, 2022
Buster moon (2 more)
The songs
Clay calloway
Out of this world
What a movie there are plenty of good songs which I was tempted to sing along and many likeable characters like buster moon and others why I hadn't seen the first movie before the sequel maybe I should check it sometime but what sold the movie for me was out of this world the big stage musical at the end
Kevin Phillipson (10072 KP) rated Love and Monsters (2021) in Movies
Mar 31, 2022
Dylan o' Brien (1 more)
Michael rooker
Watched last night the movie reminds me alot of the zombieland movies but instead of zombies giant mutated inscets and other creatures cause I liked the zombieland movies I liked this movie and the fact u got Michael rooker who's been things like the walking dead it works could have done with abit more rooker but overall decent movie left it open for a sequel
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Paranormal Activity (2007) in Movies
Oct 28, 2019 (Updated Jan 27, 2020)
The Found-Footage Rebirth
After the huge sucess of the blair witch project, Paramount pitcures and blumhouse decided many years later to rebirth the found-footage movies. And this result was this and so many god damn sequels later.
Here's how confusing the timeline is and how many sequels this movie has...
The film is the first (chronologically, the third) entry in the Paranormal Activity film series. A parallel sequel and prequel, Paranormal Activity 2, was released in 2010. The success of the first two films would spawn additional films in the series: the prequel Paranormal Activity 3 in 2011, and Paranormal Activity 4 (the sequel to the second installment) in 2012. The fifth installment, The Marked Ones, was released in 2014, and the sixth installment, The Ghost Dimension, was released in 2015.
So really this is the third movie in the franchise, but it came out first, than a prequel/sequel with the 2nd one, than the prequel with the 3d one, than the sequel to the 2nd one which is actually the 4th movie. Makes any sense, no!!!!! Confusing fuck yes!!!!!
Anyways the plot: Soon after moving into a suburban tract home, Katie (Katie Featherston) and Micah (Micah Sloat) become increasingly disturbed by what appears to be a supernatural presence. Hoping to capture evidence of it on film, they set up video cameras in the house but are not prepared for the terrifying events that follow.
Its very slow, its not that scary, nothing really happens, just people watching footage on a computer, repeat that couple of times, make sure who ever is holding the camera make it shake and out of focus. Also Cameras!!!!! So Many Cameras.
This movie was so overhyped and in the end that was its downfall. That and not being actaully really scary. Makes this film, really not good.
Lastly shout out to @Sarah for getting the hints/clues for this movie correct.
Here's how confusing the timeline is and how many sequels this movie has...
The film is the first (chronologically, the third) entry in the Paranormal Activity film series. A parallel sequel and prequel, Paranormal Activity 2, was released in 2010. The success of the first two films would spawn additional films in the series: the prequel Paranormal Activity 3 in 2011, and Paranormal Activity 4 (the sequel to the second installment) in 2012. The fifth installment, The Marked Ones, was released in 2014, and the sixth installment, The Ghost Dimension, was released in 2015.
So really this is the third movie in the franchise, but it came out first, than a prequel/sequel with the 2nd one, than the prequel with the 3d one, than the sequel to the 2nd one which is actually the 4th movie. Makes any sense, no!!!!! Confusing fuck yes!!!!!
Anyways the plot: Soon after moving into a suburban tract home, Katie (Katie Featherston) and Micah (Micah Sloat) become increasingly disturbed by what appears to be a supernatural presence. Hoping to capture evidence of it on film, they set up video cameras in the house but are not prepared for the terrifying events that follow.
Its very slow, its not that scary, nothing really happens, just people watching footage on a computer, repeat that couple of times, make sure who ever is holding the camera make it shake and out of focus. Also Cameras!!!!! So Many Cameras.
This movie was so overhyped and in the end that was its downfall. That and not being actaully really scary. Makes this film, really not good.
Lastly shout out to @Sarah for getting the hints/clues for this movie correct.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Halloween II (1981) in Movies
Mar 5, 2021
There's a fair amount to love about Halloween II, a sequel set on the same night as the original, immediately following that films ending.
For instance, I can admire the style that director Rick Rosenthal was going for, attempting to make his sequel feel as much like the first film as possible, the idea being that you could watch both back to back.
There a few creepy shots here and there. One that really sticks is the shot of Michael in the darkness just before the poor nurse get killed with a syringe. Another is Michael on the CCTV when he first enters the hospital. Another is when Laurie see Michael across the parking lot underneath a red light. and then there's Michael with blood running out of the eye holes in his mask, followed by him walking out of that one room completely ablaze. It's all to do with Michael then! Once again, this movie showcases how his straightforward design is striking and rightly iconic.
It's nice to see Jamie Lee Curtis back as Laurie, and Donald Pleasance back as Loomis. All in all, it does truly feel like a sequel, but there's something missing.
The original is one of my favourite horrors ever made, and Halloween II, despite its positives, just fails to capture the same essence. This is partly to do with the script. It feels like a lot of the actors were just told to ad lib all their lines or something. The tension building scenes go on for a little too long also, ironically voiding a few scenes of said tension. It's feels like the first film in everything but execution pretty much.
It's a heavily flawed sequel, but it's still a decent watch, and is certainly one of the better sequels in this long running series. It deserves credit for the bit near the beginning where Loomis shouts "you don't know what death is!" before the synth heavy version of the theme tune kicks in, that was badass.
For instance, I can admire the style that director Rick Rosenthal was going for, attempting to make his sequel feel as much like the first film as possible, the idea being that you could watch both back to back.
There a few creepy shots here and there. One that really sticks is the shot of Michael in the darkness just before the poor nurse get killed with a syringe. Another is Michael on the CCTV when he first enters the hospital. Another is when Laurie see Michael across the parking lot underneath a red light. and then there's Michael with blood running out of the eye holes in his mask, followed by him walking out of that one room completely ablaze. It's all to do with Michael then! Once again, this movie showcases how his straightforward design is striking and rightly iconic.
It's nice to see Jamie Lee Curtis back as Laurie, and Donald Pleasance back as Loomis. All in all, it does truly feel like a sequel, but there's something missing.
The original is one of my favourite horrors ever made, and Halloween II, despite its positives, just fails to capture the same essence. This is partly to do with the script. It feels like a lot of the actors were just told to ad lib all their lines or something. The tension building scenes go on for a little too long also, ironically voiding a few scenes of said tension. It's feels like the first film in everything but execution pretty much.
It's a heavily flawed sequel, but it's still a decent watch, and is certainly one of the better sequels in this long running series. It deserves credit for the bit near the beginning where Loomis shouts "you don't know what death is!" before the synth heavy version of the theme tune kicks in, that was badass.
Sarah (7799 KP) rated Strangers: Prey at Night (2018) in Movies
Dec 26, 2018 (Updated Aug 19, 2020)
An unnecessary sequel
Yet again this is another sequel that was entirely unneeded and unnecessary. Whilst the original wasn’t brilliant or a classic, it was at least very creepy and bleak, and the ending was quite interesting and what i found the scariest thing of all about the entire film.
Sadly this sequel fails because it mostly ruins the ending of the first film. It’s initially more of the same but set in a trailer park, with characters who make some very dodgy decisions that wind up getting them hurt/killed. It’s quite bloody and gory at least, and still kind of creepy, and it has a killer soundtrack. The two kids do fairly well, and as with Hard Times at the El Royale, Lewis Pullman really shines and he makes this worth sticking with. The ending however is a little lacklustre and is just your typical horror movie ending. It wasn’t unusual or creepy and bleak like the original, and this is such a shame. Had they improved the ending, I may have rated this a little higher.
Edit 19th Aug 2020:
Having just rewatched the original, I has to return and rate this higher. Not only does it have the killer soundtrack it has some great performances and is a lot more entertaining than the original. There's still a lot of stupidity in this, but it's definitely the better of the 2 films.
Sadly this sequel fails because it mostly ruins the ending of the first film. It’s initially more of the same but set in a trailer park, with characters who make some very dodgy decisions that wind up getting them hurt/killed. It’s quite bloody and gory at least, and still kind of creepy, and it has a killer soundtrack. The two kids do fairly well, and as with Hard Times at the El Royale, Lewis Pullman really shines and he makes this worth sticking with. The ending however is a little lacklustre and is just your typical horror movie ending. It wasn’t unusual or creepy and bleak like the original, and this is such a shame. Had they improved the ending, I may have rated this a little higher.
Edit 19th Aug 2020:
Having just rewatched the original, I has to return and rate this higher. Not only does it have the killer soundtrack it has some great performances and is a lot more entertaining than the original. There's still a lot of stupidity in this, but it's definitely the better of the 2 films.
Sarah (7799 KP) rated The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part (2019) in Movies
Dec 31, 2019
An average sequel
The original Lego movie (and the Lego Batman film) were surprisingly great films, so it's no surprise they decided to make a sequel. Sadly it's also no surprise that the sequel only ends up fairly average.
It looks visually stunning, and I loved how they've tied this in more with the real world. I think it's quite smart how they've managed to link the characters to the real life toys. The problem is the story itself is rather lacklustre and a little all over the place, and most of the jokes fall flat. There was only 1 or 2 things I laughed at during the entire film, which is a shame as the original and Batman film were downright hilarious. Even the music is pretty dull. There's no song that really matches up to the brilliant Everything is Awesome and the ones that almost do are the remix versions of that song. Although I did love the Lonely Island song over the credits. There's a great voice cast in this too, to the point where I spend most of the film trying to figure out who's who. But there are some who sound a little out of place - Richard Ayoade and Noel Fielding to name a couple. And also what was with Will Ferrell? He barely featured in this at all apparent from being a voice from another room, rather odd!
It looks visually stunning, and I loved how they've tied this in more with the real world. I think it's quite smart how they've managed to link the characters to the real life toys. The problem is the story itself is rather lacklustre and a little all over the place, and most of the jokes fall flat. There was only 1 or 2 things I laughed at during the entire film, which is a shame as the original and Batman film were downright hilarious. Even the music is pretty dull. There's no song that really matches up to the brilliant Everything is Awesome and the ones that almost do are the remix versions of that song. Although I did love the Lonely Island song over the credits. There's a great voice cast in this too, to the point where I spend most of the film trying to figure out who's who. But there are some who sound a little out of place - Richard Ayoade and Noel Fielding to name a couple. And also what was with Will Ferrell? He barely featured in this at all apparent from being a voice from another room, rather odd!
Chris Columbus recommended Saturday Night Fever (1977) in Movies (curated)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Return of the Vampire (1944) in Movies
Oct 17, 2020
Vampire Telsa
The Return of the Vampire- at first I thought it was a sequel to "Mark of the Vampire", but it was not. Second i thought it might be a sequel to "Dracula", than i was like it couldnt be cause ths film was made by Columbia not Univerisal. So what is it than. Its a stand-alone. Its Bela Lugosi playing as a vampire, sound like anethor film? Anyways..
The Plot: In 1918 London, Hungarian vampire Armand Tesla (Bela Lugosi) uses his servant, werewolf Andreas Obry (Matt Willis), to assist in procuring victims. When a friend of Lady Jane Ainsley (Frieda Inescort) becomes Tesla's next victim, Jane and an acquaintance stalk the vampire and kill him by driving a stake through his heart. But 23 years later, a German bomb disturbs Tesla's grave, and cemetery workers restoring the site pull the stake from his corpse, bringing him back to life to seek revenge.
The Return of the Vampire is not an official sequel to Lugosi's 1931 Universal Studios film Dracula, but the film has been interpreted by David J. Skal as an unofficial follow-up with Lugosi's character renamed only because the film was not made by Universal.
Bela Lugosi's scenes were filmed in August and September 1943, prior to his final two Monogram films. This was also the last time he would receive top billing by a major Hollywood studio.
Its a really good film.
The Plot: In 1918 London, Hungarian vampire Armand Tesla (Bela Lugosi) uses his servant, werewolf Andreas Obry (Matt Willis), to assist in procuring victims. When a friend of Lady Jane Ainsley (Frieda Inescort) becomes Tesla's next victim, Jane and an acquaintance stalk the vampire and kill him by driving a stake through his heart. But 23 years later, a German bomb disturbs Tesla's grave, and cemetery workers restoring the site pull the stake from his corpse, bringing him back to life to seek revenge.
The Return of the Vampire is not an official sequel to Lugosi's 1931 Universal Studios film Dracula, but the film has been interpreted by David J. Skal as an unofficial follow-up with Lugosi's character renamed only because the film was not made by Universal.
Bela Lugosi's scenes were filmed in August and September 1943, prior to his final two Monogram films. This was also the last time he would receive top billing by a major Hollywood studio.
Its a really good film.
Marie (1 KP) rated The Incredibles 2 (2018) in Movies
Apr 5, 2019
The animation (2 more)
The plot
Character development
Contains spoilers, click to show
I really enjoyed this sequel that I had been waiting years for. The animation in the original is good but somehow they got even better for the sequel.
The plot was interesting and it was nice to see how the Parrs dealt with life after the events of the first movie. And seeing the kids actually saving the day and taking lead, rather than only helping.
I liked getting to see Helen take a bigger superhero role while getting to see Robert connect with the kids, who had their own normal kid problems not related to powers, mostly (for Violet and Dash at least). And Jack-Jacks powers and interactions with Edna were a delight.
I did not like the bright flashing lights that got the movie the seizure warnings. Just looking at them was painful, causing a headache, and that's without having issues with seizures.
But overall, I really enjoyed this movie.
The plot was interesting and it was nice to see how the Parrs dealt with life after the events of the first movie. And seeing the kids actually saving the day and taking lead, rather than only helping.
I liked getting to see Helen take a bigger superhero role while getting to see Robert connect with the kids, who had their own normal kid problems not related to powers, mostly (for Violet and Dash at least). And Jack-Jacks powers and interactions with Edna were a delight.
I did not like the bright flashing lights that got the movie the seizure warnings. Just looking at them was painful, causing a headache, and that's without having issues with seizures.
But overall, I really enjoyed this movie.