Search
Search results
Dean (6921 KP) rated the Xbox One version of Friday the 13th : The Game in Video Games
Feb 16, 2019 (Updated Feb 16, 2019)
Good graphics (2 more)
Shows the love for the films
Easy to play
So young, so pretty.... Kill them all Jason!
A very good game based on the film franchise that came about via the kickstarter website. You can tell this was created by fans of the franchise, one of the biggest backers is a playable character in the game. The attention to detail is great. I've watched the first 4 films again recently and the layouts for the maps are the same as the films. Little details like the look of the cabins and interiors are true to the films as well.
I've read that Kane Hodder did some motion capture for the Jason character and SFX expert Tom Savini had an input on some of the kills.
The game is simple survive and try to escape as a counsellor or kill them all as Jason. The graphics are good with the moonlight and thunderstorms at night looking realistic. As with the film the music adds great tension, even better on surround sound during the storm!
There are a few offline challenges, closely taken from the film scenarios. Also a virtual cabin which acts as a museum of sorts with details about the films.
There are a couple of flaws, wait times for a lobby can be annoying, quitters, time it takes to level up and unlock some items. Also sometimes getting stuck on scenery when shifting. All these are quite minor though.
Overall you can sense the love and detail that has gone into this game, a great achievement for a crowd funded venture. Time to go camping... Think I'll take this old hockey mask with me.
I've read that Kane Hodder did some motion capture for the Jason character and SFX expert Tom Savini had an input on some of the kills.
The game is simple survive and try to escape as a counsellor or kill them all as Jason. The graphics are good with the moonlight and thunderstorms at night looking realistic. As with the film the music adds great tension, even better on surround sound during the storm!
There are a few offline challenges, closely taken from the film scenarios. Also a virtual cabin which acts as a museum of sorts with details about the films.
There are a couple of flaws, wait times for a lobby can be annoying, quitters, time it takes to level up and unlock some items. Also sometimes getting stuck on scenery when shifting. All these are quite minor though.
Overall you can sense the love and detail that has gone into this game, a great achievement for a crowd funded venture. Time to go camping... Think I'll take this old hockey mask with me.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Overlord (2018) in Movies
Dec 1, 2019
Saving Private Ryan meets Resident Evil!
Had heard mixed reviews on this, but saw it for 4 bucks for Black Friday so I figured I couldn't lose!
Basically, to prevent the Allied forces being massacred on D-Day, US troops are ordered to detonate a Nazi communication tower. A small band of brothers actually makes it to the ground and finds a small French town equipped with a cute French girl and her brother. When a Nazi commander comes calling for more than an interrogation, the surviving troops must decide whether t reveal themselves to save her.
I actually really got into this movie and thought the action mixed with horror was pretty cool. Some of the fight/shootout sequences were cleverly done along with some of the secrets and experiments the Nazis are hiding deep within their stronghold. There are tough decisions and ultimate sacrifices to be made and the film threads the needle between genres successfully. I could see how if you were thinking this was going to be a full out horror film you would be disappointed; however, I had kind of heard a little about it ahead of time so my expectations were redirected.
The SFX held well throughout and didn't stick out as being bad or taking you out of the action. When some of the more extreme elements are revealed, I went along with it like I was watching my son play one of his weird FPS games. A lot of the film did feel like I was watching Call of Duty or something like that. Boy do I wish I could have those yeas of my life watching my son play that crap back!
Colossally entertaining!
Basically, to prevent the Allied forces being massacred on D-Day, US troops are ordered to detonate a Nazi communication tower. A small band of brothers actually makes it to the ground and finds a small French town equipped with a cute French girl and her brother. When a Nazi commander comes calling for more than an interrogation, the surviving troops must decide whether t reveal themselves to save her.
I actually really got into this movie and thought the action mixed with horror was pretty cool. Some of the fight/shootout sequences were cleverly done along with some of the secrets and experiments the Nazis are hiding deep within their stronghold. There are tough decisions and ultimate sacrifices to be made and the film threads the needle between genres successfully. I could see how if you were thinking this was going to be a full out horror film you would be disappointed; however, I had kind of heard a little about it ahead of time so my expectations were redirected.
The SFX held well throughout and didn't stick out as being bad or taking you out of the action. When some of the more extreme elements are revealed, I went along with it like I was watching my son play one of his weird FPS games. A lot of the film did feel like I was watching Call of Duty or something like that. Boy do I wish I could have those yeas of my life watching my son play that crap back!
Colossally entertaining!
Lee KM Pallatina (951 KP) rated Die Hard (1988) in Movies
Jan 16, 2021 (Updated Jan 17, 2021)
The casting (3 more)
Plot
SFX
Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman in general
Welcome to the party pal!
In 1988 Hollywood Gambled on a lesser known tv star for it's high budget action thriller.
Laughed at when hearing their choice of actor, it was the 80's and when you heard action movie you'd immediately think "Schwarzenegger or stallone, maybe even Kurt Russel" Hollywood wanted obe of the bigger stars and reached out to them, but they all turned it down so average Joe became their Vacationing NYPD hero, so they stuck with the man known as Bruce Willis!
Whilst Visiting his estranged wife at the (fictional) Nakatomi plaza (Fox plaza) the building and it's workforce are quickly taken hostage.
Enter John McClain (willis) a rough looking, smooth talking (the guy literally has a smooth/relaxed voice) witty, sarcastic NYPD cop who just can't seem to catch a break.
Armed with everything I wrote above, aswell as bare feet, air-vents, and a fire hose, McClain pursues the terrorists in an action packed attempt at proving his wife wrong and maybe saving a few people in the process.
Die Hard is a classic 80's action epic that spawned many terrible sequels (excluding 'with a vengeance') that we still paid to watch aswell as countless knockoffs.
Did you know?
. The team behind die hard was laughed at because of their lead choice (you should do I just told you)
. The movie was almost shut down because they used a real life helicopter around the building whilst local residents tried to sleep causing an outrage and filed complaints.
. miniature explosions were set of atop the building for affect.
. Alan Rickman was lied to about when he'd be dropped from the "building" the capture a natural look of fear (about a 30ft drop).
. It was Alan Rickmans first movie ( what a way to hit the ground and keep running)
. A replica model of the building was built to film the remaining explosions on the building.
. The original Vest (tank top) is on display in the Smithsonian.
.the movie was filmed during official construction of the fox plaza aka nakatomi plaza.
Laughed at when hearing their choice of actor, it was the 80's and when you heard action movie you'd immediately think "Schwarzenegger or stallone, maybe even Kurt Russel" Hollywood wanted obe of the bigger stars and reached out to them, but they all turned it down so average Joe became their Vacationing NYPD hero, so they stuck with the man known as Bruce Willis!
Whilst Visiting his estranged wife at the (fictional) Nakatomi plaza (Fox plaza) the building and it's workforce are quickly taken hostage.
Enter John McClain (willis) a rough looking, smooth talking (the guy literally has a smooth/relaxed voice) witty, sarcastic NYPD cop who just can't seem to catch a break.
Armed with everything I wrote above, aswell as bare feet, air-vents, and a fire hose, McClain pursues the terrorists in an action packed attempt at proving his wife wrong and maybe saving a few people in the process.
Die Hard is a classic 80's action epic that spawned many terrible sequels (excluding 'with a vengeance') that we still paid to watch aswell as countless knockoffs.
Did you know?
. The team behind die hard was laughed at because of their lead choice (you should do I just told you)
. The movie was almost shut down because they used a real life helicopter around the building whilst local residents tried to sleep causing an outrage and filed complaints.
. miniature explosions were set of atop the building for affect.
. Alan Rickman was lied to about when he'd be dropped from the "building" the capture a natural look of fear (about a 30ft drop).
. It was Alan Rickmans first movie ( what a way to hit the ground and keep running)
. A replica model of the building was built to film the remaining explosions on the building.
. The original Vest (tank top) is on display in the Smithsonian.
.the movie was filmed during official construction of the fox plaza aka nakatomi plaza.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Game Of Thrones - Season 7 in TV
Sep 5, 2017
Inconsistent characters (2 more)
Lazy writing
Huge plot holes
Who Wrote This?
Contains spoilers, click to show
Full disclosure, I wasn't a huge GoT fan to begin with, but this season takes the cake for the amount of nonsense it expected the viewer to accept without question. The show is ahead of the books at this point, so its no longer based on George RR Martin's books and it shows.
From this point on, I will be spoiling the events of the season, so if you haven't seen it and you care about spoilers, look away now.
If you are looking for a drinking game to play this season, drink every time Danyres is an entitled brat, drink every time Bran says something pretentious, drink every time John mentions the white walkers and drink when Tyrion screws up and I guarantee you that you won't be able to stand up by the end of the season.
There were two things in particular that got under my skin this season. First of all Littlefinger, (the supposed 'smartest character in the show,') got outsmarted by Arya and Sansa? Are you kidding? His death was so unsatisfying and ridiculous and in past seasons that character would have never have been stupid enough to get himself into that situation without working out a way to get himself away with his life.
The second thing is Bran. You can't have an all knowing character that doesn't know things. How is it that Sam has to be the one to tell Bran about John's parents being married when he was born? I've heard the excuse made that Bran has to choose to go to a period in history in order to see what happened at that time, but we have seen that he was back there last season when John was born in that tower! Also, why didn't he inform his brother that the Night King had a dragon, as soon as it happened? I realise that Bran is in Winterfell and John is with Danyres, but in the last episode, John sends Bran a note via carrier pigeon, so why couldn't he have sent one to John? Why didn't Bran see that Cersei was going to betray John and Danyres? If in the next season John and Dany are surprised when Cersei doesn't back them, then the writing for this show has well and truly fell off a cliff.
From this point on, I will be spoiling the events of the season, so if you haven't seen it and you care about spoilers, look away now.
If you are looking for a drinking game to play this season, drink every time Danyres is an entitled brat, drink every time Bran says something pretentious, drink every time John mentions the white walkers and drink when Tyrion screws up and I guarantee you that you won't be able to stand up by the end of the season.
There were two things in particular that got under my skin this season. First of all Littlefinger, (the supposed 'smartest character in the show,') got outsmarted by Arya and Sansa? Are you kidding? His death was so unsatisfying and ridiculous and in past seasons that character would have never have been stupid enough to get himself into that situation without working out a way to get himself away with his life.
The second thing is Bran. You can't have an all knowing character that doesn't know things. How is it that Sam has to be the one to tell Bran about John's parents being married when he was born? I've heard the excuse made that Bran has to choose to go to a period in history in order to see what happened at that time, but we have seen that he was back there last season when John was born in that tower! Also, why didn't he inform his brother that the Night King had a dragon, as soon as it happened? I realise that Bran is in Winterfell and John is with Danyres, but in the last episode, John sends Bran a note via carrier pigeon, so why couldn't he have sent one to John? Why didn't Bran see that Cersei was going to betray John and Danyres? If in the next season John and Dany are surprised when Cersei doesn't back them, then the writing for this show has well and truly fell off a cliff.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Thor: The Dark World (2013) in Movies
Oct 10, 2017 (Updated Oct 10, 2017)
Loki was fun to watch. (1 more)
Good SFX.
Totally forgettable villain. (1 more)
Any scene involving Kat Dennings and her intern.
Thor: God Of Meh
In the run up to the release of Thor: Ragnarok, the third Thor movie, I decided to go back and watch the only movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe that I have not seen yet. I never had anything against this movie before I saw it, I had just heard it is mediocre and a bit unnecessary and to be honest Thor is one of my least favourite Avengers. Funnily enough what I got was a fairly unnecessary, mediocre superhero sequel with some fun moments sprinkled throughout.
This isn't a bad movie overall, it's just painfully mediocre. The direction is uninspired, the performances are phoned in and the plot is run of the mill for a superhero story. The new characters introduced are extraordinarily vanilla, the score is okay and the script is pretty pedestrian in terms of the kind of story it is telling. The whole thing is just passable and yet extremely unremarkable.
I know Marvel movies have become notorious for their obvious lack of decent antagonists, (other than Loki,) but this takes it to a new level of generic. This group of villains makes the Ultron bots look like deep, fleshed out characters.
I found myself getting extremely annoyed every time that Kat Dennings was in the screen and I don't hate this actress, I don't even remember hating her in the first Thor movie, but in this she was insufferable. Her over the top pantomime acting was painful to watch and none of the snarky remarks that she hit out with landed. The guy that was her intern was just as bad and there wasn't even any real need for these characters to be in the movie.
In summary, it's okay. Not much focus is put on Tom Hiddleston's Loki in this one, but when it is, these are the best parts of the movie. He is easily the highlight of a sub par movie overall. Even Chris Hemsworth was bad in this and I know that the guy is a good actor, I've seen him give brilliant performances in movies both within and outside of the MCU. Every part of this movie is positively conventional and these moderately successful parts add up to a tolerable film that is by no means required viewing, not even for the most die hard of comic book fans.
This isn't a bad movie overall, it's just painfully mediocre. The direction is uninspired, the performances are phoned in and the plot is run of the mill for a superhero story. The new characters introduced are extraordinarily vanilla, the score is okay and the script is pretty pedestrian in terms of the kind of story it is telling. The whole thing is just passable and yet extremely unremarkable.
I know Marvel movies have become notorious for their obvious lack of decent antagonists, (other than Loki,) but this takes it to a new level of generic. This group of villains makes the Ultron bots look like deep, fleshed out characters.
I found myself getting extremely annoyed every time that Kat Dennings was in the screen and I don't hate this actress, I don't even remember hating her in the first Thor movie, but in this she was insufferable. Her over the top pantomime acting was painful to watch and none of the snarky remarks that she hit out with landed. The guy that was her intern was just as bad and there wasn't even any real need for these characters to be in the movie.
In summary, it's okay. Not much focus is put on Tom Hiddleston's Loki in this one, but when it is, these are the best parts of the movie. He is easily the highlight of a sub par movie overall. Even Chris Hemsworth was bad in this and I know that the guy is a good actor, I've seen him give brilliant performances in movies both within and outside of the MCU. Every part of this movie is positively conventional and these moderately successful parts add up to a tolerable film that is by no means required viewing, not even for the most die hard of comic book fans.
Scott Tostik (389 KP) rated The Burning (1981) in Movies
Jun 21, 2017
Amazing SFX by Tom Savini (2 more)
One of the best camp slashers
A great killer before the likes of Jason, Myers and Freddy
Welcome to Camp... Oh who gives a shit... Let's get on with the killing
This has got to be one of my favorite and top 5 first watch in a relationship films of all time.
Not for the squeamish at all. The Burning has some of the best post CGI kill effects... And personally I love practical effects, nothing destroys a good beheading like digitized blood flying around out of sync with the body dropping.
Effects Master Tom Savini was fresh off the original Friday the 13th when he landed this flick.
A few years into the past the kids of a summer camp decide to pull a prank on the asshole caretaker involving a skull all dolled up with maggots, worms and burning eyes for effect. They sneak it into his dilapidated cabin, where he is sleeping off a drunk, and proceed to bang on his windows shaking him awake and scaring the hell out of hum. In his flailing fear he knocks the skull onto a pile of blankets and his hanging curtains and the whole place goes up in flames... As does he... His name is Cropsey... And he is engulfed in fire. The kids run like hell to get away as Cropsey flies out the door, rolls down a hill and ends up in the lake. Now I'm no doctor, never claim to be and certainly have never played one on tv, but in my imagination dirty lake water and freshly burnt skin do not a good combination make.
We skip ahead a few years and Cropsey is released from the hospital and goes into the downtown core of wherever the hell he is, searching for something. Wearing a trenchcoat and an old fedora over his scars. He picks up a hooker and goes to her place. She gets him to take off his clothes and recoils in horror. He grabs a pair of scissors and exacts revenge.
Without giving more away. You can see where this is going. A slash and gash festival unlike anything is about to follow. Starring a few familiar faces such as Seinfeld's Jason Alexander, Short Circut's Fisher Stevens and a young Holly Hunter in what I imagine was their first big breaks in film. This movie offers the viewer a glimpse of things to come in the slasher sub-genre of horror.
It's worth it alone of the scene in the canoe... What is that you may ask... Watch The damned movie and find out...lol
Not for the squeamish at all. The Burning has some of the best post CGI kill effects... And personally I love practical effects, nothing destroys a good beheading like digitized blood flying around out of sync with the body dropping.
Effects Master Tom Savini was fresh off the original Friday the 13th when he landed this flick.
A few years into the past the kids of a summer camp decide to pull a prank on the asshole caretaker involving a skull all dolled up with maggots, worms and burning eyes for effect. They sneak it into his dilapidated cabin, where he is sleeping off a drunk, and proceed to bang on his windows shaking him awake and scaring the hell out of hum. In his flailing fear he knocks the skull onto a pile of blankets and his hanging curtains and the whole place goes up in flames... As does he... His name is Cropsey... And he is engulfed in fire. The kids run like hell to get away as Cropsey flies out the door, rolls down a hill and ends up in the lake. Now I'm no doctor, never claim to be and certainly have never played one on tv, but in my imagination dirty lake water and freshly burnt skin do not a good combination make.
We skip ahead a few years and Cropsey is released from the hospital and goes into the downtown core of wherever the hell he is, searching for something. Wearing a trenchcoat and an old fedora over his scars. He picks up a hooker and goes to her place. She gets him to take off his clothes and recoils in horror. He grabs a pair of scissors and exacts revenge.
Without giving more away. You can see where this is going. A slash and gash festival unlike anything is about to follow. Starring a few familiar faces such as Seinfeld's Jason Alexander, Short Circut's Fisher Stevens and a young Holly Hunter in what I imagine was their first big breaks in film. This movie offers the viewer a glimpse of things to come in the slasher sub-genre of horror.
It's worth it alone of the scene in the canoe... What is that you may ask... Watch The damned movie and find out...lol
MisterMovieDude (2 KP) rated Downsizing (2017) in Movies
Dec 29, 2017 (Updated Dec 29, 2017)
Hong Chou (3 more)
The concept
The SFX
Has heart
Every actor except Hong Chou (2 more)
Run time
Pacing issues
Big Concept, comes up short
Contains spoilers, click to show
Going into Downsizing I was excited. I had seen all of Alexander Payne’s previous work, but couldn’t necessarily call myself a fan, but I had respect for him as a filmmaker. I had a feeling that this was going to feel more like stranger than fiction, or everything must go than the trailers and tv spots were making it seem. Unfortunately, I was right.
First off, the movie is obnoxiously long. I saw this and Jumanji as a double feature and while Jumanji was 15 minutes shorter, Downsizing felt like it lasted for about 5 hours too long. The pacing was way off as well. It felt like the movie was going pretty well, and then it just slowed to a crawl at times. I get why, because the writer and director were trying to set up story and tell an awards caliber story, but that was really unnecessary. We have a movie about shrinking people down to 5 inches and placing them into a whole new community. That is a great concept, and a concept that would have made a great comedy. It didn’t make a great dramedy.
Second, the acting was bad, well for everyone except Hong Chou. I don’t know who she is but I fell in love with her in this movie. They say that beauty is In the eye of the beholder, and man, she starts out rough, but by the end she ends up this sweet, beautiful soul. It was truly a “shes all that” type of situation, but internally, if that makes any sense. The other actors just played themselves. Damon played himself, Christoph played the same character as he did in the Green Hornet(I know, we all wish we can forget he was in that too). Jason Sudeikis and NPH were in it for literally two seconds a piece, which was unfortunate, and once Wiig leaves the movie, it slows to a crawl.
I didn’t hate the movie. It had its moments, but I feel like the could have told the same movie and leave out the downsizing concept, and have two pretty decent movies with them being separate. What this is, is matt Damon finding himself after his wife backed out. Thats it. How he copes with his irreversible decision, and his story in “Liesure Land”, the community he lives in after being down sized.
Jokes don’t land, it’s too long and its poorly acted, but Hong, she is something special. I’ve never left a movie I hated before and still wanted to see a sequel because I wanted to see more of her characters story, so for that reason I recommend this movie.
There won’t be a sequel, but it’s already basically a prequel to the borrowers. You’ll see why, if you see it.
First off, the movie is obnoxiously long. I saw this and Jumanji as a double feature and while Jumanji was 15 minutes shorter, Downsizing felt like it lasted for about 5 hours too long. The pacing was way off as well. It felt like the movie was going pretty well, and then it just slowed to a crawl at times. I get why, because the writer and director were trying to set up story and tell an awards caliber story, but that was really unnecessary. We have a movie about shrinking people down to 5 inches and placing them into a whole new community. That is a great concept, and a concept that would have made a great comedy. It didn’t make a great dramedy.
Second, the acting was bad, well for everyone except Hong Chou. I don’t know who she is but I fell in love with her in this movie. They say that beauty is In the eye of the beholder, and man, she starts out rough, but by the end she ends up this sweet, beautiful soul. It was truly a “shes all that” type of situation, but internally, if that makes any sense. The other actors just played themselves. Damon played himself, Christoph played the same character as he did in the Green Hornet(I know, we all wish we can forget he was in that too). Jason Sudeikis and NPH were in it for literally two seconds a piece, which was unfortunate, and once Wiig leaves the movie, it slows to a crawl.
I didn’t hate the movie. It had its moments, but I feel like the could have told the same movie and leave out the downsizing concept, and have two pretty decent movies with them being separate. What this is, is matt Damon finding himself after his wife backed out. Thats it. How he copes with his irreversible decision, and his story in “Liesure Land”, the community he lives in after being down sized.
Jokes don’t land, it’s too long and its poorly acted, but Hong, she is something special. I’ve never left a movie I hated before and still wanted to see a sequel because I wanted to see more of her characters story, so for that reason I recommend this movie.
There won’t be a sequel, but it’s already basically a prequel to the borrowers. You’ll see why, if you see it.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Umbrella Academy in TV
Mar 7, 2019 (Updated Mar 7, 2019)
Characters (1 more)
SFX
One For A Rainy Day
A few years ago when I heard the guy from My Chemical Romance had wrote a graphic novel, it peaked my interest, but after reading up on some reviews of the book, it just sounded like a rip-off of other properties like Watchmen and X-Men and to be honest I wasn't a huge fan of the obscure character designs and bizarre artwork. I never got around to reading it after this as I was kind of put off by the accusations of unoriginality and the weird art.
Then late last year, I read that there was a Netflix adaption of the show being released and my curiosity was once again peaked. After reading some of the early glowing reviews from critics, I knew that I had found my next binge.
This show is fantastic, which for the most part is owed to it's well written and well acted characters. The members of the Umbrella Academy and their various odd relationships with one another, as well as the outsiders that have interaction with them throughout the show, make the character dynamics of this show as a whole pretty unique and exciting. The cast are all brilliant, with Robert Sheehan's Klaus being the clear stand-out. He gets all of the best lines and nails the American accent that he speaks with in the show.
It is cool to get an insight into the world that the show-runners have crafted, which is as odd as it is charming. It is similar to our own world, with a few pretty drastic changes that change the dynamic of the universe in a oddly interesting way. There were points while watching the show that I was reminded of other superhero stories like Watchmen and X-Men, but instead of Umbrella Academy blatantly ripping off these other stories, it instead takes some of the best parts from its respective influences and adapts them to suit the narrative that is unfolding. It comes off as more of a wink and a nod than just a lazy copy/paste job.
I also feel like the amazing CGI work on Pogo the chimp, - who is highly intelligent and serves as the family's butler, - deserves a shout-out. It is quite possibly the best CGI that I have ever seen in a TV show and is almost on the same level as the CGI on Caesar in the Planet Of The Apes movies.
Overall, The Umbrella Academy is a stellar example of what happens when a show embraces it's influences and presents them in a coherent way in collaboration with the original story that the show itself is telling. It is not the greatest superhero story ever filmed, but it is an extremely entertaining and satisfying ride that the show takes you on over its 10 episodes and it is well worth your time.
Then late last year, I read that there was a Netflix adaption of the show being released and my curiosity was once again peaked. After reading some of the early glowing reviews from critics, I knew that I had found my next binge.
This show is fantastic, which for the most part is owed to it's well written and well acted characters. The members of the Umbrella Academy and their various odd relationships with one another, as well as the outsiders that have interaction with them throughout the show, make the character dynamics of this show as a whole pretty unique and exciting. The cast are all brilliant, with Robert Sheehan's Klaus being the clear stand-out. He gets all of the best lines and nails the American accent that he speaks with in the show.
It is cool to get an insight into the world that the show-runners have crafted, which is as odd as it is charming. It is similar to our own world, with a few pretty drastic changes that change the dynamic of the universe in a oddly interesting way. There were points while watching the show that I was reminded of other superhero stories like Watchmen and X-Men, but instead of Umbrella Academy blatantly ripping off these other stories, it instead takes some of the best parts from its respective influences and adapts them to suit the narrative that is unfolding. It comes off as more of a wink and a nod than just a lazy copy/paste job.
I also feel like the amazing CGI work on Pogo the chimp, - who is highly intelligent and serves as the family's butler, - deserves a shout-out. It is quite possibly the best CGI that I have ever seen in a TV show and is almost on the same level as the CGI on Caesar in the Planet Of The Apes movies.
Overall, The Umbrella Academy is a stellar example of what happens when a show embraces it's influences and presents them in a coherent way in collaboration with the original story that the show itself is telling. It is not the greatest superhero story ever filmed, but it is an extremely entertaining and satisfying ride that the show takes you on over its 10 episodes and it is well worth your time.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Shazam! (2019) in Movies
Apr 9, 2019 (Updated Apr 9, 2019)
Good Fun
Being the big ol' geek that I am, I usually know the source material of the superhero movie I am going to see pretty well. Shazam is an exception to this, - other than the infamous Captain Marvel/Shazam copyright battle between Marvel and DC's lawyers over the years and the fact that he is a teenage boy who transforms into a grown man who looks like Superman with a similar power set, - I don't know much about the character. Watching Shazam, I was more so reminded of a Mark Millar comic called Superior, which bears multiple plot similarities to Shazam, to the point that I am surprised that DC have never attempted to sue Millar for blatant plagiarism.
In a word, Shazam is fun. I enjoyed my time with it and I would see it again. I enjoyed seeing Mark Strong hamming it up as the movie's villain and Zachary Levi did a great job in the titular role. Also, his chemistry with Jack Dylan Grazer's character was a huge highlight of the film for me. The SFX were on point for the most part other than the fairly cartoony representations of the 7 deadly sins monsters. There was also a charming, dumb, pure, innocence to the movie that really shone through the entire thing.
My biggest issue with the movie was Asher Angel as Billy Batson when he's not Shazam. Not necessarily because he is a bad actor or anything, but more because of how he chose to play the role. He came across as broody and introspective, almost the total opposite of how Zachary Levi came across as Shazam with his over the top playfulness and silly puns. This discrepancy was prevalent to the point where the illusion that these two actors were playing the same character was entirely broken and it was as if they were just playing two totally different characters with entirely opposite personalities that were just never in the same room. I feel like a bit of smoothing out could have been done between the actors to come to a compromise where they could both deliver their respective lines while believably playing the same character.
Also, something that you should probably know going in is that this is a comedy with lessons about family and responsibility before it is a Superhero/Action movie. It does make sense within the context of the film that there are no epic action scenes as Billy is just an untrained everyday kid that has been given a bunch of amazing powers that he is still getting to grips with, but don't expect any mind-blowing action scenes on par with MCU movies etc. Even though I guess it makes sense that there wasn't anything too impressive in terms of action scenes, I was left a little bit unfulfilled as I left the theatre that the film felt more insistent on showing us tender family moments rather than huge scale superhero battles.
Overall, Shazam is dumb fun. Don't think too hard about it and you will almost certainly have a great time watching it. I am glad that the fun factor of DC films seems to be on the up and they have dropped the dour tone of their Batman/Superman stories set up by Zack Snyder and they seem to have almost totally abandoned the idea of following in Marvel's footsteps of tying movies together in order to lead up to a team up blockbuster. This move seems to be for the best and is what they should have been doing from the start rather than trying to win a losing battle and play catch up with a franchise that has been building for an entire decade at this point.
In a word, Shazam is fun. I enjoyed my time with it and I would see it again. I enjoyed seeing Mark Strong hamming it up as the movie's villain and Zachary Levi did a great job in the titular role. Also, his chemistry with Jack Dylan Grazer's character was a huge highlight of the film for me. The SFX were on point for the most part other than the fairly cartoony representations of the 7 deadly sins monsters. There was also a charming, dumb, pure, innocence to the movie that really shone through the entire thing.
My biggest issue with the movie was Asher Angel as Billy Batson when he's not Shazam. Not necessarily because he is a bad actor or anything, but more because of how he chose to play the role. He came across as broody and introspective, almost the total opposite of how Zachary Levi came across as Shazam with his over the top playfulness and silly puns. This discrepancy was prevalent to the point where the illusion that these two actors were playing the same character was entirely broken and it was as if they were just playing two totally different characters with entirely opposite personalities that were just never in the same room. I feel like a bit of smoothing out could have been done between the actors to come to a compromise where they could both deliver their respective lines while believably playing the same character.
Also, something that you should probably know going in is that this is a comedy with lessons about family and responsibility before it is a Superhero/Action movie. It does make sense within the context of the film that there are no epic action scenes as Billy is just an untrained everyday kid that has been given a bunch of amazing powers that he is still getting to grips with, but don't expect any mind-blowing action scenes on par with MCU movies etc. Even though I guess it makes sense that there wasn't anything too impressive in terms of action scenes, I was left a little bit unfulfilled as I left the theatre that the film felt more insistent on showing us tender family moments rather than huge scale superhero battles.
Overall, Shazam is dumb fun. Don't think too hard about it and you will almost certainly have a great time watching it. I am glad that the fun factor of DC films seems to be on the up and they have dropped the dour tone of their Batman/Superman stories set up by Zack Snyder and they seem to have almost totally abandoned the idea of following in Marvel's footsteps of tying movies together in order to lead up to a team up blockbuster. This move seems to be for the best and is what they should have been doing from the start rather than trying to win a losing battle and play catch up with a franchise that has been building for an entire decade at this point.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Jan 8, 2019 (Updated Jan 8, 2019)
Wishy Washy
I was excited to see this movie after hearing the glowing reviews and praise it was getting. I am also a fan of Jason Momoa and James Wan, so I was really hoping for this to be at least as good as Wonder Woman. Also, being a long time fan of DC Comics, I really want to see them find their footing cinematically and I thought that this could finally be the start of that. Unfortunately I left the cinema feeling pretty underwhelmed.
The movie opens by telling the story of how Aquaman's parents came to meet and fall in love, even though they are from vastly different worlds. This whole sequence is brilliant and I was totally on-board for what was to come afterwards. Sadly, this opening sequence is by far the best part of the entire movie. From this point on it descends into a mediocre action adventure flick with story elements very reminiscent of Thor and Black Panther, (two movies that are vastly superior to this one.)
From a direction standpoint, it is clear that James Wan knows how to visually capture a scene in the most beautiful and intriguing way possible, which is especially evident during the trench sequence. His direction during all of the action sequences is great, with Nicole Kidman's trident work in the opening scene and the rooftop sequence with Black Manta, Mera and Aquaman being the highlights. I don't think that my issue with this movie is due to the direction lacking in any aspect. The only questionable choice in my opinion, was the choice to shoot the big Black Manta scene in broad daylight. It just looked slightly naff and would have came across much better if shot in darker conditions at night.
Nor do I think that it is the fault of any of the cast members. I think that Momoa does a great job in the title role and he looks incredible in the full on Aquaman suit, (which I don't think many other actors could legitimately pull off.) I think that Patrick Wilson did a decent job as the evil slightly cheesy power hungry half brother of Aquaman. I also enjoyed Willem Dafoe, Dolph Lundgren and Nicole Kidman in each of their scenes.
I think that the major culprit in this movie feeling a bit forced at times, is the lazy script that the actors had to work with. Almost every scene plays out in the exact same way; with the characters that we are following turning up to a new location, meeting up with a character, (usually Willem Dafoe,) listening to them spout a bunch of expositional dialogue and then mid sentence bad guys will attack and an explosion will go off cutting the conversation short. Then we will get a well shot action sequence with super dynamic cinematography, then the characters will figure out where they need to go next, they will go to the next location and the process will be rinsed and repeated for the duration of the movie.
Overall, Aquaman is not a bad superhero movie, there is a lot of fun to be had here with the badass action sequences. Unfortunately the lazy script holds the movie back from being as good as the glowing reviews told me it would be and out of the DC solo movies, - this, Man of Steel and Wonder Woman, - this is probably the worst of the three.
PS. Although I don't think that the movie in general was up to the highest level of quality, the CGI is objectively breath-taking in every scene and I totally agree with James Wan that it is nothing short of an atrocity that the SFX team on this movie have been snubbed for this year's Oscars ceremony.
The movie opens by telling the story of how Aquaman's parents came to meet and fall in love, even though they are from vastly different worlds. This whole sequence is brilliant and I was totally on-board for what was to come afterwards. Sadly, this opening sequence is by far the best part of the entire movie. From this point on it descends into a mediocre action adventure flick with story elements very reminiscent of Thor and Black Panther, (two movies that are vastly superior to this one.)
From a direction standpoint, it is clear that James Wan knows how to visually capture a scene in the most beautiful and intriguing way possible, which is especially evident during the trench sequence. His direction during all of the action sequences is great, with Nicole Kidman's trident work in the opening scene and the rooftop sequence with Black Manta, Mera and Aquaman being the highlights. I don't think that my issue with this movie is due to the direction lacking in any aspect. The only questionable choice in my opinion, was the choice to shoot the big Black Manta scene in broad daylight. It just looked slightly naff and would have came across much better if shot in darker conditions at night.
Nor do I think that it is the fault of any of the cast members. I think that Momoa does a great job in the title role and he looks incredible in the full on Aquaman suit, (which I don't think many other actors could legitimately pull off.) I think that Patrick Wilson did a decent job as the evil slightly cheesy power hungry half brother of Aquaman. I also enjoyed Willem Dafoe, Dolph Lundgren and Nicole Kidman in each of their scenes.
I think that the major culprit in this movie feeling a bit forced at times, is the lazy script that the actors had to work with. Almost every scene plays out in the exact same way; with the characters that we are following turning up to a new location, meeting up with a character, (usually Willem Dafoe,) listening to them spout a bunch of expositional dialogue and then mid sentence bad guys will attack and an explosion will go off cutting the conversation short. Then we will get a well shot action sequence with super dynamic cinematography, then the characters will figure out where they need to go next, they will go to the next location and the process will be rinsed and repeated for the duration of the movie.
Overall, Aquaman is not a bad superhero movie, there is a lot of fun to be had here with the badass action sequences. Unfortunately the lazy script holds the movie back from being as good as the glowing reviews told me it would be and out of the DC solo movies, - this, Man of Steel and Wonder Woman, - this is probably the worst of the three.
PS. Although I don't think that the movie in general was up to the highest level of quality, the CGI is objectively breath-taking in every scene and I totally agree with James Wan that it is nothing short of an atrocity that the SFX team on this movie have been snubbed for this year's Oscars ceremony.
p3anut (62 KP) Feb 20, 2019
Dean (6921 KP) Feb 20, 2019