Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
This one belongs to James Spader
I doubt that Joss Whedon and the team down at Marvel knew just how successful 2012’s Avengers Assemble would go on to be. After just a few months of release it became the third highest-grossing film of all time, by no means an easy feat to achieve.
Therefore, Whedon and co had their work cut out trying to build on the solid foundations they had laid when it came to producing a sequel. However, three years and $250m later Avengers: Age of Ultron hits our screens. But is it the follow-up everyone was asking for?
Age of Ultron follows the dynamic team of superheroes as they continue to save the world following the near cataclysmic events of the 2009 predecessor and of course every Marvel film released since. Here however, they are tasked with taking down a robot hell bent on destroying the world – a tough day at the office to say the least.
All the fan favourites return as well as some new faces in a film that is technically spectacular but a little overambitious at times. There are 11, count them 11, major characters vying for screen time in Age of Ultron and while Whedon manages to give each of them their own story arc, at times it feels a little rushed.
Joining the cast is James Spader as the voice of Ultron, a robot accidentally created by Tony Stark, and he is by far the most intriguing character in an already impressive line-up. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be on fine form as the wise-cracking Iron Man/Stark with Chris Hemsworth providing the eye-candy as Thor.
It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner’s Black Widow and Hawkeye get some much-needed fleshing out after their fairly limited roles in previous Marvel films, and Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk is a joy to watch.
Kick-Ass’ Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Godzilla’s Elizabeth Olsen also join the cast as Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, two characters fans of the X-Men universe will recognise. However, due to legal requirements their origins are changed and the fact that they are mutants is never revealed, unfortunately limiting their appeal.
When it comes to special effects, Whedon has made sure every sequence is brimming with the highest quality CGI, and despite a couple of lapses early on in the film, the majority of the picture is flawless with some stunning global locations beautifully juxtaposed with the characters doing their thing.
What stands out in Age of Ultron however is the plot. Avengers Assemble was a fine film right up until the generic city-levelling, headache inducing climax that looked like it could have come straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
Thankfully, whilst the action is dialled up a few notches here, the plot is much more detailed and the final scenes are utterly breath-taking.
Overall, Avengers: Age of Ultron had a massive amount to live up to and in some respects it falls a little short, its overambitious nature is its downfall with too many characters needing screen time. However, as a good-time blockbuster it’s hard to find one better and James Spader is genuinely mesmerising as Ultron.
Is it the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Well, it’s definitely an improvement on its predecessor – but for me, Guardians of the Galaxy just takes that title by a whisker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/26/this-one-belongs-to-james-spader-avengers-age-of-ultron-review/
Therefore, Whedon and co had their work cut out trying to build on the solid foundations they had laid when it came to producing a sequel. However, three years and $250m later Avengers: Age of Ultron hits our screens. But is it the follow-up everyone was asking for?
Age of Ultron follows the dynamic team of superheroes as they continue to save the world following the near cataclysmic events of the 2009 predecessor and of course every Marvel film released since. Here however, they are tasked with taking down a robot hell bent on destroying the world – a tough day at the office to say the least.
All the fan favourites return as well as some new faces in a film that is technically spectacular but a little overambitious at times. There are 11, count them 11, major characters vying for screen time in Age of Ultron and while Whedon manages to give each of them their own story arc, at times it feels a little rushed.
Joining the cast is James Spader as the voice of Ultron, a robot accidentally created by Tony Stark, and he is by far the most intriguing character in an already impressive line-up. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be on fine form as the wise-cracking Iron Man/Stark with Chris Hemsworth providing the eye-candy as Thor.
It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner’s Black Widow and Hawkeye get some much-needed fleshing out after their fairly limited roles in previous Marvel films, and Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk is a joy to watch.
Kick-Ass’ Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Godzilla’s Elizabeth Olsen also join the cast as Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, two characters fans of the X-Men universe will recognise. However, due to legal requirements their origins are changed and the fact that they are mutants is never revealed, unfortunately limiting their appeal.
When it comes to special effects, Whedon has made sure every sequence is brimming with the highest quality CGI, and despite a couple of lapses early on in the film, the majority of the picture is flawless with some stunning global locations beautifully juxtaposed with the characters doing their thing.
What stands out in Age of Ultron however is the plot. Avengers Assemble was a fine film right up until the generic city-levelling, headache inducing climax that looked like it could have come straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
Thankfully, whilst the action is dialled up a few notches here, the plot is much more detailed and the final scenes are utterly breath-taking.
Overall, Avengers: Age of Ultron had a massive amount to live up to and in some respects it falls a little short, its overambitious nature is its downfall with too many characters needing screen time. However, as a good-time blockbuster it’s hard to find one better and James Spader is genuinely mesmerising as Ultron.
Is it the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Well, it’s definitely an improvement on its predecessor – but for me, Guardians of the Galaxy just takes that title by a whisker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/26/this-one-belongs-to-james-spader-avengers-age-of-ultron-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The BFG (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Spielberg, where are you?
Roald Dahl’s inspiring novels have had a chequered history when it comes to turning them into films. Danny DeVito’s Matilda is widely regarded as one of the best adaptations, with Tim Burton’s Charlie & the Chocolate Factory rendered a monstrosity by fans of the author and movie critics alike.
So when Steven Spielberg was announced as director of The BFG, my personal favourite of all Dahl’s novels, I was equal parts pleased and wary. Could my favourite filmmaker really do this amazing book justice?
Partially is the short answer. Spielberg proves a safe pair of hands as usual, but it lacks his trademark flair, losing the darker, more brooding elements of the source material in the process.
Ten-year-old Sophie (Ruby Barnhill) experiences the adventure of a lifetime when she meets the Big Friendly Giant (Mark Rylance). Naturally scared at first, she soon realizes that the 24-foot behemoth is actually gentle and charming. As their friendship grows, Sophie’s presence attracts the unwanted attention of Bloodbottler, Fleshlumpeater and other giants. After traveling to London, Sophie and the BFG must convince the Queen to help them get rid of all the bad giants once and for all.
Casting wise, The BFG is practically spot on with Mark Rylance being exceptional in the titular role. It was always going to be hard to fill the shoes of David Jason, who tackled the character in the 1989 TV film, but he is perfect; getting the mannerisms and voice down to a tee. The motion capture used to render Rylance’s face onto the giant is breath-taking and some of the best I’ve seen. Elsewhere, Ruby Barnhill certainly has the look of Sophie, but lacks the acting finesse of some child actors.
The cinematography is both beautiful and at times hard to stomach. The opening sequence in which Sophie is taken from her bed to Giant Country is stunning, climaxing in a first-person view of the far-away land. Unfortunately, Spielberg’s avoidance of shaky cam lends an almost video-game feel to the scene that proves nauseating after a few minutes.
The BFG also suffers when both its main characters share a close-up. In particular, when Sophie is being carried by the giant, the motions look continuously jerky and spoil an otherwise impeccably rendered film – you can see where the $140million was spent.
Unfortunately, John Williams’ score lacks any sort of punch and feels sorely out of place in certain parts of the film. This is even more unusual considering the pairing of Spielberg and Williams has given us greats like Jurassic Park, E.T. and Indiana Jones.
Nevertheless, this is a sweet film that children and adults should enjoy. The themes of friendship and loneliness can resonate with all generations and a packed-out cinema proves just what a draw Roald Dahl still is to this day.
Overall, The BFG is everything most families will want from a summer holiday blockbuster. It’s sugary sweet, with great special effects, engaging acting and a wonderful story that follows its source material reasonably well. However, for Spielberg fans, it’s puzzling because the director’s presence feels a little lost. There’s a lot to like, but not a lot to love.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/07/28/spielberg-where-are-you-the-bfg-review/
So when Steven Spielberg was announced as director of The BFG, my personal favourite of all Dahl’s novels, I was equal parts pleased and wary. Could my favourite filmmaker really do this amazing book justice?
Partially is the short answer. Spielberg proves a safe pair of hands as usual, but it lacks his trademark flair, losing the darker, more brooding elements of the source material in the process.
Ten-year-old Sophie (Ruby Barnhill) experiences the adventure of a lifetime when she meets the Big Friendly Giant (Mark Rylance). Naturally scared at first, she soon realizes that the 24-foot behemoth is actually gentle and charming. As their friendship grows, Sophie’s presence attracts the unwanted attention of Bloodbottler, Fleshlumpeater and other giants. After traveling to London, Sophie and the BFG must convince the Queen to help them get rid of all the bad giants once and for all.
Casting wise, The BFG is practically spot on with Mark Rylance being exceptional in the titular role. It was always going to be hard to fill the shoes of David Jason, who tackled the character in the 1989 TV film, but he is perfect; getting the mannerisms and voice down to a tee. The motion capture used to render Rylance’s face onto the giant is breath-taking and some of the best I’ve seen. Elsewhere, Ruby Barnhill certainly has the look of Sophie, but lacks the acting finesse of some child actors.
The cinematography is both beautiful and at times hard to stomach. The opening sequence in which Sophie is taken from her bed to Giant Country is stunning, climaxing in a first-person view of the far-away land. Unfortunately, Spielberg’s avoidance of shaky cam lends an almost video-game feel to the scene that proves nauseating after a few minutes.
The BFG also suffers when both its main characters share a close-up. In particular, when Sophie is being carried by the giant, the motions look continuously jerky and spoil an otherwise impeccably rendered film – you can see where the $140million was spent.
Unfortunately, John Williams’ score lacks any sort of punch and feels sorely out of place in certain parts of the film. This is even more unusual considering the pairing of Spielberg and Williams has given us greats like Jurassic Park, E.T. and Indiana Jones.
Nevertheless, this is a sweet film that children and adults should enjoy. The themes of friendship and loneliness can resonate with all generations and a packed-out cinema proves just what a draw Roald Dahl still is to this day.
Overall, The BFG is everything most families will want from a summer holiday blockbuster. It’s sugary sweet, with great special effects, engaging acting and a wonderful story that follows its source material reasonably well. However, for Spielberg fans, it’s puzzling because the director’s presence feels a little lost. There’s a lot to like, but not a lot to love.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/07/28/spielberg-where-are-you-the-bfg-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Snow White and the Huntsman (2012) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Snow White has certainly been receiving a lot of attention this year and it’s been hard to ignore two films competing with each other to win the accolade of best cinema adaptation.
Julia Roberts has already starred in sickly sweet adaptation Mirror Mirror and here Kristen Stewart of Twilight fame takes on the lead role in the gritty, dramatic adaptation of the fairytale. But is it a good take on a children’s classic?
Snow White & The Huntsman opens as you would expect with a look back at the aforementioned Princess’ traumatic childhood, from the death of her mother, to witnessing the death of her father King Magnus, it seems like any normal child would’ve had a few problems after this but Snow seems a little more reserved.
Snow White’s father is killed at the hands of her wicked stepmother, played wonderfully by Charlize Theron who really gets her teeth into the role she’s been given and plays the character with a nice dose of evil intertwined with brief moments of sincerity. Those of you familiar with the story will no doubt know that Snow White hides with the seven dwarves to escape the clutches of her stepmother, but more on that later.
Chris Hemsworth, who seems to be getting more and more acting jobs these days does a nice job as the widowed, constantly drunk huntsman, though his accent is a little hard to assess, no doubt done to cover his Australian roots.
Hemsworth is sent by the wicked Queen to kill Snow White so that her eternal youth isn’t threatened but things run less than smoothly as he realises that he is being tricked, he and Snow then decide to go on the run, bumping into the seven dwarves along the way.
The Kingdom in which they live is beautifully realised in fabulous CGI, from the dark forest, to the towering stone walls of the castle and then further into the ‘sanctuary’ a place where people can go to relax and unwind. Fairies, badgers, foxes, rabbits, mushrooms with beady little eyes and moss covered tortoises are amongst the creatures here and ruling over them all is the spirit of the forest, a fabulous and very real looking white stag.
This is, however, where Snow White & The Huntsman falls short. Yes, the CGI is impeccable and yes the acting is good, but it all feels a little bit soulless. It’s all about the frills rather than creating a deep and meaningful story. It has the basics right but it’s impossible to care about the characters because there isn’t enough back-story. Each set piece is interspersed with a little bit of emotion, but it’s not really enough and because of this, the entire film feels disjointed.
This is made worse by the fact the film is stretched to over two hours when there isn’t really enough story to create a two hour film.
Unfortunately, these points detract from what is a wonderful and beautifully realised adaptation of a classic children’s fairytale. To compare it to Mirror Mirror would be unfair as they are both so different. Snow White & The Huntsman is like last year’s Alice in Wonderland, it all looks and sounds great, but is ultimately; decidedly average.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2012/06/07/snow-white-the-huntsman-review/
Julia Roberts has already starred in sickly sweet adaptation Mirror Mirror and here Kristen Stewart of Twilight fame takes on the lead role in the gritty, dramatic adaptation of the fairytale. But is it a good take on a children’s classic?
Snow White & The Huntsman opens as you would expect with a look back at the aforementioned Princess’ traumatic childhood, from the death of her mother, to witnessing the death of her father King Magnus, it seems like any normal child would’ve had a few problems after this but Snow seems a little more reserved.
Snow White’s father is killed at the hands of her wicked stepmother, played wonderfully by Charlize Theron who really gets her teeth into the role she’s been given and plays the character with a nice dose of evil intertwined with brief moments of sincerity. Those of you familiar with the story will no doubt know that Snow White hides with the seven dwarves to escape the clutches of her stepmother, but more on that later.
Chris Hemsworth, who seems to be getting more and more acting jobs these days does a nice job as the widowed, constantly drunk huntsman, though his accent is a little hard to assess, no doubt done to cover his Australian roots.
Hemsworth is sent by the wicked Queen to kill Snow White so that her eternal youth isn’t threatened but things run less than smoothly as he realises that he is being tricked, he and Snow then decide to go on the run, bumping into the seven dwarves along the way.
The Kingdom in which they live is beautifully realised in fabulous CGI, from the dark forest, to the towering stone walls of the castle and then further into the ‘sanctuary’ a place where people can go to relax and unwind. Fairies, badgers, foxes, rabbits, mushrooms with beady little eyes and moss covered tortoises are amongst the creatures here and ruling over them all is the spirit of the forest, a fabulous and very real looking white stag.
This is, however, where Snow White & The Huntsman falls short. Yes, the CGI is impeccable and yes the acting is good, but it all feels a little bit soulless. It’s all about the frills rather than creating a deep and meaningful story. It has the basics right but it’s impossible to care about the characters because there isn’t enough back-story. Each set piece is interspersed with a little bit of emotion, but it’s not really enough and because of this, the entire film feels disjointed.
This is made worse by the fact the film is stretched to over two hours when there isn’t really enough story to create a two hour film.
Unfortunately, these points detract from what is a wonderful and beautifully realised adaptation of a classic children’s fairytale. To compare it to Mirror Mirror would be unfair as they are both so different. Snow White & The Huntsman is like last year’s Alice in Wonderland, it all looks and sounds great, but is ultimately; decidedly average.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2012/06/07/snow-white-the-huntsman-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Vacation (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Family holidays will never be the same
It was 1983 when Chevy Chase and Beverly D’Angelo made the infamous decision to take their family across the US to “America’s Favourite Family Fun Park” in National Lampoon’s Vacation.
Being the best in the long-running series, it seemed natural for it to receive a fully-fledged sequel of some kind, but it has taken up until now to get the balance right, but does Vacation evoke memories of that brilliant road-trip comedy?
Ed Helms takes on the role of an adult Rusty Griswold as he, like his father makes the epic trip to Walley World theme park alongside his long-suffering wife Debbie (Christina Applegate) and his two sons James and Kevin, played by Skyler Gisondo and Steele Stebbins respectively.
Everybody’s favourite thunder-god, Chris Hemsworth makes a rather revealing cameo as Rusty’s brother-in-law and ladies’ man, Stone Crandall, and helps lift Vacation out of what could have been a half-way lull.
Naturally, there are many tasteful references to its predecessor but this isn’t just a lesson in comedy history. Writers Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley inject some much-needed modern humour into the film – this is most definitely a movie from the 21st Century.
Ed Helms and Christina Applegate have real chemistry as the married couple but it is in their children that most of the laughs are. James and Kevin are the stereotypical, bickering siblings but like everything in Vacation they are turned up to eleven.
From raw sewage infested hot springs to a would-be maniac truck driver, the gags on the whole hit the spot every single time – by no means an easy feat when writing a comedy over 90 minutes in length. There are a couple of ill-placed laughs like a Four Corners police brawl that threaten to stop the film in its tracks, but thankfully these are few and far between.
Short but sweet cameos for Chevy Chase and Beverly D’Angelo towards the climax anchor Vacation to what came before it and it’s nice that the writers didn’t forget to honour those roots in more ways than sickly nostalgia.
The direction is also positively inspired. Acting like a tourist brochure for the USA, Vacation makes you feel like you’re part of the vast locations. From desolate highways to bustling cities, it’s all here and beautifully shot.
Unfortunately the plot seems to run a little out of steam towards the end. After all, there’s only so much déjà vu a story can take and it seems that the writers put all their best work in the first two thirds of the movie, as is the case with many films in the genre.
Nevertheless, Vacation is a confident film that knows exactly what it’s trying to be. Acting as a standalone comedy for newcomers and a decent sequel for fans of the original, it has something for everyone.
The acting is sublime and the casting choices are spot on, only a lacklustre final third pull it back from the edge of glory.
I probably won’t be planning that road trip any time soon.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/23/family-holidays-will-never-be-the-same-vacation-review/
Being the best in the long-running series, it seemed natural for it to receive a fully-fledged sequel of some kind, but it has taken up until now to get the balance right, but does Vacation evoke memories of that brilliant road-trip comedy?
Ed Helms takes on the role of an adult Rusty Griswold as he, like his father makes the epic trip to Walley World theme park alongside his long-suffering wife Debbie (Christina Applegate) and his two sons James and Kevin, played by Skyler Gisondo and Steele Stebbins respectively.
Everybody’s favourite thunder-god, Chris Hemsworth makes a rather revealing cameo as Rusty’s brother-in-law and ladies’ man, Stone Crandall, and helps lift Vacation out of what could have been a half-way lull.
Naturally, there are many tasteful references to its predecessor but this isn’t just a lesson in comedy history. Writers Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley inject some much-needed modern humour into the film – this is most definitely a movie from the 21st Century.
Ed Helms and Christina Applegate have real chemistry as the married couple but it is in their children that most of the laughs are. James and Kevin are the stereotypical, bickering siblings but like everything in Vacation they are turned up to eleven.
From raw sewage infested hot springs to a would-be maniac truck driver, the gags on the whole hit the spot every single time – by no means an easy feat when writing a comedy over 90 minutes in length. There are a couple of ill-placed laughs like a Four Corners police brawl that threaten to stop the film in its tracks, but thankfully these are few and far between.
Short but sweet cameos for Chevy Chase and Beverly D’Angelo towards the climax anchor Vacation to what came before it and it’s nice that the writers didn’t forget to honour those roots in more ways than sickly nostalgia.
The direction is also positively inspired. Acting like a tourist brochure for the USA, Vacation makes you feel like you’re part of the vast locations. From desolate highways to bustling cities, it’s all here and beautifully shot.
Unfortunately the plot seems to run a little out of steam towards the end. After all, there’s only so much déjà vu a story can take and it seems that the writers put all their best work in the first two thirds of the movie, as is the case with many films in the genre.
Nevertheless, Vacation is a confident film that knows exactly what it’s trying to be. Acting as a standalone comedy for newcomers and a decent sequel for fans of the original, it has something for everyone.
The acting is sublime and the casting choices are spot on, only a lacklustre final third pull it back from the edge of glory.
I probably won’t be planning that road trip any time soon.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/23/family-holidays-will-never-be-the-same-vacation-review/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Life Finds A Way
After really enjoying Jurassic World back in 2015, I was excited when they announced that a sequel was in the works. I felt optimistic about it because the ending of Jurassic World left it wide open for a story continuation, and I didn’t feel like they were just making a new one to milk a franchise. It’s no surprise that I can be hugely critical of sequels, but I was willing to give this one a fighting chance.
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom is set three years after the destruction of the Jurassic World park, and characters are faced with the dilemma of what to do now a volcano on the island is beginning to erupt. It’s a huge moral dilemma: let the dinosaurs die again, or move them to a safe location where they can thrive. Ultimately, Claire and Owen end up back on Isla Nublar with the help of a rescue team to round up the dinosaurs. As you can expect, things don’t go according to plan and we soon realise the rescue team has other, darker intentions.
Whilst this film is not the strongest in the franchise, it’s still an enjoyable watch. I wasn’t expecting it to be as thought provoking as it was, which was a pleasant surprise. I felt like the storyline had a lot of depth to it, and a lot of emotional moments too. One thing I really love about the Jurassic franchise is how they make you connect and feel emotions towards CGI dinosaurs. You know they aren’t real, yet you get so invested in the narrative that you quickly forget. In Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom we see some familiar dinosaurs from the previous films, as well as some new ones too. In classic Jurassic nature, we also see a brand new dinosaur that humans thought was a good idea to create… for some reason.
Another thing that surprised me was the horror-like elements that were present in the film. Without giving too much away, there’s a couple of scenes that are very reminiscent of classic horror and plummets the film into a much darker, creepier atmosphere. These scenes were incredibly well done and didn’t feel out of place, even though they could’ve easily felt too jarring. It was fun to witness the franchise experimenting with this, and enhances the scary side of the dinosaurs. There’s some really impressive shots during these scenes too, that emphasises the imposing nature of these creatures.
My biggest criticism of this film is that I felt like too much was going on, and consequently the narrative felt rushed. Despite it running at just over 2 hours, I almost felt like we needed another half hour to properly tell the story without glossing over some really important plot points. The main narrative was paced okay but then we had random side storylines that seemed unnecessary and just left me confused more than anything. It’s a shame they tried to cram so much into such a short space of time as there was no need to do that.
Long time fans of Jurassic Park should definitely give this a go as I think it’s a solid entry into the franchise, though it doesn’t do enough to ascend above its predecessors. It’s what I’ve described as a “fun, Monday night film” to people who’ve asked, so if you’re looking for a visually impressive blockbuster with loud roars and some creepy elements, this film is perfect for you.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/06/24/life-finds-a-way-jurassic-world-fallen-kingdom-review/
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom is set three years after the destruction of the Jurassic World park, and characters are faced with the dilemma of what to do now a volcano on the island is beginning to erupt. It’s a huge moral dilemma: let the dinosaurs die again, or move them to a safe location where they can thrive. Ultimately, Claire and Owen end up back on Isla Nublar with the help of a rescue team to round up the dinosaurs. As you can expect, things don’t go according to plan and we soon realise the rescue team has other, darker intentions.
Whilst this film is not the strongest in the franchise, it’s still an enjoyable watch. I wasn’t expecting it to be as thought provoking as it was, which was a pleasant surprise. I felt like the storyline had a lot of depth to it, and a lot of emotional moments too. One thing I really love about the Jurassic franchise is how they make you connect and feel emotions towards CGI dinosaurs. You know they aren’t real, yet you get so invested in the narrative that you quickly forget. In Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom we see some familiar dinosaurs from the previous films, as well as some new ones too. In classic Jurassic nature, we also see a brand new dinosaur that humans thought was a good idea to create… for some reason.
Another thing that surprised me was the horror-like elements that were present in the film. Without giving too much away, there’s a couple of scenes that are very reminiscent of classic horror and plummets the film into a much darker, creepier atmosphere. These scenes were incredibly well done and didn’t feel out of place, even though they could’ve easily felt too jarring. It was fun to witness the franchise experimenting with this, and enhances the scary side of the dinosaurs. There’s some really impressive shots during these scenes too, that emphasises the imposing nature of these creatures.
My biggest criticism of this film is that I felt like too much was going on, and consequently the narrative felt rushed. Despite it running at just over 2 hours, I almost felt like we needed another half hour to properly tell the story without glossing over some really important plot points. The main narrative was paced okay but then we had random side storylines that seemed unnecessary and just left me confused more than anything. It’s a shame they tried to cram so much into such a short space of time as there was no need to do that.
Long time fans of Jurassic Park should definitely give this a go as I think it’s a solid entry into the franchise, though it doesn’t do enough to ascend above its predecessors. It’s what I’ve described as a “fun, Monday night film” to people who’ve asked, so if you’re looking for a visually impressive blockbuster with loud roars and some creepy elements, this film is perfect for you.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/06/24/life-finds-a-way-jurassic-world-fallen-kingdom-review/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Toy Story 4 (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
Thoughts on Toy Story 4
Characters – Woody is struggling with not being in control of the room anymore, he still wants to help make Bonnie happy, which sees him acting selfishly, he does try to fix his own mistakes which will see him facing a second chance, meeting an old friend and distancing himself from his current friends. Woody is the key figure in this film, this is very much his story. Forky is the newly created toy out of a spork and is learning everything as it unfolds even though he believes he is trash. Buzz Lightyear is trying to step up when Woody goes off, he does feel like a bigger idiot than we are used to, using his voice commands to help him, which seems like a huge step back on his character. Bo Peep coming back to the franchise is fun, she shows Woody a new life away from kids, where she helps toys, she is Woody’s big love in life too, kick ass fighter too. Gabby Gabby is an older toy like Woody, she has been damaged and is searching for something to hope she can be taken home one day, she is painted as the villain, though she is the weakest villain in the franchise. Duke Caboom is the best addition to the film a stuntman that has failed as a toy, he is always up for trying something new and is filled with confidence.
Story – The story here follows Woody trying to find himself a place in the world after becoming a smaller part in the life of his new owner Bonnie, he gets too involved and spends most of the story trying to make up for his mistake of letting Bonnie create a new toy, caught in the middle saving the day or breaking free. Now this is the 4th part of the franchise which did tie up nicely after the third one. The supporting characters do take a big back burner in the story which even sees Buzz getting less screen time, this is a full Woody story trying to figure out where his life is going on next. We do try to play on the heart strings, though it just doesn’t get to the levels it could have and has been there before. The new characters to bring the bright spark to the story, but we do end up going down the road, where this is becoming too unbelievable that these toys are acting like this.
Adventure/Comedy – The adventure side of this film comes from the idea that Woody will need to go on a new adventure to save Forky, only to see Buzz on his own adventure which does cross paths with Woody, only his feels like a simple side to everything. the comedy from the new characters hits very well, its just old character seem to fall short.
Settings – Having the film use an Antique story is great idea because we get to see known toys that could add comedy in places, the carnival also adds potential new characters too.
Animation – The animation is Pixar at its very best, it looks perfect like we know they are used to bring us, bringing us larger scale environment to everything going on.
Scene of the Movie – Duke Caboom.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Buzz seems to be dumber.
Final Thoughts – This does end up feeling like a cash grab sequel, it doesn’t have the heart the previous films do and fails to use the original characters well enough.
Overall: By the book sequel.
Characters – Woody is struggling with not being in control of the room anymore, he still wants to help make Bonnie happy, which sees him acting selfishly, he does try to fix his own mistakes which will see him facing a second chance, meeting an old friend and distancing himself from his current friends. Woody is the key figure in this film, this is very much his story. Forky is the newly created toy out of a spork and is learning everything as it unfolds even though he believes he is trash. Buzz Lightyear is trying to step up when Woody goes off, he does feel like a bigger idiot than we are used to, using his voice commands to help him, which seems like a huge step back on his character. Bo Peep coming back to the franchise is fun, she shows Woody a new life away from kids, where she helps toys, she is Woody’s big love in life too, kick ass fighter too. Gabby Gabby is an older toy like Woody, she has been damaged and is searching for something to hope she can be taken home one day, she is painted as the villain, though she is the weakest villain in the franchise. Duke Caboom is the best addition to the film a stuntman that has failed as a toy, he is always up for trying something new and is filled with confidence.
Story – The story here follows Woody trying to find himself a place in the world after becoming a smaller part in the life of his new owner Bonnie, he gets too involved and spends most of the story trying to make up for his mistake of letting Bonnie create a new toy, caught in the middle saving the day or breaking free. Now this is the 4th part of the franchise which did tie up nicely after the third one. The supporting characters do take a big back burner in the story which even sees Buzz getting less screen time, this is a full Woody story trying to figure out where his life is going on next. We do try to play on the heart strings, though it just doesn’t get to the levels it could have and has been there before. The new characters to bring the bright spark to the story, but we do end up going down the road, where this is becoming too unbelievable that these toys are acting like this.
Adventure/Comedy – The adventure side of this film comes from the idea that Woody will need to go on a new adventure to save Forky, only to see Buzz on his own adventure which does cross paths with Woody, only his feels like a simple side to everything. the comedy from the new characters hits very well, its just old character seem to fall short.
Settings – Having the film use an Antique story is great idea because we get to see known toys that could add comedy in places, the carnival also adds potential new characters too.
Animation – The animation is Pixar at its very best, it looks perfect like we know they are used to bring us, bringing us larger scale environment to everything going on.
Scene of the Movie – Duke Caboom.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Buzz seems to be dumber.
Final Thoughts – This does end up feeling like a cash grab sequel, it doesn’t have the heart the previous films do and fails to use the original characters well enough.
Overall: By the book sequel.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Good Liar (2019) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
Mirren and McKellen are acting in 2 different movies
In a time where large comic-book, CGI-infused monster fests are all the rage in the Cineplex, it is a welcome relief to find a cleverly written, acting-rich mystery story featuring two world class actors of "a certain age", defying the odds to make a memorable motion picture.
And...they almost succeeded.
Written by Twin Cities native Jeffrey Hatcher, THE GOOD LIAR tells the tale of a...well...good liar played by Ian McKEllen. His con-man, Roy Courtney, is a roguish scamp, bilking crooks and ne'er do wells out of their money. He then sets his sights on rich Widow Betty McLeish (Helen Mirren) and her millions of dollars.
We spend the first 3/4 of this film following Roy - and his con-man ways - and it is a pleasure to spend that time under the twinkling eyes of Sir Ian McKellen. He plays Roy with a bit of a light touch, driving down into the dirty work whenever he needs to, but spending most of his time outsmarting his opponents with a sly grin, a wry comment and a light step. He cares not for his marks, that is...until he meets Betty. And Mirren and McKellen have the ability to play off each other very well and this would have been a more effective film if both of them were acting in the same sort of film.
For, you see, McKellen is playing in a bit of light drama, landing his acting chops in a style reminiscent of con-man films like THE STING and NOW YOU SEE ME. Mirren, however, (who takes over the last 1/4 of the film) seems to be performing in a heavy drama like SOPHIE'S CHOICE or THE FRENCH LIEUTENANT'S WOMAN and I think it was the tone that each of these actors brought to their roles that drove both of these fine actors to this project.
Unfortunately, the dichotomy of the different acting styles, mood and tone ultimately derails this film and brings it down a peg from the austere heights it aspires to be.
I place the blame on Director Bill Condon (Mr. Holmes) who had two very good actors - and an interesting story - and just couldn't find the correct balance point for these actors, and this story. He also is not helped by Hatcher's script which really takes a dark turn (darker than is necessary for the story) that is a bit jarring. If this film wanted to be heavy and dark, then it shouldn't have been so light and fun at the beginning - and Sir Ian's performance needed to be heavier and darker at the beginning. Or it needed to "lighten up a bit" at the end and push Mirren's performance out of the darkness and a bit more into the light.
All-in-all it's a fine, throwback. A two actor film that is in short supplies these days - so well worth seeing. Though I will always pine for what could have been had the tone been evened out between these two veteran performers.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And...they almost succeeded.
Written by Twin Cities native Jeffrey Hatcher, THE GOOD LIAR tells the tale of a...well...good liar played by Ian McKEllen. His con-man, Roy Courtney, is a roguish scamp, bilking crooks and ne'er do wells out of their money. He then sets his sights on rich Widow Betty McLeish (Helen Mirren) and her millions of dollars.
We spend the first 3/4 of this film following Roy - and his con-man ways - and it is a pleasure to spend that time under the twinkling eyes of Sir Ian McKellen. He plays Roy with a bit of a light touch, driving down into the dirty work whenever he needs to, but spending most of his time outsmarting his opponents with a sly grin, a wry comment and a light step. He cares not for his marks, that is...until he meets Betty. And Mirren and McKellen have the ability to play off each other very well and this would have been a more effective film if both of them were acting in the same sort of film.
For, you see, McKellen is playing in a bit of light drama, landing his acting chops in a style reminiscent of con-man films like THE STING and NOW YOU SEE ME. Mirren, however, (who takes over the last 1/4 of the film) seems to be performing in a heavy drama like SOPHIE'S CHOICE or THE FRENCH LIEUTENANT'S WOMAN and I think it was the tone that each of these actors brought to their roles that drove both of these fine actors to this project.
Unfortunately, the dichotomy of the different acting styles, mood and tone ultimately derails this film and brings it down a peg from the austere heights it aspires to be.
I place the blame on Director Bill Condon (Mr. Holmes) who had two very good actors - and an interesting story - and just couldn't find the correct balance point for these actors, and this story. He also is not helped by Hatcher's script which really takes a dark turn (darker than is necessary for the story) that is a bit jarring. If this film wanted to be heavy and dark, then it shouldn't have been so light and fun at the beginning - and Sir Ian's performance needed to be heavier and darker at the beginning. Or it needed to "lighten up a bit" at the end and push Mirren's performance out of the darkness and a bit more into the light.
All-in-all it's a fine, throwback. A two actor film that is in short supplies these days - so well worth seeing. Though I will always pine for what could have been had the tone been evened out between these two veteran performers.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Parasite (2019) in Movies
Feb 9, 2020
It’s so metaphorical.
Everyone said “Go see Parasite”. Everyone said “The one rule about Parasite is that you don’t talk about Parasite”. So I went to see Parasite. So this is a review about Parasite without talking about Parasite.
Kim Ki-Woo (Woo-sik Choi) is a student living with his family in poverty in a sub-basement room, sponging off internet signals and scrounging a living, of sorts, by assembling pizza boxes. Opportunity presents itself when his best friend, the slightly older Min (Seo-joon Park), goes abroad to study. For Min is an English tutor to the up-market Park family’s school-age daughter Da-hye (Ji-so Jung). Not wanting his fellow ‘frat-boys’ to move in on future romance – he’s lined up Ki-Woo as his replacement.
Ki-woo knows he’s lucked in when he visits the swanky Park residence and manages to pull the wool over the eyes of Da-hye’s not too bright mother Yeon-kyo (Yeo-jeong Jo). But the influence of the family’s “lucky rock” doesn’t stop there. Ki-woo sees an opportunity to get jobs for his sister Kim (So-dam Park), his father Ki-taek (Kang-ho Song) and his mother Chung-sook (Hye-jin Jang). And gradually the poor Kim family start to encroach on the rich Park family’s lives.
You might think that’s the story. It’s not. Just when you think you know where the film is going – a gentle comic tale with farcical elements – the movie takes a sudden left turn into The Twilight Zone.
To say more, if you’ve not seen the film, would be cruelty beyond measure. It’s a truly astonishing script, by writer/director Bong Joon Ho, and my nomination for the Oscar for best original screenplay.
It’s the details that get to you. This will be a superb film to watch multiple times. There are fabulous details scattered throughout. You know how the more expensive the car the more “solid” the clunk is as you shut the door? Listen to the sound effect when the Park front door shuts! Look what happens to the “one of a kind” lucky rock!
As for one of my favourite films from last year – “The Farewell” – you very quickly get to accept and embrace the subtitles. YOU MUST NOT LET THIS PUT YOU OFF. This is a masterpiece of cinema, well-deserving of its multiple Oscar nominations and its Cannes Palme d’Or award. At 132 minutes, it’s not a short film, but seldom have two hours flown by faster. It’s totally gripping. At times hysterically funny; at times shocking. A class struggle movie of a calibre that Ken Loach would never have imagined!
Gripes? I had just one. An action near the end of the movie seems bizarrely out of character and was a “WTF” moment that I didn’t think the film needed. However, it did set up a wonderful story-telling finale that I will think about for many months.
It provoked that seldom found reaction in the cinema when the end-titles ran. A hubbub of chatter and appreciation.
It comes with a highly recommended from me.
For the full graphical review, check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/09/one-manns-movies-film-review-parasite-2020/.
Kim Ki-Woo (Woo-sik Choi) is a student living with his family in poverty in a sub-basement room, sponging off internet signals and scrounging a living, of sorts, by assembling pizza boxes. Opportunity presents itself when his best friend, the slightly older Min (Seo-joon Park), goes abroad to study. For Min is an English tutor to the up-market Park family’s school-age daughter Da-hye (Ji-so Jung). Not wanting his fellow ‘frat-boys’ to move in on future romance – he’s lined up Ki-Woo as his replacement.
Ki-woo knows he’s lucked in when he visits the swanky Park residence and manages to pull the wool over the eyes of Da-hye’s not too bright mother Yeon-kyo (Yeo-jeong Jo). But the influence of the family’s “lucky rock” doesn’t stop there. Ki-woo sees an opportunity to get jobs for his sister Kim (So-dam Park), his father Ki-taek (Kang-ho Song) and his mother Chung-sook (Hye-jin Jang). And gradually the poor Kim family start to encroach on the rich Park family’s lives.
You might think that’s the story. It’s not. Just when you think you know where the film is going – a gentle comic tale with farcical elements – the movie takes a sudden left turn into The Twilight Zone.
To say more, if you’ve not seen the film, would be cruelty beyond measure. It’s a truly astonishing script, by writer/director Bong Joon Ho, and my nomination for the Oscar for best original screenplay.
It’s the details that get to you. This will be a superb film to watch multiple times. There are fabulous details scattered throughout. You know how the more expensive the car the more “solid” the clunk is as you shut the door? Listen to the sound effect when the Park front door shuts! Look what happens to the “one of a kind” lucky rock!
As for one of my favourite films from last year – “The Farewell” – you very quickly get to accept and embrace the subtitles. YOU MUST NOT LET THIS PUT YOU OFF. This is a masterpiece of cinema, well-deserving of its multiple Oscar nominations and its Cannes Palme d’Or award. At 132 minutes, it’s not a short film, but seldom have two hours flown by faster. It’s totally gripping. At times hysterically funny; at times shocking. A class struggle movie of a calibre that Ken Loach would never have imagined!
Gripes? I had just one. An action near the end of the movie seems bizarrely out of character and was a “WTF” moment that I didn’t think the film needed. However, it did set up a wonderful story-telling finale that I will think about for many months.
It provoked that seldom found reaction in the cinema when the end-titles ran. A hubbub of chatter and appreciation.
It comes with a highly recommended from me.
For the full graphical review, check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/09/one-manns-movies-film-review-parasite-2020/.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Little Joe (2019) in Movies
Jun 15, 2020
Everyone knows a working Joe
Little Joe is a look into happiness and the lengths we will go to to achieve it while also delving deeply into the manipulation, the deprivation of freedom, greed and selfishness that can surround and alter that path too. After having a very limited cinema release in th Uk i decided to pre-order this on itunes. Today sees its release and after giving it a watch I can say I really did enjoy this movie despite a lot of other reviews saying its unwatchable due to its high pitched soundtrack. Little Joe most of the time is a very cold and clinically sterile looking film thats contrasted subtlety with bold pastle shades of colour in sets that almost have an art deco feel to them. This helps the film look constantly striking/beautiful but also adds a sense of unnatural uneasiness too it too. Combine this with a soundtrack made up of scratches, plucks, plinks and plonks woven together into a score that has an almost oriental sound to it which gives the film a constant chilling vibe and an unnerving/erie atmosphere. Its invokes intense stress on the senses thats for sure and it kept me feeling uncomfortable/stressed the entire movie and also leaving me ears ringing long after the film had had ended too. I wouldnt say its unbearable however and it definitely fits the film/adds to the atmosphere. Performances are great too feeling again very cold and focused with Ben Whishaw being the standout here as always playing a charcter so professional and confident when it comes to work yet so socially awkward when it comes to his relationships with other people. Theres running theme of happiness here thats for sure and the heights/lengths we as people will go to to just to achieve it. Primarily as a film it seems focused on questioning if drugs for conditions such as depression or dementia that are taken to make people feel happier/more 'normal' are worth the cost of losing personalities, emotions and in a sense freedom because like they say in the film "who cares if people are zombies as long as they are happy". Theres also a look at parents subduing childs behaviours for a quieter life which in a sence takes away all the traits youth and the joys of being a child bring, or partners that cant deal with thier other half being sad or having arguments all the time so they presure them onto drugs in a selfish/controlling way because to then its far easier and less time consuming than actually learning/undertsanding and putting in the effort in to helping them. Then theres how society mocks, neglects and fails to understand certain illnesses and also how companies profit from them making drugs with increasingly worse side effects but it doesnt phase them as long as they are meeting targets/company goals. Little Joe definitely contains a lot of very thought provoking stuff its just sadly all a bit messy when mixed in with all the films dark comedy and scifi horror elements and it does quite often lose its way or fall short on conclusions. That being said i found this film to be well worth the watch just be sure you know before you go in that its very slow, stressful and depressing with an intense score and a conclusion thats ultimately unrewarding but overall its great little look into the effects of drugs that are meant to help with making us all feel 'normal' and 'happy' in life.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The True Adventures of Wolfboy (2021) in Movies
Mar 1, 2021
Nice but lacking in magic
The Adventures of Wolfboy, also known as The True Adventures of Wolfboy, is a 2021 coming of age style drama and the feature film debut from Czech director Martin Krejcí. It follows Paul, a teenager with a life changing physical condition called congenital hypertrichosis that causes an abnormal and excessive amount of hair growth across his entire body, as he journeys to meet his estranged mother.
Paul (Jaeden Martell) lives an isolated life with his father in New York, where he hides away from everyone and only ventures out under the cover of a woolly balaclava, despite his father’s (Chris Messina) attempts to coax him into accepting his condition and revealing himself to the world. After a failed trip out to the local carnival for his 13th birthday, Paul returns home to find a mysterious gift from his mother (Chloë Sevigny), who he’s never known as she left when he was a child. Following a confrontation with his father over his proposal to send him to a special school, Paul runs away from home in search of his estranged mother. Along the way, he meets a number of colourful characters including carnival owner Mr. Silk (John Turturro), complicated and friendly Aristiana (Sophie Giannamore) and the daring and roguish Rose (Eve Hewson).
The Adventures of Wolfboy is undoubtedly a film for young adults or teenagers, meant as a coming of age, ‘accepting yourself’ type of road movie and in this it succeeds, although its message is rather more subtle than you’d expect. It expertly deals with the theme of loving yourself and others just as you are in a very low key manner, to the point where you almost miss the subtle hints at a character’s backstory (which is definitely true for Aristiana). For some this might be a problem, but a lot of films go out of their way to be heavy handed, virtually shoving a message down your throat so for me, I enjoyed the subtleties on display here. They’re helped by an unassuming performance from Jaeden Martell and charismatic turns from both Eve Hewson and Sophie Giannamore, who altogether with a story that doesn’t play out quite as predictably as first thought, make this an entertaining and heartwarming watch.
That said, despite the well meaning and heartwarming intentions, this film does falter. The title itself and the fairytale storyboard chapter titles throughout the film give this a magical sense of fantasy that just doesn’t quite materialise. I feel like it’s meant to be whimsical and adventurous, but the actual finished article falls short. It isn’t helped by John Turturro’s Mr Silk, who despite being the villain just comes across as weird rather than sinister, and what becomes of his character is a little lacklustre too. Generally if feels like it’s missing some ‘oomph’, a magical whimsical boost to turn this into something more than an average coming of age movie.
The Adventures of Wolfboy is a nice heartwarming film, and it’s refreshing to see a subtle take on a subject that has been done many times before. I just wished they’d have taken the magical and whimsical angle further, as this would have made it more than just average.
Paul (Jaeden Martell) lives an isolated life with his father in New York, where he hides away from everyone and only ventures out under the cover of a woolly balaclava, despite his father’s (Chris Messina) attempts to coax him into accepting his condition and revealing himself to the world. After a failed trip out to the local carnival for his 13th birthday, Paul returns home to find a mysterious gift from his mother (Chloë Sevigny), who he’s never known as she left when he was a child. Following a confrontation with his father over his proposal to send him to a special school, Paul runs away from home in search of his estranged mother. Along the way, he meets a number of colourful characters including carnival owner Mr. Silk (John Turturro), complicated and friendly Aristiana (Sophie Giannamore) and the daring and roguish Rose (Eve Hewson).
The Adventures of Wolfboy is undoubtedly a film for young adults or teenagers, meant as a coming of age, ‘accepting yourself’ type of road movie and in this it succeeds, although its message is rather more subtle than you’d expect. It expertly deals with the theme of loving yourself and others just as you are in a very low key manner, to the point where you almost miss the subtle hints at a character’s backstory (which is definitely true for Aristiana). For some this might be a problem, but a lot of films go out of their way to be heavy handed, virtually shoving a message down your throat so for me, I enjoyed the subtleties on display here. They’re helped by an unassuming performance from Jaeden Martell and charismatic turns from both Eve Hewson and Sophie Giannamore, who altogether with a story that doesn’t play out quite as predictably as first thought, make this an entertaining and heartwarming watch.
That said, despite the well meaning and heartwarming intentions, this film does falter. The title itself and the fairytale storyboard chapter titles throughout the film give this a magical sense of fantasy that just doesn’t quite materialise. I feel like it’s meant to be whimsical and adventurous, but the actual finished article falls short. It isn’t helped by John Turturro’s Mr Silk, who despite being the villain just comes across as weird rather than sinister, and what becomes of his character is a little lacklustre too. Generally if feels like it’s missing some ‘oomph’, a magical whimsical boost to turn this into something more than an average coming of age movie.
The Adventures of Wolfboy is a nice heartwarming film, and it’s refreshing to see a subtle take on a subject that has been done many times before. I just wished they’d have taken the magical and whimsical angle further, as this would have made it more than just average.