Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Book of Henry (2017) in Movies
Oct 2, 2019
Characters – Susan is the mother of the house, though she doesn’t have the full responsibility in the house as she lets her genius son Henry handle the finances in the home. She is a single working mother that does everything she can to help her kids, enjoys a drink with her best friend Sheila and videos to release the stress, she must go through a difficult process when Henry becomes sick and wants to follow his book to do the right thing. Henry is a genius 12-year-old boy, he keeps his family together while trying to leave his own legacy, he knows how to work the stock market which keeps the family a float and when he sees wrong in the world he wants to help change it, this brings him to write a book to stop the abuse of his neighbour by her stepfather. Peter is the younger brother to Henry, he always looks up to him and wants to help him with his innocent being the only thing that lets Henry have fun. Sheila is the best friend and work colleague of Susan, she enjoys herself a drink and has great banter with Henry. Glenn is the neighbour and police chief living next door to the Carpenter family, he has a stepdaughter that he is abusing though he position of power makes it nearly impossible for him to get investigated. Dr Daniels is the man that must treat Henry, he must help the family through the difficult decision.
Performances – Naomi Watts in the leading role is great through this film, we see how her character needs to develop after what happens to Henry. Jaeden continues to show us he is a fast-rising child star along with Jacob Tremblay who are both going to be talked about as a couple of the best of the current generations. Silverman, Morris and Pace give us good supporting performances throughout the film too.
Story – The story here follows a genius son that helps run the family to help take the pressure of his single mother, he plans long term and wants to make the world a better place, though when sees abuse he wants to step in and help. He doesn’t expect the short term though, leaving his legacy to his mother to help solve the abuse he sees the neighbour going through. We do have moments that make the children feel like they are in ‘Pay it Forward’ which does have a better message about, doing something to make the world a better place, this story does get that message over and does make you want to help bring calm to the world. if I was being honest with the way the story is told, I feel it would have been nice to mix the planning Henry does with the actual plan rather than showing his plan before the incident.
Crime – The film does have a crime base to everything going on, we get to see how Henry sees a crime being committed and the only way he can solve it is to have someone commit a crime for him.
Settings – The film shows us the simple life the Carpenter family are currently living and how Henry is happy with this even though he can make them rich with a blink of an eye, he wants family over anything.
Scene of the Movie – Take the shot.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The kids are way to talent in the talent contest.
Final Thoughts – This is a film that has taken a beating by the critics and sure there are a couple of weaknesses in this film, but the core of the story is one of the most interesting ways to show a child genius doing the right thing in life, well-acted and one people should be giving a chance too.
Overall: Nice story about leaving a legacy.
Performances – Naomi Watts in the leading role is great through this film, we see how her character needs to develop after what happens to Henry. Jaeden continues to show us he is a fast-rising child star along with Jacob Tremblay who are both going to be talked about as a couple of the best of the current generations. Silverman, Morris and Pace give us good supporting performances throughout the film too.
Story – The story here follows a genius son that helps run the family to help take the pressure of his single mother, he plans long term and wants to make the world a better place, though when sees abuse he wants to step in and help. He doesn’t expect the short term though, leaving his legacy to his mother to help solve the abuse he sees the neighbour going through. We do have moments that make the children feel like they are in ‘Pay it Forward’ which does have a better message about, doing something to make the world a better place, this story does get that message over and does make you want to help bring calm to the world. if I was being honest with the way the story is told, I feel it would have been nice to mix the planning Henry does with the actual plan rather than showing his plan before the incident.
Crime – The film does have a crime base to everything going on, we get to see how Henry sees a crime being committed and the only way he can solve it is to have someone commit a crime for him.
Settings – The film shows us the simple life the Carpenter family are currently living and how Henry is happy with this even though he can make them rich with a blink of an eye, he wants family over anything.
Scene of the Movie – Take the shot.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The kids are way to talent in the talent contest.
Final Thoughts – This is a film that has taken a beating by the critics and sure there are a couple of weaknesses in this film, but the core of the story is one of the most interesting ways to show a child genius doing the right thing in life, well-acted and one people should be giving a chance too.
Overall: Nice story about leaving a legacy.
Shifts – Shift Worker Calendar
Productivity and Business
App
*** 60% OFF FOR A LIMITED TIME ONLY *** Shifts is the fastest and easiest way to enter and view...
StudentLife Organizer
Productivity and Education
App
--TRY STUDENTLIFE TODAY FOR FREE-- StudentLife is the calendar application and organizer designed...
Master Fear of Flying
Travel and Medical
App
Discover your flying fear type with our questionnaire at masterfearofflying.com The interactive...
Snowboard Party Pro
Games and Sports
App
Snowboard Party brings the thrill of snowboarding to your mobile device! Get ready to ride the...
Toca Life: Hospital
Education and Entertainment
App
Experience the excitement of a busy medical center with Toca Life: Hospital! Welcome newborn babies...
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Girls with Sharp Sticks (Girls with Sharp Sticks #1) in Books
Oct 19, 2022
When I read the synopsis of Girls with Sharp Sticks by Suzanne Young, I was hooked. I love stories about mysterious boarding schools, so I had to read this book! Plus, I had read The Program by Suzanne Young and loved that book. I was not disappointed by this novel.
Philomena aka Mena is one of the beautiful girls. In fact, all the girls at her all girls boarding school are beautiful. They are taught how to behave. They're only allowed salads for food, and their classes focus more on etiquette and how to act in male company. They are all fully obedient until one day something awakens in Mena. She realizes that not all is as it seems at her boarding school. Something sinister is going on, and Mena will do anything to find out to protect her friends.
The plot of Girls with Sharp Sticks has been done before. In fact, much of the plot reminded me so much of the 2018 film Level 16 with a few differences. However, I still really enjoyed the plot. While one of the major plot twists became obvious to me about halfway through the book, there were still a few plot twists that I never would have predicted. Throughout my reading of this book, I felt like I was standing right there in the pages watching everything unfold. Yes, there were some over the top things that happened in the story, but this didn't put me off. I loved that this novel didn't have much romance in it. There is a very light romance though.
I very much enjoyed the creepy boarding school setting with it's very strict teachers (the majority of them male). As this is a series, there is a minor cliff hanger, but I feel like this book can be read without having to read the other books in the series unless you want to know what happens afterwards. You could just read Girls with Sharp Sticks and leave it with the happyish ending though if you really wanted to.
I enjoyed reading about all the characters even the vile ones. Mena certainly was an interesting character with her thought process and how fearless she was. Her curiosity did get her in trouble from time to time, but she persevered to get to the bottom of what was happening at her school in order to protect her friends. Guardian Bose was easy to hate because of how horrible he treated the girls. I just wanted him to go away because he was so mean! I had a love hate relationship with Anton. On one hand, I felt that he cared about the girls in his own way, but I knew he was not to be trusted at all. Jackson had an interesting back story, but after learning his back story, I was left wanting to know more about him. My favorite character throughout the book was Valentine. There was just something about her. In my mind, I had pictured her a a beautiful frail girl, but looks can be deceiving! I was hoping we'd get to read more about her throughout the book than what we did. Valentine was the best part of the book in my opinion.
Trigger warnings for Girls with Sharp Sticks include profanity, blackmail, brainwashing, violence, mentions of sexual assault, and murder.
All in all, Girls with Sharp Sticks is an engrossing read with its interesting character and a plot that will have you cheering on the young women as they try to figure out what's going on at their school. I would definitely recommend Girls with Sharp Sticks by Suzanne Young to those ages 16+ who are sick of being told what to do by the patriarchy.
Philomena aka Mena is one of the beautiful girls. In fact, all the girls at her all girls boarding school are beautiful. They are taught how to behave. They're only allowed salads for food, and their classes focus more on etiquette and how to act in male company. They are all fully obedient until one day something awakens in Mena. She realizes that not all is as it seems at her boarding school. Something sinister is going on, and Mena will do anything to find out to protect her friends.
The plot of Girls with Sharp Sticks has been done before. In fact, much of the plot reminded me so much of the 2018 film Level 16 with a few differences. However, I still really enjoyed the plot. While one of the major plot twists became obvious to me about halfway through the book, there were still a few plot twists that I never would have predicted. Throughout my reading of this book, I felt like I was standing right there in the pages watching everything unfold. Yes, there were some over the top things that happened in the story, but this didn't put me off. I loved that this novel didn't have much romance in it. There is a very light romance though.
I very much enjoyed the creepy boarding school setting with it's very strict teachers (the majority of them male). As this is a series, there is a minor cliff hanger, but I feel like this book can be read without having to read the other books in the series unless you want to know what happens afterwards. You could just read Girls with Sharp Sticks and leave it with the happyish ending though if you really wanted to.
I enjoyed reading about all the characters even the vile ones. Mena certainly was an interesting character with her thought process and how fearless she was. Her curiosity did get her in trouble from time to time, but she persevered to get to the bottom of what was happening at her school in order to protect her friends. Guardian Bose was easy to hate because of how horrible he treated the girls. I just wanted him to go away because he was so mean! I had a love hate relationship with Anton. On one hand, I felt that he cared about the girls in his own way, but I knew he was not to be trusted at all. Jackson had an interesting back story, but after learning his back story, I was left wanting to know more about him. My favorite character throughout the book was Valentine. There was just something about her. In my mind, I had pictured her a a beautiful frail girl, but looks can be deceiving! I was hoping we'd get to read more about her throughout the book than what we did. Valentine was the best part of the book in my opinion.
Trigger warnings for Girls with Sharp Sticks include profanity, blackmail, brainwashing, violence, mentions of sexual assault, and murder.
All in all, Girls with Sharp Sticks is an engrossing read with its interesting character and a plot that will have you cheering on the young women as they try to figure out what's going on at their school. I would definitely recommend Girls with Sharp Sticks by Suzanne Young to those ages 16+ who are sick of being told what to do by the patriarchy.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Blade Runner 2049 (2017) in Movies
Oct 9, 2017 (Updated Oct 13, 2017)
One of the most visually stunning movies I have ever seen. (8 more)
Awesome production design.
Brilliant direction.
Beautiful cinematography.
Solid performances.
Incredible SFX.
Great score.
Good use of lighting.
Well written script and dialogue.
Villeneuve Strikes Gold Yet Again
Wow, this movie is a feast for your eyeballs. I won't go on about the visuals too much, as I'm sure that you have already heard how good looking this movie is, all I'll say is this; the movie deserves to be seen in the biggest screen possible. What is even better though, is unlike a Zack Snyder film, Blade Runner 2049 has more to it than just surface level, pretty visuals.
Somehow, Denis Villeneuve has achieved the impossible. He has directed a movie every year for the last five years and they have all been absolutely incredible, also he has managed to pull off a fantastic sequel to a 35 year old classic.
I loved almost every part of this movie. The direction was masterful to watch, with the movie being moved along at a deliberate, purposeful pace, rather than rushing through from action scene to action scene. The sets in this were out of this world, some props were really cool to look at and the use of mostly practical backdrops made a huge difference as opposed to using an abundance of green screen. Rodger Deakins' cinematography was astonishing, you could honestly screen grab an image from any time stamp in this movie and it would work perfectly as a beautiful desktop background.
I also thought that the performances were fantastic and everyone did a great job. Although Ford doesn't appear until the movie's third act, when he does he is great. Gosling commands his leading man role as we've come to expect him to. Robin Wright and Dave Bautista were the other standouts for me in terms of their performances.
The more technical elements of the movie worked perfectly in tandem with the story being told as well. The special effects were beautifully implemented and the lighting in the movie added a whole other layer of visual depth as well. The score also worked for the tone that the movie was aiming to achieve. The script was also solid and tightly woven.
The only thing I will say is; if you are going into the film expecting a sci-fi action blockbuster, you will come out disappointed. This is a slow paced, sci-fi noir, detective story. There are a few sparse moments of action and it does feel impactful when it occurs, but it is not the focus of the movie at all.
The one small element that bothered me was Jared Leto's performance. He took me out of the movie and was the only cast member who didn't feel like a real character within this world. Maybe I'm just being biased, as Jared Leto has always annoyed me in general, but for me he was the one bad part of this near masterpiece. Thankfully he doesn't get that much screen time, so it could have been worse. Also, the fact that David Bowie was originally cast in that role adds an extra sprinkle of salt in the wound.
Unfortunately, much like the original movie, this hasn't done great at the box office on its opening weekend. If like me, you are sick of mindless sequel cash cows that are total garbage such as Jurassic World, go and see this movie and vote with your wallet. If you don't, we are telling Hollywood that as a collective, we don't want sequels with depth and integrity, we want dumb, rushed, forgettable nonsense and that is what we will end up getting. Support this movie for the betterment of filmmaking and cinema, even if you haven't seen the original.
Overall I loved the movie, but I can see why people are finding it divisive. For me though, the vast majority of this movie's parts were absolutely fantastic and come together to form a journey that you must experience for yourself.
Somehow, Denis Villeneuve has achieved the impossible. He has directed a movie every year for the last five years and they have all been absolutely incredible, also he has managed to pull off a fantastic sequel to a 35 year old classic.
I loved almost every part of this movie. The direction was masterful to watch, with the movie being moved along at a deliberate, purposeful pace, rather than rushing through from action scene to action scene. The sets in this were out of this world, some props were really cool to look at and the use of mostly practical backdrops made a huge difference as opposed to using an abundance of green screen. Rodger Deakins' cinematography was astonishing, you could honestly screen grab an image from any time stamp in this movie and it would work perfectly as a beautiful desktop background.
I also thought that the performances were fantastic and everyone did a great job. Although Ford doesn't appear until the movie's third act, when he does he is great. Gosling commands his leading man role as we've come to expect him to. Robin Wright and Dave Bautista were the other standouts for me in terms of their performances.
The more technical elements of the movie worked perfectly in tandem with the story being told as well. The special effects were beautifully implemented and the lighting in the movie added a whole other layer of visual depth as well. The score also worked for the tone that the movie was aiming to achieve. The script was also solid and tightly woven.
The only thing I will say is; if you are going into the film expecting a sci-fi action blockbuster, you will come out disappointed. This is a slow paced, sci-fi noir, detective story. There are a few sparse moments of action and it does feel impactful when it occurs, but it is not the focus of the movie at all.
The one small element that bothered me was Jared Leto's performance. He took me out of the movie and was the only cast member who didn't feel like a real character within this world. Maybe I'm just being biased, as Jared Leto has always annoyed me in general, but for me he was the one bad part of this near masterpiece. Thankfully he doesn't get that much screen time, so it could have been worse. Also, the fact that David Bowie was originally cast in that role adds an extra sprinkle of salt in the wound.
Unfortunately, much like the original movie, this hasn't done great at the box office on its opening weekend. If like me, you are sick of mindless sequel cash cows that are total garbage such as Jurassic World, go and see this movie and vote with your wallet. If you don't, we are telling Hollywood that as a collective, we don't want sequels with depth and integrity, we want dumb, rushed, forgettable nonsense and that is what we will end up getting. Support this movie for the betterment of filmmaking and cinema, even if you haven't seen the original.
Overall I loved the movie, but I can see why people are finding it divisive. For me though, the vast majority of this movie's parts were absolutely fantastic and come together to form a journey that you must experience for yourself.
Lee (2222 KP) rated It Comes At Night (2017) in Movies
Jul 14, 2017
Tension packed, slow burner
I headed into ‘It Comes At Night’ in a similar way to when I saw ‘Get Out‘ a few months back – having seen a lot of positive four or five star buzz about it on my news feeds, but without actually seeing the trailer. I skimmed a couple of reviews this time, just to get a rough idea of what I was in for, and one of the words which seemed to crop up on a number of them was ‘unsettling’. Well, that sold it for me! Get Out is my favourite movie of the year so far, and I felt that my enjoyment of seeing that had been greatly improved having not seen the trailer, and with no expectations. So, I went into ‘It Comes At Night’ hoping for a similar experience.
The opening scene sets the tone for what’s to come. A sick old man listens to his daughter Sarah tell him she loves him. She’s wearing a protective gas mask, as are her husband and son. Husband Paul and son Travis then take grandpa out of the cabin they’re in, into the woods where they proceed to wrap him up in a sheet, shoot him in the head, roll him into a ditch and set fire to him. It becomes apparent that we’re in a post apocalyptic world where some kind of plague has taken hold, and Grandpa had unfortunately become infected. We’re not shown any TV news footage, we don’t hear any radio broadcast of any kind and there aren’t any zombies or infected people wandering around. There’s just this small family, out in the middle of nowhere and with no idea what state the rest of the world is currently in or how bad things are. They keep their cabin boarded up, with only one locked door for entry. They lead a lonely, basic existence, taking no chances with whatever is going on out in the rest of the world.
And then one night they’re awoken by somebody breaking in downstairs. A man who claims he thought the place was empty. He claims to be only out scavenging for water for his family. His name is Will and he says that he’s left his wife and young son behind some 50 miles away and is only interested in providing for them. Paul and his family don’t know whether to believe him and this feeling of uncertainty, paranoia and tension is something which takes hold and continues throughout the entire movie. Not knowing if Will is infected or not, they tie him to a tree overnight to see if infection sets in. When it doesn’t, they come to an understanding and agree to go and get Wills family and bring them back to the safety of the cabin. The family seem to integrate well, falling in line with Pauls strict routine of eating, washing and going to the toilet, and all seems to be going well for a while.
Sadly, I think the expectation of an experience similar to ‘Get Out’ affected my overall enjoyment of the movie. Sure I was tense and on edge for pretty much the whole movie, but I guess I was expecting it all to build up to something much more. It did reach a pretty intense finale of sorts, but then it just seemed to fizzle out until the credits rolled and a sense of overall disappointment set in. I don’t think I was the only one either. As I stood to leave the cinema, the guy across the aisle from me, along with a couple of others seated nearby, all kind of looked at each other in disbelief and with a ‘WTF?!’ expression. It was definitely a good movie, which deserves to be seen, but it just didn’t leave that much of a lasting impression on me.
The opening scene sets the tone for what’s to come. A sick old man listens to his daughter Sarah tell him she loves him. She’s wearing a protective gas mask, as are her husband and son. Husband Paul and son Travis then take grandpa out of the cabin they’re in, into the woods where they proceed to wrap him up in a sheet, shoot him in the head, roll him into a ditch and set fire to him. It becomes apparent that we’re in a post apocalyptic world where some kind of plague has taken hold, and Grandpa had unfortunately become infected. We’re not shown any TV news footage, we don’t hear any radio broadcast of any kind and there aren’t any zombies or infected people wandering around. There’s just this small family, out in the middle of nowhere and with no idea what state the rest of the world is currently in or how bad things are. They keep their cabin boarded up, with only one locked door for entry. They lead a lonely, basic existence, taking no chances with whatever is going on out in the rest of the world.
And then one night they’re awoken by somebody breaking in downstairs. A man who claims he thought the place was empty. He claims to be only out scavenging for water for his family. His name is Will and he says that he’s left his wife and young son behind some 50 miles away and is only interested in providing for them. Paul and his family don’t know whether to believe him and this feeling of uncertainty, paranoia and tension is something which takes hold and continues throughout the entire movie. Not knowing if Will is infected or not, they tie him to a tree overnight to see if infection sets in. When it doesn’t, they come to an understanding and agree to go and get Wills family and bring them back to the safety of the cabin. The family seem to integrate well, falling in line with Pauls strict routine of eating, washing and going to the toilet, and all seems to be going well for a while.
Sadly, I think the expectation of an experience similar to ‘Get Out’ affected my overall enjoyment of the movie. Sure I was tense and on edge for pretty much the whole movie, but I guess I was expecting it all to build up to something much more. It did reach a pretty intense finale of sorts, but then it just seemed to fizzle out until the credits rolled and a sense of overall disappointment set in. I don’t think I was the only one either. As I stood to leave the cinema, the guy across the aisle from me, along with a couple of others seated nearby, all kind of looked at each other in disbelief and with a ‘WTF?!’ expression. It was definitely a good movie, which deserves to be seen, but it just didn’t leave that much of a lasting impression on me.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Schrodinger's Film
There is a thought experiment that is used to help make sense of the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Say you have a cat, a box and a fragile vial of poison. You put the cat and the poison in the box knowing that the vial may break, you lunatic.
At this point, so goes the thought experiment, until we can perceive whether or not the cat is dead, the cat is dead AND alive simultaneously, and it is only when you look into the box that you know whether you have a friend for life or a Korean meal.
I bring this up because I often insist that I prefer a bad movie with great moments than a movie that’s adequate across the board, but Guy Ritchie’s most recent film certainly puts that to the test. It’s almost my favourite film of the year but is full of nigh-unforgiveable blunders that I don’t think I can watch it again. But I don’t regret seeing it. King Arthur is both good and not good and the cat is still in the box.
Well, I might as well start with what’s good about the film. For one, the character of Arthur himself has a pretty interesting arc. Normally interpretations of the Arthur myth focus on the King bit, so despite it being yet another origin story, it at least is for a character who rarely gets one, and it’s an interesting spin on the reluctant hero arc.
In addition, the world itself feels like it desperately needs a hero. You get the sense that this world is falling apart, which is much better than some other chosen one narratives like Harry Potter, where even when Voldemort took over the wizarding world he didn’t seem to do anything. Also, this is a fantasy film that isn’t just Lord of the Rings again, but a more Celtic mystic mythology that is ripe for exploration.
Then there’s Jude Law, who is so moustache-twirlingly evil that he’s hilarious. He’s clearly having the time of his life playing this cartoon super villain and making him campy enough to be fun while still threatening and compelling when he needs to be.
Shame about the rest of the cast, who all have the same personality, that of “Ah’m just one o’ tha lads, apples and pears, apples and pears.” It’s like a Chelsea game but set in the Dark Ages. So it’s identical to a Chelsea game. The only exception is Astrid Frizbee’s mage, whose intense magic power is so devastating that she manages to put a sleep spell on the audience every time she opens her noise-hole and lets out a monotone bored drone.
There’s also the action, and Hollywood, we need to talk. I thought that shaky cam was just a phase, but I’ve seen you doing it again, and you need to stop. I’ve played VR games where you do nothing but ride particularly unstable cows and came out the other end less motion sick than your sword fighting scenes. Come on, you’re better than this, and we just what’s best for you, so just buy a steady-cam already.
Maybe it’s Guy Ritchie himself, though. Nothing in the film seems to last longer than three minutes aside Arthur’s whining. Sometimes it works, like the very snappy but informative way we see Arthur grow from stupid baby to stupid adult, and sometimes it’s stupid, like when an entire other movie’s worth of content gets squashed into an uninspired montage.
But that’s the great dilemma; the montages are good and bad, like the movie itself. You will only enjoy the movie if you enjoy the movie but if you don’t then you won’t. I write this piece a defeated critic, ladies and gentlemen. Is it worth seeing? I don’t really know. A bigger fan of Guy Ritchie or quantum mechanics than I will probably get something out of it and there are worse movies out there, but it also can’t help but disappoint somehow. The cat isn’t dead, but it has a bit of a cold.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/25/schrodingers-film-king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-review/
At this point, so goes the thought experiment, until we can perceive whether or not the cat is dead, the cat is dead AND alive simultaneously, and it is only when you look into the box that you know whether you have a friend for life or a Korean meal.
I bring this up because I often insist that I prefer a bad movie with great moments than a movie that’s adequate across the board, but Guy Ritchie’s most recent film certainly puts that to the test. It’s almost my favourite film of the year but is full of nigh-unforgiveable blunders that I don’t think I can watch it again. But I don’t regret seeing it. King Arthur is both good and not good and the cat is still in the box.
Well, I might as well start with what’s good about the film. For one, the character of Arthur himself has a pretty interesting arc. Normally interpretations of the Arthur myth focus on the King bit, so despite it being yet another origin story, it at least is for a character who rarely gets one, and it’s an interesting spin on the reluctant hero arc.
In addition, the world itself feels like it desperately needs a hero. You get the sense that this world is falling apart, which is much better than some other chosen one narratives like Harry Potter, where even when Voldemort took over the wizarding world he didn’t seem to do anything. Also, this is a fantasy film that isn’t just Lord of the Rings again, but a more Celtic mystic mythology that is ripe for exploration.
Then there’s Jude Law, who is so moustache-twirlingly evil that he’s hilarious. He’s clearly having the time of his life playing this cartoon super villain and making him campy enough to be fun while still threatening and compelling when he needs to be.
Shame about the rest of the cast, who all have the same personality, that of “Ah’m just one o’ tha lads, apples and pears, apples and pears.” It’s like a Chelsea game but set in the Dark Ages. So it’s identical to a Chelsea game. The only exception is Astrid Frizbee’s mage, whose intense magic power is so devastating that she manages to put a sleep spell on the audience every time she opens her noise-hole and lets out a monotone bored drone.
There’s also the action, and Hollywood, we need to talk. I thought that shaky cam was just a phase, but I’ve seen you doing it again, and you need to stop. I’ve played VR games where you do nothing but ride particularly unstable cows and came out the other end less motion sick than your sword fighting scenes. Come on, you’re better than this, and we just what’s best for you, so just buy a steady-cam already.
Maybe it’s Guy Ritchie himself, though. Nothing in the film seems to last longer than three minutes aside Arthur’s whining. Sometimes it works, like the very snappy but informative way we see Arthur grow from stupid baby to stupid adult, and sometimes it’s stupid, like when an entire other movie’s worth of content gets squashed into an uninspired montage.
But that’s the great dilemma; the montages are good and bad, like the movie itself. You will only enjoy the movie if you enjoy the movie but if you don’t then you won’t. I write this piece a defeated critic, ladies and gentlemen. Is it worth seeing? I don’t really know. A bigger fan of Guy Ritchie or quantum mechanics than I will probably get something out of it and there are worse movies out there, but it also can’t help but disappoint somehow. The cat isn’t dead, but it has a bit of a cold.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/25/schrodingers-film-king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-review/