Search
Search results
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated The House That Jack Built (2018) in Movies
Sep 19, 2020
One of the singular most disgusting, depraved, downright inhuman pieces of genre filth I've ever laid eyes on - try to think the šš¢šø movies' gore porn meets š šš¦š³š£šŖš¢šÆ ššŖšš® levels of twisted and shockingly grotesque subject matter. Not perfect: at times this feels more like a defense than an apology (not that he doesn't answer for a lot nor are the defenses always unwarranted), but it's rigorously complex and as a piece of provocation this is simply exquisite - almost unparalleled. Over two and a half hours of unforgettable novelistic madman monologues and some of the most cruel, savage violence you will ever see in a motion picture. I'm seldom ever less than fully impressed by Lars but the fact that this is so twisted and animalistic yet the humor is still so on point is only another testament to why he's one of the greatest living directors. Bats for the fences and rubs your noses right in all its slime, plus it has some of the most haunting effects work you're likely to ever see. Matt Dillion gives not only the ultimate performance of his career, but one of the defining of the decade in what can only be described as blood-curdling, remorseless but totally eccentric work. Screamed and shrunk into my own body numerous times. I've seen a metric ton of vile, uncomfortable cinema and I'm not unsettled easily but this was truly terrifying - as well as 110% unique. My jaw was dropped the entire epilogue well through the credits. RIP - Bruno Ganz.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Charlie's Angels (2019) in Movies
Jul 31, 2020
A poor reboot
I had little hopes for this film when it was released at the cinema as the trailer looked awful, and I'm afraid to say the trailer was an accurate representation of the film itself.
The great thing about this film was the cast. This really does have a stellar cast, however the problem is that they're criminally underutilised and let down by an awful screenplay. The only ones who come out of this relatively unscathed are Kristen Stewart (she gets the "fun" role) and Naomi Scott (who still suffers from the cliched new recruit character role). Even the great Patrick Stewart couldn't save this. The action itself is pretty second rate and rather dull, and whilst it fortunately doesn't go OTT on the CGI, the fighting is still a little clunky. And the plot is as ridiculous as you'd expect from a spy film like this, and as predictable.
I also have a bit of an issue with how they're trying to promote gender equality in this. I'm all for girl power, but it's being rammed down your throat here and it's a bit much. Every male character is portrayed to be a complete slime ball and is this really fair? I don't think so. It's a bit old fashioned to have every bloke as a bad guy and I think there are better ways to promote powerful women and equality.
Overall this was an entirely unnecessary reboot of this franchise. Whilst the previous reincarnations with Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz and Lucy Liu weren't great, they were at least better than this.
The great thing about this film was the cast. This really does have a stellar cast, however the problem is that they're criminally underutilised and let down by an awful screenplay. The only ones who come out of this relatively unscathed are Kristen Stewart (she gets the "fun" role) and Naomi Scott (who still suffers from the cliched new recruit character role). Even the great Patrick Stewart couldn't save this. The action itself is pretty second rate and rather dull, and whilst it fortunately doesn't go OTT on the CGI, the fighting is still a little clunky. And the plot is as ridiculous as you'd expect from a spy film like this, and as predictable.
I also have a bit of an issue with how they're trying to promote gender equality in this. I'm all for girl power, but it's being rammed down your throat here and it's a bit much. Every male character is portrayed to be a complete slime ball and is this really fair? I don't think so. It's a bit old fashioned to have every bloke as a bad guy and I think there are better ways to promote powerful women and equality.
Overall this was an entirely unnecessary reboot of this franchise. Whilst the previous reincarnations with Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz and Lucy Liu weren't great, they were at least better than this.
What scares you the most? Ghouls, vampires, slime-fanged aliens ...or something terrible that truly could happen? For me it's definitely the latter.
Our narrator, Jon, is a historian witnessing the most monumental event of humanity but at a great distance. He feels compelled to keep a record of the people isolated with him in a vast hotel. He collects their stories and feelings in the faint hope that some sort of civilisation will survive long enough to rediscover them. Through his journal we experience what it would be like to be aware that the world was ending, billions dying, but be totally disconnected from the horrific events.
Most books set during an apocalypse are fraught with traumatic dashes, violent brushes with death, horror and misery. There are elements of that here but this book mostly poses the question of what you would do if there was little drama but lots of time to dwell on things. The people in the hotel are comparatively safe in an old hotel surrounded by forest. They wait for something to happen, for someone to rescue them, or perhaps just for their food to run out. Jon embarks on a quest to solve one cruel murder, taking him down a path of mistrust and near hysteria.
I enjoyed the blend of dystopia and murder mystery; the first half of the book reads like a modern day progeny of George Orwell and Agatha Christie. Asking your audience to imagine bombs wiping out entire countries but then drastically limiting their focus to one death amongst multitudes is startling. I also liked the references to real people and places, there were definite shades of the Cecil Hotel here for a true-crime/horror podcast junkie like me to appreciate. However, I do feel that the novel lost it's way towards the end - trying to be all things to all people perhaps. It's definitely worth reading and I'm keen to see more from this author.
Our narrator, Jon, is a historian witnessing the most monumental event of humanity but at a great distance. He feels compelled to keep a record of the people isolated with him in a vast hotel. He collects their stories and feelings in the faint hope that some sort of civilisation will survive long enough to rediscover them. Through his journal we experience what it would be like to be aware that the world was ending, billions dying, but be totally disconnected from the horrific events.
Most books set during an apocalypse are fraught with traumatic dashes, violent brushes with death, horror and misery. There are elements of that here but this book mostly poses the question of what you would do if there was little drama but lots of time to dwell on things. The people in the hotel are comparatively safe in an old hotel surrounded by forest. They wait for something to happen, for someone to rescue them, or perhaps just for their food to run out. Jon embarks on a quest to solve one cruel murder, taking him down a path of mistrust and near hysteria.
I enjoyed the blend of dystopia and murder mystery; the first half of the book reads like a modern day progeny of George Orwell and Agatha Christie. Asking your audience to imagine bombs wiping out entire countries but then drastically limiting their focus to one death amongst multitudes is startling. I also liked the references to real people and places, there were definite shades of the Cecil Hotel here for a true-crime/horror podcast junkie like me to appreciate. However, I do feel that the novel lost it's way towards the end - trying to be all things to all people perhaps. It's definitely worth reading and I'm keen to see more from this author.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Electric Slide (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Todayās choice for your consideration is the 2014 film āElectric Slideā. A biographical crime film based on the life of antique/furniture salesman turned bank robber Eddie Dodson.
Starring Jim Sturgess, Isabel Lucas, Chloe Sevigny, Patricia Arquette, and Christopher Lambert, āElectric Slideā opens in 1983 Los Angeles. Disco is nearly dead and Rock-n-Roll is putting the final nails in its coffin. By day, Eddie Dodson (Jim Sturgess) is a hip antique furniture salesman (thereās a contradiction in terms) catering to the rich and famous while in engaging in some petty thievering from his customers on the side. By night, he moves with the drug-fueled parties from one mansion to the next. A chance encounter at one of these parties introduces him to the beautiful and aloof Pauline (Isabel Lucas). Eddie and Pauline are immediately smitten with one another as though destined by fate. At about the same time, Eddieās carefree lifestyle is coming back to haunt him as loan sharks finally catch up to him and his former benefactor Roy Fortune (Christopher Lambert) comes calling demanding the return of his money. With no other way to repay his debt, Eddie resorts to robbing banks. With Pauline in tow, Eddie uses his charm to talk the tellers at over 60 banks in the L.A. Area into handing over their cash. However, instead of paying off his debts Eddie and Pauline simply continue their life of excess with the police and the loan sharks in hot pursuit.
This film did an excellent job of depicting the āL.A. Lifestyleā of the early 1980s that didnāt involve celebrities, but the folks who you would imagine would be latching on to those said celebrities.
The groupies if you will. The main character Eddie Dodson seems like he was a born con artist ā¦ a greasy slime ball who will take you for every thing you have if you let him. He is a bizarrely likable character though and his devotion to Pauline makes the viewer all the more want him to get away with just about any scheme he tries to pull. This is the first time Iāve seen Isabel Lucas in film since āTransformers:Revenge Of The Fallenā or the āRed Dawnā remake and I must say her performance as Pauline was brilliant. To quote another reviewer who screened this film I found myself asking āWho is that girl?ā From her first appearance on screen, itās like youāre immediately drawn to her quiet/mysterious presence. It was also awesome to see Christopher Lambert in a movie once again. Although heās portrayed a villain previously, I had personally never seen anything where he was the villain. His appearance in this film although brief had me convinced. In my opinion he should pursue more roles as the villain if they present themselves.
One of the movieās aspects that bugged me though was the soundtrack. The only way I could describe it would be āhipsters trying to sound retroā and they didnāt succeed. The music didnāt sound like it belonged in the timeframe which the movie took place in. There were also far too many clips and scenes where they kicked in the slow motion or decided to have the camera pan or zoom out in some attempt to capture more of the surroundings. They couldāve used this wasted time to include more dialogue and interaction between the main characters in my opinion. Besides the A-List actors they managed to enlist for this film the only thing that saved it in the end was the knowledge that the film was based on a true story. It kinda of fizzled about halfway though and then kicked back in 3/4s of the way through. The film is worth watching visually but the thing that killed it was that it couldāve used more dialogue. Iād give it 2.5 out of 5 stars. Itās worth watching once or twice. Nothing to write home about though.
Starring Jim Sturgess, Isabel Lucas, Chloe Sevigny, Patricia Arquette, and Christopher Lambert, āElectric Slideā opens in 1983 Los Angeles. Disco is nearly dead and Rock-n-Roll is putting the final nails in its coffin. By day, Eddie Dodson (Jim Sturgess) is a hip antique furniture salesman (thereās a contradiction in terms) catering to the rich and famous while in engaging in some petty thievering from his customers on the side. By night, he moves with the drug-fueled parties from one mansion to the next. A chance encounter at one of these parties introduces him to the beautiful and aloof Pauline (Isabel Lucas). Eddie and Pauline are immediately smitten with one another as though destined by fate. At about the same time, Eddieās carefree lifestyle is coming back to haunt him as loan sharks finally catch up to him and his former benefactor Roy Fortune (Christopher Lambert) comes calling demanding the return of his money. With no other way to repay his debt, Eddie resorts to robbing banks. With Pauline in tow, Eddie uses his charm to talk the tellers at over 60 banks in the L.A. Area into handing over their cash. However, instead of paying off his debts Eddie and Pauline simply continue their life of excess with the police and the loan sharks in hot pursuit.
This film did an excellent job of depicting the āL.A. Lifestyleā of the early 1980s that didnāt involve celebrities, but the folks who you would imagine would be latching on to those said celebrities.
The groupies if you will. The main character Eddie Dodson seems like he was a born con artist ā¦ a greasy slime ball who will take you for every thing you have if you let him. He is a bizarrely likable character though and his devotion to Pauline makes the viewer all the more want him to get away with just about any scheme he tries to pull. This is the first time Iāve seen Isabel Lucas in film since āTransformers:Revenge Of The Fallenā or the āRed Dawnā remake and I must say her performance as Pauline was brilliant. To quote another reviewer who screened this film I found myself asking āWho is that girl?ā From her first appearance on screen, itās like youāre immediately drawn to her quiet/mysterious presence. It was also awesome to see Christopher Lambert in a movie once again. Although heās portrayed a villain previously, I had personally never seen anything where he was the villain. His appearance in this film although brief had me convinced. In my opinion he should pursue more roles as the villain if they present themselves.
One of the movieās aspects that bugged me though was the soundtrack. The only way I could describe it would be āhipsters trying to sound retroā and they didnāt succeed. The music didnāt sound like it belonged in the timeframe which the movie took place in. There were also far too many clips and scenes where they kicked in the slow motion or decided to have the camera pan or zoom out in some attempt to capture more of the surroundings. They couldāve used this wasted time to include more dialogue and interaction between the main characters in my opinion. Besides the A-List actors they managed to enlist for this film the only thing that saved it in the end was the knowledge that the film was based on a true story. It kinda of fizzled about halfway though and then kicked back in 3/4s of the way through. The film is worth watching visually but the thing that killed it was that it couldāve used more dialogue. Iād give it 2.5 out of 5 stars. Itās worth watching once or twice. Nothing to write home about though.