Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Zombieland: Double Tap (2019) in Movies
Nov 1, 2019
I ended up enjoying this film
I really enjoyed the 2009 Horror/Comedy ZOMBIELAND - a truly unique and original film that blends the trendy (at the time) Zombie genre with really smart comedy populated by some truly charismatic comedic performers and a GREAT surprise cameo.
So...I greeted the news that there would be a sequel - 10 years later - with a shrug. Why would they want to revisit this tired (at this time) genre with performers that have (for the most part) gone on to "bigger and better" things (including a few Oscar nominations and 1 Oscar win). But...I enjoyed the first, so I figured I'd check it out. And...for the first 20 minutes or so of this film, I sat there with my arms folded across my chest thinking "they are just trying too hard to replicate the first film". And then an interesting thing happened...
I chuckled to myself. Then I chuckled some more, and then I started laughing out loud and at about the 1 hour mark, I realized, "I'm really enjoying myself".
Credit, I think, has to go the charm, charisma and chemistry between the 4 returning leads - Emma Stone, Jesse Eisenberg, Abigail Breslin and Woody Harrelson. It was like running into 4 old friends and old, comfortable, patterns re-emerge (kind of liking eating comfort food). These are ably assisted by good, fun turns by the likes of Rosario Dawson, Luke Wilson and Thomas Middleditch. Special mention has to be made of Zoey Deutsch's turn as blonde air-head, Madison. This could have easily been a one-note, annoyance. but she brings something more to role that makes her endearing, not cloying.
The original creative team - Director Ruben Fleischer and Writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick - are back as well, so the style and humor are similar to the first film - not really bringing much new to the proceedings, but not just "getting a paycheck" either.
This film is "nothing new", but I enjoyed it anyway - so if you liked the first Zombieland, you'll like this one as well. ONE NOTE - there is a "credits scene" as well as a "button scene" at the end of the credits that are MUST WATCH. So stick around for those, you'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
So...I greeted the news that there would be a sequel - 10 years later - with a shrug. Why would they want to revisit this tired (at this time) genre with performers that have (for the most part) gone on to "bigger and better" things (including a few Oscar nominations and 1 Oscar win). But...I enjoyed the first, so I figured I'd check it out. And...for the first 20 minutes or so of this film, I sat there with my arms folded across my chest thinking "they are just trying too hard to replicate the first film". And then an interesting thing happened...
I chuckled to myself. Then I chuckled some more, and then I started laughing out loud and at about the 1 hour mark, I realized, "I'm really enjoying myself".
Credit, I think, has to go the charm, charisma and chemistry between the 4 returning leads - Emma Stone, Jesse Eisenberg, Abigail Breslin and Woody Harrelson. It was like running into 4 old friends and old, comfortable, patterns re-emerge (kind of liking eating comfort food). These are ably assisted by good, fun turns by the likes of Rosario Dawson, Luke Wilson and Thomas Middleditch. Special mention has to be made of Zoey Deutsch's turn as blonde air-head, Madison. This could have easily been a one-note, annoyance. but she brings something more to role that makes her endearing, not cloying.
The original creative team - Director Ruben Fleischer and Writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick - are back as well, so the style and humor are similar to the first film - not really bringing much new to the proceedings, but not just "getting a paycheck" either.
This film is "nothing new", but I enjoyed it anyway - so if you liked the first Zombieland, you'll like this one as well. ONE NOTE - there is a "credits scene" as well as a "button scene" at the end of the credits that are MUST WATCH. So stick around for those, you'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Tourist (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Frank Tupelo, played by Johnny Depp, is a math teacher from Wisconsin who decides to take a vacation in Italy, in hopes of mending his broken heart. While traveling on a train bound for Venice, he befriends an interesting and mysterious woman who sits next to him. Elise Clifton-Ward, played by Angelina Jolie, has been on the run from the mob and the British police for the past couple of years because her lover, Alexander Pearce, embezzled over $2 billion from a mobster. The British police want their cut for taxes owed, but without really knowing what Alexander looks like, the police are essentially just waiting for Elise to make contact with him.
Elise picks Frank to play a part in her plans of steering the mob and the British police in a different direction. After arriving in Venice, they both go their separate ways, but still end up finding each other later while Frank is sightseeing. Elise invites him on her boat and then takes him back to her hotel. They share a few passionate moments as Elise attempts to make the police who are spying on them believe that Frank is really Alexander. When Frank awakens the next day, he realizes that Elise is gone. This is where the action begins. Not only are the police after Frank, so are the mobsters from whom Alexander stole, making for a messy situationi for Frank. With a lot of great twists and turns in this movie as well as smart dialogue, The Tourist succeeds in putting a smile on your face while keeping you on the edge of your seat.
Angelina Jolie’s Elise Ward knows the power of her beauty and uses it to her great advantage. The strong supporting cast includes the likes of Paul Bettany, Timothy Dalton and Steven Berkoff. Unlike most of Johnny Depp’s other movies where he exudes confidence, he is like a lost puppy being chased for something he is unaware of doing. I do have to say that I am always able to see some of Depp’s most famous character, Captain Jack Sparrow, shine through in his current roles. If you watch closely during a chase scene, he starts to run away from the mob exactly as Captain Jack would. Or maybe that’s just how Johnny Depp runs.
Directed by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck, who makes great use of spectacular views and locales, The Tourist is a great action-adventure with storyline that keeps you interested. Sharp, witty dialog and two of the hottest stars playing the leads make The Tourist a movie worth watching.
Elise picks Frank to play a part in her plans of steering the mob and the British police in a different direction. After arriving in Venice, they both go their separate ways, but still end up finding each other later while Frank is sightseeing. Elise invites him on her boat and then takes him back to her hotel. They share a few passionate moments as Elise attempts to make the police who are spying on them believe that Frank is really Alexander. When Frank awakens the next day, he realizes that Elise is gone. This is where the action begins. Not only are the police after Frank, so are the mobsters from whom Alexander stole, making for a messy situationi for Frank. With a lot of great twists and turns in this movie as well as smart dialogue, The Tourist succeeds in putting a smile on your face while keeping you on the edge of your seat.
Angelina Jolie’s Elise Ward knows the power of her beauty and uses it to her great advantage. The strong supporting cast includes the likes of Paul Bettany, Timothy Dalton and Steven Berkoff. Unlike most of Johnny Depp’s other movies where he exudes confidence, he is like a lost puppy being chased for something he is unaware of doing. I do have to say that I am always able to see some of Depp’s most famous character, Captain Jack Sparrow, shine through in his current roles. If you watch closely during a chase scene, he starts to run away from the mob exactly as Captain Jack would. Or maybe that’s just how Johnny Depp runs.
Directed by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck, who makes great use of spectacular views and locales, The Tourist is a great action-adventure with storyline that keeps you interested. Sharp, witty dialog and two of the hottest stars playing the leads make The Tourist a movie worth watching.
BookInspector (124 KP) rated He Said/She Said in Books
Sep 24, 2020
I have seen a lot of buzz once this book came out, and after reading it, I can freely say, this book is a bestseller, and it absolutely deserved it.
The main characters of this book were Laura, Kit and Beth. The way they met was very unusual; Laura and Kit witnessed Beth being raped (well, aftermath of it). The events after that, brings Laura and Beth really close, but suddenly some things start to happen, which put Laura and Kit into hiding. All the characters of this book are incredibly interesting, and have their very diverse and unique personality, that is why I absolutely adored that. My absolute favourite was Kit. He is this Oxford smart, but at the same time innocent, cute geek. The whole story was told from Laura’s and Kit’s perspectives, and they told this story beautifully, fulfilling each other. Even though, it is enough for Kit and Laura to tell it, I still wanted to hear the story from Beth’s perspective, I think it would’ve made this book absolutely perfect.
The plot of this book was absolutely fantastic. To tell the whole story, characters had to travel between present and the events, which took place fifteen years ago. This book has everything you need for a great thriller: there were unexpected twists and turns happening all the time, the suspense was very well kept throughout whole book, and it was really fast paced, which made it an intense page turner and was very hard to put down. Before reading this book, I was not very much into eclipses, but this book radiated the passion for eclipses so intensely, that I might even try and watch one this year.
I really loved the important topics Erin Kelly was discussing in this book: how hard to convince a rapist in the court of justice; how rape affects victims and rapists as well, especially if rapists are well known; how anxiety can affect people and their lives after certain events. This book is filled with interesting topics, situations and feelings.
As I mentioned before, this book grips you form first pages with very clever writing style, and keeps the suspense going on by drop feeding new information and new findings, plus add short chapters and you are hooked. Language itself is easy to read and understandable, quite relatable to any Londoner. The author kept the interest till the last sentence by throwing in more turns and twists, that’s why it is an absolute must read and I strongly recommend it to everyone.
Was given this book by publisher and NetGalley for honest review.
The main characters of this book were Laura, Kit and Beth. The way they met was very unusual; Laura and Kit witnessed Beth being raped (well, aftermath of it). The events after that, brings Laura and Beth really close, but suddenly some things start to happen, which put Laura and Kit into hiding. All the characters of this book are incredibly interesting, and have their very diverse and unique personality, that is why I absolutely adored that. My absolute favourite was Kit. He is this Oxford smart, but at the same time innocent, cute geek. The whole story was told from Laura’s and Kit’s perspectives, and they told this story beautifully, fulfilling each other. Even though, it is enough for Kit and Laura to tell it, I still wanted to hear the story from Beth’s perspective, I think it would’ve made this book absolutely perfect.
The plot of this book was absolutely fantastic. To tell the whole story, characters had to travel between present and the events, which took place fifteen years ago. This book has everything you need for a great thriller: there were unexpected twists and turns happening all the time, the suspense was very well kept throughout whole book, and it was really fast paced, which made it an intense page turner and was very hard to put down. Before reading this book, I was not very much into eclipses, but this book radiated the passion for eclipses so intensely, that I might even try and watch one this year.
I really loved the important topics Erin Kelly was discussing in this book: how hard to convince a rapist in the court of justice; how rape affects victims and rapists as well, especially if rapists are well known; how anxiety can affect people and their lives after certain events. This book is filled with interesting topics, situations and feelings.
As I mentioned before, this book grips you form first pages with very clever writing style, and keeps the suspense going on by drop feeding new information and new findings, plus add short chapters and you are hooked. Language itself is easy to read and understandable, quite relatable to any Londoner. The author kept the interest till the last sentence by throwing in more turns and twists, that’s why it is an absolute must read and I strongly recommend it to everyone.
Was given this book by publisher and NetGalley for honest review.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Quatermass and the Pit (1967) in Movies
Oct 2, 2019 (Updated Oct 24, 2019)
Characters – Dr Mathew Roney is one of the team that is set to investigate the discovery, he takes and scientific approach to everything working with the historian to put the pieces together. Professor Bernard Quatermass brings the historical point of view to the table, wanting to study the discovery and using previous historical discoveries to help figure out the truth. Colonel Breen brings the military point of view often looking to use the quick answer over the smart answer. Barbara Judd is a reporter that is trying to put together a story for the public who believe this is an unexploded bomb.
Performances – The performances from the whole cast is great throughout, we believe the scientific figures, the military ones and the reporter looking for a story. the four main stars of the film know how to make the most of their scenes where their character needs to be the larger focus.
Story – The story follows an object being discovered in London while digger to make the underground larger, we follow how the investigation to learn what this could be from different perspectives which shows how this would be handled in real life. We do have twists which comes from the discoveries going on, but for the most part this keeps things simple, with an air of mystery about what could be happening around the object.
Horror/Mystery/Sci-Fi – The horror surrounding this movie comes from what could come from the object, it could bring horrific consequences, this plays into the mystery as we are left with the mystery behind what could be behind it. The sci-fi side of the film comes from the explanation to what could be behind the object and the potential of space being involved.
Settings – The film is set in London and the underground, this is always a tight compact location which will add to suspense and horror in anything.
Special Effects – This film was released in the 1960s, the special effects for the time were great, while we might look down on them now, it showed us just what was capable for the time.
Scene of the Movie – The final act which we are built up to nicely.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The fact they just look like grasshoppers and no one says this.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the best hammer horror mystery sci-fi horror films out there, it keeps you guessing before letting everything out in the final act instead of giving away too much too early.
Overall: Must watch Hammer Horror
Performances – The performances from the whole cast is great throughout, we believe the scientific figures, the military ones and the reporter looking for a story. the four main stars of the film know how to make the most of their scenes where their character needs to be the larger focus.
Story – The story follows an object being discovered in London while digger to make the underground larger, we follow how the investigation to learn what this could be from different perspectives which shows how this would be handled in real life. We do have twists which comes from the discoveries going on, but for the most part this keeps things simple, with an air of mystery about what could be happening around the object.
Horror/Mystery/Sci-Fi – The horror surrounding this movie comes from what could come from the object, it could bring horrific consequences, this plays into the mystery as we are left with the mystery behind what could be behind it. The sci-fi side of the film comes from the explanation to what could be behind the object and the potential of space being involved.
Settings – The film is set in London and the underground, this is always a tight compact location which will add to suspense and horror in anything.
Special Effects – This film was released in the 1960s, the special effects for the time were great, while we might look down on them now, it showed us just what was capable for the time.
Scene of the Movie – The final act which we are built up to nicely.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The fact they just look like grasshoppers and no one says this.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the best hammer horror mystery sci-fi horror films out there, it keeps you guessing before letting everything out in the final act instead of giving away too much too early.
Overall: Must watch Hammer Horror
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Electric Dreams (1984) in Movies
Oct 13, 2019
Let me start off by saying I recently purchased a region free DVD/Blu Ray player for myself when I discovered there were films I have not seen in 20+ years because they have never had a DVD/Blu Ray release in the US, but are actually available overseas! When I discovered this fact, among the first movies I purchased is this 1980s classic which has been mostly forgotten due to its unavailability.
Miles is an unorganized, nerdy architect who is delighted to discover a young, beautiful cellist moving in to the apartment above his sparse decorated pad in San Francisco. At the same time, a work colleague tells Miles he should get himself organized so he doesn't miss meetings spending all his time working on a new earthquake=proof brick, his dream pet project. Miles heads to his local electronic store (80s version) and gets talked into buying one of these "new" personal computers which everyone seems to be getting.
After some initial difficulty during set up, Miles decides to fully jump in to the PC world and not only sets up his new toy, but decides to have it fully integrated into his apartment including running his lights, door locks and appliances. He then thinks it would be a good idea to do a mass download of information for his work servers to beef up his own unit's capacity. He quickly realizes this is an overload to his machine when it starts to buzz and flash. In a panic, he douses the machine with some champagne to cool it off inadvertently giving it the spark of "life".
His new machine works quickly to understand its new world around including listening and harmonizing music with the beautiful neighbor upstairs. This leads to the two town house cohabitants developing a relationship. This does not sit well with the PC eventually as "he" has now also evolved to the point where he wants to understand love. Tensions escalate and there is a confrontation for the ultimate fate of the relationships and who will ultimately get the girl.
Since it had been probably 30 years since I had seen Electric Dreams, one of those guilty pleasures from the 80s, I was extremely anxious to rewatch; however, was also worried a new viewing in my adulthood would ruin the magic I had remembered from my youth. I couldn't have been more wrong.
The first thing I had forgotten was all the humor of the film including those awkward moments when Miles and the computer where getting to know each other and the goofy dialogue. Also, it's funny how I read a lot of the functions the computer performed had to be simulated at the time since home PCs were still pretty new to everyone at that point, but now those functions are fairly commonplace including the aforementioned "Smart Home" features among other things.
Yes fine, there are plenty of 80s staples present almost immediately like music montages, bad hairdos, leg warmers and boom boxes, but that still gives the movie charm. After thinking about it, there were elements from other 80s classics like Weird Science, WarGames, and a lot of Short Circuit where an AI was learning about itself. Who remembers Max Headroom?
The soundtrack for the film is also front and center with much of it playing a key role in the budding relationship between Miles and his musical love interest, but it works well and still holds up.
I also have to mention Virginia Madsen. I looked up she was 23 when she made this film (she looked like she was 18), but still looks as remarkable as she did then (80s crush speaking here).
I'm sure I probably still revere this movie more than the people who actually made it, but I can handle that.
Miles is an unorganized, nerdy architect who is delighted to discover a young, beautiful cellist moving in to the apartment above his sparse decorated pad in San Francisco. At the same time, a work colleague tells Miles he should get himself organized so he doesn't miss meetings spending all his time working on a new earthquake=proof brick, his dream pet project. Miles heads to his local electronic store (80s version) and gets talked into buying one of these "new" personal computers which everyone seems to be getting.
After some initial difficulty during set up, Miles decides to fully jump in to the PC world and not only sets up his new toy, but decides to have it fully integrated into his apartment including running his lights, door locks and appliances. He then thinks it would be a good idea to do a mass download of information for his work servers to beef up his own unit's capacity. He quickly realizes this is an overload to his machine when it starts to buzz and flash. In a panic, he douses the machine with some champagne to cool it off inadvertently giving it the spark of "life".
His new machine works quickly to understand its new world around including listening and harmonizing music with the beautiful neighbor upstairs. This leads to the two town house cohabitants developing a relationship. This does not sit well with the PC eventually as "he" has now also evolved to the point where he wants to understand love. Tensions escalate and there is a confrontation for the ultimate fate of the relationships and who will ultimately get the girl.
Since it had been probably 30 years since I had seen Electric Dreams, one of those guilty pleasures from the 80s, I was extremely anxious to rewatch; however, was also worried a new viewing in my adulthood would ruin the magic I had remembered from my youth. I couldn't have been more wrong.
The first thing I had forgotten was all the humor of the film including those awkward moments when Miles and the computer where getting to know each other and the goofy dialogue. Also, it's funny how I read a lot of the functions the computer performed had to be simulated at the time since home PCs were still pretty new to everyone at that point, but now those functions are fairly commonplace including the aforementioned "Smart Home" features among other things.
Yes fine, there are plenty of 80s staples present almost immediately like music montages, bad hairdos, leg warmers and boom boxes, but that still gives the movie charm. After thinking about it, there were elements from other 80s classics like Weird Science, WarGames, and a lot of Short Circuit where an AI was learning about itself. Who remembers Max Headroom?
The soundtrack for the film is also front and center with much of it playing a key role in the budding relationship between Miles and his musical love interest, but it works well and still holds up.
I also have to mention Virginia Madsen. I looked up she was 23 when she made this film (she looked like she was 18), but still looks as remarkable as she did then (80s crush speaking here).
I'm sure I probably still revere this movie more than the people who actually made it, but I can handle that.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated A Quiet Place (2018) in Movies
Apr 11, 2018
Not a "horror" movie, but a tense, taught, suspense film
There are many things the new film A QUIET PLACE is. What it is NOT is a "horror" film (as it is being promoted). What this film is is tense, suspenseful, well written, acted & directed, and quite good.
Co-written and Directed by John Krasinski (THE OFFICE) and starring Krasinski and his real-life wife, Emily Blunt (LIVE, DIE, REPEAT, the upcoming MARY POPPINS RETURNS), A QUIET PLACE tells the story of an Earth that has been overrun by aliens who hunt humans as food. These creatures are blind and have limited olfactory senses, but what they do have is extremely good hearing, so to stay alive, you must stay quiet.
We are introduced to this world by a family of 5 that have, thus far, survived. It consists of a Mother (Blunt) and Father (Kasinski) and their 3 children, one of whom is deaf. They have learned how to live in this world and we watch them struggle to stay alive - and stay together as a family unit.
This is the Directorial debut of Kasinski and he acquits himself quite well. This film is strongly paced with a sure eye for what this film should look and feel like. His handling of the actors is strong and he is smart enough to realize that this film could wear it's welcome out, so he keeps things short and to the point.
The acting of the children are good and Krasinski is very good in his role, but it is the work of Emily Blunt that really pulls this film along. As the matriarch of the family, you can see the care and concern on her face, her futility in trying to hold things together. Someone get this actress an Oscar already! Maybe not for this film...but...she is an Oscar-caliber actress showing off her abilities.
But...it is the silence that is the differentiating factor of this cinematic experience.
Because of the nature of the premise, this film - by necessity - is (in essence) a silent film. Because of this, an interesting thing happened in the movie theater I was in. At the beginning of the film, I could hear wrappers being handled and popcorn being eaten and drinks being drunk. But...after about 10 minutes, the theater became just as silent as the screen and you were pulled into the silent world of the film.
All in all, a fantastic, unique time at the cinema. As I said, I would not classify this as a "horror" film, but rather a taught, tense, suspense film that had me jumping out of my seat on more than one occasion.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Co-written and Directed by John Krasinski (THE OFFICE) and starring Krasinski and his real-life wife, Emily Blunt (LIVE, DIE, REPEAT, the upcoming MARY POPPINS RETURNS), A QUIET PLACE tells the story of an Earth that has been overrun by aliens who hunt humans as food. These creatures are blind and have limited olfactory senses, but what they do have is extremely good hearing, so to stay alive, you must stay quiet.
We are introduced to this world by a family of 5 that have, thus far, survived. It consists of a Mother (Blunt) and Father (Kasinski) and their 3 children, one of whom is deaf. They have learned how to live in this world and we watch them struggle to stay alive - and stay together as a family unit.
This is the Directorial debut of Kasinski and he acquits himself quite well. This film is strongly paced with a sure eye for what this film should look and feel like. His handling of the actors is strong and he is smart enough to realize that this film could wear it's welcome out, so he keeps things short and to the point.
The acting of the children are good and Krasinski is very good in his role, but it is the work of Emily Blunt that really pulls this film along. As the matriarch of the family, you can see the care and concern on her face, her futility in trying to hold things together. Someone get this actress an Oscar already! Maybe not for this film...but...she is an Oscar-caliber actress showing off her abilities.
But...it is the silence that is the differentiating factor of this cinematic experience.
Because of the nature of the premise, this film - by necessity - is (in essence) a silent film. Because of this, an interesting thing happened in the movie theater I was in. At the beginning of the film, I could hear wrappers being handled and popcorn being eaten and drinks being drunk. But...after about 10 minutes, the theater became just as silent as the screen and you were pulled into the silent world of the film.
All in all, a fantastic, unique time at the cinema. As I said, I would not classify this as a "horror" film, but rather a taught, tense, suspense film that had me jumping out of my seat on more than one occasion.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated The Butterfly Effect (2004) in Movies
Mar 7, 2019
Deeper than it first appears...
Contains spoilers, click to show
Having always being a fan of Time Travel and Science Fiction, I was always keen on seeing this film upon its initial release, seven years ago, now. But for one reason or another, this just didn't happen, leaving me to watch this on TV a couple of years later.
I was left disappointed. This was mainly because the film was very gritty, at times dower and not what I or many would have expected from a film in this genre. But with repeat viewings and finally watching this version, the Director's Cut, with a more downbeat and tragic conclusion, I realised that I was wrong.
Yes, this film does not tick the correct boxes for a film of this time, but that is because it is not playing it safe. It is doing what any great groundbreaking films should do and that is to find the truth of the story and tell it, show it and help the audience engage and feel it, in an uncompromising way.
*** SPOILERS *** The film deals with troubled childhoods of four kids, two of whom grow up to become Ashton Kutcher and Amy Smart. (Not literally, of course!) Kutcher's lead, has the ability to travel back to his own past for brief moments by reading his childhood journals or in some cases, watching home movies or looking at photos.
His intention upon discovering this gift, is to repair some of the damage that these events have cause to the group, who have sustained several traumas and left them in various states of dis-functionality as adults. But, as the metaphor relating to Chaos Theory states, "Does the flap of a butterfly's wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?" Philip Merilees: We witness several distinct changes in then present as a result of his tampering and this often results in more pain, in one way or another.
This is a gripping film, with a true sense of itself, philosophy and needs of the narrative to justify its own dower conclusions, and ultimately, Kutcher's final decisions.
The sound design, cinematography general direction are outstanding here, with power use of all the key elements to give us a naturalistic feel, not dis-similar from something that Steven Spielberg might produce.
The Theatrical Cut was good, but this version is superior, with a new and more appropriate ending more in keeping the with the general tone of the film, this should be a true Sci-Fi classic, in the same league as the likes of "Planet Of The Apes", "The Day The Earth Caught Fire" and in to a lesser extent, this being a more widely accepted addition, "Donnie Darko".
Highly recommended.
I was left disappointed. This was mainly because the film was very gritty, at times dower and not what I or many would have expected from a film in this genre. But with repeat viewings and finally watching this version, the Director's Cut, with a more downbeat and tragic conclusion, I realised that I was wrong.
Yes, this film does not tick the correct boxes for a film of this time, but that is because it is not playing it safe. It is doing what any great groundbreaking films should do and that is to find the truth of the story and tell it, show it and help the audience engage and feel it, in an uncompromising way.
*** SPOILERS *** The film deals with troubled childhoods of four kids, two of whom grow up to become Ashton Kutcher and Amy Smart. (Not literally, of course!) Kutcher's lead, has the ability to travel back to his own past for brief moments by reading his childhood journals or in some cases, watching home movies or looking at photos.
His intention upon discovering this gift, is to repair some of the damage that these events have cause to the group, who have sustained several traumas and left them in various states of dis-functionality as adults. But, as the metaphor relating to Chaos Theory states, "Does the flap of a butterfly's wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?" Philip Merilees: We witness several distinct changes in then present as a result of his tampering and this often results in more pain, in one way or another.
This is a gripping film, with a true sense of itself, philosophy and needs of the narrative to justify its own dower conclusions, and ultimately, Kutcher's final decisions.
The sound design, cinematography general direction are outstanding here, with power use of all the key elements to give us a naturalistic feel, not dis-similar from something that Steven Spielberg might produce.
The Theatrical Cut was good, but this version is superior, with a new and more appropriate ending more in keeping the with the general tone of the film, this should be a true Sci-Fi classic, in the same league as the likes of "Planet Of The Apes", "The Day The Earth Caught Fire" and in to a lesser extent, this being a more widely accepted addition, "Donnie Darko".
Highly recommended.
Debbie (52 KP) rated Merci Suarez Changes Gears in Books
Sep 7, 2018
<img src="https://www.netgalley.com/badge/9a41056d7201c045d3f9e5c161f9569494687ae1"; width="80" height="80" alt="Professional Reader" title="Professional Reader"/>
#Merci Suarez #Net Galley Candle Wick Publishing Children's fiction Middle Grade
Release date September 11, 2018 368 pages
I was lucky enough to be selected to read this book before it is released. I enjoyed this book greatly. I gave it 4 stars.
This book is about a Latino family who live in Florida. The family consist of a grandma, grandpa, aunt, twin cousins, mom, dad, older brother and the main character Merci. They really aren't poor but nor are they rich. probably low middle class. Both of the older children go to a private school by way of scholarship. The dad owns his own business as a painter and to pay the children's books during the summer they painted the gym. They wear a uniform to this school. Merci isn't as smart as her older brother who loves science. She has lazy eye and has gone the process of wearing a patch and having surgery. Her eye still has some issues at times. The students are required to do community service at this school. Most students only have to do 40 hours but Merci and her brother have to do 60 hours because of their scholarship. She isn't thrilled about her community service which is being a Sunshine Buddy. She ends up being a buddy to a boy which is unusually for a girl to be buddy with a boy. All the other children tease her when she tries to make contact in school. This new boy Michael Clark is a very cute boy and all the girls talk about him.
This book is about Merci and the things she goes through not only at school but also at home. She hates have to help out with her twin cousins because now she isn't able to go to soccer try outs which she really wants to do because she has to her Grandma watch the twins. Her Grandpa whom she adores is sick and she does find out but is the last to know and gets upset with her family for not telling her sooner. She is scared and mad at the same time.
This is a great book for a middle grader to read because it will explain about the disease her grandpa has in a very understanding way. It will give them understanding on how you can work through some hard times.
It is hard to go into detail because I don't want to give anything away about this story. I read most of it in one setting.
The author did a great job.
#Merci Suarez #Net Galley Candle Wick Publishing Children's fiction Middle Grade
Release date September 11, 2018 368 pages
I was lucky enough to be selected to read this book before it is released. I enjoyed this book greatly. I gave it 4 stars.
This book is about a Latino family who live in Florida. The family consist of a grandma, grandpa, aunt, twin cousins, mom, dad, older brother and the main character Merci. They really aren't poor but nor are they rich. probably low middle class. Both of the older children go to a private school by way of scholarship. The dad owns his own business as a painter and to pay the children's books during the summer they painted the gym. They wear a uniform to this school. Merci isn't as smart as her older brother who loves science. She has lazy eye and has gone the process of wearing a patch and having surgery. Her eye still has some issues at times. The students are required to do community service at this school. Most students only have to do 40 hours but Merci and her brother have to do 60 hours because of their scholarship. She isn't thrilled about her community service which is being a Sunshine Buddy. She ends up being a buddy to a boy which is unusually for a girl to be buddy with a boy. All the other children tease her when she tries to make contact in school. This new boy Michael Clark is a very cute boy and all the girls talk about him.
This book is about Merci and the things she goes through not only at school but also at home. She hates have to help out with her twin cousins because now she isn't able to go to soccer try outs which she really wants to do because she has to her Grandma watch the twins. Her Grandpa whom she adores is sick and she does find out but is the last to know and gets upset with her family for not telling her sooner. She is scared and mad at the same time.
This is a great book for a middle grader to read because it will explain about the disease her grandpa has in a very understanding way. It will give them understanding on how you can work through some hard times.
It is hard to go into detail because I don't want to give anything away about this story. I read most of it in one setting.
The author did a great job.
Erika (17788 KP) rated Loki - Season 1 in TV
Jul 16, 2021 (Updated Jul 16, 2021)
I’ll stick with Loki’s original story-arc.
Contains spoilers, click to show
Loki, featuring the return of Tom Hiddleston to the MCU, has escaped with the tesseract, and is subsequently caught by the TVA. He agrees to help Owen Wilson’s Mobius track down a variant that is conveniently a version of himself. What ensues is a painful setup for Ironman with Magic… oh, sorry, Dr. Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.
On one hand, my ma always told me, if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all, but on the other hand, I haven’t been this pissed off at a major franchise since Star Wars: The Last Jedi. My visceral, negative reaction was caused by many things.
First, this series did not need to be made. Loki had a perfect ending to his overall arc, and it really didn’t need to be messed with. I am a huge Tom Hiddleston fan, I went to NYC to see him in a play, waited outside freezing my butt off to meet him, all of that. I was so glad when Loki was killed off, so he’d be free to do other things, and not just be known for Loki. Alas, that did not happen.
This series was made for two subsets of fans: the fans that can’t accept the death of their favorite character, and the fans that are absolutely, irrationally obsessed with having their favorite character paired up romantically. I fall into neither of these categories. ‘More Stories to Tell’ was the tagline… it should have been ‘More Money to be Made’.
After watching the same movie in a different flavor for over ten years, I realized that maybe the MCU wasn’t for me anymore. But, when Loki was announced, I was promised something new and weird! I thought, maybe this will be the show to get me back into the MCU. That was not the case. I cannot believe the rave reviews about this series; did we all watch the same thing?
The first warning sign for me was when it was announced that Michael Waldron, who was a writer for Rick & Morty was going to be helming this series. Rick & Morty is funny… if you’re a dude-bro, drunk, or high. When I read a few of his interviews prior to the release of Loki, another warning sign, this guy kind of sounded like a huge douchebag. I was then calmed and reassured that maybe it wouldn’t be a train-wreck because Hiddleston was heavily involved in the series.
As I’ve mentioned before, we were promised something new, different, and weird. Don’t make promises you can’t keep, creative team behind Loki.
Episode 1 was cheap; did I need to see clips from previous movies used in a very uncreative way? No, I did not. There was also something just off about the casting of Wilson. Now, this may be on me because my teen-years were spent quoting Owen Wilson films. There were a few things I liked about Episode 1, like the Blade Runner robot reference. There was a red flag in this episode though. Pro-tip: never, EVER have a character verbalize/confirm that they’re smart. Because it’s probably not the case.
Episode 2 was the bright spot, it was my favorite, by far. It was fast-paced, amusing, and the most interesting episode out of the whole series. The Mt Vesuvius/unleashing of the goats thing was the sort of thing I was looking for in this series. I actually chuckled a little, which rarely happens. It moved the story along, and we get the big reveal of the Loki variant that’s causing all the havoc.
Episode 3 was, for lack of a better word, boring. The pace slowed, and it was the infamous Disney+ show filler episode. We’re introduced to Mary Sue, sorry, I mean Lady Loki, but not really, Sylvie, the Enchantress, right? No, wait, she’s a completely different, new character. Probably shouldn’t have opted for the name Sylvie in that case. She’s a brand new, *strong* female, that shows her strength by punching people and has no personality (see: Carol Danvers - Captain Marvel, Hope van Dyne - Ant-Man). Y’all, you told me you were going to give me something different, new, weird. A Mary Sue isn’t new, different, or weird. This episode was a get-to-know-each-other, and build a pseudo-sibling relationship, right? Because anything else would be weird in a bad way, not an interesting way. There was a considerable shift in our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki character evolution, he opened-up, announced that he was a member of the LGBTQQIAAP nation, progress! First bi-sexual character in the MCU, way to go Disney, getting with the times! It was still a filler episode though, and while the stakes seemed high, you knew that there were three more episodes to go, of course they would live.
Again, I was reassured after this lackluster episode by Hiddleston, that 4 and 5 were his favorite. That fact is now disturbing.
Episode 4 was the death knell. I think the response from the creative team afterwards was also incredibly tone-deaf, and, quite frankly, insulting. The 4th episode was so bad, I legitimately had to go cleanse my eyes and brain with a GBBO marathon. The fact that the creative team had no idea that the insta-love (see: Jane and Thor - Thor) between two characters that had seemingly formed a pseudo-sibling relationship wouldn’t come off a little incest-y is really strange to me. If a pseudo-sibling relationship was not the intention, then it was poor writing, directing and acting by all parties involved. Sometimes, when a Mary Sue punches our main character, he falls in love with her (see: Hope and Scott - Ant-Man). The whole narcissism thing was hilarious, I’m glad our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki was cured of that by Sylvie and another *strong* personality-lacking woman (see: Sif -Thor/Thor: the Dark World) kicking him between the legs was what he’d needed all along. If a small portion of this episode was actually utilizing the myth of Narcissus, then I’m glad they followed it through to the dying part. This is when everything clicked for me. Our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki’s character evolution made him a big ol’ bowl of mushy, overcooked oatmeal. HOW and WHY would you take one of the best anti-heroes in the MCU, or any superhero franchise, and make him so mushy? More importantly, I didn’t care about what happened to any of the characters, except B-15. Normally, that’s my cue to stop watching a show, but I wanted to see if they tried to convince audiences that this Oatmeal Loki was actually smart and logical.
Episode 5 was when things slightly improved. Again, I couldn’t forgive the events of Episode 4, and I totally fast-forwarded during whatever talk Loki and Mary Sue, sorry, Sylvie, had with a blankie around their shoulders. All of the other Lokis were better in their tiny amount of screen time than Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki. Alligator Loki had more personality than Sylvie. Richard Grant is the superior Loki in my opinion. This episode also reintroduced hand holding with CGI colors swirling around characters (see: Guardians of the Galaxy).
Episode 6 was our finale. Thank God. We’re introduced to the real head of the TVA, which was who everyone was expecting. This episode was a little slow-paced, with a lot of interesting chit-chat. Oatmeal Loki actually seemed like he had a brain cell or two for a few brief, fleeting moments. He even showed off some of his powers, which, by the way, we were told we’d see more of… but didn’t. Then, our Oatmeal Loki was distracted by his Mary Sue, went for a kiss, and plopped right on his ass, looking like a fool. I almost snorted my coffee as I watched. Then, they confirmed a Season 2.
Honestly, I was hoping Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki would get killed off. Sadly, it didn’t happen, and they’re getting another series, and an appearance in Ironman with Magic. I’m so glad this series was something new, different, and weird, not just the bog-standard, MCU drivel we normally get. Oh, wait… I probably don’t even need to state that this wasn’t my cup of tea, and, again, solidified the fact that I’m over the MCU. I also know that I should avoid anything Michael Waldron and Kate Herron touch. Eventually, I’ll stop feeling betrayed by Hiddleston, but it may take a while. Is that ridiculous? Probably.
On one hand, my ma always told me, if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all, but on the other hand, I haven’t been this pissed off at a major franchise since Star Wars: The Last Jedi. My visceral, negative reaction was caused by many things.
First, this series did not need to be made. Loki had a perfect ending to his overall arc, and it really didn’t need to be messed with. I am a huge Tom Hiddleston fan, I went to NYC to see him in a play, waited outside freezing my butt off to meet him, all of that. I was so glad when Loki was killed off, so he’d be free to do other things, and not just be known for Loki. Alas, that did not happen.
This series was made for two subsets of fans: the fans that can’t accept the death of their favorite character, and the fans that are absolutely, irrationally obsessed with having their favorite character paired up romantically. I fall into neither of these categories. ‘More Stories to Tell’ was the tagline… it should have been ‘More Money to be Made’.
After watching the same movie in a different flavor for over ten years, I realized that maybe the MCU wasn’t for me anymore. But, when Loki was announced, I was promised something new and weird! I thought, maybe this will be the show to get me back into the MCU. That was not the case. I cannot believe the rave reviews about this series; did we all watch the same thing?
The first warning sign for me was when it was announced that Michael Waldron, who was a writer for Rick & Morty was going to be helming this series. Rick & Morty is funny… if you’re a dude-bro, drunk, or high. When I read a few of his interviews prior to the release of Loki, another warning sign, this guy kind of sounded like a huge douchebag. I was then calmed and reassured that maybe it wouldn’t be a train-wreck because Hiddleston was heavily involved in the series.
As I’ve mentioned before, we were promised something new, different, and weird. Don’t make promises you can’t keep, creative team behind Loki.
Episode 1 was cheap; did I need to see clips from previous movies used in a very uncreative way? No, I did not. There was also something just off about the casting of Wilson. Now, this may be on me because my teen-years were spent quoting Owen Wilson films. There were a few things I liked about Episode 1, like the Blade Runner robot reference. There was a red flag in this episode though. Pro-tip: never, EVER have a character verbalize/confirm that they’re smart. Because it’s probably not the case.
Episode 2 was the bright spot, it was my favorite, by far. It was fast-paced, amusing, and the most interesting episode out of the whole series. The Mt Vesuvius/unleashing of the goats thing was the sort of thing I was looking for in this series. I actually chuckled a little, which rarely happens. It moved the story along, and we get the big reveal of the Loki variant that’s causing all the havoc.
Episode 3 was, for lack of a better word, boring. The pace slowed, and it was the infamous Disney+ show filler episode. We’re introduced to Mary Sue, sorry, I mean Lady Loki, but not really, Sylvie, the Enchantress, right? No, wait, she’s a completely different, new character. Probably shouldn’t have opted for the name Sylvie in that case. She’s a brand new, *strong* female, that shows her strength by punching people and has no personality (see: Carol Danvers - Captain Marvel, Hope van Dyne - Ant-Man). Y’all, you told me you were going to give me something different, new, weird. A Mary Sue isn’t new, different, or weird. This episode was a get-to-know-each-other, and build a pseudo-sibling relationship, right? Because anything else would be weird in a bad way, not an interesting way. There was a considerable shift in our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki character evolution, he opened-up, announced that he was a member of the LGBTQQIAAP nation, progress! First bi-sexual character in the MCU, way to go Disney, getting with the times! It was still a filler episode though, and while the stakes seemed high, you knew that there were three more episodes to go, of course they would live.
Again, I was reassured after this lackluster episode by Hiddleston, that 4 and 5 were his favorite. That fact is now disturbing.
Episode 4 was the death knell. I think the response from the creative team afterwards was also incredibly tone-deaf, and, quite frankly, insulting. The 4th episode was so bad, I legitimately had to go cleanse my eyes and brain with a GBBO marathon. The fact that the creative team had no idea that the insta-love (see: Jane and Thor - Thor) between two characters that had seemingly formed a pseudo-sibling relationship wouldn’t come off a little incest-y is really strange to me. If a pseudo-sibling relationship was not the intention, then it was poor writing, directing and acting by all parties involved. Sometimes, when a Mary Sue punches our main character, he falls in love with her (see: Hope and Scott - Ant-Man). The whole narcissism thing was hilarious, I’m glad our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki was cured of that by Sylvie and another *strong* personality-lacking woman (see: Sif -Thor/Thor: the Dark World) kicking him between the legs was what he’d needed all along. If a small portion of this episode was actually utilizing the myth of Narcissus, then I’m glad they followed it through to the dying part. This is when everything clicked for me. Our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki’s character evolution made him a big ol’ bowl of mushy, overcooked oatmeal. HOW and WHY would you take one of the best anti-heroes in the MCU, or any superhero franchise, and make him so mushy? More importantly, I didn’t care about what happened to any of the characters, except B-15. Normally, that’s my cue to stop watching a show, but I wanted to see if they tried to convince audiences that this Oatmeal Loki was actually smart and logical.
Episode 5 was when things slightly improved. Again, I couldn’t forgive the events of Episode 4, and I totally fast-forwarded during whatever talk Loki and Mary Sue, sorry, Sylvie, had with a blankie around their shoulders. All of the other Lokis were better in their tiny amount of screen time than Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki. Alligator Loki had more personality than Sylvie. Richard Grant is the superior Loki in my opinion. This episode also reintroduced hand holding with CGI colors swirling around characters (see: Guardians of the Galaxy).
Episode 6 was our finale. Thank God. We’re introduced to the real head of the TVA, which was who everyone was expecting. This episode was a little slow-paced, with a lot of interesting chit-chat. Oatmeal Loki actually seemed like he had a brain cell or two for a few brief, fleeting moments. He even showed off some of his powers, which, by the way, we were told we’d see more of… but didn’t. Then, our Oatmeal Loki was distracted by his Mary Sue, went for a kiss, and plopped right on his ass, looking like a fool. I almost snorted my coffee as I watched. Then, they confirmed a Season 2.
Honestly, I was hoping Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki would get killed off. Sadly, it didn’t happen, and they’re getting another series, and an appearance in Ironman with Magic. I’m so glad this series was something new, different, and weird, not just the bog-standard, MCU drivel we normally get. Oh, wait… I probably don’t even need to state that this wasn’t my cup of tea, and, again, solidified the fact that I’m over the MCU. I also know that I should avoid anything Michael Waldron and Kate Herron touch. Eventually, I’ll stop feeling betrayed by Hiddleston, but it may take a while. Is that ridiculous? Probably.
Mothergamer (1517 KP) rated The Green Hornet (2011) in Movies
Apr 3, 2019
I don't even have the words for how infuriated I am right now with The Green Hornet film. There's a small part of me that wishes I could just throw a brick at Seth Rogen's crotch right now, because he absolutely deserves it along with director Michael Gondry. That's right, the director of the film Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind which to me was a good movie is responsible for this equally terrible movie.
I do feel much of the blame lies with the fact that Seth Rogen co-wrote this screenplay and he claimed that he was so glad he didn't screw up one of his favorite childhood heroes. Seth, Seth, Seth....tsk tsk, someone's a dirty rotten liar Seth. Why must you constantly lie to us Seth? The truth is you messed up completely! In the original radio show, comics, and T.V. Show Britt Reid wasn't a moron. He was a smart successful newspaper publisher, he was confident, and he could fight well alongside his equally confident sidekick Kato. I loved the T.V. show and I loved the comic. I loved watching The Green Hornet on Kung Fu Saturday when I was a kid. That was the highlight of my Saturday. I would watch a couple of episodes of The Green Hornet and then watch the featured kung fu film. That's a sacred childhood memory and you, Seth Rogen along with your director have pissed all over it.
Not only did you make Britt Reid a total jerk, you made him stupid too! He loosely based Britt Reid on Paris Hilton? Are you kidding me with this nonsense?
Seth Rogen's Britt Reid is a spoiled rich brat who shows no interest in running the newspaper, but he instead becomes buddies with Kato his mechanic and coffee maker. I felt bad for Jay Chou because he's no Bruce Lee, but he did alright in spite of Seth Rogen constantly hyperventilating and shouting in every scene. He tried, he really did. Cameron Diaz's role as Reid's secretary Lenore Case is completely useless. She's basically camera filler with a great smile.
Of course, The Green Hornet has to have a villain and that is Christoph Waltz (Oscar winner from Inglorious Basterds) as Chudnofsky, but there is no depth to the character which proves bad writing is bad writing. Now I like action scenes as much as the next person, but it's as if Seth Rogen got bored and just added as much action as possible as filler rather than having an actual plot that tells the story. There's also so much pointless dialogue, watching this train wreck of a film is like being stuck in a dentist's chair having a root canal with no anesthesia. Yes, it's that damn bad. Not even the overpriced 3-D could save this film. That is just a gimmick to get more money out of people and this film proved that point real quick.
There is so much that could have been done to make this film version of the T.V. show great, but none of it was done. Instead, we get a film that is so terrible with no plot at all, a fake Britt Reid (I don't care what you say Rogen, that character you played was NOT Britt Reid! You are a liar sir!), a subdued Kato that got overshadowed by the crazy rich brat, a useless vapid secretary, and a villain that's about as threatening as a labradoodle. Seth Rogen and Michale Gondry you should be ashamed and embarrassed that your names are on this piece of trash.
Don't waste your money on this folks and certainly don't waste it on 3-D. The original is better and I'm sure that Mr. Rogen's going to have several bricks thrown at his crotch for even writing this awful screenplay. Just please, do us a favor and go sit in the corner with M. Night Shyamalan and quit making movies, because you really screwed the pooch on this one pal.
I do feel much of the blame lies with the fact that Seth Rogen co-wrote this screenplay and he claimed that he was so glad he didn't screw up one of his favorite childhood heroes. Seth, Seth, Seth....tsk tsk, someone's a dirty rotten liar Seth. Why must you constantly lie to us Seth? The truth is you messed up completely! In the original radio show, comics, and T.V. Show Britt Reid wasn't a moron. He was a smart successful newspaper publisher, he was confident, and he could fight well alongside his equally confident sidekick Kato. I loved the T.V. show and I loved the comic. I loved watching The Green Hornet on Kung Fu Saturday when I was a kid. That was the highlight of my Saturday. I would watch a couple of episodes of The Green Hornet and then watch the featured kung fu film. That's a sacred childhood memory and you, Seth Rogen along with your director have pissed all over it.
Not only did you make Britt Reid a total jerk, you made him stupid too! He loosely based Britt Reid on Paris Hilton? Are you kidding me with this nonsense?
Seth Rogen's Britt Reid is a spoiled rich brat who shows no interest in running the newspaper, but he instead becomes buddies with Kato his mechanic and coffee maker. I felt bad for Jay Chou because he's no Bruce Lee, but he did alright in spite of Seth Rogen constantly hyperventilating and shouting in every scene. He tried, he really did. Cameron Diaz's role as Reid's secretary Lenore Case is completely useless. She's basically camera filler with a great smile.
Of course, The Green Hornet has to have a villain and that is Christoph Waltz (Oscar winner from Inglorious Basterds) as Chudnofsky, but there is no depth to the character which proves bad writing is bad writing. Now I like action scenes as much as the next person, but it's as if Seth Rogen got bored and just added as much action as possible as filler rather than having an actual plot that tells the story. There's also so much pointless dialogue, watching this train wreck of a film is like being stuck in a dentist's chair having a root canal with no anesthesia. Yes, it's that damn bad. Not even the overpriced 3-D could save this film. That is just a gimmick to get more money out of people and this film proved that point real quick.
There is so much that could have been done to make this film version of the T.V. show great, but none of it was done. Instead, we get a film that is so terrible with no plot at all, a fake Britt Reid (I don't care what you say Rogen, that character you played was NOT Britt Reid! You are a liar sir!), a subdued Kato that got overshadowed by the crazy rich brat, a useless vapid secretary, and a villain that's about as threatening as a labradoodle. Seth Rogen and Michale Gondry you should be ashamed and embarrassed that your names are on this piece of trash.
Don't waste your money on this folks and certainly don't waste it on 3-D. The original is better and I'm sure that Mr. Rogen's going to have several bricks thrown at his crotch for even writing this awful screenplay. Just please, do us a favor and go sit in the corner with M. Night Shyamalan and quit making movies, because you really screwed the pooch on this one pal.