Search
Search results
Luke (12 KP) rated Bloodborne in Video Games
Oct 2, 2017
Strategic, challenging, and rewarding combat (6 more)
Excellent orchestrated soundtrack
Great aesthetic and visual design
Cool boss designs
Old Hunters expansion adds extra challenge
30-40 hour campaign with loads of content
Lovecraftian horror at its finest
Bloodborne is an action RPG developed by From Software and directed by Hidetaka Miyazaki, creator of the Dark Souls series. Bloodborne takes elements from the Dark Souls games and mixes in elements of Gothic and Lovecraftian horror to make one truly unique experience exclusively for the Playstation 4.
You play as a Hunter and you have come to the city of Yharnam on the night of the Hunt where the lines between man and beast are blurred. Initially, your goal is quite simple: just go out and kill some beasts of all manner. Everything from werewolves to madmen to even other NPC Hunters. But as you progress through the game, you begin to unravel a conspiracy involving ancient gods from the cosmos coming down to incite this madness upon the townsfolk. Souls games aren't really known for their stories. Most of the game's backstory can often be found in item descriptions. However, Bloodborne differentiates itself by having one of the most fleshed out and intriguing plots of the entire Soulsborne series.
The presentation here is breathtaking. It evokes the style of olden Gothic horror tales from days long past. Towering spires line the horizon clearly inspired by Victorian and Gothic style architecture of Romania and this is reflected in the games level design. Blood spills out in a vibrant crimson color. Most of the game is completely silent save for the excellent sound design. The soundtrack only kicks in during boss fights and other key moments in the game making it even more special.
If you are familiar with any of the Dark Souls games, then you pretty much know what to expect from Bloodborne's combat. Bloodborne emphasizes speed and aggression with its combat system, but it is still quite strategic and very challenging. Don't go in thinking you can just rush through this in a weekend. This game takes patience and effort from the player to be rewarded. The weapon variety is significantly smaller than that of the Dark Souls games, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Each weapon feels unique, and each one will cater to a specific play style. And since you can transform almost all the weapons in the game, they almost feel like two weapons in one. For example, a shortsword can be transformed into a greatsword and so on. Instead of giving you a shield, Bloodborne instead gives you a wide variety of firearms, from pistols and shotguns, to a flamesprayer and a cannon. You can use these guns on enemies to riposte and perform a visceral attack for massive damage, even on some of the bosses. Armor sets are all really cool, reflecting the games Gothic design. The good thing is that you don't need to worry about upgrading armor sets like in previous Souls games. And the boss designs here are great, some of the hardest and most challenging fights in any game. You have to learn and figure out the timings of their attacks in order to know when best to strike. And if you ever feel like you're getting stuck, you can always bring in a friend with the game's co-op system. The side characters are also great, some of them giving you optional quests that you can carry out if you choose to do so.
There are optional chalice dungeons that you can complete should you choose to do so. The good thing is that they aren't required to finish the game. The bad thing is that these aren't designed as well as the main game. These dungeons are randomly generated and it certainly feels that way as rooms are often copy pasted together to the point where you feel like you're going in circles. Enemy designs are also lazy as hell here, some of them being reused as bosses. It feels like these chalice dungeons were thrown in at the last minute to offer some kind of replay value when they clearly weren't needed in the first place. I'm baffled by their inclusion as some trophies are linked to the completion of these optional missions. But since these are completely optional, they don't take away from the overall score.
There are also a few more minor gripes that I have with Bloodborne. The camera can often get in the way of the surrounding architecture at times. The framerate dips during some instances, even after several patches. Fortunately, these things don't happen all that often. And why can't I warp between lanterns? This doesn't make much sense as if you want to get to a new area, you have to warp to the hub zone and then warp to the area you want to go to. I feel like this would save a lot of load times if you are going back and forth for farming runs. Oh well.
Bloodborne is never impossibly hard. It does have a high learning curve for new players, but if you keep at it and if you are patient enough, you will discover just how rewarding this experience can be. This was my first foray into the Souls series and I am so looking forward to going back in to Bloodborne to try out new builds, new play styles, new weapons, and even greater challenge in New Game Plus mode. Bloodborne is now one of my all time favorite games ever made.
You play as a Hunter and you have come to the city of Yharnam on the night of the Hunt where the lines between man and beast are blurred. Initially, your goal is quite simple: just go out and kill some beasts of all manner. Everything from werewolves to madmen to even other NPC Hunters. But as you progress through the game, you begin to unravel a conspiracy involving ancient gods from the cosmos coming down to incite this madness upon the townsfolk. Souls games aren't really known for their stories. Most of the game's backstory can often be found in item descriptions. However, Bloodborne differentiates itself by having one of the most fleshed out and intriguing plots of the entire Soulsborne series.
The presentation here is breathtaking. It evokes the style of olden Gothic horror tales from days long past. Towering spires line the horizon clearly inspired by Victorian and Gothic style architecture of Romania and this is reflected in the games level design. Blood spills out in a vibrant crimson color. Most of the game is completely silent save for the excellent sound design. The soundtrack only kicks in during boss fights and other key moments in the game making it even more special.
If you are familiar with any of the Dark Souls games, then you pretty much know what to expect from Bloodborne's combat. Bloodborne emphasizes speed and aggression with its combat system, but it is still quite strategic and very challenging. Don't go in thinking you can just rush through this in a weekend. This game takes patience and effort from the player to be rewarded. The weapon variety is significantly smaller than that of the Dark Souls games, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Each weapon feels unique, and each one will cater to a specific play style. And since you can transform almost all the weapons in the game, they almost feel like two weapons in one. For example, a shortsword can be transformed into a greatsword and so on. Instead of giving you a shield, Bloodborne instead gives you a wide variety of firearms, from pistols and shotguns, to a flamesprayer and a cannon. You can use these guns on enemies to riposte and perform a visceral attack for massive damage, even on some of the bosses. Armor sets are all really cool, reflecting the games Gothic design. The good thing is that you don't need to worry about upgrading armor sets like in previous Souls games. And the boss designs here are great, some of the hardest and most challenging fights in any game. You have to learn and figure out the timings of their attacks in order to know when best to strike. And if you ever feel like you're getting stuck, you can always bring in a friend with the game's co-op system. The side characters are also great, some of them giving you optional quests that you can carry out if you choose to do so.
There are optional chalice dungeons that you can complete should you choose to do so. The good thing is that they aren't required to finish the game. The bad thing is that these aren't designed as well as the main game. These dungeons are randomly generated and it certainly feels that way as rooms are often copy pasted together to the point where you feel like you're going in circles. Enemy designs are also lazy as hell here, some of them being reused as bosses. It feels like these chalice dungeons were thrown in at the last minute to offer some kind of replay value when they clearly weren't needed in the first place. I'm baffled by their inclusion as some trophies are linked to the completion of these optional missions. But since these are completely optional, they don't take away from the overall score.
There are also a few more minor gripes that I have with Bloodborne. The camera can often get in the way of the surrounding architecture at times. The framerate dips during some instances, even after several patches. Fortunately, these things don't happen all that often. And why can't I warp between lanterns? This doesn't make much sense as if you want to get to a new area, you have to warp to the hub zone and then warp to the area you want to go to. I feel like this would save a lot of load times if you are going back and forth for farming runs. Oh well.
Bloodborne is never impossibly hard. It does have a high learning curve for new players, but if you keep at it and if you are patient enough, you will discover just how rewarding this experience can be. This was my first foray into the Souls series and I am so looking forward to going back in to Bloodborne to try out new builds, new play styles, new weapons, and even greater challenge in New Game Plus mode. Bloodborne is now one of my all time favorite games ever made.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
May 25, 2019 (Updated May 25, 2019)
" You are my World"
Contains spoilers, click to show
Ultimate Edition review
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was really unlucky. Not only did the movie hit the market during the heyday of the MCU, it also had to be cut for the cinema by 30 Minutes. Too bad, because this movie could not stand against the Marvelhype, let alone convince critics and viewers with the holey story of the theatrical version. After all, Warner bros has released an Ultimate Edition, in which you can see this movie in its true splendor. And the film in this cut is still one of the best superhero movies for me.
Let's start with the most obvious. The soundtrack of the movie is more than great. Hans Zimmer and Junkie XL have created an incredibly exciting, suitable and just really good soundtrack. You can listen to this at the beginning, during the Opening Credits sequence. If only briefly, but effectively, as the fate of the young Bruce Wayne is shown. This is already known from other Batman films, but it is especially important for this movie. But more on that later.
The rest of the Sountrack kicked ass consistently. Whether it's The Red Capes Are Coming, Is She With You or Beautiful Lie, everything is great!
Ben Affleck as Batman is perfect. His acting is really good, he convinces in every second, with every emotion. In addition, Henry Cavill here again shows what he can do as supes and it's awesome. Jeremy Irons as Alfred is great too, he plays Alfred really well and I liked him alot. Even Amy Adams, Gal Gadot, Holly Hunter and the usual suspects like Diane Lane, Laurence Fishburne and Harry Lennix are great.
The action in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is also spectacular . Whether the great Batmobile chase, the battle of the giants or the final battle against Doomsday. In addition the action was clear and not too fast cut, so that one could follow and admire everything well!
Of course, the action was always supported by the successful effects. Everything looked great at all times. Doomsday may take some getting used to, but I found the effects good at all times!
I would also like to mention the humor, which is rather rare, but nevertheless effective and well placed.
I would also like to mention the introduction of Wonder Woman and the rest of the Justice League. I thought it was good and logical that Luthor has the information about the meta-beings and so Batman came to this, although he was actually looking for something else.
I also liked how the events in Man of Steel influenced this movie! But more on that later.
Incidentally, I think the already mentioned Opening Credits sequence is really good. At the same time showing the death of Bruce's parents and his meeting on the bats with Beautiful Lie in the background, I found a very successful and convincing start to this masterpiece!
Now I would like to come to the story, with which unfortunately most have problems. Because I find it consistently great!
Already at the beginning you can see how Bruce witnesses the death of his parents and how his dying father only says "Martha". This already shows directly that Batman is traumatized. This can also be seen by his dependence on alcohol and medication. With the appearance of Superman and the destruction of Metropolis that Bruce witnessed, he begins to despise Superman.
Lex Luthor, who through his many means knows who Batman and Superman are, tries to incite them against each other. But why? Because he was abused as a child by his father, now he's just crazy and wants to kill him because of his powerlessness over Superman. For in his world absolute power can not be innocent, and that power Superman has. And since Luthor knows he can not kill him, he wants Batman to do it.
And it is precisely this impotence that drives Bruce to despise Superman.
With the help of the attack, a few letters and the kidnapping of Martha Kent and Lois Lane, Lex then manages to fight day and night. Every move, every murder, everything was well thought out and planned. I think both Lex Luthor and his plan are well implemented here. In my eyes, without any logic holes, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, especially in the first half is a superhero drama in which the world wonders if it needs Superman at all and in which there is anger in Batman, Lex Luthor and so on Superman is dammed and unloaded in the explosive finale! All characters act absolutely sensible, natural and human.
I would like to go into the Martha scene.
How can anyone make fun of such a serious scene? Superman has to kill Batman to save Martha, his mother. But when he is defeated, he only wants to ask Batman to save his mother. In saying his name, Bruce unleashes his traumatic memory, the death of his parents, in which his father says his last word, "Martha." And when Lois says that Martha (Kent) is Superman's mother, Batman realizes that Superman also has a human side, and that he is even more human than himself. He also notices that his anger was meaningless. And to save Martha and stop Lex, they both come together. What is wrong with that? I think that's great!
All in all, in conclusion, I can only say again that Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is an outstanding superhero action drama! Wonderfully written, performed and filmed.
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was really unlucky. Not only did the movie hit the market during the heyday of the MCU, it also had to be cut for the cinema by 30 Minutes. Too bad, because this movie could not stand against the Marvelhype, let alone convince critics and viewers with the holey story of the theatrical version. After all, Warner bros has released an Ultimate Edition, in which you can see this movie in its true splendor. And the film in this cut is still one of the best superhero movies for me.
Let's start with the most obvious. The soundtrack of the movie is more than great. Hans Zimmer and Junkie XL have created an incredibly exciting, suitable and just really good soundtrack. You can listen to this at the beginning, during the Opening Credits sequence. If only briefly, but effectively, as the fate of the young Bruce Wayne is shown. This is already known from other Batman films, but it is especially important for this movie. But more on that later.
The rest of the Sountrack kicked ass consistently. Whether it's The Red Capes Are Coming, Is She With You or Beautiful Lie, everything is great!
Ben Affleck as Batman is perfect. His acting is really good, he convinces in every second, with every emotion. In addition, Henry Cavill here again shows what he can do as supes and it's awesome. Jeremy Irons as Alfred is great too, he plays Alfred really well and I liked him alot. Even Amy Adams, Gal Gadot, Holly Hunter and the usual suspects like Diane Lane, Laurence Fishburne and Harry Lennix are great.
The action in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is also spectacular . Whether the great Batmobile chase, the battle of the giants or the final battle against Doomsday. In addition the action was clear and not too fast cut, so that one could follow and admire everything well!
Of course, the action was always supported by the successful effects. Everything looked great at all times. Doomsday may take some getting used to, but I found the effects good at all times!
I would also like to mention the humor, which is rather rare, but nevertheless effective and well placed.
I would also like to mention the introduction of Wonder Woman and the rest of the Justice League. I thought it was good and logical that Luthor has the information about the meta-beings and so Batman came to this, although he was actually looking for something else.
I also liked how the events in Man of Steel influenced this movie! But more on that later.
Incidentally, I think the already mentioned Opening Credits sequence is really good. At the same time showing the death of Bruce's parents and his meeting on the bats with Beautiful Lie in the background, I found a very successful and convincing start to this masterpiece!
Now I would like to come to the story, with which unfortunately most have problems. Because I find it consistently great!
Already at the beginning you can see how Bruce witnesses the death of his parents and how his dying father only says "Martha". This already shows directly that Batman is traumatized. This can also be seen by his dependence on alcohol and medication. With the appearance of Superman and the destruction of Metropolis that Bruce witnessed, he begins to despise Superman.
Lex Luthor, who through his many means knows who Batman and Superman are, tries to incite them against each other. But why? Because he was abused as a child by his father, now he's just crazy and wants to kill him because of his powerlessness over Superman. For in his world absolute power can not be innocent, and that power Superman has. And since Luthor knows he can not kill him, he wants Batman to do it.
And it is precisely this impotence that drives Bruce to despise Superman.
With the help of the attack, a few letters and the kidnapping of Martha Kent and Lois Lane, Lex then manages to fight day and night. Every move, every murder, everything was well thought out and planned. I think both Lex Luthor and his plan are well implemented here. In my eyes, without any logic holes, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, especially in the first half is a superhero drama in which the world wonders if it needs Superman at all and in which there is anger in Batman, Lex Luthor and so on Superman is dammed and unloaded in the explosive finale! All characters act absolutely sensible, natural and human.
I would like to go into the Martha scene.
How can anyone make fun of such a serious scene? Superman has to kill Batman to save Martha, his mother. But when he is defeated, he only wants to ask Batman to save his mother. In saying his name, Bruce unleashes his traumatic memory, the death of his parents, in which his father says his last word, "Martha." And when Lois says that Martha (Kent) is Superman's mother, Batman realizes that Superman also has a human side, and that he is even more human than himself. He also notices that his anger was meaningless. And to save Martha and stop Lex, they both come together. What is wrong with that? I think that's great!
All in all, in conclusion, I can only say again that Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is an outstanding superhero action drama! Wonderfully written, performed and filmed.
Natalia (73 KP) rated Detroit: Become Human in Video Games
Dec 17, 2018
Story (4 more)
Characters
Art direction
Soundtrack
Controls
More Than Just a Video Game
I'll admit that hearing the initial premise of Detroit, it seemed to me cliche: a future in which technology has advanced to the point that androids exist, and how these androids themselves gain sentience. This, sprinkled in with messages of how we must improve how we treat the planet, and how we need to have a more consistent moral compass. All this I had expected from the game, but it ended up being so much more than that.
While the messages weaved into the game may not be ones people wanted or enjoyed, it can't be denied that the high-risk choices and the way we see glimpses into a wider world around these certainly engage any player. All of your choices seem high stake. Choices you make are timed, and there's no telling if they will have a completely unexpected outcome in the long-run of the story, and even if they don't, at the moment they feel like the most important choices you will ever make. Sure, some choices end up being, ultimately, pointless, but that seems to be a way that reflects life - you will make choices that seem incredibly important, but in the end, have no major result.
The game also follows three separate storylines - all of which do cross at some point within the game - and each has its charms. The most known story is the one following Connor, an android working in the DPD, but the other two focus on characters of seemingly varying importance: Kara, an android in charge of taking care of her owns daughter Alice, and Markus, an android who is charged with helping an elderly man live his day-to-day life as an artist. Within the game, however, these characters hold a similar kind of importance, perhaps due to the fact you play from their perspectives, or perhaps because you will personally gain an attachment to each characters bonds, motivations and lives as androids in a pivotal point in time for this fictional universe.
It's virtually impossible for me to review this game without mentioning the artistic efforts that went into it. Primarily, I mean the art direction and soundtrack. I'm a fan of 2D Indie games as much as the next person, just as I am a fan of the stylized graphics of the Borderlands universe and the art styles of visual novels, but something about how Detroit teeters on the edge of the uncanny valley in the best way possible speaks to how it's trying to reflect the real world. The depth of field in the game is fantastic, and small details are given their deserved attention to make a player feel as though they are watching a real-world story going on in front of them as they play. The music is certainly something that never fails for me in video games (looking at the Sonic games for influencing my love for video game music) but it completely excels in Detroit. Each story has its own collection of songs and a theme - musical loops that repeat throughout the majority of the songs in their sections to boot - and this truly helps with the experience. The way the music helps create an atmosphere, and how it fits almost perfectly into the actions going on, moves you. I don't know how else I can say this, really. Tempo changes, intensity and volume all come together to immerse you into what is happening on screen and have yet to jar me at all from my experience.
I've already mentioned the effect of the music on your mood, but what links well into this is the representation in the game - literally and symbolically. Literally, you see a diverse cast of characters that, despite most of them being androids, provide more proportional race-representation than actual films. Symbolically though, there is a much deeper idea of the past, present and future shown in the game. Perhaps this is me digging a whole lot further than necessary. I wouldn't be surprised. To avoid making this reviews very much filled with spoilers I'll have to talk in a vaguely cryptic way. Throughout Kara's story, there is a sense of being attached to the past, and this is amplified by the tracks that pair with the gameplay, truly making me cry no matter how many times I've seen a similar scene play out before me in a previous run of the game. This same link is shown with Connor and Markus, who link into the present and the past respectively. Unless I want to give away major plot points, I'll have to end my exploration of that little theory there, but if you are planning on playing through, or perhaps doing it again, it may be a good idea to look out for these themes. When you keep them in mind, they seem to pop up all over.
I know plenty of people have a problem with the pacing of the game, which can be quite understandable. Some scenes are long, some bursts of action seem unnecessary and stick around for a while longer than you may want them to, but this doesn't put as much of a damper on playing as it would seem. Pacing is an issue plenty of games have, and it seems perfectly fine to me in Detroit.
This is certainly turning into a much longer review than I had expected to give. I think to wrap this all up I can say that I have an overwhelmingly positive view of this game. Certainly, if you have enough interest in the game to be looking at reviews, this game is for you. I would recommend this for anyone looking for a unique gaming experience.
While the messages weaved into the game may not be ones people wanted or enjoyed, it can't be denied that the high-risk choices and the way we see glimpses into a wider world around these certainly engage any player. All of your choices seem high stake. Choices you make are timed, and there's no telling if they will have a completely unexpected outcome in the long-run of the story, and even if they don't, at the moment they feel like the most important choices you will ever make. Sure, some choices end up being, ultimately, pointless, but that seems to be a way that reflects life - you will make choices that seem incredibly important, but in the end, have no major result.
The game also follows three separate storylines - all of which do cross at some point within the game - and each has its charms. The most known story is the one following Connor, an android working in the DPD, but the other two focus on characters of seemingly varying importance: Kara, an android in charge of taking care of her owns daughter Alice, and Markus, an android who is charged with helping an elderly man live his day-to-day life as an artist. Within the game, however, these characters hold a similar kind of importance, perhaps due to the fact you play from their perspectives, or perhaps because you will personally gain an attachment to each characters bonds, motivations and lives as androids in a pivotal point in time for this fictional universe.
It's virtually impossible for me to review this game without mentioning the artistic efforts that went into it. Primarily, I mean the art direction and soundtrack. I'm a fan of 2D Indie games as much as the next person, just as I am a fan of the stylized graphics of the Borderlands universe and the art styles of visual novels, but something about how Detroit teeters on the edge of the uncanny valley in the best way possible speaks to how it's trying to reflect the real world. The depth of field in the game is fantastic, and small details are given their deserved attention to make a player feel as though they are watching a real-world story going on in front of them as they play. The music is certainly something that never fails for me in video games (looking at the Sonic games for influencing my love for video game music) but it completely excels in Detroit. Each story has its own collection of songs and a theme - musical loops that repeat throughout the majority of the songs in their sections to boot - and this truly helps with the experience. The way the music helps create an atmosphere, and how it fits almost perfectly into the actions going on, moves you. I don't know how else I can say this, really. Tempo changes, intensity and volume all come together to immerse you into what is happening on screen and have yet to jar me at all from my experience.
I've already mentioned the effect of the music on your mood, but what links well into this is the representation in the game - literally and symbolically. Literally, you see a diverse cast of characters that, despite most of them being androids, provide more proportional race-representation than actual films. Symbolically though, there is a much deeper idea of the past, present and future shown in the game. Perhaps this is me digging a whole lot further than necessary. I wouldn't be surprised. To avoid making this reviews very much filled with spoilers I'll have to talk in a vaguely cryptic way. Throughout Kara's story, there is a sense of being attached to the past, and this is amplified by the tracks that pair with the gameplay, truly making me cry no matter how many times I've seen a similar scene play out before me in a previous run of the game. This same link is shown with Connor and Markus, who link into the present and the past respectively. Unless I want to give away major plot points, I'll have to end my exploration of that little theory there, but if you are planning on playing through, or perhaps doing it again, it may be a good idea to look out for these themes. When you keep them in mind, they seem to pop up all over.
I know plenty of people have a problem with the pacing of the game, which can be quite understandable. Some scenes are long, some bursts of action seem unnecessary and stick around for a while longer than you may want them to, but this doesn't put as much of a damper on playing as it would seem. Pacing is an issue plenty of games have, and it seems perfectly fine to me in Detroit.
This is certainly turning into a much longer review than I had expected to give. I think to wrap this all up I can say that I have an overwhelmingly positive view of this game. Certainly, if you have enough interest in the game to be looking at reviews, this game is for you. I would recommend this for anyone looking for a unique gaming experience.
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated T2 Trainspotting (2017) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
The first time I saw Trainspotting was my senior year of high school. At the time, I knew that I wanted to get involved in film, and I really did for about ¾ of a year after I graduated. I looked at movies for their artistry and cinematography even at a young age. I was a band geek, so music was also things I would love about movies. I was deep for a 17-year-old, or so I thought any way. But I explain this to you so you don’t think that I loved this movie simply because of the drug use or humor it presented. I have always been of the mind to find something I like about a movie, watch it for what it is, and try to just find the enjoyment value (I know, weird coming from a film reviewer). I didn’t even have to try for Trainspotting. It was the complete package, and ground breaking. It also introduced me to Ewan McGregor, who is one of my favorite actors. I loved the movie so much, I bought Irvine Welsh’s book that the movie was based on of the same title, Trainspotting, which I highly recommend simply for the fact that it’s written in phonetic Scottish. I never picked up Porno, the literary sequel to Trainspotting, but I hear it is bizarre and will need to pick it up, but not because of this movie. I’ll explain in a moment.
Naturally, when the announcement was made for a second Trainspotting movie, I was both excited and terrified at the same time. The first was so good, why did Hollywood need to ruin it with a sequel that has a bigger budget. What was promising was that it was announced that the entire cast of characters (that survived from the first film) would be back, including Diane (Kelly MacDonald). But it’s been 20 years. Typically, when you see sequels come out even after only 10 years, the whole film seems a contrite, forced replication of the first. Hell, look at all the criticism for the Hangover films being exactly that, and they were only a few years apart. Whether the script feels forced just for the sake of a sequel, or the actors are trying too hard to be the character they played many years prior, it never quite works. So, as we neared the release date, I was getting more and more weary of seeing the film. Then, the trailer dropped.
Damn the trailer looked good. And I will tell you, the movie did not fall into the trap of forced sequels. The main cast came back and played the characters perfectly. Not as they were, but as the people they grew to be over the 20-year period. The plot was fun and pointless, with all of the same charm as its predecessor. I saw the movie with fellow SKNR staffer Joshua Aja, and we had a pretty good conversation following the film. We both came to the same conclusion, that neither of us could remember the last time we saw a film that just that good.
So now to the actual meat of the review itself. What was the movie about? Well, I won’t give away too much, but I will give you a quick recap of the events leading up to this film. Basically, do you remember the end of Trainspotting? Renton (Ewan McGregor), Spud (Ewen Bremner), Sick Boy (Jonny Lee Miller), and Begbie (Robert Carlyle) had successfully pulled off a heist, and Renton was making off with the money while everyone slept, except Spud of course who saw Renton leaving but didn’t say anything. As a result, Renton left Spud’s share of the cash for him in a locker. Okay; all caught up.
T2 Trainspotting picks up 20 years later. Renton comes back to Scotland because his mother passed away, he ends up reuniting with Spud, and eventually Sick Boy, who we now know by his real name, Simon. Begbie is in prison because, well… he’s Begbie, but he doesn’t stay there long. Tempers fly, old feelings flare, and not every reunited moment is met with glee. But soon enough, Renton, Simon and Spud are drawn into old habits, though not old drugs, and start to build money up to open a ‘sauna’ (read: undercover brothel) for Simon’s girlfriend, Veronika (Angela Nedyalkova). It’s not long before Begbie shows up and starts mucking things up leading to a suspenseful conclusion between Renton, Simon and Begbie.
That’s all I can say. There was an excellent use of the history from the first film, and of course we get another fantastic ‘Choose Life’ speech from Renton. The soundtrack, while not quite as good as the first, still holds its own very well. And be sure to look for the Bowie tribute, since it was he who helped Danny Boyle obtain a lot of music rights on the cheap for the first film. And, you will find Spud’s writings throughout the movie to be lifted, verbatim, from the Trainspotting by Irvine Welsh. But what’s interesting, is that there is not a lot that relates this film to the literary sequel, Porno. Much of the plot of this film is taken from, or at least inspired by, parts of the book that were not used in the first film. That combined with some new writing and storytelling from Irvine Welsh and John Hodge.
Bottom line: if you liked the Trainspotting even in the slightest, you will absolutely enjoy T2 Trainspotting. A phenomenal job by cast, crew, and writers, and an excellent soundtrack will leave you wanting a trilogy. This is only the third film I have given a perfect score to in my 7 years of reviewing films, and it is well deserved. Go see this movie.
Naturally, when the announcement was made for a second Trainspotting movie, I was both excited and terrified at the same time. The first was so good, why did Hollywood need to ruin it with a sequel that has a bigger budget. What was promising was that it was announced that the entire cast of characters (that survived from the first film) would be back, including Diane (Kelly MacDonald). But it’s been 20 years. Typically, when you see sequels come out even after only 10 years, the whole film seems a contrite, forced replication of the first. Hell, look at all the criticism for the Hangover films being exactly that, and they were only a few years apart. Whether the script feels forced just for the sake of a sequel, or the actors are trying too hard to be the character they played many years prior, it never quite works. So, as we neared the release date, I was getting more and more weary of seeing the film. Then, the trailer dropped.
Damn the trailer looked good. And I will tell you, the movie did not fall into the trap of forced sequels. The main cast came back and played the characters perfectly. Not as they were, but as the people they grew to be over the 20-year period. The plot was fun and pointless, with all of the same charm as its predecessor. I saw the movie with fellow SKNR staffer Joshua Aja, and we had a pretty good conversation following the film. We both came to the same conclusion, that neither of us could remember the last time we saw a film that just that good.
So now to the actual meat of the review itself. What was the movie about? Well, I won’t give away too much, but I will give you a quick recap of the events leading up to this film. Basically, do you remember the end of Trainspotting? Renton (Ewan McGregor), Spud (Ewen Bremner), Sick Boy (Jonny Lee Miller), and Begbie (Robert Carlyle) had successfully pulled off a heist, and Renton was making off with the money while everyone slept, except Spud of course who saw Renton leaving but didn’t say anything. As a result, Renton left Spud’s share of the cash for him in a locker. Okay; all caught up.
T2 Trainspotting picks up 20 years later. Renton comes back to Scotland because his mother passed away, he ends up reuniting with Spud, and eventually Sick Boy, who we now know by his real name, Simon. Begbie is in prison because, well… he’s Begbie, but he doesn’t stay there long. Tempers fly, old feelings flare, and not every reunited moment is met with glee. But soon enough, Renton, Simon and Spud are drawn into old habits, though not old drugs, and start to build money up to open a ‘sauna’ (read: undercover brothel) for Simon’s girlfriend, Veronika (Angela Nedyalkova). It’s not long before Begbie shows up and starts mucking things up leading to a suspenseful conclusion between Renton, Simon and Begbie.
That’s all I can say. There was an excellent use of the history from the first film, and of course we get another fantastic ‘Choose Life’ speech from Renton. The soundtrack, while not quite as good as the first, still holds its own very well. And be sure to look for the Bowie tribute, since it was he who helped Danny Boyle obtain a lot of music rights on the cheap for the first film. And, you will find Spud’s writings throughout the movie to be lifted, verbatim, from the Trainspotting by Irvine Welsh. But what’s interesting, is that there is not a lot that relates this film to the literary sequel, Porno. Much of the plot of this film is taken from, or at least inspired by, parts of the book that were not used in the first film. That combined with some new writing and storytelling from Irvine Welsh and John Hodge.
Bottom line: if you liked the Trainspotting even in the slightest, you will absolutely enjoy T2 Trainspotting. A phenomenal job by cast, crew, and writers, and an excellent soundtrack will leave you wanting a trilogy. This is only the third film I have given a perfect score to in my 7 years of reviewing films, and it is well deserved. Go see this movie.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Why is everyone not raving about this movie?
Imagine a ménage à trois of Agatha Christie, Alfred Hitchcock and Quentin Tarantino at the Overlook Hotel with a banging 60’s soundtrack. Got that unpleasant vision in your mind? Good! You’re halfway there to getting the feel of “Bad Times at the El Royale”. And they really are bad times!
The Plot
It’s 1969 and an oddball set of characters arrive at the faded glory of the El Royale hotel at Lake Tahoe: “a bi-state establishment” straddling the Nevada/California border: so describes the manager-cum-bellhop-cum-bartender-cum-cleaner Miles Miller (Lewis Pullman, soon to appear as Maverick in the “Top Gun” sequel). The motley crew include Laramie Seymour Sullivan, a vacuum cleaner salesman (Jon Hamm); Father Daniel Flynn, an oddly-acting priest (Jeff Bridges); Darlene Sweet, a struggling Motown-style singer (Cynthia Erivo); and Emily Summerspring, a rude and abrupt hippy-chick with attitude (Dakota Johnson). But noone is quite who they seem and their twisted and convoluted lives combine in a memorable night of surprise and violence at the El Royale.
The turns
I’ve often expressed my admiration for the Screen Actor’s Guild Awards and their category of “Best Ensemble Cast”: at a time when there are controversial suggestions of additions to the Oscars, this is one I would like to see (along with a “Best Stunt Team” award that I’ve previously lobbied for). And here is my second serious candidate for the “Best Ensemble Cast” Oscar in 2018, my first being “Three Billboards in Ebbing, Missouri” (which in their books would count as 2017 anyway!) Everyone really works hard on this film and the larger than life characters suck you into the story because of the quality and intensity of their performances.
Out in front of the pack are the simply brilliant Jeff Bridges and Cynthia Erivo, an actress new to me who has a great voice and made a big impression. Scenes between the pair are just electric. Jon Hamm is as quirkily great as ever and Dakota “not Fanning” Johnson is far better in this film than any recent stuff I’ve seen her in. Another standout was another newcomer to me – young Cailee Spaeny as Rose, looking for all the world in some scenes like a young Carey Mulligan. While we’re on lookalikes, Lewis Pullman (best known to me for “Battle of the Sexes“) looks very like Tom Holland in some scenes.
The Review
I found this film to be just enormously entertaining. It is very Tarantino-esque in its claustrophobic nature (compare it with “The Hateful 8” in that respect) and with its quirky episodic flash cards (compare with “Pulp Fiction” or “Kill Bill”) but for me was much more appetising since – although very violent – it never stooped to the queasy “blow your face off” excesses of Tarantino, that I personally find distasteful. Where it apes Hitchcock is in its intricate plotting: the story regularly throws you off-balance with some genuinely surprising twists and turns that you never see coming. And the interesting time-splicing and flashbacks also keep you on your mental toes. To say any more or to give any examples would be a spoilerish crime, so I will refrain. This is a dish best served cold (so avoid the trailer if you can).
The film has a marvellous sense of place and time and key to establishing that is some superb set design; some brilliant costumes; and – most of all – an exquisitely chosen song catalogue. The great Michael Giacchino is behind the music, and he does a truly fabulous job, not just with the song selection but also with the background music. This never seems to intrude noticeably until the end titles, when you realise it’s been insistently working on you all the time: the best sort of soundtrack.
There are some films that make you marvel how someone sat at a keyboard and got a screenplay down on paper so satisfyingly. While it could be accused of aping Tarantino somewhat, for me this is still one such film. The writer/director Drew Goddard has come from the J.J. Abrams stable of “Alias” and “Lost”, and has previously written the great screenplays for films including “Cloverfield”, “The Martian” and “World War Z“. His only previous directorial feature was “The Cabin in the Woods” (which I’ve not seen), but after this he is definitely on my movie radar: his next film will be “X-force”: a “Deadpool 2” follow-on with Ryan Reynolds, Josh Brolin and Zazie Beetz, and I can’t wait to see that.
If there’s a criticism it’s that at 141 minutes its a tad long. It never to me felt like a film that long, such was the entertainment value, but while I just loved the development of character just a few of the scenes felt a little leisurely and superfluous. Trim 10 minutes off the running time – no more – and it might have felt tighter still.
I didn’t mention one star name in “The Turns” section, and that’s Chris Hemsworth. He actually does a great job in his demanding Messianic role of Billy Lee, but I just had trouble equating the “Thor” star as being “all kinds of bad”: this felt like a slight misstep in the casting to me.
Summary
This film is without a doubt going to storm into my Top 10 for the year. It’s an entertaining delight, full of twists, turns, deliciously wordy dialogue and a satisfyingly open ending. I can’t believe this film hasn’t been top billing in multiplexes up and down the country for WEEKS on end. If you get the chance, my advice would be to seek this out before it disappears.
The Plot
It’s 1969 and an oddball set of characters arrive at the faded glory of the El Royale hotel at Lake Tahoe: “a bi-state establishment” straddling the Nevada/California border: so describes the manager-cum-bellhop-cum-bartender-cum-cleaner Miles Miller (Lewis Pullman, soon to appear as Maverick in the “Top Gun” sequel). The motley crew include Laramie Seymour Sullivan, a vacuum cleaner salesman (Jon Hamm); Father Daniel Flynn, an oddly-acting priest (Jeff Bridges); Darlene Sweet, a struggling Motown-style singer (Cynthia Erivo); and Emily Summerspring, a rude and abrupt hippy-chick with attitude (Dakota Johnson). But noone is quite who they seem and their twisted and convoluted lives combine in a memorable night of surprise and violence at the El Royale.
The turns
I’ve often expressed my admiration for the Screen Actor’s Guild Awards and their category of “Best Ensemble Cast”: at a time when there are controversial suggestions of additions to the Oscars, this is one I would like to see (along with a “Best Stunt Team” award that I’ve previously lobbied for). And here is my second serious candidate for the “Best Ensemble Cast” Oscar in 2018, my first being “Three Billboards in Ebbing, Missouri” (which in their books would count as 2017 anyway!) Everyone really works hard on this film and the larger than life characters suck you into the story because of the quality and intensity of their performances.
Out in front of the pack are the simply brilliant Jeff Bridges and Cynthia Erivo, an actress new to me who has a great voice and made a big impression. Scenes between the pair are just electric. Jon Hamm is as quirkily great as ever and Dakota “not Fanning” Johnson is far better in this film than any recent stuff I’ve seen her in. Another standout was another newcomer to me – young Cailee Spaeny as Rose, looking for all the world in some scenes like a young Carey Mulligan. While we’re on lookalikes, Lewis Pullman (best known to me for “Battle of the Sexes“) looks very like Tom Holland in some scenes.
The Review
I found this film to be just enormously entertaining. It is very Tarantino-esque in its claustrophobic nature (compare it with “The Hateful 8” in that respect) and with its quirky episodic flash cards (compare with “Pulp Fiction” or “Kill Bill”) but for me was much more appetising since – although very violent – it never stooped to the queasy “blow your face off” excesses of Tarantino, that I personally find distasteful. Where it apes Hitchcock is in its intricate plotting: the story regularly throws you off-balance with some genuinely surprising twists and turns that you never see coming. And the interesting time-splicing and flashbacks also keep you on your mental toes. To say any more or to give any examples would be a spoilerish crime, so I will refrain. This is a dish best served cold (so avoid the trailer if you can).
The film has a marvellous sense of place and time and key to establishing that is some superb set design; some brilliant costumes; and – most of all – an exquisitely chosen song catalogue. The great Michael Giacchino is behind the music, and he does a truly fabulous job, not just with the song selection but also with the background music. This never seems to intrude noticeably until the end titles, when you realise it’s been insistently working on you all the time: the best sort of soundtrack.
There are some films that make you marvel how someone sat at a keyboard and got a screenplay down on paper so satisfyingly. While it could be accused of aping Tarantino somewhat, for me this is still one such film. The writer/director Drew Goddard has come from the J.J. Abrams stable of “Alias” and “Lost”, and has previously written the great screenplays for films including “Cloverfield”, “The Martian” and “World War Z“. His only previous directorial feature was “The Cabin in the Woods” (which I’ve not seen), but after this he is definitely on my movie radar: his next film will be “X-force”: a “Deadpool 2” follow-on with Ryan Reynolds, Josh Brolin and Zazie Beetz, and I can’t wait to see that.
If there’s a criticism it’s that at 141 minutes its a tad long. It never to me felt like a film that long, such was the entertainment value, but while I just loved the development of character just a few of the scenes felt a little leisurely and superfluous. Trim 10 minutes off the running time – no more – and it might have felt tighter still.
I didn’t mention one star name in “The Turns” section, and that’s Chris Hemsworth. He actually does a great job in his demanding Messianic role of Billy Lee, but I just had trouble equating the “Thor” star as being “all kinds of bad”: this felt like a slight misstep in the casting to me.
Summary
This film is without a doubt going to storm into my Top 10 for the year. It’s an entertaining delight, full of twists, turns, deliciously wordy dialogue and a satisfyingly open ending. I can’t believe this film hasn’t been top billing in multiplexes up and down the country for WEEKS on end. If you get the chance, my advice would be to seek this out before it disappears.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Jungle Book (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A New Classic
There’s an old saying; “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, and that was the kind of reaction many people had towards Disney’s live-action remake of The Jungle Book.
Helmed by Iron Man director, Jon Favreau, it certainly garnered a mixed response come its first trailer release late last year. But what is the finished product like? And are we looking at a new classic?
Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle Book is one of the most recognisable tales ever, despite its wafer thin plot, and the 1967 Disney animation is faithful to the first, and unfortunately also the latter.
We join this film in the midst of the action, as our young hero Mowgli (played by an unbelievably good Neel Sethi) learns how to run with his family – an adoptive pack of wolves. As the story progresses, Mowgli meets a whole host of friendly, and not so friendly, jungle animals as he strives to find just who he is.
This is a much darker interpretation of the classic story than we have been used to. There are scenes here that are genuinely terrifying, helped in part by the breath-taking CGI used to render the animals, with one infamous tiger in particular being the stuff of nightmares.
Speaking of which, an all-star cast that includes Ben Kingsley, Bill Murray, Scarlett Johansson, Idris Elba, Christopher Walken and Lupita Nyong’o lend their voices to fan favourites like Bagheera, Baloo, Kaa, Shere Khan, King Louie and Raksha. The vocal performances from each are sublime with Murray being a particular highlight with his comedic persona fitting perfectly with Baloo.
The jungle is brought to the screen in such detail that each frame is brimming with creatures, plants and life. In 3D, it is one of the most magnificent settings ever put to film as vibrant colours make the eyes dance with excitement. It lives and breathes right before your very eyes.
Then there’s the soundtrack. It’s true that the majority of the animation’s songs failed to make the cut, but looking back, it was only Bare Necessities that made any sort of impact and thankfully this survives, receiving a thundering orchestral backing track in the process. Christopher Walken’s gangster-like singing gives I Wanna Be Like You a whole new edge.
Nevertheless, it does, at times feel like Jon Favreau is going through the motions with the rest of the story – setting Mowgli up for one big set piece after another, though a few nice additions keep the plot flowing right up until the harrowing and beautifully filmed finale.
Overall, Disney has another classic on their hands. The Jungle Book is one of the most spectacular and breath-taking films ever put to the big screen. From a magnificent score to exceptional voice acting, it’s practically perfect in every way.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/04/16/a-new-classic-the-jungle-book-review/
Helmed by Iron Man director, Jon Favreau, it certainly garnered a mixed response come its first trailer release late last year. But what is the finished product like? And are we looking at a new classic?
Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle Book is one of the most recognisable tales ever, despite its wafer thin plot, and the 1967 Disney animation is faithful to the first, and unfortunately also the latter.
We join this film in the midst of the action, as our young hero Mowgli (played by an unbelievably good Neel Sethi) learns how to run with his family – an adoptive pack of wolves. As the story progresses, Mowgli meets a whole host of friendly, and not so friendly, jungle animals as he strives to find just who he is.
This is a much darker interpretation of the classic story than we have been used to. There are scenes here that are genuinely terrifying, helped in part by the breath-taking CGI used to render the animals, with one infamous tiger in particular being the stuff of nightmares.
Speaking of which, an all-star cast that includes Ben Kingsley, Bill Murray, Scarlett Johansson, Idris Elba, Christopher Walken and Lupita Nyong’o lend their voices to fan favourites like Bagheera, Baloo, Kaa, Shere Khan, King Louie and Raksha. The vocal performances from each are sublime with Murray being a particular highlight with his comedic persona fitting perfectly with Baloo.
The jungle is brought to the screen in such detail that each frame is brimming with creatures, plants and life. In 3D, it is one of the most magnificent settings ever put to film as vibrant colours make the eyes dance with excitement. It lives and breathes right before your very eyes.
Then there’s the soundtrack. It’s true that the majority of the animation’s songs failed to make the cut, but looking back, it was only Bare Necessities that made any sort of impact and thankfully this survives, receiving a thundering orchestral backing track in the process. Christopher Walken’s gangster-like singing gives I Wanna Be Like You a whole new edge.
Nevertheless, it does, at times feel like Jon Favreau is going through the motions with the rest of the story – setting Mowgli up for one big set piece after another, though a few nice additions keep the plot flowing right up until the harrowing and beautifully filmed finale.
Overall, Disney has another classic on their hands. The Jungle Book is one of the most spectacular and breath-taking films ever put to the big screen. From a magnificent score to exceptional voice acting, it’s practically perfect in every way.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/04/16/a-new-classic-the-jungle-book-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Atomic Blonde (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Say hello to Mrs. John Wick
David Leitch is one of the most exciting film-makers of the current crop of directors working today. His brilliant John Wick reignited Keanu Reeves’ career in spectacular fashion and he’s worked behind-the-scenes on films like Captain America: Civil War and Jurassic World.
Just this year he signed on to direct Deadpool 2 after Tim Miller’s sudden departure. In the meantime, he’s treating us to another adults-only thriller, Atomic Blonde. But is this Charlize Theron-led vehicle as good as his previous work?
Sensual and savage, Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) is the most elite spy in MI6, an agent willing to use all her skills to stay alive during impossible missions. With the Berlin Wall ready to crumble, she travels into the middle of the city to retrieve a dossier and take down an espionage ring. Once there, she teams up with an embedded station chief (James McAvoy) to navigate her way through the deadliest game of spies.
Charlize Theron is fast-becoming one of Hollywood’s most bankable stars after decent turns in Fast & Furious 8 and Mad Max: Fury Road. In Atomic Blonde this is no exception. She commands the screen in each and every frame, oozing class and showing the world she is a first-class action superstar.
The rest of the cast are also exquisite. James McAvoy can do no wrong this year after his out-of-this-world performance in Split, and his David Percival here is fleshed out, well-written and beautifully acted. Elsewhere, John Goodman and Toby Jones add even more prowess to proceedings.
Add to this some stunning cinematography and you’ve got a recipe for success. Atomic Blonde relishes the era in which it is presented with a magnificent soundtrack and beautiful direction. Leitch makes the film feel very much alive, with brutally realistic action shot without needless shaky cam or over-the-top scoring.
Unfortunately, the story is less successful. If Theron is the living, beating heart of Atomic Blonde, the script nearly strangles her. It is nearly impossible to truly understand what is happening on screen as the plot throws more twists and turns at the audience than Spaghetti Junction. Ordinarily, this would be great, but here it’s distracting and nonsensical.
Nevertheless, this is a vastly entertaining film, very much in the same vein of John Wick. In fact, it’d be fantastic if we could see these two characters brought together in a crossover of epic proportions.
Overall, David Leitch hasn’t quite recaptured the success of his first feature film but has managed to craft a highly stylised and quick-moving thriller that feels very real and utilises its exceptional cast incredibly well, with Charlize Theron being an absolute delight. It’s just unfortunate the plot is a bit of a damp squib.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/08/10/atomic-blonde-review-say-hello-to-mrs-john-wick/
Just this year he signed on to direct Deadpool 2 after Tim Miller’s sudden departure. In the meantime, he’s treating us to another adults-only thriller, Atomic Blonde. But is this Charlize Theron-led vehicle as good as his previous work?
Sensual and savage, Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) is the most elite spy in MI6, an agent willing to use all her skills to stay alive during impossible missions. With the Berlin Wall ready to crumble, she travels into the middle of the city to retrieve a dossier and take down an espionage ring. Once there, she teams up with an embedded station chief (James McAvoy) to navigate her way through the deadliest game of spies.
Charlize Theron is fast-becoming one of Hollywood’s most bankable stars after decent turns in Fast & Furious 8 and Mad Max: Fury Road. In Atomic Blonde this is no exception. She commands the screen in each and every frame, oozing class and showing the world she is a first-class action superstar.
The rest of the cast are also exquisite. James McAvoy can do no wrong this year after his out-of-this-world performance in Split, and his David Percival here is fleshed out, well-written and beautifully acted. Elsewhere, John Goodman and Toby Jones add even more prowess to proceedings.
Add to this some stunning cinematography and you’ve got a recipe for success. Atomic Blonde relishes the era in which it is presented with a magnificent soundtrack and beautiful direction. Leitch makes the film feel very much alive, with brutally realistic action shot without needless shaky cam or over-the-top scoring.
Unfortunately, the story is less successful. If Theron is the living, beating heart of Atomic Blonde, the script nearly strangles her. It is nearly impossible to truly understand what is happening on screen as the plot throws more twists and turns at the audience than Spaghetti Junction. Ordinarily, this would be great, but here it’s distracting and nonsensical.
Nevertheless, this is a vastly entertaining film, very much in the same vein of John Wick. In fact, it’d be fantastic if we could see these two characters brought together in a crossover of epic proportions.
Overall, David Leitch hasn’t quite recaptured the success of his first feature film but has managed to craft a highly stylised and quick-moving thriller that feels very real and utilises its exceptional cast incredibly well, with Charlize Theron being an absolute delight. It’s just unfortunate the plot is a bit of a damp squib.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/08/10/atomic-blonde-review-say-hello-to-mrs-john-wick/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Fantastic Four (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
An absolute snooze
Here comes yet another superhero film. Ending Marvel’s year that has included the charming Big Hero 6, the overstuffed Avengers: Age of Ultron and the surprisingly excellent Ant-Man, the Fox produced Fantastic Four reboot has a tough job trying to get audiences to forget the horror that came before it.
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
Rat (1 KP) rated Peaky Blinders - Season 1 in TV
Mar 28, 2018
Forget everything you think you know about period drama
It would be easy to dismiss Peaky Blinders as just a British drama. It would be easy to dismiss it as just a period piece. It would be easy to claim that it was just a British Boardwalk Empire. You'd be so wrong to do so.
Every part of Peaky Blinders is perfection. From the superb acting of its regular cast (Cillian Murphy on a tv show? Sign me up!) to a roster of featured guests (Sam Neill? Tom Hardy? Adrien Brody? Who did the casting director sell their soul to, anyway?) to the use of colour and an outlaw music soundtrack that shouldn't work, but does (Nick Cave? PJ Harvey? Tom Waits? David Bowie? On a period drama? What is this? Freaking genius, that's what.)
Shortly after the end of the first World War, a family of Irish gypsy (their word, not mine) - blooded Birmingham bookmakers tries to recover from the horrors of that war and build up their business. Second oldest, Tommy Shelby (played expertly by Cillian Murphy who manages to play a gangster who is both ruthless and fragile with the ability to break your heart with a single look), came back from the war broken by his experiences, but determined to rise far beyond the limitations of his Small Heath upbringing. Not only does he have the expected clashes with those who want to keep him from growing his business (both criminal rivals and the police) but he has a family to run (with all the interpersonal conflicts that entails). All of this is set against a backdrop of political turmoil from the IRA and the rise of communist sympathy in the UK.
You shouldn't like Tommy Shelby, but he is written and acted so well that you won't be able to not like him. The same can be said for older brother, Arthur, younger siblings John, Ada, and Finn. If you don't love Aunt Polly, then you must have a problem with strong female characters.
Steven Knight has taken a world told to him through family legend and turned it into a world that you will be eager to inhabit an hour (or, if you're like everyone I know, a season) at a time. He writes a period drama that doesn't feel dated. The characters and their struggles are as relevant today as they were nearly a hundred years ago.
Take a chance on the show with the weird name and discover why there are very few casual Peaky Blinders fans. There's a reason why the late, great David Bowie was a huge fan and made sure that they would have a song from his last album before he died. There's a reason the show's dated fashion and hairstyles are making a comeback, why Peaky Blinders pubs and pub nights are popping up all over. It's that good. Check it out for yourself.
Every part of Peaky Blinders is perfection. From the superb acting of its regular cast (Cillian Murphy on a tv show? Sign me up!) to a roster of featured guests (Sam Neill? Tom Hardy? Adrien Brody? Who did the casting director sell their soul to, anyway?) to the use of colour and an outlaw music soundtrack that shouldn't work, but does (Nick Cave? PJ Harvey? Tom Waits? David Bowie? On a period drama? What is this? Freaking genius, that's what.)
Shortly after the end of the first World War, a family of Irish gypsy (their word, not mine) - blooded Birmingham bookmakers tries to recover from the horrors of that war and build up their business. Second oldest, Tommy Shelby (played expertly by Cillian Murphy who manages to play a gangster who is both ruthless and fragile with the ability to break your heart with a single look), came back from the war broken by his experiences, but determined to rise far beyond the limitations of his Small Heath upbringing. Not only does he have the expected clashes with those who want to keep him from growing his business (both criminal rivals and the police) but he has a family to run (with all the interpersonal conflicts that entails). All of this is set against a backdrop of political turmoil from the IRA and the rise of communist sympathy in the UK.
You shouldn't like Tommy Shelby, but he is written and acted so well that you won't be able to not like him. The same can be said for older brother, Arthur, younger siblings John, Ada, and Finn. If you don't love Aunt Polly, then you must have a problem with strong female characters.
Steven Knight has taken a world told to him through family legend and turned it into a world that you will be eager to inhabit an hour (or, if you're like everyone I know, a season) at a time. He writes a period drama that doesn't feel dated. The characters and their struggles are as relevant today as they were nearly a hundred years ago.
Take a chance on the show with the weird name and discover why there are very few casual Peaky Blinders fans. There's a reason why the late, great David Bowie was a huge fan and made sure that they would have a song from his last album before he died. There's a reason the show's dated fashion and hairstyles are making a comeback, why Peaky Blinders pubs and pub nights are popping up all over. It's that good. Check it out for yourself.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) in Movies
Oct 6, 2018
Still the "Fairest of Them All"
It's always a fear of mine when I go back to visit a beloved film of mine - especially a film that was beloved to me in my childhood. Will it hold up? Is it as good as I remember it? Will the re-visitation tarnish the precious memory of this film that I have?
I am happy to report that, upon a fresh viewing of the first full length animated film every, that I can still declare SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS "the fairest of them all".
Made in 1937, by the visionary Walt Disney, this film defies the odds - many calling it "Walt's Folly". No one had attempted a full length animated film before and the skeptics were many, but what Walt knew is that he had all the standard elements of a good story - a heroine we can root for, an evil villain, some comic characters that can help us laugh (and cry) and, more importantly, he had the skillful craftsmen of the Walt Disney Studios that can pull off such a feat.
And...pull it off they did! This film is gorgeous and lush to look at. Upon this viewing, I was drawn to the background, and the edges of the frame, marveling at the detail that was interwoven into each, hand drawn imagery - giving this tapestry a lushness and thickness heretofore unseen on the screen.
As for the story of the film - and the film itself - Disney was smart enough to know that "less is more". The film is compact - running a relatively quick 83 minutes - this was a two-fold solution. (1) It helped move the film along at a sprightly pace, never once resting or losing energy and (2) this means that the artists only had to draw what was necessary for this streamlined story.
The music, of course, is wonderful and important part of this film. This was one of the first movie musicals, and was the first film to release a Soundtrack Album. From "Some Day My Prince Will Come" to "I'm Wishing" to "Heigh-Ho" and "Whistle While You Work", the songs moved the story forward and added depth to the characters portrayed on the screen.
If you haven't caught this film in awhile, I heartily recommend you check it out - it works for young and old alike. A good film to share with children of today, to show them what lush, hand drawn animation looks like. Come for the fun of the Dwarfs and the Villainy of the Evil Queen, stay for the richness of the tapestry and the attention to detail that a true classic film portrays.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Next Month: WRECK-IT RALPH and (of course) the sequel RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET (coming to theaters in November).
I am happy to report that, upon a fresh viewing of the first full length animated film every, that I can still declare SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS "the fairest of them all".
Made in 1937, by the visionary Walt Disney, this film defies the odds - many calling it "Walt's Folly". No one had attempted a full length animated film before and the skeptics were many, but what Walt knew is that he had all the standard elements of a good story - a heroine we can root for, an evil villain, some comic characters that can help us laugh (and cry) and, more importantly, he had the skillful craftsmen of the Walt Disney Studios that can pull off such a feat.
And...pull it off they did! This film is gorgeous and lush to look at. Upon this viewing, I was drawn to the background, and the edges of the frame, marveling at the detail that was interwoven into each, hand drawn imagery - giving this tapestry a lushness and thickness heretofore unseen on the screen.
As for the story of the film - and the film itself - Disney was smart enough to know that "less is more". The film is compact - running a relatively quick 83 minutes - this was a two-fold solution. (1) It helped move the film along at a sprightly pace, never once resting or losing energy and (2) this means that the artists only had to draw what was necessary for this streamlined story.
The music, of course, is wonderful and important part of this film. This was one of the first movie musicals, and was the first film to release a Soundtrack Album. From "Some Day My Prince Will Come" to "I'm Wishing" to "Heigh-Ho" and "Whistle While You Work", the songs moved the story forward and added depth to the characters portrayed on the screen.
If you haven't caught this film in awhile, I heartily recommend you check it out - it works for young and old alike. A good film to share with children of today, to show them what lush, hand drawn animation looks like. Come for the fun of the Dwarfs and the Villainy of the Evil Queen, stay for the richness of the tapestry and the attention to detail that a true classic film portrays.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Next Month: WRECK-IT RALPH and (of course) the sequel RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET (coming to theaters in November).