Search
Search results
I usually don't judge a book by its cover, but I'm not going to lie. When I saw the gorgeous cover for Nancy Churnin's children's book For Spacious Skies, I fell in love with the cover and knew I had to read the book. I'm really glad I did because everything about it was fantastic, and I even learned a few things I had never known about the song America the Beautiful and its creator, Katharine Lee Bates.
For Spacious Skies tells the condensed biography of Katharine Lee Bates, the creator of the song America the Beautiful although when it was written, it was originally a poem. Katharine Lee Bates comes across as a fantastic person. She lived in a time when men were seen as being far superior than women, but she didn't let that stop her from getting an education and being a voice for those that felt they had no voice.
I admit that I didn't know the history behind America the Beautiful, so this book was the perfect starting point. I think my favorite fact in the book was that Katharine Lee Bates never wanted or accepted any payment for penning America the Beautiful. She just wanted to give something back to the country she loved so much.
This is a biography picture book for older children, and I believe that it's written in a way that speaks to children and will draw in their attention quite easily. The length is perfect, and the wording is fantastic. Everything flows perfectly. I also liked the fact that Nancy Churnin includes an author's note as well as a timeline of Katharine's life and accomplishments at the end. The author's note goes into a little more detail about Katharine's life which is great for adults, children who want to learn a bit more, or for a discussion. The timeline makes it easy to picture events as they happened.
The illustrations in For Spacious Skies are absolutely breathtaking! Olga Baumert is the illustrator, and her talent shines through in every page. Each illustration is full of detail and really helps to drive the story. Although my 5 year old was a little young for this book, he did love the illustrations in it and even asked if we could just look at the pictures as they are quite colorful and really draw you in. Seriously, I could go on and on about amazing the illustrations are, but it's better if you just pick up a copy of the book yourself to see what I'm talking about.
Overall, I feel that For Spacious Skies is the ultimate girl power book. Katharine Lee Bates was obviously a force to be reckoned with according to this book. If you're looking for a book with a strong female and beautiful illustrations, pick up a copy of For Spacious Skies. I would definitely recommend For Spacious Skies by Nancy Churnin to adults and children aged 8 and older. I feel as if this book needs to be required reading in all elementary schools and should be in every school library. That's how good and informative it is. Grab a copy, and see for yourself!
--
(A special thank you to Edelweiss for an eBook copy of For Spacious Skies and to Nancy Churnin and Lone Star Literary Life for a hardback copy in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
For Spacious Skies tells the condensed biography of Katharine Lee Bates, the creator of the song America the Beautiful although when it was written, it was originally a poem. Katharine Lee Bates comes across as a fantastic person. She lived in a time when men were seen as being far superior than women, but she didn't let that stop her from getting an education and being a voice for those that felt they had no voice.
I admit that I didn't know the history behind America the Beautiful, so this book was the perfect starting point. I think my favorite fact in the book was that Katharine Lee Bates never wanted or accepted any payment for penning America the Beautiful. She just wanted to give something back to the country she loved so much.
This is a biography picture book for older children, and I believe that it's written in a way that speaks to children and will draw in their attention quite easily. The length is perfect, and the wording is fantastic. Everything flows perfectly. I also liked the fact that Nancy Churnin includes an author's note as well as a timeline of Katharine's life and accomplishments at the end. The author's note goes into a little more detail about Katharine's life which is great for adults, children who want to learn a bit more, or for a discussion. The timeline makes it easy to picture events as they happened.
The illustrations in For Spacious Skies are absolutely breathtaking! Olga Baumert is the illustrator, and her talent shines through in every page. Each illustration is full of detail and really helps to drive the story. Although my 5 year old was a little young for this book, he did love the illustrations in it and even asked if we could just look at the pictures as they are quite colorful and really draw you in. Seriously, I could go on and on about amazing the illustrations are, but it's better if you just pick up a copy of the book yourself to see what I'm talking about.
Overall, I feel that For Spacious Skies is the ultimate girl power book. Katharine Lee Bates was obviously a force to be reckoned with according to this book. If you're looking for a book with a strong female and beautiful illustrations, pick up a copy of For Spacious Skies. I would definitely recommend For Spacious Skies by Nancy Churnin to adults and children aged 8 and older. I feel as if this book needs to be required reading in all elementary schools and should be in every school library. That's how good and informative it is. Grab a copy, and see for yourself!
--
(A special thank you to Edelweiss for an eBook copy of For Spacious Skies and to Nancy Churnin and Lone Star Literary Life for a hardback copy in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
Darren (1599 KP) rated Clownado (2019) in Movies
Sep 2, 2019
Thoughts on Clownado
Characters – Big Ronnie is the abusive husband and circus performer that killed Savanna’s lover and forced her into an embarrassing and humiliating performance for his show. After he becomes cursed, along with his fellow performers, he gets caught in the position of being able to transport through tornadoes, where they look to kill anyone and everyone. Savanna is the wife of Big Ronnie, she is trying to leave him, only to find her plan shattered and herself forced into performing in his circus, she puts the curse on them with a friend before going on the run, only for the circus performers not to leave her alone. Hunter is a trucker who picks us Dion, he knows the town well and is willing to do a good deed to help a stranger or a friend. Dion is the black Elvis impersonator who gets questioned about his look by everyone he meets, he helps along the way in the battle against the killer clowns.
Performances – The performances in this film are wildly over the top, which only helps with the tone of the film, John O’Hare as the leader of the clowns goes full evil in his performance, while Rachel Lagen shows just how much of a victim she is. When it comes to the rest of the cast, everybody knows who they are playing through this film.
Story – The story here follows a vengeful clown and his circus performers that use tornadoes to transport around the world in search for the woman that put the curse on them, as they look to pile up the body count, while everybody else is looking for a way to stop their evil once and for all. First thing is first, if you liked Sharknado, you will understand how to watch a film with this tone, you can’t take anything you see in this story seriously, but you aren’t meant to, we get a gimmick storyline, which does everything it needs to, to make you laugh at certain moments that are bonkers, that is designed to embrace this. We do get the idea of strangers working together, with a full range of colourful characters, as well as having plenty of bloodshed along the way, giving this story a fun grindhouse feel at times too.
Comedy/Horror – The comedy in this film comes from the over the top style of the kills and Big Ronnie’s actions, the horror comes from the bloodshed, with the clowns being over powered and will to kill with any means.
Settings – The film is set in a small town, which usually sees people pass through it, most characters know each other or have dealt with people behaving the same way, which shows us just how they will come together to look to survive the clownado.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are blood splatter heavy, they do tend to be extremely close up on the wounds which does add to the effects of shock value of the damage caused by the clowns.
Scene of the Movie – The first clownado.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – While filled with blood, the close ups of the body damage, sometimes, hide away from the reaction on the victims face.
Final Thoughts – This is a truly over the top idea, that like Sharknado works to bring one of the most popular horror figures, clowns to a new way to haunt people.
Overall: Purely Fun Horror Comedy.
Characters – Big Ronnie is the abusive husband and circus performer that killed Savanna’s lover and forced her into an embarrassing and humiliating performance for his show. After he becomes cursed, along with his fellow performers, he gets caught in the position of being able to transport through tornadoes, where they look to kill anyone and everyone. Savanna is the wife of Big Ronnie, she is trying to leave him, only to find her plan shattered and herself forced into performing in his circus, she puts the curse on them with a friend before going on the run, only for the circus performers not to leave her alone. Hunter is a trucker who picks us Dion, he knows the town well and is willing to do a good deed to help a stranger or a friend. Dion is the black Elvis impersonator who gets questioned about his look by everyone he meets, he helps along the way in the battle against the killer clowns.
Performances – The performances in this film are wildly over the top, which only helps with the tone of the film, John O’Hare as the leader of the clowns goes full evil in his performance, while Rachel Lagen shows just how much of a victim she is. When it comes to the rest of the cast, everybody knows who they are playing through this film.
Story – The story here follows a vengeful clown and his circus performers that use tornadoes to transport around the world in search for the woman that put the curse on them, as they look to pile up the body count, while everybody else is looking for a way to stop their evil once and for all. First thing is first, if you liked Sharknado, you will understand how to watch a film with this tone, you can’t take anything you see in this story seriously, but you aren’t meant to, we get a gimmick storyline, which does everything it needs to, to make you laugh at certain moments that are bonkers, that is designed to embrace this. We do get the idea of strangers working together, with a full range of colourful characters, as well as having plenty of bloodshed along the way, giving this story a fun grindhouse feel at times too.
Comedy/Horror – The comedy in this film comes from the over the top style of the kills and Big Ronnie’s actions, the horror comes from the bloodshed, with the clowns being over powered and will to kill with any means.
Settings – The film is set in a small town, which usually sees people pass through it, most characters know each other or have dealt with people behaving the same way, which shows us just how they will come together to look to survive the clownado.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are blood splatter heavy, they do tend to be extremely close up on the wounds which does add to the effects of shock value of the damage caused by the clowns.
Scene of the Movie – The first clownado.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – While filled with blood, the close ups of the body damage, sometimes, hide away from the reaction on the victims face.
Final Thoughts – This is a truly over the top idea, that like Sharknado works to bring one of the most popular horror figures, clowns to a new way to haunt people.
Overall: Purely Fun Horror Comedy.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Curse of La Llorona (2019) in Movies
Sep 14, 2019
Verdict: Jump Scare 101
Characters – Anna is the widowed social worker and mother who while doing her job, checking up on children that might be suffering abuse, trying to keep them with their parents, get involved in a curse, which puts her own children in danger. Baring in mind, she is a social work and was married to a cop, she doesn’t make the best decisions, we see how she struggles to communicate with her children, often leaves them alone and when they get injuries, she doesn’t demand answers, which remaining unanswered would mean she could be considered abusive. Chris and Samantha are the children, they are both dealing with the loss of their father, which would be difficult for any child, they become cursed by La Llorona who wants to take them, meaning they must first learn to communicate with their own mother, when the events start to happen. Rafael Olvera is one man that turned his back on the church in order to fight the evil in the world, he is the last resort for Anna, where he knows how to stop La Llorona from causing more pain in the lives of family.
Performances – Linda Cardellini in the leading role does well through the film without doing anything you wouldn’t expect for a horror film. The child actors both do a solid job through the film too.
Story – The story here follows a widowed mother that ends up getting a cursed by an evil spirit that wants to take her children and she must figure out how to stop her before it is too late. This is a horror story that does do everything it needs to, to put a character in a position where everything they do know, can be turned on its head, when it comes to child protection. The story does however fall into the position of the start of the La Llorona appearance seeming quite random to the first victim, with not enough investigation into that side of the story, while the battle to protect is pretty much every sort of possession based film we have seen before.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in the film does work if you want jump scares, it does build some up very well, with an umbrella sequences which is the standout for me. The mystery behind the film comes from just why La Llorona has appeared in the first place, which never seems to get answered, only how to beat her.
Settings – The film keeps most of the scares in and around the family home, it does make a point that it is the family that is haunted not the house, which is key to how the ghostly figure appears. Being haunted in your own home is always going to be a scary idea.
Special Effects – The effects are used to make the figure of La Llorona look frightening, it will give the scary figure a look which would get a scream too.
Scene of the Movie – Umbrella.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is pretty routine for a horror film.
Final Thoughts – This is a routine horror that does have a couple of good scares without hitting the heights of the rest of the universe it has come from.
Overall: Easy to watch horror.
Rating
Performances – Linda Cardellini in the leading role does well through the film without doing anything you wouldn’t expect for a horror film. The child actors both do a solid job through the film too.
Story – The story here follows a widowed mother that ends up getting a cursed by an evil spirit that wants to take her children and she must figure out how to stop her before it is too late. This is a horror story that does do everything it needs to, to put a character in a position where everything they do know, can be turned on its head, when it comes to child protection. The story does however fall into the position of the start of the La Llorona appearance seeming quite random to the first victim, with not enough investigation into that side of the story, while the battle to protect is pretty much every sort of possession based film we have seen before.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in the film does work if you want jump scares, it does build some up very well, with an umbrella sequences which is the standout for me. The mystery behind the film comes from just why La Llorona has appeared in the first place, which never seems to get answered, only how to beat her.
Settings – The film keeps most of the scares in and around the family home, it does make a point that it is the family that is haunted not the house, which is key to how the ghostly figure appears. Being haunted in your own home is always going to be a scary idea.
Special Effects – The effects are used to make the figure of La Llorona look frightening, it will give the scary figure a look which would get a scream too.
Scene of the Movie – Umbrella.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is pretty routine for a horror film.
Final Thoughts – This is a routine horror that does have a couple of good scares without hitting the heights of the rest of the universe it has come from.
Overall: Easy to watch horror.
Rating
Darren (1599 KP) rated Citadel (2012) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Characters – Tommy is a father with agoraphobia after he saw his wife attacked by a group of children, he is trying to be the good father for his new born child, but his fears are controlling the situation, he sees children trying to take his child, he needs to face his fears to make it through this trauma he is going through. Priest is a renegade man that is aggressively searching for a way to bring down the feral children, he sees Tommy as a chance to get the job done, even if it is against what his religion states. Marie is one of the social workers that will help Tommy, she is trying to help him through the medical side even if she is the one that puts him in contact with the priest. The Feral Children are the highlight of the film because they are genuinely frightening when they attack.
Performances – Aneurin Barnard in the leading role does make us feel for his character, we believe he has been through the trauma and is the desperation to save his family. James Cosmo is fun to watch as anti-priest figure. Wunmi Mosaku doesn’t do anything wrong in the supporting role, if only we could have seen more from the character.
Story – The story here follows a new father that is dealing with his own trauma while raising his new born child, which will see him needing to face off against feral child that feed on people’s fears. The early thing that must be pointed out here, comes from the idea that we are not full convinced that we are seeing the fears of the character dealt with, for the most part we are seeing one man terrorised but even the people without the fear seem to be targets too, this mostly confuses the rule point in place. the idea that the feral child live in the abandoned flat complex doesn’t improve on things either because you would think more incidents would happen. The part of the story that does standout and is interesting to watch would be seeing how Tommy is dealing with his own traumas while remaining strong facing the possibility of not being able to raise his own child because of his problems, sadly we don’t see enough of this addressed with the horror side of the story taking over, which simply put, isn’t as interesting.
Horror – The horror starts of being home invasion like horror, which worked for the illness Tommy had, but when we enter the flats, it does become the highlight of the action in the film, feeling dark, scary with anything able to jump out to get them.
Settings – The settings show us the run down neighbourhood in which Tommy lives, the support groups around it and most importantly the empty flat block which has the feral children in it.
Special Effects – The effects are used mostly look practical, with the moments surrounding the feral child being the most notable and scary ones.
Scene of the Movie – Inside the flat block.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It breaks the rules it sets up too easily.
Final Thoughts – This is a horror film that does take its time getting going, one the chaos is unleashed with get a highly intense final act which ramps the fear up to the max.
Overall: Slow Start, Strong Finish.
Performances – Aneurin Barnard in the leading role does make us feel for his character, we believe he has been through the trauma and is the desperation to save his family. James Cosmo is fun to watch as anti-priest figure. Wunmi Mosaku doesn’t do anything wrong in the supporting role, if only we could have seen more from the character.
Story – The story here follows a new father that is dealing with his own trauma while raising his new born child, which will see him needing to face off against feral child that feed on people’s fears. The early thing that must be pointed out here, comes from the idea that we are not full convinced that we are seeing the fears of the character dealt with, for the most part we are seeing one man terrorised but even the people without the fear seem to be targets too, this mostly confuses the rule point in place. the idea that the feral child live in the abandoned flat complex doesn’t improve on things either because you would think more incidents would happen. The part of the story that does standout and is interesting to watch would be seeing how Tommy is dealing with his own traumas while remaining strong facing the possibility of not being able to raise his own child because of his problems, sadly we don’t see enough of this addressed with the horror side of the story taking over, which simply put, isn’t as interesting.
Horror – The horror starts of being home invasion like horror, which worked for the illness Tommy had, but when we enter the flats, it does become the highlight of the action in the film, feeling dark, scary with anything able to jump out to get them.
Settings – The settings show us the run down neighbourhood in which Tommy lives, the support groups around it and most importantly the empty flat block which has the feral children in it.
Special Effects – The effects are used mostly look practical, with the moments surrounding the feral child being the most notable and scary ones.
Scene of the Movie – Inside the flat block.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It breaks the rules it sets up too easily.
Final Thoughts – This is a horror film that does take its time getting going, one the chaos is unleashed with get a highly intense final act which ramps the fear up to the max.
Overall: Slow Start, Strong Finish.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Rabid (2019) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Characters – Rose is the quiet assistant to a fashion designer, she has her own ideas that she does want to see made, the girls come to her to get small adjustments, but the designer treats her like a carpet. She isn’t seen in the same light as the models and often keeps to herself. She gets involved in an accident which first sees her horribly disfigured and secondly lose her job, desperate to fix this, she turns to an experimental procedure which fixes everything, giving her a new lease for life and a taste for blood. Brad is one of the co-workers that does try to help Rose come out of her shell by inviting her to the party before the accident. Chelsea is the foster sister to Rose that has been working with her too, she is the one that opens up her home after the accident, helping her get back on her feet, supporting her through the treatment, not looking away like most the others in her life would.
Performances – Laura Vandervoort does give us a strong performance throughout, being able to balance the losing her mind and determined personality. Hanneke Talbot is strong too and the supportive friend, that does get to show the pushy personality her character has around Rose. Benjamin Hollingsworth does show us a strong friend or potential love interest in the film, while big names like Stephen McHattie and C.M. Punk make entertaining supporting appearance.
Story – The story here follows a young lady that sees her life turned upside down after an accident leaves her disfigured, only for an experiment procedure bringing out a new version of herself and an unwanted side effect along the way. This is a remake and one story that can remain similar is places, while bringing the social side of the film to new heights, the fashion world does make a wonderful backdrop for the story because it reflects the world that image needs to be fix with surgery. There are certain ways the story does feel weaker, that is mostly seeing how everything is spreading, which is important, but it doesn’t follow Rose, which is the important side of the story.
Horror/Sci-Fi – The horror side of the film comes from the real world situation that Rose goes through, with the accident before hitting the graphic violence of what is happening to Rose, which is also the sci-fi side of the film, the changes Rose goes through.
Settings – The film uses the fashion world as the main settings backdrop, it shows us just how important image is to Rose and the people close to her.
Special Effects – The complete highlight of this film comes from the practical effects, which look as graphic as they can, the injury suffered by Rose is one of the worst wounds you will see in this year’s horror films. We should give a shout out to the team (According to IMDB) Graham Chivers, Jeff Derushie, Anahita Loghmanifar, Emily O’Quinn and Omar Roessler
Scene of the Movie – The first reveal from the injury.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We do move away from Rose, as the bigger problems spread around the city, we could have been given more fear from not seeing this, only hearing about it.
Final Thoughts – This is a practical effects masterclass in horror, it will use some of the best you will see this year even if the story is a modernised look at a cult classic.
Overall: Bloody graphic horror.
Performances – Laura Vandervoort does give us a strong performance throughout, being able to balance the losing her mind and determined personality. Hanneke Talbot is strong too and the supportive friend, that does get to show the pushy personality her character has around Rose. Benjamin Hollingsworth does show us a strong friend or potential love interest in the film, while big names like Stephen McHattie and C.M. Punk make entertaining supporting appearance.
Story – The story here follows a young lady that sees her life turned upside down after an accident leaves her disfigured, only for an experiment procedure bringing out a new version of herself and an unwanted side effect along the way. This is a remake and one story that can remain similar is places, while bringing the social side of the film to new heights, the fashion world does make a wonderful backdrop for the story because it reflects the world that image needs to be fix with surgery. There are certain ways the story does feel weaker, that is mostly seeing how everything is spreading, which is important, but it doesn’t follow Rose, which is the important side of the story.
Horror/Sci-Fi – The horror side of the film comes from the real world situation that Rose goes through, with the accident before hitting the graphic violence of what is happening to Rose, which is also the sci-fi side of the film, the changes Rose goes through.
Settings – The film uses the fashion world as the main settings backdrop, it shows us just how important image is to Rose and the people close to her.
Special Effects – The complete highlight of this film comes from the practical effects, which look as graphic as they can, the injury suffered by Rose is one of the worst wounds you will see in this year’s horror films. We should give a shout out to the team (According to IMDB) Graham Chivers, Jeff Derushie, Anahita Loghmanifar, Emily O’Quinn and Omar Roessler
Scene of the Movie – The first reveal from the injury.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We do move away from Rose, as the bigger problems spread around the city, we could have been given more fear from not seeing this, only hearing about it.
Final Thoughts – This is a practical effects masterclass in horror, it will use some of the best you will see this year even if the story is a modernised look at a cult classic.
Overall: Bloody graphic horror.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Pan (2015) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Characters – Peter is an orphan during World War II, stuck in a boys home, he believes something is happening and wants to be reunited with his mother, taken to Neverland, he learns that he has an ability unlike anyone else, he just needs to learn to believe in himself. Blackbeard has been taking orphans to help him mine for fairy dust in Neverland, he runs a strict ship which Peter upsets, however this will put Blackbeard closer than ever to getting what he wants. Hook is one of the miners that helps Peter escape, he wants to be free with his own tragic backstory. Tiger Lily has been leading the war against Blackbeard for years now, she knows the secrets to the fairies and now must protect them at all costs.
Performances – Levi Miller as the young Peter is good because he shows us the innocence needed for this film while dealing with the emotional impact his life is having. Hugh Jackman does seem to be having a lot of fun in this role even if he is overacting at times. Garrett Hedlund just can’t catch a break, his performance is solid enough, though it does feel like he just wanted to be the next Han Solo. Rooney Mara again is solid, it looks like a role which meant something to her and will help her take on the bigger roles.
Story – The story is an origin story for Peter Pan and Hook, well it seems to be, Peter is in the human world where he is an orphan taken to Neverland to help fight in a war between the two sides who want control of the fairy dust, he works with Hook which is strange because he is a good guy. The film shows us why Peter never wanted to leave Neverland and just what is meant to him once he learns about his parent’s identity. When we look deeper at the story it does feel like a pretty safe story and by having Peter needing to learn his own identity before going on to be the character we know now. The problem comes from any moment of peril he is in or Hook we know they will make it out of there because we know their story is only just beginning. The additional problem comes from just how Hook is a good guy and doesn’t get given any moments to tease his villainous ways.
Adventure/Fantasy – The adventure side of the film is good because it shows a new life Peter could have away from the war his own reality is involved in, this does take us to the fantasy world of Neverland which only seems to have one unique animal in, but it has magic.
Settings – The film uses the colour tones well, we see the darkness which shows us how bleak Peter’s real-life is, while giving us the bright open world of Neverland to show the hope of a future.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are solid enough without looking as flawless as they should, though the overly ambitious nature to it all doesn’t help.
Scene of the Movie – Hook’s escape plan.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Not filling enough of the blanks between the time period.
Final Thoughts – This is another cash-in on a franchise which feels overly done, it doesn’t capture the rue magic and only ends up confusing the time between the movies.
Overall: Magicless fantasy film.
Performances – Levi Miller as the young Peter is good because he shows us the innocence needed for this film while dealing with the emotional impact his life is having. Hugh Jackman does seem to be having a lot of fun in this role even if he is overacting at times. Garrett Hedlund just can’t catch a break, his performance is solid enough, though it does feel like he just wanted to be the next Han Solo. Rooney Mara again is solid, it looks like a role which meant something to her and will help her take on the bigger roles.
Story – The story is an origin story for Peter Pan and Hook, well it seems to be, Peter is in the human world where he is an orphan taken to Neverland to help fight in a war between the two sides who want control of the fairy dust, he works with Hook which is strange because he is a good guy. The film shows us why Peter never wanted to leave Neverland and just what is meant to him once he learns about his parent’s identity. When we look deeper at the story it does feel like a pretty safe story and by having Peter needing to learn his own identity before going on to be the character we know now. The problem comes from any moment of peril he is in or Hook we know they will make it out of there because we know their story is only just beginning. The additional problem comes from just how Hook is a good guy and doesn’t get given any moments to tease his villainous ways.
Adventure/Fantasy – The adventure side of the film is good because it shows a new life Peter could have away from the war his own reality is involved in, this does take us to the fantasy world of Neverland which only seems to have one unique animal in, but it has magic.
Settings – The film uses the colour tones well, we see the darkness which shows us how bleak Peter’s real-life is, while giving us the bright open world of Neverland to show the hope of a future.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are solid enough without looking as flawless as they should, though the overly ambitious nature to it all doesn’t help.
Scene of the Movie – Hook’s escape plan.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Not filling enough of the blanks between the time period.
Final Thoughts – This is another cash-in on a franchise which feels overly done, it doesn’t capture the rue magic and only ends up confusing the time between the movies.
Overall: Magicless fantasy film.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Knock at the cabin (2023) in Movies
Mar 31, 2023
Disappointing Ending
Writer/Director M. Night Shyamalan is a hit or miss film maker and that is because his films (usually) rely on a “twist” in the proceedings that make the movie you are watching turn into something different. Sometimes it works (the classic THE SIXTH SENSE), sometimes it doesn’t (THE HAPPENING). But, at least he has the courage of his convictions and you have to respect him for that. However, in KNOCK AT THE CABIN, Shyamalan is doing something that might undercut those twists – he’s beginning to pull his punches.
KNOCK AT THE CABIN opens with an interesting premise – a couple and their daughter are at a remote cabin (with, conveniently enough, no cell phone service) when 4 strangers show up and declare that the world will end unless one of the 3 is sacrificed to stop the upcoming carnage.
It’s a good idea that has, inherently, some moral complications and one quickly jumps onto the side of the 3 in the cabin, writing off the 4 strangers as insane, but as events transpire – and the seeming sincerity of the 4 strangers comes into focus – one starts to have doubts.
Shyamalan does a professional job of weaving the tension into the first ¾ of this film as the 3 in the cabin are trying to make logical sense out of the predicament they are in while the 4 strangers become more and more desperate in their attempts to convince the trio in the cabin to sacrifice one of themselves. This is a director sure of himself and slowly, strongly leading the audience to the ending.
He helps himself by casting some VERY good performers in a film that, basically, takes place in one room. Jonathan Groff (Broadway’s HAMILTON) and Ben Aldridge (Thomas Wayne in the TV Series PENNYWORTH) are convincing and believable as the besieged couple, while David Bautista (Drax in the GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY films), Rupert Grint (yes, Ron Weasley from the HARRY POTTER films) and newcomer (at least to me) Abby Quinn (RADIUM GIRLS) counterbalance these two nicely. Special notice needs to be made of the 4th person knocking on the cabin, Nikki Amuka-Bird (THE OUTFIT) and youngster Kristen Cui – who both bring much needed pathos and humanity to a film that could have turned into an out-of-control testosterone fest, but ended up being grounded by these two.
So, all of this adds up to a very good time at the movie theater – providing that Shyamalan can stick the landing of this piece.
Alas, he does not. And he does something worse – he pulls his punches as the outcome of one of the characters is changed from what happens to them in the 2018 novel THE CABIN AT THE END OF THE WORLD by Paul Tremblay. Shyamalan could have delivered a gut punch to the audience to accentuate the past bit of time spent with these characters (kind of like what Frank Darabont did with THE MIST) but instead decides to play it safe and lands squarely in the middle of mediocrity-land.
Your enjoyment of this film will depend on how much you like how this film ends. For the BankofMarquis, it was ¾ of a good film with a bad ending.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
KNOCK AT THE CABIN opens with an interesting premise – a couple and their daughter are at a remote cabin (with, conveniently enough, no cell phone service) when 4 strangers show up and declare that the world will end unless one of the 3 is sacrificed to stop the upcoming carnage.
It’s a good idea that has, inherently, some moral complications and one quickly jumps onto the side of the 3 in the cabin, writing off the 4 strangers as insane, but as events transpire – and the seeming sincerity of the 4 strangers comes into focus – one starts to have doubts.
Shyamalan does a professional job of weaving the tension into the first ¾ of this film as the 3 in the cabin are trying to make logical sense out of the predicament they are in while the 4 strangers become more and more desperate in their attempts to convince the trio in the cabin to sacrifice one of themselves. This is a director sure of himself and slowly, strongly leading the audience to the ending.
He helps himself by casting some VERY good performers in a film that, basically, takes place in one room. Jonathan Groff (Broadway’s HAMILTON) and Ben Aldridge (Thomas Wayne in the TV Series PENNYWORTH) are convincing and believable as the besieged couple, while David Bautista (Drax in the GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY films), Rupert Grint (yes, Ron Weasley from the HARRY POTTER films) and newcomer (at least to me) Abby Quinn (RADIUM GIRLS) counterbalance these two nicely. Special notice needs to be made of the 4th person knocking on the cabin, Nikki Amuka-Bird (THE OUTFIT) and youngster Kristen Cui – who both bring much needed pathos and humanity to a film that could have turned into an out-of-control testosterone fest, but ended up being grounded by these two.
So, all of this adds up to a very good time at the movie theater – providing that Shyamalan can stick the landing of this piece.
Alas, he does not. And he does something worse – he pulls his punches as the outcome of one of the characters is changed from what happens to them in the 2018 novel THE CABIN AT THE END OF THE WORLD by Paul Tremblay. Shyamalan could have delivered a gut punch to the audience to accentuate the past bit of time spent with these characters (kind of like what Frank Darabont did with THE MIST) but instead decides to play it safe and lands squarely in the middle of mediocrity-land.
Your enjoyment of this film will depend on how much you like how this film ends. For the BankofMarquis, it was ¾ of a good film with a bad ending.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Enola Holmes 2 (2022) in Movies
Nov 14, 2022
Pleasant and Entertaining
Back in September 2020 - in the heart of the pandemic shutdown - Netflix released ENOLA HOLMES which was dubbed “the teen version of Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes” - one can decide for themselves if that is a good or a bad thing. For me, this flick was an agreeable way to spend a few hours and I, for one, was looking forward to further adventures of Enola and her more well-known older brother, Sherlock.
And, in ENOLA HOLMES 2, we get exactly that. A very entertaining way to spend a few hours with characters that continue to be a joy to while away the time - and a mystery - with.
Starring Millie Bobby Brown (11 in STRANGER THINGS), Enola Holmes 2 follows the titular character as she has opened her own, competing, Detective Agency. But, as these sorts of things go, her case ends up intertwining with her famous older sibling’s case, so we really get “Holmes and Holmes”.
And that is just fine with me for Brown and Henry Cavill (who plays Sherlock Holmes and who has previously played the MAN OF STEEL) make a winning pair, working off each other with just the right tone of mystery and fun and they look like they are having a good time figuring out the central mystery of this story.
Credit for this must go to Director Harry Bradbeer (Director of the first ENOLA HOLMES film) who came up with this story based on Nancy Springer’s characters (she wrote the ENOLA HOLMES books) and to which Jack Thorne bases his screenplay on. Bradbeer seems to understand these characters and the tone of this film. He makes just the right balance between mystery and fun - keeping the proceedings moving along at a jaunty pace, so the audience can enjoy the ride, but aren’t too jostled around by it.
Brown and Cavill fit right into this tone as does the always wonderful Helena Bonham Carter (she of many films, let’s go with A ROOM WITH A VIEW) as the mother of both of these two Detectives. The sturdy David Thewlis (Professor Lupine in the HARRY POTTER films) brings along his professionalism, comedic timing and mysteriousness as Police Inspector Grail while Louis Partridge returns as the handsome almost-love interest of Enola, Lord Tewkesbury.
Special notice needs to be made of Costumer Consolata Boyle (THE QUEEN) she populates this film with the prerequisite muted colors of 19th Century London (lots of Grey, Black and Dark Blue) but she manages to give Enola just enough of a flair in her costumes. For example, the blue of her skirt is just brighter enough than those around her to punch her up, but it is not so much brighter that it is obviously making her stick out. It is a smart, subtle touch to a very pleasing film to look at.
And that is, really, the bottom line of this movie. It is a very pleasant movie, with a mystery that is interesting enough to keep a person hooked, but not overly complex or dingy as to turn people off.
A good family film - and that is a compliment - the type of film that can be enjoyed by young and old alike.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars
And you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And, in ENOLA HOLMES 2, we get exactly that. A very entertaining way to spend a few hours with characters that continue to be a joy to while away the time - and a mystery - with.
Starring Millie Bobby Brown (11 in STRANGER THINGS), Enola Holmes 2 follows the titular character as she has opened her own, competing, Detective Agency. But, as these sorts of things go, her case ends up intertwining with her famous older sibling’s case, so we really get “Holmes and Holmes”.
And that is just fine with me for Brown and Henry Cavill (who plays Sherlock Holmes and who has previously played the MAN OF STEEL) make a winning pair, working off each other with just the right tone of mystery and fun and they look like they are having a good time figuring out the central mystery of this story.
Credit for this must go to Director Harry Bradbeer (Director of the first ENOLA HOLMES film) who came up with this story based on Nancy Springer’s characters (she wrote the ENOLA HOLMES books) and to which Jack Thorne bases his screenplay on. Bradbeer seems to understand these characters and the tone of this film. He makes just the right balance between mystery and fun - keeping the proceedings moving along at a jaunty pace, so the audience can enjoy the ride, but aren’t too jostled around by it.
Brown and Cavill fit right into this tone as does the always wonderful Helena Bonham Carter (she of many films, let’s go with A ROOM WITH A VIEW) as the mother of both of these two Detectives. The sturdy David Thewlis (Professor Lupine in the HARRY POTTER films) brings along his professionalism, comedic timing and mysteriousness as Police Inspector Grail while Louis Partridge returns as the handsome almost-love interest of Enola, Lord Tewkesbury.
Special notice needs to be made of Costumer Consolata Boyle (THE QUEEN) she populates this film with the prerequisite muted colors of 19th Century London (lots of Grey, Black and Dark Blue) but she manages to give Enola just enough of a flair in her costumes. For example, the blue of her skirt is just brighter enough than those around her to punch her up, but it is not so much brighter that it is obviously making her stick out. It is a smart, subtle touch to a very pleasing film to look at.
And that is, really, the bottom line of this movie. It is a very pleasant movie, with a mystery that is interesting enough to keep a person hooked, but not overly complex or dingy as to turn people off.
A good family film - and that is a compliment - the type of film that can be enjoyed by young and old alike.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars
And you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Banshees of Inisherin (2022) in Movies
Jan 13, 2023
Strong Acting aids Character Study
Back in 2008, Writer/Director Martin McDonagh scored an improbable hit with IN BRUGES, a tale of two hitmen “laying low” in…well…Bruges, Belgium while awaiting instructions from their boss. During this down time these two characters muse about the meanings of life and love in a wonderful, Oscar Nominated, character study.
15 years later, McDonagh does it again with THE BANSHEES OF INISHERIN.
Set in the 1920s in the fictional Island of Inisherin (off the coast of Ireland), BANSHEES reunites Writer/Director McDonagh with his two stars of the previous film - Brendan Gleeson (“Mad Eye” Mooney in the Harry Potter films) and Colin Farrell (unrecognizable as The Penguin in the recent BATMAN movie) - and the resultant character study is just as interesting and intriguing to watch in a setting just as interesting…and breath-takingly beautifully bleak.
McDonagh, more than likely, will be nominated (as he was with IN BRUGES) for his screenplay for this film - it IS Oscar worthy - but for me, he was better as the Director of this character study, pointing his camera with a keen eye and surety in what he wanted to show all the while letting the performers and the countryside tell the story.
Both lead performers (and the Supporting Actors) are perfectly cast. Farrell, as Padraic,is the protagonist - a simple man who just wants to be able to go to the pub everyday and have conversation with his best friend, Colm (Gleeson) who, one day, proclaims that he no longer wants to be friends with Padraic. Padraic, then spends the rest of the film trying to understand why this is so, what happened and what he can do to make amends.
Farrell will earn an Oscar nomination for his portrayal of the simple (but not simple-minded) Padraic who is having a hard time grappling with deeper issues seeping into his simple life. Farrell has really grown into a fine actor and he (at this point in time) has to be considered on of the FrontRunners for the Best Actor Oscar for his work in this film.
Just as good is Gleeson as Colm, the recalcitrant, stoic friend who stubbornly wants nothing to do with Padraic. In lesser hands, this character could have come off as “one-note” being, simply, an immovable object in the way of Padraic’s irresistible force, but in Gleeson’s skilled hands, Colm has layers and depth that seep out through the cracks of his stoney facade. I would not be surprised if Gleeson, too, is nominated for an Oscar (probably in the Supporting category).
These two are capably assisted by Kerry Condon (Stacey Ehrmantraut in BETTER CAUL SAUL) and Barry Keoghn (DUNKIRK) as Padraic’s sister and a friend of both Padraic and Colm (respectively). Both bring their “A” games to this film and truly show the meaning of the term “Supporting” in “Supporting Performance”.
Special mention needs to be made for the Cinematography of Ben Davis (GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY) who brings beauty to the bleak, stark and harsh Irish countryside. This cinematography is, actually, another character of this piece and brings strong emotional support to the performances.
Not the fastest moving film you will ever see, THE BANSHEES OF INISHERIN is an interesting, intriguing - and beautifully shot - character study that will stay with you long after the film ends.
Letter Grade: A-
8 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
15 years later, McDonagh does it again with THE BANSHEES OF INISHERIN.
Set in the 1920s in the fictional Island of Inisherin (off the coast of Ireland), BANSHEES reunites Writer/Director McDonagh with his two stars of the previous film - Brendan Gleeson (“Mad Eye” Mooney in the Harry Potter films) and Colin Farrell (unrecognizable as The Penguin in the recent BATMAN movie) - and the resultant character study is just as interesting and intriguing to watch in a setting just as interesting…and breath-takingly beautifully bleak.
McDonagh, more than likely, will be nominated (as he was with IN BRUGES) for his screenplay for this film - it IS Oscar worthy - but for me, he was better as the Director of this character study, pointing his camera with a keen eye and surety in what he wanted to show all the while letting the performers and the countryside tell the story.
Both lead performers (and the Supporting Actors) are perfectly cast. Farrell, as Padraic,is the protagonist - a simple man who just wants to be able to go to the pub everyday and have conversation with his best friend, Colm (Gleeson) who, one day, proclaims that he no longer wants to be friends with Padraic. Padraic, then spends the rest of the film trying to understand why this is so, what happened and what he can do to make amends.
Farrell will earn an Oscar nomination for his portrayal of the simple (but not simple-minded) Padraic who is having a hard time grappling with deeper issues seeping into his simple life. Farrell has really grown into a fine actor and he (at this point in time) has to be considered on of the FrontRunners for the Best Actor Oscar for his work in this film.
Just as good is Gleeson as Colm, the recalcitrant, stoic friend who stubbornly wants nothing to do with Padraic. In lesser hands, this character could have come off as “one-note” being, simply, an immovable object in the way of Padraic’s irresistible force, but in Gleeson’s skilled hands, Colm has layers and depth that seep out through the cracks of his stoney facade. I would not be surprised if Gleeson, too, is nominated for an Oscar (probably in the Supporting category).
These two are capably assisted by Kerry Condon (Stacey Ehrmantraut in BETTER CAUL SAUL) and Barry Keoghn (DUNKIRK) as Padraic’s sister and a friend of both Padraic and Colm (respectively). Both bring their “A” games to this film and truly show the meaning of the term “Supporting” in “Supporting Performance”.
Special mention needs to be made for the Cinematography of Ben Davis (GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY) who brings beauty to the bleak, stark and harsh Irish countryside. This cinematography is, actually, another character of this piece and brings strong emotional support to the performances.
Not the fastest moving film you will ever see, THE BANSHEES OF INISHERIN is an interesting, intriguing - and beautifully shot - character study that will stay with you long after the film ends.
Letter Grade: A-
8 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (2019) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Before you read this review of Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw, I just want you to know that I can’t stand this franchise. I gave up keeping up with them after Furious 7 and felt like the Fast & Furious franchise peaked/was tolerable around Fast Five and never really went anywhere worthwhile before or since. I have not seen all the films and really only seemed to watch every other entry, but whether you’re in a heist or a drag race that lethal dose of masculinity being projectile vomited all over you by an entire cast (women included) for two hours straight is dull and tiresome. In fact, just call this franchise “Dull & Tiresome” from here on out and I doubt anyone would notice. It’s even got “tire” in there for car…stuff.
Ignoring the fact that screenwriters Chris Morgan (writer of every Fast and Furious entry since Tokyo Drift) and Drew Pearce (writer and director of the flop known as Hotel Artemis) were involved, I actually like David Leitch’s work (co-director of John Wick, director of Deadpool 2 and Atomic Blonde) even if he is probably going to screw up that Enter the Dragon remake. The trailers also made Hobbs & Shaw look like the stupid kind of action film I might enjoy; a bunch of fight scenes and chase sequences that give the middle finger to physics. But when a big moment in the film is a group of the good guys willingly bringing a bunch of sharp sticks to a battle where the villains are loaded to the teeth with highly advanced firearms, then you know you’ve jumped headfirst into the deep end of ridiculous without a special needs helmet.
The film is quick to point out that even though Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) is in Los Angeles and Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham) is in London, they’re essentially similar characters. Hobbs is a big dude who likes to Hulk smash everything while Shaw likes to think he has more class and finesse to his ass beatings and exaggerated torture devices. Despite their different cultures and supposedly unique way of approaching their work, they do nothing but talk trash, jack things up, simultaneously kick unsuspecting guys in the balls, and track stuff that needs tracking because that’s what trackers do. They reluctantly join forces and are in constant competition with one another to find some CT17 virus, which is currently inside Shaw’s MI6 operative sister Hattie Shaw (Vanessa Kirby) and is being hunted by formerly dead, cyber genetically altered, and current superhuman criminal mastermind Brixton Lore (Idris Elba). Don’t get too attached to the whole virus thing since even the film can’t keep up with what the hell it’s supposed to be.
The highlight of Hobbs & Shaw is the amount of cameos it’s able to squeeze into its excruciating two-hour-and-fifteen-minute runtime. The film utilizes about a third of the cast of a certain sequel to a certain film starring a certain Regenerating Degenerate and that cast is responsible for the humor that works best in whatever this spinoff is supposed to accomplish. Idris Elba is unbelievably cool as Brixton Lore. He’s this cocky and unstoppable bad ass who has a history with Shaw and his car chase on his self-driving motorcycle where he slides under a bus in slow motion is too sick for words. Vanessa Kirby has this on-screen presence that outshines the consistent bickering between Hobbs and Shaw. She’s the one capable female character in the film (Helen Mirren sitting behind glass doesn’t count) who seems to be the only one thinking logically, but it took her doing the dumbest thing imaginable at the beginning of the film to get that way.
This action film smorgasbord rides on the chemistry between Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham, but that gets old as soon as they start sort-of working together. Their incessant ribbing of each other, desire to always outdo one another, and nonstop unfiltered machismo being this palpable elephant in the room leads to nothing but verbal dick size comparisons and leaves you thinking that maybe they’ll make out or grope each other by the end of the film. Spoiler alert: maybe they’re saving that for the sequel.
There isn’t enough of a differentiation between action sequences in Hobbs & Shaw to make it feel worthwhile. There’s chemistry between the cast that is undeniable and some of its outrageousness is entertaining, but it all begins to feel similar and falls apart far sooner than it should. For those who care, there is a mid-credits and after-credits scene but neither is surprising. The cheesy motivational speeches, forced heartfelt stories, and, “all technology in the world doesn’t beat heart,” mumbo jumbo doesn’t help matters. The supposed story for this film is basically a dunce cap disguised as a pocket protector. There are intelligent elements used in ludicrous ways and maybe that’s what could describe the Fast & Furious franchise as a whole. You can bury a diamond in a dog turd and say it’s extravagant and that it’s valuable, but it’s still a dog turd that smells awful and lingers long after it’s been flushed away.
Ignoring the fact that screenwriters Chris Morgan (writer of every Fast and Furious entry since Tokyo Drift) and Drew Pearce (writer and director of the flop known as Hotel Artemis) were involved, I actually like David Leitch’s work (co-director of John Wick, director of Deadpool 2 and Atomic Blonde) even if he is probably going to screw up that Enter the Dragon remake. The trailers also made Hobbs & Shaw look like the stupid kind of action film I might enjoy; a bunch of fight scenes and chase sequences that give the middle finger to physics. But when a big moment in the film is a group of the good guys willingly bringing a bunch of sharp sticks to a battle where the villains are loaded to the teeth with highly advanced firearms, then you know you’ve jumped headfirst into the deep end of ridiculous without a special needs helmet.
The film is quick to point out that even though Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) is in Los Angeles and Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham) is in London, they’re essentially similar characters. Hobbs is a big dude who likes to Hulk smash everything while Shaw likes to think he has more class and finesse to his ass beatings and exaggerated torture devices. Despite their different cultures and supposedly unique way of approaching their work, they do nothing but talk trash, jack things up, simultaneously kick unsuspecting guys in the balls, and track stuff that needs tracking because that’s what trackers do. They reluctantly join forces and are in constant competition with one another to find some CT17 virus, which is currently inside Shaw’s MI6 operative sister Hattie Shaw (Vanessa Kirby) and is being hunted by formerly dead, cyber genetically altered, and current superhuman criminal mastermind Brixton Lore (Idris Elba). Don’t get too attached to the whole virus thing since even the film can’t keep up with what the hell it’s supposed to be.
The highlight of Hobbs & Shaw is the amount of cameos it’s able to squeeze into its excruciating two-hour-and-fifteen-minute runtime. The film utilizes about a third of the cast of a certain sequel to a certain film starring a certain Regenerating Degenerate and that cast is responsible for the humor that works best in whatever this spinoff is supposed to accomplish. Idris Elba is unbelievably cool as Brixton Lore. He’s this cocky and unstoppable bad ass who has a history with Shaw and his car chase on his self-driving motorcycle where he slides under a bus in slow motion is too sick for words. Vanessa Kirby has this on-screen presence that outshines the consistent bickering between Hobbs and Shaw. She’s the one capable female character in the film (Helen Mirren sitting behind glass doesn’t count) who seems to be the only one thinking logically, but it took her doing the dumbest thing imaginable at the beginning of the film to get that way.
This action film smorgasbord rides on the chemistry between Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham, but that gets old as soon as they start sort-of working together. Their incessant ribbing of each other, desire to always outdo one another, and nonstop unfiltered machismo being this palpable elephant in the room leads to nothing but verbal dick size comparisons and leaves you thinking that maybe they’ll make out or grope each other by the end of the film. Spoiler alert: maybe they’re saving that for the sequel.
There isn’t enough of a differentiation between action sequences in Hobbs & Shaw to make it feel worthwhile. There’s chemistry between the cast that is undeniable and some of its outrageousness is entertaining, but it all begins to feel similar and falls apart far sooner than it should. For those who care, there is a mid-credits and after-credits scene but neither is surprising. The cheesy motivational speeches, forced heartfelt stories, and, “all technology in the world doesn’t beat heart,” mumbo jumbo doesn’t help matters. The supposed story for this film is basically a dunce cap disguised as a pocket protector. There are intelligent elements used in ludicrous ways and maybe that’s what could describe the Fast & Furious franchise as a whole. You can bury a diamond in a dog turd and say it’s extravagant and that it’s valuable, but it’s still a dog turd that smells awful and lingers long after it’s been flushed away.