Search
Search results
Hidden Object Vampires Temple – Find Objects in Mystery and Fantasy Pictures
Games and Entertainment
App
Are you looking for wonderful vampire games? Do you want to become a true vampire hunter? Here is an...
Baby Monitor Pro: Universal video surveillance
Lifestyle and Utilities
App
Baby Monitor is a universal video baby monitor that allows you to check on your baby from your...
Baby Monitor : universal video surveillance
Lifestyle and Utilities
App
Baby Monitor is a universal video baby monitor that allows you to check on your baby from your...
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
More of the same
After the phenomenal success of Captain America: Civil War, the multiplexes have calmed down a little; that is until the release of X-Men: Apocalypse next week.
Sandwiched in between these two box-office behemoths is the sequel to Universal Studio’s surprise comedy hit, Bad Neighbours. But does another helping of Seth Rogen and Zac Efron’s adult humour hit the spot?
It’s fair to say that these films have a target audience firmly in mind. The first film was received best by University students and younger men according to box-office analysts and managed to gross a whopping $270m on an $18m budget – a sequel whilst completely unnecessary was as likely as an April shower.
Bad Neighbours 2 follows a very well-worn path, so well-worn in fact that it shoehorns the exact same premise from its predecessor into another 90 minute comedy, with just a few new twists and turns to stop it from being a carbon copy.
So, what are these twists and turns I hear you cry? Well, for one, Zac Efron’s Teddy Sanders is all grown up for one, returning to help Seth Rogen’s Mac, and Rose Byrne’s Kelly face-off against a sorority (instead of a fraternity) – headed by the excellent Chloe Grace Moretz.
Plot wise, that’s about it; in fact there is no plot to speak off and the real highlight in this simple film are the reams and reams of adult gags. The majority of them hit the spot; a brilliantly shot sequence at a college ‘festival’ is absolutely hilarious, and then a few of them don’t – but that’s to be expected in any comedy.
When it comes to the acting, it’s a by-the-numbers affair. Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne are dependable with the latter’s credentials in the genre expanding by the day. From Bridesmaids to Spy, she’s fast becoming a new comedy star, and there’s no complaint from me there.
Zac Efron is now utterly typecast but I doubt he’ll care if his movies keep packing out cinemas across the world. Despite his usual reliable performances, he’s starting to look a little older than his ‘frat boy’ characters would have you believe and if he can’t shake off that tag, he’ll end up in the bargain bins alongside Tobey Maguire. That’s a shame, as his more serious roles prove he has the acting chops to go with his good looks.
Elsewhere, Chloe Grace Moretz is the only sorority girl to make an impact and her sweet, if predictable backstory provide Bad Neighbours 2 with its only real sense of emotion.
Overall, Bad Neighbours 2 is a very funny adult comedy despite its lack of plot and the by-the-numbers casting. Returning director Nicholas Stoller has introduced a more female-orientated film that will no doubt pay dividends at the box-office. It definitely wasn’t needed, but as is the case in the film world, money talks.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/05/14/more-of-the-same-bad-neighbours-2-review/
Sandwiched in between these two box-office behemoths is the sequel to Universal Studio’s surprise comedy hit, Bad Neighbours. But does another helping of Seth Rogen and Zac Efron’s adult humour hit the spot?
It’s fair to say that these films have a target audience firmly in mind. The first film was received best by University students and younger men according to box-office analysts and managed to gross a whopping $270m on an $18m budget – a sequel whilst completely unnecessary was as likely as an April shower.
Bad Neighbours 2 follows a very well-worn path, so well-worn in fact that it shoehorns the exact same premise from its predecessor into another 90 minute comedy, with just a few new twists and turns to stop it from being a carbon copy.
So, what are these twists and turns I hear you cry? Well, for one, Zac Efron’s Teddy Sanders is all grown up for one, returning to help Seth Rogen’s Mac, and Rose Byrne’s Kelly face-off against a sorority (instead of a fraternity) – headed by the excellent Chloe Grace Moretz.
Plot wise, that’s about it; in fact there is no plot to speak off and the real highlight in this simple film are the reams and reams of adult gags. The majority of them hit the spot; a brilliantly shot sequence at a college ‘festival’ is absolutely hilarious, and then a few of them don’t – but that’s to be expected in any comedy.
When it comes to the acting, it’s a by-the-numbers affair. Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne are dependable with the latter’s credentials in the genre expanding by the day. From Bridesmaids to Spy, she’s fast becoming a new comedy star, and there’s no complaint from me there.
Zac Efron is now utterly typecast but I doubt he’ll care if his movies keep packing out cinemas across the world. Despite his usual reliable performances, he’s starting to look a little older than his ‘frat boy’ characters would have you believe and if he can’t shake off that tag, he’ll end up in the bargain bins alongside Tobey Maguire. That’s a shame, as his more serious roles prove he has the acting chops to go with his good looks.
Elsewhere, Chloe Grace Moretz is the only sorority girl to make an impact and her sweet, if predictable backstory provide Bad Neighbours 2 with its only real sense of emotion.
Overall, Bad Neighbours 2 is a very funny adult comedy despite its lack of plot and the by-the-numbers casting. Returning director Nicholas Stoller has introduced a more female-orientated film that will no doubt pay dividends at the box-office. It definitely wasn’t needed, but as is the case in the film world, money talks.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/05/14/more-of-the-same-bad-neighbours-2-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Dad's Army (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Full of wasted British talent
I may be fairly young in years, but I grew up around comedies like Only Fools & Horses, One Foot in the Grave and of course Dad’s Army. I remember many evenings sitting at home with my dad as he cried with laughter at all three, though it was the latter’s influence that stuck with me the most.
Now, Dad’s Army like so many classic TV shows is getting the silver screen treatment, but does this modern-day reimagining, with an all-star British cast live up to the series that delighted so many for so long?
The movie adaptation of Dad’s Army follows on from the TV series, taking place just before the Second World War comes to an end. In Walmington-On-Sea, the Home Guard, led by Captain Mainwaring must track down a German spy, who is intent on swaying the war in their favour.
A whole host of British talent, young and old, star and each and every one of them slots perfectly into the well-worn shoes of classic characters. From Michael Gambon’s effervescent performance as Godfrey and Toby Jones’ faithful portrayal of Mainwaring to Inbetweeners star Blake Harrison taking on the role of Pike, it feels as though the casting team really put a lot of thought into getting the characteristics right.
It doesn’t stop there, Welsh beauty Catherine Zeta Jones, TV favourite Sarah Lancashire and Victor Meldrew’s long-suffering wife Margaret (Annette Crosbie) all make appearances for the fairer sex, with each bringing something to the table.
The scenery is beautiful, filmed just a couple of hours up the road in Bridlington, East Yorkshire, the normally vibrant seaside town is transformed into 1940s Walmington with an enviable amount of detail. Elsewhere, the White Cliffs of Dover are replicated exceptionally at Flamborough on the east coast.
Unfortunately, the story is a little on the light side, barely managing to stretch to the film’s slightly overlong running time. This is an issue that blights many TV to film projects and it feels like this unbelievably talented cast is somewhat wasted with a fairly run-of-the-mill plot.
It also feels like the comedy is on rations. Yes, it’s nostalgic with constant references to its small-screen counterpart, but it comes across like the producers were too busy trying to shoehorn as many elements of the TV series into the film, without concentrating on what Dad’s Army was all about – laughs.
Nevertheless, there is plenty to enjoy despite a lack of giggles. The acting is, as said previously, remarkable with fans of the series and newcomers alike being able to enjoy the warm, typically British feeling these thespians bring to the film.
Overall, Dad’s Army is a decent, albeit slightly underwhelming, effort in bringing one of the most popular TV shows of all time to the big screen. Its talent and casting are undeniable and the filming style is very impressive, but a lack of attention to the plot and a comedy drought stop it short of achieving what it clearly set out to do.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/07/full-of-wasted-british-talent-dads-army-review/
Now, Dad’s Army like so many classic TV shows is getting the silver screen treatment, but does this modern-day reimagining, with an all-star British cast live up to the series that delighted so many for so long?
The movie adaptation of Dad’s Army follows on from the TV series, taking place just before the Second World War comes to an end. In Walmington-On-Sea, the Home Guard, led by Captain Mainwaring must track down a German spy, who is intent on swaying the war in their favour.
A whole host of British talent, young and old, star and each and every one of them slots perfectly into the well-worn shoes of classic characters. From Michael Gambon’s effervescent performance as Godfrey and Toby Jones’ faithful portrayal of Mainwaring to Inbetweeners star Blake Harrison taking on the role of Pike, it feels as though the casting team really put a lot of thought into getting the characteristics right.
It doesn’t stop there, Welsh beauty Catherine Zeta Jones, TV favourite Sarah Lancashire and Victor Meldrew’s long-suffering wife Margaret (Annette Crosbie) all make appearances for the fairer sex, with each bringing something to the table.
The scenery is beautiful, filmed just a couple of hours up the road in Bridlington, East Yorkshire, the normally vibrant seaside town is transformed into 1940s Walmington with an enviable amount of detail. Elsewhere, the White Cliffs of Dover are replicated exceptionally at Flamborough on the east coast.
Unfortunately, the story is a little on the light side, barely managing to stretch to the film’s slightly overlong running time. This is an issue that blights many TV to film projects and it feels like this unbelievably talented cast is somewhat wasted with a fairly run-of-the-mill plot.
It also feels like the comedy is on rations. Yes, it’s nostalgic with constant references to its small-screen counterpart, but it comes across like the producers were too busy trying to shoehorn as many elements of the TV series into the film, without concentrating on what Dad’s Army was all about – laughs.
Nevertheless, there is plenty to enjoy despite a lack of giggles. The acting is, as said previously, remarkable with fans of the series and newcomers alike being able to enjoy the warm, typically British feeling these thespians bring to the film.
Overall, Dad’s Army is a decent, albeit slightly underwhelming, effort in bringing one of the most popular TV shows of all time to the big screen. Its talent and casting are undeniable and the filming style is very impressive, but a lack of attention to the plot and a comedy drought stop it short of achieving what it clearly set out to do.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/07/full-of-wasted-british-talent-dads-army-review/
Ross (3284 KP) rated Free the Darkness in Books
Nov 14, 2018
The premise (1 more)
The flow of the story
The omnipresent narrator (2 more)
The mother of all "Mary Sue"s
The plot seems to be a secret
Very readable but with some sizeable flaws
Rezkin has grown up isolated in a fort, trained to be the most powerful weapons-master, most skilful assassin, most adept spy. At the age of 19 he is told his training is complete and the final task is to kill all of his trainers. All but one fall to his sword. With no idea of the outside world or what he is then meant to do, he travels to track down the final trainer who escaped.
So far so good.
However, this has little bearing on the rest of the plot, as Rezkin uses his skills to become head of thieves and assassins guilds, while supposedly tracking down this missing trainer. This is pitched as being his plan all along, but there is no advance warning of this anywhere. If he is somehow like some sort of sleeper agent who has been hypnotised to forget his plot and is suddenly triggered then this is not made clear at all. It really comes across as the author making it up as he went along.
As Rezkin travels, he meets men (generally all clichés - from the honourable but humble soldier to the bumbling sidekick) and women (even more clichéd as all fall for him and become obsessed with him) and travels with a group, dispatching all attackers in the blink of an eye.
I really hate when journalists try not to use someone's name repeatedly, so refer to them as "the veteran" or "the midfield ace" or "the businessman". Kade does this a lot, as Rezkin is referred to as "the young warrior" repeatedly and it really jars and annoys. This is partly due to the narrator being omnipresent, rather than the book being told from one or a number of points of view, so it has to be made clear who is being referred to a lot, but it is somewhat badly executed.
Similarly, the book could do with a serious proof-read as there are a number of grammatical errors and typos throughout.
Some of the sections of the book are excellent, the fight scenes (although Rezkin never being hit by anyone gets old really quick) and his night prowling are well described and excellent.
There is some use of magic in the book which is somewhat clumsy and throwaway and comes across as complete nonsense (somehow just thinking about an alarm and wrapping a thought around it will make it not go off?!), it really adds nothing to the book other than a way out of impossible situations.
I really enjoyed reading this book, and will be reading the other 3 in the series in short order, but the author fell into so many pitfalls that it does get annoying. I really hope he fixed these in the following books and they live up to the promise of the series. I also hope someone finally manages to even hit Rezkin in a fight, I don't really want to read fight scenes where there is no jeopardy.
So far so good.
However, this has little bearing on the rest of the plot, as Rezkin uses his skills to become head of thieves and assassins guilds, while supposedly tracking down this missing trainer. This is pitched as being his plan all along, but there is no advance warning of this anywhere. If he is somehow like some sort of sleeper agent who has been hypnotised to forget his plot and is suddenly triggered then this is not made clear at all. It really comes across as the author making it up as he went along.
As Rezkin travels, he meets men (generally all clichés - from the honourable but humble soldier to the bumbling sidekick) and women (even more clichéd as all fall for him and become obsessed with him) and travels with a group, dispatching all attackers in the blink of an eye.
I really hate when journalists try not to use someone's name repeatedly, so refer to them as "the veteran" or "the midfield ace" or "the businessman". Kade does this a lot, as Rezkin is referred to as "the young warrior" repeatedly and it really jars and annoys. This is partly due to the narrator being omnipresent, rather than the book being told from one or a number of points of view, so it has to be made clear who is being referred to a lot, but it is somewhat badly executed.
Similarly, the book could do with a serious proof-read as there are a number of grammatical errors and typos throughout.
Some of the sections of the book are excellent, the fight scenes (although Rezkin never being hit by anyone gets old really quick) and his night prowling are well described and excellent.
There is some use of magic in the book which is somewhat clumsy and throwaway and comes across as complete nonsense (somehow just thinking about an alarm and wrapping a thought around it will make it not go off?!), it really adds nothing to the book other than a way out of impossible situations.
I really enjoyed reading this book, and will be reading the other 3 in the series in short order, but the author fell into so many pitfalls that it does get annoying. I really hope he fixed these in the following books and they live up to the promise of the series. I also hope someone finally manages to even hit Rezkin in a fight, I don't really want to read fight scenes where there is no jeopardy.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated This Means War (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
It’s been said that all’s fair in love and war and never was the case more evident than in the tale of FDR and Tuck, two best friends who also happen to be partners and top agents at the CIA. After a covert operation doesn’t go as planned the duo find themselves riding their desks in the Los Angeles agency office much to their chagrin.
FDR (Chris Pine) is very confident ladies’ man while Tuck (Tom Hardy) is a divorced father of a little boy looking for “the one”. The more reserved Tuck decides to take his chances with online dating while FDR is content to cruise the local video store searching for his latest conquest. Enter Lauren (Reese Witherspoon), an attractive, independent woman who appears to have everything except a love life.
When Lauren encounters her former fiancé engaged to another woman, she vents her frustration to her best friend Trish (Chelsea Handler) who decides to take matters into her own hands and, unbeknownst to Lauren, produces an online dating profile for Lauren which matches her with Tuck. The first meeting between the two goes very well and they decide to take things slowly and see where this promising start leads. Unfortunately as Trish is heading home she stops in the same video store were FDR is on the prowl and the two mix like oil and water. Undeterred, FDR decides to pursue Lauren.
Eventually Tuck and FDR realize that they’re seeing the same woman and, not wanting to put their friendship in jeopardy, agree that they will continue to see her and let Lauren decide whom she prefers. The fact that neither men in this love triangle acknowledges that they know each other leads to some interesting complications, and naturally jealousies arise between the two friends.
With the full resources of the CIA at their disposal, Tuck and FDR, who’ve both become captivated with Lauren, soon take advantage of their job not only to spy on each other’s dates with Lauren but also to do their best to undermine the other and gain valuable information to help them appear more desirable to Lauren. As if this wasn’t complicated enough, an international criminal named Heinrich (Til Schweiger) is searching for the two agents to seek revenge. Constantly battling one another as well as the impending threat of Heinrich, FDR and Tuck embark on a hysterical and action-packed adventure that is one of the most enjoyable romantic comedies in recent memory.
Sure the film does take a few leaps in logic, such as the CIA turning a blind eye to their use of so many high-level resources in the world of dating but anyone seeing this type of film obviously isn’t expecting realism.
Directed by McG the film mixes action and comedy with a touch of romance and creates an entertaining formula. The three leads work exceptionally well with one another and Hardy and Pine are clearly stars on the rise. Handler does some great supporting work in the film and gets more than her share of laughs. This is definitely one you will not want to miss.
FDR (Chris Pine) is very confident ladies’ man while Tuck (Tom Hardy) is a divorced father of a little boy looking for “the one”. The more reserved Tuck decides to take his chances with online dating while FDR is content to cruise the local video store searching for his latest conquest. Enter Lauren (Reese Witherspoon), an attractive, independent woman who appears to have everything except a love life.
When Lauren encounters her former fiancé engaged to another woman, she vents her frustration to her best friend Trish (Chelsea Handler) who decides to take matters into her own hands and, unbeknownst to Lauren, produces an online dating profile for Lauren which matches her with Tuck. The first meeting between the two goes very well and they decide to take things slowly and see where this promising start leads. Unfortunately as Trish is heading home she stops in the same video store were FDR is on the prowl and the two mix like oil and water. Undeterred, FDR decides to pursue Lauren.
Eventually Tuck and FDR realize that they’re seeing the same woman and, not wanting to put their friendship in jeopardy, agree that they will continue to see her and let Lauren decide whom she prefers. The fact that neither men in this love triangle acknowledges that they know each other leads to some interesting complications, and naturally jealousies arise between the two friends.
With the full resources of the CIA at their disposal, Tuck and FDR, who’ve both become captivated with Lauren, soon take advantage of their job not only to spy on each other’s dates with Lauren but also to do their best to undermine the other and gain valuable information to help them appear more desirable to Lauren. As if this wasn’t complicated enough, an international criminal named Heinrich (Til Schweiger) is searching for the two agents to seek revenge. Constantly battling one another as well as the impending threat of Heinrich, FDR and Tuck embark on a hysterical and action-packed adventure that is one of the most enjoyable romantic comedies in recent memory.
Sure the film does take a few leaps in logic, such as the CIA turning a blind eye to their use of so many high-level resources in the world of dating but anyone seeing this type of film obviously isn’t expecting realism.
Directed by McG the film mixes action and comedy with a touch of romance and creates an entertaining formula. The three leads work exceptionally well with one another and Hardy and Pine are clearly stars on the rise. Handler does some great supporting work in the film and gets more than her share of laughs. This is definitely one you will not want to miss.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Spycies (2020) in Movies
Feb 22, 2020
A lot of the obscure kid's films I see at the cinema just appear with no warning, that means an exciting trip of uncertainty!
Vladimir the cat is a top spy at the Agency but after causing so much damage to property in a recent mission he's sent out to a remote station as penance. There he meets Hector, a tech genius rat who's isolation has left him craving company and eager to bond.
There isn't much excitement in their lives, just Hector's soaps on TV and trying to decide which pizza to heat up. Until one day the dullness is interrupted by a team who infiltrate the compound and steal something from the vault. After they make their escape Vlad and Hector head home to hunt down the perpetrators and get back what was stolen.
What I want to say about Spycies first is that the animation is amazing. I was blown away by some of the shots. The poster states it's from the animators of Despicable Me, Minions and The Secret Life Of Pets, I really thought this was an attempt to cash in on connections, and it is to an extent as this is relatively unknown but it does stand on its own once you see it.
The station that Hector and Vladimir are on is an oil rig out in open water and a lot of the shots are done during a storm, these scenes are incredible. One in particular felt like real footage and not animation, it was absolutely beautiful.
There's no denying that this is Zootropolis/Zootopia with spies, that thought bothered me more after watching it than it did during. It feels like they made a very specific selection of animals to be different. The other big difference is that it's clear it's set at some point in the future, and this is probably my only major issue.
Futuristic isn't something you really get from the world of Spycies, apart from when you look at the vehicles. The opening sequence, while epic on action movie scales, was very chaotic and the vehicles being new and unusual just added to that. With so much tradition around the film this felt out of place.
As an adult watching this film it was noticeable that it was made for a foreign market, it has clear regional influences that might not land for everyone but I suspect that the kids won't be too bothered about them.
I quite like the story but it isn't necessarily anything new. James Bond (yes, there's a Bond, James Bond moment in there) meets Zootropolis with flashes of Spies In Disguise. Familiar might feel stale but I enjoyed it. The script doesn't quite fit with the audience it's aimed at, it's probably not quite fun enough for kids but there's plenty of action and slapstick to keep them entertained as well as adults.
[On the title itself... I'm assuming it's a play on the word "species"?]
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/spycies-movie-review.html
Vladimir the cat is a top spy at the Agency but after causing so much damage to property in a recent mission he's sent out to a remote station as penance. There he meets Hector, a tech genius rat who's isolation has left him craving company and eager to bond.
There isn't much excitement in their lives, just Hector's soaps on TV and trying to decide which pizza to heat up. Until one day the dullness is interrupted by a team who infiltrate the compound and steal something from the vault. After they make their escape Vlad and Hector head home to hunt down the perpetrators and get back what was stolen.
What I want to say about Spycies first is that the animation is amazing. I was blown away by some of the shots. The poster states it's from the animators of Despicable Me, Minions and The Secret Life Of Pets, I really thought this was an attempt to cash in on connections, and it is to an extent as this is relatively unknown but it does stand on its own once you see it.
The station that Hector and Vladimir are on is an oil rig out in open water and a lot of the shots are done during a storm, these scenes are incredible. One in particular felt like real footage and not animation, it was absolutely beautiful.
There's no denying that this is Zootropolis/Zootopia with spies, that thought bothered me more after watching it than it did during. It feels like they made a very specific selection of animals to be different. The other big difference is that it's clear it's set at some point in the future, and this is probably my only major issue.
Futuristic isn't something you really get from the world of Spycies, apart from when you look at the vehicles. The opening sequence, while epic on action movie scales, was very chaotic and the vehicles being new and unusual just added to that. With so much tradition around the film this felt out of place.
As an adult watching this film it was noticeable that it was made for a foreign market, it has clear regional influences that might not land for everyone but I suspect that the kids won't be too bothered about them.
I quite like the story but it isn't necessarily anything new. James Bond (yes, there's a Bond, James Bond moment in there) meets Zootropolis with flashes of Spies In Disguise. Familiar might feel stale but I enjoyed it. The script doesn't quite fit with the audience it's aimed at, it's probably not quite fun enough for kids but there's plenty of action and slapstick to keep them entertained as well as adults.
[On the title itself... I'm assuming it's a play on the word "species"?]
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/spycies-movie-review.html
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Snake Eyes: G.I. Joe Origins (2021) in Movies
Jul 22, 2021
The latest film in the G.I. Joe cinematic universe has arrived with “Snake Eyes: GI Joe Origins”. The film was originally planned to arrive in March of 2020 but faced delays due to cinematic closures during the Pandemic.
The film opens with a young boy being orphaned after a group of thugs kills his father. Years later the man is still obsessed with finding out who killed his father and earns a living in underground fighting known as Snake Eyes (Henry Golding)
His exploits get the attention of Kenta (Takehiro Hira); who hires him into his organization with a promise to help him find the man who killed his father.
Snake Eyes soon finds himself working on the docks where he smuggles guns into fish bound for Japan. Despite his misgivings working for criminals, he befriends a man named Tommy (Andrew Koji); who teases him about his demeaning work by calling him “Fish Boy”.
When Kenta forces Snake Eyes to kill Tommy for being a spy; Snake Eyes refuses and the two make a daring escape to Japan. It is learned that Tommy is next in line to run his clan and that Kenta was banished years prior and plans revenge.
Despite mistrust from a trusted associate named Akiko (Hakura Abe); Snake Eyes begins his training in the Ninja Arts which should he survive will make him a valued part of the Clan which Tommy believes is correct thanks to his Blood Debt to Snake Eyes.
The film focuses on various aspects of training before branching into the larger story of divided loyalties and honors which results in a few battles and chases along the way.
While the film does space the action out; it does provide some great cinematography and the action is entertaining even if it lacks much tension.
The biggest issue is that the G.I. Joe/COBRA connection seems a bit forced as The Baroness (Ursula Corbero) arrives to move things along but it is mainly for the purpose of getting characters to do this and get that so the film can move towards the climactic action.
Samara Weaving does show up as Scarlett but she does not have a very large part in the story and aside from a few limited action moments; she seems to be more of the token G.I.Joe representation.
Golding and Hira are very good and their intertwined and complicated relationship is giving plenty of time to develop as their past is a large part of their futures and the film does a good job in explaining their past and future motivations.
The film blends Asian and Western film styles and in doing so creates an enjoyable film that for me was more enjoyable than the prior films in the series. To me those films focused mainly on action and this one was focused on developing characters.
While it remains to be seen what direction future films in the franchise will take; it would be interesting to see more of Snake Eyes story down the line.
3 stars out of 5
The film opens with a young boy being orphaned after a group of thugs kills his father. Years later the man is still obsessed with finding out who killed his father and earns a living in underground fighting known as Snake Eyes (Henry Golding)
His exploits get the attention of Kenta (Takehiro Hira); who hires him into his organization with a promise to help him find the man who killed his father.
Snake Eyes soon finds himself working on the docks where he smuggles guns into fish bound for Japan. Despite his misgivings working for criminals, he befriends a man named Tommy (Andrew Koji); who teases him about his demeaning work by calling him “Fish Boy”.
When Kenta forces Snake Eyes to kill Tommy for being a spy; Snake Eyes refuses and the two make a daring escape to Japan. It is learned that Tommy is next in line to run his clan and that Kenta was banished years prior and plans revenge.
Despite mistrust from a trusted associate named Akiko (Hakura Abe); Snake Eyes begins his training in the Ninja Arts which should he survive will make him a valued part of the Clan which Tommy believes is correct thanks to his Blood Debt to Snake Eyes.
The film focuses on various aspects of training before branching into the larger story of divided loyalties and honors which results in a few battles and chases along the way.
While the film does space the action out; it does provide some great cinematography and the action is entertaining even if it lacks much tension.
The biggest issue is that the G.I. Joe/COBRA connection seems a bit forced as The Baroness (Ursula Corbero) arrives to move things along but it is mainly for the purpose of getting characters to do this and get that so the film can move towards the climactic action.
Samara Weaving does show up as Scarlett but she does not have a very large part in the story and aside from a few limited action moments; she seems to be more of the token G.I.Joe representation.
Golding and Hira are very good and their intertwined and complicated relationship is giving plenty of time to develop as their past is a large part of their futures and the film does a good job in explaining their past and future motivations.
The film blends Asian and Western film styles and in doing so creates an enjoyable film that for me was more enjoyable than the prior films in the series. To me those films focused mainly on action and this one was focused on developing characters.
While it remains to be seen what direction future films in the franchise will take; it would be interesting to see more of Snake Eyes story down the line.
3 stars out of 5