Search
Search results
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (2018) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
Over a year on from this novelty being the first fully interactive film released by Netflix there is still no evidence of a similarly user controlled show out there. The streaming service had promised, after scooping a primetime Emmy for outstanding TV movie, that it was commissioning many more like it. But as of January 2020 they are nowhere to be seen.
Could it be that without the context of being a Black Mirror mind game, wrapped in Charlie Brooker’s clever if flimsy script, that it would just feel too intrusive and unnecessary for a mainstream drama audience? Not to mention the extra cost and hassle of filming multiple scenarios on a production. It’s fine as a distracting experiment, but would we want to have choices as a normal part of watching something?
Especially when looking back on Bandersnatch and realising that without this gimmick it is probably one of the weaker entries under the banner of Black Mirror quality. I can see how it would work well in children’s programming, as a way of keeping young audiences engaged. But beyond that, why not just play an actual video game, if an immersive interactive story that you control is what you want?
Fionn Whitehead of Dunkirk fame, does a fine job as 80s teen computer geek Stefan, as does the versatile yet under-used Will Poulter, in roles that in a straight drama would feel massively under-written. The impressive thing is how smooth the whole experience is. And you do feel increasingly uncomfortable the more you begin to influence Stefan, choosing more and more sinister actions simply out of a dark curiosity of where that will take him, and you!
The idea of reaching a dead end and having to go back to relive a moment, whilst cleverly woven in here to reflect a “choose your own adventure” book, does become a fault and a bit annoying. Something of a cheat! What would be truly impressive would be to branch the story in ways that never allow you to go back, but still results in the story making sense. Although the logistics of that script boggles the mind.
I do like the idea of no two people ever watching the same film, sort of. I also hate it. Because a good film has enough ambiguity to encourage debate anyway, and knowing everyone has watched the same story as you feels like a shared experience. No matter how interesting it might be in theory, you can’t escape the fact that Xbox and Playstation have this covered, especially as VR gaming becomes more common.
And that is the ultimate failing of Bandersnatch, in that you can’t really talk about the story in any other way than to wonder which ending you got? Apparently, it has five possible outcomes. By the time I had gone over it and found three, I was pretty much done with it. My curiosity certainly didn’t extend to going back and discovering the consequences of every possible choice.
Would I still recommend it? Well, yes. Anyone that hasn’t tried it probably should, at least have a go, to be able to say been there, done that. Would I like to see interaction as a part of my favourite shows? Definitely not.
Could it be that without the context of being a Black Mirror mind game, wrapped in Charlie Brooker’s clever if flimsy script, that it would just feel too intrusive and unnecessary for a mainstream drama audience? Not to mention the extra cost and hassle of filming multiple scenarios on a production. It’s fine as a distracting experiment, but would we want to have choices as a normal part of watching something?
Especially when looking back on Bandersnatch and realising that without this gimmick it is probably one of the weaker entries under the banner of Black Mirror quality. I can see how it would work well in children’s programming, as a way of keeping young audiences engaged. But beyond that, why not just play an actual video game, if an immersive interactive story that you control is what you want?
Fionn Whitehead of Dunkirk fame, does a fine job as 80s teen computer geek Stefan, as does the versatile yet under-used Will Poulter, in roles that in a straight drama would feel massively under-written. The impressive thing is how smooth the whole experience is. And you do feel increasingly uncomfortable the more you begin to influence Stefan, choosing more and more sinister actions simply out of a dark curiosity of where that will take him, and you!
The idea of reaching a dead end and having to go back to relive a moment, whilst cleverly woven in here to reflect a “choose your own adventure” book, does become a fault and a bit annoying. Something of a cheat! What would be truly impressive would be to branch the story in ways that never allow you to go back, but still results in the story making sense. Although the logistics of that script boggles the mind.
I do like the idea of no two people ever watching the same film, sort of. I also hate it. Because a good film has enough ambiguity to encourage debate anyway, and knowing everyone has watched the same story as you feels like a shared experience. No matter how interesting it might be in theory, you can’t escape the fact that Xbox and Playstation have this covered, especially as VR gaming becomes more common.
And that is the ultimate failing of Bandersnatch, in that you can’t really talk about the story in any other way than to wonder which ending you got? Apparently, it has five possible outcomes. By the time I had gone over it and found three, I was pretty much done with it. My curiosity certainly didn’t extend to going back and discovering the consequences of every possible choice.
Would I still recommend it? Well, yes. Anyone that hasn’t tried it probably should, at least have a go, to be able to say been there, done that. Would I like to see interaction as a part of my favourite shows? Definitely not.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Hamilton (2020) in Movies
Jul 5, 2020
Captures the power of being in "the room where it happens"
I'll just cut to the chase, the filmed version of the mega-hit stage musical HAMILTON (now streaming on Disney+) is terrific. If you are one of the few that have not seen this, check it out - you'll be glad you did.
I could go on and on about the Pulitzer-Prize winning show, the script, the music, the performances and/or the cross-cultural casting - all of which works to perfection, but what separates this film from the other hit Broadway shows that are converted to film is how well that the filmmakers were able to translate the power of being inside the theater during a live performance of this show.
Credit, of course, needs to go to the visionaries responsible for this show, creator/writer/star Lin-Manuel Miranda and Director Thomas Kail. They realized pretty early on (when the show was becoming the phenomenon that it has become) that they wanted to preserve this event for future generations, so started making plans to film the show - in High Def - with an audience and without an audience (for close-ups). In June 2016, about a month before the original cast started leaving the show (and right after the show won 11 Tony Awards), they spent $10 million to capture the show - with live audiences on Sunday and Tuesday and then spent the rest of Sunday night and all day Monday doing close-ups and crane shots to augment the action.
The results are outstanding. The wide-shots show the breadth of the production - showing the strong, Tony Award winning choreography by Andy Blankenbuehler, the unique, minimal and highly versatile set, the Tony Award winning costumes by Paul Tazewell and the Lighting Design that earned Howell Blinkley a Tony. All of these are showcased in this film - special note should be made about the Lighting that needed to be tweaked on the spot for the filming.
As for the close-ups, they showcase the wry smile and comedic delight that Tony winner Daveed Diggs shows in his roles as Lafayette/Jefferson, the power and sorrow of Tony Award winner Renee Elise Goldsberry - her spotlight number SATISFIED is as "perfect" a musical number as you will ever see. The powerful acting of Leslie Odom, Jr. as Aaron Burr (who won the Tony as Best Actor over Lin-Manuel's performance as Hamilton) as well as terrific supporting turns by the likes of Anthony Ramos (Lawrence/Phillip), Chris Jackson (showing real leadership as George Washington) and Okieriete Onaodwoan as Hercules Mulligan (one of my absolute favorite characters in this show)./James Madison.
Special note should be made to Jonathan Groff's portrayal of King George III - it is, basically, a cameo role, but he is filmed with such tight close-ups (showing spittle rolling down has chin as he sings) that marvelously juxtaposes King George's real emotions with that of the words he is speaking.
But, of course, the real star is Lin-Manuel Miranda - the genius creative force behind Hamilton. Interestingly enough, I thought his performance was the weakest of the lead cast (don't get me wrong, he was still excellent - just not "as excellent" as some of the others). His true vision, of course, was to tell the story of "the people of that era" as told by "the people of our era".
That is the true genius of Hamilton.
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars out of 10 (can I turn this up to 11)?
I could go on and on about the Pulitzer-Prize winning show, the script, the music, the performances and/or the cross-cultural casting - all of which works to perfection, but what separates this film from the other hit Broadway shows that are converted to film is how well that the filmmakers were able to translate the power of being inside the theater during a live performance of this show.
Credit, of course, needs to go to the visionaries responsible for this show, creator/writer/star Lin-Manuel Miranda and Director Thomas Kail. They realized pretty early on (when the show was becoming the phenomenon that it has become) that they wanted to preserve this event for future generations, so started making plans to film the show - in High Def - with an audience and without an audience (for close-ups). In June 2016, about a month before the original cast started leaving the show (and right after the show won 11 Tony Awards), they spent $10 million to capture the show - with live audiences on Sunday and Tuesday and then spent the rest of Sunday night and all day Monday doing close-ups and crane shots to augment the action.
The results are outstanding. The wide-shots show the breadth of the production - showing the strong, Tony Award winning choreography by Andy Blankenbuehler, the unique, minimal and highly versatile set, the Tony Award winning costumes by Paul Tazewell and the Lighting Design that earned Howell Blinkley a Tony. All of these are showcased in this film - special note should be made about the Lighting that needed to be tweaked on the spot for the filming.
As for the close-ups, they showcase the wry smile and comedic delight that Tony winner Daveed Diggs shows in his roles as Lafayette/Jefferson, the power and sorrow of Tony Award winner Renee Elise Goldsberry - her spotlight number SATISFIED is as "perfect" a musical number as you will ever see. The powerful acting of Leslie Odom, Jr. as Aaron Burr (who won the Tony as Best Actor over Lin-Manuel's performance as Hamilton) as well as terrific supporting turns by the likes of Anthony Ramos (Lawrence/Phillip), Chris Jackson (showing real leadership as George Washington) and Okieriete Onaodwoan as Hercules Mulligan (one of my absolute favorite characters in this show)./James Madison.
Special note should be made to Jonathan Groff's portrayal of King George III - it is, basically, a cameo role, but he is filmed with such tight close-ups (showing spittle rolling down has chin as he sings) that marvelously juxtaposes King George's real emotions with that of the words he is speaking.
But, of course, the real star is Lin-Manuel Miranda - the genius creative force behind Hamilton. Interestingly enough, I thought his performance was the weakest of the lead cast (don't get me wrong, he was still excellent - just not "as excellent" as some of the others). His true vision, of course, was to tell the story of "the people of that era" as told by "the people of our era".
That is the true genius of Hamilton.
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars out of 10 (can I turn this up to 11)?
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Scoob (2020) in Movies
May 8, 2021
Another film that snuck its way through to VOD (and is thankfully now streaming). As much as I love Scooby Doo, I did not have the desire to pay money to view this one.
Here I would normally put an extended synopsis, but I'll be honest, after watching the film I don't think I could tell you what the story was. I'm not sure it actually matters anyway.
The beginning of the film confused me. From every trailer that I saw I thought this film was about the mini Scooby Gang. At least that's what I remembered. So having seen lots of clips of them as kids, coupled with the posters meant I was left confused when it was hardly a feature of the final product.
Apart from me evidently forgetting the plot of the film, it was a classic Scooby story with a modern twist, and ultimately you can't go wrong with that. You get all the things you expect from masked villains to hair-brained schemes that seem to fool the minions... and that is all pretty satisfying stuff to watch.
A note I made very quickly was that the voices left a lot to be desired. While capturing the essence of the original cast would be very difficult, there's no denying that the actors from the live-action originals did a very good job... here we had no real comparison at all. Gina Rodriguez (who has been knocking it out of the park recently) probably being the only exception. I just truly don't know how anyone could possibly be better than Casey Kasem and Matthew Lillard. MVP of the film was definitely the bike cop when questioning Scooby and Shaggy, quality content, loved the end of his scene.
Despite the nostalgia of everything it doesn't make up for some truly awful dialogue, it's very inconsistent and yoyos between bad and good (when I say good, in this case, I probably mean cheesy). There are a couple of true gems though, my favourite being an early line from Shaggy with some heavy foreshadowing.
The yoyoing of the script is generally reflected in my notes on the film as a whole. For every laugh, there was something negative I wrote down. Scoob! was very self-aware, which was amusing to begin with, but it began to grate a little.
I was at least thankful that the CG animation actually became less of an annoyance as I got into the film, I wasn't a fan. The majority of the film managed to get a pass, but sadly I really disliked the portrayal of Dick Dastardly and Muttley in this style. As much as I'd like a Hanna and Barbera universe, I do not care to see anymore in this look. And absolutely no more Dastardly looking like Gru with his minions.
"But Emma... you gave this film a pretty decent rating and all you've done is grumble about it!" Yes, yes I have. But... I still enjoyed myself, and like I said, for every bad note there was a laugh or a moment that made me happy. And sometimes having a rant about a film's pitfalls is just something you need to do.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/scoob-movie-review.html
Here I would normally put an extended synopsis, but I'll be honest, after watching the film I don't think I could tell you what the story was. I'm not sure it actually matters anyway.
The beginning of the film confused me. From every trailer that I saw I thought this film was about the mini Scooby Gang. At least that's what I remembered. So having seen lots of clips of them as kids, coupled with the posters meant I was left confused when it was hardly a feature of the final product.
Apart from me evidently forgetting the plot of the film, it was a classic Scooby story with a modern twist, and ultimately you can't go wrong with that. You get all the things you expect from masked villains to hair-brained schemes that seem to fool the minions... and that is all pretty satisfying stuff to watch.
A note I made very quickly was that the voices left a lot to be desired. While capturing the essence of the original cast would be very difficult, there's no denying that the actors from the live-action originals did a very good job... here we had no real comparison at all. Gina Rodriguez (who has been knocking it out of the park recently) probably being the only exception. I just truly don't know how anyone could possibly be better than Casey Kasem and Matthew Lillard. MVP of the film was definitely the bike cop when questioning Scooby and Shaggy, quality content, loved the end of his scene.
Despite the nostalgia of everything it doesn't make up for some truly awful dialogue, it's very inconsistent and yoyos between bad and good (when I say good, in this case, I probably mean cheesy). There are a couple of true gems though, my favourite being an early line from Shaggy with some heavy foreshadowing.
The yoyoing of the script is generally reflected in my notes on the film as a whole. For every laugh, there was something negative I wrote down. Scoob! was very self-aware, which was amusing to begin with, but it began to grate a little.
I was at least thankful that the CG animation actually became less of an annoyance as I got into the film, I wasn't a fan. The majority of the film managed to get a pass, but sadly I really disliked the portrayal of Dick Dastardly and Muttley in this style. As much as I'd like a Hanna and Barbera universe, I do not care to see anymore in this look. And absolutely no more Dastardly looking like Gru with his minions.
"But Emma... you gave this film a pretty decent rating and all you've done is grumble about it!" Yes, yes I have. But... I still enjoyed myself, and like I said, for every bad note there was a laugh or a moment that made me happy. And sometimes having a rant about a film's pitfalls is just something you need to do.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/scoob-movie-review.html
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Spree (2020) in Movies
Jan 24, 2021
Different
In a world filled with YouTubers and social media influencers, it was inevitable that eventually we’d get a film shot in the style of a social media stream. We’ve seen similar with films like Unfriended and Searching, taking on the likes of social media whilst shot entirely from a webcam. However Spree is the first that I’ve seen that takes on social media almost entirely from live streaming or go pro recordings, and overall it’s a pretty decent attempt.
Spree is a 2020 comedy horror film starring Joe Keery as Kurt Kunkle, a failing social media influencer who works as a driver for a rideshare app called Spree. Fed up of his lack of viewers, Kurt decides to fit out his car with cameras and livestream “The Lesson”, where he instructs viewers on how to become famous on social media while picking up passengers and murdering them. One of the passengers he lets go is comedian Jessie Adams (Sasheer Zamata), a star and social media success who Kurt becomes obsessed with over the course of his murderous evening.
Spree is definitely a fun film. The comedic horror style works very well, especially in the first half although later on it does make way for a more serious side. There’s a decent amount of blood and gore too and it has a wonderfully cheesy B-movie vibe about it. What makes Spree so fun though is Joe Keery. His performance as an influencer is entirely believable and it’s his charisma and baby-faced innocence that makes this film watchable. He spends the entirety of the film like he’s high and hyped up on energy drinks and while this does make his performance a little over the top, this is exactly what Spree needs. David Arquette as Kurt’s dad also brings a lot of fun although his screen time is sadly lacking.
Despite Spree’s dark comedic feel, there’s a more serious story and commentary underlying this film. It might look as though it’s making light of social media influencers, but actually it’s making a rather serious point of the pressures and negatives of the constant need influencers have to be liked and obtain more followers. Kurt’s story is rather sad, and even the other characters like Jessie are shown to have their own stories but still stuck in the same social media behaviour. The live streams used to shoot most of this film, with the likes and comments from viewers, emphasise the pitfalls and real life issues with social media.
Admittedly this live stream method does get a little thin by the end of the 90 minute run time, and after the initial few murders, it’s only Keery’s performance that holds the film up to the end. It isn’t helped that aside from Kurt, none of his victims are particularly likeable and it makes them very difficult to relate to or care about. And this also goes for Jessie who despite her heroine status, becomes unlikeable due to how she too bows to the pressure of social media.
I’m not a fan of the YouTube and influencer revolution, so for me Spree was an interesting take on this and social media in general. It has a good point to make and a serious message, although this may be overshadowed by the dark comedy and horror. With a great turn from Joe Keery, it’s a fun film but not entirely memorable.
Spree is a 2020 comedy horror film starring Joe Keery as Kurt Kunkle, a failing social media influencer who works as a driver for a rideshare app called Spree. Fed up of his lack of viewers, Kurt decides to fit out his car with cameras and livestream “The Lesson”, where he instructs viewers on how to become famous on social media while picking up passengers and murdering them. One of the passengers he lets go is comedian Jessie Adams (Sasheer Zamata), a star and social media success who Kurt becomes obsessed with over the course of his murderous evening.
Spree is definitely a fun film. The comedic horror style works very well, especially in the first half although later on it does make way for a more serious side. There’s a decent amount of blood and gore too and it has a wonderfully cheesy B-movie vibe about it. What makes Spree so fun though is Joe Keery. His performance as an influencer is entirely believable and it’s his charisma and baby-faced innocence that makes this film watchable. He spends the entirety of the film like he’s high and hyped up on energy drinks and while this does make his performance a little over the top, this is exactly what Spree needs. David Arquette as Kurt’s dad also brings a lot of fun although his screen time is sadly lacking.
Despite Spree’s dark comedic feel, there’s a more serious story and commentary underlying this film. It might look as though it’s making light of social media influencers, but actually it’s making a rather serious point of the pressures and negatives of the constant need influencers have to be liked and obtain more followers. Kurt’s story is rather sad, and even the other characters like Jessie are shown to have their own stories but still stuck in the same social media behaviour. The live streams used to shoot most of this film, with the likes and comments from viewers, emphasise the pitfalls and real life issues with social media.
Admittedly this live stream method does get a little thin by the end of the 90 minute run time, and after the initial few murders, it’s only Keery’s performance that holds the film up to the end. It isn’t helped that aside from Kurt, none of his victims are particularly likeable and it makes them very difficult to relate to or care about. And this also goes for Jessie who despite her heroine status, becomes unlikeable due to how she too bows to the pressure of social media.
I’m not a fan of the YouTube and influencer revolution, so for me Spree was an interesting take on this and social media in general. It has a good point to make and a serious message, although this may be overshadowed by the dark comedy and horror. With a great turn from Joe Keery, it’s a fun film but not entirely memorable.
Garrett (1099 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
May 18, 2020
Set design (2 more)
Costumes
Most of the acting
Story (2 more)
Theme
Message/meaning
I think I need to note a few things about my review before I actually get into it. First, I got this for free in a giveaway. Second, having watched the trailers for this I thought I wasn't going to like it and I didn't see it in theaters, the buzz and good reviews made me want to enter the giveaway so I could see it because I likely wouldn't have paid for it. Third, I know that I can "grade" movies I don't like harsher than maybe they deserve. Finally, in an effort to prevent me from being too harsh I "forced" my sister to watch it with me and some of her views of the movie and review are mixed in with my opinion of it.
It was apparent to me, and my sister, that this movie was not an attempt at a comic book movie or even a movie about the Joker but a character study and a look into mental illness. This is confirmed in the special features with an interview with the director/writer/producer. I think that if this wasn't a "Joker" movie I would have liked it a little bit more. The biggest problem that this movie has, and many others like it, when the main character is a "bad guy" and they try to make you understand/sympathize with them and it doesn't work it messes up the movie's feel. It did that for both of us.
As a "DC" movie and set in the Batman "universe" this fails in almost every way possible. The actor and character are way too old (mid 30's to 40's at best), when compared to how young Bruce Wayne is (about 8). Joker is malnourished, frail, weak, incapable of planning anything out, and I can't stress this enough famous throughout the country for the actions in this movie with his real name... None of that fits the Joker from any Batman in the comics.
There are good to great parts in this movie but they are few and far between. Within this movie are the bones of a much better movie. Many of the choices the director made, that he is proud of, I think severely damage this movie. Chief among them is the dancing. With the exception of the celebrating down the stairs which is one of the most famous and favorite scenes in the movie (and that's how I saw it as celibating not dancing) the rest of them are useless, don't fit with the actual character (the Joker), and add to the run time of an already bloated and often very slow movie.
In the end I know I'm probably in the minority with my opinion on this movie, of those that have seen it, but I do think there is a good lesson here. If you see the trailers for this movie and it looks up your alley or it interests you then see it, but maybe just on streaming or renting. If you see the trailers for this and don't think you'd like it you are probably very right and shouldn't waste your money on it. If you get a chance to see it for free and you want to see what all the "hype" is about maybe check it out... but there are probably many better options that you should see before trying this out.
It was apparent to me, and my sister, that this movie was not an attempt at a comic book movie or even a movie about the Joker but a character study and a look into mental illness. This is confirmed in the special features with an interview with the director/writer/producer. I think that if this wasn't a "Joker" movie I would have liked it a little bit more. The biggest problem that this movie has, and many others like it, when the main character is a "bad guy" and they try to make you understand/sympathize with them and it doesn't work it messes up the movie's feel. It did that for both of us.
As a "DC" movie and set in the Batman "universe" this fails in almost every way possible. The actor and character are way too old (mid 30's to 40's at best), when compared to how young Bruce Wayne is (about 8). Joker is malnourished, frail, weak, incapable of planning anything out, and I can't stress this enough famous throughout the country for the actions in this movie with his real name... None of that fits the Joker from any Batman in the comics.
There are good to great parts in this movie but they are few and far between. Within this movie are the bones of a much better movie. Many of the choices the director made, that he is proud of, I think severely damage this movie. Chief among them is the dancing. With the exception of the celebrating down the stairs which is one of the most famous and favorite scenes in the movie (and that's how I saw it as celibating not dancing) the rest of them are useless, don't fit with the actual character (the Joker), and add to the run time of an already bloated and often very slow movie.
In the end I know I'm probably in the minority with my opinion on this movie, of those that have seen it, but I do think there is a good lesson here. If you see the trailers for this movie and it looks up your alley or it interests you then see it, but maybe just on streaming or renting. If you see the trailers for this and don't think you'd like it you are probably very right and shouldn't waste your money on it. If you get a chance to see it for free and you want to see what all the "hype" is about maybe check it out... but there are probably many better options that you should see before trying this out.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Scream (2022) in Movies
Feb 5, 2022
The much anticipated new release, I was amazed that I managed to avoid seeing the trailer or spoilers (I even only vaguely saw the poster), and after seeing the film... I'm not sure that was entirely sensible, I should probably have knocked down my anticipation a bit by looking at all of it.
The Scream franchise has long been one of my favourites, the lighter kind of horror that isn't actually that horrific. (Maybe I'm just a little jaded.) Controversially, my favourite is Scream 4, I enjoyed the slightly updated concepts, and that's what gave me some hopes for this fifth instalment.
Woodsboro once again feels the weight of its history when Ghostface comes back to torment the locals, bringing home its most famous residents.
A young girl, Tara, has the typical Scream opener, setting off the latest spree. With all this happening it draws her estranged sister back to town, and she feels the need to investigate the recent incidents. But she needs help, so she enlists one of Woodsboro's experts who has seen his fair share of Ghostface. As the killer gets closer to their end game, Sydney and Gale are drawn back to try and end his legacy.
That's a tried and tested formula, so it's a reasonable decision to go with it, but the execution didn't hit right for me. There were too many points that just weren't believable, even with the suspension of belief for this type of film, and this was yet another film that really overegged the fact that it was trying to be clever.
While all four of the previous films we have some different aspect to them to set them apart from each other, here, while they do have a new twist, the rest is just a rehash. Which I get, that's the point, but that only works if it's executed well.
Our returning cast were as you would expect, great repeat performances for their characters. The new additions... well, I felt like they would have been better suited to a spoof than a "serious" horror movie. While I wasn't keen on their performances, the script also didn't help them much. The prospect of seeing any of them again in the next one (yes, Scream 6 has been greenlit) doesn't appeal.
Sam is our lead character, and she's no Sidney Prescott. While her backstory has potential, it's definitely not realised in this film. There's little chemistry on screen and a distinct lack of terror befitting someone in this role.
I did go and see it twice, I genuinely thought I must have missed something. This was a similar feeling to when I saw Endgame, initially I was not a happy bunny, but the second watch was a definite improvement. Here that sadly wasn't the case. There was that same feeling as the first time, no excitement to come back and see it again, and absolutely no love for the way the storyline unfolded.
The score for this is a little upsetting, it puts it at my least favourite of the franchise. The few bits I found enjoyable had no chance of outweighing the bad, this definitely won't make it out of fifth place in the series ranking. Will I watch it again? Sure. When it's streaming, and in a rewatch before 6... but apart from that, I will have to relegate it to the pit I threw Die Hard 5 into.
For added spoilers, check out the full review on my website: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2022/02/scream-2022-spoiler-movie-review.html
The Scream franchise has long been one of my favourites, the lighter kind of horror that isn't actually that horrific. (Maybe I'm just a little jaded.) Controversially, my favourite is Scream 4, I enjoyed the slightly updated concepts, and that's what gave me some hopes for this fifth instalment.
Woodsboro once again feels the weight of its history when Ghostface comes back to torment the locals, bringing home its most famous residents.
A young girl, Tara, has the typical Scream opener, setting off the latest spree. With all this happening it draws her estranged sister back to town, and she feels the need to investigate the recent incidents. But she needs help, so she enlists one of Woodsboro's experts who has seen his fair share of Ghostface. As the killer gets closer to their end game, Sydney and Gale are drawn back to try and end his legacy.
That's a tried and tested formula, so it's a reasonable decision to go with it, but the execution didn't hit right for me. There were too many points that just weren't believable, even with the suspension of belief for this type of film, and this was yet another film that really overegged the fact that it was trying to be clever.
While all four of the previous films we have some different aspect to them to set them apart from each other, here, while they do have a new twist, the rest is just a rehash. Which I get, that's the point, but that only works if it's executed well.
Our returning cast were as you would expect, great repeat performances for their characters. The new additions... well, I felt like they would have been better suited to a spoof than a "serious" horror movie. While I wasn't keen on their performances, the script also didn't help them much. The prospect of seeing any of them again in the next one (yes, Scream 6 has been greenlit) doesn't appeal.
Sam is our lead character, and she's no Sidney Prescott. While her backstory has potential, it's definitely not realised in this film. There's little chemistry on screen and a distinct lack of terror befitting someone in this role.
I did go and see it twice, I genuinely thought I must have missed something. This was a similar feeling to when I saw Endgame, initially I was not a happy bunny, but the second watch was a definite improvement. Here that sadly wasn't the case. There was that same feeling as the first time, no excitement to come back and see it again, and absolutely no love for the way the storyline unfolded.
The score for this is a little upsetting, it puts it at my least favourite of the franchise. The few bits I found enjoyable had no chance of outweighing the bad, this definitely won't make it out of fifth place in the series ranking. Will I watch it again? Sure. When it's streaming, and in a rewatch before 6... but apart from that, I will have to relegate it to the pit I threw Die Hard 5 into.
For added spoilers, check out the full review on my website: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2022/02/scream-2022-spoiler-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Pale Blue Eye (2022) in Movies
Jan 15, 2023
Haunting and Intriguing
An eerie, gothic murder mystery pairing an ingenious Detective with a young Edgar Allan Poe is now streaming on Netflix and is the perfect way to shut out the January winds and hibernate on your couch and get involved in the mystery while sitting in front of a warm, roaring fire (or heat lamp) and your favorite warm (possibly adult) beverage).
Written for the screen (from book by Louis Bayard) and Directed by Scott Cooper (OUT OF THE FURNACE), THE PALE BLUE EYE stars the always good Christian Bale (probably my favorite actor working today) as Civilian Detective Augustus Landor who is summoned to 1830’s West Point Military Academy to solve a murder. He is aided by a young cadet played by Harry Melling (Dudley Dursley in the HARRY POTTER FILMS) who turns out to be none other than Edgar Allan Poe.
Cooper films this movie in shadow and dark brown and yellow tones, giving the 1830’s setting a certain dream-like, dreary quality that underscores the gruesome goings-on happening behind the scenes at the fledgling United States Military Academy. These types of films - and the mood that is permeated throughout - can often be slow slogs and often times bogs down under the weight of it’s own pretentiousness - but Cooper keeps the action moving forward (though at a deliberate pace) often-times mimicking the piecing together of the circumstances that Bale’s character is doing.
Thank goodness Cooper had the good sense to reunite with his OUT OF THE FURNACE star and cast Bale in the lead role. The character of Detective Augustus Landor is dark and brooding - himself still working through the emotions of a tragedy from his past. But he is also thoughtful and deliberate in his detective work and Bale handles these moods…and the pacing of the film…like the pro that he is. If for no other reason, check out THE PALE BLUE EYE (a reference to Poe’s TELL TALE HEART) for Bale’s performance at the center of things.
Fortunately, Bale is aided in this film by a strong ensemble of (mostly) British actors from Toby Jones to Gillian Anderson to Simon McBurney and Timothy Spall - they all bring their considerable talents to lesser roles as suspects and/or witnesses in this “whodunnit”. Cooper also trots out good ol’ (and I do mean old) Robert Duvall for a “blink or you’ll miss it” cameo. The casting works well for this gothic murder mystery.
And then there is Melling as Edgar Allan Poe. He plays Poe as you might expect one to play a young Edgar Allan Poe - as an “odd duck” who is fascinated by macabre scenarios (which would be later found in his storytelling), but Melling gives him an intelligence and gentleness of soul that really works in this case.
The Cinematography of this movie is bleak and dark - as befits a gothic murder mystery - and the pacing is not fast in any sense of the word, but if you click into this world, you’ll be rewarding by an interesting murder mystery that resolves itself in a surprising - and satisfactory - way.
Letter Grade: B+
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Written for the screen (from book by Louis Bayard) and Directed by Scott Cooper (OUT OF THE FURNACE), THE PALE BLUE EYE stars the always good Christian Bale (probably my favorite actor working today) as Civilian Detective Augustus Landor who is summoned to 1830’s West Point Military Academy to solve a murder. He is aided by a young cadet played by Harry Melling (Dudley Dursley in the HARRY POTTER FILMS) who turns out to be none other than Edgar Allan Poe.
Cooper films this movie in shadow and dark brown and yellow tones, giving the 1830’s setting a certain dream-like, dreary quality that underscores the gruesome goings-on happening behind the scenes at the fledgling United States Military Academy. These types of films - and the mood that is permeated throughout - can often be slow slogs and often times bogs down under the weight of it’s own pretentiousness - but Cooper keeps the action moving forward (though at a deliberate pace) often-times mimicking the piecing together of the circumstances that Bale’s character is doing.
Thank goodness Cooper had the good sense to reunite with his OUT OF THE FURNACE star and cast Bale in the lead role. The character of Detective Augustus Landor is dark and brooding - himself still working through the emotions of a tragedy from his past. But he is also thoughtful and deliberate in his detective work and Bale handles these moods…and the pacing of the film…like the pro that he is. If for no other reason, check out THE PALE BLUE EYE (a reference to Poe’s TELL TALE HEART) for Bale’s performance at the center of things.
Fortunately, Bale is aided in this film by a strong ensemble of (mostly) British actors from Toby Jones to Gillian Anderson to Simon McBurney and Timothy Spall - they all bring their considerable talents to lesser roles as suspects and/or witnesses in this “whodunnit”. Cooper also trots out good ol’ (and I do mean old) Robert Duvall for a “blink or you’ll miss it” cameo. The casting works well for this gothic murder mystery.
And then there is Melling as Edgar Allan Poe. He plays Poe as you might expect one to play a young Edgar Allan Poe - as an “odd duck” who is fascinated by macabre scenarios (which would be later found in his storytelling), but Melling gives him an intelligence and gentleness of soul that really works in this case.
The Cinematography of this movie is bleak and dark - as befits a gothic murder mystery - and the pacing is not fast in any sense of the word, but if you click into this world, you’ll be rewarding by an interesting murder mystery that resolves itself in a surprising - and satisfactory - way.
Letter Grade: B+
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bong Mines Entertainment (15 KP) rated Wishful Thinking by Augustine in Music
Jun 17, 2019
Augustine is a 22-year-old singer-songwriter, producer, and multi-instrumentalist from Sweden. Not too long ago, he released a lovely debut EP, entitled, “Wishful Thinking”, which reveals his deepest fears.
“The first song I released as an artist that changed so much about my life. It’s a memory of the contrasts in a relationship, thinking that it’s a bit scary if the current moment is the highlight of your life. You are high on life but so afraid to lose the feeling that you somehow lose yourself instead.” – Augustine
‘Luzon’ is Augustine’s debut single. Shortly after its release, it skyrocketed to #1 on Hype Machine.
The likable tune contains a lighthearted storyline, beautiful falsetto vocals, and cinematic instrumentation flavored with an alternative-pop aroma.
Augustine – “Viola”
“I was a little angry with the world when I wrote ‘Viola’. Much of that anger was due to feelings of anxiety, guilt, and other boring things. The line ‘I’ll be your biggest disappointment if you sum up the years of adolescence’ is really about being scared of not being enough.” – Augustine
‘Viola’ contains a relatable narrative, likable vocals, and warm instrumentation pulsating with mellotron tones and distinctive drums.
Augustine – “Wishful Thinking”
“I’m weak for synth-pop songs that are so big that you just lose yourself in them. So I wanted to try one myself. ‘Wishful Thinking’ is a twisted love story about looking back at something with both regret and lack. But mostly with a fear of forgetting how a certain person is, looks and sounds.” – Augustine
The title track “Wishful Thinking” tells a twisted love story about looking back at something with both regret and lack. But mostly with a fear of forgetting how a certain person is, looks and sounds.
This reminiscence is juxtaposed with exhilarating energy which builds throughout the song, emulating a windows-down late night drive and overwhelming liberation.
‘Wishful Thinking’ contains a relatable storyline, pleasing vocals, and enjoyable instrumentation which takes listeners on a bombastic synth-pop thrill ride.
The likable tune reveals Augustine’s penchant for massive synth-based productions like Lana Del Rey‘s “Summertime Sadness” and Future Islands’ “Seasons”.
Augustine – “A Scent of Lily”
“This was initially an attempt to write a pop song, with inspiration from the chorus of Ariana Grande’s ‘Into You’. ‘Lily’ eventually became much more alternative. It’s about powerlessness in a relationship, when you buy into everything about the other person, to the point that you stop thinking your own sensible thoughts.” – Augustine
‘A Scent of Lily’ is another critically acclaimed tune which made Augustine one of 2019’s most talked about new artists.
Like “Luzon”, it peaked at #1 on Hype Machine. Also, it placed Augustine in a conversational comparison with iconic voices like Bon Iver, Mark Foster, James Blake, and Ezra Koenig.
‘A Scent of Lily’ contains a relatable storyline, ear-welcoming vocals, and lush instrumentation flavored with electro-pop and modern dance elements.
Augustine – “Slacks”
“The most personal song of the EP. It’s about how a lovely relationship didn’t last because of the distance. We moved to different cities, and I became so self-absorbed. I started suffering from agoraphobia that made it hard for me to even go outside. A little crazy in hindsight.” – Augustine
‘Slacks’ possesses a bittersweet storyline, heartfelt vocals, and stripped instrumentation perfumed with a nostalgic scent.
Get acquainted with Augustine’s “Wishful Thinking” EP by streaming it via Spotify.
“Hearing the EP from a distance, it became clear that this music grew out many years of me being afraid of being a disappointment to others. All the lyrics were inspired by being afraid of people, the world and leaving things behind.” – Augustine
All five songs featured on “Wishful Thinking” are collaborations between Augustine and producers Rassmus Björnson and Agrin Rahmani (LÉON, Skott).
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/augustine-wishful-thinking/
“The first song I released as an artist that changed so much about my life. It’s a memory of the contrasts in a relationship, thinking that it’s a bit scary if the current moment is the highlight of your life. You are high on life but so afraid to lose the feeling that you somehow lose yourself instead.” – Augustine
‘Luzon’ is Augustine’s debut single. Shortly after its release, it skyrocketed to #1 on Hype Machine.
The likable tune contains a lighthearted storyline, beautiful falsetto vocals, and cinematic instrumentation flavored with an alternative-pop aroma.
Augustine – “Viola”
“I was a little angry with the world when I wrote ‘Viola’. Much of that anger was due to feelings of anxiety, guilt, and other boring things. The line ‘I’ll be your biggest disappointment if you sum up the years of adolescence’ is really about being scared of not being enough.” – Augustine
‘Viola’ contains a relatable narrative, likable vocals, and warm instrumentation pulsating with mellotron tones and distinctive drums.
Augustine – “Wishful Thinking”
“I’m weak for synth-pop songs that are so big that you just lose yourself in them. So I wanted to try one myself. ‘Wishful Thinking’ is a twisted love story about looking back at something with both regret and lack. But mostly with a fear of forgetting how a certain person is, looks and sounds.” – Augustine
The title track “Wishful Thinking” tells a twisted love story about looking back at something with both regret and lack. But mostly with a fear of forgetting how a certain person is, looks and sounds.
This reminiscence is juxtaposed with exhilarating energy which builds throughout the song, emulating a windows-down late night drive and overwhelming liberation.
‘Wishful Thinking’ contains a relatable storyline, pleasing vocals, and enjoyable instrumentation which takes listeners on a bombastic synth-pop thrill ride.
The likable tune reveals Augustine’s penchant for massive synth-based productions like Lana Del Rey‘s “Summertime Sadness” and Future Islands’ “Seasons”.
Augustine – “A Scent of Lily”
“This was initially an attempt to write a pop song, with inspiration from the chorus of Ariana Grande’s ‘Into You’. ‘Lily’ eventually became much more alternative. It’s about powerlessness in a relationship, when you buy into everything about the other person, to the point that you stop thinking your own sensible thoughts.” – Augustine
‘A Scent of Lily’ is another critically acclaimed tune which made Augustine one of 2019’s most talked about new artists.
Like “Luzon”, it peaked at #1 on Hype Machine. Also, it placed Augustine in a conversational comparison with iconic voices like Bon Iver, Mark Foster, James Blake, and Ezra Koenig.
‘A Scent of Lily’ contains a relatable storyline, ear-welcoming vocals, and lush instrumentation flavored with electro-pop and modern dance elements.
Augustine – “Slacks”
“The most personal song of the EP. It’s about how a lovely relationship didn’t last because of the distance. We moved to different cities, and I became so self-absorbed. I started suffering from agoraphobia that made it hard for me to even go outside. A little crazy in hindsight.” – Augustine
‘Slacks’ possesses a bittersweet storyline, heartfelt vocals, and stripped instrumentation perfumed with a nostalgic scent.
Get acquainted with Augustine’s “Wishful Thinking” EP by streaming it via Spotify.
“Hearing the EP from a distance, it became clear that this music grew out many years of me being afraid of being a disappointment to others. All the lyrics were inspired by being afraid of people, the world and leaving things behind.” – Augustine
All five songs featured on “Wishful Thinking” are collaborations between Augustine and producers Rassmus Björnson and Agrin Rahmani (LÉON, Skott).
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/augustine-wishful-thinking/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Velvet Buzzsaw (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Ever since Netflix have proven themselves as a fantastic streaming platform, everyone gets hyped about their ‘Originals’. Velvet Buzzsaw was no exception, and when the first trailer dropped I was so excited to watch it. Everything about it seemed great; it was written and directed by Dan Gilroy (the guy who gave us the fantastic Nightcrawler), and the cast was incredible. Who could say no to Jake Gyllenhaal, Rene Russo AND Toni Collette? Not me. Unfortunately, this wonderful mix didn’t live up to my expectations at all and left me feeling very disappointed.
The main issue I had with Velvet Buzzsaw is that the pacing is horrendously slow. The first 45 minutes felt like nothing but exposition, when it was a relatively simple concept for the audience to grasp. The film follows a bunch of art critics, artists and patrons of the arts as they uncover a series of paintings from an unknown artist. However, they’re not your normal paintings because a supernatural force lurks within them waiting to enact revenge. That’s it, that’s the synopsis. So why waste so much screen time dragging things out? The trailer made this look like a fast paced, intense thriller, but the reality is nothing like that.
It’s a shame the pacing and screenplay is so weak, because Velvet Buzzsaw does have a few redeeming features. The quality of acting is very good, and visually it’s beautiful to look at, particularly the locations and the paintings that appear throughout. I especially enjoyed the characters Rhodora Haze (Rene Russo) and Gretchen (Toni Collette), as they embody the typically powerful, ruthless and bitchy personas one would expect from this industry. They satirise art lovers perfectly, which is partially why I haven’t rated this film lower. In all honesty, these actors deserved better than the script they were dealt, and it’s a shame such talent was wasted here. I’m having trouble understanding how you can take such an interesting concept and brilliant actors, and make it so boring.
Even the inevitable death scenes are pretty dull, and play like a straight to TV horror film that doesn’t quite hit the mark. Velvet Buzzsaw fails to execute any sort of suspense, or even terror, so when people eventually die you’re just sat there like “Huh, is that it?”. After such a slow first act, you expect some kind of payoff, but it never arrives. Again, the trailer had some pretty scary moments that made me expect a few jump scares or intense moments. I’m confused about why this was even marketed as a horror-thriller, when it lacks so many of the aspects that make both those genres great. I didn’t feel scared at all, and even when the characters we were supposed to hate met their demise, there was no morbid satisfaction in it. To be completely honest, I was apathetic towards the whole thing. I just wanted it to end.
If you are a fan of slow-burning films that take a while to get going, then you might enjoy Velvet Buzzsaw more than I did. I don’t necessarily have a problem with these types of films, but you still need to keep the audience gripped somehow. You need to give people a reason to keep watching.
Gilroy’s attempt to show the horrors of the art world falls flat, and certainly doesn’t live up to the expectations based on the success of Nightcrawler. Part of me even wondered how this was the same man, it felt so vastly different to his other work. Netflix Originals rarely let me down, but this time, they really did.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/review-velvet-buzzsaw-2019/
The main issue I had with Velvet Buzzsaw is that the pacing is horrendously slow. The first 45 minutes felt like nothing but exposition, when it was a relatively simple concept for the audience to grasp. The film follows a bunch of art critics, artists and patrons of the arts as they uncover a series of paintings from an unknown artist. However, they’re not your normal paintings because a supernatural force lurks within them waiting to enact revenge. That’s it, that’s the synopsis. So why waste so much screen time dragging things out? The trailer made this look like a fast paced, intense thriller, but the reality is nothing like that.
It’s a shame the pacing and screenplay is so weak, because Velvet Buzzsaw does have a few redeeming features. The quality of acting is very good, and visually it’s beautiful to look at, particularly the locations and the paintings that appear throughout. I especially enjoyed the characters Rhodora Haze (Rene Russo) and Gretchen (Toni Collette), as they embody the typically powerful, ruthless and bitchy personas one would expect from this industry. They satirise art lovers perfectly, which is partially why I haven’t rated this film lower. In all honesty, these actors deserved better than the script they were dealt, and it’s a shame such talent was wasted here. I’m having trouble understanding how you can take such an interesting concept and brilliant actors, and make it so boring.
Even the inevitable death scenes are pretty dull, and play like a straight to TV horror film that doesn’t quite hit the mark. Velvet Buzzsaw fails to execute any sort of suspense, or even terror, so when people eventually die you’re just sat there like “Huh, is that it?”. After such a slow first act, you expect some kind of payoff, but it never arrives. Again, the trailer had some pretty scary moments that made me expect a few jump scares or intense moments. I’m confused about why this was even marketed as a horror-thriller, when it lacks so many of the aspects that make both those genres great. I didn’t feel scared at all, and even when the characters we were supposed to hate met their demise, there was no morbid satisfaction in it. To be completely honest, I was apathetic towards the whole thing. I just wanted it to end.
If you are a fan of slow-burning films that take a while to get going, then you might enjoy Velvet Buzzsaw more than I did. I don’t necessarily have a problem with these types of films, but you still need to keep the audience gripped somehow. You need to give people a reason to keep watching.
Gilroy’s attempt to show the horrors of the art world falls flat, and certainly doesn’t live up to the expectations based on the success of Nightcrawler. Part of me even wondered how this was the same man, it felt so vastly different to his other work. Netflix Originals rarely let me down, but this time, they really did.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/review-velvet-buzzsaw-2019/
365Flicks (235 KP) rated Pandorica (2016) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
Now that Chris and I have handed back the reigns of Another Damn Wrestling Show to its original hosts Matt, Joe and the other one. I no longer have to watch 12 hours of Wrestling each week so I decided to tackle my backlog of Movie reviews that some awesome very kind people have been sending. Today was the turn of Pandorica, a movie that to be fair had me at the trailer because its tells you everything without giving anything away. Best type of Trailer really (Yes that was a pop at Terminator Genisys).
I had no real expectations going into Pandorica and I came out of it very pleasantly surprised by Tom Paton’s Genre busting Futuristic Dystopian , Sci-Fi horror, Suspense, Action Filled tale of what happens when Humanity is De-Volved into its most basic instincts. Well I did say Genre Busting. One of the best things about this movie is that you really cant put it in any bracket (no matter how hard you try for the purpose of reviewing).
Set somewhere in the future we meet a small group of Natives from the Varosha tribe. Tribe leader Nus (Luke D’Silva) has brought his three bravest and best to take part in a Violent trial to determine who should be leader of the Tribe when Nus expires. As is always the way, the three in question have very differing personalities. Eiren (Jade Hobday) is as deadly as she is determined and somewhat sexy (think Milla Jovovich in Resident Evil, Keira Knightley in King Arthur, Rhona Mitra in Doomsday). She is up against the wreckless headstrong bad ass Ares (Marc Zammit) who believes he is the only man fit enough to lead, rounding off the trio is Thade (Adam Bond) a very loyal confidant to the tribe but its all a bit over his head. Once the trial begins everything really turns to shit as the 3 discover a strange woman being chased by band of Vicious Lunatics in creepy masks. They must band to together to stay alive, all the while trying to prove they are the best candidate for leader, Winner is left standing at daybreak… Hopefully.
It is hard for me to believe that this is Tom Paton’s first full length feature film. He has a very clear idea of what he is doing with getting the best out of his strong leading cast, the Cinematography in this movie is gorgeous at times showing Paton is well aware of his on location surroundings and can direct his movie as such to show us this. Sometimes just the swooping shots over the top of the trees keep make you pause to admire. He has taken a number of Genres mashed them up and made a solid as hell flick that not only stands on its own but also serves as what could potentially be a great intro to a new series of flicks hat breath new life into some of these Genres, especially the Dystopian World End-y ones in the same vein as Neil Marshalls Doomsday.
I don’t want to keep raving on too much because you guys should really see this flick. It is available on all good streaming sites and video on demand services and I guarantee you will get a kick out of it, even if only for the Bitchin as hell soundtrack. I wont lie the music alone sucks you right in. I really enjoyed the movie and can easily see a sequel in fact if you do enjoy the movie, I recommend you stick around till the end of the credits (No Spoilers).
I had no real expectations going into Pandorica and I came out of it very pleasantly surprised by Tom Paton’s Genre busting Futuristic Dystopian , Sci-Fi horror, Suspense, Action Filled tale of what happens when Humanity is De-Volved into its most basic instincts. Well I did say Genre Busting. One of the best things about this movie is that you really cant put it in any bracket (no matter how hard you try for the purpose of reviewing).
Set somewhere in the future we meet a small group of Natives from the Varosha tribe. Tribe leader Nus (Luke D’Silva) has brought his three bravest and best to take part in a Violent trial to determine who should be leader of the Tribe when Nus expires. As is always the way, the three in question have very differing personalities. Eiren (Jade Hobday) is as deadly as she is determined and somewhat sexy (think Milla Jovovich in Resident Evil, Keira Knightley in King Arthur, Rhona Mitra in Doomsday). She is up against the wreckless headstrong bad ass Ares (Marc Zammit) who believes he is the only man fit enough to lead, rounding off the trio is Thade (Adam Bond) a very loyal confidant to the tribe but its all a bit over his head. Once the trial begins everything really turns to shit as the 3 discover a strange woman being chased by band of Vicious Lunatics in creepy masks. They must band to together to stay alive, all the while trying to prove they are the best candidate for leader, Winner is left standing at daybreak… Hopefully.
It is hard for me to believe that this is Tom Paton’s first full length feature film. He has a very clear idea of what he is doing with getting the best out of his strong leading cast, the Cinematography in this movie is gorgeous at times showing Paton is well aware of his on location surroundings and can direct his movie as such to show us this. Sometimes just the swooping shots over the top of the trees keep make you pause to admire. He has taken a number of Genres mashed them up and made a solid as hell flick that not only stands on its own but also serves as what could potentially be a great intro to a new series of flicks hat breath new life into some of these Genres, especially the Dystopian World End-y ones in the same vein as Neil Marshalls Doomsday.
I don’t want to keep raving on too much because you guys should really see this flick. It is available on all good streaming sites and video on demand services and I guarantee you will get a kick out of it, even if only for the Bitchin as hell soundtrack. I wont lie the music alone sucks you right in. I really enjoyed the movie and can easily see a sequel in fact if you do enjoy the movie, I recommend you stick around till the end of the credits (No Spoilers).