Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Playmobil: The Movie (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
What can I say about Playmobil The Movie? You know how in real life Playmobil is naff when you compare it to Lego? ... Yeah.
"It's obviously a rip off of the Lego movies!" - Direct quote from my friend's son, and he's not wrong. It's basically a reverse, here people go into the fictional world whereas in the Lego movies the fictional world experiences the real world. There are many things that are reversed. Lego remembers its characters limitations, Playmobil doesn't. Lego is entertaining, Playmobil... isn't. I like daft humour so this should have been a hit with me. "But Emma, it isn't made for you." Well yes, but even I laugh at children's films, and there's definitely an aspect of it directed at adults and they don't hit either.
The beginning of the film is an experience. It opens with a musical number that doesn't have any impact at all, it's also quickly forgotten as the fun is interrupted by police officers arriving at the house. I saw with my jaw slowly dropping, this is a U rated films, they weren't really going to start it by... oh, yep, they did.
This change of mood was quite shocking to watch. It's an emergency stop of plot points, and not something that just adults would notice. A child a few rows in front turned to his mum and said "what happened?!" I unfortunately couldn't hear how she responded.
When it comes to humour, apart from one chuckle that appears in the trailer there was only one thing that I laughed at. I really did laugh out loud. It wasn't a great joke, it was verging on dad joke territory but the delivery was incredible.
I was surprisingly annoyed by the fact that at the beginning (and in the trailer) Marla doesn't know how to walk with her new Playmobil legs, yet moments later she's crawling before going back to not knowing how to walk. I don't expect a masterpiece, but I do expect at least some consistency.
Playmobil leaves me at a loss, I can't really identify anything exciting about the film. The story isn't very inspiring and the characters don't give you anything to identify with despite having the opportunity. The film also suffers from excess, storyline that goes nowhere, characters that don't get used for any real purpose... I don't think this was a particularly good attempt at bringing this toy to life, it might have been more suited to short skits in a TV series or the cutting room floor.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/playmobil-movie-review.html
"It's obviously a rip off of the Lego movies!" - Direct quote from my friend's son, and he's not wrong. It's basically a reverse, here people go into the fictional world whereas in the Lego movies the fictional world experiences the real world. There are many things that are reversed. Lego remembers its characters limitations, Playmobil doesn't. Lego is entertaining, Playmobil... isn't. I like daft humour so this should have been a hit with me. "But Emma, it isn't made for you." Well yes, but even I laugh at children's films, and there's definitely an aspect of it directed at adults and they don't hit either.
The beginning of the film is an experience. It opens with a musical number that doesn't have any impact at all, it's also quickly forgotten as the fun is interrupted by police officers arriving at the house. I saw with my jaw slowly dropping, this is a U rated films, they weren't really going to start it by... oh, yep, they did.
This change of mood was quite shocking to watch. It's an emergency stop of plot points, and not something that just adults would notice. A child a few rows in front turned to his mum and said "what happened?!" I unfortunately couldn't hear how she responded.
When it comes to humour, apart from one chuckle that appears in the trailer there was only one thing that I laughed at. I really did laugh out loud. It wasn't a great joke, it was verging on dad joke territory but the delivery was incredible.
I was surprisingly annoyed by the fact that at the beginning (and in the trailer) Marla doesn't know how to walk with her new Playmobil legs, yet moments later she's crawling before going back to not knowing how to walk. I don't expect a masterpiece, but I do expect at least some consistency.
Playmobil leaves me at a loss, I can't really identify anything exciting about the film. The story isn't very inspiring and the characters don't give you anything to identify with despite having the opportunity. The film also suffers from excess, storyline that goes nowhere, characters that don't get used for any real purpose... I don't think this was a particularly good attempt at bringing this toy to life, it might have been more suited to short skits in a TV series or the cutting room floor.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/playmobil-movie-review.html
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Polar (2019) in Movies
Jul 5, 2020
The Black Kaiser - 8/10
Polar is a 2019 neo-noir/action movie based on the Dark Horse Comics, webcomic series Polar: Came From The Cold, written by Victor Santos. It is directed by Jonas Akerlund and written by Jayson Rothwell. Starring Mads Mikkelsen, Vanessa Hudgens, Katheryn Winnick, and Matt Lucas.
Duncan Vizla, a.k.a. "the Black Kaiser" (Mads Mikkelsen), is an assassin for the Damocles corporation. It is company policy that all assassins retire at age 50. He checks with a doctor about his health which is good and his accountant about his wealth; which having made the maximum pension fund contributions as possible, has him set for life. In 14 days, on his 50th birthday, he'll be entitled to a payout of $8 million dollars. Mr. Blut (Matt Lucas), has Vivian (Katheryn Winnick), Duncan's handler, contact him for one last mission. Unbeknownst to Duncan this is a plan to have him killed to avoid paying out his pension.
This me was awesome despite what critics say. I read a lot of bad comments talking about it being abhorrent and vulgar. It is rated TV-MA and not for kids and it is very adult. Plus it is a movie about assassins, people who kill for money, so what do you expect. I was surprised how much I liked the Black Kaiser character, since he didn't speak much during the film. Almost felt like a spaghetti-western in some ways, with the silent gunslinger aspect to it. I thought the film was very well done when it came to the acting, the action, and the plot. I'm sure that there are points to what the critics have said but the movie was too awesome for me to care. One thing, the main bad guy i didn't much care for. He did get me to not like him and with acting that's harder than getting people to like you. Also I enjoyed the group of assassins who are employed with the Damocles corporation, for the most part they were pretty interesting and diverse and added something extra to the film. And I was not prepared for Vanessa Hudgen's character but she had a surprising role and did very well too. I give this movie a 8/10.
Duncan Vizla, a.k.a. "the Black Kaiser" (Mads Mikkelsen), is an assassin for the Damocles corporation. It is company policy that all assassins retire at age 50. He checks with a doctor about his health which is good and his accountant about his wealth; which having made the maximum pension fund contributions as possible, has him set for life. In 14 days, on his 50th birthday, he'll be entitled to a payout of $8 million dollars. Mr. Blut (Matt Lucas), has Vivian (Katheryn Winnick), Duncan's handler, contact him for one last mission. Unbeknownst to Duncan this is a plan to have him killed to avoid paying out his pension.
This me was awesome despite what critics say. I read a lot of bad comments talking about it being abhorrent and vulgar. It is rated TV-MA and not for kids and it is very adult. Plus it is a movie about assassins, people who kill for money, so what do you expect. I was surprised how much I liked the Black Kaiser character, since he didn't speak much during the film. Almost felt like a spaghetti-western in some ways, with the silent gunslinger aspect to it. I thought the film was very well done when it came to the acting, the action, and the plot. I'm sure that there are points to what the critics have said but the movie was too awesome for me to care. One thing, the main bad guy i didn't much care for. He did get me to not like him and with acting that's harder than getting people to like you. Also I enjoyed the group of assassins who are employed with the Damocles corporation, for the most part they were pretty interesting and diverse and added something extra to the film. And I was not prepared for Vanessa Hudgen's character but she had a surprising role and did very well too. I give this movie a 8/10.
BookInspector (124 KP) rated Thirteen Reasons Why in Books
Sep 24, 2020
I will start with a confession, I requested this book because I knew the TV Series is out, it can’t be bad if it’s on telly right? And guess what, I was right. I loved this book.
This book is a quick read because it is tiny and really gripping. This book carries two stories at once, the story of Hannah and another one of Clay. This novel is filled with feelings and regret. I loved Hannah’s character in this book, yes, even though she is dead, she is still the main character in this book. I loved her courage for this confession and the secrecy and originality of all this “business”. The palette of characters is really wide in this novel and offers a great variety of personalities to choose from. The characters are very realistic, just like ordinary school kids, which most of us faced in our lives. The whole story is told by Clay and Hannah, but that is sufficient to showcase the feelings and powerful meaning of this novel.
I absolutely loved the message of this book, and I think that Jay Asher has done a great Job, by highlighting suicide and its causes. I loved the way he showed, how small and to some, unimportant actions might influence young people and what it can lead to. I loved the difficulty of relationships which Jay Asher was portraying in this book, and how it changed due to particular actions. The narrative of this book is flowing smoothly and there are no much twists or turns, but every chapter has a great cliffhanger, which creates suspense, makes you wonder of what is waiting on the next side of that cassette. One thing that made it difficult for me, was the merging of these two stories, I would’ve preferred that Hanna’s stories would be uninterrupted by Clay’s commentary and thoughts.
The language of this book was easy to read and understandable, and the chapters are reasonable length, so it is easy, quick and very powerful read. The ending of this novel is well-thought throw and shows to all of us, that life goes on. So, to conclude, it is very amusing and extremely deep book, full of friendships and teenage relationships, and I think this book is absolute must read to all the school goers (and others as well), as in my opinion, most of them can relate to this book and learn few great things about life as well.
This book is a quick read because it is tiny and really gripping. This book carries two stories at once, the story of Hannah and another one of Clay. This novel is filled with feelings and regret. I loved Hannah’s character in this book, yes, even though she is dead, she is still the main character in this book. I loved her courage for this confession and the secrecy and originality of all this “business”. The palette of characters is really wide in this novel and offers a great variety of personalities to choose from. The characters are very realistic, just like ordinary school kids, which most of us faced in our lives. The whole story is told by Clay and Hannah, but that is sufficient to showcase the feelings and powerful meaning of this novel.
I absolutely loved the message of this book, and I think that Jay Asher has done a great Job, by highlighting suicide and its causes. I loved the way he showed, how small and to some, unimportant actions might influence young people and what it can lead to. I loved the difficulty of relationships which Jay Asher was portraying in this book, and how it changed due to particular actions. The narrative of this book is flowing smoothly and there are no much twists or turns, but every chapter has a great cliffhanger, which creates suspense, makes you wonder of what is waiting on the next side of that cassette. One thing that made it difficult for me, was the merging of these two stories, I would’ve preferred that Hanna’s stories would be uninterrupted by Clay’s commentary and thoughts.
The language of this book was easy to read and understandable, and the chapters are reasonable length, so it is easy, quick and very powerful read. The ending of this novel is well-thought throw and shows to all of us, that life goes on. So, to conclude, it is very amusing and extremely deep book, full of friendships and teenage relationships, and I think this book is absolute must read to all the school goers (and others as well), as in my opinion, most of them can relate to this book and learn few great things about life as well.
Love and Hip Hop The Game
Games
App
Join the empire of young, hot rappers all hungry for success in Love and Hip Hop. As an aspiring...
PRANK ME! 2 Trick Your Friends for iPhone & iPod touch
Catalogs and Productivity
App
*********************************** LAUNCH SPECIAL: $1.99 CENTS!! GET IT NOW BEFORE THE PRICE GOES...
Baseball Highlights: 2045
8.0
Rate It
Tabletop Game
American baseball was on its last legs as a spectator sport. Football had become the predominant...
Baseball Cyborgs Robots Deck Builder
Audio Books by Audiobooks
Book and Entertainment
App
Wish you could read more but don’t have the time? You’ll love audiobooks! Audiobooks.com is the...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Army of Thieves (2021) in Movies
Nov 4, 2021
“Did He Just Say Gulp?”
I have Covid-19, and am confined to quarters. So time to catch up on some streaming films. New on Netflix is “Army of Thieves”, a quirky prequel, of sorts, to Zac Snyder’s “Army of the Dead“.
Plot Summary:
Sebastian Schlencht-Wöhnert (Matthias Schweighöfer) is a geek obsessed with the work of legendary safe-manufacturer Hans Wagner whose magnum opus was a series of four intricate safes named after the four parts of his namesake’s Ring cycle: The Rhinegold, The Valkyrie, Siegfried and Götterdämmerung.
Seeking more the glory of cracking the legendary safes (rather than the riches within), high-class jewel-thief Gwendoline (Nathalie Emmanuel) teams with Sebastian to crack the three known safes (in Paris, Prague and St Moritz) before they are officially ‘retired’. Together with Korina (Ruby O. Fee), muscle-man Brad (Stuart Martin) and getaway driver Rolph (Guz Khan) the gang try to stay one step ahead of obsessed Interpol agent Delacroix (Jonathan Cohen).
Certification:
US: TV-MA. UK: 15.
Talent:
Starring: Matthias Schweighöfer, Nathalie Emmanuel, Ruby O. Fee, Stuart Martin, Guz Khan, Jonathan Cohen.
Directed by: Matthias Schweighöfer.
Written by: Shay Hatten (from a story by Shay Hatten and Zack Snyder).
“Army of Thieves” Review: Positives:
I really wasn’t expecting much from this offering. For me, the character of Dieter in “Army of the Dead” was an annoyingly quirky comedy character in a zombie-actioner that you just wanted to punch in the face…. repeatedly. But in contrast, this Dieter-centric film is deliberately quirky throughout and it just all worked for me. Under his own direction, Schweighöfer’s Sebastian/Dieter becomes a genuinely quirky, lovelorn and loveable loser that you want to root for.
The look and feel of the film is utterly glorious. The wonderful cinematography by Bernhard Jasper makes the introduction to the European locations feel Bond-like and the combination of Production Design and Special Effects make the safe-cracking scenes tense, dynamic and beautiful to watch. It’s all nicely rounded off by a quirky Steve Mazzaro / Hans Zimmer score.
Shay Hatten’s script delivers a nice balance of action and exposition. It actually – shock horror – takes time to flesh out some character behind the generic heist-movie stereotypes. Setting the movie in the same timeline as the emerging Nevada zombie-apocalypse as “Army of the Dead” is neat: (although those expecting extensive zombie-action will feel short-changed). And having the Las Vegas safe as the mythical Götterdämmerung is a nice touch. Above all – “SURPRISE!!!” – the script surpassed the essential six-laughs test.
The acting is above par, with Schweighöfer putting in a fabulous turn and the stunningly beautiful Nathalie Emmanuel (best known for being Ramsey in the Fast and Furious series) gets to be a lot more than mere window-dressing here. Stuart Martin is notable here for looking astonishingly like Hugh Jackman…. I mean, really, they could be twins.
Negatives:
I mean, honestly, there are more holes in this story than a St Moritz swiss-cheese. Why would all of the safes, owned by different private institutions, be being “decommissioned” due to a Zombie outbreak on the other side of the world? Can the Interpol team really be that incompetent? And however clever he is, I don’t buy that you can open safes like that!
Although I liked the balance of the script overall, the story is pretty simplistic and linear.
Summary Thoughts on “Army of Thieves”
Sometimes a little movie appears that surprises and delights you, and this was one of those for me. It’s not big and it’s not clever. But it is very nicely made, thoroughly entertained me and was – for me – way better than its source movie. A recommended watch on Netflix.
Plot Summary:
Sebastian Schlencht-Wöhnert (Matthias Schweighöfer) is a geek obsessed with the work of legendary safe-manufacturer Hans Wagner whose magnum opus was a series of four intricate safes named after the four parts of his namesake’s Ring cycle: The Rhinegold, The Valkyrie, Siegfried and Götterdämmerung.
Seeking more the glory of cracking the legendary safes (rather than the riches within), high-class jewel-thief Gwendoline (Nathalie Emmanuel) teams with Sebastian to crack the three known safes (in Paris, Prague and St Moritz) before they are officially ‘retired’. Together with Korina (Ruby O. Fee), muscle-man Brad (Stuart Martin) and getaway driver Rolph (Guz Khan) the gang try to stay one step ahead of obsessed Interpol agent Delacroix (Jonathan Cohen).
Certification:
US: TV-MA. UK: 15.
Talent:
Starring: Matthias Schweighöfer, Nathalie Emmanuel, Ruby O. Fee, Stuart Martin, Guz Khan, Jonathan Cohen.
Directed by: Matthias Schweighöfer.
Written by: Shay Hatten (from a story by Shay Hatten and Zack Snyder).
“Army of Thieves” Review: Positives:
I really wasn’t expecting much from this offering. For me, the character of Dieter in “Army of the Dead” was an annoyingly quirky comedy character in a zombie-actioner that you just wanted to punch in the face…. repeatedly. But in contrast, this Dieter-centric film is deliberately quirky throughout and it just all worked for me. Under his own direction, Schweighöfer’s Sebastian/Dieter becomes a genuinely quirky, lovelorn and loveable loser that you want to root for.
The look and feel of the film is utterly glorious. The wonderful cinematography by Bernhard Jasper makes the introduction to the European locations feel Bond-like and the combination of Production Design and Special Effects make the safe-cracking scenes tense, dynamic and beautiful to watch. It’s all nicely rounded off by a quirky Steve Mazzaro / Hans Zimmer score.
Shay Hatten’s script delivers a nice balance of action and exposition. It actually – shock horror – takes time to flesh out some character behind the generic heist-movie stereotypes. Setting the movie in the same timeline as the emerging Nevada zombie-apocalypse as “Army of the Dead” is neat: (although those expecting extensive zombie-action will feel short-changed). And having the Las Vegas safe as the mythical Götterdämmerung is a nice touch. Above all – “SURPRISE!!!” – the script surpassed the essential six-laughs test.
The acting is above par, with Schweighöfer putting in a fabulous turn and the stunningly beautiful Nathalie Emmanuel (best known for being Ramsey in the Fast and Furious series) gets to be a lot more than mere window-dressing here. Stuart Martin is notable here for looking astonishingly like Hugh Jackman…. I mean, really, they could be twins.
Negatives:
I mean, honestly, there are more holes in this story than a St Moritz swiss-cheese. Why would all of the safes, owned by different private institutions, be being “decommissioned” due to a Zombie outbreak on the other side of the world? Can the Interpol team really be that incompetent? And however clever he is, I don’t buy that you can open safes like that!
Although I liked the balance of the script overall, the story is pretty simplistic and linear.
Summary Thoughts on “Army of Thieves”
Sometimes a little movie appears that surprises and delights you, and this was one of those for me. It’s not big and it’s not clever. But it is very nicely made, thoroughly entertained me and was – for me – way better than its source movie. A recommended watch on Netflix.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022) in Movies
Apr 30, 2022
The Magic is Fading
Alas, the magic is fading in the Wizarding World
The 3rd installment of the Fantastic Beasts saga, THE SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE is satisfying enough for fans of the ongoing Wizarding World of Harry Potter universe and will be time well spent for those of you that have watched all 8 Harry Potter films and the first 2 FANTASTIC BEASTS films, but it is nothing…magical.
Picking up where the 2nd film (THE CRIMES OF GRINDEWALD) left off, the arch-nemesis of Dumbledore (a game Jude Law) is in power and looking to start a war with the Muggles (non-magic folk). A ragtag group of heroes (are there any other kind) led by Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) are humanity’s only hope.
And…while this worked well in the first series of film…this setup falls rather flat as it has a “been there done that” feel to it that is not really elevated above the ordinary.
The reason are numerous:
First, Newt Scamander is no Harry Potter. While Eddie Redymayne plays an interesting, quirky, central character - a character who’s unique skills were needed to defeat the bad guy in the first film - he is, really, a secondary character, yet he is the one we follow throughout the film. Kind of like watching the Harry Potter films through the eyes of Neville Longbottom.
Secondly, Grindewald (this time played by Mads Mikkelsen, replacing Johnny Depp) is no Voldemort. Grindewald was an interesting character set up in the first film, but by this film, he is pretty bland (and pretty blandly played by Mikkeslen who is, frankly, miscast).
Thirdly, Dumbledore (Jude Law in a very good performance, one that needed to be larger and more central) is sidelined for most of this film - a film about the battle between Grindewald and Dumbledore, a stumble (plotwise) to be sure in an awkward attempt to keeping the Newt Scamander character front and center.
Fortunately, the supporting cast is strong from Dan Fogler’s muggle, Jacob Kowalski to his love, Queenie (Alison Sudol) to Newt’s brother, Theseus (Callum Turner) to Newt’s assistant Bunty (Victoria Yeates) to Dumbledore’s brother, Aberforth (Richard Coyle) - all have their moments and are interesting (enough) to watch.
Unfortunately, Ezra Miller’s conflicted villain, Credence is poorly written with a crescendo to his character that lands with a thud. And, the inexplicable reason that Katherine Waterston’s main character of Tina is sidelined (rumors are she conflicted with J.K. Rowling) just doesn’t land, so, consequently, 2 major pieces from the first 2 films just don’t work.
What does work in this film is the magical sequences, as handled by Harry Potter veteran David Yates (who has now helmed 6 films in the Wizarding World franchise), the magical scenes are truly…magical. They are fun to watch and the real reason to watch this film, but the story is weak with a misguided viewpoint character that diminishes the fantasy for all.
Rumors are that this was supposed to be a 5 film franchise, but with box office diminishing for each successive Fantastic Beasts films, the filmmakers wisely decided to wrap up most storylines in this film.
It’s time to say goodbye to FANTASTIC BEASTS, but it should be time for the Wizarding World to go the way of Star Wars, Marvel and Star Trek - streaming TV series that breathes new life - and new, interesting characters - to a sagging franchise.
In the meantime, FANTASTIC BEASTS: THE SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE is “good enough” and since it is all we have at the moment, it will have to do.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The 3rd installment of the Fantastic Beasts saga, THE SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE is satisfying enough for fans of the ongoing Wizarding World of Harry Potter universe and will be time well spent for those of you that have watched all 8 Harry Potter films and the first 2 FANTASTIC BEASTS films, but it is nothing…magical.
Picking up where the 2nd film (THE CRIMES OF GRINDEWALD) left off, the arch-nemesis of Dumbledore (a game Jude Law) is in power and looking to start a war with the Muggles (non-magic folk). A ragtag group of heroes (are there any other kind) led by Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) are humanity’s only hope.
And…while this worked well in the first series of film…this setup falls rather flat as it has a “been there done that” feel to it that is not really elevated above the ordinary.
The reason are numerous:
First, Newt Scamander is no Harry Potter. While Eddie Redymayne plays an interesting, quirky, central character - a character who’s unique skills were needed to defeat the bad guy in the first film - he is, really, a secondary character, yet he is the one we follow throughout the film. Kind of like watching the Harry Potter films through the eyes of Neville Longbottom.
Secondly, Grindewald (this time played by Mads Mikkelsen, replacing Johnny Depp) is no Voldemort. Grindewald was an interesting character set up in the first film, but by this film, he is pretty bland (and pretty blandly played by Mikkeslen who is, frankly, miscast).
Thirdly, Dumbledore (Jude Law in a very good performance, one that needed to be larger and more central) is sidelined for most of this film - a film about the battle between Grindewald and Dumbledore, a stumble (plotwise) to be sure in an awkward attempt to keeping the Newt Scamander character front and center.
Fortunately, the supporting cast is strong from Dan Fogler’s muggle, Jacob Kowalski to his love, Queenie (Alison Sudol) to Newt’s brother, Theseus (Callum Turner) to Newt’s assistant Bunty (Victoria Yeates) to Dumbledore’s brother, Aberforth (Richard Coyle) - all have their moments and are interesting (enough) to watch.
Unfortunately, Ezra Miller’s conflicted villain, Credence is poorly written with a crescendo to his character that lands with a thud. And, the inexplicable reason that Katherine Waterston’s main character of Tina is sidelined (rumors are she conflicted with J.K. Rowling) just doesn’t land, so, consequently, 2 major pieces from the first 2 films just don’t work.
What does work in this film is the magical sequences, as handled by Harry Potter veteran David Yates (who has now helmed 6 films in the Wizarding World franchise), the magical scenes are truly…magical. They are fun to watch and the real reason to watch this film, but the story is weak with a misguided viewpoint character that diminishes the fantasy for all.
Rumors are that this was supposed to be a 5 film franchise, but with box office diminishing for each successive Fantastic Beasts films, the filmmakers wisely decided to wrap up most storylines in this film.
It’s time to say goodbye to FANTASTIC BEASTS, but it should be time for the Wizarding World to go the way of Star Wars, Marvel and Star Trek - streaming TV series that breathes new life - and new, interesting characters - to a sagging franchise.
In the meantime, FANTASTIC BEASTS: THE SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE is “good enough” and since it is all we have at the moment, it will have to do.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)