Search
Search results
Merissa (13619 KP) rated Second Place (Matchmakers #3) in Books
Sep 1, 2017
Second Place (Matchmakers #3) by G.R. Lyons
Second Place is the third and final book in the Matchmakers series - set in a world similar yet different to our own. We finally get to have Danny's story, and find out just what's going on with Eric and Bryan, and it's not at all what I was expecting!
Now, I was a bit worried about this one for a couple of reasons. I don't like reading about cheating per se. If it happened in the past, and the cheater is sorry, and it's relevant to the story, then I don't mind. And I really don't like love triangles. Threesomes/multi-partners are different, but triangles/squares/whatever, I don't do them. So going into this one, I knew that Danny had cheated, and Bryan was with Eric. Red flag warning for me.
I WAS WRONG! Any misconceptions I may have had went flying out the window once I started reading this story. It's angsty, it's heart-breaking, it's not at all what you might think. My admiration for Danny went sky high when he made a promise and kept it, years in the making, and walking through hell too. My heart really went out to him. I will say that I cried at this one. And it was f'ugly crying too. My heart was breaking for Bryan, and yet I still held hope because of Ellidan. So when Bryan goes to someone else, who does have first-hand knowledge of what it's like to lose a husband, I couldn't believe what I was reading. I may or may not have shouted at my kindle at that point, much to my children's confusion.
This is one helluva roller-coaster of a book, that will take you high and drop you down low. We still get to see Chance and Remy, and Shain and Ellidan, who continue to make my day whenever I read about them. Exceptionally well written, with no editing or grammatical errors, this book is an amazing finale to the series. Highly recommended by me.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comment here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Now, I was a bit worried about this one for a couple of reasons. I don't like reading about cheating per se. If it happened in the past, and the cheater is sorry, and it's relevant to the story, then I don't mind. And I really don't like love triangles. Threesomes/multi-partners are different, but triangles/squares/whatever, I don't do them. So going into this one, I knew that Danny had cheated, and Bryan was with Eric. Red flag warning for me.
I WAS WRONG! Any misconceptions I may have had went flying out the window once I started reading this story. It's angsty, it's heart-breaking, it's not at all what you might think. My admiration for Danny went sky high when he made a promise and kept it, years in the making, and walking through hell too. My heart really went out to him. I will say that I cried at this one. And it was f'ugly crying too. My heart was breaking for Bryan, and yet I still held hope because of Ellidan. So when Bryan goes to someone else, who does have first-hand knowledge of what it's like to lose a husband, I couldn't believe what I was reading. I may or may not have shouted at my kindle at that point, much to my children's confusion.
This is one helluva roller-coaster of a book, that will take you high and drop you down low. We still get to see Chance and Remy, and Shain and Ellidan, who continue to make my day whenever I read about them. Exceptionally well written, with no editing or grammatical errors, this book is an amazing finale to the series. Highly recommended by me.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comment here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Mary Poppins Returns (2018) in Movies
Jan 9, 2019 (Updated Jan 9, 2019)
Emily Blunt & Lin-Manuel Miranda (1 more)
An Incredible Animated Sequence
Practically Perfect In Every Way?
I've never been a big Mary Poppins fan, but I went to see this because my girlfriend is and we both enjoyed it. I didn't go in expecting much, but this was a charming, harmless, family friendly time and I had fun with it. I think the fact that I am not a huge fan of the original was actually a benefit going in, because I wasn't constantly comparing the film to the OG.
First off, Emily Blunt did a sublime job in the title role. I am a huge fan of hers and she nails this role. To be honest from what I can remember from seeing the original when I was young, I think I prefer her to Julie Andrew's take on the character. Regardless, I don't think that there is any other actress working today that could have done a better job than she did.
Lin-Manuel Miranda is also fantastic as the Dick Van Dyke type character and does a good job of keeping the energy up and the plot moving forward throughout the movie. The lamp lighting sequence that he lead was one of the best in the film. The rest of the cast also do a decent job, except from the vastly overrated Meryl Streep, she was excruciatingly annoying and she felt unnecessarily shoehorned into the movie for no apparent reason.
The highlight for me though, was the beautiful and dynamic animated sequence that happens within the porcelain bowl. This whole sequence was incredible and really blew me away. I found it particularly mind blowing as an animator myself. There were many times that I was left asking myself how they managed to pull off certain things and it left me extremely impressed.
Overall, this is a fun, family friendly romp that in my opinion surpasses the original. It is in some aspects a soft reboot, but there enough call-backs and homages to the OG version that it works as a sequel and will please long time fans of the first movie, but it will also hopefully entertain a whole new generation and Emily Blunt fills the big shoes left by her predecessor remarkably well.
First off, Emily Blunt did a sublime job in the title role. I am a huge fan of hers and she nails this role. To be honest from what I can remember from seeing the original when I was young, I think I prefer her to Julie Andrew's take on the character. Regardless, I don't think that there is any other actress working today that could have done a better job than she did.
Lin-Manuel Miranda is also fantastic as the Dick Van Dyke type character and does a good job of keeping the energy up and the plot moving forward throughout the movie. The lamp lighting sequence that he lead was one of the best in the film. The rest of the cast also do a decent job, except from the vastly overrated Meryl Streep, she was excruciatingly annoying and she felt unnecessarily shoehorned into the movie for no apparent reason.
The highlight for me though, was the beautiful and dynamic animated sequence that happens within the porcelain bowl. This whole sequence was incredible and really blew me away. I found it particularly mind blowing as an animator myself. There were many times that I was left asking myself how they managed to pull off certain things and it left me extremely impressed.
Overall, this is a fun, family friendly romp that in my opinion surpasses the original. It is in some aspects a soft reboot, but there enough call-backs and homages to the OG version that it works as a sequel and will please long time fans of the first movie, but it will also hopefully entertain a whole new generation and Emily Blunt fills the big shoes left by her predecessor remarkably well.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Kid Who Would Be King (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Let's start by saying that this film is a wonderfully entertaining adventure, I don't remember the last time this sort of story graced our screens. I've always been a fan of myths and legends and this didn't disappoint.
I'm not really sure how well myths and legends are known these days, they were one of my favourite things as a child but the topic seems to go in and out of favour. I thought it was a nice start to the whole film to show a summary of the King Arthur legend, and the graphic novel style made a nice link throughout.
There are lots of great things about the film but I think my favourite is how they managed to align the fantasy and reality. The transitions between night and day, the depths of Morgana's prison and her army of the undead are all top notch. There's only one brief moment where I grumbled and that was during Morgana's transformation, she briefly resembles a poor quality Voldemort.
Louis Ashbourne Serkis gives a great performance as Alex our reluctant hero and he's supported by some solid acting, young and old(er). The little comedy duo of Alex and Bedders is so cute comparing themselves to Frodo and Sam *squee*. The adult cast was on form too, although we don't get to see much of Denise Gough, Noma Dumezweni and Mark Bonnar, which made me a little sad. Rebecca Ferguson fairs better with screen time and managed to get the evil thing down, she was particularly menacing as Morgana. Lastly cast-wise is obviously Patrick Stewart, I love him but this film made me a little glum. Firstly because young Merlin got more screen time and secondly because he looks old... that's not supposed to happen!!
At two hours it's quite long for a family film but it actually feels like it should have been longer. The ending of the film just sort of happens, the school montage and fight scenes feel relatively short when considered as part of the whole. I honestly think that the film could have taken an extra twenty minutes or so to properly complete that ending.
What you should do
You should definitely see this film, it's good old fashioned fun for all ages
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I could do with a personal Lady of the Lake who can bring me my things when they go missing.
I'm not really sure how well myths and legends are known these days, they were one of my favourite things as a child but the topic seems to go in and out of favour. I thought it was a nice start to the whole film to show a summary of the King Arthur legend, and the graphic novel style made a nice link throughout.
There are lots of great things about the film but I think my favourite is how they managed to align the fantasy and reality. The transitions between night and day, the depths of Morgana's prison and her army of the undead are all top notch. There's only one brief moment where I grumbled and that was during Morgana's transformation, she briefly resembles a poor quality Voldemort.
Louis Ashbourne Serkis gives a great performance as Alex our reluctant hero and he's supported by some solid acting, young and old(er). The little comedy duo of Alex and Bedders is so cute comparing themselves to Frodo and Sam *squee*. The adult cast was on form too, although we don't get to see much of Denise Gough, Noma Dumezweni and Mark Bonnar, which made me a little sad. Rebecca Ferguson fairs better with screen time and managed to get the evil thing down, she was particularly menacing as Morgana. Lastly cast-wise is obviously Patrick Stewart, I love him but this film made me a little glum. Firstly because young Merlin got more screen time and secondly because he looks old... that's not supposed to happen!!
At two hours it's quite long for a family film but it actually feels like it should have been longer. The ending of the film just sort of happens, the school montage and fight scenes feel relatively short when considered as part of the whole. I honestly think that the film could have taken an extra twenty minutes or so to properly complete that ending.
What you should do
You should definitely see this film, it's good old fashioned fun for all ages
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I could do with a personal Lady of the Lake who can bring me my things when they go missing.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated A Star Is Born (1976) in Movies
Jun 30, 2020
Decent, But Hoped For More
When a local singer is discovered by a big time star, she finds that her time in the spotlight isn’t all she expected it to be.
Acting: 10
While I wasn’t in love with Barbara Streisand’s lead role of Esther Hoffman, she did alright for the most part. I’ll just say it was a little bit better than bearable. I’m never one to say an actor has to knock it out of the park, but they can’t be so bad as to take me out of the movie. For any of her shortcomings Kris Kristofferson made up for it playing the alcoholic musician John Norman Howard. He definitely carries the chemistry between the two.
Beginning: 10
Solid kickoff as you are immediately engaged with John’s character and his shortcomings as a man. You can see this guy is a trainwreck and anyone that gets close to him will probably be brought down too. While I have seen the previous two versions before this one, it made me interested to see how they would tackle his struggles.
Characters: 8
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
For what it’s worth, I did like what director Frank R. Pierson did in showing Esther’s life at home versus what the glamorous life looked like. Before she makes it big, and even in some of the quieter moments, there is peace, shots of calm and quiet. The road life is an entirely different animal, however, as heaps of fans cheer her on at every turn and you can feel just how overwhelming it is. I appreciated that stark contrast.
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 7
Throughout its 141-minute duration, A Star is Born definitely has its shining spots. Who doesn’t love a good rags to riches story? In a twist you can see coming for some time, this is a rags to riches to mortal endings story. I enjoyed watching her rise to stardom although some parts were truly unbearable with John’s character being such a total anus. It was over-the-top at times and took some of the enjoyment away.
Memorability: 2
Pace: 6
Plot: 8
Resolution: 4
Overall: 72
Of the four versions, this is hands-down the weakest A Star is Born. It’s not a horrible movie and I definitely wouldn’t steer someone away from checking it out at least once. For me, it just doesn’t stand the test of time.
Acting: 10
While I wasn’t in love with Barbara Streisand’s lead role of Esther Hoffman, she did alright for the most part. I’ll just say it was a little bit better than bearable. I’m never one to say an actor has to knock it out of the park, but they can’t be so bad as to take me out of the movie. For any of her shortcomings Kris Kristofferson made up for it playing the alcoholic musician John Norman Howard. He definitely carries the chemistry between the two.
Beginning: 10
Solid kickoff as you are immediately engaged with John’s character and his shortcomings as a man. You can see this guy is a trainwreck and anyone that gets close to him will probably be brought down too. While I have seen the previous two versions before this one, it made me interested to see how they would tackle his struggles.
Characters: 8
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
For what it’s worth, I did like what director Frank R. Pierson did in showing Esther’s life at home versus what the glamorous life looked like. Before she makes it big, and even in some of the quieter moments, there is peace, shots of calm and quiet. The road life is an entirely different animal, however, as heaps of fans cheer her on at every turn and you can feel just how overwhelming it is. I appreciated that stark contrast.
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 7
Throughout its 141-minute duration, A Star is Born definitely has its shining spots. Who doesn’t love a good rags to riches story? In a twist you can see coming for some time, this is a rags to riches to mortal endings story. I enjoyed watching her rise to stardom although some parts were truly unbearable with John’s character being such a total anus. It was over-the-top at times and took some of the enjoyment away.
Memorability: 2
Pace: 6
Plot: 8
Resolution: 4
Overall: 72
Of the four versions, this is hands-down the weakest A Star is Born. It’s not a horrible movie and I definitely wouldn’t steer someone away from checking it out at least once. For me, it just doesn’t stand the test of time.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Rental (2020) in Movies
Feb 28, 2021
After saying in my review of Tone Deaf that there are a lot of films that seem to be very similar coming out, you'd think I'd choose different films to watch... evidently not.
Charlie and Mina's hard work is finally paying off and they book a holiday home for some well deserved downtime. When they arrive with their partners they attempt to settle into the idyllic setting. But there's something not quite right about their host and their relaxing weekend starts to take a turn.
So... The Rental, Tone Deaf, The Intruder... People go to homes with weird owners and bad things happen. Something grabbed me about this one, it was a little different to the others and I'm glad I didn't dismiss it for the initial similarities.
I think the success for The Rental is its serious tone. In the other two films I mentioned we have an underlying humour, whether intentional or from overacting. It's much more of a thriller that made for some compelling moments.
Although the main cast are very familiar for various things, the "star power" didn't outshine the film around it. It's well balanced, and the chemistry between the four of them is incredibly good. The characters themselves aren't all that exciting though, and normally that would be a massive problem. While it may have been better to have something a little more thrilling happening with them, it actually leaves the film to do its thing around them.
The film was noticeably quiet to me, though the music did pipe up at key points to good effect. (Apart from one point that felt entirely out of place.) The pinpointed music combined with the location worked well together to add to the suspense as the film ramps up.
At only 88 minutes I worried about what a thriller could do in that time, but I needn't have. The build up across the film led well into the "action" of the ending, and that ending really appealed to me for how it dealt with everything that came before it. While I don't think The Rental is going to become a must see movie, it was definitely a pleasant surprise and worth the time I spent watching it.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-rental-movie-review.html
Charlie and Mina's hard work is finally paying off and they book a holiday home for some well deserved downtime. When they arrive with their partners they attempt to settle into the idyllic setting. But there's something not quite right about their host and their relaxing weekend starts to take a turn.
So... The Rental, Tone Deaf, The Intruder... People go to homes with weird owners and bad things happen. Something grabbed me about this one, it was a little different to the others and I'm glad I didn't dismiss it for the initial similarities.
I think the success for The Rental is its serious tone. In the other two films I mentioned we have an underlying humour, whether intentional or from overacting. It's much more of a thriller that made for some compelling moments.
Although the main cast are very familiar for various things, the "star power" didn't outshine the film around it. It's well balanced, and the chemistry between the four of them is incredibly good. The characters themselves aren't all that exciting though, and normally that would be a massive problem. While it may have been better to have something a little more thrilling happening with them, it actually leaves the film to do its thing around them.
The film was noticeably quiet to me, though the music did pipe up at key points to good effect. (Apart from one point that felt entirely out of place.) The pinpointed music combined with the location worked well together to add to the suspense as the film ramps up.
At only 88 minutes I worried about what a thriller could do in that time, but I needn't have. The build up across the film led well into the "action" of the ending, and that ending really appealed to me for how it dealt with everything that came before it. While I don't think The Rental is going to become a must see movie, it was definitely a pleasant surprise and worth the time I spent watching it.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-rental-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Irishman (2019) in Movies
Nov 30, 2019
Delivers What Is Expected
Like eating comfort food on a cold, wintery day, sitting down to catch the latest Scorsese/DeNiro mob movie filled me with a warmth that was satisfying for it's familiarity. It is a film landscape mined by professionals who know this genre of movie well.
There is a terrific film in this 3 1/2 hour epic - if only "Marty" would have trimmed the fat to find it.
Telling the real-life story (with some conjecture and fabrications), THE IRISHMAN tells the tale of...well...Irishman Frank Sheeran (Robert DeNiro) a working stiff who rises in the ranks of mobster Russell Buffalino (Joe Pesci) to be one of his chief enforcers and the personal bodyguard to Jimmy Hoffa (Al Paciino).
In the lead, DeNiro commands the screen like the DeNiro of old. His Frank Sheeran is menacing, razor-focused on his objectives. You never question Frank's loyalties and his ability to keep silent. DeNiro shows this by be being silent for a good part of this film, even though he is on screen for most of it. He is a commanding force that requires that we pay attention to him.
It was good to see Pesci back onscreen as Russell Buffalino. His mob boss is pragmatic, making decisions sternly and expecting his people to follow them, no questions asked. His presence on the screen is almost as commanding as DeNiro's and I wouldn't be surprised to see DeNiro (Best Actor) and Pesci (Best Supporting Actor) be in the mix come Oscar time.
In lesser, (almost cameo), roles - but faring very well - is a "who's who" of character actors, Harvey Keitel (who I would have LOVED to have seen much, much more in this film), Ray Romano, Bobby Canavale, Jesse Pleimens and Anna Paquin, I'm sure all jumped at the chance to appear - however briefly - in a Scorsese mob epic.
Faring less well in this film is Al Pacio as Jimmy Hoffa. He is back to his "yelling Al Pacino" ways of films like SCENT OF A WOMAN. His Hoffa is pretty one note and, consequently, his scenes with DeNiro are ineffective mostly because Pacino is chewing up the scenery (and yelling) while DeNiro is sitting silent and staring and listening to Pacino. This was a major disappointment for me, but (fortunately), Hoffa is in only about 1/3 of this long film, so while it hampered my enjoyment of the film, it didn't ruin it.
Credit (and blame) for all of this goes to master Director Martin Scorsese who has mined these waters more successfully in CASINO, THE DEPARTED and GOODFELLAS (his best film, IMO). This film is a loving pastiche to these types of films and a bygone era - and he chose to make it for NETFLIX for he wanted to make a sprawling epic and take his time in telling the story he wanted to tell. This is evidenced in the 3 1/2 hour length of this film, which if filled with long tracking shots set to a backdrop of Italian crooners singing old standards. It's a throwback to a different time and place, one that these players know well.
Scorsese has stated the he only decided to make this film because the "de-aging" software the he used to make DeNiro and Pesci look 30 years younger was "good enough" to use. And I would agree with that statement. The de-aging of these 2 (and others) is "good enough", in some scenes I forgot I was watching a de-aged DeNiro and Pesci, while in some other scenes, I could spot the trick. Again, it was "good enough" and not distracting (unless you were looking to make it distracting, then you probably found what you were looking for).
But for me - a fan of these types of films, I was not disappointed. It was about what I expected it to be. If you were looking for something different and new, look elsewhere, you will be disappointed.
Letter Grade: B+
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
There is a terrific film in this 3 1/2 hour epic - if only "Marty" would have trimmed the fat to find it.
Telling the real-life story (with some conjecture and fabrications), THE IRISHMAN tells the tale of...well...Irishman Frank Sheeran (Robert DeNiro) a working stiff who rises in the ranks of mobster Russell Buffalino (Joe Pesci) to be one of his chief enforcers and the personal bodyguard to Jimmy Hoffa (Al Paciino).
In the lead, DeNiro commands the screen like the DeNiro of old. His Frank Sheeran is menacing, razor-focused on his objectives. You never question Frank's loyalties and his ability to keep silent. DeNiro shows this by be being silent for a good part of this film, even though he is on screen for most of it. He is a commanding force that requires that we pay attention to him.
It was good to see Pesci back onscreen as Russell Buffalino. His mob boss is pragmatic, making decisions sternly and expecting his people to follow them, no questions asked. His presence on the screen is almost as commanding as DeNiro's and I wouldn't be surprised to see DeNiro (Best Actor) and Pesci (Best Supporting Actor) be in the mix come Oscar time.
In lesser, (almost cameo), roles - but faring very well - is a "who's who" of character actors, Harvey Keitel (who I would have LOVED to have seen much, much more in this film), Ray Romano, Bobby Canavale, Jesse Pleimens and Anna Paquin, I'm sure all jumped at the chance to appear - however briefly - in a Scorsese mob epic.
Faring less well in this film is Al Pacio as Jimmy Hoffa. He is back to his "yelling Al Pacino" ways of films like SCENT OF A WOMAN. His Hoffa is pretty one note and, consequently, his scenes with DeNiro are ineffective mostly because Pacino is chewing up the scenery (and yelling) while DeNiro is sitting silent and staring and listening to Pacino. This was a major disappointment for me, but (fortunately), Hoffa is in only about 1/3 of this long film, so while it hampered my enjoyment of the film, it didn't ruin it.
Credit (and blame) for all of this goes to master Director Martin Scorsese who has mined these waters more successfully in CASINO, THE DEPARTED and GOODFELLAS (his best film, IMO). This film is a loving pastiche to these types of films and a bygone era - and he chose to make it for NETFLIX for he wanted to make a sprawling epic and take his time in telling the story he wanted to tell. This is evidenced in the 3 1/2 hour length of this film, which if filled with long tracking shots set to a backdrop of Italian crooners singing old standards. It's a throwback to a different time and place, one that these players know well.
Scorsese has stated the he only decided to make this film because the "de-aging" software the he used to make DeNiro and Pesci look 30 years younger was "good enough" to use. And I would agree with that statement. The de-aging of these 2 (and others) is "good enough", in some scenes I forgot I was watching a de-aged DeNiro and Pesci, while in some other scenes, I could spot the trick. Again, it was "good enough" and not distracting (unless you were looking to make it distracting, then you probably found what you were looking for).
But for me - a fan of these types of films, I was not disappointed. It was about what I expected it to be. If you were looking for something different and new, look elsewhere, you will be disappointed.
Letter Grade: B+
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Endless (2020) in Movies
Nov 22, 2020
The synopsis was suitably intriguing, but there's always a slight worry that a fantasy romance is going to be a little cheesy.
Riley and Chris are the definition of young love, their future together is almost certain, until a car accident takes Chris. But Chris isn't gone yet, he's stuck on Earth in limbo. When he finds he can communicate with Riley, their love lives on, but are the consequences of living this way a price they can pay?
So, Endless is exactly what it sounds like, ghost boyfriend hangs around living girlfriend and they learn things about themselves... because that's what these films do. The opening gives you the impression you're about to see the film love child of a Disney Channel Original movie and a Hallmark movie, and that's not far off what we get... except it probably could have done with a bit more humour injected into it, and maybe a smidge less drama.
Riley and Chris are our young leading duo, they're in love, they want their future to be together... and yet somehow he is baffled by her life choices with college. The opening of the film is a montage that shows this perfect couply life, and it's very much used to cover up the fact that the main bulk of the film skips over this development between them. That would be fine if it wasn't for the fact that our first big interaction with them is basically an argument about something that they would have already talked about had they been this couple we'd seen portrayed. So not only are we starting the film with a scenario that seems contrary to the life we're shown, but we're also confronted with hostility between them which gives us no chance to get to know either one and "be on their side" through the rest of the film.
I was astounded to see that this film is only 1 hour 35... I can already sense that many people will be making jokes about this film's title and the runtime (because I can't be the only one who feels things about this film), it really did feel longer so I can't blame them for it. That does also go some way to explain bits that seem to happen very suddenly, I'm not sure if they've written it this way or if it's been cut down, but it left me with an odd feeling at times.
When it comes to acting I'm having trouble separating it from the characters and the script. Many of the characters have such a swift change in emotion that I imagined someone behind the camera was shouting "Now you're angry!" at them randomly. No one seems to be immune, even DeRon Horton, who struck me as doing the best job of his piece, has a mad moment that didn't seem to fit with the character or the story.
Endless honestly seems to have a bit of an identity crisis, I couldn't see a clear goal for what the final product was trying to be. Was it the story of them as a couple? Was it the story of Chris coming to terms with his passing? Or was it the story of Riley finding herself and her passion through grief? It appeared to be all of those with varying importance throughout.
I'm aware I'm rambling a little at this point... I'll try to get a move on!
With Chris being dead they've decided they need to capture the spirit world on screen. It's certainly clear when this happens with its hazy glimmer, but I don't think they needed to do that at all, it's a little over the top. As is the addition of the traditional ghost-passing-through-things effect. That was indeed a little cheesy in this drama and is one of the main reasons I stated above that it could have embraced some more humour. Something that particularly bugged me with the effects though is the fact they paid money to give us a Snapchat filter but didn't pay someone to take out the sound of Chris and Jordan walking on gravel.
For all my griping though, I did find it an emotional watch, sadly that couldn't pull it back from the many problems I encountered along the way. An extra ten minutes to expand on their relationship would have helped it along a little, but I think its biggest problem is the inconsistency that plagues us throughout with the characters and the storylines.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/endless-movie-review.html
Riley and Chris are the definition of young love, their future together is almost certain, until a car accident takes Chris. But Chris isn't gone yet, he's stuck on Earth in limbo. When he finds he can communicate with Riley, their love lives on, but are the consequences of living this way a price they can pay?
So, Endless is exactly what it sounds like, ghost boyfriend hangs around living girlfriend and they learn things about themselves... because that's what these films do. The opening gives you the impression you're about to see the film love child of a Disney Channel Original movie and a Hallmark movie, and that's not far off what we get... except it probably could have done with a bit more humour injected into it, and maybe a smidge less drama.
Riley and Chris are our young leading duo, they're in love, they want their future to be together... and yet somehow he is baffled by her life choices with college. The opening of the film is a montage that shows this perfect couply life, and it's very much used to cover up the fact that the main bulk of the film skips over this development between them. That would be fine if it wasn't for the fact that our first big interaction with them is basically an argument about something that they would have already talked about had they been this couple we'd seen portrayed. So not only are we starting the film with a scenario that seems contrary to the life we're shown, but we're also confronted with hostility between them which gives us no chance to get to know either one and "be on their side" through the rest of the film.
I was astounded to see that this film is only 1 hour 35... I can already sense that many people will be making jokes about this film's title and the runtime (because I can't be the only one who feels things about this film), it really did feel longer so I can't blame them for it. That does also go some way to explain bits that seem to happen very suddenly, I'm not sure if they've written it this way or if it's been cut down, but it left me with an odd feeling at times.
When it comes to acting I'm having trouble separating it from the characters and the script. Many of the characters have such a swift change in emotion that I imagined someone behind the camera was shouting "Now you're angry!" at them randomly. No one seems to be immune, even DeRon Horton, who struck me as doing the best job of his piece, has a mad moment that didn't seem to fit with the character or the story.
Endless honestly seems to have a bit of an identity crisis, I couldn't see a clear goal for what the final product was trying to be. Was it the story of them as a couple? Was it the story of Chris coming to terms with his passing? Or was it the story of Riley finding herself and her passion through grief? It appeared to be all of those with varying importance throughout.
I'm aware I'm rambling a little at this point... I'll try to get a move on!
With Chris being dead they've decided they need to capture the spirit world on screen. It's certainly clear when this happens with its hazy glimmer, but I don't think they needed to do that at all, it's a little over the top. As is the addition of the traditional ghost-passing-through-things effect. That was indeed a little cheesy in this drama and is one of the main reasons I stated above that it could have embraced some more humour. Something that particularly bugged me with the effects though is the fact they paid money to give us a Snapchat filter but didn't pay someone to take out the sound of Chris and Jordan walking on gravel.
For all my griping though, I did find it an emotional watch, sadly that couldn't pull it back from the many problems I encountered along the way. An extra ten minutes to expand on their relationship would have helped it along a little, but I think its biggest problem is the inconsistency that plagues us throughout with the characters and the storylines.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/endless-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) in Movies
Jul 5, 2018
Does what a good sequel needs to do
I have to admit that I really liked, but did not LOVE the first Guardians of the Galaxy film, so when I entered the local cineplex to check out Volume 2, I had lowered my expectations, figuring I'd find a film that was filled with "sequel-itis" and be just a step down from the previous film.
Boy...was I wrong.
I LOVED GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, VOLUME 2. This sequel succeeded in doing what a good sequel needs to do - take the premise, feel, characters and style of the first film and build on it.
And build on it, it does. Director James Gunn states that the first Guardians was about "a family coming together", and the 2nd movie is about "a family staying together" - and this is a family I want around and staying together.
Starting with the "core 5" - StarLord (Chris Pratt), Gamora (Zoe Saldona), Drax (Dave Bautista), Rocket Racoon (voiced by Bradley Cooper) and Baby Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel). These are all welcome characters that grow from the first movie to the 2nd, each with a purpose in this film and with something important to do. I enjoyed seeing them all again. Special notice should be paid to Bautista, who's Drax left me somewhat cold in the first film. Here he is a delight. Add to this returning characters Yondu (Michael Rooker) and Nebula (Karen Gillan) as well as newcomers Mantis (Pom Klementieff), Ayesha (Elizabeth Debicki) and Ego (Kurt Russell) and you have an ensemble that is easy and fun to watch.
At some point in the film, I thought to myself "now, THIS is a comic book film!" and I think it is because of the action and the visuals. The action moves fast and furious all the while populating a Universe (literally) that is eye-popping and interesting to watch. Director Gunn keeps things moving along, never staying too long in one place whilst avoiding the shaky-cam action. I always knew where I was in an action scene, what the characters are working on or for and what the outcomes might be. It is a refreshing change from the disorienting "shaky-cam" that the Bourne movies have wrought.
And, of course, nothing can top the soundtrack. The first film's "Awesome Mix" was a strong, joyous part of that movie. "Awesome Mix, Vol. 2" picks right up where the first one left off. The songs picked for this film did not disappoint.
Nor did much of this film. I enjoyed myself - and the antics of this gang - from start to finish, including the 5(!) extra scenes in the credits.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Boy...was I wrong.
I LOVED GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, VOLUME 2. This sequel succeeded in doing what a good sequel needs to do - take the premise, feel, characters and style of the first film and build on it.
And build on it, it does. Director James Gunn states that the first Guardians was about "a family coming together", and the 2nd movie is about "a family staying together" - and this is a family I want around and staying together.
Starting with the "core 5" - StarLord (Chris Pratt), Gamora (Zoe Saldona), Drax (Dave Bautista), Rocket Racoon (voiced by Bradley Cooper) and Baby Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel). These are all welcome characters that grow from the first movie to the 2nd, each with a purpose in this film and with something important to do. I enjoyed seeing them all again. Special notice should be paid to Bautista, who's Drax left me somewhat cold in the first film. Here he is a delight. Add to this returning characters Yondu (Michael Rooker) and Nebula (Karen Gillan) as well as newcomers Mantis (Pom Klementieff), Ayesha (Elizabeth Debicki) and Ego (Kurt Russell) and you have an ensemble that is easy and fun to watch.
At some point in the film, I thought to myself "now, THIS is a comic book film!" and I think it is because of the action and the visuals. The action moves fast and furious all the while populating a Universe (literally) that is eye-popping and interesting to watch. Director Gunn keeps things moving along, never staying too long in one place whilst avoiding the shaky-cam action. I always knew where I was in an action scene, what the characters are working on or for and what the outcomes might be. It is a refreshing change from the disorienting "shaky-cam" that the Bourne movies have wrought.
And, of course, nothing can top the soundtrack. The first film's "Awesome Mix" was a strong, joyous part of that movie. "Awesome Mix, Vol. 2" picks right up where the first one left off. The songs picked for this film did not disappoint.
Nor did much of this film. I enjoyed myself - and the antics of this gang - from start to finish, including the 5(!) extra scenes in the credits.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Fred (860 KP) rated Dumbo (2019) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
This is how you ruin a classic
Dumbo is one of my favorite Disney films. The original, not this crap. When told that his film was not long enough to be considered a full-length movie & that he would have to add 10 more minutes or so, Disney said "No. It's perfect the way it is." And he was right. The people who made this live-action remake apparently never heard that story. It's almost 2 hours long. The original story of the first film is done in about the first 20 minutes of this film, then it's an original sequel, basically.
The first & main problem of the film is the most obvious. The focus on the human characters over the animal characters. There are no talking animals in this one. Sure, Dumbo didn't talk, but he had Timothy mouse with him to speak for him. There's no stork, the bully elephants are gone, even the racist, but very entertaining crows are completely gone.
Second problem: Some of the music from the original film is here, but instrumental versions. Only "Baby Mine" is sung. We hear a clip of "Casey Jr." at the beginning. At the very end of the credits, we hear a bit of "When I See a Elephant Fly", but no "Look Out For Mr. Stork". But the biggest mistake was what they did with "Pink Elephants on Parade" In the original film, Dumbo accidentally drinks some champagne & gets drunk. He then blows bubbles & the bubbles take shape & thus begins one of the greatest scenes in Disney history. The bubbles take the shape of dancing, skating & tromping elephants. The scene is a nightmare & probably scared some kids in the day. The song itself is both fun & creepy. This should be perfect Tim Burton stuff, but in this film, it is not. In this film, circus performers are creating giant bubbles & somehow they are taking the shape of the elephants. In fact, they're copies of the elephants (and camel) from the original film. The song plays, but again, no lyrics. It's also not very well directed. Instead of looking like a nightmare, they keep cutting to Dumbo, watching the performers, with a smile.
And that brings me to another problem. Tim Burton. Like most Tim Burton movies, it looks fantastic, but it's just boring. The story is boring & unoriginal (Free Willy anyone?) I didn't get to like any of the human characters to care. They kind of just go through the motions. Dumbo himself lacks character & I never really felt for him.
I know Disney is set on remaking their classics & I haven't seen any before (and probably will not see anymore after this one). It breaks my heart to see Disney reduced to this sort of thing. I'll stick with the originals, thank you.
The first & main problem of the film is the most obvious. The focus on the human characters over the animal characters. There are no talking animals in this one. Sure, Dumbo didn't talk, but he had Timothy mouse with him to speak for him. There's no stork, the bully elephants are gone, even the racist, but very entertaining crows are completely gone.
Second problem: Some of the music from the original film is here, but instrumental versions. Only "Baby Mine" is sung. We hear a clip of "Casey Jr." at the beginning. At the very end of the credits, we hear a bit of "When I See a Elephant Fly", but no "Look Out For Mr. Stork". But the biggest mistake was what they did with "Pink Elephants on Parade" In the original film, Dumbo accidentally drinks some champagne & gets drunk. He then blows bubbles & the bubbles take shape & thus begins one of the greatest scenes in Disney history. The bubbles take the shape of dancing, skating & tromping elephants. The scene is a nightmare & probably scared some kids in the day. The song itself is both fun & creepy. This should be perfect Tim Burton stuff, but in this film, it is not. In this film, circus performers are creating giant bubbles & somehow they are taking the shape of the elephants. In fact, they're copies of the elephants (and camel) from the original film. The song plays, but again, no lyrics. It's also not very well directed. Instead of looking like a nightmare, they keep cutting to Dumbo, watching the performers, with a smile.
And that brings me to another problem. Tim Burton. Like most Tim Burton movies, it looks fantastic, but it's just boring. The story is boring & unoriginal (Free Willy anyone?) I didn't get to like any of the human characters to care. They kind of just go through the motions. Dumbo himself lacks character & I never really felt for him.
I know Disney is set on remaking their classics & I haven't seen any before (and probably will not see anymore after this one). It breaks my heart to see Disney reduced to this sort of thing. I'll stick with the originals, thank you.
ClareR (6054 KP) rated The Turn of The Key in Books
Aug 18, 2019
I’ve read some pretty spooky books in my time, but none have had me on the edge of my seat in quite the same way as Turn of the Key by Ruth Ware did! There’s an underlying menace in this book - nothing explicit - and I think that makes it all the more frightening. I can’t even tell you the amount of times I told the lead character, a Nanny from London, to just pack up, leave the children with the housekeeper, and go home!
So, as I’ve already begun to say, Rowan is a Nanny who has been employed to look after the children of a wealthy husband and wife architecture team. They work away from home, and need someone to take care of their young children (plus a 14 year old who comes home from boarding school at the weekend). It all seems very rushed, and when Rowan turns up to take her post, Sandra (the mum) drops the bombshell that they will both be leaving for a week the next day. The children haven’t even had a chance to get to know Rowan with their mum there! Sandra leaves a huge folder with instructions for EVERYTHING regarding the children, and a very quick lesson on ‘Happy’, the house computer system (kind of like Alexa, but less chatty and far less easy to use!). I would’ve said something here, but Rowan seems to be desperate for the job. She seems to be a nice enough person, but she does make allusions to her temper, and does seem to lose it with the children quite a bit. But I’m not surprised - she is woken up every night, either by bumps and pacing sounds, or Happy seemingly having a huge glitch and playing loud music whilst turning on lights throughout the house in the early hours. Well, Maddie, the 8 year old, did warn her about the displeasure of the ghosts at her interview.....
I loved how creepy this was - I didn’t know what was real and what Rowan was imagining because of sleep deprivation, but it made all of the days seem to merge together. You could feel how tired and scared she must have been.
The last fifth of the book was something else though. I can’t think of many books where I’ve actually told a character out loud “No!” (It made my dogs stop and look!). The last few (yes, FEW!) revelations and twists kept the tension running right up to the end.
Have I said that I loved this book? This is my second Ruth Ware book, and it certainly won’t be my last - this is even better than The Death of Mrs Westaway (if that’s possible!).
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for serialising this book - you did it again! Another absolutely cracking choice!
So, as I’ve already begun to say, Rowan is a Nanny who has been employed to look after the children of a wealthy husband and wife architecture team. They work away from home, and need someone to take care of their young children (plus a 14 year old who comes home from boarding school at the weekend). It all seems very rushed, and when Rowan turns up to take her post, Sandra (the mum) drops the bombshell that they will both be leaving for a week the next day. The children haven’t even had a chance to get to know Rowan with their mum there! Sandra leaves a huge folder with instructions for EVERYTHING regarding the children, and a very quick lesson on ‘Happy’, the house computer system (kind of like Alexa, but less chatty and far less easy to use!). I would’ve said something here, but Rowan seems to be desperate for the job. She seems to be a nice enough person, but she does make allusions to her temper, and does seem to lose it with the children quite a bit. But I’m not surprised - she is woken up every night, either by bumps and pacing sounds, or Happy seemingly having a huge glitch and playing loud music whilst turning on lights throughout the house in the early hours. Well, Maddie, the 8 year old, did warn her about the displeasure of the ghosts at her interview.....
I loved how creepy this was - I didn’t know what was real and what Rowan was imagining because of sleep deprivation, but it made all of the days seem to merge together. You could feel how tired and scared she must have been.
The last fifth of the book was something else though. I can’t think of many books where I’ve actually told a character out loud “No!” (It made my dogs stop and look!). The last few (yes, FEW!) revelations and twists kept the tension running right up to the end.
Have I said that I loved this book? This is my second Ruth Ware book, and it certainly won’t be my last - this is even better than The Death of Mrs Westaway (if that’s possible!).
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for serialising this book - you did it again! Another absolutely cracking choice!