Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Frozen II (2019) in Movies
Nov 30, 2019
Anna's character development (1 more)
Reindeer
Songs (1 more)
Olaf
Having arrived at the cinema on Saturday afternoon I was very glad I changed my plans to see this after work on Friday. The foyer was packed with children and it looked like a costume shop had a Disney special running. My 3D screening the day before had been a much more pleasant affair.
Arendelle is thriving and its people have never been happier, but Queen Elsa is feeling an emptiness that no amount of family and friends can seem to solve. When she starts to hear a song on the wind she knows she must follow its calling.
The song leads them to a place that Elsa and Anna have only ever heard about from their parents, a forest shrouded in impenetrable mist, a place that holds more questions as well as answers.
Firstly, 3D... big thumbs down. I certainly wouldn't be paying extra to see it, it's hardly ever worth it but it was the easiest way to have a screening that wasn't rammed with munchkins in cheap shiny costumes singing Let It Go.
There's always a certain amount of enjoyment to be had from a Disney film, I would say that automatically most are looking at 2.5/5 rating regardless... but coming out of Frozen II I was concerned that this one had dropped the ball.
The characters, our favourite things next to the songs... well mine at least, were hollow representations of what we saw in the first film. The peripheral characters were great so that thankfully helped everything move along well. Sadly Olaf thoroughly annoyed me with his existential crisis but while there were some heartfelt moments they didn't make up for that.
Out of the other main characters it was only Anna that had made any improvement from the original. (Sven of course is comedy gold, that's never in question.) She was stronger and more impressive, she seemed to have a lot more "role model" this time around. It also felt like there was a lot more Kristen Bell in her this time like she was allowed to have more input into Anna, she seems a lot funnier.
It is amazing just how much of an impact Disney songs can have, going in and out of the cinema at the moment you'll generally hear someone singing Let It Go or making some kind of pun, and here's where we come to my second major problem... the songs of Frozen II. There's not a single catchy tune. Much like Mary Poppins Returns I came out with original songs in my head and not the new ones. Possibly the worst thing of all is that they seemingly splice a boyband video for Kristoff right into the middle of the film. The only thing to take away from it is that reindeer are very talented.
Next, don't worry, this is the last one... probably. While the animation is the usual Disney quality there are a couple of moments (one of which is in the trailer) that when I saw them on the big screen looked terrible. Elsa fills the sky with ice crystals and they hand there and visually it's really not very good. For spoilery reasons I understand why they did it but it wasn't in keeping with the rest of the style enough to make it fit in.
The story itself was quite a nice one, it gives background context and opens up the Frozen universe for what I imagine will be a third film somewhere along the line. It covers the usual collection of things, betrayal, love, redemption, plenty of the usual Disney fodder.
Ultimately there's still a lot of good stuff in this and of course it's going to be entertaining. I don't think you could find a Disney film that wasn't, but for me the fact that Olaf and the songs were poor tarnished this one for me.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/frozen-ii-movie-review.html
Arendelle is thriving and its people have never been happier, but Queen Elsa is feeling an emptiness that no amount of family and friends can seem to solve. When she starts to hear a song on the wind she knows she must follow its calling.
The song leads them to a place that Elsa and Anna have only ever heard about from their parents, a forest shrouded in impenetrable mist, a place that holds more questions as well as answers.
Firstly, 3D... big thumbs down. I certainly wouldn't be paying extra to see it, it's hardly ever worth it but it was the easiest way to have a screening that wasn't rammed with munchkins in cheap shiny costumes singing Let It Go.
There's always a certain amount of enjoyment to be had from a Disney film, I would say that automatically most are looking at 2.5/5 rating regardless... but coming out of Frozen II I was concerned that this one had dropped the ball.
The characters, our favourite things next to the songs... well mine at least, were hollow representations of what we saw in the first film. The peripheral characters were great so that thankfully helped everything move along well. Sadly Olaf thoroughly annoyed me with his existential crisis but while there were some heartfelt moments they didn't make up for that.
Out of the other main characters it was only Anna that had made any improvement from the original. (Sven of course is comedy gold, that's never in question.) She was stronger and more impressive, she seemed to have a lot more "role model" this time around. It also felt like there was a lot more Kristen Bell in her this time like she was allowed to have more input into Anna, she seems a lot funnier.
It is amazing just how much of an impact Disney songs can have, going in and out of the cinema at the moment you'll generally hear someone singing Let It Go or making some kind of pun, and here's where we come to my second major problem... the songs of Frozen II. There's not a single catchy tune. Much like Mary Poppins Returns I came out with original songs in my head and not the new ones. Possibly the worst thing of all is that they seemingly splice a boyband video for Kristoff right into the middle of the film. The only thing to take away from it is that reindeer are very talented.
Next, don't worry, this is the last one... probably. While the animation is the usual Disney quality there are a couple of moments (one of which is in the trailer) that when I saw them on the big screen looked terrible. Elsa fills the sky with ice crystals and they hand there and visually it's really not very good. For spoilery reasons I understand why they did it but it wasn't in keeping with the rest of the style enough to make it fit in.
The story itself was quite a nice one, it gives background context and opens up the Frozen universe for what I imagine will be a third film somewhere along the line. It covers the usual collection of things, betrayal, love, redemption, plenty of the usual Disney fodder.
Ultimately there's still a lot of good stuff in this and of course it's going to be entertaining. I don't think you could find a Disney film that wasn't, but for me the fact that Olaf and the songs were poor tarnished this one for me.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/frozen-ii-movie-review.html
Melanie Caldicott (6 KP) rated The Lost Apothecary in Books
Apr 29, 2021
Thanks to the publishers and NetGalley for the ARe-copy in exchange for this honest review. You can also read my review on my blog - https:roamingthroughbooks.wordpress.com
The Lost Apothecary by Sarah Penner is a novel which switches between the storylines of a female apothecary in the 1790s who sells poisons to women to kill men who have wronged them and the present day, in which Caroline happens upon a clue which leads her to investigate the apothecary’s story.
Well, the idea of an apothecary dispensing poison for women to use for murder was enticing to say the least. This book had the potential to weave a thought-provoking, adventurous tale, developing themes about womanhood, oppression and doing evil for good. Sadly, for me it did not quite meet the mark.
The narratives switch between three characters, Caroline, our present-day historian, Nella, the apothecary, and Eliza, a servant girl who becomes friends with Nella over the course of the book.
As I said, I was expecting this novel to grapple with challenging themes, which could have been very emotive and dark. Yet, it turned out to be just a bland bit of light fiction never dwelling on anything for too long, skimming over the surface of most of the characters, their motives and their reactions and lacking depth on any of the parallel-running plotlines.
It is surprising how a book surrounding multiple murders, historical medicine and herbalism and women trapped in marriages with infidels, letches and rapists could be quite so vanilla. It was a pleasant enough read, but lacked the substance I was hoping for.
I found Nella, the apothecary to be a bit of an enigma. We do learn about her back story and gain some insight into her motives for dispensing the poisons. However, for a woman who was resourceful enough to construct the whole clandestine operation we meet her in a weakened state and I grew frustrated with how she seemed to fall into an oblivious kind of dream-like manner becoming swept along by circumstance with no clear influence on the events or people around her.
Eliza, was a naïve girl who met Nella whilst running an errand for her mistress. It is not really clear why the friendship between Nella and Eliza develops, it seems to be more for the convenience of the plot than due to real concrete reasoning. However, an intimacy develops between them which has the potential to bring new colour to the characters. But yet again, Penner seems to skim the surface of going to any depths and I was left feeling robbed of any insight into the emotional and kindred aspects of their friendship.
Finally, Caroline’s story in the present day brought a different perspective to the themes of womanhood running through this book. She parallels the wronged women of the 18th century by escaping to London on a trip she was supposed to take with her husband to celebrate their tenth wedding anniversary, but was instead travelling alone having discovered her husband had been having an affair.
I initially enjoyed Caroline’s historical investigations as they took her to The British Library and researching documents and newspapers there. As an avid genealogist I appreciated the details Penner gives about the sources of Caroline’s research and the challenges of finding the truth from historical documents.
Yet, again her story became somewhat contrived. It seemed unlikely that she would make some of the discoveries she did and her investigation became constructed around coincidence and unrealistic serendipity. Even the parallel storylines surrounding her relationship and those from the apothecary’s timeline seemed somewhat silly and phoney.
For me, the conclusion of the book yet again did not fully reconcile itself and therefore left me unmoved and feeling somewhat apathetic about the ending and the novel as a whole.
The Lost Apothecary by Sarah Penner is a novel which switches between the storylines of a female apothecary in the 1790s who sells poisons to women to kill men who have wronged them and the present day, in which Caroline happens upon a clue which leads her to investigate the apothecary’s story.
Well, the idea of an apothecary dispensing poison for women to use for murder was enticing to say the least. This book had the potential to weave a thought-provoking, adventurous tale, developing themes about womanhood, oppression and doing evil for good. Sadly, for me it did not quite meet the mark.
The narratives switch between three characters, Caroline, our present-day historian, Nella, the apothecary, and Eliza, a servant girl who becomes friends with Nella over the course of the book.
As I said, I was expecting this novel to grapple with challenging themes, which could have been very emotive and dark. Yet, it turned out to be just a bland bit of light fiction never dwelling on anything for too long, skimming over the surface of most of the characters, their motives and their reactions and lacking depth on any of the parallel-running plotlines.
It is surprising how a book surrounding multiple murders, historical medicine and herbalism and women trapped in marriages with infidels, letches and rapists could be quite so vanilla. It was a pleasant enough read, but lacked the substance I was hoping for.
I found Nella, the apothecary to be a bit of an enigma. We do learn about her back story and gain some insight into her motives for dispensing the poisons. However, for a woman who was resourceful enough to construct the whole clandestine operation we meet her in a weakened state and I grew frustrated with how she seemed to fall into an oblivious kind of dream-like manner becoming swept along by circumstance with no clear influence on the events or people around her.
Eliza, was a naïve girl who met Nella whilst running an errand for her mistress. It is not really clear why the friendship between Nella and Eliza develops, it seems to be more for the convenience of the plot than due to real concrete reasoning. However, an intimacy develops between them which has the potential to bring new colour to the characters. But yet again, Penner seems to skim the surface of going to any depths and I was left feeling robbed of any insight into the emotional and kindred aspects of their friendship.
Finally, Caroline’s story in the present day brought a different perspective to the themes of womanhood running through this book. She parallels the wronged women of the 18th century by escaping to London on a trip she was supposed to take with her husband to celebrate their tenth wedding anniversary, but was instead travelling alone having discovered her husband had been having an affair.
I initially enjoyed Caroline’s historical investigations as they took her to The British Library and researching documents and newspapers there. As an avid genealogist I appreciated the details Penner gives about the sources of Caroline’s research and the challenges of finding the truth from historical documents.
Yet, again her story became somewhat contrived. It seemed unlikely that she would make some of the discoveries she did and her investigation became constructed around coincidence and unrealistic serendipity. Even the parallel storylines surrounding her relationship and those from the apothecary’s timeline seemed somewhat silly and phoney.
For me, the conclusion of the book yet again did not fully reconcile itself and therefore left me unmoved and feeling somewhat apathetic about the ending and the novel as a whole.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Birds of Prey (And the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) (2020) in Movies
Oct 2, 2020 (Updated Oct 6, 2020)
Margot Robbie and her return to Harley Quinn (2 more)
Badass fight choreography
Some really cool action sequences
I wasn't a fan of the self narration the entire film. (2 more)
I also didn't like the Tarantino-ish way of chopping up the story and going back and forth the way they did.
I feel like every character in this movie was underutilized and could have been done better or had better character development.
Birds of a Feather Can't Stick Their Landing On This One
Contains spoilers, click to show
Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) is a 2020 action super hero film. Distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures, it is a follow-up to Suicide Squad (2016). The movie was directed by Cathy Yan and written by Christina Hodson, and it stars Margot Robbie, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Jurnee Smollett-Bell, Rosie Perez, Chris Messina and Ewan McGregor.
Four years after the defeat of the Enchantress, the Joker throws Harley Quinn out on the Gotham City streets when they break up. The already extremely volatile and unhinged, Harley (Margot Robbie) finds herself all alone with a huge target on her back. Without the Joker in the picture, the city is turned upside down as criminals that have a beef with Harley hunt her down. Gotham's most narcissistic villain, Roman Sionis (Ewan McGregor), and his right-hand man, Victor Zsasz (Chris Messina), have Harley and a precious diamond in their sights. Now Harley, Huntress (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), Black Canary (Jurnee Smollett-Bell) and Detective Renee Montoya's (Rosie Perez) paths collide, and the unlikely foursome have no choice but to team up to take Roman down.
First off let me say that I love Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn. I've always been a big Harley fan since before she was mainstream cool and a big part of that would have to be the Batman Animated Series and how it portrayed her. I liked Margot Robbie's performance in Suicide Squad and thought she did an excellent job of bringing that character to "life". I didn't have high expectations for this movie going in and sometimes that can be a good thing because it leaves you more open to the film being better than you thought it was going to be. Right away I didn't like the whole, Harley narrating the movie in the beginning and kind of throughout the movie. I don't know if they were trying to go for a "funny" Deadpool breaking the "4th" wall type thing but for me it just kind of made the movie less fun. I also have to say that I wasn't a big fan of the pacing and the whole going back and forth through time in the events of the movie. I think it might have been better on paper than how it actually came out in the movie. Kind of Tarantino-ish but just kind of overdone because of the info-dumping narration. There were some awesome fight sequences and there was plenty of over the top violence and action but a lot could have been done better. For me the plot was what felt like it made the movie feel a little lackluster. I really felt like they failed to flesh out Black Canary's character and Huntress felt extremely unpolished as well. A lot of the character's were underutilized except in gratuitous fight scenes and the audience is not shown their motivations a lot of the time but instead told them. I have to say some parts did make me laugh and the music wasn't terrible. The acting was extremely bad sometimes though. I don't know what they were going for with Huntress/Mary Elizabeth Winstead but she comes off as a badass but then really awkward or nerdy and then for a little bit she was a raging psychopath killer. I don't think they knew what direction to take the character and her performance definitely suffered. Black Canary/Jurnee Smollett-Bell was a character that was really cool but without knowing her motivations it really took alot out by never uncovering more about her character until later. A lot of things didn't make sense too. I can't believe that anyone would want to mess with Harley even if she wasn't with Joker. I however could have seen anyone and I mean anyone go after her for a big reward like they placed on the kid. Also a big reward like that on a no name kid who is just a low level pick pocket wouldn't have brought in that much results. Plus the diamond that she has is something you wouldn't want anybody else finding out about so why bring so much attention to it. Harley Quinn and all the other female actors in this movie have "plot armor" and never get hurt even when being blown up or shot at. All-in-all, it was an enjoyable movie but I wouldn't say it was anything special. This was a big-budget superhero film that comes off more run of the mill and fails to bring anything "wow" except some pretty kick ass action sequences and Margot Robbie and her return to Harley Quinn. I give it a 5/10.
Four years after the defeat of the Enchantress, the Joker throws Harley Quinn out on the Gotham City streets when they break up. The already extremely volatile and unhinged, Harley (Margot Robbie) finds herself all alone with a huge target on her back. Without the Joker in the picture, the city is turned upside down as criminals that have a beef with Harley hunt her down. Gotham's most narcissistic villain, Roman Sionis (Ewan McGregor), and his right-hand man, Victor Zsasz (Chris Messina), have Harley and a precious diamond in their sights. Now Harley, Huntress (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), Black Canary (Jurnee Smollett-Bell) and Detective Renee Montoya's (Rosie Perez) paths collide, and the unlikely foursome have no choice but to team up to take Roman down.
First off let me say that I love Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn. I've always been a big Harley fan since before she was mainstream cool and a big part of that would have to be the Batman Animated Series and how it portrayed her. I liked Margot Robbie's performance in Suicide Squad and thought she did an excellent job of bringing that character to "life". I didn't have high expectations for this movie going in and sometimes that can be a good thing because it leaves you more open to the film being better than you thought it was going to be. Right away I didn't like the whole, Harley narrating the movie in the beginning and kind of throughout the movie. I don't know if they were trying to go for a "funny" Deadpool breaking the "4th" wall type thing but for me it just kind of made the movie less fun. I also have to say that I wasn't a big fan of the pacing and the whole going back and forth through time in the events of the movie. I think it might have been better on paper than how it actually came out in the movie. Kind of Tarantino-ish but just kind of overdone because of the info-dumping narration. There were some awesome fight sequences and there was plenty of over the top violence and action but a lot could have been done better. For me the plot was what felt like it made the movie feel a little lackluster. I really felt like they failed to flesh out Black Canary's character and Huntress felt extremely unpolished as well. A lot of the character's were underutilized except in gratuitous fight scenes and the audience is not shown their motivations a lot of the time but instead told them. I have to say some parts did make me laugh and the music wasn't terrible. The acting was extremely bad sometimes though. I don't know what they were going for with Huntress/Mary Elizabeth Winstead but she comes off as a badass but then really awkward or nerdy and then for a little bit she was a raging psychopath killer. I don't think they knew what direction to take the character and her performance definitely suffered. Black Canary/Jurnee Smollett-Bell was a character that was really cool but without knowing her motivations it really took alot out by never uncovering more about her character until later. A lot of things didn't make sense too. I can't believe that anyone would want to mess with Harley even if she wasn't with Joker. I however could have seen anyone and I mean anyone go after her for a big reward like they placed on the kid. Also a big reward like that on a no name kid who is just a low level pick pocket wouldn't have brought in that much results. Plus the diamond that she has is something you wouldn't want anybody else finding out about so why bring so much attention to it. Harley Quinn and all the other female actors in this movie have "plot armor" and never get hurt even when being blown up or shot at. All-in-all, it was an enjoyable movie but I wouldn't say it was anything special. This was a big-budget superhero film that comes off more run of the mill and fails to bring anything "wow" except some pretty kick ass action sequences and Margot Robbie and her return to Harley Quinn. I give it a 5/10.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Bohemian Rhapsody (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
“Fame and fortune and everything that goes with it”.
Sometimes a trailer generates a bit of a buzz of excitement with a cinema audience and the first showings of the trailer for “Bohemian Rhapsody” was a case in point. But would the film live up to the potential?
The Plot
Farrokh Bulsara (Rami Malek), born in Zanzibar to Indian parents, is a shy boy with a dramatic singing voice. At a concert he meets Mary (Lucy Boynton) who becomes the “love of his life”. When a space for a lead singer becomes available in a college band, Farrokh leaps at the chance and onstage becomes an exuberant extrovert. The band, of course, changes its name to Queen and with Farrokh assuming the name of Freddie Mercury they are set for global success. But Freddie is a complex character, and the demands and temptations of global super-stardom take a terrible toll.
The Review
Wow! What a great film on so many different levels. As a biopic of Mercury and a history of one of the greatest ever rock bands, the film is highly entertaining. But I wasn’t prepared for how emotional I would find it. Mercury’s life is befitting of a Shakespearian tragedy: an estrangement from his ‘conservative’ father (Ace Bhatti); a public extravert, but privately an insecure and needy bi-sexual, constantly searching for his perch in life; a meteoric rise and an equally spectacular and historic fall.
Do you remember where you were (if anywhere!) during the historic Live Aid concert at Wembley in July 1985? My eagle-minded wife had to remind me that we were travelling to Hampshire to house hunt because of my graduate job offer from IBM Hursley Park. My 3 month old daughter was rolling around, unstrapped, in a carry cot on the back seat: different times; different rules! Why this is relevant is that the film culminates in a recreation of the band’s spectacular 20 minute set for 1985’s Live Aid concert at Wembley. It’s a spectacular piece of cinema and one that – for me – puts the much hyped concert scenes from “A Star is Born” back in its box. Aside from a few niggles (the sound engineers in the booth were, if I’m not mistaken, all the size of Hagrid!) it’s a spectacular piece of CGI work.
It’s also worth remembering that whilst today’s massive stadium concerts from the likes of Adele and Coldplay are commonplace, back in the UK of 1985 most of the bands played in more traditional theatre venues: this really was an historic event on so many levels.
If I’m being critical, there are a few bits of the movie that are a tad tacky and twee. A whizz around the world of tour locations is composed of some pretty ropy animations that didn’t work for me. And a few of the ‘creations’ of classic songs – particularly “Another One Bites the Dust” – are a bit forced. Countering that though, the “Bohemian Rhapsody” is mesmerising.
The Turns
I’ll just put it right out there, Rami Malek is just sensational as Mercury! I first called out Malek as someone to watch in “Need For Speed“, but since then he’s gone on to major fame in the TV series “Mr Robot”. Here he is a force of nature on the screen and you literally can’t take your eyes off him. Every nuance of Mercury’s tortured soul is up there. I would love to see the performance recognized in the Awards season, with the showreel clip being a brilliant standoff in the rain with Paul Prenter (“Downton’s” Allen Leech).
The rest of the band – Ben Hardy as drummer Roger Taylor; Gwilym Lee as lead guitar Brian May; and Joseph Mazzello (yes, young Tim from “Jurassic Park”!) as bass guitarist John Deacon – all work well together, with Lee looking more like Brian May than Brian May!
Lucy Boynton, so great in “Sing Street“, gets a meaty dramatic role to sink her teeth into, and the ever-reliable Tom Hollander is great as the band’s legal rep/manager Jim “Miami” Beech: his ‘knowing looks’ near the end of the film are brilliantly done.
The surprise piece of casting though was the very welcome return of Mike Myers as the exec Ray Foster: only seen spasmodically on screen since 2009’s “Inglorious Basterds”. It’s a role that reminded me of Tom Cruise‘s turn in “Tropic Thunder”! But it’s well done. After making “Bohemian Rhapsody” famous again in “Wayne’s World”, how could he have refused? I say “Welcome back Mr Myers”: you’ve been missed.
And a final shout out to Paul Jones, my son-in-law’s brother, who gets a full screen appearance in the crowd, arms outstretched, during the “Fat Bottomed Girls” set! (I must admit, I missed it, so will have to go and see it again!)
Final Thoughts
This is a film that grabs you and propels you through the story at a fast lick. It’s a surprisingly moving story, with a well-known and tragic finale. It’s not a perfect film, but it is up there wih the year’s best as a high-energy cinema experience.
The Plot
Farrokh Bulsara (Rami Malek), born in Zanzibar to Indian parents, is a shy boy with a dramatic singing voice. At a concert he meets Mary (Lucy Boynton) who becomes the “love of his life”. When a space for a lead singer becomes available in a college band, Farrokh leaps at the chance and onstage becomes an exuberant extrovert. The band, of course, changes its name to Queen and with Farrokh assuming the name of Freddie Mercury they are set for global success. But Freddie is a complex character, and the demands and temptations of global super-stardom take a terrible toll.
The Review
Wow! What a great film on so many different levels. As a biopic of Mercury and a history of one of the greatest ever rock bands, the film is highly entertaining. But I wasn’t prepared for how emotional I would find it. Mercury’s life is befitting of a Shakespearian tragedy: an estrangement from his ‘conservative’ father (Ace Bhatti); a public extravert, but privately an insecure and needy bi-sexual, constantly searching for his perch in life; a meteoric rise and an equally spectacular and historic fall.
Do you remember where you were (if anywhere!) during the historic Live Aid concert at Wembley in July 1985? My eagle-minded wife had to remind me that we were travelling to Hampshire to house hunt because of my graduate job offer from IBM Hursley Park. My 3 month old daughter was rolling around, unstrapped, in a carry cot on the back seat: different times; different rules! Why this is relevant is that the film culminates in a recreation of the band’s spectacular 20 minute set for 1985’s Live Aid concert at Wembley. It’s a spectacular piece of cinema and one that – for me – puts the much hyped concert scenes from “A Star is Born” back in its box. Aside from a few niggles (the sound engineers in the booth were, if I’m not mistaken, all the size of Hagrid!) it’s a spectacular piece of CGI work.
It’s also worth remembering that whilst today’s massive stadium concerts from the likes of Adele and Coldplay are commonplace, back in the UK of 1985 most of the bands played in more traditional theatre venues: this really was an historic event on so many levels.
If I’m being critical, there are a few bits of the movie that are a tad tacky and twee. A whizz around the world of tour locations is composed of some pretty ropy animations that didn’t work for me. And a few of the ‘creations’ of classic songs – particularly “Another One Bites the Dust” – are a bit forced. Countering that though, the “Bohemian Rhapsody” is mesmerising.
The Turns
I’ll just put it right out there, Rami Malek is just sensational as Mercury! I first called out Malek as someone to watch in “Need For Speed“, but since then he’s gone on to major fame in the TV series “Mr Robot”. Here he is a force of nature on the screen and you literally can’t take your eyes off him. Every nuance of Mercury’s tortured soul is up there. I would love to see the performance recognized in the Awards season, with the showreel clip being a brilliant standoff in the rain with Paul Prenter (“Downton’s” Allen Leech).
The rest of the band – Ben Hardy as drummer Roger Taylor; Gwilym Lee as lead guitar Brian May; and Joseph Mazzello (yes, young Tim from “Jurassic Park”!) as bass guitarist John Deacon – all work well together, with Lee looking more like Brian May than Brian May!
Lucy Boynton, so great in “Sing Street“, gets a meaty dramatic role to sink her teeth into, and the ever-reliable Tom Hollander is great as the band’s legal rep/manager Jim “Miami” Beech: his ‘knowing looks’ near the end of the film are brilliantly done.
The surprise piece of casting though was the very welcome return of Mike Myers as the exec Ray Foster: only seen spasmodically on screen since 2009’s “Inglorious Basterds”. It’s a role that reminded me of Tom Cruise‘s turn in “Tropic Thunder”! But it’s well done. After making “Bohemian Rhapsody” famous again in “Wayne’s World”, how could he have refused? I say “Welcome back Mr Myers”: you’ve been missed.
And a final shout out to Paul Jones, my son-in-law’s brother, who gets a full screen appearance in the crowd, arms outstretched, during the “Fat Bottomed Girls” set! (I must admit, I missed it, so will have to go and see it again!)
Final Thoughts
This is a film that grabs you and propels you through the story at a fast lick. It’s a surprisingly moving story, with a well-known and tragic finale. It’s not a perfect film, but it is up there wih the year’s best as a high-energy cinema experience.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Animal Empire in Tabletop Games
Jul 2, 2020
The age of humans is in its prime, and our civilizations keeps evolving every day. Have you ever wondered what comes after us though? The answer is the animals – at least, it is according to Animal Empire. Over time, animals have gained enough sentience to rise up and overthrow the humans! The animal kingdom is thriving as the different species learn to coexist in peace. However, the carnivorous animals are thirsting for more power and the delicate balance of peace has been upended! The game is afoot, and any species can come out victorious – can you lead your armies to victory and power over the Animal Empire?
Disclaimer: We were provided with a copy of this game for the purposes of this preview. I do not intend to rehash the entire rulebook, but rather provide the general rule set and overall flow of the game. The components pictured are final. Feel free to reach out to the publisher to snag your own copy! -L
Animal Empire is a card game of hand management, area majority, battling, and a bit of negotiation in which players are trying to be the first to gain control over 9 of the 16 Kingdoms. How? By deploying your armies, defeating your opponents, and maintaining control over your captured Kingdoms. Set up the game as described in the rulebook, and take the starting cards into your own hand and play area. Your starting Kingdom (marked by your Crown card) is placed face-up in front of you, and your Army and Wilderness cards are hidden from opponents in your hand.
Animal Empire is played over a series of turns, and on your turn you may take up to two Actions by using your Army cards. Each Army card can only perform one action per turn, unless it has a Specialty or you use a Wilderness card to affect your action. Actions that can be performed are: March, Capture, Battle, Use Specialty, Seize Crown, or Manage Vassal. Most of the actions are straight-forward – March allows you to move an Army to any Kingdom (either in the Play Area or one controlled by an opponent), Capture allows you to take a Kingdom (if you have majority presence on the card or if your Armies are unopposed), and Battle allows you to fight off rival Armies inhabiting the same Kingdom card as you. Seize Crown and Manage Vassal are the most unique. If you capture an opponent’s starting Kingdom (thereby Seizing the Crown), you take their Crown card and they are now your Vassal. They belong to your Kingdom, and must work to help you win – their Kingdom cards count with yours towards the majority total. If you have Vassals, you can use an action to Manage Vassal, which allows you to either give or take a Kingdom card from your Vassal. When you capture a new Kingdom, you also gain a new Army that matches your newest acquisition. Wilderness cards can be used at any time, and they can affect you or your opponents, depending on the card text. Play continues, with players taking turns, battling, and influencing Kingdoms until a player has captured a total of 9 Kingdoms. The game then ends and they are declared the winner!
So how does this game of ruling the animal kingdom actually fare? Pretty well for the most part, if you ask me! The basis of the game is simple – capture the majority of the Kingdoms. The execution of that goal is what takes Animal Empire to the next level for me. The amount of strategy required for success is beyond what you originally think. No matter how many Armies or Wilderness cards you have at your disposal, you only get a maximum of 2 actions per turn. That means that you really have to strategize which cards and actions to use and when. You are trying to amass a majority of Kingdoms, but just because you capture a Kingdom doesn’t mean it’s safe! Opponents can try to steal your Kingdoms, as you can theirs, so you have to find a good balance of offense and defense to ensure that your majority claim is not being compromised. Your strategy must be adaptable to respond to the actions of your opponents, and you have to be constantly engaged and alert to the playing field. Just be ready for some confrontation though – this game pits you directly against your opponents.
The only components in Animal Empire are cards, and they are a good quality and pretty sturdy. The artwork is really detailed and unique, and I find myself admiring the artwork almost as much as I spend strategizing. The trickiest part for me regarding components is that beyond the Crown cards, nothing is colored according to Crowns. All of the artwork is unique across all cards, and some cards of different types share the same base color – so you have to make sure to remember who played which card where to ensure no accidental confusion. The way I found to circumvent that was for all players to play their cards oriented towards them, so it was more clear to see which cards belonged to which players. I would’ve also liked to see Player Reference Cards detailing the different card Specialties – just to minimize the amount of time referring back to the rulebook for clarification.
All in all, I think that Animal Empire is a solid little card game. I like the strategic elements and that it keeps all players engaged throughout the entire game. I would definitely recommend it at the mid- to higher player counts though, because at only 2 player it feels like it kind of drags on in a back-and-forth battle for majority. With more players, there are more strategic implications, more options to deal with, and a little more chaos for everyone. If you’re looking for a fun little game of head-to-head battling, check out Animal Empire!
Disclaimer: We were provided with a copy of this game for the purposes of this preview. I do not intend to rehash the entire rulebook, but rather provide the general rule set and overall flow of the game. The components pictured are final. Feel free to reach out to the publisher to snag your own copy! -L
Animal Empire is a card game of hand management, area majority, battling, and a bit of negotiation in which players are trying to be the first to gain control over 9 of the 16 Kingdoms. How? By deploying your armies, defeating your opponents, and maintaining control over your captured Kingdoms. Set up the game as described in the rulebook, and take the starting cards into your own hand and play area. Your starting Kingdom (marked by your Crown card) is placed face-up in front of you, and your Army and Wilderness cards are hidden from opponents in your hand.
Animal Empire is played over a series of turns, and on your turn you may take up to two Actions by using your Army cards. Each Army card can only perform one action per turn, unless it has a Specialty or you use a Wilderness card to affect your action. Actions that can be performed are: March, Capture, Battle, Use Specialty, Seize Crown, or Manage Vassal. Most of the actions are straight-forward – March allows you to move an Army to any Kingdom (either in the Play Area or one controlled by an opponent), Capture allows you to take a Kingdom (if you have majority presence on the card or if your Armies are unopposed), and Battle allows you to fight off rival Armies inhabiting the same Kingdom card as you. Seize Crown and Manage Vassal are the most unique. If you capture an opponent’s starting Kingdom (thereby Seizing the Crown), you take their Crown card and they are now your Vassal. They belong to your Kingdom, and must work to help you win – their Kingdom cards count with yours towards the majority total. If you have Vassals, you can use an action to Manage Vassal, which allows you to either give or take a Kingdom card from your Vassal. When you capture a new Kingdom, you also gain a new Army that matches your newest acquisition. Wilderness cards can be used at any time, and they can affect you or your opponents, depending on the card text. Play continues, with players taking turns, battling, and influencing Kingdoms until a player has captured a total of 9 Kingdoms. The game then ends and they are declared the winner!
So how does this game of ruling the animal kingdom actually fare? Pretty well for the most part, if you ask me! The basis of the game is simple – capture the majority of the Kingdoms. The execution of that goal is what takes Animal Empire to the next level for me. The amount of strategy required for success is beyond what you originally think. No matter how many Armies or Wilderness cards you have at your disposal, you only get a maximum of 2 actions per turn. That means that you really have to strategize which cards and actions to use and when. You are trying to amass a majority of Kingdoms, but just because you capture a Kingdom doesn’t mean it’s safe! Opponents can try to steal your Kingdoms, as you can theirs, so you have to find a good balance of offense and defense to ensure that your majority claim is not being compromised. Your strategy must be adaptable to respond to the actions of your opponents, and you have to be constantly engaged and alert to the playing field. Just be ready for some confrontation though – this game pits you directly against your opponents.
The only components in Animal Empire are cards, and they are a good quality and pretty sturdy. The artwork is really detailed and unique, and I find myself admiring the artwork almost as much as I spend strategizing. The trickiest part for me regarding components is that beyond the Crown cards, nothing is colored according to Crowns. All of the artwork is unique across all cards, and some cards of different types share the same base color – so you have to make sure to remember who played which card where to ensure no accidental confusion. The way I found to circumvent that was for all players to play their cards oriented towards them, so it was more clear to see which cards belonged to which players. I would’ve also liked to see Player Reference Cards detailing the different card Specialties – just to minimize the amount of time referring back to the rulebook for clarification.
All in all, I think that Animal Empire is a solid little card game. I like the strategic elements and that it keeps all players engaged throughout the entire game. I would definitely recommend it at the mid- to higher player counts though, because at only 2 player it feels like it kind of drags on in a back-and-forth battle for majority. With more players, there are more strategic implications, more options to deal with, and a little more chaos for everyone. If you’re looking for a fun little game of head-to-head battling, check out Animal Empire!
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated YOHO (You Only Hang Once) in Tabletop Games
Jan 14, 2021
If you have been following us for a while you will no doubt remember my love of the pirate theme in board games. In fact, three of my top 20 games feature pirates. So when I heard the pitch for this one that it is a, “semi-cooperative card game for 2 to 4 players where you take on the role of a notorious pirate, stuck on a ship of thieves and liars” I knew I wanted in. While I wasn’t blown away, there are some quality play experiences to be had. Let me explain.
As mentioned previously, YOHO is a semi-cooperative game of pirate players attempting to find the Treasure and bury it in their safe spaces by the end of the game. Players will be assuming roles of jobs on a pirate ship: Captain, Quartermaster, Bosun, Seadog, and Pariah. These positions have jobs and pirating to do or else they may find themselves walking the plank.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup players will choose their pirate persona and place it in front of them with the Loyal side showing. On the backside is the Rebel side, which will allow the player special abilities later in the game. A Captain is chosen and that player then doles out the remaining ranks of pirate jobs to the other players. Each player will be dealt five cards from the shuffled Blame deck (draw deck) for their starting hands. The top card from the deck is flipped to become the Blame Pile (discards). The Captain takes the Course card and places it Port side up. The game may now begin!
The active player’s turn will be comprised of four steps. The first step is refilling the hand to five cards. Should the player have more than five then no additional cards are drawn. Next the player will choose one card from hand to play to the Blame Pile. The card may not contain the same text as the card below it, so no stacking UNO Draw 2s. Once the card is played to the Blame Pile the active player will carry out the card’s instructions. These could be switching hands with other players, flipping their pirate cards to Rebel or vice versa to Loyal, Demoting pirate ranks, or one of the other four actions printed on the cards. Finally the active player passes the Course card to the next player to take their turn.
While this all seems typical of many card games, YOHO forks from the common by employing a Blame mechanic. One of the aforementioned other actions on cards is the Accuse action. When one player accuses another the Blame Pile is consulted, and whichever pirate’s rank number matches the highest sum of the matching rank number of cards in the Blame will take the entirety of the Blame Pile into their hand. For example, if the Bosun (3) accuses the Seadog (2) then the Blame Pile is sifted through in order to see how many cards match the 2 and 3 of the ranks involved. Add up the totals of these cards to arrive at the rank’s Blame. The larger number receives the Blame. Special rules are provided for when the Captain is both involved in an accusation and also when the Captain is forced to take the Blame.
The game ends once a pirate draws the last card from the Blame (draw) deck. Players will total their matching Blame in their hands, adjust this number if the player holds the Treasure card or if the pirate is Loyal vs. Rebel according to the Course card’s current display. The player with the most Blame will walk the plank and lose immediately. With a few other scoring rules the player still on board with the highest rank wins!
Components. This game is a deck of cards in a tuckbox. The cards are all fine quality with linen finish (the best finish methinks). The art is somewhat cartoony, but still enjoyable and not offensive at all. I don’t have any problems with the components in YOHO.
My first game of YOHO was played between my wife and I and it was a disaster. I strongly suggest playing with three or four, with four giving the best experience. When the full compliment is used there is only one “inactive” pirate who sits in the middle of the table holding onto their rank and not really doing anything. A ghost player, if you will. However, with two players there are three ghost players not doing anything. It just didn’t work with us AT ALL. But four players was quite enjoyable and actually saved this one for me.
I like the gameplay here. It is different and quirky, and I like that. The constantly-shifting ranks and demotions left and right makes players wish for promotions, but those only come as demotions to a higher rank. Also being able to accuse other players caters to the card counters in the group because they can be watching which cards are played to the Blame Pile and know exactly which rank has more cards represented. While that is dependent on the type of players involved, I have not found that to be a problem. I also really like the shifting Course card. When on Port all pirates can do their jobs, but as soon as it flips to Starboard the Rebel pirates may NOT complete their jobs. This is such an interesting way to utilize the active player token instead of just noting which player’s turn it is currently.
Again, I do NOT recommend playing with two, but definitely do recommend with four. I would be hesitant at three, but it can certainly work. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a wishy-washy-swashbuckling 8 / 12. If your collection is missing another pirate card game that can be played quickly, has interesting twists, and fresh-feeling mechanics, give YOHO a try. You might finally have the chance to send your rival off the plank. But be warned, despite the title, there is no hanging in YOHO (You Only Hang Once).
As mentioned previously, YOHO is a semi-cooperative game of pirate players attempting to find the Treasure and bury it in their safe spaces by the end of the game. Players will be assuming roles of jobs on a pirate ship: Captain, Quartermaster, Bosun, Seadog, and Pariah. These positions have jobs and pirating to do or else they may find themselves walking the plank.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup players will choose their pirate persona and place it in front of them with the Loyal side showing. On the backside is the Rebel side, which will allow the player special abilities later in the game. A Captain is chosen and that player then doles out the remaining ranks of pirate jobs to the other players. Each player will be dealt five cards from the shuffled Blame deck (draw deck) for their starting hands. The top card from the deck is flipped to become the Blame Pile (discards). The Captain takes the Course card and places it Port side up. The game may now begin!
The active player’s turn will be comprised of four steps. The first step is refilling the hand to five cards. Should the player have more than five then no additional cards are drawn. Next the player will choose one card from hand to play to the Blame Pile. The card may not contain the same text as the card below it, so no stacking UNO Draw 2s. Once the card is played to the Blame Pile the active player will carry out the card’s instructions. These could be switching hands with other players, flipping their pirate cards to Rebel or vice versa to Loyal, Demoting pirate ranks, or one of the other four actions printed on the cards. Finally the active player passes the Course card to the next player to take their turn.
While this all seems typical of many card games, YOHO forks from the common by employing a Blame mechanic. One of the aforementioned other actions on cards is the Accuse action. When one player accuses another the Blame Pile is consulted, and whichever pirate’s rank number matches the highest sum of the matching rank number of cards in the Blame will take the entirety of the Blame Pile into their hand. For example, if the Bosun (3) accuses the Seadog (2) then the Blame Pile is sifted through in order to see how many cards match the 2 and 3 of the ranks involved. Add up the totals of these cards to arrive at the rank’s Blame. The larger number receives the Blame. Special rules are provided for when the Captain is both involved in an accusation and also when the Captain is forced to take the Blame.
The game ends once a pirate draws the last card from the Blame (draw) deck. Players will total their matching Blame in their hands, adjust this number if the player holds the Treasure card or if the pirate is Loyal vs. Rebel according to the Course card’s current display. The player with the most Blame will walk the plank and lose immediately. With a few other scoring rules the player still on board with the highest rank wins!
Components. This game is a deck of cards in a tuckbox. The cards are all fine quality with linen finish (the best finish methinks). The art is somewhat cartoony, but still enjoyable and not offensive at all. I don’t have any problems with the components in YOHO.
My first game of YOHO was played between my wife and I and it was a disaster. I strongly suggest playing with three or four, with four giving the best experience. When the full compliment is used there is only one “inactive” pirate who sits in the middle of the table holding onto their rank and not really doing anything. A ghost player, if you will. However, with two players there are three ghost players not doing anything. It just didn’t work with us AT ALL. But four players was quite enjoyable and actually saved this one for me.
I like the gameplay here. It is different and quirky, and I like that. The constantly-shifting ranks and demotions left and right makes players wish for promotions, but those only come as demotions to a higher rank. Also being able to accuse other players caters to the card counters in the group because they can be watching which cards are played to the Blame Pile and know exactly which rank has more cards represented. While that is dependent on the type of players involved, I have not found that to be a problem. I also really like the shifting Course card. When on Port all pirates can do their jobs, but as soon as it flips to Starboard the Rebel pirates may NOT complete their jobs. This is such an interesting way to utilize the active player token instead of just noting which player’s turn it is currently.
Again, I do NOT recommend playing with two, but definitely do recommend with four. I would be hesitant at three, but it can certainly work. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a wishy-washy-swashbuckling 8 / 12. If your collection is missing another pirate card game that can be played quickly, has interesting twists, and fresh-feeling mechanics, give YOHO a try. You might finally have the chance to send your rival off the plank. But be warned, despite the title, there is no hanging in YOHO (You Only Hang Once).
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Unhallowed Ground in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can also be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.co.uk">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
When I read the synopsis for Unhallowed Ground by Daniel Mills, I must confess that I was more than intrigued. I love a good ghost story, so there was no way I was going to let this one pass me by. Although this book wasn't as ghosty (not a real word, haha) as I would've liked, it was still a nice read.
Unhallowed Ground by Daniel Mills is a short story told by the main character, Henry Feathering. Henry decides to visit his only surviving relative, his uncle, at Bittersweet Lodge. Upon arriving, he notices how dilapidated the building is. Henry falls in love with a woman named Clemency and decides that she will be his wife. Henry's uncle gives him a dire warning: do not move into the lodge with his bride for it will have horrible consequences. Ignoring his uncle's warning, Henry and Clemency move into Bittersweet Lodge. Soon Clemency is acting rather distant from Henry for some strange reason. Could there be a sinister force at work?
How spooky does the cover for Unhallowed Ground look!?! The cover of this book is definitely an attention grabber. I love the fact that it also fits in with the actual story.
The title definitely lets you know that this isn't going to be a warming story. Unhallowed Ground is a great title and fits in definitely with the story since a young girl was buried on unhallowed ground. (Don't worry, I haven't given away a spoiler as this is mentioned throughout the book).
The world building and setting are fantastic in this book. The story takes place in 1891, and the author does a great job of recreating the year. The description of the lodge seems spot on, and it paints a vivid picture in your mind.
The pacing of this book couldn't have been better. It is a short story, so it shouldn't take you more than 2 or 3 hours to read especially as Unhallowed Ground is a real page turner! I was constantly trying to guess what would happen next.
The dialogue of this book is old-fashioned as one would expect since it does take place in 1891. However, it is easy to understand, and there was no swearing.
The characters were great! Henry, Clemency, and Justice are the three main characters. They all come across as feeling like real people. My favourite character was Henry's uncle. I loved his eccentricity.
The only thing I didn't like was that I was expecting more of a ghost story which this wasn't really. I wanted a typical ghost story with apparitions, things moving by themselves, etc. I felt the synopsis was a bit misleading. I also wish that this story would've been a bit longer. Despite that, this was a good read.
I'd recommend Unhallowed Ground by Daniel Mills to everyone, especially fans of the horror genre, aged 16+.
Overall, I'd give Unhallowed Ground by Daniel Mills a 3.75 out of 5.
(Thank you to the publisher and netgalley for supplying me with a free ebook of this title in exchange for a fair and honest review).
When I read the synopsis for Unhallowed Ground by Daniel Mills, I must confess that I was more than intrigued. I love a good ghost story, so there was no way I was going to let this one pass me by. Although this book wasn't as ghosty (not a real word, haha) as I would've liked, it was still a nice read.
Unhallowed Ground by Daniel Mills is a short story told by the main character, Henry Feathering. Henry decides to visit his only surviving relative, his uncle, at Bittersweet Lodge. Upon arriving, he notices how dilapidated the building is. Henry falls in love with a woman named Clemency and decides that she will be his wife. Henry's uncle gives him a dire warning: do not move into the lodge with his bride for it will have horrible consequences. Ignoring his uncle's warning, Henry and Clemency move into Bittersweet Lodge. Soon Clemency is acting rather distant from Henry for some strange reason. Could there be a sinister force at work?
How spooky does the cover for Unhallowed Ground look!?! The cover of this book is definitely an attention grabber. I love the fact that it also fits in with the actual story.
The title definitely lets you know that this isn't going to be a warming story. Unhallowed Ground is a great title and fits in definitely with the story since a young girl was buried on unhallowed ground. (Don't worry, I haven't given away a spoiler as this is mentioned throughout the book).
The world building and setting are fantastic in this book. The story takes place in 1891, and the author does a great job of recreating the year. The description of the lodge seems spot on, and it paints a vivid picture in your mind.
The pacing of this book couldn't have been better. It is a short story, so it shouldn't take you more than 2 or 3 hours to read especially as Unhallowed Ground is a real page turner! I was constantly trying to guess what would happen next.
The dialogue of this book is old-fashioned as one would expect since it does take place in 1891. However, it is easy to understand, and there was no swearing.
The characters were great! Henry, Clemency, and Justice are the three main characters. They all come across as feeling like real people. My favourite character was Henry's uncle. I loved his eccentricity.
The only thing I didn't like was that I was expecting more of a ghost story which this wasn't really. I wanted a typical ghost story with apparitions, things moving by themselves, etc. I felt the synopsis was a bit misleading. I also wish that this story would've been a bit longer. Despite that, this was a good read.
I'd recommend Unhallowed Ground by Daniel Mills to everyone, especially fans of the horror genre, aged 16+.
Overall, I'd give Unhallowed Ground by Daniel Mills a 3.75 out of 5.
(Thank you to the publisher and netgalley for supplying me with a free ebook of this title in exchange for a fair and honest review).
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Missing Link (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
This really isn't a bad little film, it has its fun and implausible action, and you come away with a message of friendship for everyone to ponder on. It's obviously great Easter holiday fodder and it won't bore the parents, which is always half the battle with kids films.
Susan is the last of his kind and desperately wants to find the fabled yeti who he believes to be his distant cousins. He enlists Sir Lionel Frost to help him on his quest after reading about his escapades in finding long lost creatures.
It's a pretty star-studded cast with Zach Galifianakis and Hugh Jackman leading it up. There will be a lot of other voices you recognise, but for the most part they stay in the background.
Both of our leading men are really well cast and give their characters a much needed boost. They get some humour in various places, but I didn't feel like the script was fantastic overall.
Where Lionel and Susan were well cast, Adeline Fortnight really missed the spot for me. From the design of the character to that accent, whose origin was kind of non-descript, I couldn't help wondering why the role went to Zoe Saldana and not Salma Hayek.
Stephen Fry makes a wonderful bad guy. I've always loved his voicework this thankfully did not break that trend and he added some oomph to the proceedings.
The last cast member I want to mention is Emma Thompson as The Elder. I think she suffered the most with the script, "The people we don't want here are leaving! Force them to stay!" I'm sure that line was meant to be amusing, and it definitely could have been, but the way it wasn't backed up with anything to come across that way. She was woefully underused and her scenes were wholly inadequate for such a great talent.
I had to stop and weep for humanity a little, there are some comments on the internet where it appears that people don't get that this is stop-motion animation, with a few saying it all looked too simple. I cannot fault the work that was put into this, it's wonderfully done, even if I'm not a fan of the strangely pointed features. There's a brief glimpse in the trailer of a barroom brawl, look out for the whole scene in the film because it is probably the most impressive piece of work.
Despite my quibbles, this is genuinely a pleasant film to watch and I don't think many people will get to the end and grumble that they've wasted their time. I just worry that it's not quite good enough to be well remembered, it's in danger of being one of those films that makes me go "oh yeah, I remember that one, it's really good."
What you should do
If you're in need of an Easter activity then it's worth the trip to the cinema, and it's certainly worth catching when it's released for home viewing.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
There's nothing in the film I'd particularly like to take home, but I wouldn't mind some of the patience and dedication that those animators must have to produce such wonderfully smooth motion.
Susan is the last of his kind and desperately wants to find the fabled yeti who he believes to be his distant cousins. He enlists Sir Lionel Frost to help him on his quest after reading about his escapades in finding long lost creatures.
It's a pretty star-studded cast with Zach Galifianakis and Hugh Jackman leading it up. There will be a lot of other voices you recognise, but for the most part they stay in the background.
Both of our leading men are really well cast and give their characters a much needed boost. They get some humour in various places, but I didn't feel like the script was fantastic overall.
Where Lionel and Susan were well cast, Adeline Fortnight really missed the spot for me. From the design of the character to that accent, whose origin was kind of non-descript, I couldn't help wondering why the role went to Zoe Saldana and not Salma Hayek.
Stephen Fry makes a wonderful bad guy. I've always loved his voicework this thankfully did not break that trend and he added some oomph to the proceedings.
The last cast member I want to mention is Emma Thompson as The Elder. I think she suffered the most with the script, "The people we don't want here are leaving! Force them to stay!" I'm sure that line was meant to be amusing, and it definitely could have been, but the way it wasn't backed up with anything to come across that way. She was woefully underused and her scenes were wholly inadequate for such a great talent.
I had to stop and weep for humanity a little, there are some comments on the internet where it appears that people don't get that this is stop-motion animation, with a few saying it all looked too simple. I cannot fault the work that was put into this, it's wonderfully done, even if I'm not a fan of the strangely pointed features. There's a brief glimpse in the trailer of a barroom brawl, look out for the whole scene in the film because it is probably the most impressive piece of work.
Despite my quibbles, this is genuinely a pleasant film to watch and I don't think many people will get to the end and grumble that they've wasted their time. I just worry that it's not quite good enough to be well remembered, it's in danger of being one of those films that makes me go "oh yeah, I remember that one, it's really good."
What you should do
If you're in need of an Easter activity then it's worth the trip to the cinema, and it's certainly worth catching when it's released for home viewing.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
There's nothing in the film I'd particularly like to take home, but I wouldn't mind some of the patience and dedication that those animators must have to produce such wonderfully smooth motion.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Lucky Grandma (2019) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
The synopsis for this sounded okay but I can't say I was blown away. I popped this in my third tier films to watch at the London Film Festival, the "I'll try and see this if there's a gap" films. There was a gap so this ended up being my first film of the festival.
Grandma Wong doesn't have a lot to live on, her son wants her to move in with his family but she likes her independence. When her doctor/fortune teller says she's got a change in fortunes coming she decides to throw caution to the wind and test this new luck out. The experiment goes well until she crosses paths with Mr Lin, a member of the Red Dragon gang.
Tsai Chin is a delight, a grumpy delight as Grandma. She's a face I recognised but of course I couldn't remember from what... to IMDb... Two Bond films! I'm a terrible movie viewer right now. As well as those there are lods of other films and shows to her name, lots that you'd recognise. Her portrayal of Grandma is wonderful, she's hardened but funny, her reaction to everything was hilarious to me. This is exactly how I see myself being as an old lady, without the life threatening situations... probably. Chin brought just the right feeling to this role and captured all her ups and downs with just the right amount of stubborn.
The reltionship forged with Big Pong, plays by Hsiao-Yuan Ha, is lovely. The strange little friendship is a sweet inclusion and even when it take a turn they manage to make it through. Big Pong is her bodyguard, it was never a conventional employer/employee relationship and their interactions are very protective towards each other. Big Pong has a real moment of sheer joy when eating Grandma's food and that expression along with a lot of Ha's performance brought me a really happy feeling.
Michael Tow as Little Handsome deserves a special mention, the pure nutball rage is really quite insane and I don't know how someone would manage to do that.
There are some great montages that sum up Grandma's life. The one at the beginning is amusing but the next proves to be a brilliant contrast after her luck has changed. I like its consistency and how it managed to accomodate the story without affecting her day to day life too much.
On a whole the film felt just the right length, it moved along fairly quickly and the quirky relationships keep you interested. It potentially could have focused on some more of the peripheral characters a little, but I actually enjoyed the main focus. The shots are quite traditional but there's one shot of Grandma's apartment as she hears intruders, it captures the whole apartment and we see her edge into shot hiding. It created a really tense moment and if gave the instinctive desire to try and look round the corner.
I'm sure this won't be to everyone's taste as there are a fair amount of subtitled bits but it really doesn't distract that much from the film.
What you should do
It's a fun little film and if it makes it into a release somewhere then it would be something fun to watch.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A big bag of money wouldn't go amiss.
Grandma Wong doesn't have a lot to live on, her son wants her to move in with his family but she likes her independence. When her doctor/fortune teller says she's got a change in fortunes coming she decides to throw caution to the wind and test this new luck out. The experiment goes well until she crosses paths with Mr Lin, a member of the Red Dragon gang.
Tsai Chin is a delight, a grumpy delight as Grandma. She's a face I recognised but of course I couldn't remember from what... to IMDb... Two Bond films! I'm a terrible movie viewer right now. As well as those there are lods of other films and shows to her name, lots that you'd recognise. Her portrayal of Grandma is wonderful, she's hardened but funny, her reaction to everything was hilarious to me. This is exactly how I see myself being as an old lady, without the life threatening situations... probably. Chin brought just the right feeling to this role and captured all her ups and downs with just the right amount of stubborn.
The reltionship forged with Big Pong, plays by Hsiao-Yuan Ha, is lovely. The strange little friendship is a sweet inclusion and even when it take a turn they manage to make it through. Big Pong is her bodyguard, it was never a conventional employer/employee relationship and their interactions are very protective towards each other. Big Pong has a real moment of sheer joy when eating Grandma's food and that expression along with a lot of Ha's performance brought me a really happy feeling.
Michael Tow as Little Handsome deserves a special mention, the pure nutball rage is really quite insane and I don't know how someone would manage to do that.
There are some great montages that sum up Grandma's life. The one at the beginning is amusing but the next proves to be a brilliant contrast after her luck has changed. I like its consistency and how it managed to accomodate the story without affecting her day to day life too much.
On a whole the film felt just the right length, it moved along fairly quickly and the quirky relationships keep you interested. It potentially could have focused on some more of the peripheral characters a little, but I actually enjoyed the main focus. The shots are quite traditional but there's one shot of Grandma's apartment as she hears intruders, it captures the whole apartment and we see her edge into shot hiding. It created a really tense moment and if gave the instinctive desire to try and look round the corner.
I'm sure this won't be to everyone's taste as there are a fair amount of subtitled bits but it really doesn't distract that much from the film.
What you should do
It's a fun little film and if it makes it into a release somewhere then it would be something fun to watch.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A big bag of money wouldn't go amiss.