Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Hunt (2020) in Movies
Mar 25, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
I've been looking forward to this since before it was cool.
A group of strangers wake up in the middle of nowhere, gagged and confused. The last thing they remember is being home in their respective states and then waking up in a clearing with each other.
It's no mystery to some why they're there, it's the Hunt. The bored elite pick up 12 strangers to hunt for sport and now it's their turn. A box full of weapons an open field and danger in every direction. Will the prey survive?
Mindless violence like this is right up my street, usually because it's so ridiculous it's funny and shocking in the most unexpected ways. It reminds me a lot of The Condemned, although there's no amazing role for Vinnie in this.
The trailers... ugh. One gives away a lot of key points and the other misleadingly splices together a lot of footage, the latter doesn't bother me nearly as much as the first. Had they only used the international trailer it would have avoided a lot of those problems and I think it would have left a bit more surprise.
Admittedly, I probably wouldn't have noticed how many reveals there were if I hadn't gone back to find something out after seeing the film. I could not for the life of me understand why they insisted on only showing the back of Hilary Swank's head in the opening, in the plane, partially during her meeting... why? If they had kept the role a secret until a reveal at the very end of the film (I still wouldn't have understood it but) I would have kind of been okay with it... but they show her face in the trailer... so why the hidden face all the time?
We get quite a big cast here with a lot of faces to recognise, all be it very briefly at times. I'm a little impressed that they decided to knock out as many as they did so early on, and especially their choices.
We have Betty Gilpin in the lead as Crystal fighting back against her would be murderers. I've only come across Gilpin (knowingly) in Elementary where she also played a character with many quirks. There's a certain kick-assery quality to Crystal, and those bits are great, but when she gets intense and mentions she might have issues it seems odd and at times not at all clear what she might be alluding to. She seemed to handle the role well but the occasional loopy moment didn't really fit.
Hilary Swank's performance as Athena was okay but the character had a lot of different issues throughout that I personally think would have made any attempt at this role mediocre.
I'll cover some of the flaws in the movie briefly, very briefly because there are a lot of things that just don't make sense. The text message that starts the whole thing... horrendously specific and doesn't seem like a likely response in that conversation. To then cause her to rage out in her meeting and decide to have the invented rampage seems even more ridiculous. When the prey can roam anywhere, why are a big chunk of them staying in the bunker on the original drop point, and how would they have known in advance that having someone with refugees would pan out in the end? And why after being so furious about the whole thing does Athena stay in her manor? Those are some of the things to quibble about, but I'll move on.
The film appears to say a lot but honestly doesn't really say anything at all. No point is ever really followed through with and explained, so the fact I wasn't "in tune" with it I didn't take anything away from those scenes anyway. At one point they throw so many topics into a conversation that it became quite annoying. I found it interesting to read up about why the film was pulled in the first place, under the veils of some terrible incidents in America at the time when it seems that the media influence was trying to crush it even before that because of all these hot topics. I don't know why anyone would be in their case if they'd actually seen the film, but as I said, this isn't my area of expertise so I don't intend to debate on the point.
I'm not sure how I feel about the ending, all I can say is that that sandwich would definitely have been burnt.
There are a lot of threads to pick at in The Hunt but none of them actually made the film fall apart, it has some humour, including some of those moments that aren't really funny but they're shocking and you laugh as a defense mechanism. It has one moment in particular that is so far off course that I wondered if it would go all out spoof. Even with the issue I still enjoyed it, there's something in these films (like Bloodshot had been) that relieves the stress of having to think.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-hunt-movie-review-spoilers.html
A group of strangers wake up in the middle of nowhere, gagged and confused. The last thing they remember is being home in their respective states and then waking up in a clearing with each other.
It's no mystery to some why they're there, it's the Hunt. The bored elite pick up 12 strangers to hunt for sport and now it's their turn. A box full of weapons an open field and danger in every direction. Will the prey survive?
Mindless violence like this is right up my street, usually because it's so ridiculous it's funny and shocking in the most unexpected ways. It reminds me a lot of The Condemned, although there's no amazing role for Vinnie in this.
The trailers... ugh. One gives away a lot of key points and the other misleadingly splices together a lot of footage, the latter doesn't bother me nearly as much as the first. Had they only used the international trailer it would have avoided a lot of those problems and I think it would have left a bit more surprise.
Admittedly, I probably wouldn't have noticed how many reveals there were if I hadn't gone back to find something out after seeing the film. I could not for the life of me understand why they insisted on only showing the back of Hilary Swank's head in the opening, in the plane, partially during her meeting... why? If they had kept the role a secret until a reveal at the very end of the film (I still wouldn't have understood it but) I would have kind of been okay with it... but they show her face in the trailer... so why the hidden face all the time?
We get quite a big cast here with a lot of faces to recognise, all be it very briefly at times. I'm a little impressed that they decided to knock out as many as they did so early on, and especially their choices.
We have Betty Gilpin in the lead as Crystal fighting back against her would be murderers. I've only come across Gilpin (knowingly) in Elementary where she also played a character with many quirks. There's a certain kick-assery quality to Crystal, and those bits are great, but when she gets intense and mentions she might have issues it seems odd and at times not at all clear what she might be alluding to. She seemed to handle the role well but the occasional loopy moment didn't really fit.
Hilary Swank's performance as Athena was okay but the character had a lot of different issues throughout that I personally think would have made any attempt at this role mediocre.
I'll cover some of the flaws in the movie briefly, very briefly because there are a lot of things that just don't make sense. The text message that starts the whole thing... horrendously specific and doesn't seem like a likely response in that conversation. To then cause her to rage out in her meeting and decide to have the invented rampage seems even more ridiculous. When the prey can roam anywhere, why are a big chunk of them staying in the bunker on the original drop point, and how would they have known in advance that having someone with refugees would pan out in the end? And why after being so furious about the whole thing does Athena stay in her manor? Those are some of the things to quibble about, but I'll move on.
The film appears to say a lot but honestly doesn't really say anything at all. No point is ever really followed through with and explained, so the fact I wasn't "in tune" with it I didn't take anything away from those scenes anyway. At one point they throw so many topics into a conversation that it became quite annoying. I found it interesting to read up about why the film was pulled in the first place, under the veils of some terrible incidents in America at the time when it seems that the media influence was trying to crush it even before that because of all these hot topics. I don't know why anyone would be in their case if they'd actually seen the film, but as I said, this isn't my area of expertise so I don't intend to debate on the point.
I'm not sure how I feel about the ending, all I can say is that that sandwich would definitely have been burnt.
There are a lot of threads to pick at in The Hunt but none of them actually made the film fall apart, it has some humour, including some of those moments that aren't really funny but they're shocking and you laugh as a defense mechanism. It has one moment in particular that is so far off course that I wondered if it would go all out spoof. Even with the issue I still enjoyed it, there's something in these films (like Bloodshot had been) that relieves the stress of having to think.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-hunt-movie-review-spoilers.html
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Timmy Failure: The Cat Stole My Pants in Books
Sep 12, 2017
Amusing ... If you are a child
I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
For fans of Diary of a Wimpy Kid (Kinney, 2004) is a juvenile series by American author, Stephan Pastis, about a young boy who believes he is the world’s greatest detective. A series that is continually growing, the sixth Timmy Failure story is now available for fans and new readers. Subtitled The Cat Stole My Pants, Timmy Failure embarks on an adventure of mystery and crime solving whilst getting himself into all sorts of mischief.
Emulating both real and fictional detectives, Timmy has established his own agency, Failure, Inc., of which he is the sole employee after the flight of his (imaginary) ex-business partner, Total the polar bear, who is currently seeking political asylum in Cuba. Unfortunately, Timmy has been forced to join his mother and Doorman Dave on their honeymoon in Key West, Florida, along with Doorman Dave’s nephew, Emilio.
“Crime doesn’t take a holiday. Neither does greatness.” Determined to continue solving crimes, Timmy hires Emilio as an unpaid intern and sets off searching for crimes, greatly over exaggerating every little piece of “evidence” he finds. However, it soon appears that someone is out to get Timmy and he, along with Emilio, is determined to find out whom.
Timmy is a melodramatic, unconventional child with a large ego and is constantly getting told off. From annoying adults to having his pants stolen by a polydactyl cat – or so he claims – there is no end to the hilarious situations he causes.
The cat that stole Timmy’s pants only makes a brief appearance in the book, therefore the subtitle is more to attract the attention of young readers with its silliness rather than be suggestive of a certain storyline.
Despite his grand claims, Timmy is not a very good detective and a lot of his unsolved crimes have been invented by his overactive imagination. This adds to the humour because, although he seems like an intelligent child, his ideas are completely silly.
Adorned with childish drawings and diagrams, Timmy Failure narrates the story from his subjective point of view, inflating his successes and blaming any failure on poor Emilio. No one takes Timmy seriously, which is something many of the target readers may appreciate, although they should also understand how futile Timmy’s attempts are at being a detective.
The storyline is not particularly clear until the final chapters of the book. Up until that moment, the book is full of disastrous, imaginary detective endeavours that prove Timmy to be nothing more than an annoying, inventive boy.
Some of the language may be above children’s reading capabilities, however, the humour is directly on their level. Whereas an adult may not find the idea of a cat stealing someone’s pants amusing, a child would find that hysterical.
There is no reason to read the Timmy Failure books in order, so if you, like me, read book six first, there is no problem. The stories are particularly aimed at young boys and will hopefully encourage the demographic to start reading more. Whilst it may not be a great feat of literature, it is a good enough introduction to the world of books.
For fans of Diary of a Wimpy Kid (Kinney, 2004) is a juvenile series by American author, Stephan Pastis, about a young boy who believes he is the world’s greatest detective. A series that is continually growing, the sixth Timmy Failure story is now available for fans and new readers. Subtitled The Cat Stole My Pants, Timmy Failure embarks on an adventure of mystery and crime solving whilst getting himself into all sorts of mischief.
Emulating both real and fictional detectives, Timmy has established his own agency, Failure, Inc., of which he is the sole employee after the flight of his (imaginary) ex-business partner, Total the polar bear, who is currently seeking political asylum in Cuba. Unfortunately, Timmy has been forced to join his mother and Doorman Dave on their honeymoon in Key West, Florida, along with Doorman Dave’s nephew, Emilio.
“Crime doesn’t take a holiday. Neither does greatness.” Determined to continue solving crimes, Timmy hires Emilio as an unpaid intern and sets off searching for crimes, greatly over exaggerating every little piece of “evidence” he finds. However, it soon appears that someone is out to get Timmy and he, along with Emilio, is determined to find out whom.
Timmy is a melodramatic, unconventional child with a large ego and is constantly getting told off. From annoying adults to having his pants stolen by a polydactyl cat – or so he claims – there is no end to the hilarious situations he causes.
The cat that stole Timmy’s pants only makes a brief appearance in the book, therefore the subtitle is more to attract the attention of young readers with its silliness rather than be suggestive of a certain storyline.
Despite his grand claims, Timmy is not a very good detective and a lot of his unsolved crimes have been invented by his overactive imagination. This adds to the humour because, although he seems like an intelligent child, his ideas are completely silly.
Adorned with childish drawings and diagrams, Timmy Failure narrates the story from his subjective point of view, inflating his successes and blaming any failure on poor Emilio. No one takes Timmy seriously, which is something many of the target readers may appreciate, although they should also understand how futile Timmy’s attempts are at being a detective.
The storyline is not particularly clear until the final chapters of the book. Up until that moment, the book is full of disastrous, imaginary detective endeavours that prove Timmy to be nothing more than an annoying, inventive boy.
Some of the language may be above children’s reading capabilities, however, the humour is directly on their level. Whereas an adult may not find the idea of a cat stealing someone’s pants amusing, a child would find that hysterical.
There is no reason to read the Timmy Failure books in order, so if you, like me, read book six first, there is no problem. The stories are particularly aimed at young boys and will hopefully encourage the demographic to start reading more. Whilst it may not be a great feat of literature, it is a good enough introduction to the world of books.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated Insidious (2010) in Movies
May 12, 2018
I finally have access to all the Insidious films. Because of this, I’m in the process of re-watching the first two – something I haven’t done since their initial release. I watched the first of the films yesterday and my thoughts are a bit mixed on it. Don’t get me wrong – I like the movie, but I think it’s PG-13 rating held it back a bit.
Dalton (Ty Simpkins) is, undoubtedly, the central figure of the story. His role throughout much of the movie is to lay comatose in a bed whilst demons fight for possession of his body. He’s got two siblings, a brother named Foster (I think I got that right) and a sister named Cali. His parents, Renai (Rose Byrne) and Josh (Patrick Wilson) are the supposed doting parents – Josh on the other hand could benefit from an actor that’s a bit more invested in his role. I could feel him rolling his eyes between scenes, he was so unenthused.
The plot of Insidious is fairly straightforward, though there is at least one glaring continuity issue that we encounter. For the most part it’s pretty standard haunting and possession, but somehow halfway through the movie (okay, maybe a little later than that) two characters vanish completely. Foster and Cali, the entire time we’re dealing with the Further – another plane of existence – are nowhere to be found. No one’s worried about their safety, no one’s trying to protect them. They’re just… gone. Unless I missed something critical in which they were sent off to a friend’s house or something, then we’ve got a glaring plot hole that gives this film a bit of a blemish when it comes to its polish.
PG-13 is the rating given to a horror film whose goal is to make money. The whole reason it doesn’t cross that boundary is so that all the teenagers can go to the theatre without their parents for what they hope will be a good scare. I learned this the hard way when I had to walk out of the Prom Night remake because kids wouldn’t shut up. (As a result, I rarely go to see a movie that is PG-13.) In Insidious we see the affects of this in the severity of the “hauntings.” Even the demons are downplayed – there’s a distinct lack of violence in the film that one might expect when a powerful entity is trying to take hold of a kid’s body. Sure, we’ve got a few bloody handprints, a little bit of poltergeist-like activity, but that’s it. It’s most stuff you’d expect to see in a scary movie directed at children, with the addition of a few jump-scares that rely heavily on auditory senses.
Needless to say, there are far worse movies than Insidious out there and I still intend to watch the other films. I’m a bit indecisive on how I want to rate this – I enjoyed watching it up until things get a bit silly toward the end, where the Further is involved. At the same time, I don’t dislike the movie. That said, I’ve decided to go with a three out of five.
Dalton (Ty Simpkins) is, undoubtedly, the central figure of the story. His role throughout much of the movie is to lay comatose in a bed whilst demons fight for possession of his body. He’s got two siblings, a brother named Foster (I think I got that right) and a sister named Cali. His parents, Renai (Rose Byrne) and Josh (Patrick Wilson) are the supposed doting parents – Josh on the other hand could benefit from an actor that’s a bit more invested in his role. I could feel him rolling his eyes between scenes, he was so unenthused.
The plot of Insidious is fairly straightforward, though there is at least one glaring continuity issue that we encounter. For the most part it’s pretty standard haunting and possession, but somehow halfway through the movie (okay, maybe a little later than that) two characters vanish completely. Foster and Cali, the entire time we’re dealing with the Further – another plane of existence – are nowhere to be found. No one’s worried about their safety, no one’s trying to protect them. They’re just… gone. Unless I missed something critical in which they were sent off to a friend’s house or something, then we’ve got a glaring plot hole that gives this film a bit of a blemish when it comes to its polish.
PG-13 is the rating given to a horror film whose goal is to make money. The whole reason it doesn’t cross that boundary is so that all the teenagers can go to the theatre without their parents for what they hope will be a good scare. I learned this the hard way when I had to walk out of the Prom Night remake because kids wouldn’t shut up. (As a result, I rarely go to see a movie that is PG-13.) In Insidious we see the affects of this in the severity of the “hauntings.” Even the demons are downplayed – there’s a distinct lack of violence in the film that one might expect when a powerful entity is trying to take hold of a kid’s body. Sure, we’ve got a few bloody handprints, a little bit of poltergeist-like activity, but that’s it. It’s most stuff you’d expect to see in a scary movie directed at children, with the addition of a few jump-scares that rely heavily on auditory senses.
Needless to say, there are far worse movies than Insidious out there and I still intend to watch the other films. I’m a bit indecisive on how I want to rate this – I enjoyed watching it up until things get a bit silly toward the end, where the Further is involved. At the same time, I don’t dislike the movie. That said, I’ve decided to go with a three out of five.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated JESUS, Career Counselor: How to Find (and Keep) Your Perfect Work in Books
Feb 11, 2019
This book sat on my desk for the longest time, half-read. I am a SAHM, stay-at-home mom, and I found this book had very little to do with my "career." Jones did eventually address this in the book, but only briefly, and it makes me wonder what the author's personal views are on women who choose my career. A perfect example of this is that at the end of every element section, she lists careers she considers appropriate for those that match that element, and none of the four lists mention a SAHM. Even when she discusses those who have been forced to leave their job or choose to leave their job, she views being stuck at home as a temporary place and describes how to move out of it, never considering that maybe Jesus wants it to be permanent.
Delving into the opening of the book, it is quickly apparent that the author assumes that the reader has read the author's previous books and will use these other books to produce a mission statement, personality profile, "four greatest talents", and a vision statement. As I have not read her previous works, and don't intend to, I felt I was at a further disadvantage from benefiting from reading this book.
Another mark against the book is that Jones does not stick with only one version of the Bible to quote from, and the only time she actually states which version she is quoting from is when she quotes the KJV - every other time is a mystery.
There are many positive points to the book, such as the organization. Each of the four elements are covered in-depth, with each of the four sections containing three chapters that each focus on a single word that fits that element, all beginning with the prefix "re-". Each of these words come with a detailed definition, and each chapter provides places for the reader to take notes and answer the author's questions, such as the "Make It Yours" sections and the "Career Exercises", with each chapter ending with a prayer. The "Bonus Features" at the end of each of the four sections list additional prayers, the aforementioned list of recommended occupations, and "Summary Points" of the three words defined in each section. The last section of the book has additional "Bonus Features," which is the authors' Book Picks, a list of Internet resources, a section on resumes, and a section titled "How to Deal with Sudden Job Loss / Reversal of Fortune." I do enjoy a well-organized book.
The anecdotes were entertaining and the advice seemed good and useful to those in the job market. I did appreciate Jones' goal of making Jesus central to a person's career, even if the methods by which she approaches this seemed more New Age than Biblical, despite the scripture quotes. Her writing was also very sensitive to the reader who has lost a job or is unhappy in his or her current job, which would be an appropriate way to address the reader in the current economy.
Delving into the opening of the book, it is quickly apparent that the author assumes that the reader has read the author's previous books and will use these other books to produce a mission statement, personality profile, "four greatest talents", and a vision statement. As I have not read her previous works, and don't intend to, I felt I was at a further disadvantage from benefiting from reading this book.
Another mark against the book is that Jones does not stick with only one version of the Bible to quote from, and the only time she actually states which version she is quoting from is when she quotes the KJV - every other time is a mystery.
There are many positive points to the book, such as the organization. Each of the four elements are covered in-depth, with each of the four sections containing three chapters that each focus on a single word that fits that element, all beginning with the prefix "re-". Each of these words come with a detailed definition, and each chapter provides places for the reader to take notes and answer the author's questions, such as the "Make It Yours" sections and the "Career Exercises", with each chapter ending with a prayer. The "Bonus Features" at the end of each of the four sections list additional prayers, the aforementioned list of recommended occupations, and "Summary Points" of the three words defined in each section. The last section of the book has additional "Bonus Features," which is the authors' Book Picks, a list of Internet resources, a section on resumes, and a section titled "How to Deal with Sudden Job Loss / Reversal of Fortune." I do enjoy a well-organized book.
The anecdotes were entertaining and the advice seemed good and useful to those in the job market. I did appreciate Jones' goal of making Jesus central to a person's career, even if the methods by which she approaches this seemed more New Age than Biblical, despite the scripture quotes. Her writing was also very sensitive to the reader who has lost a job or is unhappy in his or her current job, which would be an appropriate way to address the reader in the current economy.
Janeeny (200 KP) rated The Pisces in Books
May 9, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Lucy is a student who doesn’t really know what she wants in life, and after an acrimonious break up from her boyfriend. Her sister throws her a lifeline, giving Lucy a break from her desert life in Phoenix, her sister asks Lucy to housesit for her whilst also attending a local therapy group. So Lucy heads to Los Angeles and it’s here that she has an awakening and a lurid affair with a merman.
I read this as this months book club book. The lady that suggested it did mention that there are a fair amount of sex scenes and sexual references so I was prepared. However I must say that, for me, none of the sex scenes were gratuitous, they formed part of the story. If you took out the sex scenes the book really wouldn’t make a lot of sense or would at least be a bit weaker for it. The language she uses isn’t cliche or cringey either (there’s no heaving breasts or throbbing body parts) it’s very ‘real’.
This book is a bit like the ones you’re given to read in English literature classes in school, that are rife with meaning and symbolism that you have no idea about until your teacher points it out. I feel there is a strong feminist message in there somewhere, as most of the women in the book are trying to fight a sexual reliance on men. It’s also heavily underlined by the fact that literally all the male characters are weak in one way or another.
To that point I really did not like Theo, the main love interest. He seemed a bit too weak, not as a character but as a person. This is a book with a strong feminist message, so it wouldn’t do to have your heroine overshadowed by a man so that is understandable. (A little side note, a member of my book group bought up the interesting idea that the ‘weakness’ is just an act and he’s psychologically preying on Lucy’s vulnerability)
There are a lot of references to Sappho, which again I feel hints at a feminist message. I’m sorry to say that even though I am aware of Sappho I have barely any knowledge about her. I have now acquired a couple of books from the library to remedy this.
There were some quite strong opinions on this in book group. Whilst I liked the book for it’s style of writing, one of the other ladies liked it for its controversy, but most of the group really didn’t like it at all. The strong feeling against it came, mostly, from the explicit language that was used, whilst one member was so bewildered by the events within the book she was convinced the main character was just on a big drug trip and hallucinating the whole thing.
A couple of us did take something away from the book, I took away a strong interest in the works of Sappho, and one of the other members took away a deeper understanding of a past friend whose behaviour she recognised in some of the characters in the book.
I think we’re going for something a little less controversial next month
I read this as this months book club book. The lady that suggested it did mention that there are a fair amount of sex scenes and sexual references so I was prepared. However I must say that, for me, none of the sex scenes were gratuitous, they formed part of the story. If you took out the sex scenes the book really wouldn’t make a lot of sense or would at least be a bit weaker for it. The language she uses isn’t cliche or cringey either (there’s no heaving breasts or throbbing body parts) it’s very ‘real’.
This book is a bit like the ones you’re given to read in English literature classes in school, that are rife with meaning and symbolism that you have no idea about until your teacher points it out. I feel there is a strong feminist message in there somewhere, as most of the women in the book are trying to fight a sexual reliance on men. It’s also heavily underlined by the fact that literally all the male characters are weak in one way or another.
To that point I really did not like Theo, the main love interest. He seemed a bit too weak, not as a character but as a person. This is a book with a strong feminist message, so it wouldn’t do to have your heroine overshadowed by a man so that is understandable. (A little side note, a member of my book group bought up the interesting idea that the ‘weakness’ is just an act and he’s psychologically preying on Lucy’s vulnerability)
There are a lot of references to Sappho, which again I feel hints at a feminist message. I’m sorry to say that even though I am aware of Sappho I have barely any knowledge about her. I have now acquired a couple of books from the library to remedy this.
There were some quite strong opinions on this in book group. Whilst I liked the book for it’s style of writing, one of the other ladies liked it for its controversy, but most of the group really didn’t like it at all. The strong feeling against it came, mostly, from the explicit language that was used, whilst one member was so bewildered by the events within the book she was convinced the main character was just on a big drug trip and hallucinating the whole thing.
A couple of us did take something away from the book, I took away a strong interest in the works of Sappho, and one of the other members took away a deeper understanding of a past friend whose behaviour she recognised in some of the characters in the book.
I think we’re going for something a little less controversial next month
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated American Assassin (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Great, another terrorism thriller
Just what the world needs, another ill-timed terrorism-based thriller – you can almost hear the groans can’t you? It seems the movie-going public just can’t get enough of these accounts of urban terrorism.
Last year’s diabolical London Has Fallen inexplicably took over $200million at the box office and the better-received Unlocked also performed well commercially. All of this in spite of the constant threat posed by terrorism across the globe.
Now, there’s a new kid on the block. American Assassin. But does this film based on the novel of the same name do enough to be different?
When Cold War veteran Stan Hurley (Michael Keaton) takes CIA black ops recruit Mitch Rapp (Dylan O’Brien) under his wing, they receive an assignment to investigate a wave of random attacks on both military and civilian targets. After discovering a pattern of violence, Hurley and Rapp join forces with a lethal Turkish agent to stop a mysterious operative who wants to start a global war.
Michael Cuesta’s film is propped up by a nicely shot opening in which Dylan O’Brien’s Mitch comes up against Islamic terrorists while on holiday with his fiancé. Naturally, she’s brutally murdered and it becomes Mitch’s life-ambition to hunt down terrorist cells across the world.
Yes, you heard me right. That’s the plot. Ridiculous in every way and frankly, a little boring, American Assassin is a poor excuse for a film riddled with dreadful dialogue, phoned-in performances and uninspiring camerawork.
What makes it worse is that Maze Runner rising star Dylan O’Brien thought it would be a good idea to helm such a vehicle. He performs well but feels at odds with the film’s dark tone and is in serious danger of doing a post-Abduction Taylor Lautner and tanking his promising career. Michael Keaton’s bizarre effort here is the polar opposite of his genuinely menacing turn in Spider-Man: Homecoming only two months ago.
The rest of the cast might as well be made of cardboard they’re that uninteresting and while globe-trotting should evoke some visual joy, the scenery feels flat, hampered by a dull colour palette and the fact it’s been done to death already.
As American Assassin steamrolls to a 70s-esque Bond finale, we’re subjected to some torturous CGI, though Cuesta does well to ramp up the tension a little, but it’s the subject matter once again that proves a sticking point.
In a world where our fears of urban terrorism are greater than ever, should we be classing films like this as ‘entertainment’? Take the opening sequence for example, as nicely choreographed as it is, the parallels to the dreadful Tunisian beach attack of 2015 linger in the back of my mind and I find it all very much in poor taste.
Overall, American Assassin is yet another addition to the already overstuffed terrorism thriller genre that adds absolutely nothing new. The performances are dull, the story is flat and the cinematography is uninspired. Poor Dylan O’Brien left the Maze for this?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/09/15/american-assassin-review/
Last year’s diabolical London Has Fallen inexplicably took over $200million at the box office and the better-received Unlocked also performed well commercially. All of this in spite of the constant threat posed by terrorism across the globe.
Now, there’s a new kid on the block. American Assassin. But does this film based on the novel of the same name do enough to be different?
When Cold War veteran Stan Hurley (Michael Keaton) takes CIA black ops recruit Mitch Rapp (Dylan O’Brien) under his wing, they receive an assignment to investigate a wave of random attacks on both military and civilian targets. After discovering a pattern of violence, Hurley and Rapp join forces with a lethal Turkish agent to stop a mysterious operative who wants to start a global war.
Michael Cuesta’s film is propped up by a nicely shot opening in which Dylan O’Brien’s Mitch comes up against Islamic terrorists while on holiday with his fiancé. Naturally, she’s brutally murdered and it becomes Mitch’s life-ambition to hunt down terrorist cells across the world.
Yes, you heard me right. That’s the plot. Ridiculous in every way and frankly, a little boring, American Assassin is a poor excuse for a film riddled with dreadful dialogue, phoned-in performances and uninspiring camerawork.
What makes it worse is that Maze Runner rising star Dylan O’Brien thought it would be a good idea to helm such a vehicle. He performs well but feels at odds with the film’s dark tone and is in serious danger of doing a post-Abduction Taylor Lautner and tanking his promising career. Michael Keaton’s bizarre effort here is the polar opposite of his genuinely menacing turn in Spider-Man: Homecoming only two months ago.
The rest of the cast might as well be made of cardboard they’re that uninteresting and while globe-trotting should evoke some visual joy, the scenery feels flat, hampered by a dull colour palette and the fact it’s been done to death already.
As American Assassin steamrolls to a 70s-esque Bond finale, we’re subjected to some torturous CGI, though Cuesta does well to ramp up the tension a little, but it’s the subject matter once again that proves a sticking point.
In a world where our fears of urban terrorism are greater than ever, should we be classing films like this as ‘entertainment’? Take the opening sequence for example, as nicely choreographed as it is, the parallels to the dreadful Tunisian beach attack of 2015 linger in the back of my mind and I find it all very much in poor taste.
Overall, American Assassin is yet another addition to the already overstuffed terrorism thriller genre that adds absolutely nothing new. The performances are dull, the story is flat and the cinematography is uninspired. Poor Dylan O’Brien left the Maze for this?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/09/15/american-assassin-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated A Quiet Place (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Like many parents, Lee (John Krasinski), and Evelyn (Emily Blunt), have an overwhelming urge to keep their children safe in the world and protect them at all costs. In the new film “A Quiet Place”, that maternal drive is taken to extreme levels as the world has been attacked by vicious creatures who hunt by sound alone.
The slightest loud noise will bring a rapid moving creature in moments that will destroy whatever made the sound instantly. As such, Lee and Evelyn have gone to great lengths to live as quietly as possible and even have a system for their home and supply runs to be as safe as possible.
When tragedy strikes, it causes a division between Lee and their only daughter Regan (Millicent Simmonds), who although deaf herself believes she is being blamed for the tragedy and the guilt has only grown over time.
The family continues on and the film jumps forward in time to show that Lee is studying as much about the creatures as he can in an effort to find a weakness they can use as well as to provide more security for his family.
Of course even the best plans do not always work and what follows is a very intense and raw struggle for survival which shows just how far a person is willing to go for their family.
Krasinski not only stars in the film but also directed it and helped to write the screenplay. Working with his actual wife worked very well as they have a fantastic chemistry which helps them convey the emotions and thoughts of the film well which is amazing considering how little dialogue there is in the film as gestures and sign language are the most common form of communication.
The film is very intense in moments and a fantastic extended sequence with Blunt had my wife squeezing my hand tightly and afraid to utter a sound as it left her holding her breath.
The film is a very fresh take on the creature genre and the quality of the performances lifts the film to a level rarely seen in a suspense film. The film did play a bit fast and loose with some aspects such as the history of the creatures and the state of the world around them as it is largely conveyed through newspaper headlines left lying around. As such I found myself wondering why certain defensive options and offensive tactics were not used as to me they seemed to be common sense approaches. For a film with such a fresh premise and strong performances, the ending did seem to depend a bit too much on some of the usual Hollywood stereotypes but it did not keep the film from being highly entertaining and effective. As I watched the film I kept thinking that there could be a connection to “Cloverfield” especially based on aspects of the creatures. The film was made for a very small budget so hopefully we will be seeing a sequel in the near future as “A Quiet Place” was a very enjoyable film and one of the best surprises of the year.
http://sknr.net/2018/04/05/a-quiet-place/
The slightest loud noise will bring a rapid moving creature in moments that will destroy whatever made the sound instantly. As such, Lee and Evelyn have gone to great lengths to live as quietly as possible and even have a system for their home and supply runs to be as safe as possible.
When tragedy strikes, it causes a division between Lee and their only daughter Regan (Millicent Simmonds), who although deaf herself believes she is being blamed for the tragedy and the guilt has only grown over time.
The family continues on and the film jumps forward in time to show that Lee is studying as much about the creatures as he can in an effort to find a weakness they can use as well as to provide more security for his family.
Of course even the best plans do not always work and what follows is a very intense and raw struggle for survival which shows just how far a person is willing to go for their family.
Krasinski not only stars in the film but also directed it and helped to write the screenplay. Working with his actual wife worked very well as they have a fantastic chemistry which helps them convey the emotions and thoughts of the film well which is amazing considering how little dialogue there is in the film as gestures and sign language are the most common form of communication.
The film is very intense in moments and a fantastic extended sequence with Blunt had my wife squeezing my hand tightly and afraid to utter a sound as it left her holding her breath.
The film is a very fresh take on the creature genre and the quality of the performances lifts the film to a level rarely seen in a suspense film. The film did play a bit fast and loose with some aspects such as the history of the creatures and the state of the world around them as it is largely conveyed through newspaper headlines left lying around. As such I found myself wondering why certain defensive options and offensive tactics were not used as to me they seemed to be common sense approaches. For a film with such a fresh premise and strong performances, the ending did seem to depend a bit too much on some of the usual Hollywood stereotypes but it did not keep the film from being highly entertaining and effective. As I watched the film I kept thinking that there could be a connection to “Cloverfield” especially based on aspects of the creatures. The film was made for a very small budget so hopefully we will be seeing a sequel in the near future as “A Quiet Place” was a very enjoyable film and one of the best surprises of the year.
http://sknr.net/2018/04/05/a-quiet-place/
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Book Of Love (2017) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: The Book of Love starts when architect Henry Herschel (Sudeikis) loses his pregnant wife Penny (Biel) in a car accident, broken he needs to take time away from work, he notices homeless teenager Millie (Williams) searching for scraps.
When Henry learns what Millie is planning, he decides to jump in and help her with the project to build a raft to sail across the Atlantic, this gives him a new lease for life, to help someone follow their dream.
Thoughts on The Book of Love
Characters – Henry Herschel is an architect on the verge of a big promotion to partner in the company, and a baby, his life however is turned upside down when his wife is killed in an accident. Filled with grief he meets teenager Millie who he helps with her project, taking his mind off his loss. Millie is a homeless teenager, well she is forced to live with her estranged Uncle and she wants to build a raft like in the journal she finds. She believes she is doing the right thing as she is dealing with own problems. Penny is Henry’s wife who even after her death gives him guiding light to help Millie. Julia is the mother-in-law wanting the best for Henry as her own way of dealing with the loss of her daughter.
Performances – Jason Sudeikis continues to show that he is delightful to watch in these drama-comedy roles, he shows enough grief and hope to make you believe that he has been the one to lose his wife. Maisie Williams is good for the most part, but she does struggle to maintain the accent through the film. Jessica Biel and Mary Steenburgen both give us good performances in the supporting roles.
Story – The story follows a grief ridden man that decides to help a teenager with her own problems in an attempt to cure his own problems only to there to help cure her problems. This does have sweet moments as we see how the lives have been turned upside down by their own tragic losses and the moments where they can help support each other, we do however deal with grief in a realistic way, being left empty in need of something to keep us going. The glaring problem is the repeating of the facts about people dying, we just don’t need this on repeat to get the point, as we know the focus on the story is, enjoy life however difficult moments have been.
Settings – The film is set-in small-town America, well the suburbs, which shows us how life can change in an instant in this world no matter who or where you are.
Scene of the Movie – Closing shot.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Maisie Williams accent.
Final Thoughts – This is a charming movie that gets the message across well, we get to see just how grief can be processed by the people suffering from it.
Overall: One of the dreamers to see where people can make it.
When Henry learns what Millie is planning, he decides to jump in and help her with the project to build a raft to sail across the Atlantic, this gives him a new lease for life, to help someone follow their dream.
Thoughts on The Book of Love
Characters – Henry Herschel is an architect on the verge of a big promotion to partner in the company, and a baby, his life however is turned upside down when his wife is killed in an accident. Filled with grief he meets teenager Millie who he helps with her project, taking his mind off his loss. Millie is a homeless teenager, well she is forced to live with her estranged Uncle and she wants to build a raft like in the journal she finds. She believes she is doing the right thing as she is dealing with own problems. Penny is Henry’s wife who even after her death gives him guiding light to help Millie. Julia is the mother-in-law wanting the best for Henry as her own way of dealing with the loss of her daughter.
Performances – Jason Sudeikis continues to show that he is delightful to watch in these drama-comedy roles, he shows enough grief and hope to make you believe that he has been the one to lose his wife. Maisie Williams is good for the most part, but she does struggle to maintain the accent through the film. Jessica Biel and Mary Steenburgen both give us good performances in the supporting roles.
Story – The story follows a grief ridden man that decides to help a teenager with her own problems in an attempt to cure his own problems only to there to help cure her problems. This does have sweet moments as we see how the lives have been turned upside down by their own tragic losses and the moments where they can help support each other, we do however deal with grief in a realistic way, being left empty in need of something to keep us going. The glaring problem is the repeating of the facts about people dying, we just don’t need this on repeat to get the point, as we know the focus on the story is, enjoy life however difficult moments have been.
Settings – The film is set-in small-town America, well the suburbs, which shows us how life can change in an instant in this world no matter who or where you are.
Scene of the Movie – Closing shot.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Maisie Williams accent.
Final Thoughts – This is a charming movie that gets the message across well, we get to see just how grief can be processed by the people suffering from it.
Overall: One of the dreamers to see where people can make it.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Villain (1971) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: Villain starts as we see how gangster Vic Dakin (Burton) controls London, he has people that will grass on him to the cops with Inspector Bob Matthews (Davenport) trying to bring down the criminal.
Vic continues to use his business connections to stay ahead of the police, with Wolfe Lissner (McShane) being the latest person the inspectors are turning to try and give up Vic’s secrets.
Thoughts on Villain
Characters – Vic Dakin runs London with his criminal activities, he is feared by most people and if you cross him, you will get hurt if not killed. He has become over confident that he can get away with anything, making him one of the prime targets for everyone involved in law. Wolf Lissner works for Vic, he is one of the youngster members of the crew and the one that the police are trying to use to turn on him, even if he the one person that Vic will always turn to. Bob Matthews is the inspector that has been trying to bring down Vic for years, he has risen up the ranks, got the people in the gang, but never been able to get the conviction. Gerald Draycott is the politician that is being blackmailed to keep the business under wraps for Vic.
Performances – We do have two big names in his film, first Richard Burton that doesn’t get to show the skill he could bring to a film, while a younger Ian McShane shows us that he could be set for a career in this sidekick gangster role. The rest of the cast are doing all they need to without being in anyway stand out through the film.
Story – The story follows a gangster that has the power over London, the police have been hunting him for years, but he always finds a way to get out of trouble. This time they get closer than ever before and could finally take down one of the biggest gangsters in London. When it comes to the gangster genre, we don’t really ever get much different when it comes to where the story goes, this one is based loosely on the Kray brother, but for some reason only one of the twins. It does feel like we have seen everything before, we don’t get drawn into support either side of the battle and end up feeling like it is just another gangster film.
Crime – The crime world we enter shows us just where the criminals operate and just where the police will need to turn to, in any hope of bringing him down.
Settings – The film is mostly set in London which see just how the criminals operate, where they can get away from crime.
Scene of the Movie – The opening scene as we see just how Vic can operate.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The final shot.
Final Thoughts – This is a typical British gangster film that starts with an intense opening, only to become a drag as the film unfolds.
Overall: British Gangster 101.
Vic continues to use his business connections to stay ahead of the police, with Wolfe Lissner (McShane) being the latest person the inspectors are turning to try and give up Vic’s secrets.
Thoughts on Villain
Characters – Vic Dakin runs London with his criminal activities, he is feared by most people and if you cross him, you will get hurt if not killed. He has become over confident that he can get away with anything, making him one of the prime targets for everyone involved in law. Wolf Lissner works for Vic, he is one of the youngster members of the crew and the one that the police are trying to use to turn on him, even if he the one person that Vic will always turn to. Bob Matthews is the inspector that has been trying to bring down Vic for years, he has risen up the ranks, got the people in the gang, but never been able to get the conviction. Gerald Draycott is the politician that is being blackmailed to keep the business under wraps for Vic.
Performances – We do have two big names in his film, first Richard Burton that doesn’t get to show the skill he could bring to a film, while a younger Ian McShane shows us that he could be set for a career in this sidekick gangster role. The rest of the cast are doing all they need to without being in anyway stand out through the film.
Story – The story follows a gangster that has the power over London, the police have been hunting him for years, but he always finds a way to get out of trouble. This time they get closer than ever before and could finally take down one of the biggest gangsters in London. When it comes to the gangster genre, we don’t really ever get much different when it comes to where the story goes, this one is based loosely on the Kray brother, but for some reason only one of the twins. It does feel like we have seen everything before, we don’t get drawn into support either side of the battle and end up feeling like it is just another gangster film.
Crime – The crime world we enter shows us just where the criminals operate and just where the police will need to turn to, in any hope of bringing him down.
Settings – The film is mostly set in London which see just how the criminals operate, where they can get away from crime.
Scene of the Movie – The opening scene as we see just how Vic can operate.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The final shot.
Final Thoughts – This is a typical British gangster film that starts with an intense opening, only to become a drag as the film unfolds.
Overall: British Gangster 101.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Ringu 2 (Ring 2) (2005) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
Characters – Rachel has moved her child to a smaller town to start a new life away from the pain of the previous one. she gets a new job, only for the first day on the job, Samara takes her next victim. Wanting to stop the spread of the curse in this new town, Rachel destroys the video tape, only to see herself become the target once again of Samara. Rachel will need to continue the investigation into who Samara was and why she is still haunting the world. Max is one of the co-workers at the newspaper, he isn’t trying to hit on Rachel, but does become the only person that Rachel can turn too. Aidan is the son that has started to take after his father with his love of photography, he does become the target of Samara, we see two different sides to David in this film. Dr Temple is trying to figure out what has been happening to Aidan, first seeing that it could be child abuse, she needs to make sure the child is safe before anything else.
Performances – Naomi Watts is still strong in the leading role, we need her to show extra motherly emotions in the film this time around. Simon Baker doesn’t get a chance to get going in this film, while David Dorfman does make a big improvement because of the extra additions to his character. The supporting cast are not the strongest either with most getting left to limited screen time.
Story – The story here continues to see Rachel haunted by Samara needing to continue to unlock the truth about Samara to save her own son from her curse. Now this is a confusing as for a story because everything felt pretty wrapped up at the end of the film, this did end up just putting a forced sequel out there which tries to build more on the Samara legacy. Where this falls short in the story as by giving us weak supporting characters, having the events literally start the day Rachel arrives in the new town and going against certain things that happen in the first film.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in the film does give us basic moments of scares, though dream sequences a hoping the same jumps can worked in the first film. the mystery continues to look at the mystery about Samara and why she has continued to haunt people.
Settings – The film was moved to a smaller location, while returning to certain other locations with them being an extra clue involved in the film.
Special Effects – The effects in the film have dated already, you can see certain green screens being used, which were meant for uneasy scenes.
Scene of the Movie – The bath surprise.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The dated effects.
Final Thoughts – This is a weaker sequel that tries to build up on the original legacy, only to dive further into something we didn’t need to get more about what is happening.
Overall: Simple and weak sequel.
Performances – Naomi Watts is still strong in the leading role, we need her to show extra motherly emotions in the film this time around. Simon Baker doesn’t get a chance to get going in this film, while David Dorfman does make a big improvement because of the extra additions to his character. The supporting cast are not the strongest either with most getting left to limited screen time.
Story – The story here continues to see Rachel haunted by Samara needing to continue to unlock the truth about Samara to save her own son from her curse. Now this is a confusing as for a story because everything felt pretty wrapped up at the end of the film, this did end up just putting a forced sequel out there which tries to build more on the Samara legacy. Where this falls short in the story as by giving us weak supporting characters, having the events literally start the day Rachel arrives in the new town and going against certain things that happen in the first film.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in the film does give us basic moments of scares, though dream sequences a hoping the same jumps can worked in the first film. the mystery continues to look at the mystery about Samara and why she has continued to haunt people.
Settings – The film was moved to a smaller location, while returning to certain other locations with them being an extra clue involved in the film.
Special Effects – The effects in the film have dated already, you can see certain green screens being used, which were meant for uneasy scenes.
Scene of the Movie – The bath surprise.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The dated effects.
Final Thoughts – This is a weaker sequel that tries to build up on the original legacy, only to dive further into something we didn’t need to get more about what is happening.
Overall: Simple and weak sequel.