Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated Alaska (1996) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Alaska starts as we meet the Barnes family, father Jake (Benedict) a small plane pilot and his kids Jessie (Birch) and Sean (Kartheiser), the family has started a new life in Alaska after their death of Jake’s wife and mother of Jessie and Sean. While Jessie has embraced this new life enjoying the beautiful sites, Sean is struggling with new life. We also get to meet to poachers Perry (Heston) and Koontz (Fraser) who have been hunting polar bears.
When their father goes missing, Jessie and Sean aim to go in search of him through the Alaskan wilderness discovering a captured baby polar bear cub that they release who joins them on their adventure, which only attracts the poachers attention as they find themselves chased through the wilderness by the poachers too in a race against time to find their father.
Thoughts on Alaska
Characters/Performance – Jessie is the sister of the siblings, she has embraced the change to Alaska learning to be part of the team with her father, while they both want to search for their father, she is the most prepared of the two. Sean hates his new life in Alaska and wants to move back to Chicago but you can clearly see he is grieving his mother with his behaviour, but with his father missing he will do everything he can to find him, learning to love the beautiful landscape they are part of now. Jake is the father of the family that has given up his 747-pilot job to start a new life in the small town in Alaska, he does spend most of the film trapped in his plane but his character gives Jessie and Sean the reason for going on their adventure. Perry and Koontz are two poachers hunting polar bears, they cross paths with the kids as they menacingly try to recapture the polar bear cub that they had released.
Performance wise, Thora Birch and Vincent Kartheiser are both great in the lead roles as the children in search of their father. Dirk doesn’t have much to do but does what he needs to well. Charlton Heston as the menacing poacher does seem to enjoy the role he plays in the movie.
Story – The story of two young teenagers going into the wilderness to find their missing father is a nice tried and tested formula, this style of film seemed to be the rave for family films around the time too, so to stand out you had to do something different. We get the moments of peril which are good and well-paced but we also get the moments of discovery which are just as important. Obviously, there are negatives here which include the idea the adults are clueless when searching for people in crashes and poachers being just evil people. I would also like to point out, that it is very unlikely a polar bear mother is just going to accept another cub, well that is what David Attenborough has taught me.
Adventure/Family – The adventure the kids get to go on is one I remember watching as a kid going, I wanna do that and I still would like to. The family side of this film is about the unity between a broken family doing everything to stay together and of course having a cute little polar bear helping them out.
Settings – Alaska as a setting, beautiful, stunning, peril filled and perfect for the story being told.
Effects – We only have a few effects in use here, most feels practical with the stunt work and working with a potential deadly animal in a polar bear.
Final Thoughts – This is easily one of the better kids work with animal films of the 90s, one that gives you hope in humanity and a wonderful setting.
Overall: Family night sorted.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/01/31/alaska-1996/
When their father goes missing, Jessie and Sean aim to go in search of him through the Alaskan wilderness discovering a captured baby polar bear cub that they release who joins them on their adventure, which only attracts the poachers attention as they find themselves chased through the wilderness by the poachers too in a race against time to find their father.
Thoughts on Alaska
Characters/Performance – Jessie is the sister of the siblings, she has embraced the change to Alaska learning to be part of the team with her father, while they both want to search for their father, she is the most prepared of the two. Sean hates his new life in Alaska and wants to move back to Chicago but you can clearly see he is grieving his mother with his behaviour, but with his father missing he will do everything he can to find him, learning to love the beautiful landscape they are part of now. Jake is the father of the family that has given up his 747-pilot job to start a new life in the small town in Alaska, he does spend most of the film trapped in his plane but his character gives Jessie and Sean the reason for going on their adventure. Perry and Koontz are two poachers hunting polar bears, they cross paths with the kids as they menacingly try to recapture the polar bear cub that they had released.
Performance wise, Thora Birch and Vincent Kartheiser are both great in the lead roles as the children in search of their father. Dirk doesn’t have much to do but does what he needs to well. Charlton Heston as the menacing poacher does seem to enjoy the role he plays in the movie.
Story – The story of two young teenagers going into the wilderness to find their missing father is a nice tried and tested formula, this style of film seemed to be the rave for family films around the time too, so to stand out you had to do something different. We get the moments of peril which are good and well-paced but we also get the moments of discovery which are just as important. Obviously, there are negatives here which include the idea the adults are clueless when searching for people in crashes and poachers being just evil people. I would also like to point out, that it is very unlikely a polar bear mother is just going to accept another cub, well that is what David Attenborough has taught me.
Adventure/Family – The adventure the kids get to go on is one I remember watching as a kid going, I wanna do that and I still would like to. The family side of this film is about the unity between a broken family doing everything to stay together and of course having a cute little polar bear helping them out.
Settings – Alaska as a setting, beautiful, stunning, peril filled and perfect for the story being told.
Effects – We only have a few effects in use here, most feels practical with the stunt work and working with a potential deadly animal in a polar bear.
Final Thoughts – This is easily one of the better kids work with animal films of the 90s, one that gives you hope in humanity and a wonderful setting.
Overall: Family night sorted.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/01/31/alaska-1996/
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
If sin were visible, what would the world be like? That is the premise of this brand new, original historical novel by Dan Vyletta. Bordering on steam-punk, <i>Smoke</i> is set in a Victorian England unlike any version ever documented before. Instead of an era of peace and posterity, it is full of wickedness and chaos. For an unexplained reason whenever a human acts with malicious intention or has a sinful thought their body emits a plume of smoke, staining their clothes and surrounding area with a coating of soot.
The story begins in an Oxford boarding school where two friends, Thomas and Charlie, are being taught that Smoke is bad and that they must learn to control it. However during the Christmas holidays, which both boys spend at a prodigious manor, they discover alternative views regarding Smoke, and are spooked by the Lady Naylor’s fascination. With their lives in sudden danger, Thomas and Charlie, along with Livia – Lady Naylor’s daughter – flee with the knowledge of a sinister, scientific intent that they do not understand.
From this point onwards the tale becomes darker and much more violent as the three friends try to work out Livia’s mother’s plans and endeavor to prevent her from carrying them out. All the while they are trying to deal with the effects of Smoke, which they have long given up trying to suppress.
Written from a large variety of viewpoints, <i>Smoke</i> is full of mystery and suspense, making it difficult to work out whom to trust. The reader has the same amount of knowledge as the protagonists and thus comes to the same conclusions at the same time, making reader and character feel like they are working together to identify the unknown.
It is unclear whether this is a young adult novel or intended for older readers. The key characters are only sixteen and are a trio of friends – two boys and a girl – which is something that since the dawn of <i>Harry Potter</i> has become fairly common place in YA literature. Also, Lady Naylor is reminiscent of the antagonist in Philip Pullman’s <i>His Dark Materials</i>. On the other hand, the language, whilst fitting for the time period, is far too formal to flow in a way that a book for teenagers would expect. There is also no attempt to sugarcoat or conceal the violence that takes place throughout a large section of the novel.
<i>Smoke</i> gets off to a shaky start leaving the reader feeling bewildered. The idea of Smoke and soot is not introduced in a clear manner, instead being thrown out there where everyone has to try and find the author’s wavelength and pick up the pieces as they go. Once the action begins – the escape from the manor – the story picks up the pace and becomes far more exciting before, sadly, diminishing into a confusing, violent jumble of a narrative that is tedious to try and follow. The conclusion, unfortunately, is also unclear, providing more questions that it actually solves.
I have very mixed feelings about this book. At times I enjoyed it, yet it also felt a chore to read. I found the concept rather confusing, unresolved and, on the whole, disappointing. <i>Smoke </i>is not a book I would easily recommend to anyone; even those who I know enjoy this particular genre. To be perfectly honest, I am glad I have finished it and do not need to read it anymore.
If sin were visible, what would the world be like? That is the premise of this brand new, original historical novel by Dan Vyletta. Bordering on steam-punk, <i>Smoke</i> is set in a Victorian England unlike any version ever documented before. Instead of an era of peace and posterity, it is full of wickedness and chaos. For an unexplained reason whenever a human acts with malicious intention or has a sinful thought their body emits a plume of smoke, staining their clothes and surrounding area with a coating of soot.
The story begins in an Oxford boarding school where two friends, Thomas and Charlie, are being taught that Smoke is bad and that they must learn to control it. However during the Christmas holidays, which both boys spend at a prodigious manor, they discover alternative views regarding Smoke, and are spooked by the Lady Naylor’s fascination. With their lives in sudden danger, Thomas and Charlie, along with Livia – Lady Naylor’s daughter – flee with the knowledge of a sinister, scientific intent that they do not understand.
From this point onwards the tale becomes darker and much more violent as the three friends try to work out Livia’s mother’s plans and endeavor to prevent her from carrying them out. All the while they are trying to deal with the effects of Smoke, which they have long given up trying to suppress.
Written from a large variety of viewpoints, <i>Smoke</i> is full of mystery and suspense, making it difficult to work out whom to trust. The reader has the same amount of knowledge as the protagonists and thus comes to the same conclusions at the same time, making reader and character feel like they are working together to identify the unknown.
It is unclear whether this is a young adult novel or intended for older readers. The key characters are only sixteen and are a trio of friends – two boys and a girl – which is something that since the dawn of <i>Harry Potter</i> has become fairly common place in YA literature. Also, Lady Naylor is reminiscent of the antagonist in Philip Pullman’s <i>His Dark Materials</i>. On the other hand, the language, whilst fitting for the time period, is far too formal to flow in a way that a book for teenagers would expect. There is also no attempt to sugarcoat or conceal the violence that takes place throughout a large section of the novel.
<i>Smoke</i> gets off to a shaky start leaving the reader feeling bewildered. The idea of Smoke and soot is not introduced in a clear manner, instead being thrown out there where everyone has to try and find the author’s wavelength and pick up the pieces as they go. Once the action begins – the escape from the manor – the story picks up the pace and becomes far more exciting before, sadly, diminishing into a confusing, violent jumble of a narrative that is tedious to try and follow. The conclusion, unfortunately, is also unclear, providing more questions that it actually solves.
I have very mixed feelings about this book. At times I enjoyed it, yet it also felt a chore to read. I found the concept rather confusing, unresolved and, on the whole, disappointing. <i>Smoke </i>is not a book I would easily recommend to anyone; even those who I know enjoy this particular genre. To be perfectly honest, I am glad I have finished it and do not need to read it anymore.
Amanda (96 KP) rated Five Feet Apart in Books
Jul 7, 2019
I FINALLY finished this book and it took forever to do so. I remember starting this book a while back and I just had a difficult time getting through this story. I couldn't pin point as to why it was difficult to finish, and to this day, I really still can't.
This book had/has so much hype and more so when the movie was released. I almost skipped the book and watched the movie because of who was playing the Will character, but I decided against it and went for the book first.
First and foremost, the cover is absolutely gorgeous! I wanted to get the book with the original cover and I sometimes just stare at it. I understand why there is a re-release of the book with the movie poster on the covers, but to me, it takes away from the author and the publisher. I try my best NOT to buy the books with the movie posters.
So we have two teenagers, Stella and Will, whom both have Cystic Fibrosis. In a nutshell, this disease affects the lungs and digestive system. The lungs fill rapidly with mucus and makes it difficult to breathe. The highly big part, and the main story of this novel, is that two people with the SAME disease have to stay a minimum of six feet apart. That is because one of them could get worse, or die, just from the others contamination.
Stella is optimistic and uploads YouTube videos and tries to keep her parents notified and tries to not think about her older sister being gone.
Will has not so much as given up, but more like kind of goes with the flow of his condition. So much so that he lets his friends use his hospital room as a 'hook up' area. Such a nice guy, don't you think?
Anyway, so these two don't really like each other at first but feelings are developed over bonding of memories and Stella getting Will to get back to doing his treatments on a regular basis. The story starts that they have to be six feet apart, but Stella pushes the boundary and keeps it at five feet apart - hence the title.
I hate to say this, but I had a hard time connecting with either one of these characters. The only one I really somewhat liked was Poe.
I can see the whole similarity with this book and The Fault in Our Stars, but I can't compare the two. Because, in TFIOS, they had cancer and didn't have to stay away from each other. And to me, those characters were easier to connect with than Will and Stella. I'm not saying I didn't like them, but I just couldn't connect.
Stella basically lives so her parents don't fall a part and Will is just kind of 'whatever' about the whole thing because he sees no future for himself, or a treatment that will help him.
I don't really see the hype in this story. It felt rushed to me as well. I'm not sure if it's because the story was kind of short for the plot. Maybe it's because we didn't get a lot of story. I'm not fond of how it was written. It was almost written like it was going to be a movie so it was scripted.
I'm not saying it was a bad story. It really wasn't. I just feel like there was something missing and I couldn't really feel much for these two characters. I couldn't fathom some of the decisions and through process that Stella has done.
All in all, not a terrible story, but I don't see what the hype was about and I don't think I'll be watching the movie.
This book had/has so much hype and more so when the movie was released. I almost skipped the book and watched the movie because of who was playing the Will character, but I decided against it and went for the book first.
First and foremost, the cover is absolutely gorgeous! I wanted to get the book with the original cover and I sometimes just stare at it. I understand why there is a re-release of the book with the movie poster on the covers, but to me, it takes away from the author and the publisher. I try my best NOT to buy the books with the movie posters.
So we have two teenagers, Stella and Will, whom both have Cystic Fibrosis. In a nutshell, this disease affects the lungs and digestive system. The lungs fill rapidly with mucus and makes it difficult to breathe. The highly big part, and the main story of this novel, is that two people with the SAME disease have to stay a minimum of six feet apart. That is because one of them could get worse, or die, just from the others contamination.
Stella is optimistic and uploads YouTube videos and tries to keep her parents notified and tries to not think about her older sister being gone.
Will has not so much as given up, but more like kind of goes with the flow of his condition. So much so that he lets his friends use his hospital room as a 'hook up' area. Such a nice guy, don't you think?
Anyway, so these two don't really like each other at first but feelings are developed over bonding of memories and Stella getting Will to get back to doing his treatments on a regular basis. The story starts that they have to be six feet apart, but Stella pushes the boundary and keeps it at five feet apart - hence the title.
I hate to say this, but I had a hard time connecting with either one of these characters. The only one I really somewhat liked was Poe.
I can see the whole similarity with this book and The Fault in Our Stars, but I can't compare the two. Because, in TFIOS, they had cancer and didn't have to stay away from each other. And to me, those characters were easier to connect with than Will and Stella. I'm not saying I didn't like them, but I just couldn't connect.
Stella basically lives so her parents don't fall a part and Will is just kind of 'whatever' about the whole thing because he sees no future for himself, or a treatment that will help him.
I don't really see the hype in this story. It felt rushed to me as well. I'm not sure if it's because the story was kind of short for the plot. Maybe it's because we didn't get a lot of story. I'm not fond of how it was written. It was almost written like it was going to be a movie so it was scripted.
I'm not saying it was a bad story. It really wasn't. I just feel like there was something missing and I couldn't really feel much for these two characters. I couldn't fathom some of the decisions and through process that Stella has done.
All in all, not a terrible story, but I don't see what the hype was about and I don't think I'll be watching the movie.
MSC1: Be Confident in Who You Are
Book and Education
App
Now for iPhone and iPad! • “As you prepare for back to school, don't forget the anxiety...[this...
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Power Rangers (2017) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
When I first heard that The Mighty Morphin Power Rangers would be getting a film adaptation, I was a bit apprehensive. Hollywood has had a bit of trouble converting many of the themes and issues brought up in a variety of shows into films that stay loyal to their respective franchises.
Fans on social media have often expressed their dissatisfaction with films not staying true to the origin stories or their inabil;ity to retain much of the character and charm that endeared them to their fans. Power Rangers does not suffer from this dilemma. As someone who watched the series as it first hit American markets in the 1990s, I was unsure of how this story would transfer onto the big screen.
It wasn’t something that I was too personally invested in. It was a series in which I considered myself to be a casual fan understanding the background, characters, and general direction of the show. I wasn’t prepared for what the film version offered.
This adaptation is near perfect in the way that it is able to create a modern, mature version that incorporates many aspects into weaving their story.
The basics of the film are roughly the same as the show: it is based in Angel Grove, there are five teenagers serving the role of rangers whose goal is to save the world, and all the complexities that come with being a superhero who has a “real life.”
One of the more remarkable issues related to the film is how the writers and director are able to be inclusive with their characters without being condescending to their audiences old and new. We get a glimpse of a team that is more colorful and diverse. Where the original crew showed a group of youths of different races, the film version does not stop with race as demonstrating the variety that exists within our world. The film allows for the inclusion of people on the autism spectrum, as well as, allowing for the inclusion of the LGBT community. The film shows audiences that there are people just like them or people that they know in the superhero realm. It is not limited by race, gender, sexual orientation, or cognitive development.
Power Rangers itself is a fun movie with depth. As the film continued, I tried to look for areas to pick it apart and find those pieces that really detracted from the story. The film has its faults in a simply developing storyline, but that goes with the franchise. It isn’t supposed to be complex or overbearing. The humor ranges from sophomoric to sophisticated. The film is accessible to those who are new to the franchise and those who have been watching since its inception. Additionally, it is a superhero movie it is not insulting to its audience. It demonstrates the difficulties that exist with teen life, presents real problems that they have to deal with in contrast to the fantasy that they are living out as part of this team.
The film is beautifully shot and the CGI is nearly seamless (the film is not overly reliant on it, either). The fighting and action sequences are as much a part of the story as the characters themselves. Power Rangers allows for audiences to be entertained visually and comedically. Additionally, it allows for those of us who have not watched or followed the Power Rangers in a while to be a bit nostalgic and look back to when we ourselves could not get home quickly enough for “Morphin’ Time.” The film is updated, mature, and will have fans young and old beaming with delight.
Fans on social media have often expressed their dissatisfaction with films not staying true to the origin stories or their inabil;ity to retain much of the character and charm that endeared them to their fans. Power Rangers does not suffer from this dilemma. As someone who watched the series as it first hit American markets in the 1990s, I was unsure of how this story would transfer onto the big screen.
It wasn’t something that I was too personally invested in. It was a series in which I considered myself to be a casual fan understanding the background, characters, and general direction of the show. I wasn’t prepared for what the film version offered.
This adaptation is near perfect in the way that it is able to create a modern, mature version that incorporates many aspects into weaving their story.
The basics of the film are roughly the same as the show: it is based in Angel Grove, there are five teenagers serving the role of rangers whose goal is to save the world, and all the complexities that come with being a superhero who has a “real life.”
One of the more remarkable issues related to the film is how the writers and director are able to be inclusive with their characters without being condescending to their audiences old and new. We get a glimpse of a team that is more colorful and diverse. Where the original crew showed a group of youths of different races, the film version does not stop with race as demonstrating the variety that exists within our world. The film allows for the inclusion of people on the autism spectrum, as well as, allowing for the inclusion of the LGBT community. The film shows audiences that there are people just like them or people that they know in the superhero realm. It is not limited by race, gender, sexual orientation, or cognitive development.
Power Rangers itself is a fun movie with depth. As the film continued, I tried to look for areas to pick it apart and find those pieces that really detracted from the story. The film has its faults in a simply developing storyline, but that goes with the franchise. It isn’t supposed to be complex or overbearing. The humor ranges from sophomoric to sophisticated. The film is accessible to those who are new to the franchise and those who have been watching since its inception. Additionally, it is a superhero movie it is not insulting to its audience. It demonstrates the difficulties that exist with teen life, presents real problems that they have to deal with in contrast to the fantasy that they are living out as part of this team.
The film is beautifully shot and the CGI is nearly seamless (the film is not overly reliant on it, either). The fighting and action sequences are as much a part of the story as the characters themselves. Power Rangers allows for audiences to be entertained visually and comedically. Additionally, it allows for those of us who have not watched or followed the Power Rangers in a while to be a bit nostalgic and look back to when we ourselves could not get home quickly enough for “Morphin’ Time.” The film is updated, mature, and will have fans young and old beaming with delight.
3D Makeover and Dress Up Games for Girls
Lifestyle and Games
App
*** Write your own fabulous fashion story! *** ** Get ready for the most spectacular 3D fashion...
Fashion Designer Girls Games - Prom Salon
Lifestyle and Games
App
Are you willing to start making your own clothes collection? Eager to run your own "fashion shop" or...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Phantom Thread (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“There’s an air of quiet death in this house”.
The alleged acting swan-song of Daniel Day-Lewis (“Lincoln“) sees him deliver a brilliantly intense portrayal of a maestro in his craft with all the quirks and egotistical faults that come with that position.
Reynolds Woodcock is the craftsman behind a world-renowned 1950’s fashion house, in demand from the elite classes and even royalty. He has a magnetic personality, is overtly self-confident, obsessive, a cruel bully and treats his girlfriends as chattels that he can tire of and dismiss from his life without a backward glance. Trying to keep the business and Reynolds on track, with ruthless efficiency, is his sister Cyril (Leslie Manville, “Maleficent“).
Looking for his next conquest during a trip to his seaside residence, he reels in blushing young waitress Alma (Vicky Krieps, “The Colony”). But he gets more than he bargains for.
This is a really exquisite and gentle film. Aside from some dubious fungi-related practices, there is no violence, no sex and – aside from about half a dozen well-chosen F-words – limited swearing (of which more below). This is a study of the developing relationship between the two protagonists, with little in the way of plot. Sounds dull? Far from it. This is two hours that flew by.
What it also features is (yet) another example of extremely strong women asserting their power. A scene (well trailed in Manville’s award snippets) where Cyril firmly puts Reynolds back in his box is brilliant: a real turning of tables with Woodcock meekly falling into line. And Alma makes for an incredibly rich and complicated character, one of the most interesting female roles I’ve seen this year so far.
It’s a stellar acting performance from Day-Lewis, and while Oldman fully deserves all of his award kudos for “Darkest Hour”, Day-Lewis delivers the goods without any of the make-up. It feels like Day-Lewis is a long way down the betting odds this year because “he always gets one”. He certainly gets my vote ahead of all of the other three nominees.
Kreips – not an actress I know – also brilliantly holds her own, and if it wasn’t such a strong female field this year she could well have been nominated.
Also worthy of note is the pervasive piano score by (suprisingly) Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood. It’s really lovely and counterpoints the rest of the classical score nicely. Its BAFTA and Oscar nominations are both well deserved (though I would expect the Oscar to follow the BAFTA steer with “The Shape of Water“).
All in all, this is a real tour de force by writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson (“Inherent Vice”, “There Will Be Blood”). How much I enjoyed this film was a surprise to me, since I have no interest in the “fashion industry” (as my family will no doubt be quick to point out!) and I went to see this more out of ‘duty’ based on its Oscar buzz than because I really wanted to see it.
The big curiosity is why exactly the BBFC decided that this film was worthy of a 15 certificate rather than a 12A. Their comments on the film say “There is strong language (‘f**k’), as well as milder terms including ‘bloody’ and ‘hell’. Other issues include mild sex references and scenes of emotional upset. In one scene, a woman’s nipples are visible through her slip while she is measured for a dress.” For a 12A, the board say “The use of strong language (for example, ‘f***’) must be infrequent”. I didn’t count the f-words… but as I said I don’t think it amounts to more than a half-dozen. Is that “frequent”? And – SHOCK, HORROR… visible covered nipples you say?! Lock up your teenagers! When you look at the gentleness of this film versus the violence within “Black Panther”, you have to question this disparity.
Reynolds Woodcock is the craftsman behind a world-renowned 1950’s fashion house, in demand from the elite classes and even royalty. He has a magnetic personality, is overtly self-confident, obsessive, a cruel bully and treats his girlfriends as chattels that he can tire of and dismiss from his life without a backward glance. Trying to keep the business and Reynolds on track, with ruthless efficiency, is his sister Cyril (Leslie Manville, “Maleficent“).
Looking for his next conquest during a trip to his seaside residence, he reels in blushing young waitress Alma (Vicky Krieps, “The Colony”). But he gets more than he bargains for.
This is a really exquisite and gentle film. Aside from some dubious fungi-related practices, there is no violence, no sex and – aside from about half a dozen well-chosen F-words – limited swearing (of which more below). This is a study of the developing relationship between the two protagonists, with little in the way of plot. Sounds dull? Far from it. This is two hours that flew by.
What it also features is (yet) another example of extremely strong women asserting their power. A scene (well trailed in Manville’s award snippets) where Cyril firmly puts Reynolds back in his box is brilliant: a real turning of tables with Woodcock meekly falling into line. And Alma makes for an incredibly rich and complicated character, one of the most interesting female roles I’ve seen this year so far.
It’s a stellar acting performance from Day-Lewis, and while Oldman fully deserves all of his award kudos for “Darkest Hour”, Day-Lewis delivers the goods without any of the make-up. It feels like Day-Lewis is a long way down the betting odds this year because “he always gets one”. He certainly gets my vote ahead of all of the other three nominees.
Kreips – not an actress I know – also brilliantly holds her own, and if it wasn’t such a strong female field this year she could well have been nominated.
Also worthy of note is the pervasive piano score by (suprisingly) Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood. It’s really lovely and counterpoints the rest of the classical score nicely. Its BAFTA and Oscar nominations are both well deserved (though I would expect the Oscar to follow the BAFTA steer with “The Shape of Water“).
All in all, this is a real tour de force by writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson (“Inherent Vice”, “There Will Be Blood”). How much I enjoyed this film was a surprise to me, since I have no interest in the “fashion industry” (as my family will no doubt be quick to point out!) and I went to see this more out of ‘duty’ based on its Oscar buzz than because I really wanted to see it.
The big curiosity is why exactly the BBFC decided that this film was worthy of a 15 certificate rather than a 12A. Their comments on the film say “There is strong language (‘f**k’), as well as milder terms including ‘bloody’ and ‘hell’. Other issues include mild sex references and scenes of emotional upset. In one scene, a woman’s nipples are visible through her slip while she is measured for a dress.” For a 12A, the board say “The use of strong language (for example, ‘f***’) must be infrequent”. I didn’t count the f-words… but as I said I don’t think it amounts to more than a half-dozen. Is that “frequent”? And – SHOCK, HORROR… visible covered nipples you say?! Lock up your teenagers! When you look at the gentleness of this film versus the violence within “Black Panther”, you have to question this disparity.
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (2017) in Movies
May 27, 2017
Hilarious (2 more)
Great Cast both old and new
New Pirate legend to give the plot a direction
One of the better installments
The 5th film in the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, certainly had a lot to live up to and some things to make up for after the previous two films didn’t do as well with the critics. With a few of the original cast returning, and some fresh new faces to join them, Salazar’s Revenge was always going to be intriguing, as the audience members such as myself, wanted to know what new fantastical story this new film would tell, what trouble had Captain Jack Sparrow gotten himself into this time, and what idiotic plan would he come up with to get himself out of it.
The new cast included the young and beautiful Kaya Scodelario (Maze Runner / Skins / Moon) as Carina Smith, alongside the also young Brenton Thwaites (Home and Away / Maleficent / Gods of Egypt) as Henry Turner, the son of Will Turner portrayed by Orlando Bloom, who returns to this instalment as only a minor character, but one that sets the film in motion. Both of these new young performers excel in their roles and deliver a performance that is reminiscent of their predecessors in the franchise. Watching these two was like watching Orlando Bloom and Kiera Knightly in The Curse of the Black Pearl, with moments that reminded more so of their evolved relationship in the Dead Man’s Chest. Though Carina and Henry are not (yet) together throughout the film, you can clearly see that their shared goal to reach a mysterious legend that may or may not be true, in honour of their father’s, brings them closer and closer and time goes by and events begin to unravel.
Our new villain, Captain Salazar, is portrayed by Javier Bardem (No Country For Old Men / Skyfall / The Sea Inside) and brilliantly portrayed at that. He’s menacing and ruthless, and very haunting. His goal is clear and he does not rest until he finds Jack Sparrow. This film franchise has seen plenty of cursed men chasing the drunken idiot Captain all over the world, but Salazar is one thing the others were not….he is not a pirate. In fact he is the exact opposite, he was a naval captain for the Spanish and hunted pirates. This was his life, and this was his curse. His hatred of Jack Sparrow runs deeper than any villain set before him and this is what makes the film an exciting experience.
My only issue that whilst it is hilarious and I continued to laugh, this film seemed to be bursting at the seems with jokes and gags which sometimes felt forced. Trying to live up to the humour of the first film, but instead of always being perfectly timed to the right moments now and then, it seems to be in almost every conversation. This doesn't ruin the film in any aspect, just something I picked up on.
The fifth film is, in my opinion, definitely one of the better of the franchise. It excels in being a hilarious, exciting, action packed fantasy film, which is great for an audience of almost any age. Being a Disney film, it is suitable for children under parental guidance and older audiences from the teenagers to the elderly.
The effects get better with each instalment in the franchise and this film proves it with some beautiful imagery of the seas and the events that take place. The films makeup and set design are also incredible and fantastic to witness, as we see new treasures and new ships that take you to a whole new world, right there in the cinema.
If you’re going to watch this film, which I highly recommend, then do so at the cinema because like most films, your experience with the film will not be the same if you don’t watch it on the big screen. I saw this film in IMAX and it was stunning and incredible and just an absolutely thrilling experience.
Salazar’s Revenge (or Dead Men Tell No Tales, as it’s known in America) is most certainly going to be one of my favourite films of the year.
The new cast included the young and beautiful Kaya Scodelario (Maze Runner / Skins / Moon) as Carina Smith, alongside the also young Brenton Thwaites (Home and Away / Maleficent / Gods of Egypt) as Henry Turner, the son of Will Turner portrayed by Orlando Bloom, who returns to this instalment as only a minor character, but one that sets the film in motion. Both of these new young performers excel in their roles and deliver a performance that is reminiscent of their predecessors in the franchise. Watching these two was like watching Orlando Bloom and Kiera Knightly in The Curse of the Black Pearl, with moments that reminded more so of their evolved relationship in the Dead Man’s Chest. Though Carina and Henry are not (yet) together throughout the film, you can clearly see that their shared goal to reach a mysterious legend that may or may not be true, in honour of their father’s, brings them closer and closer and time goes by and events begin to unravel.
Our new villain, Captain Salazar, is portrayed by Javier Bardem (No Country For Old Men / Skyfall / The Sea Inside) and brilliantly portrayed at that. He’s menacing and ruthless, and very haunting. His goal is clear and he does not rest until he finds Jack Sparrow. This film franchise has seen plenty of cursed men chasing the drunken idiot Captain all over the world, but Salazar is one thing the others were not….he is not a pirate. In fact he is the exact opposite, he was a naval captain for the Spanish and hunted pirates. This was his life, and this was his curse. His hatred of Jack Sparrow runs deeper than any villain set before him and this is what makes the film an exciting experience.
My only issue that whilst it is hilarious and I continued to laugh, this film seemed to be bursting at the seems with jokes and gags which sometimes felt forced. Trying to live up to the humour of the first film, but instead of always being perfectly timed to the right moments now and then, it seems to be in almost every conversation. This doesn't ruin the film in any aspect, just something I picked up on.
The fifth film is, in my opinion, definitely one of the better of the franchise. It excels in being a hilarious, exciting, action packed fantasy film, which is great for an audience of almost any age. Being a Disney film, it is suitable for children under parental guidance and older audiences from the teenagers to the elderly.
The effects get better with each instalment in the franchise and this film proves it with some beautiful imagery of the seas and the events that take place. The films makeup and set design are also incredible and fantastic to witness, as we see new treasures and new ships that take you to a whole new world, right there in the cinema.
If you’re going to watch this film, which I highly recommend, then do so at the cinema because like most films, your experience with the film will not be the same if you don’t watch it on the big screen. I saw this film in IMAX and it was stunning and incredible and just an absolutely thrilling experience.
Salazar’s Revenge (or Dead Men Tell No Tales, as it’s known in America) is most certainly going to be one of my favourite films of the year.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Rick and Morty - Season 2 in TV
Jul 21, 2017
Absolute insanity (1 more)
Will leave you in stitches throughout
The Universe Is A Crazy and Chaotic Place…
Rick & Morty was one of those shows that totally flew under the radar for me while it was on the air for months, then all of a sudden almost every podcast and youtuber that I subscribe to were recommending it. Though by the time that I was recommended it, I was aware it was an Adult Swim show, so I assumed each episode would only be around six or seven minutes long and put it on the backburner. Then one day I had run out of things to watch, I was up to date on all of my youtube videos and decided to give it a shot. Whilst I didn’t fall in love with it immediately, it did hook me right away and I was pleased to learn each episode was 20 minutes long and because the episodes are so short, I decided to watch a few episodes in a row and by the time I had finished watching Anatomy Park, the third episode of the first season, I realised how great this show was. The writing is so off the wall and insane yet dry that it works and the characters and the dynamic that they have is honestly hilarious, the comedic timing is also spot on. If you haven’t seen the show, think a blend of Family Guy style animation, with a backdrop of a Back To The Future or Doctor Who kind of universe and sprinkled with Always Sunny In Philadelphia style comedy. There is so much about this show that makes it funny, the sheer insanity and traumatisation that Rick exposes his grandchildren to, only to then brush it off as if it is totally normal as it is them that are overreacting and then there is Gerry and Beth’s broken marriage that only exists because Gerry got Beth pregnant with Summer when they were teenagers. Rick and Gerry are probably my two favourite characters in the show, Rick because you know he has seen so many insane things all over the galaxy over the years that literally nothing bothers him anymore and everything is normal to him, no matter how insane it seems to us and the other characters in the show and Gerry because of his exceptional mediocrity and impressive amount of general naivety. Also it would be criminal not to mention the other vast array of fantastically hilarious characters that we meet throughout the show, from Mr Meeseeks, (look at me!) to Mr Poopybutthole, to Birdperson, the list goes on getting more and more crazy as it does. The show is two seasons in so far, with a total of 21 episodes and I can honestly say that there is not one episode that I don’t like. I do have my favourites however, like M Night Shamaliens, when Rick, Morty and Gerry are stuck in a simulation of the real world and Gerry thinks he is having the greatest day of his life, or Rick Potion No.9, where said potion makes everybody fall in love with Morty, then transform into grotesque monsters, so they simply leave that reality behind and move into a fresh one, or Raising Gazorpazorp, where Morty goes through fatherhood in the space of a day, or Mortynight Run where they leave Gerry in a nursing home full of other Gerrys, I don’t want to spoil too much for those who haven’t seen it, but if you haven’t then stop watching this review right now and go watch Rick & Morty. The animation uses an odd art style, which may be initially off-putting, but a few episodes in, it becomes clear that this animation is to a high standard, just done in an odd style. The voice acting also seems fairly amateur at first, but as the show goes on and you get to know the characters and the world, the voice acting actually works perfectly in unison with the way that the show is written.
There isn’t much more to say, this show has hardly any negative qualities, it is one of the best animated shows that I have seen in the last decade and it is totally my kind of humour.
There isn’t much more to say, this show has hardly any negative qualities, it is one of the best animated shows that I have seen in the last decade and it is totally my kind of humour.