Search
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Mask of Shadows in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>Review copy provided by SourcebooksFire via Netgalley</b></i>
I don’t think I follow enough people on social media, because I rarely see Mask of Shadows running around in my timeline and it deserves more hype if it hasn’t. I’ve also been reading a lot of “fluffy” reads with very little blood involved.
Mask of Shadows is a complete 180 from that. It is absolutely bloody and there are assassins involved, and sad to say, it is completely up my very dark alley of reading preferences.
My mother should be worried about me. “You’re a good kid compared to most of those I’ve seen out there. You don’t do drugs, don’t party, hang out with good people….”
I mean, has she seen the books I enjoy reading? (She would be very concerned.)
I honestly thought of The Hunger Games as an assassin edition while reading, even though the novel is pitched as Sarah J. Maas meets Leigh Bardugo. Our main character, Sal, finds an invitation to become one of the queen’s personal assassins, and sets off to audition in the hopes to get a new life. The auditions are full of trials and are a fight to the death – each of which are varied so there is never a dull moment. I’ve never read Maas, but I personally don’t see any comparisons to Bardugo unless we’re talking world building. The world building is absolutely amazing and stunning, and if I could actually draw some of the descriptions, I would totally do it. (Alas, I am just a graphic design minor.)
Emerald, a vision of steel and green silk, glided through the doorway. She was lithe and muscled, arms bare and flexed, streaked in scars with a pale silver dust twinkling over her skin like stars scattered across the evening sky. She walked past me in a breeze of perfume and peppermint, the apothecary scents clinging to her like the old, black ink of the dead runes scrawled across her. The silk layered and draped over her shoulders matched her high-cheeked, mouthless emerald mask perfectly. Beetle wings stitched into the train of her dress glittered in the light.
That is actually one of my favorite descriptions in the book. It is gorgeous.
Mask of Shadows is the first book I’ve read featuring a gender fluid character. Miller does a really good job of handling Sal’s character well, but the beginning seemed a little rocky, almost as though the author was trying to find the right foothold in the story. But after those rough patches, the story went along smoothly.
2017 was a fantastic reading year for me, and I am extremely happy to say that Mask of Shadows is one of my favorite books for the year. Miller’s debut novel is action packed and fast paced, and it will leave you turning the pages until the very end.
<a href="https://thatbookgal.wordpress.com/2018/03/23/guest-book-review-mask-of-shadows/">This review is originally posted on That Book Gal</a>
I don’t think I follow enough people on social media, because I rarely see Mask of Shadows running around in my timeline and it deserves more hype if it hasn’t. I’ve also been reading a lot of “fluffy” reads with very little blood involved.
Mask of Shadows is a complete 180 from that. It is absolutely bloody and there are assassins involved, and sad to say, it is completely up my very dark alley of reading preferences.
My mother should be worried about me. “You’re a good kid compared to most of those I’ve seen out there. You don’t do drugs, don’t party, hang out with good people….”
I mean, has she seen the books I enjoy reading? (She would be very concerned.)
I honestly thought of The Hunger Games as an assassin edition while reading, even though the novel is pitched as Sarah J. Maas meets Leigh Bardugo. Our main character, Sal, finds an invitation to become one of the queen’s personal assassins, and sets off to audition in the hopes to get a new life. The auditions are full of trials and are a fight to the death – each of which are varied so there is never a dull moment. I’ve never read Maas, but I personally don’t see any comparisons to Bardugo unless we’re talking world building. The world building is absolutely amazing and stunning, and if I could actually draw some of the descriptions, I would totally do it. (Alas, I am just a graphic design minor.)
Emerald, a vision of steel and green silk, glided through the doorway. She was lithe and muscled, arms bare and flexed, streaked in scars with a pale silver dust twinkling over her skin like stars scattered across the evening sky. She walked past me in a breeze of perfume and peppermint, the apothecary scents clinging to her like the old, black ink of the dead runes scrawled across her. The silk layered and draped over her shoulders matched her high-cheeked, mouthless emerald mask perfectly. Beetle wings stitched into the train of her dress glittered in the light.
That is actually one of my favorite descriptions in the book. It is gorgeous.
Mask of Shadows is the first book I’ve read featuring a gender fluid character. Miller does a really good job of handling Sal’s character well, but the beginning seemed a little rocky, almost as though the author was trying to find the right foothold in the story. But after those rough patches, the story went along smoothly.
2017 was a fantastic reading year for me, and I am extremely happy to say that Mask of Shadows is one of my favorite books for the year. Miller’s debut novel is action packed and fast paced, and it will leave you turning the pages until the very end.
<a href="https://thatbookgal.wordpress.com/2018/03/23/guest-book-review-mask-of-shadows/">This review is originally posted on That Book Gal</a>
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Freaky (2021) in Movies
Jul 3, 2021
No, not like the Disney version
Some B-movies really pack a much bigger punch than you would expect. "Nobody" is a perfect recent example. But movie karma needs to be balanced with something. Ladies and gentlemen - "Freaky"!
Positives:
- If you are into your "teen slasher" movies, then this is more of the same and features some innovative ways to dispatch the victims. One is certainly no way to treat a fine wine!
- Vince Vaughn has fun mincing around as his alter-ego and Kathryn Newton (soon to be in the next "Ant-Man" movie) is personable enough as the cutie-cum-serial-killer.
- It's always good to see Ferris-actor Alan Ruck on the big screen. Here, he actually plays two parts in the film. (This joke (C) One Mann's Movies.)
Negatives:
- It's flagged as "comedy/horror" but failed to meet my personal 6-laugh test. It's just not funny enough to pass muster unless, that is, you view crude dialogue as "funny". And the dialogue does get ickily crude at some points. For example, when evil-Millie ends up alone with three jocks, there's a line of misogynist dialogue (that I won't repeat) but which sets the level.
- As a Blumhouse production, the horror is ultra-gory which will put off many viewers lacking a strong stomach. But because of the associated black comedy, the horror isn't remotely tense or scary. This might be why the film only got a UK-15 certificate. But my personal view is that, with the violence and the offensive dialogue, the BBFC under called this one, and it should have been an 18.
- There's a lot of schmaltz layered on regarding the relationship between Millie and her mum (Katie Finneran, channelling a Laura Dern look). A store cubicle exchange between Finneran and Vaughn is particularly stomach-churning.
- The movie leaves logic at the door many times. A formulaic post-finale ending assumes a superhero ability to shrug off bullets.
Summary Thoughts on "Freaky": The 'body-swap idea has gone through dozens of movie versions, with Disney's "Freaky Friday" the most well known: it's actually had two outings, once in 1976 with a young Jodie Foster and Barbara Harris and again in 2003 with Lindsay Lohan and Jamie-Lee Curtis. (The latter is a firm Mann-family favourite).
This new version tries a serial-killer twist on the story, which is a good idea. But the movie fails to execute well on the concept. The director is Christopher Landon who did the "Happy Death Day" movies. This is in a similar vein. So teens who enjoyed those flicks might get a fun Saturday night out with this. But, for me, this fell between the stools of comedy and horror and is instantly forgettable.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/07/03/freaky-no-its-not-remotely-like-the-disney-version/. One Mann's Movies is also on Facebook and Tiktok (@onemannsmovies). Thanks.)
Positives:
- If you are into your "teen slasher" movies, then this is more of the same and features some innovative ways to dispatch the victims. One is certainly no way to treat a fine wine!
- Vince Vaughn has fun mincing around as his alter-ego and Kathryn Newton (soon to be in the next "Ant-Man" movie) is personable enough as the cutie-cum-serial-killer.
- It's always good to see Ferris-actor Alan Ruck on the big screen. Here, he actually plays two parts in the film. (This joke (C) One Mann's Movies.)
Negatives:
- It's flagged as "comedy/horror" but failed to meet my personal 6-laugh test. It's just not funny enough to pass muster unless, that is, you view crude dialogue as "funny". And the dialogue does get ickily crude at some points. For example, when evil-Millie ends up alone with three jocks, there's a line of misogynist dialogue (that I won't repeat) but which sets the level.
- As a Blumhouse production, the horror is ultra-gory which will put off many viewers lacking a strong stomach. But because of the associated black comedy, the horror isn't remotely tense or scary. This might be why the film only got a UK-15 certificate. But my personal view is that, with the violence and the offensive dialogue, the BBFC under called this one, and it should have been an 18.
- There's a lot of schmaltz layered on regarding the relationship between Millie and her mum (Katie Finneran, channelling a Laura Dern look). A store cubicle exchange between Finneran and Vaughn is particularly stomach-churning.
- The movie leaves logic at the door many times. A formulaic post-finale ending assumes a superhero ability to shrug off bullets.
Summary Thoughts on "Freaky": The 'body-swap idea has gone through dozens of movie versions, with Disney's "Freaky Friday" the most well known: it's actually had two outings, once in 1976 with a young Jodie Foster and Barbara Harris and again in 2003 with Lindsay Lohan and Jamie-Lee Curtis. (The latter is a firm Mann-family favourite).
This new version tries a serial-killer twist on the story, which is a good idea. But the movie fails to execute well on the concept. The director is Christopher Landon who did the "Happy Death Day" movies. This is in a similar vein. So teens who enjoyed those flicks might get a fun Saturday night out with this. But, for me, this fell between the stools of comedy and horror and is instantly forgettable.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/07/03/freaky-no-its-not-remotely-like-the-disney-version/. One Mann's Movies is also on Facebook and Tiktok (@onemannsmovies). Thanks.)
Weak characters (1 more)
Mediocre ending
A haunted house thriller that could've been more
At Spring House, it’s not just a lone ghost that haunts the property—something has awoken. Almost as if the house were alive. That’s the impression I got going into The Vines, and I thought it was a unique twist to the classic haunted house story.
The book has several narrators starting with Caitlin, an heiress whom everyone loves to hate and who is taken advantage of and cheated on by her husband. Second is Nova, an educated young black woman employed at Spring that has a real chip on her shoulder. Lastly there is Blake, a homosexual male nurse that suffers from depression after witnessing the death of his lover. All of these character’s stories come together to form the mystery around Spring House.
I had a hard time really deciding how I wanted to rate this book overall. At certain points it was thrilling, I wanted to know more about the mystery surrounding Spring House and the action scenes are written in wonderful detail. On the other hand I also found myself pretty disappointed with how one dimensional many of the characters were, particularly Caitlin and Nova. I just couldn’t find myself caring much about either one of them, which made it a little bit hard to remain interested in their respective roles in the plot.
With Caitlin she didn’t seem to be such a bad person, but the hatred and scorn from the people around her have reduced her to being a shadow of a person, not much ever comes from her character. The development of her character is seemingly dropped, she’s just there, all blind anger and rage and while it’s understandable, she has little impact on, well, anything. Which was unexpected considering the book’s synopsis was about her. What is worse is that Nova isn’t too far off from Caitlin. While there is a part of me that likes how strong willed Nova is, it is kind of annoying how she is just as blinded by her own rage and prejudice. Even she is barely relevant to the plot, if I’m to be perfectly frank. It becomes obvious that the real story is about Blake and how he faces up to the past that has been haunting him for years. This is well and good and I enjoyed his story, but then all of the other characters just become filler and this was kind of a downer.
The book just took way too long to get to that point. The focus keeps shifting before the story really starts to pick up speed and it feels like it drags a bit. I also found the ending to be a little bit cheesy, it just didn’t do it for me. Overall the book was decent, Rice has a gift for description and it was entertaining for a while. I just didn’t find this one to be particularly memorable.
The book has several narrators starting with Caitlin, an heiress whom everyone loves to hate and who is taken advantage of and cheated on by her husband. Second is Nova, an educated young black woman employed at Spring that has a real chip on her shoulder. Lastly there is Blake, a homosexual male nurse that suffers from depression after witnessing the death of his lover. All of these character’s stories come together to form the mystery around Spring House.
I had a hard time really deciding how I wanted to rate this book overall. At certain points it was thrilling, I wanted to know more about the mystery surrounding Spring House and the action scenes are written in wonderful detail. On the other hand I also found myself pretty disappointed with how one dimensional many of the characters were, particularly Caitlin and Nova. I just couldn’t find myself caring much about either one of them, which made it a little bit hard to remain interested in their respective roles in the plot.
With Caitlin she didn’t seem to be such a bad person, but the hatred and scorn from the people around her have reduced her to being a shadow of a person, not much ever comes from her character. The development of her character is seemingly dropped, she’s just there, all blind anger and rage and while it’s understandable, she has little impact on, well, anything. Which was unexpected considering the book’s synopsis was about her. What is worse is that Nova isn’t too far off from Caitlin. While there is a part of me that likes how strong willed Nova is, it is kind of annoying how she is just as blinded by her own rage and prejudice. Even she is barely relevant to the plot, if I’m to be perfectly frank. It becomes obvious that the real story is about Blake and how he faces up to the past that has been haunting him for years. This is well and good and I enjoyed his story, but then all of the other characters just become filler and this was kind of a downer.
The book just took way too long to get to that point. The focus keeps shifting before the story really starts to pick up speed and it feels like it drags a bit. I also found the ending to be a little bit cheesy, it just didn’t do it for me. Overall the book was decent, Rice has a gift for description and it was entertaining for a while. I just didn’t find this one to be particularly memorable.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Soul (2020) in Movies
Dec 30, 2020
Soul is Pixar at its most cerebral
In the last few days I've seen Pixar's latest animation - "Soul" - described by various reviewers as a cross between "Inside Out", "Coco", "La La Land" and "Whiplash". I'll add to that some older movies with more obvious parallels with the story: 1946's "A Matter of Life and Death" with David Niven; 1941's "Here Comes Mr Jordan" with Robert Montgomery and its 1978 remake - a personal favourite of mine - "Heaven Can Wait" with Warren Beatty. For these all tell the story of someone plucked from the world a tad too early.
In "Soul", Joe (Jamie Foxx) is a talented jazz pianist always dreaming of getting to be a big time session musician. He is stuck though in a worthwhile but unappreciated job as a high school music teacher. But his luck is - temporarily - about to change when an old successful student (nice touch) recommends him to provide backing to the fearsome jazz star Dorothea Williams (Angela Bassett).
Just as things seem to going his way, an open manhole cover has other ideas, and Joe falls to his 'death'. Feeling his soul has exited the world too early, and just before he gets his big shot, Joe's spirit struggles to return to the world with the help of reluctant soul/recruit "22" (Tina Fey).
Pete Docter seems to have done it again with "Soul". The man behind Pixar's hugely successful "Up" and "Inside Out" has the magic touch with these animated classics. He's had more than his share of Oscar success. (Although having gone straight to streaming on Disney+, does it qualify for the Oscars this year? Or have they relaxed the rules?) Assuming it is eligible, you'd be a brave man to bet against "Soul" winning Best Animated Feature this year.
For there are some sequences of this movie that are breathtakingly effective. The fall of Joe from the "stairway to the great beyond" to the pre-life domain (as shown in the trailer) is a masterpiece of graphic design. (And do I detect in there a tribute to the "stargate" in "2001: A Space Odyssey"?) What makes these sequences distinctive is not the afterlife soul's or the "great before" souls, who resemble blue variants of Casper. It's the 'counsellors' of the realms. They are surreally drawn Picasso-style in 2D and - although easy to draw for preschooler's with a crayon - might be a bit of a stretch for them to relate to.
But will the kids get it? I know that my 6-year old grandson enjoyed watching it. But ultimately, this is principally a Pixar film squarely targeted at adults to enjoy. Indeed, the themes of death and afterlife might be disturbing for younger children (as in "Coco"). They will certainly struggle to understand the land of lost souls, where those obsessed with their work or hobbies (metal detecting! LOL!) are almost beyond reach. And surely the message of 'enjoying the everyday here and now' rather than getting too wrapped up in career or life goals will only be relatable to adults.
"Soul" is brim-full with Pixar quirkiness. As per normal, the movie has a lot of detail that will need multiple watches. And I can confirm that the pause button helps! For example, "22" has been an earth-apprentice for so many millennia that he has had just about every mentor who's ever passed through. His 'den' is wallpapered with "Hello, My Name is ...." badges, and a pause at that point reveals mentors as varied as Gandhi, Aretha Franklin, Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking! And in the end titles, the usual list of babies born during production are "Recent You Seminar graduates"!
The movie also features two of the most distinctive voices from UK television. Graham Norton plays Moonwind: a sign-spinning hippy and lost-soul-sea piratical captain (I've honestly not been taking drugs). And Richard Ayoade, a UK TV regular but familiar to US audiences from his role in "The IT Crowd", plays Counsellor Jerry (well, one of them!). Alice Braga, as another Counsellor Jerry and most recently seen as the doctor in "The New Mutants", is another familiar voice
For once, Michael Giacchino doesn't get the scoring gig. Instead, this went to the "Nine Inch Nails" partnership of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross. (The soundtrack for "Mank" was their most recent work). The music is perhaps not as immediately accessible as some of the previous Pixar scores. But I think will be a 'grower'.
I have a "but" in my review. I sobbed like a young child during parts of "Up". And similarly, I was a mess as 'Bing Bong' faded away in "Inside Out". And yet here, my tear ducts remained stubbornly unchallenged. Perhaps this is a personal thing, and others were a soggy mess after this movie. But, for me, it simply didn't connect with me at the same raw emotional level that Docter's other work (and indeed other Pixar movies) have done. So, for that reason (only), I'm going to hold off my highest rating.
It's highly recommended since, notwithstanding this, it's a magnificent effort. (At the 11th hour, it made my "Number 7" slot in my Top 10 of 2020). It's also worth noting that it's mildly groundbreaking in being the first Pixar movie with a black leading character.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the full review in One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/30/soul-is-pixar-at-its-most-cerebral/).
In "Soul", Joe (Jamie Foxx) is a talented jazz pianist always dreaming of getting to be a big time session musician. He is stuck though in a worthwhile but unappreciated job as a high school music teacher. But his luck is - temporarily - about to change when an old successful student (nice touch) recommends him to provide backing to the fearsome jazz star Dorothea Williams (Angela Bassett).
Just as things seem to going his way, an open manhole cover has other ideas, and Joe falls to his 'death'. Feeling his soul has exited the world too early, and just before he gets his big shot, Joe's spirit struggles to return to the world with the help of reluctant soul/recruit "22" (Tina Fey).
Pete Docter seems to have done it again with "Soul". The man behind Pixar's hugely successful "Up" and "Inside Out" has the magic touch with these animated classics. He's had more than his share of Oscar success. (Although having gone straight to streaming on Disney+, does it qualify for the Oscars this year? Or have they relaxed the rules?) Assuming it is eligible, you'd be a brave man to bet against "Soul" winning Best Animated Feature this year.
For there are some sequences of this movie that are breathtakingly effective. The fall of Joe from the "stairway to the great beyond" to the pre-life domain (as shown in the trailer) is a masterpiece of graphic design. (And do I detect in there a tribute to the "stargate" in "2001: A Space Odyssey"?) What makes these sequences distinctive is not the afterlife soul's or the "great before" souls, who resemble blue variants of Casper. It's the 'counsellors' of the realms. They are surreally drawn Picasso-style in 2D and - although easy to draw for preschooler's with a crayon - might be a bit of a stretch for them to relate to.
But will the kids get it? I know that my 6-year old grandson enjoyed watching it. But ultimately, this is principally a Pixar film squarely targeted at adults to enjoy. Indeed, the themes of death and afterlife might be disturbing for younger children (as in "Coco"). They will certainly struggle to understand the land of lost souls, where those obsessed with their work or hobbies (metal detecting! LOL!) are almost beyond reach. And surely the message of 'enjoying the everyday here and now' rather than getting too wrapped up in career or life goals will only be relatable to adults.
"Soul" is brim-full with Pixar quirkiness. As per normal, the movie has a lot of detail that will need multiple watches. And I can confirm that the pause button helps! For example, "22" has been an earth-apprentice for so many millennia that he has had just about every mentor who's ever passed through. His 'den' is wallpapered with "Hello, My Name is ...." badges, and a pause at that point reveals mentors as varied as Gandhi, Aretha Franklin, Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking! And in the end titles, the usual list of babies born during production are "Recent You Seminar graduates"!
The movie also features two of the most distinctive voices from UK television. Graham Norton plays Moonwind: a sign-spinning hippy and lost-soul-sea piratical captain (I've honestly not been taking drugs). And Richard Ayoade, a UK TV regular but familiar to US audiences from his role in "The IT Crowd", plays Counsellor Jerry (well, one of them!). Alice Braga, as another Counsellor Jerry and most recently seen as the doctor in "The New Mutants", is another familiar voice
For once, Michael Giacchino doesn't get the scoring gig. Instead, this went to the "Nine Inch Nails" partnership of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross. (The soundtrack for "Mank" was their most recent work). The music is perhaps not as immediately accessible as some of the previous Pixar scores. But I think will be a 'grower'.
I have a "but" in my review. I sobbed like a young child during parts of "Up". And similarly, I was a mess as 'Bing Bong' faded away in "Inside Out". And yet here, my tear ducts remained stubbornly unchallenged. Perhaps this is a personal thing, and others were a soggy mess after this movie. But, for me, it simply didn't connect with me at the same raw emotional level that Docter's other work (and indeed other Pixar movies) have done. So, for that reason (only), I'm going to hold off my highest rating.
It's highly recommended since, notwithstanding this, it's a magnificent effort. (At the 11th hour, it made my "Number 7" slot in my Top 10 of 2020). It's also worth noting that it's mildly groundbreaking in being the first Pixar movie with a black leading character.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the full review in One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/30/soul-is-pixar-at-its-most-cerebral/).
Dwarf Fotress
7.3
Rate It
Video Game Watch
Dwarf Fortress is a single-player fantasy game. You can control a dwarven outpost or an adventurer...
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Bad Boys II (2003) in Movies
Feb 25, 2019
What ya gonna do
this time?
Contains spoilers, click to show
Whilst the first outing of the Bad Boys shocked me by how good it actually was, this one left me a little disappointed. I was hardly expecting an Oscar winning deal here, as this was always going to be a Michael Bay adrenalin rush, but for a film with a two and a half hour running time, the adrenalin came in too short a bursts.
Bad Boys was Bay's first film and was but a taster of his over the top film making, which first arrives in The Rock a year afterwards, but this made eight years later was obviously going to take this to the next level, if not several levels further than that. But to me, it didn't. Granted, the action was thrilling, outrageous and very enjoyable, but the character development was barely visible. They bicker, Lawrence moaned a lot and Smith was cool and likable but there was just a shell of what there should have been. The entire story, including what's left of their character dynamics are only present to set up the next great action sequence.
Then, the was the taste issue. The crux of the plot as it developed was that the drug dealing villains where using corpses to smuggle drugs, and this was used to "Comic Effect" in two major set-pieces. Though in the first, a car chase, it was black comedy as bodies came thick and fast from the back of a van to be run over by the pursuing cars, the second was pushing the boundaries in a to a more disturbing area.
A criticism levied at Michael Bay by British critic Mark Kermode has been that he is a filmmaker with "pornographic sensibilities". Not just in the literal sense, but in the way that he views everything from cars, women and explosions for example. But this was no more clearly re- enforced than in a scene about 90 minutes in, when our two 'bad boys' are searching a morgue and after pulling back the sheets on fat white guys, they reveal a large breasted young woman, who is refer to as "The Bimbo" if my memory serves. It's worrying because I don't know whether this was being played for laughs or was supposed to be a titillating shot of a well endowed woman? Is it right to show a dead woman, who looks to have been strangled to death and referred to a bimbo in a mainstream 15 certificated movie?
I don't want to sound like a prude but the tone of this and pretty much every scene with the bodies being used, seemed to be in plain Bad, BAD taste and though this humour can play well in the right genre of movie, this just simply wasn't the film to do it in, in my opinion. But, that criticism aside, my main issues are the pacing. It was just too hollow to sustain its running time and my mind was beginning to wander from time to time between the spectacular action and the few moments of decent comedy.
It just didn't have the magic of the 90′s actioner, a genre which had faded considerably by the early 2000′s, and without offering anything new besides improved action, which was worth the ticket or DVD price in its own right, or even retaining the original character of the original, this was a sequel failed to hold its own.
Bad Boys was Bay's first film and was but a taster of his over the top film making, which first arrives in The Rock a year afterwards, but this made eight years later was obviously going to take this to the next level, if not several levels further than that. But to me, it didn't. Granted, the action was thrilling, outrageous and very enjoyable, but the character development was barely visible. They bicker, Lawrence moaned a lot and Smith was cool and likable but there was just a shell of what there should have been. The entire story, including what's left of their character dynamics are only present to set up the next great action sequence.
Then, the was the taste issue. The crux of the plot as it developed was that the drug dealing villains where using corpses to smuggle drugs, and this was used to "Comic Effect" in two major set-pieces. Though in the first, a car chase, it was black comedy as bodies came thick and fast from the back of a van to be run over by the pursuing cars, the second was pushing the boundaries in a to a more disturbing area.
A criticism levied at Michael Bay by British critic Mark Kermode has been that he is a filmmaker with "pornographic sensibilities". Not just in the literal sense, but in the way that he views everything from cars, women and explosions for example. But this was no more clearly re- enforced than in a scene about 90 minutes in, when our two 'bad boys' are searching a morgue and after pulling back the sheets on fat white guys, they reveal a large breasted young woman, who is refer to as "The Bimbo" if my memory serves. It's worrying because I don't know whether this was being played for laughs or was supposed to be a titillating shot of a well endowed woman? Is it right to show a dead woman, who looks to have been strangled to death and referred to a bimbo in a mainstream 15 certificated movie?
I don't want to sound like a prude but the tone of this and pretty much every scene with the bodies being used, seemed to be in plain Bad, BAD taste and though this humour can play well in the right genre of movie, this just simply wasn't the film to do it in, in my opinion. But, that criticism aside, my main issues are the pacing. It was just too hollow to sustain its running time and my mind was beginning to wander from time to time between the spectacular action and the few moments of decent comedy.
It just didn't have the magic of the 90′s actioner, a genre which had faded considerably by the early 2000′s, and without offering anything new besides improved action, which was worth the ticket or DVD price in its own right, or even retaining the original character of the original, this was a sequel failed to hold its own.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Call of Duty: Modern Warfare in Video Games
Dec 2, 2019
Call of Duty is back and better than ever with the release of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. The game serves as a reboot of the Modern Warfare series and features the return of a single player campaign that was sadly missing from last year’s Call of Duty: Black Ops IIII.
The campaign is ripped from the headlines as it has a more plausible storyline with the discovery of Poison Gas that is threatening instability in the Middle East and abroad and forces the players to make very tough decisions along the way.
Playing the missions as one of several characters helps give the game a wide-ranging perspective as it is not all run and gun action as there is also stealth and tactical stages of the game.
What I really enjoyed was the updated graphical engine that not only produced some amazing visuals but really gave a new level of intensity to the game which is a non-stop thrill ride that rivals anything Hollywood can offer.
While the game has some issues at launch; they were patched up and future updates such as maps are not only free this time around but frequent.
The Multiplayer aspect of the game is always a big draw and this time around Modern Warfare really shines by featuring Cross-Play which allows Xbox One, Playstation 4, and a PC player to play in the same game and also allows players greater options in finding games to take part in.
Multiplayer Modes will be very familiar to anyone who has played any of the games in the series as the Team Death Match, Kill Confirmed, Hardpoint, and other modes are back which combine with the other modes to offer ten different options for players.
As before players will gain points as they play which will allow them to unlock new weapons, equipment, Kill Streaks, Perks, cosmetics and other options to enhance the experience and allow players to pick loadouts that best suit their style of play.
Moving away from the Battle Royale mode that was introduced last year; Modern Warfare offers a mode called Ground War which allows large groups of players to battle one another in a large map complete with vehicles such as tanks and helicopters. I can tell you that there is no greater joy than hopping in a tank to obliterate a person who has been camping and sniping your entire squad for most of the mission.
Perhaps the most interesting new feature of the game is a series of Co-Op modes. This option allows players to join with other players to complete missions; some of which extend the storyline to the game as they must work with one another to complete various missions.
The sales for the game have been very strong as it brought in over $600 million in revenue in just three days. Once the technical issues I faced were eliminated and my gameplay stabilized; I have found this to be easily one of the most enjoyable recent games in the series and one of the best overall.
I cannot wait to see what they do next as Call of Duty: Modern Warfare is a great new addition to the series that blends old and new with a gripping story and relentless action.
4.5 stars out of 5
The campaign is ripped from the headlines as it has a more plausible storyline with the discovery of Poison Gas that is threatening instability in the Middle East and abroad and forces the players to make very tough decisions along the way.
Playing the missions as one of several characters helps give the game a wide-ranging perspective as it is not all run and gun action as there is also stealth and tactical stages of the game.
What I really enjoyed was the updated graphical engine that not only produced some amazing visuals but really gave a new level of intensity to the game which is a non-stop thrill ride that rivals anything Hollywood can offer.
While the game has some issues at launch; they were patched up and future updates such as maps are not only free this time around but frequent.
The Multiplayer aspect of the game is always a big draw and this time around Modern Warfare really shines by featuring Cross-Play which allows Xbox One, Playstation 4, and a PC player to play in the same game and also allows players greater options in finding games to take part in.
Multiplayer Modes will be very familiar to anyone who has played any of the games in the series as the Team Death Match, Kill Confirmed, Hardpoint, and other modes are back which combine with the other modes to offer ten different options for players.
As before players will gain points as they play which will allow them to unlock new weapons, equipment, Kill Streaks, Perks, cosmetics and other options to enhance the experience and allow players to pick loadouts that best suit their style of play.
Moving away from the Battle Royale mode that was introduced last year; Modern Warfare offers a mode called Ground War which allows large groups of players to battle one another in a large map complete with vehicles such as tanks and helicopters. I can tell you that there is no greater joy than hopping in a tank to obliterate a person who has been camping and sniping your entire squad for most of the mission.
Perhaps the most interesting new feature of the game is a series of Co-Op modes. This option allows players to join with other players to complete missions; some of which extend the storyline to the game as they must work with one another to complete various missions.
The sales for the game have been very strong as it brought in over $600 million in revenue in just three days. Once the technical issues I faced were eliminated and my gameplay stabilized; I have found this to be easily one of the most enjoyable recent games in the series and one of the best overall.
I cannot wait to see what they do next as Call of Duty: Modern Warfare is a great new addition to the series that blends old and new with a gripping story and relentless action.
4.5 stars out of 5
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/
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016) in Movies
Jul 19, 2017
Some of the lighting is well implemented (1 more)
Colin Farrell
Bad CGI (2 more)
The movies 3 leads are extremely annoying
Johnny 'oooh' Depp
Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them - Or JK Rowling and the Never Ending Quest for More Money
Contains spoilers, click to show
First off, full disclosure, I have never been a fan of the Harry Potter franchise. I’ve read a few of the books and seen a few of the movies and it just isn’t my thing. Honestly, I’m not even a fan of fantasy in general, I think Lord Of The Rings is nonsense and Game Of Thrones is vastly overrated and the last Harry Potter movie I saw was the fourth one. However, I was willing to go into this movie with a clean slate and hopefully have it win me over and unfortunately it didn’t. Also this review will contain spoilers if you care about that sort of thing.
This film is a prequel to the other Harry Potter movies, this time set in America rather than Britain and telling the story of the events that led to the great wizarding war between Dumbledore and Grindlewald. The film did have potential, to see what would have essentially been WWII fought with magic could be really cool but unfortunately all we get here is setup and that actual event we want to see will probably take place 4 or 5 movies down the line. The film opens with Eddie Redmayne’s character, Newt Scamander going to New York from London to set free one of the beasts that he keeps inside his Tardis-like brief case. Then he ends up in a bank and meets a ‘Nomaj,’ which is this film’s lazy version of a ‘muggle,’ who we learn is a simple lonely guy that just wants to open his own bakery and that’s another character cliché ticked off the list. We now have the double act of the nerdy, sniveling protagonist and the overweight sympathetic sidekick. Also, for the rest of this review I will be referring to the baker character as fat bloke and this isn’t to be derogatory, but is purely because the script relies on the, ‘fat, jolly, sympathetic, pathetic loner’ stereotype and passes it off as a character arc. If the script isn’t treating the character with any respect, then why should I? So fat bloke it is then.
So the two of them of course have the exact same briefcase and after some cartoony looking CGI animals escape from Redmayne’s case in the bank the suitcases predictably get mixed up and then the fat bloke gets his bakery loan declined and returns home with Redmayne’s suitcase, then more bad CGI animals open the case and attack the fat bloke. Redmayne’s character then gets arrested by some wizarding inspector for letting the, ‘Nomaj,’ (urgh) get away after seeing the animals in the case and is taken to the New York Wizards base, I guess? Then it’s revealed that the wizarding inspector that arrested Redmayne is a bit of a shit inspector and she is trying to redeem herself in the eyes of her superiors, so in front of this high wizard council, she confiscates the case from Redmayne and opens it only to reveal a bunch of cakes inside. Yes, really… Who writes this shit? Rowling is doing to Harry Potter what Lucas did to Star Wars during the prequels at this point.
So Redmayne gets set free and he goes to fat bloke’s house to find him lying on the floor, then some more bad CGI later the inspector turns up and they take him back to her house to meet her sister? Friend? Does it matter? She ends up becoming the love interest for fat bloke. Then for no apparent reason Redmayne and fat bloke enter the case and he shows fat bloke all this crazy shit that apparently humans aren’t supposed to see and then Redmayne does some more sniveling and decides they have to sneak out of the girls’ apartment and recapture the animals that escaped in the bank and from fat bloke’s apartment. They get a couple of the beasts back then they go to central park to find Redmayne’s horny rhino and they dress fat bloke up in a leather rhino costume and use him as rape bait then they ice skate for a bit and capture the rhino. Again, really… I am not making this shit up for satirical reasons.
Then we see a real life prick Ezra Miller playing some sort of weird emo child who is beat by his mother and we see he is working with Colin Farrell to find a big bad dark spirit that is killing people around New York. Colin Farrell is definitely the best thing about the film at this point. After this a bunch of other stupid shit happens, like Ron Perlman and John Voight coming into the movie, showing a ray of potential then being totally wasted. The movie drags in the middle, but eventually after some more fat jokes, bad CGI and sniveling, all of the creatures are captured and Ezra Miller turns into a black death cloud or some such nonsense. Then he is boosting around New York, fucking up shit as he goes and so Redmayne and Farrell follow him down to the subway to stop him. Redmayne seems to be talking him down and then Farrell shows up and essentially tells him to join the dark side. Then there is a CGI wand battle and the council from earlier show up out of nowhere and kill the black cloud of death. Then Colin Farrell gets pissed off and in the best scene in the movie murders half of the council members before he gets arrested by Eddie Redmayne with some magic handcuffs.
Then the worst part in the movie takes place. It is revealed that Colin Farrell is actually Johnny Depp in disguise. I mean he is Grindlewald in disguise but the important part for me is the replacement of Colin Farrell with Johnny Depp. Now I’m not the world’s biggest Colin Farrell fan, he is great in, ‘In Bruges,’ but other than that he is pretty meh, but he was definitely the best thing that this movie had going for it and they fucking swapped him out! With fucking Johnny-‘ooh’-Depp. As if this movie wasn’t shit enough they swapped out the best thing about it for Johnny Depp, the biggest joke in Hollywood. I’m done, fuck this movie, fuck Johnny Depp, fuck JK Rowling, fuck Harry Potter, I’m out.
Okay, let’s briefly talk about the technical side of the film before I score this thing. The whole cast of this movie is phoning it in, so the acting is fine but nothing to write home about, Farrell is the best thing in this movie, but I feel that in the sequels it will just be an ‘ooh,’ off between Depp and Redmayne. The direction is okay as the movie plods along sufficiently, but the writing is wildly inconsistent and the plot as stated above is all over the place. The lighting and cinematography in one scene are fantastic, when Farrell and Miller are conversing in a dark alleyway but other than that they are pretty mundane too. The score is suitably Harry Potter like and the CGI is also to a similar standard of the Harry Potter films. The problem with that is that the CGI was ropey and of a fairly poor standard in the Harry Potter movies 10 years ago and it doesn’t seem like it has improved much since then. This movie isn’t for me, but even from an objective standpoint, based solely from a moviemaking perspective this movie is poor.
This film is a prequel to the other Harry Potter movies, this time set in America rather than Britain and telling the story of the events that led to the great wizarding war between Dumbledore and Grindlewald. The film did have potential, to see what would have essentially been WWII fought with magic could be really cool but unfortunately all we get here is setup and that actual event we want to see will probably take place 4 or 5 movies down the line. The film opens with Eddie Redmayne’s character, Newt Scamander going to New York from London to set free one of the beasts that he keeps inside his Tardis-like brief case. Then he ends up in a bank and meets a ‘Nomaj,’ which is this film’s lazy version of a ‘muggle,’ who we learn is a simple lonely guy that just wants to open his own bakery and that’s another character cliché ticked off the list. We now have the double act of the nerdy, sniveling protagonist and the overweight sympathetic sidekick. Also, for the rest of this review I will be referring to the baker character as fat bloke and this isn’t to be derogatory, but is purely because the script relies on the, ‘fat, jolly, sympathetic, pathetic loner’ stereotype and passes it off as a character arc. If the script isn’t treating the character with any respect, then why should I? So fat bloke it is then.
So the two of them of course have the exact same briefcase and after some cartoony looking CGI animals escape from Redmayne’s case in the bank the suitcases predictably get mixed up and then the fat bloke gets his bakery loan declined and returns home with Redmayne’s suitcase, then more bad CGI animals open the case and attack the fat bloke. Redmayne’s character then gets arrested by some wizarding inspector for letting the, ‘Nomaj,’ (urgh) get away after seeing the animals in the case and is taken to the New York Wizards base, I guess? Then it’s revealed that the wizarding inspector that arrested Redmayne is a bit of a shit inspector and she is trying to redeem herself in the eyes of her superiors, so in front of this high wizard council, she confiscates the case from Redmayne and opens it only to reveal a bunch of cakes inside. Yes, really… Who writes this shit? Rowling is doing to Harry Potter what Lucas did to Star Wars during the prequels at this point.
So Redmayne gets set free and he goes to fat bloke’s house to find him lying on the floor, then some more bad CGI later the inspector turns up and they take him back to her house to meet her sister? Friend? Does it matter? She ends up becoming the love interest for fat bloke. Then for no apparent reason Redmayne and fat bloke enter the case and he shows fat bloke all this crazy shit that apparently humans aren’t supposed to see and then Redmayne does some more sniveling and decides they have to sneak out of the girls’ apartment and recapture the animals that escaped in the bank and from fat bloke’s apartment. They get a couple of the beasts back then they go to central park to find Redmayne’s horny rhino and they dress fat bloke up in a leather rhino costume and use him as rape bait then they ice skate for a bit and capture the rhino. Again, really… I am not making this shit up for satirical reasons.
Then we see a real life prick Ezra Miller playing some sort of weird emo child who is beat by his mother and we see he is working with Colin Farrell to find a big bad dark spirit that is killing people around New York. Colin Farrell is definitely the best thing about the film at this point. After this a bunch of other stupid shit happens, like Ron Perlman and John Voight coming into the movie, showing a ray of potential then being totally wasted. The movie drags in the middle, but eventually after some more fat jokes, bad CGI and sniveling, all of the creatures are captured and Ezra Miller turns into a black death cloud or some such nonsense. Then he is boosting around New York, fucking up shit as he goes and so Redmayne and Farrell follow him down to the subway to stop him. Redmayne seems to be talking him down and then Farrell shows up and essentially tells him to join the dark side. Then there is a CGI wand battle and the council from earlier show up out of nowhere and kill the black cloud of death. Then Colin Farrell gets pissed off and in the best scene in the movie murders half of the council members before he gets arrested by Eddie Redmayne with some magic handcuffs.
Then the worst part in the movie takes place. It is revealed that Colin Farrell is actually Johnny Depp in disguise. I mean he is Grindlewald in disguise but the important part for me is the replacement of Colin Farrell with Johnny Depp. Now I’m not the world’s biggest Colin Farrell fan, he is great in, ‘In Bruges,’ but other than that he is pretty meh, but he was definitely the best thing that this movie had going for it and they fucking swapped him out! With fucking Johnny-‘ooh’-Depp. As if this movie wasn’t shit enough they swapped out the best thing about it for Johnny Depp, the biggest joke in Hollywood. I’m done, fuck this movie, fuck Johnny Depp, fuck JK Rowling, fuck Harry Potter, I’m out.
Okay, let’s briefly talk about the technical side of the film before I score this thing. The whole cast of this movie is phoning it in, so the acting is fine but nothing to write home about, Farrell is the best thing in this movie, but I feel that in the sequels it will just be an ‘ooh,’ off between Depp and Redmayne. The direction is okay as the movie plods along sufficiently, but the writing is wildly inconsistent and the plot as stated above is all over the place. The lighting and cinematography in one scene are fantastic, when Farrell and Miller are conversing in a dark alleyway but other than that they are pretty mundane too. The score is suitably Harry Potter like and the CGI is also to a similar standard of the Harry Potter films. The problem with that is that the CGI was ropey and of a fairly poor standard in the Harry Potter movies 10 years ago and it doesn’t seem like it has improved much since then. This movie isn’t for me, but even from an objective standpoint, based solely from a moviemaking perspective this movie is poor.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Cold Pursuit (2019) in Movies
Mar 15, 2020
Comments on revenge are best kept on the screen.
I'd completely forgotten the furore about Liam Neeson's comments back last February during the press-tour preceding the film's release. In discussing the destructive feelings of revenge experienced by his character, Nels Coxman, Neeson revealed something he did 40 years ago: after the rape of a friend by "a black man", Neeson went out on the streets to find another "black man" and do them harm. (As a fellow Ballymena-born man, David Moody (from the "Mark and Dave" blog) has an interesting theory about this... that it was not a "rascist" statement in the true sense, but something else entirely. See here - ).
The comments undoubtedly impacted the movie at the box office. Which is a shame. Because in his catalogue of bonkers and violent revenge-porn flicks, this is one of Neeson's more entertaining ones.
Revenge is a dish best served cold. And where colder to serve it than in the ski-resort of Kehoe where Nels Coxman is the local snowplow operative and "man of the year" for his services to the community. But the tracks are about to fall off his orderly life. For his son Kyle (Micheál Richardson) winds up dead through a drugs overdose and his strained marriage with wife Grace (Laura Dern) disintegrates. (One of the most cutting and best-written "Bye" notes ever seen in the movies).
With revenge in mind, Coxman pursues the Denver-based drugs lord Trevor Calcote (Tom Bateman) who dished out the drugs to his son. But he inadvertently manages to stay just below the parapet as he sets in train a gang war between Calcote and a Kehoe-based native-American drugs gang led by White Bull (Tom Jackson). The snow turned progressively pinker as the body count rises.
Calcote (aka "Viking") is painted as a colourful family man, with an annoyingly bright son Ryan (Nicholas Holmes) that he controls with a rod of iron. Viking is estranged from wife Aya (Julia Jones), who seems completely unafraid of him and happily embarrasses him in front of his men. This relationship never really works. Since given all the terrible and irrational things Viking does to people, whether they obstruct him or help him in equal measure, putting a quiet bullet into Aya's head seems to be to least he could do!
Where there is fun to be had is in the "Stockholm syndrome" linkage between young Ryan and Coxman. When his father insists on controlling his diet, feeding him the same insipidly healthy meals morning, noon and night, the alternative of being kidnapped and fed burgers seems eminently more preferable!
The film is at times really difficult to follow. There are lots of inexplicable leaps of logic and really inexplicably bonkers scenes that you can only patch together later. It's as if the filmmakers randomly filmed 5 hours of footage and then tried to edit it all into a cohesive plot!
As one example of this, the relationship between Coxman and "Wingman" (William Forsythe) was poorly introduced such that I was left baffled by a later plot twist.
In another scene, Neeson smashes the head of enforcer "Santa" (Michael Adamthwaite) into his steering wheel, but in the next scene collapses with him utterly exhausted in the snow. There was clearly a significant fight here that was cut out of the finished cut. But as a result the final cut makes no sense at all!
Of course, the local law enforcement team are average at best. Average because although young and keen-as-mustard detective Kim Dash (Emmy Rossum) is hot on the trail of the truth, her partner Gip (John Doman) is f*ckin' useless... wanting to do nothing but drink coffee and eat donuts in true Simpsons style.
Normally with these sort of films, it's difficult to keep track of the body count. No such problem here. Every death is celebrated with a tombstone graphic so it's easy to keep count! Needless to say, there are a lot of tombstones registered.
Directed by Norwegian Hans Petter Moland, it's all good violent cartoonish fun, that keeps its tongue firmly in its cheek for most of the running time. The snowy setting, the partly native-American cast and the presence of Julia Jones brings to mind the truly excellent Jeremy Renner / Elizabeth Olsen movie "Wind River". But there the similarities (and quality levels) definitely stop. It's not a clever movie; it's borderline bonkers for most of its running time (never more so than with a totally bizarre "joke" final shot); but it is entertaining. As a 'park brain at door' action comedy it just about makes the grade.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/03/15/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-cold-pursuit-2019/. Thanks.)
The comments undoubtedly impacted the movie at the box office. Which is a shame. Because in his catalogue of bonkers and violent revenge-porn flicks, this is one of Neeson's more entertaining ones.
Revenge is a dish best served cold. And where colder to serve it than in the ski-resort of Kehoe where Nels Coxman is the local snowplow operative and "man of the year" for his services to the community. But the tracks are about to fall off his orderly life. For his son Kyle (Micheál Richardson) winds up dead through a drugs overdose and his strained marriage with wife Grace (Laura Dern) disintegrates. (One of the most cutting and best-written "Bye" notes ever seen in the movies).
With revenge in mind, Coxman pursues the Denver-based drugs lord Trevor Calcote (Tom Bateman) who dished out the drugs to his son. But he inadvertently manages to stay just below the parapet as he sets in train a gang war between Calcote and a Kehoe-based native-American drugs gang led by White Bull (Tom Jackson). The snow turned progressively pinker as the body count rises.
Calcote (aka "Viking") is painted as a colourful family man, with an annoyingly bright son Ryan (Nicholas Holmes) that he controls with a rod of iron. Viking is estranged from wife Aya (Julia Jones), who seems completely unafraid of him and happily embarrasses him in front of his men. This relationship never really works. Since given all the terrible and irrational things Viking does to people, whether they obstruct him or help him in equal measure, putting a quiet bullet into Aya's head seems to be to least he could do!
Where there is fun to be had is in the "Stockholm syndrome" linkage between young Ryan and Coxman. When his father insists on controlling his diet, feeding him the same insipidly healthy meals morning, noon and night, the alternative of being kidnapped and fed burgers seems eminently more preferable!
The film is at times really difficult to follow. There are lots of inexplicable leaps of logic and really inexplicably bonkers scenes that you can only patch together later. It's as if the filmmakers randomly filmed 5 hours of footage and then tried to edit it all into a cohesive plot!
As one example of this, the relationship between Coxman and "Wingman" (William Forsythe) was poorly introduced such that I was left baffled by a later plot twist.
In another scene, Neeson smashes the head of enforcer "Santa" (Michael Adamthwaite) into his steering wheel, but in the next scene collapses with him utterly exhausted in the snow. There was clearly a significant fight here that was cut out of the finished cut. But as a result the final cut makes no sense at all!
Of course, the local law enforcement team are average at best. Average because although young and keen-as-mustard detective Kim Dash (Emmy Rossum) is hot on the trail of the truth, her partner Gip (John Doman) is f*ckin' useless... wanting to do nothing but drink coffee and eat donuts in true Simpsons style.
Normally with these sort of films, it's difficult to keep track of the body count. No such problem here. Every death is celebrated with a tombstone graphic so it's easy to keep count! Needless to say, there are a lot of tombstones registered.
Directed by Norwegian Hans Petter Moland, it's all good violent cartoonish fun, that keeps its tongue firmly in its cheek for most of the running time. The snowy setting, the partly native-American cast and the presence of Julia Jones brings to mind the truly excellent Jeremy Renner / Elizabeth Olsen movie "Wind River". But there the similarities (and quality levels) definitely stop. It's not a clever movie; it's borderline bonkers for most of its running time (never more so than with a totally bizarre "joke" final shot); but it is entertaining. As a 'park brain at door' action comedy it just about makes the grade.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/03/15/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-cold-pursuit-2019/. Thanks.)
