Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Mountain Between Us (2017) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A film not quite sure what it’s trying to be.
Idris Elba after scoring a mammoth hit with UK TV’s “Luther” has really struggled to make a breakthrough as a leading man into A-grade movies. Although he’s had some strong supporting roles (“Molly’s Game” and “Star Trek Beyond” for example) and small bit parts in the Marvel universe, when he has landed a lead role they are in films best forgotton (e.g. “Bastille Day”; “The Dark Tower”). This is seldom down to his performance. Here he is given more of a chance to shine, in what is almost a two-hander with Kate Winslet for most of the film. And he is the best thing in the film: lots of the brooding look that he is so famous for.
Elba plays Ben Bass, a neuro-surgeon stranded at Boise airport who has to get back to Baltimore for an important operation. Winslett playing Alex Martin, a famous photo-journalist, is stranded with him and equally desperate to travel as she is due to get married in New York the following day. The two club together to hire a plane from charter pilot Walter (Beau Bridges, “Homeland”, “The Descendents”). But in terrible conditions, and with a medical emergency, the plane crash lands in the snow of the Rockies, and Ben and Alex (together with Walter’s Labrador) need to struggle to survive in the wilderness. The problem is that they are an odd couple, and constantly wind each other up the wrong way.
It’s a well-worn tale that has been portrayed many times before in films like “Alive” and “The Grey”, so what makes the film live or die is the quality of the screenplay and the chemistry between the characters. Unfortunately the former by Chris Weitz (co-writer on “Rogue One“) is rather clunky, and in the latter case I just didn’t feel it. Winslett’s character is just so goddamn whiney and annoying that the thought of Ben doing anything with her other than hitting her with the shovel and feeding her to the dog seems unlikely! Winslett seems to sense that too, since I never felt she was completely invested in her character. Aside from one (impressive) monologue, I found it to be a so-so performance from her.
Aside from Elba the other star of the show is the landscape of the High Uintascape in North East Utah of the which is beautifully filmed, on location by Mandy Walker (“Hidden Figures“).
The story leaps from improbability to improbability and raises more questions than it answers: in a survival situation should you walk or stay put? If you have a dog, should you eat it* and what condiments are appropriate? Does an iced-over river have any current flowing under the ice? If they both died, would the audience care?
No spoilers with answers to any of these (*apart from the dog… just joking, they don’t!) , but the ending is as corny as you can get… but it still gave me a lump in my throat. #suckered!
Directed by Hany Abu-Assad, overall if you have a rainy afternoon you need to fill then this a perfectly pleasant movie to veg in front of, but it neither completely satisfies as a romance nor as an adventure flick but falls rather uncomfortably between the two stools.
Elba plays Ben Bass, a neuro-surgeon stranded at Boise airport who has to get back to Baltimore for an important operation. Winslett playing Alex Martin, a famous photo-journalist, is stranded with him and equally desperate to travel as she is due to get married in New York the following day. The two club together to hire a plane from charter pilot Walter (Beau Bridges, “Homeland”, “The Descendents”). But in terrible conditions, and with a medical emergency, the plane crash lands in the snow of the Rockies, and Ben and Alex (together with Walter’s Labrador) need to struggle to survive in the wilderness. The problem is that they are an odd couple, and constantly wind each other up the wrong way.
It’s a well-worn tale that has been portrayed many times before in films like “Alive” and “The Grey”, so what makes the film live or die is the quality of the screenplay and the chemistry between the characters. Unfortunately the former by Chris Weitz (co-writer on “Rogue One“) is rather clunky, and in the latter case I just didn’t feel it. Winslett’s character is just so goddamn whiney and annoying that the thought of Ben doing anything with her other than hitting her with the shovel and feeding her to the dog seems unlikely! Winslett seems to sense that too, since I never felt she was completely invested in her character. Aside from one (impressive) monologue, I found it to be a so-so performance from her.
Aside from Elba the other star of the show is the landscape of the High Uintascape in North East Utah of the which is beautifully filmed, on location by Mandy Walker (“Hidden Figures“).
The story leaps from improbability to improbability and raises more questions than it answers: in a survival situation should you walk or stay put? If you have a dog, should you eat it* and what condiments are appropriate? Does an iced-over river have any current flowing under the ice? If they both died, would the audience care?
No spoilers with answers to any of these (*apart from the dog… just joking, they don’t!) , but the ending is as corny as you can get… but it still gave me a lump in my throat. #suckered!
Directed by Hany Abu-Assad, overall if you have a rainy afternoon you need to fill then this a perfectly pleasant movie to veg in front of, but it neither completely satisfies as a romance nor as an adventure flick but falls rather uncomfortably between the two stools.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Meg (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The long journey to bring “The Meg” to the big screen is finally over as Author Steve Alten’s classic book series has arrived.
The film stars Jason Statham as Jonas Taylor, an expert in underwater rescues who has to makes a very difficult choice when a rescue goes bad after suffering a very unexpected encounter mid-rescue.
Five years later Jonas is out of the rescue game as he has been labeled as unreliable and prone to PTSD so he drinks his time away in Thailand working on local boats.
200 miles off the coasts of China is an advanced research lab which is the pet project of a Billionaire named Morris (Rainn Wilson), who arrives in time to witness an attempt by the crew to go deeper than ever thought possible by going through a layer that was previously believed to be the ocean floor. The experiment works and the crew is amazed by their new discoveries until something violently attacks their ship leaving them stranded on the bottom of the ocean.
With a limited amount of air and time ticking away, Jonas is recruited despite his numerous refusals as not only is one of the stranded people his ex; but the last transmission sent by the sub mentions how Jonas had been right all along when he had years early claimed they were not alone during the rescue attempt gone bad.
Jonas is teamed with a spirited member of the team named Suyin (Bingbing Li), who has taken a sub down ahead of Jonas as she was not willing to wait for outside help to arrive. She locates her comrades and is attacked by a massive shark long thought extinct.
The harrowing rescue goes off but again Jonas is faced with a no-win situation and is blamed by a former colleague for the issues.
While Morris is eager to exploit the new find for the huge financial opportunity it presents, their plans change when the creature emerges from its contained area and threatens a level of carnage on the seas the likes of which society and the ecosystem are very unprepared for.
What follows is a frantic and often intense series of engagements as Jonas and the crew must battle the massive and deadly creature and find a way to survive.
The film has some very solid effects and the intensity at times had people in the press screening partially covering their eyes during some of the more harrowing moments.
The cast is solid and work well with one another as the film does what it can to keep some of the characters from being little more than generic victims for the Meg.
The movie does differ from the book in terms of being set off China versus California but this was largely due to the joint-production with Chinese owned Gravity Pictures. The film is also much less gory than the book as Director Jon Turteltaub was mandated to deliver a PG-13 film by the studio to improve the odds of returning on the $150.00 million invested in the film.
The dialogue is also a bit stilted and formulaic in parts but action films are not known for their complex plots or advanced dialogue and I attributed this largely to the challenges of a blended cast; many of whom do not speak English as their primary language.
Despite a delay from its planned 2017 release date, “The Meg” is a solid and fun action-thriller that gives audiences one of the best excuses not to go swimming since “Jaws”. While there have been numerous Shark films over the years, “The Meg” deftly weaves good sets and production values with a top-notch cast and lavish visuals to bring the film to life.
With several other books in the series already available, I hope we see the next film surface in a few years as I cannot wait to see what comes next.
http://sknr.net/2018/08/08/the-meg/
The film stars Jason Statham as Jonas Taylor, an expert in underwater rescues who has to makes a very difficult choice when a rescue goes bad after suffering a very unexpected encounter mid-rescue.
Five years later Jonas is out of the rescue game as he has been labeled as unreliable and prone to PTSD so he drinks his time away in Thailand working on local boats.
200 miles off the coasts of China is an advanced research lab which is the pet project of a Billionaire named Morris (Rainn Wilson), who arrives in time to witness an attempt by the crew to go deeper than ever thought possible by going through a layer that was previously believed to be the ocean floor. The experiment works and the crew is amazed by their new discoveries until something violently attacks their ship leaving them stranded on the bottom of the ocean.
With a limited amount of air and time ticking away, Jonas is recruited despite his numerous refusals as not only is one of the stranded people his ex; but the last transmission sent by the sub mentions how Jonas had been right all along when he had years early claimed they were not alone during the rescue attempt gone bad.
Jonas is teamed with a spirited member of the team named Suyin (Bingbing Li), who has taken a sub down ahead of Jonas as she was not willing to wait for outside help to arrive. She locates her comrades and is attacked by a massive shark long thought extinct.
The harrowing rescue goes off but again Jonas is faced with a no-win situation and is blamed by a former colleague for the issues.
While Morris is eager to exploit the new find for the huge financial opportunity it presents, their plans change when the creature emerges from its contained area and threatens a level of carnage on the seas the likes of which society and the ecosystem are very unprepared for.
What follows is a frantic and often intense series of engagements as Jonas and the crew must battle the massive and deadly creature and find a way to survive.
The film has some very solid effects and the intensity at times had people in the press screening partially covering their eyes during some of the more harrowing moments.
The cast is solid and work well with one another as the film does what it can to keep some of the characters from being little more than generic victims for the Meg.
The movie does differ from the book in terms of being set off China versus California but this was largely due to the joint-production with Chinese owned Gravity Pictures. The film is also much less gory than the book as Director Jon Turteltaub was mandated to deliver a PG-13 film by the studio to improve the odds of returning on the $150.00 million invested in the film.
The dialogue is also a bit stilted and formulaic in parts but action films are not known for their complex plots or advanced dialogue and I attributed this largely to the challenges of a blended cast; many of whom do not speak English as their primary language.
Despite a delay from its planned 2017 release date, “The Meg” is a solid and fun action-thriller that gives audiences one of the best excuses not to go swimming since “Jaws”. While there have been numerous Shark films over the years, “The Meg” deftly weaves good sets and production values with a top-notch cast and lavish visuals to bring the film to life.
With several other books in the series already available, I hope we see the next film surface in a few years as I cannot wait to see what comes next.
http://sknr.net/2018/08/08/the-meg/
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) in Movies
Mar 26, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
Zack Snynder's Justice League is the original cut of the Justice League film that was released in 2017 which was started by by Snyder and re written / cut by Josh Whedon, cutting the film from Snyders 4 hour, R/15 rated vison to a 1.30 pg/12 rated version. The film was meant to be the big connecting point for the DC equivalent version of the MCU after following on from 'Man of Steel' and Batman vs Superman' but the Whedon cut was met with a lot of criticism as fans felt that it didn't give what was promised and so the DCCU seemed to stall, or go in a different direction with 'Birds of Prey'. We don't know if, with the release of the Snyder, the DCCU will be restarted.
Zack Snyder's Justice League follows the same basic story of the Whedon cut, after the events of 'Batman vs Superman', Batman begins to form a super hero team to be ready for the invasion Lex Luthor warned of.
The film is of a similar dark tone as the two previous films, with some humour added by Ezra Miller's Flash, and adds more back story to both the flash and Cyborg as well as more information about the villains, Steppenwolf and Darkseid.
The biggest problems of the Snyder cut is the 4 hour run time and I wonder if that would have been cut if; 1) it had been originally released without Josh Whedon's input and 2) if marvel hadn't already released the 3 hour long Avengers end game.
Any other problem I have with Justice League are minor, I'm still not sure if DC have handled the resurrection of Superman right but that's based off what they did in the comics and Snyder did... well I'll get to that in a bit.
The inclusion of Martian Manhunter was good but his first appearance in the film was a bit odd.
The last main problem I had were Stepenwolf's eye's, part way through the film his eyes seem to get too big for his face, almost giving him a cute, Anime girl look. At least until they go blue.
Zack Snyder's Justice league did a lot of things right, the inclusion on Darkseid is the big one as it makes Steppenwolf's motivation more believable and adds to the history of the DCU earth, not to mention introducing the Green Lanterns (with out CGI costumes).
Now back to Superman, I've already said that DC may have missed a trick with his resurrection but Snyder left him in his black outfit (I'm sure you se him back in his original outfit, in the present in the Whedon cut ) and anyone familiar with the 'Reign of the Superman' Comics/animated film know that the Black costumed superman is in fact the Eradicator so, depending on what DC have/had planned in Superman's future they could be planning something else, especially now the Green lanterns have been introduced .
Because of the longer runtime the new characters did seem more filled out which helped with the overall motivation and flow of the film.
Like the previous two films (I'm not counting suicide squad because it's only linked by the end scene) Justice league is quite slow paced and dark, taking time to build up to the action but the narrative does fit the pace and doesn't let it feel rushed or leave any loose ends. In fact the only part that almost felt like something was missing was when Flash repapered after breaking the speed of light however that may be because I've read a few comics and know that something normally happens when he does that.
I do hope that DCCU does continue from Zack Snyder's Justice league, if only to find out what they are planning with the whole 'nightmare future/Lois is the key' storyline they started in 'Batman vs Superman' and continued here.
Even if you have seen the Whedon cut and if you can find the time I would recommend watching the Snyder cut as there is a lot more to the film even though there are a few scenes from the Whedon cut missing and the Snyder cut does pull on a lot more law from the comics that was only hinted at in the shorter version. (I still find hard to believe they left Darkseid out of the Whedon cut considering the story they were trying to tell.)
Zack Snyder's Justice League follows the same basic story of the Whedon cut, after the events of 'Batman vs Superman', Batman begins to form a super hero team to be ready for the invasion Lex Luthor warned of.
The film is of a similar dark tone as the two previous films, with some humour added by Ezra Miller's Flash, and adds more back story to both the flash and Cyborg as well as more information about the villains, Steppenwolf and Darkseid.
The biggest problems of the Snyder cut is the 4 hour run time and I wonder if that would have been cut if; 1) it had been originally released without Josh Whedon's input and 2) if marvel hadn't already released the 3 hour long Avengers end game.
Any other problem I have with Justice League are minor, I'm still not sure if DC have handled the resurrection of Superman right but that's based off what they did in the comics and Snyder did... well I'll get to that in a bit.
The inclusion of Martian Manhunter was good but his first appearance in the film was a bit odd.
The last main problem I had were Stepenwolf's eye's, part way through the film his eyes seem to get too big for his face, almost giving him a cute, Anime girl look. At least until they go blue.
Zack Snyder's Justice league did a lot of things right, the inclusion on Darkseid is the big one as it makes Steppenwolf's motivation more believable and adds to the history of the DCU earth, not to mention introducing the Green Lanterns (with out CGI costumes).
Now back to Superman, I've already said that DC may have missed a trick with his resurrection but Snyder left him in his black outfit (I'm sure you se him back in his original outfit, in the present in the Whedon cut ) and anyone familiar with the 'Reign of the Superman' Comics/animated film know that the Black costumed superman is in fact the Eradicator so, depending on what DC have/had planned in Superman's future they could be planning something else, especially now the Green lanterns have been introduced .
Because of the longer runtime the new characters did seem more filled out which helped with the overall motivation and flow of the film.
Like the previous two films (I'm not counting suicide squad because it's only linked by the end scene) Justice league is quite slow paced and dark, taking time to build up to the action but the narrative does fit the pace and doesn't let it feel rushed or leave any loose ends. In fact the only part that almost felt like something was missing was when Flash repapered after breaking the speed of light however that may be because I've read a few comics and know that something normally happens when he does that.
I do hope that DCCU does continue from Zack Snyder's Justice league, if only to find out what they are planning with the whole 'nightmare future/Lois is the key' storyline they started in 'Batman vs Superman' and continued here.
Even if you have seen the Whedon cut and if you can find the time I would recommend watching the Snyder cut as there is a lot more to the film even though there are a few scenes from the Whedon cut missing and the Snyder cut does pull on a lot more law from the comics that was only hinted at in the shorter version. (I still find hard to believe they left Darkseid out of the Whedon cut considering the story they were trying to tell.)
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Uncanny X-Men: The New Age, Volume 4: End of Greys in Books
Nov 30, 2020
So, in my review for HOUSE OF M, I mentioned that I was making up for all I missed when it came out originally in 2006, like this TPB. This was not the book I was hoping it would be!
Chris Claremont, when he was on his game, he was good. His stories were decent, his characters cool, and at a base level, the heroes were heroes and the villains were villains. And even despite the initial outfit that Emma Frost first debuted in, his characters were not as objectified as they were in this run of UXM!
From the panels of Betsy Braddock, working out in a belly highlighting top and tight short shorts, to Rachel Grey, in a midriff baring t-shirt and little frilly bikini underwear in bed at night, the art within served as nothing more than fan service! It did not enhance the story, nor did it do anything to advance the plot. All it succeeded in doing was satisfying hornball fanboy desires!
<a href="https://s51.photobucket.com/user/dcericola/media/example2.png.html"; target="_blank"><img src="https://oi51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/dcericola/example2.png"; border="0" alt=" photo example2.png"/></a>
It's a shame, really, as the first three issues of the trade were quite good. I thought Chris Bachalo turned in some solid art, excepting the aforementioned unnecessary "cheesecake". But, after his run, it was followed by art from Jon Sibal, which was not as smooth as Bachalo's, but still managed to sandwich in more Rachel Grey fan service, this time, in the shower as the O.N.E. sentinels were watching via CCTV!
There was a time where I would have welcomed art like that in my comics, but that me is no longer relevant or welcome. I have a different mindset, one in which I am focused on what the story offers, rather than just visualization alone.
I gave this one 2 Stars, as I was taking into account Bachalo's art and Claremont's scripting on the first three issues of this TPB. I have one more undertaking, SON OF M, which I am hoping will be better than this turned out to be!
#disappointment
Chris Claremont, when he was on his game, he was good. His stories were decent, his characters cool, and at a base level, the heroes were heroes and the villains were villains. And even despite the initial outfit that Emma Frost first debuted in, his characters were not as objectified as they were in this run of UXM!
From the panels of Betsy Braddock, working out in a belly highlighting top and tight short shorts, to Rachel Grey, in a midriff baring t-shirt and little frilly bikini underwear in bed at night, the art within served as nothing more than fan service! It did not enhance the story, nor did it do anything to advance the plot. All it succeeded in doing was satisfying hornball fanboy desires!
<a href="https://s51.photobucket.com/user/dcericola/media/example2.png.html"; target="_blank"><img src="https://oi51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/dcericola/example2.png"; border="0" alt=" photo example2.png"/></a>
It's a shame, really, as the first three issues of the trade were quite good. I thought Chris Bachalo turned in some solid art, excepting the aforementioned unnecessary "cheesecake". But, after his run, it was followed by art from Jon Sibal, which was not as smooth as Bachalo's, but still managed to sandwich in more Rachel Grey fan service, this time, in the shower as the O.N.E. sentinels were watching via CCTV!
There was a time where I would have welcomed art like that in my comics, but that me is no longer relevant or welcome. I have a different mindset, one in which I am focused on what the story offers, rather than just visualization alone.
I gave this one 2 Stars, as I was taking into account Bachalo's art and Claremont's scripting on the first three issues of this TPB. I have one more undertaking, SON OF M, which I am hoping will be better than this turned out to be!
#disappointment
ClareR (5589 KP) rated The Hiding Game in Books
Sep 8, 2019 (Updated Sep 9, 2019)
A completely engrossing novel about Weimar, Bauhaus and complicated relationships
The Hiding Game is set mostly in the period between the two World Wars at the Bauhaus art school. This was a time of great change in Germany, both politically and artistically. Paul Beckermann starts his study at Bauhaus in 1922, and forms one of a group of six friends. He falls in love with the unobtainable Charlotte, a young woman from Czechoslovakia, but she loves Jenö, who in turn is loved by Paul’s best friend Walter. It seems like an impossible love triangle (or even a square?!). These strong feelings lead to betrayal in a time that it was very easy to utterly destroy lives. The six friends drift apart, mainly out of necessity (Bauhaus was not liked at all by the traditionalists in the National Socialist party), but also they just couldn’t be together anymore.
Paul, as an older man living in England, looks back at this period in his life and how it went tragically wrong. Not all of the six friends were as fortunate as he was.
It’s a heartbreaking and also a suspenseful novel. Someone with only a limited knowledge of this period will know of the kind of tragedy that could befall people then. Paul’s guilt and sadness are palpable throughout the book, and I really felt for him. This isn’t really a book where the characters find some sort of forgiveness for themselves - there is none to find. Terrible things happened, and the survivors had to find a way to live with themselves afterwards.
I loved the details about Bauhaus. I did some study on it during my German degree, and it filled in some gaps in my knowledge (there are quite a few gaps to fill when you did that degree 25 years ago!), and I’m always on the lookout for books set in Germany, especially those with a good helping of history (this has it in spades!). And for me, this really didn’t disappoint. I loved it, and I’ll be recommending it to friends (ex-German degree friends as well!).
Many thanks to NetGalley and Picador for my copy of this wonderful book.
Paul, as an older man living in England, looks back at this period in his life and how it went tragically wrong. Not all of the six friends were as fortunate as he was.
It’s a heartbreaking and also a suspenseful novel. Someone with only a limited knowledge of this period will know of the kind of tragedy that could befall people then. Paul’s guilt and sadness are palpable throughout the book, and I really felt for him. This isn’t really a book where the characters find some sort of forgiveness for themselves - there is none to find. Terrible things happened, and the survivors had to find a way to live with themselves afterwards.
I loved the details about Bauhaus. I did some study on it during my German degree, and it filled in some gaps in my knowledge (there are quite a few gaps to fill when you did that degree 25 years ago!), and I’m always on the lookout for books set in Germany, especially those with a good helping of history (this has it in spades!). And for me, this really didn’t disappoint. I loved it, and I’ll be recommending it to friends (ex-German degree friends as well!).
Many thanks to NetGalley and Picador for my copy of this wonderful book.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Jurassic World (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A Trip down memory lane
Can you believe it’s been 14 years since genetically modified dinosaurs rampaged across our screens in Joe Johnston’s underwhelming Jurassic Park III?
After being stuck in development hell for over a decade, Steven Spielberg handpicked indie director Colin Trevorrow to helm the fourth instalment of the popular adventure franchise, Jurassic World, but can it return the much-loved series to form?
Man of the moment Chris Pratt (Guardians of the Galaxy), Bryce Dallas Howard (The Village), Ty Simpkins (Iron Man 3) and Omar Sy (X-Men: Days of Future Past) lead a cast of characters in a visually spectacular film that whilst paying homage to 1993’s Jurassic Park, lacks a little of the original’s soul.
Jurassic World is now a fully functioning theme park taken over from John Hammond’s InGen by Simon Masrani (Irrfan Khan in a pleasingly comedic performance). Welcoming over 20,000 visitors a day, the park sees the need to create something bigger, louder and with more teeth to sustain visitor interest – the Indominus Rex.
Naturally, this doesn’t go quite to plan.
The performances from all of the cast are on-point with Bryce Dallas Howard being a particular highlight. There were worries that her ability would match Tea Leoni from Jurassic Park III rather than Laura Dern’s brilliant Ellie Sattler from the original. Thankfully, this isn’t the case.
Her story arc is particularly intriguing if predictable with her uptight corporate image being shed throughout the film’s succinct 123 minute running time.
Chris Pratt proves why he is the man every director wants to work with. His less comedic side comes out in Jurassic World and proves that he has the acting chops to go with his good looks.
Vincent D’Onofrio stars as the obligatory villain but his side story is never really explored – possibly setting up for a sequel should the film perform well at the box office and with it making up 90% of global ticket sales this weekend, things look promising.
Music wise, Jurassic World treads a very careful path. Make no mistake, this is a standalone movie, but the references to the original are there for all to hear. Michael Giacchino, one of the best composers of the moment, takes over from Don Davis of Jurassic Park III and provides the series with its best score since John Williams’ original.
Special effects too are top notch with the park looking stunning and the dinosaurs, on the whole, faring the same way. There are a couple of moments where things start to look a little video game like, but this never takes away from the beauty of this film.
Unfortunately, whilst the last 30 minutes are breath-taking, edge of your seat stuff, it’s difficult to differentiate Jurassic World from the plethora of high budget blockbusters that litter the cinema these days and whilst Trevorrow chooses references to the original carefully, it lacks a little of that film’s soul and ultimately charm.
Overall, Jurassic World is better than the majority of blockbusters that have come and gone from cinemas over the last year and it tops The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Jurassic Park III to become a sequel worthy of the original.
Yes it’s not perfect, with the gorgeous finale lacking substance, but after waiting 14 years it comes pretty darn close and will no doubt be, along with Star Wars: Episode VII, one of the most memorable films of the noughties.
Do you remember seeing Jurassic Park for the first time? That’s the question everyone asks, and whilst Jurassic World won’t be making anywhere near the same impact, it’s a film worthy of the brand.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/06/14/a-trip-down-memory-lane-jurassic-world-review/
After being stuck in development hell for over a decade, Steven Spielberg handpicked indie director Colin Trevorrow to helm the fourth instalment of the popular adventure franchise, Jurassic World, but can it return the much-loved series to form?
Man of the moment Chris Pratt (Guardians of the Galaxy), Bryce Dallas Howard (The Village), Ty Simpkins (Iron Man 3) and Omar Sy (X-Men: Days of Future Past) lead a cast of characters in a visually spectacular film that whilst paying homage to 1993’s Jurassic Park, lacks a little of the original’s soul.
Jurassic World is now a fully functioning theme park taken over from John Hammond’s InGen by Simon Masrani (Irrfan Khan in a pleasingly comedic performance). Welcoming over 20,000 visitors a day, the park sees the need to create something bigger, louder and with more teeth to sustain visitor interest – the Indominus Rex.
Naturally, this doesn’t go quite to plan.
The performances from all of the cast are on-point with Bryce Dallas Howard being a particular highlight. There were worries that her ability would match Tea Leoni from Jurassic Park III rather than Laura Dern’s brilliant Ellie Sattler from the original. Thankfully, this isn’t the case.
Her story arc is particularly intriguing if predictable with her uptight corporate image being shed throughout the film’s succinct 123 minute running time.
Chris Pratt proves why he is the man every director wants to work with. His less comedic side comes out in Jurassic World and proves that he has the acting chops to go with his good looks.
Vincent D’Onofrio stars as the obligatory villain but his side story is never really explored – possibly setting up for a sequel should the film perform well at the box office and with it making up 90% of global ticket sales this weekend, things look promising.
Music wise, Jurassic World treads a very careful path. Make no mistake, this is a standalone movie, but the references to the original are there for all to hear. Michael Giacchino, one of the best composers of the moment, takes over from Don Davis of Jurassic Park III and provides the series with its best score since John Williams’ original.
Special effects too are top notch with the park looking stunning and the dinosaurs, on the whole, faring the same way. There are a couple of moments where things start to look a little video game like, but this never takes away from the beauty of this film.
Unfortunately, whilst the last 30 minutes are breath-taking, edge of your seat stuff, it’s difficult to differentiate Jurassic World from the plethora of high budget blockbusters that litter the cinema these days and whilst Trevorrow chooses references to the original carefully, it lacks a little of that film’s soul and ultimately charm.
Overall, Jurassic World is better than the majority of blockbusters that have come and gone from cinemas over the last year and it tops The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Jurassic Park III to become a sequel worthy of the original.
Yes it’s not perfect, with the gorgeous finale lacking substance, but after waiting 14 years it comes pretty darn close and will no doubt be, along with Star Wars: Episode VII, one of the most memorable films of the noughties.
Do you remember seeing Jurassic Park for the first time? That’s the question everyone asks, and whilst Jurassic World won’t be making anywhere near the same impact, it’s a film worthy of the brand.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/06/14/a-trip-down-memory-lane-jurassic-world-review/
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated SuperFly (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
This is a remake of Super Fly from 1972, not one I've seen, after seeing this I don't think I'll bother.
I can't say that any of the acting really stood out over the rest. It's not really my genre/subject matter, but everything did feel rather stereotypical. It was an interesting story, but for me the negatives outweighed the positives.
The style of the first and only real fight scene of the whole film was very good, if a little cheesy. It hit the spot for action but it didn't feel like any of the rest of the movie and stuck out a little for me. Perhaps because it's one of the few times we see Priest express any violence? I'm not sure.
Superfly ticks one of my top film faux pas... tailing people so close that there's no way they're not going to see you. Especially in this instance where the job basically requires you to be excessively paranoid.
At about the half way point I honestly didn't really know what was going on. I was more confused by everything than engrossed.
I don't know the ins and outs of filming techniques, but it seemed like there were a lot of different things involved in this one. As well as the fight scene early on there's a short chase scene where the footage doesn't quite seem real, it's more like game play. Whatever it was (I know you're enjoying my super technical terminology here) it stuck out like a sore thumb.
My only other observation about Superfly is Priest's relationship. Not your usual main stream thing which made a nice change... but... it really felt like it was thrown in gratuitously. I'm not being prudish here, I honestly don't mind sex scenes in films, but this one wasn't needed for the story line. It was over the top and wholly unnecessary.
What should you do?
It's not one I'd go recommending to people, but if you like drug related movies then why not give it a go. If you're more intrigued by that sex scene then I'm sure there's plenty of porn you could watch online instead.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'll have that big pile of cash, please and thank you.
I can't say that any of the acting really stood out over the rest. It's not really my genre/subject matter, but everything did feel rather stereotypical. It was an interesting story, but for me the negatives outweighed the positives.
The style of the first and only real fight scene of the whole film was very good, if a little cheesy. It hit the spot for action but it didn't feel like any of the rest of the movie and stuck out a little for me. Perhaps because it's one of the few times we see Priest express any violence? I'm not sure.
Superfly ticks one of my top film faux pas... tailing people so close that there's no way they're not going to see you. Especially in this instance where the job basically requires you to be excessively paranoid.
At about the half way point I honestly didn't really know what was going on. I was more confused by everything than engrossed.
I don't know the ins and outs of filming techniques, but it seemed like there were a lot of different things involved in this one. As well as the fight scene early on there's a short chase scene where the footage doesn't quite seem real, it's more like game play. Whatever it was (I know you're enjoying my super technical terminology here) it stuck out like a sore thumb.
My only other observation about Superfly is Priest's relationship. Not your usual main stream thing which made a nice change... but... it really felt like it was thrown in gratuitously. I'm not being prudish here, I honestly don't mind sex scenes in films, but this one wasn't needed for the story line. It was over the top and wholly unnecessary.
What should you do?
It's not one I'd go recommending to people, but if you like drug related movies then why not give it a go. If you're more intrigued by that sex scene then I'm sure there's plenty of porn you could watch online instead.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'll have that big pile of cash, please and thank you.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) in Movies
Aug 3, 2020
God-Awful
Pretty much separate from all the other movies, when youngster Sean Black goes to Japan to live with his father, he rebels and gets involved in the underground life of street racing. Since I’m on a streak of reviewing god-awful movies, I present to you The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift.
Acting: 5
Beginning: 1
The beginning puts us right in the heart of a cheesy car race. It wasn’t bad, but as I look back over the entirety of the other movies, car races are typically the one thing they get right. So, in comparison, it was actually terrible. Definitely put me in a weird kind of mood for what was to come.
Characters: 8
What the characters lacked in depth, they were at least fun characters to include in the story. If nothing else, at least it’s not Paul Walker! That alone was enough to get my seal of approval.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 5
Sure there is a motive to drive the story. Is it strong? Not really. Enough to carry a movie? It’ll do. The problem with not having characters with depth is having to rely on the action to drive the story. When there’s not enough of it, you’re in trouble.
Entertainment Value: 5
So here’s the thing: The actual drifting part was kind of cool. I also like the fact that they really make an attempt to get you involved in the Japanese world. At one point, I made the note: “I don’t hate this movie.” At some point that did change, but there was a true moment where the movie held its own for a bit.
Memorability: 3
I couldn’t tell you one memorable line from this movie. I couldn’t tell you one cool action sequence that really got me excited. All I really remember is some drifting and some beautiful Tokyo landscapes…and that’s pretty much all in the title. This is not a repeat watch type of movie.
Pace: 10
Plot: 5
The story had potential. My problem was it kept leaving out pockets of information and it never really felt like I got the full story. It was like I kept getting up to go to the bathroom and missing something crucial each time. There is way too much jumping around for my taste.
Resolution: 5
The ending left me with a mild sense of satisfaction. Even if I wasn’t late to the game and I was watching this for the first time when it was first released, I would’ve still known that there would be more movies to come. That’s what nags at me: The lack of completion. It doesn’t feel like an ending when you know it’s not over.
Overall: 52
Some movies are bad but entertaining. Case and point: The Fast and the Furious Tokyo Drift. You will hate it, but you will also walk away having seen a few solid moments as well. As much as I try and avoid this franchise at all costs, there were glimmers in these early movies that the franchise could be more than what it was. Glad they finally found their way.
Acting: 5
Beginning: 1
The beginning puts us right in the heart of a cheesy car race. It wasn’t bad, but as I look back over the entirety of the other movies, car races are typically the one thing they get right. So, in comparison, it was actually terrible. Definitely put me in a weird kind of mood for what was to come.
Characters: 8
What the characters lacked in depth, they were at least fun characters to include in the story. If nothing else, at least it’s not Paul Walker! That alone was enough to get my seal of approval.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 5
Sure there is a motive to drive the story. Is it strong? Not really. Enough to carry a movie? It’ll do. The problem with not having characters with depth is having to rely on the action to drive the story. When there’s not enough of it, you’re in trouble.
Entertainment Value: 5
So here’s the thing: The actual drifting part was kind of cool. I also like the fact that they really make an attempt to get you involved in the Japanese world. At one point, I made the note: “I don’t hate this movie.” At some point that did change, but there was a true moment where the movie held its own for a bit.
Memorability: 3
I couldn’t tell you one memorable line from this movie. I couldn’t tell you one cool action sequence that really got me excited. All I really remember is some drifting and some beautiful Tokyo landscapes…and that’s pretty much all in the title. This is not a repeat watch type of movie.
Pace: 10
Plot: 5
The story had potential. My problem was it kept leaving out pockets of information and it never really felt like I got the full story. It was like I kept getting up to go to the bathroom and missing something crucial each time. There is way too much jumping around for my taste.
Resolution: 5
The ending left me with a mild sense of satisfaction. Even if I wasn’t late to the game and I was watching this for the first time when it was first released, I would’ve still known that there would be more movies to come. That’s what nags at me: The lack of completion. It doesn’t feel like an ending when you know it’s not over.
Overall: 52
Some movies are bad but entertaining. Case and point: The Fast and the Furious Tokyo Drift. You will hate it, but you will also walk away having seen a few solid moments as well. As much as I try and avoid this franchise at all costs, there were glimmers in these early movies that the franchise could be more than what it was. Glad they finally found their way.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Jul 26, 2017
Breathtaking and Intense
It's 1940 and the Nazis are overpowering the British army, forcing them to retreat to Dunkirk in an effort to return home to England. The English channel is all that stands in the way of the 400,000 soldiers that are stranded on the beach. The story begins with Tommy (Fionn Whitehead), making his way through the town as propaganda is being dropped from the sky, informing them that the enemy are closing in. After a brief dash to avoid the bullets that begin raining down on him and some fellow soldiers, he barely manages to make it to the beach where the immense desperation of the situation becomes apparent. Thousands of men lined up, waiting for something to free them while bodies wash up on the beach. The cinematic scale is, as you'd expect from Christopher Nolan, impressive. And it doesn't let up from then on.
We follow three different stories, covering land, sea and air and spanning differing time-frames. Intersecting and even overtaking each other at crucial moments, which sounds confusing but actually works very well. After being introduced to the perspective on land, which then continues to play out over a week, we're introduced to Mr Dawson (Mark Rylance) as he prepares to set off from England by yacht along with his son and another local boy, loaded with lifejackets and keen to do their bit to help bring our boys home. This storyline is set to play out over the period of one day. Finally, we're introduced to RAF pilot Farrier (Tom Hardy), whose story will play out over an hour. He's up in the sky, over the channel. As we alternate between each story, momentum is never lost and the tension continues to grow as time, and available options, begin to dwindle. On land, bombs, bullets and torpedoes repeatedly prevent a successful escape, sinking boats and ships. Up in the air, a damaged fuel gauge means that Farrier has to constantly guesstimate how much fuel and time he's got left before dropping out of the sky, while single-handedly taking out enemy planes in the process. Down on the water, Dawson and his small crew have their own drama after rescuing a stranded soldier (Cillian Murphy). Clearly a broken man who takes a turn for the worse upon realising that they're not headed for home and are in fact on their way back to the hell that he's just left behind.
Despite featuring a number of famous faces, probably the most surprising cast member of all is Harry Styles. Every time he features in a scene, and he does feature quite a bit, it kind of threw me off balance and I was just expecting him to cock the whole thing up. Luckily he doesn't. This is a truly breathtaking movie, with no over the top CGI or gore and with everyone at the top of their game. Perfectly ramped up tension, accompanied by an intense musical score from the fantastic Hans Zimmer. The dogfights, featuring real spitfires filmed over the English Channel, are also incredible with the roar of their engines and bullets flying. The movie does an amazing job of fully immersing you in this pivotal moment of history. It's truly edge of seat stuff throughout. Incredible.
We follow three different stories, covering land, sea and air and spanning differing time-frames. Intersecting and even overtaking each other at crucial moments, which sounds confusing but actually works very well. After being introduced to the perspective on land, which then continues to play out over a week, we're introduced to Mr Dawson (Mark Rylance) as he prepares to set off from England by yacht along with his son and another local boy, loaded with lifejackets and keen to do their bit to help bring our boys home. This storyline is set to play out over the period of one day. Finally, we're introduced to RAF pilot Farrier (Tom Hardy), whose story will play out over an hour. He's up in the sky, over the channel. As we alternate between each story, momentum is never lost and the tension continues to grow as time, and available options, begin to dwindle. On land, bombs, bullets and torpedoes repeatedly prevent a successful escape, sinking boats and ships. Up in the air, a damaged fuel gauge means that Farrier has to constantly guesstimate how much fuel and time he's got left before dropping out of the sky, while single-handedly taking out enemy planes in the process. Down on the water, Dawson and his small crew have their own drama after rescuing a stranded soldier (Cillian Murphy). Clearly a broken man who takes a turn for the worse upon realising that they're not headed for home and are in fact on their way back to the hell that he's just left behind.
Despite featuring a number of famous faces, probably the most surprising cast member of all is Harry Styles. Every time he features in a scene, and he does feature quite a bit, it kind of threw me off balance and I was just expecting him to cock the whole thing up. Luckily he doesn't. This is a truly breathtaking movie, with no over the top CGI or gore and with everyone at the top of their game. Perfectly ramped up tension, accompanied by an intense musical score from the fantastic Hans Zimmer. The dogfights, featuring real spitfires filmed over the English Channel, are also incredible with the roar of their engines and bullets flying. The movie does an amazing job of fully immersing you in this pivotal moment of history. It's truly edge of seat stuff throughout. Incredible.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Glengarry Glen Ross (1992) in Movies
Feb 21, 2019
Solid Gold Movie
Chaos ensues when a bunch or salesman at a real estate agency are forced into a high-stakes game where they either become top closers or get fired.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
You think the beginning is going to be weak…until Blake (Alec Baldwin) walks in. He is filled with such passion and rage, but the one thing he is lacking is fucks. Blake has zero fucks to give about anyone’s feelings or their jobs. “Fuck you, that’s my name!” he screams at someone thinking they will get the upperhand on him. Classic.
Characters: 10
Aside from Blake, the rest of the characters add depth to the movie. With their different personalities, each character has a distinctly different approach to the way that they sell and go about winning. Their choices and reactions hold sway over which direction the movie turns and what the audience thinks is going to happen next. As things unfold and they end up being questioned by the Detective (Jude Ciccolella), it’s interesting to watch them have different responses to the pressure.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
I love the cinematic work here. The entire film has a dreary feel, almost like there’s a fog being cast over the characters and their dilemma. The light comes in small glimpses and you mostly see rain throughout. It has a suffocating feel, adding even more certainty that the characters are resigned to their own fate.
Conflict: 10
Look, I’m in sales and few things institute conflict like sales situations. Tell a bunch of guys that they either hit their numbers or they’re fired and there’s bound to be problems. As the film drags on, the desperation becomes even heavier. You feel for these guys, but not so much so that you don’t get the enjoyment of watching them crumble in high pressure situations. As douchey as it sounds, it’s actually kind of fun.
Genre: 7
Memorability: 7
Pace: 10
Once Blake enters the scene, the movie maintains its pace from start to finish. Fueled by conflict and desperation, the characters ultimately create a mystery that you want to get to the bottom of before the movie reaches its end. It’s refreshing when you watch a movie that doesn’t have any dead spots and director James Foley succeeded in making that a reality.
Plot: 10
What happens when you put a bunch of different personalities in a room and tell them they have a certain amount of time to complete a goal or else? The story is ultimately moved by how people respond to pressure situations. I can imagine when this was written, the direction may have changed directions a couple of times due to the personalities of the characters. Memorable characters can alter the direction of a plot for the sake of staying true to the characters.
Resolution: 4
Overall: 87
I hadn’t even heard of this movie until a couple of years ago. It’s funny, this movie was recommended to me by a Sales Manager who thought, “This is how the sales team should go after it!” After watching it, I thought, “This isn’t how selling should be at all!” Glengarry Glen Ross succeeds because it appeals to people for different reasons. Some see it as a cautionary tale while others view it as inspiration. I am in the camp of the former. I’m also in the popular majority that think the movie is awesome.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
You think the beginning is going to be weak…until Blake (Alec Baldwin) walks in. He is filled with such passion and rage, but the one thing he is lacking is fucks. Blake has zero fucks to give about anyone’s feelings or their jobs. “Fuck you, that’s my name!” he screams at someone thinking they will get the upperhand on him. Classic.
Characters: 10
Aside from Blake, the rest of the characters add depth to the movie. With their different personalities, each character has a distinctly different approach to the way that they sell and go about winning. Their choices and reactions hold sway over which direction the movie turns and what the audience thinks is going to happen next. As things unfold and they end up being questioned by the Detective (Jude Ciccolella), it’s interesting to watch them have different responses to the pressure.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
I love the cinematic work here. The entire film has a dreary feel, almost like there’s a fog being cast over the characters and their dilemma. The light comes in small glimpses and you mostly see rain throughout. It has a suffocating feel, adding even more certainty that the characters are resigned to their own fate.
Conflict: 10
Look, I’m in sales and few things institute conflict like sales situations. Tell a bunch of guys that they either hit their numbers or they’re fired and there’s bound to be problems. As the film drags on, the desperation becomes even heavier. You feel for these guys, but not so much so that you don’t get the enjoyment of watching them crumble in high pressure situations. As douchey as it sounds, it’s actually kind of fun.
Genre: 7
Memorability: 7
Pace: 10
Once Blake enters the scene, the movie maintains its pace from start to finish. Fueled by conflict and desperation, the characters ultimately create a mystery that you want to get to the bottom of before the movie reaches its end. It’s refreshing when you watch a movie that doesn’t have any dead spots and director James Foley succeeded in making that a reality.
Plot: 10
What happens when you put a bunch of different personalities in a room and tell them they have a certain amount of time to complete a goal or else? The story is ultimately moved by how people respond to pressure situations. I can imagine when this was written, the direction may have changed directions a couple of times due to the personalities of the characters. Memorable characters can alter the direction of a plot for the sake of staying true to the characters.
Resolution: 4
Overall: 87
I hadn’t even heard of this movie until a couple of years ago. It’s funny, this movie was recommended to me by a Sales Manager who thought, “This is how the sales team should go after it!” After watching it, I thought, “This isn’t how selling should be at all!” Glengarry Glen Ross succeeds because it appeals to people for different reasons. Some see it as a cautionary tale while others view it as inspiration. I am in the camp of the former. I’m also in the popular majority that think the movie is awesome.
