Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
As a fan of the Pride and Prejudice book by Jane Austen, I thought it was all kinds of wrong when I came across the parody novel Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, by Seth Grahame-Smith, that essentially Austen’s classic novel with elements of modern zombie fiction. Mainly because I’m not a fan of horror movies. So as we approached the theater where we were screening Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, I told my husband, “I really don’t want to watch this. I hate zombies.” He just laughed. “You hate zombies, but you watch Walking Dead. Just pretend it’s an episode of Walking dead. Just set near the Victorian era.” I admit, I do watch the Walking Dead but it’s the most stressful hour of television for me, and there are commercial breaks. This movie has a running time for this move was almost 2 hrs with no commercials.
But the movie got a giggle out of me in the first 5 minutes. And of course it made me gasp not long after. But Walking Dead has trained me well, and it wasn’t too long ago that I watched Hateful Eight, so I think I’m quite desensitized to blood and gore now, and in comparison, PPZ was relatively mild in that regard. It also had enough of the elements of the original story that fighting zombies actually became an entertaining digression. You know – beautiful young ladies, dashing young men, ballroom dancing, budding romance, zombie attack.
“To succeed in polite society, a young woman must be many things. Kind… well-read… and accomplished. But to survive in the world as WE know it, you’ll need… other qualities.” Those qualities include being skilled in the martial arts and weapons training, while wearing a corset –essentially making them Regency era bad-asses.
Because I don’t watch Downton Abbey, the last time I saw Lily James, who plays Elizabeth Bennett, she was brilliantly blond and sweetly keeping her promise to her mother to “have courage and be kind.” as Cinderella. In PPZ, she’s a fierce brunette who doesn’t take too kindly to Fitzwilliam Darcy, played by a sullen and haughty Sam Riley – another Disney alum, last seen as Diaval, Maleficent’s companion raven.
Where the Jane Austen’s Mr. Darcy is won over by Elizbeth’s charm and wit, PPZ’s Darcy is slowly won over by Elizabeth’s aggressive and bold battle skills. Adding the alternate history of how zombies came to be a part of Regency era England hurried the story along, so the romantic developments felt a bit rushed, but Riley’s Darcy was quite believable in his reluctant but growing admiration of Elizabeth.
I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed this movie, zombies and all. When you can get guys to cheer for some undead’s head getting blown off, and still make the ladies sigh for the romance, you have a pretty perfect date movie. It may very well be my favorite period costume romantic zombie action film.
But the movie got a giggle out of me in the first 5 minutes. And of course it made me gasp not long after. But Walking Dead has trained me well, and it wasn’t too long ago that I watched Hateful Eight, so I think I’m quite desensitized to blood and gore now, and in comparison, PPZ was relatively mild in that regard. It also had enough of the elements of the original story that fighting zombies actually became an entertaining digression. You know – beautiful young ladies, dashing young men, ballroom dancing, budding romance, zombie attack.
“To succeed in polite society, a young woman must be many things. Kind… well-read… and accomplished. But to survive in the world as WE know it, you’ll need… other qualities.” Those qualities include being skilled in the martial arts and weapons training, while wearing a corset –essentially making them Regency era bad-asses.
Because I don’t watch Downton Abbey, the last time I saw Lily James, who plays Elizabeth Bennett, she was brilliantly blond and sweetly keeping her promise to her mother to “have courage and be kind.” as Cinderella. In PPZ, she’s a fierce brunette who doesn’t take too kindly to Fitzwilliam Darcy, played by a sullen and haughty Sam Riley – another Disney alum, last seen as Diaval, Maleficent’s companion raven.
Where the Jane Austen’s Mr. Darcy is won over by Elizbeth’s charm and wit, PPZ’s Darcy is slowly won over by Elizabeth’s aggressive and bold battle skills. Adding the alternate history of how zombies came to be a part of Regency era England hurried the story along, so the romantic developments felt a bit rushed, but Riley’s Darcy was quite believable in his reluctant but growing admiration of Elizabeth.
I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed this movie, zombies and all. When you can get guys to cheer for some undead’s head getting blown off, and still make the ladies sigh for the romance, you have a pretty perfect date movie. It may very well be my favorite period costume romantic zombie action film.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Heat (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In a fun twist to the traditional buddy-cop movie theme, this time we have a pair of ladies bringing The Heat to the streets of Boston for a laugh-out-loud good time.
Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy bring action and some very sharp tongues to the big screen.
The story starts out by painting a picture of the two in their separate worlds. Special Agent Ashburn (Bullock) is very prim, proper, and by-the-book. She dresses for success, knows it all, and doesn’t let so much as an S-bomb pass her lips. As she solves a case (proving herself a know-it-all in front of coworkers), a bleak picture comes into focus that this very uptight FBI agent is just the beginning.
By contrast (and fitting the expected formula), Detective Mullins (McCarthy) uses a down-and-dirty, physical, and foul-mouthed method for cleaning up the streets of Boston. Her neighborhood is definitely her home, and it needs protecting. Mullins’ slovenly lifestyle is the complete polar opposite of Ashburn, as one might expect. This conflict is the driving force behind a typical buddy cop movie. The only difference is that it’s two women instead of the usual ingredients.
Ashburn is given an assignment in Boston. The assignment will be a key, deciding factor in her next promotion, so all she wants is a simple case to solve and close. Naturally, once Mullins and Ashburn meet, sparks fly and hilarity ensues.
I went into this with low expectations, but also a deep loathing for Sandra Bullock as an actress — every role she’s ever played has been essentially the same. I expected the same in The Heat. In an oh-so-surprising twist of fate, she ended up playing the sober, strait-laced character! Despite my lack of appreciation for her acting skills, I must say she did well; her comedic timing was spot-on, and it meshed well with McCarthy’s usual brand of comedy: vociferous and physical, bordering on slapstick. I did note during the film that Bullock is definitely starting to show her age; this is not a knock on her beauty, but more an admission that I am starting to feel old!
Mullins also plays the same character in every movie role she takes, so this character was no stretch for her at all. It seems she is just there to memorize lines and provide her unabashed, high-energy quips. That said, I have to give her mad props for comedic timing and delivery. She is a one-trick-pony, but that one trick is a damn good one.
All in all, this is a great film for laughs. I laughed out loud through much of it, which was a surprise. As with all comedies, I don’t recommend spending your hard-earned cash on these top-dollar theater tickets. Wait for the small screen, but definitely see it for a good, healthy chuckle.
Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy bring action and some very sharp tongues to the big screen.
The story starts out by painting a picture of the two in their separate worlds. Special Agent Ashburn (Bullock) is very prim, proper, and by-the-book. She dresses for success, knows it all, and doesn’t let so much as an S-bomb pass her lips. As she solves a case (proving herself a know-it-all in front of coworkers), a bleak picture comes into focus that this very uptight FBI agent is just the beginning.
By contrast (and fitting the expected formula), Detective Mullins (McCarthy) uses a down-and-dirty, physical, and foul-mouthed method for cleaning up the streets of Boston. Her neighborhood is definitely her home, and it needs protecting. Mullins’ slovenly lifestyle is the complete polar opposite of Ashburn, as one might expect. This conflict is the driving force behind a typical buddy cop movie. The only difference is that it’s two women instead of the usual ingredients.
Ashburn is given an assignment in Boston. The assignment will be a key, deciding factor in her next promotion, so all she wants is a simple case to solve and close. Naturally, once Mullins and Ashburn meet, sparks fly and hilarity ensues.
I went into this with low expectations, but also a deep loathing for Sandra Bullock as an actress — every role she’s ever played has been essentially the same. I expected the same in The Heat. In an oh-so-surprising twist of fate, she ended up playing the sober, strait-laced character! Despite my lack of appreciation for her acting skills, I must say she did well; her comedic timing was spot-on, and it meshed well with McCarthy’s usual brand of comedy: vociferous and physical, bordering on slapstick. I did note during the film that Bullock is definitely starting to show her age; this is not a knock on her beauty, but more an admission that I am starting to feel old!
Mullins also plays the same character in every movie role she takes, so this character was no stretch for her at all. It seems she is just there to memorize lines and provide her unabashed, high-energy quips. That said, I have to give her mad props for comedic timing and delivery. She is a one-trick-pony, but that one trick is a damn good one.
All in all, this is a great film for laughs. I laughed out loud through much of it, which was a surprise. As with all comedies, I don’t recommend spending your hard-earned cash on these top-dollar theater tickets. Wait for the small screen, but definitely see it for a good, healthy chuckle.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Internship (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In The Internship, Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson play Billy and Nick, two men in a profession that is sorely outdated. They are watch salesmen in a world where more people use their cell phones as time pieces than hunks of metal/plastic on their wrists. When their company shuts down because of this, Billy and Nick suddenly realize they don’t have any real skills, other than being excellent salesmen. Nick accepts a job working for his sister’s tatted-up boyfriend in a mattress store, while Billy is recovering from being unceremoniously dumped by his girlfriend after their house goes into foreclosure. So in a desperate bid to find jobs online, Billy stumbles across an unlikely possibility for the two of them: an internship at Google.
The movie plays out the way any other buddy comedy might. They somehow land the gig, fight adversity, teach a few life lessons along the way, and have the tough defining moments for each character. However, despite this formulaic plot, the movie was very funny and entertaining. From the smarmy British intern who spends the movie antagonizing the 40-something duo, to the two’s intern team, there is a great deal of comedy in the movie.
Vaughn and Wilson should be the most entertaining and funny in the movie, but you have to give credit to these two veterans. They really did allow their supporting cast to shine. Josh Brener, Dylan O’Brien, Tobit Raphael and Tiya Sircar all have hilarious laugh-out-loud scenes as Billy and Nick’s intern team. Josh Gad and Aasif Mandvi also steal the scenes they are in during the course of the movie.
Throw in legitimate tech jargon, real world technology, and the fact that this was actually filmed on location at the Google campus, and you have a pretty great movie. The only issue I had with the film was they did not play too much into the intern team’s story too much. For example, there was a nice wrap up for Sircar’s character that didn’t make sense. They talked about her issue some in the movie, but the resolution for her character was just never built up to, it kind of just happened and seemed out of place. But, this could be because I am a guy and don’t pick up on some of those things. My friend that saw the movie with me said I was crazy.
Overall, this movie exceeded my expectations. I came into expecting Fox to be grabbing at the success of Wedding Crashers. But in reality, this movie does well in standing on its. Coming in at one hour fifty-nine minutes, it is a bit long compared to today’s comedy standards, but you will never notice it. I know it kept our theater laughing the whole time. Definitely worth the watch. On my “would I buy it” scale (which has three levels No, DVD and Blu Ray), it is definitely worth the Blu Ray.
The movie plays out the way any other buddy comedy might. They somehow land the gig, fight adversity, teach a few life lessons along the way, and have the tough defining moments for each character. However, despite this formulaic plot, the movie was very funny and entertaining. From the smarmy British intern who spends the movie antagonizing the 40-something duo, to the two’s intern team, there is a great deal of comedy in the movie.
Vaughn and Wilson should be the most entertaining and funny in the movie, but you have to give credit to these two veterans. They really did allow their supporting cast to shine. Josh Brener, Dylan O’Brien, Tobit Raphael and Tiya Sircar all have hilarious laugh-out-loud scenes as Billy and Nick’s intern team. Josh Gad and Aasif Mandvi also steal the scenes they are in during the course of the movie.
Throw in legitimate tech jargon, real world technology, and the fact that this was actually filmed on location at the Google campus, and you have a pretty great movie. The only issue I had with the film was they did not play too much into the intern team’s story too much. For example, there was a nice wrap up for Sircar’s character that didn’t make sense. They talked about her issue some in the movie, but the resolution for her character was just never built up to, it kind of just happened and seemed out of place. But, this could be because I am a guy and don’t pick up on some of those things. My friend that saw the movie with me said I was crazy.
Overall, this movie exceeded my expectations. I came into expecting Fox to be grabbing at the success of Wedding Crashers. But in reality, this movie does well in standing on its. Coming in at one hour fifty-nine minutes, it is a bit long compared to today’s comedy standards, but you will never notice it. I know it kept our theater laughing the whole time. Definitely worth the watch. On my “would I buy it” scale (which has three levels No, DVD and Blu Ray), it is definitely worth the Blu Ray.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Croods (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
When seeing the trailers for this film it seemed like so many other stories that have come before (Ice Age: Continental Drift for example). I figured that this was just the next shameless animated money grab by studios attempting to cash in on those parents who take their young children to each new animated film no matter what it is. That being said, the trailer for this film does not do it justice. Seriously, 20th Century Fox is doing Dreamworks Animation a disservice by not providing better trailers and promotion for The Croods. While the complete package of this film is not the best animated film, it is more than just a mere money grab.
The film opens with Eep, voiced by Emma Stone who introduces us to her cave family led by her overly protective father Grug (Nicolas Cage) and shares her rebellious desire to follow her curiosity and see more of the world. The scene quickly shifts to the family’s quest to find some food that plays like a fast paced prehistoric game of football that clues us in on each of the characters’ strengths and weaknesses. From this point forward the film does a fantastic job of keeping a steady pace that will keep both parents and young children’s interest. As I am sure most parents know, you can always tell how good a children’s movie is based on how fast the young ones lose interest and start to become fidgety. Right from the start, my girlfriend’s three year-old son was attentively glued to his seat. Also I did not notice any of the other children in the theater talking or making noise which is usually a sign of a good children’s film.
Keeping with the fast paced action we are introduced to Guy voiced by Ryan Reynolds. Guy is traveling to high ground in an effort to escape the end of the world caused by earthquakes and lava. Unlike The Croods who are simple minded cavemen, Guy has a brain and is constantly introducing the family to new ideas like fire, shoes and umbrellas. His adventurous spirit is a foil to Grug’s living in constant fear of the unknown in order to stay alive. And while the family starts to fall for Guy’s spirit, they go on an adventure not only to find safety but to finally live.
The voice acting is solid across the board. Emma Stone really shines as the rebellious teenager and Nicolas Cage gives one of his better performances in years. Ryan Reynolds is accompanied with his sloth sidekick “Belt” who provides some of the most memorable comedic moments in the film. Together, along with the other supporting actors in this film, you have several inspired performances. It is these performances that appeal to the adults in the audience and make the film memorable and fun for all ages.
The film opens with Eep, voiced by Emma Stone who introduces us to her cave family led by her overly protective father Grug (Nicolas Cage) and shares her rebellious desire to follow her curiosity and see more of the world. The scene quickly shifts to the family’s quest to find some food that plays like a fast paced prehistoric game of football that clues us in on each of the characters’ strengths and weaknesses. From this point forward the film does a fantastic job of keeping a steady pace that will keep both parents and young children’s interest. As I am sure most parents know, you can always tell how good a children’s movie is based on how fast the young ones lose interest and start to become fidgety. Right from the start, my girlfriend’s three year-old son was attentively glued to his seat. Also I did not notice any of the other children in the theater talking or making noise which is usually a sign of a good children’s film.
Keeping with the fast paced action we are introduced to Guy voiced by Ryan Reynolds. Guy is traveling to high ground in an effort to escape the end of the world caused by earthquakes and lava. Unlike The Croods who are simple minded cavemen, Guy has a brain and is constantly introducing the family to new ideas like fire, shoes and umbrellas. His adventurous spirit is a foil to Grug’s living in constant fear of the unknown in order to stay alive. And while the family starts to fall for Guy’s spirit, they go on an adventure not only to find safety but to finally live.
The voice acting is solid across the board. Emma Stone really shines as the rebellious teenager and Nicolas Cage gives one of his better performances in years. Ryan Reynolds is accompanied with his sloth sidekick “Belt” who provides some of the most memorable comedic moments in the film. Together, along with the other supporting actors in this film, you have several inspired performances. It is these performances that appeal to the adults in the audience and make the film memorable and fun for all ages.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Playing for Keeps (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Gerard Butler has stepped out of his 300 uniform and into some soccer
cleats. As a former international soccer star, George (Butler) is down on
his luck. He has no job, and he’s living in Virginia, attempting to
reconnect with his estranged son.
The story opens with some backstory about George’s past before quickly
tumbling into his present situation. George’s ex-wife (Jessica Biel) is
getting remarried, and his son Lewis (Noah Lomax) is having a hard time
learning to trust his real father after being separated for so long.
The plot quickly unfolds into a predictable “chick-flick” scenario, where
the main character is floundering and wants to get back what he once had.
His path to redemption comes in the form of coaching his son’s youth
soccer team, while fending off hordes of attractive soccer *moms* who want
to place hands on the well-sculpted Coach Dryer!
This film is incredibly formulaic, and it’s predictable every step of the
way. That said, Butler, Biel, and the rest of t*he cast* do an exceptional
job given what they had to work with. I even have to give some props to
the young actor, Noah Lomax, for giving a noteworthy performance as the
son.
While there were some great chuckles and all-out laughs mixed with a few
touching moments, it’s hard to look past the poor production values of this
film. Many of the scenes were filmed in a free-hand format. The shaking is
not just noticeable, but rampant throughout the film. It’s very
distracting, and downright shoddy film-making.
The directing wasn’t bad, in general, but I think a more seasoned director
would have at least chosen better angles. Case-in-point: many of the
scenes involving the red Ferrari were obviously lit with bright, white
lights reflecting off the surface of the car, giving us a view of grips and
other personnel behind the camera.
Dennis Quaid starts the film with a great role, and delivers a fantastic
performance. Unfortunately, after the jail scene, he’s oddly absent until
the end of the film. His absence was so awkward that it distracted me from
the people who were on the screen. I even asked myself: where did Dennis
Quaid’s character go?
Uma Thurman, playing Quaid’s character’s wife, and Catherine-Zeta Jones,
playing a soccer mom, did a marvelous job (again, despite not having much
to work with).
The Hollywood stars saved this film from rating lower, due to their vast
acting experience and talent, but I can’t recommend the movie as a whole.
Even their performances weren’t enough to keep Playing For Keeps in the
same ballpark as a well-produced film. It’s shoddy movie-making at best.
I recommend you wait to watch this one at home and save your movie theater
budget for another flick, *but if you are into chick-flicks, Playing for
Keeps will not disappoint.*
cleats. As a former international soccer star, George (Butler) is down on
his luck. He has no job, and he’s living in Virginia, attempting to
reconnect with his estranged son.
The story opens with some backstory about George’s past before quickly
tumbling into his present situation. George’s ex-wife (Jessica Biel) is
getting remarried, and his son Lewis (Noah Lomax) is having a hard time
learning to trust his real father after being separated for so long.
The plot quickly unfolds into a predictable “chick-flick” scenario, where
the main character is floundering and wants to get back what he once had.
His path to redemption comes in the form of coaching his son’s youth
soccer team, while fending off hordes of attractive soccer *moms* who want
to place hands on the well-sculpted Coach Dryer!
This film is incredibly formulaic, and it’s predictable every step of the
way. That said, Butler, Biel, and the rest of t*he cast* do an exceptional
job given what they had to work with. I even have to give some props to
the young actor, Noah Lomax, for giving a noteworthy performance as the
son.
While there were some great chuckles and all-out laughs mixed with a few
touching moments, it’s hard to look past the poor production values of this
film. Many of the scenes were filmed in a free-hand format. The shaking is
not just noticeable, but rampant throughout the film. It’s very
distracting, and downright shoddy film-making.
The directing wasn’t bad, in general, but I think a more seasoned director
would have at least chosen better angles. Case-in-point: many of the
scenes involving the red Ferrari were obviously lit with bright, white
lights reflecting off the surface of the car, giving us a view of grips and
other personnel behind the camera.
Dennis Quaid starts the film with a great role, and delivers a fantastic
performance. Unfortunately, after the jail scene, he’s oddly absent until
the end of the film. His absence was so awkward that it distracted me from
the people who were on the screen. I even asked myself: where did Dennis
Quaid’s character go?
Uma Thurman, playing Quaid’s character’s wife, and Catherine-Zeta Jones,
playing a soccer mom, did a marvelous job (again, despite not having much
to work with).
The Hollywood stars saved this film from rating lower, due to their vast
acting experience and talent, but I can’t recommend the movie as a whole.
Even their performances weren’t enough to keep Playing For Keeps in the
same ballpark as a well-produced film. It’s shoddy movie-making at best.
I recommend you wait to watch this one at home and save your movie theater
budget for another flick, *but if you are into chick-flicks, Playing for
Keeps will not disappoint.*
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Ted (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Full disclosure: I am a huge Family Guy fan. I’ve been watching since day one, and even own every volume and special edition DVD released. Okay, now that we have that out of the way.
Ted is the multi-talented Seth MacFarlane’s directorial debut for a feature films. It follows the story of John Bennett (Mark Wahlberg), who as a kid never really had any friends. For Christmas he received a talking teddy bear, which he decided to name Ted. One day he makes a wish that will forever change his life, a wish that Ted could really talk to him and be best friends. That wish came true.
Ted became a world-wide sensation. He was not a figment of John’s imagination, but rather a real-life talking teddy bear. Ted (who is voiced by MacFarlane) becomes the overnight celebrity that we have seen so many times, and eventually becomes old news when fame becomes fleeting.
Flash forward 28 years to present day, John is now 35, but still acts very much the child.
He is in a dead end job, and would rather blow the important things off in his life to hang with his best friend Ted.
This includes is Lori (Mila Kunis), his girlfriend of four years. I think we see where this going, typical relationship problems and the movie then becomes about trying to win Lori back with the help of Ted.
While the story line is a little predictable, it never felt that way while watching it. There is a lot of subtle humor, and there is a lot of in your face rude, crude humor. There were also a lot of cameos. Some will only be obvious to Family Guy fans or fans of the eighties, while others will be right in your face.
One thing that grinds my gears is when some movies these day show the funniest moments in the trailer, and the rest of the movie is… eh.
One thing is for sure: it keeps you laughing almost the whole way through. There were even some lines that I missed because of how loud the laughter in the theater was (which means a repeat trip, I think).
There were a lot of one-liners, though, that I will probably end up using on a regular basis.
I kind of always get nervous about bringing someone to a movie I want to see, afraid that they won’t like my choice. My guest came in with very low expectations of the film, but she ended up laughing the entire time, and even got really caught up in the tense moments.
With all of the drug and sex references, and crude humor, this movie is definitely not meant for a younger audience, or probably even the really easily offended. Keep that in mind and if you still want to watch, you will not be disappointed.
Ted is the multi-talented Seth MacFarlane’s directorial debut for a feature films. It follows the story of John Bennett (Mark Wahlberg), who as a kid never really had any friends. For Christmas he received a talking teddy bear, which he decided to name Ted. One day he makes a wish that will forever change his life, a wish that Ted could really talk to him and be best friends. That wish came true.
Ted became a world-wide sensation. He was not a figment of John’s imagination, but rather a real-life talking teddy bear. Ted (who is voiced by MacFarlane) becomes the overnight celebrity that we have seen so many times, and eventually becomes old news when fame becomes fleeting.
Flash forward 28 years to present day, John is now 35, but still acts very much the child.
He is in a dead end job, and would rather blow the important things off in his life to hang with his best friend Ted.
This includes is Lori (Mila Kunis), his girlfriend of four years. I think we see where this going, typical relationship problems and the movie then becomes about trying to win Lori back with the help of Ted.
While the story line is a little predictable, it never felt that way while watching it. There is a lot of subtle humor, and there is a lot of in your face rude, crude humor. There were also a lot of cameos. Some will only be obvious to Family Guy fans or fans of the eighties, while others will be right in your face.
One thing that grinds my gears is when some movies these day show the funniest moments in the trailer, and the rest of the movie is… eh.
One thing is for sure: it keeps you laughing almost the whole way through. There were even some lines that I missed because of how loud the laughter in the theater was (which means a repeat trip, I think).
There were a lot of one-liners, though, that I will probably end up using on a regular basis.
I kind of always get nervous about bringing someone to a movie I want to see, afraid that they won’t like my choice. My guest came in with very low expectations of the film, but she ended up laughing the entire time, and even got really caught up in the tense moments.
With all of the drug and sex references, and crude humor, this movie is definitely not meant for a younger audience, or probably even the really easily offended. Keep that in mind and if you still want to watch, you will not be disappointed.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Magic Mike (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Depending on what you are looking for and what your expectations are going into it, the movie Magic Mike will either satisfy you or dissapoint you entirely.
Bad news first: If you are looking for a great plot, great storyline and phenomenal acting you will undoubtedly leave the theater disappointed.
Good news: If you are looking for a movie full of ‘good views’, some decent laughs, and men with rock-hard bodies with ripped muscles, you’ll get what you were looking for.
The movie Magic Mike, produced by Channing Tatum is loosely based on Tatum’s own experience before his acting career took off, when he spent a period of time earning a living as a male stripper. While working a roofing construction job, Mike (Tatum) meets Adam (Alex Pettyfer) and despite his young age, Mike befriends him and takes him out partying and, unbeknownst to Adam, to the strip club where Mikr works as a stripper. Mike introduces Adam to Dallas (Mathew McConaughey), the owner of the strip club, as The Kid.
.
During one of the club’s shows, one of the other strippers, “Tarzan” (Kevin Nash) passed out, and Mike pushes The Kid out on stage. It’s an awkward, unpolished performance, as one would expect from someone brand new to that particular scene, but The Kid proves to be a hit. When Adam realizes the income potential and allure of life as a stripper, he expresses interest in joining Magic Mike’s crew, and Mike and Dallas take him under their wings and teach him everything he needs to know to be successful in the business. They share tips, tricks, and outfit him with appropriate costumes. He quickly learns the dance moves and the importance of perfect timing when it comes to the pelvic thrust.
While the ‘main’ story line unfolded pretty well and the dancing and on-stage portion of the male revue club scenes were rather riveting, the attempt at bringing a romance into the story – first between Mike and Joanna (a Sociology student played by Olivia Munn) then Adam’s sister Brooke (Cody Horn) fell flat. It seemed awkward and forced, and there was no chemistry whatsoever. With a cast of stars such as McConaughey and Channing, one would expect a higher level of performance, but apparently the writer was counting on the sex appeal and dance scenes to carry the film. Instead, the audience was left with a series of awkward silences and uncomfortable, choppy dialog. Magic Mike left those in the audience that were looking for more than a two-hour male revue sadly disappointed.
We agreed that if you go wanting to see a ‘real’ movie with a ‘real’ storyline, Magic Mike rates 2 out of 5.
If you go with the expectations of ‘sex on a screen’ we rate this 4 of 5. And only 4 of 5 because we both felt uncomfortable with the ‘crotch in the face scenes’. But if you’re into that kinda thing, then by all means, 5 of 5.
Bad news first: If you are looking for a great plot, great storyline and phenomenal acting you will undoubtedly leave the theater disappointed.
Good news: If you are looking for a movie full of ‘good views’, some decent laughs, and men with rock-hard bodies with ripped muscles, you’ll get what you were looking for.
The movie Magic Mike, produced by Channing Tatum is loosely based on Tatum’s own experience before his acting career took off, when he spent a period of time earning a living as a male stripper. While working a roofing construction job, Mike (Tatum) meets Adam (Alex Pettyfer) and despite his young age, Mike befriends him and takes him out partying and, unbeknownst to Adam, to the strip club where Mikr works as a stripper. Mike introduces Adam to Dallas (Mathew McConaughey), the owner of the strip club, as The Kid.
.
During one of the club’s shows, one of the other strippers, “Tarzan” (Kevin Nash) passed out, and Mike pushes The Kid out on stage. It’s an awkward, unpolished performance, as one would expect from someone brand new to that particular scene, but The Kid proves to be a hit. When Adam realizes the income potential and allure of life as a stripper, he expresses interest in joining Magic Mike’s crew, and Mike and Dallas take him under their wings and teach him everything he needs to know to be successful in the business. They share tips, tricks, and outfit him with appropriate costumes. He quickly learns the dance moves and the importance of perfect timing when it comes to the pelvic thrust.
While the ‘main’ story line unfolded pretty well and the dancing and on-stage portion of the male revue club scenes were rather riveting, the attempt at bringing a romance into the story – first between Mike and Joanna (a Sociology student played by Olivia Munn) then Adam’s sister Brooke (Cody Horn) fell flat. It seemed awkward and forced, and there was no chemistry whatsoever. With a cast of stars such as McConaughey and Channing, one would expect a higher level of performance, but apparently the writer was counting on the sex appeal and dance scenes to carry the film. Instead, the audience was left with a series of awkward silences and uncomfortable, choppy dialog. Magic Mike left those in the audience that were looking for more than a two-hour male revue sadly disappointed.
We agreed that if you go wanting to see a ‘real’ movie with a ‘real’ storyline, Magic Mike rates 2 out of 5.
If you go with the expectations of ‘sex on a screen’ we rate this 4 of 5. And only 4 of 5 because we both felt uncomfortable with the ‘crotch in the face scenes’. But if you’re into that kinda thing, then by all means, 5 of 5.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies
Jan 25, 2021
New Vibes, New Dopeness
When I first saw that Sony was playing nice with Disney/Marvel, I almost lost it when I saw that Spider-Man would make an appearance in Captain America: Civil War. Nerd Moment: I’ve always thought that all of the Marvel properties belonged together and this was a step in the right direction. It’s been amazing what’s happened since. In this third reboot since the new century, Spider-Man: Homecoming is the story of a young Peter Parker handling his role as a teenager and a webslinging superhero.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 7
Characters: 7
Peter (Tom Holland) is a lovable kid surrounded by a fun cast of friends and foes. They took a different and, in my opinion, smarter route by making Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) younger and more relatable. Not only did it pay off but it helped contribute to side jokes in the story involving Happy (Jon Favreau) and Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.). Yes, there are so many characters to love here, both familiar and new…that is until we get to the villain played by one of my favorite actors Michael Keaton. Don’t get me wrong, he wasn’t horrible, I just couldn’t buy his motivation which made it hard at times to connect to the overall story and conflict.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Watching some of these scenes play out seriously made me wish I was Spider-Man. The aerial combat and clever use of webs is such a treat to watch and experience, both at home. and in the theater. Marvel hit another home run here with cinematic perfection that stretches all over the great city of New York.
Conflict: 10
The conflict isn’t just about Spider-Man fighting bad guys. Rather it’s about having to do all of this and be a kid at the same time…and impress Tony Stark…and get used to his new suit…and keep all of this a secret from his caretaker. So many things wrapped into one makes this such a fun ride. Yes, there is plenty of spider fights to enjoy, but there is so much more to love about the movie as a whole.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Really enjoyed the story and how it plays into the Marvel universe as a whole. A few twists here and there keep things interesting. Again there is so much driving conflict here and character growth that it’s easy to miss the complexities of everything involved in the story. Again, not in love with Vulture’s motivation, but it doesn’t diminish things too badly.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 90
The difficulty of Peter trying to get used to his new suit alone was enough to keep me beaming watching this movie. Marvel movies are known for packing a mega punch and Spider-Man: Homecoming definitely stands up there as one of the stronger ones. Great movie.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 7
Characters: 7
Peter (Tom Holland) is a lovable kid surrounded by a fun cast of friends and foes. They took a different and, in my opinion, smarter route by making Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) younger and more relatable. Not only did it pay off but it helped contribute to side jokes in the story involving Happy (Jon Favreau) and Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.). Yes, there are so many characters to love here, both familiar and new…that is until we get to the villain played by one of my favorite actors Michael Keaton. Don’t get me wrong, he wasn’t horrible, I just couldn’t buy his motivation which made it hard at times to connect to the overall story and conflict.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Watching some of these scenes play out seriously made me wish I was Spider-Man. The aerial combat and clever use of webs is such a treat to watch and experience, both at home. and in the theater. Marvel hit another home run here with cinematic perfection that stretches all over the great city of New York.
Conflict: 10
The conflict isn’t just about Spider-Man fighting bad guys. Rather it’s about having to do all of this and be a kid at the same time…and impress Tony Stark…and get used to his new suit…and keep all of this a secret from his caretaker. So many things wrapped into one makes this such a fun ride. Yes, there is plenty of spider fights to enjoy, but there is so much more to love about the movie as a whole.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Really enjoyed the story and how it plays into the Marvel universe as a whole. A few twists here and there keep things interesting. Again there is so much driving conflict here and character growth that it’s easy to miss the complexities of everything involved in the story. Again, not in love with Vulture’s motivation, but it doesn’t diminish things too badly.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 90
The difficulty of Peter trying to get used to his new suit alone was enough to keep me beaming watching this movie. Marvel movies are known for packing a mega punch and Spider-Man: Homecoming definitely stands up there as one of the stronger ones. Great movie.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Bad Santa 2 (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
The last time we heard from Willie Soke (Billy Bob Thornton) he was recovering in jail after being shot eight times. We catch up with him today in maybe worse shape. He is out of jail but finds himself unable to hold a job and drinking to extreme excess. Th only visitor he has is a delusional, simple minded and well intentioned Thurman Merman (Brett Kelly). On the verge of ending it all he receives an invitation from his old partner, Marcus Skidmore (Tony Cox), to make a big score by robbing a Chicago charity on Christmas Eve. Wary, mostly because Marcus double crossed and shot him on their last job, Willie decides he needs the money and it’s a chance to double cross Marcus. So, he takes the job and heads to Chicago. When he arrives, he finds that Marcus has not told him everything. The job was put together by his arch nemesis. Someone who is more vile, crude and despicable than he is…his mother Sunny (Kathy Bates). Driven by greed and with the agreement that Marcus and him will cut his mother out at the end of the job Willie agrees to go forward with the robbery. The unlikely trio set out to infiltrate and rob the charity.
It is surprising to say but this sequel to 2003s Bad Santa is even more outrageous and raunchy than the original. Billy Bob Thornton is perfect in this role as a sex crazed and barely functioning alcoholic. Willie is truly the Anti-Santa Claus. But with Thurman having faith in him and in his very out of the box way of trying to do good, you can’t help but root for him to succeed. Kathy Bates performance as a crude as can be equal to Thornton’s character was fun and unexpected. The full cast of characters are all unique and all bring something to the film. The story however is very familiar and not that far off from the first film. There were definitely jokes and plot lines that followed too closely, in my opinion, to the original film. This is definitely not a film for young audiences, as most of the film is profanity laced and full of sexual situations and innuendos. But for the adult audience there are a lot of laughs to be had. For me this was a perfect film to shut off for an hour and a half and just enjoy the craziness happening on screen. It is not an overthought or over complicated film. They took things from the original film that were successful changed them up a little, not enough at some points, and made everything a little more over the top.
I wouldn’t necessarily recommend paying movie theater prices for this film but it is definitely worth a watch for the right audiences.
It is surprising to say but this sequel to 2003s Bad Santa is even more outrageous and raunchy than the original. Billy Bob Thornton is perfect in this role as a sex crazed and barely functioning alcoholic. Willie is truly the Anti-Santa Claus. But with Thurman having faith in him and in his very out of the box way of trying to do good, you can’t help but root for him to succeed. Kathy Bates performance as a crude as can be equal to Thornton’s character was fun and unexpected. The full cast of characters are all unique and all bring something to the film. The story however is very familiar and not that far off from the first film. There were definitely jokes and plot lines that followed too closely, in my opinion, to the original film. This is definitely not a film for young audiences, as most of the film is profanity laced and full of sexual situations and innuendos. But for the adult audience there are a lot of laughs to be had. For me this was a perfect film to shut off for an hour and a half and just enjoy the craziness happening on screen. It is not an overthought or over complicated film. They took things from the original film that were successful changed them up a little, not enough at some points, and made everything a little more over the top.
I wouldn’t necessarily recommend paying movie theater prices for this film but it is definitely worth a watch for the right audiences.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Friday the 13th (2009) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019 (Updated Jun 20, 2019)
**I wrote this review a decade ago. I was going to change some stuff (mostly the last couple lines of the last paragraph), but thought it was too crude and hilarious to remove. Hopefully you feel the same way. Thanks for reading.**
In 1980, Pamela Voorhees set out to kill all the counselors at Camp Crystal Lake. Several years ago, the counselors did nothing as Mrs. Voorhees' son, Jason, drowned in the lake. Now, as the camp is about to re-open, Mrs. Voorhees has returned to seek revenge for her son and she only has one more victim before she accomplishes that goal. Unfortunately for Mrs. Voorhees, she didn't count on this particular camp counselor decapitating her and ending her reign of terror once and for all. Unbeknownst to anyone at the time, Jason was still alive and witnessed his mother's gruesome death. Now, in the present day, Jason is the one who seeks revenge and anyone who even comes near Camp Crystal Lake is at risk of feeling his onslaught.
It's been something like five and a half years since we last saw Jason Voorhees in the theater. So was it worth the wait? Does the remake measure up to the rest of the franchise? Is it a remake worth seeing at all? Does it continue the trend with 2009 being a strong year for the horror genre? The short answer to all of these questions is yes.
I've always been partial to the Friday the 13th franchise. Jason Voorhees has always been my favorite when it comes slasher films. So I was beyond excited by the time today finally rolled around. The film opens with a flashback that chronicles what would be the ending to the original film. Jump to the present day. Some kids decide to hike out into the woods to have some fun and wind up about a half mile from Camp Blood. Everything is fun and games until one of them turns up missing. The survivors wind up exploring and get picked off one by one while Jason wears a bag over his head. After the scene in the trailer where Jason runs towards the girl on the ground and swings his machete, we get a black screen with "Friday the 13th" in red plastered across it.
Six weeks later, Clay is looking for his sister, Whitney. She was one of the victims of the attack we just witnessed. It seems as though everyone has given up hope looking for her except him. Meanwhile, Trent and his friends are going up to his dad's cabin for the weekend which just so happens to reside on Camp Crystal Lake. It's basically just more pigs being sent out to slaughter from there. Jason's bag gets pulled off right before he disposes of one of his victims in a barn. It's there that he stumbles across a hockey mask and things begin to pick up from there.
The film definitely delivers in all of the elements that make up the formula to a Friday the 13th film. There's plenty of T&A and sex for any sexhound. I haven't seen any R-rated film with this much nudity and sexual content in quite a while. The kills are also pretty satisfactory for a Friday fan. I think Trent's death is probably the most memorable, but I'm partial to Amanda's death because it was an interesting twist on the sleeping bag kill. Officer Bracke's kill was also a favorite of mine. Then, of course, there's Jason's death. It's interesting since it seems obvious how things are going to turn out for Jason, but it winds up happening in a round-a-bout way. Something is thrown in there to throw the audience off and that not many would see coming. Kind of like a, "Oh, maybe he'll die this way instead," kind of thing. Thinking back on it, it also felt like a throwback to one of the earlier sequels, which is pretty cool.
We can't finish this review without talking about Derek Mears as the man behind the hockey mask. I feel like he did a great job. I prefer him over Ken Kirzinger in Freddy Vs Jason. He kind of reminded me as a cross between C.J. Graham(part VI) and Kane Hodder(parts VII-IX). He also ran at times, which may put some people off. I actually enjoyed the running quite a bit. It reminded me of Jason in The Final Chapter, which is my favorite F13 film. He had the body movements down to perfection and is a worthy addition to the list of actors who have donned the hockey mask.
My one complaint is that it seemed like it was hard to see what was going on in certain scenes. The camera would be too shaky or scenes wouldn't have enough lighting and be too dark. It's really a minor complaint though as it usually only lasted a few seconds when it did occur.
So, all in all, I feel like it was well worth the wait for this film. I am really hoping it does well because I would welcome sequels with open arms. The remake follows the Friday the 13th formula extremely well. Right down to the ending. I guess the only thing that's not like some of the previous sequels is the acting, which seems to be top notch for a slasher film. As a Friday the 13th fan, I'm more than satisfied with the remake. To tell the truth, it was just nice to see a film with Jason Voorhees in theaters again. And as I've told quite a few friends, the feeling I had after walking out of the theater was equivalent to the way I feel after I blow my load. Not many films can plaster that on their movie poster, but this one could. And really, that's the biggest compliment of all.
In 1980, Pamela Voorhees set out to kill all the counselors at Camp Crystal Lake. Several years ago, the counselors did nothing as Mrs. Voorhees' son, Jason, drowned in the lake. Now, as the camp is about to re-open, Mrs. Voorhees has returned to seek revenge for her son and she only has one more victim before she accomplishes that goal. Unfortunately for Mrs. Voorhees, she didn't count on this particular camp counselor decapitating her and ending her reign of terror once and for all. Unbeknownst to anyone at the time, Jason was still alive and witnessed his mother's gruesome death. Now, in the present day, Jason is the one who seeks revenge and anyone who even comes near Camp Crystal Lake is at risk of feeling his onslaught.
It's been something like five and a half years since we last saw Jason Voorhees in the theater. So was it worth the wait? Does the remake measure up to the rest of the franchise? Is it a remake worth seeing at all? Does it continue the trend with 2009 being a strong year for the horror genre? The short answer to all of these questions is yes.
I've always been partial to the Friday the 13th franchise. Jason Voorhees has always been my favorite when it comes slasher films. So I was beyond excited by the time today finally rolled around. The film opens with a flashback that chronicles what would be the ending to the original film. Jump to the present day. Some kids decide to hike out into the woods to have some fun and wind up about a half mile from Camp Blood. Everything is fun and games until one of them turns up missing. The survivors wind up exploring and get picked off one by one while Jason wears a bag over his head. After the scene in the trailer where Jason runs towards the girl on the ground and swings his machete, we get a black screen with "Friday the 13th" in red plastered across it.
Six weeks later, Clay is looking for his sister, Whitney. She was one of the victims of the attack we just witnessed. It seems as though everyone has given up hope looking for her except him. Meanwhile, Trent and his friends are going up to his dad's cabin for the weekend which just so happens to reside on Camp Crystal Lake. It's basically just more pigs being sent out to slaughter from there. Jason's bag gets pulled off right before he disposes of one of his victims in a barn. It's there that he stumbles across a hockey mask and things begin to pick up from there.
The film definitely delivers in all of the elements that make up the formula to a Friday the 13th film. There's plenty of T&A and sex for any sexhound. I haven't seen any R-rated film with this much nudity and sexual content in quite a while. The kills are also pretty satisfactory for a Friday fan. I think Trent's death is probably the most memorable, but I'm partial to Amanda's death because it was an interesting twist on the sleeping bag kill. Officer Bracke's kill was also a favorite of mine. Then, of course, there's Jason's death. It's interesting since it seems obvious how things are going to turn out for Jason, but it winds up happening in a round-a-bout way. Something is thrown in there to throw the audience off and that not many would see coming. Kind of like a, "Oh, maybe he'll die this way instead," kind of thing. Thinking back on it, it also felt like a throwback to one of the earlier sequels, which is pretty cool.
We can't finish this review without talking about Derek Mears as the man behind the hockey mask. I feel like he did a great job. I prefer him over Ken Kirzinger in Freddy Vs Jason. He kind of reminded me as a cross between C.J. Graham(part VI) and Kane Hodder(parts VII-IX). He also ran at times, which may put some people off. I actually enjoyed the running quite a bit. It reminded me of Jason in The Final Chapter, which is my favorite F13 film. He had the body movements down to perfection and is a worthy addition to the list of actors who have donned the hockey mask.
My one complaint is that it seemed like it was hard to see what was going on in certain scenes. The camera would be too shaky or scenes wouldn't have enough lighting and be too dark. It's really a minor complaint though as it usually only lasted a few seconds when it did occur.
So, all in all, I feel like it was well worth the wait for this film. I am really hoping it does well because I would welcome sequels with open arms. The remake follows the Friday the 13th formula extremely well. Right down to the ending. I guess the only thing that's not like some of the previous sequels is the acting, which seems to be top notch for a slasher film. As a Friday the 13th fan, I'm more than satisfied with the remake. To tell the truth, it was just nice to see a film with Jason Voorhees in theaters again. And as I've told quite a few friends, the feeling I had after walking out of the theater was equivalent to the way I feel after I blow my load. Not many films can plaster that on their movie poster, but this one could. And really, that's the biggest compliment of all.