Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Pokémon: Detective Pikachu (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
The answer to the above is "yes" by the way... it's always yes.
When Tim gets to Ryme City and finds Pikachu, who was presumed dead along with his father, a mystery presents itself. Where is Harry Goodman? And why can Tim understand Pikachu? With an accidental encounter with a substance called R, and a reporter/intern sniffing around for a story, the sleuthing duo realise there's something bigger going on.
This really is a kids' version of Deadpool. I was even abbreviating "DP" in my notes.
I don't quite know where to start. My knowledge of Pokémon is very limited and as such, it hadn't occurred to me that Pokémon don't generally speak English. Had I remembered that fact then I probably would have guessed the ending very quickly. (Also, there's a point on this that is a spoiler that has since wound me up.)
It's not a great film, but it's an amusing one. I'm stumped as to who it is actually aimed at, it's not a kids films and it's not a adults film. It hovers somewhere overhead trying to get a slice of all the action. The kids were entertained but it was generally cooing at the animated characters when they appeared or laughing at physical humour. I was actually quite surprised that Pikachu's script has bad language in it considering it was a PG and always going to attract family viewers.
One of the many things that didn't fit for me was the very beginning of the film. While I love Karan Soni, I would have cut out the whole first scenes for a shorter and slightly more logical lead into the film. It felt a little forced as it's the only sighting of a Pokéball. I get it, you think Pokémon you see the ball, but with the city's introduction as a place where humans and Pokémon co-exist without battles you really didn't need to jam it in there.
Pikachu's animation was really good, particularly when we see him with wet fur. Consistency with the characters was a little hit and miss though and occasionally I felt like some scenes had missed a step compared to the rest of the film.
Generally the animation to real life interactions were good, generally. I can't get over how bad the full bar scene is that we see in the trailer. When Pikachu turns and his tail slaps Tim in the face... if you can't line it up well then why do it? I also found it very frustrating that Justice Smith never seemed to be looking at him properly, and it was more than just the ignoring him as was established earlier in the scene.
Kathryn Newton as Lucy Stevens... Now, I know there is always someone hyperactive in these things, but oh my. She also seemed a little surplus to requirements. Her only real purpose seemed to be as an awkward (sort of) love interest. Everything she brought to the story could easily have been achieved in other more relevant ways.
My absolute favourite part of the film is again, something that was slightly covered in a trailer, but the whole cut is wonderful if a little extreme if you over think it. Tim, Pikachu and Mr Mime. The interrogation scene is so funny... slightly sinister at the end but fun. I won't go on anymore because I don't want to spoil it for you.
I genuinely don't know how much the acting in this actually affects the overall film. Had you replaced any of the on-screen actors then you probably would have come out with the same film, without Ryan Reynolds, I'm not so sure.
As I said at the beginning, I don't know a massive about Pokémon, but even to me it doesn't seem like it matches with the franchise, perhaps that's the point. Will there be another? I don't know, but I suspect there's scope for it even though [SPOILER].
What you should do
It's amusing and I'm sure it'll be on for a while so perhaps see it when the hype has passed.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Well obviously I want a Pokémon, but do I want a Pikachu or a Growlithe?
When Tim gets to Ryme City and finds Pikachu, who was presumed dead along with his father, a mystery presents itself. Where is Harry Goodman? And why can Tim understand Pikachu? With an accidental encounter with a substance called R, and a reporter/intern sniffing around for a story, the sleuthing duo realise there's something bigger going on.
This really is a kids' version of Deadpool. I was even abbreviating "DP" in my notes.
I don't quite know where to start. My knowledge of Pokémon is very limited and as such, it hadn't occurred to me that Pokémon don't generally speak English. Had I remembered that fact then I probably would have guessed the ending very quickly. (Also, there's a point on this that is a spoiler that has since wound me up.)
It's not a great film, but it's an amusing one. I'm stumped as to who it is actually aimed at, it's not a kids films and it's not a adults film. It hovers somewhere overhead trying to get a slice of all the action. The kids were entertained but it was generally cooing at the animated characters when they appeared or laughing at physical humour. I was actually quite surprised that Pikachu's script has bad language in it considering it was a PG and always going to attract family viewers.
One of the many things that didn't fit for me was the very beginning of the film. While I love Karan Soni, I would have cut out the whole first scenes for a shorter and slightly more logical lead into the film. It felt a little forced as it's the only sighting of a Pokéball. I get it, you think Pokémon you see the ball, but with the city's introduction as a place where humans and Pokémon co-exist without battles you really didn't need to jam it in there.
Pikachu's animation was really good, particularly when we see him with wet fur. Consistency with the characters was a little hit and miss though and occasionally I felt like some scenes had missed a step compared to the rest of the film.
Generally the animation to real life interactions were good, generally. I can't get over how bad the full bar scene is that we see in the trailer. When Pikachu turns and his tail slaps Tim in the face... if you can't line it up well then why do it? I also found it very frustrating that Justice Smith never seemed to be looking at him properly, and it was more than just the ignoring him as was established earlier in the scene.
Kathryn Newton as Lucy Stevens... Now, I know there is always someone hyperactive in these things, but oh my. She also seemed a little surplus to requirements. Her only real purpose seemed to be as an awkward (sort of) love interest. Everything she brought to the story could easily have been achieved in other more relevant ways.
My absolute favourite part of the film is again, something that was slightly covered in a trailer, but the whole cut is wonderful if a little extreme if you over think it. Tim, Pikachu and Mr Mime. The interrogation scene is so funny... slightly sinister at the end but fun. I won't go on anymore because I don't want to spoil it for you.
I genuinely don't know how much the acting in this actually affects the overall film. Had you replaced any of the on-screen actors then you probably would have come out with the same film, without Ryan Reynolds, I'm not so sure.
As I said at the beginning, I don't know a massive about Pokémon, but even to me it doesn't seem like it matches with the franchise, perhaps that's the point. Will there be another? I don't know, but I suspect there's scope for it even though [SPOILER].
What you should do
It's amusing and I'm sure it'll be on for a while so perhaps see it when the hype has passed.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Well obviously I want a Pokémon, but do I want a Pikachu or a Growlithe?
Kevin Wilson (179 KP) rated The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993) in Movies
Jul 13, 2018 (Updated Jul 13, 2018)
Fantastic animation style (3 more)
Great music
Great acting
A unique story
My favourite movie of all time
This is by far my favourite movie of all time.
Created my Tim Burton who is also my favourite director (yes I know he didn't direct this)
The style he uses in incredible. It's all stop motion which basically means he builds real life models, takes a picture of it in a pose and then takes another in a slightly different pose then and another and another until the pictures come together to look like a moving model. It's incredible and if you watch the behind the scenes you can see the effort they put into this movie and it shows.
The character designs are so good as well as the locations.
The plot is pretty much halloweentown finds Christmas for the first time. It's fun, funny, emotional, even creepy and it's just a good time all the way through.
The music is fantastic. Every song is unique and catchy and you will find the soundtrack on my phone. Actors are incredible and at perfect for the roles they play.
People tend to ask if it's a Halloween or Christmas movie but I watch it anytime of the year.
Created my Tim Burton who is also my favourite director (yes I know he didn't direct this)
The style he uses in incredible. It's all stop motion which basically means he builds real life models, takes a picture of it in a pose and then takes another in a slightly different pose then and another and another until the pictures come together to look like a moving model. It's incredible and if you watch the behind the scenes you can see the effort they put into this movie and it shows.
The character designs are so good as well as the locations.
The plot is pretty much halloweentown finds Christmas for the first time. It's fun, funny, emotional, even creepy and it's just a good time all the way through.
The music is fantastic. Every song is unique and catchy and you will find the soundtrack on my phone. Actors are incredible and at perfect for the roles they play.
People tend to ask if it's a Halloween or Christmas movie but I watch it anytime of the year.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Thoroughbreds (2017) in Movies
Apr 28, 2020
A little pretentious
This film had a limited run when it was released at the cinema, and I’ve been interested to see it ever since. I’d heard good things about it, however I’m afraid to say it didn’t live up to expectations.
This is what I’d class as a pretentious arty type film, and I’m really not a big fan of films like this. There’s lots of overly dramatic music that sometimes works, but sometimes just seems ridiculously out of place. There’s also a lot of lingering shots of the characters doing barely anything that would be fine for a minute, but instead drag out for far too long. Despite this, this film does have some good points. The acting is fantastic, and the script is very smart and clever and surprisingly funny at times - the scene with the girls and Tim in the car was especially funny. The plot is a basic one, although I do feel like the story wasn’t entirely unpredictable although it was enjoyable. And fortunately it has a very short run time, which I was grateful for with all the irritating pretentious music and shots,
Overall this film was watchable, but I think it could’ve tried to be a little less pretentious.
This is what I’d class as a pretentious arty type film, and I’m really not a big fan of films like this. There’s lots of overly dramatic music that sometimes works, but sometimes just seems ridiculously out of place. There’s also a lot of lingering shots of the characters doing barely anything that would be fine for a minute, but instead drag out for far too long. Despite this, this film does have some good points. The acting is fantastic, and the script is very smart and clever and surprisingly funny at times - the scene with the girls and Tim in the car was especially funny. The plot is a basic one, although I do feel like the story wasn’t entirely unpredictable although it was enjoyable. And fortunately it has a very short run time, which I was grateful for with all the irritating pretentious music and shots,
Overall this film was watchable, but I think it could’ve tried to be a little less pretentious.
Tom Chaplin recommended Want One by Rufus Wainwright in Music (curated)
I was sent [b:Fear Week|17157832|Fear Week|Andrew McBurnie|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1356078463s/17157832.jpg|23580878] by [a:Andrew McBurnie|2920822|Andrew McBurnie|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/authors/1377149028p2/2920822.jpg], the author, in exchange for an honest review. The plot appealed to me as I'd never heard of, let alone read anything about the Cuban missile crisis, and I wanted a chance to learn about that and the Cold War.
The story centres around Adrian Thorby and the events that happen to him over the week of the Cuban missile crisis. His age is never mentioned, but I'd put it at around 13. The tension between America and Russia is affecting Hull in 1962, but those aren't the only things that worry Adrian that week.
Generally, when starting a book I read as little of the blurb as possible, so I was a little shocked when, on the second page, there's the line:
<blockquote>"He felt his willy twitching..."</blockquote>
Don't get me wrong, it's realistic, but I hadn't been expecting it! There was more on this subject throughout the book, and at times it was somewhat awkward, but this was probably proportionate to the embarrassment Adrian was feeling!
McBurnie created really realistic relationships between the characters, whether Adrian's family or friends. I loved the sibling rivalry, and could really relate to the sense of panic Adrian's friend Tim and he felt when they 'lost' his brother's book.
It took me a little while to get into this, but once I did, I enjoyed it. It's a creeper! McBurnie captures the little things really well - fears about the nuclear threat, and family niggles, for example. I also thought that, once it got going, the story managed to evoke the history it was representing. The casual acceptance of caning in school helped with a lot of this, haha!
The story centres around Adrian Thorby and the events that happen to him over the week of the Cuban missile crisis. His age is never mentioned, but I'd put it at around 13. The tension between America and Russia is affecting Hull in 1962, but those aren't the only things that worry Adrian that week.
Generally, when starting a book I read as little of the blurb as possible, so I was a little shocked when, on the second page, there's the line:
<blockquote>"He felt his willy twitching..."</blockquote>
Don't get me wrong, it's realistic, but I hadn't been expecting it! There was more on this subject throughout the book, and at times it was somewhat awkward, but this was probably proportionate to the embarrassment Adrian was feeling!
McBurnie created really realistic relationships between the characters, whether Adrian's family or friends. I loved the sibling rivalry, and could really relate to the sense of panic Adrian's friend Tim and he felt when they 'lost' his brother's book.
It took me a little while to get into this, but once I did, I enjoyed it. It's a creeper! McBurnie captures the little things really well - fears about the nuclear threat, and family niggles, for example. I also thought that, once it got going, the story managed to evoke the history it was representing. The casual acceptance of caning in school helped with a lot of this, haha!
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Toy Story 3 (2010) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Character-Driven Masterpiece
There aren’t a lot of movie series’ that get better with each movie, but the Toy Story franchise has definitely accomplished that. Toy Story 3 is not just the best movie of the franchise to date, but it’s also one of the greatest movies ever made. Also, before I go any further: DAMN, it feels good to be posting another review. To quote John Wick: “Yeah, I’m thinking I’m back!” But I digress…In this third installment, Andy is all grown up and the gang sets their sights on a preschool where they hope to get played with everyday for eternity.
Acting: 10
It’s almost unfair when you think about the amazing cast of the Toy Story franchise. Tom Hanks and Tim Allen as Woody ad Buzz really have a way of putting you dead in the moment. These are toys, yet, somehow, the phenomenal acting jobs truly brings them to life as sentient beings. Their pain as well as their triumphs are felt throughout.
Beginning: 10
Yet another thing this franchise has gotten down to a science. The first five minutes of the movie puts you in a grand adventure where all the toys are facing off against each other. Then the next five minutes are heartbreaking. It’s a pleasant rollercoaster that sets the story up perfectly.
Characters: 10
The gang’s all here, including Cowgirl Jessie from the last movie and her horse Bullseye. In addition to having their own flavor and personality, I can really appreciate how Buzz and Woody continue to develop as characters. Buzz continues to try and be the voice of reason while Woody relies mainly on his emotion. I really enjoyed Lotso (Ned Beatty) as well, a purple teddy who smells like strawberries and walks with a cane. If those were his only interesting quirks that would be enough, but there is so much more to appreciate about his character that I won’t give away.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
You know the visuals are at masterpiece levels when I’m marveling at a trash bag. A trash bag for God’s sake! But man the detail on this bag, the way it moved just so perfectly. I know, I’m a nutcase, but this trash bag! It’s the sheer attention to detail that blows my mind. There is another shot, and this one is probably my favorite, of Lotso stepping into the lights of a Tonka truck with his cronies to approach Buzz and the gang. The way the light hits perfectly casting shadows definitely tells me there are no shortages of geniuses at Pixar.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
Toy Story 3 is why I love movies. From bottom to top, it checks all the boxes. You will experience a wave of emotions and have fun the whole way.
Memorability: 10
The movie casts a memorable message about our ability to let go and move on. Watching this at different points in my life, every single time I could relate to Woody and his struggles with letting go. Oh yeah, and the film is super fun too. I can’t count the number of moments where I marveled at how this movie does things that creatively surpass the other two. Like Up, this is a movie that sticks with you long after you watch it.
Pace: 10
The longest of the three, yet it somehow feels like the shortest. There is always something exciting that’s happening. Its ebbs and flows move the story along with every single detail somehow feeling important.
Plot: 10
Watching this made me think, “Oh my goodness, they could do a hundred more of these and it would never get old.” This story stands alone and has actual plausibility…well, as toy stories go anyway. At one point, the movie moves from new adventure to crazy heist to prison break. And I’m here for all of it, every last piece.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 100
Watching a movie like this is like watching a talented gymnast perform an unforgettable routine. You know you want to give it a perfect score provided they stick the landing. Beginning, middle, and end Toy Story 3 establishes credibility as being epic and damn-near perfect. Landing stuck.
Acting: 10
It’s almost unfair when you think about the amazing cast of the Toy Story franchise. Tom Hanks and Tim Allen as Woody ad Buzz really have a way of putting you dead in the moment. These are toys, yet, somehow, the phenomenal acting jobs truly brings them to life as sentient beings. Their pain as well as their triumphs are felt throughout.
Beginning: 10
Yet another thing this franchise has gotten down to a science. The first five minutes of the movie puts you in a grand adventure where all the toys are facing off against each other. Then the next five minutes are heartbreaking. It’s a pleasant rollercoaster that sets the story up perfectly.
Characters: 10
The gang’s all here, including Cowgirl Jessie from the last movie and her horse Bullseye. In addition to having their own flavor and personality, I can really appreciate how Buzz and Woody continue to develop as characters. Buzz continues to try and be the voice of reason while Woody relies mainly on his emotion. I really enjoyed Lotso (Ned Beatty) as well, a purple teddy who smells like strawberries and walks with a cane. If those were his only interesting quirks that would be enough, but there is so much more to appreciate about his character that I won’t give away.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
You know the visuals are at masterpiece levels when I’m marveling at a trash bag. A trash bag for God’s sake! But man the detail on this bag, the way it moved just so perfectly. I know, I’m a nutcase, but this trash bag! It’s the sheer attention to detail that blows my mind. There is another shot, and this one is probably my favorite, of Lotso stepping into the lights of a Tonka truck with his cronies to approach Buzz and the gang. The way the light hits perfectly casting shadows definitely tells me there are no shortages of geniuses at Pixar.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
Toy Story 3 is why I love movies. From bottom to top, it checks all the boxes. You will experience a wave of emotions and have fun the whole way.
Memorability: 10
The movie casts a memorable message about our ability to let go and move on. Watching this at different points in my life, every single time I could relate to Woody and his struggles with letting go. Oh yeah, and the film is super fun too. I can’t count the number of moments where I marveled at how this movie does things that creatively surpass the other two. Like Up, this is a movie that sticks with you long after you watch it.
Pace: 10
The longest of the three, yet it somehow feels like the shortest. There is always something exciting that’s happening. Its ebbs and flows move the story along with every single detail somehow feeling important.
Plot: 10
Watching this made me think, “Oh my goodness, they could do a hundred more of these and it would never get old.” This story stands alone and has actual plausibility…well, as toy stories go anyway. At one point, the movie moves from new adventure to crazy heist to prison break. And I’m here for all of it, every last piece.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 100
Watching a movie like this is like watching a talented gymnast perform an unforgettable routine. You know you want to give it a perfect score provided they stick the landing. Beginning, middle, and end Toy Story 3 establishes credibility as being epic and damn-near perfect. Landing stuck.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Big Fish (2003) in Movies
May 1, 2020
Whimsical, Fantastical and Entrancing
Looking for a charming, fantastical diversion that will whisk you away from this world for 2 hours? Look no further than the heartwarming father/son story BIG FISH.
Set in the unmistakable stylings of idealic living from the mind of Tim Burton, BIG FISH tells the tale of a father by the name of Ed Bloom (the great Albert Finney) who's son, Will Bloom (Billy Crudup - fresh off of ALMOST FAMOUS) has separated himself from his father for he is sick of the "tall tales" that his father tells about his life. Most of the movie is the reconciliation of father and son set against the backdrop of these fantastical stories (the younger Ed Bloom is played with whimsical wonder by Ewan McGregor).
And...it is the telling of these stories where Director Tim Burton really shines. It is a perfect match of Director, tone and style to tell the story. He uses a primary color palate (much the same way he used it in Edward Scissorhands) punctuated by "steam punk blacks and grays" that creates a world that is a wonder to look at and is instantly recognizable not only by what is familiar but also by how it is UN-familiar. If overused, this type of stylings could be a detriment to the storytelling, but in BIG FISH, Burton paints the canvas perfectly.
As I stated, McGregor is whimsical as the young Ed Bloom. You can see a young man exploring and drinking in all the world has to offer. On the other side, Albert Finney shows that he has a twinkle in his eye (even though the older Ed Bloom is battling a chronic disease). He sparkles when he tells his stories. Finney's performance draws you in while McGregor's keeps you there.
As does the performances of such terrific actors like Steve Buscemi, Helena Bonham Carter and Danny DeVito (as individuals that Ed meets along the way). They "get" what Burton is going for and embrace the charm and whimsy of it all. "Back in the real world" - a (then) unknown Marion Cotillard is engaging as Will Bloom's pregnant wife and Jessica Lange shines as Ed's wife who has "heard it all" and is still charmed by it all after all these years. There is a scene later in the film between Finney and Lange (and a bathtub) that shows that these 2 veteran actors can throw their fastball when asked.
I was entranced by the tall tales told in this film and I think you will be to.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Set in the unmistakable stylings of idealic living from the mind of Tim Burton, BIG FISH tells the tale of a father by the name of Ed Bloom (the great Albert Finney) who's son, Will Bloom (Billy Crudup - fresh off of ALMOST FAMOUS) has separated himself from his father for he is sick of the "tall tales" that his father tells about his life. Most of the movie is the reconciliation of father and son set against the backdrop of these fantastical stories (the younger Ed Bloom is played with whimsical wonder by Ewan McGregor).
And...it is the telling of these stories where Director Tim Burton really shines. It is a perfect match of Director, tone and style to tell the story. He uses a primary color palate (much the same way he used it in Edward Scissorhands) punctuated by "steam punk blacks and grays" that creates a world that is a wonder to look at and is instantly recognizable not only by what is familiar but also by how it is UN-familiar. If overused, this type of stylings could be a detriment to the storytelling, but in BIG FISH, Burton paints the canvas perfectly.
As I stated, McGregor is whimsical as the young Ed Bloom. You can see a young man exploring and drinking in all the world has to offer. On the other side, Albert Finney shows that he has a twinkle in his eye (even though the older Ed Bloom is battling a chronic disease). He sparkles when he tells his stories. Finney's performance draws you in while McGregor's keeps you there.
As does the performances of such terrific actors like Steve Buscemi, Helena Bonham Carter and Danny DeVito (as individuals that Ed meets along the way). They "get" what Burton is going for and embrace the charm and whimsy of it all. "Back in the real world" - a (then) unknown Marion Cotillard is engaging as Will Bloom's pregnant wife and Jessica Lange shines as Ed's wife who has "heard it all" and is still charmed by it all after all these years. There is a scene later in the film between Finney and Lange (and a bathtub) that shows that these 2 veteran actors can throw their fastball when asked.
I was entranced by the tall tales told in this film and I think you will be to.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Darren (1599 KP) rated 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams (2010) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams starts by Mayor Buckman (Mosely) explaining why they are out for vengeances where they town of Pleasant Valley lost 2001 residents in the 1800s. When the deal with a local Sheriff is getting pushed to the limits Buckman makes sure his maniacs are safe. This leads to them going on tour to get the people from the north. We then meet High society sister Rome (Johnson) and Tina (Hope) part of Road Rascal reality show going to the south. After their camper gets run off the crashes they get stuck in the middle of nowhere where they bump into the Pleasant Valley community.
The producer Val (Leon) takes this chance to make the event simpler without having to go full south. Not knowing the true nature of the Pleasant Valley people are the reality show crew become the latest victims in the most gruesome possible ways.
2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams is a follow up to 2001 Maniacs a remake in its own right. Sadly this sequel is simply terrible, losing Robert Englund is always going to be bad but he just got out in time. The sound is awful the acting is terrible the story gets bogged down because the very outline of the story is well acceptable for horror. The characters or victims are all unlikable and you simple don’t care what happens to them, so how I am supposed to like this if none of the characters need supporting and nothing shocking happens? This was simple terrible rant over. (1/10)
REPORT THIS AD
Actor Review
Bill Moseley: Mayor George W Buckman leader of the Pleasant Valley people whose ability to talk people into them being friend works for them but soon we see his true nature. I know Bill is a cult favourite but this, was just bad man. (2/10)
Lin Shaye: Granny Boone old wise lady of the Pleasant Valley people who is just as crazy as Buckman. Lin would be the biggest name in the film but why is she here? Has anyone seen Insidious, yeah it is the same woman. (1/10)
Support Cast: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams every single member of the supporting cast is unlikable annoying and you might actually cheer when they die.
Director Review: Tim Sullivan – Tim just retire. (0/10)
Comedy: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams is not funny. (0/10)
Horror: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams is not scary. (0/10)
Settings: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams has a random setting that doesn’t make sense. (2/10)
Special Effects: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams blows the special effects that should be good for the kills that are sloppy. (2/10)
Suggestion: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams is one to avoid and never think twice about. (AVOID)
Best Part: My copy had adverts, so I knew what was good to watch.
Worst Part: The Film
Believability: No (0/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: Please God no
Post Credits Scene: No
Awards: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 24 Minutes
Tagline: If They Kill You, They Will Come!
Overall: I need my time back
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/02/06/2001-maniacs-field-of-screams-2010/
The producer Val (Leon) takes this chance to make the event simpler without having to go full south. Not knowing the true nature of the Pleasant Valley people are the reality show crew become the latest victims in the most gruesome possible ways.
2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams is a follow up to 2001 Maniacs a remake in its own right. Sadly this sequel is simply terrible, losing Robert Englund is always going to be bad but he just got out in time. The sound is awful the acting is terrible the story gets bogged down because the very outline of the story is well acceptable for horror. The characters or victims are all unlikable and you simple don’t care what happens to them, so how I am supposed to like this if none of the characters need supporting and nothing shocking happens? This was simple terrible rant over. (1/10)
REPORT THIS AD
Actor Review
Bill Moseley: Mayor George W Buckman leader of the Pleasant Valley people whose ability to talk people into them being friend works for them but soon we see his true nature. I know Bill is a cult favourite but this, was just bad man. (2/10)
Lin Shaye: Granny Boone old wise lady of the Pleasant Valley people who is just as crazy as Buckman. Lin would be the biggest name in the film but why is she here? Has anyone seen Insidious, yeah it is the same woman. (1/10)
Support Cast: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams every single member of the supporting cast is unlikable annoying and you might actually cheer when they die.
Director Review: Tim Sullivan – Tim just retire. (0/10)
Comedy: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams is not funny. (0/10)
Horror: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams is not scary. (0/10)
Settings: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams has a random setting that doesn’t make sense. (2/10)
Special Effects: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams blows the special effects that should be good for the kills that are sloppy. (2/10)
Suggestion: 2001 Maniacs: Field of Screams is one to avoid and never think twice about. (AVOID)
Best Part: My copy had adverts, so I knew what was good to watch.
Worst Part: The Film
Believability: No (0/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: Please God no
Post Credits Scene: No
Awards: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 24 Minutes
Tagline: If They Kill You, They Will Come!
Overall: I need my time back
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/02/06/2001-maniacs-field-of-screams-2010/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Pokémon: Detective Pikachu (2019) in Movies
Jul 27, 2019
Don't Try and Make Sense of it and You'll be Just Fine
With the aid of Detective Pikachu (Ryan Reynolds), Tim Goodman (Justice Smith) is on a mission to find out what happened to his missing father.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 6
Characters: 10
You can’t have a movie centered around Pokemon and not have a bevy of characters to behold. Detective Pikachu does not disappoint pushing the envelope of creativity with the number of characters involved. Every Pokemon you can think of shows up in some form or fashion. I was just happy seeing Jiggly Puff get a small bit of shine. Outside of Pikachu himself, I thought the mime Pokemon was a riot. Seeing him and Pikachu together was probably one of my favorite scenes.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
I was actually pretty impressed with the visuals here. The film takes place over a number of cool settings, including an MMA-style ring with a raging dragon. The colors are vibrant and help bring each Pokemon to life. I appreciate the attention to detail with this movie trying to incorporate as many characters from the game as possible. No corners were cut here as the characters seem to look true to form.
Conflict: 9
Entertainment Value: 8
I dare you to watch this movie and not at least be entertained by some of the parts. Maybe the action could have been spaced out better to prevent lagging, but there was enough there to keep my attention. Between that and Pikachu cracking me up every few minutes, I was surprised by how little of an effort it was to watch this movie.
Memorability: 7
There are a few scenes that are done extremely well while others could have been left out. Probably what stands out the most to me in terms of memorability is here is a movie that was most likely supposed to fail. Yet, director Rob Letterman managed to prove over and over again that the project had legs. It’s not a movie that over saturates you with great moments, but there is enough of a framework to keep you happy.
Pace: 8
Plot: 1
If they had gotten this part right, I’m looking at the movie in a whole different light. The story was all over the place. It was way too jumbled, a hot mess. There is an objective, then there’s a side objective with all these cheats along the way. I finally just said, “Screw it, I’ll enjoy it for what it is. Not going to try and make sense of it.”
Resolution: 10
The ending almost made up for the shoddy plot. It’s cute and touching, very fitting considering the craziness Pikachu and Tim went through for the duration of the story. Happy with how things shook out.
Overall: 78
Sometimes it only takes one thing to keep a movie from greatness. In this case Pokemon: Detective Pikachu couldn’t stop tripping over itself with its awkward storyline. I still recommend it for one good watch.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 6
Characters: 10
You can’t have a movie centered around Pokemon and not have a bevy of characters to behold. Detective Pikachu does not disappoint pushing the envelope of creativity with the number of characters involved. Every Pokemon you can think of shows up in some form or fashion. I was just happy seeing Jiggly Puff get a small bit of shine. Outside of Pikachu himself, I thought the mime Pokemon was a riot. Seeing him and Pikachu together was probably one of my favorite scenes.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
I was actually pretty impressed with the visuals here. The film takes place over a number of cool settings, including an MMA-style ring with a raging dragon. The colors are vibrant and help bring each Pokemon to life. I appreciate the attention to detail with this movie trying to incorporate as many characters from the game as possible. No corners were cut here as the characters seem to look true to form.
Conflict: 9
Entertainment Value: 8
I dare you to watch this movie and not at least be entertained by some of the parts. Maybe the action could have been spaced out better to prevent lagging, but there was enough there to keep my attention. Between that and Pikachu cracking me up every few minutes, I was surprised by how little of an effort it was to watch this movie.
Memorability: 7
There are a few scenes that are done extremely well while others could have been left out. Probably what stands out the most to me in terms of memorability is here is a movie that was most likely supposed to fail. Yet, director Rob Letterman managed to prove over and over again that the project had legs. It’s not a movie that over saturates you with great moments, but there is enough of a framework to keep you happy.
Pace: 8
Plot: 1
If they had gotten this part right, I’m looking at the movie in a whole different light. The story was all over the place. It was way too jumbled, a hot mess. There is an objective, then there’s a side objective with all these cheats along the way. I finally just said, “Screw it, I’ll enjoy it for what it is. Not going to try and make sense of it.”
Resolution: 10
The ending almost made up for the shoddy plot. It’s cute and touching, very fitting considering the craziness Pikachu and Tim went through for the duration of the story. Happy with how things shook out.
Overall: 78
Sometimes it only takes one thing to keep a movie from greatness. In this case Pokemon: Detective Pikachu couldn’t stop tripping over itself with its awkward storyline. I still recommend it for one good watch.
Kaz (232 KP) rated Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (1971) in Movies
May 24, 2019
A Childhood Favourite
I've loved this film since I was about 3 years old and that's quite a while ago! I love the songs in the film's soundtrack and the quirky character Gene Wilder plays.
Wilder has some fantastic one liners and the children are brilliant, playing the obnoxious winners of the Golden Tickets. Charlie Bucket is very likeable and you feel for him, as he and family struggle to survive.
The only part of the film which I don't particularly care for, is the 'Wonkatania' boat scene, I found this particularly disturbing as a child.
The songs in this are very memorable. Considering the fact that I have probably watched this film 100's of times, I could sing all of them at the drop of a hat! This film has been a part of my life for so long, that most of my family could recite most of the film too!
This is one of my all time favourite films and a guilty pleasure. I have watched the Tim Burton adaptation of the Roald Dahl novel this film is based on and, although it had some nice additions from the original text, which did not feature in this version of the story, I much prefer this version.
If you want to watch a film full of magic and wonder, I suggest watching this film.
Wilder has some fantastic one liners and the children are brilliant, playing the obnoxious winners of the Golden Tickets. Charlie Bucket is very likeable and you feel for him, as he and family struggle to survive.
The only part of the film which I don't particularly care for, is the 'Wonkatania' boat scene, I found this particularly disturbing as a child.
The songs in this are very memorable. Considering the fact that I have probably watched this film 100's of times, I could sing all of them at the drop of a hat! This film has been a part of my life for so long, that most of my family could recite most of the film too!
This is one of my all time favourite films and a guilty pleasure. I have watched the Tim Burton adaptation of the Roald Dahl novel this film is based on and, although it had some nice additions from the original text, which did not feature in this version of the story, I much prefer this version.
If you want to watch a film full of magic and wonder, I suggest watching this film.
