Search
Search results
Dean (6927 KP) rated Creepshow 2 (1987) in Movies
Sep 9, 2018
Very poor
A really poor collection of 3 short horror stories. All looking very outdated and silly, the acting is terrible apart from George Kennedy in the first story. The 2nd and 3rd stories barely have a plot to mention. The animation inbetween is rather poor as well, should have stuck with Tom Savini in the mask, rather than the cartoon. There are much better horror anthologies out there!
The Marinated Meeple (1853 KP) rated Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) in Movies
Apr 1, 2018
Charlize Theron (4 more)
Tom Hardy
The Sets and the Crazy Cars
This wild conjured apocalyptic world they created.
Driving thru hell and back.
An Adrenaline ride filled with nitrous oxide, and greasepaint galone...
My wife hates this film, but I loved it.... she normally has great taste. This time I respectfully disagree...
I didn't expect much of this film and it completely blew me ou of the water, I was amazed and I'm not the only one: In a Cannes press conference for the movie, Tom Hardy apologized to George Miller for the reportedly complicated relationship between the star and the director during filming. He stated: "There was no way, I mean, I have to apologize to you because I got frustrated. There was no way George could have explained what he could see in the sand when we were out there. Because of the due diligence that was required to make everything safe and so simple, what I saw was a relentless barrage of complexities, simplified for this fairly linear story. I knew he was brilliant, but I didn't know how brilliant until I saw it. So, my first reaction was 'Oh my god, I owe George an apology for being so myopic'." Charlize Theron mentioned similar experiences where she had no idea what she was filming, up to the point where she would ask the director what the hell he was doing. In the end, seeing the finished film greatly exceeded her expectations as well.
Give it a shot... it won an Oscar for gawds sake...
plus an alternate movie poster for your enjoyment.
I didn't expect much of this film and it completely blew me ou of the water, I was amazed and I'm not the only one: In a Cannes press conference for the movie, Tom Hardy apologized to George Miller for the reportedly complicated relationship between the star and the director during filming. He stated: "There was no way, I mean, I have to apologize to you because I got frustrated. There was no way George could have explained what he could see in the sand when we were out there. Because of the due diligence that was required to make everything safe and so simple, what I saw was a relentless barrage of complexities, simplified for this fairly linear story. I knew he was brilliant, but I didn't know how brilliant until I saw it. So, my first reaction was 'Oh my god, I owe George an apology for being so myopic'." Charlize Theron mentioned similar experiences where she had no idea what she was filming, up to the point where she would ask the director what the hell he was doing. In the end, seeing the finished film greatly exceeded her expectations as well.
Give it a shot... it won an Oscar for gawds sake...
plus an alternate movie poster for your enjoyment.
Sarah (7799 KP) rated The War of the Worlds in TV
Dec 6, 2019
Wasted talent & story
I really can't understand what the BBC were thinking with this one. A great story and a really good cast, completely squandered.
The first episode started off slowly but well with quite a decent build up. Even when the martians appeared it was rather tense and exciting, with a great sense of foreboding. The problem with this is the main George & Amy storyline. Despite it being set in the Edwardian period, slightly earlier than the book (but still a lot closer than that Tom Cruise abomination) they seem to have decided to ignore the majority of the book's storyline and instead include a rather convoluted and modern storyline about George and his mistress. It's entirely unnecessary and is the main focus of the series, despite it being a complete bore. This is the main issue with the 2nd and third parts of the series, they're so dull and there's no interest or excitement because it concentrates solely on George and Amy. The martians are almost an after thought. It doesnt help either that they try and explain the subtleties and intricacies of the book with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer.
Even the cast can't save this, as they seem to have given up on trying to put in believable performances. And what was with the flitting between different time periods? Trying to include a bit of intrigue with a storytelling mechanism that has worked so well with other films but fails miserable in this, as it spoils the entire ending and resolution of the story.
A classic case of looks good, starts off well but falls completely flat. Such a disappointment.
The first episode started off slowly but well with quite a decent build up. Even when the martians appeared it was rather tense and exciting, with a great sense of foreboding. The problem with this is the main George & Amy storyline. Despite it being set in the Edwardian period, slightly earlier than the book (but still a lot closer than that Tom Cruise abomination) they seem to have decided to ignore the majority of the book's storyline and instead include a rather convoluted and modern storyline about George and his mistress. It's entirely unnecessary and is the main focus of the series, despite it being a complete bore. This is the main issue with the 2nd and third parts of the series, they're so dull and there's no interest or excitement because it concentrates solely on George and Amy. The martians are almost an after thought. It doesnt help either that they try and explain the subtleties and intricacies of the book with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer.
Even the cast can't save this, as they seem to have given up on trying to put in believable performances. And what was with the flitting between different time periods? Trying to include a bit of intrigue with a storytelling mechanism that has worked so well with other films but fails miserable in this, as it spoils the entire ending and resolution of the story.
A classic case of looks good, starts off well but falls completely flat. Such a disappointment.
Jeff Lynne recommended Full Moon Fever by Tom Petty in Music (curated)
Jeff Lynne recommended Traveling Wilburys, Vol. 1 by The Traveling Wilburys in Music (curated)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Larry Crowne (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
“Larry Crowne” is a movie (in the works since 2006) that stars Tom Hanks in the lead as Larry Crown and Julia Roberts as Mercedes Tainot, a disenchanted community college speech professor.
“Larry Crowne” tells the tale of a Navy veteran and recent divorce’ whom, after many years of tirelessly and loyally working at the same big-box store, is fired on the spot supposedly because of the fact that he does not have a college degree. Coincidentally at the same time the bank demands the money from the mortgage taken out on his home. With no options and on the advice of his next door neighbor Lamar (who tries to sell him a “free” college degree for 20 cents at his garage sale) Larry decides to enroll in community college From there the movie follows Larry as falls in love with his speech professor Dr. Mercedes Tainot (who is still married to some Internet businessman obsessed with large breasted women) while at the same time, being befriended by a “gang” of motor-scooter/vespa enthusiasts.
Now ….. normally I’m not the one to go see the stereotypical “feel good movie” of the season. Plus, I’m honestly not that big a fan of Julia Roberts. But come on ….. Personally, I cannot ever recall Tom Hanks in a bad movie and I have to admit it Julia Roberts had me laughing the minute she started talking. After the first 15 minutes of the movie, you have a pretty good idea of the general direction the movie will go in and how it will end. However, this is one of those movies where it’s more entertaining to see how the whole movie plays out despite that fact. The ensemble cast that Tom Hanks put together does an excellent job of keeping you on your seat laughing (including a hilarious performance by the great George Takei as a militant economics professor who is trying to pimp his new book very two minutes in his class). Plus, the movie does a great job keeping you focused on the story. Especially when the gang of motor-scooter enthusiasts seemingly appear out of nowhere to show him how NOT to dress like a cop and to explain the concept of “Fung Shui”.
The ensemble cast that includes Bryan Cranstson, Pam Grier, Cedric The Entertainer, Rob Riggle, Wilmer Valderama, and George Takei amongst many others supports the lead characters well.
All in all, I’d say this movie deserves 4 out of 5 stars. Not a movie you’d want to take the kids to due some sexual content and alcohol use in the movie. Definitely a great “Date Movie” though. Besides being slow at some points and it’s “predictability” I’d say it’s definitely worth your hard earned money. Go to a matinee showing or get it “on demand”.
“Larry Crowne” tells the tale of a Navy veteran and recent divorce’ whom, after many years of tirelessly and loyally working at the same big-box store, is fired on the spot supposedly because of the fact that he does not have a college degree. Coincidentally at the same time the bank demands the money from the mortgage taken out on his home. With no options and on the advice of his next door neighbor Lamar (who tries to sell him a “free” college degree for 20 cents at his garage sale) Larry decides to enroll in community college From there the movie follows Larry as falls in love with his speech professor Dr. Mercedes Tainot (who is still married to some Internet businessman obsessed with large breasted women) while at the same time, being befriended by a “gang” of motor-scooter/vespa enthusiasts.
Now ….. normally I’m not the one to go see the stereotypical “feel good movie” of the season. Plus, I’m honestly not that big a fan of Julia Roberts. But come on ….. Personally, I cannot ever recall Tom Hanks in a bad movie and I have to admit it Julia Roberts had me laughing the minute she started talking. After the first 15 minutes of the movie, you have a pretty good idea of the general direction the movie will go in and how it will end. However, this is one of those movies where it’s more entertaining to see how the whole movie plays out despite that fact. The ensemble cast that Tom Hanks put together does an excellent job of keeping you on your seat laughing (including a hilarious performance by the great George Takei as a militant economics professor who is trying to pimp his new book very two minutes in his class). Plus, the movie does a great job keeping you focused on the story. Especially when the gang of motor-scooter enthusiasts seemingly appear out of nowhere to show him how NOT to dress like a cop and to explain the concept of “Fung Shui”.
The ensemble cast that includes Bryan Cranstson, Pam Grier, Cedric The Entertainer, Rob Riggle, Wilmer Valderama, and George Takei amongst many others supports the lead characters well.
All in all, I’d say this movie deserves 4 out of 5 stars. Not a movie you’d want to take the kids to due some sexual content and alcohol use in the movie. Definitely a great “Date Movie” though. Besides being slow at some points and it’s “predictability” I’d say it’s definitely worth your hard earned money. Go to a matinee showing or get it “on demand”.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Night of the Living Dead (1968) in Movies
Oct 22, 2021
All these years later, and Night of the Living Dead still stands up so well. It has wonderful cinematography for a start. Multiple shots really stuck in my head when I was a kid, and still get me now. This is also down to the films horror. NOTLD is raw horror through and through. The half eaten face at the top of the stairs still incites such a visceral reaction in me. It's gives me unpleasant tingles every time it hits the screen. I hate it (and love it). The death-by-trowel scene is still unpleasant and uncomfortable to watch. Tom and Judy in the exploding truck is still gut wrenching. The ending is so depressingly nihilistic. The film itself may be dated, sure, but these moments and more are examples of pure horror, and are a huge part of why Night is such a pillar of the genre. It still makes me feel the same terror that I felt as a kid, and that's really something.
All of this is bolstered by a fantastic lead performance from Duane Jones, taking charge of a small cast of well written characters, backed up by a rousing music score.
Night of the Living Dead is an all timer, that saw George Romero lay the ground rules and set the tone for one of the most popular horror sub genres of all time. Long live the king.
All of this is bolstered by a fantastic lead performance from Duane Jones, taking charge of a small cast of well written characters, backed up by a rousing music score.
Night of the Living Dead is an all timer, that saw George Romero lay the ground rules and set the tone for one of the most popular horror sub genres of all time. Long live the king.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Last Christmas (2019) in Movies
Nov 16, 2019
I guess I’m not exactly the target audience for a Christmas rom-com, but I don’t usually mind them. Providing the leads have believable chemistry, there’s a good story behind it all, a few laughs and something that gives you that Christmas feel good feeling, I’m happy to watch them. Sadly though, for the most part, Last Christmas struggles to tick most of those boxes.
Emilia Clarke stars as Kate (short for Katerina, her original Yugoslav name), a 26 year old who’s struggling at life right now. Her nights are filled with one-night stands and sleeping over at friends houses, dragging her suitcase behind her the next morning as she either heads to work in a Covent Garden Christmas shop or off to an audition for a West end show. She’s also currently ignoring calls from her mum (Emma Thomson), disappointing her boss (Michelle Yeoh) and coming across as selfish and not really very likeable. It’s safe to say, she’s lost her way - “Why is my life so shit?!” she exclaims after yet another disaster happens.
And then one day, Kate notices a man gazing up at a bird outside the Christmas shop and goes outside to see what he’s doing. His name is Tom (Henry Golding) and he’s handsome and charming (but a bit wooden) and despite them turning out to have zero chemistry together, they strike up a relationship - because, y’know, this is a rom-com after all. Tom takes Kate on spontaneous walks down alleyways and into nearby pocket parks, making her look up regularly so that she can appreciate the world around her. He rides a bike everywhere, doesn’t have a mobile phone and disappears for days on end. Yet his presence and friendship appear to have a positive effect on Kate, who begins to start turning her life around.
The first half of the movie is just terrible. Badly written dialogue and characters in an attempt to try and recapture some kind of Love Actually spirit, but just failing. It even tries to cram in some Brexit references and a little bit of racism to highlight the plight of immigrants. Written by Emma Thomson and directed by Paul Feig, Last Christmas is said to be inspired by the music of George Michael although, aside from its namesake, not very much of it actually ends up featuring much in the movie.
If you’ve seen the trailer, then you may well have figured out the twist that comes towards the end of the movie. If not, then you’ll probably work it out pretty early on anyway. However, I’d be lying if I said that Last Christmas didn’t manage to hit me emotionally when the time came. It also managed to invoke some warm Christmas feels and spirit too, so not quite the complete disaster it started out as.
Emilia Clarke stars as Kate (short for Katerina, her original Yugoslav name), a 26 year old who’s struggling at life right now. Her nights are filled with one-night stands and sleeping over at friends houses, dragging her suitcase behind her the next morning as she either heads to work in a Covent Garden Christmas shop or off to an audition for a West end show. She’s also currently ignoring calls from her mum (Emma Thomson), disappointing her boss (Michelle Yeoh) and coming across as selfish and not really very likeable. It’s safe to say, she’s lost her way - “Why is my life so shit?!” she exclaims after yet another disaster happens.
And then one day, Kate notices a man gazing up at a bird outside the Christmas shop and goes outside to see what he’s doing. His name is Tom (Henry Golding) and he’s handsome and charming (but a bit wooden) and despite them turning out to have zero chemistry together, they strike up a relationship - because, y’know, this is a rom-com after all. Tom takes Kate on spontaneous walks down alleyways and into nearby pocket parks, making her look up regularly so that she can appreciate the world around her. He rides a bike everywhere, doesn’t have a mobile phone and disappears for days on end. Yet his presence and friendship appear to have a positive effect on Kate, who begins to start turning her life around.
The first half of the movie is just terrible. Badly written dialogue and characters in an attempt to try and recapture some kind of Love Actually spirit, but just failing. It even tries to cram in some Brexit references and a little bit of racism to highlight the plight of immigrants. Written by Emma Thomson and directed by Paul Feig, Last Christmas is said to be inspired by the music of George Michael although, aside from its namesake, not very much of it actually ends up featuring much in the movie.
If you’ve seen the trailer, then you may well have figured out the twist that comes towards the end of the movie. If not, then you’ll probably work it out pretty early on anyway. However, I’d be lying if I said that Last Christmas didn’t manage to hit me emotionally when the time came. It also managed to invoke some warm Christmas feels and spirit too, so not quite the complete disaster it started out as.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Letters to Ethan: A Grandfather's Legacy of Life & Love in Books
Feb 11, 2019
Right from the beginning, I found the seriousness to which the author, Tom McQueen, approaches his role as a grandfather to his grandson, Ethan, as both endearing and worthy of my respect. What he is attempting to do with the letters found in this book is a commendable goal that not many grandparents may go through the trouble to achieve. Each "chapter" of the book is actually a four-to-six page letter and headed by a quotation that applies to the topic of the letter. Each of the letters address a specific topic, such as Heroism, Risk, Integrity, Love, and Imagination, to name a few. Some of the letters also include excerpts from other sources that McQueen finds wisdom in, such as poetry or short stories like the famous story "Footprints in the Sand." Many of the letters make references to sports and sports imagery, such as citing Wayne Gretsky's accomplishments, which is certainly appropriate for most boys. The letters are also peppered with poignant memories of McQueen's and bits of history, such as the story of George Washington Carver.
It becomes apparent in the first letter that this book has a decidedly Roman Catholic slant, and many of the letters include Catholic doctrine teachings. If the reader does not prescribe to Roman Catholicism, this can be a major obstacle to enjoying this book. The other thing that bugs me throughout the text is that I can not figure out at what age the author intended his grandson to read these letters. Some of the topics are rather mature, and they would not be appropriate for a boy that is too young to receive the advice given in the letter, no matter how well-meaning it is. I also could not decipher if McQueen's grandson, Ethan, was supposed to read these letters while his grandfather was still alive or if they were meant for after he passed - again, this would make sense if the appropriate age were given for each letter.
If I ignore the obvious bias in the letters, I found much of the advice given to be relevant and useful wisdom for a young man - or woman - attaining to adulthood.
It becomes apparent in the first letter that this book has a decidedly Roman Catholic slant, and many of the letters include Catholic doctrine teachings. If the reader does not prescribe to Roman Catholicism, this can be a major obstacle to enjoying this book. The other thing that bugs me throughout the text is that I can not figure out at what age the author intended his grandson to read these letters. Some of the topics are rather mature, and they would not be appropriate for a boy that is too young to receive the advice given in the letter, no matter how well-meaning it is. I also could not decipher if McQueen's grandson, Ethan, was supposed to read these letters while his grandfather was still alive or if they were meant for after he passed - again, this would make sense if the appropriate age were given for each letter.
If I ignore the obvious bias in the letters, I found much of the advice given to be relevant and useful wisdom for a young man - or woman - attaining to adulthood.