Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated WALL-E (2008) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
To be honest, I didn’t put much faith in a movie about a robot who could only say, “Wa-AA-lleee….” Especially one that’s been by himself for 700 years. Then again, the last Pixar release of talking machines wasn’t exactly a stellar production, either. Give me talking rats or talking fish, at least they had personality. But talking cars? C’mon, now. But maybe Pixar learned from its mistake of verbosity in Cars and decided limited dialogue would bring back the luster of Pixar’s blinding three dimensional success. If that’s how WALL*E came about, then kudos to Pixar. WALL*E not only kept me fascinated, it made me giggle throughout and left me sighing.
In this new offering from the same team who brought you Finding Nemo, The Incredibles and Ratatouille, Earth is a virtual wasteland, and no longer inhabited by humans. The humans are all aboard a space colony called Axiom, pampered and waited on in robot-assisted existence. Left behind is WALL*E, a hardworking Waste Allocation Load Lifter – Earth class robot, has done what he was programmed to do, compact trash and stack it neatly, cleaning the planet one trash cube at a time. Apparently the passing of years all alone has given this clunky, rusty, dented and creaky machine, time to develop a sense of curiosity, a playful personality, and a love for “Hello, Dolly” showtunes and choreography. His best friend is a cockroach, he’s managed to amass a treasure trove of junk, is seemingly content, albeit lonely.
Then along came EVE. A sleek, state-of-the art egg-shaped robot deposited on earth by an Axiom spacecraft to scan its surroundings as an Extra-terrestrial Vegetation Evaluator. WALL*E is instantly enthralled and admires EVE’s speed, versatility and gracefulness from a tentative distance. She exudes efficiency and focus and comes with a laser she’s not afraid to use. EVE has a classified directive and WALL*E, after he’s overcome his fear of her laser, befriends her and inadvertently helps EVE achieve her goal. EVE has to return to the Axiom to report her findings, but WALL*E is desperate to build on this new found friendship. Who can blame him? If you’d been alone for 700 years, wouldn’t you be reluctant to say good bye to a new friend? So WALL*E becomes an accidental tourist of the galaxy, embarking on a thrilling adventure that makes him an anxious stowaway aboard a ship of advanced machines and lazy humans.
Under the direction of by Academy Award(r)-winning writer-director Andrew Stanton, the gifted storytellers and artists who brought charm and innovation to The Incredibles and Ratatouille, elevated their game by enabling WALL*E to convey in beeps and tones and soulful eyes a gamut of emotions that captivates the viewer. Limited dialogue was definitely on the menu, at least between robots. Which makes WALL-E all the more enchanting. It’s up to the viewer to draw on simple exchanges and the robots’ varying intonations of each other’s names to interpret their growing affection for one another.
With its breathtaking animation and deft rendering of heartwarming characters, CGI-animated features don’t get much better than this.
A fantastic voyage with an eco-friendly warning wrapped in a poignant love story, WALL*E restored my faith in Pixar’s well-deserved, acclaim.
In this new offering from the same team who brought you Finding Nemo, The Incredibles and Ratatouille, Earth is a virtual wasteland, and no longer inhabited by humans. The humans are all aboard a space colony called Axiom, pampered and waited on in robot-assisted existence. Left behind is WALL*E, a hardworking Waste Allocation Load Lifter – Earth class robot, has done what he was programmed to do, compact trash and stack it neatly, cleaning the planet one trash cube at a time. Apparently the passing of years all alone has given this clunky, rusty, dented and creaky machine, time to develop a sense of curiosity, a playful personality, and a love for “Hello, Dolly” showtunes and choreography. His best friend is a cockroach, he’s managed to amass a treasure trove of junk, is seemingly content, albeit lonely.
Then along came EVE. A sleek, state-of-the art egg-shaped robot deposited on earth by an Axiom spacecraft to scan its surroundings as an Extra-terrestrial Vegetation Evaluator. WALL*E is instantly enthralled and admires EVE’s speed, versatility and gracefulness from a tentative distance. She exudes efficiency and focus and comes with a laser she’s not afraid to use. EVE has a classified directive and WALL*E, after he’s overcome his fear of her laser, befriends her and inadvertently helps EVE achieve her goal. EVE has to return to the Axiom to report her findings, but WALL*E is desperate to build on this new found friendship. Who can blame him? If you’d been alone for 700 years, wouldn’t you be reluctant to say good bye to a new friend? So WALL*E becomes an accidental tourist of the galaxy, embarking on a thrilling adventure that makes him an anxious stowaway aboard a ship of advanced machines and lazy humans.
Under the direction of by Academy Award(r)-winning writer-director Andrew Stanton, the gifted storytellers and artists who brought charm and innovation to The Incredibles and Ratatouille, elevated their game by enabling WALL*E to convey in beeps and tones and soulful eyes a gamut of emotions that captivates the viewer. Limited dialogue was definitely on the menu, at least between robots. Which makes WALL-E all the more enchanting. It’s up to the viewer to draw on simple exchanges and the robots’ varying intonations of each other’s names to interpret their growing affection for one another.
With its breathtaking animation and deft rendering of heartwarming characters, CGI-animated features don’t get much better than this.
A fantastic voyage with an eco-friendly warning wrapped in a poignant love story, WALL*E restored my faith in Pixar’s well-deserved, acclaim.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Unfriended: Dark Web (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
It seems no matter where you look these days, there’s some reference to the “Dark Web”. These references range from credit card or Social Security numbers being traded to all sorts of heinous acts that would not only be frowned upon but outright illegal in most countries. The Dark Web and all the nefarious secrets it holds sets the stage for the stand-alone sequel to Blumhouse Productions original film Unfriended.
Unfriended: Dark Web stars Colin Woodell as Matias, a man in his early twenties who is hard at work on an App that he hopes will allow him to better communicate with his deaf girlfriend Amaya (Stephanie Nogueras). His dedication to the app and his insistence on utilizing technology versus simply learning sign language has driven a wedge in their relationship and that lack of ability to communicate plays an important role in the film.
On what seems to be a typical game night of Cards Against Humanity (played on Skype because it’s too difficult for the gang to meet in person), Matias reveals that he has purchased a “new” laptop off Craigslist. While it is clearer and much faster than his previous computer, it regularly hangs and crashes while they are trying to play the game. While investigating the cause of the hang-ups, Matias uncovers a treasure trove of films that are hidden on the laptop. His curiosity gets the best of him and he begins to watch the films only to realize that he has fallen into a den of horror where people pay a lot of money to kill people off in very specific ways. Unfortunately, not only is he sharing what he has discovered with all his friends, but there are also other participants watching his every move.
Unfriended: Dark Web uses much of the same camera tricks that the original used. The entire movie is shot from the perspective of the audience watching the events unfold on the screen as if each were on their own laptop. The action takes place over Facebook Messenger, Skype, and Google and the fact that most people are familiar with these tools helps the audience feel like they are part of the events even more. By the end of the movie it is clear that you are as much of a participant in the horror that unfolds as the individuals participating via the Dark Web. I enjoyed the use of the various technologies to draw the viewer in as much as I did in the original Unfriended. It’s a very interesting and unique way to tell a story.
Unfriended: Dark Web certainly kept my interest throughout the film. I felt it took a little while to find it’s footing, but like a roller coaster with an extremely high climb, once you get over the hump it’s an exhilarating and fulfilling ride. While the technology used may be a bit exaggerated, it is realistic enough to give you that uneasy feeling that this could really happen. While it would take the uttermost bad luck for the events to happen in the perfect way as they do in the film, I enjoyed watching it all unfold. Even though I am still more afraid of my credit card information being sold on the Dark Web than the events of Unfriended happening, I would recommend this film to anyone who’s a fan of the genre.
What I liked: Interesting premise, Unique perspective
What I liked less: Characters were a bit too stereotypical, Really no connection to the first film other than the name
Unfriended: Dark Web stars Colin Woodell as Matias, a man in his early twenties who is hard at work on an App that he hopes will allow him to better communicate with his deaf girlfriend Amaya (Stephanie Nogueras). His dedication to the app and his insistence on utilizing technology versus simply learning sign language has driven a wedge in their relationship and that lack of ability to communicate plays an important role in the film.
On what seems to be a typical game night of Cards Against Humanity (played on Skype because it’s too difficult for the gang to meet in person), Matias reveals that he has purchased a “new” laptop off Craigslist. While it is clearer and much faster than his previous computer, it regularly hangs and crashes while they are trying to play the game. While investigating the cause of the hang-ups, Matias uncovers a treasure trove of films that are hidden on the laptop. His curiosity gets the best of him and he begins to watch the films only to realize that he has fallen into a den of horror where people pay a lot of money to kill people off in very specific ways. Unfortunately, not only is he sharing what he has discovered with all his friends, but there are also other participants watching his every move.
Unfriended: Dark Web uses much of the same camera tricks that the original used. The entire movie is shot from the perspective of the audience watching the events unfold on the screen as if each were on their own laptop. The action takes place over Facebook Messenger, Skype, and Google and the fact that most people are familiar with these tools helps the audience feel like they are part of the events even more. By the end of the movie it is clear that you are as much of a participant in the horror that unfolds as the individuals participating via the Dark Web. I enjoyed the use of the various technologies to draw the viewer in as much as I did in the original Unfriended. It’s a very interesting and unique way to tell a story.
Unfriended: Dark Web certainly kept my interest throughout the film. I felt it took a little while to find it’s footing, but like a roller coaster with an extremely high climb, once you get over the hump it’s an exhilarating and fulfilling ride. While the technology used may be a bit exaggerated, it is realistic enough to give you that uneasy feeling that this could really happen. While it would take the uttermost bad luck for the events to happen in the perfect way as they do in the film, I enjoyed watching it all unfold. Even though I am still more afraid of my credit card information being sold on the Dark Web than the events of Unfriended happening, I would recommend this film to anyone who’s a fan of the genre.
What I liked: Interesting premise, Unique perspective
What I liked less: Characters were a bit too stereotypical, Really no connection to the first film other than the name
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated As Above So Below (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The film “As above so below” is part horror, part treasure adventure, and
all shaky cam. This found-footage film could also be more aptly titled as
“Lara Croft goes to hell.” The story centers around an excitable young
adventurer with a British accent named Scarlett on a search for the
mythological Philosopher’s Stone. A self-professed scholar of alchemy, she
hopes proving that the stone exists will fulfill her father’s legacy and
prove to the world that he wasn’t crazy. This search leads her and her
partners through the secret areas of the haunted catacombs of Pairs, France
into what could be hell itself. The movie starts with her traveling to Iran
for clues on the location of the Philosopher’s Stone.
The action opens without introductions which I enjoyed, as it gets right
into the action and sets the a good pace for the rest of the film. After
retrieving clues to the location of the stone and narrowly avoiding
security and a cave-in in Iran, our heroine sets off to Paris, France to
gather the rest of the crew for her adventure (the rest of our films
characters). These characters include her old friend Benji, a translator, a
group of French miscreants: Papillion (the leader), Zed and Souxie (the
Banshee, no kidding) all of whom are experts on the secret underground
catacombs. Her loyal documentarian George rounds out the crew who has
followed her around since the film’s opening shot.
Up until this point, the horror element of this film is non-existent. Once
the crew journey into the secret catacombs is when things begin to get
eerie. Plot and circumstance is good and all, but it’s a horror movie, is
it scary? Well, I wasn’t scared at all, neither was my wife whom I saw the
movie with. I’d call it more of a psychological thriller, a slight one at
that. Lots of supernatural happenings occur in the caverns akin to what
you’d find in a haunted house movie. Things like phone’s ringing
inexplicably in an area devoid of electricity and hundreds of feet below
the ground, spooky ghost like figures chanting occult hymns, and dead
drowned children. There isn’t much gore in this film, the little found is
reserved for the last 3rd of the movie. Some fear and wince inducing
moments are supplied via claustrophobia as the group squeezes themselves
through tight corridors and underwater channels. They did a pretty good job
of getting your heart racing. These scenes were reminiscent of a greater
horror entry “The Descent.” If you’ve seen that film, then you know what to
expect when it comes to the 1st person moments of claustrophobia.
Once in the catacombs what follows is a maze of twists and turns and
strange occurrences as the crew tries to solve the mystery of the hidden
Philosopher’s Stone as one by one the crew members get killed off in their
attempt to escape the demonic maze of underground tunnels. As for the
ending? Well prepare to be underwhelmed. The definitive worst part of the
film is its ending. It is so mundane and handled extremely poorly as to
come to an abrupt and seemingly rushed finish without any sense of
accomplishment or endearment to any of the characters or what they have
been through. Although they don’t all make it out alive (naturally this is
a horror film) those that do give off the impression of a group that has
just passed out of the end of a haunted house maze similar to those at the
upcoming Halloween Horror Nights at Universal Studios.
all shaky cam. This found-footage film could also be more aptly titled as
“Lara Croft goes to hell.” The story centers around an excitable young
adventurer with a British accent named Scarlett on a search for the
mythological Philosopher’s Stone. A self-professed scholar of alchemy, she
hopes proving that the stone exists will fulfill her father’s legacy and
prove to the world that he wasn’t crazy. This search leads her and her
partners through the secret areas of the haunted catacombs of Pairs, France
into what could be hell itself. The movie starts with her traveling to Iran
for clues on the location of the Philosopher’s Stone.
The action opens without introductions which I enjoyed, as it gets right
into the action and sets the a good pace for the rest of the film. After
retrieving clues to the location of the stone and narrowly avoiding
security and a cave-in in Iran, our heroine sets off to Paris, France to
gather the rest of the crew for her adventure (the rest of our films
characters). These characters include her old friend Benji, a translator, a
group of French miscreants: Papillion (the leader), Zed and Souxie (the
Banshee, no kidding) all of whom are experts on the secret underground
catacombs. Her loyal documentarian George rounds out the crew who has
followed her around since the film’s opening shot.
Up until this point, the horror element of this film is non-existent. Once
the crew journey into the secret catacombs is when things begin to get
eerie. Plot and circumstance is good and all, but it’s a horror movie, is
it scary? Well, I wasn’t scared at all, neither was my wife whom I saw the
movie with. I’d call it more of a psychological thriller, a slight one at
that. Lots of supernatural happenings occur in the caverns akin to what
you’d find in a haunted house movie. Things like phone’s ringing
inexplicably in an area devoid of electricity and hundreds of feet below
the ground, spooky ghost like figures chanting occult hymns, and dead
drowned children. There isn’t much gore in this film, the little found is
reserved for the last 3rd of the movie. Some fear and wince inducing
moments are supplied via claustrophobia as the group squeezes themselves
through tight corridors and underwater channels. They did a pretty good job
of getting your heart racing. These scenes were reminiscent of a greater
horror entry “The Descent.” If you’ve seen that film, then you know what to
expect when it comes to the 1st person moments of claustrophobia.
Once in the catacombs what follows is a maze of twists and turns and
strange occurrences as the crew tries to solve the mystery of the hidden
Philosopher’s Stone as one by one the crew members get killed off in their
attempt to escape the demonic maze of underground tunnels. As for the
ending? Well prepare to be underwhelmed. The definitive worst part of the
film is its ending. It is so mundane and handled extremely poorly as to
come to an abrupt and seemingly rushed finish without any sense of
accomplishment or endearment to any of the characters or what they have
been through. Although they don’t all make it out alive (naturally this is
a horror film) those that do give off the impression of a group that has
just passed out of the end of a haunted house maze similar to those at the
upcoming Halloween Horror Nights at Universal Studios.
Jack and the Beanstalk by Nosy Crow
Book and Games
App
Welcome to Jack and the Beanstalk - Unlock the Story! Our Jack and the Beanstalk app blurs the...
Comix Zone Classic
Games, Entertainment and Stickers
App
Enter the Comix Zone, in SEGA's classic arcade-style beat 'em up, now available on mobile for the...
Masha The Dog - My Virtual Pet Game
Games, Entertainment and Stickers
App
Hey! Did you know that talking friends have a new crew member? Masha The Dog is a new my virtual pet...
Ovia Baby Development Tracker
Medical and Health & Fitness
App
***The must-have app for first-time moms and parents everywhere*** Ovia Parenting is a completely...
Mushrooms LITE
Reference and Book
App
The ultimate mushroom field guide for your pocket! +++ 300 species - 2000 images - 2...
Evangelical Lutheran Hymnal
Music and Book
App
Hymnal for the Evangelical Lutheran A collection of over 280 of your favorite hymns with full...
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Titanic (1997) in Movies
Feb 5, 2021
Shame about the romance
Film #13 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Titanic
Titanic is a rather divisive film. There are many that absolutely love it, the creators of this list among them I don’t doubt. And then there are those that can’t stand it, despite it’s 11 Oscar wins. When it was first released, Titanic’s popularity was immense and it was all the rage at my high school. At that time I loved it like everyone else, but over the years I’ve grown to notice its flaws as well.
Titanic is another epic from the mind of James Cameron and unsurprisingly tells the real life story behind the sinking of the Titanic in 1912. As the true story wasn’t enough, the sinking is shown from the point of view of a love story between Rose Dewitt Bukater (Kate Winslet) and Jack Dawson (Leonardo DiCaprio). In 1996, treasure hunter Brock Lovett (Bill Paxton) and his team are searching the wreckage of the Titanic for a rare diamond and instead come across a preserved drawing of Rose, who meets with Brock and tells the story of her experiences onboard. These experiences involve a class divide, a fiancé with anger management issues (Billy Zane) and some nice (Kathy Bates) and not very nice (Frances Fisher) female aristocrats.
While I can understand why Cameron has intertwined a romance into this real life tragedy, for me it’s this story that lessens the impact of such a horrific tale and makes this into not quite the masterpiece he wanted it to be. There are the obvious plot holes and irrational actions – the hugely memorable water door scene that could blatantly fit more than one person, and the motives for keeping a invaluable diamond hidden for 80+ years only to throw it away in the ocean – are just two of the laughably bad scenes in this. Paired with a sometimes dodgy script (there’s a scene where Rose says “Jack” over half a dozen times in less than a minute) and some cheesy exposition and narration from the older Rose, do not make for an endearing story.
However if you can ignore the romance and poor fictional story, the rest of Titanic is an impressive bit of filmmaking. From the opening shots featuring real life footage of the actual wreckage of the Titanic to the effects used to bring the ship to life, they are truly stunning. You can really appreciate the love and care that has gone in to making this film, and the cinematography is faultless. Water is not an easy element to film yet James Cameron has mastered it with ease and including shots of the real wreckage only adds to the emotions that this evokes, especially as there are a lot of facts interlaced within the romance – the band continuing to play despite impending death is particularly moving. The cast too are strong despite the sometimes questionable material they have to work with. This is undoubtedly the film that made both Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet megastars in their own rights, although for me I much preferred the more low key performances from the likes of Kathy Bates, Bernard Hill (as Captain Smith) and Victor Garber (as ship builder Thomas Andrews).
Titanic is not perfect. It is a drawn out and overly long romance set aboard a disaster movie and it can’t justify being longer than 3 hours. However despite it’s flaws, it is still a masterpiece in filmmaking and truly an epic film.
Titanic is a rather divisive film. There are many that absolutely love it, the creators of this list among them I don’t doubt. And then there are those that can’t stand it, despite it’s 11 Oscar wins. When it was first released, Titanic’s popularity was immense and it was all the rage at my high school. At that time I loved it like everyone else, but over the years I’ve grown to notice its flaws as well.
Titanic is another epic from the mind of James Cameron and unsurprisingly tells the real life story behind the sinking of the Titanic in 1912. As the true story wasn’t enough, the sinking is shown from the point of view of a love story between Rose Dewitt Bukater (Kate Winslet) and Jack Dawson (Leonardo DiCaprio). In 1996, treasure hunter Brock Lovett (Bill Paxton) and his team are searching the wreckage of the Titanic for a rare diamond and instead come across a preserved drawing of Rose, who meets with Brock and tells the story of her experiences onboard. These experiences involve a class divide, a fiancé with anger management issues (Billy Zane) and some nice (Kathy Bates) and not very nice (Frances Fisher) female aristocrats.
While I can understand why Cameron has intertwined a romance into this real life tragedy, for me it’s this story that lessens the impact of such a horrific tale and makes this into not quite the masterpiece he wanted it to be. There are the obvious plot holes and irrational actions – the hugely memorable water door scene that could blatantly fit more than one person, and the motives for keeping a invaluable diamond hidden for 80+ years only to throw it away in the ocean – are just two of the laughably bad scenes in this. Paired with a sometimes dodgy script (there’s a scene where Rose says “Jack” over half a dozen times in less than a minute) and some cheesy exposition and narration from the older Rose, do not make for an endearing story.
However if you can ignore the romance and poor fictional story, the rest of Titanic is an impressive bit of filmmaking. From the opening shots featuring real life footage of the actual wreckage of the Titanic to the effects used to bring the ship to life, they are truly stunning. You can really appreciate the love and care that has gone in to making this film, and the cinematography is faultless. Water is not an easy element to film yet James Cameron has mastered it with ease and including shots of the real wreckage only adds to the emotions that this evokes, especially as there are a lot of facts interlaced within the romance – the band continuing to play despite impending death is particularly moving. The cast too are strong despite the sometimes questionable material they have to work with. This is undoubtedly the film that made both Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet megastars in their own rights, although for me I much preferred the more low key performances from the likes of Kathy Bates, Bernard Hill (as Captain Smith) and Victor Garber (as ship builder Thomas Andrews).
Titanic is not perfect. It is a drawn out and overly long romance set aboard a disaster movie and it can’t justify being longer than 3 hours. However despite it’s flaws, it is still a masterpiece in filmmaking and truly an epic film.
