Search
Search results
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Bat (1959) in Movies
Mar 31, 2020
The Bite
The Bat- is the fourth film adaptation of the story, which began as a 1908 novel The Circular Staircase by Mary Roberts Rinehart, which she later adapted (with Avery Hopwood) into the 1920 play The Bat. The first film version of the play was the 1926 American silent film The Bat. The film version was adapted by playwright Crane Wilbur, who also directed.
This one has Vincent Price in it, which is a huge plus in my books. He is such a excellent, fantasic and phenomenal actor. He is one of my favorites. He is also one of my favorite horror actors.
The plot: A killer called "the Bat" has claimed many lives in the small town inhabited by novelist Cornelia van Gorder (Agnes Moorehead) and her maid, Lizzie (Lenita Lane). As Cornelia implores Dr. Malcolm Wells (Vincent Price) to help her ailing maid, $1 million in the town's bank goes missing. With greed and fear reaching new heights, police Lt. Andy Anderson (Gavin Gordon) goes to Cornelia's house to investigate additional murders committed by the Bat.
Its a creepy, scary and classic movie.
This one has Vincent Price in it, which is a huge plus in my books. He is such a excellent, fantasic and phenomenal actor. He is one of my favorites. He is also one of my favorite horror actors.
The plot: A killer called "the Bat" has claimed many lives in the small town inhabited by novelist Cornelia van Gorder (Agnes Moorehead) and her maid, Lizzie (Lenita Lane). As Cornelia implores Dr. Malcolm Wells (Vincent Price) to help her ailing maid, $1 million in the town's bank goes missing. With greed and fear reaching new heights, police Lt. Andy Anderson (Gavin Gordon) goes to Cornelia's house to investigate additional murders committed by the Bat.
Its a creepy, scary and classic movie.
Leanne Crabtree (480 KP) rated Sempre (Sempre, #1) in Books
Jan 7, 2021
*Copy provided via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review*
I’ve been looking at this story for a long time, undecided on whether to read it or not. Truthfully, it sounded a bit like C.J. Roberts’ Captive in the Dark series only with slightly younger characters but I was wrong.
At the start I was a little confused. Was she dreaming or had it really happened? But in the end it didn’t really matter much as the story quickly progressed.
I felt sorry for Haven a lot, being a second generation slave and having no idea what certain things are and what some words mean must have been hard for her and gave her an innocence that I wasn’t expecting considering the life she’d had. I have to admit sometimes it made me smile, if not laugh, like the cherry coke scene. Creative thinking!
The gradual change in Haven and Carmine’s relationship grabbed me immediately and I cared what happened to them, both individually and as a couple. If a book can make me care about the characters, then I’m hooked. And I was. They were such a sweet couple with Carmine having to learn how to love someone at the same time that Haven was.
It’s like there are two parts to the story. One with Haven and Carmine away from the Mafia. And one following Vincent, Carmine’s dad, as he goes back and forth between his family and his other family: the Mafia.
Then there was the mystery surrounding him. Has he taken Haven to rescue her? Or for some darker reason? It was all very intriguing.
I just HAVE to mention Dominic. He was awesome and I really liked the way he treated Haven from the moment she arrived at the house.
This drew me in completely and I couldn’t stop thinking about it when I put it down and would quickly pick it back up again. It was long–500+ pages–but it was completely captivating and I cant wait to read the second book, Sempre: Redemption.
I’ve been looking at this story for a long time, undecided on whether to read it or not. Truthfully, it sounded a bit like C.J. Roberts’ Captive in the Dark series only with slightly younger characters but I was wrong.
At the start I was a little confused. Was she dreaming or had it really happened? But in the end it didn’t really matter much as the story quickly progressed.
I felt sorry for Haven a lot, being a second generation slave and having no idea what certain things are and what some words mean must have been hard for her and gave her an innocence that I wasn’t expecting considering the life she’d had. I have to admit sometimes it made me smile, if not laugh, like the cherry coke scene. Creative thinking!
The gradual change in Haven and Carmine’s relationship grabbed me immediately and I cared what happened to them, both individually and as a couple. If a book can make me care about the characters, then I’m hooked. And I was. They were such a sweet couple with Carmine having to learn how to love someone at the same time that Haven was.
It’s like there are two parts to the story. One with Haven and Carmine away from the Mafia. And one following Vincent, Carmine’s dad, as he goes back and forth between his family and his other family: the Mafia.
Then there was the mystery surrounding him. Has he taken Haven to rescue her? Or for some darker reason? It was all very intriguing.
I just HAVE to mention Dominic. He was awesome and I really liked the way he treated Haven from the moment she arrived at the house.
This drew me in completely and I couldn’t stop thinking about it when I put it down and would quickly pick it back up again. It was long–500+ pages–but it was completely captivating and I cant wait to read the second book, Sempre: Redemption.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Flatliners (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
The undiscovered country… which they shouldn’t have returned to.
The movies have depicted the hereafter in varied ways over the years. From the bleached white warehouses of Powell and Pressburger’s “A Matter of Life and Death” in 1946 and Warren Beatty’s “Heaven Can Wait” in 1978 to – for me – the peak of the game: Vincent Ward’s mawkish but gorgeously rendered oil-paint version of heaven in 1998’s “What Dreams May Come”. Joel Schmacher’s 1990’s “Flatliners” saw a set of “brat pack” movie names of the day (including Kevin Bacon, Julia Roberts, William Baldwin and Kiefer Sutherland) as experimenting trainee doctors, cheating death to experience the afterlife and getting more than they bargained for. The depictions of the afterlife were unmemorable: in that I don’t remember them much! (I think there was some sort of spooky tree involved, but that’s about it!)
But the concept was sufficiently enticing – who isn’t a little bit intrigued by the question of “what’s beyond”? – that Cross Creek Pictures thought it worthy of dusting off and giving it another outing in pursuit of dirty lucre. But unfortunately this offering adds little to the property’s reputation.
In this version, the lead role is headed up by Ellen Page (“Inception”) who is a great actress… too good for this stuff. Also in that category is Diego Luna, who really made an impact in “Rogue One” but here has little to work with in terms of backstory. The remaining three doctors – Nina Dobrev as “the sexy one”; James Norton (“War and Peace”) as “the posh boy” and Kiersey Clemons as the “cute but repressed one”, all have even less backstory and struggle to make a great impact.
Still struggling to get the high score on Angry Birds: from left to right Ray (Diego Luna), Sophia (Kiersey Clemons), Marlo (Nina Dobrev), Courtney (Ellen Page) and Jamie (James Norton).
Also putting in an appearance, as the one link from the original film, is Kiefer Sutherland as a senior member of the teaching staff. But he’s not playing the same character (that WOULD have been a bloody miracle!) and although Sutherland adds gravitas he really is given criminally little to do. What was director Niels Arden Oplev (“The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”) thinking?
In terms of the story, it’s pretty much a re-hash of Peter Filardi’s original, with Ben Ripley (“Source Code”) adding a few minor tweaks to the screenplay to update it for the current generation. But I will levy the same criticism of this film as I levied at the recent Stephen King adaptation of “It”: for horror to work well it need to obey some decent ‘rules of physics’ and although most of the scenes work (since a lot of the “action” is sensibly based inside the character’s heads) there are the occasional linkages to the ‘real world’ that generate a “WTF???” response. A seemingly indestructible Mini car (which is also clearly untraceable by the police!) and a knife incident at the dockside are two cases in point.
Is there anything good to say about this film? Well, there are certainly a few tense moments that make the hairs on your neck at least start to stand to attention. But these are few and far between, amongst a sea of movie ‘meh’. It’s certainly not going to be the worst film I see this year, since at least I wasn’t completely bored for the two hours. But I won’t remember this one in a few weeks. As a summary in the form of a “Black Adder” quote, it’s all a bit like a broken pencil….. pointless.
But the concept was sufficiently enticing – who isn’t a little bit intrigued by the question of “what’s beyond”? – that Cross Creek Pictures thought it worthy of dusting off and giving it another outing in pursuit of dirty lucre. But unfortunately this offering adds little to the property’s reputation.
In this version, the lead role is headed up by Ellen Page (“Inception”) who is a great actress… too good for this stuff. Also in that category is Diego Luna, who really made an impact in “Rogue One” but here has little to work with in terms of backstory. The remaining three doctors – Nina Dobrev as “the sexy one”; James Norton (“War and Peace”) as “the posh boy” and Kiersey Clemons as the “cute but repressed one”, all have even less backstory and struggle to make a great impact.
Still struggling to get the high score on Angry Birds: from left to right Ray (Diego Luna), Sophia (Kiersey Clemons), Marlo (Nina Dobrev), Courtney (Ellen Page) and Jamie (James Norton).
Also putting in an appearance, as the one link from the original film, is Kiefer Sutherland as a senior member of the teaching staff. But he’s not playing the same character (that WOULD have been a bloody miracle!) and although Sutherland adds gravitas he really is given criminally little to do. What was director Niels Arden Oplev (“The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”) thinking?
In terms of the story, it’s pretty much a re-hash of Peter Filardi’s original, with Ben Ripley (“Source Code”) adding a few minor tweaks to the screenplay to update it for the current generation. But I will levy the same criticism of this film as I levied at the recent Stephen King adaptation of “It”: for horror to work well it need to obey some decent ‘rules of physics’ and although most of the scenes work (since a lot of the “action” is sensibly based inside the character’s heads) there are the occasional linkages to the ‘real world’ that generate a “WTF???” response. A seemingly indestructible Mini car (which is also clearly untraceable by the police!) and a knife incident at the dockside are two cases in point.
Is there anything good to say about this film? Well, there are certainly a few tense moments that make the hairs on your neck at least start to stand to attention. But these are few and far between, amongst a sea of movie ‘meh’. It’s certainly not going to be the worst film I see this year, since at least I wasn’t completely bored for the two hours. But I won’t remember this one in a few weeks. As a summary in the form of a “Black Adder” quote, it’s all a bit like a broken pencil….. pointless.