Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Monster Trucks (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
It’s safe to say that movies nowadays are either remakes of beloved classic movies, based off a book, or are a sequel. Original ideas and story lines are few and far between. When I first heard about this so-called movie Monster Trucks, I thought it was going to be about those hug trucks you see at Monster Jam shows driving over cars with their loud engines entertaining crowds. This film is far from anything of the sort. It’s based off the idea from a 4 year old about monster trucks actually having monsters in the trucks.
Set in a small oil drilling town in North Dakota, Tripp (Lucas Till), a troubled high school student, befriends an extraterrestrial squid-like creature that takes up residence in the hood of Tripp’s truck. After an accident occurs at a nearby drilling site displacing this creature, it doesn’t take long for the oil company to realize if they don’t locate this creature, they will have to cease drilling which affects their bottom line. With the help of his friend Meredith (Jane Levy), Tripp realizes he must take his new friend back to his home before the villainous oil company CEO ( Rob Lowe) catches them.
If you take the movie for what it is: trucks, monsters, friends, and good guy/bad guys-it’s an entertaining film with some great laugh out loud moments that also attempts to tug at the heartstrings from a pair of unlikely friends. Dig deeper and try to analyze every piece of the movie, you’ll only see the outlandish, unrealistic, and far fetch concept with underdeveloped character relationships. All in all, I enjoyed the film. The friendship between Tripp and the creature he named Creech was similar to that of Elliott and E.T. with less drama. It brought me back to my childhood. It taught my son the meaning of friendship, sacrifice, and loyalty.
Set in a small oil drilling town in North Dakota, Tripp (Lucas Till), a troubled high school student, befriends an extraterrestrial squid-like creature that takes up residence in the hood of Tripp’s truck. After an accident occurs at a nearby drilling site displacing this creature, it doesn’t take long for the oil company to realize if they don’t locate this creature, they will have to cease drilling which affects their bottom line. With the help of his friend Meredith (Jane Levy), Tripp realizes he must take his new friend back to his home before the villainous oil company CEO ( Rob Lowe) catches them.
If you take the movie for what it is: trucks, monsters, friends, and good guy/bad guys-it’s an entertaining film with some great laugh out loud moments that also attempts to tug at the heartstrings from a pair of unlikely friends. Dig deeper and try to analyze every piece of the movie, you’ll only see the outlandish, unrealistic, and far fetch concept with underdeveloped character relationships. All in all, I enjoyed the film. The friendship between Tripp and the creature he named Creech was similar to that of Elliott and E.T. with less drama. It brought me back to my childhood. It taught my son the meaning of friendship, sacrifice, and loyalty.
Merissa (11787 KP) rated Shiver (Unbreakable Bonds #1) in Books
Jun 29, 2018
Shiver (Unbreakable Bonds #1) by Jocelynn Drake & Rinda Elliott
Shiver is the first book in the Unbreakable Bonds series, and I have just found myself a whole new series that I would like. No, actually, scrap that. I don't want this series, I NEED it!!!
This story is about Lucas and Andrei, self-made millionaire and bodyguard. This book is serious and yet also amusing. They both make a comment about how corny their relationship is, a film was even made about it. This made me chuckle out loud, even as I was concerned about what was going to happen next. I love Lucas - his strength, his friendships, and how he isn't prepared to let others do things for him that he isn't prepared to do himself. He is also an arrogant, high-handed jerk at times, but will admit to when he's wrong. As for Andrei, he is a sweetie. Okay, so that may be the wrong word to describe an underground fighter/bodyguard, but he is. These two have a rocky relationship with a HFN ending, but their relationship is very strong and I can't wait to see where it goes.
The mystery side was enough to keep me guessing (although I'm happy to report my instincts were correct lol). There was plenty of action, as well as action between the sheets. Although the main focus of this book was Lucas, you also get a good glimpse of the others and potential partners for them. As for Rowe, I both want to and don't want to read his, because I think my heart might get broken before I get a HEA!
Excellently written, with no editing or grammatical errors that disrupted my reading flow, I adored this book. The dialogue flowed and felt completely natural whilst reading. I was intrigued and enthralled, and thoroughly loved every word. Absolutely recommended by me.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
This story is about Lucas and Andrei, self-made millionaire and bodyguard. This book is serious and yet also amusing. They both make a comment about how corny their relationship is, a film was even made about it. This made me chuckle out loud, even as I was concerned about what was going to happen next. I love Lucas - his strength, his friendships, and how he isn't prepared to let others do things for him that he isn't prepared to do himself. He is also an arrogant, high-handed jerk at times, but will admit to when he's wrong. As for Andrei, he is a sweetie. Okay, so that may be the wrong word to describe an underground fighter/bodyguard, but he is. These two have a rocky relationship with a HFN ending, but their relationship is very strong and I can't wait to see where it goes.
The mystery side was enough to keep me guessing (although I'm happy to report my instincts were correct lol). There was plenty of action, as well as action between the sheets. Although the main focus of this book was Lucas, you also get a good glimpse of the others and potential partners for them. As for Rowe, I both want to and don't want to read his, because I think my heart might get broken before I get a HEA!
Excellently written, with no editing or grammatical errors that disrupted my reading flow, I adored this book. The dialogue flowed and felt completely natural whilst reading. I was intrigued and enthralled, and thoroughly loved every word. Absolutely recommended by me.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Word Drops: A Sprinkling of Linguistic Curiosities
Book
If you're logofascinated, you are literally spellbound by language. This surprising compendium of...
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Trumbo (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
What is it that makes, not a great, but even a good biopic? It is certainly no enviable task, trying to condense decades of a person’s life into a mere two hours. Choosing what to keep and what to leave, stringing events together so that they feel as though they are one complete narrative opposed to a series of vignettes. And then there are the inevitable purists who will write off the entire product based on a single detail either left out or composited due to running time or budgetary restrictions. Over the years, I have found myself wrestling with my opinion of Braveheart. Do I enjoy it for its epic qualities, or do I cast it aside as the wretched historical inaccuracies fly in the face of what is one of the most important times in a country’s past?
The answer is simply, and stolen from another great historical epic, are you not entertained? Film can and should be powerful and informative. It can and should influence our thinking and encourage an emotional response, but above all, it should entertain. Trumbo does all of the above, ticks all the necessary boxes on the list of what makes a great biopic and whatever historical inaccuracies lie within be damned. Director Jay Roach, writer John McNamara and an ensemble so good it has to be seen to be believed have made, if not the best biopic of the year (that distinction still stays with Steve Jobs for now), then certainly the most enjoyable.
Where I find myself in reviewing Trumbo is trying not to sound monotonous in singing its high praises. Whether you’re interested in a message or not, because there is a good one in there, it’s a film that demands to be seen just on the strength of the cohesiveness that comes from the writing, the acting and (I still can’t believe I’m about to write this about the man who made all three Austin Powers movies) the directing.
I could prattle on endlessly about how overwhelmingly good this cast is, but the names speak for themselves. Bryan Cranston showcases that he is not just the best thing on television, but also a big-screen powerhouse. Helen Mirren, in her inimitable fashion and with beautiful understatement, is a force to be reckoned with, seething venom and self-righteousness. Louis C.K. finally breaks out of his stand-up comic persona to give a truly heartfelt performance played with surprisingly restrained vulnerability. The chemistry between him and Bryan Cranston will no doubt leave you wanting more. And John Goodman… well, it’s John Goodman. He continues to prove that no matter how small a part he has to play, it will stay with you long after you’ve left the theater. Hands down, and these are only four out of a dozen terrific performances, there hasn’t been an ensemble this stunning since L.A. Confidential.
It should also be mentioned that Michael Stuhlbarg, David James Elliott and Dean O’Gorman, who portray Edward G. Robinson, John Wayne and Kirk Douglas respectively, are unquestionably destined to go down as the unsung heroes of Trumbo. Their efforts, not just to imitate but to fully realize these Hollywood stars of a by-gone era, are a further complement to inspired casting and commitment to honoring the lives of the people portrayed on screen.
In short (and well done for making it this far through monotonous and truly well-deserved praise), if you have to see one film this Thanksgiving season that doesn’t star Tom Hardy as England’s notorious Kray brothers, see Trumbo.
The answer is simply, and stolen from another great historical epic, are you not entertained? Film can and should be powerful and informative. It can and should influence our thinking and encourage an emotional response, but above all, it should entertain. Trumbo does all of the above, ticks all the necessary boxes on the list of what makes a great biopic and whatever historical inaccuracies lie within be damned. Director Jay Roach, writer John McNamara and an ensemble so good it has to be seen to be believed have made, if not the best biopic of the year (that distinction still stays with Steve Jobs for now), then certainly the most enjoyable.
Where I find myself in reviewing Trumbo is trying not to sound monotonous in singing its high praises. Whether you’re interested in a message or not, because there is a good one in there, it’s a film that demands to be seen just on the strength of the cohesiveness that comes from the writing, the acting and (I still can’t believe I’m about to write this about the man who made all three Austin Powers movies) the directing.
I could prattle on endlessly about how overwhelmingly good this cast is, but the names speak for themselves. Bryan Cranston showcases that he is not just the best thing on television, but also a big-screen powerhouse. Helen Mirren, in her inimitable fashion and with beautiful understatement, is a force to be reckoned with, seething venom and self-righteousness. Louis C.K. finally breaks out of his stand-up comic persona to give a truly heartfelt performance played with surprisingly restrained vulnerability. The chemistry between him and Bryan Cranston will no doubt leave you wanting more. And John Goodman… well, it’s John Goodman. He continues to prove that no matter how small a part he has to play, it will stay with you long after you’ve left the theater. Hands down, and these are only four out of a dozen terrific performances, there hasn’t been an ensemble this stunning since L.A. Confidential.
It should also be mentioned that Michael Stuhlbarg, David James Elliott and Dean O’Gorman, who portray Edward G. Robinson, John Wayne and Kirk Douglas respectively, are unquestionably destined to go down as the unsung heroes of Trumbo. Their efforts, not just to imitate but to fully realize these Hollywood stars of a by-gone era, are a further complement to inspired casting and commitment to honoring the lives of the people portrayed on screen.
In short (and well done for making it this far through monotonous and truly well-deserved praise), if you have to see one film this Thanksgiving season that doesn’t star Tom Hardy as England’s notorious Kray brothers, see Trumbo.
Rules of Sailing Tips
Sports and Education
App
Sailing on Starboard or Port- on same or opposite tacks- tips to steer your boat the "Right of Way"....
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Man Who Killed Hitler and Then the Bigfoot (2018) in Movies
Apr 1, 2019
Good, But Was Hoping For More
The plot is exactly what the title entails: A man who settles down in a small town after killing Hitler is called back into action years later one last time…to kill bigfoot. You may love it, you may hate it, but you won’t be able to knock its originality. Ten minutes in and it didn’t take me long to figure out I was watching something I had never seen before.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
From the beginning, you will be focused on this movie as it grabs your attention immediately. You find yourself wondering, What exactly is this man doing? I loved the intrigue to start, hooks you in right away. You also quickly learn that Calvin Barr (Sam Elliott) is nothing to be trifled with. You get to see his first taste of action and it’s fun to watch.
Characters: 10
Calvin isn’t that hard to figure out. He kicks ass and takes names and gives zero shits about it. He’s the kind of guy you can get behind. He’s hardened by the things he has seen, causing him to shell up into himself. Life experiences, man. They have a way of shaping people.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Conflict: 8
Genre: 4
I can’t rate this any higher because I don’t think the movie ever really decided what it wanted to be. Sometimes action, sometimes drama there is a mix here that puts it in a weird place. I would be fine with it if it did one or the other exceptionally well, but I feel like it missed the boat in some spots, just shy of being a really solid movie.
Memorability: 9
Hate it or love it, this is a movie you won’t soon forget. I expected to get short-changed when it came to the bigfoot, but, no, you get to see the creature in all its glory. And what a creature! Definitely an interesting spin on the mythical beast. It’s imagery like this that really has a way of sticking out in my mind.
Pace: 9
Plot: 8
Resolution: 2
Overall: 79
I’m mad because I wanted this to be better than just a “Folding Clothes” movie. It’s good, but falls just short of great unfortunately. I think a little more tonal direction and a better ending could have put it in the range of a classic. Alas, The Man Who Killed Hitler and Then the Bigfoot is just ok.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
From the beginning, you will be focused on this movie as it grabs your attention immediately. You find yourself wondering, What exactly is this man doing? I loved the intrigue to start, hooks you in right away. You also quickly learn that Calvin Barr (Sam Elliott) is nothing to be trifled with. You get to see his first taste of action and it’s fun to watch.
Characters: 10
Calvin isn’t that hard to figure out. He kicks ass and takes names and gives zero shits about it. He’s the kind of guy you can get behind. He’s hardened by the things he has seen, causing him to shell up into himself. Life experiences, man. They have a way of shaping people.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Conflict: 8
Genre: 4
I can’t rate this any higher because I don’t think the movie ever really decided what it wanted to be. Sometimes action, sometimes drama there is a mix here that puts it in a weird place. I would be fine with it if it did one or the other exceptionally well, but I feel like it missed the boat in some spots, just shy of being a really solid movie.
Memorability: 9
Hate it or love it, this is a movie you won’t soon forget. I expected to get short-changed when it came to the bigfoot, but, no, you get to see the creature in all its glory. And what a creature! Definitely an interesting spin on the mythical beast. It’s imagery like this that really has a way of sticking out in my mind.
Pace: 9
Plot: 8
Resolution: 2
Overall: 79
I’m mad because I wanted this to be better than just a “Folding Clothes” movie. It’s good, but falls just short of great unfortunately. I think a little more tonal direction and a better ending could have put it in the range of a classic. Alas, The Man Who Killed Hitler and Then the Bigfoot is just ok.
Where Are You Now?
7.3
Rate It
Book
From America's Queen of Suspense comes a gripping tale of a young woman trying to unravel the...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated A Star Is Born (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Dullsville Arizona.
It’s unusual for the illustrious Mrs. Movie-Man and I to disagree over our opinion of a movie. Sure, she doesn’t like some genres like horror and sci-fi that I do, and I will often go to them alone. But in the main if we sit there together then we tend to have the same general view as to whether we liked it or not. (I guess that’s why we’ve been such a good match for nearly 40 years!). Not so though with this film.
The story has been filmed three times before: in 1937 (with Janet Gaynor and Fredric March); 1954 (with Judy Garland and James Mason) and 1976 (with Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson). In all of these films the story has been the same: an alcoholic and over-the-hill actor (or with Kris Kristofferson, rock star) finds a young talented ingenue to love and develop into a superstar.
The modern day remake is a little different in that Jackson Maine, our older star (now played by Bradley Cooper), is a stadium-filling mega-rock-star, recognised and idolised in every bar he goes into…. and he frequents a LOT of bars. Maine mixes the cocktail with drugs in this version meaning that as one star is ascending, his seems destined to be heading into a black hole.
At its heart, this is a good story of having self-confidence in your own abilities, no matter how people around you try to put you down. Gaga’s Ally is one such person; a waitress who is constantly being told, especially by her blue-collar dad and his boozy friends, that although she has a great voice she’s “never going to make it” because of the way she looks. In chilled fashion she meets Jackson Maine, who hears her sing and thinks she might be on the edge of glory. Not worried about her big nose, he appreciates she was born that way: in fact he likes her so much he wants to poke her face. (Sorry… couldn’t resist it).
I appreciate from the IMDB rating that I am probably in a minority here. (At the time of writing this – pre-general release – it is a ridiculously high – and I suspect artificially pumped up – 8.8). But for me, I found the whole thing a dull affair. I can’t remember the last time I went to a film when I actively looked at my watch… but 1 hour 45 into this, I did (it had another 30 minutes to run).
For one thing, I just didn’t believe Bradley Cooper as the rock star character. He just came across as totally false and unbelievable to me. I had more resonance with Gaga’s Ally. Even though she is a novice actor (and it showed at times) in general I thought she did a creditable job. But given these two factors together, there are long and indulgent exchanges between the pair that seemed to me to go on in–ter–min–ably. Best actor in the film for me was Sam Elliott as Jackson’s brother Bobby. The mellowing of the brothers is a scene that I found genuinely touching.
I’d also like a glance at the original script, since there are some passages (the “boyfriend/husband” lines is a case in point) where it felt like one of them made an script mistake and, instead of Cooper (as director) shouting “cut”, they kept it going as some sort of half-arsed improv.
What is impressive is that they got to film at live concerts (including at Glastonbury), although most of this footage is of the hand-held nausea-inducing variety. There is zero doubt that Gaga can belt out a song better than anyone. But I didn’t get that same feeling about Bradley Cooper’s singing: like a lot of this film (with Cooper as co-producer, co-screenwriter AND director) it felt to me like a self-indulgent piece of casting.
I know music is extremely subjective, and “country” isnt really my think anyway. But the songs by Gaga and Lukas Nelson were – “Shallow” aside – for me rather forgetable.
Overall, in a couple of years that have brought us some great musicals – “La La Land“; “Sing Street“; “The Greatest Showman” – here’s a film about the music industry that did nothing for me I’m afraid.
But with my new user-rating system (this is the first post on the new web site) you have a chance to have YOUR say, so vote away!
The story has been filmed three times before: in 1937 (with Janet Gaynor and Fredric March); 1954 (with Judy Garland and James Mason) and 1976 (with Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson). In all of these films the story has been the same: an alcoholic and over-the-hill actor (or with Kris Kristofferson, rock star) finds a young talented ingenue to love and develop into a superstar.
The modern day remake is a little different in that Jackson Maine, our older star (now played by Bradley Cooper), is a stadium-filling mega-rock-star, recognised and idolised in every bar he goes into…. and he frequents a LOT of bars. Maine mixes the cocktail with drugs in this version meaning that as one star is ascending, his seems destined to be heading into a black hole.
At its heart, this is a good story of having self-confidence in your own abilities, no matter how people around you try to put you down. Gaga’s Ally is one such person; a waitress who is constantly being told, especially by her blue-collar dad and his boozy friends, that although she has a great voice she’s “never going to make it” because of the way she looks. In chilled fashion she meets Jackson Maine, who hears her sing and thinks she might be on the edge of glory. Not worried about her big nose, he appreciates she was born that way: in fact he likes her so much he wants to poke her face. (Sorry… couldn’t resist it).
I appreciate from the IMDB rating that I am probably in a minority here. (At the time of writing this – pre-general release – it is a ridiculously high – and I suspect artificially pumped up – 8.8). But for me, I found the whole thing a dull affair. I can’t remember the last time I went to a film when I actively looked at my watch… but 1 hour 45 into this, I did (it had another 30 minutes to run).
For one thing, I just didn’t believe Bradley Cooper as the rock star character. He just came across as totally false and unbelievable to me. I had more resonance with Gaga’s Ally. Even though she is a novice actor (and it showed at times) in general I thought she did a creditable job. But given these two factors together, there are long and indulgent exchanges between the pair that seemed to me to go on in–ter–min–ably. Best actor in the film for me was Sam Elliott as Jackson’s brother Bobby. The mellowing of the brothers is a scene that I found genuinely touching.
I’d also like a glance at the original script, since there are some passages (the “boyfriend/husband” lines is a case in point) where it felt like one of them made an script mistake and, instead of Cooper (as director) shouting “cut”, they kept it going as some sort of half-arsed improv.
What is impressive is that they got to film at live concerts (including at Glastonbury), although most of this footage is of the hand-held nausea-inducing variety. There is zero doubt that Gaga can belt out a song better than anyone. But I didn’t get that same feeling about Bradley Cooper’s singing: like a lot of this film (with Cooper as co-producer, co-screenwriter AND director) it felt to me like a self-indulgent piece of casting.
I know music is extremely subjective, and “country” isnt really my think anyway. But the songs by Gaga and Lukas Nelson were – “Shallow” aside – for me rather forgetable.
Overall, in a couple of years that have brought us some great musicals – “La La Land“; “Sing Street“; “The Greatest Showman” – here’s a film about the music industry that did nothing for me I’m afraid.
But with my new user-rating system (this is the first post on the new web site) you have a chance to have YOUR say, so vote away!