Search
Search results
Lee Richmond (19 KP) rated Halloween (2018) in Movies
Mar 5, 2019
Face your fate.
It's 1999 and my twenty years younger self is spending the entire year getting hyped for The Phantom Menace. That movie dominated my year. I had queued at ToysRUs when they released the new figures just to get my hands on a Darth Maul and a Podracer. I had brought the CD of John Williams Soundtrack. I had seen every trailer countless times and as soon as they were put on sale I brought two tickets so that I could watch the movie twice on the same day. I sat in the theatre as the Lucasfilm logo appeared and thought 'this is it'. Then the end credits rolled and I left the movie and headed to get something to eat before the next showing, all the while trying to convince myself that I had loved what I had just watched. Truth is I couldn't do it. I hadn't loved it at all. It left me deflated and all I could think was that I had to sit and watch it all again as all that excitement turned to shit with every clunky piece of dialogue and every scene featuring Jar Jar fucking Binks. It hurt and I promised I would never get so hyped for a movie again.
Fast forward to 2018. I had been excited for the prospect of Halloween since it was announced. Jamie Lee was involved and it was a direct sequel. Both of these things had me invested. Then the trailer dropped and that old familiar feeling of hype that I had promised to forgo started to creep over me once more. Now I should add that John Carpenters original 1978 movie is one of my all time favourites. I love that movie. To me it is an example of perfect horror story telling. It's simple yet incredibly effective at doing what it says on the tin and I rewatch it every year on Haloween as a tradition.
Time came for opening night and I had purchased my ticket in advance (but only one this time just in case) and as we sat waiting for the movie to start even my wife commented that I appeared nervous. I was nervous. I had every right to be nervous because the mishandling of something that means so much to me would mean major disappointment. I am a movie geek. Movies mean so much to me, especially Halloween and I take disappointment pretty badly. So the movie played out. That old familiar score played over the top of bright orange titles against a black background as a pumpkin seemed to unrot and I loved it. I loved the steady build to Michaels escape. I loved how being locked up for so long just seemed to make him more relentless. Once he was out and let loose on Haddonfield I was hooked. The killing spree that followed as Michael went from house to house on a rampage fueled by 40 years of incarceration had me mentally punching the air with happiness. Jamie Lee Curtis though was something else all together. Her portrayal of Laurie suffering from four decades of pent up PTSD was nothing short of brilliant. I could really feel for this character that I have adored for so many years. Laurie will always be my number 1 final girl. She survived the original Halloween because she was smart, and wasn't distracted like her sex mad, airhead friends. Seeing how the events of the first film had effected her life so dramatically was like watching an old friend going through a really hard time. The closing twenty minutes literally had me on the edge of my seat as Laurie searches one dark room after another, the hunted becoming the hunter. You know Michael is there lurking somewhere, but where? The final image as a trapped Michael stares up at his escaping prey, so fixed on Laurie that he fails to even notice that he is being engulfed in flames really stuck with me after the credits rolled.
Now I'm not going as far as to say this film was perfect. Some of the humour fell a little flat and felt out of place and I hated the new Dr Loomis character and his plot twist. It felt crowbarred in and completely unnecessary. Had the rest of the film not been as tight it would have taken me out of the movie completely, but thankfully that was not the case. A lot of love and passion went into making this movie. Clearly the film makers are fans of the original and that really comes across on screen. It really honours Carpenters movie and evidently comes across as a love letter more than a cash in. I know this movie divided people. You either loved it or hated it and I am definitely in the camp of the former. Do I want another sequel? If the quality of this one is maintained then hell yeah. Halloween 2018 has taught me that allowing myself to get a little hyped now and again can sometimes be rewarding. Not everything has to be The Phantom Menace.
Fast forward to 2018. I had been excited for the prospect of Halloween since it was announced. Jamie Lee was involved and it was a direct sequel. Both of these things had me invested. Then the trailer dropped and that old familiar feeling of hype that I had promised to forgo started to creep over me once more. Now I should add that John Carpenters original 1978 movie is one of my all time favourites. I love that movie. To me it is an example of perfect horror story telling. It's simple yet incredibly effective at doing what it says on the tin and I rewatch it every year on Haloween as a tradition.
Time came for opening night and I had purchased my ticket in advance (but only one this time just in case) and as we sat waiting for the movie to start even my wife commented that I appeared nervous. I was nervous. I had every right to be nervous because the mishandling of something that means so much to me would mean major disappointment. I am a movie geek. Movies mean so much to me, especially Halloween and I take disappointment pretty badly. So the movie played out. That old familiar score played over the top of bright orange titles against a black background as a pumpkin seemed to unrot and I loved it. I loved the steady build to Michaels escape. I loved how being locked up for so long just seemed to make him more relentless. Once he was out and let loose on Haddonfield I was hooked. The killing spree that followed as Michael went from house to house on a rampage fueled by 40 years of incarceration had me mentally punching the air with happiness. Jamie Lee Curtis though was something else all together. Her portrayal of Laurie suffering from four decades of pent up PTSD was nothing short of brilliant. I could really feel for this character that I have adored for so many years. Laurie will always be my number 1 final girl. She survived the original Halloween because she was smart, and wasn't distracted like her sex mad, airhead friends. Seeing how the events of the first film had effected her life so dramatically was like watching an old friend going through a really hard time. The closing twenty minutes literally had me on the edge of my seat as Laurie searches one dark room after another, the hunted becoming the hunter. You know Michael is there lurking somewhere, but where? The final image as a trapped Michael stares up at his escaping prey, so fixed on Laurie that he fails to even notice that he is being engulfed in flames really stuck with me after the credits rolled.
Now I'm not going as far as to say this film was perfect. Some of the humour fell a little flat and felt out of place and I hated the new Dr Loomis character and his plot twist. It felt crowbarred in and completely unnecessary. Had the rest of the film not been as tight it would have taken me out of the movie completely, but thankfully that was not the case. A lot of love and passion went into making this movie. Clearly the film makers are fans of the original and that really comes across on screen. It really honours Carpenters movie and evidently comes across as a love letter more than a cash in. I know this movie divided people. You either loved it or hated it and I am definitely in the camp of the former. Do I want another sequel? If the quality of this one is maintained then hell yeah. Halloween 2018 has taught me that allowing myself to get a little hyped now and again can sometimes be rewarding. Not everything has to be The Phantom Menace.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Gemini Man (2019) in Movies
Oct 16, 2019
Exposition Man
Gemini Man is a pure bore, a tedious bombardment of utter crap that's so oversimplified you would think it was made for children. Personaly I admire Ang Lee as a director hes got this quirky kinda way of shooting films & hes always brave enough to try new filming techniques/strange camera angles that you dont really see in other movies. Id liken him to Luc Besson tbh but sadly just like him after making some absolute cinematic masterpieces they both then seem to be content with just churning out utter dross & while at the heart all these movies have great ideas/cool action its the excecution they fail on every time. Gemini man is no diffrerent infact id say its even worse than Lucy or Billy Lynn as its just so dull to the point where I was questioning if i should use the time catch up on sleep instead. Nothing of any intrest happens in this movie and im not kidding when i say all we get 90% of the time is characters repeating the extreamly basic plot to us over & over again which comes across as patronising making the movie exteamly monotonous & exhausting to watch. Acting isnt much better either its all very one tone/basic with characters clearly only there as checklist reminder of whats about to happen. But what about the action? well for a 2hour movie #action scenes only equate to about 15 minutes total & even when we do get finally get an action scene (bar the motorbike chase from the trailer) theres really nothing memorable or thrilling at all. One thing I will say its a looker for sure & at times my god does it look fantastic with a visual clarity that almost feels like your on set but problem is again its not pushed enough & theres not really any enviroments or action that makes good use of the techniques used to film it which is a big shame (it almost got a 2 because of visuals but I got annoyed I wasted 2hours of my only day off watching it). So irritating, boring, generic, predictable, shallow, basic, overlong & inteligence insulting I warn you now do not go to see Gemini Man it deserves no ones precious time or #money its just a pointless mess thats nothing but an absolutle chore to sit through.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Halloween (1978) in Movies
Sep 29, 2020
What is there to say about Halloween that hasn't already been said? Not quite the first slasher, but arguably the film to throw this particular sub genre and all its tropes into the spotlight, and it's pretty much the perfect horror.
Halloween is iconic in several ways. A big part of that is it's characters. Laurie Strode is considered by many to be the quintessential scream queen/final girl and that is completely down to Jamie Lee Curtis. Her character is down to earth and relatable, realistic but shows resolve by the time the credits role. This has resulted in her return many times throughout the franchise and is still beloved now.
Donald Pleasance as Dr Loomis is another main stay of the franchise. His character arc is more tempestuous than Laurie's and as a result is less impactful overall, but is an important part nonetheless, especially in the original.
But what would Halloween be if it wasn't for Michael Myers, and indisputable behemoth of horror. His first outing is easily his best, with just enough back story to intrigue, and a quiet determination in the way he mercilessly and calmly stalks his victims. His souless, white mask (a mask infamously modelled after William Shatner) and dark jumpsuit is a simple yet effective aesthetic.
Some of the shots in Halloween are genuinely chilling - they got me when I was a kid, and they still get me now. One shot that always sticks in my head is when Laurie clocks Michael a little way down the street staring at her from behind a bush in broad daylight. The whole film is creepy, something that has seldom been imitated in the huge number of Slashers that followed in its wake.
This is all topped off by the instantly recognisable music score, composed by director John Carpenter (the talented bastard). I'm an unashamed Carpenter fan, and my love for his work started right here, as it did for many others.
Halloween is a film that is rightly still talked about today. It will never fade away, and it's simply down to how good it is, even all these years later. It's a must see piece of cinema, and it stands shoulder to shoulder with The Thing as my personal favourite horror of all time.
Halloween is iconic in several ways. A big part of that is it's characters. Laurie Strode is considered by many to be the quintessential scream queen/final girl and that is completely down to Jamie Lee Curtis. Her character is down to earth and relatable, realistic but shows resolve by the time the credits role. This has resulted in her return many times throughout the franchise and is still beloved now.
Donald Pleasance as Dr Loomis is another main stay of the franchise. His character arc is more tempestuous than Laurie's and as a result is less impactful overall, but is an important part nonetheless, especially in the original.
But what would Halloween be if it wasn't for Michael Myers, and indisputable behemoth of horror. His first outing is easily his best, with just enough back story to intrigue, and a quiet determination in the way he mercilessly and calmly stalks his victims. His souless, white mask (a mask infamously modelled after William Shatner) and dark jumpsuit is a simple yet effective aesthetic.
Some of the shots in Halloween are genuinely chilling - they got me when I was a kid, and they still get me now. One shot that always sticks in my head is when Laurie clocks Michael a little way down the street staring at her from behind a bush in broad daylight. The whole film is creepy, something that has seldom been imitated in the huge number of Slashers that followed in its wake.
This is all topped off by the instantly recognisable music score, composed by director John Carpenter (the talented bastard). I'm an unashamed Carpenter fan, and my love for his work started right here, as it did for many others.
Halloween is a film that is rightly still talked about today. It will never fade away, and it's simply down to how good it is, even all these years later. It's a must see piece of cinema, and it stands shoulder to shoulder with The Thing as my personal favourite horror of all time.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Anatomy of a Murder (1959) in Movies
Nov 30, 2018
One of the Best Courtroom Dramas of all Time
I have to admit, that (at times) the fun part of going to "SECRET MOVIE NIGHT" is the anticipation of not knowing what the film is. Sometimes the film is "good, not great" (like THE BLUES BROTHERS, BODY HEAT and A FACE IN THE CROWD) and other times it is a CLASSIC (Like CITIZEN KANE, THE APARTMENT and NETWORK). I am happy to report that this month's installment IS a classic, our old pal Jimmy Stewart in 1959's ANATOMY OF MURDER.
Directed by the great Otto Preminger, AOM is often referred to as the finest courtroom drama ever filmed. While I need to give that some thought, I will say AOM is right up there as one of the finest examples of a courtroom drama.
Starring Jimmy Stewart as "country lawyer" Paul Biegler, who is brought in to defend Army Lieutenant Manion (Ben Gazzara). Manion is accused of murdering a man that raped his wife (Lee Remick). The central mystery isn't "did Manion kill the man" (he did), it is more of "did he kill his wife's rapist or lover" and "will Biegler get away with the temporary insanity plea".
This is the kind of plot that we've all seen a dozen times on standard TV shows, but back in 1959, this type of film - and trial - was quite new and fresh and this film was "scandalous" in it's use of frank language. Remember, this is 1959 in Eisenhower "Happy Days" Americana, so hearing words like "bitch, panties, penetration, slut, sperm, bitch and slut" was quite shocking and led to many protests of the film.
Those who were turned off by the language and frankhandling of the subject matter lost out on an intriguing, well-acted, well-written and well-directed courtroom drama, where the verdict is up in the air right up until the foreman of the jury says "We, the jury, find the defendant..."
Jimmy Stewart is perfectly cast in the lead role of Defense Attorney, Biegler. Stewart brings an instant likableness and every man integrity quality to the role. His Attorney is down-to-earth but whip-smart, able to crack a joke to lighten the mood or explode in rage at an affront at a moment's notice. He goes toe-to-toe with Prosecuting Attorney Claude Dancer (a VERY young George C. Scott). Dancer is everything that Biegler is not, crisp, well-polished and arrogant. While it would have been very easy to paint these two characters as good (Stewart) and bad (Scott), Director Preminger and screenwriter Wendell Mayes shy away from this and show these two as fierce competitors playing a very serious game of chess - and this works very well, indeed. Both Stewart and Scott were nominated for Oscars for their work as Best Actor and Supporting Actor respectively.
The Supporting cast is superb, featuring such 1950's/early 1960's stalwarts as Arthur O'Connell (also Oscar nominated as Stewarts's alcoholic law mentor), the always good Eve Arden, Orson Bean and Katherine Grant. It also features three character actors in small roles (witnesses in the trial) who you would recognize from other things - Murray Hamilton (the Mayor in Jaws), Howard McNear (Floyd the Barber from Mayberry) and Joseph Kearns (Mr. Wilson in Dennis the Menace).
Special notice needs to be made for Lee Remick as the sultry and flirtatious woman at the core of the film. Remick is superb in this role, and that is fortunate, for if she wasn't believable in the "would she or won't she" role that she is asked to play, then the film could have easily fallen apart. But the real bright spot in this film is the scene stealing Joseph N. Welch as the Judge in the case. His performance as the judge is the perfect "third leg" to the Stewart/Scott stool, balancing charm, folksiness and strength in even portions (depending on what is needed to balance the other two).
Otto Preminger (LAURA, STALAG 17) is a Director who's name is beginning to fade into the dust of the past - and that's too bad, for he is a strong director who knows how to frame a scene and pace a film. Even though AOM is 2 hours and 40 minutes of talking, it never feels long or slow.
Two other aspects of this film need to be mentioned - the "jazz" score by the great Duke Ellington (which won a grammy) is perfectly suited to the themes and mood of this film and the opening title sequence (and movie poster) is reminiscent of an Alfred Hitchock film - and that is because they are done by frequent Hitchock contributor Saul Bass.
Nominated for 7 Oscars (it won zero, falling to the juggernaut that was BEN HUR that year), ANATOMY OF A MURDER is an intriguing courtroom drama that also opens the door to performers of the past. Well worth the time investment, should you run across it (it is frequently shown on TCM).
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Directed by the great Otto Preminger, AOM is often referred to as the finest courtroom drama ever filmed. While I need to give that some thought, I will say AOM is right up there as one of the finest examples of a courtroom drama.
Starring Jimmy Stewart as "country lawyer" Paul Biegler, who is brought in to defend Army Lieutenant Manion (Ben Gazzara). Manion is accused of murdering a man that raped his wife (Lee Remick). The central mystery isn't "did Manion kill the man" (he did), it is more of "did he kill his wife's rapist or lover" and "will Biegler get away with the temporary insanity plea".
This is the kind of plot that we've all seen a dozen times on standard TV shows, but back in 1959, this type of film - and trial - was quite new and fresh and this film was "scandalous" in it's use of frank language. Remember, this is 1959 in Eisenhower "Happy Days" Americana, so hearing words like "bitch, panties, penetration, slut, sperm, bitch and slut" was quite shocking and led to many protests of the film.
Those who were turned off by the language and frankhandling of the subject matter lost out on an intriguing, well-acted, well-written and well-directed courtroom drama, where the verdict is up in the air right up until the foreman of the jury says "We, the jury, find the defendant..."
Jimmy Stewart is perfectly cast in the lead role of Defense Attorney, Biegler. Stewart brings an instant likableness and every man integrity quality to the role. His Attorney is down-to-earth but whip-smart, able to crack a joke to lighten the mood or explode in rage at an affront at a moment's notice. He goes toe-to-toe with Prosecuting Attorney Claude Dancer (a VERY young George C. Scott). Dancer is everything that Biegler is not, crisp, well-polished and arrogant. While it would have been very easy to paint these two characters as good (Stewart) and bad (Scott), Director Preminger and screenwriter Wendell Mayes shy away from this and show these two as fierce competitors playing a very serious game of chess - and this works very well, indeed. Both Stewart and Scott were nominated for Oscars for their work as Best Actor and Supporting Actor respectively.
The Supporting cast is superb, featuring such 1950's/early 1960's stalwarts as Arthur O'Connell (also Oscar nominated as Stewarts's alcoholic law mentor), the always good Eve Arden, Orson Bean and Katherine Grant. It also features three character actors in small roles (witnesses in the trial) who you would recognize from other things - Murray Hamilton (the Mayor in Jaws), Howard McNear (Floyd the Barber from Mayberry) and Joseph Kearns (Mr. Wilson in Dennis the Menace).
Special notice needs to be made for Lee Remick as the sultry and flirtatious woman at the core of the film. Remick is superb in this role, and that is fortunate, for if she wasn't believable in the "would she or won't she" role that she is asked to play, then the film could have easily fallen apart. But the real bright spot in this film is the scene stealing Joseph N. Welch as the Judge in the case. His performance as the judge is the perfect "third leg" to the Stewart/Scott stool, balancing charm, folksiness and strength in even portions (depending on what is needed to balance the other two).
Otto Preminger (LAURA, STALAG 17) is a Director who's name is beginning to fade into the dust of the past - and that's too bad, for he is a strong director who knows how to frame a scene and pace a film. Even though AOM is 2 hours and 40 minutes of talking, it never feels long or slow.
Two other aspects of this film need to be mentioned - the "jazz" score by the great Duke Ellington (which won a grammy) is perfectly suited to the themes and mood of this film and the opening title sequence (and movie poster) is reminiscent of an Alfred Hitchock film - and that is because they are done by frequent Hitchock contributor Saul Bass.
Nominated for 7 Oscars (it won zero, falling to the juggernaut that was BEN HUR that year), ANATOMY OF A MURDER is an intriguing courtroom drama that also opens the door to performers of the past. Well worth the time investment, should you run across it (it is frequently shown on TCM).
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Venom (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A film that leaves you in two minds.
After all the terrible reviews of this movie (“The Times” reviewer described it as “excreble” which is harsh indeed) I was steeling myself to reach for my 1* rating. I was happy to find that it wasn’t quite as bad as I was expecting it to be. Indeed parts of it were positively good fun.
The plot
Tom Hardy plays Eddie Brock, a San Franciscan investigative reporter who is engaged to hot-shot lawyer Anne Weying (Michelle WIlliams). Brock is a bit of a maverick and always tends to push things a bit far, both at work and at home. Brock targets for his latest investigation Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed): a billionaire space pioneer (I hope the producers got WELL lawyered up!) Drake is a Bond-style megalomaniac who is intend on saving mankind by merging humans with aliens to create a symbiotic organism. Not wishing to go through all the nampy-pamby clinical trials stuff, he is doing live research on vagrants and others who “won’t be missed”… with generally negative results. Infected accidently with the symbiont called Venom Brock’s future hangs in the balance: the meld will either kill him or else a new superhero will be born. (No guessing which!)
Review
For anyone with one foot already in the Spiderverse, Eddie Brock and his alter-ego Venom have appeared before, in the convoluted and pretty poor Tobey Maguire sequel “Spider-Man 3”. In that film Eddie (played by Topher Grace) was the boyfriend of Gwen Stacey (then played by Bryce Dallas-Howard) who was similarly infected by an alien symbiote and was transformed into Venom.
This new Venom incarnation is a Sony Pictures production “with” Marvel Studios, and although featuring a Stan Lee cameo it never quite feels like a Marvel picture. Posher critics have described it as “tonally inconsistent”…. which is posh-critic language for “it’s fecking all over the place”! And they are right. It veers suddenly from high drama and sci-fi action to plodding dialogue and Deadpool-style wisecracks with clutch-smoking rapidity. As such, the film never feels like it’s decided whether it wants to be at the po-faced Captain America end of the Marvel specturn or at the wise-cracking Deadpool/GotG end.
The Turns
Tom Hardy actually gets to spend a lot of this film without a mask over his face, which is certainly a novelty! And he gives it his all acting wise which will please his army of fans. But his pairing with the Oscar-winning Michelle Williams never feels comfortable: there seems little chemistry between the pair given that they are an “item”. None of this is helped by the grindingly turgid script which gives the pair, plus Reid Scott (“Dan” from “Veep”) as the third corner in the love triangle, some truly dire dialogue to spout at each other.
An act I did like in the film was Riz Ahmed as the “really bad guy” Drake. I found Ahmed extremely annoying in “Rogue One”, but here he slides into the smarmy evil role perfectly. A better script, like a future Bond film, would have benefitted from the turn!
Woody Harrelson also turns up in a mid-credit “monkey” as the supervillain Cletus Kasady, which meant nothing to me but certainly does to comic-book fans. (By the way, there is no “monkey” at the end of the film, but there is a 6 minute clip from the upcoming “Into the Spider Verse” cartoon feature tacked onto the end – at least of this Cineworld showing – which may or may not interest you).
A technical shout-out should go to Swedish composer Ludwig Göransson (who’s previously done “Black Panther” and “Creed”): an unusual soundtrack with odd electronica, eerie electric-guitar riffs for Eddie’s theme interspersed with exciting fast-paced action beats.
Final Thoughts
I must admit that from starting with a cynical “don’t want to know” approach to the Marvel Universe, the damn thing is slowly wearing me down into being kind of intrigued with what they are going to do next. This is not a classic Marvel flick, but for me it wasn’t nearly as bad as some of the critical reviews have made it out to be. I saw this alone: and we were quite entertained.
The plot
Tom Hardy plays Eddie Brock, a San Franciscan investigative reporter who is engaged to hot-shot lawyer Anne Weying (Michelle WIlliams). Brock is a bit of a maverick and always tends to push things a bit far, both at work and at home. Brock targets for his latest investigation Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed): a billionaire space pioneer (I hope the producers got WELL lawyered up!) Drake is a Bond-style megalomaniac who is intend on saving mankind by merging humans with aliens to create a symbiotic organism. Not wishing to go through all the nampy-pamby clinical trials stuff, he is doing live research on vagrants and others who “won’t be missed”… with generally negative results. Infected accidently with the symbiont called Venom Brock’s future hangs in the balance: the meld will either kill him or else a new superhero will be born. (No guessing which!)
Review
For anyone with one foot already in the Spiderverse, Eddie Brock and his alter-ego Venom have appeared before, in the convoluted and pretty poor Tobey Maguire sequel “Spider-Man 3”. In that film Eddie (played by Topher Grace) was the boyfriend of Gwen Stacey (then played by Bryce Dallas-Howard) who was similarly infected by an alien symbiote and was transformed into Venom.
This new Venom incarnation is a Sony Pictures production “with” Marvel Studios, and although featuring a Stan Lee cameo it never quite feels like a Marvel picture. Posher critics have described it as “tonally inconsistent”…. which is posh-critic language for “it’s fecking all over the place”! And they are right. It veers suddenly from high drama and sci-fi action to plodding dialogue and Deadpool-style wisecracks with clutch-smoking rapidity. As such, the film never feels like it’s decided whether it wants to be at the po-faced Captain America end of the Marvel specturn or at the wise-cracking Deadpool/GotG end.
The Turns
Tom Hardy actually gets to spend a lot of this film without a mask over his face, which is certainly a novelty! And he gives it his all acting wise which will please his army of fans. But his pairing with the Oscar-winning Michelle Williams never feels comfortable: there seems little chemistry between the pair given that they are an “item”. None of this is helped by the grindingly turgid script which gives the pair, plus Reid Scott (“Dan” from “Veep”) as the third corner in the love triangle, some truly dire dialogue to spout at each other.
An act I did like in the film was Riz Ahmed as the “really bad guy” Drake. I found Ahmed extremely annoying in “Rogue One”, but here he slides into the smarmy evil role perfectly. A better script, like a future Bond film, would have benefitted from the turn!
Woody Harrelson also turns up in a mid-credit “monkey” as the supervillain Cletus Kasady, which meant nothing to me but certainly does to comic-book fans. (By the way, there is no “monkey” at the end of the film, but there is a 6 minute clip from the upcoming “Into the Spider Verse” cartoon feature tacked onto the end – at least of this Cineworld showing – which may or may not interest you).
A technical shout-out should go to Swedish composer Ludwig Göransson (who’s previously done “Black Panther” and “Creed”): an unusual soundtrack with odd electronica, eerie electric-guitar riffs for Eddie’s theme interspersed with exciting fast-paced action beats.
Final Thoughts
I must admit that from starting with a cynical “don’t want to know” approach to the Marvel Universe, the damn thing is slowly wearing me down into being kind of intrigued with what they are going to do next. This is not a classic Marvel flick, but for me it wasn’t nearly as bad as some of the critical reviews have made it out to be. I saw this alone: and we were quite entertained.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Behind Closed Doors in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also find my review here: http://bit.ly/28KzCFf
<b><i>Fear," he whispered. "There is nothing quite like it. I love how it looks, I love how it feels, I love how it smells. And I especially love the sound of it." I felt his tongue on my cheek. "I even love the taste of it.</i></b>
Welcome to Jack and Grace's perfect life and perfect marriage. Jack's an amazing, handsome and successful lawyer for battered woman and Grace is the gorgeous put-together house wife... or so it seems. But what if Grace were to tell she wasn't a house wife, she was in fact a prisoner locked up by her own husband who craves nothing more than seeing and feeling another person's fear? Would you believe her?
I loved all the twists and turns and edge of the seat moments within this novel. It was an excellent thriller that Im sure thousands have and will continue to enjoy. Im definitely going to keep my eyes peeled for any more novels from Paris as I loved her style of writing and felt her story telling flowed perfectly.
The characters were very well developed and you really got a good insight into their lives, thoughts and feelings. Paris did an excellent job at making two very unique characters. Without trying to give too much away, Jack is a very different kind of sadistic captor. Hes so terrifying because he could definitely be real. He could be your neighbour, your boss, your friend even. Hes just a seemingly normal guy but what lies underneath is far from normal.
Grace can be a little stupid and doesnt often act quick enough, its no use for her to try anyway as Jack is always one step ahead. Shes trapped and she knows it, therefore shes an interesting character to see progress through the novel as we see her seemingly give up against her captor, but really, underneath, shes cunning and planning the whole time.
If it wasnt for the fact that you could easily guess how this was going to end once the idea was placed in front of you, it might have even got a 5 star rating. Though the end was predictable there was still some element of shock to it, especially the last heart breaking / lifting scene. <spoiler>The final scene shared between Grace and Esther was such a wonderful way to end this book, it rounded this book off so well. The perfect ending!</spoiler>
The weird thing is, the whole time I read this I thought how far fetched and silly it was, though I was enjoying it, but when you think about it, its not <i>that</i> far fetched. You hear all these terrible stories about women kidnapped and held against their will who are given the freedom to go outside but theyre so paralysed by fear of what could happen, they never say a thing to anyone. Jaycee Lee Dugard, for example, was kidnapped and kept hidden for 18 years! Keeping someone captive isnt that uncommon and Im sure there are actually some terrified women out there that are living a life something very similar to this. So when you put it into that perspective this becomes a very chilling horror story rather than just a fast paced thriller.
<b><i>Fear," he whispered. "There is nothing quite like it. I love how it looks, I love how it feels, I love how it smells. And I especially love the sound of it." I felt his tongue on my cheek. "I even love the taste of it.</i></b>
Welcome to Jack and Grace's perfect life and perfect marriage. Jack's an amazing, handsome and successful lawyer for battered woman and Grace is the gorgeous put-together house wife... or so it seems. But what if Grace were to tell she wasn't a house wife, she was in fact a prisoner locked up by her own husband who craves nothing more than seeing and feeling another person's fear? Would you believe her?
I loved all the twists and turns and edge of the seat moments within this novel. It was an excellent thriller that Im sure thousands have and will continue to enjoy. Im definitely going to keep my eyes peeled for any more novels from Paris as I loved her style of writing and felt her story telling flowed perfectly.
The characters were very well developed and you really got a good insight into their lives, thoughts and feelings. Paris did an excellent job at making two very unique characters. Without trying to give too much away, Jack is a very different kind of sadistic captor. Hes so terrifying because he could definitely be real. He could be your neighbour, your boss, your friend even. Hes just a seemingly normal guy but what lies underneath is far from normal.
Grace can be a little stupid and doesnt often act quick enough, its no use for her to try anyway as Jack is always one step ahead. Shes trapped and she knows it, therefore shes an interesting character to see progress through the novel as we see her seemingly give up against her captor, but really, underneath, shes cunning and planning the whole time.
If it wasnt for the fact that you could easily guess how this was going to end once the idea was placed in front of you, it might have even got a 5 star rating. Though the end was predictable there was still some element of shock to it, especially the last heart breaking / lifting scene. <spoiler>The final scene shared between Grace and Esther was such a wonderful way to end this book, it rounded this book off so well. The perfect ending!</spoiler>
The weird thing is, the whole time I read this I thought how far fetched and silly it was, though I was enjoying it, but when you think about it, its not <i>that</i> far fetched. You hear all these terrible stories about women kidnapped and held against their will who are given the freedom to go outside but theyre so paralysed by fear of what could happen, they never say a thing to anyone. Jaycee Lee Dugard, for example, was kidnapped and kept hidden for 18 years! Keeping someone captive isnt that uncommon and Im sure there are actually some terrified women out there that are living a life something very similar to this. So when you put it into that perspective this becomes a very chilling horror story rather than just a fast paced thriller.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Bohemian Rhapsody (2018) in Movies
Oct 25, 2018 (Updated Oct 25, 2018)
Sublime performance from Rami Malek (1 more)
Sound mixing
They Will Rock You
I feel like I should preface this review with some context. Queen were the first band that I was properly into and the Bohemian Rhapsody/These Are The Days Of Our Loves double A side CD was the first piece of music that I ever bought with my own money. I have loved Queen's music for the vast majority of my life and I have grown up watching their concerts and music videos. I have been waiting for this movie to be made for a long time.
So did it meet my lofty expectations? Well, that depends on what aspects you choose to highlight. If you are asking me if Rami Malek did a good job portraying Freddie Mercury, then I would reply; that is the understatement of the century. This performance is the best I've seen so far this year. There were points that I genuinely forgot that I wasn't watching the real Freddie onscreen, Malek totally disappeared into the persona and if there is any justice, the academy will recognise that come Oscar nomination time. Not only did he capture Freddie's onstage mannerisms, but even the subtle way that Freddie would shift his eyes or lick his lips during interviews etc was absolutely spot on. In terms of the singing, I believe the method used was that Malek would sing into a computer and Freddie's voice was then added over the top, then it was manipulated to where it best resembled Freddie's vocal. If this film deserves another Oscar nod, it's for the sound mixing. They managed to recreate Freddie's unique vocal range perfectly and the lip syncing is also lined up incredibly well.
The rest of the cast are great too. The rest of the band were well cast, especially Gwilym Lee as Brian May. I really enjoyed the chemistry and camaraderie between the band members too. I also enjoyed what Aidan Gillen, Tom Hollander and an unrecognisable Mike Myers brought to the film. Lucy Boynton was also believable as Freddie's one true love, Mary Austin and she and Malek brought a new dimension to Mary's and Freddie's relationship that I had never really thought too much about.
Could the movie have went further than it did in terms of portraying the hedonism went on in Freddie's life? Yes, it definitely could have and that was one of my main concerns going in. I was concerned regarding the film's 12A rating and wondered how they were going to get around this and still show the sexually driven, intense life that Freddie led. Thankfully, I felt that the movie still managed to contain enough implications and allusions to the more adult stuff in the story that you were able to fill in the blanks without feeling robbed of too much of the narrative.
Unfortunately, there was a fairly important part in the movie where the sound abruptly cut out in my cinema hall for about 30 seconds, this obviously isn't the movie's fault, but it did detract from my initial viewing.
Overall, I enjoyed Bohemian Rhapsody. It catalogued Queen's exceptional inventory of hits and did a fantastic job in casting the right actor to portray a modern day icon. The other actors that rounded out the cast helped to sell the whole movie and the production was very well done in terms of recreating the talent and energy that this band were famous for.
So did it meet my lofty expectations? Well, that depends on what aspects you choose to highlight. If you are asking me if Rami Malek did a good job portraying Freddie Mercury, then I would reply; that is the understatement of the century. This performance is the best I've seen so far this year. There were points that I genuinely forgot that I wasn't watching the real Freddie onscreen, Malek totally disappeared into the persona and if there is any justice, the academy will recognise that come Oscar nomination time. Not only did he capture Freddie's onstage mannerisms, but even the subtle way that Freddie would shift his eyes or lick his lips during interviews etc was absolutely spot on. In terms of the singing, I believe the method used was that Malek would sing into a computer and Freddie's voice was then added over the top, then it was manipulated to where it best resembled Freddie's vocal. If this film deserves another Oscar nod, it's for the sound mixing. They managed to recreate Freddie's unique vocal range perfectly and the lip syncing is also lined up incredibly well.
The rest of the cast are great too. The rest of the band were well cast, especially Gwilym Lee as Brian May. I really enjoyed the chemistry and camaraderie between the band members too. I also enjoyed what Aidan Gillen, Tom Hollander and an unrecognisable Mike Myers brought to the film. Lucy Boynton was also believable as Freddie's one true love, Mary Austin and she and Malek brought a new dimension to Mary's and Freddie's relationship that I had never really thought too much about.
Could the movie have went further than it did in terms of portraying the hedonism went on in Freddie's life? Yes, it definitely could have and that was one of my main concerns going in. I was concerned regarding the film's 12A rating and wondered how they were going to get around this and still show the sexually driven, intense life that Freddie led. Thankfully, I felt that the movie still managed to contain enough implications and allusions to the more adult stuff in the story that you were able to fill in the blanks without feeling robbed of too much of the narrative.
Unfortunately, there was a fairly important part in the movie where the sound abruptly cut out in my cinema hall for about 30 seconds, this obviously isn't the movie's fault, but it did detract from my initial viewing.
Overall, I enjoyed Bohemian Rhapsody. It catalogued Queen's exceptional inventory of hits and did a fantastic job in casting the right actor to portray a modern day icon. The other actors that rounded out the cast helped to sell the whole movie and the production was very well done in terms of recreating the talent and energy that this band were famous for.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Toy Story (1995) in Movies
Dec 16, 2018
Truly a classic
With Toy Story 4 coming out in theaters this summer, I thought I'd go back and check out a beloved classice - the original TOY STORY (1995) to see if this film holds up to my memory of it.
It sure does.
Directed by visionary Pixar founder John Lasseter, TOY STORY is the first computer generated full-length motion picture and tells the...story...of toys that come to life when the humans leave the room. It is a simple concept that is executed beautifully with wit, charm and heart that sustains to this day and (I would imagine) to infinity...and beyond.
Besides the revolutionary CGI work (which mostly holds up), the heartwarming story and the crispness of the pacing of the film, the masterstroke here is the pitch perfect voice casting. Tom Hanks was the first - and only - choice for Woody, the Cowboy doll that has been the main toy for Andy. His confidence is shattered when Andy receives a Buzz Lightyear action figure for his birthday and he struggles to maintain control of the room - and Andy's heart. In lesser hands, this character could be be annoying and a bit of a jerk, but with Hanks' inherent charm, Woody is lovable, neurotic and vulnerable as he tries to get out of one jam after another.
Tim Allen wasn't the first choice for the voice of Buzz Lightyear, but with his success in 1994's THE SANTA CLAUS he was called into service on this film - and the results couldn't be better. He blends machismo, bluster and a sincere earnestness that perfectly pairs and counterbalances Hanks' tics to form a movie duo that ranks right up there with the best in film history.
It is the attention to detail that these filmmakers really excel at and the supporting cast of voice actors really brings it here. From Don Rickles to John Ratzenberger to Annie Potts to R. Lee Emery to Jim Varney to Laurie Metcalf, all bring charm and heart to their characters even when they are in conflict.
Speaking of attention to detail, the CGI in this film works really, really well - even after 23 years of improvements. The filmmakers were blazing a trail and there is much to look at in the background, from the 2 "Hidden Mickey's" in Andy's room to the tribute to THE SHINING, the background and renderings are lush and are worth a viewing just to look at hidden gems (and Easter Eggs) in the background.
But none of this would matter if the story wasn't any good and I give story writers Lasseter and future Pixar Director's Pete Docter and Andrew Stanton credit for keeping the story crisp, clear and simple and infusing heart and sincerity without getting cloying or annoying. Interestingly enough, in looking at the credits, Joss Whedon, Joel Cohen and Alec Sokolow were all contributors to the screenplay as well. When I see that many writers on a screenplay, I worry about continuity and flow. But, make no mistake about it, this film has a strong vision driven by Lasseter and the results on the screen show that focus.
If you haven't seen this film in awhile, give yourself a treat and check it out again, it holds up very, very well and will be well worth the 84 minutes it will take to watch it (the shortest of all PIXAR films).
Letter Grade A+ - which means, of course...
A rare 10 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
It sure does.
Directed by visionary Pixar founder John Lasseter, TOY STORY is the first computer generated full-length motion picture and tells the...story...of toys that come to life when the humans leave the room. It is a simple concept that is executed beautifully with wit, charm and heart that sustains to this day and (I would imagine) to infinity...and beyond.
Besides the revolutionary CGI work (which mostly holds up), the heartwarming story and the crispness of the pacing of the film, the masterstroke here is the pitch perfect voice casting. Tom Hanks was the first - and only - choice for Woody, the Cowboy doll that has been the main toy for Andy. His confidence is shattered when Andy receives a Buzz Lightyear action figure for his birthday and he struggles to maintain control of the room - and Andy's heart. In lesser hands, this character could be be annoying and a bit of a jerk, but with Hanks' inherent charm, Woody is lovable, neurotic and vulnerable as he tries to get out of one jam after another.
Tim Allen wasn't the first choice for the voice of Buzz Lightyear, but with his success in 1994's THE SANTA CLAUS he was called into service on this film - and the results couldn't be better. He blends machismo, bluster and a sincere earnestness that perfectly pairs and counterbalances Hanks' tics to form a movie duo that ranks right up there with the best in film history.
It is the attention to detail that these filmmakers really excel at and the supporting cast of voice actors really brings it here. From Don Rickles to John Ratzenberger to Annie Potts to R. Lee Emery to Jim Varney to Laurie Metcalf, all bring charm and heart to their characters even when they are in conflict.
Speaking of attention to detail, the CGI in this film works really, really well - even after 23 years of improvements. The filmmakers were blazing a trail and there is much to look at in the background, from the 2 "Hidden Mickey's" in Andy's room to the tribute to THE SHINING, the background and renderings are lush and are worth a viewing just to look at hidden gems (and Easter Eggs) in the background.
But none of this would matter if the story wasn't any good and I give story writers Lasseter and future Pixar Director's Pete Docter and Andrew Stanton credit for keeping the story crisp, clear and simple and infusing heart and sincerity without getting cloying or annoying. Interestingly enough, in looking at the credits, Joss Whedon, Joel Cohen and Alec Sokolow were all contributors to the screenplay as well. When I see that many writers on a screenplay, I worry about continuity and flow. But, make no mistake about it, this film has a strong vision driven by Lasseter and the results on the screen show that focus.
If you haven't seen this film in awhile, give yourself a treat and check it out again, it holds up very, very well and will be well worth the 84 minutes it will take to watch it (the shortest of all PIXAR films).
Letter Grade A+ - which means, of course...
A rare 10 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Scott Pilgrim, played by Michael Cera, is a young man whose life is going nowhere fast. At 23, he describes himself as in between jobs and spends his free time playing bass in a struggling band. But Scott does have a girlfriend named Knives Chau (Ellen Wong), never mind that she is still in high school and things are about as chaste as they can get. Undaunted, Scott keeps plugging away despite the supportive taunts of his gay roomie Wallace (Kieran Culkin), and the members of his band.
Things change for Scott when he meets a girl named Ramona (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), at a party. Ramona shows no interest in Scott but he’s inexplicably drawn to her and eventually gets the roller blading delivery girl to go out with him, despite the strong protests of his sister Stacey (Anna Kendrick), and his drummer/ex-girlfriend Kim (Allison Pine). The upswing Scott’s life takes at meeting the girl of his dreams and his band’s shot at a recording deal is tempered by the complications of choosing between Knives, who is becoming more clingy, and Ramona, who brings with her a lot of angry baggage.
This baggage actually comes in the form of seven evil exes whom Scott must battle and defeat if he wishes to continue dating her. Scott accepts the challenge and finds himself in a life and death battle with some true psychos, all of whom have strange powers and appear out of nowhere to pummel Scott. I will not spoil the surprises but suffice it to say that the exes are played by some great names, and each one brings plenty of humor to go with the action.
Action and music blend well with comedy and romance and the video game-inspired fight sequences complete with numerous inside jokes for gamers are truly a delight. The frantic sequences mix music, and over the top action with cartoonish gags and humor in a winning formula. Seeing Scott take flying leaps across a room to battle for Ramona and rebounding from one pummeling after another is great fun. Scott give as good as he gets, learning at times that brains will win out over brawn.
The film has a frantic pacing that Director Edgar Wright never lets get out of control. Like his great work in Shaun of the Dead, Wright keeps the characters and their relationships at the center of the film, making them not only relatable but easy to root for despite the bizarre scenario the characters find themselves in.
The film is based on a graphic novel by Bryan Lee O’Malley and delivers a fun adventure that should delight fans of the novel as well as video gamers everywhere. The film knows who its audience is and plays the zany plot with a wink and smile and does not get caught up with intricate plotlines and overly complex characters. Instead the movie keeps the attention on the action and the great cast of characters. Cera does his best work yet in the title role and Culkin nearly steals every scene he is in as does Wong. Jason Schwartzman shines as the uber villain Gideon and rounds out the effective cast in this pleasant surprise of the summer.
Things change for Scott when he meets a girl named Ramona (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), at a party. Ramona shows no interest in Scott but he’s inexplicably drawn to her and eventually gets the roller blading delivery girl to go out with him, despite the strong protests of his sister Stacey (Anna Kendrick), and his drummer/ex-girlfriend Kim (Allison Pine). The upswing Scott’s life takes at meeting the girl of his dreams and his band’s shot at a recording deal is tempered by the complications of choosing between Knives, who is becoming more clingy, and Ramona, who brings with her a lot of angry baggage.
This baggage actually comes in the form of seven evil exes whom Scott must battle and defeat if he wishes to continue dating her. Scott accepts the challenge and finds himself in a life and death battle with some true psychos, all of whom have strange powers and appear out of nowhere to pummel Scott. I will not spoil the surprises but suffice it to say that the exes are played by some great names, and each one brings plenty of humor to go with the action.
Action and music blend well with comedy and romance and the video game-inspired fight sequences complete with numerous inside jokes for gamers are truly a delight. The frantic sequences mix music, and over the top action with cartoonish gags and humor in a winning formula. Seeing Scott take flying leaps across a room to battle for Ramona and rebounding from one pummeling after another is great fun. Scott give as good as he gets, learning at times that brains will win out over brawn.
The film has a frantic pacing that Director Edgar Wright never lets get out of control. Like his great work in Shaun of the Dead, Wright keeps the characters and their relationships at the center of the film, making them not only relatable but easy to root for despite the bizarre scenario the characters find themselves in.
The film is based on a graphic novel by Bryan Lee O’Malley and delivers a fun adventure that should delight fans of the novel as well as video gamers everywhere. The film knows who its audience is and plays the zany plot with a wink and smile and does not get caught up with intricate plotlines and overly complex characters. Instead the movie keeps the attention on the action and the great cast of characters. Cera does his best work yet in the title role and Culkin nearly steals every scene he is in as does Wong. Jason Schwartzman shines as the uber villain Gideon and rounds out the effective cast in this pleasant surprise of the summer.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Knowing my love of reading, a friend of mine suggested I read The Maze Runner by James Dashner a few years ago. I had just finished reading Hunger Games so, honestly, I was burned out on post-apocalyptic survival stories so I set it aside. However, being familiar with the title, my interest was piqued when the movie was announced and I found myself drawn into the story more than I expected when I screened The Maze Runner movie in 2014. It didn’t have the desperate drama of The Hunger Games, but the mystery of the maze was intriguing enough.
If you haven’t seen the first movie in this series, you’ll want to watch that first as Scorch Trials picks up pretty much where the last movie ended. There are no recaps or flashbacks which fans may appreciate as the full 2 hours and 12 minute running time is dedicated to advancing the story, but it’s definitely not a movie that stands well on its own.
Having escaped from the Glade, Thomas and his somber band of Gladers are transported to a fortified military installation where for a brief moment they believe they’re safe from Ava Paige and WCKD, the mysterious organization that placed them in the Glade for reasons still unknown.
Suspicious and untrusting (by nature, or conditioning?), Thomas, played with grim determination by Dylan O’Brien, uncovers the outpost’s connection to WCKD and the gang is on the run again but this time, instead of a maze, they find themselves in a desolate landscape known as the Scorch.
If the first movie was “The Great Escape”, this movie is “The Amazing Race”. Hoping to find “The Right Hand”, a vigilante group of resistance fighters that have allegedly rescued other Gladers, Thomas and gang set out across a barren wasteland. The movie follows their desperate flight to avoid both WCKD operatives and “cranks”, zombies who were victims of a virus that has wiped out most of humanity.
I watched most of The Scorch Trials, much like I watch The Walking Dead, with my eyes clenched shut but still listening earnestly, but I’m a bit of a wimp that way. There’s definitely more action in this installment and those who enjoyed the first movie, will appreciate this one more even though the last 20 minutes or so of the movie was set up for the third Maze Runner: The Death Cure due in 2017.
The core band of Gladers, played by O’Brien, Kaya Scodelario (Teresa), Thomas Brodie-Sangster (Newt), Ki Hong Lee (Minho), Dexter Darden (Frypan) and Alexander Flores (Winston) are easy to root for, while Game of Thrones’ Aiden Gillen (Janson) and Patricia Clarkson, who reprises her role as Ava Paige, are very easy to dislike. The Scorch Trials introduces new characters, like Aris another maze escapee played by Jacob Lofland, and Brenda and Jorge, survivors turned mercenaries played by Rosa Salazar and Giancarlo Esposito who add a new dimension to the story. Will they help lead the Gladers to The Right Hand or turn them over to WCKD for the right price?
In addition to nearly maiming my husband by squeezing his hand too tight, I also left the movie a little winded from holding my breath in suspense, and watching these kids do a hell of a lot of running. A worthy sequel, The Scorch Trials definitely leaves you ready for the story to continue.
If you haven’t seen the first movie in this series, you’ll want to watch that first as Scorch Trials picks up pretty much where the last movie ended. There are no recaps or flashbacks which fans may appreciate as the full 2 hours and 12 minute running time is dedicated to advancing the story, but it’s definitely not a movie that stands well on its own.
Having escaped from the Glade, Thomas and his somber band of Gladers are transported to a fortified military installation where for a brief moment they believe they’re safe from Ava Paige and WCKD, the mysterious organization that placed them in the Glade for reasons still unknown.
Suspicious and untrusting (by nature, or conditioning?), Thomas, played with grim determination by Dylan O’Brien, uncovers the outpost’s connection to WCKD and the gang is on the run again but this time, instead of a maze, they find themselves in a desolate landscape known as the Scorch.
If the first movie was “The Great Escape”, this movie is “The Amazing Race”. Hoping to find “The Right Hand”, a vigilante group of resistance fighters that have allegedly rescued other Gladers, Thomas and gang set out across a barren wasteland. The movie follows their desperate flight to avoid both WCKD operatives and “cranks”, zombies who were victims of a virus that has wiped out most of humanity.
I watched most of The Scorch Trials, much like I watch The Walking Dead, with my eyes clenched shut but still listening earnestly, but I’m a bit of a wimp that way. There’s definitely more action in this installment and those who enjoyed the first movie, will appreciate this one more even though the last 20 minutes or so of the movie was set up for the third Maze Runner: The Death Cure due in 2017.
The core band of Gladers, played by O’Brien, Kaya Scodelario (Teresa), Thomas Brodie-Sangster (Newt), Ki Hong Lee (Minho), Dexter Darden (Frypan) and Alexander Flores (Winston) are easy to root for, while Game of Thrones’ Aiden Gillen (Janson) and Patricia Clarkson, who reprises her role as Ava Paige, are very easy to dislike. The Scorch Trials introduces new characters, like Aris another maze escapee played by Jacob Lofland, and Brenda and Jorge, survivors turned mercenaries played by Rosa Salazar and Giancarlo Esposito who add a new dimension to the story. Will they help lead the Gladers to The Right Hand or turn them over to WCKD for the right price?
In addition to nearly maiming my husband by squeezing his hand too tight, I also left the movie a little winded from holding my breath in suspense, and watching these kids do a hell of a lot of running. A worthy sequel, The Scorch Trials definitely leaves you ready for the story to continue.