Search
Search results
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Deadpool (2016) in Movies
Jul 21, 2017
Ryan Reynolds (2 more)
Hilarious Throughout
Energetic Score
Even Better Than A Chimichanga
Many thought that this movie would never get made, but I am very glad that it did. The movie serves as a long awaited origin story to Deadpool, that is fairly faithful to the comic book, at least more so than the previous iteration that we got of the character. Ryan Reynolds is fantastic in the Deadpool role, he truly was born to play the merc with a mouth in my opinion. Deadpool here is crass, funny, violent and energetic as well as being pretty faithful to comic book Deadpool, with the only thing missing from this version being the multiple voices in his head, but I am pretty sure that we will see that character trait develop in future Deadpool movies. The plot is pretty simple, we are introduced to Deadpool and shown how he got his powers after being diagnosed with incurable cancer via flashback. From there we basically follow him while he attempts to track down Ajax, or Francis, (the guy that turned him into Deadpool and made him deformed,) so that he can cure his skin and give him back his good looks. The one thing that was always going to either make or break this movie, was the humour. However they capture the meta humour perfectly here, which is an essential component of what makes up this character and is one of the main reasons why so many people love him. The movie is chock full of clever fourth wall breaks and pop culture references. The film was granted an R rating by the studio and the filmmakers take full advantage of that fact, with constant blood splatter and f-bombs being dropped left and right. The hip hop based score adds to the energetic tone of the movie and the action scenes are exciting throughout.
All of this results in setting up a Deadpool universe that is full of potential, we already know that we are getting a sequel, probably featuring Cable and possibly introducing the X force, plus I am very curious whether or not we will get to see Deadpool being integrated into the larger X Men universe, it would be really cool to see him interacting with Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine, since he is the butt of several jokes in the Deadpool movie.
Overall, whether you are a fan of the Deadpool comic or not, as long as you are into crass humour, over the top cartoon violence and R rated superhero movies, then there is no reason why you won’t love this movie. It is also the best Fox superhero movie that we have had and it is the best R rated superhero movie ever produced.
All of this results in setting up a Deadpool universe that is full of potential, we already know that we are getting a sequel, probably featuring Cable and possibly introducing the X force, plus I am very curious whether or not we will get to see Deadpool being integrated into the larger X Men universe, it would be really cool to see him interacting with Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine, since he is the butt of several jokes in the Deadpool movie.
Overall, whether you are a fan of the Deadpool comic or not, as long as you are into crass humour, over the top cartoon violence and R rated superhero movies, then there is no reason why you won’t love this movie. It is also the best Fox superhero movie that we have had and it is the best R rated superhero movie ever produced.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated 3 Idiots (2009) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
So, I am writing a coffee table book that selects the 200 top films of 2000 – 2019. Called, predictably, 21st Century Cinema: 200 Unmissable films. It uses a system of rating I devised called The Decinemal, which takes the ten categories by which a film can be rated (Direction, Script, Design, Lead Acting, Support Acting, Music, Photography, Critical Acclaim, Watchability and X-Factor) and scores them out of 10, to give an overall score out of 100. Whilst not foolproof, it does give a remarkable working basis for comparing movies of different genres, and the ratings often bear a striking relation to the democratic system used by IMDb – a film scoring 7.2 on that website might be a 75 decinemal, for example, and that feels like that validates its use.
It has been a very fun, if time consuming, project. The difficulty is keeping up with new releases every year, and trying to catch some of the more obscure foreign language films out there that get high scores on IMDb. One such film was 3 Idiots, to date the highest rated Bollywood film on that website, with a score of 8.5; which is high! Very high! So I have to watch it and find out for myself.
Now, Bollywood is not me for, barring the odd amusement of how bizarre they can be. I find the musical interludes often grating and incongruous, and the melodramatic acting styles something that the cinema of most other countries outgrew decades ago. So it is hard for me to be objective about it. On the whole they just don’t compete on any level with American, European or, well, any other country’s output. In short, I would never normally watch one at all.
Surprisingly, I found 3 Idiots, although clownish and OTT, quite entertaining from the start. I even found one or two of the obligatory musical numbers very catchy and a lot of fun! Also, lead actor Aamir Khan, one of India’s biggest stars, was very charming and watchable. Of course, it is colourful, loud and has a childish sensibility, but some moments made me genuinely laugh. The main problem actually came from it being padded out to almost 2 and 1/2 hours, which was far too long for comfort. If it had been more economical I may have even been able to say it was worth watching.
Sadly, it is the moments of cultural difference and pure silliness that dragged it down. Despite its positive points, ultimately it is a mess, and to compare it on the standard I judge all films I see I have to be fair and not patronise it. Certainly in terms of the Bollywood fare I have seen bits of over the years, I can see why it is so well thought of. I can also see how films like this gain such a high rating, because it is the native audience it was made for that cast the votes. Which is fair enough, but does give it an unreasonably high score.
I think if more people watched it and rated it, it would balance out at a 6.5, and it probably deserves that for sheer entertainment value. I have certainly seen many worse films! Applying The Decinemal objectively, however, it comes out like this: Direction 4, Script 5, Design 6, Lead Acting 6, Support acting 4, Music 5, Photography 6, Critical Acclaim 7, Wachability 5, x-Factor 6. Added up that gives it a Decinemal of 54 – a far cry from the 74 it would have needed to make my top 200. And I stand by that score, as the level of likelihood of everyone’s enjoyment of it.
To an extent it discourages me from watching anything from this part of the world again, but I can’t say I didn’t appreciate why it was such a big hit. Interesting.
It has been a very fun, if time consuming, project. The difficulty is keeping up with new releases every year, and trying to catch some of the more obscure foreign language films out there that get high scores on IMDb. One such film was 3 Idiots, to date the highest rated Bollywood film on that website, with a score of 8.5; which is high! Very high! So I have to watch it and find out for myself.
Now, Bollywood is not me for, barring the odd amusement of how bizarre they can be. I find the musical interludes often grating and incongruous, and the melodramatic acting styles something that the cinema of most other countries outgrew decades ago. So it is hard for me to be objective about it. On the whole they just don’t compete on any level with American, European or, well, any other country’s output. In short, I would never normally watch one at all.
Surprisingly, I found 3 Idiots, although clownish and OTT, quite entertaining from the start. I even found one or two of the obligatory musical numbers very catchy and a lot of fun! Also, lead actor Aamir Khan, one of India’s biggest stars, was very charming and watchable. Of course, it is colourful, loud and has a childish sensibility, but some moments made me genuinely laugh. The main problem actually came from it being padded out to almost 2 and 1/2 hours, which was far too long for comfort. If it had been more economical I may have even been able to say it was worth watching.
Sadly, it is the moments of cultural difference and pure silliness that dragged it down. Despite its positive points, ultimately it is a mess, and to compare it on the standard I judge all films I see I have to be fair and not patronise it. Certainly in terms of the Bollywood fare I have seen bits of over the years, I can see why it is so well thought of. I can also see how films like this gain such a high rating, because it is the native audience it was made for that cast the votes. Which is fair enough, but does give it an unreasonably high score.
I think if more people watched it and rated it, it would balance out at a 6.5, and it probably deserves that for sheer entertainment value. I have certainly seen many worse films! Applying The Decinemal objectively, however, it comes out like this: Direction 4, Script 5, Design 6, Lead Acting 6, Support acting 4, Music 5, Photography 6, Critical Acclaim 7, Wachability 5, x-Factor 6. Added up that gives it a Decinemal of 54 – a far cry from the 74 it would have needed to make my top 200. And I stand by that score, as the level of likelihood of everyone’s enjoyment of it.
To an extent it discourages me from watching anything from this part of the world again, but I can’t say I didn’t appreciate why it was such a big hit. Interesting.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Logan (2017) in Movies
Feb 10, 2018 (Updated Feb 10, 2018)
Cover Granny's eyes and ears
The question we must ask ourselves here is: does adding graphic gory violence and F-bombs by the cartload really transform a reasonably formulaic X-men franchise movie into something qualitatively different? Because it seems to me that if you were to make a PG-rated edit of Logan it would not feel that much different from many of the other films in the series. Well, perhaps I exaggerate just a bit, because the film does have a downbeat mood quite unusual for this genre, and the focus on the fragility of its characters does give the actors a lot to work with (though Hugh Jackman is, quite predictably, acted off the screen by Patrick Stewart).
Plot as follows: the year is 2030, or thereabouts, and all is not well for mutantkind, inasmuch as they seem to have died out. A knocking-on-a-bit Wolverine is working as a limo driver and trying to keep a low profile while caring for a frail Charles Xavier, but the appearance of a young mutant girl forces the duo to reassess their priorities.
Maybe the problem is that the first trailer for this film - the one with the Johnny Cash soundtrack - promised something genuinely powerful and melancholic. The song isn't in the movie and neither, really, is the power and melancholy. The movie seems to be trying to tell the story of a conflicted man steeped in violence who tries to find redemption at the end of his life, but Jackman's Wolverine has always been so much of a teddy bear - his 'darkness' and 'edginess' have always felt like corporate branding - that this doesn't really work.
Still, the film is well-assembled and its vision of a dystopian near-future America is both engaging and consisting. The film's willingness to simply not worry about franchise continuity is also kind of refreshing. With the future of the X-franchise apparently somewhat up in the air, this is at the very least a superior entry to mark the departure of at least one of its mainstays.
Plot as follows: the year is 2030, or thereabouts, and all is not well for mutantkind, inasmuch as they seem to have died out. A knocking-on-a-bit Wolverine is working as a limo driver and trying to keep a low profile while caring for a frail Charles Xavier, but the appearance of a young mutant girl forces the duo to reassess their priorities.
Maybe the problem is that the first trailer for this film - the one with the Johnny Cash soundtrack - promised something genuinely powerful and melancholic. The song isn't in the movie and neither, really, is the power and melancholy. The movie seems to be trying to tell the story of a conflicted man steeped in violence who tries to find redemption at the end of his life, but Jackman's Wolverine has always been so much of a teddy bear - his 'darkness' and 'edginess' have always felt like corporate branding - that this doesn't really work.
Still, the film is well-assembled and its vision of a dystopian near-future America is both engaging and consisting. The film's willingness to simply not worry about franchise continuity is also kind of refreshing. With the future of the X-franchise apparently somewhat up in the air, this is at the very least a superior entry to mark the departure of at least one of its mainstays.
JT (287 KP) rated Chloe (2010) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
As sexual thrillers go this is hardly up there with the best of them, in fact it boarder lines on B-movie soft porn. Director Atom Egoyan is no stranger to this type of erotic genre having previously helmed such films as Exotica and Where The Truth Lies. But this latest turn lacked something in the plot and it just seemed to fall at the last hurdle.
With three exceptional acting talents, more so from Seyfried whose role in this as the sexy femme fatal is a far cry from Mamma Mia. For Moore it was a role that may have caused much whispering in Hollywood if anything for the lesbian clinch mid way through.
From the outset it looks as if we are going to be in for a great little thriller. Moore’s Catherine is desperate to find out if her husband (Neeson) is as honest as he says he is. But she is apparently drawn into Chloe’s sexual tales and meets up with her on countless occasions to have the events graphically recited back to her like some x-rated book club.
This is where the film seems to lack the tension that we might have been hoping for, with the exception of maybe a little flurry at the end. It never really digs its nails underneath the skin and claws at us, we hope that it will arrive at some point but alas it never does. The ending is disappointing.
However, Seyfried’s sheer beauty is not for question, she is curvaceous and captivating and her scenes with Moore are extremely sensuous, one in particular will make you sit bolt up right in your seat.
At the end of it all you’ll walk away flustered, but it certainly won’t be from the gripping suspense.
With three exceptional acting talents, more so from Seyfried whose role in this as the sexy femme fatal is a far cry from Mamma Mia. For Moore it was a role that may have caused much whispering in Hollywood if anything for the lesbian clinch mid way through.
From the outset it looks as if we are going to be in for a great little thriller. Moore’s Catherine is desperate to find out if her husband (Neeson) is as honest as he says he is. But she is apparently drawn into Chloe’s sexual tales and meets up with her on countless occasions to have the events graphically recited back to her like some x-rated book club.
This is where the film seems to lack the tension that we might have been hoping for, with the exception of maybe a little flurry at the end. It never really digs its nails underneath the skin and claws at us, we hope that it will arrive at some point but alas it never does. The ending is disappointing.
However, Seyfried’s sheer beauty is not for question, she is curvaceous and captivating and her scenes with Moore are extremely sensuous, one in particular will make you sit bolt up right in your seat.
At the end of it all you’ll walk away flustered, but it certainly won’t be from the gripping suspense.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Censor (2021) in Movies
Sep 3, 2021
Niamh Algar is fabulous (1 more)
Novel story and great direction
A genuinely original story (at last!)
Positives:
- I often whinge on about there being no novelty in movies anymore, with everything being derivative of everything else. Well here's a case for the defence. There have been movies before about the mental effect of working in the horror movie business (Toby Jones in "Berberian Sound Studio" comes to mind). But none (as far as I'm aware) from the viewpoint of a film censor. This novelty gave the movie the scope to go in a number of different directions - including as a historical drama. But it focuses on a study of how loss and grief can suddenly emerge in dramatic ways even after many years. Director Prano Bailey-Bond co-wrote this and directs it with such verve that she is very much added to my "one to watch" list for writer-directors.
- Irish actress Niamh Algar is just brilliant here, reminiscent of Morfydd Clark's fantastic performance in "Saint Maud" (not the only parallel to be drawn in this review). The acting during the dramatic conclusion is utterly chilling.
- While the ending of the movie might be polarising, I loved it. No spoilers, but it's one of my favourite endings of any movie so far this year. It reminded me strongly of the ending of "Saint Maud".
- The editing is by Mark Towns (who also did "Saint Maud"). And it's bloody marvellous, particularly during that finale! While it doesn't shy away from showing some pretty horrible stuff, Towns shows much of this subliminally in the edit (shades of the "Psycho" shower scene). This probably helped with its certification (of which more later).
- The music by Emilie Levienaise-Farrouch is quirky and fitting for the movie. I loved the jaunty end-title music.
- Has one of the best impalings since Timothy Dalton fell on that model church spire in "Hot Fuzz"!
Negatives:
- While Algar is utterly fabulous, I was less convinced by the acting of some of her fellow censors in the office. Some of this felt a bit wooden to me.
Summary Thoughts on "Censor": The workings of the UK film censors have always fascinated me, and here's a novel insight into their work during a very difficult period in their history: the National Viewers and Listener's Association, headed by the fearsome Mary Whitehouse, was up in arms at the potential damage to people's (and particularly children's) mental wellbeing from the influx of "video nasties" arriving in homes on VHS tapes. The film needs to be applauded for coming up with such a novel storyline.
What I found surprising (and ironic) is that this got away with only a "15" certificate. Editor Mark Towns suggested to me, in a private communication on Twitter, that the BBFC rated it thus due to the "context" in which the violence was set. But I remember the first 'X' film I saw. It was Brian De Palma's "The Fury", which (from memory) was purely rated as such for the final scene in which John Cassavetes's character explodes in a gory fountain. Judging from "Censor"'s "15" certificate, things have become significantly more permissive in recent years!
(For the full graphical review check out onemannsmovies on the web, facebook and (for the video review) Tiktok. Thanks)
- I often whinge on about there being no novelty in movies anymore, with everything being derivative of everything else. Well here's a case for the defence. There have been movies before about the mental effect of working in the horror movie business (Toby Jones in "Berberian Sound Studio" comes to mind). But none (as far as I'm aware) from the viewpoint of a film censor. This novelty gave the movie the scope to go in a number of different directions - including as a historical drama. But it focuses on a study of how loss and grief can suddenly emerge in dramatic ways even after many years. Director Prano Bailey-Bond co-wrote this and directs it with such verve that she is very much added to my "one to watch" list for writer-directors.
- Irish actress Niamh Algar is just brilliant here, reminiscent of Morfydd Clark's fantastic performance in "Saint Maud" (not the only parallel to be drawn in this review). The acting during the dramatic conclusion is utterly chilling.
- While the ending of the movie might be polarising, I loved it. No spoilers, but it's one of my favourite endings of any movie so far this year. It reminded me strongly of the ending of "Saint Maud".
- The editing is by Mark Towns (who also did "Saint Maud"). And it's bloody marvellous, particularly during that finale! While it doesn't shy away from showing some pretty horrible stuff, Towns shows much of this subliminally in the edit (shades of the "Psycho" shower scene). This probably helped with its certification (of which more later).
- The music by Emilie Levienaise-Farrouch is quirky and fitting for the movie. I loved the jaunty end-title music.
- Has one of the best impalings since Timothy Dalton fell on that model church spire in "Hot Fuzz"!
Negatives:
- While Algar is utterly fabulous, I was less convinced by the acting of some of her fellow censors in the office. Some of this felt a bit wooden to me.
Summary Thoughts on "Censor": The workings of the UK film censors have always fascinated me, and here's a novel insight into their work during a very difficult period in their history: the National Viewers and Listener's Association, headed by the fearsome Mary Whitehouse, was up in arms at the potential damage to people's (and particularly children's) mental wellbeing from the influx of "video nasties" arriving in homes on VHS tapes. The film needs to be applauded for coming up with such a novel storyline.
What I found surprising (and ironic) is that this got away with only a "15" certificate. Editor Mark Towns suggested to me, in a private communication on Twitter, that the BBFC rated it thus due to the "context" in which the violence was set. But I remember the first 'X' film I saw. It was Brian De Palma's "The Fury", which (from memory) was purely rated as such for the final scene in which John Cassavetes's character explodes in a gory fountain. Judging from "Censor"'s "15" certificate, things have become significantly more permissive in recent years!
(For the full graphical review check out onemannsmovies on the web, facebook and (for the video review) Tiktok. Thanks)
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday (1993) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019 (Updated Jun 21, 2019)
Jason Voorhees is believed to be dead, but his murderous rampage lives on. He's able to transfer from body to body, but each host deteriorates at an incredible rate and he has to switch frequently. Meanwhile, Steven goes to meet Diana one night, who happens to be his ex-wife's mother. She has something very important to tell Steven. You see, Diana is the sister of Jason Voorhees and Jessica, Steven's ex, is his niece. Steven and Jessica have a baby named Stephanie, as well.
According to Creighton Duke, a bounty hunter, the only way anyone can kill Jason is by destroying his heart and it has to be done by a blood relative. Not only that, but he can also be reborn by transferring into the body of another Voorhees. So after Diana is killed in a scuffle with "Jason," that only leaves Jessica and Stephanie. Steven has no choice, but to protect his family even though he's believed to be the one who killed Diana and has the police hot on his trail every step of the way.
For a Friday the 13th film, the acting in this is surprisingly good. It still has a few actors that make you groan, but the actors who get the most face time are decent and get the job done. In fact, I probably would've rated this a few points higher if it wasn't for a few factors. The main one being that Jason is a worm. Not only that, but he's like this demonic worm thing that the sphincter-blasting worms in Dreamcatcher would probably find attractive. If they hadn't tried to give Jason this supernatural explanation and had something else in its place, this would have been a lot better.
Jason, like the actual Jason with the hockey mask, is really only in the film for maybe ten to fifteen minutes tops. So that hurts the film, in my eyes. They also made Jason make all these weird noises this time around. He was wheezing, breathing heavily, groaning, and grunting. It didn't fit the character. He was generally silent up until this film and is again in Jason X. So...what the hell? It's a disappointing sendoff overall for a film labeled as The Final Friday. I guess it wasn't completely pointless. We did get the Freddy Vs Jason tease at the end, which wasn't really followed up on for ten years. But I digress...
According to Creighton Duke, a bounty hunter, the only way anyone can kill Jason is by destroying his heart and it has to be done by a blood relative. Not only that, but he can also be reborn by transferring into the body of another Voorhees. So after Diana is killed in a scuffle with "Jason," that only leaves Jessica and Stephanie. Steven has no choice, but to protect his family even though he's believed to be the one who killed Diana and has the police hot on his trail every step of the way.
For a Friday the 13th film, the acting in this is surprisingly good. It still has a few actors that make you groan, but the actors who get the most face time are decent and get the job done. In fact, I probably would've rated this a few points higher if it wasn't for a few factors. The main one being that Jason is a worm. Not only that, but he's like this demonic worm thing that the sphincter-blasting worms in Dreamcatcher would probably find attractive. If they hadn't tried to give Jason this supernatural explanation and had something else in its place, this would have been a lot better.
Jason, like the actual Jason with the hockey mask, is really only in the film for maybe ten to fifteen minutes tops. So that hurts the film, in my eyes. They also made Jason make all these weird noises this time around. He was wheezing, breathing heavily, groaning, and grunting. It didn't fit the character. He was generally silent up until this film and is again in Jason X. So...what the hell? It's a disappointing sendoff overall for a film labeled as The Final Friday. I guess it wasn't completely pointless. We did get the Freddy Vs Jason tease at the end, which wasn't really followed up on for ten years. But I digress...
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Blade (1998) in Movies
Jan 15, 2020
Blade is undeniably a product of it's time. It's the late 90s, everyone loves leather and shades, everyone loves Wesley Snipes, everyone loves dumb one liners, so the character of Blade is ripe for adaption.
But the importance of this gory action flick should absolutely not be understated. Not only was it the first proper big (ish) budget Marvel film, but it's pre dates Black Panther as the first superhero film with a black lead, and it pre dates The Punisher as the first R-rated Marvel blockbuster.
But in a pre X-Men world, comic book movies weren't a big deal at this point. I actually remember me and my friends sneakily renting and watching it (we were 10 at the time...) and none of them even knowing that Blade was even a comic book!
Here we are all these years later and the Blade trilogy is now remembered fondly (well, at least the first two are!)
Wesley Snipes is of course the star of this particular vehicle, and here, he is the most Wesley Snipes he's ever been. The cheesy one liners still come off well, and lend a nice comedic edge to the buckets of blood on display. The charm that he brings to the Blade character is the main reason why it's been hard to imagine anyone else in the role for so long (although I am here all day long for Mahershala Ali)
The other big character throughout the trilogy is Whistler, played by Kris Kristofferson, just generally being old, grumpy and badass, and is honestly the best character in the whole thing (here's hoping the MCU introduce a Whistler series on Disney+...)
Stephen Dorff plays Deacon Frost, the films villain, and he's really not much more than a generic superhero bad guy (the first of many).
The choreography and the fight scenes are pretty great, and the willingness to go hard R is what set Blade apart before comic book movies became a thing. It's sooooo bloody in parts, that it verges heavily into horror territory.
The CGI effects are utterly horrible by todays standards, but it's not used nearly enough to discredit the film too much.
Blade is a decent enough adaption of the cult Marvel series, and is a fun, gory blockbuster, but as mentioned, it's an important step in comic book cinema. Long live Blade!
But the importance of this gory action flick should absolutely not be understated. Not only was it the first proper big (ish) budget Marvel film, but it's pre dates Black Panther as the first superhero film with a black lead, and it pre dates The Punisher as the first R-rated Marvel blockbuster.
But in a pre X-Men world, comic book movies weren't a big deal at this point. I actually remember me and my friends sneakily renting and watching it (we were 10 at the time...) and none of them even knowing that Blade was even a comic book!
Here we are all these years later and the Blade trilogy is now remembered fondly (well, at least the first two are!)
Wesley Snipes is of course the star of this particular vehicle, and here, he is the most Wesley Snipes he's ever been. The cheesy one liners still come off well, and lend a nice comedic edge to the buckets of blood on display. The charm that he brings to the Blade character is the main reason why it's been hard to imagine anyone else in the role for so long (although I am here all day long for Mahershala Ali)
The other big character throughout the trilogy is Whistler, played by Kris Kristofferson, just generally being old, grumpy and badass, and is honestly the best character in the whole thing (here's hoping the MCU introduce a Whistler series on Disney+...)
Stephen Dorff plays Deacon Frost, the films villain, and he's really not much more than a generic superhero bad guy (the first of many).
The choreography and the fight scenes are pretty great, and the willingness to go hard R is what set Blade apart before comic book movies became a thing. It's sooooo bloody in parts, that it verges heavily into horror territory.
The CGI effects are utterly horrible by todays standards, but it's not used nearly enough to discredit the film too much.
Blade is a decent enough adaption of the cult Marvel series, and is a fun, gory blockbuster, but as mentioned, it's an important step in comic book cinema. Long live Blade!
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated A Jolly Good Fellow in Books
Apr 27, 2018
A Jolly Good Fellow by Stephen V. Masse
Genre: Fiction, Comedy, sort of Crime Fiction but not really
Rating: 3.75/5
Summary: Duncan is driving to the kids house. He has a plan—he’s going to kidnap him. But then he sees the kid hitchhiking in the snow. What better way to kidnap someone that to pick him up off the road and offer him a ride? Duncan dresses up as Santa Clause and sits on the street ringing a bell all day. The funds go to the needy—needy as in him. Duncan wants revenge, and he wants the ransom money. But Duncan isn’t exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer… he has no idea how to do a proper kidnapping.
Thoughts: A JOLLY GOOD FELLOW was really cute. It made me laugh, it made me smile, it had its nerve-wracking moments. It’s right in between a 3/5 and a 4 on the scale for me. The reason why is this—the plot was awesome, very unique, original, and very cute, the characters were hilarious and enchanting, but it was a little slow through the first three quarters of the book. Not that it dragged, just that it felt like the last section was fast paced, and the rest was slower and more relaxed, and those two things didn’t go well together and didn’t transition well.
I laughed a lot while I read A JOLLY GOOD FELLOW. If I had to pick a category, I’d choose comedy. It was cute and funny and a little silly, but silly in a good fun-to-read way.
The characters’ dialogue was written so that you could hear their voices in your head when they spoke. I loved hearing their accents while I read, it gave a lot of life to them. Duncan and Gabriel were very animated. Gabriel (the kid) was so full of life and energy. He was also very real. He acted the way a normal kid his age would act, he wasn’t a “perfect” child, an unrealistic character.
Content: There were a few bad words scattered throughout the book, but not much. Duncan went to the triple-X rated movie one night, but nothing was described. All in all, this was a very clean book.
Recommendation: Ages 14+ to anyone who wants a good holiday laugh. I stayed up pretty late reading this one because I couldn’t put it down. I can’t wait for more from Stephen Masse.
*This book won the INDEPENDEND PUBLISHING BOOK AWARD*
**Thanks to Pump Up Your Book for my review copy!**
Genre: Fiction, Comedy, sort of Crime Fiction but not really
Rating: 3.75/5
Summary: Duncan is driving to the kids house. He has a plan—he’s going to kidnap him. But then he sees the kid hitchhiking in the snow. What better way to kidnap someone that to pick him up off the road and offer him a ride? Duncan dresses up as Santa Clause and sits on the street ringing a bell all day. The funds go to the needy—needy as in him. Duncan wants revenge, and he wants the ransom money. But Duncan isn’t exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer… he has no idea how to do a proper kidnapping.
Thoughts: A JOLLY GOOD FELLOW was really cute. It made me laugh, it made me smile, it had its nerve-wracking moments. It’s right in between a 3/5 and a 4 on the scale for me. The reason why is this—the plot was awesome, very unique, original, and very cute, the characters were hilarious and enchanting, but it was a little slow through the first three quarters of the book. Not that it dragged, just that it felt like the last section was fast paced, and the rest was slower and more relaxed, and those two things didn’t go well together and didn’t transition well.
I laughed a lot while I read A JOLLY GOOD FELLOW. If I had to pick a category, I’d choose comedy. It was cute and funny and a little silly, but silly in a good fun-to-read way.
The characters’ dialogue was written so that you could hear their voices in your head when they spoke. I loved hearing their accents while I read, it gave a lot of life to them. Duncan and Gabriel were very animated. Gabriel (the kid) was so full of life and energy. He was also very real. He acted the way a normal kid his age would act, he wasn’t a “perfect” child, an unrealistic character.
Content: There were a few bad words scattered throughout the book, but not much. Duncan went to the triple-X rated movie one night, but nothing was described. All in all, this was a very clean book.
Recommendation: Ages 14+ to anyone who wants a good holiday laugh. I stayed up pretty late reading this one because I couldn’t put it down. I can’t wait for more from Stephen Masse.
*This book won the INDEPENDEND PUBLISHING BOOK AWARD*
**Thanks to Pump Up Your Book for my review copy!**
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard (2021) in Movies
Jun 22, 2021
No tension in the thriller elements (1 more)
Some shoddy special effects.
A movie that’s a pain in the A-double-dollar sign.
Struck-off bodyguard Michael Bryce (Ryan Reynolds) is plagued with nightmares about his failures, brought about by his nemesis Darius Kincaid (Samuel L Jackson) and his potty-mouthed wife Sonia (Salma Hayek). On doctor’s orders, he ‘retires’ from the business. But when Europe’s infrastructure is threatened by Greek megalomaniac Aristotle Papdopolous (Antonio Banderas) he is rudely dragged away from his briefly peaceful life and pitched back into utter mayhem.
Positives:
- As a comedy thriller, it does pass the '6 laughs test' in terms of the 'comedy' element. Some of these are minor chuckles. A few are really good belly laughs.
- Among these are some of the outrageous tirades of Salma Hayek: her accent makes some of the dialogue unintelligible, but given its X-rated nature, that's not necessarily a bad thing! As a mid-50's actress (Oh God - - don't tell her I mentioned her age!), Ms Hayek indeed has an arrestingly attractive form.
- Seeing Antonio Banderas and Morgan Freeman on the screen is never anything other than a positive. (Although Banderas is like Sean Connery in failing to tailor his natural accent to any role he's ever in!)
Negatives:
- A general problem I have with 'comedy thrillers' is that the comedy nearly always negates any of the thrills. Ryan Reynolds is not playing Deadpool in this one, although he might as well be doing so based on the number of times he is hit by cars and other solid objects. The result is that although it has the trappings of a Bond or a Bourne - exotic locations (here, mostly Italian ones) ; exotic woman; car chases; heavily-armed henchmen; huge explosions - it delivers none of the tension or excitement. When matched with some rather dodgy post-shoot special effects, the effect is generally underwhelming.
- If there was an award for the clumsiest movie title of 2021, we may already have a winner.
Summary Thoughts on "The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard": Sequels are very occasionally better. Often they are much worse. This one, I have to say, delivers very much "more of the same". Given that the writer/director team of Tom O'Connor and Patrick Hughes are in the driving seat, that's not much of a surprise. The shtick is mildly diverting, occasionally downright funny, but quickly outstays its welcome. The 100 minute run time felt, for me, much longer.
Looking back at my 2017 review of the first film, I think I was being over-kind giving it 6/10. I think this is neither better nor worse. So if you want to average the two and give each 5/10, I wouldn't object! But, again, it's one I will struggle to remember much about in a few month's time.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/06/22/the-hitmans-wifes-bodyguard-a-movie-thats-a-pain-in-the-a-double-dollar-sign/. Thanks).
Positives:
- As a comedy thriller, it does pass the '6 laughs test' in terms of the 'comedy' element. Some of these are minor chuckles. A few are really good belly laughs.
- Among these are some of the outrageous tirades of Salma Hayek: her accent makes some of the dialogue unintelligible, but given its X-rated nature, that's not necessarily a bad thing! As a mid-50's actress (Oh God - - don't tell her I mentioned her age!), Ms Hayek indeed has an arrestingly attractive form.
- Seeing Antonio Banderas and Morgan Freeman on the screen is never anything other than a positive. (Although Banderas is like Sean Connery in failing to tailor his natural accent to any role he's ever in!)
Negatives:
- A general problem I have with 'comedy thrillers' is that the comedy nearly always negates any of the thrills. Ryan Reynolds is not playing Deadpool in this one, although he might as well be doing so based on the number of times he is hit by cars and other solid objects. The result is that although it has the trappings of a Bond or a Bourne - exotic locations (here, mostly Italian ones) ; exotic woman; car chases; heavily-armed henchmen; huge explosions - it delivers none of the tension or excitement. When matched with some rather dodgy post-shoot special effects, the effect is generally underwhelming.
- If there was an award for the clumsiest movie title of 2021, we may already have a winner.
Summary Thoughts on "The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard": Sequels are very occasionally better. Often they are much worse. This one, I have to say, delivers very much "more of the same". Given that the writer/director team of Tom O'Connor and Patrick Hughes are in the driving seat, that's not much of a surprise. The shtick is mildly diverting, occasionally downright funny, but quickly outstays its welcome. The 100 minute run time felt, for me, much longer.
Looking back at my 2017 review of the first film, I think I was being over-kind giving it 6/10. I think this is neither better nor worse. So if you want to average the two and give each 5/10, I wouldn't object! But, again, it's one I will struggle to remember much about in a few month's time.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/06/22/the-hitmans-wifes-bodyguard-a-movie-thats-a-pain-in-the-a-double-dollar-sign/. Thanks).
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Confessions of a Queen B* (The Queen B*, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Author in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
<b>I am in love with that title</b> it's probably what got me interested in reading this in the first place. The first in Crista McHugh's <i>The Queen B*</i> series focuses on Alexis Wyndham, a high school senior who got bullied for years and decided to start a blog to expose the popular crowd at her school. Using her status as the Queen Bitch, Alexis primarily helps out other students who get bullied.
It goes without saying: <b><i>Confessions of a Queen B*</i> is quite literally a book with many common high school stereotypes and clichés.</b> There's the Queen Bee with her tiaras, entourage, and more often than not the head cheerleader. There's the star quarterback of the football team who probably has a six pack (if not, a flat stomach), dating the head cheerleader, and seems to have a perfect life with colleges all around trying to recruit him. There are the "freaks" and the "outcasts," who really have a different perspective on life but the Queen Bee says they're completely abnormal and probably asks "Why are you even here on this planet?" on a daily basis.
<b>The book has it all high school stereotypes wise.</b> Not exactly my type high schools in books are full of immature drama and I hate dramatic books unless you're highly entertaining. But <b>every once in a while, a book set in high school with all the bells and whistles comes around and sneakily gets into my good graces, even if it has immature moments here and there committed by the characters.</b>
<i>Confessions of a Queen B*</i> is just <b>a fun book to read and I enjoyed every moment. You see all sides of Alexis the sarcastic and snarky one that's public, and the secretly hidden side where she's actually a nice and down to earth person. You also see all sides of Brett the whole star quarterback with the perfect life, and the secretly hidden side where he's an absolute inner geek</b> who will probably like Sherlock and <a title="Read Ella's Confessions of a Queen B* review" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-confessions-of-a-queen-b-by-crista-mchugh/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">sweep Ella's heart away (damage is already done there)</a>. Woe is to Brett if he ever reveals it out to the world.
Their relationship is pretty typical the popular falling for the smart but it's quite realistic. <b>There are complications and ups and downs that stop Brett's and Alexis' romance from falling into THE ugly trap.</b> There are heartfelt moments and banters between the two-layered throughout the book <b>it's adorable and I ship them.</b>
The whole x-rated videos might be a subtle plot, but I was too busy enjoying myself to even care I already have a soft spot for this book.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-confessions-of-a-queen-b-by-crista-mchugh-review-and-giveaway/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<b>I am in love with that title</b> it's probably what got me interested in reading this in the first place. The first in Crista McHugh's <i>The Queen B*</i> series focuses on Alexis Wyndham, a high school senior who got bullied for years and decided to start a blog to expose the popular crowd at her school. Using her status as the Queen Bitch, Alexis primarily helps out other students who get bullied.
It goes without saying: <b><i>Confessions of a Queen B*</i> is quite literally a book with many common high school stereotypes and clichés.</b> There's the Queen Bee with her tiaras, entourage, and more often than not the head cheerleader. There's the star quarterback of the football team who probably has a six pack (if not, a flat stomach), dating the head cheerleader, and seems to have a perfect life with colleges all around trying to recruit him. There are the "freaks" and the "outcasts," who really have a different perspective on life but the Queen Bee says they're completely abnormal and probably asks "Why are you even here on this planet?" on a daily basis.
<b>The book has it all high school stereotypes wise.</b> Not exactly my type high schools in books are full of immature drama and I hate dramatic books unless you're highly entertaining. But <b>every once in a while, a book set in high school with all the bells and whistles comes around and sneakily gets into my good graces, even if it has immature moments here and there committed by the characters.</b>
<i>Confessions of a Queen B*</i> is just <b>a fun book to read and I enjoyed every moment. You see all sides of Alexis the sarcastic and snarky one that's public, and the secretly hidden side where she's actually a nice and down to earth person. You also see all sides of Brett the whole star quarterback with the perfect life, and the secretly hidden side where he's an absolute inner geek</b> who will probably like Sherlock and <a title="Read Ella's Confessions of a Queen B* review" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-confessions-of-a-queen-b-by-crista-mchugh/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">sweep Ella's heart away (damage is already done there)</a>. Woe is to Brett if he ever reveals it out to the world.
Their relationship is pretty typical the popular falling for the smart but it's quite realistic. <b>There are complications and ups and downs that stop Brett's and Alexis' romance from falling into THE ugly trap.</b> There are heartfelt moments and banters between the two-layered throughout the book <b>it's adorable and I ship them.</b>
The whole x-rated videos might be a subtle plot, but I was too busy enjoying myself to even care I already have a soft spot for this book.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-confessions-of-a-queen-b-by-crista-mchugh-review-and-giveaway/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>