Search
Search results
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of The Evil Within 2 in Video Games
Mar 5, 2018 (Updated Mar 5, 2018)
Gameplay mechanics (2 more)
Horrifically beautiful graphics
A fantastic antagonist
Some odd voice acting (1 more)
Some duff lines of dialogue
A Gruesomely Good Time
Contains spoilers, click to show
I was a fan of the first Evil Within game, which I felt was criminally underrated. However, I must admit I slept on this game. This was due to all of the fantastic games that were released in 2017 that I was trying to catch up on at the time of this game's release.
4 months after the game's initial release, I finally got my hands on it and I loved the time I spent in this insane world.
The Evil Within 2 does what all great sequels should aim to do, which is to take the best concepts and systems from the first game and expand on them, while adding in some fresh concepts and discarding a lot of the excess fat that dragged the first game down.
This game is a much more streamlined action-horror adventure than the first entry and while it starts out with some creepy and uneasy moments, it focuses more on the action element than the horror side of things in comparison with the first game. I do however feel that the game finds a nice equal balance of horror and action, in a way that feels reminiscent of the modern classic, Resident Evil 4. Even though Shinji Mikami didn't direct this game as he did the first entry, this one actually feels more like a traditional Shinji Mikami game.
The villain that torments you for the first third of the game is brilliant, he is engaging, threatening and over the top in all of the best possible ways. The one issue I have with him is, (SPOILERS,) they kill him off far too early and replace him with a more bland, less entertaining villain.
There is also some ropey voice acting present, they changed the actor playing Kidman and the new VO artist isn't as engaging in her performance. The actor playing the protagonist's daughter Lily, is also, quite awkward and stilted sounding. There are also some strange lines of dialogue that don't feel very natural and come across a bit pantomime, but you must remember that this is a Japanese game, written in Japanese and then translated into English. I did experience some technical issues whilst playing through the final third of the game, mostly to do with the use of the radio transmitter and I experienced one slight hiccup with the in-game physics. Unfortunately, although these weren't game-breaking issues, they are still present 4 months after the game's initial release, meaning I am forced to knock a point off of my overall score.
Overall though, this is a damn good time for any horror fan out there. The fact that this game is a great deal easier than the first may bother some hardcore gamers out there, but for me it was fine as I was mostly playing for the story anyway rather than the challenge. The optional first person mode is also a nice addition and adds a cool incentive to play through the New Game Plus.
4 months after the game's initial release, I finally got my hands on it and I loved the time I spent in this insane world.
The Evil Within 2 does what all great sequels should aim to do, which is to take the best concepts and systems from the first game and expand on them, while adding in some fresh concepts and discarding a lot of the excess fat that dragged the first game down.
This game is a much more streamlined action-horror adventure than the first entry and while it starts out with some creepy and uneasy moments, it focuses more on the action element than the horror side of things in comparison with the first game. I do however feel that the game finds a nice equal balance of horror and action, in a way that feels reminiscent of the modern classic, Resident Evil 4. Even though Shinji Mikami didn't direct this game as he did the first entry, this one actually feels more like a traditional Shinji Mikami game.
The villain that torments you for the first third of the game is brilliant, he is engaging, threatening and over the top in all of the best possible ways. The one issue I have with him is, (SPOILERS,) they kill him off far too early and replace him with a more bland, less entertaining villain.
There is also some ropey voice acting present, they changed the actor playing Kidman and the new VO artist isn't as engaging in her performance. The actor playing the protagonist's daughter Lily, is also, quite awkward and stilted sounding. There are also some strange lines of dialogue that don't feel very natural and come across a bit pantomime, but you must remember that this is a Japanese game, written in Japanese and then translated into English. I did experience some technical issues whilst playing through the final third of the game, mostly to do with the use of the radio transmitter and I experienced one slight hiccup with the in-game physics. Unfortunately, although these weren't game-breaking issues, they are still present 4 months after the game's initial release, meaning I am forced to knock a point off of my overall score.
Overall though, this is a damn good time for any horror fan out there. The fact that this game is a great deal easier than the first may bother some hardcore gamers out there, but for me it was fine as I was mostly playing for the story anyway rather than the challenge. The optional first person mode is also a nice addition and adds a cool incentive to play through the New Game Plus.
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated The Outsider (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
The concept of ‘The Outsider’ is a very interesting one, and partially why I was so drawn to the film in the first place. The film follows a former American GI by the name of Nick Lowell who joins the Yakuza, and that synopsis alone was enough to grab my attention. The second reason was the fact it starred Jared Leto, as I believe he’s a very good actor based on his performances in ‘Requiem for a Dream’, ‘Dallas Buyers Club’ and ‘American Psycho’.
Coming into this film, I had incredibly high hopes and was expecting an afternoon of thrilling scenes and engaging characters. As it was so easily accessible on Netflix, I also had no excuse to pass up the opportunity to get it watched. Unfortunately for me, I was left mostly disappointed by what ‘The Outsider’ delivered.
Running at 2 hours, it seems to drag on for much longer than that because the pacing of the film is poor. To be clear, I have no issue with films that have long runtimes provided they can make it work (‘The Wolf of Wall Street’, for example, runs at 3 hours yet seems to fly by), but this film has tedious scenes that simply didn’t do enough to hold my interest. They could’ve easily cut out half an hour’s worth of footage and still made the film work, in my opinion. It seems strange that a film about the Yakuza could be so boring, but sadly it was.
Jared Leto’s character, Nick, doesn’t have a clear backstory and because of this he’s a very uninteresting character. When we’re first introduced to him, I liked the fact he was such an enigma and assumed we’d learn more about him, but we never really do save for a few chunks of information scattered randomly throughout the narrative. As a Leto fan, I was disappointed that he didn’t really bring anything special to the role and literally any other actor could’ve taken his place and still delivered the same story.
The characters that Nick encounters throughout the film aren’t particularly noteworthy either, as they seem to exist to just berate Nick and frown at him, and not much happens beyond that. It seems very lazy that a film like ‘The Outsider’ has so many characters that are sloppily written, with no backstories to keep the audience interested.
‘The Outsider’ did have some redeeming features, though not enough for me to say I particularly enjoyed watching the film. There are a few gory, intense moments that hold your attention and make you squirm, but much less than I expected from a supposed crime film, especially one that focuses on such a notorious criminal organisation. Cinematically, it’s a decent film to look at based on the camerawork and colour grading throughout, but the absence of any decent story makes it fall flat.
Martin Zandvliet’s cinematic portrayal of the Japanese Yakuza is mediocre at best, and not what I expected based on the marketing I’d seen prior to watching the film. I wanted a violent, sexy, engaging crime film and got absolutely none of that.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/the-outsider/
Coming into this film, I had incredibly high hopes and was expecting an afternoon of thrilling scenes and engaging characters. As it was so easily accessible on Netflix, I also had no excuse to pass up the opportunity to get it watched. Unfortunately for me, I was left mostly disappointed by what ‘The Outsider’ delivered.
Running at 2 hours, it seems to drag on for much longer than that because the pacing of the film is poor. To be clear, I have no issue with films that have long runtimes provided they can make it work (‘The Wolf of Wall Street’, for example, runs at 3 hours yet seems to fly by), but this film has tedious scenes that simply didn’t do enough to hold my interest. They could’ve easily cut out half an hour’s worth of footage and still made the film work, in my opinion. It seems strange that a film about the Yakuza could be so boring, but sadly it was.
Jared Leto’s character, Nick, doesn’t have a clear backstory and because of this he’s a very uninteresting character. When we’re first introduced to him, I liked the fact he was such an enigma and assumed we’d learn more about him, but we never really do save for a few chunks of information scattered randomly throughout the narrative. As a Leto fan, I was disappointed that he didn’t really bring anything special to the role and literally any other actor could’ve taken his place and still delivered the same story.
The characters that Nick encounters throughout the film aren’t particularly noteworthy either, as they seem to exist to just berate Nick and frown at him, and not much happens beyond that. It seems very lazy that a film like ‘The Outsider’ has so many characters that are sloppily written, with no backstories to keep the audience interested.
‘The Outsider’ did have some redeeming features, though not enough for me to say I particularly enjoyed watching the film. There are a few gory, intense moments that hold your attention and make you squirm, but much less than I expected from a supposed crime film, especially one that focuses on such a notorious criminal organisation. Cinematically, it’s a decent film to look at based on the camerawork and colour grading throughout, but the absence of any decent story makes it fall flat.
Martin Zandvliet’s cinematic portrayal of the Japanese Yakuza is mediocre at best, and not what I expected based on the marketing I’d seen prior to watching the film. I wanted a violent, sexy, engaging crime film and got absolutely none of that.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/the-outsider/
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Spoiler free section: Pet Sematary starring Jason Clarke, Amy Seimetz and John Lithgow wasn’t badly cast, it felt perfect actually, even the child actor Jete Laurence was above average. There wasn’t anything wrong with their performance either, each actor performed their role really well and their characters were believable. But the movie just left me needing so much more.
Pet Sematary is a movie about a family who moves from Boston to escape big city life and spend more quality family time in the country side. Little do they know that their new property contains a pet cemetery! Horror ensues… well kinda, a little bit does at least.
The movie moves at a slow creeping pace, which is fine for a horror movie to start but there needs to be payoff. The build up to payoff ratio is about 90-10. It’s all build up with a few aspects of the movie never having any sort of payoff whatsoever. Even the movie as a whole ended without solid resolution.
The atmosphere in the movie was average for a main stream horror movie but if you are a hardcore horror movie fan you will be disappointed. The movie drew a lot of unintentional laughter from the audience at times when the movie should have been building tension. There was the occasion where the movie was doing it intentionally and that’s really when the movie was at its best. I use the term “best” loosely as the movie sets the bar pretty low.
If you were expecting this reboot of the Stephen King classic to be on the same level as IT, you will be greatly disappointed.
Spoiler section: The unresolved stories in this movie really bugged me.
There is a character played by Obssa Ahmed, who is a car accident victim who kinda haunts the family but says it’s because the main character tried to help him before he died. He seems like he’s eventually going to play a saving role but never does, he just exists, for no reason.
The actual Pet Sematary is meaningless. It’s actually not haunted, and nothing exceptional happens there. It’s just a passing through point to the actual haunted place a mile away. Boring.
Kids with the masks and the funeral procession that looked really cool in the preview meant nothing…
Supernatural things kept happening in the house. Was the house haunted? I couldn’t tell if it was the family, the house or just the area a mile behind the house that was haunted. The only thing I was sure about was that the titular pet cemetery was the only thing not haunted at all.
This movie is not for hard core horror fans, its more for your mom who likes scary movies occasionally. I can’t recommend this movie. It’s very forgettable and not worth the price of admission. Super vanilla, pointless characters and plot points, and only a few jump scares make this movie a hard pass. 1.5 out 5 stars. That Ramones song during the end credits is catchy as hell though J
Pet Sematary is a movie about a family who moves from Boston to escape big city life and spend more quality family time in the country side. Little do they know that their new property contains a pet cemetery! Horror ensues… well kinda, a little bit does at least.
The movie moves at a slow creeping pace, which is fine for a horror movie to start but there needs to be payoff. The build up to payoff ratio is about 90-10. It’s all build up with a few aspects of the movie never having any sort of payoff whatsoever. Even the movie as a whole ended without solid resolution.
The atmosphere in the movie was average for a main stream horror movie but if you are a hardcore horror movie fan you will be disappointed. The movie drew a lot of unintentional laughter from the audience at times when the movie should have been building tension. There was the occasion where the movie was doing it intentionally and that’s really when the movie was at its best. I use the term “best” loosely as the movie sets the bar pretty low.
If you were expecting this reboot of the Stephen King classic to be on the same level as IT, you will be greatly disappointed.
Spoiler section: The unresolved stories in this movie really bugged me.
There is a character played by Obssa Ahmed, who is a car accident victim who kinda haunts the family but says it’s because the main character tried to help him before he died. He seems like he’s eventually going to play a saving role but never does, he just exists, for no reason.
The actual Pet Sematary is meaningless. It’s actually not haunted, and nothing exceptional happens there. It’s just a passing through point to the actual haunted place a mile away. Boring.
Kids with the masks and the funeral procession that looked really cool in the preview meant nothing…
Supernatural things kept happening in the house. Was the house haunted? I couldn’t tell if it was the family, the house or just the area a mile behind the house that was haunted. The only thing I was sure about was that the titular pet cemetery was the only thing not haunted at all.
This movie is not for hard core horror fans, its more for your mom who likes scary movies occasionally. I can’t recommend this movie. It’s very forgettable and not worth the price of admission. Super vanilla, pointless characters and plot points, and only a few jump scares make this movie a hard pass. 1.5 out 5 stars. That Ramones song during the end credits is catchy as hell though J
365Flicks (235 KP) rated The Hollow (2016) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
Often all it takes for me to put a flick on is to see a name of an Actor that I have loved in other movies, this can often make me more forgiving and open to watch the next flick that comes along. When I received The Hollow for the intentions of reviewing. I was smacked in the face by two such names, William Sadler (Shawshank, Die Hard 2) and William Forsythe (Things to Do in Denver When Your Dead, The Rock). Neither actor is setting the world on fire as of late but as a movie fan you know your about to get some solid performances. I was not wrong.
The Hollow is yet another Small Town backwoods crime drama genre in a long line of VOD releases. The difference being that The Hollow has a certain amount of Backwoods charm to it that usually tends to fall flat upon replication, This is in no small part due to the performances driving the Flick. Writer, Director and Star Miles Doleac plays corrupt as balls Deputy Sheriff Ray Everett. In a town that seems to have been forgotten by the outside world Ray is able to function as a truly horrendous unlikable character, But fear not because just about everyone in this down is a bonafide Asshole. The movie kicks into gear fairly quickly when we witness a triple murder down by Make-Out Creek (Thats what they call places like that right). One of the victims being an under-age girl we witnessed barely 10 minutes ago giving Officer Ray some pretty bad head (Like a said he is a proper shit bag)… The FBI comes swarming into town when it is revealed one of the other victims is the daughter of a US Congressman. The game of small town cover up vs government stooges begins.
I’m not going to dive to deep into this flick because it is your standard by the numbers Crime/Drama. I said towards the start of this write-up that sometimes all it takes is a couple of names that you recognize as regular Jobbers who tend to put in solid performances and that is certainly one of the things this movie has going for it. Forsythe, Sadler and Jeff Fahey all being shining lights for me. Not to be out shone in his own movie though Doleac manages to portray a truly horrendous shit bag with no redeeming quality’s at all pretty expertly and that is where your Movie can live or die. Take nothing away from the supporting cast either they were all great just that most characters were fairly one dimensional.
Personally I feel like The Hollow is a good enough movie with some solid performances that you would be kept entertained. The script is not exactly Tarantino levels, while it does at times feel like thats what Doleac was going for, but as I said at the start when you sit down to this movie, you know what your getting.
Its a solid Recommend from 365HQ in a sea of by the numbers Crime/Dramas The Hollow has some pretty great performances and for the directors second Feature Film its a solid effort.
The Hollow is yet another Small Town backwoods crime drama genre in a long line of VOD releases. The difference being that The Hollow has a certain amount of Backwoods charm to it that usually tends to fall flat upon replication, This is in no small part due to the performances driving the Flick. Writer, Director and Star Miles Doleac plays corrupt as balls Deputy Sheriff Ray Everett. In a town that seems to have been forgotten by the outside world Ray is able to function as a truly horrendous unlikable character, But fear not because just about everyone in this down is a bonafide Asshole. The movie kicks into gear fairly quickly when we witness a triple murder down by Make-Out Creek (Thats what they call places like that right). One of the victims being an under-age girl we witnessed barely 10 minutes ago giving Officer Ray some pretty bad head (Like a said he is a proper shit bag)… The FBI comes swarming into town when it is revealed one of the other victims is the daughter of a US Congressman. The game of small town cover up vs government stooges begins.
I’m not going to dive to deep into this flick because it is your standard by the numbers Crime/Drama. I said towards the start of this write-up that sometimes all it takes is a couple of names that you recognize as regular Jobbers who tend to put in solid performances and that is certainly one of the things this movie has going for it. Forsythe, Sadler and Jeff Fahey all being shining lights for me. Not to be out shone in his own movie though Doleac manages to portray a truly horrendous shit bag with no redeeming quality’s at all pretty expertly and that is where your Movie can live or die. Take nothing away from the supporting cast either they were all great just that most characters were fairly one dimensional.
Personally I feel like The Hollow is a good enough movie with some solid performances that you would be kept entertained. The script is not exactly Tarantino levels, while it does at times feel like thats what Doleac was going for, but as I said at the start when you sit down to this movie, you know what your getting.
Its a solid Recommend from 365HQ in a sea of by the numbers Crime/Dramas The Hollow has some pretty great performances and for the directors second Feature Film its a solid effort.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated GoodFellas (1990) in Movies
Jun 26, 2020
LIKE A FINE WINE - gets better with age
I have to admit, when I first watched GOODFELLAS 30 years ago, I thought it was "good" but not "great".
The years and subsequent viewings of this epic masterpiece has slowly changed my mind.
Directed by one of the finest Directors of all-time, GOODFELLAS is based on the real-life experience of former "Wiseguy" Nicholas Pileggi (from his book) and depicts mob life in New York City in the 1960's and the 1970's.
Scorcese knows this world and it's looks & feels and you can sense that world while watching this movie. Whether it's the clothing, the set decorations, the vocal inflections or the music choices, Scorcese meticulously blends all of the minutiae of these eras and these people extremely effectively to draw a vivid picture of people - and gangsters - of another era.
It helps tremendously that he has an "A" cast to inherit the characters. Robert DeNiro shows his ferocious personae as a "force to be reckoned with" as legendary (their word) mobster Jimmy Conway. He has a danger to him that could erupt at any time, but he also has something else - probably even more dangerous - he's smart and wily and will meticulously plan his crimes out. This makes him stand out in a world where most are acting out of impulse. Joe Pesci, rightfully, won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for his take on psychopathic gangster Tommy DeVito. What struck me on this viewing of the film was how small a role in this film that Tommy is. Pesci is not on-screen all that much, but for the scenes that he is in, he is incredibly powerful. You can see that Tommy is dangerous and needs to be handled with "kit gloves".
Scorcese took a chance by centering this film on an unknown actor on who's shoulders that this film will stand or fall - and he chose wisely - for Ray Liotta's performance as Henry Hill is fascinating to watch. He has a charisma and charm to him that draws you in, but there is also an air about him that repels you away at the same time. Scorcese cast another unknown, Lorraine Bracco as Henry's wife, Karen Hill, who is drawn towards the power and danger of Henry (and his world). Bracco was nominated for an Oscar and Liotta never came close to this level of performance for the rest of his career.
Credit, therefore, must be given to the Directorial job that Scorcese put in on this film. This is his masterpiece (despite what the Oscars say). Years from now when scholars look back on his career, this (along with Raging Bull) will be the films that are shown (not THE DEPARTED - the film that he, finally, won his Oscar for).
I find more and more nuance and richness to this film upon subsequent re-watches, and I drank those in on this viewing. GOODFELLAS is like a fine wine, it gets better with age.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars out of 10 (and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
The years and subsequent viewings of this epic masterpiece has slowly changed my mind.
Directed by one of the finest Directors of all-time, GOODFELLAS is based on the real-life experience of former "Wiseguy" Nicholas Pileggi (from his book) and depicts mob life in New York City in the 1960's and the 1970's.
Scorcese knows this world and it's looks & feels and you can sense that world while watching this movie. Whether it's the clothing, the set decorations, the vocal inflections or the music choices, Scorcese meticulously blends all of the minutiae of these eras and these people extremely effectively to draw a vivid picture of people - and gangsters - of another era.
It helps tremendously that he has an "A" cast to inherit the characters. Robert DeNiro shows his ferocious personae as a "force to be reckoned with" as legendary (their word) mobster Jimmy Conway. He has a danger to him that could erupt at any time, but he also has something else - probably even more dangerous - he's smart and wily and will meticulously plan his crimes out. This makes him stand out in a world where most are acting out of impulse. Joe Pesci, rightfully, won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for his take on psychopathic gangster Tommy DeVito. What struck me on this viewing of the film was how small a role in this film that Tommy is. Pesci is not on-screen all that much, but for the scenes that he is in, he is incredibly powerful. You can see that Tommy is dangerous and needs to be handled with "kit gloves".
Scorcese took a chance by centering this film on an unknown actor on who's shoulders that this film will stand or fall - and he chose wisely - for Ray Liotta's performance as Henry Hill is fascinating to watch. He has a charisma and charm to him that draws you in, but there is also an air about him that repels you away at the same time. Scorcese cast another unknown, Lorraine Bracco as Henry's wife, Karen Hill, who is drawn towards the power and danger of Henry (and his world). Bracco was nominated for an Oscar and Liotta never came close to this level of performance for the rest of his career.
Credit, therefore, must be given to the Directorial job that Scorcese put in on this film. This is his masterpiece (despite what the Oscars say). Years from now when scholars look back on his career, this (along with Raging Bull) will be the films that are shown (not THE DEPARTED - the film that he, finally, won his Oscar for).
I find more and more nuance and richness to this film upon subsequent re-watches, and I drank those in on this viewing. GOODFELLAS is like a fine wine, it gets better with age.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars out of 10 (and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Shazam! (2019) in Movies
Sep 1, 2019
Entertaining Enough
In the battle of DC vs Marvel in the Cinematic world, the prevailing theory is that DC is "righting the ship" with back-to-back decent films - AQUAMAN and SHAZAM. And...after viewing both of these films, I will agree that they are moving the ship in the correct direction, but they have a long, long way to go before they can say they have "righted" this ship.
SHAZAM is a fun. light, comedic-ish film that will appeal to kids and tweens and will be considered "not bad" by older teens and adults - and that is an improvement for a DC comic book film.
Asher Angel stars as Billy Batson, a troubled teenager with family/parental issues (is there any other kind in these types of films?) who is given the power of SHAZAM by a mysterious wizard (the always dependable Djimon Hounsou), when he says the magical word SHAZAM he is instantly changed into the SuperHero SHAZAM. The Superhero part of this character is played by Zachary Levi (TV's CHUCK) and that is the first problem for me with this film, I didn't feel that these 2 actors connected much to form the illusion of 1 person. Asher is all "broody and moody" - you know, the way an adult would direct a teenage actor to perform as a troubled teen - while Levi, who is having some fun, looks like he is trying just a bit too hard to showcase his "inner teenager" while wrapped inside a body hugging, muscle enhancing costume.
Billy Batson is sent to a foster home full of a "It's A Small World" group of troubled youth that have - despite their differences - formed into a family. Want to bet that Billy figures out that "family" does not mean his mother and father who abandoned him but rather those around you that love and care for you?
All of the kids in this "family" are well played, as are the "father and mother" figures. Standouts are Faithe Herman as smart-as-a-whip/cute-as-a-button Darla and, especially, Jack Dylan Grazer (hypochondriac Eddie in IT: CHAPTER 1) as the lad who becomes Billy's best friend. He is just as fun and charismatic as he was in IT. To be honest, I think I wanted more of a movie about this group of people than the typical "Super Hero/Super Villain" film.
However, I can forgive this film for focusing on the Hero/Villain dynamic for Mark Strong (SHERLOCK) is wonderfully villainous as the bad guy with daddy issues of his own and "that guy" actor John Glover is in it all too briefly as his dad.
Director David F. Sandberg (ANNABELLE: CREATION) does a nice job of keeping the action going at a fast enough pace to keep things entertaining - albeit in a way that was rather pedestrian and "nothing new". But he aims this film squarely at the older kid/younger tween audience and they will enjoy this very much, whilst the rest of us will not be bored as we accompany them.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
SHAZAM is a fun. light, comedic-ish film that will appeal to kids and tweens and will be considered "not bad" by older teens and adults - and that is an improvement for a DC comic book film.
Asher Angel stars as Billy Batson, a troubled teenager with family/parental issues (is there any other kind in these types of films?) who is given the power of SHAZAM by a mysterious wizard (the always dependable Djimon Hounsou), when he says the magical word SHAZAM he is instantly changed into the SuperHero SHAZAM. The Superhero part of this character is played by Zachary Levi (TV's CHUCK) and that is the first problem for me with this film, I didn't feel that these 2 actors connected much to form the illusion of 1 person. Asher is all "broody and moody" - you know, the way an adult would direct a teenage actor to perform as a troubled teen - while Levi, who is having some fun, looks like he is trying just a bit too hard to showcase his "inner teenager" while wrapped inside a body hugging, muscle enhancing costume.
Billy Batson is sent to a foster home full of a "It's A Small World" group of troubled youth that have - despite their differences - formed into a family. Want to bet that Billy figures out that "family" does not mean his mother and father who abandoned him but rather those around you that love and care for you?
All of the kids in this "family" are well played, as are the "father and mother" figures. Standouts are Faithe Herman as smart-as-a-whip/cute-as-a-button Darla and, especially, Jack Dylan Grazer (hypochondriac Eddie in IT: CHAPTER 1) as the lad who becomes Billy's best friend. He is just as fun and charismatic as he was in IT. To be honest, I think I wanted more of a movie about this group of people than the typical "Super Hero/Super Villain" film.
However, I can forgive this film for focusing on the Hero/Villain dynamic for Mark Strong (SHERLOCK) is wonderfully villainous as the bad guy with daddy issues of his own and "that guy" actor John Glover is in it all too briefly as his dad.
Director David F. Sandberg (ANNABELLE: CREATION) does a nice job of keeping the action going at a fast enough pace to keep things entertaining - albeit in a way that was rather pedestrian and "nothing new". But he aims this film squarely at the older kid/younger tween audience and they will enjoy this very much, whilst the rest of us will not be bored as we accompany them.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Angel Has Fallen (2019) in Movies
Aug 26, 2019
Nolte steals the movie
It's always interesting to me that when I leave a film and realize that the best part of the movie I just saw was the extra scene during the credits. What were the folks that made this movie thinking? Did they save the best for last? Most of the time it is - unfortunately - that this scene shines BECAUSE it really has nothing to do with the rest of the film, in both style and substance.
Such is the case with ANGEL HAS FALLEN the 3rd film in the "Fallen" series (following OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN and LONDON HAS FALLEN) that follows the trials and tribulations of White House Secret Service Agent Mike Banning (Gerard Butler) as he tries, once again, to save the President (a game, stern - yet sincere - Morgan Freeman) from an assassination attempt. But this time...the twist is...that Mike is framed for the attempt, so he has to go on the lamb "The Fugitive" style to clear his name and to find out who really dunnit.
I figured out who dunnit - and who was behind it - in about the first 3 minutes those characters/performers were on the screen - but it's the destination, not the journey, that counts in these types of films and this journey is..."so-so".
The plot contrivances, action sequences and chase scenes are all pretty middle-of-the-road with Director Ric Roman Waugh (SNITCH, FELON) resorting to the quick-cut, jittery camera "cinema verite" style of action shooting that, to me, shows laziness in choreography and originality and ends up giving me a bit of a headache.
So...failing a good plot and good action sequences, a film like this must have good, interesting characters and good, interesting actors inhabiting them. And...for the most part...that part of this film generates some interest as the previously mentioned Morgan Freeman, the always dependable Lance Reddick, the oily Danny Huston and the quirky Tim Blake Nelson all share the screen to good effect. Piper Perabo also joins the fray as Mike's wife and she elevates that side of the proceedings.
In the end, it comes down to the screen presence and charisma of star Gerard Butler as Mike and - unfortunately - he just doesn't have enough of that to keep things interesting. Especially when he spends a large part of the film playing against an actor who plays Butler's father - the one and only Nick Nolte.
And he...just about...steals the movie. Here is an actor that has screen presence and charisma to spare, even under long hair, a beard and a voice that has seen many, many cigarettes and booze.
And this takes us back to the beginning (or should I say, the end) of the film...Nolte and Butler share the end credits scene and it's, by far, the best darn thing in this mediocre film.
If you're going to sit through this, make sure you stay for the end credits scene.
Letter Grade B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such is the case with ANGEL HAS FALLEN the 3rd film in the "Fallen" series (following OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN and LONDON HAS FALLEN) that follows the trials and tribulations of White House Secret Service Agent Mike Banning (Gerard Butler) as he tries, once again, to save the President (a game, stern - yet sincere - Morgan Freeman) from an assassination attempt. But this time...the twist is...that Mike is framed for the attempt, so he has to go on the lamb "The Fugitive" style to clear his name and to find out who really dunnit.
I figured out who dunnit - and who was behind it - in about the first 3 minutes those characters/performers were on the screen - but it's the destination, not the journey, that counts in these types of films and this journey is..."so-so".
The plot contrivances, action sequences and chase scenes are all pretty middle-of-the-road with Director Ric Roman Waugh (SNITCH, FELON) resorting to the quick-cut, jittery camera "cinema verite" style of action shooting that, to me, shows laziness in choreography and originality and ends up giving me a bit of a headache.
So...failing a good plot and good action sequences, a film like this must have good, interesting characters and good, interesting actors inhabiting them. And...for the most part...that part of this film generates some interest as the previously mentioned Morgan Freeman, the always dependable Lance Reddick, the oily Danny Huston and the quirky Tim Blake Nelson all share the screen to good effect. Piper Perabo also joins the fray as Mike's wife and she elevates that side of the proceedings.
In the end, it comes down to the screen presence and charisma of star Gerard Butler as Mike and - unfortunately - he just doesn't have enough of that to keep things interesting. Especially when he spends a large part of the film playing against an actor who plays Butler's father - the one and only Nick Nolte.
And he...just about...steals the movie. Here is an actor that has screen presence and charisma to spare, even under long hair, a beard and a voice that has seen many, many cigarettes and booze.
And this takes us back to the beginning (or should I say, the end) of the film...Nolte and Butler share the end credits scene and it's, by far, the best darn thing in this mediocre film.
If you're going to sit through this, make sure you stay for the end credits scene.
Letter Grade B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated You Were Never Really Here (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Joachim Phoenix delivers a standout performance in a violent tale of crusading.
Joachim Phoenix (“Her”) is a very intense actor, and fits perfectly here into the role of Joe. For he is a hired thug, available to do over anyone you think deserves dispatching or giving a good telling off. His weapon of choice for this task is a ball-point hammer, bought each time from a local hardware shop. He is a ghost, who drifts in and out of his jobs, face concealed by a hoodie and emanating an air of menace that automatically deflects enquiring eyes.
When hired by a Senator (Alex Manette) to rescue his wayward daughter Nina (Ekaterina Samsonov) from the clutches of a paedophile gang, Joe delivers on the job with gusto, and – you sense – a degree of satisfaction. But then things go from bad to violent worse and Joe is drawn into a deadly high stakes game. As things get more and more personal, Joe embarks on a personal crusade for justice and retribution.
The real joy of this film is that Joe is such a nuanced character. Yes, he’s a brutal thug, but is still living with and loving his aged and demented mother (Judith Roberts), even though she drives him to distraction. He’s also clearly damaged himself, with a high degree of OCD behavior exhibited. Via clever flashbacks, we get hints to the route that led the boy to become this damaged man. As a sociopath, when things go wrong he could just say “F*** it” and walk away. But he doesn’t. Is this altruism? A sense of professional pride? Or is it the sight of a path to redemption? Although you could strongly argue that revenge kicks in to reinforce his decision, Lynne Ramsay‘s screenplay leaves things deliciously vague. Ramsey also directs expertly: she previously did 2011’s “We Need To Talk About Kevin”.
“I don’t like gory films” you might say “so this doesn’t sound like one for me”. Me neither, but actually, the trailer makes the film seem worse than it is. The violence is more alluded to than shown. Most of the “hammer action” is done either in long shot or seen on CCTV cameras, and you don’t get to see much of the outcome. There is only one really gory bit that I remember (shut your eyes where Phoenix answers the knock at the hotel door if you are squeamish!).
This doesn’t mean that it’s a comfortable watch though. It’s an insanely tense film since you’re not sure the direction it will go in next (think “Get Out”), and it has more than its fair share of “WTF” moments, especially in a dramatic closing scene. There are some memorable cinematic moments as well: a young girl in a nightie in the paedophile den blankly observing Joe’s handiwork being one that stays with you.
It’s a standout film, winning Best Actor (for Phoenix) and best screenplay (for Ramsey) at Cannes. It will be in a strong position to make my films of the year list. Highly recommended.
When hired by a Senator (Alex Manette) to rescue his wayward daughter Nina (Ekaterina Samsonov) from the clutches of a paedophile gang, Joe delivers on the job with gusto, and – you sense – a degree of satisfaction. But then things go from bad to violent worse and Joe is drawn into a deadly high stakes game. As things get more and more personal, Joe embarks on a personal crusade for justice and retribution.
The real joy of this film is that Joe is such a nuanced character. Yes, he’s a brutal thug, but is still living with and loving his aged and demented mother (Judith Roberts), even though she drives him to distraction. He’s also clearly damaged himself, with a high degree of OCD behavior exhibited. Via clever flashbacks, we get hints to the route that led the boy to become this damaged man. As a sociopath, when things go wrong he could just say “F*** it” and walk away. But he doesn’t. Is this altruism? A sense of professional pride? Or is it the sight of a path to redemption? Although you could strongly argue that revenge kicks in to reinforce his decision, Lynne Ramsay‘s screenplay leaves things deliciously vague. Ramsey also directs expertly: she previously did 2011’s “We Need To Talk About Kevin”.
“I don’t like gory films” you might say “so this doesn’t sound like one for me”. Me neither, but actually, the trailer makes the film seem worse than it is. The violence is more alluded to than shown. Most of the “hammer action” is done either in long shot or seen on CCTV cameras, and you don’t get to see much of the outcome. There is only one really gory bit that I remember (shut your eyes where Phoenix answers the knock at the hotel door if you are squeamish!).
This doesn’t mean that it’s a comfortable watch though. It’s an insanely tense film since you’re not sure the direction it will go in next (think “Get Out”), and it has more than its fair share of “WTF” moments, especially in a dramatic closing scene. There are some memorable cinematic moments as well: a young girl in a nightie in the paedophile den blankly observing Joe’s handiwork being one that stays with you.
It’s a standout film, winning Best Actor (for Phoenix) and best screenplay (for Ramsey) at Cannes. It will be in a strong position to make my films of the year list. Highly recommended.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated CODA (2021) in Movies
Feb 25, 2022
Fairly Standard Fare
I am a film completionist, meaning I must see a film through to the end no matter what. At times, I take a break and come back to it (figuring I might not have been in the right mood for the film) but in other times, I fight through whatever emotion I am feeling (most of the time boredom) to keep focused on what the filmmakers are attempting to do in their film - and, at times, I am rewarded for this perseverance.
Such is the case with the Oscar Nominated film CODA. Written and Directed by Sian Heder (who was Oscar Nominated for her Screenplay), CODA tells the tale of Ruby who is a CODA (Child of Deaf Adults), who runs afoul of her family (especially her parents) and their expectations of her.
For the first half of this film it is pretty standard fare - one that has been shown on many, many movie screens throughout the years. Even though this one had the added “plot twist” of Ruby being able to hear while her Parents and Brothers are all deaf, the first half of this film never rose above the ordinary.
But, something happened in the 2nd half of the film, I fell in love with this family and their foibles and was rooting for them all to resolve their issues and for Ruby to get what she wanted.
Credit for this must go to Writer/Director Heder, who is not deaf, who came up with the idea/concept for the film and then felt a strong obligation to “get it right” for the deaf community. And get it right she does.
Her first good move was to cast Oscar Winner Marlee Matlin, a well known deaf performer and advocate for the Deaf Community. She brought instant credibility and star power to this film and she also insisted that the other 2 deaf characters in this film be performed by deaf performers.
Troy Kotsur is Oscar Nominated as Best Supporting Actor for his turn as Ruby’s father and he, for the first 1/2 of this film, acts in black and white - either funny (the comic relief) or angry (the drama) and I was unimpressed by him, but - just like the film - his performance gains some nuance in the 2nd half and he does have the “Oscar Moment” in this part of the movie that makes him a deserving nominee.
Emilia Jones is “just fine” in the lead role of Ruby and Daniel Durant (the other deaf actor in this film who plays her brother) and Lonnie Farmer (who plays her teacher) are also “fine”. Thank goodness we had the star wattage of Matlin to elevate the first half of the film before things got interesting - and nuanced - in the 2nd half.
Kudos to CODA for shining a light on a group that does not normally get the light shone upon it and kudos to the Academy for nominating this Sundance darling in the Best Picture category.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such is the case with the Oscar Nominated film CODA. Written and Directed by Sian Heder (who was Oscar Nominated for her Screenplay), CODA tells the tale of Ruby who is a CODA (Child of Deaf Adults), who runs afoul of her family (especially her parents) and their expectations of her.
For the first half of this film it is pretty standard fare - one that has been shown on many, many movie screens throughout the years. Even though this one had the added “plot twist” of Ruby being able to hear while her Parents and Brothers are all deaf, the first half of this film never rose above the ordinary.
But, something happened in the 2nd half of the film, I fell in love with this family and their foibles and was rooting for them all to resolve their issues and for Ruby to get what she wanted.
Credit for this must go to Writer/Director Heder, who is not deaf, who came up with the idea/concept for the film and then felt a strong obligation to “get it right” for the deaf community. And get it right she does.
Her first good move was to cast Oscar Winner Marlee Matlin, a well known deaf performer and advocate for the Deaf Community. She brought instant credibility and star power to this film and she also insisted that the other 2 deaf characters in this film be performed by deaf performers.
Troy Kotsur is Oscar Nominated as Best Supporting Actor for his turn as Ruby’s father and he, for the first 1/2 of this film, acts in black and white - either funny (the comic relief) or angry (the drama) and I was unimpressed by him, but - just like the film - his performance gains some nuance in the 2nd half and he does have the “Oscar Moment” in this part of the movie that makes him a deserving nominee.
Emilia Jones is “just fine” in the lead role of Ruby and Daniel Durant (the other deaf actor in this film who plays her brother) and Lonnie Farmer (who plays her teacher) are also “fine”. Thank goodness we had the star wattage of Matlin to elevate the first half of the film before things got interesting - and nuanced - in the 2nd half.
Kudos to CODA for shining a light on a group that does not normally get the light shone upon it and kudos to the Academy for nominating this Sundance darling in the Best Picture category.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Lee (2222 KP) rated Paddington 2 (2017) in Movies
Nov 13, 2017
The Perfect Family Movie
I'm always wary heading into the cinema to see a 'family' movie, especially those featuring a CGI main character interacting with live human actors. Alvin and the Chipmunks, The Smurfs, The Scooby Doo movie - they've all done a pretty good job of destroying the genre, along with countless others. Even the better films struggle to engage the interest of kids and adults alike. But Paddington is just different. The sequel greatly improves on an already enjoyable first movie, and to be honest it's pretty difficult for me to write anything negative about it at all.
The story is a simple one. Paddington wants to buy a very special present for his Aunt Lucy's 100th birthday, and sets his sights on buying her a lovely pop-up book of London landmarks, London being the one place she always wanted to visit. The book is quite expensive though, so Paddington sets about earning the money himself. Unfortunately things go very wrong, with Paddington ending up jailed for a crime he did not commit.
An all-star cast play a huge variety of strange and wonderful characters, but the best of them all is the villain of the story. Hugh Grant gets to ham things hilariously up as Phoenix Buchanan, an actor longing for the limelight once more, reduced instead to starring in dog food commercials. Visual gags are carefully staged, then perfectly executed and the whole movie provides the ideal mix of laughs, peril, warmth and charm. The perfect family movie!
The story is a simple one. Paddington wants to buy a very special present for his Aunt Lucy's 100th birthday, and sets his sights on buying her a lovely pop-up book of London landmarks, London being the one place she always wanted to visit. The book is quite expensive though, so Paddington sets about earning the money himself. Unfortunately things go very wrong, with Paddington ending up jailed for a crime he did not commit.
An all-star cast play a huge variety of strange and wonderful characters, but the best of them all is the villain of the story. Hugh Grant gets to ham things hilariously up as Phoenix Buchanan, an actor longing for the limelight once more, reduced instead to starring in dog food commercials. Visual gags are carefully staged, then perfectly executed and the whole movie provides the ideal mix of laughs, peril, warmth and charm. The perfect family movie!