Search
Search results
Sarah (7800 KP) rated The Umbrella Academy - Season 1 in TV
Aug 1, 2020
Deserving of the hype
The review is a copy of my review of the main series, as the first season is what I based it on!
I have to admit, I was pretty impressed with this show. It's not every day when you watch something that meets all of the hype surrounding it, and I was quite sceptical to begin with.
The show manages to brilliantly blend action, the supernatural and dark humour to form an intriguing and interesting adult plot, with just enough twists to keep you hooked without going too OTT (Lost style). It also has some brilliant fight scenes (with a decent amount of blood and gore) that are paired with a truly killer soundtrack. And it has fortunately gone down the adult route rather than making this suitable for kids like some of the Marvel type shows/films.
The characters too for the most part are witty, deep and well thought out, from the family members to the villains Hazel and Cha-Cha. My favourites are by far Five and Klaus. Robert Sheehan is a great actor, I've loved him since Misfits and he's really perfect for Klaus. And Aidan Gallagher is brilliant as the old man in a child's body Five, there's something very humorous seeing a thirteen year old outsmarting and killing people. He's a true delight whenever he's on screen. My only real issue with the characters is with Vanya. For me I found her very dull to begin with and I thought her entire storyline was a teeny bit predictable. She does pick up and get more interesting towards the end, it's just a shame she puts a downer on the earlier episodes. Luckily the rest of the show more than makes up for it.
I can't begin to say how devastated I was at the end of the final episode. I could've quite happily watched more, so I really hope they renew this for another season.
I have to admit, I was pretty impressed with this show. It's not every day when you watch something that meets all of the hype surrounding it, and I was quite sceptical to begin with.
The show manages to brilliantly blend action, the supernatural and dark humour to form an intriguing and interesting adult plot, with just enough twists to keep you hooked without going too OTT (Lost style). It also has some brilliant fight scenes (with a decent amount of blood and gore) that are paired with a truly killer soundtrack. And it has fortunately gone down the adult route rather than making this suitable for kids like some of the Marvel type shows/films.
The characters too for the most part are witty, deep and well thought out, from the family members to the villains Hazel and Cha-Cha. My favourites are by far Five and Klaus. Robert Sheehan is a great actor, I've loved him since Misfits and he's really perfect for Klaus. And Aidan Gallagher is brilliant as the old man in a child's body Five, there's something very humorous seeing a thirteen year old outsmarting and killing people. He's a true delight whenever he's on screen. My only real issue with the characters is with Vanya. For me I found her very dull to begin with and I thought her entire storyline was a teeny bit predictable. She does pick up and get more interesting towards the end, it's just a shame she puts a downer on the earlier episodes. Luckily the rest of the show more than makes up for it.
I can't begin to say how devastated I was at the end of the final episode. I could've quite happily watched more, so I really hope they renew this for another season.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Friday the 13th Part III (1982) in Movies
Aug 4, 2020
Disclaimer: I still like this film, in the same way I like the whole franchise for better or worse, but man, Part III is a struggle to get through at times.
The main issue is the pacing and dialogue. I always found Part 2 Jason to be pretty intimidating, almost like a feral animal, but this time around, he's sneaking about Higgin's Haven, causing all kinds of hijinks and skulking in the distance. Leave that shit to Michael Myers and give me the Jason that's an unstoppable bull in a china shop!
This approach to Jason means that there is a ludicrous number of fake out scares in the first half of the film. It becomes trying pretty quickly.
The script is absolutely piss poor, no two ways about it - although I do appreciate the more frequent attempts at humour than what came before. Some of the characters are memorable in their own way - Shelley and Fox to name a couple, but none of the characters are developed much - watching the special features, it was made clear that the use of 3D and the increased technical issues that came with it took up most of the attention whilst filming - a classic case of actors doing the best with what they were given, which wasn't much in this instance!
Although all of this ensures that the end product doesn't begin to touch the first two in terms of quality, there are still some positives of course. This was the entry that gave Jason his iconic hockey mask for starters, and the make up work done on actor Richard Brooker is impressive even today. The practical work put into the films many death scenes is easy to appreciate, and the overall look of the film is pure 80s slasher, which is never a bad thing.
It's not the best film in the series, and certainly not the worst, and if you like slashers as much as I do, then there's definitely something for you here, even if the end result feels a bit aimless.
The main issue is the pacing and dialogue. I always found Part 2 Jason to be pretty intimidating, almost like a feral animal, but this time around, he's sneaking about Higgin's Haven, causing all kinds of hijinks and skulking in the distance. Leave that shit to Michael Myers and give me the Jason that's an unstoppable bull in a china shop!
This approach to Jason means that there is a ludicrous number of fake out scares in the first half of the film. It becomes trying pretty quickly.
The script is absolutely piss poor, no two ways about it - although I do appreciate the more frequent attempts at humour than what came before. Some of the characters are memorable in their own way - Shelley and Fox to name a couple, but none of the characters are developed much - watching the special features, it was made clear that the use of 3D and the increased technical issues that came with it took up most of the attention whilst filming - a classic case of actors doing the best with what they were given, which wasn't much in this instance!
Although all of this ensures that the end product doesn't begin to touch the first two in terms of quality, there are still some positives of course. This was the entry that gave Jason his iconic hockey mask for starters, and the make up work done on actor Richard Brooker is impressive even today. The practical work put into the films many death scenes is easy to appreciate, and the overall look of the film is pure 80s slasher, which is never a bad thing.
It's not the best film in the series, and certainly not the worst, and if you like slashers as much as I do, then there's definitely something for you here, even if the end result feels a bit aimless.
The Answers
6.0
Rate It
Book
Mary Parsons is broke. Dead broke, really: between an onslaught of medical bills and a mountain of...
Literary Fiction
Taskmaster
8.8
Rate It
TV Show
Taskmaster is a British comedy panel game show originally created by British comedian Alex Horne...
Father Figures (2018)
6.9
Rate It
Movie Watch
Owen Wilson (“The Grand Budapest Hotel,” “Zoolander 2”) and Ed Helms (“The Hangover”...
comedy
The Real Deal: A Novel
10.0
Rate It
Book
Get ready for your next favorite romantic comedy, THE REAL DEAL! April Hamilton wants you to know...
David McK (3770 KP) rated Star Trek (2009) in Movies
Aug 23, 2020 (Updated Jan 22, 2023)
JJ Abrams prepares for Star Wars
"Space. The Final Frontier. These are the voyages ..."
2009 big screen reimagining of the iconic 60s TV series, and I use that as the touchpoint deliberately: we're back to a (recast) Kirk and co instead of the Next Generation crew, or even those from Voyager/Enterprise/Discovery.
In retrospect, it also somewhat comes across as director JJ Abrams pitch for making a Star Wars movie: this is also lens flare and slow motion, with the action ramped up considerably from the TV series or even most of the previous movies. it's also the first of the three Kelvin-verse Star Trek movies: I'm unsure whether we'll get any more in that timeline, what with the tragic death of some of the (young) key actors - I'm looking at you, Anton Yelchin (Chekov) - and with others of the cast moving on to other bigger (?) sci-fi things - yep, that's you Zoe Saldana (Uhura).
The plot, as alluded to above, involves time travel, with the events thus kicking off an entire new timeline, that here sees Chris Pine taking on the role of James T Kirk - initially introduced as a kid, driving his step fathers classic car off a cliff (talk about setting out your stall early!) - and Zachary Quinto (then more famous as the villain Sylar from TVs 'Heroes') talking on the role of a younger Spock.
Most of the cast, I felt, was pretty much spot on - the only one that really rubbed me up the wrong way was Simon Pegg as Scotty, although even he grew on me a bit (I'm also not entirely sold on the aesthetics of the USS Enterprise here - more like USS Chibiprise!). We also have the 'passing of the torch' (as it were) from one character to another, with the inclusion of a certain key half-human actor who will forever be associated with that role ...
2009 big screen reimagining of the iconic 60s TV series, and I use that as the touchpoint deliberately: we're back to a (recast) Kirk and co instead of the Next Generation crew, or even those from Voyager/Enterprise/Discovery.
In retrospect, it also somewhat comes across as director JJ Abrams pitch for making a Star Wars movie: this is also lens flare and slow motion, with the action ramped up considerably from the TV series or even most of the previous movies. it's also the first of the three Kelvin-verse Star Trek movies: I'm unsure whether we'll get any more in that timeline, what with the tragic death of some of the (young) key actors - I'm looking at you, Anton Yelchin (Chekov) - and with others of the cast moving on to other bigger (?) sci-fi things - yep, that's you Zoe Saldana (Uhura).
The plot, as alluded to above, involves time travel, with the events thus kicking off an entire new timeline, that here sees Chris Pine taking on the role of James T Kirk - initially introduced as a kid, driving his step fathers classic car off a cliff (talk about setting out your stall early!) - and Zachary Quinto (then more famous as the villain Sylar from TVs 'Heroes') talking on the role of a younger Spock.
Most of the cast, I felt, was pretty much spot on - the only one that really rubbed me up the wrong way was Simon Pegg as Scotty, although even he grew on me a bit (I'm also not entirely sold on the aesthetics of the USS Enterprise here - more like USS Chibiprise!). We also have the 'passing of the torch' (as it were) from one character to another, with the inclusion of a certain key half-human actor who will forever be associated with that role ...
Where You Are
8.0
Rate It
Book
Former model and B-list actor (B meaning really bad) Isaac Seidel is now a NYC firefighter on...
MM Contemporary Romance
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Lake Placid (1999) in Movies
Jan 7, 2022
Betty White Steals This Film
I have to admit, I actually saw LAKE PLACID in the movie theaters when it came out in 1999. I am a huge JAWS fan and am a sucker for any film that takes the elements of Jaws (or some of them, anyway) and tries to rip-off that classic film.
And, that is what Lake Placid does (is). It’s “Jaws with a Crocodile”. The residents of Black Lake are being picked off one-by-one by a killer croc and a ragtag group of heroes put aside their differences to save the day.
The “ragtag group” features an a few “B-Listers” (at the time) and one “up-and-comer”. Bill Pullman (fresh off INDEPENDENCE DAY) scores a lead role while Bridget Fonda (beginning to fade from view) is the “femme-fatale” and character actor Oliver Platt (currently on CHICAGO MED) eats the screen as the “eccentric, philanthropist Croc hunter” (I can’t think of a philanthropist croc hunter that isn’t eccentric). It also features a then unknown Brendan Gleeson (a few years before his turn as Mad-Eye Moody in the Harry Potter series) as the Sherriff of the town - the Roy Scheider/Sherriff Brody role from Jaws.
But the character that steals this film is, of course, Betty White as a foul-mouthed resident of the community. Flipping the coin on her wholesome image garnered from her turns on THE GOLDEN GIRLS and THE MARY TYLER MOORE show, Ms. White is - as should be expected - hilarious in her raunchiness.
While this movie is the very definition of “B-Movie” (maybe even “C” flick), it’s worth watching just for Betty White’s turn.
Rest in Peace, Ms. White. And THANKS FOR THE MEMORIES.
Letter Grade on Lake Placid: B (and I’m being generous)
Letter Grade on Betty White: A+
And you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And, that is what Lake Placid does (is). It’s “Jaws with a Crocodile”. The residents of Black Lake are being picked off one-by-one by a killer croc and a ragtag group of heroes put aside their differences to save the day.
The “ragtag group” features an a few “B-Listers” (at the time) and one “up-and-comer”. Bill Pullman (fresh off INDEPENDENCE DAY) scores a lead role while Bridget Fonda (beginning to fade from view) is the “femme-fatale” and character actor Oliver Platt (currently on CHICAGO MED) eats the screen as the “eccentric, philanthropist Croc hunter” (I can’t think of a philanthropist croc hunter that isn’t eccentric). It also features a then unknown Brendan Gleeson (a few years before his turn as Mad-Eye Moody in the Harry Potter series) as the Sherriff of the town - the Roy Scheider/Sherriff Brody role from Jaws.
But the character that steals this film is, of course, Betty White as a foul-mouthed resident of the community. Flipping the coin on her wholesome image garnered from her turns on THE GOLDEN GIRLS and THE MARY TYLER MOORE show, Ms. White is - as should be expected - hilarious in her raunchiness.
While this movie is the very definition of “B-Movie” (maybe even “C” flick), it’s worth watching just for Betty White’s turn.
Rest in Peace, Ms. White. And THANKS FOR THE MEMORIES.
Letter Grade on Lake Placid: B (and I’m being generous)
Letter Grade on Betty White: A+
And you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
David McK (3770 KP) rated World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie Wars in Books
May 14, 2023
Audiobooks, I find, are a bit of a strange beast: some are good; some are terrible.
I think it all depends on the skill of the narrator, and how close they are to how the character 'sounds' in your head when you're reading a book: in audio (and televisual) form, after all, you are relying on someone else's characterisation.
That is where a unique - at least, I've never come across one quite like this before - hook comes in. Sure, I've listened to a few Graphic Audio's (essentially, a dramatization for the listeners) with a wide cast of characters (each performed by a different actor) before but I don't think I've ever come across one presented like this: essentially, as interviews with survivors of a global apocalypse, the World War Z(ed, not Zee - I'm British) of the title.
Forget the Brad Pitt starring movie of the same name: while it does take the occasional pointer from this, it's a very different beast indeed.
Instead, this is presented as Max Brooks - a survivor of the War - interviewing notable, key and even sometimes seemingly normal, mundane survivors of the fictional outbreak, in chronological order from the earliest inkling that something was wrong, through to the outbreak proper, the fall of society, the fight back against the hordes and the eventual reclamation of society.
I do have to say, however, that I felt that more than a few of the chapters 'sounded' the same (and I mean that in the style and tone of language used, not so much in the verbal intonation - although there is also an element of that in the audiobook), and that I did find myself 'zoning out' for periods of time. As I listened to the audiobook version, it also didn't help that one section would sound like a character was whispering (=sounds up full), and then the very next I would have to hurriedly turn the volume down if I didn't want to be deafened ...
I think it all depends on the skill of the narrator, and how close they are to how the character 'sounds' in your head when you're reading a book: in audio (and televisual) form, after all, you are relying on someone else's characterisation.
That is where a unique - at least, I've never come across one quite like this before - hook comes in. Sure, I've listened to a few Graphic Audio's (essentially, a dramatization for the listeners) with a wide cast of characters (each performed by a different actor) before but I don't think I've ever come across one presented like this: essentially, as interviews with survivors of a global apocalypse, the World War Z(ed, not Zee - I'm British) of the title.
Forget the Brad Pitt starring movie of the same name: while it does take the occasional pointer from this, it's a very different beast indeed.
Instead, this is presented as Max Brooks - a survivor of the War - interviewing notable, key and even sometimes seemingly normal, mundane survivors of the fictional outbreak, in chronological order from the earliest inkling that something was wrong, through to the outbreak proper, the fall of society, the fight back against the hordes and the eventual reclamation of society.
I do have to say, however, that I felt that more than a few of the chapters 'sounded' the same (and I mean that in the style and tone of language used, not so much in the verbal intonation - although there is also an element of that in the audiobook), and that I did find myself 'zoning out' for periods of time. As I listened to the audiobook version, it also didn't help that one section would sound like a character was whispering (=sounds up full), and then the very next I would have to hurriedly turn the volume down if I didn't want to be deafened ...