Search
Search results
Kaz (232 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Jul 31, 2019 (Updated Jul 31, 2019)
A film which I can't figure out.
Contains spoilers, click to show
I read the novel 'Pet Semetary' last year and, although there are some questionable elements to the story, I thought that generally, it was a good, creepy read.
Having just watched the 2019 remake, (I must point out that I haven't watched the original film) I'm not sure what to make of it.
For me, the novel 'Pet Semetary' is really dark and creepy. What this film version does, is add to that atmosphere and made it even more sinister, which I really liked.
Another good thing about this adaptation, was that it stayed pretty close to the original text, for the most part. Usually I don't like changes when a book is being made into a film, but actually, thinking about it, some of the changes in 'Pet Semetary' were wise, due to practicalities,
For example, in the novel, Gage is the one that dies and not Ellie. I would imagine the producers of this film, might have thought that it would either be too extreme to show a 2-3 year old running around with a knife and also it would be difficult to direct a child in this type of scene. So I understand why this was changed.
I thought that the acting was ok, but nothing special. I think John Lithgow was underused as Judd and actually, I thought his character was much less likable, than Judd in the book. I would give a special mention to the child actor who plays Ellie, as I thought she played her role well.
Now, let's talk about the ending. Whilst I thought the ending of the book was rather questionable, I could understand the thinking behind it. This book's general theme is grief and so Louis' decision to resurrect his wife, illustrates that his grief was so powerful, that he would do almost anything to bring his loved on,e back from the dead.
The ending to the film version though, was very disappointing. For me, Stephen King, not only writes books which satisfy a reader's enjoyment for being scared, but also has other themes and messages running through them too. So, by changing the ending to this film, it kind of took away that sad, powerful message of grief and replaced it with a conventional, 'horror film' ending. This was really disappointing for me, because by putting in that ending, it kind of demeaned everything that the book was trying to do.
This film was ok and had some positive points, but I don't think it does the original book, sufficient justice.
Having just watched the 2019 remake, (I must point out that I haven't watched the original film) I'm not sure what to make of it.
For me, the novel 'Pet Semetary' is really dark and creepy. What this film version does, is add to that atmosphere and made it even more sinister, which I really liked.
Another good thing about this adaptation, was that it stayed pretty close to the original text, for the most part. Usually I don't like changes when a book is being made into a film, but actually, thinking about it, some of the changes in 'Pet Semetary' were wise, due to practicalities,
For example, in the novel, Gage is the one that dies and not Ellie. I would imagine the producers of this film, might have thought that it would either be too extreme to show a 2-3 year old running around with a knife and also it would be difficult to direct a child in this type of scene. So I understand why this was changed.
I thought that the acting was ok, but nothing special. I think John Lithgow was underused as Judd and actually, I thought his character was much less likable, than Judd in the book. I would give a special mention to the child actor who plays Ellie, as I thought she played her role well.
Now, let's talk about the ending. Whilst I thought the ending of the book was rather questionable, I could understand the thinking behind it. This book's general theme is grief and so Louis' decision to resurrect his wife, illustrates that his grief was so powerful, that he would do almost anything to bring his loved on,e back from the dead.
The ending to the film version though, was very disappointing. For me, Stephen King, not only writes books which satisfy a reader's enjoyment for being scared, but also has other themes and messages running through them too. So, by changing the ending to this film, it kind of took away that sad, powerful message of grief and replaced it with a conventional, 'horror film' ending. This was really disappointing for me, because by putting in that ending, it kind of demeaned everything that the book was trying to do.
This film was ok and had some positive points, but I don't think it does the original book, sufficient justice.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Pokémon: Detective Pikachu (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Really Great Video Game Movie
Pokemon: Detective Pikachu is a 2019 video game film adaptation directed by Rob Letterman with screenplay written by Letterman, Dan Hernandez, Benji Samit and Derek Connolly from a story by Hernandez, Samit, and Nicole Perlman. The movie is produced by Warner Bros. Pictures, Legendary Pictures and The Pokemon Company, in association with Toho Co., Ltd. It's based on the Pokemon franchise created by Satoshi Tajiri and the 2016 video game Detective Pikachu. The movie stars Justice Smith, Kathryn Newton, Suki Waterhouse, Ken Watanabe, and Bill Nighy.
Tim Goodman (Justice Smith) is a 21-year-old insurance salesman who gave up on training Pokemon at a young age. While hanging out with his friend Jack, he receives a call that his father Harry died while investigating a case. He travels to Ryme City, where his father was a detective and where Pokemon fighting is outlawed. It is a metropolis that pushes the bonds of humans and Pokemon by not conforming to some of the usual Pokemon world rules, such as battles or pokeballs. Tim is there to collect his father's belongings and encounters a Pikachu that can speak and he can somehow understand it. And together they try to uncover why Tim's father was killed.
This movie was lots of fun and very enjoyable, even for people that might not know anything about Pokemon. Ryan Reynolds did a great job in portraying the coffee drinking Pikachu detective. The plot was a little weak and could have been better, but I didn't hold that against it too hard since its kind of a kids movie. The CGI was beautiful in a lot of ways, somethings like the city and the skin and texture on Pokemon were phenomenal, but kinda fell short in a few scenes. Some of the human actors were definitely better than others and it shows but doesn't kill the whole movie or vibe. I really liked seeing Ryme City though, it was just so awesome to see all the Pokemon and people interacting and the world building done to make it look real, like it could exist in real life. I think they could of used Ken Watanabe more in the movie, he's a pretty good actor I feel was under utilized. This was a really great video game movie though and I think one that breaks the stigma that video game movies aren't good or successful. I give this movie a 7.
I almost gave it an 8 but I feel that it's nostalgia and my love for the Pokemon games and cartoon movies that are behind that. But I do give it my seal of approval, that you should go see this movie in theaters, especially if you are a Pokemon fan or if you have kids who are.
Tim Goodman (Justice Smith) is a 21-year-old insurance salesman who gave up on training Pokemon at a young age. While hanging out with his friend Jack, he receives a call that his father Harry died while investigating a case. He travels to Ryme City, where his father was a detective and where Pokemon fighting is outlawed. It is a metropolis that pushes the bonds of humans and Pokemon by not conforming to some of the usual Pokemon world rules, such as battles or pokeballs. Tim is there to collect his father's belongings and encounters a Pikachu that can speak and he can somehow understand it. And together they try to uncover why Tim's father was killed.
This movie was lots of fun and very enjoyable, even for people that might not know anything about Pokemon. Ryan Reynolds did a great job in portraying the coffee drinking Pikachu detective. The plot was a little weak and could have been better, but I didn't hold that against it too hard since its kind of a kids movie. The CGI was beautiful in a lot of ways, somethings like the city and the skin and texture on Pokemon were phenomenal, but kinda fell short in a few scenes. Some of the human actors were definitely better than others and it shows but doesn't kill the whole movie or vibe. I really liked seeing Ryme City though, it was just so awesome to see all the Pokemon and people interacting and the world building done to make it look real, like it could exist in real life. I think they could of used Ken Watanabe more in the movie, he's a pretty good actor I feel was under utilized. This was a really great video game movie though and I think one that breaks the stigma that video game movies aren't good or successful. I give this movie a 7.
I almost gave it an 8 but I feel that it's nostalgia and my love for the Pokemon games and cartoon movies that are behind that. But I do give it my seal of approval, that you should go see this movie in theaters, especially if you are a Pokemon fan or if you have kids who are.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Father (2020) in Movies
Apr 7, 2021
1st half is GREAT! The 2nd half? Not so much...
THE FATHER is one of those types of films that, generally, I would not seek out - except at Oscar time. A small, “drawing room” type of drama, based on a stage play and starring a couple of Oscar winning performers at it’s core.
And that is enough to make this film very entertaining and interesting…but, unfortunately…this piece of entertainment falls flat at the end, so one will have to be contented to watching a decent drawing room drama (based on a Stage play) starring 2 strong Oscar winning actors at it’s core.
Written and Directed by Florian Zeller, THE FATHER tells the tale of a…well…FATHER, who is aging and mentally deteriorating. His daughter is trying to aide him and bring him comfort, but his befuddled mind begins to see things (conspiracies) that are not there…or are they?
Zeller wrote the lead role, specifically for Anthony Hopkins and it is a very good thing that Hopkins agree to this role for he is in EVERY scene and commands this picture as only a performer of Hopkins stature and abilities can. Hopkins is, rightfully, nominated for this performance and could pull the upset (but I highly doubt it).
Strongly supporting him - in an Oscar nominated turn herself - as Olivia Colman as his daughter. She has the much less flashy - but no less important - role in this drama and Hopkins would not be as good as he is without her to play against.
Zeller (who was nominated for an Oscar for his Screenplay adaptation of his Stage Play) was smart to cast a strong ensemble of British Stage Actors for this film - Mark Gattis, Olivia Williams, Rufus Sewell and Imogen Poots are all strong, interesting people to watch on screen and they help bring an air of seriousness and gravitas to the proceedings.
The first half of this film is extremely fascinating to watch and I was intrigued by the premise, the direction, the script and the direction it seemed to be headed. But…unfortunately (at least for me) the 2nd half of the film (and I would imagine, the Stage Play) never, really capitalizes on the promise of the first half and THE FATHER just sorts of peters out in the end.
Which, I guess, you could say for the poor souls who suffer from dementia, but I don’t think that was the point that Zeller was trying to make.
Letter Grade: A- (did I mention that I really, really liked the first half)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And that is enough to make this film very entertaining and interesting…but, unfortunately…this piece of entertainment falls flat at the end, so one will have to be contented to watching a decent drawing room drama (based on a Stage play) starring 2 strong Oscar winning actors at it’s core.
Written and Directed by Florian Zeller, THE FATHER tells the tale of a…well…FATHER, who is aging and mentally deteriorating. His daughter is trying to aide him and bring him comfort, but his befuddled mind begins to see things (conspiracies) that are not there…or are they?
Zeller wrote the lead role, specifically for Anthony Hopkins and it is a very good thing that Hopkins agree to this role for he is in EVERY scene and commands this picture as only a performer of Hopkins stature and abilities can. Hopkins is, rightfully, nominated for this performance and could pull the upset (but I highly doubt it).
Strongly supporting him - in an Oscar nominated turn herself - as Olivia Colman as his daughter. She has the much less flashy - but no less important - role in this drama and Hopkins would not be as good as he is without her to play against.
Zeller (who was nominated for an Oscar for his Screenplay adaptation of his Stage Play) was smart to cast a strong ensemble of British Stage Actors for this film - Mark Gattis, Olivia Williams, Rufus Sewell and Imogen Poots are all strong, interesting people to watch on screen and they help bring an air of seriousness and gravitas to the proceedings.
The first half of this film is extremely fascinating to watch and I was intrigued by the premise, the direction, the script and the direction it seemed to be headed. But…unfortunately (at least for me) the 2nd half of the film (and I would imagine, the Stage Play) never, really capitalizes on the promise of the first half and THE FATHER just sorts of peters out in the end.
Which, I guess, you could say for the poor souls who suffer from dementia, but I don’t think that was the point that Zeller was trying to make.
Letter Grade: A- (did I mention that I really, really liked the first half)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BBC Drama
This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
Many people in Britain may have recently watched the drama series Our Zoo on BBC1 about the Mottershead family who moved to Oakfield, Upton in 1930 with the aim of building a zoo without bars. Based on a true story the drama over exaggerated the difficulties the family faced in developing what became to be the famous Chester Zoo. Until 2010 when TV producer Adam Kemp approached her, June Mottershead had never thought about making her history available to the public. As the truth had to be bent slightly for the television production with the removal of certain characters and added romance, and, of course, the laws preventing chimpanzees from being filmed, June Mottershead has penned the true story, also called Our Zoo, which is just as fascinating as what was shown on screen.
June was only four when she moved to Upton with her parents, grandparents, and her fourteen-year-old sister Muriel as well as a selection of animals. The BBC1 drama only showed up until the point that her father, George, had finally been given permission to build his zoo despite the petition against it. In the book, however, this occurs within the first few chapters and then continues on until June’s marriage to her husband Fred Williams in 1949. In fact the time period of the narrative jumps around depending on the animals or events that June is describing.
A large chunk of the book is focused on the effect the Second World War had on the zoo. As can be expected the rationings of vital products took its toll on the animals’ diets and, although the zoo never took a direct hit, the Liverpool blitz caused havoc by destroying the glass tanks in the aquarium. On the other hand, the amount of animals rapidly grew, as it was not just humans that became refugees during the war.
It was a delight to read about June’s relationships with some of the animals, particularly Mary the chimpanzee who was also June’s best friend as a child and behaved in a humanlike manner. Alas, as well as the happy moments there were the inevitable upsetting accounts of the deaths some of the animals, either from old age, illness or accidents.
While Our Zoo cannot be described as a novel, it neither has the feel of an autobiography. The conversational tone of the writing made it a pleasure to read and easy to visualize (admittedly watching the televised version had already provided a certain image).
This easy to read book is a strong recommendation for those who enjoyed the BBC adaptation and wish to find out what happened next. It does not matter if you have not watched the drama, as it is overall a fascinating story to read.
Many people in Britain may have recently watched the drama series Our Zoo on BBC1 about the Mottershead family who moved to Oakfield, Upton in 1930 with the aim of building a zoo without bars. Based on a true story the drama over exaggerated the difficulties the family faced in developing what became to be the famous Chester Zoo. Until 2010 when TV producer Adam Kemp approached her, June Mottershead had never thought about making her history available to the public. As the truth had to be bent slightly for the television production with the removal of certain characters and added romance, and, of course, the laws preventing chimpanzees from being filmed, June Mottershead has penned the true story, also called Our Zoo, which is just as fascinating as what was shown on screen.
June was only four when she moved to Upton with her parents, grandparents, and her fourteen-year-old sister Muriel as well as a selection of animals. The BBC1 drama only showed up until the point that her father, George, had finally been given permission to build his zoo despite the petition against it. In the book, however, this occurs within the first few chapters and then continues on until June’s marriage to her husband Fred Williams in 1949. In fact the time period of the narrative jumps around depending on the animals or events that June is describing.
A large chunk of the book is focused on the effect the Second World War had on the zoo. As can be expected the rationings of vital products took its toll on the animals’ diets and, although the zoo never took a direct hit, the Liverpool blitz caused havoc by destroying the glass tanks in the aquarium. On the other hand, the amount of animals rapidly grew, as it was not just humans that became refugees during the war.
It was a delight to read about June’s relationships with some of the animals, particularly Mary the chimpanzee who was also June’s best friend as a child and behaved in a humanlike manner. Alas, as well as the happy moments there were the inevitable upsetting accounts of the deaths some of the animals, either from old age, illness or accidents.
While Our Zoo cannot be described as a novel, it neither has the feel of an autobiography. The conversational tone of the writing made it a pleasure to read and easy to visualize (admittedly watching the televised version had already provided a certain image).
This easy to read book is a strong recommendation for those who enjoyed the BBC adaptation and wish to find out what happened next. It does not matter if you have not watched the drama, as it is overall a fascinating story to read.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated The Girl with All the Gifts in Books
Mar 15, 2018
I went to see the film adaptation of this on Saturday, and I have to say I was pretty impressed with it! Obviously the book is a whole lot better, but I think they did a pretty good job of transferring the book to screen. The characters felt a bit different to how they came across in the novel, <spoiler> Caldwell was nowhere near as evil and we didn't get to know Parks enough for his death to be that traumatising like it was in the novel</spoiler>, but I'd say it's one of the better book-to-film movies!
---------------------------------------
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/the-girl-with-all-the-gifts-m-r-carey
<b>4.5 stars</b>
I don’t really want to say a lot about this book, for 2 reasons. Reason one is to keep potential readers in the dark about what this entire book is. I feel like it’s one of those reads where you want to go in blind, it definitely made it more enjoyable for me going into it that way. The second reason is more selfish… I felt a lot of different emotions going through this book, especially within the last 50 pages! I have no desire to relive the rollercoaster I went through! I feel like the emotions from this book are gonna stay with me for a long time, so don’t expect much from this review other than spoilers (which will be hidden) of me getting emotional.
If you’re looking for a book that gets straight into a story then this will definitely please you. There’s no dilly dallying whatsoever, we get into the meat of the book within the first 50 pages which is such a relief because I hate chunky books that seem to take forever to get into the story. I wouldn’t recommend reading this if you have quite serious trypophobia. I have it quite mildly but there were a lot of times where I was reading and getting very panicky and sick feeling because of the grotesque imagery.
Each character is developed so incredibly well, as there aren’t many throughout the book we’ve got loads of time to get to know them with each chapter flitting about between perspectives. <spoiler>MELANIE WAS CUTE AF AND SO MATURE AND LOVELY AND AWW. HELEN WAS BADASS AND SASSY AND AWESOME. PARKS WAS A GENTLE GIANT AND IM SO HAPPY HE GOT TO FUCK HELEN BEFORE HE DIED CAUSE HIS DEATH MADE ME SUPER DUPER SERIOUSLY SAD. CAROLINE WAS A BITCH FROM START TO FINISH, I FELT NO REMORSE FOR HER DEATH, SHE WAS EVIL.</spoiler>
I don’t know if I’d class this as purely a thriller, it’s is also a horror and a sci-fi, which is definitely a great mix. It was definitely a really enjoyable read and I’m looking forward to reading more of Carey’s work. <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26030697-fellside?ac=1&from_search=true">Fellside</a>; is next on my list to read!
---------------------------------------
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/the-girl-with-all-the-gifts-m-r-carey
<b>4.5 stars</b>
I don’t really want to say a lot about this book, for 2 reasons. Reason one is to keep potential readers in the dark about what this entire book is. I feel like it’s one of those reads where you want to go in blind, it definitely made it more enjoyable for me going into it that way. The second reason is more selfish… I felt a lot of different emotions going through this book, especially within the last 50 pages! I have no desire to relive the rollercoaster I went through! I feel like the emotions from this book are gonna stay with me for a long time, so don’t expect much from this review other than spoilers (which will be hidden) of me getting emotional.
If you’re looking for a book that gets straight into a story then this will definitely please you. There’s no dilly dallying whatsoever, we get into the meat of the book within the first 50 pages which is such a relief because I hate chunky books that seem to take forever to get into the story. I wouldn’t recommend reading this if you have quite serious trypophobia. I have it quite mildly but there were a lot of times where I was reading and getting very panicky and sick feeling because of the grotesque imagery.
Each character is developed so incredibly well, as there aren’t many throughout the book we’ve got loads of time to get to know them with each chapter flitting about between perspectives. <spoiler>MELANIE WAS CUTE AF AND SO MATURE AND LOVELY AND AWW. HELEN WAS BADASS AND SASSY AND AWESOME. PARKS WAS A GENTLE GIANT AND IM SO HAPPY HE GOT TO FUCK HELEN BEFORE HE DIED CAUSE HIS DEATH MADE ME SUPER DUPER SERIOUSLY SAD. CAROLINE WAS A BITCH FROM START TO FINISH, I FELT NO REMORSE FOR HER DEATH, SHE WAS EVIL.</spoiler>
I don’t know if I’d class this as purely a thriller, it’s is also a horror and a sci-fi, which is definitely a great mix. It was definitely a really enjoyable read and I’m looking forward to reading more of Carey’s work. <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26030697-fellside?ac=1&from_search=true">Fellside</a>; is next on my list to read!
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review</i>
Many people in Britain may have recently watched the drama series <i>Our Zoo</i> on BBC1 about the Mottershead family who moved to Oakfield, Upton in 1930 with the aim of building a zoo without bars. Based on a true story the drama over exaggerated the difficulties the family faced in developing what became to be the famous Chester Zoo. Until 2010 when TV producer Adam Kemp approached her, June Mottershead had never thought about making her history available to the public. As the truth had to be bent slightly for the television production with the removal of certain characters and added romance, and, of course, the laws preventing chimpanzees from being filmed, June Mottershead has penned the true story, also called <i>Our Zoo</i>, which is just as fascinating as what was shown on screen.
June was only four when she moved to Upton with her parents, grandparents, and her fourteen-year-old sister Muriel as well as a selection of animals. The BBC1 drama only showed up until the point that her father, George, had finally been given permission to build his zoo despite the petition against it. In the book, however, this occurs within the first few chapters and then continues on until June’s marriage to her husband Fred Williams in 1949. In fact the time period of the narrative jumps around depending on the animals or events that June is describing.
A large chunk of the book is focused on the effect the Second World War had on the zoo. As can be expected the rationings of vital products took its toll on the animals’ diets and, although the zoo never took a direct hit, the Liverpool blitz caused havoc by destroying the glass tanks in the aquarium. On the other hand, the amount of animals rapidly grew, as it was not just humans that became refugees during the war.
It was a delight to read about June’s relationships with some of the animals, particularly Mary the chimpanzee who was also June’s best friend as a child and behaved in a humanlike manner. Alas, as well as the happy moments there were the inevitable upsetting accounts of the deaths some of the animals, either from old age, illness or accidents.
While <i>Our Zoo</i> cannot be described as a novel, it neither has the feel of an autobiography. The conversational tone of the writing made it a pleasure to read and easy to visualize (admittedly watching the televised version had already provided a certain image).
This easy to read book is a strong recommendation for those who enjoyed the BBC adaptation and wish to find out what happened next. It does not matter if you have not watched the drama, as it is overall a fascinating story to read.
Many people in Britain may have recently watched the drama series <i>Our Zoo</i> on BBC1 about the Mottershead family who moved to Oakfield, Upton in 1930 with the aim of building a zoo without bars. Based on a true story the drama over exaggerated the difficulties the family faced in developing what became to be the famous Chester Zoo. Until 2010 when TV producer Adam Kemp approached her, June Mottershead had never thought about making her history available to the public. As the truth had to be bent slightly for the television production with the removal of certain characters and added romance, and, of course, the laws preventing chimpanzees from being filmed, June Mottershead has penned the true story, also called <i>Our Zoo</i>, which is just as fascinating as what was shown on screen.
June was only four when she moved to Upton with her parents, grandparents, and her fourteen-year-old sister Muriel as well as a selection of animals. The BBC1 drama only showed up until the point that her father, George, had finally been given permission to build his zoo despite the petition against it. In the book, however, this occurs within the first few chapters and then continues on until June’s marriage to her husband Fred Williams in 1949. In fact the time period of the narrative jumps around depending on the animals or events that June is describing.
A large chunk of the book is focused on the effect the Second World War had on the zoo. As can be expected the rationings of vital products took its toll on the animals’ diets and, although the zoo never took a direct hit, the Liverpool blitz caused havoc by destroying the glass tanks in the aquarium. On the other hand, the amount of animals rapidly grew, as it was not just humans that became refugees during the war.
It was a delight to read about June’s relationships with some of the animals, particularly Mary the chimpanzee who was also June’s best friend as a child and behaved in a humanlike manner. Alas, as well as the happy moments there were the inevitable upsetting accounts of the deaths some of the animals, either from old age, illness or accidents.
While <i>Our Zoo</i> cannot be described as a novel, it neither has the feel of an autobiography. The conversational tone of the writing made it a pleasure to read and easy to visualize (admittedly watching the televised version had already provided a certain image).
This easy to read book is a strong recommendation for those who enjoyed the BBC adaptation and wish to find out what happened next. It does not matter if you have not watched the drama, as it is overall a fascinating story to read.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Ben-Hur (2016) in Movies
Jul 15, 2019
Published in 1880, Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ is considered one of the most influential Christian books of the nineteenth century. The success of the novel led to film adaptations, most notably the 1955 academy award winning version of the film string Charlton Heston. Fast forward to 2016 and MGM and Paramount Pictures hope to see continue the success of this proven story with their newest film adaptation Ben-Hur.
The story follows a fictional Jewish Prince, Juda Ben-Hur (Jack Huston) as he is betrayed by his adopted brother and roman officer Messala (Toby Kebbell). Juda’s family is falsely accused of treason and Juda becomes enslaved by the Romans. Fueled by hate, Juda returns to Jerusalem seeking vengeance, until he unexpectedly finds compassion, forgiveness and redemption.
Walking into Ben-Hur, I did not know what to expect. I watched the 1955 version of Ben-Hur in 7th grade and did not remember anything accept the amazing chariot scene. That being said, this 2016 version of Ben-Hur stands on its own as a good film. Set in the time of Jesus, the story of Ben-Hur can be universally understood by people in all walks of life, religious or otherwise. That was something that I really appreciated about this film. Often stories set in a Christian setting can turn out to be distractingly preachy. However, Ben-Hur was the perfect blend of religion being hinted at throughout the story but never actually becoming the focal point of the story as a whole until redemption is found. Sure, it is there throughout for those who want it to be, but it also plays as a quiet catalyst for Juda through the compassion he sees in his wife Esther (Nazanin Boniadi) and Jesus (Rodrigo Santoro).
The film is acted well and the use of relatively unknown actors to play these major roles in an epic like this only works to strengthen the story as a whole. In fact, the most popular actor by far is Morgan Freeman (Ilderim) who has maybe 15-20 minutes of total screen time.
From a technical standpoint, Ben-Hur works not only visually with fantastic epic action scenes, but also in its pacing. The film’s pacing finds balance between intense action moments and the quieter exposition scenes that helps develop these characters, most notably Juda. We witness Juda’s transformation from naive prince, to a slave fighting for survival, to a man on a mission for revenge and the forgiveness he gains along the way.
Ben-Hur stands out to me this summer because at its core, it is a good coherent story told between impressive action pieces. Unlike so many recent summer blockbusters that are intent on showing off huge set pieces and not much more, Ben-Hur doesn’t forget that those action scenes are there to further the plot and tell a human story.
The story follows a fictional Jewish Prince, Juda Ben-Hur (Jack Huston) as he is betrayed by his adopted brother and roman officer Messala (Toby Kebbell). Juda’s family is falsely accused of treason and Juda becomes enslaved by the Romans. Fueled by hate, Juda returns to Jerusalem seeking vengeance, until he unexpectedly finds compassion, forgiveness and redemption.
Walking into Ben-Hur, I did not know what to expect. I watched the 1955 version of Ben-Hur in 7th grade and did not remember anything accept the amazing chariot scene. That being said, this 2016 version of Ben-Hur stands on its own as a good film. Set in the time of Jesus, the story of Ben-Hur can be universally understood by people in all walks of life, religious or otherwise. That was something that I really appreciated about this film. Often stories set in a Christian setting can turn out to be distractingly preachy. However, Ben-Hur was the perfect blend of religion being hinted at throughout the story but never actually becoming the focal point of the story as a whole until redemption is found. Sure, it is there throughout for those who want it to be, but it also plays as a quiet catalyst for Juda through the compassion he sees in his wife Esther (Nazanin Boniadi) and Jesus (Rodrigo Santoro).
The film is acted well and the use of relatively unknown actors to play these major roles in an epic like this only works to strengthen the story as a whole. In fact, the most popular actor by far is Morgan Freeman (Ilderim) who has maybe 15-20 minutes of total screen time.
From a technical standpoint, Ben-Hur works not only visually with fantastic epic action scenes, but also in its pacing. The film’s pacing finds balance between intense action moments and the quieter exposition scenes that helps develop these characters, most notably Juda. We witness Juda’s transformation from naive prince, to a slave fighting for survival, to a man on a mission for revenge and the forgiveness he gains along the way.
Ben-Hur stands out to me this summer because at its core, it is a good coherent story told between impressive action pieces. Unlike so many recent summer blockbusters that are intent on showing off huge set pieces and not much more, Ben-Hur doesn’t forget that those action scenes are there to further the plot and tell a human story.
Piper (13 KP) rated Doctor Sleep (2019) in Movies
Nov 27, 2019
Impressive Casting (2 more)
Excellent Ending
Beautifully Shot
Ridiculous Running Time (1 more)
Low On Scares
Doctor Sleep: The Long Haul
Contains spoilers, click to show
Watch enough horror movies, and you develop a certain tolerance: that said, I don't think you'd have to watch many to see this film and still not be scared. There are a couple of grisly moments, and Flanagan does an excellent job of building tension, but I had the feeling coming out of this film that I hadn't just seen a horror film at all. And I think that might have been the point: this was more about the story than the scares.
The story, overall, was well-adapted. About two-thirds of the way in the film really starts to veer off the path the book had laid out, but what it does with that last third is probably the best part of the movie. Spoilers follow: the end of Kubrick's "The Shining" left the Overlook Hotel intact (if a little sad) rather than burning it down as in the novel. Mike Flanagan does two things with this film, both adapting the novel and following on from Kubrick's film, and the Overlook features heavily in this ending and wraps up the Shining story quite nicely. In fact it seems the main purpose of the ending was to do justice to Stephen King's original vision, and in honesty it's a better ending than that of the novel.
Where "The Shining" largely ignored character's motivations and development and treated them essentially as set-pieces, "Doctor Sleep" spends far too long bringing them together. The characters are expertly cast, and Ewan McGregor almost takes a back-seat to let Kyleigh Curran's Abra shine (pun intended). Interactions are played off nicely and there's a self-referential cameo from Flanagan's other King adaptation that doesn't feel too shoe-horned in. The characters that are obviously just there to die die rather obviously, and one in particular serves purely as motivation for another to keep on fightin'. The acting itself excels, with a star turn by Rebecca Ferguson. The issue is that it simply could have been half an hour shorter, with half an hour less build-up. By the end of the movie I was just glad we had finally returned to the Overlook and things were starting to really happen.
The film is shot beautifully, and where scenes or characters from "The Shining" are re-created or referenced it's done with a great amount of care. I might have been the only one that found Rose flying above the clouds a little naff, but I still have to admit it was at least shot nicely. Overall, this was a brilliant film that could just have benefitted from a little trimming down, but Flanagan clearly cared about these characters and wanted us to feel for them and I think he certainly achieved that - and I have to stress again how ridiculously impressed I was with the ending.
The story, overall, was well-adapted. About two-thirds of the way in the film really starts to veer off the path the book had laid out, but what it does with that last third is probably the best part of the movie. Spoilers follow: the end of Kubrick's "The Shining" left the Overlook Hotel intact (if a little sad) rather than burning it down as in the novel. Mike Flanagan does two things with this film, both adapting the novel and following on from Kubrick's film, and the Overlook features heavily in this ending and wraps up the Shining story quite nicely. In fact it seems the main purpose of the ending was to do justice to Stephen King's original vision, and in honesty it's a better ending than that of the novel.
Where "The Shining" largely ignored character's motivations and development and treated them essentially as set-pieces, "Doctor Sleep" spends far too long bringing them together. The characters are expertly cast, and Ewan McGregor almost takes a back-seat to let Kyleigh Curran's Abra shine (pun intended). Interactions are played off nicely and there's a self-referential cameo from Flanagan's other King adaptation that doesn't feel too shoe-horned in. The characters that are obviously just there to die die rather obviously, and one in particular serves purely as motivation for another to keep on fightin'. The acting itself excels, with a star turn by Rebecca Ferguson. The issue is that it simply could have been half an hour shorter, with half an hour less build-up. By the end of the movie I was just glad we had finally returned to the Overlook and things were starting to really happen.
The film is shot beautifully, and where scenes or characters from "The Shining" are re-created or referenced it's done with a great amount of care. I might have been the only one that found Rose flying above the clouds a little naff, but I still have to admit it was at least shot nicely. Overall, this was a brilliant film that could just have benefitted from a little trimming down, but Flanagan clearly cared about these characters and wanted us to feel for them and I think he certainly achieved that - and I have to stress again how ridiculously impressed I was with the ending.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Mortal Kombat (2021) in Movies
Apr 22, 2021
Fans of the Mortal Kombat series have known that the path to bringing the violent and controversial game to live-action formats has been a mixed bag. While the first film in 1995 was a decent hit; the follow-up in 1997 disappointed fans who had grown weary of the PG-13 take on the series.
Subsequent efforts such as the 2011 television series also left fans wanting more; especially since the game series had become even more graphic and violent.
An animated film released in 2020 gave fans a taste of what they wanted as it featured graphical violence which many fans believed was essential to properly catch the spirit and action of the series.
The latest offering in the series “Mortal Kombat”; reboots the cinematic universe and gives fans the intense, brutal, and graphic violence that they have demanded. The film keeps the basic premise that the Outworld realm has won nine tournaments in a row, and based on the ancient laws; one more victory would allow them to take control of the Earth.
Raiden the Thunder God (Tadanobu Asano); who has been tasked with protecting Earth looks to assemble and train a band of champions to save Earth. Naturally, this is not going to be easy as Shang Tsung (Chin Han); is not willing to follow the rules of the tournament and dispatches his top fighter (Sub Zero (Joe Taslim) to dispatch the champions of Earth before the tournament in a clear violation of the rules in order to ensure total victory.
What follows is solid and very graphic action which contains gore and brutality on a level that almost kept the film from earning an R-rating. The action sequences are well-choreographed and there were some great recreations of classic moves by characters from the game series which were really well utilized and did not seem like gratuitous pandering.
While the plot is fairly simplistic and does not deviate greatly from the source material; it does give a larger backstory to the universe. It was really enjoyable to see many nods to the franchise throughout both subtle and overt and while some characters were glaringly absent which was a surprise; the characters that were included were really solid to see and the door was wide open for their inclusion at a later date.
While the cast does not contain any star power in terms of what Western audiences might expect from a major studio release; the ensemble works well and do a great job in bringing their characters to life.
The film leaves sequels wide open and teases a character that in my opinion was a glaring omission from the film. That being said; “Mortal Kombat” gives fans a solid adaptation that does not shy away from gore and violence and gives fans the cinematic experience that they have wanted.
3.5 stars out of 5
Subsequent efforts such as the 2011 television series also left fans wanting more; especially since the game series had become even more graphic and violent.
An animated film released in 2020 gave fans a taste of what they wanted as it featured graphical violence which many fans believed was essential to properly catch the spirit and action of the series.
The latest offering in the series “Mortal Kombat”; reboots the cinematic universe and gives fans the intense, brutal, and graphic violence that they have demanded. The film keeps the basic premise that the Outworld realm has won nine tournaments in a row, and based on the ancient laws; one more victory would allow them to take control of the Earth.
Raiden the Thunder God (Tadanobu Asano); who has been tasked with protecting Earth looks to assemble and train a band of champions to save Earth. Naturally, this is not going to be easy as Shang Tsung (Chin Han); is not willing to follow the rules of the tournament and dispatches his top fighter (Sub Zero (Joe Taslim) to dispatch the champions of Earth before the tournament in a clear violation of the rules in order to ensure total victory.
What follows is solid and very graphic action which contains gore and brutality on a level that almost kept the film from earning an R-rating. The action sequences are well-choreographed and there were some great recreations of classic moves by characters from the game series which were really well utilized and did not seem like gratuitous pandering.
While the plot is fairly simplistic and does not deviate greatly from the source material; it does give a larger backstory to the universe. It was really enjoyable to see many nods to the franchise throughout both subtle and overt and while some characters were glaringly absent which was a surprise; the characters that were included were really solid to see and the door was wide open for their inclusion at a later date.
While the cast does not contain any star power in terms of what Western audiences might expect from a major studio release; the ensemble works well and do a great job in bringing their characters to life.
The film leaves sequels wide open and teases a character that in my opinion was a glaring omission from the film. That being said; “Mortal Kombat” gives fans a solid adaptation that does not shy away from gore and violence and gives fans the cinematic experience that they have wanted.
3.5 stars out of 5