Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Tomorrow War (2021) in Movies
Jul 1, 2021
Amazon Prime’s purchase of The Tomorrow War from Paramount was a bold move as the FX-laden film starring Chris Pratt reportedly cost around $200 million to purchase and follows prior purchases of Paramount films by the streamer.
Pratt stars as an ex-soldier named Dan Forester who has just been turned down for a research job he has been seeking and must remain teaching science to less than enthusiastic students.
While watching a Soccer match with his wife, daughter, and friends, the world is stunned when a group of armed individuals appear in a flash of light and tell the televised audience that they have come from thirty years in the future and are seeking help to save humanity.
It is soon learned that an Alien threat they call the White Spikes suddenly appeared and has humanity on the verge of extinction. The nations of the world send forces into the future to help fight the war but with a very high casualty rate; a worldwide draft is soon instituted to replenish the numbers.
Dan is eventually drafted and told he has 24 hours to get things in order before he is deployed for seven days at which time he will be returned. Dan contemplates running and seeks out his estranged father (J.K. Simmons); who has a deep disdain for governments and conducts himself in a shady fashion to the point where Dan will not let him anywhere near his daughter.
Dan eventually deploys and finds a nightmare version of the future where cities are in ruin and the deadly and very tough enemy is everywhere.
As the tension mounts; Dan must team up with the leader of the resistance to develop a way to fight the aliens and save humanity before it is too late.
The film features some good FX and action and while there were many times I questioned why a different course of action was not attempted; the film eventually attempts to address many questions later in the film.
While the final act may seem overblown and too convenient; the film works as an enjoyable and action-filled escape as long as you are willing to just go along with the ride and not ask too many questions along the way.
While there are elements of prior Science Fiction and Horror films evident; the cast and premise work well and the movie is a step above most offerings that are sold to streaming services and is well worth a watch.
Pratt stars as an ex-soldier named Dan Forester who has just been turned down for a research job he has been seeking and must remain teaching science to less than enthusiastic students.
While watching a Soccer match with his wife, daughter, and friends, the world is stunned when a group of armed individuals appear in a flash of light and tell the televised audience that they have come from thirty years in the future and are seeking help to save humanity.
It is soon learned that an Alien threat they call the White Spikes suddenly appeared and has humanity on the verge of extinction. The nations of the world send forces into the future to help fight the war but with a very high casualty rate; a worldwide draft is soon instituted to replenish the numbers.
Dan is eventually drafted and told he has 24 hours to get things in order before he is deployed for seven days at which time he will be returned. Dan contemplates running and seeks out his estranged father (J.K. Simmons); who has a deep disdain for governments and conducts himself in a shady fashion to the point where Dan will not let him anywhere near his daughter.
Dan eventually deploys and finds a nightmare version of the future where cities are in ruin and the deadly and very tough enemy is everywhere.
As the tension mounts; Dan must team up with the leader of the resistance to develop a way to fight the aliens and save humanity before it is too late.
The film features some good FX and action and while there were many times I questioned why a different course of action was not attempted; the film eventually attempts to address many questions later in the film.
While the final act may seem overblown and too convenient; the film works as an enjoyable and action-filled escape as long as you are willing to just go along with the ride and not ask too many questions along the way.
While there are elements of prior Science Fiction and Horror films evident; the cast and premise work well and the movie is a step above most offerings that are sold to streaming services and is well worth a watch.
Bubbu Cat – My Virtual Pet
Games and Entertainment
App
Meet Bubbu, your new virtual pet. He is a cute, emotional and adorable cat who loves to eat tasty...
CodyCross: Crossword Puzzles
Games and Education
9.3
Rate It
App
- A new crossword experience - Challenge yourself with countless puzzles - Relax while exploring...
100% Biodegradable Comic Collection 1
8.0
Rate It
Book
The kind of wonderful craziness we've come to demand of the creators involved" - John Freeman, Titan...
Comic
Lifeline...
Games and Entertainment
App
“[A] surprising iPhone and Apple Watch bestseller is pushing the boundaries of fiction” -...
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Last Night in Soho (2021) in Movies
Dec 1, 2021
Straight off the bat, there is a whole lot to love about Last Night in Soho. It's a modern-London thriller with a dashing of supernatural horror. It's a modern horror with lashings of giallo. It's a giallo that is also a murder mystery. It bursting with colour, and has two exceptionally talented actors at it's helm.
I enjoy Anya Taylor-Joy in pretty much anything she's in, and the same applies here, stealing most of the scenes that she's in. Thomasin McKenzie is an infectiously likable protagonist, whether she's battling seedy-men ghosts, or the struggles of going to University in England (the scene near the beginning where she's stuck at a dorm party is a literal nightmare put straight onto the screen if you ask me). She's fantastic here as she was in Jojo Rabbit.
It boasts a strong supporting cast as well. Matt Smith plays a convincing shit-bag, and is quite clearly having a ball shouting in a cockney accent. It's always a pleasure to see Terence Stamp, and of course, Diana Rigg was one of the best in the game, and her performance here in her final role is testament to that.
LNIS is dripping with style, which is to be expected from Edgar Wright, but it's more subtle than a lot of his other works, substituting clever edits, cuts, and comedy for a film that's visual crack with a more serious tone. The vibrancy of its colour pallettes, both in the modern and 60s settings are as important as any character. Every frame feels like it's been lovingly poured over and is cinematic in every sense of the word. It also boasts a stellar soundtrack. I didn't realise how much I fucking love a bit of Cilla Black but here we are.
The only minor gripes I have is that it does drag ever so slightly during the final third. At one point it feels like a natural resolve is near, but then the narrative continues for a while longer before the twists and turns land. It also goes a little slasher-y at one point, which isn't necessarily an issue, but it feels a bit alien to the rest of the vibe (still manages to be a visually striking moment though!)
Overall though, Last Night in Soho is an incredibly engaging and enjoyable thriller, and is a proud addition to both Wright's filmography, and the modern resurgence of top quality horror.
I enjoy Anya Taylor-Joy in pretty much anything she's in, and the same applies here, stealing most of the scenes that she's in. Thomasin McKenzie is an infectiously likable protagonist, whether she's battling seedy-men ghosts, or the struggles of going to University in England (the scene near the beginning where she's stuck at a dorm party is a literal nightmare put straight onto the screen if you ask me). She's fantastic here as she was in Jojo Rabbit.
It boasts a strong supporting cast as well. Matt Smith plays a convincing shit-bag, and is quite clearly having a ball shouting in a cockney accent. It's always a pleasure to see Terence Stamp, and of course, Diana Rigg was one of the best in the game, and her performance here in her final role is testament to that.
LNIS is dripping with style, which is to be expected from Edgar Wright, but it's more subtle than a lot of his other works, substituting clever edits, cuts, and comedy for a film that's visual crack with a more serious tone. The vibrancy of its colour pallettes, both in the modern and 60s settings are as important as any character. Every frame feels like it's been lovingly poured over and is cinematic in every sense of the word. It also boasts a stellar soundtrack. I didn't realise how much I fucking love a bit of Cilla Black but here we are.
The only minor gripes I have is that it does drag ever so slightly during the final third. At one point it feels like a natural resolve is near, but then the narrative continues for a while longer before the twists and turns land. It also goes a little slasher-y at one point, which isn't necessarily an issue, but it feels a bit alien to the rest of the vibe (still manages to be a visually striking moment though!)
Overall though, Last Night in Soho is an incredibly engaging and enjoyable thriller, and is a proud addition to both Wright's filmography, and the modern resurgence of top quality horror.
IT… didn’t really float my boat.
IT is based on the Stephen King novel, and tells the disturbing recurring events that happen within the town of Derry in Maine. Kids keep disappearing and sightings of a spooky clown, other visitations and red balloons occur. A group of bullied high school kids – one directly impacted by the disappearances – work to get to the bottom of the supernatural goings on. (Fortunately they don’t have a dog called Scooby).
I had in mind that with the disturbing and dangerous “clowning around” that happened in the summer of 2016 that this film had been shot a while ago and the release delayed until now for fear of adding ‘clown-flavoured fuel’ to the fire. But it appears that filming only completed in September of last year, so that appears not to be the case.
The film starts memorably and brutally with the “drain scene” from the trailer. And very effective it is too. “Great!” you think… this is a spookfest that has legs! Unfortunately, for me at least, it all went downhill from there. The film really doesn’t seem to know WHAT it’s trying to be. There are elements of “Stand By Me”; elements of “Alien”; elements of “The Conjuring”, all thrown into a cinematic blender and pulsed well.
The most endearing aspects of the movie are the interactions of the small-town kids, with this aspect of the film bearing the closest comparison with J.J. Abrams’ “Super 8”. This is carried by the great performances of the young actors involved, with Jaeden Lieberher (so memorable in “Midnight Special”) as Bill; Jeremy Ray Taylor (“Ant Man”) as Ben (‘the chubby one’); and Finn Wolfhard, in his big-screen premiere and sporting an absurd set of glasses, as the wise-cracking Ritchie.
Standout for my though was the then 14-year old Sophia Lillis as Beverly (the nearest equivalent to the Elle Fanning role in “Super 8”). This young lady has SUCH screen presence, reminiscent of Emma Watson in the Harry Potter films. I think she is a name to watch!
While commenting on the acting I do need to acknowledge Bill Skarsgård (“Atomic Blonde” and son of Stellan Skarsgård) who is creepily effective as Pennywise the clown.
Having a film that just centred on the pubescent interplay between the youngsters and their battles against the near-psychopathic school bully Bowers (Nicholas Hamilton, “Captain Fantastic”) would have kept me well-entertained for two hours. However, in the same way that the hugely over-inflated Sci-Fi ending of “Super 8” rather detracted from that film, so the clown-related story popping up all the time just irritated me to distraction. (“WILL YOU JUST FECK OFF AND LEAVE US TO FIND OUT WHO BEVERLY GETS OFF WITH???!!”)
While the film has a number of good jump-scares, a lot of them – especially those with excessive use of CGI – just don’t really work. There are normally no “outcomes” from the scares. It’s all a bit like a ghost train where the carriage rounds a corner, something jumps out, and then the carriage moves on round the corner again! What makes a great horror film is where the “science” of the horror is well thought through. “Alien” was an exceptional example of that, where the science wasn’t just “physics” but also “biology”. Here (and I’m not sure whether this is true to the book… this is one of Stephen King’s I haven’t read) there seems to be no rules involved at all. Things happen fairly randomly: shape-shifting and effects on physical objects happen with no rational explanation; the kids can see things adults can’t see. (Why?). In fact the “adults” – the usual mix of Stephen King dysfunctional small-town crazies – seem to have no significant part in the story at all. It’s all like some lame teenage fantasy where actions (a number of individuals in the story meet their demise) seem to carry no legal consequences whatsoever. I half expected Bill to wake up – Dallas style – at the end and realise it had all been an “awful dream”!
In particular, the denouement is highly dissatisfying. An opportunity for a (very black) twist in the plot is discarded. Pennywise the clown’s departure is both lame and unconvincing. And there are numerous loose ends that are never properly tied down (what was that “floaters descending” dialogue about?…. it was just never followed through!).
It’s not all bad though. The location shoots in Bangor, Maine and the Ontario countryside are all beautifully rendered by cinematographer Chung-hoon Chung (“Stoker”) and where the film clicks with the young cast it clicks well and enjoyably. I just wish that the overall film wasn’t just such a jumbled-up mess. Blame for that must lie with the screenwriting team and director Andy Muschietti (“Mama”). I’m going to give it a kicking in my rating, since with all the marketing build-up it was certainly a disappointment. I see though that at the time of writing that this film sports an unfathomably high imdb rating of 8.0/10 so I’ll acknowledge that somebody must have seen something more in this than I did!!
I had in mind that with the disturbing and dangerous “clowning around” that happened in the summer of 2016 that this film had been shot a while ago and the release delayed until now for fear of adding ‘clown-flavoured fuel’ to the fire. But it appears that filming only completed in September of last year, so that appears not to be the case.
The film starts memorably and brutally with the “drain scene” from the trailer. And very effective it is too. “Great!” you think… this is a spookfest that has legs! Unfortunately, for me at least, it all went downhill from there. The film really doesn’t seem to know WHAT it’s trying to be. There are elements of “Stand By Me”; elements of “Alien”; elements of “The Conjuring”, all thrown into a cinematic blender and pulsed well.
The most endearing aspects of the movie are the interactions of the small-town kids, with this aspect of the film bearing the closest comparison with J.J. Abrams’ “Super 8”. This is carried by the great performances of the young actors involved, with Jaeden Lieberher (so memorable in “Midnight Special”) as Bill; Jeremy Ray Taylor (“Ant Man”) as Ben (‘the chubby one’); and Finn Wolfhard, in his big-screen premiere and sporting an absurd set of glasses, as the wise-cracking Ritchie.
Standout for my though was the then 14-year old Sophia Lillis as Beverly (the nearest equivalent to the Elle Fanning role in “Super 8”). This young lady has SUCH screen presence, reminiscent of Emma Watson in the Harry Potter films. I think she is a name to watch!
While commenting on the acting I do need to acknowledge Bill Skarsgård (“Atomic Blonde” and son of Stellan Skarsgård) who is creepily effective as Pennywise the clown.
Having a film that just centred on the pubescent interplay between the youngsters and their battles against the near-psychopathic school bully Bowers (Nicholas Hamilton, “Captain Fantastic”) would have kept me well-entertained for two hours. However, in the same way that the hugely over-inflated Sci-Fi ending of “Super 8” rather detracted from that film, so the clown-related story popping up all the time just irritated me to distraction. (“WILL YOU JUST FECK OFF AND LEAVE US TO FIND OUT WHO BEVERLY GETS OFF WITH???!!”)
While the film has a number of good jump-scares, a lot of them – especially those with excessive use of CGI – just don’t really work. There are normally no “outcomes” from the scares. It’s all a bit like a ghost train where the carriage rounds a corner, something jumps out, and then the carriage moves on round the corner again! What makes a great horror film is where the “science” of the horror is well thought through. “Alien” was an exceptional example of that, where the science wasn’t just “physics” but also “biology”. Here (and I’m not sure whether this is true to the book… this is one of Stephen King’s I haven’t read) there seems to be no rules involved at all. Things happen fairly randomly: shape-shifting and effects on physical objects happen with no rational explanation; the kids can see things adults can’t see. (Why?). In fact the “adults” – the usual mix of Stephen King dysfunctional small-town crazies – seem to have no significant part in the story at all. It’s all like some lame teenage fantasy where actions (a number of individuals in the story meet their demise) seem to carry no legal consequences whatsoever. I half expected Bill to wake up – Dallas style – at the end and realise it had all been an “awful dream”!
In particular, the denouement is highly dissatisfying. An opportunity for a (very black) twist in the plot is discarded. Pennywise the clown’s departure is both lame and unconvincing. And there are numerous loose ends that are never properly tied down (what was that “floaters descending” dialogue about?…. it was just never followed through!).
It’s not all bad though. The location shoots in Bangor, Maine and the Ontario countryside are all beautifully rendered by cinematographer Chung-hoon Chung (“Stoker”) and where the film clicks with the young cast it clicks well and enjoyably. I just wish that the overall film wasn’t just such a jumbled-up mess. Blame for that must lie with the screenwriting team and director Andy Muschietti (“Mama”). I’m going to give it a kicking in my rating, since with all the marketing build-up it was certainly a disappointment. I see though that at the time of writing that this film sports an unfathomably high imdb rating of 8.0/10 so I’ll acknowledge that somebody must have seen something more in this than I did!!
Beckie Shelton (40 KP) rated The Shimmering in Books
May 28, 2017
Sci-Fi Romance
The shimmering By Susan Kearney was a sci-fi romance that was very reminiscent of the stories I have read in my younger days and I was such a sucker for these, So this book had me feeling rather nostalgic, wanting to experience this all over again.
This was my main reason for wanting to read this novel and I have to admit I was also looking for something light, fluffy and just easy to read, a bit of romantic instalove to warm the old heart, sigh.
And The Shimmering does all that, you get exactly what it says on the tin.
This was an ok read, not amazing, but it passed a few hours and was enjoyable in an easy non-brain taxing way.
Basically, you have our intrepid heroine journalist Sandra Lowell testing out an astral projecting machine for a story.
This device manages to, with a little help from an ancient Totem the Zorash, to send Sandra across the universe and into the body of a woman about to be married to Daveck. Daveck is intent on marrying his enemies daughter to force her to reveal the location of the same object that has helped propel Sandra here to his planet from across the stars.
So what worked for me and what didn't.
well, I felt that the storyline here is so imaginative that much more could have been done to expand on this, I would have liked to see this more of this new world, to explore and meet its alien people properly.
Sandra also seemed a lot more fleshed out than Daveck, who I really struggled to get a fully dimensional picture of and to connect with, also I'm all for instalove but I felt that Sandra after lamenting all through earlier chapters why she didn't have a man and how important her career was gave up that job unbelievably fast.
Now that is out of the way, why should you read The Shimmering?
Well, This is a charming uncomplicated tale of instalove across the stars, it's very imaginative and though it's a simple angst-free story it does kind of give you a warm nostalgic glow, This wasn't quite a three for me but a two seemed too low so I've rated this 2 1/2 on the Goodreads rating I would have rated it slightly higher if I was able to connect more with the book's characters, for me this was an ok read that pleasantly passed the time.
Thank you to the publisher and NetGalley for providing me with a free readers copy of the Shimmering. This is my own unbiased opinion.
Arc Reviewed By BeckieBookworm
https://www.beckiebookworm.com/
https://www.facebook.com/beckiebookworm/
https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/9460945-bex-beckie-bookworm
This was my main reason for wanting to read this novel and I have to admit I was also looking for something light, fluffy and just easy to read, a bit of romantic instalove to warm the old heart, sigh.
And The Shimmering does all that, you get exactly what it says on the tin.
This was an ok read, not amazing, but it passed a few hours and was enjoyable in an easy non-brain taxing way.
Basically, you have our intrepid heroine journalist Sandra Lowell testing out an astral projecting machine for a story.
This device manages to, with a little help from an ancient Totem the Zorash, to send Sandra across the universe and into the body of a woman about to be married to Daveck. Daveck is intent on marrying his enemies daughter to force her to reveal the location of the same object that has helped propel Sandra here to his planet from across the stars.
So what worked for me and what didn't.
well, I felt that the storyline here is so imaginative that much more could have been done to expand on this, I would have liked to see this more of this new world, to explore and meet its alien people properly.
Sandra also seemed a lot more fleshed out than Daveck, who I really struggled to get a fully dimensional picture of and to connect with, also I'm all for instalove but I felt that Sandra after lamenting all through earlier chapters why she didn't have a man and how important her career was gave up that job unbelievably fast.
Now that is out of the way, why should you read The Shimmering?
Well, This is a charming uncomplicated tale of instalove across the stars, it's very imaginative and though it's a simple angst-free story it does kind of give you a warm nostalgic glow, This wasn't quite a three for me but a two seemed too low so I've rated this 2 1/2 on the Goodreads rating I would have rated it slightly higher if I was able to connect more with the book's characters, for me this was an ok read that pleasantly passed the time.
Thank you to the publisher and NetGalley for providing me with a free readers copy of the Shimmering. This is my own unbiased opinion.
Arc Reviewed By BeckieBookworm
https://www.beckiebookworm.com/
https://www.facebook.com/beckiebookworm/
https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/9460945-bex-beckie-bookworm
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Unlocked (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
London Has Fallen, but good
Every year it happens, a big blockbuster comes along and absolutely obliterates the competition at the box office. This year, that award has gone to the much-hyped and slightly disappointing Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol 2.
Then, a fortnight later, another massive hit arrives, Alien: Covenant this time, meaning any films caught between the two behemoths are generally forgotten. In 2016, that forgotten movie was Eye in the Sky. This year, it’s Michael Apted’s terrorism thriller, Unlocked. But is it a film worth watching?
After being tricked into providing information to the wrong side, a CIA interrogator (Noomi Rapace) finds herself at the centre of a devastating biological attack on London. As she tries to dodge those that pursue her, she stumbles along a terrifying web of lies along the way.
At its core, Unlocked is an enjoyable romp that verges on the side of unremarkable but a few standout scenes, cracking cast and confident direction ensure it is one of the better films in a genre clogged with tripe.
Speaking of that cracking cast, it features the likes of John Malkovich, Toni Collette, Orlando Bloom and Michael Douglas. Each of these stars act well though some, Malkovich in particular, are sorely underused. Nevertheless, he and Collette add a level of class to proceedings whilst Douglas looks like he’s there just for the wages.
The story, written by Peter O’Brien is actually pretty good. It’s nothing particularly original, but manages to sustain enough interest to see Unlocked through its taut 98 minute running time. In fact, I wouldn’t mind seeing a sequel, it’s genuinely that intriguing.
The parallels to last year’s London Has Fallen will no doubt be drawn and the fragile subject matter that both films tackle is one that is perhaps a little too hard to stomach for some moviegoers. However, Unlocked delves into the topic of British terrorism in a much more sensitive way, rather than money-making with all-out spectacle.
Cinematography wise, it’s more of the same – competent but unexceptional. The action is staged well but Michael Apted struggles with the smaller details; there’s some lazy editing and poor sound mixing. The special effects are few and far between, helping the film’s cause in a way, but those that are there are more than up to the task of bolstering its appeal.
Overall, Unlocked is an entertaining thriller that has a stellar cast. It’s well paced, nicely shot and tackles the subjects of urban terrorism sensitively, but you’ll have a hard time remembering it a few months down the line, it’s marketing has just been that terrible.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/06/london-has-fallen-but-good-unlocked-review/
Then, a fortnight later, another massive hit arrives, Alien: Covenant this time, meaning any films caught between the two behemoths are generally forgotten. In 2016, that forgotten movie was Eye in the Sky. This year, it’s Michael Apted’s terrorism thriller, Unlocked. But is it a film worth watching?
After being tricked into providing information to the wrong side, a CIA interrogator (Noomi Rapace) finds herself at the centre of a devastating biological attack on London. As she tries to dodge those that pursue her, she stumbles along a terrifying web of lies along the way.
At its core, Unlocked is an enjoyable romp that verges on the side of unremarkable but a few standout scenes, cracking cast and confident direction ensure it is one of the better films in a genre clogged with tripe.
Speaking of that cracking cast, it features the likes of John Malkovich, Toni Collette, Orlando Bloom and Michael Douglas. Each of these stars act well though some, Malkovich in particular, are sorely underused. Nevertheless, he and Collette add a level of class to proceedings whilst Douglas looks like he’s there just for the wages.
The story, written by Peter O’Brien is actually pretty good. It’s nothing particularly original, but manages to sustain enough interest to see Unlocked through its taut 98 minute running time. In fact, I wouldn’t mind seeing a sequel, it’s genuinely that intriguing.
The parallels to last year’s London Has Fallen will no doubt be drawn and the fragile subject matter that both films tackle is one that is perhaps a little too hard to stomach for some moviegoers. However, Unlocked delves into the topic of British terrorism in a much more sensitive way, rather than money-making with all-out spectacle.
Cinematography wise, it’s more of the same – competent but unexceptional. The action is staged well but Michael Apted struggles with the smaller details; there’s some lazy editing and poor sound mixing. The special effects are few and far between, helping the film’s cause in a way, but those that are there are more than up to the task of bolstering its appeal.
Overall, Unlocked is an entertaining thriller that has a stellar cast. It’s well paced, nicely shot and tackles the subjects of urban terrorism sensitively, but you’ll have a hard time remembering it a few months down the line, it’s marketing has just been that terrible.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/06/london-has-fallen-but-good-unlocked-review/