Search
Search results
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Robin Hood (2018) in Movies
Jan 28, 2019 (Updated Jan 28, 2019)
A Middling Reboot
This is another movie from late 2018 that I am only just getting a chance to see. After my girlfriend and I sat through this one, she turned to me and asked what I thought of it. In response, I just shrugged my shoulders and went, "It was alright." That is genuinely the best way that I can think of to sum up my feeling on this film.
It's a mediocre action movie based around the basic concept of the old tale of Robin Hood. It is extremely cheesy and has bags of whatever the opposite of subtle is. It tries to tell a gritty, 'Year One,' type of story for the character and treats the Robin Hood moniker as a dual identity for Robin Loxley, which draws heavy comparisons to the Batman/Bruce Wayne dynamic. Unfortunately, not much of it lands due to the lack of risk-taking involved.
The movie also feels weirdly dated, especially considering that it's only a few months old. There are an abundance of overindulgent slow motion shots in the style of 300; a movie that was 12 years old at the time of this movie's release. The use of green-screen in this film is actually pretty atrocious judging by today's standards and actually might be some of the worst out of any 2018 movie I saw. This is noticeable throughout the whole movie, but is especially rough-looking during a carriage chase that happens around two thirds into the film.
The cast are all phoning it in as well. Taron Egerton does nothing special with the lead role and Ben Mendlesohn hams it up as the Sheriff Of Nottingham, doing pretty much the same villainous shlock that he did in Ready Player One and Star Wars: Rogue One, way to not get typecast Mendo!
That's the other weird thing about this movie, is that it's not sure what era it wants to be set in. Some of the accents, language and costumes are suitable for the period that the movie is set in, but other elements and other lines and costumes etc feel like they are from 2018, the year that this movie was made. The end result that they were aiming for may have been a sort of rolling timeline that transcends the days of the Crusades that the movie is set in but what we get is just a scattered mess.
There were a few positives in this thing. Some cool shots, Some of the stunt archery is, (while super unrealistic,) pretty cool to watch. I know that 'Real Life Legolas,' Lars Andersen was hired to teach the cast some archery and I believe he helped out with the action choreography as well, which is pretty cool. There are also some glimpses of creativity in some of the shots. One in particular that stood out to me was a shot that gradually panned out from behind a solitary soldiers shield to show the intensity and scale of the battle that was taking place. It's just unfortunate that in so many other places in the movie, all we get is lazy, generic camera angles that add nothing to the scene taking place.
Overall, this is an okay action romp. Don't go in expecting anything of substance or you will most definitely come away disappointed. Though, if all that you are looking for is something to stick on in the background while you do other things or if you are just after an easy, straightforward action adventure popcorn flick, then you could probably do worse than this.
It's a mediocre action movie based around the basic concept of the old tale of Robin Hood. It is extremely cheesy and has bags of whatever the opposite of subtle is. It tries to tell a gritty, 'Year One,' type of story for the character and treats the Robin Hood moniker as a dual identity for Robin Loxley, which draws heavy comparisons to the Batman/Bruce Wayne dynamic. Unfortunately, not much of it lands due to the lack of risk-taking involved.
The movie also feels weirdly dated, especially considering that it's only a few months old. There are an abundance of overindulgent slow motion shots in the style of 300; a movie that was 12 years old at the time of this movie's release. The use of green-screen in this film is actually pretty atrocious judging by today's standards and actually might be some of the worst out of any 2018 movie I saw. This is noticeable throughout the whole movie, but is especially rough-looking during a carriage chase that happens around two thirds into the film.
The cast are all phoning it in as well. Taron Egerton does nothing special with the lead role and Ben Mendlesohn hams it up as the Sheriff Of Nottingham, doing pretty much the same villainous shlock that he did in Ready Player One and Star Wars: Rogue One, way to not get typecast Mendo!
That's the other weird thing about this movie, is that it's not sure what era it wants to be set in. Some of the accents, language and costumes are suitable for the period that the movie is set in, but other elements and other lines and costumes etc feel like they are from 2018, the year that this movie was made. The end result that they were aiming for may have been a sort of rolling timeline that transcends the days of the Crusades that the movie is set in but what we get is just a scattered mess.
There were a few positives in this thing. Some cool shots, Some of the stunt archery is, (while super unrealistic,) pretty cool to watch. I know that 'Real Life Legolas,' Lars Andersen was hired to teach the cast some archery and I believe he helped out with the action choreography as well, which is pretty cool. There are also some glimpses of creativity in some of the shots. One in particular that stood out to me was a shot that gradually panned out from behind a solitary soldiers shield to show the intensity and scale of the battle that was taking place. It's just unfortunate that in so many other places in the movie, all we get is lazy, generic camera angles that add nothing to the scene taking place.
Overall, this is an okay action romp. Don't go in expecting anything of substance or you will most definitely come away disappointed. Though, if all that you are looking for is something to stick on in the background while you do other things or if you are just after an easy, straightforward action adventure popcorn flick, then you could probably do worse than this.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Olympic Dreams (2020) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Beautiful Story
A dentist working the winter olympics falls in love with one of the athletes.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 2
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 9
Entertainment Value: 8
Memorability: 6
Pace: 10
At just 82 minutes, the movie feels even shorter. It flows smoothly from scene to scene without ever feeling rushed. Director Jeremy Teicher does a phenomenal job of time-management and making you feel a connection in such a short amount of time.
Plot: 10
A part of what makes the story pop so well is how different they made the two main characters. They drive and move the story so smoothly because of their constant conflict. The concept is also very original as well.
Resolution: 8
Overall: 81
If you’re looking for a cute love story that’s not over-the-top sappy, Olympic Dreams is definitely the way to go. I didn’t enter the movie with very high expectations but I ended up absolutely loving it. Nick Kroll and Alexi Pappas are magic together.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 2
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 9
Entertainment Value: 8
Memorability: 6
Pace: 10
At just 82 minutes, the movie feels even shorter. It flows smoothly from scene to scene without ever feeling rushed. Director Jeremy Teicher does a phenomenal job of time-management and making you feel a connection in such a short amount of time.
Plot: 10
A part of what makes the story pop so well is how different they made the two main characters. They drive and move the story so smoothly because of their constant conflict. The concept is also very original as well.
Resolution: 8
Overall: 81
If you’re looking for a cute love story that’s not over-the-top sappy, Olympic Dreams is definitely the way to go. I didn’t enter the movie with very high expectations but I ended up absolutely loving it. Nick Kroll and Alexi Pappas are magic together.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Flashdance (1983) in Movies
Mar 4, 2021 (Updated Jul 4, 2021)
"𝘈𝘩, 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘭... 𝘪𝘵'𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦."
Hardly even a movie at all, but who cares? It's a total blast. Toned with reliably cool + seductive shots from Lyne, God-tier choreography, and a rich 80s soundtrack that positively fucks hard. Jennifer Beals is a force of nature and studio Hollywood did her so dirty by not giving her many other worthwhile roles after this. Have a couple gripes, mainly the way it suggests that certain forms of exotic dancing are dead-end last resorts which are inherently demeaning - and the women seem to be the only ones who really get punished here as opposed to the creepy, trashy men (not to mention that dumbass eating joke with the receptionist). But on the flipside, it's nice to see a movie where women are celebrated for their genuine talent but also aren't squarely defined by it. That final audition dance scene is just about perfect. Good vibes. It's easy to see why its brief mention was one of the only good qualities of boredom all-timer 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘔𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘺.
Hardly even a movie at all, but who cares? It's a total blast. Toned with reliably cool + seductive shots from Lyne, God-tier choreography, and a rich 80s soundtrack that positively fucks hard. Jennifer Beals is a force of nature and studio Hollywood did her so dirty by not giving her many other worthwhile roles after this. Have a couple gripes, mainly the way it suggests that certain forms of exotic dancing are dead-end last resorts which are inherently demeaning - and the women seem to be the only ones who really get punished here as opposed to the creepy, trashy men (not to mention that dumbass eating joke with the receptionist). But on the flipside, it's nice to see a movie where women are celebrated for their genuine talent but also aren't squarely defined by it. That final audition dance scene is just about perfect. Good vibes. It's easy to see why its brief mention was one of the only good qualities of boredom all-timer 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘔𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘺.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Casino (1995) in Movies
Sep 19, 2020
As expected this was thoroughly entertaining moment-to-moment, but as a whole this seems like small-risk doddle for Scorsese: simple characters with a not only a familiar story but an almost entirely predictable and hasty one that just doesn't feel fully rewarding enough to be three hours. For a film that's so long it feels like huge, important chunks of the story are just... gone. Though that being said, it's paced nearly to perfection - flowing steadily from one fun and confidently-crafted mob movie trope to the next. What almost explicitly saves this from otherwise total dime-a-dozen mediocrity is the fact that the three leads are some of the most engrossing actors alive and each of them are rip-roaringly astonishing in it even if they're playing characters they've already played before practically to a T. It's pretty much 𝘉𝘶𝘨𝘴𝘺 with more of an edge. Far from great but also the sort of movie Scorsese could do in his sleep. Robert De Niro's suits are the clear highlight in all of this.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Talk to Her (2002) in Movies
Sep 11, 2019 (Updated Sep 11, 2019)
Genre-busting Spanish drama almost feels like the film Hitchcock could have made if he'd spent thirty years in therapy. The story is told partly out of sequence but concerns two men devoted to women in comas: a bullfighter and a dance student. Slowly their stories unfold, and turn out to be quite different. Almodóvar's script is as subtle and playful as ever, cheerfully toying with audience assumptions and expectations - it's impossible to predict the way this story will go, and this is before we even get to the eye-popping silent movie interlude.
Brilliant performances from the two leads; for once, the female characters have a more secondary role but they are also well-played. All the vibrance and sensuousness of Almodóvar's other films, but this is a deeply serious, mature work. Perhaps his greatest achievement is to find pathos and sympathy in the most unlikely places imaginable, and conclude a film which goes to some very dark places on a definite note of implied hope. An excellent movie in every way.
Brilliant performances from the two leads; for once, the female characters have a more secondary role but they are also well-played. All the vibrance and sensuousness of Almodóvar's other films, but this is a deeply serious, mature work. Perhaps his greatest achievement is to find pathos and sympathy in the most unlikely places imaginable, and conclude a film which goes to some very dark places on a definite note of implied hope. An excellent movie in every way.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Visitor Q (2001) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Visitor Q is Takashi Miike's take on reality television. If you've never seen a Takashi Miike film, then prepare yourself to be shocked and to see things you've never seen in a movie before. Visitor Q focuses around the Yamazaki family. Kiyoshi, the father, used to be a television broadcaster and is trying to come up with ideas for a new reality television show. Keiko, the mother, is verbally and physically abused by her son. She and Kiyoshi pretty much allow it to happen, but her only rule is that her son doesn't mess up her face. Takuya, the son, is picked on by bullies even while he's at home. A visitor shows up at the house after hitting Kiyoshi over the head with a rock...twice. Their lives get even more screwed up as he shows up and it's all caught on camera.
If you watch this movie, you might as well know what you're getting yourself into. This movie not only contains "strong aberrant sexual and violent content, language and drug use" as stated by the MPAA when giving the movie an R rating, but it also contains incest, necrophilia, and just things that people will find disturbing in general. Like a woman lactating from her nipples and having it squirt all over the place. I'm just trying to give you fair warning just in case you're thinking about watching a movie that you won't be able to finish. It's not for everybody and just know that you're in for a wild ride.
That's not to say that the movie isn't enjoyable though. Even though it deals with a lot of disturbing material, there's some comedy in there. The fact that the visitor(he never really says what his name is) bashes people over the head with a rock just because he can is kind of hilarious. To tell the truth, it kept me watching because this family was so messed up. And the way Kiyoshi lost his broadcasting job will be remembered...forever.
Takashi Miike is known quite well in the horror community for pushing the envelope in movies like Ichi the Killer and Imprint, so horror fans know that if they know they're watching a movie done by Miike that they're going to see some material they won't see anywhere else. Casual movie fans may not be interested in shock value or movies that are this disturbing. Visitor Q not only pushes the envelope, it pays for postage and insurance as well.
The bottom line is that if you want to be grossed out or have a bunch of wtf moments, rent Visitor Q or any Takashi Miike film for that matter.
If you watch this movie, you might as well know what you're getting yourself into. This movie not only contains "strong aberrant sexual and violent content, language and drug use" as stated by the MPAA when giving the movie an R rating, but it also contains incest, necrophilia, and just things that people will find disturbing in general. Like a woman lactating from her nipples and having it squirt all over the place. I'm just trying to give you fair warning just in case you're thinking about watching a movie that you won't be able to finish. It's not for everybody and just know that you're in for a wild ride.
That's not to say that the movie isn't enjoyable though. Even though it deals with a lot of disturbing material, there's some comedy in there. The fact that the visitor(he never really says what his name is) bashes people over the head with a rock just because he can is kind of hilarious. To tell the truth, it kept me watching because this family was so messed up. And the way Kiyoshi lost his broadcasting job will be remembered...forever.
Takashi Miike is known quite well in the horror community for pushing the envelope in movies like Ichi the Killer and Imprint, so horror fans know that if they know they're watching a movie done by Miike that they're going to see some material they won't see anywhere else. Casual movie fans may not be interested in shock value or movies that are this disturbing. Visitor Q not only pushes the envelope, it pays for postage and insurance as well.
The bottom line is that if you want to be grossed out or have a bunch of wtf moments, rent Visitor Q or any Takashi Miike film for that matter.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated 47 Meters Down: Uncaged (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Shark Movie That Struggles To Stay Afloat
47 Meters Down Uncaged is a 2019 survival/horror movie directed by Johannes Robert and written by Robert and Ernest Riera with producers James Harris, Mark Lane and Robert Jones. It was produced by They Fyzz Facility and distributed by Entertainment Studios Motion Pictures. The film stars Corinne Foxx, Sophie Nelisse, Brianne Tju and Sistaine Stallone.
Mia (Sophie Nelisse), has had trouble fitting in living in Mexico which includes trouble with girls at school and adjusting to living with her father, step-mother (Nia Long) and sister. Three teenagers, Sasha (Corinne Foxx) her step-sister and her two friends convince her to go swimming with them at a secret lagoon rather than go on a glass bottom boat tour. The lagoon happens to be near a sunken Mayan city where Mia's father Grant (John Corbett) is working. The girls grab some scuba gear and decide to seize this opportunity to see the discovery for themselves and find that it is the hunting ground for deadly great white sharks. With their air supply running out and having to navigate the labyrinth of tunnels the girls find themselves in a race against time and the deadly sharks to try and survive.
This movie was okay but I thought it was going to be better. I hadn't seen the first one so I don't know if they are connected in anyway but I believe they are not. I wanted to see a good shark movie especially since during shark week a while back I had seen a lot of shark shows this year and the movie they did called Capsized which was pretty decent. This movie started off good but failed to set the tension in a gripping way. I didn't like the fact that since they were swimming in caves the lighting was dark and didn't allow for a lot of visuals. It was good for mood setting and ambiance but I thought it was a little gimmicky when they used the flares and it changed everything red. I say that because the CGI of the sharks left me underwhelmed as well. The sharks were supposed to be blind for having evolved or lived in caves the whole time and also adjusted to be more sensitive to sounds. To me the CGI looked unbelievable and threw off the emergence from enjoying the movie. They could have been better or the way they built the tension could have been better. The movie did have a couple of frightening "jump scares", one of which surprised and got me. For some reason I really didn't like the ending, for me it was the main character acting out of character and then there being to many "jump scares" back to back at the end. If you see it you'll know what I'm talking about. Anyways I give this movie a 5/10.
Mia (Sophie Nelisse), has had trouble fitting in living in Mexico which includes trouble with girls at school and adjusting to living with her father, step-mother (Nia Long) and sister. Three teenagers, Sasha (Corinne Foxx) her step-sister and her two friends convince her to go swimming with them at a secret lagoon rather than go on a glass bottom boat tour. The lagoon happens to be near a sunken Mayan city where Mia's father Grant (John Corbett) is working. The girls grab some scuba gear and decide to seize this opportunity to see the discovery for themselves and find that it is the hunting ground for deadly great white sharks. With their air supply running out and having to navigate the labyrinth of tunnels the girls find themselves in a race against time and the deadly sharks to try and survive.
This movie was okay but I thought it was going to be better. I hadn't seen the first one so I don't know if they are connected in anyway but I believe they are not. I wanted to see a good shark movie especially since during shark week a while back I had seen a lot of shark shows this year and the movie they did called Capsized which was pretty decent. This movie started off good but failed to set the tension in a gripping way. I didn't like the fact that since they were swimming in caves the lighting was dark and didn't allow for a lot of visuals. It was good for mood setting and ambiance but I thought it was a little gimmicky when they used the flares and it changed everything red. I say that because the CGI of the sharks left me underwhelmed as well. The sharks were supposed to be blind for having evolved or lived in caves the whole time and also adjusted to be more sensitive to sounds. To me the CGI looked unbelievable and threw off the emergence from enjoying the movie. They could have been better or the way they built the tension could have been better. The movie did have a couple of frightening "jump scares", one of which surprised and got me. For some reason I really didn't like the ending, for me it was the main character acting out of character and then there being to many "jump scares" back to back at the end. If you see it you'll know what I'm talking about. Anyways I give this movie a 5/10.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Favourite (2018) in Movies
Jan 18, 2019 (Updated Jan 18, 2019)
Fantastic script (3 more)
Brilliant performances
Clever cinematography
Insanely detailed set design
Strange But Brilliant
To be honest, I am not a huge fan of Yorgos Lanthimos' other movies, I also have a hatred for most period pieces. I am however a huge fan of Olivia Colman and it was her that swayed me to go and see this movie and I am very glad that I did.
Colman absolutely nails her role as a grief stricken, overly dramatic, short tempered Queen Anne. Her acting ability is diverse enough that she can take you from a side splitting remark one moment to a genuinely saddening comment the next and do it flawlessly and convincingly. Rachel Weisz is also pretty good here as Queen Anne's original favourite lady, Anne may be the Queen, but it is Lady Marlborough who is really running the show.
The biggest surpise for me was Emma Stone's performance. I don't hate Emma Stone, but I do feel like she plays the same goofy studenty American girl in everything that she is in, but here she is actually acting and her English accent was brilliant throughout the whole movie. It proves how much a good director is able to get out of their actors performance-wise.
The other main star here is the script. It is jam packed with brilliantly crass lines that are fired out so quickly and with such venom from the respective characters that you really feel the words being said. It is one of the best written scripts I have seen in a film in a while.
I'm not normally one to gush about set design, but my God... This movie goes all out with it's backdrops. I know that for the exterior shots, they shot on location at real palaces and castles and used mostly natural lighting at least for the daytime scenes. While these scenes are impressive, it is the interior scenes that are really mesmerising. The level of detail on the background elements in this movie is insane and anywhere that you look onscreen, there is something new and interesting to catch your eye.
The other great thing about this movie, is that even if you don't care about the competition for favour that is at the centre of the movie's plot, there is enough going on with the filmmaking itself to keep your attention throughout. The odd looking fish eye lenses that Lanthimos uses and the bizarre shot compositions looking up from waist-height at the actors is as fascinating to look at as it is weird. It gives the movie a unique feel that sets it apart from any other period piece I have seen.
Overall, I got way more out of The Favourite than I expected to going in. The movie is funny, witty and pretty unique. The attention to detail is impressive and the performances are great, with Olivia Colman's alone making the film worth the price of admission. The script is great and the direction is oddly interesting. Do be warned though; this movie is very weird and definitely not your typical period piece movie.
Colman absolutely nails her role as a grief stricken, overly dramatic, short tempered Queen Anne. Her acting ability is diverse enough that she can take you from a side splitting remark one moment to a genuinely saddening comment the next and do it flawlessly and convincingly. Rachel Weisz is also pretty good here as Queen Anne's original favourite lady, Anne may be the Queen, but it is Lady Marlborough who is really running the show.
The biggest surpise for me was Emma Stone's performance. I don't hate Emma Stone, but I do feel like she plays the same goofy studenty American girl in everything that she is in, but here she is actually acting and her English accent was brilliant throughout the whole movie. It proves how much a good director is able to get out of their actors performance-wise.
The other main star here is the script. It is jam packed with brilliantly crass lines that are fired out so quickly and with such venom from the respective characters that you really feel the words being said. It is one of the best written scripts I have seen in a film in a while.
I'm not normally one to gush about set design, but my God... This movie goes all out with it's backdrops. I know that for the exterior shots, they shot on location at real palaces and castles and used mostly natural lighting at least for the daytime scenes. While these scenes are impressive, it is the interior scenes that are really mesmerising. The level of detail on the background elements in this movie is insane and anywhere that you look onscreen, there is something new and interesting to catch your eye.
The other great thing about this movie, is that even if you don't care about the competition for favour that is at the centre of the movie's plot, there is enough going on with the filmmaking itself to keep your attention throughout. The odd looking fish eye lenses that Lanthimos uses and the bizarre shot compositions looking up from waist-height at the actors is as fascinating to look at as it is weird. It gives the movie a unique feel that sets it apart from any other period piece I have seen.
Overall, I got way more out of The Favourite than I expected to going in. The movie is funny, witty and pretty unique. The attention to detail is impressive and the performances are great, with Olivia Colman's alone making the film worth the price of admission. The script is great and the direction is oddly interesting. Do be warned though; this movie is very weird and definitely not your typical period piece movie.
Jpb (34 KP) rated Halloween (1978) in Movies
Mar 6, 2021
Were it all began
This movie may be as old as it gets, but It has stood the test of time and really like it. No one amazed me more than Donald Pleasance himself as Dr. Samuel Loomis, we all know how much of a legendary actor he is and I have never been more convinced. Everyone else play there roles brilliantly and everything else about this movie was so awesome, but in reality it's normally the characters that get the most credit with Halloween we also need to think and look at the music used and how it elevates the story. You've got to see this timeless classic, it puts the night of Halloween in a pretty creepy but mysterious perspective for all generations. I garuntee it!
Andrew Sinclair (25 KP) Nov 25, 2019
Paul John (5 KP) Nov 25, 2019