Search
Search results
Brandon Routh recommended Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) in Movies (curated)
Lee (2222 KP) rated Coco (2017) in Movies
Jan 17, 2018
Outstanding animation (1 more)
Attention to detail
Beautiful, Pixar on top form
Coco is one of those movies where I feel the trailer doesn't really do it justice. Even now, having actually seen it, I still feel the trailer makes it look like another average animated movie. But similar to previous Pixar offering 'Inside Out', this goes so much deeper than that. And it turns out to be just as brilliant too.
For the first half hour or so though, the movie didn't really grab my attention. The animation and the attention to detail is certainly superb as we're introduced to young boy Miguel, his large family and the vibrantly colourful Mexican town where they live. During the annual day of the dead celebrations, Miguel finds himself trapped in the land of the dead, another vibrant and beautifully detailed world. Rules are introduced as to how this land works and how the dead are able to visit their living loved ones. But it still left me fidgeting in my seat a little.
But then there's a twist, and a real race against time adventure kicks off. And I also started to get the impression that things were heading towards a pretty emotional ending too. From then on I was loving it. This turned out to be a brilliantly beautiful movie about life and death and the importance of family.
And sure enough, come the end of the movie I'd managed to get some dust in my eyes or something...
For the first half hour or so though, the movie didn't really grab my attention. The animation and the attention to detail is certainly superb as we're introduced to young boy Miguel, his large family and the vibrantly colourful Mexican town where they live. During the annual day of the dead celebrations, Miguel finds himself trapped in the land of the dead, another vibrant and beautifully detailed world. Rules are introduced as to how this land works and how the dead are able to visit their living loved ones. But it still left me fidgeting in my seat a little.
But then there's a twist, and a real race against time adventure kicks off. And I also started to get the impression that things were heading towards a pretty emotional ending too. From then on I was loving it. This turned out to be a brilliantly beautiful movie about life and death and the importance of family.
And sure enough, come the end of the movie I'd managed to get some dust in my eyes or something...
Ronyell (38 KP) rated We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story (1993) in Movies
Jul 24, 2020
Dinosaurs Meet New York City!
The movie starts off with a young bird wanting to run away from home because he got embarrassed by his mother coddling him in front of his brothers. But then, the young bird meets up with a tyrannosaur named...Rex and Rex then starts telling the little bird about how he and the other dinosaurs came to New York City. When a kindly inventor named Captain NewEyes brings the dinosaurs from their era and gave them a cereal brand called "Brain Grain" in order to make the dinosaurs smarter, he sends the dinosaurs on a mission to get to the Museum of Natural History. When the dinosaurs finally reach New York City, they meet up with two kids named Louie, who is a young boy with a tough attitude and Cecilia, a young girl who comes from a rich family. The two kids then accompany the dinosaurs to the Museum of Natural History, but unfortunately, they meet up the evil Professor ScrewEyes, who wants to turn the dinosaurs back into their feral states in order to showcase them in his terrifying eccentric circus.
I will admit that when I first heard about this movie, I wasn't that excited to watch it and I actually was afraid to watch it the first time. But, then I finally caved into this movie and I ended up enjoying it! I loved the way that this film explored the importance of family and friendship as the dinosaurs' friendship with Louie and Cecilia is what helps them make it on their journey to the Museum of National History and help them try to resist the evil temptations of Professor ScrewEyes. I also really loved the voice acting in this movie as all the voice actors gave it their all in voicing these characters. John Goodman did a fantastic job at voicing Rex as he makes Rex have a booming sounding voice while having a gentle tone to his voice to show Rex's kind nature. Yeardley Smith did a great job at voicing Cecilia as she made Cecilia sound so adorable. The animation was also fantastic as it was quite ahead of its time and I especially loved the scenes of New York City being lighted up as the lights look so gorgeous. The late James Horner's music was the highlight of this film as it sounds so beautiful and uplifting and I always wanted to get the soundtrack for this film!
Some of the issues that I have with this film is that there is a lack of character development. There are some characters that weren't quite fleshed out, like Professor ScrewEyes himself and I wanted to learn more about the backstories of these characters, so I would have a better understanding of them. Also, there were times where the themes of this movie were a bit clunky in its execution, like the theme of family in this film. I can see how Rex is trying to teach the little bird at the beginning of the film about the importance of family since Louie and Cecilia both had family problems of their own and it connects with the little bird's predicament. But, I don't see how the family theme connects with the dinosaurs themselves since they never really mentioned their own families to Louie and Cecilia and the movie never really implied that the dinosaurs considered each other as a family.
Overall, "We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story" is a great film for anyone who loves films that deal with dinosaurs and for anyone who is looking for a more family-friendly version of "Jurassic Park."
Originally posted on: https://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2019/05/movie-review-were-back-dinosaurs-story.html
I will admit that when I first heard about this movie, I wasn't that excited to watch it and I actually was afraid to watch it the first time. But, then I finally caved into this movie and I ended up enjoying it! I loved the way that this film explored the importance of family and friendship as the dinosaurs' friendship with Louie and Cecilia is what helps them make it on their journey to the Museum of National History and help them try to resist the evil temptations of Professor ScrewEyes. I also really loved the voice acting in this movie as all the voice actors gave it their all in voicing these characters. John Goodman did a fantastic job at voicing Rex as he makes Rex have a booming sounding voice while having a gentle tone to his voice to show Rex's kind nature. Yeardley Smith did a great job at voicing Cecilia as she made Cecilia sound so adorable. The animation was also fantastic as it was quite ahead of its time and I especially loved the scenes of New York City being lighted up as the lights look so gorgeous. The late James Horner's music was the highlight of this film as it sounds so beautiful and uplifting and I always wanted to get the soundtrack for this film!
Some of the issues that I have with this film is that there is a lack of character development. There are some characters that weren't quite fleshed out, like Professor ScrewEyes himself and I wanted to learn more about the backstories of these characters, so I would have a better understanding of them. Also, there were times where the themes of this movie were a bit clunky in its execution, like the theme of family in this film. I can see how Rex is trying to teach the little bird at the beginning of the film about the importance of family since Louie and Cecilia both had family problems of their own and it connects with the little bird's predicament. But, I don't see how the family theme connects with the dinosaurs themselves since they never really mentioned their own families to Louie and Cecilia and the movie never really implied that the dinosaurs considered each other as a family.
Overall, "We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story" is a great film for anyone who loves films that deal with dinosaurs and for anyone who is looking for a more family-friendly version of "Jurassic Park."
Originally posted on: https://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2019/05/movie-review-were-back-dinosaurs-story.html
David McK (3576 KP) rated The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) in Movies
Feb 20, 2022
Spider-man, Spider-man, does whatever a spider can ...
To do, there have been three actors starring as Spider-man on the big screen: Tobey Maguire (who had 3 movies), Andrew Garfield (2 movies) and Tom Holland (3 movies, not counting his various cameos or team-ups).
This is the first of the two Andrew Garfield (so pre Spider-man in the MCU) starring movies, again set during the early days of his crime-fighting career and telling how he got his powers: this time around, though, the first villain he faces is The Lizard rather than the Green Goblin. it also takes - at least in the very early parts of the movie - more of a thriller approach to his (Peter Parker's) story, laying the groundwork with an explanation of how he comes to live with his Aunt and Uncle (a groundwork which is seemingly forgotten about by the mid-way point of the movie), and with Garfields Parker coming across more as a 'cool kid' - skateboard and all! - than the nerdy Maguire version.
That's not the only differences: there's no MJ Watson (with her role replaced by Gwen Stacey), we're back to having his web-shooters being non-organic, and this Spider-man does seem quippier than Maguire's version whilst there's also several first-person POV segments throughout (the early 2010s, remember - 3d was still a thing).
Unfortunately, there's also no stand-out moments: nothing to rival the upside-down kiss (from Spider-Man), the train fight (Spider-Man 2) or even the Venom sequences from Spider-Man 3
This is the first of the two Andrew Garfield (so pre Spider-man in the MCU) starring movies, again set during the early days of his crime-fighting career and telling how he got his powers: this time around, though, the first villain he faces is The Lizard rather than the Green Goblin. it also takes - at least in the very early parts of the movie - more of a thriller approach to his (Peter Parker's) story, laying the groundwork with an explanation of how he comes to live with his Aunt and Uncle (a groundwork which is seemingly forgotten about by the mid-way point of the movie), and with Garfields Parker coming across more as a 'cool kid' - skateboard and all! - than the nerdy Maguire version.
That's not the only differences: there's no MJ Watson (with her role replaced by Gwen Stacey), we're back to having his web-shooters being non-organic, and this Spider-man does seem quippier than Maguire's version whilst there's also several first-person POV segments throughout (the early 2010s, remember - 3d was still a thing).
Unfortunately, there's also no stand-out moments: nothing to rival the upside-down kiss (from Spider-Man), the train fight (Spider-Man 2) or even the Venom sequences from Spider-Man 3
David McK (3576 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
Nov 28, 2021
Martha!
The secind entry in what-was-then the burgeoning Extended Universe, following on from 2013's Man of Steel - the finale of which (re. seemingly half of Metropolis getting destroyed) has repercussions in this.
I remember the film was also hotly anticipated, with lots of speculation on who it would adopt the graphic novel 'The Dark Knight Returns', a portion of which features a showdown between the Man of Steel and Batman.
So, this introduces Ben Affleck's (aka 'Batfleck') during the prologue.
It's also - unfortunately - the movie with the infamous 'save Martha!' scene, and with the very ineptly handed expansion of the DCEU via video clips played on a laptop.
This version of Batman also seems to have completely abandoned his famous 'no killing' rule, dispatching goons left, right and centre during several key moments of the film, while Henry Cavill's Superman still needs to, well, 'lighten up' quite a bit to be closer to how the Man of Steel is more commonly viewed.
And don't start me on Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor, or on the completely extraneous final 'Doomsday' act ...
(still, at least the Directors Cut manages to salvage it somewhat)
I remember the film was also hotly anticipated, with lots of speculation on who it would adopt the graphic novel 'The Dark Knight Returns', a portion of which features a showdown between the Man of Steel and Batman.
So, this introduces Ben Affleck's (aka 'Batfleck') during the prologue.
It's also - unfortunately - the movie with the infamous 'save Martha!' scene, and with the very ineptly handed expansion of the DCEU via video clips played on a laptop.
This version of Batman also seems to have completely abandoned his famous 'no killing' rule, dispatching goons left, right and centre during several key moments of the film, while Henry Cavill's Superman still needs to, well, 'lighten up' quite a bit to be closer to how the Man of Steel is more commonly viewed.
And don't start me on Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor, or on the completely extraneous final 'Doomsday' act ...
(still, at least the Directors Cut manages to salvage it somewhat)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Full disclosure here: I am a huge fan of the original series of Planet of the Apes movies. I have them on VHS and Laser Disc, having watched them at least a dozen times each. That being said, I didn’t really enjoy 2011’s Rise of the Planet of Apes with James Franco. Not that it was a bad movie, per say, but it didn’t really keep me captivated, so much so that I can barely remember all of the main plot points. At the time I thought that I might be jaded being such a huge fan of the originals. And then I saw Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (we’ll just refer to it as “Dawn” from here on out). I didn’t have very high expectations for Dawn.
Set 10 years after Rise, Dawn sees the world in ruins. Humans are struggling to survive after the Simian virus wreaked havoc on the planet. Living in colonies, they are unaware that there is a growing nation of genetically evolved apes led by Caesar. When the apes and the humans discover each other, they both feel threatened, but there is one man, Malcolm (Jason Clarke), who sees the compassion in Caesar and thinks that he will allow the humans to attempt work on a nearby dam to restore power to their colony. But dissent in the ranks of both sides of the banana prove to threaten this shaky alliance.
This movie blew me away. With an excellent cast to compliment the CGI apes in the movie, you quickly forget that there is any CGI involved at all. The seamless visuals make you feel like Dreyfus (Gary Oldman), Ellie (Keri Russell) and Alexander (Kodi Smit-McPhee) were actually interacting with the apes. The story was also very well done and seemed very plausible for the tattered world that comes about after the apocalyptic event brought on by the Simian virus. Top this all off with a tremendous score, and you have a great movie-going experience. One that definitely lives up to the original movies.
If I had one complaint about this movie, it was the rapid rate at which the apes seemed to evolve in the span of a few days. Although it’s been 10 years since the last movie, in which Caesar did speak, the movie does open with the apes communicating through inaudible language. My first thought was that they are hunt, so they are choosing to communicate in this fashion, but even when they return to their village, they continue with the inaudible, “sign-language” communication. Then over the course of the next three to four days, they slowly bring speech into their communication between themselves and the humans. The big thing is that they seem to struggle with the words at first (even Caesar), and then by the end of the movie, they are holding complete conversations. Just seems a bit rapid to me. But, it was impactful in the progression of the movie. So one small gripe on this is not enough to bring down my opinion of the film.
Here it is again, my friends. Will I buy Dawn when it is released for home consumption? You bet. Unfortunately, it is also going to force me to buy Rise as well. Though, this may not be a bad thing as a second viewing sometimes brings out the good in movies I didn’t like the first time through, especially as I now know what it is building towards. Go see this one in the theaters my friends. And be sure to check it out in 3D also, it was very well done and not overpowering as some movies have been in the past. Though if you have issues with 3D, I am sure it is just as visually appealing in 2D.
Set 10 years after Rise, Dawn sees the world in ruins. Humans are struggling to survive after the Simian virus wreaked havoc on the planet. Living in colonies, they are unaware that there is a growing nation of genetically evolved apes led by Caesar. When the apes and the humans discover each other, they both feel threatened, but there is one man, Malcolm (Jason Clarke), who sees the compassion in Caesar and thinks that he will allow the humans to attempt work on a nearby dam to restore power to their colony. But dissent in the ranks of both sides of the banana prove to threaten this shaky alliance.
This movie blew me away. With an excellent cast to compliment the CGI apes in the movie, you quickly forget that there is any CGI involved at all. The seamless visuals make you feel like Dreyfus (Gary Oldman), Ellie (Keri Russell) and Alexander (Kodi Smit-McPhee) were actually interacting with the apes. The story was also very well done and seemed very plausible for the tattered world that comes about after the apocalyptic event brought on by the Simian virus. Top this all off with a tremendous score, and you have a great movie-going experience. One that definitely lives up to the original movies.
If I had one complaint about this movie, it was the rapid rate at which the apes seemed to evolve in the span of a few days. Although it’s been 10 years since the last movie, in which Caesar did speak, the movie does open with the apes communicating through inaudible language. My first thought was that they are hunt, so they are choosing to communicate in this fashion, but even when they return to their village, they continue with the inaudible, “sign-language” communication. Then over the course of the next three to four days, they slowly bring speech into their communication between themselves and the humans. The big thing is that they seem to struggle with the words at first (even Caesar), and then by the end of the movie, they are holding complete conversations. Just seems a bit rapid to me. But, it was impactful in the progression of the movie. So one small gripe on this is not enough to bring down my opinion of the film.
Here it is again, my friends. Will I buy Dawn when it is released for home consumption? You bet. Unfortunately, it is also going to force me to buy Rise as well. Though, this may not be a bad thing as a second viewing sometimes brings out the good in movies I didn’t like the first time through, especially as I now know what it is building towards. Go see this one in the theaters my friends. And be sure to check it out in 3D also, it was very well done and not overpowering as some movies have been in the past. Though if you have issues with 3D, I am sure it is just as visually appealing in 2D.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Apr 2, 2019 (Updated Apr 5, 2019)
Not only have I not read the Stephen King book that Pet Sematary is based on, I haven't even seen the original 1989 movie either. As much as I feel ashamed for completely missing out on both of those, it also meant that I was able to head into this movie with nothing to compare it to and no idea of what to expect, other than a bit of creepy-burial-ground-raising-the-dead type stuff that the first trailer covered. One quick note on the trailers before I begin though - the most recent one, which luckily I only saw after I had seen the movie, pretty much gives away the entire plot. Granted, if you're a fan of Stephen Kings work, or even the original movie, then you're going to know what to expect anyway. But, if you're like me - someone who enjoys a good horror movie, but doesn't read books and has gaping holes in his movie viewing history, then try and give the trailers a miss on this occasion before heading into the cinema.
Louis Creed (Jason Clarke) is a Boston doctor who moves his family to the (hopefully) less chaotic setting of rural Maine - wife Rachel (Amy Seimetz), 8 year old daughter Ellie (Jeté Laurence), toddler Gage and friendly family cat Church. However, the family soon discover that their house is located right alongside a road which is prone to noisy trucks suddenly speeding past - our first jump scare and something already given away by the trailers! Those trucks also have a tendency to end the lives of any local pets who might happen to wander out in front of them, so it's pretty handy that there happens to be a Native American graveyard out in the woods at the back of the Creed's new house.
The local children make good use of the area, carrying out a funeral procession while wearing masks before burying deceased pets there, and they have also erected a sign - "Pet Sematary", which is nailed to one of the trees outside of it. Unfortunately, it's not too long before Church falls victim to a passing truck, at which point friendly neighbour Jud (John Lithgow) tells Louis of a special burial ritual which can be carried out on an area of ground located even further into the forest. It's a ritual that can bring the dead back to life so, in order to avoid upsetting daughter Ellie, Louis keeps the death a secret until he and Jud can head out late that night to perform the ritual with Church. Sure enough, Church is back with the family the next morning - alive, but looking very disheveled and in a seriously grumpy mood. He's not quite the cute little bundle of joy he once was - as Jud puts it, "Sometimes dead is better".
After banging on earlier about spoilers for movies, I feel it would be wrong of me to go and do the same thing here. If you're familiar with the story, then you'll know what happens anyway, although there is a moderate change of detail in this particular version which has already had a few die hard Stephen King fans up in arms. I'll just say that the special properties of the burial ground get used on a few more occasions during the course of the movie, with increasingly devastating consequences, and I personally felt that the change to the source material totally worked within the confines of this version of the story.
Ok, so what did I think of the movie overall? Well, I found Pet Sematary to be pretty intense, even more so than 'Us' recently. There were a couple of guys to the side of me in the cinema who were sitting forward on the edge of their seat for the majority of the movie just hyperventilating - I thought they were going to have a heart attack at one point! Yes, there are some jump scares, but this was more the kind of nightmare horror that I loved while watching 'Us' and it had me gripped to my seat for a good 80% or so of its run-time. Everyone involved in the movie is on top form - the children are outstanding, as is Jason Clarke, John Lithgow, even the cat! The dread-filled atmosphere, the tragedy and the horror of it all, it really resonated with me and I came away from this exhausted but happy!
Louis Creed (Jason Clarke) is a Boston doctor who moves his family to the (hopefully) less chaotic setting of rural Maine - wife Rachel (Amy Seimetz), 8 year old daughter Ellie (Jeté Laurence), toddler Gage and friendly family cat Church. However, the family soon discover that their house is located right alongside a road which is prone to noisy trucks suddenly speeding past - our first jump scare and something already given away by the trailers! Those trucks also have a tendency to end the lives of any local pets who might happen to wander out in front of them, so it's pretty handy that there happens to be a Native American graveyard out in the woods at the back of the Creed's new house.
The local children make good use of the area, carrying out a funeral procession while wearing masks before burying deceased pets there, and they have also erected a sign - "Pet Sematary", which is nailed to one of the trees outside of it. Unfortunately, it's not too long before Church falls victim to a passing truck, at which point friendly neighbour Jud (John Lithgow) tells Louis of a special burial ritual which can be carried out on an area of ground located even further into the forest. It's a ritual that can bring the dead back to life so, in order to avoid upsetting daughter Ellie, Louis keeps the death a secret until he and Jud can head out late that night to perform the ritual with Church. Sure enough, Church is back with the family the next morning - alive, but looking very disheveled and in a seriously grumpy mood. He's not quite the cute little bundle of joy he once was - as Jud puts it, "Sometimes dead is better".
After banging on earlier about spoilers for movies, I feel it would be wrong of me to go and do the same thing here. If you're familiar with the story, then you'll know what happens anyway, although there is a moderate change of detail in this particular version which has already had a few die hard Stephen King fans up in arms. I'll just say that the special properties of the burial ground get used on a few more occasions during the course of the movie, with increasingly devastating consequences, and I personally felt that the change to the source material totally worked within the confines of this version of the story.
Ok, so what did I think of the movie overall? Well, I found Pet Sematary to be pretty intense, even more so than 'Us' recently. There were a couple of guys to the side of me in the cinema who were sitting forward on the edge of their seat for the majority of the movie just hyperventilating - I thought they were going to have a heart attack at one point! Yes, there are some jump scares, but this was more the kind of nightmare horror that I loved while watching 'Us' and it had me gripped to my seat for a good 80% or so of its run-time. Everyone involved in the movie is on top form - the children are outstanding, as is Jason Clarke, John Lithgow, even the cat! The dread-filled atmosphere, the tragedy and the horror of it all, it really resonated with me and I came away from this exhausted but happy!
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Black Widow (2021) in Movies
Sep 6, 2021
Good casting, Scarlett and Florence felt like actual sisters. (1 more)
Good chemistry and acting from David Harbour and Rachel Weisz.
Not much of a thriller or thinker for a spy movie. (1 more)
One actor was greatly wasted in their role.
Scarlett's Swan Song Had Plenty of Action With A Decent StoryNatasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) and her sister Yelena (Florence Pugh) are living what seems like a normal life in 1995 Ohio, with their parents, mother, Melina Vostokoff (Rachel Weisz) and
Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) and her sister Yelena (Florence Pugh) are living what seems like a normal life in 1995 Ohio, with their parents, mother, Melina Vostokoff (Rachel Weisz) and father, Alexei Shostakov (David Harbour) when suddenly they must leave the country. They are all Russian undercover agents and Alexei, the super-soldier known as Red Guardian, has stolen intel from S.H.I.E.L.D. They flee to Cuba where the sisters are forcibly taken to the "Red Room" for training after they've met General Dreykov (Ray Winstone), their boss. Now in 2016 after the events of Captain America: Civil War, Natasha finds herself a fugitive on the run from U.S. Secretary of State Thaddeus Ross (William Hurt) after violating the Sokovia Accords. She's attacked by an incredibly skilled assassin called the Taskmaster and finds that she's not his target but rather a package she had with her. After learning the package originated from Budapest she heads there where she finds her sister Yelena and learns of a plot that not only jeopardizes the safety of those trained in the "Red Room" but possibly the whole world.
This movie was really good and it was great to see a Marvel movie again. I didn't see this one in theaters but I still enjoyed watching it in the safety of my home with my family. So this movie came off like a really good spy/action movie but definitely had that Marvel feel to it. It really felt like watching something out of the Bourne or Bond series films but with admittedly less plot and gadgets, but the action was really spot on. There was awesome car chase scenes and expertly crafted fight choreography too. It was even reported that they went through 13 BMW X3's for the car chase scene with Scarlett and Florence so you can tell that they really wanted to get things right and had a vision of what they wanted the audience to see for that particular scene as well. I thought there was really great chemistry from all the actors together and that it was pretty good casting. Scarlett and Florence argue throughout the film just like real sisters, and the looks that David Harbour and Rachel Weisz exchange feel like they were genuinely together. The opening scene of the movie had great acting and was very emotional. I just feel like one role/actor was kind of a bad casting and/or was greatly underutilized. I think the biggest flaw of the move was that for being a spy movie, the plot never had any mystery to it and everything was kind of predictable or at least very easy to follow. Not much of a thriller or thinker where you had to put two and two together. The cinematography was spot on and felt like you were watching any big budget spy or action movie and on par with what you expect from Marvel Studios. The tone fit the film for the most part but kind of "see-saw"-ed from time to time as they mixed serious themes with comedic dialogue throughout. But that's to be expected from a PG-13 action/spy movie from Marvel and it was a little reminiscent of the film Captain America in that regard. The music was good and there were a couple of songs that stuck out in that regard American Pie by Don Mclean and a cover of Smells Like Teen Spirit by Think Up Anger; also Cheap Thrills by Sia. The musical score was also good and the Black Widow theme was pretty epic but also with hints of melancholy to it that seemed to underline both her tragic background as well as the tragedy of the events to come in her future. Altogether the movie was really good and I give it a 7/10. If you are big time into the MCU and Marvel franchise movies then this is a must see film but if not then it might come off as just a barely above average action/spy film so that's why it doesn't get my "Must See Seal of Approval"
This movie was really good and it was great to see a Marvel movie again. I didn't see this one in theaters but I still enjoyed watching it in the safety of my home with my family. So this movie came off like a really good spy/action movie but definitely had that Marvel feel to it. It really felt like watching something out of the Bourne or Bond series films but with admittedly less plot and gadgets, but the action was really spot on. There was awesome car chase scenes and expertly crafted fight choreography too. It was even reported that they went through 13 BMW X3's for the car chase scene with Scarlett and Florence so you can tell that they really wanted to get things right and had a vision of what they wanted the audience to see for that particular scene as well. I thought there was really great chemistry from all the actors together and that it was pretty good casting. Scarlett and Florence argue throughout the film just like real sisters, and the looks that David Harbour and Rachel Weisz exchange feel like they were genuinely together. The opening scene of the movie had great acting and was very emotional. I just feel like one role/actor was kind of a bad casting and/or was greatly underutilized. I think the biggest flaw of the move was that for being a spy movie, the plot never had any mystery to it and everything was kind of predictable or at least very easy to follow. Not much of a thriller or thinker where you had to put two and two together. The cinematography was spot on and felt like you were watching any big budget spy or action movie and on par with what you expect from Marvel Studios. The tone fit the film for the most part but kind of "see-saw"-ed from time to time as they mixed serious themes with comedic dialogue throughout. But that's to be expected from a PG-13 action/spy movie from Marvel and it was a little reminiscent of the film Captain America in that regard. The music was good and there were a couple of songs that stuck out in that regard American Pie by Don Mclean and a cover of Smells Like Teen Spirit by Think Up Anger; also Cheap Thrills by Sia. The musical score was also good and the Black Widow theme was pretty epic but also with hints of melancholy to it that seemed to underline both her tragic background as well as the tragedy of the events to come in her future. Altogether the movie was really good and I give it a 7/10. If you are big time into the MCU and Marvel franchise movies then this is a must see film but if not then it might come off as just a barely above average action/spy film so that's why it doesn't get my "Must See Seal of Approval"
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Movie Star by Lizzie Pepper in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Lizzie Pepper became a famous actress as a teen -- growing up before America's eyes on her TV show. Eventually Lizzie meets America's most famous movie star, Rob Mars -- and quickly their courtship and marriage becomes tabloid fodder and her life changes forever. At first, Lizzie is head over heels in love with Rob and all that he brings: romance, lavish trips, and instant stardom. But soon, her life is taken over by Rob's wealth and fame -- his constant absences, a complete lack of privacy, and a world overshadowed by Rob's total commitment to One Cell Studio, a form of study and practice that nears cult status. Once they have children, Lizzie begins to doubt everything about their relationship -- and what her husband stands for.
This was a fun book. Written by Hilary Liftin, a celebrity ghostwriter, Lizzie is a really enjoyable and insightful character. The book is clearly supposed to be based on Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. I kept imagining Rob Mars as a creepy twist between Tom Cruise and Rob Lowe, which was a little frightening. The One Cell piece is oddly disconcerting, as it's supposed to be, and made me want to delve more into the weirdness that is Scientology. Lizzie's evolution was fun to read about (I enjoyed, on a personal level, that she had twins) and she remained a realistic and relatable character, despite being elevated to movie star status. It truly makes you think about some of the insanity that movie stars have to go through, especially those that have children. It also gets you thinking about various religious cults and the power they have over people. In the end, probably a 3.5 star book, as it's a quick, fun read, but with a surprising depth behind it in places. After all, in the end, a marriage crumbling is a marriage crumbling, even in Hollywood.
This was a fun book. Written by Hilary Liftin, a celebrity ghostwriter, Lizzie is a really enjoyable and insightful character. The book is clearly supposed to be based on Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. I kept imagining Rob Mars as a creepy twist between Tom Cruise and Rob Lowe, which was a little frightening. The One Cell piece is oddly disconcerting, as it's supposed to be, and made me want to delve more into the weirdness that is Scientology. Lizzie's evolution was fun to read about (I enjoyed, on a personal level, that she had twins) and she remained a realistic and relatable character, despite being elevated to movie star status. It truly makes you think about some of the insanity that movie stars have to go through, especially those that have children. It also gets you thinking about various religious cults and the power they have over people. In the end, probably a 3.5 star book, as it's a quick, fun read, but with a surprising depth behind it in places. After all, in the end, a marriage crumbling is a marriage crumbling, even in Hollywood.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated TinkerBell and the Legend of the NeverBeast (2014) in Movies
Jul 20, 2020
To its Credit, Not Bad
As the scout fairies fear the Neverbeast will destroy Pixie Hollow, Fawn has to convince them that the creature is actually a gentle giant.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 5
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
I have to give credit where it’s due. I have watched all three of the Tinker Bell movies that made it to theaters (not in theaters) and every movie saw improved visuals. It was kind of like watching the Toy Story movies get better over time. By the time they got to the third, the attention that went into just Lotso’s fur was unreal. I love the attention to detail in this Tinker Bell installment from the lush world to the unique creatures.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 8
At a very quick 76 minutes, this movie manages to do a lot in a little bit. I was very surprised at how much I got into it. The story flows smoothly and you’re rooting for the characters that are driving it.
Memorability: 4
Pace: 10
It should go without saying, but any movie that can tell a story in 76 minutes will not get any negative marks on the pace side from me. As previously mentioned, a lot happens in a little bit of time. I must also say that nothing ever felt rushed or forced, rather it was a natural pacing of story.
Plot: 2
Resolution: 10
Cute ending that put a bit of a smile on my face. The overall story was a hot mess, but at least it ended well. I was definitely satisfied when it was all said and done.
Overall: 79
Tinker Bell and the Legend of the Neverbeast suffers from a weak story that was obviously made for kids. Had they put a bit more time and energy into the plot aspect of things, the score would have been a lot higher. As it stands, it doesn’t quite get out of the “Folding Clothes Movie” category.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 5
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
I have to give credit where it’s due. I have watched all three of the Tinker Bell movies that made it to theaters (not in theaters) and every movie saw improved visuals. It was kind of like watching the Toy Story movies get better over time. By the time they got to the third, the attention that went into just Lotso’s fur was unreal. I love the attention to detail in this Tinker Bell installment from the lush world to the unique creatures.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 8
At a very quick 76 minutes, this movie manages to do a lot in a little bit. I was very surprised at how much I got into it. The story flows smoothly and you’re rooting for the characters that are driving it.
Memorability: 4
Pace: 10
It should go without saying, but any movie that can tell a story in 76 minutes will not get any negative marks on the pace side from me. As previously mentioned, a lot happens in a little bit of time. I must also say that nothing ever felt rushed or forced, rather it was a natural pacing of story.
Plot: 2
Resolution: 10
Cute ending that put a bit of a smile on my face. The overall story was a hot mess, but at least it ended well. I was definitely satisfied when it was all said and done.
Overall: 79
Tinker Bell and the Legend of the Neverbeast suffers from a weak story that was obviously made for kids. Had they put a bit more time and energy into the plot aspect of things, the score would have been a lot higher. As it stands, it doesn’t quite get out of the “Folding Clothes Movie” category.