Search
Search results
Awix (3310 KP) rated Riders of Justice (2020) in Movies
Jul 24, 2021
Danish revenge thriller. A veteran soldier teams up with a gang of geeks to find the man responsible for his wife's death. Looks like yet another attempt at something like a Liam Neeson movie, but this is much defter and funnier, and more emotionally articulate.
Great performance from Mikkelson, playing the straight man as he is surrounded by comic performances from his various sidekicks - but this is a serious film about grief and how the world works and how people attempt to make sense of this. The director manages to slide the film from farce to thriller to drama without any of the changes in tone jarring in the slightest, even if the plot is a bit reliant on the occasional contrivance. Lots of fun but also undeniably moving.
Great performance from Mikkelson, playing the straight man as he is surrounded by comic performances from his various sidekicks - but this is a serious film about grief and how the world works and how people attempt to make sense of this. The director manages to slide the film from farce to thriller to drama without any of the changes in tone jarring in the slightest, even if the plot is a bit reliant on the occasional contrivance. Lots of fun but also undeniably moving.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Expendables (2010) in Movies
Nov 22, 2019
Mumble Mumble Mumbe Part 1
Lets get all of the 80's action stars and throw them into a movie. Will Bruce and Arnold be in it, nope well for only 1min and 30secs. Yes you heard that correctly two of the biggest action stars only get 1min and 30sec screen time cameo with Sly. Making jokes and one-liners. So whats the plot then.
The Plot: A group of mercenaries is double-crossed during a mission and are approached by Church to overthrow the ruthless dictator of a South American country. It isn't long before the men realise things aren't quite as they appear, finding themselves caught in a dangerous web of betrayal. Although their mission is compromised and an innocent is in danger, soldier of fortune Barney and his comrades decide to get the job done.
Also the charcter names are really weird but intresting and predictable. Like Lee Christmas, Gunner Jensen, Yin Yang, Hale Caesar, Toll Road, Toll and Mr. Church.
All of 80's stars are here like Dolph Lundren who, ohh the russian guy from rocky 4 and Randy Couture who, oh a retired MMA fighting.
Its a funny, action movie and will have a good time watching.
The Plot: A group of mercenaries is double-crossed during a mission and are approached by Church to overthrow the ruthless dictator of a South American country. It isn't long before the men realise things aren't quite as they appear, finding themselves caught in a dangerous web of betrayal. Although their mission is compromised and an innocent is in danger, soldier of fortune Barney and his comrades decide to get the job done.
Also the charcter names are really weird but intresting and predictable. Like Lee Christmas, Gunner Jensen, Yin Yang, Hale Caesar, Toll Road, Toll and Mr. Church.
All of 80's stars are here like Dolph Lundren who, ohh the russian guy from rocky 4 and Randy Couture who, oh a retired MMA fighting.
Its a funny, action movie and will have a good time watching.
Annie Baker recommended A Room With a View (1985) in Movies (curated)
Annie Baker recommended Documenteur (1981) in Movies (curated)
John Gielgud: Matinee Idol to Movie Star
Book
New in paperback, John Gielgud: Matinee Idol to Movie Star is the most authoritative and...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Dead Ringers (1988) in Movies
Sep 15, 2020 (Updated Sep 15, 2020)
Whats The Difference Between Us
Dead Ringers- is a decent movie, its the last movie david cronenberg did in the 80's. So his 80's streak ending on a low ball/a dispointment. I really liked Jeremy Irons he was really good. And the psychological espect was good as well. Other than that it was a okay movie.
The Plot: Elliot (Jeremy Irons), a successful gynecologist, works at the same practice as his identical twin, Beverly (also Irons). Elliot is attracted to many of his patients and has affairs with them. When he inevitably loses interest, he will give the woman over to Beverly, the meeker of the two, without the woman knowing the difference. Beverly falls hard for one of the patients, Claire (Geneviève Bujold), but when she inadvertently deceives him, he slips into a state of madness.
In his DVD commentary, Irons claims that Robert De Niro declined playing the Mantles due to his unease with the subject matter and portraying gynecologists, while William Hurt decided to reject the parts because "it is hard enough to play one role".
Irons was given two different dressing rooms with two sets of costumes for playing his two characters. However, given the fact that he said "the whole point of the story is you should sometimes be confused as to which is which", he chose to use only one of the rooms and combine different costume items intended for different characters. Irons also developed an "internal way" to portray each character, employing the Alexander technique for "different energy points", giving each character his own appearance.
Like i said before the psychological espect is good in this. Jeremy Irons was excellent. I wouldnt really recordmend this film, rather davids other 80's films instead.
The Plot: Elliot (Jeremy Irons), a successful gynecologist, works at the same practice as his identical twin, Beverly (also Irons). Elliot is attracted to many of his patients and has affairs with them. When he inevitably loses interest, he will give the woman over to Beverly, the meeker of the two, without the woman knowing the difference. Beverly falls hard for one of the patients, Claire (Geneviève Bujold), but when she inadvertently deceives him, he slips into a state of madness.
In his DVD commentary, Irons claims that Robert De Niro declined playing the Mantles due to his unease with the subject matter and portraying gynecologists, while William Hurt decided to reject the parts because "it is hard enough to play one role".
Irons was given two different dressing rooms with two sets of costumes for playing his two characters. However, given the fact that he said "the whole point of the story is you should sometimes be confused as to which is which", he chose to use only one of the rooms and combine different costume items intended for different characters. Irons also developed an "internal way" to portray each character, employing the Alexander technique for "different energy points", giving each character his own appearance.
Like i said before the psychological espect is good in this. Jeremy Irons was excellent. I wouldnt really recordmend this film, rather davids other 80's films instead.
David McK (3576 KP) rated Batman: The Long Halloween in Books
Jan 30, 2019
Of all the Superhero's around, I personally think that Batman has the best Rogue's gallery of villains: Superman, for instance, has Lex Luthor And (to a lesser extent) General Zod, while Spiderman has, what, Green Goblin? Dr Octopus? Venom?
Batman, on the other hand (and purely off the top of my head): The Joker. The Penguin. Poison Ivy. The Riddler. Catwoman (on/off as a villain). Scarecrow. Bane. And Two-Face.
Admittedly, some of those characters are now more famous than they used to be before due to the various Batman films, with the last four (And the first) mentioned in my list all appearing in the more-recent Christopher Nolan 'Dark Knight' series of Batman films. Of that trilogy, the second movie concerned itself principally with two main villains: The Joker, and Harvey Dent (aka Two-Face) and, in particular, the circumstances that led District Attorney Dent to become Two-Face.
Those circumstances are also the subject of this graphic novel, which also has a foreword/introduction by the director and writer of 'The Dark Knight', Christopher Nolan and David Goyer, in which they acknowledge the huge debt their movie owes to this novel.
This is also commonly cited as one of the better Batman stories, and is set during the early days of Batman's crusade against criminality in Gotham - there's no Robin here, nor Oracle (well, there is, but only as a baby), for instance.
As such, it makes a good intro (IMO) into the Batman mythos, not far behind the futuristic The Dark Knight Returns or the early-set Year One.
Batman, on the other hand (and purely off the top of my head): The Joker. The Penguin. Poison Ivy. The Riddler. Catwoman (on/off as a villain). Scarecrow. Bane. And Two-Face.
Admittedly, some of those characters are now more famous than they used to be before due to the various Batman films, with the last four (And the first) mentioned in my list all appearing in the more-recent Christopher Nolan 'Dark Knight' series of Batman films. Of that trilogy, the second movie concerned itself principally with two main villains: The Joker, and Harvey Dent (aka Two-Face) and, in particular, the circumstances that led District Attorney Dent to become Two-Face.
Those circumstances are also the subject of this graphic novel, which also has a foreword/introduction by the director and writer of 'The Dark Knight', Christopher Nolan and David Goyer, in which they acknowledge the huge debt their movie owes to this novel.
This is also commonly cited as one of the better Batman stories, and is set during the early days of Batman's crusade against criminality in Gotham - there's no Robin here, nor Oracle (well, there is, but only as a baby), for instance.
As such, it makes a good intro (IMO) into the Batman mythos, not far behind the futuristic The Dark Knight Returns or the early-set Year One.
MelanieTheresa (997 KP) rated Yesterday (2019) in Movies
Sep 23, 2019 (Updated Sep 23, 2019)
Better than I thought it would be.
Contains spoilers, click to show
Failing musician gets hit by a car during a mysterious worldwide 12-second blackout, and wakes up to a world in which The Beatles never existed (also never existed: Coca-Cola, cigarettes (?), and Harry Potter). Musician claims the songs as his own and becomes an overnight sensation.
(There are also the rom-com elements: failing musician is oblivious to the feelings of his friend-slash-manager until he's uber-famous and it's almost too late, friend-slash-manager starts seeing someone else, etc.)
Evidently, there are two other people in the world who also remember The Beatles, and though the movie attempts to make you think there may be something sinister happening there (*gasp* are they going to expose him??), there isn't. These two people aren't even mad that the musician is claiming he wrote the songs; they're just happy to hear the songs again.
There's a pretty great sequence in which our main character looks up John Lennon (played by Robert Carlyle) and goes to visit him, because hey, if The Beatles never existed, then it follows that John must still be alive, right? I didn't even think of that until he showed up on screen, but it seemed like a quietly brilliant piece of the movie.
So what caused the mysterious 12-second blackout and the disappearance of The Beatles (and Coca-Cola, cigarettes, Harry Potter)? I HAVE NO IDEA BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T TELL US. Anybody who knows me will tell you I always need to know the "why" of things, so this mostly happily-ever-after ending left me super frustrated.
(There are also the rom-com elements: failing musician is oblivious to the feelings of his friend-slash-manager until he's uber-famous and it's almost too late, friend-slash-manager starts seeing someone else, etc.)
Evidently, there are two other people in the world who also remember The Beatles, and though the movie attempts to make you think there may be something sinister happening there (*gasp* are they going to expose him??), there isn't. These two people aren't even mad that the musician is claiming he wrote the songs; they're just happy to hear the songs again.
There's a pretty great sequence in which our main character looks up John Lennon (played by Robert Carlyle) and goes to visit him, because hey, if The Beatles never existed, then it follows that John must still be alive, right? I didn't even think of that until he showed up on screen, but it seemed like a quietly brilliant piece of the movie.
So what caused the mysterious 12-second blackout and the disappearance of The Beatles (and Coca-Cola, cigarettes, Harry Potter)? I HAVE NO IDEA BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T TELL US. Anybody who knows me will tell you I always need to know the "why" of things, so this mostly happily-ever-after ending left me super frustrated.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Okja (2017) in Movies
Jul 14, 2017
Seo-Hyun Ahn (1 more)
Seamless, beautiful effects
Should have stuck at being a family movie (1 more)
Jake Gyllenhaal
Plays as though it should be a family movie, but it definitely isn't
Okja created a fair bit of buzz at Cannes recently, when it was revealed that it had been picked up by Netflix, resulting in boos from some of the snobby traditionalists that were present for its screening. Okja was written and directed by Bong Joon Ho, a Korean filmmaker who also wrote and directed one of my favourite movies of recent years, Snowpiercer. That movie failed to receive a UK release, despite starring Chris Evans in-between his Captain America/Avengers duties, so I’m more than happy if a movie that’s just a little bit different from the norm manages to find an audience through modern, ‘non-traditional’ routes.
And Okja certainly is a bit different. We’re first introduced to CEO of Mirando Corporation, Lucy Mirando (Tilda Swinton) who has ‘bred’ superpigs, in an effort to help with world hunger. 26 of these superpigs are being sent to farmers at various locations around the world and in 10 years time a competition is planned to determine who has raised the largest superpig. Lucy is clearly a bit strange (the perfect role for Tilda Swinton), and her company spokesperson, TV zoologist Johnny Wilcox (Jake Gyllenhaal) is even stranger. They’re determined to put a friendly, happy gloss over the fact that these animals have been genetically modified for slaughter and profit. So, time for us to get to know, and fall in love with one of them…
It’s now 10 years later and we’re with Mija, a young girl living in the mountains of Korea with her grandfather and Okja, the large hippo-like superpig who has become her close friend. They spend their time together out in the forest, with Okja helping to catch fish for dinner, and proving to be a faithful companion for Mija. And when disaster strikes, Okja even demonstrates the intelligence required to work out how to save Mija’s life. Okja is beautifully rendered in CGI, interacting perfectly with the surroundings and actors and is thoroughly convincing. It’s an enchanting and beautiful half hour or so – but we know it’s not going to last.
A small team from the Miranda Corporation arrives, along with Johnny Wilcox, who is just hugely annoying. They’re here to check up on how Okja is doing and, unbeknown to Mija, take her back to New York as the winner of the superpig contest. While Mija is in the forest with her grandfather she discovers what they’re planning and heads off to rescue Okja. What follows is an entertaining and thrilling chase to get Okja before she heads onto a plane. Mija is fearless and determined, a strong young heroine and probably the best thing about this movie. Along the way she is joined by the Animal Liberation Front, a young team that includes Steven Yeun, Paul Dano and Lily Collins. They know where Okja is headed and what her fate will be and they plan to stop it, with the help of Mija.
Much of Okja plays as though it should be a family movie and I wish that’s how they’d made it. With a large, friendly creature companion that needs to be rescued from the bad guys, much of this reminded me of the 2016 live action remake of Pete’s Dragon, which I enjoyed a lot. However, the final hour or so turns distinctly dark as we venture into the slaughterhouse and that, along with regular use of bad language, has given this movie a 15 certificate. It’s a strange variation of styles that just didn’t sit right with me overall. As mentioned before, Gyllenhaals character is seriously annoying and would have been much better suited as the wacky comic relief if this were a family movie. Tilda Swinton soon becomes boring too and it’s left to Mija and Okja to save the movie from becoming a total disaster.
Entertaining and enjoyable at times, but the wild variation of styles and characters just made the latter half of the movie drag.
And Okja certainly is a bit different. We’re first introduced to CEO of Mirando Corporation, Lucy Mirando (Tilda Swinton) who has ‘bred’ superpigs, in an effort to help with world hunger. 26 of these superpigs are being sent to farmers at various locations around the world and in 10 years time a competition is planned to determine who has raised the largest superpig. Lucy is clearly a bit strange (the perfect role for Tilda Swinton), and her company spokesperson, TV zoologist Johnny Wilcox (Jake Gyllenhaal) is even stranger. They’re determined to put a friendly, happy gloss over the fact that these animals have been genetically modified for slaughter and profit. So, time for us to get to know, and fall in love with one of them…
It’s now 10 years later and we’re with Mija, a young girl living in the mountains of Korea with her grandfather and Okja, the large hippo-like superpig who has become her close friend. They spend their time together out in the forest, with Okja helping to catch fish for dinner, and proving to be a faithful companion for Mija. And when disaster strikes, Okja even demonstrates the intelligence required to work out how to save Mija’s life. Okja is beautifully rendered in CGI, interacting perfectly with the surroundings and actors and is thoroughly convincing. It’s an enchanting and beautiful half hour or so – but we know it’s not going to last.
A small team from the Miranda Corporation arrives, along with Johnny Wilcox, who is just hugely annoying. They’re here to check up on how Okja is doing and, unbeknown to Mija, take her back to New York as the winner of the superpig contest. While Mija is in the forest with her grandfather she discovers what they’re planning and heads off to rescue Okja. What follows is an entertaining and thrilling chase to get Okja before she heads onto a plane. Mija is fearless and determined, a strong young heroine and probably the best thing about this movie. Along the way she is joined by the Animal Liberation Front, a young team that includes Steven Yeun, Paul Dano and Lily Collins. They know where Okja is headed and what her fate will be and they plan to stop it, with the help of Mija.
Much of Okja plays as though it should be a family movie and I wish that’s how they’d made it. With a large, friendly creature companion that needs to be rescued from the bad guys, much of this reminded me of the 2016 live action remake of Pete’s Dragon, which I enjoyed a lot. However, the final hour or so turns distinctly dark as we venture into the slaughterhouse and that, along with regular use of bad language, has given this movie a 15 certificate. It’s a strange variation of styles that just didn’t sit right with me overall. As mentioned before, Gyllenhaals character is seriously annoying and would have been much better suited as the wacky comic relief if this were a family movie. Tilda Swinton soon becomes boring too and it’s left to Mija and Okja to save the movie from becoming a total disaster.
Entertaining and enjoyable at times, but the wild variation of styles and characters just made the latter half of the movie drag.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Shazam! (2019) in Movies
Oct 1, 2019
Another DC Win
When a foster kid runs into an ancient wizard, he suddenly finds that he can turn himself into a superhero by uttering a simple word: Shazam! DC has run into a fair share of buzz saws when it comes to making quality movies, but chalk one up on the positive side with this one.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
Characters: 7
I loved all the characters for the most part. Billy Batson (Asher Angel) is a cool kid with attitude merely trying to find his place in the world. You don’t feel sorry for him; even though he is definitely mistreated, he’s also a bit of a butthead as most kids that age are. He’s met in his new foster home by a fun group of kids that will give you a number of reasons to laugh. His roommate Freddy (Jack Dylan Grazer) had me cracking up throughout. He wasn’t just there for comic relief though as I appreciated the more sensitive moments. Big shout-out to Zachary Levi as well playing the role of the superhero Shazam. It’s fun watching Shazam learn his powers just like a kid would because, well, he’s a kid.
Yes, these characters are great. You know who wasn’t great? Dr. Thaddeus Sivana (Mark Strong). Felt way too over-the-top for me. I didn’t really understand his motivation either or, rather, I understood but just didn’t think it was enough for him to go as bonkers as he did. He honestly almost ruined the movie for me singlehandedly but I got ahold of myself and remembered I was having a good time.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
While I was mostly impressed with the quality of the visuals, I felt like they took a shortcut in a handful of spots, particularly with the opposition. The villain and his henchmen didn’t quite look as up to par as Shazam. The man of the hour, however, was on point. Shift changes were smooth and fluid. I enjoyed watching him steadily come into his own as a superhero as the camera captured each new ability one-by-one.
Conflict: 8
The action was steady but uneven. You’re watching Shazam slowly develop his powers and it’s great at times, but it’s not without a bit of lag. Things definitely heat up more towards the back half of the movie than in the beginning. When the action does go down, the battles that unfold are solid and entertaining.
Entertainment Value: 8
While the action isn’t always at its strongest, the movie makes up for it with some solid comedic moments. We go to movies to have a good time and, I gotta say, I had a blast watching Shazam! With a heartfelt story that gives you a reason to root for the protagonist and delightful side characters, entertaining is beyond a fair word for this movie.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 5
A few issues here I can’t overlook. My biggest problem were the coincidental occurrences that happened for the sake of advancing the story. For this movie to be mostly great, I think it cheated its way through some parts, parts which definitely could have been handled better. I am never a fan of that as it’s just lazy. Definitely could have been better.
Resolution: 10
Couldn’t have asked for a better ending. If the entirety of the movie had been more like this, we might have a classic on our hands. It ties up everything in a great bow and gives you yet another reason to love the movie.
Overall: 84
Because of my past experience with DC, I went in with low expectations. I was pleasantly surprised and happy with how much I enjoyed this movie. If DC can continue to make quality movies like Shazam!, they may be due for a comeback!
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
Characters: 7
I loved all the characters for the most part. Billy Batson (Asher Angel) is a cool kid with attitude merely trying to find his place in the world. You don’t feel sorry for him; even though he is definitely mistreated, he’s also a bit of a butthead as most kids that age are. He’s met in his new foster home by a fun group of kids that will give you a number of reasons to laugh. His roommate Freddy (Jack Dylan Grazer) had me cracking up throughout. He wasn’t just there for comic relief though as I appreciated the more sensitive moments. Big shout-out to Zachary Levi as well playing the role of the superhero Shazam. It’s fun watching Shazam learn his powers just like a kid would because, well, he’s a kid.
Yes, these characters are great. You know who wasn’t great? Dr. Thaddeus Sivana (Mark Strong). Felt way too over-the-top for me. I didn’t really understand his motivation either or, rather, I understood but just didn’t think it was enough for him to go as bonkers as he did. He honestly almost ruined the movie for me singlehandedly but I got ahold of myself and remembered I was having a good time.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
While I was mostly impressed with the quality of the visuals, I felt like they took a shortcut in a handful of spots, particularly with the opposition. The villain and his henchmen didn’t quite look as up to par as Shazam. The man of the hour, however, was on point. Shift changes were smooth and fluid. I enjoyed watching him steadily come into his own as a superhero as the camera captured each new ability one-by-one.
Conflict: 8
The action was steady but uneven. You’re watching Shazam slowly develop his powers and it’s great at times, but it’s not without a bit of lag. Things definitely heat up more towards the back half of the movie than in the beginning. When the action does go down, the battles that unfold are solid and entertaining.
Entertainment Value: 8
While the action isn’t always at its strongest, the movie makes up for it with some solid comedic moments. We go to movies to have a good time and, I gotta say, I had a blast watching Shazam! With a heartfelt story that gives you a reason to root for the protagonist and delightful side characters, entertaining is beyond a fair word for this movie.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 5
A few issues here I can’t overlook. My biggest problem were the coincidental occurrences that happened for the sake of advancing the story. For this movie to be mostly great, I think it cheated its way through some parts, parts which definitely could have been handled better. I am never a fan of that as it’s just lazy. Definitely could have been better.
Resolution: 10
Couldn’t have asked for a better ending. If the entirety of the movie had been more like this, we might have a classic on our hands. It ties up everything in a great bow and gives you yet another reason to love the movie.
Overall: 84
Because of my past experience with DC, I went in with low expectations. I was pleasantly surprised and happy with how much I enjoyed this movie. If DC can continue to make quality movies like Shazam!, they may be due for a comeback!