Search
Search results
Annie Baker recommended Documenteur (1981) in Movies (curated)
David McK (3857 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.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Return of The King
The Lion King is a 2019 computer-animated musical movie directed and produced by Jon Favreau. It was written by Jeff Nathanson, and produced by Fairview Entertainment and Walt Disney Pictures and distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures. The film stars Donald Glover, Seth Rogen, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Beyonce and James Earl Jones.
King Mufasa (James Earl Jones) and Queen Sarabi rule over the animal kingdom with their pride of lions from Pride Rock, in the African Pride Lands. Things change with the birth of their son, Simba, the new Prince. Mufasa's younger brother, and former heir to the throne, Scar, covets the throne and plots to eliminate Mufasa and Simba, so he may become king. The battle for Pride Rock is filled with betrayal, tragedy and drama and circumstances are forever changed after the events of the stampede.
This movie was really good, but of course it was. The original Lion King was one of Disney's best animated films to date. There was a lot of build up to the release of this movie, with fans every anticipating when they could finally see this story on the big screen again. Jon Favreau did not disappoint, but there was a lot of negativity and bad review scores when it first released. I think the big problem was that in all the previews/trailers leading up to the movie coming out showed how realistic the animals looked and how they were able to recreate iconic scenes in stunning state of the art CGI, but they never showed the animals talking or singing. This for me made it difficult to get fully immersed in the film when the very realistic animals began talking and singing, but eventually it went away or I got used to it a couple minutes into the movie. Also they changed very little in this remake and it was almost literally a shot for shot or scene for scene recreation of the original Lion King, which I think bothered the critics. I personally liked little changes they made that I felt made the movie just a little bit better, like the dialogue between Mufasa's and Scar implying Mufasa's gave him the scar, Zimbabwe catching up with Nala for the journey back to Pride Rock, and Nala leading the female lions in the fight against the hyenas. I also thought it was cool how they made it more clear that one of the hyenas was the leader and it was the female and the scene where Scar makes the deal with them. Overall though I feel like they could have shown more emotion in the animals if they had chosen a style that was so detailed to look so realistic. I give this movie a 7/10. It is worth watching for nostalgia and to see it in theaters is a treat, especially when getting children or younger family members to see it for the first time, but the original is still the better film.
King Mufasa (James Earl Jones) and Queen Sarabi rule over the animal kingdom with their pride of lions from Pride Rock, in the African Pride Lands. Things change with the birth of their son, Simba, the new Prince. Mufasa's younger brother, and former heir to the throne, Scar, covets the throne and plots to eliminate Mufasa and Simba, so he may become king. The battle for Pride Rock is filled with betrayal, tragedy and drama and circumstances are forever changed after the events of the stampede.
This movie was really good, but of course it was. The original Lion King was one of Disney's best animated films to date. There was a lot of build up to the release of this movie, with fans every anticipating when they could finally see this story on the big screen again. Jon Favreau did not disappoint, but there was a lot of negativity and bad review scores when it first released. I think the big problem was that in all the previews/trailers leading up to the movie coming out showed how realistic the animals looked and how they were able to recreate iconic scenes in stunning state of the art CGI, but they never showed the animals talking or singing. This for me made it difficult to get fully immersed in the film when the very realistic animals began talking and singing, but eventually it went away or I got used to it a couple minutes into the movie. Also they changed very little in this remake and it was almost literally a shot for shot or scene for scene recreation of the original Lion King, which I think bothered the critics. I personally liked little changes they made that I felt made the movie just a little bit better, like the dialogue between Mufasa's and Scar implying Mufasa's gave him the scar, Zimbabwe catching up with Nala for the journey back to Pride Rock, and Nala leading the female lions in the fight against the hyenas. I also thought it was cool how they made it more clear that one of the hyenas was the leader and it was the female and the scene where Scar makes the deal with them. Overall though I feel like they could have shown more emotion in the animals if they had chosen a style that was so detailed to look so realistic. I give this movie a 7/10. It is worth watching for nostalgia and to see it in theaters is a treat, especially when getting children or younger family members to see it for the first time, but the original is still the better film.
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!
Chris Hooker (419 KP) rated The Girl Who Came Home in Books
Jan 12, 2018
[The Girl Who Came Home] by [Hazel Gaynor] will appeal to fans of the movie Titanic. Fortunately this story has more depth and more believable characters.
[Gaynor] tells the story of Maggie, and Irish girl, who is leaving her home to travel to America with her aunt after the death of her mother. Maggie does not want to leave unlike those she is traveling with since she is in love.
This novel does a good job mixing history with fiction and making it believable. It is also told as a memory to Maggie's granddaughter, Grace, who has made her own sacrifices for family. It is an enjoyable read with a slight twist at the end.
[Gaynor] tells the story of Maggie, and Irish girl, who is leaving her home to travel to America with her aunt after the death of her mother. Maggie does not want to leave unlike those she is traveling with since she is in love.
This novel does a good job mixing history with fiction and making it believable. It is also told as a memory to Maggie's granddaughter, Grace, who has made her own sacrifices for family. It is an enjoyable read with a slight twist at the end.
Erika (17789 KP) rated Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1992) in Movies
Mar 9, 2019
I re-watched this film on the day Luke Perry (RIP) passed. This is also the only thing I've seen to do with the 'Buffy-verse'.
I really enjoy this movie, and I like it even more each time I watch it. It's entertaining and Luke Perry is a looker. He's very swoon-worthy when he cleans up and walks into that dance. Kristy Swanson kicks a lot of butt. But, seriously, Luke Perry has the two best lines in the entire film.
"Are YOU addressing I?"
as well as:
"And, now you're a coat rack."
While I liked this film, I'm not sure about jumping to the series. I may just watch this again.
I really enjoy this movie, and I like it even more each time I watch it. It's entertaining and Luke Perry is a looker. He's very swoon-worthy when he cleans up and walks into that dance. Kristy Swanson kicks a lot of butt. But, seriously, Luke Perry has the two best lines in the entire film.
"Are YOU addressing I?"
as well as:
"And, now you're a coat rack."
While I liked this film, I'm not sure about jumping to the series. I may just watch this again.
Rickey A. Mossow Jr. (689 KP) rated Creed II (2018) in Movies
May 21, 2019
A fitting conclusion.
The original Creed was an incredible movie, so of course one has to head into the sequel with reservations that they couldn't possibly tell a story as compelling as the first. The film hits the ground running and never lets up telling three parallel stories that combine into one amazing journey. The film also beautifully never forgets or betrays its roots. Stallone knows the story his characters and the story he wants to tell with them. His Rocky beautifully compliments the brilliant and layered performance by Michael B. Jordan. If this is indeed the final chapter of Rocky series, it's a beautiful work of art to close the over 4-decade odyssey.
EmersonRose (320 KP) rated The Scarlet Letter in Books
Nov 20, 2019
This is one of those books that I feel like everyone reads in high school but my English teacher never had us read it. I will admit that I have been interested in reading it ever since I saw Easy A starring Emma Stone (Such a fun movie). I found myself really enjoying the story. It was deeper than I anticipated, and I loved the language and characters, especially Hester and Pearl. My only real struggle with the book was the first two hours were the author rambling before the story even started! But this book also gets bonus points because Hawthorne was friends with Ralph Waldo Emerson, a writer and transcendentalist, who I was named after.