Search
Search results
Rhett Reese recommended Shakespeare in Love (1998) in Movies (curated)
Erika (17789 KP) rated Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) in Movies
May 28, 2018 (Updated May 28, 2018)
I think I liked this film, I'll definitely have to see it at least once more to form a full opinion. But, for now:
The plot was engaging, but fairly predictable. It did a good job of checking off the boxes, how Han met Chewie, the Kessel Run, and winning the ship from Lando.
I don't think I can currently comment on Alden's Han, I'll definitely need to see it again. I don't think he was bad, but he needed to make the character his own. I'm not sure he really had a choice in that though.
I do take a slight issue with Donald Glover's Lando. I'm not particularly a Lando fan, I don't feel one way or another about him. Lando was schmaltzy, corny, and I don't need a stand alone Lando movie.
I think Ron Howard did a good job with fixing the film. And I liked that he threw his bro in as a cameo.
Also, the appearance of ... that character... great.
The plot was engaging, but fairly predictable. It did a good job of checking off the boxes, how Han met Chewie, the Kessel Run, and winning the ship from Lando.
I don't think I can currently comment on Alden's Han, I'll definitely need to see it again. I don't think he was bad, but he needed to make the character his own. I'm not sure he really had a choice in that though.
I do take a slight issue with Donald Glover's Lando. I'm not particularly a Lando fan, I don't feel one way or another about him. Lando was schmaltzy, corny, and I don't need a stand alone Lando movie.
I think Ron Howard did a good job with fixing the film. And I liked that he threw his bro in as a cameo.
Also, the appearance of ... that character... great.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Pet Sematary (1989) in Movies
Oct 19, 2018
A good adaptation
Whilst this isn’t one of the best Stephen King adaptations, it’s a lot better than expected.
This stays very true to the original book. It’s been a while since I’ve read the book, but there was nothing in this that stood out as being different, which is always good news. This is a typical late 80s film, with some very weak performances and feels very much like a made for TV movie. That said, a lot of the physical effects and make up were very impressively done and the film is a lot bloodier than i ever would’ve expected. There are also some very bad special effects, but fortunately these are few and far between. Watching this has made me intrigued to see how the new adaptation turns out - if they manage to stay faithfully to the story but with a 21st century update on the effects, it should really be one to watch.
This stays very true to the original book. It’s been a while since I’ve read the book, but there was nothing in this that stood out as being different, which is always good news. This is a typical late 80s film, with some very weak performances and feels very much like a made for TV movie. That said, a lot of the physical effects and make up were very impressively done and the film is a lot bloodier than i ever would’ve expected. There are also some very bad special effects, but fortunately these are few and far between. Watching this has made me intrigued to see how the new adaptation turns out - if they manage to stay faithfully to the story but with a 21st century update on the effects, it should really be one to watch.
Postcards from the Cinema
Book
Postcards from the Cinema is the book Serge Daney, one of the greatest of film critics, never wrote....
Moon Country
Book
Fifteen years ago, Tommy Hunter committed a terrible crime. Now pursued by his own bad memories and...
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated The Wailing (2016) in Movies
Oct 28, 2021
Babe, are you okay? You haven't even touched your rotting deer carcass. Better than 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘝𝘝𝘪𝘵𝘤𝘩 - A weird, absolute gonzo ripper of a ghost movie bursting at the seams with occult gibberish that shrieks with the agonizing intensity of a dying animal and wraps up with one of the most genius conclusions of the 2010s decade. On top of all that it's also chock full of exposed-nerve performances, amazing cinematography, and all these dazzlingly staged setpieces (highlights include the multiple rituals that are thrilling as *hell* and the literally dizzying chase sequence in the cliffside woods). Can't really say this wastes a minute of its 156 minute runtime - starting by very engagingly stringing along a deceitfully simple mystery which gradually morphs into a messy blast of at least three different genres all handled with originality and a wicked sense of inertia - with one of the best child performances ever translated to film. One of the few "begs for a rewatch" movies that actually warrants one.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Jungle Cruise (2021) in Movies
Aug 2, 2021
Star power from Johnson and Blunt (1 more)
Direction, cinematography, special effects and score all top notch
An Amazon-based blockbuster that delivers!
Dating from 1955, Jungle Cruise was one of the key attractions at Disneyland when it first opened. Full of corny spiel from the lovable boat captains, the experience is nicely evoked in the new Disney movie: a true summer blockbuster that delights.
Positives:
- Cut the movie open and it reads "summer blockbuster pleaser" through the middle. This is largely down to the charisma of its two stars, Blunt and Johnson, who prove why they are both such bankable commodities. It's clearly based on the "will they/won't they" simmering sexual chemistry between two polar-opposites, as featured in movies such as "Romancing the Stone" and "The African Queen". (Since the theme park ride was heavily influenced by the latter, this is no surprise). But there's also a heavy dose of tongue-in-cheek ridiculousness as featured in other great B-movie homages such as "The Mummy" and (most notably) "Raiders of the Lost Ark". (A few scenes directly mimic the Indiana Jones movies.)
- The supporting cast also have fun with their roles. Jack Whitehouse, doing almost a like-for-like copy of John Hannah's character in "The Mummy", could have been extremely annoying. But although he's the comic relief in the piece, he steers it just the right side of farcical, avoiding Jar-Jar Binks territory. ("When in Rome" he declares, swallowing a flagon of fermented spit. "God - I wish I was in Rome"!) Jesse Plemons, one of my favourite actors, who proved his comic chops in "Game Night", here delivers one of the most over-the-top Nazis since Ronald Lacey's Toht in "Raiders". Rounding things off is Paul Giamatti with a bizarrely comic performance as Nilo, a competing riverboat owner.
- Special effects, cinematography (Flavio Martínez Labiano, of "The Shallows") and James Newton-Howard's score all add to the lush blockbuster feel of the movie. And director Jaume Collet-Serra (who did the clever shark B-movie "The Shallows") keeps the movie clipping along at a fine rate, with only a few sections of character-building dialogue to get the kids fidgety.
Negatives:
- I mean, it's popcorn nonsense of course. The Amazonian 'McGuffin' is a tree that only comes to life under very specific conditions. And isn't it amazing that watery machinery (developed by who?) still works after at least 400 years, when my dishwasher gives up after ten? (But it's done with verve and style, so who cares?)
- Although the screenplay is actually very slick for a movie of this type, it feels like a script by committee at times. A single writer might have been tempted to duck the Hollywood ending and leave things on a more thoughtful, albeit downbeat, note.
Summary Thoughts on "Jungle Cruise": This was a pleasant surprise for me. A fun and light-hearted movie that ticks all the boxes as a summer blockbuster. It nicely evokes the cheesiness of the theme park ride operator (past alumni have included Robin Williams and Kevin Costner), especially with Johnson's opening scenes. But then rounds it out as a spectacular and appealing tongue-in-cheek adventure.
And, by the way, in case you fancy sitting through the interminable end titles to watch a post-credits scene.... there isn't one.
(#takenonefortheteam).
Parental Guidance: One question might be whether, with a "12A" certificate, this summer blockbuster is one that your kids might enjoy or be freaked out by. A comparison with "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is perhaps useful here. There are quite a number of "jolts" involving snakes and bees but probably not as bad as the ones you get in an uncut version of "Raiders" (think the spiked Satipo; the mummies/snakes when escaping the 'Well of Souls'; and the melting Nazi bad-guys). So if you have kids that lapped up that stuff then I don't think they would have any issues with this one.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks).
Positives:
- Cut the movie open and it reads "summer blockbuster pleaser" through the middle. This is largely down to the charisma of its two stars, Blunt and Johnson, who prove why they are both such bankable commodities. It's clearly based on the "will they/won't they" simmering sexual chemistry between two polar-opposites, as featured in movies such as "Romancing the Stone" and "The African Queen". (Since the theme park ride was heavily influenced by the latter, this is no surprise). But there's also a heavy dose of tongue-in-cheek ridiculousness as featured in other great B-movie homages such as "The Mummy" and (most notably) "Raiders of the Lost Ark". (A few scenes directly mimic the Indiana Jones movies.)
- The supporting cast also have fun with their roles. Jack Whitehouse, doing almost a like-for-like copy of John Hannah's character in "The Mummy", could have been extremely annoying. But although he's the comic relief in the piece, he steers it just the right side of farcical, avoiding Jar-Jar Binks territory. ("When in Rome" he declares, swallowing a flagon of fermented spit. "God - I wish I was in Rome"!) Jesse Plemons, one of my favourite actors, who proved his comic chops in "Game Night", here delivers one of the most over-the-top Nazis since Ronald Lacey's Toht in "Raiders". Rounding things off is Paul Giamatti with a bizarrely comic performance as Nilo, a competing riverboat owner.
- Special effects, cinematography (Flavio Martínez Labiano, of "The Shallows") and James Newton-Howard's score all add to the lush blockbuster feel of the movie. And director Jaume Collet-Serra (who did the clever shark B-movie "The Shallows") keeps the movie clipping along at a fine rate, with only a few sections of character-building dialogue to get the kids fidgety.
Negatives:
- I mean, it's popcorn nonsense of course. The Amazonian 'McGuffin' is a tree that only comes to life under very specific conditions. And isn't it amazing that watery machinery (developed by who?) still works after at least 400 years, when my dishwasher gives up after ten? (But it's done with verve and style, so who cares?)
- Although the screenplay is actually very slick for a movie of this type, it feels like a script by committee at times. A single writer might have been tempted to duck the Hollywood ending and leave things on a more thoughtful, albeit downbeat, note.
Summary Thoughts on "Jungle Cruise": This was a pleasant surprise for me. A fun and light-hearted movie that ticks all the boxes as a summer blockbuster. It nicely evokes the cheesiness of the theme park ride operator (past alumni have included Robin Williams and Kevin Costner), especially with Johnson's opening scenes. But then rounds it out as a spectacular and appealing tongue-in-cheek adventure.
And, by the way, in case you fancy sitting through the interminable end titles to watch a post-credits scene.... there isn't one.
(#takenonefortheteam).
Parental Guidance: One question might be whether, with a "12A" certificate, this summer blockbuster is one that your kids might enjoy or be freaked out by. A comparison with "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is perhaps useful here. There are quite a number of "jolts" involving snakes and bees but probably not as bad as the ones you get in an uncut version of "Raiders" (think the spiked Satipo; the mummies/snakes when escaping the 'Well of Souls'; and the melting Nazi bad-guys). So if you have kids that lapped up that stuff then I don't think they would have any issues with this one.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks).
Lee (2222 KP) rated Shazam! (2019) in Movies
Apr 8, 2019 (Updated Apr 8, 2019)
Shazam is the latest DC superhero to land himself a standalone movie and continues to highlight the fact that these self contained DC offerings really do seem to be a lot better than their rushed ensemble movie output. It also shows how much better they can be when straying from the traditional dark DC gloom and deciding to inject a bit more humour and fun into it all. Aquaman recently showed just how much of a box office success that formula can be, Wonder Woman before it to a certain extent, and although Shazam does certainly have some dark themes and moments, it’s ultimately a lot more fun than either of those.
Shazam does take it’s time in introducing our superhero though, not to mention our super-villain, and the result is a much more grounded and believable movie. We begin with young boy Thaddeus Sivana, traveling by car with his elder brother and father. It’s the first of a number of dark scenes involving the Sivana family, really helping us to get a better understanding and appreciation of the man he later becomes and the motivation that drives him. We then head to present day Philadelphia, where 15 year old Billy Batson is using whatever means possible, legal or otherwise, to try and locate the birth mother he became separated from as a young boy while at a crowded funfair. Since then, Billy has been in the foster care system, and now finds himself in the care of Victor and Rosa – former foster kids themselves, who now run a home for a small group of foster children. Billy is sharing a room with Freddy, a disabled boy with an interest in superheroes and the proud owner of some pretty cool superhero memorabilia, including a batarang from Batman and a genuine bullet, flattened from having bounced off the man of steel himself! The foster home is a pretty close knit group and Billy initially struggles to fit into this large new ready made family.
And then one day, while on the run after standing up to a couple of older kids who were bullying Freddy, Billy finds himself transported to a dark mysterious cave where he inherits the powers of aged wizard Shazam (Djimon Hounsoul). The wizard is the last Shazam, currently protecting the world from an invasion of the Seven Deadly Sins, but now so weak that he must transfer his powers to someone who is true of heart. Absorbing his power, Billy becomes a grown up superhero (Zachari Levy), but by saying the word Shazam he is able to alternate between his teen body and that of the mighty superhero whenever he wants.
Once he manages to convince Freddy that he is in fact Billy and not some crazy guy in a suit, they have a lot of fun trying to work out which powers Shazam actually has and how to best make use of them. If you’ve seen the trailer, you’ll know that this is where a lot of the fun lies within the movie and it’s definitely very entertaining. But Billy eventually begins having a little too much fun for Freddy’s liking, and when all he is doing is skipping school to go shoot off lightning bolts for a gathered crowd, Freddy becomes frustrated that he is wasting his gift. With great power comes great responsibility and all that. Meanwhile, young Thaddeus Sivana has now become Dr Sivana (Mark Strong), acquiring some pretty impressive powers of his own and forging his own dark path in a scene which really pushes the 12A age rating for the movie. All his life, Sivana has been seeking the power that Billy has now acquired, so when this larger than life hero shows up, goofing around and not really taking that power seriously, Dr Sivana goes after Shazam to try and take the power for himself.
From there, the rest of the movie is pretty much a cat and mouse chase between Sivana and Shazam across the city, up in the sky and down on the streets as they smash through shopping malls and buildings before culminating in a fairground showdown. It’s actually a lot more fun than it sounds, although the whole movie could probably benefit from having about 10-15 minutes cut from it. Also, the dark threat introduced so shockingly earlier on in the movie, suddenly doesn’t become so shocking or menacing towards the end. It’s indicative of the tone of the movie as a whole really, trying to remain rooted in the traditional DC gloom, but striving for family friendly box office success. These are all very minor negatives for me though – overall Shazam is a lot of fun and very lighthearted, with a lot to say about the importance of family. And the Boardman family had an absolute blast watching it!
Shazam does take it’s time in introducing our superhero though, not to mention our super-villain, and the result is a much more grounded and believable movie. We begin with young boy Thaddeus Sivana, traveling by car with his elder brother and father. It’s the first of a number of dark scenes involving the Sivana family, really helping us to get a better understanding and appreciation of the man he later becomes and the motivation that drives him. We then head to present day Philadelphia, where 15 year old Billy Batson is using whatever means possible, legal or otherwise, to try and locate the birth mother he became separated from as a young boy while at a crowded funfair. Since then, Billy has been in the foster care system, and now finds himself in the care of Victor and Rosa – former foster kids themselves, who now run a home for a small group of foster children. Billy is sharing a room with Freddy, a disabled boy with an interest in superheroes and the proud owner of some pretty cool superhero memorabilia, including a batarang from Batman and a genuine bullet, flattened from having bounced off the man of steel himself! The foster home is a pretty close knit group and Billy initially struggles to fit into this large new ready made family.
And then one day, while on the run after standing up to a couple of older kids who were bullying Freddy, Billy finds himself transported to a dark mysterious cave where he inherits the powers of aged wizard Shazam (Djimon Hounsoul). The wizard is the last Shazam, currently protecting the world from an invasion of the Seven Deadly Sins, but now so weak that he must transfer his powers to someone who is true of heart. Absorbing his power, Billy becomes a grown up superhero (Zachari Levy), but by saying the word Shazam he is able to alternate between his teen body and that of the mighty superhero whenever he wants.
Once he manages to convince Freddy that he is in fact Billy and not some crazy guy in a suit, they have a lot of fun trying to work out which powers Shazam actually has and how to best make use of them. If you’ve seen the trailer, you’ll know that this is where a lot of the fun lies within the movie and it’s definitely very entertaining. But Billy eventually begins having a little too much fun for Freddy’s liking, and when all he is doing is skipping school to go shoot off lightning bolts for a gathered crowd, Freddy becomes frustrated that he is wasting his gift. With great power comes great responsibility and all that. Meanwhile, young Thaddeus Sivana has now become Dr Sivana (Mark Strong), acquiring some pretty impressive powers of his own and forging his own dark path in a scene which really pushes the 12A age rating for the movie. All his life, Sivana has been seeking the power that Billy has now acquired, so when this larger than life hero shows up, goofing around and not really taking that power seriously, Dr Sivana goes after Shazam to try and take the power for himself.
From there, the rest of the movie is pretty much a cat and mouse chase between Sivana and Shazam across the city, up in the sky and down on the streets as they smash through shopping malls and buildings before culminating in a fairground showdown. It’s actually a lot more fun than it sounds, although the whole movie could probably benefit from having about 10-15 minutes cut from it. Also, the dark threat introduced so shockingly earlier on in the movie, suddenly doesn’t become so shocking or menacing towards the end. It’s indicative of the tone of the movie as a whole really, trying to remain rooted in the traditional DC gloom, but striving for family friendly box office success. These are all very minor negatives for me though – overall Shazam is a lot of fun and very lighthearted, with a lot to say about the importance of family. And the Boardman family had an absolute blast watching it!
David McK (3576 KP) rated Alien: River of Pain in Books
Jul 21, 2019
The second (or is it third? Audible has it 2nd, but I've also seen it called #3? Maybe 3rd produced, but 2nd set?) of - currently - 3 canon Alien novels, this takes part largely alongside the early parts of the movie Aliens, cutting back and forth between Ripley and the inhabitants of the colony of Hadley's Hope.
Remember I said alongside the start of Aliens? To put that into context, this is - largely - filling in the gaps in the movie, between the point at which Ripley's escape pod is picked up, and the arrival of the Marines (and Ripley, and Burke) to that colony, after all communication with it is lost. As such, there are several scenes in here which are lifted straight from that movie, with some - slightly - expanded upon.
It also gives a reason why Newt is the only survivor found hiding in the air-ducts ("They mostly come at night. Mostly"), why there's Alien Face-huggers in jars in the colony, why the marines are so hyped up when we first meet them in the film (they're just back from R&R), and even why Newt's family went out prospecting in the first place.
Worth a read/listen? Yes, although I have to say that there are elements of this that reminded me quite a bit of the 90s comic/novel "Aliens: Nightmare Asylum" - especially in some of the characters - and that it just seems weird, now, that the presence of Marines on the planetoid, pre Ripley and co, are never mentioned at all!
Remember I said alongside the start of Aliens? To put that into context, this is - largely - filling in the gaps in the movie, between the point at which Ripley's escape pod is picked up, and the arrival of the Marines (and Ripley, and Burke) to that colony, after all communication with it is lost. As such, there are several scenes in here which are lifted straight from that movie, with some - slightly - expanded upon.
It also gives a reason why Newt is the only survivor found hiding in the air-ducts ("They mostly come at night. Mostly"), why there's Alien Face-huggers in jars in the colony, why the marines are so hyped up when we first meet them in the film (they're just back from R&R), and even why Newt's family went out prospecting in the first place.
Worth a read/listen? Yes, although I have to say that there are elements of this that reminded me quite a bit of the 90s comic/novel "Aliens: Nightmare Asylum" - especially in some of the characters - and that it just seems weird, now, that the presence of Marines on the planetoid, pre Ripley and co, are never mentioned at all!
