Search
Search results
David McK (3770 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) in Movies
Dec 23, 2019 (Updated Apr 28, 2020)
Let's face it: no matter what JJ Abrams did, he was never going to please everyone.
Personally, I feel he wasn't helped by the fact that there was no clear over-arching strand to the sequel trilogy; no guiding hand (as it were) such as with Kevin Feige's role in the MCU, leaving each director free to do their own thing, to ignore what had went before or (as in this case) to blatantly attempt to fix what many see as the flaws of the previous film.
Set up as both the capper to this particular trilogy, and to the 9-movie Skywalker saga as a whole, Abrams was definitely NOT in an enviable position ...
It's hard to talk about this movie without giving too much of the plot away: I think it's fairly safe to say that Palpatine returns (he's in the trailers) for reasons, that the issue of Reys parentage is - again - brought up, and that this was intended to be Leia's movie (before Carrie Fisher passed away) in much the same way as The Force Awakens was Hans and that The Last Jedi was Luke's.
It also very much has a 'Return of the Jedi' feel to it, and seemingly lifts from the 'Legends' series of no-longer-canon Star Wars spin-offs, with the inclusion of the Katana fleet in all but name.
Personally, I feel he wasn't helped by the fact that there was no clear over-arching strand to the sequel trilogy; no guiding hand (as it were) such as with Kevin Feige's role in the MCU, leaving each director free to do their own thing, to ignore what had went before or (as in this case) to blatantly attempt to fix what many see as the flaws of the previous film.
Set up as both the capper to this particular trilogy, and to the 9-movie Skywalker saga as a whole, Abrams was definitely NOT in an enviable position ...
It's hard to talk about this movie without giving too much of the plot away: I think it's fairly safe to say that Palpatine returns (he's in the trailers) for reasons, that the issue of Reys parentage is - again - brought up, and that this was intended to be Leia's movie (before Carrie Fisher passed away) in much the same way as The Force Awakens was Hans and that The Last Jedi was Luke's.
It also very much has a 'Return of the Jedi' feel to it, and seemingly lifts from the 'Legends' series of no-longer-canon Star Wars spin-offs, with the inclusion of the Katana fleet in all but name.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Straight Outta Compton (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The moment I heard they were making a film about N.W.A., I knew I had to see it. Like many, I didn’t listen to their music during their height of their popularity. Unlike many, I am willing to admit that. But it doesn’t mean that their music didn’t influence me in significant ways when I was in my teens. So naturally, I was excited about this movie. I only wish it would have lived up to my expectations.
Straight Outta Compton tells the story of N.W.A.’s formation, but it’s more than just that. It tells of the trials and tribulations the members of the group went through to become the icons they were. It tells of both the struggle with their oppressors, as well as each other. We start the film in 1986 with an introduction to the three main guys that everyone knows: Eazy-E (Jason Mitchell), Dr. Dre (Corey Hawkings) and Ice Cube (O’Shea Jackson, Jr.). They soon form Ruthless records putting out their first single, which gets the attention of Jerry Heller (Paul Giamatti), their future manager. The movie then tells of their rise to stardom, and ultimate falling out, all the way through to the passing of Eazy-E.
Straight Outta Compton sets out to do a lot of things, some of which it doesn’t get exactly right. Don’t get me wrong, the movie is good. It just felt… unnatural at times. The actors themselves did a great job portraying the real-life people they were representing, but I don’t think they had the chemistry as an ensemble. I noticed it really early on in the movie, when Ice Cube and Dr. Dre were at Dre’ aunt’s house. The flow of the conversation just didn’t feel comfortable. It didn’t feel like the natural conversations I had with my friends when I was around the same age, as they were putting clear distance (time) between each of the character’s lines, just so you can make out what they were saying. And Hawkings and Jackson, Jr. just seemed really awkward in delivering their lines to each other. I know that this is needed often in movies, but I have seen similar scenes in other movies where I didn’t have this feeling.
There were also many things that the movie put into your face, but then didn’t really finish telling you what it was about, or make you believe in the connection. For example, the movie starts with Dre having a girl and baby, and you see her for all of 10 seconds, and then you see her a little later when she is leaving him. Dre also has very minimal time with his brother in the beginning of the film, again a short time later they interact for a few moments on screen (over the phone), and then there is supposed to be a moving scene where Dre finds out his brother was killed. I say supposed to be because as with the film where Dre’s girl left him, you are supposed to feel something for the character here, but there wasn’t enough for you to go on. There wasn’t the emotional connection to the relationship between Dre and his girl/brother for you to feel connected to the movie and character. These are just a few examples, another could be a menacing threat to Jerry Heller at his home, but the movie never really wraps back around to it. Most people are supposed to know, or maybe you are supposed to infer from the plotline at the time, but it seemed a little abrupt to me. Now, I hear that the running time of this film, 147 minutes, is actually a far cry from the original 210 minutes. This could explain a lot of where I felt the film just kind of failed at follow through. Hopefully we get to see this on the home release.
Ultimately, this was a great movie. It was amazing to sit in the theater and listen to people sing along with the iconic songs that were released not only from the super group themselves, but even from Eazy-E, Ice Cube and others. Plus, there were many great easter eggs throughout the film, including appearances of the characters Snoop Dogg, Tupac, Warren G, Suge Knight and many others. There was plenty of humor, but still managing to portray the struggle they went through well. One of things I was worried about was O’Shea Jackson, Jr. I originally thought they only cast him as his father because of the looks, but he really did hold his own. I definitely see a future in acting, and possibly in music too, just like his father.
Should you go see it in theaters? If you are a super fan, then definitely. Even if you are not, definitely check it out as it tells a great story about what was considered at one point the most dangerous group in music. This is definitely one that will be added to my collection upon home release, especially if there is an uncut version.
Straight Outta Compton tells the story of N.W.A.’s formation, but it’s more than just that. It tells of the trials and tribulations the members of the group went through to become the icons they were. It tells of both the struggle with their oppressors, as well as each other. We start the film in 1986 with an introduction to the three main guys that everyone knows: Eazy-E (Jason Mitchell), Dr. Dre (Corey Hawkings) and Ice Cube (O’Shea Jackson, Jr.). They soon form Ruthless records putting out their first single, which gets the attention of Jerry Heller (Paul Giamatti), their future manager. The movie then tells of their rise to stardom, and ultimate falling out, all the way through to the passing of Eazy-E.
Straight Outta Compton sets out to do a lot of things, some of which it doesn’t get exactly right. Don’t get me wrong, the movie is good. It just felt… unnatural at times. The actors themselves did a great job portraying the real-life people they were representing, but I don’t think they had the chemistry as an ensemble. I noticed it really early on in the movie, when Ice Cube and Dr. Dre were at Dre’ aunt’s house. The flow of the conversation just didn’t feel comfortable. It didn’t feel like the natural conversations I had with my friends when I was around the same age, as they were putting clear distance (time) between each of the character’s lines, just so you can make out what they were saying. And Hawkings and Jackson, Jr. just seemed really awkward in delivering their lines to each other. I know that this is needed often in movies, but I have seen similar scenes in other movies where I didn’t have this feeling.
There were also many things that the movie put into your face, but then didn’t really finish telling you what it was about, or make you believe in the connection. For example, the movie starts with Dre having a girl and baby, and you see her for all of 10 seconds, and then you see her a little later when she is leaving him. Dre also has very minimal time with his brother in the beginning of the film, again a short time later they interact for a few moments on screen (over the phone), and then there is supposed to be a moving scene where Dre finds out his brother was killed. I say supposed to be because as with the film where Dre’s girl left him, you are supposed to feel something for the character here, but there wasn’t enough for you to go on. There wasn’t the emotional connection to the relationship between Dre and his girl/brother for you to feel connected to the movie and character. These are just a few examples, another could be a menacing threat to Jerry Heller at his home, but the movie never really wraps back around to it. Most people are supposed to know, or maybe you are supposed to infer from the plotline at the time, but it seemed a little abrupt to me. Now, I hear that the running time of this film, 147 minutes, is actually a far cry from the original 210 minutes. This could explain a lot of where I felt the film just kind of failed at follow through. Hopefully we get to see this on the home release.
Ultimately, this was a great movie. It was amazing to sit in the theater and listen to people sing along with the iconic songs that were released not only from the super group themselves, but even from Eazy-E, Ice Cube and others. Plus, there were many great easter eggs throughout the film, including appearances of the characters Snoop Dogg, Tupac, Warren G, Suge Knight and many others. There was plenty of humor, but still managing to portray the struggle they went through well. One of things I was worried about was O’Shea Jackson, Jr. I originally thought they only cast him as his father because of the looks, but he really did hold his own. I definitely see a future in acting, and possibly in music too, just like his father.
Should you go see it in theaters? If you are a super fan, then definitely. Even if you are not, definitely check it out as it tells a great story about what was considered at one point the most dangerous group in music. This is definitely one that will be added to my collection upon home release, especially if there is an uncut version.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) in Movies
Aug 3, 2020
God-Awful
Pretty much separate from all the other movies, when youngster Sean Black goes to Japan to live with his father, he rebels and gets involved in the underground life of street racing. Since I’m on a streak of reviewing god-awful movies, I present to you The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift.
Acting: 5
Beginning: 1
The beginning puts us right in the heart of a cheesy car race. It wasn’t bad, but as I look back over the entirety of the other movies, car races are typically the one thing they get right. So, in comparison, it was actually terrible. Definitely put me in a weird kind of mood for what was to come.
Characters: 8
What the characters lacked in depth, they were at least fun characters to include in the story. If nothing else, at least it’s not Paul Walker! That alone was enough to get my seal of approval.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 5
Sure there is a motive to drive the story. Is it strong? Not really. Enough to carry a movie? It’ll do. The problem with not having characters with depth is having to rely on the action to drive the story. When there’s not enough of it, you’re in trouble.
Entertainment Value: 5
So here’s the thing: The actual drifting part was kind of cool. I also like the fact that they really make an attempt to get you involved in the Japanese world. At one point, I made the note: “I don’t hate this movie.” At some point that did change, but there was a true moment where the movie held its own for a bit.
Memorability: 3
I couldn’t tell you one memorable line from this movie. I couldn’t tell you one cool action sequence that really got me excited. All I really remember is some drifting and some beautiful Tokyo landscapes…and that’s pretty much all in the title. This is not a repeat watch type of movie.
Pace: 10
Plot: 5
The story had potential. My problem was it kept leaving out pockets of information and it never really felt like I got the full story. It was like I kept getting up to go to the bathroom and missing something crucial each time. There is way too much jumping around for my taste.
Resolution: 5
The ending left me with a mild sense of satisfaction. Even if I wasn’t late to the game and I was watching this for the first time when it was first released, I would’ve still known that there would be more movies to come. That’s what nags at me: The lack of completion. It doesn’t feel like an ending when you know it’s not over.
Overall: 52
Some movies are bad but entertaining. Case and point: The Fast and the Furious Tokyo Drift. You will hate it, but you will also walk away having seen a few solid moments as well. As much as I try and avoid this franchise at all costs, there were glimmers in these early movies that the franchise could be more than what it was. Glad they finally found their way.
Acting: 5
Beginning: 1
The beginning puts us right in the heart of a cheesy car race. It wasn’t bad, but as I look back over the entirety of the other movies, car races are typically the one thing they get right. So, in comparison, it was actually terrible. Definitely put me in a weird kind of mood for what was to come.
Characters: 8
What the characters lacked in depth, they were at least fun characters to include in the story. If nothing else, at least it’s not Paul Walker! That alone was enough to get my seal of approval.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 5
Sure there is a motive to drive the story. Is it strong? Not really. Enough to carry a movie? It’ll do. The problem with not having characters with depth is having to rely on the action to drive the story. When there’s not enough of it, you’re in trouble.
Entertainment Value: 5
So here’s the thing: The actual drifting part was kind of cool. I also like the fact that they really make an attempt to get you involved in the Japanese world. At one point, I made the note: “I don’t hate this movie.” At some point that did change, but there was a true moment where the movie held its own for a bit.
Memorability: 3
I couldn’t tell you one memorable line from this movie. I couldn’t tell you one cool action sequence that really got me excited. All I really remember is some drifting and some beautiful Tokyo landscapes…and that’s pretty much all in the title. This is not a repeat watch type of movie.
Pace: 10
Plot: 5
The story had potential. My problem was it kept leaving out pockets of information and it never really felt like I got the full story. It was like I kept getting up to go to the bathroom and missing something crucial each time. There is way too much jumping around for my taste.
Resolution: 5
The ending left me with a mild sense of satisfaction. Even if I wasn’t late to the game and I was watching this for the first time when it was first released, I would’ve still known that there would be more movies to come. That’s what nags at me: The lack of completion. It doesn’t feel like an ending when you know it’s not over.
Overall: 52
Some movies are bad but entertaining. Case and point: The Fast and the Furious Tokyo Drift. You will hate it, but you will also walk away having seen a few solid moments as well. As much as I try and avoid this franchise at all costs, there were glimmers in these early movies that the franchise could be more than what it was. Glad they finally found their way.
Mike Wilder (20 KP) rated The Descendants (2011) in Movies
May 30, 2018
It's a good movie for a quiet afternoon.
Contains spoilers, click to show
I wanted to see this mainly to see if George Clooney was truly deserving of the best actor nomination. I'm a fan of his but he usually always plays the same kind of characters, a flawed and/or ruthless person who has an experience and realises the error of his ways. And this is no different.
George Clooney plays Matt King who along with his family owns a large piece of land on a Hawaiian island. His wife is in a boating accident and is left in a coma. Matt has to put his professional life on hold to take care of his two daughters. He also discovers his wife was seeing another man and wanted to leave him.
This is a good film with every cast member, Shailene Woodley, Amara Miller, Beau Bridges, Matthew Lillard and Judy Greer, doing an excellent job. But it is the performance of Nick Krause as Sid who steals the scene every time he speaks. He adds a needed element of comedy in an otherwise serious film.
So does George Clooney's performance deserve the Oscar nomination and the Golden Globe win? Having not yet watched all the nominated films I can't say. But he is great in this film. He is better than usual showing more emotion and vulnerability than he normally does. But it is the cast as a whole that makes this film work so well. Even though he is in pretty much every scene and it is his story, the cast brings this film to life and helps give his character added dimension.
The film itself is one of those that doesn't really go anywhere. It tells the story that takes place over a few days well. There is no need for character development and no one really learns a life lesson. But the story is good and the characters realistic and interesting.
This is a good film and I enjoyed watching it. It's a good movie for a quiet afternoon.
George Clooney plays Matt King who along with his family owns a large piece of land on a Hawaiian island. His wife is in a boating accident and is left in a coma. Matt has to put his professional life on hold to take care of his two daughters. He also discovers his wife was seeing another man and wanted to leave him.
This is a good film with every cast member, Shailene Woodley, Amara Miller, Beau Bridges, Matthew Lillard and Judy Greer, doing an excellent job. But it is the performance of Nick Krause as Sid who steals the scene every time he speaks. He adds a needed element of comedy in an otherwise serious film.
So does George Clooney's performance deserve the Oscar nomination and the Golden Globe win? Having not yet watched all the nominated films I can't say. But he is great in this film. He is better than usual showing more emotion and vulnerability than he normally does. But it is the cast as a whole that makes this film work so well. Even though he is in pretty much every scene and it is his story, the cast brings this film to life and helps give his character added dimension.
The film itself is one of those that doesn't really go anywhere. It tells the story that takes place over a few days well. There is no need for character development and no one really learns a life lesson. But the story is good and the characters realistic and interesting.
This is a good film and I enjoyed watching it. It's a good movie for a quiet afternoon.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Fonzo (Capone) (2020) in Movies
Jul 4, 2021
What's the scariest thing to reckon with: mortality, humanity, or yourself? Tom Hardy plays a constipated bulldog with a pinch of Beetlejuice in this utterly beguiling Frankenstein's monster of a film which can only be described as 𝘎𝘰𝘵𝘵𝘪 (2018) hopped up on a bunch of prescription medication. I think the major takeaway from this is that Trank makes a tedious gangster movie - but a pretty fuckin' sweet horror/fantasy curio. Right off the bat I admire it for being so scene-to-scene fascinating based solely on how wholeheartedly unique it is; I expected no less from Trank than an auteurist stamp as big, original, and defined as this. Yes this is wonderfully experimental, yes this is very uncomfortable - seasoned with bodily fluids, a good amount of violence, and the sort of medical anguish which starts out grim and only gets more merciless as it continues... however, it also doesn't amount to too much. Hardy's grotesque turn here is memorable but 80% of the time it's reduced to staring off into the distance making various faces. It also has a similar issue to Barry Levinson's 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘞𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘓𝘪𝘦𝘴 in that the show-stealing macabre nightmare segments are just *crying* to break out more than the seemingly stock, incompetently structured narrative. However this was still super cool just on principle alone, and as someone who is sick of rote biopics it's nice to see one of them not be afraid to try something unquestionably different for a change (especially by dragging such a historic, opulent figure through the mud the whole time). Plus one of these are finally under an hour-45, go figure!
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Friday (1995) in Movies
Feb 12, 2019
Comedy That Still Holds Up
Can you believe that 2018 was the first time that I ever watched Friday in its unrated entirety? I had seen bits and pieces on USA, but I always felt like I was missing something in the translation. I get it now. The plot: After Craig (Ice Cube) gets fired on his day off, he suddenly finds himself helping his pothead friend Smokey (Chris Tucker) earn enough money selling weed to pay off Big Worm (Faizon Love).
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
Characters: 10
The first scene introduces Deebo (Tiny Lister) a viable villain around which the story revolves. The entire neighborhood fears and hates Deebo and it doesn’t take long at all to figure out why. He helps keep the conflict serious, but not too serious.
But we all know who makes this movie: Smokey. There isn’t one scene where I didn’t find myself laughing at something stupid he did or said. He thinks he’s the man, but it’s probably just the weed boosting his confidence. His delivery is flawless. My favorite line: “What the fuck you stealing boxes for? What, you trying to build a clubhouse? Man, I know you ain’t go out like that!” Classic. I almost died laughing when he was crying in the truck. Smokey represents a cast of characters that are all unique and hilarious in their own way.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 10
Between Smokey trying to get enough money to pay Worm and everyone trying to steer clear of Deebo, there is enough here to keep the story moving. There are shootouts, heists gone wrong, hood fights, a number of things worthy to entertain. For a comedy, I was actually impressed by the amount of action interwoven in the story.
Genre: 8
Friday ranks up there with some of the best comedies I’ve seen, second-tier worthy at the very least. Its job is to make you laugh and entertain and it does that very well. I also love that you don’t have to overthink the comedy, it’s just there in the dialogue and in the events that unfold.
Memorability: 10
Who do you know that can’t quote at least one line from Friday? I still knew lines even when I hadn’t seen it all the way through. The dialogue has a way of sticking to you long after you’ve watched the movie. I give a lot of that credit to Chris Tucker’s ability to deliver with perfect comedic timing.
Pace: 5
Plot: 6
Resolution: 10
Overall: 85
While Friday is a movie that takes awhile to get to the meat of the plot, I appreciate how hilarious it was, but also appreciate the more serious moments. It’s not just good, but surprisingly so. A movie I’ll still be watching for years to come.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
Characters: 10
The first scene introduces Deebo (Tiny Lister) a viable villain around which the story revolves. The entire neighborhood fears and hates Deebo and it doesn’t take long at all to figure out why. He helps keep the conflict serious, but not too serious.
But we all know who makes this movie: Smokey. There isn’t one scene where I didn’t find myself laughing at something stupid he did or said. He thinks he’s the man, but it’s probably just the weed boosting his confidence. His delivery is flawless. My favorite line: “What the fuck you stealing boxes for? What, you trying to build a clubhouse? Man, I know you ain’t go out like that!” Classic. I almost died laughing when he was crying in the truck. Smokey represents a cast of characters that are all unique and hilarious in their own way.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 10
Between Smokey trying to get enough money to pay Worm and everyone trying to steer clear of Deebo, there is enough here to keep the story moving. There are shootouts, heists gone wrong, hood fights, a number of things worthy to entertain. For a comedy, I was actually impressed by the amount of action interwoven in the story.
Genre: 8
Friday ranks up there with some of the best comedies I’ve seen, second-tier worthy at the very least. Its job is to make you laugh and entertain and it does that very well. I also love that you don’t have to overthink the comedy, it’s just there in the dialogue and in the events that unfold.
Memorability: 10
Who do you know that can’t quote at least one line from Friday? I still knew lines even when I hadn’t seen it all the way through. The dialogue has a way of sticking to you long after you’ve watched the movie. I give a lot of that credit to Chris Tucker’s ability to deliver with perfect comedic timing.
Pace: 5
Plot: 6
Resolution: 10
Overall: 85
While Friday is a movie that takes awhile to get to the meat of the plot, I appreciate how hilarious it was, but also appreciate the more serious moments. It’s not just good, but surprisingly so. A movie I’ll still be watching for years to come.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Nun (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
I’ve always been a sucker for supernatural thrillers that are based on “actual events”, even if the way it’s portrayed in the movies nowhere resembles the truth. For some reason, it’s always intriguing to watch a film and imagine that these things could potentially happen. This has always been the draw of The Conjuring films, which are loosely based on the lives of Ed and Lorraine Warren, whose paranormal investigations were the inspiration behind not only this series but the Amityville Horror. So, when I heard that The Nun was another movie set in the same cinematic universe as The Conjuring franchise I anxiously awaited the opportunity to review it.
The Nun begins with two nuns who are attempting to destroy an evil being that has cursed an abbey in a small Romanian village for hundreds of years. After a young man who goes by the name Frenchie (Jonas Bloquet) discovers one of the nuns has hung herself, the Vatican summons Father Burke (Demián Bichir), who is known for his special skills in exorcisms and Sister Irene (Taissa Farmiga), a young nun-in-training to investigate the matter. With Frenchie as their guide, they travel to the abbey to uncover the mysteries of the nun’s suicide.
The Nun reintroduces us to a familiar demonic figure that was originally introduced in The Conjuring 2. Sadly, this is where the similarities to the other Conjuring films end. The Nun has its share of jump scares, but the entire film seems to be a compilation of various horror tropes including everything from crosses turning upside down to using holy water to get rid of demons. All the typical exorcism movie elements are there, but none of them really add any context to the story or answer any questions as to why the priest and nun were sent to investigate the suicide. There is no discernable path that the characters take to unravel the mystery, and it attempts to build suspense only to “Hollywood-up” the ending. They sacrificed suspense and mystery and replaced it with monster filled battles and cheesy one-liners. Instead of beautifully haunting ghosts and demons we got what I could only describe as nun-mummies which can now be taken down with shovels and shotguns. A shotgun was not part of Father Burke’s exorcism arsenal but towards the end of the movie you start to think maybe that should have been his weapon of choice all along (who needs a cross and holy water, when you have your trusty 12-gauge).
The setting is as beautiful as it is creepy, and it’s hard not to wonder how they could take such an amazing setting and dumb it down. The Nun herself is particularly creepy and the characters at first glance appear to be interesting which is why it’s so disappointing that the movie feels so much like a missed opportunity. The pacing of the movie is incredibly slow as well, with all the buildup of the investigation most of the time you are just waiting for something to happen. To make it even worse, most of the buildups lead the audience down a path of confusion and not only raise more questions that will never be answered, but also destroy any believability of the story.
Ultimately, fans of The Conjuring franchise will likely leave disappointed and with even more longing for The Conjuring 3 to be released. The movie lacks much of the suspense and outright terror that the previous movies in the series were well known for and ultimately feels like a spinoff movie that lacks any real connection to the movies preceding it. The Nun isn’t a terrible movie, and I didn’t leave feeling as though I had completely wasted an hour and a half of my time, it just really doesn’t do anything to break new ground or move the franchise along in any meaningful way. While there are parts of the movie that will have you jump, the reality is, that the scenes following these moments will keep you bewildered and likely cause you to forget what made you jump in the first place. It has some interesting concepts, but nothing that hasn’t been done better in similar movies before it. In the end it’s a movie that people will not likely hate but will not feel satisfied with either. I certainly wouldn’t recommend paying full price to see it, but it may be worth the Saturday matinee price or watching it when it comes to Blu-ray. If you want a good ghost or demon movie to get you in the Halloween spirit, this isn’t it. You’d be much better off watching the spectacularly classic Poltergeist or The Exorcist if you really want to be scared out of your wits.
What I liked: The setting and atmosphere, The Nun herself was pretty freaky
What I liked less: Disjointed story, Too many unanswered questions, Overall “meh” feeling
The Nun begins with two nuns who are attempting to destroy an evil being that has cursed an abbey in a small Romanian village for hundreds of years. After a young man who goes by the name Frenchie (Jonas Bloquet) discovers one of the nuns has hung herself, the Vatican summons Father Burke (Demián Bichir), who is known for his special skills in exorcisms and Sister Irene (Taissa Farmiga), a young nun-in-training to investigate the matter. With Frenchie as their guide, they travel to the abbey to uncover the mysteries of the nun’s suicide.
The Nun reintroduces us to a familiar demonic figure that was originally introduced in The Conjuring 2. Sadly, this is where the similarities to the other Conjuring films end. The Nun has its share of jump scares, but the entire film seems to be a compilation of various horror tropes including everything from crosses turning upside down to using holy water to get rid of demons. All the typical exorcism movie elements are there, but none of them really add any context to the story or answer any questions as to why the priest and nun were sent to investigate the suicide. There is no discernable path that the characters take to unravel the mystery, and it attempts to build suspense only to “Hollywood-up” the ending. They sacrificed suspense and mystery and replaced it with monster filled battles and cheesy one-liners. Instead of beautifully haunting ghosts and demons we got what I could only describe as nun-mummies which can now be taken down with shovels and shotguns. A shotgun was not part of Father Burke’s exorcism arsenal but towards the end of the movie you start to think maybe that should have been his weapon of choice all along (who needs a cross and holy water, when you have your trusty 12-gauge).
The setting is as beautiful as it is creepy, and it’s hard not to wonder how they could take such an amazing setting and dumb it down. The Nun herself is particularly creepy and the characters at first glance appear to be interesting which is why it’s so disappointing that the movie feels so much like a missed opportunity. The pacing of the movie is incredibly slow as well, with all the buildup of the investigation most of the time you are just waiting for something to happen. To make it even worse, most of the buildups lead the audience down a path of confusion and not only raise more questions that will never be answered, but also destroy any believability of the story.
Ultimately, fans of The Conjuring franchise will likely leave disappointed and with even more longing for The Conjuring 3 to be released. The movie lacks much of the suspense and outright terror that the previous movies in the series were well known for and ultimately feels like a spinoff movie that lacks any real connection to the movies preceding it. The Nun isn’t a terrible movie, and I didn’t leave feeling as though I had completely wasted an hour and a half of my time, it just really doesn’t do anything to break new ground or move the franchise along in any meaningful way. While there are parts of the movie that will have you jump, the reality is, that the scenes following these moments will keep you bewildered and likely cause you to forget what made you jump in the first place. It has some interesting concepts, but nothing that hasn’t been done better in similar movies before it. In the end it’s a movie that people will not likely hate but will not feel satisfied with either. I certainly wouldn’t recommend paying full price to see it, but it may be worth the Saturday matinee price or watching it when it comes to Blu-ray. If you want a good ghost or demon movie to get you in the Halloween spirit, this isn’t it. You’d be much better off watching the spectacularly classic Poltergeist or The Exorcist if you really want to be scared out of your wits.
What I liked: The setting and atmosphere, The Nun herself was pretty freaky
What I liked less: Disjointed story, Too many unanswered questions, Overall “meh” feeling
Lee (2222 KP) rated Zombieland: Double Tap (2019) in Movies
Oct 22, 2019
Not quite as good as the original
It's been 10 years since we last saw Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) and our TV and movie screens have since become even more saturated with zombie content. It's something which even gets acknowledged by Columbus during his opening narration to Zombieland: Double Tap as he thanks the audience for choosing this movie, now that there are "many choices in zombie entertainment."
The opening narration also hilariously introduces us to some of the specific variations of zombies currently being encountered - the Homer, the Hawking and the Ninja - before continuing the comic book violence that we know and love from the first movie. A hugely entertaining slo-mo zombie battle on the overgrown grounds in front of The White House while the opening credits roll. But after that, the foursome setup residence in the presidential home, making good use of the space available and even celebrating Christmas there (even though it's only November!).
Little has changed in the group dynamic, other than the fact that Little Rock is now all grown up, something which forms the basis for the main plot of the movie. Columbus and Wichita are struggling to settle into a routine as a couple, and Tallahassee serves only as an overbearing father figure to Little Rock. Tiring of this setup, and longing for friends her own age, Little Rock runs away with a peace loving boy called Berkeley, to a place called Bablyon, home to a community of pacifists where weapons are not allowed. The others, fearing for her safety, set out on a road trip to go find her.
Something about the humour of Double Tap doesn't seem to work as well as it did in the first movie and much of the bickering and interaction between this makeshift family doesn't feel quite as enjoyable this time around. The constant onscreen reminders of 'the rules' that the group live by becomes tiresome at times and it's therefore up to a number of new characters that the guys meet along the way to try and inject something fresh into it all.
First up is Madison (Zoey Deutch), a young woman that Columbus and Tallahassee meet at a mall early on. Madison is a typical ditzy blonde cliché, forming the butt of many of the jokes, but still managing to be endearing and a lot of fun. Then there's Nevada (Rosario Dawson), along with Tallahassee and Columbus meeting up with their doppelgängers Albuquerque (Luke Wilson) and Flagstaff (Thomas Middleditch). If you've seen the trailer then that manages to cover off a lot of these character meetings and interactions, along with a number of plot beats too unfortunately.
What the trailer doesn't show you though are the hugely satisfying, big action set-pieces, which manage to come along just at the right time in order to inject some serious entertainment into the flagging dialogue. Aside from the slo-mo opening battle that I've already mentioned, there's a wildly fun slapstick zombie fight in an Elvis themed motel and a finale that's packed full of zombie carnage. Not to mention a lengthy credits scene which starts off well, and just keeps on getting better! And the introduction of a more difficult to kill strain of zombie only adds to the fun too.
Overall, Double Tap doesn't quite live up to its predecessor. It's a fun ride though, still boasting some of the best zombie killing action out there, but ultimately doesn't leave much of a lasting impression.
The opening narration also hilariously introduces us to some of the specific variations of zombies currently being encountered - the Homer, the Hawking and the Ninja - before continuing the comic book violence that we know and love from the first movie. A hugely entertaining slo-mo zombie battle on the overgrown grounds in front of The White House while the opening credits roll. But after that, the foursome setup residence in the presidential home, making good use of the space available and even celebrating Christmas there (even though it's only November!).
Little has changed in the group dynamic, other than the fact that Little Rock is now all grown up, something which forms the basis for the main plot of the movie. Columbus and Wichita are struggling to settle into a routine as a couple, and Tallahassee serves only as an overbearing father figure to Little Rock. Tiring of this setup, and longing for friends her own age, Little Rock runs away with a peace loving boy called Berkeley, to a place called Bablyon, home to a community of pacifists where weapons are not allowed. The others, fearing for her safety, set out on a road trip to go find her.
Something about the humour of Double Tap doesn't seem to work as well as it did in the first movie and much of the bickering and interaction between this makeshift family doesn't feel quite as enjoyable this time around. The constant onscreen reminders of 'the rules' that the group live by becomes tiresome at times and it's therefore up to a number of new characters that the guys meet along the way to try and inject something fresh into it all.
First up is Madison (Zoey Deutch), a young woman that Columbus and Tallahassee meet at a mall early on. Madison is a typical ditzy blonde cliché, forming the butt of many of the jokes, but still managing to be endearing and a lot of fun. Then there's Nevada (Rosario Dawson), along with Tallahassee and Columbus meeting up with their doppelgängers Albuquerque (Luke Wilson) and Flagstaff (Thomas Middleditch). If you've seen the trailer then that manages to cover off a lot of these character meetings and interactions, along with a number of plot beats too unfortunately.
What the trailer doesn't show you though are the hugely satisfying, big action set-pieces, which manage to come along just at the right time in order to inject some serious entertainment into the flagging dialogue. Aside from the slo-mo opening battle that I've already mentioned, there's a wildly fun slapstick zombie fight in an Elvis themed motel and a finale that's packed full of zombie carnage. Not to mention a lengthy credits scene which starts off well, and just keeps on getting better! And the introduction of a more difficult to kill strain of zombie only adds to the fun too.
Overall, Double Tap doesn't quite live up to its predecessor. It's a fun ride though, still boasting some of the best zombie killing action out there, but ultimately doesn't leave much of a lasting impression.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Heat (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In a fun twist to the traditional buddy-cop movie theme, this time we have a pair of ladies bringing The Heat to the streets of Boston for a laugh-out-loud good time.
Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy bring action and some very sharp tongues to the big screen.
The story starts out by painting a picture of the two in their separate worlds. Special Agent Ashburn (Bullock) is very prim, proper, and by-the-book. She dresses for success, knows it all, and doesn’t let so much as an S-bomb pass her lips. As she solves a case (proving herself a know-it-all in front of coworkers), a bleak picture comes into focus that this very uptight FBI agent is just the beginning.
By contrast (and fitting the expected formula), Detective Mullins (McCarthy) uses a down-and-dirty, physical, and foul-mouthed method for cleaning up the streets of Boston. Her neighborhood is definitely her home, and it needs protecting. Mullins’ slovenly lifestyle is the complete polar opposite of Ashburn, as one might expect. This conflict is the driving force behind a typical buddy cop movie. The only difference is that it’s two women instead of the usual ingredients.
Ashburn is given an assignment in Boston. The assignment will be a key, deciding factor in her next promotion, so all she wants is a simple case to solve and close. Naturally, once Mullins and Ashburn meet, sparks fly and hilarity ensues.
I went into this with low expectations, but also a deep loathing for Sandra Bullock as an actress — every role she’s ever played has been essentially the same. I expected the same in The Heat. In an oh-so-surprising twist of fate, she ended up playing the sober, strait-laced character! Despite my lack of appreciation for her acting skills, I must say she did well; her comedic timing was spot-on, and it meshed well with McCarthy’s usual brand of comedy: vociferous and physical, bordering on slapstick. I did note during the film that Bullock is definitely starting to show her age; this is not a knock on her beauty, but more an admission that I am starting to feel old!
Mullins also plays the same character in every movie role she takes, so this character was no stretch for her at all. It seems she is just there to memorize lines and provide her unabashed, high-energy quips. That said, I have to give her mad props for comedic timing and delivery. She is a one-trick-pony, but that one trick is a damn good one.
All in all, this is a great film for laughs. I laughed out loud through much of it, which was a surprise. As with all comedies, I don’t recommend spending your hard-earned cash on these top-dollar theater tickets. Wait for the small screen, but definitely see it for a good, healthy chuckle.
Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy bring action and some very sharp tongues to the big screen.
The story starts out by painting a picture of the two in their separate worlds. Special Agent Ashburn (Bullock) is very prim, proper, and by-the-book. She dresses for success, knows it all, and doesn’t let so much as an S-bomb pass her lips. As she solves a case (proving herself a know-it-all in front of coworkers), a bleak picture comes into focus that this very uptight FBI agent is just the beginning.
By contrast (and fitting the expected formula), Detective Mullins (McCarthy) uses a down-and-dirty, physical, and foul-mouthed method for cleaning up the streets of Boston. Her neighborhood is definitely her home, and it needs protecting. Mullins’ slovenly lifestyle is the complete polar opposite of Ashburn, as one might expect. This conflict is the driving force behind a typical buddy cop movie. The only difference is that it’s two women instead of the usual ingredients.
Ashburn is given an assignment in Boston. The assignment will be a key, deciding factor in her next promotion, so all she wants is a simple case to solve and close. Naturally, once Mullins and Ashburn meet, sparks fly and hilarity ensues.
I went into this with low expectations, but also a deep loathing for Sandra Bullock as an actress — every role she’s ever played has been essentially the same. I expected the same in The Heat. In an oh-so-surprising twist of fate, she ended up playing the sober, strait-laced character! Despite my lack of appreciation for her acting skills, I must say she did well; her comedic timing was spot-on, and it meshed well with McCarthy’s usual brand of comedy: vociferous and physical, bordering on slapstick. I did note during the film that Bullock is definitely starting to show her age; this is not a knock on her beauty, but more an admission that I am starting to feel old!
Mullins also plays the same character in every movie role she takes, so this character was no stretch for her at all. It seems she is just there to memorize lines and provide her unabashed, high-energy quips. That said, I have to give her mad props for comedic timing and delivery. She is a one-trick-pony, but that one trick is a damn good one.
All in all, this is a great film for laughs. I laughed out loud through much of it, which was a surprise. As with all comedies, I don’t recommend spending your hard-earned cash on these top-dollar theater tickets. Wait for the small screen, but definitely see it for a good, healthy chuckle.
Hannah (27 KP) rated Kong: Skull Island (2017) in Movies
Jun 6, 2017
Exciting (3 more)
Not cliche!
Samuel L. Jackson!!
Exhilarating
Better than the last!
I wasn't expecting too much from this movie but it really delivered way more!! It was exciting, tense, funny and sweet. It wasn't what I was expecting but I really enjoyed it. This adaptation is WAY better than the Jack Black one, it's just so much better! And I was very happy with the way things turned out. I was also glad and surprised that they didn't include a romance plot for the film, which I personally found relieving. I would have liked to know more about what Kong and his enemies are, seeing as the man who might have known couldn't explain after a while. There wasn't much explanation in regards to them, which would have been nice. But still, it's a good, easy to watch film. It's definitely worth a watch! Plus, who doesn't love Samuel L. Jackson????