Search
Search results
Autumn (430 KP) rated Ready Player One in Books
Jan 2, 2018 (Updated Jan 2, 2018)
80s references (2 more)
Immersive world building
Not just for gamers
A bit too much referencing (1 more)
Would have liked to know what the winner did with the money after the game was over
I wasn’t alive in the 80s and am not a gamer, but I still got sucked into this book. I have seen a lot of 80s movies and heard of a lot of the consoles and games mentioned, so I was able to catch/understand most of the references. A lot of world building went into this, both inside and outside the OASIS simulation, and I think it was done well. I wish it had gone into what happened after the game was over. Did the winner try to help fix this dystopian society or just buy a big mansion, live like a king and watch the rest of the world burn? I’m glad the main character was from Oklahoma, my home state, and from a city only about 2 to 3 hrs from where I live. Oklahoma isn’t usually a popular place for movies or books to take place so it was nice to see something that partly took place in my state. It was also nice that this character wasn’t portrayed as a country bumpkin being from Oklahoma. Although, his living conditions and home life are pretty standard for characters from my state. I’m excited to see how this story translates from book to movie because, if done right, I think it could be good.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Life (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Life after Gravity.
Mankind is on the verge of a major milestone. The “Pilgrim” probe is returning from Mars containing soil samples that might spell the discovery of the first palpable evidence of life beyond earth. Proving that earth scientists are not completely incompetent, the probe is being returned not to earth but to a lab on the International Space Station where strict quarantine can be maintained. This key mission requirement is the responsibility of Miranda North (Rebecca Ferguson, “Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation”). Supporting her is an international crew including fellow doctor David Harris (Jake Gyllenhaal, “Source Code”), professional astronaut Rory Adams (Ryan Reynolds, “Deadpool”) and Hugh Derry (Ariyon Bakare), the lead scientist studying the samples. Needless to say, the soil samples yield more promise than Derry could have ever hoped for (or North could have feared). A crisis of growth and death ensues in a manner that fans of “Alien” will be suitably familiar with. Can the crew survive against all the odds?
Jake Gyllenhaal is one of my favourite actors with a raft of quality films in his CV such as “Nightcrawler” and last year’s hugely underrated (and almost Oscar-ignored) “Nocturnal Animals”. Rebecca Ferguson is also a class act and one of my favourite actresses of the moment. Here they are starring together for the first time and they don’t disappoint. Whilst neither gets enough quality screentime to really hammer their roles home, both connect to the audience in different ways: Harris is heading for an ISS endurance record, and starting to mentally disconnect from earthly connections as his body also starts to atrophy. North, with a clear attraction to him, tries to hold both him and everything together with steely determination, while carrying more knowledge of the mission directives than anyone else has.
The supporting ensemble cast also work well, portraying a real mixture of nationalities from the cock-sure American played by Reynolds to the sultry Russian commander Golovkina, played by the lovely Olga Dihovichnaya. A special note should also be added in the margin for one of the most surprising portrayals of a disabled character in a recent film.
Unfortunately the material the actors get to deliver, by Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick (co-writers of “Deadpool” and “Zombieland”) doesn’t match their ability. The first 30 minutes or so of the film I found to be totally gripping, but even here some of the dialogue is sufficiently clunky to distract you from the ongoing narrative. Some of the rest of the dialogue becomes head-in-the-hands awful in places: a scene during a de-pressurization episode being particularly painful.
Some dodgy dialogue might be forgivable in an action movie if supported by a strong story. Unfortunately, while the premise of the film is sound (if not original), the story leaps from inconsistency to inconsistency from beginning to end. The writers never seem to settle on whether the ‘being’ needs oxygen, likes oxygen, likes hot, likes cold, etc. and this lack of credibility distracts from the whole film. While the screenplay delivers some seriously suspenseful moments, and some decent jump scares, this is not satisfactory enough to serve up a cohesive movie meal.
This is not helped by ‘bad science’. As I have commented upon before, I’m a physicist by training and unscientific scenes annoy me to distraction. I’ve had to learn to live with the basics of explosions and other ‘noise’ in space (something “Star Wars” started 40 years ago, damn those TIE fighters). But there is a scene in “Life” involving an airlock breach that just completely beggers belief, acted out as if it’s a stiff breeze on the front at Skegness! It’s almost – (almost) – as bonkers as the ‘reactor venting’ scene with Chris Pratt in “Passengers“.
However, the film has its strong points too. Like “Gravity”, this is another special effects triumph with the scenes outside the ISS being gorgeously rendered. “Gravity” was a clear 10/10; this is probably at least a 7, and a reason for seeing the film on the big screen. A key question though is why there wasn’t a 3D version of the film released? Heaven knows I’m no fan of 3D, but “Gravity” was one of the few films that was genuinely enhanced by the format: in fact it is currently the only 3D Blu-ray that I own!
In general, the whole film seems a little half-cocked and lacking in its own conviction. You wonder whether the production company (Skydance) got rather cold-feet about the film in releasing it when it did. Yes, “Deadpool” did very well with its February release, but this is a much more suitable film for a summer audience than a release in this post-Oscars doldrums.
In summary, its a moderately entertaining watch, but at heart just another retelling of the old ‘something nasty in the woodshed’ yarn that we’ve seen played out countless times before. Here though the swanky setting and special effects are diminished by a lack of credibility and consistency in the storytelling. Redemption was on hand though, for while it was heading for a middling 3-Fad rating, it managed to salvage another half Fad in the final 60 seconds: a memorable movie ending that might prove hard to beat during 2017.
Jake Gyllenhaal is one of my favourite actors with a raft of quality films in his CV such as “Nightcrawler” and last year’s hugely underrated (and almost Oscar-ignored) “Nocturnal Animals”. Rebecca Ferguson is also a class act and one of my favourite actresses of the moment. Here they are starring together for the first time and they don’t disappoint. Whilst neither gets enough quality screentime to really hammer their roles home, both connect to the audience in different ways: Harris is heading for an ISS endurance record, and starting to mentally disconnect from earthly connections as his body also starts to atrophy. North, with a clear attraction to him, tries to hold both him and everything together with steely determination, while carrying more knowledge of the mission directives than anyone else has.
The supporting ensemble cast also work well, portraying a real mixture of nationalities from the cock-sure American played by Reynolds to the sultry Russian commander Golovkina, played by the lovely Olga Dihovichnaya. A special note should also be added in the margin for one of the most surprising portrayals of a disabled character in a recent film.
Unfortunately the material the actors get to deliver, by Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick (co-writers of “Deadpool” and “Zombieland”) doesn’t match their ability. The first 30 minutes or so of the film I found to be totally gripping, but even here some of the dialogue is sufficiently clunky to distract you from the ongoing narrative. Some of the rest of the dialogue becomes head-in-the-hands awful in places: a scene during a de-pressurization episode being particularly painful.
Some dodgy dialogue might be forgivable in an action movie if supported by a strong story. Unfortunately, while the premise of the film is sound (if not original), the story leaps from inconsistency to inconsistency from beginning to end. The writers never seem to settle on whether the ‘being’ needs oxygen, likes oxygen, likes hot, likes cold, etc. and this lack of credibility distracts from the whole film. While the screenplay delivers some seriously suspenseful moments, and some decent jump scares, this is not satisfactory enough to serve up a cohesive movie meal.
This is not helped by ‘bad science’. As I have commented upon before, I’m a physicist by training and unscientific scenes annoy me to distraction. I’ve had to learn to live with the basics of explosions and other ‘noise’ in space (something “Star Wars” started 40 years ago, damn those TIE fighters). But there is a scene in “Life” involving an airlock breach that just completely beggers belief, acted out as if it’s a stiff breeze on the front at Skegness! It’s almost – (almost) – as bonkers as the ‘reactor venting’ scene with Chris Pratt in “Passengers“.
However, the film has its strong points too. Like “Gravity”, this is another special effects triumph with the scenes outside the ISS being gorgeously rendered. “Gravity” was a clear 10/10; this is probably at least a 7, and a reason for seeing the film on the big screen. A key question though is why there wasn’t a 3D version of the film released? Heaven knows I’m no fan of 3D, but “Gravity” was one of the few films that was genuinely enhanced by the format: in fact it is currently the only 3D Blu-ray that I own!
In general, the whole film seems a little half-cocked and lacking in its own conviction. You wonder whether the production company (Skydance) got rather cold-feet about the film in releasing it when it did. Yes, “Deadpool” did very well with its February release, but this is a much more suitable film for a summer audience than a release in this post-Oscars doldrums.
In summary, its a moderately entertaining watch, but at heart just another retelling of the old ‘something nasty in the woodshed’ yarn that we’ve seen played out countless times before. Here though the swanky setting and special effects are diminished by a lack of credibility and consistency in the storytelling. Redemption was on hand though, for while it was heading for a middling 3-Fad rating, it managed to salvage another half Fad in the final 60 seconds: a memorable movie ending that might prove hard to beat during 2017.
Awix (3310 KP) rated King Kong Lives (1986) in Movies
Jun 15, 2018
Ape Sh*t
Inexplicably boring and frankly quite weird attempt to cash in on the Kong name: having survived being machine gunned off the top of the Twin Towers and falling five hundred metres onto concrete (and thus proving that some gorillas just can't take a hint), Kong is in a coma being looked after by Linda Hamilton, who should have read the script before signing on. A no-mark leading man is able to hunt up a female giant gorilla to help out with a blood transfusion, but when the two apes get it on and escape, there's panic all round.
History has seen many overly optimistic monster movies, but few quite as out-of-touch with reality as King Kong Lives. It's not just that the story is preposterous (it is), or that the special effects are terrible (they are), but that one of main emotional relationships at the heart of the story is realised through the medium of two stuntmen in not-great gorilla suits nuzzling up to each other in simulation of simian romance. Your mind rebels when it is exposed to this stuff. 'No,' comes the interior monologue, 'no. Even the big bird in The Giant Claw was more convincing than this. I object. I am on strike from this point on.' With your suspension of disbelief in full revolt, you are forced to watch the rest of the movie simply in 'how much worse can this possibly get?' mode. And the answer is: considerably. To be honest it's only the sheer badness of the movie that keeps it interesting; anything remotely competent is also rather dull. I don't think the 1976 version of King Kong is nearly as bad as most people say; it certainly looks like a classic compared to this.
History has seen many overly optimistic monster movies, but few quite as out-of-touch with reality as King Kong Lives. It's not just that the story is preposterous (it is), or that the special effects are terrible (they are), but that one of main emotional relationships at the heart of the story is realised through the medium of two stuntmen in not-great gorilla suits nuzzling up to each other in simulation of simian romance. Your mind rebels when it is exposed to this stuff. 'No,' comes the interior monologue, 'no. Even the big bird in The Giant Claw was more convincing than this. I object. I am on strike from this point on.' With your suspension of disbelief in full revolt, you are forced to watch the rest of the movie simply in 'how much worse can this possibly get?' mode. And the answer is: considerably. To be honest it's only the sheer badness of the movie that keeps it interesting; anything remotely competent is also rather dull. I don't think the 1976 version of King Kong is nearly as bad as most people say; it certainly looks like a classic compared to this.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Oct 21, 2019
Fun and Exhilarating
War is coming between Earth and the underwater world of Atlantis. Arthur Curry (Jason Momoa), half-human half Atlantean, seeks to end the war before it spirals out of control. Despite its shortcomings, I’ll get this out of the way now: Aquaman absolutely rocks.
Acting: 7
Beginning: 10
Characters: 8
Arthur’s character grew on me as the movie progressed. He’s a tough guy, no doubt, but I also appreciated his honesty in expressing fear at the same time. He wasn’t reckless, rather he was someone that fully understood the stakes. Despite this clearly being an action blockbuster, I appreciate the efforts in trying to make the characters fun and exhilarating.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 8
This movie won’t make you think. In fact, there are a number of times where it feels designed to do just the opposite. It’s memorability comes in the fact that I can honestly say I’ve never really seen anything like it. The scenes, sequences, and setpieces try really hard and it’s very endearing. The visuals are beautiful particularly during the underwater battle sequences. Just damn beautiful to watch. It’s Finding Nemo on steroids.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Didn’t linger, ended at exactly the right time with something feasible and simple. A great finish for an overall great experience.
Overall: 92
If you’re a fan of sports, you might relate to this analogy: Ever watch a playoff series and the underdog wins the first game? You say to yourself, “Meh, it’s one game. They’ll lose the next four.” Then they win the next game and another game. Your eyes start to get big as you realize, “They might actually do this!” DC, I’m looking at you. I’m rooting so hard that you guys keep the train rolling. Aquaman is a hit.
Acting: 7
Beginning: 10
Characters: 8
Arthur’s character grew on me as the movie progressed. He’s a tough guy, no doubt, but I also appreciated his honesty in expressing fear at the same time. He wasn’t reckless, rather he was someone that fully understood the stakes. Despite this clearly being an action blockbuster, I appreciate the efforts in trying to make the characters fun and exhilarating.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 8
This movie won’t make you think. In fact, there are a number of times where it feels designed to do just the opposite. It’s memorability comes in the fact that I can honestly say I’ve never really seen anything like it. The scenes, sequences, and setpieces try really hard and it’s very endearing. The visuals are beautiful particularly during the underwater battle sequences. Just damn beautiful to watch. It’s Finding Nemo on steroids.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Didn’t linger, ended at exactly the right time with something feasible and simple. A great finish for an overall great experience.
Overall: 92
If you’re a fan of sports, you might relate to this analogy: Ever watch a playoff series and the underdog wins the first game? You say to yourself, “Meh, it’s one game. They’ll lose the next four.” Then they win the next game and another game. Your eyes start to get big as you realize, “They might actually do this!” DC, I’m looking at you. I’m rooting so hard that you guys keep the train rolling. Aquaman is a hit.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Thor: The Dark World (2013) in Movies
Oct 1, 2020
The second Thor movie is a visual representation of the word "meh". It has all the right ingredients, but somehow manages to fall flat.
The general plot is an issue. It's not a terrible narrative, but it's the kind of bloated fantasy stuff you would find in an early 2000s superhero movie, not a franchise that is eight films in and includes The Avengers.
The only purpose it serves in the grand scheme of things is the introduction of another Infinity Stone. Other than that it's just stuffed with exposition and kind of bland.
Another issue is, you guess it, the villain. Malekith isn't necessarily a bad choice for the movies antagonist, but his execution feels inconsequential and boring. Christopher Eccleston does the best with what he has but the stakes never feel high with this guy, although I do enjoy his comic- accurate appearance from the halfway mark.
Visually, The Dark World looks great. The CGI is pretty decent, the locations such as Asgard are just as well realised as the first film. Returning cast members include Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård, Rene Russo, Kat Dennings, Idris Elba and Natalie Portman, as well as the always awesome Chris Hemsworth. Nothing wrong here, although I do feel that Lady Sif and The Warriors Three are wasted this time around.
The final set piece is pretty damn entertaining to be fair, and borders on suitable comic-book absurdity at points. The attack on Asgard by the Dark Elves is also pretty thrilling, but everything else is a little so so.
I still like Thor: The Dark World for what it's worth, it's just a little by the numbers and uninspired, and is probably my least favourite of the MCU movies to date.
The general plot is an issue. It's not a terrible narrative, but it's the kind of bloated fantasy stuff you would find in an early 2000s superhero movie, not a franchise that is eight films in and includes The Avengers.
The only purpose it serves in the grand scheme of things is the introduction of another Infinity Stone. Other than that it's just stuffed with exposition and kind of bland.
Another issue is, you guess it, the villain. Malekith isn't necessarily a bad choice for the movies antagonist, but his execution feels inconsequential and boring. Christopher Eccleston does the best with what he has but the stakes never feel high with this guy, although I do enjoy his comic- accurate appearance from the halfway mark.
Visually, The Dark World looks great. The CGI is pretty decent, the locations such as Asgard are just as well realised as the first film. Returning cast members include Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård, Rene Russo, Kat Dennings, Idris Elba and Natalie Portman, as well as the always awesome Chris Hemsworth. Nothing wrong here, although I do feel that Lady Sif and The Warriors Three are wasted this time around.
The final set piece is pretty damn entertaining to be fair, and borders on suitable comic-book absurdity at points. The attack on Asgard by the Dark Elves is also pretty thrilling, but everything else is a little so so.
I still like Thor: The Dark World for what it's worth, it's just a little by the numbers and uninspired, and is probably my least favourite of the MCU movies to date.
Li Hughes (285 KP) rated I, Olga Hepnarová (Já, Olga Hepnarová) (2017) in Movies
Aug 6, 2017
I had never heard about this case before, so this was fascinating to me and I read up on the actual history before I watched the film. The film isn't too far off, though it does seem to fill in holes and exaggerate things as many movies do. The acting is very good, and the film's atmosphere makes it feel almost like an authentic product of the 70's at times. The depiction of Olga's mental illness is also very on point.
The iffy points for me: the plot can be very disjointed in places. Maybe it's because the subtitles lose part of the film's flow, but there were several points (when she moved to the cottage, when she got fired, etc.) where I had to stop and think about how we had gotten to that point. And the depiction of Olga's attempts to experiment and create relationships with both genders began to feel a bit exploitative, though maybe that was just me.
Overall, this was a very good movie about a very interesting and sad situation and woman.
The iffy points for me: the plot can be very disjointed in places. Maybe it's because the subtitles lose part of the film's flow, but there were several points (when she moved to the cottage, when she got fired, etc.) where I had to stop and think about how we had gotten to that point. And the depiction of Olga's attempts to experiment and create relationships with both genders began to feel a bit exploitative, though maybe that was just me.
Overall, this was a very good movie about a very interesting and sad situation and woman.
Diego V (43 KP) rated The Shawshank Redemption (1994) in Movies
Mar 24, 2019
The story is amazing showing how prison life is for some of the inmates from Shawshank and Andy dealing with it. (3 more)
The characters like Andy, Red, Samuel, and Byron are memorable. Andy is a character we want to see succeed as well as Red with his charm. While Samuel the warden and Byron the guard are ruthless.
The acting from Tim Robbins, Morgan Freeman, Bob Gunton, Clancy Brown, and James Whitmore do an amazing job with their acting and making the characters memorable
The production design from the Shawshank Prison is rally great and the music is amazing.
Shawshank Redemption
The film has a great story, memorable characters, incredible acting, and impressive production design as well as amazing music. This is one of the best films I have ever seen and I watch it whenever it comes on and I also have the DVD. If you’re a fan of Stephen King this movie will make you satisfied as well as non Stephen King fans who never read his books like me.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated The Last Starfighter (1984) in Movies
Dec 2, 2018
Guilty 80s pleasure still sparkles!
I have made several "Andy's Guilty Pleasures" lists in my life and Flash Gordon, Krull and this film are always at the very top. I'm sure it's because this movie was a childhood favorite, but also because it hits everything just right. It's not complicated, scary, or deep at all. Just a campy good time.
When local teenager trailer park handyman Alex Rogan finally beats his favorite video game "Starfighter" he gets more than he bargained for when it's owner comes calling and invites Alex into outer space to help the star league defend itself against its enemies.
It was one of the first movies to use any sort of CGI images as we think of them today. I'm sure nowadays people would say it looked a bit dated, but I would argue the characters and story are what keep it relevant.
There have been many stories and attempts to remake or reboot this film, even from Steven Spielberg, and thus far it hasn't happened.
Keeping my fingers crossed it never does.
When local teenager trailer park handyman Alex Rogan finally beats his favorite video game "Starfighter" he gets more than he bargained for when it's owner comes calling and invites Alex into outer space to help the star league defend itself against its enemies.
It was one of the first movies to use any sort of CGI images as we think of them today. I'm sure nowadays people would say it looked a bit dated, but I would argue the characters and story are what keep it relevant.
There have been many stories and attempts to remake or reboot this film, even from Steven Spielberg, and thus far it hasn't happened.
Keeping my fingers crossed it never does.
Last Man Standing: Tales from Tinseltown
3.0
Rate It
Book
In a career that spans over seven decades, Roger Moore has been at the very heart of the show...
Digital Visual Effects in Cinema: The Seduction of Reality
Book
Avatar. Inception. Jurassic Park. Lord of the Rings. Ratatouille. Not only are these some of the...