Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Dead Don't Die (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
I'm a little sad to say that I spent real money on this film. It wasn't showing at my Cineworld and the chance of a second stage release with the summer holidays approaching was unlikely. Luckily one of my Showcase Cinemas had it on and I ventured out into the real world to see it.
I won't bother with an extended synopsis because honestly I don't know what the point would be... it's zombies, everyone is trying to stay alive, literally nothing else is really happening in the story.
Up until this point I never really understood people using the word "meta" (unless it was DC related), I get it now. Officer Peterson, played by Adam Driver, is so meta that there actually may not be any more to go around.
The cast felt like it was just quirky enough to work together, especially as this wasn't going to be a traditional zombie movie. Looking back at the actors now I'm wondering if I might have enjoyed this movie more if it had unknown actors in it. I don't think it would have risen much higher in the rankings but I would have been less annoyed by some of the happenings.
Bill Murray plays Chief Robertson, a man who is seemingly always slightly confused by everything and also never becomes more than mildly alarmed by what's going on. The character and the performance were both rather boring. Murray came alive about as much as any of the zombies did.
The same can be said for Adam Driver, though I actually think that's par for the course with the way he acts rather than anything else. He always feels like mid-tier Keanu Reeves without the range. Once you realise that Peterson has the meta inside track it becomes a challenge to see anything he says in any other way. The script became rather frustrating because of this.
We're shown a very strange Tilda Swinton in the trailer and you have to wonder if the make-up direction was just "I want her to be the palest she's ever been and throw in a little "Ring" vibe for good measure." Zelda is probably the perfect zombie apocalypse companion, but she doesn't make for very dynamic viewing.
All of this negative feeling can be laid squarely at the script's door. It has little of interest to warrant a story at all, which is weird because there are elements that you think lead somewhere and then inexplicably don't. The ending is particularly bad and is what I've dubbed the "Stephen King ending". I won't expand on that here because it definitely constitutes spoilers if you haven't seen it.
There are some nice touches. The animal behaviour, the character of Mallory, and some of the effects on Selena Gomez. There's also some that left me questioning how they've portrayed zombies in this compared to other z-movies, but it's not in the trailer and while it's in my notes I'm wondering if I didn't just imagine the whole thing.
Those few little snippets can't save this movie. The poor script has several (that's me being generous) holes in it that just don't stand up when you look closely, and it's not good enough to give you anything else to look at apart from those holes. From its "maybe sciency things will cover the lack of reasoning" beginning to the "Stephen King ending" I was very disappointed.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/07/the-dead-dont-die-movie-review.html
I won't bother with an extended synopsis because honestly I don't know what the point would be... it's zombies, everyone is trying to stay alive, literally nothing else is really happening in the story.
Up until this point I never really understood people using the word "meta" (unless it was DC related), I get it now. Officer Peterson, played by Adam Driver, is so meta that there actually may not be any more to go around.
The cast felt like it was just quirky enough to work together, especially as this wasn't going to be a traditional zombie movie. Looking back at the actors now I'm wondering if I might have enjoyed this movie more if it had unknown actors in it. I don't think it would have risen much higher in the rankings but I would have been less annoyed by some of the happenings.
Bill Murray plays Chief Robertson, a man who is seemingly always slightly confused by everything and also never becomes more than mildly alarmed by what's going on. The character and the performance were both rather boring. Murray came alive about as much as any of the zombies did.
The same can be said for Adam Driver, though I actually think that's par for the course with the way he acts rather than anything else. He always feels like mid-tier Keanu Reeves without the range. Once you realise that Peterson has the meta inside track it becomes a challenge to see anything he says in any other way. The script became rather frustrating because of this.
We're shown a very strange Tilda Swinton in the trailer and you have to wonder if the make-up direction was just "I want her to be the palest she's ever been and throw in a little "Ring" vibe for good measure." Zelda is probably the perfect zombie apocalypse companion, but she doesn't make for very dynamic viewing.
All of this negative feeling can be laid squarely at the script's door. It has little of interest to warrant a story at all, which is weird because there are elements that you think lead somewhere and then inexplicably don't. The ending is particularly bad and is what I've dubbed the "Stephen King ending". I won't expand on that here because it definitely constitutes spoilers if you haven't seen it.
There are some nice touches. The animal behaviour, the character of Mallory, and some of the effects on Selena Gomez. There's also some that left me questioning how they've portrayed zombies in this compared to other z-movies, but it's not in the trailer and while it's in my notes I'm wondering if I didn't just imagine the whole thing.
Those few little snippets can't save this movie. The poor script has several (that's me being generous) holes in it that just don't stand up when you look closely, and it's not good enough to give you anything else to look at apart from those holes. From its "maybe sciency things will cover the lack of reasoning" beginning to the "Stephen King ending" I was very disappointed.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/07/the-dead-dont-die-movie-review.html
VideoShow Video Editor & Maker
Photo & Video and Utilities
10.0
Rate It
App
VideoShow - The Best Video Editor and Movie Maker App Available VideoShow is ranked as the No.1...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Bumblebee (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Like most kids growing up in the 80’s the Transformers always held a special place in my heart. I didn’t have a huge collection because the die-cast/plastic vehicles that transformed into robots could get a little expensive. Thankfully the morning cartoons and comic books filled in the spaces where I lacked the toys. When I heard there would be a live action movie based on the characters that had been such a integral part of my childhood, I couldn’t help but feel excited. I had seen some of the previews of the original Transformers movie by Michael Bay, the characters looked different than I imagined, but how bad could it be. The movie started, and heart break ensued, the first one was ok, the second was worse, and so on and so forth to a point where I still have not brought myself to watch the last installment of the Michael Bay franchise. Fast Forward to the first glimpse I had of Bumblebee, a prequel/reboot of the Transformers franchise, and that feeling of trepidation lingered. The first glimmer of hope was when the previews began to show images of the Transformers that I remembered, now referred to as G1 (Generation One), these transformers were recognizable. Still, the stories have always been lacking, so while I held out a glimmer of hope, I was sure to guard my heart closely…after all, we’ve been down this road before.
Bumblebee begins on Cybertron, where the Autobots and Decepticons are battling for control of what is left of the planet. The visuals are stunning, and as I stated before, here our all our favorites from the G1 universe in their recognizable forms. Once I saw Wheeljack, a personal favorite of mine, I felt I was in for something special. The Autobots are losing control to the evil Decepticons and are forced to evacuate Cybertron to regroup. Bumblebee is sent to Earth, a planet where Optimus Prime feels that the Autobots can rendezvous, but also tasked to protect the planet from any encroachment of the Decepticons.
Bumblebee unfortunately crash lands in the middle of a military training exercise and is quickly engaged by the armed forces there. While Bumblebee alone is a match for the Humvees and small arms fire, the battle is quickly joined by a Decepticon who has followed Bumblebee to Earth. He is completely out matched and outgunned it is not long before Bumblebee is defeated and barely escapes with his life. It is here that he is “saved” by Charlie Watson (Hailee Steinfeld) who finds the battered and broken beetle in a junkyard on her birthday, and a deep bond between the two is formed.
Bumblebee does not disappoint in its amazing visuals. The robots are as big as ever, yet now retain a more familiar look. The story still has explosions, and epic one-on-one robot battles that fans of the Michael Bay franchise can enjoy, but it’s the deep and meaningful story where Bumblebee truly shines. Written by Christina Hodson (Shut In/Unforgetable) and Directed by Travis Knight (Kudo and the Two Strings/Paranorman) we are finally given a story with a plot that fans of the series can get behind and enjoy. It’s not to say that the story is perfect, there are still the occasional lines that fall into groan-worthy territory, but to say that Bumblebee surpasses the previous live action movies is an understatement.
You don’t have to be a fan (or have any familiarity at all) with the Transformer toys, cartoon, or live action movies to enjoy it. However, for those who have been fortunate (or unfortunate) to experience them all will appreciate the subtle nods to previous films. The audience clapped and cheered when Stan Bush’s well-known Transformer song The Touch exploded on screen. Sure, it’s a spoiler, but for those who are still reluctant to see it based on previous films, maybe it’s exactly what’s needed. The film is littered with such nods and die-hard Transformer fans are in for a real treat.
The acting in the film is top-notch, not only by Hailee Steinfeld and Jorge Lendeborg Jr who are the main human characters, but by the supporting characters as well. John Cena brings his witty one-liners and Peter Cullen once again reprises his role of the now infamous Optimus Prime. For a movie that seems more at home as a summer blockbuster, it carries with it a tremendous amount of heart. Even Bumblebee who rarely utters a word throughout the entire film, brings out emotion in his facial expressions, or movements.
I’ll admit that going into Bumblebee I had my reservations and for those who have been burned by previous iterations of the series it’s a completely understandable concern. I’ll say it here though, Bumblebee is a terrific Transformers movie, easily on-par with the animated film, which to date had been the only Transformer movie worth talking about. Fans of the franchise will not be disappointed, and probably like myself, will be naming the numerous Transformers on the screen, by how they look…not by what they are called. In the famous words of Optimus Prime…Autobots Roll-out, and go see Bumblebee, coming to theaters on December 21st.
Bumblebee begins on Cybertron, where the Autobots and Decepticons are battling for control of what is left of the planet. The visuals are stunning, and as I stated before, here our all our favorites from the G1 universe in their recognizable forms. Once I saw Wheeljack, a personal favorite of mine, I felt I was in for something special. The Autobots are losing control to the evil Decepticons and are forced to evacuate Cybertron to regroup. Bumblebee is sent to Earth, a planet where Optimus Prime feels that the Autobots can rendezvous, but also tasked to protect the planet from any encroachment of the Decepticons.
Bumblebee unfortunately crash lands in the middle of a military training exercise and is quickly engaged by the armed forces there. While Bumblebee alone is a match for the Humvees and small arms fire, the battle is quickly joined by a Decepticon who has followed Bumblebee to Earth. He is completely out matched and outgunned it is not long before Bumblebee is defeated and barely escapes with his life. It is here that he is “saved” by Charlie Watson (Hailee Steinfeld) who finds the battered and broken beetle in a junkyard on her birthday, and a deep bond between the two is formed.
Bumblebee does not disappoint in its amazing visuals. The robots are as big as ever, yet now retain a more familiar look. The story still has explosions, and epic one-on-one robot battles that fans of the Michael Bay franchise can enjoy, but it’s the deep and meaningful story where Bumblebee truly shines. Written by Christina Hodson (Shut In/Unforgetable) and Directed by Travis Knight (Kudo and the Two Strings/Paranorman) we are finally given a story with a plot that fans of the series can get behind and enjoy. It’s not to say that the story is perfect, there are still the occasional lines that fall into groan-worthy territory, but to say that Bumblebee surpasses the previous live action movies is an understatement.
You don’t have to be a fan (or have any familiarity at all) with the Transformer toys, cartoon, or live action movies to enjoy it. However, for those who have been fortunate (or unfortunate) to experience them all will appreciate the subtle nods to previous films. The audience clapped and cheered when Stan Bush’s well-known Transformer song The Touch exploded on screen. Sure, it’s a spoiler, but for those who are still reluctant to see it based on previous films, maybe it’s exactly what’s needed. The film is littered with such nods and die-hard Transformer fans are in for a real treat.
The acting in the film is top-notch, not only by Hailee Steinfeld and Jorge Lendeborg Jr who are the main human characters, but by the supporting characters as well. John Cena brings his witty one-liners and Peter Cullen once again reprises his role of the now infamous Optimus Prime. For a movie that seems more at home as a summer blockbuster, it carries with it a tremendous amount of heart. Even Bumblebee who rarely utters a word throughout the entire film, brings out emotion in his facial expressions, or movements.
I’ll admit that going into Bumblebee I had my reservations and for those who have been burned by previous iterations of the series it’s a completely understandable concern. I’ll say it here though, Bumblebee is a terrific Transformers movie, easily on-par with the animated film, which to date had been the only Transformer movie worth talking about. Fans of the franchise will not be disappointed, and probably like myself, will be naming the numerous Transformers on the screen, by how they look…not by what they are called. In the famous words of Optimus Prime…Autobots Roll-out, and go see Bumblebee, coming to theaters on December 21st.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020) in Movies
Oct 24, 2020
The epic ensemble cast (1 more)
The direction from Aaron Sorkin
“Trial” is a less wordy triumph for Sorkin
So, "The Trial of the Chicago 7" is one which I was unfortunately unable to catch on its short "Oscar-nom" cinema release, but is now on Netflix. And boy, for older viewers who prefer historical drama over wham-bam action, this is definitely worth the watch.
I know a decent bit of 20th century history, but this is a story I knew nothing about. At the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, anti-Vietnam protests resulted in a violent and brutal confrontation with the police. Eight of the ring-leaders were rounded up and charged with inciting the violence. What happens in the court with the eight convicted men, in front of an old and partisan judge (the wonderful Frank Langella), is simply amazing.
There's a nice wiki article on the history you can look up. But its worth watching the movie blind, since it's a great rollercoaster ride.
If you read my blog regularly, you'll know that one of my favourite of the awards in award season is the "Ensemble Cast" award from the Screen Actor's Guild (SAG). I think a good measure of which movies might be good candidates for this award is when you find it difficult to single out particular actors for an individual award when they all work so well together. For this is a cast to die for:
- Sacha Baron Cohen, as Abbie Hoffman: an intelligent 'straight' role, poles apart from Borat and Bruno, that he delivers on 100%;
- Jeremy Strong as Hoffman's buddy Jerry Rubin, doing an enormously entertaining turn;
- Eddie Redmayne as the apparently 'sensible one' Tom Hayden. A bit similar to his role in "Les Miserables", but diving off in a different direction at a key point;
- John Carroll Lynch as the genuine 'boy scout' David Dellinger, so good in "The Founder" and here as the only family man under the judgmental stare of his wife and son;
- Yahya Abdul-Mateen II as Black Panther member Bobby Seale - the "minus 1" from the title - in an astonishingly powerful performance;
- Joseph Gordon-Levitt as the prosecutor Richard Schultz - always quietly dependable;
- And the fantastic Mark Rylance as the defense attorney William Kunstler. I appreciate I am having a tendency to gush in this review, but Rylance expresses such a range of frustration and disgust here that his performance is nothing short of electrifying.
There's also a cracking cameo from Michael Keaton playing the former US Attorney General, Ramsey Clark.
I would think that any of these performances might be Oscar-worthy (somewhere in the Actor/Supporting Actor categories) but my personal choices would be Rylance for Best Actor and Baron Cohen and Langella for Best Supporting Actor nods.
One of my issues with the scripts of Aaron Sorkin is that they tend to be overly dense and wordy. In epic TV like "The West Wing" he could spread the dialogue over a whole series, but in a feature film it can become very dense and verbose. I found that in both of his last two films - "Molly's Game" and "Steve Jobs".
Here, in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", even though there's a lot of speechifying, to me it never felt over the top. Although an epic courtroom drama (akin to his debut script "A Few Good Men") the characters are given time to breath between the lines. And many of those lines are real zingers, particularly out of the mouth of stand-up anarchist Abbie Hoffman (Sacha Baron Cohen).
Aside from the script being a zinger, the direction here from Aaron Sorkin is also top-notch. If you thought a courtroom drama was going to be static and boring, think again. The camera never rests, and inserted flashbacks (excellent film editing from Alan Baumgarten) maintain the momentum of the story.
Overall, this is a movie tour-de-force from Sorkin, and a fantastic watch. Could this be a writing/directing double Oscar nom for Sorkin?
(For the full graphical review, check out the bob the movie man review here - https://rb.gy/y6bxtf . Thanks.)
I know a decent bit of 20th century history, but this is a story I knew nothing about. At the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, anti-Vietnam protests resulted in a violent and brutal confrontation with the police. Eight of the ring-leaders were rounded up and charged with inciting the violence. What happens in the court with the eight convicted men, in front of an old and partisan judge (the wonderful Frank Langella), is simply amazing.
There's a nice wiki article on the history you can look up. But its worth watching the movie blind, since it's a great rollercoaster ride.
If you read my blog regularly, you'll know that one of my favourite of the awards in award season is the "Ensemble Cast" award from the Screen Actor's Guild (SAG). I think a good measure of which movies might be good candidates for this award is when you find it difficult to single out particular actors for an individual award when they all work so well together. For this is a cast to die for:
- Sacha Baron Cohen, as Abbie Hoffman: an intelligent 'straight' role, poles apart from Borat and Bruno, that he delivers on 100%;
- Jeremy Strong as Hoffman's buddy Jerry Rubin, doing an enormously entertaining turn;
- Eddie Redmayne as the apparently 'sensible one' Tom Hayden. A bit similar to his role in "Les Miserables", but diving off in a different direction at a key point;
- John Carroll Lynch as the genuine 'boy scout' David Dellinger, so good in "The Founder" and here as the only family man under the judgmental stare of his wife and son;
- Yahya Abdul-Mateen II as Black Panther member Bobby Seale - the "minus 1" from the title - in an astonishingly powerful performance;
- Joseph Gordon-Levitt as the prosecutor Richard Schultz - always quietly dependable;
- And the fantastic Mark Rylance as the defense attorney William Kunstler. I appreciate I am having a tendency to gush in this review, but Rylance expresses such a range of frustration and disgust here that his performance is nothing short of electrifying.
There's also a cracking cameo from Michael Keaton playing the former US Attorney General, Ramsey Clark.
I would think that any of these performances might be Oscar-worthy (somewhere in the Actor/Supporting Actor categories) but my personal choices would be Rylance for Best Actor and Baron Cohen and Langella for Best Supporting Actor nods.
One of my issues with the scripts of Aaron Sorkin is that they tend to be overly dense and wordy. In epic TV like "The West Wing" he could spread the dialogue over a whole series, but in a feature film it can become very dense and verbose. I found that in both of his last two films - "Molly's Game" and "Steve Jobs".
Here, in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", even though there's a lot of speechifying, to me it never felt over the top. Although an epic courtroom drama (akin to his debut script "A Few Good Men") the characters are given time to breath between the lines. And many of those lines are real zingers, particularly out of the mouth of stand-up anarchist Abbie Hoffman (Sacha Baron Cohen).
Aside from the script being a zinger, the direction here from Aaron Sorkin is also top-notch. If you thought a courtroom drama was going to be static and boring, think again. The camera never rests, and inserted flashbacks (excellent film editing from Alan Baumgarten) maintain the momentum of the story.
Overall, this is a movie tour-de-force from Sorkin, and a fantastic watch. Could this be a writing/directing double Oscar nom for Sorkin?
(For the full graphical review, check out the bob the movie man review here - https://rb.gy/y6bxtf . Thanks.)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Halloween (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
“He’s waited for me; I’ve waited for him”.
A blood-soaked history.
There’s such a familiarity with the content of these films that it’s difficult to put yourself back in 1978 for Jamie Lee Curtis‘s original battle with Michael Myers when the teen-slasher genre was in its infancy. Arguably “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” four years earlier booted the 70’s/80’s genre; but thanks to its huge success John Carpenter’s “Halloween” opened the flood-gates… or should I say, blood-gates.
The plot.
40 years after the terrifying events of Halloween night in Haddonfield, Illinois, Michael Myers is still mute and incarcerated in a psychiatric unit being studied by Dr Sartain (Haluk Bilginer). He is joined by two investigative journalists – Aaron Korey (Jefferson Hall) and Dana Haines (Basingstoke’s-own Rhian Rees: “Where are your loos?”… classic!). They are keen to reunite Myers with his nemesis Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) to watch the fireworks.
Strode is unfortunately damaged goods: still mentally traumatised and with failed marriages and a child taken into care, she lives in a fortified home in the middle of the woods. But she knows she has a date with destiny. As Halloween 2018 approaches, an ‘incident’ puts Myers on a collision course with Haddonfield’s teenage population all over again.
The turns.
Wow… you forget what an effective actress Jamie Lee Curtis is and here she absolutely owns every single scene she’s in, bringing enormous energy to the screen as the paranoid but ever-prepared hunter-in-waiting. The original Halloween was Lee Curtis’s movie debut and the film that made her a household name, and it almost feels like this is a passion-project for her to say “thanks for all the fish” for her career. Impressive.
As her eye-rolling daughter, Judy Greer rather pales in comparison (I found her character is a bit whiny and annoying), but the acting stakes pick up again with Andi Matichak as the granddaughter Allyson.
Of the other teens, Virginia Gardner is particularly effective as Vicky: the cute “favourite” babysitter who you can’t help but empathise with.
The review.
It’s very easy to make a very bad slasher movie, but this isn’t such a movie. Although having a wonderfully retro feel (when is the last time you saw “traditional” opening titles like this?) and despite mining every horror cliché known to man (ALWAYS look in the back seat when you get in a car!) it’s all obviously been done with loving care by the director David Gordon Green.
Above all, the director knows that what’s more scary than seeing violent murders is what your imagination can visualise happening off-screen. Don’t get me wrong, there is some SERIOUS gore meted out, with a few ‘cover your eyes’ moments. However, a good proportion of the violence is not shown, and very effective that is too, supported by Carpenter’s classic and insistent theme and some kick-ass foley work to add spice to your imagination!
The script (by the writing team of David Gordon Green, Danny McBride and Jeff Fradley) also wickedly plays with your darkest fear of where the plot *could* go if it wanted to: in a brilliant piece of misdirection (you’ll know the scene) your “OMG surely not” nerves twang and then un-twang with relief.
The script also works well to help you care about the teens on the menu, in much the same way as “Jaws” did with the tourists to Amity Beach.
Where the plot nearly lost me was in a rather daft twist before the final reel (which actually made more sense of what happened in the first reel, but was still hugely improbable). The ship rights itself fairly quickly (if messily) and normal order is resumed for the finale it deserves.
Final thoughts.
I’m not really a “horror nut” but this was popcorn horror of the best sort and I enjoyed it. Reverential to the original classic, it made for some entertaining reactions in the sparsely populated showing I attended: I imagine if seen in a packed auditorium on a Saturday night (or perhaps tomorrow night!) it would literally be a scream.
One’s thing for sure: when I got into my car in the dark cinema car park, I did take a sneaky look into the back seat!
There’s such a familiarity with the content of these films that it’s difficult to put yourself back in 1978 for Jamie Lee Curtis‘s original battle with Michael Myers when the teen-slasher genre was in its infancy. Arguably “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” four years earlier booted the 70’s/80’s genre; but thanks to its huge success John Carpenter’s “Halloween” opened the flood-gates… or should I say, blood-gates.
The plot.
40 years after the terrifying events of Halloween night in Haddonfield, Illinois, Michael Myers is still mute and incarcerated in a psychiatric unit being studied by Dr Sartain (Haluk Bilginer). He is joined by two investigative journalists – Aaron Korey (Jefferson Hall) and Dana Haines (Basingstoke’s-own Rhian Rees: “Where are your loos?”… classic!). They are keen to reunite Myers with his nemesis Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) to watch the fireworks.
Strode is unfortunately damaged goods: still mentally traumatised and with failed marriages and a child taken into care, she lives in a fortified home in the middle of the woods. But she knows she has a date with destiny. As Halloween 2018 approaches, an ‘incident’ puts Myers on a collision course with Haddonfield’s teenage population all over again.
The turns.
Wow… you forget what an effective actress Jamie Lee Curtis is and here she absolutely owns every single scene she’s in, bringing enormous energy to the screen as the paranoid but ever-prepared hunter-in-waiting. The original Halloween was Lee Curtis’s movie debut and the film that made her a household name, and it almost feels like this is a passion-project for her to say “thanks for all the fish” for her career. Impressive.
As her eye-rolling daughter, Judy Greer rather pales in comparison (I found her character is a bit whiny and annoying), but the acting stakes pick up again with Andi Matichak as the granddaughter Allyson.
Of the other teens, Virginia Gardner is particularly effective as Vicky: the cute “favourite” babysitter who you can’t help but empathise with.
The review.
It’s very easy to make a very bad slasher movie, but this isn’t such a movie. Although having a wonderfully retro feel (when is the last time you saw “traditional” opening titles like this?) and despite mining every horror cliché known to man (ALWAYS look in the back seat when you get in a car!) it’s all obviously been done with loving care by the director David Gordon Green.
Above all, the director knows that what’s more scary than seeing violent murders is what your imagination can visualise happening off-screen. Don’t get me wrong, there is some SERIOUS gore meted out, with a few ‘cover your eyes’ moments. However, a good proportion of the violence is not shown, and very effective that is too, supported by Carpenter’s classic and insistent theme and some kick-ass foley work to add spice to your imagination!
The script (by the writing team of David Gordon Green, Danny McBride and Jeff Fradley) also wickedly plays with your darkest fear of where the plot *could* go if it wanted to: in a brilliant piece of misdirection (you’ll know the scene) your “OMG surely not” nerves twang and then un-twang with relief.
The script also works well to help you care about the teens on the menu, in much the same way as “Jaws” did with the tourists to Amity Beach.
Where the plot nearly lost me was in a rather daft twist before the final reel (which actually made more sense of what happened in the first reel, but was still hugely improbable). The ship rights itself fairly quickly (if messily) and normal order is resumed for the finale it deserves.
Final thoughts.
I’m not really a “horror nut” but this was popcorn horror of the best sort and I enjoyed it. Reverential to the original classic, it made for some entertaining reactions in the sparsely populated showing I attended: I imagine if seen in a packed auditorium on a Saturday night (or perhaps tomorrow night!) it would literally be a scream.
One’s thing for sure: when I got into my car in the dark cinema car park, I did take a sneaky look into the back seat!
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Red Joan (2018) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
There are some films that just stop me in my tracks, not because they're good or bad, but because they're so mediocre. I watched this two weeks ago and I've sat down to try and write this review about 8 times, each time I've ended up barely writing a sentence before giving up.
The film is split between present and past, this means that there's very little Dench despite what we're led to believe in the trailer. Old Joan doesn't get much of a chance to do anything other than be old, when she does get the chance to do something else it is effective but far too rare.
When the whole story relies so heavily on stories from the past I was surprised that they didn't use more of a storytelling idea. You don't see any of the evidence that they have in the modern case, we're just propelled back into Joan's memories. This made for a very easy leap from the interview room to the past. Joan was there telling her story so the fact they didn't use this opportunity to have her telling a story that spills over into the flashbacks as a voiceover seems like a rather large missed opportunity. It also might have helped form a bigger connection between the two versions of the main character and allowed us a better connection with her.
Dench was definitely not used to the best effect. I'd expect Joan in her old age to still have some of the pep from her youth about her, but there seemed to be few similarities between the two incarnations. I think I enjoyed Sophie Cookson as young Joan, but again, it wasn't something I was wowed about.
The whole production erred too much on the side of relationships rather than the espionage. I certainly think it could have stood up to having something a bit grittier in it. As it was it felt very much like a TV movie, and I possibly would have been more interested in it had it been a TV movie rather than a general release. Now I said that I feel it's completely mad that I have different expectations from the two areas for film releases.
Red Joan had very little that stood out for me, there were only two moments that shone. Tom Hughes as Leo giving his speech before meeting Joan, the reaction of the crowd to him was tremendous and overall the scene worked well. Then there's Ben Miles as Joan's son, Nick. He isn't bad in any of his scenes but right at the end of the film when he stands with his mother I was actually moved. The first of these scenes made me think there was hope for the film, the second sadly came too late to make a difference to the whole thing.
Everything about Red Joan was just okay in the end. When someone asked me about it my response was a shrug and the comment "it was a film". Coming from me that generally means the film will be forgotten very quickly.
I wish there was more to say about it. Ultimately I think I would have had more enjoyment out of researching the story this was loosely based on.
What you should do
This isn't one I'd recommend, the moments that are interesting and satisfying to watch do not outweigh the mediocre. Red Joan is something I would say is more interesting as non-fiction than fiction.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
One thing from the movie that I feel we should all take as a top life tip is that men are easily scared by sanitary products, a very handy thing to remember.
The film is split between present and past, this means that there's very little Dench despite what we're led to believe in the trailer. Old Joan doesn't get much of a chance to do anything other than be old, when she does get the chance to do something else it is effective but far too rare.
When the whole story relies so heavily on stories from the past I was surprised that they didn't use more of a storytelling idea. You don't see any of the evidence that they have in the modern case, we're just propelled back into Joan's memories. This made for a very easy leap from the interview room to the past. Joan was there telling her story so the fact they didn't use this opportunity to have her telling a story that spills over into the flashbacks as a voiceover seems like a rather large missed opportunity. It also might have helped form a bigger connection between the two versions of the main character and allowed us a better connection with her.
Dench was definitely not used to the best effect. I'd expect Joan in her old age to still have some of the pep from her youth about her, but there seemed to be few similarities between the two incarnations. I think I enjoyed Sophie Cookson as young Joan, but again, it wasn't something I was wowed about.
The whole production erred too much on the side of relationships rather than the espionage. I certainly think it could have stood up to having something a bit grittier in it. As it was it felt very much like a TV movie, and I possibly would have been more interested in it had it been a TV movie rather than a general release. Now I said that I feel it's completely mad that I have different expectations from the two areas for film releases.
Red Joan had very little that stood out for me, there were only two moments that shone. Tom Hughes as Leo giving his speech before meeting Joan, the reaction of the crowd to him was tremendous and overall the scene worked well. Then there's Ben Miles as Joan's son, Nick. He isn't bad in any of his scenes but right at the end of the film when he stands with his mother I was actually moved. The first of these scenes made me think there was hope for the film, the second sadly came too late to make a difference to the whole thing.
Everything about Red Joan was just okay in the end. When someone asked me about it my response was a shrug and the comment "it was a film". Coming from me that generally means the film will be forgotten very quickly.
I wish there was more to say about it. Ultimately I think I would have had more enjoyment out of researching the story this was loosely based on.
What you should do
This isn't one I'd recommend, the moments that are interesting and satisfying to watch do not outweigh the mediocre. Red Joan is something I would say is more interesting as non-fiction than fiction.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
One thing from the movie that I feel we should all take as a top life tip is that men are easily scared by sanitary products, a very handy thing to remember.
Erika (17789 KP) rated X-Men: Dark Phoenix (2019) in Movies
Jun 8, 2019 (Updated Jun 8, 2019)
Better than Last Stand
Last Stand didn't exactly set a high bar for the Dark Phoenix story line, and luckily, this film surpassed it. To be honest, the only reason they got my butt in a seat was for Michael Fassbender and James McAvoy.
The story goes the way you expect it to go. I'm not completely convinced Sophie Turner is a good actress. I'm also glad that they killed Raven (not a spoiler, it's common knowledge), though it wasn't quick enough in my opinion.
I'm unsure as to why Jessica Chastain was cast (or why she's ever cast in ANYTHING); her 'villain' was completely useless. The movie didn't even need that subplot, they would have had a better movie without it and her. Pro-tip: don't introduce new characters in the last film of a saga because no one will care enough about them. Seriously, I felt like my time was wasted having to watch her.
I will say, this film FINALLY gave us good scenes with the X-Men kicking some ass, all using their unique powers. They really gave Nicholas Hoult something to do, and he was great!
Finally, the reason I was there, McFassy. This was one of McAvoy's best Professor X performances, he wasn't black or white, he was more gray and it really worked. They didn't give Magneto much to do, but I loved that they introduced Genosha. This will be below the 'see more' line, so, the best flexing his power scene was when he lifted the subway through the concrete, it was almost on par with the submarine being lifted out of the sea in First Class, and pulling up the Auschwitz gate in Apocalypse.
The last scene shows the entire new saga go first circle. Of course, it's very Dark Knight Rises, but it was perfect. I'm only rating it a 6 because of that.
The story goes the way you expect it to go. I'm not completely convinced Sophie Turner is a good actress. I'm also glad that they killed Raven (not a spoiler, it's common knowledge), though it wasn't quick enough in my opinion.
I'm unsure as to why Jessica Chastain was cast (or why she's ever cast in ANYTHING); her 'villain' was completely useless. The movie didn't even need that subplot, they would have had a better movie without it and her. Pro-tip: don't introduce new characters in the last film of a saga because no one will care enough about them. Seriously, I felt like my time was wasted having to watch her.
I will say, this film FINALLY gave us good scenes with the X-Men kicking some ass, all using their unique powers. They really gave Nicholas Hoult something to do, and he was great!
Finally, the reason I was there, McFassy. This was one of McAvoy's best Professor X performances, he wasn't black or white, he was more gray and it really worked. They didn't give Magneto much to do, but I loved that they introduced Genosha. This will be below the 'see more' line, so, the best flexing his power scene was when he lifted the subway through the concrete, it was almost on par with the submarine being lifted out of the sea in First Class, and pulling up the Auschwitz gate in Apocalypse.
The last scene shows the entire new saga go first circle. Of course, it's very Dark Knight Rises, but it was perfect. I'm only rating it a 6 because of that.
Lumos (380 KP) rated The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in Books
Jan 25, 2018
Not as good as I was expecting.
I was very excited to read Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. I even recommended it for this month's book club read. I know it is such an iconic book and so many great quotes and scenes come from it (I remember watching the movie when it came out and I was obsessed with the "So Long and Thanks for all the Fish" song that the dolphins sing... I even had it on a CD) but I just felt as though I was missing something while I was reading through it. Perhaps, I am just not a fan of that sort of dry... British sarcasm.
I have been trying to push myself beyond my typical genre. Science Fiction is generally not one of my favorite, but I thought I would give this book a try since it has been so well received for generations. I’m sure that has to do with it, but I just found myself zoning out when I read. Douglas Adams’ writing style was just a little too… over the top for me. It seemed like the author was just trying to come up with some of the most bizarre names and titles for his characters and locations and it made it hard for me to slog through.
I was ashamed to admit my dislike for the book at book club but I was quick to find that I am not alone in my feelings. None of us particularly cared for the book. Perhaps it is a “millennial” thing? We had also all seen the movie previously and that could have clouded our vision, perhaps when it came to the book.
All that being said, however, I did find some parts of the book a little humorous. I smiled at parts and chuckled a little, but it wasn’t really enough to save the book in my eyes.
I have been trying to push myself beyond my typical genre. Science Fiction is generally not one of my favorite, but I thought I would give this book a try since it has been so well received for generations. I’m sure that has to do with it, but I just found myself zoning out when I read. Douglas Adams’ writing style was just a little too… over the top for me. It seemed like the author was just trying to come up with some of the most bizarre names and titles for his characters and locations and it made it hard for me to slog through.
I was ashamed to admit my dislike for the book at book club but I was quick to find that I am not alone in my feelings. None of us particularly cared for the book. Perhaps it is a “millennial” thing? We had also all seen the movie previously and that could have clouded our vision, perhaps when it came to the book.
All that being said, however, I did find some parts of the book a little humorous. I smiled at parts and chuckled a little, but it wasn’t really enough to save the book in my eyes.
Nick Smallwood (0 KP) rated Black Panther (2018) in Movies
Mar 10, 2018
Black Panther was a great movie with very few negatives to it. Marvel movies being what they are, there are definitely similarities to be drawn between BP and other recent MCU entries, mostly along the lines of Spider-Man: Homecoming and Thor: Ragnarok.
Ryan Coogler very adeptly introduces a brand new culture, a brand new nation, to the Marvel Universe, finally pulling back the veil on Wakanda itself after many hints and Easter eggs.
Fresh from his appearance in Captain America: Civil War, which is recapped very briefly in the beginning of the film, Black Panther comes home to be declared King after a quick action scene that shows Black Panther in action, shot VERY well while maintaining the Marvel humor shown in Ragnarok. "Don't freeze."
As the movie progresses and we're introduced to Michael B. Jordan's villain of the film, we are given an empathetic villain we can eventually sympathize with, albeit knowing full and well that he is still the bad guy who needs to be foiled.
Some character highlights of the film include Princess Shuri, a welcome addition to the MCU, the return of Ulysses Claue from Avengers: Age of Ultron and Everett Ross from Captain America: Civil War, and newcomer M'Baku, who was very tastefully adapted for the film without calling him Man-Ape.
The action scenes were well done, Wakanda showed cultural depth, the plot was well-developed and every scene that wasn't self-explained was eventually paid off later on.
This being a comic book film, it translated Wakanda well, and shows Marvel has found their groove. The distractions I have are few and far between, mostly just stemming from Killmonger's use of a Black Panther suit (Iron Monger, The Abomination, The Red Skull, and Kaecillius all come to mind as mirrored versions of the heroes) and some spotty pacing between some scenes.
Also.
Didn't expect it, didn't see it in trailers, so mild spoilers, but.
Battle Rhinos.
Awesome.
Ryan Coogler very adeptly introduces a brand new culture, a brand new nation, to the Marvel Universe, finally pulling back the veil on Wakanda itself after many hints and Easter eggs.
Fresh from his appearance in Captain America: Civil War, which is recapped very briefly in the beginning of the film, Black Panther comes home to be declared King after a quick action scene that shows Black Panther in action, shot VERY well while maintaining the Marvel humor shown in Ragnarok. "Don't freeze."
As the movie progresses and we're introduced to Michael B. Jordan's villain of the film, we are given an empathetic villain we can eventually sympathize with, albeit knowing full and well that he is still the bad guy who needs to be foiled.
Some character highlights of the film include Princess Shuri, a welcome addition to the MCU, the return of Ulysses Claue from Avengers: Age of Ultron and Everett Ross from Captain America: Civil War, and newcomer M'Baku, who was very tastefully adapted for the film without calling him Man-Ape.
The action scenes were well done, Wakanda showed cultural depth, the plot was well-developed and every scene that wasn't self-explained was eventually paid off later on.
This being a comic book film, it translated Wakanda well, and shows Marvel has found their groove. The distractions I have are few and far between, mostly just stemming from Killmonger's use of a Black Panther suit (Iron Monger, The Abomination, The Red Skull, and Kaecillius all come to mind as mirrored versions of the heroes) and some spotty pacing between some scenes.
Also.
Didn't expect it, didn't see it in trailers, so mild spoilers, but.
Battle Rhinos.
Awesome.
James P. Sumner (65 KP) rated Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) in Movies
Jul 10, 2019
The MCU delivers again!
Tom Holland reprises his role as the friendly neighbourhood Spiderman in this enjoyable final entry in the MCU's third phase.
Picking up where Avengers: Endgame left off, the world is slowly getting back on its feet after Thanos' handiwork was reversed. Peter Parker is on a school trip across Europe when huge Elemental enemies attack. He's unprepared, but the day is saved by Mysterio - a superhero from an alternate universe.
So far, so Marvel.
Twists and turns follow, with plenty of action throughout. The storyline reminded me of Iron Man 3 in some ways, in terms of it's structure and style. The visuals were impressive as always. The acting was spot-on, with Happy returning in a comic relief/mentor role that worked really well alongside the hero.
The great thing about all the Marvel movies is how they distinguish themselves from each other. Aside from being just comic book movies, each individual series has its own themes and genre. Guardians of the Galaxy is sci-fi/action/comedy, Captain America is more political/action, Thor is fantasy, etc... Spiderman fills the gap for a teen drama, appealing to the younger audience by giving them the angst and romance they crave and relate to. The relationship between Peter and MJ is explored in greater detail here, and their on-screen awkward is fun to watch, but also believable - largely, I suspect, due to the pair's off-screen friendship. Their chemistry is brilliant and really adds to the movie.
As with all Marvel movies, it ain't over 'til it's over. The mid-credits scene does a truly fantastic job of setting up the third movie in the series, while the post-credits scene teases at the future of the wider MCU.
Marvel has had numerous hits with only a small handful of near-misses. Spiderman: Far From Home is a resounding hit and not to be missed!
Picking up where Avengers: Endgame left off, the world is slowly getting back on its feet after Thanos' handiwork was reversed. Peter Parker is on a school trip across Europe when huge Elemental enemies attack. He's unprepared, but the day is saved by Mysterio - a superhero from an alternate universe.
So far, so Marvel.
Twists and turns follow, with plenty of action throughout. The storyline reminded me of Iron Man 3 in some ways, in terms of it's structure and style. The visuals were impressive as always. The acting was spot-on, with Happy returning in a comic relief/mentor role that worked really well alongside the hero.
The great thing about all the Marvel movies is how they distinguish themselves from each other. Aside from being just comic book movies, each individual series has its own themes and genre. Guardians of the Galaxy is sci-fi/action/comedy, Captain America is more political/action, Thor is fantasy, etc... Spiderman fills the gap for a teen drama, appealing to the younger audience by giving them the angst and romance they crave and relate to. The relationship between Peter and MJ is explored in greater detail here, and their on-screen awkward is fun to watch, but also believable - largely, I suspect, due to the pair's off-screen friendship. Their chemistry is brilliant and really adds to the movie.
As with all Marvel movies, it ain't over 'til it's over. The mid-credits scene does a truly fantastic job of setting up the third movie in the series, while the post-credits scene teases at the future of the wider MCU.
Marvel has had numerous hits with only a small handful of near-misses. Spiderman: Far From Home is a resounding hit and not to be missed!