Search
Search results
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated When Will I Be Loved (2004) in Movies
Jul 4, 2021 (Updated Jul 4, 2021)
"𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘵𝘭𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘥𝘺'𝘴 𝘨𝘪𝘳𝘭, 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘤𝘬 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨? 𝘏𝘰𝘸 𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘰𝘬𝘦 𝘮𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴!"
A deeply, *deeply* misogynistic, artsy-fartsy disaster of stratospheric proportions where every slimebag man has some idiotic 'philosophical' defense as to why they need to manipulate this woman into letting them fuck her - made by a known serial sexual predator. I felt complicit for even entertaining the idea to watch such dogshit, like I needed a military-grade chemical shower after seeing it. Or to at least bleach my eyes. Might be the worst movie I've ever seen, if not then certainly somewhere down in the bottom 5 or 10. Written, edited, and shot like a bad high school student project with this unbearable non-story which rips off - of all movies - 𝘐𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘢𝘭 (by name, in fact)? Neve Campbell has sex with another women (without showing any skin of course) behind a transparent mesh curtain scored to a shitty Bach cover - imagine if that episode from "South Park" where the people smelled their own farts was real and you'd get this depth-free piece of shit. As cynical, uninvolved, and up-its-own-ass as 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘋𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘴 is, at least that one actually went through with its promise of provocation. 𝘍𝘪𝘧𝘵𝘺 𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘎𝘳𝘦𝘺 is unironically more provocative than this. Effectively just a series of bullshit conversations that go nowhere and shit-tier sex scenes more poorly thrown together than that one from Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part I. And then it also features horrible ass songs on the soundtrack because of course it does. One of the rare movies to bag Roger Ebert's highest rating... which was also 'earned' by fellow turds 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘯 𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘴 and 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘈𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘖𝘯𝘦 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 (which - awful as they are - are masterpieces compared to this) so it shows how much that distinction is worth lmao. Shoot me now.
A deeply, *deeply* misogynistic, artsy-fartsy disaster of stratospheric proportions where every slimebag man has some idiotic 'philosophical' defense as to why they need to manipulate this woman into letting them fuck her - made by a known serial sexual predator. I felt complicit for even entertaining the idea to watch such dogshit, like I needed a military-grade chemical shower after seeing it. Or to at least bleach my eyes. Might be the worst movie I've ever seen, if not then certainly somewhere down in the bottom 5 or 10. Written, edited, and shot like a bad high school student project with this unbearable non-story which rips off - of all movies - 𝘐𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘢𝘭 (by name, in fact)? Neve Campbell has sex with another women (without showing any skin of course) behind a transparent mesh curtain scored to a shitty Bach cover - imagine if that episode from "South Park" where the people smelled their own farts was real and you'd get this depth-free piece of shit. As cynical, uninvolved, and up-its-own-ass as 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘋𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘴 is, at least that one actually went through with its promise of provocation. 𝘍𝘪𝘧𝘵𝘺 𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘎𝘳𝘦𝘺 is unironically more provocative than this. Effectively just a series of bullshit conversations that go nowhere and shit-tier sex scenes more poorly thrown together than that one from Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part I. And then it also features horrible ass songs on the soundtrack because of course it does. One of the rare movies to bag Roger Ebert's highest rating... which was also 'earned' by fellow turds 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘯 𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘴 and 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘈𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘖𝘯𝘦 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 (which - awful as they are - are masterpieces compared to this) so it shows how much that distinction is worth lmao. Shoot me now.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Great Wall (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Exercising your Damons.
Millions of people watching the Oscars would have seen Jimmy Kimmel roasting poor Matt Damon as a part of their long running ‘feud’. At one point he points out that Matt gave up the leading role in “Manchester by the Sea” to star in a “Chinese ponytail movie” that “went on to lose $80 million at the box office”. “The Great Wall” is that movie!
So is it really that bad?
Well, it’s no “Manchester by the Sea” for sure. But I don’t think it’s quite the total turkey that critics have been labelling it as either. I went to see it on a Sunday afternoon, and approaching it as a matinee bit of frothy action is a good mental state to be in.
Matt Damon plays the ponytailed-wonder William, a European mercenary travelling in 11th Century China with his colleague Tovar (Pedro Pascal) in an attempt to determine the secrets of black powder – a secret well-guarded by the Chinese. Captured by the ‘New Order’ at the Great Wall and imprisoned there by General Shao (Hanyu Zhang), William earns the respect of Shao and his beautiful warrior second-in-command Lin Mae (Tian Jing) with his bowmanship. This is almost immediately put to use by the arrival (after 60 year’s absence – a funny thing, timing, isn’t it?) of hoards of vicious creatures called Taoties. (I thought they said Tauntauns initially, so was expecting some sort of Chinese/Star Wars crossover! But no.)
Taoties who scale the wall are defeated by William who poleaxes them. (This is an attempt at brilliant humour to anyone who has already seen the film – poleaxe…. get it? POLEaxe. Oh, never mind!) Despite being a mercenary at heart, William is torn between staying and helping Lin Mae fight the beasts and fleeing with Tovar, their new chum Ballard (Willem Dafoe) and their black powder loot. (I’m sure something about Lin Mae’s tight-fitting blue armour was influential in his decision).
This is an historic film in that although in recent years there has been cross-fertilization of Chinese actors into Western films for box-office reasons (for example, in the appalling “Independence Day: Resurgence” and the much better Damon vehicle “The Martian“) this was the first truly co-produced Chinese/Hollywood feature filmed entirely in China. It might also be the last given the film’s $150 million budget and the dismal box-office!
To start with some positives, you can rely on a Chinese-set film (the film location was Qingdao) to allow the use of an army of extras and – although a whole bunch of CGI was also no doubt used – some of the battles scenes are impressive. There is a stirring choral theme by Ramin Djawadi (best known for his TV themes for “Game of Thrones” and the brilliant “Westworld”) played over silk-screen painted end titles that just make for a beautiful combination. And Tian Jing as the heroine Lin Mae is not only stunningly good-looking but also injects some much needed acting talent into the cast, where most of those involved (including Damon himself) look like they would rather be somewhere else.
And some of the action scenes are rather fun in a ‘park your brain by the door’ sort of way, including (nonsensically) cute warrior girls high-diving off the wall on bungey ropes to near certain death. While the CGI monsters are of the (yawn) over-the-top LoTR variety, their ability to swarm like locusts at the Queen’s command is also quite entertainingly rendered.
Where the movie balloon comes crashing down to earth in flames though is with the story and the screenplay – all done by three different people each, which is NEVER a good sign.
The story (by Max Brooks (“World War Z”), Edward Zwick and Marshall Herskovitz (both on “The Last Samurai”) is plain nonsensical at times. No spoilers here, but the transition from “wall under siege” to “wall not under siege” gives the word ‘clunky’ a bad name. As another absurdity, the “New Order” seem amazed how William was able to slay one of the creatures (thanks to the poleaxing ‘McGuffin’ previously referenced) but then throughout the rest of the film he slays creatures left right and centre (McGuffin-less) through just the use of a spear or an arrow! Bonkers.
Things get worse when you add words to the actions. The screenplay by Carlo Bernard and Doug Miro (both “Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time”) and Tony Gilroy (Tony Gilroy? Surely not he of all the “Bourne” films and “Rogue One” fame? The very same!) has a reading age of about an 8 year old. It feels like it has been translated into Chinese and then back again to English with Google Translate. “Is that the best you can do?” asks Tovar to William at one point. I was thinking exactly the same thing.
The combination of the cinematography and the special effects have the unfortunate effect of giving the film the veneer of a video game, but this is one where your kid-brother has stolen the controls and refuses to give them back to you.
Having had the great thrill of visiting a section of The Great Wall near Beijing, I can confirm that it is an astonishing engineering masterpiece that has to be seen to be truly believed. It ranks as one of the genuine wonders of the world. The same can not be said of this movie. Early teens might enjoy it as a mindless action flick. But otherwise best avoided until it emerges on a raining Sunday afternoon on the TV.
So is it really that bad?
Well, it’s no “Manchester by the Sea” for sure. But I don’t think it’s quite the total turkey that critics have been labelling it as either. I went to see it on a Sunday afternoon, and approaching it as a matinee bit of frothy action is a good mental state to be in.
Matt Damon plays the ponytailed-wonder William, a European mercenary travelling in 11th Century China with his colleague Tovar (Pedro Pascal) in an attempt to determine the secrets of black powder – a secret well-guarded by the Chinese. Captured by the ‘New Order’ at the Great Wall and imprisoned there by General Shao (Hanyu Zhang), William earns the respect of Shao and his beautiful warrior second-in-command Lin Mae (Tian Jing) with his bowmanship. This is almost immediately put to use by the arrival (after 60 year’s absence – a funny thing, timing, isn’t it?) of hoards of vicious creatures called Taoties. (I thought they said Tauntauns initially, so was expecting some sort of Chinese/Star Wars crossover! But no.)
Taoties who scale the wall are defeated by William who poleaxes them. (This is an attempt at brilliant humour to anyone who has already seen the film – poleaxe…. get it? POLEaxe. Oh, never mind!) Despite being a mercenary at heart, William is torn between staying and helping Lin Mae fight the beasts and fleeing with Tovar, their new chum Ballard (Willem Dafoe) and their black powder loot. (I’m sure something about Lin Mae’s tight-fitting blue armour was influential in his decision).
This is an historic film in that although in recent years there has been cross-fertilization of Chinese actors into Western films for box-office reasons (for example, in the appalling “Independence Day: Resurgence” and the much better Damon vehicle “The Martian“) this was the first truly co-produced Chinese/Hollywood feature filmed entirely in China. It might also be the last given the film’s $150 million budget and the dismal box-office!
To start with some positives, you can rely on a Chinese-set film (the film location was Qingdao) to allow the use of an army of extras and – although a whole bunch of CGI was also no doubt used – some of the battles scenes are impressive. There is a stirring choral theme by Ramin Djawadi (best known for his TV themes for “Game of Thrones” and the brilliant “Westworld”) played over silk-screen painted end titles that just make for a beautiful combination. And Tian Jing as the heroine Lin Mae is not only stunningly good-looking but also injects some much needed acting talent into the cast, where most of those involved (including Damon himself) look like they would rather be somewhere else.
And some of the action scenes are rather fun in a ‘park your brain by the door’ sort of way, including (nonsensically) cute warrior girls high-diving off the wall on bungey ropes to near certain death. While the CGI monsters are of the (yawn) over-the-top LoTR variety, their ability to swarm like locusts at the Queen’s command is also quite entertainingly rendered.
Where the movie balloon comes crashing down to earth in flames though is with the story and the screenplay – all done by three different people each, which is NEVER a good sign.
The story (by Max Brooks (“World War Z”), Edward Zwick and Marshall Herskovitz (both on “The Last Samurai”) is plain nonsensical at times. No spoilers here, but the transition from “wall under siege” to “wall not under siege” gives the word ‘clunky’ a bad name. As another absurdity, the “New Order” seem amazed how William was able to slay one of the creatures (thanks to the poleaxing ‘McGuffin’ previously referenced) but then throughout the rest of the film he slays creatures left right and centre (McGuffin-less) through just the use of a spear or an arrow! Bonkers.
Things get worse when you add words to the actions. The screenplay by Carlo Bernard and Doug Miro (both “Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time”) and Tony Gilroy (Tony Gilroy? Surely not he of all the “Bourne” films and “Rogue One” fame? The very same!) has a reading age of about an 8 year old. It feels like it has been translated into Chinese and then back again to English with Google Translate. “Is that the best you can do?” asks Tovar to William at one point. I was thinking exactly the same thing.
The combination of the cinematography and the special effects have the unfortunate effect of giving the film the veneer of a video game, but this is one where your kid-brother has stolen the controls and refuses to give them back to you.
Having had the great thrill of visiting a section of The Great Wall near Beijing, I can confirm that it is an astonishing engineering masterpiece that has to be seen to be truly believed. It ranks as one of the genuine wonders of the world. The same can not be said of this movie. Early teens might enjoy it as a mindless action flick. But otherwise best avoided until it emerges on a raining Sunday afternoon on the TV.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Ready Player One (2018) in Movies
Mar 20, 2018
A dazzling, geeky feast for the eyes!
I don't really do books. In the last twenty years or so, I've probably only read one book from start to finish, and that book was Ready Player One. And I absolutely loved it, reading it pretty much non stop until I'd completed it. As anyone else who has read the book knows, there's a hell of a lot in there for someone to try and incorporate into any movie adaptation that gets undertaken, not to mention all the rights needing to be obtained for the vast wealth of famous characters, movies and video games that it features and recreates in such intricate geeky detail. Steven Spielberg is probably about a good a choice as any for tackling something like this though, and to say I was excited heading in to the preview screening of this would be a serious understatement.
The movie covers a lot of detail up front in a fairly brisk, but very effective introduction in order to set the scene. It's 2045, and our hero is Wade Watts, living high up in 'The Stacks', towers of trailers crudely stacked and held up together by metal beams in a densely populated urban area of Columbus. As Wade descends from his home, he passes his neighbours, many of whom are wearing some kind of VR headsets, involved in different kinds of online activity that we can't see. Wade tells us that at some point in the past people just stopped trying to fix lifes problems and learnt to just live with them instead. And to make things easier, they have the OASIS. The virtual world that his neighbours, and billions of people around the world, all connect to in order to escape the daily grind of the real world. In the OASIS you can be anyone you want to be, do anything you want to do. There are different worlds you can visit, and coins to be earned in order to upgrade your experience. Wade has all his equipment for connecting to the OASIS hidden away among the nearby piles of scrap cars, and when he puts on his headset, we are introduced to his online avatar, Parzival. He tells us about James Halliday, creator of the OASIS, who died five years ago. He left behind a message, informing the world that within the OASIS he'd hidden an Easter egg. Anyone who could find the three keys needed to unlock the door to that Easter egg, would inherit his entire fortune, and gain complete control of the OASIS. Since then, nobody has even got their hands on the first key. Nobody has their name up on the high score board. So... Ready Player One...
And so it kicks off, in dazzlingly glorious fashion, with a crazy multi-vehicle race through New York city in order to get to the finish line and grab the first key. It's like Mario Kart on steroids, with jumps and hazards throughout. Wrecking balls smashing the road, a T-Rex causing havoc and Kong jumping from building to building, smashing things up and taking players out of the game. But nobody can make it to the finish line. It's a fantastic, dizzy assault on the senses, and the first of many scenes where you find yourself frantically scouring the screen to see how many famous cars and characters you can spot. Parzival himself is driving a DeLorean, obviously. We're also introduced to fellow racer, and legend within the OASIS, Art3mis, who after being rescued by Parzival, becomes a close friend. Along with Art3mis, Parzival has a number of other close friends within the OASIS - Aech, Daito and Shoto, none of whom he has met in real life. As Parzival finds the first key, and begins sharing that knowledge with his friends in order to work together for the rest of the keys, they become known as the High Five, in recognition of their names being top of the scoreboard.
The bad guy of the movie is Nolan Sorrento, who used to work for Halliday. He, along with his army of employees, are out to try and take over the OASIS for monetary gain and will do whatever it takes in order to make that happen. When Sorrento discovers the real world identity of Parzival, things begin to get very difficult for the High Five who now have to struggle to not only find the keys first, but also evade capture in the real world.
I don't remember all of the details from the book, so I can't comment too much on what's been missed. But I do know that the puzzles surrounding the keys differ in the movie from those in the book. There are also some pretty big elements which don't feature in the book at all, but the main thing for me was that the overall spirit of the book definitely carries over to the movie. There is some occasional second half drag, but that's inevitable when there are so many prolonged moments of eye-popping visuals on display in-between. One thing I do remember well from the book is the final act, where Wade calls upon an army of OASIS users to help him and the high five fight Sorrento and his army in order to gain access to the final key. It's something I always imagined while reading as being absolutely epic if it were ever to be recreated on screen. Luckily, it is. Wow, just wow!! And once again, like with much of this movie overall, I sat there, wide eyed and with a big gormless geeky grin on my face.
The movie covers a lot of detail up front in a fairly brisk, but very effective introduction in order to set the scene. It's 2045, and our hero is Wade Watts, living high up in 'The Stacks', towers of trailers crudely stacked and held up together by metal beams in a densely populated urban area of Columbus. As Wade descends from his home, he passes his neighbours, many of whom are wearing some kind of VR headsets, involved in different kinds of online activity that we can't see. Wade tells us that at some point in the past people just stopped trying to fix lifes problems and learnt to just live with them instead. And to make things easier, they have the OASIS. The virtual world that his neighbours, and billions of people around the world, all connect to in order to escape the daily grind of the real world. In the OASIS you can be anyone you want to be, do anything you want to do. There are different worlds you can visit, and coins to be earned in order to upgrade your experience. Wade has all his equipment for connecting to the OASIS hidden away among the nearby piles of scrap cars, and when he puts on his headset, we are introduced to his online avatar, Parzival. He tells us about James Halliday, creator of the OASIS, who died five years ago. He left behind a message, informing the world that within the OASIS he'd hidden an Easter egg. Anyone who could find the three keys needed to unlock the door to that Easter egg, would inherit his entire fortune, and gain complete control of the OASIS. Since then, nobody has even got their hands on the first key. Nobody has their name up on the high score board. So... Ready Player One...
And so it kicks off, in dazzlingly glorious fashion, with a crazy multi-vehicle race through New York city in order to get to the finish line and grab the first key. It's like Mario Kart on steroids, with jumps and hazards throughout. Wrecking balls smashing the road, a T-Rex causing havoc and Kong jumping from building to building, smashing things up and taking players out of the game. But nobody can make it to the finish line. It's a fantastic, dizzy assault on the senses, and the first of many scenes where you find yourself frantically scouring the screen to see how many famous cars and characters you can spot. Parzival himself is driving a DeLorean, obviously. We're also introduced to fellow racer, and legend within the OASIS, Art3mis, who after being rescued by Parzival, becomes a close friend. Along with Art3mis, Parzival has a number of other close friends within the OASIS - Aech, Daito and Shoto, none of whom he has met in real life. As Parzival finds the first key, and begins sharing that knowledge with his friends in order to work together for the rest of the keys, they become known as the High Five, in recognition of their names being top of the scoreboard.
The bad guy of the movie is Nolan Sorrento, who used to work for Halliday. He, along with his army of employees, are out to try and take over the OASIS for monetary gain and will do whatever it takes in order to make that happen. When Sorrento discovers the real world identity of Parzival, things begin to get very difficult for the High Five who now have to struggle to not only find the keys first, but also evade capture in the real world.
I don't remember all of the details from the book, so I can't comment too much on what's been missed. But I do know that the puzzles surrounding the keys differ in the movie from those in the book. There are also some pretty big elements which don't feature in the book at all, but the main thing for me was that the overall spirit of the book definitely carries over to the movie. There is some occasional second half drag, but that's inevitable when there are so many prolonged moments of eye-popping visuals on display in-between. One thing I do remember well from the book is the final act, where Wade calls upon an army of OASIS users to help him and the high five fight Sorrento and his army in order to gain access to the final key. It's something I always imagined while reading as being absolutely epic if it were ever to be recreated on screen. Luckily, it is. Wow, just wow!! And once again, like with much of this movie overall, I sat there, wide eyed and with a big gormless geeky grin on my face.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Good Liar (2019) in Movies
Nov 9, 2019
Murder She Wrote
The good liar is creaky but enjoyable little movie that screams 80s British murder mystery Tv show and while its extreamly predictable theres enough twists to keep you entertained. Whats aparent right from the start is Ian Mckellen and Helen Mirren's on screen chemistry, the two are just fantastic to watch interacting with each other and really help to carry the entire film with thier acting skills alone. Sadly I really cant say the same about the rest of the cast most of whomb come across as stiff, lifeless souls with no personality making most of thier scenes dull and unitresting filler (russell toveys character especially). Plot wise its fine and actually tries some quite brave ideas for this kind of film taking the movie places I really didnt expect it to go. Trouble is the film feels caught between what it wants to be switching between grisly violent crime thriller back to tame old light hearted drama randomly without the two ever seeming connected. Also while ian mckellen is fantastic the film tries far to hard to make the viewer dislike him by using seemingly forced reasons eg showing him far to often randomly cursing profoudly, smoking, drinking or comitting a random out of place extreame act of violence its all very unnecisary and seems only there to hide a twist that comes later in the film. Music cues frustrate too cheaply placed into the film to tell us how we should be feeling during certain scenes but instead making the film feel outdated. Theres no real sense of nail biting tension either and while the story is fun to watch play out with no real danger, urgency or any griping scenes its all just one tone throughout. A big plot twist can also be seen coming right from the start too but thankfully theres enough twists and turns to make that not to much of a problem. All this being said I did have a good time with good liar the two leads clearly enjoyed working together and while the film is extreamly out dated as far as film making goes it will no doubt spark nostalgia and bring enjoyment to people that grew up with shows such a Poirot and Coloumbo.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Mary Queen of Scots (2018) in Movies
Jan 20, 2019
Mary (Saoirse Ronan), having lived in France where she was recently widowed, returns home to Scotland to claim her rightful place as queen. But she is not exactly welcomed with open arms in the world of men and when she also decides to set her sights on becoming successor to the crown of England, a power struggle ensues. Both at home, and with her cousin Queen Elizabeth I (Margot Robbie).
There's not very much that I enjoyed about this movie to be honest. An important and intriguing period in history, involving two extremely interesting and strong women, this should have been so much better. It tries to cover so much ground in its two hour runtime, barely focusing on any particular element for very long. Vast numbers of characters are introduced, none of which are given enough time for you to feel any kind of interest or emotional investment in and at times it drastically shifts between varying tones with confusing editing.
What the movie does manage to portray is that all the men are complete bastards. Scheming, plotting and murdering, all for their own gains. It's sad that, aside from the murdering (I hope), not much has changed in modern politics.
Both female leads, especially Saoirse, are actually very good in this, despite everything, and probably the best scene in the movie is when they meet alone towards the end (something which didn't actually happen in real life!). Sadly though, I was fidgeting in my seat up until that point just waiting for it to end.
There's not very much that I enjoyed about this movie to be honest. An important and intriguing period in history, involving two extremely interesting and strong women, this should have been so much better. It tries to cover so much ground in its two hour runtime, barely focusing on any particular element for very long. Vast numbers of characters are introduced, none of which are given enough time for you to feel any kind of interest or emotional investment in and at times it drastically shifts between varying tones with confusing editing.
What the movie does manage to portray is that all the men are complete bastards. Scheming, plotting and murdering, all for their own gains. It's sad that, aside from the murdering (I hope), not much has changed in modern politics.
Both female leads, especially Saoirse, are actually very good in this, despite everything, and probably the best scene in the movie is when they meet alone towards the end (something which didn't actually happen in real life!). Sadly though, I was fidgeting in my seat up until that point just waiting for it to end.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Mortal Kombat (2021) in Movies
May 23, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
Mortal Kombat is one of those films that doesn't seem to know what story it wants to tell, it starts with a grudge battle between a proto Sub Zero and Proto Scorpion then jumps to the modern times with Sub-Zero hunting a young fighter, Cole Young. Then it (kind of) switches back to the Scorpion/Sub-Zero grudge match.
The bulk of the movie follows Cole as he joins up with Sonya Blade to find a group of 'Earths Champions' in an attempt to stop a secret invasion from Outworld. The hero's are, of course various characters from the 'Mortal Kombat' video games and a lot of the film is just looking for excuses to for the characters to shout out one liners from the games.
This isn't to say that Mortal Kombat is a bad movie, it has good fight scenes and the relationship between Sonia and Kano lead to some of the funniest moments of the movie. In fact I would go as far as saying that Kano is the best character of the film, a tough job seeing as he seems to be there for the comic relief.
There is a lot of time put into the put into the human characters but almost nothing to the villains, the most we find out about them is that Kabal seems to be a human and that Kano put him in his suit, there is no back story to this, no information a to how he ended up on outworld and, puzzlingly he seems to want to Kano to join up with his team.
I felt that there was something disappointing about the ending (HERE BE SPOILERS)..... All through the film we are told that Cole is the last of Hanzo Hasashi's (Scorpion) blood line (even though Cole has a daughter so she should be the last), he's given Hanzo's weapon and is being set up to become Scorpion. Then suddenly Hanzo is back, as Scorpion and all but saves the day. I know the film has the law of the games to follow but building one character up and then just re introducing someone else to all but take his place just feels like a cheat, especially as most of the film is about finding the power within and using it to win.
Saying all that Mortal Kombat is a good film, it has action and humour and some quite graphic 'Brutalities'. I think part of the problem is the 1995 Mortal Kombat film which feels a lot more fun, it doesn't have all the blood but it has a simple story, the villains seem slightly more rounded and the soundtrack just works. Also, and I know there is a big push to have actors of the 'correct' ethnicity I really do think that Christopher Lambert was a better 'Lord Rayden', Tadanobu Asano, who plays the character in this version seems bland and emotionless. I think that even an elder god would get worked up if evil forces were trying to invade his realm, especially if the invaders were breaking the rules.
The effects are good although some charters seem to have more attention than others (Sub-Zero, I'm looking at you) and there could have been more attention spent to the 'Evil' characters but, over all the film works with few problems.
The bulk of the movie follows Cole as he joins up with Sonya Blade to find a group of 'Earths Champions' in an attempt to stop a secret invasion from Outworld. The hero's are, of course various characters from the 'Mortal Kombat' video games and a lot of the film is just looking for excuses to for the characters to shout out one liners from the games.
This isn't to say that Mortal Kombat is a bad movie, it has good fight scenes and the relationship between Sonia and Kano lead to some of the funniest moments of the movie. In fact I would go as far as saying that Kano is the best character of the film, a tough job seeing as he seems to be there for the comic relief.
There is a lot of time put into the put into the human characters but almost nothing to the villains, the most we find out about them is that Kabal seems to be a human and that Kano put him in his suit, there is no back story to this, no information a to how he ended up on outworld and, puzzlingly he seems to want to Kano to join up with his team.
I felt that there was something disappointing about the ending (HERE BE SPOILERS)..... All through the film we are told that Cole is the last of Hanzo Hasashi's (Scorpion) blood line (even though Cole has a daughter so she should be the last), he's given Hanzo's weapon and is being set up to become Scorpion. Then suddenly Hanzo is back, as Scorpion and all but saves the day. I know the film has the law of the games to follow but building one character up and then just re introducing someone else to all but take his place just feels like a cheat, especially as most of the film is about finding the power within and using it to win.
Saying all that Mortal Kombat is a good film, it has action and humour and some quite graphic 'Brutalities'. I think part of the problem is the 1995 Mortal Kombat film which feels a lot more fun, it doesn't have all the blood but it has a simple story, the villains seem slightly more rounded and the soundtrack just works. Also, and I know there is a big push to have actors of the 'correct' ethnicity I really do think that Christopher Lambert was a better 'Lord Rayden', Tadanobu Asano, who plays the character in this version seems bland and emotionless. I think that even an elder god would get worked up if evil forces were trying to invade his realm, especially if the invaders were breaking the rules.
The effects are good although some charters seem to have more attention than others (Sub-Zero, I'm looking at you) and there could have been more attention spent to the 'Evil' characters but, over all the film works with few problems.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Aliens (1986) in Movies
Feb 13, 2020
An absolute screamer of a sequel
Aliens may very well be the best sequel of all time, if not it's certainly up there!
The original Alien is about as perfect as sci-fi horror can get, so it was a smart move on James Cameron's part to not recycle that again, and take Alien in a different direction.
The slow burning, claustrophobic high tension of the original is replaced here with all out war.
The simple idea of multiple Xenomorphs is effective and terrifying, and packs the runtime of Aliens with top tier action.
Sigourney Weaver returns as Ellen Ripley, and whilst she was a tough yet vulnerable survivor first time around, here we get to see her vulnerability crumble away. By the time the final act kicks in and Ripley is decked out in a mech...she just a badass from here on out.
She's is joined by a group of gun toting, 80s as fuck mercenaries, including the likes of Michael Biehn (fresh from the recently released, first Terminator movie), Bill Paxton, Al Matthews, Jenette Goldstein, and of course Lance Henriksen as Android, Bishop. It's a fantastic cast, who all end up mattering one way or another, even the ones who don't last very long.
The Xenomorphs themselves look as horrifying as ever, still practically achieved, and have an urgent sense of visceral danger whenever they're on screen.
Aliens is also the debut if the Alien Queen, a classic staple of the series since.
No matter how much time goes by, Aliens never fails to be entertaining, and still looks great. It's James Cameron at the top of his game.
The original Alien is about as perfect as sci-fi horror can get, so it was a smart move on James Cameron's part to not recycle that again, and take Alien in a different direction.
The slow burning, claustrophobic high tension of the original is replaced here with all out war.
The simple idea of multiple Xenomorphs is effective and terrifying, and packs the runtime of Aliens with top tier action.
Sigourney Weaver returns as Ellen Ripley, and whilst she was a tough yet vulnerable survivor first time around, here we get to see her vulnerability crumble away. By the time the final act kicks in and Ripley is decked out in a mech...she just a badass from here on out.
She's is joined by a group of gun toting, 80s as fuck mercenaries, including the likes of Michael Biehn (fresh from the recently released, first Terminator movie), Bill Paxton, Al Matthews, Jenette Goldstein, and of course Lance Henriksen as Android, Bishop. It's a fantastic cast, who all end up mattering one way or another, even the ones who don't last very long.
The Xenomorphs themselves look as horrifying as ever, still practically achieved, and have an urgent sense of visceral danger whenever they're on screen.
Aliens is also the debut if the Alien Queen, a classic staple of the series since.
No matter how much time goes by, Aliens never fails to be entertaining, and still looks great. It's James Cameron at the top of his game.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Near Dark (1987) in Movies
Nov 3, 2020
Bill Paxton (1 more)
Lance Henrikson
Finger-Lickin' Good!
Near Dark- is a great neo-western horror film about vampires. It was directed by Kathryn Bigelow, it was also her debut film.
The plot: Cowboy Caleb Colton (Adrian Pasdar) meets gorgeous Mae (Jenny Wright) at a bar, and the two have an immediate attraction. But when Mae turns out to be a vampire and bites Caleb on the neck, their relationship gets complicated. Wracked with a craving for human blood, Caleb is forced to leave his family and ride with Mae and her gang of vampires, including the evil Severen. Along the way Caleb must decide between his new love of Mae and the love of his family.
Vampire films had become "trendy" by the time of Near Dark's production, with the success of Fright Night (1985) and The Lost Boys (1987), the latter released two months before Near Dark and grossing $32 million. Kathryn Bigelow wanted to film a Western movie that departed from cinematic convention.
The combination of the genres had been visited at least twice before on the big screen, with Curse of the Undead (1959) and Billy the Kid Versus Dracula (1966).
Bigelow knew (and later married) director James Cameron, who directed Aliens (1986), a film that shares three cast members (Paxton, Goldstein and Henriksen) with Near Dark. Actor Michael Biehn was offered the role of Jesse Hooker, but he rejected the role because he found the script confusing. Lance Henriksen took over the role. A cinema seen in the background early in the film has Aliens on its marquee and Cameron played the man who "flips off" Severen.
Its a classic and a cult film.
The plot: Cowboy Caleb Colton (Adrian Pasdar) meets gorgeous Mae (Jenny Wright) at a bar, and the two have an immediate attraction. But when Mae turns out to be a vampire and bites Caleb on the neck, their relationship gets complicated. Wracked with a craving for human blood, Caleb is forced to leave his family and ride with Mae and her gang of vampires, including the evil Severen. Along the way Caleb must decide between his new love of Mae and the love of his family.
Vampire films had become "trendy" by the time of Near Dark's production, with the success of Fright Night (1985) and The Lost Boys (1987), the latter released two months before Near Dark and grossing $32 million. Kathryn Bigelow wanted to film a Western movie that departed from cinematic convention.
The combination of the genres had been visited at least twice before on the big screen, with Curse of the Undead (1959) and Billy the Kid Versus Dracula (1966).
Bigelow knew (and later married) director James Cameron, who directed Aliens (1986), a film that shares three cast members (Paxton, Goldstein and Henriksen) with Near Dark. Actor Michael Biehn was offered the role of Jesse Hooker, but he rejected the role because he found the script confusing. Lance Henriksen took over the role. A cinema seen in the background early in the film has Aliens on its marquee and Cameron played the man who "flips off" Severen.
Its a classic and a cult film.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Windmill (The Windmill Massacre) (2016) in Movies
May 12, 2018
I spend a bit too much time on Facebook, of that there’s no doubt. As a result, I tend to pay attention to what movies my friends talk about. One such friend is horror author Edward Lorn, and one such movie that popped up in my feed because of him is The Windmill.
Set in Holland, The Windmill is a fun film that follows the traditional “haunted locale” story. Like most movies of this nature, viewers are presented with an abandoned building (the windmill), an old legend, and a supernatural being. In this case, the windmill is considered a gateway to Hell, courtesy of a miller that, after making a deal with the devil, ground the bones of his victims rather than flour. When a group of individuals embark on a tour of Holland’s windmills, what appears to be an every day, run of the mill (pun totally intended) attraction quickly turns deadly.
The Windmill‘s cast of characters fits several different roles, from the uppity doctor to the vengeful model and even the cliché mad woman with daddy issues. These characters remain true to their personality types and don’t tend to waiver, even as things continue to spin out of control, for which I am thankful – even though it means that they’re downright horrible people. The acting is fairly well done in comparison to a lot of available horror movies, too.
One of the things that did bother me about this movie was an extremely brief lack of continuity. At the point in which the tour bus breaks down in middle of the road, an incident occurs and the bus falls over. That isn’t altogether strange, aside from the fact that it appears to have been knocked over by a bird flying into the window. Whether that was intentional or not, I did find it to be a bit amusing. Since I don’t consider this to be much of a spoiler, I figured I’d simply point it out.
While The Windmill contains several elements of the slasher genre, it appeals more to the psyche via the use of the demonic haunting and vivid hallucinations that reveal the deepest, darkest secrets of its cast. It’s not the best film out there, but it is certainly entertaining in its own right and is undoubtedly worth the watch for a bit of cheesy horror fun. The title, also known as The Windmill Massacre, can be found on Netflix in the United States.
Set in Holland, The Windmill is a fun film that follows the traditional “haunted locale” story. Like most movies of this nature, viewers are presented with an abandoned building (the windmill), an old legend, and a supernatural being. In this case, the windmill is considered a gateway to Hell, courtesy of a miller that, after making a deal with the devil, ground the bones of his victims rather than flour. When a group of individuals embark on a tour of Holland’s windmills, what appears to be an every day, run of the mill (pun totally intended) attraction quickly turns deadly.
The Windmill‘s cast of characters fits several different roles, from the uppity doctor to the vengeful model and even the cliché mad woman with daddy issues. These characters remain true to their personality types and don’t tend to waiver, even as things continue to spin out of control, for which I am thankful – even though it means that they’re downright horrible people. The acting is fairly well done in comparison to a lot of available horror movies, too.
One of the things that did bother me about this movie was an extremely brief lack of continuity. At the point in which the tour bus breaks down in middle of the road, an incident occurs and the bus falls over. That isn’t altogether strange, aside from the fact that it appears to have been knocked over by a bird flying into the window. Whether that was intentional or not, I did find it to be a bit amusing. Since I don’t consider this to be much of a spoiler, I figured I’d simply point it out.
While The Windmill contains several elements of the slasher genre, it appeals more to the psyche via the use of the demonic haunting and vivid hallucinations that reveal the deepest, darkest secrets of its cast. It’s not the best film out there, but it is certainly entertaining in its own right and is undoubtedly worth the watch for a bit of cheesy horror fun. The title, also known as The Windmill Massacre, can be found on Netflix in the United States.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Funny People (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
We all have our favorite Adam Sandler movies. There are the fans of The Wedding Singer and 50 First Dates and there’s the loyal camp who can quote Happy Gilmore or Big Daddy verbatim. You hear the name Adam Sandler’s and you think goofy, lovable guy. Dependably funny and quotable, from the mid-90’s on, he was the go-to comedian when we looked for an easy laugh. Of late, with the growing list of popular movies under his belt, when you think goofy, lovable funny guy, another name comes up: Seth Rogan. In “Funny People” you get them both.
Sandler plays George Simmons, a popular comedian who’s diagnosed with a fatal disease. Playing a comedian is hardly a stretch for Sandler, but for one whose dramatic turns can be counted on one hand, he plays the stricken man who’s suddenly face to face with his immortality quite convincingly. Rogan is Ira Wright, a desperate young comic who’s still vying for stage time at the local comedy club. George, perhaps recognizing a bit of himself or seeing a glimmer of comedic genius in Ira after catching his act, hires Ira to write for him.
Ira goes from writer and personal assistant/confidante to opening act as he helps George deal with his illness. He encourages the veteran comedian to reconnect with his compatriots in the business, opening the film to a parade of old faces from the stand-up circuit. George’s reflections on his life eventually lead him back to a lost love, Laura, played by Leslie Mann. Amidst the funny, laugh-out-loud scenes, are some believably tender moments, not just between Mann and Sandler but also, oddly enough, Sandler and Rogan.
Directing the comedic duo is writer/director Judd Apatow, who gave Rogan that growing list of successful movies after first casting him in The 40-Year-Old Virgin. Sandler could certainly use some of Apatow’s Midas-like touch after his recent string of marginal films. With a strong supporting cast of Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman who play Ira’s roommates Leo and Mark and Eric Bana, Laura’s husband, the movie is in turns hilarious and puzzling. The strong storyline of a veteran comedian taking a novice comic under his wings gets lost when George pursues a second chance with an unhappily married Laura. What could’ve been a touching passing of the torch tale is confused by an annoying love triangle. When the movie returns its focus to George and Ira, it’s saved, just barely, by the fact that we’re still watching two of comedy’s goofy, lovable funny guys.
Sandler plays George Simmons, a popular comedian who’s diagnosed with a fatal disease. Playing a comedian is hardly a stretch for Sandler, but for one whose dramatic turns can be counted on one hand, he plays the stricken man who’s suddenly face to face with his immortality quite convincingly. Rogan is Ira Wright, a desperate young comic who’s still vying for stage time at the local comedy club. George, perhaps recognizing a bit of himself or seeing a glimmer of comedic genius in Ira after catching his act, hires Ira to write for him.
Ira goes from writer and personal assistant/confidante to opening act as he helps George deal with his illness. He encourages the veteran comedian to reconnect with his compatriots in the business, opening the film to a parade of old faces from the stand-up circuit. George’s reflections on his life eventually lead him back to a lost love, Laura, played by Leslie Mann. Amidst the funny, laugh-out-loud scenes, are some believably tender moments, not just between Mann and Sandler but also, oddly enough, Sandler and Rogan.
Directing the comedic duo is writer/director Judd Apatow, who gave Rogan that growing list of successful movies after first casting him in The 40-Year-Old Virgin. Sandler could certainly use some of Apatow’s Midas-like touch after his recent string of marginal films. With a strong supporting cast of Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman who play Ira’s roommates Leo and Mark and Eric Bana, Laura’s husband, the movie is in turns hilarious and puzzling. The strong storyline of a veteran comedian taking a novice comic under his wings gets lost when George pursues a second chance with an unhappily married Laura. What could’ve been a touching passing of the torch tale is confused by an annoying love triangle. When the movie returns its focus to George and Ira, it’s saved, just barely, by the fact that we’re still watching two of comedy’s goofy, lovable funny guys.