Search
Search results
VAG_Abbo (4 KP) rated Transformers: The Last Knight (2017) in Movies
Jul 13, 2017
Great CGI work as always (3 more)
Little bits of Autobot and Cybertronian history sprinkled in
Lots of humour
Anthony Hopkins (watch it and you will understand)
Story was good yet a bit convoluted (2 more)
Lack of Dinobot screen time
Optimus not a big feature in this one
Better than expected
Contains spoilers, click to show
After seeing this film get slated by "professional" reviewers my hopes weren't very high for this instalment of a franchise that I personally enjoy. I was a pleasant surprise by how enjoyable this film was and maybe the number of laughs this film produces helps with that. It's nice to see that this film has visited the history of Cybertron and its race, but at the same time, it isn't over-explaining things and visiting the past too much. Anthony Hopkins has yet again given a great performance in this role and Mark Wahlberg gives a good show as well. For me personally, I think the trailers are a little deceiving as Optimus doesn't feature a great deal in this film. To be honest I think that there isn't enough screen time for any of the transformers as this one seems to be more about the humans, and considering the movie is called Transformers I feel that this is a bit of a letdown. Also, there was no explanation as to how Bumblebee gets his voice back and why it disappears as quick as it shows up. Yes, it's good that Optimus snaps out of the mind control (or is it bad coding in the ECU? LOL) at the sound of his old friend's real voice, but seriously how easy did that happen? If that's all it took then why didn't Bee just talk to him at the start instead of trading blows with each other and risking dying. Yes, maybe it is to get the point across that Bee will do anything for Optimus, but they are in a war they are losing so why let your strongest ally be fighting for the other side for so long? And what about Grimlock and Slag?? Very small bit parts for the Dinobots AND they changed Slags name to Slug!
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Avengers: Endgame (2019) in Movies
May 14, 2019 (Updated May 14, 2019)
A truly incredible end to the MCU Infinity Saga
SPOLIER FREE REVIEW
Avengers: Endgame is finally here after the shocking events of Infinity War.
First and foremost, a huge amount of respect is owed to the Russo brothers for managing to juggle so many characters across these two films (and Civil War) to a hugely satisfying degree.
But with a smaller cast to manage this time around, this is a film that is able to focus more on the original six Avengers from 2012.
The majority of the film is quite dialogue heavy, as the film focuses on a fun time travel plot, that takes us through a nostalgia filled trip through some of the past MCU films, filled with cameos galore.
The usual mix of thrilling set pieces, emotional beats (that scene set in 1970?), and comedy land just as well as they always have done, with Paul Rudd and Chris Hemsworth delivering most of the humour.
Robert Downey Jr and Scarlett Johansson shine as Tony Stark and Black Widow, as they always do, and I also enjoyed the amount of time they spent with characters like Hawkeye and Nebula, characters who would usually be considered secondary.
A concern I had going in was that they might use the recently added Captain Marvel, but thankfully isn't the case. She is used sparingly, and therefore effectively.
The only real gripe I have with Endgame, is that Thanos is forced more into a backseat role, after his incredible character arc throughout Infinity War, but is understandable, as mentioned above, this film is all about the original 6, and that's where the main focus lies. Saying that though, I did feel pretty unsatisfied with how they concluded the story arc for Black Widow...
As the movie approaches the inevitable big showdown, the ensuing battle is nothing short of thrilling, a pure scene of unobstructed comic book joy, that will have any Marvel fan trying not to shout at the screen.
All in all, it's a phenomenal ending to this chapter of the MCU, and I can't wait for what comes next (especially now that Marvel Studios have the Fox properties back)
Avengers: Endgame is finally here after the shocking events of Infinity War.
First and foremost, a huge amount of respect is owed to the Russo brothers for managing to juggle so many characters across these two films (and Civil War) to a hugely satisfying degree.
But with a smaller cast to manage this time around, this is a film that is able to focus more on the original six Avengers from 2012.
The majority of the film is quite dialogue heavy, as the film focuses on a fun time travel plot, that takes us through a nostalgia filled trip through some of the past MCU films, filled with cameos galore.
The usual mix of thrilling set pieces, emotional beats (that scene set in 1970?), and comedy land just as well as they always have done, with Paul Rudd and Chris Hemsworth delivering most of the humour.
Robert Downey Jr and Scarlett Johansson shine as Tony Stark and Black Widow, as they always do, and I also enjoyed the amount of time they spent with characters like Hawkeye and Nebula, characters who would usually be considered secondary.
A concern I had going in was that they might use the recently added Captain Marvel, but thankfully isn't the case. She is used sparingly, and therefore effectively.
The only real gripe I have with Endgame, is that Thanos is forced more into a backseat role, after his incredible character arc throughout Infinity War, but is understandable, as mentioned above, this film is all about the original 6, and that's where the main focus lies. Saying that though, I did feel pretty unsatisfied with how they concluded the story arc for Black Widow...
As the movie approaches the inevitable big showdown, the ensuing battle is nothing short of thrilling, a pure scene of unobstructed comic book joy, that will have any Marvel fan trying not to shout at the screen.
All in all, it's a phenomenal ending to this chapter of the MCU, and I can't wait for what comes next (especially now that Marvel Studios have the Fox properties back)
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) in Movies
Mar 13, 2020
Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is on of those films that has no business being as good as it is.
Released a whopping 22 years after the beloved original, it's existence feels like it should be firmly in the "money grab" territory of Hollywood, but that just simply isn't the case.
Firstly, it's not just a re hash of the original plot. This time around, four teenagers all in detention for one reason or another, come across an old, unrecognisable games console labelled 'Jumanji'. After booting up the game and selecting their desired characters, the group are sucked into the game world, and have to complete it from within if they want to escape with their lives.
When in the game, the teens take on the roles of the characters they selected, each with their own skill sets. It's a delight for any video game fans, with fun references and silly NPC jokes scattered around.
The four younger actors don't get a huge amount of screen time, but they're engaging enough when they are about, bit the stars are of course the four who are front and centre of all the advertising. The chemistry between Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson, Karen Gillan, Kevin Hart and Jack Black is fantastic and genuine. The script is tight and joke heavy, and every humourous line lands without fail. They all do a great job of awkward teenagers trapped inside the bodies of video game characters. Jack Black is a particular highlight, essentially playing an Instagram obsessed 18 year old girl.
The whole movie is pretty hilarious. It also carries a passive story of friendship and family, as the four very different people form a strong bond as the story progresses.
The action sequences are pretty thrilling as well, even if it is hard to not notice the excessive CGI at times.
WTTJ is a really enjoyable popcorn blockbuster. It's funny, silly, and has enough substance to it to get nicely invested in the characters. It even includes a subtle and tasteful nod to Robin Williams' character from 1995, and is a classy touch.
Released a whopping 22 years after the beloved original, it's existence feels like it should be firmly in the "money grab" territory of Hollywood, but that just simply isn't the case.
Firstly, it's not just a re hash of the original plot. This time around, four teenagers all in detention for one reason or another, come across an old, unrecognisable games console labelled 'Jumanji'. After booting up the game and selecting their desired characters, the group are sucked into the game world, and have to complete it from within if they want to escape with their lives.
When in the game, the teens take on the roles of the characters they selected, each with their own skill sets. It's a delight for any video game fans, with fun references and silly NPC jokes scattered around.
The four younger actors don't get a huge amount of screen time, but they're engaging enough when they are about, bit the stars are of course the four who are front and centre of all the advertising. The chemistry between Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson, Karen Gillan, Kevin Hart and Jack Black is fantastic and genuine. The script is tight and joke heavy, and every humourous line lands without fail. They all do a great job of awkward teenagers trapped inside the bodies of video game characters. Jack Black is a particular highlight, essentially playing an Instagram obsessed 18 year old girl.
The whole movie is pretty hilarious. It also carries a passive story of friendship and family, as the four very different people form a strong bond as the story progresses.
The action sequences are pretty thrilling as well, even if it is hard to not notice the excessive CGI at times.
WTTJ is a really enjoyable popcorn blockbuster. It's funny, silly, and has enough substance to it to get nicely invested in the characters. It even includes a subtle and tasteful nod to Robin Williams' character from 1995, and is a classy touch.
Illeana Douglas recommended Vagabond (1985) in Movies (curated)
Places Around
Travel and Navigation
App
With "Places Around", finding any place around you, is only a tap. Restaurants to Hospitals, Gas...
FearlessLover (27 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Jul 31, 2017
Stunning cinea
It' s 1940, 400,000 allied troops are cornered and cut off on the beaches of Dunkirk; with the enemy closing in, and no cover or defence, they await annihilation or a miracle. We experience the moment as the characters do, without unnecessary exposition or dialogue! This proves quite the departure for Nolan; there is a lot here that owes more to silent cinema than anything else, but his images often say all that needs to be said.
An opening frame invites us to join a group of soldiers. Next, the loudest onslaught of gunfire kicks the film into another gear. We are given as much pause for thought as the soldiers we follow. We run with Tommy, played here by a Fionn Whitehead, and like him, we are aware of comrades falling dead next to us, but it is all panic and no time; we will lament their loss later. Set to the ticking of a watch, we feel Tommy's heart pounding with ours, and we know the tone for this audacious movie has been set.
We see the event from different perspectives and from within different time frames. Right now, not many directors can build momentum like Nolan. The jumping to and from different characters' point of view, the corkscrewing impression of the editing, events echoed and mirrored by Hans Zimmer's Shepherd's Tones and persistent, all enveloping score, acting at times more like sound design than music; it all results in a constant rise in tension, to the point of almost being exhaustive.
This said, the editing also serves another purpose. The "Miracle of Dunkirk" is a grand story, with every soldier, every pilot, and every civilian having their own point of view. Nolan wants us to build up an overall picture of the event purely through subjective experience, so of course we spend a tiring week with the terrified boys. Of course we spend a desperate day with a fisherman as he and his familial crew sail their way into action. Lastly, given the fuel constraints of the RAF, whose decisions had to be immediate and impulsive, always a choice between defending the beach or getting home, why would we spend any more that an edge-of-your-seat, quickly-cut hour in the cockpit of a Spitfire, as they do their duty and enter into dogfights to keep the German aircraft at bay? Each timeline is contracted or dilated to give everybody equal measure and importance, whilst staying true to and very much in their situation. Yes, this means we're kept on our toes; we have moments of confusion as timelines cross over and we see the same thing happening from another point of view, but as we head into the finale, as well as the aforementioned tension and release (which is just exciting cinema), we also get to see how, despite very different perspectives, everyone was working together, and how sacrifice and struggle for duty were par for the course for all involved, whether other people knew it or not. It is important that we the audience recognise this bigger picture, and as everything clicks together in an emotive final convergence of efforts, we not only see the justification for the techniques adopted, but struggle to imagine the story told another way. That is, at least, without going down a standard route, with objective storytelling employed.
A proper review not being complete without comment on the elephant in the room, it must be said that Harry Styles does not stand out like the proverbial sore thumb at all. Frankly, he carries his scenes with aplomb, and surely, following the Heath Ledger lesson, and now this, it is time we learned that, maybe, Christopher Nolan just knows what he's doing better that we do? As to the other big names, there are moments from that remain with me so long after having seen it: Kenneth Brannagh and Mark Rylance can say so much with so little, their faces and gestures doing the heavy lifting to deliver a lot of the human emotion, and it would appear Tom Hardy has Oscar-worthy eyes! You need see nothing more through the course of his drama to have a complete sense of the type of man his Farrier is. We talk about great acting and achieving realism through imagination, but with the knowledge that Nolan actually took everyone to Dunkirk, sank real ships, sailed real ships, flew real Spitfires overhead, employed real explosions on the beach, and even rejected green screen and CGI in favour of cardboard cut-outs, it seems imagination wasn't too necessary for these already consummate actors.
Nolan's principle fan base will be well prepared for what they get; but with his insistence on holding back from the audience any perspective not afforded his characters, ala 'Memento', some knowledge of the "Miracle Of Dunkirk" might put the more casual viewer in better stead. Regardless of which camp you fall into, or indeed of whether or not the movie does it for you, certain things are for sure: With no melodrama or cheese, and no superfluous fluff or emotional subterfuge, 'Dunkirk' is a purely experiential movie, a technical marvel of a war film unlike any other I can name. It also stands as a beacon in Nolan's career, characterised by his desire to cultivate an audience willing to keep up with him. And perhaps most importantly, this is a key moment in world history that is often overlooked; a disaster averted which, had it not been, would have seen the history books written very differently. That this event has been marshalled by a confident and sincere director, who has surely by now cemented his name alongside those of his own heroes, is reason enough to see 'Dunkirk'.
An opening frame invites us to join a group of soldiers. Next, the loudest onslaught of gunfire kicks the film into another gear. We are given as much pause for thought as the soldiers we follow. We run with Tommy, played here by a Fionn Whitehead, and like him, we are aware of comrades falling dead next to us, but it is all panic and no time; we will lament their loss later. Set to the ticking of a watch, we feel Tommy's heart pounding with ours, and we know the tone for this audacious movie has been set.
We see the event from different perspectives and from within different time frames. Right now, not many directors can build momentum like Nolan. The jumping to and from different characters' point of view, the corkscrewing impression of the editing, events echoed and mirrored by Hans Zimmer's Shepherd's Tones and persistent, all enveloping score, acting at times more like sound design than music; it all results in a constant rise in tension, to the point of almost being exhaustive.
This said, the editing also serves another purpose. The "Miracle of Dunkirk" is a grand story, with every soldier, every pilot, and every civilian having their own point of view. Nolan wants us to build up an overall picture of the event purely through subjective experience, so of course we spend a tiring week with the terrified boys. Of course we spend a desperate day with a fisherman as he and his familial crew sail their way into action. Lastly, given the fuel constraints of the RAF, whose decisions had to be immediate and impulsive, always a choice between defending the beach or getting home, why would we spend any more that an edge-of-your-seat, quickly-cut hour in the cockpit of a Spitfire, as they do their duty and enter into dogfights to keep the German aircraft at bay? Each timeline is contracted or dilated to give everybody equal measure and importance, whilst staying true to and very much in their situation. Yes, this means we're kept on our toes; we have moments of confusion as timelines cross over and we see the same thing happening from another point of view, but as we head into the finale, as well as the aforementioned tension and release (which is just exciting cinema), we also get to see how, despite very different perspectives, everyone was working together, and how sacrifice and struggle for duty were par for the course for all involved, whether other people knew it or not. It is important that we the audience recognise this bigger picture, and as everything clicks together in an emotive final convergence of efforts, we not only see the justification for the techniques adopted, but struggle to imagine the story told another way. That is, at least, without going down a standard route, with objective storytelling employed.
A proper review not being complete without comment on the elephant in the room, it must be said that Harry Styles does not stand out like the proverbial sore thumb at all. Frankly, he carries his scenes with aplomb, and surely, following the Heath Ledger lesson, and now this, it is time we learned that, maybe, Christopher Nolan just knows what he's doing better that we do? As to the other big names, there are moments from that remain with me so long after having seen it: Kenneth Brannagh and Mark Rylance can say so much with so little, their faces and gestures doing the heavy lifting to deliver a lot of the human emotion, and it would appear Tom Hardy has Oscar-worthy eyes! You need see nothing more through the course of his drama to have a complete sense of the type of man his Farrier is. We talk about great acting and achieving realism through imagination, but with the knowledge that Nolan actually took everyone to Dunkirk, sank real ships, sailed real ships, flew real Spitfires overhead, employed real explosions on the beach, and even rejected green screen and CGI in favour of cardboard cut-outs, it seems imagination wasn't too necessary for these already consummate actors.
Nolan's principle fan base will be well prepared for what they get; but with his insistence on holding back from the audience any perspective not afforded his characters, ala 'Memento', some knowledge of the "Miracle Of Dunkirk" might put the more casual viewer in better stead. Regardless of which camp you fall into, or indeed of whether or not the movie does it for you, certain things are for sure: With no melodrama or cheese, and no superfluous fluff or emotional subterfuge, 'Dunkirk' is a purely experiential movie, a technical marvel of a war film unlike any other I can name. It also stands as a beacon in Nolan's career, characterised by his desire to cultivate an audience willing to keep up with him. And perhaps most importantly, this is a key moment in world history that is often overlooked; a disaster averted which, had it not been, would have seen the history books written very differently. That this event has been marshalled by a confident and sincere director, who has surely by now cemented his name alongside those of his own heroes, is reason enough to see 'Dunkirk'.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Black Swan (2010) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019 (Updated Jun 23, 2019)
Darren Aronofsky has been circling movie news sites pretty frequently as of late. He recently signed on to direct the stand-alone sequel to Wolverine (appropriately titled The Wolverine). He also developed a rather large and devoted fanbase over the course of directing fantastically surreal films such as Pi, Requiem for a Dream, and The Wrestler, but his psychological thriller Black Swan has also been gaining quite a bit of steam leading up to its December 3rd release. Despite Aronofsky's already well-established reputation and the rather high anticipation for the film, Black Swan still delivers a product that is even better than expected.
Like most ballerinas, Nina (Portman) lives, breathes, and is completely devoted to dance. Artistic director Thomas Leroy (Cassel) is preparing a new spring production of his interpretation of Swan Lake. Nina is next in line to become prima ballerina after the former dancer to hold that spot, Beth Macintyre (Ryder), reluctantly retires. Everything seems to be shifting in that direction until a rather unorthodox, provocative, and unstable (in a dangerous kind of way) dancer named Lily (Kunis) arrives. Lily seems to have an eye for Nina's spot as soon as she walks through the door. Thomas begins to see Nina as the White Swan, which signifies innocence and perfection and Lily as the Black Swan, which is more sensual and deceptive. The problem is that one dancer is required to play both parts. Other than the stiff competition she has to deal with, The Swan Queen role begins to take its toll on Nina who begins to think Lily wants even more than her spot in the production. Nina's obsessive behavior leads to her releasing her dark side that she must now struggle to control.
Aronofsky has always had an exceptional eye for cinematography in his films. His use of micro-photography in The Fountain made the entire film a visually stunning spectacle that will stand the test of time while something like a someone's pupil dilating or a drug deal gone bad in Requiem for a Dream is memorable because of the way and angle Aronofsky shot it rather than relying on its disturbing content to make the scene a classic. Black Swan is no different. Being placed behind Nina whenever she heads to the dance venue gives the viewer a rather unique third person perspective that also gives the impression that you're walking right behind the main character of the film. The intense dream sequences are also shot in a way that flawlessly blur the line between reality and hallucination. Is this really happening or is it all a figment of Nina's deteriorating imagination? Figuring that out is half the film's charm.
The extraordinary main cast is the main ingredient to the film being as great as it is though. The key players all seem to have this twisted side to them that is nearly the exact opposite of the way they first appear to be, which coincides with the Swan Lake theme. Winona Ryder steals most of the screen time she's given whether she's trashing her dressing room, yelling obscenities in Portman's face, or sitting in a hospital room. Even though Mila Kunis seems to play nothing more than her role in Forgetting Sarah Marshall to the most extreme degree on the surface, it's the edge she's given that results in unpredictablity for her character. While Vincent Cassel's performance is strong thanks to his sensual reputation with his dancers and Barbara Hersey is both charming and disturbing as Nina's mother who seems to secretly be trying to live in her daughter's dance shoes after a missed opportunity in her past, it's no surprise to hear that Natalie Portman is the heart of the film. Nina is so consumed with dance that she keeps pushing herself even when her mind and body begin to show her that she's had enough. Her breakdowns are heartbreaking and engaging to watch while her transformation by the end of the film can best be described as a monstrous beauty. It's all thanks to Portman's powerful, phenomenal, tour de force performance.
While some might not be surprised that Aronofsky has created another masterpiece, this may be his most solid and well-rounded film to date. Black Swan is a beautiful, disturbing, and captivating work of art that features gorgeous camera work, an excellent and mindbending story, and one of Natalie Portman's best performances.
Like most ballerinas, Nina (Portman) lives, breathes, and is completely devoted to dance. Artistic director Thomas Leroy (Cassel) is preparing a new spring production of his interpretation of Swan Lake. Nina is next in line to become prima ballerina after the former dancer to hold that spot, Beth Macintyre (Ryder), reluctantly retires. Everything seems to be shifting in that direction until a rather unorthodox, provocative, and unstable (in a dangerous kind of way) dancer named Lily (Kunis) arrives. Lily seems to have an eye for Nina's spot as soon as she walks through the door. Thomas begins to see Nina as the White Swan, which signifies innocence and perfection and Lily as the Black Swan, which is more sensual and deceptive. The problem is that one dancer is required to play both parts. Other than the stiff competition she has to deal with, The Swan Queen role begins to take its toll on Nina who begins to think Lily wants even more than her spot in the production. Nina's obsessive behavior leads to her releasing her dark side that she must now struggle to control.
Aronofsky has always had an exceptional eye for cinematography in his films. His use of micro-photography in The Fountain made the entire film a visually stunning spectacle that will stand the test of time while something like a someone's pupil dilating or a drug deal gone bad in Requiem for a Dream is memorable because of the way and angle Aronofsky shot it rather than relying on its disturbing content to make the scene a classic. Black Swan is no different. Being placed behind Nina whenever she heads to the dance venue gives the viewer a rather unique third person perspective that also gives the impression that you're walking right behind the main character of the film. The intense dream sequences are also shot in a way that flawlessly blur the line between reality and hallucination. Is this really happening or is it all a figment of Nina's deteriorating imagination? Figuring that out is half the film's charm.
The extraordinary main cast is the main ingredient to the film being as great as it is though. The key players all seem to have this twisted side to them that is nearly the exact opposite of the way they first appear to be, which coincides with the Swan Lake theme. Winona Ryder steals most of the screen time she's given whether she's trashing her dressing room, yelling obscenities in Portman's face, or sitting in a hospital room. Even though Mila Kunis seems to play nothing more than her role in Forgetting Sarah Marshall to the most extreme degree on the surface, it's the edge she's given that results in unpredictablity for her character. While Vincent Cassel's performance is strong thanks to his sensual reputation with his dancers and Barbara Hersey is both charming and disturbing as Nina's mother who seems to secretly be trying to live in her daughter's dance shoes after a missed opportunity in her past, it's no surprise to hear that Natalie Portman is the heart of the film. Nina is so consumed with dance that she keeps pushing herself even when her mind and body begin to show her that she's had enough. Her breakdowns are heartbreaking and engaging to watch while her transformation by the end of the film can best be described as a monstrous beauty. It's all thanks to Portman's powerful, phenomenal, tour de force performance.
While some might not be surprised that Aronofsky has created another masterpiece, this may be his most solid and well-rounded film to date. Black Swan is a beautiful, disturbing, and captivating work of art that features gorgeous camera work, an excellent and mindbending story, and one of Natalie Portman's best performances.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Big Hero 6 (2014) in Movies
Nov 5, 2018
Phenomenal
Big Hero 6 sits on top for me as probably the best under-the-radar film of all-time. No one talks about it or really brings it up. Anytime I mention its greatness, I get the typical response: “Well, yeah, I guess it was kind of awesome.” Not only is it one of the best under-the-radar films, but it’s the best film I have reviewed so far. Disagree all you want, but hear me out on my argument.
Set in the swanky, futuristic city of San Fransokyo, Big Hero 6 is the story of how young Hiro Hamada develops an unlikely friendship with his brother’s marshmallow-esque robot Baymax and they form an unlikely superhero team.
Acting: 10
Each voice actor does an excellent job capturing the essence of their character. Strong, emotional moments suck you into the film and keep you invested. As in most Disney films, there are no weaknesses from an acting standpoint. Damon Wayans Jr. was my personal favorite playing the role of Wasabi one of Hiro’s friends. He doesn’t dominate the scenes that he stars in, but definitely manages to make the most of his lines.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The animations are beautiful and crisp. The opening scene provides a breathtaking view of the city of San Fransokyo. Building lights pop against the night sky. Bay waters glimmer. Attention to detail is exquisite. There is one scene where Hiro and Baymax are falling through an open window in slow-motion. Bushes below rustle while glass flies past them. It only lasts for a couple of seconds, but it’s a testament to the solid work that went into the animation of this film.
The powers the team displayed added to the film’s visual prowess. I loved watching Fred breathe fire in his awful (and also hilarious) superhero costume. Their powers and team-ups made for some stunning battles against a unique villain.
Conflict: 10
I am amazed at the balance of story and action as a film typically has to sacrifice one over the other. Even during their earlier training phases, the action is both consistent and non-stop. It fills the entire landscape of the screen. From battles to car chases to harrowing escapes, Big Hero 6 establishes and maintains a high level of intensity.
Genre: 10
Not only does this film establish itself as one of the best animated films ever done, but it’s also one of the best superhero films ever made. The fact that it excels in both genres just speaks of the film’s overall greatness. I expected to like it, but I never expected to love it. Big Hero 6 is easily in the same class as The Incredibles.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
The ending is perfect. Sappy, yet believable. Great wrap-up of a great movie.
Overall: 100
A great family film with solid superhero action and a fun, meaningful story you can get behind. What more do you need? Loved this movie.
Set in the swanky, futuristic city of San Fransokyo, Big Hero 6 is the story of how young Hiro Hamada develops an unlikely friendship with his brother’s marshmallow-esque robot Baymax and they form an unlikely superhero team.
Acting: 10
Each voice actor does an excellent job capturing the essence of their character. Strong, emotional moments suck you into the film and keep you invested. As in most Disney films, there are no weaknesses from an acting standpoint. Damon Wayans Jr. was my personal favorite playing the role of Wasabi one of Hiro’s friends. He doesn’t dominate the scenes that he stars in, but definitely manages to make the most of his lines.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The animations are beautiful and crisp. The opening scene provides a breathtaking view of the city of San Fransokyo. Building lights pop against the night sky. Bay waters glimmer. Attention to detail is exquisite. There is one scene where Hiro and Baymax are falling through an open window in slow-motion. Bushes below rustle while glass flies past them. It only lasts for a couple of seconds, but it’s a testament to the solid work that went into the animation of this film.
The powers the team displayed added to the film’s visual prowess. I loved watching Fred breathe fire in his awful (and also hilarious) superhero costume. Their powers and team-ups made for some stunning battles against a unique villain.
Conflict: 10
I am amazed at the balance of story and action as a film typically has to sacrifice one over the other. Even during their earlier training phases, the action is both consistent and non-stop. It fills the entire landscape of the screen. From battles to car chases to harrowing escapes, Big Hero 6 establishes and maintains a high level of intensity.
Genre: 10
Not only does this film establish itself as one of the best animated films ever done, but it’s also one of the best superhero films ever made. The fact that it excels in both genres just speaks of the film’s overall greatness. I expected to like it, but I never expected to love it. Big Hero 6 is easily in the same class as The Incredibles.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
The ending is perfect. Sappy, yet believable. Great wrap-up of a great movie.
Overall: 100
A great family film with solid superhero action and a fun, meaningful story you can get behind. What more do you need? Loved this movie.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated CODA (2021) in Movies
Feb 25, 2022
Fairly Standard Fare
I am a film completionist, meaning I must see a film through to the end no matter what. At times, I take a break and come back to it (figuring I might not have been in the right mood for the film) but in other times, I fight through whatever emotion I am feeling (most of the time boredom) to keep focused on what the filmmakers are attempting to do in their film - and, at times, I am rewarded for this perseverance.
Such is the case with the Oscar Nominated film CODA. Written and Directed by Sian Heder (who was Oscar Nominated for her Screenplay), CODA tells the tale of Ruby who is a CODA (Child of Deaf Adults), who runs afoul of her family (especially her parents) and their expectations of her.
For the first half of this film it is pretty standard fare - one that has been shown on many, many movie screens throughout the years. Even though this one had the added “plot twist” of Ruby being able to hear while her Parents and Brothers are all deaf, the first half of this film never rose above the ordinary.
But, something happened in the 2nd half of the film, I fell in love with this family and their foibles and was rooting for them all to resolve their issues and for Ruby to get what she wanted.
Credit for this must go to Writer/Director Heder, who is not deaf, who came up with the idea/concept for the film and then felt a strong obligation to “get it right” for the deaf community. And get it right she does.
Her first good move was to cast Oscar Winner Marlee Matlin, a well known deaf performer and advocate for the Deaf Community. She brought instant credibility and star power to this film and she also insisted that the other 2 deaf characters in this film be performed by deaf performers.
Troy Kotsur is Oscar Nominated as Best Supporting Actor for his turn as Ruby’s father and he, for the first 1/2 of this film, acts in black and white - either funny (the comic relief) or angry (the drama) and I was unimpressed by him, but - just like the film - his performance gains some nuance in the 2nd half and he does have the “Oscar Moment” in this part of the movie that makes him a deserving nominee.
Emilia Jones is “just fine” in the lead role of Ruby and Daniel Durant (the other deaf actor in this film who plays her brother) and Lonnie Farmer (who plays her teacher) are also “fine”. Thank goodness we had the star wattage of Matlin to elevate the first half of the film before things got interesting - and nuanced - in the 2nd half.
Kudos to CODA for shining a light on a group that does not normally get the light shone upon it and kudos to the Academy for nominating this Sundance darling in the Best Picture category.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such is the case with the Oscar Nominated film CODA. Written and Directed by Sian Heder (who was Oscar Nominated for her Screenplay), CODA tells the tale of Ruby who is a CODA (Child of Deaf Adults), who runs afoul of her family (especially her parents) and their expectations of her.
For the first half of this film it is pretty standard fare - one that has been shown on many, many movie screens throughout the years. Even though this one had the added “plot twist” of Ruby being able to hear while her Parents and Brothers are all deaf, the first half of this film never rose above the ordinary.
But, something happened in the 2nd half of the film, I fell in love with this family and their foibles and was rooting for them all to resolve their issues and for Ruby to get what she wanted.
Credit for this must go to Writer/Director Heder, who is not deaf, who came up with the idea/concept for the film and then felt a strong obligation to “get it right” for the deaf community. And get it right she does.
Her first good move was to cast Oscar Winner Marlee Matlin, a well known deaf performer and advocate for the Deaf Community. She brought instant credibility and star power to this film and she also insisted that the other 2 deaf characters in this film be performed by deaf performers.
Troy Kotsur is Oscar Nominated as Best Supporting Actor for his turn as Ruby’s father and he, for the first 1/2 of this film, acts in black and white - either funny (the comic relief) or angry (the drama) and I was unimpressed by him, but - just like the film - his performance gains some nuance in the 2nd half and he does have the “Oscar Moment” in this part of the movie that makes him a deserving nominee.
Emilia Jones is “just fine” in the lead role of Ruby and Daniel Durant (the other deaf actor in this film who plays her brother) and Lonnie Farmer (who plays her teacher) are also “fine”. Thank goodness we had the star wattage of Matlin to elevate the first half of the film before things got interesting - and nuanced - in the 2nd half.
Kudos to CODA for shining a light on a group that does not normally get the light shone upon it and kudos to the Academy for nominating this Sundance darling in the Best Picture category.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Black Panther (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Is the MCU all out of surprises?
The Marvel Cinematic Universe has become one of the most successful movie franchises ever made, and it’s easy to see why. Featuring incredible actors, up-and-coming directors and that trademark sense of humour, each film in the MCU has something to offer.
That doesn’t mean they’re perfect however. The MCU has a distinct lack of decent villains, strong female characters and characters from ethnic minorities. In the run-up to this year’s Infinity War, Black Panther aims to turn what we know about Marvel on its head. But has it succeeded?
After the death of his father, T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) returns home to the African nation of Wakanda to take his rightful place as king. When a powerful enemy suddenly reappears, T’Challa’s mettle as king – and as Black Panther – gets tested when he’s drawn into a conflict that puts the fate of Wakanda and the entire world at risk. Faced with treachery and danger, the young king must rally his allies and release the full power of Black Panther to defeat his foes and secure the safety of his people.
The opening sequence of Black Panther is an absolute treat as the audience are given a brief history of Wakanda and the tribes from which it grew. It’s a great montage to kick off a film that’s packed with stunning visuals and gorgeous landscapes, even though some of the special effects are left wanting at times.
Cast wise, this is one of the strongest entries into the MCU. Chadwick Boseman absolutely embodies the young, naïve yet warm T’Challa beautifully and it’s nice to see his character given some reference points after his sudden inclusion in Captain America: Civil War. Elsewhere, Lupita Nyong’o is always a pleasure to see on screen and her love interest to Boseman keeps him grounded over the course of the runtime.
For me the standout character is Danai Gurira’s Okoye, leader of a group of female warriors ordered to protect Wakanda and its king no matter what the cost. She’s certainly not to be messed with and gets a pleasing arc throughout. The script also seems to work best when she’s on screen.
When it comes to the bad guy, director Ryan Coogler (Creed) gets it nearly spot on. After dozens of, shall we say, lacklustre villains, the MCU receives its best yet. Michael B. Jordan’s Killmonger is, despite his ridiculous name, absolutely brilliant. Menacing and oddly charming in equal measure, he does away with the tradition of bizarre villain motives in the MCU. In fact, his motives throughout feel entirely believable and the film feels more grounded because of this.
Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion
Martin Freeman’s Agent Ross is a strange addition to the cast, simply because his character isn’t essential to the plot. Freeman is always a magnetic presence but he really doesn’t have all that much to do. Finally, Andy Serkis reprises his role as arms dealer Ulysses Klaue and is great fun.
Looking at Wakanda itself, Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion. It certainly feels more real than the hollow golden towers of Asgard (something thankfully fixed in last year’s Thor: Ragnarok), and Wakanda is a great addition to the many locations the Marvel Cinematic Universe has created.
So, I’ve mentioned disappointing special effects twice in this review and whilst they aren’t terrible, there are a few occasions where they are a little poor – especially evident in the film’s finale. For all his exciting filming style, Coogler’s shot choices occasionally jar with the uninspiring and lifeless CGI. Some of the landscapes also feel like a brochure for Disney’s upcoming The Lion King live-action remake.
I think it’s time to talk about film politics, because as much as Black Panther is a great addition to the MCU and a fine solo movie in itself, the legacy it will leave on the industry will be absolutely huge. With a majority black cast, strong female characters and a black director, it’s progressive and incredibly brave in its choices.
Any less of a story, director or cast wouldn’t have made it work and despite some poor CGI and slight pacing issues at the start, Black Panther is one of the best solo Marvel movies in years. Bring on Infinity War.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/02/15/black-panther-review-is-the-mcu-all-out-of-surprises/
That doesn’t mean they’re perfect however. The MCU has a distinct lack of decent villains, strong female characters and characters from ethnic minorities. In the run-up to this year’s Infinity War, Black Panther aims to turn what we know about Marvel on its head. But has it succeeded?
After the death of his father, T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) returns home to the African nation of Wakanda to take his rightful place as king. When a powerful enemy suddenly reappears, T’Challa’s mettle as king – and as Black Panther – gets tested when he’s drawn into a conflict that puts the fate of Wakanda and the entire world at risk. Faced with treachery and danger, the young king must rally his allies and release the full power of Black Panther to defeat his foes and secure the safety of his people.
The opening sequence of Black Panther is an absolute treat as the audience are given a brief history of Wakanda and the tribes from which it grew. It’s a great montage to kick off a film that’s packed with stunning visuals and gorgeous landscapes, even though some of the special effects are left wanting at times.
Cast wise, this is one of the strongest entries into the MCU. Chadwick Boseman absolutely embodies the young, naïve yet warm T’Challa beautifully and it’s nice to see his character given some reference points after his sudden inclusion in Captain America: Civil War. Elsewhere, Lupita Nyong’o is always a pleasure to see on screen and her love interest to Boseman keeps him grounded over the course of the runtime.
For me the standout character is Danai Gurira’s Okoye, leader of a group of female warriors ordered to protect Wakanda and its king no matter what the cost. She’s certainly not to be messed with and gets a pleasing arc throughout. The script also seems to work best when she’s on screen.
When it comes to the bad guy, director Ryan Coogler (Creed) gets it nearly spot on. After dozens of, shall we say, lacklustre villains, the MCU receives its best yet. Michael B. Jordan’s Killmonger is, despite his ridiculous name, absolutely brilliant. Menacing and oddly charming in equal measure, he does away with the tradition of bizarre villain motives in the MCU. In fact, his motives throughout feel entirely believable and the film feels more grounded because of this.
Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion
Martin Freeman’s Agent Ross is a strange addition to the cast, simply because his character isn’t essential to the plot. Freeman is always a magnetic presence but he really doesn’t have all that much to do. Finally, Andy Serkis reprises his role as arms dealer Ulysses Klaue and is great fun.
Looking at Wakanda itself, Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion. It certainly feels more real than the hollow golden towers of Asgard (something thankfully fixed in last year’s Thor: Ragnarok), and Wakanda is a great addition to the many locations the Marvel Cinematic Universe has created.
So, I’ve mentioned disappointing special effects twice in this review and whilst they aren’t terrible, there are a few occasions where they are a little poor – especially evident in the film’s finale. For all his exciting filming style, Coogler’s shot choices occasionally jar with the uninspiring and lifeless CGI. Some of the landscapes also feel like a brochure for Disney’s upcoming The Lion King live-action remake.
I think it’s time to talk about film politics, because as much as Black Panther is a great addition to the MCU and a fine solo movie in itself, the legacy it will leave on the industry will be absolutely huge. With a majority black cast, strong female characters and a black director, it’s progressive and incredibly brave in its choices.
Any less of a story, director or cast wouldn’t have made it work and despite some poor CGI and slight pacing issues at the start, Black Panther is one of the best solo Marvel movies in years. Bring on Infinity War.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/02/15/black-panther-review-is-the-mcu-all-out-of-surprises/