Search
Search results
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Rear Window (1954) in Movies
Dec 24, 2018
Great Mystery
A photojournalist is wheelchair-ridden, watching people in his apartment complex from his window for hours. He’s thrown for a loop when he witnesses what he thinks is a murder. He wants to get to the bottom of it or die trying.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
I’ll start with Stella (Thelma Ritter) who is easily my favorite character in the entire movie. She is an in-home nurse who is taking care of main character L.B. Jeffries (James Stewart). Out of all the characters in the story, she has the brightest sense of humor. I also loved that she takes zero guff from L.B., sometimes even making it seem like he works for her. She was stern and went beyond the parameters of her job doing everything from offering love advice to helping L.B. dive into the murder.
Of course I appreciated a number of the other characters as well, including the creepy Lars Thorwald (Raymond Burr). He is the object of L.B.’s accusation. Lars does a great job of making you think L.B. could be right. At other times, Lars seems like just a normal guy going about his daily routine. He takes strange to new heights. Each of the characters, the important ones anyway, help to frame the story and keep you intrigued.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 8
Genre: 5
Memorability: 10
Pace: 9
Plot: 10
Rear Window succeeds with a script that’s extremely crisp and engaging. Mystery and tension abound as you try and figure out what’s going to happen next. The story is simple, yet is peeled back in layers. Very well done.
Resolution: 10
I won’t dive in too much here but I will say that the ending is perfect to the point that it answers all the right questions. It doesn’t overdo things and try and unnecessarily put a bow on things. We find out what we need to know and that’s that.
Overall: 92
Alfred Hitchcock puts together stories like a boxer puts together a fight. He hits you with little jabs that wake you up. Eventually he goes in for the kill with harder punches that you’re not ready for. He is definitely one of the greats and Rear Window is yet another one of his classics to show for it.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
I’ll start with Stella (Thelma Ritter) who is easily my favorite character in the entire movie. She is an in-home nurse who is taking care of main character L.B. Jeffries (James Stewart). Out of all the characters in the story, she has the brightest sense of humor. I also loved that she takes zero guff from L.B., sometimes even making it seem like he works for her. She was stern and went beyond the parameters of her job doing everything from offering love advice to helping L.B. dive into the murder.
Of course I appreciated a number of the other characters as well, including the creepy Lars Thorwald (Raymond Burr). He is the object of L.B.’s accusation. Lars does a great job of making you think L.B. could be right. At other times, Lars seems like just a normal guy going about his daily routine. He takes strange to new heights. Each of the characters, the important ones anyway, help to frame the story and keep you intrigued.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 8
Genre: 5
Memorability: 10
Pace: 9
Plot: 10
Rear Window succeeds with a script that’s extremely crisp and engaging. Mystery and tension abound as you try and figure out what’s going to happen next. The story is simple, yet is peeled back in layers. Very well done.
Resolution: 10
I won’t dive in too much here but I will say that the ending is perfect to the point that it answers all the right questions. It doesn’t overdo things and try and unnecessarily put a bow on things. We find out what we need to know and that’s that.
Overall: 92
Alfred Hitchcock puts together stories like a boxer puts together a fight. He hits you with little jabs that wake you up. Eventually he goes in for the kill with harder punches that you’re not ready for. He is definitely one of the greats and Rear Window is yet another one of his classics to show for it.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Echoes in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Author in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
<h2><strong>Three words: Hackers. Go. Missing.</strong></h2>
I'm not talking baby hackers who have no clue what they're doing and slipped up badly I'm talking top of the ladder ones.
Mallory Park is a hacker who moderates The Forum, a message board where hackers are anonymous, crack down on the dirty secrets of companies, and leak them out to the world anonymously. She's extremely motivated and passionate about her work, and likes to have control she's independent, wants to do her own thing, and based on her background, it definitely fits her character. Mallory, however...
Just comes out cold. Apathetic. Indifferent. She doesn't really have any clue what to do with herself because hacking IS who she is. She is also extremely brilliant (I would love to have her math skills right now in Calculus...), hates being touched (much like me...), and is as awkward as David 1 and David 2 (one of them is a <a title="The Sorcerer's Apprentice review" href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/movie-review-the-sorcerers-apprentice"; target="_blank" rel="noopener tag">Physics major</a> and the other is <a title="Steelheart by Brandon Sanderson review" href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-steelheart-by-brandon-sanderson"; target="_blank" rel="noopener tag">terrible with metaphors</a>).
While I like Mallory, I think Mallory came more out of her shell when she meets Warden. Warden is very cheery, optimistic, and hilarious he's really just one of those adorable nerds who would love to squish hug. And despite the fact he is introduced as Mallory's online friend from The Forum, I can hear his voice and see his facial expressions leaping off the screen at Mallory.
There's so much anticipation and danger (and Warden's humor laced throughout) as Mallory gets closer to finding out about the missing hackers, but in the long run, <em>Echoes</em> really just teaches about online safety in a similar, yet different way compared to other books related to online safety.
But you should really just read it for Warden's humor.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-echoes-by-laura-tisda/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<h2><strong>Three words: Hackers. Go. Missing.</strong></h2>
I'm not talking baby hackers who have no clue what they're doing and slipped up badly I'm talking top of the ladder ones.
Mallory Park is a hacker who moderates The Forum, a message board where hackers are anonymous, crack down on the dirty secrets of companies, and leak them out to the world anonymously. She's extremely motivated and passionate about her work, and likes to have control she's independent, wants to do her own thing, and based on her background, it definitely fits her character. Mallory, however...
Just comes out cold. Apathetic. Indifferent. She doesn't really have any clue what to do with herself because hacking IS who she is. She is also extremely brilliant (I would love to have her math skills right now in Calculus...), hates being touched (much like me...), and is as awkward as David 1 and David 2 (one of them is a <a title="The Sorcerer's Apprentice review" href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/movie-review-the-sorcerers-apprentice"; target="_blank" rel="noopener tag">Physics major</a> and the other is <a title="Steelheart by Brandon Sanderson review" href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-steelheart-by-brandon-sanderson"; target="_blank" rel="noopener tag">terrible with metaphors</a>).
While I like Mallory, I think Mallory came more out of her shell when she meets Warden. Warden is very cheery, optimistic, and hilarious he's really just one of those adorable nerds who would love to squish hug. And despite the fact he is introduced as Mallory's online friend from The Forum, I can hear his voice and see his facial expressions leaping off the screen at Mallory.
There's so much anticipation and danger (and Warden's humor laced throughout) as Mallory gets closer to finding out about the missing hackers, but in the long run, <em>Echoes</em> really just teaches about online safety in a similar, yet different way compared to other books related to online safety.
But you should really just read it for Warden's humor.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-echoes-by-laura-tisda/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Personal History of David Copperfield (2019) in Movies
Jan 29, 2020
Hard Cake
The personal history of david copperfield really disappointed me especially after such a cracking trailer and while no means a bad film it just really wasnt a film I enjoyed. What I was expecting was a sharply written, quirky yet dry and playful adaptation of the Charles Dickens novel something similar to a yorgos lanthimos film like the favorite for instance but sadly I found this movie to be extreamly dull, uninteresting and severely lacking overall. I wouldnt say its necessarily bad however it all just felt very flat to me. Characters didnt feel believable, humour seemed forced and while david patel burts at the seemes constantly with energy the film around him didnt seem to follow along the same. Very interesting ideas are present here and the emphases is on life almost being like a stage play with people we meet being the characters in it. See everyone in life is unique and has their own distinctive traits/interesting stories and no matter what happenes in our lives neither one is no less meaningless or important than the other. This does come across brilliantly and shows the bad traits of human nature, see everyone is on the path to happiness its just what they do and who they exploit or how much they choose to lie to get there and achieve sucess is diffrent from person to person. Then on a positive side it also shows how we should all realise where we have come from, to be greatful for what we have, to let our creativity flow and to appreciate these characters that enter our lives and inspire/care for us. So heres where I feel conflicted as much as I like these great ideas I feel they they just aren't integrated well enough with the dull story or the forced comedy and sure the film is well made but to watch its just not exciting or that engaging and the characters all became forgettable once off screen just like when watching a sketch show. Failing to keep my intrest constantly made the runtime feel a drag too and by the time I left I struggled to remember much of what had just happened infront of me wishing I'd of just stayed home and watched Perfume or The Favorite instead in the warm. No doubt some will enjoy this but will they be talking about it in a month? I highly doubt it.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Falcon and the Winter Soldier in TV
Apr 24, 2021 (Updated Jul 16, 2021)
Contains spoilers, click to show
On the surface, The Falcon and the Winter Soldier starts off in a familiar fashion. The first couple of episodes feel like a (welcome) return to the earlier days of the MCU, but as the story develops, it just blossoms into so much more.
The narrative mainly focuses on the two titular Avengers taking on a revolutionary group, hell bent on returning to a post snap world. It deals head first with the fallout of Thanos' devastating blow in Infinity War, and the subsequent return of the 3.5 billion people who re-materialised after Endgame, and the issues that came with them. It's good to see that Marvel Studios aren't avoiding these complicated plot points that could have potentially just been swept under the rug.
The series also develops the John Walker/U.S. Agent comic story. Its well realised and Wyatt Russell is fantastic in the role. Daniel Brühl returns as Baron Zemo after an underwhelming narrative in Civil War, and unexpectedly is plain hilarious (and finally in full costume, even if it is for one scene).
As well as all this, fans of the comics are treated to a plethora of potential future stories - The introduction of Madripoor marks the first proper acknowledgement of X-Men material. Lesser known comic characters such as Isiah Bradley, Madame Hydra, Battlestar, Batroc, and Ayo are given screentime. There's even some carrots dangled for a potential Young Avengers adaption with the appearance of Eli Bradley/Patriot (and with Kate Bishop incoming, surely this is a thing)
Perhaps most importantly, TFATWS doesn't shy away from tackling race issues, touching upon real world events, and developing them into the plot. This spills over into the future of Captain America, and what the shield represents to the black community. There are some truly powerful moments of dialogue, especially between Isiah and Sam. It's all handled respectfully, and brings new depth the MCU, as they stride into a more diverse future.
With this series, and the preceding WandaVision, this new phase for the MCU is off to an incredibly strong start, and I'm so excited to see where they take it. Between Falcon rightfully taking the reigns as Captain America, the upcoming Shang Chi movie finally adapting the martial arts corner of Marvel for the MCU, and the tantalising promise of the multiverse, it's a good time to be a Marvel fan.
The narrative mainly focuses on the two titular Avengers taking on a revolutionary group, hell bent on returning to a post snap world. It deals head first with the fallout of Thanos' devastating blow in Infinity War, and the subsequent return of the 3.5 billion people who re-materialised after Endgame, and the issues that came with them. It's good to see that Marvel Studios aren't avoiding these complicated plot points that could have potentially just been swept under the rug.
The series also develops the John Walker/U.S. Agent comic story. Its well realised and Wyatt Russell is fantastic in the role. Daniel Brühl returns as Baron Zemo after an underwhelming narrative in Civil War, and unexpectedly is plain hilarious (and finally in full costume, even if it is for one scene).
As well as all this, fans of the comics are treated to a plethora of potential future stories - The introduction of Madripoor marks the first proper acknowledgement of X-Men material. Lesser known comic characters such as Isiah Bradley, Madame Hydra, Battlestar, Batroc, and Ayo are given screentime. There's even some carrots dangled for a potential Young Avengers adaption with the appearance of Eli Bradley/Patriot (and with Kate Bishop incoming, surely this is a thing)
Perhaps most importantly, TFATWS doesn't shy away from tackling race issues, touching upon real world events, and developing them into the plot. This spills over into the future of Captain America, and what the shield represents to the black community. There are some truly powerful moments of dialogue, especially between Isiah and Sam. It's all handled respectfully, and brings new depth the MCU, as they stride into a more diverse future.
With this series, and the preceding WandaVision, this new phase for the MCU is off to an incredibly strong start, and I'm so excited to see where they take it. Between Falcon rightfully taking the reigns as Captain America, the upcoming Shang Chi movie finally adapting the martial arts corner of Marvel for the MCU, and the tantalising promise of the multiverse, it's a good time to be a Marvel fan.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Saw III (2006) in Movies
Oct 8, 2020
The first Saw film is genuinely great. The second I can tolerate. Saw III however is where the franchise started to lose me.
At this point, it's still not as convoluted as the series eventually gets, but it's here where you can clearly see the cracks start to appear, where every entry going forwards tries to ape what made the first film a success, whilst simultaneously becoming increasingly mean spirited - it's the first entry that really hints at the gore and viscera being more important than a decent plot.
The main positive of Saw III is the sheer amount of Tobin Bell we're treated to. Even on his death bed, Jigsaw is still appropriately sinister, and it's hard to see the role belonging to any other actor.
It's also nice to see Dina Meyer back for another turn, but her role here is all too brief.
Unfortunately, everyone else I can take or leave. Shawnee Smith returns as Jigsaws' apprentice, and her character is just so damn unlikable with no redeemable features, and is a far cry from her more compelling teacher, who always had a reason for doing what he did.
Then there's Jeff (Slow Ass Motherfuckin' Jeff to some) played by Angus Macfadyen. Honestly, I struggle to recall a protagonist in a horror movie that is quite as useless as this guy. He's insufferable to the point of sheer frustration.
Everyone else is just hugely forgettable, even Costas Mandylor who would go on to have a bigger role in the series moving forward.
The mixture of these non characters makes for a boring narrative, that ends up relying on gore for any worth.
The various Jigsaw traps seen in these films become more ambitious, theatrical, and disgusting as the franchise waddles along, and that's not necessarily a good thing. With each film, the more minimalist approach to the first film seems further and further out of reach.
As I mentioned, some of the deaths in Saw III are just plain mean spirited. Gore in horror movies really works when the film still manages to be entertaining, something that the bleak Saw III just isn't.
It's still not a terrible film, but honestly, the series just nosedives from here on out in my opinion, and this third entry is the jumping point.
At this point, it's still not as convoluted as the series eventually gets, but it's here where you can clearly see the cracks start to appear, where every entry going forwards tries to ape what made the first film a success, whilst simultaneously becoming increasingly mean spirited - it's the first entry that really hints at the gore and viscera being more important than a decent plot.
The main positive of Saw III is the sheer amount of Tobin Bell we're treated to. Even on his death bed, Jigsaw is still appropriately sinister, and it's hard to see the role belonging to any other actor.
It's also nice to see Dina Meyer back for another turn, but her role here is all too brief.
Unfortunately, everyone else I can take or leave. Shawnee Smith returns as Jigsaws' apprentice, and her character is just so damn unlikable with no redeemable features, and is a far cry from her more compelling teacher, who always had a reason for doing what he did.
Then there's Jeff (Slow Ass Motherfuckin' Jeff to some) played by Angus Macfadyen. Honestly, I struggle to recall a protagonist in a horror movie that is quite as useless as this guy. He's insufferable to the point of sheer frustration.
Everyone else is just hugely forgettable, even Costas Mandylor who would go on to have a bigger role in the series moving forward.
The mixture of these non characters makes for a boring narrative, that ends up relying on gore for any worth.
The various Jigsaw traps seen in these films become more ambitious, theatrical, and disgusting as the franchise waddles along, and that's not necessarily a good thing. With each film, the more minimalist approach to the first film seems further and further out of reach.
As I mentioned, some of the deaths in Saw III are just plain mean spirited. Gore in horror movies really works when the film still manages to be entertaining, something that the bleak Saw III just isn't.
It's still not a terrible film, but honestly, the series just nosedives from here on out in my opinion, and this third entry is the jumping point.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Spencer (2021) in Movies
Feb 10, 2022
Stewart's Performance Elevates a Mediocre Film
Pablo Loraine’s SPENCER is not a subtle film, it shows the confinement and suffocation of Lady Diana Spencer under the watchful eye of the British monarchy and is not shy about who the bad guys are.
This sort of one-sided-ness of storytelling does not a compelling film make, but what does make this film compelling is the outstanding performance that is at the center of this film, Kristen Stewart as Lady Diana Spencer.
Telling the tale of the last Christmas that Diana spent as a member of the Royal family, SPENCER shows a a person in mental distress, living an ordered life that leaves little room for spontaneity or originality - things that Diana had in spades.
The only thing that makes this film work is the Oscar Nominated performance of Kristen Stewart as Diana. The way this movie was filmed, it would have been very easy for Stewart to portray Diana as a one-note victim, by she embodies this character with joy, sorrow, love, anger, depression and acceptance - sometimes at the same time. It is a tour-de-force performance that is well deserved of the Oscar nom.
What doesn’t work is the perspective of the film by Director Pablo Larrain (who also Directed Natalie Portman to an Oscar nom in JACKIE). He, clearly, had a vision and the look of the film is strong. What isn’t strong is the characters apart from Diana. The Royal family (especially Jack Farthings’ Prince Charles and Stella Gonet’s Queen Elizabeth) are mustache-twirling villians, Diana’s sons William and Harry look like they came out of the “Weasley Family” casting agency, while terrific character actors like Sally Hawkins, Timothy Spall and Sean Harris have almost (but not quite) interesting characters that don’t quite gel with what is going on.
But that is besides the point, for this is a story about Diana and Stewart is front and center in almost every scene - and is fascinating to watch - especially as she embodies Lady Diana in the marvelous costumes by Jacqueline Durran.
Come for the look at the Royals, stay for the performance by Stewart - one that I would not be suprised is honored come Oscar night.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This sort of one-sided-ness of storytelling does not a compelling film make, but what does make this film compelling is the outstanding performance that is at the center of this film, Kristen Stewart as Lady Diana Spencer.
Telling the tale of the last Christmas that Diana spent as a member of the Royal family, SPENCER shows a a person in mental distress, living an ordered life that leaves little room for spontaneity or originality - things that Diana had in spades.
The only thing that makes this film work is the Oscar Nominated performance of Kristen Stewart as Diana. The way this movie was filmed, it would have been very easy for Stewart to portray Diana as a one-note victim, by she embodies this character with joy, sorrow, love, anger, depression and acceptance - sometimes at the same time. It is a tour-de-force performance that is well deserved of the Oscar nom.
What doesn’t work is the perspective of the film by Director Pablo Larrain (who also Directed Natalie Portman to an Oscar nom in JACKIE). He, clearly, had a vision and the look of the film is strong. What isn’t strong is the characters apart from Diana. The Royal family (especially Jack Farthings’ Prince Charles and Stella Gonet’s Queen Elizabeth) are mustache-twirling villians, Diana’s sons William and Harry look like they came out of the “Weasley Family” casting agency, while terrific character actors like Sally Hawkins, Timothy Spall and Sean Harris have almost (but not quite) interesting characters that don’t quite gel with what is going on.
But that is besides the point, for this is a story about Diana and Stewart is front and center in almost every scene - and is fascinating to watch - especially as she embodies Lady Diana in the marvelous costumes by Jacqueline Durran.
Come for the look at the Royals, stay for the performance by Stewart - one that I would not be suprised is honored come Oscar night.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 (2023) in Movies
May 6, 2023
A Return to Form for the MCU
Welcome back, MCU, we missed you.
With GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, VOLUME 3, the MCU has returned to the top ranks of movie-making, creating a thrilling, character-driven action/adventure that is emotionally charged and satisfying.
Directed and Written by James Gunn (as he has done with the first 2 Guardians films), Guardians 3 ties off the trilogy of this ragtag group of heroes in an appropriate, fun way by focusing on something that recent MCU films failed to do - it focuses on the characters and their relationships and how the out-of-this-world adventure that they are on will, ultimately, grow and enrich these characters and relationships.
Chris Pratt (Star-Lord), Zoe Saldana (Gamora), Dave Bautista (Drax), Pom Klementieff (Mantis) and the voice of Vin Diesel (Groot) are all back and they all slip, comfortably, into their roles and relationships and it feels good to have them back together again.
Karen Gillan (Nebula) and, especially, Bradley Cooper (the voice of Rocket Racoon) shine above the rest as the script calls for their characters to grow in smart, fulfilling ways and both actors shine in these circumstances.
This film also has something that the previous few films - especially the latest Ant-Man film - were lacking…a terrific villain. Chukwudi Iwuji is terribly scary as THE HIGH EVOLUTIONARY who is so single-minded in his mission that living beings - and planets - are expendable. It is a terrific performance (and the 2nd straight strong one from Iwuji in a comic book vehicle, following his work in the HBO-MAX DCU TV Series Peacemaker). He is a talent to keep an eye on.
Of course, credit to all of this goes to James Gunn who, after some controversy, returned to helm the end of the Guardians trilogy (at least the Guardians of the Galaxy with THESE characters) and he hits the mark, finding the right blend of action and character that makes the audience care very much what happens to this group. It is a strong exit film from the MCU for Gunn and the DCU is very lucky/smart to hire him as their artistic director going forward.
A very rewarding end to the Guardians trilogy - and a return to form (at least for 1 film) for the MCU.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
With GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, VOLUME 3, the MCU has returned to the top ranks of movie-making, creating a thrilling, character-driven action/adventure that is emotionally charged and satisfying.
Directed and Written by James Gunn (as he has done with the first 2 Guardians films), Guardians 3 ties off the trilogy of this ragtag group of heroes in an appropriate, fun way by focusing on something that recent MCU films failed to do - it focuses on the characters and their relationships and how the out-of-this-world adventure that they are on will, ultimately, grow and enrich these characters and relationships.
Chris Pratt (Star-Lord), Zoe Saldana (Gamora), Dave Bautista (Drax), Pom Klementieff (Mantis) and the voice of Vin Diesel (Groot) are all back and they all slip, comfortably, into their roles and relationships and it feels good to have them back together again.
Karen Gillan (Nebula) and, especially, Bradley Cooper (the voice of Rocket Racoon) shine above the rest as the script calls for their characters to grow in smart, fulfilling ways and both actors shine in these circumstances.
This film also has something that the previous few films - especially the latest Ant-Man film - were lacking…a terrific villain. Chukwudi Iwuji is terribly scary as THE HIGH EVOLUTIONARY who is so single-minded in his mission that living beings - and planets - are expendable. It is a terrific performance (and the 2nd straight strong one from Iwuji in a comic book vehicle, following his work in the HBO-MAX DCU TV Series Peacemaker). He is a talent to keep an eye on.
Of course, credit to all of this goes to James Gunn who, after some controversy, returned to helm the end of the Guardians trilogy (at least the Guardians of the Galaxy with THESE characters) and he hits the mark, finding the right blend of action and character that makes the audience care very much what happens to this group. It is a strong exit film from the MCU for Gunn and the DCU is very lucky/smart to hire him as their artistic director going forward.
A very rewarding end to the Guardians trilogy - and a return to form (at least for 1 film) for the MCU.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Darren (1599 KP) rated Unnatural (2015) in Movies
Oct 24, 2019
Characters – Martin is the expert in the area where the photoshoot takes place, he knows the wildlife and how to deal with any threats that come his way and must protect the people who are not used to the threat. Dr Lindval was part of the research team that created the polar bear, she is desperate to survive once it is free but does know more than she is letting on. Brooking in the photographer on the shoot, he does lack the guts to defend himself from the threat. We also have the models but they are here to look pretty through the terror.
Performance – James Remar is clearly the biggest draw in this film and he is good without being his best, when you look into the other performance we get the mystery from Fenn and the annoying wimpy guy from Carlson hitting the marks we are expecting to see in the film like this.
Story – Group of people in Alaska with no escape must rely on one expert to keep them safe against an unknown creature for a set amount of days, well this is easy enough to go with and stops a lot of pointless discussion about trying to get help when there isn’t any, we also have the characters getting picked off in the random order like you would expect which is fine too.
Action/Horror – The action is mostly running from the attacks from the creature which isn’t the most impressive either.
Settings – The setting is the highlight as we have the group trapped with nowhere to run for the 3 days before the next plan arrives.
Special Effects – The effects look mostly practical as we barely get to see the monster apart from in the shadows.
Scene of the Movie – The first attack is a fun moment.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t see enough of the creature.
Final Thoughts – This is a forgettable creature feature that tries to ask bigger questions but doesn’t seem to want to try and answer them.
Overall: Not one of the best.
Performance – James Remar is clearly the biggest draw in this film and he is good without being his best, when you look into the other performance we get the mystery from Fenn and the annoying wimpy guy from Carlson hitting the marks we are expecting to see in the film like this.
Story – Group of people in Alaska with no escape must rely on one expert to keep them safe against an unknown creature for a set amount of days, well this is easy enough to go with and stops a lot of pointless discussion about trying to get help when there isn’t any, we also have the characters getting picked off in the random order like you would expect which is fine too.
Action/Horror – The action is mostly running from the attacks from the creature which isn’t the most impressive either.
Settings – The setting is the highlight as we have the group trapped with nowhere to run for the 3 days before the next plan arrives.
Special Effects – The effects look mostly practical as we barely get to see the monster apart from in the shadows.
Scene of the Movie – The first attack is a fun moment.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t see enough of the creature.
Final Thoughts – This is a forgettable creature feature that tries to ask bigger questions but doesn’t seem to want to try and answer them.
Overall: Not one of the best.
American Star. Jackie Collins
6.0
Rate It
Book
Featuring a brand new introduction from bestselling author, Isabelle Broom, talking about what...
The Academy Awards: The Complete Unofficial History - Revised and Up-to-Date
Jim Piazza and Gail Kinn
Book
Updated to include the 2014 Academy Awards, this is the definitive guide to 86 years of the Oscars,...