Search
Search results
Kevin Phillipson (10017 KP) rated Blinded by the Light (2019) in Movies
Sep 5, 2019
The boss (1 more)
80s soundtrack
I quite like it not bad not perfect but fantastic soundtrack I was teenager myself back in 80s and remembering alot of the music and the trends of the decade including that weather report of the hurricane of 87 would o watch probably just to listen to Springsteens music
Leanne Crabtree (480 KP) rated So Many Reasons Why (So Many Reasons, #1) in Books
Sep 6, 2019
This story just didn't do it for me; that's not to say its bad because it's not.
It was different plot-wise to everything else I've read which is a good thing but the romance between the characters felt a little unrealistic with how quickly and easily they fell for each other.
It was different plot-wise to everything else I've read which is a good thing but the romance between the characters felt a little unrealistic with how quickly and easily they fell for each other.
The Best Thing
10.0
Rate It
Book
Some things are easily forgiven. Other things… not so much. Lenny DeMaio made herself a...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Hurricane Heist (2018) in Movies
Mar 10, 2018
Doesn't Go Far Enough
There are times when all I want to do is to sit in a darkened movie theater, turn off my brain, and let a movie with a silly, over-the-top premise wash all over me. THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS films are an example of an "A" in this category. Last year's GEOSTORM was a "B" (it was so over-the-top that it was fun, especially when the meteorologist declared - as if he was reciting Shakespeare - "Oh my God, it's a GEOSTORM!"). Unfortunately, a "C" example of this is THE HURRICANE HEIST.
Directed by Rob Cohen - who brought us the original FAST AND FURIOUS film lo' those many years ago - THE HURRICANE HEIST tells the tale of a HEIST set during a...anyone?...HURRICANE. That's pretty much all you need to know of the plot. The rest is action, escapes, weather gone bad, bad guys being bad guys and good guys being good guys.
The good guys are Toby Kebbel (so good as the motion capture bad-guy ape in DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES), perennial "B"-movie actress Maggie Grace (TAKEN, LOST and the immortal HOT GIRL, FAST CAR, EATING A BANANA) and Ryan Kwanten (I guess he was in TRUE BLOOD). What do these good guys have in common? They are not hard to look at on the screen. The two men also have really bad Southern accents.
The bad guys are led by Ralph Ineson ( a perennial "that guy" in such films as STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI, GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY and KINGSMAN: THE SECRET SERVICE) and a host of "red shirts". The problem is that Ineson plays his bad guy role as a "that guy" and the "red shirts" have no personality at all. One guy tries to be the "loose cannon" but he doesn't go far enough, nor does Ineson or ANY of the bad guys.
Oh...did I mention Ben Cross (Sarek in the new STAR TREK films)? Cross leaped off the screen in the Oscar winning film CHARIOTS OF FIRE way back in 1981 and was going to be "the next big thing". How has that worked out for him? I'm sure he's making a nice living, but...
But...you don't come to this kind of films for the acting. You come to it for the insane premise, the over-the-top acting, the out-of-this-world stunts and special effects. Unfortunately, THE HURRICANE HEIST plays each one of these "safely". The premise is insane, just not insane enough. The acting is melodramatic - just not over-the-top. The script doesn't really have any "oh-my-gosh, did he just say that" lines and the action, stunts and special effects are pretty good, (maybe even good), but not great.
A pretty mediocre time at the movies. It did serve it's purpose, I turned my brain off for two hours. I just wish it didn't power down as well.
Letter Grade: C (thanks for trying)
5 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Directed by Rob Cohen - who brought us the original FAST AND FURIOUS film lo' those many years ago - THE HURRICANE HEIST tells the tale of a HEIST set during a...anyone?...HURRICANE. That's pretty much all you need to know of the plot. The rest is action, escapes, weather gone bad, bad guys being bad guys and good guys being good guys.
The good guys are Toby Kebbel (so good as the motion capture bad-guy ape in DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES), perennial "B"-movie actress Maggie Grace (TAKEN, LOST and the immortal HOT GIRL, FAST CAR, EATING A BANANA) and Ryan Kwanten (I guess he was in TRUE BLOOD). What do these good guys have in common? They are not hard to look at on the screen. The two men also have really bad Southern accents.
The bad guys are led by Ralph Ineson ( a perennial "that guy" in such films as STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI, GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY and KINGSMAN: THE SECRET SERVICE) and a host of "red shirts". The problem is that Ineson plays his bad guy role as a "that guy" and the "red shirts" have no personality at all. One guy tries to be the "loose cannon" but he doesn't go far enough, nor does Ineson or ANY of the bad guys.
Oh...did I mention Ben Cross (Sarek in the new STAR TREK films)? Cross leaped off the screen in the Oscar winning film CHARIOTS OF FIRE way back in 1981 and was going to be "the next big thing". How has that worked out for him? I'm sure he's making a nice living, but...
But...you don't come to this kind of films for the acting. You come to it for the insane premise, the over-the-top acting, the out-of-this-world stunts and special effects. Unfortunately, THE HURRICANE HEIST plays each one of these "safely". The premise is insane, just not insane enough. The acting is melodramatic - just not over-the-top. The script doesn't really have any "oh-my-gosh, did he just say that" lines and the action, stunts and special effects are pretty good, (maybe even good), but not great.
A pretty mediocre time at the movies. It did serve it's purpose, I turned my brain off for two hours. I just wish it didn't power down as well.
Letter Grade: C (thanks for trying)
5 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Casino Royale (1967) in Movies
Jul 24, 2020
It Gets Real Bad
Here’s what Rotten Tomatoes has to say because I couldn’t begin to tell you what this shit-show is about: “This James Bond spoof features the hero coming out of retirement to attempt to fix some problems for SMERSH, while a multitude of other subplots unwind about the central figure.” Yeah, even RT was having trouble trying to figure out what the hell was going on with the 1967 Casino Royale. How bad is it? Well, let’s just say I just finished reading a list of the Top 100 Worst Movies of All Time and I was very surprised to not see this movie on there.
Acting: 10
The movie was bad, but I honestly can’t say that the acting was. These professionals had a job to do and they did it…more or less. While there’s no one performance that really stood out for me, I can definitely remember thinking that no one shit the bed at least.
Beginning: 6
This movie is weird through and through and the beginning is no exception. I will say there was some mild interest after the first ten minutes. I knew it was going to be different than the previous Bond movies, but I wasn’t sure if that was a good thing or not.
Characters: 8
In addition to solid acting, the characters weren’t all that bad either. Sure James Bond was way more lame than the usual guy we had come to know and love over the previous few movies. But throw in characters like the aloof Evelyn Tremble (Peter Sellers) and you’ve got a fun cast of characters that at least try to keep things interesting.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Casino Royale is shot like they were given the lowest budget imaginable. Everything feels extremely cheap and done with little to no effort. It is a far cry from the previous Bond movies that give you groundbreaking shots and decent special effects. This movie’s visuals are mediocre at best.
Conflict: 6
Entertainment Value: 3
It’s never a good sign when I have to stop watching a movie at night and continue on in the morning. When it’s good enough, I will stay up no matter how tired I am. This movie was bad enough to put me right to sleep. I scored it a 3 because it reached a point where my interest was piqued in just how bad things were going to get.
Memorability: 8
It’s bad sure…but boy is it unforgettable bad. With all the craziness that ensued, they made sure you would remember it a long time after watching it. And you know what? There’s a fun respectability that comes with that.
Pace: 1
Plot: 2
Resolution: 6
The best part about the end? It was the end.
Overall: 55
I wanted to watch all the Bond movies, including the stinkers. Casino Royale is easily one of the stinkers. But, with movies as it is with everything, you can’t know where you’re going unless you see where you’ve been.
Acting: 10
The movie was bad, but I honestly can’t say that the acting was. These professionals had a job to do and they did it…more or less. While there’s no one performance that really stood out for me, I can definitely remember thinking that no one shit the bed at least.
Beginning: 6
This movie is weird through and through and the beginning is no exception. I will say there was some mild interest after the first ten minutes. I knew it was going to be different than the previous Bond movies, but I wasn’t sure if that was a good thing or not.
Characters: 8
In addition to solid acting, the characters weren’t all that bad either. Sure James Bond was way more lame than the usual guy we had come to know and love over the previous few movies. But throw in characters like the aloof Evelyn Tremble (Peter Sellers) and you’ve got a fun cast of characters that at least try to keep things interesting.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Casino Royale is shot like they were given the lowest budget imaginable. Everything feels extremely cheap and done with little to no effort. It is a far cry from the previous Bond movies that give you groundbreaking shots and decent special effects. This movie’s visuals are mediocre at best.
Conflict: 6
Entertainment Value: 3
It’s never a good sign when I have to stop watching a movie at night and continue on in the morning. When it’s good enough, I will stay up no matter how tired I am. This movie was bad enough to put me right to sleep. I scored it a 3 because it reached a point where my interest was piqued in just how bad things were going to get.
Memorability: 8
It’s bad sure…but boy is it unforgettable bad. With all the craziness that ensued, they made sure you would remember it a long time after watching it. And you know what? There’s a fun respectability that comes with that.
Pace: 1
Plot: 2
Resolution: 6
The best part about the end? It was the end.
Overall: 55
I wanted to watch all the Bond movies, including the stinkers. Casino Royale is easily one of the stinkers. But, with movies as it is with everything, you can’t know where you’re going unless you see where you’ve been.
Lee (2222 KP) rated The House (2017) in Movies
Jul 14, 2017
Worst movie I've seen in a very, very long time
Usually when I review comedies I start off by complaining about how disappointing they tend to be these days. Sometimes they manage to prove me wrong (Bad Moms), sometimes they’re not quite as bad as I was expecting (Baywatch). The last time I was seriously annoyed about how bad a comedy was it was Office Christmas Party, but even then that managed to raise a laugh or two. The House though, well that goes way beyond that, taking it to a whole other level by having absolutely no laughs in it at all!
Will Ferrell is Scott, Amy Poehler is his wife Kate. When their daughter Alex gets into the university she wanted, they’re over the moon. Especially as the town runs some kind of scholarship program, paying for one lucky students education each year. This years lucky recipient is due to be Alex but when sleazy city councilman Bob decides to cancel the program in favour of building a huge pool for the town, Scott and Kate need to come up with another way of raising the money. Recently divorced neighbour Frank has a big empty house and between them they hit upon the idea of building a casino in his home, somewhere for the locals to come and spend all their money. Things go well for a while, then things get way out of hand. Cue the opportunity for some riotous, hilarious humour…
Only there’s none of that. It’s riotous, but this is just such a lazily written movie that the humour is non-existent. Featuring a date rape ‘gag’ within the first five minutes(?!) it just gets progressively worse from there. Pointless, nonsensical playground style bickering, name calling and random violence feature heavily throughout in a scatter-gun attempt at trying to raise a laugh. All of this ends up coming across as either poorly written, badly improvised, or both. Even the editing is a total disaster – in one scene Amy Poehler has a guy standing right behind her, cut to another camera and he’s gone, cut back and he’s there again, cut back and he’s gone!
The biggest disappointment about this is the complete waste of talent. Admittedly, Will Ferrell is on a downward spiral anyway since his Anchorman days and the brilliant Step Brothers, but you’d still expect more from him than this. One of my favourite TV shows, Parks and Recreation, stars Amy Poehler as the hilarious Leslie Knope, so I’d expect way more from her too. Even her movie roles haven’t been too bad so far. I guess it just proves that if you’ve got a seriously dud script on your hands, there isn’t really much that anyone can do to fix it. This isn’t just a bad comedy, it’s a bad, bad movie.
Will Ferrell is Scott, Amy Poehler is his wife Kate. When their daughter Alex gets into the university she wanted, they’re over the moon. Especially as the town runs some kind of scholarship program, paying for one lucky students education each year. This years lucky recipient is due to be Alex but when sleazy city councilman Bob decides to cancel the program in favour of building a huge pool for the town, Scott and Kate need to come up with another way of raising the money. Recently divorced neighbour Frank has a big empty house and between them they hit upon the idea of building a casino in his home, somewhere for the locals to come and spend all their money. Things go well for a while, then things get way out of hand. Cue the opportunity for some riotous, hilarious humour…
Only there’s none of that. It’s riotous, but this is just such a lazily written movie that the humour is non-existent. Featuring a date rape ‘gag’ within the first five minutes(?!) it just gets progressively worse from there. Pointless, nonsensical playground style bickering, name calling and random violence feature heavily throughout in a scatter-gun attempt at trying to raise a laugh. All of this ends up coming across as either poorly written, badly improvised, or both. Even the editing is a total disaster – in one scene Amy Poehler has a guy standing right behind her, cut to another camera and he’s gone, cut back and he’s there again, cut back and he’s gone!
The biggest disappointment about this is the complete waste of talent. Admittedly, Will Ferrell is on a downward spiral anyway since his Anchorman days and the brilliant Step Brothers, but you’d still expect more from him than this. One of my favourite TV shows, Parks and Recreation, stars Amy Poehler as the hilarious Leslie Knope, so I’d expect way more from her too. Even her movie roles haven’t been too bad so far. I guess it just proves that if you’ve got a seriously dud script on your hands, there isn’t really much that anyone can do to fix it. This isn’t just a bad comedy, it’s a bad, bad movie.
The Wish-Bringer
Geraldine McCaughrean and Jana Diemberger
Book
The Little Monk Monacello returns, once again beautifully illustrated with Jana Diemberger's...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Fantastic Four (1994) in Movies
Jul 30, 2020
You Think You've Seen Bad?
Before the 2005 stinker, New Horizons film company tried their hand at creating the origin story of a group of four that become superheroes after coming in contact with a meteor collision in space. Both bombed miserably. This version is one of the all-time worst movies I have seen in my life.
Acting: 2
Beginning: 1
Characters: 3
Cinematography/Visuals: 1
If you are looking for some of the worst special effects you have seen in your life, look no further. The scene that points this out more than anything is the one where they first discover their powers. The low-budgetness of it all is mindblowing. You’ll have to see it to believe it but it will feel like you’re watching a PBS special.
Conflict: 0
Entertainment Value: 0
Memorability: 5
It is memorable but only in a sense of how bad it is. It’s one of those movies you could watch with friends and pick a part while drinking or smoking, whatever your poison is. It’s bad, sure, but in an unforgettable type of way.
Pace: 1
Hard as a rock to decipher or get through. There is never really a story so it’s hard to manage a pace against something that doesn’t exist. For what it’s worth, it is consistent. Consistently bad.
Plot: 0
I feel like I’ve heard six-year-olds tell better stories than this. At no point does the way this story unfold makes sense. There’s not set up, not character development, no motivations. It’s just…bad.
Resolution: 4
Overall: 17
For what it’s worth, I gave Battlefield Earth the same exact score and that movie had a massive budget with A-list actors. Fantastic Four is a nightmare but I can say I’ve seen worse. If you’re a fan of movies, I say watch it! Never hurts to check a turd off your list every once in awhile.
Acting: 2
Beginning: 1
Characters: 3
Cinematography/Visuals: 1
If you are looking for some of the worst special effects you have seen in your life, look no further. The scene that points this out more than anything is the one where they first discover their powers. The low-budgetness of it all is mindblowing. You’ll have to see it to believe it but it will feel like you’re watching a PBS special.
Conflict: 0
Entertainment Value: 0
Memorability: 5
It is memorable but only in a sense of how bad it is. It’s one of those movies you could watch with friends and pick a part while drinking or smoking, whatever your poison is. It’s bad, sure, but in an unforgettable type of way.
Pace: 1
Hard as a rock to decipher or get through. There is never really a story so it’s hard to manage a pace against something that doesn’t exist. For what it’s worth, it is consistent. Consistently bad.
Plot: 0
I feel like I’ve heard six-year-olds tell better stories than this. At no point does the way this story unfold makes sense. There’s not set up, not character development, no motivations. It’s just…bad.
Resolution: 4
Overall: 17
For what it’s worth, I gave Battlefield Earth the same exact score and that movie had a massive budget with A-list actors. Fantastic Four is a nightmare but I can say I’ve seen worse. If you’re a fan of movies, I say watch it! Never hurts to check a turd off your list every once in awhile.
Leanne Crabtree (480 KP) rated Clan of the Jersey Boys (Fangsters #1) in Books
Sep 6, 2019
DNF
I hate DNFs. I always feel bad for not finishing them but sometimes I just cant get into a story. I stopped at 38%.
Right. Well, I expected this to be betterthat sounds bad I knowbut I was expecting them to be these tough vampires who kicked arse while running an illegal empire. In a way it was, but it didnt seem bad-arse enough for me. Sure there were a few scenes with retribution/warnings handed out to people but I didnt feel it.
Another thing that got me was all the mention of family and its many members. Yeah I know families are important in Italian/Sicilian cultures but more people kept getting mentioned and I found myself getting confused. What with Anton and someone else being turned by one person and his dad and uncle turned by someone else and this guy turned by the brother of that guy making them cousins I got lost. It was a little too much for me to keep up with.
The relationship between Anton and Leo happened a little too fast for me to believe. Not the sexhes an attractive guy after allbut the love yous and how strong their feelings were after the one night they spent together. Or maybe I just missed something?
Its not a bad story, it was just a little different to what I normally read; the mobster/gangster bit anyway. If you like vampires, mobsters and m/m stories then you will probably like this.
I hate DNFs. I always feel bad for not finishing them but sometimes I just cant get into a story. I stopped at 38%.
Right. Well, I expected this to be betterthat sounds bad I knowbut I was expecting them to be these tough vampires who kicked arse while running an illegal empire. In a way it was, but it didnt seem bad-arse enough for me. Sure there were a few scenes with retribution/warnings handed out to people but I didnt feel it.
Another thing that got me was all the mention of family and its many members. Yeah I know families are important in Italian/Sicilian cultures but more people kept getting mentioned and I found myself getting confused. What with Anton and someone else being turned by one person and his dad and uncle turned by someone else and this guy turned by the brother of that guy making them cousins I got lost. It was a little too much for me to keep up with.
The relationship between Anton and Leo happened a little too fast for me to believe. Not the sexhes an attractive guy after allbut the love yous and how strong their feelings were after the one night they spent together. Or maybe I just missed something?
Its not a bad story, it was just a little different to what I normally read; the mobster/gangster bit anyway. If you like vampires, mobsters and m/m stories then you will probably like this.