Search

Search only in certain items:

Bloodshot (2020)
Bloodshot (2020)
2020 | Action, Drama, Fantasy
It's nice to get a different side of the comic book genre for once, I'm still suffering from Marvel/Avengers fatigue so this was a welcome diversion.

After a successful operation, soldier Ray Garrison has come home to take his beautiful wife of a well deserved break. What he doesn't realise is that he's being tracked by a team who are looking for information, and they'll do anything it takes to get it.

Waking up in a high tech lab with no memory Ray discovers that his body has been donated to a company after his death. RSC are pioneers in enhancements to the human body, taking people who might otherwise be given up on and giving them a new lease of life.

When you've had one of those days and you need some gratuitous violence you can't really go wrong with a Vin Diesel films... can you?

I can't say I ever go into films like this expecting a "masterpiece" of cinema, I was just hoping for some solid entertainment and it certainly gives that.

Enhanced humans always offer that level of escapism that allows for a few faux pas to come across as less obvious, but the trailer made me raise an eyebrow. The effects didn't look great in the few snippets we got, luckily, on seeing the final product thought I was pleasantly surprised. The close up action that wouldn't require major stunts were excellent and believable, I didn't feel like there were any holes to pick... until the elevator scene. You'll clearly see the graphic work and it's a real shame it is so bad in comparison to the rest, there's also a terrible chase scene that has no natural movement in it either.

It's not often Vin strays from a certain type of character so we get exactly what you'd expect from his portrayal of Ray Garrison, a driven "bad guy" with a reason to be mad at a lot of stuff. It's not groundbreaking but it's always fun to see.

Eiza Gonzalez as KT gets a good range to work with, she gives us an excellent character with a reasonable amount of depth compared to her counterparts... who I had to call Legs and Eyes in my notes because at no point did I notice if they had names or not.

Our bad guy was obviously Guy Pearce seems about right for him. It wasn't really out of his comfort zone either though and despite him being great as Dr Emil Harting it wasn't really pushing any boundaries.

Visually this film is pretty good, the fight sequence we get glimpses of during the trailer uses colour well and has some amusing little touches in it. A bit of humour and some shots that I'd associate with horror/thriller movies build that excitement and tension well. There's also a well edited montage that's used to great effect to show the audience an event succinctly without it becoming boring, which is always greatly appreciated in films.

There are a few comments I have but they definitely constitute spoilers so I'll keep them to myself, but there's nothing that majorly added or detracted from the film for me beyond what I've mentioned already.

As I said at the beginning, it's nice to have a different comic book entity on our screens and I think the story is a good one, we're thankfully given an interesting set of characters to focus on and that helps the story stay a little lighter. You know how I like an origin tale though and this seems a bit short on that bit of discovery. I've got the graphic novel to read though so I'm interested to see where it deviates. Despite its minor (and slightly major action CGI) issues I really enjoyed Bloodshot, Ray's anger issues really helped get out some frustration.

Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/bloodshot-movie-review.html
  
40x40

Darren (1599 KP) rated 48 HRS (1982) in Movies

Jun 20, 2019  
48 HRS (1982)
48 HRS (1982)
1982 | Action, Comedy
7
7.2 (9 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Story: 48 Hrs starts as Ganz (Remar) gets broken out of jail while on work detail by Billy Bear (Landham), he heads off to clean up old debts leaving cops bodies in his path of destruction. It doesn’t take long for Ganz to clash with detective Jack Cates (Nolte), where Ganz forces Jack into a difficult situation.

Jack must go to prisoner Reggie Hammond (Murphy) a wise cracking con man to help track down Ganz using his street knowledge. In what is an unlikely partnership turns into something special as the two find a way to get to the bottom of the crime.

 

Thoughts on 48 Hrs

 

Characters – Jack Cates is a grizzled cop, he gets the job done with his experience keeping him in high regard. He must stop the killer using criminal Reggie Hammond as the best chance to catch this killer. Reggie Hammond is a criminal near the end of his stint in jail, he is wise-cracking fast-talking meaning he can bullshit his way out of any situation he finds himself in. He uses this chance of time out of jail to settle a few scores. Elaine is the girlfriend of Jack who is tired of not making things serious between the two. Ganz is the killer on the loose, after his break from prison, he has a short-temper which causes his itchy trigger finger to fire on any enemy he comes across.

Performances – Nick Nolte is a great choice for a seemingly warn down cop, he takes the non-sense style needed for the role and goes with it. Eddie Murphy was one of the most popular stand-up comedians at the time, this was his film debut and he handed it very well, bringing his own energy to the role which could have been something we have seen before. James Remar is good as a villain because it is a character we have seen before, but he really convinces in this role. There is a negative here, that is Annette O’Toole, which to be fair isn’t her fault because the character is written so poorly

Story – The story follows a cop and a criminal work together to stop another criminal, yes this is a buddy cop movie. We have unlikely partnership which must work together to get the common goal. This is a story we have seen plenty of times since and it seems to be a hit or miss through the years, but this does keep things simple enough to enjoy not looking to throw us any surprises along the way.

Action/Crime/Comedy – The action is by the book for cops and criminals, nothing is over the top and mostly comes off like you would expect. The crime world is the cop needing to work with the criminal that is the best chance to catch a cop killer. The comedy comes from the odd pairing that must work together.

Settings – The film is set in San Francisco which always seems to be a great location for any crime comedy world to unfold.


Scene of the Movie – Settle this with fists.

That Moment That Annoyed Me – Ganz seems a lot easier to catch.

Final Thoughts – This is a good buddy comedy that bought us Eddie Murphy to the big screen. We get the action and comedy without being buried with one too often and most importantly we are entertained.

 

Overall: Great fun action comedy.

https://moviesreview101.com/2018/05/26/franchise-weekend-48-hrs-1982/
  
The Sorrows
The Sorrows
10
10.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
The Sorrows, an island off the coast of northern California, and its castle have been uninhabited since a series of gruesome murders in 1925. But its owner needs money, so he allows film composers Ben and Eddie and a couple of their female friends to stay a month in Castle Blackwood. Eddie is certain a haunted castle is just the setting Ben needs to find inspiration for a horror film.
But what they find is more horrific than any movie. Something is waiting for them in the castle. A malevolent being has been trapped for nearly a century. And he's ready to feed.
*Disclosure - I received a free copy for purposes of an honest review*

This is definitely a more slow burn novel that creeps up on you, giving you that uneasy feeling and putting you on edge.
The characters are each realistically flawed and interesting; this book does have sexual scenes, some scenes of violence and gore. This did not bother me as it flows with books plot.
If you have read anything by Janz then you will probably be aware that he has a talent for the darkest depths of hell and horror. The Sorrows represents the beginning of his journey, and also shows much he has honed his craft since then.
There are a few story lines in this novel, all keep you the edge of your seat with bated breath waiting to see what would happen next! We have a diary from the past talking about a mysterious little boy called Gabriel and the wrongdoing and terror that occurred on the island in 1925.
While the foursome are the island, things start off being just a little bit spooky. Strange sightings take place, violent apparitions, voices are heard and take control of people, mirrored walls and secret passages, the brutality of some of the characters, and finally the goat hooves beast of the island.
Then tension builds in the books with little tidbits of supernatural. The tension, it was palpable as you delve further into the mystery of the island and the past. A couple of things I felt were a bit too unexplained but I think it that it added to the magic of the book, because let us be honest when you watch films the unexpected always happens!
  
3 Idiots (2009)
3 Idiots (2009)
2009 | Comedy, Drama
5
6.0 (2 Ratings)
Movie Rating
So, I am writing a coffee table book that selects the 200 top films of 2000 – 2019. Called, predictably, 21st Century Cinema: 200 Unmissable films. It uses a system of rating I devised called The Decinemal, which takes the ten categories by which a film can be rated (Direction, Script, Design, Lead Acting, Support Acting, Music, Photography, Critical Acclaim, Watchability and X-Factor) and scores them out of 10, to give an overall score out of 100. Whilst not foolproof, it does give a remarkable working basis for comparing movies of different genres, and the ratings often bear a striking relation to the democratic system used by IMDb – a film scoring 7.2 on that website might be a 75 decinemal, for example, and that feels like that validates its use.

It has been a very fun, if time consuming, project. The difficulty is keeping up with new releases every year, and trying to catch some of the more obscure foreign language films out there that get high scores on IMDb. One such film was 3 Idiots, to date the highest rated Bollywood film on that website, with a score of 8.5; which is high! Very high! So I have to watch it and find out for myself.

Now, Bollywood is not me for, barring the odd amusement of how bizarre they can be. I find the musical interludes often grating and incongruous, and the melodramatic acting styles something that the cinema of most other countries outgrew decades ago. So it is hard for me to be objective about it. On the whole they just don’t compete on any level with American, European or, well, any other country’s output. In short, I would never normally watch one at all.

Surprisingly, I found 3 Idiots, although clownish and OTT, quite entertaining from the start. I even found one or two of the obligatory musical numbers very catchy and a lot of fun! Also, lead actor Aamir Khan, one of India’s biggest stars, was very charming and watchable. Of course, it is colourful, loud and has a childish sensibility, but some moments made me genuinely laugh. The main problem actually came from it being padded out to almost 2 and 1/2 hours, which was far too long for comfort. If it had been more economical I may have even been able to say it was worth watching.

Sadly, it is the moments of cultural difference and pure silliness that dragged it down. Despite its positive points, ultimately it is a mess, and to compare it on the standard I judge all films I see I have to be fair and not patronise it. Certainly in terms of the Bollywood fare I have seen bits of over the years, I can see why it is so well thought of. I can also see how films like this gain such a high rating, because it is the native audience it was made for that cast the votes. Which is fair enough, but does give it an unreasonably high score.

I think if more people watched it and rated it, it would balance out at a 6.5, and it probably deserves that for sheer entertainment value. I have certainly seen many worse films! Applying The Decinemal objectively, however, it comes out like this: Direction 4, Script 5, Design 6, Lead Acting 6, Support acting 4, Music 5, Photography 6, Critical Acclaim 7, Wachability 5, x-Factor 6. Added up that gives it a Decinemal of 54 – a far cry from the 74 it would have needed to make my top 200. And I stand by that score, as the level of likelihood of everyone’s enjoyment of it.

To an extent it discourages me from watching anything from this part of the world again, but I can’t say I didn’t appreciate why it was such a big hit. Interesting.