Search
Search results
Gaz Coombes recommended On The Beach by Neil Young in Music (curated)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Car Dogs (2017) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
One of the things that universally connects us in this world is driving. Eventually, in life, the other factor involved is buying a vehicle. Depending on your experience, it can be nerve wracking, intensely crazy or enjoyable. Almost everyone has a story about the first car they purchased. For some it is the entire process, spotting THE car or coming up against the salespeople. This common thread allows us to identify with each other. With Car Dogs, you will find yourself immersed in the world of car sales.
Mark Chamberlain (Patrick J. Adams) is a sales manager at his father’s dealership. He is in line to get his own shop once he fulfills the quota assigned by his dad. We see Mark go through his day handling purchase issues, client issues and his salespeople in the bullpen. Christian (George Lopez, playing against type) is one of the top dogs at Chamberlain. He gets assigned a fresh rookie on the day that he is busting to make his numbers. Sharon (Nia Vardalos) Is the clever sales guru that is always in competition with Christian. She plays Sharon as a tough but smart sales rep with a warm likability. George Lopez and Nia Vardalos are both well known for comedic parts and they play against type with such care that their performances are refreshingly unexpected.
Patrick J. Adams evokes the stress and pressure that he slowly builds throughout the day, taking us with him as the clock counts down to the hour of reckoning that is the sales goal of 35 cars for the day. This number is enforced by Mark’s father Malcolm (Chris Mulkey) embodying the old school stereotype of a car dealer, pushing his son in a supremely passive-aggressive dance with his brown nosing sadist sidekick Mike (Josh Hopkins).
Filmed on location in Scottsdale, Arizona. Directed by Adam Collis, taking us on a road trip that has familiar sites and unexpected surprises. Mark Edward King’s script pulls the curtain back from a world we rarely see the inner workings and shows us that even car salesmen, although can be real jerks to get the sale, are also human.
Whether you have bought or sold a car. Shopped or searched for the right one, dealt with some B.S. artist or had a fantastic experience. This movie provides the viewer with moments at a dealership that are so familiar, yet gives us a look at how they function behind the sales desk.
Mark Chamberlain (Patrick J. Adams) is a sales manager at his father’s dealership. He is in line to get his own shop once he fulfills the quota assigned by his dad. We see Mark go through his day handling purchase issues, client issues and his salespeople in the bullpen. Christian (George Lopez, playing against type) is one of the top dogs at Chamberlain. He gets assigned a fresh rookie on the day that he is busting to make his numbers. Sharon (Nia Vardalos) Is the clever sales guru that is always in competition with Christian. She plays Sharon as a tough but smart sales rep with a warm likability. George Lopez and Nia Vardalos are both well known for comedic parts and they play against type with such care that their performances are refreshingly unexpected.
Patrick J. Adams evokes the stress and pressure that he slowly builds throughout the day, taking us with him as the clock counts down to the hour of reckoning that is the sales goal of 35 cars for the day. This number is enforced by Mark’s father Malcolm (Chris Mulkey) embodying the old school stereotype of a car dealer, pushing his son in a supremely passive-aggressive dance with his brown nosing sadist sidekick Mike (Josh Hopkins).
Filmed on location in Scottsdale, Arizona. Directed by Adam Collis, taking us on a road trip that has familiar sites and unexpected surprises. Mark Edward King’s script pulls the curtain back from a world we rarely see the inner workings and shows us that even car salesmen, although can be real jerks to get the sale, are also human.
Whether you have bought or sold a car. Shopped or searched for the right one, dealt with some B.S. artist or had a fantastic experience. This movie provides the viewer with moments at a dealership that are so familiar, yet gives us a look at how they function behind the sales desk.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Ford v Ferrari (aka Le Mans '66) (2019) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
Damon, Bale and fast cars (1 more)
Epic technical film making - cinematography, editing and sound - Oscar bait
A linear story on a circular track - but beautifully done.
Despite the love affair cinema has had with cars over the years, the sport of motor racing on film has been patchy. Too often the drama on the track has been deluged with melodrama off the track, as in John Frankenheimer's "Grand Prix" from 1966. While recent efforts such as Ron Howard's "Rush" have brought modern filming techniques to better convey the speed and excitement, it is Steve McQueen's "Le Mans" from 1971 that had previously set the bar for realism in the sport. But even there, there were a few off-track love stories to interweave into the action.
I wouldn't hesitate to suggest that "Le Mans '66" is a strong contender for the motor racing high-water mark.
The film was marketed as "Ford v Ferrari" in the US. (What... do the American distributors think their film-goers are so stupid that if "Le" is in the title they will think it sub-titled foreign language??). But it's a valid title, since the movie tells the true story of when Henry Ford... the second... (Tracy Letts) throws his toys out of the pram at Ford's faltering progress. ("James Bond does not drive a Ford". "That's because he's a degenerate!" snaps back Ford, which kind of typifies the problem"). Marketing man Lee Iacocca (Jon Bernthal) persuades retired hot-shot racer Carroll Shelby (Matt Damon) to take Ford's blank-cheque to build a car to win the Le Mans 24 hour race.
Shelby enlists maverick Brit racer Ken Miles (Christian Bale) to help design and drive the next-generation machine. But neither had banked on the interference of the hoards of Ford suits, led by VP Leo Beebe (Josh Lucas). An explosion is imminent! And its not just from the over-heated brake pads!
What's really odd about this film is how linear the story is. While we get to see the family life of Miles (to add necessary context to what follows) these are merely minor diversions. There are no sub-plots or flashback scenes. It just relates the history from beginning to end, enlivened by some of the best and most exciting motor-racing footage put to celluloid.
At a bladder-testing 152 minutes, this really shouldn't have worked. I should have got bored and restless. But I really didn't.
In many ways - bladders aside - I think this will appeal in particular to an older breed of movie-goer. It's a 100% 'sit back in your seat and enjoy' cinema treat.
This is the first film Matt Damon and Christian Bale have made together, and I understand that Damon specifically signed on since he wanted to work with Bale. And there is palpable chemistry there. The movie includes one of the best 'bad-fights' since Colin Firth and Hugh Grant locked horns in the Bridget Jones films. And Damon - never one of the most expressive actors in the world - here really shines.
Bale also appears to be having a whale of a time. Not having to adopt a US accent suits him, as he blasts and swears his way through various UK-specific expletives that probably passed the US-censors by! He often tends to play characters in movies that are difficult to warm to, but here - although suitably spiky and irascible - the family man really shines through and you feel a real warmth for the guy.
There's a strong supporting cast behind the leads, with Tracy Letts' fast-driving breakdown being a standout moment. I wonder how many takes they needed on that for Damon to keep a semi-straight face?! Also impressive as the son Peter Miles is Noah Jupe. If you're wondering where the hell you've seen him before, he was young (Marcus in "A Quiet Place").
Where the film comes alive is on the track, and a particular shout out should to to the technical teams. Cinematography is by Phedon Papamichael ("Walk the Line"), film editing is led by Andrew Buckland and Michael McCusker. And sound mixing - which to my ear was piston-valve perfect - is by Steven Morrow. Also worthy of note is a kick-ass driving soundtrack by Marco Beltrami that genuinely excited. These categories are fearsomly hard to predict in awards season, but you might like to listen out for those names.
If I was going to pick at any faults in the film, it would be that Ford exec Leo Beebe is painted a little too much as a "boo-hiss" pantomime villain in the piece. It could have been perhaps toned down 20% or so.
James Mangold ("Logan"; "Walk the Line") directs in style. From the rather po-faced trailer, you might think this is a "car movie that's not for me". But it really is a tremendously fun movie, with some genuinely laugh-out-loud moments mixed in with edge-of-your-seat action and some heart-rending moments.
Above all, this is a film that really benefits from the wide-screen and sound-system that only a big cinema can provide. As such this goes on my "get out and see it" list without any hesitation! It's going to make my movies of the year: and I'm off to see it again on Saturday!
Read the full review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/11/20/one-manns-movies-film-review-le-mans-66-2019/
I wouldn't hesitate to suggest that "Le Mans '66" is a strong contender for the motor racing high-water mark.
The film was marketed as "Ford v Ferrari" in the US. (What... do the American distributors think their film-goers are so stupid that if "Le" is in the title they will think it sub-titled foreign language??). But it's a valid title, since the movie tells the true story of when Henry Ford... the second... (Tracy Letts) throws his toys out of the pram at Ford's faltering progress. ("James Bond does not drive a Ford". "That's because he's a degenerate!" snaps back Ford, which kind of typifies the problem"). Marketing man Lee Iacocca (Jon Bernthal) persuades retired hot-shot racer Carroll Shelby (Matt Damon) to take Ford's blank-cheque to build a car to win the Le Mans 24 hour race.
Shelby enlists maverick Brit racer Ken Miles (Christian Bale) to help design and drive the next-generation machine. But neither had banked on the interference of the hoards of Ford suits, led by VP Leo Beebe (Josh Lucas). An explosion is imminent! And its not just from the over-heated brake pads!
What's really odd about this film is how linear the story is. While we get to see the family life of Miles (to add necessary context to what follows) these are merely minor diversions. There are no sub-plots or flashback scenes. It just relates the history from beginning to end, enlivened by some of the best and most exciting motor-racing footage put to celluloid.
At a bladder-testing 152 minutes, this really shouldn't have worked. I should have got bored and restless. But I really didn't.
In many ways - bladders aside - I think this will appeal in particular to an older breed of movie-goer. It's a 100% 'sit back in your seat and enjoy' cinema treat.
This is the first film Matt Damon and Christian Bale have made together, and I understand that Damon specifically signed on since he wanted to work with Bale. And there is palpable chemistry there. The movie includes one of the best 'bad-fights' since Colin Firth and Hugh Grant locked horns in the Bridget Jones films. And Damon - never one of the most expressive actors in the world - here really shines.
Bale also appears to be having a whale of a time. Not having to adopt a US accent suits him, as he blasts and swears his way through various UK-specific expletives that probably passed the US-censors by! He often tends to play characters in movies that are difficult to warm to, but here - although suitably spiky and irascible - the family man really shines through and you feel a real warmth for the guy.
There's a strong supporting cast behind the leads, with Tracy Letts' fast-driving breakdown being a standout moment. I wonder how many takes they needed on that for Damon to keep a semi-straight face?! Also impressive as the son Peter Miles is Noah Jupe. If you're wondering where the hell you've seen him before, he was young (Marcus in "A Quiet Place").
Where the film comes alive is on the track, and a particular shout out should to to the technical teams. Cinematography is by Phedon Papamichael ("Walk the Line"), film editing is led by Andrew Buckland and Michael McCusker. And sound mixing - which to my ear was piston-valve perfect - is by Steven Morrow. Also worthy of note is a kick-ass driving soundtrack by Marco Beltrami that genuinely excited. These categories are fearsomly hard to predict in awards season, but you might like to listen out for those names.
If I was going to pick at any faults in the film, it would be that Ford exec Leo Beebe is painted a little too much as a "boo-hiss" pantomime villain in the piece. It could have been perhaps toned down 20% or so.
James Mangold ("Logan"; "Walk the Line") directs in style. From the rather po-faced trailer, you might think this is a "car movie that's not for me". But it really is a tremendously fun movie, with some genuinely laugh-out-loud moments mixed in with edge-of-your-seat action and some heart-rending moments.
Above all, this is a film that really benefits from the wide-screen and sound-system that only a big cinema can provide. As such this goes on my "get out and see it" list without any hesitation! It's going to make my movies of the year: and I'm off to see it again on Saturday!
Read the full review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/11/20/one-manns-movies-film-review-le-mans-66-2019/
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Ticket to Ride in Tabletop Games
Jan 9, 2020
I am one of the remaining few who reviewers who haven’t put in their two cents on Ticket to Ride. Why? Is it bad? No. Am I lazy? No. It’s really because I don’t think I have anything new to say about it that hasn’t already been said a hundred times. So this review on this game will be a little different from me. Instead of going over the rules and such (however truncated they typically are from me) I will question how well this game has aged for me.
Ticket to Ride is one of those games that has really hit it big in the mass market. You can find it all over in big box stores, in FLGS, online, secondary market, just everywhere. But why? And for this long? Ticket to Ride (TTR) came out in 2004. A mere 15 years ago. While that doesn’t really sound like a long time, in contrast to today’s game industry it is an eternity. With thousands upon thousands of games being released into the market through direct publish, Kickstarter/crowd funding, and big releases at conventions it’s hard to believe that you can still find this hanging with the exciting, fresh new games.
What I truly believe is magical about this game is its simplicity. “You have two main options: take some cards or play some cards.” When you can start a teach of a game by saying that, your players are invested right away because they know you aren’t going to bog them down with rules upon rules. “If you decide to take cards you can take these colored train cards or you can take new route ticket cards.” So now players have two choices from gaining cards. “If you decide to play cards you need to play cards of a color and number matching whichever route between two connecting cities on the map you like.” Done. The game is explained. Yeah, you can fight me about the endgame scoring stuff like longest route and whatnot, but for new gamers, you have explained this classic in three sentences. It’s so beautiful when a game allows you to teach it so quickly.
But that surely means that this is an easy game, right? With so few rules and such. Well, no. It’s not really “easy” at all. While your main rules are light, the strategy and tactics during play can cause feelings of joy and delight as well as frustration and concern as you see someone claim the route you need to connect to two cities on the map. Of course, you can’t explain that to your new players right away. You want them to experience these feelings organically and fully. It’s what makes TTR a really great game: having your well-laid plans just shot to smithereens by the guy who can’t tell the difference between the white train cars and the wild rainbow train cars.
DISCLAIMER: I play with the 1910 expansion, which is a MUST. The larger cards are way easier to play with. See photo below with comparisons from base game on bottom with the larger 1910 cards above. YMMV, but I will always play using this expansion. -T
Components. Let’s compare components to some current or newer games. The game board is laid out really well, and the artwork is sparse and not over-busy on the board. This is a HUGE plus for me. I like nothing more than for the board to offer thematic elements and feeling without pelting my eyes with too much distraction. The cards were a bad choice. Not because the art or the quality on them is bad – because that’s not what I am saying. The size of the cards was a poor choice. I did purchase the 1910 expansion and simply will not play my copy without it. I recently played TTR for GenCan’t 2019 at my FLGS with OG base cards and found myself dreaming of the 1910 cards. The score tracker discs are of industry-standard quality for scoring discs. The plastic train car pieces are still just as wonderful to handle and play with as are many other more modern components. Seriously just as good. TTR components (and really, most of the time Days of Wonder components in general) are really great.
So do I still enjoy playing it? You betcha, don’tcha know. I still love seeing the board in front of me, agonizing over the route tickets I am dealt, and trying to decide if I should go for the New York to Los Angeles, or keep it simple with multiple routes along the Mississippi River. I still love the panic that ensues when I see people hoarding train cards, just knowing that they will soon be on the attack and their train car collection will dwindle to almost endgame levels in too few rounds for me to complete my masterpiece. I guess I still really love it.
Is Ticket to Ride my favorite game? No. But I’ll tell you what. I hadn’t played it in a couple years, and after this weekend’s play, it has moved up on my list by several spaces. It still holds a special place in my heart, and also the hearts of my team. That’s why Purple Phoenix Games gives Ticket to Ride a retrospective 20 / 24. It’s still great!
Ticket to Ride is one of those games that has really hit it big in the mass market. You can find it all over in big box stores, in FLGS, online, secondary market, just everywhere. But why? And for this long? Ticket to Ride (TTR) came out in 2004. A mere 15 years ago. While that doesn’t really sound like a long time, in contrast to today’s game industry it is an eternity. With thousands upon thousands of games being released into the market through direct publish, Kickstarter/crowd funding, and big releases at conventions it’s hard to believe that you can still find this hanging with the exciting, fresh new games.
What I truly believe is magical about this game is its simplicity. “You have two main options: take some cards or play some cards.” When you can start a teach of a game by saying that, your players are invested right away because they know you aren’t going to bog them down with rules upon rules. “If you decide to take cards you can take these colored train cards or you can take new route ticket cards.” So now players have two choices from gaining cards. “If you decide to play cards you need to play cards of a color and number matching whichever route between two connecting cities on the map you like.” Done. The game is explained. Yeah, you can fight me about the endgame scoring stuff like longest route and whatnot, but for new gamers, you have explained this classic in three sentences. It’s so beautiful when a game allows you to teach it so quickly.
But that surely means that this is an easy game, right? With so few rules and such. Well, no. It’s not really “easy” at all. While your main rules are light, the strategy and tactics during play can cause feelings of joy and delight as well as frustration and concern as you see someone claim the route you need to connect to two cities on the map. Of course, you can’t explain that to your new players right away. You want them to experience these feelings organically and fully. It’s what makes TTR a really great game: having your well-laid plans just shot to smithereens by the guy who can’t tell the difference between the white train cars and the wild rainbow train cars.
DISCLAIMER: I play with the 1910 expansion, which is a MUST. The larger cards are way easier to play with. See photo below with comparisons from base game on bottom with the larger 1910 cards above. YMMV, but I will always play using this expansion. -T
Components. Let’s compare components to some current or newer games. The game board is laid out really well, and the artwork is sparse and not over-busy on the board. This is a HUGE plus for me. I like nothing more than for the board to offer thematic elements and feeling without pelting my eyes with too much distraction. The cards were a bad choice. Not because the art or the quality on them is bad – because that’s not what I am saying. The size of the cards was a poor choice. I did purchase the 1910 expansion and simply will not play my copy without it. I recently played TTR for GenCan’t 2019 at my FLGS with OG base cards and found myself dreaming of the 1910 cards. The score tracker discs are of industry-standard quality for scoring discs. The plastic train car pieces are still just as wonderful to handle and play with as are many other more modern components. Seriously just as good. TTR components (and really, most of the time Days of Wonder components in general) are really great.
So do I still enjoy playing it? You betcha, don’tcha know. I still love seeing the board in front of me, agonizing over the route tickets I am dealt, and trying to decide if I should go for the New York to Los Angeles, or keep it simple with multiple routes along the Mississippi River. I still love the panic that ensues when I see people hoarding train cards, just knowing that they will soon be on the attack and their train car collection will dwindle to almost endgame levels in too few rounds for me to complete my masterpiece. I guess I still really love it.
Is Ticket to Ride my favorite game? No. But I’ll tell you what. I hadn’t played it in a couple years, and after this weekend’s play, it has moved up on my list by several spaces. It still holds a special place in my heart, and also the hearts of my team. That’s why Purple Phoenix Games gives Ticket to Ride a retrospective 20 / 24. It’s still great!
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Mad Max (1979) in Movies
Jan 5, 2018
Decent
Guilty confession: Typically when I watch a "classic" or a film I've really been looking forward to, I go into it expecting to like it. In other words, the film is already ahead of the curve when it comes to my grading scale. It has to do a lot to let me down. I hate to say it, but Mad Max? It let me down. Not in the sense that it was bad, but rather in the sense that I was hoping for more.
Max is a police officer in a post-apocalyptic world where biker gangs rule the road. After his partner is brutally burned by one of the most dangerous gangs, Max decides to retire but a terrible turn of events sucks him right back in.
The film got off to a slow start for me. I was confused by what was happening and why it was happening. It's not a good sign when I have to jump on to Wikipedia to clarify things. Unfortunately things never quite bounced back for me after that. I spent a good majority of the film thinking, "What are the stakes for Max? Why should I care about his character?" You're not really given a ton of insight into who he is and why he's a hero you want to root for. Read to kids in the hospital. Pull a cat out of a tree. Do something! Give me a reason to care. I don't think that's too much to ask for.
Despite my issues with the film, Mad Max is carried by a solid performance from Gibson. Visceral rage just oozes from the man as he goes out for his revenge. He's got that look, one we've seen in many films before. A look that says, "I'm crazy and I want you to know it." His passion in the role is a shining spot.
The film also benefits from solid world-building. Though you're only given a small taste, it's all you need to see. The road is what's important, the heartbeat of the film. You witness it in the attention to detail behind the cars (Max's car in the end was dope) and the gangs' constant power struggle over maintaining territory. The road is a wasteland, yet extremely vital for those living in it.
I'm giving Mad Max a 73. Perhaps that's not a bad thing. For a movie to be missing some key components and still get a decent score says a lot. It's kind of like eating at an expensive restaurant: When you see your plate, you're slightly let down because you were hoping for more, but you quickly find that the portion you received was good enough.
Max is a police officer in a post-apocalyptic world where biker gangs rule the road. After his partner is brutally burned by one of the most dangerous gangs, Max decides to retire but a terrible turn of events sucks him right back in.
The film got off to a slow start for me. I was confused by what was happening and why it was happening. It's not a good sign when I have to jump on to Wikipedia to clarify things. Unfortunately things never quite bounced back for me after that. I spent a good majority of the film thinking, "What are the stakes for Max? Why should I care about his character?" You're not really given a ton of insight into who he is and why he's a hero you want to root for. Read to kids in the hospital. Pull a cat out of a tree. Do something! Give me a reason to care. I don't think that's too much to ask for.
Despite my issues with the film, Mad Max is carried by a solid performance from Gibson. Visceral rage just oozes from the man as he goes out for his revenge. He's got that look, one we've seen in many films before. A look that says, "I'm crazy and I want you to know it." His passion in the role is a shining spot.
The film also benefits from solid world-building. Though you're only given a small taste, it's all you need to see. The road is what's important, the heartbeat of the film. You witness it in the attention to detail behind the cars (Max's car in the end was dope) and the gangs' constant power struggle over maintaining territory. The road is a wasteland, yet extremely vital for those living in it.
I'm giving Mad Max a 73. Perhaps that's not a bad thing. For a movie to be missing some key components and still get a decent score says a lot. It's kind of like eating at an expensive restaurant: When you see your plate, you're slightly let down because you were hoping for more, but you quickly find that the portion you received was good enough.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation (2015) in Movies
Apr 8, 2019
What a Blast
Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) is back for this fifth installment where he gathers a team to stop an international terrorist group called The Syndicate.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The Mission: Impossible franchise has a way of hopping from one locale quickly to the next and Rogue Nation is no exception. Every location brings them to a different point in the journey, a means to an end, which makes things fun to follow. There’s always something happening that manages to up the visual ante from one scene to the next. My personal favorite was a crazy car chase through a crowded city. Director Christopher McQuarrie really manages to capture the intensity of this moment as cars and motorcycles weave in and out of tight spaces. This is just one of many heartpacing sequences that are visually stunning.
Conflict: 8
While the movie doesn’t skimp on the action, Rogue Nation isn’t quite as intense as other movies in the franchise. Not to say that this movie will put you to sleep by any means as there is plenty to keep the viewer occupied. One scene (actually the scene right before the car chase I love) involves Ethan having to capture data from an underwater security system. I could take a stab at describing it, but I couldn’t do it justice. It’s intense and fun to watch at the same time. I remember watching it for the first time in theaters and screaming out loud at the movie screen as Ethan found himself racing against times. It’s action sequences like that that make me wonder why more people don’t love movies.
Genre: 7
Pretty damn good…but I’ve seen better, particularly in the franchise itself. It falls just a couple notches shy of being great. Despite falling just shy of a classic, it manages to hold its own and gives me a good time with every watch.
Memorability: 10
Car chases. Underwater security fields. Tom Cruise suspended in mid-air hanging on to the side of an aircraft. And, most importantly, Tom Cruise running. This is a movie that reminds you why it’s fun to go to the theater. Rather than beat you over the head with deep messages, it hits you with high-intensity action that inspires a rewatch.
Pace: 9
Plot: 8
Resolution: 7
Overall: 89
I won’t lie to you, I hope they make a million of these movies because it never seems to get old. Since the second film (which was a pure nightmare), the franchise not only bounced back, but continues to improve and stay fresh. Mission: Impossible—Rogue Nation is just a flat-out good time.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The Mission: Impossible franchise has a way of hopping from one locale quickly to the next and Rogue Nation is no exception. Every location brings them to a different point in the journey, a means to an end, which makes things fun to follow. There’s always something happening that manages to up the visual ante from one scene to the next. My personal favorite was a crazy car chase through a crowded city. Director Christopher McQuarrie really manages to capture the intensity of this moment as cars and motorcycles weave in and out of tight spaces. This is just one of many heartpacing sequences that are visually stunning.
Conflict: 8
While the movie doesn’t skimp on the action, Rogue Nation isn’t quite as intense as other movies in the franchise. Not to say that this movie will put you to sleep by any means as there is plenty to keep the viewer occupied. One scene (actually the scene right before the car chase I love) involves Ethan having to capture data from an underwater security system. I could take a stab at describing it, but I couldn’t do it justice. It’s intense and fun to watch at the same time. I remember watching it for the first time in theaters and screaming out loud at the movie screen as Ethan found himself racing against times. It’s action sequences like that that make me wonder why more people don’t love movies.
Genre: 7
Pretty damn good…but I’ve seen better, particularly in the franchise itself. It falls just a couple notches shy of being great. Despite falling just shy of a classic, it manages to hold its own and gives me a good time with every watch.
Memorability: 10
Car chases. Underwater security fields. Tom Cruise suspended in mid-air hanging on to the side of an aircraft. And, most importantly, Tom Cruise running. This is a movie that reminds you why it’s fun to go to the theater. Rather than beat you over the head with deep messages, it hits you with high-intensity action that inspires a rewatch.
Pace: 9
Plot: 8
Resolution: 7
Overall: 89
I won’t lie to you, I hope they make a million of these movies because it never seems to get old. Since the second film (which was a pure nightmare), the franchise not only bounced back, but continues to improve and stay fresh. Mission: Impossible—Rogue Nation is just a flat-out good time.
Bookapotamus (289 KP) rated Do This For Me in Books
May 29, 2018
Can I give a 5 star rating for PART of a book?!? I was ALL-IN from page one of this book. The beginning was so fast, so awesome, with such manic intensity - I was like, this chick is BAD ASS! I TORE through the first quarter of this book. And then... meh. I guess we needed a bit of a breather because the first quarter of this book is one serious wild ride. It got back to it's intense awesomeness almost mid-way through, but then I felt it just got sappy and fizzled.
I need a book about JUST the Raney Moore in the beginning. She is NO JOKE. High-powered attorney Raney Moore has it all. Shes partner at her law form, he husband is a famous bug guy, and shes got twin teenage girls who are the light of her life. She's wealthy, and can have anything she wants. But she already seems to have it all. Or so she thinks. When Raney finds out her life is not as perfect as she thought - in less than a split second she turns into a jilted-wife phsychopath - and goes balls-to-the-wall revenge-mode to destroy the cause of her pain. But may in fact destroy everything good in her life. You don't even see it coming. I was riveted by the endless access she has to everything you can imagine to carry out her plans. Money, researchers, cars, hackers.... you name it. Don't mess with Raney. You cross her and you will be in SERIOUS trouble.
I read a lot of reviews that people didn't like the book because they hated Raney. I think some of the best books are when you have intense feeling for a character. Good OR bad. Raney was a character I couldn't get enough of. There's another almost equally manic scene in the middle where she is in a dressing room, and the crazy, intense Raney (with yet again, resources aplenty) returns and I am once again enthralled with her.
But unfortunately, after about mid-way it just fell flat to me. A lot of the dialogue is hilarious. It's witty, fast and keeps your attention, but the rest of the story just wasn't what I wanted - what I craved. I wanted more Raney. I didn't want her to try to change herself, or be a better person. Eliza Kennedy shouldn't have written the old Raney as such an incredibly intense and off-kilter character because she made me fall for her - but then she took her away! (sad face)
I'd kill for a prequel. To see Raney as she emerges into the person she was in the beginning of this book: her start at the law firm, her rise to Partner. Give me that Raney All. Day. Long.
I need a book about JUST the Raney Moore in the beginning. She is NO JOKE. High-powered attorney Raney Moore has it all. Shes partner at her law form, he husband is a famous bug guy, and shes got twin teenage girls who are the light of her life. She's wealthy, and can have anything she wants. But she already seems to have it all. Or so she thinks. When Raney finds out her life is not as perfect as she thought - in less than a split second she turns into a jilted-wife phsychopath - and goes balls-to-the-wall revenge-mode to destroy the cause of her pain. But may in fact destroy everything good in her life. You don't even see it coming. I was riveted by the endless access she has to everything you can imagine to carry out her plans. Money, researchers, cars, hackers.... you name it. Don't mess with Raney. You cross her and you will be in SERIOUS trouble.
I read a lot of reviews that people didn't like the book because they hated Raney. I think some of the best books are when you have intense feeling for a character. Good OR bad. Raney was a character I couldn't get enough of. There's another almost equally manic scene in the middle where she is in a dressing room, and the crazy, intense Raney (with yet again, resources aplenty) returns and I am once again enthralled with her.
But unfortunately, after about mid-way it just fell flat to me. A lot of the dialogue is hilarious. It's witty, fast and keeps your attention, but the rest of the story just wasn't what I wanted - what I craved. I wanted more Raney. I didn't want her to try to change herself, or be a better person. Eliza Kennedy shouldn't have written the old Raney as such an incredibly intense and off-kilter character because she made me fall for her - but then she took her away! (sad face)
I'd kill for a prequel. To see Raney as she emerges into the person she was in the beginning of this book: her start at the law firm, her rise to Partner. Give me that Raney All. Day. Long.
Lee (2222 KP) rated The Christmas Chronicles (2018) in Movies
Nov 25, 2018
Kurt Russell is Santa Claus!!!
My wife and daughter started watching Christmas movies a few weeks back now, far too early in my opinion. But when the trailer first came out for The Christmas Chronicles on Netflix, it definitely got me in the Christmas spirit and I just couldn't wait to see it. So, on a lazy Sunday morning, cold and wet outside, all snuggled up in bed and with a cat and a dog spread out on top of us, we decided to watch it. Perfect.
Teddy and Kate Pierce have had a tough year. We see home movies of most of their Christmas's growing up, showing the good fun times with their parents. And then we see this Christmas. They've lost their dad, mum going out to work while Kate helps around the house and Teddy going out with friends, stealing cars and getting into trouble. When mum has to work on Christmas Eve night, the kids are left home alone and Christmas looks like being very different from previous years. While Kate watches those old Christmas movies, she notices a mysterious arm briefly appearing in the corner of the screen and is convinced they'd captured Santa Claus on camera. Enlisting the help of brother Teddy, they decide to try and catch Santa on camera once more. Things don't end up going quite according to plan though and they end up crash landing with Santa somewhere in Chicago. The reindeer came loose during their descent and are lost in the city. Santa's hat, which helps him zip around and teleport down chimneys, also blew off during the fall. Christmas is in jeopardy and Santa and his two new helpers need to fix it. We get car chases, badass little elves and Santa in jail wearing shades while playing the piano and belting out Christmas tunes, accompanied by backing singers!
As with any Christmas film that's introducing us to a new Santa and a new vision of the world he lives in, it takes a little while to get used to. Luckily, this one doesn't take long, and Kurt Russell is a very believable and enjoyable Santa who doesn't do ho-ho-ho's. The one thing that worried me from the trailer were the elves, who looked like they were going to be annoying little CGI characters. Luckily, they're used sparingly but effectively and were a lot of fun.
The whole Christmas in jeopardy plot is a fairly familiar one, having been done time and again over the years. But I actually really enjoyed this latest spin. Good fun, a bit of emotional stuff at the end and a nice surprise cameo to finish things off. Definitely got me in the Christmas spirit
Teddy and Kate Pierce have had a tough year. We see home movies of most of their Christmas's growing up, showing the good fun times with their parents. And then we see this Christmas. They've lost their dad, mum going out to work while Kate helps around the house and Teddy going out with friends, stealing cars and getting into trouble. When mum has to work on Christmas Eve night, the kids are left home alone and Christmas looks like being very different from previous years. While Kate watches those old Christmas movies, she notices a mysterious arm briefly appearing in the corner of the screen and is convinced they'd captured Santa Claus on camera. Enlisting the help of brother Teddy, they decide to try and catch Santa on camera once more. Things don't end up going quite according to plan though and they end up crash landing with Santa somewhere in Chicago. The reindeer came loose during their descent and are lost in the city. Santa's hat, which helps him zip around and teleport down chimneys, also blew off during the fall. Christmas is in jeopardy and Santa and his two new helpers need to fix it. We get car chases, badass little elves and Santa in jail wearing shades while playing the piano and belting out Christmas tunes, accompanied by backing singers!
As with any Christmas film that's introducing us to a new Santa and a new vision of the world he lives in, it takes a little while to get used to. Luckily, this one doesn't take long, and Kurt Russell is a very believable and enjoyable Santa who doesn't do ho-ho-ho's. The one thing that worried me from the trailer were the elves, who looked like they were going to be annoying little CGI characters. Luckily, they're used sparingly but effectively and were a lot of fun.
The whole Christmas in jeopardy plot is a fairly familiar one, having been done time and again over the years. But I actually really enjoyed this latest spin. Good fun, a bit of emotional stuff at the end and a nice surprise cameo to finish things off. Definitely got me in the Christmas spirit
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) in Movies
Jul 20, 2019
"You know in the future if you're gonna steal cars, don't dress like a car thief man"
So Sony had two choices, either sell the Spider-Man rights back to Marvel or press the reboot button on the Spider-Man franchise, so we got this and I see a lot of mixed opinions about this film, some love it, some don't, I think it's a good film but it's not as good as Sam Raimi's 2002 classic Spider-Man.
After Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is bitten by a genetically altered spider, he gains newfound, spider-like powers and ventures out to solve the mystery of his parent's mysterious death.
The action scenes in this film are enjoyable, especially the High School fight scene between Spidey and the Lizard and make for an enjoyable film, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone have better chemistry than Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst did, seeing as Garfield and Stone where dating at the time which made for a better on screen relationship between the two.
I do like Gwen Stacy more than Mary Jane thanks to Emma Stone seeing as Gwen is useful in this film and doesn't always need rescuing, also I like how they gave Spidey some quips to dish out in the film but it was only done for one scene.
There are a lot of problems with this film, I personally don't like the photographic style of the film, it's too dark and grainy for a Spider-Man film and I prefer the style Raimi used, speaking of Raimi, the director Marc Webb repeated a lot of stuff Raimi did in the first film, I'd much rather he had added something new to the blend.
I didn't really like Garfield as Peter Parker, he was just bland and I couldn't care for him due to bad writing, he is alright as Spidey but he's not the best, Rhys Ifans does a decent job as Dr. Curt Connors / The Lizard but he is just a forgettable villain, you can see the writing isn't up too scratch along with the story, the story isn't that good sadly and because most of the scenes where rushed characters suffer as a result along with the emotional and powerful scenes.
I can see why people might prefer this to the Raimi trilogy because of it's darker approach to Spider-Man but I prefer the light hearted approach Raimi took, overall I did like The Amazing Spider-Man, it's a good film but it was done so much better by Sam Raimi 17 years ago.
After Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is bitten by a genetically altered spider, he gains newfound, spider-like powers and ventures out to solve the mystery of his parent's mysterious death.
The action scenes in this film are enjoyable, especially the High School fight scene between Spidey and the Lizard and make for an enjoyable film, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone have better chemistry than Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst did, seeing as Garfield and Stone where dating at the time which made for a better on screen relationship between the two.
I do like Gwen Stacy more than Mary Jane thanks to Emma Stone seeing as Gwen is useful in this film and doesn't always need rescuing, also I like how they gave Spidey some quips to dish out in the film but it was only done for one scene.
There are a lot of problems with this film, I personally don't like the photographic style of the film, it's too dark and grainy for a Spider-Man film and I prefer the style Raimi used, speaking of Raimi, the director Marc Webb repeated a lot of stuff Raimi did in the first film, I'd much rather he had added something new to the blend.
I didn't really like Garfield as Peter Parker, he was just bland and I couldn't care for him due to bad writing, he is alright as Spidey but he's not the best, Rhys Ifans does a decent job as Dr. Curt Connors / The Lizard but he is just a forgettable villain, you can see the writing isn't up too scratch along with the story, the story isn't that good sadly and because most of the scenes where rushed characters suffer as a result along with the emotional and powerful scenes.
I can see why people might prefer this to the Raimi trilogy because of it's darker approach to Spider-Man but I prefer the light hearted approach Raimi took, overall I did like The Amazing Spider-Man, it's a good film but it was done so much better by Sam Raimi 17 years ago.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Fast & Furious 9 (2021) in Movies
Jun 23, 2021
F9 The Fast Saga Does Not Offer Anything New But Serves Up An Abundance Of High-Octane; Over The Top Action
After being delayed from a summer 2020 release by the Pandemic; Universal has released the latest film in the Fast and The Furious franchise to fans eager for some adrenaline-fueled summer action.
“F9 The Fast Saga” has done well in the few countries it has already been released, and has raced to a nearly $300 million total which the industry hopes is a signal that people are ready to return to cinemas in numbers again and that the film will take off when it opens in the U.S. and other markets.
The film opens with a flashback to the 1980s where young Dominic and his brother experience an event that changes their lives and drives a wedge between them. Moving forward to the present day, Dom (Vin Diesel) and Letty (Michelle Rodriguez), are living in seclusion with Dom’s son.
When the crew shows up unexpectedly with a mission from Mr. Nobody (Kurt Russell); who has gone missing, the crew venture out to retrieve a missing device which in turn puts them directly in the path with nefarious individuals and a ghost from Dom’s past.
As anyone who has watched any films in the series knows; the plots are often thin and a bit absurd as they serve simply as a device for the cast to assemble and chase a McGuffin to save the day. In doing so; the audience knows there will be an abundance of fists, bullets, cars, crashes, and outrageous stunts along the way.
While reality and credibility are not words associated with the franchise, the cast eagerly plays along with the absurdity, action, and mayhem and gives fans what they want. While the middle portion dragged while the audience was given more of the setup and introduced to cast members old and new; the action sequences are the over-the-top show stoppers which have become a staple of the franchise.
Director Justin Lin knows this and his return to the franchise does not attempt to invoke any new wrinkles and gives fans what they expect. The large ensemble works well with one another and John Cena is a very interesting addition to the cast.
Audiences will want to make sure to stay seated for a bonus scene that sets up the next film or spin-off very well and opens up some very interesting possibilities.
In the end “F9 The Fast Saga” gives audiences a dose of high-octane adrenaline and a return to no-brainer over the top action when it is needed the most. Check your brain at the door, strap in, and enjoy the ride.
3.5 stars out of 5
“F9 The Fast Saga” has done well in the few countries it has already been released, and has raced to a nearly $300 million total which the industry hopes is a signal that people are ready to return to cinemas in numbers again and that the film will take off when it opens in the U.S. and other markets.
The film opens with a flashback to the 1980s where young Dominic and his brother experience an event that changes their lives and drives a wedge between them. Moving forward to the present day, Dom (Vin Diesel) and Letty (Michelle Rodriguez), are living in seclusion with Dom’s son.
When the crew shows up unexpectedly with a mission from Mr. Nobody (Kurt Russell); who has gone missing, the crew venture out to retrieve a missing device which in turn puts them directly in the path with nefarious individuals and a ghost from Dom’s past.
As anyone who has watched any films in the series knows; the plots are often thin and a bit absurd as they serve simply as a device for the cast to assemble and chase a McGuffin to save the day. In doing so; the audience knows there will be an abundance of fists, bullets, cars, crashes, and outrageous stunts along the way.
While reality and credibility are not words associated with the franchise, the cast eagerly plays along with the absurdity, action, and mayhem and gives fans what they want. While the middle portion dragged while the audience was given more of the setup and introduced to cast members old and new; the action sequences are the over-the-top show stoppers which have become a staple of the franchise.
Director Justin Lin knows this and his return to the franchise does not attempt to invoke any new wrinkles and gives fans what they expect. The large ensemble works well with one another and John Cena is a very interesting addition to the cast.
Audiences will want to make sure to stay seated for a bonus scene that sets up the next film or spin-off very well and opens up some very interesting possibilities.
In the end “F9 The Fast Saga” gives audiences a dose of high-octane adrenaline and a return to no-brainer over the top action when it is needed the most. Check your brain at the door, strap in, and enjoy the ride.
3.5 stars out of 5