Search
Search results
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Drive Angry (2011) in Movies
Mar 13, 2020
What Happens When a Movie Meets Zero Effort
Ok, let’s not waste time with this: Drive Angry is easily one of the worst movies I’ve ever watched in my life. To be more specific, third worst behind the awful 1994 version of Fantastic Four (look that doozy up when you have a chance) and Battlefield Earth where we got to see John Travolta sporting dreads. Yes, folks, Drive Angry is bad in every single way imaginable. It is a movie you will long to forget. As far as the plot is concerned, there is a lot I tried to blot out about this movie but I’m pretty sure it’s about a man who has returned from Hell in a car he stole from the set of Fast and the Furious to prevent the sacrifice of his granddaughter by an evil cult. You say what now?
Acting: 5
I feel like these actors knew after the first week of filming that this was going to be a shit-show so they all mailed it in. Nicholas Cage, star of said shit-show, delivers his lines with the excitement of someone getting a flu shot. I won’t linger on this point, but let’s just say I’ve seen the cast of a Hallmark movie do better than these lame-duck performances.
Beginning: 1
Much like the middle and the end, the beginning is an awful disaster. It sports one of the worst setups I think I have ever seen for a movie. After ten minutes, I knew I was in for a world of pain.
Characters: 2
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Honestly, the visuals could be a lot worse. There were some decent moments particularly when things slowed down that were bordering on looking pretty cool. While a lot of action sequences were pretty cheesy it was nice to see they at least put in a smidgeon of effort with the special effects.
Conflict: 5
Entertainment Value: 2
Memorability: 0
After the movie was over, I instantly started thinking, “Is there a time machine that I can use to get part of my life back?” There is absolutely no value in this movie, nothing to remember with the exception of the absolutely horrid filmmaking. I am still appalled this project made it through completion.
Pace: 0
Plot: 0
Story? We don’t need no stinking story! Oh, how I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during this pitch meeting. It seriously made my head hurt. They try and give you a story then throw it all out the window with repeated implausible occurrences that beat you into submission.
Resolution: 1
Overall: 24
In light of the Black Mamba Kobe Bryant’s passing, the number 24 should represent greatness. Not with my scoring of Drive Angry. Unless, of course, I’m referring to the greatness of sucking. If that’s the case, then yes, this movie is indeed great. Great and terrible.
Acting: 5
I feel like these actors knew after the first week of filming that this was going to be a shit-show so they all mailed it in. Nicholas Cage, star of said shit-show, delivers his lines with the excitement of someone getting a flu shot. I won’t linger on this point, but let’s just say I’ve seen the cast of a Hallmark movie do better than these lame-duck performances.
Beginning: 1
Much like the middle and the end, the beginning is an awful disaster. It sports one of the worst setups I think I have ever seen for a movie. After ten minutes, I knew I was in for a world of pain.
Characters: 2
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Honestly, the visuals could be a lot worse. There were some decent moments particularly when things slowed down that were bordering on looking pretty cool. While a lot of action sequences were pretty cheesy it was nice to see they at least put in a smidgeon of effort with the special effects.
Conflict: 5
Entertainment Value: 2
Memorability: 0
After the movie was over, I instantly started thinking, “Is there a time machine that I can use to get part of my life back?” There is absolutely no value in this movie, nothing to remember with the exception of the absolutely horrid filmmaking. I am still appalled this project made it through completion.
Pace: 0
Plot: 0
Story? We don’t need no stinking story! Oh, how I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during this pitch meeting. It seriously made my head hurt. They try and give you a story then throw it all out the window with repeated implausible occurrences that beat you into submission.
Resolution: 1
Overall: 24
In light of the Black Mamba Kobe Bryant’s passing, the number 24 should represent greatness. Not with my scoring of Drive Angry. Unless, of course, I’m referring to the greatness of sucking. If that’s the case, then yes, this movie is indeed great. Great and terrible.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Crank 2: High Voltage (2009) in Movies
Apr 12, 2020
A Very Poor Man's Hardcore Henry
Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) is back (because apparently falling out of a helicopter thousands of feet in the air can’t kill him) facing off against a gang of thugs that want to harvest his “special” heart for their leader. Artificial heart attached, Chev has to keep recharging himself or slow down and, ultimately, die. Can’t make this shit up…
Acting: 2
Beginning: 4
Characters: 3
You might find it a challenge to find a more disinteresting group of characters wrapped in one movie. I’m not exaggerating when I say I hated just about everyone in Crank 2: High Voltage. Every character is overdone and represents one big waste of space. And the man of the hour, Chev Chelios? Yep, hate him too. He’s crass (and not in the cool Logan kind of way), racist (and not in the cool Clint Eastwood kind of way), and only cares about himself. Thirty minutes in, I was wishing he would run out of options and his heart would just stop, putting me out of my misery once and for all.
I wish he was the worst, but yes it gets worse. The other characters are a combination of racist stereotypes, antagonists that would be better off with a couple of lines rather than pages of them, and fodder for gunfire. The combination was painful to say the least.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Conflict: 7
The action is far out there and I definitely give them a C for effort. I know farfetched is the name of the game when it comes to this movie, but so is Hardcore Henry by comparison and I loved those action scenes. Perfect example: A gunfight breaks out at a mansion. A gardener continues to hedge the bushes while bullets are flying all around him before he finally gets shot. Come on, man! Too lazy for words.
Entertainment Value: 5
Memorability: 7
For better or worse, there are definitely moments of this movie I will never forget. Like the sex scene on the horse racetrack. During a live horse race. Or the head in the jar. Or the random porn star protest. Or or or…I never said they were great memorable moments, but they are in there.
Pace: 7
Plot: 4
The story doesn’t even begin to make sense. I’m only giving it a four because the whole story revolves around Chev beating people the hell up so the story really shouldn’t matter that much. Still, if you’re looking for something coherent, please save your time and go watch something else.
Resolution: 4
Overall: 52
On my quest to watch 366 movies in a year, yes, I have seen worse movies than Crank 2: High Voltage. But not many. It’s bad. Real bad. Please save your time and avoid this movie at all costs.
Acting: 2
Beginning: 4
Characters: 3
You might find it a challenge to find a more disinteresting group of characters wrapped in one movie. I’m not exaggerating when I say I hated just about everyone in Crank 2: High Voltage. Every character is overdone and represents one big waste of space. And the man of the hour, Chev Chelios? Yep, hate him too. He’s crass (and not in the cool Logan kind of way), racist (and not in the cool Clint Eastwood kind of way), and only cares about himself. Thirty minutes in, I was wishing he would run out of options and his heart would just stop, putting me out of my misery once and for all.
I wish he was the worst, but yes it gets worse. The other characters are a combination of racist stereotypes, antagonists that would be better off with a couple of lines rather than pages of them, and fodder for gunfire. The combination was painful to say the least.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Conflict: 7
The action is far out there and I definitely give them a C for effort. I know farfetched is the name of the game when it comes to this movie, but so is Hardcore Henry by comparison and I loved those action scenes. Perfect example: A gunfight breaks out at a mansion. A gardener continues to hedge the bushes while bullets are flying all around him before he finally gets shot. Come on, man! Too lazy for words.
Entertainment Value: 5
Memorability: 7
For better or worse, there are definitely moments of this movie I will never forget. Like the sex scene on the horse racetrack. During a live horse race. Or the head in the jar. Or the random porn star protest. Or or or…I never said they were great memorable moments, but they are in there.
Pace: 7
Plot: 4
The story doesn’t even begin to make sense. I’m only giving it a four because the whole story revolves around Chev beating people the hell up so the story really shouldn’t matter that much. Still, if you’re looking for something coherent, please save your time and go watch something else.
Resolution: 4
Overall: 52
On my quest to watch 366 movies in a year, yes, I have seen worse movies than Crank 2: High Voltage. But not many. It’s bad. Real bad. Please save your time and avoid this movie at all costs.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Heat (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In a fun twist to the traditional buddy-cop movie theme, this time we have a pair of ladies bringing The Heat to the streets of Boston for a laugh-out-loud good time.
Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy bring action and some very sharp tongues to the big screen.
The story starts out by painting a picture of the two in their separate worlds. Special Agent Ashburn (Bullock) is very prim, proper, and by-the-book. She dresses for success, knows it all, and doesn’t let so much as an S-bomb pass her lips. As she solves a case (proving herself a know-it-all in front of coworkers), a bleak picture comes into focus that this very uptight FBI agent is just the beginning.
By contrast (and fitting the expected formula), Detective Mullins (McCarthy) uses a down-and-dirty, physical, and foul-mouthed method for cleaning up the streets of Boston. Her neighborhood is definitely her home, and it needs protecting. Mullins’ slovenly lifestyle is the complete polar opposite of Ashburn, as one might expect. This conflict is the driving force behind a typical buddy cop movie. The only difference is that it’s two women instead of the usual ingredients.
Ashburn is given an assignment in Boston. The assignment will be a key, deciding factor in her next promotion, so all she wants is a simple case to solve and close. Naturally, once Mullins and Ashburn meet, sparks fly and hilarity ensues.
I went into this with low expectations, but also a deep loathing for Sandra Bullock as an actress — every role she’s ever played has been essentially the same. I expected the same in The Heat. In an oh-so-surprising twist of fate, she ended up playing the sober, strait-laced character! Despite my lack of appreciation for her acting skills, I must say she did well; her comedic timing was spot-on, and it meshed well with McCarthy’s usual brand of comedy: vociferous and physical, bordering on slapstick. I did note during the film that Bullock is definitely starting to show her age; this is not a knock on her beauty, but more an admission that I am starting to feel old!
Mullins also plays the same character in every movie role she takes, so this character was no stretch for her at all. It seems she is just there to memorize lines and provide her unabashed, high-energy quips. That said, I have to give her mad props for comedic timing and delivery. She is a one-trick-pony, but that one trick is a damn good one.
All in all, this is a great film for laughs. I laughed out loud through much of it, which was a surprise. As with all comedies, I don’t recommend spending your hard-earned cash on these top-dollar theater tickets. Wait for the small screen, but definitely see it for a good, healthy chuckle.
Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy bring action and some very sharp tongues to the big screen.
The story starts out by painting a picture of the two in their separate worlds. Special Agent Ashburn (Bullock) is very prim, proper, and by-the-book. She dresses for success, knows it all, and doesn’t let so much as an S-bomb pass her lips. As she solves a case (proving herself a know-it-all in front of coworkers), a bleak picture comes into focus that this very uptight FBI agent is just the beginning.
By contrast (and fitting the expected formula), Detective Mullins (McCarthy) uses a down-and-dirty, physical, and foul-mouthed method for cleaning up the streets of Boston. Her neighborhood is definitely her home, and it needs protecting. Mullins’ slovenly lifestyle is the complete polar opposite of Ashburn, as one might expect. This conflict is the driving force behind a typical buddy cop movie. The only difference is that it’s two women instead of the usual ingredients.
Ashburn is given an assignment in Boston. The assignment will be a key, deciding factor in her next promotion, so all she wants is a simple case to solve and close. Naturally, once Mullins and Ashburn meet, sparks fly and hilarity ensues.
I went into this with low expectations, but also a deep loathing for Sandra Bullock as an actress — every role she’s ever played has been essentially the same. I expected the same in The Heat. In an oh-so-surprising twist of fate, she ended up playing the sober, strait-laced character! Despite my lack of appreciation for her acting skills, I must say she did well; her comedic timing was spot-on, and it meshed well with McCarthy’s usual brand of comedy: vociferous and physical, bordering on slapstick. I did note during the film that Bullock is definitely starting to show her age; this is not a knock on her beauty, but more an admission that I am starting to feel old!
Mullins also plays the same character in every movie role she takes, so this character was no stretch for her at all. It seems she is just there to memorize lines and provide her unabashed, high-energy quips. That said, I have to give her mad props for comedic timing and delivery. She is a one-trick-pony, but that one trick is a damn good one.
All in all, this is a great film for laughs. I laughed out loud through much of it, which was a surprise. As with all comedies, I don’t recommend spending your hard-earned cash on these top-dollar theater tickets. Wait for the small screen, but definitely see it for a good, healthy chuckle.
World War 2 History: WW2 Lite
Book and Reference
App
A very comprehensive App on World War II made specifically for the iPad. Brings World War 2 alive on...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) in Movies
Oct 27, 2020
Fun Ride
Solo: A Star Wars Story is the origin story of Han Solo before his life with the Rebel Alliance. What I expected to be a cheesy and lame attempt to cash in on a successful series actually turned out to be a pretty fun romp.
Acting: 10
Solid cast here with Alden Ehrenreich playing the leading man Han. He captures the vibe and feel of the character perfectly and has a charisma perfect for the screen. The rest of the cast carries their weight as well. I especially loved the voice performance of Phoebe Waller-Bridge lending her voice to the awesome droid L3-37. Her comedic timing is spot-on.
Beginning: 10
The story jumps in with a harrowing escape from the sewers of an alien planet. You are quickly thrown into the adventure at a moment’s notice and things continue to ramp up from there. My worry of this being a bad movie started to dissipate after the first ten minutes.
Characters: 10
L3-37 aside, other great characters help carry the movie as well. Paul Bettany’s Dryden Vos is a dashing antagonist, a madman who definitely puts off infinite creepy vibes. He adds flare to the story for sure. It’s also refreshing to meet a young Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover) who seems to be just as suave now as he is in the future. The creative characters fill the story with more depth than I was expecting.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
The action is nonstop and very entertaining, never letting up for longer than a few moments. Between the numerous chase scenes and blaster battles there is always something to keep you entertained. I especially loved the train heist, so fun and heartracing at the same time.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 5
Pace: 10
Plot: 7
Outside of a couple twists and turns, the story is pretty straightforward. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still a fun ride, there was just nothing storywise that blew my mind. I do appreciate Han’s journey and his maturation as the story progresses. It makes the story worth telling. My biggest gripe was with one major coincidence in the story thrown in for the sake of advancing the plot. I won’t give anything away, I’ll just say there were better ways they could have made that connection.
Resolution: 7
Decent ending. Not in love with how it ended, but I knew things had to transpire this way in order to pave the way for future happenings in other movies. Still, I was hoping for a bit more.
Overall: 88
If you’re facing Star Wars overload and still wondering as to whether or not you want to add more movies into the mix, Solo: A Star Wars Story is a blast. I was pleasantly surprised by how well done it was done. A fun adventure from beginning to end.
Acting: 10
Solid cast here with Alden Ehrenreich playing the leading man Han. He captures the vibe and feel of the character perfectly and has a charisma perfect for the screen. The rest of the cast carries their weight as well. I especially loved the voice performance of Phoebe Waller-Bridge lending her voice to the awesome droid L3-37. Her comedic timing is spot-on.
Beginning: 10
The story jumps in with a harrowing escape from the sewers of an alien planet. You are quickly thrown into the adventure at a moment’s notice and things continue to ramp up from there. My worry of this being a bad movie started to dissipate after the first ten minutes.
Characters: 10
L3-37 aside, other great characters help carry the movie as well. Paul Bettany’s Dryden Vos is a dashing antagonist, a madman who definitely puts off infinite creepy vibes. He adds flare to the story for sure. It’s also refreshing to meet a young Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover) who seems to be just as suave now as he is in the future. The creative characters fill the story with more depth than I was expecting.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
The action is nonstop and very entertaining, never letting up for longer than a few moments. Between the numerous chase scenes and blaster battles there is always something to keep you entertained. I especially loved the train heist, so fun and heartracing at the same time.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 5
Pace: 10
Plot: 7
Outside of a couple twists and turns, the story is pretty straightforward. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still a fun ride, there was just nothing storywise that blew my mind. I do appreciate Han’s journey and his maturation as the story progresses. It makes the story worth telling. My biggest gripe was with one major coincidence in the story thrown in for the sake of advancing the plot. I won’t give anything away, I’ll just say there were better ways they could have made that connection.
Resolution: 7
Decent ending. Not in love with how it ended, but I knew things had to transpire this way in order to pave the way for future happenings in other movies. Still, I was hoping for a bit more.
Overall: 88
If you’re facing Star Wars overload and still wondering as to whether or not you want to add more movies into the mix, Solo: A Star Wars Story is a blast. I was pleasantly surprised by how well done it was done. A fun adventure from beginning to end.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated G.I. Joe: Retaliation (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Who didn’t grow up as a child of the eighties and nineties and not play with G.I. Joes? And of those, who can honestly say they were not thoroughly disappointed in G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra? Surprisingly, I can say that I wasn’t thoroughly disappointed, but I know the movie could have been so much more than it was. Could it have done without the surreal technology, the sappy love story and the unrealistic action scenes in the movie? Yes. Many fans cried out about this. G.I. Joe: Retaliation set out to respond.
Did they succeed? That’s debatable, but they did a lot of things right in the go-around. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not award winning or anything, and you should never expect a movie like this to be that. But let’s run through a check list. Sappy out of place love-story: gone. Surreal technology: less. Let’s face it, despite what some people felt about the first movie, it did kind of set that precedent. Retaliation is considered a true follow up to The Rise of Cobra. So would it honestly make any sense to go from one extreme of nearly impossible gadgets to none at all? Absolutely not. Besides, the cartoon series also had technology in it. I am not trying to defend the use of it, and there were some pretty crazy gadgets going on in this movie, but it seemed to jive better with what I remember of it as a kid. And they found a really unique way to tone it down without it not seeming right. Unfortunately, there is still a fair amount of unrealistic action in this movie, but that’s kind of become the norm for most action movies these days.
We pick up fairly close to where we left off in The Rise of Cobra. Duke (Channing Tatum) is now commanding a unit of the Joes with Roadblock, Lady Jaye, Flint and Snake Eyes (Dwayne Johnson, Adrianne Palicki, D.J. Cotrona and Ray Park respectively) under his command. The Joes are sent out on a mission, a good rapport is built between Duke and Roadblock, but then they go and destroy that when their convoy gets attacked by Cobra eliminating Duke from the rest of the film. Go cry spoiler somewhere else, this happens in the beginning of the movie, and it’s been everywhere since the delay of the movie from last year. I was hoping they would somehow managed to keep him in the movie, especially after seeing the chemistry between Tatum and Johnson, but alas…
So the convoy attacked, and all the Joes presumed dead. Only Roadblock, Jaye and Flint actually survive and try to get to the bottom of everything. Meanwhile President Zartan (remember how the last movie ended) is up to his own nefarious plans in breaking out Cobra Commander with the aide of Storm Shadow. The Joes work their magic, still have access to some technology (though not over the top like The Rise of Cobra), and recruit people to help them along the way, including the man who is the reason the Joes were started: General Joe Coulton (played epic-ly by Bruce Willis).
The movie was entertaining, had a lot of great and clever humor that wasn’t thrown in your face, and had some great action scenes (if you can get past the fact that in one scene they are fighting Cirque Du Soleil style on the side of a cliff). But it’s some of the little things in this movie that prevent it from redeeming the franchise after the first iteration, including the casting of RZA in a part that looks like it is meant to be serious, but his horrible acting make you really wonder if it was supposed to be a serious role or not. The other gripe I had with the movie was the unlikely resolution of the main conflict. With the Cobra Commander so confident in his plan, why would he, or any self-respecting super villain, deliver a way to foil the evil plan with literally half a second left on a silver platter. The last issue I had with the movie was Storm Shadow. I really liked the conflict between him and Snake Eyes in The Rise of Cobra, but they seemed to discredit his character a lot in this movie. Ultimately they changed the nature of Storm Shadow to make it seem as if he might switch sides in any future installments of the franchise, and that’s just not cool. The character was awesome the way he was.
As for the 3D aspect, it’s said this was the reason that the studio delayed the movie for a year. They wanted to add more effects to it. This tells me two things: the movie was shot in 2D and they had little faith in it. Honestly, I think we all know they tried to add more Duke to the movie in this time (which it’s really hard to tell if they did), but you can tell there was work done with 3D aspect. Too much. It was very distracting at points, and it seemed liked they added elements to scenes just to have 3D. For instance there was a scene where you were in a situation room viewing information on a monitor. It literally looked like they just super imposed a shoulder into the lower right of the screen so they could have in 3D as if you were looking over someone’s shoulder. That’s just silly.
All that being said. I had fun watching the movie. Dwayne Johnson is becoming a powerhouse that everyone was expecting him to years ago. I hope that he can continue this streak with some good movies (he’s got two more within the next month alone). I own the first one on Blu Ray, and I will probably buy this one when comes out as well. I would watch it in theater just for the enormity of the action on the big screen, but skip the 3D.
Did they succeed? That’s debatable, but they did a lot of things right in the go-around. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not award winning or anything, and you should never expect a movie like this to be that. But let’s run through a check list. Sappy out of place love-story: gone. Surreal technology: less. Let’s face it, despite what some people felt about the first movie, it did kind of set that precedent. Retaliation is considered a true follow up to The Rise of Cobra. So would it honestly make any sense to go from one extreme of nearly impossible gadgets to none at all? Absolutely not. Besides, the cartoon series also had technology in it. I am not trying to defend the use of it, and there were some pretty crazy gadgets going on in this movie, but it seemed to jive better with what I remember of it as a kid. And they found a really unique way to tone it down without it not seeming right. Unfortunately, there is still a fair amount of unrealistic action in this movie, but that’s kind of become the norm for most action movies these days.
We pick up fairly close to where we left off in The Rise of Cobra. Duke (Channing Tatum) is now commanding a unit of the Joes with Roadblock, Lady Jaye, Flint and Snake Eyes (Dwayne Johnson, Adrianne Palicki, D.J. Cotrona and Ray Park respectively) under his command. The Joes are sent out on a mission, a good rapport is built between Duke and Roadblock, but then they go and destroy that when their convoy gets attacked by Cobra eliminating Duke from the rest of the film. Go cry spoiler somewhere else, this happens in the beginning of the movie, and it’s been everywhere since the delay of the movie from last year. I was hoping they would somehow managed to keep him in the movie, especially after seeing the chemistry between Tatum and Johnson, but alas…
So the convoy attacked, and all the Joes presumed dead. Only Roadblock, Jaye and Flint actually survive and try to get to the bottom of everything. Meanwhile President Zartan (remember how the last movie ended) is up to his own nefarious plans in breaking out Cobra Commander with the aide of Storm Shadow. The Joes work their magic, still have access to some technology (though not over the top like The Rise of Cobra), and recruit people to help them along the way, including the man who is the reason the Joes were started: General Joe Coulton (played epic-ly by Bruce Willis).
The movie was entertaining, had a lot of great and clever humor that wasn’t thrown in your face, and had some great action scenes (if you can get past the fact that in one scene they are fighting Cirque Du Soleil style on the side of a cliff). But it’s some of the little things in this movie that prevent it from redeeming the franchise after the first iteration, including the casting of RZA in a part that looks like it is meant to be serious, but his horrible acting make you really wonder if it was supposed to be a serious role or not. The other gripe I had with the movie was the unlikely resolution of the main conflict. With the Cobra Commander so confident in his plan, why would he, or any self-respecting super villain, deliver a way to foil the evil plan with literally half a second left on a silver platter. The last issue I had with the movie was Storm Shadow. I really liked the conflict between him and Snake Eyes in The Rise of Cobra, but they seemed to discredit his character a lot in this movie. Ultimately they changed the nature of Storm Shadow to make it seem as if he might switch sides in any future installments of the franchise, and that’s just not cool. The character was awesome the way he was.
As for the 3D aspect, it’s said this was the reason that the studio delayed the movie for a year. They wanted to add more effects to it. This tells me two things: the movie was shot in 2D and they had little faith in it. Honestly, I think we all know they tried to add more Duke to the movie in this time (which it’s really hard to tell if they did), but you can tell there was work done with 3D aspect. Too much. It was very distracting at points, and it seemed liked they added elements to scenes just to have 3D. For instance there was a scene where you were in a situation room viewing information on a monitor. It literally looked like they just super imposed a shoulder into the lower right of the screen so they could have in 3D as if you were looking over someone’s shoulder. That’s just silly.
All that being said. I had fun watching the movie. Dwayne Johnson is becoming a powerhouse that everyone was expecting him to years ago. I hope that he can continue this streak with some good movies (he’s got two more within the next month alone). I own the first one on Blu Ray, and I will probably buy this one when comes out as well. I would watch it in theater just for the enormity of the action on the big screen, but skip the 3D.
5 Minute Movie Guy (379 KP) rated Live Die Repeat: Edge of Tomorrow (2014) in Movies
Jun 26, 2019
One of the best action films of Tom Cruise's incredible career. (4 more)
Emily Blunt is a true force to be reckoned with.
The film's aliens and special effects are simply outstanding.
Unexpectedly hilarious. Who knew watching Tom Cruise die repeatedly could be so funny?
Edge of Tomorrow feels like a video game made into an unforgettably great movie.
Edge of Tomorrow is one of the best action movies of Tom Cruise’s illustrious career and might just be the most fun you'll have at the movies all year.
Amidst the yearly barrage of unimaginative action movies, Edge of Tomorrow is a breath of fresh air. It’s smart, funny, and full of action-packed excitement. It is a definitive summer blockbuster and is one of the best action movies of Tom Cruise’s illustrious career. Based on the graphic novel All You Need is Kill by Hiroshi Sakurazaka, Edge of Tomorrow stars Tom Cruise as Major William Cage, who has earned his rank without ever having served a day in combat. All of that quickly comes to a change when he’s put on the frontlines of a war that threatens humanity’s entire existence. Thrust into combat, Cage is cowardly, and also comically unprepared. He fearfully fights for his life, but is quickly killed in the conflict, only to reawaken at the start of the same day. Cage is given another chance at life, with the benefit of having lived the day before and fully remembering it. This is not a gift bestowed upon Tom Cruise by the power of Scientology, nor by Tom Cruise’s near-invincibility in his films, but instead his character Cage inadvertently has tapped into a divine alien power through which he is able to re-spawn from death over and over again. Trapped In this seemingly infinite loop, Cage is able to learn from his mistakes and thereby has the power to single-handedly change the outcome of this war and save the human race from complete annihilation.
The brilliance of Edge of Tomorrow is in its execution. This is a movie that could have easily been tiresome considering it replays the same day continuously on repeat, but it’s handled in a way that makes it entertaining and engaging. It is superbly edited to keep the story moving and the laughs coming. Even as a huge fan of Tom Cruise, I had a marvelous time watching him die off again and again while thoroughly laughing at his expense. What makes it so funny is that Tom is completely in on the joke and is able to generously poke fun at himself. He is perfectly cast in this role, as it allows him to act totally crazy and completely spineless, while gradually transitioning into his usual kick-ass, cool Cruise persona. Edge of Tomorrow feels both exhilarating and original, although it is clearly inspired in part by some other films, such as the comedy classic Groundhog Day, and even The Matrix trilogy. However, having these influences doesn’t take away from the film’s enormous accomplishments. To call it an action sci-fi version of Groundhog Day is only to sell it short. In fact, Edge of Tomorrow might just be the most fun you’ll have at the movies all year.
The conflict in Edge of Tomorrow is an alien invasion that is obliterating humanity. The aliens, known as Mimics, have taken over most of Europe, and with the exception of one keystone battle, have easily routed human military forces. Rita Vrataski, played by Emily Blunt, led that decisive victory at Verdun, earning herself the moniker the “Angel of Verdun” after single-handedly killing hundreds of Mimics in humanity’s first and only victory against the alien species. How was one woman able to massacre these aliens that can lay waste to an armed infantry in minutes? Well, as Cage finds out, she previously had his ability to reset in death, although she no longer possesses that power. Nevertheless, with her knowledge and skill set acquired from her nearly infinite practice, she can transform Cage into Earth’s greatest weapon.
Edge of Tomorrow is a thoroughly impressive package, complete with superb special effects, a heart-pounding musical score, and outstanding performances from its lead characters. Tom Cruise carries the film with veteran expertise, making the film fun and deeply entertaining. Emily Blunt is a powerhouse as Rita, showcasing a heroic toughness with a survivor mentality. I don’t think there are many actresses in Hollywood that could play such a role as convincingly as Blunt does here. Meanwhile, Bill Paxton is as enjoyable to watch as ever. He plays Master Sergeant Farrell, who is Cage’s cocky commanding officer that takes great pleasure in giving him a hard time. As for the aliens in the movie, they look absolutely incredible, not to mention highly original. I think they’re some of the coolest aliens I’ve ever seen, and they’re also far more threatening than your typical movie alien. They’re deathly fast and unpredictable, which makes the film’s action all the more intense. Edge of Tomorrow actually feels very much like a video game, and not just because of the respawning feature. The characters are memorable, the stakes are high, and the action is so engrossing that you feel like you’re an active participant in it. The creativity and combat at work in this film are worthy of belonging in a blockbuster game series. It rarely lets up and is an adrenaline-fueled ride from beginning to end.
I’ll admit that Edge of Tomorrow far-exceeded my expectations. It’s cool in every way imaginable, from the story and the action to the aliens and characters. It will immerse you in its desolate, doomed world that unknowingly rests on the brink of total destruction. Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt are both in top form and make this a movie you won’t want to miss. Edge of Tomorrow is certain to become an instant action classic. One that I wholly look forward to watching again and again and again.
(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 6.30.14.)
The brilliance of Edge of Tomorrow is in its execution. This is a movie that could have easily been tiresome considering it replays the same day continuously on repeat, but it’s handled in a way that makes it entertaining and engaging. It is superbly edited to keep the story moving and the laughs coming. Even as a huge fan of Tom Cruise, I had a marvelous time watching him die off again and again while thoroughly laughing at his expense. What makes it so funny is that Tom is completely in on the joke and is able to generously poke fun at himself. He is perfectly cast in this role, as it allows him to act totally crazy and completely spineless, while gradually transitioning into his usual kick-ass, cool Cruise persona. Edge of Tomorrow feels both exhilarating and original, although it is clearly inspired in part by some other films, such as the comedy classic Groundhog Day, and even The Matrix trilogy. However, having these influences doesn’t take away from the film’s enormous accomplishments. To call it an action sci-fi version of Groundhog Day is only to sell it short. In fact, Edge of Tomorrow might just be the most fun you’ll have at the movies all year.
The conflict in Edge of Tomorrow is an alien invasion that is obliterating humanity. The aliens, known as Mimics, have taken over most of Europe, and with the exception of one keystone battle, have easily routed human military forces. Rita Vrataski, played by Emily Blunt, led that decisive victory at Verdun, earning herself the moniker the “Angel of Verdun” after single-handedly killing hundreds of Mimics in humanity’s first and only victory against the alien species. How was one woman able to massacre these aliens that can lay waste to an armed infantry in minutes? Well, as Cage finds out, she previously had his ability to reset in death, although she no longer possesses that power. Nevertheless, with her knowledge and skill set acquired from her nearly infinite practice, she can transform Cage into Earth’s greatest weapon.
Edge of Tomorrow is a thoroughly impressive package, complete with superb special effects, a heart-pounding musical score, and outstanding performances from its lead characters. Tom Cruise carries the film with veteran expertise, making the film fun and deeply entertaining. Emily Blunt is a powerhouse as Rita, showcasing a heroic toughness with a survivor mentality. I don’t think there are many actresses in Hollywood that could play such a role as convincingly as Blunt does here. Meanwhile, Bill Paxton is as enjoyable to watch as ever. He plays Master Sergeant Farrell, who is Cage’s cocky commanding officer that takes great pleasure in giving him a hard time. As for the aliens in the movie, they look absolutely incredible, not to mention highly original. I think they’re some of the coolest aliens I’ve ever seen, and they’re also far more threatening than your typical movie alien. They’re deathly fast and unpredictable, which makes the film’s action all the more intense. Edge of Tomorrow actually feels very much like a video game, and not just because of the respawning feature. The characters are memorable, the stakes are high, and the action is so engrossing that you feel like you’re an active participant in it. The creativity and combat at work in this film are worthy of belonging in a blockbuster game series. It rarely lets up and is an adrenaline-fueled ride from beginning to end.
I’ll admit that Edge of Tomorrow far-exceeded my expectations. It’s cool in every way imaginable, from the story and the action to the aliens and characters. It will immerse you in its desolate, doomed world that unknowingly rests on the brink of total destruction. Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt are both in top form and make this a movie you won’t want to miss. Edge of Tomorrow is certain to become an instant action classic. One that I wholly look forward to watching again and again and again.
(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 6.30.14.)
*** I received a free advance copy of this book from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review ***
I have read Adrian Tchakovsky's Shadows of the Apt series and loved it.
I recently read his Dogs of War and enjoyed it. However I think this has somewhat tainted Ironclads for me.
Ireonclads sees us again in the near-future where the UK (read as England which annoyed me, being Scottish) has gained independence from Europe and subsequently gone bust and been bought over by the USA. The USA is likewise invading or at war with much of the rest of the world. These wars are now fought mainly in corporate interest (but then what's new *cough gulf war cough*) with armies of poorly equipped government soldiers being dent in to conflict occasionally supported by corporate playboys (generally the heir to the corporate fortunes) in their massive armoured scion suits (hence iron-clad) where they are fully protected from pretty much everything. These playboys tend to be captured by each other and ransomed back to their families, guffawing at their japes all the way.
The story sees one small group of US soldiers sent in to deepest darkest Sweden to rescue one such playboy who got himself too far ahead of the army and appears to have gone missing but without ransom (without his scion suit).
Being a short (200 pages) book worked well for me, I felt any more scenes or narrative would have felt like padding and this was its natural length.
However, for me this book felt like the notes or background story to Dogs of War and has suffered from my having read the latter. That book notes that wars used to be fought with machines and robots but moves on to cybernetically enhanced animals. This book felt like a side story or introduction to the Dogs of War world and little more.
Other aspects of the story chimed with that of Dogs of War as well and showed the author to be a little short of ideas - living beings with their brains/bodies cybernetically enhanced, swarms of insects used to disrupt communications, the USA being a little bit invadey and corrupt etc.
While this is not my usual cup of tea, I have enjoyed other sci-fi and felt this was a little slapdash. I didn't like the narrative style, finding the blasé, informal tones of the army sergeant both jarring and poorly executed. And while I don't need to be spoon-fed the plot, I found some elements badly or barely explained (what DID the Finns do?!) and the major plot twist neither surprising nor worth the wait.
Tchaikovsky can describe a battle scene well and you get a feel for the whole battle as well as the key conflicts, so the action itself is fairly gripping at times. However, the finished article left me feeling a bit meh.
All in all I am glad I read this, but had expected better things from his sci-fi given Children of Time won the Arthur C Clarke award.
I have read Adrian Tchakovsky's Shadows of the Apt series and loved it.
I recently read his Dogs of War and enjoyed it. However I think this has somewhat tainted Ironclads for me.
Ireonclads sees us again in the near-future where the UK (read as England which annoyed me, being Scottish) has gained independence from Europe and subsequently gone bust and been bought over by the USA. The USA is likewise invading or at war with much of the rest of the world. These wars are now fought mainly in corporate interest (but then what's new *cough gulf war cough*) with armies of poorly equipped government soldiers being dent in to conflict occasionally supported by corporate playboys (generally the heir to the corporate fortunes) in their massive armoured scion suits (hence iron-clad) where they are fully protected from pretty much everything. These playboys tend to be captured by each other and ransomed back to their families, guffawing at their japes all the way.
The story sees one small group of US soldiers sent in to deepest darkest Sweden to rescue one such playboy who got himself too far ahead of the army and appears to have gone missing but without ransom (without his scion suit).
Being a short (200 pages) book worked well for me, I felt any more scenes or narrative would have felt like padding and this was its natural length.
However, for me this book felt like the notes or background story to Dogs of War and has suffered from my having read the latter. That book notes that wars used to be fought with machines and robots but moves on to cybernetically enhanced animals. This book felt like a side story or introduction to the Dogs of War world and little more.
Other aspects of the story chimed with that of Dogs of War as well and showed the author to be a little short of ideas - living beings with their brains/bodies cybernetically enhanced, swarms of insects used to disrupt communications, the USA being a little bit invadey and corrupt etc.
While this is not my usual cup of tea, I have enjoyed other sci-fi and felt this was a little slapdash. I didn't like the narrative style, finding the blasé, informal tones of the army sergeant both jarring and poorly executed. And while I don't need to be spoon-fed the plot, I found some elements badly or barely explained (what DID the Finns do?!) and the major plot twist neither surprising nor worth the wait.
Tchaikovsky can describe a battle scene well and you get a feel for the whole battle as well as the key conflicts, so the action itself is fairly gripping at times. However, the finished article left me feeling a bit meh.
All in all I am glad I read this, but had expected better things from his sci-fi given Children of Time won the Arthur C Clarke award.
Jamie (131 KP) rated The Edible Woman in Books
May 24, 2017
An honest exploration of the roles of women, marriage, and entering adulthood
Marian is an average college-educated woman who lives with a roommate in a decent apartment, works for a survey company, is moderately good looking, and has a handsome fiancé who is on his way to being a big shot lawyer. It sounds like life altogether is going pretty well for Marian. Yet for some reason she feels empty, why?
The Edible Woman explores the themes of losing a sense of self with maturity. At work she is pushed around, her roommate Ainsley is inconsiderate, the landlady is judgmental, and her boyfriend Peter is self centered and makes snide comments at Marian’s expense, acting like he can barely tolerate her. With each encounter Marian puts aside her pride for the sake of avoiding conflict. Marian expresses her problems through eating, or the lack thereof, hinting at a potential eating disorder. Just as she feels inhibited in life, she suddenly feels inhibited with the kinds of food that she can eat.
As the story continues she begins to dread marriage and question the direction her life is going—becoming just as listless as her friend and former classmate Clara, who after marriage and three pregnancies just seems beaten down. Marian’s fiancé Peter is the stereotypical perfect bachelor: a man’s man that looks down on women and views marriage as a ball and chain. Peter pushes Marian around in order to mold her into a subservient woman. There is no longer any room for her thoughts, her feelings, or her desires from under his shadow.
But what about work? What are women’s roles in society and the work force? Throughout the story there are several women including Marian with college educations, yet none of them really have a stable career. Women are expected to be wives and mothers, there’s simply no time for an education or a job. In this case, their educations are ultimately viewed as their downfall due to the crushing reality of how little opportunity they would have. This was the very sad truth at the time the book was written and thankfully is not exactly the case now in most parts of the world.
Atwood tackles a large number of social issues throughout the book that I think would be important for any young woman. Adulthood, relationships, marriage, the choice between work and education versus starting a family, and lastly feminism—both good and bad. (Hint: Ainsely is a perfect example of a bad feminist.)
There are certain elements of the book that are becoming quite dated. Namely the typewriters, the social expectation that all women can be are housewives, and the limited ways that women can dress; These things might make it difficult for young women to look past and relate to the main character. Despite this the book is still incredibly relevant in the message that it brings about maintaining one’s individuality. I absolutely love this book and found a lot of my former self in it’s pages.
The Edible Woman explores the themes of losing a sense of self with maturity. At work she is pushed around, her roommate Ainsley is inconsiderate, the landlady is judgmental, and her boyfriend Peter is self centered and makes snide comments at Marian’s expense, acting like he can barely tolerate her. With each encounter Marian puts aside her pride for the sake of avoiding conflict. Marian expresses her problems through eating, or the lack thereof, hinting at a potential eating disorder. Just as she feels inhibited in life, she suddenly feels inhibited with the kinds of food that she can eat.
As the story continues she begins to dread marriage and question the direction her life is going—becoming just as listless as her friend and former classmate Clara, who after marriage and three pregnancies just seems beaten down. Marian’s fiancé Peter is the stereotypical perfect bachelor: a man’s man that looks down on women and views marriage as a ball and chain. Peter pushes Marian around in order to mold her into a subservient woman. There is no longer any room for her thoughts, her feelings, or her desires from under his shadow.
But what about work? What are women’s roles in society and the work force? Throughout the story there are several women including Marian with college educations, yet none of them really have a stable career. Women are expected to be wives and mothers, there’s simply no time for an education or a job. In this case, their educations are ultimately viewed as their downfall due to the crushing reality of how little opportunity they would have. This was the very sad truth at the time the book was written and thankfully is not exactly the case now in most parts of the world.
Atwood tackles a large number of social issues throughout the book that I think would be important for any young woman. Adulthood, relationships, marriage, the choice between work and education versus starting a family, and lastly feminism—both good and bad. (Hint: Ainsely is a perfect example of a bad feminist.)
There are certain elements of the book that are becoming quite dated. Namely the typewriters, the social expectation that all women can be are housewives, and the limited ways that women can dress; These things might make it difficult for young women to look past and relate to the main character. Despite this the book is still incredibly relevant in the message that it brings about maintaining one’s individuality. I absolutely love this book and found a lot of my former self in it’s pages.
Lee (2222 KP) rated War for the Planet of the Apes (2017) in Movies
Jul 19, 2017
Strong ending to a fantastic trilogy
Finally, after a recent lengthy spell of average or just plain disappointing blockbusters, along comes War for the Planet of the Apes to show them how it's done. The first two movies in this new trilogy have been consistently strong and enjoyable and War continues to deliver on that high quality, proving itself to be the best of the trilogy.
Despite it's name, there's not really a huge amount of war on show here. Unless of course we're referring to the inner conflict and turmoil experienced by Caesar. The movie begins with some human soldiers sneaking through the woods to try and take out the apes. They get their asses kicked and Caesar lets a few of them go in the hope that their crazed colonel (Woody Harrelson) will see just how merciful the apes are and understand that they just want to live their lives in peace and harmony. Unfortunately, things don't quite go to plan and the colonel returns later that night with a surprise attack on the apes home while they're sleeping. Some heavy ape casualties are sustained, and Caesar is pissed. Grief stricken, and out for revenge, he wants to go in search of the colonel while the rest of the apes head off to a potential new home out in the desert.
From there our story shifts down a gear, as Caesar and a small number of his trusted allies set off on horseback to track down the colonel. By this point though, you've already forgotten that these are not real apes, such is the exceptional quality of the effects on display here. The emotions are all there and the detail is perfect, totally believable. To all intents and purposes, these are real apes, and what they're experiencing feels real.
Along the way they manage pick up a young orphan mute girl and a former zoo ape called 'Bad Ape', who manages to provide much of the scarce humour found throughout the movie. When they do find the colonel and his base, the movie becomes more a prisoner of war, great escape style story rather than all out war. Yet it still manages to be extremely intense, highly emotional and hugely enjoyable.
By now, Andy Serkis and his team of performers are experts at bringing these apes to life and Caesar has now developed further than any other character in the trilogy. Serkis portrays equal amounts of rage and compassion beautifully, aided by the pixel perfect rendering of Caesar. Harrelson is the only human of any real note here, despite the large number of human soldiers under his command, and he manages to bring just the right amount of intense crazy and depth to the role.
The trilogy comes to a pretty satisfying and emotional close, with potential for further Apes movies. Overall though this has proved to be one of the strongest trilogies I've seen in a long time.
Despite it's name, there's not really a huge amount of war on show here. Unless of course we're referring to the inner conflict and turmoil experienced by Caesar. The movie begins with some human soldiers sneaking through the woods to try and take out the apes. They get their asses kicked and Caesar lets a few of them go in the hope that their crazed colonel (Woody Harrelson) will see just how merciful the apes are and understand that they just want to live their lives in peace and harmony. Unfortunately, things don't quite go to plan and the colonel returns later that night with a surprise attack on the apes home while they're sleeping. Some heavy ape casualties are sustained, and Caesar is pissed. Grief stricken, and out for revenge, he wants to go in search of the colonel while the rest of the apes head off to a potential new home out in the desert.
From there our story shifts down a gear, as Caesar and a small number of his trusted allies set off on horseback to track down the colonel. By this point though, you've already forgotten that these are not real apes, such is the exceptional quality of the effects on display here. The emotions are all there and the detail is perfect, totally believable. To all intents and purposes, these are real apes, and what they're experiencing feels real.
Along the way they manage pick up a young orphan mute girl and a former zoo ape called 'Bad Ape', who manages to provide much of the scarce humour found throughout the movie. When they do find the colonel and his base, the movie becomes more a prisoner of war, great escape style story rather than all out war. Yet it still manages to be extremely intense, highly emotional and hugely enjoyable.
By now, Andy Serkis and his team of performers are experts at bringing these apes to life and Caesar has now developed further than any other character in the trilogy. Serkis portrays equal amounts of rage and compassion beautifully, aided by the pixel perfect rendering of Caesar. Harrelson is the only human of any real note here, despite the large number of human soldiers under his command, and he manages to bring just the right amount of intense crazy and depth to the role.
The trilogy comes to a pretty satisfying and emotional close, with potential for further Apes movies. Overall though this has proved to be one of the strongest trilogies I've seen in a long time.